Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on BattleCryBabies

1

I've heard 219348571984571billion christian conservatives talk about how much it sucks to be gay, that there's depression, unhappiness, etc etc etc, and "it's a hardship." What pisses me off is that they don't seem to get the fact that it wouldn't be anymore depressing or anymore of a hardship than being straight if not for the rampant homophobia that these pitying conservatives generate. "Aw, we feel so bad for them. Nevermind the fact that we're the reason they have such a rough time in the hate society we've encouraged." Asshats.

Posted by Ann | March 9, 2007 12:55 PM
2

Haha, nicely done with the Laci Peterson reference.

Posted by Aislinn | March 9, 2007 12:58 PM
3

Why can't they just be like Tim Hardaway? At least his biggoted rant didn't insult my intelligence.

Posted by BWA | March 9, 2007 1:01 PM
4

Amen, Ann!

ASS!
HATS!

Posted by monkey | March 9, 2007 1:04 PM
5

Love.it.

P.S. Jesus Camp is excellent.

Posted by anon | March 9, 2007 1:08 PM
6

Yes, but Dan, if it comes up, it will be a *sinful* dawn. And that's what important, knowing which category things belong in, not whether or not the categories themselves make sense.

My money is on San Francisco showing them "another way."

Posted by MvB | March 9, 2007 1:19 PM
7

So, are they working to take away the right to marriage for liars?

Posted by Fnarf | March 9, 2007 1:21 PM
8

You people are missing the point! Being around homosexuals makes them feel...well...uncomfortable!! Sort of like when they get down on their knees in front of their pastor to praise Jesus!! That's the whole point of going to San Francisco for their rally!!

[/Jesus' General]

Posted by Tlazolteotl | March 9, 2007 1:32 PM
9

Please don't let this rally be taking BART when I get off work. Ugh.

Posted by Dougsf | March 9, 2007 1:51 PM
10

They really should plan this for the Folsom Street Fair. The closeted kids can develop their leather fetishes early.

Posted by Gitai | March 9, 2007 1:52 PM
11

You could oppose cancer or oppose anti-gay bigotry even though tomorrow, sure as the sun will come up, there will be people with cancer and people who are anti-gay bigots.

I'd drop that tack and stick to the immorality of telling other people whom to love and wherm (wherm? to where? whence?) to stick their dick.

Posted by elenchos | March 9, 2007 2:01 PM
12

Ah, those hazy crazy days of youth. Nazi youth, that is.

Posted by johnnie | March 9, 2007 2:03 PM
13

Maybe those Ass-hats can practice their "BattleCry" from BlowBuddies, just around the corner from the ballpark. They can go and convert some of the sinners there. Or vice versa.

Posted by junior | March 9, 2007 2:35 PM
14

Because there's always an excuse for a protest:

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/03/09/18374843.php

SF will protest the BattleCry babies

Posted by Dee in SF | March 9, 2007 4:02 PM
15

Judeo Christian types are all idiots.


Christians don't want teenagers to have sex. Meanwhile Rabbi's diddle little boys and are protected by special Jewish "community courts".


See this New York magazine article for details;
http://nymag.com/news/features/17010/


We all know Christians are slime, how about more postings about the Rabbi perverts out there?

Posted by Religion Sucks | March 9, 2007 4:57 PM
16

Well many Christians only do anal so they can still be all virgin and what not, and a guy banging a girl in the ass is like only a step of two from full on gayness.

Posted by Giffy | March 9, 2007 6:13 PM
17

20,000 evangelicals crowding into San Francisco this weekend? I'm betting the gay bars are going to be packed tonight! I wonder how many of their attendees will be Left Behind when it's time to go home.

Posted by dantc | March 9, 2007 7:00 PM
18

God is Love and Understanding,accepting people for who they are; Judge not lest ye be judged and treat others as you would want to be treated......Except Queers; God hates them(unless they`re child molesting priests.They`re not really gay so God still loves them so it`s ok to give them your money

Posted by pyrofly70 | March 9, 2007 9:17 PM
19

Yeah, I agree with you that there are going to be a lot of ecstatic closeted youths this weekend (A completely unexpected result of their leaders attempt to convert gays to straightdom) So this visit is probably going to end up being very positive for many of the kids.

