Rate Thread
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
GOProud: Actually Pro-Gay, Or Anti-Gay?
#1
Hey guys this is my first type of thread like this but I wanted some input. For those of you who do not know, GOProud is a political organization for LGBT conservatives and they've been gaining some notoriety throughout the world. Well thing is I've been wondering as of recently is are they pro-gay rights or anti-gay rights?

I honestly am on the anti-gay side of this. Mostly because everything I've heard from and about them has been anti-gay. They endorsed Donald Trump for one who was opposed to any recognition of domestic partnerships for LGBT folk. They are against ENDA, The Matthew Shepard ACT, and one other hate crime law that would protect LGBT people. They allowed Ann Coulter to speak at HomoCon who I view excuse my French, one homophobic bitch. They even called gays of the Left similar to the Taliban; angry, hateful and dumb as shift. Typing this now, I am pissed off as shit as I used to support them. I though they we need allies in the Republican aisle of things... but no, they're no allies of mine to me personally. That and one of their top members is in a domestic-partnership with someone yet they sit there and say it should be left up to the states to decide.

So let me know what you guys think about them please. I am dying to hear from you.
Reply

#2
Personally I agree with you. They are just pushovers.
I mean more power to them, but they are not helping our cause in any way whatsoever,
They seem to be just in the way being stupid fools. Rolleyes

Vote: Anti-Gay
Reply

#3
DarkDaisuke Wrote:Typing this now, I am pissed off as shit as I used to support them. I though they we need allies in the Republican aisle of things... but no, they're no allies of mine to me personally.

I agree on the need for allies. Support the Log Cabin Republicans. GOProud are, as far as I can tell, a just self-hating splinter group.
Fred

Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
Reply

#4
I know little about them. I'll admit.
But it SOUNDS like just a way to fool some gay people from conservative families into thinking the GOP aren't so bad when it comes to gay rights.

Or it was just invented to help gay people with conservative views feel "accepted" by the party.(by being nothing more than acknowledge.)

Either way, i still think its a ploy to gain votes.

*Reads a little about them on wikipedia(Not the best source of info, i know:redfaceSmile*

From what little i've just read, they seem to hold some views contrary to...well...the rest of the GOP. And most of the GOP seem to be against its existence. So all i can say is, i doubt they're going to have much influence inside the party.

My final verdict:
A ploy for people on the fence on whether to vote GOP or not. They hope that if these people see this tiny organization, they may feel the GOP isn't so harsh in the rights department and thus, vote for them.
Even though(at an educated guess) this group has no power in the party, and represent an EXTREME minority in the party.(Those with homosexually sympathy) But that isn't obvious at first glance to those unaware of the GOP's usual stance on such matters.

Hope this makes sense. I'm not big on politics.:redface:
Silly Sarcastic So-and-so
Reply

#5
In Canada their used to a be a strong gay wing of the Progressive Conservative party. But then they merged with the socially conservative Reform Party to "unite the right" in Canadian politics. Since then, Tories in Canada have been a force of social regression and the party has stood against gay rights at every stand. There is a gay cabinet minister in the current Tory government, John Baird, who came from the Progressive Conservative wing of the party. I don't know how he lives with himself supporting a party that is against his rights. He has even supported efforts by the Tories to cut support for HIV/AIDS organization, funding of gay cultural organizations, and legal support of civil rights cases. When the Tories voted on whether to re-open the gay marriage debate, he had the balls to vote against that at least.

Edit: Disclaimer of personal bias: I am a card carrying member of the social democratic New Democratic Party of Canada, and would be quite happy to see most of the Tory leadership suddenly die in an unfortunate airplane crash.
Reply

#6
OrphanPip Wrote:He has even supported efforts by the Tories to cut support for HIV/AIDS organization, funding of gay cultural organizations, and legal support of civil rights cases. When the Tories voted on whether to re-open the gay marriage debate, he had the balls to vote against that at least.

One does not get preferment in partisan politics if one is not prepared to toe the Party line the great majority of the time. I am sure they must the plenty of others who are not where he is today for the same reason, the same of course applying to all his cabinet colleagues.

However just playing Devil's Advocate, why is it anti-gay to believe the HIV/AIDS organisation in question was a poor use of public money, that, with the exception of cultural events that bring the whole nation together (maintaining the federal union), the government shouldn't demand taxes from people to pay for cultural events or that in civil cases people should pay for their own lawyers, if their case is strong they will win, in which case their opponents will pay their lawyers?

