Oops: OkCupid CEO once donated to a congressman who opposed gay marriage; Update: CEO regrets donation

posted at 11:21 am on April 8, 2014 by Allahpundit

And not just gay marriage. The congressman, Chris Cannon, also opposed adoptions by gay couples and laws prohibiting discrimination in hiring gays. Sam Yagan’s donation, in other words, was more of a multi-spectrum anti-gay contribution than Brendan Eich’s $1,000 gift to support Prop 8 and yet he took it upon himself to be the tip of the spear in the “Eich must go” movement. Says Rick Moran of Yagan’s past, “The gay mafia is never around when you need them.”

The Daily Caller actually had this five days ago but it’s breaking big today because of Mother Jones. Never underestimate the viral power of blue-on-blue PC purging.

OkCupid’s co-founder and CEO Sam Yagan once donated to an anti-gay candidate. (Yagan is also CEO of Match.com.) Specifically, Yagan donated $500 to Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah) in 2004, reports Uncrunched. During his time as congressman from 1997 to 2009, Cannon voted for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, against a ban on sexual-orientation based job discrimination, and for prohibition of gay adoptions.

He’s also voted for numerous anti-choice measures, earning a 0 percent rating from NARAL Pro Choice America. Among other measures, Cannon voted for laws prohibiting government from denying funds to medical facilities that withhold abortion information, stopping minors from crossing state lines to obtain an abortion, and banning family planning funding in US aid abroad. Cannon also earned a 7 percent rating from the ACLU for his poor civil rights voting record: He voted to amend FISA to allow warrant-less electronic surveillance, to allow NSA intelligence gathering without civil oversight, and to reauthorize the PATRIOT act.

I thought the OkCupid stunt over Eich was just a publicity scam but maybe there was more to it. Maybe Yagan fretted that he was compromised because of his Cannon donation and decided to inoculate himself by sacrificing Eich, to prove his (belated) commitment to The Cause. Maybe it wasn’t even the anti-gay component of Cannon’s record that worried him. The reason there’s an uproar over Eich in the first place is because it proves that the line of impermissible private activity by employees has shifted (in Silicon Valley, at least) in a way that most of the public hadn’t realized. If it can shift once unexpectedly, it can shift unexpectedly on other issues too. When does Yagan get fired for backing a candidate who voted against abortion?

He’s going to say one of two things in his defense (or both) once OkCupid comments on this. One: His donation to Cannon wasn’t about gay issues, it was about something unrelated — tech policy or whatever. You can contribute to a candidate without endorsing every position he holds; you can’t say the same of Eich’s contribution, which was aimed specifically at gay marriage. Okay, but in that case, what issue was so important to Yagan that it justified handing over money to a candidate who voted against gay rights at every turn? Let’s hear how he prioritizes and see if his friends on the left agree.

Two: He’ll claim that he’s changed his mind on gay rights, just like Obama but (apparently) unlike Brendan Eich. (Yagan also donated to Obama in 2008, back when O was dutifully posing as a traditional-marriage supporter.) Eich never renounced his donation to Prop 8; Yagan will, presumably, happily renounce his Cannon donation now to avoid the dreaded charge of hypocrisy. I’ve never understood, though, why any former opponent of gay marriage would, after changing his mind, bring down the hammer on someone who hasn’t changed his mind yet. I used to oppose gay marriage too; practically all straights (and some gays) have at some point. And yet lots of converts on this issue seem able to transition awfully quickly from opposition to ambivalence to burning other holdouts at the stake. If Yagan’s going to distinguish himself from Eich, let’s at least have a timeline from him of how long he thinks an SSM opponent should have to “evolve” in order to spare himself from a witch hunt.

Update: The heretic recants and returns to a state of grace:

“A decade ago, I made a contribution to Representative Chris Cannon because he was the ranking Republican on the House subcommittee that oversaw the Internet and Intellectual Property, matters important to my business and our industry. I accept responsibility for not knowing where he stood on gay rights in particular; I unequivocally support marriage equality and I would not make that contribution again today. However, a contribution made to a candidate with views on hundreds of issues has no equivalence to a contribution supporting Prop 8, a single issue that has no purpose other than to affirmatively prohibit gay marriage, which I believe is a basic civil right.”

So gay rights were less important to him than profit? That’s a one-percenter for you.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 6

He donated to a Senator who opposed gay marriage too.

It’s also quite possible that Yagan’s politics have changed since 2004: He donated to Barack Obama’s campaign in 2007 and 2008.

forest on April 8, 2014 at 11:24 AM

Oops. Another inconvenient truth.

tominsd on April 8, 2014 at 11:25 AM

That’s as bad as killing a baby seal!!!

Akzed on April 8, 2014 at 11:27 AM

I was testing my irrigation system and one sprinkler head cast a rainbow!

I then turned that zone off and tested the next zone. The rainbow went away.

I killed a rainbow. Should I resign from my job now?

Tsar of Earth on April 8, 2014 at 11:31 AM

He doesn’t have to explain anything, and unless and until the gaystopo makes an issue of it, OKCupid won’t be issuing a statement either.

Fenris on April 8, 2014 at 11:31 AM

Often, the same people who’d like to turn conservative politics into a federal crime, are the same people who decry any lack of transparency in PAC donations.

RBMN on April 8, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Left: “Shut up. We got our man. The debate is over.”

BuckeyeSam on April 8, 2014 at 11:34 AM

You know what, I intend to donate to every pro-traditional marriage group that needs funding from now on.

Bring it you Fascists.

I killed a rainbow. Should I resign from my job now?

Tsar of Earth on April 8, 2014 at 11:31 AM

I’m on the phone right now with Eric Holder to see if we can charge you with a hate crime. Gimme about 5 minutes.

hawkdriver on April 8, 2014 at 11:36 AM

Can’t wait for the trolls.

Schadenfreude on April 8, 2014 at 11:36 AM

If OKCupid doesnt force their CEO out, then the issue is about power and fascism, not rights. Period.

faraway on April 8, 2014 at 11:36 AM

If it can shift once unexpectedly, it can shift unexpectedly on other issues too. When does Yagan get fired for backing a candidate who voted against abortion?

The above quote shows just how out of touch with basic logic is the idea that what happened to Eich is fascism. Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks. And yes we do work towards the day when stating opposition to gay marriage is something not done in polite society, just as stating racial bigotry is today (at least among whites and Asians). Abortion is a complex issue and not subject to the same social enforcement.

Let me point out the future of this issue. It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983:

Bob Jones University v. United States

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

“marriage equality” is the new “reproductive rights” bullsh*t

dpduq on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

They have their right to their opinions, but I have the right to call Yagan and his OKCupid cohorts hypocritical a$$holes. Then again, let them continue with their demonizing tactics. It is only hurting their cause. Americans don’t put up with this kind of $hit.

Mallard T. Drake on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

He’s a witch!

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

I’ve never understood, though, why any former opponent of gay marriage would, after changing his mind, bring down the hammer on someone who hasn’t changed his mind yet.

Seriously?

It’s what weak personalities do. They try and prove their fidelity (as if they ever had any) to their new masters by giving lists of names to be rounded up.

As to Eich and the rest of the homo-mob, I don’t care if he loses his job or if they demand it. I just want match.com, okStupid, Firefux and the rest to go down the drain, where they belong. And the homo-mob can go with them. Nothing but useless wastes of existence who are all trying to make the rest of society as flucked up as they are – so that they can claim to feel normal – as the whole kit and kaboodle goes down the tubes.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on April 8, 2014 at 11:38 AM

I used to oppose gay marriage too;

What made you change your mind?

faraway on April 8, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Diversity and tolerance for me, but not for thee:

Judge Rules Gay League Can Limit Number of Bisexual/Heterosexual Players

A federal judge ruled Thursday that a gay softball league can limit the number of heterosexuals on its teams, the Courthouse News Service reports.

The ruling was announced after three bisexual men claimed they were kicked out of the Gay Softball World Series for not being gay enough and filed a lawsuit in Washington state against the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Association.

The three men, playing for a San Francisco softball team, were challenged on their sexuality by a rival team, citing a rule that limits no more than two heterosexuals on a team.

The men claim they were “summoned to a hearing room to answer questions about their sexual interests or attractions,” according to the Courthouse News Service.

The men said they were told that “this is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series.”

U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour struck down the lawsuit.

“Plaintiffs have failed to argue that there is a compelling state interest in allowing heterosexuals to play gay softball,” Coughenour wrote, according to the Courthouse News Service.

“It is not the role of the courts to scrutinize the content of an organization’s chosen expression.”*

The judge did rule the association failed to prove it should not be subjected to public-accommodation laws.

* Except when it is…like a bakery or photography studio

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Sorry, it’s not.

hawkdriver on April 8, 2014 at 11:41 AM

Well WTF … every single one of the tech-industry liberals donated to O’Bozo/Biden in 2008, no? Every single one?

Jaibones on April 8, 2014 at 11:41 AM

He’s a witch!

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

How do I know? He turned me into a newt!

Jaibones on April 8, 2014 at 11:42 AM

I’ve never understood, though, why any former opponent of gay marriage would, after changing his mind, bring down the hammer on someone who hasn’t changed his mind yet.

As Jon Stewart himself noted, Peer Pressure and Shame are the hallmarks of leftist tactics. And when someone doesn’t give in, they’re attacked.

Simply put, Yagan doesn’t even consider himself a convert to SSM, he’s always bought in but it’s never benefited him. When the LGB advocates went after dating sites, OKCupid’s pro-LGB tactics gave it marginal benefit.

So Yagan flipped out because Eich’s position was somewhat known and was still promoted to a somewhat exalted position.

budfox on April 8, 2014 at 11:43 AM

It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983:

Bob Jones University v. United States

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Child abuse is actively petitioning to make the age of legal consensual sex to 14-16.

hawkdriver on April 8, 2014 at 11:43 AM

The men claim they were “summoned to a hearing room to answer questions about their sexual interests or attractions,” according to the Courthouse News Service.

This is the Obama Era. The pot is now boiling.

faraway on April 8, 2014 at 11:43 AM

The above quote shows just how out of touch with basic logic is the idea that what happened to Eich is fascism. Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks. And yes we do work towards the day when stating opposition to gay marriage is something not done in polite society, just as stating racial bigotry is today (at least among whites and Asians). Abortion is a complex issue and not subject to the same social enforcement.

Let me point out the future of this issue. It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983:

Bob Jones University v. United States

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

This is fascism. Even the nut Andrew Sullivan can see that.

And discrimination against gays is not akin to discrimination against blacks. It’s not even close. And you know it.

But the pro “gay rights” crowd has to maintain this lie because if they don’t co-opt the black civil rights movement they lose a lot of their steam.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:44 AM

Everybody who voted for Obama in 2008 should lose their jobs and homes for supporting hatred.

malclave on April 8, 2014 at 11:45 AM

What made you change your mind?

faraway on April 8, 2014 at 11:40 AM

A summer in Fire Island.

budfox on April 8, 2014 at 11:46 AM

99.999% of sodomists voted for 0b00ba in 2008 when he was opposed to aval marriage. I guess Michael 0b00ba was opposed to it then too.

Akzed on April 8, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Well, I am thinking that we should have kept the gays in the closet.

What harm is there in letting them out…
What harm is there in letting them have nude parades of acted out sodomy on the streets…
What harm is there in saying they can have civil unions…
What harm is there in letting them petition for marriage…

Well, I think we are at the point where the harm is front and center. It is not even the worst of the harms, but it is visible and immediately identifiable as to where it radiates from.

Degenerates should not be openly tolerated in a civil society. It in fact works to destroy civil society pretty much be definition. This is one reason libertarians get extremely little respect from me. They propose a world where diversity of culture is encouraged. but the fact is that diversity is the same thing as conflict. Most things do not just simply meld together seamlessly and without conflict. The greater the diversity the greater the conflict. The greater the conflict the greater the harm and the more victims there will be.

astonerii on April 8, 2014 at 11:48 AM

How do I know? He turned me into a newt!

Jaibones on April 8, 2014 at 11:42 AM

I got better.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:49 AM

The above quote shows just how out of touch with basic logic is the idea that what happened to Eich is fascism. Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks. And yes we do work towards the day when stating opposition to gay marriage is something not done in polite society, just as stating racial bigotry is today (at least among whites and Asians). Abortion is a complex issue and not subject to the same social enforcement.

Let me point out the future of this issue. It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983:

Bob Jones University v. United States

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

You’ve got to love a post that says this isn’t fascism then goes on to say that “teaching hatred of gays to children” is child abuse and that requires the intervention of the state.

Bravo, thuja.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:50 AM

It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983: Bob Jones University v. United States NAMBLAthuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Akzed on April 8, 2014 at 11:51 AM

* Except when it is…like a bakery or photography studio

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Which is why liberals stray away from rights. Everything is “gay rights”, “black rights”. And of course “equality” and “social justice”.

They really don’t want the same rules for everyone they want special rules for certain groups. To the left the individual doesn’t have rights – rights are doled out to you by the state according to which collective you belong to.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:52 AM

I’ve never understood, though, why any former opponent of gay marriage would, after changing his mind, bring down the hammer on someone who hasn’t changed his mind yet. I used to oppose gay marriage too; practically all straights (and some gays) have at some point. And yet lots of converts on this issue seem able to transition awfully quickly from opposition to ambivalence to burning other holdouts at the stake.

To be honest, I don’t know if I ever actually opposed gay marriage. The first real conversation I recall having about the issue was with my family nearly 10 years ago at the dinner table. My parents were vehemently opposed(they felt the union between a man and a woman was a tradition that shouldn’t be changed) while my sister and I were fine with it. I figured that could be partially attributed to a generational gap, but I also respected their view on the matter.

That’s the part I don’t get about the gay mafia. Forcing people into submission either by intimidation like with Eich or smear tactics like calling opponents of gay marriage “bigots” or equating them to Jew haters or using tired, condescending remarks like “being on the wrong side of history” is not going to win the hearts and minds of the public. Neither is forcing gay marriage down everyone’s throats via activist judges.

The pro-gay marriage movement is winning. But they’re going to snatch defeats from the jaws of victory or if they keep this crap up much longer.

Doughboy on April 8, 2014 at 11:52 AM

It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983:

Bob Jones University v. United States

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

There are, literally, decades and decades of Supreme Court precedent which firmly and completely holds that the government may not involve itself in the tenets and dogmas of religious institutions. Bob Jones University didn’t lose its tax-exempt status because it taught that interracial marriage was wrong. It lost it because of discriminatory admissions policies. It was an act not a creed or thought that caused the university to lose its status.

Be careful for what you wish because, one day, your beliefs could land you on the wrong side of the law. Zealots are already calling for climate change ‘deniers’ to be tattooed or imprisoned.

No one wants to return to the Salem Witch Trials. Well, everyone, that is, except for zealots, freaks, and loons.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Good stuff. Mozilla and the gay activists clearly jumped the shark. The combination of cowardice (Mozilla) and zealotry (activists) have produced quite a tempest. It remains to be seen if this backlash against them grows or if it is forgotten in a news cycle or two.

MJBrutus on April 8, 2014 at 11:54 AM

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Don’t worry folks. It’s not fascism. But the state is going to fairly and impartially reach into your soul and determine if you are teaching “hatred” of gays to your children to determine if you’re engaging in child abuse.

Sounds like a job for the IRS. Or maybe the DoJ.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:55 AM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

First off, believing in a definition of marriage is not discrimination anymore than believing in a definition of divorce is. Prop 8 was about a definition of a word making Eich guilty of a thought crime. Domestic Partnership gave gay all the “rights” (translation: bennies) that “marriage” did in California. The only difference is one license said domestic partnership, and one said marriage.

melle1228 on April 8, 2014 at 11:55 AM

“Fascism will return to the United States not as right wing ideology, but almost as a quasi-leftist ideology.

The content of left-wing fascism is heavily based on an elitist vision of the world. At every level of society, it juxtaposes its minoritarianism against majoritarianism. It may take libertarian or authoritarian forms, but it always defends its leadership vision over any populist vision. Some examples are the hip versus the square, the gay versus the straight, the individualistic free soul versus the family-oriented slave, those who believe in the cult of direct action versus the fools who participate in the political process, those who practise nonviolence over those who assert willfulness and violence as measures of human strength and courage, those who have strong affiliations with cults and cultism over the traditional non-believer (a marked departure from the anti-theological vision of most forms of leftist and socialist behaviour), those who argue the case for deviance over mainline participation in the working class or in segments of class society, those who choose underground organisations in preference to established voluntary organisations and, ultimately, those who choose some type of deracinated behaviour over class behaviour and participation.

Historically, communists, like fascists, have had an uncomfortable attraction to both elitism and populism. The theory of vanguards acting in the name of the true interests of the masses presupposes a higher science of society (or in the case of fascism, a biology of society) beyond the reach of ordinary citizens. The superstructure of science, like culture generally, becomes a realm in which elites act in the name of the public. What happens to the notion of the people determining their own history in their own way? Here populism, or pseudo-populism, steps in to fuse formerly antagonistic trends. In some mysterious, inexplicable manner, these mass forces must be shaped or molded. Under communism, in sharp contrast to fascism, the stratification elements in the national culture are deemed unique or uniquely worth salvaging. But, in the anti-ideological climate of the “new world,” people (class) and fold (race) blend, becoming the raw materials for fashioning the new society.

Left-wing fascism does not so much as overcome this dilemma of elitism and populism as it seeks to harness both under the rubric of a movement. Having its roots in the 1960s, left-wing fascism views the loose movement, the foco, the force, as expanding the élan and the communist vanguard. It permits a theory of politics without the encumbrance of parties. It allows, even encourages, a culture of elitism and crackpot technocracy while extolling the virtues of a presumed inarticulate mass suffering under inscrutable false consciousness. The mystification and debasement of language displaces the search for clarity of expression and analysis, enabling a minuscule elite to harness the everyday discontent of ordinary living to a grand mission. Left-wing fascism becomes a theory of fault, locating the question of personal failure everywhere and always in an imperial conspiracy of wealth, power or status.

Fascism requires a focal point of hatred behind which to unify. Thus, when fascists advocate anti-Semitism, they are simply using a tactic, one not opposed by communism. It becomes a modality of affixing the climate of a post-Nazi holocaust, a post-Stalinist Gulag, and the monopoly of petroleum wealth by forces historically antagonistic to Jewish ambitions. The new left-wing fascist segments, weak within the nation, can draw great strength from “world forces” deemed favourable to their cause. The unitary character of anti-Semitism draws fascist and communist elements together in a new social climate. Anti-Semitism is essential motor of left-wing fascism. The grand illusion of seeing communism and fascism as polarised opposites (the latter being evil with a few redeeming virtues, the former being good with a few historical blemishes) is the sort of liberal collapse that reduces analysis to nostalgia — an abiding faith in the unique mission of a communist left that has long ago lost its universal claims to a higher society. This catalogue of polarities, this litany of beliefs, adds up to a lifestyle of left-wing fascism.”

- Irving Louis Horowitz, The Decomposition of Sociology, 1929 – 2012) was a radical, left-wing sociologist, Fulbright lecturer, author of more than 25 books and articles, and a Professor of Sociology at Rutgers University

Now, just substitute any cause du jour for anti-semitism and, Boom!, Horowitz is right…again.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 11:56 AM

I’ve never understood, though, why any former opponent of gay marriage would, after changing his mind, bring down the hammer on someone who hasn’t changed his mind yet.

LOL, AP – you’re projecting something that you possess onto the gheystapo and their enablers: Sanity.
.
They will never engage in a reasonable debate
They will never forgive their opponents
They will never give an opponent the benefit of the doubt
They will never wait for the facts before pouncing
They are simply the embodiment of Perpetual Outrage and will never relax their attacks until everyone thinks exactly like them.

KS Rex on April 8, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Furthermore, Eich worked for Mozilla for 15 years, and there is no evidence he discriminated at all.

melle1228 on April 8, 2014 at 11:57 AM

First off, believing in a definition of marriage is not discrimination anymore than believing in a definition of divorce is. Prop 8 was about a definition of a word making Eich guilty of a thought crime. Domestic Partnership gave gay all the “rights” (translation: bennies) that “marriage” did in California. The only difference is one license said domestic partnership, and one said marriage.

melle1228 on April 8, 2014 at 11:55 AM

To leftists “gay rights” isn’t about government bennies it’s using government and social totalitarianism to force cultural changes.
Tolerance becomes a mandate to accept that becomes a mandate to celebrate.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:59 AM

KS Rex on April 8, 2014 at 11:57 AM

While true of gay activists, I think you described activists of all stripes. Whether pro lifers or pro choicers, 99 percenters or closed border-ers.

MJBrutus on April 8, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Thuja, here’s an idea for you and a way to solve your ‘problem’:

Let’s tie up all religious leaders and throw them in the river. If they sink, they were guilty of ‘child abuse’ by teaching children to ‘hate’ gays. If they float, they were innocent of the charge.

Sure, either way they die, but I’m pretty sure that you wouldn’t have a problem with that anyway. It would be a feature, not a bug.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:01 PM

It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983: Bob Jones University v. United States NAMBLAthuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Your real concern is that children might be steeled against your advances if they learn the truth. I mean, if they become familiar with what your hobbies do to your body and mind, they would be repulsed on the basis of self-preservation.

For instance, in a sane society this would be required reading for eight graders.

Health Risks of the Homosexual Lifestyle

The current media portrayal of gay and lesbian relationships is that they are as healthy, stable and loving as heterosexual marriages — or even more so.1 Medical associations are promoting somewhat similar messages.2 Sexual relationships between members of the same sex, however, expose gays, lesbians and bisexuals to extreme risks of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs), physical injuries, mental disorders and even a shortened life span.

There are five major distinctions between gay and heterosexual relationships, with specific medical consequences. They are…

Akzed on April 8, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Can you point out where being ‘black’ as you call it is a sin in any religion?

Muslims believe that gay acts are sinful. Do you hate Muslims because of their beliefs?

faraway on April 8, 2014 at 12:02 PM

It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983:

Bob Jones University v. United States

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Put the broad brush down. It is possible to oppose gay marriage, and at the same time not “hate” gays.

TheBubs on April 8, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Meh, the issue isn’t Gay Marriage; it’s calling Gay Unions marriage.

You should be with anyone you care to stand to spend your life with…I got no problem with that…but why the demand to call it marriage? That smacks of trying to be provocative to 1 man/woman traditionalists….

BlaxPac on April 8, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Now, just substitute any cause du jour for anti-semitism and, Boom!, Horowitz is right…again.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 11:56 AM

Irving Louis Horowitz’s blind spot is that fascism has never been a right wing ideology. At least not as the right-left argument exists in the US. Sure in Europe they may be mostly elitists, and their right wing descends from the monarchy. But here, the right wing is something entirely different and his constant using of “left-wing” or worse “quasi-left” as an adjective implies that real fascism is right wing here in the US. Wrong wrong wrong.

Fenris on April 8, 2014 at 12:03 PM

What about all the people who donated to and VOTED FOR Barack Obama in 2008? He was – after all – an “anti-gay” candidate.

TarheelBen on April 8, 2014 at 12:03 PM

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:01 PM

You got your witch test backwards.

drown == innocent
float == guilty and then executed

MJBrutus on April 8, 2014 at 12:04 PM

” What the heck is in our water supply? What the heck is in our air supply . . . that create a rainbow effect in a sprinkler? “

blink on April 8, 2014 at 11:36 AM

The problem is with the head, not the water.

The head’s female threads should connect directly to the rigid riser’s male coupling. A threaded nipple (or two) may be handy.

Else, rainbow.

Tsar of Earth on April 8, 2014 at 12:04 PM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Sorry, Cupcake, it’s not. People are born black and they are not born homosexual. And before you try to tell me that they are born ‘gay’, please show me the ‘gay gene’…otherwise…you cannot prove it anymore than I can prove that God is real…

bimmcorp on April 8, 2014 at 12:05 PM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

How do the words “man” and “woman” discriminate? Aren’t we all born male and female – and of male and female?

monalisa on April 8, 2014 at 12:06 PM

* Except when it is…like a bakery or photography studio

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Or Boy Scouts.

monalisa on April 8, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:01 PM

You got your witch test backwards.

drown == innocent
float == guilty and then executed

MJBrutus on April 8, 2014 at 12:04 PM

Forget it, she’s rolling.

Fenris on April 8, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Fenris on April 8, 2014 at 12:03 PM

Agreed. As I have written in the past, I consider Woodrow Wilson, a Progressive, to be America’s first fascist President.

You got your witch test backwards.

drown == innocent
float == guilty and then executed

MJBrutus on April 8, 2014 at 12:04 PM

I should have looked it up. I think that I am confusing the drowning test for witches with Catherine de’Medici and her test for some of the Huguenots. The test that I am thinking of resulted in the person drowning either way. There wasn’t a subsequent execution.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:11 PM

It is child abuse to let the kind of deviant propaganda endemic to homosexual organizations with an unhealthy fixation on “normalizing” homosexuality in ever younger and younger school students be allowed to flourish there.

Homeschool your kids, before the thujas of the world make even that illegal.

It is wrong to send an entire group of people (practicing gay men) to an early grave by propagating a medically ignorant understanding of “alternative” intimate relationships.

Yet we will do so because apparently discernment of the obvious and testable is now discrimination if the observation derived is unfavorable to a vapid, gaseous notion of “equality.”

BKennedy on April 8, 2014 at 12:13 PM

Forget it, she’s rolling.

Fenris on April 8, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Lolz. I am actually having lunch with Congressman Keith Ellison today to discuss the Nazis’ bombing of Pearl Harbour. Bluto will be there is spirit.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:14 PM

How do the words “man” and “woman” discriminate? Aren’t we all born male and female – and of male and female?

monalisa on April 8, 2014 at 12:06 PM

Nope.

That is “heteronormative” you can simply choose your gender now. I am sure you will be able to choose your race next.

Science has nothing to do with what these fascists are talking about.

tetriskid on April 8, 2014 at 12:14 PM

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:14 PM

I hope you were kidding about having lunch with him, life is too short.

Fenris on April 8, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

70% of blacks in California also voted for Prop 8.

monalisa on April 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM

Lolz. I am actually having lunch with Congressman Keith Ellison today to discuss the Nazis’ bombing of Pearl Harbour. Bluto will be there is spirit.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:14 PM

You mean the Japanese?

darwin on April 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM

To leftists “gay rights” isn’t about government bennies it’s using government and social totalitarianism to force cultural changes.
Tolerance becomes a mandate to accept that becomes a mandate to celebrate.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:59 AM

Totalitarianism? We are talking about using the model we used to address race to address sexual orientation? Either we are already in a totalitarian state or you are guilty of extreme hyperbole.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 12:19 PM

Lolz. I am actually having lunch with Congressman Keith Ellison today to discuss the Nazis’ bombing of Pearl Harbour. Bluto will be there is spirit.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:14 PM

You mean the Japanese?

darwin on April 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM

I know that. Keith Ellison doesn’t. See the youtube link in my post.

It was a joke and I would never have lunch with Ellison to discuss anything.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:20 PM

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Unfortunately one of the more common demonstrations of logical gymnastics regularly employed by the progressive fascists is the effort to apply a moral equivalence between Civil Rights movement and the craven identity politics being employed by the GheyGestapo in order to get, not just a societal recognition of their lifestyle, but protected class status which apparently includes the ‘right’ to arrogantly shove themselves into everyone’s face demanding submission, ‘social justice’, respect, and an adherence to a ‘proper’ ‘groupthink’.

There’s a huge difference between racial discrimination – and that of the rest of the identity politics groups. But because of the success of those who fought racial discrimination, other identity groups seek to link themselves morally to that movement and draw an equivalency with that movement. Just because they want to link themselves, doesn’t mean that the link is accurate or legitimate…particularly when the goal is craven identity politics and seeking, not equal rights, but superior rights and the enforcement of a new ‘groupthink’ as well as ‘revenge’ in the name of ‘social justice’.

That they wish to exploit the state to enforce their definition of acceptable ‘groupspeak’ and ‘groupthink’ is little more than an Orwellian fascism.

Athos on April 8, 2014 at 12:21 PM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Wtf?

Fast lesson: you can’t hide being black, but you’re sexual proclivities are not known unless you tell someone…

So no, it’s not the same, and to try to compare the two is at best, disingenuous.

BlaxPac on April 8, 2014 at 12:21 PM

darwin on April 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM

Not a fan of Animal House, are you?

MJBrutus on April 8, 2014 at 12:21 PM

It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983:

Bob Jones University v. United States

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Yes, the LGBT community definitely put BJU in its place, didn’t they? How dare a faith-based school teach students that homosexuality is a sinful behavior in the eyes of God when every one knows that this definition of “sinful” equals hatred in the dictionary of the left.

It actually turned out well for the school. The community rallied around them and supported them to compensate for the change in tax status.

Amazing school that has thrived in spite of all the obstacles thrown at it by those seeking to destroy it. Incredibly high educational standards!

lineholder on April 8, 2014 at 12:21 PM

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 11:59 AM

Totalitarianism? We are talking about using the model we used to address race to address sexual orientation? Either we are already in a totalitarian state or you are guilty of extreme hyperbole.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 12:19 PM

And you’re guilty of mind-bending rationalization and projection. Or suffering from?

hawkdriver on April 8, 2014 at 12:22 PM

thuja, why do you discriminate against Muslims?

faraway on April 8, 2014 at 12:22 PM

I’m pretty sure that the OkStupid CEO is going to be canned over this. 1) this is a “Golden Opportunity” to extract another head for the gay movement, to further reinforce the “You oppose us, you die” rhetoric.

2) there won’t be any backlash–everyone will see this as just punishing hypocrisy. I’m totally opposed to Eich going, but this guy? Yeah, he needs to be fired because of the sheer stupidity of what he’s done. Live by the ghey rights sword, die by it. And I hope OKstupid goes down too.

In general, though–thuja represents what the gay movement wants to enforce: that religions will have their doctrines dictated to them by the government.

Here’s an example: my faith, LDS, teaches that gay marriage is wrong because 1) God said so and 2) God said so because ultimately, we believe in the salvation of the family unit–that you cam be together forever in heaven with your spouse and children. And that your family will keep growing in the eternities. Gays cannot have children, either now or in the eternities. Therefore, unless you overcome your homosexual tendencies here on earth, you damn yourself, in the sense that you stop your own progression.

So I’m opposed to homosexuality and same sex marriage because that particular sin prevents its participants from ever being more than just an angel. So does adultery and other sins, but we don’t have a bunch of adulterers out there insisting that adultery is not a sin, and that we should fire everyone who doesn’t celebrate adultery.

Vanceone on April 8, 2014 at 12:22 PM

darwin on April 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM

Not a fan of Animal House, are you?

MJBrutus on April 8, 2014 at 12:21 PM

WTH? Any man who is not a fan of the telling of Fawn Leibowitz is no man.

Detente off.

hawkdriver on April 8, 2014 at 12:24 PM

blink on April 8, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Just so I’m clear, could you please define “true marriage equality” for me? Before I either agree or disagree with you, I’d like to at least know what you mean.

Komsomoletz on April 8, 2014 at 12:26 PM

Never forget. “Fawn”

hawkdriver on April 8, 2014 at 12:27 PM

Totalitarianism? We are talking about using the model we used to address race to address sexual orientation? Either we are already in a totalitarian state or you are guilty of extreme hyperbole.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 12:19 PM

Extreme hyperbole? Are you not saying that the state should be involved in determining if parents are teaching their children “hatred” towards gays and are therefor guilty of child abuse?

That requires a totalitarian government.

And the left is pushing for as much as a totalitarian government as they can get.

They are also pushing for as much of a totalitarian culture as they can get.

YOU made a FALSE equivalence between “gay rights” and black civil rights. Precisely because you’d like to invoke the same heavy handed governmental “solutions”.

And yes the black civil rights movement did have totalitarian aspects to it. This is why Barry Goldwater opposed certain incarnations of black “civil rights”. Because he knew that once the government used the power of the state to turn the culture towards one end it would go back to it again and again. That’s what we’re seeing. Except gays haven’t suffered like blacks. Not even close. And gays haven’t had to face the same kind and magnitude of institutional oppression that blacks did. You could argue that black slavery and oppression under Jim Crow (enforced by the state) required a semi-totalitarian response because it was both extremely unjust AND intractable in society. Gays cannot claim this. But please, keep beclowning yourself by claiming that modern gays – or even gays of the last 30 years – faced the same challenged that blacks have faced over the past 200 years.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 12:28 PM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

A perfect example of the moral equivalency fallacy.

Why do gays feel compelled to identify their entire self and being based on their sexual preference – and believe that everyone should not only know, but kowtow to them because of that preference?

Athos on April 8, 2014 at 12:29 PM

It was a joke and I would never have lunch with Ellison to discuss anything.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:20 PM

Oh I would. I’d order the pulled pork.

Happy Nomad on April 8, 2014 at 12:29 PM

Just so I’m clear, could you please define “true marriage equality” for me? Before I either agree or disagree with you, I’d like to at least know what you mean.

Komsomoletz on April 8, 2014 at 12:26 PM

Polygamy. Or any coupling people want. If “marriage” is a fundamental right of equality then why only restrict it to gays and one man and one woman?

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Harry Reid accepted Koch money and now the OKCupid CEO, are we in Seinfeld’s bizarro world?

smitty41 on April 8, 2014 at 12:32 PM

Totalitarianism? We are talking about using the model we used to address race to address sexual orientation? Either we are already in a totalitarian state or you are guilty of extreme hyperbole.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 12:19 PM

Yes, it is totalitarianism. It is not akin to racism since there is NO evidence that Eich was homophobic. It is akin to someone supporting a group that is against affirmative action or welfare benefits and getting tarred with racism since that affects black Americans.

melle1228 on April 8, 2014 at 12:33 PM

So does adultery and other sins, but we don’t have a bunch of adulterers out there insisting that adultery is not a sin, and that we should fire everyone who doesn’t celebrate adultery.

Vanceone on April 8, 2014 at 12:22 PM

While I’m unaware of any calls to fire strict monogamists, you can be sure that there are plenty of people demanding to have their adulterous lifestyle validated by the masses. Look at all the people who cheat and then get a “No-fault Divorce”. It’s more than just a title- it’s a description of how they want the state (and people) to view their actions leading up to the dissolution of their marriage.

Komsomoletz on April 8, 2014 at 12:34 PM

Why do gays feel compelled to identify their entire self and being based on their sexual preference – and believe that everyone should not only know, but kowtow to them because of that preference?

Athos on April 8, 2014 at 12:29 PM

Good question. I’ve yet to have a straight person come up and make sure I knew of their sexual orientation within minutes of meeting them.

Happy Nomad on April 8, 2014 at 12:36 PM

It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children, and institutions that do will loose their tax-exempt status just as Bob Jones University lost their case in 1983:

Bob Jones University v. United States

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM
Yes, the LGBT community definitely put BJU in its place, didn’t they? How dare a faith-based school teach students that homosexuality is a sinful behavior in the eyes of God when every one knows that this definition of “sinful” equals hatred in the dictionary of the left.

It actually turned out well for the school. The community rallied around them and supported them to compensate for the change in tax status.

Amazing school that has thrived in spite of all the obstacles thrown at it by those seeking to destroy it. Incredibly high educational standards!

lineholder on April 8, 2014 at 12:21 PM

There’s also a gay writer Brandon Ambrosino the left hates that Ezra Klein hired – and has stood by despite protest – that went to Liberty University who has written that the Christians there treated him very well and that he wasn’t the subject of much hatred or bigotry.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 12:36 PM

It was a joke and I would never have lunch with Ellison to discuss anything.

Resist We Much on April 8, 2014 at 12:20 PM

Oh I would. I’d order the pulled pork.

Happy Nomad on April 8, 2014 at 12:29 PM

Good point. And some beer. And, just to be on topic, bring along a gay friend or three and a woman lacking a hijab. And some paparazzi and a recorder. Discuss Saudi Arabia.

Fenris on April 8, 2014 at 12:36 PM

Yes, it is totalitarianism. It is not akin to racism since there is NO evidence that Eich was homophobic. It is akin to someone supporting a group that is against affirmative action or welfare benefits and getting tarred with racism since that affects black Americans.

melle1228 on April 8, 2014 at 12:33 PM

+1

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 12:37 PM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

…you’ve regressed… to just making stupid statements.

KOOLAID2 on April 8, 2014 at 12:38 PM

It is child abuse for religious figures to teach hatred of gays to children…

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM

You’re making this up, of course… Aside from extreme fringies like that Westboro crowd, I know of no religious figures that teach hatred of gays.

Ricard on April 8, 2014 at 12:39 PM

There are standards of hypocracy and there are the standards of “the left” on hypocracy.

Two different animals. One is selectively blind.

Nothing to see here.

Carnac on April 8, 2014 at 12:39 PM

Fast lesson: you can’t hide being black, but you’re sexual proclivities are not known unless you tell someone…

So no, it’s not the same, and to try to compare the two is at best, disingenuous.

BlaxPac on April 8, 2014 at 12:21 PM

That’s not even a reply. A goal of the gay movement is that there is no reason to hide being gay, since the only reason that history gave us to hide was bigotry against us.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 12:40 PM

Discrimination against gays is akin to discrimination against blacks.

Wasn’t discrimination against blacks centered around the equality of people?
And isn’t the gay marriage argument centered around the equality of relationships?

The real question in the gay marriage debate is whether same-sex relationships differ significantly from opposite-sex relationships and does the state necessarily need to treat them as if they were the same.

And fwiw, I think gay rights advocates should stop trying to ride piggyback on the struggle of blacks. From what I’ve seen, it kinda pisses off the black community. Doesn’t the struggle of gays have enough merit of it’s own?

lynncgb on April 8, 2014 at 12:41 PM

how nutz would the media get if a CEO was fired or “asked to resign” because they supported SSM?

smitty41 on April 8, 2014 at 12:42 PM

… Doesn’t the struggle of gays have enough merit of it’s own?

lynncgb on April 8, 2014 at 12:41 PM

If it did, they wouldn’t feel the need to piggyback.

Fenris on April 8, 2014 at 12:43 PM

That’s not even a reply. A goal of the gay movement is that there is no reason to hide being gay, since the only reason that history gave us to hide was bigotry against us.

thuja on April 8, 2014 at 12:40 PM

That is a reply.

YOU want to make the false equivalence between being gay and being black in America. Black people couldn’t hide. They were subject to a lot more institutional bigotry than gays did. Again, they couldn’t hide.

I’m not saying gay people should hide or feel they need to hide but they cannot in any way make an honest claim to face the same kind or magnitude of struggles that blacks have. It’s utterly ridiculous.

gwelf on April 8, 2014 at 12:43 PM

It is not akin to racism since there is NO evidence that Eich was homophobic. melle1228 on April 8, 2014 at 12:33 PM

Don’t use and legitimize their pretend words.

Akzed on April 8, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 6