I just wrote rough-trade academic shit all day and I’m juiced out, so may I be economic?  Thanks:

Tool.

“I know that Bob Vander Plaats is not afraid to stand up for what is right,” Ratliff said. “That takes courage.”

Good to know “courage” is enforcing second class citizenship on a minority segmant of the population.
And he seems to say it without comprehending the irony.

Only semi-related to the topic at hand, but guaranteed to make your jaw drop at the sheer galling audacity: Dallin H. Oaks, a Mormon leader, just compared Mormons championing Prop 8 to the civil rights movement. Yes, he went there.

Original statement by Oaks:
““As such, these incidents of ‘violence and intimidation’ are not so much anti-religious as anti-democratic,” he said. “In their effect they are like well-known and widely condemned voter-intimidation of blacks in the South that produced corrective federal civil-rights legislation.”

And then when his asshattery was pointed out, he said:
“It may be offensive to some—maybe because it hadn’t occurred to them that they were putting themselves in the same category as people we deplore from that bygone era.”

Considering that “people we deplore from that bygone era” includes major Mormon leaders of the time, I’m beyond astounded.

Link: http://www.fox13now.com/news/kstu-mormon-leader-religious-freedom-at-risk,0,648952.story
(Sorry it’s a Fox link, but the other option was linking to the LDS church owned paper and news station.)

If Rev. Ratliff woke up one morning and realized that he no longer believed baptism could cleanse a person’s sins, he would need to find a new church.

Now that he has decided that civil rights aren’t for everyone, shouldn’t he find a different political organization to belong to and sit on the board of?

Wait, let me get this straight.  In Maine, marriage equality needs to pass both Houses of Congress and get the signature of the Governor.  Then, it has to survive a public voter challenge via Constitutional Amendment.

In California, it has to overcome a Constitutional Amendment after working it’s way through both Houses, the Governor’s Office, and the state Supreme Court.

In Iowa, you can overturn marriage equality with an executive order?

What an amazing legal system we have!  Can the President pull this trick too?  Perhaps we can get DOMA repealed via signing statement.

In Iowa, you can overturn marriage equality with an executive order?

No.  You can’t.  But you can make it a campaign promise that you will in order to get the backing of other vicious bigots.

No.  You can’t.  But you can make it a campaign promise that you will in order to get the backing of other vicious bigots.

I mean, I’m sure he’ll at least try it.  And then you get to fight over it in court.  And then we get another round of “Why are you persecuting the Christians?!” while the Iowa SC sorts it out again.

If Rev. Ratliff woke up one morning and realized that he no longer believed baptism could cleanse a person’s sins, he would need to find a new church.

Now that he has decided that civil rights aren’t for everyone, shouldn’t he find a different political organization to belong to and sit on the board of?

This. Have there been any calls for him to resign? (Also since I doubt VDP is for the rights of black people, either.)

I got nothing.

Nothing but disgust.

So, discrimination and denying civil rights to others is now a civil right?  Is that like when we don’t tolerate intolerance, that makes us intolerant, too, somehow?

“Have there been any calls for him to resign?”

There god damn better be!

no excuses for this back-stabbing crap, Solidarity aint a one way street

@ Caren - That’s a favorite BS rhetorical trick among the wingnuttia.  Oh, you’re saying it’s bad to discriminate against [insert whoever they’re trying to oppress that day], that makes you the intolerant one.  You’re trying to censor us, and make us give up our beliefs!

To which one might reasonably reply, but by the time you stop sputtering from outrage at the sheer hypocrisy and start forming coherent sentences again, they’ve already whipped up the angry mob against your intolerant and censoring ways.

When others gain their rights, my rights are not diminished in any way. My rights are not diluted when my neighbor enjoys protection from discrimination.

Wrong, Mr. Bond!  When others gain their rights, my right to not have my beautiful mind offended by their exercise of their rights is infringed.  See, no man is an island, but all men are ambulatory castles and kings thereof.  And kings are rulers of all they survey, so when I survey gays having rights I have the right (as king!) to deny them their rights anywhere I might survey them.  And since I might survey them (gay people being gay) almost anywhere I happen to go, it’s just more efficient to deny them rights anywhere.  QED, and therefore.

The bottom line is, the very idea of teh buttsecs is disgusting and therefore all gayness must be illegal, because every time I see a gay person it makes me think of teh buttsecs and ewww ick right?

Gotta love the qualifier there, “this endorsement is not in his capacity as NAACP director.”  So he has such a flexible ethical framework that as a preacher he can be against teh buttsecs er gay rights, but as NAACP director he is in favor of them, as Mr. Bond and therefore presumably the NAACP is?  Wow.  Even the Cirque du Soliel performers would be envious.

is the good pastor working just as hard to rid Iowa of the abomination unto the Lord that is shellfish?

http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/

“is the good pastor working just as hard to rid Iowa of the abomination unto the Lord that is shellfish?”

In the future, I be sure to make the effort to cater to his shellfish demands

In the future, I be sure to make the effort to cater to his shellfish demands

Bad puns make me crabby.

I want an ambulatory castle.

“I want an ambulatory castle.”

Are you talking about American citizens or crabs?...

“Bad puns make me crabby.”

No such thing as a “Bad” pun
They dont have moral agency so they are incapable of sinning

I want to be able to spell “soleil.”  Fratz.

Just for the halibut:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEZG14eGmR8

The fuckery is strong with this one . . . bullying a marginalized group defined as courage, bragging about protecting something not threatened in the least, making campaign promises one knows full well one cannot keep, all done by a civil rights leader who’s decided that the rights that are important for him to have should be denied to certain groups of people who are not him . . .

How does the Republican party get any votes?  Seriously, they should fall behind in popularity to the ballots where people have written in “Lizard People.”

Exhibit A for the Dan Savage thesis of Black-gay politics.

This is the thing that just drives me completely nuts. If Iowa passed a law requiring all citizens to have gay sex, that would be a law violating someone’s religious beliefs (granting for the sake of argument that there are people who feel their beliefs oppose it.)

Allowing that people who are free to choose may choose gay marriage (whether or not they have sex, thank you) while those who don’t so choose are free not to contract one for themselves is NOT infringing on their religious beliefs.

They are welcome to disapprove. They are not welcome to discriminate. How hard is that to get?

They cannot differentiate between free practice of religion and the rights of the individual.  Since they define religion as everyone living “according to god’s law,” in order to practice their religion they must be free to enforce “god’s law” across all of society.  Not permitting that is an infringement of their freedom of religion.  That’s how they see it.  People are not free to choose gay marriage because they think homosexuality itself is against “god’s law” and therefore permitting it to exist is also an infringement of their freedom to practice their religion.

Until these people internalize that the freedom to practice religion does not mean freedom to enforce “god’s law” across all of society, they will continue to wail about how their right to freely practice their religion is being attacked.

Liberalrob, you said all I wanted to say but much better. May I quote you in my LiveJournal?

All you WHITE PEOPLE think that black people should embrace the homosexuals like they’re brothers-in-arms or something.

Well, you don’t know SHIT!

Homos weren’t in the fields pickin’ cotton and they sure weren’t there at Selma. They are not poor and they are not oppressed and they are not politically powerless.

And yet all the white liberals try to tell everyone that this is just like race. Well, it isn’t.

You white folk need to put up the bong for a while or somethin’.

Ah, NYSN, Pam is African-American, so that you think she’s white is the least of your confusions.

They are not poor and they are not oppressed and they are not politically powerless.

Yes, nobody is speaking against them, and they can get married in all 50 states of the Union(not!).

Pam only acknowledges her black half. She hates white people, as I do.

I have license. My people have been fucked over by white people. And the contemporary liberals have protected me from charges of racism by making up these new rules so that I can say FUCK WHITEY and can’t be accused of racism.

I like being special. My people have earned the right to be “better than you” with special privileges. Homosexuals have not.

Pam only acknowledges her black half.

Bzzzzt, Not Your Stereotypical Nigger, I don’t have a “half” of one color or another to acknowledge since both of my parents were black. Needless to say your trollery rates on the lower half of the entertainment scale.

“I don’t have a “half” of one color or another to acknowledge”

perhaps he thought you were like Frank Gorshen’s character on Star Trek?

</i>...boh of my parents were black.</i>

Good GAWD!

No wonder you take the hits from the black community. You’re truly a RACE TRAITOR.

Wha’s the matter with you, Sistah?

And NYSN makes the point of the asshole JoP in LA.  Puts him/her on the same evil level.  I posted this on Jesse’s thread.  It really more belongs here. 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091016/ap_on_re_us/us_interracial_rebuff

It was all a hoax.

I’m not black. I just wanted to demonstrate the racism that Pam practices. Anyone that she thought was white would have been banned and the comments containing the word “nigger” would have been deleted.

But, because I said I was black, she gave free reign to say and think what I wish. This is the double standard of the radical left.

A little Racism there, Pammy?