Conservatives 'Concerned' Over Judge Roberts Gay Past

[Ian David]

Conservatives 'Concerned' Over Judge Roberts Gay Past
by Doreen Brandt 365Gay.com Washington Bureau

Posted: August 5, 2005 3:00 pm ET


(Washington) Christian conservative groups that only days go were criticizing Democrats and demanding a speedy confirmation of judge John G. Roberts Jr. to the US Supreme Court now are calling for tough questioning in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The speedy change in their approach follows this week's report that Roberts had offered free legal advice to an LGBT group that ultimately won a landmark 1996 gay civil rights case at the Supreme Court. (story)
http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/08/080405roberts.htm

In the hours before President Bush publicly announced Roberts' nomination the President called leading fundamentalist Christians assuring them of Roberts conservative background. Indeed he was once a member of a right wing legal group in Washington - an organization that Roberts says he does not remember ever belonging to.

Now, some conservative Christian leaders say they, and the President, may have been mislead by "by a liberal in conservative robes".


<snip>

It "is a red herring meant to divide the right," Sean Rushton, executive director of the Committee for Justice told the Chicago Tribune. The CFJ helps coordinate strategy on judicial nominations for conservative groups.

<snip>

"All this shows is that Roberts is a good lawyer," National Gay and Lesbian Task Force executive director Matt Foreman told 365Gay.com earlier this week. (story) "It has nothing to do with his ideology."
http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/08/080405roberts.htm

More:
http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/08/080505robertsFolo.htm

[ironman202]

1. he's a lawyer for cristsakes...

a money grubbing ambulance chasing lawyer! He'd represent a werewolf if it could pay his fee. These fundies are hysterical.

[Mythsaje]

6. LOL

Represent a werewolf. What a novel idea. <eg>

And you're probably right.

[Geoff R. Casavant]

8. Hey, thanks.

Maybe next time I'll go for a vocation where I get to decide who's worthy to receive good representation.

[GOPNotForMe]

10. That's a little harsh.

I work around lawyers every day and, for the most part, they're good people. Geez.

[beyurslf]

2. That headline is priceless :)

[kweerwolf]

3. Roberts' gay past?

Say it ain't so!!!!!

First Jeff Gannon ... Then * holding hands and skipping through the Rose Garden with the Saudi ... Not to mention the speculation about whether KKKarl's closet has a revolving door!

Those right-wing gays are takin' over! :wow:

[Son of California]

4. This whole thing doesn't add up?

I mean, this was the guy that Bush picked?
I don't get it.
I just don't get it.

I thought for sure, just from my first impression of Roberts that he would be a totally strident Christian Conservative. But maybe not.

If you consider that no matter what, no matter how we play our cards, Bush is going to nominate a conservative, we might as well go with the one who's down with gay rights -right?

I wonder if Bush knew about this Robert's "Gay" past? -or if he's just as surprised as the rest of us.

But as time passes, I'm less and less worried about Roberts being an ideological wacko, who knows, he might end up being the diamond in the mud of the whole Bush administration.

[kweerwolf]

5. Is this whole thing more KKKarl Rove smoke and mirrors?

I can see the puppet master removing his hand from *'s butt long enough to orchestrate this to keep the left off guard.

Granted, * claimed he has "no lithmus test" for SCOTUS nominees (which I don't think any of us bought)so the cynic in me thinks all this broke now so we'd be sitting around wondering :wtf: while *, KKKarl and the rest of the evil cabal sit around and congratulate themselves for yet another feat of misdirection and prestidigitation.

[Meldread]

7. It's the same tactic being used again...

It's the same tactic that has been used again and again by this Administration. Roberts is just enough to the left that he is right of center, so Bush can say "Hey, look I'm fair." Then when another seat opens up he can put forward a nominee that is to the extreme right. That way he can say, "I gave you yours, now give me mine."

What could be interesting, however, is what would happen if Roberts turns out to be pro-gay marriage. The Christian Right would cringe, but what would we do? Would we support him then, knowing that he could possibly help push forward our hopes of marriage equality, or would we say no simply based on principle.

Frankly, I don't know what I'd do. The Democratic Party has sent us up the river without a paddle. We have very little hope of getting Marriage Equality outside of the Justice System. Karl Rove flat out said that Bush would have been pro-gay marriage had the poll numbers been in favor, they just used it as a wedge issue to divide voters. If Roberts is pro-gay marriage then we might not see another decent chance to have marriage equality for the next 20 or so years.

On the other hand... on the issue of abortion he could be anti-choice. Abortions aren't really a big concern for gay people (for obvious reasons), but selling out a womans right to choose for our right to marry? Ick.

Part of me feels selfish for saying that I'd consider it, and the other part of me is saying, "Where are all those right to choose women on the issue of gay marriage? They are silent. Why should I (as a gay male) care about a womans right to choose when they aren't standing up for my right to marry?"

[Cornus]

9. Agree...

...except for the following: "Where are all those right to choose women on the issue of gay marriage? They are silent. Why should I (as a gay male) care about a womans right to choose when they aren't standing up for my right to marry?"

That's not been my experience. All of the pro-choice women I know are also pro-gay rights. They may be more vocal about what directly affects them, just as we are more vocal about what directly affects us. The two are not mutually exclusive.

[Meldread]

11. I'm not saying...

...that some pro-choice women aren't pro-gay rights as well. Of course there are. I mean, there are even Republicans who are pro-gay rights. However, just look at the poll numbers for gay marriage. Where are all those pro-choice people when it comes to us?

I'd hate to have to choose between abortion rights and my civil rights. I don't know which way I'd go.

[SocialJustice18]

12. Gay is poison to The Right

Of course they're recanting,a gay supporter is poison to their main-base. During the 2004 election campaign President Bush started the whole "Marriage Amendment Act" and called on the "Traditional Family" to be preserved. Once Bush won his reelection, "moral values" were the reason for his reelection. Having a gay supporter in the Supreme Court would poison their votes by the Religious Right. So yeah...gay is bad.