Personal Liberty Digest™ will be upgraded this weekend to reflect a dynamic new look and mobile-friendly viewing to enhance your experience! Plus, we'll be providing even more of the compelling content you've come to expect, delivered in a whole new way!

  Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Posters Linking Gun Rights, Gay Rights Baffle The Left

May 27, 2013 by  

In Washington State, gay rights advocates and gun rights advocates intersect in a series of posters appearing around the State Capitol in the past several days linking gay rights and opposition to gun laws.

The posters, which direct people to a pro-gun website, have liberals complaining — seemingly appalled that homosexuals might also value 2nd Amendment rights.

From the Seattle alt-weekly The Stranger’s Cienna Madrid:

I just find it striking that a traditionally conservative movement is branching out to recruit gays and lesbians.

It’s hard to know who’s responsible for putting the posters up all over Capitol Hill. “Nale Dixon,” who’s credited for drawing the cartoon of the gay couple, returns no search results online. The pro-gun website is run by a dude named Oleg Volk, “An American,” but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s responsible for papering the hill with them. Without someone to credit, it’s impossible to glean the posterer’s intentions.

Perhaps being courted by a traditionally right-wing, conservative movement is refreshing and progressive, but it could also just be really effective concern trolling. What better way to make people feel unsafe in gay-friendly Capitol Hill than by slyly referencing homophobia and hate crimes in pro-gun propaganda plastered on every street corner?

Over at Buzzfeed, a report about the posters came with the sarcastic headline “Bizarre Pro-Gun, Pro-Gay Posters Appear In Washington State: Because gun control and LGBT rights go hand-in-hand, obviously.”

Here are a couple of the posters:

guns-gays-1-e1369087376383

guns-gays-2

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Posters Linking Gun Rights, Gay Rights Baffle The Left”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • $28109413

    I’m not sure if this was the message of these posters or not. But they seem to me to point out the hypocrisy of the Leftists. They WANT rights for THEIR causes LGBT, Abortion, etc, BUT they refuse to allow for gun rights as well. As the saying goes, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. EITHER YOU HONOR RIGHTS FOR ALL, OR RIGHTS FOR NONE. YOU DON’T GET TO PICK AND CHOOSE WHICH RIGHTS YOU LIKE OR DON’T LIKE…

    • Vigilant

      The combination speaks more to Libertarian views than to left-right concerns.

    • Chester

      Seems the right wingers have the same sort of problem. They demand gun rights, but want to deny gays and lesbians their rights. Seems they also have a problem with the word choice when it comes to pregnancies, and whether or not they can be legally terminated. Should be either all or nothing, not a pick and choose. My time in serviced was to give those rights to all, not just to the few who feel they have earned them.

      • JimH

        legally terminated is just a nice way of saying “killed”.

        It isn’t a right wing, left wing issue. Its a good verses evil issue.

        Even if it’s “legal” it doesn’t make it not evil.

        If you feel murder is a “right”, you have made your point.
        Some issues are more than just political. They are ethical and moral issues. Unless you want to infer that left wingers are less moral than right wingers.

        • John Mitchell

          There is no need to infer that left wingers are less moral than right wingers. That fact is obvious! The left wingers not only support having children out of wedlock they promote it for political gain. How much more immoral can you get? All through history societies have shunned having children out of wedlock because of the social problems it creates. Most of our societies social problems are directly related to illegitimate children!

          The murder rate in counties carried by Obama in the 2012 election was over 13 per 100,000 while the murder rate in counties carried by Romney was less than 2 per 100,000. The facts speak for themselves.

          Hypocrisy runs in both parties. Both conservatives and Liberals can look at any data and mine it for facts that support their point of view while ignoring facts that refute it.

      • Justsomeguy151

        Gays already have rights, they want SPECIAL rights. Even straight people don’t have the right to marry someone of the same gender, so why are gays acting like someone already has that right and its being denied to gays? Everyone has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, gays are trying to REDEFINE marriage by desecrating it and making a mockery of it. And NO, no one is “afraid” of gays, they are just repulsed by their deviant behavior.

        • vicki

          The special rights gays are asking for are the privilges ALREADY handed out to married couples. But your point is well taken.

          Show me exactly where people of opposite gender do NOT have the right to marry the same gender even though they obviously would not as they are not interested in the same gender.

          Or if easier to charactarize a right, show me where people of opposite gender are harmed (their rights interfered with) by people of the same gender choosing to be a couple.

          • Justsomeguy151

            If that was all gays were truly fighting for, they wouldn’t have such resistance, not even from me. But it not. Society in general is harmed for the perverted whims of a segment of the population that is less than 1%. Can you show me why gays need to marry? Why can’t they just be happy w/ partner’s rights re: hospitals, insurance etc? Did you know NAMBLA is fighting for the right to marry and molest children? Do you think they are being discriminated against? Sexual preference is being compared to the civil rights movement which couldn’t be less applicable. There are no former Africans, Asians or Indians but there ARE former gays. It is a choice and not remotely similar. I don’t hate or fear gays but I hate and fear what they want to do to our society. And have already done.

          • Don 2

            From the horses mouth: Masha Gessen, a lesbian, and LBGT activist let the cat out of the bag. She stated that once the court rules and opens the door, the ultimate goal is ‘Marriage Extinction.’ She proclaimed that gay marriage is a lie and that fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there. It’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist…..’marriage equality’ becomes ‘marriage elasticity’ with the ultimate goal of ‘marriage extinction’ with incest, polygamous, and any other equally aberrant nuptial cocktail being likewise permitted.

