Gays For Ron Paul?

[JMann]

I would think Paul's position is that the federal government shouldn't dictate the terms of a contract which that is what marriage is.

 

[TooConservative]

Get that guy Andrew Sullivan to be a face for the group. He's an openly gay media character who has written positive stuff about Paul.

You might just talk him into it. Maybe.

He is a bit controversial with the Log Cabins. His writing can be a bit on edge at times and he pulls no punches and he does take hostages rhetorically.

Despite his tendency toward controversy, he would be a plus for the effort. Well, if we can't get Larry 'Toetapper' Craig, that is.

 

[TooConservative]

That's exactly right. Marriage has no place in the government, heterosexual or homosexual. And just to say, I'm a full supporter of gay rights.

Personally, I'm more passionate about gun right than gay rights. The Second Amendment protects the former; the Bill of Rights does not address the latter directly.

It's a matter of taste and passion but fundamental civil rights under the Consitution and Bill of Rights is my primary agenda. Marriage issues are farther down the list. I'm fine with states determining the issue, provided the courts or the Court don't impose it on other states. Of course, that is clearly the agenda for legitimizing same-sex marriage, to use it to force other states to recognize and codify it.

Personally, I find the thought of respectable middle-class suburban homos with 2.2 children to be utterly bleak. Where's the thrill in that? Where is the queer spirit if you're just planning to join the PTA?

 

[AlexMerced]

lol whatever gets votes

 

[dircha]

Absolutely not true, he does not support the current Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. He said that he would make a policy that is focused solely on behavior issues, both heterosexual and homosexual, not just based on an orientation.

Listen to the The American View interview.

Congressman Paul supports Don't Ask Don't Tell. He explicitly says so. He also says so in the Google talk interview.

 

[kjk437]

Personally, I'm more passionate about gun right than gay rights. The Second Amendment protects the former; the Bill of Rights does not address the latter directly.

It's a matter of taste and passion but fundamental civil rights under the Consitution and Bill of Rights is my primary agenda. Marriage issues are farther down the list. I'm fine with states determining the issue, provided the courts or the Court don't impose it on other states. Of course, that is clearly the agenda for legitimizing same-sex marriage, to use it to force other states to recognize and codify it.

Personally, I find the thought of respectable middle-class suburban homos with 2.2 children to be utterly bleak. Where's the thrill in that? Where is the queer spirit if you're just planning to join the PTA?

I think you entirely misinterpreted my statements. Nowhere in the Bill of Rights does it mention marriage, either, so I think that the institution should be entirely removed from the government. And, if you want to invoke the 9th Amendment about protection of miscellaneous rights not specifically mentioned by the Bill of Rights, then I'll equally argue gay rights are there.

I also never mentioned that I was more a supporter of gay rights than any other issue. I simply mentioned I fully supported gay rights, much the way I do the amendments of the Bill of Rights.

Also, if a gay couple wants to live the typical American lifestyle by raising 2.2 children in a suburban house, why shouldn't they? I know my uncle and his partner (who, in great irony considering the debate about gay marriage across the nation, have the longest running relationship in my family [35 years]) would love to be able to settle down in a conventional lifestyle and not be ostracised. I think if we remove government intervention in marriage and purely make it a religious/private matter, that would go a long way towards helping the problem.

 

[ThePieSwindler]

I would think Paul's position is that the federal government shouldn't dictate the terms of a contract which that is what marriage is.

Thats exactly his position, i think it was the Kansas City rally or something like that where he gave almost that exact answer.

 

[kjk437]

Towards the end of this video Dr. Paul makes it very clear on his position of marriage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwoK5HQ39_0

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

how about we send that video of that g4 interview where Ron Paul talks about gay marriage to the Log Cabin Republican group??

 

[austin356]

I dont want to pour cold water on any efforts...but lets just not promote it around my neck of the woods.

I am thinking about putting a "I'm Gay and voting for Giuliani" sticker on my car. More effective than a Ron Paul sticker.

 

[Hope]

I dont want to pour cold water on any efforts...but lets just not promote it around my neck of the woods.

