There are 118 comments.

1. Coolidge
   Richard Easton

   @RichardEaston

   4:10 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

   Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

   There was a fascinating article with the arresting title Against Heterosexuality in First Things a few years ago:

   Alasdair MacIntyre once quipped that “facts, like telescopes and wigs for gentlemen, were a seventeenth-century invention.” Something similar can be said about sexual orientation: Heterosexuals, like typewriters and urinals (also, obviously, for gentlemen), were an invention of the 1860s. Contrary to our cultural preconceptions and the lies of what has come to be called “orientation essentialism,” “straight” and “gay” are not ageless absolutes. Sexual orientation is a conceptual scheme with a history, and a dark one at that. It is a history that began far more recently than most people know, and it is one that will likely end much sooner than most people think.

   Most of our ancestors would have viewed the term (and underlying concept) of “heterosexual” as absurd and superfluous, much as most of us view the similar, recently-coined term “cisgender.”

   My friend Marjorie Rosenberg has written extensively on that subject.

2. Inactive
   Randy Webster

   @RandyWebster

   4:14 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

   Joseph Stanko (View Comment):
   Alasdair MacIntyre once quipped that “facts, like telescopes and wigs for gentlemen, were a seventeenth-century invention.” Something similar can be said about sexual orientation: Heterosexuals, like typewriters and urinals (also, obviously, for gentlemen), were an invention of the 1860s. Contrary to our cultural preconceptions and the lies of what has come to be called “orientation essentialism,” “straight” and “gay” are not ageless absolutes. Sexual orientation is a conceptual scheme with a history, and a dark one at that. It is a history that began far more recently than most people know, and it is one that will likely end much sooner than most people think.

   Every once in a while something is so loony you just have to call bulls**t. 

   I know it’s not you Joseph.

3. Coolidge
   Joseph Stanko

   @JosephStanko

   

   4:21 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

   Randy Webster (View Comment):
   Every once in a while something is so loony you just have to call bulls**t. 

   What, precisely, are you calling loony?

    

4. Inactive
   Randy Webster

   @RandyWebster

   4:31 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

   Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

   Randy Webster (View Comment):
   Every once in a while something is so loony you just have to call bulls**t.

   What, precisely, are you calling loony?

    

   What I take to be Alasdair MacIntyre’s reflections on heterosexuality.

5. Coolidge
   Joseph Stanko

   @JosephStanko

   

   4:59 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

   Randy Webster (View Comment):
   What I take to be Alasdair MacIntyre’s reflections on heterosexuality.

   Well for starters, the article is written by Michael W. Hannon.  He’s just using the Alasdair MacIntyre quip about facts as a launching point, note that the quotation marks end after the first sentence.

   Perhaps a few more paragraphs would help clarify the thrust of the argument:

   Over the course of several centuries, the West had progressively abandoned Christianity’s marital architecture for human sexuality. Then, about one hundred and fifty years ago, it began to replace that longstanding teleological tradition with a brand new creation: the absolutist but absurd taxonomy of sexual orientations. Heterosexuality was made to serve as this fanciful framework’s regulating ideal, preserving the social prohibitions against sodomy and other sexual debaucheries without requiring recourse to the procreative nature of human sexuality.

   On this novel account, same-sex sex acts were wrong not because they spurn the rational-animal purpose of sex—namely the family—but rather because the desire for these actions allegedly arises from a distasteful psychological disorder. As queer theorist Hanne Blank recounts, “This new concept [of heterosexuality], gussied up in a mangled mix of impressive-sounding dead languages, gave old orthodoxies a new and vibrant lease on life by suggesting, in authoritative tones, that science had effectively pronounced them natural, inevitable, and innate.”

   In other words, the traditional idea that the morality of sexual behavior should be judged by understanding the purpose of sex in the context of marriage was supplanted by the emerging new science of psychology, which labeled some people as “homosexuals” and classified this as a mental disorder.  Then later (sometime in the 1970’s I believe) they changed their mind, and decided it was no longer a mental illness after all, but the category persisted as a “sexual orientation” and became a component of identity politics.

    

    

6. Member
   Zafar

   @Zafar

   6:11 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

   This focus on SSM is a red herring – the Secretary of State doesn’t really deal with that.

   The Secretary of State will have to deal with countries in the Muslim World on behalf of the US.

   So there’s this:

   Try this simple experiment. Take Mike Pompeo’s statements about Muslims, and his alliances with anti-Muslim bigots. Then imagine that he had made similar statements about Jews, and forged similar ties to anti-Semites. Then imagine the reaction if he were nominated for secretary of state.

   If the analogy appears farfetched, it’s only because, in the President Trump era, anti-Muslim bigotry is so pervasive that many of us have trouble recognizing it as bigotry at all.

   And also this:

   Booker said he agreed with Pompeo that “silence in the face of injustice lends strength to that injustice.”…He brought up Pompeo’s long history of association with two of America’s most prominent Islamophobes, Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel, and asked whether Pompeo had ever used his “position” to denounce their extremist views….Did Pompeo ever condemn them in the way he expects all Muslims to condemn terrorists?

   Pompeo had no good answer: “Senator, I couldn’t tell you,” he responded. “I don’t recall each statement I’ve made over 54 years.”

   How confident are you that he can deal with the Muslim World in a clear headed fashion – unswayed by personal prejudice or bias – no matter what policy the elected President asks him to execute?

   Truly.

7. Coolidge
   Richard Easton

   @RichardEaston

   6:52 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

   Zafar (View Comment):

   This focus on SSM is a red herring – the Secretary of State doesn’t really deal with that.

   The Secretary of State will have to deal with countries in the Muslim World on behalf of the US.

   So there’s this:

   Try this simple experiment. Take Mike Pompeo’s statements about Muslims, and his alliances with anti-Muslim bigots. Then imagine that he had made similar statements about Jews, and forged similar ties to anti-Semites. Then imagine the reaction if he were nominated for secretary of state.

   If the analogy appears farfetched, it’s only because, in the President Trump era, anti-Muslim bigotry is so pervasive that many of us have trouble recognizing it as bigotry at all.

   And also this:

   Booker said he agreed with Pompeo that “silence in the face of injustice lends strength to that injustice.”…He brought up Pompeo’s long history of association with two of America’s most prominent Islamophobes, Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel, and asked whether Pompeo had ever used his “position” to denounce their extremist views….Did Pompeo ever condemn them in the way he expects all Muslims to condemn terrorists?

   Pompeo had no good answer: “Senator, I couldn’t tell you,” he responded. “I don’t recall each statement I’ve made over 54 years.”

   How confident are you that he can deal with the Muslim World in a clear headed fashion – unswayed by personal prejudice or bias – no matter what policy the elected President asks him to execute?

   Truly.

   In what ways have Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel mischaracterized Islam.

8. Member
   Clifford A. Brown

   @CliffordBrown

   7:05 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

   PHCheese (View Comment):

   I think it’s appropriate for the nominee to simply refuse to discuss any question related to religion and ones beliefs. No nominee should want the job bad enough to allow a US senator or anyone else to badger him or her about religious beliefs. Every senator should not know better. What a sad statement of our political discourse.

   Almost. The correct answer is to summon up great moral indignation and throw back in the Senators’ faces:

   “I have repeatedly sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, as commanded by Article VI. You are absolutely bound by Article VI. How dare you violate the Constitution, boldly, under the bright lights of the cameras. All Americans can see what you are doing here, and you owe every Wounded Warrior, every Gold Star family, an immediate apology!”

   If that is not enough, add:

   Your anti-Christian bigotry disgusts me. I am shocked that the Chair of this committee has not stirred himself to save this committee from the taint of your violation of our Constitution and your vile hatred of Christians.

9. Inactive
   Columbo

   @Columbo

   7:12 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

   jeannebodine (View Comment):

   Corey Booker is obsessed with homosexuality because of his long relationship with T-Bone.

   Hehehehe … you said T-Bone …

   
    

10. Member
    Zafar

    @Zafar

    7:40 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 14, 2018

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

     

    In what ways have Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel mischaracterized Islam.

    The ADL nails the issue:

    In advance of the Senate confirmation hearings for Mike Pompeo, the President’s nominee for Secretary of State, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) sent a letter urging all members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to closely examine Pompeo’s views, given his past statements and close ties to stridently anti-Muslim groups.

    The letter cites Pompeo’s past anti-Muslim statements and his associations with organizations that have frequently expressed hostility toward Muslims and trafficked in anti-Muslim conspiracy theories.  ADL calls on the committee members to ask Pompeo tough questions to see where he stands on Muslims in America and America’s policy priorities, including promotion and protection of human rights abroad.

    While ADL agrees with some of Pompeo’s positions on Israel, the organization’s letter said that certainly should not make him immune from hard questions about his fitness to serve based on his full record.

    “As America’s top diplomat, the Secretary of State must be prepared to faithfully represent the United States in building international partnerships and coalitions and negotiating delicate treaties and agreements,” ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt wrote in the letter, which was made public today.

    “Mr. Pompeo’s long, documented record of anti-Muslim prejudice threatens to undermine the essential work our Secretary of State does in representing American interests and values abroad,” Greenblatt said. “In our view, it is essential for the nominee to repudiate his past anti-LGBT and anti-Muslim views and to renounce any associations with anti-Muslim conspiracy-haunted organizations.”

    ADL cited a number of anti-Muslim statements made by Pompeo in the past, as well as his association with anti-Muslim activists such as Frank Gaffney, who hosted him many times and honored him at his think tank, the Center for Security Policy. The letter also cites Pompeo’s longtime association with Brigitte Gabriel, the founder of ACT for America, an organization that peddles anti-Muslim conspiracy theories. Pompeo accepted the organization’s America’s National Security Eagle Award in 2016.

    The letter is pretty detailed on this (and other) issues.  iow, it documents.

11. Member
    Scott Wilmot

    @ScottWilmot

    4:40 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):
    Most of our ancestors would have viewed the term (and underlying concept) of “heterosexual” as absurd and superfluous, much as most of us view the similar, recently-coined term “cisgender.”

    This article at Catholic World Report also speaks to the issue you raise Joseph, and to the issue in the OP.

    Katherine Asjes, a mother of six, the wife of a military veteran, a conservative Republican, and a practicing Catholic was rejected for appointment to the Iowa Board of Medicine because of a comment she wrote last year on the post linked to in the following paragraph.

    Carl Olson links to an article written by Jim Russell where he goes “back to the beginning of the ideological roots that gave us “homosexuality” and “heterosexuality”” and shows how this has “spawned the chaos we have now”:

    A show of hands, please: How many of you know that the term “heterosexual” was originally used to describe a condition that was considered, in clinical terms, like the term “homosexual,” to be “morbid” or “pathological”?

    That’s right. These terms were first brought into use in the last decades of the 19th-century by psychologists seeking to classify sexual attractions, emotions, and acts—not persons, not “identities”—associated with sexual abnormality. Of course, this begs the question—if even “heterosexual” was pathological, what was considered “normal” sexual attraction, emotion, and act?

    Normal sexual desires and behaviors all had procreative sex as their focus. Acts and desires that directed a person toward procreative sexual activity (acts that properly could lead to procreation) were considered “normal.” Acts and desires reflecting a “morbid passion” for non-procreative sex acts with someone of the other sex were classified as “heterosexual.” Similarly, acts and desires reflecting a “morbid passion” for obviously non-procreative sex acts with someone of the same sex were classified as “homosexual.” How many people are aware of this?

    As Carl Olson writes:

    The new “normal” now is that any positive references to what really is normal is not just bothersome, but cannot be allowed by those who carry the banner of the Reign of Gay. It has no place in the public square; for them, it is the ultimate heresy.

    And as he writes in his 2014 article, Welcome to the Reign of “Gay”:

    In a certain sense, the Sexual Revolution is over; at the very least, the walls have been breached and the consequences are serious and long-lasting. The Reign of “Gay” is proud, loud, and quite unwilling to tolerate dissent or discussion.

