October 11, 2006

Gay Republicans

I’m sure there’s more than a small measure of truth in this:

Daniel Blatt, who helps to run a website called Gay Patriot, said
that he had rarely encountered any prejudice within the party.

“It’s harder to be a gay Republican in gay circles than it is
to be a gay in Republican circles — gay activists are the most
intolerant SOBs I’ve ever come across.”

BTW, just worth pointing out something about the Foley scandal itself. The age of consent in Washington DC is 16: whatever else was going on it wasn’t paedophilia. After all, there are a rather large number of heterosexual men who are attracted to 16 and 17 year old women, are there not?

Sex

8 responses

Tristan

October 11, 2006

I’ve known gay people who shun the ‘gay scene’ because it is so intolerant to difference. There’s a model to be accepted and if you don’t fit it you’re not ‘properly gay’ (that is of course a sweeping generalisation and something of a characature).
Its like in many ‘progressive’ and ‘tolerant’ circles: You become a paraiah if you dare suggest that Maggie did something good or that the leftist views are damaging to the very causes they care about…

Loading…

Reply
Not Saussure

October 11, 2006

However, the age of consent in many states is 18, and Rep Foley’s emails and texts apparently may comprise the Federal offence of ‘grooming’ someone under that age, under ‘The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006’, of which Mr Foley was a noted sponsor. Indeed, he appears to have built his career ‘on legislative proposals meant to halt the sexual predation of children and others’, according to the Washington Post
Tim adds: Oh yes, I’m aware of that bit, biter bit and all that. It’s a gross abuse of power and so on as well, just wanted to make the point that it ain’t paedophilia.

Loading…

Reply
.

October 11, 2006

16-year old girls are the best

Loading…

Reply
james higham

October 11, 2006

Tim, how does the changeover from 16 to 17 effect the maturity of the molested boy?

Loading…

Reply
Natalie Solent

October 11, 2006

Mr Higham, by that argument we’d none of us grow old. The change in one year, or between the day before and the day after a person’s birthday that takes them to the age of consent is trivial. But they add up.

Loading…

Reply
Andrew Ian Dodge

October 11, 2006

I have several gay friends that were Tories (shock horror) and a couple in the Republican party. They all reported similar experiences to this guy.
On a related note: when I was at my alma malus Colby in Maine it was far more shocking to “out” yourself as a metalhead or worse a Republican than to come out as gay.

Loading…

Reply
David Gillies

October 11, 2006

Natalie is right. It’s called the Sorites Paradox (by adding grains of wheat one at a time, we eventually end up with a heap of grain, but which grain altered the collection of grains into a heap?) Law destroys the paradox in Solomonic fashion, by saying: this side of the (arbitrary) line X; this side Y.
The whole issue of ‘grooming’ being an offence is iffy, too. I’m all for coming down like a ton of bricks on paedophiles who actually consummate their perversions, but don’t you need actus reus in addition to mens rea? (IANAL).

Loading…

Reply
P. Froward

October 12, 2006

They can call it what they like, but it’s a poor excuse for a paradox, if you ask me. More of an illustration of why, having invented words, we still had to invent numbers.
Anyhow. In other poor excuse news, somebody who macks on sixteen-year-olds isn’t much of a pedophile, in the macking-on-five-year-olds sense that gives the notion of pedophilia its unique horror. It’s sleazy and pervy (in a bad way) but being attracted to people who are physically adults is not the same as being attracted to people who are physically children. Remember people calling Bill Clinton a pedophile? Gibberish.

Loading…

Reply