play_arrow
The CRUSADE Radio Network CRUSADE Radio Network
play_arrow
The Mike Church Show-Radio Would Have Thwarted The Trump Assassination Attempt The KingDude
play_arrow
Audio Post Format TheKingDude
Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – If you’re going to have a public parade and there are going to be children cavorting about in a downtown area, you cannot very well have people running around in various stages of undress. If heterosexual people tried to do this, they would be arrested for public nudity or disturbing the peace or whatever the ordinance might be, or just be drummed out of polite society because they acted in poor taste. But say the word gay and all is supposed to be forgiven. Check out today’s transcript for the rest…
Begin Mike Church Show Transcript
Mike: Rod Dreher, posting at The American Conservative yesterday under the title of “Getting The Narrative Straight,” I’ll just read you what Dreher posted.
[reading]
No Christians need apply to work at Fox Sports, unless they’re Episcopalians or something:
Fox Sports fired college football analyst Craig James last Monday after a video surfaced in which he said he opposed homosexual civil unions. James, a former pro running back for the New England Patriots, made the comments at a debate in Texas during his unsuccessful run in 2012 for the U.S. Senate seat now held by Ted Cruz. …
When asked for comment, a Fox Sports spokesperson told The Dallas Morning News, “We just asked ourselves how Craig’s statements would play in our human resources department. He couldn’t say those things here.”
He didn’t say those things there, but whatever. James’s viewpoint is widely shared in this country, and is basic Christian doctrine, though certainly there are liberal churches that don’t share it. But at Fox Sports, you are not allowed to hold these views, or if you do, you must never, ever share them publicly, or you will be fired.
Cue the Law of Merited Impossibility: Nobody will get fired for opposing gay marriage, and when they do, they’ll damn well deserve it.
A reader sends another story out of Dallas today. It seems that Gay Pride Parade organizers have, responsibly enough, asked participants to put on clothes this year. More:
Michael Doughman, executive director of the Dallas Tavern Guild, which organizes the event, says that organizers and police will patrol the staging area to make sure all parade participants are properly clothed. If they aren’t, they could be removed from the parade, or their group may be blacklisted from next year’s celebration.
For the rest of today’s transcript please sign up for a Founders Pass or if you’re already a member, make sure you are logged in!
[private FP-Yearly|FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76]
“Just because it’s a day of celebration for our community doesn’t mean we are exempt from the law,” he told Unfair Park on Tuesday. [Mike: Maybe Mr. Doughman is a minority among his own group because Dreher finds a comment here about the put clothes on before the Gay Pride Parade in Dallas.]
Some local LGBT activists view the crackdown on nudity as a betrayal of what the event is supposed to be about. [Mike: What, it’s not supposed to be about pride and pomp and circumstance and bands and the kinds of things other parades are about? Maybe I should read the rest of this.]
Daniel Cates, an organizer with GetEqual, recently sounded the alarm on Facebook that the Tavern Guild was watering down the parade to make it more family friendly and please corporate sponsors.
“No bare asses, no breasts (even with pasties) no tight underwear on dancers, nothing too political at all,” he wrote. “The ‘queer’ is effectively being erased from our pride celebration in favor of the most polished, heteronormative representation of our community as possible.”
Oh, the horror. The event is about Gay Pride, which, according to these critics, means that if you tell people to cover up their butts or their breasts, you are denying their gayness. Does gayness = public obscenity?
[end reading]
Mike: I think that’s a pretty good question to ask there. Why would you protest mightily against societal norms that I thought we all agreed on? If you’re going to have a public parade and there are going to be children cavorting about in a downtown area, you cannot very well have people running around in various stages of undress. If heterosexual people tried to do this, they would be arrested for public nudity or disturbing the peace or whatever the ordinance might be, or just be drummed out of polite society because they acted in poor taste. But say the word gay and all is supposed to be forgiven.
I guess the expression then doesn’t have anything to do with what we’re told it had to do with: We just want to be equal. We’re looking for equality under the law, man. We’re just looking to get along. We just want all the other things that all you heteros have. I don’t have the right to strip down naked and run down Main Street in a parade. But wait, I’m not in a “minority group,” am I? I wonder what else you expect you should be able to get away with if you’re a member of a minority group? Challenges the mind, doesn’t it?
Also, you will recall, I played for you the comments of one Masha Gessen, a very rabid, I don’t want to say she’s a gay marriage activist because she really isn’t even for that. She’s for ending the term marriage for anyone and for ending societal norms when it comes to any form of relationship. In other words, we ought to be able to just make them up as we go along. Whatever we think should be a relationship, regardless of who it is between or among — I say between because between is between two and among, which can be among many. You can have five, six, polyamory and all these other things. Those of you that thought: We gotta do the civil unions and the marriages and insurance and all the other things, it’s all about equality and fairness and justice and all that. That’s really all they’re asking for. Maybe some of them, that’s true, but certainly there are others out there, loudmouths and real rabid and I would say extreme, radical activists, and that’s not all they’re asking for.
As a matter of fact, the world as it is currently consecrated and as we currently act in it and live in it, is just too restrictive. All these bans on people running about naked, all these bans on sex in public, all these taboos of marrying cousins or sisters and brothers and all this other stuff, malarkey. That’s a holdover from “that era,” you know that era that began around anno Domini one, when “that guy” came and set up these “restrictive norms.” Just reading the news, folks. I don’t make it up.
End Mike Church Show Transcript
[/private]
Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – "Abortion, and even contraception, even in the prevention of pregnancy, is verboten in church teaching. This goes all the way back prior – this is taken directly from the gospels, directly from the Old Testament, and then passed on traditionally." Check out today’s transcript […]
Post comments (0)