RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

05/06/2009

Video: 'Factor' Fiction

by Jeremy Hooper

Bill "I'm an independent even though I'm SO not" O'Reilly is now carrying water for the far-right and their "pedophilia is a sexual orientation" claims:

Yes, Bill, and here is a list of other things that Rep. Baldwin didn't want included in the bill:

Sex with school buses

Popsicle sucking

Pregnant virgins

People with a fetish for f***ing up the truth by injecting baseless, disingenuous lies into the discourse

Those who claim to not spin, but in reality are more dizzying fashion than a merry-go-round

And why didn't Rep Baldwin want these things (and many others) included in the measure? BECAUSE. THEY. HAVE. NOTHING. TO. DO. WITH. ACTUAL. SCIENTIFICALLY. DEFINED. SEXUAL. ORIENTATIONS. OR. GENDER. IDENTITIES!!!!!!!!!!!!! Putting this politically-motivate non-orientation into the bill would be like putting the mortgage of a new Focus on the Family headquarters into a financial stimulus package!

Though we do hope for our socially conservative opposition that extended noses are next up in the sought-after hate crimes protections. With the Pinocchio-like way that they are addressing this "fight," they just might need it.

'Reilly characterizes Rep. Baldwin's statement that amendment is "unnecessary" and "inflammatory" as not wanting "the law to automatically eliminate pedophile protection" [Media Matters]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

I hope he remembers moments like this the next time he wonders why he got the pink brick.

Posted by: | May 6, 2009 9:56:48 AM

Did Bill's list include...loofahs or a falafel? If I were him, I'd be very careful talking about what's considered an orientation and what isn't. Considering the list of his predilections that came up in his sexual harassment lawsuit.

Posted by: Taylor | May 6, 2009 1:11:33 PM

Anyone who would use Steve King (R, Idiot) Iowa as the spokesman for their argument has already lost.

Posted by: Owen | May 7, 2009 4:31:02 AM

One can have it as a SO (not a mental disorder) or being disabled (it is a mental disorder), either way, it is covered.

Peace.

NLO

Posted by: Dr Nigel Leigh Oldfield | May 8, 2009 8:41:48 AM

The DSM "SCIENTIFICALLY. DEFINES" nothing.

Peace.

NLO.

Posted by: Dr Nigel Leigh Oldfield | May 8, 2009 8:42:49 AM

Just stop it, Mr. Oldfield. Seriously. You are spinning for your own self-satisfaction. And your bio (which I won't repeat, but that anyone can Google if they wish) speaks for itself.

Posted by: G-A-Y | May 8, 2009 8:53:48 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails