Gay Patriot Header Image

Lefty Fey Outrage About PajamaBoy and Duck Dynasty

Ace takes note of a lefty setzpinkler who thinks he’s figured out why Conservatives have been making fun of Obamacare spokesmodel PajamaBoy. It’s because Conservatives hate gays.

I had no idea that left-wing pundits had Professor Charles Xavier-level telepathic abilities and were able to read the minds of all Conservatives everywhere all the time!

Also, GLAAD is throwing a hissy-fit because one of the stars of Duck Dynasty expressed an opinion about gay people that hurt their feelers.

GLAAD has condemned “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson in the wake of inflammatory remarks about gay people.

In January’s issue of GQ, Robertson said that “homosexual offenders” will not “inherit the Kingdom of God” and unfavorably compared “a man’s anus” to the vagina.

The gay rights group was quick to denounce his comments.  In a statement, GLAAD spokesman Wilson Cruz slammed the Robertson family patriarch:

“Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil’s lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe. He clearly knows nothing about gay people or the majority of Louisianans — and Americans — who support legal recognition for loving and committed gay and lesbian couples. Phil’s decision to push vile and extreme stereotypes is a stain on A&E and his sponsors who now need to reexamine their ties to someone with such public disdain for LGBT people and families.”

On one level, I don’t get the mindset that says you can’t be happy if someone, somewhere doesn’t approve of your lifestyle. What’s the Big Deal if a guy on a cable TV show doesn’t like you? Obsession that someone, somewhere might disapprove of you seems like a cripplingly neurotic way to go through life. (We’ll leave aside, for the moment, the obsession secular leftists have with judging what “true Christians” should and should not believe.)

On another level, I understand it completely. Faux outrage generates publicity. Publicity generates donations. Donations ensure that Wilson Cruz can keep his cushy job as an outraged spokesperson for GLAAD and not have to get a real job in the miserable Obamaconomy. Such generosity is what earned Alec Baldwin a pass from GLAAD for his repeated use of anti-gay slurs.

Update: A&E caves to intolerant bigots.





  1. Funny thing is I read his comments as “I don’t get it, what makes it attractive?” I chuckled because that quote kind of matches my mindset.

    ““It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”

    He’s right. Sin isn’t logical, neither is love.

    Comment by The_Livewire — December 18, 2013 @ 6:34 pm - December 18, 2013

  2. There are gay men who echo his sentiment and don’t ever use the back door. I’m sure a Leftist would be able to discern some deep-seated self-hatred in them though.

    Mr. Robertson simply echoes the sentiments of many Americans who just don’t understand anal sex. I myself am ambivalent on the matter. I differ with him on theology, but this is a religiously free country.

    Comment by Sean — December 18, 2013 @ 7:43 pm - December 18, 2013

  3. I’m trying to figure out where the “vile and extreme stereotype” was — I mean, I’ve seen statistics from various studies claiming that approximately 20-25% of gay guys essentially never take the Hershey Highway… which means that something like 3 out of 4 gay men DO engage in anal sex sometimes. In other words, Robertson was more or less accurately describing “average” or “typical” gay behavior.

    (It’s not like he asserted that the majority of gay men are into double-fisting, or that the “average gay men” has more than 20 different sex partners per month and ingests 3.5 pounds of fecal material per year, a la Dr. Paul Cameron.)

    Comment by Throbert McGee — December 18, 2013 @ 8:10 pm - December 18, 2013

  4. Much ado about nothing. So he believes we are he’ll bound. Ok. So what? I can guarantee that there are many folks somewhere in the world of many different faiths that believe the same about him as well as you, me and the rest of us. I took much of his remarks as being as characterized in #1 along with a belief that being gay is a sun in his faith. Ok. Again, so what? I’ve never seen his show nor do I have plans to, mostly because I can’t stand the so-called reality show genre. So what does this mans personal beliefs do to me? Nada. Zip. Zilch. If he were a politician stumping on such beliefs for civil policy or this was the main theme about his show I might feel differently, but neither is the case here. Some people should realize that not everyone is going to agree with them all the time and move on.

    Comment by JohnAGJ — December 18, 2013 @ 8:53 pm - December 18, 2013

  5. *sigh*… I hate auto correct…

    Comment by JohnAGJ — December 18, 2013 @ 8:54 pm - December 18, 2013

  6. Hey V the K! Glad you’re writing on here. Thou speaketh much sense!

    Comment by Seane-Anna — December 18, 2013 @ 9:03 pm - December 18, 2013

  7. Hey John,

    I think he believes we’re all hell bound, unless we ask for forgiveness of all our sins. In that he’s treating everyone, gay or straight, the same way.

    Comment by The_Livewire — December 18, 2013 @ 9:09 pm - December 18, 2013

  8. And for the record, Phil Robertson spoke the truth. The Bible DOES teach that homosexual behavior is a sin, and true Christians believe what the Bible says no matter what society–or Wilson Cruz–thinks.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — December 18, 2013 @ 9:12 pm - December 18, 2013

  9. GLAAD? The same people that were calling me a “Breeder” not so long ago?

    Listen, some gay men I used to know died before their time in my opinion and according to scientific evidence it had to do with risky sexual practices. I feel I’m doing the right thing when I encourage these men to be as abstinent as they possibly can. I also encourage single hetero’s to do the same. Sex is a risky business for everyone. Gay men comprise 5% of the population, conservatively speaking, and the 95% of the hetero population pretty much would say the same thing as Mr. Roberts. Time to start ignoring the GLAADs, the Dan Savage’s and the rest of the pearl clutching “gay activist class.”

    Comment by Richard Bell — December 18, 2013 @ 9:36 pm - December 18, 2013

  10. Seane-Anna: the Bible teaches that there are numerous things people do that are sinful. I’m not sure why homosexual behavior gets so much air time.

    If Robertson is concerned about all this sinning, has he mentioned, oh, people having kids out of wedlock?

    It doesn’t really matter to me what some guy that looks like a flea ranch thinks. The firing of him by the network is tediously predictable. At some point, no public person with any remotely controversial (on the left) thought will dare utter a word in public.

    And then we can lament the crushingly banal nature of political discourse.

    Comment by KCRob (SoCalRobert) — December 18, 2013 @ 9:41 pm - December 18, 2013

  11. Didn’t @AETV just violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act? Sure looks that way —

    After all, this is a negative employment action based upon someone engaged in religious speech away from the workplace — quoting (OK, paraphrasing) Scripture!

    Comment by Rhymes With Right — December 18, 2013 @ 10:00 pm - December 18, 2013

  12. Funny how GLAAD was outraged about Phil Robertson, but not a word about some real criminals here:

    GLAAD does not speak for me. I can think for myself.

    And as for A&E, I hope that the Robertsons sue them for every penny and KEEP THE MONEY.

    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — December 18, 2013 @ 10:11 pm - December 18, 2013

  13. This isn’t about being gay… it’s about FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

    Where will your freedom stop?

    Comment by Candice R. — December 18, 2013 @ 10:38 pm - December 18, 2013

  14. Peter the Robertsons don’t need to sue A&E. They have plenty of money. a thriving business, and a close knit family. And they are one of the highest rated shows on A&E and that is A&Es problem they could all walk tomorrow and A&E will be utterly screwed. But they very well might the Robertsons and A&E have had problems because of their faith before. A&E might very well find itself on the receiving end of a religious discrimination lawsuit. Fun Times! And PC is not an organized religious faith at least that’s not what it says no matter how it acts.

    Comment by Catseyes — December 18, 2013 @ 10:52 pm - December 18, 2013

  15. @KCRob, in my comment I was refuting Wilson Cruz’s implication that “true Christians” don’t believe that homosexual behavior is sin; that’s why I gave homosexual behavior “so much air time”. And as for Phil Robertson mentioning people having kids out of wedlock, I don’t know if he’s ever addressed that specifically; however, in the QG article he did talk about the collapse of right and wrong generally so I think it’s safe to say that he’s aware that many behaviors fall short of God’s standard.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — December 18, 2013 @ 11:10 pm - December 18, 2013

  16. …refuting Wilson Cruz’s implication that “true Christians”

    It’s disgusting how many people who likely have spent some time mocking people of faith, and who haven’t seen the inside of a church or picked up a bible in years (and probably don’t own one) are so quick to declare what constitutes “true Christianity” when it suits their purposes.

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 18, 2013 @ 11:19 pm - December 18, 2013

  17. Just saw Wilson Cruz on that episode of NCIS the other day. That f’ing pansy is supposed to be representative of us?

    Comment by RobSchellinger — December 19, 2013 @ 1:24 am - December 19, 2013

  18. Someone on the HRC site going by the name Pflagmom was concerned about what young gay kids think when they read what Mr. Robertson said. I thusly launched off into a rant. I was sorta on autopilot so I wasn’t paying too much attention to form:

    As a gay man, I’m sick and tired of the professional victims always wetting their panties whenever anyone (other than a fellow liberal) says something they don’t like. I’m tired of hucksters and frauds manufacturing nonroversies to make money and add to their six-figure salaries. I’m tired of pansies like Cruz, Sean Hayes, Jesse Tyler Ferguson, Eric Stonestreet etc. pretending they represent us.

    You say “How do you think young LGBT teens who read stuff like this must feel?” How do you think young gay teens must feel if they’re on the cusp of coming out but don’t want to be identified as the flaming queens that represent us in the media? I and several others I know stayed in the closet because we didn’t want to be confused with them and the jack booted little brown shirts of “equality” and “tolerance” who only accept you if you’re just like them or if they think they have a chance of getting you in the sack. Many of us are not gay first. Many of us are, indeed, Republicans and Conservatives. We see more bullying and intolerance from gays than we ever see from Republicans. I for one am fed up with the hatmongers and bullies defining “tolerance” and “bullying”. I’m fed up with Aholes like HRC, GLAAD, PFLAG etc. pretending they give a damn about all of us when they only care about the little queens that fit into the little accepted box.

    I have a bigger problem with the greedy bastards that blow stuff like this up so they can make more money for themselves while ignoring real hate and bullying. Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn if these folks have a problem with what Phil said. I care more that they’re frauds preying on emotions and kneejerk reactions for financial gain while ignoring REAL homophobia and bullying from their buddies.

    Comment by RobSchellinger — December 19, 2013 @ 4:36 am - December 19, 2013

  19. While I may not agree with his views I don’t think his comments were outside the norm for his faith.

    His comments aren’t super politically correct and even the HRC seems to get it wrong (he wasn’t comparing homosexuality to bestiality-he was listing a bunch of acts he views as win-homosexuality, bestiality and heterosexual promiscuous sex all made the list along with greed and other acts).

    I also think A&E needs them more than they need A&E. I have never watched the show (probably won’t either-reality TV like this doesn’t appeal to me) but I assume A&E will cave-the dollar speaks louder than the HRC.

    Comment by Just Me — December 19, 2013 @ 8:13 am - December 19, 2013

  20. You can murder gays if you’re Muslim. You can call a guy “cocksucking fag” or write a lengthy blog post about how great Hiitler was and how he was the most misunderstood man in history as long as you’re a liberal. If a Christian says “gay” and “beastiality” in the same conversation, Joe Dirtyknees and Wilson Cruz cinch up their anal beads and go on the warpath demanding silence and capitulation.

