|
|
|
October 18, 2006
Which party persecutes more homosexuals?
Let's see if I can get this right. Back in the 1950s Red Scare era, homosexuals working in government or in visible positions in public life were persecuted if found out, and exposed to extreme humiliation and ridicule. There was such a thing as sexual McCarthyism then. But times changed, right? And while it seemed for a while that sexual McCarthyism had pretty much died out, it now seems to be alive and well -- but only in the supposedly tolerant Democratic Party. In what will go down as one of history's great ironies, in enlightened, modern America, there are still people engaged in exposing and persecuting homosexuals working in the government or in important positions, and they are activists in the Democratic Party. (Michael Rogers and John Aravosis are two notorious, longtime practitioners, and the latter was recently invited to lunch with Bill Clinton.) The difference is that the Democrats doing the persecution today can't fire gay Republicans directly; instead they are tracking them down and exposing them in the hope that the Republicans will be bigoted enough to fire them. Unfortunately, this has failed. Even Rick Santorum, supposedly the worst gay basher of the lot, refused to fire his gay aide after the man was outed. What this has created is a huge (if ironic) double standard between the parties. Gay Democrats have a right to their privacy, but gay Republicans are hounded and live in fear of the new (Democratic) sexual McCarthyism. The reason they are made to live in fear while their Democrat counterparts are not is because gay Republicans are said to be self hating hypocrites. According to this argument, because the Republican Party does not support same sex marriage, any gay Republican is by definition betraying himself -- even if he disagrees with the Republican Party on that issue. For that, it is fair to invade his privacy and make his identity and sexuality known to the world, in the hope that he'll be fired by bigoted Republicans. Yet the outed Republicans are not being fired. Their only persecutors are on the left. And they're redoubling their efforts in order to combat more "hypocrisy." Glenn Reynolds, Jonah Goldberg, Ann Althouse, Patterico, and Captain Ed are asking whether this might yet tilt the election in favor of the Republicans. I agree that it might. I think that most American voters (even the 70% who oppose gay marriage) take a dim view of persecuting homosexuals by invading their privacy. Homosexual witch hunts should have died with McCarthy, and the reasoning behind reviving them in the current political context is so convoluted that it would make sense only to a bigot. I'm not saying that the Republican Party is free of bigotry, because it isn't. But if the activists keep this stuff up and ordinary voters find out about it (I'm not sure whether they have) pretty soon someone's going to ask which party has more bigots. UPDATE: My thanks to Glenn Reynolds for linking this post (and my earlier post). Welcome everyone! Glenn also links Dean Barnett, whose observations about "outing" ought to be taken to heart by the Democratic Party: ...I wonder if any of these people would have the guts to look their target in the eye and express their passion for ruining their target's life. I'd wager not. Theirs is a sickening and pathetic kind of cowardice.I don't know the extent to which Democratic Party officials support these tactics, but I somehow doubt that the purpose of Bill Clinton's lunch with Aravosis was to deliver a sound scolding.... MORE: Satire meets reality! Iowahawk reprints a secret letter from Howard Dean to Glenn Reynolds' clique of Republican homo-haters who demonize gays to promote Cultural Tribalism: That's why we would like to take this opportunity to start a dialog with you, the conservative "values voter," by addressing an issue of vital importance to all of us -- the growing Republican homo menace.(Via the Gay Demonizing Tribal Chieftain himself) Read the whole thing; it's sheer genius. (And it's about time the Howard Dean nutroots started listening to those who know how to help their less literate kinfolks recognize the dire homo threat.....) UPDATE (10/20/06): My thanks to Bruce at Gay Patriot for linking and quoting this post! Bruce offers an additional conclusion: I am very proud of the excellent work by the conservative blogosphere by standing up for gay Americans while our own gay community turns on itself in a feeding frenzy. I'd like to think our voices have had some impact in how conservative bloggers view gay issues and how their perceptions may have changed over the past two years.Despite the many ironies, principles remain principles, and the blogosphere has done much break up the monolithic thinking so characteristic of identity politics. posted by Eric on 10.18.06 at 10:38 PM
Comments
It is sad that leftists are outing the gays among the Republicans. That is wrong and will come back to bite them. But guess what? The religious extremists that the Republicans have catered to and nurtured want those outed gays expelled from the party and positions of power! Surpised? The chickens have come home to roost, and the Republicans have only themselves to blame. Trying to distract the country by appealling to the prejudices of the "family values" crowd can only work for a while. Seeing sons and daughters being flown off to a war with no end strikes to the heart of much deeper family values. That sacrifice is being ignored. It is going to be a "comma" in history. So please, don't act all surprised. You've encouraged the fear and loathing. Now those same phobias are being used against you. You've taught the extreme left well. Too bad there are no real accomplishments for the Republicans to fall back on. Enjoy the election. Eric D. · October 19, 2006 08:53 AM Guess what. I don't hate gays, yet I oppose gay marriage. Sorry to burst your moral bubble. T · October 19, 2006 09:59 AM I forget ... which party had a KKK Kleagel as a long-serving member? Musta been the Baath party. mdmhvonpa · October 19, 2006 10:16 AM "Homosexual witch hunts should have died with McCarthy" Huh? Is this claiming that McCarthy persecuted homosexuals? I don't think it was McCarthy who hounded the hell out of Roy Cohn... and it wasn't the Right that smeared J Edgar Hoover as a tranvestite without any evidence... Fact is, it's been the Left that has been outing and mocking homosexuals since, well, always. I am not able to think of a single instance where the Right treated a homosexual with the same ferocity that the Left treated Roy Cohn, J Edgar Hoover or Foley. Qwinn Qwinn · October 19, 2006 10:50 AM Eric D, In Louisiana the marriage amendment passed by over 70%. There aren't that many Republicans in Louisiana. It passed by closer margins in New Orleans, but it still passed. Are you suggesting that the most decadent city in America is against sex? The gay marriage issue is one where the activists misjudged the temperature of the water. Over 70% of the country is against the idea and that INCLUDES democrats. What the activists did was a HUGE mistake. They not only missed the brass ring they were reaching for, they set back partnership agreements 50 years. The fact is there ARE activists with an agenda. That does not mean that there aren't other activists with an honest agenda, but people have reason to be suspicious. People said "no" and the people who said that were the vast majority of the country. So don't blame all of that on the "religious right." The activists who attempted to circumvent our system by using activist judges bear the brunt of the blame. Are you suggesting that "Heather Has Two Mommies" or GLSEN don't exist? It doesn't have to be representative to scare people or validate the legitmacy of teaching a form of decadence, straight or gay. Did GLSEN not know that one of the contributing authors to "Two Teenagers in 20: Writings by Gay and Lesbian Youth" was affiliated with NAMBLA (Bill Andriette)? If not, then they SHOULD have. It's either blindlingly stupid or deceptive. WHICH? Are plays like "Vagina Monologues" in which a woman talks about seducing a teenager acceptable to the American public? NO! An adult seducing a teenager is wrong, regardless if it is practiced by straights or gays. So the gay marriage argument against the "religious right" is specious. You can support the civil rights of all and be against social reeingeering. Mrs. du Toit · October 19, 2006 12:09 PM Well, I'd love to think that homosexuals aren't persecuted in America, but the fact is, they are, at least somewhat. When was the last time you heard of an openly gay movie star? Now, when was the last time you heard of an openly Jewish or other non-Christian movie star? Also, when was the last time you heard of a creepy, short guy with a crazy ass pseudo religion who wanted to eat his wife's placenta and made fun of Brook Shields for being depressed after her baby was born? My point is, you can be a crazy Scientologist all you want (well, not ALL you want, he probably went too far based on his box office numbers), but Tom Cruise will sue your ass in a heart beat if you say he's gay. Jon Thompson · October 19, 2006 03:44 PM Ok. So. Some Democrats are bigots too. Gays are stuck between a rock and a hard place. pietro · October 19, 2006 04:20 PM And Squealer was seen descending the ladder with white paint smearing his jowls and when Boxer looked at the new 7 Commandments, he couldn't remember exactly, but they sure did look different. 1) Sexual harassment by powerful officials is bad,... except if the victim is "trailer trash", then they asked for it. 2) Intentionally misleading the public is no different than an outright lie, it is always to be condemned, ....except when Napoleon needs to do it, long live Napoleon. 3) Intentionally targeting gays for "outing" for crass political purposes is evil, mean-spirited, bigoted and dirty politics, ....unless they DESERVE to be targeted because they work for the Snowball. 4) The press has a moral obligation and are guardians of a sacred public trust to expose hypocrisy, unfairness, deceit, and biased propaganda....unless they are called upon by Napoleon to prostitute themselves and engage in it. 5)Freedom of speech, congregation, religion are sacred foundations of our very constitution...except when animalists are called upon to shout down, denigrate, smear and libel Christians, Jews, Americans and Israelis. 6)War is always evil, we shall never approve picking up a weapon in anger...except when the enemies of America and Israel do it...then it was "deserved". 7)Animalists can call for the destruction of the country and it is not treason, and they are not traitors, how dare anyone say that dissent is traitorous or treasonous...and anyone who dares to dispute any issue that the party takes a position on.... deserves to be treated as a traitor and outed, ousted and destroyed. Squealer then was looked upon with approval by Napoleon, the dogs all growled menacingly at the the assembled...who all fell in line quietly and sang MoveOn Lemmings March to the Sea. cf bleachers · October 19, 2006 04:51 PM "When was the last time you heard of an openly gay movie star?" Um... Sir Ian McKellen? Anne Heche? Not big enough? B. Durbin · October 19, 2006 10:28 PM It was actually gay persecution that brought down Joe McCarthy. Look at the film or trnascrips of Army vs. McCarthy hearings. The whole thing turned around when Roy Cohn was called a "fairy". Mark in Texas · October 19, 2006 11:20 PM Jon Just off the top of my head Open gay movie stars: Rupert Everett, Harvey Fierstein, Rosie O'Donnell, Ellen DeGeneres Jewish: Ben Stiller, Adam Sandler, Woody Allen, Gene Wilder, Mel Brooks, the Marx Brothers And remember that Tom's nuttiness has affected his bottom line. Darleen · October 19, 2006 11:57 PM and, btw, if reparations are on the table Darleen · October 20, 2006 12:00 AM Aside from the general vileness of demanding that people adopt a certain belief system, assign certain priorities to those beliefs (with same sex marriage at the top, of course), and vote a certain way just because of their sexual orientation, what gets me about these leftists is that they're saying that gays are obligated to act in their own self interest. I mean... what? This from a group of people in love with wealth redistribution? Is this seriously something they want to encourage? (Okay, I already know the answer: only when it's convenient for them.) And shouldn't wealthy gays get a pass when they vote Republican, then? Stephanie · October 20, 2006 10:17 AM Eric D. said: -------- I knew full well when I enlisted that I may have to fight a war. It's *you*, not Bush or the Republican party, who is belittling our sacrifice, by ignoring the reasons for it and most of all by using it as nothing more than a political weapon. If *I* die fighting for my country, I sure as hell don't want my death used as a stick to beat my own Commander-in-Chief with. Quit pretending to give a damn about the troops. We despise you. ProudPrivate · October 20, 2006 11:27 PM Thanks for visiting, ProudPrivate. I think that what would really ignore the sacrifice of the troops would be any "Exit Strategy" short of solid victory. Eric Scheie · October 20, 2006 11:53 PM Poor Sir Ian McKellen, if only our country wasn't so horrifically intolerant of gays, maybe all those christian protests of the Lord of the Rings movies and the X-Men movies wouldn't have happened. Maybe production wouldn't have had to have been cancelled on Two Towers, Return of the King, X-men 2 and X-Men 3. I bet X-Men 3 would have been a good movie... if only the evil devilmonster homophobes in America could handle a gay actor playing Magneto or Gandalf. Why are we so hateful? Etain Peregrine · October 22, 2006 12:45 AM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• The right to be irrational?
• I'm cool with the passion fashion • Climate change meltdown at the polls? • If you're wrong, then so is God? • Have a nice day, asshole! • Scarlet "R"? • Consuming power while empowering consumption • Shrinking is growth! • My dirty thoughts • art not codes?
Links
Site Credits
|
|
I keep looking out the window to see if the pigs have flown by yet.
But, actually, I'm not at all surprised by the Democrats behavior. That's the purpose of identity politics. This is the end result.
But why gay activists think that Republicans are anti-gay because of the gay marriage issue never ceases to confuse me. I suppose if someone is against reparations or affirmative action for blacks or if a black person works for a republican who opposes those things, that makes them a sell out.
And it does. Look at the crap LaShawn Barber has to put up with.
It will never end. Until we stop looking at someone's race, sex, or sexual preference as entitling them to anything extra or special, this will continue to happen. Entitlements are the opposite side of the segregation coin.
Communists and socialists have been treating homosexuals as criminals since their formation. Yeah, the USSR eventually decriminalized homosexuality. They reclassified it as a incurable disease and put people in asylums instead. In China the punishment for homosexual acts is death.
How gays and lesbians in America ever got the idea that the socialists were their friends ASTOUNDS me.