The “gay agenda” today is fundamentally conservative

[EastMed]

There are as many gay people on the right as on the left, I imagine.
Most of my gay friends are conservative (European syle).

 

[construct]

There are as many gay people on the right as on the left, I imagine.
Most of my gay friends are conservative (European syle).

Who in the United States (apart from a few pedants) is intent on using European definitions of 'liberal' and 'conservative' to define his own position?



If gay conservatives want to hunker down and dodge the political brickbats hurled by the Republican Party, that is their prerogative; but don't think that I'm such a fool that I could be hoodwinked into believing the brickbats are imaginary. Given the choice between a party that pretends to believe in gay equality and a party that doesn't even pretend, I'll take the party that pretends. At least they can be shamed into doing something good sometimes.

 

[EastMed]

Who in the United States (apart from a few pedants) is intent on using European definitions of 'liberal' and 'conservative' to define his own position?



If gay conservatives want to hunker down and dodge the political brickbats hurled by the Republican Party, that is their prerogative; but don't think that I'm such a fool that I could be hoodwinked into believing the brickbats are imaginary. Given the choice between a party that pretends to believe in gay equality and a party that doesn't even pretend, I'll take the party that pretends. At least they can be shamed into doing something good sometimes.

Apologies. I should have said I'm a European and I live there.

 

[construct]

Apologies. I should have said I'm a European and I live there.

Apologies. My Americo-centrism was showing. I suppose our Democratic Party is pretty close to what Europeans would call conservative. The Republican Party on the other hand . . . .

 

[Stardreamer]

Who in the United States (apart from a few pedants) is intent on using European definitions of 'liberal' and 'conservative' to define his own position?



If gay conservatives want to hunker down and dodge the political brickbats hurled by the Republican Party, that is their prerogative; but don't think that I'm such a fool that I could be hoodwinked into believing the brickbats are imaginary. Given the choice between a party that pretends to believe in gay equality and a party that doesn't even pretend, I'll take the party that pretends. At least they can be shamed into doing something good sometimes.

Both of the two main parties are comprised of many diverse interests which make them up by their very natures. The dynamics of the party changes over time based on the perceived attitudes of the American people and those who support the party. Unless it totally implodes, a very unlikely scenario, the Republicans will continue to alternate with the Democrats for control of the Federal government for the foreseeable future. As the evidence of the current administration shows, the pipe-dream that the Democrats are going to one day dominate all of Washington and never lose power again is just that a pipe dream. We have to live with conservatives and deal with the fact that they will have periods where they control the powers of government.

As such it is in the interests of GLBT conservatives to participate in the Republican party and work to increase the influence of the Libertarian wing and reduce the influence of the (ir)religious right in the party. Instead of reviling them you should encourage these people for taking the HARD road to reforming the Republicans from within. In the long run it will benefit us all.

 

[kallipolis]

Instead of reviling them you should encourage these people for taking the HARD road to reforming the Republicans from within. In the long run it will benefit us all.

A highly constructive observation.

 

[CowboyBob]

27%..? That's about 1 in 4.

That means almost 3 out of 4 aren't conservative Republicans or 73%. The large majority.

 

[construct]

it is in the interests of GLBT conservatives to participate in the Republican party and work to increase the influence of the Libertarian wing and reduce the influence of the (ir)religious right in the party. Instead of reviling them you should encourage these people for taking the HARD road to reforming the Republicans from within. In the long run it will benefit us all.

Shoo-uh. As I say, that is their prerogative. Far be it from me to ever encourage a Republican, gay or otherwise, in his partisan efforts.

 

[Kulindahr]

The majority of racists are teabaggers and or republicans. They would love nothing better than returning to a state of segregation. (Like separating blacks and whites while doing laundry).

As for the false world bit, how about you, and the other 3 republicans go to GOP meetings and tell them ur a non-rich fag and see how well you are treated in passing our agenda.

This thread is an example of the republican disease that strikes some gays. Like autoimmune diseases, republican sympathy takes control of the host gay, and forces it to attack itself through supporting the GOP. Look at Minnesota for example. They can't wait to kill progress there.

Wow -- the arrational hatred here is astounding!

So what if "the majority of racists are teabaggers and or republicans"? That tells us absolutely nothing about teabaggers or republicans -- but from other sources we know that a solid majority of 'teabaggers' aren't racist, in fact the ethnic makeup of the Tea Party basically matches that of the rest of the country, and some of the Tea Party candidates elected recently were ethnic minorities.

Just to illustrate the meaninglessness of your statement, 'Bill' could say "I put the majority of my toys in that box' -- which tells us about Bill, but gives us no clue at all as to how many of the toys in the box are his.

Meanwhile, I'm trying to figure out why you think there are only sixteen gays in the United States -- or did you mean on JUB? Is it your belief that most of the guys here are straights lying about their identity???

Perhaps you should go tell Alex Nicholson of the LCR lawsuit against DA/DT that he should tell those Republicans they're just a disease. Just to be thorough, round up a couple of dozen Republican ex-military gay officers and enlisted and tell them to their faces that they're nothing but a disease working to harm the gay community.

Oh -- unless that total number of gays, sixteen, that you believe in is for the whole country, not just JUB.

I agree Construct the Democratic party should move to the center some; just as the republican party needs to much more so for the older regime.

49% of the teaparty folks support gay marriage/civil unions. now is the time to firmly place the gay american viewpoint in that facet of the republican party.

Maybe because they know what torontoboy does, that there are only sixteen gays around.

 

[Kulindahr]

Can you please name one Republican attempting to resume state segregation?

If they don't have to be politicians, I could point out nine for you.

They include the local KKK, Aryan Brotherhood, American Nazi, White Brotherhood, and White Power Skinhead leaders....

 

[construct]

If they don't have to be politicians, I could point out nine for you.

They include the local KKK, Aryan Brotherhood, American Nazi, White Brotherhood, and White Power Skinhead leaders....

Are they Republicans? I figured them to be in the Constitution Party.

 

[Kulindahr]

As for Gay Republicans going to GOP meetings and how they are greeted, GOPride co-sponsored this years CPAC conference despite a walk out and protest by the Religious Right. When a speaker at the conference gave the usual religious right mantra, he was booed off the stage.

I'll dial back my "theocratic takeover clock" by five minutes.

But that article by James Kirchick is beyond absurd, even for right wingnut non-factual illogic.

The "gay agenda" is "fundamentally conservative" ?!? What "gay agenda?" We're conservative because we want equal rights?!? What part of the conservatives doing everything they could to stop the equal rights movement over the past 60 years did the author miss?

We're conservative because we want our military to join the Twentieth Century? What part of the conservatives doing everything they can to block DADT did the author miss?

We're conservative because 27% of self-reported gays said they supported McCain in one survey? And the other 73% don't count?

"Antigay animus does not appear to have any place in the Tea Party movement?" What part of Christine O'Donnell's, Sharron Angle's, Michele Bachman's, Marco Rubio's, Rand Paul's, Carl Paladino's, Ken Buck's, Joe Miller's, and Sarah Palin's anti-gay hate speeches did the author miss?

Gays were anti-American in the 60s and 70s?!? We wanted the Viet Cong to succeed?!? We were travelling to Cuba to support Castro?!? Where does this guy come up with this crap? There is not one shred of truth in this bigotry.

That's a rather disgusting screed.

You're confusing conservative, the technical descriptive word, and conservatives, the political manipulators who are in fact reactionaries.

He has some details lacking, but his main point is sound: gays aren't any longer trying to shock society, but to join it. That's where his argument lies, and it's sound. He's not saying that because of some percentage who voted McCain we're all conservative, he's saying that a percentage that large supporting McCain is a symptom of us being conservative -- you're confusing symptom with cause.

As evidence that we're conservative, when guys go to gay bars, have you ever seen a fight break out because someone's conservative? ever seen a guy thrown into the street because he's a Republican? Far more important questions in that venue are "Can you keep up with me dancing?" and "How long is yours?"

Conservative means holding to traditional values and buying into traditional institutions. Back to that gay bar: except for a couple, I haven't been to one ever where I didn't encounter straights of both persuasions -- that's conservative! Well, from the side of the gay "movement", anyway; from the side of society, it's liberal, but then that's now social movements go: as the radicals become accepted and integrated, they become more conservative, and society allows them to integrate, showing their acceptance by liberalizing their own definitions and practices to accommodate (an interesting example of that is when I bumped into a hot guy at a bar; he looked me over and asked something like, "You want to blow me, right?", and when I said sure, he said he'd ask his girlfriend!).


I'm not sure 27% of gays supporting McCain was a good thing in itself. But it tells the Democrats we're not property, and they'd bloody well actually do something, not just flap their lips -- and that is a good thing.

 

[Stardreamer]

Are they Republicans? I figured them to be in the Constitution Party.

The KKK started out among Southern Democrats and at its political heights was courted by BOTH parties. I'm afraid the Republicans have no lock on racial supremacists or segregationists. They have existed and exist in both parties.

 

[Stardreamer]

He has some details lacking, but his main point is sound: gays aren't any longer trying to shock society, but to join it. That's where his argument lies, and it's sound. He's not saying that because of some percentage who voted McCain we're all conservative, he's saying that a percentage that large supporting McCain is a symptom of us being conservative -- you're confusing symptom with cause.

I've heard it speculated that the actual push for Gay Marriage is a sign of this. Marriage is a conservative institution and wanting to be in on it is a sign of wanting to join mainstream society and not be on the fringes. The thing the so called 'marriage defenders' don't understand is allowing Gays into the franchise strengthens it, not weakens it as they fear. Given all the 'real' problems the institution of marriage is suffering, they should be welcoming people into it who respect and desire what it stands for.

 

[Telstra]

what is the "gay agenda" ?

Is there such a thing as the "straight agenda ?

 

[Kulindahr]

As such it is in the interests of GLBT conservatives to participate in the Republican party and work to increase the influence of the Libertarian wing and reduce the influence of the (ir)religious right in the party. Instead of reviling them you should encourage these people for taking the HARD road to reforming the Republicans from within. In the long run it will benefit us all.

Now THERE is a rationale for gays in the Republican Party being a good thing: ANYONE there who isn't religious right is a good thing --
unless you want them to totally implode, which unless there's something viable in the wings isn't likely to happen.

We really need a serious "Vote 'Third' Party!" campaign -- if only for the purpose of figuring out what might serve to replace the CRM.*

Are they Republicans? I figured them to be in the Constitution Party.

Ya'd think, huh?

I'm not certain they've realized that exists.








*Christian Republican Machine; alternatively, Certifiable Religious Maniacs

 

[JayHawk]

This will be short because it is on a BB handheld.

I am glad some realize my point. I can see how pulling that quote out of the article for a threadline turned the liberal tigers loose as it were. That was not my intention and for that I apologize.

I do think the efforts of those who would walk into the den of lions which desire to destroy our community, lifestyle and our very being deserve some credit and a hell of lot less instant hate.

An example, when I first joined Bill Clinton had just passed DADT. I commented to a shipmate that is was stupid because it changes nothing. That person got up and walked away without saying a word and didn't speak to me for the next four years we worked together. Now we have conversations where bigotry sometimes comes out but mostly where people simply acknowledge that there is no reason to not allow the LGBT community to serve.

Who would have initiated these rational conversations if gays refused to serve and were not present?

The same holds true in any republican meeting. Our voice needs to be there until it is heard. Is it easy to sacrifice a part of yourself to do something you love? YES and I would do it again.

 

[Stardreamer]

what is the "gay agenda" ?

Is there such a thing as the "straight agenda ?

Its exactly the same as the gay agenda except for the gender of the hot blonde.

 

[Kulindahr]

An example, when I first joined Bill Clinton had just passed DADT. I commented to a shipmate that is was stupid because it changes nothing. That person got up and walked away without saying a word and didn't speak to me for the next four years we worked together. Now we have conversations where bigotry sometimes comes out but mostly where people simply acknowledge that there is no reason to not allow the LGBT community to serve.

Who would have initiated these rational conversations if gays refused to serve and were not present?

The same holds true in any republican meeting. Our voice needs to be there until it is heard. Is it easy to sacrifice a part of yourself to do something you love? YES and I would do it again.

I can envision something here that I think would terrify the religious reactionaries to think of: at future Republican gatherings, any time an anti-gay speaker took the stage, one or two dozen gay veterans, in uniform, silently climb up and just stand between speaker and audience -- or, better, between speaker and podium.

 

[construct]

Now THERE is a rationale for gays in the Republican Party being a good thing: ANYONE there who isn't religious right is a good thing --
unless you want them to totally implode, which unless there's something viable in the wings isn't likely to happen.

We really need a serious "Vote 'Third' Party!" campaign -- if only for the purpose of figuring out what might serve to replace the CRM.*

*Christian Republican Machine; alternatively, Certifiable Religious Maniacs

Which is why I always vote for a few Libertarians. I want to make sure they retain ballot access.