    Comment by RobSchellinger — December 19, 2013 @ 12:07 pm - December 19, 2013

  21. Livewire: No doubt, but the exact details aren’t really important here. He gave an opinion from his religious beliefs that I didn’t find to be offensive or worthy of his being canned. I could care less what he thinks about the eternal destiny of myself or anyone else. I don’t share his views so what’s the problem? He wasn’t trying to be a wanker about it, he wasn’t a politician using such beliefs to formulate political policy, etc. So why should anyone care if Robertson or anyone else thinks their soul is at risk? I don’t lose sleep when others say this for whatever reason (it’s not always about the ghey), so why should I in this case? To me that’s the point here.

    Candace: I disagree. This isn’t about free speech, at least as guaranteed under the Constitution. A&E has every right to free speech just as Robertson, however boneheaded both may be, just as you and I.

    Comment by JohnAGJ — December 19, 2013 @ 12:45 pm - December 19, 2013

  22. The Bible DOES teach that homosexual behavior is a sin

    For the record: The Bible doesn’t. If it did, that would be one thing. But it doesn’t.

    “Sin” connotes an ethical violation. Homosexuals are certainly capable of ethical violations, such as rape or murder or adultery or theft or forgetting God or forgetting the poor. And homosexual behavior could be involved in some cases, but it is not the sin (which would instead be the actual rape, murder, adultery, theft, ignoring God or the poor, etc.). The Hebrew Testament characterizes homosexual behavior as a ritual violation, not as an ethical violation. And the Christian Testament makes clear that the Hebrew ritual rules were voided by the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ, and so are to be disregarded by non-Jews.

    The (very few) places where the Christian Testament mentions homosexual behavior negatively, treat it as an example of lust/promiscuity in which God is forgotten and real sins (actual ethical violations) are just around the corner; it follows that homosexuals who remember God and treat people morally are no more sinful than heterosexuals are (keeping in mind that both are still capable of sin and that, in the Bible, every human being but one is a sinner in some way).

    I can go quote-for-quote on these matters or, just to save time, direct you to various books such as this one. People taking the other view are either mis-using Bible quotes, or are (sincerely) using quotes that had been translated inaccurately from the original Hebrew or Greek.

    For the record, it is rare for me to speak on this topic and likely to remain rare, just because it’s not a thorny issue for me. It is a debate which has been settled (along the lines I’ve described). At any point in the past or future, if this debate arises and I happen to remain silent, it is only from boredom or from being busy with other things; *not* because I lack full answers to what the other side claims.

    I agree with most of the other comments above. While I disagree with what Phil Robertson says, I will defend his right to say it (just as when I defended the Rev. Scott Lively). Rob – Good rant! 🙂

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 19, 2013 @ 1:54 pm - December 19, 2013

  23. ILC, that was a very nice summary. I’m not familiar with that book (it sounds informative), but I’m a big personal fan of Mr. Compton’s Homosexuality and Civilization. While much broader in scope and not limited to or focused on Christianity, it does explore a number of early (and not so early) religious trends. For example, it identifies how the story about the destruction of Sodom was RetCon‘ed several centuries after Christ to, wait for it, promote the anti-gay policies of several political leaders, including at least one important Byzantine emperor in the early 500’s (described as “Ambitious… and ruthless in suppressing opposition”).

    Comment by Sathar — December 19, 2013 @ 2:41 pm - December 19, 2013

  24. Just FYI – if you believe that A&E not only violated Phil Robertson’s civil rights (1st & 9th Amendments) but also want to send a message to GLAAD and their enablers, here are some A&E contact details if you want to request that he be reinstated:

    A&E contact info Ms. Abbe Raven, CEO A&E Television Networks 235 East 45th St. New York, NY 10017




    COLLEEN CONWAY (Director of Non-Fiction Programming)


    ABBE RAVEN (CEO) LINE: (212) 210-9007

    GENERAL TELEPHONE: (212) 210-1400

    Facebook: Duck Dynasty on A&E

    Twitter: @AETV @DuckDynastyAE

    Show them that we won’t be silenced, either!

