Why has Rand not released a statement on the same sex marriage ruling?

tod evans said:
Your version of "Christianity".........Don't forget that there are homos who profess to be Christian...

You STILL haven't tied the homo verdict to violations of the 1st, bringing up local decisions in local courts isn't furthering your argument.

As much as I disapprove of homos I really hope the "Moral Majority" are literally forced into a corner by this decision, so much so that as a collective group they're forced to reevaluate some of the positions they've pushed over the years that severely, and adversely, affected so many.

Try to see that the homos have only done what the "Moral Majority" has been doing for decades...

Leaves a bitter taste in your mouth doesn't it?
Click to expand...

The so called "moral majority" is not responsible for pushing tyrannical social laws any more than is the left and non Christians. The American people across the board, including both Christians and non Christians have been in favor of drug laws. So something like that has absolutely nothing to do with the "religious right alone" forcing their views on everyone else.
 
Brett85 said:
Religious liberty means having the right to practice your religion as you see fit. And I'll give you examples of how the gay rights movement is infringing on the religious liberty rights of Christians.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...stian-bakers-lose-gay-cake-case-31233574.html

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...arriage-ceremony-next-stop-u-s-supreme-court/
Click to expand...

The second case you provided happened in a state that did not recognize gay marriage at the time, so again I reiterate that the state's recognition has no bearing on this issue with Christian businesses. There might be some correlation simply because of the increase in the number of gay marriages taking place, but the root problem is more related to the CRA and the issue about refusal of service or freedom of association.
 
Crashland said:
The second case you provided happened in a state that did not recognize gay marriage at the time, so again I reiterate that the state's recognition has no bearing on this issue with Christian businesses. There might be some correlation simply because of the increase in the number of gay marriages taking place, but the root problem is more related to the CRA and the issue about refusal of service or freedom of association.
Click to expand...

Fair point. It's still true that none of these religious liberty violations occurred before the gay rights movement really began to kick into high gear.
 
Voluntarist said:
The CRA should only have dealt with discrimination by the government, not by individuals. Much of the discrimination in the 50's and 60's south came by law from the state governments - it was illegal to not discriminate. Once you knock down those government barriers it becomes easy to deal with discrimination by individual businesses simply by using boycotts.
Click to expand...

I agree. The Civil Rights Act is part of the problem as well. But now Rand is refusing to speak out against the Civil Rights Act. And yeah I understand, politics and all and that he can't get away with that. But it's just unfortunate.
 
Some of us are kind of between a rock and a hard place because we can't support Cruz because of his interventionist foreign policy, but unfortunately Rand is far worse than Cruz on this issue, and if Rand keeps it up we won't be able to support him eith
Click to expand...

Of course, this is exactly how Jeb Bush will be the nominee...
 
squirl22 said:
Brett85 said:
I agree. The Civil Rights Act is part of the problem as well. But now Rand is refusing to speak out against the Civil Rights Act. And yeah I understand, politics and all and that he can't get away with that. But it's just unfortunate.
Click to expand...

Of course, this is exactly how Jeb Bush will be the nominee...
Click to expand...

Exactly how he is engineered to win the nomination. Exactly how. A perfect sample. A dangerous strategy.

Is this how he will be the nominee--and go on to lose to Clinton? Depends. Mr. Traditional Conservative all over the country! Are you listening?

It doesn't matter if Cruz' lip service sounds better than Rand's promises here and there! Cruz blathers lip service and Rand makes a stand! You people might get led down the garden path. And we may never be able to prove that, because the damned idiot Democrat won. But this does not mean we're going down that garden path with you. Screw that.
 
Last edited:
acptulsa said:
Exactly how he is engineered to win the nomination. Exactly how. A perfect sample. A dangerous strategy.

Is this how he will be the nominee--and go on to lose to Clinton? Depends. Mr. Traditional Conservative all over the country! Are you listening?

It doesn't matter if Cruz' lip service sounds better than Rand's promises here and there! Cruz blathers lip service and Rand makes a stand! You people might get led down the garden path. And we may never be able to prove that, because the damned idiot Democrat won. But this does not mean we're going down that garden path with you. Screw that.

Somebody please rep that squirrel for me! I'll be spreading myself.
Click to expand...

I hope that I'll still be able to support Rand. I'm very disappointed in his silence on this, but if he publicly comes out in favor of defending religious liberty in the coming weeks and months, that will be enough for me to continue to support him. It's all up to him at this point.
 
