The thing about wingnuts is that everything they disagree with is, in their minds, endowed with superpowers and possibly capable of bringing about the very apocalypse they simultaneously fear and desperately wish for. Consider this bit of mildly positive news about HUD:

The Department of Housing and Urban Development is taking steps to ensure gays and lesbians don’t face discrimination when applying for federal housing assistance.

HUD has unveiled a series of proposed rule changes that would prohibit lenders from using sexual orientation or gender identity as a way of determining a borrower’s eligibility. The rule change would state that eligible families have the opportunity to participate in HUD-based programs regardless of marital status or sexual orientation.

The new rules, if adopted, also would prohibit owners and operators of HUD-funded housing from asking applicants or household occupants about sexual orientation or gender identity.

The proposals must undergo a 60-day public comment period before formal implementation.

So, that’s nice. Not a huge change, but a small step to ensure fair treatment for all people.

Now, let’s watch Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association absolutely weeing all over himself over this news. The headline:

HUD projects now hunting grounds for homosexual child molesters

Religious Right figures bitch when we call them homophobes, but this is why. Can you not just smell the abject, night-sweat-producing fear in that headline? It’s bizarre, like all irrational prejudice against entire groups of people is bizarre, but there you go.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is proposing a new rule that would require that homosexuals, transsexuals, transgenders, and cross-dressing transvestites be given the same access to taxpayer-funded HUD programs that sexually normal people have.

I don’t know that I would call fundamentalists “sexually normal.” I mean, the English language is evolving, but come on now.

No “arbitrary exclusion” would be allowed, as if taking sexual deviancy into account is something capricious. But we know that homosexual behavior poses the same health risks that intravenous drug use and prostitution pose

Liar or stupid…liar or stupid? [Both.]

Survey after survey indicates that homosexuals have higher levels of income and education than sexually normal individuals, meaning they have a greater range of housing choices than normal folk as it is.

See, now we run into the dual nature of homophobia. In Bryan’s world, where cognitive dissonance does not exist [words too big, cannot process], gays are BOTH dangerous, dead-end, diseased health risks like lepers, but ALSO we are the richest, smartest damn lepers on the planet. We saw this during the fight to repeal DADT, when wingnuts like Bryan simultaneously made jokes [meant to prop up their thin images of their own masculinity] about gay people “feminizing” the military, making us weaker, etc., but also warned that gays are More Brutal Than Nazis and will “take over” the armed forces. We are that powerful with our pink curtains and stuff, you see. Wingnuts turn their ideological opponents into superheroes, while at the same time desperately trying to convince themselves and others that they are the ones holding moral and physical authority. It’s funny to watch, and kind of sad, sort of like when upon a summer’s day, you happen to chance upon a bumblebee repeatedly flying into a window, slamming up against it, coming back, slamming up against it again, never learning, etc.

So this really isn’t about access to housing; it’s about forcing the rest of us to accept homosexual behavior as normative, something no sane society should ever do.

Canada, Sweden, etc. = insane.

Iran = epitome of sanity.

[Bryan and pals: Seriously, just convert to Islam and move there. It's not like your religious beliefs have anything to do with the figure of Jesus anyway.]

The second thing at work here is that not only will this rule demonstrate government endorsement of homosexual behavior – which is the real goal of homosexual activists – it will give activists a way to punish, marginalize, and silence any landlords with deeply held moral and religious convictions who won’t cravenly capitulate to political correctness.

In other words, if this is going to be a “rule,” there have to be penalties for breaking it. Ultimately, this is about inflicting Inquisition-type pain on any HUD landlord who holds time-honored convictions about human sexuality. The vicious homosexual lobby wants to make them pay, and pay they will.

Being forced to follow the law in a free country, by not discriminating against entire groups of people = “Inquisition-type pain” for fundamentalists. Because they are weak people.

Now, for the obligatory quote combining the wingnut victim complex with their constant obsession with gay sexytime:

This has already happened in England, where an elderly couple has just been dragged into court, convicted, and fined for refusing to rent a room with just one bed to a pair of homosexuals looking for a countryside tryst.

Straight couple going to bed and breakfast = vacay.

Gay couple going to bed and breakfast = ILLICIT COUNTRYSIDE TRYST!

So funny.

There are two more reasons why this is a perfectly bad idea. (I brought both of these up with the writer of the Christian Post article, but they did not make it into the published piece.) One, many young boys living in HUD housing are already in troubled domestic situations, many with no father presence in the home. The last thing they need is suddenly to be living next door to two males modeling a sexually abnormal lifestyle. Role models matter immensely to young boys, and they don’t need any more adults around them setting bad examples. They’ve already been exposed to enough of that.

Bryan Fischer thinks of the poor first, you see, as long as he can use his dim charitable instinct to bolster his case for hating gay people.

And we know – despite the howls of protest to the contrary – that male homosexuals molest young boys at a hugely exaggerated rate. The Roman Catholic Church, for instance, did a study of its own priests who molested children, and found that 81% of the victims were boys.

Stupid, or liar? Stupid, or liar? [Still both.]

For slow members of the class: No credible study has linked homosexuality to pedophilia. Moreover, anyone with half a brain and a perfunctory knowledge of the subject knows that pedophilia is not about sexual orientation, i.e. the gender of the child does not matter. It’s about power, and it’s a sickness, and the reason there are more boy victims in the Catholic church is that [I cannot believe I'm having to explain this] priests have more access to young boys! [Duh.] Because of the gender separation reinforced by the patriarchy, priests have always been given beaucoups access to boys, so when they’re feeling molest-y, as so many of them so often do, the victims they have access to are boys.

That’s enough Bryan for now.  I truly think he may be the world’s stupidest, most fearful wingnut.