[basil]

I don’t get it—
I’m not threatened by gays. Pro-equality votes are votes. First, we have to win this next election, and then we can sort it all out.

[little jeremiah]

If you’re not threatened by the homosexual agenda, you must be in favor of it.

The homosexual agenda is busily destroying our freedoms of religion, speech and association, as well as the military, and the natural family, and childrens’ innocence.

This means nothing to you?

[cripplecreek]

Maybe you can list the openly gay republicans who have won races for us.

[bwc2221]

I sometimes look at statements made by people who have been posting here for 8 years or more and just shake my head. I think many have long been under the illusion that this is a Republican blog rather than a conservative blog.

[muawiyah]

if the homosexual crowd wants to give us money, fine. if they want to vote for us, fine. The AMERICAN PEOPLE do not tolerate homosexuals in leadership positions in the Republican party nor do they tolerate homosexuals elected as Republicans.

We lost 2006 because of a half dozen people.

NO MORE 2006 EVENTS.

[DBeers]

I don’t get it— I’m not threatened by gays.

Are you threatened by people who prefer sex with sheep?

You are correct, you do not get it. On this subject there are those who get it and there are useful idiots.

[Yaelle]

Here you go, Basil - you are going to take some heat for that comment. So will I for mine! Let’s get our flammable jammies on!

(Seriously, on election day, if we beat Obama by 1000 votes, who’s going to give back those votes because those people were homosexual?? Says more about some of us than our core beliefs, doesn’t it?)

[Scotsman will be Free]

I’m not “threatened” by abortionists either, but I ain’t voting for one and I’m not joining ranks with any of them either.

[itsahoot]

You are correct basil, you don’t get it.

[JustaDumbBlonde]

"I’m not threatened by gays."

I don't feel personally threatened by homos, but I do feel that our entire society is threatened by the homosexual agenda. In the 70's the queers just wanted to be accepted, in the 80's they wanted to be recognized formally, in the 90's they were far enough out of the closet to start demanding special rights, and this decade they are demanding that their deviant behavior be taught to elementary students as something that is normal.

Of course, the evolution of the homo agenda is a bit more complicated than my brief run-down, but hopefully you see my point.

"Pro-equality votes are votes."

All votes are votes. All people are free to vote as they please. On one hand you may accept a vote from a homo as a citizen, it is all together something different to allow them to promote their personal and societal agenda through politics. That is where this will end up going.

"First, we have to win this next election, and then we can sort it all out."

Once things like this get in, there is no sorting it out later. That would be discrimination and run into every bugaboo in existence, both social and legal. Do you really think republicans would win the elections and then turn around and get all of the pro-deviant behavior out of the power structure?

Just my two cents and I mean you no harm by disagreeing with your comments. :)