Log Cabin Republicans – What’s wrong with these Queens?

Great Debates
201

**

He and people like him have created an “America” where I cannot marry (or recieve the hundreds and hundreds of liberties and benefits included therein), where I cannot be a public school teacher in some places, where the police can kick down my door and arrest me for having sex with another consenting adult, where I can be fired for simply being different, where I am blamed for the spread of disease, terrorist attacks, the molestation of children by priests, etc etc etc.

Life in this country sucks beyond measure for people who are gay. And that is entirely the fault of Pat Robertson and everyone like him.

Enslave is a hyperbolic term. However, I do pay the same taxes, and recieve unequal rights. That is not right. Thanks to people like Pat Robertson, and everyone who supports him.

He spreads lies about gays and lesbians, and works to maintain my second-class citizen status.

He’s on TV, and there are people unbelievably stupid enough to listen to him.

He’s still on TV. I’m still a second-class pseudo-citizen.

I would not mourn the death of Sistah Souldjah. She’s just as bad as Robertson.

Wow, an arrogant, heterosexual conservative isn’t as fragile as someone whose gone through the absolute horror and terror of being gay in America isn’t as fragile as me. Who would have thought.

Kirk

202

Kirkland:

Ok, now we have some meat:

**

Actually you have the same right to marry as I do. You just don’t have the right to marry a man. Our rights our equal. They are however, unfair to you. I strongly support changing this.

And, guess what?

The fact that you don’t have the right to marry the man you love has nothing to do with Pat Robertson. You’ve never had that right. Pat didn’t take it away from you. Same sex marriages have never been legally recognized in this country.

Here’s the other thing. It’s going to change. Not a moment to soon, either. Nothing Pat can do is going to stop that.

**

Pat didn’t make those laws.

**

I suppose they could arrest me for having oral sex or sodomy with my wife as well. Has there been a case in the last 30 years where a warrant has been issued and an arrest made for sodomy?

**

And Pat made this law?

Big whoop. You’re blaming me for the prejudice of society because I’m not heartily agreeing that PR is the antichrist. I get blamed for all kinds of stuff I have nothing to do with. We all do. That’s life.

**

You seem to think Pat Robertson made the world and is responsible for society.

203

Pat Robertson is iconic of those who made this horrible world, this perverted and evil monstrosity we call existence, and is one of the leaders of those fighting to maintain it. That makes him culpable for that which he defends.

Kirk

204

Bullshit. You are free to marry the person you love, Kirk isn’t. That is not anywhere near equal.
Suppose the government decided tommorrow that your marriage was invalid because of your wifes’ eye color? would you not be pissed off.
Kirk may be a little intemperate sometimes, that doesn’t change the fact that he is in the right. For fuck sake, if you can’t understand why some of us are angry there is no hope for you.

205

And now we have the proof that you aren’t paying attention to this issue, therefore you opinions are based on incomplete information and are deeply flawed.

14 States, Puerto Rico and the military have sodomy laws. Out of those, four states, including my and Kirkland’s home state of Texas, have sodomy laws that apply only to homosexuals.

Here’s a few recent arrests for you:

Houston, Texas in 1998

Jefferson County, Mo., March 2002.

Arkansas’ Same-Sex only law was struck down in July 2002.

Virgina, 1998 Gay men are being arrested simply for “soliciting sodomy”.

Pat Robertson is far more of a problem than Fred Phelps because of the amount of influence he has with the Republican leadership and his audience. Just look at the amount of money he raises to guage his influence. Like I mentioned before, with a cite of the Hawaiian letter, his fund raising letters are much more hateful than his on-air bile, which is bad enough. For you to dismiss our evaluations about a topic we follow much closer than you do is both arrogant and asinine.

206

Grendel:

Did you not read my next sentence?

207

Homebrew:

I did specifically ask if there was a case where a “warrant” was issued followed by an arrest for sodomy.

I asked that because Kirkland said his door could be kicked down, and he could be arrested for no other reason than having sex with a consenting adult.

So, please don’t be too quick with the call that I’m totally ignorant. I asked “warrant” for a reason.

Secondly, your links seem to agree with my opinion that these things are pretty rare, and are under fire where they are occuring, and are rapicly being appealed.

Finally, I was not aware that Pat Robertson was seeking enforcement of the sodomy laws (but I might be mistaken.)

208

I’m a straight white male conservative. That makes me iconic, too. Doesn’t it?

To Pat Robertson aren’t you iconic of pedophiles?
The man has negligible power to effect your life or society. He preaches to the choir, and his existence as a whipping boy, and convenient enemy may even have a net positve effect on promoting gay rights. Isn’t that ironic.

You know who I think have it really tough?

Women.

I don’t want to play games about who has it worse, but I imagine that being a woman is a scary thing.

To me, I think I could handle the disadvantages of being gay. Perhaps falsely, I think I can even imagine what it must be like.

I can’t imagine what it would be like to be a woman. I can’t imagine handling it.

Sometimes I’ll see a woman, and they’ll have a quality no man has. It’s not altogether common, and I think this quality only comes because of what it’s like to be a woman.

Call it “grace.”

This grace seems to convey a highly realistic sense of the evils and injustices of the world. It doesn’t forgive these things. It holds accountability. At the same time it also seems that its very existence is paying the world a compliment.

I’ve seen versions of it in other people. MLK had a piece of it. Nobody else that I can think of whom you would know. But, occasionally a woman shows it pretty clearly. That’s where I see it anyway. That’s partly why I think it must be so hard to be a woman.

Now whatever this grace is, I don’t have it, and I have no idea how to get it, and I probably can’t anyway. The fact is that I probably neither need, nor have earned, nor deserve it.

But, if you have an inkling of what I’m talking about, and it’s open to you, than my best suggestion is to seek it.

Anyway we’re not getting anywhere, but take care.

209

That it hasn’t happened recently doesn’t change the fact that the law is on the books. That means it could happen. Which is all that matters.

Kirk

210

I truly don’t mean to be belittling you Kirk, but this is your big issue?

The fact that a few states have not yet repealed their obsolete blue laws has made your life a horrible existence?

You’re worried that somebody is going to get a warrant and arrest you?

My wife and I face this same hypothetical risk my friend for our engagement in “deviant” sexual practices.

Even now these laws seem to be collapsing. Victory looks all but won on this front.

This is what it comes down to? This is why you hate Pat Robertson, and say he and everyone who dares associate or not speak the name in hatred deserves death?

Because he’s “iconic?”
Does it seem a little extreme to you, because it does from where I’m sitting?

211

Well, to nitpick, in some states heterosexual sodomy is legal and homosexual sodomy isn’t, and ultimately, the discrimination facing gay people in this country amounts to more than just sodomy laws. Gay people face discrimination in employment and housing. There are no legal mechanisms for gay couples to have their relationship officially recognized, and gay couples don’t enjoy the same legal benefits and protections straight couples do. Gay people are not allowed to serve in the armed forces, and, until a few years ago, homosexuality was grounds for denial of a security clearance. So there are real examples of official discrimination against gays that goes beyond sodomy laws.

However, to address the more general question about Pat Robertson, more than the question of whether Robertson is a good guy or a bad guy is the question as to whether Robertson’s views, and the views of those like him, are actually relevant anymore. This isn’t 1988, where Robertson was able to turn his unsuccessful presidential campaign into the Christian Coalition, giving him, and those who thought like him, a good deal of influence over the party. I don’t think that right now a candidate could successfuly run basing his campaign on an anti-gay or “family values” platform. This isn’t to say that people who are homophobic or anti-gay can’t run and win, just that that dog doesn’t hunt anymore if you focus on it.

212

In many cases the sodomy laws are such that an officer must witness the “offense” in order to arrest, therefore asking about a “warrant” is somewhat a red herring.

However, the existence of the laws have further implications, as discussed in a 1998 editorial in The Advocate

The fact that these laws remain on the books - and in four of the remaining states they only apply to homosexuals - mean we are in danger of being prosecuted. It matters not whether they are routinely enforced. If a particularly obsessed DA or detective rises to power, the shit hits the fan. Do you recall the McMartin Daycare case in the 1980s?

Besides prosecution, the laws are used to intimidate. They are used against parents in custody cases. They are used to discriminate in hiring practices. They are used to disqualify otherwise qualified people from military service.

And, yes, Pat Robertson is quite influencial in keeping these laws and policies in place. He wields quite a bit of power amoung conservative Republicans and is an impediment to our equality.

Your continued braying of “shut and and sit down” is tiresome. I guess you think Rosa Parks should have just moved to the back, eh? These laws are mostly being overturned by the courts, often after someone appeals a conviction. They are not being struck down by some magnanimous act by the legislatures of the various states. And when politicians do the right thing, as evidenced by the Tampa anti-discrimination vote, it is a hard-fought effort to convice the public that it is the right thing to do.

In Miami, perhaps one of the 10 Gayest cities in the US, there was a massive effort this year to repeal the county’s anti-discrimination policy that included sexual orientation. Who led that fight? Religious groups including the Miami-Dade chapter of the Christian Coalition. Interestingly enough, several people involved in the repeal effort were arrested for forging signatures and lying on the petitions to even get enough signatures to force a vote.

Unless we continue to agitate and demand our rights, things won’t change. And in cases like Miami-Dade progress may be undone. You say you agree with our goals, but then tell us to shut up about it. Which is it? Are you for us or agin’ us?

Marriage is important. Here’s the case of a Tampa police department detective who was killed in the line of duty. Her partner of 10-years, also a Tampa detective, was denied pension benefits because they weren’t “married”. They weren’t married because they are not allowed to. Discrimination is real. And unless we continue to stand up against it, it will continue. Please don’t tell us to shut up about it.

213

More Anti-Gay Republicans
from a congressional sign-on letter to President Bush from Rep. Thomas Tancredo (R-Colo), also signed by Reps. John Hostettler, (R-Ind.); Ernest Istook (R-Okla.); Brian Kerns (R-Ind.); Joseph Pitts (R-Pa.); Jim Ryun (R-Kan.); Bob Schaffer (R-Colo.); Chris Smith (R-N.J.); and John Sullivan (R-Okla.)

The letter is opposing the anti-discrimination policies of Big Brothers and Big Sisters of America.

Yep, the LCR is being quite effective in their party. :rolleyes:

214

Homebrew:

No. I’m not on your side. If you want to make it us and them, you’re on your own. I’m for what I think is right.

You keep trying to convince me that these blue laws are bad. I know. I agree. You keep saying that PR wields all this power but you’ve shown me nothing but assertion.

Finally, I happen to strongly agree with my Republican brethren concerning BBA.

I would not feel it appropriate for a heterosexual man to be the Big Brother to a teenage girl for several reasons.

Most simply, my wife’s OB/Gyn always has a femal chaperone in the room when he’s with a patient. Not only does this protect the patient, it also protects him against false accusations which would be damaging to him and his practice.

I would not support a man being Big Brother to a teenage girl, because there is the possibility that the man’s intentions in seeking the position might not be 100% charitable. There is also the possibility that he might have the finest intentions, but slip up. Children needing BB or BS need support an mature guidance in a safe environment. They may already have problems. They shouldn’t be put in a position where they can be taken advantage of in an unscrupulous moment.

Even more importantly, these are often troubled children. A man being Big Brother to a teenage girl may do nothing wrong. He may be 100% proper and responsible. The girl may seek his affections and be hurt by rejection, or even make a false accusation out of spite.

Segregating it, protects the children, protects the Big Brothers/Sisters as well as the organization itself.

For these same reasons, a Big Brother who is gay, shouldn’t work with a boy in an unsupervised capacity.

I can see no reason why he couldn’t work with a girl though.

A Big brother/Big Sister is supposed to be a platonic relationship, and it is probably best that they be structured and matched in such a way that prevents sexual attraction from either direction.

Having a gay man being Big bother to a boy isn’t a good idea. Preventing the man from taking advantage of the boy is only 1/3 of the issue.

The man needs to be protected from a spiteful or a wishful accusation on the part of a troubled child, and the organization needs to be protected from unnecessary scandal so it can continue to do its damn good work.

That’s why men aren’t Big Brothers to girls.

Shouldn’t it be the same for gay men?

If I have it wrong, explain it to me. It really doesn’t seem a matter of prejudice but of common sense.

215

Yes you have it wrong. Non-discrimination has been the policy of the national BBBS for 25 years. In those 25 years of inclusion, can you identify one, single case of a child being abused by a homosexual BB or BS? One? And why are you linking homosexuality with pedeophile behavior? The research indicates that heterosexual men molest far more boys than homosexual men do. So where’s the concern that all Big Brothers are a risk to their Little Brothers?

BBBS is not about providing a heterosexual model for kids to learn to be a good “Husband” or “Wife”. It’s about providing a positive same-sex role model and stable adult for kids. Read that again, “same-sex” role model. That is why heterosexual men don’t mentor girls. BBBS vice-president and CEO Mack Koonce says it best:

Furthermore, and on top of that, if a parent has a problem with a child having a gay mentor, they can always object. Why is there a need for a blanket ban?

Common Sense tells me to not post anymore for now so I don’t end up with a warning.

216

Scylla, the point is that whether or not you and your wife indulge in oral sex, there is not a organized and widespread group who are prepared to take away various of your civil rights based on the supposition that you do. For gay men and women, there is, and it will not be too difficult for me or others to find a wide variety of links to such materials.

With regard to the warrant question, I will direct you to the original Georgia v. Hardwick case, not the one that made it to the Supreme Court as Bowers v. Hardwick. In that case, Hardwick, a bartender at a gay bar, had received some sort of traffic citation, IIRC a parking ticket. He paid off that ticket. A cop opposed to his being gay sought out a warrant for his arrest on the basis of his not having paid off the ticket, after he had, entered his premises illegally (being let in by a houseguest), discovered him having oral sex with another man, and placed him under arrest under the sodomy law then in place in Georgia. There seems to be little dispute in the write-ups of the case that the cop was motivated by wanting to “get” him for being a gay man. (The felony sodomy charge against Hardwick was dismissed by the D.A., who had a pretty good guess where it would have gone in court; the Supreme Court case was one brought by Hardwick against State Attorney General Bowers for allowing the initial arrest, with the idea that he could get the law overturned as an unconstitutional invasion of privacy.)

When Ray Warren, a competent judge from Charlotte, came out, his opponents (Republicans, by the way) alleged that he was a “Class I Felon” – not for his having actually committed a class I felony, but for being gay, this being presumptive evidence in their minds that he was guilty of the class I felony Crime Against Nature in N.C. statutes.

217

Homebrew:

Scott Wagner.
Chester Palmisciano
Tim Brown

That’s a simplification of a complex issue.

In the first place, you have to define your terms. If a man attempts to have sex with a prebuscent boy, is that a heterosexual act, a homosexual act, or a pedophilic act?

I would guess it would be a pedophilic act.

If a man attempts to have sex with a post-pubescent boy I would tend to think that would be a homosexual act, just as I would think a man having sex with a 14-15 year old girl would be a heterosexual act.

Certainly more men who are normally heterosexual commit pedophilic acts than those who are normally heterosexual. This is because there are a lot more heterosexual men than homosexual.

If you were to break it down into percentages I suspect it would be equal within a standard deviation.

The spectrum of sexuality is pretty wide, and I imagine that you might have exclusive adult homosexuals who when they molest children choose girls exclusivey, and those who chose boy exclusively, as well as male heterosexuals who molest either boys or girls exlusively.

I have seen studies that say a homosexual is less likely to be a molester, and I have seen studies that say a homosexual is more likely. The difference in results seems to be how you define your terms.

Thank you for telling me something I already know. I am thinking that it may need to be different in the case of gay mentors in order to protect all concerned.

I am sorry to say that I feel this way, but a gay man who seeks to spend time alone with a teenage boy is as suspicious as a heterosexual man who seeks to spend time alone with a teenage girl.

Polycarp:

We are arguing outside of the original point. I will concede that there are incidents of law enforcement officials using the blue laws to target gays, if you will concede that these are rather rare, and that the blue laws are being rapidly eroded.

My point isn’t that there is not a lot of intolerance and prejudice out there. Clearly there is.

I simply object to the proposition that the fact that a man is bigoted totally defines him.

I also object to hating back against bigotry. It is simply unconstructive, and makes that person’s hatred is as vile as the bigots.

Kirkland has made some pretty strong comments characterizing me. If I followed his policy of returning hate with hate, all that would do is seperate and polarize us further.

Furthermore, gays are winning the battle for fairer more equal civil rights. Integration shouldn’t mean the destruction and demonization of your enemies. It should mean accomodation, acceptance, and the search for common ground.

Some people maintain prejudices against gays because they hate them and will never change. Others, and I would like to think it is the majority do out of fear and ignorance.

Attacking back gives that latter group sound reasons not to change and sound reasons to believe the former group’s propaganda.

218

The homo/hetero child-molesting relative risk appears to have been settled in this thread (by RickJay). Apparently, the defining line is is the age of the child (whether pre or post puberty). Worth a read.

219

Izzy:

That’s a good link. I’m going to give myself a pat on the back for having hit pretty close to the mark.

220

No, I won’t. But it was not long ago I would have. I think it’s a case of particular “microcultures” fostering anti-gay sentiment. It’s not prevalent in PA or NYS, though I venture to suggest that JayJay could target specific instances in your home state.

It’s not common in the Triangle nor in metropolitan Atlanta. But there are areas within an hour or so’s drive of each where it is.

And I agree. Like Tom DeLay, Jesse Helms is capable of warm human feeling and also like him, he has gone the length of adopting a special-needs child and apparently has been a near-ideal parent to the kid.

Which does not excuse the policy stances of either or their refusal to grant basic human rights to people on the basis of their own misunderstandings of what those people are and stand for.

Excellent point. I’d just draw the Martin Niemoeller quote to your mind. When they start condemning people with scarred hands for having had poor judgment and therefore a need to have decisions made in your behalf “for your own good” – and yes, I know I’m hitting close to home on that one – the rest of us will already be taken away, and not able to stand up for you, or anyone else. That, as much as anything else, is why I’m fighting the gays’ battles alongside them – along with a couple of real “walk-in-their-shoes” experiences. I suspect strongly that you are failing to empathize with the very real problems that gay people do face, simply because you have not been in a position where “Now it’s personal” as I have.

Lincoln’s quote is apposite: “The best way to destroy an enemy is to make him your friend.”