'They are going to hate us': How an aggressive anti-LGBT movement 'justifies' radical discrimination
Of all of the lines that the anti-LGBT conservatives use to "justify" their radical push for discrimination, this kind of thing might just annoy me the most:
I hear social conservatives say it all the time. "We are going to be hated the way Christ was hated." The idea is that the pro-equality movement's pushback and scrutiny means they are doing something good. Something biblical. Something right.
But they are wrong. The truth is that these anti-LGBT figures bring this wave of resistance on themselves, and they could alleviate it if they wanted to. They just don't want to. They want to continue to deny and demean LGBT people, because their ingrained biases tell them to do so, while also soothing their own souls by telling themselves that other people's heartbreak/disgust/resistance is a foregone conclusion.
It's yet another "win-win" tactic, one of many that the pointed and determined discriminators of America use to make their radical agenda seem like anything other than what it is. This movement has workshopped lines to take the onus off of every one of their rights-depriving acts. They say they are simply "loving the sinner and hating the sin" so that they can pretend their cause is geared toward actions and not people. They claim they are "protecting" marriage and family rather than denying those concepts to others so that they can act as if their votes against certain kinds of taxpayers are morally sanctified acts in favor of virtue. They use lines like, "we know who wins in the end" so that they can salve over the hopeless feeling they experience whenever they realize that LGBT equality is inevitable. And yes, they claim that "people are going to hate us" because it allows them to shirk responsibility for the chosen acts of antagonism that provoked the pushback.
It's elementary-level obvious. And while this fanciful game of faux justification might have some efficacy when it comes to how well these chosen discriminators of America sleep at night, it does nothing to change the common understanding that does (and increasingly will) surround this modern civil rights debate. History sees and understands what it really going on; the history books know that the side that claims to be "hated" is the team that could have stopped it all from happening.
GLAAD: Anti-trans forces not waiting for ballot initiative to fail, looking for 'victims'
Audio: Brad Dacus, leading opponent of CA's trans rights law, prays LGBT people out of 'Satan's dominion'
Brad Dacus is one of the figures leading the charge to repeal California's law protecting transgender students. On the most recent agenda of his radio show, he admitted what his fight is really all about.
After interviewing both an "ex-transgender" and an "ex-gay," Dacus concluded with the following prayer to save people from "Satan's dominion":
[SOURCE: Brad Dacus Report, 11/30]
This is what drives me so crazy about debates like the current one over trans rights in California. We know what the people leading the charge truly want: for us to not be L, G, B, or T. That is the end game; that is the goal. It's not about this policy or that law—it's about "changing" us. In almost every instance, this is the underlying motivation.
Yet we are supposed to pretend like we don't know that and continue to engage them in a two-sided conversation, as if they are having anything resembling the same conversation as us. It's maddening, frankly.
If you think that LGBT people are under Satan's snare, you are probably not going to support a policy that makes life a little more accommodating for them and their "devilish" ways. It is not unfair to point that out! In fact, responsible media outlets covering this and other LGBT rights debates should do so, and clearly.
Melissa Klein shunned a lesbian customer because of her 'lifestyle'—but is 'shocked' at how mean people are
Melissa Klein made national headlines when she and her husband told a lesbian customer that they could not and would not make a cake for her wedding ceremony. But she's the "victim" of course:
SOURCE: Focus on the Family
"Better and nicer people"? What, because turning away a client while she's planning one of the happiest events of her life is both good and sweet?
I swear, while this movement and its militant push for discrimination is the obvious bad thing that brings us all to this fight, these folks' refusal to take responsibility for anything is the more annoying aspect of the whole debate.
Shimon Peres lights a candle for peace
It's a workable plan for peace in the region, if you ask me. If there's anything that can heal decades of tension, it's a meticulously stocked open bar at a gay wedding.
It worked for cousin Norm and aunt Ida, so why not the West Bank?
Photo: Anita Bryant out of exile, posing with Marie Osmond
Something tells me that Osmond, a professed equality ally with a lesbian daughter, might regret this post:
Marie Osmond [Instagram]
(h/t: Dave Evans)
Sure, they have a shared history. Bryant first sang "Paper Roses;" Osmond made it famous. I get it.
But still, we're talking about Anita Bryant. ANITA gays-recruit-children-so-let-me-campaign-against-them-throughout-the-seventies BRYANT! She isn't just some fellow guest star on a modern version of The Love Boat, with whom Osmond can wax nostalgic about variety shows gone by. This is someone who chose to do actual harm to an entire community of people—people just like Marie Osmond's own daughter.
No Instagram filter can pretty-up Ms. Bryant's record.
Wholly undeserving NOM butts its way into 'Giving Tuesday'
The 92nd Street Y, a progressive organization based in NYC, started the do-gooder idea known as "Giving Tuesday." NOM, a discriminatory organization based in myth, is determined to kill its spirit:
I take it back, people who trampled each other on Black Friday in order to dupe their credit cards into believing the half-a-shekel savings were going to make the payments somehow easier—yours was not the past seven days' biggest waste of time and cash after all.
No word on how NOM will next butt its way into nice holiday traditions. Although I do hear interns are busy dubbing their voices into all known copies of It's A Wonderful Life so that the famous line instead reads, "Every time a bell rings, you should give us money so that we can make life harder and less enjoyable for gay people."
In fury to attack gay moms and dads, anti-gay group continues to demean single parents
After ten weeks of being a parent with an equally dedicated spouse, this writer has come to one conclusion: Single parents perform a nearly impossible act.
Parenting is a 24/7 job, with a level of commitment far exceeding anything I have ever known. I cannot imagine how hard it must be to go it alone.
Yet amazing single parents rise to the challenge on a daily basis, bringing up awesome kids with all the right gifts. Like all dedicated parents, they deserve our respect. They certainly don't deserve the indignity of supposedly faith-driven special interest groups telling their children that they are somehow deprived or even broken because they do not have an opposite-sex duo at the head of their household.
Yet that is exactly the message that the rabidly anti-LGBT Alliance Defending Freedom is sending via its latest smear graphic. In its ongoing quest to attack loving gay parents like myself, the ADF is actually telling America that all parents, straight or gay, who fall outside of the ADF's limited spectrum of acceptability are doing damage to their kids:
It's just so gross. Actual human kids see stuff like this. When kids who do not have a male and female team of parents at the head of their household see this stuff, how does it make them feel? Why would an organization supposedly concerned with child welfare be so focused on casting a myopic model that they know does not, cannot, and will not define the full slate of families? Why are they so hellbent on exclusion when even a young child can see that the choice to foster a community of understanding would be of far better benefit?
"Alliance"? Sure, if you sign on to an exceedingly limited agenda. If not, you are cast down and out, written off as somehow losing at this whole life thing.
"Defending"? Well maybe, if you are a conservative, heterosexual Christian in a "traditional marriage." Otherwise, prepare yourself for offenses—often deep ones.
"Freedom"? Only if it looks, walks, and talks very much like discrimination.