An extended excerpt from an important post by Linda Harvey:
The “shoot-themselves-in-the-foot” party is stalking the irresistible “youth voter,” or what purportedly has been learned about this elusive prototype. The College Republican National Committee commissioned surveys of young adults, 18 to 29, and issued a report which advises the party to radically alter not just its media tactics and grassroots outreach to youth, but the Party’s current message on some issues.
[R]ather than pledge to educate the shallow, the immature, the indoctrinated, and the distracted, the Winston Group researchers recommend the GOP back off from the truth. Winning elections is the all-important goal, forgetting conveniently the incentive to win isto implement a particular policy agenda. If you have no fixed “policy orientation,” who cares?
Which brings us to homosexuality. Predictably, the researchers found that younger voters are more inclined to see nothing wrong with this behavior, dutifully regurgitating the relentless, inaccurate messaging of “gay” advocates and the liberal media. Opposing same sex marriage is a “deal breaker” for one out of four younger voters, who said they’d never pull the lever for such candidates. So what do the “experts” advise?
On the issue of same sex so-called marriage, the report recommends, “…the party ought to promote the diversity of thought within its ranks and make clear that we welcome healthy debate on the policy topic at hand. We should also strongly oppose the use of anti-gay rhetoric.”
“Healthy” debate does not include lies. And by suggesting the GOP avoid “anti-gay rhetoric,” the report ironically uses pro-“gay” rhetoric. “Anti-gay” is a pejorative that neatly accomplishes several deceptive rhetorical goals at once. It assumes an unsubstantiated inborn identity of “gay,” which has been the campaign of homosexual activists for forty years; and the phrase adopts the “anti” label for those trying to put forward a positive, pro-family, sexual integrity message that embraces male/female natural sexuality while rejecting perversion.
Ignoring all the evidenceto swallow the whopper that there’s nothing wrong with homosexual behavior, candidates are to be counseled to capitulate to the militant “gay” lobby. Does this apply even if religious principle is involved? Even if these deviant behaviors are packaged and sold to vulnerable children without their parents’ consent (as in Massachusetts and California)? Even if this behavior will never be marriage in reality, no matter how many people in surveys say otherwise?
What if… I’m just dreaming now… a strategic political objective of the supposed “conservative” party would be choosing instead to launch a massive education effort to younger voters about why they can support timeless values, why it’s not “hate” to support natural man/woman marriage, and why they are being far more compassionate to support defunding Planned Parenthood, than to keep letting that group get away with, well… murder?