Time to face facts: Gays gain victory

townhall ^ | June 20, 2003 | Jonah Goldberg

[RomanCatholicProlifer]

More ramblings from that pseudo intellectual, neo conservative Goldberg again, I see. Neo Conservatives have sold thier sold to the PC crowd on many topics, with the normalization of homersexuality being at the top. Normalizing the deviancy of homersexuals has diluted conservativism.

[kidd]

What arrogance!

So if I don't accept homosexual behavior, I "don't think for myself" or I'm not "enlightened"???

You have it backwards. You have been brainwashed by the NY Times / ABC news type media. Ask yourself - when is the last time the mainstream media portrayed a homosexual as evil? Perhaps you are not aware of an ongoing agenda?

If homosexuals are supposed to be just like everyone else, then shouldn't they have an equal proportion of evil people? But when a movie comes out like "Basic Instinct", severalhomosexual groups came out in protest of the movie - not because it portrayed homosexuals as evil, but because a lesbian committed a murder. They want the public to believe that homosexuals are incapable of being evil!

Do you ever hear the mainstream media describe how homosexual behavior significantly shortens life? You hear about AIDS, but you never hear about the numerous other diseases that is spread by homosexual acts. I've read that gay men live to be an average of 41 years old, while the general population of men live into their late 70's.

Homosexuals know that the "10% of the population is gay" is 5-20 times too high. But they continue to repeat the larger number as part of their agenda to demonstrate that they are "normal". They have to lie to show they are normal.

Wake up.

[RomanCatholicProlifer]

exactly.......ask a few homersexuals who Matthew Shepard is, then ask them who Jessie Dirkhising is.........

[Bryan24]

Only those who don't think for themselves and take the Bible literally see this path leading to tolerance of pedophilia and everything else they try to scare us with.

The bible can hardly be clearer about homosexuality. If it is your postion to ignore the bible, then so be it. But we are trying to SCARE you?

Excuse me, but the virtues of gay sex are AIDS, STDs and a host of other physical problems. Man was not made to stick his penis into another man's anus.

Gays can try and mainstream that all they want, and I will fight them till the day I die, as I will also fight pedophilia. They are BOTH sexual perversions.

[laureldrive]

Neo Conservatives have sold thier sold to the PC crowd on many topics

Neo conservatives aren't predictably pro-life, or pro-traditional family; they don't talk a lot about tax cuts or shrinking government. What they're enthusiastic about is WAR - -- I'm not sure why this makes them conservatives, but it's hard to argue the point on Freerepublic without being branded "unpatriotic"

[Angelus Errare]

"Gays indeed have become mainstreamed. It's inexorable. Women having careers. Blacks having equal rights. Tolerating gays. It's called being enlightened."

Tolerance and respect for them as possessing the same rights and privileges as we do under the American constitution is one thing, special rights are another altogether. Sodomy laws may indeed be going the way of the dinosaur, but the fact that so many are willing to tar those opposed to the gay rights movement with the brand of "intolerance" (which may as well be heresy in today's society) rather than debate the issues concerning gay marriage as have been laid out on the NRO as well as other places only serves to reinforce the perception that those claiming intolerance are themselves too intellectually bankrupt to support their positions.

"The ultimate proof are the number of us on a right-wing Web site who are gay-friendly."

I disagree. That merely demonstrates that we are willing to tolerate a difference of opinion for the sake of advancing the broader conservative movement. Unlike say, the Democratic Party, where one MUST adhere to a set position and ideology on the issue of abortion or homosexuality in order to be elected or represent the party on a national level. This creates friction between the different wings of the party, but even while you may find some on Free Republic who don't favor certain aspects of traditional morality, I very much doubt that there is a sizeable number of people here who would willingly embrace the gay rights movement, which in of itself simply utilizes Marxist class warfare as applied to sexual orientation.

"America is on an inexorable liberal path on social issues, and has pretty much seen its realization."

Perhaps so, but there are any number of societies that have gone from social liberalism to social conservativism in roughly short periods of time. The formerly atheistic communist states of the Soviet Union, for example, are currently hotbeds social conservatism. More to the point, time and simple reproduction arithmetic is on the side of social conservatives.

"However, on economic issues, America is on a path towards the right. America has seen the failure of New Deal socialism and is moving away. 10-15 years ago, when I tried to talk about privatizing social security, or replacing the IRS, it was laughable. Even among Republicans. Now, they're taken seriously, and you'll see significant steps toward these goals by the end of Bush's second term."

Indeed. However, the passage school vouchers is very likely to get children out of the decaying public school system and once there is serious reform in the higher levels of academia, I very much doubt that current social liberalism is going to be as popular in 30 years if we pull things off right than it is today. And it is precisely that position that scares social liberals so much, which is why there are so many analogies to the Nazi regime being floated about the Bush administration on any number of liberal sites.

"But if you're focused on social issues--you have a lost cause."

I agree, because the three are intertwined. Respect for private property is itself derived from the concept of natural and American national security as it is currently defined is based primarily on the fact that our national culture retains some moral clarity on the part that we can at least call a spade a spade and use the word "evil" without everyone going freaky like in Western Europe, that bastion of enlightened thought. You have a veritable example of any number of "socially enlightened" societies today in France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Germany, and to a certain extent England. Now there are still groups working hard to turn these countries around and they should be commended for their efforts, but I still cannot for the life of me understand why people desire to jettison the concept of moral law when there existing examples of what happens to nations that do.

"Social conservatives will eventually win all of these issues. It's just a matter of time."

Actually, I'd say it's also reproduction. Western Europe's birthrates are rapidly declining and the place is going to completely Islamicized in 30 to 50 years. Assuming Islam doesn't fix the current state that it's in, that in of itself is worrying enough, but either way the enlightened EU and its bureaucratic social engineering will either be long dead and buried or altered beyond recognition by the time that occurs. In the US, if the Republican Party can successfully coopt the Hispanic voting bloc (which tends to be extremely social conservative in my own experience), that's pretty much the death knell to gay marriage any time soon. Canada will likely endure a little longer, but ultimately it too will crack and dissolve or be altered beyond recognition by some type of internal reorganization. So where does that leave the gloriously enlightened social liberals of the US? In the dregs of defeat, one assumes, one way or another.

"Better get used to tyranny."

Why? We have a chance right now to stop it, if we act fast enough and don't let ourself get bogged down in defeatist rhetoric from people who have long since written us off as a viable force. Rome wasn't built in a day, and neither will the unreveling of the damage of the counter-culture did to our country. Deciding that we've been defeated before we act is a de facto acceptance of Goldberg's argument, that social conservatives have lost and we should simply adopt the ostrich approach and bury our heads in the sand waiting for ... something.

Maybe the odds are as great as everyone says they are, maybe they aren't. My point is that not trying is simply a concession of what some polyannish social liberals have already said: we've lost and there's nothing we can do about it. You could've said the same to any number of groups or causes in history, like say ... a religion that was founded by a group of fishermen whose leader had been executed by the state a little while back. Funny, they seemed to do rather well for themselves.

[freedumb2003]

>>Gays indeed have become mainstreamed. It's inexorable. Women having careers. Blacks having equal rights. Tolerating gays. It's called being enlightened. <<

What a hodgepodge of completely unrelated concepts you have linked together under your rather presumptuous label of "enlightened."

Women having careers AFTER CHILDBIRTH AND VOLUNTARILY IN LEIU OF CHILD REARING is a net bad. Children pay the price of the mother's selfishness. I used to try to be "enlightened" and say that either parent could be the chold-raiser, but I was wrong. Women and men are different and in their formulative years, kids need the female parent.

