Posted on 09/16/2002 5:13:42 PM PDT by Young Americans for Freedom
homosexual activist Republican group that seeks to make homosexuality a 'non-issue' in the GOP and compares opposition to homosexuality to racism.">
|
C&F REPORT |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
Mary Cheney Joins Homosexual Activist Group
Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, has joined the board of a homosexual activist Republican group that seeks to make homosexuality a “non-issue” in the GOP and compares opposition to homosexuality to racism.
Homosexual author and activist Andrew Sullivan reported April 23 that the Republican Unity Coalition (RUC) founder Charles Francis said Mary Cheney’s:
RUC, which describes itself as a “gay-straight alliance,” was founded by Charles Francis, a Texas friend of President Bush and a homosexual. Writing in the “Daily Dish” section of his personal Web site, Sullivan calls Francis “a close gay friend of the president, and a good friend of mine and supporter of this site.”
Quoting the vice president’s daughter herself, Sullivan then writes, “Cheney puts it this way”:
According to its Web site, RUC (which is supported by senior White House advisor Mary Matalin) seeks to build support from “individuals who want to help the Party and its candidates get over the issue of sexual orientation, just like the GOP got over the issue of color in years past.” Its supporters include noted Republicans like retired U.S. Senator Al Simpson (Wyoming), who serves as the RUC Honorary Chairman, homosexual congressman Jim Kolbe (Arizona), former members of Congress Mike Huffington (of California, who is also a homosexual) and Susan Molinari (New York), former Los Angeles mayor Dick Riordan, and former president Gerald Ford. DISUNITY COALTION?
“Homosexuality should no more be a non-issue in the Republican Party — or any party — than abortion, high taxes, pornography, excessive government regulation, or other issues that concern and motivate the party faithful,” LaBarbera said.
He noted that the Republican Party platform has long included language critical of “gay” activist goals such as “gay marriage” and opening the military to homosexuals. CWA PRESS RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. — As homosexual GOP activists convene in the nation’s capital for the annual convention of the Log Cabin Republicans, the Culture & Family Institute of Concerned Women for America reminded Republican Party leaders of the dangers of advancing the homosexual agenda.
CFI Senior Policy Analyst Peter LaBarbera commented this morning, “Catering to a Republican brand of homosexual activism will hurt support for the GOP among the party’s core base of religious — and moral-minded voters. Recently, senior presidential advisor Karl Rove said the party needs to do more to attract religious conservatives. If President Bush continues to support pro-’gay’ policies launched under the Clinton administration, he will alienate these voters.”
“The Log Cabin Republicans’ most visible appointment in the Bush administration, AIDS Policy director Scott Evertz, has been an embarrassment to the administration, publicly contradicting Bush policy,” LaBarbera said. “Evertz, a former Log Cabin official in Wisconsin, has shown more loyalty to the homosexual community than to Bush.”
In an interview with the “gay” press, Evertz came out for needle exchange programs for drug addicts — even though Bush has denounced needle-exchange as signaling “nothing but abdication.” The White House quickly disavowed Evertz’s remarks, but he continues to make questionable public statements that antagonize grassroots GOP conservatives.
Minority voters, especially Hispanics — whom Republicans hope to draw into the party — appear to oppose homosexual activism more strongly than white voters. For example, in March 2000, 58 percent of white voters in California cast ballots supporting Proposition 22, which said only true marriages (between one man and one woman) would be recognized in the state. That compares with 65 percent of Hispanic voters who supported Prop 22, and 62 percent of Black voters who supported the traditional marriage ballot measure.
|
 |
|
|
LOL-- Love those blinking frogs.
Do some reading about the early republicans. What they promoted was setting aside the Constitution. Their "moral vision" was insane, being a hodgepodge of various weirdness like Transcendentalism and Utopianism. The abolitionists were a gang of wealthy dilletantish nutjobs just like today's PETA activists. The main difference is that the abos pretended to Christianity while rejecting its basic tenets such as the divinity of Christ. The legislative democracy that replaced the design of constitutional republic established by the framers is ours courtesy of the early radical republicans you think were such heroes. I think you watch too much History Channel programing.
Right. I reached that point some time ago, when I was castigated as a 'hater' for not wanting homosexual scoutmasters for my kids. I don't hate anyone. I try to love everyone (as my religion teaches), including homosexuals. But that doesn't mean that their condition is normal (it's not) or that I want it portrayed as such to my kids. Homosexuals are the least tolerant people in America.
If you want to support homosexuality do it with your own money, not mine.
Flatly counterfactual. Try overturning Texas's anti-sodomy law, or Georgia's.
Furthermore, your printing $20 bills is a form of "private behavior" that will bring the Treasury Department into your bedroom.
And if you'd like a bedroomful of DEA agents, just start storing opium base there, and tell all your neighbors.
Privately fabricate and assemble a couple of really good working copies of a fully-automatic Kalashnikov rifle in your basement, and see if BATF doesn't come calling.
Law enforcement doesn't take a powder, just because you hang a "Do not disturb" sign on the door.
The Log Cabins and the Wall Street Wing are getting married. The economic royalists despise your little middle-class morality and its hobgoblins (except to the extent that Straussian theorists acknowledge that promoting an objective morality among the masses helps society, and therefore its masters), and they don't care about your agenda.
People around Dubya and the rest of the topsiders think you have noplace to go -- this is their dissing of you and everyone like you. Stay or go, they don't care: they know you'll be ineffectual off by yourself, they own the Party now; and they know you can't afford to let the Rats win. So your concerns and cares, no matter how well founded, will receive no audience with these people. Sorry.
That said, I'm very disappointed in Mary Matalin; I thought she was better than that, but then she was a Bush loyalist in 1988 and 1992. Wonder if she ever voted for Reagan in 1976, before Bush I was on the national ticket with him? Or is she a lifer Bushie/Topsider?
Wasn't it a Republican President who freed the slave and a Republican Congress that passed Civil Rights Bills over fillibusters of Democrats including one by the name of Al Gore Sr.
"LG"
It was, briefly, twice: once when Barry was running (and Rockefeller gave the AuH2O delegates the finger in the middle of the national convention), and again when Reagan won the nomination and the Bush people blackmailed their way onto the ticket and into the Administration. Oh, excuse me -- I shouldn't use ugly words like "blackmail", should I? I meant, "hardballed". Yeah, that sounds better.
But you're right; the limousine passengers get snotty when the proles think they have the right to say something.
Your political strategy is opaque. Care to elaborate a little?
Along the way, maybe you could work in an explanation of how promoting gayness -- and accepting "single-sex marriage" -- could possibly be good for society.
Straw man. Fifteen yards for fallacy of distraction. The Republican Party isn't a totalitarian party, and won't be one if it continues to support morality.
Unless you believe that allowing homosexuals into the Republican Party will result in the majority of Americans deciding not to be heterosexual any more.
Not a majority, perhaps, but it would certainly tend to promote "lifestyle" or "dystonic" homosexuality, aka going along in order to get along. Gays are promoting it diligently in school outreach programs and in the arts: Living Out Loud was a billboard for lifestyle lesbianism.
Your statement is far too sweeping. Homosexuality has got to be an issue in the military, e.g., and saying that it isn't or shouldn't be an issue is taking the wrong side. There is no privacy in the military as there is in private business.
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.