All the buzz today is last night's VP debate. I have to be honest with you ... I didn't watch too much of it. I'm too busy to sit down for long and watch TV but I did catch a few moments of it.
There was something that caught my attention and at first I wasn't going to blog about it for a couple of reasons. 1) I didn't want to offend anybody and/or step on toes and 2) I don't like to get too wrapped up in politics. But the more I've thought about this, the more I'm bothered by it (and well, it's my blog and I can say whatever I choose).
The moderator asked a question about whether or not Joe Biden and Sarah Palin supported same sex benefits. Joe Biden was first up and gave an adamant "yes" ... no big surprise. But then Sarah Palin also said that she supported same sex benefits. This bothered me!!! I think what bothered me the most was the fact that she ended her answer with a statement about how she stands by her belief that marriage should be reserved for a man and woman. So, tell me, how can you support same sex benefits but not same sex marriage?
One of the reasons I liked Sarah Palin was because she wasn't afraid to admit that she is a believer. I have to be very careful here because I don't want to come across as judgemental or "holier than thou". Personally though, I don't feel like you can stand firm on the Word and at the same time, support such a sinful act.
Any thoughts?
***Please check out this link for the text version of what I'm talking about***
3 comments:
Hmm, I didn't see any of the debates, but I can't say I am surprised. Both McCain and Palin are "feel-good" Conservatives. McCain has said he is pro-life, but he's voted pro abortion also. I know they only chose her to gain women voters, and I can't stand all the Hollywood-like role playing going on. Republican or not, Believer or not, make up your mind and stick with the same answers people! She definitely shouldn't be saying one thing and then backing it up with "but I believe marriage is between one man and one woman."
Thanks for posting that link. She does try to keep her claims to the conservative side, but goes on to say that, "And so, we do support -- we do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same Constitutional benefits as it relates to their property rights, their rights of visitation, their rights of insurance, their rights of ownership, as heterosexual couples do." Which obviously doesn't make any sense. If you don't support it, why do you make allowances for it? There have to be moral absolutes somewhere.
I whole-heartedly agree!!
Post a Comment