Lovely how Carl Paladino tries to have it both ways: he’s all for “live and let live,” but children must not be “brainwashed” into thinking that the gay lifestyle is a “valid or successful option.”
And who or what makes a lifestyle “valid,” hmm? And since when is there a single measure for human “success”?
I think Andrew Cuomo is handling Paladino’s bigotry correctly. This in Forbes today:
Democratic candidate Andrew Cuomo declined comment Tuesday. On Monday, he called Paladino’s comments “reckless and divisive,” saying New York needs tolerance, not someone to pit one group against another.
And I think the clip above is illustrative of the tensions and instabilities within the Tea Party movement itself: is it evolving into an ever more strident Herderian nationalist and religious movement (which I think is its most likely trajectory) or is it evolving into a Randian and libertarian movement (“live and let live”)?
I’m actually totally with Paladino on this one. Gayness is almost trendy in some circles and valuing masculinity over effeminate traits in men is being seen as discriminatory. I have gay friends, but I’d be lying if I said that I haven’t been made uncomfortable by unwanted advances by some of them. I think people have a right to be sexist, racist or anti-gay so long as they don’t hurt anybody just like they have equal rights no matter what race, gender or sexual orientation they are. I have been very disappointed with the Libertarian candidate for New york Governor this election thus far, and Paladino just might get my vote.
Liberals need to realize that it is and will continue to be a battle for “gays” to be accepted as “normal”. Just face the facts that it isn’t natural, and will never be looked upon as a normal or natural lifestyle.
I don’t care if someone is gay, but I do care when they try to impose their belief that it is ok within the school system, and within society.
If you are gay, what you do in your private life should be private and stay private, as the rest of us don’t want to know about it.
@Trisho – Please, define “natural” for me. As homosexuality is seen spread throughout the animal kingdom, it is implicitly “natural.” And you honestly believe that gays are trying to impose their beliefs on you? How so? What I often find in people spouting this ignorant line is that they dislike even acknowledging the existence of gays. Guess what, they exist and they have the same rights as you. Which means you have no choice but acknowledging their existence, regardless of what your bigotry desires.
The moral discrepancy from Paladino is actually quite humorous. It must be pretty high on Paladino’s list to ensure that his illegitimate daughter – who he had with his mistress – is not exposed to such a corrupting influence as gays. She might draw a poor conclusion on what is right and what is not.
I define “natural” as sex between a man and a woman. I believe most people would agree that that is considered “natural”.
Yes, the gays are trying to implement the “acceptance” of their ways within public school systems. It has been in the news, specifically in California.
As I stated before, I don’t care if someone is gay, but they should keep it to themselves.
What people do in their private lives is none of my business.
The gay agenda within the public school system, find here:
So, you believe something even though it can be proven that what you believe is incorrect. You then go on to base the rest of your attitude off of what you know is incorrect. Does that not seem ludicrous?
Yes, they are pushing “acceptance” from the perspective that gays are just another variation of person – we have many cultures, religions, etc. Gays are just another variation of this. You want them to stay in the closet, because of your belief that gays are “unnatural” which we have already established is untrue.
Your stance is absolute bigotry and ignorance.
From your link, here is a quote:
“Gay activists were free to pop into public high schools to distribute quizzes asking students in detail about their sexual habits, detailing what many still think of as deviant and/or unhealthy sexual practices.”
This is total BS. Have any corroborating testimony from students or teachers that this is true? Have any copies of these “quizzes?” My wife is a teacher and they walk the PC tightrope daily. And they are forbidden to cross into sexual topics that are not explicitly part of the state mandated curriculum. No possible way is a special interest group coming in and teaching crap like this in the classroom.
Just because some blogger who turned around her obsessive and self centered nature be fixating on religion and becoming a blind bigot writes BS does not make it true.
So, Andrew – are you still with Paladino, now that he’s retracting all his statements and apologizing effusively for his bigotry? Apparently, every thing he said was wrong. And of course he was just reading from a script prepared by someone else…so his “mistakes” should be forgiven. Ya, know, don’t let his waffling on, what was recently an extremely important moral issue to him-but now it’s not-cause, ya know i’m not really like that-dear voters, affect your vote for him.
What a craven, pathetic POS he is. I had more respect for him when he was spewing his bigoted nonsense, hoping to garner some votes from the “family values” chapter of our society.
His small government approach is equally whimsical. He demands small government .. yet he will invoke imminent domain to stop the mosque from being built near the WTC. What a joke.
What, really? You have a link JCR?
Never mind JCR, I just found it.
Such a disappointment.
yeah, disappointing. Will there ever be a candidate that is REALLY fiscally conservative ?? And the dream of finding a candidate that is fiscally conservative, yet NOT part of the religious right … ah, I can dream, can’t I?
Hey Trisho, why don’t you go and tell that to the parents of the kid who just jumped to his death off the George Washington bridge due to being harrassed and humiliated for his sexuality? Or maybe to the families of those boys who were tortured in Brooklyn? Maybe you can explain to them how it’s “not natural” and if they would only choose to hide themselves from society and not be included in the education system then their suffering wouldn’t have occured. Maybe this will assuage their grief?
very important rule. NEVER make a discussion that a view is immoral because of the tragic death of a child. Parents of dead children are notorious for pushing through bad legislation because they’ve clung to a cause.
There was that girl from Ireland who committed suicide too. Then people were talking about cyber-bullying as if it’s an epidemic. Besides laws were already broken that are completely unrelated to homosexuality in the case you’re talking about. It’s almost like society is treating gays the way Jessie Jackson treats blacks, like every issue in which they’re involved MUST be about discrimination.
Her views are not immoral due to the death of a child and I never said as much. The deaths are simply the consequences of such immorality. And ur attempts to equate Jesse Jackson’s over-reactive nonsense with the rampant, violent, anti-gay movement occurring in this country and being countenanced by our politicians, is either woefully ignorant or flatout intellectual dishonesty. There is a world of difference between arguing for affirmative action and bashing someones face in and sodomizing them with a plunger. Do u really need that pointed out to you?
What you were doing was a blatant emotional appeal. i called you out on it, and it has EVERYTHING to do with Jesse Jackson’s approach to discrimination. Where’s the rampant anti-gay violence in the US? I’m not seeing it, and attributing the harassment and violence of youth is woefully ignorant, fear/hate of homosexuality is an ad-hock justification not the reason for it.
And your whole line of, “There is a world of difference between arguing for affirmative action and bashing someones face in and sodomizing them with a plunger. Do u really need that pointed out to you?” makes absolutely no sense.
u made a pathetic attempt to equate the outrage expressed at the very real violence, threats, shaming, suicides and pervasive bigotry that homosexuals are facing today to nothing more credible than the histrionics of Jesse Jackson, who is well known for tilting at discriminatory windmills. Which, in case ur unaware, implies that there either is no, or little discrimination/violence taking place against homosexuals. I simply pointed out that comparing the two, like u did, in light of the recent violent episodes involving gays, is utterly ridiculous.
But I guess I shouldn’t be surprised – you claim u don’t see it. I guess u need it pointed out that there have been numerous violent episodes just within the past few weeks – nevermind historically; and that ur posting in a thread which documents the explicit bigotry of an elected.official; that currently there is a massive national level argument going on about gay marriage rights; that gay teens have been committing suicide due to harassment.
Nah, you don’t see it, those silly gays, nothing more than the next iteration of Jesse Jackson.
I see nothing wrong when an appeal to.emotion is made that is grounded in a strong moral and logically supported position. So go ahead and call it all.you want, it does nothing to discredit the position
Article documenting some of the violence and discrimination….hardly Jesse Jackson material
Wow. Are you going to do one on Obama’s BS on this?