**Post UPDATED at bottom.
In the weeks leading up to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) last week, there was a sidebar skirmish involving two of the CPAC sponsors. The new gay conservative group, GOProud.org, which was formed in 2009, wanted to make a splash at CPAC and introduce itself to the conservative movement. But long-time sponsor, Liberty University, would have none of it:
Obviously as an exhibitor or participant, you don’t necessarily have to think that everyone agrees with you, and some people might even work against you [notes Liberty Law School Dean Mat] Staver. But as a co-sponsor, even though not everybody would have the same mission, not everyone would agree with the same tactics, and some would actually focus on economics whereas others might focus on social issues and others might focus on national defense – the fact is they’re all conservative in nature. You wouldn’t expect, however, a co-sponsor to actively work to undermine another co-sponsor, and that is in fact what GOProud does.
Liberty dropped, GOProud stayed, and CPAC took some heat. So coming into CPAC, GOProud knew its presence would be controversial and their members were prepared to address opponents at the exhibit booth. But last Friday, when a series of student activists spoke at the podium, no one imagined the undercurrent would erupt the way it did.
Alexander McCobin addressed the GOProud/Liberty sponsor issue head-on and praised CPAC for being inclusive and standing up for the principles of freedom and liberty. McCobin was met with praise and applause for his remarks.
A few minutes later, Ryan Sorba from the California Young Americans for Freedom got to the podium and started a bizarre tirade against CPAC, gays and lesbians, and the audience itself. Following the incident, information quickly turned up that Sorba has been trying to peddle a manuscript called “The Born Gay Hoax” for a few years now. In his post-outburst interviews and encounters, Sorba hasn’t revealed whether his CPAC rant was planned in advance or the result of McCobin’s previous praise of GOProud.
The conservative crowd quickly turned on him and forced him to walk off the stage. The ironic part of the crowd support of GOProud is that none of its leaders were even in the room at the time, but in the exhibit hall. This was a spontaneous rejection of Sorba’s anti-gay rant by the CPAC grassroots. They drove him off-stage in a moment that quickly became the talk of the conference and the internet.
The reaction from the mainstream media and Gay Left blog community was swift and predictable: CPAC boos the gays. Most delivered their verdicts without being at the conference itself, talking to anyone there or even watching the earlier video where Alexander McCobin was applauded. The idea that the conservative movement would actually rally behind GOProud at the CPAC conference was completely unimaginable to those on the Left as news of the event spread. Some examples:
Media Matters for America: Commenters all jumped to the conclusion that it was CPAC rejecting GOProud, not CPAC rejecting Sorba.
Democratic Underground: Immediate headline: “Your Homophobic CPAC Moment, Featuring Ryan Sorba”
Mother Jones: “So while CPAC organizers might have shown some backbone by resisting calls to kick GOProud out of its event, it’s hard to give them much credit for providing a guy like Sorba such a prominent platform.”
Left-wing gay extremist Wayne Besen: “I guarantee you that, for a lot of people in that room, their issue is not the content of Sorba’s tirade, but rather the unfiltered nature of it, because they know that their bigotry is not acceptable in intelligent society.”
Gay left wing radical Michaelangelo Signorile: Wow. Just played this on show. RT @CPAC speaker “condemn[s] CPAC for bringing” gay GOP group “to this event”
But then a funny thing happened. The conservative bloggers who were actually at CPAC and who actually witnessed the Sorba tirade went ballistic on him immediately. From Ace of Spades, to HotAir, to Michelle Malkin and across the entire center-right blogosphere, especially via Twitter, the reaction was one of complete and utter disdain – not for Sorba’s lack of etiquette, but for his message of intolerance.
Suddenly the mainstream media and liberal bloggers couldn’t hide the truth. The first video of Alexander McCobin was now on YouTube, going viral, and creating the contrast with how Sorba was booed off the CPAC stage. It was undeniable; facts truly are stubborn things. And this all happened at the speed of the internet in 2010.
The change in the reaction on the Left came when Keith Olbermann at MSNBC, in the midst of a rant on the “crazies” at CPAC, conceded that the conservatives turned on Sorba and stood up for GOProud. If Olbermann is defending CPAC, you know there’s a break in the Maginot Line. Fast-forward to 4:50:
John Aravosis, long-time gay liberal internet activist, was the first and most prominent voice on the Gay Left to grasp what had happened about three hours after Sorba’s CPAC explosion: “To the White House, the DNC, and our leadership in Congress: You are messing with people’s lives, and we know it. And the day that an anti-gay bigot gets booed at CPAC, you all better start being very afraid.”
He got it. And so did all of the conservative bloggers at CPAC and especially the gay conservatives both in person at CPAC and keeping in touch in real-time via the internet. We were a part of one of those moments. Another telling piece of evidence is that of the 15 issues that CPAC 2010 straw poll participants said was important to them, only 1% named gay marriage. It’s also worth noting, according to the results of the straw poll, the amount of participants who listed “stopping gay marriage” as their most important issue was statistically insignificant.
And though it took a while, formerly-conservative gay blogger Andrew Sullivan – never one to miss a chance to hammer the alleged intolerance of American conservatives – finally weighed in. Sullivan was completely silent about Sorba on Friday. And Saturday. But two days later, when he found a new angle, Sullivan couldn’t help himself. The story was too juicy for even him to ignore and he joined the blogosphere left-wing media bandwagon since he knew the way the winds were blowing. Nevertheless, Sullivan labeled Sorba “a glimpse into the future of Republicanism.” While Keith Olbermann is defending conservatives, Andrew Sullivan is tearing them down.
This moment at CPAC is even more important for the conservative movement as it happened at an important time when there is already a generational change going on in America. Boomers are fading, Xer’s are ruling, and Millenials are finding their way. Forty-eight percent of those who participated in the CPAC straw poll last week identified themselves as students. They are the future of conservativism. And they shouted down an anti-gay bigot.
There will surely be other homocon-related clashes within the conservative movement, just as the Democrat Party has regularly used the gay community as pawns in their re-election schemes for decades. But as the late gay political icon Harvey Milk, who started out as a Republican, famously said:
Gay people, we will not win our rights by staying silently in our closets… We are coming out. We are coming out to fight the lies, the myths, the distortions. We are coming out to tell the truths about gays, for I am tired of the conspiracy of silence, so I’m going to talk about it. And I want you to talk about it. You must come out. Come out to your parents, your relatives.
Last week at CPAC we saw the many years of work by dedicated conservative gays and lesbians standing up for their values and the principles of freedom and liberty finally pay off. There was a tipping point for gays in America last week at CPAC. It happened because they have been coming out to their parents, friends and relatives over time… as American conservatives who just happen to be gay.
**
UPDATE: I have been informed by a number of folks who were at the CPAC Blogger’s Lounge that indeed one liberal reporter did “get” the Sorba-GOProud moment correct. Tommy Christopher from Mediate.com wrote, right after the incident last Friday:
Just when it looks like this country can’t get any more divided, there comes a tiny glimmer of hope. Just mi,nutes ago here at CPAC, California Young Americans for Freedom’s Ryan Sorba launched into a denunciation of the conference for inviting GOProud, and as he railed against gays, he was roundly booed off the stage.
The difference between Tommy and the other liberal bloggers and media is that Tommy was actually in the room and present for the outburst, while the others were pontificating from outside the hall.
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
1,106 Comments
They should have rejected the gays.
Rejecting the gays isn't going to get anybody anywhere. they're people just like us just with different lifestyles, whether they be conservative, progressive, or tea partier. if the tea partiers want to connect with more American voters they have to reach out to the gay, lesbian, transgender, transexual and minority voters.
Sexual orientation, in and of itself, it absolutely irrelevant to any political discourse.
So why did they identify themselves as a gay group?
I feel compelled to comment. Probably out of habit, as I voice in on everything else.
My Momma always told me, "Boy, if you can't say something constructive, keep your big mouth shut." On further reflection, as much as this might be abhorrent to me, Brokeback Mountain meets CPAC, it is not for me to judge.
" Forty-eight percent of those who participated in the CPAC straw poll last week identified themselves as students. They are the future of conservativism. And they shouted down an anti-gay bigot."
I am proud of those young students. Dinosaurs like me won't be here much longer, and the world is a changin'. I reckon I had better accept it, even though I might not like it.
Some of us are raising and encouraging the next generation to do the right thing, regardless of forces hammering away at the foundations of decency, the vocal few, in our communities.
Confusion of belief and activism, conservative gays do not dress as slutty nuns in parades, are more likely to be monogamous, and steathed to gaydar. During WW2 my father's units most effective soldier was an obvious gay man. Hesed there is a difference between gay and f@g, this is the world not religion.
I don't care about calling gays, f@gs or whatever. The fact remains they have chosen a sexual orientation that is not conservative.
Certainly I have no problems with those who say they are gay supporting conservative causes. But I do question the motives, and the involvement/influence upon those causes, by those who choose to live an immoral lifestyle, as gays do, monogamous or not.
That's it….I'm done with politics and this degenerat(ing) society…
CPAC asked for this – goproud does not stand for what conservatism stands for. The gays in the crowd just showed how arrogant and disgusting they are and that is the only reason they attended. Thank GOD for Matt Staver and the people from Liberty to bow out of this charade which is all that it was. WHAT EVER HAPPENDED TO RESPECT – GOPROUD – you sicko wackos. You are on the same track as the corrupt government and just as disgusting. Not only is their lifestyle not conservative it is against the teachings in the BIBLE – how about reading it and take heed. CPAC and all these other FRONTS get more disgusting everyday and that is just why we are in the mess we are today.
I AGREE. Conservatives need to drop the anti-gay stuff. I don't see anything in conservative principles or the founding documents about gay ppl.
"…it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." -Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
I believe this is true for religious beliefs and for other personal matters as well. What a person believes in, and whom he or she loves, is none of my business. Period. It only becomes my problem (and the Government's) if it leads that person to coercive or violent behavior toward others. That is how Liberty works. Leave the policing of a person's private thoughts and feelings to the Progressives. That is the sort of evil at which they excel.
Kudos to McCobin. Well done.
I find it difficult to believe that at any time 'stopping gay marriage' might be at the top of a Conservative's list of items of importance. Perhaps the way it was phrased might have impacted the statistics. Would 'preserving the institution of marriage as presently defined' have ranked slightly higher, for example? Just saying.
I don't give a damn what consenting adults do in private. That's their own business. If gay people want to join the fight against socialism, welcome aboard. Time to stay focused on keeping this republic from going off the economic cliff.
Just think, a few years ago it was blacks and other minorities. Glad you can find someone safe to hate.
What is great about this country is that we have the ability to form our own opinions and then do our best lead our lives based on them. The trouble I have had with this debate is the difference between "tolerance" and "acceptance". Letting people live their lives the way they wish, staying out of their bedroom, etc is being tolerant. I consider myself tolerant. It does not mean that I have to ACCEPT these ways as a way that I would lead my life or raise my family.
In most cases, it does not matter to me how you lead your life or raise your family to a certain point. I am in no position to be telling people how to raise their own kids since I am having enough challenges raising my own. However, I have also made it clear to my children that different families have different rules and what might be right for them may not be right for us. Again, it doesn't make us intolerant it is just a different take on what is considered acceptable in my view.
Personally, I think there can be other legal "marriage-equivalent" structures in place for gays to commit to a relationship that allows the things they claim are being denied to them, visitation rights, estate rights, etc. Since many couples just go to a judge to fill out the paperwork now a days to "get married" I don't see the big deal other than I do have a problem with using the word marriage. It's a hangup I need to probably deal with but if the civil union can give them the rights they deem "missing", why do they need it to be called marriage? I am always asked, it's just a word, what's the big deal, but then I never hear reverse ever answered. If civil unions give them what they want, why do they insist on NEEDING the word?
Because folks like you need to see them as people, and that is one way. Also, protection in numbers.
I guess you really don't understand people with religious principles, also supported by the founding documents. Yes, I will flat out tell you its my religious beliefs that cause me to seriously question the morality and profitability of homosexuality. Its great that there are "conservative" homosexuals who aren't Marxists, but that doesn't mean I will accept their lifestyles and choices. I promise you that any conservative homosexual push to be accepted will put such a huge rift in the conservative ranks that Marxist will end up winning by default.
An picketing service member funerals to make your points?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church
I should also quickly add, that in terms of an overall priority, the gay marriage battle ranks just above global warming for me which is to say, we have MUCH BIGGER ISSUES than this to worry about in our nation today then whether or not some gay conservatives helped sponsor a conference.
Not all change is good.
Normalization and acceptance of homosexuality to make it equal to heterosexuality is not a positive change.
Does this mean that homosexuals should be treated badly?
No, of course not, they are human beings and deserve the same respect and dignity that any of us deserve.
I think we need to re-visit the definition of the word tolerance.
America is a Republic/Democracy. Keep your Amer-Taliban Theocracy out of my house and gtfo my lawn! This is what Our Founders warned against- the Republican Party got corrupted by the Radical Right. Enjoy your hair shirts and "purity tests", folks.
Well if you want to call opposition to sin, and opposition to those who are in open sin, hatred, so be it.
I'm a adult. I have no problem dealing with the consequences caused by those who deny the truth.
Homosexuality as an issue has no place in a forum esposing conservative principles anymore than satan worshippers do at a religion conference.At this event ..like they always do ..homosexuals show their penchant for disruptive,exhibitionist behavior and take awy from them main focus .
Conservatives need to get rid of that idiotic neocon idea of a big tent.Just like with the boy scouts ..there are someplaces where homosexuals don't fit.
That's the point.
When you get hired, you don't say, hey look everyone I'm gay, deal with it. Nope, that's wrong.
But we supposedly have to allow it in conservative circles. Not.
Unless, of course, your neighbor's religion believes in picking your pocket and breaking your leg.
With all due respect, I respect that and commend it.
For anyone that has been around here for more than a day, they have an inkling that i am usually to the right of Rush Limbaugh and Atilla the Hun. I do not judge when it comes to that topic.
Where you say: "Some of us are teaching, raising, and encouraging the next generation to do the right thing", that is indeed commendable, yet you are teaching, raising and encouraging based upon your INTERPRETATION of what is right and wrong. You are instilling your values.
Far be it for me to have a philosophy debate with you, or anyone else here.
You know, there is nothing like getting the s*it beat out of you because of what you are to open your eyes to the misery poured on others. Who cares how one wants to use their plumbing, none of my business, and it should not be yours. Are you so insecure of yourself you have to hate others for this?
I'm the father of a two-parent conservative Christian household with four children. Everyone in my family has accepted Jesus Christ as our Savior. Although it is VERY clear, from the Word of God, that homosexuality is probably the great sin possible, since it not only goes directly against what God instructed for man, but also goes against what God has instilled in the natural world (homosexuality is basically the ultimate slap in the face to God), my own teenaged children have been indoctrinated by the public school system to be "accepting" of homosexuality. My hope is that as they grow in their faith, they will realize just how sinful it is. It is not surprising that a conference with a large percentage of public school graduates (of the past 20 years), who have been subject to the pro-gay agenda in school, TV, movies, and news their entire lives, would respond this way. The homos have succeeded in their initial goal of "being accepted", now they are making steps toward well more than just acceptance.
Sorry, but you are wrong. I am gay and conservative….you would never know it if you met me. There are many very fine gay people in this world. And being gay is NOT a choice. I didn't ask for it, but it is the way God made me. Anyway, The majority of gay's are not out. They are conservative and want as normal a life as any one else. It is only the few that are in your face with their agendas. I personally don't understand why the gay agenda about getting married is such a big deal in the gay community. Marriage is for straight couples, a civil union does the same thing for gays.
Good post
Agreed. I don't care if you're an alcoholic, adulterer, gay, etc. That never needs to be brought up.
Hence the just opposition to any group that labels themselves as gay. There is no need for any gay groups, if they want to be a part.
As a geeky, straight, white man I find it mind blowing that some people try to use "natural law" arguments against homosexual behavior. Homosexual behavior is seen in all animals at all levels of intelligence and non-intelligence. Sex has more than the core purpose of reproduction ESPECIALLY in higher intelligences. The argument that sex is a rational behavioral extension for reproduction is irrational. To say that homosexual behavior is against natural law is to COMPLETELY IGNORE what happens in nature. Also, ANYONE who believes in equality under the law or blind justice who is against gay marriage (a legal status, not a religious one) is a hypocrite. And "conservatives" who think people should be treated differently because they might prefer sex with someone of the same gender is no conservative at all because it flies in the face of the fundamental conservative ideal: INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM. A conservative certainly can find homosexual behavior disgusting but a conservative would NEVER think of trying to limit the freedom of someone because of exercising those freedoms.
repeating from above:
I guess [the gay sponsors] really don't understand people with religious principles, also supported by the founding documents. Yes, I will flat out tell you its my religious beliefs that cause me to seriously question the morality and profitability of homosexuality. Its great that there are "conservative" homosexuals who aren't Marxists, but that doesn't mean I will accept their lifestyles and choices. I promise you that any conservative homosexual push to be accepted will put such a huge rift in the conservative ranks that Marxist will end up winning by default.
CPAC this year was almost no better than a liberal rally. After all, look who won the straw poll? Crazy man Ron Paul and his political cultist followers. This more than anything has proven that, like it or not, there is still huge divisions within the conservative movements; probably more so than liberals.
And of course, now on to the Christian bashing. Anything of substance you'd like to add?
No problem with your opinion. Opinions may change through experience and understanding. Peace.
Nice of you to censure my comments. I guess you can't handle the truth. (for those of you who might see this in the split second before it's deleted, I did not use any profanity and instead of typing "homosexual", I typed "homo"; the HORROR!
Let me ask you a question? Do YOU choose to be gay? NO!!!…so why would I? I didn't choose to be gay…after years of fighting not to be and contemplating suicide in high shcool because of it…I decided life is too short too fret over it. So I decided to live my life as normal as possible I could and be an example that not ALL gays are freaks.
If, in the state of emergency this country is in, stopping gay marriage is at the top of your list, you are NOT a Conservative. I don't know what you are, but it's not Conservative.
Guess you guys missed this, just minutes after Sorba's exit:
Anti-Gay CPAC Speaker Booed Off The Stage
http://www.mediaite.com/online/homophobic-cpac-sp...
Yes, it was a liberal who reported it that way first, and called out liberals who reported it the other way on Twitter. ( twitter.com/tommyxtopher )
My whole point is that just as we would reject the KKK groups, the alcoholic groups, the racist groups, the porn groups, etc from conservative organizations, we shouldn't have any 'sexual choice orientation' groups, either.
Tolerance does not equate to acceptance. And that is what they want, and want to force upon those who give them a platform.
Gay is neither here nor there.
It's like a society advocating only the missionary position. What is the point of bringing up your sexual preferences in a political context. Gay Marriage is totally pointless, they just want sodomy validated. Why do we need to do that?
What a dumb ass comment!!! There are more straight people with AIDS than gay people!!!
Hell, stick around!
It'll be interesting to see what Michael Steele fills the Republican Big tent with. I'm sure there " will be green alligators and long-necked geese, some humpty backed camels and some chimpanzees,some cats and rats and elephants, but sure as you're born,the loveliest of all was the unicorn". He might even bring in a troupe of traveling minstrels, a fairie or two, and don't forgey the lusty, busty, bodacious Meghan McCain. She is going to do her burlesque dance to the hurdy gurdy music.
Good gawd, it's turning into a freak show. Pretty soon it'll look like the DNC…………
When you define yourself by your sexual practices then guess what…people get to comment on those sexual practices.
So, if Jack Ryan's ex-wife's accusations were true should Mr.Ryan head up a Republican group that are into wife-swapping, BDSM, etc?
Cause, hey, we need to see them as people. Kinky, kinky people.
It's your choice as with whom you sexually gratify yourself. That's a fact.
There's nothing deviant about being homosexual. All animal species (including human beings) have members who are homosexual.
Sorry to hear you are such an intolerant bigot, but you certainly don't represent my brand of conservatism.
Agreed, tolerance does not equal acceptance.
Being conservative has nothing to do with religion… or sexual preference for that matter you moron. While I may agree with you that homosexual acts are disgusting since I am attracted to women, you are completely irrational to think discussion of sexuallity has ANYPLACE in a political debate. You also need to read up on what being a "conservative" means. It means you advocate individual freedom, not advocating for making everyone conform to your ideals. I am sure you do something that makes me more disgusted than gay men having sex. Should I start a PAC to get what you do made "less equal" than what I do?
We will stay of your lawn, that's easy. You need to respect our right to educate our kids without the sodomite agenda.
The gay groups whole mission is to force acceptance on everyone else. That is why civil unions aren't good enough for them, why Obama has Jennings in the DOE, why employment equality laws aren't enough, and why in legal academia the focus is on getting the message to children through schools. I would never lash out against someone doing something in their home that I believe is morally wrong, and giving legal rights such as employment, inheritance, etc. The idea that the homsexual political movement is just about what people do in their bedrooms is an facade fabricated by gay activists and unfortunately young students are too under-informed, too Hollywood-following and entrenched in a romantic idealism to see through. The homosexual agenda is not about freedom to do something in the privacy of one's own bedroom, nor about legal equality. It is a culture war to fundamentally reform the family and marriage. I won't be drinking the homosexual political movement's kool-aid even if it does show up at CPAC or becomes a trend in conservatism.
Glad to see you have elevated one sin above another…didn't think God taught that. I understand that all sins are the same in Gods eyes. What deviant bible are you reading?
I have many gay friends.
I've hired and fired gay people over the years. In fact, when they didn't share their sexual choices with people at work, they usually were good workers. The ones who did, were disruptive and didn't last.
I have no problem working alongside of, or having gays working for me. At work, and in politics, sexual gratification choices have no place.
Groups that want to identify themselves by their ideology, God Hates Fags groups, Gay Groups, Straight Groups, etc have no place and shouldn't, IMO, in conservative causes.
Obviously, these groups divide, not unite people.
Avoid gay groups just as you, as a gay, avoid sharing your sexual gratification choices. No one never need know in order to benefit the group.
Sorry, but identifying your sexual gratification choices really shouldn't have a place in any discussion.
Nobama, it is idiots like you that give the progressives ammo to feed their lie machine on the internet. Are you sure you are not a progressive? I thought only progressives tried to make everyone do things as they want them to do it rather than allowing people individual freedom? You are certainly no conservative.
I don't see gay marriage as "tolerance" or "acceptance". Gay marriage is validation. They want sodomy validated and celebrated. We are suppose to love them, that's what they want. Tilting against windmills imo.
well said.
Yep, as with global warming (cap and trade) issues/legislation, gay marriage should be opposed just as vehemently.
So you're saying that in order to exercise one's individual freedom, one must have one's union with a partner recognized and sanctioned by The Government?
Hear, hear!
No, you didn't say Sodomite, now did you? Ouch!
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd444.htm
Sodomy is not a marriage. Bake a cake, get the justice of the peace and a certificate. It's still not a marriage. So in my opinion there is nothing to stop.
This country was founded upon freedom, freedom so long as it does not infringe upon the freedom of another…or a group. While I do not condone the gay life style I do recognize that they are not harming me or my freedom. Their are gaining freedom in their own way and who am I to keep them from it. this is a non-political issue.
I just get annoyed with the gays that use their lifestyle as a publicity event, a so called “teachable” moment. While toleration is required for harmony, love of the style is not. A persons sex life should remain private, hetero or homo.
Because they wanted to fight the steriotype conservatives have of being straight white men. The same reason minority conservative groups self identify. The video of right thinking people who shouted down that idiot Sorba and his irrational argument against homosexuals is the result of GOProud's label. PR to fight the steriotype.
Conservativism is about improving the individual's life, regardless of their personal sexual choices. If gays, like blacks, want to reject the so-called "liberal" movement that hates them passionately (just search Twitter for Breitbart and O'Keefe sexual innuendo!), they're welcome. None should expect their choices to be approved, however, but they MUST be at least tolerated.
With one important caveat: conservativism is about the advancement of the INDIVIDUAL, not protecting a category racket.
Gays that want to advance their acceptance into society as individuals, not as a category, they'll find that at the very least their money doesn't smell to pragmatic capitalists. Many might not approve, but will have to tolerate – because those that don't are going to lose customers in capitalism.
Gays that believe they can get gay marriage or other anti-heterosexual discrimination laws (such as ones that would make it a bigger crime for a non-gay to assault a gay than vice-versa), they will only get a well-earned cold shoulder.
Conservativism is about making choices and living with them. The choice of homosexuality is neither different nor worthy of special treatment from others.
I hope that you conservatives who are supportive of equality for everyone, who denounced the vile rhetoric of Ryan Sorba, take note at the vicious, hateful comments above towards gays and lesbians. This is a perfect example of why we can not even come together on this common issue of left and right and the bond of being gay or accepting of gays.
Take note at how vicious, hateful and threatening a good number of these comments are. This is what we on the left face from the majority of your conservatives on a daily basis.
These are your family, brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, sons and daughters that these hateful comments are being stated about.
Until those in the Obstructionist Party of NO, are willing to meet half way, and decide that we do have a common ground of accepting a lifestyle that happens to be different, by reaching out and be tolerant, your side will forever be seen as the Ryan Sorbas of the Conservative Party and we will never be able to find common ground.
The only reason the 'God Hates Fags' and the 'Gay' groups join in any organization, meeting, or forum is to divide.
When they bring those things to the table, they're just vomiting on the whole process, and should, rightfully, be excluded from these progressive issues, as they are a disruptive, divisive minority with nothing substantive to add.
People have the right of free association. If they want to label themselves as gay, well I'm too busy losing sleep over an encroaching tyranny to worry about that. The tea party movement is supposed to be about restoring economic sanity to government, not a religious sermon.
…does anyone REALLY think that Jesus would celebrate a homosexual dying of AIDS?!?!? Seriously?????
No, but he also would love them enough to tell them the truth about what they are doing to themselves.
Just like he told all the other people engaged in self-destructive behavior about the consequences of their actions.
Okay, and those deviant sexual choices have what to do with the conversation? Nada.
And decent people do not care about those things. So don't bring them to the table with your label of 'gay group' or 'god hates fags' groups.
Maybe to bring conservatives gays out of the closet? I understand your argument Hesed and time will tell if they are truly conservative in nature. It is something that warrants watching, but……
It is difficult to embrace this movement and as an Evangelical Christian I don't agree with the lifestyle they have chosen. I am a stranger in a strange land and am given the task of being an example to every human on this earth of my Saviors ability to redeem. Given an opportunity to know and share with anyone the hope that is in me is something I need to keep first and foremost in my life. I have to leave my judgement at the door, with every sin there is the possiblity of redemption.
I don't disagree with GOProud's right to speak nor Sorba's right to speak….that is the crux of being a conservative. Whether we agree with their lifestyle it should not be something we discriminate against….once again another conservative principle….There have been Log Cabin Republicans for a while and we need to be able to embrace them like any other human being as long as they tow the conservative line.
Not Christian, just the view you are espousing. WWJD? Have you not sined?
Not all gays are imoral folks, not all straight folks are moral.
I tithe, take time to help those in my community and outside, support missions, and spend lots of time with the Lord by suporting his church.
instead of busilly looking for faults in others, why don't you look into that splinter in your eye?
bible.cc/matthew/7-3.htm
Wow, how intolerant and progressive of you.
So Lindsey Lohan and Anne Heche were “born gay”?
Homosexuality is behavior, people. Maybe people are born with certain tendencies towards it and others aren’t, but it’s ultimately their choice whether they want to do it or not. It doesn’t mean I accept or condemn your lifestyle, it’s just fact. But why go around demanding special rights because of what you CHOOSE to do in your life? The fact that so many think behavior is a civil right is just sad
Bruce,
Although I wasn't in attendance at CPAC, I have been following the events closely. And I agree–I think we have reached a positive milestone of sorts within the conservative movement.
Conservative lesbians and gays like yourself, who have endured the wrath and scorn of the progressive lesbian and gay communities and who have struggled to be heard and accepted by fellow patriots, deserve our respect and gratitude.
Thank you for your courage and perseverance. One small milestone at a time.
>ANYONE who believes in equality under the law or blind justice who is against gay marriage (a legal status, not a religious one) is a hypocrite
See? This is the kind of behavior that doesn't help to advance the toleration of homosexual behavior in the slightest. Sex is somehow above mere reproduction (not quite, there are more complex elements at work regarding intimacy that sex overlaps as a further incentive to reproduction), but marriage is simply a "legal" status. You're the hypocrite, if anything.
Gays need to get this very clear if they want to have the tolerance of conservativism: GAY MARRIAGE IS NOT HAPPENING. Not now, not ever. Tolerance is all you can shoot for; gay marriage implies acceptance of your choices. Forcing that on the public is against all that individualism is about.
If you can't live on tolerance and must have acceptance, especially if you confuse the latter for the former, you'll find no tolerance in any society, present or future.
They demonstrated their intolerance of others' opnions, and the lamestram media is loving it, no doubt.
Personally, I've never seen gay people not accepted as individuals at any conservative meeting. The individuals, if open-minded and not bigoted, are acceptable/tolerable.
But hey, when you come to the meeting as a 'gay group' or a 'god hates fags' group, you should be excluded, as you're there to divide, and to create a media moment, not to participate and to help the process.
Ahh, the old, "If you don't like homosexuality then you must be a closeted gay." routine.
Second only to the, I'm for gay marriage as long as both chicks are hot.
Sorry, but most straight men are repulsed by male homosexual behavior, not because they are latent homosexuals but because they are straight.
Well I am not a part of any gay group. I am an idividual who is self employed, who works very hard, I have watched my business get slower and slower because of this Marxist we have in office. I keep my private life to my self except for these few posts. I know many many gay people who are married, have kids and are conservative. We are active everyday in promoting conservativism because it truely is the freeist form of govt that promotes, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of hapiness. Some of my friends know, but for the most part, the majority of all gays are in the closet because they choose to be, so they can have as normal of a life as possible, so as not to offend anyone.
Right. Participate, don't flaunt your stuff.
We don't need the 'god hates fags' groups, or the 'I love my gay lover' groups either.
I am I hetrosexual conserative who was raised Southern Baptist. I know my Bible. It DOES speake out against homesexual relationships. Guess what it speakes out against evenmore often: extramartial hetrosexual sex! It is completly unjustified to focus on one sexual sin and ingore the others.
Your religious principlas are fine, but remember that God did not crerate use to be mindless, soulless robots blindly worshiping his name. Instead he gave us the ability to choose our lifestyles for ourselves and HE ALONE has the right to judge us for the choices we make.
YES we should accept the gay conseratives as our brothers and sisters in the political movement.
No one says you have to agree with the choices of their personal lives. Your church does not have to sponcer gay marriage. You dont have to accept gay marriage. We just need to work togather with ALL conseratives to insure that the ideals of Freedom, Liberty, and Justice apply to everyone. This is done through shrinking the Fed and building personal rights.
So if your for small Goverment, balanced budgets, and personal freedoms, then I couldnt care less what your sex lfe is.
Welcome to the Big Tent GOProud.
Dan,
That is the biggest bunch of unmitigated bullshit that I have ever read. You are doing nothing more than making excuses, using your "we are different" and "you people are mean". That is nothing but exclusionary.
I am further to the right than probably anyone here, and i resent what you just wrote. I refuse to be stereotyped by you, because you get your little felings hurt, or your panties in a knot.
Obstructionist Party of NO? Bullshit. You people need the Democrat Party as much as they need you. You need to feel victimized, and they need pawns. It is indeed a match made in Heaven, or at least San Francisco. I challange you to change your attitude and your mindset, the world looks a whole lot different, once you remove the rose colored glasses, or pull your head out of your ass..
Neither should have had a place at CPAC, IMO.
Sorba would not have said anything, and the gays who were there, but not a part of the author of this article's group, would have participated anyway.
The only reason to 'flaunt your sexual choices' is to divide.
They should not be recognized, or allowed to be a part, under those pretenses.
It has to do with gay couples wanting government to recognize their union in the SAME manner as it recognizes heterosexual unions….it is a desire for equality. And the answer is really simple: the government should only have the power to recognize civil unions, because by definition civil unions are unions recognized by the law. Marriage has historically been a religious ceremony/institution and should remain that way, free of government coercion.
I, for one, would be totally fine with the government *only* recognizing civil unions (for gays and straights) for legal purposes. I'd be fine with going down to a courthouse and signing legal paperwork to codify my legal connection to my husband. Then the marriage ceremony, which is a religious sacrament, can be performed by my church. Let's keep government out of our churches and out of religious ceremonies, like marriage. The only power that government should have is over civil unions. It should have no power to compel my church to perform marriage ceremonies for people who are homosexual or divorced or anything else that my particular church disagrees with.
I am less convinced that the heckling of Sorba was the recognition of GOPride as it was acknowledgement that Sorba is apparently a douchebag. It seems his reputation preceded him, because the booing started before he even opened his mouth. That being said, any progress on the issue is good.
I am a conservative, born and bred, and I have no problem saying that homosexuals should be a part of the conservative movement.
And of course, now on to the Christian bashing. Anything of substance you'd like to add? Maybe a spell checker?
The study found that the biggest homophobes were the ones with the most to hide.
IntenseDebate Notification <DIV>You are so right conservative does mean individual freedom but that does not mean we need to have you guys in our face constantly and especially so arrogant and yes I probably do something more disgusting to you than gay men having sex and that would be reading the BIBLE, trusting GOD and following his word – oh and yes I cling to my gun and Bible and so yes I am sure that is disgusting to you. Thank you for allowing me to respond to you.</DIV> <DIV style=\”FONT: 10pt arial\”>
The government should only preside over civil unions both straight and gay. Leave marriage in the church, if your church or religion calls you married it's their decision and yours. Marriage is a spiritual union and does not involve contract law as a civil union would, isn't that the only thing the Gov't should care about? The disposition of property both real and personal and the care and custody of offspring? Why should who you sleep with even be a part of any professional or social interactions. Do we need to start adding gay and straight to our names as some kind of title. Why? Why do we care? It's your life and your freedom.
Apparently there are some people on this forum who ARE that insecure. What a shame…..I always thought that being the Thought Police was something that conservatives were against….
Unfortunately for you, the party that has made a living proclaiming their devotion to gays and minorities (all the while setting them back over and over) is horrible for this country from an economic, freedom and foreign policy standpoint.
It's too bad that gays can't understand that most conservatives are fine with letting them do what they want in their own bedroom, they just don't want it to be taught to be an equal choice to heterosexuality in our schools. That's really the gist of it. Do what you want, but keep it in your bedroom.
Much of the "hate" you claim to see on a regular basis is based on the small group of gays that insist on pushing the lifestyle on others.
But back to my first point, it's sad that because of the Dems putting their arm around you with a wink and a nod, you're willing to throw all of the other things that matter, like financial responsibility, freedom to excel, capitalism that made this country one of the greatest in history, and protecting our borders and citizens right out the window.
It's pretty sad, and the Left lives off people like you..
The enemy is not gays, Christains, blacks, hispanics, Jews, or whatever other group you decide to use for political advantage. The problem is using people for political gain. The left has been using gays, blacks, hispanics,etc. for years to further a political cause–socialism. I welcome gays and all groups who disagree into the conservative movement. God knows we need every single one to fight to keep America from becoming some has-been failed socialist state.
Then those sinners will be called to account by God some day. Isn't it better to look after one's own spiritual health and let others do the same? Best way to spread the Gospel is by example. The finger wagging is counter productive.
No Lindsey and Anne are not "gay" they are either bisexual or I would suspect in both cases just showing off.
How about using their exes Sam Ronson and Ellen DeGeneres as better examples of being "born gay"?
Our world is changing Cowboy, and we had better figure out what is really important. As long as the left can use social issues like homosexuality to divide us, they have such an easier time changing us into some socialist utopia, (there is not such thing, of course, I am being facitious!) We must put many matters aside and focus on the really important issues–and homosexuality is not so important when you face losing our great nation to follow other failed experiments.
Saying that sexuality has a moral component, and making a moral judgment about sexual behavior is not the same as homophobia.
Calling everyone that you disagree with on this issue a homophobe does not help.
Tolerance does not equal acceptance. But it does mean homosexuals deserve the same respect and dignity we all do.
Good points. Gays have and will always be a part of any political group, conservatives included, IMO.
Just as much as we shouldn't let the 'god hates fags' groups in, we don't need the 'anal aroused' and 'gay groups' either.
What way you choose to sexually gratify yourself should not be how you identify yourself, and should not be a part of the political groups, IMO, such as CPAC.
Actually, it's not. Recently I learned that the passage in Leviticus to which you're probably referring uses two different words for "man." The one party (the one who is supposed to obey the commandment) is an "ish, " whereas the other is "zachar." Accordingly, there's at least a colorable argument that the prohibition against lying with a man isn't a general statement, but rather only directed at anal intercourse with the male temple prostitutes who were part of the "religious" practices of some of the heathen neighbors of the Israelites. Read in context, this makes some sense. Which is not to say that the sorts of orgies celebrated in parts of the "gay" community are not highly offensive to the Almighty. One needs to think in terms of the purposes for which men's parts & passions were created. Yet surely murder, the shedding of innocent blood (see abortion), rape and other sins rank higher in the judgment scales.
That said, I'm totally with you in terms of the public school indoctrination on this subject. Fortunately, my children have not particularly bought into it.
"I don't know what you are"
Um . . . maybe . . . religious? To say I am not Conservative or don't hold OTHER things equally important, however, is a liberal tactic to shut me up. Kind of like calling me homophobic and racist.
You must be logged in to post a comment.