Gay Marriage/Anti-gay marriage

[DragonStryk72]

Yes, I know we've got a topic going on related subject, but I had a significant deviation, and felt that derailing the thread to deal with it would be untoward.

Okay, so here we go: Gay marriage, whether for or against doesn't matter currently. What's hit me is that we only really hear about it right around election times, when the left start moving to court the gay/liberal vote, and the right starts trying to court the religious/conservative vote. It really comes down to this: None of our "leaders" will do anything either way about gay marriage, because in the end, the issue is simply far too good at making us stop paying attention to the things that really matter. I mean come on: The giveaway here is that both major candidates flipped on their previously held opinions on this subject, Romney suddenly turning against it, despite helping gay marriage in his state, and Obama becoming a proponent of it, despite going against it in '08. My suspicion on the latter is that Hilary was pro, and he needed to snag the votes to get to the big game.

They sure as hell don't want to talk about the economy, really. Well, they want to refer to it in broad terms, but far too many on both sides have their hands dirty for them to have the spine to say what we need to hear.

[gabosaurus]

Excellent point!! Most hot button topics are like this.
I think the same holds true for immigration. Every state and national political candidate champions immigration reform. But happens when they get elected? Nothing!

For politicians on both side, the lie is the thing. Candidates will lie out their tail ends to get elected. They will point out how their opponent lied.
In the end, nothing will matter. If you like a candidate (or their general party beliefs), you are going to vote for them whether they lied or not.

If Romney came out and admitted that he had sex with donkeys at a young age, his supporters will respond "so what? Obama ate dogs!"

If Obama came out and admitted he stole from people in college, his supporters will respond "so what? Romney was too rich to steal!"

[tailfins]

If Romney came out and admitted that he had sex with donkeys at a young age, his supporters will respond "so what? Obama ate dogs!"

If Obama came out and admitted he stole from people in college, his supporters will respond "so what? Romney was too rich to steal!"

I ask you: Which of the two is more plausible?

[gabosaurus]

I ask you: Which of the two is more plausible?

I think they both are. That's why I listed them. :rolleyes:

[tailfins]

Delete this: Re-posting under new thread

[fj1200]

Okay, so here we go: Gay marriage, whether for or against doesn't matter currently. What's hit me is that we only really hear about it right around election times, when the left start moving to court the gay/liberal vote, and the right starts trying to court the religious/conservative vote.

I disagree with your point to the extent that, especially at the Federal level, there is nothing to be done about it. The left/right will each court there constituencies which is not unusual during election time. Action was taken on gays in the military and action has been taken at the state levels on the matter of marriage. DOMA has also happened in the past and was bipartisan at the time.