Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
Frenemies

Why Is GOProud Teaming Up With Anti-Gay Hate Groups?

jimmy-lasalvia

President Obama liked to use the phrase “reaching across the aisle” to explain his attempt at bipartisanship. He also used it to excuse the invitation of Rick Warren to Inauguration Day. How might other folks abuse the notion? Let’s start with gay conservative group GOProud.

Having split from the way-too-gay-friendly (or was that way-too-liberal?) Log Cabin Republicans, Jimmy LaSalvia formed GOProud (with Chris Barron). It’s a return to the conservative values a sect of gay men and women have been looking for! But how conservative is too conservative?

LaSalvia just added his name to a new memo calling on Republican U.S. senators to filibuster the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor at her confirmation hearing. And who else is on that same memo? Folks representing “certified hate groups,” notes Good As You, like the Traditional Values Coalition and impossibly anti-gay groups like Focus on the Family, the Massachusetts Family Institute, and the American Family Association.

It kind of makes you wonder: Is it self-hatred that makes GOPround want to join with the very people who hate him? Or just a guiding principle of — ahem — reaching across the aisle?

By:           editor editor
On:           Jun 3, 2009
Tagged: , , , , ,
  • 44 Comments
    • Miss Understood
      Miss Understood

      They are far too creepy to work with.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 9:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Terry
      Terry

      they suck (and not in a good way)

      Jun 3, 2009 at 9:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • VegasTeaRoom
      VegasTeaRoom

      The GOP is the party of privileged white people. It makes perfect sense that white privileged gay people find they enjoy the company of other white privileged people no matter how much they ultimately detest each other. The bottom line is retaining money and their established privilege.

      You see, conservative gays are not defined by their gayness, perish, as much as their CASH. That is what sets them apart from poor gay Democratic ideologues like the most of us.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 9:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      Suuure, everybody would love our government to be smarter with money, to not overspend etc… but none of us are going to team up with Anti-gay groups, or a party that hates gays as it’s platform…oh wait, except for these guys I guess.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 9:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris

      GOProud is made up of Gays that are desperate to be liked by those who condemn and hate them.

      Glad I got over that when I was, like, 14 years old.

      It’s kind of sad, really.

      Kind of.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 10:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mike
      mike

      Dude………. GOP PROUD has only three members……….
      who cares what they do

      Jun 3, 2009 at 10:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • yero69
      yero69

      It is the same old same old, we all have different aims and objectives you just have to revisit the evolution of the Community’s history. Personally, left of left Queer just thinking of the word conservative makes me want to take a shower. Sorry to say while I support the concept of ‘gay marriage, it is straight from the conservative agenda for assimilation. Due to diverse nature of our community there will always be conflicts the Left, middle and right, just like a big pink flamingo

      Jun 3, 2009 at 10:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • countervail
      countervail

      I’ve come to realize conservative gay Republicans are very much like the Shakers, a sect that died from existence simply because they refused to modify their mores to be more modern and inclusive. And like the Shakers, I think there’s actually some things to appreciate and learn from their positions, but it’s just not a lifestyle most people, especially most gay people, could conceive of living or want to be part of.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 10:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andrew
      Andrew

      This from New Republic, May 29, 2009 re LaSalvia and Barron:

      “For instance, the duo argues that hate crimes and employment discrimination, two items high on Log Cabin’s agenda, are not as important to most gay conservatives as standard Republican fare like estate-tax repeal and Social Security privatization–issues that they say particularly affect gay couples because of the lack of partnership recognition in many states and by the federal government.”

      Yes, let’s shelve work on hate-crimes and discrimination and focus our efforts on repealing the estate tax — a tax that less than 1% of estates end up paying. Yippee for the GOProud!

      Jun 3, 2009 at 11:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • andy_d
      andy_d

      one word. “Quisling.”

      Jun 3, 2009 at 11:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hand
      hand

      i thought this story was bullshit when i read it on joe my god, and i think it’s bullshit now.

      here’s the article the story was based on: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/conservatives-ask-republican-senators-to-filibuster-on-sotomayor/

      and what does the NYT say? it’s a coalition including “a broad swath of the conservative movement, including evangelicals, gun-rights advocates, anti-tax leaders, anti-abortion groups, libertarians and local Republican leaders.”

      that’s not a “traditional values” coalition. they were opposed to a nominee who is freaking out both libertarians and conservatives. if goproud is conservative, obviously they’re going to sign petitions with other conservatives!!

      Jun 3, 2009 at 11:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DaveO
      DaveO

      This is like that Simpsons episode (or was it family guy?) where the candidate is profiled in Time magazine and IN THAT VERY SAME ISSUE is a story about (gasp) Osama bin Laden…

      Jun 3, 2009 at 12:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Larry
      Larry

      I’ve encountered gay Republicans who like to say they’re not “single-issue voters.” That may be, but we’re not in a comfortable enough position to largely ignore or abandon our community’s needs. Groups like GOProud represent the same complacency that helped us lose in California, multiplied by 100. Until we have full legal equality, obtaining and ensuring that equality should be our priority.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 1:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andrew
      Andrew

      @countervail: At least the Shakers made some nice furniture. ;)

      Jun 3, 2009 at 1:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rick
      rick

      HE WOULD EAT HIS OWN YOUNG.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 2:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dennis
      Dennis

      Douchebag is such an overused term these days, but when it sooo describes someone’s overall character, I guess it it still effective. “Jimmy” (for real, Jimmy?) Lasalvia, Chris barron, and all other d-bags involved with GOProud deserve to face every type of rejection, shaming, insult, and ostracism possible from the GLBT community… These a**holes actually make Log Cabiners seem noble and gay supportive (no easy task, that.)

      Jun 3, 2009 at 2:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Desmothenes
      Desmothenes

      Gay Republican? Is that Latin for Uncle Tom?

      Jun 3, 2009 at 4:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • GBM
      GBM

      LOL……Hell NO I will never accept that group!

      Jun 3, 2009 at 5:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Captain Freedom
      Captain Freedom

      Hey look I am a libertarian. I strongly support Austrian economics and believe the income tax should be abolished. I also believe in mass capitalism and free markets 100%.

      However…. I would NEVER vote Republican with a gun to my head because they are the party of Christianism and the Taliban of the Americas. They promote Iran like policies of killing off the gays and are the party whose supporters publicly express the desire to have us all murdered.

      I didn’t even vote for Ron Paul because I think he too is a hypocrite by calling himself a libertarian and then voting Yes on DOMA.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 5:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alan brickman
      alan brickman

      hot but still creepy..

      Jun 3, 2009 at 7:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jarvisbearcub
      jarvisbearcub

      I think there should be diversity among gay people. The only thing that unites us is the fact that we’re gay. Everything else is up for grabs.

      That being said, these people must really need to cling to their family’s money. Who ARE they?

      As a religious person, I meet lots of religious gay men who still harbor sexist attitudes towards women, and openly gay men who reject the ordination of women. Discussions about religious gay people as self-hating aside, (which most of us aren’t), there are still numerous gay men who have major problems with women. Unfortunately, it only plays into the ex-gay myth that gay men are just straight men who haven’t resolved their issues with women. Nonetheless…

      That’s more what it smells like to me. A woman in charge is VERY scary for some men, even some gay ones.

      And for the record, the Shakers went away because they had to be celibate. No children for future generations, no more religious followers!

      Jun 3, 2009 at 8:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Dennis: These a**holes actually make Log Cabiners seem noble and gay supportive (no easy task, that.)

      I know. I would never have imagined the Log Cabiners could be outflanked on the right by a gay political organization.

      Then I discovered GayPatriot, where I discovered I was to be designated a “gay sex liberal” (whatever the hell that is).

      However, I must agree with Mike. I think there are probably a couple of hundred people involved in this organization, at best.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 8:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @jarvisbearcub: Who ARE they?

      Guys who never got over Catholicism, Mormonism and being from the South.

      Or people with lots of money. And, every once in a while, anti-choice voters.

      I don’t think it has that much to do with gender issues, except to the extent that those background issues impact their view of gender.

      Jun 3, 2009 at 8:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark
      Mark

      I know two gays boys who are white, rich and certified GOPers. They have no ‘real’ gay friends, tout how ‘wonderful’ it is to have all these straight friends, are both queens and both think that their straight friends don’t know they sit on penises.

      They are deluded gay boys.

      This is the diagnoses: delusion.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 8:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AL
      AL

      Ahh! Why so much hatred towards Log Cabin Republicans? Your hatred towards Republicans in general completely clouds your rational thinking. They honestly pursue the goal of making the Republican Party friendlier towards gay people. What’s wrong with that? Just because you are gay, it doesn’t mean you have support every single liberal cause. How about some diversity of opinions within gay community?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 3:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hand
      hand

      @AL: seriously. something like 1/3 of gays voted republican in the last election. demonizing a significant share of the community like that is terrible.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 3:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • countervail
      countervail

      Oh AL, poor naive AL. You don’t know much about gay Republicans/conservatives do you?

      See the mindset is not to advocate for the Republican party to be more gay friendly and inclusive. That would mean having to actually modify specifically held conservative philosophies. Their are numerous examples of how attempts toward this end have both alienated Log Cabin Republicans from the party as well as from the more conservative base of gay Republicans. Log Cabin Republicans are basically considered a nuisance by the larger party and as wimpy, socialist Obama-lovers by the people who formed the new GOProud organization.

      Rather, gay Republicans/conservatives would rather whine, prevaricate, and deceive to have Democrats and progressives be more Republican friendly, not have Republicans be more gay-friendly. The hardcore gay Republicans like the party just as it is thank you very much, or even that it’s gotten too soft and permissive and needs to get back to the fundamental roots (like they ever adhered to those roots to begin with).

      Jun 4, 2009 at 3:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Captain Freedom
      Captain Freedom

      I used to despise the Log Cabin Republicans until I saw Steve Schmidt and Meghan McCain speak to them. That was a watershed moment watching one of the most powerful strategists in the GOP call for gays to be recognized. People like him have a lot of sway with the politicians.

      Then there was NY State where the Senate Minority Leader opened up his caucus to vote their conscience on marriage equality. That would not have happened without the Log Cabin Republicans.

      To me I feel the Log Cabin Republicans are doing some good and they may be breaking ground after all.

      As for GOProud and GayPatriot… those are all the self-hating gays who left the Log Cabin Republicans because they still hold out hope that they’ll have their orgy with Eric Cantor and Charlie Crist.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 3:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AL
      AL

      @countervail: Log Cabin is not some Uncle Tom prototype. They don’t cling to the religious faction of the Republican Party. It’s evident in their refusal to endorse Bush in 2004 elections. If I am not mistaken, in 2008 elections they endorsed Guiliani, who has exactly the same view on gay marriage as Obama does.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 4:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • countervail
      countervail

      @AL: Well I remember what happened when they didn’t endorse Bush in 2004. Just like I said, the Republican party ignored them, as it basically didn’t matter to the outcome, and the hard liners like Gaypatriot called them traitors.

      As you can see now, four years later, the organization is all but bankrupt with a huge defection to this new GOProud organization. Republicans and conservatives and gay men and women that consider themselves Republicans/conservatives first and foremost have no use for a moderate gay Republican organization.

      Can you name me one thing that Log Cabin Republicans were mainly responsible for in making the GOP more progressive on gay issues?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 4:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      The enemy of my enemy is my friend (temporarily until my enemy is gone anyways). Just because this group agrees with those groups about Sotomayer being a racist radical feminist doesn’t mean that they agree with them on other issues. Its not that uncommon to see two groups that don’t like each other work together. Hell, this country currently does it with Iraqi officials (if you think they actually like us you are not thinking straight) to rebuild Iraq.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • countervail
      countervail

      @galefan2004: Again, I have to take issue with your comment.

      “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” That implies that there are times when gay Republicans/conservatives are actually in agreement with more mainstream LGBT issues. This simply isn’t the case.

      Gay Republicans/conservatives first and foremost consider themselves Republicans/conservatives. The gay part is just happenstance that in their mindset gets little to no consideration.

      “Just because this group agrees with those groups…doesn’t mean that they agree with them on other issues.” The point, and the problem, is that they usually do.

      You’re proposing that they just happen to agree with these groups on the Sotomayor issue but generally disagree with conservative groups on everything else. The reality is they generally agree with these groups on everything else, and disagree with gay groups on gay issues. It’s a very specific distinction.

      Go to http://www.gaypatriot.net/, read some of the articles but more importantly read some of the comment threads if you don’t believe me.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruce (GayPatriot)
      Bruce (GayPatriot)

      Wow. Lots of liberal tolerance displayed here (as usual), I see.

      Cpt. Freedom, if I may ask: Could you please provide specific factual examples of this accusation about American Christians who you paint with a broad brush…

      “I would NEVER vote Republican with a gun to my head because they are the party of Christianism and the Taliban of the Americas. They promote Iran like policies of killing off the gays and are the party whose supporters publicly express the desire to have us all murdered.”

      On the other hand, I have repeatedly shown PHOTOS of gay men hanged by Islamic regimes.

      As soon as you get factual evidence to support your Christian bigotry — please email me at BRUCE@GAYPATRIOT.ORG and I’d be happy to post on it.

      Thanks.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Bruce (GayPatriot): Ugh. We’ve visited your site. You never criticize the right wing, or even the outlandish comments by your own site participants, who are insanely abusive and over the top (I’ve been called a “gay sex liberal” by one of your more obnoxious participants at least five times).

      If you were as adept at addressing the homophobia within your party as you were complaining about the Democrats, that would be one thing. You’re not, however.

      And more than a few state Republican parties support the recriminalization of homosexuality; Texas, namely. Others oppose openly gay public school teachers, almost all oppose marriage and adoption, etc. And the fringe Christian Reconstructionists openly admit that capital punishment for homosexuality is “on the table.”

      Yet they’re not criticized. Shocker.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • countervail
      countervail

      That didn’t take long.

      See the meme of GayPatriot is that you are supposed to tolerate their intolerance because liberals are supposedly more tolerant than conservatives.

      They then also get to justify their hawkish military stance, which is absolutely the same as other conservative Republicans, on Middle East policy because it for the good of the gays. But ask them what they think about hate crimes of people in the United States where people are regularly beaten and murdered and it’s suddenly a police matter that requires no special laws regarding hate crimes to deal with.

      Got it? Do you understand that dog chasing his tail logic? Well me either. That’s why I have many articles about the ridiculousness of the GayPatriot crowd at http://tragicalthing.blogspot.com.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @countervail

      “That implies that there are times when gay Republicans/conservatives are actually in agreement with more mainstream LGBT issues. This simply isn’t the case.”

      No it doesn’t. If Sotomayer was a “mainstream LGBT issue” than it would, but she isn’t. It would be the same as Queerty and Focus on the Family both saying they hate Obama. They have very different reasons for saying it, but they have both made the claim that Obama isn’t doing what he said he would. What I said is when you take a neutral object and put two people on completely different sides that hate the each other against that same neutral object it doesn’t suddenly mean they like each other.

      “Gay Republicans/conservatives first and foremost consider themselves Republicans/conservatives. The gay part is just happenstance that in their mindset gets little to no consideration.”

