Posted on 08/28/2010 5:39:37 AM PDT by Kaslin
Editors' note: This piece is co-authored by Ken Klukowski.
Same-sex marriage is back as a front-burner issue in American politics.
On August 4, a federal judge in San Francisco held that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, striking down part of the California Constitution defining marriage as one man and one woman. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ordered an expedited schedule to consider this case, with arguments to be held in December.
Now former RNC chairman and 2004 Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman came out this week, announcing he’s homosexual, and pushing the Republican Party to support the homosexual-rights agenda. Republicans leaders are beginning to weigh in on where they stand, including on the agenda’s centerpiece: Redefining marriage.
The Republican Party has an official position on same-sex marriage. It’s found in the 2008 GOP platform, which is the clear and uncontestable Republican position until the 2012 convention. When one of your authors (Blackwell) was serving as vice chairman of the GOP Platform Committee, there was a singular focus on producing a party platform that fully reflects the vast majority of Republican Party members.
The GOP platform could not be more explicit: Marriage is the union of one man and one woman. The fundamental institution of human civilization should be preserved as it has been known through the entirety of American history and Western civilization. Supporters of same-sex marriage had the full opportunity to make their case to the party. They made it, and they lost.
But whether same-sex marriage should be legal is a completely separate issue from whether there’s a right to same-sex marriage in the U.S. Constitution. A person can support same sex marriage, but admit that it’s a state issue to be decided locally, not a right that can be imposed on a state—or the nation—by federal judges.
That’s where supporters of same-sex marriage cannot have it both ways. Central to the Republican agenda is that the U.S. Constitution must be interpreted according to its original meaning. If the Constitution must be changed, then we do so democratically through the amendment process. Republicans demand that judges interpret the Constitution as written, not rewrite it from the bench.
The same judicial activism that Judge Walker in San Francisco displayed in declaring a constitutional right to same-sex marriage is the same activism that Republicans decry on every other front. It’s the same activism found in Roe v. Wade, declaring a right to abortion. It’s also the same activism that would uphold Obamacare as constitutional. It’s the same activism that declares foreign terrorists are protected by the Bill of Rights and habeas corpus.
You cannot have it both ways. Do you want to see Obamacare struck down as unconstitutional? Then you can’t have a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.
Republican leadership is working hard to prevent a party split. Millions of Tea Party people are justifiably fed up with the GOP, and threatening to abandon the GOP in favor of a third party if Republicans do not fully attack out-of-control federal spending and power with a commitment to constitutional government.
That danger cuts both ways.
Social conservatives cannot be played as fools by the Republican Party. They are not “useful idiots.” If Republican leaders abandon social conservatives and the party platform, then they will face the same disaster as if Tea Partiers abandon the GOP. Millions of social conservatives will either stay home, or will vote for a third-party candidate who takes up the mantle of marriage, life, faith and family.
As we discuss in the introduction of our book, The Blueprint, this is exactly what President Obama wants to see. If a majority of Americans reject the agenda of President Obama and his Democratic Party—as they do today—the only way that Obama and the Dems can hold on to power is to split the opposition vote. If the GOP splits either over economic issues or over social issues, then President Obama could be reelected with as little as 40% of the vote. It’s happened before in American politics, with 1912 as a perfect example. The year 2012 will be the 100-year anniversary of when a Republican split gave America a Democratic president.
If Republicans flinch on marriage, America could have eight years of President Obama.
Ken Klukowski is a fellow and senior legal analyst with the American Civil Rights Union.
“Obama Wins if GOP Flinches on Marriage”
Amen and....AMEN!!!
Flinch? The GOP will bend over backwards to support homosexual unions. After all, the GOP leadership does not, under any circumstances, want to be branded as “homophobic” (which...technically...means the fear of sameness, fear of monotony, or the like...but that’s besides the point)
Same sex is a another DISTRACTION to DIVIDE.
It is NOT the main issue and the GOP must not fall for this. Focus on the ECONOMY.
Just like abortion is unimportant, etc, etc, etc.
Deal with it once. “This party supports traditional marriage between a man and a woman.”
End issue.
Am I supposed to be surprised that the Bush administration was peppered with libs and homos? W is a good man, but with the extreme lib father (41) and all his hangers on, how could it have been any different? We were just dreaming to think 43 would be setting the agenda all by himself.
I think they will do exactly that. They will print it in their platform and then rat on it in their talks.
Who’s kidding who? The GOP (I’m talking the PARTY ELITES now, not individual conservatives) will flinch on ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING.
Why? Because they, like the ‘Rat elites, have fallen in love with big government, big spending, onerous regulations (and the sense of control they bring), and pop culture.
There is not a dime’s worth of difference between the major parties. And there is a disgusting track record to prove it.
