Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg is FOR gay marriages...so that means the Republicans ARE FOR gay marriage?
488099
Hmmmm...doesn't this qualify \nthe Republicans as \nFLIP FLOPPERS?\n\nThey're against gay marriages \n\nBut for it \nif its Cheney's daughter\nbut against it \nif its YOUR daughter...\n\nYup...it sure sounds like a \nREPUG FLIP FLOP TO ME!
1015100
Just look at what's happening right now.  Politicians -- and especially the Republicans right now -- have perfected the evil art of manipulating the emotions of ignorant, uneducated people.  Everything the Republicans do is bad for 99% of the population.  They give tax cuts to millionaires, while the debt rises and the public schools are screwed (and the people you ask about send their kids to public schools).  And how do they get the very people they're screwing to vote for them?...\nThe Republicans get people in Red States riled up about stupid issues.  Gay marriage, for instance. How does gay marriage affect anyone who isn't gay?  It doesn't.  But they manipulate people's emotions, and get them all angry about stupid issues like this, all the time convincing them that the Democrats (who are also sleazy & corrupt, but no where near the level the Republicans are) are crazy liberals who want to burn their bibles and make their kids gay.  It's so obvious -- they always trot out the gay marriage issue around election time!  It's just a big distraction! \nThere's no doubt that the Dems would be better for regular people, but the bad guys have painted them as liberal, weak, communists who think they're smarter than the working class.\nSorry this is such a long answer, but it's a topic that disgusts me greatly.
625476
No, there is nothing wrong with it.  If a gay couple is in love, they deserve every right a hetero couple has. Marriage rights are exactly that, rights. And ever American is entitled to them. Some liberals even buy the conservative rhetoric against gay marriage. A common conservative tactic against liberal proposals is to convince the public that it would be  devastating financially. Similar arguments were made about abolishing slavery, workers unions, raising the minimum wage, and environmental protections. Gays represent about 5% of the population. Considering the number of hetero couples that get married and divorced, and the overall makeup of the economy, including the hundreds of billions spent on wars, corporate welfare, social programs, and numerous other government programs, the impact would be minimal and the economy would adjust without serious consequences.\n\nIt has more to do with religous idealogy and bigotry - they often go hand in hand. It's not only the idea of a gay couple being together they don't like, or the pretense that it would somehow cheapen their marriage. Along with marriage rights they would have the right to adopt, which also goes against their personal/religous beliefs.
749930
Republicans realized it could be a wedge issue and capitalized on it. Interesting definitions of "marriage" given by responders above. They all sound religious. The topic, I believe is civil marriage -- marriage as recognized or performed by the state. \n\nThere are children in US institutions and foster care who need 2 parent homes. Gays should be allowed to adopt such hard-to-place children. This would probably occur defacto. Mothers giving up their babies  and agencies with young, easy to adopt children would continue to choose straight adoptive couples.
546877
I'm sick of Republicans trying to justify their idiotic opinions.\n\nThanks I feel better.\n\nOh yeah-I'm ENGAGED!
349549
You need to look at the religious issues that each side accepts as it's moral grounding. Republicans usually stand on a platform built on values that include Pro-Life, and the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman. There are many other issues to be concerned with, but these are the majors. \nDemocrats generally believe the opposite and go with a more liberal approach to abortion and Pro-Choice is their platform. Also, the take on the gay marriage is usually widely accepted with the Democrat community.\nIf you are looking for a "side" to stand on, I suggest that you do some serious research and decide for yourself which you prefer. I don't know anyone that agrees with everything that their party does, and just because the current President is a Republican, don't let the things that you've read on this site skew your beliefs. You have a choice to believe what you want. Choose wisely.\n\nAnd just a side note......Vote Republican, those Democrats are morons.
540693
No, it is not true.  There are people from both parties that do not believe in the gay life style.  However, there are more Republicans who do not believe in it, because Republicans tend to be more conservative and traditional in what they believe.
86860
That depends.  Are AZNS's Republicans?
911046
I agree. I think it was Conservatives that switched Civil Unions to GAY MARRIAGE to freak out church goers to vote. Someday America will look back and regret their decisions just like they did with slavery, women and civil rights. This is clearly a violation of church and state. But I think that a grandmother and her caretaking granddaughter should be able to enter into a civil union to if they life together to enjoy the same rights. Family is more complicated these days then a man and a woman and the divorce rate will tell you that.\n\nI DON'T WANT GAY MARRIAGE!!!\nYou straight people can have it, sit on it, spin, and repeat three times.\n\nAND the fact the conservatives deny gay people marriage only further helps us to "corrupt your children" into polyamourous life styles, cause gay people are so "much cooler" role models. LIKE SEX IN THE CITY!!! and the whole metrosexual trend amoung straight huys so that they can get more punany and justify being players.\n\nOf course, some gays, but especially lesbians would benefit: Adoption, Inheiritance, Medical Insurance and Patient Rights, etc. So I do want Gay Marriage for them (Just not for me---at least at this point in my life).\n\nBut actually, here is a nifty solution:\nAbolish governement recognized marriages alltogether.\nYou get a CIVIL UNION at the Court House.\nYou get the Sacrement of Marriage at a Church.\n\nThen Priests and Ministers could be more selective and curb the divorce rate...But wait, that is how they make money by leaching off social needs. So why don't they let all those rich, over-embellishing, excessive-spending gay people get married and take their money???\n\nWell I am just as happy to keep my $ and my freedom!
298235
No.  The federal government is currently run by morons who are afraid to legitimize gay marriage because they are under the dilusion that it might somehow impact the Church (even though the religious and legal institutions of marriage are totally and completely separate and any Chuch can refuse to marry anyone they want for any reason they want).  Same-sex partnerships essentially have no legal status in the US, so their existence is virtually irrelevent to the immigration process.  It's not fair but that's the way it is.
811762
Gay Marriage and flag burning...the usual ones that the GOP brings to the ballot box to help their chances.  Neither of these issues means jack crap in the grand scheme of things.  Not one American would be hurt or affected by either issue.
557528
Only if they're Republicans.
781346
damn republican preachers. As gay as the Republicans on this site!
1108712
I don't think it's that they're afraid, but that they don't believe it's "right".  They use the Bible as a reference, saying that a marriage is a union of man and wife.  Or something like that.  haha, I'm registered republican, but not really sure on this issue (I'm more fiscally conservative than socially conservative -- I vote the way I feel is right).  With Conservatives, I think a lot of their beliefs stem from traditional Christian beliefs.  Me, personally, I just believe in having morals, that is, treating people with as much respect as I can.  \n\nBut if you're in love, it's not the government's right to tell you who you can or cannot marry (given that the person is not in you immediate family!).
850087
Statistically I don't know which party has more homosexual politicians. What I do know, is that the Republican party has more "in the closet" homosexuals.\nThe homosexuals in the Democratic party are proud of who they are and are not trying to hide anything.\nThe Republicans are generally anti-gay, even though some of them are gay.\nThe issue is not whether they are gay, it's whether or not they tell the truth. That has always been the issue, it's just one more set of stories that proves the overall Hypocrisy that has come to be the norm for that party.
530940
Of course they are. Do you have any idea of the Lesbian, cookie eating Republicans that want to rewrite English. They call it Bi-sexual, Ha Ha Ha, it's still being a Homosexual in all the books. Pat Robinson and Jerry Falwell call them an abomination, yet they vote them into office.
777173
When were the religious Republicans repudiated? You got me.  I know it these last elections, 90% of conservative initiatives/referrendums were passed (8 of 9 states banned gay marriage, and on that didn't was because they had constructed it way too strictly; similarly certain abortion matters were constructed to push the envelope and were far too stringent even for religious republicans).  The real matter at issue in this last election was the war and corruption; it was primarily a referrendum against president Bush.  Many people overlooked the Republican candidates without even considering the issues.  Additionally, many of the Democrats stealing away Republican seats are religious individuals, who support those things you disapprove of.  It's not a party thing.