Bad Day for Bigots III: DOMA Struck Down.


Cheers rang out across America today. Firstly, the wonderful filibuster in the Texas State Senate by Senator Wendy Davis, defeating the anti-women bill, and secondly, the Supreme Court has just struck down The Defence of Marriage Act as unconstitutional, 17 years after President Clinton signed it into law. Most recognise the incredible step forward for human equality and progress and the right to love that SCOTUS has affirmed today. Predictably, certain people were not too pleased with the ruling. I thought I’d post some of my favourite right winged meltdowns from the World of social media. And what better place to start than Fox News:

twitter-starnes-20130626-DOMAgod
- This overly dramatic nonsense is brought to you by Fox News’ Todd Starnes, who seems to be under the impression that his definition of ‘God’ has the right to legislate, in a secular democracy. Not only that, but he seems to be complaining, whilst completely clean shaven. This of course being in direct contradiction – or, direct overruling – of God’s law found in Leviticus 19:27. Theocrats tend to ignore Biblical rules not pertaining to discriminating against same-sex couples.

Here are a few of my favourite post-DOMA freakouts:

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.10.29
- “Becoming Sodom and Gomorrah” (a place that didn’t actually exist) needs to be added to my list of terrible things same-sex marriage will lead to according to conservatives. This list so far includes; marrying your duck, marrying your computer, a lesbian Queen with an artificially inseminated heir, and a US radio DJ vomiting continuously.

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 17.05.43
- Another that relies on a Christian interpretation only of the word ‘marriage’. So culturally narrow, and so wrong to impose this one religious concept of marriage on a secular nation. Marriage, of course, has many different definitions throughout history (as I note here). Enshrining a Christian definition only, institutionalising a Christian understanding of marriage, completely shatters the wall between Church and State, and could not be any more anti-constitutional if it tried. Theocracy is not an American value.

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 17.14.02
- Massive population losses? Because heterosexual people will all now decide they’re gay?

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.15.54
- Are the Supreme Court Justices not aware that we should be basing all rational discourse on dust man and rib lady myths? If not, why not?

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 17.47.31
- As well as dust man and rib lady myths, why aren’t the Supreme Court framing law around principles of IKEA furniture assembly?

This guy is entertaining all by himself. He appears to be having a homophobic meltdown. One of those “he’s protesting a lot…… perhaps he has something to hide” sort of meltdown:
Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.27.14

And he continues, in a somewhat more flirtatious style:
Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.28.29

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.33.48
- Southern States were pretty overruled in the 1860s too. Are we going to suggest that shouldn’t have been the case? Institutional bigotry is acceptable, if the majority who benefit from it say so? Really? Denying equality under the law based on biological differences like race, or gender, or sexuality, is not a States Rights issue. Conservatives do not get to decide the superiority of one race, or gender, or sexuality. Permitting the same rights that they themselves have always enjoyed, to another group, takes nothing away from their rights. And of course, the repeal of DOMA simply means States now rule on same sex marriage. So, a victory for States Rights as well as equality.

tumblr_inline_mp0iouQhWI1qz4rgp
- Yes! Exactly! You must be exactly what you support. Support women’s suffrage? You must be female. Are you pro-life? You must be a fetus! Support 1960s civil rights movement? You must be a racial minority. Support funding for NASA? You must be an astronaut! That’s how supporting things works.

Here’s a few more overly dramatic, end times tweets to enjoy:

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.42.14
Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 17.45.52
Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 17.17.30
Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.44.17
Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.48.14
Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.50.58
Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 16.52.55
Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 17.01.31

And my absolute favourite of them all:
Untitled-1

From the bigoted, to the ridiculous, to the incredibly funny, we see that progression, is still met with mind blowing overly dramatic, conservative meltdowns. We should check back with them in a years time to note if any of their marriages have failed due entirely to same-sex marriages, or if Jesus has returned, wrapped in a Confederate flag, unleashing end times on California. Naturally, God will take revenge through right winged commentators, insisting that perfectly natural weather cycles are actually His wrath.

Today is a wonderful day, for liberal, progressive, secular, Constitutional America. It is a wonderful day, for the battle for equality, and natural human rights. But it is a terribly bad day for bigots.

For ‘Bad Day for Bigots’ part I, click here. For Part II, click here.

About these ads

12 Responses to Bad Day for Bigots III: DOMA Struck Down.

  1. Lis says:

    You did a great job finding all the wackos out there! Sickening, aren’t they?

  2. violetwisp says:

    Hilarious! Thanks for giving these an airing to the wider public.

  3. happygayguy says:

    I like “rednecks marrying their trucks #itwillhappen”

    Silly conservatives!

  4. CBS says:

    The right decision was made, but for the wrong reasons- The problem for me is that DOMA violated the federal system that guarantees decentralized decision making where possible (something the true democratic left should always unconditionally support), not “equal protection”,a spurious use of clause that gives the Judiciary the right to overturn literally any legislation it dislikes, regardless of its objective constitutionality.

  5. CBS says:

    Sorry, I probably should have said, the only condition is that people should be treated equally reardless of their race or sex and have basic representative democratic rights. I think each and every marriage is a privilege anyway, not a right ,so states should be selective (though I also believe GM is an acceptable thing)

  6. Ambidexter says:

    It’s funny how states rights only gets invoked when conservatives want to deny rights to some group.

  7. Marcel Kincaid says:

    Once again we discover that bigots, right wingers, Republicans, “social conservatives” … are ignorant, stupid, intellectually dishonest, and vile.

  8. Meizac says:

    Reblogged this on Meizac and commented:
    The tweets in this are hilarious. My favourite part of this entry (aside from the tweets) is this bit by the writer: “Yes! Exactly! You must be exactly what you support. Support women’s suffrage? You must be female. Are you pro-life? You must be a fetus! Support 1960s civil rights movement? You must be a racial minority. Support funding for NASA? You must be an astronaut! That’s how supporting things works.”

  9. Emily L. Ferguson says:

    Funny how preoccupied with sex they all are.

  10. Reblogged this on ASpoonfulofSuga and commented:
    wow I have no words for this

  11. Kagehi says:

    @CBS

    I never understood the whole “state rights” argument, as used to argue against the fed actually setting the “universal” standards for all of it. I mean, I can understand things like:

    1. Maintaining your own resources, so long as you do so within some reasonable guidelines i.e., one state shouldn’t sell scientifically sound medicines, while the next one over hires some quack from South America, to make “folk remedies”, with arsenic in them.

    2. To a certain extent, providing protections, or safety, or building requirements, which are not needed some place else. I.e., you probably don’t need hurricane codes on a bloody mountain.

    3. Any other controls, requirements, etc., which are “localized”.

    While certain “codes of behavior” laws are, imho, completely bloody stupid, including things like the case where several states panicked over the growth of nudism in some states, to concluded nudist = sex club = nude summer camp = camps to teach kids how to have orgies, and immediately passed laws banning them in their states. This just makes the sort of dimwits that pass these things look like total idiots.

    However, without a central concept of what we stand for, what is protected, or restricted, etc., in cases where misuse of resources has an impact on the entire nation, or abuse of the law has consequences across state lines, or the passage of restrictions on freedom, rather than protections of the same, and are not really needful, have, again, wide consequences, beyond the borders of your own state, we wouldn’t be “The United States”, we would be more like, “The loose confederation of nations”.

    The core problem, which the right fails at, constantly, is this:

    “If we can’t rule the whole nation, and force our ideals on it, in its entirety, then we should be allowed to do so in our city, county, or state. Who gives a damn what effect this actually has on the union, since, in the long run, we plan to legislate this stuff into that too. But, for now, hands off our personal playground! And F you, if you don’t like it!”

    We see just how well that sort of “system” works, where every damn economy, every tax system, every local set of laws, etc., differ, between completely “independent” states, in Europe, with the EU. It, put simply, doesn’t, at all, and when it goes to shit, everyone there suffered, unequally, with neither the means, nor the will (or means), nor any “requirement” for the losers to get helped out, by the rest. But, sure, we can do it their way, just like they want. Which means, since “local disasters” are a state issue, they get “no” help, when something goes wrong. Since “local crime problems” are a state issue, they get no help from the FBI, CIA, NSA, or anyone else, and they have to negotiate with the other state, for extradition, without, again, any help from the “union” to resolve it. If some dictator takes over the state, in a violent revolution, well… It would be nice for the union to do something about that, but.. really, that is just an issue for their own state government, right? lol

    Whole bloody lot of them have no clue, at all, what they are actually demanding, when they state whining about “state rights”, as though everything from who gets their water, to whether or not someone’s marriage is valid, the moment they cross the state line, are all part of the same “state rights”, and there is, pretty much nothing, that some moron wouldn’t insist was a “state issue, instead of federal”, including, probably even the military.

  12. […] in 2012. As of July 2013, the Republicans have simply continued their war on immigrants, the poor, gay rights, and most notably, on women. And so it is those groups that will provide the strength to knock the […]

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,294 other followers

%d bloggers like this: