With Gays Marrying in Canada, & APA Going Easy on Pedophiles, Republicans Must Take a Stand!

Ave Maria

[AveMaria]

NOTE: I posted the message below several weeks ago. Since that time, there have been several new developments. The American Psychological Association is now considering normalizing pedophilia, as it did to homosexuality in 1973. Canada has now normalized homosexual marriages, to be exactly equal in status to heterosexual marriages. And Presidential candidate, Howard Dean, has demanded that America extend recognition to Canadian gay marriages. And he is a guy who stands a good chance of winning the Democratic nomination (and possibly the Presidency if the economy is not booming in November 2004.)

REPUBLICANS AND HOMOSEXUALITY - By Ave Maria

It is time for the Republican Party and the Conservative Movement to make a clear and unambigous moral statement on homosexuality, and stop sending out mixed messages. In 1980, 1984, 1988 and 1992, the Republicans run on a clear, unapologetic, and unambigous platform of family values and traditional morality. Not surprisingly, they won 3 out of those 4 elections, but lost in 1992 because Ross Perot attracted some conservatives to his side.

Whichever way you try to spin it, homosexuality is a behavior. YES! It is a BEHAVIOR! I totally refuse to buy the psycho-garbage that claims that gays were born that way, and cannot control their behavior. If a human being cannot control his behavior, then he is a danger to himself and others, and should be locked up.

I know something about behavior. I had alcohol problems when I was younger, and my Irish family has suffered from at least 5 generations of alcoholism. So, I knew that my alcoholism was partly genetic, because of my family history. But even during my struggles with alcohol, I knew that every time I raised a glass of whiskey to my lips, I was making a conscious choice to drink. I haven't touched a drop of alcohol in 25 years. I empathise with George W. Bush as a human being, partly because he made a conscious decision to give up alcohol, just like I did.

I have also done a lot of reading of medical literature on alcholism, and I have read of something that experts describe as "dry alcoholism". People who are genetically inclined to alcoholism, may suffer severe cravings for alcohol, or may exhibit certain behavior related to the craving for alcohol such as nervous twitches, overeating, etc. Yet, society expects those of us who are genetically inclined towards alcoholism, to meet the same standards of public behavior as everyone else - such as showing up for work on time, avoiding public drunkeness, and avoiding DUIs. Is society being fair to us, by holding us to the same standards as those who do not have alcoholism genes? Yes! Yes! Yes! It is much harder for those of us genetically inclined to alcoholism, to avoid intoxication, but we try the best that we can. And we do not want law enforcement to make exceptions on DUI laws for us.

Is it too much to ask from homosexuals, to meet the same standards of moral behavior, as those of us who lack the gay orientation? No.

The Ex-Gay movement, says that people who live the homosexual lifestyle, are capable of making a conscious choice to abandon their repulsive behavior. The ex-gays present themselves as living proof, that people can change their homosexual behavior, and start living like normal people - whether as single people living chaste lives, or in married heterosexual relationships with spouses and children: http://www.pfox.org/

If the conservative movement and the GOP want to be true to the principles of their party, by holding everyone to the same standard, then the only truly authentic spokesmen on homosexuality that they should accept are the ex-gays. Ex-gays will not alienate the GOP from their social conservative base - the evangelical Christians, conservative Catholics, and Orthodox Jews. In fact, ex-gays are represented in those three movements. Ex-gays will make the conservative movement even more conservative and pro-family, and help defeat the moral relativism that is so prevalent in modern society.

On the other hand, the Log Cabin Republicans reduce conservatism to nothing more than cutting taxes: http://www.lcr.org/ Almost all Log Cabin Republicans are RINOS, and most are pro-choice. If the Republican Party and the GOP accept the philosophy of the Log Cabin Republicans, then, they would be accepting moral relativism, and the proposition that human beings are unable to regulate their sexual behavior in accordance to socially acceptable standards.

If the Log Cabin Republicans accept the GOP philosophy on taxes and defence spending, then they are certainly welcome to vote for the GOP. But for the GOP to insult the deepest held beliefs of their most faithful followers, by changing their electoral platform to endorse sickening and disgusting sexual acts, that is simply unacceptable.

[AveMaria]

How did the Republican Party become the majority party in 1980? By standing up against the moral decadence of the 1960s, and embracing traditional family values. Southern evangelicals who had voted for Carter in 1976, and Conservative urban Catholics from union households, formed the coalition that put Ronald Reagan in the Whitehouse in 1980. They delivered for the Republicans on two more electoral landslides, in 1984 and 1988.

If the GOP fails to distinguish itself from the Democrats on traditional moral values, then they are doomed as a party. How else do they expect to bring back conservative Reagan Democrats to the party? By endorsing the normalization of homosexuality? By supporting special rights for homosexuals? By exempting homosexual from moral standards that all of us should meet?

Republicans must make a moral stand, by distinguishing themselves from Democrats. This does not require intruding into peoples bedrooms. It only requires stating that sexual immorality must not be endorsed or celebrated in the public sphere.

[AveMaria]

And if Republicans are concerned about being tolerant and embracing compassionate conservatism, do they think endorsing gay behavior will win them more black and hispanic votes?

[Saundra Duffy]

The Republicans will never take a stand on anything. They lack the guts.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

The APA gets it right

[RAT Patrol]

I agree 100%, but I'm afraid I have little faith that they will.

[friendly]

The Psychiatrists absolutely have NOT accepted the ridiculous proposal by some hare-brained non-physician the pedophilia is "normal," and continue to call this a disease.

However in Canada, the degenerates rule. I want to marry my pet goat, so I think that's the place for me!

[Ol' Sparky]

The truth is that Log Cabin Republicans exist for one reason -- to advance a homosexual agenda within the Republican party and force the nation to accept homosexuality.

I've debated the head of the Minnesota LCR and her friends and few of them are even conservative on other issues and most have very little interest politically in other issues.

[DoctorMichael]

I've debated the head of the Minnesota LCR and her friends and few of them are even conservative on other issues and most have very little interest politically in other issues.

I'll Bump THAT!

[LibertarianInExile]

Maybe if the Republican Party gets enough Simon- and Falwell- and Roberts-types together, and they all spout off in the press about social issues, they can alienate independent voters so that Republicans can lose to a jackass like Kerry! That would be so great, evangelicals bringing big-fish-in-little-pond status to the Republican party! /sarcasm

How about you have the party finish the job on the issues that unite its winning coalition (i.e., economic and defense issues) before you have it work on dividing it by trying to pass Ashcroftian stuff? Bush won by focusing on typical RAT issues, and shifting focus away from defense and the economy now would be a great way to give the rats ammo for the fall. Better to get entrenched with a solid majority in both houses, and get the ability to legislate through the bench right back at the rats, than to get antsy and blow it.

Image a court with three more Scalias. Yeah, I have a big smile on my face, too.

[Rudder]

The American Psychological Association is now considering normalizing pedophilia, as it did to homosexuality in 1973.

This is false.

[Brian Allen]

<< Is it too much to ask from homosexuals, to meet the same standards of moral behavior, as [Normal folks?]

I once knew a feller who was born with a kleptomaniacal orientation.

Succumbed to it, poor bastard -- and now he's called a thief.

And is doin' 30 years to life.

Usetah be if the deviates converted their "orientation" into sodomy they'd get to meat up with the converted kleptos in the stir.

[only1percent]

This doesn't seem to be sound political thinking.

Ever-greater acceptance of homosexuality is one of the most indisputable political phenomena of modern Western culture. It increases steadily, even in times when conservatives are politically in ascendance. (Mental exercise: was homosexuality more or less publicly acceptable in 1969, when the degenerate left was near its apex, or in 1992, after 12 years of Reagan/Bush?)

Look at the UCLA Freshman Survey, one of the most large-scale assessements of shifting public opinion among younger people. Young people are massively more conservative than they were on a variety of public safety, defense, and social-welfare type issues, and are becoming more skeptical regarding abortion and other items of that category. But acceptance of homosexuality has left the majority long behind and is approaching consensus.

It should be clear that the practical option for those who feel that homosexuality is a choice, and a bad one at that, is for them to live an exemplary heterosexual life (happy spouse, lots of happy kids, etc.), and hope that homosexuals leading their lives in a less-exemplary fasion will cause people to determine not to make that choice.

[randog]

The Psychiatrists absolutely have NOT accepted the ridiculous proposal by some hare-brained non-physician the pedophilia is "normal," and continue to call this a disease.

I was hoping the APA would have dropped pedophilia as a disease so that pedophiles wouldn't have an excuse and would go directly to prison with no treatment or hospital sentencing options available to them.

[friendly]

I was hoping the APA would have dropped pedophilia as a disease so that pedophiles wouldn't have an excuse and would go directly to prison with no treatment or hospital sentencing options available to them.

Treatment is useless on these perverts.

[Rudder]

Pedophilia does not meet criteria for NGRI.

[randog]

Treatment is useless on these perverts.

Exactly, and without the "disease" crutch, these monsters would have no excuse. Try 'em and fry 'em.

[Loose_Cannon1]

Listen to me carefully:

If the Republican party continues to push an Anti-Abortion/Anti-Homosexual behavior agenda, they will go the way of the Whig party. And fast.

Instead, republicans need to push a fiscally responsible agenda starting with reduction in taxes, curtailing of entitlement programs, and privatizing Socialist inSecurity.

If we conservatives continue to act like this is our agenda, we will lose at the polls every single time. Instead, make our agenda economic conservatism and less socicial conservatism, then we can win elections, and change these problems from within.

The last Presidential election was too close. Let's take America in all 50 states in 2004, then Condi Rice can work on the anti-abortion/anti-homosexual issues when she's elected in 2008!: )

[friendly]

NGRI = Not guilty by reason of insanity.

[Born in a Rage]

Some of these people post 'scare tactics' in order to further their agenda, whatever that is...locking up homosexuals, I presume.

[gcruse]

I play a lot of pocket pool. Does this
mean no more away games?