          • vicki

            Since marriage is a religious concept it is beyond the power of government (or Masha) to make extinct. It is a fully protected right (see Amendment 1, US Constitution)

          • Don 2

            I respectfully disagree. Marriage can be formalized legally(justice of the peace, for example) or through a religious ceremony.

            If the high court removes one natural barrier parameter for one special-interest group, then “equal protection under the law” requires that it remove all natural barrier parameters for all special interest groups. Every argument for same-sex marriage is also an argument for consensual polygamy and certain adult incestuous relationships. If anything is marriage, then everything is marriage.

          • vicki

            I respectfully disagree. Marriage can be formalized legally(justice of the peace, for example) or through a religious ceremony.

            There is a civil institution that bears the same name but it is a contract between consenting adults and as such
            contains no limitations based on sex, race, color, creed etc. Governments sole involvement is to protect the individuals from force or fraud.

            If anything is marriage, then everything is marriage.

            This is how it should be. Government has no business telling consenting adults how they will arrange their affairs. Now the question you have to ask yourself is do you want government to define words? Just think of the fun liberals would have with the definition of “regulated”

            Instead of focusing on a word or religious institution, focus on the civil institution and get it renamed.

          • vicki

            If that was all gays were truly fighting for, they wouldn’t have such resistance, not even from me. But it not. Society in general is harmed for the perverted whims of a segment of the population that is less than 1%.

            You have not been able to make a case that the free expression of gays harms Society at all, let alone you as an individual. Please do take the time to read the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

            Can you show me why gays need to marry? Why can’t they just be happy w/ partner’s rights re: hospitals, insurance etc?

            Can you show me why heterosexuals need to marry? Why can’t they just be happy w/ partner
            s rights re:hospitals, insurance etc. Btw were you actually planning on allowing gays to have those rights too?

            Did you know NAMBLA is fighting for the right to marry and molest children?

            Did you know that children can not consent? Find a better red herring.

            Do you think they are being discriminated against?

            How are they being discriminate against?

          • Justsomeguy151

            No one is denying gays their First Amednment rights. If anything its gays that re violating normal people’s 1st Amendment rights whenever they speak against the gay Agenda. The Gay Agenda now has forced school curriculum across the nation to teach “pro homosexual”/indoctrination classes where they read material that encourages homosexual sex and preaches how “normal” it is.

            I see yr using a Libtard argument, “flip the script, try and keep a straight face, and sell your fallacious idea”. Straight people get married because they want to start a family, don’t want to live in sin, and want to make a commitment to each other in the eyes of God. I would allow sodomites the rights that married couples have, I’m not heartless. That doesn’t make their perversion any more acceptable tho.
            Those poor NAMBLAites don’t care, much like sodomites don’t care that straight people don’t have the right to marry someone of the same sex either, even tho they fallaciously demand “equal” rights which are really SPECIAL rights.
            Why do you have yr panties in a bunch over a bunch of perverts? Why does this less than 1% of the population get to change a societal institution that has stood for THOUSANDS of years? What gives them the right? Why must the many be forced to accept the perversions of the few? You’ve yet to demonstrate that anyone’s being discriminated against at all.

          • vicki

            No one is denying gays their First Amednment rights. If anything its gays that re violating normal people’s 1st Amendment rights whenever they speak against the gay Agenda.

            Do you have even the faintest clue what the 1st Amendment says?

            The Gay Agenda now has forced school curriculum across the nation to teach “prohomosexual”/indoctrination classes where they read
            material that encourages homosexual sex and preaches how “normal” it is.

            Take that up with big government that is quite happy to use any excuse to control the people and suppress our rights.

            I see yr using a Libtard argument,

            I see your using an argument to ridicule. Debate win to me.

          • Justsomeguy151

            Apparently you ignore the 1st Amendment unless its someone saying sausage to the keester is ‘free speech’. What rights are gays lacking? You want us to petition govt cronies wh are decidedly gay or bow to the Gay Agenda and tell them to stop indoctrinating our children? Been there done that. They call that us being “intolerant” when its just us taking a moral stand. You “win”? You should take a victory lap.

          • vicki

            Apparently you ignore the 1st Amendment unless its someone saying
            sausage to the keester is ‘free speech’.

            Ad hominem. Debate win to me.

          • Justsomeguy151

            LOL Whatever you say. You’ve yet to present an example where gays are being forbidden the same rights as anyone else.

          • vicki
          • Justsomeguy151

            So in other words, NOTHING. Already told you that gays aren’t being denied ANYTHING that anyone else is and what you’ve linked admits that. Straight people don’t have the right to marry someone of the same gender either.

          • Ringgo1

            Poor you.

      • vicki

        Seems they also have a problem with the word choice when it comes to pregnancies, and whether or not they can be legally terminated. Should be either all or nothing, not a pick and choose.

        You may have a problem with choice since you make no attempt protect the choice of the baby to live.

        We don’t have any problem with the word. It is wrong and immoral and evil to murder the most innocent among us.

  • Wellarmed

    Glad to see the positive reinforcement for 2nd amendment and its applicability to all. Anything that moves us as a nation towards eliminating the word “victim” from the American lexicon I am all for.

    It is also great to see all those depicted exercising proper trigger control!

  • FreedomFighter

    ROFLAO even liberal gays understand the right to self defense in America. Bravo!
    Laus DeoSemper FI

  • ChuckS123

    I noticed that they’re following safety rules, like having their fingers off the triggers and pointing the guns up or down. Unlike Mayor Bloomberg’s ads that show the guy with a shotgun horizontal and his finger on the trigger, with little kids playing behind him.

  • LibertarianPatriot

    The reason Liberals are shocked, is because Liberals are incapable of understanding Libertarianism, which embraces All Rights, and All Freedoms.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.