pageok
pageok
pageok
"Homosexuality [Even Bigger Threat] than Terrorists, or Islam":

A remarkable speech by Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern (transcript, which seems accurate, included together with the audio). Oh, and here's another particularly amusing item:

It's a matter of fact, studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades.

Uh-huh, I'd like to see those studies. Rep. Kern acknowledges the comments are hers, "and stands by her comments."

By the way, the first item I saw about this pointed to this YouTube video, which combines the audio of Rep. Kern's speech with still images critical of her position. Maybe it's just me, but the video struck me as quite ineffective. Letting Rep. Kern's words speak for themselves (with perhaps some emphasis of the most striking parts) seems to me to be much better.

Per Son:
My favorite thing is her reaction, which is so common when people are criticized. "I can say what I want, I have freedom of speech!"

Last time I checked the First Amendment does not have a bar on publically disagreeing with another's views or seeking retractions or apologies. Raising the 1st Amendment when people are criticizing your views is the biggest deflection ever (unless you are being prosecuted for your views).
3.12.2008 2:24pm
Ben P (mail):
ok, seriously?

It's Oklahoma, I'm from just across the border from there. (NW Arkansas)

If I publicized half the things our local politicians say we'd look like loons.

Just as an example, there was a case of leprosy in a hospital here not too long ago, (in a resident of Guam or something) a local political candidate used the occasion to go on a rant about how illegal immigrants bringing diseases from third would countries would destroy America.
3.12.2008 2:28pm
Anderson (mail):
What does "totally embracing homosexuality" mean? I suppose she means everyone's gay &thus no more kids.

An example would be nice. No, Sodom &Gomorrah don't count, Rep. Kerr.

Of course, the biggest danger to our nation is Islamic homosexual terrorists ... who I guess would be self-hating enough to blow themselves up along with the rest of us.
3.12.2008 2:32pm
Anderson (mail):
"Kerr" s/b "Kern." No relation to Orin, I'm sure.
3.12.2008 2:33pm
Ex parte McCardle:
Right, Per Son, it's all of a piece with the absurd ongoing campaign of religious-right hyper-Christians to portray themselves as the last persecuted minority.

The other part of her reaction was telling as well--she invoked "shame" on whoever surreptitiously recorded her rant and posted it to YouTube (BTW, I agree with Eugene that it would have been better just with her words). To me, that person, whoever it is, should be commended for exposing her as the Yahoo, zealot and backwoods gomer that she is.
3.12.2008 2:33pm
Ex parte McCardle:
Anderson, those are the Islamosodomites. Let's call things what they are, shall we?
3.12.2008 2:34pm
ithaqua (mail):
"It's a matter of fact, studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades."

Counterexample: Athens.

Really, now that I think about it, was there *ever* a society that was actually destroyed by homosexuality, as the good Representative seems to be claiming? Anywhere? Bueller? Bueller?
3.12.2008 2:36pm
Ex parte McCardle:
I clicked on Eugene's first link above ("Ace on Tech"). I love the transcription of "the death nail for the US." Can't make this stuff up!
3.12.2008 2:38pm
DJR:
List of places "controlled" by gays:

Eureka Springs
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Kensington Maryland
Vermont
Oregon
West Palm Beach, Florida

I like how the way they are taking control is (the horror!) "winning elections."
3.12.2008 2:50pm
Ben P (mail):
I'd hardly call Eureka Springs the next sodom and gomorrah unless one measures sodom by the number of Antique Shops and Sidewalk cafes per capita.

Otherwise Eureka Springs is a very pleasant small mountain town in Northwest Arkansas.
3.12.2008 2:58pm
Fub:
From TFA:
You know, gays are infiltrating city capitals. Did you know, Eureka Springs, anybody been there? Have you heard that the city castle of Eureka Springs is now controlled by gays?
Great Gawd! Eureka Springs, population 2,278, favorite city of Carrie Nation and Gerald L. K. Smith!

And they're storming the gates of the City Castle! Elise Quigley must be spinning in her grave.

The horror! The horror!
3.12.2008 3:02pm
ruralcounsel (mail) (www):
I suppose it is a good sign we can laugh at this rampant example of the failure of our educational system to overcome systemic religious bias. Hopefully that means it is so rare that we don't really feel threatened by it.

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." Robert Heinlein
3.12.2008 3:03pm
Randy R. (mail):
Too bad we have only an audio, and no photos with it. I'm willing to bet dollars to flowers that she needs a complete makeover by a homosexual.

Why is it that the worst dressed are always the first to complain about gays?
3.12.2008 3:12pm
Serendipity:
Wow, guess I've been missing out. Definitely going to make plans to go to Gay Pride in Eureka Springs this year.
3.12.2008 3:24pm
Wayne Jarvis:
She is definitely confused. Pittsburgh is not controlled by gays. Pittsburgh has been controlled by flesh eating zombies since the seventies.
3.12.2008 3:26pm
Cornellian (mail):
Too bad we have only an audio, and no photos with it. I'm willing to bet dollars to flowers that she needs a complete makeover by a homosexual.

I've seen a picture of her and you're right on target.
3.12.2008 3:28pm
hattio1:
Randy R. says;

Why is it that the worst dressed are always the first to complain about gays?

Jealousy? Because those are the people who keep pointing out the fact that we (marking myself as one of the rare worst-dressed who isn't homophobic) are poorly dressed.
3.12.2008 3:34pm
Oren:
Why is it that the worst dressed are always the first to complain about gays?
Same reason that most pro-lifers are people you wouldn't want to f*** to begin with (apologies to George Carlin).
3.12.2008 3:41pm
WHOI Jacket:
I dunno. It IS hard to get parking in Provincetown after April.
3.12.2008 3:52pm
Smallholder (mail) (www):
When I went through my officer basic course, about forty of my classmates were West Point grads who had been taught that Greek Civilization collapsed because homosexuality envervated their fighting spirit and left them open to conquest. Of course, the same teacher taught them that the Jews control the media.

This was in 1993.

To quote Dave Barry, I'm not making this up.
3.12.2008 4:15pm
Dave Hardy (mail) (www):
Really, now that I think about it, was there *ever* a society that was actually destroyed by homosexuality, as the good Representative seems to be claiming? Anywhere? Bueller? Bueller?

The Persian Empire. Destroyed at the Battle of Issus in 333 BC because the Greeks could run faster with their skirts up than the Persians could with their pants down.
3.12.2008 4:16pm
M.E.Butler (mail):
I was hoping the transcriber at Ace on Tech would be some slack-jawed hillbilly in full agreement with the speaker. How else do you get "death nail"? Or "city castle"? But, no, it's some right-thinking anti-gay-basher who can't tell a nail from a knell. And it wasn't even a full-on southern drawl that turned knell into nail. It was sloppy hearing, and sloppier writing, by the guy at Ace on Tech.
3.12.2008 4:28pm
Early Childhood Education = Gay Indoctrination.:
As the lady said:


You know why they're trying to get early childhood education? They want to get our young children into the government schools so they can indoctrinate them.


I always knew there was something fishy about Head Start.
3.12.2008 4:37pm
Anderson (mail):
I always knew there was something fishy about Head Start.
3.12.2008 4:44pm
LM (mail):

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." Robert Heinlein

If this hasn't retired the Maxims Observed in the Breach Award by now, it certainly ought to.
3.12.2008 4:48pm
Clayton E. Cramer (mail) (www):
This is an amazingly ignorant statement. Classical civilization was fairly tolerant of homosexuality, although it was generally not sex between equals. But I would hardly say that they collapsed because of it. By the time the Western Roman Empire fell, Christianity had been dominant for many decades.

Professor Rodney Stark's The Rise of Christianity: How the Obscure, Marginal Jesus Movement Became the Dominant Religious Force in the Western World in a Few Centuries (Harper San Francisco, 1997) makes the argument that classical civilization's tolerance of abortion, infanticide, early marriage (including sex with prepubescent girls), homosexuality, and non-procreative heterosexual sex, played a significant role in why Christianity ended up in control. Christians reproduced; non-Christians, for the most part, did not. There's more to his argument than that, but even that doesn't claim that Rome fell because of homosexuality.
3.12.2008 4:56pm
Caliban Darklock (www):
It seems to me that we don't often read between the lines on these things and see what the real problem is.

"It has deadly consequences for those people involved in it. It has more suicides. They're more discouraged. There's more illness. Their lifespans are shorter."

All of these things are true... but in my experience - and I'm no expert, but I do enjoy the company of gay men - all of these things are a direct consequence, not of homosexuality, but of cultural intolerance.

They're committing suicide because their families are disowning them. They're discouraged because their friends hate them. There's more illness because doctors dismiss them. And their lifespans are shorter because people occasionally decide it would be jolly good fun to go out and beat them.

Not one of these conditions is a direct result of homosexuality. Each and every problem cited is caused exclusively by the cultural attitude we hold toward homosexuality. If it's these things that make homosexuality unacceptable, then it isn't the gay community who need to change. It's the rest of us.
3.12.2008 5:16pm
Hoosier:
"Too bad we have only an audio, and no photos with it. I'm willing to bet dollars to flowers that she needs a complete makeover by a homosexual."

Randy R.--Thanks. I needed that laugh today.
3.12.2008 5:25pm
Hoosier:
As for societies that totally embrace homosexuality being short-lived, let's grant that she may have a point. I mean, go look at a map of today's world. You won't find Homoslavia: It only survived for, like, a couple decades.
3.12.2008 5:27pm
Anderson (mail):
She can't even get Clayton Cramer on board. Give it up, lady.
3.12.2008 5:55pm
Cornellian (mail):
She is definitely confused. Pittsburgh is not controlled by gays. Pittsburgh has been controlled by flesh eating zombies since the seventies.

But the zombies built a nice airport - you have to give them credit for that.
3.12.2008 6:10pm
gattsuru (mail) (www):
Each and every problem cited is caused exclusively by the cultural attitude we hold toward homosexuality.


I don't think that's as fundamentally true as you're asserting. For some attributes (suicide), it's a really logical statement, but other ones aren't quite that clear.

That really shows up when you start comparing self-identified heterosexual men who have sex with men (yes, it's a contradiction in terms, it's still a recognized group). They do show noticeably differently on studies of suicide, longevity, and disease, sometimes in interesting ways (higher rate of HIV infection under one survey, which surprised the researchers). Self-identified bisexual males are even again different.

There are some neural differences in there. I've got no doubt that societal pressures make up a significant portion of things, but it's rather difficult to truthfully claim that they're the only differences.

That doesn't make it a successful argument for much other than a few behavioral stereotypes, though, since the numbers for self-identified homosexual men tend to stay pretty stable for everything but HIV transmission regardless of whether they're sexually active or not (risk taking behavior does increase with the number of sexual partners gay or straight).
3.12.2008 6:15pm
tjvm:
Another highlight:

"Not everybody's lifestyle is equal. Just like not all religions are equal."
3.12.2008 6:42pm
Anderson (mail):
self-identified heterosexual men who have sex with men (yes, it's a contradiction in terms, it's still a recognized group)

Oh, good, another excuse to link to this Onion op-ed.
3.12.2008 6:43pm
LM (mail):

Oh, good, another excuse to link to this Onion op-ed.

Always a fun read, excuse or not.
3.12.2008 8:41pm
Randy R. (mail):
"When I went through my officer basic course, about forty of my classmates were West Point grads who had been taught that Greek Civilization collapsed because homosexuality envervated their fighting spirit and left them open to conquest."

Yeah, and that brilliant brain trust must never had heard of Alexander the Great, who, incidently, didn't destroy too many civilizations, but certainly conquered a few. Perhaps if Rommy were gay, we would be out of Iraq by now....
3.12.2008 9:37pm
Peter Shalen:
As a matter of logic, it is a tautology that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality---in the sense that everyone was exclusively homosexual---can have survived more than a few decades. Athens doesn't count, of course, because most people were married, including those who rejoiced in homosexual activity outside marriage. In fact, there may not be any examples of societies that have totally embraced homosexuality, in which case the statement is vacuously true.
3.12.2008 11:41pm
Rod Blaine (mail):
> most pro-lifers are people you wouldn't want to f*** to begin with (apologies to George Carlin)."

Carlin had better stop it - he's going blind.
3.12.2008 11:51pm
Rod Blaine (mail):
Weimar Germany is a frequent Exhibit A for "pro-homosexual societies don't survive long", but running that line tends to clash with another right-wing trope, that a lot of top Nazis (eg, Rohm) were gay. (For a left-wing appraisal, see Johann Hari's "Queer as Volk"). Running the theme that "moral relativism leads to fascism" faces the problem that actual real-life fascists thought the Weimar Republic was far too morally relativist. (Of course, for an absolutist, supporting one's own set of moral absolutes in no way commits you to supporting every other moral absolutist's set of moral absolutes).
3.13.2008 12:04am
postmodernprimate (mail):
SAN FRANCISCO—Spokespersons for the National Gay &Lesbian Recruitment Task Force announced Monday that more than 288,000 straights have been converted to homosexuality since Jan. 1, 1998, putting the group well on pace to reach its goal of 350,000 conversions by the end of the year.

Damn that shifty homosexual lobby!
3.13.2008 1:35am
postmodernprimate (mail):
Oops, here's the link...

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28970
3.13.2008 1:37am
Bad (mail) (www):
It's just you. The simple message of "you don't speak for me" is very effective and properly measured: instead of trying to scapegoat her religion, or her party, the message is simply that it's all on her.
3.13.2008 5:34am
Kern is Right:
Representative Kern is right, no matter if the PC crowd throws a tantrum over it.

It strikes me as amazing at how "tolerant" the PC crowd is when it comes to a Religious Conservative expressing their views on certain issues.

"Tolerance" apparently does not include "Tolerance" for dissenting opinions.
3.13.2008 4:14pm
Per Son:
Kern:

You don't get it, do you? Why should people who disagree with Kern stay mum. Don't they have a right to criticize others?

Last time I checked the Religious Right is not too tolerant of those who disagree with them.

No one should open their mouth if they feel that they should be immune to criticism. Why should those who believe in tolerence be tolerant of the intolorent? Why should they sit down and not criticize hate like that?

Its one big 1st Amendment party. One person uses speech, and the others use speech to show disagreement.
3.13.2008 4:52pm
Kern is Right:
Why should those who believe in tolerence be tolerant of the intolorent? Why should they sit down and not criticize hate like that?

Because that is a self refuting proposition. Moral Relativist PC "Tolerance" is based on the principle that all views are equally valid and that there is no such thing as "Objective Truth". (Live and Let Live, What is Truth for you may not be Truth for Me, Ect...)

If this proposition is correct, and there is no "Objective Truth" than the "Tolerance" advocate automatically gives up the right to criticize the "Intolerant". For the views of the "Intolerant" as just as much "Truth" as the "Truth" of the "Tolerance Advocate".

But of course, no PC "Tolerance" advocate lives this way. Instead, they want to be free to be "Intolerant of the Intolerant". Hence their position is by definition SELF-REFUTING, as this is an endorsement of THEIR version of Truth, which they want to force on everyone.
3.13.2008 5:03pm
Per Son:
Kern:

Who said liberals (or PC advocates) were 100% moral relativists? I don't know of any who are, while I know many libertarians who are moral relativists ("unless you have anti-libertarian views").

In other words, you might want to use some nails and concrete to keep your house of cards from collapsing any further.

Yawn. Give me a real challenge.
3.13.2008 5:56pm
pluribus:
Kern is Right:
Man, you are confused. You have a constitutional right to express your opinion, and I have a constitutional right to disagree with you. In other words, we all have the constitutional right to disagree. That isn't intolerance. It's free speech. That isn't too hard for you, is it?
3.13.2008 6:08pm
Per Son:
Pluribus, Kern describes a fictitious stereotype of PCers - and then knocks them down. Big tough one.

I'll try it on for size. I'll pull a "Kern is Right" Ok - conservatives don't like feminists. Feminists advocate for women. Therefore, conservatives don't like women, and hate women's rights because there is only one truth, and the truth will set you free, and John Birch kicks ass!!!!!
3.13.2008 6:21pm
Kern is Right:

Last time I checked the Religious Right is not too tolerant of those who disagree with them.


Those in the "Religious Right" don't pretend to be "tolerant". In fact, tolerance of evil is expressly renounced and rejected.

Nice try Sonny Boy.
3.13.2008 6:49pm
Kern is Right:
Who said liberals (or PC advocates) were 100% moral relativists?

Have you actually read any "Tolerance" propaganda from PC advocates?

I don't know of any who are, while I know many libertarians who are moral relativists ("unless you have anti-libertarian views").

Then you haven't been looking enough.

In other words, you might want to use some nails and concrete to keep your house of cards from collapsing any further.

Yawn. Give me a real challenge.


Oh boy, another "internet star" who thinks they can "win" a conversation on a forum.

Seek help.
3.13.2008 6:51pm
Kern is Right:

Man, you are confused. You have a constitutional right to express your opinion, and I have a constitutional right to disagree with you. In other words, we all have the constitutional right to disagree. That isn't intolerance. It's free speech. That isn't too hard for you, is it?


Nice red herring. I am not talking about Free Speech or Constitutional Rights, but rather, the self refuting nature of the PC "Tolerance" advocates on this issue.
3.13.2008 6:52pm
Kern is Right:
Pluribus, Kern describes a fictitious stereotype of PCers - and then knocks them down. Big tough one.

Are you going to seriously suggest that you've never heard a PC advocate utter the phrase "what is true for you is not true for me".

I'll try it on for size. I'll pull a "Kern is Right" Ok - conservatives don't like feminists. Feminists advocate for women. Therefore, conservatives don't like women, and hate women's rights because there is only one truth, and the truth will set you free, and John Birch kicks ass!!!!!

Really nice try, but a really miserable fail.
3.13.2008 6:59pm
Randy R. (mail):
Okay, Kern, please tell us why you think gays are a bigger threat to the US than terrorists or Islam.

" In fact, tolerance of evil is expressly renounced and rejected."

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm evil. My only goal is to tear down American society, because, well, my 60 hour a week job running a company isn't enough for me. Good thing we have people like Kern and her supporters to tell warn America of the great scourge of Oscar Wilde and Ted Haggard!
3.13.2008 7:04pm