Posted on 05/18/2006 8:13:44 AM PDT by polymuser
Mary Cheney was just on NPR's Diane Rehm Show, promoting her new book "Now It's My Turn".
She spanked Diane and the standard lib callers pretty darned good. Sounded like they just can't possibly fathom a conservative Republican gay person. She set them straight about her parent's investments going into a nonrevocable trust that goes to charity, about the 2004 election being about trust and national security and not about Republican misrepresentation, about her being a person speaking her own mind and not a glbt shrill, and other good stuff. She told a number of callers they were just wrong about things. And she left Rehm without words a few times, trying to deal with some truths. That's always priceless.
I doubt NPR will invite her back for any future segments.
I adore Mary Cheney, and applaud both her and her partner for staying true to both themselves and their principles.
Um... ok at the risk of getting in some serious trouble I have to admit I cannot fathom it either.
Had all sorts of images from this headline.
I've known some myself. In fact the guy who started me seriously moving into the Republican side of things was a conservative gay republican man - he even took me to the registrar's office back in the 80s so I could fill out the paperwork officially switching me from democrat to republican. They for sure exist.
Sounded like they just can't possibly fathom a conservative Republican gay person.
Um... ok at the risk of getting in some serious trouble I have to admit I cannot fathom it either.
Why??
My life is a complex bag of stuff, who I sleep with might make the top 5, who somebody else sleeps with don't make my top 10.
Well for starters having worked with gay people and having a gay brother myself I don't personally care about people's sex life.
What I have seen though on FR is a large number of posts where people claim that homosexuality and conservative values do not mix at all. Sure the "fiscal conservative" side does but then we hit a whole area of morality that just doesn't seem to go hand in hand with homosexuality (no pun intended).
I think you can make a conservative argument for gay marriage, on the basis that it strengthens instead of weakening its importance and universality in everyday life, and that it encourages monogamy and personal responsiblity. For years, the left has been telling us that marriage didn't matter (remember Dan Quayle and Murphy Brown?), but only now have they realized that conservatives have been right all along about it.
I guess everyone has a different definition of "conservative".
I know several conservatives who happen to be gay, and their sexuality really makes absolutely no difference to our friendships or business relationships. With my conservative gay friends, we have loads of we talk about in honest, fun, and lively discussions, and our mutual respect for each other means that their sexuality is a non-issue for us.
With the liberal gay people, however, there is always this uncomfortable sense that they are demanding respect for their lifestyles while they refuse to accord respect to you. But that is true of liberal heterosexuals as well. They have to broadcast their love lives to one and all, whether it is sensitive to the wishes of others, or not. It is the left that has to sexualize everything. (Think of that hilarious photo of Algore on the front of that magazine, showing off his "package", or the Clinton cover focused on his crotch, or the Heinz-sKerry clinch, or, or, or, ad nauseum). It's almost like they are (ahem) compensating for something.
Put me in the category of one who applauds Mary Cheney, and her parents, for being the illustration of "grace under pressure" on such a hot-button topic. My best wishes go to them all.
While your argument is a logical one about monogamy, I don't think that this is how most "conservatives" regard gay marriage. We have only to look at posts here on FR to see what the "conservative" stance is, right?
On FR many people want to actually have a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. On one thread I had some serious arguments with people because I said I felt that it was wrong to use the Constitution in this manner. You should have seen the sparks fly over that statement.
So I doubt that people are going to embrace gay marriage as a conservative value any time soon.
I am also curious do they ever come to places like freerepublic and read what other "conservatives" think about homosexuality?
The rabid liberal lesbians absolutely hate Mary Cheney.
"She spanked Diane and the standard lib callers pretty darned good. Sounded like they just can't possibly fathom a conservative Republican gay person."
Neither can a lot of conservative Republicans. ;)
We really haven't talked about that much, and it is my impression that it didn't seem a "deal breaker" issue for them, at least in our discussion. For the most part, these folks are smart enough to know how to protect their rights without having "gay marriage" make their private lives public. They just go their own way in the same way you or I do. The smart ones recognize that when you have a big tent, there are ALWAYS some people who want to make the tent smaller and more "pure". (As an analogy, there are some who genuinely think that women shouldn't have the vote, and I'm pretty philosophical about the insecurities of people who feel that way, LOL!)
I have mentioned FR to some, quite casually, and I don't know if they visit here. Some forums and daily threads here are very careful not to engage in "bashing" and to try to keep things civil, but there are trolls of every stripe, as is to be expected in an online, anonymous forum. Those gays who aren't energized enough for the roughness of the debate probably don't come back or stay too long, but the ones who do visit must have some pretty thick skin to tolerate some of the things said here.
I sometimes find myself out of step with many Republicans and some here because of my committment to vegetarianism. I understand that some people who aren't comfortable with that, and will debate me about "who is right" on this issue. It doesn't matter: I'm not trying to convert them, and they probably won't convince me to go back to eating meat. The point is, we all probably have issues where we differ from the loudest voices on this forum. We can take offense, fight back, or decide just to let it go. My energies are more profitably directed at doing things other than getting hissy about whether or not someone makes fun of my food choices.
Ask yourself, 'how does one's sexual proclivities influence ideas regarding abortion (for instance), or taxes, or the death penalty, or illegal immigration, or the failing public school system, or right to bear arms.' It is a mixed bag of effects so it's not difficult to see that even a sexual degenerate (and that applies to the bill clinton types as well as the homosexual types) can hold conservative notions on some topics.
Yeah. Sort of bursts the ego balloons of all the liberals who thought there's no way, just no way...
I think you and I have had very different experiences here on FR and with others that call themselves conservatives. I do not get the feeling of good will towards gays here at all. I think the whole Christy Todd Whitman PAC, "It's My Party Too", is about addressing how not inclusive the Republican party is to others.
You feel out of step because of your vegetarianism? Now that is funny. What does being a vegetarian have to do with your political beliefs?
I find myself feeling "out of step" with other conservatives over the Intelligent Design debate. My opinion is it is not a science and should not be pushed as one. I have taken a break from arguing it on here because it just goes round and round in circles.
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.