“It is NOT the main issue and the GOP must not fall for this. Focus on the ECONOMY.”
I agree. If the GOP makes abortion and same sex marriage the tenet of its 2010 platform, Democrats will use it against them.
This is a ploy by the MSM to discourage voters in Nov. It’s the ONLY way that the Dems can retain seats (besides fraud which is a given)...if conservatives stay home. So they push the lie that the Repubs may back the homosexual agenda. Look who’s talking about it, NYTimes and WaPo have BOTH said the Repubs are leaning that direction. The RNC has said NOTHING. Don’t fall for it!
And then we call them out when they do that garbage. How hard is it to win a freaking election?! I mean really.
You crack me up, nmh! Here...
I think we should reduce government, thereby improving the economy.
Same-sex “marriage” should be opposed as contrary to nature.
WOW! I’m actually able to focus on more than one issue at a time. Imagine that!
Libertarians would LOVE for us to toss out the social conservative agenda in order to “focus” on the economy, but it’s actually possible to do BOTH at the same time. Does a senator only have a limited number of votes, so that they can vote for reduced taxes but not vote for laws opposing same-sex marriage? No. Is it like we have a shortage of lawyers so we can only litigate some cases and must surrender others? Um...no!
So please stop with your ridiculous assertion that Republicans can only focus on fiscal issues.
“Democrats will use it against them.”
Those Republicans are so scary. They support keeping babies alive rather then killing them and they support marriage between a man and a woman.
Scary stuff indeed. Convictions are a useful thing...
“but it’s actually possible to do BOTH at the same time”
And yet apparently we are the ‘single issue’ voters. How many times do we here that trope?
If you won’t vote for a prolife person, than the single issue is your own.
Please read my reply to nmh. You’re assertion is as laughable as his. Let me educate you. A platform can contain more than just fiscal conservative issues. I know. It’s shocking, but the platform can actually address multiple issues, like abortion, same-sex marriage, AND fiscal conservatism. Now you may think abortion and same-sex marriage are insignificant issues, but you’re wrong. You try to turn the Republican Party into the Libertarian Party, and you’ll lose simply because you don’t have majority support. Try to strike abortion from the platform and you’ll be squashed. That’s just political fact.
It's already in the current platform.
“A person can support same sex marriage, but admit that it’s a state issue to be decided locally,”
Really? That’s about the exact opposite of what it says in Article 4, Section 1.
The author tries to make the point that we need to be consistent in our support of adherence to the Constitution. He should too.
If we want to define marriage as only one man and one woman, we either need to do that in all 57 states or amend the US Constitution.
Mehlman is homosexual and is a GOP party leader.
Many in the GOP (RINOs) are actually Leftists in their thoughts and actions.
No doubt there is an infiltration and control body of Leftists into the GOP.
And that is why they are so scared of the Tea Party.
Four states had to forever swear off plural marriage in order for Congress to allow them into the Union: Oklahoma, Arizona, Utah, and Idaho.
One man, one woman marriage. It’s the law of the land. Always has been.
Those who let the silly states’ rights arguments come into this are playing directly into the hands of the radical gay activists.
Voting third party is a vote for gay agenda.
When conservatives split the vote, liberals win.
It's tradition, but I don't see anything that stops one State from changing their minds and then having that position forced on all the others.
I'm actually rather surprised this section hasn't been exploited for all kinds of agendas. I guess the "Commerce Clause" can be so universally misinterpreted that it is unnecessary.
Your argument is fundamentally flawed, in that you make the false assumption that we have a choice.
The Republican Party today is a false flag party.
No one is advising splitting conservative votes. What we're advising is to stop compromising and voting for liberals just because they have an R by their name. To do the latter is insane.
Another success story & legacy from dumb-ass GW Bush in presiding over the near destruction of the Republican Party. Promote the RINOs & diss the conservatives. I swear, I think that GW Bush has done everything he can to have paved the way for commie pig 0b0z0. I would bet anything that Laura Bush & their two dimwit daughters voted for 0b0z0 the commie pig. Heck, I wonder if GW Bush did as well!
And you are falling for the NYTimes and WaPo spin to save Dems seats.
If the Rinos control the GOP after this election, they will not care if they assure the GOP permanent minority status. Rinos are nothing more than a wing of the Democrat Party and keeping conservatives out of power means Rinos have defeated the opposition party.
The Rinos dominating the GOP were perfectly happy as a minority party for decades before “extremist” Reagan and his silent majority came along.
If they keep majority and leadership power in the GOP, they will pass cap and trade, amnesty and gay special rights - marriage and all. They will pass every ugly treaty proposed to strip the US of idenity, economic and legal authority and self determination. Every crappy communist judge they can find will be sitting on the bench. Reverse discrimination will come back into fashion and Christians will no longer have the illusion of religious freedom (freedom of assoication and freedom of speech) in the US. Obamacare will be set in stone.