I am thinking about putting a "I'm Gay and voting for Giuliani" sticker on my car. More effective than a Ron Paul sticker.

Oh, great idea! Why don't you put "I'm black and I'm voting for Guiliani" and a "I'm female and voting for Guiliani" stickers on there as well? I mean, if you're going to feed prejudice to turn off voters, let's go all out, shall we?

 

[austin356]

I think you entirely misinterpreted my statements. Nowhere in the Bill of Rights does it mention marriage, either, so I think that the institution should be entirely removed from the government. And, if you want to invoke the 9th Amendment about protection of miscellaneous rights not specifically mentioned by the Bill of Rights, then I'll equally argue gay rights are there.

I also never mentioned that I was more a supporter of gay rights than any other issue. I simply mentioned I fully supported gay rights, much the way I do the amendments of the Bill of Rights.

Also, if a gay couple wants to live the typical American lifestyle by raising 2.2 children in a suburban house, why shouldn't they? I know my uncle and his partner (who, in great irony considering the debate about gay marriage across the nation, have the longest running relationship in my family [35 years]) would love to be able to settle down in a conventional lifestyle and not be ostracised. I think if we remove government intervention in marriage and purely make it a religious/private matter, that would go a long way towards helping the problem.

This type of "seeing something not directly in the Constitution" is what basis for which the Progressives, Liberals, and Neoconservatives have destroyed the Constitution.

Constitution Party members regular argue that the Constitution "protects life". When we read the Constitution to suit our beliefs it inevitably comes back to bite us in the ass 10x as hard, after another group uses the same notions to promote their agenda.

Marriage = None of any governments' business

Federal government telling state governments that = setting the framework, structure, and precedent for Federal tyranny.

 

[austin356]

Oh, great idea! Why don't you put "I'm black and I'm voting for Guiliani" and a "I'm female and voting for Guiliani" stickers on there as well? I mean, if you're going to feed prejudice to turn off voters, let's go all out, shall we?

Its a joke....... I don't court prejudiced individuals, but in this case when I am trying to get their vote I rather not turn those prejudices against our candidate.

 

[Hope]

Its a joke....... I don't court prejudiced individuals, but in this case when I am trying to get their vote I rather not turn those prejudices against our candidate.

That's what kinda bothers me about your sentiments though. Unless I'm reading your wrong, it seems like you'd rather the Log Cabin Republicans and such not endorse Ron Paul simply because it might rile up those who hate gay people.

 

[austin356]

That's what kinda bothers me about your sentiments though. Unless I'm reading your wrong, it seems like you'd rather the Log Cabin Republicans and such not endorse Ron Paul simply because it might rile up those who hate gay people.

No I welcome their endorsement......... its just I rather not play it up too my prejudiced neighbors. Simple as that.

 

[vegetarianrpfan]

I've read a lot of his speeches over the last ten years and I don't recall that. Do you have a source? I am surprised he would indicate a biological cause because there has never been any evidence asserted for it that survived peer review.

There was a radio interview in which he said that as a doctor, he thinks that homosexuality may have a biological basis and Christians must keep that in mind. As for no "peer-reviewed studies" proving any sort of biological basis, I think this one does quite well. It appeared in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences last year:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200978,00.html

Listen to the The American View interview.

Congressman Paul supports Don't Ask Don't Tell. He explicitly says so. He also says so in the Google talk interview.

Nope. Watch the debate where he talked about this-- multiple times, he has said while he supports a literal interpretation of "not asking or telling" about any sort of personal life in the military, he does not think the Arabic translators should have been dismissed for being gay, he does not think it should be based solely on orientation and should include both genders and focus on behavior.

----------------------------
Libertarian Girl
http://www.libertariangirl.com

 

[kjk437]

Marriage = None of any governments' business.

That's exactly what I believe... I still think that there's some miscommunication here.

 

[Kregener]

You do not have a choice of being black or female....

 

[cowb0y]

You do not have a choice of being black or female....

Well, no one gave me a choice about being gay, either. Of course, a black person can always *act* like a white person (cf., The OC Obama), and a woman can *act* like a man (cf. Hillary :O ). And, of course, a gay person can *act* straight, but it don't make it so. You're welcome to have your own opinion on the matter, but I'll take my first-hand experience over anything you or anyone else have to offer.

Someone lost in the Threads of Time:

I don't understand where Hitlary's appeal to gays comes from.

From brainwashing. Just like many blacks, there are a lot of gays (sorry, LGBTQMNOPs, don't want to leave anyone out) who feel that they need group politics to defend the group. This is understandable, because any well-defined group of people (minority) who is discriminated against quickly recognizes that by banding (or huddling, as the case may be) together, there is more safety and more chance to influence the political environment.

While this can be an effective short-term strategy, there needs at some point to be a transition to a longer-term view of how to achieve lasting acceptance in the larger (hostile) society. Blacks still have not entirely achieved this state in the most liberal places, even though they have made great progress in doing so, partly because of the perception of the majority that they are playing the "oppression card" too much. Regardless of the truth of the reality, people don't like it, and it becomes counterproductive after a certain point.

Yes, gay marriage is an issue for a couple of reasons: gays (sorry, there I go again; I just prefer words or acronyms that have vowels in them) want to be treated like everyone else (in order to feel good about ourselves, and not to be discriminated against in the workplace, murdered, etc.). And by forcing government to legitimize gay marriage, some feel that society will be forced to change it's views to follow (which didn't work very well with black folks).

Just like blacks, there are real issues at stake, economic, personal liberty, and not having your kids taken away from you because you happen to be passing through Alabama).

I'm starting to ramble. Gays are afraid of scary neonazi/fundamentalist types, and believe that govt. will protect them (Except for the Pink Pistols, of course ). Like any minority, we need to believe in the value of individual freedom, the evenhanded application of the law, and individual responsibility for challenging society's stereotypes and calling it on the whole "We Believe these Truths" thing.

 

[libertythor]

There are tons of gay Ron Paul supporters. Most are of the sort that feel no need to identify as a separate community, so you won't be able to pick them out at a gathering of supporters. However, one will figure out if you get to know them down the road...e.g. knowing homelife, enough personal details to "figure it out".

Most homosexuals don't wear it on their sleeves and at the same time aren't in denial.

Well, no one gave me a choice about being gay, either. Of course, a black person can always *act* like a white person (cf., The OC Obama), and a woman can *act* like a man (cf. Hillary :O ). And, of course, a gay person can *act* straight, but it don't make it so. You're welcome to have your own opinion on the matter, but I'll take my first-hand experience over anything you or anyone else have to offer.

Someone lost in the Threads of Time:
From brainwashing. Just like many blacks, there are a lot of gays (sorry, LGBTQMNOPs, don't want to leave anyone out) who feel that they need group politics to defend the group. This is understandable, because any well-defined group of people (minority) who is discriminated against quickly recognizes that by banding (or huddling, as the case may be) together, there is more safety and more chance to influence the political environment.

While this can be an effective short-term strategy, there needs at some point to be a transition to a longer-term view of how to achieve lasting acceptance in the larger (hostile) society. Blacks still have not entirely achieved this state in the most liberal places, even though they have made great progress in doing so, partly because of the perception of the majority that they are playing the "oppression card" too much. Regardless of the truth of the reality, people don't like it, and it becomes counterproductive after a certain point.

Yes, gay marriage is an issue for a couple of reasons: gays (sorry, there I go again; I just prefer words or acronyms that have vowels in them) want to be treated like everyone else (in order to feel good about ourselves, and not to be discriminated against in the workplace, murdered, etc.). And by forcing government to legitimize gay marriage, some feel that society will be forced to change it's views to follow (which didn't work very well with black folks).

Just like blacks, there are real issues at stake, economic, personal liberty, and not having your kids taken away from you because you happen to be passing through Alabama).

I'm starting to ramble. Gays are afraid of scary neonazi/fundamentalist types, and believe that govt. will protect them (Except for the Pink Pistols, of course ). Like any minority, we need to believe in the value of individual freedom, the evenhanded application of the law, and individual responsibility for challenging society's stereotypes and calling it on the whole "We Believe these Truths" thing.