Quote of the day
posted at 10:30 pm on March 11, 2009 by Allahpundit
Do you think homosexuality is a choice?
Oh, no. I don’t think I’ve ever really subscribed to that view, that you can turn it on and off like a water tap. Um, you know, I think that there’s a whole lot that goes into the makeup of an individual that, uh, you just can’t simply say, oh, like, “Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being gay.” It’s like saying, “Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being black.”
So your feeling would be that people are born one way or another.
I mean, I think that’s the prevailing view at this point, and I know that there’s some out there who think that you can absolutely make that choice. And maybe some people have. I don’t know, I can’t say. Until we can give a definitive answer one way or the other, I think we should respect that.
*
Explain that.
The choice issue cuts two ways. You can choose life, or you can choose abortion. You know, my mother chose life. So, you know, I think the power of the argument of choice boils down to stating a case for one or the other.
Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?
Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.
You do?
Yeah. Absolutely.
Are you saying you don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade?
I think Roe v. Wade—as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter.
Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?
The states should make that choice. That’s what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide.
*
So, Rush Limbaugh—good or bad for you guys?
Rush is a friend. I like Rush. Rush is a bomb-thrower extraordinaire. And we need him. We need him because what he does is, he stimulates debate. And I know it drives a lot of folks on the left loony. But so does Al Franken for us. Okay? So don’t give me, “Rush is a bad guy, we need to offset him.” You already have. You got Al Franken, for goodness sakes.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
I understand your sentiment; however, do you agree that the individual state probably does have the right to regulate abortions? If not, then we should vastly cut back the current regulations applied to medicine.
Again, I understand your sentiment. It’s quite upsetting that people want to regulate how many children Octomom can have, but I don’t think it would be unreasonable for a state to refuse to say give her a welfare check.
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Here’s something refreshing….
here we are talking about a man who was elected into a leadership position in the republican party, has made some questionable moves and now we are debating tossing this leader out of his position for his stand on issues and leadership ability, yet his skin color has never come up?
I am ashamed of my party… ;( /
katy on March 11, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Sorry. I answered a little too soon. The states clearly hold the responsibility for determining when a person is dead, but there was The Uniform Determination of Death Act that it seems all states have ratified, though I’m not getting much info on the specific state ratifications.
So, death determination might be uniform, now, but the power of deciding death still resides in the individual states. With the beginning of life there would be several different definitions among the states (as there certainly used to be with death) and that would be that.
progressoverpeace on March 11, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Grrrrrr. Steele really irritates me. I’m so tired of his assessments of Rush as a bomb thrower, entertainer, blah blah blah.
How about “Educator”, “Historian”, …and yes, “Satirist”.
Buy Danish on March 11, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Are you claiming it is scientifically impossible for someone to be born with a sexual disorder? Who let the scientific illiterates out.
Poptech on March 11, 2009 at 11:09 PM
erm…
better to knife the tumor early than let it grow into a blob sticking out of your forehead….
DL Hughgley Steele has to go….
I have no stomach and no purse for the new and improved Donk Party version 2.0….
I’ll buy a Canadian citizenship first.
sven10077 on March 11, 2009 at 11:09 PM
@ fossten on March 11, 2009 at 11:08 PM
“Oops, I accidentally shoved my **** in that girl’s *****. I really wish I’d had a choice about it.”
thphilli on March 11, 2009 at 11:09 PM
Yes, murder and criminal laws are provinces of the state governments. The reason why they’re all so similar is because people usually aren’t stupid enough to legalize murder against one group.It takes judges to do that.
JohnJ on March 11, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Perhaps you would care to explain what the meaning of ‘is’ is, Mr. Guardhouse Lawyer.
fossten on March 11, 2009 at 11:11 PM
I don’t give a damn if he is a purple castrated hermaphrodite who fears the bicycle bar his first job is to build the machine and backing to nail the donks, not crow about how much smarter he is than everyone while simultaneously not having even a 50% staffing…
sven10077 on March 11, 2009 at 11:11 PM
And you intend to make alcohol illegal, too? I’m just saying. Alcoholics have access to alcohol. Gay people can be gay, but they can’t get married. Would I consider a marriage between two people of the same sex legitimate? Probably. I wouldn’t really like it, but yeah, probably.
The only problem I would have with the legalization of gay marriage is if the gov’t forces churches to marry gay people. Since homosexuality is viewed as a sin in many religions (like Christianity), the gov’t taking such action would infringe upon the rights of the churches and their respective religions. If THAT situation were to occur, I would not be as supportive of gay marriage.
Achilles on March 11, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Thanks for proving my point. Celibacy is a third choice as well.
fossten on March 11, 2009 at 11:12 PM
That’s no choice at all, honey!
Jim Treacher on March 11, 2009 at 11:12 PM
I’m not claiming anything. Scientific possibility is no substitute for such troublesome things as “facts” or “evidence.” It is entirely possible that homosexuality is genetic…it is equally possible that Michael Steele is a robot being controlled by a colony of advanced rabbits.
blankminde on March 11, 2009 at 11:12 PM
But there is discussion in the scientific community that it may be hormonal. I’ve known plenty of gay people, but never any who chose to be gay.
Laura in Maryland on March 11, 2009 at 11:12 PM
S/b + multi-million, of yet, still free Americans.
Entelechy on March 11, 2009 at 11:13 PM
@ fossten on March 11, 2009 at 11:12 PM
My point, as you know it, is that its not a choice. Who would choose to have a hairy set of male reproductive organs on your forehead? Some people just like that crap. Go to any little league baseball game, and you will notice at least one boy in the outfield spinning like a ballerina, with a dejected father who is sulking away from the rest of the parents. Its not that kids choice.
thphilli on March 11, 2009 at 11:15 PM
Exactly! WE… DON’t CARE!!!!
katy on March 11, 2009 at 11:15 PM
Why is being gay (Choice or not) even a political issue? Changing the legal definition of marriage is a political issue. I can see that. But this discussion about whether someone chooses to be gay doesn’t belong in the political arena.
Chekote on March 11, 2009 at 11:15 PM
@ Jim Treacher on March 11, 2009 at 11:12 PM
Haha, I know. Give me a big ole bear anyday, rawwwrrr.
/ugh
thphilli on March 11, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Clearly, there are genetic factors to being gay, along with some who choose to be gay. We don’t know what the breakdown is, in numbers, but the more public and “endorsed” homosexuality is, the more people will choose to be gay – or to live the gay lifestyle, if you prefer. People can convince themselves of just about anything, if they really want to.
progressoverpeace on March 11, 2009 at 11:16 PM
I’m highly disappointed with how he answered this one. First, he’s clueless on the historical facts, which he should have set straight, and second all that is liberal swill. Thirdly, it denotes that he can’t debate, not even this sissy in front of him. It’s over for him.
Entelechy on March 11, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Since you have no facts, only feelings we can get back to reality. People can be born with sexual disorders just like any other genetic problem. That does not mean others cannot choose to behave a certain way. One does not exclude the other.
Poptech on March 11, 2009 at 11:16 PM
I sure hope the republicans can get there ducks in a row soon. This country is bleeding and we need someone to step up to the plate that can take on the media, that can show what consertivies stand for, and take what the dems say and use it against them. Is there any one out there for the people anymore? This is just getting sickning.
Brat4life on March 11, 2009 at 11:16 PM
So are about 80% of Americans. Good luck winning any more elections nationwide or in about 30 states with the other 20%.
rockmom on March 11, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Yes, and it probably shouldn’t become part of some government policy… but it will…
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:16 PM
The correct response from any true federalist conservative.
Viewtifulgare on March 11, 2009 at 11:17 PM
I don’t understand this campaign against Steele. But the GOP is definately the stupid party. They’ll kick Steele out and replace him with a former member of a “whites only” club. The GOP is bent on self-destruction. And I am sick and tired of SoCons trying to use the power of government to push their morality on everybody else. I thought we were a free people.
Chekote on March 11, 2009 at 11:18 PM
I’m pro choice on the issue of abortion, as well as slavery. Heck, if someone wants to have an abortion or own a slave, what authority do I have to tell them its wrong? Its an individual decision…although I do agree with Mr.Steel
It should be the states’ choice…it’s not like we’ve already given that a shot, right??
akaag on March 11, 2009 at 11:18 PM
Quick poll:
What were Lee Atwater’s views on abortion or homosexuality?
What were Haley Barbour’s views?
rockmom on March 11, 2009 at 11:19 PM
From now on you call me a female Transylvanian American…
Entelechy on Mar 11,2009 at 10:56PM.
Entelechy:Would there be a *’Vampire’at the end,of that!:)
*(canopfor awaits Entelechy’s verbal airstrike,in,3,2,1:)
canopfor on March 11, 2009 at 11:19 PM
wait till all your kids come home from school with their “gay rights awareness” homework project…oh wait, its already happening.
ernesto on March 11, 2009 at 11:19 PM
Just making a sideline observation amongst the heated verbiage.
I’ll leave now… Carry on.
katy on March 11, 2009 at 11:19 PM
We don’t, but look how stupid he address the very topic here
Entelechy on March 11, 2009 at 10:56 PM
Entelechy on March 11, 2009 at 11:19 PM
No thanks, I prefer to let the states decide. That way if I don’t like the answer I can either get elected myself and vote the bums out or move to another state.
BRILLIANT!
Tman on March 11, 2009 at 11:19 PM
was the way I was raised….it’s sad….I hope we don’t allow the newsies to hold us hostage to our AWESOME 1.1% of the African-American vote to keep the noob…
sven10077 on March 11, 2009 at 11:19 PM
This is the confusion. Sexual disorders should not be taught as “normal” sexual behavior. Thus it is important for Homosexuality to be called what it is a “Sexual Disorder”. This is why the argument keeps going on. Homosexuality is being propagandized as normal and some bullshit civil rights issue, when it should be a medical issue like bipolar.
Poptech on March 11, 2009 at 11:20 PM
I like this.
WisCon on March 11, 2009 at 11:20 PM
The Constitution is clear. Social issues need to be left to the states to decide unless you amend the Constitution. So Steele answered the question right. But it will not make the pro-lifers happy.
Chekote on March 11, 2009 at 11:20 PM
Rewrite
Entelechy on March 11, 2009 at 11:20 PM
As long as my we have a choice, my (future) children will probably not be going to a government endorsed school.
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:20 PM
Steele seems like a nice guy but….the more he says the more I wonder how he became chairman of the RNC. Sounds inarticulate and somewhat like a RINO.
Could we please have a real conservative lead the Republican party?
Dr Bob on March 11, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Leadership…
d1carter on March 11, 2009 at 11:21 PM
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THE ONE WITH NO CHOICE ENDS UP PRIVATELY DEAD.
Rovin on March 11, 2009 at 11:22 PM
I don’t think many people are arguing about the rights of states to regulate abortions… I think they are surprised by his apathy towards those concerned that abortion is in fact unethical.
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:23 PM
Hello our Canadian friend. I only ‘strike’ gnats, with pleasure.
Entelechy on March 11, 2009 at 11:23 PM
You insult me by insinuating that I have feelings. Our original discussion was on the scientific possibility of genetically assumed homosexuality. Regarding sexual disorders being identified as a genetic problem, I don’t really have a dog in that fight. Have a pleasant evening, and take care not to smoke around your strawmen.
blankminde on March 11, 2009 at 11:23 PM
I can agree with you on this one on principal, however, I strongly disagree with the government, state or fed, dishing out welfare checks. It only makes people more dependent upon the government. Who knows, if it wasn’t available in the first place maybe Octomom would have made a more responsible decision.
fogw on March 11, 2009 at 11:24 PM
.
amend2 on March 11, 2009 at 11:24 PM
“I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.”
Well, if this is the Republican leader.
IM NO LONGER A REPUBLICAN!
JihadKiller1s1k on March 11, 2009 at 11:25 PM
Most likely…
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:25 PM
Steele is a good guy. Please read the entire interview.
Does anyone seriously think there is no genetic component to sexuality????
Isn’t the states rights position on abortion a logical one?
I’m beginning to think there are a lot of false flags on this thread. You know provocateurs. You know the ones that would love to see a black GOP chair forced out in a month. Maybe even some koskidz.
Like, how stupid is that????
r keller on March 11, 2009 at 11:26 PM
I guess people are just “born” child molesters too.
JihadKiller1s1k on March 11, 2009 at 11:26 PM
I tend to agree. I wouldn’t call is a sexual disorder so much as a sexual aberration/deviation. And people need to keep in mind that peer pressure is an awfully powerful force on teenagers. The normalization (and often glorification) of homosexuality has huge effects.
progressoverpeace on March 11, 2009 at 11:27 PM
only strikes’gnats’
Entelechy on Mar 11,2009 at 11:23PM.
Entelechy:(Wipes brow)Whew!Hehe.
canopfor on March 11, 2009 at 11:28 PM
republicans would get roe overturned in a heartbeat if they came up with a legal framework for prosecuting all parties involved in an abortion should abortion be against the law. just as a getaway driver is an accessory to murder, if abortion is murder, the doctor gets life or the death penalty for premeditated murder…the “mother” gets 25-life.
ernesto on March 11, 2009 at 11:28 PM
Better. Now, if he can just stretch his interview prep time to over one minute, he might be start becoming an asset to the GOP.
Dusty on March 11, 2009 at 11:28 PM
The scientifically illiterate among us do. Because evolution is some crazy wack stuff too – so says the bible.
Poptech on March 11, 2009 at 11:29 PM
I’m sorry. I’ve had it. People talking about our tent being too small. That’s b.s. I think out party is way too big. How come we have all of these people in our party who don’t even know what our principles are? The “leader” of the RNC can’t articulate any of them in an interview?
I go along with the idea/fact that gays/lesbians are born that way. But, can’t say that abortion is murder and should be a choice? He elevated that douchebag Al Franken to the level of Rush?!?!
I need a new party and I don’t care how small it is and if it doesn’t win any elections. I want a conservative party that stands for national security, small government, responsible mangement of government, personal responsibility, freedom to do what I want with my property, 2nd amendment, etc. You get my drift.
cjs1943 on March 11, 2009 at 11:29 PM
I’m not impressed with anything he has done or said since taking the helm.
He’s not a conservative. He’s just another squishy panderer.
My initial comment was more about our party and how non-racial we are than it was about Steele.
katy on March 11, 2009 at 11:29 PM
As a feet-in-concrete pro lifer I can accept the States Rights argument. It gets the issue pushed out of the gilded halls and back into Mayberry’s town hall. Back in Mayberry I’m sure that the babies will be issued large bats and a cheering crowd to egg them on.
Limerick on March 11, 2009 at 11:29 PM
I never said he should be forced out; however, why did he feel the need to actually answer this question? Are people that agree with him somehow intolerant Nazis? What is his definition of gay? Attraction to the same sex, sex with the same sex, acting effeminate, gay marriage, gay adoption, the so called gay civil rights, etc???
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Flush Mr. Smeele. He’s stinkin’ up the joint.
Captain America on March 11, 2009 at 11:31 PM
Memo to Steele:
1) Get your staff in place and get organized
2) Get a plan, goals, execute
3) Talk less, work more
You are not running for anything. Stop defining the GOP platform.
Thank You
swede7 on March 11, 2009 at 11:32 PM
Steele seems to have both feet firmly planted on the ground to me, although he could have used a different turn of phrase than “bomb thrower”, maybe something like “provocateur”
MB4 on March 11, 2009 at 11:32 PM
Sure. That way, anybody who wants to murder their unborn baby can simply go to a state that allows it, where it’s not illegal.
Brilliant.
fossten on March 11, 2009 at 11:33 PM
Here’s my favorite quote of the day (from Michelle’s page):
480 BILLION dollar package, full of earmarks, but this must end!, says Messiah.
Conservatives, let’s shoot each other instead.
Marcus on March 11, 2009 at 11:33 PM
I am tired of social issues driving the debate. Bush was great on social issue but he was a big government guy. I rather have a pro-choicer who reduces the size and scope of the federal government than a pro-lifer who expands it.
Chekote on March 11, 2009 at 11:33 PM
Steele is a very good guy. I used to love his debates on Fox News. He was excellent. But he sucks as RNC chair. I don’t know what changed, but something did.
I’d rather have him back as a pundit on Fox.
progressoverpeace on March 11, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Right, and neither is pedophilia. After all, they’re born that way, so it should be okay, right?
fossten on March 11, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Whom would that be? Steele? He’s small-government-ier than Bushy?
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:35 PM
Has anyone given him credit yet for his Coulter comment:
Is that throwing her under the bus????????? I don’t think so.
Ok, so in his first couple of tv interviews he didn’t throw stuff back in the inteviewers face like Ann would have. So what’s your point?
Now please, can we get back to how Steele can pull the party together, we’ve got NY-20 soon.
Focus people.
r keller on March 11, 2009 at 11:36 PM
Gay (Homosexual) would be wanting to and engaging in sexual acts with a member of the same sex.
Marriage is a states rights issue. Since it is a state sanctioned contract, the people get to decide how these are determined in society. It has nothing to do with civil rights, that is utter propaganda as Homosexuals have all the right Heterosexuals do under the constitution. Gay adoption makes no sense as why would you allow someone to raise a child who has a serious sexual disorder? Would they also allow people with known mental disorders to adopt? Homosexuality is a medical issue.
Poptech on March 11, 2009 at 11:36 PM
If homosexuality was genetic, wouldn’t it have pretty much died out by now?
Daggett on March 11, 2009 at 11:37 PM
That may be a wise choice, because, if it’s up to Barack, your children might not be home much at all in the future.
However, keep in mind that home-schooling is illegal in some countries like Germany – you know, where Obama gave his we are the ones we’ve been waiting for speech.
Buy Danish on March 11, 2009 at 11:37 PM
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:38 PM
Daggett: Please, the answer is No.
r keller on March 11, 2009 at 11:38 PM
Upstater85
Steele is not running for office. I supported him because the rest of the candidates were pathetic. I don’t want someone who belongs to exclusionary country clubs to represent the party. Who were the rest? The guy in MI. Yeah, the GOP is really doing great in Michigan! Blackwell who can’t put two sentences together. I can’t even remember the rest.
