For those of you who like to argue about the nature of the Republican Party, here's something to chew on wink


Gays Denied GOP Booth (Raleigh News & Observer)

I personally can't see the Republican Party being able to stay together on this. The religious right at some point will break off or take the party over, causing moderates to split--much like church denominations have done in the past over issues like women in office and more are beginning to do over the "gay issue".

Wow, Im just shocked and awed, how could this be?

I thought all that "working within" had been a smashing success.

This kinda stuff is old news in TX, that havent let the Log Cabinettes here have a booth for years, but the door mats keep hanging in there - keep up the good work LCR, maybe someday you'll really reach the pinnacle of success and you'll be able to pass out pamphlets at your state convention. One can dream....

Ronnie's "Big Tent" doesn't seem so roomy after all.

But I thought Bush represented the "compassionate conservative" aspect of the party, and was inclusive...???? :confused:

Inclusion Wins!

freaking masochists

posted by JTnCarolina
I agree JT and actually, this could be a positive outcome in the long run. It seems like the Religious Right becomes more dogmatic and intolerant with every passing gay/lesbian/fill in the alphabet achievement. As they become more shrill and uncompromising in their insistence on anti-gay attitudes, legislation and platforms, they could very well cause a complete fracture of the Republican party, as the now-weak moderate wing takes off on their own, and the nasty Religious Right-wing (all puns intended) become the modern-day Dixiecrats.

I know that I have heard some reporting that moderate Republicans are concerned that if Bush wins in 2004, they will not be able to rescue the GOP from the devil's deal it has made with the pseudo-Christian Right.

As for the "big tent" the GOP supposedly has - I hope all the LCRs from NC attend the convention, in HOT PINK. If you can't join their party, at least crash it and cause them all to flee from you.

At some point will take the party over? You mean that hasn't already happened?

Too bad Goldwater is dead. He'd be outspoken about this.

[ May 19, 2004, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: twin58 ]

What does our friend PF have to say about this?? :confused:

Oh he'll find some way to blame this on Kerry and the Dems

He's like the black guy who's a white supremicist on the Dave Chappelle Show. He's blind and doesn't know he's black. When he finds out, he divorces his wife of 30 years because she's a "n*gger lover".

PhillyFan probably thinks the "c*ck-sucking f*ggots" deserve it.

Actually, that would be the MOST racist comment EVER made around here... What does it take to get someone banned around here?

Actually, i have no affiliation with the LCR.

By the way, when is Kerry going to support your right to marry rather than to just get on the bus but sit in the back like good little homo's and be quiet.

Wow! Another thread talking about how much we hate the Republicans, how evil the Republicans really are, how only cra-ay-ay-zeee gays would ever be Republican. You know, some people claim this forum is just hopelessly boring and redundant, but I don't know how anyone could think such a thing when presented with unique, insightful threads like this one. I mean, to think that there might be conflicts within a particular political party - wow, do you think the Washington Post and New York Times have heard about this? Stunning! Leave it to the Outsports P&R junkies to pull back the curtain and expose the truth about party politics.

[ May 19, 2004, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: William1865 ]

Um, KWG, you may wanna re-think that one.

PhillyFan is African-American.

Oh the chuckles I get from the banter that goes and has gone back and forth for so long between some of you. But in all seriousness, for better or worse, I'm not registered with either party. Sure the Dems aren't perfect when it comes to gay issues, but when you have such a polarizing thing before the public, very few people will be...we are a society of slow movement in any one direction. I think the bottom line, though, is that eventually, gay folks who identify exclusively with the Republican Party are at some point going to have to deal with the fact that they are not wanted by the majority in the party. Having grown up in a very easily-fractured religious environment, I see many parallels with what's going on in politics today as to what has historically happened in church politics over the years. Again, for better or for worse, we have a predominately two-party political system who can never hope to represent everyone...there's simply too many views out there, and as more polarizing issues come to the forefront, some things will have to give. Kerry's no saint in my book, but he represents the move I'd rather see the country moving towards on gay issues than the way W would have it moving. As for the marriage thing, I don't care what you call it, I just want to be treated by the government the same way anyone else is...let the church worry for themselves how they want to deal with the "marriage" issue...some already support marriage for gays in the religious sense. But anyway, one can go on and on about this. Just remember, if we can't respect and love each other--including our differences, we've (the gay population as a whole) got a loooooooong way to go folks.

[ May 19, 2004, 03:05 PM: Message edited by: JTnCarolina ]

Where does your candidate stand on the right to marry?

i'm not sure where nader stands on this.

If you'd seen the Dave Chappelle skit (he's black too), you'd understand my point. It's about the hypocrisy of self-hating individuals who align themselves with groups who want nothing to do with them, e.g., gays and the Republican Party, as well as blacks and the KKK.

Btw, the show and the particular episode have been discussed previously without calls for banning someone. Dave Chappelle thread

Also, you can download the skit here and decide for yourself. Note the the words used are direct quotes, not my words.

[ May 19, 2004, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: KeyWest Guy ]

Let's see, i'm in favor of lower taxes, so i should vote dem?

favor school vouchers, choice... ETC, i should vote dem?

I hate unions, i should vote DEM?

Oh yeah PF, you are self hating cause you vote repub even if you agree with them 90% of the time.

Anyone who does that, is an idiot..

and speaking of idiots, i'll wait for your response.

I'm shocked you'd support Nader if you don't like unions and you want school vouchers.

Hmm, a group with "Log Cabin" in its name gets a cold shoulder in North Carolina ... in the heart of the Confederacy ... think the association of log cabins with Lincoln might have something to do with it?

"Penny" for your thoughts?

[ May 19, 2004, 05:31 PM: Message edited by: danimal ]

FINALLY PF tells us who his candidate is, Im kinda suprised, but hey, knock yourself out.

Gee, an attitude like that is enough to make you a Goldwater Republican.

Whoops. They're not around anymore.

Well this isnt anything new. Moderate Republicans and Conservative Republicans have never really gotten along in NC anyway, except when they would all continually re-elect Jesse Helms. So they surely wont be including any ho-mo-sex-ulzzz.

NC is a weird state anyway. Theyve had a Democratic governor for 19 of the last 27 years. Their US Senators have always traditionally been one Republican and one Democrat (except for that Lauch Faircloth fiasco). Yet the State House ends up run by Republicans and the state is ultra conservative. So its really quite the retarded stepchild of the political spectrum. Texas is a close to it in that spectrum.

Are you simply in favor of lower taxes, or are you in favor of fiscal responsibility? Certainly, the Republican party as led by George W. Bush is about as wasteful and irresponsible as any Democratic administration you'd care to mention.

You favor choice? Oh you mean school choice. Well, the Republicans are really doing a bangup job getting our kids into private shools. As a product of private schools whose parents paid the taxes and the tuition, I'm all in favor of vouchers. I don't see it as worth voting for George W. Bush, particularly since his ridiculous \"no child left behind\" education policy hasn't done a damn thing to promote private education in this country or even done anything to better educate students in public schools.


Can't say that's a topic that controls my vote. But that's just me.

90% of the time? I don't agree with my friends 90% percent of the time, much less a political party. Voting Democrat isn't necessarily the answer. Even voting Republican can be a legitimate choice. There are basically two problems with your posts here, PF. You're an apologist. The Republicans can do no wrong. Whenever legitimate concerns are raised about Republican offenses against our community or the rest of the world, your reaction is always to say that they lowered your taxes. That's nice, but it doesn't address the great harms they've perpetrated along the way. However, even this could be forgiven. Hell, I'm a yellow dog Democrat. Lots of people on this board put the blinders on when it comes to "our guys," whoever those guys are. The second problem is what gets you the most of your beloved hate mail. You're a pig. You're an arrogant, argumentative, mysoginistic, mysanthropic nut who isn't very pleasant to be around, at least in cyberspace. You seem to enjoy it, so I suppose you're getting what you want out of these exchanges. I have to admit, steaming over the latest of your excesses has given me a moment or two of satisfaction, but on the whole, you're just not important enough to spend this kind of time on. But you asked a question. It's only polite to come up with an answer.

[ May 19, 2004, 09:48 PM: Message edited by: jqueer ]

jqeer, I feel your pain. We've all been there.

You made Julia Sugarbaker proud tonight.

To me it is not only the republican's position on gay marriae - it is their opinion on gay people in general. They really do not want us in their fold. The leaders in NC did not even try to hide their disgust for the gay population. I also checked out the Free Republic page just to see what they are saying. Post after post of hateful and derogratory statements. I realize that these people are not representative of all Republicans - but the leaders in the party tend to agree with them. It is scary about what would happen if they had more power. Why should I support a party who outright shows that they do not want me. Kerry has not come out in favor of gay marriage - and I do not expect him to. At least Kerry and the Democratic party like us - or at least pretend to.
My own polical views tend to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Neither of thses views are currently being represented by the Republican party. Another important issue for me is the Supreme Court nominees. This is a much more important topic to me than gay marriage. There could be several opening on the SC in the next presidential term. With a court stacked with judges like Scalia - we will not even have to worry about gay marriage or equal rights for who knows how long. We have come too far for Bush & Co. to throw us back in the closet where they wish we would have stayed.

JTinCarolina, excellent posts. People do get a bit personal around the politics & religion threads, which is why I stay out of them, but this is very disturbing to me. I am right across the line in Danville, VA, but NC politics are very interesting and easy to keep up with since all my gay friends from Carolina follow it and are deeply involved.

People outside the south do not realize how much religion is tied up in day to day life here. I counted 5 stories in our local paper about churches and religion in the last two weeks, and that is the norm. Christianity is tied into politics here, it is a breath of fresh air to go to the west or the north or even Florida and see that people take separation of church and state very seriously.

I get very discouraged about where I live, and the story about the log cabin republicans in NC just adds to the frustration. Both parties need to accept gays, not just the dems. While I am a democrat, I want my friends to be accepted in either political party.

Well, let's also not forget taht there are other parties other than the Democrats that accept homosexuals, particularly the Greens and Libertarians. And if Nader is running as a Reform Party candidate, then that party's standard-bearer would also be pro-gay. Only the GOP candidate has come out strongly--and repeatedly--for a constitutional BAN against gay marriage.

There are pro-gay Republicans, many of them. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Rudy Giuliani, Paul Cellucci, William Weld, George Pataki, and Lincoln Chafee are some of them. However, the mainstream of the party and its leadership are anti-gay, and unless the Log Cabin can break the hold of the homophobes, the neo-fascists, and the extremist Christians, the GOP's national profile on gay equality is not going to change.

Is it possible for 17 or 18 people to do that?

FT, you hit the nail on the head. A LOT of what we're doing in LCR IS trying to break the stranglehold that the RR has on too much of our Grand Old Party. If others can't - or won't - understand that, that's their problem, but we're going to persevere ... just as those who first took the Democrats to task over support for gay rights did back in the '60s and '70s. And when we do, which we will, the RR will be sent back to the political fringe where it belongs and we'll ALL be better off, whatever our political leanings.

I must say you're doing a bang up job of it!
Congrats! Hows that constitutional amendment coming along??

Inclusion wins!!!

P.S. Have the cowards decided to endorse Bush yet?

Really?

GMG, I'm not a big fan of the GOP, but I can say without question that if the mainstream of the party were along the lines of people like Chafee, Collins, Snowe, even Schwarzenegger, Pataki, Bloomberg, crooko Rowland, etc. (Giuliani was so racist I couldn't stand him) I'd be less opposed to them holding office.

Instead, we've got people like Bill Frist, Don Nickles, Tom DeLay, etc., running Congress, and W in the White House, and the moderates' voices--except occasionally--get shouted down or erased altogether. I don't really see McCain and Hagel as moderates so much as mavericks, though both appear to operate according to principles at odds with the most shameless, fascistic, scary right-wingers, people like Cornyn, Sessions, and the man who must take the cake as the dumbest person in the senate (and one of the most extreme right), James Inhofe. He is REALLY, REALLY far to the Right, on par with Santorum, who hates gays and Democrats with every bone in his body. It's psychotic, I think. (Maybe they feel they have to make up for the absence of people like Jesse Helms.)

How do you propose ever dealing with people like Santorum, Inhofe, Enzi, Cornyn, Chambliss, DeLay, Rohrabacher, etc.? I think these people will NEVER be brought around; I mean, it's not like we're talking about John Danforth or Ed Brooke!