    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — December 19, 2013 @ 3:52 pm - December 19, 2013

  25. Spam filter, please.

    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — December 19, 2013 @ 3:53 pm - December 19, 2013

  26. Apparently Pajama Boy has a name, Ethan Krupp.

    I propose a shaming…

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — December 19, 2013 @ 3:53 pm - December 19, 2013

  27. @18: Rob – that was awesome. I’d like to ask Pflagmom her opinion of what young LBTBQABCDEFG kids think when they see images of certain gay pride parades or… the Folsom Street festival.

    Comment by KCRob (SoCalRobert) — December 19, 2013 @ 6:14 pm - December 19, 2013

  28. @ #27

    My reaction: “No. Just no.”

    Comment by Sean — December 19, 2013 @ 7:28 pm - December 19, 2013

  29. I share no point of common opinion regarding everything the good Duck Dynast has said about homosexuality. However, my sympathies are wholly with him in this matter.

    I am also in as much agreement with Rob Schellinger as it is possible for a straight guy to be.

    Comment by perturbed — December 19, 2013 @ 8:09 pm - December 19, 2013

  30. the Bible teaches that there are numerous things people do that are sinful. I’m not sure why homosexual behavior gets so much air time.

    In fairness to Robertson, he did specifically mention anal sex, rather than the umbrella term “homosexual behavior” — which is significant because neither the Hebrew Bible nor the Christian NT directly mention lesbian sex using some unambiguous phrase like “women lying down with women.” (The Apostle Paul refers to women doing unnatural acts, which could presumably include Tijuana donkey shows — only from the surrounding context can we infer that Paul probably had lesbianism in mind.)

    And, as far as I know, the majority of Orthodox rabbis interpret the Hebrew mishkavi ishshah (“[in a manner like] the copulations of women”) as a euphemism for buttsecks, which was deemed to be an imitation of vaginal intercourse. So mishkavi ishshah therefore narrows and restricts the scope of Lev. 18:22 and 20:13 — it’s perfectly clear from 20:12, for instance, that yishkav et (“lying down with”) has a clear sexual meaning all by itself, and does not require the word mishkavi to establish that men lying together platonically (as in the case of soldiers sharing a blanket) is perfectly cromulent and a non-abomination.

    Or, in other words, if the verses were intended as broad condemnations of all types of male/male sex, and not anal alone, then the phrase mishkavi ishshah or “as with a woman” logically ought to have been left out, because its presence unavoidably narrows the scope of the whole sentence.

    So give Robertson credit for “strict constructionism”, at least! 😉

    Comment by Throbert McGee — December 19, 2013 @ 8:51 pm - December 19, 2013

  31. Ethan Krupp

    He looks like an Ethan. Don’t ask me to explain that. Anyways, I’ve long wished that I had some of those footie pajamas. I had some when I was a kid and they were my favorite, except they were pretty warm and not always necessary in the South. I’d get some of the adult ones but they don’t come that big.

    Comment by RobSchellinger — December 20, 2013 @ 12:39 am - December 20, 2013

  32. Footie Jammie

    Comment by rusty — December 20, 2013 @ 1:16 am - December 20, 2013

  33. @Thorbert.

    Years ago I read an article on (Which I need to read more) about the Torah and homosexuality. I shot the Rabbi an e-mail asking, since the article was very specific, about female pairings.

    He replied that, yes, the Torah is silent on female/female pairings. Apparently a lot of the Orthadox admonation comes from the Talmud, where it talks about not acting as the people of Egypt.

    My mom was less than amused when I told her that as long as she didn’t date an Egyptian chick, she was fine. 😉

    Comment by The_Livewire — December 22, 2013 @ 12:22 pm - December 22, 2013

  34. Who gives a shit…you have the right to be gay and he has the right to his own opinion…not like he tried to make you suck his dick and say you were the one sinning…SMH, AMERIC…Get Over Yourself and look toward where we are being led! It’ll always be a “he said/she said” world, but it’s a “he did or didn’t/she did or didn’t” life!
    Wake up everyone!

    Comment by 8randO — December 26, 2013 @ 2:21 pm - December 26, 2013

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.