Ok.
Given the self-evident nature of the Transhumanist/Postgenderist/LGBTQXYZWhateverist agenda - I vote we stand for conserving the human species:
Most of my gay friends are not about pushing a social agenda. They just want to be left alone. This idea that all gays want the throw it in our faces is yet another lie by the left to divide us. We need to get away from the manufactured fights and stand together on the things we do agree on. There will never be a winning party that agrees 100% on everything because you limit the number of people you can attract. You have to take the wins you can get.
For instance on abortion, if we had been willing to compromise we could have gotten much stronger restrictions placed on it but people with an all or nothing attitude sunk that ship.
The author of the article anticipated your comment when he wrote: “Sadly post-Reagan Republicans have proven to be endlessly gullible and susceptible to this strategy.”
Divide "us?" So now you're including homosexuals (not "gays") in "us?" Kindly include me out of any such grouping.
For instance on abortion, if we had been willing to compromise we could have gotten much stronger restrictions placed on it but people with an all or nothing attitude sunk that ship.
[sarcasm] Oh yes. Because libertarianism and capitalism are so much more important than the Will of A-mighty G-d. [/sarcasm]
I’m with you, 100% and also share your experience. So, if self-righteous Christian conservatives want to disavow homosexuals in the party, then they’ll also need to both judge then disavow every other unrepentant sinner as well as atheists, Jews, agnostics, and any other non-conforming New Testament un-scriptural man made denominations like Catholics and Mormons. Yeah, just shut the doors to the church and to the party.
“Since Feb 9, 2016.”
“Most of my gay friends are not about pushing a social agenda. They just want to be left alone.”
They want to be left alone?
Really, because since 1992 when Bill Clinton was elected all I have heard of is countless reasons whey “they” were supposed to be allowed to serve openly in the military.
I ask the question time and time again, “do openly gay and now openly transgender people being allowed to serve in the military, make the military a more fierce and feared fighting force?”
We all know the answer to that question is a qualified, NO!!!
But, politicians insist, for ddddiiiiiivvvvverrrrsiiiittttyyyy sake, that it must be allowed...So...what is the objective here.
Ask the question, you have one choice it is either diversity, or being the world’s most dominate, fierce, and feared fighting force, what is it?
Because you simply cannot have both. Because in most cases for every quota you fill to appease the diversity gods you are reducing your true combat warrior quota by one...Truth.
Consider this analogy, simply replace every third football player on an NFL team with a kicker or punter, how will that team do? The other 31 teams do not do have to this and they don’t have comply with that rule, honestly, how will that team do? That’s right, while kickers and punters are football players they are not usually your meanest, toughest, fiercest competitors...that team is going to get slaughtered...Truth.
What is going to happened to the US Military if we continue down the path of political correctness, that of pushing a social agenda?
If we had just compromised on slavery, we might have avoided a Civil War. We should just compromise on baby murder.
Gay friends, huh? I work with lots of gays and transgenders but I don’t call them friends. My friends are people I share common values with, and those people don’t see the world the way I do.
As far as compromising on abortion, I don’t compromise on evil. Killing babies is killing babies, whether its at 12 weeks or 20 weeks, disabled babies, girl babies, or babies conceived in rape. NO COMPROMISE
You and your ‘apolitical’ homosexual friends should tell your political homosexual friends to stfu. The latter is the problem, the social conservatives aren’t.
Capiche?
Sorry, FRiend, but it was precisely our willingness to “compromise” on abortion that got us Roe v. Wade.
Specifically, agreeing to limit “pregnancy termination” to the first 12 weeks kicked the door open, making it easy-peasy for the left to continue pushing the woman’s “right to choose” “late term abortion” up to, and even after, the moment of birth.
A child in the womb not a disposable blob of goo until 12 weeks, nor until it emerges from the womb. It’s a baby, a human being with a full set of human dna from the moment of conception.
So we either allow baby killing, or we don’t. There’s no in between.
How do you compromise murder?
One’s understanding of what conservatism means determines whether it is possible to be a gay conservative. I think that definition should also include conserving the wholesome morality of the past.
That said, I can form alliances. The nature of a two party system requires it.
Ok.
Given the self-evident nature of the Transhumanist/Postgenderist/LGBTQXYZWhateverist agenda - I vote we stand for conserving the human species: