The Watering Hole, Monday, April 6,2015: Conservatives Think About Gay Sex A Lot

Pat Robertson is a frightened man. That’s not any new insight, we’ve all known that for years. But with the outcry over Indiana’s RFRA law (which was neither the first, nor was it identical to the early versions), and their subsequent “acquiescence” to those protests, Old Man Pat has come to believe his worst nightmares are coming true: Gay people will be accepted into Society as equals. And when that happens, somehow they’ll take over the world.

“They’re going to force you into their mold, they’re going to make you conform to political correctness, they’re going to make you do what the Left thinks is right, they’re going to make you acknowledge homosexual marriage, they’re going to make you embrace lifestyles that you think are anti-biblical despite your religious belief.”

There’s a lot wrong with those few sentences, including both projection and cognitive dissonance. Whether or not they realize it, Conservative Christians want everybody to be compelled by law to follow their religious beliefs. When you talk about making our laws conform to the Bible, you are imposing your religion on everyone else. If you can’t understand that, then perhaps you should sit back and let the rest of us talk. It is a fact. It is what they want. As for “political correctness,” I ignore that term. It was created by a right wing misanthrope named David Horowitz, and it only makes sense within the framework of an extremely conservative mind. Essentially, it’s a complaint conservatives have when they get called out for saying the kind of hateful, ignorant, bigoted things they’re known for saying. As for making people do things that anybody says is right, that’s what laws are for. Our entire system of laws is based on somebody’s (often a lot of somebodies) idea of what the right way to behave in our society is. So, yes, we on the Left think there’s a certain way you should behave toward your fellow citizens. If people on the right have a problem with it, it’s because they want the legal right to mistreat, abuse, demean, or otherwise put down people different from themselves. Are we going to make you acknowledge homosexual marriage? Only in the sense that we want you to see it as “marriage,” and not anything different than what you’re used to. If you define a marriage by the style of sex you have, then your definition of marriage is the problem. As for the last part, “they’re going to make you embrace lifestyles that you think are anti-biblical despite your religious belief,” exactly what does that mean? Homosexuality is not a “lifestyle choice,” no matter how much the frightened straight people claim it is. And nobody is asking anybody to “embrace” homosexuality, whatever the hell that’s supposed to mean. As for it being “anti-Biblical,” that’s just too fucking bad. Lots of things are “anti-Biblical.” Lots of those same things are perfectly fine according to other people’s religious beliefs. Why should things that are “anti-Biblical” be singled out for being banned by law? Why should some particular interpretation of “The Bible” become the basis for the way the rest of us live? Why does it matter so much what kind of sex people have? As long as it’s consenting adults participating (of any gender and number), why should it be any of our business? If you want to claim people should live by the Bible, then prove it. Pick up a stone and start stoning all those people who work on the Sabbath. Stone the farmer who plants two different crops in his field. Stone that woman wearing a dress made from two different cloths. They’re just as deserving as the two men who love each other and want to live as a loving married couple just like anybody else. (I almost never hear anti-marriage equality people complain about lesbians getting married, except for Ellen, it’s always the guys getting married that bothers them. “It’s Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.” You never hear, “It’s Adam and Eve, not Alice and Eve.” I tell you, they think about gay male sex a lot more than they want to admit.

And Old Man Pat Robertson is definitely one of them. After going on that rant he came back the next day to continue thinking out loud.

“It doesn’t matter what custom you’ve got, it doesn’t matter what holy thing that you worship and adore, the gays are going to get it,” Robertson said. “They’re going to make you conform to them. You are going to say you like anal sex, you like oral sex, you like bestiality, you like anything you can think of, whatever it is. And sooner or later you are going to have to conform your religious beliefs to the group of some aberrant thing. It won’t stop at homosexuality.”

