Posted on 02/22/2010 9:06:23 PM PST by DesertRenegade
California Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) chairman Ryan Sorba generated a media controversy when he was shown at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) denouncing the organizers for inviting a homosexual Republican group, GOProud, into the event as an official sponsor. In "controversial" remarks, Sorba said homosexuality was unnatural and that he welcomed more debate and discussion about the subject from his political adversaries.
But what many people don't realize is that Sorba's "outburst" was provoked by a speaker who preceded him, Alexander McCobin of Students For Liberty (SFL).
McCobin went out of his way to use valuable time from the podium to thank the American Conservative Union, the main CPAC organizer, for making the controversial decision to approve GOProud's participation.
David Keene, a lobbyist, is the chairman of the ACU and personally approved GOProud's involvement in CPAC.
Sorba told AIM, "I think CPAC went overboard this year. I don't think he [Keene] should be sitting at the top of CPAC." He noted that CPAC over the last several years has also allowed groups such as the ACLU to have exhibits at the event.
"What's next?," Sorba asked. "Are they going to have Republicans for Obamacare? Republicans for free abortions?"
Incredibly, McCobin of SFL told me that his group "is not a conservative organization" and that "We spent this past weekend reaching out to the left and the right at both the Young Democrats of America's convention and the Conservative Political Action Conference. We are not left or right."
If they are not conservative, Sorba asked, "What are they doing at CPAC?"
No stranger to controversy, Sorba is the author of the book, The Born Gay Hoax (this is a working draft) and was shouted down at Smith College by lesbian activists because of his support for traditional values.
Look at how ACT UP would go into Catholic masses and throw used condoms at people.
Lots of tolerance, acceptance, diversity THERE.
Cheers!
We need a new conservative convention the same way we need a new conservative party.
And the Sergeant Majors. Other than that, it isn’t a democracy.
“It’s not even libertarian. Libertarians are not all one on the gay issues that FUDGE-PAC is pushing.”
The “F” in FPAC stands for “fecal”.
“...however, on the other hand, there are plenty of straight conservatives that harbor a liberal idea or two on one issue or another. Why are the gay conservatives any different than these other “conservatives”?
What near destroyed the GOP is your embrace without the important caveat that says the GOP will allow groups -ASYLUM - ONLY. Let any group support the conservative platform all they want; however, they cannot come into this party and attempt to promulgate immorality, which is destructive to the very foundations of the party.
It’s just as absurd as allowing Muslims to become part of our government. Islam results in tyranny and savagery in every part of the Islamic world. That is because it is a savage religion founded by a murderous pedophile who built the entire religion on force, plunder, murder and rape. It is very unpopular to admit this because the west is hell bent on self-destruction but the bottom-line is that allowing Islam representation in our government is EXACTLY the same as allowing a religion whose central tenet is to destroy Democracy and of course to destroy America.
Allowing homosexuality is not the same thing as inviting Islam in that homosexuals don’t necessarily -intend- to destroy our party and our country. They just intend to permeate our body, corrupt our collective morals and legitimize their sin. Our destruction just happens to be an inevitable consequence.
The overall point is that the words “big tent” cannot mean that we give commendation to all beliefs. Asylum is crucial. The lesson we better have learned over the past decade is that if we do not hold firm to our conservative platform and allow people who have beliefs that are destructive to our party into leadership roles within the party and elective office simply because “only a moderate can win in New Hampshire or New York” - we are inviting our destruction. That mistake that we have to support people like Arlen Specter is exactly why our nation is in the debacle it is in today.
Is a virus a good thing simply because it can survive in a particular environment?
I agree. On issues like preaching in schools, for example, there should be no pushing of social values on my children. That I think is a very legitmate complaint of social conservatives. Is the definition of socially conservative, then, that social values will not enter the political arena by any group or does it call for government intervention to promote social values. I say the later is not conservative (all a bit rambling. Consider is a dialog opener if anyone wants to engage).
Thanks. Not surprising they’re engaged in guerilla tactics. And they’re working everywhere .. notably in the schools so that it’s ‘homophobic’ to question anything about the gay agenda. So Guerriero and Smith are gay whores, basically. Shocking.
>versus just wanting to be accepted as normal flawed human beings.<
Again, that is simply not the case, but if you even inSINuate that homosexuality is a flaw you will be shouted down, and it is because they have an agenda that they have are part of a specific group. If you knew the history of this movement you would not entertain such thought that this is a benign group. GoProud would be akin to an al-Qaeda conservative PAC, and in fact, the latter would be more conservative all told.
Catholics and Bingo? More confusion. But if the RC. church was a PAC that claimed to be conservative, and booed a Protestant as a CPAC meeting, while advocating liberal issues, as they do in some areas (and overall those it counts as members do*), that would be a real issue also.
As for Brown, he is not part of a PAC of conservative strippers, nor is that a ongoing identification, while he does not represent the the kind of conservatism that is viable. As it is, the Republicans typically do the same things the Democrats do, only slower. Conservatism that does not uphold the moral aspect overall will not see fiscal conservatism or small government and preservation of historical freedoms either.
*http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html#Sec4
Precisely. What you said. We have monsters in the White House.
>Government can neither promote or suppress homosexuals and be consistently conservative.<
So, to use my analogy again, if taking part in a consensual activity that is not essential to physical life, such as the Lord’s supper, was implicated as a primary cause in the death of over half a million Americans, and multitude more worldwide, as well as a greatly increased incidence of infectious diseases, despite attempts to use preventive measures, and was also contrary to the well-being of the family, then the government would not be conservative it did not work to suppress this practice? Thus the liberals were acting conservative when they fought against shutting down bath houses at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, which still has homosexuality as it major cause in the West.
If the practice of a foreign power caused the medical and social problems, and the resultant financial cost which homosexuality has*, America would be at war with that country right now.
No, homosexuality is not alone in this, and the war against God is very costly and we all have our guilt, but we are not to justify sin, bu turn in repentance to the Lord Jesus, in which there is redemption for both straight and homosexual sinners. Thanks be to God.
*http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html#Sec8
As a movement, this is not hype, but consistent with stated goals and efforts, and while there are more moderate homosexuals, overall this is what the movement seeks.
I call them hetrophobes.
Your analogy is perverse. If hitting each other in the face resulted in this: http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality#Health_Effects_of_Homosexual_Lifestyle, and those involved promoted such as normal and health, and sought to censure or even incarcerate those who disagree, (see post 139) while insisting to be recognized as part of a conservative PAC in a conservative org, then your analogy would be fitting.
The wise understand. Well said.
For a minute, I thought you were talking about smoking :-)
Or maybe driving.
Once the hazard was known, steps can be and were taken to mitigate the hazard. You should limit your case to those who have died since the ramifications (no pun intended) of the activity have been known who were not participants and did not choose to accept the risk created by others. That number is quite small and comparable to many risks of life to bystanders.
Many things are detrimental to families that are not illegal and are far more prevalent: football widowhood, ordinary adultery, boy’s night out etc. And then there is simple laziness, bad temperament, inability to communicate etc. The fact is, you cannot perfect humanity by passing laws. That has been religion’s greatest mistake since first achieving power under Constantine. Christ denied His kingdom was of this world or that perfection or something like it was achievable by fiat. But it doesn’t stop many people who call themselves Christians from trying over and over and ultimately becoming their own enemy in the process.
I want to go back to George Washington’s rules regarding homosexuals that lie and sneak to get into the military, not Bill Clinton’s rule.
I don’t know what idiot told you that heterosexuals being in the military are just as serious as homosexuals being in the military, did you form that idea while you were in?
You play so many devious, dishonest games it is difficult to make sense of your posts, seems to me that you also want faggot “marriage” on the same level as actual marriage.
This is still a social conservative site.
I decline to answer until you actually read my posts, beginning with #167 which conclusively refutes your assertion.
Open Notepad, put all my posts together, and then if you don’t understand, I will try to make sense of them for you.
That answer is actually an improvement over the gibberish you have been posting.
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.