Brett85 said:
I hope that I'll still be able to support Rand. I'm very disappointed in his silence on this, but if he publicly comes out in favor of defending religious liberty in the coming weeks and months, that will be enough for me to continue to support him. It's all up to him at this point.
Click to expand...

You think he has flip-flopped since April? Or even in the last two years?


randomname said:
Paul hasn’t refrained from talking about gay marriage before, however. In April, in an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash, Paul said he believed “people ought to be treated fairly under the law” but also said he believed in the “traditional religious connotation” of marriage, usually defined by religious conservatives as between a man and a woman.

“And you probably could have both,” Paul added. “You could have both traditional marriage, which I believe in. And then you could also have the neutrality of the law that allows people to have contracts with another.”
INDEPENDENCE , IA - MAY 19: Democratic presidential hopeful and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visits Laree's The Shoppe of Favorites store on May 19, 2015 in Independence, Iowa. Earlier in the day Clinton hosted a small business forum with members of the business and lending communities in Cedar Falls, Iowa. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Also on POLITICO
Clinton slams GOP as 'party of the past'

GABRIEL DEBENEDETTI

In a 2013 interview with the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer, Paul voiced reservations about “federalizing” same-sex marriage.

“I’m not sure exactly how I’d come down on the federalization part,” Paul said in the January 2013 interview. “My fear is that in federalizing it, we’re going to lose the battle for the whole country. In keeping it state by state, which is the way marriage has always been adjudicated, we’ll have states that continue to have traditional marriage. I think we’re losing in large areas of the country now. If the urban areas are able to dictate, for the rest of the country, what our definition of marriage is, I’m really concerned about that.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...arriage-supreme-court-ruling-2016-119500.html
Click to expand...

We know where he stands. The only thing to change since then is a SCOTUS ruling. Those things tend to be long, and convoluted, and are liable to require some digestion and thought before a way can be found to live with them, or get around them. And there is no point in saying anything until you know what can be intelligently said. A kneejerk reaction is easy. It's also meaningless. You seem to want something right now, even if it's just posturing. But 'Do something, even if it's wrong' is very often a piss poor strategy. Especially when the MSM spend their days and nights sharpening their knives primarily for you.

I hope he and his staff read this monstrosity and find something interesting in it. If they do, I'm sure we'll hear about it shortly thereafter. And if they cannot, then this big buildup will be for naught. But give the man a chance to inform himself well enough to find a meaningful and enlightening answer.
 
Last edited:
Brett85 said:
Rand had a "knee jerk reaction" to the Obamacare ruling. He commented on it and criticized it right away without reflecting on it and reading the ruling.
Click to expand...

Rand's learning curve will be short though . . .
remind me/us in the forums here. and the campaign too when this happens . . . it doesn't look good - and everyone would advise against it.

. . . maybe Rand needs a press secretary before he is even elected, for all the extraneous bullsheeeet.

think more like Def Leppard maybe comes to mind (?) -
I'll be two steps behind --- but right.
Take the time to think about it.



.
 
I probably did get quite carried away in all of this. I should've been more patient. Mods, please delete this thread if you will.
 
Brett85 said:
Yes! Better late than never. I'm really glad he's taking this position. I agree with everything he said in the article.
Click to expand...

I also agree with everything he said. Great way to show the hypocrisy about liberty on some contracts (marriage) but not other contracts (wages). I wonder if any others in the GOP field will follow his lead about the government getting out of marriage altogether, or if they will just continue pouting about the SCOTUS decision, or if they will try to avoid it altogether.
 
Me ? ... grad school in Cleveland - Lewis-NASA/Case/CCF
. . .

Government should get out of ______________________ (fill in the blank)

\
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Matt Collins
Rand releases statement on Rubio nomination to Secretary of State:
Replies
16
Views
2K
osan
osan
tebowlives
Rand Paul Signals He Will be a 'No' on Labor Secretary Nominee Lori Chavez-DeRemer
Replies
1
Views
592
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
jct74
  • Poll Poll
Rand waiting on Trump to support liberty issues and candidates more
2
Replies
38
Views
8K
Anti Globalist
Anti Globalist
jct74
[Updated] UFO community is pissed at Rand for supposedly blocking transparency legislation
Replies
2
Views
3K
dannno
dannno
Occam's Banana
Germany's ruling coalition collapses
Replies
1
Views
423
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Back
Top