GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2013/02/27/gaypatriot-exclusivefull-list-of-republicans-signing-prop-8-amicus-brief/trackback/

  1. Wow! What a bandwagon

    Comment by rusty — February 27, 2013 @ 7:40 pm - February 27, 2013

  2. So basically, these people are saying their opinion means more than the voting citizens of CA? Whether Prop 8 is wrong or write is up the voters, not people who assume their “expertise” makes their opinions more valid.

    Comment by Chip — February 27, 2013 @ 7:51 pm - February 27, 2013

  3. I see where you’re coming from Chip, but I disagree that voters always get things right.

    Comment by Joseph — February 27, 2013 @ 8:33 pm - February 27, 2013

  4. This list is actually depressing. For or against gay marriage, ALL Republicans and conservatives should be united that this is a legislative matter, not a matter for the courts. What this group of people have done, is written a brief begging SCOTUS to legislate. And that is very troublesome.

    Comment by AmericanElephant — February 27, 2013 @ 9:33 pm - February 27, 2013

  5. This week’s theme;

    מנא ,מנא, תקל, ופרסין
    Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — February 27, 2013 @ 9:53 pm - February 27, 2013

  6. #4 – “This list is actually depressing.”

    Especially with the current SCOTUS.

    Comment by Richard Bell — February 27, 2013 @ 11:10 pm - February 27, 2013

  7. Gosh, I wish Meg had been elected governor of CA.

    Comment by Left Coast but Leans Right — February 28, 2013 @ 12:11 am - February 28, 2013

  8. Well, I’m in the minority here, but I think that it is appropriate for the courts to rule on issues that impact civil rights/liberties. Some things are legislative, I get that, but this one I just happen to disagree.

    Comment by Joseph — February 28, 2013 @ 1:52 am - February 28, 2013

  9. True conservatives believe that the Constitution and Bill of Rights protects the rights of all Americans regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, or whatever other bigoted reason people want to give to withhold equal rights.

    Comment by David — February 28, 2013 @ 7:05 am - February 28, 2013

  10. Sorry David, ‘true conservatives’ don’t believe in a universal ‘right’ to government recognized marriage. I personally find it revolting that you think a 50 year old marrying a 10 year old is fine, for example.

    Comment by The_Livewire — February 28, 2013 @ 7:49 am - February 28, 2013

  11. Livewire you have it backwards. Government doesn’t have the right to “recognize” that marriage is solely between a man and woman.

    Your second statement is a completely distorted and disturbing response based on nothing that I have ever said that indicates significant underlying personal issues. You should seek professional help with why you feel the need to lash out and make false statements about someone who’s comment you disagree with.

    Comment by David — February 28, 2013 @ 8:27 am - February 28, 2013

  12. Joseph,

    Perhaps changing the definition of marriage involves neither a civil right nor an issue of liberty.

    Comment by heliotrope — February 28, 2013 @ 8:27 am - February 28, 2013

  13. The only one I can’t get my head around, is S.E. Cupp. I just don’t get it, unless she has been at CNN too long.

    Tell us on the doll, S. E., where those evil liberals have touched you…

    Comment by BigGator5 — February 28, 2013 @ 8:40 am - February 28, 2013

  14. #13 – That may be the case, Gator…

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    PS – Just my own $0.02, but I am depressed that the list contains a bunch of RINOs and “squishy” Republicans who think that their world revolves around the admiration and validation of those mortally opposed to them (i.e. progressives and socialists).

    Comment by Peter Hughes — February 28, 2013 @ 9:38 am - February 28, 2013

  15. @David

    No, you have it backwards. The People have the right to apply conditions for the government to recognize contracts, and restrict the application of the same. This has been done in all 50 states. But then again, given you’ve said that keeping 50 year olds from marrying 10 year olds is ‘bigoted’ I’m not surprised at your lack of understanding.

    Indeed, [i]Baker v. Nelson[/i] is the court upholding that people have the right of self determination and that they (through the states) can set conditions on what conditions are met.

    9.True conservatives believe that the Constitution and Bill of Rights protects the rights of all Americans regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, or whatever other bigoted reason people want to give to withhold equal rights.

    You’re the one with the open ended statements Dave. Clearly anyone who opposes any form of equality is ‘bigoted’ in your mind. So you must support lowering/removing age of consent laws. After all, you’re ‘withholding equal rights’ from those who want to bugger young children. And I’m sure you wouldn’t want to be a ‘bigot’ would you?

    Perhaps you shouldn’t be surprised when people take you at your world.

