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 »

11/26/2012

And now this from the man single-handedly destroying AFA's last shreds of credibility:

by Jeremy Hooper

What he's referring to in these tweets is the condom mandate, which requires Los Angeles adult performers to wrap it up before shooting sex scenes. In the world of the American Family Association's ever-relentless Bryan Fischer, that requirement for both gay and straight performers, is somehow equivalent to the incarceration/death penalties that some Uganda lawmakers want to impose on LGB citizens:

Screen Shot 2012-11-26 At 8.20.46 Am
Screen Shot 2012-11-26 At 8.24.24 Am

Where to even begin? Do you start with the obvious difference between sex work and sexual orientation? Do you start with the stark contrast between safer sex practices and draconian laws that can even come with the death penalty in some cases? Do you note, again, that the Los Angeles policy is the same for all performers regardless of sexual orientation (despite Bryan's insistence that it's just about gay sex)? Or do you just let it all hang there, as the readers' own interoperation of Bryan's obvious agenda, motivations, and seeming support for the proposed Uganda laws is likely more damaging to the AFA's reputation than anything I could even say?

I'm going with the latter. Here we have a man giving credence to a proposed national policy that is so chillingly heinous, even hardcore social conservatives have been clear to distance themselves from it (even if, in some cases, it was only after the were called out). If Bryan wants to advocate for the kinds of restrictions being discussed in Uganda, it's only going to help us American activists connect crucial dots about our own organizations here at home.

Pagebreak-203

**Oh, and there's this one, too:

Fischeruganda
(via Joe)

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