Here's part of Lopez's story (Thanks to Jason for the link):
Readers will have to forgive me for sounding angry, but the recent news involving GLAAD has enraged me. Mark Steyn's most recent piece in National Review sums up some of the worst aspects of the epic saga known as GLAAD v. Duck Dynasty.One of the things that amazes me about the current state of our culture, a thing that I can never seem to get used to, is the complete socio-ideological reversal that has taken place since I was in college. Back then I had several lefty professors, one in particular who was my advisor and with whom I spent many hours in conversation (I worked for him on one of his research projects for a couple of summers) who regaled us with stories of how ugly and bigoted conservatives were and how noble and compassionate was the left. The right was all about hatred, censorship and oppression and the left was all about letting a thousand flowers bloom, love, tolerance, free speech and the free exchange of ideas.
Steyn resonates with me on one key point: yes, GLAAD is ridiculous and foolish. We knew this. But some conservatives who should know better are truly pathetic. A National Review editor scolds Steyn for being "puerile," while people on Fox News say that Phil Robertson should have been suspended. Pusillanimous obeisance to false ideology isn't exclusive to left or right.
A bunch of people on the left called GLAAD out, and I'm glad they did. Yet a bunch of people on the right are still terrified of GLAAD, or else actually believe that it's defamation to say negative things or think negative thoughts about homosexuality. In case you don't know the full extent of GLAAD's fascism, let me tell you what GLAAD did to me.
I won't hyperlink this, but if you go to GLAAD's website and seek out their "commentator accountability project," you will find my name. This is GLAAD's blacklist. Within hours of GLAAD's publication of my addition to the list, which amounts to an excommunication from polite society, an e-mail was sent to the president of my university, along with dozens of other high officials in California, with the announcement: ROBERT OSCAR LOPEZ PLACED ON GLAAD WATCH LIST.
The e-mail stated clearly that as a result of my being placed on this list, I would never get a direct interview in the United States. (Whoever "they" are, they made good on the threat, because when I was brought onto Al Jazeera, they made sure that I was the only one critical of gay adoption, versus two hosts and two other panelists who were for it, and the host cut my microphone.)
According to the press release sent to my university, any media outlet introducing me would be bound to introduce me as an "anti-gay activist" certified by GLAAD as a bigot. When I read the claims of this e-mail, I wondered if this would be true -- would media in the United States really introduce me by saying I was certified as "anti-gay" by GLAAD?
Well, the answer to that question remains mostly unanswered. Aside from that one fling on Al Jazeera, since GLAAD placed me on their blacklist, no secular media outlet has invited me on its show in the United States. In-depth interviews with me have been broadcast in Chile, Russia, France, Ireland, and a number of other nations. In the United States, Christian broadcasters like the American Family Association and Frank Sontag's "Faith and Reason" show in Los Angeles have interviewed me. And I'd been interviewed, prior to the GLAAD blacklisting, by Minnesota affiliates of NBC, CBS, Fox, and NPR, as well as a number of newspapers. Since GLAAD's blacklisting, none.
Prior to GLAAD's blacklisting, I had received calls from people at universities discussing their interest in having me come to campus and give speeches. Three were working with me to set up dates. Since GLAAD's blacklisting, none. Those who had discussed this with me said point-blank that their superiors did not want to create controversy....
Being blacklisted by GLAAD was the end of my world. (It just so happens I entered a new, happier one, but that doesn't take away from the terror caused by their omerta.) Even though I wrote The Colorful Conservative, I am too colorful for right-wing think-tanks, too vulgar for Beltway Republicans, too much a fan of Sarah Palin for the Big Boys down in D.C. I'm too queer for the legit crowd, and GLAAD basically put the word out to the queers not to talk to me anymore.
Old friends and even some family members took GLAAD's marching orders and have summarily cut me out of their lives. And when I mean cut me out, I mean we will never be in the same room again. One person very close to me, who works in the entertainment industry, was accosted at a dinner and told in no uncertain terms that if he didn't join in denouncing me, he'd have difficulty finding work. I was less important than his shot at getting better contracts -- so gosh, I miss him.
I didn't think his take on the matter was quite right, but, being a college student and therefore pretty much uninformed, I was unable to argue otherwise. Even so, granting my advisor the benefit of the doubt, over the following decades the two ideological poles underwent a complete reversal in the nature of their character.
Today, I don't think there's any doubt that most of the bigotry, vitriol, hatred, racism, intolerance, and overall ugliness is on the left. I don't know whether it does any good to point this out, but I sometimes feel compelled to do so. I think people are for the most part reluctant to align themselves with those they perceive to be unpleasant and unkind, and I'm gripped by the hope that by pointing out where that unpleasantness lay, by insisting that ideas which are attractive to the mean-spirited and vulgar, some who might otherwise be drawn to the philosophy of the left might at least think twice about it.
Read the rest of Lopez's article at the link. It's both interesting and important, especially if you think that gays are virtually unanimous in their support for gay marriage and families.
