Final Texas GOP 2014 Platform Says "Homosexuality Is a Chosen Behavior"

640px-NastRepublicanElephant.jpg
Thomas Nast
Rampaging GOP strikes again.

In month when Texas Republicans seemingly cannot stop saying dumb things about homosexuality, the party's finished 2014 platform makes it clear the state GOP isn't just ignorant about gay life -- it's willfully ignorant. They even put it in writing.

See also: Rick Perry Doubles Down on Stupid Talking About Conversion Therapy

Some of the platform's language is almost unfathomable in 2014. On top of the usual stuff -- God is mentioned 12 times, Judeo-Christian values are mentioned four times -- the new platform contains some especially contentious language about the LGBTQ community.

In a section titled "Strengthening Families, Protecting Life, and Promoting Health," the platform says the following:

"Homosexuality is a chosen behavior that is contrary to the fundamental unchanging truths that have been ordained by God in the Bible, recognized by our nation's founders, and shared by the majority of Texans."

That's it. According to Texas Republicans gay folks in our state, for whatever reason -- certainly not any sort of privilege, protection from discrimination or granting of equivalent rights -- choose to feel attraction to whomever they are attracted. Just like, Unfair Park's sure, those who drafted the platform choose to feel attraction to their opposite-sex partners.

It's an all too common refrain, but for a party that claims to support small government and people fending for themselves, the Texas GOP sure cares a whole helluva a lot about what goes on in people's bedrooms and the deity or lack of deity they choose to believe or not believe in.

2014 Republican Party of Texas Platform

My Voice Nation Help
106 comments
DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

Simple solution would be to Eliminate ALL Government Preference (discrimination) based on Marital status -- which should be unlawful anyway under Federal / State anti-discrimination laws anyway.


Stop discriminating against unmarried individuals, render NO ADVANTAGE for marriage in any Government or Social programs -- taxes, insurance, inheritance, etc.


Place the archaic institution of "marriage" back into the civil / social arena from whence it came. 





DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

BTW -- why is Baby Dolls having such a difficult time finding and hiring "employees" -- dry-prostitutes -- that they've been running a daily banner advert on the DO's www site for over a month now?





laa2005
laa2005

There's absolutely nothing anyone could say to me to convince me Into being gay... Okay, so they may not be "born gay" but I believe you're wired differently. I love many, many gay people and have no problem with how they chose to have sex (when I'm not even present). Just because you sin differently doesn't mean you don't sin.

Sotiredofitall
Sotiredofitall topcommenter

Just don't understand why is the GOP and Christianistas so threatened of gay folk? 


And don't really care about Bucky's purient research



CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum

To Bucky, whose ability to spew pseudo-academic bullshit is nearly unrivaled ... 

Your statement: "
the logical conclusion was that while there is likely a genetic component to sexual orientation, it is not a determining factor in their behavior- that it's still up to the individual to decide how they will live their lives."

The gist of your conclusion is that people don't have to act on what they feel is their sexual orientation, therefore acting on one's homosexual orientation is a choice, just as much as it is for heterosexuals. Thanks, Captain Obvious. Do you think there is any merit to the idea that self-imposed celibacy can and does result in anti-social behavior? Ask some kid-touching priests about that one.


Also, if we can agree that there is nothing immoral about homosexual sex, why would someone want to be celibate? Because you call them "deviants"? The fact that you persist in using the loaded term "deviant" tells me you have some emotional baggage on this topic because you are most likely a self-hating gay man. Where is that on the continuum?


Finally, here is the ACTUAL official position of the APA: http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.pdf


"There is no consensus among scientists 

about the exact reasons that an individual 

develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or 

lesbian orientation. Although much research 

has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, 

developmental, social, and cultural influences 

on sexual orientation, no findings have 

emerged that permit scientists to conclude 

that sexual orientation is determined by any 

particular factor or factors. Many think that 

nature and nurture both play complex roles; 

most people experience little or no sense of 

choice about their sexual orientation."

JackJett
JackJett

That is about the most insightful take on this issue I have yet to read.  I don't think I have even come across this in the gay press.  


It is an argument that has never crossed my mind and I have given this a lot of thought.  Hats off to you RTGolden.  Really.  

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

Bucky, in his own idiotic way, has brought up a good point, although it is buried in all his babbling.  If the Republicans claim is that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, then why are they advocating a 'cure' or a 'treatment' for it?  You don't treat people for choices, you punish them.  You treat people for involuntary conditions or ailments; disease, injury, deformity, etc.  You punish people for poor choices; criminals get jail time (theoretically), for instance.  As even the great everlastingphelps himself has stated on this very board: the litmus test for policy or laws such as these is; would you still support it if conditions were reversed?  If the alternative lifestyles were in the majority and were advocating ONLY recognizing homosexual marriage, and removing recognition for heterosexual marriage, would you still support the policy?  Or would you claim that this is an undue invasion of privacy, an over-reach by government into the private lives of the citizenry?

If you cannot claim that you would still support the policy under those conditions, you're nothing but a hypocrite.

Montemalone
Montemalone topcommenter

Fuck those selfish, hateful, greedy assholes.


RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

This whole debate should be shifted into another direction.  It is obvious that something as personal and contentious as marriage should not be left in the hands of the government.  Tax everyone individually, a flat percentage based on income and assets.  If two people want to merge assets and incomes under a joint name, let them incorporate.  Marriages could then be left up to the two people desiring such a thing.

The debate is a mind-numbingly stupid waste of time.  Homosexuals being married will have no effect on heterosexual marriages, any particular religious faith or even God.  Homosexuals being able to marry won't shatter heterosexual marriages. (Infidelity by one or both partners, something actually immoral, is usually the cause of that).

Since we've gone so many years and made no headway in this debate, I say just scrap it.  Remove marriage from the equation, and the State has nothing left to bitch about.

shawn4848
shawn4848

100% CORRECT...SPOT ON.....anyone's lifestyle they CHOOSE to live....IS A CHOICE....and they CHOOSE to be a homosexual...to be immoral with another man or a woman chooses to be immoral with another woman...CHOICE CHOICE CHOICE EVERY TIME...end of discussion

roo_ster
roo_ster

Unless done under duress, "Homosexuality is a chosen behavior" is accurate.  And in the case of duress, the homosexual behavior is only chosen because the alternative is worse (death, torture, whatever form the duress takes).


A person is homosexual (or heterosexual or abstinent) because they engage in that sort of behavior, not because they have may have thoughts or inclinations in that direction.  Actions count, not words and not thoughts.


Were it otherwise, we would have to address all the nutters who claim to be Napolean as "Napoléon, par la grâce de Dieu et les Constitutions de la République, Empereur des Français."  instead of "Mr. Johnson, inmate of the Texas State Lunatic Asylum."


This does assume homosexuals have agency.

fred.garvin.mp.713
fred.garvin.mp.713

What's a "Judeo-Christian" anyway?

Whatever it is, count me out. I don't need two days of rest, I hardly get anything done as it is.

JackJett
JackJett

@bvckvs I had a heck of a conversation with my rational brain tonight and we decided that we have not seen such utter passive aggressive bullshit since the dawn of gayness.

I don’t know what your trip is nor do I care what the Association of Pathetic Assholes believes.  Yet we have too many impressionable teens who are having a hard enough time coming to terms with their own sexuality in such a conservative and religious environment that the last thing they need is an extra layer of utter shit stained psycho babble coming from some self- absorbed confused individual.  And if you are in that situation and you are reading this, do not trust me, go to The Trevor Project or any number of organizations that will remind you that you are awesome the way you are and there is not a god damned thing wrong with you. 

To others who may not support the gay community, at least listen to some parents who have lost their gay kids in a tragic way because they read this sort of shit and bottle it up.  It is NOT an easy process coming out, as may be evidenced in this diatribe.  Why make it any harder just to get a point across here?  

Mr initial-man …Your verbiage makes the folks at Westboro Baptist seem somewhat rational.  And just as you have the right to spew it and others to support it, I have every right to tell you that your self induced arrogance has got the best of you and this gay man thinks your views are not only off track but that you are full of shit it must be oozing out of your tantra.     

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@bvckvs So, it would be similar to someone trying to cover their ignorance by claiming that anyone who disagrees with them is 'tantric'?

JackJett
JackJett

@Montemalone Beautiful!  Is that your own original prose or from the recent Tribute to Maya Angelou?    Either way, it brought a motherfucking tear to my eye.  

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@RTGolden1 

I agree with you for the most part, the issue of marriage linked to equality is the product of the government granting benefits and rights to those who are recognized as married. If there were ot this special treatment there wouldn't be such an uproar.

It is more than the tax consequences, or even issues of testament. I read about a gay couple in Plano who fathered 2 kids by a surrogate mother, and the State will not recognize them as fathers. Seriously, DNA tests proving fatherhood and the Judge would not allow for the fathers to be noted on the birth certificate.

It seems the institution of marriage is too intertwined into one's rights in many respects. While the idea of removing marriage from the equation may be a great idea, it is today an impractical act.

roo_ster
roo_ster

@bvckvs 

Indeed.

At this point it is not possible to show genetic causality of ANY complex human behavior. Too many factors and too many combinations possible.

bippyizod
bippyizod

@shawn4848 A quick review of comments by shawn4848 show that 88 percent of them are about buttfucking between two men.  Seriously.  And we are not talking about a few comments.  

graham57
graham57

@shawn4848 Putting your bloviations in all caps does not magically make them more compelling or plausible. It is shouting, and simply draws attention to the fact that you have basically yelled a bunch of assertions with no supporting evidence whatsoever. 

dfwheathen
dfwheathen

@shawn4848 In other words, you are attracted to both men and women but you only choose to act on your feelings towards women. That right?

Montemalone
Montemalone topcommenter

@roo_ster How many cocks did you suck before you decided not to suck any more cocks? Is that how it works? I never had to poke any stinkylips to know I had no desire whatsoever to go anywhere near stinkylips.

CandyDate
CandyDate

@bvckvs @Sotiredofitall  Kinda like talking about mentioning crazy twice in one sentence might deflect attention away from the writer when it actually brings it on? Yes, very effective. 

CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum

What you seem to be missing is that, if we agree that sexual orientation has a very complex and as yet unknown causation, and that there is nothing inherently immoral with a homosexual lifestyle, then there is no good reason for withholding civil rights for gay people. Wouldn't you agree? Or do you think that because - as you repeatedly emphasize - they are "deviants" that society has license to treat them as second-class citizens?

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@bvckvs @RTGolden1 Heroin use is a choice, as is the use of any drug. Addiction is a medical condition, not a choice.  Domestic violence is not a choice for the victim, so we treat the victim.  It is a choice for the perpetrator, and we punish them for that choice (hypothetically).

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@mavdog @RTGolden1 Of course, you're correct, and the right thing to do is to equalize marriage, across the board, for all people.  I just think it would be better to get the government out from behind our doors and curtains and back out there working on roads and bridges and delivering mail and national defense.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@fred.garvin.mp.713 

...and the wind is directed right at him, at gale-force speed.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@roo_ster 

At this point it is not possible to show genetic causality of ANY complex human behavior

bzzt, wrong answer.

Aggressiveness is highly heritable. Recent experimental work has linked individual differences in a functional polymorphism of the monoamine oxidase-A gene (MAOA) to anger-driven aggression. Other work has implicated the dorsal ACC (dACC) in cognitive-emotional control and the amygdala in emotional arousal.

http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/jocn_a_00592

science is uncovering many genetic factors with causality to behavior, including the sexual orientation of people.

JackJett
JackJett

@Myrna.Minkoff-Katz We are  so lucky to have people who never hang around gay people and despise every aspect of their life to figure these issues out for us.  And the way we know they are right is that if you question them...that makes you an ignorant ________(fill in the blank).


Now these are the same people who know what is best for women's health as well as their reproductive rights.  Even though they will never have children any more than they will ever have gay friends.   And they know as much about vagina's as they know about gay rights.


Yet they spew irrational bullshit they can't explain.  Nor can they explain why a subject that supposedly doesn't concern them.....concerns them to such a mega degree.  


So the only thing I would add to your comment is Abject ignorance from yet another one of the usual suspects.  Yet in this case now one crows about gay issues more often and louder than the Rooster.   

JackJett
JackJett

@bvckvs Dearest Dr. Bucky, My partner of 23 years and I want to thank you for taking our case under your wings and allowing us to fly again.  Through you and your ministry we now understand just how totally fucked up we are.  From our tantricity, transferance, victim mentality, anger, reacting emotionally, sexual deviant with a disorder, a "die hard" homo, hypocondriac, potential psychotic break, festering psoriasis in addition to being ignorant, stupid etc.


I would have never know these things and yet you do and have never met me.  Your ability is beyond magical and again, thank you so much and know we appreciate it.  We are both preparing to better ourselves through the power you have instilled in us.  


Again thank you Bucky,  my partner thanks you, my family thanks you, my canine thanks you as should everyone who you are gracious enough so spread your words of wisdom with.  




JackJett
JackJett

@RTGolden1 @bvckvs RT, come with us.  Drink Bucky's Kool-Aid.  We are fools if we don't accept his every word as the holy gospel.  

roo_ster
roo_ster

@mavdog @roo_ster 

And you have just shown you do not know the difference between correlation and causation.

 
Come on back when you have a rudimentary grasp of the difference.

bippyizod
bippyizod

@roo_ster @Montemalone Seems like a logical question and one that would only be hard to answer if the number is so high.  In that case you can round it up or down.  And I think the question is at what age did you decide to stop sucking dicks and go for the vagina because that is what you are saying.  Every man that says it is a choice is a man who has sucked a cock and they later decided against it.  Otherwise how would they KNOW that as a fact?  The are Cock-Sure of this choice.  Thus only gay people decided to continue with men and straights gave it up for women.  You do understand in saying it is a personal choice is a full admission that you have had to make that choice.  

JackJett
JackJett

@roo_ster @Montemalone They should be very proud of him because he knows when you can not have a rational conversation with someone who is FAR TOO interested in gay causes  and the only way to deal with this sort of obsessed person is to get in the gutter and speak on their terms.....Yeah they are probably real proud.


It is always so obvious to me when people start throwing your own bullshit back at you, you suddenly become holier than thou.   So if you can't back up your bullshit then at least be a man and take a portion of what you dish out.  

CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum

@bvckvs Bucky, you do realize you're espousing "separate but equal" policy, right? However,  your premise is flawed because you are conflating civil unions with marriage. While the rights conferred under both may be virtually identical, the significance in many people's minds, of the term "marriage" carries with it great cultural significance. Can a couple who have a civil union say, "I'm married," for example? No. It's a fine distinction, but one that conservatives have fought tooth and nail to maintain, merely so they can say that those in a civil union aren't married in the traditional sense.


And, no, your comparison to emancipation is completely wrong. Emancipation rendered black people free, just as white people were. Your parallel would work if emancipation had declared all black people in the South as similar to free, but used a different word, like "un-enslaved."


You can claim your use of "deviant" is purely based on logic, but you can't deny the negative connotations of the word. Sensitivity training might be in order.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@bvckvs "Gay marriage isn't about civil rights."


Same types of bigoted people used to utter the same obscenities about denying Negroes the right to marry White women, not too long ago in the U$A's ugly history.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@bvckvs @JackJett


When did you choose to be a heterosexual, homophobic bigot?


How does other peoples' different choices affect your tenuous grasp on heterosexuality?


Will too much homosexuality in society cause you to become a homosexual?



CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum

Let me ask you this: is it a civil rights issue when there is a minority that wants to be treated the same way as the majority by having their union recognized with the same legal terms? Further, is it conceivable that by using different terms to delineate same sex from heterosexual marriages, the stage is being set for further discrimination in terms of benefits?

bippyizod
bippyizod

@bvckvs @DonkeyHotay @JackJett You know that digging that bullshit hole deeper and deeper is not going to help you out.  Plus you are building wall that will make it harder for people to help you come out.  It is never too late. 

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@bvckvs "why rational people dismiss gay rights activists as irrelevant."


False, twice, in a single phrase.


So why are you so afraid of homosexuals that you feel the need to hate and marginalize them?



CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum

@bvckvs Am I to understand that you don't believe there are differences in the benefits conferred upon civil unions vs. marriages? I believe you are mistaken, namely when it comes to federal benefits. Also, please don't play word games with me. I used adjectives to describe two types of scenarios - "same sex" and "hetero." That means nothing other than I recognize that there are two scenarios -- one in which the spouses' genders are either the same or different. That does not mean, however, that they should be treated differently in terms of rights and benefits.

CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum

@bvckvs Bucky, you simply say things that aren't true. Above, you say "there's no such thing as civil unions," which I addressed directly. And when I pointed out that your stated premise -- that civil unions (which you don't think actually exist) are treated exactly the same way as marriage -- is false, you do exactly what you accuse me of -- ignore it.


Are you as delusional as you portray yourself? If not, you must admit 1. civil unions do, in fact, exist in this country, and 2. they are not treated the same way marriages are, namely in terms of federal benefits.


As far as the GOP appearing "less loony," I submit that the fact Americans' support for same-sex marriage continues to grow says otherwise. On average, the party platform that appears "less loony" would tend to actually gain support, not lose it, as the Republicans are doing.

bippyizod
bippyizod

@bvckvs @CogitoErgoSum When a closet case homophobe gets their bigot train to the end of the track and have no place to go, they simply cut it of with a line in the sand.  I reject your submission tran slates to the fact he sees his own hypocrisy spinning in circles. 

Just a note to bvc, Cogito and Hotay clearly know their shit so perhaps you should think twice about getting into THIS argument with THESE two.  These guys/gals are our of your paygrade.  Even with the six weeks of Richland Hills Education. 

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...