Comments on: What Do Americans Think Of Gay Rights? http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights Building a conservatism that can win again Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:32:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: MittMan http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-52042 MittMan Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:46:28 +0000 #comment-52042 Being 'gay' is a personal lifestyle choice and should in no means be acknowledged as some sort of minority status that gains homosexuals special treatment over their fellow non-gay citizens. It is illogical and laughable that someone spinning the 'gay rights' agenda would compare their situation with blacks in the South during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. There is no comparisons. What the 'gay rights' movement is really about is forcing the majority of Americans to accpet as 'normal' a lifestyle choice they find unsettling. If this happens then what is next? Are we going to be forced to recognize other lifestyle choices like Polygamy and Beastiality? That is what the agenda of the radical gay movement is about - cracking open the door to make legal a whole slew of nonsensical and disgusting behavior. That is the cold, hard truth. If you want to be gay then by all means be gay but don't get in my face and tell me I have to like your lifestyle choice. I reserve the right not to like it as should any American. Being ‘gay’ is a personal lifestyle choice and should in no means be acknowledged as some sort of minority status that gains homosexuals special treatment over their fellow non-gay citizens. It is illogical and laughable that someone spinning the ‘gay rights’ agenda would compare their situation with blacks in the South during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. There is no comparisons. What the ‘gay rights’ movement is really about is forcing the majority of Americans to accpet as ‘normal’ a lifestyle choice they find unsettling. If this happens then what is next? Are we going to be forced to recognize other lifestyle choices like Polygamy and Beastiality? That is what the agenda of the radical gay movement is about – cracking open the door to make legal a whole slew of nonsensical and disgusting behavior. That is the cold, hard truth.
If you want to be gay then by all means be gay but don’t get in my face and tell me I have to like your lifestyle choice. I reserve the right not to like it as should any American.

]]> By: Pincher Martin http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-49601 Pincher Martin Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:38:31 +0000 #comment-49601 "Given the bloodbath that was 2008 for Republicans, the obsession of social "conservatives" with homosexuality seems ill-advised. You said before that these issues were "trivial" -- so isn't money and focus better spent elsewhere?" ******************************************************************** The issues are trivial to the future of the GOP. We are not dependent on the gay vote. We are dependent, however, on social conservatives. And the electoral outcomes in 2006 and 2008 had nothing to do with gay rights. They had to do with incompetence and corruption. “Given the bloodbath that was 2008 for Republicans, the obsession of social “conservatives” with homosexuality seems ill-advised. You said before that these issues were “trivial” — so isn’t money and focus better spent elsewhere?”
******************************************************************** The issues are trivial to the future of the GOP. We are not dependent on the gay vote. We are dependent, however, on social conservatives. And the electoral outcomes in 2006 and 2008 had nothing to do with gay rights. They had to do with incompetence and corruption.

]]> By: Pincher Martin http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-49861 Pincher Martin Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:32:04 +0000 #comment-49861 "Pincher Martin: The question is not why California needed same-sex marriage -- it already had it since June 2008. The question is why did it need to be taken away?"**************************************************************** No, that is not the question. The issue had been settled by California's voters when gay rights advocates tried to force the issue in the courts. It's now been settled twice. California showed there are no red and blue states on this issue; there are only states which support a distinction between gays and breeders, and those states which have political elites (i.e. judges) willing to buck popular opinion. It's intellectually dishonest to characterize this issue as anything but marginal to the future of the GOP. “Pincher Martin: The question is not why California needed same-sex marriage — it already had it since June 2008. The question is why did it need to be taken away?”****************************************************************
No, that is not the question. The issue had been settled by California’s voters when gay rights advocates tried to force the issue in the courts. It’s now been settled twice. California showed there are no red and blue states on this issue; there are only states which support a distinction between gays and breeders, and those states which have political elites (i.e. judges) willing to buck popular opinion. It’s intellectually dishonest to characterize this issue as anything but marginal to the future of the GOP.

]]> By: Pincher Martin http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-55153 Pincher Martin Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:23:23 +0000 #comment-55153 esurience, so 4% of the national electorate identifies as gay, according to the CNN exit polls. That is still at the upper end of the range I originally provided (2% to 4%) to Doug. Like I said, that is not significant. It is certainly not why the GOP got slaughtered in 2006 or 2008. As for the 18-29 year-old demographic in California, I said they were "revved up for Obama." In 2004, they went 58% to 39% for Kerry over Bush -- a nineteen-point margin. In 2008, they went 76% to 23% for Obama over McCain -- a fifty-three-point margin. That supports my characterization. esurience, so 4% of the national electorate identifies as gay, according to the CNN exit polls. That is still at the upper end of the range I originally provided (2% to 4%) to Doug. Like I said, that is not significant. It is certainly not why the GOP got slaughtered in 2006 or 2008. As for the 18-29 year-old demographic in California, I said they were “revved up for Obama.” In 2004, they went 58% to 39% for Kerry over Bush — a nineteen-point margin. In 2008, they went 76% to 23% for Obama over McCain — a fifty-three-point margin. That supports my characterization.

]]> By: Fitz http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-38495 Fitz Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:34:25 +0000 #comment-38495 The people and republicans are very tolerant & even generous when it comes to gays. The problem is the gender left in our Universities have radicalized homosexuals into thinking of themselves as analogous to blacks. So you get the whole litany heterosexism, homophobia, heteronormativityand so on. People know intuitively that #1. Marriage must be distinguished as superior to all other relationships and exclusively male/female #2.Children and young people should be free from homosexual propaganda. Now this is all very reasonable, except the homosexual lobby is not reasonable. They demand absolute moral equivalency. Tolerance is not enough; when they use that word they mean capitulation. That is why civil unions are considered separate but equal. Reasonable Americans would draw a line that offered reasonable protections; but the gay lobby will only use this all to get the camels nose under the tent and end up perverting marriage & children. The people and republicans are very tolerant & even generous when it comes to gays.

The problem is the gender left in our Universities have radicalized homosexuals into thinking of themselves as analogous to blacks. So you get the whole litany heterosexism, homophobia, heteronormativityand so on.

People know intuitively that #1. Marriage must be distinguished as superior to all other relationships and exclusively male/female #2.Children and young people should be free from homosexual propaganda.

Now this is all very reasonable, except the homosexual lobby is not reasonable. They demand absolute moral equivalency. Tolerance is not enough; when they use that word they mean capitulation. That is why civil unions are considered separate but equal. Reasonable Americans would draw a line that offered reasonable protections; but the gay lobby will only use this all to get the camels nose under the tent and end up perverting marriage & children.

]]> By: esurience http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-41832 esurience Thu, 22 Jan 2009 04:42:22 +0000 #comment-41832 Pincher Martin: The question is not why California needed same-sex marriage -- it already had it since June 2008. The question is why did it need to be taken away? Proponents of Prop8 spent about 40 million dollars -- money that could have gone to support Republican candidates -- to unwed thousands of same-sex couples. What makes that a wise expenditure, both in terms of money and political capital? Given the bloodbath that was 2008 for Republicans, the obsession of social "conservatives" with homosexuality seems ill-advised. You said before that these issues were "trivial" -- so isn't money and focus better spent elsewhere? Pincher Martin: The question is not why California needed same-sex marriage — it already had it since June 2008. The question is why did it need to be taken away? Proponents of Prop8 spent about 40 million dollars — money that could have gone to support Republican candidates — to unwed thousands of same-sex couples. What makes that a wise expenditure, both in terms of money and political capital? Given the bloodbath that was 2008 for Republicans, the obsession of social “conservatives” with homosexuality seems ill-advised. You said before that these issues were “trivial” — so isn’t money and focus better spent elsewhere?

]]> By: esurience http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-49980 esurience Thu, 22 Jan 2009 04:07:54 +0000 #comment-49980 Pincher Martin: This link ( http://www.gaypatriot.net/2008/11/07/mccain-increased-gay-vote-margin-for-gop/ ) references a national CNN exit poll that showed self-identified gays made up 4% of the electorate. Also, the 18-29 demographic in California was about the same in 2004 and 2008, according to: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/CA/S/01/epolls.0.html (2004) and: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#CAI01p1 (2008). It was 21% vs 20% (so, if anything, it went down). Anyway, the point is not just the closeness of the vote this time, but the direction it is heading. If in 8 years the margin between supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage grows by another 10% (as it did from the 2000 to 2008 election), then same-sex marriage will pass with 58% of the vote. Pincher Martin: This link ( http://www.gaypatriot.net/2008/11/07/mccain-increased-gay-vote-margin-for-gop/ ) references a national CNN exit poll that showed self-identified gays made up 4% of the electorate. Also, the 18-29 demographic in California was about the same in 2004 and 2008, according to: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/CA/S/01/epolls.0.html (2004) and: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#CAI01p1 (2008). It was 21% vs 20% (so, if anything, it went down). Anyway, the point is not just the closeness of the vote this time, but the direction it is heading. If in 8 years the margin between supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage grows by another 10% (as it did from the 2000 to 2008 election), then same-sex marriage will pass with 58% of the vote.

