Rand Paul is for "gay contracts" not " gay marriage".

The contract applies to equal marriage rights for gays with a "contract" instead of the word "marriage". I think he is trying to appeal to the right with wordplay or he wants the opposition to shut the hell up, but he claims he is offended by non traditional marriage, either way Im voting for the guy. I tried to close this thread so to not make the only half descent candidate look bad but cant.
www.washingtonblade.com...

a reply to: Foderalover

could you provide a link so that I can hear what Paul actually said, instead of you paraphrasing what you think he said?

a reply to: DeadSeraph

hERE, I FORGOT. lINK IS LOCATED AT THE BOTTOM OF MY THREAD .

a reply to: Foderalover

Your on thinner ice with no OP source...tool.

a reply to: Granite

The source is listed . TOOL !

What the hell is the difference? Isn't marriage basically a contract as well? It's a legal contract made by two people, is he really SO against calling it "marriage" that he has to call it a "contract"?

What a joke. Huge fan of Ron, not so much Rand.

a reply to: Foderalover

there are acually many differences between Ron and Rand. Rand has tried numerous times to appeal to the Republican base if you will. and Ron to my knowledge has never really tried to appeal. Ron says what he says and if you jive with it great if not oh well.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Yep, no difference. I think he is trying to appeal to the conservatives for votes and give gays the same marriage rights just call it a contract, that's the way it sounds.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

My guess is that he feels he can call it a contract, but not a marriage-so that he can still feel in keeping with his beliefs; and doesn't offend the gay community.

But just assuming.

a reply to: American-philosopher

Im with You, Ron Paul didn't kiss anyones butt .

Maybe he shouldn't get offended so easy.

Call it marriage, and lets get over it.

Cause we all know how untarnished that word is now a days... Of course it is only the same sex people that are ruining it.

Keep government out of telling yo who to marry!

a reply to: Foderalover

Why is "bigger government" your ATS agenda in every OP you spew...including this hitpiece?

a reply to: Granite

Is it not big gov to tell you who you can't marry?

Or is it only big when they are saying you can't tell people who they can marry?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

yeah I havent watched the interview with Baier. But it sound slike something to say to appeal to the conservative block, that he hasnt of yet had a good answer to, I mean its hard for conservatives to answer that right now.

I mean the contracts thing right off the bat doesnt make a whole lot of sense. It is almost like he think 's it should be ran as a bussiness when he said the thing about "competing"

a reply to: American-philosopher

A marriage has many elements of a business. Cash flow management not being the least important or subject to dispute.
The roots of marriage lie in business. And politics.

i can see the branding team assigning the focus groups questions. Then high fiving themselves when they came up with "gay contracts"

next they'll come up with new safe words like. 'Mexican Gardeners contract"

and "Greenies for Guns"

a reply to: RobinB022

That what I think. Im voting for him either way, the others are just way more uncool.

a reply to: Phage

okay but how would competing contracts solve anything?

It is States Rights not "LGBT agenda".

a reply to: American-philosopher

It wouldn't.
But it makes a tasty waffle.