The Myth Of White, Heterosexual Christian Entitlement

4This past Saturday, I was sitting at a local crawfish restaurant enjoying a large, steaming tray of spicy crawfish and watching the NFL draft results when the announcement of Michael Sam being drafted by the St. Louis Rams came through on ESPN. As the video of his celebration played, a couple of older guys to my left were absolutely horrified and disgusted that a TV station, especially ESPN, would show two men kissing. For a moment, I thought a full-fledged emotional meltdown was going to occur as my friend and I considered if we should pretend to be gay in order to infuriate them further.

Whether it is Michael Sam being drafted or gay marriage bans being ruled unconstitutional in some Southern states, the old guard of bigotry and discrimination is on the ropes right now and the angry missives of how they’re “being persecuted” are flying left and right. As a straight man who was bullied for being presumed gay in my younger years, let me tell the so-called Christians that you are not being “persecuted.” Can you name one child in America that was bullied to suicide for being straight like Justin Aaberg? Can you tell me of one person who was tormented relentlessly in school for wearing a crucifix or having a Bible in their backpack like Grayson Bruce was for liking My Little Pony? Or how about a Christian being beaten, tied to a fence and left to die as in the case of Matthew Shepard?

The false narrative of persecution is something which has been used successfully by the religious right for many years now as they scream about having their First Amendment rights violated every time someone counters their hatred. In the world of the religious bully, all of their hatred and venom is justified because of the way they personally interpret the Bible to put themselves above others. In fact, many of these people fit the profile of what is known as the “serial bully” as they try to counter the criticism of their behavior by blaming the victim. You’ll commonly hear such statements as “I’m not a homophobe, I just think they should keep it to themselves” or “I have nothing against gay people but I don’t see why they get special rights” and other false arguments like these. During the Civil Rights era, the same excuses were made for discrimination. All you have to do is replace gay people with persons of color and almost every single one of these intolerant statements are just the same old hatred of everyone else who isn’t a member of the white, conservative, heterosexual Christian entitlement club.

You see, these aren’t people who believe in equal rights, not by a long shot. In fact, they believe that because of their lucky place in the white, conservative, heterosexual Christian entitlement club that they deserve superior rights. They believe they are entitled to not be offended while being able to offend anyone else, because you know… white, conservative, heterosexual Christian privilege trumps everyone else. Across the South, as well as the rest of the country, there are still people who think based solely off the color of their skin or the religion that they practice that they were automatically handed a VIP card to carry through life – and out of all of the people in the world, God loves them the most.

I’ll admit, it gave me a great deal of amusement, Schadenfreude even, to watch how uncomfortable the sight of an interracial, gay couple passionately kissing each other made the two guys at the next table. I would say they probably weren’t quite old enough to be able to remember the days of segregation and whites only drinking fountains, but if this had been 50+ years ago, they would have been equally infuriated to see a black man and a white woman seated at a table near them or kissing on television.

These people will eventually follow their bigoted parents and grandparents into the darker pages of American history where our children and grandchildren will look back, perhaps with a small degree of embarrassment or disbelief while wondering what the big deal was. Just as generations before used religion to justify slavery and segregation, now these people are using religion to infringe upon the constitutional rights of the LGBT community. History will judge them harshly.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Jim Bean

    The reason that the men in the restaurant found Sam and the other guy kissing repulsive is because, well, most men find that repulsive. Its instinctual and the speech police can’t change it. They can only coerce people into pretending otherwise.

    • Clare

      Why would it be instinctual to be disgusted by two people kissing, unless they’re overdoing it and eating each other’s faces (which is inappropriate regardless of sex)? I’m calling B.S. on that–there’s just no reason, unless you’re afraid that others will call you gay for not being disgusted by it. And that reaction is the fault of society, not human instinct.

      • Cassy_Again

        It actually makes no sense from an evolutionary standpoint. Homosexuals are not in competition for the opposite sex. If anything, homosexuals should be welcomed by heterosexuals.

        More homosexual men = more potentially available women for the heterosexuals. From the sounds of it, the heterosexuals might need all the help they can get.

      • fud

        More potentially available women = more potentially homosexual females.

      • Jim Bean

        Who drew that line? The line between kissing and eating each others faces, I mean?

      • alexes

        anyone with eyes

      • Rob G

        Bedroom behavior should stay in the bedroom, that’s all I’m saying. I don’t like seeing people making out on street corners or any other public place. PDA is not appropriate. It would be nice if I didn’t have to deal with it while watching football. Just saying. I don’t care if it’s homosexual or heterosexual can we just please keep football football?

    • Gay men certainly don’t find it repulsive. 😛

      • Shannon

        and have to be exposed to “heterosexual” kissing all the time! And I cant think of a single time i have heard of a gay person bitching about that..

      • Heh. That’s very true. Straight sex is as unnatural to most gay people as gay sex apparently is to Jim Bean. 🙂

    • Retrodude

      “Most” men. Prove this.

    • fud

      I would hardly call it repulsive. Two guys are together, people that are together kiss, they kissed. Big deal. Move on.

    • Sandy Greer

      It’s not instinctual to be repulsed by others. It’s learned behavior.

      As babies, our natural instinct is to like others – to ‘reach out’ and touch.

      Hate, Racism, Fear of the Unknown (aka repulsion, aversion) are learned behavior. As we grow, we ‘shut down’ our natural instincts, that we had as babies. Any number of reasons: Maybe a hot stove burned us, or we ‘accepted’ the stove as hot – without actually touching it, ourselves.

      Good thing is – learned behavior can be unlearned, as well.

      As people – we are capable of anything we put our minds to. 😉

      • Jim Bean

        Rubbish. When we see a parent violently beating a child we instinctively know it wrong. When they’re underwater a baby instinctively knows not to breath. More things are instinctual than not. Overcoming instinct – that is a learned behavior that liberals seek to teach.

      • DoctorButler

        You don’t “instinctively” know that domestic violence is wrong. You “know” it’s wrong because it’s looked down upon by your culture. What if you lived in an ass-backward culture that approved of beating your family? You’d see it as normal, not “instinctively know” it’s wrong.

        And that’s why you “instinctively know” that gay people existing is so wrong, because you were raised in an ass-backward culture. Your a bigoted elitist.

        And btw, physiological aversion to drowning is not the same as making a sociological judgement call. That’s a false equivalency. Not that your kind know a great deal about what’s natural.

      • alexes

        well, most kids cry when they see their parents fighting, and all cry when they see someone being beaten – well before they can talk or be socialized. it IS instinctual to be afraid of violence. later they might learn to accept it, but early on they are afraid of it. as to the “instinct” of not liking men kissing – that’s garbage, as you said.

      • Jim Bean

        The person (Sue) below begs to differ with both you and Doc – and she would know.

      • alexes

        did you even read what i said?

      • Sue Roediger

        now YOU are deciding what I think????

      • Jim Bean

        Now you are responding to what’s going on in your imagination, not what I said. I don’t think gay people existing is wrong. I think insisting there is something wrong with anyone who doesn’t champion the gay cause is what’s wrong. I happen to not think society has anything to gain by endorsing it and plenty has been lost already to HIV.

      • Sue Roediger

        we are not really asking the world to “champion” homosexuality….just to stop hating, shaming, ostracizing and beating us up about it. Other people being gay hurts you …… not at all.

      • Mog

        you also have an aversion to your parents having sx, yet that is completely normal in your world. Why is that do you think?

      • Jim Bean

        Dad’s dead. Moms 86. But I never had that aversion. What do you think? Learned or instinct?

      • Sue Roediger

        seriously….. even as a little boy you never thought kissing “icky”……even in movies, you are either kidding or telling a big fat lie.

      • Jim Bean

        Well, OK, maybe as a wee lad. But I had my first girlfriend at age 6 and was over it by then.

      • Sue Roediger

        ahh .. then you get what I have been trying to say sexual attraction is not learned. It is innate to each individual. Just as some kids developed either right or left handedness by age 3 – by around age 5 kids are set in their sexual orientation. Growing up in a suppressive culture and keep them for realizing it. I was one of those people I tried so hard to adapt to what was expected of me but something always seemed not quite right for me. In my 3o’s I finally figured it out. My niece says she knew in kindergarten. Right not there are in any kindergarten class many youngsters who are just recognizing that they are gay. They are not choosing based on what they see on TV.

      • Sue Roediger

        sorry for the typos—- should read “growing up in a suppressive culture can keep them from realizing”. I hate it when my fingers don’t follow my directions

      • Jim Bean

        The kissing thing, when in conjunction with the sexual thing, is a precursor to the baby-making thing. Sometimes it goes off the rails.

      • Sue Roediger

        Huh? as a lesbian I have no worry about the baby making issues …….. For all of us kissing can lead to sexual contact .. straights also do other things besides “missionary position” … so what is the problem????

      • The kissing thing, when in conjunction with the sexual thing, is a precursor to the baby-making thing.

        Huh? You are aware that a great many women (and men) never intend to have children, and take active steps to prevent it, aren’t you? I’m one of them. Had myself snipped twenty years ago and have never regretted it.

        Also, a great many gay and lesbian couples DO have children, either through adoption, surrogacy or sperm donation. In our modern age, with modern, reliable birth control, kissing and sex isn’t necessarily linked with pregnancy, nor should it be.

      • Jim Bean

        The purpose of sex organs is baby making.

      • Well, obviously. (Although that orgasm thing, and emotional intimacy with your partner, is pretty nice too….) That doesn’t change the fact that in this modern technological age, sex isn’t inextricably linked to pregnancy. Many people want to do other things besides pop out kids.

        You just thoroughly ignored everything I said, didn’t you?

      • Jim Bean

        No. I agree with 100% of what you just said. Many people find young children and animals sexually attractive and want to do sexual things with them, also. Now before you throw a tantrum, let me point out I’m not trying to suggest an apples to apples comparison with homosexuality. I simply use that to illustrate that different people draw the line at different points and whether they are right or wrong is simply a matter of opinion. Once you depart from the baby-making process, you’re outside the box. What is ‘too far outside the box’ has no scientific answer though liberals strive gallantly to convince others that they have the answer.

      • Honestly, Jim, sometimes the things you say leave me scratching my head.

        I simply use that to illustrate that different people draw the line at different points and whether they are right or wrong is simply a matter of opinion.

        Well, except for the inconvenient fact that bestiality and child rape are illegal. We as a society have decided this because children and animals are incapable of consenting to sex.

        We as a society have also decided that interracial marriage will be allowed, and we are on our way to deciding (if we haven’t already, based on the most recent polling) that same-sex marriage will be allowed. But the common thread through both of these is that they involve CONSENTING ADULTS. Which is not true with the other two scenarios.

        Once you depart from the baby-making process, you’re outside the box.

        So? I fail to see how that is even relevant. My life is not the sum of my baby-making capabilities.

      • Jim Bean

        ‘Outside the box’ becomes relevant when confronted with the argument that ‘you must agree with me or you’re stupid.”

      • Rob G

        Hmmm, So just for curious, how would you feel about polygamy between consenting adults?

      • I think in our society, at this time, there would be a LOT of issues that would have to be worked out re: children, taxes, property, inheritance, divorce, and so on and so forth. There’s also the old nasty power imbalances that would rear their heads when you have, say, one husband and more than one wife. (That could be solved by allowing a true “group marriage”–more than one husband and more than one wife.)

        But if all those problems could be addressed, I don’t think polygamy would be that big of a deal.

      • Sue Roediger

        neither children nor animals can give consent.

      • Sue Roediger

        so ….. logically a fertility test should be required before a couple can marry. No more marriages between the 80 – 90 year old in nursing homes …. eh? and if people are married a designated period of time …. and produce no offspring.. the marriage should be annulled … ?

      • Jim Bean

        Honey, I don’t care who marries what. But here’s the thing. Each body part serves a natural purpose. Every person, fairly early in life, figures out what each part does through observation. With a little imagination one can get creative and come up with some variances. And that’s fine. But please don’t walk up to me on your hands and insult my intelligence by saying “there’s absolutely no difference between what I’m doing and you walking on legs and feet.”

      • Sue Roediger

        Straight people get into all kinds of kink I would never do ,,,,,,,,,,,

      • Jim Bean

        Indeed they do.

      • Sue Roediger

        So – every act of sex MUST be to make a baby? The purpose of sex is to create an intimate bond between the two people. That way if they have a baby=they are more likely to stick together to raise, and provide for it. This intimate bond is also formed by same sex couples and when the have kids (through adoption or other means) they tend to stay together. The whole same sex marriage issue is not so these couples can have sex – it is because that have formed just such a bond and want to declare it. The same things that motivate straight people to marry.
        If the purpose of sex was baby making —- why do so many people use means to prevent a baby from getting made?

      • John

        true that is the purpose of sex organs, but thats not the only reason for sex organs. but I do have to say that a man and a woman is a beautiful thing, they fit like a perfect piece of a puzzle, And together they can create a baby which is a remarkable thing. Its part of nature it is what makes humanity survive, with out a man and woman together creating life there would be no people. The act of lovemaking between a man and a woman is so perfect and natural.

      • Jim Bean

        You can get into a lot of trouble for talking like that around here.

      • Shawn Scott

        I have to disagree with you there Jim. I have friends in the zoology line of work who witness and describe animal antics often. Animals constantly mount each other. It’s not just for procreation, its also for leadership and sorting out the echelon. Its for dominance and submission. EXCEPT for the gay animals. It doesn’t seem to be about sex and dominance for the gay fauna. There is a gay penguin couple in a local zoo that management has tried to separate for years (shhhh we are located on the shiney rodeo buckle of the bible belt so we have to be careful not to let the locals know or they would, you know, kill them…), and the result is that these two will find a way to just be together without mounting each other constantly like the “hetero” animal faction. They will overcome great obstacles to be together and their interactions aren’t sexual, more affectionate to each other. Two. Male. Penguins.

      • Jim Bean

        I’ve watched the monkeys at the zoo. They do lots of thing – many of them quite disgusting. I hope we never ‘evolve’ to the point where we accept humans doing all of them. I don’t dispute the (gay)phenomenon exists in other species though I’ve not seen any evidence that they are conscious of the deviance from norm.

      • Sue Roediger

        They don’t have priests, or busybodies, to accuse them of being deviant ….

      • Sue Roediger

        why then does the desire to have sex… not wane when fertility has ended?

      • Sandy Greer

        Funny you mention babies in water. It’s actually easier to teach a baby to swim, than an adult.
        Babies ‘accept’ the water; don’t ‘fear’ it – as adults do, who never learned to swim.
        Kinda proves my point. 😉

      • Jim Bean

        Baby’s and adults both fear breathing in water. I’d suggest that rather proves mine.

      • Sandy Greer

        Really? How so?

      • Sue Roediger

        If you want to bring physiology into this discussion … A blindfolded person will respond to being kissed… regardless of the gender of he person kissing them. The “ick factor” only kicks in when they see – and judge – the person.
        For someone who is gay – our instinct is different from yours … kissing an opposite sex person is – to use your word – repulsive.

      • Jim Bean

        I fully appreciate that.

    • Steve Summers

      i dont find it repulsive, but i only speak for the people that are like me…. *EVERYBODY IN AMERICA BUT YOU*.

      • Jim Bean

        Go to a PTA meeting and ask, “How many of you hope your child grows up to be gay?” Report back.

      • Sue Roediger

        No one would “hope” for it. Everyone wants their kid to “fit in”…………. If you think of being gay as a defect then you have to go through a lot of process to “accept it”. If you think of it as a “difference” then it just is like hair color, eye color, handedness, IQ or any other attribute of a person.

      • Jane

        Most people just want their children to grow to be happy and content – most people nowadays are not as obsessed with what other consenting adults get up to during their intimate moments as you are. You’re likely a repressed gay yourself – otherwise you wouldn’t be so obsessed with it.

