RECENT  POSTS:  » Read: NOM's guide to pressuring lawmakers to ban marriages (while pretending you're doing something good and positive instead) » Full trailer: 'The Normal Heart' » Vintage Clinton era oppo memo perhaps even more relevant today » Concerned Women For America advises churches to lockdown exclusionary marriage views » Video: What does conservative columnist Cal Thomas see as America's biggest threat? Take a guess. » Correcting NOM's fallacious fear graphic » Gee, Bryan, can't understand why federal courts are rejecting you gay = incest view » Former NOM sr. associate admits shift: Moving away from intellectual arguments, focusing on spiritual » Prop 8 defense attorney now planning lesbian daughter's wedding » If you can't afford your event, NOM, perhaps you should just cancel  

« 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