« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
08/13/2008
Missing the punchline, using it to punch gays
It seems that some folks on the anti-gay side of things have become so extreme in their views, they are actually taking intentionally over-the-top satire and using it at face value. Here, check this out -- this is a pic that a blogger at a site called "The Catholic Knight" is using to highlight a post wherein he or she non-ironically asserts that gays are persecuting Christians:
Yes, that's right -- it's a knife-wielding hand, which bears the words "gay agenda," brutally murdering the Statue of Liberty. Seems pretty extreme, right? Pretty heavy-handed? Like something that one would only post if they were intentionally trying to make a sardonic or point?
Well there's a good reason for that: IT TOTALLY IS SATIRE! The parodic image was created by Austin Cline, who writes the Agnosticism/Atheism section of About.com. Here's the post wherein Austin first employed the imagery:
Gay Agenda vs. Civil Liberty [About.com]
But to this writer who traffics in the world of anti-gay politics, where the hyperbole is often ratcheted up to an unintentionally funny/frightening degree, this image apparently came across as perfectly grounded and suitable for the purposes of straightforward illustration. Lady Liberty getting the shiv at the hand of a homo? It seemed plausible!
::sigh:: As both a Manhattanite and a "sodomite," I'm deeply offended!
**The anti-gay blog post: Gays To Persecute Christians [Catholic Knight]
**AFTER THE JUMP: Austin Cline has given us a response to the unfair usage of his photo. Oh, and he ain't happy:
1. The original was created to satirize and mock people who think that equality for gays is an attack on religious liberty. Maybe that's why the image was posted without attributing the original creator and as if Catholic Knight created it.
2. This blogger does not have permission to use the image and, therefore, is violating copyright laws.
3. What does it say about "Catholic Knight" that they illegally use a satirical image as if it were real? That's like taking a story from The Onion and reposting it without permission as if it were genuine news.
Your thoughts
Religion is highly profitable business but mostly when they are carrying out a jihad! It is very easy to stir up the hate or fear especially when you simultaneously stroke the ego with claims of superiority. It is also good measure to throw in some unrealizable reward for the faithful that can only be achieved after death (convenient how that works out).
But in modern western civilization, that hatred can't be overtly stoked (in most cases). It has to be the result of being directly attacked by the evil enemy. They have to be the martyr. But even then, it only works when they are bilking money out of their faithful flockers. If they tried to use this as an issues ad to convince the general population to vote for prop h8, that would be the surest way possible to ensure that it goes down in flames.
The funniest thing about this plagiarism (which more than likely is the point of the original) is that if you swap the protagonist and the antagonist it is actually pretty close to being true. The lying liars have learned that if they write down exactly what their agenda is, and then accuse us of exactly what they're doing, they can sell it. And the sheep just mindlessly march in lockstep in complete oblivion.
Posted by: Dick Mills | Aug 13, 2008 9:18:36 PM
talk about fuzzy math:
First we start with
"It would be fair to say that a large number of them are hell-bent not only on forcing their perversion upon us as 'normal', but also in using the law to punish those of us who disagree."
Then immediately we get:
"In all fairness, not every homosexual fits this description. Most are content to live out their lives quietly..."
But wait, there's still....
"However there is also a growing number of gays who seem to eat, sleep, and breath their homosexuality. Like an obsession..."
A large number, but not most, but alot, but not all, but a growing number of gays are homofacists.. say what?
and what's with the "so called 'gay-rights'"? What else would they be, komodo dragon rights? The majority of anti-gays call into question our "equality" claims, they don't call into question whether or not we're fighting for gay-rights. If we're not fighting for that, what are we fighting for, and why does the Catholic Knight oppose us?
And it's a total fabrication about Catholic Charities in Massachusettes. The board voted to obey the law and provide services to gays, it was the archbishop who overruled them and closed their doors. Nobody forced them to do anything, they closed shop voluntarily.
It's also a fabrication about Ocean Grove in NJ. They got special tax-exempt status for one piece of boardwalk property under a program that gives special tax-exemptions to groups who open up their private property TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. They violated the terms of that agreement, and thus lost the tax exempt status for that particular piece of land. As the NY Times noted "The administrator of the Camp Meeting Association, Scott Hoffman, said in a written statement that “the Camp Meeting is reviewing the letter. However, it is worth noting that over 99 percent of the Camp Meeting’s land was recertified as tax-exempt.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/nyregion/18grove.html
Posted by: Jason D | Aug 13, 2008 9:22:28 PM
All so d***nably true Dick.
Posted by: LOrion | Aug 13, 2008 10:11:50 PM
So how far a stretch is it from a knife in the SOL to a gun in a Democratic Headquarters....
oh wait that did just happen.
Posted by: LOrion | Aug 13, 2008 10:12:51 PM
The absolutely stunning part of this is how one could simply replace all references to homosexuals and homosexuality (and our supposed master agenda) with Christian labels and you'd be talking about the Christianist movement in this country.
Amazing the pure disconnect that occurs in their minds that leads them to believe their own attacks on "living and letting live" are acts of protection and ours are acts of destruction.
Posted by: Eric | Aug 14, 2008 8:30:25 AM
comments powered by Disqus