Comments on the Democrat "Presidential Gay Debate"
On Thursday, the first ever televised (Logo TV) Democrat "Presidential Gay Debate" was held in Los Angeles. The two-hour forum had been previously tagged as an event to address issues affecting the lives of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) people in the United States . However, it was also clearly a biased GLBT agenda driven event. See also: Democratic Contenders Address Gay Rights in TV Forum In keeping with the 'fairness doctrine" for televised events, below some limited comments from two traditional family organizations.
1) Religious Freedom Coalition: Want To Be Presidents & Gays -There they were, six of the eight Democratic presidential hopefuls on a gay TV cable channel pandering to homosexuals. Hillary Clinton told them she would be a "...president who will fight for you." The "debate" was held in West Hollywood (where else?) and was sponsored by the gay TV network Logo and the Homosexual lobbying group Human Rights Campaign. After the event Hillary Clinton held a fund raising party at the Abby in West Hollywood which is the largest homosexual night club in the United States. Click here for more.
2) Family Research Council: Shades of Gay: Hopefuls Go to Mat on LOGO - For all the hype surrounding last night's first presidential "Gay Debate," there were few real surprises. Trying their best to placate homosexuals without disillusioning the rest of America, the candidates walked gingerly through a maze of loaded questions. All reaffirmed their commitment to broadening "hate crimes" laws, repealing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, and allowing homosexual couples to adopt children. Interestingly enough, none of the Democratic front runners went so far as to endorse same-sex "marriage"--though they did vow to fight for the same "rights" and benefits through civil unions. Former Gov. Bill Richardson felt the heat when he was asked whether he believed people are "born gay or chose to be gay." He said, "It's a choice." When it was obvious that the moderator was unsatisfied with his response, Richardson stumbled to clarify, saying, "I'm not a scientist... I see gays and lesbians as people..." Nanoseconds after the event, Richardson's office released a statement recanting his answer and stating that he "misunderstood the question." If liberals wanted to make a social statement last night, participating in the debate was a good move. If they want to raise money among special interest groups, it was a good move. But if they want to win the White House, polling shows that courting the homosexual vote is not the thing to do. For the truth on one of the hot issues in last night's debate--"hate crimes" legislation--read Peter Sprigg's op-ed in today's Washington Times: Op-ed: Reject The 'Hate Crimes' Bill
Tags: debate, Democrat, Family Research Council, gay agenda, gay debate, Religious Freedom Coalition To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
1) Religious Freedom Coalition: Want To Be Presidents & Gays -There they were, six of the eight Democratic presidential hopefuls on a gay TV cable channel pandering to homosexuals. Hillary Clinton told them she would be a "...president who will fight for you." The "debate" was held in West Hollywood (where else?) and was sponsored by the gay TV network Logo and the Homosexual lobbying group Human Rights Campaign. After the event Hillary Clinton held a fund raising party at the Abby in West Hollywood which is the largest homosexual night club in the United States. Click here for more.
2) Family Research Council: Shades of Gay: Hopefuls Go to Mat on LOGO - For all the hype surrounding last night's first presidential "Gay Debate," there were few real surprises. Trying their best to placate homosexuals without disillusioning the rest of America, the candidates walked gingerly through a maze of loaded questions. All reaffirmed their commitment to broadening "hate crimes" laws, repealing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, and allowing homosexual couples to adopt children. Interestingly enough, none of the Democratic front runners went so far as to endorse same-sex "marriage"--though they did vow to fight for the same "rights" and benefits through civil unions. Former Gov. Bill Richardson felt the heat when he was asked whether he believed people are "born gay or chose to be gay." He said, "It's a choice." When it was obvious that the moderator was unsatisfied with his response, Richardson stumbled to clarify, saying, "I'm not a scientist... I see gays and lesbians as people..." Nanoseconds after the event, Richardson's office released a statement recanting his answer and stating that he "misunderstood the question." If liberals wanted to make a social statement last night, participating in the debate was a good move. If they want to raise money among special interest groups, it was a good move. But if they want to win the White House, polling shows that courting the homosexual vote is not the thing to do. For the truth on one of the hot issues in last night's debate--"hate crimes" legislation--read Peter Sprigg's op-ed in today's Washington Times: Op-ed: Reject The 'Hate Crimes' Bill
Tags: debate, Democrat, Family Research Council, gay agenda, gay debate, Religious Freedom Coalition To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Posted by Bill Smith at 10:03 PM - Post Link
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home