Skip to comments.Log Cabin Republicans 'not a worthwhile exchange'
Posted on 02/17/2009 7:39:28 AM PST by GonzoII
A conservative activist group is urging the new chairman of the Republican National Committee to refrain from courting homosexual activists within the GOP.
Illinois-based Americans for Truth About Homosexuality is calling on socially conservative Republicans to call or write new party chairman Michael Steele and ask him not to promote the agenda of the Log Cabin Republicans, a homosexual activist group.
(Excerpt) Read more at onenewsnow.com ...
"It's not a worthwhile exchange to get 20,000 votes to lose millions and millions of faithful, pro-family religious conservatives who are the grassroots of the Republican Party."
I got news for those “millions and millions of faithful, pro-family religious conservatives”; this is not a theocracy. whatever Party you go to, there will be gays there as well.
Tough. Where can they go if they don’t like it? To the Rats?
Good Gravy!Excluding them doesn’t sound very christian to me. Where is ‘hate the sin, love the sinner’ in this baloney?
Personally, I don’t really care. I mean, the party certainly should not discriminate in terms of sexual preference, but the point needs to be driven across the table that gay marriage is not up for debate.
True, but they are not entitled to any "special rights" under the law any more than the heterosexuals are, so there is no "gay agenda" worth pursuing. Being gay doesn't make you any different under the law than being left handed.
Why should the Republican agenda be driven by a tiny minority, which is generally at odds with the rest of the Party on a LOT of issues, anywise?
There are Pro-Abortion Republicans with whom we agree 90% of the time.
There are Pro-Tax Republicans with whom we agree 60% of the time.
There are Anti-Military Republicans (read: Libertarians) with whom we agree 75% of the time.
There are Pro-Homosexual Republicans with whom we agree 70% of the time.
I’ve worked with some Log Cabin Republicans to coordinate an Anti-Castro march when he was planning to attend the WTO in Seattle. Decent chap. I’m sure we agreed on 70% of policy. That we can disagree on a fraction of the platform is normal. Whatever your particular political beliefs, they will not be mine.
While we need not cater to Pro-Abortion, Pro-Tax, Anti-Military or Pro-Homosexual factions within the party, we need not read them out of the movement. They are welcome so long as they understand that the areas in which they disagree are their problem, and unlikely to be changed in the future.
So, I’m in favor of the Big Tent, so long as everyone understands that the basic platform will not be modified for their pet project. Minority opinions do not rule the party.
‘whatever Party you go to, there will be gays there as well.’
There is perhaps no group that more consistently sides against everything the conservative American thinks and stands for than the fruits. So, sorry, I’m not tolerant of them and their actions. They work every day to undermine this country, I don’t trust any of them who claim to be on our side, and I detest all of them who entered the priesthood to undermine Catholicism with their liberal agenda and their child molesting, correction, young boy molesting.
But why should people who choose to categorize themselves SOLELY based on where they choose to put their sexual organs be given special considerations?
If the minority, they lets change election laws and those that get the least votes should win.
I think the Log Cabin's folks understand we are under a Tyranny by the minority today passing laws and burdens against the majority every day and it needs to stop.
True, but they are not entitled to any “special rights”
How many of the ‘Logs’ voted for Hussein?????
Would be verrry interesting! My guess: the ‘Logs’ and Hussein ave very tight!
Homosexuals who are conservatives and not pushing the “gay” agenda can already be republicans without anyone being the wiser. The Log Cabin “Republicans” purpose is to push the GAY agenda, not any Republican or conservative agenda. The very name Log Cabin is based on the scurrilous lie that Lincoln was a closet homo.
Any kind of “gay” identity group is pushing the homosexual agenda. The Log Cabinites always vote Dem anyway. PLus, homosexuals are only around 2% of the population max, at any given time and most vote rabid leftist anyway.
One can "hate the sin, love the sinner" yet still not want that sinner to propound his ideology within one's group.
It's not a question of hating the sinner; it's a matter of not allowing harmful ideologies to poison the whole.
When I was growing up, the 'tolerance mantra' was "Homosexuals are just like everybody else." Today, that mantra has changed to "We (homos) are different, and you're going to accept and even promote our lifestyle -- whether you like it or not."
Please read my comment above.
Harry - list?
I canno think of a more destructive, self-defeating, selfish agenda to pursue now than to purge gays when the country is confronting a unified push from the Democrats to destroy the USA and convert it into a socialist/fascist dictatorship.
Really, have you no ability to proritize? We need all the allies we can find.
You speak for me too, Wil, hey if they want to vote Republican, fine.
That should be the end of it.
>>Illinois-based Americans for Truth About Homosexuality is calling on socially conservative Republicans to call or write new party chairman Michael Steele and ask him not to promote the agenda of the Log Cabin Republicans<<
I’m not sure what their agenda is. All I remember recently is they supported Sarah Palin
“Good Gravy!Excluding them doesnt sound very christian to me. Where is hate the sin, love the sinner in this baloney?”
Do you like this kind of advocacy from “conservatives” in our party, as with this statement from Mitt Romney to the Log Cabin Republicans?
“I am more convinced than ever before that as we seek to establish full equality for Americas gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent.
I am not unaware of my opponents considerable record in the area of civil rights, or the commitment of Massachusetts voters to the principle of equality for all Americans. For some voters it might be enough for me to simply match my opponents record in this area. But I believe we can and must do better. If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern. My opponent cannot do this. I can and will.
We have discussed a number of important issues such as the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which I have agreed to co-sponsor, and if possible broaden to include housing and credit, and the bill to create a federal panel to find ways to reduce gay and lesbian youth suicide, which I also support. One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clintons dont ask, dont tell, dont pursue military policy. I believe that the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nations military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share.
As we begin the final phase of this campaign, I need your support more than ever. By working together, we will achieve the goals we share for Massachusetts and our Nation.”
W. Mitt Romney
I’ve got no issue with conservative gays. And there are many of them. What I do have issues with are those who push the radical homosexual agenda. And I really don’t think they fall within the realm of conservatism. The homosexuals I know put their country first, not their sexuality.
Thank you! One of the best posts I have seen on the subject and one that needs circulated far and wide. You are right on the mark. Made my day!
So maybe we should go ahead and welcome the “Pro Tax Increase” Republicans and the “Peace At Any Cost” Republicans.
No Appy, those folks I will fight just as you would.
I am in total agreement with this. As long as we stick to our fundamentals I don't care who wants to vote with us, as long as they are not simply infiltrating the party to dilute the conservative principles.
Agreed. And it should stay that way.
Frankly, I don’t care. As long as you keep it in the bedroom.
What we should do is take ‘marriage’ away from the state!
You said: "Really, have you no ability to proritize? We need all the allies we can find. "
Marriage trumps these folks hands down. If we lose the family we lose the culture.
I believe I've got my priorities strait.
Your right on target; hate the "sin" that is their agenda, and keep it out of the Republican Party.
They can vote Republican, no problem, I hope they do.
The article called on Steele to refrain from “courting” the Log Cabin Republicans. I have seen no indication that the Republican Party is leaninf toward supporting gay marriage. I would oppose the party if it did.
But we don’t have to support the platform of a splinter group in order to welcome them into the party. Please notice that I said “welcome”, not just tolerate.
I would vote for a Log Cabin Republican over Spector, Snowe or Collins in a heartbeat. I would vote for them against my own senators, Durbin and Burris.
We should not antagonize potential allies against dictatorship. Period.
What, make it Federal? or only recognized via religion? explain pls, I'm not following you.
those homosexuals have always represented themselves as moles for their homosexual agenda. They are frauds at best. IF they were serious republicans then they would not have a recreational sex “caucus”, they would just be republicans.
Even their name is a sexual euphamism. They are not to be taken seriously if anything they are to be viewed as adversaries to the party.
I’m sure there are some rich gays who don’t like taxes, but hate everything else conservatives and republicans stand for. They have alot in common with the NE CC pubbies in that respect.
Problem is, they’ve turned into dog-wagging despots trying to push their agenda to the detriment of the party and the country in general. All they can hope to accomplish is depressing voter turnout among the 60% of Republican voters who self-identify as conservative. In fact, I’m not entirely sure that isn’t their entire reason for existing.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
If the GOP goes gay, they lose my vote.
Lip service. This guy's a RINO! Say one thing and do another. All they need do is dangle the carrot til' we vote then sell us down the river.
No one said it was. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have some moral guidance.
whatever Party you go to, there will be gays there as well.
Which is fine as long as they identify themselves as regular "people." It's when they start the "we're here, we're queer, get used to it!" crap and teach it to the kids in order to recruit more to the cause, all the while marginalizing anyone who disagrees with their strategies or goals.
Are the Log Cabin boys for gay marriage?
Video Cafe (via Fox News) ^ | Feburary 1, 2009 | David Sunday
Now wait one minute there, sir.
It is WAY different under the law than being left handed.
I understand your point, and, in fact, I agree with the underlying meaning, but as a left handed person, I will state that I am in many ways different under the law.
Gays have numerous laws, most of the Media, and an entire liberal trash school system promoting and even enforcing their regressive agenda that would allow and promote the extinction of their respective bloodlines.
I can't even buy a pair of scissors that work in my hand, but then again, I do refuse to allow my ancestor's DNA to be removed from the Earth by populist liberal theology that has exactly that agenda.
Thank you for your post.
If you support the Democrats, why are you here?
It is suicide to promote a group that alligns with the Republican party (but has loyalty) toward a cause that is at ODDS with our national platform (or at least in promotion of that cause) with the vast majority of grass-roots activsts.
A Ticked Off Member.
Thank you! Someone who gets it.
All of this debate about homosexual marriage is nonsense and a waste of our time and energy. This issue isn’t whether or not any government agency should recognize it. The issue is whether or not the government should be involved with marriage in the first place.
Marriage should be a private matter between two people. Whether they want to involve a church, a ship’s captain or some Elvis impersonator is their call. Marriage licenses, related tax initiatives and governmental approval should not be part of the mix.
I have an old family Bible that has a list of marriages in the family. Many of those involved no governmental paricipation whatsoever. There was no need. They went to their local church and just got married. Afterwards, they recorded the moment in the Bible. That was that.
To think that we need governmental involvement sounds earily similiar to leftists who preach the same nonsense about their pet issues. Heck, the same could be said with many of the hotbed issues of the day. Can you imagine how many problems could be fixed if we just got the government out of something like education?
You are preaching to the choir!
People who fondle poop “Are special”.
” whatever Party you go to, there will be gays there as well.”
That is true.
The big question I suppose comes down to the “gay marriage” issue - should republicans cave?
The gays can either be democrat over that issue, and be part of the new socialist takeover, or they can decide what is more important - trying to change the traditional definition of marriage - or having more money and more freedom in other aspects of their lives.