Wednesday, August 20, 2008

It's been a while! How about some more insane homobigot comments?

Professor Mike S. Adams, relatively unknown author of "Feminists Say The Darndest Things" recently wrote a piece titled "Fat Lesbians on Crack."

What lesbians have to do with obesity or drug use, he leaves that up to his faithful readers to discern.

Oh wait, I get it. He's just taking a cheap shot at lesbians everywhere by calling them fat and on crack.

How typical of one whose argument doesn't have much else to stand on. Call them names instead!

Not that he really ever gets to a point, much less an argument, in this article.

He mostly just blathers in the typical hetero-male-that-is-insecure-because-lesbians-do-it-better speak, which is mostly just propaganda and scare tactics to help sway the echo chamber that is the religious right in this country.

The background of the story is that a *gasp* lezzzzbian came in for counseling, and the counselor refused to see the woman because homosexuality is against her religion. The woman allegedly asked for a new counselor and within 10 minutes was allowed to see a non-prejudiced counselor.

Where did this happen? No one knows.

When? Not one date is provided by Adams.

Actually, did this really happen? We don't know!

Adams never provides a link to any real news source. This could be hypothetical, this could be a real story.

Or, for all we know, he could have pulled it from the lapel of the classy little gay man suit he's wearing.

But I get it. The hypothetical (?) he poses merely serves as yet another fundamentalist scare tactic about The Gay Agenda taking over the Universe.

In Adams' eyes, homosexual and feminist rights present The Classic, Ever-Pressing (non)Issue of the oppressed becoming the opressor.

But let's talk about this in real terms.

Is it ethical for a counselor to refuse to treat a client based on her sexuality?

Christian blogger Shawn McEvoy says no, at least in the context of doctors and medical care.

While blogging about CA's recent decision stating doctor's can not refuse medical treatment to gays and lesbians, even when doing so goes against their religious beliefs, McEvoy gives his opinion.

In his words,

"'Thank God,' I said to myself. Goodness, a lesbian is still a woman, and still has reproductive capabilities, does she not? If I refuse to treat her, am I doing more damage to the body of Christ and the gospel message, and completely missing a chance to treat her with love and kindness, vs. refusing on the grounds that society apparently will crumble if one more child is raised in a non-traditional family?"

First off, I just want to give McEvoy the props he deserves for his compassionate response above. Of the thousands of so-called Christians I have seen argue against rights and equal treatment for gays and lesbians, this is one of the first times I have ever seen on a fundamentalist Christian website a compassionate, empathetic reaction towards gays and lesbians.

Secondly, my opinion as a health-care provider. My main priorities in my profession is to do no harm to patients, and only work to better their health.

Do some of the patients I see have lifestyles and do things with which I personally disagree? Do they go against my personal morals and spirituality? Hell yes.

But as a health-care provider, I am there to treat an individual for specific health needs. Not society as a whole. Let's leave that up to the democratic process, shall we?

Does it sometimes piss me off on a personal level? Yes. But I would never be so self-righteous that I would refuse to treat someone based on something my religion disagrees with. The two are separate, for good reason. If someone is so deeply religious that they are not able to care for those that their profession asks that they care for, perhaps they should consider another calling. Priesthood? Missionary work? Private school teacher?

Anyway, here is a sampling of comments from Adams' article from some other "Christian" folk:

Ken, in North Carolina, wrote:


"You see, Homosexuality is a perversion, a twisted thing, a biological wrong behavior. It can be corrected, but the addict must realize the error in this behavior. There is room at the cross for even you, Will. You can find your way back. What you are doing is wrong, and cannot be proven right no matter how many black robed nutcases you can get to say it is right. It is a biological and medical abberation. Continuing to practice this abberation will only result in your paying a huge pain price someday. Not to mention the cost of your soul."

That's not all folks! Ken posted immediately after his comment above to say,


"I saw a picture on Yahoo of Ellen DeGeneres and her partner, Portia. You know, I know they are not that old. I think DeGeneres is only in her early 40's, and Portia is probably about the same. Yet, the lifestyle is getting them obviously. They are both wrinkled and drawn. I was thinking they looked pretty fair for a couple in their late 50's. I mean DeGeneres looked older than even I, who understands the damage Homosexuality does to the human body (and soul)."

Jim, in VA states,
"Subject: Baby Deserves a Father
What we are missing here are the consequences of lesbians and insemination. The baby never knows its FATHER. Two women do not a father make. That is pure evil."

DanS in CO prophecizes,

"Supremacy of the Lowest Denominator"
"I’m not claiming that the gay rights movement has taken over the country."

You don't have to, it's self-evident. It is the public school principle of the "supremacy of the lowest common denominator" which has empowered homosexuals. See http://withChrist.org/SLCD.htm

Being under "God wrath," (Rom. 1:18) they are mentally haunted and tormented. Their effort to find psychological relief is a socio-political agenda to eliminate Christians (first by incarceration, then death if necessary) and Christianity from the face of the earth. Sound extreme? You're not paying attention.

Tolerance of and civil rights for the sodomite lifestyle will never be adequate to assuage their psychological torment, which they attribute solely to Christianity.

Sorry folks, but this situation is not going to have a pretty ending."


Eeeeep!! Armageddon!

And, there actually were some rational people on the site, too:

Shells, from IL said
"Subject: Joycey
Counselors are trained to be empathetic and non judgemental. There is a way to move the lesbian to a new counselor without making it seem judgemental. It is not lying.

People go to suicide for counselors. Would she turn them away? I don't think she would. So it's more the act of homosexuality that impales her ability to be empathetic and non judgemental. That's not good.

Counselors are meant to listen, to empathize, to help, to offer advice and if necessary if the problems are too deep, to refer.

They are entitled to their beliefs, such as, we don't believe in child molestation, we don't believe the color red means to kill us and we don't believe in marrying our pets, but if a person seeks help for these matters, and your job is counselor, you counsel."

True that, sister.

Swampfox from SC said,

"Subject: The counselor
The Christian counselor thought that this was the time and the place to espouse her religious beliefs on homosexuality? She should have deftly referred the young woman to someone else without the judgmental remark. But, then the Christian Counselor says that her religion doesn't allow her to lie. Then Adams's column says that being lesbian is an unhealthy lifestyle. This whole issue is getting tiresome. I don't know what is the cause of my homosexuality might be. I did not choose it. But, I have to live with it. For once I would pray that Mr. Adams would try to walk in my shoes just once.

And, I will add that I hope that the Christian counselor gets a better job somewhere else that is more suitable to her beliefs and Christian lifestyle."

I agree. Since when is being a lesbian considered to be unhealthy, by any medical standards?

Just a thought.

Anyway, an easy google search of Professor Mike S. Adams shows that he is profoundly not respected or admired by most people he encounters on the internet.

I sure hope my friend Fannie decides to put this dude in her Asinine for Attention archives.

1 comments:

Fannie said...

I'm sorry, what exactly did Adams' article have to do with "fat lesbians on crack"?

But seriously, wow, tthose comments. What ignorant crocks of shits. That's really all that deserves to be said about that level of asininity. And I guarantee that those are the same people saying "we don't haaaate homasexuls, we just think it's disgusting and twisted and perverted!" It's like, if these people don't meet the definition of bigoted, the word is utterly devoid of meaning.