Are you trying to say you're a homophobe too? I am not attributing any particular behavior to the republican party other then the oneness they tend to exude marching in lockstep to whatever directions are given by repub hq.

In this particular case, the parties political consultants came up with a way to distract voters from what I believe to be the real issues. And at least up to the last midterm elections it has been a large success.

They did their research and found that abortion and homosexuality are 2 hot buttons with a large group of people. And they were able to frame the discussion in such a way that these 2 topics took presedence over everything else.

So repubs far and wide started sponsering bills involving abortion and/or homosexuality. Despite their personal feeling on the subject.

The behavior I am attributing to repubs in general is to speak against anything involving homosexuality or abortion.


>>>You're branding the whole by the actions of a few which is disingenuous at best and patently absurd at the most. Its like saying that because a handful of catholics were convicted of scams, another handful of molesting young men, that the catholic church as a whole is a pious hypocratic organization.
>>>
>>
>>FWIW, I think the leadership of the Catholic Church is hypocritical (but not hippocratic, since they're not doctors <s>). The biggest issue for me in that scandal isn't that some priests behaved that way. It's that the church leadership moved these guys around and let them have continuing contact with children.
>>
>>I don't even mind that they protected them. Had they sent them off to monasteries where they couldn't find more victims, fine. But they kept sending them into parishes and schools.
>>
>>
>>As for Perry's argument, the issue here is that the leadership set a tone and an agenda that called for certain people to be demonized.
>>
>>Tamar
>
>
>Nice try. Maybe the Catholic church wasn't the best example and gave you the opportunity to apply fog to the argument, even though you knew exactly what I was meant. A better example would have been to label all of the UT'ers and the UT itself as worthless, bad, arrogant, violent etc, because a handfew of the membership chose to act that way. Spin it any way you want, you can't judge the whole by a few of its parts.