Here Comes the Executive Order on Background Checks

[Birds Away]

I don't have a problem voting for Christians; I've been voting for them my entire adult life. As long as they keep church and state separate, I'm fine with it.

As long as they will bake you a cake, right?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I was in high school when George w. Was president and evolution was taught. I don't think the president will have much impact on that. I'll start worrying about climate change when the potus stops burning thousands of gallons of jet fuel to play golf, my suv burns less than that during my entire lifetime. If Christianity is such a concern you'd rationalize voting away rights to keep a Christian out of office I'd suggest a foreign land that has neither Christians or a constitution... and gay marriage is way down the list of things to focus on...we have a whole mess of liberal policies to fix before we're bored enough to attempt abolishing gay marriage.

No...the next step is making you accept and condone it. And they're willing to pass laws to force you to, or else.

 

[Lowe0]

As long as they will bake you a cake, right?

You know, I actually don't totally agree with the liberal position on that. I think it's reasonable not to expect someone to "participate" in something that they have a strong moral opposition to. The question is, what constitutes participation? Photography? Certainly. Custom designing jewelry? Possibly. Baking the same cake you would for a straight couple and selling them a male-male cake topper out of a catalog? Not really.

 

[Birds Away]

In a country that has freedom of religion you don't get to decide. That's the point.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

In a country that has freedom of religion you don't get to decide. That's the point.

You do when you have the votes and you don't care about the Constitution.

 

[17 squirrel]

Because guns weren't the only issue on my mind when I voted? I'll be honest; I expect that I'll be voting for Hillary next year. I'm not just thinking about guns, but also science (climate change, evolution in education), gay rights, and overseas military action. I can't, in good conscience, say "I got mine, you're on your own."

Already answered. The 2A is important, but not the most important thing on my mind when voting.

So I would believe that it would be gay rights then. What rights should gay, lesbian citizens have that they don't have already ?

 

[Lowe0]

So I would believe that it would be gay rights then. What rights should gay, lesbian citizens have that they don't have already ?

On gay rights, automatic power of attorney (say, for hospital visits) and adoption stick out in my mind. For science, it's things like Reps insisting that "man doesn't change the climate; God does" or mucking with textbooks to "teach the controversy".

 

[dirtybird]

On gay rights, automatic power of attorney (say, for hospital visits) and adoption stick out in my mind. For science, it's things like Reps insisting that "man doesn't change the climate; God does" or mucking with textbooks to "teach the controversy".

Last I checked gay marriage was legal, and the spouse has power of attorney. And gay couples are able to adopt children. As for "science" and climate change, as I said before, my suv doesn't burn in a lifetime the amount of fuel the potus burns in a jet to go play a round of golf. The ice age wasn't because of suv's and aerosol cans...

As far as "mucking with textbooks" we teach evolution in school and did when we had a Republican potus.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

Nope. Saving the world is a job for scientists and engineers....

Saving the world is a job for Superman.

I don't believe that job is even remotely within the abilities of any mortal man, or group thereof.

 

[Lowe0]

Last I checked gay marriage was legal, and the spouse has power of attorney. And gay couples are able to adopt children. As for "science" and climate change, as I said before, my suv doesn't burn in a lifetime the amount of fuel the potus burns in a jet to go play a round of golf. The ice age wasn't because of suv's and aerosol cans...

As far as "mucking with textbooks" we teach evolution in school and did when we had a Republican potus.

Then why do we have candidates specifically vowing to ignore Obergefell? On top of that, when Ted Cruz appears on stage with someone like Kevin Swanson, that doesn't give me a lot of hope that he'll maintain the status quo on gay rights.

If the Republican Party were actually serious about getting people like me to vote for gun rights, they'd ditch the culture war nonsense and build a coalition for that specific purpose. I'm not holding my breath on that one.

 

[KJQ6945]

A conservative in academia is a lot like a liberal on a gun forum, pretty rare.
Conservatives generally aren't the ones "mucking" with the text books. We study history to learn from the mistakes of the past so we don't repeat them. The progressives want to rewrite history so they feel better about who they are. What exactly are you afraid of here?

If you destroy the constitution, or even parts of it, for the gain of "newly proclaimed rights" that aren't in it, you'll probably end up with neither. The left loves to champion minority groups for the votes, but how many have they truly advanced?

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

Then why do we have candidates specifically vowing to ignore Obergefell? On top of that, when Ted Cruz appears on stage with someone like Kevin Swanson, that doesn't give me a lot of hope that he'll maintain the status quo on gay rights.

If the Republican Party were actually serious about getting people like me to vote for gun rights, they'd ditch the culture war nonsense and build a coalition for that specific purpose. I'm not holding my breath on that one.

The funniest things about both gay rights and gun control is that I really don't think that the candidate supporters or detractors of either give a rats ***, but all of them are thrilled that we voters stay caught up in the fury and brimstone, and keep ignoring the issues that they don't want to be issues.

Like: You mean you want to spend HOW MANY of our tax dollars?.............and on WHAT?

 

[Lowe0]

A conservative in academia is a lot like a liberal on a gun forum, pretty rare.
Conservatives generally aren't the ones "mucking" with the text books. We study history to learn from the mistakes of the past so we don't repeat them. The progressives want to rewrite history so they feel better about who they are. What exactly are you afraid of here?

The Texas State Board of Education, usually. They were still trying to wedge in Creationism as recently as 2013.

If you destroy the constitution, or even parts of it, for the gain of "newly proclaimed rights" that aren't in it, you'll probably end up with neither. The left loves to champion minority groups for the votes, but how many have they truly advanced?

Didn't you just acknowledge that gay marriage is now the law of the land? There's one recent example.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The Texas State Board of Education, usually. They were still trying to wedge in Creationism as recently as 2013.

That's certainly one slant.

 

[dirtybird]

Then why do we have candidates specifically vowing to ignore Obergefell? On top of that, when Ted Cruz appears on stage with someone like Kevin Swanson, that doesn't give me a lot of hope that he'll maintain the status quo on gay rights.

If the Republican Party were actually serious about getting people like me to vote for gun rights, they'd ditch the culture war nonsense and build a coalition for that specific purpose. I'm not holding my breath on that one.

Culture war? Like the democratic culture war on gun owners? Or christians? Or white people?

To me it seems your priority is with gay marriage and not the 2A, which is what you've repeatedly stated throughout this thread. So you're a supporter of the 2A and gay rights, but willing to sacrifice 1 for the other?

 

[rhino]

I just never understood how someone can claim to be a 2A supporter then vote for someone who is against it.

That's because it doesn't work that way. You can't claim to support the 2nd Amendment and then take actions that can and will erode or eliminate rights protected by it and remain consistent.

 

[Lowe0]

So you're a supporter of the 2A and gay rights, but willing to sacrifice 1 for the other?

Yes. No one is offering both, so I have to pick and choose. That's just how it goes.

 

[KJQ6945]

This is a lost cause.
We should just burn the constitution because the founders didn't understand LGBT rights. If we get rid of the constitution we can institute a benevolent dictatorship. That has always worked out well for homosexuals. History, read it before your preferred candidate re writes it, and you end up re living it.

 

[dusty88]

Yes. No one is offering both, so I have to pick and choose. That's just how it goes.

Gay rights have greatly increased in this country. In colonial times, they discontinued execution for sodomy. And it's gotten a bit better still since then.

I don't mean to be trite or suggest it's not an important priority but, politically speaking, it's going towards increasing gay rights. A few Repubs are playing a tune to their base, but increasing members of their base favor gay rights. It's not in danger.

 

[dirtybird]

Yes. No one is offering both, so I have to pick and choose. That's just how it goes.