Gore sexual assualt Follow

I didn't present that as a quote from him though. Since his view of "gay rights" pretty clearly opposes the positions taken by conservatives, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that he's going after gay conservative politicians.


Tell you what. Find me an example of a Democrat he's gone after. Can you do that?





He defines "gay rights" in a way which aligns itself with the liberal agenda regarding homosexuality and opposes the conservative view. I'm not sure why you're choosing to be so coy about this.



You're free to go find other information about him and his actions so far Joph. It's not like I'm preventing you from doing so.



I provided the wiki as a means of identifying the person I was talking about. You're the one who quoted from said article, cut out half the quote, and attempted to use the other half to refute something I'd said which was supported by the half of the quote you left off.

Feel free to be butthurt about that if you want. It's your own doing, not mine.




I think I touched a nerve!




Lol! Yup. Totally touched a nerve. How about next time not be so obvious about editing a quotation? Then you wont feel all embarrassed about it and feel like you have to lash out at me and call me names. It's ok Joph, we get that you're human.

You tell me. Has he gone after Democrats? I'm just pointing out the list of people he has outted, and amazingly every single one of them is a Republican, works for the Republican party, or is in some way publicly connected to GOP and/or conservative politics. If you want to make the argument that he's an equal opportunity outer of gay people in politics, then by all means go find some evidence to back that up.

Until you do, I'll just go on the list of people he has outed, which all just happen to be conservatives.


PS: He's also not the only one, just probably has the biggest track record so far. The method is ugly to say the least.

Now, let's be fair. IF Republican members came out and said "I am gay, but I am against equal rights for homosexuals because of (reason)" then we would have a basis of argument. Usually said "(reason)" will be "because of my religion." Which then leads us to "Well, so you're using religion to support your legislative decisions... that's pretty messed up." They could be like gbaji and say "Because gays can't procreate"... which makes them hypocrites for not advocating for the repealing of, say, marriage benefits for elderly or infertile couples (or those who don't want kids), as well as adopters. There are a lot of reasons, all of which can be argued with...

BUT most Republican, conservative, anti-gay folks who "come out" through media attention, by and large, are covering up their homosexuality because they know that there is a huge amount of cognitive dissonance between what they say and what they practice. We call this "hypocrisy." Folks tend not to like it. Political opponents certainly don't (but it makes an easy target), and constituents certainly don't. I don't think people should be lambasted for their orientation any more than their race or their religion. But when you support something and CLEARLY defy it in your day-to-day life, it makes me go "Uh... what?" If a Congresscritter was hugely behind initiatives from MADD and was caught drunk driving, they'd be hung out to dry. If one advocated stricter penalties for drugs and was caught doing blow, they'd be FUBARed. If one voted against equal rights or protection for gays using religious rhetoric and is caught soliciting sex in an airport bathroom... well... hypocrisy doesn't go over well.

No, you tell me. You're claiming that he targets conservatives. Would he expose me or not?

Over 28,000 posts hardly makes me rare.

No. Damn it, now I'm irrelevant.




Shut it

Of course. The fact that they USUALLY cannot while being Republican is a travesty. As I have been arguing the entire time. The GOP is, by a majority, anti-homosexual. To claim otherwise is to ignore reality. I'm not even talking about gay rights. Well, I expand it later to such, but at the very basis, the majority of GOP voters are against homosexuality as a concept, not even as a legally defensible life style.

And as I said before, sure they can take opposing views. I find plenty of libertarian views palatable, or at the least, understandable. But the problem is that the GOP voting base does NOT want gays, never mind any rights for them. The GOP, for better or (MUCH) worse has aligned itself with the religious movement of America, which is vehemently anti-homosexual. If you cannot see this, well, you need your eyesight checked.


Nope! I'm saying that if they don't, and then are shown to be gay they get turned on by the GOP. If they vote against equal rights or protections for gay and are then shown to be gay, they are turned on by the Dems. It's, er, kinda obvious. Each party is out for each other... hence why I am not in a party.

The GOP is perfectly fine with Bi's though, assuming they only marry women. It's a weird dynamic, but they named a wildlife refuge after Stewart McKinney, (R-CT). Sidenote: this guy was the guy who got 'ole Barney Frank to come out of the closet.

Debo,



It would help if you actually knew what capitalism was. Ex-politicians using junk science to steal money from american taxpayers against their will is hardly capitalism.

No, that's not what liberals want. We just want to see equality. No one is saying you have to accept it or even like it. You just shouldn't be able to discriminate based on sexual orientation. It's that simple. I'm not surprised that you can't grasp it.

Next you're going to tell me Jesus wasn't white.