Monday, May 25, 2009

Same-Sex Hate-Seekers

I had a long and extremely interesting exchange with Alex Knepper yesterday. Alex is a member of my Facebook community. He's a young conservative who thinks the GOP needs to moderate its social conservatism. He sent me an e-mail after finding an old essay of mine on Sarah Palin at RealClearPolitics. We debated Palin for a little while, and then our discussion turned to gay marriage.

We went back and forth for a few iterations. Alex got a little agitated when I mentioned a continuing controversy in the literature over the biological basis for sexual orientation. He turned at that and said, "if you actually think that homosexuality is not a choice, then you're accusing me of being a liar and a con artist. All of those feelings toward boys that I started having at the ages of 11 and 12 - were they fake?" I then wrote back calmly, "I'm not doubting your feelings, Alex. All I'm saying is that biological determination is still controversial in the literature." (See, for example, "
Current Theories on the Genesis of Homosexuality.")

Alex mellowed out a little later, especially after I told him that he'd be my friend irrespective of his sexual orientation. As some may know from my writing, I get along fine with homosexuals. Indeed, I lost friends during the AIDS crisis of the 1980s. A good friend of mine now lives in San Francisco. We used to party on the weekends. He graduated from high school with my older sister. As much as I liked him, I declined his offer to perform oral sexual favors. "I'm straight," I told him, "and not interested." So much for "not knowing a single gay," as leftists always allege.

I mention all of this since we're seeing the gay marriage debate pick up again this weekend. The
California Supreme Court will rule tomorrow on the constitutionality of Proposition 8. The Court is expected to uphold the will of the voters, and gay activists have planned massive statewide demonstrations to protest the "hatred."

In my discussions with Alex, he mentioned that he'd written a lot on all of this, and he linked to his essay, "
The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage." But while doing some research last night, I found Alex's piece, "Gay. And Republican. And Not Confused." According to Alex:
I believe that the gay subculture is destructive. I am not completely sure why a person should be "proud" of his sexuality, which is not an accomplishment. I am confused by the discord between a group of people who insist that they're just like everyone else on one hand and then on the other refuse to assimilate into mainstream society ....

I am unable to relate to the faction of gay men who revolve their lives around their sexuality: their neighborhood is gay, their friends are gay, their music and movies are gay, their academic interests are gay, the stores that they frequent are gay — their lives are gay. I am not interested, though, in living my life as a gay man, but simply as a man. I envision a future in which a person's sexual orientation will be an afterthought. I do not in any way whatsoever see the Democratic Party furthering that.

I have been discriminated against more by Democrats than by Republicans. I have been shunned and mocked by Democrats, many of whom will not accept me as a gay man unless I fit into their neatly packaged view of what a gay man is "supposed" to be. I have yet to encounter, on the other hand, a Republican who has rejected my presence in the party, shunned me on a personal level or refused to engage me on the issues.
I asked Alex if I could share our exchange with readers, so it's not like I'm "dishing dirt." Indeed, Alex has grappled with these issues more than most people. And I especially appreciate Alex's identification of gay radical leftists as those who evince the most vicious intolerance on these issues.

I've been blogging gay marriage regularly since last November. As I've noted repeatedly, the same-sex marriage agenda is the capstone to the nihilist revolutionary program that's sweeping the country. Leftists constantly impute "bigotry" to their conservative enemies. The truth of the matter is it's become politically incorrect to stand for traditionalism in America today.
As Diana West argued after the radical gay protests last year:
Conservatism isn't simply in political retreat, it is fast travelling beyond the pale, fast becoming anathema in America. And not just "conservatism" - any bumper sticker sentiment that denies due reverence for the precepts of progressivism as exemplified by the leftward evolving sensibility of the media and cultural mainstream ... It is anything that smacks of the traditional that is under assault now in the public sphere, in the cultural mainstream, and sometimes literally.
And it's coming again. One of the most incredible memes on the left right now is that conservatism - especially as seen in faith-based opposition to the homosexual marriage program - is essentially a violent militia movement that's spring-loaded to erupt in a last-gasp violent backlash against the "inevitable" political success of same-sex marriage.

Check out Sara Robinson's essay at Orcinus, "
Decision Day on California's Prop 8." This is really a mind-boggling piece of gay marriage advocacy. The tone is not just of political inevitability, but of outright moral condescension toward anyone who deviates from the radical same-sex marriage party line. If you read it close enough, the piece is essentially a propaganda précis justifying mayhem in the streets if the California Court upholds the will of a majority. It's extremely interesting, since these are the same people who are all about constitutional rights and due process, and what not. But when those same legal and political processes leave them on the short end of the stick, all bets are off. It's now "Mormon bigotry" or "extremist Dominionism." In fact, some of Robinson's assertions are truly out there in left field. I mean really, we're talking 9/11-trutherism type stuff:

In the worst case, this decision could become the catalyst for a new round of large-scale domestic terrorism from the right. As I've noted, everything I'm seeing points to a subculture that is gearing up for this kind of heroic last stand in defense of a lost cause. And this time, it's not going to be just a few white supremacist/militia/patriot/anti-choice wackos. The new crop of right wing militants is better connected, better trained, better armed, and absolutely determined to go down fighting. And, as the SPLC keeps telling us, there may considerably more people motivated to support them than there have been in the past. It’s not unthinkable that between 15 and 20% of the country could be inclined to start - or at least support - a civil war over this.
You really have to step back for a second to catch your breath. Just 31 percent nationally support full-on same-sex marriage rights when given a choice between that or civil unions. And in the allegedy "liberal" Iowa, only 26 percent support unequivocal gay marriage given the same choices. But majorities like this, seen as standing athwart the radical left's agenda, are excoriated as "white supremacist/militia/patriot/anti-choice wackos."

I imagine leftists are in fact so insecure that such demonological conspiracy discourses are necessary to sustain whatever momentum they've got. Frankly, most people I've talked to don't really want to deal with allegations of "homophobia" and "racism" toward "marginalized" minorities. The attacks get old, and people have lives. The media plays along, and today's youth aren't acculturated to traditionalism and American exceptionism. So the leftist demonization seeks to gain traction.

Alexander Cockburn,
in a recent Nation essay on the decline of the GOP, ridiculed the notion that "there's a right resurgence out there in the hinterland with legions of haters ready to march down Main Street draped in Klan robes, a copy of Mein Kampf tucked under one arm and a Bible under the other ..." According to Cockburn, folks like Morris Dees at the Southern Poverty Law Center are "hate-seekers" barking up the wrong tree. The truth, for Cockburn, is that the true "haters" are right under our noses: "The effective haters are big, powerful, easily identifiable entities. Why is Dees fingering militiamen in a potato field in Idaho when we have identifiable, well-organized groups that the SPLC could take on?"

According to Discover the Networks, Cockburn is an "unreconstructed Communist." As strong as that sounds, what's interesting is how close Cockburn's "legions of haters" meme tracks with the claims of the gay radical agenda.

I mean, really. Check out
Pam Spaulding's post on Sara Robinson's, "Decision Day on California's Prop 8." The leftists are now gearing up for cultural Armageddon: "Folks, arm yourselves. Get training, buy a gun and a good personal safe, get a carry permit, and protect yourselves."

People often talk of how polarized is American politics today. Leftists see traditionalists as racist militia members out to defend their culture in a final battle of righteousness. But in making such arguments, the radicals transmogrify into a caricature of the very enemy they seek to destroy.

Meanwhile, the regular workings of the democracy will function tomorrow. The California Court will rule on the constitutionality of a ballot initiative supported by a mainstream majority of the people. The fact is, the real "wackos" we'll likely be seeing in the next few days are the gay marriage extremists who take to the streets to protest the legal affirmation of the popular will.

This is the battle for America's future. It's hardly any longer a fight for gay marriage "rights." No, we'll see the battle lines drawn at the landing grounds of America's partisan culture wars this week. The stakes are extremely high. The left will continue to browbeat and bully those slow to get in line. Boycott lists will be circulated once again, and show trials will be mounted for the "collaborators."
We saw the countours last November. The next phase is about to begin.


Unknown said...

I think your writings are beautifully detailed and informative. My entire family and I are all conservative and fear greatly what is happening to our country. My personal fear and willingness to fight for things that are right have even made me change my major from Medical to Political Science. I hope one day that I can be half as good as you, as an educated individual and wonderful blogger. I am battling a democrat Judge from Texas that has decided I need to drive my six year old from Nashville, TN to Waco, TX every first third and fifth weekend of every month. He found this completely reasonable.
It seems to me that democrats and liberals continue to become more hostile, throwing their "Holier than thou art" dung at any conservative they get the chance to bully. It deeply saddens me not only what is going on in the Government, but what we as individuals are being forced to deal with on a daily basis. Thank you for your blogging, it is refreshing to know there are others on the same page.

Grizzly Mama said...

I agree that your writing is great.

The subject of this post reminds me of the recent Homeland Security memo tempest.

Because we disagree - we ARE radical extremists. The left believes that. We are dangerous, we need to be brought under control ASAP by any means necessary. Cockburne, Spaulding - and perhaps those now holding office with the same political leaning as these two whackjobs - they truly are afraid of us.

Jordan said...

Great post!

The Left's inability to remove emotional reaction from political opposition has led them to a very dangerous and childish place: constant moral outrage.

I'd rather be back in the early 30s when we could at least debate the left. Now, we have to avoid the stones.

Greywolfe said...

Well, Grizzly Mama stole my thunder. That's what I get for being late. DD, great post. It's one for the files.

The left has to demonize their opposition because all it has for an argument is one of emotions. And since no argument based on emotions can win, they have to shut the opposition down.

Well, I will be watching the socio-legal hoops the courts in California are going to try to jump through. Either the prop 8 stands or the Constitution in California can be used as toilet paper.

Being of a liberal bend, the Supreme Court there is probably having bowel constricting spasms over having to actually rule on this.

Montag said...

what, there's no "moral outrage" or demonization of the opposition in statements along the lines of, 'supporters of gay marriage are radical left nihilists who want to tear our national moral fabric asunder. and if they don't get their way they will resort to neo-Stalinist thuggery to force their enemies to comply'?

DD sketches his opposition every bit as cartoonishly as the nihilists do. i personally doubt the gay marriage debate will erupt into civil war between neo-nihilist-bolshevics and paranoid-traditionalist-militias. i could always be wrong though.

also, Donald, how does "biological determination" bear on your position on gay marriage? for me it has nothing to do with anything, (and maybe you are only responding to a specific argument raised by Alex,) but i'd be interested if your view would be different if you had convincing proof that homosexuality were genetically determined.

Dennis said...

Hate is a very powerful emotion that does more damage to the hater than to the person or group that is hated. NOTE: One discerns more hatred in Montag's disbelief that there is no moral outrage, his terms. Most of us have the ability to like or dislike people without the Left's resulting need to move straight to hatred. I would posit, as in Montag's comment, that much of what drives the Left is Hatred. Hatred of Conservatives. Hatred of Religion. Hatred of Republicans. Hatred of anyone who might think or act in opposition to their wants and desires. I could go on for several paragraphs defining their various forms of hatred, but why waste my time. Interesting also how much the term "rage" appears in the Left's comments. Transference is a wonderful thing.
It is interesting how much of the Left's time and energy is spent in hate and their closeness to the death of anything that gets in their way. Always the need to de-humanize those that would disagree so that justification for acts that would not be contemplated otherwise can be justified. So much easier to kill a "fetus" than a child in the womb.
I would suggest if the Left really wants to seek haters of any kind that a look in their mirror would show that which they seek.

Montag said...

no hate intended, Dennis. moral outrage was Jordan's terminology. those weren't "scare quotes," as the kids call them.

my point was that "DD sketches his opposition every bit as cartoonishly as the nihilists do."

if you're wondering why you can't find productive civil discussion, Dennis, perhaps a look in your mirror is in order.

robotsoul said...

It seems more than a little extreme to suggest that the SSM debate will spiral into all out armed culture war. I think you are onfusing conviction with hate. America is a unique country, the passion you feel for your beliefs is felt in equal measure by those who disagree with you. I think this issue will continue to be debated through intelligent discourse. However, before that can happen the GOP needs to find leadership that can accurately represent the views of consitituents like you so that the conversation doesn't get reduced to alienating name calling. Here is a great story on the issue here( multiple sources):