From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: The NRA, homophobia, weapons rights, and conflicting values...
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:18:48 GMT
Organization: Twilight Zone

In article <1innuhINN7n1@flash.pax.tpa.com.au> anon.526@pax.tpa.com.au writes:
>
>It appears that the the homophobia question comes to a stopping point.
>My bets are that it's there in the NRA and it's taking it's toll, and
>my main reason for thinking so is admittedly circumstantial:  

	

>One, the NRA, while exteremely sensitive of its image, seems unconcerned that 
>it appears right-wing to most gays (and most other people) on the basis of
>which Congressmen it funds

	In cases such as this, the NRA, and any other organization in similar
	circumsances, will always find themselves in a catch-22.  How easy would
	it be for the NRA to find candidates to back that pleased all people?
	This is simple impossible.  Also ask yourself "how effectively would 
	the interests of the NRA membership be served?"  If NRA chooses to
	not back candidates that are anti-gay, they have just lost perhaps a
	significant bit of influence.

	And this can be extended in any direction you care to take it.  What if
	a candidate is anti-abortion?  Then the so-called "pro life" humans
	will be pissed off.  If they embrace homosexuals, then they alienate
	the Christian fundamentalist contingent.  And so on and so forth it
	goe without end.

	The NRA exists for a purpose, and in order to fulfil that purpose, the
	directorship must choose between conflicting qualities in anything they
	do, politically speaking.  They have to  weigh the relative merits 
	between backing a candidate that is pro this or anti that against what
	they stand for in terms of second amendment rights.  This is, as I am
	sure you will agree, not the easiest thing to do and often the choices
	are not pleseant, but must be made nonetheless.

	Just because they back Joe Scumbag for the Senate who has made some
	disparaging comments against Homos or abortion Rights activists, it
	does not necessarily follow that any gove member or director is
	necessarily in agreement with Mr. Scumbag's opinions on these matters.
	
	In the extreme cases, such as Mr. Scumbag favors lynching niggerz for
	kicks on Friday night of microwaving a couple of Jews for laughs, I
	think it (or at least hope) that it would be clear that the NRA would 
	not back such a person, even if their views on the second amendment
	were perfectly in line.  

	As I said, in some respects it is a no-win situation.  You will always
	be offending someone by backing this person or that.  This is one of the
	realities of politics, sad to say, I suppose.  On the other hand, gay
	people (and all others for that matter) should have the intelligence
	and the willingness to realize that political conflict makes for
	strange bedfellows at times and that just because NRA (or whomever)
	backs a certain person for office, that it does not mean that they agree
	fully with all of the candidates views.  The backing ought to be
	looked at in the context of the backer.  Ask yourself "why are they 
	backing this guy?" and "does this indicate anything beyond the narrow
	category of interest in question?" before passing your judgements.

>
>While no one else has presented any substantive evidence to the
>contrary, the majority feeling here is that the NRA is on trial and is
>innocent of homophobia until proven guilty.  Ok, I'm convinced.
>The NRA has no image problem with its members and sympathizers.

	Well, I cannot say that the NRA does not have an image problem.  I think
	it has one, very certainly.  In fact I might even a=gree that they have 
	the image of being homophobic, but this is not through any fault of
	theirs, as far as I can see.  I have never seen or hears anything,
	either official or otherwise that has indicated to me that the NRA is
	officially against homosexuals.  Indeed I think they probably are not.
	The problem has come from the press, who has been on a rampage against
	them for several decades.  They go out of their way to paint the 
	typical NRA member as some inbred, tobacco chewing, right-wing,
	screaming-believer fundamentalist Christian, foaming at the mouth
	lunatic that buggers his children and the neighbors cat.  This image
	tends to have homophobia as an integral component, and so there is your
	image problem, in a nutshell.

	I've no doubt that you have anti-gay persons in the NRA, but SO WHAT?
	As long as the official posture does not step over that line and
	homos are not treated differently from the rest, I would not worry about
	whether or not some folks are homophobes.  

	Besides, if ~10% of the population really *is* gay, then I would find
	it hard to believe that there would be much less than that proportion
	in the NRA membership, which means around 300K people.  I've known
	quite a few gay folk over the years and they ranged from fairy Mary
	flower child to super rugged mucho macho men and everything in between,
	my point being that I am sure there are plenty of gay folks in the NRA.
	Are they openly gay?  I cannot say, but if not that would not surprise
	me... most homos are still in the closet to all but their personal
	circle of family and friends.  The world is still not so kind for them
	in many (most?) cases.  I would not cast the NRA in a light any worse
	than any other typical organization on this point, at least not until
	you get some clear and unmistakable evidence that they are OFFICIALLY
	homophobic.
>
>Anyway, since I'm out of evidence, circumstantial or otherwise,
>I have nothing more to add for the moment.

	Cool.  If you DO find something I'm sure folks would be interested
	in knowing.  An organixation such as NRA, that extolls the virtues
	of freedom and liberty would be hard pressed to justify any position
	that discriminated against homos based on their sexual orientation.
	Even though I am not gay and I personally find nothing attractive
	about the lifestyle, I would be very displeased with any organization
	that I was a member of, if they were to take such an odious posture.
>

	-Andy V.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns