Comments might be closed here at Ruth Institute. But they’re not closed over at my own blog. So, come on over and tell me how evil I am.
Mendelson links to a blog posted on PoliticallyIncorrectNovel.com, and it quickly becomes obvious why he expects to receive a negative reaction from his readers.
The PoliticallyIncorrectNovel blog criticizes two women in Iowa currently considering taking legal action against a baker who refused to prepare a cake for their same-sex wedding. According to the post, the women are more loathsome than “jihadi terrorists”:
You might think jihadi terrorists are the most loathsome people in the world. And you wouldn’t be too far from wrong. But jihadi terrorists, despite their enormous evil, have one virtue to their credit: courage. Would you fly a plane into a building? Neither would I. That takes guts. Perhaps more guts than I or anybody else I know will ever have.
Contempt is more suited for people like Trina Vodraska and Janelle Sievers. Like jihadi terrorists, many gay rights activists, (the kind satirized in Bias Incident: The World’s Most Politically Incorrect Novel) want to force people to agree with them by striking fear into the hearts of all that would voice dissent. In other words, the goals Trina and Janelle pursue are the spitting image of the goals of jihadi terrorists.
But these activists are more loathsome than the terrorists. Why? Because they lack courage.
So, by combining bullying with cowardice, Trina and Janelle and those like them have become the most loathsome creatures on the planet.
Amy Alkon is right in noting that the Iowa Law which these two broads are contemplating using against their enemy is an affront to freedom. But she missed a big point: those who would contemplate using such a law to bully others should not be able to go out in the streets for fear of being spat upon by decent people. [emphasis added]
It’s worth letting the vile nature of these comments sink in: Gay activists are “more loathsome than the terrorists.” Gay people who want to end anti-gay discrimination should fear being “spat upon” when they leave their homes.
This is the kind of rhetoric being promoted by an organization that repeatedly claims to believe in “decency and civility.”
This is the kind of rhetoric being promoted by an organization that recently launched a Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance to encourage “people on both sides of this debate to step up to the plate to deplore” the denial of people’s rights and dignity.
After a post like this, how can anyone take them seriously?
Reprinted by permission.