:yawn:
So, let me get this straight:
All the right-thinking Republicans actually supported gay rights all these years, and kept that under wraps because of the homophobic Democrats who passed all those laws like DOMA?
What planet is this? And how can I get back to Earth from here? :eek:
Aw, come on, Poly. You’re talking about Republican posters who support gay rights. They have to rationalize their party affiliation somehow. 
Polycarp, I refer you to my post of 11/15 above.
Here’s a lovely little tidbit from THIS YEAR’s Republican platform in Bush’s home state of Texas:
This is “compassionate conservativism.” This is pure, unadulterated anti-gay hate. Fuck the Republican party, and everyone who supports it. A vote for a Republican is a vote to keep gays and lesbians second class citizens.
Kirk
Dang it, I thought this was the BBQ Pit. Would a kindly moderator please remove the inappropriate word from my post above and replace it with “To hell with”? I’m very sorry – I tried to stop the submission as soon as I realized what forum this was, but it got through anyway. And since this board refuses to have an “edit” feature…
Anyway, I apologize, and if someone could edit the post, I’d be grateful.
Kirk
Once again, the attempt to project the platform of the Texas Republican Party (which doesn’t even reflect the mainstream of Texas Republicans, or G.W. Bush, see above) onto Republicans everywhere.
Did the national party tell the Texas branch to knock off the homophobia? No? Didn’t think so.
Walloon, I used the platform from Texas because that’s the state that, sadly, I live in. And gee, you seem to have overlooked the post above which specifically uses the bigotted term “sexual preference” when dealing with homosexuals. Homosexuality is an orientation, not a preference.
Find me Republican platforms that don’t try to foist God into the public arena, that support the ENDA and which are blatantly supportive of gays, and then we can talk.
Until then, you’re just trying to claim the GOP isn’t home to the country’s most pathetic and evil bigots, but have nothing on your side to back up your claim, and a lot of evidence, such as the GOP platforms mentioned above, contradcits them.
Kirk
Minty:
But that’s tolerating intolerance, isn’t it? You said the Democrats didn’t do that, and that’s why you’re a Democrat, and certainly a majority of Democrats signed off on Doma. That’s not just tolerating intolerance. That’s taking an active homophobic role.
You’ve responded with individual instances of homophobia among some Republicans and it’s policy. So what? I am not maintaining that there are homophobic elements in the Republican party.
My point, I’ll repeat it for the third time, in the hopes that you will respond to the actual issue I’m raising, is as follows.
You said:
This is your stated reason for being a Democrat.
It is a fundamental LIE.
Democrats voted in favor of DOMA. DOMA not only tolerates homophobia it encourages it.
Don’t ask don’t tell tolerates homophobia, and my opinion is that it was far worse than what occured before, and no party that claims not to tolerate intolerance would ever make such a compromise.
Like I said. Your original statement and attempt to characterize the Republican party in general based on the actions of a few individuals is characteristic of the Democratic party, which seems to no longer stand for anything but name-calling.
Zis is not vot I said:
But, for your information Barry Goldwater, the father of modern conservatism spoke and lobbied heroically for the recognition of gay rights in the military before his death.
Well, I think they probably did.
Now, since you’re just stating a matter of opinion, I can satisfactorily rebut it with my opinion. However, in the interests of furthering the debate, I’ll refer you to the part of your link that I quoted showing Bush meeting with Log Cabin Republicans but refusing to meet with intolerant elements.
Looks to me like that’s a way of telling them to knock off the homophobia, doesn’t it?
Furthermore, since the GOP was sending a clear message by trotting out a gay speaker, I doubt they were pleased by the little display (even if it was only one or two people,) and I’ll bet those people had that displeasure expressed to them.
Once again, we’re talking about a couple of Crackers acting in embarassing fashion.
Their actions do not characterize my entire party and it is a lie to suggest they do.
Cite, please?
Not that I’m at all happy with DOMA, but like I said, my party still wants to make the benefits of marriage available to gays and lesbians. Yours actively opposes that position.
Nor am I maintaining that there are no homophobes in the Democratic Party. Rather, what I’m saying is that the homophobes control your party and set an actively anti-gay agenda. In my party, supporters of gay rights control the party and set an actively pro-rights agenda. That’s why I’m a Democrat, and it’s a shame that you’re a Republican.
Can’t say as I disagree with you there. But like I keep telling you, my party also supports “the full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of the nation. This would include an equitable alignment of benefits.” Your party opposes that, i.e., it tolerates homophobia. Mine attacks and ameliorates homophobia.
Nonsense. By that measure, the 1964 Civil Rights Act was an act of intolerance. Compromises are sometimes made out of political necessity because they advance the proper agenda when political opposition prevents a complete remedy of the problem. And like I said, it was mostly your party that wanted to continue the witch hunt.
I cited the jerks who protested the gay congressman as an example of Republican tolerance of homophobia, not as the be-all and end-all of the problem. As for characterizing the party in general (note: that does not mean “all party members”) as actively hostile to gays, I refer you once again to your party’s platform and my party’s platform.
And I know you’re wrong. As you will note from Kirkland’s citation of that platform, the nasty language is still there. I live in this state, and I pay attention to its politics. At no time did the RNC or any of the party’s national leaders tell the Texas party to drop the anti-gay hatred from the state platform.
And of course, as soon as I post it, I find where I said it. :smack: Oh well, as a general proposition, I see nothing inaccurate about the statement. The devil, of course, is always in the details.
Minty:
I was quoting you!
Bullshit! Jesus man, do you beleive yourself? This is a self-refuting statement. Come on, you’re a lawyer! If they wanted to "make the benefits of marriage available to gays and lesbians then why did they vote for DOMA?
This is what I’m talking about with the outright demonization and lies.
Allow me to quote another:
[quote]
A false argument should be refuted, not named. That’s the basic idea behind freedom of speech. Arguments by demonization rather than truth and light, can be presumed to be fraudulent. Real hate speech does not have to be flagged and labelled. It speaks for itself. If a person makes an argument that is, in fact, “Racist” (anti-semitic, sexist, looksist----whatever,) that fact ought to be sef-evident. Simply restating the argument would expose the wily bigot --if bigotry it is-- without a big warning label screaming “Racist!” “Sexist!” “Homophobic!”
You pretend that individual actions characterize the Republican party, while at the same time those same actions by Democrats do not characterize your party. Insane!!
But, A majority of Democrats voted in favor of DOMA That fact would seem to entirely refute what you just said. If your party is so big on attaqcking ameliorating homophobia then by what insane logic would you explain the fact that so very many Democrats voted in favor of DOMA?
You just don’t want to let go of the big lie, do you?
That doesn’t sound at all like not tolerating intolerance.
And, like I said, such statements are lies and attempts to demonize the opposition, which is mostly what liberalism seems to stand for these days, attacking Republicans. Your party bandies such about like Chicken Little, with as little actual substance.
And signing Doma is an example of Democrats propagating intolerance.
Yes, I’ve seen that, and it’s been discussed before. Doubtless you were part of that discussion, as you’re familiar with it. That’s what some shitheads wrote. At least they told the truth. The shitheads that wrote your platform acted all high and mighty and inclusive and then signed DOMA anyway. The big difference is that the Republican shitheads weren’t hypocritical about it. We don’t claiming that we’re the party for gay rights, and then pass legislation against gays.
It reflects poorly on both parties, but at least our platform wasn’t a lie.
Again. This is beside the point. I am not maintaining or trying to argue that there are not strong homophobic elements within the Republican party.
The fact that they are Texans has a lot more to do with those particular beleifs than the fact that they are Republicans.
You cite the worst, and say that it represents the entire party. Bullshit!
Jesus H. Christ, Scylla, the national Republican platform has also been quoted above with anti-gay rhetoric. It’s not just Texas.
Do yo not read?
From my previous post:
Polycarp, you are in the Scylla,december, Minty, Bricker Zone, (The SdMB Zone for convenience) a trademark of the Fenris Equine Soup Jazzercize Group. A SdMB debate has nothing to do with reality as experienced by hew-mans.
So let me see if I got this straight (snicker), Scylla.
One party supports, or at the very least, does not repudiate, a position stating that the ordinary sexual behavior of persons not in the public view, and presenting no direct peril of scaring the horses should be considered felonious, and punishable by law.
The other, apparently with some reluctance, supports a position that states that such persons should not be considered “married” in the conventional meaning of that word.
One wants to throw gays in jail, the other is uncomfortable with the idea that they legally marry.
And they are equally homophobic.
No, sugarpants, it simply won’t do. By the by, that tie doesn’t suit you, you’re more of an Autumn. And, good God, man, Old Spice?
Any day I get compared to the likes of Bricker and Fenris for my political debating is a good day for me.