Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 23, 2014, 10:22:24 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2012 Elections (Moderators: Mr. Morden, Bacon King, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | |-+  Mitt: No to gay marriage; children need a mother and father. Gay adoption? Fine.
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: Mitt: No to gay marriage; children need a mother and father. Gay adoption? Fine.  (Read 1396 times)
Joe Republic
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29574
United States


View Profile
« on: May 11, 2012, 02:39:12 am »
Ignore

I hate how truncated the title of this thread is.  Oh well.

Mitt Romney said Thursday that same-sex couples should be allowed to adopt children, but they should not be married because children should be raised by a mother and a father.

[...]

Romney told Fox News' Neil Cavuto that his views on same-sex marriage are unchanged. He explained some of the rights he believes should be extended to gay couples. He said the issue is about what is best for the nation, referring specifically to children. He said his "preference" is that marriage continue to be defined as between a man and a woman.

"I happen to believe that the best setting for raising a child is where this is the opportunity to a mom and a dad to be in the home," Romney said. "I know there are many circumstances where that is not possible, through death or divorce. I also know many gay couples are able to adopt children. That's fine."

Could somebody please explain to me how the fabulous f[inks] that makes any sense.  Thanks.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2012, 03:00:28 am by Joe Republic »Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13232


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2012, 02:42:01 am »
Ignore

He thinks it will get him elected?
Logged
wildfood
Full Member
***
Posts: 149
View Profile
« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2012, 04:36:53 am »
Ignore

Mitt is rattled and rambling due to the latest developments.

If a handler doesn't come out an "clairify" what the candidate actually meant I will be surprised.

Obviously what he said makes no sense.
Logged
Vermin Supreme
Henry Clay
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 470


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2012, 04:57:11 am »
Ignore

Mitt Romney is such a dissimulator. I'm sure he doesn't care that much about gay rights in his personal life but in reality he seems like the type that wouldn't mind  hiring a gay employer. It's just Mitt Romney to win the GOP nomination is to start 180 on some social issues such as abortion and gay rights.

No to gay marriage  but yes for gay adoption? How about both yes to gay marriage and gay adoption Mitt Romney.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2012, 04:59:15 am by Vermin Supreme »Logged

Franzl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21401
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2012, 04:59:34 am »
Ignore

He thinks it will get him elected?

What percentage of voters do you think even recognize the contradiction?
Logged
Senator Alfred F. Jones
Alfred F. Jones
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7617
United States


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2012, 05:30:36 am »
Ignore

Objection!

Folks, I believe that what we are seeing right now is a very rare specimen: I think this is a living, breathing Politicus romneyi, commonly known as the Michigan-New Hampshire-Massachusetts-Utah Etch-a-Sketch.
Logged



Alfred is the only acceptable option

Clinton they've discovered our lovechild Sad

ShadowOfTheWave
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1230
United States


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2012, 06:45:53 am »
Ignore

I really don't understand why it's "fine" but whatever.
Logged
AverroŽs Nix
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9071
United States


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2012, 07:21:02 am »
Ignore

It's not as complicated (or as contradictory) as most here are making it out to be:

1. A married, heterosexual, two-parent family is the best setting for raising a child.
2. Marriage should be used to encourage the best possible kind of setting for raising children.
3. (1) is not always possible, and it's OK to allow other kinds of families to raise children, even though these arrangements are less than ideal.

The problem with the position is that empirical evidence demonstrates that a least the "heterosexual" part of point one is bunk, but that's not really the point being discussed here.
Logged

muon2
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8112


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 11, 2012, 08:01:37 am »
Ignore

It's not as complicated (or as contradictory) as most here are making it out to be:

1. A married, heterosexual, two-parent family is the best setting for raising a child.
2. Marriage should be used to encourage the best possible kind of setting for raising children.
3. (1) is not always possible, and it's OK to allow other kinds of families to raise children, even though these arrangements are less than ideal.

The problem with the position is that empirical evidence demonstrates that a least the "heterosexual" part of point one is bunk, but that's not really the point being discussed here.

I think Nix pretty much has it right here. Best does not mean only, especially for a person like Mitt who often sees issues in shades of gray rather than black and white. His shading of the issues is exactly what gets him in trouble with the base, but it's generally a good quality for a top administrator. Top execs who treat all issues in a black and white fashion box themselves into positions that hurt their organizations. Mitt will struggle throughout the campaign as he tries to produce simple sound bites while recognizing internally the complexity of an issue.
Logged


Lunar Eclipse of April 15, 2014 with the star Spica.
So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!
Rockingham
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 489


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2012, 08:21:05 am »
Ignore

Good. Gay adoption rights are far more substantive and important then the symbolic label of marriage.
Logged
BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1077
United States


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 11, 2012, 08:31:52 am »
Ignore

If a kid needs both a dad and a mom, what about single parents? I wonder how he will react to that.
Logged

"Weezy F Baby and the F is for Phenomenal" - Lil' Wayne

"Look at this photograph/Every time I do it makes me laugh/How did our eyes get so red?/And what the hell is on Joey's head?" - Nickelback
muon2
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8112


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: May 11, 2012, 08:45:45 am »
Ignore

If a kid needs both a dad and a mom, what about single parents? I wonder how he will react to that.

I think he did, and in the same statement.

Mitt Romney said Thursday that same-sex couples should be allowed to adopt children, but they should not be married because children should be raised by a mother and a father.

[...]

Romney told Fox News' Neil Cavuto that his views on same-sex marriage are unchanged. He explained some of the rights he believes should be extended to gay couples. He said the issue is about what is best for the nation, referring specifically to children. He said his "preference" is that marriage continue to be defined as between a man and a woman.

"I happen to believe that the best setting for raising a child is where this is the opportunity to a mom and a dad to be in the home," Romney said. "I know there are many circumstances where that is not possible, through death or divorce. I also know many gay couples are able to adopt children. That's fine."
Logged


Lunar Eclipse of April 15, 2014 with the star Spica.
BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1077
United States


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 11, 2012, 08:53:45 am »
Ignore

I find it more odd that he'd be in favor of gay adoptions, but be against gay marriage.
Logged

"Weezy F Baby and the F is for Phenomenal" - Lil' Wayne

"Look at this photograph/Every time I do it makes me laugh/How did our eyes get so red?/And what the hell is on Joey's head?" - Nickelback
Abdul the Damned
Kalwejt
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37893
Turkey
View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 11, 2012, 08:56:53 am »
Ignore

What a nice logical fallacy.
Logged

Keystone Phil
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51139


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: May 11, 2012, 09:07:17 am »
Ignore

There's nothing inconsistent with Mitt's position (now there's a genuine shocker!) but the way he worded it makes it another gaffe (not a shocker).
Logged



Grazie, Capitano!
cavalcade
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 746


Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -3.13

View Profile
« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2012, 09:43:13 am »
Ignore

I, personally, believe that it's "best" for a child to have two parents (though it's possible that more is also fine) but I don't think single parenthood should be illegal.  Mitt's logic is similar, as others have pointed out.

I am sure gay couples are thrilled to be compared to widowed/divorced parents though.
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18306
United States


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: May 11, 2012, 09:56:41 am »
Ignore

Could somebody please explain to me how the fabulous f[inks] that makes any sense.  Thanks.
 

it doesn't
Logged

Do not fight with one another over my banning.  I've enjoyed the time I have spent with all of you, but the time really has come for me to leave.  It is what I want.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9Y_GLT4_9I

I looked over Jordan, and what did I see?
Coming for to carry me home,
A band of angels coming after me,
Coming for to carry me home.

Swing low, sweet chariot,
Coming for to carry me home.
Simfan34
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8091


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: May 11, 2012, 10:33:10 am »
Ignore

Ahh, so now we're attacking Mitt for not being progressive enough. Do we forget he's a Republican? I applaud this move, and I think what muon2 said about not seeing things in just black and white is a good sign that Romney will be a competent president. I don't see how any gay person could be offended by this any more than they've been already by Romney.
Logged

Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26895
United States


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: May 11, 2012, 10:45:55 am »
Ignore

All other things being equal, which of course is never the case, isn't a kid living with two parents, one male, and one female, probably the most ideal for the kid - you know gender role models and so forth?  As others have stated, just because something is best, does not mean that some law should mandate it (among other things, as I said, all other things are really never equal).  The elusive theoretical perfect can be the enemy of the practical good.
Logged

A dog on every car, a car in every elevator
Bull Moose Base
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2495


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: May 11, 2012, 11:06:53 am »
Ignore

That family is fine provided the child's parents are not married.
Logged
memphis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14075


Political Matrix
E: -3.10, S: -3.83


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: May 11, 2012, 12:19:48 pm »
Ignore

All other things being equal, which of course is never the case, isn't a kid living with two parents, one male, and one female, probably the most ideal for the kid - you know gender role models and so forth?  As others have stated, just because something is best, does not mean that some law should mandate it (among other things, as I said, all other things are really never equal).  The elusive theoretical perfect can be the enemy of the practical good.
Not really. My parents had a very ugly marriage. My quality of life improved immensly when they got divorced. And I don't think I'm alone in saying I'm tired of santimonious Republican politicians telling me what my family is supposed to look like. For a party that claims to be for "small gov't" they're strangely obsessive about what people do in their own homes on their own time.
Logged

I was naturally suited to be a lawyer, almost from birth. It was as if, almost, God had willed it. He meant for me to be here, to punish you, and then punish you some more.
I refuse to die a martyrs death here, because you know why?  Martyrs are still dead.
Joe Republic
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29574
United States


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: May 11, 2012, 12:52:14 pm »
Ignore

I really don't understand why it's "fine" but whatever.

Mainly because the vast majority of psychological studies have shown no difference in the quality of child-rearing between heterosexual and homosexual parents.
Logged
IDS Judicial Overlord John Dibble
John Dibble
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18785
Japan


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: May 11, 2012, 02:29:54 pm »
Ignore

Ahh, so now we're attacking Mitt for not being progressive enough. Do we forget he's a Republican?

No, he's being attacked on this for holding a blatantly contradictory stance, something not uncommon among Republican politicians.
Logged

Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4888
View Profile
« Reply #23 on: May 11, 2012, 06:30:34 pm »
Ignore

It's not as complicated (or as contradictory) as most here are making it out to be:

1. A married, heterosexual, two-parent family is the best setting for raising a child.
2. Marriage should be used to encourage the best possible kind of setting for raising children.
3. (1) is not always possible, and it's OK to allow other kinds of families to raise children, even though these arrangements are less than ideal.

The problem with the position is that empirical evidence demonstrates that a least the "heterosexual" part of point one is bunk, but that's not really the point being discussed here.

I think Nix pretty much has it right here. Best does not mean only, especially for a person like Mitt who often sees issues in shades of gray rather than black and white. His shading of the issues is exactly what gets him in trouble with the base, but it's generally a good quality for a top administrator. Top execs who treat all issues in a black and white fashion box themselves into positions that hurt their organizations. Mitt will struggle throughout the campaign as he tries to produce simple sound bites while recognizing internally the complexity of an issue.

This.
Logged

"Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."

- Bastiat
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4888
View Profile
« Reply #24 on: May 11, 2012, 06:32:49 pm »
Ignore

Objection!

Folks, I believe that what we are seeing right now is a very rare specimen: I think this is a living, breathing Politicus romneyi, commonly known as the Michigan-New Hampshire-Massachusetts-Utah Etch-a-Sketch.

I told you guys that Romney would triangulate like nobody's business. Social issues are off the table even though Romney is going to please his base with conservative judges after he becomes POTUS. In the meantime, Romney is gonna find a way to keep this about the economy, and the base has every reason to come out for Romney without being vocal about social issues to such an extent it turns off independents from Mitt. The last thing the base wants is four more years of Obama. Romney is a heck of a lot more conservative than Obama, which pleases Republicans, but Romney's also a heck of a lot safer and toned down in rhetoric than most conservatives, which pleases independents. It's a winning combination.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2012, 06:40:02 pm by Politico »Logged

"Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."

- Bastiat
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines