I'm a Pro Choice male and supporter of Same Sex Marriages! DOWN WITH THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT!

I won't allow anyone to tell me what consistutes life and at what stage, and I won't allow anyone who tells me it's ok to give illegals free things while our own people starve and go without...our elderly are again being pushed to the sides and no one seems to care....why is that?

I also don't care for a candidate who is supported by all wealthy , movie stars who already earn more then they have a right to, what with all our own kind going without as well. Or those supported by ex-Crips with hidden agendas.....who think that if their candidate is selected we will have a country ran by all blacks and for blacks.....which is racist thinking in itself.

So needless to say I'm still confused as to who to choose but what I am not confused about is that the Right-Wing supporters are clueless and like lemmings to the edge of a cliff will follow whoever [generally Dobson and Robertson who have their own private agenda, and imo use God as much as religious fanatics do to browbeat you into submission] these types tell them to follow and if they do choose to follow Dobsons advice they will straight into Clintons hands.

People start thinking for yourselves, ask and keep asking until someone answers you honestly........not an easy feat for any CAREER politician.......oh how I wish I knew who Billy Graham supported. *sigh*

I sincerely hope that is an attempt at sarcasm; if it was Great job

...otherwise if not, you need serious help

I would love to see a candidate from either party be brave enough to stand up for what everyone knows down deep in their heart of what is right and of what is ethical. Candidates from both the Republican and Democratic parties have their strengths and weaknesses. However, it would be a great day for our country when the citizens stand up and demand that our government does what we have elected them to do.

They are in office to protect our Constitution and Bill of Rights. They are not elected to submit themselves to just the big businesses and wealthy, but they are to also submit themselves to the poor, the hungry, the homeless, the fatherless, and the widows. They are to submit themselves in service to the working class people of which keeps this country alive.

Each party submits to a minority which either pads their pockets or yells the loudest. It is time that our government officials are held accountable to be as honest and fair as they impose laws on the citizens to be. There are too many scandals in our government of which sets a terrible example to the rest of the nation and to our children.

We need someone leading our country that is strong in their military beliefs in order to keep our country safe. We need a president that submits himself/herself to the citizens as a whole, so everyone that has the initiative to work has the opportunity to do so and have a retirement that will see them through their elder years. In addition, health care should be a top priority for our government so that every American citizen can afford the best of health care without it draining our savings.

However, above all else, we do need to return to the fundamental moral values that our forefathers possessed. I do share Dr. Dobson's spiritual, ethical, and moral values, but I also believe there may be a candidate within one of the two parties that holds the primary values that would serve our country with good moral ethics.

Neither Mr. Giuliani or Mrs. Clinton are even close to what our founding fathers possessed when they established this country upon biblical principles.

We all must remember the most true test of what a person is made of is what they do when they are absolutely free to make a choice. Maybe Giuliani nor Clinton should be the presidential candidates that represent the two parties.

Being a person of faith is one thing... to bludgeon people over the head with your belief and threaten to hold your entire politcal party hostage (see "MoveOn") is another.

If he's so naive to purposefully split the conservative voting block, Conservatives will get exactly what we don't want. Hillary by default.

Hell, he'd get the same result if he simply told Conservatives to just vote for Hillary, or told them to just stay home on election day. Again, the same result... Hillary by default.

We conservatives need to wake the hell up and put this guy on a shelf, or we'll be bled dry by a reinstitution of pre-1981 tax rates (see "Hillary for President".

please for the love of everything SANE and yes HOLY keep your religion out of my life, my body,and my bed room. I am a christian plain and simple.

I do not want James Dobson dictating how I whould live. That is between me and God.

Yes split the Republican vote. Better yet go to chucrh on election day and Don't vote. If these are the only issues you care about, then pray, but please stay the H- away from the polls

I think it would probably be best if this social conservative infestation left the party for their own. On the one hand, it would be a great tragedy to see a theocratic candidate win, but on the other splitting may make the Republican party more tolerable to people who believe in freedom and justice for ALL people, not just those living in accordance with Christian doctrines.

If Rudy Giuliani wins the nomination I'll be quite pleased. I do not vote based on political parties. I vote based on who I think supports the values of freedom, justice, and equality the most. Many times the Republican candidate does not fit that bill, shrugging off science and equality to oppose rights such as sexual orientation while sounding like televangelists at speeches.

I will be comfortable if either Hillary or Rudy wins. I need to research them more but at least they have the common sense respect of equality that so many Republican candidates have lacked. I lost sleep both times George W. Bush was elected, and that loss of sleep was quite clearly merited. We need a logical President, not a crusader.

If you pass laws that make it illegal to sin, then where does the morality come in? No one needs to be moral, think morality or ponder the implications of right and wrong when someone else decided it all for you.

If you sin, you are supposed to go to hell, not prison.

Free will was G-d's greatest gift to mankind and I don't need your laws to know the difference between right and wrong, or even the Bible.

I am scared to death of people who think that you cannot, on your own, figure out what is right and what is wrong. Now for figuring out what is legal, that's harder.

This group of single-issue voters is the biggest reason I am not a Republican, and as long as they are trying to extort the party I will remain independent.

I personally think Giuliani is one of the best Republican candidates in a long time, due in no small part to the fact that he stands firm on his principles. Rather than trying to pull a Romney and conveniently change his views to satisfy this group of voters, he stands up for what he believes in.

I think at the end of the day the American people will respond favorably to someone who tells them like it is and has strong convictions. The American people are not foolish enough to buy into someone like Hillary who they know good and well would say ANYTHING it took to get elected.

Giuliani continues to surprise all those who had previously said he had no chance to get the Republican nod. When the dust settles and all that is left standing is Rudy and Hillary, people will come out of the woodwork to ensure that the pathological opportunist remains Senator of New York.

The Catholic Church is in the same awful state of affairs as the Republican Party (oh, and I'm republican). The Church is more concerned about holding onto power than doing the right thing (hiding child molestors). The Republican Party has gorged on power for the past 6 years and needs a diet and a dose of ass kicking to return to more principled roots.

The Christian right...is as bad as the wacky leftists. They scream so loudly bloody murder about gays and abortion that it makes everyone else deaf. The Church, under John Paul II started to turn things around with how homosexuals are dealt with. I mean, Jesus saw the leapers, he took the hated tax collector under his wing, he helped out a prostitute. He helped the people who no one else would help.
The Church needs to get its priorities straight and start judging people by the character, heart, and soul, of people, not because of what gender their genetics have given them.

Homosexuality in most cases appears to be caused by genetics, just like some men are more masculine than others, why some men are uber agressive and others more passive. People have different levels of chemicals and hormones in their bodies. Why is it so hard to accept that the wiring in our brains that affect gender could be wired incorrectly? It doesn't make homosexuals any less of a person or hated by god, or immoral. Yes, its not supposed to be like that in nature, but you know what, life isn't perfect, people are born without arms and legs all the time. Nature didn't intend for them to not have legs.

In the case of homosexuals, the delicate balance of chemicals and hormones has been changed, but that's all. What's the big deal?

If people are scared by gay sex...straight people do some of those same acts, too. Straight people get divorced all the time, abandon child, and have broken families. Being heterosexual doesn't make you a good person or make you go to 'heaven'.
WWJD? Jesus would save the gay person from being trampled on by bigoted striaght people.

More people ought to point their criticsm inward and work on improving themselves. More people ought to look inward and provide for themselves and not rely on the boogy man 'government'
to give them handouts. People ought to realize that Lou Dobson is a power hungry individual and is looking out for his own interest and the expense and detriment of others.

None of the current candidates in either party exude the leadership and character that i want to see in a president. But we have to choose who's closest to those ideals. I'm not sure yet, but I'm not just going to vote for someone who is anti abortion.

I'd reserve abortion for those girls who are put into a situation where their life and the life of the baby is compromised. Not just a life or death situation, but quality of life. We shouldn't have 15 years old mothers who have kids and then that kid is likely to also have a child when they are a child.

Adoption is great, but not enough people do it. Everyone wants to pass on 'their' genes, like is so damn important. Loving a child is more important. Until society decides to take all the babies from these girls, its better served to learn a hard lesson than bring a child into this world that one can't care for adequately.

He is absolutely right that they should not compromise on such a core belief, if it is sincere, and therefore they must not support Rudy, Mitt, McCain or Thompson in any way, no matter what.

He is wrong of course on many other issues and his world view but if his movement is sincere, they must remain consistent and true to their core.

The same reason, Jim, the NAACP has tax-exempt status.

I respect your belief that life begins at conception, the problem that I have is that the Republicans who so deeply care about the Fetus don't seem to care about that precious life once it has had it's first breath. They don't want to make sure that child has healthcare and good food and good schools and equal opportunities.

We just want the Dr. Dobson's of the world to care about the born as much as they care about the unborn.....oh... I'm sorry that requires taxes....uh... nevermind.

What if the people who disagree with you are a large majority of Americans and voters?

While liberal pundits, the media, and a few Giulianiacs (read Novak) in New York are fixated on Romney’s religion, very few national evangelical leaders oppose Romney on religious grounds. For obvious reasons Catholic and Jewish leaders are rather adamant that there be no religious issue concerning Romney and the 2008 presidential race.

The loudest objections come from the left. Jacob Weisberg, editor of Slate, said, "Romney's religion will become an issue with moderate and secular voters – and rightly so." His justification comes from a rather strained reasoning that objecting to one’s “religious beliefs is not the same thing as prejudice based on religious heritage . . .”

What? Late last year Romney met with the prominent evangelical leaders. Oh, to have been a fly on that wall! From the few remarks made by some of the attendees, that meeting must have gone quite well.

Says Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, "Evangelicals know that they're not electing a theologian in chief, but a commander in chief. If they agree with Romney on social issues, his Mormonism won't be a hindrance . . ." And Jerry Falwell, who has often spoken in unflattering terms about Mormons said, "There's no question that there are strong feelings about Mormonism. But we're not electing a Sunday school teacher; we're electing a president. I do not believe his church affiliation will hinder his being a viable candidate among evangelicals."

So just who are these 24 percent of Americans (not 29 percent as reported by Novak.) who would not vote for a Mormon? see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21036143/site/newsweek/
Well, certainly many are liberal and/or secular. In the same poll 14 percent said they would not vote for a woman, 64 percent said no to an Atheist. Even more telling is what Novak did not reveal.

In the same poll 68 percent of Americans said they had a favorable opinion of Mitt Romney while only 13 percent did not. Gee, I wonder what Hillary’s numbers would be.

So everybody, just take a deep breath. Go to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21036143/site/newsweek/ and see the results for yourselves. After Mitt has secured the nomination there will be plenty of time for The Speech.

To those out there who say Conservatives need to focus on the issues, fundamentalists view this as THE issue. Voting for a third party candidate is a way to keep their hands clean. It's not unlike voting for Van Buren and the Free-Soilers in 1848.

Can Mr. Dobson tell me why are the not good enough??? He only mentions the front runners....

There is only one true conservative running for President under the Republican ticket, and that's Ron Paul.

I feel that he wants to impose a theracracy based on the Christian religion into our government and I DO NOT approve. So go ahead, Dobson, take away the religious fundamentalists voters from the GOP, and you'll never win the election, thankfully neither will the sane members of the GOP either.

As if there are not more pressing matters right now after this disaster of an administration for the past 6 plus years. The evaporation of the middle class, the price of EVERYTHING, ridiculous tax cuts for the rich, and most of all IRAQ....

Boy, I sure would look past all of those problems that are noticeably affecting our world and livelihood just to make sure my candidate is anti-choice and anti-anything but heterosexual!!!!

Quit preaching HATRED and stupidity.

As for this 'sanctity of life' BS...
I don't see them sanctifying the lives of the people that the corporate/political bullies have destroyed in the middle east.
Oh, I get it now. Sanctity of life... American life.
I truly hope the next human elected to the presidency isn't a right wing, christian ass who caters to the bible belt and is basically a bigot to all those who DON'T follow their antiquated ideologies.
Believe in it all you want, but don't force feed it to me, just do the job you were elected to do.

If they had it their way, the Constitition would be the Bible. That's not the way I, our Founding Fathers, or anyone else wants this country run except for that small 25% radical segment.

How many names could we list? The priests who are after the altar boys, the evangelist leader who asked his gay prostitute to procure drugs for him, the televangelist who had an addiction to prostitutes, the many many financial scandals where church funds become private funds, the evangelist whose God whispered amazing details about people in the audience (turned out to be his wife whispering into a small radio receiver in his ear), the bogus cures where the same cripples are healed in town after town, the miracle prayer cloths available only through a toll-free number, the Christian leader who was involved with lobbyist Jack Abramoff and bribes (campaign contributions) from an Indian reservation to rig disapproval of another reservation's application to open a casino, the evangelist who ran for President after God told him he would win the election (God reneged on that promise, but the evangelist and God are still on speaking terms), the evangelist who got a court order preventing a TV program from airing a show in which a man claiming to be the evangelist's gay lover a lie detector test to authenticate the lover's claims – these are the ones that come easily to mind.

Evangelist Billy Graham is conspicuous in this seedy crowd by virtue of his integrity, his honesty, and his sincerity – like tall strong oak growing in a landfill, surrounded by filth.

If Christianity was a theater, it would have already been raided by the vice squad.

Other leaders, like Dobson, the late Falwell, and the Pope remain untouched by scandal but they stand resolutely against solving any of our nation's problems. They are against abortion, sex education, birth control, unmarried sex, and sex scenes in movies. The convince teenagers to sign chastity pledges fully knowing that the typical result is that the girls give the boys oral sex to protect their virginity.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Ron Paul is the closest thing that the Republican party has to a real conservative and we all see how much of a chance he has of gaining the nomination.