The overreaching federal government is forcing the fag agenda on us all. The fag agenda is a tentacle of the overreaching fed gov and many state govs have swallowed the koolaid as well.
The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that laws against sodomy were perfectly fine and Constitutional. They of course didn’t need any federal laws about it because they didn’t have a leftist SCOTUS overturning states’ rights nor did they have a fedgov larded with fags and fag agenda supporters overturning states’ rights and the votes of citizens.
86 comments
"The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that laws against sodomy were perfectly fine and Constitutional."
Yes. There's obviously a wide array of anti-fag literature and essays put out and published by the US' founding fathers. You can see them all in little jeremiah's attic along with the rest of his conspiracy related media.
Scalia, Thomas and Alito, a bunch of moderates and one slightly liberal judge. Yeah, really leftist, asshole.
The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that slavery was perfectly fine and Constitutional. So does your drivel of a holy book. Those are timeless authorities deserving our unquestioning respect, for sure.
Really, religious fundamentalism and the hero-worship of the Founding Fathers are one and the same. They reflect the same hubristic need to believe that the world is simple, that right and wrong are clearly defined by an intemporal authority, and that they are the good guys.
> The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that laws against sodomy were perfectly fine and Constitutional. They of course didn’t need any federal laws about it because they didn’t have a leftist SCOTUS
Continuing that logic: in retrospect, they obviously should have added that bit to the Constitution if they felt so strongly about the issue. Because if it was in the Constitution, then it would be abundantly clear what they thought of the matter. Now that it isn't clearly spelled out in the Constitution, you've got courts contradicting those unwritten, unstated ideas.
A free hint: In democratic countries, the law is as it's written and agreed upon by the legislators. Unwritten, unclear laws that depend on the whims of some random people belong to autocratic monarchies. I don't know much about the history of United States, but I thought your founding fathers weren't very keen on those.
1) The Founding Fathers bickered just like modern politicians do about everything. They had to "kick the can" of slavery "down the road" in order to get the Constitution ratified. Saying that you know what they thought about something, especially when there's no writing on the issue (do the Federalist Papers discuss sodomy?) is ludicrous.
2) You keep hearing "the homosexual agenda" or the "gay agenda" or the "fag agenda." What is the fag agenda, exactly? A world where the fags aren't killed, beaten or harassed for being fags? Boy, that sounds just awful.
"The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that laws against sodomy were perfectly fine and Constitutional."
Yep, the same Founding Fathers who made it clear in the Constitution that slaves only counted as three-fifths of a person.
"They of course didn’t need any federal laws about it because they didn’t have a leftist SCOTUS overturning states’ rights nor did they have a fedgov larded with fags and fag agenda supporters overturning states’ rights and the votes of citizens."
The fact that there are people like you in our society, ready and willing to revoke every last piece of civil right from a certain segment of the population, is precisely why the federal government must safeguard the rights of LGBT citizens. You don't get to decide on the civil rights of others.
I'm not American, but I think that many of the founding fathers were very great men. However, they were also a product of their time and culture. I cannot understand the obsession with fundies, and actually a lot of Americans, with trying to live as if nothing's changed since the Mayflower. The founding fathers were not omniscient gods, they were men. I mean, I'm a big fan of people like Socrates, Spinoza, and Newton, but I don't spend my waking hours trying to live a life they would have approved of. Even if all the founding fathers were rabid Christian racist homophobes, why does that have to have a bearing on modern life? Americans live in the here and now, so just amend the sodding constitution, or get rid of it and install a real democracy.
The folks who signed the Constitution also owned slaves and didn't let women vote. Also, le fag agenda has nothing to do with tentacles. That's a hentai thing.
States' rights, also, should never trump <I>human</I> rights. I don't see any logical reason to deny gays the right to marry each other; while the Declaration of Independence has no legal bearings on this matter, it does state that we are endowed with certain inalienable rights, that among these is the pursuit of happiness. Talk about the founders all you want, but it's right there.
The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that laws against sodomy were perfectly fine and Constitutional.
There was no 14th Amendment at the time. That's why it's called an amendment and why it's the 14th.
overturning states’ rights and the votes of citizens.
It's funny how so-cons have no problem doing so with regard to medical marijuana.
Huh? The federal government is overreaching by allowing something to be legal? How does that work?
And again, I wish you conservitards could understand that allowing something to be legal does not mean forcing people to participate in it.
To everybody else: I think it's fairly obvious that the founding father worship is nothing more than an appeal to authority. It's the political equivalent to "God wants X." All they do is say "The founding fathers wanted X." Where X of course always equals what the right-wing fundies themselves want.
