GP Reader Wakes Me Up!
I’m not out of my funk….but I’m trying to get there. As part of my journey, I went back and read some emails that I’ve saved. I am glad this one was there for me to read again. With permission, I am reprinting it with my thanks to this great lady.
I am an avid reader of blogs, and I read yours daily, because I am in complete support of your views. I am a 70-year-old straight white happily married woman–a former chemist, and a former public school teacher, and presently a writer of science fiction that I sell on the Internet. Politically, I am a centrist, who, lately, votes Republican, because I don’t trust the Democratic Party as it exists today to keep America safe from terrorist attacks, or to fight terrorism world-wide. I am an agnostic, a supporter of abortion rights as long as the abortion takes place within the first four months, but an opponent of “partial birth abortion” which I view as murder. I live with my husband of 37 years on a cattle ranch in Western Wyoming–a very red state. I got a big charge out of the post you wrote after going to your first rodeo. We, too, play the national anthem at rodeos, and everyone stands respectfully and salutes the Flag, while the national anthem booms from the loudspeaker. We unabashedly love our country here.
I am writing to tell you how glad I am that you continue to point out to the fog-bound leftists in this country that “The Iranian government is executing gay and bisexual men under the cover of rape and kidnapping charges…” etc. What hypocrisy, the silence of the radical left regarding the atrocious treatment of gays in Moslem countries! Do these deluded American liberals–gay or straight or in-between–really wish to live under Sharia law? When will they wake up to the danger creeping up on us from within as well as from without?
I believe in gay marriage and all the legal benefits such legislation would bring. I believe in the right of gay men to live as they please, peacefully and cooperatively, as members of a community that accepts the right of any pair of consenting adults to live in whatever sexual relationship they please.
I am firmly of the opinion that the leftist radicalized gay movement is going more than a little overboard in its demands–that it is hurting the cause, rather than helping it–by adopting overly aggressive political strategies used also by radical Moslems. I think you know that, and I admire you for taking the firm stands you have, on your blog.
I expect that when you see by my Internet address that I am a resident of Wyoming, you will think immediately of the Matthew Shepard case. That’s only natural. Well, let me tell you a few facts about that vicious attack and its dreadful consequences.
First: before the news of that heinous murder ever hit the prime time news, the Laramie police had the two perps in custody. They also had secured hard evidence of their guilt: evidence that stood up in court. Second: the two perps were high school dropouts who were high on methamphetamine when they committed the crime. The drugs played as big a part in the tragedy as did their anti-gay bias. Third: the photos that appeared on the national news, of people holding up revolting, disgusting, hate-filled placards at Matthew’s funeral–photos that the news services let their viewers believe were images of Wyoming residents–were not such. They were photos of members of the hate group–a so-called “church”–run by a bigot named Fred Phelps. (Today he takes his followers to disrupt the funerals of servicemen, damn his appalling gall). Phelps and his adherents had hastened to Wyoming from Kansas and Texas as soon as they heard the news. What the media did NOT show, was that the students of the University of Wyoming formed a human wall between those demented purveyors of hatred and the family of Matthew Shepard, forming a solid, impassible line with their bodies to shield the family members from the sight of the placards. Fourth: Wyoming does NOT have a “hate crimes” law. But we do have the death penalty for murder. The authorities tried the less guilty man first, and he got life without possibility of parole in the Rawlins Penitentiary (not a good place to spend one’s life, believe me!) The more guilty of the two–the man who actually committed the murder–I truly believe would have gotten the death penalty, but for one thing: Matthew Shepard’s mother made a dramatic appeal at the trial that the murderer not be given the death penalty. She swayed the jurors and the judge. But for that highly emotional appeal–one with which I did not agree–the convicted man would have been executed, and no one in this state would have raised any outcry. As things turned out, the guiltier of the two perps also got life in Rawlins without possibility of parole. Actually, a good case could be made that the punishment turned out to be worse than death. I personally hope the two criminals find it so.
Wyoming people may vote solidly conservative, and some undoubtedly disapprove of the gay lifestyle, but Wyomingites universally condemned those two murderers. Wyoming people tend strongly to judge the people they meet on their merits, not on those people’s degree of wealth, their political affiliations, their sexual orientation, their race, their religion or lack thereof, their ethnic origin, or any other such distinction. Wyomingites judge a newcomer mainly by his ability to be a good neighbor, in the old, classic sense of the word. This is a land that’s still not fully tamed. There are times when one’s life or livelihood depends on one’s having good neighbors. That’s the acid test applied to any newcomer, be he rich or poor. If he measures up in a pinch, he’s accepted. Oh, yes, the old ways are passing–but slowly. And when they’re gone, the United States will be the poorer for their going.
My husband’s grandfather was the first settler in this part of Wyoming. He came in 1885, bringing his wife and a herd of cows. All of the cows but one died in the blizzard of 1888–the one made famous by Charlie Russell in his drawing entitled “The Last of 10,000.” Cows, that is. My husband’s grandfather wanted to move on, but couldn’t afford to. So he stayed, and our family grew. My husband is the last of his descendants to remain in the cattle ranching business here.
I admire you for entertaining views that conflict with those of radical gay men. I hope that some day, if you should be passing through Wyoming, you’ll take time to stop off and attend a rodeo here!
You can count on it! And thanks for reminding me that sometimes the windmills we run toward are important.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
27 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Wow! What an amazing letter!!! She sounds like a great woman, and it’s so fantastic to hear that there are a large number of supporters, even in the midst of closed-mindedness. I feel so strongly that that’s the trend. It’s sweeping through the nation, and I’m proud to be part of the generation that’s raising my children to love and accept everyone for who they are. The closed-mindedness will narrow, and the acceptance will broaden. Due, in large part, to people like yourselves. Kudos.
Comment by Melanie — May 19, 2006 @ 9:01 am - May 19, 2006
Nothing worst than a heartfelt letter to remind me of the decency of the human spirit. Damn you GayPatriot!
Thanks for the Friday pick me up.
Comment by ralph — May 19, 2006 @ 10:08 am - May 19, 2006
I’m wiping my eyes as I type this response. THIS is what America is all about – the land of the free and the home of the brave!
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 19, 2006 @ 11:08 am - May 19, 2006
That is a great letter
It’s striking how, with the illusion of “permanent social prosperity” that most of us live under – the illusion that food will always magically be present on Safeway’s shelves, for example – many have forgotten about being “good neighbors in the old, classic sense of the word”.
I still think 9-11 and the War on Terror, as topics, upset people because they puncture the illusion. Left-liberal / anti-war types are in “Blame the Messenger” mode: hating the people who fight the terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere (and who thus validate the psychological and existential fact of the terrorists’ existence)… rather than hating the terrorists.
Comment by Calarato — May 19, 2006 @ 11:13 am - May 19, 2006
Excellent: I try to read you everyday. I enjoy your wit, your thought and your concerns for other human beings. Your choice to live as you choose is founded on the same right I have as a Christian straight man to write you telling you how much I enjoy your posts. America is truly a nation blessed.
This guy Phelps (the idiot Preacher from Kansas) is no more a Christian, at least as Jesus explained how we are to live, than are the cattle on the lady’s ranch in Wyoming.
The appalling tragedy that was the death of Mathew Sheppard will never leave my mind. That so-called human beings could perpetrate such an act of violence on another of their kind is beyond my comprehension. I will never forget the picture of that boy hanging on a barbed wire fence.
My belief in God is strenghtened each time I think about Mathew, if for no other reason, than there just has to be a hell for his murderer’s.
Thanks for your posts. Keep it up.
Mason
Comment by Mason — May 19, 2006 @ 11:20 am - May 19, 2006
Honest questions –
What exactly does the ‘radical gay left’ want that is different than what you want?
Also, saying that the ‘radical’ gay left employs too aggressive political tactics and comparing it to radical Islamists’ methods is kind of overboard. I am pro-life, but in Cincinnati we have pro-lifers that are way more overboard than anything gays have done. Anything from throwing ketchup covered baby dolls to hanging very graphic posters on street corners. Abortion doctors being stalked and threatened… I have two children, and I don’t want them to see such things. Moreover, I don’t want them to learn acting like that is ok. That is, I don’t want them thinking that persecuting and accosting people based on our faith is ok. We can agree, I hope, that is what Muslims do.
I’m sure a lot of people are put off on the gay pride parades, and I personally think they’re goofy. But we also have parades were Irishmen dress in funny costumes and get drunk in the streets. We have Oktoberfest in Cincinnati where all the Germans come out, wear funny costumes, and get drunk in the streets. We have the same for Latinos and Italians. There is Mardis Gras too, for Catholics.
Comment by James — May 19, 2006 @ 11:49 am - May 19, 2006
A moving letter.
I have to say though, I’m confused about her accusations of the media not showing the “full story” about Mathew Shepard. All of the things she described, the human wall between Phelps and the family, etc. I already knew. And I certainly didn’t learn about it from reading it at Gay Patriot.
There have been many more horrific murders of gay men and lesbians in this country than that of poor Mathew. But this one hit the national conscience squarely with a two-by-four. You can blame some of it on media hype, but I think its more complex than that. The reason I think, was just the imagery of Mathew tied to the fence “like a scarecrow”. But of course what that really meant to those who learned about his murder it was that it looked like he had been crucified.
We are a Christian nation, and its norms, and its symbols, are a deep part of our national identity. Even for those like myself, that do not consider themselves Christian. Mathew Shepard became of symbol of Christ, and of Christian martyrs. Thats why his murder had such a profound effect nationally and with such a deep resonance. Symbols have great power at times, it would be wise of us to make better use of them.
Comment by Patrick (Gryph) — May 19, 2006 @ 11:54 am - May 19, 2006
Ahmadinejad’s The Real Deal…
If you thought that comparisons between Ahmadinejad and Hiter were far fetched, think again. He’s going down the same path that Hitler took Germany, and we know how well that ended up for everyone around the world….
Trackback by A Blog For All — May 19, 2006 @ 1:58 pm - May 19, 2006
Iran 2006=Germany 1938?…
Gay Patriot reminds us that the thugocracy in Iran is not just attacking those of other religions….
Trackback by Environmental Republican — May 19, 2006 @ 2:51 pm - May 19, 2006
What exactly does the ‘radical gay left’ want that is different than what you want?
To use gay rights as a means of getting what they want, rather than as an end in itself.
Also, saying that the ‘radical’ gay left employs too aggressive political tactics and comparing it to radical Islamists’ methods is kind of overboard.
Not in the least.
Remember, this is someone who openly bragged that HRC, LCR, and Democratic Party staffers were helping him do all of this. Indeed, this person has received numerous honors from the “gay community” for his actions, and just last week was a guest at (ironically) the national dinner of SLDN, which supposedly is AGAINST harassing and outing gays.
The people you mention are, , like gay leftists, using the “cause” as a means to be hateful, not an end. However, they are not the majority of pro-life activists; the hatemongering leftists, though, ARE the majority of “gay activists”.
That’s why the Islamic comparison is valid.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 19, 2006 @ 3:02 pm - May 19, 2006
I don’t get it. Where’s the GP post on Iran, that the above trackbacks are for?
Comment by Calarato — May 19, 2006 @ 3:02 pm - May 19, 2006
What exactly does the ‘radical gay left’ want that is different than what you want?
What far-leftists in general want… namely:
- Socialism – a.k.a. the end of freedom; the enslavement of all-to-all.
- Thought control – e.g., speech codes and hate crimes legislation. The supreme reign of political correctness.
- America’s downfall or defeat in the War on Terror.
- “Equality” – meaning, the destruction or tearing down of anyone who is more successful, materially or personally, than them.
All 3 are easy to substantiate, but they can be summed up in one word: Power. The hard Left (gay or otherwise) wants a world where all others – e.g., true individualists, capitalists, Christians, and so forth – are answerable to them, or their bureaucrats.
Comment by Calarato — May 19, 2006 @ 3:11 pm - May 19, 2006
P.S. In more prosaic terms (and, substantiating the above), the hard gay Left wants:
- imposition of gay marriage thoughout the country by judicial fiat;
- imposition of speech codes, hate crimes legislation, etc. throughout the country;
- An incredible amount of stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with being gay or lesbian – but is general left-wing stuff. Unrestricted abortion, tax increases, nationalized / socialized health care, nationalized / socialized industrial policy in the name of “environmentalism”, the defeat of U.S. foreign policy (as I mentioned), and much more.
Comment by Calarato — May 19, 2006 @ 3:25 pm - May 19, 2006
Touching
Comment by Jo macDougal — May 19, 2006 @ 5:37 pm - May 19, 2006
I don’t think gay marriage OR adding sexual orientation to the long list of “do not discriminate against” list should be made part of the law.
However, to be fair they must. Obviously I’m libertarian-leaning, but i understand it’s an idealistic political view. People will not let gays marry unless it’s part of law… that is why many states (and even the federal gov’t now) are making laws to restrict it, despite the fact that all those laws are obvious discrimination. No laws about any kind of marriage should be in the constitution and they shouldn’t be sanctioned by the gov’t at all. Marriage is a spritual, religious bond… and I don’t need my gov’t to acknowledge it.
Also, I don’t think sexual orientation should be specifically mentioned in civil code in terms of not discriminating against gays. But I think that entire code should be abolished. I’m not going to discriminate against old people, black people, dumb people, Mexican people, or Jewish people. Ideally, neither would anyone else — but they do. People say, “People choose to be gay.” Screw that! I choose my religion. I choose my US citizenship. Even if I wanted to cede that yes, people choose to be gay, then they also should not be discriminated for it.
None of this stuff should be in the law. I want the government out of my business. But the rest of the world doesn’t think like I do.
Comment by James — May 19, 2006 @ 6:08 pm - May 19, 2006
#15 – I’m on the same page, James. Pro-gay-marriage here. And in favor of abolishing all anti-discrimination laws on liberty grounds… but, if we must have them, they may as well mention sexual orientation in my opinion.
What I’m against is:
(a) all the other crap that the Gay Left groups stand for having truly nothing to do with gays/lesbians, and/or that veer into thought control; see #12 / #13; and
(b) in addition, I’m against gay-marriage-imposed-by-mere-judicial-fiat. I think gay-marriage-imposed-by-mere-judicial-fiat is an unsustainable proposition that will backlash on us badly. (In fact – It has.)
Comment by Calarato — May 19, 2006 @ 6:14 pm - May 19, 2006
Gay rights (marriage, wills et al) should be done as Federalist #77 advocates – through the Tenth Amendment (powers relegated to the states and to the people respectively), rather than as a Constitutional amendment.
The same can be said for abortion as well. The Founding Fathers wanted the PEOPLE to have the final say in their respective states, NOT the federal government.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 19, 2006 @ 7:54 pm - May 19, 2006
I have to disagree, Peter. The amendment process worked quite well with the 19th amendment. Why can’t we have a pro-gay marriage amendment or a pro-abortion amendment if the people want it?
Comment by John in IL — May 19, 2006 @ 9:35 pm - May 19, 2006
Orrin Hatch has come up with a new marriage amendment. In his version, civil marriage would be left up to the states, meaning they could create gay marriage, civil unions, or other such unions for gays, or anyone, for that matter. The second part of his proposed amendment says that nothing in the US Constitution is to be construed to mean that marriage is anything other than a union of a man and a woman. What this means is that no federal judge could impose gay marriage by judicial fiat. I like it. I think it would satisfy all but the most rabid anti-gay conservatives, while allowing states to go their own way. It assures that no court will impose anything on states that don’t want it. This was on a thread at RedState last night.
Comment by Scott in CA — May 19, 2006 @ 9:55 pm - May 19, 2006
In his version, civil marriage would be left up to the states
Isn’t it already?
Comment by John in IL — May 19, 2006 @ 9:58 pm - May 19, 2006
The second part of his proposed amendment says that nothing in the US Constitution is to be construed to mean that marriage is anything other than a union of a man and a woman
Unless we added a constitutional amendment that said otherwise. Such an amendment would be part of the constitution.
I’m confused.
Comment by John in IL — May 19, 2006 @ 10:16 pm - May 19, 2006
What intellectual power this women commands with her ability to distinguish between non-life at four months and life beginning after the fourth month and, a chemist to boot. What intellectual inspiration is She to hold such devine ability to reason. How noble is her mind.
Comment by syn — May 19, 2006 @ 11:27 pm - May 19, 2006
I believe the Dred Scott case determined that no human being has the right to privacy in owernship of another human being. Of course , females within a period of nine moths is exempt from this law but what does that matter to humanity.
Comment by syn — May 19, 2006 @ 11:31 pm - May 19, 2006
M Shepard myths have got to stop . M Shepard was killed over a meth deal gone sour. He met these two losers in a seedy bar well known for DRUGS in that college town! He was not left strung up like JC. He was hanging over a cattle fence. These myths were manufactured and promoted by a Denver Gay activist group who saw a political opportunity and the Shepards. The Shepards apparently wanted there son to be remembered as a martyr rather than a dead meth head with poor judgement. I worked there every week so I heard the Real Facts !
As for gay marriage. The whoe thing was cooked by the Gay Left and the Dems for the 2000 elections . Oddly , they have forgottne to tell everyone that that BJ Clinton and a majority of Dems signed off on the first anti gay marriage act in the 90s. Queen Hillary campaigned for the Senate on a anti -gay marriage platfrom! Where is the outraged about those FACTS from the left wing gay activists ! Yep, there just poorly disguised DNC operatives.
By the way, the gay marriage business in Mass and Vermont is REAL SLOW . Apparently, everyone heard how hard it was to get divorced real quick !
Comment by Burt — May 20, 2006 @ 9:09 am - May 20, 2006
Well, I was just dealing with gay-specific politics. Sure, there are some gay people that are more left than others… but this website is living proof that there are some gay people more right-leaning than others. Being against socialized medicine is not being against a gay-left policy… it’s being against a left policy. I just don’t think the gay left should be singled out. They all deserve equal treatment, haha.
I do agree with the Republican party on a lot of issues. But we have to face the facts… most polls show that far more Democrats are supportive of gay marriage and/or civil rights (regardless of if you believe they should be law). Here in Ohio, every single bill introduced that is anti-gay is introduced by conservative Republicans. I’m not marginalizing at all, and I know there are Rebuplicans that could give two sh*ts about gay rights. It is just very difficult not to recognize the voting trends. Democrats being wusses does not really make them look good, however. And I imagine Bill Clinton initiated anti-gay legislation simply because it was popular.
Case in point — the Republicans aren’t all that popular now. So what do they do? Introduce a vote on the FMA, set in June if I recall correctly. It seems like it will be an easy “win” for them… just in time for building momentum for November. I’m curious as to see who supports what.
Comment by James — May 20, 2006 @ 10:56 am - May 20, 2006
“I am a 70-year-old straight white happily married woman–a former chemist, and a former public school teacher, and presently a writer of science fiction that I sell on the Internet”
And I bet she’s a good cook, too!
Something intrinsically strong, level headed and compassionate about her generation (born into a depression, came of age during a World War, raised the baby boom) that is missing from the younger generations that came after her.
Vera would be honored to buy Mrs. Wyoming a martini and drink to her health.
Cheers!
Comment by Vera Charles — May 20, 2006 @ 11:06 am - May 20, 2006
This woman make me even more proud of my late mother.
Comment by mr politeness — May 21, 2006 @ 6:14 pm - May 21, 2006