Alex Blaze

GOP platform calls for FMA

Filed By Alex Blaze | August 26, 2008 4:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Politics
Tags: GOP, John McCain, Log Cabin Republicans, platform, Republicans

While we're worried about whether we're called by name or not on the Democratic Platform, the Republicans have their draft out and they're calling for FMA.

Even though the GOP can't bring themselves to even submit the FMA this session in the House, they're still going to pretend like they actually care about getting that legislation through at all. They know the value of getting the homophobes out to vote for McCain, so they have to throw them some meat.

The Log Cabin's response is, well, not unexpected, and after the the jump.

"This isn't a hill we're going to die on," said Scott Tucker, a spokesman for the gay rights group Log Cabin Republicans.

"Unlike previous years," said Gary Bauer, a social-conservative veteran of platform struggles, "I just don't see deep divisions within the party."

Bauer, an evangelical Christian who is advising McCain, said the focus is on emphasizing Republican unity on the issues.[...]

Party platforms are not binding on candidates or the next president and tend to be largely forgotten once they're in place.

Even so, candidates want to make sure the document doesn't drift too far from their own agenda and the GOP in particular has seen platform fights over a variety of social issues in the past.

Tucker said his group is "more interested in substance than symbolism" and believes McCain to be an "inclusive candidate who understands that our party needs to reach out to all Americans to win this election."

Um, yeah. I'm sure he pulled all the strings he could to get the FMA off the table, but, in the end, he just couldn't. It's very hard being a maverick.

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.

Now, they are calling for a federal marriage amendment, McCain is opposed to a VP who is at all gay-positive, but Brutus in an honourable man, according to the LRC's

No one can be that self centered, elitist, greedy and intellectually blind as to truly not be aware that the Republicans do not love us....

John R. Selig | August 26, 2008 6:35 PM

And 10% of gays plan to vote for John McCain, 3% plan to vote for Ralph Nader and 1% for Bob Barr and 15% can't seem to be able to make up their minds yet according to a recent Harris-Interactive poll!

Curtis Morton | August 27, 2008 2:57 PM

John, I am gay, but I am not voting for Obama. I was going to vote for McCain, but now I'm not so sure. While gay rights are very high on my priority list, there are several other items that hold just as much importance. For instance, our economy, the war in Iraq, gas prices, national security, taxes, and so on. I typically put everything that is important to me on a list, and then include what my stance is on the topic, followed by the where the candidates stand. Then I weight the pros and cons, and figure out which candidate is closest to my own views. Honestly, no candidate is anywhere near where I stand 100%, but then again, it's never happened in the 10 years that I've been eligible to vote. That is why I always say it's not picking the best candidate, but the better of two evils.

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | August 26, 2008 7:37 PM

I posted about this same topic at and the LCRers got all upset.

IMHO, it is one thing to be a gay Republican, it is a whole other thing to consider endorsing McCain when he has opposed every piece of pro-LGBT legislation that has come his way.

I think what gets me the most is the dishonesty of this group, as Maura points out. It's one thing to be a gay Republican, another to consider endorsing McCain even though he's against anything that would help us out, and by far the worst thing to endorse him and constantly talk up how gay friendly he is.

But I guess they can't admit what everyone else in the community knew months ago: Mitt Romney wasn't different enough from McCain on these issues to raise the huss-fuss they did about it. I'm thinking they just have trouble admitting that they were wrong.

Just for fun, picture the following:

John McCain decudes he needs a candidate for VP that resounds with the right wing of the party, the law and order crowd and the evangelicals.

After vetting he picks a man whose age will not point up his own by getting an older figure, a man with a record as a former Federal Prosecutor, and now a minister who is anti-gay.

He picks Fred Phelps.

You just KNOW that the LCR's would still rationalise this, with the "McCain is not really against us" and "Phelps won't kill us , he wants God to do that" or "I am voting for the economy"

Please feel free to add your own conceptions of the LCR rationalisations of a Phelps VP candidacy that we would see..

I don't blame the log cabin republicans for faith based iniatives such as fma.That is the responsibilty of the greater lgbt community for failing to see the danger in allowing a religious right to raise to power.A straight out failure in seeking aggressive strategys to counter them and allowing them to claim they represent different religions even though they are only separate denominations of the same religion.An Evangelical maybe different then a catholic in interpretation but they are both Christian even if the Baptist chooses to deny that reality.Why wasn't there a strong upprising when the Catholic Church dumped the Pedophile priest abuse scandal on gay men by barring them as Priest and saying it was their fault? Faith based iniatives aren't just a violation of the constitution but they are also a violation of the oath of office and an act of treason for any congressman who supports them or even bears them the recognition of voting for it in the affirmative or the negative.Baptist,Catholics,Lutherans or any other denomination of Christianity only represent one religion and if Congress is voting on legislation lobbied by them to use their beliefs to oppress others they are bearing respect to an organization of religion a clear act of treason for all involved.Pointing the finger at each other and kicking our own asses does nothing but empower the Asses we should be kicking.

Curtis Morton | August 27, 2008 2:47 PM

I believe that on the Saddleback Civil Forum a few weeks ago, McCain said that he supported allowing the states to decide on marriage laws, and even went as far as saying that he would not support a federal legislation. I may be a little hazy on his exact verbiage, but wouldn't this contradict what he said? Hrm!