Donald Trump and Same-Sex “Marriage” Revisionist History
The Hartford Courant got together Democrats and liberal Republicans for a front-page piece contra Donald Trump, but at least one seems to be suffering from Trump-induced amnesia:
“‘Republicans in Connecticut are hedge fund and stock market and banking — with a social conscience,’ said state Rep. Bob Godfrey, a Danbury Democrat. ‘Remember, a Republican governor signed the same-sex marriage statute.'”
Godfrey’s idea of a “social conscience” — one that excludes tens of thousands of Connecticut citizens whose conscience told them it was wrong for the state to presume to redefine marriage — strikes us as backwards indeed, but it’s one thing to have an opinion and another to thoroughly mangle the historical facts. Governor Rell signed a civil unions bill that explicitly defined marriage as between a man and a woman, and said repeatedly that she would veto same-sex “marriage,” though in the words of Peter Wolfgang in a 2009 interview, “Even as Gov. Rell leaves the scene, she seems clueless about the role she played in [bringing about] something she herself says she opposes.” Our state legislature, liberal though it was (and is), consistently rejected same-sex “marriage” until it was imposed by a 4-3 court vote. We don’t know what Godfrey’s excuse is — he was there, after all.
What is The Donald’s actual stance on marriage? Forget his personal life for the moment, if you can. Let us look to the barometer of our opponents. The Advocate makes a headline out of his professed opposition; however, much of the article is spent qualifying the headline. Although pro-SSM Human Rights Campaign calls him “a consistent opponent of [same-sex ‘marriage’],” they do better when they deem his record muddy at best. Trump’s philosophical basis appears to be personal feeling, as explained through a bafflingly incoherent golf metaphor. It makes Rell look downright courageous. If, after eight long years, there might be a real chance for someone to articulate the case for marriage at the national level, and that someone is Donald Trump, we’re in trouble.
Chris Shays thinks Trump’s reality-TV fame is reminiscent of Linda McMahon. The thing he doesn’t mention is the reason we’ll never forget the Linda McMahon campaign: her infamous flip-flop on DOMA. What would a Trump flip-flop look like? Hard to say, since his positions on, for instance, abortion are already a moving target and exhibit the same superficial quality as his putt-putt logic.
We can understand why Democrats and liberal Republicans might be repelled by the idea of a Trump presidency (even if his “New York values” differ from theirs less than they care to admit), but if they think serious opposition to same-sex “marriage” has anything to do with it, they’re barking up the wrong tree.