• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

GOP reignites issue of gay marriage

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
G.O.P. Moves Fast to Reignite Issue of Gay Marriage
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG


WASHINGTON, Oct. 26 — The divisive debate over gay marriage, which played a prominent role in 2004 campaigns but this year largely faded from view, erupted anew on Thursday as President Bush and Republicans across the country tried to use a court ruling in New Jersey to rally dispirited conservatives to the polls.

Wednesday’s ruling, in which the New Jersey Supreme Court decided that gay couples are entitled to the same legal rights and financial benefits as heterosexual couples, had immediate ripple effects, especially in Senate races in some of the eight states where voters are considering constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage.

President Bush put a spotlight on the issue while campaigning in Iowa, which does not have a proposal on the ballot. With the Republican House candidate, Jeff Lamberti, by his side, Mr. Bush — who has not been talking about gay marriage in recent weeks — took pains to insert a reference into his stump speech warning that Democrats would raise taxes and make America less safe.

“Yesterday in New Jersey, we had another activist court issue a ruling that raises doubts about the institution of marriage,” Mr. Bush said at a luncheon at the Iowa State Fairgrounds that raised $400,000 for Mr. Lamberti.

The president drew applause when he reiterated his long-held stance that marriage was “a union between a man and a woman,” adding, “I believe it’s a sacred institution that is critical to the health of our society and the well-being of families, and it must be defended.”

The ruling in New Jersey left it to the Legislature to decide whether to legalize gay marriage. Even so, the threat that gay marriage could become legal energized conservatives at a time when Republican strategists say that turning out the base could make the difference between winning and losing on Nov. 7. With many independent analysts predicting Republicans will lose the House and possibly the Senate, President Bush’s political team is counting on the party’s sophisticated voter turnout machinery to hold Democratic advances enough that Republicans can at least maintain control.

“It’s a game of margins,” said Charles Black, a Republican strategist who consults frequently with Karl Rove, the chief White House political strategist. “You’ve got about 20 House races and probably half a dozen Senate races that are either dead even or very, very close. So if it motivates voters in one or two to go vote, it could make a difference.”

Democrats predicted Thursday that the debate would not dramatically alter the national conversation in an election that has been dominated by the war in Iraq and corruption and scandal in Washington. But across the country, Republicans quickly embraced the New Jersey ruling as a reason for voters to send them to Capitol Hill.

In Virginia, the court decision could not have come at a better time for Senator George Allen, a Republican whose campaign for re-election had been thrown off course by allegations that he had used racially insensitive remarks. The Virginia ballot includes a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Mr. Allen supports it; his Democratic opponent, Jim Webb, argues that the ban is unnecessary.

On Thursday, Mr. Allen could be found in Roanoke at a rally held by backers of a ballot initiative to ban gay marriage. Victoria Cobb, an organizer of the events, said the New Jersey ruling was giving the cause “a new momentum.”

“It’s an issue that’s going to play a big role in the next 12 days,” Mr. Allen’s campaign manager, Dick Wadhams, said in an interview.
In Tennessee, another state with a proposal to ban gay marriage, Representative Harold E. Ford Jr., a Democrat running for the Senate, was sparring with Republicans over an advertisement in which the Republican National Committee asserts that Mr. Ford supports gay marriage — an assertion Mr. Ford says is wrong. On Thursday, he responded with his own advertisement, calling the Republican ad “despicable, rotten lies.”

Mr. Ford says he will vote for the Tennessee gay marriage ban. With early voting under way, the Republican candidate, Bob Corker, is telling voters that he has already cast his ballot in favor of the gay marriage ban.

And in Pennsylvania, where Senator Rick Santorum, the Senate’s leading Republican backer of a gay marriage ban, is fighting for his political survival, conservative advocacy groups were working furiously to revive the gay marriage debate. Pennsylvania does not have a ballot initiative.

“It’s an important wedge issue to talk about between candidates where there are two distinct viewpoints on the issue,” said Joseph Cella, president of Fidelis, a national Catholic advocacy group that has embraced Mr. Santorum for his views on abortion and gay marriage. Mr. Cella said his organization, which was also working to pass a gay marriage ban in Colorado, was contemplating an advertising campaign.

As of January 2006, 45 states had enacted some form of law — from a simple statute to a constitutional amendment — banning same-sex marriage. In addition to Virginia, Tennessee and Colorado, the states that have proposed constitutional amendments on the November ballot include Arizona, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

For conservatives, the debate brings back memories of 2004, when they rallied in opposition to a Massachusetts court ruling that same sex couples had a right to marry. The issue proved central in places like South Dakota, where Senator John Thune, a Republican, railed against activist judges in his successful campaign to oust Tom Daschle, then the Senate Democratic leader.

This year, by contrast, conservatives have felt frustrated that the debate over gay marriage and the judiciary is no longer front and center.

“I think they’ve been a little sedate,” Mr. Cella said. But in the wake of the New Jersey ruling, he said, conservatives “are really getting motivated, and this is a shot in the arm to propel that.”

Democrats, though, insist they are not concerned.

“It’s not going to be close to the issue it was in 2004,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York. “In 2004 they scared people that the court ruling in Massachusetts would just change America and families dramatically. By 2006, it’s clear that hasn’t happened, and so the scare tactic, what motivated people to go to the polls, just isn’t there.”

One place the New Jersey court ruling is not likely to have much of a political impact is, paradoxically, New Jersey, a largely Democratic state that does not have a proposed gay marriage ban on the ballot.

The Republican Senate candidate, State Senator Thomas H. Kean Jr., has been distancing himself from his party throughout the campaign, in which he has focused largely on economic issues, domestic security and alleged ethical improprieties on the part of his Democratic opponent, Senator Robert Menendez. A Kean spokeswoman said Thursday that theme is unlikely to change.

“We’re going to stick with the issues that we’ve been winning on this entire campaign,” the spokeswoman, Jill Hazelbaker, said. Gay marriage, she said, “is not an issue that he’s not talking about, or that he’s trying to avoid. But in terms of our marquee issues that we’re winning on, I don’t think it rises to an issue that’s going to define the campaign.”

New York Times
October 27, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/27/us/politics/27marriage.html?ei=5094&en=c51cc42b3624a489&hp=&ex=1161921600&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print
 

Steve

Well-known member
Darn republican conspiricy,....got the liberal court to agree with the liberals....and just in time for the mid term elections.....

kind leads credance to the "give em enough rope, and they will hang themselves"......
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Too bad this odd duck didn't decide he liked men better than women before he married his first wife... or his second wife!

NJ's Gay Ex-Governor Says He Would Marry
Oct 26, 2006


Former Gov. James McGreevey, who resigned after acknowledging a gay affair, said he would tie the knot with his partner if state lawmakers decide to allow gay marriage.

"Marriage would offer the ability to bless our relationship in a committed way," McGreevey, 49, told The New York Times.

McGreevey's comments followed a state Supreme Court ruling Wednesday that same-sex couples must be given the same rights as married people. The court left it up to the Legislature to decide whether to extend those rights under the structure of marriage or something else.
Some gay-rights advocates said the decision didn't go far enough.

McGreevey, who told The Associated Press last month that he had publicly opposed gay marriage while in office as a way to keep his homosexuality hidden, hailed the ruling.

"I applaud the court's courage," McGreevey told the AP. "I regret not having had the fortitude to embrace this right during my tenure as governor."

The former governor stepped down in 2004 after announcing he was gay.
McGreevey now lives with Mark O'Donnell, a 43-year-old Australian businessman. Before they could marry, the former governor would have to finalize his divorce from his second wife.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/26/D8L0CL2O1.html
 

jigs

Well-known member
to demonstrate the usefulness of gay unions, I would like to build every congress man an electric cord with two male ends...and tell them to go use it to turn on a lamp....
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
jigs said:
to demonstrate the usefulness of gay unions, I would like to build every congress man an electric cord with two male ends...and tell them to go use it to turn on a lamp....

Great point Jigs.

And Katrina said you wasn't smart! :shock:

:wink: :lol: :lol:
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
katrina said:
What!!!!!!! I didn't say that........Here I am minding my own buisness..
Jb I'm gonna tell your mother.....

How do you like it when people make false accusations against you? :???:
 

jigs

Well-known member
Jinglebob said:
jigs said:
to demonstrate the usefulness of gay unions, I would like to build every congress man an electric cord with two male ends...and tell them to go use it to turn on a lamp....

Great point Jigs.

And Katrina said you wasn't smart! :shock:

:wink: :lol: :lol:

well I never did take opinions of Husker fans too seriously.

besides, ya can't be smart AND beautiful.....so maybe I is smart!
 

katrina

Well-known member
accuasations???? Now who did I accuse??? :???:
Jigs,
Just remember any thing you say can and will be used aginst you on ranchersnets... :D :D :D
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
katrina said:
accuasations???? Now who did I accuse??? :???:
Jigs,
Just remember any thing you say can and will be used aginst you on ranchersnets... :D :D :D

:p

I'll learn you to tell lies about me and what I did in Valentine! :p


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Econ101 said:
One thing about gay marriage is that we don't have to worry about reproduction!
:lol: Theoretically, that would cut down on the numbers, wouldn't it?

In spite of that, the contagious part of it worries me. Seems like more and more teenagers now think it's cool to be queer. Wonder where they get that from. :mad:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
X said:
Econ101 said:
One thing about gay marriage is that we don't have to worry about reproduction!
:lol: Theoretically, that would cut down on the numbers, wouldn't it?

In spite of that, the contagious part of it worries me. Seems like more and more teenagers now think it's cool to be queer. Wonder where they get that from. :mad:

Well when its exploited all over TV and the movies as the "cool way"- and in the Liberal press...Probably doesn't help when you have Congressman that are gay and perverts that the Leadership try to cover up, instead of condeming and kicking out......

Luckily I grew up in a time when Gay still meant "happy or merry"...
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Hillary has "seen the light" over gay rights?

Absorbing Gay Pain & Praise, Clinton Says She's Evolved
By: PAUL SCHINDLER
10/26/2006


In an appearance early Wednesday evening in front of roughly three-dozen LGBT leaders, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton indicated that she would not oppose efforts by Eliot Spitzer, the odds-on favorite to become the new governor, to enact a same-sex marriage law in New York.

She also suggested that language she used when she first ran for the Senate in 2000 explaining her opposition to marriage equality based on the institution's moral, religious, and traditional foundations had not reflected the "many long conversations" she's had since with "friends" and others, and that her advocacy on LGBT issues "has certainly evolved."

On Wednesday, Clinton presented her position on marriage equality as more one of pragmatism.

"I believe in full equality of benefits, nothing left out," she said. "From my perspective there is a greater likelihood of us getting to that point in civil unions or domestic partnerships and that is my very considered assessment."

Clinton addressed a gathering organized by the Greater Voices Coalition made up of LGBT Democratic organizations citywide. Leaders of those clubs, along with out elected officials, including Democratic district leaders and state committee members, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, state Senator Tom Duane, and Assemblymembers Deborah Glick and Daniel O'Donnell, were in attendance. The meeting, which was held at the Upper East Side home of a Clinton supporter, ran for more than an hour.

Representatives of the gay press were invited to the meeting, which was on the record.

The session included both warm, enthusiastic praise for New York's junior Democratic senator and sharp questioning about her posture on marriage equality.

Quinn opened the meeting recalling a number of issues-LGBT-related and not-which she had worked with Clinton on in the 10 months since she's been the Council leader. She focused in particular on their efforts to strategize about the Senate Democrats' response to this summer's efforts by Republicans to revive a federal constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage beaten back in 2004.

"Every single time since I've been elected speaker, I ever time I've picked up the phone to ask Senator Clinton to help the LGBT community, she has said yes," Quinn said. "She's assigned staff, she's taken her own time and political capital to put in on the deal."

Ethan Geto, a long-time gay activist who described himself as an advisor to the senator on LGBT issues, introduced Clinton, addressing what he called "the elephant in the room."

"We're engaged in a dialogue with someone who has the stature, who has the credibility, the viability to be the party's standard bearer in 2008," he said. "I think when you look at Senator Clinton's record, she may not agree with us on every last policy issue, but when you look at the totality of the record, there is no one in this country who may be the president of the United States with whom we have a warmer, a stronger, a closer productive working relationship."

But once the meeting moved from introductions to questions, Clinton faced a considerably more varied reception-and, hands down, the most challenging issue she faced was marriage equality.

Doug Robinson, the co-president of the Out People of Color Political Action Club who with his partner of more than 20 years has raised two sons, spoke about the pressures his family faces in sending both to college without the benefits of marriage's economic advantages. In what began as a strong challenge to Clinton, Robinson said, "We need your support on marriage, we need you to look at that."

Yet, just as Robinson was about to yield the floor for Clinton's response, he offered her a bit of wiggle room.
"Even if you say civil marriage isn't as important as equal benefits, in my mind I don't care what you call it," he concluded. "But I need the same things that everyone does so I can sustain my family."

It was at this point that the senator stated her support for "full equality of benefits, nothing left out," before saying that civil unions offered the more certain route to that goal.

"If you go the next step and say, 'But I want what is called marriage,' you're going to have a problem."

Following up, Allen Roskoff, the president of the Jim Owles Liberal Democratic Club, worked to hold Clinton's feet to the fire. Recalling a conversation he had with her during her first Senate campaign, Roskoff said, "It was right after you said that you were against same-sex marriage on moral, religious, and traditional grounds and I found that incredibly hurtful." He also criticized the senator for volunteering her support for the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, even if not asked, and for not speaking during the Senate marriage amendment debate in June regardless of the work she did behind the scenes.

Clinton offered Roskoff some consolation regarding her earlier characterizations of marriage's history as an exclusively heterosexual institution, an argument that she made in an interview with this reporter as well during the 2000 campaign.

"Obviously my friends and people who spoke to me-we've had many long conversations and I think-and which I believe-that the way that I have spoken and I have advocated has certainly evolved and I am happy to be educated and to learn as much as I can," she said.

Clinton went on to defend both DOMA and her decision not to speak during the marriage amendment debate this past June, and in fact linked the two. She said that without being able to point to the U.S. law which bars federal recognition of gay marriage and allows states to similarly refuse to acknowledge such unions from other states, many more members of Congress would have voted to amend the Constitution, especially when that effort had its first vote two years ago.

She explained that her choice not to speak on the Senate floor about the amendment this year was strategic.
"Very few Democrats spoke, because maybe you thought one way, which is that you want people out there speaking for us. We thought as-force the Republicans out there, make them look like they're trying to enshrine discrimination in the Constitution. We don't even want to dignify it."

Later in the discussion, Larry Moss, who as a Democratic state committeeman led the charge for the state party's endorsement of marriage equality, raised the issue with specific reference to politics in Albany. Noting that Spitzer, if elected governor, plans to introduce a "program bill" legalizing gay marriage as a sign of his commitment to the issue, Moss asked, "How do we keep your words from being cover for conservative Democrats who want to compromise with Eliot and say, 'Just do civil unions?'"

Clinton's response was probably the evening's most newsworthy moment.

"My position is consistent," she said. "I support states making the decision. I think that Chuck Schumer would say the same thing. And if anyone ever tried to use our words in any way, we'll review that. Because I think that it should be in the political process and people make a decision and if our governor and our Legislature support marriage in New York, I'm not going to be against that... So I feel very comfortable with being able to refute anybody who tries to pit us or pit me against Eliot."

Asked several moments later by Gary Parker, the Greater Voices leader who chaired the meeting, to clarify that point, Clinton reiterated, "I am not going to speak out against, I'm not going to oppose anything that the governor and the Legislature do."

No other issue raised during the gathering garnered the heat that marriage did. Clinton spoke passionately against what she said was the injustice, waste, and stupidity of the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy that has led to 10,000 discharges in the past 13 years, including some involving personnel with specialized skills such as language translation.

The senator won praise from several at the meeting for her work in blocking Senate approval of a Ryan White AIDS Care Act reauthorization that would mean the loss of millions in federal dollars to New York each year.

Asked by Melissa Sklarz, a transgendered activist who is a former president of the Gay and Lesbian Independent Democrats, if she would support the inclusion of gender identity and expression protections in the long-stalled federal employment nondiscrimination act, or ENDA, Clinton noted that the federal hate crimes measure also lacks such language, but said only, "We are very aware of that and we are raising that."

Asked about a measure authored by West Side Democratic Congressman Jerrold Nadler that would allow immigrant partners of Americans to gain citizenship just as foreign-born married spouses can, Clinton said movement on that awaits a comprehensive solution to the immigration issue that moves beyond the current Republican emphasis on penalties and border fences. With a Democratic Congress, Clinton said, much more is possible "and I think that will be included in it."

Only at the very end of the meeting did Clinton get around to foreign policy, the Iraq War, and what she called the Bush administration's "abuse of power."

"I think they put Nixon to shame," she said, in what was an indisputable crowd-pleaser.

©GayCityNews 2006
http://gaycitynews.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17379741&BRD=2729&PAG=461&dept_id=568864&rfi=6
 

Cal

Well-known member
Absorbing Gay Pain & Praise, Clinton Says She's Evolved

I'm thinking that the next logical step is for Hillary to come out of the closet....might explain a few things. Also saw a picture of Roseanne Barr with her hair died blonde....she could have passed for Hillary's twin sister.
 

Latest posts

Top