One more time, Conservatives. Bestiality has nothing whatsoever to do with homosexuality. And homosexuals aren’t the only ones engaging in anal sex or oral sex. Many, many straight couples enjoy them, too, and nobody says we should deny service to straight married couples who engage in, what are legally called, acts of sodomy. And “liking” homosexuality does not equate to liking “anything you can think of.” That is just ignorant bigotry talking there, and why anybody would value the opinion of a man who believes such things is beyond me. Old Man Pat began this rant talking about the owners of Memories Pizza in Indiana, saying they should have kept their mouths shut. But if they did, there wouldn’t have been $842,387 raised on their behalf. The pizza owners claim their viewpoints (which they did not have to give) were misrepresented in the media. They claim they would be happy to serve gay people, but they just wouldn’t cater to a gay wedding. I hate to admit I agree with Pat, so I’ll just say that coincidentally enough, Pat agrees with me on this. This was an issue that would rarely, if ever, come up, because hardly anybody serves pizza at a wedding. But here’s the thing – by specifically saying they wouldn’t serve their pizzas to a couple holding a gay wedding, without specifying any other Biblical violations for whom they would deny service, they are admitting that the Bible has nothing to do with their viewpoint. The fact that they would be willing to serve gay people, just not their weddings, shows they are not adhering to Biblical principles. If the Bible is the reason they would deny wedding services to gay people, then they should be denying all services to gay people. After all, I’m sure they don’t question every woman who comes in to see if she is on her period. So the Bible can’t be the reason for their policy. But the Indiana law, as originally passed, would have given them the right to deny service to anybody they chose by citing their religious beliefs. It doesn’t have to actually be their religious beliefs, they just have to say it is. THAT’S what’s wrong with religious freedom laws like that – you are allowed to openly lie in court and claim something completely false led you to do what you did (or not do what you didn’t do.)

But Old Man Pat is not the only one confused about gay people. Mike Huckabee apparently has gay people confused with atheists. After insisting in an interview with Tony Perkins that the whole discussion about how far people can go to oppress the rights of gay people is a “manufactured crisis” (Huckabee insists the “war on woman” is a manufactured crisis, and that there is no war on women. Of course, what we call a “war on women” is just, to the Conservatives, Christians exercising their freedoms), Mikey went into full Conservative Defensive Projection mode. “The left has gotten very good on creating a crisis, something to divide the country, something to create this sense in which ‘we’ve got to go after these conservatives because they are trying to trample over our rights.'” Really, Mike? Can you say, “Benghazi”? He then went on to make the remarkable comparison:

“It is a classic example of — really a page out of ‘1984,’ when what things mean are the opposite of what they really are. And that’s what I’m seeing here is that in the name of tolerance, there’s intolerance. In the name of diversity, there’s uniformity. In the name of acceptance, there’s true discrimination.”

Let me stop you right there, Mikey. Never mind the fact that “1984” was about a lot more than just words meaning the opposite of what they really mean, about this whole “tolerance” thing. Conservative Christians simply do not understand the concept of tolerance. They seem to think that tolerant people are supposed to tolerate intolerant behavior, such as that exhibited by people who say the kinds of anti-LGBT things Conservative Christians are always being quoted saying. And we aren’t asking for uniformity in the name of diversity. Where the hell did you get that stupid idea? Frank Luntz? And, again, how is not accepting your discriminating behavior an example of discrimination on our part? You are the ones twisting words around, and projecting your own feelings onto us. Perky suggested that gay people who are denied service by one business should just go find another? But what if there are no others because your state law says places open to the public do not have to accommodate the public? He asks Mikey, “Where will it stop?”

“It won’t stop until there are no more churches, until there are no more people who are spreading the Gospel, and I’m talking now about the unabridged, unapologetic Gospel that is really God’s truth.”

What Mikey ignores is that there is quite a lot of disagreement over what constitutes the “unabridged, unapologetic Gospel that is really God’s truth.” Does it happen, in his mind, to coincide with the version of Christianity that he thinks is “correct”? I would argue that precisely because there are so many different flavors of Christianity that there is, in fact no such thing as an “unabridged, unapologetic Gospel that is really God’s truth.” As for where it stops? It stops, Perky, when guys like you stop using your Bible to insist that the rest of the country behave according to your religion’s rules. Your religion is just as false as all the other versions of your religion, and just as wrong as all the other deity-based, Creationist religions. Your belief system makes zero sense to a mind capable of critical thought. To insist that it’s correct if you have “faith” is the same as saying, “It makes sense if you don’t try to make sense out of it.” If that’s what your belief system comes down to, then it cannot and should not be the basis of anybody’s laws. And it cannot and should not be accepted as a valid argument against any law. Later, Mikey insisted that “unlike the gay community, conservative Christians would never boycott a business like Walmart.” Not only did Perky immediately say he was boycotting Walmart over their objections to Arkansas’ RFRA, but Mikey forgot about the conservative boycotts encouraged by Townhall.com a couple of years ago. Out of five companies being suggested for boycotts, only one was for anything to do with LGBT rights. The other reasons were unions, MoveOn.org, Alec Baldwin, and Obamacare. And I’ll say this again and for the record: Yes, I am an atheist, but I am not totally unfamiliar with the teachings of the Biblical character known as Jesus. And I do not believe that those teachings could at all be characterized as “Conservative.” Caring for the health and well being of strangers is antithetical to the philosophy of Conservatism, but central to the teachings of Jesus. So the term “Conservative Christian” must be an oxymoron. It is impossible to follow the teachings of Jesus and still be Conservative. And if you’re following the philosophy of Conservatism, then you cannot be following the teachings of Jesus. The two are incompatible. Besides, I’m pretty sure Jesus had nothing to say about whether or not gay people should be ostracized from society. I do remember hearing that, like many of us Atheists, Jesus encouraged you to treat other people the way you yourself would want to be treated.

This post is from a much longer one on my own blog. You are encouraged to read the original here.

This is our daily open thread. Feel free to discuss LGBT rights, Old Man Pat, Mikey, Perky, or any other closeted gay men you wish to discuss.

43 thoughts on “The Watering Hole, Monday, April 6,2015: Conservatives Think About Gay Sex A Lot

  1. Georgia Teacher Tells Students Their Parents Aren’t Christians If They Support President Obama

    A Georgia teacher told her middle school students that if their parents support President Obama they aren’t real Christians. Then she wanted the kids to prove their Christianity to her.

    Nancy Perry is somehow still an employee at Dublin Middle School after she brought her toxic religious and political views to the classroom in which she teaches. During class a few weeks ago, Perry told her students that President Obama is lying about being a Christian and said that if their parents support him, they aren’t true Christians. She then challenged the students to prove they were Christians.

    Naturally, one of the students relayed his teacher’s remarks to his parents, who understandably demanded a conference with Perry to discuss her inappropriate actions.

    But when the day of the conference arrived, the boy’s parents discovered they weren’t going to have a meeting with Perry alone. They would also have to deal with her husband, who sits on the school board and has political clout in the town.

    This is totally inappropriate classroom behavior anywhere in the country, but in a rural county in Georgia, this teacher will probably get away with this. Dublin is about 16,000 population, and Laurens County has about 48,000. Since the NAACP is involved, I presume the teacher is white and the offended student and his family aren’t.

    • Its not religious to say “No Fred Phelps wannabe I don’t need your business today” – I don’t feel like printing something that is likely to cause a riot.

  2. Excellent post, Wayne.

    . . . you are going to have to conform your religious beliefs to the group of some aberrant thing.

    Seems to me Robertson’s words describe precisely the problem when these ‘Christian Jihadists’ such as himself and his compatriot right wing fundies demand that all of us must ‘conform’ our ‘religions beliefs to’ their own ‘aberrant’ religious philosophy for absolutely no other reason than that they presume only they have it properly figured. As proof they are correct, they offer up the bible and then say “see, I told you so.” Ultimately they demand that everyone accept and practice their own philosophy, and those who choose otherwise are undeserving of anything, even life.

    Ask them what’s so special about the bible and they say ‘God wrote it.’ Ask them how they know that, their answer is ‘it says so in the bible.’ Dog chases tail. Despite the fact that there is not a single shred of verifiable evidence anywhere that their god or any other god is anything more than an ancient notion ‘written by faded men’, their belief remains, in their own feeble minds, the absolute truth, and any attempt at intelligent conversation in a frame that does not acknowledge biblical inerrancy is impossible.

