Posted on 02/28/2013 9:35:48 PM PST by Mozilla
TheBlaze TV’s S.E. Cupp captured headlines on Tuesday after she announced that she’s 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. “That’s not a bad thing. What we can’t 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 Party’s 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.
“I’m 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 Cupp’s statements, some might assume that she’s arguing for the Republican Party to embrace gay marriage. But when asked about the political movement’s future if it fails to do so, she clarified her stance, saying that the GOP doesn’t 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 shouldn’t 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 it’s not her intention to use the bully pulpit or to attack CPAC. In fact, she said she’s hoping to work with the group again in the future. But for now, she simply cannot lend her support.
“This year it just didn’t 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 party’s future in mind. Considering the dearth of support the GOP has among minority groups and young people, she said excluding gays simply doesn’t make sense.
It’s “beyond bad manners, that’s 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.
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.