Oh, and in before the myriad of hate, bile and ignorance spews forth from knuckle dragging “progressives” that would make the KKK blush.

As for my larger point: if someone had been a gay Repubican 20 years ago, it would be one thing. Since then, the party has been taken over by religious extremists. I commend to your attention the book “Republican Gomorrah” by Max Blumenthal, which tells the whole sorry story. There is not one major GOP candidate who is pro-gay. The best is Romney, who is currently kinda anti-anti-agy, having done a 180 on some LGBT issues in response to pressures from “the base.” Ron Paul? Well, yeah, he’s just anti-federal-government-everything. So if he had his way, gay sex would still be illegal in many states in the Union (see his criticism of Lawrence v. Texas). (And he’s also made some very pecuiar friends, like former adviser Gary North, who advocates stoning evildoers to death, and whoever wrote the rat poison official Ron Paul newsletters with their anti-gay and ugly racist spew, while Dr. Ron was otherwise engaged.) If Santorum has his way, gay sex will be illegal everywhere.

I might question why kids from working- and middle-class backgrounds would favor economic policies that would exacerbate even further the redistribution of wealth upward. Are they dreaming of slipping into the 99%? Or waiting for the trickle-down that seems not to have come, as corporations have record profits, are paying less in taxes, and haven’t used those profits to increase hiring. “Keep what they earn?” The US already has one of the very lowest rates of taxation in the developed world. Major corporations (which are, according to Romney, just plain folks) are paying no federal taxes at all. I’d be happy if you folks kept everything you earned, as long as you didn’t drive on public roads, use public libraries, go to public universities or emergency rooms, and just took everything you earned from the banking and the insurance industries (which, if memory serves, were permitted by deregulation, to rape this country).

But let me ask about the “living their own lives and starting businesses without government interference.” Can we have specifics? In what ways is the government currently “interfering” with these guys’ personal lives? Or even potentially? Certainly we’re not talking about the law preventing them from being legally wed, are we? Clearly, a woman who wants an abortion,not believing it to be a deadly sin, would face government interference under in a GOP world. We’ve already gone into the “sodomy” thing, and though one might argue that mostly takes place in private, Paul believes we don’t have privacy rights in such cases. And “interference” in business? We’re talking about, what? The child labor laws Newt disdains? The civil rights laws that prevent businesses from firing people because they’re, oh, gay? Requiring that workers be paid a living wage? Not be subjected to a toxic environment? Just what?

Believe me, the Dems don’t play the part of God in my life. But the GOTP clearly thinks that they ARE the party of God. Folks, Perry’s antigay ad is not some unfortunate misstep. It’s part and parcel of where the GOTP has got to. And if you think that joining hands with them and singing “Kumbaya” is going to change the party’s well-nourished homophobia…you might just as well hold your breath and wait for the Second Coming. Have fun watching the convention. I’m sure that “the Gay Agenda” won’t be demonized at all.

I do like the “gay cabal” thing, though…it’s so, wow, silly. But I’m certainly not going to show YOU the secret handshake. See, I don’t care if one single Republican is “compelled to like me.” I just want freedom from verbal and physical bullying, and equal rights.

You dare to say we are self hating? Sadly mistaken! And don’t you dare start talking about my opinions and how they are wrong when the fact IS that there are so many more problems in the country, and people worse off than ALL of us…I think its rather selfish to vote one way solely for me when I believe someone else will help alot more people.

Please stop posting such hatred on here. It is uneducated, improper, and disgusting.

Read more: http://www.towleroad.com/2011/07/bachmannsatan.html#ixzz1ijj7MtQq”

So, she is actually saying that calling the homosexual lifestyle “gay” is part of satan because it is a sad lifestyle and not actually “gay” (for those of you who remember that gay also means happy.

I don’t agree with her actual statement but her actual statement is very different from the one attributed to her and, to the extent that deliberately twisting and misrepresenting what someone says in order to incite hatred against him or her is wrong, evil and deceptive, then, yes, if you are accustomed to speaking that way ( I am not) it is part of satan.

What is worse is that all of you are not changing anyone’s mind nor furthering any possibility of dialogue with people who disagree with you when you do such things (selectively excerpt, twist and distort) what you are doing is proving that you are part of the problem of a gay cabal that attacks and attempts to personally destroy anyone who disagrees with you. And you do it, not for yourselves but for the Democratic party which seems to have assumed the status of God in your lives. The people interviewed in this article understand what has been historically true. If they can have personal and economic freedom ( which means they can start their own businesses and live their own lives without interference from the state) they don’t need anyone to compel anyone else to like them. When the principles of private property, individual freedom, constitutional rights are observed, religious, ethnic and sexual minorities have been able to create their own sub societies and to thrive. Take for example, Mormons. There have never been laws that barred gays from owning property or voting. There have been laws that banned them from public service but they have been overturned and were never very effective anyway. There are many rational people who ask to be judged only on their competence and nothing more and who want to be able to keep what they earn and pursue their own interests What is so really terrible about that? And they tend to vote REpublican these days.

Simply repeating tired, old talking points and foisting the Democratic Party upon us, as though we are gay first and nothing else second, is both unintelligent and disrespectful. I resent your disdainful sneering, and take pride in being a conservative. Indeed, it is conservative economic policy that will turn this country around and help us recover from the disastrous Obama Presidency.

You tend to play to extremes while whining about the Republican Party, as though, again, we’re too stupid to know that extremists like Bachmann and Santorum should not be standard-bearers for our party. Give me a break. Grow up.

Face it; gay liberals can’t handle honest debate. A “community” that celebrates diversity and inclusion can’t handle disagreement on economic matters, as it treats party identification as a pass-fail metric. D for pass, R for fail. I needn’t point out the flawed logic in this assessment–we’ll settle this at the ballot box, when 1/3 of this so-called “community” votes for the Republican nominee for President.

A “community” would reject demagoguery and groupthink. To reject gay conservatives who no doubt support gay equality is to reject their shared commitment to issues upon which we agree. Yet, we can’t pretend that gay liberals on this comment feed truly care about bringing people together. They’re too angry and hateful for that. (Hint: before you criticize Republican “hatred”, please look in the mirror).

Really? REALLY? So when Michele Bachmann says that gays are “part of Satan,” she’s merely having an intellectual disagreement? That the Christian Reconstructionist Right doesn’t believe it’s locked in some cosmic holy war against the Forces of Darkness? That fanatical right-to-lifers think those of us who don’t believe Jay-sus sticks a soul into every fetus at conception are mistaken, not murderers? That when Santorum says gay sex “undermines the basic tenets of our society,” that’s supposed to be a value-neutral statement?

Wow! Talk about your alternative realities!