Posted on 02/12/2011 12:42:10 AM PST by Nickname
The party staged by Andrew Breitbart for GOProud — the gay Republican and conservative group — was as close to a game changer as things get and the most interesting event at CPAC by far, at least to this point — and that’s meant as no insult to CPAC. With sexy Sophie B. Hawkins singing to a boisterous, supportive crowd, the party almost obliterated in one night the conception that Republicans are anti-gay and gave the impression that young libertarians — and some not so young — are taking over the GOP. Pretty soon it may be cool to be a Republican and square to be a Democrat.
Well, maybe that’s what I wanted to see and wanted to feel, but the atmosphere was certainly there Thursday night at DC’s Eighteenth Street Lounge. People wandered the club’s corridors in wonderment at it all. No, there weren’t any leather biker studs or other accoutrements of the more outre gay scene, but there was as much acceptance of our modern world as at Democratic Party events, especially national ones of the scope of CPAC.
Does this indeed mean that libertarianism in its various strains is taking over the GOP? Again, that is possibly wishful thinking (and I wouldn’t want it to be that brand of libertarianism that seems to think the common defense can be accomplished with BB guns in someone’s garage), but there are indications across CPAC. Again, maybe this is anecdotal, but I’ve hardly heard much talk of abortion or other social issues at the conference — and when I have it seems vaguely discordant or anachronistic. Most people wanted to discuss the economy or the looming dangers of the Muslim Brotherhood. And, of course, who would be best to put Barack Obama out of office.
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
Is Breitbart gay?
CPAC sucks.
I’m reminded of that classical old western tune sung by Gene Autry, an american legend in singing, acting, business, horsemanship, baseball, and longevity, “Back in the Closet Again”.
Just as Conservative, Christian, Constitutional folks have their sexual preferences firmly behind the door of the closet, the only way to recognize a truly Conservative, Christian, Constitutional, homosexual, is to not recognize them at all, because their sexual preferences are firmly behind the door of the proverbial closet and will remain there where they belong.
Breitbart’s done a great deal to expose corruption but endorsing the homosexual agenda is not advancing conservatism.
We’re going to end up with a lot more Scott Browns in the GOP if courting special interest groups like GOProud is the road we take. We’ve actually done the “big tent” thing before and the results have been disastrous. A watered down GOP that stands for nothing. Dem lite.
Join us as individuals but get the hell away from me if you have the slightest inclination to use the power of the government to force anyone to approve of whatever it is you’re doing behind closed doors. And GOProud is inclined to do that.
Yep. Breitbart will now be thrown to the dogs on FR, just like Sarah Palin has been. It's too bad that we can't even tell who our allies are.
Not to my knowledge.
I'm assuming Beck, who hired Scott Baker from Breitbart's operation to run The Blaze.
Next year, prepare for gala events celebrating those who practice incest and bestiality. They’re equally sinful to homosexuality in the Bible, so if it’s cool to be gay, then I guess it’s cool to participate in the other stuff.
I am putting on my nomex now.
1. Marriage recognition is a state issue, not a federal one. Any “conservative” that says marriage recognition should be dictated to the states by the federal government is no conservative. I don’t think there should be a separate federal recognition of marriage at all.
2. “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” Some Protestants, often the most violently opposed to government “recognition” of gay marriage, accept a marriage as valid when presided over by a judge. Marriage is a sacrament. Whatever any earthly government declares as marriage may or may not be one, but the government declaring it so does not make it so.
From Man For All Seasons: “Some men think the earth is round, others think it flat. It is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat,will the King’s command make it round? And if it is round, will the King’s command flatten it?”
Many are arguing about whether or not the state can make a marriage that is against God. Since the state is not competent to make marriage, obviously it cannot. That certain religious groups assumed the state had that power by accepting “marriage” “granted” by the state (a justice of the peace), I can see their problem. They, like the left, have tried to give that which is God’s to their Caesar. *That* is the real problem.
One may need a licenses to have his marriage recognized by the state and to receive the tax benefits of marriage recognition, but recognition is a far cry from making a marriage, which can only be done by God.
3. There have always been factions in both parties that feel they can save individuals by passing laws to save them from themselves (see Prohibition, for example). Contrary to the statements by Scott Magill in the much lauded link, the Constitution does *not* deal with the relationships of an individual to the family, the family to the church, nor even the government to the family, but the government to the *individual*. (”Church and family are the basis of the traditional values upon which our Constitution rests.”)
I, too, have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. However, radical divinations of what the Constitution ought to say based on a quote from a historical figure not only does not magically transform the Constitution into something it is not (a bulwark for the ideals of some religious institutions) , but recalls the tactics of the radical left in their attempts to destroy that very document. It says what it says and for a reason.
I do *not* support gay marriage, as there is no such thing. The state claiming there is such a thing would be as meaningful as the state declaring that the Earth is flat (or that there really is a market for ethanol).
He’s married and has 4 kids for what it’s worth.
Anyone trying to make Conservatives look like Democrats isn't an ally.
Homosexuals are less than 2% of the population and most of them are liberals. How many votes are people willing to pander for? Are they worth chucking standards? Why not just vote Dem?
*****************************
That would be exactly..nothing.
Unfortunately, the homosexual agenda doesn't stop at "marriage".
Well, we must admit it is getting harder to do. Things and people are not always what they seem. Some Leftists, like Bill Maher, claim to be Libertarian. I suspect that is to deny his true colors and he thinks few people even know what a Libertarian stands for.
What makes GOProud different, IMO, is they are declaring themselves to be conservative even though they are gay. That means they are not claiming special status nor wanting any special treatment from the government. They are saying that not all gays are pushing the liberal agenda.
Some Freepers are quick to judge and they come out with guns blazing to declare their bona fides as conservatives before they have all the facts or before they have thought the matter through. I agree we must be wary of RINOs but we shouldn't throw our daughters out of the house if they happen to lose their virginity. Dick Cheney has a lesbian daughter whom he loves very much. Did you disown Cheney over that? Some declare their opposition to homosexuality based on their understanding of, and belief in, the Bible. Did they miss the part that says, "Hate the sin but love the sinner."? If you accept their help in other matters it does not mean you are supporting their sin.
Were GOProud not flying under that banner but were instead quietly joining as individuals, as wita suggested, would the same Freepers be demanding their expulsion? I doubt it, and that would also deprive us of the message that the Left cannot create victim groups, demand special rights for them and then claim them as their own and rely on their votes. Some of these made-up victim groups, blacks, women, homosexuals, illegals, etc., are conservatives and we should be happy when they declare themselves so.
To abandon Breitbart over this is ridiculous, wounding yourself in the futile attempt to hurt someone else. Is that Christian? It is certainly dumb and all would see it as such were their vision not clouded by religion and politics.
I suggest that some Freepers should cool their jets, stop their sanctimonious Bible thumping, and take a closer look at this thing.
Breitbart has done more for conservatives than any of the 100 percent club have.
A very good post #28, and I agree.
The ‘Age of Consent’ is also a state issue, not a federal one. So if the left-wing attack this state issue the same way that they have attacked the definition and recoginiton of marraige are you still going to spout the same BS?
The Constitution specifies the means for Amendments. Yet you claim it is anti-conservative to seek an Amendment in order to clarify the definition of marraige for activist judges?
As it stands now the left-wing seek to dictate a perverted morality through federal law. They have also saught this on the state level for many states as well. People and businesses have been punished for opposing perversion. The ‘right to association’ is being destroyed. The People’s ‘right to representation’ is also being destroyed by activist judges who claim that the people have no right to make state laws opposing perversion rights.
The military is now also being perverted at the federal level as well by leftists. What state laws will prevent that?
All of this eventually winds up in front of judges. The only way to make it crystal clear for judges is through a Constitutional Amendment that clarifies it for all of the states.
But if we are lacking the majority to Amend the Constitution then we still will have to fight the left here on every level from the state level to the federal level. It is moronic to think that it is anyother way.
The past wording of the ‘Marraige’ Amendment may not be the silver bullet answer but to defeat the left will require action at the federal level and ultimetaly an Amendment.
Well said.
GOProud pushes a left-wing agenda. They are for special rights for perversion. They support law that would punish those who oppose perversion.
There is no need for a closer look. The GOProud perversion rights agenda is known.
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.