UPDATE: I have a proposal that could help reduce the "culture wars" - Christians stop wearing their religion on their sleeves and recognize that others have the right to freedom of religion too. I wonder what Rep. King would say to that?*
Over the years I have followed a number of "pro-family" and "family values" organizations run by the professional Christian set and one message always comes through: gays are a subhuman category defined solely by sex acts. The rest of our lives and our accomplishments mean nothing. As do our loves and emotions mean nothing. We are boiled down to two things: sex acts and "behavior." All LEGITIMATE medical and mental health associations have concluded that sexual orientation is innate and not changeable. But among our enemies the truth means nothing and lying is the norm - even as they false profess to worship the Ten Commandments and the Bible. Sadly, too many elected officials out of either intellectual laziness or a willingness to prostitute themselves for votes parrot the bile disseminated by these false Christians. A case in point is GOP Congressman Steve King (Iowa) (pictured at right) who on the issue of employment non-discrimination said that if homosexuals want to avoid discrimination they should be more discrete about being homosexual. Should heterosexuals also be more discrete about their sexual orientation? And who is it that really wants "special rights" - gays or conservative Christians? Obviously, it is the latter who want to disregard the laws and impose their warped and hate filled views on all citizens. King went on and stated this:
*
If people wear their sexuality on their sleeve, then they want to bring litigation against someone that they would point their finger at and say “you discriminate,” it is an entrapment that is legalized by the ENDA Act, it appears to, and its a violation of the individual rights of employers to, at their own discretion, decide who they want to hire and who they want to fire. We don’t need more federal mandates. And we surely don’t need a political statement, and that’s what this is, too. This is the homosexual activist lobby taking it out on the rest of society. They are demanding affirmation for their lifestyle. That’s at the bottom of this.
*
Fortunately, blogger friend Jeremy Hooper at Good As You did not let King's bullshit go unchallenged:
*
And in terms of hypocrisy: Where the flying, falsified frick does Rep. King get off saying that "they should have known" Behn's sexuality? People like King and Tony Perkins go on all the time about how a gay person's sexuality is only apparent if the person makes it known. Literally seconds after King made his comment about state senator Behn, he talks about how sexuality must be "projected" or "advertised" or "worn on the sleeve" if it is to be known. Yet that same rule doesn't apply to apparent heterosexuals like Senator Behn? People "should have known" just from looking at him? Why the double standard?!? Why is one's bio automatically "militant" if they are openly gay or lesbian, yet just a "should have known" kind of benign normalcy if it skews towards opposite-sex relations? The obvious answer: Folks like King hold a double standard in every single way that they deal with LGBT people. . . . .That's why they have to flip every piece of legislation that pertains to sexuality and (a) overlook the way it protects all of us, and (b) flip the script so that heterosexual Christians are the supposed victims.
If people wear their sexuality on their sleeve, then they want to bring litigation against someone that they would point their finger at and say “you discriminate,” it is an entrapment that is legalized by the ENDA Act, it appears to, and its a violation of the individual rights of employers to, at their own discretion, decide who they want to hire and who they want to fire. We don’t need more federal mandates. And we surely don’t need a political statement, and that’s what this is, too. This is the homosexual activist lobby taking it out on the rest of society. They are demanding affirmation for their lifestyle. That’s at the bottom of this.
*
Fortunately, blogger friend Jeremy Hooper at Good As You did not let King's bullshit go unchallenged:
*
And in terms of hypocrisy: Where the flying, falsified frick does Rep. King get off saying that "they should have known" Behn's sexuality? People like King and Tony Perkins go on all the time about how a gay person's sexuality is only apparent if the person makes it known. Literally seconds after King made his comment about state senator Behn, he talks about how sexuality must be "projected" or "advertised" or "worn on the sleeve" if it is to be known. Yet that same rule doesn't apply to apparent heterosexuals like Senator Behn? People "should have known" just from looking at him? Why the double standard?!? Why is one's bio automatically "militant" if they are openly gay or lesbian, yet just a "should have known" kind of benign normalcy if it skews towards opposite-sex relations? The obvious answer: Folks like King hold a double standard in every single way that they deal with LGBT people. . . . .That's why they have to flip every piece of legislation that pertains to sexuality and (a) overlook the way it protects all of us, and (b) flip the script so that heterosexual Christians are the supposed victims.
*
As always, Jeremy has a wonderful way with words.
No comments:
Post a Comment