Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

1. It is an interesting article....a fantasy from a pagan leftist. It sounds like it is a good theory but like all theories only time will tell if society will side with the 'fear' of the hateful establishment or if they will move toward the ‘intellectual, spiritual, sexual’ peace loving pagan. The article suggests that the pagan will prevail because the GOD loving religious conservative is stuck in a strategy dominated only by fear and hatred. This strategy will only fail. So why bother to fight a doomed strategy? If the light of the Godless will ultimately win out over the evil empire of religious hatred anyway then do we have do anything in the mean time?

   Posted by: Matthew Schooler | Jan 27, 2006 12:42:12 PM

   
   

2. I love Mark Morford, who for those that don't know him is straight. He has a follow-up to his Brokeback column (responding to some homophobic emails) wherein he reveals the "Gay Agenda," and he compares that to the Christian, straight agenda. The following quote is priceless:

   Much can be learned from this shocking revelation. Much we can glean from the gay agenda's "true" motivations -- most notably in how it contrasts with the famed and beloved Christian neoconservative heterosexual agenda, the one that instructs that you please keep your mouth shut and blindly believe in the same bitter God as everyone else, and by the way please bury your true sexuality and get married at 23 and pop out six kids and become quickly and quietly miserable and gain 30 pounds and stop having sex entirely and get divorced at 50 and wake up just in time to watch yourself die.

   http://sfgate.com/columnists/morford/
   

   Posted by: Kyle Childress | Jan 27, 2006 12:47:07 PM

   
   

3. Matthew -

   A small but significant point: regardless of whether Morford is or is not advocating passivity on the part of progressives (although I, personally, don't think he is), and regardless of whether or not Morford is a pagan (I have no idea), pagans are not "Godless." Pagans are polytheistic.

   Posted by: JOE 2 | Jan 27, 2006 1:21:07 PM

   
   

4. Priceless. It's great to see true believers, thinkers and truth seekers fighting with the pen. Although the article does raise an interesting point, the basic principle that good and evil will always have a place. When one person opens their eyes to a better life, another will close theirs. Will acceptance exist on a greater scale? I honestly do not know. I am uncertain in that as I am in our future. Pharmaceutical companies will never cure a disease, as there is more money in treatment. Wars will always exist, as man will profit from another’s downfall. The more "doom and gloom" networks like CNN take over the media, the more I fear for our future. Man will always want, for their own individual agenda, and will group together from those commonalities like a scab to a wound. The key here is not in acceptance, but educating American's to open their minds to life outside of this bubble. The longer we believe we are superior the harder it will be to change. The more we are content in being stagnant, the more arduous the task. We as a nation need to think globally, and by understanding that other people and cultures exist outside their own and accepting that whole-heartedly is the first step to acceptance...

   Posted by: Cj | Jan 27, 2006 1:28:44 PM

   
   

5. Joe you are right - I usually refer to all non believers of the Christian God as pagans but they should actually be broken down into two categories - pagan (which indeed are religious) and then atheist. Morford obviously falls into the second category. My bad.

   Posted by: Matthew Schooler | Jan 27, 2006 1:35:11 PM

   
   

6. What is up with you constantly towing the party line and never giving credit to intellectual, political, and religious diversity within the gay community??!! Are we all supposed to be liberal, Democratic, and anti-orthodox (whether Jew, Christian or Muslim)?

   Posted by: W | Jan 27, 2006 1:55:55 PM

   
   

7. WAre we all supposed to be liberal, Democratic, and anti-orthodox...." Well, yes, now that you mention it, W, [how apt a monicker], yes, we are—if we are not anti-civil liberties, anti-democratic [small D], and do not follow the herd over the cliff, into the sea, and into stoning or burning at the stake those who aren't like "us." Please read [reread?] both of Morford's pieces. If you still identify more with the Alitoettes, perhaps you should enroll in one of the "ex-gay" programs, but be sure and ask for the Platinum Electro Shock to the Testicles package.

   Posted by: Leland | Jan 27, 2006 2:18:35 PM

   
   

8. >>Just what do Samuel Alito and Brokeback Mountain have in common?

   1. They have both been maligned and praised in the press, lately.

   2. They both represent strongly felt values of the American people.

   3. They will both have a permanent place in our history.

   The beauty of America? We don't all have to agree, in order to get along.

   Posted by: Jay Croce | Jan 27, 2006 2:21:03 PM

   
   

9. I've never understood the literal knee-jerk reaction of gay conservatives to jump to the defense of their brethren on the right who seek to permanently put them in a status of second-class citizen.

   You can be gay and conservative, but the minute you start speaking for those misguided religionists who to persecute us into non-existence, you have lost all respect from me (and my friends, and their friends, and so on, and so on).

   Posted by: Tread | Jan 27, 2006 2:51:44 PM

   
   

10. Did you check out the Wash Blade column today (1/27 on their site)that stated that founder Wm Waybourne retired? It's a scam; he was in fact FIRED by the investment firm, Avalon, that now owns the vast majority of Windows Media (I don't even think they are a gay company). Wm and co-founder Chris Crain sold a large majority of Windows to the firm over the years, and apparently lost control. Crain was ordered back to DC from one of his many overseas trips, and is likly the next one to go. If they did sell off the company to straight investors, they certainly deserve to be fired.

    Posted by: Mike G | Jan 27, 2006 3:42:57 PM

    
    

11. "What the debate is about — is whether it's OK to be gay or lesbian in the state. People don't choose this. People don't chose who they love. The heart chooses."

    Lame I know, but I actually got teary-eyed reading that. I've been very emotional lately and this news, although it doesn't technically affect me (I don't like in WA) still does in a way.

    Posted by: matt f. | Jan 27, 2006 3:45:54 PM

    
    

12. *live, not like. Whoops. Heh.

    Posted by: matt f. | Jan 27, 2006 3:47:05 PM

    
    

13. I sent Morford a comment after reading his complete comments in this morning's Chronicle.

    It's a great article, and it caused me to smile.

    I know that's not much, but when one considers how few pleasures one gets from the MSM, it's worth letting authors know they've made an impact.

    I urge reading the whole article:
    http://sfgate.com/columnists/morford/

    Posted by: DSH | Jan 27, 2006 4:11:57 PM

    
    

14. Alito—"strongly felt values of the America people"? Excuse fucking me, but, as Chip Arndt said at the close of Amazing Race 4--we're Americans, too. It grinds my last nerve to repeatedly hear people repeat this "can't we all just get along" fantasy when the most central part of our existences are being attacked by the Americans who share his values. It's all there in the combinationn of Morford's two essays. We just want to run OUR lives, and THEY just want to run their lives AND ours.

    Posted by: Leland | Jan 27, 2006 4:21:54 PM

    
    

15. Hear hear, Leland.

    We're as American as the Republicans are. I bet my apple pie is better than theirs, frankly.

    As long as Supreme Court nominees refuse to answer questions regarding their opinions on controversial issues, then the confirmation process will remain a joke. I won't say that Alito is destined to be "Scalia II: The Reawakening", since he simply didn't provide enough answers to the salient questions to give much of an impression. But I will say that his insistent refusal to answer questions related to abortion, executive powers, church and state separation, GLBT equality, etc, don't spell "trustworthy" for me. It doesn't bode well.

    If his past rulings are any indication, then yes he should be Borked.

    Posted by: Brian | Jan 27, 2006 4:49:54 PM

    
    

16. WOW,

    Whatta great debate! I may even have agreed with MATTHEW about a couple of things. My GAWD!

    Speaking of God, I believe pagans and atheists were specified here, but no mention was made of AGNOSTICS. Something I was for awhile--agnostic Catholic =).

    I too sent MORFORD a note after reading his article the first time. The PASSION that OOZES from his PEN--an inCREdible writer!

    FUNNY, I thought MORFORD was STRAIGHT after my first read of his article, but GAY after my second.

    How odd.

    Posted by: Gilli | Jan 27, 2006 5:25:38 PM

    
    

17. Morford will confuse you, especially when he starts talking about the fine qualities of dildos and sex toys that he has no shame in discussing. Nonetheless, he says he's straight, and given what he says and how he says it, I believe him. In other words, he seems perfectly comfortable with himself, so if he were gay, he would likely not blink an eye in admitting it.

    Posted by: Kyle Childress | Jan 27, 2006 6:05:26 PM

    
    

18. Gilli

    We might agree? Wow! That is not a bad thing at all...I too was an agnostic for a few years.

    Posted by: Matthew Schooler | Jan 27, 2006 6:09:30 PM

    
    

19. I've never understood the literal knee-jerk reaction of gay liberals to jump to the defense of their brethren on the left who seek to permanently put them in a status of second-class citizen.

    You can be gay and liberal, but the minute you start speaking for those misguided democrats who seek to persecute everyone who disagrees with them, you have lost all respect from me (and my friends, and their friends, and so on, and so on).

    Posted by: Jay Croce | Jan 27, 2006 7:50:54 PM

    
    

20. I agree with Morford, change does bring fear. Most of these comments prove that the gay left is all about reacting with fear to anything that doesn't neatly conform to their hysterical vision of a world cleaved in two, with pure, loving left-liberal homos on one side and evil religious 'neo-cons' (has any ideological moniker ever been so widely misused as this one?) on the other.

    When you adhere so blindly to a vision of the world that assigns good and evil arbitrarily based on nothing more than religious or political affiliation, good and evil become detached from the reality of their outcomes. great evil has been done historically by the entire range of the political spectrum, to deny the possibility that evil can exist on your side of the equation, or that amazing good can spring up on the other side occassionally, is to flirt with a danger far greater than the paranoid fantasies posited here.
    

    Posted by: Aatom | Jan 30, 2006 12:34:51 PM

    
    

21. Aatom,

    As much as you condemn blanket statements, look at how you've just made one YOURSELF. This makes YOU just as bad as the LEFTIES you self-righteously pooh-pooh.

    Posted by: Gilli | Jan 31, 2006 12:12:15 AM

    
    

22. yes, well, the "I know you are, but what am I?" argument doesn't usually hold up very well, Gilli.

    Posted by: Aatom | Jan 31, 2006 11:23:05 AM

    
    

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: