I just finished reading the candidates’ positions on faith, fairness and religion. I am impressed by the ability of the Republican candidates not to see logical connections. Apparently, absence of logical reasoning is a requirement for a GOP candidacy. I will pick on Labrador, since of the three Republicans he seems the one furthest from any sense of logic, although the same can be said of all three. In just a statement he can be in favor of “rugged independence” while at the same time telling people who they should or should not marry (perhaps he secretly loves big government?). Should I remind him that the same biblical arguments were used to support slavery and segregation, and used against interracial marriage? I think he could restate his position this way, “I stand for rugged independence as long as it does not interfere with my bigoted ideas, and I stand for faith as long as the faith is my faith.” When somebody will force Mr. Labrador to marry a man, then he can talk about infringement on his religious freedoms. Otherwise, let people chose whom they want to share their lives with. Rugged independence, you said first.
Guido Giuntini, Boise