The GOP's Gay-Rights Reboot: An effort to change the Republican Party's platform.

National Journal ^ | 07/14/2014 | Michael Catalini

[SeekAndFind]

Inside the offices of Republican gay-rights groups, a strategy is forming to convince party leaders to strip opposition to gay marriage from the GOP platform.

The target, operatives say, is to see party leaders drop their support for a gay-marriage ban in time for the Republican National Convention in summer 2016.

It's a long shot, but Republican gay-rights lobbyists think they can build on the momentum provided by courts nationwide and the belief that, philosophically, the GOP's social conservatives are fighting a battle that puts them well out of step with the majority of the country, and that could demographically doom national aspirations.

"The ground has never been more inviting and welcoming to someone changing their position on the issue," said Marc Solomon, a former Republican Hill staffer, now with Freedom to Marry. "Where the polling is on the issue, it shows that we have a real legitimate chance at victory in 2016."

A group called Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry is part of the effort to remove the traditional-marriage plank from the GOP platform at the Cleveland convention. Already, the group has met with state and county party officials in New Hampshire, and they're planning trips to Iowa in August and to South Carolina and Nevada in September.

[Pelham]

This sounds like something being pushed by so-called ‘Reform Conservatism’, a product of the ‘Young Guns’ movement.

The discredited Eric Cantor, his chosen successor Kevin McCarthy and Paul Ryan are the hacks behind the YG movement.

Their “intellectuals” include:

Andrew Kelly, Adam White, Scott Winship, James Pethokoukis, Yuval Levin, Kate O’Beirne, W. Bradford Wilcox, Peter Wehner; seated, from left, Michael R. Strain, April Ponnuru and Ramesh Ponnuru.

[Semper]

Do you believe that a destructive Obama is better than a competent, successful (in business and state government), moral, Romney who was governor of a democrat state where he had to compromise to get anything done?

[Semper]

One of the reasons that we became a great country is that our constitution requires the co-operation of those with differing interests and beliefs. If you have never held a belief which you believed was absolutely correct and later found that you were mistaken, you should be out walking on the waters and healing the multitudes.

The genius of our founding fathers was that they knew that ultimate solutions could not come from any one person or group of persons and good solutions come from hard work and co-operation from all involved. When you do it quickly and exclusively, you get obamacare, et al. And that comes out of loosing elections.

[Claud]

Again the devil took him up into a very high mountain, and shewed him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them. And said to him:

“All these will I give thee, if falling down thou wilt adore me.”

Then Jesus saith to him: “Begone, Satan: for it is written, The Lord thy God shalt thou adore, and him only shalt thou serve.”

Matthew 4:8-10

[madprof98]

The genius of our founding fathers was that they knew that ultimate solutions could not come from any one person or group of persons . . .

You should go to work for the Republican National Committee - or, for that matter, the Democratic National Committee. But hurry before they require that all new hires pass some LGBT litmus test.

[zeestephen]

Re: “Why don’t RINOs simply become Democrats?”

That's a great question.

I think many of them are probably “single issue” Republicans: very assertive on defense and foreign policy, or tax and debt issues, or private sector business issues, or support for Israel.

But, even though most of their politics might be center-left, they know the Democrats completely reject the issue they care about most.

I think other RINO’s are probably turned off by the secular religious nature of Left wing politics, by the rigid discipline of the Democrat Party, and by the constant Left wing demand for public political display.

Mostly, though, I think RINO’s love holding elective office, but they completely lack the deeply felt political principles that have guided most of us here to Free Republic.

[cdcdawg]

There were also conservatives who did not support Governor Romney because he is not a conservative. He would have been a better manager than Obama, without question, but the general direction of ever-growing government would not have altered, unless he completely changed. He was the PERFECT establishment candidate in every conceivable way, and ran a technically sound campaign. He won independents handily. He lost the election.

[GeronL]

I don’t know how moral a person can be if they change their opinions and flip-flop on a whim.

[Semper]

He (Romney) would have been a better manager than Obama, without question, but the general direction of ever-growing government would not have altered,

Obama has hurt this country more than any other president in modern times. He has forced spending to a level beyond belief. He is on a path to substantially destroy our economy, our foreign policy and our military. He has spent the last 6 years forcing this country towards 3rd World status. He is the greatest resource of our enemies.

Romney was so successful in business that no one even tries to deny it. One reason for that is that he knows how to get very good people to work for him. (Something Obama certainly can't do.) Also, Romney obviously understands fiscal realities such as too much debt. He is a leader as well as a manager. He clearly loves this country and Obama does not. If we have a major disaster (economic melt-down; terrorist attack; natural), Romney could have handled it - Obama wants it and he will make it worse.

For me the biggest question is: Since it was obvious that only Obama or Romney could win the election, how could the country I love make such a poor and disastrous choice?

Because too many thought Romney was not conservative enough? Because too many wanted all or nothing? Because too many would not work hard and smart enough to change the minds of others?

Well, when this country suffers the consequences of Obama and the democrats, those "republicans" who helped by not supporting the best alternative can smugly say "I did not compromise because I believed I was right" - even though the result was far from being right.

[Semper]

I don’t know how moral a person can be if they change their opinions and flip-flop on a whim.

You have bought the democrat and media propaganda. It is not possible to be as successful in business as Romney was and flip-flop on whims. When conditions change or when you actually learn from experience, a good manager changes appropriately. But more of his "changes" were not accurately represented. Of course our current president does not flip-flop on a massive scale?

[Semper]

You should go to work for the Republican National Committee - or, for that matter, the Democratic National Committee.

I think you have to be a member of one of those parties to do that. I am not a member of any political party.

[GeronL]

We were talking about Romney, the pro-abort, pro-gay, liberal Republican pretending to be "severely conservative".

He was lying almost every time he opened his mouth. That might work in the Democrat primary where they love liars and the biggest and best liars are rewarded. Conservatives do not operate that way.

Besides it is not my job or duty to vote for someone I don't trust. It is the job of the party and candidate to earn our votes. They do not get them by default.

The "lesser evil" argument doesn't work any more. Sorry about that.

[Semper]

Besides it is not my job or duty to vote for someone I don't trust. It is the job of the party and candidate to earn our votes. They do not get them by default.

It is our duty to vote and to vote for what we believe will be best for our country. There are certainly circumstances when standing firm with your beliefs is very admirable. When what you do impacts on other people it may be a little different. Do you really think our country is better off after the Obama years than we would have been with a Romney presidency? Which comments about Obama that I made in my last post to "cdcdawg" do you disagree with?

The "lesser evil" argument doesn't work any more. Sorry about that.

I agree, you should be sorry about that. Please explain why the greater evil is better than the lesser. Since we live in an imperfect world, everything has some evil. Why is it not good to always try to choose that which has the least evil and the most good - call it the "most good" argument. If you believe that Obama was the "most good" option then you will deserve all the potential grief he may cause.

[dbehsman]

They do this, and I'm out.

Might as well start voting democrat and hasten the collapse of the nation

[Objective Scrutator]

Didn’t GOProud shut itself down because they whined that the Republican Party was too bigoted?

This is the problem with giving political freedom, or any freedom, to Sodomites. The moment we quit throwing them in jail and burning their dissenting literature was the moment they immediately began to work towards destroying the nuclear family, the institution of marriage, and began attempting to indoctrinate children through adoption and the teachers’ unions. The Bible was adamant that society legislate against deviancy such as this, and we instead chose to mock God in favor of laughable libertine ethics.

There is no thesis-antithesis-synthesis between Christianity and homosexuality. Anyone who supported the outcome of Lawrence v. Texas has tainted blood in their body. This tendency towards libertarianism with relation to morals has consequently neutered free enterprise, and led to the rise of the welfare state.