GOPround founder Jimmy LaSalvia has left the building, as in
the Republican Party, and become an Independent conservative. President Obama
sounded off on his departure, even though Democrats in Washington are weighing
whether to run for office in 2014 or jump ship of state while the jumping's
good.

Yet the issue of homosexuals in the Republican Party, and
whether the national GOP should change its platform, requires more discussion
than offered by one activist leaving the party.

The “gay issue” has spurred bloggers to blather. Townhall.com
discussed that three gay conservatives will be running for Congress as
Republicans, including Carl DeMaio in my home state, as well as Dan Innis for
New Hampshire and Richard Tisei (probably) for a rematch in MA-6 against John
"My wife's the crook" Tierney. Ann Coulter attended and spoke at
GOPround meetings, too, adding some legitimacy (?) to the group.

Still, Mr. LaSilva is leaving a party which he believes is
doomed because the leadership will not accept recognize the homosexual
lifestyle. Honesty, with or without LaSilva, the rainbows will keep shedding
their seven-fold wonder, and the six-striped symbol for homosexual causes will,
well…who knows?

The issue of gay conservatism, and by extension Log Cabin
Republicans, and the log-rolling which may ensue as a result of this
controversial matter, may spell big trouble for the Republican Party and conservative
interests in general.

Or maybe not.

Frankly, the origins (or etiology) of homosexual behavior
have not received their due vetting, likely because individuals, leaning left
or right, do not want to be labeled intolerant bigots. This subtle poison of
group acceptance/conformity has pushed interest groups, private institutions, and
especially public sector interests to recognize homosexuality as another
identity, and those who live out such conduct as another minority.

These assertions are false. Homosexuality is a choice, and a
bad one. The notion that one is born attracted to someone else of the same sex
makes no sense. The cohort of consequences associated with such conduct
demonstrates a legacy of disease, dysfunction, and death. Yet the fact that
many leaders in our political culture, and in our locales, are not pushing back
against the rising tide of "coerced acceptance" is alarming. One of
the schemes behind the Gay Rights movement included the argument that people “are
born that way”, and thus to disparage homosexuality makes one a bigot.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

People are not born gay. Thousands have abandoned the
homosexual lifestyle for a heterosexual lifestyle. Even Libertarian lesbian
Tammy Bruce acknowledges that she chooses her lifestyle.

Yet other limited government leaders are not leading on this
issue. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie waffled during his debate with
Democratic no-chancer Barbara Buono in 2013. When pressed with the inevitable
hypothetical that one of his kids would announcing a homosexual predisposition,
Christie responded:

"I would hug my child, tell him I love him, then say “Marriage
is not for you."

What kind of an answer is that? Unjust and inauthentic, to
say the least. The truth is that homosexuality is not a course of conduct one
is born or destined to carry on. Nor should conservatives ignore the cultural
repercussions of this lifestyle.

In a free society, consenting adults will choose to abuse or
respect their bodies. Conservative MP Margaret Thatcher moved to decriminalize
homosexual conduct between consenting adults. Such liberty (or rather
libertarianism) is the better solution. Furthermore, the Republican Party
National Committee took a vote on the marriage issue, and decided that the
platform would still recognize marriage as between one man and one woman.
Following the overturning of the anti-polygamy laws in Utah, as well as the
potential dangers of subcultures which respect child-marriages, a stance on
defining traditional marriage remains a worthwhile fight.

Despite this seeming division in the GOP on gay issues, this
country, and the voting public, should not be forced to recognize gay marriage by
cowardly politicians and vain efforts to grow one’s party. Instead of running from
this debate, and permitting a vocal yet very limited minority of interests to shame
people into quiet acquiescence on homosexuality, it’s time for people to gain
some courage and explain the myriad 
consequences of homosexual conduct, as well as the acceptable resistance
to its legitimacy.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus declared that there is room in
the GOP for pro-gay marriage. So be it. US Senator Bob Portman (R-Ohio) endorsed
the policy because of his gay son. Not so good. As a father, Portman should have
discussed identity and the proper scope of sexual relations with his son, as
well as other matters which have influenced him.

Yes, there are “gay” Republicans, yet the argument that they
should be welcomed because of their homosexuality is both irrelevant and
insulting. Homosexuality is a choice, and a bad one. Besides, conservatives as
a rule recognize the importance of key institutions, many of which should not
be changed, and some with only the greatest deliberation.

GOProud LaSilva’s departure is not a big deal. Conservatism (and
the GOP) should recognize a libertarian stance on marriage (get the government
out of it), and move on.
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x