GOProud Slams Pawlenty Over DADT
BY Advocate.com Editors
February 10 2011 3:20 PM ET
GOProud chairman Chris Barron is blasting former Minnesota governor and possible GOP presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty (pictured) for his public comments calling for a reversal of the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Barron says Pawlenty is grasping at straws to find distinction among a potential group of much better-known likely candidates including Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich.
Via AmericaBlog, the leader of the conseravtive gay rights group said in a statement, “I understand that Pawlenty is trying hard to get people to pay attention to his campaign. It’s certainly a challenge for someone with such little stature in the conservative movement to compete with high profile conservative leaders like, Herman Cain, etc. Unfortunately for Pawlenty, comments like this simply show how totally out-of-touch he is with the issues that rank and file conservatives care about. If he wants to show he is a committed social conservative he would be much better served talking about the need to defund Planned Parenthood, end federal funding for abortion, reign [sic] in an out of control judiciary and support for a parents rigths [sic] amendment to protect home-schoolers.”
Pawlenty said Monday that he would support the stripping away the Department of Defense funds required to implement the DADT repeal. Both Barron and Pawlenty are expected to attend the Conservative Political Action Conference this week.
While GOProud is going on the offensive against Pawlenty, it finds itself the subject of an attack by the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins. Joe.My.God blog reports this statement from Perkins, who refers to the DADT repeal and the fight for marriage equality:
"The demand by GOProud and other homosexual activists to legalize homosexual marriage undermines the institution of marriage, in that it insists that consent and affection are the only two criteria for marriage. In doing so, GOProud joins with its liberal homosexual allies in opening the door for all manner of unions (polyamory and polygamy, for example) premised on the same criteria, and calls on conservatives to accept a definition of marriage that is intrinsically illogical and defiant of rudimentary biology. ... Any group that purports to be conservative should not attempt to destroy the foundations of conservatism itself, and we will not aid and abet such groups by partnering with them. Attacking both marriage and the military is a blunt-edged assault on the two institutions that, with churches and synagogues, compose the superstructure of our national life. On them hang the future of our children, our economy, and our security. On these things, true conservatives must never waver nor compromise."