12. Member
    Scott Wilmot

    @ScottWilmot

    5:07 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Zafar (View Comment):
    How confident are you that he can deal with the Muslim World in a clear headed fashion – unswayed by personal prejudice or bias

    Is understanding the nature of groups such as CAIR or IIIT or the Muslim Brotherhood a “personal prejudice or bias”? Sharia law is fundamentally incompatible with western democracy yet the West continues to kowtow to the Islamists. Mr. Pompeo is right to be skeptical. He seems to hold views similar to those of Andrew McCarthy in The Grand Jihad:

    The real threat to the United States is not terrorism. The real threat is the sophisticated forces of Islamism, which have collaborated with the American Left not only to undermine U.S. national security, but to shred the fabric of American constitutional democracy—freedom and individual liberty. In The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America, bestselling author Andrew C. McCarthy provides a harrowing account of how the global Islamist movement’s jihad involves far more than terrorist attacks, and how it has found the ideal partner in President Barack Obama, whose Islamist sympathies run deep.

    McCarthy is the former federal prosecutor who convicted the notorious “Blind Sheikh” and other jihadists for waging a terrorist war that included the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. In his national bestseller, Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad (Encounter 2008), he explored government’s conscious avoidance of the terrorist threat, which made the nation vulnerable to mass-murder attacks. In The Grand Jihad, he exposes a more insidious peril: government’s active concealment of the Islamist ideology that unabashedly vows to “conquer America.” With the help of witting and unwitting accomplices in and out of government, Islamism doesn’t merely fuel terrorism but spawns America-hating Islamic enclaves in our midst and gradually foists Islam’s repressive law, sharia, on American life. The revolutionary doctrine has made common cause with an ascendant Left that also seeks radical transformation of our constitutional order. The prognosis for liberty could not be more dire.

    I agree. That is not an irrational fear of Islam (what the Left labels Islamophobia), it is just seeing things as they are – not prejudice or bias.

    Men such as Booker are just pawns for the Islamists and homosexualists – he is the one with the prejudice and bias.

13. Inactive
    Larry3435

    @Larry3435

    5:27 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    PHenry (View Comment):
    The ten commandments are universal human truths, even if you don’t believe in G-d. 

    Okay, that may be partially true.  Commandments 6-10 have a certain universality, although I have my doubts that some of them could or should be enacted into law.  (“Thou shalt not covet.”  How do you enforce that?)  But it seems to me that Commandments 1-5 cannot really be divorced from one’s belief in God.  Tell me where I’m wrong?

    I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

    Thou shalt have no other gods before me

    Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image

    Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain

    Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy

14. Member
    Zafar

    @Zafar

    5:31 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):

    Men such as Booker are just pawns for the Islamists and homosexualists – he is the one with the prejudice and bias.

    What with all those Sharia zones popping up left and right.  Point made decisively, Sir.  

15. Inactive
    Randy Webster

    @RandyWebster

    5:40 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):

    Men such as Booker are just pawns for the Islamists and homosexualists – he is the one with the prejudice and bias.

    What with all those Sharia zones popping up left and right. Point made decisively, Sir.

    I don’t think there’s going to be much congruence between gay muslims and orthodox catholics.

16. Member
    Zafar

    @Zafar

    5:47 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):

    Men such as Booker are just pawns for the Islamists and homosexualists – he is the one with the prejudice and bias.

    What with all those Sharia zones popping up left and right. Point made decisively, Sir.

    I don’t think there’s going to be much congruence between gay muslims and orthodox catholics.

    Yet somehow there’s congruence on this issue between at least one gay Muslim and the ADL.

    Perhaps it isn’t a matter of religion or lack thereof? Just a thought.

    (Wait.  Asking too much?)

17. Inactive
    Randy Webster

    @RandyWebster

    5:51 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):

    Men such as Booker are just pawns for the Islamists and homosexualists – he is the one with the prejudice and bias.

    What with all those Sharia zones popping up left and right. Point made decisively, Sir.

    I don’t think there’s going to be much congruence between gay muslims and orthodox catholics.

    Yet somehow there’s congruence on this issue between at least one gay Muslim and the ADL.

    Perhaps it isn’t a matter of religion or lack thereof? Just a thought.

    (Wait. Asking too much?)

    Well, Zafar, I think you’re one of a kind.

18. Member
    Zafar

    @Zafar

    5:59 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Well, Zafar, I think you’re one of a kind.

    Doubtless, and I hope kindly meant (???), but hard too see how it’s relevant.  

    (Also: Rootless Cosmopolitan and proud of it, man!!!)

19. Member
    Scott Wilmot

    @ScottWilmot

    6:22 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Zafar (View Comment):
    What with all those Sharia zones popping up left and right. Point made decisively, Sir.

    Go ahead and mock me, but I’ll stick with what I wrote – it is hard to deny the facts as they are. Your point with your link is lost on me.

20. Inactive
    Randy Webster

    @RandyWebster

    6:25 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Well, Zafar, I think you’re one of a kind.

    Doubtless, and I hope kindly meant (???), but hard too see how it’s relevant.

    (Also: Rootless Cosmopolitan and proud of it, man!!!)

    It was kindly meant.

21. Coolidge
    Stad

    @Stad

    6:35 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Booker is a bigot plain and simple.

    He’s liable to be our president in a few years.

    I think he’s too unlikable to be elected Prez, but you never know what the American people are going to do next.

22. Inactive
    Randy Webster

    @RandyWebster

    6:46 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Stad (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Booker is a bigot plain and simple.

    He’s liable to be our president in a few years.

    I think he’s too unlikable to be elected Prez, but you never know what the American people are going to do next.

    Trump was pretty unlikable, too.  Or maybe is.

23. Member
    Zafar

    @Zafar

    7:15 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):
    What with all those Sharia zones popping up left and right. Point made decisively, Sir.

    Go ahead and mock me, but I’ll stick with what I wrote – it is hard to deny the facts as they are. Your point with your link is lost on me.

    You surprise me. 

24. Member
    Western Chauvinist

    @WesternChauvinist

    

    8:26 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Zafar (View Comment):

    How confident are you that he can deal with the Muslim World in a clear headed fashion – unswayed by personal prejudice or bias – no matter what policy the elected President asks him to execute?

    Truly.

    Extremely! Since you’re now citing your favorite Jews (the ADL is just another left wing organization, btw), I’ll cite mine from last week. Dennis Prager points out that just because conservatives believe leftists are wrong (about just about everything), doesn’t mean we think they should cease to exist or be silenced. We are the “live and let live” bunch. This is why the Left has made such great strides against tolerant conservatism. 

    Leftists do not understand us because their inclination is to destroy that which doesn’t align with leftism. I can provide a multiplicity of examples — starting on college campuses.

25. Member
    Zafar

    @Zafar

    8:46 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    How confident are you that he can deal with the Muslim World in a clear headed fashion – unswayed by personal prejudice or bias – no matter what policy the elected President asks him to execute?

    Truly.

    Extremely!

     

    Based on what?

26. Member
    Western Chauvinist

    @WesternChauvinist

    

    9:07 AM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    How confident are you that he can deal with the Muslim World in a clear headed fashion – unswayed by personal prejudice or bias – no matter what policy the elected President asks him to execute?

    Truly.

    Extremely!

    Based on what?

    His overall competence and realistic view of the world.

    Do you realize, Zafar, that what Corey Booker did in this interrogation is prototypical leftism? It isn’t enough for people to conform to leftist behavior; we must be made to conform in our consciences! It’s domination and bullying of the first order. 

    How about you give me examples of where Pompeo has behaved unjustly toward Muslims and gays? Let’s start there.

27. Coolidge
    Richard Easton

    @RichardEaston

    12:24 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    In what ways have Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel mischaracterized Islam.

