Gay Leftist

1980 Was Not a Primmer ~ ESPN Authoritarianism (Updated)

Published by Papa Giorgio

ESPN let’s everyone know, no one can hold differing views of those held by the left.

bigot

I have been saying as of late that in pre-war Germany, it wasn’t that a law was passed that immediately forbade Jews the freedom to interact in business (owning a business), society (respectful interactions with the community), commerce (the buying and selling with all people groups)… they were pushed out of these incrementally. Similarly, we are seeing the same thing happen here. Over a decade the Judeo-Christian view (the traditional Western view of marriage) is now considered bigoted. It is becoming impossible to own businesses in some states… and this view was “federalized” by the Court recently.

Take note that while I agree with Larry 100% that ESPN has a right to fire whomever they wish, this thinking that is starting to pervade corporations and public life is an ethos similar to that of pre-war Germany, and should be called out as “fascistic” by those of us who love freedom.

I first saw this on The Blaze, here is the gist of the story:

Legendary MLB pitcher Curt Schilling on Monday shared a meme to his Facebook page that one pro-LGBT website called “disgusting.”

The post, which Schilling later deleted, showed a man dressed as a woman with a caption referring to the transgender bathroom laws that have become especially controversial recently. It was unclear whether the individual seen in the photo is actually transgender.

Before Schilling deleted the post, however, users on social screen-captured and shared the image.Transgender

[….]

Schilling was suspended by ESPN last year after tweeting a Hitler meme comparing world’s percentage of Muslims to the percentage of Nazis in Germany in 1940. He later deleted the tweet, and apologized, saying, “it didn’t come across in any way as intended.”

And in March, Schilling was criticized for saying of Hillary Clinton, “She should be buried under a jail somewhere.” ESPN confirmed after that comment it still planned to have Schilling return as an analyst on Monday Night Baseball this season, the Huffington Post reported.

But in light of his most recent post about transgender individuals’ bathroom use, the sports network said it is “taking this matter very seriously and are in the process of reviewing it.”

Gay Patriot quotes the main story as well:

Schilling, a baseball analyst for ESPN and former Red Sox pitcher, posted a Facebook comment criticizing a transgender women.

“A man is a man no matter what they call themselves,” read Schilling’s comment, which he apparently posted in response to a photo about a recent North Carolina law that restricts transgender people’s access to bathrooms and locker rooms. “I don’t care what they are, who they sleep with, men’s room was designed for the penis, women’s not so much. Now you need laws telling us differently? Pathetic.”

ESPN issued a statement on Tuesday, saying “ESPN is an inclusive company. Curt Schilling has been advised that his conduct was unacceptable and his employment with ESPN has been terminated.”

Then, Gay Patriot brings in the BOOMSTICK:

The second to the last sentence is a lie; by firing Schilling for having the wrong opinion, they have proven that they are not ‘inclusive’ at all. But, as a private company, they have and should have the right to fire people whose values conflict with their own.

And, that same standard ought to apply to Christian businesses who don’t want to participate in homosexual weddings, but for some reason it doesn’t.  And by “some reason,” I mean the systematic abuse of state power to selectively enable certain politically favored groups to bully other politically disfavored groups.

This is not about empathy for transgendereds; it’s about enforcing compliance with political correctness and punishing those who refuse to comply. In other words, it’s about using power to bully others.

This is FASCISM. Remember, Mussolini defined it for us:Cake Gay Fascism

“Everything I have said and done in these last years is relativism by intuition….  If relativism signifies contempt for fixed categories and men who claim to be bearers of an objective, immortal truth… then there is nothing more relativistic than fascistic attitudes and activity….  From the fact that all ideologies are of equal value, that all ideologies are mere fictions, the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his own ideology and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable.”

Peter Kreeft, A Refutation of Moral Relativism: Interviews with an Absolutist (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press; 1999), 18.

And POWER this is about, because you cannot have equality (as the left sees it) without an authoritarian government to make sure of it.

For the curious who missed a previous post/upload on this, here is the North Carolina law and misunderstanding of by the left and Democrats on this protection:

A Medical Doctor Fired For Expressing “Health Pride”

Published by Papa Giorgio

Health and religious pride excluded… only gay pride allowed. (Hat-Tip to Gospel for Life) If you are a medical doctor, do not say the following… as true as it may be:

  • “The evidence is irrefutable that behaviors common within the homosexual community are unhealthy and high risk for a host of serious medical consequences, including STD’s, HIV and AIDS, anal cancer, hepatitis, parasitic intestinal infections, and psychiatric disorders,” Church reportedly wrote. 
  • “Life expectancy is significantly decreased as a result of HIV/AIDS, complications from the other health problems, and suicide. This alone should make it reprehensible to the medical community, who has an obligation to promote and model healthy behaviors and lifestyles.”

By the way… if you are “up-in-the-air,” or undecided on if the homosexual lifestyle has a “net” negative effect (especially for gay males), you may want to take some time and read my post on the matter:

Here is a short video and LINK to Mass Resistance’s story:

World Magazine has this to say about the situation:

HIV/AIDS is the most politicized disease of the modern era. From the start of the epidemic, political correctness dampened mobilization against it. When the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) first published its report on the strange disease on June 5, 1981, staffers wrangled over how to note the homosexual aspect of the pandemic: Would mentioning that gay men were predominantly affected offend the gay community? Would it inflame and legitimize “homophobes”? Many skittish doctors and leaders tiptoed around telling the gay community to stop having reckless sex. 

Medicine and public health reflect political and social climates. The American Medical Association (AMA)—the largest association of physicians and medical students in the United States—has at least 35 LGBT-related policies, several with little or nothing to do with medical practice. One AMA policy calls the denial of same-sex marriage “discriminatory” and “harmful.” Another supports child adoption by same-sex partners. Another suggests “improving” the curriculum in medical schools to portray sexual history in a “nonjudgmental” and “sensitive” manner.

Such LGBT-affirming narrative has infiltrated many medical institutions so deeply that Christian medical professionals find it tough to speak out, even from a medical standpoint. 

[….]

Paul Church is another such doctor who’s facing hostility for voicing his medical and moral convictions. As an urologist working in Boston for almost 30 years, Church has had dozens of patients who self-identify as LGBT. Over the years, Church observed a pattern with his gay patients: A majority also suffered from a gamut of serious diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, parasitic infections, hepatitis, and anal cancer.

Church’s patients reflect well-documented, nationwide statistics: Individuals who practice homosexual behaviors face higher risks of various diseases and sexually transmitted infections. Research also shows the LGBT community has higher instances of mental issues, such as depression, suicide, substance abuse, and eating disorders.

So when the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), one of the nation’s top health facilities and a major teaching hospital for Harvard Medical School, started actively promoting the LGBT movement, Church became alarmed. As a member of the BIDMC staff and Harvard Medical School faculty, he voiced his opposition by citing medical, religious, and moral concerns.

[….]

That struck him as irresponsible healthcare, Church told me: “The hospital is not Home Depot or Starbucks. In medicine, we have a higher commitment and mission to promote healthy lifestyles and behaviors, but promoting homosexuality is contrary to that mission.”

Gender Neutral Elementary Bathrooms ~ Thank You Democrats

Published by Papa Giorgio

HotAir has this nugget:

I really didn’t think it was going to happen this fast when I predicted last week that schools were going to need all new bathrooms soon to accommodate “transgender children.” That case involved a Missouri high school senior who triggered a large protest when he insisted on changing in the girls’ locker room. I clearly failed to anticipate just how quickly the SJW forces can move because one school district in the San Francisco area is already on top of the problem. They’re going to entirely unisex bathrooms to avoid insulting any “differently gendered” students, by golly, and they’re starting with the elementary school. (Yahoo News)

[….]

Who could possibly have guessed that the epicenter for erasing the concept of gender from the early education system would come from San Francisco? I suppose if you indoctrinate them early enough you can really strike a blow for change, but this highly disturbing trend isn’t just taking place in the left coast granola-centric community. This entire concept of restructuring the human race in abject denial of fundamental, biological reality – not to mention millennia of attempting to instill civil behavior for young ladies and gentlemen – should be a warning sign. We’re managing to tear down our own house from the inside and the government seems to be perfectly willing to finance the wrecking ball.

When you read a facepalm inducing story like this you might be wondering, well how many kids are having gender issues in kindergarten? The obvious and easy answer is that none of them are, but some of them have parents who watch Rachel Maddow or read Sally Kohn too frequently and you never know what they’ll be getting up to with their own children. Another case in point comes to us once again not from California, but from Nashville, Tennessee. Hang on to your hats for this one. (Yahoo)

Christiane Davis, a stay-at-home mom, lives in Nashville, Tennessee, with her husband, Jeremiah, and their two kids, A.J. and Patrick. What most people wouldn’t know at first glance is that A.J., which stands for Andrew Jackson, is a female-to-male transgender child.

On Nov. 14, 2007, Davis gave birth to a baby girl named Nadine. Davis began seeing signs that her child was a boy rather than a girl early on. By the time A.J. turned three, he was refusing to wear “girly” clothes. Another issue was A.J.’s hair: He did not want it to be touched. “He didn’t want me to put it up into little clips or bows,” she said.

Davis thought she was going to have a tomboy and didn’t want to label her child anything. She thought her then daughter was just a strong-willed little girl. But it went beyond that.

The story just goes downhill from there. I can’t even imagine what’s going to become of the Davis family’s daughter in later years but it seems to be beyond our control. I’m just hoping they’re not going to try chemically altering her body to delay the onset of puberty or begin scheduling surgery on her….

NOT JUST San Francisco:

Gay Patriot Tackles A Killer in the Gay Community ~ Moral Equivalency

Published by Papa Giorgio

Since marriage is no longer about creating a stable environment for children, and has become (and this mainly the fault of heterosexual liberals [e.g., liberalism]) about personal fulfillment, validation, and access to social benefits, there literally is no constraint on how much more broadly it can be redefined. ~ Gay Patriot

Gay Patriot bravely steps out on this subject and accepts the challenge… as any rational thinking conservatarian would:

The New York Times has noticed that bareback sex is a thing gay people are doing, which is breaking news from about the mid-1990′s when (according to Wikipedia) gay publications like The Advocate first took note of the phenomenon of gay men having unprotected sex and, in some cases, deliberately seeking HIV infection.

Anyway, the Times, perhaps after failing to find a celebrity to comment on the issue, goes to the next best source for information on epidemiology and behavioral psychology… an English professor from SUNY-Buffalo. Who provides this analysis:

What I learned in my research is that gay men are pursuing bareback sex not just for the thrill of it, but also as a way to experience intimacy, vulnerability and connection. Emotional connection may be symbolized in the idea that something tangible is being exchanged. A desire for connection outweighs adherence to the rules of disease prevention.

And some guys are apparently getting intimate, tangible, emotional connections 10-20 times a night in bathhouses.

It also seems that the readers of the NY Times, based on the comments, are in complete denial that this phenomenon exists, and think the author is just making it up to attack the gay community. Liberals choose to blame the recent dramatic increases in HIV infection rates on “the stigma attached to HIV.” Um, excuse me, but don’t stigmas usually make people avoid those things to which stigmas are attached?

In the real world, stigmatizing a behavior results in less of it: Which is why people don’t use the N-word in public any more and smoking has declined as a social activity. When the social stigma is removed … as with HIV infection and teenage pregnancy … you get more of those things.

…read more…

Bravo. I just wish to mention that this area of the body is not made for sex. And many will read the following and think that this is an attack on the humanity of the gay lifestyle/choice. It is not, it is a cry for gay men to become monogamous and cease having relations with the people they purport to love in that area. It is out of compassion, not hatred the following is pointed out:

Homosexuals also continue to contract and spread other diseases at rates significantly higher that the community at large. These include syphilis, gonorrhea, herpes, hepatitis A and B, a variety of intestinal parasites including amebiases and giardiasis, and even typhoid fever (David G. Ostrow, Terry Alan Sandholzer, and Yehudi M. Felman, eds., Sexually Transmitted Diseases in Homosexual Men; see also, Sevgi O. Aral and King K. Holmes, “Sexually Transmitted Diseases in the AIDS Era,” Scientific American). This is because rectal intercourse or sodomy, typically practiced by homosexuals, is one of the most efficient methods of transmitting disease. Why? Because nature designed the human rectum for a single purpose: expelling waste from the body. It is built of a thin layer of columnar cells, different in structure than the plate cells that line the female reproductive tract. Because the wall of the rectum is so thin, it is easily ruptured during intercourse, allowing semen, blood, feces, and saliva to directly enter the bloodstream. The chances for infection increases further when multiple partners are involved, as is frequently the case: Surveys indicate that American male homosexuals average between 10 and 110 sex partners per year (L. Corey and K. K. Holmes, “Sexual Transmission of Hepatitis A in Homosexual Men,” New England Journal of Medicine; and, Paul Cameron et al., “Sexual Orientation and Sexually Transmitted Disease,” Nebraska Medical Journal).

Not surprisingly, these diseases shorten life expectancy. Social psychologist Paul Cameron compared over 6,200 obituaries from homosexual magazines and tabloids to a comparable number of obituaries from major American Newspapers. He found that while the median age of death of married American males was 75, for sexually active homosexual American males it is 42. For homosexual males infected with the AIDS virus, it was 39. While 80 percent of married American men lived to 65 or older, less than two percent of the homosexual men covered in the survey lived as long

…read more…

…these problems don’t remain personal and private. The drive, especially since this issue is associated with the word “gay rights,” is to make sure your worldview reflects theirs. To counter this effort, we must demand that the medical and psychiatric community take off their PC blinders and treat these people responsibly.  If we don’t, the next thing you know, your child will be taking a “tolerance” class explaining how “transexuality” is just another “lifestyle choice”…. After all, it is the only way malignant narcissists will ever feel normal, healthy, and acceptable: by remaking society – children – in their image

Tammy Bruce, The Death of Right and Wrong: Exposing the Left’s Assault on Our Culture and Values (Roseville: Prima, 2003), 92, 206.

In the black community, for example, one of the major factors in the degradation of that sub-culture is fatherlessness. In order to stop the devolving of young men into criminals, the black community would have to step up to the plate and accept responsibility for their own actions and change behavior… not blaming outside forces. Similarly, the gay community will have to battle their demons as well to help their subculture. See my Cumulative Case for some ideas of what these demons are.

Many years ago, Tammy Bruce reemphasized this dangerous, self-destructive notion and action:

….What a difference treatment makes! As researchers succeeded in developing ever more effective drugs, AIDS became—like gonorrhea, syphilis, and hepatitis B before it—what many if consider to be a simple “chronic disease.” And many of the gay men who had heeded the initial warning went right back to having promiscuous unprotected sex here is now even a movement—the “bareback” movement—that encourages sex  without condoms. The infamous bathhouses are opening up again; drug use, sex parties, and hundreds of sex partners a year are all once again a feature of the “gay lifestyle.” In fact, “sexual liberation” has simply become a code phrase for the abandonment of personal responsibility, respect, and integrity.

In his column for Salon.com, David Horowitz discussed gay radicals like the writer Edmund White. During the 1960s and beyond, White addressed audiences in the New York gay community on the subject of sexual liberation. He told one such audience that “gay men should wear their sexually transmitted diseases like red badges of courage in a war against a  sex-negative society.” And did they ever. Then, getting gonorrhea was the so-called courageous act. Today, the stakes are much higher. That red badge is now one of AIDS suffering and death, and not just for gay men themselves. In their effort to transform society, the perpetrators are taking women and children and straight men with them.

Even Camille Paglia, a woman whom I do not often praise, astutely commented some years ago, “Everyone who preached  free love in the Sixties is responsible for AIDS. This idea that it was somehow an accident, a microbe that sort of fell from  heaven—absurd. We must face what we did.”

The moral vacuum did rear its ugly head during the 1960s with the blurring of the lines of right and wrong (remember “situational ethics”?),  the sexual revolution, and the consequent emergence of the feminist and gay civil-rights movements. It’s not the original ideas of these movements, mind you, that caused and have perpetuated the problems we’re discussing. It was and remains the few in power who project their destructive sense of themselves onto the innocent landscape, all  the while influencing and conditioning others. Today, not only is the blight not being faced, but in our Looking-Glass world, AIDS is romanticized and sought after….

Tammy Bruce, The Death of Right and Wrong: Exposing the Left’s Assault on Our Culture and Values (Roseville: Prima, 2003), 96-97.

And take note I talk about the nihilistic culture in the gay community [infected by liberalism] in a more philosophical and religious sense than most places, from my chapter in my book:

…Foucault looked at truth as an object to be constructed by those whom wielded the power to define facts.  “Madness, abnormal sex, and criminality were not objective categories but rather social constructs.”[73] He embraced what mainstream society had rejected, which was sadomasochism and drug use. In 1984 Foucault died from contracting AIDS.  One should take note that Foucault so enjoyed his hope of dying “of an overdose of pleasure” that he frequented gay bathhouses and sex clubs even after knowing of his communicable disease.  Many people were infected because of Foucault and Foucault’s post-modern views.[74]  On a lighter note, Dinesh D’Souza tells of a contest about the time Foucault was dying.  The story is fitting for those who view hell as a real option:

People were debating whether AIDS victims should be quarantined as syphilis victims had been in the past.  [William F.] Buckley said no. The solution was to have a small tattoo on their rear ends to warn potential partners.  Buckley’s suggestion caused a bit of a public stir, but the folks at National Review were animated by a different question: What should the tattoo say?  A contest was held, and when the entries were reviewed, the winner by unanimous consent was Hart.[75]  He [Hart] suggested the lines emblazoned on the gates to Dante’s Inferno: “Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.”[76]

You see, in order to have one’s alternative lifestyle accepted, one must attack “what truth is” in its absolute (Judeo-Christian) sense.  Truth is whatever the powerful decided it was, or so Foucault proposed.  This is the attack.  “We are subjected to the production of truth through power and we cannot exercise power except through the production of truth.”[77]  Foucault, sadly, never repented from violating God’s natural order and truth.  He was a living example in his death of what Paul said was naturally to follow in their rejection of God’s gracious revelation of Himself to humanity,[78] Romans 1:26-32 reads:

Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn’t know how to be human either—women didn’t know how to be women, men didn’t know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches.… And it’s not as if they don’t know better. They know perfectly well they’re spitting in God’s face. And they don’t care—worse, they hand out prizes to those who do the worst things best! [79]

Foucault said that “sex was worth dying for,”[80] but is it?…

Notes:
[73] Ibid.
[74] Ibid.
[75] Jeffrey Hart, a professor many years ago at Dartmouth Univ.
[76] Dinesh D’ Souza, Letters to a Young Conservative: The Art of Mentoring (New York: Basic Books, 2002), 20.
[77] Flynn, 235-237.
[78] Walter A Elwell, Evangelical Commentary on the Bible (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996), Romans 1:21
[79] Eugene H Peterson, The Message: The Bible in Contemporary Language (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2002), Romans 1:26-27, 30-32.
[80] Ibid., 235.

 

Canada On Verge of Banning Christians from Professional Life

Published by Papa Giorgio

Watchmen News has a great article in regards to this important case that will be heard by the Supreme Court in Canada:

An intense struggle is happening in the realm of professional licensing in Canada. The religious freedom of Christians and others is colliding on a grand scale with the “equality rights” of the LGBTQ identity group, and as the tide turns in favor of equality rights, we are starting to witness socially accepted ostracism of Christians by professional bodies.

On April 24th, the law society of Canada’s largest province voted against admitting among their ranks graduates of Trinity Western University, for the sole reason that the school’s community covenant, which students (and teachers) voluntarily sign upon admission or hiring, reserves sexual intimacy for heterosexual marriage. Nova Scotia followed suit, wording their rejection as approval on the condition that TWU change its community covenant or allow students to opt out. In British Columbia, where the school is located, the law society voted on April 11th to admit TWU graduates to the bar, but momentum is building for the law society to reverse that decision in a special meeting on June 10th.

[….]

Christians Are the New Racists

Just a few years ago, it would have sounded absurd to say that Christians who believe in traditional heterosexual marriage are akin to racists. Today this opinion is quite seriously held by an increasing number of our most prominent lawyers. B.C. Bencher Cameron Ward put it this way: “I remember that in the 1960s some people in the deep south of the United States were made to feel unwelcome at lunch counters, at the fronts of buses and, indeed, in some universities…TWU’s community covenant is an anachronism, a throwback that wouldn’t be out of place in the 1960s.” Other Benchers asked “whether we would have the same debate over discrimination against other equity-seeking groups, like women, people with disabilities or racial minorities.”

What is perhaps most concerning about these comparisons of Christianity to racism and other heinous intolerance is that they lead directly to the belief that Christians are simply not capable of practicing their professions without imperilling the rights of minority groups. Just as they would feel justified in excluding those who hold racist or misogynistic beliefs from positions of influence, so many Benchers also found it right and good to exclude Christians from the legal profession. For such lawyers, Christians have become synonymous with bigots who represent a public threat.

[….]

The current developments in Canada bring to mind a quote from Princeton Professor Robert George, who recently warned Catholics in Washington, D.C. of a nascent persecution of Christians in our society:

To be a witness to the Gospel today is to make oneself a marked man or woman. It is to expose oneself to scorn and reproach. To unashamedly proclaim the Gospel in its fullness is to place in jeopardy one’s security, one’s personal aspirations and ambitions, the peace and tranquility one enjoys, one’s standing in polite society. One may in consequence of one’s public witness be discriminated against and denied educational opportunities and the prestigious credentials they may offer; one may lose valuable opportunities for employment and professional advancement; one may be excluded from worldly recognition and honors of various sorts; one’s witness may even cost one treasured friendships. It may produce familial discord and even alienation from family members. Yes, there are costs of discipleship—heavy costs…(more)

…read it all…

With the above context in mind, Moonbat asks a series of questions: “Why are the liberals who command the government–media establishment constantly ramming homosexuality and even transsexuality down our throats lately?” Here is an answer he gives that makes sense, and why Liberals [proper] are using gay-leftists like the Palestinians are using “refugees”… for political purposes/gains.

Moonbattery continues:

Answer the second question and you have answered the first. Sexual perversion has been fundamentally transformed into a “civil rights” issue not merely to advance the cultural Marxist divide-and-conquer strategy, but to attack the Christian religion.

The campaign against Canada’s Trinity Western University is illustrative:

On April 24th, the law society of Canada’s largest province voted against admitting among their ranks graduates of Trinity Western University, for the sole reason that the school’s community covenant, which students (and teachers) voluntarily sign upon admission or hiring, reserves sexual intimacy for heterosexual marriage. Nova Scotia followed suit, wording their rejection as approval on the condition that TWU change its community covenant or allow students to opt out. In British Columbia, where the school is located, the law society voted on April 11th to admit TWU graduates to the bar, but momentum is building for the law society to reverse that decision in a special meeting on June 10th.

For TWU to renounce this covenant under pressure would be for it to renounce the faith upon which the school is based. It would be moral suicide. That’s why liberals are trying to force this to happen.

Very likely, TWU will be destroyed, either as a Christian institution, or as a university:

With same-sex marriage legalized, the public debate is now strongly weighed against Christians who believe in traditional marriage [i.e., literally all Christians, by definition], and they face rapidly mounting charges of unreasonable intolerance. During the April 11th debate by the B.C. law society (read the transcript online), some Benchers considered TWU’s covenant discriminatory because it requires gay students to abstain from intimacy “even within a legal marriage,” and because it prevents gay students “from being married by the State, a right that was hard fought and hard won.”

Nothing could be more quintessentially liberal than sanctimoniously screeching the words “discriminatory” and “intolerance” to justify intolerant discrimination against Christians.

As equality rights [i.e., homosexual privileges] have been gaining ground, religious freedom has been on the retreat. Many lawyers now argue that even a private religious school like TWU must not be allowed to “discriminate” in its hiring practices by choosing teachers who abide by its moral tenets or by expecting students to conform their behavior to the beliefs that the school espouses.

