Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Don't Worry Dan, the War's Not... | Seattle Ain't Green »

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Iran Doesn’t Have Any Homosexuals…

posted by on November 13 at 8:34 AM

…left. From the Times of London:

Homosexuals deserve to be executed or tortured and possibly both, an Iranian leader told British MPs during a private meeting at a peace conference, The Times has learnt.

Mohsen Yahyavi is the highest-ranked politician to admit that Iran believes in the death penalty for homosexuality after a spate of reports that gay youths were being hanged…. Britain regularly challenges Iran about its gay hangings, stonings and executions of adulterers and perceived moral criminals, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) papers show.

The latest row involves a woman hanged this June in the town of Gorgan after becoming pregnant by her brother. He was absolved after expressing his remorse.

RSS icon Comments


oh, of course he was absolved... fucking christ. no matter that he probably raped her to begin with.

Posted by JasonC | November 13, 2007 8:49 AM

It's funny how far-right conservatives hate Iran but try so hard to make America to look so much like Iran.

Posted by Packratt | November 13, 2007 9:07 AM

I was pondering the same thing, Packratt.

It's amazing how the fundamentalists of different religions hate each other for believing in the wrong god, but they're certainly in agreement on "moral" issues.

Posted by BallardDan | November 13, 2007 9:19 AM

@2 right on the spot!!

all fascists should meet in iran to see a lovely show of how to treat a moral wrongdoer and the rest of the world should bomb the hell out of all of them.

Posted by girl in spain | November 13, 2007 9:29 AM

Name one American far-right conservative (besides Fred Phelps) who has ever called for gays to be executed.

Posted by Fnarf | November 13, 2007 9:40 AM

Fnarf, that's only because they "love" the gays because the bible says you have to even though you get to hate the sin.

when fascism finally comes out in the daylight in murka (wait till there ain't no more gas), they'll call for camps & killing.

Posted by max solomon | November 13, 2007 10:01 AM


name one far-right conservative stupid enough to say something like that in public.

Open gay bashing in this country generally stops before "execution" is mentioned. Does that mean nobody's for it?

Posted by BallardDan | November 13, 2007 10:04 AM

Name one American far-right conservative who would call for the execution of an incest/rape victim.

Posted by keshmeshi | November 13, 2007 10:32 AM

Why must my fellow liberals make themselves look foolish by suggesting things like an equation between American conservatives and Iranian fanatics? For all their ignorance and lack of mutual respect, conservatives here do not routinely call for the torture and murder of gay people or anyone else that they have moral and political differences with. There is something to be said for democratic values and human rights in the West, despite the sometimes vitriolic disagreements between parties. Don't let your own partisanship blur the lines between very different worldviews and moral stances.

Posted by jack | November 13, 2007 10:43 AM

@9 because they can't take off their blinders for a moment and apply some critical thinking to the comparison. It's nothing more than a sound bite.

Posted by Westside forever | November 13, 2007 11:40 AM

Hey Jack -
I've heard lots of arguments from the pro-life (anti-choice) lobby that women who seek abortions (and the doctors that provide them) should be executed for murder. A lot of women who seek abortions are victims of incest and rape. Not an exact quid pro quo, but it's similar. Of course, these are the same crazies that think it's okay to murder doctors in their homes, in front of their wives. So basically, there are stupidly fanatical people everywhere who want to kill people. It's not just Iran.

Posted by Cecilia Hennessy | November 13, 2007 11:57 AM

Um, that last post was supposed to be addressed to Keshmeshi, not Jack. Sorry.

Posted by Cecilia | November 13, 2007 11:59 AM


I'd be interested to see the statistics that say "a lot of women who seek abortions are victims of incest and rape." Cause from my albeit unresearched perspective, a lot of women get em because they're not ready for kids, got knocked up by their idiot boyfriend, or have parents who would kill them. Maybe incest and rape is a justification for keeping em around but I can't say in good faith it accounts for the majority of them.

Posted by Marty | November 13, 2007 12:27 PM

Well, for one thing, the definition of "a lot" isn't "a majority," Marty, so right there you're not making much sense.

Cecilia's point was that there are plenty social conservatives in the US who think women who get abortions should be executed for murder, even if the child was the result of rape or incest, which is somewhat akin to the example Dan posted from Iran.

Posted by reading comprehension is fun | November 13, 2007 2:29 PM

Come the fuck on. Privately, all these homo hating crypto-fascists want to round up gays and gas them. Iran is exactly the state that cultural conservatives in this country would create, only I'm willing to bet, our rightists would go much further with the brakes off.

Stop deluding yourselves (and I mean those of you who are) into thinking that the far right, or even the fringe of the center right in this country, cares about democracy, human rights, or the lives of minorities. They're just kept in check by a far stronger center. Iran is just what happens when you lose the center and take the brakes off.

Posted by Jay | November 13, 2007 4:59 PM

How do you know this, Jay? "Come the fuck on" is not a terribly convincing argument.

Posted by Matt | November 13, 2007 5:30 PM

Because I've personally known a lot of conservatives who said gays should be killed or interned when they thought they had a sympathetic ear, or even when they didn't. That's admittedly anecdotal. But underlying most of the "mainstream" anti-gay rhetoric is a violent intolerance. Gays are characterized as nothing short than an assault on the moral fabric of the country, an affront to nature itself. A close study of history casts light on the genocidal tendencies underlying this kind of thinking- the only thing that keeps average xenophobes from carrying out Aryan Brotherhood style killings is the rule of law (also see: abortion). And while you can call this all flawed inference, I know crypto-fascism when I see it. The nazis never argued openly that they were going to gas the Jews until they came to power, but their anti-Jewish/anto-gay rhetoric was markedly similar to the anti-gay rhetoric the right in the United States uses.

Look, I'm not literally saying if the far right took power they would dissolve the government or kill the gays, but I can guarantee they'd go as far as Iran. Why would they admit they had a moral scourge operating underground if they effectively shut down all gay visibility in public- do you honestly think they wouldn't legislate against "the gay lifestyle," effectively driving it underground? It's not self restraint that keeps this country from going overboard; it's a government of checks and balances and a reasonable moderate majority. Quasi fascists, nationalists, and other ultraconservative extremists are always just on the outskirts of democracy, ready to exploit any weaknesses (people like Buchanan and Ann Coulture would do quite well in an economic crisis). This is a historically demonstrable truth.

Going back to my anecdotal evidence, everyone I've known who've said moderately racist things in public had no problem using words like "nigger" in private. And every moderate homophobe I've listened to is more extreme in private- in public, gays are simply sinful, in private gays are subhuman degenerates. You take the brakes off, there is little doubt rightists in the country would do everything in their power to remake it, and I'm sorry to tell you, gays don't fit into that master narrative.

Posted by Jay | November 13, 2007 7:11 PM


Your rant just goes to prove my point that liberal extremists are prone to exaggeration and hyperbole when it comes to discussing conservative politics in America. The "ultraconservative extremists" that you pillory here are NOT the equivalent of "social conservatives," publicly or privately--they are a tiny, radical minority that most conservative Americans fear and loathe as much as you do. The tendency of some religious conservatives to talk about gays as "aberrations" or "sinners" misleads you into thinking that they're advocating some kind of pogrom against gays--but that's simply not the case. The language of religion is always extreme and absolute, but that's rarely reflected in most conservatives' practical attitudes or policies. American conservatives are reluctant to embrace social change and fearful of their loss of the "moral majority," but they're also too protective of their own freedoms and civil rights to see any kind of fascistic regime installed. Their own libertarian tendencies forestall that kind of government authority. What's more, they have a large moderate and smaller liberal population to deal with, making compromise a necessary element of even the most conservative agendas. I agree that, "Quasi fascists, nationalists, and other ultraconservative extremists are always just on the outskirts of democracy"--but so far in our history, that's exactly where they've stayed. The nightmare scenario that you outline is largely a product of irrational fears, bordering on paranoia. That's not to say that we shouldn't be alert and wary of such movements--they can have ugly, if temporary and localized, consequences. But this constant accusation of "fascism" against average conservatives in this country is untenable and unproductive.

Posted by jack | November 14, 2007 7:04 AM

i grew up christian and even went to mars hill for a little bit when i was younger. i never once heard anyone say they thought homosexuals should be murdered. i certainly never heard that any woman seeking an abortion should be. in fact, surrounded by ultra-conservatives my entire young life, i can only think of one person who ever said that killing an abortion doctor might be justified. it was during a "philosophical" debate where they were playing devil's advocate.

sure, they want to discriminate. but they don't want to kill. discriminating is bad, but you really need to address the issue correctly.

Posted by infrequent | November 14, 2007 12:00 PM

18: I didn't say they were average conservatives. I made a point of saying that the vast majority of Americans, which would include most people who identify as Republicans, are in the center. I made a point of describing the people I was talking about as ultraconservatives and the far right for a reason. I was never talking about paleo or fiscal conservatives. The people who use specifically anti-gay rhetoric are in many cases closet fascists.

Posted by Jay | November 14, 2007 8:29 PM

And also, I'm not a liberal. I'm a leftist. My beliefs do not generally gel with liberal beliefs on most issues.

Posted by Jay | November 14, 2007 8:30 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).