As criminalization of homosexuality strikes me as an inherent violation of human rights, I was glad to see that the United States is at least trying to stop it:
President Obama issued a memorandum directing American agencies to look for ways to combat efforts by foreign governments to criminalize homosexuality.
As I have said before, I consider this sort of thing to be nothing less than savagery:
Apparently (as Taylor Marsh points out), some Republicans have a different view.
It is a great day for which we owe Pres. Obama a great deal, with this speech by Secy. Clinton a historic moment for her as well.
Of course, in an election season, nothing this grand could go without scurrilous words from the right. It’s fitting that it comes from Rick Perry.
“This administration’s war on traditional American values must stop. … Promoting special rights for gays in foreign countries is not in America’s interests and not worth a dime of taxpayers’ money. … This is just the most recent example of an administration at war with people of faith in this country. Investing tax dollars promoting a lifestyle many Americas of faith find so deeply objectionable is wrong. President Obama has again mistaken America’s tolerance for different lifestyles with an endorsement of those lifestyles. I will not make that mistake.”
Ah yes, human rights as “special rights,” the threats of torture and even death for gays not enough to convince Republicans like Rick Perry that this is a human rights issue.
Wow. When I criticized Perry for supporting the criminalization of homosexuality, I honestly had hoped he was just demagoguing the issue. It now appears that he really meant it.
Unbelievable.
Saying I told you so is a small comfort.
UPDATE: Out of fairness to Perry (who is a strong constitutional conservative), it should be pointed out that his staff was strongly divided over the wisdom of the anti-gay ad.
AND MORE: Stacy McCain has more, and notes that a Perry spokesman “blunted the potential impact of that ad by disclaiming any intention by the candidate to reinstate the policy prohibiting open homosexuality in the armed services.” Also, the anti-gay issue might be all that Perry has left:
Michael O’Brien of NBC News described the Perry ads as “part of an emergent strategy … a last-ditch effort to revive his campaign,” and quoted Sarah Huckabee Sanders saying “that’s probably the only path he has left, to be honest.” Sanders is the daughter of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who won the Iowa caucuses during his 2008 Republican presidential campaign.
My indignation over sodomy laws aside, I find this fascinating from a political standpoint. Regardless of how they might stand if forced to take a position one way or the other, the majority of voters could care less about the gay issue. Far from being the wedge issue that so many activists want it to be, it ranks at the very bottom of voters’ concerns.
So, while Perry’s ad might help him with a certain element in the party, he risks making himself look irrelevant. Or even ridiculous.
UPDATE (12/18/11): The conversation continues here.
Comments
20 responses to “The right to not be killed and imprisoned is a “special right””
So sick.
Pinellas hydroponic garden shop has attention of deputies searching for marijuana growers
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/article1204506.ece
But the surveillance of Simply Hydroponics, while legal, has riled the owners of the business as well as local defense attorneys who say citizens are being unfairly watched and investigated.
“It’s wrong, completely wrong, that a law enforcement agency will target what is, on its face, a legitimate business and target the customers of that business simply because they show up on camera going into a store where it’s legal to shop,” said attorney John Trevena of Largo, who is representing some of the defendants.
Done hyperventilating?
Good.
Now re-read exactly what Perry said – including that last line about tolerance.
Our Story So Far:
The NObama administration spends 3 years throwing Jews and Coptic Christians to the wolves, and bowing (literally!) to Muslims – you know, the folks actually stringing up those boys in your photo.
Then someone in the White House had a handslapping oh-sh*t moment and remembered an election is coming.
So they launched this hare-brained “statement” – which betrays:
– cynicism (as if gays didn’t notice that they were largely abandoned by this administration, or The Rest of Us haven’t noticed 3 years of kowtowing to the Jihadis)
– selective moral umbrage based on the Left’s A-list of Sacred Victim Groups – and its B-list of Bitter Clingers We Can Safely Diss.
– amateurish cluelessness about how diplomacy actually works.
– divisive internal politics – the typical PC tactic of delegitimizing those who disagree with you, which in this case is still a significant chunk of the US populace
The majority of Perry’s statements on “social issues” combine his own traditional beliefs with a clearly libertarian, let-the-states-decide political view.
Just like another politician whose name begins with “P” – who got hammered by the media despite her excellent live-and-let-live record with gays and other minorities in Alaska.
In other words – Perry is a grownup who respects the American social contract.
Can you set aside your prejudices and see that?
Rick Perry wants to re-criminalize sex between consenting same-sex adults. He thinks that Bible verses written by nomadic goat herders a few thousand years ago should be the law of this country.
You can put all the lipstick on this pig you want, but he’s a Bible thumping nitwit.
“Live and let live” my ass.
Ever the opportunist, Obama is probably grandstanding. That does not make what he said wrong.
I have my prejudices but I don’t think opposing sodomy laws constitutes prejudice. On the contrary, I think supporting sodomy laws is the worst sort of bigotry. Not only is Perry on record as supporting sodomy laws, but his latest statement — that opposing them constitutes “promoting a lifestyle” and that the abolition of criminal penalties is a “special right” — puts him squarely on the side of bigots around the world.
The right to not be imprisoned or killed is not a “special right,” nor does not imprisoning or killing people promote their lifestyle. European laws used to provide for imprisoning or killing gypsies:
http://history1900s.about.com/od/holocaust/a/gypsies.htm
Would it have been promoting the gypsy lifestyle or promoting “special rights” to leave them alone?
Or does the category of “special rights” only apply to gays?
Why ask me whether I am “done hyperventilating”? I’m actually a slow breather, and while I might be disgusted with Perry, I’m not losing any sleep over the man.
Why do Republicans insist on shooting themselves in the foot over things like this? Do they not understand how bad the optics are on this type of stuff?
Big FYI to Republicans and social conservatives. You can’t turn back the clock. And trying to turn back this particular clock makes you look mean, bigoted, uncaring, vindictive, small-minded, insular, etc.
Every general election is the same, Left partisans will vote Dem, Right partisans will vote Repub. You win the election by attracting the most moderate/independent voters. By and large these voters in the middle are socially liberal and this sort of stupid moves hurts you with these voters. It’s an unforced error.
If you want to see what needs to be done, check out Zombie at PJ Media. Now THERE’S a policy!
Thanks Charlene. Perfect. Here’s the link:
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/12/06/obamas-new-gay-rights-strategy-fail-check-out-my-new-gay-rights-strategy/?singlepage=true
Agreed. Here’s his strategy:
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/12/06/obamas-new-gay-rights-strategy-fail-check-out-my-new-gay-rights-strategy/?singlepage=true
***QUOTE***
Zombie’s No-Holds-Barred International Gay Rights Strategy
• Enforce a total embargo against any country that has a death penalty for homosexual activity, including most importantly Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as well as Yemen, Iran, Mauritania, and Somalia.
• In order to implement the embargo and make the United States energy-independent from these death-penalty countries, open up to drilling all American-controlled offshore oil fields in the Gulf of Mexico, and loosen any existing restrictions against oil production on U.S. territory.
• Enact punitive tariffs and other severe economic penalties against any US trading partners that continue to do business with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, or other countries where gays are executed.
• Withhold all – and I mean ALL – foreign aid from any countries where homosexuality is officially illegal and where gays are imprisoned or punished simply for being gay. Promise to restore aid only when homosexuality is legalized. The countries affected by this order include Pakistan, the Palestinian Territories (Gaza), Syria, Qatar, Malaysia, Oman, Lebanon, Kuwait, Bangladesh, Burma, Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe, Senegal, Ghana, among many others.
• Stop all immigration from any countries mentioned above until they relax their anti-gay laws, with the exception of gay asylum-seekers.
• Issue a clear timetable to all countries formerly receiving aid from the US: If you relax anti-gay laws and legalize homosexuality within two years, then aid will be restored. But if you maintain or increase existing anti-gay laws, then after two years the withdrawal of foreign aid will be escalated to full embargo status.
• All monies saved from the withholding of foreign aid will be allocated to the newly gay-friendly U.S. military, which will be instructed to develop contingency plans to invade and overthrow the government of any country which maintains harsh anti-gay legislation after three years’ time, starting with the death penalty states and continuing down the list from most severe to least severe.
• Encourage and fund the building of next-generation ultra-safe nuclear power plants in areas far from population centers and seismic faultlines to minimize any potential danger, to help replace energy sources lost due to economic sanctions.
• Remove any restrictions preventing the development of American natural gas fields and other fossil fuels.
• At the United Nations, veto, vote against or boycott all proposals by any countries who maintain anti-gay legislation, until such time that homosexuality is fully legalized.
***END QUOTE***
I completely agree with all of the above, although I think that opposing the criminalization of gay sex (especially the death penalty) is a start. Similarly, I am against all drug laws, but I think opposing the death penalty is a start. So is supporting softening any drug laws, such as marijuana. Tyranny cannot be defeated overnight, but I am glad to see the U.S. at least doing something in one of these areas. Obama is of course pandering, but I can’t condemn him for making at least some move — even if it is inadequate — in this area, any more than I would condemn him for endorsing medical marijuana while the prisons are filled with drug “criminals.” It’s a start.
As to Perry, the man believes in sodomy laws. He is to homosexuality as Gingrich is to drugs, and I agree with Randy:
Why do Republicans insist on shooting themselves in the foot over things like this?
I don’t know. I can barely stand to vote for them.
But I must, only because I hate the left more.
(Hardly a recipe for happiness, much less mental health….)
Here’s a “live and let live” line direct from the horse’s mouth in a new campaign add running in Iowa:
“I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m a Christian,” Perry says in a new ad. “But you don’t need to be in the pew every Sunday to know there’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military…
The full quote from Perry is this:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/07/perry-attacks-dont-ask-dont-tell-repeal-in-new-ad/
***QUOTE***
I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m a Christian, but you don’t need to be in the pew every Sunday to know there’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can’t openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school.
***END QUOTE***
I am for the freedom to pray, the freedom to be gay, and the freedom to celebrate Christmas.
Is Perry?
Eric:
I am for the freedom to pray, the freedom to be gay, and the freedom to celebrate Christmas.
Is Perry?
– – – – – – – – – – –
Wrong question.
It goes like this:
Q: Who is imposing their values on who?
A: The Left is imposing its values on The Rest of Us.
The Left uses pity-me let’s-just-tolerate-each-other rhetoric to play on American’s decency and get its foot in the door – then imposes its values with heavy-handed INtolerance.
This has happened with other issues – but we’ve already seen Our Liberal Betters penalize a private Christian business for declining to photograph a gay “wedding”, penalize parents for trying to opt-out of pro-gay indoctrination in public school, penalize college students who object to “sensitivity” indoctrination, and try to penalize the Boy Scouts for adhering to policies most parents agree with.
And those are just the cases in which obviously private rights have been trampled. There’s also been a shitload of coercion and demonization in school systems and the media.
So:
1) If the only reason you can give for imposing your opinion on the majority is “But I’m a Progressive and I Know I’m Right” – you are the problem.
2) If your only response to the majority that disagrees with you is to call them “hateful” or “racists” when neither really applies – you’re a demagogue, not a champion of rights or freedoms.
Perry is a politician as well as a Christian – he’s speaking out because he know that The Rest of Us are feeling increasingly put upon by Our Liberal Betters…. Keep tut-tutting about what’s obvious to you, but know this: the dysfuctional behaviors of the gay “community” – and the mechanism of PC umbrage used to promote its normalization – are increasingly obvious to The Rest of Us.
Ben David, the issues you raise in defense of Rick Perry, like liberal indoctrination in public schools, or heavy handed intervention into private organizations like the Boy Scouts should be condemned. That is not the argument.
The public school system in this country has been a vessel for one type of indoctrination or another since its inception. At one time it was used in an attempt to stamp out the Jewish religion. It was used as a way to separate us along racial lines. The sight-reading phase in the 1950’s and 60’s led to illiterates who couldn’t spell or read. My father enrolled me in parochial school for that reason alone. It is still a battle ground for Biblical teachings of Creationism vs. Darwinian Evolution. The nature of a public school system is the problem itself. Like Reagan once advocated, it should be phased out in favor of private, parent controlled schools. The voucher system is a start.
As to private organizations who in no way have government support either through tax dollars or special considerations like use of public facilities for free, they should have every right to dictate membership. And that includes banning gays, Muslims, Native Americans, blacks, Jews, or atheists. They should have every right to be as irrationally bigoted as they want. Hey, it’s a free country isn’t it? Or it was anyway.
But when you start advocating jailing adults for private consensual activity like what they consume or whom they love, then you are no longer an advocate of individual rights. You are just as much a control freak as those on the left who want to dictate your diet or indoctrinate your children. Actually worse, because they at least are using coercive persuasion, while you make us into criminals.
That is what is wrong with Rick Perry. He wants to enforce his religious beliefs through legislation. And half the country or more does NOT want those religious beliefs imposed on them.
Get it?
The imposition of liberal orthodoxy is a topic that any regular reader knows I have condemned in countless blog posts.
Here I condemn the criminalization of homosexuality, and Perry’s apparent support of it. The argument that getting rid of these criminal penalties constitutes the imposition of “liberal values” — is that supposed to be an argument in favor of criminal penalties, or is it just meant as gratuitous snark? I don’t know, but as I have said before, if preventing people from locking you up or killing you is an imposition on the bigots who want to do that, then fine. So is self defense.
If your only response to the majority that disagrees with you is to call them “hateful” or “racists” when neither really applies – you’re a demagogue, not a champion of rights or freedoms.
I don’t think I used the term hateful or racist, but I would argue that advocacy of imprisoning or killing people constitutes the most extreme form of violent intolerance — which is bigotry per se. If it is not bigotry, then is anything?
BTW, my argument is not limited to homosexuality, and I would argue that Barack Obama should similarly condemn the criminalization of consenting heterosexual acts like fornication or adultery. Stoning women to death and the advocacy thereof are also bigotry per se.
Every legal system expresses a shared moral code.
That’s not a bug, it’s a feature.
“Private” sexual behaviors eventually impact the larger society. The obvious example is the century-long Progressive attack on the traditional family – and the social/political changes it has wrought.
There is no reason why laws should not regulate sexual behavior to conform with mainstream moral values. For some reason, “progressives” never object when the law is used to shift the public moral compact Leftward… the tut-tutting about “individual liberty” only comes when The Rest of Us try to roll back the “progressive” agenda imposed upon us.
Focusing on homosexuality:
The “lifestyle” that is the norm in the gay “community” does not agree with widely held, COMPLETELY SECULAR (and not particularly Judeo-Christian) values:
– that healthy adult sexuality is linked to, and enriched by, shared intimacy and fidelity.
– that sexuality released from bonds of fidelity becomes exploitative, debasing, and hence corrosive to self and society.
Paradoxically, a clear-eyed look at how most gays actually live provides the best modern justification for centuries of legal/cultural rejection of these behaviors. There’s no need to thump any Bibles: The Rest of Us simply compare the glimpses of real gay life that slip through the media filter – the Pride Parades, the shifting parade of “life-long lovers” in our gay acquaintances’ lives, the enduring, exploitative, hookup culture – to the above-mentioned moral codes, and find homosexuality to be dysfunctional.
The gay rights movement has gotten as far as it has by sidestepping this judgement – by deliberately spreading falsehoods such as the “born that way” myth, by hiding the dysfunctional realities of “out-n-proud” gay life, and by playing manipulative games of PC victim politics – abetted by media and others pushing left-wing moral relativism on The Rest of Us.
But the Rest of Us are catching on to the shell game… and there is nothing “hateful” or “undemocratic” about passing laws that reflect widely held moral values.
BD, you are continuing to put things I never said into my mouth. While it is one thing for you to have a debate with what you see as the gay movement, please do not impute to me things I have not said. I objected here to the criminalization of homosexual conduct, and I did not mention “hatefulness” which I consider irrelevant. (For all I know, those who imprison or stone people may imagine that they are acting out of love.) Nor did I mention the “born that way” argument, which is as irrelevant to my point as is intimacy or monogamy. Again, you are having an argument with yourself.
As to what is democratic, I didn’t bring that up either. However, I would be willing to venture that a large majority of Americans do not want sodomy laws.
BD,
I guess if they decide to kill Jews because of their shared moral code you would be down with that.
After all what is more of a choice than the religion one adheres to?
I’ll put you down as a supporter of the Austrian Corporal. Because of the shared German moral code of the time.
Neither Eric nor Simon deny the dysfunctions I’ve described in the gay “community” – so I guess they admit they exist – and maybe even endorse them…. But for the sake of argument:
Eric:
I objected here to the criminalization of homosexual conduct, and I did not mention “hatefulness” which I consider irrelevant.
– – – – – – – – –
And I framed a justification for the longstanding criminalization of that conduct.
So what’s off topic?
And we both know that the hand-wringing about “hatefulness” is used in the PC bully-pulpit to shift public opinion.
Simon writes:
I guess if they decide to kill Jews because of their shared moral code you would be down with that.
– – – – – – – – – –
(OK – I win, since the first person to fall back on Nazi-name-calling obviously doesn’t have a real argument…)
We’re currently seeing fundamentalists and lefties exploiting Western freedoms to weaken the West – does that mean we should abandon Western ideas because they are corruptible? Or that laws should not reflect shared moral values?
You point to a valid weakness of all human systems of governance. The US Constitution provides some protection against that – but is still dependent on “reasonable man” standards at the end of the day….
… and Practically, the only people moving to delegitimize their opponents are the left-liberal PC crowd – as I listed above. So your attempt to play the “Nazi!” card is particularly ironic given the heavy hand of my-way-or-the-highway political correctness.
Instead of taking cheap shots – how about framing exactly how a non-judgemental legal alternative would work.
I have a real argument. Nazis had special badges for Jews and gays.
Just because you don’t like history doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
According to Nazi theory Jews AND gays are dysfunctional.
Actually the rule is: the first person to adopt the Nazi argument loses. That would be you. And you know Jew hatred and hatred of gays IS traditional and long preceded the Nazis. They are just the most recent historical example.
I guess that would make you a traditional values kind of guy.
[…] Chapman’s take on criminalization of gay sex is similar to mine. Like me, Chapman finds it amazing that the barbaric practices in certain countries actually have […]
[…] And no matter what he thinks, the logic is appalling. It’s like claiming that if Rick Perry supports sodomy laws, and he’s a Republican, therefore all Republicans support sodomy laws (including […]