The "founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution" were very careful to exclude religion from said Constitution. Plus, even though slavery was written in, we have since come to interpret the document as a condemnation of imposed bigotry.
"The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that laws against sodomy were perfectly fine and Constitutional."
Yeah?
So why isn't it actually in the Constitution anywhere?
"They of course didn’t need any federal laws about it because they didn’t have a leftist SCOTUS overturning states’ rights nor did they have a fedgov larded with fags and fag agenda supporters overturning states’ rights and the votes of citizens."
The Founders lived during a time where people were expected to be self sufficient to a degree that most people today couldn't fathom. The concept of a Nanny State telling you what you can, can't, should and shouldn't do was entirely alien to them, as would be the modern Republican Party which tries to legislate everything a person can, can't, should and shouldn't do all the while bleating on about "small government" and how "government should stay out of people's lives!"
Go fuck yourself, Jeremiah.
If the onrushing "fag agenda" is approaching with all the urgency and speed of the whooshfest, then you've nothing to worry about. Thankfully for you, it will only be "soon". Or, to put it in terms that the ordinary man and woman in the street will understand, "never".
The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that laws for slavery were perfectly fine and Constitutional. They of course didn’t need any federal laws about it because they didn’t have a leftist SCOTUS overturning states’ rights nor did they have a fedgov larded with blacks and black agenda supporters overturning states’ rights and the votes of citizens.
I don't often like to do "fixed" posts but this one was just too ripe for it.
@pete
Plus, even though slavery was written in, we have since come to interpret the document as a condemnation of imposed bigotry.
Actually, it was later amended in the 13th-15th Amendments to condemn imposed bigotry.
Nevermind the fact that John Marshall, Chief Justice appointed by John Adams was a huge proponent of federal power over states' rights. In fact, there was a whole Federalist Party was in favor of a stronger federal government. It's members included George Washington, John Adams, and ALexander Hamilton. And "leftist" had nothing to do with it. The Federalists were the more conservative party.
Fag agenda...fags...fag this...fag that...sounds like Fred Phelps & his goons, they term things like that.
So much "fag" that it sounds like a British cigarette obsession.
And "Fag Agenda Tentacles" sounds like a Yaoi hentai anime. "SEE THE GORGEOUS YOUNG BISHOUNEN PRETTYBOY GET VIOLATED BY THE TENTACLE MONSTER OF PLANET LAMBDA-5!"
Is that why the Constitution says nothing about sodomy laws at all, and the closest any of their documents comes to mentioning gay people is the Declaration of Independence. You know, the part about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And you have made it your life's purpose to destroy the life, liberty, and happiness of gay people.
"The overreaching federal government is forcing the fag agenda on us all. The fag agenda is a tentacle of the overreaching fed gov and many state govs have swallowed the koolaid as well."
"a fedgov larded with fags and fag agenda"
Waiter, this word salad is unpalatable! (and I ordered a glass of Vimto, not that sickly Kool-Aid!) Why does it keep referring to 'fags'? Which is the slang term for 'Cigarettes' here in the UK.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_are_Cigarettes_called_fags
image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faggot_%28food%29
What have you got against a tasty, nutritious, traditional & wholesome foodstuff eh, Fred Phelps & co?
I love the smell of annihilated arguments - and insults - in the morning. Smells like... victory (and pork meatballs in onion gravy :9 ).
When the founding fathers created this nation and the Constitution which gives us all our rights, they didn't deem it necessary to give rights to slaves or women. Our "overreaching" federal government has since corrected that oversight, and are on our way to correcting it yet again as it concerns another minority group, homosexuals.
And my irony meter burnt out from the juxtaposition of an overreaching federal govenrment and being perfectly OK with sodomy laws. I guess the government isn't overreaching when it has its hands in other people's bedrooms?
Hey, little asshole, the Constitution mentions sodomy in exactly the same places, and as many times, as it mentions God, Jehovah, and Jesus.
Nowhere in the entirety of the document. You'd know that if you actually read the damn thing.
I think REPUBLICAN Rudy Giuliani said it best.
"I think the Republican Party would be well advised to get the heck out of people's bedrooms and let these things get decided by states," Giuliani said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." "We'd be a much more successful political party if we stuck to our economic, conservative roots."
They of course didn’t need any federal laws about it because they didn’t have a leftist SCOTUS overturning states’ rights
SCOTUS didn't overturn states rights. The 14th Amendment did. The Founders didn't have a bunch of states trying to secede, nor did the Constitution have the 14th Amendment passed after the Civil War to prevent states from overriding the US Constitution and taking away Constitutional rights by state law.
