Posted on 12/11/2008 5:41:24 AM PST by andrew roman
How was your “Day Without a Gay” day?
Did you “call in gay” yesterday?
Were you afforded the opportunity to “Fight H8 with love” on Wednesday?
Yesterday America was slated to feel the pain and hurt of a day where homosexuals were taken out of the societal equation. Gays across the map were encouraged to stay home on Wednesday – to “call in gay,” as it were – as a form of nonviolent protest against an American society still mired in antiquated anti-gay sentiment (or something close to that) - not unlike the wildly successful “Day without an Immigrant” day, you might remember, back on May 1st (International Workers Day).
Ironic it is that the image of a raised clenched fist, adorned in rainbow colors, is the symbol of what gays call a genuine, bona-fide civil rights movement - obnoxiously comparing their "struggles" with those of American blacks. Of course, I am still waiting to get an answer to my question – Which color of the all-inclusive rainbow represents those who wish to defend the millennia-old definition of marriage?
Tolerance anyone?
Remember … as I’ve written on many occasions – liberal bigotry fosters unity.
Sean Hetherington, the organizer of the “Day Without a Gay” campaign, made the rounds on some conservative talk shows – appearing on Mike Gallagher's show on Tuesday and Michael Medved's on Wednesday – to explain the protest. As expected, however, discussions primarily focused on the broader issues of "gay rights" and the aftermath of the passage of Proposition 8 in California.
On Gallagher's show Tuesday morning, Hetherington, in classic liberal form, not only incorrectly characterized defenders of traditional marriage with the standard (and predictable) text-book Hitlerian reference, but he did what leftists do so well - that is, project the very bigotry onto his opponents that he accuses conservatives of having.
Said Hetherington:
"What we're asking is to be treated fairy, and to be treated equally. And I understand that there is this question about what's okay in the bible in terms of marriage. I get it. I get that we won't ever be able to change the hearts and minds of those people who are on the far right. Just as we couldn't change Hitler's mind about how he felt about Jews."
I didn't realize that everyone who voted in favor of Proposition 8 in California - fifty-two percent - were on the "far right."
The natural instinct of those who are embarrassingly void of a reasoned argument against maintaining the traditional definition of marriage, other than "This is what I want...and I want it now because I want it!" is to throw in the obligatory reference to Adolf Hitler. After all, if one is in favor of keeping the definition of marriage as it is - and always has been - he must be a of the same mind as a murderous practitioner of genocide. To the Sean Hetheringtons of the world, one cannot possibly be against same-sex marriage without hating gays.
If Hethereington's point was to simply measure the inflexibility of those opposed to same-sex marriage, he easily could have said something like, "I get that we won't ever be able to change the hearts and minds of those people who are against what we want. Just as we can't change Al Gore's mind on Global Warming."
But the point was not to illustrate indomitability. It was to demonize traditional values. Using the name "Hitler," as leftists know, is an effective way of doing so (at least until it is prostituted so much as to have very little meaning).
On Medved's show, on Wednesday, the discussion turned to a story that came out of Philadelphia, where as many twenty-five city school teachers said they would be taking the day off from the Independence Charter School to discuss ways of introducing gay issues to their students.
Scott Craig, a teacher at Independence Charter, said this morning: “We are not an isolated group of people but taking part in a national campaign and that is Day Without Gay.”
The irony here is that in playing the "Hitler" card, as Hetherington did on both radio appearances, he actually promotes a totalitarian type of response on the part of gays, as demonstrated by this exchange on Wednesday's Michael Medved show:
Medved: The issue here with school children in public schools, which tax payers pay for, sir, is whether it is legitimate for someone to teach his own children or her own children that homosexuality is a sin. Is that a permissible - in your mind - point of view for someone to hold?
Hetherington: Well, homosexuality is not a sin. In fact, the word homosexual was not even added to the bible until the 40s. So -
Medved: Wait, I understand that you believe it's not a sin. What I'm saying is - Is it okay if someone disagrees with you?
Hetherington: Not on that point. No, it's not. This is a civil rights issue. It's like using the "N" word for black people to say that homosexuality is a sin. You know, Hitler was trying to convince people that Jews were sinners, too. So, this is a very old school thought that will be outdated long before we know it...
...
Medved: You happen to think that homosexuality is a beautiful thing, and it's a wonderful thing. Fine. You're entitled to your opinion. I have no desire to shut you up. I have no desire to put you in jail. I have no desire to repress you. However, you have a desire to repress someone who disagrees with you, right?
Hetherington: I believe that you, in talking to you, even in the way you were able to get me on this show - I never heard your show before, but I was told by your producer that you were a moderate, and that you supported -
Medved: The producer never said that, and I am not a moderate, and I have never been moderate.
Hetherington: Well, that's good to know. I wish I would have known that before I came on your show because I didn't realize I was going to be attacked for being a gay person -
Medved: Wait, wait. How have I attacked you for being a gay person?
Hetherington: Well, because what you're suggesting is that activism is somehow wrong because it's going to affect children -
Medved: I didn't say that. I said that your kind of activism, as evidenced by this guy Craig in Philadelphia with the school system, is repressive. You are repressing anyone who disagrees with you.
Hetherington: What's repression is when we send a message that gayness is a sin or that it's wrong. There's just no room for that in society anymore.
Medved: It seems to me that for someone in the United States of America to say there isn't room for an opinion - that's Hitlerian. I don't want to repress your opinion. You want to repress mine ...
Notice that when directly confronted with the issue of repressing opposing opinions - the very thing that lefties always accuse conservatives of doing - Mr. Hetherington completely (and quite amateurishly) avoided the question and instead began attacking Medved's producer for misleading him into appearing on what he thought was a "moderate" radio talk show.
I seriously doubt that the producer of the Michael Medved has ever had to deceive anyone into thinking the show was "moderate." And even if it were true, so what? Can't the position be defended even against the most ardent and zealous opponent?
Remember, Mr. Hetherington said, in no uncertain terms, that it was not okay to disagree with him on the issue of the sinfulness of homosexuality. It's also important to note that directly after that exchange between Medved and Hetherington, the program hit a hard break (a scheduled commercial break). When it returned, Hetherington had already hung up, refusing to continue - even though he was slated to stay the entire hour.
Way to man up.
Back on November 15th, I posted an article called, "Do As You Want, But Do It My Way - The Radical Gay." As much as I hate to be a cut-and-paste Johnny, these few lines from that piece are worth repeating:
In truth, this isn’t about rights. It never was. Marriage, quite honestly, is not a right.Incidentally, the early returns are showing that participation in Wednesday's "Day Without a Gay" was, at best, patchy.And as far as "equality" is concerned - there is no one I can marry that a gay man cannot marry. That he chooses not to, or has no desire to, does not mean that I – or anyone else – hate him.
This is really about acceptance.
The irony was always so striking – that gays on one hand insist that the society at large stay out of their bedrooms, casting no aspersions nor passing judgments on the way they choose to live their lives … yet, demand acceptance and tolerance based on precisely what they do in their bedrooms.
Sorry to disappoint you.
I do not harbor any hatred for homosexuals. Anyone who knows me knows this is true. I frankly don't care what goes on behind drawn curtains or locked doors. I do, however, care about my country - and this kind of intolerance from the Left cannot go unnoticed or unchallenged.
Lisa Leff of the Associated Press writes:
Participants ... were asked to refrain from spending money or at least to patronize gay-friendly businesses for the day.Imagine that....
In San Francisco's gay Castro district, several residents and merchants said they endorsed the cause but did not think a work stoppage or spending boycott was practical, given the poor economy and how quickly the strike was organized.
...
David Lang, 44, a San Francisco gymnastics coach who said he conceived of a similar idea right after the election, said he thinks a coordinated job action would have been more successful if organizers had enlisted support from sympathetic employers, labor groups and industries.
"If we are going to make a huge impact and not be laughed at, then we have to take the time and make the time to communicate with all the parties. We could have shut down a lot of the hotels," Lang said. "In theory it's a great idea, but it's being done wrong and now that it's been done wrong, I don't think it will be done again."
-
All those poor California women who couldn’t get their hairdressing.....cry me a river.....
hehe.
Hmmmm. I guess we are bunch of homophobes! :-)
Guy at my office said he’s bi so he only came in half a day.
There’s not even logic here. No one wants them to disappear, even for day, but rather to just stop forcing everyone else to forgo one of the pillers of Western civilization. Their insistance that everyone else bless their conscious choice of pretending that sexual relations with people of one’s own gender is a glorious thing suggests their need for therapy rignt there. They need help if they need to force people to hear about their sex lives at all, let alone all the time. Can we assume they spent the day in bed? Maybe we need a day without a heterosexual. The impact would be overwhelming.
Never even realized it was happening. Everywhere I went everywhere I conducted business the same people were there as usuual.
If anyone was missing then as I thought when I heard this they really would not be missed............
LOL
I called in sick Monday and wasn’t feeling too good yesterday but I had to pull it together. I live in Oklahoma where that type of thing is still looked down upon.
I’ll say it again, once it was the “love that dare not speak it’s name.” Now, it’s “the love that won’t shut the hell up.”
Hetherington: Well, homosexuality is not a sin. In fact, the word homosexual was not even added to the bible until the 40s. So -
The 40s, eh? Yeah, try the 1540s...BC!!!
‘Guy at my office said he’s bi so he only came in half a day.’
Hahahaha,good one! Which half of the day did he show up for?
How appropriate for this day to be on a Wednesday. Isn’t it also called “hump” day?
Let’s expand it to a “year without a queer”.
The world continued to spin yesterday. These homos have such delusions of grandeur thinking their immature protest would really change anything.
That’s what I was thinking.
If “day without a gay” didn’t work, let ‘em try a year.
Oh, was that yesterday? I didn’t notice.
Even better was when I skimmed over the phrase “liberal bigotry”.
Anyone else read a similarly-sounding but much more relevant name for their hijinks?
Would someone who put in a half day yesterday be considered bi-curious?
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.
