Republican Gay Rights Group Demands Apology from Santorum

CBS News ^ | September 23, 2011 | Lucy Madison

[lbryce]

Members of the conservative gay rights group GOProud are demanding an apology from Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum for what they call his disrespectful comments directed at a gay soldier in Thursday night's GOP presidential debate.

"Tonight, Rick Santorum disrespected our brave men and women in uniform, and he owes Stephen Hill, the gay soldier who asked him the question about Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal, an immediate apology," said GOProud's Christopher Barron and Jimmy LaSalvia in a Thursday night press release.

During the Fox News/Google-sponsored debate, which took place in Orlando, Florida, a gay soldier deployed in Iraq asked the candidates if they would take measures to "circumvent" the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," if elected president.

Some audience members audibly booed the soldier -- a moment the GOP candidates on stage chose to ignore.

GOProud also noted that Santorum, who answered the question, declined to thank the soldier for his service, and called the repeal of DADT "social experimentation" - and "tragic."

"I would say any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military," Santorum responded. "And the fact that they're making a point to include it as a provision within the military that we are going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege to -- and removing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' I think tries to inject social policy into the military. And the military's job is to do one thing, and that is to defend our country."

[MrB]

Is that a version of what I used to see on leftist chat boards?

“You can’t comment on military issues, including how and where they should be used, unless you’ve served in the military”

[newfreep]

Ahhhh yes, the old leftist “situational ethics” defense.

Those lefty, anti-God homos can get quite upset & violent when you point out God’s word on the subject.

I guess our mission is to “Hate the sin, love the sinner”...but do not condone their lifestyle choice.

[trumandogz]

“And yes, homosexuals on the Viet Nam Memorial wall should have their names removed.”

If that is the way you feel, you need to grab your hammer and chisel, head to Washington D.C. and start chipping away at those names.

[upsdriver]

GOProud can stick it where the sun don’t shine. They’re good at that.

[HarleyD]

If they showed the gay rights celebration in San Francisco or New Orleans on prime time TV, that would be the end of the gay rights movement.

[MrB]

You’re not showing “love” to anyone if you see them driving toward a cliff and don’t say something because it’s none of your business where they drive.

[Antoninus]

He should be able to exercise his First Amendment Rights without being booed.

Nonsense. Booing is the way the rest of us exercise our First Amendment right to show contempt for his pathetic statement. I have absolutely no problem with it.

If another soldier got up and said "9-11 was an inside job" I'd expect him to get booed, too. Serving in uniform does not make you exempt from criticism or contempt when you say stupid tings.

[Antoninus]

He should be able to exercise his First Amendment Rights without being booed.

Nonsense. Booing is the way the rest of us exercise our First Amendment right to show contempt for his pathetic statement. I have absolutely no problem with it.

If another soldier got up and said "9-11 was an inside job" I'd expect him to get booed, too. Serving in uniform does not make you exempt from criticism or contempt when you say stupid things.

[DJ MacWoW]

Trisham made a statement that you questioned.

You are on the same side. Trisham is appalled at GOProuds demand. The point that you brought up wasn't addressed. Both of us have been labeled "homophobes" often enough that it never occurred to trisham that they had to defend their stand.

[MrB]

Which ones would those be?
Not categories, but which names?

[MrB]

Serving in uniform does not make you exempt from criticism or contempt when you say stupid tings.

Yeah, it's not like being a minority or anything... :)

[Chainmail]

No, serving under false pretences then making your deviant sexual orientation your whole focus is low class.

Any candidate who wants my vote better resolve to ban gays in the military service.

Nothing could be more destructive to good order and discipline than homosexuals in the service.

[trisham]

You got that right. Imho, the majority of our society have no real idea of the reality of homosexual life or the homosexual agenda. Because of their lack of knowledge, they also don’t realize what an impact it has had on our culture.

[Netizen]

I never could understand the political concept of "gay republican" other than that of being an oxymoron.

I think its a 'destroy from within' tactic. jmo

[Responsibility2nd]

Thanks DJ. I appreciate how you can bring things together. I’m sorry for being snippy at you and trisham. My apologies to you both.

You are correct. WE are on the same wavelength here. Unlike others who want to glorify gay soldiers.

[scripter]

I didn't mention DADT, what I asked was whether you supported gays in the military. I'll clarify:

Do you support gays serving openly in the military?

[trisham]

And a lot of people are not considering what the consequences are. Would you put a man in the middle of an all woman unit? Or a woman in with all men? Good gravy!

***************************

That's a big problem. People don't consider the consequences.

[djrakowski]

The horrendous CRISIS that we now find ourselves in is not merely economic. It has been growing for many years. Our present-day culture is the product of ignoring God and trampling morality.

Absolutely correct... Psalm 146:3...

[Lancey Howard]

Is this like a Democrat gun rights group?
Or a Democrat pro-life group?
Or a Democrat cut-taxes group?

[papertyger]

If that is the way you feel, you need to grab your hammer and chisel, head to Washington D.C. and start chipping away at those names.

Tell you what...how about I just stridently oppose moral sophists trying to smooth the acceptance of deviancy into the mainstream, and call it good?