Author Archives: Stephen H. Miller

Derangement

by on

I guess they think the tax bill is like the Holocaust.

Gay people should be ashamed that this publication, on display in news boxes throughout the Washington, D.C. area, purports to represent our views.

7 Comments

Annals of Intersectionality

by on

For the progressive LGBQT+ movement, any issue on the left is now a LGBTQ+ issue. which is part of the ethos of intersectionality that only a racist, sexist, classist, transphobe would dare to object to.

Among recent examples:


For a different view of net neutrality:

,
Obviously, it’s an issue that well-meaning people can disagree about, except if you do, you’re a racist, sexist, classist, transphobe.

Another example:

As the Blade reports:

Laura Durso, vice president of LGBT research and communications for the Center for American Progress, said the package “will have massively negative implications for LGBTQ people” especially as a result of ending the individual mandate for health care.

The advantages/disadvantages of ending the individual mandate that Americans must buy expensive Obamacare policies or pay a tax penalty is also a matter that’s debatable, except when it isn’t.

And this:

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has projected the package would add $1.5 trillion to the deficit over the course of 10 years, or as much as $2.2 trillion. As a result, the national debt — which is now $20.6 trillion — would double by 2027.

There is room for argument over whether the bill will stimulate economic growth to compensate for lower rates, but progressive groups were silent on the debt issue while under the sainted Obama the national debt grew by about $9 trillion, or an increase of 86%.

The point is not to convince those on the left that net neutrality, the individual mandate or letting people save and invest more of their own money is good or bad, it’s to point out that for those in leadership positions within the LGBTQ+ activist movement, to take the wrong side of these issues is to be ant-gay and, well you know the rest of the litany.

12 Comments

After Roy Moore

by on

Some of the conclusions being drawn from the defeat of Roy Moore in the Alabama Senate race and the election of Democrat Doug Jones are overwrought, as post-election political analysis tends to be. Nevertheless, the election was a defeat for a social conservative (albeit one accused of sexual misconduct with minors) in an overwhelmingly Republican state. Here are some posts I found worthwhile.

David Boaz reposts Roy Moore’s final message to America: “Abortion, sodomy, and materialism have taken the place of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

29 Comments

Delayed for Now

by on

More. LGBTQ activists have been supporting the proposed Equality Act, which would explicitly include LGBT Americans in the Civil Rights Act, providing protection from housing, employment and public-accommodations discrimination under federal law. The Equality Act also includes a provision revoking any protection that religious objectors might enjoy under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

In that regard, including sexual orientation and gender identity under Title VII would be preferable to the damage to liberty rights that the Equality Act would impose.

In July I wrote The Civil Rights Act and Sexual-Orientation Discrimination.

Also, from last October, The Rejection of Compromise: Take Two.

8 Comments

Tolerance Is Not a One-Way Street

by on

A word of caution from Andrew Sullivan, an early, forceful advocate of marriage equality and supporter of Barack Obama:

The freedom of any baker to express himself is, in this respect, indistinguishable from that of any gay person to do so — a truth that our current tribalism blinds so many to. I hope, in other words, that the baker prevails — but that the Supreme Court decision doesn’t turn on religious so much as artistic freedom.

More. The response from many on the LGBTQ+ progressive left has been fear-mongering, with little to no empathy for religiously conservative small business owners and often dismissive of religious liberty itself and the right not to be coerced by the state, on pain of losing one’s livelihood (or worse), to engage in expressive activity that violates deeply held religious belief.
Slate: How Clueless Straight White Guys Excuse Religious Homophobia.

What the left keeps getting wrong:

14 Comments

Not Just Off the Shelf

by on


The Wall Street Journal opines:

At issue is whether baker Jack Phillips, who opposes same-sex marriage out of sincere religious beliefs, can be compelled to custom design a cake for a gay nuptial. …

While some on the left liken Mr. Phillips to hotel owners in the Jim Crow era, there’s no evidence of invidious discrimination. Mr. Phillips and others who have denied wedding services to same-sex nuptials have consistently served gays in other contexts. Mr. Phillips said he would sell the gay couple other baked goods—simply not a custom wedding cake.

As the editorial notes, the issue pits the government’s interest in social equality against an individual’s constitutional right to express his beliefs.

22 Comments

Jim Nabors, RIP

by on

Interesting that the Fox News story leads with “husband,” with relationship details below after professional info. The Hollywood Reporter mentions his “longtime partner” up front, but toward the end says that they’d been married.

6 Comments

Not a Parody

by on

(image via Reddit)

As advertised by the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, but perhaps soon to make its way down to the states.

That’s lesbian, gay, genderqueer, bisexual, demisexual, transgender, transsexual, two-spirit, intersex, queer, questioning, asexual, allies, pansexual, polygamous.

The flyer says: “Our goal is to become more familiar with current language, sensitive to current issues, and to share best practices in supporting our LGGBDTTTIQQAAPP peers & students.”

That’s a lot to cover in one hour!

More. Andrew Sullivan blogs on LGGBDTTTIQQAAPPWHAT? and asks, “Is the gay-rights movement effectively over?” (second item):

For most of the straight people we need to engage, it feels like a near-parodic example of hair-splitting victimology and grievance-mongering. And to me, and many who once thought of ourselves as supporters of gay equality, it feels like an unpronounceable and impenetrable congeries of literally everything … and therefore nothing.

He adds:

My point is that a political movement makes sense in a liberal society because it advances certain policy proposals, and not because it spends its time constantly defining and redefining who is or who is not part of it, or sees itself as just one sliver of a broader movement dedicated to an ideology a very hefty chunk of the gay world simply doesn’t adhere to or believe in.

3 Comments