Monday, May 19, 2008
FOTF outraged by Brown vs. Board
Blast from the past ...
On today's Focus on Certain Kinds of Family radiotelephone "broadcast," Doctuh James Dobson updated listeners on last week's outrageous decision by the United States Supreme Court to redefine freedom, in Brown vs. Board of Education.
"It was a breathtakin' overreach by a co-urt and one that has fah-reachin' implications, not only fah Kansas, but fah the country and the family at la-arge," said Doctuh Dobson, founder and chairman of Focus on the Family.
The court struck down Plessy vs. Ferguson -- a fine, ah say, a fine a piece of legislatin' as evuh come from the bench, you know, the kind we'uns like -- thus legalizing "inter-racial" edu-ma-cation.
Joining Doctuh Dobson on the "broadcast" were Tony Perkins, president of the Family Citizens Council; Tom Minnery, senior vice president of gubment and public policy at Focus on Certain Kinds of Family Action; and Pastuh Jack Hibbs of Calvary Chapel of Chino Hills, Calif.
"Judicial activism is back in this country with a vengeance," Perkins said. "They completely overstepped the Congress and established public policy. This is a judicial shotgun weddin'. A salt-and-peppuh weddin' Next thing you know, why, they'll be lettin' homo-sexuals git married and divorced. And dogs and cats'll be livin' together. Where will it end?"
Minnery said the ruling makes state separate-but-equal amendments absolutely essential.
"Schoolin' means schoolin' for white young'uns ovuh heah, and schoolin' for colored young'uns over theah," Minnery said. "It’s always meant that."
One more thing:
Pbththth.
Read the real thing from FOTF.
--ER
On today's Focus on Certain Kinds of Family radiotelephone "broadcast," Doctuh James Dobson updated listeners on last week's outrageous decision by the United States Supreme Court to redefine freedom, in Brown vs. Board of Education.
"It was a breathtakin' overreach by a co-urt and one that has fah-reachin' implications, not only fah Kansas, but fah the country and the family at la-arge," said Doctuh Dobson, founder and chairman of Focus on the Family.
The court struck down Plessy vs. Ferguson -- a fine, ah say, a fine a piece of legislatin' as evuh come from the bench, you know, the kind we'uns like -- thus legalizing "inter-racial" edu-ma-cation.
Joining Doctuh Dobson on the "broadcast" were Tony Perkins, president of the Family Citizens Council; Tom Minnery, senior vice president of gubment and public policy at Focus on Certain Kinds of Family Action; and Pastuh Jack Hibbs of Calvary Chapel of Chino Hills, Calif.
"Judicial activism is back in this country with a vengeance," Perkins said. "They completely overstepped the Congress and established public policy. This is a judicial shotgun weddin'. A salt-and-peppuh weddin' Next thing you know, why, they'll be lettin' homo-sexuals git married and divorced. And dogs and cats'll be livin' together. Where will it end?"
Minnery said the ruling makes state separate-but-equal amendments absolutely essential.
"Schoolin' means schoolin' for white young'uns ovuh heah, and schoolin' for colored young'uns over theah," Minnery said. "It’s always meant that."
One more thing:
Pbththth.
Read the real thing from FOTF.
--ER
Comments:
<< Home
Yeah, it's been awhile since I slapped Focus on Everybody Else's Family around.
But crap.
The same thing that incensed me about the anti-cockfighting people insenses me about this.
It's about FREEDOM, y'all.
No way did the fact that some people legally raised and fought fighting roosters affect anything about anybody else's companionship with their pets, or their taste for chicken.
Gay marriage has JACK to do with anyone else's marriage.
Extending the marriage right to gays is about FREEDOM. Opposing it is about CONTROL.
Just like the majority in Oklahoma forced out legal rooster righting. It was a CONTROL issue.
Why? Because it made them UNCOMFORTABLE.
What bullshit.
And God love any gay rooster fighters in Little Dixie (southeastern Oklahoma).
But crap.
The same thing that incensed me about the anti-cockfighting people insenses me about this.
It's about FREEDOM, y'all.
No way did the fact that some people legally raised and fought fighting roosters affect anything about anybody else's companionship with their pets, or their taste for chicken.
Gay marriage has JACK to do with anyone else's marriage.
Extending the marriage right to gays is about FREEDOM. Opposing it is about CONTROL.
Just like the majority in Oklahoma forced out legal rooster righting. It was a CONTROL issue.
Why? Because it made them UNCOMFORTABLE.
What bullshit.
And God love any gay rooster fighters in Little Dixie (southeastern Oklahoma).
"Family" is one of those political buzzwords that everyone thinks they understand, but has no definition and few references (other than to my own, it would seem) to what actually happens in people's lives.
I also have no idea what "threat" is posed by recognizing in law the union of two adults who happen to be of the same gender. I have heard the "arguments", but they make no sense to me, and no matter how many times I hear them, they make no more sense with repetition.
I also have no idea what "threat" is posed by recognizing in law the union of two adults who happen to be of the same gender. I have heard the "arguments", but they make no sense to me, and no matter how many times I hear them, they make no more sense with repetition.
Well, I'll have to disagree with you on rooster fighting. I don't understand the amusement in watching a bunch of dumb animals tear each other apart with razor blades. I realize that fighting comes naturally to them, but giving them weapons and putting them together for fun seems a little gross.
However, I'm with you on gay marriage. It's the courts JOB to be a check on the other two branches. Judicial activism, my ass.
However, I'm with you on gay marriage. It's the courts JOB to be a check on the other two branches. Judicial activism, my ass.
# posted by 
: 7:13 AM
: 7:13 AM
Oh, and GKS was wondering what "threat" hmosexuals are supposed to pose?
According to right-wing-wacko-nutjobs, teh gays lead to Nazism.
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/fischer/080515
Nazism...it's not just for "atheists" (who believe in creationism, a created heirarchy of species, and microevolution) anymore!
:-)
Political discourse in Americs:
Right-wing: "You're Hitler"
Left-wing: "No, YOU'RE Hitler"
Right-wing: "You're Hitler plus one!"
Left Wing: "You're Hitler plys Eva Brown.
Right Wing: "Well, at least we're having straight sex...YOU'RE Hitler plus Ernst Roehm!"
Sheeesh.
According to right-wing-wacko-nutjobs, teh gays lead to Nazism.
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/fischer/080515
Nazism...it's not just for "atheists" (who believe in creationism, a created heirarchy of species, and microevolution) anymore!
:-)
Political discourse in Americs:
Right-wing: "You're Hitler"
Left-wing: "No, YOU'RE Hitler"
Right-wing: "You're Hitler plus one!"
Left Wing: "You're Hitler plys Eva Brown.
Right Wing: "Well, at least we're having straight sex...YOU'RE Hitler plus Ernst Roehm!"
Sheeesh.
# posted by : 9:23 AM
: 9:23 AM
Judicial activism = any time a court's decision contradicts a someone's preferred ideology.
Slight off topic, but have you been to Brown v Board NHS in Topeka?
Slight off topic, but have you been to Brown v Board NHS in Topeka?
What's Brown v Board NHS??
(BTW, I recognize 1., the inherent danger in a post that includes the terms "gay marriage" and "cockfighting," and 2., I recognize it's a stretch, and terribly impolitic, to see anything similar between the two issues, but I do: It's a matter of control.
Opponents of each say strikingly similar things:
Roosters: "I realize that fighting comes naturally to them, but giving them weapons and putting them together for fun seems a little gross."
Gay peeps:
"I realize that love comes naturally to them, but giving them societal approval and putting them together for fun seems a little gross."
!!
BTW, I personally dislike the use of gaffs in rooster fights.
(BTW, I recognize 1., the inherent danger in a post that includes the terms "gay marriage" and "cockfighting," and 2., I recognize it's a stretch, and terribly impolitic, to see anything similar between the two issues, but I do: It's a matter of control.
Opponents of each say strikingly similar things:
Roosters: "I realize that fighting comes naturally to them, but giving them weapons and putting them together for fun seems a little gross."
Gay peeps:
"I realize that love comes naturally to them, but giving them societal approval and putting them together for fun seems a little gross."
