S12E11: Alliance Defending Freedom

[Lantern7]

Another week, another serious topic. This felt lighter for some reason. Maybe because a certain elephant wasn’t in the room? Or maybe it was John trying to draw out a homophobe’s view of what a human/donkey wedding would be like. Blessed be the folks that come up with the graphics for this show.

Anyone else watch the commercials with Ron Reagan arguing for the separation of church and state? That’s where my mind kept going. John (and Ron) made good points, showing how those that would advocate rights for refusal of services are in fact assholes that bend the truth . . . if not outright lie. It’s discouraging to me that things are going the way some of those people want.

What exactly is a ‘doll”? How old is Brian Killme or whatever his name is? If he’s older than me, he probably played with GI Joes that were larger than the action figures Generation X had. Whatever . . . no one tunes in to Fox & Friends for enlightenment about gender norms.

Donald Trump is still an ass.

Anyone from Philadelphia reading this? Do you guys dig John Kruk? He seems to be a blast to be with. And yeah, that umpire dusting home plate had a really unfortunate stance for the camera.

PS: The original title for this thread was “Politics & Religion.” The segment running on YouTube has been titled “Alliance Defending Freedom,” so I felt a change was in order.

Edited May 12 by Lantern7

[ebk57]

Honestly, I try not to, but lately I hate everyone.  Winsomely... 

[Annber03]

1 hour ago, Lantern7 said:

Anyone else watch the commercials with Ron Reagan arguing for the separation of church and state? That’s where my mind kept going. John (and Ron) made good points, showing how those that would advocate rights for refusal of services are in fact assholes that bend the truth . . . if not outright lie. It’s discouraging to me that things are going the way some of those people want.

Yes! I have! I've always liked those ads - it's especailly amusing to see therm where I live, 'cause our local affiliate that airs those also airs ads for a local church promoting thier Sunday services, often during the same hour :p. 

But yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah, any group that's activley trying to go to the Supreme Court to try and get public/governemnt support for their religious agenda automatically has my antenna up. So all the reveals about their shady behavior and bigoted beliefs are not even remotely surprising - the fact they're connected to people like James freaking Dobson (there's a name I havent heard in a while) just further has my back up. 

But yeah, all the reveals about the people involved with this organization, while not surprising, were still no less hilariously stupid and disturbng. That audio of the woman going on about why anal sex didn't work because of what the anus was designed to do...truly, I have never seen a group of people that were SO FREAKING OBSESSED with the genitalia and innter workings of how people had sex. For people who are supposedly so grossed out by "homosexual behavior"*, they sure do have a super creepy fixation on it and think about it an awful lot. That book review mocking their obsession with homosexual sex summed up my sentiments beautifully. 

And then the freakout over cakes and websites, like they're going to get "gay cooties" or something if they dare to work on things like that - it's insane. And it'd be laughable if they weren't so hellbent on trying to push thier religious beliefs on the rest of the country and make their badkwards beliefs law. I just...do not get how the hell we're losing to creeps like this. 

*They...do know that straight people have anal sex, too, right? Like, they are aware that's a thing? I woudl think they'd have to know, given how intense their focus seems to be on all matters relating to sex. 

Quote

What exactly is a ‘doll”? How old is Brian Killme or whatever his name is? If he’s older than me, he probably played with GI Joes that were larger than the action figures Generation X had. Whatever . . . no one tunes in to Fox & Friends for enlightenment about gender norms.

I got a REALLY good laugh at one point when Brian talked about how he had a Ken doll hanging out with the G.I. Joe dolls and that said Ken doll "was the happiest he'd ever been ":D. But god, his comment about wanting to "make Ken a real man", or words to that effect. Dude. It's a fucking Barbie doll, not some gender experiment. 

I also got a real kick out of how that segment aired right after the clips of Trump talking about girls playing with dolls. That had to be intentional on the show's part :D. 

And on that note...

Quote

Donald Trump is still an ass.

He is such a moron, it's truly stunning how increasingly stupid he sounds every time he opens his mouth. John's comments about how his skin feels like it's turning inside out anytime Trump goes on about what young girls like - again, my sentiments exactly. I really do not want to hear Trump talking about young girls in ANY context, thank yo uvery much. I loved the reminder of his connection to Epstein - fucking thank you. 

