Posted on 09/05/2010 10:56:10 AM PDT by Kaslin
In the wake of a dispute between WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah and conservative author Ann Coulter over her decision to headline an event sponsored by GOProud, a gay conservative organization, Farah and GOProud Chairman Christopher Barron will square off in a debate later this month at WND’s convention.
Barron told The Daily Caller that Farah challenged him to debate over whether GOProud can be considered “conservative” after Farah argued on his site that there is no place within conservatism for an organization like GOProud, a group that promotes itself as “the only national organization representing gay conservatives and their allies.” TheDC is waiting for confirmation from WND about the debate’s details.
Farah dropped Coulter from a speaking engagement at WND’s annual “Taking America Back” convention in Miami for agreeing to speak at GOProud’s “Homocon” party in New York. (Coulter later said that Farah had never actually booked her for a speech, calling him a “swine” and a “publicity whore.”)
Farah contends that groups like GOProud are trying to commit a “coup” to unroot the conservative movement with an “agenda…to take the homosexual agenda inside the conservative tent.”
Barron insists that his group is genuinely conservative and said he looks forward taking on Farah in front of a WND crowd.
“Since we announced that conservative author and columnist Ann Coulter would be headlining our Homocon 2010 in New York City, Farah has attacked GOProud, attacked Ann, and challenged our work almost every single day,” Barron said in a statement to The Daily Caller. “I look forward to standing on the stage with Mr. Farah to defend GOProud, to debunk the misinformation he has spread, and to make the case for GOProud’s conservative mission.”
Barron added that conservatism stands at a major crossroads in its acceptance of gays into the movement. A number of high profile conservatives, including Lisa De Pasquale of the Conservative Political Action Conference, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform and former General Counsel to the National Republican Senatorial Committee Craig Engle, have signed on as official sponsors of GOProud’s event.
The debate will be held on September 17 at 7:30 PM at the Doral Golf and Spa Resort in Miami, Florida.
Email Chris Moody and follow him on Twitter
I don’t much care what gay men and women do in their bedrooms or bathhouses. It’s what they are trying to do to the institution of marriage and their agenda in public schools that I object to. If it were about what goes on behind bedroom doors, there wouldn’t be a need for organizations and indoctrinating school children into the world of homosexuality and tolerance of perversion. There is nothing conservative about the homosexual agenda.
I’ve always figured the more gay men, the more potential women for me. But somehow it’s still just as hard to get chicks.
Lol.
In theory that would be the case in SoCal, but here the true babes have pretty high expectations.
However I cannot honestly self-identify as conservative, since even though I pray honestly, I don’t go to church and am a bit too tolerant of some things to really be conservative.
It’s not a hindrance that I’ve found. Most of the time I’m tolerated here. Despite having a strong belief in trade protectionism, and I’m very proud to be a FReeper.
I guess I consider myself a Tea Party libertarian.
Those are some slick spin-divisions between types of Christianity, constitutionalists, Tea Partiers, and libertarians. What is this, the balkanization of the Republicans? Or should we call it the Protestantization? Whatever, it supports myriad divisions, and leaves the Left laughing with glee.
I call myself a conservative because I believe in conserving the doctrine of negative rights put forth by the Constitution of 1789. That political philosophy, to me, defines America, and is the highest political expression of the Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian teachings of thousands of years of Western history. I truly believe that if we lose it - as the Left is pounding away to accomplish - we will be plunged into a thousand years (or more) of global collapse, and billions dead in the process.
That's why I want to conserve it, against anyone - the Left, gay-hating-Christians, Christian-hating-gays, RINOs, or anyone else who would throw it out in the name of "higher principles" invoked solely to polarize people and destroy the unity necessary for its preservation.
Mr. Farah will get his ass handed to him on a platter. Yeah, I know ... bad visual, given that the guy who’ll be handing it to him will find it a tasty dish.
Get Help: How To Improve Reading Comprehension
..As it was in the days of Lot....
I see your point, yes.
Thing is, there is a mainstream of conservative thought which has been its center for as long as our nation has been its home - which includes a strong moral component, in addition to the constitutional aspects of negative rights you mention.
Maybe that second pillar of conservatism - that having to do with freedoms, should be more accurately defined. As well as the first - having to do with morals.
The two can at times end up in direct opposition to each other. My own tendency when faced with that contradiction, is to come down on the side of freedoms. Others would quite rightly decide the side of morality is more important.
Both are conservative, but it seems to me the morality side has a more solid claim to the word “conservative”, and I won’t try to claim it as my own. Nor should the gay group. For pretty much the same reasons.
(and for the record, I’m not gay)
My point was not to Balkanize. We’re all mostly on the same side I think. But the group should be more honest and stop trying to claim the term “conservative”. They’re not.
Republicans have been self-balkanizing for the past 25 years or more.
Or should we call it the Protestantization?
If, by that, you mean a tendency to stage schisms, viciously fought, over increasingly small distinctions, ... yes, that's a pretty good description of where we are today.
Nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. When I see the phrase “bible thumper” it’s quite clear what sort of bigot I’m looking at.
I get the special rights thing, and the camel's nose in the tent. And I agree that such things are the undermining of the very fabric of American constiutional law, and therefore and extreme - even lethal - danger to the country.
I just believe we need to fight it with more, not less, constitutional power. The problem isn't the Republicans being exposed to the gyas demanding special rights - the problem is the Republican caving into them.
That's why I'm all for the debates, for Coulter and others to take them on. They need to be told: NO. They need to be told that there is a limit to how far the law can, and should, go towards their shrieks for special rights. They need to be confronted as the elitist, fairness-undermining saboteurs they really are. And most especially, in doing this, it will REFRAME the discussion away from who they screw, back towards equal recognitions as human beings - and ONLY as human beings - under the law. Not gay human being, black human beings, female human beings, or mexican human beings.
If Republican don't take back the UNITY of being natural human being persons under the constitution, the continued splitting off of special rights for every Left-voting group will, in the end, destroy the country. Even the Left doesn't give a damn about gays - all it cares about is multiplying special rights. Gays are utterly clueless to this, though (as are every other special rights group on the Left).
Clarity is always good.
And that would be?
That's why I'm all for the debates, for Coulter and others to take them on. They need to be told: NO.
You have no idea what she's going to say but I think calling herself the "Judy Garland of the right" (a gay icon) doesn't indicate a "NO". And her presence gives them validity as a group. Younger conservatives see her acceptance to speak at Homocon as a win for the gay agenda. And it is. Since when is it conservative policy to recognize a group whose sole existence is based on deviant behavior?
Agreed. The problem with both Christians and gays is that so many of them are Christian or gay BEFORE they are an American conservative. The only time you can count on an American conservative really being one is when they're conservatives FIRST. And you don't get that with either uber-religious types or sexual-identity politics types.
Don’t miss this one. Joseph Farah, anything to gin-up a crowd, including rank hypocrisy.
Many are conservative because they are Christians. And this IS a pro-God site.
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.