Posted on 08/27/2012 9:23:52 AM PDT by scottjewell
American Family Association's Bryan Fischer has slammed gay right-wing groups such as Log Cabin Republicans
A homophobic pundit has said gay people have ‘no business’ being Republican, saying they undermine the ‘pure morals’ of the GOP.
American Family Association's Bryan Fischer, who supports the criminalization of homosexuality in the US, said gay right-wingers ‘undermine and subvert’ the ‘moral foundations’ of the Republican Party.
Speaking ahead of the Republican National Convention, he slammed the rise of gay groups like the Log Cabin Republicans.
In an interview with Pittsburg Post-Gazette, Fischer said: ‘They have no business being there. Our message to them is that your home is in the Democratic Party.
‘These groups are actively working to undermine and subvert the Republican Party platform and the principles of the Republican Party.’
Fischer pointed to two examples where the ‘gay agenda’ had trumped ‘religious freedom’: the Boston mayor who said Chick-Fil-A did not belong in his city because it discriminates against people, and the Christian photographer who refused to take pictures of a lesbian’s civil ceremony.
‘There is no place for the homosexual agenda,’ he said. ‘The Republican platform is very clean on the issues of marriage family and parenting, and these are people that are actively working against the principles of the party.’
The Log Cabin Republicans say they work to make the party more inclusive, and say opposing gay people is at odds with the Republican core values.
But Fischer believes that younger members of the right-wing party are ‘unaware of the severe dangers to liberty that is posed by the homosexual agenda.’
Both Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, the president and vice-presidential Republican nominee, have voted against same-sex marriage, adoption by gay couples, and a multitude of other gay equality issues.
The Human Rights Group has also criticized the politicians, saying: ‘LGBT Americans need leadership that will continue to fight for their rights to protect their families, marry the person they love, and enjoy equal protections under the law.’
Interesting but dumb. I know homosexuals who 1) do NOT want to gay marriage 2) chose to remain single and celibate because of their religious believes and 3) are tried and true conservatives.....why shouldn’t they be republicans?
Well, some of them are not very good at it. Sen. Lindsey Graham, for instance.
Yes - were they truly in earnest about Republican principles, they would quietly join and work for the party, leaving their sexual orientation at home.
Even so, this article assumes all gays should be single issue voters.
I think drugs should be legalized so does that mean I have “no business” voting for anyone but Gary Johnson? No, it means I disagree with most people from the 2 major parties on that particular issue.
Those ones should be Republicans. Those are not the ones Fischer is referring to.
A lot of truth in what you are saying, just as all women need not support female or feminist candidates.
That said. Fisher smells a rat about these gay groups who are so hell-bent on divisive identity politics and I wager there is much truth in what he’s saying too.
I grew up with a guy who is a conservative homosexual. He’s always voted republican but wants nothing to do with groups like the Log Cabin Republicans. He says they aren’t what the claim to be.
There are always exceptions, and he sounds like one of them: Just as there are women who don’t toe the party line of feminism.
We grew up in a very conservative rural town and he lived next door to my grandmother who called him “Peculiar”. He’s one of the rare few who were gay from day one.
It was obvious to the rest of us because he was always most comfortable with girls and was my sister’s best friend. He got all excited about the royal wedding (Charles and Diana). He was married twice to women 20 and 30 years older than himself. Oddly enough he’s an avid hunter and fisherman.
I don't disagree on either point. Homosexuality should be criminalized, as it has been in the past. Now, it is up to the states (NOT THE FEDGOV) to decide whether they want to criminalize it.
And I agree that homosexual organizations have nothing in common with a party that supports marriage as between a man and a woman.
I don't think the Republican party should not require a homosexual litmus test for membership. Thoughtcrime isn't American.
However, if I was an influential member of the party, I would want to expel any person in a leadership position who was caught having sex with someone not their spouse, gender regardless.
Gays who want lower taxes, a better economy, a sane culture, a country with a future and prosperity, less government, limited government and so on, would be foolish not to vote Republican. Those who want nothing but their gay agenda have a home in the Democratic Party. It’s an almost insignificant demographic either way. It may prove more expedient for gays to extricate themselves from their sexual identification when choosing their political affiliations. Why should they muck themselves up in a minority lump?
I hate the AFA!! While I believe GAY MARRIAGE is wrong, Homosexuals that are business people (in the area where my office is located is the gay section of Tampa. My office is in a historical cigar factory.) they are worried about TAXEs and the future of the USA.
To an extent I agree with you.
On the other hand, I think if Lawrence v TX was going to over-turn criminal statutes regarding sodomy, it would’ve been alright if they simply kept their private behavior to themselves. In a democracy, consenting adults can adhere to their own principles.
However, as the dissenting justice noted, they used this victory to push for the redefinition of marriage, and to attempt to transform the culture in their own image. This is not Republican.
I think a man like that has every right to live unhindered and I would wish him no harm at all. It is the powerful gay lobby & their infiltration tactics which is bothersome.
I believe it's important these people are made known to exist because they have no voice inside the "gay community." The ones I know have great antipathy for the values it represents along with the hypocrisy and hostility of those self-styled champions of diversity.
In a sense it's a little like the black conservative. Both are seen as 'traitors' to their community groups.
exactly. sometimes folks are really quick to condemn the whole (and certainly the loud and offensive groups out there pushing their ‘agenda’ are the reason why)over looking good and decent folk who they probably agree with on 95% OF issues
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.