Texans Plan to Moon the Christian Family Values Rally
We just saw how crazy it is out there in Texas, where they're getting ready to vote to abolish marriage. But, you know, they're not all "like that." To tell you the truth, both my parents were Texans, and I'm wearing a pair of cowboy boots right now -- got my first pair when I was four. My brother once told me that when he went to Texas (we grew up in Arizona) he felt more "at home" than in any other place. I was in San Antonio a couple of years ago, and yeah, I'd say so, too.
Texans tend to be real sensible, in a sort of crazy way.
But they have their nuts, like everybody else. Said nuts are planning to hold a "Christian Family Values" rally in Austin in a couple of weeks. It's all about this gay-marriage issue, you know, they want to support this amendment to the state constitution that will define marriage as a thing between a woman and a man (and then make it illegal). We know how this is, we don't have to look far to see people who share those kinds of beliefs right here in our own little Maryland county.
When they say "Christian Family Values," let's be clear what they mean: the Ku Klux Klan.
But those fine folks in Austin know how to deal with these Christian Family Values-type people. The web site Full Moon Over the Klan is the focus of some organizing to moon the Klan when they come to town:
That's the way to do it. Don't take them seriously, don't let them irritate you, just show them what you think of their "Christian Family Values."
I love that.
Texans tend to be real sensible, in a sort of crazy way.
But they have their nuts, like everybody else. Said nuts are planning to hold a "Christian Family Values" rally in Austin in a couple of weeks. It's all about this gay-marriage issue, you know, they want to support this amendment to the state constitution that will define marriage as a thing between a woman and a man (and then make it illegal). We know how this is, we don't have to look far to see people who share those kinds of beliefs right here in our own little Maryland county.
When they say "Christian Family Values," let's be clear what they mean: the Ku Klux Klan.
But those fine folks in Austin know how to deal with these Christian Family Values-type people. The web site Full Moon Over the Klan is the focus of some organizing to moon the Klan when they come to town:
You are invited to join in
the 2nd* Austin Mooning of the Klan
Saturday, November 5th
Austin City Hall (or nearby depending on where the police make us stand)
from 1-3PM
*The first mooning of the Klan was organized by Texas musician Steve Fromholz in 1993 and proved to be an effective means of making counter protesters smile and Klanspeople cringe.
That's the way to do it. Don't take them seriously, don't let them irritate you, just show them what you think of their "Christian Family Values."
I love that.
posted by JimK at 2:19 PM
27 Comments:
That's a very interesting/amusing idea.
Silly Ku Klux Klan-esque Christians, marriage is for everyone.
Alex said...marriage is for everyone
The way Texas lawmakers have it....marriage is for no one...:)
The KKK is not just nuts they're racist and evil. Normal, sensible people in Texas, however, oppose the redefinition of marriage into a farce and, I suspect, they represent a majority in the Lone star state.
KKK ideas are un-Christian, Alex. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Eyes
KKK ideas are un-Christian and so are people who espouse bigotry and hatred for gay people.
Anon, you're wrong, of course. Go to the klan's web site, www.kkk.com. "Bringing a Message of Hope and Deliverance to White Christian America! A Message of Love NOT Hate!" The next page has a big link to buy "Christian Books and Things."
Even that "love not hate" thing, we hear that in Montgomery County, too.
JimK
Jim, you're wrong, of course. They live in a part of the country where everyone pretends to be a Christian.
If you think racism is supported by Christian doctrine show us where. This is similar to those who promote sexual immorality and pretend to be Christians.
"KKK ideas are un-Christian and so are people who espouse bigotry and hatred for gay people."
And you believe that any concept of sexual morality is bigoted and hateful to those who would be considered sexually immoral under that concept, right?
If someone likes to have sex with different, anonymous people every night, would I be hateful and bigoted believing that to be wrong? How is it different?
Anon said They live in a part of the country where everyone pretends to be a Christian.
Funny, the Southern Poverty Law Center SPLCenter reports three active Klan groups in the state of Maaryland: Imperial Klans of America Knights of the Ku Klux Klan , Southern White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, and the World Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. So what part of the world were you saying they were in?