      • Jim Bean

        I’m always fascinated when someone goes for the ‘repressed gay person’ accusation. Its source is exactly the same as the racist accusation the same people use to try to stop anyone from disagreeing with a black person. If Hillary is elected, I’ve no doubt they will make fine use of the sexist accusation. They are great options for the simple minded when confronted with the complex.

      • Sue Roediger

        . No reason not to disagree with a woman or a black person (or someone) gay as long as you are not disagreeing just because they are a woman or black (or gay)

      • Jim Bean

        99% of the claims of racism levied since Obama became President were levied at someone who was disagreeing with his policies and they would have disagreed with those policies regardless of the skin color of the person espousing them.

      • Sue Roediger

        where do you get 99%? There is a big difference between the folks objecting to policies and those who call him names like “Obummer”, and post pictures of chimps.

      • Jim Bean

        I dare say, no one affiliated with the Left is in any position to pretend indignation at name calling.

      • That may be (and actually you were the one to point that out to me, and I thank you for doing so), but the amount of racialized insults that have been thrown President Obama’s way are unique and unprecedented.

        The pictures I have seen include: a watermelon patch in front of the White House (playing on stereotypes of black people eating watermelons), the President’s face superimposed on a pictue of an African witch doctor, complete with a bone through the nose; a man waving a Confederate flag in front of the White House; a man with a Romney/Ryan campaign sticker on a t-shirt, with this proclamation underneath: “Put the White back in the White House”; and pictures of both the President and Michelle with their faces superimposed over photos of chimpanzees.

        Given the history of slavery, discrimination and Jim Crow in this country, stuff like this is qualitatively different than, for instance, calling George W. Bush, a white man, a “smirking chimp.”

        On another thread, I’ve taken progressives to task for calling conservative women “slut”, “cunt,” and “bitch.” Jim, are you prepared to do the same to conservatives, given the examples I’ve provided above?

      • Jim Bean

        I am, in fact. Regardless of what team they play for, that type of person is a liability.

      • Rob G

        I’m with you in that I couldn’t care less what other consenting adults get up to during their intimate moments (as long as I don’t have to watch, gay or straight), but I would actually like to be a grandpa one day and I would prefer my grandkids have my genes. It would be nice if they shared my faith and patriotism as well. I think faith and moral values have a huge impact on happiness.

    • Brian

      “Its instinctual”
      Proof from valid and respected psychological and biological publications?

    • Keyote™

      You’ve proven yourself, to date, to be full of shit. You are fine with “Straight people” in movies, all the time, “Kissing” most likely, but can’t deal with it in reality? It’s “repulsive”, says who? You, and you have the mythical, invisible “we” to back you? No, doesn’t work like that. I’m not pretending it isn’t otherwise, it simply, ISN’T otherwise, unless you are a bigoted piece of shit. Want the description? Go find a mirror.

  • Nanaramma

    you forgot a word…
    The Myth Of White, Heterosexual Christian MALE Entitlement

    • gstoya

      Too funny

    • Jim Bean

      We have an entitlement, alright. We’re entitled to provide for everyone else.

      • oldntired

        I have never had one provide for me so I see your judgement very flawed

      • Keyote™

        So, as of 2 years ago you agree to being: Treated better, making more, etc. etc. all due to fortune, color, and religion? But don’t see it as a prejudice in your favor? It’s fine as long as it isn’t “Against you?”

        I’d be curious as to how you “Provide for everyone else.” Because it smells like bullshit without examples.

      • Jim Bean

        I provided for everyone else by going to work every day for 45 years and giving back to society more than I took from it.

      • Keyote™

        And only you did that? Only? Ever? And how is that “Providing for everyone else?” Really? Is it the 36 bucks a year you put into foodstamps? Over 45 years, if that is what you are alluding to? That’s 1,620 bucks. Or the 870 for Corporate subsidies? (39,150, by the way, over 45 years.)

        So, what are you bitching about, exactly? And who is this mythical: “Everyone else”, and again, how did you working, mean anything? Just curious how you are going to back this framing.

  • I’m not fond of watching people kiss. It doesn’t warm my heart or anything sentimental. It also doesn’t bother me. I like to kiss, it’s something between me and the person I’m kissing. I’m not ashamed of it, and if you don’t like it, there are plenty of other things to look at.

  • daniel emerson

    This “persecution” bullshit is a severe twisting of ‘confirmation bias’, i.e., it actually happens to one or two Christians in some neck of the woods, and it gets rocketed out of propulsion, as if ALL Christians, everywhere, are suffering the same discrimination. Meanwhile, Christians make up the overwhelming majority of the nation, and at least 72% of all Americans believe in Biblical figures (angels, etc). I do believe a key component to persecution is being a discriminated minority, of which Christians are assuredly not.

    Progressives are making leaps and bounds in progress, but there’s still a significant shortfall, quantity-wise, behind Christians. When Christians become the minority, THEN I’ll put some stock into their ramblings of persecution and discrimination. Then again, is turnabout truly fair play? Do those who use Godly justifications to abdicate their bigotry open themselves up to more secularly-minded criticism? One can only hope.

    • Guest

      You get my vote for the biggest dumbass of the year…

      • DoctorButler

        Why? For stating factual, readily available observations? Are you one of those victim-complex Christians too?

      • Rob G

        You are just as illogical as Daniel Emerson is. Discrimination is discrimination. I don’t care if it’s the majority discriminating against the minority, or the minority discriminating against the majority. It’s still discrimination and it’s still wrong! A small group of bullies (i.e. a gang) would be the minority of a school student body, but they can have a huge negative impact on everyone around them. Does the fact that they are a minority mean they can’t discriminate? Does this mean that everything they do is ok just because they are the minority? If they go through the playground making out in front of the rest of the student body (heterosexually), does the fact that they are different (Goth, Emo, or whatever), or a minority group make it any less disgusting? If they go around stealing everyone else’s lunch money because they didn’t have any and forgot to pack a lunch, does the fact that they are a minority make it right? I don’t like walking down the sidewalk and seeing a heterosexual couple making out on the street corner, so why would I want to see a homosexual one? Bedroom practices need to stay in the bedroom. I don’t go making out with my wife in public because I think it’s disgusting when other people do it in front of me. So why should I suddenly think it’s not disgusting when two men do it? The point is: All discrimination is wrong. Just because there happens to be more religious people than non-religious (a statement that I think is more and more questionable) doesn’t mean the religious people can’t be discriminated against.

    • rock

      To be a real Christian you must follow the bible and it clearly states its opinions of homosexual acts. Your 72% is not Christians but misguided biblical creature believers. The reason progressive people do not back up Christians is simply because there is no progress for mankind in scripture. You think if a man rapes a virgin and they are found they should be married, well as long as he gives her father 50 silver things ?

      • Nick

        So you get to decide who is or isn’t a Christian based upon what you think they should or shouldn’t believe or how they should or should not interpret scripture? Doesn’t work that way, it’s not up to you to determine who is or isn’t a “believer”. There are loads of Christians out there who don’t believe in biblical literalism (they believe it’s allegorical and symbolic like any work of literature) and there are loads of progressives who also consider themselves to be Christians.

      • Sue Roediger

        Personally I look for guidance fro the words of Jesus regarding homosexuality. ” ” ……. Amen

      • Jamie A. Young

        Jesus didn’t write the Bible Sue, and the only person, having supposedly written any homosexual excerpts to or of the book, is Leviticus. That’s point one.

        Please tell me you’re not married. Being it’s a Federal Union, not a religious one, I doubt you are, I mean, what kind of woman would you be Sue, coveting your unclean feelings for another person (a heterosexual male, of course), all while you wear clothes made of different threads (mentioned in Leviticus), eating foods that may have been planted next to a different family of crops, eaten any sea food? Hope you didn’t have any children? If you had a daughter, your husband should’ve been stoned to death, had he continued to sleep next to you after her birth. Of course, you were once a child yourself, and a female at that, did you stone your parents to death? I hope you’ve said yes! Because otherwise, how can the word of a woman, claiming to live by the Bible, be taken seriously, if in fact, she doesn’t live by the words found therein?

        Oh yeah, and before anyone decides to try to call me a sicko, etc, let it be known, these are actual points of interest and mostly common knowledge FROM the book. So, if ya’ll insist on living in ancient times, sobeit, but, I, liken to many others in the world, choose to live in the present, and from where I’m sitting, in the here-and-now, you all are the ‘sicko’. Also, it’s my belief, in order to boast of Supreme Knowledge and favor, you actually have to possess them. So, good luck everyone, and Sue, you should probably read the book you so proudly say you live by, otherwise, you haven’t got a valuable statement to offer a rock garden.

      • Sue Roediger

        Dude, — you missed my point entirely.
        I guess I was too subtle. I have just finished a four year program of church study so I do know what is in the bible. (I did it so I can argue better by knowing exactly what is in there and how it got there) It is a man-written, stone-age collection of stories, fables and metaphors. The New testament is propaganda to get folks to join up. My point is that in the bible if you read Jesus’ words (what he is alleged to have said) HE says not one word about same sex behavior. He says a lot about many other things. Nothing about “the gays”.
        I am a big ole’, rather butch, dyke and I llve my life the best way I know how and not by what that big old pile of misinformation says. If Jesus did say “love your neighbor as yourself” , that I can get behind. I am sorry if my flip response caused any confusion or stress — I would bet we are on the same page about this

      • Luke

        Well done!

        I read your first reply and it appeared to be dripping in sarcasm, but I thought maybe I was mistaken if someone else needed to hammer you so hard.

        At any rate, “The New testament is propaganda to get folks to join up.” has to be one of the better quotes I’ll read with regard to this subject.

      • Sue Roediger

        I has put quotation marks with a big gap in the middle by when I posted it just showed “” and got over-looked. After Jesus’ death the apostles peter and James had certain ideas of Jesus’ message and Paul had other ideas it seems Paul was more influential because the current church is more like Paul’s teaching than Jesus’.

      • Thomas Collins Jr

        Not GAY, but there is the mention of sexual immorality several times mentioned in the New Testament, check out the Pauline letters. Unbelievers are as guilty of Cherry Picking the bible as the Right Wingers and in general Progressives will argue any point as long as they can do what that want. Why argue/debate a Christian? We will all find out what happens when we take that final Dirt Nap. God Bless.

      • Sue Roediger

        oh the Pauline letters. We spent months on those. Only about 1/3 are thought to be actually written by him – other are written by men who were associated with him, or came after him, who wrote “in his name”. This was customary at the time and not considered plagiarism. Many biblical scholars interpret his words to be in reference to pagan temple ceremonies involving orgiastic male and female temple prostitutes.
        I am glad you realize that foe us to judge each other and argue over all this is pointless as each of us stands alone in Judgment at death and God won’t be consulting with any denomination on earth to do so.
        May God Bless you also.

      • Rob G

        I’m with you in that we are in no place to judge anyone because we all have our faults and we will all have to be judged for them in the end after our “dirt nap” as someone earlier said (and believe me, I’m definitely no where near good enough to consider myself any better than ANYONE else!). That being said, there are three places in Mathew and two places in Luke where Jesus himself seemed to indicate that things weren’t going to go so well for the inhabitants of a couple of cities, namely Sodom and Gomorrah. I didn’t see where it said specifically what these people were doing that was so bad that God would destroy them and where Christ would indicate things would not go so well for them on judgment day, but there was this exchange just before Sodom was destroyed where the men of Sodom were trying to have sex with the male angels who came to judge the city and that happens to be when the city was destroyed. I’d be interested to hear your take on this situation.

      • Sue Roediger

        Ezekiel 16:49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. 16:50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

        I Genesis 18 we read About Abraham and how he was so hospitable to the “three men” 18:8 And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.

        In Genisis 19 the “two angels” got similar treatment from Lot and his family. then 19:4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: 19:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

        Somehow “Christians” interpreted this one act of violence as the one sin of Sodom.

        What do you make of Lot’s offer?

        19:8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

        And does God punish Lot for offering his daughters this way – no. Because this story is man made to prove a point some human man was trying to make. Women in those time were chattel, property to be disposed of. When people make movies of he bible stories – they leave out that part as well as 19:30 And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters. 19:31 And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth: 19:32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. 19:33 And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. 19:34 And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. 19:35 And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. 19:36 Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.
        and God did not punish them —

      • Sue Roediger

        I just re read out posts to each other and I think my last post to you was unnecessarily snarky. I apologize !

      • Kouueeiij-IJyuaen Tsjang

        “and the only person, having supposedly written any homosexual excerpts to or of the book, is Leviticus.”

        Ahem, Leviticus is a BOOK written by Moshe, not a person.

      • Sue Roediger

        there are many Christians who study the bible in context and in its history……and come to a different conclusion. Much of it is not appropriate for our time or is meant as metaphor. These progressive Christians are welcoming and inclusive of ALL God’s children

      • Thomas Collins Jr

        Sue, “Not appropriate for our time”, have to disagree, the Bible and Jesus teachings are the same now as when he lived. God doesn’t have a social agenda that he must keep up with in changing times. The laws that Jesus spoke 2000 years ago are the same for today. It’s humankind who what to fit God’s laws/teachings to their lifestyles today. Doesn’t work that way I’m afraid.

      • Sue Roediger

        So then you keep and live by ALL of Leviticus ?

      • Thomas Collins Jr

        No, I’m not Jewish. I live by Christ, he came to fulfill the law for both Jews and Gentiles.

      • Which is fine. Except when people start making LAWS AND POLICY based on those Biblical precepts, in a country where the Bible has absolutely nothing to do with the Constitution. That’s where the problem comes in. Gay people are being persecuted and discriminated against because of Biblical morality, and that has no place in our country.

      • Rob G

        Sir, you are absolutely correct that people should not base any laws or policy in the U.S. on the Bible since there is an explicit separation between Church and State. However, this does not mean that there should be any laws or policy created specifically against the Bible and its teachings either as this would equally jeopardize the separation between Church and State. All laws and policy should propagate Freedom of Religion as this is a right that is guaranteed in the Constitution. If your religion is Atheism, that’s fine. Freedom of Religion includes those beliefs as well. Policy and Laws should be designed to specifically not force anyone to do anything which is against his or her Religion/Moral Values. Any Law or Policy that would force someone to do something that is contrary to his or her belief system would by definition sever that all important Separation between Church and State (so long as what the person is trying to do does not interfere with the freedoms of others). A great example of this working is the “Moment of Silence” in schools. This way no one is forced to pray who doesn’t want to, and those who do want to are allowed to. It’s the perfect compromise. I do feel though that unfortunately we are losing sight of this whole concept in this country. For example, how do you justify expelling a kid from his public school for reading his Bible in school during silent reading? How do you justify forcing a bakery to bake a wedding cake for a same sex wedding when it is against the baker’s belief system and the couple could have had any number of other bakers bake them a wedding cake? There are several other examples in recent history where the religious freedoms of United States Citizens have been trampled on by the state and this is a very scary thing. The State (or Government if you prefer) needs to get its nose out of everything to do with religion. If you support the government getting involved to force the Christian baker to bake a cake in a situation that is contrary to his belief system, then what happens when the tide is turned? Next you’re going to force a black baker to bake a cake for a white pride celebration, or a pro life physician to perform a late term abortion. Any way you cut it, this is wrong. Whether the gay marriage, the white pride celebration, or the late term abortion is wrong is beside the point. The Government forcing someone to perform a service which is against his or her beliefs is in direct violation of our Freedom of Religion.

      • Sue Roediger

        I live by Christ’s words…… and he said nothing about same sex behavior. Love God, Love you neighbor as your self, forgive us as we forgive others.

      • Sue Roediger

        Jesus spoke laws? I don’t see much in the words he is alleged to have spoken that sound like “laws”. Maybe the parts about divorce………..but what did he say about homosexuality?

      • Also, it’s not possible for you to admit that your interpretation of the Bible could be wrong?

    • fldpwrman

      There hasn’t been any “progress” in christbotism since it’s inception. If you “resurrected” a third century christbot today, he would be as exactly well informed about christbotism as anyone.

      • Sue Roediger

        check out the Episcopal church

    • Rob G

      This is completely illogical. Discrimination is discrimination. I don’t care if it’s the majority discriminating against the minority, or the minority discriminating against the majority. It’s still discrimination and it’s still wrong! A small group of bullies (i.e. a gang) would be the minority of a school student body, but they can have a huge negative impact on everyone around them. Does the fact that they are a minority mean they can’t discriminate? Does this mean that everything they do is ok just because they are the minority? If they go through the playground making out in front of the rest of the student body (heterosexually), does the fact that they are different (Goth, Emo, or whatever), or a minority group make it any less disgusting? If they go around stealing everyone else’s lunch money because they didn’t have any and forgot to pack a lunch, does the fact that they are a minority make it right? I don’t like walking down the sidewalk and seeing a heterosexual couple making out on the street corner, so why would I want to see a homosexual one? Bedroom practices need to stay in the bedroom. I don’t go making out with my wife in public because I think it’s disgusting when other people do it in front of me. So why should I suddenly think it’s not disgusting when two men do it? The point is: All discrimination is wrong. Just because there happens to be more religious people than non-religious (a statement that I think is more and more questionable) doesn’t mean the religious people can’t be discriminated against.

    • Edward Krebbs

      No doubt the confirmation bias is a part of it. But I also have to note that growing up in the 60s in a fundamentalist church, there was an actual need to be persecuted. Persecution proved that you were one of the faithful. Plus, within the next few decades persecution would really get ramped up in anticipation of the Antichrist, Mark of the Beast, rapture, and extreme persecution of those left behind.

      After all, Jesus said not to be surprised when they persecute you as they persecuted him first. He also pointed out that they stoned the prophets. In short, being persecuted by the world proves that you are getting “under its skin” by being different which proves you’re following God (versus being welcomed by the world as someone who is part of the world system).

  • mypaynus

    The same guys saying “that’s gross” are the same guys who watch porn. And while they are watching some guy have sex with a girl, they don’t stop in the middle of masturbating and complain about having to see another man’s dick.

    • Shannon

      great point!!!

      • Rob G

        Not really. I don’t feel like copying and pasting, but scroll up to my earlier post and you’ll see exactly why mypaynus’ point was completely ignorant.

    • catholicrn44

      Disgusting and what a clever screen name…sicko!!!

      • gstoya

        Lol.

      • oldntired

        He is telling the truth though even though you don’t like his name

    • Rob G

      You are one sick puppy. They kissed. It’s not the first time. Gay men kiss on TV all the time. I personally think it’s disgusting, but that’s why I don’t watch much TV. I think it’s unfortunate that they are turning Football, which is a long standing American Tradition, into a tool for promoting the Gay agenda, but this is a free country. Personally, I don’t like my young kids watching anyone making out on TV. I don’t care if it’s hetero or homo, it has no place in my living room. Save that stuff for the soap operas. Just like when Janet Jackson had her wardrobe malfunction incident, it has no place in my living room where my little boys can see it. Let’s just keep football football please? No one wants to walk down the sidewalk and see a heterosexual couple making out on the corner, so why would we want to see a homosexual one doing it? Again I say this whole thing is dumb. SMH.

      • Brian

        How is two people being in love turning football into a tool for promoting the “gay agenda”? What the hell is a “gay agenda”? The fact that you even say that pretty much gives away the fact that you’re one of the self-proclaimed totally not homophobic people spoken of in the article.
        Maybe I have a problem with football. After all, those men in really tight pants stick their faces in each others rears then take showers together. That’s kind of gay and inappropriate.

        Life is life and love is love. Might as well get over it and accept it.

      • Rob G

        “Two people being in love” has nothing to do with Football for crying out loud. You don’t interrupt a Field Goal so the kicker can kiss his girlfriend do you? That’s all soap opera stuff and should stay in that genre of television (So my boys and I don’t have to watch it). If you have a problem with football, then don’t watch it!! That is simple! … Wait, … So now you are saying being Gay is inappropriate?! SMH. Wow, and you’re calling me a homophobe!!? Your comment makes absolutely no sense. If you don’t believe there is a large body of people referred to as the LBGT community who have the agenda of getting same sex marriage legalized in all states, then you seriously haven’t been paying attention. Let me be clear. I actually support the government getting it’s nose out of who is allowed to marry who. I just don’t like seeing football being turned into a venue for their demonstrations. I don’t care who football players love or don’t love. It makes no difference to me. I don’t want to see them making out with their boyfriends or their girlfriends on TV where my boys can see it. There’s a time and place and that’s not it. Keep football football, and keep soap opera soap opera please. Like I said earlier, no one wants to see a straight couple standing on a street corner making out, so why would a gay couple be any different?

      • Keyote™

        So you dealt with being upset by kiss-cam and every straight couple on it, in every sporting event, ever? REALLY?

        GOT IT!

      • Rob G

        Dang man, it’s like arguing with my wife and she brings up stuff from so long ago I don’t even remember the conversation!! … You’re a woman aren’t you?

      • Keyote™

        Apparently, your wife is very smart, just not smart enough not to marry someone like you.

      • Rob G

        SMH. Not only a Troll, but a Necrotroll. Wow.

      • Keyote™

        Not just a hypocrite, a necro-hypocrite. 😉

      • Kouueeiij-IJyuaen Tsjang

        Ahem, kissing is NOT the same thing as putting a yard in an arsehole or putting a yard in a maidshealth.

        Why is a boy kissing a girl OK but not two girls kissing each other or two boys kissing each other (what about a feudal lord and his vassal)?

      • Keyote™

        So, wait, by your argument, everyone else is promiting “Straight agenda”? Because if showing people kissing is an agenda, we have “Gay Agenda” trumped.

      • Rob G

        This is ridiculous. I can’t believe I’m even replying to your necropost!

      • Keyote™

        Ignored everything, usual tactic? Ignorance upon ignorance?

      • Rob G

        In order to avoid “Copy and Pasting”, please see my original comment above.

      • Keyote™

        Read previous comment. Still stands.

    • Rob G

      You sir are ignorant. First off, a lot of guys are actually faithful to their wives and don’t watch porn. On top of that, most porn doesn’t have the guys kissing each other (unless it’s specifically geared toward gays). Obviously, you’re gay and so you don’t understand this, but straight guys don’t get turned on by guys kissing guys (If they did, then that would mean by definition they are gay or at least have gay tendencies). A lot of straight girls don’t get turned on by seeing girls kissing. (I know there are some that do, but generally that’s an acquired taste unless they are gay). All of this has nothing to do with this situation. The Point is, there’s a time and a place for romance and football isn’t one of them. Most people feel somewhat uncomfortable seeing a straight couple making out on a street corner. That’s because that’s not the right time or place for that type of behavior. Have you ever heard the phrase “Get a Room!”? It applies equally to the gay and the straight. Bedroom behavior belongs in the bedroom, not on the street corner, and not in my living room (via television) where my kids can see it.

      • Kouueeiij-IJyuaen Tsjang

        “Most people feel somewhat uncomfortable seeing a straight couple making out on a street corner.”

        Ahem, kissing is NOT the same as yard-rubbing, yard-foldling, or putting a yard in an arsehole (“yard” is the true word for “a man’s fleshy rod” in English, penisis an “euphemism”).

        Also, during the Middle Eld the lords often KISSED their knights ON THE MOUTH, and Middle Eld writers reported no “uncomfortable feeling.”

      • Rob G

        Back in Rome they used to have all kinds of orgies homosexual and otherwise. This doesn’t mean I want to watch either one happening on national television. In Europe they still kiss each other all the time (more on the corners of the mouth actually) without any intimacy (as Americans use the word) involved. And finally, as a medical student who has passed both my urology didactic tests as well as the clinical rotation, I can tell you most assuredly that the medical word for that part of the male anatomy is the penis. You will not find the word “yard” in any medical literature after the 19th century. There are a lot of archaic words that are no longer used by anyone other than enthusiasts (which clearly is what you are).

  • chillinout.

    This is probably the best article I have read in months. Thankyou 🙂

    • Rob G

      Actually I thought it was pretty dumb. They kissed. It’s not the first time. Gay men kiss on TV all the time. I personally think it’s disgusting, but that’s why I don’t watch much TV. I think it’s unfortunate that they are turning Football, which is a long standing American Tradition, into a tool for promoting the Gay agenda, but this is a free country. Personally, I don’t like my young kids watching anyone making out on TV. I don’t care if it’s hetero or homo, it has no place in my living room. Save that stuff for the soap operas. Just like when Janet Jackson had her wardrobe malfunction incident, it has no place in my living room where my little boys can see it. Let’s just keep football football please? No one wants to walk down the sidewalk and see a heterosexual couple making out on the corner, so why would we want to see a homosexual one doing it? Again I say this whole thing is dumb. SMH.

      • Keyote™

        Again, then you are saying you’ve been pushing “Straight Agenda”, for years, dipshit. Again: Kisscam is fine, no all out posts about that? Is there? (If so? Fucking link them, please), otherwise, you’re full of shit. Your brain needs an enema.

      • Rob G

        WHOA!! From 2 YEARS ago? Really?!

  • TheRealThunderChild

    Amen to That Nanaramma. If you’ll excuse the pun.

  • catholicrn44

    Jesus, I hope the time you come back is near….pray, pray just continue to pray for everyone….we ALL need it!!!

  • gstoya

    This is so conflated it amounts to nothing more than an amateur screed.

  • curious

    “In fact, they believe that because of their lucky place in the white, conservative, heterosexual Christian entitlement club that they deserve superior rights.” Manny Schewitz. What a great mistake it is! By my experiences: In fact, because of their lucky place in the white, conservative, heterosexual Christian entitlement club, they do not have superior rights. Their rights are obviously ordinary and spontaneous. That is the reason why they are not able to understand why non-members of this “club” should get superior rights often standing against mother nature´s keystones such as natural pregnancy and childbirth or natural death. And against many other lifelikes matters that are covered various pseudohumanistic theories and activities.

  • John

    so some people think it is disgusting, So what! why do homosexuals want everyone to like what they do, why does it bother them so much, why do they care? I do not care if you are gay, Do I think men kissing or having sex is disgusting YES I do, its my right to like something or not to like something. I also think spinach is disgusting but some people love it. So you know what we are allowed to like or hate something, quit trying to make everyone in the world approve of what you do or like. We are allowed to have our own dislikes and likes. There will always be straight men and women that are disgusted by what gay people do, so get over it and quit worried about people trying to change people you can not change everyone, if you do like that someone thinks it is disgusting to bad!!!! GET OVER IT!!!! go live your life, and quit making a big deal out of being gay WHO CARES!!!!!!

    • So can gay people get married in your state?

      Are gay people protected from being fired simply because of their orientation in your state?

      When that’s true everywhere, then maybe your little rant might have some value.

      • John

        well if thats a problem, then go to a state where you can get married, and what you said about being fired, bullshit people get fired for all kinds of things and those reason are just as bad as getting fired for being gay, so quit whinning, there are all kinds of things people deal with in the work place not only gays have to deal with certain issues. like I said before get over it!!!! thats life deal with it. We all have to deal with things in life we do not like. If straight people have to deal with gays kissing on live tv, than gay people have to deal with staright people that do not like it. Like I said before we are allowed to like and dislike what ever we want. Go live your life the way you want and leave us live ours the way we want.

      • well if thats a problem, then go to a state where you can get married

        Why should gay people have to do that? Heterosexual people certainly don’t.

        people get fired for all kinds of things and those reason are just as bad as getting fired for being gay

        What’s as bad as getting fired for simply being who you are, pray tell? Would it be all right for me to be fired simply because I’m a woman?

        We all have to deal with things in life we do not like.

        We’re not talking about “likes and dislikes” here. We’re talking about discrimination being enshrined into law, which is a whole different ball game. It’s also, needless to say, against the 14th Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause.

      • John

        As I said before thats life deal with it, we all have our problems. and there are others that are discriminated against not just the gays. Life is to short deal and get over it! There always be people that are bigots. Face it there is nothing you can do about it, you can not change the way people are or the way they feel about certain things. they have thier rights too just like you. If someone feels two men or two women kissing is disgusting than SO WHAT! ignore it, grow up! and again I will say it, DEAL WITH IT! thats life not everyone thinks the same or accepts everything you do. So quit trying to change people, straight pwople do not try to change you.

      • Do you always ignore what other people say?

        What part of “Life is short, deal with it” and “Discrimination being enshrined into law” ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS is hard for you to understand?

        Kee-ripes.

      • Sue Roediger

        When Jim Crow Laws were in place and blacks were segregated …. lots of people said “. Face it there is nothing you can do about it, you can not change the way people are or the way they feel about certain things.” …. BUT lots of people decided not to just accept it. You don’t have to like the fact that gays exist …. but discrimination is wrong.

      • Rob G

        “well if thats a problem, then go to a state where you can get married

        Why should gay people have to do that? Heterosexual people certainly don’t.”
        I happen to like firearms, but I can’t have my firearms in places like California, Oregon, and New York State, so I can’t live there because I like my firearms. Different states are better for different kinds of people. That’s the beauty of the United States. If you don’t like how people live in the state you are in, go somewhere else. A lot of people like marijuana, but if they want to smoke it legally, they have to move to Colorado or another state where it’s legal. Why should they have to do that? People who smoke regular cigarettes certainly don’t.

      • I happen to like firearms, but I can’t have my firearms in places like California, Oregon, and New York State, so I can’t live there because I like my firearms.

        I’m calling bullshit until you explain exactly what sort of firearms you supposedly can’t have. Certainly the states mentioned have more stringent restrictions than the rest of the country, but the 2nd Amendment would still apply even there.

        A lot of people like marijuana, but if they want to smoke it legally, they have to move to Colorado or another state where it’s legal.

        There’s a fundamental Constitutional right to marry, per the 14th Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause, according to the Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court decision. There isn’t a fundamental right to smoke marijuana (at least not yet).

      • Rob G

        My SKS happens to have a 30 round removable magazine and a cut away pistol grip which is completely legal in the state I live in, but is completely illegal in the states I mentioned. The same goes for my S&W .40s which have 12 round removable mags. Again, perfectly legal where I live, but I can’t have them in NY where the largest mag you are allowed to have only holds 7 rounds. California and Oregon laws are pretty similar. Go ahead and call BS all you like, but I can’t have my weapons in the states I mentioned. I could get arrested and thrown in jail for years for just crossing the NY state boarder with my pistols (Go ahead and call BS on that too, and while you’re at it tell the guy that was made to take possession of his checked pistol that he was flying with legally (it was checked in his luggage the way it was supposed to be) while transferring from one plane to another in NY and because of this he went to prison for it). Unfortunately, when the liberals all say they won’t come get our guns, that doesn’t mean they won’t make them illegal and throw you in jail for having them.

    • Luke

      I was with you a little bit.

      I mean, right… Who cares? Yeah… But people are hitting the hyperbole pretty hard by using words like “disgusting” or “revolting”. Let’s remember that we’re talking about people.

      Why can’t we just go with: “Eh, it makes me feel uncomfortable.” At that point, the person making the statement is taking the ownership for their emotions. No judgment. When I saw it, I just thought… “Really, cake too? I’d be as excited as anyone, but let’s just stop before cake.”

      In the end, the networks just want eyeballs on commercials, that’s it. And so long as people are outraged with stuff like this, they will continue to cover it. If people really didn’t care, this would be a non-issue.

      • John

        why should they have to change how they fell if they are disgusted by it so be, thats how they feel why should they use different words, People say disgusted about a lot of things not just gays kissing and no one ever says say use a different word, Disgusted means disgusted
        And you are right the media loves this, but also gays help add to it like making sure they kiss on live tv when they know people will debate and say things about it so the blame goes both ways, He knew when he did that the media would take off with it and this is why these debates and comments go on.keep it private it was about being drafted on a football team not his sexuality. again who cares, it was about football.

      • In other words, you want gay people to hide, to deny who they are, because it might upset some straight people.

        Meanwhile, if Michael Sam had kissed his GIRLFRIEND when he found out he had been drafted (because people tend to share their happiness with their partners when something good happens to them) you wouldn’t have blinked an eye.

        You’re right, people say “disgusted” about a lot of things. I’m saying it now. You disgust me.

      • John

        Who said to hide it? looks like you are not to bright are you, I disgust you why? so you are a bigot now and are digusted by a straight person well i see you are a hypocrate. You think you were smart by saying I disgust you, You did not prove anything by that comment.

      • John

        Deal with it, Life tough so learn to handle it, and people can feel how they want to bad if you do not like it! grow up and go live your life in what ever disgusting way you want hypocrate

      • Sue Roediger

        There are gay people in the world –
        ” Deal with it, learn to handle it. Too bad if you do not like it. Grow up and go live your life.”

      • Rob G

        It’s not that I want Gay People to keep their private moments private, I want EVERYONE to keep their private moments private. This isn’t a soap opera for crying out loud! It’s football. Keep your touchy feely kissy bedroom stuff in the bedroom where it belongs. I don’t like watching heterosexual couples making out on the street corner where my little boys can see it, so why would I want them to see homosexual couples doing it? The only way people are going to get along in this country is if EVERYONE keeps that stuff in the bedroom.

      • Luke

        You’re right. It should be about football. Honestly, the hyperbole comment of mine was more general, not so much directed at you. Several other comments here are more over the top.

        I also wasn’t saying that people need to change the way they feel. I was merely suggesting that they temper the way they communicate it. Let’s be honest, if every bit of human interaction was just people saying exactly what was on their mind the minute they thought it, society wouldn’t last three days.

        I guess I just see things both ways and it’s a bit of a circular argument. If people think Michael ought to keep his relationship private, then wouldn’t it be fair for him to think that people ought to keep their homophobic thoughts private? And since the latter is NEVER going to happen, then one might as well be as liberal as they want with the display of the former. It’s a cycle…

      • Rob G

        This whole thing is dumb. They kissed. It’s not the first time. Gay men kiss on TV all the time. I personally think it’s disgusting, but that’s why I don’t watch much TV. I think it’s unfortunate that they are turning Football, which is a long standing American Tradition, into a tool for promoting the Gay agenda, but this is a free country. Personally, I don’t like my young kids watching anyone making out on TV. I don’t care if it’s hetero or homo, it has no place in my living room. Save that stuff for the soap operas. Just like when Janet Jackson had her wardrobe malfunction incident, it has no place in my living room where my little boys can see it. Let’s just keep football football please? No one wants to walk down the sidewalk and see a heterosexual couple making out on the corner, so why would we want to see a homosexual one doing it? Again I say this whole thing is dumb. SMH.

      • Keyote™

        Do you just copy and paste for everyone? Is it a habit?

      • Rob G

        Holy Necropost Batman!!

      • Keyote™

        And yet, doesn’t answer anything. 2 years to think, and no thought? Says something, buddy.

      • Rob G

        Umm you’re asking if it’s a habit if I copy and past for everyone… what do you want me to say? It was the same discussion in a different place on the thread where it is unlikely the person I was replying to would see my other comment. Are you really that retarded? Are you really going to Troll a 2 year old post? Really? Says something, buddy. I’m done with you.

      • Keyote™

        In other words, you are lazy? And I think you copied the same thing, like, multiple times. Trolling is without a point. Like I said: I asked questions, you never answered anything “Buddy”, so be done, brainless wonders like you aren’t worth any more effort than I’ve already put in.

      • Sue Roediger

        Something tells me you be just as “disgusted” if he had just looked lovingly into his partner’s eyes, or hugged him. I noticed long ago on TV game shows when the winner has family or friends come out to hug them at the end – they started “allowing” same sex couples the same privilege. I guess if you were watching Wheel of Fortune you’d be all disgusted then too, Relax — it is not contagious. Just seeing it won’t make you gay.

    • julie sipes

      Hey John. I have to give you “your due”, here. I understand what you’re saying, and I want to validate your feelings. I consider myself a “Liberal” (as does my husband – we both support “marriage equality”) but we both were rather “turned-off” by seeing Michael Sam kiss his boyfriend. Saying this may not be politically correct, but it’s the truth. Furthermore, it would be inaccurate or unfair to label either of us homophobic or bigoted for saying this or feeling this way.

  • econnofoot

    Gay media agenda.

  • Rob G

    I would just like to point out that Christians HAVE been persecuted in this country to a much greater extent than anything you mentioned in this article. It was still LEGAL to shoot a Mormon in Missouri just for being Mormon until the 1980s. The reason they had to resort to polygamy was because mobs of people would come to Mormon houses and kill the men, rape the women and then burn the houses and then leave as a common practice. The Holocaust is an example of religious people being persecuted for being religious. And last but not least, one of the major reasons the pilgrims crossed the Atlantic and founded this great country was to escape religious persecution. There have been countless atrocities done either in the name of religion (Spanish Inquisition, Crusades, Jihads, etc.), but there have also been countless atrocities committed AGAINST people for being religious (Mormon extermination order of Missouri, Holocaust). Now, let me put this in perspective. I am not homophobic. I have many gay friends. My Best Man at my wedding was gay for crying out loud. I too was bullied in Jr. High and High School because someone thought I was gay. But now lets look at this through Christian eyes: Christ said “Love them that Hate you…” I say persecuting people who persecute is still persecution. Discriminating against those who discriminate is still discrimination. Two wrongs don’t make a right. It seems that in todays society anyone who voices their beliefs is discriminated against if those beliefs don’t happen to be popular among the gay community. For goodness sakes, that guy from Mozilla was Fired from his CEO position costing him millions of dollars just because he believed in Christian values. And you say he’s not being discriminating against? OMGosh what happened to the Bill of Rights?! What happened to the 1st amendment?! Demonstrating and fund raising is all good as long as it goes along with popular opinion, but heaven forbid someone speak out in favor of what they believe in if their values are different than yours. We are losing what the founding fathers of this country gave us line by line. If you don’t think Christians are being discriminated against, then please explain why that kid was expelled from his school for reading his bible to himself during silent reading (No I don’t remember his name, it was all over the news a few months back. Google it, you’ll find it). Gay Pride, White Pride, Black Pride, Yellow, Pink, Purple, Green, and Blue Pride … These all need to go away if we are going to become a tolerant country. The more we talk about discrimination, whatever type it is, the more it will grow in this country. What we need to talk about is getting along. Instead of focusing on who was mean to who, we ought to be praising those who were nice. Everyone seems to be walking around with a chip on their shoulder listening attentively for anyone who has different values than you do so that you can immediately attack them or ridicule them. This country is progressively becoming the most intolerant country ever!! smh. And heaven forbid a school kid eats his pop tart into an L shape because OMGosh that might be a gun!! SMH! Ok, I’ve said my piece, bring on the flames!!!

    • Sue Roediger

      what religion wee those who burned the Mormon homes?

      • Rob G

        The people who burned the Mormon homes were not of any particular religion. They were mobs from the community. They were mainly Atheists, but some Christians as well. I don’t think there were many Hindus or Muslims just because these religions were not heavily represented in the area at that time, but I could be mistaken. The Jews in the Holocaust were killed mainly by Atheists (Nazis). Right now the Muslims in the middle east are fighting each other in Jihad Muslim vs. Muslim (of different sects). My point is it really doesn’t matter who is doing the discriminating. Discrimination is discrimination is discrimination whether it’s done by an Atheist, a Christian, a Muslim, Shiite, a Sunni, a Black, a White, a Green, a Purple, a Blue, a Male, a Female, a Gay, or a Straight … it doesn’t matter. It is all discrimination and it’s all wrong. People should be able to express their beliefs publicly without fear of attack. That is what the 1st Amendment is all about. I don’t attack you for saying God burned down Sodom and Gomorrah because of homosexuality, you shouldn’t attack me for saying the Government has no place telling me who should marry who (Unless there is a public health concern of course). The whole point of this being a free country and us having the 1st Amendment, is so we are all free to express whatever opinion we have, or whatever values we hold dear. We are free to say and do whatever we want (as long as it doesn’t interfere with someone else’s freedom to say and do whatever they want). That freedom only ends when it interferes with another’s freedom to say or do what they want. So, for example if I say someone is guilty of a crime (social or legal) and they are not in fact guilty of said crime, now I have jeopardized that individual’s freedom because he or she might miss out on opportunities because of opinions that are formed about them by other people based on the false things I said. That is not protected under the 1st Amendment because it is interfering with another person’s freedom. If I accuse them of something that they are guilty of, however, then that is protected since I have only spoken the truth. Now just because people Can say evil things doesn’t mean they Should, but I still fight for their freedom to say it anyway because I swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

      • Sue Roediger

        It wasn’t “mainly atheist’s, who attacked the Mormons it was the general population which- based on the census of the times- were most likely mostly Christian Repots from that time said – “they needed to call out the militia to “prevent further violence.” This is how it was explained in a letter to US Army Colonel R. B. Mason of Ft. Leavenworth:
        “The citizens of Daviess, Carroll, and some other normal counties have raised mob after mob for the last two months for the purpose of driving a group of fanatics, (called mormons) from those counties and from the State.” “Most members of the Nazi Party, however, were Christians. Composed mostly of the Lutheran Evangelical tradition, the apostate members of Nazi inspired Positive Christianity sect and some of the Catholic faith tradition respectively. The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievancesNOTE it is about “the making of any LAW” So you speech is protected from Gov’t interference – but if someone uses their free speech to say something hateful or inflammatory – others have the right of free speech to say something back.

      • Rob G

        I appreciate you citing your sources, and since my information is based mainly on the same source, we should agree. I would, however be extremely interested in seeing where you got your census data that includes the percentages of the different religious sects at the time since I have been unable to find any census data that includes religious affiliation. The actual ratio of atheists to practicing Christians of whatever sect is not well known, but based on the actions, manner of speech, and attitudes of the mobs recorded in the journals of those who were attacked by these mobs, it would be hard to believe they were practicing Christians. Since you are quoting Wikipedia, you must have read that the whole thing started when the Mormons leader wrote his letter that said basically that we are not going to have our safety and rights trampled on anymore. This was because these mob attacks which I described earlier had been going on for years prior to the extermination order and this was the Mormons warning that we were not going to just let them do this anymore (the Mormons were very peaceful prior to this and didn’t fight back). Then when the mobs kept coming and committing these atrocities, the Mormons started shooting back and this is when the extermination order was issued based on false information (all but the fact that the mobs had been attacking the Mormons for years prior to the extermination order is stated in the same Wikipedia page you cited). This is a clear example of persecution against the Mormon Religion by the State. As for the Nazi scenario, it is true that the majority of the people were Christian, however the people who made the decisions (i.e. Hitler and those close to him) were not and they actually planned to ban Christianity soon after WWII (again according to Wikipedia). Hitler and his Minister of Religion (who was also not religious by the way) created the Positive Christianity sect in order to appease the Christians in the country and pacify them long enough to win the war so they could get rid of Christianity as well as all other religions besides the state religion. This was a clear attack not only on Judaism, but also on Christianity and all other religions in Nazi Germany. These are the people who committed these crimes against humanity. It certainly was not the Christians! I couldn’t agree more about your interpretation of the 1st Amendment!! This is exactly what I have been saying! True now that I re-read what I wrote in the previous post it doesn’t appear to come out that way because you are absolutely correct, like I said earlier, we can say whatever we want, and I said you, but I should have said the Government can not do or say anything about it. Stating our opinions and beliefs is protected by the 1st Amendment. But my point is that the government HAS been getting involved in ways that impede the free exercise of religion. They have forced bakers, and florists to act in ways that are contrary to their established beliefs. A public school has expelled a kid for reading a Bible during silent reading. And just to tie it all up in a nice neat bow, the Mormon Extermination Order shows that in the past the government Has gone way beyond what would be considered acceptable or constitutional in the past and it is up to you and I to make sure things like that NEVER happen again!!

      • Sue Roediger

        You are so certain that “atheists” are responsible for so many atrocities. I recommend – American Holocaust by David E. Stannard. It begins with Columbus’ landing on Hispaniola and discusses how the native population was decimated by the new arrivals. It also covers the Crusades, and Nazi’s. The perpetrators were “Christian” or specifically Catholic. They were able to “justify” their actions because they were fighting against pagans, or heathens, or apostate. They truly believed that the others were not quite human – or at least not as human as themselves.
        Atheists have little motivation to attack “Christians” and generally co exist, Christians get all riled up by other Christians who don’t conform to their interpretation of the bible. Mormons were a threat to Christians because they claimed their own inspired word of God. And of course there was the polygamy.
        Hitler was raised Christian but rejected it but in Germany of Hitler’s time the anti-Semitic teaching of the church, especially Martin Luther’s rant, were pervasive. The “Christian” teaching that the Jews killed Jesus …lead the faithful to hate Jews.
        Atheists do commit crimes, but seldom t=with the “God is on our side” sense of entitlement that Christians have when they commit their “Holy Wars”.

      • Sue Roediger

        my citations are from Wikipedia – I realize there are better sources but that is where I started because I didn’t want to just assert my opinion

  • Austin Brenan

    This is one of the most ignorant generalizations, but at the same time, it’s also one of the most believable. You truly don’t know how many white, heterosexual Christians aren’t what you claim they are, but so many others (different races, different/no religion) say the same shit that your generalized group does. I’m a liberal, and this pissed me off. Why don’t I just say that the white population is the largest minority group now because of all the laws and programs helping/protecting other races and sexes. Let’s see how that turns out. (Keep in mind that I’m pro-gay marriage and a liberal). When you come off as hateful towards a certain group of people, but don’t acknowledge that there are always exceptions, maybe even in larger quantity than you expect, then it makes your reporting seem like a biased joke and results in loss of respect. Just “saying it like it is.”

  • Mark Roberts, Esq.

    It should be remembered that the “false narrative of persecution” is tool a often used by members of the left in an attempt to paint those on the other side of an issue as inferior in intelligence, mental status, or judgement.

    Against Obamacare? You’re a racist who doesn’t care about mankind.
    Don’t like Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi explanation? You’re a misogynist.
    Believe the US should stop sending aid to Israel? You’re anti-Semitic.

    Thanks to my profession, I see all sorts of people who want to be compensated for being offended. I try not to laugh in their faces as I tell them they have no case. The simple fact is the 1st Amendment protections extend to all, no matter the point of view; it doesn’t matter if you like it, if it’s “bad” for progressive goals, or otherwise. For example, you can have a blog and I can provide a dissenting opinion. What a country! 🙂

    • Sue Roediger

      well … the “false narrative of persecution” is tool ALSO often used by members of the LEFT in an attempt to paint those on the other side of an issue as inferior in intelligence, mental status, or judgment.
      You knew that right????/

      • Rob G

        Isn’t that almost exactly what he just said?

      • Sue Roediger

        he said the LEFT does it — I say the RIGHT does it.

      • Rob G

        Ah, I was confused because I could swear your comment says “LEFT” as well. 😉

      • Sue Roediger

        I humbly accept your correction. When I am giving driving directions I point left and say right. How embarrassing – I pontificate and get it bass ackwards.

    • Keyote™

      Actually, you are just showing bias, yourself, Mr “Esq.”, Cherrypicking things to oversimpify and re-frame. Congrats. Hopefully you’ve grown up since this.

  • Sa

    GOD will judge them harshly…

  • Debo Jenkins

    I agree with a lot of what was said there, but the tone of it insinuates a black and white couple no longer face bigotry. “but if this had been 50+ years ago, they would have been equally infuriated to see a black man and a white woman seated at a table near them or kissing on television. ” No, I’m sorry, but this is still a problem today. Racism is alive and well. 80% of the problem is this type of rhetoric that it no longer exist.