Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
UNIFORM DISRUPTION

QUOTE: Heteros In The Military Cause Way More Trouble Than Homos

I don’t think of people in little groups like that… of people as ‘gay’ here and ‘black people’ there, or ‘women’ over here… Everybody is an individual person and everybody has the same rights as anyone else. The government has no business in your private life, you know, so if one person is allowed to do something so should everyone else. The whole gay marriage issue is a private affair and the federal government has no say.

Everybody has the same rights as everybody else, so homosexuals in the military isn’t a problem. It’s only if they’re doing things they shouldn’t be, if they’re disruptive. But there’s … men and women getting into trouble with each other too. And there’s a lot more heterosexuals in the military, so logically they’re causing more trouble than gays. So yes, you just have the same rules for everybody and treat them all the same.”

- GOP Presidential candidate Ron Paul, discussing gays in the Armed Forces, in the Iowa State Daily.

By:           Daniel Villarreal
On:           Oct 26, 2011
Tagged: , ,
  • 21 Comments
    • Owen
      Owen

      As an far far FAR left leaning liberal Democrat…I always have like Ron Paul. He’s pure. His son, however, is an ass.

      Oct 26, 2011 at 6:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alicia
      alicia

      amen!

      ron paul 2012

      cc this to that dl frenemy global warmonger hobama!!!

      alicia banks
      eloquent fury

      Oct 26, 2011 at 7:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris

      The “get government out of marriage” position is a lot like saying that we should all walk to work instead of developing alternative energy. Sure, we would need to restructure most of society, but it is the ideologically pure solution.

      Oct 26, 2011 at 7:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andy
      Andy

      In a lot of ways I feel like the common trend these days is “pass anything I don’t feel like dealing with onto the states”, which is a terrible idea. We need unified laws, especially in something as important as marriage equality.

      I like what he’s saying about gays not causing trouble in the military, but the “everybody has the same rights as everyone else” isn’t exactly true. And not seeing people’s individual skin tones, sexualities, or genders isn’t a great thing, it smacks of a colorblind mentality. Groups ARE different from one another, and their differences matter. I feel like Ron Paul is definitely the least insane of the GOP people… but that’s not saying much. His statements and views are a lot better for us as a community than a lot of other crazies out there.

      Oct 26, 2011 at 8:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • LandStander
      LandStander

      As much as I like Ron Paul on some issues, in respect to marriage equality he is either a) a liar or b) a hypocrite. Yes, he says the rules should be the same for everyone, and keep the FEDERAL government out of marriage, but he also says that his solution is letting the states decide. So which is it Ron Paul? Government should treat everyone the same, as long as it is just the Federal government? States can still treat people differently? Yes you believe in equality, the equal opportunity for every gay person to have their rights voted on.

      I have the same problem with Ron Paul on this issue as I do with Obama on this issue. They *say* they believe everyone should be treated equally, but that they also believe the state should be able to discriminate if they want to.

      Oct 26, 2011 at 8:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MH
      MH

      Remember that time he proposed multiple bills to permanently ban gay marriage at the federal level? Or are we going to be short-sighted on this guy, too? Remember Bruno? That movie where he shouted ‘FUCKING FAGGOTS’ when he was being interviewed?

      Please don’t be taken in by his bullcrap. Please don’t let this “CONSTITUTIONAL CONSERVATIVE” (read: “Conservative”) pull the wool over our heads.

      Oct 26, 2011 at 9:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • macmantoo
      macmantoo

      No, he is just like all the rest of the republocraps. He doesn’t want the Federal Government interfering because they will make it legal for gays to be married. He wants the individual states to make the laws where the anti-gays can control MOST OF THE STATES. Don’t be fooled he hasn’t changed, he’s just doing the wording VERY CAREFULLY. A vote for Paul is a vote against gay rights.

      Oct 26, 2011 at 9:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Billy
      Billy

      Saying that it’s not the federal governments place to have a say, is essentially saying no to gay rights. What if the same logic had been applied to the civil rights movement? We would still have jim crow laws, it would be illegal in many states for interracial couples to marry…Get real!!

      Oct 26, 2011 at 10:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jeff4justice
      jeff4justice

      He’s pro-liberty but not LGBT friendly.

      If we can elect a black President and openly-gay candidates then we can certainly start electing alternative party candidates.

      Media blackout/bias (including from LGBT blogs) and unfair election laws hinder alternative party candidates. Also some of them accept no corporate donations.

      Whether you like the Tea Party or Occupy wall Street it does not matter what people complain about if they don’t strike at the root of the problem which is the corporately controlled 2party system.

      It’s real simple: stop voting for candidates who take corporate donations, stop buying into media conditioning on who to vote for, and vote for alternative party candidates whether you’re liberal, conservative or libertarian.

      Oct 26, 2011 at 10:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BubbasBack
      BubbasBack

      Long live Herman Cain! Burp.

      Oct 27, 2011 at 11:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kieran
      Kieran

      We finally get a Republican candidate who is Anti-War and NOT homophobic and the corporate newsmedia writes him off as “unelectable”. Why are so many people in the media so afraid of Ron Paul’s candidacy that they have gone so far as to blacklist him?

      Oct 27, 2011 at 11:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert in NYC
      Robert in NYC

      Nos 1 and 2. FYI…..getting government out of marriage is NEVER going to happen. Every western government issues secular marriage licenses or certificates allowing couples to marry. It’s disingenuous of Ron Paul to say the federal government shouldn’t be involved in marriage because he knows it’s never going to happen. As long as heterosexual married couples enjoy the more than 1134 federal rights and privileges through marriage, that will never materialize and Ron Paul knows it. Leaving decisions such as these to the states is another disingenuous statement he’s made. He also supports the rights of states to enact DOMA as well as those who wish not to. Using his m.o. we’ll NEVER get DOMA repealed and marriage equality will never happen in all 50 states either. He can’t have it both ways. He’s delusional and so too are the people who vote for him. He’s going NOWHERE, thankfully.

      Oct 27, 2011 at 12:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sass-zilla
      Sass-zilla

      Ron Paul 2012! I love this man. He understands our Constitution – which made this country great – and that it was made so small governments (State) would make the more binding laws that affect us directly, because small government/State government is easier to influence or change than a giant faceless federal government.

      Oct 27, 2011 at 1:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nlanigan
      Nlanigan

      @MH: He did not say “fucking faggots”-he said “He’s queer as the blazes”…because he had been cornered in a hotel room by a complete stranger making sexual passes @ him. Also, he is not passing the situation off on states. He is being Constitutionally correct-it’s called the 10th Amendment. Last I checked, he is allowed his private thoughts on homosexuality, but he has never done anything to squash homosexual rights. He is correct when he states that the federal government has no legal right to have a say in the matter-either yea or nay. His Congressional voting record shows that he does not vote for or against homosexuality, but Constitutionally. Whether you agree with him or not on any stance-he does not vote in favor of or against any special interest.

      http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=296

      IMHO, knowing that America has the opportunity to have a person in office that will not flip-flop or kowtow to ANY special interest (which levels the paying field for all) is pertinent.

      Oct 27, 2011 at 1:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      The fact his son is nowhere to be found during these debates is astonishingly telling. Sorry but both of the Pauls are completely nuts. Dangerously cuckoo.

      Oct 27, 2011 at 1:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert in NYC
      Robert in NYC

      Sass-zilla, really? Name one of the 31 states with DOMA on its books that has seen it overturned by influence or persuasion to change? Dream on! Civil Libertarians are delusional just like their fellow Tea Partyers. You all have one thing in common, you’re all republicans under another name. Leopards never change their spots and no sitting GOPer is going to push for repealing DOMA in any of the red states that have it, that’s even more delusional. Republican senators and congressmen kow-tow to religious bigots. As long as that remains, DOMA will remain.

      Oct 27, 2011 at 4:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Zach
      Zach

      Andy, why do we need unified laws? What is good for one state is not necessarily good for the other 49. We can choose between 50 state governments and thousands of local ones, but Americans are stuck with one federal government.

      Oct 27, 2011 at 4:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason
      Jason

      @Zach: Because we are the UNITED States of America. We’re one nation subject to the Constitution, and if you read your history, you’ll learn that many of the states under our union were busy violating the Constitution, left, right and center. Besides, it’s this very Constitution that mandates a federal government.

      Geez, what happened to intelligence and basic knowledge.

      Oct 27, 2011 at 6:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jay
      Jay

      I was in the military before “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was repealed, and I can tell you that young troops right out of high school who are still dating, or troops who marry too young, are the source of many issues which consume a lot of a junior commander’s time, and this periodically results in situations that are “prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the armed forces.” One Marine Corps Commandant even attempted (unsuccessfully) to prevent Marines from getting married during their first enlistment largely because of such matters. I didn’t agree with the Commandant’s approach, but I understood where he was coming from.

      I am not able to compare how these issues are measured against incidents involving gay service members, but after reading Air Force veteran Ron Paul’s entire quote (not just the intentionally inflammatory headline), he is absolutely spot on about the periodic “disruption” associated with just heterosexual alone. Anyone who has been in a command or leadership role in the military for less than a year would tell you the same.

      Oct 27, 2011 at 7:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Queer Supremacist
      Queer Supremacist

      @Robert in NYC: This is why I never liked Ron Paul or any faux-libertarian who spouts the “get the government out of marriage” crap. This is the “if we can’t keep marriage all to ourselves, then no one should have it” argument. Breeders are never going to give up the government largesse they get from a state marriage license. I call them Breedertarians because they support unfettered liberty for themselves, but those fucking faggots can choke on it.

      If anything, it is the government that needs to take marriage away from the churches. If marriage is a “religious” ceremony, why are breeder atheists allowed to marry? And why is it not a violation of the First Amendment for government at any level to perform a “religious” ceremony? And the churches need to be taxed. If we stopped taxing the income of individuals and businesses and replaced it with a tax of 50% on every religious organization’s income, problem solved.

      Republican senators and congressmen kow-tow to religious bigots. As long as that remains, DOMA will remain.

      Then get rid of the religious bigots. And when I say get rid of them I mean really get rid of them.

      Nov 2, 2011 at 4:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rudolf
      Rudolf

      @Queer Supremacist: Just try to get rid of me you sewer packing piece of crap! I’ve got a “special right” for all of ya’! You can have first and unfettered dibs on our nations sewer treatment plants.
      I’ve about had it with all you sickening, selfish, arrogant, cesspoolian toxic anal cavity lovers. Get it in your head, YOU ARE SICK IN THE HEAD, you just don’t know it, because you’re letting other “SICK IN THE HEAD” perverts, convince you – you aren’t! BELIEVE ME, delving into the TOXIC ANAL CAVITIES of other people is as ABNORMAL as desiring a dog shit burger.

      Nov 11, 2011 at 6:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

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



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     


    POPULAR ON QUEERTY


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.