I posted this in the comments section at Towle Road in response to being called an “Uncle Tom” by one of the visitors to that site. It may seem silly, but the point needs to be made.

I am 35 and have been out since I was 20. Was does it say to you that in 15 years the most intolerant and hateful things that have ever been said to me did not come from Republicans speaking about the fact that I was gay but from Democrats speaking about the fact I am a Republican?

What does it say to you that my Republican parents and Republican sisters and their Republican husbands flew half-way across the country to spend Christmas with their Republican son/brother and his Republican partner and his Republican parents after never having met them or any person that I have ever dated?

What does it say to you that my Republican father, the same man that 15 years ago said I was mentally ill and needed help and that he would never accept his gay son hugged my partner at the airport when we dropped them off and said, “next year is at our house” and left me a note saying “We had a GREAT time”?

It says to me that people like Jimmyboyo (see comments section) haven’t got the first clue what true acceptance, tolerance and diversity really mean and that they are angy - angry at those that refuse to accept them and angy at those they percieve to be the cause.

“They will never accept you” - True, some will not, no more than people like Jimmyboyo will accept the opinion of a gay Republican. But the people that truly matter in my life already have and maybe, in the end, that is what is missing from the lives of people so appalled with those of us that refuse to simply toe the party line because we’re gay and it is expected.

To them I say get the mirror out and take a good, long look. Your problem isn’t with gay Republicans, the religious right, or anyone else; the problem lies in the image staring back at you in that mirror.

Did Michael Rogers’ latest antic violate D.C. criminal code? It sure looks like it did to me. Rob at Say Anything has picked up on an NRO post regarding a threat Michael Rogers has made against a Republican senator to “out” him for not voting the way Rogers believes he should.

Mr. Senator:

Tomorrow you will be faced with a vote that may have the longest aftereffects of any other you have cast in your Senate career.

Tomorrow you will decide if your political position is worth more than doing what is right for others like you. For others like you, Mr. Senator, who engage in oral sex with other men. (Although, Mr. Senator, most of us don’t do in the bathrooms of Union Station!) Your fake marriage, by the way, will NOT protect you from the truth being told on this blog.

How does this blog decide who to report on? It’s simple. We report on hypocrites. In this case, hypocrites who vote against the gay and lesbian community while engaging in gay sex themselves*.

When you cast that vote, Mr. Senator, represent your own…it’s the least you could do.

Michael Rogers
blogACTIVE.com

*While votes on many matters are considered, votes “FOR” either the Alito nomination and the Federal Marriage Amendment are enough to qualify legislators for reporting on this site.

Why, that sounds an awful lot like blackmail, doesn’t it? Well, it sounds that way to a few other people too:

The post on BlogActive may constitute blackmail under the criminal law of Washington, D.C. As set forth on Lexis - Nexis, section 22-3252 of the District Columbia Code provides:

(a) A person commits the offense of blackmail, if, with intent to obtain property of another or to cause another to do or refrain from doing any act, that person threatens:

(1) To accuse any person of a crime;

(2) To expose a secret or publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject any person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule; or

(3) To impair the reputation of any person, including a deceased person.

(b) Any person convicted of blackmail shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.

It appears the author of the BlogActive post has threatened, with “intent to . . . cause another to do or refrain from doing any act,” to “expose a secret or publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject any person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule.”

I’m assuming the D.C. Code applies because the BlogActive website lists a D.C. post office box for contributions.

I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t know if threatening an unnamed person constitutes blackmail. But it could….

I hope someone has made a phone call to the D.C. police. Michael Rogers is scum and he may have just gone too far. We’ll see.

How long before GLAAD, HRC, and other groups denounce the military’s “biggoted decision” not to show Brokeback Mountain? I am betting within 24 hours.

The Malcontent has some very good commentary on Mike Rogers’ claiming vindication in his gay outing campaign because an online poll (of all things)! Nevermind the thing is likely stacked with the trolls from his comments section. The fact is, most straight Americans would likely find his actions reprehensible.

How about we balance the scales a bit.

What?? Really?? Because all I have been reading from certain gay bloggers is that Schwarzenegger doesn’t believe in equality. While some people are bemoaning Schwarzenegger’s refusal to allow the state legislature to overturn a voter-approved initiative instead of getting the voters to do it themselves, they have completely ignored the fact that he has signed into law some sweeping pro-gay, EQUAL PROTECTION legislation. From BfT:

While most headlines will tell you that Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 849–the Marriage Equality bill–don’t overlook the fact that, today, California’s Governor added sexual orientation and marital status to the Unruh Civil Rights Act (AB 1400), signed legislation prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity in health care plans (AB 1586), granted equal recognition for gay and lesbian couples under Proposition 13 for Property Tax appraisals, and granted pension benefits for gay and lesbian couples who retired before his predecessor finally signed a law recognizing Domestic Partnerships.

Most important, however, is Schwarzenegger’s statement on the malicious “Protect Marriage” initiatives, which came as part of his veto-message of AB 849. Circulating among California voters are measures which would eliminate all State and Local recognition of gay couples. The Governor would have none of that, stating, “I support current domestic partner rights and will continue to vigorously defend and support these rights… and will not support any roll back.” [ed. emphasis mine]

But, you know, he HATES us.

**UPDATE**

Arnold’s statement:

“To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 849 without my signature because I do not believe the Legislature can reverse an initiative approved by the people of California.

I am proud California is a leader in recognizing and respecting domestic partnerships and the equal rights of domestic partners. I believe that lesbian and gay couples are entitled to full protection under the law and should not be discriminated against based upon their relationships. I support current domestic partnership rights and will continue to vigorously defend and enforce these rights and as such will not support any rollback.

California Family Code Section 308.5 was enacted by an initiative statute passed by the voters as Proposition 22 in 2000. Article II, section 10 of the California Constitution prohibits the Legislature from amending this initiative statute without a vote of the people. This bill does not provide for such a vote.

The ultimate issue regarding the constitutionality of section 308.5 and its prohibition against same-sex marriage is currently before the Court of Appeal in San Francisco and will likely be decided by the Supreme Court.

This bill simply adds confusion to a constitutional issue. If the ban of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, this bill is not necessary. If the ban is constitutional, this bill is ineffective.

Sincerely,

Arnold Schwarzenegger” - [ed. emphasis mine]

And, legally, he is right.

The problem with the left in this country, and large parts of the gay community specifically, is they are unable to reconcile their emotions with the rule of law. They feel it, so they must have it - with zero respect for the system we live under. Don’t like the system? Just defy it. Don’t like a law? Just don’t obey it. Voters pass an initiative you don’t like? Illegally go around them.

There is a word for that: anarchy.

As a wise Vulcan once said, “Really, Dr. McCoy. You must learn to govern your passions. They will be your undoing.” The left in this country should heed those words because from where I sit, they are simply coming undone.

The Prism Warden hits it square between the eyes.

Homosexuals are not my brothers and sisters. My friends are my family, and they are my friends for a variety of reasons. I am not loyal to anyone out of a shared orientation. Neither am I loyal to white people due to the color of my skin. Were I to ever make a political argument that someone is betraying their brothers and sisters in the white race by supporting affirmative action, I would rightly be denounced as a virulent racist and bigot. It’s an unconscienable mindset that should neither be encouraged nor supported.

Enforced racial, sexual, or gendered loyalty to one political party is a form of ideological slavery. People like Mike Rogers are the bounty hunters intended to use whips of gossip and privacy invasion to lash those errant thinkers back onto the plantation of partisan Democratic thought. Do not wander too far, lest you get the beating that is coming to you courtesy of Overseer Mike.

I have already noted that I am conservative and voted for Bush based on shifting priorities. While I am unabashedly pro gay marriage, I part with the gay left on the method and importance in obtaining it. There are simply greater issues facing the republic which demand my attention and vote. That does not mean I cannot compartmentalize the issues and work against the federal marriage amendment while supporting the broader goals of the conservative movement. That people like Rogers cannot separate gay marriage from larger issues is more a testament to his narrow-minded intolerance than any imagined self-loathing on my part.

Read it all. (h/t Confederate Yankee)

But that is for another post. In the meantime, checkout the Prism Warden’s post on gay sheep following the Democratic party over the cliffs. (h/t Republic of M)

Arnold will veto the gay marriage bill. I am disappointed but I knew he would and his reasoning is sound.

“We cannot have a system where the people vote and the Legislature derails that vote,” the governor’s press secretary, Margita Thompson, said in a statement.

With Prop. 22 still on the books (it defines marriage as a union between a man and woman and passed by 61% in 2000) there really was little choice.

Even though opinion polls are showing a shift in sentiment on gay marriage, nothing has been done to change the law and this all would have ended up in court anyway. Mark Leno, the State Assemblyman that put together and got this passed, did a great thing - too early. Prop. 22 is before the courts now and he should have waited for the outcome. If the courts reaffirmed Prop. 22, then he should have put a ballot measure up repealing it. Had the court struck it down, it would have cleared the way for Arnold to sign the bill. Whether he would have is another question but he would have been hard-pressed to come up with a reason not to.

Doing things the right way is a major pain in the ass sometimes, but things worth doing are seldom easy.One good thing did come of this though. The California State Legislature passed a bill approving gay marriage. The first in the history of this nation and, I dare say, it will not be the last time either.

**UPDATE**

Of course, some people would prefer to take the easy way and just allow the legislature to say “f-off” to the people that put them there to do the people’s will.

While I am really very emotionally happy about the California legislature passing AB0849 (”Gender-neutral marriage” bill), I cannot help but remember that the voters of this state have already spoken on this issue and they overwhelmingly said “NO” to gay marriage with Prop. 22.

That being said, I hate the proposition system in this state. I have even advocated getting rid of it. The typical voter is uninformed and ill equipped to make a decision based on anything else except raw emotion.

We are a Republic and if you don’t like what your elected officials do, you vote them out of office.

Support the bill.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-445-4633

Thanks to The Malcontent for the contact info, and the nudge his post on the subject provided.

I am normally asked at least once a month how I could be gay and Republican in that exasperated-disbelief kinda way. “Don’t you know they hate you? They don’t want you to get married for crying out loud! How much more proof do you need?”

Well, like SOME ACTUAL PROOF would be nice, especially since there is a whole lot more to the contrary, including a new Pew poll.

Just over half of those polled, 53 percent, said they support civil unions for gay people, while 36 percent said they favor gay marriage - a slight increase on both issues from a year ago.

The American people can be very reasonable when you are not trying to force-feed them something they are not prepared to accept. And just because they are not ready for something, doesn’t mean they hate - it means they disagree.

**UPDATE**

Remember what I was saying about evidence to the contrary? If the leftist Democrats rake this guy over the coals and the NY Times goes after his kids (which is disgustingly sleazy but not at all surprising coming from the Times) they can kiss 2006, 2008, and quite likely 2010 goodbye.