    Comment by The_Livewire — February 28, 2013 @ 11:13 am - February 28, 2013

  16. The comment that the voters are not always right is well taken. That is exactly why we have Obama for President and all manner of corruptocrats in Congress. But I do not believe the founders intended for the Supreme Court to have the power they have taken for themselves. Maybe it would help those who think otherwise to read Mark Levin’s “Tyranny and Liberty.”
    As to another issue which is not actually related to the above comment, I do think GOProud should be included at CPAC.

    Comment by Linda Strickland — February 28, 2013 @ 11:13 am - February 28, 2013

  17. A better option might be Levin’s “Men in Black.”

    Comment by Linda Strickland — February 28, 2013 @ 11:16 am - February 28, 2013

  18. Linda, I agree with you on all counts in your post.

    Comment by The_Livewire — February 28, 2013 @ 11:47 am - February 28, 2013

  19. Why David Frum signed the amicus brief (Daily Beast):

    As a conservative concerned with stabilizing families to rely less on government aid, I have been convinced: I’ve been worrying about the wrong thing. Stopping same-sex marriages does nothing to support families battered by economic adversity. Instead, it excludes and punishes people who seek only to live as conservatives would urge them to live. Treating same-sex partnerships differently from husband-wife marriages only serves to divide and antagonize those who ought to be working together.

    Like many signatories of the amicus brief, my thinking has been influenced by the fine example of the many committed, devoted same-sex couples I know. At least as much, however, I have also been swayed by an intensifying awareness of the harm culture-war politics has done to my party. Culture-war politics have isolated the GOP from the America of the present and future, fastening it to politics of nostalgia for a (mis)remembered past. Culture-war politics have substituted for relevant cultural policies aimed at encouraging the raising of children within married families. Worst of all, culture-war politics has taught the GOP to talk to America as if the nation were split into hostile halves, as if more separates Americans than unites them.

    Comment by rusty — February 28, 2013 @ 11:56 am - February 28, 2013

  20. Nice to see the list of people who wish to overturn our votes

    Comment by Kyle — February 28, 2013 @ 12:22 pm - February 28, 2013

  21. I don’t see Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity there. Ergo, nothing will change.

    Comment by facesofkoridai — February 28, 2013 @ 6:05 pm - February 28, 2013

  22. Video: What most schools don’t teach:

    http://commoncts.blogspot.com/2013/02/video-what-most-schools-dont-teach.html

    Comment by Steve — February 28, 2013 @ 6:14 pm - February 28, 2013

  23. I voted No on 8 and would vote for gay marriage again if it were ever placed on the ballot, but the issue should be decided by the voters, NOT the courts. Whether gay marriage is good or bad policy is irrelevant to the court decision – unless Prop 8 is unconstitutional it has to be upheld. All this list tells me is how many purported conservatives don’t understand the Constitution.

    Comment by Irving Washington — February 28, 2013 @ 11:44 pm - February 28, 2013

  24. Big deal. A group of closeted homosexuals and bisexuals hiding behind the progressive and conservative monikers. The goal of the SCOTUS is to address the collusion within the federal judiciary and the APAs/ABA among its homosexual bisexual jurists and court officers since the revision of the ALIMPC in 1955 meant to indoctrinate the population into accepting the sociopathic behavior of homosexuals and bisexuals and the subsequent normalization of neurotic behavior and its associated paraphilias to children.

    Gay ‘marriage’ not a right, prohibiting gay adoption not ‘discrimination’: European Court of Human Rights (REJECTION OF THE SOCIAL ACTIVISM OF THE APAs/ABA AND THE SWEDISH MODEL IN THE INTEREST OF CHILDREN)

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-marriage-not-a-right-prohibiting-gay-adoption-not-discrimination-europe#

    Russians overwhelmingly endorse ‘gay propaganda’ ban

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/russians-overwhelmingly-endorse-gay-propaganda-ban?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com%20Daily%20Newsletter&utm_campaign=448adc7414-LifeSiteNews_com_Canada_Headlines_04_19_2012&utm_medium=email#

    From the Republican Party…………………..

    Republicans Quietly Retreat on Gay Marriage
    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/273209_Republicans_Quietly_Retreat_on
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74661.html

    From the Obama administration………………..

    Obama says in the memo:
    “I declared before heads of state gathered at the United Nations, ‘no country should deny people their rights because of who they love’ . . . Under my Administration, agencies engaged abroad have already begun taking action . . . as we in the United States bring our tools to bear to vigorously advance this goal.”

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/presidential-memorandum-international-initiatives-advance-human-rights-l

    02242013_Oscar Night_1st Lady presentation_wearing the affectations of a sadomasochistic freak

    Comment by rjligier — March 1, 2013 @ 4:46 am - March 1, 2013

  25. The who’s who of closeted homosexuals and bisexuals within the Republican Party masquerading as progressives, conservatives, and federalists. ROFLMAO. The SCOTUS has to address the collusion within the federal judiciary and the APAs/ABA amongst homosexual bisexual jurists and court officers as no evidence supports the legalization of homosexual marriage and adoption.

    Gay ‘marriage’ not a right, prohibiting gay adoption not ‘discrimination’: European Court of Human Rights (REJECTION OF THE SOCIAL ACTIVISM OF THE APAs/ABA AND THE SWEDISH MODEL IN THE INTEREST OF CHILDREN)

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-marriage-not-a-right-prohibiting-gay-adoption-not-discrimination-europe#

    Russians overwhelmingly endorse ‘gay propaganda’ ban

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/russians-overwhelmingly-endorse-gay-propaganda-ban?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com%20Daily%20Newsletter&utm_campaign=448adc7414-LifeSiteNews_com_Canada_Headlines_04_19_2012&utm_medium=email#

    From the Republican Party…………………..

    Republicans Quietly Retreat on Gay Marriage
    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/273209_Republicans_Quietly_Retreat_on
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74661.html

    From the Obama administration………………..

    Obama says in the memo:
    “I declared before heads of state gathered at the United Nations, ‘no country should deny people their rights because of who they love’ . . . Under my Administration, agencies engaged abroad have already begun taking action . . . as we in the United States bring our tools to bear to vigorously advance this goal.”

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/presidential-memorandum-international-initiatives-advance-human-rights-l

    02242013_Oscar Night_1st Lady presentation_wearing the affectations of a sadomasochistic freak

    Comment by rjligier — March 1, 2013 @ 4:53 am - March 1, 2013

  26. The who’s who of closeted homosexuals and bisexuals within the Republican Party masquerading as progressives, conservatives, and federalists. ROFLMAO. The SCOTUS needs to address the collusion within the federal judiciary and the APAs/ABA amongst its homosexual bisexual jurists and court officers to legalize homosexual marriage and adoption and subsequently the normalization of neurotic behavior and its associated paraphilias to children without replicable, empirical data to support their position.

    Gay ‘marriage’ not a right, prohibiting gay adoption not ‘discrimination’: European Court of Human Rights (REJECTION OF THE SOCIAL ACTIVISM OF THE APAs/ABA AND THE SWEDISH MODEL IN THE INTEREST OF CHILDREN)

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-marriage-not-a-right-prohibiting-gay-adoption-not-discrimination-europe#

    Russians overwhelmingly endorse ‘gay propaganda’ ban

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/russians-overwhelmingly-endorse-gay-propaganda-ban?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com%20Daily%20Newsletter&utm_campaign=448adc7414-LifeSiteNews_com_Canada_Headlines_04_19_2012&utm_medium=email#

    From the Republican Party…………………..

    Republicans Quietly Retreat on Gay Marriage
    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/273209_Republicans_Quietly_Retreat_on
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74661.html

    From the Obama administration………………..

    Obama says in the memo:
    “I declared before heads of state gathered at the United Nations, ‘no country should deny people their rights because of who they love’ . . . Under my Administration, agencies engaged abroad have already begun taking action . . . as we in the United States bring our tools to bear to vigorously advance this goal.”

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/presidential-memorandum-international-initiatives-advance-human-rights-l

    02242013_Oscar Night_1st Lady presentation_wearing the affectations of a sadomasochistic freak

    Comment by rjligier — March 1, 2013 @ 4:57 am - March 1, 2013

  27. 14.#13 – That may be the case, Gator…

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    PS – Just my own $0.02, but I am depressed that the list contains a bunch of RINOs and “squishy” Republicans who think that their world revolves around the admiration and validation of those mortally opposed to them (i.e. progressives and socialists).

    While I generally loathe the term ‘RINO’, I notice that most, if not all, the names were of people who had either previously come out in favor of same-gender marriage, or at least in favor of civil unions [eg, Jon Huntsman]. With one possible exception, I don’t see anyone on the list who appears to have had an epiphany on the issue—which is what I think might motivate some on the issue to also reconsider. The other post on the topic referred to a “cultural earthquake”. This list is more representative of a special occasion dance party at a gay bar.

    Comment by RSG — March 1, 2013 @ 7:49 am - March 1, 2013

  28. Wonder if they’d like to stand up for Chick fil A‘s actual rights while they’re at it.

    Comment by The_Livewire — March 1, 2013 @ 12:13 pm - March 1, 2013

  29. NRO’s counterpoint to the letter.

    Comment by The_Livewire — March 1, 2013 @ 4:13 pm - March 1, 2013

  30. THE GAYS ARE CORRUPTING THE CHILDREN

    Comment by Rattlesnake — March 1, 2013 @ 5:13 pm - March 1, 2013

  31. I voted No on Prop 8 and was disappointed when it passed but I have a problem with the court stepping in to define marriage.

    One of the few bright spots in last year’s election from my point of view was that 3 states voted to legalize same-sex marriage. It is only a matter of time.

    I would like to see a proposition on California’s ballot to overturn Prop 8. I’d vote for it happily, but until then it should stand.

    Comment by Andrew — March 1, 2013 @ 11:54 pm - March 1, 2013

  32. The court is unlikely to make a broad ruling on gay marriage. I think they’re gonna sidestep the bigger debate on marriage and focus on a California only ruling either way. I even think Prop 8 has a better chance of survival than does DOMA since that’s a federal issue. If the court goes DOMA no and Prop 8 yes then it’ll make clear gay marriage a state’s rights issue. Also I don’t believe Anthony Kennedy (despite what gay lefties like to rant) a devoted ally to either side. People forget that back in 2000 there was suit came up that challenged the Boy Scouts’ of America statue banning homosexuals being scout leaders and it was upheld 5-4 with Kennedy in the majority. I consider myself a libertarian and I believe marriage is a state’s rights issue and decided not by the Feds or the courts (though I personally believe marriage as between a man and a woman). Also I hate the saying “gay marriage is inevitable”. It’s not inevitable when you’ve still got a lot of opposition.

    Comment by Jonathan Gillispie — March 2, 2013 @ 1:25 pm - March 2, 2013

  33. Yeah, I agree with Peter Hughes in #14. Most are kind of RINO anyhow, so I don’t look to them for how the conservative movement or the GOP should be on same-sex marriage. And how many are CURRENT elected members of anything? I don’t think any. Again, I do not particulary favor same-sex marriage. BUT, if the voters of California do in a future proposition, I will support is as the law of the state of California. It is about state-rights for me. And FTR, will CPAC just stop the carnage and let GOProud sponsor and attend?

    Comment by Mark J. Goluskin — March 3, 2013 @ 12:55 am - March 3, 2013

  34. [...] has breaking news on gaypatriot.net regarding Prop 8 Amicus [...]

    Pingback by Guest Host for OpinioNation On Wednesday | ExceptionalAmerican — March 3, 2013 @ 6:24 pm - March 3, 2013

  35. Government doesn’t have the right to “recognize” that marriage is solely between a man and woman.

    David, I’m afraid that it does. Government-sponsored marriage is a licensing scheme. The purpose of all licensing schemes is precisely to discriminate among people, in some fashion. Fundamental rights precede government (morally and logically) and are inherent to individuals; while licenses that incorporate multiple individuals into new legal entities (like corporations, families, etc.) are creations of government and, as such, are public policy instruments – NOT fundamental rights of individuals.

    I support gay marriage, just because I think the exclusion of same-sex couples from government-sponsored marriage licensing is bad public policy. I support legislative (not judicial) efforts toward gay marriage.

    Comment by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism) — March 4, 2013 @ 12:03 am - March 4, 2013

  36. P.S. Before you try to whip out the _Loving_ decision, note well that:

    - In the end it supported a “freedom” to marry, not a universal individual right; and
    - It supported that freedom for mixed-race couples, because of the 14th Amendment’s prohibition of all discrimination involving race. The 14th Amendment does not similarly prohibit discrimination (especially if the courts perceive the discrimination to be rational) involving gender or, more precisely, the question of mixed-gender vs. same-gender couples.

    Comment by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism) — March 4, 2013 @ 12:13 am - March 4, 2013

  37. Sorry to see David ran away from logic.

    Jeff, one reason I see conservatism as the ‘big tent is we can civilly disagree. I think that the government should legislatively create ‘Fred’ you think it should just legislatively change marriage. IT is the civil discussion, and the precision of the language that is the importance of the debate.

    Comment by The_Livewire — March 6, 2013 @ 11:35 am - March 6, 2013

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**


Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.239 Powered by Wordpress