Another Mississippi Gov. Candidate Disqualifies Himself From Being Able to Hold Public Office in the United States of America

From HuffPo:

Another Republican man running for governor of Mississippi has said that he refuses to be alone in a room with a woman who is not his wife.

Former Mississippi Supreme Court Justice Bill Waller Jr. told Mississippi Today reporter Larrison Campbell on Monday that he abides by the “Billy Graham rule” because it’s “common sense.”

Okay, lets boil this down to what it is: This guy is saying that, if elected (and, presumably, when he held a position on the Supreme Court), he will not obey any law that requires equal treatment of men and women.

Therefore, he is saying in advance that he will not obey the law.

Therefore, he is unable to lawfully take an oath of office for anything, much less the head of the executive branch of a Confederate, er…, American state.

Think I’m being hyperbolic?

Will he hire men for positions in government that might require legitimate one-on-one interaction with him?

One would assume so.

Will he hire any woman for any position in government that might require legitimate one-on-one interaction with him?

Not if he can be taken at his word.

He is disqualified.

End of story.

Two Questions for Marion G. “Pat” Robertson, Franklin Graham and Jerry Falwell, Jr.

If a catastrophic tornado hit Missouri’s capitol city of Jefferson City days after the state’s General Assembly enacted pro-LGBT equality legislation, what would you deem said tornado to be?

Of course, we know that the Missouri General Assembly did not enact pro-LGBT equality legislation this year, and, lets be real, we all know what all of you would deem a tornado that might have hit immediately after the enactment of such legislation to be.

Yes, we all do know.

So, now on to the second question….

If a catastrophic tornado hit Missouri’s capitol city of Jefferson City days after the state’s General Assembly enacted woman-hating, body-control legislation, what would you deem said tornado to be?

America awaits your responses.

Christianist Hatemongers Admit to Their Fraud in Their Attempt to Kill Civil Rights in Massachusetts

I refuse to provide a direct link to any hate group’s site, but if you want to type it in on your own, here it is:

MA-LS-1

It can also be found here:

MA-LS-4

So…

What will you find there?

The rallying cry of the pro-family groups trying to repeal the law was the well-known “bathroom safety” argument – that in addition to transgenders, this law allows male sexual predators to lurk in women’s restrooms to prey on girls and women. This was technically true, but was largely contrived.

Contrived…

MA-LS-2

Translated: They made it up…

Just like trans people have been saying christianists and TERFs (not that there is any substantive difference between the two anymore) have been doing for years.

History repeats itself

Over a decade ago when LGBT movement took the “gay marriage” battles into the state legislatures, and later into the federal courts, the major pro-family groups tried a similar strategy. As we reported at the time, they refused to argue that homosexuality was immoral, had terrible health risks, was fraught with addiction and mental health problems, etc.

Instead, they concocted less offensive arguments such as, “Every child needs a father and a mother” and “the word ‘marriage’ is special” – and used them almost exclusively. It actually worked for a little while. But while technically true, before long they were easily picked apart by the LGBT lobby, and they began their string of wins. Nevertheless, on every level the pro-family lawyers and lobbyists refused to budge from that approach. Without any credible opposing arguments, the “gay marriage” push cruised to victories right up to the US Supreme Court. It was a shameful display of legal malpractice.

Now with the “transgender anti-discrimination” bills the same thing is happening. Our side concocted the “bathroom safety” male predator argument as a way to avoid an uncomfortable battle over LGBT ideology, and still fire up people’s emotions. It worked in Houston a few years ago.

But the LGBT lobby has now figured out how to beat it.

Concocted…

MA-LS-3

They dreamed it up…

which means they need to look in the mirror when they talk about people being delusional.

They made it up…

which means they committed actionable defamation against the entirety of the trans community.

They fabricated it…

which means they committed fraud – because they raised money off of it.

They invented it…

which means, like all professional con artists, they’ll just try again to invent something that might actually work just a little bit longer – just long enough for them to fully cash out and crawl away.

They lied…

which means they have conclusively demonstrated how little they care about the christian values that they claim they are battling to preserve by inflicting on everyone via force of law…

which means when next any of them appear in any forum – governmental or media – to speak in opposition to our civil rights, they should be vocally pummeled with “LIAR!” until they physically fall to pieces.

Its up to us to ensure that they don’t even come as close as they did this time to achieving their bigoted dreams.

But it is also up to legitimate media to bring their admission up – and place it front and center – any time that any christianisTERF squats in front of a camera or a microphone to bleat about the next fictional terror that they attribute to the existence of trans people (particularly trans women.)

“TERF” is not a slur now because it never was.

The same is true for “christianist.”

You Can’t Believe In So-Called ‘Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria’ Without Also Believing In ‘Rapid Onset Homosexuality’

From the Hartford Courant, Feb. 18, 1976:

EastWindsor

We wouldn’t want no schools to have no ‘homosexuality whisperers,’ now would we?

Not as Unwell as You, Ann

UnwellAnn

He hasn’t started to rot yet.

Joe McCarthy Called – He Wants His Face Back

Both of them.

Seen recently on Twitter:

CruzTwit

Who the hell made Facebook the arbiter of political speech, you ask?

Well, you personality-devoid buffoon, you attempted to be hip by using the #1A hashtag, but I’ll go ahead and give you a full answer: The First Amendment to the United States Constitution – you know, the Supreme Law of the Land (that’s right – THAT’S the Supreme Law of the Land, NOT your Bible!) – makes all private entities masters of their own decisions as to whether or not to speak.

And wasn’t that YOUR position when it came to christian-owned Hobby Lobby?

I guess a different standard applies to entities controlled by people with names such as Zuckerberg.

Yes, on a sleepy Sunday morning in July, I discovered yet another reason to hate Sen. Rafael “Ted” Cruz (R-Calgary): He forced me to say something in defense of Mark Zuckerberg.

“Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement”

AlabamaDogs