RECENT  POSTS:  » 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' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama  

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

03/26/2014

Video: When no one's buying your 'right' to discriminate, try AFA radio

by Jeremy Hooper

Having little success with the public (including the Republican public), Heritage Foundation's Ryan T. Anderson today took his pro-discrimination views on business owners' supposed right to turn away gay couples to the uber anti-gay waters of the American Family Association. Speaking to host Tim "gay activists are a new kind of 'Gestapo'" Wildmon, Ryan attempted to "explain" to all of us why (a) people who sell cakes and flowers and assorted wedding accoutrements are casting an endorsement on the pending nuptials whenever they book a client, (b) why these wholly ancillary and in no way binding bits of wedding ephemera apparently come with some sort of special status, and (c) why gay people should just stop their whining, since they can just spend their days driving around in a fun new game where they hunt for the vendor who deems them acceptable enough for service.

Clip is cued to pertinent point (and you can stop it about two minutes after for the purposes of this post):

It's such a pretzel of twists. One, they have to pretend that discrimination in public accommodations is "religious freedom," as if that trumps fair practice. Two, they have to equate elements that are mostly featured at wedding receptions or in post-event scrapbooks with the granting (/denial) of marital rights. Three, they have to pretend that this naked act of superiority is someone an act of peace. And so on. It's just such a mess of untenability, which is why it's failing so damn hard.

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