2012 Election | Discrimination | News

BigGayDeal.com

GOP Candidate Gary Johnson Blasts "Offensive" Anti-Gay Pledge

GaryJohnson Iowa-based conservative group The Family Leader last week asked Republican presidential candidates to sign a document that pledges opposition to marriage equality, infidelity and Sharia law.

It's an absolutely unnecessary and offensive covenant, yet at least two GOP presidential hopefuls, Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum, have already signed onto the vow, which also claims black children were better off in 1860, slave days, and that homosexuality is a choice.

But Gary Johnson, a libertarian Republican candidate, refuses to follow suit, and yesterday described the document as "offensive to the principles of liberty and freedom on which this country was founded."

"The Republican Party cannot be sidetracked into discussing these morally judgmental issues," said Johnson, a former New Mexico governor who supports marijuana legalization and civil unions.

Johnson continued, "While the Family Leader pledge covers just about every other so-called virtue they can think of, the one that is conspicuously missing is tolerance. In one concise document, they manage to condemn gays, single parents, single individuals, divorcees, Muslims, gays in the military, unmarried couples, women who choose to have abortions, and everyone else who doesn’t fit in a Norman Rockwell painting."

The governor also insists, "This type of rhetoric is what gives Republicans a bad name." And he's right.

Read all of Johnson's comments, AFTER THE JUMP...

From the candidate's website:

Government should not be involved in the bedrooms of consenting adults. I have always been a strong advocate of liberty and freedom from unnecessary government intervention into our lives. The freedoms that our forefathers fought for in this country are sacred and must be preserved. The Republican Party cannot be sidetracked into discussing these morally judgmental issues — such a discussion is simply wrongheaded. We need to maintain our position as the party of efficient government management and the watchdogs of the “public’s pocket book”.


“This ‘pledge’ is nothing short of a promise to discriminate against everyone who makes a personal choice that doesn’t fit into a particular definition of ‘virtue’.


While the Family Leader pledge covers just about every other so-called virtue they can think of, the one that is conspicuously missing is tolerance. In one concise document, they manage to condemn gays, single parents, single individuals, divorcees, Muslims, gays in the military, unmarried couples, women who choose to have abortions, and everyone else who doesn’t fit in a Norman Rockwell painting.


The Republican Party cannot afford to have a Presidential candidate who condones intolerance, bigotry and the denial of liberty to the citizens of this country. If we nominate such a candidate, we will never capture the White House in 2012. If candidates who sign this pledge somehow think they are scoring some points with some core constituency of the Republican Party, they are doing so at the peril of writing off the vast majority of Americans who want no part of this ‘pledge’ and its offensive language.


Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Sadly this guy doesn't have a chance. :( He was pretty funny on Wait Wait Don't Tell me though.

    Posted by: Matthew | Jul 10, 2011 9:38:00 AM


  2. A raindrop's chance in hell of being elected, but I'm glad he stood up to this.

    Posted by: Gregoire | Jul 10, 2011 10:04:46 AM


  3. I find the opposition to Sharia puzzling, given the Christianist version popularized by some in the GOP.

    Posted by: Dickster | Jul 10, 2011 10:06:57 AM


  4. Maybe they don't appreciate the competition, Dickster.

    Posted by: Leonard | Jul 10, 2011 10:10:16 AM


  5. where is the rest of the majority of the GOP taking a similar stand....deafening..isn't it....cowards

    Posted by: chris | Jul 10, 2011 10:27:12 AM


  6. The Republicans sold their soul a long time ago when Reagan opened the Big Tent and Falwell slithered inside. Their wedge issues have now turned into a tombstone.

    Posted by: Plainotm | Jul 10, 2011 11:02:38 AM


  7. If Ron Paul was worth his salt, he would be the one lambasting Bachmann and her parade of clowns, but he doesn't. Odd that Johnson only supports civil unions in a party that allegedly supports same-sex marriage but doesn't campaign for it at the federal level. All of that nonsense about not having government getting involved in marriage is just a red herring to avoid declaring full support for marriage equality in every state with federal recognition. Government will never be out of the business of marriage as long as it provides 1138 rights at the federal level and hundreds of others at the state level, as well as issuing marriage licenses.

    Posted by: Robert | Jul 10, 2011 11:04:45 AM


  8. yes, also heard him on NPR - this is what a Republican should be - maybe they'd get more respect

    Posted by: tundra | Jul 10, 2011 11:06:33 AM


  9. "yes, also heard him on NPR - this is what a Republican should be - maybe they'd get more respect."

