New Concept of ‘Rights’ in America: If You’re Not Gay, You Don’t Have Any

Posted on Comments

Gosh, it seems like just a few years ago that allegedly serious people were warning about how the “christofascist godbags” of the Religious Right were an existential threat to freedom in America, and if you disagreed with these allegedly serious people, you were just a hateful bigot.

Now? Well, you’re still a hateful bigot, but freedom’s just another word for “nothing left to lose”:

New Mexico’s Supreme Court rules that people must set aside their religion in order to avoid creating the slightest inconvenience for gay people. . . .
No, by all means, let’s use the power of the state to reach as deeply as possible into people’s lives instead of just telling the gay couple to “Look online for ten minutes and find someone else.”

Ace of Spades is not a homophobe, not a hater of any kind. Everybody who knows Ace knows this: Ewoks don’t even have a word for “hate.” And yet we may notice that Ace has had it up to here with the New Normal of Compulsory Approval and Correct Thought:

The New Republic Headline in 20 Point
Font: “He Is Not Bradley Manning.
She Is Chelsea Manning. Deal With It.”

and also . . .

Salon, the Web Magazine for Dumb People:
Why Is the Media Referring to Bradley Manning,
Who is a Man Named Bradley Manning, as a
Man Whose Name Is Bradley Manning?

Do you see what this is really about? If not, let me tell you that this is really about, “We, who are Your Moral Superiors, have authority to dictate your behavior, your words and, indeed, your thoughts.”

The language of “rights” is not about freedom, but rather power. I tried to warn people about this in November 2008, but nobody listened, because Important Smart People (e.g., Nicolle Wallace) were telling Republicans to forget about that “social issues” stuff.

Things that almost no one predicted in 2003, when Justice Kennedy created the “emerging awareness” doctrine out of thin air to justify overturning the 1986 Bowers v. Hardwick decision, are now happening routinely. The truly weird thing is that so few people understand why it’s happening or what it means.

“The military . . . decided this guy was a Solid Citizen posing little-to-no security risk and could and should be trusted with our top secret military and diplomatic communications.”

Yeah, that’s kind of random and coincidental, like a high-school dropout with a background in anime Web sites getting a six-figure top-secret clearance job in an intelligence agency. But if you think this is not random and coincidental, you’re a paranoid kook.

 

113 comments

  2. Unless your a Muslim then your religious rights trump public acommodation apparently in Bubba the fascist sponges mind.

  6. This is the second posting I’ve accidentally undone today — hit the wrong bleeding button and suddenly I’m irreversibly ‘Guest’…

  8. If I provided wedding services, I would tell them I can only do it if they (the homosexual couple) agree in writing with signature that their money spent goes to one or more organizations that goes against their beliefs; like a counseling organization that offers therapy to help people overcome homosexual attractions and/or any pro-family ministry and activist group.

  12. Rights aside, any couple who sues a wedding photographer to force him/her to shoot their wedding deserves the results.

Comments are closed.