The Definition of Bigotry on Planet Wingnuttia


I’m sure you’ve heard by now that evangelical minister Louie Giglio has withdrawn from giving an invocation at President Obama’s second inauguration after it came out that he’d delivered the usual fundie sermon about gay people being evil sinners doomed by God. And on Planet Wingnuttia, that means he was prevented from speaking due to liberal bigotry. I’m sure it will come as no surprise that the Worldnutdaily is promoting this framing.

Some high-profile Christians are alleging leftist bigotry is to blame for prominent evangelical pastor Louie Giglio being forced to back out from delivering the benediction at President Obama’s upcoming inauguration…

“Louie Giglio was simply reflecting what the scriptures have taught for 2,000 years, what Christianity has believed and taught for 2,000 years,” said Bryan Fischer, director of issue analysis at the American Family Association and host of “Focal Point” on American Family Radio.

Fischer, who is as virulent a bigot as you will ever encounter, is selling the Orwellian idea that it’s not bigotry to condemn gay people to hell and blame them for everything from pedophilia to the downfall of human civilization, but it is bigotry to point out such despicable claims and argue that those who make them should not be giving the invocation at the inaugural event for a president that owes much of his electoral support to the LGBT community and its supporters. And up is down. And black is white. And Fischer is sane.

Comments

  1. troll says

    I’m sure I’m beating a dead horse here, but why do we even have a religious invocation at a state function like the inauguration at all?

  2. dugglebogey says

    Those same scriptures taught racism and slavery for 1950 years, but suddenly stopped recently. D’ya think maybe they could stop this cherry picked issue too any time soon? kthxbai.

  3. theguy says

    “director of issue analysis at the American Family Association”

    For the sake of brevity (and irony), I think that position should be called “Father of Lies.”

  4. oranje says

    So any time their message isn’t front and center, it’s because of bigotry?

    They’re just so completely sure that they have it all correct, eh? That they could just bring us “truth?”

  5. Draken says

    “Director of issue analysis”. I like these self-appointed titles. You know who else were really good at making up titles and ranks?

  6. says

    troll “I’m sure I’m beating a dead horse here, but why do we even have a religious invocation at a state function like the inauguration at all?”
    Because we need all the help we can get.

  7. John Hinkle says

    Nutcase Xians hate being called bigots. It really chaps their lips, because their only defense is that God is also a bigot, but they can’t say that. When your only defense is to invoke the imaginary, then you’ve got nothing.

    They think the other side has nothing too, so when they level the charge “bigot”, they expect the same infliction of pain. But it’s not the same. The other side just responds with, “you’re a moron.”

  8. magistramarla says

    I’ve heard that there will now be same-sex weddings at the National Cathedral. BTW – YES!
    It seems that the easiest solution would be to ask one of the officiants from there to participate in the inauguration. If I were President Obama, I would ask a woman rector from the National Cathedral.
    That would have the right-wingers in a tizzy!

  9. Bill Openthalt says

    @9: John, do you like to be called a bigot? Of course, you are convinced you are not a bigot, and you would not be happy if you’d have to admit some of your views are indeed bigotted. So when someone calls you a bigot, you have two options:

    1. You dismiss the person as a moron so you can disregard their opinion

    2. You defend your views by explaining why you believe them not to be bigotted.

    This is exactly what fundamentalists do. You suggest that they are silently admitting they are bigots, and manufacture explanations they know to be false. That’s not how the human mind works. Christians are just as convinced of their righteousness as you are of yours. Atheists are probably slightly less deluded than fundamentalists, but our convictions and beliefs use the same mental circuitry as religious beliefs, and are, when it comes to morality, just as arbitrary.

  10. bradleybetts says

    ” theguy
    January 15, 2013 at 2:27 pm (UTC -5) Link to this comment

    “director of issue analysis at the American Family Association”

    For the sake of brevity (and irony), I think that position should be called “Father of Lies.””

    I’m not sure that would be ironic so much as a literal interpretation of his job description.

  11. Michael Heath says

    Bill Openthalt writes:

    Atheists are probably slightly less deluded than fundamentalists . . .

    Citation requested. I’d be particularly interested in seeing how your assertion holds up beyond your general statement, but also by socio-economic class and level of education.

  12. Bill Openthalt says

    @13: No cite available. I was merely refering to the fact that atheists do not believe in (a) god(s), which is one delusion less than a fundamentalist (believer). That being said, atheists and believers are humans, so on average, members of both groups are probably equally delusional.

  13. Michael Heath says

    Bill Openthalt writes:

    . . . atheists and believers are humans, so on average, members of both groups are probably equally delusional.

    I suggest reading up on research regarding how subsets of people think, e.g., conservatives vs. liberals, authoritarians vs. non-authoritarians, partisans vs. non-partisans. You’ll find your comment to be incredibly provocative and I highly doubt true. Chris Mooney’s Republican Brain is a good start.

Leave a Reply