Quantcast

«

»

Sep 11 2011

Robert O’Brien Nominee: David Barton

Add this one to the long list of crazy from David Barton:

I will tell you that the science will always catch up with the Bible, it may not appear to be right it will always catch up, it always has, always will. We now have a study out in the last few months called “ex-gays,” and it is significant, it has changed the entire psychological, psychiatric world, because it documents authoritatively people who were homosexuals who no longer were. Now on the secular side they’ve been saying ‘oh there’s nothing you can do about it, you were born that way, that’s you’re nature,’ well if that’s true you can’t have ex-gays. That’s like being an ex-black or an ex-white or an ex-whatever.

So what it has done, science has now figured out, ‘you know God was right.’ So when you said that about you know God didn’t create you to be a homosexual, they’ll say, ‘well wait a minute science says,’ well science doesn’t say that anymore. Science just got changed this year to match what the Bible’s been telling us all along, and that’s why you always stick with the Bible, science will catch up with the Bible.

I don’t care who you are, that’s stupid right there.

18 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    DaveL

    So… where’s this study?

  2. 2
    Aquaria

    So… where’s this study?

    Same place where everything is with Barton: Up his ass, so that he can pull it out when he needs to.

  3. 3
    Chiroptera

    I will tell you that the science will always catch up with the Bible….

    Well, the Bible doesn’t actually say whether or not homosexuality is congenital. Sure, it condemns it, but it also seems to condemn people to death for being Canaanites, so I don’t think you can read much about “being a choice or not” into that one.

    -

    Now on the secular side they’ve been saying ‘oh there’s nothing you can do about it, you were born that way….’

    That’s not the secular side. That the empirical evidence side.

    And if there is empirical evidence that indicates the previous studies were flawed, that indicates that homosexuality is isn’t predominately genetic, that’s fine, too. It still doesn’t mean that homosexuality vs heterosexuality is a choice.

    And even if it were a choice, that’s not really the main issue among the advocates for gay rights anyway.

    -

    …That’s like being an ex-black or an ex-white or an ex-whatever.

    Suppose that it were possible to be “ex-black” or whatever. Would you really be advocating repealing civil rights legislation? Would you suddenly be cool with prejudice and discrimination against blacks, since it would just be a “choice”? Really?

    These fools don’t even understand the principles, even if they are principles they claim to hold.

    -

    …science will catch up with the Bible.

    Yeah. I’m still waiting for NASA to figure out that the sky is really a solid dome over a flat earth with holes in it through which rain falls.

    And then maybe they can open the holes over Texas and Oklahoma to give us a bit of relief!

  4. 4
    Chris from Europe

    I guess someone recycled a Paul Cameron study.

  5. 5
    Michael Heath

    I perceive this visually as David Barton defecating in public and then smearing his feces on himself and far worse, those attracted to his behavior who hungrily lap it up. These fan-boys and their leader then turn around and scream at the horrified bystanders that they’re both vile and unclean. It’s incredibly repugnant and difficult to rationalize how anyone not in an insane asylum can actually succumb to and reward such behavior. My stomach has yet to become resistant to tummie-cringing moments when I read the assertions by David Barton and his ilk.

  6. 6
    386sx

    So science will catch up and say that donkeys can talk and birdie-people can fly?

  7. 7
    Budbear

    I’m undecided over whether Barton is incredibly clueless or incredibly dishonest, though I’m leaning to the latter.

  8. 8
    Michael Heath

    Budbear:

    I’m undecided over whether Barton is incredibly clueless or incredibly dishonest, though I’m leaning to the latter.

    Like those who subscribe to his positions, he’s both.

  9. 9
    feralboy12

    I’m undecided over whether Barton is incredibly clueless or incredibly dishonest, though I’m leaning to the latter.

    I don’t think the two are mutually exclusive.

  10. 10
    Tim DeLaney

    Isn’t it time for a “sexual rights” amendment?

    “Congress shall make no law regulating the private sexual conduct of consenting adults, nor shall it restrict the right of two competent adults to marry, nor shall it tolerate or condone unequal treatment of adults based on their sexual preferences.”

    In an ideal world, such an amendment would be unnecessary, but the real world contains people like Barton.

  11. 11
    MikeMa

    Ed,
    Nice reference to Larry the Cable Guy.

    If you believe Barton, you might be an ignorant teabagger.
    If you think the babble contains any valuable science at all, you might be a moron.
    If you desire a theocratic US, you might be an anti-constitutional, anti-american, religious twit.

  12. 12
    abb3w

    Poking Google a bit looking for the study turns up:
    1) A book from 2007 (ISBN 083082846X) with some pretty blunt critiques of the methodology in the Amazon reviews
    2) (DOI:10.1080/19359705.2010.544186), which finds SRT without statistically significant impact on participants.

    Cue the Wikipedian Protestor.

  13. 13
    Reginald Selkirk

    I will tell you that the science will always catch up with the Bible, it may not appear to be right it will always catch up, it always has, always will.

    You will tell me that, and you will be lying. Science has yet to catch up to the wealth of biological information in Leviticus chapter 11.

    Verse 6, rabbits chew their cud

    Verse 19, bats are a type of “fowl.”

    Verse 22, insects; including locusts, beetles and grasshoppers, have four legs.

    C’mon science, try harder.

  14. 14
    Michael Heath

    abb3w:

    Cue the Wikipedian Protestor.

    Too bad that’s not the American voter protesting.

  15. 15
    WMDKitty -- Survivor

    Heh. Really, now. *shakes head*

  16. 16
    Pinky

    Barton is to truth what Bachmann is to sanity.

  17. 17
    DaveL

    Too bad that’s not the American voter protesting.

    Or the American media, for that matter.

  18. 18
    abb3w

    Wikipedia is (well-sieved) crap.

    It may be even more bad that WP serves as metric of a high standard.

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site