Losin' it and losin' it and losin' it well
Published on June 18, 2005 By philomedy In Current Events
Alright, so we know Jerry Falwell, he of the raving lunacy? Good. We know the American Family Association, it of non-spongebob fame? Good. They've both lost it.

Falwell I won't really elaborate on because he's pretty much lost all credibility with me after "Spongebob is gay", but long story short he wants you to boycott Kraft for sponsoring the Gay Games. I'm sure the AFA wants you to do the same, although they aren't being so upfront. But anyways, let me hit y'all with a couple of numbers:

1) $12 million donated in conjunction with Coca-Cola and The Boys and Girls Clubs of American to fund a Youth Health and Wellness Initiative
2) $250,000 donated to food banks around the US and Canada
3)Partnership with Save the Children outlining a four year plan to build schools and donate money to education initiatives in underdeveloped nations.
4)Partnership with the Rainforest Alliance to preserve the environment while still supporting their independent coffee growers.
5)Ongoing association with the American Red Cross (and other organizations) to donate food, money and supplies to disaster areas.
6)The release of a new product whose proceeds will go towards childhood cancer research in association with Alex's Lemonade Stand.
7)ALL, I repeat, ALL IRRELEVANT BECAUSE THEY ALSO SUPPORT THE GAY GAMES.

To quote the esteemed Mr. Falwell "I don't think moral-minded Americans understand the potential power that we wield...I urge everyone to take a stand for decency by participating in this national effort..." and it goes on from there. This from the same man who says gay rights' activists whine about him being stuffed with hate like an overblown turkey, simply because they disagree with him. Of course, he then turns around and whines that everyone who doesn't support him is immoral and indecent, simply for disagreeing with him. Neither is perfect, but I'd rather be hate-filled than immoral and indecent, wouldn't you?

Alright, on to the AFA. They're throwing their fit about the Gay Games organizing parties at clubs for the athletes and participants to attend during the night. They also link to pictures of what goes on in gay night clubs. (As a side note, does it seem ironic to anyone that the AFA links to more images of softcore gay porn than any lewd pop-up ad that I've ever received? Just a thought...) So anyways, after perusing the "offensive" 3 photo spread that the AFA website displays after lots of rather serious looking red capital letters, I've established this: The photographs depict the exact same things that go on in every other night club anywhere. Shirtless men, dry humping, lots of rubbing and grinding...yawn. Go to a straight club. Go on spring break. Watch MTV. (By the way, another side note: the AFA doesn't seem to find lesbian pictures offensive...odd...)

So anyways, to recap: Apparantly the problem is not the gay games, its what goes on at gay night clubs. So, then, forgetting the fact that the same stuff happens at straight clubs and its okay, the problem has now gone from gay's "hoisting their lifestyle" onto people with PDA's to gay people convening in ENCLOSED, OFTEN FLAMBOYANTLY MARKED night clubs that it is everyone's option to avoid. Wow. Why don't we just bury them in underground pits where they won't bother anyone? Or better yet, tall towers. Did anyone see The Man in the Iron Mask?

But as balanced as the AFA is, I suppose we'll soon see their boycott of the Olympic games (which also seeks to foster an active social nightlife for the participants) and the World Cup (for which Germany is actually erecting a "sex village", a town of small huts where prostitutes can stock up on free condoms and food). I eagerly await the AFA's assault on the corporate sponsors of these events, as I doubt premarital simulated sex (homosexual or otherwise) and government sponsored prostitution falls in line with the AFA's "traditional values."





Comments (Page 2)
7 Pages1 2 3 4  Last
on Jun 19, 2005

How is this any different than the last confused rant?


If you don't see how this is different than the last article, you should enroll in a reading comprehension course at your local community college.

-If you are trying to say that boycotts are wrong, then you are starting on the wrong side. The other side of the aisle invented and perfected the process.


Again, let me repeat it: Not about boycotts. Ended with the boycotts the last time. Boycotts are over. Go boycott whatever you want. In your case, feel free to start with me. Please boycott me.

-If you are saying this organization is wrong for using a boycott when other causes you agree with do the same thing, you are a hypocrite.


No. Don't know where you got this one from, but no. I don't think the I said anything about boycott's other than there's one happening. Thanks for assuming though.

-If you are addressing their beliefs about gays, why address the boycott at all?


BECAUSE IT'S HAPPENING! Damn. I mentioned it in passing. What do you want from me? I mention Spongebob out of place, you yell at me for lying...I mention boycotts in context, you yell at me for telling the truth...Just tell me what you want me to say.

Strike, two, imho. Either you aren't making your point about boycotts, or you don't have a point about boycotts.


And finally, the revelation hits him that this article isn't about boycotts.

-If you are addressing their beliefs about gays, why address the boycott at all? Their attitude toward homosexuality is well known. Are you saying you just suddenly learned through this boycott how they felt about gay people?


I'm saying I have a problem with their attitudes toward homosexuality, ok? Clear enough for you?
on Jun 19, 2005
Yep, I think it is just sad that you have to have a strawman to express yourself. This is twice you've ragged on boycotts you disagree with as an excuse to talk about beliefs you disagree with.

Why not just come out of the closet and admit you are intolerant of other people's religious beliefs?



P.S. You have a link to a quote about Falwell saying Spongebob is gay? I can't find one, only sites rants like this one who assume he said it. I realize that he said that about Tinky Winky, but one has to wonder about any purple guy that carries a purse...
on Jun 20, 2005
Yep, I think it is just sad that you have to have a strawman to express yourself. This is twice you've ragged on boycotts you disagree with as an excuse to talk about beliefs you disagree with.


Tell me where I've ragged on boycotts here. I said Jerry Falwell was sponsoring a boycott, and that the AFA probably wouldn't mind one. That's it. I didn't express my opinion on the boycott one way or another. But it's been awhile since you've decided to actually read what I write in an article, anyways.

Why not just come out of the closet and admit you are intolerant of other people's religious beliefs?


Because I'm not. If you want me to come out and say that I'm intolerant of people who are intolerant of gays, fine. I'm intolerant of people who are intolerant of gays. Here, once more so you don't miss it. I AM INTOLERANT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE INTOLERANT OF GAYS. If the reason a person is intolerant of gays happens to be religious, than I guess I am intolerant of ONE of said person's religious beliefs. Just like if someone's religious belief happens to be flying planes into buildings or blowing themselves up in large public places. I'm rather intolerant of those too. (Disclaimer: No matter how you try to twist this, I am in no way, shape or form equating being against gays to terrorism. I'm just saying that both attitudes have proponents who wish to link these things to religion, and that I am intolerant of them both.)

P.S. You have a link to a quote about Falwell saying Spongebob is gay? I can't find one, only sites rants like this one who assume he said it. I realize that he said that about Tinky Winky, but one has to wonder about any purple guy that carries a purse...


I'm gonna have to refer you to Gideon on that one. I had originally attributed the Spongebob quote to someone else, but he told me it had been Falwell.

on Jun 20, 2005
no, you misunderstood, philo...lol (but that's ok). What I was saying is that your article would have been funnier if the topic were Falwell rather than Dobson because Falwell HAD said those kind of ridiculous things (implicitly referring to the tinky winky thing). Sorry about the confusion! (BAD GID!)
on Jun 20, 2005
If gays want us heteros to stay out of their bedrooms, they need to keep their bedrooms out of our faces.


Bingo, bingo, bingo.

As for the Madison Avenue marketing of heterosexuality, the poster has a point as well. And yes, I find it equally appalling.
on Jun 20, 2005
Have you ever been to Cherry Grove or Fire Island Pines, both on Fire Island, NY? Both these communities are predominantly gay oriented. Though I am not gay, I particularly enjoy going to Cherry Grove. I do understand this feeling of community that some here perceive as "segregation". Cherry Grove is a place where gays can go and not be inhibited by their sexuality, holding hands, being flamboyant, or whatever. Hell, they can even do the "clothing optional" thing on the beach. They play gay volley ball, have gay parties, gay bars, gay fire department, etc.


And see, while to some people that may sound like a tourist brochure, to me that enumerates a place where I'd really not rather be. I think sexual behaviour belongs in the bedroom, not on the city square, irrespective of the sexual preferences of the participants.

This irritates me for the same reason "Christian music" irritates me: would you rather be known as the preeminent GAY athlete on the planet, or the preeminent athlete on the planet? To add the modifier "gay" in this instance implies an inferiority and an inability to compete on an equal basis.
on Jun 22, 2005
no, you misunderstood, philo...lol (but that's ok). What I was saying is that your article would have been funnier if the topic were Falwell rather than Dobson because Falwell HAD said those kind of ridiculous things (implicitly referring to the tinky winky thing). Sorry about the confusion! (BAD GID!)


My fault entirely...does anyone actually know who said the thing about Spongebob?

If gays want us heteros to stay out of their bedrooms, they need to keep their bedrooms out of our faces.


I don't see how holding a sporting event equates with putting a bedroom in your face, but alright. If you read the article, the problem that Falwell and the AFA have isn't with the games, its with the social functions that are organized in gay night clubs for the athletes. So it sounds to me like they're trying to keep their sexuality confined to a place where no one has to see it if they don't want to...whats the issue?

To add the modifier "gay" in this instance implies an inferiority and an inability to compete on an equal basis.


There gay games do not exist because of an inferiority complex, but because of the public stigma about homosexuality, which is the whole point of the article, since it is this stigma that Falwell and the AFA refuse to let die. Saying that this is about implied inferiority is like saying the Negro Leagues irritate you because of the implied inferiority they feel towards Major League Baseball.
on Jun 22, 2005
"My fault entirely...does anyone actually know who said the thing about Spongebob?"


No one did. No one ever said the character was gay to my knowledge, I had a feeling you had ignored it. The tinky winky thing is true, and I think it is pretty silly. I don't doubt that the creators try slip in a lot of 'tolerance' stuff, but I think it just slides by the kids and is never seen.

I posted a link to my article on the subject on your other blog. The issue was that the "We are Family" foundation had co-opted a bunch of popular cartoon characters to make a video about "tolerance", that was going to be shipped to 50,000 schools and shown.

IN the AFA's perspective, and mine, the flavor of tolerance espoused was really "acceptance". The ideals of 'we are family' and affiliated organizations go beyond tolerance and made openly differing with moral differences as "intolerance". That is attacking the religious beliefs of a child in a venue where those ideals can't be defended.

I can't remember it all and I have to run and do some tech work for a guy. The details are on that article I linked.
on Jun 22, 2005
I would add that you still have both the AFA and Falwell listed on your blogs as saying spongebob is gay. I hope you don't espouse the 'Lying for Truth' thing, though I can't see any other reason to leave such up.
on Jun 22, 2005
I would add that you still have both the AFA and Falwell listed on your blogs as saying spongebob is gay. I hope you don't espouse the 'Lying for Truth' thing, though I can't see any other reason to leave such up.


The reason is called laziness my friend. But I shall oblige.
on Jun 22, 2005
No worries.
on Jun 22, 2005
If gays want us heteros to stay out of their bedrooms, they need to keep their bedrooms out of our faces.


It's that "Don't ask, don't tell" policy. As long as gays keep their sexuality in the closet, do not let heteros know they are gay, then heteros can go around saying how tolerant they are. What freakin' hogwash. It's nothing but intolerant bullcrap. However, let us not forget that heteros can flaunt their sexuality ad nauseum, in sporting events, advertisments, in parks, out in the open, etc., but that's just hunky dory. What freakin' hypocrisy. Given the source of the above quote, I am not at all surprised.
on Jun 23, 2005
"However, let us not forget that heteros can flaunt their sexuality ad nauseum, in sporting events, advertisments, in parks, out in the open, etc., but that's just hunky dory. What freakin' hypocrisy. Given the source of the above quote, I am not at all surprised."


Don't overlook the fact that the people who oppose this kind of thing for homosexuals would almost always oppose HETEROsexual displays of sexuality like you describe at sports event, etc. They weren't angry about Janet Jackson's boob because they thought she was a lesbian.
on Jun 24, 2005
My fault entirely...does anyone actually know who said the thing about Spongebob?


Actually, nobody. The GAY community first presented Spongebob as a gay icon.
on Jun 24, 2005
Saying that this is about implied inferiority is like saying the Negro Leagues irritate you because of the implied inferiority they feel towards Major League Baseball.


The Negro leagues existed because African Americans weren't ALLOWED in major league baseball. I defy you to show me ONE homosexual athlete in this era who has been excluded from their sport because of their sexuality. There's NOT one.
7 Pages1 2 3 4  Last