Tag: Intolerance

There was a reason he won the position in the first place; as someone who would hold TRUE to conservative Republican principles, and strengthen them in the national platform.  While the establishment Republicans are decrying Democrats as "bad," Committeeman Agema was rebuilding the foundation so Republicans could say why.  Real fiscal restraint, real solutions aimed at preserving families and traditions that have made this country great.

And the feeble sensibilities of an offended malcontent within the party continuously stirs up sympathy for the other side's (progressive Dems for those of you who remain unsure) point of view?

"Hey look at me! I am a Republican and I don't like your stand on what I like to do, so you better tolerate my perverse lifestyle or I will forever more divide the party until I get what I want!  You can call it a big tent if you want."

When moral restraint is removed in one way, it certainly follows that the caps are off in others too.

Michigan Republican National Committeeman, Dave Agema, has been under relentless and vicious attack from advocates of same sex marriage, solely on the basis of having reposted an article which proposes a number of health risks and social consequences the writer claims are associated with same sex relationships.

The article: "Everyone Should Know These Statistics on Homosexuals`, by Frank Joseph, M.D, suggests that their are a number of negative consequences to the lifestyle of homosexuality.

The author of the article also addresses what he calls "The Homosexual Agenda", among other things.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with the opinions of the article, it is clear that the author poses some compelling points that are worthy of civil debates.

Dave Agema simply offered the article for such as debate to occur.

Nevertheless, in an attempt to suppress Agema's constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech, even some so called Republicans have publicly come out against him, calling for his resignation, accusing him of being a "bigot", `hateful', etc.

Allegedly. the Libertarian Party of Michigan has also called for Agema's resignation, accusing him of actions that are "unacceptable, sickening and reprehensible."

What is it? Yea or nay? Yes or No?  Is the average 'moderate' Muslim a danger to our constitutional Republic?  Is there an underlying desire to dismantle our bill of rights because of hurt religious feelings?  Given this:

"Protesting the film, "Innocence of Muslims," that has sparked protests in the Mideast, rally organizer Tarek Baydoun says that so-called blasphemy laws are necessary to prevent speech that hurts the "the religious feelings of Muslims."

Lets just take this a step further.

If these are NOT representing the 'moderate' Islamists in our midst, then what are they representing?

Its not as if one would feel compelled to walk away from such examples of tolerance.