Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  Gay Marriage

Pat Buchanan: ‘You Cannot Violate the Laws of Human Nature’

Successfully feeding the news cycle, New York Gov. David Paterson’s push for gay marriage legislation means the cable networks are going to debate it! MSNBC’s own Pat Buchanan talks about the “law of human nature defined by God” — and never has one of God’s own children talked out of his ass so much. This man will never get on board with equality, because he (and folks like him) will never understand being gay is not a choice, nor is it an “aberration” of nature. But this isn’t news: Buchanan’s homophobia is a long standing tradition.

By:           editor editor
On:           Apr 17, 2009
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

  • 35 Comments
    • Isabello
      Isabello

      Pat who?

      Apr 17, 2009 at 10:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • glen
      glen

      pat buchanan = fossil

      Let’s put him in a museum where school children can learn scary stories about the old days and marvel at his intolerance, ignorance and downright annoying ideas…

      Apr 17, 2009 at 10:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DM
      DM

      He’s still alive? Oh yeah….only the good die young.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 10:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MTiffany
      MTiffany

      I think we might be missing the finer point here when we get trapped in talk about whether or not sexual orientation is a choice. Engaging in sexual activity is a choice, and I think that’s what Buchanan and the godsquad get all riled up about: other people having the right to choose something they themselves wouldn’t choose for themselves, or want to do but have hangups about.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 10:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      Does he mean that he can’t stop being an obnoxious fool?

      Apr 17, 2009 at 10:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      All that this appeal to human nature and law of god amounts to for these individuals is simply, “I believe otherwise.” They can try to take themselves out of the equation and thus out of responsibility for their beliefs all they wish, but it can’t. It’s obviously not a law like…I dunno…physics, this law of human nature. And it’s not on the book anywhere, so it’s not a social law… What kind of law is it? God’s law? You’d think god’s laws wouldn’t be so effortless to violate. His plan so easily suberverted…if he existed…

      Apr 17, 2009 at 11:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cheesehead
      Cheesehead

      I’ve seen Joe Solmonese do several of these interviews where is there for the sole purpose of defending same-sex marriage rights, and he’s done a poor job in all of them. He needs to either go to a debate class, study the talking points more or start sending someone else.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 11:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Yeah, joe sucks. He should send henry rollins instead.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 11:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Basil
      Basil

      Joe was pretty limp wristed in his response to Pat. He needs to be much more aggressive

      Apr 17, 2009 at 11:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RichardR
      RichardR

      Buchanan seemed to admit the inevitability of gay marriage but links it to the collapse of America. Right, Pat. Noting that the sky hasn’t fallen in Massachusetts or Canada, Joe wasn’t that bad — Matthews actually led the dialogue, and set Buchanan up for his predictable, foolish responses. Offensive as he is, I say let Pat keep blathering! The only response to his god-nature-civilization position is simply irrelevant-wrong-nonsense.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 11:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rogue dandelion
      rogue dandelion

      I don’t know about joe.
      But pat is one lovable bigot-the arguments he’d made were so preposterous- about natural law! whose definition?? He is like America’s embarrassing grampa. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks- he’ll be spitting this dribble until he’s half way in the grave.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 11:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dabq
      Dabq

      The hypocrisy is amazing, while he has a right to his ridiculous thoughts, why should it be legal for him and his old lady to get all those rights when they have not, thank goodness had any spawn, sorry, offspring. And why is that anti-gay marriage folks who don’t have kids and use that as a reason never get called out for being barren or having low, umm, counts?

      Apr 17, 2009 at 12:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KPC
      KPC

      @MTiffany: I think that’s an awfully fine line. Sexual activity is a basic instinctial human behavior and while some people repress this instinct (which I don’t believe is particualarly healthy) most of us don’t and frankly cannot – look at how much of what is around us is based on sex. Sexual orientation comes in many “flavors” and degrees and this is something that narrow-minded and sheltered people can’t or refuse to acknowledge.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 12:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Marty
      Marty

      Pat and his crowd continue to overlook the fact that marriage is not born of our “nature” but our preferences — human beings are not monogamous creatures by nature, this is evidenced by the very creation of marriage. But, then again, most folks using his arguments don’t think about the scientific or socialistic factors in this. They really need some updates.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 12:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Marty
      Marty

      Oops — “socialistic” in my above post should refer to “socialization”, sorry about that (my cat was on my desk fighting for the keyboard)…

      Apr 17, 2009 at 12:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alex
      Alex

      Joe let pass a repetition of the 70% lie and Chris Matthews getting his name wrong. Maybe we’ve had it wrong and he just didn’t notice that transfolk were excluded from the ENDA bill he supported.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 1:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlwaysGay
      AlwaysGay

      Joe Solmonese needs to resign as head of HRC. Joe is weak and ineffective. He can’t even correct someone when they say his name wrong let alone give clear answers why gay couples deserve the right to legally marry. Where are the strong gay voices that can present our case effectively?

      Apr 17, 2009 at 2:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ben
      Ben

      Oh, good ol’ Uncle Pat.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 4:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thom Freeheart
      Thom Freeheart

      Pat Buchanan and Barack Obama have the same position on gay marriage.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 4:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      When I first started watching the MSNBC shows last fall, Pat would appear on Maddow quite a bit. He’s unquestionably her intellectual inferior, as he is just about anybody else’s on the network, so it mostly played out pretty harmlessly. But now I realize his role on that network isn’t that much unlike Colmes on Fox. He’s there to make the liberal arguments look that much better, since he doesn’t particularly have much solid ground to stand on these days, and is a surprisingly docile character in an argument.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 5:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lance Rockland
      Lance Rockland

      Someone needs to send this man some gay porn.

      Not the mild stuff either. Hardcore man on man action.

      Or maybe Pat just needs a blow job.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 5:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mickey's mouse :P
      Mickey's mouse :P

      Pat Buchanan may very well be a straw man…but if he isn’t…

      WHERE EXACTLY DOES NATURE PREVENT HOMOSEXUALS FROM EXISTING?!?!? THERE ARE GAY FUCKING SHEEP FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!!!! what the fuck is wrong with these people, they cannot just accept things for what they are. They are archaic bastards raised in repressed households.

      THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE LAW OF HUMAN NATURE! It’s disgusting to think that such a hateful man is walking this planet. His views are based on old time views and christianity. Christianity was pushed on the ancestors of Blacks and Hispanics(my ancestors) on pain of death which is why so many of them vehemently follow Christianity. It is completely ridiculous to assume that christian belief systems are NATURAL law. It’s human imposed fear based on the idiotic practices of long dead white men. There are already enough humans on the planet. Homosexuals are an evolutionary necessity to prevent overcrowding. This is why, when a woman has many sons, the last or youngest of them are more likely to be gay. The female body attacks male fetuses with estrogen because the male baby is seen as a parasite by the female body. That estrogen greatly affects the male thought processes, and some women are especially viable to do this to their first children. Humanity has been wildly successful, and homosexuality is a natural occurrence of that success.

      The people that claim this isn’t natural are just idiots who do not accept the facts that people are born the way they are and there’s no changing it. The majority of “Ex-Gays” are most likely bisexual men who had more of a proclivity towards men, and were tortured enough, either through electroshock, or behavior modification therapy(which uses learned helplessness to create pavlovian men who are afraid of getting shocked and beaten) to go exclusively to women.

      The internet can give you all the information you’re looking for, if you look in all the right places. These people fail to see that humanity is much more diverse than their little pocket of the world. they are a speck on a vast planet, and their opinions shouldn’t matter naturally. If it weren’t for unnatural means of communication their opinions wouldn’t matter, so they should stop trying to change the world to suit their needs. Someone who does not live my life should not be able to make my life choices for me.

      Thank you and good day.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 5:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sarah
      Sarah

      So legalizing SSM will cause another civil war? This is something to think about for sure ;)

      Apr 17, 2009 at 6:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • niles
      niles

      Here’s a law of human nature: don’t force your hair to perform unnatural acts in a vain attempt to hide baldness.

      Apr 17, 2009 at 11:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Skye M.
      Skye M.

      @TANK: I can’t help it, Tank, I love you man.

      Apr 18, 2009 at 11:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Skye M.
      Skye M.

      @Mickey’s mouse :P: I think you’re on track.

      Apr 18, 2009 at 11:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lizzie
      Lizzie

      Well, the comment about “is he still alive” made me laugh. A book, “Dominance and Delusion” talks about all manner of “why we do the things we do,” and why we behave as we do. The author went for the scientific and dispassionate attitude in looking for answers. Among the various issues he looks at is homosexuality, including why, if it’s genetic and gay people rarely have children, how is the genetic predisposition passed on? Have to admit Inever thought of it that way. That’s one of the questions covered in an excerpt of the book.

      Apr 18, 2009 at 12:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Captain Freedom
      Captain Freedom

      The last time Pat Buchanan was even REMOTELY relevant was in 1992 at the Great White Race, erm, Repbulican Convention where he gave the speech that solidified the GOP as the White Christian Evangelical Southern Party and forever cemented Pat Buchanan’s image in history.

      The GOP and the Christian Club fanatics had their last hurrah in 2004. They will never come back as a national party. George Bush will be the last President they ever have in office. How do I know this? They are getting more and more fanatical by the day.

      Steve Schmidt, Meghan McCain, Jon Huntsman and all the moderates will be forced out of the party by the Glen Becks, the Constitutionalists, the Mike Huckabees and Sarah Palins.

      I see a new party forming. One that respects LGBT Equality and can still remain a loyal opposition party to the Dems so we don’t become a one-party state.

      Apr 18, 2009 at 1:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      This wasn’t a fair match. Buchanan is a commentator with a lot of debate experience, while Solmonese is an organizational leader. They should have had Buchanan debate someone like Keith Olbermann – or how about Thom Hartmann? Here’s Hartmann debating NOM on Youtube:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki6ciLAYbLU

      Solmonese did get the main point across – that the cries of doom and gloom from the right wing haven’t been borne out in states like Massachusetts.

      Apr 18, 2009 at 2:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Wasn’t a fair match? Pat Buchanan’s argument is easily dismantled. Pat, like most conservative pundits, is not the fastest gun in the west…years of experience amounts to years of having his ass handed to him by conservatives and liberals alike. I’d hope that the head of the HRC who makes almost $400K per year would be able to take control of the debate with more skill and aplomb. There’s no excuse for these third rate performances, of which this is just another.

      Satisfaction! SATISFACTION!

      Apr 18, 2009 at 4:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      Tank, you’ve disregarded what I just said. I’m not saying Buchanan’s arguments are difficult to refute. I’m saying someone who debates for a living was matched with someone who runs an organization. Naturally, the debater will probably win. I see this all the time: professional debaters on the right are pitted against organizers on the left.

      It goes deeper than that. Buchanan is much more prominent than Solmonese. Buchanan has broken into national politics, and that has been his remit for years. Solmonese has never really done that. Most people have never heard of him.

      You repeated my first statement and then disregarded everything I said to support it. If you choose to engage me, please be fair and respond to arguments that I’ve actually made. If you have no response to them, simply post your own opinion with no reference to me. Thank you.

      Apr 18, 2009 at 5:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      But a professional debater (and pat’s no professional debater. He’s a pundit, but c’mon…the guy’s borderline retarded–get it, borderline? Dinesh D’sleaza, mayhaps) is clearly what Joe should have chosen to represent the HRC instead of himself…unless it’s his ego getting in the way of effective leadership… Setting up the dichotomy like that does not excuse joe from this, as someone who organizes the largest lgbt lobbying group in the country should know something about…debating the issue and, moreso, effective ways of doing so, don’t you think? As such, he should have long ago recognized his inability to comprehend the substance of other’s views that oppose his own, and recused himself from public debate on policy and ethics…appointing someone with more skill in his place for such public exchanges. That’s a part of his job as someone who delegates tasks in running an organization…no?

      And it doesn’t matter if no one’s ever heard of Joe and Pat’s a household name amongst those who watched crossfire…or now, hardball…or whateverthefuck lame excuse for political commentary and opinion is propped up because of a lack of competition and a viewership that demands a more informed and trenchant discourse due to a paucity of critical reasoning skills. If joe were competent at all, that wouldn’t matter.

      Apr 18, 2009 at 6:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      I mean, it’s as if joe didn’t prepare at all for this and the other awful appearances.

      Apr 18, 2009 at 6:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      Pat Buchanan has been blathering about how “marriage is for procreation” for half of eternity.

      Yet his own longtime marriage has produced no children whatsoever.

      Next time he opens his pie-hole, someone should confront him about his sham marriage and ask why he hasn’t done his Catholic duty to pop out a couple of children. If he gets enraged at the breach of his privacy or goes snappy-doodle about how he loves his wife, simple explain to him that under the rules he helped establish…

      1) “Love” is irrelevant;

      2) Only marriages that produce children are natural.

      Thus, his marriage is unnatural and rather than waste precious procreation time condemning others, he needs to get workin’ on popping out a couple kids himself or filing for divorce to dissolve his unnatural marriage.

      Bigots HATE it when you throw their own judgmental crap back in their faces so blatantly.

      Apr 19, 2009 at 9:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Exactly, Brian Miller. Also, if pat hates illegal aliens from mexico so much, why does he love mexican food? WTF?! It doesn’t add up. I think maybe, pat’s got something to hide…and it’s not just erectile dysfunction.

      Apr 20, 2009 at 12:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    !-- Sailthru Horizon -->
    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.