Gay Patriot Header Image

More Foley Fallout: The Gay GOP Witchhunt Begins

**UPDATE BELOW** Welcome readers from Instapundit, The Corner and Mary Katharine Ham!

From liberal blogger David Corn (of The Nation and “outing Valerie Plame” fame) comes this disturbing development in the Foley saga.

There’s a list going around. Those disseminating it call it “The List.” It’s a roster of top-level Republican congressional aides who are gay.

On CBS News on Tuesday, correspondent Gloria Borger reported that there’s anger among House Republicans at what an unidentified House GOPer called a “network of gay staffers and gay members who protect each other and did the Speaker a disservice.” The implication is that these gay Republicans somehow helped page-pursuing Mark Foley before his ugly (and possibly illegal) conduct was exposed. The List–drawn up by gay politicos–is a partial accounting of who on Capitol Hill might be in that network.

I have a copy. I’m not going to publish it. For one, I don’t know for a fact that the men on the list are gay. And generally I don’t fancy outing people–though I have not objected when others have outed gay Republicans, who, after all, work for a party that tries to limit the rights of gays and lesbians and that welcomes the support of those who demonize same-sexers.

What’s interesting about The List–which includes nine chiefs of staffs, two press secretaries, and two directors of communications–is that (if it’s accurate) it shows that some of the religious right’s favorite representatives and senators have gay staffers helping them advance their political careers and agendas. These include Representative Katherine Harris and Henry Hyde and Senators Bill Frist, George Allen, Mitch McConnell and Rick Santorum. Should we salute these legislators for being open-minded enough to have such tolerant hiring practices? After all, Santorum in a 2003 AP interview compared homosexuality to bestiality, incest and polygamy. It would be rather big of Santorum to employ a fellow who engages in activity akin to such horrors. That is, if Santorum knows about his orientation.

Let’s be clear about one thing: the Mark Foley scandal is not about homosexuality. Some family value conservatives are suggesting it is. (GP Ed. Note – So are most Liberal Chestbeaters…. calling Bob Beckel!)

But anytime a gay Republican is outed by events, a dicey issue is raised: what about those GOPers who are gay and who serve a party that is anti-gay? Are they hypocrites, opportunists, or just confused individuals? Is it possible to support a party because you adhere to most of its tenets–even if that party refuses to recognize you as a full citizen? The men on The List might want to think hard about these questions–as they probably already have–for if I have a copy of The List, there’s a good chance it will be appearing soon on a website near everyone.

Full citizen? No party has the power or right to tell me I am a full citizen. Supporting or opposing gay marriage does not make you a hypocrite. It makes you question the policy on its face. I am a full citizen thanks to the US Constitution.

Did it ever occur to Mr. Corn that the representatives and Senators he mentions that may or may not have gay staffers do not care about their sexual orientation yet value their participation as public servants? Is it not rational that you can hire a gay staffer, but at the same time oppose PUBLIC POLICY POSITIONS that you are morally or philosophically opposed to without being labeled a homophobe?

Perhaps Mr. Corn is ignoring the fact that most gay conservatives identify more strongly in our American Identity than our Gay Identity. Did that ever cross your mind, Mr. Corn? Probably not since you seem to have had no problem outing a CIA agent and then letting others take the fall for your actions.

I am not surprised that this is where we are headed. But my question is…. why have our national gay organizations (HRC, Log Cabin, NGLTF) not stepped in to stop this witchhunt which originated on the Gay Left in the first place? I think we know the answer. Tolerance and diversity of opinion is a one-way street for the Gay Liberals and their masters in the Democrat Party.

By the way, the only people that are advancing or talking “The List” that I’ve seen are Liberals! And that List was begun by Gay Leftists years ago.

This witchhunt has got to stop.

**UPDATE** The first casualty of the Gay GOP Witchhunt has occurred. Forced out by Democrats politicizing the Foley Affair. Statement by Kirk Fordham, Rep. Reynolds Chief of Staff…

“I have resigned today from Congressman Tom Reynolds’ office. It is clear the Democrats are intent on making me a political issue in my boss’s race, and I will not let them do so.

I want to clarify a few things: When I sought to help Congressman Foley and his family when his shocking secrets were being revealed, I did so as a friend of my former boss, not as Congressman Reynolds’ Chief of Staff. I reached out to the Foley family, as any good friend would, because I was worried about their emotional well-being.

At the same time, I want it to be perfectly clear that I never attempted to prevent any inquiries or investigation of Foley’s conduct by House officials or any other authorities.

Like so many, I feel betrayed by Mark Foley’s indefensible behavior. Again, I will not allow the Democrats to make me a political issue in my boss’s race, and I will fully cooperate with the ongoing investigation.”

Where will it end?

[RELATED STORY – Ace Of Spades sees the dawning of liberal “conversion camps” for those pesky gay conservatives who have slipped off the plantation.]

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UP-UPDATE (from GPW): The Malcontent‘s Robbie had a good followup post and describes it as Torquemada Ascendant. Just read the whole thing!

Share

148 Comments

  1. #98 – Read Corn’s posting CLOSELY. He says the list has been put together by GAY POLITICOS.. NOT by Republicans.

    Jesus, people…. READ!

    Comment by GayPatriot — October 5, 2006 @ 12:20 am - October 5, 2006

  2. #100 — What “rights” don’t you have?

    Comment by GayPatriot — October 5, 2006 @ 12:21 am - October 5, 2006

  3. Name me one gay Republican who got elected to federal office from the outset running as an actual gay Republican.

    Note the caveats by the puppet, “from the outset” and “Federal office”.

    Of course the puppet neglects people like Jim Kolbe, or perhaps David Catania, or even Neil Giuliano, or Paul Koering.

    What the puppet also conveniently glosses over is that his organizations like Equality California openly campaign AGAINST gay Republicans, actually endorsing their non-gay Democratic opponents instead.

    One wonders if the puppet thinks that Barney “Pimp” Frank doesn’t count since he was outed in office by the criminal activities in which he had entangled himself and did not run as a gay Democrat.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 5, 2006 @ 12:25 am - October 5, 2006

  4. North Dallas Thirty conveniently ignores HIS OWN point here… namely that it is only gay REPUBLICANS like himself who can “appeal to voters”. Barney Frank “doesn’t count” because you yourself have excluded him from the equation… he isn’t a Republican. Your point was that gay Republicans can appeal to the voters… I’m just asking for a single example of a gay Republican who has done so. Tammy Baldwin did it.

    Where are all the gay Republicans who are being honest FROM THE BEGINNING and successfully appealing to the voters? Why does it seem that they all have to start out being dishonest? Because they all do. Jim Kolbe got into office by lying. So did Koering and Foley and Dreier and Gunderson. If gay Republicans are sooooo good at appealing to voters, then why hide it?

    The honest answer, and one you will never hear from ND30, is that the Republican Party is so viciously hostile to gay people that an openly gay candidate could never successfully survive a GOP primary without the heavy advantage of incumbency already behind him. And THAT is the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. The Republicans don’t have a Tammy Baldwin. And at this rate, they never will.

    Comment by Anonymous — October 5, 2006 @ 12:46 am - October 5, 2006

  5. Pardon my ignorance, but someone want to tell me what the hell an “ephebophile” is?

    #81 writes

    Is that why Mark Foley “loves the closet” (in his own words)? If “people like you” can appeal to voters, why is it that only closeted gay Republicans get elected, and those that do come out only do so when forcibly outed? If you guys can appeal to voters, then why can’t you get elected honestly, the way Tammy Bruce did?

    Name me one gay Republican who got elected to federal office from the outset running as an actual gay Republican.

    Has it ever occurred to you that some of us could care less what you do in the privacy of your own home but we damn sure don’t want to sit and listen to you brag about it in public? We’d actually like to keep what precious few shreds of decency are left in our country intact.

    I also don’t want to know what my heterosexual friends are doing in their bedrooms. Nor do I want to know what my children (all grown) are doing in theirs, and I damn sure am not going to tell them what my wife and I do in ours!

    I would find “vote for me. I’m heterosexual” just as off-putting as I find “Vote for me. I’m homosexual”. What the hell does your sexuality have to do with public policy anyway?

    Quixotic, I know, but there you have it.

    We elected a lesbian Sheriff here in Dallas, in the last election. Not once did she discuss her “orientation” (I prefer sexual preference) or parade her partner in public, but the media trumpted it to the high heavens, as if it was some badge of honor. It got the anti-gay crowd stirred up, but this conservative could have cared less. (In case you haven’t noticed, Dallas is very conservative.)

    My sister is lesbian. I’ve never once asked her what she does with her partners. But I’ve slept under the same roof with her and her lover. And I’ve never once said, “So, sis, what’s it like to be lesbian?”

    I have a very good friend at work who is gay and a hemophiliac. (Imagine the battles he has to fight every day just to stay alive!) He has a picture of his partner (who I personally don’t care for at all) as the background on his computer. Yet not once has he pushed his “gayness” on me. It was I that brought the subject up, because I wanted to learn and I trusted him to respect my questions and answer them honestly. (And no, I didn’t ask him about sex. The questions were related to AIDS and public policy, and I thought if anyone would know those issues he would, because he has to worry about every once of blood that enters his body.)

    Some of you (I’m referring to guys like #81) could make a lot more headway if you’d keep your sex lives to yourselves and your mouths shut. I would have thought that the resounding defeats you suffered across the country in 2004 would have taught you that!

    Try reading Dale Carnegie’s “How To Win Friends and Influence People”. I don’t give a damn if you’re gay. But the fact that you are is not only none of my business, it’s rude of you to shove it in my face.

    Comment by antimedia — October 5, 2006 @ 12:55 am - October 5, 2006

  6. First of all, I’ve only just noticed that GP has apparently outed Kirk Fordham. I certainly didn’t know he was gay. I’ve been reading all the usual liberal suspect blogs and I have to come here to find out that Kirk Fordham is gay. Wow and GP is ranting about outing gay Republicans – geez, he just threw a big boulder into his own glass house.

    Or maybe you’re merely an uneducated idiot — or willfully blind.

    Aravosis said he obtained the latest information about the five-term congressman from Foley’s former chief of staff, Kirk Fordham.

    Fordham, who is gay, headed up fund-raising efforts for Foley’s aborted Senate campaign and is now the finance director for one of the remaining GOP primary candidates in that race: Mel Martinez, George W. Bush’s former Housing & Urban Development secretary. Martinez has come out in favor of the Federal Marriage Amendment.

    Fordham denied ever speaking with Aravosis and told the Blade, “I just don’t discuss Congressman Foley’s personal life with reporters, but I’m not sure what their motive is in outing him, other than to draw attention to themselves. Foley has a good track record with gay issues and opposes the FMA.”

    Asked for comment, Foley spokesperson Jason Kello re-issued the congressman’ statement on the amendment.

    “The issue we are facing right now is whether Congress will approve a Family Marriage Amendment — something the Senate is posed to act on soon,” Foley said. “I oppose this amendment — and I am confident it will fall short of the votes it needs and will go nowhere.”

    A simple Google search, i.e. “Fordham is gay” would have pointed out that story and several others as far back as 2003.

    In short, IanRaj, you slandered GayPatriot — and you either did it out of complete idiocy or, more likely, mendacity.

    And to your next raving point:

    It is not an outing issue but in the weird, weird world or Republican politics it is more convenient for gay Republicans and homophobic Republicans to both make it about homosexuality or its attempted disclosure. That way, they get to avoid the more important ethics issue: The party’s leadership protected a known ephebophile for three years, refusing to respond to many complaints.

    LOL……but IanRaj, all of your sockpuppet identities have made it clear that there is nothing wrong with adults having sex with teenagers and children.

    Second, what you conveniently leave out is that the Republican leadership was acting on emails, not the emails AND instant messages that the Democratic leadership had and delayed acting upon — even though, according to Democrats, any delay endangered children.

    Finally, given that you’ve already demonstrated above that you’re either too foolish or too dishonest to tell the truth of a situation or intelligently interpret facts, why should we believe that you’re trying anything other than a coverup?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 5, 2006 @ 1:04 am - October 5, 2006

  7. Where are all the gay Republicans who are being honest FROM THE BEGINNING and successfully appealing to the voters? Why does it seem that they all have to start out being dishonest?

    David Catania and Neil Giuliano ran for office as openly gay Republicans.

    I can list you five openly-gay Republicans who just won their party primaries – Steve Sion, for one.

    Of course, the problem is that you’re not supposed to know that, because it exposes that “Equality” California is merely a puppet organization of the Democratic Party and will actually endorse more antigay candidates rather than endorse a Republican.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 5, 2006 @ 1:15 am - October 5, 2006

  8. Oh this is just too rich… so Repubs, who don’t trust Dems as far as they can throw them, are now using a list given to them by Dems, to tell them which of their most trusted associates are gay.

    Seems to me, if I was a “Gay Politico,” this would be the time to really screw over (so to speak) some Repub staffers I really didn’t like…

    Comment by The Evil Midnite Bomber — October 5, 2006 @ 1:18 am - October 5, 2006

  9. Or even better, to take out some really effective ones.

    Comment by The Evil Midnite Bomber — October 5, 2006 @ 1:36 am - October 5, 2006

  10. #107: “Neil Giuliano ran for office as openly gay Republicans.”

    Gee, to not know that Neil was in the closet when he was first elected as mayor of Tempe, you must be either an idiot or a liar. Both in your case, I suppose. BTW, have you been practising the phrase “Speaker Pelosi”? Be careful, I wouldn’t want your head exploding all over some innocent bystander!

    Comment by Ian — October 5, 2006 @ 2:11 am - October 5, 2006

  11. #106: Are you imagining things again? Because I don’t even recognize the quote you are attributing to me (raj doesn’t seem to be around this thread.) Maybe you’re fantasizing. In any event, you would appear to need help. This implosion of the House GOP seems to be getting to you.

    Comment by Ian — October 5, 2006 @ 2:22 am - October 5, 2006

  12. LOL….and now IanRaj is trying to argue that Neil Giuliano was never elected as a gay person.

    Right.

    Another lie by IanRaj exposed; Giuliano ran in numerous elections as a gay person.

    That’s not something IanRaj likes to admit; after all, it makes obvious that Republicans have no problem with electing gay people — just with hatemongering gay Democrats like himself.

    But we understand why he’s whining so; IanRaj is desperately trying to cover up the clear, proven fact of his lie up above in claiming that GayPatriot outed Kirk Fordham.

    IanRaj, you’re a coward who cannot admit that he was caught in a lie — and you’re making it more obvious.

    You will apologize to GayPatriot immediately for slandering him.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 5, 2006 @ 2:26 am - October 5, 2006

  13. #7
    I’ll drink to that.
    I haven’t read far enough, so it may be covered already, but I have to ask the old question:

    What about the “democrats” who oppose gay marriage?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 5, 2006 @ 3:36 am - October 5, 2006

  14. These are PEOPLE and their private lives are nobodys business even if they work in the public sector.

    Which is why individual rights are the key and collectivism the threat.

    Think about it…

    When that genetic test is developed that allows for determination of a ‘gay’ child, how many New York minutes until ‘gay’ Americans become pro-Life?

    I personally don’t care whether it’s genetic or choice. Because it’s NONE OF MY BUSINESS… I’m even tolerant of the evil of 1st tri-mester abortions.

    I’m just saying… if you are an identifiable ‘group’… just beware of the risks of being a ‘group’ first and a person second.

    Comment by DANEgerus — October 5, 2006 @ 3:38 am - October 5, 2006

  15. #25
    My point was, however, that what one is and how one is treated are two different things, and affects one’s experience as an American.

    If you know what you are, why do you give a rat’s ass about what others think?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 5, 2006 @ 3:55 am - October 5, 2006

  16. “what one is and how one is treated are two different things, and affects one’s experience as an American” sounds like a pile of Boo Freaking Hoo. When the Islamists come to saw your head off you will see what affects your experience.

    Comment by anon — October 5, 2006 @ 4:40 am - October 5, 2006

  17. GP didn’t out Fordham. Living in South Florida, we knew that Fordham was gay. Like most gay South Floridians (and I mean those living in Broward and Dade), I didn’t understand how Fordham could work for Martinez either. I still cannot get my head around it, but whatever. My point is, GP didn’t out Fordham.

    Comment by DanielFTL — October 5, 2006 @ 5:39 am - October 5, 2006

  18. Jesus, this is the stupidist line of reasoning I’ve ever seen.

    Until the the right-wingers made it an issue, Fordham being gay wasn’t an issue. Well, except with a few insecure nut-jobs with small brains and are looking for any excuse to absove Republican leadership for their massive failure.

    Let’s be clear, this is just like Cardinal Law protecting the child molesting priests. There was a choice to be made:

    The children or the organization.

    Both made the same wrong choice: the organization.

    Both kept the problem hidden until it couldn’t be hidden any longer. Law resigned. Haslert will be forced out eventually.

    Please try to keep up. It’s not about Foley any longer. It’s about the corruption of power. It’s about people like my family who’ve been Republicans for as long as there’s been a Republican party. It’s about my cousin who sent her two boys off to be pages, one in 2001 and one in 2004. She’s hopping mad right now and she’s got a hell of a big mouth and a lot of endurance, plus a political cachet to be heard.

    The Democrats took 40 years to corrupt themselves into a second-rate part, lose the House and marginalize themselves. For the Republicans, looks like it’ll be 12 years. Because once they lose the house, all the chickens are going to come home to roost. And it won’t be pretty.

    Comment by Moses — October 5, 2006 @ 6:56 am - October 5, 2006

  19. #101 – Read Corn’s posting CLOSELY. He says the list has been put together by GAY POLITICOS.. NOT by Republicans.

    I did read closedly. “Gay politicos” and “Republicans” are NOT mutually exclusive terms. A clue to this might have been the fact that the list consists entirely of alleged gay Republican politicos.

    Comment by Shalimar — October 5, 2006 @ 7:46 am - October 5, 2006

  20. Hey, antimedia… If you don’t know what your heterosexual friends do in their bedrooms, then how do you know they are heterosexuals?

    Comment by Anonymous — October 5, 2006 @ 9:16 am - October 5, 2006

  21. As a straight, married, male Republican, I have a question to which I would appreciatre an honest answer. This seems like a good place to ask it.

    Is the average adult homosexual man more likely to try to bed a 16-year old male than an adult heterosexual man is to try to bed a 16-year old female?

    Also, change the age to 8 and answer as well.

    Note I am not asking about fantasies or desires, but rather a bona fide attempt to do the act.

    Comment by Chester White — October 5, 2006 @ 9:31 am - October 5, 2006

  22. As a straight, married, male Republican, I have a question to which I would appreciate an honest answer. This seems like a good place to ask it.

    Is the average adult homosexual man more likely to try to bed a 16-year old male than an adult heterosexual man is to try to bed a 16-year old female?

    Also, change the age to 8 and answer as well.

    Note I am not asking about fantasies or desires, but rather a bona fide attempt to do the act.

    Comment by Chester White — October 5, 2006 @ 9:32 am - October 5, 2006

  23. #112: “Giuliano ran in numerous elections as a gay person.”

    Gawd, you really have a reading comprehension problem. I said: “Neil was in the closet when he was first elected as mayor of Tempe”. He came out (when threatened with being outed) while he was a very popular mayor. If you had bothered to read the article to which you linked, even you could have figured it out. The point is Giuliano was in the closet until AFTER he became a successful politician.

    Comment by Ian — October 5, 2006 @ 9:45 am - October 5, 2006

  24. Ian-

    Unless you apologize for the Fordham slander, you will be banned from this site immediately.

    Comment by GayPatriot — October 5, 2006 @ 9:54 am - October 5, 2006

  25. #124: Ok I apologize. My mistake. Btw, there were others BEFORE me who also thought you had outed Fordham. See

    http://gaypatriot.net/?comments_popup=1723#comment-131805 and

    http://gaypatriot.net/?comments_popup=1723#comment-131829

    Comment by Ian — October 5, 2006 @ 10:29 am - October 5, 2006

  26. Loundry,

    re:

    “If I were to announce to his family, with my friend present, at Thanksgiving dinner that he’s been actively and secretly gay for years, would he feel humiliated? Of course he would.”

    That is a phony argument. The humiliation in the example here isn’t the humiliation of the sexual choice, but rather the inappropriateness of the situation.

    If you were a straight heterosexual male attending Easter Mass and your straight heterosexual female wife stepped forward and announced to the congregation that you, her straight heterosexual husband, ate out her pussy last night and she loved it, you would also feel humiliated. But again, as in yopur example, the humilation has NOTHING to do with heterosexuality or sexual preference; on the contrary, the humiliation has EVERYTHING to do with the inappropriateness of the situation.

    Even small children understand that.

    If you have to reveal a secret to your father-in-law, perhaps there are better options than vomiting at the Thanksgiving Dinner table. That’s simply common sense and decency.

    Regarding the outing on gay men — I believe all men and women are entitled to their privacy. The late Canadian PM Trudeau said it best, that the state has no business interfering in the bedrooms of the nation.

    But really, the premise of the original question is not invalid. If there’s nothing wrong with being gay, then why do we hide it? Is it because we are ashamed? Ashamed of what? Our own deviancy? We need to accept ourselves and come out of the closet and stop living a lie. But that’s for men to decide for themselves. Some are brave. Some are cowards. As it is in all walks of life. I think that’s what many gay men are fearful of — not exposing their sexual preference, but exposing their cowardice, because they still feel ashamed of who they are. That’s not a crime. Just a psyhcological dysfunction of insecure men who prefer to live the lie.

    re:

    “I would not shed a single god damn tear if these self-important and self-indulgent “gay activists” got penile and rectal cancer.”

    Some people get their hurt feelings hurt worse than others and become more unhinged and vicious than others. Your vile and bitter feelings directed towards others tells me a lot about shame so easily mutates into misanthropy and violence.

    Comment by Leo Drongo — October 5, 2006 @ 10:42 am - October 5, 2006

  27. #14: Real patriots do not work for The State.

    Comment by kdogg36 — October 5, 2006 @ 11:38 am - October 5, 2006

  28. #26 Barry: To those who say Republicans oppose homosexual rights- you have it wrong. They oppose special privileges and preferential treatment for any one group.

    Which particular Republicans seek to end the special marriage privilege for heterosexual couples? Because (s)he’d get my vote — the State doesn’t have any business blessing particular human relationships.

    Comment by kdogg36 — October 5, 2006 @ 11:42 am - October 5, 2006

  29. Is the average adult homosexual man more likely to try to bed a 16-year old male than an adult heterosexual man is to try to bed a 16-year old female?

    Nope. Equal likelihood, once you consider all things.

    What may be confusing you is that, as IanRaj demonstrates, Democratic gays see nothing wrong or immoral with bedding minors — they call laws, for instance, that would criminalize it “imposing religious dogma”.

    This isn’t really driven by their sexuality, though. It’s driven by the fact that they are committed to groups like the ACLU, which defends pedophiles like NAMBLA, the pro-abortion groups that encourage teenage sex as a means of increasing their bottom line, and the leftists who want to dismantle marriage and consider children having sex to be necessary to their normal development.

    If you look at Republican gays, for instance, many of those here who are raising children, we will tell you flatly opposite. We are much more strongly in favor of laws that criminalize sexual activity with minors consistently so that predators like Foley can be punished.

    The reason gays are so misunderstood in the mainstream media is because the majority of the ones in the public eye are like IanRaj — they loudly condemn underage sex as wrong and immoral, but then claim that acting to stop it is “imposing religious dogma”. This is part of the reason this story is resonating so strongly; people are used to “gay activists” being duplicitous on issues.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 5, 2006 @ 12:39 pm - October 5, 2006

  30. Re:

    It’s driven by the fact that they are committed to groups like the ACLU, which defends

    drug addicts like Rush Limbaugh.

