CPAC | Gay Marriage | Michelangelo Signorile | News | Ralph Reed | Republican Party

Ralph Reed: Conservatives Can't Put the Gay Marriage Genie 'Back in the Bottle'

2_ralphreedMichelangelo Signorile interviewed former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed at CPAC on Friday and said that even though he believes the Republican party and every GOP candidate that will seek the nomination for president will be in favor of 'traditional marriage', he says a long sought after federal marriage amendment is dead in the water:

"Even if you passed a federal marriage amendment, I would assume it would grandfather in anyone who's been married, so I don't know. It was always a very difficult option. I don't think we ever got 50 votes in the U.S. Senate for that amendment. So, we always knew that the amendment was going to be very difficult to pass."

Reed added that trying to pass such an amendment would be "trying to put the genie back in the bottle."

Listen to Signorile's interview with Reed, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. I noticed that Ralph Reed is popping up everywhere again. Why anyone gives this man the time of day is beyond me.

    Posted by: Gerry | Mar 10, 2014 12:07:43 PM


  2. Let's give Reed credit for engaging in a rare moment of honesty, which is far too rare on the political right.

    Posted by: Clayton | Mar 10, 2014 12:14:09 PM


  3. Reed may say it is dead but there are still plenty of flim-flam men and women looking to make a buck off the issue.

    Posted by: bkmn | Mar 10, 2014 12:17:37 PM


  4. The GOP raises way too much money off of the gay marriage issue (and abortion) to ever do away with it. If we had a Federal amendment, they would have to find some other group to demonize for fundraising purposes.

    Posted by: Chadd | Mar 10, 2014 12:22:18 PM


  5. Reed, you idiot, it takes 67 votes in the Senate for an amendment, not 50.

    Posted by: plinx | Mar 10, 2014 12:32:29 PM


  6. Every GOP prospect for 2016 will support "traditional" marraige thereby assuring an increasing irrelevance with any voter under retirement age.

    Posted by: e.c. | Mar 10, 2014 1:06:26 PM


  7. Plinx, I was thinking the same thing.

    I find it truly amazing that crooks and liars and felons make it big in the Republicant party after they have been convicted and in some cases served their time.

    Posted by: john patrick | Mar 10, 2014 1:09:24 PM


  8. Even if it passed, will it withstand scrutinies in federal courts?

    Posted by: simon | Mar 10, 2014 1:13:17 PM


  9. @Chadd

    No, they would simply move onto the re-criminalization of homosexuality.

    Posted by: Chris | Mar 10, 2014 1:13:43 PM


  10. I support "traditional" marriage, that is a union between a man and a woman. I support it because that is what some men and some women do.

    I also support "gay" marriage because is what some other men and some other women do.

    Either one is "for" marriage or "not for" marriage. Marriage between whom is irrelevant.

    Posted by: Esther Blodgett | Mar 10, 2014 1:16:56 PM


  11. Isn't he widely known as an anti-gay closet case who used to pick up gay hustlers? Isn't he part of the Abramhoff scandal?

    Posted by: WayneMPLS | Mar 10, 2014 1:23:05 PM


  12. Don't even try it Ralph; because a few living things might die along with it!

    The LGBT community is sick-to-death of you idiots!

    Posted by: BRAINS | Mar 10, 2014 1:58:21 PM


  13. Don't even try it Ralph; because a few living things might die along with it!

    The LGBT community is sick-to-death of you idiots!

    Posted by: BRAINS | Mar 10, 2014 1:58:25 PM


  14. Don't even try it Ralph; because a few living things might die along with it!

    The LGBT community is sick-to-death of you idiots!

    Posted by: BRAINS | Mar 10, 2014 1:58:40 PM


  15. Don't even try it Ralph; because a few living things might die along with it!

    The LGBT community is sick-to-death of you idiots!

    Posted by: BRAINS | Mar 10, 2014 1:59:49 PM


  16. @ PLINX - I was hoping I wasn't the only one to catch that little detail. Ralphie needs 67 votes, not 50.

    It's a sad(er) day for Ralphie and his Christian Coalition buddies...

    Posted by: AdamTh | Mar 10, 2014 2:23:07 PM


  17. Really, Signorile should have known enough to call Reed on that 50 vs. 67 vote divide, as this is basic High School Civics. Do they still teach High School Civics? ..lol!

    And actually the legislature in California DID pass marriage equality. Twice. (2005 and 2008). "The Governator" (Schwarzenegger - R) hadn't "evolved" at that point and vetoed the measure both times. If former Democratic Governor, Gray Davis, hadn't been recalled, because of the made-up electricity crisis (thanks Enron!), we probably would have had marriage equality in the state without all the strum and drang of Prop. H8 a long, long time ago.

    Posted by: Lexis | Mar 10, 2014 3:48:52 PM


  18. I believe Reed knows that amendments need 67 Senate votes to go out to the states. His point is that if they couldn't get a simple majority of 50 yes votes in far more favorable times, things are only going to get worse in future for them.

    Posted by: Jackster | Mar 10, 2014 4:15:26 PM


  19. Thanks for stating the obvious. If the FMA couldn't even come close to getting 2/3 in the House or Senate in 2004 or 2006 (never mine 38/50 states), do you really think it will pass in 2014?

    I suppose you will try to repeal the 5th amendment next?

    Posted by: Matt N | Mar 10, 2014 5:21:19 PM


  20. I don't think he was confusing the 50/67 thing. He's just using that as the first benchmark for the Senate. The other option for amendments is to take them to the states first to get them passed, and that might have worked back in 2004, but few groups want to put the money and time into such an effort if there is a good chance of failure. They went to the congress knowing they were going to lose the vote, but gain in PR. Now it's lose-lose.

    At least now he can marry his BF.

    Posted by: anon | Mar 10, 2014 5:32:26 PM


  21. @Lexis : While the energy crisis was part of Davis' problems, one thing that really had the voters mad was raising vehicle license fees by a factor of 3 (which state law allowed if there was a budget shortfall).

    BTW, the term is "Sturm und Drang" (German for "storm and stress"), with Drang having a number of meanings in other contexts.

    Posted by: Bill | Mar 11, 2014 12:44:31 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Justin Bieber Swears at Court Reporter in Miami Deposition: VIDEO« «