Sunday, January 8, 2012

Social conservatives ignored in 2012 Republican nomination

Listening to the Republicans debate in New Hampshire was painful as a person predisposed to support some of the socially conservative messages the GOP is known for.  I'm not pro-life, but I want that message presented personally and forcefully because it is necessary.  Like many Americans I'm personally pro-life but politically pro-choice.  The correct way to address the issue is to change people's hearts.  You can't do that if it is just a talking point, and then you move on.

The talk about gay rights and gay marriage was most offensive.  Not one candidate spoke out against people living a homosexual lifestyle.  It was all about tolerance and even support for people's "personal choices", but that the candidates couldn't support gay marriage because it went too far.

That's not a conservative message. It's a moderate to liberal message. It was the stance of the Democratic party in the 1990's!  Who's standing up for regular Americans who think gay sex (men) is disgusting?  Who articulates the absurdity of two women acting as a "family"?  It's not just that children need a mother and a father, of course they do, it's that gay rights is wrong. It is deviant.  Being gay is not a condition, it is a lifestyle choice.

Everyone who has homosexual orientation is not in the gay lifestyle. Furthermore, there are millions who don't accept this declaration as a good thing, but rather a problem, deviancy, or a sickness.  We should and still do love everyone as being made in God's image.  We all sin in many ways on every day.  We are all fallible.
But we don't walk around trying to turn our deviancy into a civil right!  We either try to change it, hide it, or accept that there's something different about us.

The problem with the Republican debate last night was that no one made the case that "It is not ok to be gay". It is ok to be normal.  One man, One woman.  They should get married. Then decide if they want children.

They took the normal and made it ancillary; this from the conservative party?

No comments: