Skip to comments.S.E. Cupp Tells TheBlaze Why She Supports Gay Republican Groups
Posted on 02/28/2013 9:35:48 PM PST by Mozilla
TheBlaze TVs S.E. Cupp captured headlines on Tuesday after she announced that shes backing out of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) until gay Republican groups are officially welcomed. Her decision was rooted in the notion that CPAC reportedly allows gay groups to attend, but does not permit them to sponsor the event something she called a cop-out of sorts. On Wednesday, TheBlaze interviewed Cupp to speak further about her views on same-sex marriage and how the GOP should be handling the issue.
First and foremost, we asked Cupp how she believes the party should be handling the complex social debate one that is increasingly dividing Republicans. In an e-mail response, she explained that the GOP should be celebrating and acknowledging that it is a party of intellectual diversity. This is true not only on the same-sex marriage front, but also on a myriad of other important issues.
Libertarians, social conservatives and even fiscal hawks have different views on gay marriage, and even within those subsets of the party there are different foundational backgrounds and perspectives on the issue, Cupp noted. Thats not a bad thing. What we cant do, as a party, is castigate or marginalize the conservatives whose support we already enjoy for their positions on gay rights.
Just as she has defended the notion that the party should embrace gay conservatives, Cupp also spoke about the importance of not disparaging those who disagree with these unions. She noted her personal qualms with the Republican Partys official stance on gay marriage, but said that she has no intention of speaking out against conservatives who stand in opposition to these rights for homosexual couples. There are interesting, well-intentioned and valid religious, constitutional and economic arguments against gay marriage, and those arguments should be given a voice, she added. But we allow for nuanced differences of opinion on fiscal issues, national security, foreign policy and elsewhere without questioning each others conservative credentials. We should allow for differences of opinion on gay marriage as well.
Cupp doubled-down on the notion that there is no singular conservative view on gay rights: While libertarians would take a more favorable stance, evangelical Christians would not. As far as the commentator is concerned, neither perspective or any of the others in between would be distinguishable as the one, true conservative stance on the issue.
Im a conservative who believes that keeping the government out of my private life on a whole host of issues is totally consistent with supporting gay rights, she said, noting that the finds no conflict between holding right-of-center views and allowing gays to marry.
From Cupps statements, some might assume that shes arguing for the Republican Party to embrace gay marriage. But when asked about the political movements future if it fails to do so, she clarified her stance, saying that the GOP doesnt need to embrace gay marriage, per se. Rather than touting the institution, she noted the importance of Republicans being inclusive and allowing gay individuals into the tent.
Republicans (and Democrats, for that matter) who disagree with gay marriage shouldnt be forced or bullied into accepting it but the party does need to embrace gay conservatives, as well as conservatives who support gay marriage, Cupp said.
As far as her CPAC decision goes, she informed the organizers before making her public statement on MSNBC. Rather than speaking out against event organizers, she reiterated positive feelings about the annual conservative conference, noting that its not her intention to use the bully pulpit or to attack CPAC. In fact, she said shes hoping to work with the group again in the future. But for now, she simply cannot lend her support.
This year it just didnt feel like there was a way for me to support my friends at GOProud and [Log Cabin Republicans], promote an inclusive, big-tent party, and participate in the conference at the same time, she explained.
Regardless of her views on same-sex marriage, Cupp also seems to have the partys future in mind. Considering the dearth of support the GOP has among minority groups and young people, she said excluding gays simply doesnt make sense.
Its beyond bad manners, thats bad calculus, she believes.
Cupp is demented if she thinks the GOP needs to welcome sexual perversion and its promoters into the party. I suppose she believes the Boy Scouts should let homosexual scout leaders take little boys off into the woods? Maybe Jerry Sandusky would make a great RNC Chairman? Cupp is goofy.
She isn’t a real true conservative. I don’t think she has any real good ideas. She is no good.
GOP will keep losing elections if it becomes an exclusionary party. The democraps do not exclude any group. That is why their ranks are growing and GOP is shrinking. And when you lose elections, you become totally irrelevant.
Winner takes it all.....beautiful ABBA song.
Folly and utter nonsense. The Tea Party candidates were not elected on the strength of their support for so-called “minority” groups, including those who define themselves by their sexual proclivities. And isn’t it funny that there is no talk of election fraud from people like Sarah Elizabeth?
So how did that “shellacking” only three years ago happen?
The Democrats exclude anyone with a brain
Is S.E.Cupp a pen name of Ann Coulter?
