RE: GOP Renunciation
"What's the difference between the fight for black civil rights and gay civil rights?"
I know. I know. They're both mythological beings? Civil rights are civil rights. The fundamental idea of civil rights is that they apply to human beings. Not black human beings, not homosexual human beings, just plain, unhyphenated human beings. Only in the dementia of liberal-land are there flavors of civil rights. "All pigs are created equal, but some are more equal than others."
"We're fighting the same battle again and the lines are drawn in the exact same place."
Baloney. Or to be proper, Bologna. And most veterans of the civil rights movements of the sixties get very unhappy when you compare the two of them. Homosexuals would love for you to think they are being lynched and burned out of their homes, but such is not the case. Homosexuals are fighting for the societal normalization of their particular sexual deviancy. In a sane world, they would fail utterly and we would laugh them off the political landscape. I leave you to deduce the sanity of the current American political landscape.
"This article makes an excellent point in suggesting that the Republican party might want to rethink it's stance on immigration and gay rights if it wants to be taken seriously by the black community."
And what stance would that be? Let's see, on immigration, the Republicans, all except Geroge Bush, favor the enforcement of our laws. Radical concept, I know, but that's how those old Republicans are. I can't even approach the homosexual rights business. Care to explain what rights homosexuals have that the rest of us don't? Care to explain how they came by these extra rights or why we should recognize them? How is it that homosexuals are deserving of these extra rights? Last time I checked, Republicans believed that everyone has the same rights and that they were given to us by God. But since I'm not a Republican any more, I can't vouch for their current beliefs. When last I saw them, they were trying to pretend to be Democrats.
I know. I know. They're both mythological beings? Civil rights are civil rights. The fundamental idea of civil rights is that they apply to human beings. Not black human beings, not homosexual human beings, just plain, unhyphenated human beings. Only in the dementia of liberal-land are there flavors of civil rights. "All pigs are created equal, but some are more equal than others."
"We're fighting the same battle again and the lines are drawn in the exact same place."
Baloney. Or to be proper, Bologna. And most veterans of the civil rights movements of the sixties get very unhappy when you compare the two of them. Homosexuals would love for you to think they are being lynched and burned out of their homes, but such is not the case. Homosexuals are fighting for the societal normalization of their particular sexual deviancy. In a sane world, they would fail utterly and we would laugh them off the political landscape. I leave you to deduce the sanity of the current American political landscape.
"This article makes an excellent point in suggesting that the Republican party might want to rethink it's stance on immigration and gay rights if it wants to be taken seriously by the black community."
And what stance would that be? Let's see, on immigration, the Republicans, all except Geroge Bush, favor the enforcement of our laws. Radical concept, I know, but that's how those old Republicans are. I can't even approach the homosexual rights business. Care to explain what rights homosexuals have that the rest of us don't? Care to explain how they came by these extra rights or why we should recognize them? How is it that homosexuals are deserving of these extra rights? Last time I checked, Republicans believed that everyone has the same rights and that they were given to us by God. But since I'm not a Republican any more, I can't vouch for their current beliefs. When last I saw them, they were trying to pretend to be Democrats.
posted by Anonymous | 11:15 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home