    Comment by Duff McWiggler — October 5, 2006 @ 12:43 pm - October 5, 2006

  31. Republican Party to Purge Homosexuals From Its Midst?…

    GayPatriot is reporting that the Republican party may begin to purge itself of gay identified staffers, etc.  He lists Kirk Fordham as the first casualty.  I think Mr. Fordham’s departure has more to do with his direct involvement and his acti……

    Trackback by Blowhard — October 5, 2006 @ 1:12 pm - October 5, 2006

  32. “anonymous” asks

    Hey, antimedia… If you don’t know what your heterosexual friends do in their bedrooms, then how do you know they are heterosexuals?

    The same way I know my gay friend is gay. I saw a picture of his partner on his computer, and he spoke of him in loving terms. I don’t need a graphic demonstration to figure the rest out. But I have a great deal of respect for him simply doing the same things that all people in love do rather than shoving his “gayness” in my face and asking me to “accept” it.

    Get it?

    And frankly, if some of my hetereosexual friends really arent hetereosexual, so what? I don’t care, and I don’t need to know what they do in their bedrooms. What the hell does what you do sexually have to do with friendship anyway?

    Leo writes

    But really, the premise of the original question is not invalid. If there’s nothing wrong with being gay, then why do we hide it? Is it because we are ashamed? Ashamed of what? Our own deviancy? We need to accept ourselves and come out of the closet and stop living a lie. But that’s for men to decide for themselves. Some are brave. Some are cowards. As it is in all walks of life. I think that’s what many gay men are fearful of — not exposing their sexual preference, but exposing their cowardice, because they still feel ashamed of who they are. That’s not a crime. Just a psyhcological dysfunction of insecure men who prefer to live the lie.

    So every gay who doesn’t openly flaunt their sexuality is a coward? Boy do you have a warped mind!

    Gay men who prefer to not tell their anti-gay friends and/or family are not cowards. They value those relationships more than they do being “honest” and they’re realistic enough to know when a relationship would be threatened by that knowledge.

    What you claim is bravery is nothing more than selfishness. Only a person who has no consideration for others would feel the need to publicly confront people about their sexual preferences. Someone who is comfortable about their sexual preferences would simply live their lives as they see fit without feeling the need to announce it to the world.

    What you describe as courage is really nothing more than adolescent immaturity that reveals a profound form of insecurity.

    Comment by antimedia — October 5, 2006 @ 1:13 pm - October 5, 2006

  33. Bravo, antimedia!

    I think you nailed exactly what the issue is: people have confused being open and honest with being confrontational.

    People like Anonymous think being gay is something that should be used for purposes of power over other people. They are like black Americans whose attitude is, “My skin color excuses all”.

    The vast majority of the gays you will find here have a totally different attitude. We believe that our sexual orientation has little to no bearing on what we do on a day to day basis, nor does it excuse us from the same social and work responsibilities as have straight people.

    Most of the antigay backlash, in my opinion, is because gays like Anonymous have used being gay as a reason to support unpopular leftist causes, like allowing minors to have sex and have abortions without parental consent or notification, or anti-Semitic terror supporters and Democrats like Cindy Sheehan, or punishing those who work to pay for those who won’t, or antireligious bigotry….you get the idea. It’s no surprise that people then associate being gay with being undesirable

    We are slowly trying to undo this, but as you see from other posts here on GP, the Democrats see diversity of political opinion in the gay community as a threat to their power — and thus have unleashed people like Anonymous to berate and harass gays who differ, just as they send black people to throw oreos at and call “house slaves” and “Uncle Toms” those black people who do not automatically do the Democrats’ bidding.

    Thank you for supporting your friend and being willing to look past the screaming idiots like Anonymous. We need more people to do that, and we need your help in showing them that not all gays are like Anonymous.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 5, 2006 @ 2:01 pm - October 5, 2006

  34. …As a straight, married, male Republican, I have a question to which I would appreciate an honest answer. This seems like a good place to ask it. Is the average adult homosexual man more likely to try to bed a 16-year old male than an adult heterosexual man is to try to bed a 16-year old female?

    As a Gay, single Republican who’s over 40, my response is that the straight guy is. Assuming a 20-plus difference in ages I’ll cite popular culture as examples. Marketing sexy teenager girls to middle-aged (straight) men is a given in advertising and pornography. Girls in “schoolgirl” outfits are practically a stereotype.

    Most older gay men are not attracted to adolescent high-school boys. Once there’s a number of years difference, the lower boundry generally is college or post-college guys at-least. If for no more selfish and superficial reason tham men develop later than girls and the “masculine” body-type doesn’t manifest itself until the twenties. A sixteen year-old boy is still a child-physically…and most gay men are NOT interested in children. Also, looking at the shelves of a mixed-audience porn shop; the overwhelming age/appearance of the “girls” is much younger than the “boys”. Most of the popular gay porn stars are built-guys in the twenties and thirties….the young(ish)-twinks are a sub-market.

    (an unscientific opinion….)

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — October 5, 2006 @ 3:09 pm - October 5, 2006

  35. Oh you quisling Gay-republicans. You live in your ivory towers with your boy toys and expect to have real lives. you’re pathetic. what part of the anti-gay GOP don’t you understand. you’re gay uncle tom’s of the worst sort. do you really think you’re money will buy into republican country clubs? will you have lives beyond what you have to intimidate or spend for companionship? you’re disgusting.

    Comment by longboardersurf — October 5, 2006 @ 3:18 pm - October 5, 2006

  36. LOL, longboardersurf…..spoken like a true gay Democrat.

    Personally, I have a very satisfying life.

    I don’t play golf, so getting into or out of the country clubs is no problem.

    I can’t recall ever being discriminated against when I asked to join or be included in memberships, clubs, or professional organizations.

    I’ve never had any trouble getting sex or companionship, and I have a wonderful husband whom I adore — who is, actually, one of a very few reasons I don’t condemn gays who tend to vote Democrat categorically.

    I suppose you like this fiction that we gay conservative/Republican types are all miserable, but that could not be farther than the truth. The vast majority of the ones I know are happy, partnered, successful people who are both pragmatic and optimistic. They enjoy their jobs and coworkers and tend to be heavily involved in community affairs — except for gay community affairs.

    Mainly because they tend to gravitate towards the straight people, who don’t abuse them and namecall them, and away from the “gay community”, which does.

    I understand your confusion; as a good Democrat, you’ve been fully programmed to believe that you cannot survive off the plantation, that everyone who isn’t gay hates you, and that the Democrats are doing you a favor by even acknowledging your existence.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 5, 2006 @ 3:57 pm - October 5, 2006

  37. I know I can’t afford a surfboard.

    Comment by GayPatriot — October 5, 2006 @ 4:13 pm - October 5, 2006

  38. I assume it will end when your republican buddies along with the religious jerkoffs they allow to dictate to them will decide it is time to render you.

    Comment by jerry — October 6, 2006 @ 11:12 am - October 6, 2006

  39. antimedia

    re:

    “So every gay who doesn’t openly flaunt their sexuality is a coward? Boy do you have a warped mind!

    Gay men who prefer to not tell their anti-gay friends and/or family are not cowards.”

    I disagree. I believe it is cowardice, and as I said earlier, there’s no crime in that. It’s insecurity, pathology and fear.

    You can imagine what it would be like for a black person ashamed of their color, walking through life hiding behind a burqa. It’s not a crime and it’s not a life I’d like to live. But it’s moral cowardice.

    Have a great weekend!

    Comment by Leo Drongo — October 6, 2006 @ 12:14 pm - October 6, 2006

  40. “Anti-gay friends”? Well, I guess I must have standards. If someone is anti-gay they are not my friend. To me, it is like joining a fraternity or sorority, if I have to pay to have “friends” they were never my friends to begin with.

    Comment by HDBiker — October 6, 2006 @ 12:35 pm - October 6, 2006

  41. When I first came across this site I thought this has to be some kind of joke, some bitter satire. How little we know of each other as we stay in our camps looking with intrepidation at each other all the while ignoring our common ground, which is extensive. We like our stereotypes to keep the camps apart. As an ultra right winger I’m here to tell you folks that there is a very large bunch of American people who don’t care about anyone’s sexual preference, more than some here want to realize. To many of us, it’s like driving a Ford or a Chevy – it’s really that goddamn simple. The whole point about Foley is that he is an aggressive bastard, the kind that uses sex for personal gain and control. I don’t really understand this business of “outing” but clearly it is for gain/control. Foley needs to be prosecuted for abuse of official power – I doubt they can nail him for pedophilia based on those IMs, but if they could hang him for that, all the better. Anyone seeking to make this a mere political issue is tyring to put their own sexual preferences above who they are as humans, neighbors, co-workers, citizens. This is patently evident by there being no concern at all expressed for Foley’s victims and the now-developing counter mind set that says this was just a bunch of younger homos mad at an older homo. Yup, there goes the notion that voters are going to switch parties en masse because of Foley. That’s the type of crap we step into when the issue of who we share our bodies with becomes a political and moral issue. Look at the rhetoric we use in discussing sexuality. Hitting on someone – my God! what an expression for wanting to share your body with someone you like and trust. Picking someone up – like a mere commodity to be discarded when done using. The list goes on and on. No wonder common values get shuffled to the side when the straight and gay camps look at each other. And what stupid names – gay and straight. What the hell does that exactly mean, those terms? I have a bunch of grandkids who talk about ‘straight and gay’ like I talk about Fords and Chevys. I admit I still put a string of garlic around my neck at times when venturing too near your camp but they don’t and they are the ones that will be running things when I’m maggot food. 50 years ago, most Blacks couldn’t vote. Of course anyone with a clean record and good record of employment and references should be able to adopt and get custody of a child in a divorce. Marriage? nope – the majority thinks its for male and female, but my grandkids will change that most likely. As far as politics, I would suggest you folks here look very closely at the real nature of radical islam and what sharia law and al qu’ran says about people who share their bodies as you folks do. Stoning and hanging makes the American redneck homophobe rather benign, so I would not cozy up too much to any philosophy that treats this as a mere cultural thing to be resolved with good police work and economic policy. They are coming for all of us but you good folks will be the first to have your heads lopped off. I hope you don’t ban me for cussing, but if you must, you must.

    Comment by goesh — October 6, 2006 @ 12:55 pm - October 6, 2006

  42. Most of the antigay backlash, in my opinion, is because gays like Anonymous have used being gay as a reason to support unpopular leftist causes, like allowing minors to have sex and have abortions without parental consent or notification, or anti-Semitic terror supporters and Democrats like Cindy Sheehan, or punishing those who work to pay for those who won’t, or antireligious bigotry….you get the idea. It’s no surprise that people then associate being gay with being undesirable

    are you insane ? really. are you ?

    what on earth do gays have to do with any of that ?

    Comment by cleek — October 6, 2006 @ 5:51 pm - October 6, 2006

  43. Personally, as long as the GOP gains points with its base by bashing gay people…I don’t care if we out them all!

    Comment by James1 — October 7, 2006 @ 1:21 am - October 7, 2006

  44. what on earth do gays have to do with any of that ?

    Exactly my point.

    But talk to leftists like Matt Foreman, who think abortion is a gay issue.

    I particularly love this insane line:

    Our individual and family needs are inextricably linked with all other Americans – we love and have sex; women in our community get pregnant, need the assistance of fertility clinics to do so, or choose or need to end a pregnancy; both men and women in our community choose to – or choose not to – have children.

    If someone can explain to me how gay men or lesbians are getting pregnant from sex, I’d love to hear it. And if lesbians are choosing to get pregnant and then have an abortion, they’re a little to the left of sick.

    This is the kind of leftist drivel to which being gay is linked by these whores like Foreman.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 7, 2006 @ 2:55 am - October 7, 2006

  45. […] Gay Patriot has a good response to David Corn: Full citizen? No party has the power or right to tell me I am a full citizen. Supporting or opposing gay marriage does not make you a hypocrite. It makes you question the policy on its face. I am a full citizen thanks to the US Constitution. […]

    Pingback by Snarky Bastards » Blog Archive » On the Sickness of the Left — October 7, 2006 @ 2:26 pm - October 7, 2006

  46. I am a conservative – I am 50. A neocon, social moderate, fiscal conservative, environmental conservationist – two kids, love my wife, vote for Bush because of national security but would just as easily vote for Lieberman for his moral stance.

    Ok – here’s the deal on gay people. Who fucking cares!

    Its none of my business what you do in your bedroom.

    Any questions?

    PS I grew up in the Midwest. I think most of my contemporaries feel the sam.

    Comment by Kevin — October 7, 2006 @ 7:50 pm - October 7, 2006

  47. Leo writes

    I disagree. I believe it is cowardice, and as I said earlier, there’s no crime in that. It’s insecurity, pathology and fear.

    You can imagine what it would be like for a black person ashamed of their color, walking through life hiding behind a burqa. It’s not a crime and it’s not a life I’d like to live. But it’s moral cowardice.

    Leo, did you think about this before you wrote it? (I’m serious.)

    A black man would have to hide his skin (as you point out) in order to hide the fact that he is black. A gay man has to – act perfectly normal to “hide” the fact that he’s gay. For a gay man to display “courage” as you describe, he has to trumpet to the world, “Look at me! I’m gay!”. That isn’t courage. It’s selfishness.

    As I said before, it’s perfectly possible to live your life as a gay person without annoncing it to everyone you meet. And it isn’t an indication of shame or cowardice. Running around flaunting your sexuality and insisting that everyone accept that and honor your for it is. It reminds me of the famous line from MacBeth – Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

    Comment by antimedia — October 7, 2006 @ 11:20 pm - October 7, 2006

  48. For the life of me, I cannot understand why a gay person would be a member of the Republican Party in the first place. This is the group that vehemently supports “don’t ask, don’t tell.” After all, this is the “family values” crowd. And, don’t forget, the present occupant in the White House was pushing for the “marriage amendment.”

    Comment by Jean Standish — September 15, 2008 @ 10:22 pm - September 15, 2008

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.