Florida Agenda

By JOE HARRIS

The late Hunter S. Thompson would have felt comfortable lurking in the wings of Ybor City’s Honey Pot nightclub last Tuesday night, with a surreal, “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”-esque vibe to the gay bar and the several hundred Republicans-and-their-besties who had gathered for a night of “booze” (in the words of co-organizer Jimmy LaSalvia, who noted that, “This is the largest event hosted by a gay group at a Republican convention, not that size matters.”) and talking points.

To underscore just exactly who was “coming to dinner” (or in this case, drinks), the RSVP email was clear: “Homocon 2012 is not a clothing optional event! We don’t care what you wear, but you do have to wear clothes.” LaSalvia, who co-founded GOProud, a group for gay conservatives, orchestrated Homocon 2012 to be an evening of strippers (who honestly weren’t all that stripped-down—in deference, I’m sure, to the Romneys, who were just down the road) and party stalwarts. And even if Ann Coulter wasn’t in attendance (as she had been in 2010), former Romney foreign policy spokesman Richard Grenell (who was reportedly squeezed out of his Team Mitt gig because of pressure from social conservatives) was.

LaSalvia’s GOProud is the only gay group thus far to endorse the Romney-Ryan ticket. The larger Log Cabin Republicans have yet to give the running mates their blessing, although the organization’s DC chapter voted last week to endorse the ticket and recommended that the national organization do likewise, with acknowledgment made for the group’s differences with Romney over points of LGBT civil rights, including marriage equality.

But for LaSalvia, it was a Big Gay Tent, with same-sex marriage taking a back seat to matters of economic policy. “Before you can get married, you have to have a date,” noted LaSalvia, perhaps a little too glibly. “And everyone knows you can’t get a date without a job.” In keeping with the upbeat dynamic, LaSalvia—perhaps with diplomacy in his mind—failed to note that GOProud itself was prohibited from attending this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (C-PAC).

There was also no mention made that after the Obama administration announced that it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in federal court, it was Republican House leaders (under Speaker John Boehner) who took up the slack, with gusto and glee (no pun intended). Nor that the 2012 GOP Platform calls for enshrining DOMA as an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, forever defining marriage between a man and a woman.

By way of e x p l a n a t i on—or possibly apologia– Sarah Longwell of Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry told NPR, “Well, the main thing that we want to communicate is that the freedom to marry is really consistent and in line with the conservative ideology of individual liberty, personal responsibility, family, and freedom. And so I think that conservatives tend to respond to that language. They understand that they do want to minimize government’s role in people’s lives, maximize freedom.”

Maybe they’ll be more responsive— and more inclined to “maximize freedom”—in 2016.

By Cliff Dunn

TAMPA – Last week, a draft of the Republican Party platform was posted on the Republican National Committee Web site, then quickly taken down—but not before at least one copy was downloaded.

In its foreign policy section—titled “American Exceptionalism”—the draft includes language that reads, “The effectiveness of our foreign aid has been limited by the cultural agenda of the [Obama] Administration, attempting to impose on foreign countries, especially the peoples of Africa, legalized abortion and the homosexual rights agenda.”

It added, “We will reverse this tragic course, encourage more involvement by the most effective aid organizations, and trust developing peoples to build their future from the ground up.”

Although the section on international human rights addressed, “the work of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, established by Congressional Republicans to advance the rights of persecuted peoples everywhere,” and notes that a “Republican Administration will return the advocacy of religious liberty to a central place in our diplomacy,” no mention was given to the violence and murder against LGBT persons, or the activism against such brutality, which is reported in Europe, Asia, and Africa on an almost-weekly basis. It also fails to address Uganda’s 2009 legislation (still in Parliament) which calls for the death penalty for those found guilty of “aggravated homosexuality.” It was response to acts of violence abroad that moved Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in December 2011 to tell UN delegates that “gay rights are human rights.” When President Obama ordered “all agencies engaged abroad to ensure that U.S. diplomacy and foreign assistance promote and protect the human rights of LGBT persons,” Texas Governor Rick Perry—who was then seeking the Republican presidential nomination— objected that “promoting special rights for gays in foreign countries is not in America’s interests, and not worth a dime of taxpayers’ money.”

The 2012 Republican platform supports “traditional marriage,” which it defines as between a man and a woman. A draft last week calls for a constitutional amendment that recognizes that definition, which would ban gay men and women from marrying. It condemns judges—including Bush-43 appointees—who have ruled in favor of marriage equality, calling it “an assault on the foundations of our society, challenging the institution which, for thousands of years in virtually every civilization, has been entrusted with the rearing of children and the transmission of cultural values.”

It likewise calls President Obama’s decision not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court “a mockery of the President’s inaugural oath,” and “commend[s] the United States House of Representatives” for taking up the legal slack. Although at press time the platform draft does not call for reinstating Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, which was repealed by President Obama, it rejects “the use of the military as a platform for social experimentation.”

A cadre of platform committee members consists of former Ron Paul delegates, who reportedly joined with Log Cabin Republicans and other libertarian-leaning members to include the conciliatory statement, “We embrace the principle that all Americans should be treated with respect and dignity.”

By Joe Harris

The decision by Mitt Romney last weekend to name U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) as his presumptive vice presidential nominee may be the kind of political cover the Republican presidential contender needs as he shifts his campaign from primary season-mode to a general election campaign status—a “calibration” the former Massachusetts governor may find more to his liking, especially as it relates to the values stuff with which he seems most uncomfortable.

Despite his credentials as a returned Mormon missionary, a graduate of Mormon Church-owned Brigham Young University, a captain of finance, and an active Republican (since 1993, anyway; prior to that, he was a registered Independent, who had previously voted for some Democrats, including the late Paul Tsongas during the 1992 Massachusetts presidential primary), Romney has been viewed with suspicion by the social Right and other values voters.

His single term as governor of the Bay State (2003 to 2007) did not endear him to fiscal and small governmentconservatives outside—or frankly, inside—of “Taxachusetts,” especially after his 2006 signing into law of the state’s health care reform legislation (or, more informally, “Romneycare”), the first of its kind in the U.S., which provided nearuniversal health coverage access via statelevel subsidies and individual mandates to purchase insurance.

Although in Massachusetts he presided over eliminating a projected $3 billion deficit—in part by reducing state funding for higher education, and cutting aid to municipalities—the pragmatic Romney approved the raising of fees, and his public austerity was aided by an unanticipated windfall of federal funds, and unexpected revenues generated via a capital gains tax hike.

Conservatives can be forgiven for being confused about where Romney actually stands on the subject of gay civil rights, and Democrats like to point to the candidate’s perceived contradictions on the subject, as when, during his 1994 campaign against Ted Kennedy for the late Liberal lion’s U.S. Senate seat, Romney promised the Log Cabin Republicans of Massachusetts that he would seek “full equality” for LGBT persons, and went so far as to say that he was more supportive of gay rights than Kennedy.

In May, when President Obama announced his support for gay marriage, Romney acknowledged that, “Benefits of that nature may well be appropriate, and states are able to make a provision for the determination of those kinds of rights.” The practicing Mormon has said that his opposition to marriage equality stems from his religious beliefs.

In 2003, when the Massachusetts courts legalized same-sex marriage, the governor complained that the state was becoming “San Francisco East.” He also warned in (mock?) horror a conservative audience that “some are actually having children born to them.”

How will his Ryan selection impact this election cycle’s yet-to-be-seen Romney, particularly for gays? It may have already started, with the announcement last week by a Romney campaign spokesperson confirming the candidate’s opposition to the Boy Scouts of America’s ban on gay leaders, something which he publicly expressed during his failed 1994 Senate bid. Andrea Saul told reporters that the former governor believes “all people should be able to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation.” That won’t play well with the people most uplifted by Ryan’s selection for the ticket. Stay tuned.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Last week, the executive director of the nation’s largest LGBT conservative political group announced his organization’s participation in this year’s party platform drafting process. R. Clarke Cooper of Log Cabin Republicans said that members from his organization will be credentialed attendees at the Republican National Convention (RNC) Platform Committee meeting on August 20. The committee will meet just prior to the start of the party’s quadrennial national convention in Tampa.

Cooper said that the GOP’s 2008 platform contained language that was divisive, and specifically targeted the LGBT community. “Just looking at the 2008 [platform], Log Cabin has gone through and we’ve noted language in there that’s either directly unhelpful, or seen as anti-gay, and have marked it for deletion,” he said. In a section titled, “Preserving Traditional Marriage,” the 2008 platform endorses the federal Defense of Marriage Act, and supports the passage of same-sex marriage bans through state referendums.

Log Cabin Republicans plan to host a number of events during the week of the RNC, including an Aug. 26 welcome reception, a meet-and-greet with the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund for openly-gay Republican candidates on Aug. 27, a brunch for “Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry” on Aug. 29, and a press event to honor congressional Republican allies of the gay community, on Aug. 30. Another LGBT conservative group, GOProud, will host its annual “Homocon” party on Aug. 28, at The Honey Pot in Ybor City.

By Jason Otero

I’ve quietly had enough of my loudmouthed liberal Facebook friends (you know who are, the really UNHINGED ones), and the demagogic talking heads of ratings-challenged MSNBC and other media outlets, constantly trashing conservatism and spewing lie after distortion about the things for which I, as an American LGBT conservative, stand. Although I am capable of admitting that some good things have come from the Left, they are far outweighed by its demagoguery, hyperbole, and lies, which are desperate attempts to hide from the current round of resounding failures of their political ideology, and their economically and socially-disastrous president.

Blindly labeling conservatives and Tea Partiers as “anti-environment,” “racists,” “sexists,” “bigots,” and “homophobes,” without any proof is the height of disingenuousness. On the contrary, I’ve personally heard more racist, sexist, bigoted, AND HOMOPHOBIC rhetoric from within the mainstream of our own LGBT community than I ever did living in conservative Seminole County, Florida, or in Louisville, Kentucky.

One must only look to our liberal strongholds (California, Detroit, New Orleans, New York, etc.), and the disastrous cesspool of democratic socialism in Europe, to see how liberalism, when left unchallenged, causes deep unemployment, overprinting cash (which lowers currency value and increases inflation), inescapable dependence on government, soaring deficits and debt, plummeting property values, high taxes (coupled with higher costs of living and declining wages), and a truly desperate population. This is the path upon which Obama, Pelosi, and other powerful democratic socialists have taken us. (Please, stop with the “Party of ‘No’” rhetoric.The Democrats had two solid years of supermajorities, when GOP interference was not possible.)

Here, now, is my “short list” of the consequences of unchecked, radical liberalism: The emphasis on “good intentions” while ignoring disastrous results; the victim mentality; incitement of racial hatred and class envy; the “thought police” and political correctness; anti-Americanism; Christian persecution; crusades against corporations and small businesses; radical environmentalism and its violent eco-terrorists; white-washing history in the “liberal image” in public schools and academia; the spreading of verifiable lies and exaggerations about global warming, and leaders who become as wealthy spreading those lies; refusing to denounce the numerous criminal and deviant elements among the Occupy Wall Street crowd; the rise of the “me first” mentality, and envious wealth- and success-haters; moral relativism; radical feminism and the “twink”-ification of men; the betrayal by the black “elite” of their own people; the radical gay “elite” who demand devotion to the Democrat Party and Liberalism; absurdly high taxes, over-regulation, and deficit spending, all deadly to an economy; “nanny government” and invasive control of every aspect of our lives, most notoriously under Obamacare; the belief that government knows best; demonization of our military power; the myth of a shrinking middle class; and the monopoly over and corruption of the news media.

Atop my list is the Left’s “living, breathing document” re-interpretation of the Constitution, designed to make violating our rights easier, while inflating the government’s power and size dangerously beyond what our Founding Fathers intended.

Nothing extreme is sustainable or healthy for a nation, and that goes for Conservatism, too. The truth lies in the “sensible center.” Fight honorably for what you believe in, but don’t demonize everything about your opponents while ignoring and enabling radicalism on your own side. This constitutes the height of ignorance in the political discourse of civilized 21st century society.

My advice to the Left: Get it together, girls. Obama has driven this country off a cliff.

“The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.” – U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Arizona), 1981

CLIFF DUNN

I’m going to depart this week from my usual tones of conciliation and tolerance because, as my grandmother would say, My Irish is up. This sort of mood often accompanies casting caution to the wind, and speaking in broader generalities than with I am normally comfortable. So be it. My feeling as I write this is that anyone who decides to vote for a Republican U.S. House candidate come November must harbor some— realized or unknown—degree of homophobia, or at least a well-honed sense of Schadenfreude that is focused on one group, namely us.

(Note that I said “decides” to vote: I recognize that there are many factors that go into casting one’s vote, not the least of which are a predisposition to choose a political party based upon one’s parents’ voting habits, or one’s geographic region of birth, which also relates to the first. If you vote solely based on one of these criteria, I am hard-pressed to think of you as homophobic—more properly, you lack self-identity, or may just be lazy.)

In the reverse, any GOP House candidate who supports LGBT rights (to my present, captured-in-amberin- the-moment way-of-thinking) must be either a) insincere, or b) in the wrong party (but there’s redress for this). Sorry, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. I believe that 5 million guncontrol advocates should get together and join the NRA (which claims a membership of 4.3 million), vote out the hard core gun nuts (the ones who think Junior should get a howitzer for Christmas), and the next day add the Brady Law to its membership platform. (But, see “laziness,” above.) and I am not saying that there aren’t good Republicans—gay and straight—who want the same things for themselves and their families that I want for mine.

I was a very right-of-center member of the Grand Old Party during the mid-90s—a reaction, I realize now, to the entitlement and corruption that marked the early Bill Clinton years. I have since made peace with Clinton, and both my beliefs and my political self-discovery have matured into selfknowledge that I am left-of-center, with some traditionalist values (like a gay Mike Logan on “Law and Order: Criminal Intent,” but less boozy). On Tuesday, July 31, U.S. District Judge Vanessa Bryant, in Hartford, Connecticut, issued a 104-page decision, in which she ruled that a provision in the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection. This is the fifth federal judge to rule that DOMA is repellant to the U.S. Constitution.

Bryant—who was appointed to the federal bench by George W. Bush—ruled that the provision, which denies federal recognition of tax, health, and other benefits to married same-sex couples, “obligates the federal government to single out a certain category of marriages as excluded from federal recognition, thereby resulting in an inconsistent distribution of federal marital benefits.” She added that “many courts have concluded that homosexuals have suffered a long and significant history of purposeful discrimination.”

The ink on Bryant’s ruling was barely dry when the House Republican leadership—which has made itself the guardian of DOMA’s sacred screed since Attorney General Eric Holder decided last year to no longer waste tax dollars defending the indefensible—announced that it would continue to represent the interests of bigots and the narrowminded, by hiring outside legal counsel to fly to the nation’s far reaches when danger exists that American citizens might exercise their rights as free men and women. That sends a powerfuly bad message that is impossible to ignore.

Although I have no allegiance to the party of Jefferson, Jackson, FDR, and Obama, I would challenge any gay American to name another issue as important to the future of civil rights as marriage equality. I don’t think that civil unions are a terrible idea, but I understand the outrage of those who believe that a right for one should be a right for all. This is plain fairness. For House Republicans to throw ideological red meat to bigots and demagogues is an endorsement of hate, and in this moment, those gay Republicans who give their political or monetary support to GOP House candidates are endorsing hatred, plain and simple.

I don’t know if North Miami pastor Jack Hakimian hates gays as much as his words would indicate, but through his sermons, he is creating another generation of bigots and small-thinkers, and for what? A regular paying job? The satisfaction of being shepherd to the anchorless and rudderless? Maybe 5 million LGBT Americans should descend upon Chick-fil-A and order “Santorum shakes” to make the point that we may not like bigotry, but we think so little of it that we will ignore your narrow-mindedness, and show you true power, to forgive as well as to buy. But I would rather take my money—and my vote—elsewhere.

Republican Traditionalists: “It’s Chick-fil-A’s carcass, and I helped!”

It seems that high-profile members of the Grand Old Party love themselves some fried chicken—as long as it features a Chick-fil-A sticker someplace on the packaging. Since his interview last month with Baptist Press, CEO Dan Cathy’s comments espousing “the biblical definition of the family unit” have gone viral, and netted the support of such prominent Republicans as former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, who declared August 1—today—to be “Chick Fil-A Appreciation Day,” former Pennsylvania U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (who genuflected over his family’s love for the chicken joint’s peach shakes, via Twitter), and ex-Alaska governor Sarah Palin, who told Lone Star State supporters last week that she was planning a post-rally poultry-binge— and posted her proof online (replete with pics of her and hubby Todd, pullet prizes in hand).

Images touted by conservative activists depicted traditionalists standing in long lines at Chick-fil-A franchises, presumably waiting for their buckets and side dishes. It would seem that Republicans have succeeded in mobilizing the “base” to rally around the fast food chain as a cause worth protecting. But a new analysis from international internet market research firm YouGov suggests that the company’s brand is being hurt by all this Republican-ized romance— not to mention CEO Cathy’s suggestion that too much progressive thinking (like same-sex marriage) is just “inviting God’s judgment on our nation.”

The U.K.-based online pollster’s Brand Index uses an algorithm that takes its nearly 2 million American fast-food consumer poll subjects, and subtracts their negative feedback numbers from positive totals. Since July 19, perception of the Chick-fil-A brand has dropped to 4 points below the national average—a drop of 15 points (from 19 points above the average) before Cathy bashed gay marriage (and divorcees). According to YouGov, the conservative Midwest is the only place the pullet hasn’t hit the fan.

FORT LAUDERDALE – A push by Florida-based evangelical voters to mobilize unregistered voters could provide the push needed to deliver Florida’s 29 electoral votes to the Republican presidential nominee— whomever that individual proves to be.

At a meeting last week at Fort Lauderdale mega-church Calvary Chapel, John Stemberger, president of the Orlando-based Florida Family Policy Council (FFPC), told nearly 200 assembled volunteers, “We’re organizing Florida to take back America.”

The volunteers were mobilized to recruit thousands of local Christians who haven’t registered to vote in an effort to create an evangelical voting bloc that will deliver the Sunshine State to the GOP in November. In 2008, Barack Obama won Florida’s 27 electoral votes. (Under the U.S. Constitution, the increase to the state’s population under the 2010 U.S. Census resulted in an addition of two congressional seats and two electoral votes.)

“What you do or don’t do in the next seven months could mean the difference in who is running the free world. It’s that serious,” emphasized Stemberger, whose organization is affiliated with the conservative Family Research Council (FRC).

“We live in a complacent nation, and that affects everybody,” noted Scott Spages, an official of Faith Forum, which draws its members from Calvary Chapel’s Broward and Palm Beach County campuses. “And there is a tendency among the faithful that God is directing things, when, in fact, He specifically calls on us to be involved in the governance of our land. And that’s often confused by the faithful,” he told the Sun Sentinel.

According to FRC data, in 2008, Florida was home to 668,890 conservative Christians who didn’t vote because they weren’t registered. Obama won the state by 236,450.

“With a fraction of that, we can win Florida,” Stemberger said at Calvary Chapel. “These are people who would vote the right way if they were registered.” For Stemberger, the Florida Republican Party’s former political director, “the right way” means stopping the Democratic Obama, from being reelected.

Critics, including LGBT rights activists, say that fractures within the Republican coalition may make it difficult for the party to win with or without an energized base of heretofore unregistered voters. They also point to the likelihood of Mitt Romney’s presumptive nomination, and the potential the former Massachusetts governor’s Mormon faith has to turn off potential Christian evangelical and fundamentalist voters, many of whom do not view the Latter Day Saint (Mormon) religion as truly Christian as they understand the term.

To the concerns of these latter day “doubting Thomases,” Stemberger has a reply. “You may not like the [GOP] nominee,” he told one group of volunteers. “We have got to think clearly about this. We can’t be purists. If we’re purists, strategically we’re done. And so we have to understand the stakes are high. The world is at stake.”

By CLIFF DUNN

WASHINGTON, DC – A subtle cultural shift may be underway on the part of the highest ranks of the Republican Party and their unofficial but no less powerful greybeards, with GOP Congressional leaders blocking passage of a number of measures that would have strengthened the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the federal ban on same-sex marriage.

Even cultural conservatives including Rep. Allen West (R-FL), whose district encompasses portions of Fort Lauderdale and Wilton Manors, have made drastic shifts in their on-record statements.

Last week on CNN, West— whose previous statements warned that marriage equality would be a signpost of the decay of society and that homosexuality is a “choice”— said “I want my daughters to have the opportunities that I had, and that’s what concerns me. That’s what keeps me up awake at night, not worrying about who’s sleeping with whom.”

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX)—who voted “no” in 2007 on federal legislation that would prohibit employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, and was rated 0% by the Human Rights Campaign, indicating opposition to gay-rights—told Politico.com, “That’s not something we’re focused on now.”

During the 2010 House floor debate on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Gohmert predicted that permitting openly-gay military servicemembers would sound America’s downfall. The Congressional Record reported the four-term lawmaker as saying that “when militaries throughout history … have adopted the policy [of] ‘fine for homosexuality…’—they’re toward the end of their existence as a great nation.”

Congressional Quarterly quoted an aide to a ranking House Republican who said that GOP lawmakers are concerned that the conservative social agenda that has been driving the Republican presidential primaries will alienate independent and socially moderate voters in their home congressional districts.

“There is a debate in the Republican conference on whether defense of marriage is a winning issue politically,” the unnamed aide said. These concerns have touched the top echelon of GOP leaders, who have been sending mixed signals to social conservatives—to the displeasure of the latter.

In 2011, President Obama instructed the Justice Department to stop defending DOMA in court. At that time, House Speaker John Boehner and the Republican House leadership formed the House Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) to step into the void and defend the law in court. Attorney Paul Clement was hired to defend DOMA, and given a $1.5 million budget by BLAG.

Marriage equality opponents expressed satisfaction with Boehner and BLAG. They have recently begun to sharply criticize what they perceive as lackluster performance on the part of Boehner and the GOP leadership, and accuse them of paying lip service to mollify religious and social conservatives.

“They hired Paul Clement, and they think their job is done,” complained Tom McClusky, senior vice president of the Family Research Council, to Congressional Quarterly. “While the Obama administration ignores DOMA, Speaker Boehner has forgotten that the checks and balances also include Congress,” he added.

The possibility of a social realignment within the GOP echoes an actual shift that occurred during the 1948 presidential election, when the Democratic Party split on the issue of civil rights for African Americans.

Addressing the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia that year, Minneapolis mayor Hubert Humphrey urged party leaders to “get out of the shadow of states’ rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights.” That call resulted in a walkout by Southern Democrat delegates, who subsequently nominated then-South Carolina Gov. Strom Thurmond as the candidate of the States’ Rights Party, or Dixiecrats.

“Republicans are cognizant of where the public is moving,” said Brian Moulton, the legal director of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation’s largest LGBT rights organization, concerning the mixed signals. “The Speaker’s defense of the law helps us show the harms that the law has caused,” and, he added, “at the end of the day, his action perpetuates the harms.”

MANCHESTER, NH – Lawmakers rejected a bill that would have made New Hampshire’s legislature the first to repeal a marriage equality law.

Members of the state House voted 211-116 to defeat the bill, which ended attempts by the chamber’s new GOP majority to overturn the Granite State’s two-yearold same-sex marriage law.

“They blew it,” said Craig Stowell, co-chair of Standing Up For New Hampshire Families, citing conservatives’ efforts to undo the existing gay marriage law. “This was supposed to be the most favorable legislative climate for repeal and they couldn’t even get a majority.”

Republicans hold a 189-seat majority in the state’s House of Representatives.

The Republican-backed measure would have ended same-sex marriage effective March 2013, and replaced it with a previous civil unions law that had been in effect in 2008 and 2009. Under the bill, those same-sex marriages that were made prior to the repeal taking effect would have remained valid.

State Rep. David Welch, a Republican, said he had been against same-sex marriage, but that the time for repeal had come and gone. “The Legislature has given certain rights to members of our community and now we’re being asked to take them away,” said Welch.

Another Republican, state Rep. Warren Groen, supported the bill because, in his view, marriage equality is a gateway to legalizing polygamy and other non-traditional lifestyles. “We are indeed on a slippery slope,” Groen said.