It seems to me that their values are diametrically opposed to each other.
Homosexuals wouldn't go to work for a cause that says homosexuality is wrong, seems like. No more than I could go to a group that espouses abortion, or communism.
Unless we assume that conservatism no longer has anything to do with moral issues, but that's not really the case, yet.
Ed
Your reasoning is here sound. However, a homosexual might go to work for a specifically pro-straight-marriage organization cause if he wanted access to data. Political Infiltration. It's also done in businesses -- business infiltration. And in countries with spies.
In this particular thread matter, however.. liberals flung together a bunch of hoohaa. They don't specifically "say" that Mr. Gannon is gay in a double life. Oh, nooo. They play hopskotch with loose data. And their prime argument with him, as they allege, based upon their rumor/insinuation that he is gay, is that at a conservative news site, Talon News, he has asserted or taken position which are anti-gay MARRIAGE. Therefore, and based upon this rubric, they assert him as a hypocrite.
Let the facts be clear here. There is no known evidence that Mr. Gannon is either straight, gay, or A Stranger In a Strange Land named Valentine.
And it is now quite established, factually, that he is not personally, directly, involvedly -- with porno sites. Straight or Gay.
The point of the liberal "dots" is to let the reader "assume" that Mr. Gannon is a) gay, b) a hypocrite, c) and therefore the President must be impeached.
And this "picture" is brought to the world by those who want to see Gay Marriage a reality. And I read today where the upholding of a "gay marriage" ruling was upheld in court in NY today. My, my... oh the timing. And goodness, but the Eason Jordan story still hasn't really aired yet.. but..
Anyway, I hope this makes the points clearer.
You are quite correct, conservatives are a moral people. Moral people uphold timeheld, constitutional standards. And anyone may apply for a daily pass at WH press briefings, regardless of sex, ethnicity, race, and provided that they are indeed a news organization. Jeff's crime? He asked unusual questions! And he actually read something about Valerie Plame "case" that "established credentialed" journalists hadn't seen first (or did and didn't want anyone to know). And now they are mad.