I met my first gay friends in the bay area when I came out. (away from my Michigan parents influence)

Posted by lawrence clark | March 9, 2007 10:46 PM
20

Oh Dan, please tell me it's not true, you judge these kids!!! What if I told you I was a huge fan and I think you are smart and fair and that I admire you tremendously and given half the chance would buy you all the beverages of your choice for just a few moments to engage you in real one on one conversation. What if I also told you that I think their ideas are not completely off base would you want me to stop reading your column would you want me to stop being your fan? It's so easy for the so called liberals to bash these kids and act all high and mighty with their tolerance of "alternative" lifestyles and "acceptance" of individual choice, and while I can see why you should be justified in feeling that way. After all a lot of these people have been and continue to be human garbage. Why is it ok for you to be so unloving, why is it ok for you to be so judgmental. I know you are mostly neutral but your disdain is evident. These folks are clearly misguided but they are not hateful,and yet most of these comments are. I'll never understand the duplicitous nature with which the so called open minded people behave when they perceive a vague threat to their chosen lifestyle. Guess what folks, if the idea of creation is in fact true, which has yet to be conclusively proven or disproved, then we are all in the same boat, one no better than the other. Which means these criers out to shut their mouths, and you progressives ought to show the attitude you so regularly demand be shown to you with your snarky comments.

Posted by Skeezer | March 10, 2007 1:38 AM
21

Oh noes! Skeezer pulled the reverse-tolerance card! What shall we do? WHAT SHALL WE DO?

Laugh louder, I hope.

Honey, when we start passing laws that limit the civil rights (just the basic stuff, like marriage, of course) of the BattleCry folks, come on back and see if that card plays better.

Also, if you're such a fan of Dan Savage I'd like to know why you'd think he gave a fuck about your "what if?" scenarious.

Posted by dantc | March 10, 2007 6:45 AM
22

Dantc, you're right I was a lil over the top with the gushing love, I doubt Savage would even read my drivel.I like Dan, but I feel like his tone lately is becoming more desperate when he should be more the voice of reason I imagined him to be. My point is, it's so easy to hate people and spit vitrol and boy that really seems to be helping Dan and his partner gain the right to be married.

Besides they do have laws restricting the battle criers marriage as far I know they have to go to at least a 3rd cousin or something.

My point isn't that their right or wrong I myself am totally conflicted about it, I'm hetero but I think Dan ought to be able to enjoy all the same rights I do. I agree it's wrong that he and anyone else who identifies alternatively gets the "shaft" so to speak. You say "Laugh louder I hope" how about think harder instead. How about not give into this insulated group think mentality cuz you can put your head in the sand all you want but het's vs. Mo's is a lopsided battle at this point. As someone on the fence I don't see where the attitude shown here is any different than what the more vile of the believers espouse. I think Dan would agree as long as people like me see you two sides as being no differently then demands for equality will simply be drowned out by all the oceans of "he said she said" and "honey" that's never going to get your goals, whatever they may be, accomplished!

Posted by Skeezer | March 10, 2007 10:29 AM
23

And furthermore, Dantc, there is no such thing as a "reverse tolerance" card. There's tolerance or intolerance, your racist or your not. When people use inflammatory terms like that on people like me who support causes like Dan's you simply create an atmosphere where I feel like you don't want my tolerance and would prefer if I spent my energy supporting the other side. Is that in fact the case? Just let me know now if you'd prefer we all be polarized, or is there room for two different ideas at the table as long as we show equal respect?

Posted by Skeezer | March 10, 2007 10:49 AM
24

#20
being gay is not an alternative life style like you could choose to be gay at some point and leave your main ungay lifestyle. It is part of life in general part of a bigger picture. it is not a choice of who you are but an understanding. Not over there, or outside but part of life as a whole. You do not choose to go have an alternate life you just realize you need to live life with a broader understanding more to the fullest, unblinkered. You are born gay and eventually understand who you are and get on with life. Not an alternative life. You do not have a different life force powering you it is the same as everyone else's. I don't feel like I am in an alternative life I try not to feel outside of everything like many people would want me to feel, like for example Christians and for that matter some defining gay culture.
If any of those kids come to some understanding about themselves based upon going to San Francisco they will not realize an "alternate" they will just realize that life is much bigger than what they have been led do believe from continuous brain washing from infancy.
They will just end up with a broader life's view but it depends on how you define Alternative I guess. Usually alternative can mean not as good or outside the main trend with emphasis on the main trend being more acceptable by some.
Personally I do not believe in alternative as an "over there or opposing" choice much like "alternative music" lets say. it is just a catch phrase to promote segregation or sell an idea. I listen to lots of different music none is alternative to me it is all music and I listen to what I want depending on my mood and have a broader understanding of music because I treat it all the same. I live life as life and do not segregated the life I live and call it alternative.

Posted by -B- | March 10, 2007 11:21 AM
25

And furthermore, Dantc, there is no such thing as a "reverse tolerance" card.

Which is exactly what a person writing from a position of privilege would state. Whether you realize it or not, you have it and it comes screaming through in your text. I'm certain you believe yourself to be a very well-intentioned individual, but you're ignorant.

Posted by dantc | March 10, 2007 11:38 AM
26

Also, when I have equal rights, I'll show equal respect. In your black and white worldview, surely that's a concept easy enough to understand.

Posted by dantc | March 10, 2007 11:41 AM
27

#24

You're right I didn't mean "alternatively" to sound as if I was trying to endorse one over the other. In my mind when I pictured the sentence I imagined air quotes around the word but in my haste to write I forgot to include them. All the same I think it is indicative of my attitude in that I do see a us vs them mentality there, but only in a political/societal sense. I just find it hard sometimes to see where my perspective fits in. I do genuinely agree with you about how sexuality fits into one's life like an extension of body function rather than the clothes you choose to put on that body. I also happen to think that the bible does have validity. Some people may think I'm "ignorant" but I thought the point of dialog was to not make me think what you think or vice versa. I thought we were trying to establish a respectful way to share one another's views without having to lead to verbal attacks which invariably lead to more escalated attacks. I will say this and tell me if I'm wrong, I will listen to you because of the respect you've shown me in your thoughtful comment.

If Homosexual people adopt a stance of attacking the "Christian right" and their lifestyle won't it only result in a harder push back from the James Dobson's of the world thus making it harder if not at the least longer until they can enjoy the equality they deserve?

Posted by Skeezer | March 11, 2007 10:06 AM
28

Skeezer, I do think you're trying to learn, and that's good. You won't get many props for that on the internet, but I'll give 'em to you.


I will try to explain the expectation of tolerance as best I understand it. Progressives exprect tolerance of various sexualities, genders, lifestyles, religions, races, ethnicities, etc. This should include intolerant Christians, but since intolerant Christians make a lot of progressives mad, those individual progressives don't want to tolerate those Christians.


One way to explain this is, we ask you be tolerant of what people ARE, not necessarily what they CHOOSE. Since being gay is not a choice, but being anti-gay it, we can be intolerant of anti-gays.


Also, we want people to live more freely and be themselves. While intolerant Christians should be included in this, they are also the opposition to this belief. Both inclusion and opposition are mutually exclusive, therefore we cannot tolerate their intolerance, even if it seems we "should."


There is a paradox: "Intollerance is intollerable." I do try to be as accepting of Christianity as I can, even though I don't understand it, but it is difficult when they preach something so anathema to my beliefs, and so harmful and hateful toward people I love.


Or, to be childish, when you demand we tolerate them, we could respond, "Them first!"

Posted by exelizabeth | March 12, 2007 1:10 PM
29

Skeezer, I do think you're trying to learn, and that's good. You won't get many props for that on the internet, but I'll give 'em to you.


I will try to explain the expectation of tolerance as best I understand it. Progressives exprect tolerance of various sexualities, genders, lifestyles, religions, races, ethnicities, etc. This should include intolerant Christians, but since intolerant Christians make a lot of progressives mad, those individual progressives don't want to tolerate those Christians.


One way to explain this is, we ask you be tolerant of what people ARE, not necessarily what they CHOOSE. Since being gay is not a choice, but being anti-gay it, we can be intolerant of anti-gays.


Also, we want people to live more freely and be themselves. While intolerant Christians should be included in this, they are also the opposition to this belief. Both inclusion and opposition are mutually exclusive, therefore we cannot tolerate their intolerance, even if it seems we "should."


There is a paradox: "Intollerance is intollerable." I do try to be as accepting of Christianity as I can, even though I don't understand it, but it is difficult when they preach something so anathema to my beliefs, and so harmful and hateful toward people I love.


Or, to be childish, when you demand we tolerate them, we could respond, "Them first!"

Posted by exelizabeth | March 12, 2007 1:10 PM
30

Hi Jim. You letter i received. Thanks! Photos is GREAT!!!!

Posted by Slim | March 20, 2007 8:24 AM
31

Hi Jim. You letter i received. Thanks! Photos is GREAT!!!!

Posted by Slim | March 20, 2007 8:24 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).