Gay Patriot Header Image

Savage Duplicity on Ex-gays

Reader E.N. alerted me to this piece which made me wonder if Dan Savage has made as harsh attacks on Barack Obama since he won the Democratic nomination as he has on the Republican Party. Last week, Scott Tucker reported how, in a radio interview with Joe Solmonese lambasted the GOP and misrepresented the party’s platform and relationship with Log Cabin.

A year ago, however, Dan Savage savaged the soon-to-be Democratic nominee for campaigning with “ex-gay/anti-gay preacher,” Donnie McClurkin:

Excuse me, but what the f***? If believing in the “respect, dignity, and rights of all other citizens,” including gay and lesbian citizens, doesn’t preclude touring with a hate-monger bigot like McClurkin, what the f*** good is your support? How can the gay community “stand together” with a**holes that have declared war on us? And I’m sorry, Barack, but if you choose to stand with McClurkin—if you give him a pass on his anti-gay bigotry—than your “belief” in our brotherhood isn’t worth a bucket of warm santorum.

I wonder what Andrew Sullivan has to say about this, given his conviction that Sarah Palin judges homosexuals harshly since her church has promoted a conference devoted to a notion that we can be “cured” of our same-sex attraction. Last year, his candidate, you know Obama, this “remarkable man at a vital moment,” campaigned with someone who has taken the “cure” and promotes it regularly in his ministry.

So, if a Republican belongs to a church which promotes an ex-gay conference, she harbors extreme feelings against homosexuals.  On the other hand, if a Democrat campaigns with an ex-gay activist, he earn accolades from the very gay blogger who accused her of extremism.  

Meanwhile, another gay writer who took Obama to task for campaigning with that activist in the Democratic primary contest, would rather heaps scorn on and spread lies about the Republican Party now that the Democrat he once appropriately upbraided has won his party’s presidential nomination.

Share

17 Comments

  1. Dan’s drivel is given away for free in gas stations and supported by ads for sex lines and transexual whores “escorts”. He tells people how to use dildos for a living. His current masterpiece is on an amateur porn festival. This guy is taken seriously why again?

    But yes, your points are all spot on.

    Comment by American Elephant — September 19, 2008 @ 9:52 am - September 19, 2008

  2. It’s not about being black, it’s about being a liberal black.
    It’s not about being a woman, it’s about being a liberal woman.
    It’s not about being a Hispanic, it’s about being a liberal Hispanic.
    It’s not about being gay, it’s about being liberal and gay.

    The left lives off of the political and intellectual, servitude of “victims.” Stay on the plantation and they’ll throw you a bone. Stray and suffer a heretic’s death.
    Support the leftist ideology and all is forgiven. Oppose it and no victim group status will be adequate to protect you.

    The Devil could rise from hell with the blood of children dripping from his lips and be welcomed with open arms…as long as he has a BO sticker on his car.

    Comment by iamnot — September 19, 2008 @ 10:09 am - September 19, 2008

  3. [...] Savage Duplicity on Ex-gays By GayPatriotWest Reader EN alerted me to this piece which made me wonder if Dan Savage has made as harsh attacks on Barack Obama since he won the Democratic nomination as he has on the Republican Party. Last week, Scott Tucker reported how, … GayPatriot – http://www.gaypatriot.net [...]

    Pingback by Political Blog Posts » Blog Archive » - Democratic Nomination — September 19, 2008 @ 12:05 pm - September 19, 2008

  4. It is actually simple: Palin hasn’t either told us her views on gay folks as citizens or agrees with the ex-gay folks and her church, while Obama himself has told us that gay folks as citizens should be equal in all ways as citizens and critiqued said anti-gay preacher. You’re really reaching here. Be sure to stretch before you engage in these feats of argument or you’ll get cramped.

    Comment by jimmy — September 19, 2008 @ 12:32 pm - September 19, 2008

  5. Obama himself has told us that gay folks as citizens should be equal in all ways as citizens and critiqued said anti-gay preacher.

    You mean the ones who he supported and endorsed as models for faith-based action?

    And Obama has specifically stated that he believes gays and lesbians should not be allowed to marry because marriage is a “sacred union” — a statement which, jimmy, you have screamed proves someone is “homophobic” and believes gays should be “second-class citizens”.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — September 19, 2008 @ 12:57 pm - September 19, 2008

  6. Um, Jimmy, but she has. She just hasn’t given the answers you want.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — September 19, 2008 @ 1:26 pm - September 19, 2008

  7. Nice post. Good for you for bringing Sullivan into it as well. It amazes me how he still is presented as a “conservative” voice because he describes himself as such. The man suffers some sort of neurosis that is hard to pronounce, I am sure.
    If Andrew Sullivan is a conservative, then Henri Petain was a great French patriot.

    Comment by E.N. — September 19, 2008 @ 1:36 pm - September 19, 2008

  8. Sitation please jim-

    Oh forget it. Capitals are beyond you, why should I expect anything else than ‘is not’ as your rebuttal?

    Comment by The Livewire — September 19, 2008 @ 2:46 pm - September 19, 2008

  9. #3 raises a very good point. Palin needs to be pressed – without “savage” hostility – to elaborate her opinions, values, policy preferences and would-be ininitiatives.

    Comment by Jeremayakovka — September 19, 2008 @ 4:37 pm - September 19, 2008

  10. So, if a Republican belongs to a church which promotes an ex-gay conference, she harbors extreme feelings against homosexuals. On the other hand, if a Democrat campaigns with an ex-gay activist, he earn accolades from the very gay blogger who accused her of extremism.

    So, if a Democrat says he supports equivalent rights but acknowledges there are differences of opinion and campaigns with someone who disagrees, he’s a hypocrite. But, a Republican who openly opposed equal rights associates herself with a church promoting openly extreme anti-gay views, she’s being honest and therefore deserves our support. Um… yeah, brilliant.

    Comment by CR — September 20, 2008 @ 1:10 pm - September 20, 2008

  11. Anybody know any people on the right who are gay who don’t support gay marriage? I’ve met two people like that. I find it bizarre.

    Personally, I’m not interested in getting married (and I’m a straight girl), but as a magnet on my refrigerator reads: “Let gay people marry. Let them be miserable like the rest of us.”

    Everybody’s unions, gay and straight, should be civil, and the same rights should be accorded to everyone no matter what whosit you stick in who’s hole, or get stuck in yours.

    Marriage can remain a church thing, and it should be recognized by the state in exactly the same way holy communions and bar mitzvahs are.

    Comment by Amy Alkon — September 20, 2008 @ 6:21 pm - September 20, 2008

  12. I dont supoprt gay marriage.

    Marriage is between man and woman , and the broader soceity does not want it changed.

    Comment by Vince P — September 20, 2008 @ 8:04 pm - September 20, 2008

  13. Amy,

    Liberals have succeeded, in your case at least, of defining the issue as a matter of equal treatment under the law by talking about equality, equality, equality. “we just want the same benefits straight couples get” they say. What is ENTIRELY missing from the liberal argument is why we give benefits in the first place. Why government is involved in marriage in the first place. People who have forgotten or never knew the purpose of marriage to society are inclined to fall prey to this argument. And if you dont know why government is involved in marriage, it makes perfect sense to either extend marriage to gays (or anyone else who wants to marry) or get government out of the mix altogether. Its when you look at the benefits that marriage provides to society — reproduction of society and the raising of children by their biological parents — that the gay marriage debate falls apart. These are things we want to encourage, and they are things gay couples are incapable of doing. The institution as it exists encourages these things, putting other arrangements on the same pedestal can only detract from them.

    It may be bizarre to you that gays would be against changing the marriage institution — I find it sad that putting country first has become bizarre.

    Comment by American Elephant — September 21, 2008 @ 2:10 am - September 21, 2008

  14. Why are you giving Andrew Sullivan ANY publicity? Sullivan (over the course of the Clinton campaign and now the McCain campaign) has show himself shallow, vindictive, and hateful. Disagreeing with policy positions is fine, and those disagreements can be aired in an adult manner…..however, Sullivan has shown himself to be more inclined to viciously ad hominem attacks on a long list of public figures. If you *must* look at thinkers from the left side of the aisle, consider someone like Carville or Joe Trippi. Someone like Sullivan is just Water B*tch for the DailyKos brigade (despite his claim of being conservative). If Andrew Sullivan is a conservative at this point, then that makes Larry Flynt a high-minded moralist.

    Comment by Jeff — September 21, 2008 @ 11:00 am - September 21, 2008

  15. Vince P said, “Marriage is between man and woman , and the broader soceity does not want it changed.“If you mean the term “marriage”, yes, you’re right. If you mean the rights that go with marriage, you’re wrong.

    As of July 2008, 65% of Americans favored extending either “marriage” or civil unions to same-sex couples, and only 29% said “No Legal Recognition”.

    Source: http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm

    American Elephant said (or rather implied, apparently trying to be witty) that government is only in the marriage business to support families and, presumably, the bearing and raising of children. This is a red herring. While perhaps historically true, our concept and understanding of marriage has changed just as our society has. Neither is static, and to argue otherwise is a fallacy. Now, if you really think that’s the ONLY reason government should be involved in marriage, then fine… carry that to the logical conclusion and ban new marriages between infertile couples and elderly couples.

    Comment by CR — September 21, 2008 @ 12:43 pm - September 21, 2008

  16. CR: I was asked specifically about gay marriage. Not gay marriage OR civl unions

    I stand by what I said.

    Comment by Vince P — September 21, 2008 @ 1:17 pm - September 21, 2008

  17. [...] Not just that. She may belong to a church which promotes an ex-gay ministry, but Obama campaigned with an ex-gay minister. [...]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » On Sarah Palin’s Church & Obama’s — October 5, 2008 @ 5:28 pm - October 5, 2008

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.