Yesterday it was reported that “17 of the Victory Fund’s 21 endorsed candidates on the ballot yesterday either won their races outright or advanced to general elections.”
The Victory Fund endorses and supports openly LGBT candidates and works to help them win election to local, state and federal offices … and so I guess it should come as no surprise that people like Cynthia Hill of the Family Research Council would start raising alarms about the success of LGBT candidates and “The Pinking of America“:
Americans should take a cold, hard look at the consequences of significant wins by openly lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender (LGBT) candidates in last night’s races. This is the fruition of that community’s methodical efforts to further homosexualize America. Their efforts, combined with this administration’s appointments of key federal positions of at least 101 LGBT aficionados, have largely been under the radar, but could predict critical damage to our rule of law. Think of it – we are electing people who ultimately see the Christian world view as the single, final barrier to their ultimate goal of acceptance and implementation of the homosexual agenda. If and when they dominate the legislatures, those who espouse Biblical principles then become the enemy and will surely be on the wrong end of law-making. We, in fact, saw this played out last night in the Rhode Island legislature where two concurrent measures, H 7044 and S 2055, passed which can criminalize dissent and infringe upon free speech and religious liberty. We need to rethink the skills needed to run a country, and to even consider that someone’s sexual predilections somehow qualifies them for the job is a joke that should have none of us laughing.
Did it ever occur to Hill that gay candidates and appointees might actually possess the necessary qualifications for these positions? Apparently not.
And what exactly does she mean when she says “we need to rethink the skills needed to run a country”? That gays do not have the skills needed to run the country? Or that, by virture of being gay, they ought to be disqualified from serving in public office?