http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/frc-tony-perkins-gop-gay-marriage-89989.html Seems the Religious Right don't like seeing all these Republican Senators support or "go squishy" on same-sex marriage and wants to hit the Repubs where it hurts....their wallets. "Battle of Chancellorsville" in the Rightwing Civil War.
Is it true that the GOP is suddenly finding itself weak in the knees and ever so wobbly over this issue now that it is being debated and discussed by SCOTA? Man...it's times like these I wish I had cable TV so I could just sit there and laugh and laugh and laugh. And of course the religious right is suddenly crying out to cut them off because they are probably realizing now that you cannot base your laws on religion.
Conservatives and Republicans (in their current political state) as seriously marginalizing themselves; I saw it coming during Mr. Obama's first Presidential Campaign.
And the GOP caved. Welcome to more lost elections GOP. http://www.advocate.com/politics/ma...e-neocons-affirm-opposition-marriage-equality
I didn't see any support in there for the Federal Marriage Amendment though? Seems more like a "defensive" stance that an offensive one. Maybe they're finally realising they don't have a chance in He'll of passing it? (or the "personhood" amendment for that matter - that's in there though)
GOP tactic will move away from supporting anti-gay stuff like the Federal Marriage Amendment....to more "My personal view is, it's betweena man and a woman...but I want the States to decide." Therefore the Religious Rightys can't get pissed...and if the States pass it and the Courts uphold it, the Repub says "Hey, it's the law of the land now...can't we just move on?" But the loss of those Repub Senators....shows that fear of the Religious Right is ebbing.
It's clear that a good share of GOP leaders think that a change in image is all that's required, not a change in policy positions that would cost them the $upport of Arlington Group members and other religious, social conservatives. The Federal Marriage Amendment is dead and hopefully stays dead. It's not a winner with GOP members concerned with states' rights - that's why it never went anywhere the last time around. You simply can't be for smaller government/states' rights and congruently support a Federal Marriage Amendment that dictates public policy to the states on an issue where the power hasn't been reserved or delegated to the federal government.
Another move you'll see is when the topic of gay marriage comes up for a Repub politician in front of a group of Social Cons, they'll do this- "I strongly believe in the Biblical definition of marriage between a man and woman. And that's why I support legislation to expand the tax credit for married couples, deductions for children, etc." In other words, quickly get away from anything that seems supportive of anti-gay legislation....and TO stuff that seems supportive of marriage in general, and let the audience make the inference that the pol is talking ONLY about hetero marriage. Then the guy can go to a more liberal audience and say "I'm for letting the states decide....my personal opinion plays no part in it. Also I support legislation to expand the tax credit for married couples, deductions for children, etc."....and let THAT audience infer that it means he's "open-minded" and his legislation is keyed to gay couples (which it would be as well). Will Social Cons fall for that? Well, the "pro-lifers" have proved pretty gullible over the past 35 years, haven't they?
You hit the nail on the head. It's talking out of both sides of their mouth while trying to say as little as possible.
Lets all hope that the GOP fight back, by backing laws that make these rich theocrats pay more taxes.
Perkins and others are "wobbly" in their heads. It appears that their religion, bigotry and homophobia has pulverized whatever they had left of logic.