Gays Make Right Turn

Front Page Magazine ^ | October 18, 2002 | Joseph J. Sabia

[M 91 u2 K]

During the last year, political pundits have spent a great deal of time discussing American Jews' growing support for President Bush and the Republican Party. In particular, writers at the Weekly Standard and National Review have written at length about how Republicans are wooing traditional Democratic Jews into the conservative fold. Most agree that the shift can be attributed to Jews' support for the Bush Doctrine, especially as it applies to the current Arab-Israeli conflict. But there is another significant political shift that has been largely ignored by most analysts — the rightward shift of American gays.

During the 1992 presidential campaign, there was open acrimony between gay voters and the Republican Party. Some of these hard feelings stemmed from the liberal press' distortion of Patrick Buchanan's famous "culture war" convention speech. In that speech, Buchanan mentioned gay rights two times - first, when he referenced that the Democratic Party would not permit pro-life Governor Robert Casey to address delegates at their convention, but would allow "a militant leader of the homosexual rights movement" to speak, and second, when he announced his opposition to state-sanctioned gay marriage.

While the latter reference ruffled the feathers of some gays, it was hardly a call for jihad by the Republican Party (especially since the Democratic Party had also adopted an anti-gay marriage position). Nonetheless, the press - along with militant leftist gay leaders — was able to scare mainstream gays into believing that a second Krystallnacht was right around the corner if President George H.W. Bush were re-elected.

In 1996, Republican Presidential Candidate Bob Dole returned a $1000 check that his campaign had received from the openly gay Log Cabin Republicans. Apparently, he thought that such an action would solidify his support among some socially conservative Republican voters. The strategy backfired and little came of the entire affair, other than some unnecessary bad press.

By the 2000 campaign, gay rights issues were not discussed by the two major parties because each had virtually identical positions. Both Al Gore and George Bush endorsed the Defense of Marriage Act and Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman voiced opposition to discrimination against gays in the workplace.

Despite the difference in tenor of the 1992, 1996, and 2000 presidential campaigns, the proportion of self-identified gays voting for Republicans has steadily increased. Self-identified gays have represented between 4% to 5% of all voters during the last four election cycles, a proportion double that of American Jews. In 1998, 4.2% of voters were self-identified gays (a figure likely to be understated due to the personal nature of one's sexual orientation) while 2.6% of voters were Jews.

In 1992, 23% of gays voted for the Republican candidate for the House of Representatives. That figure increased to 26% in 1994, 28% in 1996, and 33% in 1998. In 2000, over one-fourth of all self-identified gays voted for an unabashed economic and social conservative, George W. Bush. Though no polls have been released since September 11, there is anecdotal evidence suggesting that gays are extremely supportive of the war on terrorism and are identifying more with center-right politicians than the usual neo-socialist busybodies offered by the Democrats.

Why are gays marching rightward in their political affiliations? Four key explanations come to mind:

(1) Greater understanding of the role of free markets in curing AIDS.

Recent technological advancements in medicine have resulted in the development of cocktail drugs that have increased both the life expectancy and quality of life of individuals living with AIDS. These drugs have been especially beneficial to American gays, who have higher rates of HIV infection than other demographic groups. Gays understand that the primary reason why these drugs are now available is the existence of our free market economy.

In a free market, a private pharmaceutical firm has a profit-incentive to develop an AIDS drug if there is consumer demand for that product. This is precisely what we observed in the 1990s. Firms were willing to invest in these life-saving drugs knowing that they would have the opportunity to earn a profit from their sales.

Today, there are radical gay leftists who wish to remove these incentives. Jon Bell, from Act-Up Philadelphia, recently summed up this position:

"All but the wealthiest will continue to have no access to life-saving medicine. The only acceptable plan from industry will guarantee affordability through cuts of 95% or more of the prices we pay."

If Mr. Bell were to get his wish, pharmaceutical companies would have little or no incentive to invent drugs that could improve the lives of people with AIDS. Though he may believe that his heart is in the right place, the policies he advocates would result in more misery and higher death rates.

American gays are turning away from the harmful, radical health policies advocated by Act-Up because they increasingly understand that the free market is the best hope for the creation of life-saving AIDS drugs. To that end, many gays are throwing their support to the Republican Party because the political right does a better job than the left at protecting the market from government intrusion.

(2) Admiration for President Bush's moral clarity in the war on terrorism.

Leftists have long been blaming America for every social and political ill on the face of the earth. Prior to September 11, organizations like the Human Rights Commission (HRC) and the Gay and Lesbian Association Against Defamation (GLAAD) missed no opportunity to whine about the so-called "oppression" of gays in America. They rarely, if ever, spoke of the savage individual rights violations that gays face in the Middle East. Most Arab countries imprison or execute individuals if they are suspected to have engaged in homosexual activity.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban government sanctioned that suspected gays be thrown off of mountaintops or crushed under stone walls. In Egypt, gays are routinely imprisoned, tortured, and killed. After a recent show trial in Saudi Arabia, three gays were beheaded after being charged with "immorality."

What has the HRC and GLADD said about these atrocities? Almost nothing. In fact, many of the leftists affiliated with these organizations have been openly critical of the United States' war on terrorism and the upcoming war in Iraq.

Mainstream gays are beginning to understand that their political leadership is comprised of shrill, socialist anti-Americans who are willing to ally themselves with foreign governments that execute gays in order to enhance their domestic political power. How else can one explain how the HRC and GLAAD can support "zero tolerance" for gay-related hate crimes in America while at the same time finding political solidarity with murderous Islamists and sadistic dictators like Saddam Hussein?

President Bush has provided a clear vision of the necessity to destroy the evildoers in the Middle East before they destroy us. And it is a vision that is increasingly appealing to mainstream gays.

(3) Greater sensitivity to tax policy.

Gay individuals are increasingly becoming the wealthiest taxpayers in the nation. According to the 2000 Census, average household income for gay men is $85,400, more than double the national average (note, however, that this figure does not take into account that gays tend to live in geographic regions with higher costs of living). Moreover, gay households are 3.4 times more likely to have incomes greater than $250,000.

With liberals constantly calling for the rich to be soaked with higher taxes, gay voters are increasingly turning away from the party that wishes to confiscate their wealth. Mainstream gays have a libertarian strand in their philosophy that wishes to keep the state out of their private affairs — that includes their wallets.

A February 2001 nationally representative poll of gays conducted by the Gill Foundation found that 60% of gay Americans rate tax policy as "important to them personally." In addition, a May 2001 Luntz poll found that 72% of gays agreed that the federal death tax is "discriminatory" and 82% support its repeal. Gays are speaking loud and clear on these economic issues — they prefer smaller government. This is good news for the Republican Party.

(4) A change in the selection of individuals who "come out of the closet."

Surely, one of the reasons for the increase in gay support for Republicans is that those individuals who identify themselves as gay today are different than those who did so, say, 10 years ago. In large part due to public efforts by political pundits like Andrew Sullivan and organizations such as the Independent Gay Forum, self-identified politically active gays are no longer cookie-cutter leftists. Today, right-wing gays are more comfortable "coming out of the closet" and voicing their political views because there are many more public figures who share their positions.

The lessons of the last 10 years reflect that the Republican Party will continue to win the votes of American gays not by pandering to them, but rather by sticking to a consistent philosophy that appeals to all voters - one that emphasizes individual liberty and personal accountability.

[Double Tap]

You wish to put to death people who have consenual sex. That is the point I was discussing with you when you went off into spamming the thread. You are insane.

Last time. I don't argue with idiots, liars and insane people. I will not break this rule again.

Do not post to me again.

Ba'Bye.

[weikel]

Im not a lawyer but I know enough about law that ORs do make a diffrence. Seriously FF seek help though...

[steve-b]

they're unenforceable unless you endorse installing cameras, monitoring their behavior, and breaking down peoples' doors and hauling them out of their bedrooms

Don't say this stuff where FF578 can hear it -- he'll cream all over his jackboots and have to polish them again.

[steve-b]

It's time to stop pulling FF578's chain.

I think it's long past time for JimRob to pull his chain, and posting privileges, and send him back to the DUmpster to report the failure of yet another attempt to make FR look like a nest of kooks.

[irksome1]

Why refer them to Exodus? I thought you wanted sodomites to die?

[irksome1]

Let me ask you, be honest with your answer. Were our Founders Mentally Unstable and Insane? They made Sodomy, Fornication and Adultery Capital Crimes.

Well, the Founding Fathers also advocated for slavery, the political marginalization of women and wrote the Sedition Act of 1798 in direct violation of the First Amendment. They may not have been mentally unstable or insane, but they weren't infallible either.

[irksome1]

How 'bout when a HIV+ queer masquerades as 'straight' in order to seduce a female . . .

You're absolutely right! Let's shut down Exodus before they do any more damage.

