Connect with us

Why Does Marco Rubio Hate Gay People So Much?

Published

on

U.S. Senator Marco Rubio, Tea Party Republican of Florida, must really, really hate gay people. Why else would he, in the space of 24 hours, in two separate interviews, threaten to vote against the immigration reform bill that he co-authored if it includes an amendment that merely treats same-sex binational legally married couples the same as opposite-sex binational legally married couples, and then, hours later, announce that he will vote against ENDA because, as he told a reporter, “I’m not for any special protections based on orientation.”

Speaking about the immigration reform bill yesterday, Rubio told Fox News pundit Andrea Tantaros on her radio show, “If this bill has something in it that gives gay couples immigration rights and so forth, it kills the bill. I’m done.”

Just hours later, Rubio spoke at evangelical-political leader Ralph Reed‘s “Road to Majority” conference, and Think Progress reporter Scott Keyes asked him about ENDA.

KEYES: The Senate this summer is going to be taking up the Employment Non-Discrimination Act which makes it illegal to fire someone for being gay. Do you know if you’ll be supporting that?

RUBIO: I haven’t read the legislation. By and large I think all Americans should be protected but I’m not for any special protections based on orientation.

Keyes and Adam Peck noted in their report:

Workplace discrimination is an all-too-frequent reality for LGBT individuals. Two out of every five openly lesbian, gay, or bisexual employees have reported discrimination at their jobs. Among transgender workers, that figure rises to nine out of ten.

Currently, 29 states have no laws protecting gay and lesbian workers from discrimination in the workplace, and an additional five states don’t protect workers based on gender identity. And yet nine in ten Americans mistakenly believe that it is illegal to fire someone for being gay.

LGBT workers aren’t asking for “special protections,” as Rubio would have people believe. They’re asking to be treated like everyone else and be allowed to do their job without fear of being harassed or fired for who they are.

Rubio’s presence at Reed’s “Road to Majority” conference, which includes anti-gay notables like NOM President Brian Brown — itself is troubling. Reed, who was disgraced and forced to leave as the first executive director of Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition amid allegations of violations of federal campaign finance laws.

But worse, a reported 500 attendees from yesterday’s conference flooded Capitol Hill to demand lawmakers pass a replacement bill for DOMA, which even the anti-gay Christian group believes will be struck down by the Supreme Court.

Rubio, who is 44 and a Roman Catholic, also voted against reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act, which included new protections for LGBT people, and he is on record s supporting a federal amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would permanently ban same-sex couples from marrying.

Rubio would have voted against repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” in 2010 but wasn’t a member of the Senate when it was repealed. His spokesperson did say Rubio “supports the current policy and doesn’t see any reason for it to change.”

That perhaps should have been unsurprising. Earlier that year Rubio received a glowing endorsement from hate group leader Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.

Not only did Rubio get an endorsement from Perkins, Rubio “boasted the endorsement of anti-gay hate groups like the Family Research Council and during the election recorded robocalls for the National Organization of Marriage urging Americans to deny equal rights to gays and lesbians,” Igor Volsky at Think Progress reported earlier this year.

And in April 2006, the state of Florida “was being criticized for its inability to place foster children with families, a problem that had become so acute that some foster kids were forced to sleep in a state conference room,” OnTheIssues reports. Rubio, who was serving in the Florida House, “dismissed expanding the program to include gay couples who wanted to take in children. ‘Some of these kids are the most disadvantaged in the state,’ Rubio said. ‘They shouldn’t be forced to be part of a social experiment.'”

 

Image via Facebook: “Meet Marco at CPAC and get VIP seating for his speech”

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘I Will Not Stand by Silently’: Sotomayor Blasts SCOTUS Conservatives Over Their Latest Attack on Abortion Rights

Published

on

“The Court may look the other way, but I cannot.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed outrage at her conservative Supreme Court colleagues Thursday afternoon, after the six right wing jurists went one step further in attacking the constitutional guarantee of abortion.

Voting 6-3 against a women’s health care provider the Court denied a request by Texas Women’s Health, which provides abortion services, to change jurisdictions, which according to Justice Sotomayor the Court should have done.

“The lawsuit is now stalled with the Texas Supreme Court,” Rewire News reports.

Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern, a Supreme Court expert calls Sotomayor’s dissent “stunning.”

“This case is a disaster for the rule of law and a grave disservice to women in Texas, who have a right to control their own bodies,” Sotomayor writes. “I will not stand by silently as a State continues to nullify this constitutional guarantee. I dissent.”

She begins her dissent by explaining the case:

“It has been over four months since Texas Senate Bill 8 (S. B. 8) took effect. The law immediately devastated access to abortion care in Texas through a complicated private-bounty-hunter scheme that violates nearly 50 years of this Court’s precedents.”

“Today, for the fourth time, this Court declines to protect pregnant Texans from egregious violations of their constitutional rights. One month after directing that the petitioners’ suit could proceed in part, the Court countenances yet another violation of its own commands. Instead of stopping a Fifth Circuit panel from indulging Texas’ newest delay tactics, the Court allows the State yet again to extend the deprivation of the federal constitutional rights of its citizens through procedural manipulation. The Court may look the other way, but I cannot.”

In response the Guttmacher Institute, an organization focused on sexual and reproductive health and rights, accused the Supreme Court of “once again putting ideology over the rule of law.”

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Ivanka Trump Responds to Committee’s Invite by Saying She Called for End to Violence – Leaves Out ‘Patriots’ Part

Published

on

Ivanka Trump is responding to her invitation from the January 6 Committee by issuing a statement that is being seen suggesting she has no intention of accepting. Earlier Thursday the Committee sent the former First Daughter and White House senior advisor a lengthy 11-page letter asking for her voluntary cooperation.

A statement from her spokesperson given to CNN White House Correspondent Kate Bennett references a tweet posted by Ivanka Trump the day of the attack on the Capitol – a tweet she was forced to delete after massive outrage.

“As the Committee already knows, Ivanka did not speak at the January 6 rally,” the statement reads. “As she publicly stated at 3:15pm, ‘any security breach or disrespect to our law enforcement is unacceptable. The violence must stop immediately.”

But in the actual Ivanka Trump called the insurrectionists “American Patriots,” as CNN reported that day:

 

Continue Reading

BREAKING NEWS

Georgia Prosecutor Asks to Convene Special Grand Jury to Investigate Donald Trump’s Alleged Election Interference

Published

on

A Georgia county district attorney has requested to convene a special grand jury to assist in her investigation of Donald Trump‘s alleged election interference.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in a letter to the county’s Superior Court chief judge writes that her office “has received information indicating a reasonable probability that the State of Georgia’s administration of elections in 2020, including the State’s election of the President of the United States, was subject to possible criminal disruptions,” according to the Associated Press.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (photo) was forced to release audio of then-President Trump appearing to intimidate him into fixing the election in his favor.

Trump, in the audio, can be heard berating and threatening the Republican Secretary of State, demanding he “recalculate” the losing election results and “find 11,780 votes” for him, which would have enabled Trump to falsely be declared the winner. Raffensberger refused.

“So look. All I want to do is this,” Trump told Raffensberger. “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state.”

“There’s no way I lost Georgia,” he added, falsely. “There’s no way. We won by hundreds of thousands of votes.”

Willis told the AP the scope of her investigation “includes — but is not limited to — a Jan. 2, 2021, phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a November 2020 phone call between U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham and Raffensperger, the abrupt resignation of the U.S. attorney in Atlanta on Jan. 4, 2021, and comments made during December 2020 Georgia legislative committee hearings on the election.”

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.