[mredskins]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

this is what i have problems understanding as well.

members of the "small gov't" want very limited federal gov't and to be allowed to live how they and their local community wishes, i.e. laws and regs on intimate and personal issues should be left to the individual person or their local voted-for representative.

yet when it comes to gay marriages and abortions (2 issues representing the core of what I consider intimate and personal choices), the "small gov't" people in texas want communities in california to abide by their own preferences on issues such as abortion or gay rights.

i agree to an extent with the small gov't group. imo arlington va representatives are much more closely in-tune and aware of their towns wishes and needs more than the president of the US. so if a town in texas wants to ban gay marriages, so be it. if a town wants to allow gay marriage, so be it.

thats why we have salt lake city and las vegas.

some good discussion going on here fellas. this has to be some of the most intelligent discussion ever had between football fans on a football fan forum.

Nice reply to a two year old post. For a second I thought SGG was back.