Alabama GOP Seeks To Sanction College Republican Who Supports Same-Sex Marriage
Down in Alabama, the Stupid Party is being particularly stupid.
The Alabama Republican Party is seeking to oust the head of the Alabama College Republicans because of her public support for same-sex marriage:
A proposed amendment to the state’s Republican Party bylaws would allow the removal of the Alabama College Republicans chairwoman, who spoke out in favor of same-sex marriage in June, from the party’s steering committee.
Following the Supreme Court ruling against the Defense of Marriage Act in June, chairwoman and University of Alabama student Stephanie Petelos spoke to AL.com about the generational divide between party leadership and young conservatives on the issue.
She told Buzzfeed the comments reportedly infuriated party leaders, who began attempting then to remove her from the steering committee.
They struck a deal in which Petelos would not speak to the press on the issue, and committee members would stop trying to oust her.
The proposed amendment, sponsored by Don Wallace of Tuscaloosa and Bonnie Sachs of Double Springs, states no one can continue to serve on the steering committee if they publicly advocate a position contrary to the platform adopted at the Republican National Convention.
To be reinstated, the individual must publicly rescind his or her comments, the amendment states.
Today, Petelos would only offer a brief statement to AL.com regarding the issue.
“The only thing I have to say is that I had an agreement with GOP leaders to not discuss the gay marriage issue further, and they agreed to drop the issue and stop trying to remove my position,” Petelos said. “So I am going to continue upholding my agreement with them.”
Back in June, Petelos was among several younger politically active people quoted in a story regarding reaction to the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage decisions:
Stephanie Petelos, chairwoman of the College Republican Federation of Alabama and former president of the University of Alabama College Republicans, said she was frustrated with the harsh statements and religious rhetoric from Republican leaders.
Petelos said she believed most college students’ views on social issues differ from that of the GOP, and that the continued emphasis the party places on religion gets in the way of issues young people could get behind, like the economy.
While religious rhetoric has a small place in government due to politicians’ personal beliefs and moral codes, Petelos said their arguments often don’t fly with students who identify as Republican because of political issues, not because they’re Christian.
“The majority of students don’t derive the premise of their argument for or against gay marriage from religion, because we’re governed by the constitution and not the Bible,” Petelos said.
Though some young Republicans have come out in support of gay marriage, Petelos said even more probably believe in it but remain quiet in fear of retribution.
“I think a lot of people would be actively for it if they didn’t live in fear of backlash from party leaders,” she said. “We don’t want to go against the party, we love the party. We’re just passionate about a whole list of other issues, that’s why we’re involved.”
Petelos is, of course, reflection a reality about her generation, and about the American electorate in general. The GOP’s emphasis on social issues such as same-sex marriage, something which is especially prevalent in Bible Belt states like Alabama, is a major turnoff to younger voters, most of whom are far more concerned about economic issues than they are about whether the couple living next door to them is of opposite genders or the same gender. The fact that the state party in Alabama is seeking to punish Petelos for stating a simple fact is indicative of just how much the GOP has decided to adopt an ostrich-like attitude when it comes to the political realities that face it. After all, it’s easier to stick your head in the sand than it is face the reality that your political party is in serious danger of losing an entire generation of voters. Instead of trying to purge people like Petelos, the Alabama GOP, and the party as a whole, should be asking itself how they can attract more people like her who are willing to do the hard work its going to take to build the party for the future.
They’re not likely to do that, of course. Which is why they’re known as the Stupid Party.
“The fact that the state party in Alabama is seeking to punish Petelos for stating a simple fact is indicative of just how much the GOP has decided to adopt an ostrich-like attitude when it comes to the political realities that face it.”
——————————–
Bama GOP BoyZ. . . . .
Crimethink!
That GOP outreach initiative needs a little help….
Was that supposed to be “entire generation of voters”?
Only agree with us on 95% of of our issues and dare to vocalize that 5% disagreement? Time to throw out the heretic! Has anyone bothered to tell these idiots they’re supposed to be running a party, not a religious cult?
