Anti-Gay CA State Sen. Roy Ashburn Admits He's Homosexual
A Republican state senator in California with a staunch anti-gay voting record came out of the closet Monday and asked for his constituents' prayers. "I am gay," state Sen. Roy Ashburn said on a conservative talk radio show. "Those are the words that have been so difficult for me for so long."
Speculation about Ashburn began last week after he was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving near a gay nightclub he reportedly patronized in Sacramento. Ashburn said since then, he's been plagued by "restless nights" and "soul searching." He finally decided his constituents deserved to know the truth.
"I've always believed that I could keep my personal life personal and my public life public. But through my own actions, I have made my personal life public," he said on AM 1180 KERN Radio.
The 55-year-old divorced father of four defended his opposition to gay rights, saying his votes reflected the majority views of his largely conservative district, "not my own point of view, not my own internal conflict." Ashburn anti-gay votes included opposing recognizing gay marriages performed legally in other states, and against a bill to establish a Harvey Milk Day in honor of the murdered gay-rights activist.
Asked about his Christian faith and whether he now will live an openly gay life, Ashburn was ambiguous.
"I would ask people to pray for me. My faith is very clear and very firm," he said. "I pray to God that I can find peace, and I want to go back to work in the Senate and work hard for the people who sent me to the legislature."
Ashburn will leave office this year after 14 years because of term limits. He was planning on running for Congress. But now he said he will not run.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
I don't know of this mans' anti- gay votes. Did he want them sold into slavery, did he want them stomed in the street for being gay, did he want them to give up any RIGHTS that any American has, simply because they're gay? Last time I checked, gays had every right protected that straight people had protected. No President, senator, or house member(state or federal) can take those rights away.
Hey dude, vote how you sold yourself. If you duped your constituancy into thinking you were a certain way, you owe them that, otherwise you're a liar.
I don't follow anyone, because those that appear to be on the same path usually end up just getting in my way.
"Last time I checked, gays had every right protected that straight people had protected. "
Except the rights bestowed by marriage .
What rights are bestowed by marriage . Benefits yes, rights no.
I don't follow anyone, because those that appear to be on the same path usually end up just getting in my way.
then you're already a liar, aren't you?
Let me ask you this. You wanted to get married to a person who isn't your race . The judge you go to so you can get a marriage license denies you, on the grounds that they personally don't believe in mixed race couples (This happened). What do you do?
Make your own commitment to your partner and screw the government . I know of a few couples that consider themselves husband and wife and have never had a ceremony. They have kids and have been together for several years and just never felt the need to have a ceremony.
I know there are benefits to being married , but most can be gained through other means. Those that can't, shouldn't be benefits anyway and should be done away with. They could fight for that. They would probably get more support for equallization through those means.
As for politicians, they sell themselves as what they think people want and then begin their work on getting re-elected after that.
I don't follow anyone, because those that appear to be on the same path usually end up just getting in my way.
"hey have kids and have been together for several years and just never felt the need to have a ceremony."
That does not mean that they are not legally considered married . They could have a legal marriage , or be married under 'common law '.
"Those that can't, shouldn't be benefits anyway and should be done away with."
Heath care, Social Security survivor benefits, medical decision making? What rights that are bestowed by marriage should be gotten rid of? Why should homosexuals have to jump through all the legal hoops of getting all those rights independently when heterosexuals can get them in a single bundle?
Single bundle would include things that aren't "rights" at all.
Let's start with getting rid of these rights. First off social security , please, let's. Who believes in it any way? However, if it's actually a personal account as it was supposed to be, we should be able to bequeath it to someone else.
Healthcare...that's up to the provider on whom they cover. Those who have to buy it themselves(not much of a right if you have to buy it),can sign up whoever they want to pay for.
Medical decisions....I can put my dog in charge of whether or not they pull the plug, not really, but it's not an inconvienence to choose someone to do that for you.
If you're exceptionally lazy, I can see shere these would be a problem.
It all comes down to the government validating us rather than the other way around. Now were back to limited government. I'm with ya.
I don't follow anyone, because those that appear to be on the same path usually end up just getting in my way.
Further why should heterosexuals be able to get these rights under the blanket of marriage ... but homosexuals be forced to jump through hoops?
They're not rights, but rather policy and privilage. Maybe you could go the route of changing policy, since changing policy doesn't necessarily take away rights. Make it uncomfortable equally to raise awareness.
I don't follow anyone, because those that appear to be on the same path usually end up just getting in my way.
But marriage is a right.