Sean Paul Lockhart For NoH8 Campaign

He’s so grown up!! When did his voice get so manly?? I H8 the worthless NoH8 campaign, but Sean/Brent looks cute, so this is fine. Also, I’m feeling schizophrenic (more than usual) referring to him by his porn star name, Brent Corrigan, in one post and his actor name, Sean Paul Lockhart, in another. We need to come up with ONE name for him and just stick with that. Some sort of portmanteau, perhaps? Sean Brent Lockigan? Brent Paul Corrihart? I am DONE switching back and forth! Brent Sean Hartigan? Feel free to leave your suggestions below.

33 thoughts on “Sean Paul Lockhart For NoH8 Campaign”

  1. Honor Sean Paul Lockhart!!
    Its route is admirable and I hope all his fans support him!
    Schizophrenic? We are definitely a bit ‘all …
    Sean takes his choices very well and should be respected and supported!

  2. I agree with commentator Albert that this is a state issue. However, I would question whether the states are sovereign and America a true federation – there is no institution in our system of government which protects the states (the Senate is party-political and the judiciary is a fed: they centralize power). I would direct him to the most stable and prosperous country in the world (Switzerland) where direct democracy allows for robust federalism and decentralisation (notice, by contrast, most centralized power proceeds undemocratically, while direct democracy tends to decentralize expenditure and taxation). I would also draw him to Article 29(4) of the German Constitution where ordinary citizens can use the initiative process to create new states to accomodate their sexual, religious, cultural and linguistic needs. Perhaps this is what he had in mind whenn calling forth minorities to establish their own lifestyles in a federation – so San Fran could be its own state, if its people chose – in a referendum – for this to be case.

    1. Publius is correct that we have lost our true Federalism. The Senate is a party controlled or at least highly influenced body. Our original Constitution had Senators appointed by the States, not by election of the people. Changing that(by Constitutional Amendment) changed a lot.

      I am happy for Sweden and Germany but I do not live there. San Francisco has already become part of a State by it’s own will and choosing. If California chose to allow San Francisco to separate and we the people agreed to admit San Francisco as a separate State, well and good and given the nature of San Francisco, perhaps understandable.

      In general, comparisons of the United States to other nations just doesn’t carry much weight with me. They are not expected to respond immediately to relief efforts after earthquakes and tsunamis world wide as we do. Nor could they.

    2. OH yeah, the enforcement mechanism of final resort is as always, the second Amendment and We The People. The real authority.

  3. Is that a beard or did someone rub his face in the mud or what? Sean/Brent needs to shave.
    Also going back to porn would be nice.

  4. Adam Bouska is a very good photographer. He is also a very good salesman.

    NO8H is a brilliant marketing tool. Adam has been able to photograph hundreds of celebrities and thousand of people who would not otherwise give him the time of day. He also charges for the effort. This is a business. It is how he makes a very good living, for a photographer.

    As a concept, NO8H has as much meaning as, hope and change. Sadly, meaningless bumper sticker slogans work on a lot of minds.

    1. I know! I’m not a fan of him at all he’s always looked too fem to me, but something about the little scruff he had really caught my attention!

  5. My position on ‘legal’ marriage is based on our U.S. Constitution. Our Constitution specifically empowers the Federal government to act in certain areas like national defense. No where is the Federal government empowered to act on sexuality. That authority is therefore delegated to the States or the People through the 10th Amendment.

    Under that contract, Utah should be able to declare it’s official religion as Mormon and allow plural marriages. I would support that although I would not approve. I will live in Texas.

    Too often, citizens want to lay responsibility for (whatever) on the highest authority they recognize. That is directly opposed to what our founders envisioned. Except for those few enumerated powers in the U.S. Constitution, all other authority should be left to the local authority,….the citizens of that region.

    Were such a concept to actually be followed, other good countries may well join our union as free and independent States. I could well see Germany, Kuwait, South Korea and others become one with us.

    Marriage is a small point but it serves as an example as to the wisdom of our founding fathers.

    Let the people decide and rule themselves. Let us all be free to move to a better place for US.

    1. Typical neocon fetiishism of the Founding Fathers.

      Germany, Kuwait and South Korea become one with us? I think they call that an Empire.

      Oh, one last thing – sure, let’s leave everything to the states and get the Federal Government out of it altogether. That’s called the pre-Civil Rights era south. How’d that work out again, I forget?

  6. This campaign rests on the false proposition that Proposition 8 was entirely about “hate”. Yet a simple consultation with the campaign literature behind Proposition 8 reveals other factors were involved. A voter might favour Proposition 8 for any of these reasons:

    Voter 1: *My* criteria is that the government should have no role in marriage i.e. it should be delegated to the Church and otherwise the process should be left to private contracts. We do not need more state intervention in marriage by also extending it to homosexuals – marriage as it is now is bad enough and we do not need to make it even more statist. As such I am voting yes for Prop 8 (my second-order preference, compared to my first-order preference of no state involvement);

    Voter 2: *My* criteria is that gay marriage should be conferred via direct consent of the people, rather than unelected judges [recall Prop 8’s MAIN PURPOSE was direct against judges, not gay marriage PER SE]. If approved at a referendum, the gay rights movement would have unprecedented social legitmacy that no other gay community in the world would have by having marriage granted via a direct vote of their fellow citizens silencing critics who argued we obtained it via “friends in high places”. As such I am voting against gay marriage (for now);

    Voter 3: *My* criteria is that if you move toward gay marriage, children might be denied a putative right to a mother and a father. As such I am voting yes for Prop 8;

    Voter 4: *My* criteria is after reading John Finnis’ views on natural law and the works Plato on marriage, I find gay relationships to be largely “instrumental” and as such I am voting in favour of Prop 8 [yep, the NOH8 campaign hates Plato].

    Which of these is a priori the ‘correct’ preference that allows the above preferences to be self-evidentially given less weight to more progressive preferences? That itself is a matter of preference.

    In any event, by the time Judge Walker invalidated Prop 8 (in 2010) polls already showed support for gay marriage was in the majority (so much for deep resentful “h8” among the population of California) and it would appear that the initiative scheduled for 2012 would be approved by the voters.

    [Btw, it might actually worth noting that 26 judicial judgements/cases have found NO right to same-sex marriage – compared to the 12 or so initiatives in the form of direct constitutional amendments – does the NOH8 campaign also have a problem with the judiciary, or is its campaign only directed against 52.5% of voters in 2008, hardly a large margin? Indeed, if New Jersey, Rhode Island and Maryland and a few other states had direct democracy, they would *ALREADY* have gay marriage, judging by the polls].

  7. it is now official. i hate this campaign too!

    why are porn stars spokespeople for the gay community? i hate that. i don’t appreciate being represented by a bunch of sociopaths.

    1. Wow, sociopaths? Nonsense. That may be true for some, but not for most that I know.

      I’ve done quite a lot of thinking about why the gay community makes porn stars into “stars” the way the straight world does not.

      First of all, remember that it’s only been fairly recently that we’ve had any real open gay celebrities on a national or international scale. The quite open Ellens and Neil Patrick Harrises are recent phenomena. Sure, there were widespread rumors of the Rock Hudsons, and the wink-wink-nod-nods of the Paul Lyndes, but generally there were few out celebrities. We embraced notoriety where we could, usually local (and occasionally national) drag queens and porn stars.

      Second, the fact that we can embrace porn performers as real human beings rather than people to be scorned (while secretly masturbating to them) is, I think, a positive thing. It’s an outgrowth of the fact that gay people, as “sexual outlaws” in the eyes of the rest of the world (historically, at least) are more open and embracing of sexuality in general. More open to discussing and exploring kinks and fetishes openly and without shame. And more open to see porn and sex work as a career choice rather than an act of sheer desperation. Yes, exploitation exists, but so do people who enter porn not out of fear or desperation, but because they *want* to.

      So yeah, I have absolutely no problem with regarding porn stars as celebrities. Not every porn performer merits that, of course, just as not every B-movie actor merits celebrity, either. But I think our community’s open embrace of porn as being a positive thing.

      1. You are REALLY over thinking this, RS.

        Heterosexuals don’t think about it in those terms.

        In fact, a heterosexual could reject a ‘celebrity’ as someone look up to. Most, if not all heterosexuals, do not care about orientation; They often idolize someone who is relative to there own experience outside the relm of heterosexuality. Gays seem to be incapable in doing this. They want to make a fuss over some celebrity, and celebrity is the only way for legitimacy…it is sad. So much so, that some ‘wannabe’ porn ‘star’ would do.

        And yes, porn personas are sociopathic because they lack components of emotion that other people have. For instance, the abundant amount of ‘straight’ men that appear in porn cannot identify without putting down homosexuality; it is apparent in choice, that homosexuality is less than heterosexuality.

        1. And yes, there are some teenagers that exhibit the idolization of a celebrity; but most grow the fuck up and lose interest. It appears that most gays are immature in this matter.

  8. Sean Paul Lockhart is a name to flaunt. Well worthy of the natural beauty of the man.

    DeWayne in SD did some research on the name many years ago. A clan of Irish carried the heart of Robert the Bruce in a locked box into the crusades. The clan became known as Lockhart.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 50 MB. You can upload: image. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Scroll to Top