Will California save the (R) party in Nov?

Men and women are different. That's why a both-sexes union is different from other kinds. Only a man and woman can naturally perpetuate the next generation and provide children with both a mother and father. That is why the state has an interest in licensing marriage and does not have the same interest in licensing other social relationships.

http://walrus.blogtownhall.com/2008/05/15/california_goes_f or_chuck_and_larry.thtml

Thanks for visiting this blog. Your comments are welcome ..

Our constitution does not require Govt (the State) to encourage marriage or procreation. At best, the state should be neutral in this matter.

I realize that our current tax code is used to promote certain behavior via favorable tax treatment. However, that requires the imposition of higher taxation - and then a subjective kind of relief for certain 'preferred' people.

NOTE: what follows is slightly tangential to the topic at hand, but you may get a kick out of it!

Since many people throw out analogies & examples on this subject, here is a parallel that hasn't been made before (I think). Homeowners are allowed to deduct their housing cost (mortgage interest) for tax purposes; renters are not afforded the same privilege. Although this might be beneficial to the real estate market as well as the lenders, it seems unfair to the renters. TH readers are smart enough to figure out that homeowners in this example are analogous to heterosexuals - while renters are analogous to gay couples.

So, should renters also get a tax deduction for their housing costs? In fairness, they could certainly make such a case. The reasons that there hasn't been a taxpayer revolt on this issue are (a) most renters eventually aspire to become homeowners (b) landlords are not as organized as real estate professionals (c) due to the numbers, there isn't enough financial or political motivation behind this issue

My solution: repeal this deduction and lower taxes for everyone - clearly the Govt doesn't need this money, if they can give it back selectively!

Norman, a frequent poster in TH has invited all to participate in a grassroots effort to come up with an alternative to McCain:

My TH blog, The Blogatorium, has a new mission: To serve as a forum for disenchanted conservatives who cannot in good conscience support John McCain, and want to use their vote wisely and effectively in November.

This endeavor is predicated on the following assumptions:

1. That the GOP has abandoned conservatism, and that conservatives are consequently under no moral, ethical, or other obligation to support the so-called "lesser of two evils."

2. That no true conservative would willingly and enthusiastically support John McCain.

3. That the basic tenets of conservatism are accurately reflected in the "three-legs" model (social, fiscal, and national security), and that a true conservative will embrace all three.

4. That conservatives may, however, differ on the application of each "leg," particularly with respect to questions of faith, and should respect each others' right to do so.

5. That with unprecedented turmoil in both major parties, there has never been a better time to galvanize and mobilize conservative support for a viable, third-party candidate.

6. That compromise is often necessary in politics, but that there comes a time when compromise becomes counterproductive and even suicidal.

7. That the GOP, in making an abusive and manipulative “case” for John McCain, is asking conservatives to put party over principle and to help the GOP destroy the conservative movement.

8. That, in consequence of the aforementioned, a forum should exist wherein conservatives may discuss, debate, and compare the various third-party candidates.

9. That conservatives should, as much as possible, throw their support to ONE third-party candidate, en masse, in order to facilitate a strong showing in November, and future election victories.

Go to: http://blogatorium.blogtownhall.com/

I agree. I would get the state out of the "marriage" business all together. Issue Civil Union licenses, or otherwise register your union with a lawyer via some contract. This should enable you to visit on "family only" times at hospitals, specify where your stuff goes to when you die in absense of another will, and legally enjoy all the other "benefits" of marriage. (I use the term loosely...)

If you want to be married, go to a church. If your church won't marry you, find another. Get the state out of the marriage business.

saving the (R) party?

I'm surprised McCain't hasn't run out to California to wrap himself in a rainbow flag yet!