Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If I was his son I would have banned him from the wedding and told him why to his face.
He may be biologically responsible, but he's no father.
Speaking as a gay man, your attitude is reprehensible.
Look, even as a gay man who supports gay marriage, I still understand why many people don't support gay marriage. Much of it has to do with history and religion and culture. Before a decade ago, nowhere in the world in any cultures and civilizations did you have gay marriage, and the great faiths expounded for thousands of years that marriage was a unity between man and woman for the express purpose of having children and family. It's a sacred concept. To overturn thousands and thousands of years of civilization's understanding of marriage in just a few years is a remarkable thing, and also does require some understanding and tolerance (both ways).
Again, I just don't think of it as hypocritical. Again, this could be a states right thing to him even if he does support gay marriage.
I think it's a rohrshack test of partisanship.
Not sure its a states rights issue. Some might say that. It simply says that marriages performed in one state are considered valid in all states. It does not force say Alabama to sanction gay marriages if the SCOTUS comes in and says states have a right to decide whether gay marriages can be performed in their state. There is also 14th amendment issues with letting some people do something but not others.
I am fine with states deciding if gay marriages should be allowed or not. But to have a legal document valid only in some states is a problem.
Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.) last week voted against federal legislation that would require states to recognize same-sex marriages. Three days later, the congressman attended his son’s same-sex wedding.
“Congressman and Mrs. Thompson were thrilled to attend and celebrate their son’s marriage on Friday night as he began this new chapter in his life. The Thompsons are very happy to welcome their new son-in-law into their family,” Thompson’s press secretary, Maddison Stone, told The Washington Post late Monday in an email.
It's not clear to me how an elected leader following the desires of their constituency even when it conflicts with their personal beliefs is a bad thing.
All true but this thread is about this particular hypocrite.
You are totally missing it - and it's typical of those who blame others regardless of what they do.
He attends the wedding - hypocrite
He skips the wedding - he's a monster who puts politics over family.
It's a no-win situation.
He chose family - which is the proper choice.
This is the problem with America today that goes unnoticed. You should be able to co-exist and seek one another's better interest even when opinions differ. We don't do that anymore. Everything is fight, fight, fight. Some things are worthy of a fight... others aren't. The law maker chose not to fight on this one because the relationship is more important.
Speaking as a gay man, your attitude is reprehensible.
Look, even as a gay man who supports gay marriage, I still understand why many people don't support gay marriage. Much of it has to do with history and religion and culture. Before a decade ago, nowhere in the world in any cultures and civilizations did you have gay marriage, and the great faiths expounded for thousands of years that marriage was a unity between man and woman for the express purpose of having children and family. It's a sacred concept. To overturn thousands and thousands of years of civilization's understanding of marriage in just a few years is a remarkable thing, and also does require some understanding and tolerance (both ways).
+1 Understanding different viewpoints, lifestyles and working with them even if you don't completely agree is a two way street.
Otherwise, we're just buying into anger and division rooted in the certainty that I'm right and have the moral high ground and you are wrong and evil. (Basically the difference between liberals\cons vs. progressess\far right.)
Not sure its a states rights issue. Some might say that. It simply says that marriages performed in one state are considered valid in all states. It does not force say Alabama to sanction gay marriages if the SCOTUS comes in and says states have a right to decide whether gay marriages can be performed in their state. There is also 14th amendment issues with letting some people do something but not others.
I am fine with states deciding if gay marriages should be allowed or not. But to have a legal document valid only in some states is a problem.
You are totally missing it - and it's typical of those who blame others regardless of what they do.
He attends the wedding - hypocrite
He skips the wedding - he's a monster who puts politics over family.
It's a no-win situation.
He chose family - which is the proper choice.
That is a problem when your personal beliefs conflict with your political ones. Look at Biden and some other dems in congress. Said he is personally anti abortion but is pro choice politically. He was lambasted by the GOP, rightfully for that. This rep could simply abstain from voting on the bill because he has a personal conflict of interest. That would be choosing family.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