Tolerating Gays is like labelling an eating "disorder" a "disease." This is simply a matter of choice and will. Homesexuality is 100% about sexuality and most pedophelia lays directly at the feet of the homosexual community. Very soon, the same parents who are now staying home to raise their own children (out of an adverse reaction to how THEY were abandoned by their "career" moms) are going to realise that homosexuality is a net bad that threatens thier children. And the worm will turn -- BIG TIME.

The idea that blacks having equal rights is somehow "enlightened" is insulting to blacks in particular and americans in general. Recognition of the even-handed application of the laws and rights established by the Constitution of the United States to ALL people, blacks included was REALIZATION, not "Enlightenment."

Presumptuous putz.

[A CA Guy]

Bump tot he top!

[weegee]

They have to lie to show they are normal.

All liberals lie to push forth their agenda. A straight forward presentation of facts won't win their arguments.

[RAT Patrol]

Goldberg is only willing to cave because he sides with the left on this issue. He has already advocated for domestic partnership legislation himself. He would never lie down and play dead so easily if he really gave a rip about the issue himself. I've lost a lot of respect for him lately.

[RAT Patrol]

when principle is gone we get this.....

Good point. Unless we get some backbone, I'm sure I side will cave in just like Goldberg has. They will not do it with my support, however. That's when I cease to vote GOP.

[First Amendment]

In short, it's a global trend and, like it or not, the traditionalists have lost. This isn't a value judgment, it's simply dispassionate analysis. Many conservatives refuse to accept this fact. But refusing to acknowledge a fact doesn't make it any less real.

I haven't even read the thread yet and I am p***ed and more than a little sick to my stomach. If the US had this attitude towards Hitler (whine - he won some battles, let's wave the white flag and hope he doesn't put all of us in the ovens!) we'd be speaking German and world Jewry would be a memory.

What is this guy's personal viewpoint on homosexuality? He sees what he wants to see. Moral relativism at its best. Nauseating. He can give up if he likes. It's d***less wimps like him that are helping the homo cause.

[First Amendment]

In short, it's a global trend and, like it or not, the traditionalists have lost. This isn't a value judgment, it's simply dispassionate analysis. Many conservatives refuse to accept this fact. But refusing to acknowledge a fact doesn't make it any less real.

I haven't even read the thread yet and I am p***ed and more than a little sick to my stomach. If the US had this attitude towards Hitler (whine - he won some battles, let's wave the white flag and hope he doesn't put all of us in the ovens!) we'd be speaking German and world Jewry would be a memory.

What is this guy's personal viewpoint on homosexuality? He sees what he wants to see. Moral relativism at its best. Nauseating. He can give up if he likes. It's d***less wimps like him that are helping the homo cause.

[First Amendment]

In short, it's a global trend and, like it or not, the traditionalists have lost. This isn't a value judgment, it's simply dispassionate analysis. Many conservatives refuse to accept this fact. But refusing to acknowledge a fact doesn't make it any less real.

I haven't even read the thread yet and I am p***ed and more than a little sick to my stomach. If the US had this attitude towards Hitler (whine - he won some battles, let's wave the white flag and hope he doesn't put all of us in the ovens!) we'd be speaking German and world Jewry would be a memory.

What is this guy's personal viewpoint on homosexuality? He sees what he wants to see. Moral relativism at its best. Nauseating. He can give up if he likes. It's d***less wimps like him that are helping the homo cause.

[First Amendment]

Sorry for the multiple posts - button got stuck or something!

[lentulusgracchus]

Goldberg can stick "it" where the sun don't shine.

Your beef isn't with Goldberg, he's just reading the thermometer.

Your beef is with Dubya. Why does he keep courting the Log Cabins and covering for them? Why did he rebuff and countermand Ashcroft? -- that's the clear meaning of what happened with Gay Pride Day at DoJ.

Why is the Bush Family playing footsie with the gay lobby?

This is the problem with Wall Street Republicans -- too rich to care. Period.