    What’s sad is that were it not for closed religious minds, human existence might have a shot at actually working. Tolerance and caring are not atheistic or LGBT characteristics, although when one considers the attitudes of Robertson/pHuckabee et al., one can only assume that irrational hatred is biblically — hence God — based. Personally, my preference is to NOT hate people or ideas or critters for no good reason. In a nutshell, that’s why long ago I walked away from religion; it’s also why I have zero interest in reconsidering.

    Oh, and I don’t “hate” Robertson, pHuckabee, et al. I do despise their ideas, but If they’d shut their yaps and quit preaching hate and stop trying to impose it on others, there’d be nothing left to despise.

    • One of the biggest conmen in the universe.
      Why the hell people think ‘the lord’ told them to give and give to a man so he could live in opulence is beyond me.
      Joel inherited his daddy’s business of ‘preaching and taking money’.

      His father, a former Southern Baptist pastor, founded Lakewood Church, of which Osteen is the current senior pastor.
      Osteen attended Oral Roberts University in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where he studied radio and television communications, but did not graduate and did not receive a degree from a divinity school.

      • Ah, I see. A religious grafter… In the previous century they were revivalist hucksters…

  3. Clinton Will Acquire Obama’s Email List

    Politico reports Hillary Clinton “is expected from the start to have access to two potent collections of names, email addresses and other useful information — Obama’s vaunted 2012 campaign list of roughly 12 million supporters, and a separate list of about four million people gathered over the last two years by the outside group Ready for Hillary. While the legal details for the lists’ transfer are still being worked out, Democratic strategists say they expect both will eventually help Clinton raise money and build her team of volunteer field staffers.”

    Well this explains why the server had to be cleared. They needed the whole thing to load the new data.

  4. Wow, over the weekend, Jane gave a link to last Monday’s Watering Hole (my RFRA post) on a TP comment, and yesterday it got 233 views. So we had more exposure to The Zoo.🙂

    • Yeah, and there I was with my shirttail hanging out, barefooted, and my hair not combed. Thanks, Jane! 😉

      • That’s exactly the reason I put a piece of tape over the camera lens on my laptop. Internet peeping Toms are not welcome in my cave!

  5. Fair warming:

    Prophecy: Indiana Criticism A Forerunner Of ‘Perversion’ Tsunami

    Jennifer LeClaire, the news editor of the Religious Right magazine “Charisma,” appeared on “Trunews” yesterday to tell host Rick Wiles about a recent prophetic experience she had in which God warned her that “a tsunami of perversion and all manner of wicked sin is headed towards this nation.”

    . . . “we’ve opened the door to the Enemy in this land” and . . . the country is now experiencing “a spiritual attack.”

    You’ve been warned.😯

  6. I notice Sick Rantorum recently said (outloud) that Americans must “begin to push back and rise up” against left-wing officials who are bent on “imposing their will on people of faith.”

    So from that I garner it’s ok and fine for “people of faith” to impose their will on the entire planet and beyond, but it’s not ok for folks who don’t believe their bullshit to resist and even fight back.

    OK, well at least I’m finally starting to understand fundy Christeranity; why, I wonder, is it starting to sound a lot like ordinary old fascism but with a God wrinkle? I understand the notion worked well for Adolf, but why try it here? I mean hey, Amurkans are SMART, ain’t we? S’posed to be at least?

    • I tremble in my boots, daily, awaiting the destructive god they keep preaching about. Too bad (s)he has no love to give.//

    • Being a Repugnant Party member he’ll be forgiven. Checking the incorrect box, wasn’t his fault. (spit)

      • That presumes he had the course in the first place. I wonder if his contempt for the Supreme Court began while he was clerking for Rehnquist?

  7. A Columbia attorney and former executive director of the S.C. Republican party has been arrested for criminal domestic violence.

    James Todd Kincannon, 33, of Columbia was arrested Monday night on an arrest warrant in connection to an incident on March 26 that caused the man’s wife to tell deputies that she was fearful for her life.

  8. Rand Paul has announced he is running for President.

    Brent Budowsky said the first person he should debate is Ron Paul.

    • Ain’t it great? His platform is “fighting to protect the Constitution”. I have yet to see any evidence that he has read the Constitution much less understood a word of it.

Comments are closed.