David Boaz at The Cato Institute makes an interesting point this week about the extent to which “Republicans” campaigning for higher office in the state of Virginia are adopting positions on social issues that could prove very costly to their electability.
“Last week I reported that 40 percent of Virginia Republicans – and 56 percent of independents – now support gay marriage,” Boaz writes. “But on Saturday the Virginia GOP nominated three statewide candidates whose views on homosexuality and marriage equality range from unwavering opposition to bigoted to insane.”
The unwavering opponent? That would be GOP State Senator Mark Obenshain – who won his party’s nomination to be Virginia’s next attorney general.
The bigot? That would be GOP gubernatorial nominee (and current attorney general) Ken Cuccinelli, who in 2009 said it was appropriate for taxpayer-funded agencies to formulate public policy based on the assumption that homosexuality was “intrinsically wrong” and an offense to “natural law.”
Yikes …
The crazy guy? That would be GOP lieutenant gubernatorial nominee E.W. Jackson, Sr. – a pastor who said last October that homosexuals were “very sick people psychologically, mentally and emotionally.”
“They’ll never feel satisfied because in their heart of hearts (gays know homosexuality) is immoral, it is perverse, it is degenerate,” Jackson added.
Wow … and this is the slate of candidates that Virginia “Republicans” think will sway a state that’s gone twice in a row for U.S. President Barack Obama? Good luck with all that …
“There’s a reason that a report by the Republican National Committee found that voters see the GOP as ‘scary,’ ‘narrow minded,’ and ‘out of touch’ – and the Virginia Republican ticket is part of that reason,” Boaz concludes.
We concur … although as we’ve noted in the past we’re not going to fight the Rick Santorums of the world over the carcass of a party that has totally abdicated its legitimacy on the “fiscal values” that matter to us. In fact we’re going to call out “Republicans” when they do so …
Why are these three candidates adopting such aggressive anti-gay positions? Because they support government sanctioned heterosexual marriage.
Our view? As we’ve stated on numerous occasions, marriage is none of government’s damn business. The authority to perform – or refuse to perform – such services on any basis should rest exclusively with individual pastors who are in turn held accountable by their congregations and denominations.
Again … government should have absolutely nothing to do with marriage. Now, as for civil unions, last time we checked there’s such a thing in this country as equal protection under the law (even though you wouldn’t know it from the conduct of the Obama administration).
That means for the purposes of taxation Americans should be allowed to “partner” with anyone they want – although based on the stunningly corrupt practices of the Obama IRS they should probably prepare to be discriminated against based on their ideological choices.
Anyway … the “Virginia slate” represents the perfect example of a winning ticket for Republicans (assuming you hopped in a time traveling DeLorean and went back to 1985). In 2013, however, it is yet another example of why the GOP needs to go away.
***
73 comments
Prepare for the onslaught of BJU-types who believe the job of the government is to mandate and enforce a certain set of social standards – theirs – under the guise of “morality” and “God”. We have a few of these up in Greenville…
They’re called ‘Muslims’ — and I’m positive they aren’t “BJU-types”.
The funny thing is that those two groups (Muslims and Christian fundamentalists) are similar in how they want government to legislate and control personal morality yet are passionately opposed to the theology of the other.
Obviously, you don’t have any skin in the game.
Christians — fundamentalist or otherwise — are generally not great supporters of Big Bloated Government and all the trappings that lie therein. Quite the opposite in fact. Nor do they maim, murder, and brutalize anyone whatsoever in the name of their ‘theology’ everywhere across the entire world.
But you’d know that if your cranium wasn’t firmly planted deep within your posterior.
Yeah just ignore the gays being violently beaten and killed in Uganda, Georgia, and Russia by CHRISTIANS. Nothing to see here, doesn’t happen.
Again, we were talking about America. I don’t know that the ‘Christians’ of Uganda, Georgia, and Russia are even actually Christians despite their claims to being so. The culture gaps are pretty huge all the way around. I think Uganda Christians are actually a mix of Roman Catholic and Voodoo religions combined. And then there’s the whole ‘Coptic’ angle in Georgia and Russia.
But if you were not a simpleton — you would know that.
Sorry.
For you being a simpleton that is … must suck.
“Again, we were talking about America.”
No, see, you started talking about people who “brutalize anyone whatsoever in the name of their ‘theology’ everywhere across the entire world.”
Scroll up and look at your own post, man.
Religion just sucks, period.
Again, we were talking about America. I don’t know that the ‘Christians’ of Uganda, Georgia, and Russia are even actually Christians despite their claims to being so. The culture gaps are pretty huge all the way around. I think Uganda Christians are actually a mix of Roman Catholic and Voodoo religions combined. And then there’s the whole ‘Coptic’ angle in Georgia and Russia.
But if you were not a simpleton — you would know that.
Sorry.
For you being a simpleton that is … must suck.
And who was it who fought tooth-and-nail against the people trying to decriminalize homosexuality in the US for decades? CHRISTIANS
Man, is that spastic, quivering mass of gelatinous goo you call a brain actually switched on? Homosexuality has never been illegal in the USA. Not for one day, not for one minute, not even for one, single, solitary second.
However, sodomy was illegal in many states — and the fight to legalize sodomy was done on a State-by-State basis until the landmark case of Lawrence vs. Texas in 2003. The remaining anti-sodomy laws in all states that still had them were then repealed as unconstitutional. Just like the gay Marriage boondoggle of present — but with the constitutionality still undecided. And Christians weren’t the only folks who opposed legalizing sodomy State-by-State. Not by a longshot.
Did you know that Islamic/Muslim Governments still hang homosexuals from their necks until dead from a construction crane in public squares for all the town residents to revel in? Yeah — sad but true. But not in America. Never a single, solitary, homosexual hung from the neck until dead in a public square by any local, state, or federal government in the entire history of the USA.
But if you were not a simpleton — you would know that.
Sorry.
For you being a simpleton that is … must suck.
Here’s your peaceful Christians defending the fact that they beat up a bunch of gays.
http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=15302&MediaType=1&Category=24
Yeah — we should have been more specific about the ‘BJU-types’ and so on in AMERICA — and not on the other side of the world in TBILISI, GEORGIA.
But if you were not a simpleton — that would have been obvious.
Sorry.
For you being a simpleton that is … must suck.
Wow, you’re lack of knowledge is comparable with Grand Tango. Welcome to the Big (Idio)T Club!
I’m not sure what you mean by “you don’t have any skin in the game.” As a citizen and resident of South Carolina, I have an interest when any group of extremist tries to assert itself and legislate morality to the rest of the state. Fundamentalist Christians here in America, and especially in the South, have often been at the forefront of oppressing others, be it for reasons of gender, race, or sexuality.
You seem fixated on criticizing Islam. Such is your right. However, my initial point, and the point of this whole story, has been on the fact that fundamental Christians are reactionary and will not tolerate candidates that might be open any sort of rights for homosexuals.
The only reason I ever get within a mile of BJU is because of Cateran’s.
Dang, closed on Monday.
You have more than a few.
Prepare for the onslaught of BJU-types who believe the job of the government is to mandate and enforce a certain set of social standards – theirs – under the guise of “morality” and “God”. We have a few of these up in Greenville…
They’re called ‘Muslims’ — and I’m positive they aren’t “BJU-types”.
The funny thing is that those two groups (Muslims and Christian fundamentalists) are similar in how they want government to legislate and control personal morality yet are passionately opposed to the theology of the other.
Obviously, you don’t have any skin in the game.
American Christians — fundamentalist or otherwise — are generally not great supporters of Big Bloated Government and all the trappings that lie therein. Quite the opposite in fact. Nor do they maim, murder, and brutalize anyone whatsoever in the name of their ‘theology’ everywhere across the entire world.
But you’d know that if your cranium wasn’t firmly planted deep within your posterior.
Yeah just ignore the gays being violently beaten and killed in Uganda, Georgia, and Russia by CHRISTIANS. Nothing to see here, doesn’t happen.
Again, we were talking about America. I don’t know that the ‘Christians’ of Uganda, Georgia, and Russia are even actually Christians despite their claims to being so. The culture gaps are pretty huge all the way around. I think Uganda Christians are actually a mix of Roman Catholic and Voodoo religions combined. And then there’s the whole ‘Coptic’ [roots in Egypt] angle in Georgia and Russia. They extoll a kind of combination Muslim-Catholic/Christian dogma.
But if you were not a simpleton — you would know that.
Sorry.
For you being a simpleton that is … must suck.
“Again, we were talking about America.”
No, see, you started talking about people who “brutalize anyone whatsoever in the name of their ‘theology’ everywhere across the entire world.”
Scroll up and look at your own post, man.
Religion just sucks, period.
And who was it who fought tooth-and-nail against the people trying to decriminalize homosexuality in the US for decades? CHRISTIANS
Man, is that spastic, quivering mass of gelatinous goo you call a brain actually switched on? Homosexuality has never been illegal in the USA. Not for one day, not for one minute, not even for one, single, solitary second.
However, sodomy was illegal in many states — and the fight to legalize sodomy was done on a State-by-State basis until the landmark case of Lawrence vs. Texas in 2003. The remaining anti-sodomy laws in all states that still had them were then repealed as unconstitutional. Just like the gay Marriage boondoggle of present — but with the constitutionality still undecided. And Christians weren’t the only folks who opposed legalizing sodomy State-by-State. Not by a longshot.
Did you know that Islamic/Muslim Governments still hang homosexuals from their necks until dead from a construction crane in public squares for all the town residents to revel in? Yeah — sad but true. But not in America. Never a single, solitary, homosexual hung from the neck until dead in a public square by any local, state, or federal government in the entire history of the USA.
But if you were not a simpleton — you would know that.
Sorry.
For you being a simpleton that is … must suck.
Here’s your peaceful Christians defending the fact that they beat up a bunch of gays.
http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=15302&MediaType=1&Category=24
Yeah — we should have been more specific about the ‘BJU-types’ and so on in AMERICA — and not on the other side of the world in TBILISI, GEORGIA.
But if you were not a simpleton — that would have been obvious.
Sorry.
For you being a simpleton that is … must suck.
Wow, you’re lack of knowledge is comparable with Grand Tango. Welcome to the Big (Idio)T Club!
I’m not sure what you mean by “you don’t have any skin in the game.” As a citizen and resident of South Carolina, I have an interest when any group of extremist tries to assert itself and legislate morality to the rest of the state. Fundamentalist Christians here in America, and especially in the South, have often been at the forefront of oppressing others, be it for reasons of gender, race, or sexuality.
You seem fixated on criticizing Islam. Such is your right. However, my initial point, and the point of this whole story, has been on the fact that fundamental Christians are reactionary and will not tolerate candidates that might be open any sort of rights for homosexuals.
The only reason I ever get within a mile of BJU is because of Cateran’s.
Dang, closed on Monday.
You have more than a few.
I can’t believe the GOP is so hip these days. Hell, next they may introduce a bill calling to remove all science books(except the Bible) from their school system. Keep ’em dumb, y’all.
I can’t believe the GOP is so hip these days. Hell, next they may introduce a bill calling to remove all science books(except the Bible) from their school system. Keep ’em dumb, y’all.
The idiots couldn’t even open the door on a DeLorean. They would just sit inside looking out saying “how did we lose”.
The idiots couldn’t even open the door on a DeLorean. They would just sit inside looking out saying “how did we lose”.
You left out the single most important fact of this story – Virginia decided to go with a nominating convention this year. All of their candidates were chosen, not by the vote of the people, but by a small group of folks who bother to get credentialed and attend the state convention. It’s madness and the reason poor VA will have a bad cycle for the GOP. It dyfes logic.
Cuccinelli will benefit from the fact the the Dem nominee is far worse of a candidate, but the rest will suffer tragically.
I remember when this site wrote about the effort to move SC’s GOP primary to a convention – calling it BS. Well if VA did it, then I imagine folks in this state we thinking about it as well.
The convention would help liberty candidates in SC…Lindsey Graham would be gone.
Yep. No one with a snowball’s chance would get nominated by the SCGOP. God, I hope this happens…
If Liberty candidates can’t get regular Republicans to vote for them in an actual election where people vote for you – then they shouldn’t make it to the General Election on the vote of couple hundred at convention.
Yea, fuck liberty.
Before the Lexington county GOP convention on May 5 there was talk and strategy sessions about who and how to select delegates to the State GOP convention because there were rumors of factions trying to call a convention for next year (not normally done) to choose candidates by convention. If this convention is called, if the motion passes at this convention to select GOP candidates for election by convention South Carolina will do it. IF rumors prove true that is the potential intrigue for SC politics next year, don’t think it will happen but you never know.