[kittykat]

1 hour ago, Annber03 said:

got a REALLY good laugh at one point when Brian talked about how he had a Ken doll hanging out with the G.I. Joe dolls and that said Ken doll "was the happiest he'd ever been ":D. But god, his comment about wanting to "make Ken a real man", or words to that effect. Dude. It's a fucking Barbie doll, not some gender experiment

Steve Doocy in that clip trying his hardest not to burst into laughter is the one and only time I will ever relate to Steve Doocy.

As for the rest not surprising that another infuriating Family Values company is behind all the Supreme Court cases.  And not only that but their tactics of flooding smaller courts with lawsuits and hoping the SC bites is actually working. The hypocrisy with these people is unreal.

Kudos to whichever writer either volunteered or drew the short straw in the donkey wedding album. It wasn't Jon marrying a cabbage level of epic but still funny.

[peeayebee]

10 hours ago, ebk57 said:

Honestly, I try not to, but lately I hate everyone.  Winsomely... 

I never used the word 'winsome' but I swear to God, I will never ever use it ever.

9 hours ago, Annber03 said:

I loved the reminder of his connection to Epstein - fucking thank you. 

Yes, I kept waiting for John to bring it up, and I was not disappointed.

I don't quite get why that ADF person off-camera kept telling the interviewer that a particular question wouldn't be answered. The idea seemed to be that they didn't want to admit that they're directly involved with all these cases. Why deny it?

Also, of course I disagree with various businesses refusing to provide services for LGBTQ people, but I would have no problem with a business refusing, for instance, to provide a cake for the KKK or do a website for, well, pedophiles. Is the difference that LGBTQ people are a protected class, as Sotomayor stated, while the KKK and pedophiles aren't?

It's so incredibly upsetting and frustrating when the law is manipulated to hurt others. I know I sound naive, but these days it's just one thing after the other that makes me want to tune out all news.

It's also frustrating the some people refuse to acknowledge that Trump is not the great mind that they believe, or even that his brain is deteriorating. He constantly makes no sense.

Also, I don't understand how any court could ok a religious school receiving money from the government. The phrase 'separation of church and state' is apparently meaningless. So many phrases that previously directed how our government operates are empty words now.

[DoctorAtomic]

Public funding for private (religious) schools is a big issue in my state because the legislature largely doesn't have an original thought and just copies what Texas and Florida is doing because they think they're some major red player despite negligible electoral votes. 

Young Mike Johnson looks so massively repressed homosexual it's no wonder he needs an anti porn app. Dude is the postmodern Larry Craig. 

I'd love for a politician to grow a spine and just call these people out. You want to spew your bile? Absolutely. But it's not religious speech, and your organization will pay taxes. 

I never understood why cakes were the battleground for marriage equality. Always mystified me. You don't like making money? 

Three things that are always patently false - 1. All due respect. There's no respect; you're going to hurl some insults. 2. It's not about the money. It's always about the money. 3. Deeply held/deep seeded religious beliefs. You're using religion to spew hateful and false rhetoric. You can say it all you want, but it's not a shield. 

Please tell me you all heard that 'what?!' in the audience about the woman ranting about anal. 

12 hours ago, Annber03 said:

*They...do know that straight people have anal sex, too, right?

I wouldn't say anal is the norm, but it's not a negligible activity. I'm Generation X and in my circles in college and on (that's when I became sexuall active) it was discussed regularly as any other sex. 

 

[iMonrey]

So, the girl who was testifying about the opposing team having a trans woman, the whole thing turned out to be a big lie and she's the daughter of the ADF spokesperson. I wanted to cut that clip and send it to my siblings after the absurd argument we had about transgenderism in sports. They covered this awhile back but they really hit on an effective scare tactic, because, sports! SO important. 

The ADF and these other Christian fundamentalist groups scare the living hell out of me. They are determined to turn this country into The Handmaid's Tale, and I feel like we are already halfway there.

15 hours ago, Annber03 said:

I got a REALLY good laugh at one point when Brian talked about how he had a Ken doll hanging out with the G.I. Joe dolls and that said Ken doll "was the happiest he'd ever been ":D. But god, his comment about wanting to "make Ken a real man", or words to that effect. Dude. It's a fucking Barbie doll, not some gender experiment. 

Um, his story about making a "real man" out of Ken by putting him together with GI Joe? Sounds like the start of a gay porno. 

3 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I never understood why cakes were the battleground for marriage equality. Always mystified me. You don't like making money? 

I think it's because groups like the ADF find them useful as plaintiffs. I would never shop somewhere I knew my money wasn't wanted, and a business that turns away business is doomed to fail. 

[Shrek]

47 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

So, the girl who was testifying about the opposing team having a trans woman, the whole thing turned out to be a big lie and she's the daughter of the ADF spokesperson. I wanted to cut that clip and send it to my siblings after the absurd argument we had about transgenderism in sports. They covered this awhile back but they really hit on an effective scare tactic, because, sports! SO important. 

 

If they're anything like some of the people I've met they won't believe it anyway & will tell you there's plenty more examples and even one is one too many. 

[Annber03]

7 hours ago, peeayebee said:

I don't quite get why that ADF person off-camera kept telling the interviewer that a particular question wouldn't be answered. The idea seemed to be that they didn't want to admit that they're directly involved with all these cases. Why deny it?

It always amazes me how these people will proudly spout their backwards views to anyone who'll listen and try and manipulate the law to make everyone else abide by their batshit insane nonsense...

...and yet when someone tries to press them on the stuff they support, like that reporter did, all of a sudden they're skirting around the topic and refusing to answer questions. Trump supporters in general are the same way whenever they're confronted head on about their beliefs and support of his shitty policies. No, no, no, guys. You're bold enough to try and push to change our laws to fit your idiotic worldview, you can sure as hell be bold enough to honestly answer a question about your beliefs from a reporter. They're happy to dish it out, but god forbid they ever have to actually be confronted face to face about the insane stuff they spew. 

Quote

Also, of course I disagree with various businesses refusing to provide services for LGBTQ people, but I would have no problem with a business refusing, for instance, to provide a cake for the KKK or do a website for, well, pedophiles. Is the difference that LGBTQ people are a protected class, as Sotomayor stated, while the KKK and pedophiles aren't?

Correct. Sexual orientation is treated like one's race and ethnic background - stuff that is part of you from birth and which can't be changed (and shouldn't be changed), and so on. 

Whereas KKK supporters, yeah, they are obviously not born that way, those are beliefs that can be changed and those are beliefs that do nothing but incite violence and hatred, so they are, naturally, going to be treated differently as a reuslt. 

That's the basic gist, at least. 

Quote

It's so incredibly upsetting and frustrating when the law is manipulated to hurt others. I know I sound naive, but these days it's just one thing after the other that makes me want to tune out all news.

What boggles my mind is how these people can be crafty enough to manipulate the law as they do...and then you hear people like that one woman say the dumbest nonsense imaginable about why male genitalia is a "perfect fit" for female genitalia*.

*I meant to say last night that I also absolutlely LOVED John's reaction to the "perfect fit" part of that speech XD.

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

So, the girl who was testifying about the opposing team having a trans woman, the whole thing turned out to be a big lie and she's the daughter of the ADF spokesperson. I wanted to cut that clip and send it to my siblings after the absurd argument we had about transgenderism in sports. They covered this awhile back but they really hit on an effective scare tactic, because, sports! SO important. 

The part that got me was how oh-so-dramatic her story was. "Oh, we were all so excited and then we got on the field and we saw a MAN posing as a woman and it totally crushed our spirit and  WE LOST!" 

Like, please, get the hell over yourself and spare us the lame (and fake) sob story.

Quote

Um, his story about making a "real man" out of Ken by putting him together with GI Joe? Sounds like the start of a gay porno. 

My thoughts exactly :D. 

4 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I never understood why cakes were the battleground for marriage equality. Always mystified me. You don't like making money? 

I genuinely wonder what they're so afraid will happen if they make a cake for a same-sex couple. Is it going to burst into flames? Are they going to be struck by lightning? Do they think they'll somehow "turn gay" afterward? I'd love someone to just ask them that point blank. Whether we'd actually get any sort of an answer, I don't know, but I just feel like someone really needs to ask that. 

And yeah, I also wonder why one even gets into the wedding business if they're so opposed to same-sex marriage. It's like the people who work at a pharmacy but think their religious views should allow them to refuse to sell someone birth control. If your beliefs are THAT sacrosanct to you, why on earth are you working somewhere where you might have to serve people who will come into conflict with those oh-so-precious religious views? How do people like this manage to go through their daily lives and interact with other people in general?

(To say nothing of how far exactly does this restriction go? Do people who don't want to make wedding cakes for same-sex couples also check to see if straight couples, say, had an affair before they got engaged and requested a cake for their wedding? Do they check to see if straight couples are waiting until marriage before making a cake for them? Do they check to see if one or both people in a straight relationship have been married before? 

I'm going to take a wild guess that the answer to all of the above is no. And if they do happen to do that? Well, at least they'd be consistent, but again, that would still be really creepy and really invasive stuff to ask a couple for whom you're making a freaking wedding cake.)

Edited May 12 by Annber03

[DoctorAtomic]

Just speaking from a criminal perspective, I would think you'd want to charge gay people more for the cake. iirc math correctly, more money > zero money. Don't they try upselling cakes to hetero couples?

It's just weird that the cakes is what stood out. Not the store where you rent the tux from. The venue. The band/DJ. Caterer. Limo service. 

All the things that go into pulling off a wedding, but it was the cakes? It's entirely too random to be coincidental. 

It's just baffling to me where everyone is out to squeeze every cent they can out of people, a cake is where the line is drawn. 

 

[MaryMitch]

The thing about the Colorado baker - in Colorado, sexuality is a protected class, same as race, religion, and ethnicity. Comparing making a cake to celebrate a same sex wedding to making one for pedophiles is not only horrible, it doesn't even apply in the legal sense.

[Shrek]

14 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

 

It's just baffling to me where everyone is out to squeeze every cent they can out of people, a cake is where the line is drawn. 

 

Because you first need someone who is willing to draw that line & cakes just happened to be where the religious nutjob with an axe to grind resided. It could have been any one of the other places you mentioned but the owners of those businesses are probably the live & let live type who just see gay business as good business rather than something to be stamped out.

[peeayebee]

It might also have to do with the "tell a story" -- a winsome one -- to win support. Who doesn't love cake? Who doesn't love beautifully decorated cake? They are TV shows devoted to them. Yummy cakes, artistic expression. It's meant to hit in the feels.

[iMonrey]

17 hours ago, Annber03 said:

The part that got me was how oh-so-dramatic her story was. "Oh, we were all so excited and then we got on the field and we saw a MAN posing as a woman and it totally crushed our spirit and  WE LOST!" 

If you're so upset the opposing team has "a man" then why don't you go and get your own "man?" Level the playing field. Problem solved.

What cracks me up is this pervasive idea they try to push that cis, hetero males are "pretending" to be women just so they can excel in sports. Or go into women's bathrooms and locker rooms to peep. It's hilariously paranoid.

Edited May 13 by iMonrey

[milkyaqua]

Ugh, I swear I've never had a decent wedding cake no matter whose wedding it was or how cheap (Costco) or expensive the cake was.  Funny the hill that people choose to die on.  Except it's more stupid than funny.

[angelamh66]

I think they pick the cakes and websites because they can tie it to speech. Driving a limo for a gay wedding does not involve any type of speech, whereas under their theory, the decorating of a cake or design of a website is a form of speech. 

[peeayebee]

Today on NPR, on a program called 1A, was the author of a book called 'Lawless.' 

Quote

... when the Supreme Court held in the marriage equality decision Obergefell versus Hodges that states were required to license marriages between couples of the same sex, Justices Alito and Thomas dissented, and they warned that the court's marriage equality decision risked violating the First Amendment rights of people with religious objections to marriage equality.... That basically generated a cottage industry of the conservative legal movement filing cases that challenged and sought exceptions to civil rights protections for the LGBT community on First Amendment grounds.

Quote

Three zero three Creative [the website-designer case] is one of those cases where they found a website design company, refashioned it into a wedding website design company, and then refashioned it into a wedding website company that wanted to engage in religious speech and celebrate the religious nature of weddings. And all of that allowed them to generate this case before the justices that cleanly presented the issues that the justices wanted to opine on.

So yes, as @angelamh66 said, orgs like ADF choose or create 1st Amendment cases because that's what the Supreme Court is focused on, rather than on gay rights.

Here's a link to that program, where you can listen or read the transcript.

Edited May 13 by peeayebee

[Annber03]

7 hours ago, iMonrey said:

What cracks me up is this pervasive idea they try to push that cis, hetero males are "pretending" to be women just so they can excel in sports. Or go into women's bathrooms and locker rooms to peep. It's hilariously paranoid.

Right? Like, if a guy wants to be a creeper, he really doesn't need to go to those kinds of lengths to do so  And even if he did want to dress up in women's clothing to sneak in and take a peek at women, I guarantee you he's not going to be swayed by some law or some sign stating, "NO TRANSGENDER PEOPLE ALLOWED", or words to that effect 

(Also, if a guy does dress up in women's clothing and creep on/attack a woman in the restroom...that is still not the fault of transgender people? 'Cause they weren't creeped on or attacked by a transgender person, they were creeped on/attacked by a cis, hetero man. He is the problem and the person they should fear, not, y'know, the transgender people who had nothing to do with that invasion of privacy or attack.)

I also wonder how the people who keep insisting that people should go into the "right" bathroom would feel if, say, someone who looked like Caitlyn Jenner went into the men's room. Or someone who looked like Chaz Bono went into the women's room. I mean, they're going into the "right" bathroom, like these people keep insisting, so surely they won't face any kind of harassment whatsoever from other men or women in those restrooms, right?

I know logic is apparently a dying art in this country nowadays, but holy shit, people*, can we at least TRY using our brains for a second here?

*Speaking generally, obviously.

[iMonrey]

3 hours ago, Annber03 said:

Right? Like, if a guy wants to be a creeper, he really doesn't need to go to those kinds of lengths to do so  And even if he did want to dress up in women's clothing to sneak in and take a peek at women, I guarantee you he's not going to be swayed by some law or some sign stating, "NO TRANSGENDER PEOPLE ALLOWED", or words to that effect 

And as far as I know there have been no documented cases where a man dressed as a woman went into a woman's restroom and attacked anyone or even bothered anyone. It's the same argument as "if a man can marry another man then why not a donkey?" I'm not aware of anyone trying to marry a donkey. It's not a plausible danger.

But it's the sports thing that gets me. Like there are men who aren't competitive enough to play men's sports so they pose as women so they can win in women's sports? How would they brag about that? Wouldn't it come out? And if they're that bad at sports who's to say they wouldn't suck just as badly at women's sports? It's really an insult to female athletes that they couldn't kick this guy's ass just because he's a man.

Oh, he's a man, he's got an unfair advantage. Well, not enough to succeed at men's sports, obviously. Just being a man doesn't make you better than ANY WOMEN in sports. How dumb. Especially in a team competition. Oh, that team has "a man?" Well, I guess you're screwed, entire team of women, because that other team has ONE MAN. 

[fanestre]

7 hours ago, iMonrey said:

And as far as I know there have been no documented cases where a man dressed as a woman went into a woman's restroom and attacked anyone or even bothered anyone. It's the same argument as "if a man can marry another man then why not a donkey?" I'm not aware of anyone trying to marry a donkey. It's not a plausible danger.

But it's the sports thing that gets me. Like there are men who aren't competitive enough to play men's sports so they pose as women so they can win in women's sports? How would they brag about that? Wouldn't it come out? And if they're that bad at sports who's to say they wouldn't suck just as badly at women's sports? It's really an insult to female athletes that they couldn't kick this guy's ass just because he's a man.

Oh, he's a man, he's got an unfair advantage. Well, not enough to succeed at men's sports, obviously. Just being a man doesn't make you better than ANY WOMEN in sports. How dumb. Especially in a team competition. Oh, that team has "a man?" Well, I guess you're screwed, entire team of women, because that other team has ONE MAN. 

I have a sneaking suspicion that the desire to end Title IX funding for women's sports is one of the reasons behind this nonsense.  That way there will be even more money for football.

[andromeda331]

That book review summons up my feelings on all this so perfect. Why are they so obsessed with gay sex? Or gays or trans? They put so much work into being terrible people.

They are so determined to go after gays or trans but they can't actually come up with anything that proves their point. If they did they wouldn't have to make them up. 

The ruling on the baker refusing to make a wedding cake is such bullshit and stupid. How does he know he's never made a cake for a murderer before? Or rapist? He doesn't and he doesn't care. It reminds me of a line about how even criminals need groceries. But nope he'll throw a fit and compare making a cake for a gay couple to pedophile. By the way how does he know he hasn't made a cake for one? 

Edited May 15 by andromeda331

[DoctorAtomic]

I have no interest in going into the women's locker room.

I've said before, when I used to go to fraternity parties, there were girls there, but no women's bathroom. Because it's a fraternity. We all used the same bathrooms. There were urinals for the guys, and the girls went in the stalls. Nothing happened ever. I don't get why it matters who is in what bathroom. I've peed at parties when women were in there fixing their makeup, or when the bar is crowded, the girls would go in with the guys because, again, you have the urinals and stalls.