Santorum Gets Booed in NH

Exactly what Santorum was pointing out. If you redefine the law of marriage for a group, it leaves the door open for other groups. That is what he was attempting to say when being rudely interrupted. He attempted to engage them in debate about opening those doors but as usual they weren't to interested or versed in the art of open debates!

If you change laws for a group of people, why wouldn't you consider changing laws for others!

 

Allowing two consenting adults who happen to be gay to get married is ridiculously different than bestiality, or pedophilia, and I can guarantee you it will not allow people to have do anything w/ dogs or kids...

To claim that is very dishonest, and is just a pathetic attempt to say that homosexuality is the same as bestiality, or pedophilia...

And honestly, the only reason polygamy is illegal is because of taxation reasons...

Consenting adults is the key point here...

 

Wrong, the key point to this debate is one sector/minority of people want to redefine a law that has been in existence for centuries for their own personal reasons. A law that most states citizens have voted against, yet they persist. Should the feds relent, then IT WOULD open the doors for other minority groups to demand the same.

Gay advocates detest the fact that citizens aren't on board with them redefining marriage!!!! That is the whole point!

 

What bothers me is when people want to make laws based on personal morals...

 

Then it should bother you when others personal morals are attempting to change laws to suit their morals! Isn't that what the entire Gay marriage issue is about! You are talking in circles.

Isn't their insistence that their morals for pro gay marriage should be pushed above the consensus of the majority against it?

 

NH is a liberal bastion. As we all know, liberalism is a mental disorder. No sanity whatsoever.

Conservatives never do well there. This is why Romney is leading and Huntsman has a pulse. All those Rinos will vote Romney like they did McCain in 2008.

Let's see how SC and Florida vote.

 

Excellent observation! Although the facts of which you speak will fall on deaf ears for most of the liberals here.

 

Ah but you just threw in a new requirement for marriage. We have been told marriage is a civil right by liberals. If it is it should be open to all people. You can't hide behind age of consent laws to ban certain types of marriage you dont like and want to ban laws that are already written down against gay marriage.

Who are you to decide marriage can only exist between adults? You are violating the new civil rights liberals have bestowed upon marriage!

 

NH is one of the best places to park your medical insurance corporation. Just go ask Mit.

Mega bucks to be made on medical insurance investments.

 

......

From a USAToday article:

"The New York Times describes the incident:

The testiest part of the exchange came when an audience member suggested that gay people should be allowed to marry because they have a right to happiness.

In response, Mr. Santorum asked whether she thought that more than two people should be allowed to marry, apparently trying to suggest that the questioner was advocating an extreme position.

"If you're not happy unless you're married to five other people, is that OK?" he asked.

That angered the audience, which booed his answer.

"I'm happy to engage in a discussion," he continued, saying that he wanted to "give people a chance to answer, but we're going to have a civil discussion."

The woman who had asked the first question then persisted, saying that the question about bigamy was "irrelevant."

"In my personal opinion, go for it," she said. "But when two men want to marry ..."

Mr. Santorum interrupted, "What about three men?"

"That's not what I'm talking about," the woman said to Mr. Santorum, who spent close to an hour and a half before the crowd.

The session ended with many of the students booing Mr. Santorum as he left for his next event."

http://content.usatoday.com/communi...antorum-college-students-argue-gay-marriage/1
.....

I hope he doesn't get the nomination:

I think love between a man and a woman is sweet; between two men and two women it is fantastic between one man and four women it is freakin' Mormon in nature....

 

Really? Equating a consenting show of love with a consenting show of hatred so bad that 2 people are willing to kill one another? Can you homophobic, big social government progressives please stay within reality, at least on the same side of the argument?

But hey, I am all for legalizing duels too.

 

Ron Paul isn't.

 

LOL, haha, that's a good one, 'NH a liberal bastion'.

 

You really can't comprehend this whole "consenting adults" thing can you? You will never have 2 (KEY POINT HERE) consenting persons in bestiality or pedophilia performing the acts. Kids CAN NOT consent. Lassie, CAN NOT consent. To say there is similarities between homosexuals trying to get a LEGAL act of love bound by marriage with 2 other totally ILLEGAL acts to the same footing is 100% bogus analogy. It isn't even apples and oranges, it is more like apples and a house.

 

Those were dishonest campaigns. When the real facts are laid out a majority of Americans support gay marriage. "you can fool some of the people some of the time..."

Do try to keep up, Tex.



PRINCETON, NJ -- For the first time in Gallup's tracking of the issue, a majority of Americans (53%) believe same-sex marriage should be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages. The increase since last year came exclusively among political independents and Democrats. Republicans' views did not change.





Track election 2012 data >
These results are based on Gallup's May 5-8 Values and Beliefs poll, which has tracked attitudes toward legalizing same-sex marriage each year since 2004, adding to Gallup's initial polling on the topic in 1996 and 1999.
This year's nine-percentage-point increase in support for same-sex marriage is the largest year-to-year shift yet measured over this time period. Two-thirds of Americans were opposed to legalized same-sex marriage in 1996, with 27% in favor. By 2004, support had risen to 42% and, despite some fluctuations from year to year, stayed at roughly that level through last year.

Democrats' and Independents' Greater Acceptance Shifts the Balance

Democrats' and independents' support for legalized same-sex marriage increased this year by 13 and 10 points, respectively. Republicans' views on the issue did not change from last year. Clear majorities of both Democrats and independents now support gay marriage, 69% and 59% respectively, contrasted with 28% support among Republicans.

Majorities of moderates and liberals support gay marriage, as they did last year, contrasted with 28% of conservatives.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx

 

Bigamous/group marriage is banned because government has defined marriage as between one man and one woman throughout its history.

First define incest. Most states define it as not only immediate family but extended as well. Biological evidence suggests that cousins could marry and expect babies every bit as healthy as non-close relation marriages. You are correct on immediate family, but if they want children, what makes them any different than gays? They could adopt, have a surrogate or get the female partner artificially inseminated from a donor.

Although I agree, societal norms only recently changed. Life expectancy has ballooned since the turn of the last century.Because of this, women and young ladies were married sooner so as to produce children

Do gays love each other any more than two consenting siblings? Would you be against an incestuous marriage if one or both potential spouses agreed to a medical procedure to ensure they couldn't conceive?

 

^^^ Liberals ignored this post... I wonder why?

 

A guy wanting to impose christian sharia should not only be booed but beaten.

 

It's all about creeping incrementalism. Who are we to be able to tell others they can't marry when you've changed the definition of marriage?

 

Correct. How do you feel about two adult siblings marrying?

 

Other than the possibility of the baby being completely deformed, WHO THE (*)(*)(*)(*) CARES WHAT SOMEONE ELSE DOES? As long as their action harm neither me or someone else that is not a consenting adult, why does it matter?

 

Why don't these same liberal brainwashed kids boo Barack Obama? Santorum and Barack Obama have the same position on the matter.

 

Because that would be racist to boo a black person that insulted you. DUH

 

I think it's gross...

But, then again, what do my own personal (*)(*)(*)(*)ing feelings have to do with two consenting adults wanting to get married!?

But, hey, let's build ourselves a theocracy...

After all, that's what will save us all, right?

A law system based on a few peoples moral principles...

 

Good job, New Hampshire. Boo him out of the state and the nation if possible.