Jeff Sessions (R-AL) is replacing Arlen Specter as the ranking minority member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. As such, he will have some clout in how the confirmations of judicial nominees proceed.
It comes as a surprise that both Sessions and the ultra-conservative religious right group, Focus on the Family, have said that they would not oppose an openly gay nominee to fill the Supreme Court seat of Justice Souter.
This is especially surprising, given that Focus on the Family is widely known for its anti-gay activism and for sponsoring weekend conferences around the country, featuring reparative therapists and aimed at helping gay people overcome their "homosexual lifestyle."
Don't get me wrong. It's a very sensible position, and I would be delighted if Obama chooses a gay justice (and there are reportedly two highly qualified, openly gay women being mentioned, one the former dean of Stanford Law School).
I'm just confused. It's so uncharacteristic of this crowd not to be anti-gay in every way. And I had to do a double-take when Sen. Sessions said he was opposed to a litmus test and that he would make his determination based on a nominee's personal ethcs and legal skills.
Well, yes, we've been saying that for years when the right had a litmus test regarding abortion.
So, have they suddenly "got religion?" Or have they been reading the polls on gay marriage? Or watching the news about Iowa and Vermont and Maine?
What gives?
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I knew good old Pat Robertson wouldn't let us down. He's no longer the firebrand he once was, but he can still come through with the anti-gay slurs:
ReplyDelete"ROBERTSON: Lee, we haven’t taken this to its ultimate conclusion. You got polygamy out there. How can we rule that polygamy is illegal when you say that homosexual marriage is legal. What is it about polygamy that’s different? Well, polygamy was outlawed because it was considered immoral according to biblical standards. But if we take biblical standards away in homosexuality, what about the other? And what about bestiality and ultimately what about child molestation and pedophilia? How can we criminalize these things and at the same time have constitutional amendments allowing same-sex marriage among homosexuals. You mark my words, this is just the beginning in a long downward slide in relation to all the things that we consider to be abhorrent."
Pat, oh Pat. You forgot one. The downward slide began when we defied Biblical teachings about slavery and made that illegal. You see: you outlaw slavery and you get homosexuality. What's the world coming to?
And what about eating shellfish? I'll bet you've had a shrimp dinner or two yourself. And wearing suits made of blends of two different kinds of cloth. Those are also Biblical no-no's, condemned as an abomination just like "man lying with man."
You gotta study your Bible more, Pat. It's all in there. Look it up. And while you're at it, look up polygamy. You'll find places that specify how many wives men can have -- different numbers depending on the man's station in life, like the king gets to have lots of them and some poor schmucks get only one.
Personally, I think one is enough. But I'm just a spoil-sport.
ReplyDelete