Taxpayer Money Used In Same-Sex Marriage Fight

Got to love those hard core right leaning folks.

Millions in grants to be used for marriage counseling helped support this group's quest to stop gay marriage.

So why does this group sound so familiar? Well, they have had Cain, Bachmann, Santorum, and Paul speak at some lectures for them.

Amazing hypocrisy. Amazing misuse of funds.

http://www.kcci.com/r/28977802/detail.html

IOWA CITY, Iowa -- Federal government grant money awarded to a social conservative group to provide marriage counseling in Iowa also helped pay some of its operational expenses while it was leading an anti-same-sex marriage campaign, newly released documents show.

The documents reviewed by The Associated Press show the $2.2 million received by the Iowa Family Policy Center between 2006 and 2010 helped hundreds of Iowans get marriage education and counseling.

But the money also paid for part of the salaries of five employees, its rent, phones and other expenses while opposing legalized same-sex marriage in Iowa.

Federal employees at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services approved the costs, and the center's top official said they were careful to comply with all guidelines.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa has requested additional documents as part of a look at whether the money was spent appropriately.

The Iowa Family Policy Center, led by Bob Vander Plaats, is a group that lead the campaign to remove three Iowa Supreme Court justices following their decision to support a lower court ruling that overturned the state ban on same-sex marriage.

Read more: http://www.kcci.com/politics/28977802/detail.html#ixzz1W9EwO5qt

IOWA CITY, Iowa -- Federal government grant money awarded to a social conservative group to provide marriage counseling in Iowa also helped pay some of its operational expenses while it was leading an anti-same-sex marriage campaign, newly released documents show.

The documents reviewed by The Associated Press show the $2.2 million received by the Iowa Family Policy Center between 2006 and 2010 helped hundreds of Iowans get marriage education and counseling.

But the money also paid for part of the salaries of five employees, its rent, phones and other expenses while opposing legalized same-sex marriage in Iowa.

Federal employees at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services approved the costs, and the center's top official said they were careful to comply with all guidelines.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa has requested additional documents as part of a look at whether the money was spent appropriately.

The Iowa Family Policy Center, led by Bob Vander Plaats, is a group that lead the campaign to remove three Iowa Supreme Court justices following their decision to support a lower court ruling that overturned the state ban on same-sex marriage.

 

So only pro homosexual marriage groups can use tax payer funding.

Typical FM. Hypocrisy on parade.

 

The should be allowed to use tax payer funds to enforce the law.

Defense of Marriage Act Much?

 

A somewhat laughable premise you have put forth.

The money was a grant for one thing. It was misused to attempt to influence legislation. This is the same group that some of the GOP presidential candidates are courting.

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/gop-contenders-straw-poll/2011/08/12/id/407079

Now if you are cool with misappropriating funds and law breaking, then I woudl say the partisanship in your post is less than logical or moral.

 

I think you have a point.

But the joke is on libs who used to have all the federal grant money sewed up for themselves but now find one of their best tools being used against them.

As far as I'm concerned we can fix this problem by doing away with all government grant money to private organizations.

And that is something the budget cutters should look at first.

 

AHAHAHHAAHAHAA

WTF???

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2MjQ17kDng"]Obama vs Obama on the Stimulus - YouTube[/ame]

You act like Im a lefty... AHAHAHHAHAAHH​

 

I'm glad to hear you oppose Planned Parenthood, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, and NPR.

 

The joke is on the libs?

Is it possible for your posts to actually criticize law breaking without becoming overwhelmingly hyper partisan in favor of the GOP? I am startign to think not.

The "libs" had nothing to do with this group, this GOP darling, spending this money on things it was not supposed to. The "libs" are not the ones fluffing these guys hoping to get their endorsement.

 

Ah yes, the straw man argument. the post seemingly unable to address the topic so it just flings e-poo.

Your posts inability to actually make a logic point defies odds, as one woudl think it woudl happen accidentally once in awhile.

 

Ah yes, more off topic nonsense. It is almost like there is a group out there dedicated to it.

I am not sure what the president has to do with anythign here, but I must note that so far not a single person has addressed the thread topic.

Not aa single one. Amazing, isn't it? That out of all of you not one can say anythign on topic and instead resort to rhetoric.

 

I'm just telling you how it is.

ACORN sucked up billions of taxpayer money and it is the most far left group I can think of.

Someone already mentioned NPR, Planned Parenthood and other far left organizations that receive federal money.

And they are very biased and political for their point of view.

But I have given you the solution to this problem.

No more federal grant money to ANY private organization.

 

And here you are, unable to criticize your own side when they do it. Yet you throw the left under the bus for your perception of the same actions.

How is that raging hypocrisy working out for you?

 

The argument in the OP actually makes a good point.

Conservatives blast government funding going to Planned Parenthood because they supposedly perform abortions with government money.

Wouldn't it also logically follow that a group that pushes against gay marriage shouldn't be allowed to use government money for their agenda?

 

If you want to ban all government money used in this way on both sides I'll fully support it.

But if you are like FM and only want to criticize when the opposite side uses it then you (in general) are a hypocrite

 

What was the first line I wrote on this topic?

"I think you have a point."

And what was the last thing I wrote?

"No more federal grant money to ANY private organization."

 

When you criticize your side for doing the exact same thing for decades and we all die from shock, that will be the day

 

yup

I don't think the OP denies or even denounces the use of taxpayer money for liberal causes. I believe that this is a case of what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

If we conservatives want to point out the waste of taxpayer dollars on all of those liberal causes then we should not support even 1 dollar for conservative issues. Sure we could get into a score box and the liberal expenditure would far and away eclipse that of conservative issues but that's not the point. The point is that a liberal blog linked to 1 case of a conservative group and the OP used that to create a thread.

 

Awesome. I think you are now the third person throwing out the straw man argument here.

 

I don't agree with you on the scorebox assumption, but I agree with the principle of what you and Tex are saying.

It's really just a matter of being consistent.

Either blast all use of government money for political agendas, or blast none of it.

 

Wait.....you agree with me?

 

you do understand the term "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" don't you?

My take-away from your post is that if conservatives want to denounce the use of taxpayer funds for liberal causes then they should do the same for conservative causes.

There is no straw-man there. Where you may be confused is that your history of your posts has demonstrated that it's OK to use taxpayer funds for liberal causes. I don't think anyone who replied to your thread even for a second misunderstands where you stand.

We have never insulted each other TFM. We may disagree on almost everything but we at least know where each other stands. If you want insults, just start picking on my beloved SEC football conference

 

Only two?

I was the first to say it on this thread.

And I was speaking for practically all conservatives.

It's libs who are addicted to government grants.

 

Cool. Post one where I said that. Just one. Prove your case. I would love to see it.

Otherwise, I am going to say your preconceived notion regarding me is incorrect.

 

I look forward to being proven wrong. One more liberal converting to conservatism would be a good thing for the world.

 

All too easy FM

An article attacking planned parenthood on the numbers of abortions they do using taxpayer money.

You defended it

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...t-women-planned-parenthood-get-abortions.html

Another thread this one started by you to defend Planned Paranthood taking government money

http://www.politicalforum.com/abort...ims-about-planned-parenthood.html#post3726731

Here you are defending the ACLU who also uses public funding in a criminal case:

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...s-ids-gubernatorial-cadidate.html#post2496510

As proven you have no problem standing behind liberal groups like these who use taxpayer money to fight for causes you believe in but you attack any conservative group who also uses public money to fund their political beliefs.


Once again you have been owned by your own words. You would think by now not to be so foolish to throw down challenges where your own words choke you but then again you wouldn't be our beloved FM if you didn't would you?