Posted on 04/27/2011 1:32:16 PM PDT by presidio9
Republican leaders in California today admonished Orange County official Marilyn Davenport for disseminating racist rhetoric about President Obama. Meanwhile, in Washington, Speaker John Boehner wants government money to reinforce anti-gay discrimination. Is the GOP totally blind to double-speak?
Speaker of the House John Boehner officially requested Department of Justice funds today to fight for the Defense of Marriage Act, 15-year old legislation that prohibits the federal government from recognizing marriage equality.
Referencing the DOJ’s decision not to defend DOMA, which the Department and President deemed unconstitutional earlier this year, Boehner wrote to Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, “Obviously, [that] decision results in DOJ no longer needing the funds it would have otherwise expended defending the constitutionality of DOMA.”
“It is my intent that those funds be diverted to the House for reimbursement of any costs incurred by and associated with the House, and not DOJ, defending DOMA,” he said.
It’s an incredible show of politically convenient hypocrisy, especially as the Republicans rally their troops against governmental overspending, and as Orange County Republican official Marilyn Davenport comes under fire for sending a blatantly racist email about Barack Obama.
Davenport’s email, covered here by Carmel Lobello, portrays our president as a chimp, complete with the caption, “Now you know why — No birth certificate.”
GOP leaders in the Golden State have been quick to lambast Davenport’s correspondence as “despicable,” and said that it “drips with racism.”
While the national party has yet to respond to Davenport’s clearly racist email, it’s safe to assume that they would never, ever, not in one million years, endorse such a missive. Yet, they find it okay to back anti-gay politics?
It’s always difficult to compare racism and homophobia. They are different forms of discrimination with varying manifestations. The message, however, remains the same: one “type” — either white or straight — can be quantified as “right,” while the opposite — black or LGBT — qualifies as “wrong.” They’re two sides of the same coin.
Why, then, does the GOP find it acceptable to criticize one form of hate, yet condone another? Clearly politics are at play here: Republican leaders think they can consolidate power by attacking a conveniently marginalized group, gay folk, yet realize it’s wrong to describe black people as apes.
This tactic will backfire; not simply because Americans are becoming more accepting of their LGBT friends and neighbors, but because their fetishization of homophobia flies in the face of the party’s claim that they will unify the nation, as embodied in the official Republican platform, “Our Republican ideals are those that unify our country.”
Some day soon, their base will wise up to these contradictory politics, and when that happens, all bets are off.
“I remember reading an article last year that stated the American Psychiatric Association has determined that being gay is not caused by birth and is determined by upbringing or other social factors. Therefore, it is not born into them, it is a choice and can be conditioned out of them.”
Even if that’s so, you’re on the wrong track. The whole “born that way” argument is a red herring. So what if they’re “born that way”? Can’t pedophiles, polygamists, and representatives from all manner of perversities argue the exact same thing?
Besides that, what are we talking about in actual votes?
About 100 million people vote.
1.5% of the population is homosexual.
Let’s say about half the homosexuals do vote.
How many of those would ever even consider voting Republican even if we gave them everything they wanted?
If I knew how to do math I think we would be talking about gaining 33 votes.
OK. So portraying George W Bush as a chimp via cartoons and photoshopped images is just political banter - not hateful at all, but portraying Obama as a chimp is inherently racist.
And when members of the GOP leadership criticize the use of the Obama as Chimp images, that is hypocrisy because they still support defending the Defense of Marriage Act. But it is perfectly ok that the DemocRAT leadership never once deigned to criticize liberal hate propaganda against Bush/Cheney/Palin, etc.
The author’s attempts at logical progression are such a hodge-podge of random syllables that it comes across as unintelligble as the baby jibbering that Obama’s new pastor interpreted as a moral analysis of the Constitution’s calculation of slaves for Census Enumeration purposes.
The sex positive agenda (as espoused by William Reich, Alfred Kinskey, a socialist Feminists) doesn’t CARE if it is genetic or conditional impulse.
They believe that sex is a birthright joy to be enjoyed by anyone, anywhere, at anytime, without any moral judgements regarding the sex, age, relation, martial status, number, or species of partner(s). If it feels good, do it.
The “gay gene” is just a little something something to convince some holdouts. The argument that ALL acts should come without moral judgement shows where they really are taking the political football.
Well, it goes back a long time. It was general General Phil Sheridan who is said to have said “Queers are like Indians. The only good Indian is a dead Indian”
See how easy this is?
Are there any states that are seeking an end to the DOMA? Those states that wanted to force a change in marriage laws have done so. Whenever their citizens have put it to a vote, they've opposed same sex marriage.
The connotation of the term homophobia suggests an irrational fear. The queer nation and their captives have exploited the
deliberate distortion of fact to paint anyone who disagrees with the lifestyle choice for any reason as homophobic. I disagree with the lifestyle of deception and destruction because I find t to be both a self and a social destruction.
I could care less what anyone says they think I am -what matters is if I can demonstrate my beliefs are grounded in fact.And I find No facts support the LIE of the Homosexual lifestyle as anything but fornication and and abomination unto the Lord.
They know their agenda needs layers of deception and propaganda to hide the truth. They have no real morality so lying is always on their tongues and is part of their club's unstated oath.
I haven't heard the non-conservative radio talk show hosts use the gay gene study as a 'scientific' proof weapon against those awful conservatives lately. I bet they even forgot to apologize when they were found to be willfully ignorant tools for the far left filth lobby.
Does the morally challenged Neal Boortz still peddle the gay gene myth. How convenient the faded gay gene mythology was(oh, but it was science and all) for those who did not have the fortitude to stand up for the truth.
Actually, the target is the traditional family, and queerdom is the best weapon against the family.
Homos, also, make a very good foil against Christianity.
You can make is so that even holding the beliefs of Christianity is being “hateful”, and could lead to discrimination or violence, so such beliefs should be outlawed.
Homophobia means fear of the same; not that this idiot would know.
The church going black community also opposes homosexuality. Obama’s defenders had to lie about his attitude on this matter to ensure they would vote. Same with Obama’s extreme position on abortion.
We are supposed to believe that gay scout leaders would molest girls instead of boys if they only had they opportunity for one on one overnight stays with females.
Thanks.
As to marriage laws,
- You may not marry a minor
- You may not marry a relative (although OTHER people can, how can YOUR rights in this matter be denied? < /sarc >)
- You may not marry someone who is already married
- You may not finalize a divorce without the signature from your spouse (how can someone DENY you your right to marry someone else? < /sarc >)
- You may not marry someone of the same sex (this does not seem any more unreasonable than the above conditions, which as noted do not affect EVERYONE seeking candidate X’s hand in marriage)
In Bill Ayer’s 9-11-2001 NY Times interview, it’s mentioned that the Weather Underground dabbled in swapping partners and that Bill even engaged in homosexual acts with other male members of the Weather Underground. He says that they did it to “smash monogamy” as they sought to nationwide.
A culture war is underway and it has waged for decades from a seditious lot of leftists. The institutions of marriage and church are under attack. By hook or by crook, the left means to sabotage them further than welfare handout policies already have.
Homotaedium.
People who took their cues from Ayers and the Weather Underground had bigger problems than sexual perversions.
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.