Wednesday, August 10, 2005

Is that a Crack in the Wall

The first conservative group to pull its endorsement of John Robert's came today after revelations that he did pro bono work for a gay rights case.

These wingnut groups never cease to amaze me. Roberts was not advocating gay marriage. He wasn't advocating civil unions or adoption rights. No, these religious wingnuts are so bigoted that they pulled their support of Roberts merely because he was advocating not making it legal to discriminate against homosexuals. Here they are with their dream candidate on 99% of the issues, but yet they pull their support because Roberts argued that we should all be treated equal. Hmmm... this really does say a lot about these people.

Group withdraws its support for nominee Roberts
Conservatives cite his work in a gay rights case
By JESSE J. HOLLAND
Associated Press

WASHINGTON - A conservative group in Virginia said Tuesday that it was withdrawing its support for Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' confirmation because of his work helping overturn a Colorado referendum on gays.

The group, Public Advocate of the United States, is one of the first conservative organizations to announce anything but support for the judge

Eugene Delgaudio, the president of the group, said that he hopes his stance will prod others.

"I know that others feel the same way. I know they believe as I do. They're just not going to act," the northern Virginia man, 50, said. "But once I've done it, then they can't claim that no one's opposing Roberts."

"We can't take our limited resources and put it toward a candidate who is not a strict constructionist when we were told he is," Delgaudio said.

The stance by his group, which describes itself as a pro-family organization, puts it in opposition to conservative groups that have endorsed Roberts. A number of liberal groups already oppose President Bush's high court nominee.

...

The Colorado gay rights case involved Amendment 2, a constitutional amendment approved by voters in 1992 that would have barred laws, ordinances or regulations protecting gays from discrimination by landlords, employers or public agencies such as school districts.

Gay rights groups sued, and the U.S. Supreme Court declared the measure unconstitutional in a 6-3 ruling in 1996.

Roberts' role in the case included helping develop a strategy and firing tough questions during a mock court session at Jean Dubofsky, a former Colorado Supreme Court justice who argued the case on behalf of the gay rights plaintiffs.


(Full Story)

5 comments:

Sigmund, Carl and Alfred said...

What a team- NARAL and these whack jobs.

Politics really does make for strange bedfellows.

Good post.

MaxedOutMama said...

Hey, I looked them up (never heard of them, not that it's surprising). Take a look at this, Dingo:
http://www.publicadvocateusa.org/news/article.php?article=766

They are running around trying to "expose" Republican congressmen who (gasp) accept money from the "Radical Homosexual Lobby". These guys are extremely hysterical about sex. I bet Congress hates these people with a passion.

Look at this! Scroll down to get to the list of people who have accepted money from the "Homo Lobby".

There's another similar organization, but I forget the name of it. I should have saved the article I saw last year. It was about gays and marriage in MA. The claim in the article was that the gays wanted to take straight people's children away from them so they could raise them.

But I don't think it's much of a crack. I don't think many Congressmen are going to want to oppose the guy on the basis that he believes homosexuals are entitled to their day in court. That's just disgusting when you get down to it.

Anonymous said...

Aaron,
Can I infer that you are supporting Roberts, then? Welcome aboard.

Chris P/M

Dingo said...

I checked out the link MoM. Thanks. They are a nutty bunch for sure.

Chris, I am not a supporter of Roberts, but not a detractor either. Of course, I would like to see someone more liberal, but I don't think he is a horrible choice either. I do have some concerns on his stances on privacy, but overall, I think he will give an honest open minded look at issues and not just party lines.

NYgirl said...

This group is indeed nutty, as Sigmund, Carl & Alfred said, politics do make for strange bedfellows.