Perkins: How Dare You Criticize Christians Who Discriminate!


Tony Perkins is mad as hell that people are actually criticizing two Pennsylvania businesses, a bridal shop and a bed and breakfast, who have refused to offer their services to gay customers. And he says it’s downright intolerant for gay rights advocates to dare to speak out against such discrimination.

At W.W. Bridal Boutique, it isn’t unusual to see two women shopping for wedding dresses. What is unusual is two women shopping for wedding dresses for the same ceremony. That’s the predicament Victoria Miller found herself in as the owner of the Pennsylvania shop. When a lesbian couple contacted the store for an appointment, Victoria explained that she couldn’t help the women find gowns for a ceremony that violates her Christian faith. Right now, an employee explained, the Bloomsburg store doesn’t service same-sex weddings.

Instead of showing the tolerance their movement claims to practice, the women turned to social media to bully the shop — trashing its online reviews and sparking a city-wide firestorm. Miller, whose orthodox beliefs are in the bulls-eye, isn’t backing down. “We feel we have to answer to God for what we do,” she told reporters, “and providing those two girls dresses for a sanctified marriage would break God’s law.”…

Back in Pennsylvania, Victoria Miller continues to be a target. “As a fellow Christian, I’m ashamed of people like you,” one commenter wrote. “We are taught to love our neighbor regardless.” Unfortunately, culturally intoxicated believers like this one have a misguided (and convenient) view of Christ’s calling. Real love doesn’t mean you facilitate people’s desires that are both harmful to them and society. It means speaking the truth in love.

Yeah, how intolerant of you not to accept your second class citizen status and allow others to discriminate against you! You’re obviously a bunch of heterophobes who hate the baby Jesus.

Comments

  1. lordshipmayhem says

    He wouldn’t dare complain about the criticism if it were blacks instead of gays. Tony’s kind already lost that fight, and their losing the fight to discriminate against gays.

  2. says

    Right now, an employee explained, the Bloomsburg store doesn’t service same-sex weddings.

    OF COARSE THEY DONT!!! WHEN YOU ORDER A WEDDING IT COMES WITH A BRIDES DRESS AND A GROOMS SUIT!!! FOR SOCALLED “GAY” WEDDINGS THE STORE WOULD HAVE TO BUY TWO WEDDINGS AND THEYD BE LEFT WITH TWO GROOMS SUITS AND WHAT GOOD IS THAT?!!!

  3. Chiroptera says

    Instead of showing the tolerance their movement claims to practice….

    Ya know, for a movement that makes it routine to mangle the meanings of ordinary words, they can be surprisingly hyperliteral when they want to.

  4. Mr Ed says

    A tolerant person does not judge others, a tolerant person does judge others’ actions. Sort of a moral version of love the sinner but hate the sin.

  5. Sastra says

    When a lesbian couple contacted the store for an appointment, Victoria explained that she couldn’t help the women find gowns for a ceremony that violates her Christian faith.

    Oh dear, someone else with a “misguided (and convenient) view of Christ’s calling.” It seems we have nothing here except Christians with a misguided (and convenient) view of Christ’s calling. Too bad Christ never just calls direct from his own damn phone to settle this objectively. The atheists get to interpret, for only we are qualified.

    Let’s make a deal with those who feel they must answer to God for what they do and obey His special holy laws. We will stop calling them “bigots” if we therefore get to call their religion bigoted.

    “You’re a nice person. Too bad Christianity sucks.”

  6. Chiroptera says

    That’s the predicament Victoria Miller found herself in as the owner of the Pennsylvania shop.

    She found herself in a predicament? That implies that at that time she had to think over whether or not to sell the dresses.

    “Hmm. I can either obey God and not sell dresses to these women, or….”

    Or what? What was the other half of the predicament?

    “…or I can make enough money to buy that new tv.”

    “…or I can avoid being sent to the FEMA camps.”

    “..or I might get some unpleasant feedback on Facebook.”

    “…or I can avoid people finding out about this nasty, horrible side to my personality that I’ve been hiding.”

  7. Matt G says

    Christianity – 2000 years of giving you permission to hate gays, lesbians, Jews, Muslims, blacks, and pretty much anyone else you’d like to hate!

  8. theguy says

    @ lordshipmayhem

    “He wouldn’t dare complain about the criticism if it were blacks instead of gays. Tony’s kind already lost that fight,”

    From what I remember, Perkins did once work with white supremacists, even paying out a hefty sum of money to buy David Duke’s mailing list.

  9. John Pieret says

    It means speaking the truth in love.

    Yeah, nothing says “love” more than “no, you can’t even come into my store.”

  10. busterggi says

    Real love doesn’t mean you facilitate people’s desires that are both harmful to them and society. It means you treat people you don’t like as if they are shit because an invisible magician in the sky supposedly said so to someone a few millenia ago.

