GOP platform committee rejects civil unions

[charminglife]

Not surprised, but I'm glad there are people like Ms. Fenton speaking up.

GOP platform committee rejects civil unions

TAMPA, Fla. — The Republican platform committee resoundingly rejected an amendment Tuesday that would have endorsed civil unions for gay couples.

The GOP will maintain its official support for a constitutional amendment that would “protect traditional marriage” by defining it as between a man and a woman.

The Democratic National Committee platform has embraced gay marriage, urged on by President Barack Obama’s decision to endorse it earlier in the year.

But here at the Marriott hotel, where Mitt Romney will stay when he accepts his party’s nomination next week, a series of similar amendments were soundly rejected during subcommittee meetings on Monday. Supporters of marriage equality wanted an up-or-down vote before the full body of just over 100 members.

Barbara Ann Fenton, Rhode Island’s representative to the quadrennial session that decides official Republican Party principles, called for a platform plank that would recognize civil union partnerships for heterosexual and homosexual couples.

“As a Roman Catholic, there’s nobody in this room who believes [more than I do] that the definition of marriage is between one man and one woman,” she said. “But those are my religious beliefs, and this country was founded on the separation of church and state.”

“At 31, I don’t see people because of the color of their skin and I don’t recognize them by their sexuality,” she added. “For my own generation, a lot of times homosexuality is not the biggest deal in the world. And that’s okay.”

The room sat quietly as Fenton spoke. Social conservatives respectfully listened.

Then platform committee chairman Bob McDonnell, the governor of Virginia, asked if anyone wanted to speak. A sea of hands shot up.

“Our party has always been the party of defending traditional marriage,” said Sharee Langenstein from Illinois. “We need to continue being the party that defends traditional marriage.”

Indiana representative Jim Bopp called civil unions “counterfeit marriage.”

“The recognition of marriage between a man and a woman when the government does that has nothing to do with the separation of church and state,” he said.

Fenton was one of four people to speak in support of more gay rights in the platform. Aggressively working the halls of the meeting were representatives of the Log Cabin Republicans, a group that supports gay rights. They were overpowered and outmaneuvered by social conservative groups like the Family Research Council. FRC President Tony Perkins, for example, is Louisiana’s male representative to the platform session.

Themis Klarides from Connecticut noted that she voted for civil unions in the state legislature.

“I don’t think this diminishes or degrades marriage,” she said. “My parents have been married over 55 years, and I believe in that institution…But I think those terms have been co-mingled for so long that we’ve lost the difference between civil and religious [unions].”

After the civil unions amendment failed, Nevada representative Pat Kerby tried to amend the traditional marriage section to say that every American should be treated “equally under the law” as long as they are not hurting anyone else. He said that the GOP should focus on an economic message, not waging the culture wars.

“I believe this is the most important election of our lives,” said Kerby, a strong supporter of Ron Paul. “I believe this social issues grants Hollywood and the media to paint us as people who aren’t after a free country but kind of theological ‘we want to impose our will on others.’”

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach opposed the amendment on the ground that government routinely regulates behaviors like drugs and polygamy

“We condemn those activities even though they’re not hurting other people, at least directly,” he said.

Bopp from Indiana argued that the GOP benefits politically from supporting a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. He noted that California passed Proposition 8 on the same day Obama handily won the state in 2008, and he pointed to the recent success of a constitutional ballot referendum in North Carolina.

“This suggests that strongly supporting traditional marriage is actually quite popular and would enhance the support of our candidates,” he said.

Several more social conservatives wanted to express their opposition to gay marriage.

“We’re not going to be able to entertain all the people that want to speak,” said McDonnell.


www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79936.html

[wawa]

not surprised. But still sad.

I kinda keep expecting them to at least drop the support for the constitutional amendment. Just leave the status quo as is and not try to make it worse, ya know?

*sigh*

[llama]

Aug 21, 2012 10:39:28 GMT -5 wawa said:

not surprised. But still sad.

I kinda keep expecting them to at least drop the support for the constitutional amendment. Just leave the status quo as is and not try to make it worse, ya know?

*sigh*

Ditto all of this. I don't expect the Republican Party to advance LGBT rights. I don't even expect Democrats to do that in a meaningful way most of the time. But there is a huge distinction between remaining silent or giving lip service and little action to something vs. actively and balls to the walls opposing it and trying to make things worse.

I do long for the day when the consistency of a small federal government is realized in their dropping the anti same-sex marriage constitutional amendment. For me that is more about consistency than about party ideology, though.

[wawa]

Also I find this depressing as hell.
“This suggests that strongly supporting traditional marriage is actually quite popular and would enhance the support of our candidates,” he said.


So no discussion of whether it's actually RIGHT or anything. Just that it'll get more votes, so let's keep it. Am I the only one who thinks that this kind of thinking shows a complete lack of actual values or morals? I will still vehemently disagree with people who think that there is an actual moral/legal/ethical argument for banning gay marriage, but at least I can kinda sorta get it. The argument that the GOP should still oppose it because it'll get votes is just fucking heinous to me.

Politics are gross.

[Deleted]

I like Barbara Fenton - I wish she had been able to convince people, but I'm not surprised.

[bqbride]

“I believe this is the most important election of our lives,” said Kerby, a strong supporter of Ron Paul. “I believe this social issues grants Hollywood and the media to paint us as people who aren’t after a free country but kind of theological ‘we want to impose our will on others.’”

I don't think Hollywood and the media have to try very hard to "paint" them as such. They're pretty open about the fact that this is precisely what they want--the imposition of their religious beliefs onto the masses.

[emilyj]

This disgusts me to no end.

And also: "Nevada representative Pat Kerby tried to amend the traditional marriage section to say that every American should be treated “equally under the law” as long as they are not hurting anyone else. He said that the GOP should focus on an economic message, not waging the culture wars."

YES.

[msmerymac]

Aug 21, 2012 10:39:28 GMT -5 wawa said:

not surprised. But still sad.

I kinda keep expecting them to at least drop the support for the constitutional amendment. Just leave the status quo as is and not try to make it worse, ya know?

*sigh*

But then there's always the fear that SCOTUS will deem gay marriage a constitutional right, and give gay marriage equal protection under the law. Unless they amend the constitution! Muahaha!