Browsing the archives for the gays tag.
Cialis fr


Please remove your *yoohoo* from Coach Dave’s *ahem*

Jesus done want me for a SWAT team

Fascinating as it is, the evangelical community’s internet presence isn’t anything I’m interested in. I have no idea what exactly gets the minions to booing or jeering other than in the broadest senses. I expect they worship violence and bloodshed like all the other patriots. I know they despise women and queers. ObamaKare will give 30 million people a chance to see a doctor so I presume that’s Saint Schiavo sauced with catnip and dangled before the lions. We have little in common. But until now, I swear I had no idea how much they disliked the glorious weekends we spent together, the two us.


Alright: I’m sorry. I figured it was our Sunday thing.

Share
Comments Off

Pity the poor witch hunter

*holes

Something like 3 billion of our fellow human beings survive on $2.50 a day. A billion of those can’t read or write. The 10 major conflicts ongoing across the globe will kill over 100,000 people this year. And about 25,000 people, almost all of them children, will die today from starvation. But that’s not so bad, really, considering what some Americans have to go through.

If you are a conservative evangelical who believes in the biblical definition of traditional marriage then guess what? You are one of the following: An outcast, a bigot, narrow-minded, a “hater” or all of the above. It’s a different type of ridicule but it’s still ridicule.

It’s not the type of ridicule that makes you to want to hide in your closet. It’s a ridicule that makes you want file back into your megachurch to re-load, politically. C’mon, you’ve got to come up with better ways to denigrate your fellow Americans as filthy, hell-bound, diseased and disgusting. Gay teens don’t become suicidal all by themselves, folks.

The tables have been turned. Evangelicals are now the ugly stepchild. In our American culture today, you can easily make the argument that it is harder to stand for biblical truth than it is to be a supporter of gay marriage in today’s society.

Persecution is harder than it looks. You try it sometime.

Share
6 COMMENTS

If anything, it’s the Boy Scouts who are depraved

culture war, gays

Matt Barber is one nasty piece of work. A cultural warrior from Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University law school, he sees his particular battle as homosexuality. Lately, in the war, he’s been employing a new tactic. Anything that’s pro-gay, he calls it “Sandusky,” as in the child rapist serving 30 to 60 years in Greene State prison. It’s Barber’s way of claiming that homosexuals and molesters are the same.

For example, in a December piece on the banning of homosexual conversion therapy (‘pray the gay away’), he called such legal injunctions “Sandusky laws.” Because they protect the future Jerry Sanduskys of the world, see? Barber is a man without a conscience.

In coming days the Boy Scouts of America will decide whether to violate – eliminate, really – its own mission statement, oath and law by changing its policy to allow, within its ranks, Scouts and Scoutmasters who are open practitioners of the homosexual lifestyle . .

Still, under immense socio-political – indeed spiritual pressure, the Boy Scouts appear poised to play a very dangerous, self-deluded game of “the Scoutmaster wears no clothes.” They’re flirting with the queer idea of an about turn – of betraying both absolute truth and the very boys they serve.

Did any of you catch that foreshadowing?

But it’s much worse than all that. We mustn’t ignore the pink elephant in the room; the Penn State factor. Should the BSA cave beneath the weight of sexual anarchist intimidation, Scoutmaster Sandusky joins the jamboree.

Jerry could never have joined the Scouts otherwise? Please. You see how Barber is no tactical genius, obviously. We already know how the Boy Scouts would have welcomed Jerry Sandusky with open arms given their real-life “Sanduskys,” and I mean actual child molesters. Scout pedophiles were rarely ejected from or exposed within the organization, though there were thousands. And when their crimes were finally made public, the Boy Scouts reacted more with vengeance than compassion:

In 2002, Jerrold Schwartz, a 42-year-old former scoutmaster in New York, admitted abusing a boy in his troop in the 1990s. After being secretly recorded saying he “did something very, very wrong” and apologizing to the boy, Schwartz pleaded guilty to four counts of sodomy and was sent to prison.

Despite the conviction and the victim’s testimony that Schwartz “raped me and forced me to perform oral sex on him,” the Scouts, in a motion to dismiss a subsequent lawsuit, contended that the sex was consensual, records show.

“To argue that an adult scoutmaster in his 30s can have consensual sex with a 13-year-old in his Scout troop is something dreamt up in pedophile heaven,” attorney Michael Dowd told the New York Law Journal in 2006 after a judge rejected the Scouts’ motion.

This has been a BSA tactic. They merely say they had no idea how dangerously “gay” the Scoutmaster was. Which makes for a convenient reason to be angry with his 13 year-old boyfriend, too.

It’s the same with Barber, et. al. The Catholic Church, the Boy Scouts, they only are ideals and Godly and to be shielded at all costs. But once they’re exposed for being secured dens of depravity and child rape, the Sandusky gays get all the blame. Because these organizations couldn’t be more simply wholesome, patriotic and pure. It’s the liberal culture to blame, never the institution. Ad absurdum:

For example, a New York scoutmaster was accused by a former scout of sexually assaulting him dozens of times in different locations, including campouts and overnight trips. The allegations were made in a $50 million lawsuit against the scoutmaster, Jerrold Schwartz, who led Troop 666 at the prestigious St. Bartholomew’s Church. The investigation produced four tape recordings in which Schwartz admitted sexual contact with the Boy Scout. The sexual assaults occurred in Manhattan and on trips to Philadelphia, Washington and Vermont. Schwartz even attacked the boy on the night before Schwartz’s 1997 wedding. The best cover for a gay predator is a bogus marriage, which makes his straight wife yet another victim of gay duplicity.

So amazing the lengths a homosexual will go to. Jerry Sandusky married his wife Dottie back in 1966. They adopted 6 children. Sandusky later molested his son, Matt. And this is why gay teens don’t belong in the Boy Scouts.

Share
4 COMMENTS

Wooly bully

attack of the wuss

Wunderkind turned kinderscheisse Ben Shapiro, acolyte of Andrew Breitbart — cause of death: recurring remitting ragesclerosis — focuses his clawing out of the wingnut fifth-tier doldrums with a Goldberg impersonation:

President Obama and his leftist allies like to claim they’re anti-bullying. They stand up for the little guy. They stand up to the powerful. They protect victims.

They’re liars. What’s more, they’re the true bullies, as I explain in my new book, Bullies: How The Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America.

Fascists! Michael Savage recently called for the creation of a “Nationalist Party.” Conservatives by the thousands weighed in on the WhiteHouse.gov site to deport Piers Morgan after he conducted a less-than-patriotic TV interview. Wingnuts are petitioning to imprison and maybe execute Sen. Dianne Feinstein because she might, maybe, someday, we’ll see, you never really know, it could happen, how about that thing when your psychic cousin complimented your optimism then you got a McDonald’s Monopoly scratcher that won a bag of fries, argue for gun control. Note: Back off.

When the DHS wasn’t busy running StopBullying.gov, they were busy bullying religious employers into violating their consciences by forcing them to cover contraception for employees. And who headed up the It Gets Better Project? Dan Savage, the thug who screamed at Christian teenagers who had the temerity to walk out on one of his anti-Biblical screeds.

The crucial part of bullying, where a “bully” can seriously harm you, is lost on these folks. Dan Savage can’t do squat to anyone walking out while he’s talking.

Obama isn’t against bullying. Neither is the left more broadly. After all, when someone stands up to a bully – say, Israel standing up to Islamic terrorists, or even George Zimmerman standing up to a young bully pounding his head into the pavement – the left goes berserk.

Poor Israel somehow dispatches the “bullies” at better than a 10:1 clip. And I can’t imagine how a teen with his fists full of candy can bully a vigilante carrying all of a racial grudge, stand-your-ground presuppositions and a Kel-Tec semiauto.

Share
Comments Off

Lectures from the likes of Dana Milbank

*holes, ops and eds

After some violent ‘left-wing’ asshole shoots a guard at the Family Research Council, brave Dana Milbank thinks everything over. He cuts through the reeds of confusion and partisanship (just listen to us: “He’s one of ours! Let him go!”), and he issues as surprisingly sage a tract as any villager ever wrote:

Hateful speech on hate groups
By Dana Milbank, August 16

Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay rights organization, posted an alert on its blog Tuesday: “Paul Ryan Speaking at Hate Group’s Annual Conference.”

The “hate group” that the Republicans’ vice presidential candidate would be addressing? The Family Research Council, a mainstream conservative think tank founded by James Dobson and run for many years by Gary Bauer.

You see where this is going.

Human Rights Campaign isn’t responsible for the shooting. Neither should the organization that deemed the FRC a “hate group,” the Southern Poverty Law Center, be blamed for a madman’s act. But both are reckless in labeling as a “hate group” a policy shop that advocates for a full range of conservative Christian positions, on issues from stem cells to euthanasia.

Let’s not play around. Okay?

1.) It’s okay to “hate” a hate group. Grow up, Dana.

2.) The Family Research Council is a hate group. They may advocate on a “full range” of issues, but their bread and butter, the advocacy that garners them the most kudos, attention and cash, is their raving, lying hatred for gay American men and women. They are nasty, immoral homophobes.

How do we know this? The FRC’s own words and deeds. But let’s not gloss over the charge (as Dana does), let’s instead put it to a test. Dana and the SPLC disagree, but who should win the argument? Has the “think tank” earned the hate group designation? Here’s the SPLC’s argument:

In Its Own Words

“Gaining access to children has been a long-term goal of the homosexual movement.”
— Robert Knight, FRC director of cultural studies, and Frank York, 1999

“[Homosexuality] … embodies a deep-seated hatred against true religion.”
— Steven Schwalm, FRC senior writer and analyst, in “Desecrating Corpus Christi,” 1999

“One of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order.”
-1999 FRC pamphlet, Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex with Boys.

“[T]he evidence indicates that disproportionate numbers of gay men seek adolescent males or boys as sexual partners.”
— Timothy Dailey, senior research fellow, “Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse,” 2002

“While activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two. … It is a homosexual problem.”
— FRC President Tony Perkins, FRC website, 2010

They add:

Other anti-gay propagandists at the FRC include Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies, who joined the organization in 2001. Sprigg authored a 2010 brochure touting “The Top Ten Myths about Homosexuality.” In the brochure, Sprigg claimed that ex-gay therapy works, that sexual orientation can change, that gay people are mentally ill simply because homosexuality makes them that way, and that, “Sexual abuse of boys by adult men is many times more common than consensual sex between adult men, and most of those engaging in such molestation identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual.” . .

In March 2008, Sprigg responded to a question about uniting gay partners during immigration by saying, “I would much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than import them.” He later apologized, but in February 2009, he told Chris Matthews, “I think there would be a place for criminal sanctions on homosexual behavior.” “So we should outlaw gay behavior?” Matthews asked. “Yes,” Sprigg replied.

Okay. Now let’s see what the other side has to say. Dana?

The Family Research Council [is] a mainstream conservative think tank founded by James Dobson and run for many years by Gary Bauer.

Who wins the argument? The SPLC calls the FRC a hate group for routinely saying homosexuals are mentally ill, conspiracists, pedophiles, and asking they be criminalized and exported from the country. Dana calls the FRC “mainstream” for what peculiar reason, again? Because James Dobson and Gary Bauer are familiar to him.

It’s these lazy calculations that render the villagers pathetic. They learned long ago that ethics present a serious impediment to maintaining a lucrative beat within the dreamy beltway. Somehow the practical result isn’t a soul-free mercenary, it’s a sophisticated journalist who can’t, golly god knows why, construct the flimsiest of arguments.

It would be one thing to ply your gutless profession and manage to cash the paychecks without whining. But when you see fit to lecture the rest of us about the dangerous rhetoric of morality (these people are immoral, Dana), you are one stupid asshole.

Share
2 COMMENTS

Bryan Fischer: You two homos get a room

2012 campaign, gays

Pictured (l to r): gay Republican, curious Mormon, bucket of water

Shorter Bryan Fischer, Renew American Christian Hate:

“Only pansy candidates hire faggots.”

Share
Comments Off

Rev. Harry Jackson: Black people are not gays

I doubt that, I'm not gay, shorter

Pictured (l to r): past, present

Shorter Reverend Harry R. Jackson Jr., Townhall.com:

“You homos have some nerve. We were netted, sold, and branded before we won our civil rights. Currently, you’re not even legal.”

Share
Comments Off

Newt Gingrich’s bus, once gay curious, can no longer walk

2012 campaign, gays, yay

That must have been a sight.

Newt Gingrich’s campaign bus, shadowing the candidate here as he went from insulting Asians to lying to Jews, broke down on Sunset Boulevard near Crescent Heights. That would be in West Hollywood, the San Francisco of Los Angeles. The gentlemen of Boystown took to Twitter to remark on the karmic event:

More here and here.

Share
Comments Off

On The Habits of My Dog, Merv Griffin

gays, I'm not gay

I come across a dog, walking on the sidewalk. The both of us, frequently. I bend down, say something like, “Whooz a moo moo goo?” and skritch his neck. What’s the point of this? This is how I get in your head.

Stacey Campfield, Tennessee Senator Behind ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Bill, On Bullying, AIDS And Homosexual ‘Glorification’
HuffPo | Michelangelo Signorile

In an often belligerent and sarcastic tone, GOP State Senator Stacey Campfield, the man who spearheaded Tennessee’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill — which would ban discussion in schools of “sexual orientation other than heterosexuality”– lashed out at arguments against his bill by comparing homosexuality to bestiality . .

What makes Stacey tick? How do you think his brain works? Let’s find out:

On bullying and suicides by gay teens, including two teens in Tennessee in recent months:

“That bullying thing is the biggest lark out there.”

Remember the time you and your girlfriend dressed up as waiters and served trays of flowers to riders on the subway? That was a lark. Those were heady days. Remember the time when you punched a stranger in the face because he had a lisp? That was notable too.

“There are sexually confused children who could be pushed into a lifestyle that I don’t think is appropriate with them and it’s not for the norm for society, and they don’t know how they can get back from that. I think a lot of times these young teens and young children, they find it very hard on themselves and unfortunately some of them commit suicide.”

Stacey (smash/fondle) knows what kinda sex is “appropriate with them.” He’s also well-informed as to what’s “the norm for society.” At some point this sex stuff should probably be personal. When it gets there and people tell me what turns them on, I’ll just believe it. At most, yuck. I’m not equipped to say anything about how you choose to poop, either. My sex life is like, wow. Believe me.

On why only heterosexuality should be discussed in schools:

“I just think there are situations where some kids maybe sexually unsecure [sic] in themselves or sexually confused and don’t necessarily know clearly what direction they are.”

What direction they are? There are no directions – that’s the point that Stacey (crush/tickle) would drive home. There is heterosexuality, period. He doesn’t even recognize his own bullshit.

“If someone, a person of influence, says maybe you’re gay, maybe you should explore those things — maybe the child, who is young and impressionable, says maybe I am gay.”

And then it sticks, like a bad paint job. Scrub all you like but you’re gonna want a penis in your rear end the rest of your life. Darn.

“[Homosexuals] do not naturally reproduce.”

Tell that to Merv Griffin.

“It has not been proven that it is nature. It happens in nature, but so does beastiality.”

My dog wangs the vacuum cleaner. It does little for his self esteem so who’s the victim? Hmm? Would bestiality be something that only humans, by definition, do? Seems ‘nature’ is something left to both an elite and a primordial bunch. Unlike homosexuality, which is equal-opportunity and universal.

“That does not make it right or something we should be teaching in school.”

And there it is. If we accept people, we teach their sex practices. Gah.

Share
Comments Off

Catholic Church and children, the long-play lament

bigots, Jesus done want me for a SWAT team

Bishops Say Rules on Gay Parents Limit Freedom of Religion
LAURIE GOODSTEIN | New York Times | Dec 28 2011

Roman Catholic bishops in Illinois have shuttered most of the Catholic Charities affiliates in the state rather than comply with a new requirement that says they must consider same-sex couples as potential foster-care and adoptive parents if they want to receive state money. The charities have served for more than 40 years as a major link in the state’s social service network for poor and neglected children.

soapbox/ Why should the state partner with an organization that discriminates against better parents in order to place children with inferior ones? It’s bad government to participate in incompetence. It’s appalling to promote discrimination.

Why can’t the church do the right thing? Presumably, the ‘right thing’ would be of some interest? It doesn’t promote homosexuality to place children with same-sex parents. It doesn’t make the gays any more gay, and it doesn’t queer the kids.

You say ‘I can’t imagine them doing that.’ Yeah, here’s why: Children who grow up with gay parents will love them. And that’s a reality the Catholic Church can’t stand.

