Gays For Ron Paul?

[giskard]

Is there such a group?

[DRV45N05]

If not...

Maybe you should start one.

[ThePieSwindler]

ask Justin Raimondo to spearhead it, since hes is well known in both gay San francisco circles as well as antiwar libertarian circles.

[Bradley in DC]

Some of our DC delegation started a group.

[giskard]

DRV, I'm not gay, so I wouldn't be a convincing person to start "Gays for Ron Paul".

I'm having trouble convincing some gay friends that Hillary is a politics-as-usual, warmongering scumbag, and that RP being pro individual rights, is pro gay. I don't understand where Hitlary's appeal to gays comes from.

[bszoka]

I've already started a facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6699671620

I also created a store to sell t-shirts for this group at cost at:
http://150624.spreadshirt.com/us/US/Shop/

If anyone is interested in assisting with the group, please let me know. I'd like to promote it and get more content up.

[jake]

I'm having trouble convincing some gay friends that Hillary is a politics-as-usual, warmongering scumbag, and that RP being pro individual rights, is pro gay. I don't understand where Hitlary's appeal to gays comes from.

probably because she is a woman. don't see how that means anything though :confused:

[giskard]

I'm thinking part of the appeal is that gays tend to be "liberals"... ironic, because neither Hitlary nor Obama voted against the Patriot Act and the Bomb Iran resolution.

[TheIndependent]

Someone should contact the Log Cabin Republicans. They're the largest such group in the U.S., and despite some people saying otherwise, are actually quite numerous and effective. You don't always hear them, but when they can be heard, they make it count.

See the anti-Romney ad they developed as proof. It's on YouTube.

That said, I know of many gays in politics in D.C. who are probably leaning Paul, and I'm working on some gay/lesbian friends to get them to see how a Paul administration will better their lives with freedom. just because their sexual orientation is different, it doesn't mean we should be leaving anyone flat on their ass. Everyone deserves a voice and this time it's one most Republicans would rather tell to shove off than get support from, which is sad.

[giskard]

bszoka, good stuff, gotta get that out on the general www.

[fortilite]

You know about some of these ones already, see if you can make a pitch to these guys to be a guest at any meetings coming up. Do it locally, contact your local chapter.

Log Cabin Republicans - there will be war hawks here but there will also be many open minded people. So many RP supporters are disgruntled republicans, and the Log Cabin's definitely have good reason to be disgruntled.
http://online.logcabin.org/chapters/

Outright Libertarians - I'm sure they're mostly supporting him anyways, but call just to make sure.
http://www.outrightusa.org/chapters.html

Pink Pistols (Gay Gun Group)
http://www.pinkpistols.org/local.html

[Danny Molina]

I don't see why any gay republicans wouldn't support Dr. Paul. Though they'd probably like him better if he was a proctologist instead of an OBGYN.

I kid I kid.

[OptionsTrader]

I'm thinking part of the appeal is that gays tend to be "liberals"... ironic, because neither Hitlary nor Obama voted against the Patriot Act and the Bomb Iran resolution.

Words like liberal and conservative have been misused so many times the words have no meaning anymore.

Yes gays should support Ron Paul, because he will treat them just like any other individual. No "group" is going to get prefferential or bigotted treatment from a Ron Paul administration. I suspect that gays want to be left the hell alone just liek everyone else that is damn tired of the government encroaching in our personal lives, our money, our economy, our educations, our emails, and sending our young people to other countries to die based on propaganda and lies.

[Hope]

Studies show that 25% of people who identify as homosexual are Republican.

We need to let them know about Ron Paul! If they don't support him, chances are that it's because no one has told them about him yet.

[JustAnotherV]

[QUOTE=TheIndependent;529400]Someone should contact the Log Cabin Republicans. They're the largest such group in the U.S., and despite some people saying otherwise, are actually quite numerous and effective. You don't always hear them, but when they can be heard, they make it count.
QUOTE]

This is a good idea I have heard of them and there was somehting in the last debate about this that came up. Of course in the primary this might scare away more social conservatives, but Ron Paul is about principle not politics, so I trying to get a their attention might be pretty valuable.

Of course in a general election, it would also really take the wind out of one more democratic sail...

[runderwo]

Words like liberal and conservative have been misused so many times the words have no meaning anymore.

Yes gays should support Ron Paul, because he will treat them just like any other individual. No "group" is going to get prefferential or bigotted treatment from a Ron Paul administration. I suspect that gays want to be left the hell alone just liek everyone else that is damn tired of the government encroaching in our personal lives, our money, our economy, our educations, our emails, and sending our young people to other countries to die based on propaganda and lies.

They also won't get a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

[dircha]

Congressman Paul supports Don't Ask Don't Tell, opposes federal Hate Crime legislation, and wants to strip federal courts of jurisdiction to rule on same sex marriage laws.

I haven't heard definitively where he stands on stripping federal courts of jurisdiction to rule on homosexual sodomy laws. Does anyone know where he stands on a Constitutional right to privacy?

These are all issues that I typically hear the GLBT community advocating opposing positions on.

Where do Log Cabin Republicans stand on these issues?

[honkywill]

Reminds me when I was out campaigning at a fair and these two gay college dudes walked by.

I got their attention handed some info over, looked at one straight in the eyes "He's a Republican who is FOR INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES."

He said thanks and that he would check him out.

I communicated that fact so well that I astounded myself, it was probably the best connection I've ever made with a complete stranger in so few words.

I've also been met with little objection by my handful of gay friends. I think them knowing that I support someone alone says that whoever it is I'm supporting isn't some crazy wanting to impose morality on others.

[fortilite]

My gay roommate is a war hawk and a mild socialist (surprised he isn't voting for Rudy :rolleyes:), so I can't get him on board. But he never said anything bad about Ron Paul relating to gay issues.

Definitely hit up the Log Cabins asap.

[xd9fan]

Forget group rights....there is no such thing...in the Constitution
how about Individual Rights/Liberty for Ron Paul

The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.
Ayn Rand

[libertythor]

I don't see why any gay republicans wouldn't support Dr. Paul. Though they'd probably like him better if he was a proctologist instead of an OBGYN.

I kid I kid.

Yeah, that was wrong. :D But funny.

There are lots of gay Ron Paul supporters; its just that they don't come right out and say it because their agenda for equality under the law is naturally included in the general umbrella policy of liberty.

[Cardinal Red]

Both spoke at the Berkeley Rally for Paul-- Both are openly gay and good political organizers--- Both are a bit polarizing-- might not be the ideal figure to have at the top of the organization, but they could certainly help in organizing-- and if they are willing to take the lead, I certainly wouldn't complaing

[Broadlighter]

Gay Rights proponents typically collectivize to strengthen themselves against the religious people who want to deny them everything. The religious people who are anti-gay feel the gays will deny them everything.

I think the biggest obstacle to reaching gay liberals is in making the distinction between individual privacy matters and collective rights. They want a candidate who supports gay marriage. WTF? I don't believe there is anything in the Constitution that especially supports heterosexual marriage. Individuals have the right to associate as a natural God-given right. That and personal privacy should be enough and if the gay person doesn't see that as a preferrable option to collective rights, we can't convert them to Ron Paul. Just move on.

[Ozwest]

Gays should get (right behind) Ron Pauls message of tolerence and individual liberty.

I'm sure their support is reflected in the strong donations from California.

I for one, encourage their visible presence in this campaign.

[vegetarianrpfan]

Congressman Paul supports Don't Ask Don't Tell...


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.



I'm having trouble convincing some gay friends that Hillary is a politics-as-usual, warmongering scumbag, and that RP being pro individual rights, is pro gay. I don't understand where Hitlary's appeal to gays comes from.

I don't, either. I saw a video where Hillary said that being gay is immoral (or, refused to deny that she thinks it's immoral... same difference.)

[giskard]

Link to video?

[Kregener]

Someone should start a redhead, left handed, dyslexics for Ron Paul...

[Ozwest]

Lose the conventional "Repuclican" tag of bigotry and 'Party" subservience and actively invite the gay community into this revolution.

Do your Libertarian beliefs come with addendumes?

[Ron Paul Fan]

I welcome all gays to the Ron Paul revolution. I don't care what your sexual preference is. The freedom message brings us together, it doesn't divide us. If people believe in freedom and individual liberty then they should get behind Ron Paul and we should welcome them.

[Mental Dribble]

According to the HRC Ron Paul does not support gay adoption rights... i think they turns off alot from that community. I was actually talking to a friend about that last night, that was his biggest complaint. That, and he works on the Hillary team (pretty high up there too)

[Melissa]

According to the HRC Ron Paul does not support gay adoption rights... i think they turns off alot from that community. I was actually talking to a friend about that last night, that was his biggest complaint. That, and he works on the Hillary team (pretty high up there too)


That is not true. He is against federal funding for this and would be for any other groups so this is not a gay issue but a "using taxpayers money" issue.

[ashlux]

Yes gays should support Ron Paul, because he will treat them just like any other individual.

You would think this is what the LGBT community would want (and some actually do). But the sentiment seems to be wanting to be treated as a special group with hate crime laws and anti-discrimination laws being seen as vital to gay rights. Things seem to be heavily group-oriented instead of individual-oriented. This has been my impression with my involvement with LGBT college organizations, friends, and parades anyhow.

I have gay friends and have attended LGBT functions, so I don't want to hear any of "you're just anti-gay" nonsense. :-)

[ashlux]

Someone should start a redhead, left handed, dyslexics for Ron Paul...

I'm a lefty, so don't tempt me :-P

[Jason T]

Ron Paul is strongly for federally legalizing gay marriage, a lot of the dems are only for civil unions.

Paul for gays in the military as long as their behavior is not disruptive, but doesn't think they should be judged on a different basis than straight people.

But hey, like all the morons out there, people don't understand this guys is against subsidies. A Christian website says:

"Ron Paul is opposed to same-sex marriage. Although he doesn't want to strip homosexuals of their civil rights, he has voted to prohibit federal funding for the joint adoption of a child between individuals who are not related by blood or marriage."

I'm trying to find out if he is for same-sex adoption or not, but I can't find anything. I just know he is against federal funding, for any adoption.

Well, best case scenario is that Christian voters stay thinking he's opposed to same-sex marriage, and gay people become aware of his true stances.

If he became president, the states that for gay marriage would legalize it and the states w/ the Christian nut cases (aka the south) where gay people are afraid of anyways will keep it banned. Good way to make everyone happy, imo.

[runderwo]

Ron Paul is strongly for federally legalizing gay marriage, a lot of the dems are only for civil unions.

Erm, no. He is strongly for getting the government out of marriage, and allowing states to not be forced to recognize marriages from other states that are illegal in their state.

[Bradley in DC]

Do your Libertarian beliefs come with addendumes?

Do you mean "addenda"?

[Ozwest]

Mmmm... You've got me scratching my head on that one. Might have to hit the Websters.

[Ozwest]

Addendum?

[ChairmanMao]

Low hanging fruit http://www.affirmation.org/ its a gay mormon website.

[Bradley in DC]

Addendum?

Sorry for going pedantic on you, addendum is singular, addenda is the plural form. Don't get me started on my pet peeve of the name of our beloved forum. :D

[Ozwest]

ChairmanMao,

I've got the acceptance bit down, but introducing oneself on a gay/mormon website is beyond my capabilities.

Any takers?

[Ozwest]

Huh, that is interesting, the look of the word would cause one to think it would be singular.

Can't wait to work it into my next conversation. hehe

[AlexMerced]

I contacted the gay mormon site and explained them why it might be a good idea to contact them for apossible interview, and explained them RP's stance Gay Marriage/Military issues.

[TooConservative]

I'm not gay for Ron Paul but I'm quite cheerful about him in a manly and platonic way.

[werdd]

brokeback mountaineers 4 RP?

[AlexMerced]

I'm not gay, but I'd love to find a woman like Ron Paul, but maybe younger

[Ozwest]

Stop it. You're breaking me up!

[akovacs]

My friend is gay and is a Paul supporter. He said he would normally consider himself Republican but Bush and the current crop of religious theocrats made him run away a long time ago.

[TooConservative]

Low hanging fruit http://www.affirmation.org/ its a gay mormon website.

Are we allowed to use "low hanging fruit" in reference to a gay Mormon website? LOL.

The nannystaters have passed laws against it, I'm sure, having taken time out from their busy schedule of voting to perpetrate war crimes against non-nuclear Iran. It's for the children, you see.

Someone suggested Justin Raimondo to head up this reacharound...ahem...outreach effort to gays. I think he'd be an outstanding pick if you could convince him.

Then there's Alan Simpson, retired Republican senator from Wyoming who spends a lot of his time frolicking about with the Log Cabin Republicans. I tend to think they'll go for Giuliani.

If nothing else, start a group called WeAreNotGayForRonPaul.com and get Larry Craig to head the effort. Sounds like toetapping fun to me.

[Paul.Bearer.of.Injustice]

I like to fondle low-hanging fruit.

[TooConservative]

Ron Paul is strongly for federally legalizing gay marriage, a lot of the dems are only for civil unions.

I think it's more accurate to say he doesn't favor amending the Constitution over definitions of marriage. I would be very surprised if he believes the Court should be allowed to issue any rulings in support of gay marriage in the way that the Court overturned miscegenation laws. Generally speaking, he's quite federalist on such issues and he's not very politically correct about these causes.

I would hazard a guess that RP opposes it personally in Texas if it is on the ballot there. But he might surprise me.

[KewlRonduderules]

I think it's more accurate to say he doesn't favor amending the Constitution over definitions of marriage. I would be very surprised if he believes the Court should be allowed to issue any rulings in support of gay marriage in the way that the Court overturned miscegenation laws. Generally speaking, he's quite federalist on such issues and he's not very politically correct about these causes.

I would hazard a guess that RP opposes it personally in Texas if it is on the ballot there. But he might surprise me.


Dude, you are way off on your understanding of Dr. Paul's stance on gay marriage!!!

He has said it himself that he believes in his opinion that there is a biological disposition toward being homosexual. Under no circumstances should they be discriminated against. Marriage is not a religious, federal, or state issue. Instead it is a social construct that should be dealt with at the local level. Simply put- marriage has no business in courts (at any level) period!!!

[TooConservative]

He has said it himself that he believes in his opinion that there is a biological disposition toward being homosexual.

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. Worse yet, if it is biological, it could be declared or considered a birth defect which might be tested for prenatally and then you could add unborn children suspected of innate homosexual tendencies to all the other babies murdered by abortion.

Don't be quite so quick to think that the argument for biological causes is either medically proven or that it is even a desirable grounds by which you justify homosexual behavior.

Please provide some quotes or writings by Dr. Paul on the subject.

[runningdiz]

tooconservative... maybe he was refering to this video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIeW0DY64bE Paul does not say those exact words but clearly suggests it... Hope it helps.

[hasan]

ron paul believes gay marriage is a religious/personal institution. he says the government only started keeping record of marriages for health purposes. he doesn't believe it is a federal or state issue. its an issue of religious and personal freedom

[Bradley in DC]

All of these posts, and not one person worked in a Seinfeld, "not that there's anything wrong with that."

<gratuitous bump>

[SeanEdwards]

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.

[SeanEdwards]

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. Worse yet, if it is biological, it could be declared or considered a birth defect which might be tested for prenatally and then you could add unborn children suspected of innate homosexual tendencies to all the other babies murdered by abortion.

If it's ever isolated down to a testable few genes, then what you describe is inevitable, at least in some circles. People all over the world are selecting offspring through IVF techniques to exclude certain genes, or choose gender.

I heard somewhere about some conservative religious fellows getting all excited about the possibility of being able to make sure they didn't produce gay offspring.

But people already do this kind of thing all the time. They make choices for their children and mold them to an ideal, at least to some extent. It seems weird, but I tend to think that as long as all the control stays in the hands of the parents, then for the most part things will work out ok. Though there can certainly be some rough spots along the way. There's apparently quite a crisis in parts of the world now because families are preferring to produce male chidlren instead of female, and technology is giving them the power to choose.

[AlexMerced]

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. Worse yet, if it is biological, it could be declared or considered a birth defect which might be tested for prenatally and then you could add unborn children suspected of innate homosexual tendencies to all the other babies murdered by abortion.

Don't be quite so quick to think that the argument for biological causes is either medically proven or that it is even a desirable grounds by which you justify homosexual behavior.

Please provide some quotes or writings by Dr. Paul on the subject.

Ron Paul insintuates he thinks being gay is biological in this interview
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zIeW0DY64bE

Ron Paul saids he's ok with gay marriage cause it should be voluntary contract not a government one in the Candidates@Google interview


period.

[kjk437]

ron paul believes gay marriage is a religious/personal institution. he says the government only started keeping record of marriages for health purposes. he doesn't believe it is a federal or state issue. its an issue of religious and personal freedom

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.

[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 ***** with 2.2 children to be utterly bleak. Where's the thrill in that? Where is the ***** 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 ***** with 2.2 children to be utterly bleak. Where's the thrill in that? Where is the ***** 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....

:rolleyes:

[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.

[NCSURonPaulAddict]

My boyfriend and I are both avid Ron Paul supporters. The great thing about Ron Paul is that his message protects everyone's liberties without singling any single group out.

The democrats (and neo-cons) have been using us as a wedge for YEARS so it is very refreshing to see someone who views it as a non-issue.

[Mark]

Someone should start a redhead, left handed, dyslexics for Ron Paul...

I could do that. Sometimes my hair looks red. I favored my left hand, but was "trained" to be right handed. Slightly dyslexic.

hmmm.. yep..

RedheadLefthandedDyslexicsForRonPaul.com IS available!!

Website here we come!

[InRonWeTrust]

I support gays and their right to be humans.

[Ronin]

Here's the vote I have among gay friends and acquaintances. I'm trying to convert one of the Hillary guys, but he's not budging. The other Hillary supporter has a grad degree in Political Science and is in the "he's crazy and doesn't have a chance" camp. Not budging either. Oh well. I guess 2 out of 4 isn't bad.

Hillary: 2
Paul: 2

[bszoka]

Here is our new Gays & Lesbians for Ron Paul blog:
http://gays-for-ron.blogspot.com/

[bszoka]

Check out my blog! http://gays-for-ron.blogspot.com/

[loupeznik]

Individual liberty should appeal to all minorities.

[AlbemarleNC0003]

I'm here. I'm *****. I'm a precinct captain.

[MikeStanart]

We can call it: G.R.O.P.E

G.ays for R.O.n P.aul E.xcellent!

[libertythor]

We can call it: G.R.O.P.E

G.ays for R.O.n P.aul E.xcellent!

:confused:

Try a better acronym please!

[amy31416]

I'm here. I'm *****. I'm a precinct captain.

That is simply FABULOUS darling!

Seriously, that is great. Thank you for your open-mindedness, your time and all your work. If I were gay, I'd be all over Ron Paul--wait, that didn't come out right. I'd be all about Ron Paul. Well, okay, I am all about Ron Paul without being gay, but I think you know what I'm saying.

Hillary, at best, might promote another "Don't ask, don't tell" piece of BS. Tell the Hillary people that. Though I doubt she'd even do that much...

[jorlowitz]

http://gays-for-ron.blogspot.com/

[BobSmith]

Rather than create A Gays For ron paul group. Advertise his message in gay newsletters.