Facing the gay gestapo

The Advocate ^ | 4/16/02 | Tammy Bruce

[bribriagain]

"You don't know any gay people, do you?"

Why, are you looking?

[Pistias]

the gay gestapo

Whatever you do, do NOT try to find a funny picture to mock that title.

[nickcarraway]

Well, which do you support, that both Christian and gay groups can do this or that they can't do it? Or that only one or the other can do it?

[nickcarraway]

Have you ever heard of the movie, ``American Beauty?''

[KS Flyover]

the gay gestapo

"Whatever you do, do NOT try to find a funny picture to mock that title."

[nickcarraway]

Did you see it the movie ``American Beauty?'' It won the Academy Award two years ago. They portray every character in the movie as deeply disturbed and basically mentally. Marriage is portrayed as inevitably damaging and unhealthy. The only happy well-adjusted people in the entire movie was the gay couple. The message was quite clear.

[nickcarraway]

I think Miss Bruce was equally against both, so her position remains consistent.

I seem to recall that a lot of her complaint had to do with news shows, which aren't controlled by advertisers as much. For example, fellow members of NOW didn't want her on TV criticizing O.J. Simpson because they deemed that unacceptable.

[Tuor]

She is thinking libertarians (fence sitters), who want a feel good society of anarchy and socialism.

And you should take a course in libertarianism. Libertarians want small government, not *no* government and certainly not socialism.

As a semi-libertarian, I want the smallest possible government needed to do the things proscribed by the Constitution. No larger...and no smaller. I believe, that the State should stay out of those individual freedoms which do not interfere with the freedoms of others, *whether or not I agree with them*.

I don't see how that is 'fence sitting.'

Tuor

[Tuor]

It doesn't matter whether I support either doing it--they'll do it regardless.

Nice non-answer. For myself, I support them doing this... as long as the government stays out of it.

More generally, I think that homosexuality is wrong; morally wrong, but it shouldn't be illegal. God may take exception to the act, but that's between the individual and God, so long as no one else is hurt by it.

I think homosexuality is a choice, but one that some people are more prone towards than others, just as some people are more prone towards excessive drinking and others towards greed: we are all flawed and it is part of our duty to strive to overcome these flaws...with God's help.

Obviously, I don't expect you to agree with my views. It's not really important that you do. My views allow you to follow what you want so long as others are not hurt. I uphold your right to use and abuse your free will. I think you'll have to answer to God for it, but if you don't believe in Him (or think he doesn't have a problem with it), then that's your choice. The key, for us, is to keep the government out of things they have no business being in, and IMO, this is one of those things.

Tuor

[wwjdn]

I see it as fence sitting becuase they will almost always say that anything between two consenting adults is fine. This is a very dangerous ideal that I believe is destroying our nation and turning millions away from God. We need morals and rules, we don't need big Govt. to do this, which is the one part of their ideals I agree with.

[wwjdn]

Well seeing how we've been in normal society since time immemorial, where would you like to put us? We're not going anywhere, you know.

The main issue is that the homosexuals existed quietly, which is how it should be! Just like any other sexual activity, should be kept in private. Today we should all kinds of sexual perversions from our TV's, billboards, radios, CD's, mouths in public, etc. Then we expect our children to grow up and have a normal, healthy life.

We have also taken all responsibility away from everyone. All crimes are blamed on someone else and the punishment is therefore diminished and ineffective. We have GOT to start accepting and placing responsibility where it belongs and rebuild our society.

[TLBSHOW]

No! It goes on and on

[Tuor]

I see it as fence sitting becuase they will almost always say that anything between two consenting adults is fine.

I seperate the State from the Community and the Individual. Laws, IMO, can never create a moral society on a large scale. Instead, it is up to individuals -- people such as you and me -- to establish and uphold community standards which are moral and upstanding.

Thus, I would disagree with a law prohibiting homosexuality, but would be in complete agreement with a community that shunned all known homosexuals. On the one hand, the State is given the power to enforce morals; on the other, the people do it through their right to associate or disassociate.

I am both a libertarian *and* a Christian. I believe that God has certain expectations and requirements towards us, and that those who ignore or spit on those things are in Deep Trouble. However, I also believe in God-given free will, so people do have the right to ignore God, so long as they hurt no one besides themselves when doing so. As a Christian, I find homosexuality reprehensible, but also as a Christian I acknowledge that people who practice homosexuality have the right to exercise their free will in doing so.

The State is an inhuman institution, especially when it grows very large. It becomes a monster that reflects all the worst tendencies of men with very little of the restraints that individuals are forced to live under. The State must *never* be allowed to roam unfettered or unwatched, but must always be chained down as securely as possible.

Our Founding Fathers realized this and did what they could to straitjacket government without making it completely useless (as government *is* a necessary evil -- I am not an anarchist). But, over time, the worst elements of mankind (the kind that are attracted to the power found in government) have managed to corrode most of the safeguards the Founding Fathers put in place. This is easily observable and why I think that the US is, as a Constitutional Republic, doomed -- there will still be a US perhaps, but it wont be the sort of country envisioned by Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Fanklin, and the others.

As a libertarian and a Christian, I think the US Constitution was the best document for running a country that could be conceived. I regret deeply that the US is no longer committed to upholding the principles it enshrines.

Tuor