Posted on 06/02/2003 12:24:58 PM PDT by Remedy
The Rev. Jerry Falwell, one of President Bush's staunchest supporters in the Christian right, may be shying away from the Commander-in-Chief as the 2004 election fast approaches. The current National Liberty Journal, a Falwell publication, features a story ominously headlined "Christian Leaders Threaten to Abandon GOP in 2004."
Penned by the Journal's editor J.M. Smith, this lead story lambastes the Republican party and its current chairman, Marc Racicot, for getting too cozy with gay groups.
The issue of GOP courting of gay activist groups has been swirling in Washington for months, and became a lighting rod issue for the Christian right and pro-family groups after Republican National Committee Chairman Raicot met privately with members of the Human Rights Campaign, a powerful gay group.
The conservative groups also were angered after the White House and RNC offered only tepid support for Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, after remarks he made were harshly criticized by gay groups.
The weight given to this issue by Falwell's publication can not be ignored, and indicates how serious this issue may become in Bush's re-election effort. Leading Lights
The Journal quoted such leading lights in the family oriented conservative community as former presidential candidate Gary Bauer and the Family Research Council's Ken Connor, a group founded by Dr. James Dobson.
As NewsMax.com first reported [Christian Right Talks of Bolting GOP in 2004] Connor said, "If Republican leaders cannot mount a vigorous defense of marriage the pro-family voters perhaps should begin to reconsider their loyalty to the party."
In reaction to Racicot's meeting with the Human Right Campaign, a dozen top conservative leaders met with RNC chairman in early May and conveyed their concerns to him. Most came away convinced they had made some headway in convincing Racicot of the danger of massive defections should the GOP cave on such issues as gay marriage. However, as the Journal reports, their hope were dashed when Racicot suggested that religious conservatives are opposed to the gay rights agenda because of fear and ignorance.
The Advocate, a gay magazine, quoted Racicot telling gay activists, "They probably don't know gay people."
Smith responded that Racicot, in so speaking, showed his "own ignorance and willingness to make blind suggestions about people of faith."
The gay magazine also quoted Racicot as saying Christian activists had frightened potential supporters: "People fear to educate them. [They have] their own fear and lots of misinformation and disinformation, which some do for political expediency." 'Tone Deaf'
These insensitive remarks about Mr. Bush's strongest and most dedicated supporters provoked Ken Connor to write "Mr. Racicot appears to be utterly tone deaf - or openly hostile - to the concerns of the GOP's pro-family voters who oppose same-sex marriage, mainstreaming homosexuality in the public schools, allowing gays to serve openly in the military, adopt children, and making homosexual conduct a protected civil right with special legal privileges. We question whether Mr. Racicot has the sensibilities to lead the Bush Campaign."
Adding fuel to the fire, the notoriously left-wing New York Times revealed Saturday that in early May White House officials went out of their way to host 200 members of the Log Cabin Republicans, a 25-year-old gay Republican group. According to the Times, the visit "included a policy briefing with senior administration officials in the Old Executive Office Building," which "symbolized their progress under President Bush."
Noting that "the emergence of gays as a more vocal presence in Republican politics is angering some leaders of conservative groups," the Times reported that White House officials were dismissive of the complaints, arguing that the President Bush is "simply trying to be inclusive and find common ground with gays when he can," a strategy "political analysts say has worked well for Mr. Bush on other issues."
The Times noted conservative concerns and that pro-family groups "have been sending pointed messages to the White House warning that President Bush's re-election is in jeopardy if he continues to court what they call the 'homosexual lobby...'"
"Although Mr. Bush did not attend," the Times reported, "gone are the days when Bob Dole, a Republican candidate for president, refused a campaign contribution from the Log Cabin group."
"In '96, Bob Dole returned a check," Randy Boudreaux, 33, a Log Cabin leader from Louisiana, told the Times reporter who accompanied the group on the bus ride to the White House. "Now we're going to the White House." Bringing People Together
Defending White House approaches to gay groups, Scott McClellan, a White House spokesman told the Times that the president "believes strongly that one of the roles of a leader is to bring people together around shared priorities."
Furthermore, some Republican strategists like Charlie Black think Bush's outreach is a good idea. Black told the Times that Bush "understands the old Reagan rule, which is somebody who supports me 80 percent of the time is my 80 percent friend and not my 20 percent enemy."
The Times recognized the serious political consequences that could flow from current GOP outreach attempts towards gay groups, noting that "the current tension between gays and conservatives" illustrates the risks of that strategy, which puts "the two main tenets of Mr. Bush's brand of Republicanism - the 'big tent' philosophy and the 'family values' agenda - on a collision course, just in time for the 2004 election campaign."
Almost all political pundits agree that in the 2000 election Christian right voters gave Bush his margin of victory in his slim win over Al Gore.
"The first crash, people on both sides say, could be in June, when the Supreme Court is expected to rule on a case involving a Texas law banning sodomy," the Times predicted. "The case is regarded as pivotal for those advocating equal rights for gays, and many legal experts predict that the Supreme Court will overturn the law."
The Times quoted Ken Connor as saying, "Candidate Bush said in the second debate that he felt marriage was a sacred covenant, limited to a man and a woman. That was not a huge issue in 2000. Mark it down. It will be a big, big issue in 2004."
The paper added comments by Free Congress Foundation head Paul Weyrich that should convince the White House of the dangers the president faces as a result of GOP flirting with supporters of the gay agenda.
Speaking of the meeting with Racicot, Weyrich said, "The main message that we delivered was that you are playing with political fire if you are seen to be in any way compromising with the homosexual lobby."
With Falwell's influential National Liberty Journal joining in the fray, the political fire has just gotten hotter.
Jerry Falwell is not advocating the right to sentence people for their sins. He is not a legal judge. He is simply teaching the Gentiles right from wrong and opposing the agenda to normalize homosexuality as a lifestyle with full rights and privileges in what is left of it.
Jesus did promise to extend the right to judge in his kingdom to those he finds trustworthy in this world.
The sheep and the goats are the members of nations who are judged for how they treated Jesus' brethren (Jews and those Gentiles grafted into the olive tree). I don't find homosexuals or other groups defined by their sexual deviancy as a protected class in this context.
The Samaritan was a member of an ethnic group, not a group defined by sexual preference.
Those who have AIDS have our compassion and mercy. They are akin to lepers in that anyone can catch the disease. If one engages in forbidden behavior and thereby contracts a disease, one is also responsible for the outcome.
How can you ignore Jesus' call to mercy, kindness, compassion, and love, even when the subject is someone you don't like? (Matthew 5).
I ignored nothing from the Scriptures although you seemed to ignore or deny him in Revelation.
Those who have erred and fallen into a pit have a great opportunity for mercy, kindness, compassion and love. They are not however allowed to seduce others into their wickedness. They must repent from their sins and become holy. Homosexuality must stop. There is no inheritance in the Kingdom of God to those who continue to practice homosexual sex.
Mary Cheney ducks out of GOP gay group Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of U.S. vice president Dick Cheney, has resigned from the board of the Republican Unity Coalition slightly more than one year after taking on the largely honorary post with the gay-straight political alliance.
Cheney, who once marketed beer to the gay and lesbian community as an employee of the Coors Brewing Co. of Golden, Colo., has been one of the few key gay rights supporters with close ties to the White House.
A source close to the Cheney family said Mary Cheney's resignation from RUC will allow her to pursue business interests in her home state of Colorado, where she lives with her partner, Heather Poe. But some gay activists suggest that there may be more behind the decision, since it comes on the heels of protests from the religious right regarding pro-gay comments by GOP chairman Marc Racicot. "Leaders of the extreme right are demanding that the GOP back away from any association with the gay community," said David Smith, a spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, a Washington, D.C., gay rights group. "The Right is calling into question what little outreach the party had to gay voters at the crossroads of an election season. While I can't speculate on the reasons for her decision, Mary Cheney's departure definitely comes at an interesting time."
Let me post Jefferson's words once again, try having someone read them to you if need be.
You have permission to read this and to get help if you can't: the
warning...
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion...Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." warning... "Have you ever found in history, one single example of a Nation thoroughly corrupted that was afterwards restored to virtue?... And without virtue, there can be no political liberty....Will you tell me how to prevent riches from becoming the effects of temperance and industry? Will you tell me how to prevent luxury from producing effeminacy, intoxication, extravagance, vice and folly?..." T If the answer is no then everyone should just shut up...hetero is okay, cousins are okay, polygamy is okay, bi is okay; gay is okay, 13-year olds are okay, and one or one-hundred-at-a-time are okay, et. al. However, if a society decides that certain rules about who does whom when and where is functional and perhaps even necessary, all that is left is to decide is Van & Katherine Jenerette
- John Adams, October 11, 1798
www.jenerette.com �
242 posted on 04/26/2003 9:22 PM EDT by Van Jenerette (Our Republic...If We Can Keep It!)
Red herring.
The question is: Does the US Government have the constitutional authority to regulate the sexual preferences of consenting adults who wish to engage in same sex relationships?
And further to that: Has the Federal government (or any government for that matter) been deputized by the Almighty to enforce His rules and regulations here on Earth? Or will the issues of sin be settled by the TRUE SUPREME COURT, one not bound by our Constitution?
One last thing.
If we are to pay attention to the opinions of 18th Century American politicians about the fact that our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people, are we in turn going to apply 18th Century morality and religious concepts to our society in general to see if we fall under their definition of moral and religious people?
Because you, me and nearly everyone alive today will fail miserably.
In the eyes of the Founders, and judged by their standards, we are a society of reprobates, immoral, heathens. And that would be before they even dealt with the issue of homosexuality, which they would most likely see as the natural side-effect to our own debauchery.
I'm sticking with Jefferson when it comes to electing public officials.
ROTFLMAO!!!!
So, because I do not agree with your vitriol, I'm gay?
BTW, that section of the journal probably would apply to a person whose participation on an internent forum as diverse as this, consisted (yesterday) of 52 posts. Three of those posts were cut and paste links on an anti abortion thread, 49 were posts on anti homosexual threads.
Obsessive-compulsive disorder?
Phobias?
Anxiety disorders?
POT---KETTLE---BLACK!!!
I don't know if you cast a reflection or not, but next time you read that tidbit from the Archives of General Psychiatry, do it while facing a mirror, and try to listen to the person standing there talking to you.
Now you have a good point. I do believe however, that he will put 2 solid pro-life judges on the SCOTUS. His wife does feel roe vs wade should not be overturned, his mother also felt the same way. Nancy Reagan was hard to pin down between what she said in public and private.
I have no problem with somone joining the party, but the key part is, you join us, we do not change for you. I've been assuming that Ranciot's only goal was to sell them on economic issues, but leave social issues off the table. With one exception, Bush has done nothing to show me that he is not a committed pro-life person, he has not done anything to show that he supports or condones abortion, and he has vehemently opposed legislation that would support gay rights, including civil unions and has voiced support for a "respect for marriage act" which I do believe he should push harder for, as this appeals not just to christians, but also to muslims, jews, hindu's and across the board in popularity.
The corporate policy you are speaking of is true, and it actually started over at Disney world, and its basis was 2 fold. Essentially, they were dealing with lawsuit threats for providing benefits for married couples but not for homosexual couples, in there stupidity, and an attempt at good PR, they took the inititive to give benefits to gay couples, personally, I do not think straight or gay couples should be given benefits, only married couples (in the proper traditional mold).
Also to note, Cheney has 2 daughters and yes, one of them is truely a sick depraved person. I understand the love the sinner but hate the sin logic, but thats like telling me, love pornographer, hate the porn.
Is there a difference between Bush handled the response to 9/11 as opposed to the way Gore would have?
Would judicial nominees be similar in a Ketchup administration as opposed to a Bush admin?
If you believe there would be no difference, you're an idiot.
What's your point?
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.