The American Taliban

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Not sure how many of you caught Hardball tonight, but the Family Research Council trotted out Peter Sprigg, another one of their odious spokesbots to rail against the repeal of DADT, and at the end of the piece, this little exchange happened:

Matthews: Do you think we should outlaw gay behavior?

Sprigg: Well, I think certainly..

Matthews: I’m just asking, should we outlaw gay behavior?

Sprigg: I think the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas which overturned the sodomy laws in this country was wrongly decided. I think there would be a place in this country for criminal sanctions against homosexual behavior.

Matthews: So we should outlaw gay behavior?

Sprigg: YES!

No dog whistles there. They aren’t even hiding it anymore.

183 replies
  1. 1
    DougJ says:

    If you outlaw gay behavior….

  2. 2
    Spork says:

    Can you say WTF??? in a sad voice? Just the fact that people like this still have serious representation in mainstream media makes me sad.

  3. 3
    soonergrunt says:

    Of course they’re not hiding it. There’s no point in hiding it. When you’ve abandoned the middle, and they’ve abandoned you, you might as well double down on the crazy and shore up relations with the rest of the base. That poll of republicans over at DailyKos teaches everybody one important thing–republicans are fucking nuts.

  4. 4
    rob! says:

    What does the Family Research Council have against Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Charlie Crist, Lindsey Graham, and Mary Cheney?

  5. 5
    Evan Hurst says:

    Uganda, I fear, is giving some of these bigots a new energy in saying what they really mean.

    We look at men like Bahati and are disgusted. They look at a man who writes a genocidal bill, and they’re in awe.

  6. 6
    Spork says:

    @rob!: Oh, they have a lot against them. It’s just that you don’t speak about it in polite company. If the Democrat party would quit bringing it up, we wouldn’t have to talk about it.

  7. 7
    Midnight Marauder says:

    “Women sometimes need a little more handholding, or they need their friends to help them make a decision. And by our going in and talking to them and recruiting and educating and training them to either get involved in a campaign or become a candidate, we’re giving them the tools so that they can do that on their own.” — RNC co-chair Jan Larimer, on the Republican Party’s efforts to recruit and train more female candidates.

  8. 8
    Karen says:

    I am thrilled they’re no longer hiding.

    It’s easier to fight your enemies when they show their cards.

    I’d rather know who my enemies are than have them act nice to my face. Wouldn’t you?

  9. 9
    calipygian says:

    What does the Family Research Council have against Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Charlie Crist, Lindsey Graham, and Mary Cheney?

    Not to mention James Dobson himself, who advocates exposing your penis to dachsund puppies in the shower to show the pooch what a penis looks like.

    Or am I mixing my Dobson memes up?

    Does he beat dogs and expose himself to kids or beat kids and expose himself to dogs in the shower? Or is it a little from A and a little from B? Its so hard to keep up with these fuckers without a scorecard…

  10. 10
    Paula says:

    Hmmm, since no one here’s posted it yet:

    Why does the Family Research Council hate our troops????

  11. 11
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    Shorter Family Research Council: The only thing hotter than buttfucking is breaking the law while buttfucking!

  12. 12
    scav says:

    It’s like waking up at the zoo unexpectedly and finding yourself watching the dinosaur cages. Where have they been hiding all these living fossils?

  13. 13
    inkadu says:

    @soonergrunt: Actually, while Republicans are frighteningly backwards, it looks like modernity has caught up to them finally: Kos’ poll shows they believe women should work and that marriages are equal partnerships.

    Abortion is still murder and jimmy hats are still contraband, but the drip-drip-drip of history is eroding the patriarchy.

  14. 14
    Neutron Flux says:

    How come Tweety didn’t ask this Sprigg fucker if he ever served?

    And I am saying WTF in a sad voice.

  15. 15
    beltane says:

    If they are determined to go the full Taliban, is it too much to ask that they cloak themselves in turbans, robes and a bit of kohl around the eyes. The only thing worse than a backwards ass religious nut is an effete, dorky looking backwards ass religious nut. Can someone please make all of them just go away?

  16. 16
    Martin says:

    They got their asses handed to them out here in the Prop 8 case. There’s really no point being subtle about it any more now that Boies has entered the whole thing into the record.

    I think they’re on the ropes here. At some point soon the courts are going to rule that sexual orientation can’t be treated as a choice and that’ll be the game.

  17. 17
    Comrade Mary says:

    Every so often, Tweety gets the bit in his teeth and actually pushes a useful line of questioning.

  18. 18
    beltane says:

    @inkadu: The only reason they think women should work is so that the family (i.e. the husband) can have more money. Remember, the prosperity gospel is based upon the worship of Christ the Cash Dispenser.

  19. 19
    gex says:

    This is not an unusual belief for the right wing. It is just no longer in code.

  20. 20
    Martin says:

    @Just Some Fuckhead: I never considered that. Maybe conservatives are all just sexual thrillseekers.

  21. 21
    Max says:

    I posted a version of this on Twitter earlier today, but it bears repeating…

    After listening to our President’s Townhall, it really made me wish we had a dem party with its act together. He shouldn’t have to do the heavy lift alone.

    The republicans are fucking evil. I hate that Obama is the only counter we have to them and it pisses me off that his great potential is being brought down by his own party and its activists.

    Imagine what we could do if we worked together, rather than fighting amongst each other over who is a “real dem” or the “base” or “just words” or bathing in Clinton fetishes to the point of revisionist history.

  22. 22
    gex says:

    @Martin: Oh yes. Why is Larry Craig cruising in a bathroom? Because boring monogamous gay sex doesn’t do it for him. He needs to be titillated. He does not care one whit that he has to demonize, marginalize, and other negative-rhyming-words others to get his rocks off.

  23. 23
    Zandar says:

    “Do you want to criminalize gay behavior?”

    “Don’t answer that, Mr. Sprigg!”

    Do you want to criminalize gay behavior?

    Yes I want to criminalize gay behavior and I hope they burn in hell!

    (huge gasp from the courtroom)

  24. 24
    Violet says:

    Matthews does have a knack for asking pointed questions. I kinda like that about him. Of course he gives idiots like this – and every other kind of idiot – a platform, which is wrong. But at least when he does he frequently seems to get them to show their true colors.

  25. 25
    Martin says:

    @Max: Let’s see what happens in that Q&A with Senate Dems. I’m hoping for a ‘What the fuck is wrong with you people’ smackdown, personally (in Obama’s typical calm, kick your legs out way).

  26. 26
    Martin says:

    @gex: I suppose that explains the two wetsuits. One wetsuit and a dildo is just so… normal.

  27. 27
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @inkadu:

    Actually, while Republicans are frighteningly backwards, it looks like modernity has caught up to them finally: Kos’ poll shows they believe women should work and that marriages are equal partnerships.

    You should probably talk to my good friend Jan Larimer. He might just have a few more backhanded compliments to throw your way.

  28. 28
    suzanne says:

    Anyone want to place bets on how many times Mr. Sprigg has enjoyed the services of a male escort?

