back to basics
or a russ beattie would say, “see, i made this happen.” today it is all over the news that not just local governments but states have passed laws banning protests at funerals because of the WBC’s crazy new tactics they started last year. (johnny sent the news in. thanks pal!) Back then i said that broadnening their focus and protesting stuff that is not strictly related to gays would be their downfall. i was right. anyone with half a brain predicted it, i’m sure. but just as i figured, when they started to protest soldier’s funerals instead of gay stuff middle america took notice, and now the WBC is branded as the freaks they are. and even the VFW chairman, who probably isn’t that pro-gay himself, now thinks they’re homophobic lunatics. give ’em enough rope.
the ultra evangelicals have realized that gay is the new abortion (i thought gay was the new black) and continue to focus on it as their rallying point and wedge issue. for a while it seemed like they were going to do it right (from a PR perspective), but now it seems even they have gone a little crazy. i can’t exactly follow the argument, but it goes something like this (and no, it’s not about man coexisiting with dinosaurs like the flinstones). evangelicals christians anti-gay view are causing them to be persecuted, hated, if you will. so we should protect evangelical’s anti-gay rhetoric under the same anti-hate speech clause that is supposed to prevent it in the first place. or better yet, eliminate hate speech clauses altogether to protect the religious freedom of evangelicals to hate gays. not that i’m against the idea of eliminating anti-hate speech rules. after all, if evangelicals think they’re persecuted now, just wait until it’s ok to blanket campuses with anti-evangelical fliers. and protest their events, their services, maybe spray paint epithets on their homes. that would be ok since hate speech would be legal and protected, right?
this sort of double talk is so confounding that it’s difficult to come up with counter argument. even an FSM style one. The SPLC says replace evangelical anti-gay speech with anti-black speech and the evangelicals will get it because they don’t want to be seen as racist. but i don’t think that will work. i don’t think giving them a taste of their own medicine will work either (but the thought of protesting evangelical events and burning crosses (or something else – upside down crosses? i dunno) on their lawn does sound kinda fun. or it would if i had nothing better to do.
Filed under: homo gay | Leave a Comment