Forum Thread

Rick Perry Compares Alcoholism To Homosexuality

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 11 Posts
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    When asked whether or not homosexuality was a disorder, Texas Governor Rick Perry had this to say, speaking at a Christian Science Monitor event held on 6/19/14 in San Francisco:

    "I may have the genetic coding that I'm inclined to be an alcoholic, but I have the desire not to do that. And I look at the homosexual issue as the same way."

    While this won't surprise 99% of us on here, as Rick Perry has long since shown his ignorance on the issue, and has a rolodex of dumb comments that are only rivaled by the great, native Texan flub artist G.W. himself, I thought it worth pointing out anyways.

    This man is serious about bidding for the 2016 Commander-in-Chief position. And the GOP are seriously considering him for the nomination. While he repeatedly pushed the idea on CNN's Crossfire that this comment shouldn't be of any focus because he believes that social issues should be left up to the states and the psychiatrists, still his opinion and views matter. And being a governor of a state, especially as one as large as Texas, your views on social issues matter.

    Equating being homosexual to having the disease of alcoholism.. I guess I've heard the comparison before. I'm honestly just shocked that with the tidal wave of change throughout the country toward gay rights, gay marriage acceptance, and overall more equality on the issue that Gov. Rick Perry hasn't begun to evolve with the times. Yet another example that the dinosaurs in the GOP party aren't listening, or refusing to. Either way, they continue to alienate and repeat the same ol' nonsense.
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I feel like it is stuff like this that causes Rand Paul to warn the GOP that Texas could turn blue in the next decade.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Zach F Wrote: I feel like it is stuff like this that causes Rand Paul to warn the GOP that Texas could turn blue in the next decade.
    I would think more like an appendix of the US or a seperate country; may be Mexico wants it?
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:
    Zach F Wrote: I feel like it is stuff like this that causes Rand Paul to warn the GOP that Texas could turn blue in the next decade.
    I would think more like an appendix of the US or a seperate country; may be Mexico wants it?
    Well, seeing how Texas makes up 9% of the US GDP, that would be an extremely important appendix. Only California produces more. Texas leaving the union would be terrible for both the US and Texas.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Zach F Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote:
    Zach F Wrote: I feel like it is stuff like this that causes Rand Paul to warn the GOP that Texas could turn blue in the next decade.
    I would think more like an appendix of the US or a seperate country; may be Mexico wants it?
    Well, seeing how Texas makes up 9% of the US GDP, that would be an extremely important appendix. Only California produces more. Texas leaving the union would be terrible for both the US and Texas.
    At least as a seperate country it is huge compared to the Netherlands!!! So not that impossible. If Iraq can (may be) split up in 3 countries and the USSR did in multiple countries, why not the US?; lets split the "south" and "north" (civil war all over) and give Alaska to the Canadians. Also make "Detroit" a seperate city like D.C. because it is broke. Also seperate Oklahoma; Nebraska; Kansas etc. (the tornado ally) as a seperate union (way too costly to maintain) This seperation will boost competion for sure. (Wow; I will be declared a total nut for sure on this site.)
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:
    Zach F Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote:
    Zach F Wrote: I feel like it is stuff like this that causes Rand Paul to warn the GOP that Texas could turn blue in the next decade.
    I would think more like an appendix of the US or a seperate country; may be Mexico wants it?
    Well, seeing how Texas makes up 9% of the US GDP, that would be an extremely important appendix. Only California produces more. Texas leaving the union would be terrible for both the US and Texas.
    At least as a seperate country it is huge compared to the Netherlands!!! So not that impossible. If Iraq can (may be) split up in 3 countries and the USSR did in multiple countries, why not the US?; lets split the "south" and "north" (civil war all over) and give Alaska to the Canadians. Also make "Detroit" a seperate city like D.C. because it is broke. Also seperate Oklahoma; Nebraska; Kansas etc. (the tornado ally) as a seperate union (way too costly to maintain) This seperation will boost competion for sure. (Wow; I will be declared a total nut for sure on this site.)
    My only question is why? Why would we ever do that? What are we looking to achieve?
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Zach F Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote:
    Zach F Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote:
    Zach F Wrote: I feel like it is stuff like this that causes Rand Paul to warn the GOP that Texas could turn blue in the next decade.
    I would think more like an appendix of the US or a seperate country; may be Mexico wants it?
    Well, seeing how Texas makes up 9% of the US GDP, that would be an extremely important appendix. Only California produces more. Texas leaving the union would be terrible for both the US and Texas.
    At least as a seperate country it is huge compared to the Netherlands!!! So not that impossible. If Iraq can (may be) split up in 3 countries and the USSR did in multiple countries, why not the US?; lets split the "south" and "north" (civil war all over) and give Alaska to the Canadians. Also make "Detroit" a seperate city like D.C. because it is broke. Also seperate Oklahoma; Nebraska; Kansas etc. (the tornado ally) as a seperate union (way too costly to maintain) This seperation will boost competion for sure. (Wow; I will be declared a total nut for sure on this site.)
    My only question is why? Why would we ever do that? What are we looking to achieve?
    Nothing!! you never know; some states like TX like to run their own show; the same as happening in FL. (GOP dictatorship)
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I'm still a little lost. Are there states that don't like to run their own show? Is Montana asking for Idaho to run the Montana government?

    But back to the thread OP, Perry has acknowledged that he "really stepped in it" with that comment. Which is about as apologetic as you can get without actually apologizing.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Zach F Wrote: I'm still a little lost. Are there states that don't like to run their own show? Is Montana asking for Idaho to run the Montana government?

    But back to the thread OP, Perry has acknowledged that he "really stepped in it" with that comment. Which is about as apologetic as you can get without actually apologizing.
    Compare it to the Netherlands; they have 13 provinces ( just like the "states" here) however they all comply to the "laws/rules of the central government. Here it is a total mess; if you only already look at traffic laws, then there are huge differences between states etc. So in other words all of them are actually little countries and make their own rules. I can not imagine that in the Netherlands every province would make their own licence plate and tax stickers (efficiency is an unknown word here)
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The Netherlands are slightly larger than the state of Maryland. Governing over a territory that size is much simpler than governing over a territory that is 237 times larger.
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Add Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker to the list of prominent Republicans that are against gay marriage, but would rather not talk about it any longer. Instead of changing their minds, or admitting that they could be wrong, it seems the party got together and decided they would go with lines like:

    "My position has been clear. I voted in the past. It really doesn't matter," - Scott Walker when asked about his current position on gay marriage in a recent interview.

    Looks like the Republicans got together and said look, we can't win this debate anymore. But we don't want to look like flip-floppers (i.e. Mitt Romney). So, instead, we'll side-step the questions, pretend like our opinions now mean nothing, and shift focus toward the economy and yadda-yadda-yadda.

    Forget that both Rick Perry and Gov. Walker have said some outrageous things in favor of keeping gay marriage and gay rights quelled. Forget that they have been obstacles that their own state has had to circumvent in order to have sexual orientation equality. No, now they would just like to drop it, please and thank you.

    Scott Walker is another GOP hopeful for the 2016 Presidency. It isn't hard to convince anyone that of the few social issues that are most important to voters in today's world, sexual orientation equality is arguably number 1, and you don't become the Commander-in-Chief being against it. At least, I hope not. Gerrymandering is tricky thing though.