http://www.365gay.com/newscon04/07/070704gayDems.htm

wonder if any of the pro-gay Republicans in Congress will respond to this

doubtful

any of the gay Republicans on here?

I will: I think it's another misstep down the wrong path of how to defeat the Dems in November. Conversely, it's perfectly predictable that the Stonewall, and all other, Dems would rally to their candidates' defense on this, but their constant use of the word "hate" in all its variants is tiresome and ultimately robs the term of whatever value it had as a political weapon, assuming, outside the pages of "1984," it ever had any value in the first place.

You're right gmginsfo, they should use the appropriate terminology - bigoted or discriminatory would be better.

After all, it is the leadership of the Republican party that has signed on to the idea that faggots and dykes must be pre-judged as horrible human beings, in order for society to be saved. Why else would they think it is just fine for us to be fired from our jobs, evicted from our homes, or kicked out of public places simply because we exist?

I don't actually think the Bush/Cheney ticket is "hateful" per se (completely lacking in moral character? Yes, willing to sacrifice a child for political expediency? Certainly), because they don't hate gay people, they just don't think we're worth their time or effort. They believe we are expendable, and that anyone who supports us must be "out of the mainstream" (yeah, because believing all human beings deserve respect is such a radical idea).

Not to mention targeted for exclusion by constitutional amendment ... an issue that W called "a national emergency" ... so this latest turn of events is hardly surprising. Disgusting but hardly surprising. :mad:

We ain't seen nuthin yet. Chimpy and his merry gang will stop at nothing to win reelection.

This we understand perfectly. Anyone here who hasn't seen "Farenheit 9/11"????

I just returned from North Carolina today.

Unfortunately, I saw the gay issue is being used heavily by just about every Republican in the state in their ads for office now. One woman running for Congress stated she was a proud conservative and was for the constitutional amendment. Another had an ad likening what is happening today to the Twilight Zone, and if you voted for him he would revert us back to the good ol days of Leave it to Beaver (not kidding- he used good ol Beav at the end of the ad).

So poor John Edwards will now get the attack, thanks in part to his insane state residents. Though it was good to see on tv that 25,000 people turned out in Raleigh to see he and Kerry.

When did Edwards endorse civil unions?
I totally missed that news...

I think Edwards did during his primary campaign. I do remember him saying that at one of the debates on tv.

As far as John Kerry ever endorsing civil unions, I had never heard that until recently either. But it could be on his platform on his website.

Personally at this point I dont care what they call it so long as it will happen in the next year.

Hmmm, looks like I have a little internet research to do. Does no one else remember Edwards being against gay marriage. I could swear up and down and left and right that he was against gay marriage.

Civil unions are a different thing, though, so I'm wondering if his opinion has evolved or if he's felt this way the whole time.

And, hey, how come no fuss about Lynne Cheney? Go Momma!