  11. dingojack says

    But, but but….. Those lezzos might EAT SHELLFISH wearing those wedding dresses !!eleventy!!
    Dingo

  12. Chris J says

    What if the two women just didn’t mention they were buying dresses for the same wedding? Would selling them dresses suddenly be ok? Or is there gonna have to be a prevailing undercurrent of paranoia that maybe the men and women buying wedding outfits aren’t going to be using them for the religiously-proscribed purpose?

    Are we going to have to add a questionnaire to every purchase? Are you going to have to certify that you are going to use the thing you paid money for in a way that the supplier deems appropriate? Are Christian grocery stores going to have to ask probing questions of everyone wanting to buy produce?

  13. cptdoom says

    Somehow I’m thinking her “Christian” principles didn’t trouble her when unwed mothers came in for dresses when they finally married their baby daddies, nor when divorced women came in for gowns for their second, third or fifth marriages. I also would guess, seeing as she’s still in business, she hasn’t violated state and federal laws by refusing to provide services to the wrong sorts of Christians, Jews or even Mormons. IOW her principles this time amount to “ick, I don’t like those people.

  14. coragyps says

    “providing those two girls dresses for a sanctified marriage would break God’s law”

    What business does tht s-word have in there? How, in Ms. Miller’s eyes, can two lesbians be having a “sanctified” marriage? I think she’s a bit confused here…

  15. timberwoof says

    The fun dies haven’t caught on to why gays hate Baby Jesus. It’s for the same reason that Sister Mary Ignatius does not want any discussion about brothers and sisters or cousins: They imply fathers and mothers which imply sex. So talking about Baby Jesus means your’e talking about … oh, wait. That doesn’t work.

    It’s interesting that the fun dies have stopped talking about special rights. They used to say that gays didn’t deserve civil rights, and granting them to us would mean granting us special rights. It’s clear that they still think that way, though: Christians don’t have to be tolerant or even accepting; gays do.

    There needs to be a false-flag operation. The players are a fabulous tailor and a unwed same-sex couple. The tailor opens a bridal shop and the fiancees go there to order a wedding dress and a tuxedo. The tailor refuses, as he serves only gay couples. The fiancees sue and establish a precedent. Then, after the media uproar, the fiancees and the tailor hold a joint news conference and explain what they did. So nyah.

  16. vmanis1 says

    This still has nothing to do with Christianity. Lots of Christians would agree with the bridal-shop-bigot, and the hateful clown defending her, Tony Pervertkins; lots of others would celebrate the imminent wedding of any two people who love each other, regardless of sex. Attributing her intolerance to the supposed evils of Christianity is simply playing into the hateful clown’s game. Bigotry is bigotry, regardless of the religious affiliation, or lack of same, claimed by the bigot.

    (For the record, I am not now, nor have I ever been, a Christian.)

  17. Uncle Ebeneezer says

    Funny how we are always told that anti-discrimination laws are totes not needed and Tyranny etc., because we can just let The Market Decide! But then when people post negative reviews in order to let fellow consumers help The Market Decide, that’s also a problem.

  18. Uncle Ebeneezer says

    When a lesbian couple contacted the store for an appointment, Victoria explained that she couldn’t help the women find gowns for a ceremony that violates her Christian faith.

    But yeah, nothing to do with Christianity…

  19. Matt G says

    Well that’s the thing: is she a bigot by nature, who happens to be a Christian, or is she not a bigot by nature, and her Christian faith tells her she should be a bigot regarding SSM? Does Christianity simply provide cover for her bigotry – and is therefore just being used by her – or is she simply a pawn of those who interpret Christianity as being anti-SSM? Or does the truth lie somewhere in between?

  20. freehand says

    vmanis1 – Sure, people can be bigots (scientifically illiterate, authoritarian bullies, misogynistic, etc.) without being Christian, but Christian Fundamentalism encourages, trains, legitimizes, and even sanctifies such flaws.
    .
    For some people, brought up in this environment, it is almost impossible to not be all these things.

  21. magistramarla says

    “Unfortunately, culturally intoxicated believers like this one have a misguided (and convenient) view of Christ’s calling.”
    How about this? Now those of us who support SSM are “culturally intoxicated”?
    HIC! I’ll drink to that!

  22. says

    Oooh, can’t you just *feel* the Christian love oozing around this story? Another one for them to mark down in their records of how Christians – in a free Western nation – are once again being persecuted.

  23. vmanis1 says

    freehand: “Sure, people can be bigots (scientifically illiterate, authoritarian bullies, misogynistic, etc.) without being Christian, but Christian Fundamentalism encourages, trains, legitimizes, and even sanctifies such flaws”

    I wouldn’t disagree that some forms of Christianity (and not just fundamentalism) can provide a place for breeding bigotry, but Christianity is hardly unique. There are all sorts of bigotry that have little or nothing to do with Christianity (for example, there was persecution long before the advent of Christianity, and we have only to look at the persecution of Muslims by Buddhists in Myanmar/Burma, or the atrocities committed in 1930s Ukraine by the officially-atheist USSR[*]). I’d be inclined to say that prevailing ideologies that encourage bigotry provide places for breeding bigotry, except that is completely circular.

    There are forms of Christianity (not to mention nearly all other religions) that deeply object to bigotry, and there are forms that embrace it. By conflating these, people end up putting Tony Pervertkins and Martin Luther King, Jr, in the same category.

    [*] From what I understand, there is a difference of opinion as to whether the Ukrainian Holodomor was an instance of genocide directed at Ukrainian nationalists, or simply horrendously bad economic management. In either case, though, Stalin’s government knew that millions of people were dying, and did little or nothing to remedy the situation.

  24. Ichthyic says

    Does Christianity simply provide cover for her bigotry – and is therefore just being used by her – or is she simply a pawn of those who interpret Christianity as being anti-SSM? Or does the truth lie somewhere in between?

    or does it really even matter what someone uses as irrational justification for discrimination?

    perhaps there lies the truth.

  25. Ichthyic says

    Christianity is hardly unique.

    to be clear, that is not an argument against the premise, it’s a red herring.

  26. skinnercitycyclist says

    or does it really even matter what someone uses as irrational justification for discrimination?

    perhaps there lies the truth.

    For starters, it matters when that “irrational justification” (a characterization I fully support) is marked out for particular protection in the Bill of Rights.

  27. Matt G says

    Ichthyic- I think that to fight bigots – and fight bigotry – you have to understand where it’s coming from: what causes it, what sustains it, what inflames it. Are bigots born, or made? I know a kid who is being raised with his parents’ anti-science and anti-gay views. Can he be rescued, or are these values so deeply ingrained that his bigotry and ignorance will be with him (and us) for another 80 years? Some views only die when the person holding them does.

  28. says

    Matt G:
    I wouldn’t give up hope. Quite a lot of us secular humanists were raised in religiously conservative environments, but somehow managed to reject the indoctrination. It’s not always an easy or comfortable process, but it can be done.

  29. caseloweraz says

    Random thoughts in the morning . . .

    Matt G, your phrase “bigotry and ignorance will be with him” triggered this:

    No lord is my shepherd, for with forethought I myself decide what is the path of righteousness. Decision restoreth my soul. Yea, though I walk through the valley of darkness, I get by with a little help from my friends; their goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life.

  30. steffp says

    @vmanis1, #27
    Pointing to a case of US-Christian Right bigotry and discrimination does not imply that Christianity is the sole source of such behavior. There are all kinds of ideologies that lend a hand for insecure people to stabilize their weak self esteem by creating inferior classes of underdogs. Nevertheless, here we have the Christian Right version.
    Now part of that fraction’s political strategy is to claim that every opposition to their sectarian beliefs – which are, as we see, not shared by the majority of Christians – is somehow an assault on all of Christendom. Which is demonstrably not the case. In fact, Ed is doing here what the leaders of less benighted Christian denominations should do: point to the sectarian and inhuman nature of the conflict…

  31. Anri says

    vmanis1 @20:

    This still has nothing to do with Christianity. Lots of Christians would agree with the bridal-shop-bigot, and the hateful clown defending her, Tony Pervertkins; lots of others would celebrate the imminent wedding of any two people who love each other, regardless of sex. Attributing her intolerance to the supposed evils of Christianity is simply playing into the hateful clown’s game. Bigotry is bigotry, regardless of the religious affiliation, or lack of same, claimed by the bigot.

    (bolded for emphasis)

    It’s worth noting we’re not the ones attributing her bigotry thusly – she is (from the OP):

    “We feel we have to answer to God for what we do,” she told reporters, “and providing those two girls dresses for a sanctified marriage would break God’s law.”

    Are you trying to tell us that multiple centuries of official Christian condemnation of gay people and this woman’s condemnation of gay people in the name of Christianity is just some sort of coincidence? ‘Cause I’m not buying that.

    Unless you believe she was born hating lesbians, she had to be taught that. Ask yourself who you think taught her that, and what they based that teaching on. Ask yourself why she doesn’t question that teaching today. Ask yourself not only why she’s a bigot, but why she considers bigotry the right course of action.

    Of course there are tolerant Christians. But they are tolerant only to the extent that they reject the intolerance taught by their religion.

  32. chuckster says

    Huh?

    Shouldn’t the shop owners be taking the criticism as “badge of honor” Shouldn’t their response to the online review be “You’re Darn tootin”!! we don’t serve them.

    The fact they want to keep their bigotry secret at least means they are afraid they would lose money if the public knew it.

  33. D. C. Sessions says

    Ed is doing here what the leaders of less benighted Christian denominations should do: point to the sectarian and inhuman nature of the conflict…

    Of course it’s inhuman. Perkins here is, after all, just a front man for God Himself. Master of the Universe (and he even had his own kid’s TV show for a while.)

  34. Ichthyic says

    I think that to fight bigots – and fight bigotry – you have to understand where it’s coming from:

    my point is, you’re not going to get that from the irrational justifications people use for their bigotry.

    ergo, it doesn’t matter WHAT excuse they use, you’ll learn nothing from it. You have to use a different tactic than listening to what the bigots say about why they do what they do.

Leave a Reply