“I welcome anyone, gay or straight, who will add their vote to mine to defeat socialism. We can’t afford to pick and choose who is going to vote with us. “
The current option of alienating them and driving votes away hasn’t worked so well.
So Farah shouldn’t be in control of his own private political messaging? Did you know that in constitutional law forcing someone to “say” something they don’t want to say is as much an offence as “censorship?” But even more importantly, the First Amendment is not a limitation on private associations, but on the government. In fact, freedom of association is as important to constitutional liberty as freedom of speech. Would you force the Boy Scouts to accept gay speakers they didn’t want to host? Or would you force a church to accept an Imam teaching sharia law against the churchs desire, out of a fear of censorship? How is this picture you’re painting of forcing unwanted associations on Farah anything remotely like conservatism?
There is a HUGE difference between voting and lobbying! Of course people can vote any way they wish. This is a lobbying group with an expressed agenda, that is well spelled out on their website. No organization holding a convention named “HomoCon” is there to be talked to about the error of their ways. The group exists solely to push gay special rights. THAT is a problem.
True conservatives don't give credibility to faux conservative groups trying to make an issue of their sexuality nor do they support lying frauds like Mitt Romney. Coulter has done both.
If she was speaking before a gathering for the Ku Klux Klan on illegal immigration and affirmative action, would be supporting her? Or would oppose her because she was giving legitimacy to them?