Todd Starnes’ Convenient Concerns About Violence


Todd Starnes is very concerned. He thinks that calling someone like, say, Duck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson, hateful “is going to justify violence against those kinds of people.” Funny, though, he has no concern at all about he and his fellow bigots spewing the most demonizing rhetoric about gay people.

Gee, do you recall Starnes ever expressing even a hint of worry that comparing gay people to pedophiles and murderers is going to justify violence against them? He and his bigoted comrades routinely accuse gay people of being demon-possessed, of wanting to rape your children, of literally trying to destroy God and America and even human civilization itself, of being Nazis who want to throw Christians in concentration camps. I’ve never heard a peep out of Starnes about such dehumanizing and demonizing rhetoric leading to violence against gay people. For that matter, I’ve never heard Starnes utter a single word in opposition to actual violence against gay people, which happens every day. Very convenient how he segregates his concern and limits it only to people he agrees with.

Comments

  1. says

    “Funny, though, he has no concern at all about he and his fellow bigots spewing the most demonizing rhetoric about gay people.”

    You make the common, annoying,.progressivistical mistake, Ed, of conflating “GAY” with “people”.

    They.Are.Not. PEOPLE!

    They are animals of some sort, undoubtedly mammalian, but PEOPLE? Give us a frakkin’ break, here, Ed. You’re not dealin’ with somebody who just got offa the turnip boat!

  2. John Pieret says

    The “obvious” difference is that gay people ARE hateful (as shown by the fact that people like Starnes hate them) while mouth-breathers (or people who play them on TV) like Phil Robertson aren’t because what they say about gays is endorsed by the Bible, which is a book full of nothing but LOVE!

  3. Trebuchet says

    But gays are so violent! Remember the case where Matthew Shepard tied a couple of clean-cut straight guys to a fence and left them to die?

  4. Michael Heath says

    democommie writes:

    You make the common, annoying,.progressivistical mistake, Ed, of conflating “GAY” with “people”.

    They.Are.Not. PEOPLE!

    They are animals of some sort, undoubtedly mammalian, but PEOPLE? Give us a frakkin’ break, here, Ed. You’re not dealin’ with somebody who just got offa the turnip boat!

    Democommie has a good point though a bit hyperbolic. The fact is, conservative Christianity has a long history of treating some groups of people as second class citizens. Treatment that continues with females, gay people, Muslims, atheists, secularists – even liberal Christians secularist, liberals, Democrats, non-white people, and I’m sure a few other groups.

    The idea of equality is a concept they misconstrue into privilege for their in-group only. That leads to the interesting question on whether this defective thinking is something they consciously do (overt hate), or unconsciously do (delusional idiocy). My guess is that both occur at different times and different contexts.

    So when an emergent group gains political influence that conservative Christians decide to hate on, they’re well practiced and eager to deploy that behavior onto this new group. I think that’s worth noting because conservative Christians have long hated gay people. It’s just that the energy level of their hatred only started amping up once gay people started coming out of the close in significant numbers and demanding equal protection. Where we now observe this energy dissipating across the broader population of conservative Christians with decreasing holdouts. Those holdouts seem intent on amping up the rhetoric even further to make up for the loss of hatred across their greater in-group.

  5. says

    “Democommie has a good point though a bit hyperbolic.”

    As close as I will ever get to the closetful of “Netties” that Modusoperandi has won, just THIS year!

  6. dan4 says

    I wonder if Starnes has the same concerns about the scripture in Romans where it states that homosexuality (among other things) is “worthy of death.” I answer my own question: Starnes is a vocal Christian, so no, he does not.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply