Comments (18) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   Sisyphos said, 5 months ago

   Radical Meadow Party; Wiseacre? Is there a half-hidden pun lurking?

2. 

   wndrwrthg said, 5 months ago

   “Meadow Party” in 2012!

3. 

   ejcapulet said, 5 months ago

   Wow, a person with a literal mind! He’s got my vote!

4. 

   Dry said, 5 months ago

   Now that’s funny!

5. 

   Coffee-Turtle said, 5 months ago

   LOL! Trying to get a straight and direct answer from any politician is much like this anyway. :-D

6. 

   Kerovan said, 5 months ago

   Now[b] there’s[/b] a politician I can vote for. Somehow I missed this one the first time it was shown. I thought Limekiller only appeared in about an half dozen issues the first week or so this strip was published. That was a real pity since I liked him. Blondie was another favorite of mine that had a very limited run.

7. 

   nighthawks said, 5 months ago

   looks like he’s leaning to the right…
   which means he’s all for it, as long as we have tax cuts

8. 

   striper77 said, 5 months ago

   ResearchGirl,
   From yesterday.
   Here is the real gay agenda, you may need some researching on your end.

   The term “the gay agenda” was first used in public discourse in 1992 when the Family Research Council published a video series called The Gay Agenda as part of a pack of materials campaigning on homosexual issues and the “hidden gay agenda”.[2] In the same year the Oregon Citizens Alliance used this video as part of their campaign for Ballot Measure 9 to amend the Oregon Constitution to prevent what the OCA called special rights for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals.[3] Paul Cameron — co-founder of the Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality in Lincoln, later renamed the Family Research Institute — appeared in the video, wherein he asserted that 75 percent of gay men regularly ingest feces and that 70-78 percent have had a sexually transmitted disease.[4] The Gay Agenda was followed by three other video publications; The Gay Agenda in Public Education (1993), The Gay Agenda: March on Washington (1993) and a feature follow-up Stonewall: 25 Years of Deception (1994). All these videos contain interviews with anti-gay experts, and the series is widely available through Christian right organizations.[5]

   The similar phrase “homosexual agenda” appears in many forums from political commentary to talk radio, and even once in 2003 by the U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote in his dissent in the landmark case Lawrence v. Texas that the

   “Today’s opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.”[6][7]

   In 2005, James Dobson, director of Focus on the Family, a Christian non-profit organization based in the United States, and a Christian social conservative commentator in American popular media, described the homosexual agenda as follows:

   Those goals include universal acceptance of the gay lifestyle, discrediting of scriptures that condemn homosexuality, muzzling of the clergy and Christian media, granting of special privileges and rights in the law, overturning laws prohibiting pedophilia, indoctrinating children and future generations through public education, and securing all the legal benefits of marriage for any two or more people who claim to have homosexual tendencies.[8]

   The term is sometimes used satirically by those who might normally be offended by a serious reference to this term.[9][10]

   edit] After the Ball
   In 2003 Alan Sears and Craig Osten, president and vice-president of the Alliance Defense Fund, an American conservative Christian non-profit organization, offered another characterization:

   It is an agenda that they basically set in the late 1980s, in a book called After the Ball[11], where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior — in a decade-long time frame…. They admit it privately, but they will not say that publicly. In their private publications, homosexual activists make it very clear that there is an agenda. The six-point agenda that they laid out in 1989 was explicit: Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible… Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers… Give homosexual protectors a just cause… Make gays look good… Make the victimizers look bad… Get funds from corporate America.[1]

   After the Ball[11] is a book published in 1989 by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. It argues that after the gay liberation phase of the ’70s and ’80s, gay rights groups should adopt more professional public relations techniques to convey their message. It was published by Doubleday and was generally available.

   According to a Christian Broadcasting Network article by Paul Strand, Sears and Osten argue that After the Ball follows from “a 1988 summit of gay leaders in Warrenton, Virginia, who came together to agree on the agenda” and that “the two men [Kirk and Madsen] proposed using tactics on ‘straight’ America that are remarkably similar to the brainwashing methods of Mao Tse-Tung’s Communist Chinese – mixed with Madison Avenue’s most persuasive selling techniques.”[12]

   The article goes on to claim that films such as Brokeback Mountain are part of this “well-planned propaganda campaign”.

   edit] Objection
   Groups such as the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), an American non-profit organization state that their major goal is to end discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations and to achieve equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons. These groups describe the term as a “rhetorical invention of anti-gay extremists seeking to create a climate of fear by portraying the pursuit of civil rights for LGBT people as sinister”.[13] Some members of the LGBT community consider their political goals to be too diverse to be grouped together into a single agenda.[14]

   [edit] Michael Swift essay
   Some commentators have cited a satirical article by Michael Swift which appeared in the Gay Community News in February 1987 as evidence of a more radical “Gay Agenda.” Originally titled “Gay Revolutionary”, the article describes a scenario in which homosexual men dominate American society and suppress all things heterosexual. The article was reprinted in Congressional Record without an opening disclaimer in which the author makes clear that is satirical.

9. 

   jrbj said, 5 months ago

   Sounds like another version of hope and change to me. Burn me once that’s your fault. Burn me twice that’s my fault.

10. 

    Melissa Tempke said, 5 months ago

    What in the Sam Hill Tarnation was THAT all about?!

11. 

    ResearchGirl said, 5 months ago

    Striper, just because the Religious Right, and even Justice Scalia, says something, doesn’t make it true. The “gay agenda” and the “straight agenda” are the same - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.*

    And that’s all I’m going to say on the subject.

    *Unless you’re a Stan Freiberg fan, then it’s the “purfuit of happineff.”

12. 

    jackofstories said, 5 months ago

    God bless you ResearchGirl, for the common sense AND the Freberg quote.

13. 

    GJ_Jehosaphat said, 5 months ago

    Great Jumping Jehosaphat - Stripper77 went off on a rant (again). All that righteous rhetoric (anti-gay and/or anti-choice) was/is used as extremist fund-raising fodder - “made up” by the folks who rely on hate and fear to fill their coffers. Must be getting ready for the next election year cycle.

14. 

    tobybartels said, 5 months ago

    
    

    What in the Sam Hill Tarnation was THAT all about?!

    
    

    That was Striper showing us that ‘e knows how to cut and paste from Wikipedia.

    Very intelligent! Good boy! Have a biscuit! Next time include the footnotes.

15. 

    4deerinmyyard said, 5 months ago

    It is transparently obvious that everything in the above rant, far from being a history of the gay anything, is rather a history of the hysterical and paranoid campaign against anything gay.

    Whenever anyone is that desperate to control somebody else’s sexuality (given that everyone involved is a consenting adult), you gotta wonder what kink they’re working from.

16. 

    Owlsly Whistlepig said, 5 months ago

    striper77…you talk funny….

17. 

    Al said, 5 months ago

    It’s a real pity that most people don’t have the disposition of some of the gay people I have known. there would certainly be less ranting and raving and more love. I get very tired of the rhetoric.

18. 

    Shades78 said, 5 months ago

    Glad to see this strip. I had it hanging over my desk for years.