The Enlightened and Tolerent hoisted by their own petard

[Religious Dick]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33xbmB2O-r0[/youtube]

[BT]

It's a complicated world.

[richpo64]

Not when it comes to this. People are against it, mostly for religious reasons. That's true all over the world.

[BT]

I just find it interesting that perhaps the protesters should be picketing Obama's house in stead of Mormon Churches, hating on religious white folk.

Seems his get out the vote strategy was the scale tipper.

Did Rev Wright ever give a sermon about gay marriage?

[Plane]

Hmmm...

So relitively conservative Mexicans can swamp the gay voice in the Democrat party ,if they continue to immagrate at the same rates as they have been?

What prevents the Gays from takeing over the Republican party and trying to win with a "western" strategy?

[Xavier_Onassis]

What prevents the Gays from takeing over the Republican party and trying to win with a "western" strategy?

That is a truly unlikely occurrence. Perhaps one of the weridest theory you have come up with to date.

A Western strategy would not result in a majority of the population. Observe that California is the only heavily populated state west of the Mississippi. There would also be a revulsion factor as well. Tom Tancredo, the most anti-Mexican guy in Congress is a Republican. Do you think that a Gay Republican Party would actually carry Utah?

[Plane]

What prevents the Gays from takeing over the Republican party and trying to win with a "western" strategy?

That is a truly unlikely occurrence. Perhaps one of the weridest theory you have come up with to date.

A Western strategy would not result in a majority of the population. Observe that California is the only heavily populated state west of the Mississippi. There would also be a revulsion factor as well. Tom Tancredo, the most anti-Mexican guy in Congress is a Republican. Do you think that a Gay Republican Party would actually carry Utah?

It is no more unatural than the Republican "southern" strategy of myth and legend.

If the Democrats and Republicans have entirely swapped membership before, what stopps them from doing so again?

[Xavier_Onassis]

It is impractical, because there are not as many votes in the West as there are in the South.

You can believe all you want in the gays taking over Utah, but it won't happen, not ever.

The Gay and Lesbian population never exceeds 10% in any population. Presumably, they could all move to some underpopulated state and take it over, but this is even less likely than the Libertarians taking over New Hampshire, as some Libertarians have suggested. That won't happen, either.
 
Most people are just not so deeply into politics that they let it dominate their lves and al the decisions they make to live their lives.

Again, this is a deeply weird idea.

The Democrats and Republicans have never entirely swapped membership before. All that happened is that Southern bigots left the Democratic Party, because they did nt want to share with newly franchised Black voters. First they switched to Wallace, and then when Wallace was crippled by a would-be assassin, they switched to the Republican Party, at first only in presidential elections. The rest of the country did not switch.

[Plane]

It is impractical, because there are not as many votes in the West as there are in the South.

You can believe all you want in the gays taking over Utah, but it won't happen, not ever.

The Gay and Lesbian population never exceeds 10% in any population. Presumably, they could all move to some underpopulated state and take it over, but this is even less likely than the Libertarians taking over New Hampshire, as some Libertarians have suggested. That won't happen, either.
 
Most people are just not so deeply into politics that they let it dominate their lves and al the decisions they make to live their lives.

Again, this is a deeply weird idea.

The Democrats and Republicans have never entirely swapped membership before. All that happened is that Southern bigots left the Democratic Party, because they did nt want to share with newly franchised Black voters. First they switched to Wallace, and then when Wallace was crippled by a would-be assassin, they switched to the Republican Party, at first only in presidential elections. The rest of the country did not switch.

It is not a bit more weird ,less likely or concerned with reality than is the "Southern Strategy" which actually gets taken seriously.

When it was supposed to have happened there were a lot more votes in the north than the south, New England was still "rock ribbed " no less than the south was "yellow dog". There has never been a reason for the Republicans to woo racists , there has only been a good reason for Democrats to dump them. Bully for you that dumped them , but the same reasons you didn't want them apply and we don't want them either. 

[fatman]

The vision of a collapsed society, where men abandon their wives in droves to 'become gay, consumed these callers".

Seriously, is this some kind of joke?  The most liberal estimates by sociologists put gays, both closeted and out, at around 7-10% of the population.  Two states and several countries allow gay marriage.  Surely there is some corroborating evidence that allowing gay marriage results in men abandoning their wives in droves to become gay.  Isn't there?  I would laugh at the absurdity of such a statement if it weren't for the fact that people are using rationales like this to vote against gay marriage.  If you're opposed to it, fine, but don't lean on total absurdities, like the one above to make your case.  It's offensive in its stupidity.

[Xavier_Onassis]

It is not a bit more weird ,less likely or concerned with reality than is the "Southern Strategy" which actually gets taken seriously.

=========================
It gets taken seriously because it was announced as the strategy of the Republican Party under both Nixon and Reagan. It's not some sort of myth. Richard Vigerie and a bunch of Republican strategists came up with it. I think the name was even on the cover of Time magazine.

Why do you suppose Reagan decided to make a big deal of giving a speech in the podunk town of Philadelphia, Mississippi--a place that despite its name, was never noted for "brotherly love", but a vile lynching. This was the Southern Strategy in action, a way of saying "kluxers and bigots, racists and haters-- Daddy Reagan loves you".

[Henny]

The vision of a collapsed society, where men abandon their wives in droves to 'become gay, consumed these callers".

Seriously, is this some kind of joke?  The most liberal estimates by sociologists put gays, both closeted and out, at around 7-10% of the population.  Two states and several countries allow gay marriage.  Surely there is some corroborating evidence that allowing gay marriage results in men abandoning their wives in droves to become gay.  Isn't there?  I would laugh at the absurdity of such a statement if it weren't for the fact that people are using rationales like this to vote against gay marriage.  If you're opposed to it, fine, but don't lean on total absurdities, like the one above to make your case.  It's offensive in its stupidity.

And even more - if a woman is married to a man who is gay - albeit "in the closet" - wouldn't she prefer him to go and live his life rather than continuing the marriage on false pretenses?

[Xavier_Onassis]

And even more - if a woman is married to a man who is gay - albeit "in the closet" - wouldn't she prefer him to go and live his life rather than continuing the marriage on false pretenses?
========================================
This is probably true in some, perhaps most cases, but I doubt that it would be the preference in all of them.

[Plane]

It gets taken seriously because it was announced as the strategy of the Republican Party under both Nixon and Reagan.

Announced?


I didn't know that , who announced it?

[Xavier_Onassis]

I didn't know that , who announced it?

Nixon and his campaign manager. Reagan and his campaign manager.