Ms. Cupp’s cup runneth over with misguided understandings of what many Americans hold, believe and live by. To borrow and paraphrase her phrase, conservatives who hold “interesting, well-intentioned and valid religious, constitutional and economic arguments against gay marriage” are hardly “nuanced differences of opinion”. Ms. Cupp is an atheist. Her belief is hardly “nuanced” as opposed to orthodox Christian belief and faith.
if gays want to bungle that abnormal way, go for it....
we've got millions of illegals here so why not make them pay taxes and buy car insurance like the rest of us...why not make them pay for my SS when I get to that age....
we should be fiscal conservatives, wanting smaller govt and less taxation, less interference in our private lives....a strong defense....
we're eliminating ourselves just as quickly as we can and I'm wondering if this was all the plan from the beginning..
The gay-pedophile movement is not part of the conservative movement, they simply wish to poison our well
It is good there is at least one logical thinker besides me on this issue. I am creeped out by homosexuals, but I can tolerate them so long as they keep it private. What they do in private does not affect my life.
On the other hand when we lose elections, and community organizers get the power, it hurts so many aspects of my life. Taxes affect everything, what house I can afford, what foods I can afford, Which colleges I can afford for the kids, can I afford a decent vaction once in a while, can I afford to eat out in a good restaurant once in while, which car I can afford.....almost every aspect of our lives.
They exclude anyone who believes in life, God, guns and family. They refuse any of us bitter clingers. They exclude anyone who believes in the Constitution, US sovereignty and the rule of law. They exclude anyone who refuses to go along with gimmies, high taxes and the redistribution of wealth. Those who disagree with gay propaganda and abortion aren’t welcome either.
Perhaps you should just keep enjoying your dance with those commies and your belief that they will fulfill all those “winning” socialist dreams.
Glenn Beck - please just can this dopey atheist RINO already.
And I am supposed to give a rat's behind?
She’s probably playing for the other team is my guess.
A very “butch” move by Cupp..
Marriage isn’t private. It is a societal blessing that should be denied deviant activities that have no benefit for society.
The reason why the government is involved in marriages at all is for the protection of women and children. The ancillary benefits and responsibilities of marriage are incidental, not important, to the underlying reason why we have marriages condoned by government.
Without some standards, there is chaos. As we see the erosion of more and more civil institutions we see the increase of social ills.
Also: We hardly have lost a great deal of elections. We lost the latest PRESIDENTIAL election because we ran a moderate/liberal Northeast Republican instead of a strong Conservative.
Even with that we BARELY lost in the popular vote. O’Bumbler is no where near a popular President. He got millions of fewer votes than he got four years ago. Even with 24/7/365 protection from the main stream media.
We simply need a Conservative that is articulate.
No kidding...."articulate" is the key word.
You are correct in that Obummer won by what 53:47? So only 3% switch could make a difference depending on electoral. My concern is the trend. Hispanics are growing much faster than others. GOP can't win future election without breaking into that group.
Did I say I am for gay marriage? Heck no. My point is no need to disparage any group that wants to vote republican.
Good, glad she took herself out of a group she clearly does not belong in.
Wish more would do the same. Out of the entire party for that matter. You aren’t conservative if you are for gay marriage. Period. You don’t fit the definition and we’re not changing the definition of “marriage” or “conservative” just because you don’t like them.
“GOP will keep losing elections if it becomes an exclusionary party. The democraps do not exclude any group. That is why their ranks are growing and GOP is shrinking. And when you lose elections, you become totally irrelevant.”
We tried that. It was called Mitt Romney, who supported gays in the boy scouts, who had spokesman going to individual groups and telling them not to take his pro-life comments seriously, who was everything to everybody, and so he lost the easiest political campaign in history.
If we don’t have people who stand for something, we will never win. Sorry, but that means excluding the perverts, and the illegal alien lobby.
“we’ve got millions of illegals here so why not make them pay taxes and buy car insurance like the rest of us...why not make them pay for my SS when I get to that age....”
And still forbid them the right to vote? Nuts! There is no scenario where amnesty does not eventually lead to giving these people the right to vote. As a Hispanic myself, with family that came straight from Mexico (LEGALLY), I can tell you that allowing these people to profit from their criminality is just going to breed further corruption and decay. You don’t want millions of the poorest of the poor, low information pawns of Mexico and Leftist socialist movements, who had no problem with breaking American law, suddenly getting the right to vote. Prepare for a century of Communist rule, or at least a few months of it before the country implodes and we revert to Feudalism. That is what YOU are promoting by even thinking of any other option besides border enforecement and deportation.
Trust me. The only position that can be sold, and that actually works, is the one no one tries... Standing up for principles. Refusing to look away and allow criminal acts to go on unpunished. The Conservative movement must take a firm stand, “NO” to coddling the illegals, “YES” to enforcement of borders and immigration laws, including going after businesses that hire them.
