It’s Christmas, which means that Scott Lively, he who is currently on trial for crimes against humanity, decided to sit down and create a miniature conspiracy theory (not full-blown like his books) about how the Duck Dynasty controversy has exposed how gay conservatives are simply a tool of the Great Gay Agenda. Never mind that gay liberals are perpetually annoyed with gay conservatives, that’s all a ruse, because that’s what Scott’s paranoid mind says. Let’s examine his “argument,” for lack of a better word:
Laura Ingram [sic] had some “gay” writer on her show, and let him get away with characterizing Phil Robertson‘s comments as bigotry. Lots of pro-family people are quoting Brandon Ambrosino’s article in Time and open lesbian Camille Paglia has also written a widely distributed piece.
[W]e never hear from these supposedly “conservative” or “moderate” homosexuals [like Camille Paglia -- do we claim her? I wasn't aware] unless it’s to do damage control to protect their agenda (which is to fully legitimize homosexuality in society). We saw the same thing occur in 2012 when the “liberal” homosexual attack on Chic-Fil-A [sic] in 2012 sparked a national backlash. Whenever the more progressive wing of the “gay” movement goes too fast and threatens the success of the LGBT marketing strategy, the “conservatives” jump into the spotlight to soothe the public nerves. Why should we help them accomplish that?
We sent gay wingnuts in to soothe people’s nerves? I can’t imagine any possible set of events which would call for Camille Paglia’s World-Renowned Bedside Manner.
Second, we need to recognize that the supposed “liberal” vs. “conservative” polarity in the homosexual alliance is a cleverly crafted illusion to infiltrate the pro-family movement. Of course there are some genuine political and ideological differences among homosexuals, but do not deceived, these cosmetic differences are all subsumed within the common goal of conquest of Christian civilization.
The hell? How can they be “genuine political and ideological differences,” yet at the same time be “cosmetic” and “subsumed within the common goal of conquest of Christian civilization?” Scott, I know this all makes sense in your head, but this conspiracy theory isn’t even coherent enough to be debunked by Snopes, much less believed by the wingnuts who get their news from e-mail forwards.
We must remember that the “gay” movement is a single, united cult of cultural Marxists, following the Hegelian thesis-antithesis-synthesis dialectic.
Crap, here we go. Pretend scholar attempts to look scholarly by throwing out a bunch of wise-guy words in order that idiots might respect his intellect.
Our thesis is the truth of the Bible: homosexuality is condemned by God as an abomination.
Their anti-thesis is that homosexuality is good and normal.
Any “synthesis” of these two contradictory premises is abandonment of the thesis and an outright rejection of the truth of God.
Our embrace of people like Tammy Bruce and Camille Paglia (as brilliant as the latter may be to quote on feminist issues) is the “synthesis” phase of the Hegelian dialectic and poisonous to our theology and agenda.
Camille Paglia is being used for the “synthesis” phase of the Hegelian dialectic. Got it. She and Tammy Bruce are just the sinister “tools” we’re using in order to achieve equality, much to the chagrin of people like Scott Lively.
I mean granted, people like Tammy Bruce and Camille Paglia are tools, but I never really thought of them as our tools.
The rise of “conservative” homosexuals is a ruse to sucker us into endorsing “gay rights” in a slightly different form. Think about it for a moment.
I have thought about it for a moment and I have decided that being inside the derp-matrix that is Scott Lively’s mind is terrifying.
If these people were truly on our side politically or ideologically they would consider their homosexual inclinations a private matter and a challenge to be overcome, and never publicly identify as “gay.”
They would hate themselves as much as the Religious Right commands, I guess. I mean, seriously, gay conservatives annoy the crap out of me all the time, but I will defend their position under the conservative umbrella, especially considering the fact that the Religious Right hi-jacking of conservatism is unique to the last several decades. Indeed, those GOProud types who value fiscal conservatism and whatnot are far more in line with historical conservatism than the Scott Lively/Porno Pete-type freakshows that have taken up residence there.
Lets [sic] have compassion for homosexuals
Lip service from the man who, again, is currently on trial for crimes against humanity for going to Uganda and inciting hatred against LGBT people. This man also believes — even though there is no evidence for it besides his laughed-at-by-real-historians book — that gays caused the Holocaust, and that they were also involved in the Rwandan genocide. And he told the Ugandans this. Let’s have compassion for Scott Lively by encouraging his family to take him in for a psychological evaulation.
Love them as lost sheep, but hate the false premise they live their lives by.
Again, we’ve seen how Scott Lively loves “lost sheep.”
Remember, the Marxist dialectic was taught as a dance to Soviet children: two steps forward, one step back equals a net gain of one step. The “progressive” homosexual agenda represents the two steps forward. The “conservative” homosexual “counter-faction” is one step back. When we endorse “conservative gays” we are helping the entire “gay” movement to advance at the expense of the Bible. Lets not dance with the devil!
Got it. In Scott Lively’s scary headspace of repressed trauma and regret, Tammy Bruce is part of some sort of Soviet hokey-pokey that she’s willingly taking part in, because, you know, the worldwide gay conspiracy to hurt Scott Lively’s fee fees. And Camille Paglia is doing…something. Oh yes, bedside manner.
Well, that was enlightening. How about we ignore him until the verdict comes down in his trial?