I think I'm in looooove

Friday, October 20, 2006
Kirsten Powers / Powers-Point: "this is a ridiculous argument in defense of outing gay (or allegedly gay) Republicans. Since when does bad behavior justify other bad behavior? 'Their entire political movement over the last 20 years has been fueled by sleazy sexual innuendo; dragging private sexual behavior into the public arena...'

Oh ok! So, let's do it too! It's sleazy and disgusting...so by all means let's start outing gay people. And all the examples listed in this blog deal with extramarital affairs. The outing of gay people is about what exactly? What is their 'moral' crime that is akin to adultery? Don't liberals believe that being gay is ok? Ahh...yes. But being gay and not thinking like liberals think is apparently 'immoral.' Who says so? The Liberal Police. Who will they target next?"

5 comments:

chuck said...

"I think I'm in looooove"

Yeah, Allah too. Best of luck to both of you, and may the best man win.

Barry Dauphin said...

This is the logical extension of the personal is political. The "crime" in this case is the individuals not being "out", because that axiomatically means that they are ashamed of their sexuality. But such shame hurts the "cause" of acceptance, so it becomes not only justfiable but an imperative to "out" the person for the "common good". Waiting to out them during election season serves the cause doubly since electing the "right" people will lead to greater "tolerance" (/end irony). See, it's easy when you drink the koolaid.

Rick Ballard said...

Barry,

The tactic reveals the absolute puerility of the liberal thought process as well. The promoters of the outing - including Pajams Media - have such a very limited understanding of the Christian boogeymen that they have concocted that they are blind to the net effect of their efforts.

They ought to consider giving up thinking with their tiny little "packages". Liberal orthodoxy makes Calvin look like a libertine and Cromwell like a font of mercy.

When this is over they will be farther from their "objective" than they were before starting.

terrye said...

Rick:

Love the sinner, hate the sin.

Rick Ballard said...

"Hate" is probably too strong - until the damage done by the homosexual priests was revealed homosexual behavior got about as much attention as simony. The demand that the Boy Scouts provide fodder for men with inclinations toward ehebophilia on top of the demonstration by the priests as to probable outcomes was the first bridge too far.

I've known both closeted and open gays and I have a great deal of sympathy for the terror that the closeted gays feel of being exposed. Particularly to those who fear the damage that exposure would do to parents and siblings that they truly love. The cruelty exhibited by those doing the outings to advance their idiotic cause is a much greater sin than any voluntary homosexual act could ever be considered to be.