Rep. Amash Warns GOP About Conservative Youth Support for Gay Marriage

Trying to encourage them to think carefully about response to Supreme Court decision

Rep. Justin Amash does not want Republicans to say anything stupid about gay marriage.

During Wednesday morning's House Republican Conference meeting, according to multiple sources in the room, the Michigan Republican stood up and told his GOP colleagues they should watch what they say about gay marriage.

Amash was concerned that some Republicans might make the wrong remark just after the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Wednesday that the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional and that California's Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage, would be overturned.

Comments

[jessie]

Too late.

http://americablog.com/2013/06.....ality.html

[Muzzle of Bees]

goddammit

[Calidissident]

For someone who is so conscious about his political image, that was an exceptionally stupid thing to say. Even if you oppose gay marriage and think there's nothing morally wrong with what he said, it's still idiotic from a political standpoint. And I say this as someone who considers himself a Rand Paul supporter.

In one day, he managed to piss off both gay rights people, with this comment, and a large number of SOCONS by supporting the decision and the notion that gay marriage is a state issue. That has to be some kind of record.

[headlocal]

maybe Rand ia angling for the PETA or ASPCA demographic?

[Bob Straub]

I'm sorry to read about Rand Paul's statement, LMAO over Bachmann's comments, and somewhat irked to have to agree with Pelosi's "Who cares?"

Bestiality? That apparently goes on now. DOMA doesn't prevent it. And I don't think you can legally enter into any contract with a non-human.

Marriage created by Bachmann's god? What about other countries and cultures? Would she not legally recognize those unions? If marriage were created by the Judeo-Christian god, it would be especially wrong for governments to give it special treatment, because not all citizens believe in that god, and are free to hold and practice their beliefs.

[JeremyR]

I think his point is that now anything will be legal, thanks to this precedent being set.

Polygamy? Yup
Incest? Yup
Bestiality? Probably,

[Calidissident]

The first two perhaps, although I think they should be legal as long as no force is involved (yes, I find incest disgusting, but that's not a reason for it to be illegal), but bestiality is a ridiculous, idiotic comparison. Animals can't consent. It's a stupid, offensive thing to say, and Rand Paul should know better

[headlocal]

Skip hassling gays - Leviticus ch 18 & 20 only apply to "...children of Israel"
and not either to Christians, or Republicas
and no more does Leviticus and the ch 11 dietary laws

the only rule to worry about is Matt 7:1 JUDGE NOT THAT YE BE JUDGED!

If anyone really wants to "discuss" Leviticus, find a serious rabbinical group e.g. http://www.rabbis.org/about_us.cfm, and get them to issue a ruling that the Torah, including Leviticus, doesn't apply to gentiles
...
or take the same point to the POPE in Rome, or the Queen of UK etc
...
ultimately between Rabbis and the Pope, repudiation of application of the "children of Israel" notion is the main point.