Michiganers: homo-bigot Keith Butler is running for the Senate
Keith Butler represents religious black voters that are slipping away to the GOP; is Stabenow vulnerable?
I came across this article and couldn’t place this guy’s name for a moment. Then I recalled why it is familiar. Keith Butler was one of the black folks trotted out by the GOP at the NY convention in 2004 to add a dash of color. Now, the Grand Rapids station WOOD-TV reports Butler has announced that he will run for the Republican slot to face off against Senator Debbie Stabenow.
He’s a world-class homophobe that subscribes to the belief that being gay is a sin and that any comparison of any kind between the struggle for gay rights and the black civil rights movement is an insult. He (along with possible Alabama gubanatorial candidate Roy “Ten Commandments” Moore) have been praying on the decision to run. Guess Butler got the thumbs up.
I’m sure the GOP will throw money at this race. Butler may not be well-known now, but I hope queer folks and allies in get to know more about Butler by reading the following; he’s written some insane editorials in the Detroit News that will raise the hair on the back of your neck. (Michigan is one of the states that passed a marriage amendment). From 10/25/2003, “Keep defining marriage as between man, woman“:
Marriage was instituted by God himself for the purpose of preventing the promiscuous intercourse of the sexes — and for securing the maintenance and education of children.” Recent legal and cultural trends seek to redefine Webster’s definition of marriage.
…First, traditional marriage must be protected for the proliferation of our generations. Regardless of how you slice it, you cannot get around the fact that a woman is the one who carries the egg and the man is the one who carries the sperm. The natural union of the egg and the sperm is how you and I came into being.
A man-man or a woman-woman relationship cannot produce or bear children. The longevity of our familial generations throughout the years is based on the procreation of children.
[Geez — the whole “parts fit”/procreation argument again — Pam]
Furthermore, depicting marriage as something other than that relationship between one man and one woman is not good for children. Homosexuality is a lifestyle that is neither normal nor natural. It is a decision, a choice. This lifestyle should not be illustrated to our children as normal.
Classes such as the one being taught at the University of Michigan should be banned. If you were to look at your college student’s class schedule, you would see English 317. Look further. The course title for English 317 is “How To Be Gay: Male Homosexuality and Initiation.” The course description reads as follows: “Students in class examine the general topic of the role that initiation plays in the formation of gay male identity and will examine a number of cultural artifacts and activities that seem to play a prominent role in learning how to be gay including Broadway musicals, diva-worship, drag, muscle culture, taste and political activism.”
[Unhinged, Freeper-esque comments follow – beware. — Pam]
This course is outright recruitment of young people into this decadent lifestyle. Common sense tells us that if this lifestyle were to become the dominant choice of our culture, our culture would soon be extinct.
Second, supporters of same-sex marriage tout their cause as a civil rights issue. The gay community’s attempt to tie their pursuit of special rights based on their behavior to the civil rights movement of the 1960s is abhorrent.
Being black is not a lifestyle choice. You can physically see and determine our heritage. The civil rights struggle found its purpose from depriving human beings of the most basic human rights simply because of the color of their skin. A popular black magazine, in almost every edition, proudly presents the “first black” in various professions. Why so long to become the “first black”? This is the wrong the civil rights movement seeks to correct.
The gay lifestyle is based on a behavior choice that endangers family, children, and the core of society. The attempt to push this decadent lifestyle into mainstream society and to brand those who oppose it as “homophobic” is simply wrong. The suffix, “phobic” implies, by nature, a fear. There is no fear; opponents simply oppose the gay lifestyle as the norm and refuse to accept that such a lifestyle is good for society.