Tea Party Leader Wants to Sue Homosexuality

[EleCivil]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/tea-party-unity-founder-calls-for-class-action-lawsuit-against-homosexuality/

Long story short:

Tea Party Dude thinks that homosexuality causes AIDS the same way cigarettes cause lung cancer, and therefore, everyone with AIDS should be allowed to join a class-action suit against gayness.

He also suggests that FOX News isn't doing its part - that they need to show more stories about ex-gays.

I love this story. It's just such an American mindset - "I don't like this abstract concept...but what can I do? Of course! I'll SUE it!"

[Cole Parker]

OK, I may be a little slow out of the gate here, but how does one sue gayness? Isn't that like suing fire after your house burns down? Or Christianity after your neighbors judge you harshly?

These people! They make themselves look like fools. Well, if someone looks like one, and acts like one, and carries on like one, then perhaps...

C

[EleCivil]

Oh god, the more I read about this guy, the better it gets.

He opposed HPV vaccines in favor of abstinence-only education.

He says that calling "sodomites" gay is inappropriate.

He says that the Aurora shootings were a case of "God lowering his protection", but that it was divine intervention that made it so that "only" twelve people were killed.

I've got a theory.

I think there must be a conservative strategist somewhere who keeps telling his people to get out there and make statements like this. And then he goes home at night and pulls off his Mrs. Doubtfire-esque mask, and he's really just this stereotypical liberal hippie, pulling some kind of false-flag operation to discredit the GOP.

By day, he goes by "Greg Whiteford," drives an American pickup truck and has a sensible haircut. By night, he's Moonbeam Ramirez, the gay, pot-smoking animal rights activist. He works as a tenured professor in the department of Anti-American Studies at Harvard, but is somehow also in a public teacher's union and is collecting welfare, even though he has yet to produce his birth certificate.

So when you see a headline that says something like "Tea Party Leader Says We Should Sue the Concept of Homosexuality", just shake your head and say "Ramirez, you've done it again."

I can't prove it, but it helps me sleep at night to believe that we're all being conned by some zany scheme. The alternative is to believe that our elected officials and political movements truly believe the insane things that they say, and that's just depressing.

[Bruin Fisher]

I can't prove it, but it helps me sleep at night to believe that we're all being conned by some zany scheme. The alternative is to believe that our elected officials and political movements truly believe the insane things that they say, and that's just depressing.

EleC, I think you may have just saved my equilibrium. Thank you....

[Merkin]

Wasn't Moonbeam one of the celebrity births from the Seventies? Oh, wait, that was Moon Unit Zappa, along with his sibs Diva Muffin and Dweezel. Moonbeam must have issued from some other union. Let's see...Are you sure this mysterious do-gooder wasn't Moxie Crimefighter, offspring of Penn and Emily Jillette? Then there was Zowie, child of David and Angela Bowie. Zowie Bowie has a nice superhero ring to it, doesn't it? Or try Tabooger, an inspired naming by Dan Corlesi and DeeDee Henby, if you're going to get picky. Or how about Sage Moonblood, love child of Sylvester Stallone and Sasha Czack? Or Bogart Che Peyote, child of David "Puck" Rainey and Betty Rainey...too many children of love now grown into superheros to choose among. Maybe they're all out there, righting wrongs, zapping bad guys, making us safe from politicians? I sure hope so.

[vwl]

I'm not sure what the Tea Party has to do with his vile social-conservative positions.

As started by Rick Santelli, the Tea Party has an economic mission to recognize the serious and unsustainable national debt that has been run up in the last five years with spending exceeding revenues by about $1 trillion a year.

In my view, the Tea Party is largely a libertarian group, but social conservatives obviously belong to it.

[EleCivil]

I'm not sure what the Tea Party has to do with his vile social-conservative positions.

As started by Rick Santelli, the Tea Party has an economic mission to recognize the serious and unsustainable national debt that has been run up in the last five years with spending exceeding revenues by about $1 trillion a year.

In my view, the Tea Party is largely a libertarian group, but social conservatives obviously belong to it.

Since the Tea Party itself doesn't necessarily have a leader, but rather local chapters that have leaders, the ideology could change drastically depending on the chapter. Just as there are hardline evangelicals like this guy calling themselves Tea Party Leaders, there are probably plenty of fiscally conservative libertarian Tea Party Leaders who think this guy's an ass.

That's the problem with starting a decentralized movement, I guess - you'll wind up with people who completely misunderstand your ideals flying your flag and wearing your t-shirt.

[JamesSavik]

Rick Scarborough, the guy who is saying this, isn't an elected official. In fact he's only a "tea party leader" in his own mind. He's a troll (aka attention whore) known for saying wild shit to get publicity for himself.

[Cole Parker]

I've said this before but I'll say it again.

Religious zealots shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the political platform. These people should, by law, be unelectable. From what I've seen over the last few years most of your zanier politicians are religious nuts. If I've understood your constitution correctly that's the absolute reason it states the view/rule of secularism in politics or words similar to that effect. Remove these nuts from politics and you've removed most of the anti-gay movement, who count, in fell swoop. The extremist Middle East is a case in point showing you what happens when radical religious views and beliefs rule the roost.

Rick

Prohibiting evangelicals or nutcase religious zealots from running for office would be a violation of their rights. Our Constitution guarantees our rights more than it prohibits our excesses. What it does say about religion is there will be no state-sponsored religions, and that the populace will not be restricted from following the religion of it's choice.

So, these nut jobs can certainly run, and if they somehow can garner enough votes, they can be elected. What they then cannot do is then attempt to turn their religious views into the law of the land.

C

[JamesSavik]

One of the problems with our primary process is that elements of the far-right and far-left are very well organized and active. They are on the ground and working sometimes years before the primaries begin and exercise undue influence on the primary process. This is why both parties tend to nominate a candidate that further from the center of the party than they would like and have to watch them move toward the middle as the general election begins.

This explains why ideologues like Dean and Santorum made noise early in recent primaries and then the party picks someone closer to the middle for the nomination.

It would be very interesting to see the moderates of both parties jump on the primaries early to shut down the fruit-loops and pick serious candidates from the start and not those that pass the vetting of both parties extreme wings.

[colinian]

I'm glad I don't listen to the shaat guys like Scarborough and LaBarbera spew. It would rot my brain which would atrophy and I'd start believing their shaat.

Colin