RECENT  POSTS:  » No, you really don't seem to know what tyranny is, Jerry Cox » Vatican's #Humanum event meant to paint gay families as 'evil' and 'obscene,' admits invited guest » Read: Federal judge calls MS's marriage ban what it is: discriminatory » Yet another federal judge accurately notes crude discrimination within Arkansas' marriage ban » Prominent conservative outlet equates LGBT activists with Nazi paramilitary » New pledge: Conservative pastors choose to separate selves from civil marriage » Read: ADF creates fake 'victim' superbook; misapplies business matters to churches » P&G reaches out to pro-discrimination activist, learns it made right choice » In prep for Pope's 2015 visit, World Meeting of Families readies gay stigma, exclusion » Today in ambition: NOM cofounder vows to fight marriage equality for 100 years  

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

05/17/2010

If we don't ask 'how dare you?!', Tony's terrorism claims win

by Jeremy Hooper

6A00D8341C503453Ef01310F4D47Ef970C-1Just moments after President Obama's State of the Union speech, the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins said that the Commander in Chief is "willing to jeopardize our nation’s security to advance the agenda of the radical homosexual lobby." Comments that got him (rightly) disinvited from a speaking engagement at Andrew's Air Force Base.

Well now Perkins has turned his attention to Elena Kagan, using the exact same meme to reject the SCOTUS nominee's concern for our national security:

"It's not that Elena Kagan does not want the military to defend our nation against terrorism; it's just that she wants to use the military to advance the left's radical social policy more. At least we know her priorities." [SOURCE]

Truly beyond the pale. And honestly, the kind of thing that deserves condemnation well outside of the so-called "culture war" and the usual partisan breakdowns that fall within it. These kinds of comments, which Tony has clearly adopted as anti-DADT strategy, deserve attention and condemnation from the political commentariat all-around.

Take Tony's flippant words to their logical end. What he is seriously suggesting -- without scruples, irony, humor, true Christian principles, restraint, or apology -- is that both the president and one of his crucial nominees (and current Solicitor General), if given the choice between removing a live bomb from Times Square and removing the live ban from the armed forces, would choose the latter. There is no way around it: Tony is saying that these two (and presumably anyone in office who supports repeal) are willing to sacrifice as many our servicemembers' lives as needed in order to finally remove this one bit of discrimination from the military. Because, ya know: He "knows her priorities." Tony has created a skewed, remarkably cruel straw man -- a hierarchy on which progressive supporters of DADT repeal cannot move forward with publicly popular plans for military inclusion without having to turn a blind eye to anthrax and subway bombs. The rhetoric is truly jaw-dropping, if one thinks about what it's actually implying.

And remember: This is not coming from a random writer. It's not coming from Peter LaBarbera. This is not coming from Paul Cameron. Not Westboro Baptist. This is the Family Research Council, a group that (a) obtains regular bookings on all mainstream cable channels, (b) hosts one of the most prominent annual events on the conservative calendar (the Values Voters Summit), at which (c) all major GOP candidates willingly cater/defer to the organizational mission. In short: They get respect from the right. They influence right-leaning lawmakers. They matter to many.

And rather than fight for the basic freedoms on which this nation is built, Tony is instead fighting against those partisan opponents who are working towards the same. At least we know his priorities.

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


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails