Moyers: Pledge of Allegiance is a Lie »« McMillan Blames JFK for Nazi Unions

Beware the ‘Rainbow Curtain’

I’ve thoroughly enjoyed the last couple weeks of reading the hysterical and fevered reactions of the Christian right to the Supreme Court’s marriage rulings. This column by megachurch pastor Dan Cummins is one of my favorites. It’s full of soaring and incoherent rhetoric, starting with the obligatory comparison to Nazi communists:

After World War II, Stalin installed an iron curtain around Russia, keeping his capitalist neighbors from eavesdropping. The Chinese accessorized their Cold War condo with a bamboo curtain deterring pesky peeping toms from the West. Soon Mr. Khrushchev, keeping up with his Commie neighbors, built a privacy wall and gated community secluding East Berliners from greedy, free-market entrepreneurs soliciting door-to-door. Not to forget Kim Il-Sung’s ensemble of razor wire and land mines across North Korea’s 38th parallel to discourage those JWs and LDS types from indoctrinating the folks.

Now, in the midst of the American Culture War, behind another curtain of sorts – a life-size photographic scrim concealing a facelift to the Supreme Court’s crumbling west façade – Justice Anthony Kennedy has ordered a redecorating of the nation’s landscape with a bold, colorful and inclusive statement – the Rainbow Curtain – a polyamorous blend suited for a post-moralist motif, designed to safeguard the modern American family from the narrow-minded views of those “animus”-filled Founding Fathers.

Seriously, that just makes me laugh and say “more please.” And oh, there’s more.

From their juridical lair, the liberal Gang of Five recently set off a catalytic charge toppling traditional marriage – the last principled pillar upholding Uncle Sam’s home.

Really? Traditional marriage was toppled? You mean straight people are going to stop getting married? Stop having kids? Stop loving their families? Indeed, how will any marriage be affected in any way because others are allowed to get married too? When other people get to eat lunch, does that somehow diminish your lunch? Has your lunch been toppled?

What’s ahead for those in the Gay Zones who refuse to comply with Kennedy’s dictates – re-education camps for homophobic racists? Will Big Sis employ foreign troops invading through our unsecured borders to enforce the transition into this brave new world? What stark new realities are ahead for those behind the Rainbow Curtain? Will Americans become refugees in their own country as they flee with their families into neighboring Free Zone states?

Will Amanda discover that Rod has had a secret identity all along? Will Batman save the day? Tune in next week, same batshit time, same batshit channel. Yes, he seriously just wondered aloud if Janet Napolitano (that’s who the wingnuts love to call Big Sis) will allow a foreign invasion to enforce marriage equality. WTF? He might as well have asked if Obama is going to bring in Al Qaeda members to work in daycare centers. Shit, I just gave them a new conspiracy theory idea, didn’t I?

Comments

  1. Chiroptera says

    last principled pillar

    Oh, was that last week’s last principled pillar? I wonder what next week’s last principled pillar will be.

  2. says

    Do you think that he was out shopping at Bed, Bath and Beyond, when he had the sudden realization,
    “Oh, shit, I have to write a column.”?

  3. Larry says

    They sure do love them some jail and bondage fantasies. With the young, strapping, FEMA re-education guards in their tight, black, uniforms and long, hard, re-education batons. I guess it’s some form of christo-porn that they’re addicted to.

  4. Chiroptera says

    Are we sure that Ed hasn’t gotten lazy and is just posting stuff from the Glenn Beck Conspiracy Generator?

  5. frankb says

    First he lists the Russian leader Stalin, then the Chinese leader Mao, then another Russian leader Khrushchev keeping up with his commie neighbors as if he was an East German. I bet Cummins doesn’t know that Khrushchev is Russian.

  6. eric says

    Can one wear a polyamorous blend with cotton without angering the OT God? Is it machine washable? Is it a fashion faux pas to wear one’s polyamorous blend after Labor day?

  7. John Pieret says

    juridical lair

    I like that. I may use it in the future (though not in any briefs I write!).

    liberal Gang of Five

    Less successful, since it requires ignorance of Kennedy’s record on the court.

    Shit, I just gave them a new conspiracy theory idea, didn’t I?

    Don’t worry, Ed. It is beyond the power of ordinary mortals to out batshit-crazy the Religious Right.

  8. dingojack says

    Weren’t there originally five principaled pillars holding up the Cleaver’s home?

    Does this American home have ”unscrupulous” lintels,’ inscrutable’ door-jams and ‘incomprehensible’ floorboards as well?

    Dingo

  9. CaitieCat says

    I think this guy’s a secret Muslinhomofascist himself, like the Kenyan usurper, talking about his pillar toppling, I’m pretty sure they talk about their pillars all the time, or so it said in this e-mail my uncle sent me.

  10. Reginald Selkirk says

    Ky. church wants pastor gone after wife’s column

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — A newspaper column lampooning Southern Baptists, calling the group “the crazy old paranoid uncle of evangelical Christians,” is causing quite a stir in a Kentucky city and put a pastor’s job in jeopardy.

    The column was written by Angela Thomas, the wife of Bill Thomas, an assistant pastor at the First Baptist Church in Madisonville. Her column was done in response to the Southern Baptist Convention’s opposition to a new Boy Scouts of America policy that welcomes gay members…

  11. Synfandel says

    Oh, the foreign invasion to enforce marriage equality is coming. It’s coming from the socialist north. And we’re bringing beer and poutine. Be afraid.

  12. CaitieCat says

    And we’re bringing beer and poutine.

    Yeah, but it’s good beer. So there’s that. Plus it’s harder to kill someone with a stubby than one of those long-necked USan bottles.

  13. F [is for fluvial] says

    Marriage is a pillar upholding the federal government? OK….

    dingojack
    I think it was the fifth column what was the dangerous one.

  14. Scr... Archivist says

    So much crazy.

    Like a surreal scene from “Red Dawn,” America woke up on June 26 to a divided nation with 95 million of its citizens in 13 states held hostage to judicial legislation, trapped behind the Rainbow Curtain and forced to accept the moral dictates of the elitist ruling party….

    Wow. I’ve heard the Culture War described as a Cold Civil War, but this takes the cake.

    And the Iron Curtain wasn’t about stopping eavesdropping. It was about the extreme level of control that the USSR had over the Eastern Bloc countries, in every regard.

    Where are Patrick Dempsey and his pack of Wolverines when we need them?

    Oh boy, now we’re moving into slightly-veiled calls for paramilitary violence. Another bigot is waiting for our cold war to become hot. (And, by the way, I think he means “Swayze”.)

    Anyhow, it’s pretty clear that Cummins is worried that the gays are going to force bigot churches to wed same-sex couples.

    Watch what happens to the families, businesses and churches in the Gay Zones who refuse to comply with Kennedy’s Court. Be forewarned and become forearmed.

    And again I have to wonder what arms he’s talking about. They’re probably not the kind used for hugging.

    Churches in the Free Zones will be intentionally targeted by transplanted same-sex couples unpacking their rainbow watermarked marriage licenses issued in the Gay Zone states. They will demand membership in your churches.

    Can a marriage license in one state compel anyone in another state to formalize it? I thought the wedding had to happen in the same state, perhaps even the same county, where the license was granted.

    … any church standing upon biblical grounds for traditional marriage and against homosexuality will be labeled as the new KKK of this generation’s civil rights movement.

    Too late. They have already earned themselves that reputation.

    Its clergy will be compared to the likes of David Duke and convicted for hate speech inciting civil unrest.

    Am I wrong to understand that there is no such legal category as “hate speech”? If any clergy-member is convicted of a hate crime, it has to be a part of something else that is already a crime, such as battery, right?

    The end result for any church refusing complicity to the court’s opinion will be loss of tax-exempt status.

    Oh, that’s what he’s really worried about — money. His predictions of indebted churches closing their doors because of government persecution is also a clever way of preparing an excuse for the decline in Christian dominance in the U.S. As more people avoid the bigot churches, those churches can claim it’s because of the money and not their unpopular doctrines.

  15. otrame says

    The curtains in question were needed to keep people INSIDE not keep people out whereas personally I am perfectly happy for him and his friends to leave if they want…. Though honestly I don’t know where they would go. The only places as rabidly homophobic as he would like are either very unfriendly to good Christians such as himself or are absolutely full of black people, which many of those who agree with him wouldn’t like.

  16. says

    Well, the “Rainbow Curtain” might be totalitarifascihomislaminazi inspired but I guarantee that both the design and the fabric are fucking FABULOUS!!

  17. dugglebogey says

    Your “lunch” example is especially appropriate, considering a lot of these people may have had their lunches ruined when “certain” other people were allowed to eat at the same lunch counters…

  18. cptdoom says

    Where are Patrick Dempsey and his pack of Wolverines when we need them?

    Um, apparently at a hospital in Seattle (which is in the “Gay Zone”), because that’s where Dempsey is acting these days. Patrick Swayze, of course, was the leader in the original Red Dawn.

    What’s ahead for those in the Gay Zones who refuse to comply with Kennedy’s dictates – re-education camps for homophobic racists? Will Big Sis employ foreign troops invading through our unsecured borders to enforce the transition into this brave new world? What stark new realities are ahead for those behind the Rainbow Curtain? Will Americans become refugees in their own country as they flee with their families into neighboring Free Zone states?

    Actually, they’ll just have to treat gays and lesbians like they treat Jews and Mormons – snickering behind their backs while taking their money. It’s the American way.

    Pro-biblical marriage groups are not prepared nor organized to oppose [the radical LGBT leadership's] well-planned, thought-out agenda.

    Well, then you’d better get a move on. I know, why don’t you form some groups, raise some money from your fellow bigots and work both in legislatures and at the ballot box to stop gay equality. It’s not like you’ve tried that already, right?

    Its clergy will be compared to the likes of David Duke and convicted for hate speech inciting civil unrest.

    Is that the same David Duke who was once buddies with Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council? Just asking.

  19. raven says

    What’s ahead for those in the Gay Zones who refuse to comply with Kennedy’s dictates – re-education camps for homophobic racists? Will Big Sis employ foreign troops invading through our unsecured borders…

    Naw.

    Everyone will just have fabulous curtains.

    And owning a stylish pair of shoes will be considered a human right.

  20. raven says

    Will Americans become refugees in their own country as they flee with their families into neighboring Free Zone states?

    Fundie kooks never, ever walk their talk.

    We could easily raise millions to send them to the nearest xian theocracy. Surely, their god, the most powerful being in the universe, has one in one of the 220 nations on earth.

    Dan Cummins won’t be one of them. As a successful con man with a megachurch, he is making too much money babbling like an idiot and selling hate and fear to want to move.

  21. Subtract Hominem says

    dugglebogey @ 21

    Also, people who fear and hate homosexuality this much are CLEARLY gay.

    Ugh. Not this shit again. Some are repressed, some are only in it for the money they can raise by pandering to paranoia, some have just been raised in a culture of hate and are talking about what they know. For some, it’s probably more than one of the above.

    All the homophobes who aren’t actually gay or bi certainly don’t make the news for their faithful heterosexuality, so it’s easy for this kind of confirmation bias to set in. That doesn’t make the stereotype any less inaccurate.

  22. John Pieret says

    Its clergy will be compared to the likes of David Duke and convicted for hate speech inciting civil unrest.

    I suppose he didn’t notice that David Duke was never arrested, much less convicted, for “hate speech,” except in the Czech Republic (on suspicion of “denying or approving of the Nazi genocide”).

    Once again, reality refuses to intrude on the wingnuts.

  23. oranje says

    Anything polyamorous that the SC wants to install is fine by me. I’ve lost enough friends, in a sea of derisive and condemning comments, when they find out my wife and I are poly.

    I love the word “installed” for the iron curtain. A small part of me wonders if he pictures Joseph Stalin, in a tank top behind the controls of a crane, installing plates of steel himself.

  24. caseloweraz says

    What’s ahead for those in the Gay Zones who refuse to comply with Kennedy’s dictates — re-education camps for homophobic racists?

    Nope, something more subtle and insidious — Invasion of the Marriage Snatchers!

    Here’s how it ends.

    /snark

  25. JustaTech says

    I’m sorry, but where does this tidbit come from?

    ” Not to forget Kim Il-Sung’s ensemble of razor wire and land mines across North Korea’s 38th parallel to discourage those JWs and LDS types from indoctrinating the folks.”

    Granted, much of my understanding of the Korean War comes from M*A*S*H, but I’m fairly certain that keeping out missionaries was pretty low on the to-do list for the North.

  26. says

    Subtract Hominem

    dugglebogey @ 21

    Also, people who fear and hate homosexuality this much are CLEARLY gay.

    Ugh. Not this shit again. Some are repressed, some are only in it for the money they can raise by pandering to paranoia, some have just been raised in a culture of hate and are talking about what they know. For some, it’s probably more than one of the above.

    All the homophobes who aren’t actually gay or bi certainly don’t make the news for their faithful heterosexuality, so it’s easy for this kind of confirmation bias to set in. That doesn’t make the stereotype any less inaccurate.

    I think I’m with you, Subtract. I do think there are plenty of self-hating homosexuals among the homophobes, I’d prefer that intuition not be treated as a default assumption or indicated by intensity of the hatred alone. I’d only seriously suggest it if there’s legitimate suspicion of homosexual affairs by the homophobe in question, or maybe jokingly if there’s a lot of accidental double entendres or apparent Freudian slips in one of their speeches.

  27. dogmeat says

    Scr … Archivist @ 15

    Can a marriage license in one state compel anyone in another state to formalize it? I thought the wedding had to happen in the same state, perhaps even the same county, where the license was granted.

    I’m not certain what you mean here. Do you mean a wedding that occurs but isn’t registered with a clerk or other public official? Or do you mean a couple who are fully recognized as married in another state moving to a second state? In the former, no, I don’t believe there is any compulsion for a state to recognize a ceremony that occurs outside their borders, in the latter, we have the full faith and credit clause. My wife and I were recognized by Arizona as married the moment we applied for anything that would requite that recognition (health coverage by employer, contract borrowing money, etc.)

    —————————
    frankb@6

    I bet Cummins doesn’t know that Khrushchev is Russian.

    I was wondering the same thing when reading that part. What made it so difficult was the babble intermixed with lack of understanding of the history coupled with a bit of anti-eastern snide-ness (bamboo curtain, really?) The way it’s written certainly suggests that he thinks Khrushchev was German, not surprising given the general lack of international knowledge, knowledge of history, or knowledge in general exhibited by fundies..

  28. eric says

    Those quotes really cry out for Modusoperandi. Where’s that blasted FtB satirist when you need him?

  29. Chiroptera says

    And another thing: I sure wish the Christianists would quit trying to make Same Sex Marriage about them. It really has nothing to do with them at all.

  30. Scr... Archivist says

    dogmeat @15,

    Do you mean a wedding that occurs but isn’t registered with a clerk or other public official? Or do you mean a couple who are fully recognized as married in another state moving to a second state.

    No, I mean a case that is just shy of your second example, one in which they get a license in one state and get married in another. Is that even possible?

    Cummins’ comment isn’t clear, but I think he is describing a situation in which:

    1.) a same-sex couple that lives in a marriage-equality state gets a marriage license there
    2.) before any wedding, the couple then move to a state that doesn’t have marriage equality
    3.) the couple then impose themselves on an anti-gay church with a homophobic congregation and demand that the church officials there conduct a same-sex wedding for them.

    First off, I doubt anyone would want to have a wedding where they are not welcome. But second, would this even work legally? Let’s ignore churches, or gay marriage, for a moment. If a woman and a man got a marriage license from a town clerk in one state, can they be married by another state’s recognized officiant on that same license?

  31. hunter says

    Chiroptera @32: I had the same thought, but then I realized: Everything is about them.

  32. francesc says

    “After World War II, Stalin installed an iron curtain around Russia, keeping his capitalist neighbors from eavesdropping…”
    Well, yeah, it sounds like immigration laws and the US border with Mexico, I think it’s ok as an analogy to ask for it’s amend.
    Oh, wait

  33. eric says

    Scr…Archivist:

    No, I mean a case that is just shy of your second example, one in which they get a license in one state and get married in another. Is that even possible?

    IANAL, but…

    AIUI the marriage licence IS the marriage, as far as the law is concerned. If the state requires a celebrant’s signature to issue the license, then they must get that signature before you can get the official marriage licence. The situation you’ve described above would go something like this: (1) get the State A paperwork and fill out all the bits you can. (2) Travel to state B, find a celebrant that state A legally recognizes as legimitate, have them peform the ceremony and sign the appropriate paperwork. (3) Travel back to state A and submit your paperwork (or maybe you can just mail it in), and only then would state A issue a marriage license. Your license will be dated to the day that the notary or other official signee signed it.

    If State A does not require a celebrant’s signature, then its much simpler. You go to the courthouse in state A and get your marriage license. Congratulations, you are now married in the eyes of the law. You can now go to B and have any ceremony you want, and the law doesn’t care, because that ceremony has no legal impact.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply