They're Coming To Get You, Barbara!

February 23, 2010 - 9:52 pm
Irradiated by LabRat
Comments Off

Seems some folks are really upset that some people are getting gay into their conservative cake, and that it’s all the fault of those nasty libertarians. To wit:

California Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) chairman Ryan Sorba generated a media controversy when he was shown at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) denouncing the organizers for inviting a homosexual Republican group, GOProud, into the event as an official sponsor. In “controversial” remarks, Sorba said homosexuality was unnatural and that he welcomed more debate and discussion about the subject from his political adversaries.

But what many people don’t realize is that Sorba’s “outburst” was provoked by a speaker who preceded him, Alexander McCobin of Students For Liberty (SFL). McCobin went out of his way to use valuable time from the podium to thank the American Conservative Union, the main CPAC organizer, for making the controversial decision to approve GOProud’s participation.

Actually, what Sorba said specifically was that homosexual sex is not reproductive, which is not natural, therefore gays don’t have natural rights because they’re based on what “natural human behavior” is, and civil rights that conflict with this conception of natural rights shouldn’t exist. In that case I damn well hope he was booed down, because that’s such a tortured construction of natural rights that it should offend any principled conservative. For starters, under such a definition my civil right to use birth control to prevent sequential pregnancy shouldn’t exist either- and a conservative pastor’s right to tell teenagers they shouldn’t be getting it on and popping out babies is also at issue, given that it’s natural in terms of human history to become reproductive at around thirteen.

Sorba said the negative reaction he got from some in the CPAC audience came from those in libertarian and pro-Ron Paul groups whose purpose is “to infiltrate the conservative movement and take it over from within.”

Well, yes. And from where I’m sitting, I sure as hell hope they succeed. But the point that Sparky seems to be missing here, possibly because the whole natural-rights brouhaha reveals he has as much familiarity with the history and philosophical roots of conservatism in America as he does Aboriginal rain rituals, is that his bunch did the exact same thing. The religious right is a relatively young force in conservatism; they became a movement in the eighties, organized groups like Falwell’s moral majority, and did exactly what Sorba’s bleating about here: gained a such a significance in the Republican party and movement conservatism that for decades they could not be ignored. The damn dirty libertarians have a hell of a lot more in common with Barry Goldwater’s conservatism than Mike Huckabee’s. That’s the nature of American politics; the tent is big, contains several factions struggling for influence, and none of them own conservatism, or liberalism for that matter. To Goldwater conservatives, these people aren’t trying to take over conservatism from the inside, they’re trying to take it back. It’s almost like this kind of cycle is somehow natural in movements or something.

“We have our work cut out for us, between the media and the libertarian student movement that supports sodomy. We are going to organize a huge turnout of socially conservative youth next year, to offset the libertarian slide that CPAC has taken.”

Given the demographics, good luck with that, chief. But seriously, they’re perfectly free and within their rights to do so- just like the libertarians are.

In fact, GOProud’s commitment to constitutionally protected homosexual sodomy (i.e., anal intercourse) is not a position that appears on the agenda of any conservative groups. Hence, using the term “gay conservative” to describe these people is either a deliberate deception or an oxymoron that doesn’t stand up under scrutiny.

Only if you define the opinion that it’s none of the government’s or Ryan Sorbo’s goddamn business what consenting adults do with each other- and when it comes to sodomy, that includes a hell of a lot of straight couples- is inherently unconservative. Others of us would assert that the position that a great many things are not the government’s business, with this being merely one issue on a very long list, is an inherently more conservative position.

These “radical regimes,” such as the Christian-dominated government in Uganda, are trying to prevent the spread of AIDS and protect traditional moral values by toughening laws against homosexuality.

Death is a pretty tough sentence, yes. Apparently it is also conservative to approve of targeted genocide in the name of traditional values.

GOProud also says it wants to “defend the Constitution” in the U.S. by “Opposing any anti-gay federal marriage amendment.” It doesn’t explain how protecting the country against out-of-control judges legalizing gay marriage without a vote of the people is unconstitutional.

Oh, those radical judges, going around overturning laws the court thinks are “unconstitutional”. It’s almost like they think that’s their role in government or something. Curse this creeping liberalization! The whole thing started to go to hell at Marbury v. Madison, I tell you.

David Barton of Wallbuilders, whose knowledge about the moral foundations of America has been cited and recognized by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, points out that the founding fathers regarded homosexual sodomy as a crime against nature and believed it should be outlawed and punished severely. Indeed, Barton cites a case in which General George Washington himself authorized the expulsion of a solder from the army for sodomy.

The Founders also were pretty much okay with slavery, being human beings congruent with their times and not moral and philosophical superbeings, after all. Liberals accuse conservatives of wanting to bring this particular bit of old-school back, and reading stuff like this I’m not entirely sure I can accuse them of being totally off the wall.

McCobin’s CPAC remarks consisted of the following: “In the name of freedom, I would like to thank the American Conservative Union for welcoming GOProud as a co-sponsor of this event, not for any political reason but for the message it sends….Students today recognize that freedom does not come in pieces. Freedom is a single thing that applies to the social as well as the economic realms and should be defended at all times.”

That subversive bastard.

Asked to explain where Students For Liberty stands on the major social issues, McCobin told me that his group doesn’t take “policy stances” on such issues as abortion and illegal drug use.

But it does apparently believe that government should protect and promote the right to practice homosexuality.

This guy has a serious issue with conflating government not banning something with actively promoting it. He reminds me of the leftist nanny-staters that want to ban trans-fats and punish smoking with forty lashes. I demand he and everyone who agrees with him be kicked out of conservatism immediately.

He’s right. The libertarians are coming to get conservatism, and if a majority of other conservatives agree that fiscal conservatism and individual liberty are mayhap more important, more coherent values, and more crucial to defining acceptable alliances than writing into law who can fuck whom and why, then maybe they deserve to get it. I certainly think so.

We are coming to get you, Ryan, and Cliff. And we’re bringing our friends. But I really wouldn’t flatter yourself they’re interested in doing more with your ass than kicking it.

No Responses to “They're Coming To Get You, Barbara!”

  1. bluntobject Says:

    Very well-ranted.

    Also, this:

    As I hail from Argentina, it struck me that our good friend Ryan’s last name is just so ready for parody. “Sorba” means to sip, slurp, soak up. Ah, the possibilities.

    Paging Mr. Savage, Mr. Dan Savage to the white courtesy phone please….

  2. GayCynic Says:

    Well said, well said indeed. May the theocrats rant with such vehemence and enthusiasm that their bigotry grow ever more obvious, and they eventually suffer apoplexy as a result of their misguided enthusiasm.

  3. JC Says:

    I have no difficulty with assimilation of any minority group, be they minorities by color,creed, or sexual persuasion.
    The problem I have is taht experience has shown us that assimilation leads inevitably to a protected status. Having once been the victim of an exclusive procedure, there must needs be a countering preferential treatment. This must be avoided.
    Barry Goldwater was right; “You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight. ” I even have vague recollections of hearing about a “Straight Shooters for Goldwater” movement when I was young and dinosaurs ruled the earth.
    But as the great St. Robert Heinlein said, “there’s no room for hyphenated Americans”
    To the extent that any identity - be it religious, sexual of dietary - takes precedence to the primary responsibility of a fighting man/woman/other in our nation’s forces it must be denied.

  4. Kevin S Says:

    Wow. This guy is just not getting it. Liberty in this country applies to everyone, not just those whose habits you approve of. If the republicans keep up with this crap, they’re going to hurt in November. Leaving people alone also applies to the bedroom as well as the wallet. Listening to stuff like this makes me think that they didn’t learn from their last drubbing, and have absolutely no idea what the uprising of sentiment represented in part by the Tea Party movement really means.

  5. Black Ice Says:

    I owe Kevin S a beverage for putting into one paragraph what I would have taken three posts to say.

    “The libertarians are coming to get conservatism, and if a majority of other conservatives agree that fiscal conservatism and individual liberty are mayhap more important, more coherent values, and more crucial to defining acceptable alliances than writing into law who can fuck whom and why, then maybe they deserve to get it. I certainly think so.”

    If you’re right, my dreams have come true.

  6. SayUncle » The Big Tent Says:

    […] Of course, that doesn’t fit the narrative the left is running. On Sorba, LabRat brings it: Actually, what Sorba said specifically was that homosexual sex is not reproductive, which is not […]

  7. elmo iscariot Says:

    In fact, GOProud’s commitment to constitutionally protected homosexual sodomy (i.e., anal intercourse) is not a position that appears on the agenda of any conservative groups. Hence, using the term “gay conservative” to describe these people is either a deliberate deception or an oxymoron that doesn’t stand up under scrutiny.

    Holy crap, logic fail. “No other conservative groups say X, so if A says X, A is not conservative”?

    So if I start a group specifically devoted to overturning the ban on concealed carry in post offices, and no other gun rights organization’s agenda specifically mentions PO carry, that means calling my group pro-gun is either deceptive or oxymoronic?

  8. Kristopher Says:

    Heh.

    It wasn’t just paul-bots booing that turd.

    All of the other speakers were at least polite to their internal political rivals in the GOP. This was the only person who chose to use the podium to attack other Republicans.

    You’re damned straight he was booed.

    Everyone else realizes that we have to hang together or we will be hung separately. The fundies are having difficulty with the concept, and are confused about why the Tea-Party folks, who are generally, at most, Easter only Christians and non-attenders, aren’t marching in lockstep behind them.

  9. Old NFO Says:

    Excellent post!!! :-)

  10. Holly Says:

    I always wonder what “natural” means if homosexuality is unnatural. To me, anything humans do is natural-i.e., not supernatural, it’s an act performed by biological beings in the physical world. In which case it’s definitionally impossible for human beings to be unnatural unless the gays are practicing Sodomy Magic. (Some of them are. But still.)

    Or maybe they’re using the meat-label definition of “natural,” meaning something without human artifice. In which case, everything we do that animals don’t is unnatural. (And homosexuality isn’t even one of those things…)

    I wish people who meant “icky and yucky and like totally nasty-poo” would use the words they meant, instead of using other words that already have meanings.

  11. RobertM Says:

    Excellent post.

  12. David Says:

    Great post.

    And the libertarian-vs-conservative-vs-“liberals” thing is such a mess…

    An old-school conservative is likely what you’d now have to call a libertarian, or fiscally conservative, or just plain ol’ change-averse, for the sake of distinction between them and the (sorry) raving nutbars, closet-cases, hypocrites, and, um, overly religiously inspired would-be policy makers that have taken over the Conservative (and Republican) name.

    Damn shame - otherwise, the two parties make an acceptable ying-yang tag team. One become too cozy? Pitch ‘em out, and let things swing the other way for a while. But now, with personal morality coming so much into the policy arena, that’s no longer a safe option.

    To do my own What Would Washington Do? bit, I suspect the Founding Fathers were quite happy with morality staying more or less a matter of public opinion; keeping Church (the period’s primary social-norms source) separate from State seems in line with this notion.

    Is there a Gay Dems group? Or fifteen? Probably - but they aren’t newsworthy, because the organization whose policies and ideology they support isn’t riddled with people who are willing to despise a fellow citizen because of sexual orientation.

    Fifty, sixty years ago, society as a whole figured homosexuality was a Bad Thing, to the extent of being a mental disorder: one imagines that both parties hewed to that view. Now? Only one party has followed society’s lead: the other still seems to think that Teh Gheys are out to Ruin America Through Buttsecks. Or something.

  13. NinjaViking Says:

    How about heterosexual buggery? Oral sex? Foreplay? Kissing? Not reproductive, so perhaps the government should put a stop to it!