Is it ironic that the modern republican party would never nominate an irreligious gay person when its founder?
1) I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I would find any evidence you have that Lincoln was gay or bi useful. His being married does not disprove the claim (Elton John was married), but it does mean you have to demonstrate the claim. 2) While the parties have remained nominally the same since roughly 1848 with the Free Soiler movement, etc., the actual party lines have switched, with the democrats being the liberals and the republicans becoming the conservatives.
That was a very different republican party. I’d gladly vote republican if they ever returned to: limited government interference in the private lives of citizens small government limited foreign involvement fiscal conservatism via spending on programs that actually work and paying off the national debt I do think that it is interesting that people are attempting to “defend” Lincoln’s sexuality as if it is such a radical notion and horrible thing that one of the 43 US presidents may have been queer.
