I Have Your Answer

jackass

Since you’ve asked, Damon, let me clear up the confusion.

When you oppose marriage equality because it makes you feel icky and you just can’t bear the thought of facing your invisible sky jeebus and think that you have the right to some things based on a 2000 year old work of fiction and others do not, simply based on sexual orientation, you’re pretty much veering into the homophobe zone, if not already parked there with a lifetime parking pass.

bible_is_used_to_justify_homophobia

When every time Obama comes on tv and you feel the urge to yell Kenyan socialist or you say things like “he doesn’t share OUR values” or if you belong to a group of people who (and this is where we start to see a coincidence) used (and still do) a 2000 year old work of fiction to justify treating people differently just because of the color of their skin, then you are probably a little racist.

raceandchurch

I hope this helps.

And by the way, regarding this:

Writing at The New Republic, Isaac Chotiner doesn’t much appreciate my argument about the growing cockiness of secular liberals. Where I see liberals arrogantly (and illiberally) pushing traditionalist religious believers into a corner with ObamaCare’s contraception mandate and anti-discrimination laws surrounding gay marriage, Chotiner sees…no problem at all. That’s exactly how I’d expect a committed secular liberal to respond. Which is why I wrote the column in the first place.

And this:

Chotiner and his fellow secular liberals may well be right that traditionalist views of sexuality are bound to evolve, with nearly everyone destined to accept and affirm the dignity of homosexual relationships. But given the commitments of these same liberals to personal freedom, shouldn’t they also insist that the evolution take place at its own pace, without being forcibly imposed by the coercive powers of the state?

When you write stuff like that, I’m not gonna judge whether you are a racist or a bigot, but I will tell you that you are a total gaping asshole.

*** Update ***

Somewhat related:

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit

111 replies
  1. 1
    Bart says:

    FYI: Looks like you incorrectly closed the quote, since your response and the share/shave buttons are included.

  2. 2

    I love how these boors have co-opted religion. Or is this Linker person saying that anyone who is religious is illiberal and believe the vile bullshit that many fundamentalists peddle?

    ETA: Where does someone like Mr Rogers who was an ordained minister or President Carter figure in this calculus.

  3. 3
    JPL says:

    The right is trying to get their base out in 2014 so they need someone to kick.

  4. 4
    JPL says:

    double post.. whoops

  5. 5
    Chris says:

    “Is opposing gay marriage the same as being a racist?”

    Yes.

    Next question.

  6. 6
    dmsilev says:

    @schrodinger’s cat: Usually, they have the causal arrow pointing in the other direction, that anyone who is liberal is incapable of being religious.

  7. 7

    Great Tunch in the sky please make the snow stop. Its still coming down here in Mass and the road outside my house is snow covered and you can’t see the asphalt or the yellow line.

  8. 8
    Gypsy Howell says:

    Chotiner and his fellow secular liberals may well be right that traditionalist views of sexuality are bound to evolve, with nearly everyone destined to accept and affirm the dignity of homosexual relationships.

    That’s what’s even more infuriating, and why I give them no quarter on their “beliefs.” He knows he’s wrong. He just doesn’t feel like giving up his racism and bigotry quite yet.

  9. 9
    Baud says:

    But given the commitments of these same liberals to personal freedom, shouldn’t they also insist that the evolution take place at its own pace, without being forcibly imposed by the coercive powers of the state?

    I remember when the coercive power of the state imposed algebra on me. I still have the mental scars.

  10. 10
    Hill Dweller says:

    Wingnuts are always playing the victim.

  11. 11

    The conservative Christians act as if they are the only Christians on the planet and what they say goes for all of them. But there are a number of Christian denominations that embrace marriage equality and celebrate it, including the Religious Society of Friends, more commonly known as the Quakers, the Unitarians, and the United Church of Christ. They just don’t have the lungs or the chutzpah to try to corner the market on sanctimony.

    Why, yes, I am a Quaker. How did you know?

  12. 12
    catclub says:

    @Baud: The beliefs are not being forcibly changed. It is the actions that the state can come down against. But the writer seems to confuse the two on purpose.

  13. 13

    @dmsilev: Part of my schooling was in a Catholic school run by Jesuits. The nuns in my school were more liberal on economic issues than many totebaggers and had no problem with evolution either. And if nuns are not religious then who is?

  14. 14
    catclub says:

    I like the Jeff Foxworthy approach:
    You could be a racist if…

  15. 15
    dmsilev says:

    @schrodinger’s cat: It’s the wrong kind of religious.

