Marriage Blitz, Snarky Jabs At SCRCC

Why are we not asking the question?

This is Veritaspac.com’s  week for responding to the same sex marriage “blitz” being put on by Democrats and some Republicans.   Just another one of our services to local Republicans  in support of our local, state and national platforms  . . . oh  . . . and the judgement of human  civilization. We do this in order to add our meager contribution to the Scott County Republican leadership’s efforts in the same regard.

As any SCR Central Committee member knows the organization is led by an illustrious reconstituted leadership cadre whose own devotion to Republican principles specified in the platform causes it to burden our chairwoman to put in 40 to 60 hours every week in benevolent service,  profiling and defending those principles and fostering a finely tuned mechanism to defend and promote the platform on core matters in between elections.

Even though the last election was five months ago the work never ends. The phenomenal organizational enthusiasm has translated to providing grist for the mill of public outreach defending platform positions on economics, second amendment rights, right to life, marriage, defense, foreign policy, voter integrity and other important issues.

We see it everyday on the SCRCC web site in the form of outstanding commentaries and resource links provided by one or more of the outreach chairman in furtherance of their assigned specialization. Articles championing or defending Republican principles aimed at various racial profiles, Catholics, young people, are plastered all over the website, our grand portal to the community at large.  Thematic social media efforts are generated constantly.

The chairwoman is ceaseless in fostering efforts by precinct chairs in blue and purple precincts to whip up support for Republican principles. Why  just the other day the Chairwoman segregated an hour out of what we are told are her 40 to 60 hour weekly devotionals managing Republican outreach efforts to actually drive to West Davenport, venturing below Locust Street for the first time since she moved to Scott County, to scope out potential locations for a combined precinct Republican outreach effort “down there.”

Or not.*

So seeing nothing from what should be the A team on offense, we have set forth a shotgun formation here to defend against the liberal blitz assaulting our Republican line. It is in the form of some more insightful articles lending support to our Republican platforms protecting and fostering husband and wife centered families. Regrettably they are necessarily focused on protecting our flank from weak kneed Republicans.

Kristol Clear on Marriage . . . from the Family Research Council:

 While the media is practically giddy over the GOP’s two flip-floppers on marriage, the intellectual wing of the party is lining up to attack the shallowness of their “evolution.” Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard who typically doesn’t focus on social issues, came right out and called their shift on marriage “pathetic.”

On his podcast, Kristol shook his head at any Republican who would “just throw over thousands of years of history and what the great religions teach, and let’s just embrace it because, hey–you don’t want to be on the other side from a TV show that has 20 millions viewers. I mean, really, that’s what a serious political party does?” It’s a fad, he argued, and for any leader to be so easily swayed, “…there’s something pathetic about it,” Kristol told listeners. “I’ve found it really distasteful. I mean, I myself am a social conservative on the marriage issue, but even if you’re not–just say what you believe and let the country decide… This kind of pathetic attempt of ‘Oh my, young people especially are liberal, so let’s just rush to cater to them.’ As if they’re going to respect you if you just embrace the views of some 26-year-old who doesn’t know anything, honestly. Can’t adults say young people are sometimes wrong?”

Second Senate Republican For Redefining Marriage  From Gary Bauer at Campaign for Working Families

Yesterday Illinois Senator Mark Kirk became the second Senate Republican to embrace the notion of men “marrying” other men. His announcement has added to the daily drumbeat of “inevitability.” At least that is what the media would like us to believe.

For the moment, the problem is not elected Republicans. You could count on one hand the number of congressional Republicans who have publicly endorsed same-sex marriage.

The problem, in my opinion, has been the unwillingness of those in elected office who support normal marriage to make an intellectual case for why marriage should remain what it always has been — the union of one man and one woman. Their silence signals to the public that they are embarrassed by their position and suggests that others who also cherish traditional marriage should be as well.

The second problem is the unelected GOP establishment — pollsters, strategists and consultants — who rarely venture outside the Washington, D.C., Beltway and can go months without interacting with average Americans who live and work on Main Street, U.S.A. Among the so-called “elites,” the drift is clear.

Crucial battle in the war on marriage — excerpts from Robert Knight writing in the Washington Times:

Over the past few weeks, the “war on marriage” has turned into a blitzkrieg.

It’s all designed to sway the Supreme Court, which will be hearing arguments this week on California’s voter-approved constitutional marriage amendment and the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

A day doesn’t pass without another bomb dropped on the oldest human institution. If it’s not another slanted poll, negatively worded to elicit the “correct” response, it’s a politician sharing his sudden revelation that God didn’t know what He was doing when He created marriage as the union of male and female . . .

The left’s drive for “gay rights” poses the greatest domestic threat to the freedoms of religion, speech and assembly. When traditional morality is equated with racist bigotry, civil rights enforcement becomes a gun aimed at the head of citizens, . . .

Recently, Sen. Rob Portman, Ohio Republican, announced support for homosexual “marriage” because his son is homosexual.

It’s one thing to have unconditional love and compassion toward a friend or loved one, and another thing to redefine marriage for the whole nation. Public policy is the force of law. Civil libertarians who are jumping aboard the homosexual “marriage” bandwagon might want to stop and consider why this will lead to less freedom and more government . . .

Yet, conservatives, the GOP and even the Tea Parties are told they must bow before this increasingly intolerant movement. President Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Lady Gaga and the Democratic Party embrace homosexual “marriage,” so it must advance conservative principles, right?

Laurie Higgins, a perceptive writer for the Illinois Family Institute, asks this question: “What if Portman’s son had announced he was bisexual or polyamorous? Would Portman then seek to have the government recognize plural unions as marriages? Imagine if everyone decided that the ‘Bible’s overarching themes of love and compassion’ and the ‘belief that we’re all children of God’ compel us to affirm all the feelings, beliefs and life choices of our loved ones. The truth is, it is entirely possible to deeply love people while finding their feelings, beliefs and life choices disordered or false. In this wildly diverse world, most of us do it all the time.”

Many more important comments are made in the article which can be viewed here.

R Mall

* OK, we got a little bit afield from our primary intention of defending marriage and culture to take some snarky jabs at the SCRCC leadership . But then when part of the problem, as highlighted in the articles above, comes from Republicans, well, we felt inspired to bring it home. Nevertheless we apologize.  Or not.

0

0