Tator, I will agree that your views reflect a majority in the USA.
In Calif your views are only a very slight majority however, something like 52% vs 48%.
For the record, I am straight, always have been straight, always will be straight. I know people who are GLTB (their buzzword) and they are good people, good at their jobs, although it seems creepy to me when I consider their alternative lifestyles. Therefore I keep my thoughts on business and I don't invade their privacy.
In terms of the overall issue and problem of calling civil unions "marriage" that creeps me out also. Marriage is a church issue. History tells us that it was the Roman Catholic Church that invented the marriage ceremony sometime around the 2nd century AD. Prior to then, cohabitation was the norm, largely celebrated with parties in the community.
Gays and lesbians have always existed in society throughout history, although prior to Harvey Milk days, they used to stay in the closet about it. They have always been about 10% of the population.
When the Social Security system and the Internal Revenue Code began to "subsidize" marriage, that is when the problem started. Now the GLTB community wants the same retirement and tax benefits for themselves.
I cannot blame them.
There is no reasonable argument against giving them these rights.
That's just logic.
If you had lots of friends and associates who were GLTB I think you would be forced to confront the logic directly.
It is easy to live in a secluded area where you don't know who the 10% are, and therefore not have to deal with the reality.
Having said all that, it is a difficult issue for most people, and it has become a political issue as well, like abortions, like smoking dope, like growing dope, like euthanasia, like everything else that the 2 parties write their platforms about.
I think O needs the votes, so he has flipped from a traditional family view and flopped to alternative marriage now, since he needs the rainbows behind him.
R has flip-flopped as well on everything he needed to flip-flop in order to get his party's endorsement. What the RNC supporters really seem to want is someone like Sarah Palin, although Independents (and certainly not Demo's) would never ever vote for her.
Both O and R have been flopping around like two fish on the sandy shore. Nothing new about that.
Nobody on the campaign trail is talking about Obama-care anymore because if they do then they would also need to answer about Romney-care. Nobody is talking about O's abismal gun-rights record because then they also would need to answer about R's Massachusetts assault-rifle ban.
Perhaps we do need something like Obama-care or Romney-care, but nobody likes to think about that?
Perhaps sturmgewehr are across the line of "destructive devices" and convey so much power to spree and mass shooters that it may be appropriate to draw the line at the 1903 Springfield bolt-action, but nobody likes to think about that?
Seems to me that O and R agree on a lot of the same things.
Since I am not GLTB, and since I don't smoke or grow dope, and since I don't need an abortion (male not female), and since I qualified for my own private medical insurance, and since my hunting rifle is a Remington 700 not an AK-47, these peripheral issues simply do not resonate for me. I don't care about them.
The US economy is in a major recession because of Wall Street not because of Main Street nor because of Wash DC.
There is nothing anyone in Wash DC can do about the economy. When the Japanese were in this same boat 20 years ago for mostly the same reasons (real estate speculation and easy lending by their banks) it took them 10 years to recover from it. It has only been 3 1/2 years in the USA so far. So we still have a ways to go.
Ergo there is nothing either O or R can do about the economy to "make it better."
The economy will just need to fix itself.
Last edited by Shoobee; 05-18-2012 at 01:59 PM.