Who knew?
Posted on 10/06/2014 7:27:31 AM PDT by wagglebee
Billionaire donor Paul Singer held a secret, closed doors meeting with other megadonors to promote same-sex "marriage" within the Republican Party.
The Washington Blade reported that Singer and a number of wealthy donors, politicians, and the head of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) met on Thursday to discuss how to swing the GOP in favor of redefining marriage.
Relying on four anonymous sources, the Blade found that HRC president Chad Griffin, a Democratic operative, was expected to speak at the event. Prominent Republicans are expected to be in attendance, including former Bush administration Solicitor General Ted Olson, who has led lawsuits against California and Virginia in support of same-sex "marriage."
Former GOP Senator Norm Coleman, former Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman -- who "came out" as gay years after his term ended -- and Republican Rep. Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania were also expected to attend. Dent is one of the few House Republicans in favor of changing the legal definition of marriage, while Coleman has lobbied for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act on Capitol Hill. Coleman now heads the American Action Network and is on the board of the Republican Jewish Committee.
Singer, whose gay son has reportedly influenced his support for same-sex "marriage," has long been a powerhouse GOP donor on issues like lower taxes and reducing regulations. In the last several years, he has also become a leading influence in the marriage battles, donating at least $10 million to states to redefine marriage.
ConservativeHQ.com editor George Rasley told LifeSiteNews that Singer's efforts could doom the GOP, if the party changes its view on marriage. " Eliminating the Republican platform language in support of Biblical (traditional) marriage would have a disastrous effect on the success of the Republican Party. It would leave millions of voters who hold traditional Judeo-Christian values without a political home," Rasley said.
Rasley, who said that "breaking the Reagan coalition of economic, national security, and social conservatives would be sheer folly for Republicans," also pointed out that Singer "is the latest in a long line of influential people who have tried to remake the Republican Party into a pale shadow of the Democratic Party."
Dr. Jennifer Morse, who founded the Ruth Institute, agreed that if the Republican Party changes its formal views on marriage, "the millions of ordinary people of all ages, races, and religions who value marriage as a pro-child institution will be politically homeless."
"Resistance to the Sexual Revolution has always been lackluster and half-hearted among the top donors of both political parties," Morse said. "I fear that [Singer's] money will be the one and only deciding argument and that the GOP will align itself with the rich and powerful on this issue."
Rasley said that GOP support for same-sex "marriage" would be disastrous to the party's fundraising efforts. "It would spell the end of the Republican Party's grassroots donor base," he predicted. "Grassroots Republican donors clearly remember that when God was mentioned at the 2012 Democratic Convention the audience booed – they will want no part of, and will not support financially, a Republican Party that has the same policies as the Democrats who booed mention of God at their convention."
In addition to the political calculations, Rasley said that "abandoning traditional marriage is the wrong policy morally, because it is contrary to the Biblical teachings that are the foundation of every successful Western society."
That ship sailed long ago. Rush has been telling us for 20 years about his rich republican friends attitude towards Christians, abortion and gay rights.
Many here try very hard to convince us that the only way to have principals is to abandon our principals.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”
-- John Quincy Adams
It doesn't even require a Constitutional amendment, Congress can pass laws that the Supreme Court can not adjudicate, many here deny that they can do that but they have done it about 120 times in the past. It is called "Not Subject to Judicial Review."
Maybe they can take up something really important after the election, like the Redskins name, forget Tahmooressi, he is just one vote and he can't even do that if we leave him in Mexico jail.
Did you forget the /s at the end of your post. If not then keep on swallowing those blue pills.
Republicrat bump for later...
Megadonors from a what I hear support Amnesty too. So what issue will republicans abandone next?
Like you say republicans don’t represent conservatives any more. Time for a 3rd party.
Who says state legislators and governors have to obey lower courts?
More republican cowardice right there.
Very true. I stopped being a republican a long time ago. I occasionally vote for one but I am not one.
I suspect, no evidence, that if one fetish becomes legal then all other fetishes can not be attacked. WHEVEVER they may be.
If this was not so dangerous, the would not be meeting in secret.
Who knew?
Sorry, I just had to fix that. An even better fix would be this:
Megadonors don't even bother meeting behind closed doors to convince Conservatives to support gay marriage.
That's a capital C.
I’ve been repeatedly informed the GOPe either doesn’t exist, or I shouldn’t be worried about them. Elect them some more, I’m told. Otherwise, there might be a liberal.....
GOP = Gay Old Party.
And guess what? Supporting gay marriage will not win the GOP a single social liberal vote.
bookmark
True.
A caution for those who want to say the world is falling apart because some Republicans are social liberals while being economic and/or national defense conservatives — look at the pre-Reagan history of the Republican Party. Things were once worse — much, much worse — in the Republican Party. There was a day when **BOTH** parties were pro-abortion.
As late as the 1970s and early 1980s, lots of conservative Christians were still members of the Democratic Party, especially in the South, but also with traditional Roman Catholics in a lot of northern industrial states.
I personally believe that President Obama’s anti-Israel attitudes may be the tipping point needed to bring observant Jewish believers into the Republican Party. (Frankly, liberal Jews are increasingly irrelevant due to intermarriage and assimilation.) That may be difficult, but it is no more silly than it sounded in the 1970s to say that Southerners would vote Republican in places like Texas and South Carolina.
The decision by the Republican Party to be openly pro-life was a major factor in lots of conservative Democrats jumping ship and becoming Republicans, despite every effort by RINO Republican blueblood elites to discourage them and drive them away.
Knowing our history is important in preventing despair and defeatism. We've been down this road before. The Republican Party was on the verge of becoming politically irrelevant in the 1960s, and a decision to be on the “wrong side of history” by backing the agendas of “radical extremists” like Ronald Reagan resulted in victory.
Republicans who want to be, as the article calls it, a “pale shadow of the Democratic Party” need to ask how successful RINO Republicans were in the 1960s and 1970s by their “go along, get along” tactics.
Compromise with evil didn't work then. It won't work now. And for those of us who believe ultimate victory belongs to Someone other than us, knowing who is on the “wrong side of history” means reading to the end of the Book to find out Who wins and what His rules are for winning.
The late Senator Prescott Bush was involved with the American Birth Control League as early as 1942 and served as the treasurer of the first national capital campaign for Planned Parenthood in 1947.
I personally believe that President Obama’s anti-Israel attitudes may be the tipping point needed to bring observant Jewish believers into the Republican Party. (Frankly, liberal Jews are increasingly irrelevant due to intermarriage and assimilation.) That may be difficult, but it is no more silly than it sounded in the 1970s to say that Southerners would vote Republican in places like Texas and South Carolina.
Getting attacked on the street (i.e., knockout games and the like) and conservatives keeping a light in the window for them will ultimately yield huge dividends. When I lived in Far Rockaway and saw the local observant Jewish notables suddenly appearing in Chuck Schumer’s camp when he inexplicably moved from the Upper East Side was both alarming and disgusting. Mayor Giuliani’s amazing eight years in office made a lot of converts to the GOP throughout the NYC observant rank and file, which is usually very conservative. But there’s Chuck Schumer, still cracking the whip with the rabbis and yeshiva heads, as far as I know.
Fall right into the trap. The left is going to try to split us. This is nonsense. It’s a few people. Gay marriage will not be an issue if we have Sharia law people. Pleae focus on what’s important right now. We need to get the liberals OUT of office. They will keep throwing these wedge issues in to divide us and you know what they do it..BECAUSE IT WORKS EVERY TIME. For crying out loud.
I think there are close parallels to traditional Roman Catholics in the industrial states, and evangelical Protestants in the South, continuing for years to vote for Democrats based on long-ago Republican attacks on the “rum, Romanism and rebellion” of the Democratic Party.
It is beyond dispute that a century ago, way back when Republican leaders were nativist WASPs from the Northeast who detested most European immigrants, let alone Jews, the Democratic Party was a logical home for Jews, Italians, Eastern Europeans, Hispanics, and others who were being abused by Republican leaders.
It should also be beyond dispute that those days are long gone.
There is no good reason for conservatives who take their religious faith seriously, no matter what their faith is, to vote for a Democrat on the national level. The Democrats have clearly become the party of opposition to basic morality, not the party seeking full political rights for Roman Catholic and Jewish believers.
And as Hildy correctly points out, Sharia law is a possibility if America continues to move down the road Europe has taken. It may be too much to say demographics determine destiny, but Europe's need for a blue-collar workforce, a need created in significant measure by aborting babies, has led to the immigration of massive numbers of Muslims.
It would be quite ironic if a post-Christian future for Europe, a future which liberals thought would be secular and tolerant of gross immorality, turned out to be a future of strict Islamic law and rules stricter than anything enforced by the traditional churches of Europe.
If they tolerate gross immorality in sexuality, and tolerate bizarro multiculturalism in religion, they’ll tolerate beheading videos and honor killings, pogroms and total anarchy, so long as it’s done by non-whites. Europe always seems to have a knack for going down the wrong road and causing the deaths of millions.
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.