OKC state rep uncovers gay agenda

[Chuck Bao]

According to the OKGazette, Oklahoma state Rep. Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City told members of the John Birch Society earlier this week that she had found the “gay agenda”.

I guess this is as good as some of the other conspiracy theories and, at least, this one is based on a book named after a musical adaptation of an Oscar Wilde play.

But seriously, is this for realz?

Still interesting read about the JBS.

http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/3394/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA#kern


As conspiracy theories abound in Oklahoma, John Birch Society, others rally
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
By Ben Fenwick

The crowd in the banquet hall at the Character Conference Center, housed in an old Holiday Inn in downtown Oklahoma City, sat packed, rapt with attention as Oklahoma state Rep. Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City, told them she’d found it: the gay agenda.

Kern said the agenda is in a book called “After the Ball,” by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, a book named after a musical adaptation of Oscar Wilde’s “Lady Windermere’s Fan.” She recounted the bullet points of a secret public relations campaign to have gays accepted by the general public — step by step — with the final goal being not just acceptance of gays by heterosexuals, but eventual triumph of homosexuality as a superior lifestyle.

Among the items in the agenda, Kern said, was getting the public to view homosexuality as a matter of taste, like a preference for strawberry or vanilla ice cream. She quoted the text: “The masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself.”

“You know,” Kern said. “I’ve done a lot of reading on this. I wish I could describe to you their behavior. I will not because I would be redder than this suit. It’s their behavior that we oppose.

“This theme of equality and freedom is the approach that the homosexuals are using today — totally perverting the true intention of what our Constitution meant. … The homosexuals get it — it’s a struggle between our religious freedoms and their right to do what they want to do.”

Around the banquet hall, Kern’s speech met with applause and calls of “Amen!” from a crowd stoked in a crucible of conspiracy and intrigue. For the whole day, the “Clouds Over America” conference, run and organized by the John Birch Society, held lecture after lecture Jan. 23 and 24 dedicated to explaining their various conspiracy-laden tenets. Here’s one — that a godless secret society, the Illuminati, has been battling against the founding of the United States of America and decent citizens to live in peaceful, worshipful freedom.

[Frozen Sooner]

Yeah, she does something nutty ranting about the gays every couple of years and gets in the national papers. Apparently her constituents love her though, 'cause she wins reelection.

[KC//CRIMSON]

Good grief, what is this woman's problem?

Did some chick try to go down on her back in high school or something?

[King Crimson]

well, she's done a lot of reading about it.

[JohnnyMack]

Sure makes me proud to be an Okie.

[OUMallen]

She's humiliating, and I don't think her constituents even use their brain cells when voting for her. She's an intolerant, hatemongering bigot.

[Frozen Sooner]

If that's who they want representing them, though, who are we to argue?

[OklahomaTuba]

she is just pointing out the obvious here. Every group has a political agenda, including gays, and i really don't see how that is "hate mongering".

[Chuck Bao]

Sadly, I have to agree with Froze.

In Thailand, the whole clash between the yellow shirts and red shirts essentially boils down to whether citizens should be entrusted with the right to elect their leaders.

I have repeatedly pointed out here that this issue is being brought forward not only in Thailand but throughout the world. There is a very clear move against democracy and freedom.

The JBS may not be right, but I like some of the things that they are saying, or I should say railing against.

[King Crimson]

If that's who they want representing them, though, who are we to argue?

100% true.

[Chuck Bao]

she is just pointing out the obvious here. Every group has a political agenda, including gays, and i really don't see how that is "hate mongering".

Of course, there is an agenda and that agenda is freedom. I bet that that is pretty universal.

So, you don't get the contradiction in her statement implying that religious freedom for her means denying rights to others?


“This theme of equality and freedom is the approach that the homosexuals are using today — totally perverting the true intention of what our Constitution meant. … The homosexuals get it — it’s a struggle between our religious freedoms and their right to do what they want to do.”

[OklahomaTuba]

So, you don't get the contradiction in her statement implying that religious freedom for her means denying rights to others?

What rights don't they have? They have all the same rights as everyone else does.

(Besides trying to re-define marriage I mean, as I think they ought to have civil unions)

[Chuck Bao]

What rights don't they have? They have all the same rights as everyone else does.

How about living together with your life partner with the legal benefits and protections afforded to married couples?

How about not having your state representative denigrate you by saying that she wishes that she could describe your relationship with your partner in terms of very specific sex acts, but she is too embarrassed. Okay, that is not a right, but it is hatemongering.

[Chuck Bao]

What rights don't they have? They have all the same rights as everyone else does.

(Besides trying to re-define marriage I mean, as I think they ought to have civil unions)

So if you are in favor of civil unions, we are in agreement. The current problem with civil unions is that they aren't recognized in states outside where they are issued. If the states would do that like marriage licenses, I would be a happy camper.

[SicEmBaylor]

Sadly, I have to agree with Froze.

In Thailand, the whole clash between the yellow shirts and red shirts essentially boils down to whether citizens should be entrusted with the right to elect their leaders.

