First off, Joe.My.God reports on one of our regulars, Matt Barber:
Matt Barber believes you are a diseased, perverted, pedophilia-prone, culture-destroying monster who will die decades early and then be righteously cast into an eternal lake of fire. And therefore every lie about you, no matter how outrageous, is worth saying. But he still loves you.
“Barber’s tweet: Remember: Hate the liberalism. Love the liberal…”
Over at NOM, Brian Brown’s blathering on about the Boy Scouts. Towleroad.com reports:
“Their decision to admit openly gay scouts will end up sexualizing the organization. I am certain that having changed their policy on homosexuality, it’s only a matter of time before courts order them to admit homosexual scout leaders. Meanwhile, countless thousands of churches will very likely pull their sponsorship rather than endorse homosexuality, and the entire organization will begin to collapse. All of this is happening not because of a true grassroots demand of gay youth to be part of the organization but by an orchestrated political effort by gay activists who want to punish any group or organization that does not embrace homosexuality. It’s the beginning of the end for what once was one of America’s noblest organizations.”
Or, perhaps, the scouts will find out what most of the rest of America already knows – that gays are just like everyone else, and gay kids deserve the same rights and opportunities as everyone else. The Girl Scouts has been open to lesbian kids and adults for a long time, and has that organization become “sexualized” and collapsed?
Over at the AFA, Bryan Fischer’s also jumping into the ring on this one. Pink News reports:
Fischer, the head of the American Family Association, tweeted the reference to Luke 17:2, directly addressing the BSA, and suggesting that forced drowning would be better than the inclusion of gay members. “Jesus to BSA: ‘It would be better… if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea.’ Luke 17:2”
Lovely. Funny how they always get away with essentially making death threats by cloaking them in the language of the bible.
Over in the UK, MP Richard Drax called the marriage equality bill intolerant. Pink News reports:
“As a nation, we pride ourselves on tolerance. But during a controversial and emotive debate in the House over gay marriage this week, there was scant evidence of it being shown to the millions who believe that ‘marriage’ can only be between a man and a woman. Instead, in what is arguably one of the most intolerant pieces of legislation in years, we have trampled on conscience and faith with abandon. There are no protections for teachers who refuse to promote same-sex marriage or for registrars who conscientiously object to conducting gay marriages, or even for those, who, like me, happen to disagree.”
And in an amazing statement, he continued:
“And if this does become law, gay couples will be able to choose marriage or civil union, while heterosexual couples can only marry. The government has no answer to these disparities.”
Oh yes, how horrible to treat an entire group of people differently based on their sexual orientation. Oh that he can’t see the irony. Not to mention that a proposal to consider extending civil partnerships to straight couples was passed by the House of Commons just last week.
Finally, another old regular here (and we do mean old) checks in – Phyllis Schlafly thinks the polls on marriage equality are defective. Joe.My.God reports:
“The polls are very defective. If you look at the polls, most of them ask the question: Are you in favor of banning same-sex marriage? Now, we have no law that bans same-sex marriage. Any gay couple can get married — all they have to do is find a preacher or justice of the peace who will perform the ceremony. There’s no law against that. What they are demanding is that we respect them as being OK, and that’s an interference with our free speech rights. There’s no obligation that we have to respect something we think is morally wrong.”
Seriously? We have no law that bans same sex marriage? What planet is this woman living on? Sure, anyone can have a priest “marry” them, but it comes without all the rights and responsibilities that straight folks enjoy automatically.