(Hucakbee) also affirmed support for a law in Arkansas that prohibits same-sex couples from becoming adoptive or foster parents. “I think this is not about trying to create statements for people who want to change the basic fundamental definitions of family,” Huckabee said. “And always we should act in the best interest of the children, not in the seeming interest of the adults.”
“Children are not puppies,” he continued. “This is not a time to see if we can experiment and find out, how does this work?” http://tcnjperspective.wordpress.com/2010/04/09/huckabee-rips-steele-romney-lgbt-activists-4/
Okay, first off, that is awesome that Arkansas has so many foster and adoptive parents that they simply do not need anymore. Wow! So, there is not a single child in Arkansas that does not have a safe and loving home? Amazing! Good for you, Arkansas!
Hmm, “best interest of the children, not the seeming interest of the adults.” Wow, that one is a stumper. I guess in Arkansas, the “best interest of the children” is to remain parentless, if the only parents available are gay or lesbian. Oh, wait! There ARE no available children in Arkansas, remember? And, those great heterosexuals who took them in have no “seeming interest” in them, I guess. Wow, I wonder how they get them to fill out the forms with so little interest?
I do not understand the puppies comment, though. Are puppies being experimented on in Arkansas? To find out “how they work?” Huh. I thought Arkansas was a little more advanced than that, but apparently not.
He continues to oppose any government recognition of same-sex relationships. Even civil unions are “not necessary,” Huckabee said. “I think there’s been a real level of being disingenuous on the part of the gay and lesbian community with their goal of civil unions,” he alleged, referring to LGBT activists who first claimed that their goal in several states was to enact civil unions, but subsequently launched efforts to implement full marriage rights.
Huckabee went on to draw parallels between homosexuality and other lifestyles that are considered by some to be morally aberrant. “You don’t go ahead and accommodate every behavioral pattern that is against the ideal,” he said of same-sex marriage. “That would be like saying, well, there are a lot of people who like to use drugs, so let’s go ahead and accommodate those who want who use drugs. There are some people who believe in incest, so we should accommodate them. There are people who believe in polygamy, so we should accommodate them.”
“Disingenuous?” Well, sure, since we all know that LGBT activists work on a kind of “collective consciousness” and all think the same way. Surely every single one agreed to this in the beginning and none of them were allowed to change their minds (including the ones that were born later). I am sure none of them wanted marriage ever and if they did, they should have spoken to Mr. Huckabee about it first.
And, of course there are parallels between being gay and taking drugs! I mean, just the other day, I heard this lesbian saying that she was going down to the store to pick up some milk. Milk! Who does she think she’s kidding? I’ve seen Fox News. They think up all these innocuous names for these drugs and they think we don’t know. Oh, we know.
And incest and polygamy? Oh, I am sure that no one in the Bible ever committed incest or polygamy, but if they did, I am sure that God smote them immediately, right? Well, maybe not, since they all happened to be heterosexuals. (I think God might be a wee bit confused on this issue, personally.)
Huckabee, a former Baptist preacher, remains in favor of keeping in place ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,’ the policy that requires the military to expel openly gay service members. “I wouldn’t support a repeal if I were commander-in-chief,” he said. “You don’t see foot soldiers out there demanding it. I’m not sure that’s the most important thing we ought to be doing for the military.”
“[‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’] touches an extraordinarily small group of people,” Huckabee continued. He dismissed calls to amend the policy as “primarily a posturing point for political purposes,” and an attempt to “force something on the military that they themselves haven’t pushed that hard.”
“I think we certainly should be very sensitive to the fact that the purpose of the military is not to see if we can create social experiments,” Huckabee warned.
So true. Because a repeal of DADT would be such a slap in the face to all of those soldiers who died for liberty, for freedom, for equality. What good is equality if you can’t deny it from people? Especially such an “extraordinarily small group of people.”
Besides, we would never experiment with the troops. Nope, the troops are the same as they’ve always been and no changes have ever been successful. To ever suggest that allowing trained Arabic linguists be allowed to serve, even if they are gay, would certainly be a “posturing point for political purposes”, right? I mean, what would we ever need Arabic linguists for, right?
As for the soldiers demanding it, well, I suppose after they are discharged, they are not technically soldiers anymore, are they? Besides, aren’t they all supposed to do what they are told anyway? By their leaders? Out of curiosity, Mr. Huckabee, are we supposed to be listening to the leaders or the soldiers? Or is it just whoever is giving you the answer you want?
I just still can’t believe you compared the children of Arkansas to puppies.