Following up on Anon-e-moose's comment regarding proper definitions of "fag" and "faggot," I would just like to add that a faggot is also a bundle of sticks used to start a fire as well as a knitting technique.
Why are homophobes so afraid to use the proper term "homosexual"?
@ Caterina
'Faggot' is a term of abuse - a reminder of the times when homosexuals were burnt to death, perhaps.
Right wing fundamentalists may not say it out loud too often, but they see their Bible (Leviticus especially) in effect as a fatwa against gays. And I have little doubt that there are those who would be happy enough to execute the fatwa. Some have done. Remember Matthew Sheherd?
@ All
SCOTUS and POTUS are mistaken acronyms - SCOTUSA and POTUSA surely? :-)
@ studapples
The "Gay Agenda" is apparently the "goal of destroying the Christian foundations of America by becoming a fag state."
There IS a Gay Agenda, but it's not what these people think it is. The Gay Agenda: legalize Same-sex marriage across the US (and eventually all developed nations). Nothing more, nothing less.
So the federal government is a sort of octopus that forces you to drink kool aid? Mixing your metaphors there a bit, pal.
And "The founders of this country...thought sodomy laws were perfectly fine and constituional." Did they? How do you know what they thought? How come they didn't put in the constitution? Could it be because they wanted to maximise personal freedom, and thought that a man's personal life was his own business? Could it be that they wanted to avoid the situation in Europe, where the church and ecclesiastical authorities had way too much influence on people's lives?
..."the overreaching fed gov...."
You mean like the one you keep trying to create, which would tell me what I can and can not do with my uterus?
"The fag agenda is a tentacle of the overreaching fed gov"
Silly fundamentalist, tentacle porn comes from Japan! :D
Face it, little jerkawhiner, it's a slippery slope and you're too far downhill to bitch about it now. States' rights got the death blow in the Civil War, but was too stupid to die. You knuckle-draggers kept pissing on Blacks until well after the Civil Rights movement of the '60's. Hell, you can't even use the N-word now... and you can't even get away with kicking the crap out of Kikes after gym class thanks to the backlash after that whole Germany thing. If fags demand the same respect as everyone else, you won't have anyone to piss on to make yourself feel superior. Poor you.
So they realized the need, but had no need?
You're a fucking moron, aren't you? I'll bet your walls are lined with Glenn and Rush posters and you car is covered in home made bumper stickers bitching about the nigger in office. Am I close?
Of course the government is forcing the fag agenda on all of us.
After all, tobacco smoke causes multiple cancers and whatnot.
"The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that laws against sodomy were perfectly fine and Constitutional."
Truly you are a great medium.
"Fag"
"tentacle"
"overreaching (with said tentacle)"
"swallowed"
You guys make this way too easy, sometimes.
@Caterina
"Why are homophobes so afraid to use the proper term "homosexual"?"
image
They do go on & on about oral transmission, (Closet cases? Not so's you'd notice...! X3 ) and all that jazz, so...!
A decade ago, I had an operation to remove a tumour from my rectal wall (it was benign fortunately; merely giving me gyp when I was on the toilet, if you catch my drift). During which, I was given a unit of blood. The giving of such is done on a completely anonymous basis (Presumably in the US, as here in the UK). For all I know, that blood was donated by an LGBT person. Regardless, I'm glad they did (I donate blood twice a year; 'Commit Acts of Gratuitous Kindness', and all that jazz). Still here, still straighter than a laser:
image
Yet, lasers can be used to create fabulous patterns in a myriad of colours; all those of the rainbow , and more besides.
Annihilated argument much, Fred Phelps & co.?
Wow, what a whiny little cunt. "Fag agenda"- how very original. Gays are lobbying for their own rights, oh noes! D,: Bitch. I hope a cop finds a picture of you masturbating, confuses your tiny dick for kiddy porn and throws you in jail where you get nightly cum-enemas from a 400-pound lardass named "Bubba."
@ Caterina --
Why are homophobes so afraid to use the proper term "homosexual"?
If by "proper" you mean "unusually clinical and invented for the sake of implying pathology", sure. The word "homosexual" was invented to create a "scientific" category as an excuse for brutal mistreatment. And no, it's not really a standard-use term; insisting on exonyms is generally considered tacky. Unless you're going to insist that only scientific terms are "proper" -- in which case, do you insist that the proper term for women and men are, respectively, "female Homo sapiens " and "male Homo sapiens "?
Hell, this is why insisting on using the term "homosexual" is usually a sign that the speaker/writer is a heterosexual-supremacist.
The founders of this country who actually wrote, signed and understood the Constitution thought that laws against sodomy were perfectly fine and Constitutional.
Many of those same men also thought that laws for slavery were perfectly fine and Constitituional.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.