Posted on 10/20/2013 6:37:47 PM PDT by markomalley
Almost no elected Republicans support giving gays the right to marry. The party’s influential social-conservative wing sees “traditional marriage” as a defining issue. And while most major Democrats are rushing to embrace same-sex marriage, none of the most prominent potential Republican presidential candidates have taken that step.
But a powerful group of Republican donors, who see the GOP’s staunch opposition to gay rights as a major problem, is trying to push the party toward a more welcoming middle ground — where candidates who oppose marriage rights can do so without seeming hateful.
The behind-the-scenes effort is being led largely by GOP mega-donor Paul Singer, a hedge fund executive whose son is gay, and former Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman, who revealed his homosexuality in 2010, long after he had left the GOP leadership.
Singer’s advocacy group, the American Unity Fund, has been quietly prodding Republican lawmakers to take a first step toward backing gay rights by voting for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The measure, which is expected to come to the full Senate for a vote as early as this month, would ban workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
Singer’s group recently hired as lobbyists two former GOP lawmakers, Tom Reynolds (N.Y.) and Norm Coleman (Minn.), who say they oppose same-sex marriage but support workplace protections for gays.
Armed with new polling data and talking points, organizers are coaching lawmakers and potential candidates on politically smart ways to talk about gay rights to reassure general-election voters while not alienating core conservatives.
A softer GOP approach, they argue, would boost the party’s chances with young voters, women and centrist independents, all of whom tend to be supportive of gay rights and have drifted away from the party.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The GOP abandoned the family a long time ago. When is the last time you heard the Federal Marriage Amendment discussed? What did Romney and McCain say about the homosexual agenda? Even FR favorites like Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz basically ignore the issue in favor of economic matters.
The American people don’t believe they will stand before God in the final judgment; see themselves as “the elect”. And elect they do, liberal after liberal.
And that’s the failure of the church to be faithful to the Bible and to preach the gospel without compromise.
"a God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross."
--H Richard Neibuhr, “The Kingdom of God in America”, 1937
Note the date.
Let's not forget the pro-homo 2012 candidate the GOPe put up.
Businesses should be free to hire whoever they want. If that means a business won’t hire me because I’m heterosexual, so be it. I’ll just go find another place to work.
I don’t really understand why the homosexuals have to be so anti-liberty. If they truly want tolerance, then they’ve got to be tolerant in return. Otherwise, this is going to turn into another Roe v. Wade like ruling where government simply strong arms people into hiring homosexuals.
The problem with rulings like Roe v. Wade is simply. They do grave injury to our civil society. In simple terms, two wrongs don’t make a right. I suppose you could also say it’s impossible to right a perceived injustice with another injustice (taking away the right of people to not hire someone they believe is morally corrupt for example).
The US Constitution says I have the freedom of association. That’s another right that was wrongly tossed out during the civil rights era. It’s one thing to say government cannot discriminate. It’s totally different (and blatantly unconstitutional) to say a privately owned business can’t hire or not hire whoever it wants.
That gay bishop is a heretic. I hope for his sake he repents while he still has time, because the Bible is absolutely clear. Homosexual offenders, i.e. those who haven’t had their sin of homosexuality cleansed by the blood of Christ, will not see Heaven. The temptation itself is not sin. Acting or wishing to act on that temptation is.
Vicky Gene Robinson goes beyond the sin of homosexuality. He actually calls evil good and probably inspires other homosexuals to die in their sins (by saying homosexuality isn’t evil). In other words, he’s a teacher who leads others into grave sin, and Christ had special warnings for teachers like that.
Somehow the “middle” is now radical left-socialism
I think Glenn Beck already “evolved”
publius911: “Moving toward the middle is exactly what the GOPe must do to survive!”
LOL. Good one, and true. The GOPe is definitely center left on the scale of government. On one end you have statist ideologies like communism and fascism. On the other end you have small or no government ideologies like conservatism, libertarianism, and anarchy.