The American people respect strength, and those who stand up strongly for their positions. And as for the illegals, most of them will deport themselves in such a hostile environment. Let Mexico solve their own problems, instead of willfully handing their problems out to us.
Sorry, but the celebration of these deviants is nothing to celebrate. you know a society is in the toilet when this sick behavior is celebrated by the “tolerant” crowd.
Now I must vomit!
CPAC IS NOT a Republican convention. It is an organization that was set up to FIGHT the Republican establishment that was drifting too far into Liberalism. The Log Cabin Republicans are not excluded from participating in the event. They are simply not allowed to sponsor any of the event. They do not toe the Conservative line on many important issues to the people who control CPAC.
CPAC is not Libertarian it is Conservative and Conservative concerns itself equally with financial and social issues. As for SE Cupp. Not being at CPAC is her loss. She needs them more than they need her. She is stuck on a Liberal network and has been nearly invisible since she went to work at the Blaze. Besides, she is much more physically attractive that she is bright.
“we’re eliminating ourselves just as quickly as we can and I’m wondering if this was all the plan from the beginning..”
The quickest way to eliminate Republicans and conservatives as political forces is to grant another amnesty. We’d be instantly and permanently electorally irrelevant.
The usual gift that keeps on giving
No one is saying we need to encourage gay or any other perverse lifestyle. Politics is a blood sport. I am more saddened by the SCOTUS appointments made by the winner from Chicago than someone making a speech at CPAC or whatever. Those appointments will kill more fetuses than all soldiers killed in the wars this country has fought against other countries. Sotomayor and Kagan will be around for 30+ years. The more groups we exclude from voting republican, more Kagan’s will sit on the SCOTUS.
“That is why their ranks are growing and GOP is shrinking. And when you lose elections, you become totally irrelevant.”
The GOP had record registrations before the November elections. The reason why the GOP is “shrinking” is because the non-white immigrants are growing in numbers and they have been conditioned to vote Dummycrat. I’m not a member of the GOP BTW and I would rather stick my face up Moochelle obama’s fat ass than vote Dumocrap.
Romney was not my definition of an articulate or shrewd politician. He seriously offended the 47% by his stupid remarks at a fund raising event.
In 2016, I am hoping for someone who does not make dumb statements even at private gatherings. Smart cell phones can record words and video.
Nobody is excluding anybody from voting Republican. Only their own ignorance and moral degeneracy causes that.
We have nothing against those who are homosexual. They should live and be well. However, we have a great deal against those who believe that we should bend to the desires of 1% of the population that happens to believe that their degenerate, dangerous and unhealthy sexual perversions should be blessed by all in society.
There is a reason why virtually every civilization throughout history has shunned Homosexual unions. We are certainly not smarter than the collective of all human experience.
Best laugh I’ve had in forever! Brilliant
Well said. Agree.
By Cupp’s “reasoning” we should be welcoming self-professed pedophiles to the party as well to broaden the base.
So....is SE Cupp being invited to the Glenn Beck Compound when it is finished?
First its Illegal Alien Amnesty.....then it’s caving in to ObamaCare....now it’s Homosexual Marriage....the GOP is slowly destroying itself
S.E. Cupp won’t be speaking at CPAC? Why is this even a story? Get over yourself, honey. ‘The Blaze’ needs an overhaul...too many nonsensical stories...
I don’t mind dumb statements at private gatherings. What concerns me more is the immorality of a man we seek to elect to the highest office of the land, and rain praises on him as if he were “good.” There are none who are good, but nominating an unrepentant sinner, who lied to our faces all the way through the election, who schemed to have us cheated of our choice and imposed himself on us with the help of the GOPelite, is worse to me than any difficulty to articulate a message or other surface-level problem he might have possessed.
If we want to reform the nation, we need men of integrity. Not what this world calls “electable.” No, we aren’t electing a Pope, but we ought to hold our leaders to a high standard. Pretty words and appearances are deceptive, and we must always keep watch on what they do. Which Founding Father was it that said we ought to prefer Christian men for our leaders?
Go ahead, GOP...embrace the sodomite agenda...turn your back on G-d...become the J.C. Penney’s of the political world.
...so Cupp...how does ostracizing true conservatives win elections? You really think embracing the anti-G-d sodomite agenda will draw in enough gay-supporting voters to offset the conservatives that will stay home? Even an atheist like Cupp should be able to see that the numbers there add up to GOP defeats at any level...
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
...we're eliminating ourselves just as quickly as we can and I'm wondering if this was all the plan from the beginning..
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
...now WHY would the Communist Party support that? Hmmm?
To borrow from Rush Limbaugh for those living Riolinda a Judas goat is used to lead US sheeples to the slaughter pen . The Republicans were given a chance to use a wedge issue to split up the democratic party and blew it.
