Con Artist, Bigot, Perjurer and Exterminationist Mat Staver Demonstrates Why LGBT People Need Legal Protection from ‘Christians’

From HuffPo:

One of the difficulties that religious advocates have is that many seem to think the ideas and beliefs that they hold most dear are somehow different or exceptional compared with the base tenets of others.

Actually, I thought that that was essentially the definition of “religion” (well, that coupled with the inability to differentiate fairy tales from facts.)

On Tuesday, the House Judiciary Committee held yet another sham hearing designed to use taxpayer money to generate soundbites for Republican campaign ads.  This one was dubbed: “The State Of Religious Liberty In The United States.”

You know where this is going, right?

[T]he advocates called before the panel were loath to admit that religion had been used in the past to justify slavery, with people often citing the Bible.

Remember what I said about the inability to differentiate fairy tales from facts?

“Actually, I’ve heard that argument made a lot, and it’s something I’m trying to look into on my own,” said Kim Colby, a lawyer with the Christian Legal Society. She credited Quakers and then evangelical Christians with leading the abolition movement.

All of which means nothing given that there were even more christians were pro-slavery and used religion to justify it.

But, no christianist has ever met a proven fact that he or she couldn’t ignore.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) sought to find out why requiring insurers to cover contraception or abortion, which the Christian advocates opposed, was any more of a restriction on religious liberty than requiring insurers to cover blood transfusions, which some other religions oppose.

“It could be similar, but I think it’s also fundamentally different,” said Staver, coming about as close as he could to admitting the cases were parallel. The difference, he said, is in the fundamental beliefs of many Christians when it comes to the “creation or destruction of innocent human life.”

He did not admit that other religions were entitled to protection of their fundamental beliefs.

Similarly, he refused to see any equivalence in a photographer who refuses to photograph the weddings of gay and lesbian couples on religious grounds, and one who says their religion forbids them from celebrating the marriages of Jews or African-Americans. The first was adhering to a religious belief, while the later would break civil rights laws, Staver said.

Again, no christianist has ever met a proven fact that he or she couldn’t ignore.

[H]e later dodged on whether he supported Russia’s anti-gay laws, telling Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), “I don’t know what you’ve read; I haven’t spoken on the Russian law anywhere.” You can hear Staver speak about his support for the law here, however.


He lied to Congress.

Why isn’t he being indicted for perjury?

Leave a comment

No comments yet.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a reply, but don't be a troll. Have a nice day!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s