Mitt Romney Discloses Contributions to Antigay Groups

  • metta

    Posts: 39134

    Jan 28, 2012 5:46 AM GMT
    Mitt Romney Discloses Contributions to Antigay Groups


    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/01/24/Mitt_Romney_Discloses_Contributions_to_Antigay_Groups/
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jan 29, 2012 11:10 AM GMT
    Let's hear it from the righting posse

    I'm not a one factor voter ..... Blah blah blah

    ..... Cue the Charlie Brown teacher trombone
  • hebrewman

    Posts: 1367

    Jan 29, 2012 11:25 AM GMT
    why does this NOT surprise me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 11:58 AM GMT
    He could advocate lynching gay people and, inexplicably, some of them (us) would still vote for him.

    "If people are looking for someone who will discriminate against gays or who will in any way try to suggest that people that have different sexual orientations don't have full rights in the country, they won't find that in me," Romney said, declaring, "I don't discriminate."
    ("I just promote the hating of queer scum by the back door instead.")
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 12:14 PM GMT
    Oh yes, he's fit to be President. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 12:40 PM GMT
    Honestly, I'm not happy with any of them, Newt, Romney, Obama, Santorum, none of them!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 12:41 PM GMT
    Yawn... big surprise.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 1:26 PM GMT
    The only candidate on the GOP slate who cares for Anerica and her liberty:

    pVm8S.jpg

    He is the ONLY major GOP candidate who did NOT sign the NOM pledge to strip away our human rights.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 1:50 PM GMT
    AlphaTrigger saidThe only candidate on the GOP slate who cares for Anerica and her liberty:

    pVm8S.jpg

    He is the ONLY major GOP candidate who did NOT sign the NOM pledge to strip away our human rights.

    making him not a major candidate really.


    He's the right wing's Nader.
  • LuckyGuyKC

    Posts: 2080

    Jan 29, 2012 2:04 PM GMT
    Really if you are gay and not for Obama or Ron Paul you just aren't paying attention.

    The rest will sell LGBT issues down the river like Every President before them.

    Obama isn't perfect but he's the best President to date on Gay rights. I'm staying with him.
  • a303guy

    Posts: 829

    Jan 29, 2012 2:07 PM GMT
    HowHotKC saidReally if you are gay and not for Obama or Ron Paul you just aren't paying attention.

    The rest will sell LGBT issues down the river like Every President before them.

    Obama isn't perfect but he's the best President to date on Gay rights. I'm staying with him.


    You are correct sir! I'm sticking with Obama too
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 2:35 PM GMT
    AlphaTrigger saidHe is the ONLY major GOP candidate who did NOT sign the NOM pledge to strip away our human rights.



    I would not vote for Paul if he was the nominee, but I would be much less worried for gay rights if was the Republican nominee. I don't think he would be a fighter for gay rights, but I also do not think he would work against what gains have already been made.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jan 29, 2012 2:36 PM GMT
    a303guy said
    HowHotKC saidReally if you are gay and not for Obama or Ron Paul you just aren't paying attention.

    The rest will sell LGBT issues down the river like Every President before them.

    Obama isn't perfect but he's the best President to date on Gay rights. I'm staying with him.


    You are correct sir! I'm sticking with Obama too



    I suppose the above would be true if you vote via "GLBT issues strictly".
    I'm not a one issue voter... it's the "sum total" for me.. it just happens to be overwhelmingly democratic...

    On the question at hand... disturbing certainly... but not surprising.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19136

    Jan 29, 2012 3:08 PM GMT
    This is nothing but left-wing scare tactics and misleading propaganda with the clear agenda of painting Mitt Romney as anti-gay. Neither of these contributions concern me. Sure, you can look at them as "anti-gay", but if you dig a little deeper and bother looking at the whole picture, it isn't really it's sole focus. Of course, people here will, as usual, make it ALL ABOUT THE GAY, but that's not really telling the whole story.

    The Massachusetts Family Institute is dedicated to strengthening the family and affirming the Judeo-Christian values upon which it is based. Like it or not, this is far more "pro-family" than "anti-gay".

    The other contribution for The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which is a non-profit, public-interest legal and educational institute that protects the free expression of all faiths. The are basically a law firm that protects religious freedoms, not necessarily an "anti-gay" group.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 3:11 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidThis is nothing but left-wing scare tactics and misleading propaganda with the clear agenda of painting Mitt Romney as anti-gay. Neither of these contributions concern me. Sure, you can look at them as "anti-gay", but if you dig a little deeper and bother looking at the whole picture, it isn't really it's sole focus. Of course, people here will, as usual, make it ALL ABOUT THE GAY, but that's not really telling the whole story.

    The Massachusetts Family Institute is dedicated to strengthening the family and affirming the Judeo-Christian values upon which it is based. Like it or not, this is far more "pro-family" than "anti-gay".

    The other contribution for The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which is a non-profit, public-interest legal and educational institute that protects the free expression of all faiths. The are basically a law firm that protects religious freedoms, not necessarily an "anti-gay" group.


    Oh come off it. He's a Mormon. His religion repudiates homosexuality and so does he.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19136

    Jan 29, 2012 3:17 PM GMT
    Mil8 said
    Oh come off it. He's a Mormon. His religion repudiates homosexuality and so does he.


    You're being a melodramatic and making statements that simply are overblown and not true. Maybe you should look up the word repudiate. Romney has never said anything of the sort about gays. He is not in favor of gay marriage, but that is a far cry from saying he "repudiates homosexuality".
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jan 29, 2012 3:21 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidThis is nothing but left-wing scare tactics and misleading propaganda with the clear agenda of painting Mitt Romney as anti-gay. Neither of these contributions concern me. Sure, you can look at them as "anti-gay",.



    You mean this is an example of what the right ring does constantly (on this site too) to paint Obama poorly? NO SAY IT AIN'T SO! LOL

    My reaction to it is , it depends on who Romney was appealing to... when he was running for Govenor in Mass... of course not., but in courting the right wing tea party crowd... of course!

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

    Jan 29, 2012 3:25 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidThis is nothing but left-wing scare tactics and misleading propaganda with the clear agenda of painting Mitt Romney as anti-gay. Neither of these contributions concern me. Sure, you can look at them as "anti-gay", but if you dig a little deeper and bother looking at the whole picture, it isn't really it's sole focus. Of course, people here will, as usual, make it ALL ABOUT THE GAY, but that's not really telling the whole story.

    The Massachusetts Family Institute is dedicated to strengthening the family and affirming the Judeo-Christian values upon which it is based. Like it or not, this is far more "pro-family" than "anti-gay".

    The other contribution for The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which is a non-profit, public-interest legal and educational institute that protects the free expression of all faiths. The are basically a law firm that protects religious freedoms, not necessarily an "anti-gay" group.


    Really Curiousjock, REALLY?

    From their website,
    "In keeping with the Judeo-Christian values that our society was founded upon, MFI believes that all sex outside of heterosexual marriage is detrimental to families and that includes homosexuality. Our compassion is for those struggling with same-sex attraction and we encourage the healing of individuals who wish to change their choice of lifestyle through the work of Exodus International, Love Won Out and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays. MFI strongly opposes any efforts by political activists to normalize homosexual behavior and all attempts to equate homosexuality with immutable characteristics such as skin color, or the “gay rights” movement with the civil rights movement.


    Pay close attention to the bolded words.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jan 29, 2012 3:28 PM GMT
    Thanks Doug for the above. I think any argument to the contrary is really ridiculous....
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19136

    Jan 29, 2012 3:29 PM GMT
    HndsmKansan said
    You mean this is an example of what the right ring does constantly (on this site too) to paint Obama poorly? NO SAY IT AIN'T SO! LOL



    I'll give you that. Scare tactics are a political ploy used on all sides. In this case, painting Romney as "Anti-Gay" because he made contributions to "Pro-Family values" groups or religious-themed organizations isn't likely going to do much other than perhaps reaffirm to the already closed-minded "one issue" fraction of the gay community that this must mean Romney hates the gays --- which of course isn't the case --- but some people cannot see past their gayness to grasp the broader picture, and that is what people peddling this kind of biased misinformation are counting on.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 3:30 PM GMT
    metta8 saidMitt Romney Discloses Contributions to Antigay Groups


    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/01/24/Mitt_Romney_Discloses_Contributions_to_Antigay_Groups/


    Mitt Romney, Mormon (Have you seen the movie 8: The Mormon Proposition?) Discloses Contributions to Antigay Groups
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 3:32 PM GMT
    meninlove said

    From their website,
    "In keeping with the Judeo-Christian values that our society was founded upon, MFI believes that all sex outside of heterosexual marriage is detrimental to families and that includes homosexuality. Our compassion is for those struggling with same-sex attraction and we encourage the healing of individuals who wish to change their choice of lifestyle through the work of Exodus International, Love Won Out and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays. MFI strongly opposes any efforts by political activists to normalize homosexual behavior and all attempts to equate homosexuality with immutable characteristics such as skin color, or the “gay rights” movement with the civil rights movement.


    Ah, but he's only funding the repudiation of homosexuality, without actually saying it. So that's okay.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19136

    Jan 29, 2012 3:41 PM GMT
    StephenOABC said
    Mitt Romney, Mormon (Have you seen the movie 8: The Mormon Proposition?) Discloses Contributions to Antigay Groups


    I'm glad you brought up "8: The Mormon Proposition", because it isa prime example of gross misrepresentation and bias. Even extremely gay friendly critics rolled their eyes at much of what the misinformation this biased documentary tried to peddle.

    Based on 24 reviews collected by the film review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, 63% of critics gave 8: The Mormon Proposition a positive review, with an average rating of 6.0/10.[8]

    The Village Voice noted "cheesy dramatic reenactments" and suggested some flaws, but then went on to say that "the flaws pale against what's illustrated, which is not just how Prop. 8 passed, but the sordid, cynical workings of our political machine."[9]

    Michelle Orange of Movieline commented that "The opening impression — that the LDS acted villainously with regard to Prop 8 — will soon be supported by a raft of facts; that the Mormon church couldn’t have done it alone is a complication the film sidesteps almost completely."[10]

    Newsweek called the film "messy and sometimes downright cheesy", but says that "at its best, which is only at the end, The Mormon Proposition reminds us—no, insists that we remember—that demonizing a group doesn’t make the world a better place."[11]

    The Wall Street Journal noted that "as a spotlight on the suffering of same-sex couples and individuals who are rejected by family and church leaders, the film succeeds. Its critique of the church's recent political activism, however, is as ham-fisted as many of the mid-19th century allegations against the church."[12]

    Sean Gandert of Paste Magazine notes that 8 "spends more time than it should on the faith’s general treatment of homosexuality, eventually drifting into an unpleasant streak of overt Mormon-bashing. The film also fails to take into account the many other factors in play during the 2008 election, narrowing events down to one all-encompassing Mormon-based explanation. 8 means well, but is too blinded by its own biases to do its cause justice."[13]

    The San Francisco Chronicle notes that the film is "marred by loaded language and a propagandistic tone that undercuts rather than promotes its purposes." It concludes that "If you're in favor of same-sex marriage, the documentary isn't telling you something new. If you're against same-sex marriage, the documentary - despite sometimes touching shots of loving couples - won't convince you otherwise."[14]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 3:45 PM GMT
    HowHotKC saidReally if you are gay and not for Obama or Ron Paul you just aren't paying attention.

    The rest will sell LGBT issues down the river like Every President before them.

    Obama isn't perfect but he's the best President to date on Gay rights. I'm staying with him.


    Well, I saw the documentary "Inside Job." http://www.sonyclassics.com/insidejob/

    I'm glad I voted against Obama by voting for Ralph Nader in '08.

    Did you see Bill Moyers last Sunday?

    http://billmoyers.com/episode/crony-capitalism/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2012 3:49 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    I'm glad you brought up "8: The Mormon Proposition", because it


    allows me to go off on a tangent, without addressing the fact Romney is funding an organisation that condemns my sexual orientation.