Besides being unable to equate Obamas socialist schemes particularly his energy policy running up the costs on everything and still is thus forcing those with limited incomes to go on the dole. BTW the angle here is to blame the system not the folks using it. Because they have to. But it’s a signature of Rove’s past performances when with Bush. The demo-coms used it because it fell into “heartless Republicans”.
Blaming Obama and explaining that policy in terms those proverbial LIVs could understand wasnt even considered. Refusing to attack Obama was based on MSM polling showing his popularity suggesting an intellectual inability by Rove and the GOPES to rejoin any racial charge.
....Does anybody remember what the Democrats did at their 2012 convention ??? First they eliminated any mention of the word GOD...and when they thought twice about doing that they reintroduced the resolution what happened ? They booed God..thrice..That resolution was rammed through just like the Affordable Health Care Act ...That’s a wedge issue within the democrat party.which was not exploited by Roves RINOS and GOPES and the Republicans generally to this day. To properly describe that episode .Its the marriage of the radical and democrat into the hyphenated Demo-Com union.
Was that fact used in any of the material Roves RINOS spewed forth during the 2012 Romney or US senate races his group of GOPES (Government Ofthe People Elite Snobs) used on their hit list ? I like using that acronym because it rhymes with dopes.
Noooo ! They could have used that episode to point out how far to the left the democrat party has hyphenated into; Demo-Coms ...Instead well we dont like Aikin ...He said what ? OMG OMG hes unqualified ...If there was a chance he would have been burned at the stake by Roves RINOS and the so called conservative talkies spouting Roves tripe.
The Aikin or ODonnells response to a set up phoney issue had nothing to do with any thing that would ever occur in any legislation that would pass their respective desks had they been elected.
THE RESPONSE YOU DIDNT HEAR WAS THIS While at their convention the Democrats were busy denying God . Aikin believes in something like the ten commandments. Including Thou shalt not steal and doesnt believe that getting elected to office gives you a license to do steal ... Which his opponent seems to have done rather well since being in office. The same thing with Mourdock,ODonnnell, etc,etc, etc.
That presentation could have been expanded to Reid, Pelosi, and the slew of Demo-Com pigs at the trough. Expanding their personal wealth at the expense of the US taxpayers.
Now his bunch seems to be saying if you hold a religious view dont run for office... Were gonna save the Republican party ....to be finished off by Obama and the hypenated democrats..
Roves RINOS wrong for America and wrong for the Republican party...
GOD DENIERS LED BY A CONGENITAL LIAR
ARE REDISTRIBUTE WEALTH INCITERS/
FOR FIRST YOUR MONEY THEN YOUR GUNS
BE DEFENSELESS WHEN THEY COME
FOR TO THEIR GOVERNMENT YOU MUST RUN
Its time to get government out of Our face
Our religion and and Our pocketbook
(The above is designed to be printed up and passed around your precinct and your friends and neighbors as a (index sized) palmcard. On the face (REVERSE SIDE)or below the slogan you can put the name of the candidate you favor and the election dates...EXCELLENT FOR SLIPPING UNDER WINDSHIELD WIPERS ON CARS PARKED IN KEY PARKING LOTS CHURCHES, RALLY SITES
There you go, trying to get some one that is 100% right all the time.
Atheists are what they are, sadly she often defended the Christian Conservative position better than the nominal Christians that are on the "Real News" with her.
I agree with all of the concepts you put forward. (But can we please refrain from profanity. There are ladies present, you know.)
When the fairies are displeased with anybody, they are said to send their elves to pinch them.
The ecclesiastics, when they are displeased with any civil state, make also their elves, that is, superstitious, enchanted subjects, to pinch their princes, by preaching sedition; or one prince, enchanted with promises, to pinch another.
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: with selected variants from the Latin edition of 1668. Ed. Edwin Curley. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994.
When the more conservative candidates all stayed in during the primaries, and fought among themselves, they paved the way for moderate Romney nomination. If you recall he was under 30% votes in almost all states, and a unified conservative front would have defeated him easily.
That is the reason IMO why Sarah Palin did not enter the fray. She was smart enough to realize with Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Newt & Rick dividing the conservative vote she had no chance to win over the singular moderate.
It is a straw man argument to blame GOPe on Romney’s nomination. I am afraid same thing could happen in 2016. If Rubio, Paul & Cruz all stay in the run, any RINO could end up winning....Christy comes to mind.
“It is a straw man argument to blame GOPe on Romneys nomination. I am afraid same thing could happen in 2016. If Rubio, Paul & Cruz all stay in the run, any RINO could end up winning....Christy comes to mind.”
Rubio IS the RINO in that confederation, not just Christie. I think that we, as a nation, are under the judgment of God, and that is why we have such a poor choice of leaders.
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.