Someone set the alarm on one of those 400 foot clocks: you’re getting increasingly marginalized by a society that’s learning to value all its citizens, Papa. The lingering memory of your church will include the way it rejected the example of Christ, pushing aside orphans to embrace hate. /soapbox


Shorter:

Funny Hats Rout Children
by Dusty Cliche | woebegonesports.com | Feb 2, ∞

Extending a remarkable streak, the Roman Mitres blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah fear blah blah blah . . .

Share
Comments Off

Ron Paul: I peddled bigotry but I don’t want to talk about it

2012 campaign, bigots

Ron Paul’s newsletter in 1992:

“Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. … What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided.”

1994:

“. . those who don’t commit sodomy, who don’t get blood a transfusion, and who don’t swap needles, are virtually assured of not getting AIDS unless they are deliberately infected by a malicious gay.”

Ron Paul, 1995, telling you how great this literature is:

. . followed by Ron currently refusing to discuss all the racist, homophobic junk he published for years and profited from.

It’s been out there for a long time, so the current question isn’t what sort of man Ron is. He’s fatally flawed. The question is: How has he remained so popular? He clearly doesn’t merit the attention.

You will recall a Black candidate from 2008 who had to disavow the personal and professional relationship he’d had with a supposedly racist pastor, Jeremiah Wright. That was so disgusting a liaison in Conservatives’ eyes that it categorically eliminated Barack Obama from being president. It didn’t matter that Wright was not, in fact, a racist.

Now you’ve got an Iowa caucus frontrunner that, if not himself a racist, ran a business that peddled nasty bigotry year after year after year. He profited handsomely from the trade. But he’s currently more popular than ever?

I’m sure our Conservative friends will get around to holding him up to the lofty standards that all presidential candidates must meet. Eventually.

Share
Comments Off

Reverend Bresciani, drunkblogger

gays, Jesus done want me for a SWAT team

Every once in a while, I look over the Renew America website. It’s an internet destination for angry right-wing Christians. Between all the misspellings, syntax errors, and commas used for mumble markers, there’s some wicked comedy.

But there’s very rarely a drunken post. These Christians are a bodily, not mentally, sober lot. So how to explain Michael Bresciani’s last screed? It’s incoherent.

Obama rebukes GOP for snubbing gay serviceman? – High level hypocrisy
By Michael Bresciani

. . In the case of Obama’s indignant public reproof of the republicans at the recent GOP debate in Orlando on September 22, 2011, three points and one sad conclusion are all that’s needed.

Mr. Obama said “We don’t believe in the kind of smallness that says it’s OK for a stage full of political leaders — one of whom could end up being the President of the United States — being silent when an American soldier is booed.” The rebuke was leveled at a Human Rights Campaign annual dinner in Washington which was attended by gays, lesbians and their supporters.

He didn’t rebuke the Human Rights Campaign, obviously. I hope this isn’t your first point, Michael. But go on:

A far more angry and animated rebuke was leveled at the GOP which brought applause and cheers from his supporters when Mr. Obama said, “We don’t believe in the kind of smallness that says it’s OK for a stage full of political leaders — one of whom could end up being the President of the United States — being silent when an American soldier is booed.”

?? How many times did the president say it? You’re nitpicking on the second one, really. Maybe it was the inflection. “. . when an American soldier is BOOED.” “That tears it” Michael thought. Or “THAT tears it.” He despised Humbert Humbert, bristled at Duran Duran.

Brewsciani takes another slug of sacramental Coors and points out that Obama isn’t Commander in Chief, the alien jerk. That makes him a giant hypocrite, err, somehow. He wouldn’t even bring his obviously fake birth certificate to court. Look what that cowardice did to a certain wingnut colonel:

Col. Lakin got no justice but only a speedy one way trip on the Obama I don’t care railroad to Leavenworth penitentiary.

Why didn’t the president save this guy? I don’t know.

In conclusion, it has never been proven that the gay serviceman was actually booed at the debate.

Let’s leave that to science, shall we? Whether booing actually occurred is mysterious as particle spin coupling, so let’s not inject politics. Right. We’re agreed. Now, I’d like to make my final comments in Jabberwock. Pray’t please the brillig:

. . Additionally if he was ignored it could be that even that could be called discretion for a group of Americans who for the most part because they are on the right, continue to hold to the scriptural belief that homosexuality is a sin of perversion and the promulgation or promoting of it can make them guilty, culpable or complicit by association.

??

Share
Comments Off
« Older Posts