From the NC rethuglicans platform:

"homosexuality is not normal and should not be established as an acceptable 'alternative' lifestyle either in public education or in public policy."

The platform says that state Republicans oppose gay marriage, tax benefits for unmarried partners and "special treatment by law based on nothing other than homosexual behavior or identity."

"We also stand united with private organizations, such as the Boy Scouts, who defend moral decency and freedom according to their own long-held and well-established traditions and beliefs," the platform reads.
_________________________________________________.

Good job guys, keep "working within!"

As a former Republican, I think it comes down to a more basic issue than taxes or school vouchers or the environment. (I don't believe 100% with either of the two major parties on any of those.) What we have seen in today's GOP is the emergence of the belief that gay people are not deserving of equality. Rather, according to voice of way too many in the GOP heirarchy, we are deserving of scorn as sinners and heathens. They can put a Laura Bush smiley-face on things, but it's stories like this which show the inner thoughts of the GOP establishment (aka, the New Taliban).

I certainly don't think the Dems are all a gay person could hope for in a political party, but how on earth can any law-abiding gay person support a Republican Party that sees him or her as less deserving of equality than a murderer sitting on death row?

Since when did we start wanting equality for murderers sitting on death row? I'm a Republican and nobody told me that.

You understand, I'm sure, that some people might make decisions differently than you do. That doesn't mean they're wrong or bad. You might think they're wrong and bad, but that doesn't make it so. I'm just saying.

That's fine when they're making the decision for themselves. When they start making my decisions for me, it becomes a problem. Of course, every government makes decisions for its citizens. What I pay at the pump is a direct result of government policy from taxation to trade policy to our government's ongoing placation of monopolistic control of the oil market by dictators and potentates. The criminal justice system is entirely based on making the decision whether a person will go to jail, or even die, or not based on little if any input from the person who's life is being discussed, or, for that matter, with little input from the person or people who were victimized in the first place. There's no question that everyone who enters politics is doing so to make decisions for other people. Democrats do it. Republicans do it. Even Libertarians do it, but only in private with the blinds drawn. It is our responsibility as citizens to take the stand against these incursions into our decision making whenever we feel they've crossed the line. A mass murderer annoucing to the court it has no jurisdiction over him is not going to be well received. But a same sex couple trying to control their own destiny should encounter no resistance from outside forces. I happen to think pork is an anethema. I think the practice of eating it is barbaric and against G-d's wishes. That doesn't mean I get to tell all you pork lovers out there you can't eat it. I'd be laughed off this board if I announced anyone who ate it was intrinsically evil. It is enough that I do not eat it. It should be enough that Lou Sheldon is not married to a man. He has no business telling me whether I can.

I'm taking things too seriously again, aren't I?

Oh well, I guess I am as humorless as you said I was.

Wait, What is the dixi chic gonna do if she cant have her pork chops n gravy? sheesh...

She'll just have to settle for a cheesesteak *ewww*

Are not murderers sitting on death row permitted to marry? Do not their spouses then automatically become eligible for a variety of federal and state rights? Are these rights available to same-sex couples?

Yes. Yes. No.

But you get to pay taxes and get those taxes cut, what more could a gay want?

Sorry, the mixing of milk and meat is actually a far more serious sin than the mere eating of pork.

Sorry jqueer, Im not Jewish The only thing that has the word "kosher" on it I think are pickles. Mmmmm pickles. wink And actually a lot of people make pork chop gravy with water anyway. And why are we discussing this in a Log Cabin post anyway?

[ May 23, 2004, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: DallasUNC ]

If you hadn't mentioned a boyfriend/spouse in the quietly gay thread, I would have made a sincere joke about not being able to be picky when living in Dallas. Alas, you're off the market, and even if I'm open minded enough to date non-Jews, you are unavailable to me.

As for why we're discussing this in an LCR thread, someone bemoaned the hijacking of the Republican party by the religious right. An appologist for the religious right used the "they're entitled to their opinion" defense. My response, as it generally is, was to present my opinion in the way that they present theirs. And since in my case mandating everyone eat kosher food would not be acceptable in mainstream society, either I'm not entitled to my opinion, or the religious right and its appologists are using their opinions in unconstitutional ways.