October 11, 2006
But that rule doesn’t apply to homosexuals who dare to engage in the heresy of independent thought and deviation from the political orthodoxy of the “gay rights” movement.
Homosexual activist Mike Rogers said he will reveal the identities of homosexual Republicans on Capitol Hill each day "for hypocritically opposing gay rights for political reasons when they themselves are gay."But according to Rogers, who runs a web log called BlogActive.com, he's "reporting on hypocrisy," not "outing them."
"The right wing of this country is so out of control beating up gay people," Rogers told Cybercast News Service on Tuesday.
Rogers named two congressional staffers who he believes had "a vested interest in protecting closeted men like former Republican Congressman Mark Foley so the majority can remain in power." One of those staffers left Capitol Hill earlier this year.
Rogers also blamed the Republican Party for pushing the Federal Marriage Amendment and the military's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy.
"It's [because of] those kinds of things that it's time to say 'enough, it's over,'" Rogers said. "Those who equate being gay with immorality will be surprised just how diverse the House Republican Caucus is when it comes to sexual orientation.
"The party is over for these guys who think they can be gay and beat up gay people, and there are a lot of them in the Republican Party," Rogers added.
In other words, homosexuals are only as free to exercise their political rights as the “queer mafia” like Rogers are willing to permit them to be. If they don’t hew the right (or is that “left”?) political line, they lose what we keep being told is an essential right.
It rather makes me wonder if folks Rogers and his ilk are behind the Foley scandal, outing him not because of his sex talk with a former page but because of his politics. After all, folks like Rogers still view Gerry Studds as a hero and a role model, even though he actually engaged in sex acts with a page while that boy was serving his internship. The difference (other than the fact that Studds’ actions were much more repulsive) is that Studds is appropriately “progressive” in his politics, while Foley was a conservative. Thus Studds was and is exempt from criticism while the activists seek to destroy gay Republicans because they dare to support conservative policies.
What moral midgets like Rogers fail to recognize is that the overwhelming majority of conservatives are significantly more tolerant of homosexuals than he is. We judge them based upon their individual behavior and character, not upon their adherence to the correct set of political beliefs. We don’t use their sexuality as a club to beat them into submission – that is the job for Mike Rogers in the other intolerant leftists of the gay no-rights movement.
And remember, this is not the first time Mike Rogers has attempted to intimidate gay conservatives.
Posted by: Greg at
11:03 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 538 words, total size 4 kb.
Anyway, I'm glad that he had nothing to do with it.
After reading the link, I have to say, I'm completely disgusted. It reads like a bad tabloid or gossip column.
Good work!
Lindsey
Posted by: Lindsey at Wed Oct 11 13:41:54 2006 (/orhF)
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Wed Oct 11 15:12:19 2006 (HNpeG)
Posted by: Lindsey Russell at Wed Oct 11 15:43:09 2006 (/orhF)
Posted by: Gene at Thu Oct 12 15:19:48 2006 (raFYn)
That flyerplays right into the hands of those you seek to defeat.
Speaking as the local GOP precinct chair, I beg you (and Mr. Owens, who produced it) NOT to send it into my precinct.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Thu Oct 12 16:15:26 2006 (UwrB2)
21 queries taking 0.0099 seconds, 34 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.