This blog printed on 100% recycled electrons.
I can live with the fundagelical wingnuts doing their Limbaugh/Beck karaoke in the car and at their little meetings. If it makes you feel good to mouth the rhetoric fed to you by talk radio and World Net Daily and hear it echoing in your own head, then go ahead, knock yourselves out.
But when that karaoke goes public and starts spreading lies about good people, the wingnuts need a whoopin'... or at least a reasonable refutation.
That's what Curtis Price does as he responds to the wingnuttery of self-styled family-values crusader David Astin of Hermosa, whose "Family Matters PAC in South Dakota" has mailed out a big pink postcard attacking Equality SD as an extremist group pushing an agenda of deviance and oppression. The accusations are pretty much the same tired text Astin used to attack District 33 state senate candidate and Democrat Dennis Finch in the 2008 election.
On the latest FMPACinSD campaign finance report, Astin lists a Gmail address of "inquisitiveminds." Gee, maybe if Astin really had an inquisitive mind, he'd have been able to cite for reporter Kevin Woster some examples back in 2008 of how Finch supports the kinds of laws Astin shouts about on his lying postcards. Astin could only substantiate his wild accusations with the (Woster's words) "impression he got from reading the Equality South Dakota website."
Really, Mr. Astin, I hope you've stopped doing impressions and can come back with some actual research and examples on your current smear campaign.
FMPACinSD had a whopping $203 on hand last month. (When you have less money than the Lake County Dems, you're really wimpy.) FMPACinSD has reported no donations this year. I'd like to cite that as evidence that the usual right-wing "family values" distractions aren't playing this year in the face of the economy, education, and other issues that really are the government's business.
But FMPACinSD's lack of donations is more an indication that they aren't really a PAC. They are hardly a they. They are David Astin, spewing his insecure and hateful publications on his own dime. Since the PAC's inception in 2006, Astin has received $452.19 in unitemized contributions versus the $3475 of his own money poured into securing his own intolerant worldview with deceitful rhetoric.
By the way, pastor's son Astin doesn't appear to have a website for his PAC yet... but another more tolerant and tolerable SD Family Matters already exists... and appears to be doing more to protect real families than Astin's propaganda.
---------------------
Maybe related: political karaoke progenitor Rush Limbaugh is supporting family values by getting married for the fourth time. Of course, the Lord will likely strike down this relationship as he did Limbaugh's previous three marriages due to the presence of notorious homosexual Sir Elton John, whom Limbaugh paid $1 million to sing at the reception.
---------------------
Update 2010.06.09: Casey Murschel in District 12 says she got whacked by what sounds like the Astin PAC attack. Yuck!
Hide Fido (by Andy Horowitz)
-
I coined Noem as the ‘Palin of South Dakota’ when she ran for the state
house, seems I nailed it; America: meet your new Secretary of Homeland
Security. Sh...
4 hours ago
In that oh, so special liberal dictionary that has no connection to reality but is invaluable in making immoral people feel good about themselves, under "lying" in the Liberal Dictionary we find this definition: "Lying: telling the truth about those who do wrong and don't want people to know."
ReplyDeleteOf course, in the liberal encyclopedia of life, conservatives are supposed to keep quiet about liberal immoral acts and their deceptions, so of course any conservative who brings these things to light is the one who had done evil.
Homosexual activist groups (and EqSD is most assuredly one)are indeed intent on forcing employers to accept and legitimize homosexual behavior, want to silence the inconvenient truth being taught by pastors, and want to force South Dakotans (as they have done in other states) to accept the insane concept of homosexual "marriage."
Like virtually all liberals, however, EqSD feels compelled to lie about exactly what they intend...perhaps because they know that average South Dakotans will never got for that societal rot.
Surprise me someday, Cory, but telling the truth about something...or if you really want to amaze me, stand for something positive for a change.
It would be SO refreshing.
Bob,
ReplyDeleteDo you beleive that individuals, not the government should have control over their own lives?
How do two homosexual people getting married have a direct affect on your individual rights?
Absolutely I believe individuals should have control of their own lives. And they do.
