Box Turtle Bulletin
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobby“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobbyJuly 9th, 2010
The Tea Party movement can be difficult to understand. On the one hand, they are not supportive of gay equality, but on the other they truly dislike and distrust a large centralized government.
And the New York Times found that, for the most part, the Tea Party leaders supported the decision to overturn the federal Defense of Marriage Act as a victory for states’ rights, even if they don’t much like the consequences.
Some people involved in the campaigns to limit Washington’s reach cheered what they said was a states’ rights victory.
“The Constitution isn’t about political ideology,” said Michael Boldin, the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center, a group based in Los Angeles. “It’s about liberty, and limiting the government to certain divisive issues — I applaud what I consider a very rare ruling form the judiciary.”
Others, like Steve V. Moon, a software programmer and founder of States-rights.org, a group founded in Utah in 2008, said the judge’s decision was both right and wrong.
“It’s unconstitutional for the federal government to pass laws superseding state authority — and the judge did affirm states’ rights in this area,” he said. “But I personally believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and woman and support any state passing laws affirming the sanctity of marriage.”
Mr. Moon said he feared that what might look like a states’ rights victory could backfire. If judges in other states, drawing on Judge Tauro’s reasoning, start throwing out marriage definition laws that were passed by residents or legislatures, “that could be detrimental to states’ rights.”
A spokeswoman for one of the biggest Tea Party umbrella organizations, Tea Party Patriots, said that social questions were not part of their mission.
“As far as an assertion of states’ rights goes, I believe it’s a good thing,” said Shelby Blakely, executive director of The New Patriot Journal, the group’s online publication. “The Constitution does not allow federal regulation of gay marriage just as it doesn’t allow for federal regulation of health care.”
“But I don’t want to come off saying I support gay marriage,” she added.
Meanwhile, the white house continues to stay silent on the decision.
Latest Posts
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.
“Google” is a trademark of Google Inc.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Jim Burroway
July 9th, 2010
Oh really? I thought the Glenn Beck/Sarah Palin/Dick Army wing of the Tea Party were so proud of the fact that the tea party was a so-called spontaneous grassroots groundswell that had no leaders?
And who really say that these people speak for tea partiers?
Believe me, the tea party of Arizona, among may other places, are very different. Let’s not pretend that this manufactured movement is our friends.
Timothy Kincaid
July 9th, 2010
Jim,
I’m looking for any statements from Tea Party groups who think the judge got that wrong. Maybe the Times only talked to the ones who agreed and Arizona Tea Party groups wish the the feds had won rather than the state.
I haven’t found any yet, but if you do then please link to them.
Rev. Loush
July 9th, 2010
not all tea party people are against gay rights. one of my best friends is an older woman and she is fully supportive of me getting all my rights. heer main reason for joining the tea party was because she wants to vote EVERYONE out of office who is currently in office. she wants fresh blood she says. if it says incumbant next to their name she wants them out! i am confused by the whole party personally!
bb
L
Timothy Kincaid
July 9th, 2010
Actually, it’s not just the Tea Party. I’m having difficulty in finding anyone outside of NOM and pals that has said boo about this decision.
No GOP leaders. No senators. Not even Huckabee.
This is bizarre. I’ve not figured out yet what is fueling the silence. It’s like what happened when New Hampshire legislature voted for marriage equality or when Washington State populace voted down Ref 71.
It may be that some of the party actually believes their own statements about “states’ rights”.
John in the Bay Area
July 9th, 2010
Libertarians may get up and say things like this, but there is no reason to believe that libertarian thinking, rather than arch conservative Republican politics, is behind the Tea Party Movement. It is, I guess, nice to dream sometimes.
beachewtoy75
July 9th, 2010
Ugh. Dammit. I like my conservatives crazy irrational and foaming at the mouth! Funny hats help, too!
Richard Rush
July 9th, 2010
I’m wondering if the Tea Partiers’ championing of states’ rights is a double edge sword for us. While they may support overturning DOMA, wouldn’t it also mean that the Federal courts should have no authority to overturn California’s Prop 8, for example?
Would they support the overturning of Loving v. Virginia so that states would be free to bring back miscegenation laws?
Lindoro Almaviva
July 9th, 2010
The only reason why they like it being overturned is because now they can create a frenzy of fear about the gay monster being able to marry and thus make sure that more stated pass “marriage protection” laws.
They do not like the federal government sponsored discrimination because then they can not do their little witch hunts themselves.
Funny thing is that, if DOMA is unconstitutional, they can not correlate the fact that all those “marriage protection acts” will also be found unconstitutional on the same grounds.
Ryan
July 9th, 2010
@lindoro, actually, challenging DOMA on 10 Amendment grounds would mean that the Prop 8 case would logically be upheld, since it would affirm the California’s right to define marriage for itself, just as invalidating DOMA affirms Massachusetts’ right to do the same. It’s a shockingly reasoned and consistent point of view from the Tea Party leaders quoted in the article. But let’s not forget that the Texas Tea Party wants us in jail. So I’m thinking these quotes were somewhat cherry picked.
Lindoro Almaviva
July 9th, 2010
But the problem is that one of the decisions said that DOMA violates the due process, that will be the same argument that eventually will dissolve all those marriage protection acts
Lynn David
July 9th, 2010
Surprised, I am…. bet these guys are in a really small minority, though. Even the people calling themselves libertarian these days are very libertarian about sexual matters.
cooner
July 10th, 2010
I don’t live there, but the impression I’ve gotten about Iowa is that while not many people there like the idea of gay marriage, now that it’s law they mostly shrug their shoulders and figure it doesn’t affect them, so they’d rather focus on more important things. It seems like attempts by anti-gay activists to whip up support there are greeted with a collective shrug.
I kind of get the sense that other than some vocally social-conservative splinters, the bulk of the Tea Party groups are probably similar. Most of them don’t care for gay rights or gay marriage per se, but they seem more interested in devoting their efforts towards cutting taxes, undoing healthcare reform, stopping the slow march of socialism, etc. etc.
I could be wrong, of course; only time will tell.
Other Fred in the UK
July 10th, 2010
My guess is that for many conservatives this judgement presents a real political dilemma, do they fail to support States rights or do they, de facto, support gay marriage. I suspect that many do not want to give quotes out that show them to be doing either of those two things.
Ben Mathis
July 10th, 2010
State’s rights is, and always will be, code for private tyranny. Chomsky says it far better than I.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxT1VLNamR8
Neon Genesis
July 10th, 2010
I found this poll from way back in April this year which said the Tea Party was less likely to support the ban of gay marriage, but they were also more likely to be supportive of getting rid of all marriage including civil unions: http://www.dallasvoice.com/instant-tea/poll-tea-party-backers-are-17-less-likely-to-support-gay-marriage-than-the-general-public/ So it makes sense you haven’t heard much complaints from the Tea Party about DOMA. The Tea Party wants to abolish all forms of government recognized marriage including civil unions.
justsearching
July 10th, 2010
I’ll believe it if I see a poll to back it up, one that asked self-avowed Tea-Partiers about their opinions of this recent ruling. My guess is that some of the more prominent Tea Partiers and some of the libertarian-leaning ones might be ambivalent about or supportive of this ruling, but that the the majority would be against.
Priya Lynn
July 10th, 2010
Justsearching is right. No statistician would accept a handful of quotes as being representative of what tea partiers believe. Absent a statistically significant representative poll these quotes are meaningless.
Leave A Comment