‘Bamans gonna ‘Bama.
Seriously, it would surprise me if the Alabama GOP did NOT pull stuff like that.
I wonder if Libertarians will ever realize that the Republican Party is NOT going to turn libertarian any time soon.
@NBH:
You have a point. And, yes, that was a typo. Obviously, not enough coffee this morning
@Doug Mataconis:
Just make sure it’s not too much coffee though Doug, as Steven points out that can cause problems as well.
@Al:
What do you think would happen if a Democrat came out against homosexual marriage. There would be no amount of backtracking that would save their career.
What is amazing is how naive college Republicans sound. Do they not realize that every demographic trend is against the survival of the Republican Party. do they not realize that there is no amount of pandering that is going to get homosexuals (or LGBT etc) to ever vote for the more conservative party.
If Ms. Petelos is really interested in a career in politics, she might as well become a Democrat now and move to state where white Democrats will be able to have some influence in the future. There is no future being a Republican in Alabama in about 20 years.
@superdestroyer:
As of May 30:
Which of them has had a career ruined by fellow Democrats?
@superdestroyer:
Or. . . or possibly the college Republicans are trying to put backward fools like you in the rearview mirror and actually save their party.
@superdestroyer: Maybe that would be that the Democratic Party realizes that turning off a whole segnent of society is a bad thing and made even worse in that it is a position that is contrary to the Democratic Party’s emphasis on civil rights? The Republican Party is on the wrong side of history on this and the sooner they realize this the better it is so we can focus on issues that are actually important, like jobs, health care, jobs, the NSA programs, jobs, and lest I forget, jobs. Instead, the Republican Party seems to focus on the gays, abortion, guns, abortion, taking a step back in health care reform, abortion, and, oh yeah, abortion. That and cutting tax breaks for rich people while holding the government hostage over funding and the debt limit.
You want the Republican Party to be relevant? Have them start acting like a party that wants to govern instead of a two year old that is having a tantrum.
@David in KC: and, oh yeah, see Michael’s comment above.
Oh, Sweet Home Alabama! The Republican Party couldn’t get anymore stupid if they tried! It’s clear the wheels have come off their bus totally. I’m sure Alabama must have an asylum or one close by. They should send all their Republican representatives there pronto! They are in dire need of help. Serious help!
@James in Silverdale, WA:
Really? I think it’s working well.
Full disclosure: I’m a Democrat.
@superdestroyer:
Nah …. they’d just change parties and become Republicans – bam, career saved, problem solved.
@Caj:
What I don’t get, will never get, is that the people of Alabama are some of the nicest people anywhere. Just what is it that goes on in the voting booths down there anyway?
@superdestroyer:
Ummmm, let me take a guess: They wouldn’t marry someone of the same sex?
Please proceed, GOP.
Good Lord, they’re treating her like a pro-life Democrat. That’s just wrong.
Everyone keeps saying that the GOP has to appeal to Hispanics in order to be a majority party but it looks to me like age is where the GOP is in real trouble. Under 30’s voted for Obama over Romney by 24 points in 2012. In 2016, if nothing changes, that will be under 34, then four years later, under 38….
The number of people born after 1982 who are voting is growing. For those of us born earlier than 1982, well sadly there are fewer of us every year. GOP may well need Hispanic votes but if they keep losing people born after 1982 by 24 points then it really wont matter what happens with other groups.
Man, that tent just gets bigger and bigger, huh.
Aren’t Republicans usually the same folks complaining that colleges are controlling the minds of students (you know, by promoting free thought). I’m sure the irony of what they are doing will not be lost at all.
Which Democrat who is opposed to abortion has been sanctioned…
@David in KC:
Anyone who thinks that giving in on homosexual marriage that the homosexual activist will leave them alone if a fool. There is no such thing as putting the issue behind everyone. Eventually homosexuals will become like blacks where people used to be open in their support for quotas affirmative action, set asides, and forced busing. However, now even though the law mandates such programs, most people hate such programs and have had to adjust their lives to avoid the impact of such programs.
Eventually more people will learn that homosexuals are natural bullies and drama queens and will need to oppose in some of their policy proposals. I suspect when homosexuals go after the tax exemption of churches that oppose them that there will be a huge backlash. The only thing that will prevent that is if the left has succeeded in attacking religion enough that most people do not want to be associated with organized religion.
@jib10:
Under 30 whites voted more than 50% for Republicans and married under thirty whites vote Republican like most other married whites. However, the under 30 demographic is the least white voting demograpic. What makes the under 30 demographic overwhelmingly Democratic is that the non-whites vote for Democrats at overwhemingly number and their turnout has increased. Also, the under 30 demographic is the least married and has a high level of being single mothers. Single women and single mothers are to groups who conservatives just cannot appeal to when the other party promises to tax rich men and give them the money.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
You’re right. That’s why here in Indiana all the democrats ran a strong primary against Joe Donnelly, and then refused to vote for him over his stance.
Idiot.
@An Interested Party:
Any of them who wanted to speak at the national convetion. Any of them who want to run for office. Any of them who want a job in DC.
@jib10:
It´s a intersection of both, because a large number of young people can be considered nonwhite.
So I suppose that Bob Casey Jr. (who spoke at the 2008 Democratic National Convention) and Harry Reid (who holds some kind of job in D.C.), among others, are simply a figment of someone’s imagination…
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Google Harry Reid
Edit added, I see this has already been mentioned
@An Interested Party:
Harry Reid is pro-abortion. See http://www.ontheissues.org/social/Harry_Reid_Abortion.htm
Jenos…
All Democrats are pro-life…unless you can link to an actual anti-life Democrat.
Democrats are pro-choice…Republicans are anti-choice.
And thus Republicans try to obscure their position.
@superdestroyer:
Awesome! That has nothing to do with the conversation at hand!
(see above comments re: 5%)
“I love this country – you can always find a party.
In Soviet Russia, Party find you!”
I’m ashamed that a certain party is that way here now. I was a member of that party for almost thirty-five years, in most of which it was a coalition party. Sadly, it is now an ideologically-driven party.
You know….I think today’s Republicans would have been loyalists in the Revolutionary era.
They are against freedom…of choice…of orientation….of voting for chrisakes.
They are all about protecting the wealthy…which of course were the British Aristocracy…they e proven themselves willing to raise everyone’s taxes instead of raising the taxes of their overlords.
Rigid ideologues like the Republicans wouldn’t be likely to begin the grand experiment that was the Revolution.
They are scared shitless of any kind of change.
I think the examples go on and on.
Discuss.
@C. Clavin:
While I agree with you on principle, I have a small quibble. I’m reading 1776 by McCoullough. He has an inhas a passage that compares colonists average wealth compared to those in England. Due to the massive amount of land and resources, as well as a constantly growing market, iin the colonies across the board the American people were more wealthy than their British counterpoints. The nobility–old wealth–in England sure had more, but really we were the richer ones, per capita.
@superdestroyer: Gee, I just want to have the same rights as you. You know what the homosexual agenda is? It’s real simple, the same basic civil rights that straight people have. The right to get married, the right to adopt, the right for partners to visit in the hospital, the right to make medical decisions and end of life decisions for each other, you know, those things that straight married couples get by default. Sure, we can replicate some of those things by shelling out money to an attorney and hope that the hospital accepts them or oesnt flat out ignore them if some long lost sibling shows upnand makes trouble. The fact that you think there is something more to it demonstrates your complete ignorance on the subject. I know a number of gay people who would vote republican if the party wasn’t preaching that we are evil and took a reasonable position on social issues. Actually know some that voted that way up until Rove pushed the ant gay agenda.
Being gay s not an ideology, it’s a part of what we are. And we come in all favors, liberal and conservative. I know you will never buy that, but its true.
@Andre Kenji: There is another demographic working against the Republicans – as the baby boomers become seniors the ranks of the seniors become younger. Some of them may be conservative but few of them are social conservatives. This is interesting as well:
@ Super
What’s your deal anyway. Did the musical theater guys in high school kick your ass or something?
@Jenos Idanian #13:
You mean they plan to make her Senate Majority Leader, like Harry Reid?
@ Jenos
Do you ever tire of making a fool of yourself? Just wondering. Most of us lose our taste for that sort of thing shortly after our 13th birthday…
@superdestroyer:
Your link says “Rated 29% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record.”
@NBH: I like the term “a danger of voters.” Sort of like “a murder of crows.”
@Electroman: Oh it’s still a coalition – but has evolved to an unholy cluster of religious nuts, business magnates (which includes the guns/war leadership), and poor whites who will vote for anything – even things that materially injure them, just as long as it injures black people (or gays) more.
I can’t imagine why you wouldn’t want to be a part of that.
@Neil Hudelson:
The claim was that Harry Reid was pro-life. The cite proves that wrong. At least I did not call anyone a liar unlike virtually every progressive.
@David in KC:
There is something more to it. How soon will homosexuals demand quotas for homosexuals? How soon will homosexuals go after churches that will not perform same-sex marriages? How soon will employer have to worry about disparate lawsuits? Homosexuals already go after any private individual who opposes their political views.
The homosexual movement may claim to be about equality and being like everyone else but it is really about raw political power, special rights, and the ability to use the government, the media, and activism to brow beat every opponent into submission. That the MSM refuses to admit that homosexuals are at the top of the politically correct pyramid should be enough to show that the movement in the long run is about being the most politically powerful group in the U.S.
@michael reynolds:
Harry Reid has not voted for any bill that would be considered pro-choice or would have been supported by the pro-life movement.
@superdestroyer:
Are you drunk?
@ Neil…
Good point.
I’ve read that book…he’s very entertaining.
What actually made landowners rich was human chattel… slaves…the land was worth nothing if you couldn’t work it.
I’ll grant your point…and stand by my position…if today’s Republicans were alive in 1776 they would be against the American Revolution.
It always amazes me the lack of shame shown by bigots like Superdooperpooperscooper.
@superdestroyer:
That´s the problem, the so called activists are a minority among the homosexuals, and in fact, many homosexuals simply cannot stand them. The opposition to SSM only makes these activists more powerful than they should be – many homosexuals would be more than happy with civil unions.
The GOP could gain many votes by saying that homosexuality is normal and that it should not be politicized, a perfectly normal position.
@superdestroyer:
How soon til a gay guy hits on you? I mean, come on man, you’re an attractive guy. Aren’t you?
Okay, maybe you’re not a male model, but damn, all kinds of guys get hit on by gays. Why not you? What have you done to be so completely ignored? Can’t they see that beneath that white hood you’re hot? So very, very hot?
@superdestroyer:
Alright…to be fair I didn’t realize what you were responding to. I disagree with you, but my post wasn’t germane to your thread.
My apologies.
The GOP’s emphasis on social issues such as same-sex marriage, something which is especially prevalent in Bible Belt states like Alabama, is a major turnoff to younger voters, most of whom are far more concerned about economic issues than they are about whether the couple living next door to them is of opposite genders or the same gender.
That is correct. The problem is that the GOP’s economic agenda isn’t popular with young voters either:
This is why I can only half agree with you here, Doug. In this post, as in so many others by you and the rest of the OTB gang, you have this tone that “if only Republicans would give up all this distracting nonsense about teh gays, they’d be just flying with voters.” In reality, most of the economic policies pushed by the GOP are just as toxic to the electorate as the “social issues” they seem unable to shake free of. Libertarian-leaning conservatives like yourself are more embarrassed by the latter than the former, but neither is popular.
@Kylopod:
Oh, well said.
It’s not just social issues that consign the GOP to the past, it’s economic positions that simply ignore the vast disparities in income and wealth that relegate most of the American population to the rank of serfs.
@superdestroyer:
“Single women and single mothers are to (sic) groups who conservatives just cannot appeal to when the other party promises to tax rich men and give them the money.”
I’m intrigued by this Rich Man Tax that doesn’t affect wealthy single women and wealthy single mothers. Perhaps you can provide a single example of a Democratic politician proposing it.
@ Super
What if… a gay guy hits on you, and you like it??
Oh myyy
@angelfoot:
There are some tax deductions that affects mainly wealthy people – dividends received deduction, capital gains deductions and the mortgage interest deduction. And, if you consider that Wealthy Married Man are more likely to own real estate and investments, one can argue that´s entirely possible to increase taxes on the rich -affecting mainly Wealthy Men- only by cutting these deductions. In fact, there are several loopholes that benefits mainly the super masculine world of Wall Street.
Unfortunately, the Democrats lacks the cojones to mess with these deductions.
@OzarkHillbilly: “What I don’t get, will never get, is that the people of Alabama are some of the nicest people anywhere. Just what is it that goes on in the voting booths down there anyway? ”
Somebody made a comment once that in many cases, that ‘niceness’ is a politeness which doesn’t mean that they like somebody.
@superdestroyer: ” Any of them who want a job in DC. ”
You were already given the lie above.
This is simple. Political parties parrot the lines supported by their major funders. The GOP is locked into a handful of individual billionaires and multinational conglomerates. Sure they have individuals and legitimate small business donations as well…but those are birds in the hand. You can get most people go along with anything if you craft the message to resonate with their personal fears and motivations.
They can’t afford to lose those deep pockets so whatever platform is of interest to old, filthy rich white guys for whom money and power are the residue of true virtue… That will be the Republican platform.
@angelfoot:
What percentage of the rich are single mothers. Very few of them are rich compared to massive number of single mothers who receive welfare from the government. Blacks are the most loyal Democratic Party voters and more than 70% of children are born to single mothers.
When David Axelrod talks about raising taxes on the rich, the message heard by single women is that rich white men will pay more taxes and that those single women will benefit. There is no way that the Republicans can counter that message.
@Barry:
“Southern Hospitality” is a lot like “Minnesota Nice” in that it’s often more a form of passive aggressiveness using a façade of niceness than actual niceness.
Speaking of things gay, The Russian women’s 4×100 team won the gold in Moscow. After they’d received the medal, and while still on the stand, two of the ladies caused a bit of ruckus. I’ve not found an English-language story that contains this picture, but check this out: Osado beso de dos atletas rusas tras las frases antigay de Isinbayeva.
Take that Putin and Yelena Isinbayenva.
@Stormy Dragon: When I lived in Dallas, many years ago, there was a restaurant I occasionally went to. It was owned by Southern Hospitality, Inc. At the bottom of the menu there was a footer:
I’ve got relatives in Minnesota. I’ve always found Minnesota nice a deal more sincere than Southern hospitality.
@michael reynolds: What has occurred to me about the change in public opinion on SSM is that it represents a loss of one of the GOP’s tools that it has used in the past to attract certain lower-income voters who might otherwise be turned off by the party’s economic platform. And it isn’t the only issue for which this has happened: appeals to white resentment against government aid to minorities, which we discussed in that other thread last week, is also losing its ability to move voters as the older generation dies off and an increasingly diverse youth reaches voting age.
The overall effect is that the GOP now has fewer tools at its disposal to distract voters from an economic agenda that was never popular. That’s why their rhetoric on economic issues becomes increasingly incoherent and filled with contradictions (e.g. let’s cut Medicare, and oh, the Dems are coming for your grandma). They’ve got no options left except to lie about their positions and present them as the opposite of what they are.
@Jenos Idanian #13: what they made her the Senate Majority Leader (a pro-life Democrat)?
@superdestroyer:
do they not realize that there is no amount of pandering that is going to get homosexuals (or LGBT etc) to ever vote for the more conservative party.
Taking a position solely based on whether it can win votes is the exact opposite way to think, both politically and ethically.