Posted on 10/04/2014 6:26:22 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
NEW YORK (AP) — As same-sex marriage cases cascade through the federal courts, Republican politicians find themselves awkwardly split into three camps.
There's a small but growing number who favor legalizing gay marriage, a hard-core faction that continues to denounce it, and a sizable group in between that seems to wish the issue would disappear.
At one end of the spectrum, at least eight GOP members of Congress have endorsed same-sex marriage, and two openly gay GOP candidates for the House hope to join them.
In Massachusetts, Richard Tisei has run ads featuring his husband. In California, Carl DeMaio ran an ad showing him and his long-term partner in San Diego's gay-pride parade.
On the other flank, conservative Republicans in Congress have introduced legislation seeking to protect states from being forced to recognize same-sex marriages. One of those lawmakers is Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, a potential presidential contender who drew applause at a recent conservative gathering by saying, "We stand for marriage," and insisting that his party not shy away from "family values."
Then there's the large group in middle, not ready to embrace same-sex marriage but wary of antagonizing its supporters, including what polls suggest is a solid majority of Republicans under age 30.
Several GOP governors fit into this category, including Chris Christie of New Jersey, Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania, Susana Martinez of New Mexico and Brian Sandoval of Nevada. Each decided within the past year to back away from all-out legal fights against gay marriage.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Let us hope the GOP does not run on this topic. There are much larger and more important issues the public are more concerned about.
The GOP has become accomplished at giving away elections. Hope they focus and FIGHT on the real issues.
A more appropriate way to characterize the "in-between" group would be that they are able to recognize when a battle has been lost.
I can think of few more conservative traits than the ability to know when you've lost a battle and it's time to cut your losses.
Having said this, I don't see the profit of dedicating inordinate amounts of time or energy to the subject. First, we're dealing with a tiny minority of disordered people here. Second, the issue pales in comparison to the other things that are disordered in government. Third, ignoring the constant pleas for attention by these narcissists seems a prudent approach.
OK, know and be ready to defend your position but first point out the absurdity of spending time and resources on what is essentially a perversion. It should not be dignified beyond that. Not a topic worthy of discussion and a diversion.
“A more appropriate way to characterize the “in-between” group would be that they are able to recognize when a battle has been lost.
I can think of few more conservative traits than the ability to know when you’ve lost a battle and it’s time to cut your losses.”
Except it wouldn’t cut your losses, it would guarantee you never had another win. A third party would form and the Republican party would go the way of the Whigs.
Or we could write an article on how immigration divides the Democrats into three camps: those who want amnesty in return for some future nebulous promises of border control, those who just want amnesty now with no promises, and those who want to actively encourage immigration from every third world hell hole in the world in order to displace the native population.
Yep. Gays are a tiny percent of the population. Monogamous gays are a tiny percent of that subset. Numerically, the subset of that subset is about as numerous as the entire Amish population in the eastern United States.
How does continuing to fight a lost battle keep you from suffering continuing losses?
Sadly, a great many American conservatives opposed the civil rights revolution of the 50s/60s. Either because they believe, inaccurately, that racial equality was not a simple extrapolation of the American system. Or, more accurately and understandably, that it was a lesser issue being exploited by Communism, with which America was engaged in a death struggle.
Very, very few conservatives continue to hold either of these views. The battle against civil rights was lost, and deservedly so.
The battle against “gay marriage” has also been lost. IMO, intelligent conservatives should recognize this fact and concentrate on the still-winnable issues of protecting the right of individuals and groups to continue to oppose homosexuality.
Well said.
+1
The GOP needs to avoid this issue when possible, but if unavoidable they must be clear that this is a state local issue, and needs to be determined by popular vote not some social activist judge or court.
It’s clearly WRONG and we need a smart policy to destroy it.
“Very, very few conservatives continue to hold either of these views. The battle against civil rights was lost, and deservedly so.
The battle against “gay marriage” has also been lost. IMO, intelligent conservatives should recognize this fact and concentrate on the still-winnable issues of protecting the right of individuals and groups to continue to oppose homosexuality.”
Do you understand that when equate queer marriage to civil rights you have lost any ability to ever again argue against the queer agenda, and every perversion that goes along with it.
Fighting against the queer agenda isn’t racist, that is nonsense and a coward’s argument to end debate.
I know which “camp” I’m in. To compromise God’s principles is giving Satan a blank check. Time on this earth is not even a blip on the Richter scale of life compared to eternity. We should all concentrate on the issues using God’s Word as the Standard. . .to do less is selling our souls to the devil. The older I get, and believe me I am getting old. . .the more I am convinced that there is “no middle ground”. . .it’s God’s Way or the highway. . .we all will be held accountable. Think about it.
All would benefit by going to this site I just discovered and click on “listen”. It is very well narrated. Just type in the book you would like to read/listen to.
http://www.esvbible.org/Revelation%201/
Did not say it was racist.
Only that both causes have been / are being lost.
If you can think of another cause that has been lost and that conservatives have accepted as such and cut their losses, feel free to substitute it.
First off, conservatives won the civil rights debate, the demonrats lost that one.
The queer marriage/agenda debate is nothing like that. It is the fight for our morals and religious rights.
That isn’t something people will give up and move on.
Those willing to toss the 1st amendment so easily will do the same to the 2nd!
I agree with you. I also think the “fight for the real issues” ship has sailed. It’s a month to the election and strategy is still being debated.
“The Supreme Court may soon say whether it will take up one or more same-sex marriage cases in its term that begins Monday. Were the justices to rule that gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry in all 50 states, some activists and political analysts believe it would be a relief for the GOP’s 2016 presidential hopefuls.
“Then they wouldn’t have to talk about it,” said Evan Wolfson, who heads the advocacy group Freedom to Marry. “They’d really like the Supreme Court to finish the job and be able to move on.”
I think this is probably true. If a verdict comes down like that, which wouldn’t shock anyone I can imagine the sighs of relief from all the potential GOP campaign managers.
Freegards
More democrats than republicans were against the civil rights legislation. Unfortunately, the legislation went too far, ordering private businesses under the threat of the law to accommodate minorities. That set the precedent for gay couples to insist the government can force bakers to bake for gay weddings, and force businesses to allow contraceptives.
Keep at an individual rights plank. Don’t ban their silliness, but fight to allow individuals to be allowed to recognize or not recognize such marriages as they see fit.
Mitt Romney helped facilitate homo marriage in his state as governor. One of the two main reasons he was the first GOP candidate in my entire voting life to ‘not’ get my vote. I left my ballot blank. And I’ll do that again and again, without any qualms, to any candidate indicating any wobbliness on the issue. No way in hell will I, nor my family, ever give my vote to those so comfortable with such deviancy and moral rot.
“OK, know and be ready to defend your position but first point out the absurdity of spending time and resources on what is essentially a perversion. It should not be dignified beyond that. Not a topic worthy of discussion and a diversion.”
It’s always been about using the power of the state to punish those who they know can never buy into ‘gay marriage’ or whatever other impossibility the state defines as marriage for itself. It’s the stick they will never have to put down. So in my opinion it’s going to be pretty hard to not talk about. The other side is going to bring it up, and you will have the testimony of those who have been punished for not accepting it.
Freegards
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.