Ominously, the case is heading toward Canada’s Supreme Court, where leftists hope to achieve a major victory over Christianity.

…read more…

Much like the polygamy case in Canada, so too will we be watching what the outcome is in Canada. I wonder how long it would take for unrest once Christianity is outlawed, i-f it is outlawed.

Gay Repub Running for Cali’s 52nd Congressional District – Harassed

Published by Papa Giorgio

The Inquisitr brings us up to speed on the main issue at hand, and it is this — totalitarian thinking of the LEFT, which includes the Gay Laeft:

Gay Republican congressional candidate Carl DeMaio feels he is being attack by liberal groups and LGBT-friendly organizations simply because he is a Republican. Ads mocking DeMaio have included putting his likeness on the body of a drag queen.

Dana Perino of Fox News first brought the Carl DeMaio race to national attention after flying to the state to meet the man who might become the first openly gay Republican to be elected to the state Congress. Perino was moved by Demaio’s life story and achievement working across the aisle to foster economic growth when serving in other elected positions. The man referred to by many as “the gay Republican” was orphaned at 13 when his dad left the family a few weeks for his mother died. He and his brothers and sisters were separated into different foster homes by social services.

As a young adult, Carl DeMaio worked to put himself through a top-tier college and ultimately went on to build and then sell two multi-million dollar companies. The Californian’s story sounds like the embodiment of the American dream, but the attack ads he has endured since throwing his hat into the ring for a congressional seat have been deemed as demonizing, demoralizing, and full of “gay-baiting” hate speech. Media Matters is among those who appear to not support DeMaio and have mocked Fox News for supporting the candidate. The gay Republican was also booed during a gay pride parade in California…

…read more…

The story was brought to my attention (and the video starting out the post) are with thanks to Gateway Pundit. GP puts it thus:

Carl DeMaio was orphaned when he was 14. He was taken in by Jesuits and earned his way to Georgetown University. After college, Carl founded two successful businesses before the age of thirty. He sold the businesses and was elected to San Diego City Council. Now Carl DeMaio is running for Congress.

That’s why the liberal gay groups hate him. Ads mocking DeMaio, by far left groups, have included putting his likeness on the body of a drag queen.

On Wednesday Carl DeMaio’s San Diego office was vandalized. Computers were destroyed and electrical cords were cut only six days before the primary election.

Another recent story that encapsulates the totalitarianism (total thought) of the LEFT is this story via Gay Patriot about a law professor at the University of Virginia, WHO ACTUALLY SUPPORTS GAY MARRIAGE, has a campaign by the gay-left against him because his thinking also includes “religious freedom.” This apparently is not “total” enough for the left:

Douglas Laycock is a law professor at the University of Virginia, a supporter of gay marriage, but also a supporter of religious liberty. Therefore, he is now the target of an intimidation and harassment campaign from the intolerant gay left.

An outfit called GetEQUAL (led by its co-director Heather Cronk) has launched a national e-mail campaign attacking Laycock for his role in shoring up the legal arguments of those who support what it calls “religious bigotry.”

GetEQUAL has also recruited a University of Virginia law student (Greg Lewis) and an alum (Stephanie Montenegro) to send an open letter to Laycock asking him to consider the “real-world consequences that [his] work is having.” And they have submitted a Freedom of Information Act request seeking e-mails between Laycock and various right-wing and religious liberty groups.

Laycock has apparently committed the unforgivable Thoughtcrime of valuing religious liberty and freedom over the oh-so-delicate feelings of … I’m just going to say it… pansies. (Not used as a pejorative against their sexuality, but against their mewling, whiny, complete lack of emotional strength.)…

…read more…

The “Gay Gestapo” Needs to Be Routed, Liberty Demands It!

Published by Papa Giorgio

“The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.” ~ Last Line, Animal Farm, George Orwell. (h/t, GayPatriot)

This comes way of a h/t by a friend, and is Robert George (via First Things), and was originally linked by Denny Burk:

Mozilla has now made its employment policy clear.

  • No Catholics need apply.
  • Or Evangelical Christians.
  • Or Eastern Orthodox.
  • Or Orthodox Jews.
  • Or Mormons.
  • Or Muslims.

Unless, that is, you are the “right kind” of Catholic, Evangelical, Eastern Orthodox Christian, observant Jew, Mormon, or Muslim, namely, the kind who believes your religious or philosophical tradition is wrong about the nature of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife, and the view now dominant among secular elites is correct. In that case, Mozilla will consider you morally worthy to work for them. Or maybe you can work for them even if you do happen to believe (or should I say “believe”) your faith’s teaching—so long as you keep your mouth shut about it: “Don’t ask, don’t tell.”

You are disqualified from employment, however, if you reveal your alleged “bigotry” and “cause pain” by stating your convictions. And you are certainly disqualified if you do anything to advance the historic understanding of marriage as a conjugal union in the public square.

[….]

You can bet it’s not just Mozilla. Now that the bullies have Eich’s head as a trophy on their wall, they will put the heat on every other corporation and major employer. They will pressure them to refuse employment to those who decline to conform their views to the new orthodoxy. And you can also bet that it won’t end with same-sex marriage. Next, it will be support for the pro-life cause that will be treated as moral turpitude in the same way that support for marriage is treated. Do you believe in protecting unborn babies from being slain in the womb? Why, then: “You are a misogynist. You are a hater of women. You are a bigot. We can’t have a person like you working for our company.” And there will be other political and moral issues, too, that will be treated as litmus tests for eligibility for employment. The defenestration of Eich by people at Mozilla for dissenting from the new orthodoxy on marriage is just the beginning.

Catholics, Evangelicals, Orthodox Christians, Mormons, observant Jews… and others had better stand together and face down the bullies, and they had better do it now, or else they will be resigning themselves and their families to a very unhappy status in this society. A very unhappy status indeed. When tactics of intimidation succeed, their success ensures that they will be used more and more often in more and more contexts to serve more and more causes. And standing up to intimidation will become more and more difficult. And more and more costly. And more and more dangerous.

…read more…

As I see it, those who are on the right who are religious better also become familiar with those who are conservatively libertarian who happen to be gay ~ like the people at gaypatriot.net. In other words, Catholics, Evangelicals, Orthodox Christians, Mormons, observant Jews, and the like shouldn’t be all whom we should join hands with. There are gay men and women who want the Constitutional Republic to succeed, UNLIKE their counter-parts on the left (a majority of leftists in fact). And to my friends who are of the right-leaning/homosexual persuasion, do not dismiss resources like What Is Marriage?, or people who may have a religious worldview that considers the full approval from society on same-sex relations immoral. We fall into the Reagan line of demarcation when he said, “somebody who agrees with you 80% of the time is an 80% friend not a 20% enemy.”

To wit I will post again a paragraph written by Gay Patriot I loved, and that gets to the bottom of the matter… and it is this: don’t be so myopic to see this as an attack of gays, see it as the rotten fruit which infects all conservatively minded views of society, theology, liberty, and what constitutes happiness ~ e.g., LEFTISM.

Since marriage is no longer about creating a stable environment for children, and has become (and this mainly the fault of heterosexual liberals) about personal fulfillment, validation, and access to social benefits, there literally is no constraint on how much more broadly it can be redefined.

My compatriots who are conservatively minded will hear–for instance–Tammy Bruce (above) mention she is FOR gay-marriage… and they simply dismiss her (some will). What she means when she states such a thing and what Andrew Sullivan means are two VERY different things. The former wants the people, state-by-state to be persuaded enough that this is the right step for society in their state/country. She rejects the abuses by judges to usurp the will of the people.

The latter wants it effectively shoved down our throat while acting surprised that the progressive establishment he has supported during his career has — gasp — tyrannical tendencies. (One need only view history and see that pretty much any totalitarian movement in the 20th century have been leftists.) Yesterday, Dennis Prager had some great commentary that builds on this these somewhat:

Some compatriots in the fight for liberty… not totalitarian equality:

Newest attack on freedom: Gay Mafia Targets Oregon Grocer Over Anti-Gay Marriage Facebook Statements