[Coleus]

Bible calls homosexuality an abomination - Leviticus 18:22 —

Leviticus 18:22 "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination." (Lev. 20:13; Rom. 1:27; 1 Cor 6:9-10).

The correct reference for the death penalty is Leviticus 20:13 "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."

As homosexual acts (Rom. 1:26) are directly against the initial command of God to be fertile and multiply (Gn. 1:28), and as no relationship can be built with God by a person who is denied the possibility of coming into existence, the death penalty for such acts is well warranted (Gn. 6:4-5; Jude 1:6-7; Gn. 13:13, 18:20, 19:4-5, 24; Dt. 29:23; Isa. 3:9; Jer. 23:14).

Sentient creation is the unlimited God's chosen way of best sharing with intelligent spiritual beings – the spiritual intellect is the important aspect of creation while the bodily form –latter to be resurrected– is the method chosen to bring the spirit to its greatest potential for full relationship with God in eternal life.

Procured abortion –a heinous form of cold-blooded murder, a crime scripturally warranting the death penalty that also subjects primary offenders and accomplices to automatic excommunication in the Catholic Church– is less of an offense against God than homosexual conduct. Abortion takes the life of an innocent person. A homosexual act –an abuse of the sexual faculty– denies potential life to a possible innocent person. An aborted person has the opportunity to obtain eternal life. A non-conceived person never has that opportunity.


Classical sodomy, the form commonly understood by most Old and New Testament Bible readers includes sexual activity between two persons of the same sex –whether male or female– or any sexual act between any human being and an animal (dog, sheep, donkey, monkey, etc.).
"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." [Leviticus 20:13]
"Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity." [Romans 1:26-27]
"The angels too, who did not keep to their own domain but deserted their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains, in gloom, for the judgment of the great day. Likewise, Sodom, Gomorrah, and the surrounding towns, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual promiscuity and practiced unnatural vice, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." [Jude 6,7]
"Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor practicing homosexuals nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God." [1 Corinthians 6:9-10]
"Anyone who lies with an animal shall be put to death." [Exodus 22:19]
"But as for cowards, the unfaithful, the depraved, murderers, the unchaste, sorcerers, idol-worshipers, and deceivers of every sort, their lot is in the burning pool of fire and sulfur, which is the second death." [Revelations 21:8]

Practical or inherent sodomy is in essence no different than classical sodomy. The initial command of God is foundational for arriving at an understanding of practical sodomy.

God blessed them, saying: "Be fertile and multiply;
fill the earth2 and subdue it." [Gn. 1:28 and 9:1,7]

The essence of the command is procreation. The essence of the term sodomy then includes any use of the sexual faculty –by two humans or one human and an animal– that by act or intention precludes the bringing of new human life into existence. The use of the sexual faculty without being open to its intended result is contrary to the will of God who designed into human nature the very strong urge for relationships designed to produce human forms for occupancy by eternal spirits designated to share the magnificence of His existence. God, an intellectual being, designed compatible beings capable of both utilizing His creative capacity and sharing with Him in an intellectual manner. (The concept should be clear that in both classical and practical sodomy the result is the same – use of one's sexuality faculty in a manner that is not open to pregnancy.)

God created in order to have an uncountable number of intellectual beings to share eternal existence with Him. This was, is, and forever will be the whole point of every facet of creation. His desire is unalterable. Our choice is to share in building the Kingdom to its fullness according to His will or to be rejected for occupancy in His Kingdom.

The necessity of intellectual life is foundational to all other considerations. To place limits on procreation is to limit the creative capacity of God who is Himself without limits. Without procreated intellectual life there is no reason for created existence. To use one's sexual faculty without acceptance of life as its natural consequence is condemnatory. While repentance is for a time available, no number of good deeds can ever take the place of life forever lost to God's Kingdom.

Saint Paul expresses the importance of pregnancy as follows.

"But she will be saved through motherhood,
provided women persevere in faith and love
and holiness, with self-control." [1 Tim. 2:15]
(Motherhood occurs at conception)

God not only refers to pregnancy as being a blessing for women, but has established His own version of Natural Family Planning that is intended to increase the probability of pregnancy. God ordered women's fertility cycle in such a fashion that in conjunction with required sexual abstinence the incidence of pregnancy would be at its greatest when copulation inevitably takes place. While there is no requirement to be married, –St. Paul comments that in single life one can be of greater service to God and His community [1Cor. 7:7, 32-34]– those who do marry should be mindful of the initial commandment given by God to humanity ("Be fertile and multiply.").

