RECENT  POSTS:  » 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' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama » In 2008, the AFA was the same on LGBT rights as President Obama; and I was a flying unicorn » The Hitching Post plot thickens in a truly remarkable way » On Rivka, Robert and their dirty, self-victimizing, anti-intellectual blame game » POTUS believes in fifty-state equality, happy with way it's playing out  

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

03/11/2010

Video: ABC raises Scott Lively's profile. Sorry, Scott.

by Jeremy Hooper

Scott Lively is an official signatory to the rabidly-anti-gay-yet-supposedly-"mainstream" Manhattan Declaration. Those behind the document (Focus on the Family's Jim Daly, NOM's Robby George, Chuck Colson, etc.) leave Lively on their list at their own peril. Here's the latest reason why:

***

*Others close to Lively: Here is the acknowledgements page from Scott's web-based book Redeeming the Rainbow:

6A00D8341C503453Ef01310F31502E970C-1
Redeeming The Rainbow [Lively]

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


Your thoughts

"Sexual terrorism," "nuclear bomb." Right, and it's gay people who use ridiculous rhetoric. I hope Martin Ssempa and Chris Buttars are bffs.

Posted by: DN | Mar 11, 2010 9:15:46 AM

THANK YOU, ABC!!!!!!!!!! I was beginning to think that no national news agency would cover this subject to the degree that they did!

Now, can you go after the Manhattan Declaration and its attempt to expunge Christian history in favor of some fluff bunny-fable that has NO basis in reality? As a History Nerd, THAT crap seriously offends me, ABC!

Posted by: Wade MacMorrighan | Mar 11, 2010 9:54:43 AM

"It's offensive to me that every time a black man does something good, you have to say that a white man told us to do it."

There are so many things wrong with that statement. The fact that this hate filled ass suggests that this is something good is just the beginning. He then plays this "the media is racist" card, I guess because he is not being given credit for being a hate filled ass all by himself.

But, the most egregious aspect is that he lambastes others for his trumped up "racist" slight, while at the same time suggesting that killing members of a minority group because of his own xenophobic hatred is "a good thing". It is so far beyond the realm of reasonableness that in any other situation it might be considered foolish enough to be cartoonish. It might be considered cartoonish, except for the fact that it ends up with xenophobic hatemongers putting those that they love to hate to death - and that makes it criminal.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Mar 11, 2010 10:31:22 AM

For those who haven't already seen: Martin Ssempa has a blog. He even allows comments. Have at it:

http://martinssempa.blogspot.com/

Posted by: G-A-Y | Mar 11, 2010 10:50:59 AM

Thanks, J-dawg! Not that it'll ever get "approved", but I took a minute to post a comment:

"Until Christianity came onto the scene at a relatively late date, Gay people were actually revered by society, holding positions (amongst many Native American Nations) equal to Heads of State, and especially the roles of a High Priest or Priestess, because in every society and culture on earth Gay people were deeply revered and thought to be natural-born Shamans as they were among the Native American plains Indians (until barbaric Christian interference) and as they *are* amid the Asiatic tribes of the Chuckchi; in each of these culture-groups two men or two women were free to marry. In fact, it was quite common for two men or two women to fall in love and get married in ancient Rome; two famous Emperors (Nero and Elagabalus) had very public marriages to men to the cheers and adoration of the public--ancient writers even called their husbands their respective 'spouse'. No one has a logical standing in which to declare that these are not examples of a marriage. What's next, outlawing all non-Christian marriages as invalid or fraudulent (which is what many American Evangelicals have been hinting at in recent months)?"

Posted by: Wade MacMorrighan | Mar 11, 2010 2:43:55 PM

What IS it with these people?!
On the one hand, they accuse gay folks of taking their sexuality into the streets (even if it's just hugging and hand holding).

But it's the opposition that's got diagrams on their signs and uses sexually explicit talk and pictures in CHURCH to demonstrate what gay people are about.

If I happen to be talking to a homophobe, and they don't like my support, as a last resort, THEY go into lecture mode telling ME in the same explicit way what I SHOULD know about gay people.


That has GOT to be a kind of mental illness, or mass hysteria. I mean that is a FREAKISH and unhealthy obsession, right there.

Posted by: Regan DuCasse | Mar 11, 2010 4:42:18 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails