Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

NOM runs anti-Ron Paul ad

Timothy Kincaid

December 28th, 2011

While our community may be noting with discomfort the peculiar affiliations or view of a number of Ron Paul’s prominent supporters, that doesn’t mean that he is viewed favorably by those who dedicate themselves day in and day out to obsessing about Teh Ghey. It seems that Ron Paul is “a radical who would destroy traditional marriage in America.”

YouTube Preview Image

Whodathunkit? So pro-equality is Ron Paul that NOM has created an entire website for the purpose of “spotlighting Ron Paul’s unwillingness to defend marriage.”

But it seems that Ron Paul is not the only nefarious secret supporter of equality, Michele Bachmann has learned that Mitt Romney is pro-equality as well:

“Mitt Romney has defended gay marriage and even signed marriage licenses for same-sex couples and Ron Paul doesn’t believe the government should protect the institution of marriage,” Bachmann said. “I have a record of defending life, marriage and the family and I’ll protect them as president of the United States.”

But I just don’t think that Hatin’ on Teh Ghey is getting as much traction as it has in the past. There’s something about having real issues like a stagnant economy and high unemployment to make such issues seem as silly as they really are.



Eric in Oakland
December 28th, 2011 | LINK

Maybe NOM opposes Ron Paul because he doesn’t favor the Catholic church?

Rob in San Diego
December 29th, 2011 | LINK

“While our community may be noting with discomfort the peculiar affiliations or view of a number of Ron Paul’s prominent supporters,”

OK, please stop lumping us all together, I feel like I’m watching FOX or MSNBC and I’m being told what to think. Please use better vocabulary like “While some in our community…”

And then you said “There’s something about having real issues like a stagnant economy and high unemployment to make such issues seem as silly as they really are.”

Now you see what I’m talking about and why I’m voting for him. His not out to kill or destroy us, he’s trying to fix this country, and I’m afraid it needs a lot of fixing, and if that means putting my homosexual wants aside for a moment to get America back on track, than so be it, I’M PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN and I will do what is necessary to get it back up to it’s great fullness. Look, we’ve survived after 8 years of Bush and 4 years of Obama, let’s try something different and if it still doesn’t work we can go back to handing out money all over the world and bailing everyone out.

December 29th, 2011 | LINK


“While our community may be noting with discomfort the peculiar affiliations or view of a number of Ron Paul’s prominent supporters,”

I’m pretty sure the above sentence was in reference to the endorsement of Phil Kaiser, which Ron Paul was ‘touting’ before he decided to scrub his website of such an affiliation.

And while I agree that there are a lot of things that need fixing in this country, I’m not willing to set aside the fight for rights that we are 100% entitled to because ‘it’s a bad time’ to be fighting for them right now. Face it, Ron Paul, while he may have some good ideas, isn’t an ally of the LGBT community. He never has been, and he never will be. I’m not going to vote for someone that thinks I’m a little bit less than fully human. EVER.

December 29th, 2011 | LINK

Rob in San Diego, I am NOT picking a fight with you, really I am NOT. You identify yourself as being from/in California. Alright in California you do not have the right to civil marriage but you have got everything but. In your state laws all the rights of California citizenship for sexual minorites in a Domestic Partnership = civil marriage. So you speak from a position of privilege.

What about all the sexual minorities (emphasis on the word minority) who live in Texas, Mississippi, Ohio, etc. etc. ? What if all the sexual minorities in New York and DC and Massachusetts and California etc. who have equality or damned near, just abandoned the National fight and voted for candidates that will never ever grant all sexual minority citizens to have equal civil rights? What about them? Again I am NOT picking a fight with you, but please never forget that you are speaking (and voting) from a position of privilege.

“Yup, what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one?” A slightly different issue but the sentiment should be the same for all of us concerning civil rights for sexual minorities. I think.

Please re-consider, thank you.

Rob in San Diego
December 30th, 2011 | LINK

To Straightgrandmother, nor do I want to pick a fight with anyone, I just want to speak my mind as we are greatfull to have the privilege to do here in America on such forums. I do not take offense.

If marriage is to be a states rights issue then we must live in the states that accept it till the SCOTUS overturns all state laws banning it. When it was legal here in California for a few months my partner was not ready to get married to me after just divorcing his wife.

Yes we do live in a state that may get it back. We also might not get it back. At that point if marriage is really that important to me than I will recommend that we move to another state that does offer it. However I will not go to another state and get it do to the fact that my state would not recognize it.

Look, I understand that it sucks here in America that we have to fight hard for it, and that not all states or people are equal. But I prefer not to be hypocritical in my positions, I can’t have my cake and eat it to. I won’t be a hypocrite like Rick Perry, complaining about liberal, activist, legislating from the bench judges, and yet go crying to them to allow him to be on Virgina’s ballot all because he couldn’t get enough signatures turned in on time, nor a flip flopper.

Happy New Year Everyone!

January 2nd, 2012 | LINK

Ron Paul’s positions is the same as a great many libertarians: get the government out of the job of granting approvals for one’s life. Do you really want to go to Uncle Sam and beg for him to give you a piece of paper? Sure you can argue about rights and legal equality, but the government was the entity that started giving married people additional rights. The fairest thing to do is to allow everyone to apply for a state-level certificate that has whatever rights in addition that the state wants to bestow for any couple that files it. Of course, most straights will not be willing to give up the additional rights they have, and so the best we might be able to do for now, is just allow gays the same ones (by allowing them to marry). Later on we will still have to revisit the issue of why we allow governments to have so much control over our personal lives, to the point of licensing them.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.