« | »

NYT: Politicians Lag Public On Gay Rights

From the militant homosexuals of the New York Times:

After Fall of ‘Don’t Ask,’ Pushing for ‘I Do’

December 20, 2010

WASHINGTON — … [W]hile public opinion has changed in favor of gay rights over the past two decades, those attitudes are often not reflected in public policy, because the views of lawmakers, polls suggest, lag behind the public, and not just among social conservatives who have long opposed elements of the gay rights agenda on moral grounds.

Polls show the public is broadly supportive of equal rights for gay men and lesbians on several issues — with the exception of the right to marry. The vast majority of Americans, nearly 90 percent, favor equality of opportunity in the workplace.

Even if this is true, how has "public policy" lagged behind this? Where do homosexuals not have equal opportunity in the work place? In fact, homosexuals are the wealthiest ‘minority’ in the country.

More than 60 percent favored overturning “don’t ask, don’t tell” — a figure that has stood steady at least since 2005, according to the Gallup Organization, which tracks public sentiment on gay rights.

Who believes this? But, again, even if this is true, ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ has been repealed. And five years is not such a "lag." Or should our laws be made on the whim of the moment?

Yet the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, first proposed in the Clinton years, remains stuck on Capitol Hill, in part because lawmakers are squeamish about language in it that would protect transgender employees

Yes, the American public is up in arms against discrimination against ‘transgendered’ employees. You see it everywhere, don’t you? Every poll has this crisis at the top of everyone’s list.

Same-sex marriage is even trickier for politicians. Fewer than half of all Americans support it, which puts even supporters of gay rights, like President Obama, in a political bind.

"Few than half of all Americans support it" is New York Times speak for "nobody supports it." (‘Gay marriage’ has been rejected in landslides everywhere it has been on a ballot, including California.)

Mr. Obama supports civil unions but has opposed same-sex marriage, although he recently said that “attitudes evolve, including mine” — a hint that he might change his position.

Wait a minute. We thought the point of this article was to castigate politicians for not following public opinion. And yet here they are pushing our representatives to ram through something that even The Times admits is hugely unpopular with the American public.

But this is how the propagandists work. Logic means nothing to them. Words are just tools they use to get what they want. And the Solons at the New York Times have been obsessed with advancing the homosexual agenda for years.

“There have been enormous and important shifts in public attitudes, and those are a hopeful sign,” said Tobias B. Wolff, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who advises the Obama White House on gay rights issues. But Mr. Wolff speaks of a “political gay panic,” saying, “Even when the public is so strongly behind equality, so strongly behind the right thing, politicians are hyper-cautious.”

Ms. Achtenberg [an avowed lesbian], who was…confirmed as Mr. Clinton’s assistant secretary for housing — after a protracted debate — agrees. She became the first openly gay appointee to win Senate confirmation at just about the same time as Mr. Clinton put forth the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. She said she watched the Senate vote on Saturday at home in San Francisco and cried.

“It feels like 17 years of unfinished business,” she said.

Isn’t it amazing? The Times found two homosexual activists who agree with their position. That is journalism at its finest.

Now that Republicans have won control of the House and increased their numbers in the Senate, many in Washington expect the political climate for gay causes to worsen. Some advocates of gay rights say their efforts will shift to the states; Maryland, New York and Rhode Island, for instance, are all contemplating legislation to legalize same-sex marriage.

And the will of the people be damned. (And so much for the concern about public policy not matching public opinion.)

Activists are also looking to the courts. In California, a federal appeals court will soon hear a challenge to that state’s same-sex marriage ban.

The hell you say? Homosexual activists are going to try to get the courts to give them things they cannot get through legislation? Even though The Times insists the public is behind them all the way? This is news.

In one big sign that attitudes have changed, a lead lawyer trying to overturn the ban is Theodore B. Olson, the conservative lawyer who was solicitor general to President George W. Bush

Of course this is no shift for Mr. Olson, who says he has believed in homosexual rights for a very long time. But The Times needed an example of a dramatic change of heart — and the truth be damned.

Popular culture has been a driving force behind attitudinal shifts around gay men and lesbians and gay rights, and the pace of change has been faster than during the civil rights or women’s rights movements, said Anna Greenberg, a pollster who tracks gay rights issues for the Human Rights Campaign, an advocacy group

Astonishing. The Times even managed to find a pollster for a militant homosexual rights group who agreed with them. 

Conservatives are dismayed

And no wonder, in the face of such a groundswell of support. They are clearly on the wrong side of history. Except on election day.

Yet while the country may have embraced gay men and lesbians in popular culture — witness the success of movies like “Milk,” based on the life of the slain gay rights activist Harvey Milk — its political leaders are careful about that embrace.…

Hilarious. ‘Milk’ had a very limited release and was a box office flop. But when has The Times ever let such details get in the way of their unrelenting agit-prop?

After all, they have their priorities, and reporting the truth has nothing to do with any of them.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, December 21st, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

5 Responses to “NYT: Politicians Lag Public On Gay Rights”

  1. wardmama4 says:

    This is Federal – it will simply be a matter of time/coercion before it becomes (somehow, oh maybe as the result of a Supreme Court Decison) ‘law’ of the land (sort of like the bogus ‘right’ to abortion found by the majority idiots in 1973). Once again – what these amoral, lying cheating crapweasels can’t get through in a stand alone bill – they manage to shove down our throats in a backdoor, un-Constitutional double-dealing backstabbing criminal act.

    And oh, hey NYT – the Public is not all FOR this bowing down to activist amoral and in one case Traitorous people. Look at the entire Pentagon study – it does not show a complete support for this social experiment nor does a study taken in downtown San Fransisco show the true nature of all of America citizens thoughts on this subject.

    Bias I don’t see no stinkin’ bias.

  2. JohnMG says:

    …..”the Solons at the New York Times have been obsessed with advancing the homosexual agenda for years……..”

    That couldn’t possibly have anything to do with “Pinch” Sulzberger owning the paper could it?

  3. MinnesotaRush says:

    “Activists are also looking to the courts.”

    Screw Article 1, Section 1 of our Constitution that says something about ALL LEGISLATIVE POWERS .. being reserved to the Congress.

    Oh yeah, that went out the window long ago.

  4. Mithrandir says:

    The NYT article has already been written!

    Don’t you see? The steps are already in place!

    Timing for the NYT article is critical.

    Sadly, Sergeant ______(name) has served his country on the front lines of ______(country) for _____(year) now, and civil rights at home is still just a dream.
    Although the military was desegregated by sexual orientation ________ (# of years) ago, his Civil Rights at home has been slow to catch up.
    “I thought if I served my country honorably, sacrificed, proved I was worthy, my country would grant me my freedom and marry whomever I want.”
    Sergeant ________(name) cannot marry his long-time lover of ______(years). Even though he earned __________ (name of ribbon or medal), it is not enough for him to become a full citizen, a full human being in America.
    “Some day, a just man will grant me my freedom, I’ve earned it, I just want to be left alone to live my life as I desire.”

    1st, remove homosexuality from the DSM.
    2nd, decriminalize sodomy and gay activity
    3rd, teach it slowly to school children
    4th, glorify gay people, their thoughts, behavior
    5th, shun and punish those who don’t
    6th, circumvent the public opinion by continuous vote or repeal by judge
    7th, get gays into the military and other institution to show “normalcy”
    8th, overturn by Congress, Presidential Orders, or Courts, all laws opposing homosexuality

    We are on STEP 7. Thank you G.O.P. and others that only fight AFTER THE FACT for things they believe in. You had decades to reverse step #1. Democrats engage in evil, Republicans stand by and watch….

  5. JannyMae says:

    “She became the first openly gay appointee to win Senate confirmation at just about the same time as Mr. Clinton put forth the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.” — from the article.

    I am shocked to see this passing reference, linking Clinton and DADT. Part of the propaganda surrounding this has been ignoring the fact that Clinton had anything to do with DADT, even though it was implemented by executive order under his watch. Otherwise, this is a shameless propaganda piece masquerading as news.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »