We Want Yellow!
Donate Today Monthly if Possible
Posted on 08/11/2011 11:19:48 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Why pander to them?”
Exactly.
Trying to win the votes of homosexuals, is like crawling through a sewer to find a scrap of bread.
What we really need to do is not alienate real conservatives by pandering to these degenerates.
ann is now in the same category to me as elanor clift.
LLS
She only dates ultra liberal metrosexuals.
LLS
Although I can't read Ann Coulters mind, I'm afraid I can't buy that rationale. I don't believe Ann is going to convince sodomites to change their (sexual) behavior by attending 'GOProud' board meetings as an adviser. I think she is being willingly used by this group and I have to question her motives. She is not naive and certainly not stupid. So, if I accept your hypothesis regarding Coulter's reasons for joining the 'GOProud' board in an advisory position, I have to consider her reasons rather unsophisticated, which doesn't ring true of this well-educated (Cornell, U of M law school), accomplished (author of 8 books and a newspaper column plus numerous TV appearances as a political commentator) 49-year-old woman. Ann's decision to join the 'GOProud' board is confounding and has diminished my respect for Ann Coulter's commitment to conservative ideology. However, I'm not quite ready to 'never read/watch/listen to her again'. As much as I dislike her decision regarding 'GOProud' I'll be watching to see if this move has any effect on Ann's political commentary. I hope not.
I doubt this very much. There are not a lot of homosexuals in this country and I'd wager that far fewer than 50% of homosexual voters are conservative.
So long as they dont try to stick it down my throat I don’t care what they do in private.
I agree with you, however the very existence of 'GOProud' means that they are not content in keeping their proclivities private. Otherwise they'd simply join some existing conservative organization and keep their mouth shut with respect to their bedroom lives.
I’ll pass.
I think that “conservative homosexuals” are a terribly oppressed group, attacked from all sides. Yet they don’t have much of a voice, except among the Republican leadership, which they have tried to quietly cultivate for years. To some extent guessing, I will suggest that their “agenda items” are as follows.
1) They see that sooner or later, liberals will hatefully turn on them, like they have the Israelis. That being said, little or nothing in the liberal agenda appeals to them. They like the conservative agenda, both economically and socially, and see no great threat from it, except from those individuals that openly threaten them.
2) They want to keep their quiet and private lives quiet and private, and they want all the protections of the criminal and civil laws that all citizens have. That is, no b.s. “hate crimes” laws, just the same rights and liberties that everyone else has. Generally, this does *not* include homosexual marriage, which they see as a belligerent attack against religion and heterosexuals, solely for the sake of attacking, and they want no part of that.
3) They are intensely aware that liberals and radicals bitterly hate them for having conservative views, and would ruin their lives if they could, either for this non-conformity, pure meanness, or blackmail.
4) They are not big believers in “the homosexual community”, nor do they seek membership in it, recognition by it, and they do not feel they owe it, and its radical and exclusive agenda anything. They reject the more cult-like elements of its membership as well, including breaking off relations with family and heterosexual friends.
5) They are not flamboyant and do not define their life by their sexuality, but by their education, profession, memberships in other organizations, social standing and wealth.
Seems to me that GOProud would be a natural for the TEA Party - stick to the taxes and finances, ignore the rest. Natural supporters of that movement...
I've been a lurker here long enough (a few years) to know that heckling Ron Paul and Paulistians is a regular sport here at FR!
Hey now, no fair bringing logic into a good bash-fest! You take that intellect and get out of here, you... you... thinker!
The whole "anti-bullying" thing is just a screen for pushing homosexual agenda in school...as there's no more bullying now, than there's always been...
Again, it needs to be said: Homosexual "rights" and freedom of religion are NOT compatible.
To me this is as silly as "pro-life" Democrats. Or pro-socialist libertarians. A politically conservative homosexual rejects the foundation of the conservative movement: Traditional values.
Libertines should be libertarian as they are not, by definition, conservative.
Yes, but by that same argument, atheists would have difficulty being conservatives as well. Yet many of them don’t. At the same time your argument justifies why they would want their own subgroup among conservatives.
I’ve said in past that there are major subdivisions in conservatism, yet not in conflict with each other for the most part, but existing more from point of view and focus. Some examples.
“True” conservatives, which are conservatives as to the dictionary definition of conservative. People who are generally satisfied with the status quo, and see no need for radical departure from it in any direction. They much prefer a mode of gradualism for any change.
“Religious” or “Moral” conservatives, whose political direction is based on their moral values, but with far less emphasis on subjects that are morally neutral.
“Business” conservatives, whose concern is that a thriving economy “raises all boats”, and inherently solves many other problems. This group is again subdivided between the small business types, and big business types. It also has a somewhat corrupt “international business” type as well, that are truly outside of conservative thought.
“Anti-leftist” conservatives, whose firm belief is that *nothing* good comes from leftism, liberalism, radicalism, socialism, and their ilk, so their agenda is to stop, thwart, interfere with, inhibit, neutralize, and hopefully turn back what the left has done. They’ll let the rest of conservatives figure out what conservatism should promulgate; they are busy enough fighting to “stop evil.”
Law & Order, military, and foreign policy conservatives.
Reactionary and isolationist conservatives. Pat Buchanan and maybe Ron Paul.
Other varieties of conservatism, and the overlap with Libertarianism. This can cover the gamut from Ted Nugent to G. Gordon Liddy, and the innumerable variations between.
You too huh?!
Yeah, a lot of it rang somewhat hollow as I was writing it - like I said, sometimes I try to look at other angles for some rationality - and sometimes it's still confounding.
Thanks.
Every conservative does not agree with me on everything, and likewise.....
But I try to find common ground when I can - sometimes I can't, but sometimes I have to recognize the good in somethings - like the way Ann slaps around libtards - I take joy in that - so she does some whacky things, maybe some things I don't agree with - so what?
Just an observation but I learned early on that one can usually get a good idea of another’s character just by the kind of company they keep or run with and you gotta admit that Coulter keeps some strange or some might say, troubling company these days.
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.