That's according to The Malcontent, discussing Amandagate and the lack of openness on the left to anyone who isn't doctrinnaire. (Via HotAir).
Leave it to Andy Towle to put me on the same side of an issue as William Donohue. (shudder)
The ad-heavy gay blogger has rushed predictably to the side of John Edwards' recently hired hate bloggers merely because they're allegedly "pro-gay" — i.e., they're sufficiently liberal.
But Malcontent points out that Amanda has only written one post in the last six months under GLBT.
In other words, to a certain brand of blogger — and gay activist – "pro-gay" and wildly liberal are automatically synonymous, despite any evidence to the contrary.
The lesson to be learned: Even hate-spewing simpletons are to be defended, as long as their politics are far enough to the left.
I view this narrow-mindedness the same way I view Amanda's vision of feminism: if you aren't for abortion rights, you aren't a feminist. Well, there's obviously a similar standard for gay rights supporters.
Why aren't people allowed to hold a variety of views--some similar, some contrary--and still be seen as legitimate?
|