  16. 16
    Seanly says:

    In happytime news, I am proud to call Darcy & Rene from the Idaho adoption case friends. Darcy is helping with some of the caregiving for my wife who was recently diagnosed with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (that’s not so happytime…).

    I lamented previously that the terrible state constitutional amendments and laws would keep marriage equality from happening for another generation. I thought they should lie down & wait, but good on folks for continuing to fight for equality. The Supreme Court is going to have to adjudicate on this issue sooner rather than later. I’m looking forward to Scalia’s incoherent and rambling dissent on that one.

  17. 17
    srv says:

    Not that we believe in Evolution, but shouldn’t you people let us all evolve at our own pace?

    I mean, look at all the progress in the South since the War of Northern Aggression.

  18. 18
    Baud says:

    @catclub:

    True. They seem to espouse a religious libertarianism in which they are entitled to a law-free zone in their public interactions with others.

  19. 19
    Butch says:

    I was thinking that maybe “Secular Liberal” would be a good name for a rock band.

  20. 20
    beltane says:

    @schrodinger’s cat: Or even the pope for that matter.

  21. 21
    Ash Can says:

    shouldn’t they also insist that the evolution take place at its own pace, without being forcibly imposed by the coercive powers of the state?

    They do. They want all the fucking legal roadblocks to gay marriage removed so that nature can take its course, you stupid fuck.

    (Edited for moar clarity)

  22. 22
    Trollhattan says:

    The hell is a “secular liberal”? Sounds like a flavored coffee drink. Make mine a vente.

  23. 23
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    O/T: My work email address has yet again been scraped by a wingnut spam outfit: TeaParty.org. I just got my first email from them. It came with the subject line “Smoking gun in IRS political targeting” (boooo-ring!), but I did enjoy the article’s lede:

    “Obama may insist that the IRS hasn’t politically targeted nonprofits even a “smidgen” but as it turns out the agency has data that is filed by smaller tax-exempt groups and processed by a “progressive” organization supported by none other than…George Soros.”

    DUN DUN DUUUUUN! Ernst Stavro Soros strikes again!

  24. 24
    Suffern ACE says:

    Fortunately, secular liberals don’t have deeply held convictions.

  25. 25
    beltane says:

    @Bubblegum Tate: Whatever will they do when George Soros is no longer with us?

  26. 26
    Trollhattan says:

    @Bubblegum Tate:

    Now ah’m a’skeert.

    Bet they have offices in BENGHAZI!

  27. 27
    Anybodybuther2016 says:

    “Is opposing gay marriage the same as being a racist?”

    No. Knock it off white people, you look stupid comparing gay people to blacks. Just stop.

  28. 28
    Howard Beale IV says:

    Speaking of having answers, it appears that a certain L Brent Bozell doesn’t write his own articles…..

  29. 29
    Trollhattan says:

    @beltane:

    They’ll still have to deal with Zombie George Soros.Although he’ll obviously be going elsewhere for bwaaaains.

  30. 30
    Bill in Section 147 says:

    You would think being outright liars and haters would be a bigger problem than somebody getting to visit their same-sex spouse in a hospital or leaving their same-sex life partner with the security of survivor benefits. But the later seems to make my imaginary friend cry.

    And the canard about contraception…Mike Huckabee was governor when Arkansas made that law and Alabama (IIRC) passed a law providing contraception coverage 10 or so years ago. But a black dude is trying to make private insurers do that on the FEDERAL level. Again the later seems to make my imaginary friend cry.

  31. 31

    @Trollhattan: Secular Liberal = Ebil Godless Heathen in wingnutese. They have their own jargon, when they can’t argue on the merits they start calling you names.

  32. 32
    Baud says:

    @Anybodybuther2016:

    Interesting. Your unhingosity extends beyond Hillary Clinton.

  33. 33
    Roger Moore says:

    It’s really pretty simple. If you find yourself saying bigoted things, agreeing with other people when they say bigoted things, and advocating bigoted policies, you’re probably a bigot. If you think what you’re saying is fine, but the people around you tell you that you sound like a bigot, you’re probably a bigot. If you advocate policies that discriminate against a group of people because of who they are, you’re probably a bigot.

  34. 34
    the Conster says:

    As I watched “The Loving Story” about miscegenation, the SC ruling that overturned the remaining 16 states whose laws could imprison you (only if you were white) for marrying a person of another race, unanimously held “under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the state.” Substitute “the same sex” for “another race”, and it’s exactly the analog. As the song says, it’s a slow, slow train, but it’s moving on. Everybody gets a ticket.

  35. 35
    gussie says:

    But given the commitments of these same liberals to personal freedom, shouldn’t they also insist that AFFORDING THE SAME PERSONAL FREEDOMS TO EVERYONE take place at its own pace, without being forcibly imposed by the coercive powers of the state?

    Fixed!

  36. 36
    Trollhattan says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:

    It’s one of those two-word constructions that rattles around unchallenged, but when I try to place some meaning it I come up empty-handed, as though I should feel insulted but can’t be bothered.

    “You’re lawn furniture!”
    “Uh, thanks?”

  37. 37
    chopper says:

    shouldn’t they also insist that the evolution take place at its own pace

    exactly! the dudes that have been denying gay people basic rights for thousands of years are going to come around any time now and you stupid liberals are just going to ruin everything.

  38. 38

    @Trollhattan: Indian wingnuts are even funnier, when they don’t agree with someone they call them McCaulayites. I had to look him up, he was some British administrator dude in the 19th century India who criminalized the more charming Hindu practices like burning widows live on the pyre and such.

  39. 39
    mac007 says:

    But given the commitments of these same liberals to personal freedom, shouldn’t they also insist that the evolution take place at its own pace, without being forcibly imposed by the coercive powers of the state?

    No. SATSQ.

    I find it fascinating (in a Freudian kind of way) how people like Mr. Gaping Asshole here equate marriage equality to government tyranny. Maybe, just maybe, recognition of the right of gay and lesbian couples to get married is about rejecting government tyranny.

    This issue has never been about using government power to impose a minority viewpoint on the majority. That argument really boils down to whining from bigots who wish to use religion as a cover for their bigotry. This issue is about recognizing that the government has no compelling interest in regulating marriage only to heterosexuals, and that such regulation only serves one purpose: singling out a particular minority and treating them unequally.

  40. 40
    Cermet says:

    This is why if this Christ was in fact alive/returned that person would disown those vile racist; last I checked, the State allowing people to marry is none of their God damn business and ONLY their racist vile hate causes them to prevent people from the chance to enjoy the same rights.
    Finally, this asswipe hasn’t bothered to notice this IS the natural progression! That people are demanding that all humans be granted equal rights. I guess the results of the Civil War (or the Southern war of aggression against the North to impose slavery on every one) was, in fact, won by the North and it was mainly fought to defeat vile racist like him and that God cursed religion.

  41. 41
    Roger Moore says:

    @catclub:

    The beliefs are not being forcibly changed. It is the actions that the state can come down against. But the writer seems to confuse the two on purpose.

    I’m not sure if it’s confusion on purpose or simply a general inability to recognize the difference between having a belief and enacting a policy based on that belief. Because, if you note, it generally isn’t any old action that the state is coming down on. They aren’t suggesting that churches be forced to recognize gay marriage or conduct gay weddings; they’re just saying that their church doesn’t get to limit who can be married in the eyes of the state.

  42. 42
    shortstop says:

    Biblical justifications for racism: mark of Cain, curse of Ham, etc., etc.

    But when I point this out to anti-marriage equality people who insist their opposition is religiously based and thus uniquely special and precious, they say, “Well, but you can’t compare skin color to sexual choices.* One is immutable and the other is totes under our control! There shouldn’t be laws to protect classes of people who are making choices!”

    So I say: like people make choices about what religion, if any, to follow? And they pivot and say that their religion is part of their “core identity.” Which sexual orientation is apparently not. (That might actually make sense to people who hate or feel shame about all sex, as I suspect many of them do.)

    Moral, such as it is, of the story: These fuckers will keep briskly trotting down the field, goalposts over their shoulders, looking for a justification for their prejudice. They really do see themselves as the victims here because they’ve had to deal with the terrible, terrible injustice of people criticizing them for expressing bigoted opinions. More and more I find organizations like Stormfront to be refreshingly upfront in owning their racism. At least you know who you’re dealing with and they don’t cry about being called names.

    *I know, I know — no one needs to explain to me that sexual orientation is not something we wake up one day and choose.

  43. 43
    Trollhattan says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:
    Zowie, who knew? The bastard. Can they still turn people into newts, or is that out as well?

  44. 44

    @Trollhattan: I was wrong in comment #38. McCaulay was the one who brought British Education to India to educate Indian worker bees in service of the empire. Lord Bentick was the one who was the social reformer. Sorry I gots my dead British administrator dudes in India confused.

    Okay now the slur makes slightly more sense.

  45. 45
    Hungry Joe says:

    ” … at their own pace, without being forcibly imposed by the coercive powers of the state … ” And you know what? I bet that by now Woolworth’s would be serving food to Negroes at their lunch counters. Probably just the far end of the lunch counters, but still …

    Or not. These things need to happen at their own pace.

  46. 46
    shortstop says:

    @Mustang Bobby: Unitarianism technically isn’t Christian. The term “Unitarian” explicitly rejects the notion of the trinity. But because they’re so chillax, you can be a Christian and still call yourself a Unitarian in a UU community. Or not be a Christian and call yourself a Unitarian. It’s all cool.

  47. 47
    Trollhattan says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:

    At least millions of Indians now know which is the salad, dinner and dessert fork.

    God save the queen.

  48. 48
    Amir Khalid says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:
    There was a guy like that in Malaya back in the 19th century, name of James W.W. Birch.

  49. 49
    srv says:

    @mac007:

    is about rejecting government tyranny.

    As I ask them, “Your faith must be very weak if its tenents have to be encoded into Law by the Federal Goverment of the United States of America”

  50. 50
    Ash Can says:

    @shortstop:

    “One is immutable and the other is totes under our control!”

    So the obvious question to them, of course, is “At what point did you decide not to be gay?”

  51. 51
    Kay says:

    I think it’s weirdly fascinating that he’s completely ignoring both the law and the facts in the contraception cases.

    This is the language of the waiver for contraception:

    “I certify that, on account, of religious objections, the organization opposes providing coverage for some or all of any contraceptive services that would otherwise be required to be covered; the organization is organized and operates as a nonprofit entity; and the organization holds itself out as a religious organization.”

    Obviously that doesn’t apply to religious hospitals or health care orgs that merge with secular for profits and non profits, nor does it apply to commercial entities like Hobby Lobby. I mean, I don’t think it’s a secret that they’re employing a larger strategy here. They want the broadest exemption possible, which is why they refused to accept the one they got.

    On the facts of this case, the refusal to sign the form is so far-fetched that this concocted controversy can only be understood in the context of high-stakes politics. The dozens of pending challenges to the contraception mandate are not popping up randomly or by accident.

    No, they’re sure not.

    He’s bending over backward to clothe this in lofty moral terms, but anyone who can read can see this is a deliberate strategy. I don’t even object to them relying on a strategy. I do object to someone pretending that isn’t happening in order to turn it around into a discussion of liberal intolerance.

  52. 52
    shortstop says:

    @Amir Khalid:

    There once was a guy in Malaya,
    Who said to Malays, “Oh, I saya!
    “You must do things Brits’ way!”
    But the locals said, “Nay.
    “For that attitude, dude, we will slay ya.”

  53. 53
    shortstop says:

    @Ash Can: Ah! But the answer to that is, “I didn’t have to choose it because it’s natural.”

    Seriously, they are impervious to any response to what they’ve actually said. They simply move on to another bit of outrageousness.

  54. 54
    Anybodybuther2016 says:

    @Baud: Which continent were gay people kidnapped from? How long were they held in bondage? Name the terrorist organization that was created to intimidate, murder, rape, steal from and/or destroy the property of gay folks with the tacit approval of law enforcement officials and their fellow citizens. How many gay youth have been murdered by their fellow citizens while walking home because somebody decided that they needed to follow them because they pretty sure the gay youth were up to no good? I can go on but I think you get the idea.

  55. 55
    Hungry Joe says:

    @Ash Can: Exactly. It kills me when these guys go on and on about resisting homosexuality. I always want to say, “Uh, listen, pal, I never felt the pull. But apparently you did. Maybe you still do. Hmmmm. Interesting. Would you like to talk about it?”

  56. 56
    Mike in NC says:

    Conservative opposition to same sex marriage is deeply rooted in religious belief

    Conservative opposition to [fill in the blank] is generally rooted in religious belief. If you live in the south, in particular, odds are your local newspaper Letters to the Editor are filled with rants against gays, minorities, gun control, taxes, abortion, etc. all backed up with cherry-picked Biblical quotations. But sometimes they also just make shit up.

