THEOCRACY WATCH! Republicans believe government must "protect our souls"

[Do Miss America]

Apparently 51% of the country asked for this shit. It's going to get worse before it gets better. As soon as you have a little support for keeping one portion of the population under lock and key, sorta speak, you'll have every hateful wacko coming out of the woodworks.

 

[Irvine511]

after they purge american life of homosexuality, what's next? who will they have to scapegoat for every conceivable social ill?

let's start a list of possible contenders for "the new gays":

1. the jews (kind of obvious, i know)
2. muslims in America
3. californians, or perhaps just san franciscans
4. doctors
5. Christmas and Easter Christians
6. new yorkers
7. lawyers
8. single mothers
9. television writers (though this is almost the same thing as "the jews")
10. europeans living in America


place your bets now! who will political Christianity blame next?

 

[Do Miss America]

Atheists

 

[MadelynIris]

Isn't this old news? Like was posted here in Jan?

There are lots of crazy guys in state legislatures doing this kind of crap. They never get anywhere.

 

[MadelynIris]

place your bets now! who will political Christianity blame next?

You guys are doing a fine job of grouping all 'political christianity' as wacko's against the world.

Give it a rest. You're getting just as over the top as this bozo.

 

[MadelynIris]

television writers (though this is almost the same thing as "the jews")

Ok, that was pretty funny.

 

[verte76]

Yeah, the guy originally did the proposal in January. I remember the day it hit the Birmingham newspapers. I was outraged then, and I get more and more angry as I read about the guy's actions. The guy's a lunatic and he's just trying to build a political career on fear and hatred. This is Alabama politics for you. We have the worst schools, the worst everything in the country because no one is willing to pay taxes to even maintain basic services. I don't recommend that anyone move here.

 

[Irvine511]

Isn't this old news? Like was posted here in Jan?

There are lots of crazy guys in state legislatures doing this kind of crap. They never get anywhere.

imagine if someone told you that you couldn't get married.

or adopt children, because they don't want you raising children (remember: you've done nothing wrong, they don't know you).

and that any books mentioning you, or written about your particular "group" were to be removed from the public libraries because taxpayer money shouldn't "endorse" your "lifestyle."



and we wonder why so many gay people hate themselves.

and we're just scapegoat du jour.

 

[Irvine511]

You guys are doing a fine job of grouping all 'political christianity' as wacko's against the world.

Give it a rest. You're getting just as over the top as this bozo.

i've got to great semantic lengths to call this a "particular stripe" of "political" christianity.

please, drop the semantic distinctions. we all know what is being talked about.

 

[deep]

 

[Liesje]

So, any Republican gonna defend this?

absofuckinglutely not!

 

[BonosSaint]

Censorship has a way of backfiring. The most effective way to get a kid (or adult ) to read a book they never would have touched is to tell them it is forbidden.

 

[Pearl]

Its ridiculous. Even with the ban, kids are still going to find out about homosexuality, from the TV, Internet and the newspapers.

I guess Allen is going to ban TV and the Internet, and censor the press.

 

[martha]

We have the worst schools, the worst everything in the country because no one is willing to pay taxes to even maintain basic services. I don't recommend that anyone move here.

And the cherry on that sundae is the tornadoes.

 

[nbcrusader]

Does this include SpongeBob?

 

[verte76]

And the cherry on that sundae is the tornadoes.

Yes, indeed. Don't get me started on hurricanes.

 

[martha]

Oh crap. I forgot about the hurricanes.

 

[Irvine511]

... this is not about homosexuality, it's about theocracy ... this is not just about homosexuality it's about theocracy ... this is not a gay issue it's an issue about being able to live the life you want ... it's about the government telling you what you can and cannot read ... this is not just a gay issue ... i'm trying not to gaze at my own navel ... this will affect everyone ... this is not just a gay issue ...

 

[Do Miss America]

This isn't just a gay issue.








I think Irvine would agree with me.

 

[A_Wanderer]

That is a mighty big generalisation though, I would say that big government social conservatives want to censor anything that they find disagreeable.

 

[Do Miss America]

That is a mighty big generalisation though, I would say that big government social conservatives want to censor anything that they find disagreeable.

True, but it's very hypocritical to the whole "we don't stand for big government" that so many conservatives still try and claim.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Censorship has a way of backfiring. The most effective way to get a kid (or adult ) to read a book they never would have touched is to tell them it is forbidden.

Ta-da! There ya go-you speak the truth, my friend. It seriously amazes me that some people still haven't caught on to that concept.

Angela

 

[ILuvLarryMullen]

Re: THEOCRACY WATCH! Republicans believe government must "protect our souls"

"It's not healthy for America, it doesn't fit what we stand for," says Allen.

We stand for penises and vaginas touching! Let's put a picture of it on the flag !

 

[Macfistowannabe]

Apparently 51% of the country asked for this shit.

51% of the country doesn't live in Alabama...

 

[deep]

 

[deep]

Re: Re: THEOCRACY WATCH! Republicans believe government must "protect our souls"

We stand for penises and vaginas touching! Let's put a picture of it on the flag !

that might get some to salute the flag

 

[BonosSaint]

Thanks, Deep. I'm swiping your picture of the billboard for this week's computer wallpaper.

Idea suppression, thought suppression is a scary deal. We live under the illusion we live in a free society, but the impact of what we do sometimes is no different from what is done in some of the most oppressive societies. And both sides do it. I remember an uproar some years back about Huckleberry Finn. Liberal though I may be, I do not find any essential difference there.

The fundamentalists--or those that are beholden to them--are in power now. To see the power they are trying to wield in personal lives and private decisions is more than troubling. Dreadsox started a thread about extreme fundamentalists, quoting Bono about the hypocrisy, worrying about personal "sins" that don't seem to hurt anyone but affect delicate sensibilities (Victorian swoon here) and have no concern about the bigger actions that affect millions.

I have plenty of problems with the other side. I think they interfere. I think political correctness is a form of thought suppression. I think for all intents and purposes they espouse a philosophy that places personal freedom way above personal responsibility (unless it is the cause de jour) when there should be a balance.

Neither side has any respect whatsoever for the ideas of the other and will silence them however they can, which is the very definition of thought suppression. I am uncomfortable with both sides.

Here's to the moderates, who lean a little either way.

 

[A_Wanderer]

True, but it's very hypocritical to the whole "we don't stand for big government" that so many conservatives still try and claim.

And those small government conservatives should be against moves like this and the libertarians should most definitely be opposed to it. I think this is more of an issue with religious minded folk than it is of conservatives.

 

[pax]

True, but it's very hypocritical to the whole "we don't stand for big government" that so many conservatives still try and claim.

It's sad that most conservatives don't seem to think this way any more. My dad is pretty conservative, but of the old-school stripe (fiscal responsibility, small government) that's closer to libertarianism in its thinking. He has always said that it's not the government's business what two consenting adults do in their own bedrooms.

It's that wing of conservative thought that I do admire, although I have my disagreements with it; we'd all like a government that respects individual privacy and spends tax money wisely and carefully. For conservatives wanting to wrest their party away from hypermoralism and the image that comes with it, they might start by re-emphasizing those goals of small government and fiscal responsibility. Because today's Republican party is certainly not pro-small government; they want a small government when it comes to human services, but a great big one when it comes to defense and monitoring "moral values."

 

[verte76]

You're right pax, conservativism these days often isn't what it used to be. If these particular Republicans were more like Barry Goldwater and less like Jerry Falwell, I'd have alot more respect for them.