I believe the “homophobia is caused by deeply closeted homosexually” thing is a myth. It’s easy to gloat when one does get caught in a motel with three meth shooting male prostitutes, but it should not imply that that is always the case. Some people are just dickish homophobes on their own.
Ha, I just had a vision of Jesus showing up, then decapitating the first Christian he runs across while yelling “there can be only one!”
There does seem to be a significant correlation between the intense homophobia and suppressed homosexuality according to various scientific studies.
thelurkinghorror did not deny that, DT (not that you actually accused him of doing so). He merely implied that the correlation should be appreciated for the beautiful thing that it is, and not pressed into service as a sociologically established fact.
And according to a lot of anecdotal evidence; it seems whenever I hear “the elected official was seen coming out of a gay bar…with an underage boy…with his pants down…” it’s almost always a right-winger that had railed against gay rights.
Nitpick: while this episode was produced when John Paul was Pope, the Family Guy Pope wasn’t John Paul. He was portrayed as speaking with an Italian accent, for one.
Yeah, The Family Guy is notorious for their near-fanatical devotion to fact checking and historical accuracy.
It’s a damn shame the Highlander TV series didn’t have the balls to do that story arc. It’s a natural too - an immortal started Christianity in order to get people to be nicer to each other, and comes out of hiding on occasion to take out whoever is currently perverting his message.
Not only easy but karmically appropriate for the harm these tools cause.
TV & movies are like that; like Stargate SG1 going out of their way to say Jesus wasn’t a Goa’uld. In fact (checks) there’s a TV Tropes page on it; No Such Thing as Wizard Jesus. Jesus is never an alien, wizard, psychic, or whatever; other religious figures can be but not Jesus.
At least in the visual media; I’ve seen various written fiction where he is.
Psst…post #48. But I’m invisible, so that’s OK.
Don’t be too sure. You’re familiar with The Emperor’s New Clothes?
Yes, a 19th century tradition. Slavery was a “tradition” at one time in America and so was the tradition of denying women the right to vote.
Santorum is an anachronism who, if given the chance, would set the country back to the Puritanical era.
Why would you force a woman who was raped to carry the child to term and then care for a reminder of such a reprehensible act??
<Santorum>
Because it is God’s will, and the baby is a gift. If she prays hard enough, God will give her the strength to carry on. If she is finding it difficult to accept her rape baby gift, this simply means that she lacks faith, or is not praying enough.
</Santorum>
I honestly believe that this is what he is thinking. He’s also possibly thinking “only sluts get raped, she was probably asking for it, so she deserves the consequences of her slutty behavior”
No child should be raised by someone unwilling to raise a child. Its tough enough to do it when you love the snot-sleeved, scabby-kneed little shits!
Santorum “All the rights in the Constitution, which are individually based rights, according to our founders were not there for the individual’s gain, but the reason we established those rights was for the common good.”
Sounds like Socialism to me!
Romney is doing similar crap. They seem to be convinced that the best way to back away from an extreme position is to offer the opposite extreme the very next day.
Well, there is the Republican politico (can’t recall the name, and I find the subject too nauseating to spend a lot of time looking) who said in all seriousness that if a woman was really, truly raped against her will, then the Holy Spirit would protect her from the consequences. So if she became pregnant or contracted some “loathsome disease,” she was a willing participant in her heart of hearts.
Even worse, it’s the kind of thinking that produces an ethos of: “From each according to his abilities; to each according to his needs.” It’s… it’s… COMMUNISM!!!
:eek:
I’m pretty sure that was Sharron Angle.
In fact, I think it was some comment about making lemons into lemonade.
It’s not “one” getting caught (albeit not necessarily with three partners and/or meth and/or financial consideration) – it’s one after another after another after another, to the point where dismissing the pattern as a “myth” becomes willful blindness.
That said, there probably are some “just dickish homophobes” in the mix.