RECENT  POSTS:  » Head of Virginia's anti-equality org: 'open season to discriminate against anyone who believes that children deserve a mom and a dad' » Force behind Virginia's marriage ban ably demonstrates animus behind it » NOM to show rest of world its impressive ability to exacerbate loss » Bryan Fischer: Marriage equality supporters are like baseball's legendarily winning team » On NC's Attorney General and the bipartisan hunt for a 'culture war' off ramp » Read: 4th Circuit strikes down Virginia marriage ban » GLAAD: Change is possible: Former 'ex-gay' activist Yvette Schneider 'celebrates the worthiness and equality of all people' » Man who stands in way of Texas equality works to stunt economic windfall as well » Miami-Dade Circuit judge rules state marriage ban unconstitutional; stays ruling » Video: With marriage equality, Texas could put in a pool at the Alamo  

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

04/23/2014

Robert Oscar Lopez says I perform 'psychological operations routine' on him when I quote his own words from his own web site

by Jeremy Hooper

Every one of the sourced and linked quotes on Robert Oscar Lopez' truly unbelievable Commentator Accountability Project page direct readers back to his very own website, video clips, or commentaries that he's placed elsewhere on the web. Robert, professional victim that he is, loves to claim the quotes on the site are "out of context," which is laughable as it is. But the fact of the matter is that the full source material is always linked—always, every time, in every instance—for anyone who wants the broader context.

Despite this truth, Lopez has on several occasions thrown around words like "libel" and "slander," both publicly and in off-record communications that moles within his own movement (there are many) have forwarded to me. And now, in a post where he first calls me a "troll," "incredibly dangerous," and "incredibly stupid," this vicious anti-gay activist and marriage movement star attempts to defend his own penchant for equating same-sex parents with slaveowners (which he has done incessantly, in every linguistic assembly imaginable) by saying I am performing a "psychological operations routine" against him when I do nothing more than note his very own words:

 Sites Default Files Styles Medium Public Screen-Shot-2013-07-15-At-4.17.43-Pm"They define 'pro-gay' as anti-children and pro-slavery, and then get mad when people debate about children's rights and the history of slavery. Pope Francis, who was Advocate's man of the year for 2013, recently issued a statement that children have a right to a mom and dad. That's all I'm saying -- what the pope is saying, even though I am not Catholic, and note that this Pope is beloved by people at the Advocate. The entire basis for calling me a rising star of the "anti-gay" movement depends upon a belief that it is anti-gay to protect children's rights against slavery or deprivation of a mother/father. This is why Jeremy Hooper tries his psychological operations routine where he goes to every site remotely involved with me and says 'Robert Oscar Lopez equates same-sex marriage with slavery.' Slavery is defined as purchasing and ownership of human beings as chattel. If you pay a price to someone else for control of a child, you have engaged in human trafficking and are a slaver. Gay parenting depends on pairs of people acquiring children whom they can't conceive, so often, when there aren't orphans conveniently roaming around for the picking, they end up paying people for their genetic materials or directly for their children. To be considered "pro-gay," apparently, you have to be completely fine with this and cannot even call it what it is. So I told the reporter quite specifically, "they are not gay rights groups, they are groups devoted to taking other people's rights away,' since 'they are anti-children's rights, and I am pro-human and by extension pro-gay." Why am I pro-gay and not them? Because gay people have a right to a mother and father, and that right will be eliminated if the LGBT lobby gets its way."
[Source]

There is no logical way he can confine this disturbingly myopic, highly offensive view to just same-sex couples. There are far more opposite-sex couples who adopt children or use any of the reproductive assistance that Robert seems to loathe. If his standard for parent-driven "slavery" is one where the child is brought into the world and provided for by parents (or a parent) other than the people who contributed to that child's DNA, then he has to logically apply that to many more situations than just the ones that he finds politically convenient. I don't think, a deeply offensive suggestion that is nothing short of denigration of millions of children and their families, is a road he wants to go down; I know it's not a road that his allied groups want to go down.

And you keep saying it Robert, and I'll keep documenting it. Call me whatever name you want, tough guy. I'm more than confident in how this public debate will play out.

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