Hat Tip: The People’s Cube
“I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.” – Intolerant, bigoted hick, Phil Robertson
“I wish they (Republicans) were all f–king dead!” – Tolerant, enlightened leftist, Dan Savage
The continual intolerance and hatred from the Militant Gay Community is starting to get to me. If the GLBT community is going to continue being enemies of America, then maybe they need to be treated like The Enemy. I have long supported GLBT issues, including gay marriage, and have a number of close GLBT friends. This is not about how you play with your plumbing, or who you marry, or how you relate to your gender.
It is about the Gay Mafia’s vicious, hateful, intolerant, hypocritical attacks on anyone who doesn’t toe their political line. It is about their Totalitarian Liberalism. Liberalism is a cult of hate and violence, and they are among the biggest haters. Not everyone gay, but the activist community. But the rank and file apparently support that, so they are just as bad.
It’s not that they are gay. It is that they are damned Liberal scum.
GLADD is just one more front group for the Leftists who want to take down Western Civilization and the freedoms therein.
OUSEKEEPING An Apology
posted by DAN SAVAGE on FRI, JUL 15, 2011 at 10:28 PM
I was on Real Time with Bill Maher tonight. I was talking to someone at the party after the show, and they asked me how I thought it went. Okay, I said—and then I told them that I said something really, really stupid, half under my breath, and I was relieved that Bill and the rest of the panel didn’t hear it. But folks watching the show at home might have heard it… so… I want to apologize for… um… wishing all Republicans dead.
I don’t feel that way. My dad is a Republican. (Well, he says he’s an independent, but he hasn’t voted for a Democrat since JFK. My dad is a Republican.) I’m fond of Michael Bloomberg and William Weld and Lincoln Chafee, and I wish no harm—save the political variety—on those Republicans I loathe. Even the one Republican I really had it in for once upon a time—Ronald Reagan—managed to outlive my anger.
It was a stupid, rude, thoughtless remark, a flubbed expression of disgust. I was reaching for something like, “I wish they would drop fucking dead,” which doesn’t mean literally die, and I blew it. And it’s no defense, but… the last time I wished someone dead on a live mic, I was on the radio talking about Bill Clinton back in 1993. Then, i got a deserved visit from the Secret Service.
I am sorry about my remark on Maher and my apology is sincerely offered. I regret it and I retract it and I apologize to anyone watching at home—particularly my father (!)—who may have heard me say it. I had a drink before the show—first and last time I’ve ever done that—but this wasn’t a case of, “In vino, veritas.” This was a case of, “In vino, stupidtas!
I can’t tell you how many times I have heard statements similar to yours in the past few days. The mistake Glaad made is that they think their stormtrooper tactics piss off only conservative Christians. But there are many who have supported, or at least were not antagonistic to gay rights who are now having second thoughts.
Glaad has done more damage to the gay community than the Westboro Baptist Church ever could.
HOUSEKEEPING An Apology
posted by DAN SAVAGE on FRI, JUL 15, 2011 at 10:28 PM
I was on Real Time with Bill Maher tonight. I was talking to someone at the party after the show, and they asked me how I thought it went. Okay, I said—and then I told them that I said something really, really stupid, half under my breath, and I was relieved that Bill and the rest of the panel didn’t hear it. But folks watching the show at home might have heard it… so… I want to apologize for… um… wishing all Republicans dead.
I don’t feel that way. My dad is a Republican. (Well, he says he’s an independent, but he hasn’t voted for a Democrat since JFK. My dad is a Republican.) I’m fond of Michael Bloomberg and William Weld and Lincoln Chafee, and I wish no harm—save the political variety—on those Republicans I loathe. Even the one Republican I really had it in for once upon a time—Ronald Reagan—managed to outlive my anger.
It was a stupid, rude, thoughtless remark, a flubbed expression of disgust. I was reaching for something like, “I wish they would drop f@@ing dead,” which doesn’t mean literally die, and I blew it. And it’s no defense, but… the last time I wished someone dead on a live mic, I was on the radio talking about Bill Clinton back in 1993. Then, i got a deserved visit from the Secret Service.
I am sorry about my remark on Maher and my apology is sincerely offered. I regret it and I retract it and I apologize to anyone watching at home—particularly my father (!)—who may have heard me say it. I had a drink before the show—first and last time I’ve ever done that—but this wasn’t a case of, “In vino, veritas.” This was a case of, “In vino, stupidtas!
The point is, rusty, that any conservative who said “I wish Democrats were all f-king dead!” would have been expelled from politics and public life so fast, it would be like they had never even existed. But no, because Dan Savage is a liberal who bullies Christian teenagers and wishes ill on gay conservatives, he gets a pass.
Savage perpetuates the stereotype of the histrionic gay man, flying off the handle at the slightest provocation and hurling the most hurtful thing that comes to mind at the offender, and then begging forgiveness afterwards. The fact that he’s uttered death threats before without lasting consequence, when an ordinary person or a conservative would have been arrested or worse, makes it worse. And the liberal media abets his behavior in a soft form of homoaidia: “Oh, don’t mind Dan. You know how queers get. They go from smiling to throwing knives at you in a second. They really can’t help it, the poor dears.”
So, rusty, what you are saying is that it is OK to wish someone dead, piss on them, defecate on them (I’m looking at you, Martin al-Bashir), but once you say “I’m sorry,” then all is well?
Hypocrisy, thy name is liberalism.
Regards,
Peter H.
OK, we’ll give Dan Savage half a pass.
Let’s substitute the tolerant, enlightened leftist, Martin Bashir suggesting that someone should defecate in Sarah Palin’s mouth.
According to Lord Google, that Savage remark, and retraction, are from 2011, so I’m not sure how relevant either (or their author) are today.
My particular $0.02 on Mr. Savage: I used to respect his viewpoints, as well as read his advice column regularly. I felt that we both sat atop the Libertarian fence, without much concern over the combating forces beneath us. Our real difference lay in that when someone would come over and kick the fence, we would fall on opposite sides before quickly scrambling back up.
As our society has become more and more hyper-polarized (which has been happening for a while, merely greatly accelerated under the current administration), neither of us seem to want to climb back up to middle ground any more. Rather I have pitched my tent somewhere between Mr. Limbaugh’s and Mr. Dobb’s as we try to preserve our culture (my definition of “Diversity” can include them regardless of whether they would reciprocate — something many of my friends cannot understand), while Mr. Savage seems to have immersed himself in the melee with sentiments like the ones described here. More critically, he broke his own rule of “GGG” (regarding keeping an open mind in a relationship) with the neologism “House Fa@@ot,” which he intended for his opponents but better describe the elite of the above organizations as well as those that have infiltrated the White House and other Government agencies, all of whom police the rank-and-file “Field” homosexuals to maintain their own elevated status and the limited scraps of power they are afforded by the Great DNC.
@ Sathar
Maybe it’s my youth, but I have only known Dan Savage to be the shrill militant he is today.
My impression of Rush Limbaugh is the “blithe indifference” form of tolerance: don’t involve him too deeply in gay culture and he won’t get his nose out of joint with gay people. This is the man who got Elton John to sing at his wedding, mind you.
I might give Dan Savage credit for his apology, except he continues to spew hatred and stupidity even to this day.
@Sean, actually I thought my youth was the source of my naivety — I only “Knew” Mr Savage from his advice column, and not any of his activism either before, during, or after the time I followed it. In that sense, I suppose he did maintain some degree of professionalism, as his activist voice occasionally, but not routinely, colored his column (I give him a pass for bringing up issues from time to time that affected him directly, like marriage and adoption). Until March 2010, I tended to tune out activism from either side, but now I’m not so fortunate.
As far as Limbaugh goes, he definitely has sincerity on his side. I believe that he believes everything he says, and that’s okay. I don’t have to agree with him always, and as you point out, when not pressed into a corner he’d probably let me go my own way too. While there are many issues important to me where I doubt any amount of effort would cause him to change his position, I nonetheless get the sense listening to him that calm, reasoned, passionate debate is possible and encouraged. Contrast with pretty much any example on the other side of the media “Aisle,” where personages like Mr Maher or Mr Stewart will simply give you that condescending look as if to say that they understand that it is your ignorance that gives you your flawed position, and that they can wait patiently for you to realize that they were the ones right all along.
It was Question #2, “Then why do you care?”, that really cracked me up.
I think I may have still been hanging out on LGF back when Ann Coulter told a liberal, secularized Jewish radio host that “Christians want Jews to be perfected” — with the implication that the Old Covenant had been superseded, so that Jews no longer had “afterlife coverage.”
And I still recall the distinct lack of apoplexy from Orthodox Jews (perhaps also including individuals from Conservative Judaism). In other words, Jews who took their faith very seriously — and had faith in their own Faith — didn’t seem much bothered by Coulter’s suggestion that they might be in danger of Hell along with everyone else who doesn’t accept Jesus as Lord.
Rather, their reaction was along the lines of “My, what an interesting theory you’ve got there, Ms. Coulter!”
Because they knew in their hearts that the so-called “New Covenant” was a sort of quaint notion among Christians that had never been properly co-signed and endorsed by Mr. [HaShem, Adonai] Himself; and that the original Covenant was not “Old” at all, but remained very much in effect; and that Ann Coulter, bless her, was mistaken. So what’s to get upset about?
Most of the “OMG-how-dare-she-say-that-Jews-aren’t-saved!!!” outrage came from Jews and Christians whose faith was “lukewarm” at best, as well as from secular people who don’t even believe that there’s a Hell one needs to be saved from or a Heaven that one can go to.
Addendum to my previous thought:
Over the years, online, I’ve encountered a relative handful of self-described Gay Christians who struck me as truly, sincerely, inwardly believing that Jesus had no particular objections to the fact that they were in a same-sex relationship. In other words, they had an authentic sense of confidence — they “knew in their heart of hearts” — that homosexual activity is not intrinsically sinful and that Scripture only condemns specific kinds of homosexual activities.
And to me, it’s an indicator of their Sincere Confidence in this point that they avoided public attacks against “hateful fundamentalist Christians who twist the words of Jesus and give True Christianity a bad name, etc.” Instead, they preferred to say “Well, I interpret this or that verse differently than many Christians have historically done,” and leave it at that.
That is, they register their dissent from traditional teaching without implying that Christians who merely believe that same-gender sex is always forbidden (and thereby reject the possibility of “homosexual acts that one needn’t apologize to Jesus for”) must somehow be hypocrites, heretics, or apostates who miss the entire point of Christianity.
P.S. Of course, all of the above could’ve been summed up with less typing by quoting a famous line by Queen Gertrude in Hamlet, methinks.