  57. 57
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    @beltane:

    There will always be a Soros. He just won’t necessarily be named Soros.

    I have to admit, I was tickled by the use of ellipses in that lede. TeaParty.org really wanted to steel their readers for the truth bomb they were about to drop!

  58. 58
    Haydnseek says:

    Perhaps he should ask countless African Americans who gained entrance to universities and public accommodations in the south since the mid 60’s how they feel about the “coercive powers of the state.”

  59. 59
    Mnemosyne says:

    I know he’s the go-to guy for all us liberals, but Fred Clark had a great article and chart yesterday showing how young-earth creationism, anti-gay rhetoric, and patriarchal beliefs all stem from the original sin of Baptist churches trying to justify slavery with cherry-picking and “clobber texts.”

    That’s right, folks — it really is racism all the way down, even if the people using the clobber texts don’t acknowledge the roots of their technique.

  60. 60
    SRW1 says:

    Did the New Life Assembly of God ask permission from the KKK to use that burning cross as its emblem?

  61. 61
    matt says:

    So for liberals, asking for anything to be made into law is hypocritical because it’s against freedom? fuck you, dude.

  62. 62
    Chyron HR says:

    @Anybodybuther2016:

    How many gay youth have been murdered by their fellow citizens

    Christ, you’re an asshole.

  63. 63
    Roger Moore says:

    @Kay:

    They want the broadest exemption possible, which is why they refused to accept the one they got.

    They want a general exemption from any secular law that they feel conflicts with their religious beliefs, though I sincerely doubt they be happy if and when people with different religious beliefs start trying the same thing. Even that is a watering down of their true desire, which is to enact their religious preferences as the law of the land and force everyone to do things their way.

  64. 64
    Mike in NC says:

    Interesting that both of those old B&W photos show Assembly of God churches. Not really familiar with the various denominations, but maybe they could change their name to “Assembly of Godbotherers”.

  65. 65
    GregB says:

    I can’t remember if I saw it on some religious pamphlet but the person was railing, with all caps, against SECULAR HUMANIST LIES!

  66. 66
    Kay says:

    @matt:

    for liberals,

    Yeah, and that’s the key right there, because apparently conservatives can employ an incredibly aggressive legal strategy (as they’re doing in the contraceptive cases) and everyone else has to show absolute deference and just let them write their own special health care law, or we’re horrible monsters.

    Just don’t even respond to these lawsuits. To do so is to reveal how insensitive you are.

  67. 67
    divF says:

    @Anybodybuther2016:
    I’ll just take a swing at the KKK reference: they used to terrorize gays when they could find and identify them. For example, Florence King talks about that in her autobiography as being widely known in Mississippi in the 50’s during the time she was in graduate school at Ole Miss.

    I’ll leave others to dismantle the rest of your list.

  68. 68
    Ash Can says:

    @Anybodybuther2016: You’re talking history now, and have veered off the subject at hand, which is the comparison of racism to the objection to same-sex marriage. The two are the same in that they’re both expressions of bigotry, which itself stems from fear of/ignorance of/hatred of The Other.

  69. 69
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Anybodybuther2016:

    How many gay youth have been murdered by their fellow citizens while walking home because somebody decided that they needed to follow them because they pretty sure the gay youth were up to no good?

    Quite a few, actually. Did you really need to be educated that gay bashing exists and people die or are severely injured by it every year?

  70. 70
    Kyle says:

    It bears repeating, repeatedly, that these folks don’t give a good god-damn about marriage. They just feel obliged to hate gay people and require that others do the same. The “traditional marriage” crap is marketing. Look back at their actions over the last 30 years, and you’ll not find one single pro-gay proposal that they didn’t fight against (even attempts to stop bullying in schools). They are homophobes, They hate gays. Let’s just be clear.

  71. 71
    Wrangler says:

    So how exactly do values evolve independently of humans pushing them?

    The author seems to think “liberal” is some kind of poli-sci shorthand for “doesn’t give a shit”.

  72. 72
    Ash Can says:

    @Anybodybuther2016: And PS, if you’re trying to say that gays haven’t been the targets of violence, you’re living in a fantasy.

  73. 73

    Religious thread needs Ceiling Cat
    and in the spirit of secular liberal fairness, and missionary dogs.

  74. 74
    Sloegin says:

    Freedom to oppress ain’t a freedom.

    Interesting that this “New Republican” is for evolution. Thought they didn’t believe in it.

  75. 75
    dedc79 says:

    Stop talking about gays or you’ll make Jonah Goldberg uncomfortable.

  76. 76
    Kay says:

    @Roger Moore:

    I actually think in terms of health care it’s much more practical and hard-headed than that. The fact is they are merging with secular nonprofits and for profits, and this isn’t the only area where they’re running into huge conflicts with that.

    There’s a romanticism about this that bugs me. At some point we have to face the fact that these are huge entities, these religious health care orgs, and they’re sophisticated actors in health care markets. It isn’t 1956. They know that. That’s why they’re merging.

    I’m completely willing to be respectful, but I’m not vowing to show complete deference and just let them write the law they like in some misplaced show of “respect”. They’re acting extremely aggressively, which is their right. That can be met on its own terms, with a vigorous defense of the (limited) exemption to the law. That’s fair, and it’s not disrespectful. It’s a fight they joined.

  77. 77
    Chyron HR says:

    @Mnemosyne:
    @Ash Can:

    “Matthew Shepard’s murder was a hoax.”

    Virginia Foxx, R-Virginia Anybodybuther2016

  78. 78
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Chyron HR:

    And we haven’t even started pointing out his automatic assumption that “gay” and “black” are mutually exclusive categories.

  79. 79
    Southern Goth says:

    In order to become a committed secular liberal, does one have to take vows first? Or is there a certification process?

  80. 80
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Kay: yes, but it seems so smug. It will make liberals smug if they win, which might lead to liberal hubris, and then where will we be? It might be better off if liberals just humbly left everything alone until a more oppurtune time where change can be slower and more acceptable.

    It seems that there is quiet a bit of surrender when you’re winning advice being given.

  81. 81
    Kay says:

    @Roger Moore:

    The whole “they provide so much charity care” thing drives me crazy, too. No, they actually don’t. They provide about as much as secular nonprofit hospitals do. The big charity care providers are public hospitals.

    There may be many good reasons for religious hospitals, but charity care isn’t one of them. If we wanted that we’d be protecting public hospitals, and we aren’t, we ‘re privatizing them.

    I would do a lot better with this if it wasn’t such an elaborate narrative that may once have been true but no longer is true.

  82. 82

    @Trollhattan: Why use forks when you can use your paws.

  83. 83
    Chris Rich says:

    I just work with the conviction that marriage is a strange and repulsive imposition for a bunch of promiscuous monkeys to cling to.

    All we have to show for it are inbreeding problems and divorce profit centers for attorneys.

    Surely we can come up with some less pathetic way to designate our favorite other monkey and call it good.

    There are plenty or co-tenant structures to satisfy property division issues, what to call offspring monkeys and so on.

    Won’t it be great when we finally get over it all?

  84. 84
    McJulie says:

    @Mnemosyne: “racism all the way down” — I like that. I recently tried to explain to somebody how I thought pretty much every modern USA political problem could be ultimately laid at the feet of slavery.

    I’m not sure they bought it.

  85. 85

    @shortstop: Same with Quakers. There are some who believe in the whole Jesus is Lord thang and those who would be considered atheist. But as long as they bring something tasty and whole-foody to the potluck, it’s all good.

  86. 86

    @dedc79: Jonah Goldberg strikes me as one of those who feel uncomfortable about being naked in front of gay guys because they might be scoping him out. In reality what they’re thinking is “Hey, looks like a dick, only smaller.”

  87. 87
    Jibeaux says:

    @Chris Rich: (most) people want to get married. They don’t generally want to be contracted or civil partnershipped. A premise that starts with “what if billions of people wanted something different than they do?” is not terribly useful.

  88. 88

    @Chris Rich: So don’t get married but don’t prevent others from doing so.

  89. 89
    Trollhattan says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:

    Have you been talking to my kid? This is precisely her thinking.

  90. 90
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @schrodinger’s cat: Or that King fellow. The one whose birthday we couldn’t celebrate because he was a Communist, until we did, after which he became a conservative Republican.

  91. 91
    The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik says:

    I just wish I could feel like things were getting better. But instead, it seems like everywhere I fucking see, it’s either “DEMOCRATS ARE THE REAL SUPER MEGA-FUCKING RACISTS” or “ALL BLACKS ARE CRIMINAL PSYCHOPATHS IN WAITING”, and the sentiment doesn’t seem like it’s rising so much as it is spiking to fucking ridiculous levels. We should be getting better, but instead, blatant bigotry and racism has been remainstreamed to ridiculous levels.

    We’re backsliding so fucking hard it just makes me slump down defeated.

  92. 92
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @Mnemosyne: I think it just outed itself as a Republican agent provocateur.

  93. 93
    WereBear says:

    @The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik: We’re backsliding so fucking hard it just makes me slump down defeated.

    These rights are under such attack because they are advancing.

  94. 94
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @dmsilev:

    They have actually come out and said this, on numerous occasions. That some faiths are not “proper” or “real” religions.

    Only their fucked up set of superstitions is real and should be imposed by the state on everyone.

  95. 95
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    Conservative opposition to same sex marriage is deeply rooted in religious belief

    150 odd years ago, “Conservative” opposition to the abolition of slavery was deeply rooted in religious belief.

  96. 96
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    And they’re using the same techniques to defend their anti-gay marriage stance as they did to defend their anti-abolition stance — see my link to Fred Clark at #59.

  97. 97
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @Anybodybuther2016: I’m Black and I totally see the connection between what happened to Blacks during the Civil Rights era and what is happening to gays now. The situations are comparable. Not sure what you’re getting at. Rights are rights, regardless of sexual orientation, race, sex, etc.

  98. 98
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Great link, and everyone should take a look at it. It explains a great deal about this bullshit, and how what Jesus of Nazareth talked about is missing from fundigelicalism.

  99. 99
    mainmata says:

    @schrodinger’s cat: Well, it’s still coming down here in MD too and we are trending towards eventually 16 inches so there’s that.

  100. 100
    slippytoad says:

    here I see liberals arrogantly (and illiberally) pushing traditionalist religious believers into a corner

    The only reason these assholes are in a corner is because they can’t keep their gaping yawps clapped shut about what is PATENTLY none of their business. Fuck them, in the face, with a rake.

  101. 101
    Ruckus says:

    @Chyron HR:
    You’re just figuring that out?

  102. 102
    Plantsmantx says:

    But given the commitments of these same liberals to personal freedom, shouldn’t they also insist that the evolution take place at its own pace, without being forcibly imposed by the coercive powers of the state?

    Many people made that exact same argument in opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Pauls still make that argument.

  103. 103
    xenos says:

    @Chris Rich:

    There are plenty or co-tenant structures to satisfy property division issues, what to call offspring monkeys and so on.

    Yes, but none work so well at supporting the modern nation-state and the demands of capitalism, so traditional marriage will be around for a long time.

  104. 104
    Chris T. says:

    @Trollhattan: “Secular” means “someone who engages in devil worship by stealing babies from hospitals and sacrificing them in sadistic twisted ritual fashion.”

    And “liberal” is really bad.

  105. 105

    […] to answer the question posed by Damon Linker: Yes, opposing gay marriage is the same as being a racist.  Next […]

  106. 106
    Chris Rich says:

    @schrodinger’s cat: Wasn’t planning on either option.

    I suspect my attempts to oppose would be something of a canary fart in the roaring sawmill of conformity anxieties and the rush to emulate breeders so that self validation can be attained.

    But that is probably due to my inability to have delusions of significance.

  107. 107
    Donut says:

    @Anybodybuther2016:

    Jebus H. Keyryst on a stick is that dumb fucking post!

    If you have a hard time finding example of persecution of gay, lesbian, bi, trans and queer folks, you are just willfully stupid. And an asshole, to boot.

    Especially to your very last point about Trayvon Martin, just do a search on the name Matthew Shepard and then shut the fuck up.

  108. 108
    Paul in KY says:

    @schrodinger’s cat: But those widows totally wanted to get thrown into that pyre! Honest!

  109. 109
    Paul in KY says:

    @Mike in NC: Assembly of Godders are generally a very close-minded, priggish bunch of idiots who love to have some dude with a radio voice tell them what to do (in every aspect of their lives).

    The guy with the radio voice has tithing very high on his list. Go figure…

  110. 110
    Paul in KY says:

    @The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik: That’s just stuff you are seeing on the zombiebox (stole that from the Russians) & some loudmouths on the intertubes.

    Progress marches on (and they are whining like Hell about it).

  111. 111
    Paul in KY says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: I agree with them on Scientology. That one is a tax scam.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] to answer the question posed by Damon Linker: Yes, opposing gay marriage is the same as being a racist.  Next […]

Comments are closed.