Just another WordPress.com site

Posts tagged ‘politics’

Ron Paul arguably more homophobic than fellow GOP bigots…if that’s possible.

I for one am glad that the Iowa Caucuses are over. The whole thing kind of reminded me of Halloween in January with all of the lunatics and crazies out. All of the back-slapping and sucking up to Ethanol farmers is over and now we can move on to other states and eventually to President Obama’s inevitable victory.

The results were disheartening but not surprising. It appears the God’s Own Party (the GOP, get it?) is as flagrantly anti-gay as ever. On top, we had Mitt Romney of the magic underwear cult who tried to block gay people’s happy day when he was governor of the Gay State. He’s such a judegmental, judging hatemonger bigot just like all Mormons. For more on that particular church see my anti-Mormon hate site on the right, “Stop the Mormons”. Then there was Michele “Pray Away the Gay” Bachmann who finished dismally, thank goodness. Her husband’s obviously a repressed homosexual; did you know that? Toward the bottom of the heap was Rick “I’m Not Ashamed to be a Christian” Perry. If he’s going to be a Christian, can’t he at least have the decency to be ashamed? Rick “Man-Dog Sex” Santorum was the surprise of the night, proving that you can still be a contender in the Republican Party and hold Roman Catholic beliefs, something that I think our Constitution prohibits.

I was really supporting the Texan Ron Paul until I found out that he doesn’t think that government should be in the marriage business. That really upset me. If I can’t get the government to recognize my marriage, that means I can’t force others to recognize it under penalty of law. I like to tell people that I just want the government out of my life, out of my bedroom, and out of my relationships. But that’s just another one of those lies that keeps dribbling out of my mouth like Michael’s spooge on a Saturday night. If that’s all I wanted,  I already had that before marriage equality came to my state. In fact, homos can have that in every state, even Mississippi. Nope, we want the government more involved in our personal lives, not less.  We want our relationships to be formalized and contractual. So when we say that we just want the government out of our lives, we actually mean exactly the opposite.

With Ron Paul, we wouldn’t be able to do that. No one would be forced to recognize my marriage, which defeats the purpose.

You can imagine how disappointed I was to learn that Ron Paul is in fact no different than the others. He likes to tell people that he’s a “defender of the Constitution” but then he turns around and denies the separation of church and state. Everyone knows that those words in the Constitution–right there in the first amendement. Well, I can’t find them, but I’m sure they’re there. If you don’t believe that, you’re probably a member of the Christian Taliban. Here’s what Paul actually said about the separation of church and state:

“In case after case, the supreme Court has used the infamous ‘separation of church and state’ metaphor to uphold court decisions that allow the federal government to intrude upon and deprive citizens of their religious liberty. “

That’s the PURPOSE of the first amendment, you dolt! It isn’t to defend people of faith from the government. It’s to defend me from people of faith. They’re scary and the government needs to restrain them. The Constitution guarantees my right to never see or hear anything that might involve God, and it mandates the religious loons check their values outside the voting booth or else forfeit their right to vote.

Yeah, next thing we know he’s going to want to stone people for adultery. He continues:

“This ‘separation’ doctrine is based upon a phrase taken out of context from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists on January 1, 1802.”

Jefferson was a deist. That’s what I heard anyway. And even though he wasn’t involved in the drafting of the Constitution because he was the ambassador to France at the time, I’ll look to his words, taken out of context, for guidance. Only because he said what I want to hear. After all, he’s the expert. Jefferson’s words trump the actual text of the Constitution.

Paul doesn’t have such a great track record with teh gheys. He even opposed Lawrence v. Texas on the grounds that the Constitution doesn’t actually guarantee a right to sodomy! Can you believe that? I did a quick google search and determined that the word “sodomy” appears nowhere in the Constitution, much less a right thereto. But in 2003, a bunch of justices said that it did. And I agree with them because I like sodomy. I’m sure it’s emanating somewhere in the penumbras.

Batty ol’ Ron Paul disagrees. As he wrote in an essay found at Lewrockwell.com :

“Consider the Lawrence case decided by the Supreme Court in June. The Court determined that Texas had no right to establish its own standards for private sexual conduct, because gay sodomy is somehow protected under the 14th amendment “right to privacy.” Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution. There are, however, states’ rights — rights plainly affirmed in the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Under those amendments, the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards. But rather than applying the real Constitution and declining jurisdiction over a properly state matter, the Court decided to apply the imaginary Constitution and impose its vision on the people of Texas.

I get it. He wants the federal government out of our bedrooms. But the fifty state governments are still okay.

Ron Paul: He's a rock star to the youth voters. To me, he's just another Republican BIGOT.

It’s almost as if he’s saying that there are no sexual rights in the Constitution, and thus the issues are for the states to decide. But I’d like it much better if there were sexual rights in the Constitution. And because I want them there, that means that I support any judge who imagines them to be there and rules accordingly. It’s so much easier to just have a judge strike down all of the laws I don’t like than it would be to do the hard work of changing minds and laws in all fifty states. Less messy, too.

It doesn’t matter at all to me whether there’s a “right to privacy” in the Constitution. Those words aren’t there, but neither are “right to sodomy” or “separation of church and state”. If we were to go down that road of only accepting words contained in the Constitution as legitimately constitutional, we’d be in a world of trouble. I prefer a living, breathing document–it says what I want it to say.

Ron Paul even advocates the bizarre theory that homosexuals get AIDS from their sexual behaviors. That’s not true. We get AIDS from Ronald Reagan and the Catholic Church. Everyone knows that. As he wrote in his January 1990 newsletter:

‘The ACT-UP slogan on stickers plastered all over Manhattan is ‘Silence=Death.’ But shouldn’t it be Sodomy = Death’?

That is just ABSURD! He’s  insinuating that the best way to avoid getting AIDS is to stop taking it up the ass! That’s just irresponsible, especially coming from a medical doctor. He’s blaming the victim. It’s like telling someone that the best way to avoid lung cancer is to quit smoking, or the best way to avoid obesity is to watch their diet. Actions do not have consequences and I loathe people who tell me that they do. Science is very clear on this: there is no known connection between butt sex and AIDS. They are two completely unrelated concepts. He needs to go back to med school.

His newsletters are a treasure trove of homophobic delusions. Oh, here’s another one from September 1994. Watch out for malicious gays!

“those who don’t commit sodomy, who don’t get blood a transfusion, and who don’t swap needles, are virtually assured of not getting AIDS unless they are deliberately infected by a malicious gay.”

Hey, I do know a few malicious gays who do stuff like that, but only to other willing partners. Fully knowledeable that they are HIV positive, they head on down to the bathhouse and engage in group sex with lots of other guys. Bu those other guys being infected already fall under the first category: those who commit sodomy. Not that sodomy has anything to do with AIDS.

The supposedly libertarian congressman also wants to keeps us queers from eating in restaurants. Well, not queers, but AIDS patients. He bases this on the “fact” that “AIDS can be transmitted by saliva”. That’s a lie. AIDS cannot be transmitted by saliva. Or sodomy, for that matter. AIDS is transmitted by lack of federal funding for research and by homophobia.

Oh, what a disappointment he turned out to be. I thought he was the face of a new, sodomy-friendly GOP. And it turns out that he’s the worst of the bunch! If it were between him and Santorum, and I absolutely had to choose one or the other, I think I might have to choose ol’ Man-Dog sex. At least he looks handsome in a sweater vest. (Okay, so I fantasize about him, just like Dan Savage does). Ron Paul just looks like a wrinkled old prune.

I took this picture of Ron Paul two winters ago while he was chopping ice. I was trying to catch a glimpse of his cock, but it was kind of shriveled in the cold water.

Advertisements

Ireland’s great gay hope tripped up by petty concerns about pedophilia.

In the pantheon of gay heroes, David Norris ranks among the greatest. His long legal battle with the Republic of Ireland led to the repeal of its anti-homosexuality laws in 1993. His career in the Seanad (Irish Senate) has been characterized by his passion for civil rights (for homosexuals, not for anyone else). And until just recently, he was the odds on favorite to be the next President of Ireland. If he had achieved that feat, he would have been the first openly gay president in the history of Ireland; and Europe for that matter. His candidacy had strong support across Ireland, particularly among Irish youth. His following generated comparisons between Norris and Obama circa 2008. He was, in short, a rock star.

David Norris at pro-baby killing rally. You go, girl!

Electing an openly gay president would have signaled Ireland’s complete break with the medieval institution so long associated with it–the Catholic Church. The once socially conservative country has moved left in a big way, having legalized divorce, homosexual relations, and even gay civil unions. Abortion and gay marriage seem like the next logical steps.

Faith in the church has largely declined because Irish priests are a bunch of icky child molesters. Which wouldn’t normally bother me, except for the fact that the child molesters involved are Catholic priests. I don’t hate child molesting Catholic priests because they’re child molesters. I hate them because they are Catholic priests. And David Norris basically agrees with me.

Mr. Norris abandoned the campaign for the Irish presidency last week after a trumped up pedophilia scare brought the pressure to bear on him. Which is so stupid, because when I look for a president, I don’t ask myself what his personal feelings are on adults having sex with children. That’s of no consequence to me. I want competency. And I also want to advance the homosexual agenda while simultaneously bankrupting the nation, which is why I voted for Barack Obama. And if I were Irish, I’d be voting for Norris.

The statesman weathered a previous “scandal” in May when a tawdry restaurant critic–Helen Lucy Burke–dug up an old interview she’d done with Norris from 2002. In it, Norris mentions his support for pedophilia.

“In terms of classic paedophilia, as practised by the Greeks for example, where it is an older man introducing a younger man or boy to adult life, I think there can be something to be said for it.”

What’s controversial about that? One of my favorite tactics to use when trying to justify the morality of homosexuality is to point out that it has always existed. And that means that it’s okay. Just like pedophilia has always existed. Homosexuality was rampant in all sorts of pre-Christian societies like Rome and Greece. And that means that it’s okay. Just like pedophilia. The samurai of feudal Japan were raging homosexuals and no one thought anything was wrong with it. They were usually raping the boy apprentices placed in their charge, and no one thought anything was wrong with that either. To tell the truth, I can’t think of a single society that has tolerated homosexuality that didn’t also tolerate all sorts of other perversions. Those societies are clearly more enlightened than this one, which drips of Chrisotfascist moralisms.

Scenes like this have been found in archeological digs from all over the Hellenic world. Homosexuality was common in the ancient world. Powerful friendships blossomed between men and boys. It wasn't until the Christianization of these areas that such practices were suppressed. David Norris sees nothing wrong with it and I don't think we can fault him for that. He's clearly the victim of a homophobic witch-hunt.

Basically, everywhere you look in the non-Christian world, homosexuality has flourished. Well, except for the Muslim world, where they kill fags like me. But then along came these religious zealots with their moral hangups about sex and everything changed. All of a sudden it wasn’t permitted anymore for guys to take it in the poopchute or to have huge orgies with eleven year old boys or to fuck the samurai trainees. It’s a good thing we’re rapidly progressing toward the post-Christian world when these taboos on things like homosexuality and pedophilia will fade away again.   

The senator continued:

“Now again, this is not something that appeals to me, although when I was younger it would most certainly have appealed to me in the sense that  I would have greatly relished the prospect of an older, attractive, mature man taking me under his wing, lovingly introducing me to sexual realities, and treating me with affection and teaching me about life – yes, I think that would be lovely; I would have enjoyed that.”

Yeah, me too.

Norris called the reemergence of a nine year old interview “sabotage”, which it clearly was. No fair bringing up stuff like that, especially in an election year. Norris fired back:

“This is an attempt to sabotage my campaign. It’s a 10-year-old article. There is nothing new and I want to ask why is this being brought up now… I abhor, and I’ve made that clear, again and again on the record, I abhor the abuse of children, sexual, emotional or physical”

Yeah, so there! It’s old news. Everyone knew that Norris thinks it’s okay for adults to bang boys. Everyone knew, and nobody cared. Certainly not the people of Ireland who continued to name Norris as their top pick in poll after poll, even after the restaurant critic attempted to sabotage him.

The dapper senator has always been quite liberal in his views. Cosmopolitan, you might say. He thinks, for example, that Ireland’s age of consent law is much too high. Well, not that it’s too high, but that it shouldn’t exist at all. That’s right, these silly laws are really just as backwards as all the others that came before it–the ones against sodomy and killing children in the womb and stuff like that. David Norris remarked to Jason O’Toole of the Irish Daily Mail that he doesn’t believe there should be any laws regarding the age of consent for sexual activity.

Oooh…so “controversial”. If you’re a complete square, that is.

Now, he DOES abhor the abuse of children. He’s been on record about that. He took the church to task for its sex scandals in the Seanad’s Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. Read it here:

http://www.senatordavidnorris.ie/blogger/2009/05/statements-on-commission-to-inquire.html

That’s right, this perv was on the Commission to Inquire Into Child Abuse! But, like me, he only hates pedophiles when they belong to the homophobic church in Rome. Because they’re HYPOCRITES. Not like David Norris.

Ireland’s leading LGBTQXYZ crusader loathes child sexual abuse so much that he even dated a child sex abuser for about thirty years. In fact, his love an adoration for this man was eventually what brought down his campaign. Norris was once romantically linked with an Israeli peace activist named Ezra Yitzhak Nawi.

Ezra Yitzhak Nawi, former partner of David Norris. He's a lifelong peace activist and supporter of Palestinian rights. Which is kind of strange because he likes to sleep with Palestinian men who take up arms against Israel. Odd that a peace activist would do that. I bet he's a member of QUIT!--see link at right side. Anyway, Mr. Nawi was convicted of statutory rape of a fifteen year old Palestinian boy. Which could have happened to anybody.

Mr. Nawi bedded a fifteen year old Palestinian boy in 1992. He was later convicted of statutory rape for the offense in 1997. Senator David Norris then sent a letter, on his official Irish parliamentary letterhead, to the High Court in Jerusalem begging for clemency. Norris presented himself as a character witness on Nawi’s behalf. He’s the Irish Bawney Fwank! (See This Day in LGBTQXYZ History: July 20th)

The senator really went to bat for his butt buddy:

“I know him to be an intelligent, honest, trustworthy, good and moral person for whom the present difficulty is quite uncharacteristic.”

See? So this is totally uncharacteristic. He’s only done it like two or three times before. Usually he only sleeps with men who are at least sixteen…usually. He’s also a very moral person. He’s the most moral statutory rapist there’s ever been. Norris even went as far as to say that Nawi is “a very good son to his mother”! Yeah, Nawi really makes his old Jewish mother proud when he piddles Palestinian boys. He’s a real Mensch, eh?

Senator Norris rounded out his chutzpah by arguing that his ex-boyfriend was the true victim here, having been “lured into a carefully prepared trap.” No doubt by the Joos! But Nawi pled guilty nonetheless, just so a trial would be averted and the Palestinian boy would be spared the pain of having to give testimony. So he pled guilty for the boy’s sake, and not because he did anything wrong. Norris also wrote that he was writing his letter “out of love and concern” for his former lover.

I do not regret supporting and seeking clemency for a friend, but I do regret giving the impression that I did not have sufficient compassion for the victim of Ezra’s crime.

Um…what crime, David? Ezra’s the victim here, remember? 

Well, we all know that Norris has compassion for the “victim”. That’s why he thinks that age of consent laws should be abolished. And that there’s something to be said for “classical pedophilia” in the Greek tradition. And why he talks dreamily about how wonderful it would have been if an older man had stuck his dick in his rectum when he was a child.

That letter brought down the presidential campaign of a gay giant, and along with it the hope of a new, post-Catholic generation of young Irishmen and -women. Ireland is the poorer for it.  The nation will just have to wait a little longer for its first gay president. Hopefully the next one won’t like the lads as much as this one does.

As David Norris remarked:

“I have lived a decent, respectable life, and there has been no scandal.”

So true, David. So true.

Tag Cloud