!!
BTW, I personally dislike the use of gaffs in rooster fights.
Well there are some important differences between cockfighting and gay marriage.
Turns out that cockfighting isn't so good for the roosters. Gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone, least of all the actual participants. In fact, as with all marriage, it's actually good for you (spiritually, emotionally, physically, economically, etc.) Next month will be 13 years with my husband, and we still have all our eyes and all our fingers. LOL Second problem with the analogy: we're sentient and can make our own choices. The roosters, not so much.
But, I do agree that it is all about busybodies and fusspots deciding that yelling out their front door to keep the neighborhood kids off their lawn just wasn't working for them anymore. So, as befits the age of Oprah, they decided to stick their noses into everyone else's business on every issue imaginable. It doesn't matter to these Church Ladies that whatever their whining about doesn't impact them a bit. They've got to have something to do, other than just watch Wheel of Fortune with their 10 cats. ;) (That is, those of them who aren't spending their time in airport bathrooms, calling up expensive hookers for sex and meth, etc., etc., etc.)
Nothing shuts them up faster though, than asking for an example of a happily married couple who decided, the day after the California decision, to get divorced because their marriage had been destroyed. Occasionally they attempt to reply with, "Well, you don't have to show an actual example of harm to demonstrate ... um ... well ... actual ... um ... harm." Unfortunately when they're that far gone they no longer have the good sense to even be embarrassed for themselves.
Turns out that cockfighting isn't so good for the roosters. Gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone, least of all the actual participants. In fact, as with all marriage, it's actually good for you (spiritually, emotionally, physically, economically, etc.) Next month will be 13 years with my husband, and we still have all our eyes and all our fingers. LOL Second problem with the analogy: we're sentient and can make our own choices. The roosters, not so much.
But, I do agree that it is all about busybodies and fusspots deciding that yelling out their front door to keep the neighborhood kids off their lawn just wasn't working for them anymore. So, as befits the age of Oprah, they decided to stick their noses into everyone else's business on every issue imaginable. It doesn't matter to these Church Ladies that whatever their whining about doesn't impact them a bit. They've got to have something to do, other than just watch Wheel of Fortune with their 10 cats. ;) (That is, those of them who aren't spending their time in airport bathrooms, calling up expensive hookers for sex and meth, etc., etc., etc.)
Nothing shuts them up faster though, than asking for an example of a happily married couple who decided, the day after the California decision, to get divorced because their marriage had been destroyed. Occasionally they attempt to reply with, "Well, you don't have to show an actual example of harm to demonstrate ... um ... well ... actual ... um ... harm." Unfortunately when they're that far gone they no longer have the good sense to even be embarrassed for themselves.
"And God love any gay rooster fighters in Little Dixie (southeastern Oklahoma)."
I've never seen a gay rooster, but I'm sure my conservative sensibilities would be offended.
I've never seen a gay rooster, but I'm sure my conservative sensibilities would be offended.
"I've never seen a gay rooster...."
That you know of. As with all professional sports, gay roosters typically prefer to stay in the closet for the sake of their career. ;)
That you know of. As with all professional sports, gay roosters typically prefer to stay in the closet for the sake of their career. ;)
"Roosters: "I realize that fighting comes naturally to them, but giving them weapons and putting them together for fun seems a little gross."
Gay peeps:
"I realize that love comes naturally to them, but giving them societal approval and putting them together for fun seems a little gross."
"
Well, when you put it like that and add the cheering crowd of sweaty men taking bets on who lasdts longer...they BOTH sound bad to me.
Gay peeps:
"I realize that love comes naturally to them, but giving them societal approval and putting them together for fun seems a little gross."
"
Well, when you put it like that and add the cheering crowd of sweaty men taking bets on who lasdts longer...they BOTH sound bad to me.
# posted by : 12:30 PM
: 12:30 PM
Ha. As a member of the workin' press, I war agin' unfamiliar acronyms.
If it ain't FBI or CIA, it's got to be spelled out on first reference.
Laughed Out Loud!
Post a Comment
If it ain't FBI or CIA, it's got to be spelled out on first reference.
Laughed Out Loud!
<< Home
