Answer this question for me... Options

[*kryogenix*]

I've approached some people with the question, Why John Kerry, even when you acknowlege that he's a lousy candidate? They reply "He's not George Bush. Anyone but Bush."

Well, Ralph Nader isn't George Bush. Michael Badnarik is not George Bush. Why not vote for them?

Most reply, "Because they won't win."

I thought the reason we vote was because we wanted the candidate with the closest ideals to ours to be elected. Not because we wanted to vote for the winning candidate.

Responses?

[strice]

out of the "many" reasons bush shouldnt be president, you sure picked the most controversial, amongst all people, one.
In my opinion gays shouldnt be allowd to MARRY, strictly, MARRIAGE. Marriage is not meant for gays, it never was. Why go against the bible rather than the constitution?
Now, the descrimination is there.

For example: Say you are gay and part of a country club. You and your partner want to play golf together, but your partner isnt part of the club, and since you arent married, your forced to pay a large fee for he or she,(whoever your partner in life is), to play with you. The club will not allow "gay partnership" to be considered in there guidelines for this.

This is actually a true story
you see that it would not be the constitution or the president that would be descriminating against the rights, it is the people, in general; which is really sad, but true.

most of what you wrote was rather in comprehensible but i'll try to answer to what i think you're saying.

so you say that doing something that doesn't quite agree with the bible is discrimination? policies should not be based on such a silly book, considering the weight the founding fathers put upon the separation of church and state. Being gay is natural and is found in animals other than humans. also, nobody cares if people discriminate, it can't be really stopped. it's only a problem if the government that supposedly embodies liberty endorses it.