A busy summer is limiting my blogging. But this “Queers Against NATO” story caught my eye. They certainly have a right to protest, and they give this rationale: “The anti-war movement and the queer movement are allied, according to the queer protestors, because queer people are affected by militarization.” Well, that explains things.
Gays are also affected by higher taxes and excessive regulation, of course. So if we can have Queers Against NATO, why not Gays for the Tea Party? At least that would serve to publicize that gay people aren’t all on the left and might help build support in the long run. Right now, for instance, there’s an effort by anti-gay social conservatives to use the Tea Party as part of their anti-gay agenda, although others are fighting against it and want the Tea Party to remain focused on limited government and liberty. The fight within the Tea Party for a true liberty agenda would seem more important than still more showings of solidarity with the radical left.
10 Comments for “‘Queers’ Against NATO and Gays for the Tea Party?”
posted by JohnInCA on
… you know, I really do think I’ve had enough of so-called Tea Partiers whining that people characterize their movement based on how their politicians vote.
If your “movement” keeps pushing anti-gay voices into elected seats, then your “movement” is anti-gay, regardless what some would *want* it to be.
posted by Houndentenor on
I am currently (and unfortunately) living in Texas surrounded by Tea Party types. The voting record of the elected Tea Party candidates on social issues is perfectly aligned with the people in the movement around these parts. Maybe the gay conservatives should come visit the red states and see what the Tea Party is really all about.
posted by Gus on
Or they should visit Ohio, we call them Teavangelicals.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
Right now, for instance, there’s an effort by anti-gay social conservatives to use the Tea Party as part of their anti-gay agenda, although others are fighting against it and want the Tea Party to remain focused on limited government and liberty.
I wish the pro-equality forces within the Tea Party success.
I am not hopeful, however, that pro-equality forces within the Tea Party will be any more successful than pro-equality forces within the Republican Party have been in fighting off social conservatives, because, when push comes to shove in the voting booth, pro-equality Tea Party voters suck it up and vote for anti-equality politicians.
Change will not come to either the Republican Party or the Tea Party if conservative pro-equality voters continue to vote for anti-equality politicians.
JohnInCA got it exactly right: “If your “movement” keeps pushing anti-gay voices into elected seats, then your “movement” is anti-gay, regardless what some would *want* it to be.”
To my mind, the same is true of individuals. If an individual votes for an anti-equality politician, he or she is voting against equality.
posted by Houndentenor on
Yet another fringe lefty movement of less than a dozen people that no one would ever have heard of if it weren’t for right-wing bloggers. I’ve never heard of these folks and I can’t imagine they will have any affect on anything. They do, however, have a right to voice their opinions, whatever they may be.
Also, I thought this was the official “queers for the Tea Party” website. Or is that gaypatriot? I forget. No one seems to be stopping gay people from supporting the Tea Party, which is, from what I can tell here in Texas, working as hard as it can to be anti-gay. We may criticize gay people for belonging to anti-gay parties and movements, but that doesn’t stop you in any way from doing what you want.
posted by TomJeffersonIII on
Without getting into the pros and cons of any particular foreign policy, I believe that the overall trend of most NATO members is for gay equality, including (in theory) military service.
In fact that was one of t he arguments against the U.S. ban on gays in the military, most NATO nations and even nations that had to have a BIG priority on a strong military (i.e. Israel) did not really seem to believe that gays could not make good servicemen and women.
Most people I know — gay and straight — tend to have much more nuanced and complicated views on what foreign policy should and should not be. For example,, I have mixed opinions on the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, which do not seem to entirely fit into the ‘pro-war’ or ‘anti-war’ camps.
posted by Jorge on
So if we can have Queers Against NATO, why not Gays for the Tea Party?
I think the split between Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud is enough.
posted by Mark F. on
I think gay groups should focus on gay issues.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
I think gay groups should focus on gay issues.
I agree.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
How about “ Money for Marriage Equality” instead of “Queers for the Tea Party”. Now, that might make a difference.