The Religious Right likes to pretend that they’re trying to protect societal institutions, to preserve the natural order, to look out for the best needs of children, and so on. They continually assert that they don’t want to hurt gay people, per se, and they like to pretend that they respect our freedoms to live our lives as we choose. They just want to protect the institution of marriage, for instance. They’re lying, of course, because they’re liars, but it’s nice to see one of America’s queen bigots, Linda Harvey of Mission America, lay her hateful agenda out for all to see, without euphemisms. Linda is basically a snake, so it’s no surprise that she’s willing to hiss out words like this. On the radio today, she said this:
Our President has launched a broad scale attack on traditional values. If homosexuals and transgenders are allowed to live and love as they see fit, we would have a whole societal mess on our hands, which is already starting to happen in some areas. We’re already seeing the denial of liberty, intimidation tactics, and flat out dirty tricks in the effort to silence concerned citizens, especially Christians. And I’m sure many of you are as dismayed as I am over our hyper-sexualized culture, well homosexual activism only puts that trend on steroids.
…
It’s not a rights issue, its cultural revolution, where homosexuality is declared acceptable, the harm and detriments disguised, and no other views are allowed. And that’s not human rights, friends, it’s anti-family tyranny. We need someone else as President, don’t you think? Someone who loves and honors God, His design, and truth itself.
If we are allowed — ALLOWED — to live and love as WE SEE FIT.
Linda Harvey is not a cultured woman. She’s not an intelligent woman. But she thinks that, due to her pigheaded, stunted obeisance to a disproven worldview that is purportedly attached to a book she couldn’t truly understand if her life depended on it, she has the right to decide how a portion of the society — a portion, I might add, that has no desire to meet her in whatever suburban Wal-Mart infested trans fat zone where she dwells — lives our lives.
Sorry, Linda. You’re not a greater citizen than we are. The laws are finally being changed to reflect that. You’re free to live out your life screaming at the homosexuals in your head, but otherwise, you’d best learn to deal with reality.
Appreciate the honesty, though. That’s rare when dealing with fundamentalists!
Trueyaddayaddayadda–everything you’ve written shows you haven’t read a word Priya’s said. You’re a troll sitting under the bridge listening to the billy goats walk across. You keep bringing up your “attraction” line even though Priya’s shot it down quite well several times over.
As for who you’ve attacked–you’ve attacked gay people and their reasons for wanting to be married. Do you think your blithe tone makes your hateful intent less obvious?
Daniel,
You may want to reread both of our posts, as we both arrive at the same conclusion.
Attraction is not a valid reason for a civil right nor does disapproving of an attraction validate the refusal of a civil right.
I think you’re going off the deep end of the pool now.
Are you actually stating that if one has a different viewpoint it is synonymous with hatefully attacking?
False motive, you haven’t been forthcoming or responsive, you’ve pretended you didn’t get the driver’s license analogy, in short you’re behaving like a troll – go away.
You’ve also come here to attack LGBTs by pretending its somehow our responsibility to justify denying polygamists marriage rights. Your dishonest underlying argument is that denying gays the right to marry somehow justifies denying polygamists the right to marry – it does not any more than denying immigrants diver’s licenses would justify denying Texans driver’s licenses.
Priya,
I guess we will have to bting in the turtles.
(not really)
First off I thought we were talking about attraction(s) and the impact on the perceived notion of a corresponding cival right.
I really don’t get the driver license analogy unless you are just taking things into a whole other direction.
That’s all fine, but as I’ve noted before I’m not the brightest bulb on the chandelier.
Lastly, I do take exception to the charge of attacking anyone, unless of course you fall into the category of anyone disagreeing with you must somehow hate you, but I think you’re above that and certaingly stronger than that. Otherwise there can never be dialog with those we disagree with.
That would indeed be a very narrow world in which to live.
[...] lives of LGBT people: “Our President has launched a broad scale attack on traditional values,” Harvey said on her radio program. “If homosexuals and transgenders are allowed to live and love as they see [...]
[...] lives of LGBT people: “Our President has launched a broad scale attack on traditional values,” Harvey said on her radio program. “If homosexuals and transgenders are allowed to live and love as they see [...]