[Torie]

I suspect the number that read your post will be very small. Cutting and pasting long and turgid jerimiads is one way to go, but not the way to go if you expect them to be read.

[ALS]

I agree, and we all know that gays, per se, tend to work their into management positions. This is not what we want in the Republican party. To imagine that they will be quiet little taxpayers is naive at best. Let the Demoscrums have them, and any that wish to vote Republican are welcome.

[GOPJ]

As Republicans we now have our own heavy weight (yet fashionable) intellectual types like Andrew Sullivan. They add a needed voice.

Mainstream gays are beginning to understand that their political leadership is comprised of shrill, socialist anti-Americans who are willing to ally themselves with foreign governments that execute gays in order to enhance their domestic political power. How else can one explain how the HRC and GLAAD can support "zero tolerance" for gay-related hate crimes in America while at the same time finding political solidarity with murderous Islamists and sadistic dictators like Saddam Hussein?

President Bush has provided a clear vision of the necessity to destroy the evildoers in the Middle East before they destroy us. And it is a vision that is increasingly appealing to mainstream gays.

[freebilly]

Homosexuality is immoral, Indecent, abhorant, and repugnant. It is a stain on our society, and must never ever be tolerated.

With people like you as supporters, how could Pat Buchanan fail to get even 1% of the vote in 2000...?

[freebilly]

Virginia: If any person carnally knows in any manner... any... female person... by or with the mouth, or voluntarily submits to such carnal knowledge, he or she shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony.

Seems to me that 90% of the Virginia males should be locked up for committing a Class 6 felony.

Seriously, don't you have better things to do than work yourself into a frenzy over how some folks choose to stimulate their erectile tissues?

[alwaysconservative]

I understand and respect your concerns and the basis for your belief on this issue. Let me go back to my original comment, if I can remember it correctly, which was more narrowly focused. I simply said that in the 10 commandments, God's proclaimed Word to His people, there was no commandment against homosexuality. All the other "biggies" are there: putting God first, killing, stealing, adultery, idol worship, covetousness, honoring your parents, keeping the Sabbath holy. If this one issue was a concern for Him, I don't think He would have overlooked it when He gave His pronouncements to Moses. Nor did He exclude from His presence (or presumably eternally damn) those who violated the commandments since Moses, for one, had already killed, and was accepted into Heaven. (And several Old Testament prophets went into Heaven, despite less than perfect lives.)

The Bible calls many things "an abomination", some of which are significant, some of which are not. Eating shellfish is an abomination unto the Lord, as is eating pork. When the word is used that indiscriminately, particularly as found in the law of Leviticus, I tend to go back to the commandments and the direct pronouncements through the words of God himself or as He told to the prophets. For example, the Lord said that He will demand the price of our lives for eating flesh (Genesis 9:4-5), and whoever kills an ox is the same as killing a man (Isaiah 66:3-4), and that he desires mercy and not sacrifice (Hosea, I can't remember the verse). I am not a homosexual, and I don't eat flesh foods. Does that mean that because I follow these laws, I will gain entrance to Heaven; or conversely, that someone who does not follow the law is prohibited from the kingdom of Heaven and should be shunned by us? I thought Jesus' death changed all that; it is what is in our hearts that counts, and it is up to Him, not us, to judge us for what is in our hearts.

He also said that whoever was without sin could cast the first stone, and no one could then "rightly" punish the harlot for her crimes. I don't believe that the Kingdom of God is an exclusive club for any particular group (as the Pharisees did), nor do I think that the Republican party should have an entrance examination to see who is without sin before they're allowed to share "our" ideals and goals.

Romans is a beautiful witness to a mature theology on the part of Paul. But you have selected only one verse out of an entire passage of how humankind has betrayed God. Read all of Romans 1:18-32. Verses 22-23: "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles." This is a clear warning for humans NOT to attempt to usurp God's power and glory for ourselves; NOT to set ourselves up as God; not to place our human and earthly concerns on the level of God (which is the sin of political environmentalism, in my opinion). But even Paul talks about several other sins of sexual impurity, about turning away from God, depravity, before he gets to mentioning homosexuality as part of the sin of turning away from God. The remainder of THAT list is pretty extensive.

I believe that Jesus' example was that of acceptance of sinners and the outcast, rather than prohibiting them from dining at His table. That's my belief, and I try to practice it.

[freebilly]

You're preaching to "whited sepulchres"....