Minnesota Republican who voted for gay marriage retires after party abandonment

[COpatriot]

The GOP needs to purge those who don't hold strong against the homosexual agenda.

And everyone on the other side hopes the GOP listens to you. Keep fighting that losing battle and continue to alienate and display yourselves to be out of touch with a portion of the public that grows with each passing year. This will be what seals their fate in irrelevance. And then people will wonder why there is no one left to fight for us on gun rights.

 

[Keith and stuff]

And everyone on the other side hopes the GOP listens to you. Keep fighting that losing battle and continue to alienate and display yourselves to be out of touch with a portion of the public that grows with each passing year. This will be what seals their fate in irrelevance. And then people will wonder why there is no one left to fight for us on gun rights.

He isn't fighting a battle. He doesn't even live in the US. I have no idea why he even bothers to comment on such things.

 

[oyarde]

That doesn't necessarily make it right that the GOP withdrew their endorsement. If he's good on other issues, he's not really a problem. Hope he returns to the Republican Party in the near future.

I agree , but probably too late anyway, all of the population in MN is in the Twin Cities and that belongs to the communist party ......

 

[LibertyEagle]

This is why the R party needs to go. Libertarian, freedom for all, including gays.

You know, it always strikes me as odd when "libertarians" are all about less government, except in *some* cases.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Clearly not. Ron Paul Republicans disagree on 1,000s of issues, including this one. I'm not really sure why you made your comment...

Uh huh, however some who call themselves Ron Paul Republicans don't agree with Ron Paul, either.

 

[LibertyEagle]

He isn't fighting a battle. He doesn't even live in the US. I have no idea why he even bothers to comment on such things.

He has more sense than many here.

 

[Guitarzan]

If this guy were a Ron Paul Republican he would've voted against this bill.

Thank you for clearing that up Almighty Arbiter of all Ron Paul Republicans.

 

[Cabal]

He has more sense than many here.

An endorsement from you doesn't help his cause.

 

[LibertyEagle]

An endorsement from you doesn't help his cause.

Opinions vary.

And here's a newsflash for you. Eduardo doesn't need permission from you to post his thoughts. If you doubt this, go check out the forum guidelines.

 

[DamianTV]

The GOP needs to purge those who don't hold strong against the homosexual agenda.

The GOP is purging anyone who doesnt endorse the Status Quo. Theyve cost themselves their own credibility by focusing on opposition to gay rights instead of equal rights for all people. The less they adhere to the principles of the constitution, the more they will alienate more and more people and their support in general. Establishment Republicans endorse fiat currencies, bipartisan bills of surveillance and oppression, and full elimination of the Constitution. The GOP is so divided against itself that it may not survive.

 

[LibertyEagle]

The GOP is purging anyone who doesnt endorse the Status Quo. Theyve cost themselves their own credibility by focusing on opposition to gay rights instead of equal rights for all people. The less they adhere to the principles of the constitution, the more they will alienate more and more people and their support in general. Establishment Republicans endorse fiat currencies, bipartisan bills of surveillance and oppression, and full elimination of the Constitution. The GOP is so divided against itself that it may not survive.

I'm sorry, but the goal has never been to gather around the lowest common denominator. Government needs to get out of the marriage business. Churches should be able to refuse to marry gays and no one should be forced to do business with someone they don't want to.

People claim that we should all be focusing on the government surveillance, but when there is a gay, tranny, etc. thread posted, it usually gets an enormous number of hits.

 

[DamianTV]

I'm sorry, but the goal has never been to gather around the lowest common denominator. Government needs to get out of the marriage business. Churches should be able to refuse to marry gays and no one should be forced to do business with someone they don't want to.

People claim that we should all be focusing on the government surveillance, but when their is a gay, tranny, etc. thread posted, it usually gets an enormous number of hits.

Youre right.

Many claim that we simply can not afford the consequences of the actions of the GOP, when maybe we should consider that we can not afford the GOP itself any longer. Or for that matter, the entire militarized police war industrial banking prison education food television complex.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Youre right.

Many claim that we simply can not afford the consequences of the actions of the GOP, when maybe we should consider that we can not afford the GOP itself any longer. Or for that matter, the entire militarized police war industrial banking prison education food television complex.

The GOP is whomever is in it. It is an inanimate object. If WE are in it and did the work required to fill the offices of the Republican parties in most of the states, we would own it right now. But, no, people refuse to do the work, or run into a tough time and quit. You mean they didn't welcome me? Oh, boo hoo, they are horrible. I am quitting and taking my marbles home and pout about how horrible it all is.

If you got rid of the GOP, you would still have the Democratic Party and whatever new establishment party that would be started.

This isn't about parties. I thought you knew that.

 

[DamianTV]

They may very well be ready to give up on the two party paradigm because its no longer working, but we'll see, there are still a lot of people that do fall for it and contribute nothing. Ive been a State Delegate myself in one of the handfuls of states that Ron Paul won in the last election. Id say thats getting involved.

 

[Queer_Libertarian_Radical]

Clearly this issue's one that sometimes splits "liberty" folk. I fully disagree that he should've voted against the bill, as do the vast majority of "Ron Paul Republicans" that I've heard from since this fiasco here in Minnesota. (No that's not scientific, but I'll stand by it till a poll comes out.)

Quite frankly, as an athiest and pro-humanity type, I fear that too often being "anti gay marriage" while couching it in freedom language is merely a cover for blatant bigotry. I have gay friends, including two who got married right after they COULD. I care not one BIT about what they (or anyone else) does in the bedroom. This is one of those issues that is just purely NOT MY DAMNED BUSINESS.

And yes, I grant that government should get out of marriage entirely. I could live with that. Just as I think that government should get out of the drug war entirely, but I can live with medical marijuana and "legalization and taxation" as much better than what was.

Many people on here don't realize that state level marriage can also hinder adoption rights.

For example in Utah there is a law against non-married couples from adopting.

Utah tells judges to reject adoption petitions filed by same-sex couples

http://fox13now.com/2014/02/27/utah...adoption-petitions-filed-by-same-sex-couples/

While most of us, including me, want to see marriage privatized eventually that doesn't deal with the here and now.

 

[Queer_Libertarian_Radical]

If WE are in it and did the work required to fill the offices of the Republican parties in most of the states, we would own it right now.

Although I'm not a Demo-Republicrat, in Pennsylvania the GOP here is VERY hostile to libertarianism. PA Governor Tom Corbett is a huge statist monster and the most unpopular governor in the entire United States.

Problem is that you can't get liberty candidates in primaries due to massive corporate and banker spending in those primaries. So I've lost almost all faith in electoral politics.

 

[eduardo89]

For example in Utah there is a law against non-married couples from adopting.

That's a very good law.

 

[fr33]

I'm sorry, but the goal has never been to gather around the lowest common denominator. Government needs to get out of the marriage business. Churches should be able to refuse to marry gays and no one should be forced to do business with someone they don't want to.

People claim that we should all be focusing on the government surveillance, but when there is a gay, tranny, etc. thread posted, it usually gets an enormous number of hits.

But most republicans don't want to get the government out of marriage. There has been almost no effort to do so. There has however been efforts to define marriage at a federal level that was popular among republicans. The GOP will lose on this issue and run people out of the party by doing it.

 

[Keith and stuff]

Uh huh, however some who call themselves Ron Paul Republicans don't agree with Ron Paul, either.

Sure, there only person that agrees with Ron Paul on every issue, every time is Ron Paul. And that's not even always true since he changes his mind. A well known example (to us) is him changing his mind from being in favor of the government death penalty to being opposed to the government death penalty. He will likely continue to change his mind on issues.

 

[LibertyEagle]

They may very well be ready to give up on the two party paradigm because its no longer working, but we'll see, there are still a lot of people that do fall for it and contribute nothing. Ive been a State Delegate myself in one of the handfuls of states that Ron Paul won in the last election. Id say thats getting involved.

Who is "they"? The establishment is not ready to give up on them, because political parties have been very useful to them and will continue to be until people stop whining and get in there and take them over.