ReplyDeleteHowever, homosexuals seek government and societal acceptance and sanction for their unnatural, immoral and unhealthy sexual behavior; they are going far beyond the simple freedom to behave homosexually in the privacy of their own homes.
Government and society is under no obligation whatsoever to bless such illegitimate behavior, and actually does have an obligation to children and the moral fiber of our civilization not to sanction the counterfeiting of the most important institution in the world: marriage.
Remind me what's unnatural, immoral, and unhealthy about two people being faithful to each other, living with each other, and raising a family? And remind me how the government and businesses make sure that heterosexual employees who receive family benefits don't engage in any unnatural, immoral, and unhealthy sex acts when they're not at work?
ReplyDeleteI know some homosexuals who have honored the idea of commitment much more consistently than thrice-divorced Rush Limbaugh. If we want to base employment benefits and civil rights protection on some full-scale morality test rather than on the rather narrow question of our preferred sexual partners, then we'd all be in trouble for our human failings. Seems easier for the government just to declare that every citizen has the same civil rights, regardless of the identity of the person they choose to sleep with at night. And it seems businesses do better to give employees the same benefits and respect regardless of who they sleep with, as long as the employees aren't sleeping with anyone (or sleeping, period!) on the job.
And the moral fiber of civilization will carry on, much as it has throughout the sordid history of our species.
Say, it's hard to hear through Bob's shouting, but I just heard a key word in his grandstanding: counterfeiting. How does one counterfeit marriage?
ReplyDeleteWebster's tells me counterfeit means "make in imitation of something else with intent to deceive." I'm sure Bob will be able to pile on some spiteful rhetoric about how those durned homina-homina-sexuals are trying to deceive us and themselves and God... but what is the content of the deceit? What are they trying to trick us into believing? That they love each other? That they are committed to each other just like heterosexuals are? That marriage is whatever we want it to be? That Eve was a man?
Think of counterfeiting in its usual context: currency. Counterfeiting money is a serious problem: it cheats other citizens, complicates commerce as we go through more elaborate procedures to verify the authenticity of every big bill we receive, and, if not properly checked, could undermine confidence and inflate prices.
But plug your nose and try on Bob's worldview: where is the comparable impact of "counterfeiting" a marriage by saying to two gays or two lesbians, "O.K., you're married, here's your family insurance policy." Does that "counterfeit" homosexual union make anyone look at Bob's marriage, or Mark's, or mine any differently? More importantly, does that "counterfeit" make me look at my marriage any differently? (I know, Bob, I'm a godless pagan, so my view of my marriage is counterfeit and irrelevant, anyway, but roll with me a moment longer.)
There's the interesting part: in all these discussions about homosexuals getting married and Rush Limbaugh getting divorced and re-married (and I really do hope he sticks with this one), it never occurs to me to worry about the impact the actions and arguable "counterfeiting" of those other lovers might have on my marriage. It never occurs to me that what two or three or twenty other people do in their bed is going to have any impact on my commitment to ending each day in the same bed with the same person... not to mention my commitment to all the many more significant parts of my commitment to my wife.
Currency derives its value from the confidence of all players in the government that issues the currency. My marriage derives its value much more internally, from the confidence and commitment my wife and I have in and to each other. If you could hook an EKG up to our marriage to measure its strength, you would not have seen the needle budge when Iowa overturned its same-sex marriage ban or when Ted Haggard revealed he cheated on his wife with a gay prostitute.
My marriage needs no external validation. It needs no affirmation from government-sanctioned discrimination against my fellow citizens. It won't be harmed by anything David Astin or Equality SD do. What's your problem, Bob?
Bob,
ReplyDeleteYou dodged my second question:
How do two homosexual people getting married have a direct affect on your individual rights?
I'm pretty sure I've explained this to you before, but since we can never know when the light may come on in a person's head, I'll give it another try. After all, the truth never changes.
ReplyDeleteIf you've bothered to read the Bible in either Old or New Testaments, you would know that homosexual behavior is immoral; it is a perversion of God's design for human sexuality which is between a man and a woman in marriage.
If you've bothered to read the wealth of information from the CDC, various state health departments around the country, the New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, the Justice Department, the Journal of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, the National Health and Social Life Survey, the Archives of General Psychiatry, Department of Health statisics, or any of a host of other information sources, you would know that homosexuals have vastly elevated health risks including AIDS, hepatitis, syphilis, gonorrhea, herpes, HPV, anal cancer, substance abuse, anxiety, depression, suicide, domestic violence and more. It's no wonder that even homosexual filmmaker Simon Fanshawe likened homosexual sex to a "sewer;" it is riven with disease and health hazards.
If you've ever been exposed to any biology information (or simply looked at the sex organs of both men and women), you would realize that male and female sex organs were naturally designed to work together; no other combination is natural, legitimate, rational, logical, or functional. If you think male-to-male or female-to-female hookups are any of the things I just mentioned, try building a bathroom with all male or all female hookups. Somehow I'm pretty sure even you are not that insane (about household plumbing, anyway).
While Rush Limbaugh has indeed made a mockery of the sanctity of marriage, homosexuals have done far more so. The illegitimate attempt at sexual union between homosexuals makes a mockery of the union of marriage, for starters. But what's more, monogamy is very rare among homosexuals. Study after study after study has found that homosexuals average hundreds of sexual partners, and that even most "committed" homosexuals experience infidelity within the first 5 years, and by that time most have adopted provision for outside sexual gratification with other partners. Several studies within the last year or two have found that even most homosexual couples who describe themselfes as "monogamous" have had several sex partners outside their "committed" relationship within the past year.
Of course, if you've bothered to read things things, found them detrimental to your fantasy-version of reality and rejected them, then you might be deep within the delusion that no such evidence exists. But the rest of us live in the real world.
It takes a man and a woman to produce a family. Two men or two women are incapable of creating one. Introducing a child into a homoseuxal home deliberately robs a child of either a mother or a father--something any rational person would otherwise condemn.
Every person has the same civil rights based on their innate physical characteristics (e.g. skin color, age, sex, etc.). But not all behaviors are equal, especially immoral ones. People who choose to live a life that is overtly immoral probably will not fit in well in a Christian ministry, a Christian business, or a business that wants to portray a moral, family-friendly atmosphere. People who insist on openly displaying immoral behavior that is not in keeping with the beliefs of a business owner should not be forced on that business owner. That is immoral and un-American.
As always, you can choose to ignore reality, and I strongly suspect you will, but you cannot say that you have not been educated or warned.
Mark, I answered your question, but apparently you weren't astute enough to pick up on it.
ReplyDeleteI answered it in a number of different ways, but perhaps the most clear and easy for you to understand would be illustrated by asking you this question:
How does someone counterfeiting $20 bills affect you (and society as a whole)?
Bob, I'm still waiting for the example of how any of the perversion, depravity, and disease in your standard anti-gay debate brief undermines my marriage. Or yours. Or Mark's. Or anyone else's.
ReplyDeleteCory, you have overwhelming proved yet again that you don't care in the slightest to accept reality, to do what is right, look out for the interests of families and children, or to contribute to a healthy society.
ReplyDeleteVery, very sad indeed.
I've met my responsibility to refute your destructive lies, and I've met my responsibility to warn you from your embrace of evil. I now shake the dust of Madville from my feet until the next time you attempt to deceive people.
Here is a culture that has existed long before Bob's universe was even created:
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winkte
Oh and Bob, this is for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finger_(gesture)
Because these folks are so extreme in their beliefs, they probably do more harm than good to their own cause, and be thankful they aren't your basis of self judgment. How their intolerance influences other people (and their own children) is the sad thing. The movie Prayers for Bobby tells that story: True account of Mary Griffith, gay rights crusader, whose teenage son committed suicide due to her religious intolerance.
ReplyDeleteBob,
ReplyDeleteNo, you did not answer my question. You just ranted on without answering.
You would be a heck of a politician. Considering by your lack of either understanding, or refusing to answer the question, you show that facts and logic are your greatest fear.
Fear, that the truth, which you claim to be the beholder of, actually makes you look like a boob.
You spout about how we need the government out of our lives, but yet when it furthers YOUR agenda, you support government stepping in. Pure hypocracy at its finest Mr. Ellis.
Thanks for the laughs today, its been fun.
Cory,
Bring Sibby back please. Bob is boring again.