McCain Answers On Abortion, Homosexuality Anything But “Straight Talk”
By John Lofton, Editor
SENATOR NOT ‘pro-life’ because he OKs murder of some unborn children.You remember John (I-Just-Tell-It-Like-It-Is-And-Let-The-Chips-Fall-Where-They-May) McCain, right? He’s the “no-nonsense,” Republican Arizona Senator whose Presidential-candidate campaign bus was called “The Straight-Talk Express?” Yeah, that John McCain.
Well, on ABC’s “This Week” program recently (11/19/06), when asked about sodomite “rights” and abortion, McCain’s answers were anything but straight. His replies were crooked, twisted, double-minded, evasive, serpentine. Indeed, his disagreeing with God’s Word, his denying that homosexuality is a sin, sounded like the actual Voice Of The Serpent (Genesis 3:1).
Q: I know you’re not pro-choice, you’re pro-life. Are you pro-gay rights?
Comment: No, McCain is not pro-life because he believes in exceptions, that it’s OK to murder some innocent, unborn babies by abortion, as he’ll admit a little later in this interview.
A: In the respect that I believe that the don’t ask, don’t tell policy is working in the military. I don’t know how you view that. I do not believe that marriage between — I believe in the sanctity and unique role of marriage between man and woman. But I certainly don’t believe in discriminating against any American.
Q: But on that don’t ask, don’t tell policy the military now classifies homosexuals, they classify it, homosexuality as a defect. Do you agree with that?
A: I don’t think they do that.
Q: It actually is. Yes they do right now.
A: Well I don’t think it’s a ‘defect’ but I do believe the don’t ask, don’t tell policy has been very effective. We’ve got the best military we’ve ever had and are well into all volunteer force so I think the policy is working.
Comment: McCain’s questioner is correct. And the fact that McCain doesn’t believe homosexuality is a “defect” reveals a defect in his own thinking. Any policy that allows sex perverts to stay in our military, under any circumstances, is not working. The policy should be no homosexuals in the military — period. A “Report to the Secretary of Defense/Review of the Effectiveness of the Application and Enforcement of the Department’s Policy on Homosexual Conduct in the Military/Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) — in April of 1998 — said, in part:
“On February 28, 1994, after extensive hearings in Congress…Congress expressly found that service by those who have a propensity to engage in homosexual conduct creates an unacceptable risk to morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion, and that the long-standing prohibition of homosexual conduct therefore continues to be necessary in the unique circumstances of military service.”
But, of course, it was President Clinton, himself a sex pervert and predator, who gave us, not surprisingly, the don’t ask don’t tell, pro-sodomite policy when the policy should be: Ask and tell before a person is in our military. If that person is a homosexual, no military service.
IF HOMOSEXUALITY not sin apology owed to Sodom-Gomorrah which experienced serious urban renewal. But, of course, God says it is sin.The Clinton cover-up-the-queers-in-the-military-policy has proven very expensive because when they are discovered and kicked out replacements must be found. Earlier this year (2/14/06), the “Washington Post” reported that financial costs to the U.S. military for discharging and replacing homosexuals under the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy are nearly twice what the government estimated last year, with taxpayers covering at least $364 million in associated funds over the policy’s first decade, according to a University of California report scheduled for release today.
A footnote: A recent issue of “Newsweek” magazine says that with Democrats now in control of Congress there may be a move to allow open, out-of-the-closet homosexuals to join our military. Now, back to the McCain interview:
Q: You say you believe that marriage should be reserved for between a man…
A: Yes.
Q: And a woman. You voted for an initiative in Arizona that went beyond that and actually denied any government benefits to civil unions or domestic partnerships. Are you against civil unions for gay couples?
A: No, I’m not. But the — that initiative I think was misinterpreted. I think that initiative did allow for people to join in legal agreements such as power of attorney and others. I think there was a — I think that there was a difference of opinion on the interpretation of that constitutional amendment in Arizona.
Q: So you’re for civil unions?
A: No I am for ability of two —- I do not believe gay marriage should be legal. I do not believe gay marriage should be legal. But I do believe that people ought to be able to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways that people who have relationships can enter into.
Comment: Whoa! Time out! Talk about something being “misinterpreted”! Being for two shacked-up homosexuals being allowed “to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways that people who have relationships can enter into,” is being for civil unions and being for civil unions is, de facto, being for “gay marriage”!!
Q: You threw your support behind Trent Lott this week to be Whip. He has said that homosexuality is a sin. Is that what you think?
A: I’ve never heard Trent Lott state that. But no, that’s not what I…
Q: That’s not your position?
A: No.
Comment: Well, that homosexuality is a sin is God’s position. And McCain’s disagreeing with God here makes one wonder where else he differs with God.
Q: One final question on abortion, you’re for…
A: I just want to point out again. I believe that gay marriage should not be legal, okay. But I don’t believe that we should discriminate against any American because that’s not the nature of America okay?
Comment: OK, OK, OK — we get it, Senator. The question was about abortion but we understand your wanting a clean marriage sound bite unencumbered by the previous gibberish you uttered. OK, yes OK — OK? Is it OK if we’re OK with you saying OK? But if you’re OK with don’t ask don’t tell in the military, why not don’t ask don’t tell with marriage? — you know, two men/two women come to get “married;” why isn’t it your position (since you don’t “discriminate”) to not ask if they are men or women, or ask them to tell you if they are homosexuals — just let them “marry”? Huh? Why isn’t this OK with you, sir?
Q: Does that extend then, you should have —- do you believe then that there should be a law that bans discrimination against gays and lesbians in the workplace?
A: I don’t believe we should discriminate against anyone in the workplace. But I don’t think we need specific laws that would apply necessarily to people who are gay.
Comment: Which, of course, means, Senator, that, without such specific laws, homosexuals — using your vocabulary — could be “discriminated against” and not hired/or fired because they are homosexuals! Quick on his feet this guy ain’t.
Q: Let me ask one question about abortion…You’re for a Constitutional amendment banning abortion with some exceptions for life and rape and incest.
A: Rape, incest and the life of the mother, yes.
Comment: “Some exceptions.” Right — precisely. And this is why McCain is not “pro-life.” Pro-life means being “pro” all innocent, unborn human life.
Q: So is President Bush, yet that hasn’t advanced in the six years he’s been in office. What are you going to do to advance a Constitutional amendment that President Bush hasn’t done?
A: I don’t think a Constitutional amendment is probably going to take place. But I do believe that it’s very likely, or possible, that a Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe V Wade which would then return these decisions to the states which I support.
Q: And you’d be for that?
A: Yes, because I’m a Federalist. Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states. So I believe that we would be better off by having Roe V Wade returned to the states. And I don’t believe the Supreme Court should be legislating in the way that they did on Roe V Wade.
Comment: Neither the President nor the GOP-controlled Congress have advanced anything to try and stop all abortions because they are not pro-life. The states do not have to wait on the Supreme Court to govern themselves, Senator. The “gay marriage” issue has already been “decided” by God, sir — He says it’s an abomination, a no-no. Thus, no “deciding” allowed by states if by deciding you mean states can OK homo “marriage.” And Roe v Wade is not “legislating;” it is not “legislation.” Only you guys in Congress may do this. Roe is a nullity, a nothing — not law because it contradicts God’s Law against murder; not law because courts don’t make law.