    The ADL nails the issue:

    In advance of the Senate confirmation hearings for Mike Pompeo, the President’s nominee for Secretary of State, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) sent a letter urging all members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to closely examine Pompeo’s views, given his past statements and close ties to stridently anti-Muslim groups.

    The letter cites Pompeo’s past anti-Muslim statements and his associations with organizations that have frequently expressed hostility toward Muslims and trafficked in anti-Muslim conspiracy theories. ADL calls on the committee members to ask Pompeo tough questions to see where he stands on Muslims in America and America’s policy priorities, including promotion and protection of human rights abroad.

    While ADL agrees with some of Pompeo’s positions on Israel, the organization’s letter said that certainly should not make him immune from hard questions about his fitness to serve based on his full record.

    “As America’s top diplomat, the Secretary of State must be prepared to faithfully represent the United States in building international partnerships and coalitions and negotiating delicate treaties and agreements,” ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt wrote in the letter, which was made public today.

    “Mr. Pompeo’s long, documented record of anti-Muslim prejudice threatens to undermine the essential work our Secretary of State does in representing American interests and values abroad,” Greenblatt said. “In our view, it is essential for the nominee to repudiate his past anti-LGBT and anti-Muslim views and to renounce any associations with anti-Muslim conspiracy-haunted organizations.”

    ADL cited a number of anti-Muslim statements made by Pompeo in the past, as well as his association with anti-Muslim activists such as Frank Gaffney, who hosted him many times and honored him at his think tank, the Center for Security Policy. The letter also cites Pompeo’s longtime association with Brigitte Gabriel, the founder of ACT for America, an organization that peddles anti-Muslim conspiracy theories. Pompeo accepted the organization’s America’s National Security Eagle Award in 2016.

    The letter is pretty detailed on this (and other) issues. iow, it documents.

    My question was what inaccuracies there were in Gaffney’s and Gabriel’s characterizations of Islam.  Calling Gaffney anti-Islam or Gabriel as supposedly peddling anti-Muslim conspiracy theories doesn’t answer my simple question.  

28. Inactive
    TheSockMonkey

    @TheSockMonkey

    Post author

    1:28 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Zafar (View Comment):

    This focus on SSM is a red herring – the Secretary of State doesn’t really deal with that.

    That’s part of what makes Booker’s comments so frustrating.

    I agree Booker would have looked like less of a Christophobe if he’d just stuck to the questions about Pompeo’s alleged Islamophobia. And I think Pompeo could have defended himself easily enough, if he’d changed his response a little bit.

    But are you saying that Booker’s anti-Christian comments are not something Americans should be concerned about?

29. Inactive
    Randy Webster

    @RandyWebster

    1:31 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Booker’s one of the prices we pay for federalism.

30. Member
    Scott Wilmot

    @ScottWilmot

    3:16 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 15, 2018

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):

    More signs of the left’s intolerance of Christianity from the New Yorker:

    Chick-fil-A’s Creepy Infiltration of New York City

    Steven Hayward at PowerLine asks, after reading that ridiculous article: Have We Reached Peak Liberalism?

    He’s got a tweet from Nate Silver and John Podhoretz, but the best rebuttal comes from Fr. Dwight Longenecker:

    Starbuck’s Creepy Infiltration of South Carolina:

    Ah cain’t help noticing that this here Starbucks keeps setting up new coffee shops all over South Carolina

    My and my younguns were comin’ back from church and headin’ for the rifle range for some practice, and goshdarn if I ain’t seen another one of them liberal, communist coffee shops opening up. I said to Houston (he’s my fourth boy), “Son, look at that sign up air. You see that?”

    “Yessir.” he said.

    “You see that mermaid kinda woman on that Starbucks sign?”

    “I can see it Daddy!” says San Antonia. She’s my girl.

    “That there is a pagan symbol of a mother goddess–the goddess of the sea and the moon. That Starbucks is a devil worshipping kinda place.”

    “What are they doin here in South Carolina Pa?” says my boy Austin. He’s the oldest. He’s fourteen.

    “They come here from out West in Seattle where all them folks are feminists and homos and communists.”

    Read it all – it is hilarious.