Anti-Gay Activist Phyllis Schlafly: How Dare Those Gay People Ask Us To Respect Them
This qualifies as the most irrational, hateful thing I’ve heard come out of Phyllis Schalfly’s mouth, and that’s saying something:
Many social conservatives, such as Eagle Forum President Phyllis Schlafly of Ladue, refuse to believe that a majority of Americans would support gay marriage. Obama’s shifting position, she said, “is the story of politics: An aggressive well-funded pressure group can achieve goals contrary to what the majority of people want. I think same-sex marriage would be a terrible mistake. I don’t think there are any good arguments for it.”
Gays, she said, are already free to live together. “Nobody’s stopping them from shacking up,” she said. “The problem is they are trying to make us respect them, and that’s an interference with what we believe.”
Yes, how dare we treat human beings as human beings.
A thought. People like this need to stop calling themselves Christian, because there’s nothing Christ like about them.
Actually, Jesus said that he wasn’t send to overturn the Mosaic Law, but to fulfill it. And the Mosaic law isn’t exactly friendly to gays. So by a Biblical standard, I see nothing un-Christian about hatred of and violence against gays.
The same goes for slavery (which is part of Mosiac Law explicitly endorsed by the New Testament in its demand that slaves obey their masters), tyranny (since political powers were instituted by God, so it’s wrong to oppose them), and killing blasphemers (done at God’s command by the Israelites).
And that’s just so much the worse for Christianity.
It’s a mistake to suppose that Christianity is about love and respect for other people. Nothing in the Bible supports that interpretation, except a few quotes taken out of context.
The word “Christian” does not even appear in the article…nor do the words “anti-gay”
You seem to possess a deeply held resentment of people who disagree with your position…would it be alright if others chose to vilify and possibly sanction you for your core beliefs?
How does someone trained in legal reasoning make so many gaffes in in basic reasoning?
Schafly is referring to people who self-identify based on behavior and/or orientation. She doesn’t respect the behavior and doesn’t think she should be forced to accept it as normative. Whether you agree with her or not, you should at least make an effort to understand what she is saying.
Yet instead of responding to what she said you jump to a non sequitur: “Yes, how dare we treat human beings as human beings.”
Does treating people as human beings require that we accept every form of behavior as normative? Do really think that is necessary to “treat human beings as human beings?”
Also, you say, “People like this need to stop calling themselves Christian, because there’s nothing Christ like about them.”
What in the world are you talking abotu? Are you claiming that Christ approved of homosexuality? That is certainly a view that was never held by anyone before the late 20th century. Whether you like it or not, Christ most certainly disapproved of such behavior.
I realize everyone is entitled to their opinion. But many OTS readers have been coming here for years to read Joyner’s well-reasoned and thoughtful posts. Don’t you think you should at least try to live up to that standard?
Diana,
Do you see anything contradictory about the fact that slavery was overturned, worldwide, primarily at the leading of Christians (since the churches were the place where almost all of the abolition movements had there beginnings)?
Does it surprise you that most Christians do not hate or assault anyone?
Diana, I never said that. I would never say that. Don’t you ever say something like that ever to me again.
@Joe –
(citation needed)
Also Joe, I hate you. I never like you. That’s why I told dad to give you that horrific birthmark and the huge nose. Do you remember Rome in 1st century? I do. It was one super gay orgy. Everyone had a super a great time. Remember, no one likes a buzz kill!
“Whether you like it or not, Christ most certainly disapproved of such behavior. ”
If I recall correctly, Christ said exactly nothing about homosexuality. One of the letter writers (Paul?) said something negative about it. He also said everyone should: Best-remain celibate your whole life; Next Best – Cut off your nuts to keep you from wanting to have sex; Last Resort – get married. ‘Scuse me if I don’t give a whole lot credence to his opinion on sexual matters.
In the Old Testament, it is mentioned once I think, or at the most twice, and described as an abomination. Also described in similar terms is eating pork (Hot dogs? Barbecue? Bacon?) and mixing different materials in the same cloth (Cotton-Poly blend?) as well as a number of other things the so-called Christians indulge in on regular basis.
Oh, and by the way – the Old and New Testament combined have exactly nothing to say about abortion.
“Schafly is referring to people who self-identify based on behavior and/or orientation.”
Have you ever tried ignoring your libido, Joe?
What is it about some Christians that turn them into psychopaths? I mean seriously now – Schlaffy have achieved some sort of emotional epistemic closure, where somehow criticizing the pathetic, unforgivable attempts to legitimize tactless and knowingly hurtful comments is insulting, another reason to be wary of homosexuals.
If you tell them they are being callous and full of themselves, they say they are being pressured and that gays are mean. If you don’t tell them to stop, their casual hatred and distaste for your persona will be allowed to go uncontested, increasing the chances that you will get physically hurt in the future.
What could a Christian possibly have to gain from saying out loud that he or she is upset by gay “behavior” or finds it sinful? Are they so sick that they won’t be happy until they are allowed to say words that are intrinsically demeaning or dangerous without getting snapped back at?
I really don’t trust monotheists. Period. They are capable of anything.
@Joe
>She doesn’t respect the behavior and doesn’t think she should be forced to accept it as normative.
That’s not what she said. Here are her words again: “The problem is they are trying to make us respect them.” She is saying she disrespects gay people, not merely their behavior.
> Whether you like it or not, Christ most certainly disapproved of such behavior.
Please support this statement. So far, it’s your opinion.
The problem is not so much the lack of respect, but the fact that this lack of respect can translate into homophobic *legislation* and *actions* in a country.
If there were no such aberrations or atrocities as DOMA or DADT or homophobic violence, then the gay people would not care about Schlaffy at all – they would just pity her.
But the usage of casually demeaning and smearing language against gay people will invariably increase the chances that there will be sticks and stones in the future. The gay people are asking Schlaffy to think about what she is saying and show some basic concern for fellow citizens. For her kind of self-righteous, infantile and weak Christian, this is impossible.
For example, I regularly express my deep dislike of monotheists etc., but I would be very very wary of doing so if I lived in a country where there was a possibility that Christians et al. could be the target of violence or mistreatment in schools or of discriminating legislation.
I also don’t care much for the presence of Islam in my country, but I would be wary of my language lest I incited anti-Muslim violence or blatant political mistreatment of them. Schlaffy has lived so long in insulation and mental padding that she can’t consider the meanin of her words.
This vile, despicable old crone is still oozing hatred, I see…her noxious views are terribly ironic, considering her own son is gay…”family values” indeed…
Phyllis Schafly…. isn’t she a woman ensconced in Alzheimers???? Why do you listen to a person with Alzheimers? My old man had it (and yeah I listened to him, but I NEVER acted on any of his rantings)
Get real folks, PS is…. beside the point, she just doesn’t know it yet.
“Love thy neighbor” says absolutely nothing about who qualifies as your neighbor.
And what about her own son? Does he not deserve her love and respect?
One thing I noted as I read the Old Testament is how often the practices of the tribe of Benjamin were mentioned, usually in connection with the tribes acceptance of homosexuality. Now keep in mind that the Benjamites are the only surviving tribe of the nation of Israel next to the Judeans.
The pooftah tribe stuck by the Judeans after the other 10 seceded and claimed the name of Israel for themselves.
And let us not forget what !st Kings had to say about the relationship between David (a Judean) and Jonathan (a Benjamite), that David loved Jonathan as a man loves his wife.
All that anti homosexual crap in Leviticus? Wouldn’t surprise me if it wasn’t plugged into the original document sometime after Israel and Judea split, and very possibly sometime after the Jews returned from Babylon.
InCali and JoeCarter, I believe that Doug’s remarks in the original post can be fairly interpreted as calling Schlafly out for (deserved) obloquy and scorn, precisely because Doug disagrees with her and finds (as I do) Schlafly’s moral position on the issue to be appalling. The fact that one has a Constitutional right to be a bigot does not render bigotry praiseworthy.
As to the reference to Christianity, Ms. Schlafly has never hidden her claim that Roman Catholicism is the foundation for her morality and is one of the foundations of her political activism. Religious beliefs derived from specific religions not shared by all Americans, and spurious claims about purported infringements upon freedom of religion, are frequently cited as justifications for opposing same-sex marriage rights. Religious organizations have provided the organizational, financial, and staffing backbones of most efforts to oppose same-sex marriage rights in both legislative, initiative, and litigated efforts to address the right (e.g., who provided most of the support for Prop. 8 in California — The LDS church and a coalition of smaller churches around the state).
Come on, we’re talking about Phyllis Schafly here. Making idiotic statements isn’t exactly a new hobby for her.
“Sexual harassment on the job is not a problem for virtuous women”
“Sex education classes are like in-home sales parties for abortions”
“It’s very healthy for a young girl to be deterred from promiscuity by fear of contracting a painful, incurable disease, or cervical cancer, or sterility, or the likelihood of giving birth to a dead, blind, or brain-damage (sic) baby”
“It is long overdue for parents to realize they have the right and duty to protect our children against the intolerant evolutionists.”
“People think that child-support enforcement benefits children, but it doesn’t.”
Just a few examples of the idiocy this hag has spouted over the years. One word, Nutcase.
“Whether you like it or not, Christ most certainly disapproved of such behavior.”
Well, I’m glad we’ve got someone here who speaks for Christ on this matter… because he said nothing about it himself.
Thanks for clearing that up. While we’re at it, can we get a statement from Jesus on the Wikileaks matter?