I just don't get it: how can you be gay AND a Republican?

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

    Dec 21, 2011 9:30 PM GMT
    I'm not trying to be a condescending smartass. I really want to understand...

    Is it that the policies of the Obama admin and the Democratic Party are so abhorrent to you that you can overlook the GOP's anti-gay stance?

    Or do you think their anti-gay rhetoric is just lip-service to the ultra-right and they really won't do anything to us?

    Or perhaps you agree that gay community should NOT be integrated into the larger society, or that "the gays" are just too whiny and in actuality we already have everything we need - that we aren't really separated as we claim to be?

    Seriously, I want to understand how you justify your support (monetarily or otherwise) to a group who claims that you aren't worthy of "special rights"?

    RJ Republicans, educate me.

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

    Dec 21, 2011 9:52 PM GMT
    Newt Gingrich doesn't even want your votes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 9:53 PM GMT
    Squarepeg saidI'm not trying to be a condescending smartass. I really want to understand...

    Is it that the policies of the Obama admin and the Democratic Party are so abhorrent to you that you can overlook the GOP's anti-gay stance?

    Or do you think their anti-gay rhetoric is just lip-service to the ultra-right and they really won't do anything to us?

    Or perhaps you agree that gay community should NOT be integrated into the larger society, or that "the gays" are just too whiny and in actuality we already have everything we need - that we aren't really separated as we claim to be?

    Seriously, I want to understand how you justify your support (monetarily or otherwise) to a group who claims that you aren't worthy of "special rights"?

    RJ Republicans, educate me.



    I dont want "special rights", I want equal rights. The only issue I disagree with the GOP on is gay marriage and the Dems aren't exactly trying to get that done. I'm not a one issue voter. I have a lot more going on in my life than being gay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 9:58 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNewt Gingrich doesn't even want your votes.


    Not quite what he said



    I have no problem with what he said. If he's the nominee he absolutely has my vote.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 10:03 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNewt Gingrich doesn't even want your votes.


    Not quite what he said



    I have no problem with what he said. If he's the nominee he absolutely has my vote.


    You aren't even gay, you're a troll.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 10:04 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNewt Gingrich doesn't even want your votes.


    Not quite what he said



    I have no problem with what he said. If he's the nominee he absolutely has my vote.


    While I dont agree with Gingrich on gays, I agree with him on just about everything else. I will vote for Gingrich if he is the nominee.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 10:08 PM GMT
    CHRISTOPHER34 said
    freedomisntfree said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNewt Gingrich doesn't even want your votes.


    Not quite what he said



    I have no problem with what he said. If he's the nominee he absolutely has my vote.


    While I dont agree with Gingrich on gays, I agree with him on just about everything else. I will vote for Gingrich if he is the nominee.


    Sock puppets cant vote
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 10:09 PM GMT
    catfish5 said
    CHRISTOPHER34 said
    freedomisntfree said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNewt Gingrich doesn't even want your votes.


    Not quite what he said



    I have no problem with what he said. If he's the nominee he absolutely has my vote.


    While I dont agree with Gingrich on gays, I agree with him on just about everything else. I will vote for Gingrich if he is the nominee.


    Sock puppets cant vote


    I nearly collided with you getting to that joke!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 10:13 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca said
    freedomisntfree said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNewt Gingrich doesn't even want your votes.


    Not quite what he said



    I have no problem with what he said. If he's the nominee he absolutely has my vote.


    You aren't even gay, you're a troll.


    Thank you. Funny!

    I have a gym friend who worked on the John Kasich campaign who accused me of being a ‘closet straight’ last night. I told him I have pics!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 10:25 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    catfish5 said
    CHRISTOPHER34 said
    freedomisntfree said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNewt Gingrich doesn't even want your votes.


    Not quite what he said

    x-shockwave-flash"" background=""#333333"" width=""425"" height=""279"" allowfullscreen=""true"" allowscriptaccess=""always"" flashvars=""si=254&&contentValue=50116906&shareUrl=http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7392399n&tag=mncol;lst;3"">

    I have no problem with what he said. If he's the nominee he absolutely has my vote.


    While I dont agree with Gingrich on gays, I agree with him on just about everything else. I will vote for Gingrich if he is the nominee.


    Sock puppets cant vote


    Can escorts?


    For someone with an Adam4Adam profile, you're very judgmental...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 10:29 PM GMT
    This would depend if he is listed on A4A as a "Pro" (read: escort) or not.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 10:33 PM GMT
    What is Adam and Adam?

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

    Dec 21, 2011 10:33 PM GMT
    Squarepeg saidIs it that the policies of the Obama admin and the Democratic Party are so abhorrent to you that you can overlook the GOP's anti-gay stance?

    Or do you think their anti-gay rhetoric is just lip-service to the ultra-right and they really won't do anything to us?



    These two items for me.

    Although the only GOP presidential candidate I like is Ron Paul.

    I might vote for Gingrich or Romney, though I am highly disappointed that they signed the NOM pledge. For them I think it is lip service.


    The cray-cray bottom tier bible-banger candidates will pretty much guarantee an Obama vote from me should any of them get the nomination. That lot were the first to sign onto the NOM pledge, and they fucking mean every word of it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 10:44 PM GMT
    Squarepeg,

    Who one votes for has to do with a lot of factors, not just one issue. I'm not a "republican" but I consider myself a fiscal conservative/libertarian.

    It's not as easy as "democrat = pro-gay rights", "republican = anti-gay rights". Neither is "liberal=pro gay rights" or "conservative = anti-gay rights" accurate either.

    Neither party as a whole supports full gay rights, including gay marriage. While it is true that democrats give a whole lot more attention to gay rights issues and advocate to a greater extent for the LGBT community (for which I am very thankful and I give due credit), that is not ALL they advocate for, genererally speaking. Beyond wedge social issues we still have what is called the "big picture". Many conservative leaning pundits also support gay rights.

    If we took both parties and swapped social stance issues and kept economic issues the same then you would see the opposite effect --- gays justifying why they are voting democrat even though in such a scenario democrat would be perceived as the more "anti-gay" party. What would be their reasons? Economic issues. Many gay liberals here have confessed that if roles were switched they would not necessarily vote for the "pro-gay marriage" party.

    The economic direction of a country is closely related to the very question of whether or not we will have a great country remaining with which to advance gay rights or any other rights of freedom for that matter.

    Like I said, numerous factors involved. Since voting for either a democratic nominee or republican nominee means a vote against gay marriage equality, it's important for me to analyze the extent of one's non-favorable stance towards gays. Gays voting democrat have to do the same thing -- rationalize why they might be voting for a democratic candidate who opposes gay marriage, convincing themselves that they are still voting "more" in favor of their rights.

    For me, if it becomes evident that a candidate is going to truly actively seek to repress gays and overturn progress that has been made then I invariably will question supporting them, however, if it is apparent that they are, for political posturing, taking certain positions in order to get votes then I might consider voting for that candidate if I consider the other one to be a greater of the two issues when factoring in the big picture -- including economic matters.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:07 PM GMT
    "If we took both parties and swapped social stance issues and kept economic issues the same then you would see the opposite effect --- gays justifying why they are voting democrat even though in such a scenario democrat would be perceived as the more "anti-gay" party. What would be their reasons? Economic issues. Many gay liberals here have confessed that if roles were switched they would not necessarily vote for the "pro-gay marriage" party. "

    WEAK ARGUMENT!!!

    Justifying your political affiliation on a hypothetically contrived sitituation and then backing it with anecdotal evidence is ridiculous!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:10 PM GMT
    catfish5 said"If we took both parties and swapped social stance issues and kept economic issues the same then you would see the opposite effect --- gays justifying why they are voting democrat even though in such a scenario democrat would be perceived as the more "anti-gay" party. What would be their reasons? Economic issues. Many gay liberals here have confessed that if roles were switched they would not necessarily vote for the "pro-gay marriage" party. "

    WEAK ARGUMENT!!!

    Justifying your political affiliation on a hypothetically contrived sitituation and then backing it with anecdotal evidence is ridiculous!


    Nothing is being justified. I'm exposing the popular and simpleton misconception that being "pro" gay rights is somehow inexorably tethered to being or voting democrat. Everyone does NOT vote democratic because of gay rights issues. Gay rights is a temporary wedge issue to capture votes from all affiliations, it's not an inherently "conservative" principle necessarily -- unless speaking in "religious conservative" terms. Take the UK for example. Conservatives are very openly supporting for equal marriage rights -- are you saying they aren't conservative?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:11 PM GMT
    AlphaTrigger saidThis would depend if he is listed on A4A as a "Pro" (read: escort) or not.


    Pro? He´d not make enough money to pay for cat litter
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:19 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    catfish5 said"If we took both parties and swapped social stance issues and kept economic issues the same then you would see the opposite effect --- gays justifying why they are voting democrat even though in such a scenario democrat would be perceived as the more "anti-gay" party. What would be their reasons? Economic issues. Many gay liberals here have confessed that if roles were switched they would not necessarily vote for the "pro-gay marriage" party. "

    WEAK ARGUMENT!!!

    Justifying your political affiliation on a hypothetically contrived sitituation and then backing it with anecdotal evidence is ridiculous!


    Nothing is being justified. I'm exposing the lie that being "prop" gay rights is somehow inexorably tethered to being or voting democrat. You do NOT vote democratic exclusively because of gay rights issues. Gay rights is a temporary wedge issue to capture votes from all affiliations, it's not an inherently "conservative" principle necessarily -- unless speaking in "religious conservative" terms. Take the UK for example. Conservatives are very openly supporting for equal marriage rights -- are you saying they aren't conservative?


    What im saying is that your ala carte approach to justifying your support of a party who treats gays as 2nd class citizens is weak at best.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:23 PM GMT
    catfish5 said
    mocktwinkie said
    catfish5 said"If we took both parties and swapped social stance issues and kept economic issues the same then you would see the opposite effect --- gays justifying why they are voting democrat even though in such a scenario democrat would be perceived as the more "anti-gay" party. What would be their reasons? Economic issues. Many gay liberals here have confessed that if roles were switched they would not necessarily vote for the "pro-gay marriage" party. "

    WEAK ARGUMENT!!!

    Justifying your political affiliation on a hypothetically contrived sitituation and then backing it with anecdotal evidence is ridiculous!


    Nothing is being justified. I'm exposing the lie that being "prop" gay rights is somehow inexorably tethered to being or voting democrat. You do NOT vote democratic exclusively because of gay rights issues. Gay rights is a temporary wedge issue to capture votes from all affiliations, it's not an inherently "conservative" principle necessarily -- unless speaking in "religious conservative" terms. Take the UK for example. Conservatives are very openly supporting for equal marriage rights -- are you saying they aren't conservative?


    What im saying is that your ala carte approach to justifying your support of a party who treats gays as 2nd class citizens is weak at best.


    It's a coincidence though, not the "must-be-this-way" dichotomy you are pushing. Both parties have transformed significantly over the years in terms of stances, including slavery, women's rights etc.

    Conservatives in the UK do not treat gays as second class citizens and one day Republicans will not in this country either. Wedge issues can be taken on by any political group --- Democrats take on their own.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:25 PM GMT
    Sorry. If u support gay rights then vote for candidates who support gay rights. Otherwise, you are just giving lip service to the issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:27 PM GMT
    catfish5 saidSorry. If u support gay rights then vote for candidates who support gay rights. Otherwise, you are just giving lip service to the issue.


    So define for us the "extent" that a candidate must be in favor of gay rights in order for it to be "okay" and "justifiable" in your all-knowing book of "Do you really love gays or do you only give Lip Service" to vote for them?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:35 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    catfish5 saidSorry. If u support gay rights then vote for candidates who support gay rights. Otherwise, you are just giving lip service to the issue.


    So define for us the "extent" that a candidate must be in favor of gay rights in order for it to be "okay" and "justifiable" in your all-knowing book of "Do you really love gays or do you only give Lip Service" to vote for them?


    Look at their voting record. A candidate with a voting record supporting LGBT issues is generally considered a pro gay candidate.

    But u know this already. U just like to play the define game. I get it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:37 PM GMT
    catfish5 said
    mocktwinkie said
    catfish5 saidSorry. If u support gay rights then vote for candidates who support gay rights. Otherwise, you are just giving lip service to the issue.


    So define for us the "extent" that a candidate must be in favor of gay rights in order for it to be "okay" and "justifiable" in your all-knowing book of "Do you really love gays or do you only give Lip Service" to vote for them?


    Look at their voting record. A candidate with a voting record supporting LGBT issues is generally considered a pro gay candidate.

    But u know this already. U just like to play the define game. I get it.


    Is a candidate that supports civil unions but is for defining marriage as a man and a woman considered anti gay to you? Or can someone be against-gay marriage and be "pro-gay" to you?

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

    Dec 21, 2011 11:39 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    catfish5 said
    mocktwinkie said
    catfish5 saidSorry. If u support gay rights then vote for candidates who support gay rights. Otherwise, you are just giving lip service to the issue.


    So define for us the "extent" that a candidate must be in favor of gay rights in order for it to be "okay" and "justifiable" in your all-knowing book of "Do you really love gays or do you only give Lip Service" to vote for them?


    Look at their voting record. A candidate with a voting record supporting LGBT issues is generally considered a pro gay candidate.

    But u know this already. U just like to play the define game. I get it.


    Is a candidate that supports civil unions but is for defining marriage as a man and a woman considered anti gay to you? Or can someone be against-gay marriage and be "pro-gay" to you?



    When in doubt, look at how they voted on other pro gay issues likevrepealing DADT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 21, 2011 11:40 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidNothing is being justified. I'm exposing the popular and simpleton misconception that being "pro" gay rights is somehow inexorably tethered to being or voting democrat. Everyone does NOT vote democratic because of gay rights issues. Gay rights is a temporary wedge issue to capture votes from all affiliations, it's not an inherently "conservative" principle necessarily -- unless speaking in "religious conservative" terms. Take the UK for example. Conservatives are very openly supporting for equal marriage rights -- are you saying they aren't conservative?

    Trying to explain multiple issues to someone who can only comprehend one issue would be like trying to explain the concept of a 3 dimensional universe to a being who only lives in a 2 dimensional plane. They can't process.