Wednesday, August 01, 2012

You're Doing it Wrong! 3: Gay Rights Supporters

Yes, I'm a Conservative Republican.

But I'm also a Californian who voted No on 8.

I am a Goth who is a Social Libertarian and every time I try to make progress on this front, a so-called "Gay Rights," advocate attacks the GOP (not knowing the difference between Moderate Republicans like Romney or Tea Party Republicans like Rep. Paul Ryan or Social Conservatives like Governor Huckabee) and makes it harder for Gay Rights to be a bi-partisan effort.

I love women, but I believe every consenting adult should have a right to be happy (which fits perfectly with my philosophy of being Conservative) 

I think Dan Savage and others on the Left forget how the system works.

If you do not win in Elections (that is, by putting ALL your voters into a Politico Ghetto), you have to convince the folks who have already won to support your side.

To pass bills in Congress, you need to get Bi-partisan support.  So when Dan Savage yells, "Kill all Republicans!" Why should any Republican Legislator support Gay Rights under any circumstances?

Again, I have to teach this lesson to the Left every day: We are not all Social Conservatives. 
(I had to tell an HBO Director this ALL THE TIME, he never listened.)

If you call us names, we will defend our (Political) Tribe.  Don't insult us, we might listen why your views might coincide with ours. 

Gay Marriage is becoming normalized across the States.  However, those supporters of Gay Rights are doing everything through the courts rather then courting the public.  

Willie Wonka Meme meets Current Events

As an example of the push back, the CEO of Chick-fil-a said a stupid thing.  I like Chick-fil-a's food.  Every Gay Rights advocate wanted to use the power of the State to block CFA.  Today, in reports across the fruited plain, CFA is doing very brisk business.  Some prognosticators, like Dana Loesch, say this is prep for November.

It jumped from being a Gay Rights issue to a First Amendment issue, that's why it lost.

Let Glenn Greenwald, Liberal, explain:

It’s always easy to get people to condemn threats to free speech when the speech being threatened is speech that they like. It’s much more difficult to induce support for free speech rights when the speech being punished is speech they find repellent. But having Mayors and other officials punish businesses for the political and social views of their executives — regardless of what those views are — is as pure a violation of the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech as it gets, and beyond that, is genuinely dangerous.

If you support what Emanuel is doing here, then you should be equally supportive of a Mayor in Texas or a Governor in Idaho who blocks businesses from opening if they are run by those who support same-sex marriage — or who oppose American wars, or who support reproductive rights, or who favor single-payer health care, or which donates to LGBT groups and Planned Parenthood, on the ground that such views are offensive to Christian or conservative residents. You can’t cheer when political officials punish the expression of views you dislike and then expect to be taken seriously when you wrap yourself in the banner of free speech in order to protest state punishment of views you like and share. Free speech rights means that government officials are barred from creating lists of approved and disapproved political ideas and then using the power of the state to enforce those preferences.

Thank you Mr. Greenwald for making my point.

If the Gay Rights people want to win, they need to figure out how to win over Republicans, Conservatives (even Social), and Tea Partiers.  Yelling at us and calling us names will not do it. 

President Obama only switched his views on Gay Marriage before a fundraiser. Where were the protests then?

And if the Gay Rights people want to have any standing, look at how the Muslim brotherhood and Iran treats its gays and then attack Republicans.  The difference is so far that its the difference between calling someone a "hack," (the GOP) and a Nazi (Iran).

But Dan Savage does not know how bills get passed or to win people to his side.  He is doing more harm to his issue then any Social Conservative.

My question: Why have the Gay Rights advocates forget to court the Public and the Other Major political party in their Country?


  1. The thing is, Dan Savage is a comedian. He is also a frakking idiot.
    The other problem is that Gay Marriage is a heart issue, as so many social political issues become. What I mean is that people have very strong emotion based feelings about it, and very few are able to put those aside and argue facts. It's the same with abortion.

    People get caught up because they feel they are being told that they are invalid as people and have to be "fixed." They feel that someone is standing in the way of their love, or that of their friends. No one is going to be immediately rational when they feel their love is being threatened.

    And so, yes, liberal pro-gay marriage types lose their heads. The tone of politics, on both sides, has become absurdly violent and heated, and each side is worried about being ostracized by their tribe for believing something different.

    You and I both know that there is no risk to marriage in allowing people to marry others of the same sex. The SoCons, however, are all pulling out their bibles and hooting and hollering about Leviticus. (this becomes absolutely hilarious with the recent development of the Rep. platform including "no foreign basis for American law").

    At the same time, your painting in overly broad strokes. Not every liberal wants all conservatives to die (a lot of us just want the attempted oppressive religious SoCons to go the hell away). I am... probably best described as a liberal. Obama is not my preferred president, but I will stand by my belief that he's better than McCain would have been, and better than Romney would be. That said, I'm fairly in line with a lot of liberal view points. I don't want my catholic SoCon parents to die. I just want them to see reason, or at least what I'm trying to argue for. I don't want you to die, ESPECIALLY as you are a SoLibertarian, or describe yourself as such.

    You are right in that it will take a bipartisan effort. So many things will. The economy, for example, requires some additional taxation, and a lot of budget cuts (I say we start with the defense budget and politician salaries). Gun laws will never be successful as an all or nothing thing either. An untrained person carrying a concealed weapon will frequently be a danger to those around them, because even trained people are. But no guns at all won't solve things either.

    I found your blog just today, and while I disagree with the point of the article that brought me here, so far I'm interested and will be watching.

  2. Korbi,

    I have published all your comments.

    First let me say, welcome to the Valley. I hope you enjoy what you read and more. I will get back to you on every comment you made.

    You came in with the right attitude. That of willing to learn and willing to teach -- so points to you.

    The reason I highlighted Dan Savage in this post is because he has a large say in the Cultural side of things ("It gets better," and his Savage Love column,).

    My first recommendation here is that if the Left can tamper their cultural warriors on this issue, the SoCons will not feel oppressed (as is their wont) and lean on the rest of the Party for help.

    As a former Liberal, I again say welcome! I hope I can convince you to come to the dark Side (the GOP) on issues. If not, no worries. You will help me up my debating game.


Welcome to the Valley! Please comment about the post and keep to the subject.

There is only one person (JSF) keeping track of comments, so as long as what you write is civil and close to the purpose of the post, you will see it.

Keep this in mind: Politics should not be Personal; then you have a place here.

Write! History will remember your words!


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...