Posted by
Playful Walrus on Thursday, March 03, 2011 6:33:24 PM
Tom Hamburger and Matea Gold
have a Los Angeles Times piece on Newt Gingrinch, specifically on his relationship with Republicans who are identified as evangelical Christians. Gee, I wonder what the article is going to bring up?
Newt Gingrich - the twice-divorced former House speaker and recent convert to Roman Catholicism - is courting evangelical Christians as he lays the groundwork for a possible presidential campaign, hoping to find favor among a group that will play a pivotal role in picking the 2012 Republican nominee.
Evangelical Christians also dig King David, who was a murderer and a polygamist and additionally an adulterer. And every born-again person admits that they're a sinner themselves. None claim perfection. We're more concerned about someone's current obedience to God, not the sins of the past.
The Left loves to point out conservatives who have been divorced and remarried. Because, you know, apparently it is somehow better to simply fornicate and shack up with a series of different women, not actually marry them.
Gingrich has also provided financial and strategic support for their causes. Last fall, he played a key behind-the-scenes role in an unprecedented - and successful - campaign to remove three Iowa Supreme Court judges who approved same-sex marriage in the state, helping secure $200,000 in seed money for the effort.
This is where I remind people that
no matter how many divorces or affairs Gingrich or anyone has had, it still takes a bride and a groom to make a marriage.
In 2007, he admitted during a radio interview with Focus on the Family founder James Dobson that he had been having an extramarital affair with his present wife as he was excoriating President Clinton for lying to a grand jury about his dalliance with a White House intern.
Perjury is a different issue than having an affair.
Meanwhile, over at The Opine Editorials, I talk about
California's AG breaking her oath of office. I also look at an article in the Los Angeles Times
detailing the strategy of a marriage neutering advocacy group.
A nationwide requirement to treat these three different kinds of associations as though they were all the same would have implications in all sorts of areas that marriage neutering advocates and homosexuality advocates likely haven't considered much. If men can form an association and call it whatever they want without being required to admit women, it will be very interesting to see the return of male-only clubs. What will Gloria Allred do?