GoProud, only gay organization willing to advocate for the global gay community

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 11:42 PM GMT
    "GOProud is the Only National Gay Group Willing to Stand Up for Basic Human Rights for Gay People across the Globe
    For Immediate Release
    April 4, 2011


    Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director – “It is a sad day for gay people across the globe, when so many national gay groups would literally sacrifice their lives at the altar of political correctness”

    (Washington, D.C.) – Today, GOProud, the only national group representing gay conservatives and their allies, released an open letter on action in Libya and on the need to stand up for the basic human rights of gay people across the globe. GOProud circulated the sign on letter to other national gay groups, and all declined to sign it. “It is a sad for gay people across the globe when so many national gay groups would literally sacrifice their lives at the altar of political correctness,” said Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director. “It may be an inconvenient truth for the left, but it is still the truth – the spread of radical Islam, and the proliferation of brutal dictatorial regimes that support jihadist terrorism, represent the greatest threat to the safety of gay people worldwide.”

    The leadership of the gay left in this country is more concerned with demonizing Christians in this country for not supporting gay marriage than they are in standing up to the spread of radicalized Islam that literally kills people for simply being gay or lesbian,” continued LaSalvia.

    “Moammar Qaddafi is an international menace with a long track record of supporting Islamic terrorist organizations. He has brutalized his own people and denied them basic civil rights and civil liberties. The Libyan people, and indeed the world, will be better without Qaddafi, and no one should be shy about saying that,” concluded LaSalvia.

    BELOW IS THE TEXT OF THE LETTER


    The greatest global threat to the basic human rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered persons is the spread of radical Islam and the proliferation of repressive dictatorial regimes.

    Radical jihadist Islam is a barbaric ideology that fails to recognize the basic human rights of women, gays and religious minorities. Its spread represents an existential threat to Western civilization – and to LGBT people in particular – and we must be willing to confront it across the globe.

    Additionally, repressive dictatorial regimes, regardless of their religious ideology, represent some of the worst offenders of basic human rights for LGBT people.

    Respect for basic human rights shouldn’t be determined by geography and freedom shouldn’t know borders.

    Today, the United States has an opportunity today to strike a blow in defense of the basic human rights of LGBT people – and indeed all people – by removing Libyan dictator Moammar Qaddafi.

    Moammar Qaddafi is an international menace and a dictator who has violently brutalized his own people. Not only do we have a moral obligation to act, it is in the strategic best interest of the United States to see the Qaddafi regime replaced by a democratic one that will respect basic civil liberties and the rule of law. We believe strongly that a failure to act could result in an increased threat of terrorism against Americans world-wide.

    We believe that President Obama should go even further and recognize the rebel leadership as the legitimate government in Libya and, if need be, should authorize the use of surgical air strikes to remove the Qaddafi regime.

    Defending America’s national security interests, however, cannot and should not be outsourced – not to the UN or NATO or the Arab League. The Constitution empowers one person – the President – to serve as Commander-in-Chief. President Obama should not try to pass this responsibility on to anyone else.

    We urge President Obama to act decisively and without delay to protect America’s interests and defend basic human rights by removing Qaddafi.

    Sincerely,
    Jimmy LaSalvia
    Executive Director, GOProud

    Christopher R Barron
    Chairman of the Board, GOProud"

    http://www.goproud.org/goproud-is-the-only-national-gay-group-willing-to-stand-up-for-basic-human-rights-for-gay-people-across-the-globe/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 2:23 AM GMT
    Its no wonder that these guys are ignored by the GOP..
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 1:00 PM GMT
    TropicalMark saidIts no wonder that these guys are ignored by the GOP..


    But isn't it sad that all other gay organizations are unwilling to advocate for the global gay community and are more interested in demonizing christians?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 6:56 PM GMT
    This is really an extremely confusing statement. I think we can all agree that the fundamentalist aspects of Islam are deeply homophobic and that it's in the interest of gay people in those countries where Islam has significant numbers that the *fundamentalist* Islamists do not have power.

    What I don't understand is how supporting the rebel movement in Libya makes any sense at all from an LGBT perspective. Qaddafi has brutally opposed Islamic fundamentalism in Libya. To be sure, homosexuality is illegal in Libya with a 5 year jail sentence, but the rebels have made no indication that they intend to change this or that LGBT issues even remotely enter into their radar. It is entirely plausible (even likely) that they are just as homophobic as Qaddafi!

    I'm supportive of the rebels insofar as they are committed to a pluralistic multi-party democracy versus the authoritarian regime that exists at present. What I take issue with is an LGBT organization taking a stance on an issue that really has absolutely no connection with LGBT issues. GoProud can be rightly proud of their efforts on DADT, and organizations like the HRC should give long pause for thought about the effectiveness of their efforts...

    ... but this really statement really is bizarre!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 7:06 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidThis is really an extremely confusing statement. I think we can all agree that the fundamentalist aspects of Islam are deeply homophobic and that it's in the interest of gay people in those countries where Islam has significant numbers that the *fundamentalist* Islamists do not have power.

    What I don't understand is how supporting the rebel movement in Libya makes any sense at all from an LGBT perspective. Qaddafi has brutally opposed Islamic fundamentalism in Libya. To be sure, homosexuality is illegal in Libya with a 5 year jail sentence, but the rebels have made no indication that they intend to change this or that LGBT issues even remotely enter into their radar. It is entirely plausible (even likely) that they are just as homophobic as Qaddafi!

    I'm supportive of the rebels insofar as they are committed to a pluralistic multi-party democracy versus the authoritarian regime that exists at present. What I take issue with is an LGBT organization taking a stance on an issue that really has absolutely no connection with LGBT issues. GoProud can be rightly proud of their efforts on DADT, and organizations like the HRC should give long pause for thought about the effectiveness of their efforts...

    ... but this really statement really is bizarre!


    But even regardless of Lybia, western gay advocacy organizations seem more interested in demonizing Christianity and Christians than making their opposition known towards more egregious threats in this world spawning from radical Islam. It makes no sense at all, really.

    I just got back from vacationing in London and Paris and it was confirmed by a few gay locals in some pubs that visible homophobia seems to be on the rise and becoming, at least to some extent, more widespread in proportion to the influx of various Islamic and other groups (including Somalis) -- some of these sentiments coming from individuals who were immigrants themselves (Keeping in mind that British people rarely open up about these things).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 7:35 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    TropicalMark saidIts no wonder that these guys are ignored by the GOP..


    But isn't it sad that all other gay organizations are unwilling to advocate for the global gay community and are more interested in demonizing christians?




    TOTAL BS.

    Describing the reason for the gay organizations refusal to collude with GOProud as "demonizing Christians" is a total load of crap.
    Those are the words of GOProud ONLY.
    Those words are a complete fantasy and a deliberate distortion of reality.
    And they're BS.

    The other gay groups in NO WAY stated anything anti-Christian.
    That's a LIE.

    GOProud - AS USUAL - is functioning NOT as a gay advocacy group.
    THEY'RE ACTING AS A PRO-REPUBLICAN GROUP.
    They're trying to spread dissent among the gay community and are trying to get gays to vote Republican - and against their own interests.

    GOProud is not on our side.
    They're working to help Republicans win elections.
    They're NOT working for us.
    And this attempt at dividing the gay community is yet another example of that.

    This is yet another example of the fact that the Repubs will say and do anything to try to help the Republican party score political points and win elections.

    The Republican party and GOProud cannot be trusted to tell the truth or to do the right thing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 7:36 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidBut even regardless of Lybia, western gay advocacy organizations seem more interested in demonizing Christianity and Christians than making their opposition known towards more egregious threats in this world spawning from radical Islam. It makes no sense at all, really.

    I just got back from vacationing in London and Paris and it was confirmed by a few gay locals in some pubs that visible homophobia seems to be on the rise and becoming, at least to some extent, more widespread in proportion to the influx of various Islamic and other groups (including Somalis) -- some of these sentiments coming from individuals who were immigrants themselves (Keeping in mind that British people rarely open up about these things).


    Your conclusions are not justified by your selection of anecdotal evidence. Let us not forget that it was American Christian Evangelicals who precipitated the hatred in Uganda.

    I think it is certainly true that LGBT organizations rarely comment on events outside of the borders of the country in which they are founded. Perhaps the most important exception to this is the British activist Peter Tatchell and OutRage! who has campaigned for LGBT freedom in many countries.

    It's important that campaigns for LGBT freedom in foreign countries take into account the local situation. It's absolutely appalling that some western countries criticize others for denying basic rights to their LGBT citizens when they do not extend full rights to their own LGBT citizens [America and the UK are two examples]. Talk about hypocrisy! As we all know, the particular situation in any country really can only be changed by locals, so efforts from foreigners should focus on empowering them and campaigning for their safety. It is very important to bear in mind that outspoken criticism from foreigners *can* in some circumstances make the situation *worse* for LGBT people in some countries.

    I am astonished at the claim that homophobia is on the rise in London. The precise opposite seems to be true. I have held hands/made out with people in public in London on many occasions, and I recall the *vitriol* thrown at me ten years ago for doing so. Over the past couple of years, people have barely batted an eyelid.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 7:39 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    TigerTim saidThis is really an extremely confusing statement. I think we can all agree that the fundamentalist aspects of Islam are deeply homophobic and that it's in the interest of gay people in those countries where Islam has significant numbers that the *fundamentalist* Islamists do not have power.

    What I don't understand is how supporting the rebel movement in Libya makes any sense at all from an LGBT perspective. Qaddafi has brutally opposed Islamic fundamentalism in Libya. To be sure, homosexuality is illegal in Libya with a 5 year jail sentence, but the rebels have made no indication that they intend to change this or that LGBT issues even remotely enter into their radar. It is entirely plausible (even likely) that they are just as homophobic as Qaddafi!

    I'm supportive of the rebels insofar as they are committed to a pluralistic multi-party democracy versus the authoritarian regime that exists at present. What I take issue with is an LGBT organization taking a stance on an issue that really has absolutely no connection with LGBT issues. GoProud can be rightly proud of their efforts on DADT, and organizations like the HRC should give long pause for thought about the effectiveness of their efforts...

    ... but this really statement really is bizarre!


    But even regardless of Lybia, western gay advocacy organizations seem more interested in demonizing Christianity and Christians than making their opposition known towards more egregious threats in this world spawning from radical Islam. It makes no sense at all, really.

    I just got back from vacationing in London and Paris and it was confirmed by a few gay locals in some pubs that visible homophobia seems to be on the rise and becoming, at least to some extent, more widespread in proportion to the influx of various Islamic and other groups (including Somalis) -- some of these sentiments coming from individuals who were immigrants themselves (Keeping in mind that British people rarely open up about these things).


    There are plenty of LGBT and allied groups who speak out and fight against radical Islam. In the US, their virtually no threat from Islamic fundamentalists whereas there is a well-documented threat from Christian extremists.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 7:41 PM GMT
    A final serious criticism:

    There is no single group of "Christians" in this. It's clear that some christians are certainly in favor of LGBT equality. Some have, motivated by their faith, gone to exceptional lengths to campaign for it and ought to be commended.

    Others, however, have absolutely condemned us and worked---again motivated by their faith---as hard as they can to deny us equality or indeed any rights at all.

    It is manifestly idiotic to conflate two diametrically opposed positions into one. One may assume nothing about a persons views if they claim to be "Christian", really on any moral subject at all. I know of no subject that any arbitrary pair of them are guaranteed to agree on.
  • tongun18

    Posts: 593

    Apr 05, 2011 7:50 PM GMT
    My support of gay rights and Qaddafi's deplorable reputation aside, how exactly does meddling in the internal affairs of another nation provide for limited government and limited federal spending here at home?

    I'm sorry but I'm really tired of conservatives that go on and on about spending cuts and minimizing the size of government and then call for military intervention of some third world country that isn't a direct threat to our security or well being. Military intervention expands the federal government, it increases spending, and it usually binds us to wherever we've stuck our noses for much longer then we anticipate.

    This is a good example of what I've said on here before, people who call themselves conservative in the US don't actually want less government, they just want it in different areas than the liberals.

    We can't afford to keep acting like the worlds police force. As long as they keep it within their own borders, let them figure shit out for themselves.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 8:13 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    mocktwinkie saidBut even regardless of Lybia, western gay advocacy organizations seem more interested in demonizing Christianity and Christians than making their opposition known towards more egregious threats in this world spawning from radical Islam. It makes no sense at all, really.

    I just got back from vacationing in London and Paris and it was confirmed by a few gay locals in some pubs that visible homophobia seems to be on the rise and becoming, at least to some extent, more widespread in proportion to the influx of various Islamic and other groups (including Somalis) -- some of these sentiments coming from individuals who were immigrants themselves (Keeping in mind that British people rarely open up about these things).


    Your conclusions are not justified by your selection of anecdotal evidence. Let us not forget that it was American Christian Evangelicals who precipitated the hatred in Uganda.

    I think it is certainly true that LGBT organizations rarely comment on events outside of the borders of the country in which they are founded. Perhaps the most important exception to this is the British activist Peter Tatchell and OutRage! who has campaigned for LGBT freedom in many countries.

    It's important that campaigns for LGBT freedom in foreign countries take into account the local situation. It's absolutely appalling that some western countries criticize others for denying basic rights to their LGBT citizens when they do not extend full rights to their own LGBT citizens [America and the UK are two examples]. Talk about hypocrisy! As we all know, the particular situation in any country really can only be changed by locals, so efforts from foreigners should focus on empowering them and campaigning for their safety. It is very important to bear in mind that outspoken criticism from foreigners *can* in some circumstances make the situation *worse* for LGBT people in some countries.

    I am astonished at the claim that homophobia is on the rise in London. The precise opposite seems to be true. I have held hands/made out with people in public in London on many occasions, and I recall the *vitriol* thrown at me ten years ago for doing so. Over the past couple of years, people have barely batted an eyelid.


    The extremist "christian" missionary presence in Uganda never said to actually start murdering gay people. Extreme hatred to the point of execution is widespread all over subsaharan Africa, not just Uganda so trying to find some opportunistic reason to blame Christians continually for every woe happening across the world is just plain naive if not disingenuous. I'm not saying the radical "christian" presence in Uganda should not be criticized, they should be.

    Even across Europe, the conservative/classical liberal/rightwing parties aimed at eliminating the very immigration presences threatening the gay community are the ones that are criticized the most by gays. That's the absurd irony of it all.

    Liberals say that they are into gay rights but they'll let in the floodgates of people who will take precisely those rights away, if not downright kill them once they have a majority (speaking precisely of mass Islamic immigration into Europe).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 8:15 PM GMT
    rickrick91 said
    mocktwinkie said
    TropicalMark saidIts no wonder that these guys are ignored by the GOP..


    But isn't it sad that all other gay organizations are unwilling to advocate for the global gay community and are more interested in demonizing christians?




    TOTAL BS.

    Describing the reason for the gay organizations refusal to collude with GOProud as "demonizing Christians" is a total load of crap.
    Those are the words of GOProud ONLY.
    Those words are a complete fantasy and a deliberate distortion of reality.
    And they're BS.

    The other gay groups in NO WAY stated anything anti-Christian.
    That's a LIE.

    GOProud - AS USUAL - is functioning NOT as a gay advocacy group.
    THEY'RE ACTING AS A PRO-REPUBLICAN GROUP.
    They're trying to spread dissent among the gay community and are trying to get gays to vote Republican - and against their own interests.

    GOProud is not on our side.
    They're working to help Republicans win elections.
    They're NOT working for us.
    And this attempt at dividing the gay community is yet another example of that.

    This is yet another example of the fact that the Repubs will say and do anything to try to help the Republican party score political points and win elections.

    The Republican party and GOProud cannot be trusted to tell the truth or to do the right thing.


    You made a wrong turn, the asylum is up the next street.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 8:27 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    rickrick91 said
    mocktwinkie said
    TropicalMark saidIts no wonder that these guys are ignored by the GOP..


    But isn't it sad that all other gay organizations are unwilling to advocate for the global gay community and are more interested in demonizing christians?




    TOTAL BS.

    Describing the reason for the gay organizations refusal to collude with GOProud as "demonizing Christians" is a total load of crap.
    Those are the words of GOProud ONLY.
    Those words are a complete fantasy and a deliberate distortion of reality.
    And they're BS.

    The other gay groups in NO WAY stated anything anti-Christian.
    That's a LIE.

    GOProud - AS USUAL - is functioning NOT as a gay advocacy group.
    THEY'RE ACTING AS A PRO-REPUBLICAN GROUP.
    They're trying to spread dissent among the gay community and are trying to get gays to vote Republican - and against their own interests.

    GOProud is not on our side.
    They're working to help Republicans win elections.
    They're NOT working for us.
    And this attempt at dividing the gay community is yet another example of that.

    This is yet another example of the fact that the Repubs will say and do anything to try to help the Republican party score political points and win elections.

    The Republican party and GOProud cannot be trusted to tell the truth or to do the right thing.


    You made a wrong turn, the asylum is up the next street.




    It's unfortunate that you just keep posting lame personal attacks that make you look bad - instead of intelligent interesting ON-TOPIC comments that would earn the respect of your fellow RJ members.

    And, GOProud is not a gay advocacy group.
    It's a pro-Republican advocacy group.
    It's agenda is not to help gay Americans.
    It's agenda is to help elect Republicans.
    GOProud ran countless ads and spent a lot of money and worked very hard to help elect Republicans in the 2010 campaign.
    In fact, we saw many of their ads right here on RJ.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 10:50 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidThe extremist "christian" missionary presence in Uganda never said to actually start murdering gay people. Extreme hatred to the point of execution is widespread all over subsaharan Africa, not just Uganda so trying to find some opportunistic reason to blame Christians continually for every woe happening across the world is just plain naive if not disingenuous. I'm not saying the radical "christian" presence in Uganda should not be criticized, they should be.

    Even across Europe, the conservative/classical liberal/rightwing parties aimed at eliminating the very immigration presences threatening the gay community are the ones that are criticized the most by gays. That's the absurd irony of it all.

    Liberals say that they are into gay rights but they'll let in the floodgates of people who will take precisely those rights away, if not downright kill them once they have a majority (speaking precisely of mass Islamic immigration into Europe).


    You are not entitled to use the scare quotes around Christian. They claimed to be Christian, therefore they are. Hatred towards gays is largely a byproduct of colonialism, as any competent historian will tell you. And the religion of colonialism was... yes, Christianity.

    Conservative/rightwing parties in Europe are, on the whole, not interested in gays [I'll except the tories in the UK as most of them are, apparently, gay] In fact many of them are rather homophobic. Certainly they do not oppose immigration because of a tender love of gays!

    You're rehashing a slippery slope argument, which is as we all know, a logical fallacy. You have shown nothing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 11:32 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    mocktwinkie saidThe extremist "christian" missionary presence in Uganda never said to actually start murdering gay people. Extreme hatred to the point of execution is widespread all over subsaharan Africa, not just Uganda so trying to find some opportunistic reason to blame Christians continually for every woe happening across the world is just plain naive if not disingenuous. I'm not saying the radical "christian" presence in Uganda should not be criticized, they should be.

    Even across Europe, the conservative/classical liberal/rightwing parties aimed at eliminating the very immigration presences threatening the gay community are the ones that are criticized the most by gays. That's the absurd irony of it all.

    Liberals say that they are into gay rights but they'll let in the floodgates of people who will take precisely those rights away, if not downright kill them once they have a majority (speaking precisely of mass Islamic immigration into Europe).


    You are not entitled to use the scare quotes around Christian. They claimed to be Christian, therefore they are. Hatred towards gays is largely a byproduct of colonialism, as any competent historian will tell you. And the religion of colonialism was... yes, Christianity.

    Conservative/rightwing parties in Europe are, on the whole, not interested in gays [I'll except the tories in the UK as most of them are, apparently, gay] In fact many of them are rather homophobic. Certainly they do not oppose immigration because of a tender love of gays!

    You're rehashing a slippery slope argument, which is as we all know, a logical fallacy. You have shown nothing.


    Ah yes, and do go on to convince readers that islamic countries are homophobic due to the christian colonization that has occurred there! There also must be a lot of Christianity rampant in China and Japan too!

    As far as rightwing parties in europe, very few of the ones within countries experiencing islamic immigration concerns express a desire to take away freedoms from gays. They may not be pro-gay but they are rather neutral in the sense that it's not something they are interested in addressing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 11:42 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidAh yes, and do go on to convince readers that islamic countries are homophobic due to the christian colonization that has occurred there! There also must be a lot of Christianity rampant in China and Japan too!

    As far as rightwing parties in europe, very few of the ones within countries experiencing mass third world immigration concerns express a desire to take away freedoms from gays. They may not be pro-gay but they are rather neutral in the sense that it's not something they are interested in addressing.


    I was addressing the argument that you made, which was about *African* countries, not the point that you *didn't* make which concerns other countries.

    And on your second point, you're simply wrong!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 11:47 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    mocktwinkie saidAh yes, and do go on to convince readers that islamic countries are homophobic due to the christian colonization that has occurred there! There also must be a lot of Christianity rampant in China and Japan too!

    As far as rightwing parties in europe, very few of the ones within countries experiencing mass third world immigration concerns express a desire to take away freedoms from gays. They may not be pro-gay but they are rather neutral in the sense that it's not something they are interested in addressing.


    I was addressing the argument that you made, which was about *African* countries, not the point that you *didn't* make which concerns other countries.

    And on your second point, you're simply wrong!


    Actually, your bullshit was exposed for what it was. Every country and continent on this earth has a majority of people who are anti-gay. Some more than others. Just admit you want Christianity to be portrayed in the worst light of any religion.

    And on the second point, no I'm not. I keep up very much with European politics.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 05, 2011 11:53 PM GMT
    GOProud could be more accurately described a gay Republican advocacy group:

    One that supports the emergence of right-leaning gays with an aim to shape GOP policy planks in favour of gay rights issues.

    Not every gay man is required to live on the radical left plantation, much less drink the Kos Kool-aid.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2011 12:02 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidActually, your bullshit was exposed for what it was. Every country and continent on this earth has a majority of people who are anti-gay. Some more than others. Just admit you want Christianity to be portrayed in the worst light of any religion.

    And on the second point, no I'm not. I keep up very much with European politics.


    I have no idea why you would think I want Christianity to be portrayed in the worst light of any religion. If you had bothered to read my post above, I merely do not think of Christianity as a coherent whole. Let me spell it out to you:

    SOME CHRISTIANS ARE PRO-GAY [and some of them have been active in securing the liberties we enjoy.]

    SOME CHRISTIANS ARE ANTI-GAY.

    I do not see why it is so difficult to distinguish between the two groups. Quite a few of my friends [and my two sisters actually] are active Christians [they are Anglicans, largely]. I concede that I am an atheist, actually a humanist, but there you go.

    In any case, I was merely attempting to elucidate the historical context of homophobia in modern-day African culture. I regard it as part of *colonialism*, and think *Christianity* actually has rather little to do with it.

    What I find really depressing is how you always present your opinions as if they were always right and no argument were possible. This is not the way to think.

    And on your second point, it is clear that you know next to nothing about European politics. Many close friends of mine have senior positions in the various diplomatic missions to the EU. That's what being an aristocrat does for you, I suppose.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Apr 06, 2011 12:20 AM GMT
    rickrick91 said

    The Republican party and GOProud cannot be trusted to tell the truth or to do the right thing.


    You're so cynical. Thank God what you consider "BS" (which it seems is just about everything right of center) is what most normal people consider "The Real World"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2011 12:25 AM GMT
    TigerTim said
    mocktwinkie saidActually, your bullshit was exposed for what it was. Every country and continent on this earth has a majority of people who are anti-gay. Some more than others. Just admit you want Christianity to be portrayed in the worst light of any religion.

    And on the second point, no I'm not. I keep up very much with European politics.


    I have no idea why you would think I want Christianity to be portrayed in the worst light of any religion. If you had bothered to read my post above, I merely do not think of Christianity as a coherent whole. Let me spell it out to you:

    SOME CHRISTIANS ARE PRO-GAY [and some of them have been active in securing the liberties we enjoy.]

    SOME CHRISTIANS ARE ANTI-GAY.

    I do not see why it is so difficult to distinguish between the two groups. Quite a few of my friends [and my two sisters actually] are active Christians [they are Anglicans, largely]. I concede that I am an atheist, actually a humanist, but there you go.

    In any case, I was merely attempting to elucidate the historical context of homophobia in modern-day African culture. I regard it as part of *colonialism*, and think *Christianity* actually has rather little to do with it.

    What I find really depressing is how you always present your opinions as if they were always right and no argument were possible. This is not the way to think.

    And on your second point, it is clear that you know next to nothing about European politics. Many close friends of mine have senior positions in the various diplomatic missions to the EU. That's what being an aristocrat does for you, I suppose.


    But your idea that Africa is largely anti-gay precisely because of colonialism and that without which we would see an Africa that is completely loving and tolerant of gay rights is just a pure assumption and a convenience ploy to somehow place the blame on the West. Can't you see that?

    I'm not going to argue with you on European politics. Unless you want to bring up specific examples of mainstream conservative/classical liberal parties in western Europe vocally espousing anti-gay measures in their platforms then there's really nothing to discuss and it's an "I'm right. No, I'm right" scenario. It's just not as big of an issue over there.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2011 1:40 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    TropicalMark saidIts no wonder that these guys are ignored by the GOP..


    But isn't it sad that all other gay organizations are unwilling to advocate for the global gay community and are more interested in demonizing christians?
    Most of us are multi-taskers.. we can and do both!
    Can't they? NOPE.. the religious is who they are!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2011 2:00 AM GMT
    alphatrigger saidGOProud could be more accurately described a gay Republican advocacy group:

    One that supports the emergence of right-leaning gays with an aim to shape GOP policy planks in favour of gay rights issues.

    Not every gay man is required to live on the radical left plantation, much less drink the Kos Kool-aid.




    TOTAL BS.
    And you're the one who's drunk on right-wing Kool-Aid.

    GOProud advocated strongly for Republican candidates in the 2010 campaign.
    They ran a vast number of ads on this and many other sites.
    They spent a lot of money trying to get Republicans elected.
    They did NOT demand that the Republican party alter it's anti-gay agenda one iota, in order to earn gay votes.
    They did not differentiate between Republican politicians who support gay rights and Republican politicians who oppose gay rights.
    They supported ALL Republican candidates no matter what anti-gay views and actions those candidates may have been guilty of.
    GOProud is a pro-Republican advocacy group.
    Their goal is to elect Republicans regardless of what views those Republican candidates may have.
    GOProud worked hard and spent a LOT of money trying to elect Republican candidates who oppose equal rights for gay Americans, and who have a record of voting to deny gay Americans equal rights.
    GOProud is NOT on our side, and they ARE NOT helping to advance the push for full equality for gay Americans.
    They're working to help elect Republican politicians who will vote AGAINST our rights once they get in office.

    Any gay person who supports GOProud is supporting a group that is working on the side of the religious right haters who want to keep gays second class citizens.

    I do give credit to the Log Cabiners for trying to push the Republican party to change it's anti-gay agenda.
    But, GOProud is an entirely different kettle of (partisan Republican) fish.
    Any gay Republican who wants the Republican party to become more pro-gay should support the Log Cabiners - NOT GOProud.
    GOProud hasn't done shit to try to get the Republican party to become less stridently anti-gay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2011 2:06 AM GMT
    It's naive, and quite frankly plain stupid, to think that discrimination against gays in Libya will cease if Gadaffi is overthrown. I feel sorry for GOProud. They're not accepted by Republicans or by the gay community.

    In my opinion, they're so desperate to please both groups (which are mostly at odds) that they're taking an issue that is important to Republicans and trying to make it palatable to gays. Unfortunately, protecting the rights of gays and lesbians abroad isn't a priority to most Republicans in Congress (heck, most of them are fighting to deny rights to gays in this country!).

    If they're so willing to help out the gay community abroad, why not start with Jamaica? Maybe because it is a Christian country?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 06, 2011 2:14 AM GMT
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teh7hOUCIPY&feature=related

    GOProud member:

    0:20 "I don't really like gay people that much"