The Weekend Response; Gay Marriage Amendment: Bad for Popkey

Dan Popkey had a piece in Sunday’s Statesman in which he called for the state not to pass a gay marriage Amendment. Popkey wants to make sure the 12 Senators saying no, stay firm:

Twelve senators can spare Idaho an ugly, demeaning, expensive fight over gay marriage that would have no practical effect except to divide us.

–Lets face face facts. The 12 can’t spare Idaho the gay marriage fight-they can only delay it. The issue has legs and I’ll give you one guess what issue will dominate the primary’s should the bill go down to defeat.

Brad Little can say b’bye to Gubenatorial ambitions. He’s going to be dogged with the issue up and down the campaign trail. Putting off ’til tomorrow the inevitable debates that will come is not leadership-it is cowardice and this issue will not disappear if the bill fails in the Senate.

Popkey has some personal reasons for opposing the Amendment, as well, he writes:

But as a divorced parent with equal custody of my kids, I’m chilled by the assertion that gays and lesbians are unfit parents because they don’t provide both a mother and father at home. Sure, I’d rather my marriage worked out better, but loving relationships are what count, not gender or numbers.

So just throw out the studies on what’s best for Children and avoid making an argument that might make Dan Popkey uncomfortable? More proof of what I wrote a few weeks ago in The Devil’s Deal. People take positions on issues like gay marriage to assuage their own guilt.

Popkey gets to the real political reason for opposing it when he writes:

That’s not quite right. Remember those 13 elections? This effort is designed to turn out evangelical voters, elect conservatives, and employ consultants.

-Dan Popkey fears that with a gay marriage amendment on the ballot in 2006, a Conservative Republican could be elected governor and to fill Butch Otter’s House Seat. The fact is that electing Conservative Republicans is not the cause of the Gay Marriage Amendment, only an effect.

At this point, no one on our side is even thinking about 2006. Sure, some GOP leaders are salivating, but this is a one time hit. Besides, I’m not certain if it’s even possible to devestate Democrats worse than they already are in the legislature. The question is not who benefits but what’s right for Idaho and protecting marriage is the right thing to do.

—–