(I apologise for the length of that last sentence.)
Fred

Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
Reply

#7
fredv3b Wrote:One does not get preferment in partisan politics if one is not prepared to toe the Party line the great majority of the time. I am sure they must the plenty of others who are not where he is today for the same reason, the same of course applying to all his cabinet colleagues.

Of course, but one would think that someone with a modicum of principles would at least choose a political party that would support their own community. And Canada has a history of being lead by the socially progressive, while fiscally conservative, Liberal party. Another former gay Tory MP in Canada, Scott Brison, jumped to the Liberals after the Progressive Conservatives merged with the so-cons. Baird chose a career with a party that doesn't respect people like him as human beings. That's his right, but it being his right doesn't change the fact that it also makes him a douchebag.

fredv3b Wrote:However just playing Devil's Advocate, why is it anti-gay to believe the HIV/AIDS organisation in question was a poor use of public money, that, with the exception of cultural events that bring the whole nation together (maintaining the federal union), the government shouldn't demand taxes from people to pay for cultural events or that in civil cases people should pay for their own lawyers, if their case is strong they will win, in which case their opponents will pay their lawyers?

(I apologise for the length of that last sentence.)

There are numerous issues here to raise. First to the HIV/AIDS funding, the Tories cut prevention programs in Africa and at home, which is nothing but pandering to social conservatives who object to the promotion of condom use. Then they wasted a bunch of money promising extra funding to vaccine research, which they then scrapped when it proved unpopular with their base.

The Canadian constitution specifically states that the government must be committed to promoting multicuturalism in Canada. This has historically been put into effect by the government giving ample funding to cultural events of all sorts. In 2009, the government had set 100 million dollars to be spent on tourist events. The cabinet minister in charge gave 400,000 to Toronto Pride. She was subsequently fired over it. In 2010, Toronto pride didn't get any funding, instead the money went to big promoters of tourism like a hot air balloon festival, and pretty much every single major cultural event in Canada that wasn't connected to gays got money.

The legal defense funding didn't involve paying for lawyers predominantly, but with making sure that people were aware of their rights, and making sure that human rights legislation was accessible. The most vulnerable members of our society are most likely to be abused and ignored.

Now, just yesterday the at the Tory convention, the party voted to make official the party's stance against same-sex marriage.

The conservatives also rewrote the immigration guide for new citizens to remove all mention of gay rights as a part of Canadian law. The guide used to make it explicit that sexual orientation was protected in Canada, and that same-sex marriage was a legal right to all Canadians. This is also a part of the Tory strategy of using anti-abortion and anti-gay campaigning in immigrant communities across Canada.

The party has shown itself to be soundly anti-gay, and the current PM has a history of campaigning against gay rights at every turn. He has also sheltered MPs that have said outright homophobic things such as "There’s As and there’s Bs. The As are guys like me; the Bs are homosexual faggots with dirt under their fingernails that transmit diseases." That was Tom Lukiwiski, who even got promoted to a cabinet role after wards! As, of all things, John Baird;s parliamentary secretary. I'm sure they get along just fine, as long as Baird doesn't touch him with his diseased fingernails. There are also too many instances of Tories comparing gays to pedophiles to count.

I honestly don't care if Baird is fiscally conservative, but I don't know how he can possibly stand working with and supporting these people.
Reply

#8
Pip,

Good answer.
Fred

Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
Reply

#9
Just read what they say they are about

Must admit, the single use of the word "gay" on the page says it all for me. Were I in your country I would probably not trust them an inch.
Reply

#10
I wish we could have a party in the United States committed to fiscal conservatism and social progress, but ever since Republicans found that an appeal to the Evangelical and Catholic base gets them votes, they have adopted an entirely conservative form of politics. Regan was really the first to sellout to this type of politics. Libertarians are far too week to ever pose a threat to the established parties.

I also feel somewhat sorry for conservatives in America, as their main media sources are talk radio and Fox News, which oppressively misinform, blur, and spin information toward the extreme right.
Reply



Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Being gay in Pakistan: Where anti-gay serial killers are applauded Saleem 9 2,002 04-20-2015, 08:43 PM
Last Post: Hey
  Can you be pro gay marriage and anti polygamous marriage? viktor77 1 1,081 04-18-2014, 09:00 AM
Last Post: dianamaria
  Breaking News.... For all the anti-gun peeps! GOD BLESS THE U.S. countyboy 44 3,785 01-21-2012, 05:56 AM
Last Post: Inchante
  "Cameron threat to dock some UK aid to anti-gay nations" Almac 6 1,456 11-02-2011, 01:03 AM
Last Post: zeon

Forum Jump:


Recently Browsing
1 Guest(s)

© 2002-2024 GaySpeak.com