[Vision2020] Re: David Horowitz [A gift to Ed] Was: A sad day in IDAHO

[Scott Dredge]

Here is another good article.  This one is from the conservative Weekly Standard.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=12191&R=EC642EDAE

Hat-tip goes to Dale.  In addition to continuously posting about homosexuality and same sex marriage on his blog, Dale spoke about these topics at a Carmel High School in California in 1999.

-Scott

Ed <ecooper at turbonet.com> wrote:       Chas,
  
 I'm glad to see you're reading material  from quality web sites. Horowitz is not my hero, but a great visionary and  thinker. He makes some valid points in the article; but, in my estimation,   he fails to stress the importance of our Constitutionally-grounded individual  rights in a society that is increasingly demanding group rights. 
  
 True conservatives advocate equal rights  for all; liberals want special privileges for every diversity or enclave in the  States. In my estimation, he (Horowitz) was a bit over the line in his  dismissal of the KKK analogy. The KKK is somebody--even though their  intentions/actions are racially-driven. However, one could categorize both these  groups' agendas as harmful, detrimental to society. (Note, I don't advocate  violence towards any person or any group--or kicking someone in the groin for  that matter. )
  
 In sum, the article was well-written, but  failed to mention his true feelings about the homosexual agenda..
  
 FWIW, my idol (if I had one) would be  Lawrence Auster...another Jewish American.. (Horowitz and Feder, also great  conservative Jewish intellects.) Course, I'm a racist, sexist, homophobe if  you listen to some people..
  
 Thanks for sharing the article, Chas.   I enjoyed it...
  
 --Ed
    ----- Original Message ----- 
   From:    Chasuk 
   To: Ed 
   Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com 
   Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 3:25    PM
   Subject: David Horowitz [A gift to Ed]    Was: A sad day in IDAHO
   

On 5/17/06, Ed <ecooper at turbonet.com>    wrote:

> Next, a well-written article, by a Jewish intellect, many    will find
> interesting

> HOMOSEXUALS HAVE EASTER BUNNY IN    THEIR SIGHTS

Thank you, Ed.  In the spirit of reciprocity, I'll    share an article
written by your hero, David Horowitz.  Actually, I    think everyone
should read this article.  I found it informative, and    Horowitz is
definitely not my hero.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=7910

Pride    Before a Fall

In four Gospels - including the Sermon on the Mount    -  Jesus neglected
to mention the subject of homosexuality. But that    hasn't stopped a
handful of self-appointed leaders of the so-called    Religious Right
from deciding that it is an issue worth the presidency of    the United
States. In what the Washington Times described as a "stormy    session"
last week, the Rev. Lou Sheldon, Paul Weyrich, Gary Bauer and    eight
other "social conservatives" read the riot act to RNC chairman    Marc
Racicot for meeting with the "Human Rights Campaign," a    group
promoting legal protections for homosexuals. This indiscretion,    they
said, "could put Bush's entire re-election campaign in    jeopardy."

According to the Times' report by Ralph Hallow, the RNC    chairman
defended himself by saying, "You people don't want me to meet    with
other folks, but I meet with anybody and everybody." To this    Gary
Bauer retorted, "That can't be true because you surely would not    meet
with the leaders of the Ku Klux Klan."

Nice analogy Gary. Way    to love thy neighbor.

This demand to quarantine a political enemy might    have had more
credibility if the target � the Campaign for Human Rights --    were
busily burning crosses on social conservatives' lawns. But    they
aren't. Moreover, the fact that it is, after all, crosses the Ku    Klux
Klan burns, might suggest a little more humility on the part    of
Christians addressing these issues. Just before the launching of    the
2000 presidential campaign, George Bush himself was asked    about
similarly mean-spirited Republican attacks. His response was    that
politicians like him weren't elected to pontificate about    other
people's morals and that his own faith admonished him to take the    beam
out of his own eye before obsessing over the mote in someone    else's.

The real issue here is tolerance of differences in a    pluralistic
society. Tolerance is different from approval, but it is    also
different from stigmatizing and shunning those with whom we    disagree.

I say this as someone who is well aware that Christians are    themselves
a persecuted community in liberal America, and as one who has    stood up
for the rights of Christians like Paul Weyrich and Gary Bauer to    have
their views, even when I have not agreed with some of their    agendas.
Not long ago, I went out on a public limb to defend Paul Weyrich    when
he was under attack by the Washington Post and other    predictable
sources for a remark he had made that was (reasonably)    construed as
anti-Semitic. I defended Weyrich because I have known him to    be a
decent man without malice towards Jews and I did not want to see    him
condemned for a careless remark. I defended him in order to    protest
the way in which we have become a less tolerant and more    mean-spirited
culture than we were.

I have this to say to Paul: A    delegation to the chairman of the RNC to
demand that he have no dialogue    with the members of an organization
for human rights is itself intolerant,    and serves neither your ends
nor ours. You told Racicot, "if the perception    is out there that the
party has accepted the homosexual agenda, the leaders    of the
pro-family community will be unable to help turn out the    pro-family
voters. It won't matter what we say; people will leave in    droves."

This is disingenuous, since you are a community leader and    share the
attitude you describe. In other words, what you are really saying    is
that if the mere perception is that the Republican Party has    accepted
the "homosexual agenda," you will tell your followers to defect    with
the disastrous consequences that may follow. As a fellow    conservative,
I do not understand how in good conscience you can do this.    Are you
prepared to have President Howard Dean or President John Kerry    preside
over our nation's security? Do you think a liberal in the White    House
is going to advance the agendas of social conservatives? What can    you
be thinking?

In the second place, the very term "homosexual    agenda," is an
expression of intolerance as well. Since when do all    homosexuals think
alike? In fact, thirty percent of the gay population    voted Republican
in the last presidential election. This is a greater    percentage than
blacks, Hispanics or Jews. Were these homosexuals simply    deluded into
thinking that George Bush shared their agendas? Or do they    perhaps
have agendas that are as complex, diverse and separable from    their
sexuality as women, gun owners or Christians, for that    matter?

In your confusion on these matters, you have fallen into the    trap set
for you by your enemies on the left. It is the left that insists    its
radical agendas are the agendas of blacks and women and gays. Are    you
ready to make this concession -- that the left speaks for    these
groups, for minorities and "the oppressed?" Isn't it the heart of    the
conservative argument that liberalism (or, as I would call    it,
leftism) is bad doctrine for all humanity, not just white    Christian
males?

If the President's party � or conservatism itself    -- is to prevail in
the political wars, it must address the concerns of all    Americans and
seek to win their hearts and minds. It is conservative values    that
forge our community and create our coalition, and neither you    nor
anyone else has - or should have - a monopoly in determining    what
those values are._____________________________________________________
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
�����������������������������������������������������

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060517/8882df5c/attachment.htm