All around repugnant, immoral, evil person, Scott Lively has a new shtick in his bid for governor of Massachusetts: he’s going to be the voice of all those nice, properly closeted, quiet, conservative queers, who understand that heterosexuality must remain dominant. Mr. Lively is doing his damnedest to come across as reasonable and tolerant. Not at all the same Scott Lively who once called for the execution of all queer folk, no, no. If you want to read his glurgetastic appeal to “authentic conservative homosexuals”, you can do that at Lively on “Gays”. If you’ve eaten today, you might want to wait a while. In the meantime:
“One of my goals here in this campaign is I want to establish sort of a profile of what an authentic conservative homosexual looks like,” Lively said, quickly making clear that this should not be construed to mean that he would consider “ever endorsing homosexuality, because it’s something condemned by God.”
Lively asserted that “authentically conservative” gay voters are nothing like “the gay progressives,” because the former place “an emphasis on personal privacy instead of gay pride parades cramming it down everybody’s throats.”
Lively said that gay rights activists today are part of a “radical cultural Marxist warfare” movement whereas the founders of the fight for gay rights were simply seeking “the right to be left alone,” which is something he is willing to support because “we should respect people’s right to be wrong, because in God’s perfect timing, he works with every person.”
This is a truly astonishing pile of shit. I don’t believe for one second that Lively has at all softened his views on queer people, he has been utterly virulent in his hate and condemnation of them for decades. He really wants that governorship though, and he’s obviously more than willing to lie his arse off in order to obtain said office. I sincerely hope the people of Massachusetts show Mr. Lively the curb.
Lively declared that as long as gay conservatives “agree that mainstream society should be—and must be—heterosexual,” then society should be willing to accommodate them, especially when faced with the threat that the “gay cultural supremacy being driven by the hard-left progressives” is creating an environment in which “the natural family may actually be facing extinction.”
That is not going to happen. If anything, climate change will get us first, but people are not going to stop breeding. The majority of people on this planet are hetero, and most of them either want or end up with children, and there’s a fucktonne of people on this planet.
“If the concept of male and female complementarity actually becomes criminalized, and that’s where this is headed,” Lively warned, “we’re going to face some really serious problems.”
No, that is NOT where we are headed, you melodramatic asshole. Some people are now learning about gender, and coming to understand it properly, and expanding on the rigid gender definitions which have defined, and often devastated generations of people. That’s not a threat to hetros in any way whatsoever. Family has become a much larger umbrella, to embrace all manner of configurations, and in many cases, extended families are coming back, which is a good thing, because there’s a lot of support in that. There are a whole lot of children out there who are in desperate need of homes, and assholes like you, Mr. Lively, would stop queer folk from providing those homes. It’s good to remember that you don’t actually care about any people outside of evangelical fringe, and all you want is the power to oppress.
I can’t wait for the NYT op-ed chastising him for his use of language!
You’ll pardon me if I don’t hold my breath.
If there were any justice in the world he’d rot in a prison cell somewhere in Africa for the rest of his life, for his part in fanning the flames of murderous homophobia across the continent. Though I’d settle for one in the US, since that has a pretty horrible prison system too.
I have never understood the line of reasoning that allowing gays to be open about their sexuality and marry somehow will lead to heteroxexuality being in danger.
I mean, I cannot choose being attracted to a man and I do not think my upbringing has had anything to do with it. Men never attracted me sexually and I cannot “choose” or be “persuaded” to become gay. It just does not work that way.
The good news is that Lively has virtually no chance of being nominated, let alone elected, here in MA. We currently have an extremely popular moderate Republican governor, who should easily brush aside Lively’s challenge.
Regardless, I feel like I need to apologize to the rest of the country and world for this bozo. I second cartomancer’s call for him to experience some sort of justice for his anti-gay activities.
This sounds a lot like “equity feminists” talking about actual feminism.
Charly
I do so partly.
For one thing, lots of gay peolpe will simply go through miserable pretend hetero lives making their wives and husbands and children miserable by proxy.
Secondly, I think that many people are not as heterosexual as you might think. Or as they might think. If heteronormativity is reduced, lots of bisexual people will explore their sexual orientation more. I mean, I’m happily married to a straight guy, and I hopefully always will be, and I used to identify as hetero (because that’s what people are by default, especially when they fuck somebody of the “other” gender, right?). I no longer do so. I stopped compartmentalising the fact that there are women I find damn attractive and wouldn’t push out of the bed and came to terms with the fact that yes, while not equally, I’m also attracted to women.
Giliell, yes, but all that notwithstanding, there’s never going to be a shortage of straight people, or people happily breeding. The fear is in being outnumbered by them, then they’d have no choice but to accept them, no matter how grudgingly.
Caine you are so wrong, a natural family doesn’t mean just breeding, it’s being in a union blessed by God! ;)
Oh, “God”. Yes, well, there are just a fucktonne of Gods too, aren’t there? Goddesses, even! :D
I’ve been keeping a wary eye on this POS for some time now, as he’s local for me. The reason he’s looking so smug is that he convinced enough Republican bigots (redundant?) that he’s the True Conservative they can vote for instead of the bowl of beige that is our current governor (Charlie Baker, R, depressingly popular). He did this by kissing Trump’s ass at the recent convention, netting him more that a quarter of the delegate vote and putting him on the primary ballot. There was your typical muted Republican outrage before the convention that naked bigotry might get publicly linked to the party; it makes the Kabuki Theater/dog whistle messaging of traditional Repubs less comfortable.
“union blessed by god”
So all you non Catholics are out of luck……. /s
Some Old Programmer:
Yeah, this worries me. I know Mass is known for being quite liberal, but the religious reich is going nuts trying to gain all political positions, and several lunatic evangelical pastors have already unseated less religious people. People said there was no way Trump could be elected, either…
@Gilliell, I have no reason to dispute anything you say. No doubt there are many people who are not “as hetero as they think” and in a different upbringin they would behave differently.
But given the behaviour present throughout the nature I do not believe they are nowhere near so prevalent as to potentially endanger the species with extinction.
Sexual attraction to opposite sex is prevalent throughout the animal kingdom and is indeed innate. There is no reason to suppose humans are different in this regard from, say, bonobos. Who embrace homosexuality yet are endangered by habitat destruction not by lack of procreating pairs.
Caine
No argument, and I think you’ll have none with me emphasizing that those are different things.
Charly
Beware of bi erasure.
Liking heterosexual sex is not the same as being heterosexual.
But no, I don’t disagree with your predictions that we won’t die out from lack of PiV sex.
—
Maybe it would make sense to clear up what these people actually fear. Not that heterosexuality will disappear, but that heteronormativity will cease to be the dominant paradigm.
(Ow, my eyes! Are there really people who think a wall of white text on a plain red background is, uh, comfortable, let alone appealing graphic “design”?)
A while ago there was that guy saying it would soon be a crime to talk about (his very wrong and sad idea of) heterosexual relationships, now this… I wonder if it’s because they are projecting their habits of wanting to criminalize everything they don’t like on everyone else?