Hogwash.
No thank you
exactly
That’s alright. We don’t want anyone who is still under the delusion that the Republican Party is going to save them.
I have never voted for a democrat and a third party candidate, and I will never vote for a democrat and a third party candidate
Parse the language all you want...the math is absolute.
The Republican party is not supporting gay marriage.
Primary out the RINO's, but support the nominee or you'll be voting for the liberal agenda. How often does it have to happen before some people accept it as fact?
Let's review.
Aug 4th Homosexual judge strikes down an amendment to confirm one man one woman as marriage in Calif.
Aug 6 Coulter announced as Homocon keynote speaker.
Throw in Olson and Beck either backing homosexual marriage or unconcerned about it.
Aug 25 Mehlman announces he's "gay".
Aug 27 NYTimes declares "gay" marriage groundswell.
Aug 28 WaPo declares Republican support for "gay" marriage.
This is a push by the left to discourage conservatives. If you can't see that I certainly don't understand why. Divide and conquer. The MSM KNOWS that America is angry. The ONLY way to keep Dems in power is to discourage voters.
I guess you missed the Mehlman story, and your current chairman's praise for his wonderful "gayness."
And that's only the tip of the iceberg.
But that’s not what you said that made me say “hogwash.” You claimed I was “falling for” something, which I’m not. I know the tactics of the Left Media at least as well as you do.
When posters undermine efforts to stop liberals, we lose. They never learn. They whine the MSM is biased and then buy into every word the MSM utters. “We’re doomed! We’re doomed!”.
But, no matter what the Left Media says, the fact remains that there are powerful forces in your party that ARE empowering the gay agenda.
Yes it is what I said. I started saying it in post 10. The MSM is pushing the story that Republicans back “gay” marriage and you’re buying it. They are trying to alienate voters. And it’s working.
Between the idiot independents and the conservative purists who stayed home for the 2008 election, we ended up with Nancy and Harry’s Big Adventure...I’m sick of it!
Do you think that the Repubs don't see that every state that's voted on homosexual marriage has turned it down?
the fact remains that there are powerful forces in your party
My party?
Watch what they do, not what they say.
Your party spent a million bucks pushing Scozzafava. Pro-gay agenda.
They’ve spent a fortune in this election cycle pushing folks like Mark Kirk, Charlie Crist, Meg Whitman, et al. Pro-gay.
And don’t kid yourself, folks like John McCain are not on our side, or the side of the natural law or the natural family.
And that’s before we even start talking about the judicial supremacist mindset that permeates the leadership of the formerly grand OLD party, which assures the success of the “gay” agenda, or the states’ rights trumps unalienable rights nonsense of the Paul faction in your party.
Yup. Throw in the liberaltarians and it spells disaster.
I was correct and you are doing EXACTLY what the left wants you to do. Muzzle it Eeyore. Nobody needs your doom and gloom. There are true conservatives running for election. And you are undermining the next election.
Run real conservatives instead of lying liberals and you won’t have any problem.
There are real conservatives running and voters are fired up. But you boost defeatism. Nobody wants to hear it nor do we need it.
We may be doomed. Who knows? Does it really matter? We conservatives are going to fight the enemies without and WITHIN our party. To do anything less than fight for what is right is as much contrary to American values as socialism.
There’s no doubt the MSM is pushing the homosexual agenda, but they aren’t the majority. If the homosexuals had majority support, gay marriage wouldn’t have failed everywhere where it was put to a vote of the people.
Abortion IS evil. Homosexuality IS unnatural. Fighting to defeat the liberal agenda is a fight worth fighting! Again, we may lose, but that doesn’t mean we don’t fight. If we give up, our defeat is assured.
William Wallace: Aye, fight and you may die. Run, and you’ll live... at least a while. And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin’ to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take... OUR FREEDOM!
To whatever extent that is true, I support them. Probably quite a bit more actively than yourself.
And you are undermining the next election.
I"m not undermining anything that matters. I'm simply pointing out those who are undermining the foundational principles of our free republic and our liberty, regardless of party.
To whatever extent your party is supporting liberals and so-called conservatives who say one thing and do another, you're the only one undermining anything important.
I don't care one way or another whether the Republican Party lives or dies. I only care whether the American republic lives or dies.
Despite what we say, the MSM is very effective at boosting issues. They have managed to make gays benign and almost mainstream.
Fighting to defeat the liberal agenda is a fight worth fighting!
Yes it is if we can get the defeatists to shut it. We lose when there are too many "chicken littles". And they are all over these threads.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.