How is it that the Republican party is for making gay marriage illegal?

Im just wondering. Since the republicans support less governmental involvement. But isnt that a bit intrusive for the government to be passing laws on what people can do in their personal lives? Wouldnt that be more government involvment than the democrats?


Its not like they are telling the churches they have to, all they are doing is giving the country the option to choose so.How is it that the Republican party is for making gay marriage illegal?
You bring up a great question that highlights Republican ideals and values versus how public policy development plays out among Republicans.





The ';smaller government'; that you refer to for Republicans has almost always had to do more so with very little or no regulation of the general economy, big business, and fiscal spending.





The idea of smaller or less government with Republicans has a line and that line is traditionally drawn at getting involved with people's personal lives: gay marriage, opposing a woman's right to choose, Terri Schiavo, etc.





Republicans tend to be more states' rights oriented and some of them will at times be AGAINST making gay marriage illegal on a federal level arguing that marriage is a state's rights issue. (But at the end of the day, they will still promote anti-gay marriage policies in their state.)





All in all the irony indicated in your original question hints at the answer. The answer is that, yes, Republicans ARE contradicting themselves on their views and ideals. Plain and simple.How is it that the Republican party is for making gay marriage illegal?
I agree. The problem is not same sex marriage. The problem is the government involvement in the marriage business at all. Marriage should be left as an institution of faith. If a faith wants to marry two men or two women together that is their prerogative and is between them and their god not the government.





I don't see why people stomach the government control of marriage anyways. The marriage license was invented in the Jim Crow era to prevent black men from marrying white women. The government expanded it because they found it made tax collection more expedient and repressive to the married couple.





The governments role is to protect contracts not to be creator of them.
I don't know but I could care less. We have other more important issues to deal with like health care. And if gays really wanted to have the same rights as married couples, they could have called it civil unions by law, named it anything they wanted amongst their friends and family, and call it a day. They would have had their civil unions by now, with the same rights as married couples. Sometimes being stubborn like that ruins everything.
It's not a Federal issue.....whatever is not granted by the Constitution to the Federal Govt, is to be a State's issue.








Obama doesn't believe in gay marriage.
Their libertarian talk is just that, talk. They're really about moralism, which implies authoritarianism. Ironic since the GOP is chock-a-block with homosexuals, but just the deeply-closeted, self-hating kind trying to be ultra-orthodox in every other way.
Liberals seek to RE-DEFINE the definition of what marriage has always been throughout history: a union between a man and a woman.
Actually it requires laws to force it to be legal. More laws = more government. You fail even in this..
Same as pro-life movement. No government control unless it suites their best interests.
Because they're homophobic.
I agree on that one.





And also the pro-life thing. Stupid and dehumanizing.