RECENT  POSTS:  » Today in 'um, yeah, obviously': Stunt marriages not confined to opposite-sex partnerships » Video: Brian Brown's fellow panelist gives insight into Moscow panel's extreme views on homosexuality, marriage » Video: TN man condemns gays with Leviticus billboards; oddly allows local Red Lobsters to remain open » Video: 'Ex-gay' speaker at upcoming ERLC summit equates talking to gay people with talking to cancer patients » GLAAD: Mainstream media is catching on to NOM's broader agenda » FRC's Values Voter Summit puts anti-gay bakers on a marriage panel; so we won, basically » GOP front group NOM raising money for a GOP US Senate » Leave beloved children's author Beverly Cleary out of your dastardly agenda, NOM! » Video: Another hour, another anti-gay activist warning society of its impending, gay-initiated doom » Video: Target features gay dads in new ad #MadeToMatter  

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

11/17/2009

Video: Few care to enter far-right's house of cards

by Jeremy Hooper

From what we hear, the far-right's ridiculous, red herring of an anti-hate crimes law press conference was a complete and utter bust, with sign-waving gays outweighing the scant-to-nil media presence. So don't fear these two clips. Don't even feel the need to yell at Janet Porter's recitation of the same fallacious arguments and non-American "examples" that we've heard a million times. Instead, have a good laugh at their expense:


**ALSO: One of the few outlets on hand was CBN. Check out what amounts to a completely non-helpful report for their side, featuring clips from extremist street preachers:

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


Your thoughts

As we all know, all Christians in Canada are immediately sent to the maple syrup gulag to toil in the grueling copper mines of Kugluktuk.

Posted by: marsmannetje | Nov 17, 2009 11:28:44 AM

Why didn't they take their rally to Canada to REALLY test their assertion?
I bet they wouldn't get much more attention even there.
They still keep trying to see that 'this WILL happen'..'it's GOING to happen!' 'Well, it happened in Canada!'

But in fact, it didn't happen. There is a difference between TWO ministers being censured for their unprotected speech that puts gays and lesbians at UNNECESSARY risk, as opposed to just 'speaking the truth of the Bible' and it being a trend all over Canada and elsewhere.

The Bible only has a few passages that are interpreted as referring to homosexual behavior. And even that can rightly be debatable.
1. Is this speaking the truth that the Bible in fact says it?

2. Or speaking a truth that what the Bible says is fact?

I say the former is a matter of acknowledging what it says and I can accept that. Despite all the reinterpretations, evolution though the filter of different languages and so on.

Claiming the latter and using it as a means of denying basic civil and human rights, anywhere, is not acceptable.

It's a chronicle of a people and how they handled their times and who they experienced it with, it's not all entirely directives to be enforced against non believers AND believers.
When will these people get THAT too?

The Bible doesn't say 'they spread AIDS!', 'they'll teach your children to be homosexual' 'they're all pedophiles and marriage will lead to marrying your pig' 'homosexuality is a mental illness!' People make shit up all the time to maintain cruel hierarchies. Biblical societies did, and even in recent American history the Bible was used to do so. Why rush to emulate the worst from a thousands year old culture and their fearful reactions to what was different or mysterious?

No, there is considerable gravitas and reactionary directives in the Bible, but if taken literally, it requires people to be extremely barbaric and reductive.
Who wants that?

We have limits here to what's protected speech for a good reason the Bible spells out too. You aren't allowed to put people at risk with your speech. False witness is frowned on, and unacceptable for ANY reason.
But the bigger point is: WHY DO IT?
And why say such things EXCLUSIVELY about gay people and not the sorts of behaviors that have the same results for everyone?

That was the question put before the ministers talked about in this woman's book and they didn't have a good answer either. Indeed, gays and lesbians ARE put at risk, and there are the 'bloody shirts' out there to prove it.
Canadians do not let the religious communities deny there is a connection between their speech and violations against gay people.

We do have long sad lists of gay victims of violence and socio/political anti gay animus written into our laws.

Canada won't tolerate it as much as our country does and they have FAR less hate crimes too.


Which this woman at the podium failed to mention, along with marriage equality being healthy for Canadian society at large.

BTW...I'm not sure if this was the same case, but the 5,000 dollar fine mentioned, was to reimburse a gay owned business that this minister had targeted. He'd accused the owners of being a threat to children because the business was near a school. I think it was a clothing store.

I might not have that right.
Even so, I see the logic in how Canada handles things.
Ministers make themselves a LIABILITY to civility, truth and peaceful integration of gay and straight people, if not physical safety and the livelihoods of gay people and their supporters.

And if these people at this puny rally have a problem with gay people having all that: to hell with them too.

Posted by: Regan DuCasse | Nov 17, 2009 4:05:53 PM

That Janet woman is quite the flaming lesbian.

Posted by: simon | Nov 18, 2009 1:15:45 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails