A Town Hall winger's take on the HRC/LOGO presidential forum

The Democrats need to start supporting equality

Before I left the US, the DNC called to ask me for more money.  I told them as long as the party line was 'we don't need a marriage amendment because it's already illegal for gays to marry' they'd see as much support from me as I was seeing from them - zero.  Maybe enough people did the same and that's why we have candidates that are willing to talk about it, even if many are still having "personal issues" with the word marriage.

You're absolutely right - religious extremists of any faith do not need to be kissed up to by our political leaders, that will only "embolden the terrorists".

---

by: Robguy @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 06:13:49 AM CDT

Damn, that's bad...

I was actually thinking about trying a fisking, but after 10 hours of Topix, I'm worn out.

I was bored and feeling blah today.

I will say, however, that that is not the worst thing I have read today.

Its bad, but its *nothing* compared to what I had placed before me this afternoon.

Today, I am reminded of some old sunday school lesson I had when in church, long ago and far away.

It was about how the Devil worked.

If there was every any sort of evidence that would make me believe in Christianity (or any similar faith) instead of my own, I would have to say that the sheer depth of evil represented by the theocons is it.

They aren't republicans.

They aren't neocons, even.

THey are something new and vile and sickening. Theocons.

The earlier post with a video is right -- theocons *are* my worst nightmare.

They actually have a chance at destroying the nation, and establishing a handmaiden's tale of their own.

But this one will be far worse.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 06:47:56 AM CDT

From Talk2Action:

Regaining Control of the Public Discourse.

By Frank Cocozzelli Sat Jun 30, 2007

In last week's post I discussed how neoconservative allies of the Religious Right try to control the discourse by demonizing opponents as being godless. With that in mind, I hope to explain their technique in greater detail and then offer a way to break their grip -- to our considerable advantage.

The best line in the whole article is this:

But most importantly, when Enemy/Friend rears its ugly head in debate the trick is to attack the frame itself.

This man (Kevin McCullough) is of the lowest of the low to question someone elses relationship with God, and needs to be called on it.

And this is indicative of one of the shortcomings of our movement. THEY have proclaimed themselves the ONLY ones who can define God. Thus, instantly disenfranchising anyone who disagrees with them. It's the definition of supremacy.

Everytime they say Christians are a majority in this country (70%), half of them are progressives like Clinton and Obama and insanely liberal people like me -- whom they don't even consider to be "true" Christians, specifically because they support equal rights IN the name of God (they just don't wear that fact on their sleeves).

I went to the ex-gay SURVIVORS conference and heard heart breaking testimony of people who have literally been left spritually homeless because of what's been done to them in their attempts to "please God." Some of them now agnostic and atheist.

This has brought on the strongest of responses by anti-gay forces. And it should! The reason is that these are (gay) Christians whose personal relationship with Jesus Christ/God has been damaged or COMPLETELY destroyed by other Christians.

To put it plainly, this seems to be the first time they've realized they're creating more atheists than Christians.

Ex-gay = gay is a choice. All you atheists and agnostics need to get in on this faith debate! They IDEA of God that they own is the reason that some of you are atheist and agnostic. Let these "Christians" know just how many atheists and agnostics they've created, and why.

It's their weakest link. - Truth is God, not the other way around.

PS, Sorry for the book.

---

by: Emproph @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 07:36:53 AM CDT

Here's a headline:

Townhall's McCullough: Democrats lust for the sexually depraved.

Attempting to smear Fox News as a less than credible broker of fair and balanced news coverage Edwards, then Obama, and finally Clinton waived at the invite.

Hold that thought.

The willingness of the leading candidates of the Democratic Party to even acknowledge the invite of the LOGO network is embarrassing enough. To go so far as to give their consent to be queried over the softball questions that they will be thrown is a travesty to the American political process.

Translation of projection:

The willingness of the leading candidates of the Democratic Party to even acknowledge the invite of the FOX network is embarrassing enough. To go so far as to give their consent to be queried over the INSANELY BIASED questions that they will be thrown is a travesty to the American political process.

His last line sums it up.

But what do I know? I watch Fox News Channel

This guy is certifiable. It says way more about the sites (Town Hall and WND) that publish his dung as legitimate, than it does about us OR him.

The truth is Democrats are not now nor have they ever been interested in seriously committed faith based voters. They have no use for true believers be they Jewish, Catholic, or Evangelical...But they have an insatiable lust for the sexually depraved among us.

The man's a living insult to half of faith-based America. Those who cater to him are traitors.

Does Town hall support the hatred of half of all American Christians?

---

by: Emproph @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 08:51:39 AM CDT

Here's his other nut job article.

Why homosexuals despise marriage

No longer satisfied with practicing the unspeakable perverse sexual pleasures that their hearts seek in private bedrooms, they wish to be able to do so in public. They are also suffering from such immense guilt over their sexual behaviors, because they know inherently that the actions they perform are in fact unhealthy, that they will go to any means necessary to try and shut down the voices in their heads that tell them it is wrong.

They wrongfully believe that the guilty voice within them is an echo of a prudish state that seeks to limit their freedoms. They wrongfully believe that the judgment they feel is emanating from "Bible thumpers." And what they fail to admit is that the voice that condemns them the loudest is never a human voice ? but in fact the voice of their own conscience informed by the truth of the God who created them.

How's that for psychological projection?

---

by: Emproph @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 12:58:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

LMAO, these people have way to much time on thier hands.

  Most gays, lesbians, and trans people I know are very happy in life, we just don't like our government treating us as second class citizens.

  How dare we blame the bible beaters for influenceing our legislators, when it is God talking to us all along.  And if it is God talking to me, how the hell do these people know what he is saying to me?

  And if God is telling them the same thing he is telling me, why are these people so worried about me owning a vibrator?

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 13:23:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Re: adultery, pornography, bestiality, pedophilia, pre-marital . . .etc., etc. etc.

Ho Hum.  I really wish they'd get some new activities to compare homosexuality with.  These are getting to be a tad cliché.  ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

---

by: Jon Michaels @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 08:58:46 AM CDT

How about Hot Falafel Love?

---

by: NancyP @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 10:53:16 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

or sinful chocolate cake

i made love to a huge piece of it just last night. 

The gays stole my lunch money

---

by: matt in mpls @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 11:26:42 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

"Homosexual behavior and Christianity do not mix."

Well actually, according to the words and actions of the very first christians--Jesus and his disciples--it's heterosexuality and christianity which do not mix.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto

---

by: Sportin' Life @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 09:19:56 AM CDT

You missed the best part, Pam

...when he threatened, er, promise to go to all the black churches in NYC and read everyone the riot act.

---

by: NG @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 10:15:12 AM CDT

Andrew Sullivan and GayPatriot are opposing this debate

I don't get their arguments, but Andrew Sullivan and GayPatriot are railing against this debate calling it a demand for 'victimhood' and 'special rights'. Sometimes I wonder if some in our community aren't our own worst enemies.

---

by: SanRafaelKid @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 10:32:42 AM CDT

Some gays get a perverse thrill with siding against other gays

Years ago, I was roommates with a guy who was a gay conservative.  He said he wasn't interested in gay rights because he felt gay sex is more fun when it is considered "dirty" and "wrong."  Also, he was terrified of his fundy parents.  That probably had a lot to do with it as well.

---

by: JoshWatermanMN @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 10:43:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Self-resentment

That's because they hate that part of themselves which they know they can't change, want to continue indulging, yet resent because they're shallow.

---

by: lampster @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 12:24:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not for mainstream gay consumption

The likes of Andrew Sullivan, Jeff Gannon, and their respective websites are not intended for the gay audience at large.  They are meant to appeal to neo-cons who refuse to entertain the idea that any gays are conservative.  That's why I don't read them.  I'm not in their target demo:  Those who get off on hearing neo-con gays bash liberals, mainstream gays, etc.  Another sick, twisted conservative fetish.  Did you hear they busted another GOP lawmaker for trying to pay for a BJ in a public bathroom?  Towleroad and JoeMyGod have it.

---

by: lampster @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 12:31:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think Sullivan's take on the debate is worth reading

Because there is nothing in his post about "special rights" or "victiemhood".  Perhaps those quotes can be attributed to Gay Patriot, but they didn't come from Sullivan.

http://andrewsulliva...

I think he indirectly brings up a good point here... why is LOGO, a pay channel, hosting this debate instead of CSPAN, a free channel?  Is it because having LOGO host is really the *best* way to do this debate for the gay community, or is it because HRC is looking to make corporate ties with the VIACOM/MTV/LOGO people?  And are those corporate ties in our best interest?

---

by: SarahS @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 13:50:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ooooh I like the corporate ties angel

---

by: Karen in Kalifornia @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 14:14:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I clicked through...

...and you're right, the post is definitely worth reading.

However, the bulk of it is a blockquote from Chris Crain.  That's the good part (which I agree with completely, btw).  All Sully does it tack on a bit of boohooing about "left liberals" at the end.  That part is thoroughly disposable.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto

---

by: Sportin' Life @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 14:24:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Huh?

After all who could argue with the intellectual, philosophical, economic, national security, and social conscience expertise of a network that prides itself on the number of different ways a human being can have engage in sexual behavior while at the same time avoiding good old fashioned marital sexual intercourse?

Glad to hear Cinemax is picking up the debate.

---

by: eastsidekate @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 12:31:57 PM CDT

Wingers

Found this on Pharyngula today, I went there from here and almost forgot which blog I was reading!  Reply #13 may be on to something...

My America includes LGBT families.

---

by: Mena @ Thu Jul 12, 2007 at 12:33:21 PM CDT