NOM BLOG

Will Hillary's Pakistani Gay Rights Meeting Sponsor More Terrorism?

 

Pakistan is not happy about a U.S. embassy-sponsored gay rights meeting, calling it second only to a military drone strike as an attack on Pakistan.

We do not concur, but we worry about our embassy's priorities. Is this worth breaking an alliance or spurring more terrorism? Is Pakistan our business on this issue?

America less than 20 years ago decriminalized homosexuality. Can we not allow cultures to evolve?

Via The Blaze/AP:

A group of conservative Islamic political and religious officials has condemned a meeting by the U.S. Embassy supporting gay rights in Pakistan as “cultural terrorism” against the country.

The group, which included the head of Pakistan’s largest Islamic party, Jamaat-e-Islami, claimed the meeting — the first of its kind held by the embassy — was the second most dangerous attack by the U.S. against Pakistan, following missiles fired from unmanned drones.

13 Comments

  1. John Noe
    Posted July 10, 2011 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

    This is absoutely stupid and ridiculous on the part ofthe US Embassy. Hillary just showed that she does not deserve to be the Secretary of State.
    We rely on cooperation from nations like Pakistan to help us in our struggle against terrorism. Actions like these spur non cooperation and hostility towards us and it puts more undeserving stress on our military.
    This is horrible that this administration along with the homosexuals would put our own American service people at risk just to advance their agenda.

  2. Barb
    Posted July 10, 2011 at 9:34 pm | Permalink

    The current administration is a toxic mixture of stupidity and psychopathology.

    2012, please come soon.

  3. j
    Posted July 10, 2011 at 9:58 pm | Permalink

    I would be inclined to concur with the reasoning expressed in the blog post, and John Noe's comment. However, the condition of homosexuals in Pakistan should not be overlooked. I would have to imagine any undeserving stress visited upon our military troops from this issue is more than justified by the hope, dignity, and legal advocacy graced on this horribly oppressed population in Pakistan.

    America has the right and obligation to appropriately express moral views based on our values (just as much as the Catholic church)

    In light of Barb's comment, I would counter that this advocacy by the current Administration makes me proud to be an American.

  4. Daughter of Eve
    Posted July 10, 2011 at 10:03 pm | Permalink

    We should not cater to identity politics, whether in our own country or in another. It is un-American, and undermines true justice. But the liberal elites are all about political correctness, at the expense of justice and common sense.

  5. Randy E King
    Posted July 10, 2011 at 10:48 pm | Permalink

    "America has the right and obligation to appropriately express moral views based on our values (just as much as the Catholic church) "

    So your interpretation of the seperation of church and state applies to everybodies value system that does not agree with yours?

    Nothing says hypocrite quite like being a progressive Democrate same-sex enthusiast.

  6. Posted July 11, 2011 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

    "America less than 20 years ago decriminalized homosexuality."

    This is revisionist history. It was only in the Lawrence V. Texas decision that anti-sodomy laws created to exclusively target gay men were rendered unenforceable in 2003. In fact, many states still have these laws on the books. They just can't enforce them because of the SCOTUS ruling in LvT.

  7. Marty
    Posted July 11, 2011 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

    RJ, 2003 is not "less than 20 years ago"?

    Math much sir?

  8. Jackson
    Posted July 11, 2011 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

    "Christianist/pseudo-Catholicism" is the epitome of identity politics. This is just further proof that NOM isn't only interested in marriage -- nope, it's about stigmatizing gays at every turn.

  9. Emily K
    Posted July 11, 2011 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

    I'm confused. What does any of this have to do with protecting marriage here in the US?

  10. Combatvet
    Posted July 12, 2011 at 8:37 am | Permalink

    Marty some if the things u say make me sad for you. You come across as a self hating gay that "chose" to be heterosexual and obviously doesn't know what love is. Research adult attachment and it's physiology to understand why a gay can't love a lesbian... And why you can't love a woman despite te lie you chose.

  11. Posted July 12, 2011 at 12:42 pm | Permalink

    Marty,

    No need to be wise. 2003 is 8 years ago. The accurate statement would be "The United States decriminalized homosexuality less than 8 years ago" - if referring to the universal abandon of anti-sodomy laws always targeted at gay men.

  12. Daughter of Eve
    Posted July 12, 2011 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

    Christians don't view their belief to be immutable, but rather, a choice. They don't vote for legislation on the premise that they should be granted any rights because "they were born this way." but such an argument is the hallmark of homosexual identity politics, and the cause for promoting inequality, disguised as "tolerance."

    Man/woman marriage makes no demands on sexual orientation of consenting adult participants. SSM is a solution looking for a problem, where none exists.

  13. homer
    Posted July 12, 2011 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

    You really, really hate us, don't you?