mike adams: nothing gay about it - a thoughtful critique

Mike Adams is an ignorant, bigoted fuckwit.

There, now that that's out of my system...

Mr. Adams, writer for Townhall.com, has excreted some slop he's called "Nothing Gay About It" in which he displays a phenomenal level of dumbassedry. Normally, I'd let it slide because, hey, it's fucking townhall.com. If the internet were the crust of the earth, townhall.com would be a rich vein of shit coursing through it, poisoning everything it touched. But I'm in dire need of a chew toy to work out some of my frustration on, so why the fuck not?

First, go read Adams' post, if you can manage it without your eyes melting out of their sockets and running down your face.

Done? Good. Let's get this show on the road.

There are a couple of terms I need to stop using in my columns. One of those terms is “liberal” - most of the self-described liberals I write about in my columns are not tolerant enough to be called liberals. The other term is “gay” - most of the self-described gays I write about in my columns are not happy enough to be called gays. This is especially true of those who also call themselves “gay activists.”

 One point the stupider conservatives seem to be fond of  belaboring is that liberals are being "intolerant" by criticizing them, which is a betrayal of the liberal value of tolerance. Take note, Adams; being "tolerant" doesn't mean you don't ever criticize someone's opinion. What it does mean is fostering understanding and equality between people, and working against the forces of bigotry and oppression that oppose that goal.

In short, being tolerant doesn't require you to tolerate intolerance. Asshole.

Oh, and ha ha. You're so fucking funny. The gays aren't gay? He he, ho ho, ha ha. You're a goddamn riot. Maybe if us queers didn't live in a world where the cultural stigma (thanks largely in part to fuckers like yourself) was so great that three out of four queer teenagers have attempted suicide, we might be a bit more jolly. Maybe if gay couples weren't being stripped of the rights and privileges afforded to their heterosexual counterparts, we might smile a tad more. I mean, Jesus fucking Christ. Are you that stupid, Mike?

The active aggression of gay activists is on full display each time they lobby for so-called gay marriage. These are the same people who argue that marriage is a form of patriarchal oppression, which benefits men more than women – despite the fact that this “patriarchal” institution shields women from violent crimes including rape. Feminists who claim to be anti-rape and anti-marriage simply suffer from severe intellectual hernia – in addition to the emotional weakness that causes them to rely upon feminism in the first place.

Careful, Mike. Your ignorance is showing. I've never heard anyone, radical feminist or not, argue that all marriage is a tool of patriarchal oppression. Maybe if you'd bother to pay attention to your critics instead of making snide remarks, you'd actually grasp that what they're criticizing is your own narrow interpretation of what marriage consists of.

And where's your evidence that marriage shields women from rape? It's not like wedding rings come with a +3 shield of anti-penetration or something. And are you forgetting the historical masses of women trapped in abusive marriages that had no means of escape because traditionalists like you stigmatized divorce to the point that it was pretty much unthinkable?

Oh, and feminism is a result of emotional weakness? Got anything to back that up with? Or are you just talking out your ass like usual?

The common thread between opposition to heterosexual marriage and support of gay marriage is not a love of gays. It is a hatred of marriage rooted in a rebellion against God and all that He has ordained. But those who simply acquiesce on the issue of gay marriage are different. They are not engaged in active rebellion against God. They just lack the faith to believe that God will be there for them when they are subjected to personal attacks by decidedly un-gay activists seeking to destroy faithful Christians who stand in their way.

Sweet merciful fuck. How has someone this stupid managed to avoid drowning in the shower?

Look, Mike. Marriage is not a product your god or your religion. Marriage has existed in societies thousands of years older than the book you hold in such high regard. Pair bonding isn't even unique to humans, so unless you're going to claim that biblegod gave marriage to the dolphins, you need to shut the hell up. People who support gay marriage (myself included) don't do it out of some sense of rebellion, they do it because they think that gay people are human fucking beings, and deserve the rights and privileges thereof. I know I'm not doing it to be rebellious towards god because I don't think there's a fucking god to being with.

But there can be no indifference or acquiescence on this issue because same sex marriage hurts everyone. Some examples of the widespread harm that would follow in the wake of government-backed same-sex marriage follow:

Oh, I'm on the edge of my seat. Please, tell us how two men or two women getting married will hurt anyone!

1. Income taxes will be increased to make up for the marriage tax benefits given to homosexual couples. We provide financial benefits to married couples because they produce and raise children. Why would we want to provide similar benefits to homosexual couples?

Except that we provide tax benefits to married couples that don't plan on having kids, and married couples that can't have kids, because one or both of the people involved are sterile. Hell, we let ninety-year-olds get married. They're sure as fuck not going to be having kids, but they get the tax break anyway.

The easiest way to solve this is to get rid of the tax breaks for married couples. If you're actually interested in providing benefits to people who raise children, then give tax breaks on a per child basis. Oh, and that includes adopted kids, which includes homosexual couples.

2. Social security taxes will be increased in order to pay survivor benefits to “widows” and “widowers.”

Boo. Fucking. Hoo.

Next.

3. Medical insurance premiums will rise in order to offset healthcare costs associated with the bad lifestyle choices typically made by homosexuals. AIDS, colon cancer, and hepatitis are only a few examples of the costly consequences of these bad choices. 

 I'd really like to get inside Mike's head. I want to know how dysfunctional a mind has to be in order to think that more gay people getting married, that is, entering into stable monogamous relationships, will  increase the rate of STD transmission.

The simple fact is that gay people are going to fuck. Always have, and always will. If, as Mike says, all this buggery results in increased levels of all sorts of Bad Things (something I'm skeptical of and that he's neglected to provide any evidence for), then letting gay people get married isn't going to change this. If anything it will reduce the levels of STD transmission.

These "reasons" are pathetic. It's transparently obvious that Mike is desperately reaching around to find a secular reason to justify his religiously based hatred.

Of course, the detriments are not all financial. We all lose our liberties whenever the gay rights agenda advances. There is no more hostile group in this nation than homosexuals, especially when it comes to civil liberties. Right now, as you are reading this column, un-gay activists are writing to my employer demanding my firing - all in the name of “tolerance” and “diversity of thought.”

 Ooh! OOH! I've got a more hostile group I could name! Fundie Christian assholes! After all, gay people aren't systematically stripping Christians of their rights, now are they?

Let's be realistic here. You work for a right wing rag. You're in no danger of being fired because some gay people are writing to your bosses. Frankly, I don't think that trying to silence any opposition is the right way to go about having this argument, but you know what? At this point I don't give a shit. You're so fucking evil, so despicably, utterly disgusting, that I hope you do get fired. Frankly, I'd like to see you and everyone else who shares your dark age viewpoint relegated to the same social status that we give flagrant racists.

Such tactics can be deterred only by rebellion against political correctness. Edmund Burke once said that the only thing necessary for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing. And evil it surely is. Imagine a world in which everyone lived faithfully in natural marriage the way that God intended for us to live. This would produce dramatic reductions in crime, poverty, abortion, and child abuse. Now imagine the alternative. If everyone lived faithfully in same-sex marriage it would result in the end of the human race itself. 

I've got to say, I'm impressed. Just when I thought you couldn't get any dumber, you somehow manage it. You're like fucking Mandelbrot set of stupidity. I mean, holy shit. Have you never heard of the phrase "false dichotomy" before? Neither of those worlds you're envisioning will ever come to pass. They're just masturbatory fantasies in your head with no correspondence to reality.

In which direction should a Christian nation turn? And by what justification can Christians remain silent?


Even a slight movement in the direction of government-backed same-sex marriage will be disastrous. It will open the door on a number of troubling issues: Should bisexuals be permitted to marry two people? No one is raising the issue now. But they will. 

Oh for fucks sake. Here comes the old polygamy argument. Never far out of reach for you fundie assholes, is it? Here's the deal, Mike. If it's between two consenting individuals, it should be legal. If two, or three, or a dozen legal adults want to get married, let them.

And on a personal note, as a bisexual myself, I'd like to give a hearty fuck you for perpetuating the stereotype that bisexuals are inherently promiscuous. I don't need a husband and a wife any more than you need wives of every hair color.

As a nation, we have fallen a long way in recent years by pretending that abnormal things are normal. But now we are on the verge of pretending that the same abnormal things are actually desirable. And that is unconscionable. 

Examples? Or is this just more scaremongering bullshit?

 The APA is not likely to cease its double standard of opposing gay re-orientation therapy while supporting gay-affirmation therapy. But society-at-large need not employ the same double-standard. After all, the average citizen has far more common sense than the average psychiatrist.

Yay bullshit populism! No, Mike. The average citizen does not have more common sense than the average psychiatrist, and even if they did, it wouldn't matter. Psychiatrists go through years of specialized training and schooling to understand the human mind and the human condition. This makes them infinitely better equipped to deal with psychological issues than the average citizen. Or the average pundit.

And no, there's no double standard at work here. Re-orientation "therapy" doesn't work, and often ends up doing massive psychological damage to the people it's inflicted upon. Gay affirmative psychotherapy, on the other hand, attempts to help people come to grips with their own orientation, something that wouldn't be necessary if pricks like you weren't constantly telling us queers how evil and worthless and abnormal we are.

Contrary to what many believe, traditional marriage is not all about affirming love. In fact, many, if not most, of the world’s marriages are arranged. 

And you think that's a good thing? You're even more fucked up that I thought. Marriage is and should be what humans make it, and I'd rather it be based of love than stupid traditionalist bullshit like this.

Nor is the push for same-sex marriage all about affirming love. The life span of the average gay man is about twenty years shorter than the lifespan of the average heterosexual man. With consequences as grave as an early grave no man who truly loved another would engage in homosexual acts with him. 

Bullshit.

Your writing is so free of facts that it would be hilarious if so many people didn't believe you.

This debate is about more than two people in love. It is about two factions of society, which are sharply divided. One chooses to live in accordance with God’s word and the other chooses to live in rebellion against it. 

Mr. Adams, the first commandment and the first amendment are in conflict, and we all know which is legally binding. Your god and your religion do not and should not dictate the course this country takes.

But if you're so concerned about living in a godly fashion, why aren't you out stoning adulterers and disobedient children? After all, God commands it.

Because the stakes are so high the debate must be joined by everyone. It cannot be dictated by those who call themselves gay but use anger to silence those who object to the same-sex union. Now more than ever, we must speak now or forever hold our peace.

*sigh*

I thought venting for a bit would make me feel better, but it doesn't seem to have helped much.

Oh well. If nothing else, I can take solace from the fact that, in a hundred years, when Mr. Adams and I are both worm food, and gay marriage has become commonplace and a non-issue, and society has subsequently failed to collapse, people will see opinions like yours in the history books and hang their heads in shame, that we as a species ever had members who thought as you do.

Oh, and in conclusion? Fuck you, you fucking fucker.