      So, you speak for every gay republican/conservative now although, let me guess, you are a democratic liberal? I don’t see how that makes you qualified to judge. I don’t even think its the case, I think that the gay really does get consideration or else they wouldn’t classify themselves as GAY conservatives/republicans. You can respect conservative values (pro-life, religious values) and republican ideals (states rights, small central government, free trade) and still support gay issues.

      “The point, and the problem, is that they usually do.”

      Speaking for others again eh? Well, there are two problems with that. The first is that you are wrong, and the second is that when you say stuff like that it just helps to drive a wedge between the gay conservatives and the gay liberals and the result is we only hurt gay rights.

      “You’re proposing that they just happen to agree with these groups on the Sotomayor issue but generally disagree with conservative groups on everything else. The reality is they generally agree with these groups on everything else, and disagree with gay groups on gay issues. It’s a very specific distinction.”

      No, I’m proposing that they generally accept their own sexuality and what it means to them, and they view it as different from their political allegiances and their conservative stance. They might disagree with gay groups on gay issues, but who the hell gave these gay groups the rights to fundamentally speak for all gays. I know I didn’t give them the right to speak for me.

      I honestly don’t see a huge difference between what they do and what you are doing right now. If you mean that they would rather side with other conservative groups than with gay liberal groups then that is basically what you are doing right now when you say they are the ones with the problem. I’m not going to try to disagree with you when you say that the underlying problem is that BOTH (liberal and conservative) should work together and that that side doesn’t seem to make that a priority, but you are kidding yourself if you think the liberal side is any more open to working with the conservative side.

      The problem is that gay rights is not a left issue and it is not a right issue. It is a human rights issue. Any human rights issue that affects Americans is by ideal centrist because we are a nation founded on human rights.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Bruce (GayPatriot):

      Your site’s chazzerai.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @countervail: Yes, that’s a good summary of one of the many problems with their “logic.”

      I happily recommend libertarian gay blogs over the garbage bin of the right wing gay bloggers, though. They may oppose hate crimes legislation, but they’re far more consistent (and more likely to still oppose the Iraq war, etc.).

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      While you are bringing up the subject of republican support of re- criminalization of homosexuality, opposition of openly gay public school teachers, marriage, adoption, and the possible support of capital punishment for gay offense, and hate crimes (granted from a different post), maybe those should be addressed. For starters, republican fringe groups have every right to support whatever they want. That doesn’t mean the mainstream is going to listen. Liberal freaks have supported everything they have wanted for a long time too. Liberals support radical feminism (lets get rid of everything with a penis type feminism), partial birth abortion, and main scale socialism by this same principal of ascribing all extremist to the root party. Hate crime laws are bogus. Every crime is a hate crime. If the punishment for a crime isn’t enough to deter the person from doing it then the actual punishment for the crime needs to be reworked. We don’t need separate punishments for a protected class. Also, if 10 years in prison isn’t enough to deter someone from kicking the crap out of someone what makes you think 20 years is. If the death penalty isn’t enough to deter someone from murder what is going to be the double of that?

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @galefan2004: First, you’re never going to get me to equate the radical egalitarian positions of the far left with the fascist positions of the far right. There’s no moral equivalence. Second, if the national Democratic Party or state parties endorsed those things, assuming your faulty comparison was actually on point, that would be one thing. But there’s no Democratic Party, at any level, running around endorsing “lets get rid of everything with a penis type feminism.” So your attempt to rescue the fascists fails. Surprise, surprise.

      Deterrence isn’t the only purpose of sentencing, btw; retribution is recognized as one as well.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 4:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Alec: Sorry to burst your bubble dude, but I could give a crap less what the Republican party of Texas espouses. When they bring it to a national level than I still don’t care. Alright, so it might be part of the party at the state level. They have that right. Partial birth abortion is part of the Democratic party at the national level (hell its even been supported by Obama). I personally find partial birth abortion, which still happens every day, a lot more disturbing then some fringe group that wants to kill homosexuals. Is that fringe group ever going to dominate the NRC? No. Does that fringe group speak for the RNC? No. Just because it is part of the RNC doesn’t mean that it represents it. I’m not from Texas, so I really don’t care what their RNC wants. Hell, they want to succeed from the union as well last time I checked, so maybe they just should. The problem for that is that they can’t even get the support of their own party to do, and they wouldn’t be able to get the support of their own party to start the public hangings of homosexuals in the town square either. Why are we really drudging up radical thought just because its part of the party when its obvious that the RNC as a whole does not support those views?

      Jun 5, 2009 at 4:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @galefan2004: First, define “partial birth abortion,” as the most of the party and Obama have expressed support for those bans if they include health exceptions. Second, the failure of gay Republicans to criticize the GOP for not reigning in the blatant homophobia of their state organizations is worth pointing out.

      Finally, they support judges in the mold of Scalia, who would uphold any anti-gay legislation on the basis of “moral disapproval of the majority.” So the idea that this doesn’t have an impact is laughable.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 4:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • countervail
      countervail

      @galefan2004: I try to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I’ve always come to see that this GayPatriot/GOProud mentality tends to act a certain way. It’s a bit difficult to ignore literally years of observation and interaction with this crowd.

      Re Sotomayor, it’s really too difficult to know how she specifically regards LGBT issue. She really has little track record. But if you survey gay Republicans, they oppose her on the basis of Republican/conservative philosophies, not LGBT issues. I understood what you were trying to say, except it just doesn’t apply in this scenario.

      And for the record I’m an independent moderate and take as much issue with illogical hyperbolic rhetoric on the left as the right, I’m just more in line on the left regarding LGBT issues The GayPatriot crowd has a major problem of using psuedo-logic to try to justify their conservative sentiments, regularly lambasting the gay community, and in nearly every issue takes the position of the Right despite how it might negatively affect them or other gay men and women. I cannot appreciate them. Where once I might have been more sympathetic to their concerns, they’ve proven themselves more than willing to sell out the gay community to support conservative causes. There is no middle ground in their reality, much like the Bush quote “you are either with us, or against us.”

      I take issue with your sentiment about their sexuality as well. I’ve found that these are people not comfortable in their gay skins. They are resigned rather than accepting of their sexuality. It’s a big difference.

      I also take issue in how they approach gay issues as well. They do not advocate for gay issues, rather they criticize those that advocate for gay issues. I’ve posted several articles regarding their stances on gay marriage and how they criticize every step of the process for any state. If the proposal for gay marriage was from a state supreme court ruling on unequal treatment, it was “judicial activism.” If marriage rights were pushed through by the actions of a governor (like NY recognizing out of state marriages) it was “executive fiat.” If a governor twice vetoed marriage laws enacted by state legislature (like California) it was a representation of “the will of the people.” They suggested that the gay leaders of the failed repeal of Prop 8 should immediately resign but had no comment on the overt influence and financial support of the Mormon church in other state’s gay marriage issues (CA and Alaska). They were “disappointed” when Republican leaders threatened federal legislation against same sex unions. Even in cases where states enact gay marriage, in the very strict way they seem to approve of (overwhelming, filibuster-proof, legislative approval with specific provisions to guarantee the immunity of religious organizations from prosecution for discrimination), they’re still ambivalent about the whole issue for societal implications. They criticize the very modest Federal advances in LGBT issues as failures of the Left instead of recognizing the non-action of their own party. They regularly turn a blind eye to when Republicans and conservatives demonize gay man and women and how this influence stifles inclusion and advancement of openly gay individuals.

      I’ve regularly debated them and their cronies. I know of what I speak but I invite you to go on GayPatriot and take the opposite side of any issue in the comments. I’d be very interested to hear about your experience… that is if you’re not banned before you have the chance to see any argument through.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @countervail: My experience as well. Dead on regarding the way they move the ball on marriage.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 4:42 pm · @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.