    Yeah, I agree with Tundra: The GOP needs to kick out ALL extremists. It's sad to see how far it's wandered from the original precepts of the party. Mr. Lincoln would NEVER recognize his own party!

    Too bad they have allowed what is occurring in the GOP to continue this long. Whatever happened to moderation?


    Posted by: CAfurrball | Jul 10, 2011 11:39:53 AM


  10. I have lived in New Mexico all my life. Gov. Richardson did more for gay rights then any governor of the state of New Mexico. Gov. Johnson refused to endorse a hate crimes law because he felt every crime was a hate crime. Johnson is clearly much more progressive then our current Gov. Susana La Tejana.

    Posted by: Cihua | Jul 10, 2011 1:14:33 PM


  11. Glad at least 1 republican knows best to stand up to the establishment of the party ... bigotry is not an american value, but these conservatives insist on injecting it into our politics.

    Posted by: Real | Jul 10, 2011 1:16:51 PM


  12. Johnson's support for civil unions shouldn't be seen as 'only,' Robert. With his consistent Libertarian lean, he'd prefer government endorsement of civil unions for everyone, with marriage being a religious rite only. He sees civil unions as the ultimate for any couple. And, yes, Ron Paul should be saying and doing the same thing.

    Posted by: Brian | Jul 10, 2011 1:17:34 PM


  13. Moderation was marginalized after the Republican part was taken over by the Evangelicals in the 80's, and reinforced when they started crawling up the Tea Party's ass last year.

    I would be nice to see more like this guy on the right side of the spectrum, but their voices will perpetually be drown out by the disciples of Bachmann/Palin.

    Posted by: Rich | Jul 10, 2011 1:23:46 PM


  14. @Cihua (or anyone really)

    If you knew that the person speaking on the subject wasn't a homophobe, wasn't a racist, wasn't a misogynist and they told you that they thought all crime was the act of cruelty and hate...would you still disagree with them? Isn't it only when you think that there is underlying reasons for their hesitance that their logic becomes "illogical" to you?

    Women are protected under hate crimes laws in many states, but I still don't understand why the person who beats me over the person who beats a white male is MORE hateful.

    Criminals are criminals are criminals.

    This isn't like a discrimination policy where minorities are denied employment or housing. A criminal act is random, the act of hate in general. A dude who robs a white dude doesn't like the guy he's robbing.

    I'm rather ambivalent on this issue because no one has made a really good case for me as to why I should hop on this type of legislation.

    For example, the 300 lb woman is probably equally sensitive about her weight as a person of color is about the N-word, and yet there are no fines for calling someone "fatty" "Fatass", "whale" etc.

    I'm seriously in desire of an explanation of the logic so I can inform my own opinion.

    Posted by: Rin | Jul 10, 2011 1:28:50 PM


  15. I have yet to see anyone called fatass and then physically attacked but I personally have been called faggot and then attacked

    Posted by: Grover Underwood | Jul 10, 2011 4:38:42 PM


  16. America has lost God's blessings and Gary Johnson is still sleeping.

    He wants the supports of the about 3% abnormal homosexuals in America and is challenging God - intentionally offending Him.

    Doesn't he know that South Africa, the first country in the world that legalised gay "marriage" is plagued with the highest number of AIDS sufferers? God will judge directly if men legalise sin.

    Gary Johnson & Obama are wrong about liberty & freedom. According to the declaration of Independence, "Life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" are unalienable rights endowed by our CREATOR.
    Obviuosly the CREATOR does not allow governments to violate His natural and moral laws.

    Bachmann 2012

    Posted by: Reuel | Jul 10, 2011 5:46:30 PM


  17. Actually Reuel The Netherlands was the first country in the world to legalize Gay marriage. By the time South Africa got around to it, it was already legal in Belgium, Spain, Canada and Massachusetts. The vast majority of AIDS cases in South Africa are heterosexuals.
    Like so many you mistake the endowed by our creator to mean the Christian God, it does not. Furthermore are Gays people not also accorded these same unalienable rights. Anyway the United States is governed by the constitution (which makes no mention of God or a creator) not by the Declaration of Independence.

    Posted by: unreligious | Jul 10, 2011 6:28:32 PM


  18. Grover,

    ask some women who have been raped if there were names called out before they were raped. I'm sure they will tell you that they were.

    You're missing my point though in the question.

    From the perspective of the criminal mind...do you really think that the sorts of people who rob banks, rape people, steal from others after physically assaulting them are happy, nice, decent people? Or are they hateful creatures who have no sense of empathy for others?

    All crimes that hurt someone else could be construed as hate crimes.

    Its that punishment after the fact thing that I just don't see working. The death penalty is not a deterrent to murder, and hate crimes laws won't deter hate crimes. Punishing people for buying and taking drugs doesn't do anything either. Law enforcement penalties do not stop people from doing anything at all. I could steal something today. Maybe I'll get punished, but the law didn't prevent me from doing it.

    Now, if someone spent the time to convince me why I shouldn't do it that would do more good to prevent it than punishing after the fact.

    If you curb demand, if you change people's hearts you will do more good than saying: the punishment is stricter for this than if you do this or that. All that does is create a larger divide among supporters that might help you.

    Instead of pumping money into enforcement, why not reward people for good behavior, promote tolerance in the schools, put money out there in a positive way?

    I guess I just want to understand why I should support Hate Crime legislation from a philosophical (not emotional) standpoint. I change my opinion all the time. I just want to know why I should because right now it just feels like the type of people who commit any violent crime are...hateful.

    I say this as a minority supposedly protected by these laws. I don't feel any safer for them. They seem like a political placation to me. Ooooh, look I love minorities. I voted for the (propaganda shout) Hate Crimes Legislation.

    Okay, and?

    Politicians always pull stunts like this instead of being proactive with real change. Obama could have as Commander and Chief repealed DADT his first day in office. He didn't. He just coached from the sidelines. All the people promoting the Hate Crimes Laws could be out there in their communities having Town Halls, talking about equality, voting for it in terms of GLBT marriage, etc. gay workplace rights.

    I don't know...maybe I'm too cyncial.

    Posted by: Rin | Jul 10, 2011 6:28:52 PM


  19. @Reuel
    Ah, yes: critical thinking as taught by good ol' Liberty U and other such institutions of higher learning.

    Canada, which shamelessy flouted God's Immutable Law in 2005 has an HIV infection rate of 0.30%. That's less than one third of one percent, just in case your math skills are as good as your critical thinking skills.

    On the other hand, Uganda is moving in the opposite direction from Canada on all issues to do with Teh Gehz, and its HIV infection rate is 5.40%.

    Glory!

    Posted by: agcons | Jul 10, 2011 6:40:06 PM


  20. I like it when Repubs drop the party line, and express who they are. being a republican has come to mean a senseless parroting of party line, like robots. Cool when someone in the repub party actually considers issues. This guy is more of a maverick than palin et al.
    @reuel-wtf? don't you have a christian broadcasting program to listen too, or donations to make to the ugandan christian death squad? bye bye.

    Posted by: kodiak | Jul 10, 2011 7:26:37 PM


  21. where are lcr and goproud when all these expressions of hate and bigotry are being spewed by the repuks. do they really think they can change these people? no honest gay could support what the repuks have become. this is a political party that has to away like the no nothings.

    Posted by: walter | Jul 10, 2011 11:09:34 PM


  22. On the hate crimes issue I would like to say as a gay man I am against the hate crimes legislation. Let me give you an example. Say I am on the street holding my other half's hand and someone yells queer their is no crime done. But if he beats me that is a crime and he should go to jail not an extra 10 years because he beat me or any minority. That extra 10 years he only going to hate me more with this law. This law only breeds hate. I don't need the gay hating cops to protect me I have a 2nd amendment right to protect myself if my life is in threat in this county and my state were I live it's constitution say the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed or questioned. With the hate crime law now in place what next you say some anti government statement
    and you will be arrested for a hate crime. It is a scary slope we are going down in this country! I rather rely on the bill of right that protects all then have the government protect me as a gay man!

    Posted by: matt schutter | Sep 21, 2011 6:32:16 AM


  23. I don't like him, but I completely agree with what he's saying, and I am a very far right Republican when it comes to some things. This is truly unconstitutional and it's based in moral judgement. It's a waste of time and money, and who cares? It's not hurting anybody! If it hurts you, then you don't have to believe in it! I can't stand the Religious Right...they give Republicans..true Republicans a bad name.

    However, they have a right to believe in what they believe. That's what a true Republican is. You see, it's not equality AND fairness for all. It's equal opportunities for all, but ability and talent are first priority. That's exactly what Democrat's increasingly terrible problem. There is no "fairness" in politics. It leads to welfare, spending, government run programs, and basically everything that falls under Obama's plan. Can we get rid of him please?

    Posted by: Lauren Thomas | Sep 25, 2011 8:06:00 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «6 Atlanta Cops Dismissed For Gay Bar Raid« «