Rios: Gays Love Like Ariel Castro

Sandy Rios continues her campaign to dehumanize gay people on her radio show, declaring that gay people love one another the same way Ariel Castro loved the women he kidnapped and raped. And her guest compared their love for each other to pedophilia.

This kind of thing really makes me angry. It is literally dehumanizing. It dismisses millions of people and the very real human emotions they feel and compares them to monsters when they have done nothing at all to hurt anyone else, all because their barbaric God doesn’t like gay people. That, I would submit, is the essence of immorality and irrationality.

24 comments on this post.
  1. cottonnero:

    Why is mutual informed consent such a hard concept?

  2. Raging Bee:

    As usual, the people looking for ever more inventive ways to call gays sick, turn out to be pretty sick themselves. These asshats should be making horror movies, not policy speeches. Horror movies serve only to scare people away from anything new or unusual, and mindless fear is all these bigots are good for; so there’s the most perfect career match I’ve ever seen.

  3. Zeno:

    Sandy Rios is a twisted little creature who “knows the truth” and her “truth” advocates the dehumanization and imprisonment of millions.

  4. John Pieret:

    Why doesn’t she just make Der ewige Homosexuell and be done with it?

  5. grumpyoldfart:

    It is literally dehumanizing. It dismisses millions of people and the very real human emotions they feel and compares them to monsters…

    That is exactly what religion is designed to do. The leaders push the “us and them” message to make sure the flock doesn’t go gallivanting off in some other direction. And the mugs in the pews love the idea that they are the chosen ones; bigger, stronger, and much more moral than everyone else.

    The flock is prepared to pay money to have their egos massaged in that fashion and the leaders are happy to be paid in cash for providing that service.

  6. thisisaturingtest:

    She not only dehumanizes gay people, she makes criminals of them (maybe, to her, the same thing). I don’t know what else you could call it when you compare actions that are legal (gay folks) to actions that are not (Castro or pedophiles). But it’s not really very surprising; it’s the same binary tactic they use to compare all abortion providers to Kermit Gosnell.

  7. Raging Bee:

    And the mugs in the pews love the idea that they are the chosen ones; bigger, stronger, and much more moral than everyone else.

    …in many cases, without having to actually do anything moral, or suffer any change or personal inconvenience at all.

  8. Who Knows?:

    If you love me, you will keep my commandments

    Seems like an odd kind of love to me.

  9. sharonb:

    Gandhi: “I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians; they are so un-like your Christ.”

  10. dugglebogey:

    Also:

    The ACTUAL guy who ACTUALLY did all these horrific things is STRAIGHT.

    How can you use the behavior of a straight man as an example of how gay people act?

  11. Pyra:

    Sometimes I wish I didn’t read your blog so that I wouldn’t know this sort of thing. But then, know thy enemy is handy, I guess. I can’t even begin to express my disgust with such sentiment. It is stomach-churning.

  12. Michael Heath:

    sharonb writes:

    Gandhi: “I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians; they are so un-like your Christ.”

    I’ll repeat what I just wrote yesterday in another thread. Your Ghandi argument is fatally defective.

    Those who know the Bible and can think straight know that the Jesus character in the Bible is infinitely evil. That’s given his promise to punish some humans with unimaginable torment for all of eternity. How can anyone “like” such an evil entity? It’s the epitome of evil, even if only one person were to suffer such an affliction.

  13. Loqi:

    I have the mental image of Rios discovering a gay BDSM site and freaking out. Since that side of the fence doesn’t seem to have any concept of consent, I can sort of see the confusion.

  14. Abby Normal:

    Ed, in accordance with your stated desire to show more sensitivity to people with mental issues I’d like to point out that pedophiles are in fact people, people with a socially maligned mental disorder, but still people with “very real human emotions.” It may be helpful to note that not all pedophiles are child molesters (and vice versa). Though even the ones who cross the line and become child molesters, a monstrous act I’m sure we’ll all agree, are still people.

    That aside, you’re spot on, this radio broadcast an ugly attempt to paint homosexuals as lesser beings. Their love is not really love. Their commitment isn’t really commitment. They’re just rationalizing their base animal desires by calling it love. The whole clip is nothing but contemptible, self-aggrandizing drivel.

  15. zmidponk:

    cottonnero:

    Why is mutual informed consent such a hard concept?

    I could be wrong, but I think, to them, the issue of consent doesn’t even come into it – these people are simply incapable of wrapping their minds around the concept that homosexuality is not wrong. That being the case, in their minds, any time a homosexual person expresses their sexuality in any way, such as by having a sexual encounter with someone of the same gender, something that is or should be a crime has been committed, so, obviously, this must be just like other sexual crimes, like paedophilia.

  16. Dr X:

    @15,

    That seems about right.

  17. Artor:

    Loqi @13
    I expect he has several such sites bookmarked, and visits them regularly, for “research.”

  18. dan4:

    @17: Uh, Sandy Rios is a woman. Ed even indicates that fact twice (“her guest…her guest…”).

  19. dan4:

    Yikes, meant (“her campaign…her guest…”).

  20. anne mariehovgaard:

    @1:

    Why is mutual informed consent such a hard concept?

    Understanding consent would mean realising that a Master/slave relationship your parents made you enter into long before you reached the age of consent is not “love”.

  21. freehand:

    anne mariehovgaard:
    Why is mutual informed consent such a hard concept?
    Understanding consent would mean realising that a Master/slave relationship your parents made you enter into long before you reached the age of consent is not “love”.

    .
    Hmm. Interesting additional feature of the arrested moral development of the Fundamentalist. Alice Miller’s “For Your Own Good” discusses the observation that it is very difficult for abused children to admit that they are abused. They usually grow up to be abusers or abusees unless some adult in their childhood validated their suffering by describing their situation as abusive, e.g. “Your daddy beats you for no reason at all! That is so mean – you don’t deserve that!” Then they are more likely to grow up hating their parents instead of themselves. Or if they are particularly sophisticated, hating the process which made their parents abusive.
    .
    But however it comes about, yes: the Fundamentalist cannot understand the concept of informed consent. Morality is obedience, and all disobedient acts are interchangeable. Especially the ones that make us feel funny “down there”.

  22. Pierce R. Butler:

    It is literally dehumanizing.

    Huh? Did she claim Ariel Castro is a duck, or a robot, or a dandelion, or an extraterrestrial?

  23. dingojack:

    Pierce R. Butler – And what, pray tell, is the first sentence of leader?
    Reading comprehension fail.
    Dingo

  24. Pierce R. Butler:

    dingojack @ # 23 – I also fail to understand your comment.

    Gonna be one of those days, I guess…

Leave a comment

You must be