Comments on: FRC VP Warns of Third Party If GOP Embraces Marriage Equality

By: Hunter

Hunter — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 19:56:50 +0000

Republicans who actually want to hold office are realizing that the anti-gay agenda is not going to pay off for them — the rest of the country has shifted its view.

FRC, on the other hand, along with NOM and the rest of the pack, seems intent on marginalizing itself.

More power to ‘em. May they succeed beyond their wildest nightmares.

By: Timothy (TRiG)

Timothy (TRiG) — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 16:40:08 +0000

And then you could start a campaign for PR-STV, which frankly you could do with.

TRiG.

By: JohnAGJ

JohnAGJ — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 00:46:10 +0000

Hey if all the socons want to leave the GOP and form their own group, I wouldn’t mind one bit. Frankly I’m more Republican-leaning on other matters but I’m not supporting these folks one bit. So please, don’t the door hit your collective keisters on the way out.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 00:37:13 +0000

I’ve never claimed that Republicans are evil or Democrats are angels. I just think that twisting yourself up in knots to applaud the barest of bare feints towards the slightest bit of non-antipathy from an occasional Republican is a bit silly. They are what they are, and even if many of the smarter ones aren’t particularly anti-gay, they’re in no mood to alienate the ones who are.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 23:41:01 +0000

Ryan,

It’s enough of a “same thing” for FRC to worry.

To you I say “Don’t worry.” You’ll have plenty of examples to illustrate how evil Republicans are and how angelic Democrats are. Things haven’t changed enough to impact your purposes.

But FRC needs to worry. They are reading the writing on the wall and it wasn’t painted there by Thomas Kinkade.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 23:13:31 +0000

Timothy, the NH GOP declined to rescind marriage equality there, they didn’t pass it. Don’t get me wrong, its great. But its hardly the same thing. And 4 republicans voted for equality in NY; clearly not a majority. And those were in the liberal states. Nationally is far worse.

By: Hyhybt

Hyhybt — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 18:57:24 +0000

This could be fun. A third party based mainly on restricting marriage, if it became large enough to notice, would draw those who have that as their top priority away from both the Republicans and the Democrats, leaving behind in *both* of the parties big enough to get anything done only those who either don’t much care or are on our side.

Short of a Supreme Court ruling that no level of government may ban gay marriage, I can’t think of anything that would get the job done nationwide faster .

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 18:21:30 +0000

Gus, let’s see: they want America to be a Christian nation, the are focused entirely on social issues, and they demand that we “let the people vote”.

Someone should recommend that they become the Christian Social Democrat Party and see how long they champion that idea before someone leads them to Wikipedia.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 18:14:56 +0000

Ryan

“…and why no Republican majority has *ever * passed any gay rights legislation.”

Other, of course, than the New York Senate and the New Hampshire House just this year.

Which is why FRC is worried.

By: Lord_Byron

Lord_Byron — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 13:58:24 +0000

Good luck with being an one issue party.