Chekote on March 11, 2009 at 11:39 PM
No he is not, Steele is big government in other ways…
“I strongly support affirmative action” – Michael Steele (The Washington Post, October 30, 2006)
“You draw the line. I mean, what do you need an assault weapon for?” – Michael Steele (Washington Post, October 14, 2006)
“We have to elect moderates in the party.” – Michael Steele (CBN News, December 8, 2008)
Poptech on March 11, 2009 at 11:39 PM
Affirmative. He is not the guy for the job. Nothing personal, but his credentials, experience and weak leadership are not what we need now. He may have a better impact on Fox.
swede7 on March 11, 2009 at 11:39 PM
Think of it like left-handedness. There are genetic components to it, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a heritable trait.
progressoverpeace on March 11, 2009 at 11:41 PM
That theory works well for Down Syndrome.
Poptech on March 11, 2009 at 11:41 PM
I’m honestly not sure if you are trying to be funny or sarcastic, but I think you have a good point. We need to take a page out of the dems’ playbook on incrementalism. I don’t think we can win this one overnight. Unfortunately, I think it will require moving the fight to individual states, and starting with eliminating late-term abortions.
I used to be a pro-choice RINO, but thanks to the liberals’ evil support for partial birth and late term abortions, I had to re-evaluate my support for all abortion. The more it is fought and discussed, the more others may rethink their views.
Laura in Maryland on March 11, 2009 at 11:41 PM
The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
Psalm 14:1
AZ_Redneck on March 11, 2009 at 11:41 PM
Look initially, I didn’t think he was too bad, but then I saw
(before March 11th)
Just because he’s the best, non-country-club choice doesn’t mean we should support him.
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:42 PM
No, because the way society and economics worked in the past one almost had to get married and have kids. Now that is not the case so we shall see in a couple more generations.
MB4 on March 11, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Laura,
The majority of Americans say that abortion is morally wrong. Yet a majority supports keeping it legal. Especially during the early stages of pregnancy. All ballot initiative to ban abortion have failed. In Colorado, it failed 73%-27%.
Chekote on March 11, 2009 at 11:44 PM
And those that we left behind would be stuck with the skyrocketing premiums? There goes my high end gravestone.
Rovin on March 11, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Upstate,
They people who want to throw Steele overboard are backing Katon Dawson. Why don’t we just put the head of the KKK in charge of the RNC?!
Chekote on March 11, 2009 at 11:46 PM
By classifying homosexuality as a sexual disorder, you’ve effectively grouped it with incest, Oedipus and Electra complexes, and pedophilia.
I will stand up and state that it is scientifically impossible for a newborn to comprehend what a penis or a vagina is, much less something as complex as love, which therefore disproves the notion that people are born homosexual.
For you to believe that anyone can be born homosexual is a reflection of your sheer stupidity and willingness to be a slave and a lemming to an incompetent social atmosphere.
leetpriest on March 11, 2009 at 11:46 PM
An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of support.
- John Buchan
MB4 on March 11, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Wasn’t a fan of Dawson. But putting the head of the KKK in charge of the RNC would at least pit the RNC toward it’s real enemy, Obama.
leetpriest on March 11, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Excellent point.
progressoverpeace on March 11, 2009 at 11:48 PM
I don’t think that Robert Byrd would want to become a Republican.
MB4 on March 11, 2009 at 11:48 PM
I think some people choose homosexuality (Anne Heche) and other are born that way (Ellen DeGeneris). I have seen young kids that I could just tell they were going to be gay. Anyway, it doesn’t matter. We should not redefine marriage to accomodate a small percentage of the population.
Chekote on March 11, 2009 at 11:48 PM
So Steele is the lesser of all the evils? This type of reasoning is why the conservatives never got so upset with Dear Leader Bush. We aren’t allowed to strongly disagree with Steele’s principles?
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Dawson shows a total lack of judgement for staying in an exclusionary club. I can see the MSM asking him every time he appears about his country club membership. The Left will attack us anyway. Let’s not give them more ammunition.
Chekote on March 11, 2009 at 11:50 PM
Aha, I’m right, the false flags (maybe even the koskidz) are out tonight.
r keller on March 11, 2009 at 11:50 PM
If you want to outlaw abortion by designating each and every abortion performed as first degree murder -regardless if it’s done by a 9 year old who was just raped by her father, or one that’s potentially threatening the life of the mother- than I think you’re crazy, and I don’t want to live in a state or a country that thinks that is a good idea.
This is an untenable position.
Tman on March 11, 2009 at 11:50 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »