Gay Republican fights to keep Minn. seat

09-11-2006, 10:50 AM

MSNBC.com has just posted the following:

State Sen. Paul Koering once fit neatly into the profile of socially conservative central Minnesota: abortion opponent, supporter of gun and property rights, outspoken supporter of veterans.

More...

foundit66 · 09-11-2006, 11:25 AM

BRAINERD, Minn. - State Sen. Paul Koering once fit neatly into the profile of socially conservative central Minnesota: abortion opponent, supporter of gun and property rights, outspoken supporter of veterans.

....
"There's going to be a lot of people watching to see if the voters can look at my record and say, 'He's doing a good job,'" said the 41-year-old Koering. "Or, will they look at my personal life and say, 'I can't support him because of that.' If that's how they're going to vote, I may be out of a job."

Kevin Goedker, a city councilman who's challenging Koering in Tuesday's GOP primary, says it isn't because his opponent is gay. But he's making an explicit appeal to voters whose values guide them in the voting booth.

"People of high moral values and integrity must rally and support candidates who will work to bring ethics, morals and family values back into government," Goedker's father, Gene, his campaign treasurer, wrote in a fundraising letter.
Gay Republican fights to keep Minn. seat - Politics - MSNBC.com

It's not because he's "gay", but then he starts ranting about "high moral values and integrity"...
Gee. What "moral value" does the GAY Senator lack then???
Conspicuously missing...

Why don't the bigots just be honest about their bigotry?

alias · 09-11-2006, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

BRAINERD, Minn. - State Sen. Paul Koering once fit neatly into the profile of socially conservative central Minnesota: abortion opponent, supporter of gun and property rights, outspoken supporter of veterans.

....
"There's going to be a lot of people watching to see if the voters can look at my record and say, 'He's doing a good job,'" said the 41-year-old Koering. "Or, will they look at my personal life and say, 'I can't support him because of that.' If that's how they're going to vote, I may be out of a job."

Kevin Goedker, a city councilman who's challenging Koering in Tuesday's GOP primary, says it isn't because his opponent is gay. But he's making an explicit appeal to voters whose values guide them in the voting booth.

"People of high moral values and integrity must rally and support candidates who will work to bring ethics, morals and family values back into government," Goedker's father, Gene, his campaign treasurer, wrote in a fundraising letter.
Gay Republican fights to keep Minn. seat - Politics - MSNBC.com

It's not because he's "gay", but then he starts ranting about "high moral values and integrity"...
Gee. What "moral value" does the GAY Senator lack then???
Conspicuously missing...

Why don't the bigots just be honest about their bigotry?

Does the senator have the right to be gay? Yes. Do the people have the right to not vote for him because he is gay? Yes. It's called freedom.

foundit66 · 09-11-2006, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

Does the senator have the right to be gay? Yes. Do the people have the right to not vote for him because he is gay? Yes. It's called freedom.

You talk a lot but say nothing of meaning.
BIGOTRY is a freedom in this country as well.

My point was that the people running against him were throwing BIGOTRY into the political race without having the courage to explicitly admit that they wanted people to vote against the candidate because he was gay.
Cowardice and bigotry.

The candidate stands WITH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY on the major issues. Abortion. Gun Control. Even GAY MARRIAGE.

So what "morality" does the candidate lack????

Voting against a man just because he's black is bigotry.
Voting against a man just because he's gay is bigotry.
Yes. We have the freedom to vote based on bigotry, but it is STILL BIGOTRY.

Can you address my point?
Or will you continue to attempt to side-track it?

jaaaman · 09-11-2006, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

Voting against a man just because he's gay is bigotry.
Yes. We have the freedom to vote based on bigotry, but it is STILL BIGOTRY.

That's bullshit. It is my right not to vote for someone because that candidate is gay. I wouldn't vote for someone of the ilk of Larry Flynt either... I do not vote for candidates that are sexually depraved. That is my right... and it's not bigotry. It's called personal choice.

foundit66 · 09-11-2006, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaaaman

That's bullshit. It is my right not to vote for someone because that candidate is gay.

< taps the mic >
Is this thing on?

I EXPLICITLY said it was your right to not vote for a candidate just because he's gay.
"Voting against a man just because he's black is bigotry.
Voting against a man just because he's gay is bigotry.
Yes. We have the freedom to vote based on bigotry, but it is STILL BIGOTRY."

What is so difficult to understand about that?

My point was that it was BIGOTRY to not vote for someone JUST BECAUSE they are gay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaaaman

That is my right... and it's not bigotry. It's called personal choice.

Yeah.
And I'm sure the KKK members also say it's their "personal choice".

Why don't you think it's bigotry Jaaaman?
You are excluding a candidate based SOLELY on his sexual orientation.

If somebody excluded a candidate just because he was black, would you think that was bigotry?
Yes or no.

jaaaman · 09-11-2006, 12:37 PM

And would you not exclude someone of the ilk of Larry Flynt when voting for a candidate? Give me a break.

foundit66 · 09-11-2006, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaaaman

And would you not exclude someone of the ilk of Larry Flynt when voting for a candidate? Give me a break.

I'm just calling it what it is.
You seem to define "bigotry" based on what is pleasing to you. I don't employ such a subjective definition.

If I were confronted with a candidate which was a pedophile, I would admit it was bigotry that would make me vote against him.

alias · 09-11-2006, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

You talk a lot but say nothing of meaning.
BIGOTRY is a freedom in this country as well.

My point was that the people running against him were throwing BIGOTRY into the political race without having the courage to explicitly admit that they wanted people to vote against the candidate because he was gay.
Cowardice and bigotry.

The candidate stands WITH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY on the major issues. Abortion. Gun Control. Even GAY MARRIAGE.

So what "morality" does the candidate lack????

Voting against a man just because he's black is bigotry.
Voting against a man just because he's gay is bigotry.
Yes. We have the freedom to vote based on bigotry, but it is STILL BIGOTRY.

Can you address my point?
Or will you continue to attempt to side-track it?

The people have the right to vote for who they want to. They have the right to not vote for a person because that person is a homosexual. The only bigotry is in your mind.

alias · 09-11-2006, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

< taps the mic >
Is this thing on?

I EXPLICITLY said it was your right to not vote for a candidate just because he's gay.
"Voting against a man just because he's black is bigotry.
Voting against a man just because he's gay is bigotry.
Yes. We have the freedom to vote based on bigotry, but it is STILL BIGOTRY."

What is so difficult to understand about that?

My point was that it was BIGOTRY to not vote for someone JUST BECAUSE they are gay.

Yeah.
And I'm sure the KKK members also say it's their "personal choice".

Why don't you think it's bigotry Jaaaman?
You are excluding a candidate based SOLELY on his sexual orientation.

If somebody excluded a candidate just because he was black, would you think that was bigotry?
Yes or no.

You would not vote for Pat Robertson if he ran for president. Shall we call you a bigot?