George Will: ‘Sore winners’ in gay rights movement pushing too far

George Will should have been smarter.

Fielding a question from Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday” about Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s veto of a bill that would have allowed private businesses to turn away customers based on the business owners’ religious beliefs, Will responded by implying that religious views actually deserve some respect.

georgewill0302The public accommodations section of the Civil Rights Act requires businesses to serve all customers equally, Will acknowledged, as the courts have ruled in recent cases involving gay marriages.

“If you open your doors to business in the United States, you open it to everybody. That’s a settled issue,” Will said.

“That said, this too must be said: It’s a funny kind of winner in the gay rights movement that would say, ‘a photographer doesn’t want to photograph my wedding. I’ve got lots of other photographers I can go to, but I’m going to use the hammer of government to force them to do this.’

“It’s not neighborly and it’s not nice,” Will said. “The gay rights movement is winning. They should be, as I say, not sore winners.”

As smart as he is, Will is assuming far too much. The whole concept of “neighborly” – the implicit understanding that Americans in 2014 can respect the rights of their fellow citizens on their own steam, without the litigious hand of the state getting involved – isn’t much in vogue these days in Obama’s America.

Obamas set new record for vacation expenses; stonewalled documents finally released

It’s getting less in vogue with every passing case, whether it’s a baker in Oregon who has no right not to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding or a photographer in New Mexico who has to pay to settle a complaint about refusing to shoot a lesbian marriage.

The libs are already chortling at Will’s comment. The lefty website Raw Story is headlining its take on it: “George Will: It’s ‘not neighborly’ for LGBT people to ask for equal rights,” and it will be no surprise when the boringly predictable Bill Maher or The New York Times editorial page start making strained comparisons between borrowing cups of sugar and the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

The fact is, Obama liberals are using the hammer of government to pound away at religious liberty, whether it’s the Portland, Ore., bakers who lost their case, or the Little Sisters of the Poor, who are still waiting for the Supreme Court to hear theirs.

So Will really hit the nail on the head when he said they’re not nice and they’re not neighborly.

He just should have been smarter.

We know first-hand that censorship against conservative news is real. Please share stories and encourage your friends to sign up for our daily email blast so they are not getting shut out of seeing conservative news.

Joe Saunders

Joe Saunders, a 25-year newspaper veteran, is a staff writer and editor for BizPac Review who lives in Tallahassee and covers capital and Florida politics. Email Joe at jpj[email protected].


199 thoughts on “George Will: ‘Sore winners’ in gay rights movement pushing too far

  1. Parque_Hundido says:

    Oh, poor thing. Those homosexuals just don’t know their place, they don’t realize that just because they are increasingly on the winning side of elections and court cases that they should be polite enough to never bother enforcing the rights they’ve won.

    Cry me a river. I for one have had it with hearing these right wing bigoted dinosaurs go on long winded pity parties. You’re losing, you can’t expect that those of us who’ve won will sit back and let the status quo go un disturbed.

    1. Theresa Easley says:

      You know, I used to not concern myself with homosexuals and what they do at all. The hateful, intolerant ones like you, though, have really turned me against them. There may come a time when things will change especially with elections. If Republicans take the Senate and the Presidency I wonder how cocky you’ll be feeling then? You might end up being the losers.

      1. Parque_Hundido says:

        Aww, poor thing. You’ve lost. And a change in the composition of Congress will not roll back changes in Supreme Court decisions. Cry me a river. One more right wing extremist homophobic bigot who doesn’t like losing! You’re going to be the loser for a long, long time. Society is already hating you and those like you. You are now the equivalent of the KKK. LOL.

      2. magister ludi says:

        Your far too late for that. This genies out of the bottle, whether Republicans or Democrats take control.

        You are really out of touch, aren’t you?

  2. Joey H says:

    Why should a gay couple face religious bigots when no other other group has to? I should be able to go into a bakery and just order a cake with 2 dudes on top with no garbage or hate from the owner. No one told them they couldn’t bang their Bible at Church. People seem to lose track that religion is pretty harmful sometimes. What would Jesus do? He probably would treat gay people as equals as he did with all people he encountered. Have we forgotten his example? Sad

  3. Parque_Hundido says:

    George Will is to homophobic bigots what George Wallace was to racist bigots. Congrats!

  4. Sharon says:

    Christians do not hate, being against or having certain morals does not make you a hater, I’m a Christian and I have a family member who I love very much but also excepts the fact I don’t agree with their life style but that’s not my call, that is between him and God, I can only tell you truths, its up to you whether you choose to believe it or not, If I were the owner, I would bake the cake, but, they would have to put their own topper on it

    1. JKellogg says:

      Great post, Sharon! Some Christians do indeed hate and sometimes that hate is justified, but so often we confuse the message with the person and the intellect with the heart.

      I too am a Christian and do my level best to confess the sin of hate when I find I harbor it.

      That said, in all but the most extreme congregations (and there are a few followers of those Christian heretical teaching here on BizPac), hate is not taught.

      The trouble is that when a Christian expresses hate, it shines a bad light on all of us. Then when hatred of certain sins is deserved, it fails to convince.

      Remember, you can win an argument and still not win the heart of the one with whom you debate, right?


      1. magister ludi says:

        Thank you. JKellogg.

    2. corruptintenz says:

      Rather, its between you and your deity, correct? What is at the crux of this is that you don’t get to impose a relationship with deities or lack thereof upon anyone else.

