Cooks Argue over Homosexual Dish

The trouble the so-called "anti-discrimination" homosexual rights bill has encountered in the past day or so is very enlightening--far more so than liberals would like, I'm sure.

What is perhaps at the heart of the "problem" is that Democrats want to pull out the "transgender" protection from the bill, in the hopes that will help it's chances for passage. That's not sitting well with the homosexual community.

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

Gay rights groups have been waiting for a decade for the bill to pass, and many say a few more months to try to build support for including gender identity would be worth the wait. They say transgender people will have little chance of winning protection from discrimination if they aren't included in this bill.

Pelosi and Frank, however, fear the inclusion of gender identity will kill the overall bill - again denying gays and lesbians protection against job discrimination.

Translation: we realize we've reached too far and have to pull back to something people will be more willing to tolerate.

This of course isn't good enough for the homosexual community, which wants full-fledged acceptance and approval of every perversion they can think up.

And this dissatisfaction has Democrats doing their traditional two-faced flip-flopping dance:

Pelosi, D-San Francisco, issued conflicting statements in reaction to the turmoil. The first, issued Friday, declared her personal support for including transgender people in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act but asserted she would stick by her decision to drop them from the bill to give it a greater chance of passage.

But they're trying to placate their homosexual supporters by throwing them a bone and a promise of "someday."

Frank argued last Thursday in pushing to strip gender identity from the bill that the measure would fail if transgender people were included. Frank issued a four-page statement late Friday defending his decision. He promised hearings on a separate bill banning workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual identity as a way to educate the public and members about a group he said was only recently added to legislation covering sexual orientation.

Translation: we can't boil the frog this fast (he'll jump out if we turn up the heat too quickly). A guy at work talking about sodomizing his buddy last night, people might put up with that in the name of "anti-discrimination." But a man wearing a dress and makeup as he rings up your groceries, or a man who demands to use the women's restroom because he thinks he's a woman...I don't think we can get that one to pass...yet. But we'll continue to crank up the heat slowly with these "separate bills."

In short, we're getting a rare public glimpse into the kitchen of societal change. We're seeing two "cooks" wrestling over the temperature knob on the stove. One cook says if we turn up the heat too fast, we'll burn the dish. The other cook wants to eat NOW.

Guess who the frog is: our civilization.