Do Liberals "Own" Gay Voters?

The Democratic Underground and other unsavory corners of the Web are all atwitter about the unconfirmed rumor that Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlmann might be gay.

In all seriousness; does it matter?

To most conservatives and libertarians I know, it doesn't. While it may bother some of the very old or very far right members of our side of tehpolitical spectrum, most conservatives don't care all that much about someone's sexuality, and many of us have gay friends.

Despite that, liberals, particularly in the blogosphere, have consistently pounced upon (figuratively) suspected gays within the Republican party, demonizing as traitors to their community. What gives them the right to make that determination? What gives liberals the arrogance to determine which community someone belongs to merely on the basis of sexual orientation?

Should a lesbian businesswoman be ideologically bound to vote for higher corporate taxes because she loves another woman? Of course not. Should a gay gun nut have to give up his love of shooting sports because Republicans are more gun-friendly? No.

Liberals, gay liberals, in particular, are guilty in this instance of pigeonholing and stereotyping and entire group of people based one aspect of their personality. Militantly liberal gays like John Aravosis at Americablog seem to imply that if an American is gay, he or she is obligated to vote for liberal candidates.

I'd like to know why liberals seem to think they own homosexual voters, and almost uniformly consider gay conservatives, as one long-time Democratic Underground poster put it, "Destructive, treasonous, hypocritical, cynical opportunists," that "deserve no mercy."

Sounds mighty arrogant to me.

Update: Shamelessly added to the Beltway Traffic Jam.