JimK
Oh, another illogical statement but thinking having many anon sexual partners is immoral is not wrong(to me) nor bigoted. I think having sex with a married person(if you are not the spouse) is wrong The difference is I am not saying that adultery is a characteristic of any group- and you are saying anon sex is. That is where bigotry comes in- when you characterize a whole group of people.
"Oh, another illogical statement but thinking having many anon sexual partners is immoral is not wrong(to me) nor bigoted. I think having sex with a married person(if you are not the spouse) is wrong The difference is I am not saying that adultery is a characteristic of any group- and you are saying anon sex is. That is where bigotry comes in- when you characterize a whole group of people."
I've said it is very common and much more common among ho-sex'ls than he'sex'ls. Never said each and every ho-sex'l is identical. Are you saying that is incorrect?
Why do you think AIDS surfaced in the gay community and has persisted in the gay community at much higher rates than non-drug using heterosexuals? Facts are not bigotry.
Also, Andrea, couldn't make out the grammar of your first sentence. Do you think having anonymous sex is immoral?
"Anon said They live in a part of the country where everyone pretends to be a Christian.
Funny, the Southern Poverty Law Center SPLCenter reports three active Klan groups in the state of Maaryland: Imperial Klans of America Knights of the Ku Klux Klan , Southern White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, and the World Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. So what part of the world were you saying they were in?"
So what? We were talking about Texas. Obviously, there are nuts everywhere. Look at your TTF Board.
I said the racism of the KKK is not Christian doctrine and you disagreed. Do I mischaracterize your statements or not?
This is not a hard question at all. Being Christian is central to the Klan's identity, half of the groups have have the word in their name. They stand for the same things that you do, Anon, for instance, they would say that gays are trying to "re-define marriage," they would say that gays are promiscuous and other stereotypical things that you say here ... it's weird that you seem to be in total agreement with them, and you claim to be a Christian, as they do, but you want to argue that they aren't real Christians, but you are.
Why, they even believe in going around Anonymously, berating people and saying bigoted things. The resemblance is extraordinary.
You must admit, there's a whole bunch of incongruity there.
JimK
Yes, to me, personally, anonymous sex is wrong- it seems degrading and of course, dangerous. I think the idea that young adults go out for the evening with the idea of "hooking up"- which I understand is basically anonymous sex- is a sad and terrible thing. I worry that television(and we do not have cable) is showing more and more horrible violence(why a TV movie about the BTK murderer?) in TV series because people get bored if it doesn't get more vicious and disgusting- and compete- I suppose -with cable. Is it so shocking that I think some things are wrong? The kind of people
you think we are exists in your fevered imagination- not in our lives.
Are you calling me a "nut"? Hmmm...
Let's see -- what rationale was used by the Confederacy to support slavery? And to support Jim Crow? Was it evolution? Secular humanism? No, it was Christianity.
Even many of the Nazis attended church. And while I do not believe that their racial hatred was Christian, their anti-Semitism most definitely was rooted in two millenia of Christianity.
There are many more examples. But as I am not a bigot, I will not say all Christians are racists, or anti-Semites, or homophobes. It is far from true, particularly in America, and especially when you consider the silent majority of Christians who don't espouse your beliefs.
Bottom line, Jesus was a liberal (particularly when it came to sexual issues). And Hitler was a conservative.
As for anonymous sex (by which I mean sex with multiple strangers, not with OUR Anonymous :-)), I find it degrading and enervating as well.
While HIV was initially primarily transmitted in the US via promiscuous gay male sex, that has not been the case anywhere else.
And I will also say that the problems of promiscuity are, and always have been, primarily problems of male sexuality, not female sexuality. It has nothing to do with orientation. There was even an article in today's paper exposing the millions of descendants of the great Khan. Guy stuff again.
And, really, you CRC blokes, if it's promiscuity you so despise, then why not help change the gay male culture and encourage them to become monogamous? And encourage straight men to remain monogamous while you're at it.
"This is not a hard question at all. Being Christian is central to the Klan's identity, half of the groups have have the word in their name. They stand for the same things that you do, Anon, for instance, they would say that gays are trying to "re-define marriage," they would say that gays are promiscuous and other stereotypical things that you say here ... it's weird that you seem to be in total agreement with them, and you claim to be a Christian, as they do, but you want to argue that they aren't real Christians, but you are.
Why, they even believe in going around Anonymously, berating people and saying bigoted things. The resemblance is extraordinary.
You must admit, there's a whole bunch of incongruity there."
Thanks, Jim, for voicing your views. I think this is a clear demonstration of why you don't represent the community and don't belong on the CAC.
"Yes, to me, personally, anonymous sex is wrong- it seems degrading and of course, dangerous. I think the idea that young adults go out for the evening with the idea of "hooking up"- which I understand is basically anonymous sex- is a sad and terrible thing. I worry that television(and we do not have cable) is showing more and more horrible violence(why a TV movie about the BTK murderer?) in TV series because people get bored if it doesn't get more vicious and disgusting- and compete- I suppose -with cable. Is it so shocking that I think some things are wrong? The kind of people
you think we are exists in your fevered imagination- not in our lives."
Didn't know you were gay, Andrea. Anyway, for whatever it's worth, I think male and female homosexuality are completely different phenomena with different causes and manifestations. The stuff I was saying applied to male homosexuals.
I think this is a clear demonstration of why you don't represent the community and don't belong on the CAC.
Anon, I was thinking you would take that opportunity to distinguish your views from the Klan's, but all you saw was an opening for a cheap shot.
JimK
"Are you calling me a "nut"? Hmmm..."
Oh, don't take it personal. Just throwing the term uses so indiscriminately back at him.
"Let's see -- what rationale was used by the Confederacy to support slavery?"
Slavery has existed in other places as well. There's usually an attempt to use the prevailing belief system to justify it. Abolitionists were religiously motivated too. Slaves were Christians.
"And to support Jim Crow?"
I think it was racism. Not found in the Bible.
"Was it evolution? Secular humanism? No, it was Christianity.
Even many of the Nazis attended church."
Again, trying to manipulate the masses. People in the allied countries went to church, too. Hitler's ideas came from blending Nietsche (God is dead) and Darwin (survival of the fittest). Darwin inspired quite a bit of racism.
"And while I do not believe that their racial hatred was Christian, their anti-Semitism most definitely was rooted in two millenia of Christianity."
Well, I'm a protestant so, to me, Christianity is the Bible not Church tradition, especially not Catholic church tradition. I would say that the worst of what you speak is the Inquisition which I think you woud agree is not anything Jesus would have condoned.
"There are many more examples. But as I am not a bigot, I will not say all Christians are racists, or anti-Semites, or homophobes."
Well, you would be accurate. The preacher at my church this week, for example, examined Acts 8:26-40, where God led Philip to the desert to share the gospel with an Ethiopian eunuch. The preacher said this was a story indicates that we shouldn't display moral prejudice.
"It is far from true, particularly in America, and especially when you consider the silent majority of Christians who don't espouse your beliefs."
Well, I would only speak for the group of which I am part, evangelicals. We're not very silent. Even at my own church, we agree on essentials of the faith, but outside of that, you can find someone to disagree with practically anything you say.
"Bottom line, Jesus was a liberal (particularly when it came to sexual issues)."
Well, you're right and wrong. It's true that he easily forgave sexual sin. Indeed, the only sin which he seems to find almost unforgivable was hypocrisy.
He also associated with people who others would feel were outcasts because of their sexual sins (like prostitutes.)
Yet, he never crossed a line where he said sexual immorality was not sin. Even in the famous story, John 8:1-11, (which was the topic of our Sunday evening service this week, coincidentally)where Jesus refused to condemn a woman who committed adultery, he still concluded,"go, and sin no more"
"And Hitler was a conservative."
Maybe of some kind. He wasn't a Christian but a Darwinist.
"As for anonymous sex (by which I mean sex with multiple strangers, not with OUR Anonymous :-)), I find it degrading and enervating as well.
While HIV was initially primarily transmitted in the US via promiscuous gay male sex, that has not been the case anywhere else."
Thanks for acknowledging a fact. No wonder I think you should be president of Teach The Facts.
"And I will also say that the problems of promiscuity are, and always have been, primarily problems of male sexuality, not female sexuality."
I think you might be right.
"It has nothing to do with orientation. There was even an article in today's paper exposing the millions of descendants of the great Khan. Guy stuff again."
I think you're wrong about that but it's getting late.
"And, really, you CRC blokes, if it's promiscuity you so despise, then why not help change the gay male culture and encourage them to become monogamous? And encourage straight men to remain monogamous while you're at"
It's not the only thing.
"Anon, I was thinking you would take that opportunity to distinguish your views from the Klan's, but all you saw was an opening for a cheap shot."
I'm completely serious, Jim.
This organization has a mission to promote tolerance and fact-based education.
Their current goals are:
1. have students taught that homosexuality is not a choice
2. have students taught that homosexuality is not a disease
3. save student lives by teaching them how to protect themselves while being sexually active
Each of these goals contradicts the group's mission statement. Over the next three nights, we will examine how. First up, this evening, teaching students that homosexuality is not a choice.
Here's a pretty good, short introducttion to the Christian Identity movement, which includes the Klan. Their antisemitic, racist, and anti-gay views flow out of a twisted interpretation of Christianity: ReligiousTolerance.org. There are lots of churches who do not preach this stuff -- Jesus himself taught just the opposite. But to pretend that rightwing bigotry and radical Christianity are not linked in America is ignore an obvious truth. Where would the rightwing movement be now without Jerry Falwell, Pat Roberson, James Dobson?
The Christianity that teaches "turn the other cheek," that teaches "judge not lest ye be judged," that believes that Jesus loves "all the little children of the world," still lives in America. Both the extreme rightwing wraps itself in a Christian cloak. And people have a problem, it seems to me, at least a PR problem, when their views and the Klan's become indistinguishable except for the isolated question of race. And the Anonymity of the hoods.
Jim
Well, Anon, firstly I still don't know who you are.
Secondly, we were able to agree on a number of things. That's a good start.
>Slavery has existed in other places as well. There's usually an attempt to use the prevailing belief system to justify it. Abolitionists were religiously motivated too. Slaves were Christians.<
Yes, very true. Even Jews had slaves. My point is that Christians use their Bible, very selectively, to justify whatever they feel like justifying. In the 1850s it was slavery. In the 1950s it was Jim Crow. In the 1960s the liberal churches used it to support integration. And today the right-wing evnagelicals are using it to condemn gay persons.
"And to support Jim Crow?"
>I think it was racism. Not found in the Bible.<
Actually, no, it was racism with a Biblical rationalization. And the Bible is full of genocidal hatreds and tribalism.
"Was it evolution? Secular humanism? No, it was Christianity.
Even many of the Nazis attended church."
>Again, trying to manipulate the masses. People in the allied countries went to church, too. Hitler's ideas came from blending Nietsche (God is dead) and Darwin (survival of the fittest). Darwin inspired quite a bit of racism.<
And what is Karl Rove, Joseph Goebbels' star pupil, trying to do other than manipulate the masses? Please. Yes, leaders manipulate the masses. Decent people try to bring out the best in their constituents, the malevolent try to bring out the worst.
Much of Nazism had a racialist basis, true, but it would never have taken root without 2000 years of church anti-Semitism. And, yes, Darwinism has been grossly misused over the past 150 years. No one would argue with that. It's the same problem -- your religion can be used for good or evil, as can science.
"And while I do not believe that their racial hatred was Christian, their anti-Semitism most definitely was rooted in two millenia of Christianity."
>Well, I'm a protestant so, to me, Christianity is the Bible not Church tradition, especially not Catholic church tradition. I would say that the worst of what you speak is the Inquisition which I think you woud agree is not anything Jesus would have condoned.<
Sorry, that won't work with me. You're a product of 2000 years of Christianity; you didn't spring de novo from Jesus' love. Martin Luther, your spiritual forbear, was a vile anti-Semite. The worst pogroms were caused by the Eastern churches. The Germans were predominantly a Protestant culture, and the Poles Catholic. When it comes to Jew-hatred, there's been little difference. I will admit America is a different situation, but that is true for many reasons, primarily the separation of church and state.
And, of course, Jesus would not have condoned the Inquisition or any other kind of religiously-inspired violence. Including homophobia.
"There are many more examples. But as I am not a bigot, I will not say all Christians are racists, or anti-Semites, or homophobes."
>>Well, you would be accurate. The preacher at my church this week, for example, examined Acts 8:26-40, where God led Philip to the desert to share the gospel with an Ethiopian eunuch. The preacher said this was a story indicates that we shouldn't display moral prejudice.<<
"It is far from true, particularly in America, and especially when you consider the silent majority of Christians who don't espouse your beliefs."
>> Well, I would only speak for the group of which I am part, evangelicals. We're not very silent. Even at my own church, we agree on essentials of the faith, but outside of that, you can find someone to disagree with practically anything you say. <<
And you're entitled to that. I have learned that evangelicals come in many stripes, and it may not even be true that the majority are homophobic. But if that is the case, you need to distinguish yourself from them. It's not hard, but most Christians have a hard time today doing so. And you seem to be having a hard time as well, since you can't acknowledge the KKK is Christian but just not your kind of Christian.
"Bottom line, Jesus was a liberal (particularly when it came to sexual issues)."
>> Well, you're right and wrong. It's true that he easily forgave sexual sin. Indeed, the only sin which he seems to find almost unforgivable was hypocrisy.
He also associated with people who others would feel were outcasts because of their sexual sins (like prostitutes.)
Yet, he never crossed a line where he said sexual immorality was not sin. Even in the famous story, John 8:1-11, (which was the topic of our Sunday evening service this week, coincidentally)where Jesus refused to condemn a woman who committed adultery, he still concluded,"go, and sin no more" <<
Well, what's the point? He wanted people to be their best. He defined it his way; we define it somewhat differently. He asked spouses to split up and join him. Not what we're trying to accomplish in America today. But he didn't condemn and just asked people to be better. I hear little of that from any church today.
And, once again, he said nothing about homosexuality, nor abortion, and certainly nothing in the most remote way about transsexualism. But all that stuff causes many radicals to explode today. Why?
"And Hitler was a conservative."
>> Maybe of some kind. He wasn't a Christian but a Darwinist.<<
Actually, he was, and you can't do any more than say he wasn't your kind of Christian. He took what he wanted from whatever intellectual traditions fit his own twisted mind.
"As for anonymous sex (by which I mean sex with multiple strangers, not with OUR Anonymous :-)), I find it degrading and enervating as well.
While HIV was initially primarily transmitted in the US via promiscuous gay male sex, that has not been the case anywhere else."
>> Thanks for acknowledging a fact. No wonder I think you should be president of Teach The Facts. <<
It's an historical fact. And it was a result of the ghettoization and vilification of an entire community of men who said to hell with society, we're just going to have fun. And they paid dearly for it. Sort of like (male) soldiers' attitudes towards sex through the millenia and the results, wrt STIs, is always the same.
"And I will also say that the problems of promiscuity are, and always have been, primarily problems of male sexuality, not female sexuality."
I think you might be right.
"It has nothing to do with orientation. There was even an article in today's paper exposing the millions of descendants of the great Khan. Guy stuff again."
I think you're wrong about that but it's getting late.
"And, really, you CRC blokes, if it's promiscuity you so despise, then why not help change the gay male culture and encourage them to become monogamous? And encourage straight men to remain monogamous while you're at"
anon
How are male and female homosexuality different- in your mind?
Andrea
how are they alike in your imagination, Andrea?
To some Anon, you said male and female homosexuals are different in your message and now you don't want to explain? not untypical of the anons on this blog. I think gay people are gay by biology/genetics, not by choice. As you know many major medical organizations agree with me-I don't think the AMA or the APA(for instance) are in my imagination.
OK , Andrea, you think the similarity is that both are biologically determined. I promised to address choice tonight but just got back from a dinner and am too tired to address but hopefully will have energy tomorrow at some point. I am summarizing you correctly, though, am I not?
Post a Comment
<< Home