Saturday, September 15, 2012

Should A Gay Man Have Been Serving As Ambassador To A Muslim Nation?

Chris Stevens (left) with his friend and former roommate, Austin Tichenor (right), in  a photo taken in the 70s
A prominent gay Chicago blogger, Kevin DuJan, is confirming a story that had been rumored about Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was murdered by Islamic terrorists this week after the consular outpost in Benghazi, Libya was overtaken during a well-organized attack against the facility on the anniversary of 9-11. DuJan has confirmed through sources that it was no secret among his friends and in the diplomatic community that Stevens was gay, and some are questioning the wisdom of the Obama administration  sending a gay man to serve as ambassador to a Muslim nation like Libya where homosexuality is a crime punishable by death.

Internet reports out of the Middle East following Stevens' killing made shocking claims that he was tortured and sodomized before he was killed by his attackers. "A former 'roommate' of Stevens by the name of Austin Tichenor lives and works in Chicago and while making calls to friends of mine in the theater world who know him I also thought to check some sources with the city who deal with the State Department and foreign dignitaries when they are in town," Dujan writes on his blog, Hillbuzz. DuJan says there has been a buzz in the diplomatic community that the Obama administration sent a gay man to be ambassador to a Muslim country. Citing a Serbian consular employee based in Chicago, DuJan reports:
The Serbian consulate employee identified himself to me as “Dino” and wouldn’t give me any more of a name than that, but told me it was no secret that Chris Stevens was gay and that “it was stupid to send him to Libya as the ambassador when he was a known homosexual”.
Dino explained in great detail that the brutal sodomizing of Stevens’ corpse was something that Muslims do to show the “utmost disrespect to the body” and that this is “a great insult in Islam” reserved for homosexuals. ”It is like making him a woman in death and he will be a woman now after life” the Serbian explained to me. There’s a good chance this guy was Muslim too, and gay, which makes my head spin more than a little since he seemed to have no anger at all in his voice that Muslims in Libya assassinated the American ambassador and then sodomized his corpse.
“He should not have gone there” was the general consensus from this man.

UPDATE: Fellow blogger Debbie Schlussel makes the argument that is should not matter whether our ambasador to Libya was gay unless your goal is to pander to Islam:

I’m amazed at how many conservatives have e-mailed me and/or posted commentary elsewhere about how “inappropriate” it was for Barack Obama to send a gay man as a U.S. Ambassador to a Muslim country. Huh? Why should we give a crap what Muslims think about gays? And why should we pander to what they demand? Heck, if I were Prez, I’d send gays, strippers, and Playboy centerfolds as U.S. Ambassadors to every single Muslim nation (if I even sent any of these places ambassadors at all, since we know ambassadors are in these countries strictly to kiss the asses of Third World savages and pretend that they’re actually a civilization; oh, and to give them visas to come to America and disappear on American soil to do who knows what). Next, you’ll be telling me that it’s “inappropriate” to send Christians and women to these countries because Muslims hate them, too. And forget about the Jews. Are you kidding me? This is your excuse for why Muslims were right to murder this guy? (In other gay-related news in the everyday world of non-stop Muslim violence, gay porn star Tim Dax says he was duped into starring in “Innocence of Muslims,” the anti-Mohammed movie being used as a phony excuse for the Muslim violence that Muslims engage in, movie or no movie.) 



Indy Rob said...

It all depends on his conduct as a representative of the US. If a diplomat maintains proper decorum, it does not matter. If a diplomat goes out clubbing with his friends (in the foreign country), of course it matters (and this is saying that his behaviour while clubbing is the opposite of circumspect). A diplomat's behaviour reflects on the US, being aware of a foreign country's rules of behaviour and following those rules goes a long way toward having successful relationships with that country.

Jeff Cox said...

It was perfectly fine to send a homosexual to be ambassador to a Muslim nation. There is no reason we should subject ourselves to their barbaric Shar'ia law.

Gary R. Welsh said...

According to the Obama administration, we must refrain from doing anything that would offend their sensibilities, even if that requires us to curtail our freedoms and liberties. I mean, the feds are doing everything they can to figure out a reason to file criminal charges against this guy who made a very amateurish movie that would have received no currency at all but for their overreaction to it. They tell women they should wear head coverings and keep their bodies fully covered when they are visiting their countries. I don't disagree that we should not be subjected to their barbaric Sharia law, but that's precisely what the Obama administration is trying to impose on us by asking us to change what we do.