Posted on 02/19/2010 6:06:35 PM PST by Maelstorm
During a CPAC segment to recognize student conservative activists from across the country, one particular conservative, Ryan Sorba of the California Young Americans for Freedom, denounced CPAC for allowing the gay conservative group GOProud to co-sponsor the event and host a booth. After finishing his short speech against homosexuality as being contrary to the concept of natural rights -- amidst booing from the crowd -- he walked off the stage.
"Just to change the subject for just a second, I'd like to condemn CPAC for bringing GOPride (sic) to this event," said Sorba. The young activist crowd erupted into booing, but Sorbs continued. "Bring it. Bring it. I love it. I love it. I love it.
"Guess what? Guess what? All right, guess what? Civil rights are grounded in natural rights," said Sorba. "Natural rights are grounded in human nature. Human nature is a rational substance in relationship. The intelligible end of the reproductive act is reproduction. Do you understand that? Civil rights, when they conflict with natural rights, are contrary -- hey, you sit down. The lesbians at Smith College protest better than you do. The lesbians at Smith College protest than you do. All right? Bring it."
I thought that a lot of what he said was very good, but having read some of the comments here, I think his words were misunderstood.
And the fact that CPAC had him, Rubio, the Cheneys, as well as Scott Brown, Mitt Romney, and as well as Glenn Beck, shows that CPAC isn’t an ideologically narrow meeting, but does offer a platform for us to air and discuss many different viewpoints.
We need to be able to have these speeches, and debates, and discussions, and it bothers me that some posters in this thread wish that these opportunities were stifled.
It is also discouraging that some here want to impose a moral litmus test, but only for specific sins that are particularly disgusting to us.
I would prefer that we elect once-married protestant men with solid families and a squeaky-clean private lives. But if everybody only votes for the perfect people, we won’t elect anybody. So I happily cast my vote for Catholics, for single people, for divorced men, for women, if on the issues they are solid, and on philosophy the are committed to limited government constitutional principles.
And if they happened to be gay, but aren’t pushing gay rights, and the alternative is some liberal, I’d vote for a gay person. They are sinners, but so are we all.
Yes. It is wrong to think of CPAC as the epitome of ideological conservatism. But it is also wrong to discard it for political purposes.
Of course, I’m convinced that if Sarah Palin had decided to speak at CPAC, there would be only muted complaints here about them. And of course, if CPAC hadn’t allowed a pro-homosexual-rights group to sponsor them, I don’t think there would be much complaining even though Romney tends to win the straw polls.
Since the straw poll doesn’t seem to have mattered (didn’t Hucakbee win in 2008?) I don’t see it as something to get worked up about.
But I knew that with Sarah Palin publicly denouncing CPAC there would be a considerable force here denouncing it as well.
I was in fact surprised at how muted that criticism was yesterday, but I figured it was because of the strength of the speakers.
This year’s CPAC has the most attendees ever...the speakers are varied and pretty solid, with populist Glenn Beck wrapping it up...like it or not, this is the “team” for the Republicans in 2010 and 2012...magritte
I agree. But they aren't there as people. They are there as part of their 'movement' to force people to accept homosexuality. Presumably there are individual homosexuals at the conference who are not part of this pro-sodomy organization, and that's fine.
To put it another way, I assume there are adulterers and burglars in the crowd at CPAC too. But if CPAC starts accepting organizations devoted to advocating adultery as normal and demanding that people just accept burglary as an alternative lifestyle, then I have a problem with that.
It bothers me that we have groups like “GOProud” on the conservative side. If they have a conservative agenda, why be a “gay” group? If they have a gay agenda, they don’t belong in the conservative fold.
It seems counterproductive. Groups should be defined by the issues that are advocating, not the orientation of their membership. Of course, my opinion is that GOProud IS advocating a gay agenda — after all, they are pushing for an openly gay military.
"ELEVENTH: The religious influence of this School shall not be sectarian, but evangelically Christian."
Sorba is dead-on. It is a disgrace that they invited/allowed GOProud. It isn’t bad enough that CPAC tolerates RINOs, nanny-staters, and ACLU-shills like Bob Barr. Now the gays have taken over the conference as well. Did you see those dozens of men standing up to heckle him? Who are they? Keene is a pathetic tool. The fags have totally infiltrated this once-fine conference. It is just disgusting.
Are adulterers, liars, thieves and speeders demanding that their behavior be held up as morally equivalent? The gays are. They can do as they please, but they have no right to redefine marriage. And who is "they" anyway? This about isn't some "race" needing 14th Amendment protections. What about Sarah MacLachlan, Anne Heche and others, who once lived as homosexual but now have families and children. Are they "lesbians", are they "straight"? What about ex-gays? The very idea that these people who practice changable sexual behaviors constitute a special status worthy of constitutional recognition should be abhorrent to every conservative. To every American.
He's not on the side of Truthers—even within the GOP!
Hey, how about if we leave sexual behaviors out of a meeting on political thought, and leave peoples morals to the church...?"
Because The Church proved that homosexuals corrupt America's male children?
It's obvious to me that he has been trying to cull his audience of all conservatives and become the Oprah of the RINOs.
Look at all the postings about his rants against the Birthers -- just what percentage of his audience used to be comprised of people who would like to know the TRUTH of BHO's country of origin and his entire backstory???
I believe that Beck is intentionally trying to marginalize and offend and alienate conservatives, and then he will start attacking Governor Sarah Palin. His plan after that works is to become the OPRAH of the Romney/Whitman~2012 presidential campaign.
Unless of course, if Glenn is simply in the process of a total breakdown and needs professional help ASAP, and that's why he's ranting & raving and not caring who he offends or what he sounds and/or looks like/??
I'll think this huge convention of ROMNEY supporters will just adore Beck.
I believe that the first thread below starts with the article I remeber. They referred to it as the GAY MAFIA.
The other threads all contain a reference to the very rich Hormel heir, James C. Hormel who rose to fame when Bill Clinton appointed him Ambassador to Luxemborg; George Bush leter appointed Hormel as the ambassador to Romania.
The Gay Mafia That's Redefining Liberal Politics
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2133233/posts
Vocal Gay Republicans Upsetting Conservatives
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/920915/posts
New Liberal Group Hopes to Be "As influential as the MRC"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1128748/posts
BLOGGERGATE: Hillary Leads Army of Paid Bloggers
Yep. Social conservatives will never accept CPAC as any sort of unified voice for conservatism now.
I agree with this and everything else you said, but I didn't see it as a refutation of my statement (which obviously you recognized as sarcastic). Every gay person isn't trying to take over our country. And it's not the gay people that we have issues with from a political perspective, it is the gay agenda.
If I could go through my entire life and never once have to know what deviant sexual behavior anybody else was performing, I'd die a happy man. And if that could happen, I could care less whether the guy sitting next to me at a political convention was gay or straight.
I do tend to make arguments on the margins. There is a big problem in the country because of a concerted push by gays to gain special recognition and special rights, and to redefine marriage for their convenience. We need to oppose that, but I hope we can do so these efforts are bad for our country.
His plan after that works is to become the OPRAH of the Romney/Whitman~2012 presidential campaign.
Which Whitman? Meg (CA) or Christy Todd (NJ)
Now she's busy buying the governorship of California --- for all I know, they plan to have a Whitman/Romney~2012 ticket.
“I believe that Beck is intentionally trying to marginalize and offend and alienate conservatives...”
He did nothing but spank RINOS and praise Conservatives at the CPAC.
Perhaps you can bless us with more of your deep political wisdom in the future?
What an embarrassing episode. Lot of gay-friendly Paulites there huh?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.