    I’m going to also guess he’s into golden showers.

  29. 29
    cleek says:

    nobody watches Chris Matthews.

  30. 30
    scav says:

    And I just learned that gay sex is apparently the gateway behavior to “alcohol use, adultery, fraternization, and body art” especially in the U.S. military. The Gospel according to Chambliss (R-GA). Oh these little dinos are so cute! I simply can’t wait to hear about their positions on greeting cards and kites.

  31. 31

    You know, the Roman empire had the right idea about how to deal with morons like Sprigg.

  32. 32

    Look at that fucker. From the still alone I can tell he’s wearing THREE wetsuits and carrying a carefully concealed XtraLarge butt plug.

    I think there would be a place in this country for criminal sanctions against homosexual behavior.

    Hmmm. Homosexual behaviour. Let’s see. Going to work, mowing the lawn, buying groceries … Oh, he means SEX.

    Yes, making sex between two consenting adults a crime would be handy, especially with the sex offender databases being so popular these days. Creepy sick fucks like Spriggs could tell their wives they’re checking the database to make sure there are no sex offenders in the area and avoid those awkward moments when the missus catches them poring over MeetHotStuds .com.

  33. 33
    Ash says:

    So wait, do they only want to outlaw homosexual sodomy? Because even a shit ton of straight dudes like it…

  34. 34
    Fitzwili says:

    @ Max
    I agree wholeheartedly! By trashing Obama using Republican memes and the internecine fighting, we have squandered a great deal. I hope that we can snap out of this spiral and focus on accomplishing things, if we have to get the things done using pragmatism rather than idealism – so be it.

  35. 35
    Martin says:

    @scav: Yes, because booze and tattoos are completely unheard of in the military.

  36. 36
    rob! says:

    I, for one, look forward to our gay and/or brown-skinned overlords. As a white guy, I’m tired of having to run everything.

  37. 37
    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal) says:

    This is why it’s important that DADT be shelved by law and not an Executive Order. It needs to be chiseled in stone and then that stone should be dropped on the heads of people like Sprigg.

    I’d say that dropping it from about a mile up ought to get it through their thick skulls. Repeat if necessary but with more altitude.

  38. 38

    @suzanne:

    Anyone want to place bets on how many times Mr. Sprigg has enjoyed the services of a male escort?
    I’m going to also guess he’s into golden showers.

    I dunno, he strikes me as more of a stinky Hitler kind of guy.

  39. 39
    Catsy says:

    The word that comes to mind is “atavism”.

  40. 40
    CalD says:

    No dog whistles there. They aren’t even hiding it anymore.

    They don’t have to. The left is too busy attacking Democrats these days to much give a fuck what Republicans do.

  41. 41
    Ash Can says:

    @Midnight Marauder: Ssh…don’t tell them, but they’re sinking all their time and effort into recruiting the wrong women.

  42. 42
    inkadu says:

    @Midnight Marauder: So here’s a clip from Jan Larimer:

    http://www.rncwomen.com/video/.....chairman-1

    Question: Is the sound in the background actually a old-fashioned reel camera, or just the sound of an old-fashioned real camera digitally added to make the audience feel more comfortable with this new-fangled double-u double-u double-u?

    Also, I can see an asshole case for the party of Democrats the Democrat party, but using it as an adjective? “The Democrat plan?” What the fuck? I know this has been going on for years now, but it still pisses me off. If Republicans wrote the rules for grammar the plural of moose would be meeses.

  43. 43

    […] the middle of a discussion over the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell debate, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Counsel had something truly bizarre to say: Matthews: Do you think we should outlaw gay behavior?Sprigg: Well, I think […]

  44. 44
    Ash Can says:

    @inkadu:

    Abortion is still murder and jimmy hats are still contraband, but the drip-drip-drip of history the destruction of the middle class thanks to the economic “policies” of these fuckers is eroding the patriarchy.

    Funny how that works.

  45. 45
    NR says:

    Clearly, the answer is for Obama to be bipartisan and reach out to these people more.

  46. 46
    Quiddity says:

    I pledge allegiance to the non-rainbow flag of the Heterosexual United States of America, and to the macho republic for which it stands (as far away from Nancy-boys as possible), one straight nation under a God who hates perverts, twink-free, with liberty and justice for all non fags.

  47. 47
    Mnemosyne says:

    In thematically related news, “Christian” conservatives in Georgia are apparently upset because the authorities want to try to focus on helping child prostitutes escape that life instead of jailing the little harlots. Because, as we all know, 13-year-olds freely choose a life of prostitution and certainly wouldn’t be interested in, say, a safe place to sleep and an education.

  48. 48
    wiley says:

    Freeduuuuuum!!! No government intervention!!!!

    Outlaw homosexual relations.

    Riiiiiight.

  49. 49

    @Ash:

    So wait, do they only want to outlaw homosexual sodomy? Because even a shit ton of straight dudes like it…

    I’ve even heard rumors that some . . . well, a few depraved harlots*, anyways . . . straight *women* like it.

    Not that that concerns Mr. Sprigg at all, straight or gay.

    *Anyone know where I could find a depraved harlot?

  50. 50
  51. 51
    me says:

    @Wile E. Quixote: To paraphrase Bill Hicks; Nero had the right idea, he was just an underachiever.

  52. 52

    @J. Michael Neal:

    straight women like it

    I can confirm this. Heartily.

  53. 53
    wasabi gasp says:

    Alls I know is if that guy handed me a cucumber salad, I ain’t eat’n it.

  54. 54
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    I’m going to applaud Tweety in this case for making the guy come right out and way what he was thinking.

  55. 55
    Alice B. Stuck says:

    No dog whistles there. They aren’t even hiding it anymore.

    That’s because they lost and they know it. No more need for dog whistles. Admiral Mullen drove a nail through their bigoted tiny hearts and made little wingnut baby jeevus cry and nobody can do anything about it. Sprigg and his ilk are dead fish flopping on the bank. Only a matter of time now.

    We usually end up getting shit right in this country, somehow, after decades of angst and tears and injustice that seems stoopid. Maybe cause it is.

  56. 56
    Um Yeah says:

    The only thing Matthews is good at is giving people enough rope to hang themselves.

  57. 57
    b-psycho says:

    Future Kos/R2k poll question for Republicans: “Do you believe a government that can regulate sexual behavior can still be ‘limited’?”

  58. 58
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @inkadu:

    Question: Is the sound in the background actually a old-fashioned reel camera, or just the sound of an old-fashioned real camera digitally added to make the audience feel more comfortable with this new-fangled double-u double-u double-u?
    __
    Also, I can see an asshole case for the party of Democrats the Democrat party, but using it as an adjective? “The Democrat plan?” What the fuck? I know this has been going on for years now, but it still pisses me off. If Republicans wrote the rules for grammar the plural of moose would be meeses.

    First, there definitely was supposed to be an S in my post earlier. That said, forget all the Democrat nonsense. What is that jacket she’s wearing?! The woman looks like an extra from 2 Fast 2 Furious.

  59. 59
    r€nato says:

    Outlaw gay behavior? Does that mean I can’t wear my Dolce & Gabbana belt or shirt? I have to delete their app from my iPhone?

    Cuz, I get told D&G is kinda gay, but I don’t give a shit.

  60. 60
    TuiMel says:

    When did the people of Mr. Spriggs’s ilk ever try to hide it? IMO he and his fellow travelers have plainly stated their BELIEFS about homosexuality (it is a choice; it should be criminal; allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry will destroy marriage) loudly and from many platforms. I find nothing shocking here. What I hope is that more and more people will find his views to be odious, bigotted, and intrusive in the extreme. Then, perhaps, the number of platforms from which they get to bray about their concerns will go to nearly zero.

  61. 61
    Alice B. Stuck says:

    @Max: Shrill!

    And I love it. :>)

  62. 62
    Mumphrey says:

    Well, that just makes me sad. The guy said that people don’t choose to be attracted to people of the same sex, which is, I guess his way of saying they don’t choose to be gay, yet we should still have the right to throw them in jail for acting on their attractions. How is that in any way at all unlike saying that people don’t choose to be black, but hey, unless they go around with white paint on their skin, we should have the right to throw them in jail? Or saying, well, Jewish people might be born into a Jewish family, but if they choose to worship like Jews, well, we’ll just throw them in jail? Or you could say people are born left-handed, but if they insist on living that way, writing and throwing and batting left-handed, in front of good, God-fearing right-handed folk, then we’ll just have to lock them up?

    For my part, I say people don’t choose to be bigoted assholes, but if they choose to behave that way, then we should lock them up for life. I guess Mr. Spriggs is the first in line. Well, jeez, thinking it over, maybe it’s Rush Limbaugh. Or Cheney. Or Sean Hannity. Though it could be Mitch McConnell. Maybe McCain. Glenn Beck? Sarah Palin? Pat Robertson? Michelle Bachmann? John Boehner? Looks like we’re going to have to let a lot of violent criminals out to make room for these creeps…

  63. 63
    Warren Terra says:

    Surely no thread inspired by a discussion of sodomy, especially in Texas, is complete without citing Molly Ivins’s wonderful essay “The Seventy-Third Session”, published in 1993 and included in her second collection “Nothing But Good Times Ahead”. The relevant passage follows, per my retyping into the comment box. I’ve also taken the liberty of bolding the last sentence quoted, for obvious reasons.

    (WARNING: Some salty language, though not quite beyond the bounds for newsmagazine publication)

    The Texas Senate had a rare moment of courage and voted to remove homosexual sodomy from the revised version of the penal code. All were astonished. The revision made its way over to the House, where Representative Chisum promptly rose and introduced an amendment to reinstate the damn thing. The Housies were afraid everyone would think they were queer if they didn’t vote for it, so they did. Then some scholar explains to Chisum that unless he reinstates heterosexual sodomy as well, it’s going to be declared unconstitutional. So Chisum promptly rises and moves to do that.
    Whereupon we had one of the more bizarre debates in the history of the Lege, with assorted avant-garde members rising at the back mike to say approximately, “Uh, Warren, suppose I am in bed with my lawfully wedded spoise and I, like, kind of mis-aim and wind up in the wrong hole. You don’t want to send me to prison for that, do you?”
    Chisum would stoutly reply, “Yes, I do. It’s against nature and the Bible.” So the Housies were afraid everyone would think they were perverts if they didn’t vote it, so they did. Chisum then shook hands with his ally Talmadge Heflin of Houston in celevration of this double triumph, and the Speaker had to sent the sergeant of arms over to reprimand them both. Because under Chisum’s own amendments, it’s illegal for a prick to touch an asshole in this state.

    The whole column is worth reading, of course (and you should be able to at this Amazon Read Inside link – search for “Warren Chisum”, as I can’t figure out how to hyperlink a specific page). It’s a great book, and I’d strongly recommend that anyone who hasn’t read it get a copy from your library or from your local or internet-accessible used bookstore.

  64. 64
    Straight Irish Woman says:

    Manly yes, but I like it too.

  65. 65
    scav says:

    @TuiMel: well, while the beliefs may not be new, they are beginning to frighten the horses with it.

    I think they’re beginning to confuse personal volume with relevance, but that may just be the hope speaking.

  66. 66
    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal) says:

    @Quiddity:

    I pledge allegiance to the non-rainbow flag of the Heterosexual United States of America, and to the macho republic for which it stands (as far away from Nancy-boys as possible), one straight nation under a God who hates perverts, twink-free, with liberty and justice for all non fags.

    Not ‘right’ enough, how about:

    I pledge allegiance,
    to the non-rainbow flag,
    of the United Heterosexual States of America,
    and to the Republican party,
    who wants to destroy it.
    My nation,
    worshiping a non-gay God,
    with gays in prison, or better yet,
    to their deaths send them all.

    Alternatively the last four lines could be:

    A nation,
    of men,
    with dildos in ass,
    wearing two wetsuits and tap dancing in Mens rooms.

  67. 67
    DougJ says:

    @r€nato:

    Outlaw gay behavior? Does that mean I can’t wear my Dolce & Gabbana belt or shirt? I have to delete their app from my iPhone?

    FWIW, the belt and shirt are okay, but the app should probably be outlawed.

  68. 68
    toujoursdan says:

    @Mumphrey:

    This is no surprise. They frequently compare homosexuality with theft, child molestation and murder. People have may have urges to do these, but they believe acting on them should still be against the law.

    That’s the thing about fundamentalism. They can’t think beyond rules and see a distinction between acts which cause objective harm and the breaking of an Abrahamic purity law, which belongs in the same category as eating pork or working on the Sabbath.

    What’s ironic is that Jesus fought against applying purity codes for the sake of applying purity codes throughout his recorded ministry. He ate with the unclean, gathered grain on the Sabbath, condemned people who used Mosaic law to avoid compassion and mercy towards others and questioned the morality of those who wanted to cast stones.

  69. 69
  70. 70
    jayjaybear says:

    Why is it that all of these guys look, as Alice Roosevelt once described Calvin Coolidge, like they were weaned on a pickle?

  71. 71
    MikeJ says:

    Oddly enough, DADT doesn’t outlaw gay “behavior”in the military. Only identifying yourself as gay. If you are caught in the throws of gayness, you can be excused and allowed to stay in the military using a provision they call, “queen for a day”, i.e., you’re not gay, you just like sucking dick.

    If however you say you’re gay but have never had sex with anyone, DADT mandates you be kicked out.

  72. 72
    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal) says:

    @MikeJ: “If you are caught in the throws of gayness…”

    It’s them damned limp wrists, gives them away every time they throw something. ;)

  73. 73
    handy says:

    @NR:

    Heh. I expect a full wingnut walkback on this one.

  74. 74
    inkadu says:

    @Ash Can: Yeah, I was thinking the necessity of work would have caught up to them, and would just write it off to women needing to work; but the other question was is marriage a partnership or does the man wear the pants, etc… and most GOPers went for marriage partnership.

    @Midnight Marauder: Maybe Renato, local man of fashion, can tell us a little bit about Ms. Larimer’s flame-retardant suit.

    Did I say flame-retardant? I meant flame-special-needs.

  75. 75
    cmorenc says:

    @Violet:

    Matthews does have a knack for asking pointed questions. I kinda like that about him. Of course he gives idiots like this – and every other kind of idiot – a platform, which is wrong. But at least when he does he frequently seems to get them to show their true colors.

    Yes Tweety indeed can every now and then show bona fide genuine talent for incisively probing television journalism – unfortunately, most of the time he’s too distracted interviewing himself to get very far with his guests.

  76. 76
    Mumphrey says:

    @toujoursdan:

    Well, yeah, but we all know Jesus was Jewish, so how can we really trust him? Also, I bet he was gay, too. And black. I’m pretty sure he was a stoner, as well; he wore sandals and had a beard, so, you know, that just screams “stoner!” to me.

    Fundamentalists astound me. I can’t begin to understand what makes them tick. If Jesus came back tomorrow, it would be the fundamentalist Christians who’d be first in line to strap him into the gas chamber for blasphemy or something.

  77. 77
    scav says:

    @MikeJ: oh you gotta love the law. And I am totally stealing the throws of gayness, so much better than the throes of gayness and I don’t know why. The sheer elan of it all I guess.

  78. 78
    MikeJ says:

    @DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal): Goddammit, every night between 8-10pm I make an embarrassing typo/thinko. If I ever decide to not drink with dinner you’ll start seeing razor sharp reasoning here.

  79. 79

    @J. Michael Neal:

    Anyone know where I could find a depraved harlot?

    Go to Wasilla, Alaska and ask for Sarahcuda. Leave the money in a plain brown envelope on the dresser and don’t call her kid a retard.

  80. 80
    inkadu says:

    @Mumphrey: With a name like Jesus, you know he must have been one of those Mexican jews.

  81. 81
    scav says:

    @MikeJ: Don’t apologize. Some of us would even feed you alcohol for typos of the ilk.

  82. 82

    @toujoursdan:

    That’s the thing about fundamentalism. They can’t think beyond rules and see a distinction between acts which cause objective harm and the breaking of an Abrahamic purity law, which belongs in the same category as eating pork or working on the Sabbath.

    So if I had hot gay sex on the Sabbath, and then replenished my precious bodily fluids with a chocolate shake and double bacon double cheeseburger, just how busted would I be?

  83. 83
    KDP says:

    @Max: I am looking forward to what I hope will be a a$$whopping tomorrow morning on C-Span. What will impress me more will be if the other cable news stations give us the same 90 minutes of uninterrupted broadcast.

  84. 84
    slag says:

    Damn. Not content with outlawing gay sex, they have to go all the way to outlawing gay “behavior”?

    Not only does renato lose the outfit, but no more show tunes? No more Golden Girls? And how’s a straight girl supposed to get a decent haircut anymore?^

    These people aren’t just after teh gay. They’re after our whole way of life!

    ^ = Apologies to anyone offended by use of gay stereotypes for humor purposes. But seriously, the haircut thing…that better not happen.

  85. 85

    @MikeJ:

    Oddly enough, DADT doesn’t outlaw gay “behavior”in the military. Only identifying yourself as gay. If you are caught in the throws of gayness, you can be excused and allowed to stay in the military using a provision they call, “queen for a day”, i.e., you’re not gay, you just like sucking dick.

    I’m sure that’s the excuse that Jimmy Dobson and Mr. Sprigg use. “We’re not gay, we’re sucking each other’s dick like good Christians.” Or maybe they use one of these excuses.

  86. 86
    Liberty60 says:

    “Tonight on Hardball- Another dead ender heard from.”

  87. 87
    GregB says:

    In the event it hasn’t be re-posted.

    The Onion covered these closet loony tunes quite well.

    -G

  88. 88
    t jasper parnell says:

    @Straight Irish Woman: Ha, that some fine commentatering.

  89. 89
    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal) says:

    @MikeJ:

    Naah, keep it up because it gives me something to do to amuse myself.

    I’m easily amused…lol

  90. 90

    I don’t know how many of you caught that trackback above, but that’s Charles Johnson of LGF posting on True/Slant!? How did I miss that?

    The conversion must be almost complete.

  91. 91

    Re: outlawing homosexual “behavior.”

    I am curious if the fundies also include in that definition oral sex, because I’m pretty sure there are some heteros who enjoy that type of behavior as well.

  92. 92
    gex says:

    Now, I need more details about this which so called “gay behavior” he thinks should be criminalized, because I don’t think they have the entire list down. I’m going to guess most of the rules will restrict effeminate behaviors in gay men. Lesbians will hopefully still be allowed to drive trucks and join fantasy football leagues, right?

  93. 93
    mr. whipple says:

    If you are caught in the throws of gayness

    How does one get in the throws of gayness? Is it like baseball?

  94. 94
    ajr22 says:

    This segment just made me hate Tim Tebow even more. These people scary me, and the fact that he is acting as their spokes person pisses me off. At least he is gonna suck in the nfl, and hopefully get the shit kicked out of him.

  95. 95
    scav says:

    @mr. whipple: yeah, but you’re allowed four balls.

  96. 96
    The Republic of Stupidity says:

    @gex:

    Lesbians will hopefully still be allowed to drive trucks and join fantasy football leagues, right?

    And make lots and lots of pay-per-view videos for Rupert Murdoch… lots and lots and lots of them… w/ titles like Blond on Blond… or Catch’er In the Rye… or My Naked Lunch With Andrea

  97. 97
    Church Lady says:

    @Wile E. Quixote:

    “….replenished my precious bodily fluids…”

    I think I just threw up a little bit.

  98. 98
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @inkadu:

    Maybe Renato, local man of fashion, can tell us a little bit about Ms. Larimer’s flame-retardant suit.
    Did I say flame-retardant? I meant flame-special-needs.

    A winner is you.

    @b-psycho:

    Future Kos/R2k poll question for Republicans: “Do you believe a government that can regulate sexual behavior can still be ‘limited’?”

    This should happen.

    +2

  99. 99
    Mike in NC says:

    Gotta love these crackpots and the labels they choose: Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, Club for Growth. Some really Orwellian shit there.

  100. 100
    metalgirl says:

    @Midnight Marauder: I would so love to see them answer that one :)

  101. 101
    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal) says:

    @mr. whipple:

    Well, it could involve a baseball. I’m pretty sure being “caught in the throws of gayness” means that you are a gay guy, you are hiding it and you are spotted throwing something without a wrist brace.

    Maybe it’s when you are told to throw the grenade and it lands right outside your foxhole? Either way, it’s clear that this wouldn’t be a problem if they would only wear wrist braces.

  102. 102
    BongCrosby says:

    A sprig is a small shoot or twig of a plant.

    Peter is a synonym for….well, you know.

    I think one could make a credible argument that “Peter Sprigg” is, in fact, a synonym for “small penis.”

  103. 103
    darryl says:

    February 2nd, 2010 at 10:45 pm Reply to this comment
    Mnemosyne
    In thematically related news, “Christian” conservatives in Georgia are apparently upset because the authorities want to try to focus on helping child prostitutes escape that life instead of jailing the little harlots. Because, as we all know, 13-year-olds freely choose a life of prostitution and certainly wouldn’t be interested in, say, a safe place to sleep and an education.

    It’s often seemed to me that a christian conservative is a normal person whose conscience has been removed, and replaced with a double dose of righteousness.

  104. 104
    slag says:

    @The Republic of Stupidity:

    My Naked Lunch With Andrea

    I understand the Naked part and the Andrea part. But why switch from Dinner to Lunch? Just curious.

  105. 105
    de stijl says:

    The throw rugs of gayness

    The throw pillows of gayness

    Getting thrown under the bus of gayness

    Throws gay, bats left

  106. 106
    The Republic of Stupidity says:

    @slag:

    Oh… just an attempt to combine Naked Lunch W/ My Dinner w/ Andre and make it sound pseudo-arty and porny at the same time…

  107. 107
    DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal) says:

    It’s often seemed to me that a christian conservative is a normal person whose conscience has been removed, and replaced with a double dose of mean-spirited righteousness.

    Improved. ;)

  108. 108
    slag says:

    @The Republic of Stupidity: Ah. That makes sense. I’m actually glad I asked.

  109. 109
    Anne Laurie says:

    @Martin:

    I think they’re on the ropes here. At some point soon the courts are going to rule that sexual orientation can’t be treated as a choice and that’ll be the game.

    Not while the Opus Dei squadron (Roberts, Scalia, Alito & Thomas) are on the SCOTUS.* “Walking back” a century of stare decisis just to give ADM greater freedom in buying Congressmen wholesale was just a shot across the prow.

    *”The Scrotes of SCOTUS” — worst Playgirl photospread evah.

  110. 110
    soonergrunt says:

    That gay man on the Matthews clip–he’s my brother. He stood up when so many others wouldn’t and still don’t today. The other guy–I don’t want him anywhere near me or mine or to have anything to do with making laws.
    These religious nuts, particularly the FoF types creep me the fuck out.
    I’d rather have a whole squad of gay men than one single Christian Conservative in a fight.

    And another thing (and yes, I know this is a cliche`) did anyone notice how ‘Christian Conservatives are neither Christian nor Conservative’?

  111. 111
    Morbo says:

    Hey, awesome, Carly Fiorina wants to be my Senator. Good luck with that, Carly; way to target those ad dollars. Pandora does a better job for crying out loud.

  112. 112
    TuiMel says:

    Watching Gates and Mullen testify about DADT. I think even those who are NOT C-Span junkies would find this very illuminating. McCain was at his pricky old jerk finest. Watch and be grateful he never was and never will be elected POTUS.

  113. 113

    @soonergrunt:

    I agree wholeheartedly, and you’re remarks led me to a tangential question: what percentage of the LGBT community is nonreligious? What % of armed servicemen and women that are LGBT are nonreligious?

    Because as an atheist, I obviously have a confirmation bias trending towards gays and lesbians being overwhelmingly secular after bearing the brunt of constant religious bigotry, but who knows? The point I am heading towards would be in the vein of saying that for the most part, we are self-aware of the oaths we take and honor them regardless of reward.

    In short, we have no reason to lie out of cowardice in the face of an unaccountable higher judgment, and also, atheists make the worlds worst suicide bombers.

  114. 114
    Mouse Tolliver says:

    Sometimes when Tweety flips his Two Face coin, the side without the scratch marks comes up.

  115. 115
    Yutsano says:

    @slag: I just want to say, for the record, the best haircut I ever had was from a straight married male.

  116. 116

    @Yutsano:

    4. Do the regulations governing the private sector ensure that auditor’s opinion is “totally” independent and unbiased? Do you agree that Ferguson should have been replaced?

    I used to get very good haircuts from a straight, married male who attended Michigan State on a football scholarship. Of course, other than being attracted to women, he completely fit the stereotype of the gay hairdresser. How he avoided getting beat up in the locker room, I’ll never understand.

    Unfortunately, he moved to Chicago.

  117. 117
    Yutsano says:

    @J. Michael Neal: Maybe I’m just being slow tonight, but where does your blockquote come from?

  118. 118

    @Yutsano: It comes from an auditing case I’m working on. I apparently failed to properly copy this, which was supposed to be the blockquote:

    I just want to say, for the record, the best haircut I ever had was from a straight married male.

    I’m well known for doing this over at Baseball Think Factory, but I think it’s the first time I’ve done it here.

  119. 119

    Kinda makes you want to slap somebody, but they’d probably find it sexually gratifying. When these idjits are given a platform and asked the right questions they make asses of themselves in front of people and that is a good thing.

    Somebody(ies) above once again is ranting about the left “attacking” Democrats, the operative question in this case is, “Exactly who do you think you’re attacking?” with this shit? Martians?

  120. 120
    Yutsano says:

    @J. Michael Neal: Knowing what you do, I suspected this might be the case. However I never assume that I might be missing a detail from somewhere.

    The case sounds interesting.

  121. 121

    @freelancer (itouch):

    as an atheist, I obviously have a confirmation bias trending towards gays and lesbians being overwhelmingly secular.

    Andrew Sullivan, Bishop Robinson and the Metropolitan Church communities would like a word with you.

  122. 122
    Yutsano says:

    @arguingwithsignposts: *ahem*

    :: gay theist raises hand ::

    Secular maybe, I know quite a few that believe. Me and the Dawg being just two examples.

  123. 123

    @Yutsano: It’s about a conflict between Callmate Tellips, a Pakistani wireless telecoms firm, and A.F. Ferguson, the Pakistani arm of PWC. The whole thing is a mess from which no one ended up looking good. I think my favorite part is that, in an attempt to manipulate its shares, Callmate ended up with more shares owned in the badla market (a crazy method for avoiding ownership disclosure and margin requirements) than it had in its public float.

  124. 124
    Yutsano says:

    @J. Michael Neal: Wow…maybe it’s all the random education I’ve been getting from the fallout from the financial crisis, but I kinda get what the basic issue is. I’m not familiar with the players involved, but FWIW I get a better understanding of what forensic accounting is now.

  125. 125

    I fail to see how the belief in the lack of something is more credible than the belief in the existence of something. I sincerly dislike the misuse of religion, but misuse doesn’t make something bad. I say this as one with no religion whatever. I don’t kick belief systems, whether they’re theistic or atheistic, but they are belief systems and denying it is silly and intellectually dishonest.

    I’ve known plenty of gay theists and churches that support them whole heartedly. Laying the abuse of assholes on everyone is…well, silly.

  126. 126
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @Yutsano: Yes, I am commenting on every thread you are on until you respond!

    I am a bi agnostic. I believe in something–I am just not exactly sure what that something is. As for the asshattery so proudly on display here, well, I would like to outlaw bigoted assholes like him, but I wouldn’t really do it because it would be fucking unconstitutional and not really breaking any laws. Good lord. I bet this guy thinks he’s a true American, too. Wah, wah, wah. Change all the laws to keep me safe in my little world. What the fuck ever.

  127. 127

    @Yutsano: Yeah, when there are more shares purchased than the company has issued, there’s pretty clearly a problem. Even American companies haven’t been that brazen.

    That wasn’t the nut of the case, though, just a fascinating sidelight. Basically, the company and the auditor appear to have disagreed over revenue recognition, then decided that they hated each other, and started lobbing charges that escalated from the plausible but contradictory to the outright ridiculous. Then the SECP (Securities and Exchange Commission Pakistan) weighed in on the side of the auditors, and the High Court of Sindh took the side of the company, and turned it into a Regulatory Death Match.

    My write-up basically concluded that, in the end, it was impossible to figure out whose charges were actually true, but that all the parties involved behaved disgracefully, and that I have no intention of putting any money into anything traded on the Karachi Stock Exchange.

  128. 128
    Yutsano says:

    @asiangrrlMN: I think I feel stalked loved now. But, not to put too fine a point on it, I did answer. And to answer the digging question in your brain, no the Dawg and I aren’t the same religion.

    @J. Michael Neal: Heh. I don’t blame you there. In fact I don’t think I would even dip a toe in European markets honestly.

  129. 129

    I’m watching the Bangladesh/New Zealand Twenty20. The New Zealand accent is great. The commentators keep telling me that, “He hit that one for sex.”

  130. 130

    @Yutsano:
    I am not certain that “secular” is the right word to contrast with theism in freelancer’s sentence, anyway. If that’s what freelancer means in the first place.

    Secular would be believing in a church-state separation. In the context of atheism as presented in the original statement, it’s unclear that’s what he meant.

  131. 131
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @Yutsano: You should feel stalked loved now. I saw you answered! I hope your back isn’t giving you too much trouble. I know you are Jewish. The Dawg, some branch of Christianity?

    @arguingwithsignposts: How’s Smudgey?

  132. 132
    Yutsano says:

    @asiangrrlMN: @arguingwithsignposts: Yesh. This thread needs more Smudge.

  133. 133

    @arguingwithsignposts: Woo hoo! A chance to be pedantic! And hopefully piss off Stuck if he shows up.

    Secular would be believing in a church-state separation.

    Not quite, though that it often one of the side effects. Secularism is putting the main focus of attention on humans, rather than God. A secular theist basically believes that how we treat each other is more important than exactly how we relate to God. The latter may be very important, but secondary, or even the result of, the former.

  134. 134
    scav says:

    @J. Michael Neal: cool, pedantry! so what’s the difference between secularism and humanism? because your definition is what I thought humanism was.

  135. 135
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @scav: I second that question. It sounds pretty humanistic to me.

  136. 136

    @J. Michael Neal:
    Just going from the wikipedia, it’s a pretty squishy term.

    “Secularism is not an argument against Christianity, it is one independent of it. It does not question the pretensions of Christianity; it advances others. Secularism does not say there is no light or guidance elsewhere, but maintains that there is light and guidance in secular truth, whose conditions and sanctions exist independently, and act forever. Secular knowledge is manifestly that kind of knowledge which is founded in this life, which relates to the conduct of this life, conduces to the welfare of this life, and is capable of being tested by the experience of this life.”

    Still, it is incorrect to use the term as contra theism, which seems to be what freelancer was inferring.

    However, it should be noted that fundies like to use the term in that way. (often with “humanism” appended)

  137. 137

    @asiangrrlMN: @Yutsano:
    Like this?

    She has developed the ability to open a cabinet door where I keep cleaning supplies, which is not a good thing, and which means I have to get some sort of latch. I’ve also learned not to put a whole small can of cat food in her bowl at one time or she won’t eat all of it, and then half the can goes to waste.

    Haven’t been able to take pics for a couple days because of an electrical short in my apt. which just got fixed this evening. Fun stuff.

  138. 138

    @scav:

    cool, pedantry! so what’s the difference between secularism and humanism? because your definition is what I thought humanism was.

    There’s a lot of overlap between them. Although, I did come closer to defining humanism than secularism, properly. Pedantry fail.

    Secularism is basically that things can be judged purely by their effects in this world. Value is a material judgment. It’s also closely related to empiricism, explicitly stripped of any supernatural element.

  139. 139
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @arguingwithsignposts: She is such a doll. I mentioned child locks the last time you commented that she has learned how to open closets. As for the tin food, yeah. I don’t feed my boys a whole can each time, either. Can’t wait until you post new pics of her.

  140. 140

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    However, it should be noted that fundies like to use the term in that way. (often with “humanism” appended)

    I know plenty of secular humanists that like to use the term that way, too*. Oddly, the two sides actually mean something pretty similar when they use it. They mostly disagree one the desirability of secular humanism, and the likely consequences if we all adopted it.

    *Despite my religious beliefs being in flux at the moment, this includes myself, though I am currently drawing distinctions between myself and the sort of secular humanists that hang out at Unitarian churches. I’m a Universalist, and firmly believe that Unitarians think too much.

  141. 141

    Looks like I’m going to be going to bed earlier than expected. Bangladesh just completely laid an egg, and I expect New Zealand to chase down the target in a half hour, tops.

  142. 142
    Yutsano says:

    @arguingwithsignposts: That’s the sort of thing that has me hissing and spitting at the landlord to get corrected ASAFP or else I’ll fix it myself and they can just deduct the bill from my rent. But at least the lights are back on and Smudge has heat again.

  143. 143
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @Yutsano: I would like to see you hissing and spitting. I have a hunch that would be highly amusing to watch.

    Yawn. It’s bedtime for me. Early, I know, but I have to take my sleep where I can get it. Night!

  144. 144

    @Yutsano:
    @asiangrrlMN:
    Here’s a profile from the same set as the tongue.

    @asiangrrlMN – sorry I missed that. I posted that in the morning before going to work.

    @Yutsano – The landlord spent most of the day working on it. I still had electricity in the kitchen (which was the breaker that the heat was on as well), so it wasn’t totally bad. Two wall outlets apparently blew out, and they couldn’t figure out which ones at first. A wasted day, but at least it wasn’t a pipe bursting or something.

    ETA: Nobody would want me messing with electrical sockets. Least of all me. :)

  145. 145
    Yutsano says:

    @asiangrrlMN: Heh. I’m a Scorpio. Me mad is not a pretty sight. Not a pretty sight at all, especially after I pass the volcano blowing up stage. I keep it under wraps though. For the most part.

  146. 146
    scav says:

    @J. Michael Neal: ain’t nothing cuter (or amusingly pedantic) than inter UU distinctions. Night Night. I’m leaving now so that I’ll spend hours trying to figure out if your Bangladeshi Egg being chased by New Zealand pertains to dodgy telecom shares or some sort of ball.

  147. 147
    Yutsano says:

    @scav: The best part? No matter what your conclusion is you’re probably right.

  148. 148

    @Yutsano:
    What is the point of a Unitarian Universalist theological debate? I don’t have that much experience with their belief system, but it seems that such a debate would be a distinction without a difference.

  149. 149
    Blue Raven says:

    Hm. Based on this, I’m a bisexual polytheist (henotheistic, so I only worship a handful instead of feeling the need to act like I can cover the bases with dozens in a sweeping generalization) and a bit of a secularist as well. I already knew I had humanist tendencies, but those started with my Roman Catholic upbringing. Gods bless the spiritual descendants of Father De La Salle. All the sensible logic of Jesuits with none of the Inquisition baggage.

  150. 150
    Yutsano says:

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    What is the point of a Unitarian Universalist theological debate?

    They call it church on Sunday. Actually there is a set of beliefs in the UU church, the biggest one being that the trinity is pretty much horsepuckey. Jesus is emphasized more for his human aspects than his divine ones. It fits rather neatly with my own religious regard for the man.

  151. 151

    @Blue Raven:

    All the sensible logic of Jesuits with none of the Inquisition baggage.

    They should put that on a bumper sticker.

    @Yutsano: But absent some sort of foundational documents like the Bible, the Mormon Book, the Koran or the like, it seems sort of a waste of time to argue about the trinity. I will have to attend a UU sometime, although I like sleeping in on Sunday too much.

  152. 152
    de stijl says:

    I just like typing UU

    It looks like boobies!

  153. 153
    Yutsano says:

    @arguingwithsignposts: They have good coffee, plus they tend to have late morning or early afternoon services. I have a good friend who’s a UU, she’s tried to get me to go with her except I work on Sundays. She’s awesome, she might be letting me borrow her husband as a date for my wedding in Arizona. I just had to promise not to let him spend too much money.

  154. 154

    Heh, sorry to drop a vague bomb and just walk away like that.

    Yeah, AWS you pretty much got it on the nose. Like I said in my post aimed at soonergrunt, I was, for the most part, being interrogative. I was curious if the widespread and permeating persecution of gays and lesbians made them more or less averse to religion, at least the organized ones.

    @Blue Raven:

    Polytheist? Really? Godsdamnnit
    @de stijl:

    Church ServiceFAIL

    And yes, I’m referring to openly, unashamed gays in the vein of something like valid polling data. I know that anecdotally, you’d be able to counter any findings with examples like Sully, Ted Haggard, and a plurality of Catholic priests.

  155. 155

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    Actually there is a set of beliefs in the UU church, the biggest one being that the trinity is pretty much horsepuckey.

    This is true historically, but is something I disagree with in contemporary Unitarianism/Universalism. In fact, it gets to the heart of one of the biggest problems with the way that so many UU congregations operate: a contempt for orthodox Christians, whether they accept the liberal traditions or not. It’s something we talk about at my church from time to time: the biggest change that UUs need to make is to be accepting of trinitarian Christians. We are tolerant of Buddhists, atheists, Jews, agnostics, Wiccans, and every stray mutt that comes along, but drive away Christians. It’s the biggest flaw I see in those around me.

    I see so much potential in Universalism for expansion. (Less so for Unitarianism. That’s not a condemnation, just a belief that an explicitly non-spiritual, intellectual approach to religion is less likely to develop mass appeal.) However, until we can open the doors to a truly dogma-free theology, and react in a positive way to someone who wants to offer us their testimony, that growth potential is going to be stunted.

  156. 156

    @Yutsano:

    They have good coffee

    The proper measure of a UU is whether they put the coffee maker at the top of the list of Most Important Household Appliances. They pass if they can’t come up with anything else to put at #2.

  157. 157

    @freelancer (itouch):

    Nonlinear EDIT on a smartphone-like device fail.

    Frak.

  158. 158
    Yutsano says:

    @J. Michael Neal: My friend and her husband all know the really good coffee places around town (as do I, it’s a Northwest thing, I’ll get into my Atlanta experience with coffee another time) and we sample the various goods all the time and almost never at the same place twice. They have a lot of used and second-hand appliances in their kitchen…and a brand new coffee maker.

  159. 159

    @freelancer (itouch): Well, I did mention the Metropolitan Churches. They did have a sizable church in Dallas a few years ago, and are pretty mainline.

    I don’t count Ted Haggard and the like. I wouldn’t even put him in the same sentence. Although Sullivan lives in a strong field of cognitive dissonance, at least he’s honest about his sexuality. (I know you are joking)

    I too would be curious about any such polling data. There is this from Barna:

    Nearly half (47 percent) of heterosexual adults qualify as born-again Christians compared to 27 percent of homosexuals. Also, 75 percent of straight adults reported having made “a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important” in their life today. Fifty-eight percent of homosexual adults said the same.
    __
    While six out of ten heterosexuals said they are absolutely committed to the Christian faith, only four out of ten homosexuals expressed such commitment.

    Not quite as high as heteros, but still a sizable amount consider themselves religious in some way.

  160. 160

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    That sounds pretty close to what I’d expect though.@arguingwithsignposts:

    I will have to attend a UU sometime, although I like sleeping in on Sunday too much.

    I’ve done the same with the local atheist meetup. I feel for the organizer, what can I say? We’re like herding cats.

    @yutsano

    have you seen A Serious Man yet? If not, I highly recommend it. To everyone here in fact. One of the smartest movies ive ever seen, and damned funny too, as only the Coen’s can.

  161. 161
    Yutsano says:

    @freelancer (itouch): I’m so far behind on my movie watching it’s not even funny. Some day maybe I’ll catch up. I work for a movie distributor too it’s not like I have an excuse or anything.

  162. 162

    @freelancer (itouch):

    have you seen A Serious Man yet? If not, I highly recommend it. To everyone here in fact. One of the smartest movies ive ever seen, and damned funny too, as only the Coen’s can.

    I need to see it at some point. I think that the Coen Brothers are miss more often than hit (I hate Fargo, for instance), but Nicole Kruex is an acquaintance/former boss.

    Yeah, she’s that hot in real life.

  163. 163
    Ted the Slacker says:

    Should point out that the Republican Party of Texas still runs on a platform that declares:

    We oppose the legalization of sodomy.

    It’s less the case that it’s been hidden, more that it has not been reported.

  164. 164

    […] View video over at Ballon Juice. […]

  165. 165
    bob h says:

    The real thing Taliban are actually cool with homosexuality, I believe. Abuse of boys is quite a common thing, I have read.

  166. 166
    kay says:

    I think the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas which overturned the sodomy laws in this country was wrongly decided.

    Lawrence isn’t just about sodomy laws. It’s about the whether there is or is not protection in the US constitution against state interference in private consensual sexual behavior between adults.

    And the answer to that question should matter to everyone.

    In a sense they’re still lying. Lawrence has much broader implications than he’s letting on here.

  167. 167
  168. 168
    Remember November says:

    Nice to see their hatred and bigotry and Victorian mores have been outed. Funny tho, most of England’s kinkiest times were in teh Victorian age.

    WHat a bunch of retro-primates. Bet he cuts a hole in his sheet for his wife and fantasizes about buggering altar boys.

  169. 169
    Remember November says:

    @Ted the Slacker:

    but to them getting a hummer from a hooker is not “sodomy”

  170. 170
    toujoursdan says:

    My Brooklyn, NY Episcopal Church is about 1/3 gay. We have a gay priest who has been in a relationship for ten years. The parish in the neighbouring area also has a gay priest. Our bishop is heterosexual but has a lesbian daughter who is married to another women and living in MA.

    When he became bishop he ordered all openly gay priests in relationships in the diocese to get married/civil unioned so that their relationships are taken just as seriously as straight marriages.

    A rather small percentage of the Episcopal Church (at most 5-10%) is gnashing their teeth over gay people in their midst but most people accept it, have moved on and treat gay couples like anyone else. Many gay people (particularly ex-Catholics and ex-Orthodox) end up at Episcopal churches because they like the worship but are tired of the rejection.

  171. 171
    Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony says:

    The Family Research Council never hid it.

  172. 172

    […] good recaps of the hearing are here, here, and here.  Honestly, I’m a bit bummed it’ll take a year, but I’d rather they do this right so when it […]

  173. 173

    […] 3, 2010 Homogenic Posted by curv3ball under Uncategorized Leave a Comment  This exchange from a Chris Matthews interview with the Family Research Council’s Peter Sprigg makes me […]

  174. 174
    AxelFoley says:

    @inkadu:

    Did I say flame-retardant? I meant flame-special-needs.

    LOL, I see what you did there.

  175. 175
    soonergrunt says:

    @bob h:
    Yes. It is so. I searched a TB safe house once and we found a huge stash of man/boy and a much smaller one of man/girl (as in younger than 10) porn.
    Old saying in Afghanistan–Women are for procreation. Boys are for recreation.

  176. 176
    Mike in NC says:

    Old saying in Afghanistan—Women are for procreation. Boys are for recreation.

    That’s the way they played it in Bahrain, and pretty much all over the Middle East.

  177. 177
    Interrobang says:

    Just remember, whenever you see a right-wing organisation with “Family” in the name, the name will always make more sense if you substitute “Patriarchy” instead.

    Chuck Butcher: I fail to see how the belief in the lack of something is more credible than the belief in the existence of something.

    That’s because atheism isn’t a belief in the lack of something (*headdesk*), it’s a lack of belief in something. There is no “lack,” to believe in; there’s just no belief. If you’re having trouble getting your head around that idea, spend a few moments pondering how you believe there’s no such goddess as Innana. Or how you believe there’s no such god as Inkadu. Or how you believe there’s no such spiritual figure as The Coyote. Sounding ridiculous yet?

    The thing is, you don’t believe there’s no Innana, Inkadu, Coyote, Thor, Anansi, whoever; you don’t believe in any of them.

    Personally, I believe in one less god than most Christians, is all…

  178. 178

    […] As Sargent points out, when asked whether Obama “understand the problems of people like you,” 57% said yes, 42% said no and 2% were undecided. And the Post chooses to portray this by asserting “almost half” of the respondents feel he is disconnected. They’re not even trying anymore; just like the guy on Hardball yesterday who, in explaining his opposition to ending DADT, said he wanted to outlaw homosexuality. […]

  179. 179
    celticdragonchick says:

    After watching this segment, I only wonder that people ask me why I am armed.

    I know that there men like Sprigg who are willing to use the coercive power of the state and even deadly force to enact their religious agenda on everybody else. They are dangerous and they are not going away.

    If I think for one moment that somebody like him is in any way a threat to my person or my family, I will keep shooting until I am satisfied that he won’t be a threat again.

    Never take for granted that the freedoms we have now are permanent. Never assume that history trends towards justice. There are an awful lot of very wealthy and very motivated “conservatives” who are willing to throw me and you into prison or see us dead…and they vote.

  180. 180
    zoe kentucky in pittsburgh says:

    It’s people like Peter Sprigg (and all of the other crazy professional anti-gay folks in the beltway) that keep me from being too angry and vindicitive towards the Dems. I want to scream whenever I hear any of my fellow lefties act like letting the GOP back in power is somehow a punishment that the dems need and deserve. It just goes so show that they’re not adequately scared enough of how crazy the right-wing is and what they would try to do if they thought they could get away with it.

    My partner and I have been together for over 10 years. I don’t ever pretend that that shit couldn’t get ugly/crazy enough in this country that we couldn’t be rounded up and prosecuted. I suppose my identity as a Jewish lesbian sort of helps me never forget that things can go in a very bad direction when you least expect it.

    There are more of us than there of them BUT they don’t have doubts that they are completely right and would pretty much do anything to get their bigoted beliefs enshrined into law.

  181. 181

    […] Family Research Center flack Peter Sprigg (which, come to think of it, wouldn’t be a bad gay porn name) flat cut to the case. He just wants to outlaw the gays entirely. […]

  182. 182
    Dennis says:

    DId anyone notice, or did I hear wrong, around the 8:10 mark – did Peter Sprigg actually admit he thinks people are born gay (“they do not choose to have homosexual attraction but they do choose to engage in it” or something to that effect)? Regardless of the idiocy of the rest of his comments, that’s fairly interesting.

  183. 183
    Danny Libre says:

    That’s funny, i like it. happens all the time

    Follow me on Twitter

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] Family Research Center flack Peter Sprigg (which, come to think of it, wouldn’t be a bad gay porn name) flat cut to the case. He just wants to outlaw the gays entirely. […]

  2. […] As Sargent points out, when asked whether Obama “understand the problems of people like you,” 57% said yes, 42% said no and 2% were undecided. And the Post chooses to portray this by asserting “almost half” of the respondents feel he is disconnected. They’re not even trying anymore; just like the guy on Hardball yesterday who, in explaining his opposition to ending DADT, said he wanted to outlaw homosexuality. […]

  3. […] 3, 2010 Homogenic Posted by curv3ball under Uncategorized Leave a Comment  This exchange from a Chris Matthews interview with the Family Research Council’s Peter Sprigg makes me […]

  4. […] good recaps of the hearing are here, here, and here.  Honestly, I’m a bit bummed it’ll take a year, but I’d rather they do this right so when it […]

  5. […] View video over at Ballon Juice. […]

  6. […] the middle of a discussion over the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell debate, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Counsel had something truly bizarre to say: Matthews: Do you think we should outlaw gay behavior?Sprigg: Well, I think […]

Comments are closed.