A Fundamental Freedom is a new book that every Republican, conservative, and Libertarian should read. The author, David Lampo, has a long resume as a Republican Party Activist, and Director of Publication at the Cato Institute. He has also been a member of the Log Cabin Republicans.
Lampo’s book is an essay on why Republicans, conservatives and Libertarians should support Gay Rights. If you are ready to stop reading I urge you to stay. I urge Conservatives to look at the arguments of a respected Republican thinker, and I urge Liberals to stay because they might learn something about how a Republican thinks about social issues that make sense on a variety of levels.
He argues that an anti-gay agenda succinctly exposes a hypocrisy, that Liberals frequently point to, of those who talk of limited government and individual rights but ignore both when it comes to other personal freedoms.
He argues that ultimately, it is those who defend gay rights within the Republican Party, who are keeping a faith with core conservative principles. And interestingly, Lampo, presents data that reveals many rank-and-file Republicans, including many Tea Party adherents, are far more supportive of gay rights than is commonly presumed.
Twenty years ago they were in support of the individual mandate concept - back when a Republican was president. The mindset was "Why do I have to pay for other people's bills - make everyone get their own insurance!" Of course, when a Democrat passes it, they flip the hypocrite switch and use the "How dare our government tell us what to do" argument. See, Republicans are great at being hypocrites (not that Dems are appreciably less so - they aren't). This is why Romney is the perfect candidate for him. I haven't seen a flopper like Romney since....Clinton.
http://canyonwalkerconnections.com/six-things-straight-people-should-stop-saying-about-gay-people/
Civil marriage is a legal idea, but legal ideas are based off of the morality of those who put those laws in place including the founders of this country.
Lets talk about these ideas.
Thomas Jefferson himself established this as a principle of the first Amendment in 1802 here: http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html In it, its noted: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." Now, in the view of the US Supreme Court all throughout history, this was interpreted to go both ways and be absolute. Nothing in the Constitution prevents anyone - you, me, Mark, or anyone, from VOTING in elections based on our religious leanings. However, refusing to treat gays/lesbians as equals in the eyes of the law- based solely on religious principles-in my view violates Thomas Jefferson's intentions in this 1802 speech to a small sect of baptists in Danbury Connecticut. Simply put - refusing to allow same sex marriage, and give them the same rights in the eyes of the law - is a violation of the First Amendment. Repressing same sex marriage in the eyes of government is indeed establishing religion.