Walker: I don't know if being gay is a choice

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/55abb15be4b0caf721b30c5b?

Still not ready for primetime.

[Torie]

Given how superficial and unknowledgeable Walker is about so much, perhaps he was just telling the truth. It's pathetic that he is not better prepared for these questions however. He could have said I'm not an expert on the issue, although I am aware that most who are knowledgeable on the subject think that it is not a choice, but at this point as a practical matter, it really does not make any difference one way or the other. Walker over time is going to sink like a rock.

[bedstuy]

Walker doesn't seem to have it.  It's looking more and more like we're in for a Hillary Clinton vs. Ted Cruz election.

[dudeabides]

Walker doesn't seem to have it.  It's looking more and more like we're in for a Hillary Clinton vs. Ted Cruz election.

You wish!

It's Bush Vs. Clinton.

I'm done with Walker, Rubio is now my second choice.

[Thomas D]

President Bush was asked this question in the 3rd debate in 2004. He said the same thing.

Walker knows Tammy Baldwin. Just ask her.

[Likely Voter]

For anyone who opposes SSM (and ENDA) this is really the only position you can have. Once you agree that being gay isn't a choice, there is no longer any rationale for opposition to gay rights. So opponents have to be in the choice crowd (like Santorum or Carson) or "I dont know."  At least there is some consistency.  Rubio tried for moderate heroism by saying being gay isn't a choice, but gays still shouldnt be allowed to get married. In my book that is worse.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Paul vs Hilldawg. Randslide thank you very much

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

For anyone who opposes SSM (and ENDA) this is really the only position you can have. Once you agree that being gay isn't a choice, there is no longer any rationale for opposition to gay rights. So opponents have to be in the choice crowd (like Santorum or Carson) or "I dont know."  At least there is some consistency.  Rubio tried for moderate heroism by saying being gay isn't a choice, but gays still shouldnt be allowed to get married. In my book that is worse.

It's a choice.. Plain and simple.

[Thomas D]

For anyone who opposes SSM (and ENDA) this is really the only position you can have. Once you agree that being gay isn't a choice, there is no longer any rationale for opposition to gay rights. So opponents have to be in the choice crowd (like Santorum or Carson) or "I dont know."  At least there is some consistency.  Rubio tried for moderate heroism by saying being gay isn't a choice, but gays still shouldnt be allowed to get married. In my book that is worse.

It's a choice.. Plain and simple.

So you could choose to be gay....if you wanted to. Good to know.

[Consciously Unconscious]

For anyone who opposes SSM (and ENDA) this is really the only position you can have. Once you agree that being gay isn't a choice, there is no longer any rationale for opposition to gay rights. So opponents have to be in the choice crowd (like Santorum or Carson) or "I dont know."  At least there is some consistency.  Rubio tried for moderate heroism by saying being gay isn't a choice, but gays still shouldnt be allowed to get married. In my book that is worse.

It's a choice.. Plain and simple.

I'm just wondering if you've ever told a gay person that to their face.  Look them in the eyes and say that they're lying about choosing to be gay.  You'll be laughed at.

[Torie]

For anyone who opposes SSM (and ENDA) this is really the only position you can have. Once you agree that being gay isn't a choice, there is no longer any rationale for opposition to gay rights. So opponents have to be in the choice crowd (like Santorum or Carson) or "I dont know."  At least there is some consistency.  Rubio tried for moderate heroism by saying being gay isn't a choice, but gays still shouldnt be allowed to get married. In my book that is worse.

It's a choice.. Plain and simple.

OK, I'll bite. How do you know this?

[Higgs]

I'm curious why a question like this is even asked. How in any way would his belief if it's a choice to be gay (which its obviously not) affect his ability to run the country. I wish we could actually talk about the issues for once.

[Famous Mortimer]

For anyone who opposes SSM (and ENDA) this is really the only position you can have. Once you agree that being gay isn't a choice, there is no longer any rationale for opposition to gay rights. So opponents have to be in the choice crowd (like Santorum or Carson) or "I dont know."  At least there is some consistency.  Rubio tried for moderate heroism by saying being gay isn't a choice, but gays still shouldnt be allowed to get married. In my book that is worse.

It's a choice.. Plain and simple.

I know engaging in same sex intercourse is a choice. Do you believe being attracted to the same sex is a choice?

[Famous Mortimer]

I'm curious why a question like this is even asked. How in any way would his belief if it's a choice to be gay (which its obviously not) affect his ability to run the country. I wish we could actually talk about the issues for once.

Answered your own question. As you said, it's obviously not a choice. So if he answers an obvious question wrong, he's obviously a dullard and not fit to be president.

[Thomas D]

I'm curious why a question like this is even asked. How in any way would his belief if it's a choice to be gay (which its obviously not) affect his ability to run the country. I wish we could actually talk about the issues for once.

It's a window into who they are.  I want to know what your tax policies would be, but I also want to know how'd you react if your son wanted to convert to Judaism to marry a Jewish Woman.  

[Higgs]

I'm curious why a question like this is even asked. How in any way would his belief if it's a choice to be gay (which its obviously not) affect his ability to run the country. I wish we could actually talk about the issues for once.

Answered your own question. As you said, it's obviously not a choice. So if he answers an obvious question wrong, he's obviously a dullard and not fit to be president.

I strongly disagree, just because he doesn't know the facts to answer a random question like this does not disqualify him for the presidency. He has a great list of accomplishments as Governor of Wisconsin that surely make him fit to be president. The people that say this disqualifies him from the presidency weren't voting for him anyway, luckily I don't think the majority of people would change a vote based on something as silly as this comment.

[ScottieF]

Wow. Maybe he should have finished college.

[Likely Voter]

I'm curious why a question like this is even asked. How in any way would his belief if it's a choice to be gay (which its obviously not) affect his ability to run the country. I wish we could actually talk about the issues for once.

Here is why. If you believe being gay is a choice, then gay people should be treated like model train enthusiasts. You have nothing against them and they have every right to enjoy their 'lifestyle' but they shouldn't have any 'special protections.'  Whereas if you believe it isn't a choice, then sexual orientation becomes like race/ethnicity. And therefore deserves protection from discrimination.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I don't know if Scott Walker is being dumb by choice.

[Bojack Horseman]

For anyone who opposes SSM (and ENDA) this is really the only position you can have. Once you agree that being gay isn't a choice, there is no longer any rationale for opposition to gay rights. So opponents have to be in the choice crowd (like Santorum or Carson) or "I dont know."  At least there is some consistency.  Rubio tried for moderate heroism by saying being gay isn't a choice, but gays still shouldnt be allowed to get married. In my book that is worse.

It's a choice.. Plain and simple.

Why don't you come over to my place tonight and prove that you can choose to be gay. No shortage of room in my bed.

[Famous Mortimer]

I'm curious why a question like this is even asked. How in any way would his belief if it's a choice to be gay (which its obviously not) affect his ability to run the country. I wish we could actually talk about the issues for once.

Answered your own question. As you said, it's obviously not a choice. So if he answers an obvious question wrong, he's obviously a dullard and not fit to be president.

I strongly disagree, just because he doesn't know the facts to answer a random question like this does not disqualify him for the presidency. He has a great list of accomplishments as Governor of Wisconsin that surely make him fit to be president. The people that say this disqualifies him from the presidency weren't voting for him anyway, luckily I don't think the majority of people would change a vote based on something as silly as this comment.

No. You had it right the first time when you said the answer was obvious. It is obvious. Only an idiot would answer anything other than "no, it's not a choice". Furthermore, it's not a "random" question. Gay rights was/is one of the biggest issues in American politics, the field in which he works. Walker supported a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and was the defendant in a court case to overturn that amendment. If he really took such a strong stance on gay rights and never thought about whether homosexuality is a choice or not, if the question was really "random" to him, again, it proves he is a gigantic idiot and specifically that he doesn't think through policies before he commits to them. Very extremely relevant to his ability to be president.

[Higgs]

I'm curious why a question like this is even asked. How in any way would his belief if it's a choice to be gay (which its obviously not) affect his ability to run the country. I wish we could actually talk about the issues for once.

Answered your own question. As you said, it's obviously not a choice. So if he answers an obvious question wrong, he's obviously a dullard and not fit to be president.

I strongly disagree, just because he doesn't know the facts to answer a random question like this does not disqualify him for the presidency. He has a great list of accomplishments as Governor of Wisconsin that surely make him fit to be president. The people that say this disqualifies him from the presidency weren't voting for him anyway, luckily I don't think the majority of people would change a vote based on something as silly as this comment.

No. You had it right the first time when you said the answer was obvious. It is obvious. Only an idiot would answer anything other than "no, it's not a choice". Furthermore, it's not a "random" question. Gay rights was/is one of the biggest issues in American politics, the field in which he works. Walker supported a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and was the defendant in a court case to overturn that amendment. If he really took such a strong stance on gay rights and never thought about whether homosexuality is a choice or not, if the question was really "random" to him, again, it proves he is a gigantic idiot and specifically that he doesn't think through policies before he commits to them. Very extremely relevant to his ability to be president.

Ok I see your point now in how the question is relevant to gay rights issues. I certainly still don't think it disqualifies him to be president, but I am a little disappointed with his stance on some gay rights issues.

[Likely Voter]

This 'I dunno' thing is akin to how GOPers are handling climate change with 'I'm not a scientist.' The logic flows gay isn't a choice therefore we can ban SSM/dont need ENDA. Or climate change isn't real/isnt caused by humans therefore we dont need to regulate carbon, stop building new coal plants, etc.

THe GOPers arent ready to give up their positions (SSM is bad, regulating carbon is bad), but they realise the rationales for those decisions are making them look like idiots. So they now default to the 'I dunno' position.  From a policy perspective there is no difference between the most ardent climate deniar and most ardent gay hating bible thumper, but the "I dunno" is a copout to sound less like an idiot (but still kind of an idiot).

[Fuzzy Bear]

I'm curious why a question like this is even asked. How in any way would his belief if it's a choice to be gay (which its obviously not) affect his ability to run the country. I wish we could actually talk about the issues for once.

Here is why. If you believe being gay is a choice, then gay people should be treated like model train enthusiasts. You have nothing against them and they have every right to enjoy their 'lifestyle' but they shouldn't have any 'special protections.'  Whereas if you believe it isn't a choice, then sexual orientation becomes like race/ethnicity. And therefore deserves protection from discrimination.

I take the Biblical view of homosexuality.  That being said, the goal of homosexuals has been to become a protected minority, regardless of the lack of proof that homosexuals are "born that way".  They've just about achieved that goal when the SSM ship sailed.

"Sexual orientation" is going to be like race and ethnicity in the next few years.  And it won't matter if it's a Democratic or Republican President; the Courts will end up doing this.  There's legal precedent for this now.  And the moral compass of America is such that there are more that 13 states that would block any Constitutional Amendment to undo Obergefell. 

This is, I believe, an issue that the GOP wants to go away, and fast. 

[Xing]

"I don't have an opinion on know much about every any single issue out there," Walker told CNN in an interview.

There's the Walker-English translation. You're welcome.