I don’t believe the GOPe has ever moved toward smaller government in my lifetime. They are reliable votes for expanding government control over the people, so that puts them left of middle as you noted.
I find one aspect of the Obama administration to be refreshing. The left has come out of the closet so to speak as the totalitarians they are. Not only that, but the GOPe also revealed itself as a party of big government. We know we have enemies in our midst, and that’s a key step toward defeating them.
Agreed. It’s like government commanding who you’ll be friends with. Not an aspect of true liberty in the slightest.
“I don’t really understand why the homosexuals have to be so anti-liberty. If they truly want tolerance, then they’ve got to be tolerant in return.”
It’s their consciences convicting them. If they really thought homosexuality was OK, then they wouldn’t be trying to use the state to force everyone to believe so.
Hey, Peter Poofter, Obama said he was against gay marriage in 2008 - remember?
If you support same-sex marriage than you have to support incestuous same-sex marriage too. There is no argument that can be made for or against incestuous same-sex marriage that doesn’t apply to regular same-sex marriage also. So ask same-sex marriage proponents if they support incestuous same-sex marriage and why or why not. If they say because it’s immoral, well, pot kettle black.
Bottom line is the definition of marriage is linked to what promotes reproduction and the family. It exists as an institution to promote proper, stable child-rearing. It does not exist to promote self-gratification of a sexual fetish. Believing that doesn’t mean you “hate” anybody. Not wanting to encourage smoking doesn’t mean you hate smokers.
Let’s start that conversation by acknowledging we aren’t going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants... bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society. Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors. [but he’s not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.
The behind-the-scenes effort is being led largely by GOP mega-donor Paul Singer, a hedge fund executive whose son is gay, and former Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman, who revealed his homosexuality in 2010, long after he had left the GOP leadership. Singer’s advocacy group, the American Unity Fund, has been quietly prodding Republican lawmakers to take a first step toward backing gay rights by voting for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The measure, which is expected to come to the full Senate for a vote as early as this month, would ban workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Singer’s group recently hired as lobbyists two former GOP lawmakers, Tom Reynolds (N.Y.) and Norm Coleman (Minn.), who say they oppose same-sex marriage but support workplace protections for gays.
Who is that bishop with the Liberace outfit?
Liz Cheney was against both DOMA and the marriage Amendment and supports gay marriage, Mitt Romney has always been radically pro-homosexual agenda. Governor Palin was pro-DOMA and pro Constitutional Amendment.
Palin--"Like the majority of Americans, I support the Defense of Marriage Act and find it appalling that the Obama administration decided not to defend this federal law which was enacted with broad bipartisan support and signed into law by a Democrat president."
Palin--Breaking ranks from the top of her ticket, the Alaska governor said she had voted in 1998 for a state amendment banning same-sex marriage and hoped to see a federal ban on such unions. She said she believed traditional marriage is the foundation for strong families.
McCain was more libertarian--"McCain, an Arizona senator, is supporting a ballot initiative in his state this year that would ban gay marriage. But he has consistently and forcefully opposed a federal marriage amendment, saying it would usurp states' authority on such matters."
Romney--"For some voters it might be enough for me to simply match my opponent’s record in this area. But I believe we can and must do better. If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern. My opponent cannot do this. I can and will."
"One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” military policy. I believe that the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share."
One doesn’t have to be a Christian to oppose homosexual marriage. There’s certainly a spiritual, moral case to be made against homosexuality, but there’s a natural order argument against it, too.
Homosexuality goes against the natural design of the human body. A society of heterosexuals can procreate and survive the natural world. A society of homosexuals cannot.
BTW, I’m not saying that homosexuality isn’t naturally occurring. It is, but so are many other dysfunctions. It doesn’t even matter if homosexuals are made that way. If that was possible, it still doesn’t change the natural order of things. We can look upon them with sympathy and maybe even tolerate their behaviors, but we cannot rationally claim homosexuality is normal in the way that heterosexuality is.
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.