  5. Scott Leger says:

    i hope every baker who DOESNT want to bake a cake for a gay couple, says YES OF COURSE< I WOULD LOVE TO BAKE A CAKE FOR YOUR GAY WEDDING, then make sure its the worse cake ever made, but do not politely turn them down, The gay lobby just likes to force their will and create problems for others, #justgosomewhereelse.

    1. magister ludi says:

      You are actually suggesting that a business provide shoddy service to clients?

      Is that the kind of “culture war” you seek?

      Then when bigoted, Christian fanatics come into my business, they’d better think twice before they eat.

      You’re a disgusting excuse for a human being and you’re clearly un-American.

      Don’t eat out, old man; stay in your rest home and hope the cooks don’t know about your position.

  6. corruptintenz says:


    1. Wraith says:

      You will not supersede nature itself, & nature does establish the rules. You as a human being are not the center of the universe; your behavior doesn’t follow the norm.

      1. corruptintenz says:

        Can you show that I am superseding nature is my intention? By what means do you purport to show that?

        Can you show that my position is that humans are the center of the universe? Is this a straw man argument?

        Can you show what my behavior is?

        I sense you are rushing through your answers at the cost of rationally.

        1. Wraith says:

          Historical Connection between Pedophilia and the Gay Rights Movement

          David Thorstad is a homosexual
          activist and historian of the gay rights movement.[48] He is a former president
          of New York’s Gay Activists Alliance (GAA), a prototype activist group founded
          in December 1969. The GAA at its inception opposed age of consent laws, which
          prohibited adults from having sex with children.[49] Thorstad is also a
          pedophile and founding member of the North American Man Boy Love Association

          Thorstad argues that there is a
          natural and undeniable connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. He expresses
          bitterness that the gay rights movement has, in his view, abandoned pedophilia.
          Thorstad writes: “Boy-lovers were involved in the gay movement from the
          beginning, and their presence was tolerated. Gay youth groups encouraged adults
          to attend their dances. . . . There was a mood of tolerance, even joy at
          discovering the myriad of lifestyles within the gay and lesbian

          The inaugural issue of the Gay
          Community News in 1979 published a “Statement to the Gay Liberation
          Movement on the Issue of Man/Boy Love,” which challenged the movement to
          return to a vision of sexual liberation. It argued that “the ultimate goal
          of gay liberation is the achievement of sexual freedom for all–not just equal
          rights for ‘lesbian and gay men,’ but also freedom of sexual expression for
          young people and children.”

          In the early years there was some
          reluctance to accept pedophilia, primarily among feminist and lesbian activist
          groups. In March 1979 the Lesbian Feminist Liberation (LFL) accusing
          “so-called Man/Boy Lovers” of “attempting to legitimize sex
          between children and adults. . . . Feminists easily recognize this as the
          latest attempt to make palatable the sexual exploitation of children.” The
          coalition went on record as opposing “the sexual abuse of children by
          heterosexual or homosexual persons.”[51]

          Despite this opposition, Thorstad
          claims that by 1985 homosexual pedophiles had won acceptance within the gay
          movement. He cites Jim Kepner, then curator of the International Gay and
          Lesbian Archives in Los Angeles: “A point I’ve been trying to make is that
          if we reject the boylovers in our midst today we’d better stop waving the
          banner of the Ancient Greeks, of Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Oscar Wilde,
          Walt Whitman, Horatio Alger, and Shakespeare. We’d better stop claiming them as
          part of our heritage unless we are broadening our concept of what it means to
          be gay today.”[52]

          In 1985 NAMBLA was admitted as a
          member in New York’s council of Lesbian and Gay Organizations as well as the
          International Gay Association–now the International Lesbian and Gay
          Association (ILGA). In the mid-1990’s ILGA’s association with NAMBLA and other
          pedophile groups cost the organization it’s status as a Non-Governmental
          Organization in the United Nations.

          ILGA’s renewed attempt to gain
          admittance to the UN was rejected again in April 2002 because the organization
          “did not document that it had purged pedophile groups such as
          [NAMBLA].” The Washington Times reports that Ishtiag H. Anrabi,
          Pakistani delegate to the UN Economic and Social Council, expressed concern
          that ILGA was continuing to be secretive about ties with pedophile groups:
          “For more than a year, the ILGA has refused to provide documentation or
          allow review of its membership list to demonstrate that pedophilia groups have
          been expelled.”[53]

          1. corruptintenz says:

            This seems but an extension of the same pointless rambling from before. Assuming, you have no point then?

          2. Wraith says:

            Do you have any argument at all? You will never win, even if you have the backing of government, governments do change, as well as social trends. If a State views that your movement doesn’t benefit its survival, guess what buddy, they can reverse their decision. You make no point whatsoever.

  7. Five Guyz says:

    Since innovations resulting from freedom of action tend to be just as useful as those arising from intellectual freedom, it seems clear that liberty’s value does not depend upon the intellectual merit of what it makes possible.

    1. magister ludi says:

      Ok. Your point is…..?

  8. FilmDoctor says:

    Will is too mealy-mouthed for me. It’s WRONG to force any business to serve anyone, including a racial minority. The Supreme Court and the laws are wrong. Forced integration may not be as immoral as forced segregation, but it’s definitely immoral. I have the right to freedom of assembly, inside my business and outside my business. Not all morality should be legislated. Refusing to serve a person because they are a certain color is racist, but it doesn’t have to be or shouldn’t be against the law.

  9. ttyler5 says:

    George Will is an unmitigated bore, and he’s not smart. The homosexuals aren’t “winning”, this is being forced on America by a set of Obama-appointed lower court fed judges, and it’s going to end with a total loss for the perverts and their political allies.

Comments are closed.

Latest Articles