English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Serious Question. They're out there passing laws which have negative impacts on their own kind. I don't get it.
Wouldn't they want to just be neutral, why hostile?

2007-08-31 14:05:15 · 23 answers · asked by Rockvillerich 5 in Politics & Government Politics

*
I was asking about gay conservatives. Where do you see anything about ALL in the question?
*

2007-08-31 14:26:16 · update #1

*
Thanks for your thoughts.
*

2007-08-31 14:35:10 · update #2

23 answers

We call them self-loathers in the gay community. They are men who cannot reconcile their own self image with their desires and they usually have a distorted image of other gay men and themselves. They are stuck with the image of gay men as feminine and/or evil; and most men hate to feminized and no one wants to be called evil. And since they're masculine, they've concluded they can't be gay.

Over time that inability to realize that you can be good man, be masculine and gay twists and distorts until the individual hates himself. Most of us, come to realize that the image society has of gay men and the truth are vastly different. I could not count the people who were absolutely stunned to learn that their are gay men who don't flame, hate to shop and don't run around acting like a sissies---and don't wear dresses. It's an image I hate.....and that's the difference between me and them! I've learn to hate the stereotype not myself.

2007-08-31 14:35:43 · answer #1 · answered by God 6 · 3 0

Being a rightwing Republican and gay myself, I can tell you why, but first lets settle a terminology issue.
Gay Bashing is the practice of gangs who seek out and attack gay men, usually. This usually results in the death of the gay victim. I don't think Senator Craig ever did such a thing.
Just last month in Detroit I was assaulted by three young men with knives while I was going into a Gay bar. Being a retired soldier, they were relatively easy to fend off. The Detroit police are absolutely useless, it is a waste of time even calling them.
The Republican party has unfortunately alligned itself with the American Christian Taliban. For the greater good, it is necessary but unfortunate.
I know of only one other Gay Republican like myself and heard about another. Most of my Gay friends are Democrats or totally apolitical.
I'm out of the closet now but for the 24 years I spent in the Army, I was totally closetted.

2007-08-31 14:39:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

David Brock explained it has a rush for greater good. He denied he was homosexual and supported people who were against homosexuals so that the conservative agenda could be passed. Its all about coalition building. He even lied and wrote a book on Anita Hill just so that the conservatives 'could win'. To them it's all about the end justifying the means. He finally got fed up, exposed them and is now head of Media Matters web.

2007-08-31 14:33:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

My accepted argument is that it weakens the institute of marriage, as you have stated. yet, generally it weakens society. infants do not and could not could comprehend why 2 adult men or 2 ladies are making out on the line. Plus, how is procreation achievable with a same intercourse couple returned? notwithstanding i'm bodily revolted by utilising the belief of homosexuality and thoroughly disagree with their alternatives, i've got had conversations with homosexuals and am nice with them. What they do interior the privateness of their very very own residence is their employer, and that they are going to fulfill their maker at last. Marriage is a non secular ceremony in maximum cultures, which includes the hodge-podge American lifestyle, so i don't think that a same-intercourse couple could be married on those grounds.

2016-11-13 21:24:29 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I compare it to say, criminals in jail who tell kids "stay in school and don't end up like me", or drug addicts that can't break the habit warning people not to end up like them.

If the Senator is finding "love" (and I use that term loosely) in a men's bathroom stall, perhaps he knows how dirty and shameful that lifestyle is, and doesn't want laws encouraging such behavior.

Please note, I do make a distinction between normal gay behavior and slutty men's room behavior. Once is acceptable, the other is not.

2007-08-31 14:13:24 · answer #5 · answered by askthepizzaguy 4 · 4 0

Well you don't get it because you are a Liberal! But I'll explain. How many Republicans came rushing to his side when he pulled a stunt like he did ? No one. In fact they told him to resign Why? Because Republicans do NOT put up with this kind of behavior .That is why the Republican party is far superior to the Democrat party. And if you knew what you where talking about Most Gays are Liberal Democrats along with Child molesters that Liberals (ACLU) pay for there defense funds so they can do it again to another child. How proud you must be to be a Liberal . The lowest form of life!

2007-08-31 14:36:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

The same reason someone told me was the reason there are not many gays in the democrat seats. You don't have to be gay to support gay rights and you apparently don't have to be straight to support traditional family values. Tortured souls living in two worlds, doesn't bother me a bit they have confusion. Maybe it's a test from God.
The funny thing about this issue is, people call it hypocrisy when a republican is gay. But when I asked why there aren't more gay people in the democrat party, I get responses saying they don't need gay people in their party in order to support them, well, thats like saying you are all for being a meat eater just, don't ask me to be in the room when you do it. It's hypocrisy from both sides as usual. The gays are being used by the Democrats for votes, as usual. They have to realize that eventually.
And even most gay people do not come out for their own reasons so what do you call them, hypocrites?

2007-08-31 14:11:42 · answer #7 · answered by eldude 5 · 5 3

Remember Larry Craig, et al and other older closeted gays do not even consider themselves to be "gay". They view "gays" as perverts, pointing to the San Francisco Gay Pride Gays as examples of what they are not.

They have self-deluded to the point of "I am a married heterosexual man, who occassionaly enjoys anonymous no-strings sex with strangers. But I am not gay. So what's the harm?"

2007-08-31 14:16:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

craig voted against gay marriage or having gay marriages recognized by the state the same as hetero marriages. i think he voted against gays a lot.

he did this for the same reason that dems don't cut off the funds for the war in iraq even though that funding is killing our troops.

they want to keep their jobs. freedom and democracy.

2007-08-31 14:17:39 · answer #9 · answered by soperson 4 · 1 0

there are gays in all walks of life as there are straights, however, 20 times as many straights in all walks of life. it has been a policy of the conservatives to enforce the pro straight agendas in the pro straight marriage stances. other than that, i really don't think you'll hear too much out of conservatives any more regarding soley pro straight.

2007-08-31 14:12:08 · answer #10 · answered by 27ysq 4 · 4 0

fedest.com, questions and answers