Santorum, Huckabee to ‘March for Marriage’ this week in D.C.

washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jun/16/santorum-huckabee-march-marriage-dc/

A couple potential 2016 GOP presidential contenders plan to show their support for traditional marriage and opposition to same-sex marriage by taking part in a march this week in Washington.

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, the runner-up in the 2012 nomination race, and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who ran for president in 2008, are among the featured speakers Thursday at the National Organization for Marriage’s second annual “March for Marriage,” which planners hope with draw thousands.

“The best and surest way to safeguard the basic rights of free exercise and free expression for pro-marriage individuals and communities, especially individuals and communities of faith, is to rally the American people behind the cause and give them the courage and support they need to stand up and speak out on its behalf,” the National Organization for Marriage said in a news release.

While I’m greatful for the news about the March for Marriage. And for Mr. Santorum’s and Mr. Huckabee’s standing up for something I believe in. It is hard to endure the barnacles with which such “NEWS organizations” feel compelled to attach to it … to tell us poor unenlightened readers how to think and feel about the news (in a PC way). :rolleyes:

Maybe it was the LARGE picture of the same sex marriage march (not the story!) with large signs invoking the words “Equality” and “Love” that is attached to THAT story. Shameless promotion or free advertising running right NEXT to this story could hardly do “better” to manipulate readers into a negative view of THIS pro-marriage March and its supporters. IMO.

Or the driving need to attach the word “strident” to Santorum and Huckabee (which in addition to being not-so-subtle editorializing within a news story … is also a false witness in my opinion). Why not the more detached words … “committed advocates” or “strong advocates”? :hmmm:

Mr. Santorum and Mr. Huckabee have left the door open to taking another crack at the presidency. They are both ***strident ***advocates for marriage being between one man and one woman, and enjoyed strong support from evangelical or born-again Christians in respective presidential bids.

Read more: washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jun/16/santorum-huckabee-march-marriage-dc/#ixzz34qGrMf4u
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

dictionary.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0SO8wfwaZ9T9yEA8r9XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTB0aG1zbG5oBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDI4M18x?p=strident&.sep=

STRIDENT

Houghton Mifflin
adj.adjective

Loud, harsh, grating, or shrill; discordant.

I did enjoy the unintentional comedy of the following paragraph, which is as self-contradictory as it is disingenuous.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll released this week showed that 56 percent of adults nationwide support allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally. The poll, though, also found that 37 percent of Republicans support same-sex marriage, compared to 67 percent of Democrats and 58 percent of Republicans.

I don’t know whether its ABC, The Washington Post, The Washington Times or which combination is responsible for hilarious non-sequitur above - but it reads like one of those funny Yogi Berra malaprops of yesteryear. Like " … 90 percent of baseball is pitching … the other HALF is defense and hitting …" or “Nobody goes THERE anymore … it’s too crowded!”

The many little additives to this story seem to be aimed at marginalizing Huckabee, Santorum in my opinion.

And possibly San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone or any other public figure who will also be attending the event - although usually observant Catholic clergy’s principled stands < (MY bit of editorializing here) are contrasted with “Catholic Opinion Polls” that show how out of touch they are with “the people” :nope:)

At least the article ended with the straight news (pardon the pun) that

The “March for Marriage” will begin with a rally in front of the Capitol and end at the Supreme Court.

Sorry for the duplication. The other thread of this name was posted accidentally before I was done with it. :frowning:

THIS is the one I intended.

The writer probably just got a new thesaurus and wanted to use a $2 word rather than the old boring accurate ones. :shrug:

Plus - keeping one’s boss happy is always job ONE.

Thanks for your best case scenario though. Optimism usually is the better path.

Too many elements of the story and its coincidental surroundings got on my nerves though, can you tell? Lol.

I’m glad some leaders are standing up for traditional marriage (and religious freedom) meanwhile. And that there was a story at ALL in a newspaper somewhere.

Were it just publicized in a blog I couldn’t post it here … though the NEWS of the happening would be unchanged.

While I consider emphasizing the positive … at least the headline is neutral and NEWSy.

Maybe it will be covered more than last year.

patheos.com/blogs/publiccatholic/2013/03/where-is-the-news-coverage-on-the-march-for-marriage/

[size=]Where is the News Coverage on the March for Marriage?[/size]

March 26, 2013 By Rebecca Hamilton 5 Comments

I can’t find it.
I’ve:
Googled and looked at
MSNBC
CNN
FOX
C-SPAN
EWTN

The only place I can find coverage of the March for Marriage today is on the March for Marriage Facebook page. I took these photos from there to prove that, news blackout or not, it really is happening. < (***WAS ***happening … this is from 2013)

Read more: patheos.com/blogs/publiccatholic/2013/03/where-is-the-news-coverage-on-the-march-for-marriage/#ixzz34r3aQKjD

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/publiccatholic/files/2013/03/24430_10151503122478604_1701994715_n.jpg http://www.patheos.com/blogs/publiccatholic/files/2013/03/206277_10152158737987814_565346847_n.jpg

EWTN had a little bit about the 2014 event in May. But I can’t find so far if EWTN or CSPAN or Fox News (with Huckabee having a show on Fox, you’d sort of think so) plans any coverage. I guess we’ll find out Thursday. I will look for any such news meanwhile.

So far even the NOM (National Organization for Marriage) doesn’t even list such on ITS site! Other than this.

marriagemarch.org/news/ewtn-covers-march-for-marriage/

I think Nancy should get a lot of the credit for getting the coverage. With out her, I doubt many people would know that it’s going on. Apparently this is the 2nd year they’ve done this. Who knew?

The news article you mention is from the Washington Times. That newspaper is one of the primary sponsors of the March for Marriage where Huckabee and Santorum will be speaking.
marriagemarch.org/sponsors/

I agree with your criticisms, but wonder why the newspaper didn’t run a more favorable story about an event they are sponsoring.

Well, a lot of people go into making up a newspaper.

The person assigned to writing the article might not always agree with the theme of the event, and decide to give a bit of “balance” to it. Whereas a person who favored the March on Marriage might not go to great pains to insert contradictory opinion polls and telling verbs to editorialize in the contrary direction.

The photos selected were of a pro-gay marriage march … and not so flattering and small photos of Huckabee at an unflattering angle and Santorum with somewhat of a smirk on his face (it seems to me).

The Washington Times seems like a rather conservative newspaper as compared to others - and the headline writer crafted a rather neutral and factual label devoid of any
editorial slant.

To Santorum and Huckabee and Archbishop Cordilleone I’d just add … wear your spiritual armor. You knew the job was dangerous when you took it.

Who knew 10 years ago that supporting traditional marriage would be viewed in some quarters as: “divisive” or “intolerant” or “imposing one’s views on others”. This controversy is a “right” rather lately discovered.

Sometimes I think some of the political folk with connections amuse themselves by running social experiments like: “I wonder if we could get the American public to go for ***THIS *** (whatever it is) … if we put on a full court propaganda press at full on
conquest attitude?” Trial balloons are floated in the press or as court cases or ballot initiatives … and if defeated can be recycled. With court cases or recalls overturning elections; public opinion molders attacking court cases (and judges) who rule against the new experiment(s); and traditional political and religious leaders lampooned with visceral buzz words like “racist”, “sexist”, “homophobic” or even as subtly as the unnecessary adjective “strident” as in this article.

This March for Marriage is counter-demonstration though. And the San Francisco Archbishop, Santorum and Huckabee are on defense.

Bishops Urge Constitutional Amendment to Protect Marriage

WASHINGTON (CNS) – The Administrative Committee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has called for a constitutional amendment to protect the unique social and legal status of marriage.

In Catholic belief, “marriage is a faithful, exclusive and lifelong union between one man and one woman, joined as husband and wife in an intimate partnership of life and love,” the 47-bishop committee said in a statement released Sept. 10.

“What are called ‘homosexual unions,’ because they do not express full human complementarity and because they are inherently nonprocreative, cannot be given the status of marriage,” the committee said.

It warned that “the importance of marriage for children and for society” is under attack in U.S. courts and legislatures and in popular culture and entertainment media, which “often undermine or ignore the essential role of marriage and promote equivalence between marriage and homosexual relationships.”

The Administrative Committee – composed of the USCCB’s executive officers, elected committee chairmen and elected regional representatives – is the highest policy and decision-making body of the bishops apart from the entire body when it meets twice a year in general assembly.

americancatholic.org/News/Homosexuality/default.asp < above quote from the Catholic News Service, 2003

Considering there is speculation that Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee will run for president again, hopefully them speaking at the March for Marriage will bring more media attention to the March.

I am happy to hear that they are doing this. I would go to the March for Marriage but I don’t have enough money to travel that far.

I doubt it. Neither of them have any chance of winning. They’re fringe candidates at best.

Au contraire mon frere! :wink: Lol.

http://lh6.ggpht.com/-oUnzvw8ggRc/TzLqYHYLu7I/AAAAAAAADHA/UYyTOC5RvDE/santorum-huckabee_thumb%255B3%255D.jpg?imgmax=800http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=HN.607990944933741053&pid=15.1

They’ve each won SEVERAL GOP primary states in the past - when they were much less well known nationally, had less resources, and no organization(s). The Iowa primary (caucus) kicks off the actual race and each has won it in the past.

Of course that means that each might take some of the same votes from the other in that race – should both run.

Usually when I hear someone say “__________ has no chance” … I think they like another competing candidate better … and it is wishful thinking. Why bother to comment upon candidates who are THAT insignificant? If a candidate is drawing support or fire … that candidate is generally viable.

It’s a long time until 2016. But I could live with a President Huckabee or a President Santorum. Right NOW even. :dancing:

The “inevitable” candidates sometimes don’t get as far as Huckabee and Santorum got their last times out.

Early on, when the GOP candidates try to outdo one another in claiming that they are
the conservative heirs of the Ronald Reagan legacy (to gain the nomination), Mike and Rick will have some credentials to show on the traditional marriage front. They stood up and were counted.

Sooo … we disagree a bit. No one is running away with the GOP lead at this point (as Hillary is on the Democratic side), and Huckabee and Santorum are well liked and each would likely gain steam as voters see their favorite picks drop out of the race. That’s the way it was last time with Santorum (2012) and somewhat for Huckabee in 2008.

Since their last showings each has grown. And have national followings. And are often making national news. Here are their websites.

mikehuckabee.com/ < with another one at Fox for his syndicated TV show.

patriotvoices.com/ < A national newsletter.

Huckabee currently has more to lose by running in Iowa. He’d have to give up that TV show (at least until he lost - without knowing if he’d be rehired).

Santorum quit his job as a Fox analyst to run in 2012 and scored what was to “experts” several “upset” wins in national primaries before Mitt Romney’s better financed and organized campaign prevailed. This time (if there is one) … Santorum follows that template theoretically, with people from his 2012 campaign in place in many of the primary states instead of starting from scratch.

Each is, interestingly, reaching out to not-traditionally-Republican voters.

Huckabee interviews newsmakers from all political compass points on his program and comes off as a genial host.

Santorum has just published a book called “Blue Collar Conservatives” … and he came to prominence in Western Pennsylvania by winning larger than usual shares of union workers in winning a House seat and getting elected twice to the Senate.

Santorum mended fences with Romney by his endorsement after being the last party opposition in April 2012 - but his opposition to Romneycare as well as Obamacare may play better now that the latter is so unpopular and the former is barely mentioned anymore.

christianpost.com/news/paul-ryan-mike-huckabee-rick-santorum-lead-in-iowa-2016-presidential-poll-evangelicals-favor-huckabee-ryan-111060/ <EARLY poll that had Huckabee and Santorum among the leaders in Iowa 2016

breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/29/2016-Rand-Paul-Mike-Huckabee-Tied-for-Lead-in-GOP-Presidential-Poll < March 2014 poll had Huckabee as leading all Republican candidates nationally.

But I will be tuning in to see their speeches at the March for Marriage Thursday.

If I can find them anywhere.

They’ve each had their opportunity, and they weren’t selected by the GOP voters. The GOP should be looking for fresh candidates, not re-treads.

Agree. I have no idea at this point who I like for the GOP nomination. I had liked Rubio. I still like Bobby Jindal. But I am not sure who would be the strongest candidate. I wasn’t ever that impressed with either Santorum or Huckabee. For one, I think that both have their strengths with a narrow group of the electorate. Huckabee is the white, religious right evangelical Christian. Santorum is the Catholic version. I have doubts that they could appeal to enough voters to get elected. If I am proved wrong and either of those two men were elected president, then I would have no problem with that.

Ishii

For those interested in joining the Archbishop without leaving home you can join the Virtual March

Or if you just want to spectate there is a live event feed

**Matt. 5:10: **"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Thanks Dawnia. Maybe the speeches will be on that feed.

marriagemarch.org/news/tune-in-live/ < article on this.

I’m surprised not to see coverage of this live on CSPAN or EWTN or somewhere.

Fox News sometimes covers things at the last minute, like coverage of the Papal election and this years’ March for Life … but so far this (above) is ALL I can find on the March as far as broadcasting it (or the speeches).

youtube.com/watch?v=gKqhClu0sHE#t=7109

Here are speeches from March for Marriage

Archbishop Cordelione:

We can take heart from what we are seeing now in the pro-life movement. Back in the early 70s, public support for abortion was growing rapidly, and as with marriage redefinition today, a generation gap opened in the polls, many said that opposition to abortion would literally die-off, that was the future, before long it would no longer be an issue. Instead something unexpected happened, a relatively small band of faithful belivers held the line on the sancity of human life in the womb, and today, two generations later, the pro-life movement is flourishing like never before. We now have the most pro-life generation of young adults since the infamous Roe decision.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.