I have repeatedly pointed out here that this issue is being brought forward not only in Thailand but throughout the world. There is a very clear move against democracy and freedom.

The JBS may not be right, but I like some of the things that they are saying, or I should say railing against.

I joined the John Birch Society late last year. They are an excellent group of people, and I have found myself to be in near total agreement with their ideology. There are a few crazies in any group, but they are definitely one of the few who truly believe in maximising individual liberty.

[SicEmBaylor]

So if you are in favor of civil unions, we are in agreement. The current problem with civil unions is that they aren't recognized in states outside where they are issued. If the states would do that like marriage licenses, I would be a happy camper.

States shouldn't be expected to accept any marriage or union that is contrary to their own values and laws. It's called the "public policy exemption" to the full faith and credit clause of the constitution.

[JohnnyMack]

Religion hijacked marriage a long, long time ago.

[LosAngelesSooner]

I joined the John Birch Society late last year. They are an excellent group of people, and I have found myself to be in near total agreement with their ideology. There are a few crazies in any group, but they are definitely one of the few who truly believe in maximising individual liberty.

Interesting.

Now could you please explain how that statement jibes with denying homosexuals equal treatment and equal status under the law?

[Chuck Bao]

States shouldn't be expected to accept any marriage or union that is contrary to their own values and laws. It's called the "public policy exemption" to the full faith and credit clause of the constitution.

Now see, I respect that. I have already shown my colors for democracy.

I have traveled around the world and met quite a few folks. I really think that we all just want to get along with our lives and not be bothered too much with politics and political interference. Yeah, some of the religious types jump up and down and claim to have some special hotline to God Almighty and that gives them the right tell other people what to do.

Going back to your point, I trust that people in each state will decide for freedom. Free choice is not the end of the world, unless you are fixiated by girls aged 18-24 visiting bars. It may not happen overnight. But, by God there is an agenda: live and let live.

[JohnnyMack]

I joined the John Birch Society late last year. They are an excellent group of people, and I have found myself to be in near total agreement with their ideology. There are a few crazies in any group, but they are definitely one of the few who truly believe in maximising individual liberty.

Didn't they oppose the civil rights movement?

[NYC Poke]

Didn't they oppose the civil rights movement?


Yeah, and the EU, NAFTA, CAFTA, and accused Eisenhower of being a communist.

Join the Federalist Society, SicEm. It's a conservative group with greater intellectual underpinnings.

[SicEmBaylor]

Yeah, and the EU, NAFTA, CAFTA, and accused Eisenhower of being a communist.

Join the Federalist Society, SicEm. It's a conservative group with greater intellectual underpinnings.

I have a couple of issues with the Federalist Society (for example, I haven't made up my mind about the unitary executive). In any case, it's impossible because it's a law school organization and I'm not in law school.

[SicEmBaylor]

Didn't they oppose the civil rights movement?

Lots of people opposed the civil rights act for reasons that had nothing to do with color (though many did). Barry Goldwater was anything but a racist, and he opposed the legislation purely based on states' rights.

[bluedogok]

Yeah, she does something nutty ranting about the gays every couple of years and gets in the national papers. Apparently her constituents love her though, 'cause she wins reelection.

If that's who they want representing them, though, who are we to argue?
Well, for my parents and my sister who live in her district, she doesn't represent their views. They are Republicans but don't buy into her line of crap but there are enough fools in that area that vote who do.

She replaced Bill Graves (http://bubbaworld.com/graves.html), who was as bad as her in social issues, even bought his house in the district. She shows up at the neighborhood meeting saying "she does this and that" for them when everyone knows she has only one agenda.

[JohnnyMack]

Too bad states' right DON'T trump all other rights.

[soonerhubs]

I'm all for giving everyone equal rights, and yes that includes homosexuals and their right to have civil unions recognized everywhere. However, the equal rights argument should apply to everything including unfair privileges given to minorities.

Can someone explain why because I was born Caucasian I do not have the same rights and opportunities as minorities regarding education and employment? It wasn't my choice. I was born that way, so to me, I consider this unequal, unfair, and thus some like Tom Hanks or Samuel L Jackson may even call it unAmerican.

[Frozen Sooner]

Well, for my parents and my sister who live in her district, she doesn't represent their views. They are Republicans but don't buy into her line of crap but there are enough fools in that area that vote who do.

She replaced Bill Graves (http://bubbaworld.com/graves.html), who was as bad as her in social issues, even bought his house in the district. She shows up at the neighborhood meeting saying "she does this and that" for them when everyone knows she has only one agenda.

Wasn't trying to argue that she was representative of the WHOLE district, just the majority of those who bother to vote.

Don Young certainly doesn't represent my views on a lot of things, but the majority of voters up here feel differently. :shrug: I just vote against the guy whenever I get a chance.

[Frozen Sooner]

I'm all for giving everyone equal rights, and yes that includes homosexuals and their right to have civil unions recognized everywhere. However, the equal rights argument should apply to everything including unfair privileges given to minorities.

Can someone explain why because I was born Caucasian I do not have the same rights and opportunities as minorities regarding education and employment? It wasn't my choice. I was born that way, so to me, I consider this unequal, unfair, and thus some like Tom Hanks or Samuel L Jackson may even call it unAmerican.

Considering the percentages of caucasians enrolled in universities vs. most minority groups and the disparity in wages between caucasians and most minority groups, it's a pretty hard argument to make that caucasians are wholesale being denied opportunity in either field.

[soonerhubs]

Considering the percentages of caucasians enrolled in universities vs. most minority groups and the disparity in wages between caucasians and most minority groups, it's a pretty hard argument to make that caucasians are wholesale being denied opportunity in either field.

I was denied many scholarships other folks were given based on race. So the adage must apply:
Injustice for One is Injustice for All

[Mjcpr]

What is And Justice for All?

[Tulsa_Fireman]

A Metallica album.

[bluedogok]

Wasn't trying to argue that she was representative of the WHOLE district, just the majority of those who bother to vote.

Don Young certainly doesn't represent my views on a lot of things, but the majority of voters up here feel differently. :shrug: I just vote against the guy whenever I get a chance.
Oh I didn't feel that you weren't implying that, just "voicing" some of my dad's frustration over the windbag.

Anyone remember Paul Blair, the former OSU lineman and was with the Chicago Bears for a little time? He evidently inherited his father's church and has become one of her allies. He has a group called Reclaim Oklahoma (http://www.reclaimoklahoma.org/) promoting the same agenda as Kern.

[Half a Hundred]

It doesn't take that much logic to realize that Kern's dream of an oppressive homoeroticracy isn't going to happen, simply because most people, even in SF and NYC, like having sex with people of the opposite sex.

It's like she reflexively says anything that goes against common sense.

[AlbqSooner]

She is probably a fine representative of the majority of her constituents.

[Half a Hundred]

She is probably a fine representative of the majority of her constituents.

http://repsallykern.com/html/about_sally.php

After that cursory glance, a couple of possibilities come to mind:

1. Kern really doesn't believe most of the crap she's spewing. She's a complete attention whore who realizes going George Wallace on one of the most contentious issues of the day will bring her all the publicity she could ever want or need.

2. Kern really isn't the one behind these thoughts; her husband is. For whatever reason, the guy is terrified by homosexuals. However, Baptist ministers speaking out against gays is cliche at best, annoying at worst, but a state legislator on the other hand...

Finally, and more importantly, if there were an Olevet Church somewhere, I'd certainly be a member. Communion would be that much more interesting...

[GrapevineSooner]

Kern said the agenda is in a book called “After the Ball,” by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, a book named after a musical adaptation of Oscar Wilde’s “Lady Windermere’s Fan.” She recounted the bullet points of a secret public relations campaign to have gays accepted by the general public — step by step — with the final goal being not just acceptance of gays by heterosexuals, but eventual triumph of homosexuality as a superior lifestyle.It makes perfect sense!!!

You see, Olivia Wilde plays 13 on House. And Olivia may or may not be related to Oscar!!

[GrapevineSooner]

It doesn't take that much logic to realize that Kern's dream of an oppressive homoeroticracy isn't going to happen, simply because most people, even in SF and NYC, like having sex with people of the opposite sex.

It's like she reflexively says anything that goes against common sense.

She's pandering to voters in her district.

I submit that this issue ranks about 100th or lower nationally on the list of issues that the average American cares about.

[bluedogok]

She (or more accurately her husband) is a Christian version of a Mullah......

[Chuck Bao]

So, her husband is helping her keep up with the gay literary world?

[Chuck Bao]

I bet there aren't even any dirty pictures in this book.

http://img5.ranchoweb.com/images/kanunu/aftertheball.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/After-Ball-America-Conquer-Hatred/dp/0452264987/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234031021&sr=1-1

[Half a Hundred]

She's pandering to voters in her district.

I submit that this issue ranks about 100th or lower nationally on the list of issues that the average American cares about.

That's what's confusing to me... northwest Oklahoma City doesn't exactly have the demographics that would suggest such a hard-line attitude on the subject.

Something else is going on here, even if it is just a very loud minority that bothers to actually vote in the state elections

[NYC Poke]

I bet there aren't even any dirty pictures in this book.

http://img5.ranchoweb.com/images/kanunu/aftertheball.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/After-Ball-America-Conquer-Hatred/dp/0452264987/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234031021&sr=1-1


Heh. He said "ball."

[NYC Poke]

I have a couple of issues with the Federalist Society (for example, I haven't made up my mind about the unitary executive). In any case, it's impossible because it's a law school organization and I'm not in law school.


I hadn't realized they'd gotten behind the unitary executive theory, which certainly doesn't jibe with my reading of the Federalist Papers. I personally became disillusioned with the Federalist Society when it seemed to be replacing it's libertarian principles with purely partisan Republican dogma. I still think you can do better than the Birchers.