Here’s a real winner from Minnesota. State party Democrats are trying to convince Legislator Kerry Gauthier not to run for re-election in his reliably Democrat district. Gauthier, 56, had consensual oral sex with a 17 year old boy at a rest stop in Duluth back in July. (The age of consent for such matter appears to be 16 in Minnesota.) Gauthier, also a Democrat, has caught local party leadership with their pants down–they want him to drop out of his race as soon as possible.
Their point seems to be that this is inappropriate conduct for two males above the age of consent, and that it is a distraction. But I though the Democrat Party line was that consensual sex between any two consenting “adults” was a right (and their own damn business)…no matter what kind of sex it was? So what the hell just happened?
If Democrats do not believe it is immoral nor illegal then why would the Minnesota Democrat party be objecting to its exercise? What is it that has them put-off?
The fact that the State legislator is 56 and his sex partner was 17?
How about that the 17 year old responded to Gauthier’s Craig’s List ad for “no-strings attached” sex?
Was it the fact that the sex occurred in public–though no one seems to have noticed or reported it at the time?
Did he break some law no one is reporting?
Is Gauthier married, like the party of Clinton, Weiner, and Edwards would really care about that?
My guess is political power. Political power does trump all else. And despite all the words and gestures about support for gay-rights, sexual freedom, it’s my body, Democrats who want kids being educated about sex as young as possible and about how gay sex is normal, all that noise about gay kids being bullied, Democrats wanting 12 or 13 year old kids to have abortions without parental consent…after all of that they don’t want voters to know that this is an acceptable part of the sexual culture they endorse every day through their legislation and the kinds of issues they claim to support.
And then they try to bully a candidate out of his race for participating in a consensual homosexual act.
By all accounts, what occurred in the rest stop in Minnesota–at least by the standards of your average Democrat–might as well be protected free speech.
Yet here we have a growing movement among Minnesota Democrats to kick Gauthier out of his race in time for them to suck up to some passable write in candidate they can all get behind in time for November.
Talk about hypocrisy.
So here’s an exit question. Will the openly homosexual Democrat party chairman and champion of gay rights from New Hampshire stand up and defend Gauthier or will he join the hypocrites. Silence, by the way, should be taken as joining the hypocrites.
Note: For those who got this far…I am not commenting on the morality condoning the sex act, legal standards, ages of consent, the appropriateness of this elected officials behavior, or anything other than the Democrat parties response to it and what ii tells us about them and their policy stands. Any other assumptions on your part are just that–“yours,” and” assumptions.” But we will happily entertain them for the purpose of debate if you just can’t help yourself.
