RECENT  POSTS:  » No, you really don't seem to know what tyranny is, Jerry Cox » Vatican's #Humanum event meant to paint gay families as 'evil' and 'obscene,' admits invited guest » Read: Federal judge calls MS's marriage ban what it is: discriminatory » Yet another federal judge accurately notes crude discrimination within Arkansas' marriage ban » Prominent conservative outlet equates LGBT activists with Nazi paramilitary » New pledge: Conservative pastors choose to separate selves from civil marriage » Read: ADF creates fake 'victim' superbook; misapplies business matters to churches » P&G reaches out to pro-discrimination activist, learns it made right choice » In prep for Pope's 2015 visit, World Meeting of Families readies gay stigma, exclusion » Today in ambition: NOM cofounder vows to fight marriage equality for 100 years  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

10/20/2008

Video: Potential federal mistake supports another

by Jeremy Hooper

This from the Christian Broadcast Network:

Still want to defend her as an "inclusive" Republican, Log Cabin?

Sarah Palin on the Brody File - Marriage Amendment [YouTube]
(h/t: Joe My God)

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Hmm, so she is for "traditional marriage"? How can that be? She has JOB!!! Isn't the "traditional" wife supposed to stay home, make babies and have dinner ready for "hubby"? Isn't she being a bit hypicritical, having a MAJORLY powerful job AND not staying home to care for her children?

just my 2 cents.
aj

Posted by: aj | Oct 21, 2008 11:16:40 PM

How can someone running for office only be for some Americans, but not all, not you people over there. That doesn't make any sense.

Posted by: Kevin | Oct 23, 2008 1:40:32 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails