Same-sex marriage as a “conservative” goal?

Sure, says Andrew Sullivan, who approvingly quotes David Frum, who now agrees with Sullivan. All “principled conservatives,” says Sullivan, support same-sex marriage.

Right. Let’s not forget that both were prominent chickenhawk war boosters for the disastrous invasion of Iraq. Frum slammed REAL conservatives who questioned W’s lunatic crusade as “unpatriotic,” and Sullivan called for nuking Iraq, convinced that Saddam was behind the anthrax scares. In fact, Sullivan even advised fellow homosexuals to support regime change in Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of “gay liberation.”

“Principled conservatives,” indeed.

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil

8 thoughts on “Same-sex marriage as a “conservative” goal?

  1. James Kabala

    Has anyone here ever read Frum’s book on the Seventies, How We Got Here? It’s actually not that bad a book if you can ignore the author’s identity. Most relevantly for our purposes, it’s clear every time Frum talks about homosexuality how viscerally disgusted he is by it – clearly he would prefer for that to be swept under the rug now (or maybe not, since the book is still in print).

  2. Feltan

    HB2,

    The mere fact that gay marriage is being argued in front of the Supreme Court is a sure sign the Republic is in jeopardy. The world is turned upside down. The thought that holy matrimony and wedding bells should include two guys drilling each other in the ass would seem a sick joke if it wasn’t so serious.

    Unfortunately, I have no faith the Supremes will rule correctly.

    Regards,
    Feltan

  3. Chris Hewlett

    If this “queer marriage” debate doesn’t make someone believe in God I don’t know what will. There obviously is a higher power which has been directing humans from the beginning bcause we certainly cannot manage our own affairs. Furthermore, the supreme unmitigated selfishness and adolescence of the queer population is a sight to behold. Tear down everything of any meaning in order to have your deviant sexual practices sanctioned by some godless oligarchy. All at the same time with the realization that you are free to engage in your deviant sexual practices at any time anyway. Amazing.

  4. HarrisonBergeron2 Post author

    James Kabala,

    Interesting. In the Sullivan post, Frum is quoted as having sworn to sic more vice squad enforcers on homosexual agitators should same-sex marriage gain traction.

    Was Frum sincere when he claimed to be disgusted by buggery? Let’s not forget that as a card-carrying Neocon, Frum believes in the use of the “noble lie” to manipulate the masses.

  5. HarrisonBergeron2 Post author

    Feltan,

    Upside-down, indeed! And as you say, we’d be fools to trust the black-robed deities to look out for us.

    If anything is going to be done, we’re going to have to do it.

  6. HarrisonBergeron2 Post author

    Chris Hewlett,

    “unmitigated selfishness and adolescence of the queer population”

    That’s about as compact and useful of a definition of homosexuality as I’ve ever seen.

    Sadly, we’re now supposed to accommodate these people and regard their perversion as a sacred right.

    And progressives snicker when we paleocons express concern about the sick society we find ourselves in.

  7. Matt Weber

    Huntsman also thinks gay marriage is conservative, in a TAC article. TAC is also the only place that would consider Andrew Sullivan a conservative.

  8. IanH

    TAC is a joke, and I look forward to it’s eventual demise. I used to go just for Daniel Larison, but he’s gotten far to repetitive and anal-retentive for my liking.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>