]]> By: Pincher Martin http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-42603 Pincher Martin Thu, 22 Jan 2009 03:57:33 +0000 #comment-42603 And the problem is not social conservatives' "obsession" with homosexuals. The problem is that homosexuals are obsessed with themselves, and continually foist their narcissism and their pet issues on the rest of us -- even though most of us don't give a shit about who they fuck. Why did California, with its domestic partnerships, need to have gay marriage? It clearly didn't. Gays in the state had de facto equality. But, you see, a gay man is not happy unless he is talking about himself. So they push court cases (and bad law) into areas where it isn't needed. And the problem is not social conservatives’ “obsession” with homosexuals. The problem is that homosexuals are obsessed with themselves, and continually foist their narcissism and their pet issues on the rest of us — even though most of us don’t give a shit about who they fuck. Why did California, with its domestic partnerships, need to have gay marriage? It clearly didn’t. Gays in the state had de facto equality. But, you see, a gay man is not happy unless he is talking about himself. So they push court cases (and bad law) into areas where it isn’t needed.

]]> By: Pincher Martin http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-40192 Pincher Martin Thu, 22 Jan 2009 03:50:00 +0000 #comment-40192 Esuriance, what exit polling data are you referring to? California's? Well, that is hardly likely to be representative of the U.S. as a whole. The Golden State is a Mecca for gays. As for Prop 8, when you consider that the state is very blue and that the youth vote was revved up for Obama and that gays are about 5% of the voting population, what is surprising is that the vote wasn't lopsidedly in favor of the "No's". The state voted in favor of Obama by nearly 25%. There was not a single major politician in the state who came out in favor of the proposition. And yet even with all that, Prop 8 won by more than half-a-million votes. That's not close. Esuriance, what exit polling data are you referring to? California’s? Well, that is hardly likely to be representative of the U.S. as a whole. The Golden State is a Mecca for gays. As for Prop 8, when you consider that the state is very blue and that the youth vote was revved up for Obama and that gays are about 5% of the voting population, what is surprising is that the vote wasn’t lopsidedly in favor of the “No’s”. The state voted in favor of Obama by nearly 25%. There was not a single major politician in the state who came out in favor of the proposition. And yet even with all that, Prop 8 won by more than half-a-million votes. That’s not close.

]]> By: esurience http://www.frumforum.com/what-do-americans-think-of-gay-rights/comment-page-1#comment-47084 esurience Thu, 22 Jan 2009 03:32:36 +0000 #comment-47084 Pincher Martin: You don't have to be gay to support equal rights for gays, so it doesn't matter what percentage of the population is gay. (Exit polling data suggests it's about 4-5%, but that's just people who self-identify as gay. There are plenty of Ted Haggards and Larry Craigs out there.) There's much larger group that is sympathetic to the cause of equality. You reference prop8 in California, but 48% of people voted 'No', it was a close vote. And it's dramatically closer than the vote 8 years ago when only 38% of people voted for equality. But the policy differences between the parties with regard to equal rights isn't the major problem. The problem is social conservatives' obsession with homosexuality. As long as a politician is pro-life and willing to bash the gays, they get a free pass on every other issue from these so-called conservatives. That's not good for conservatism. We need to hold politicians accountable on issues that actually matter to the country, rather than obsessing about sex. Pincher Martin: You don’t have to be gay to support equal rights for gays, so it doesn’t matter what percentage of the population is gay. (Exit polling data suggests it’s about 4-5%, but that’s just people who self-identify as gay. There are plenty of Ted Haggards and Larry Craigs out there.) There’s much larger group that is sympathetic to the cause of equality. You reference prop8 in California, but 48% of people voted ‘No’, it was a close vote. And it’s dramatically closer than the vote 8 years ago when only 38% of people voted for equality. But the policy differences between the parties with regard to equal rights isn’t the major problem. The problem is social conservatives’ obsession with homosexuality. As long as a politician is pro-life and willing to bash the gays, they get a free pass on every other issue from these so-called conservatives. That’s not good for conservatism. We need to hold politicians accountable on issues that actually matter to the country, rather than obsessing about sex.

]]>