It's Official - Republicans Endorse Homophobia

[Joe Guy]

Republican Party poised to oppose gay marriage

The Republican National Committee, at its spring meeting in Hollywood, on Friday passed a strongly worded resolution opposing same-sex marriage and imploring the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s anti-gay Prop. 8.

The resolution comes soon after two top-rank Republican lawmakers — Sens. Rob Portman, R-Ohio and Mark Kirk, R-Illinois — have endorsed marriage equality, while 131 conservative and Republican activists signed a brief to the Supreme Court urging that DOMA be overturned.

Ken Mehlman with then-President George W. Bush. The former Republican National Chairman has organized a letter, signed by 131 conservatives, calling on Supreme Court to overturn Defense of Marriage Act.

The “Resolution for Marriage and Children 2013″, unanimously adopted by the 168-member national committee, is emphatic:

“Resolved the Republican National Committee affirms its support for marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and as the optimum environment in which to raise healthy children for the future of America, and further:

“Resolved the Republican National Committee implores the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the sanctity of marriage in its rulings on California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act.”

The resolution was denounced early Friday by National Review Online, a major conservative voice, which said it “risks further marginalization of the Republican Party, adding: “Passage of this resolution would please a vocal but shrinking faction of activists.”

The Republican Party has wrestled of late with gay rights, after adopting a 2012 platform that strongly opposed even civil unions for same-sex couples.

The case against Prop. 8 was argued in the Supreme Court by Theodore Olson, a former Solicitor General in the George W. Bush administration, and lead attorney for Republicans in the 2000 Bush v. Gore litigation. The anti-DOMA letter by conservatives was organized by former Republican National Chairman Ken Mehlman. Mehlman managed the 2004 Bush campaign, which mobilized evangelicals as a key element of its victory. He has since come out as a gay man.

A recent evaluation of 2012 Republican defeats, under auspices of Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus, concluded: “If our party is not welcoming and inclusive, young people and increasingly other voters will continue to tune us out.”

But other Republicans have dug in their heels. While polls show growing support for marriage equality, a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll has found that Republican voters have firmed up in opposition to same-sex marriage.

Ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, now a Fox News host, has warned that it would be “suicidal” for his party to embrace gay rights. The Republican leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives has taken over the legal defense of DOMA, on which it is spending up to $3 million in taxpayer money.

The “Resolution for Marriage and Children 2013″ has multiple, wordy “Whereas” clauses, written in the style of one of those Seattle City Council resolutions sponsored by Mike O’Brien and Nick Licata. It says in part:

“Whereas the institution of marriage is the solid foundation upon which our society is built and in which children thrive, it is based on the conjugal relationship that only a man and a woman can form,” and

“Whereas no Act of human government can change the reality that marriage is a natural and most desirable union, especially when procreation is the goal.” Huh?

source

[Long Run]

Republican Party poised to oppose gay marriage

The resolution comes soon after two top-rank Republican lawmakers — Sens. Rob Portman, R-Ohio and Mark Kirk, R-Illinois — have endorsed marriage equality, while 131 conservative and Republican activists signed a brief to the Supreme Court urging that DOMA be overturned.

So they have a difference of opinion, like the D's on this very topic (and pretty much any other topic), and the majority gets to write a worthless resolution that will pander to some group somewhere. That said, seems like an unnecessary exercise that looks a bit like shooting themselves in the foot (with a pellet gun).

[rubato]

The Republicans wave whored for votes by appealing to the hate-faggots crowd for >30 years. Only since the last election have the complete cynics like "Newtie" Gingrich accepted that a tactic they endorsed until 2012 will cost them more votes than it gets them in the future. That is why only 1 Republican senator has ever endorsed gay rights, and that was, very conveniently, after the last election and after whores like "Newtie" had admitted the truth.

They have whored for votes with the "hate immigrant" tactic as well, and the few more intelligently cynical ones have accepted that they will have to change there as well.


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

Rube, you seem to have whores on the brain....

Things a little lonely 'round your place?

[rubato]

It's your party, bitch. Cry if you want to.


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

Guess I hit the nail on the head there...

[Andrew D]

Setting aside the relentless trolling, the "difference of opinion" -- which is to say the minuscule support for marriage equality among Republican office-holders vs. the overwhelming opposition to it among them -- is not merely a "difference of opinion" within Republican ranks. It is a "difference of opinion" between Republican office-holders on one hand and the American people on the other.

And the polling data reveal an important truth: The Republican party is, quite literally, dying.

Younger voters strongly support marriage equality, by margins which increase as the survey pool moves younger. The opposition to marriage equality comes much more from older voters than from younger voters.

The older voters are on their way out. No great loss to American politics there.

America has a future. The Republican party plays a steadily decreasing role in it. Good for everyone.

[Econoline]

The older voters are on their way out. No great loss to American politics there.

Hey! Hey! Hey! I'm an "older voter"...and I'm not dead yet--and I'm not a Republican, and I strongly support marriage equality! (Ditto for my wife.)

America has a future. The Republican party plays a steadily decreasing role in it. Good for everyone.

Agreed.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Gay marriage makes not one iota of difference to my heterosexual marriage. If they want to get married, fine. One things for sure if gays/lesbians get married, divorce rates will go up.

[Crackpot]

Actually I doubt the rates would change much. The number would likely rise but I see no evidence for a change of rate

[oldr_n_wsr]

You're right, I meant to say "number" rather than "rate". My bad.

[dgs49]

OK, let's review:

The Defense of Marriage Act is the law of the land. Passed by a bipartisan majority, it has never been repealed nor has any "progressive" legislator ever even suggested such a thing. If there is overwhelming public support for "marriage equality," what is holding them back? Really. Answer the question.

"Homophobia" is a made-up word with no rational definition. It is simply trotted out when some "progressive" wants to insult someone with whom s/he disagrees. Unfortunately for them, in order to BE insulted, the target of the insult has to consider that the "criticism" has some merit, which, in the case of being called a "homophobe" is decidedly not the case.

There is a virtual mountain of reasons to oppose "marriage equality" that have nothing to do with "hate" for sexual perverts. In fact, a true majority of Americans (not one manipulated by distorted poll questions) have no objection whatsoever to consenting-adult perverts of every stripe conducting their disgusting private lives in whatever manner they like - privately. To suppose that the only reason one might oppose "marriage equality" is "hate" of homosexuals is shallow and sophomoric.

Which is why it is not surprising coming from this group.

And as I have said in the past in this space, I personally have no objection to "marriage equality." As long as the "married" bastards file their income appropriately and pay the marriage penalty, like I do.

[Econoline]

Yep, Andrew, up there, right there, where Mr. Green is pointing with two appropriate fingers...that's an older voter on his way out. And I guess you're right: no great loss to American politics there.

[Scooter]

The more Dave speaks, the more I suspect that he is a radical liberal taking on a persona in order to make conservatives look stupid.

Passed by a bipartisan majority, it has never been repealed nor has any "progressive" legislator ever even suggested such a thing. If there is overwhelming public support for "marriage equality," what is holding them back? Really. Answer the question.

H.R.1116 and S.598, which would repeal DOMA, were introduced in the last session of Congress with 160 and 32 co-sponsors respectively.

The bills did not pass because House Republicans refused to schedule it for examination in the Subcommittee on the Constitution, to which it had been referred, and Senate Republican refused to allow it to come to a vote after it had been reported on by the Judiciary Committee and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar.

If you want to know what is holding back Republicans from allowing debate and a vote on these bills, then you will have to ask them.

To suppose that the only reason one might oppose "marriage equality" is "hate" of homosexuals is shallow and sophomoric.

Hmmmm.

consenting-adult perverts of every stripe conducting their disgusting private lives

No hate being expressed there at all, no sir.

And "perverts" Dave? Speaking of shallow and sophomoric...

Did you ever think to ask yourself why you have such an obsessive fascination with gay sex? Is there something you haven't told us?

[Crackpot]

Hey Scoot don't try to steal my theory

[Scooter]

It's actually a pretty old theory that has been scientifically validated.

[Crackpot]

No the one about Dave being a liberal plant.

[Crackpot]

It too is an old theory:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2553&p=33589&hilit=Dgs#p33589

[dgs49]

A "pervert" is someone who habitually utilizes their reproductive organs in a way that is contrary to their biological function. Using parts of the human digestive system in a grotesque simulation of sexual intercourse qualifies as perverted behavior. "Pervert" is apropos.

If the facts are a problem to you, then the problem is not with the facts, it is with you.

[Lord Jim]

Well then wouldn't heterosexual couples that engage in anal sex (or oral sex, for that matter) qualify as "perverts" by that definition? (Assuming that they do it on a regular basis, which would make it "habitual")

Hell, even anyone who masturbates would qualify as a pervert, (since the "biological function" is reproduction, and masturbation doesn't qualify for that....Unless, I guess, the person is masturbating to produce sperm for artificial insemination...)