I think the problem that people like the speaker have (I will admit, I haven’t watched the video, so i could be completely wrong) is that they equate gay with gay activist Leftist.

As far as the Identity Politics game goes, I consider myself a Christian first (though a poor example of one), an American, a Consitutionalist, a Italian-American Chicagoan,an Islamophobe, a guy, a gay guy, in that order

Instead, we experience a truly groundbreaking moment in conservative politics and what do we get from the MSM?

*chirp* … *chirp* … *chirp*

Seriously, it’s good that Sorba showed up and said what he said, and experienced boos from the audience. After all, it’s freedom of speech. Not freedom of speech with a guaranteed audience.

Remember the ridiculous response by the Dixie Chicks to people who didn’t agree with them in their dislike of President Bush? They acted as if disagreement with their point of view was akin to quashing their free speech right. What hubris.

Looks like Mr. Sorba, like the DChicks, got a little lesson in humbleness. Just because folks like what you do and/or generally agree with you, it doesn’t mean they’ll parrot everyone of your opinions.

But moving on to the Sorba thing because that’s what was pointed out…

Yes, people were booing Sorba before he spoke because of his past comments. So what? I want you to consider something: when someone takes to the podium to have their say and refuses to address the original question, but instead launches into attack mode – the tone is set and people are free to respond. I will also tell you that Tammy, Ann Coulter, Tom Tancredo, etc. – conservatives who have been treated poorly as guests – did not take to a stage insulting their audience! There’s a big difference between what people were responding to with Sorba as opposed to what was being done to Ann Coulter when something was thrown at her or Tancredo when he was being rudely shouted down – not because of anything he had ever said – but because the intent was to keep him from saying anything. If Sorba had taken to the stage like a professional and proceeded to answer the damn question, the audience would have listened. It only escalated because Sorba is a hothead and wanted to direct the conversation into something combative.

Trying to say this guy was being mistreated or not having his say is bullshit! He had his say! He has enough of an ego problem and is not a professional -that’s why he went to the mic with a shitty attitude and made it worse! But hey, it gave us more than enough info to see who the hell he is. This rude display BY SORBA does not have ANYTHING to do with how past conservative speakers have been treated by liberals, so I wish those comparisons would stop right now.

What I saw of Sorba’s speech on homosexuality (elsewhere) indicated that he believes in something akin to Intelligent Design theory. Since people were designed a certain way, obviously they have something wrong with them if they act contrary to that design. I don’t subscribe to that view. I consider ID to be pseudoscience anyway. It requires belief on the part of its adherents more than a pondering of evidence. I’m making no religious statement by saying this, just that if we’re going to be honest about what science can tell us, I don’t think ID is scientific. But since pseudoscience requires belief, you tend to get people who are dogmatic about it, and Sorba fits that description. It’s difficult to debate with such people. I know because I’ve tried.

It pains me that liberals used to believe in the idea that free speech means that someone is free to shout at the top of their lungs things which make your blood boil, and which you would be willing to spend a lifetime fighting against. They used to defend that principle. It used to be the Right that was accused of silencing and censoring speech. Now the Left is doing it, and it’s the Right that’s defending free speech. If the Left doesn’t believe in that principle, somebody’s got to or else we’re in real trouble.

What I noticed in the clip was an intolerance of Sorba’s speech because of his ideas. You’ll notice the booing started before he even said anything. Now come on. This is the kind of treatment that conservative speakers have gotten on college campuses. Just ask Tammy. She knows what I’m talking about.

This doesn’t mean that someone couldn’t have come up after he was done and refuted what he said about gay people, and the gay organizations that were there. He could’ve had his say, and he could’ve been criticized for what he said. I hope you can forgive me for disagreeing with you, but in my view that would’ve been the civilized way of holding him accountable for his actions.

As for the Phelps, there’s a fine line between our right of free speech and protection from harassment. I heard recently about a military family that successfully prosecuted the Phelps for trespassing (I think). I consider that a victory. There’s a difference between “stepping over the line” socially and legally, and what I’m emphasizing is we need to really pay attention to the legal line, while calling for civility, and not confusing the two.

He was upset over a gay group being invited to CPAC. His reason is that homosexuals are biological freaks unworthy of inclusion. For me, the outrage over what he said is much more serious than an insult to gays. As thierry points out, the logical extension of his biological imperative argument is that the females at CPAC should be home in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant. I don’t think it’s going too far to wonder if he also harbors opinions about genetic superiority of certain races.

Call me crazy. Maybe I’m way overstating the matter at hand. When biological determinism is served up as a rationale for political censorship, history gives us good reason to shout down the speaker. Indeed, it is our duty to do so because it is so serious.

These are the people Sorba is freaked out about:

About GOProud

Mission

GOProud represents gay conservatives and their allies. GOProud is committed to a traditional conservative agenda that emphasizes limited government, individual liberty, free markets and a confident foreign policy. GOProud promotes our traditional conservative agenda by influencing politics and policy at the federal level.

What we believe

We are Republicans and conservatives who believe in limited government, individual liberty, free markets, a strong national defense and a confident foreign policy. We believe that every individual should be equal under the law. Click here to learn about our federal legislative priorities.

What we do

GOProud advocates for federal public policy initiatives consistent with our mission. We support policies that promote the power of individuals, limit government’s reach, enable economic growth through free market principles, and strengthen America’s position in the world. We support candidates for federal office who share our priorities.