President Bush’s administration has done something to cater to the homosexual political lobby that even his pathetic, pandering predecessor never contemplated.
The New York Times reports the Agriculture Department is advertising for a “gay and lesbian program specialist” who would help improve working conditions for the agency’s homosexual employees.
Even homosexual activists seemed stunned by the move – acclaiming it as the first time an administration had sought to hire someone to handle homosexual issues in the federal workplace.
“It’s a big deal,” said E. Julian Potter, President Clinton’s liaison to “the gay and lesbian community.”
“It takes an enormous amount of time to affect this kind of change within an administration” – whatever that means.
The job of this as yet-unnamed professional homosexual advocate will be to deal with barriers to recruitment, hiring and career advancement for people who prefer sexual partners of the same gender.
The job pays between $74,697 and $97,108 – if you’re interested.
The department is simultaneously recruiting for “program specialists” to serve other employee constituencies as well – namely blacks, Indians, Asian-Americans, Hispanics and women. Heterosexual white men? I suppose you will have to fend for yourselves.
Now, I’ve got to tell you this column is not going to make me popular at the next Log Cabin Club meeting nor at future gatherings of the North American Man-Boy Love Association.
So-called “breakthroughs” like this in the Bush administration make me physically sick to my stomach. It’s what you would expect from the perverted Clinton administration. But when the Bush administration puts its stamp of approval on such policies, they have really gone mainstream. There may be no turning back.
It’s one more big step in the direction of creating affirmative action for people based on their sexual proclivities – nothing more, nothing less.
If homosexuals warrant such specialized kid-glove handling by their federal employers, why not adulterers? Why not transvestites? Why not transsexuals? Why not those inclined toward bigamy? Or bestiality? Or pedophilia? Where does such madness end?
The answer to such questions, of course, is: As soon as those constituencies gain enough clout to demand it. That’s the way things work in America today. There is no right and wrong. There is no difference between a condition called race and sexual preference. There is no Constitution limiting the government’s power and decision-making authority.
It’s all just a question of how loud certain people can shout.
It’s time somebody speaks up and says it that plainly. You know where this is going.
Certainly if the Agriculture Department – a thoroughly unnecessary and wasteful federal agency – needs such an advocate, every other department and agency needs one, too. That’s even more dollars down the drain. But, more importantly, there’s a principle at stake.
It is blatantly discriminatory for the government to show favoritism toward one class of people over another. And that is just what is happening here. Everybody has their advocate pushing recruitment, hiring, promotions, etc. – except the heterosexual white men.
This is affirmative action gone mad. And affirmative action of any kind is madness enough.
It’s way past time in America that we got back to the idea that we’re all individuals – and that our rights are individual rights. We don’t have group rights. Group rights by definition lead to victimization of individuals as well as to other less privileged groups. Group rights lead only one place – to the gulags and gas chambers.
And homosexual group rights are the silliest of all. They are based not on a person’s unchangeable characteristic, i.e. skin color or ethnicity, but on behavior – specifically what someone does or prefers to do in the privacy of their bedroom!
If they weren’t so pitifully sad, these brave new world policies would be funny. Wasn’t it the homosexual rights activists themselves who once proclaimed to the world that what they did in the privacy of their own bedrooms was nobody else’s business?
If that were still the case, why are they making it everyone else’s business? Why are they forcing this information on us all? Why are they using their sexual preferences as a battering ram to further their own narrow economic, personal and political agendas?
Today I can proudly say, without reservations, I’m glad I didn’t vote for George W. Bush. If this is “compassionate conservatism,” I can sure live without it. My conscience is clear. I just wish I could figure out a way to get my country back.
