RECENT  POSTS:  » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

12/14/2010

Professed supporters stood with procedural obstruction -- yet repeal *backers* are the arm-twisters?!

by Jeremy Hooper

In their latest call to action against Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal, the American Family Association says the following about the Senators who voted against the National Defense Authorization Act but who will likely support standalone repeal:

Some Senators who voted against repeal last week are faltering in the face of political arm twisting. One of them may be yours!

It's just one line, yes. But one that pretty much sums up the "pro-family" movement and its typical lack of concern for anything other than their own discriminatory ends.

Because in truth: It was political arm twisting -- or at the very least, political procedure -- that led these referenced senators (Murkowski, Brown, Manchin, etc.) to ever vote no in the first place. If there was a falter, it was on behalf of these senators' commitment to equality! And if these same senators vote against standalone repeal even though they are on record stating their commitment to the same, it will be because politics again put a twist on their limbs, not because credible arguments bent their minds.

So yeah: The AFA can believe all they want that the U.S. Senate is still debating this matter on its merits. The reality is that substantively, repeal supporters have enough votes for cloture and more than enough votes for passage. On substance the AFA has nothing on substance, which is why they're projecting past political obstructionism onto potential votes of principle.

***

*AFA's full email:

Screen Shot 2010-12-14 At 7.47.45 Pm
***

*SEE ALSO: Adam Bink on the latest: House Dems to introduce DADT repeal companion bill, vote expected tomorrow [P8TT]

Make sure they do the right thing:
Lisa Murkowski (R-AK): 202-224-6665 (supports repeal, but mixed signals on the stand-alone bill)
George Voinovich (R-OH): 202-224-3353 (no position)
Olympia Snowe (R-ME): 202-224-5344 (no position)
Richard Lugar (R-IN): 202-224-4814 (no position)
Judd Gregg (R-NH): 202-224-3324 (no position)
Scott Brown (R-MA): 202-224-4543 (supports repeal, but has not made a position clear yet on the stand-alone bill)
Kit Bond (R-MO): 202-224-5721 (no position)
Mark Kirk (R-IL): 202-224-2854 (no position)
Joe Manchin (D-WV): 202-224-3954 (no position, but mixed signals on repeal)

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails