Republican AG candidate Jim McKenna promises homosexual community he'll help strike down Defense of Marriage Act!
Shock to pro-family supporters
POSTED: October 25, 2010
Less than a month ago, Jim McKenna got on the Republican ballot for Attorney General by getting nearly 27,000 write-in votes in the primary -- with considerable help from pro-family groups.
Well, well, how things change. Last week, McKenna was on the front page of the hardcore homosexual newspaper Bay Windows promising the homosexual community that if elected he will continue Martha Coakley's efforts to attempt to strike down the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Apparently he's decided to become a more "modern" Massachusetts Republican.
"Civil rights" guardian?
Front page of past week's homosexual newspaper featuring Republican AG candidate Jim McKenna. |
|
On July 8, after a vigorous lawsuit by Attorney General Martha Coakley (teaming up with the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders), a US district court judge in Boston declared that several parts of DOMA are "unconstitutional." It is now being appealed, and the new Attorney General will have discretion whether to continue to prosecute it, or abandon it.
DOMA was passed in 1996 by huge majorities in Congress and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The law bars the federal government from recognizing same-sex "marriages" and also gives individual states the legal option not to recognize them.
However, the absurd arguments Coakley presented and terrible flaws in the judge's ruling seem to make no difference to McKenna. He appears to be more interested in placating the homosexual community.
As Bay Windows reported:
McKenna told Bay Windows that he wouldn't stand in the way of the case, should it proceed. "I am prepared protect the Commonwealth and all of our people to the best of my ability," he said in an e-mail. "Should the DOMA case go to appeal, as an impartial and fair Attorney General, I would let the case continue, allowing the higher courts the opportunity to come to a decision on this important matter."
Laura Keehner Rigas, a spokesperson for McKenna, confirmed to Lisa Keen of Keen News Service that McKenna would defend the state's DOMA challenge. "[A]s an impartial and fair Attorney General he would vigorously defend this case, allowing the higher courts the opportunity to come to a decision on this important matter," she said. "He will defend, enforce, and uphold all Massachusetts laws and, if necessary, fight in court those that are inconsistent with federal laws, including the DOMA case."
The former Worcester County Assistant District Attorney said that despite "personal views," he does not intend to challenge LGBT civil rights in Massachusetts. "We've all had the chance to see Massachusetts with same-sex marriage as an option. My opinion is five years later we are the same Massachusetts," he said. "I am just another guy trying to do what is right in this world, and yes, of course I have my own personal views.
"However, as a lawyer and a professor of ethics, I know that the rule of law is bigger than any of our personal views. I know I will uphold our laws with fairness and objectivity as your next Attorney General. And I pledge I won't work to change the law when it comes to social issues like same-sex marriage and abortion."
Read the full Bay Windoes article HERE.
Is McKenna even paying attention? There is no actual "law" involved. The 2003 Goodridge ruling was just a court case. In fact, in Massachusetts the state constitution has never allowed a court to change the law. Thus, the actual marriage statutes have not changed at all, despite bills every year before the Legislature to attempt to change the marriage laws to allow same-sex "marriage".
And McKenna thinks we're the "same Massachusetts" after five years of same-sex "marriage"? Obviously he hasn't visited any public schools, or read the ruling in the infamous David Parker case that says schools now have an "obligation" to teach about same-sex relationships.
Why is it that we never read about a liberal politician caving in and saying, "I won't help special interests push their agendas any more." It's always conservatives caving in, buying into the left-wing rhetoric and agreeing to their absurd demands.
We realize that he's nowhere near as bad as Coakley. But a lot of us thought we were writing in the name for "the real thing," not another mushy moderate.