Virginia GOP has been picking its nominees by convention for the last 10 to 12 years, nothing new there, and they have done it off an on in the past(Mike Farris was chosen as the LT Gov candidate i Think 20 years ago at a GOP nomination convention in VA
You left out the single most important fact of this story – Virginia decided to go with a nominating convention this year. All of their candidates were chosen, not by the vote of the people, but by a small group of folks who bother to get credentialed and attend the state convention. It’s madness and the reason poor VA will have a bad cycle for the GOP. It dyfes logic.
Cuccinelli will benefit from the fact the the Dem nominee is far worse of a candidate, but the rest will suffer tragically.
I remember when this site wrote about the effort to move SC’s GOP primary to a convention – calling it BS. Well if VA did it, then I imagine folks in this state we thinking about it as well.
The convention would help liberty candidates in SC…Lindsey Graham would be gone.
Yep. No one with a snowball’s chance would get nominated by the SCGOP. God, I hope this happens…
If Liberty candidates can’t get regular Republicans to vote for them in an actual election where people vote for you – then they shouldn’t make it to the General Election on the vote of couple hundred at convention.
Yea, fuck liberty.
Before the Lexington county GOP convention on May 5 there was talk and strategy sessions about who and how to select delegates to the State GOP convention because there were rumors of factions trying to call a convention for next year (not normally done) to choose candidates by convention. If this convention is called, if the motion passes at this convention to select GOP candidates for election by convention South Carolina will do it. IF rumors prove true that is the potential intrigue for SC politics next year, don’t think it will happen but you never know.
Virginia GOP has been picking its nominees by convention for the last 10 to 12 years, nothing new there, and they have done it off an on in the past(Mike Farris was chosen as the LT Gov candidate i Think 20 years ago at a GOP nomination convention in VA
Looks to me like they need another visit from Grant.
Looks to me like they need another visit from Grant.
I disagree with only one point, Sic. There should not be civil unions allowed. This is merely another form of marriage, which the government should not partake in, in any form or fashion. Further there should not be any double standards on taxation. I would expect you to understand this. Each person should be taxed based on the tax code, which is a flipping joke at the moment.
Have a Great Day!! :) There won’t be many left with the Demlicans and Republicrats in charge.
Frank Pytel
I disagree with only one point, Sic. There should not be civil unions allowed. This is merely another form of marriage, which the government should not partake in, in any form or fashion. Further there should not be any double standards on taxation. I would expect you to understand this. Each person should be taxed based on the tax code, which is a flipping joke at the moment.
Have a Great Day!! :) There won’t be many left with the Demlicans and Republicrats in charge.
Frank Pytel
Hey, GOP, keep on being anti-gay, and please vilify and spit at gay men and women. I want you to lose bigtime, so please keep it up. Motivate your base of old, aging, white Christians. Yessir. Get their arthritic, hemorrhoidic asses in gear !
Ain’t it the queers with the hemorrhoids? Honest to God, I couldn’t even spell it until I looked back at your comment.
Hey, GOP, keep on being anti-gay, and please vilify and spit at gay men and women. I want you to lose bigtime, so please keep it up. Motivate your base of old, aging, white Christians. Yessir. Get their arthritic, hemorrhoidic asses in gear !
Ain’t it the queers with the hemorrhoids? Honest to God, I couldn’t even spell it until I looked back at your comment.
Marriage=Civil Union
Virginia Is For Homos
Marriage=Civil Union
Virginia Is For Homos
“partner with anyone they want”? OK, how about 3 people…or 5, or 7? How about your sister? (convenient in some parts of the south, huh?) if a “civil union” in the libertarian mindset can mean anything, then it means nothing.
Oh, and while you’re getting the govt out of the marriage business, will you first get it out of the business of making individuals “recognize” gay “marriage” even if it violates their religious beliefs?
“Til you do that, lay off the “none of govt’s business” rhetoric.
“partner with anyone they want”? OK, how about 3 people…or 5, or 7? How about your sister? (convenient in some parts of the south, huh?) if a “civil union” in the libertarian mindset can mean anything, then it means nothing.
Oh, and while you’re getting the govt out of the marriage business, will you first get it out of the business of making individuals “recognize” gay “marriage” even if it violates their religious beliefs?
“Til you do that, lay off the “none of govt’s business” rhetoric.
Government will never get out of the marriage business, there is too much in it for government. That aside there is more to marriage than taxes and religion, like end of life decisions that spouses can make for each other. All kinds of lines are drawn by government; speed limits for roads, legal age of consent for sex or legal age for drinking to name three.
Used to be there were different speed limits for trucks and different speed limits for night and daytime driving. Then we went to the national 55 speed limit then went back up to 70 but no different speed limits for trucks or night time. However in some places trucks can’t drive in the left hand lane.
Age of consent for sex in South Carolina used to be 13, now its 16 while homosexual activity was illegal and now is not. Drinking age was 21 in Iowa when I started high school, dropped to 19, then 18 when I was a senior and now is back up to 21.
Point is, government is allowed to draw these lines mostly due to social changes of the populace (and the fact that most people don’t care about the Constitution). Used to was Jews and Catholics couldn’t marry, nor whites and blacks, many of the arguments used then are being used against homosexuals today. If a church wants to tell a gay couple to get lost that should be their prerogative. But if the gays want to get married in front of a JP they should be able to. Laws have been written that put spouses first in line in certain situations and gays should have the same legal rights in that regard as straights.
Government will never get out of the marriage business, there is too much in it for government. That aside there is more to marriage than taxes and religion, like end of life decisions that spouses can make for each other. All kinds of lines are drawn by government; speed limits for roads, legal age of consent for sex or legal age for drinking to name three.
Used to be there were different speed limits for trucks and different speed limits for night and daytime driving. Then we went to the national 55 speed limit then went back up to 70 but no different speed limits for trucks or night time. However in some places trucks can’t drive in the left hand lane.
Age of consent for sex in South Carolina used to be 13, now its 16 while homosexual activity was illegal and now is not. Drinking age was 21 in Iowa when I started high school, dropped to 19, then 18 when I was a senior and now is back up to 21.
Point is, government is allowed to draw these lines mostly due to social changes of the populace (and the fact that most people don’t care about the Constitution). Used to was Jews and Catholics couldn’t marry, nor whites and blacks, many of the arguments used then are being used against homosexuals today. If a church wants to tell a gay couple to get lost that should be their prerogative. But if the gays want to get married in front of a JP they should be able to. Laws have been written that put spouses first in line in certain situations and gays should have the same legal rights in that regard as straights.
The new boss
Same as the old boss.
We won’t be screwed again.
The new boss
Same as the old boss.
We won’t be screwed again.
Sorry, Fits. You’re pretty good sometimes, but when it comes to this issue, you’re outta your league. Sure, the gov needs to stay out of marriage.
But the fact that the active party nominated these folks is a testament to the fact that your open door, pun intended, policy that was embraced by guys like Romney and McCain is a losing one.
Team R doesn’t lose because they alienated the homo vote. They lose because they alienate the principled, committed base with their homo support.
Cucc wins. Mark my words…
Sorry, Fits. You’re pretty good sometimes, but when it comes to this issue, you’re outta your league. Sure, the gov needs to stay out of marriage.
But the fact that the active party nominated these folks is a testament to the fact that your open door, pun intended, policy that was embraced by guys like Romney and McCain is a losing one.
Team R doesn’t lose because they alienated the homo vote. They lose because they alienate the principled, committed base with their homo support.
Cucc wins. Mark my words…
You had something going until-‘Why are these three candidates adopting such aggressive anti-gay positions? Because they support government sanctioned heterosexual marriage.’
Fits’ marriage isn’t ‘government sanctioned’?
What if your wife was dying in the hospital,and you were not allowed to see her? You meet your ‘in-laws’ for the first time while she’s dying,and they’ll be making all the decisions,including ,taking what’s in her bank account,insurance policies,etc,etc.
Why did you bother getting a ‘government sanctioned marriage’?
You’re not thinking straight.
You had something going until-‘Why are these three candidates adopting such aggressive anti-gay positions? Because they support government sanctioned heterosexual marriage.’
Fits’ marriage isn’t ‘government sanctioned’?
What if your wife was dying in the hospital,and you were not allowed to see her? You meet your ‘in-laws’ for the first time while she’s dying,and they’ll be making all the decisions,including ,taking what’s in her bank account,insurance policies,etc,etc.
Why did you bother getting a ‘government sanctioned marriage’?
You’re not thinking straight.