One of the most telling aspect of the left-wing prejudice against conservatives and Republicans is how people who have never been to a meeting of a Republican committee, club or auxiliary or rarely associated with conservatives (if at all) will tell us just exactly what our party and our movement is all about. Matched up against their prejudices, our experiences count for nothing.
I can decide in order to have a story to tell that when I went to the Republican National Convention as a credentielled blogger, I’d come out as gay as often as possible in order to gage people’s reaction. It won’t matter that my sexual orientation barely elicited a raised eyebrow because, you see, well, Republicans hate gay people and would never allow a single one who openly professed his preference for his own sex within their midst, much less as a guest at their national convention. Heaven forfend! They’re just so bigotted, intolerant and all around not nice. And they have bad hair too!
For ten of the last fifteen years, I have been out a a gay man in Republican circles and yes, I have encountered some of my fellow partisans less than pleased with my orientation, with at least one, scratch that, with just one wondering if I were aware of Exodus Ministries (or some similar outfit). Another woman once cut short a conversation upon learning I was a homosexual (she couldn’t bring herself to speak the word, “gay”), but was remarkably polite in doing so. Contrast that with the rudeness of the gays who learned I was Republican.
On the whole, I have found my partisan peers remarkably welcoming, even those who have religious objections to expressions of homosexuality. Yet, our experiences notwithstanding, our liberal friends know better just how our party should treat us. Responding to my post on the Golden Age for gays while Bush was in the White House, a reader guaranteed me
that if you went to a TRUE conservative (read: Christian Right Republican) meeting and self-identified as a Gay Conservative Republican, they would ride your ass out of the building on a rail faster than you could say “Log Cabin Republican.”
Well, I just returned from such a meeting where I was one of the two featured speakers. They let me speak. They didn’t even interrupt me. After they talk, they peppered me with questions. Guess they had to because the person designated to bring the rail either forgot to bring it or didn’t show up.
Perhaps by our reader’s definition, this wasn’t a TRUE conservative meeting so maybe the designated rail-bringer can be forgiven for not keeping with party custom. These rail-bringers do have a bad habit of skipping town whenever I decide to attend a Republican or conservative gathering. And some of those gatherings have even included prominent evangelicals. There have even been Mormons (yes, Mormons!) in attendance at some.
It’s not just me. I’ve talked to other gay Republican friends who’ve had the same experience. Readers have e-mailed us to report somethingsimilar. When they go to GOP meetings and happen to mention their sexual orientation, the rail-bringer is nowhere to be found. No rail. These gay Republicans remained in the building.
But, those are just our experiences. Our liberal readers know that at most such gatherings, the rails are standing at the ready. And people like us ridden out before they can say Jack Robinson.
It was wonderful to hear you speak! No one batted an eye about your sexual orientation, least of all our Christian Evangelical chairman. You made a fine case for why those who want freedom — gay or straight — should be Republicans.
This relates to my wholesale/retail theory of gays in American politics;
Democrats conversely have loud support for “gays” and the whole GLBT-alphabet when it comes to public policy. But they can also be the most intolerant to the individual, rude, and freak-out about gay Republicans or gay teachers at THEIR kid’s school. And if really-pressed often don’t actually have any gay friends other than their one token “gay friend”…just to demonstrate they’re open-minded. (wholesale support}
While many conservative Republicans have their reservations about gays in-general, they also are polite and even accepting towards gays individually, have gay friends and/or family members. It’s gays in the abstract they express having their problems with. (retail support)
Well, I am straight and I am Catholic. I am not a Republican 🙂 but I lean towards the Liberal Party in Australia.
Whilst I do not have any gay friends I have worked with homosexuals and found only one to be really obnoxious. It is not the orientation that matters here, it is the how the person behaves in general.
Your left wing homosexuals tend to be the ones who are very “in yer face” and I do detest that type. However, someone who does not flaunt it is fine by me, since there are other important things in life, including having a good laugh at the dopey people who believe Al Gore.
well, as the keeper of the rail in this part of the Valley, being the designated token conservative in this little bit of it, i would have been happy to bring one to tonight’s meeting, but Gabe Malor (AoSHQ) didn’t mention it in time for me to meet the woman i live in sin with over in Westweird so we could attend the meeting with y’all.
of course, one rail is utterly useless, since you need at least two, plus posts, in order to make a fence section to lean on, with drinks , in order to discuss the weighty problems of the world and philosophy in an intelligent and relaxed manner…. i’d guess your other reader was channeling their inner fantasies, but i really don’t wanna know. (ignorance *is* bliss sometimes. %-)
gay, shmay, who gives a damn? as long as you’re not trying to spend my money, take my property, infringe on my liberties, and generally conduct yourself in public in a civil manner like other productive members of society, why should i care what you do with other consenting adults?
if you don’t/won’t act within those guidelines, your orientation is the least of the reasons why you and i are going to have issues.
of course, i’m just a beer drinking, barbecue cooking, good old boy native of Los Angeles, so what could i possibly know? i stick with PJ on the issue of telling people what they can and can’t do: “America wasn’t founded so that we could all be better. America was founded so we could all be anything we damned well pleased.”
regards, like totally!
red
Speaking of which, I saw a thread over at ThinkPropaganda supposedly about Liberty Law dropping their support of CPAC because of GOProud. In the same thread where many posters pissed & moaned about how bigoted Republicans are, they were trashing another commenter over and over repeatedly calling him “sissy” and “pansy”.
I have no reason to believe GLAAD wouldn’t defend it.
Now now Dan, you know that Republicans spit bile behind your back and when they think they’re off the record.
Y’know, like those great republican stalwarts Harry Reid, Bill Clinton, Howard Dean, Roberty Byrd, etc. etc.
Ahh, Dan,
I don’t know if you realize this or not, but Los Angeles is not exactly representative of America in general. It is a very liberal town, with the liberal tide lifting all ideological boats.
It is hardly a surprise to anyone that big-city Republicans are rather socially liberal – it has always been that way. It is a function of living in a big city, where you are forced to deal with a wide diversity of people whether you like it or not, and a premium is placed on attitudes that facilitate non-contentious interactions.
@Tano: I have no doubt that you sincerly believe the worst about your fellow Americans, but Dan’s experience is simply the truth.
Now, I’ve been out since ’84, a conservative since ’88. Lived in New York City, my current quiet town of 1,100 souls and a dozen other places in eight states obver the years.
Been called “queer” six times that I recall and every one was from a straight leftist in a large liberal enclave. “Forced to deal with a wide diversity of people?” Wouldn’t it be nice if that were true?
Best wishes,
-MFS
Glenn Beck is going to be featured speaker at CPAC. I’ve often felt he would be open to gay rights if he saw gays who, like him, believe in God, value American and its traditions, and want lifelong, monogamous relationships. I hope he gets the chance to meet some at this year’s convention.
Whew!
There, fixed it for you.
Tano, “you lie” or “you stupid” to post such an inanity.
Ah, and Tano can’t even make a straight (pun intended) accusation that those of us in ‘flyover’ territory are all secretly wanting to push walls on gay people. He’s so cowardly he has to insinuate it.
He thinks we should be more like the liberal tolerant Reid, Clinton, Byrd, Sharpton, Jackson, et. al.
MWS,
Where did I deny Dan’s experience? I have no reason to doubt that he was received well by Republicans in the middle of one of Americ’s largest cities. That was my whole point.
Are you trying to deny the fact that social liberalism is found to a far greater extent in larger cities, and social conservatism in small towns?
Huh?
I live in New York City for four months a year. There is a wide diversity of people, but I am not “forced” to deal with anybody I do not care to deal with. I have the common sense to be able to interact, non-contentiously, with people in New York City, at Liberty University, at Harvard, in West Virginia, on Fiji, in Tibet and Peoria.
This whole quote makes me feel like the author believes you need to be carefully trained and groomed to live among people who have opinions and experiences different from your own.
Good golly, how did the people landing at Ellis Island ever survive in New York City if this is the case?
When you get so wrapped up in being a statist and bowing to political correctness, I can see how you can create a world that must be micromanaged in order to achieve your predetermined outcomes. Social engineering is hardly sissy work, I suppose.
@Tano 12: I guess I was not clear; my apologies.
YES – smaller towns are more conservative than big cities. (That’s why I live in a charming little seaside hamlet BTW)
NO – That does not mean more tolerance in the cities. It’s simply not true. As I said originally, the most fierce and -yes – homophobic resistance I’ve encountered has always been from straight Democrats who felt confident enough to be rude to my face.
Anyone who followed the savage treatment of Sarah Palin, Ward Connerly, Michele Malkin – to say nothing of Clarence Thomas – will know exactly what I’m talking about.
Best wishes,
-MFS
MWS,
Wow. I learn something new everyday. I had no idea that Palin, Connerly, Malkin and Thomas were gay.
Or are you just referring to tolerance in general? You have an interesting hypothesis there. It seems to fly in the face of the experience of millions of people – many of whom fled to big cities precisely to escape the oppression of small town conservatism.
Are people in big cities resistant to, and downright hostile to conservative political figures who try to bring their oppression to the cities?
Yes. But that is a very different thing. You seem to be saying something analogous to a claim that being against racism (for example) is just another example of intolerance.
“I live in New York City for four months a year. There is a wide diversity of people, but I am not “forced” to deal with anybody I do not care to deal with”
Of course you are. Just walking down the street you encounter, and perhaps interact with people whether you like it or not. I was born and raised in NYC and lived there 30 years. Thats what life in a big city is all about. If you manage to live there for a period of time without dealing with anyone except who you choose to deal with, it must be a pretty strange life you are leading there.
“I have the common sense to be able to interact, non-contentiously, with people in New York City,”
Well good for you. Thats all it really takes. Not everyone does have such common sense. Although some who don’t, manage to learn it. Many people who are used to living in homogeneous societies have a real problem with people who seem not to be operating on the same page as what they are used to.
“This whole quote makes me feel like the author believes you need to be carefully trained and groomed to live among people…”
Well there is no accounting for your feelings. I had no intention of making any such point, and I dont really know where you got that from.
Now here is a brand new sociological premise on the growth of the cities.
Oh, I know. Small town liberals flee to the cities where they find each other, thrive and create great art, industries, social movements and philosophies. They become prosperous, generous and direct their efforts to breaking down the inhibiting taboos, bigotry and suffocating societies of the small towns.
In fact, small town oppressive conservatism is a new sociological premise, as well. How does that work? There is a town hall meeting and someone is identified as not conservative enough and then he harassed out of town by the knuckle dragging conservatives?
Oh, I know. The small town relegates the blacks to a subservient class and the blacks leave, causing the small town whites to mow their own yards and iron their own shirts. Then they harass the gays and then they go to church and get extra points for hating a sinner. Then they go after the mayor’s daughter for her pink hair and tatoos and even the mayor grabs his gun and chases her to the city.
Tano, Just because I am walking down the street and I encounter people I do not care to interact with has nothing whatsoever to do with cities and whether I am liberal or conservative. You have a non-point.
My studies in New York City are with the people of the city. I encounter thousands and thousands of strangers while I am there. We interact and move on. I do not engage whackos or addicts. They can not be interviewed, because they are not in control of their lives.
I have interviewed a whole host of people who would not talk openly with me if they knew or thought I am a Christian or a conservative. I do not have to be dishonest or even particularly clever to conduct an extensive, thorough and unbiased interview.
Sure there are people who do not want to be interviewed. I consider it a right of privacy and I wish them well and move on.
Now, if I am going from point A to point B and I am involved with someone who is rude, crude, or aggressive, I do what anyone does. I disentangle myself and move on. That goes for anywhere in the world I may be, including my quiet neighborhood where the dog poop lady screams at every dog walker.
Oh look, Tano goes all non-sequetor. “Wow. I learn something new everyday. I had no idea that Palin, Connerly, Malkin and Thomas were gay.”
I guess that means Tano finds the hatred and contempt directed at these people in his ‘enlightened cities’ as acceptable.
Actually, Tano’s blabbering is nothing more than the official contempt that the Obama Party and Barack Obama have for people who don’t live in big cities, saying that they all are “bitter” and that they “cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations”.
And this one was my favorite:
Are people in big cities resistant to, and downright hostile to conservative political figures who try to bring their oppression to the cities?
Yes. But that is a very different thing. You seem to be saying something analogous to a claim that being against racism (for example) is just another example of intolerance.
Of course, when Tano accuses conservatives of anything, we should remember that he simply lies.
As for Jesus and the dinosaurs, she does believe that – or something equivalent. Its in her book.
This was days before Palin’s book was even published. But that didn’t stop Tano from telling a lie and attempting to smear Sarah Palin.
So puppet Tano’s “logic” here is that he can attack conservatives based on lies he tells about them, and that intolerance and hate against them is justified by the lies that he tells.
You notice the hypocrisy and the hilarity? The bigot Tano smears and tells lies about people who are not the same as he is. Tano isn’t capable of functioning in a non-homogenous society; he is terrified, frightened, and bitter towards people who have different political attitudes than he does, and he needs to tell lies about them and attack them in order to to cope with his infantile fears and emotions.
Kindly post the relevant passage, then. (Her words. In adequate context.)
Dan,
AMEN!!! I’m in a stretch-mark of the Bible belt – and I fully concur with your article. It’s much easier for me to come out as gay in the work environment than to come out as conservative in either the gay chorus or the gay church!
AMEN!!
I was at a SFV Republican Club meeting a couple of years ago when a conservative gay entertainment lawyer was running for congress. Most people didn’t behave any differently towards, but there were a few who were off the bat dismissive of him. But I balance that experience with the knowledge that the Left will rip you apart as soon as you have ideological differences, and then they’ll let you know you are just an ignorant, racist faggot, Jew, or other filthy invective. The intolerance of the Left is overwhelming.
Dan, you haven’t commented on what I find the most interesting part of Larry G’s little comment, the equation
True Conservative = Christian Right
(He also threw Republican into the mix, but I don’t see the relevance of party affiliation here.)
Does anyone care to comment?
Now we know where Tano gets his talking points…. MATT DA-MON!
Sure, I’ll comment.
And to round things out:
Actually, this could be a fun drinking game. You start with the Conservative model we were presented and go from there.