Google+ Followers

Wednesday, 29 January 2014

Muehlenberg Lies About Michael Swift

In his article, "Children Targeted By The Militants", Muehlenberg opens this way:
Homosexuals of course cannot reproduce – they can only recruit.
It's a sentence that manages to combine lying with logical fallacies. Homosexuals can't reproduce? Why, are they all infertile? Homosexuals can and do reproduce - there is such a thing as gay parenting and gay adoption! Yet Muehlenberg is wholly against that. Assuming they can't reproduce, why does Muehlenberg think it logically follows that they must therefore "recruit"?

This is evil nonsense, and a lie Muehlenberg has peddled repeatedly. He thinks if he repeats a lie often enough, people will start to believe it. The idiots who post on his site don't know how to think for themselves so they will probably lap up this sort of egregious lie. Homosexuality is naturally occurring. There have always been gay people. There will always be gay people as long as there is the human race. Gay people have no need to recruit, even if such an absurd proposition were possible, because the percentage of homosexuals in society is roughly the same throughout time.

Muehlenberg should actually take up his beef with all the straight couples who keep giving birth to gay children!

Muehlenberg is so confused about human sexuality he seems to think if a younger man is "touched" by an older man, he'll magically turn gay (and note Muehlenberg once again spreads another favourite lie of his - that there is a connection between male homosexuality and paedophilia). Sadly for him, sexuality doesn't work like that. One is either gay, straight, or somewhere in between. It's also disturbing that he's willing to spread the lie and the stigma that gay people have been sexually abused as children, or else had poor relationships with their father, which is why they are gay. This is utter foolishness, and wrongly stigmatises loving parents. It's all part of Muehlenberg's vicious agenda of hatred against gay people and those who have no problem with the existence of gay people, so he's quite happy to push the lies and stigmatise parents and friends of gay people in this way.

He then goes on to quotemine from Michael Swift's 1987 satirical essay "Gay Revolutionary" and makes the suggestion that it was meant seriously, calling it a "declaration of war against our children". You'll notice he doesn't even name the author of the essay or its title, because he's too afraid people will go away and look it up and realise that it's a work of satire! Right wing people invariably have a sense of humour bypass, and Muehlenberg is certainly no exception, but you'd have to be stupid to quote from this obviously ironic essay and suggest it's the ultimate aim of gay people!

Muehlenberg also commits the sin of omission with it because, as well as avoiding citing the author or title, he doesn't quote the first line that tells the reader it's a fantasy:
This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor.
I'd say Michael Swift is pretty explicit about his intention, wouldn't you? For more on Muehlenberg's faulty "source", see Wikipedia and the Fordham University website, and you can see just how twisted he is to quote from a satirical work that is 27 years old and pretend it represents the wishes of the gay community:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/swift1.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_agenda

Muehlenberg is upset because apparently Disney have made a TV show that doesn't exclusively show white, middle-class, heterosexual Christians. How dare Disney actually represent minorities! He quotes from right-wing pressure group One Million Moms:
Conservative families need to urge Disney to exclude confusing topics that children are far too young to comprehend.
What they (and he) mean is that it's too much for them to comprehend! Bigots like Muehlenberg know full well that young children aren't inherently bigoted, and that if they're educated about gay people they'll accept them as perfectly normal. That's what terrifies the bigots.

So what they want instead is to recruit children into the Christian lifestyle, to get to them young enough so they can twist their minds into being nasty, antisocial bigots, just like them.

There's only one group hellbent on recruiting children. It's not gay people: it's religious nutters.

Leave our kids alone, Muehlenberg. We don't need more of your type in this world.

Muehlenberg ends saying, "This is a war which we did not start." That would be because it's only a "war" that exists inside your paranoid, delusional head. War! Get a grip.

Friday, 3 January 2014

Bill Muehlenberg and the Sin of Omission

In his desperate rush to blame anything and everything on gay people, Muehlenberg, in his article "A Culture of Bullying and Intolerance" - where, remarkably, he isn't talking about himself - he opens with characteristic understatement:
We now know without the slightest doubt that the homosexual militants are a pack of bullies who thrive on intimidation, stand-over tactics, and thuggery. And they are clearly one of the most intolerant groups on the planet. They have declared war on every single person on earth who refuses to bow down before their agenda.
Most people in the west at least don't have the slightest problem with gay people, yet the sheer fact that they exist is such an affront to Muehlenberg that his rage spills over into this ludicrous hyperbole. Apparently gay people have "declared war". Well, I don't see any tanks or bloodshed, do you?

So what's grinding Muehlenberg's gears this time? It's the suspension of uneducated bigoted redneck Phil Robertson from the A&E show "Duck Dynasty" for certain comments he made:
For having the audacity to actually proclaim in public what the Bible says about the issue of homosexuality, all hell has broken loose, with the A&E network suspending Phil Robertson from his own show a few weeks ago. A storm of protest rightly erupted over this nasty bit of intolerance, and the network was forced to back down.
You'd think, judging by Muehlenberg's claim, that all Robertson did was attack gay people, and that right-wing Christian nutters have fought back, defending Robertson's right to be a homophobic cunt. This is indeed what Muehlenberg states:
It all serves as yet another clear illustration of the culture of intolerance and bullying which has sprung up all over the West, primarily at the hands of the militant homosexual lobby. They think they own the world, and can push their agenda with impunity, and smash all dissent along the way.
He then uses his favourite insult against gay people, "homonazis" (Bill hates name-calling, of course, but only when it's directed against Christian nutters. Hypocrisy, as ever, the bedfellow of the religionist), and claims:
...for every action there is a reaction, and most folks in America at least have had a gutful of these bullies trying to coerce everyone else to embrace their perverted agenda.
Perverted agenda! Nice! So much for tolerance, decency and respect.

It's what Bill doesn't mention that's telling. I left a comment on his website asking him for his opinion on Phil Robertson's racist comments.

What??? RACIST COMMENTS?

Yes, as well as making deeply homophobic comments, Robertson also made deeply racist comments, claiming that black people were just fine before the Civil Rights Movement. Here's what he said:
I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.
So according to Phil Robertson, Martin Luther King was wasting his time, and Rose Parks should have given up her seat on the bus.

What's fascinating is that the Christian zealots who have come out in force, Muehlenberg included, have COMPLETELY IGNORED these racist comments, and instead used Robertson's bigoted interview to defend their own deeply bigoted views. A generation ago, these Christians would have used their "faith" to defend their racist views. Now they know they can't get away with it, so they turn to the last outpost for their "acceptable" ugly bigotry - homophobia.

Muehlenberg, and all the other Xtian zealots, casually pretend that Phil Robertson didn't make any racist comments, and completely IGNORE this aspect of his interview, telling their followers that Robertson was merely defending his faith by launching an attack on the dignity of gay people.

It is pathetic that Muehlenberg is so desperate to attack gay people at every conceivable opportunity that he would stoop as low as this, deliberately being economical with the truth and deliberately deceiving his readers as to what Robertson said.

In the same interview, Robertson compares Shintoism, the Japanese religion of ancestral worship, to Nazism. He's not just bigoted about gay people, but black people and the Japanese too. Nice guy.

Muehlenberg sees Robertson's re-instatement to the reality show as a victory for "free speech" - even though Phil Robertson is entitled to his opinion, and other people (A&E, say) are entitled to suspend him for his expression of free speech, which is no infringement upon his rights.

Muehlenberg would probably also agree with some of Phil Robertson's other statements, such as that men should take their wives when they're no older than 16, so that they can better control them. Yet you can bet your last dollar that if Robertson were gay and talking about finding a male partner, Muehlenberg would have jumped up and down claiming paedophilia. Such is the selectiveness and hypocrisy of Muehlenberg's position, which he expresses through foul language, aggressiveness and deliberate hostility towards gay people.

Muehlenberg is welcome to come here and defend his decision not to mention Phil Robertson's racist comments, and he is welcome to defend his deceit, hypocrisy and bigotry.