dude, c’mon. alabama

— I don’t understand what’s going on in Alabama.

— That’s okay. The people of Alabama don’t always understand what’s going on in Alabama. Nobody has ever quite understood what’s going on in Alabama. When Hernando de Soto first passed through the area, the Choctaw Indians who lived there are quoted as saying “Who the hell ARE these people. What the hell are they up to? We just don’t understand.”

— I mean this whole same-sex marriage thing. What’s up with that?

— Oh, right, that. Well, back in 2006 Alabama added a Sanctity of Marriage Amendment to their State Constitution.

— What’s a Sanctity of Marriage Amendment? What does it do?

— It said marriage was “a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman.” It basically told same-sex couples they could go fuck themselves.

— Really?

— Yeah. Well, no…not literally. I mean, it’s only been about seven months…yeah, that’s right, months…that Alabama’s anti-sodomy law was finally kicked to the curb. Alabama law doesn’t much like gay folks. The Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court thinks gay sex is icky. Back in 2002 he wrote a legal opinion saying homosexuality was “a crime in Alabama, a crime against nature, an inherent evil, and an act so heinous that it defies one’s ability to describe it.”

Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court -- thinks gay sex is icky.

Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court — thinks gay sex is icky.

— Lawdy. Defies one’s ability to describe it? You know, it’s really not that hard to describe gay sex.

— I know, right? Anyway, a couple weeks ago a federal judge said the Sanctity of Marriage Amendment was unconstitutional, and Alabama couldn’t use it to deny a marriage license to same-sex couples.

— Oh, well that should settle it, right?

— Dude, c’mon. This is Alabama. The Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court told the federal court it could go fuck itself. Again, not literally. On account of that would be icky, and all that.

— Can the Chief Justice of anyplace actually do that?

— Nope.

— Is that the same Chief Justice who wrote that earlier opinion?

— It surely is. He’s a yahoo named Roy Moore. He told the folks who issue marriages licenses at the county offices to ignore the federal court ruling. Told them they should refuse to issue licences to same-sex couples.

— They ought to kick that guy out of office.

— They actually did. Back in 2003. Kicked his ass right out of office.

Jusge Roy Moore with two-and-a-half tons of Commandments

Judge Roy Moore with two-and-a-half tons of Commandments

— Because of the gay thing?

— Nope. It was another thing. Judge Moore commissioned a two-and-a-half ton monument to the Ten Commandments, which he put in the central rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court.

— That’s pretty much a violation of the separation of church and state, isn’t it?

— Pretty much.

— So what happened?

— Somebody sued. A federal judge said the monument had to be removed. Judge Moore told the judge to go fuck himself.

— Not literally.

— No, not literally. Anyway, Moore refused to remove the monument, and eventually an Alabama judiciary commission booted his ass out of office.

— But he’s back now? He’s the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court again?

— Yep. Again.

— Why? How?

— Dude, c’mon. Alabama.

— Right. Okay, so what’s going to happen?

— Damned if I know. Some Alabama counties are issuing marriage license to same-sex couple, some are refusing to issue licences to same-sex couples, some have stopped issuing marriage licenses to anybody.

Alabama couple refused a license to marry

Alabama couple refused a license to marry

— That doesn’t make any sense, does it?

— Nope.

— That judge, Moore…he’s going to lose again, isn’t he? Eventually?

— Almost certainly. He might be able to drag this fuss out until later in the year when the U.S. Supreme Court issues a final ruling about same-sex marriage. But yeah, he’s almost certainly going to lose. Again.

Alabama couple granted a license to marry

Alabama couple granted a license to marry

— So he’s causing all this trouble and confusion because of some religious principle?

— That’s what he says. The Bible, and all that.

— But the Bible isn’t the law. The Ten Commandments aren’t the law.

— Nope.

— I mean, there’s all that coveting business. We’re pretty much free to covet whatever the hell we want in America, aren’t we?

— Pretty much.

— I mean, this is America. We’re all about coveting, aren’t we.

— Totally about the coveting.

— So why is all this happening?

— Dude, c’mon. It’s Alabama.

UPDATE 9/27/2017

— I see your boy Roy Moore is back.

— Not my boy, but yeah. Year and a half later and he’s back. Just won the Republican primary to run for the United States Senate representing the great state of Alabama.

— So what happened back then about that gay marriage business?

—  Glad you asked. A couple of months later Moore was suspended from the Alabama Supreme Court for the second time.

— So that settled that.

— You’d think. But nope. Moore told the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission to go fuck itself.

— Not literally, right?

— Right. He sued them. Said it was unconstitutional to suspend him from the court just on account of he refuse to obey the law.

— You’re making that up, right?

— Nope. But then a couple of months after that, same sex marriage became legal everywhere. Including in Alabama.

— Right. So that settled everything, right?

— Dude, c’mon. It’s Alabama. Moore’s suit against the Judicial Inquiry Whatsit dragged itself on like a damned zombie until just a few months ago. April, 2017. That’s when a special Alabama court told Moore to go fuck himself. No, not literally. They upheld his suspension.

— Suspension.

— Bingo. He wasn’t kicked off the court this time. He was just suspended from ever sitting at the bench and hearing a case or doing anything remotely supreme courtish.

— What did Moore do?

— He told the special Alabama court to go fuck itself. He resigned and said he’d run for the U.S. Senate.

— Which he did.

— Which he totally did. And yeah, last night he won the nomination. I think it was the thing with the gun that sealed his win.

— Thing with the gun?

Former judge Roy Moore says hello to his little friend.

— On Monday, the day before the election, Moore was giving a speech and he pulled out a handgun.

— Onstage? Why?

— To show he loves guns. It was just a little silver revolver, kind of a girly gun, but still. Some folks love that stuff.

— So he’s going to be the next United States Senator for Alabama?

— Well, he’ll have to face a Democrat in the next election, but yeah, he’s the Republican nominee.

— Lawdy.

— I know, right?

— But this guy’s completely horrible. He can’t possibly win, can he?

— Dude, c’mon. It’s Alabama.

Advertisements

what did they expect?

“What did they expect?” I don’t know how many times I’ve heard this comment made about the massacre at Charlie Hebdo. “What the fuck did they expect?

The implication is that since the editors and cartoonists knew that images of the Prophet Mohammed offended Muslim extremists, they should have expected a violent reaction from them. Because they knew Muslim extremists were capable of massive acts of immoderate and irrational violence, they should have expected to be firebombed or stabbed or shot. Because they knew something like this might happen, they shouldn’t publish cartoons of the Prophet.

In other words, Charlie Hebdo should let extremists decide what they ought to publish.

But let me actually answer the question. What did the editors and cartoonists and support staff of Charlie Hebdo expect? They expected people who were offended by their magazine would choose not to read their magazine. It’s that simple.

If you’re offended by rap music, don’t listen to rap music. If you’re offended by South Park, don’t watch South Park. If you’re offended by Sarah Palin, don’t listen to Sarah Palin. If you’re offended by photographs of naked people, don’t go to exhibits that show photos of naked people. If you’re offended by Charlie Hebdo, don’t buy or read Charlie Hebdo.

So let’s turn that question to the Muslim extremists? What the fuck did they expect? If they knew Charlie Hebdo published outrageous cartoons of the Prophet, they should have expected to be offended. So let’s consider their options.

Option 1 — Don’t buy or read Charlie Hebdo.

Option 2 — Gear up and slaughter as many people who work at Charlie Hebdo as they possibly can.

This is not a difficult decision. I don’t think it was unreasonable for the staff of Charlie Hebdo to expect folks to choose Option 1.

je suis toujours charlie

First, let me make a request. If you have something to say about anything I’ve written here, I’d prefer you say it in the comments rather than send me an email. That way your point of view will be most accurately represented.

I received some email (well, a few emails…okay, three…I received three emails) that I think deserve a response. Two of them essentially suggested Stéphane Charbonnier and his compatriots at Charlie Hebdo were at least marginally complicit in their own murders. Neither writer actually said that directly, but it seemed implicit. I should also say both writers were firm in stating that there was absolutely no justification for the murder of the twelve people killed in the attack. Both were explicit in stating they were passionate supporters of free expression. However, both took the “don’t poke a stick at a mad dog” approach.

Charbonnier was an egotistical narcissist. He knew he was provoking a group who responded to insults with violence, yet he insisted on doing it — and now there are twelve families who’ve lost loved one. All because Charb wanted to be a bad boy.

And this:

They knew those offensive cartoons of Muhommed [sic] would be insulting, they didn’t have to publish them, but they did anyways. What did they expect? That the terrorists would write a strongly-worded letter to the editor?

Were the editorial staff of Charlie Hebdo being reckless? Yeah, probably. But that’s the thing about free expression, isn’t it. If you limit it to ‘reasonable’ speech, then it’s no longer free expression. If free expression doesn’t protect the extremes, then it’s worthless.

"I am the Prophet, fool."

“I am the Prophet, fool!”

The third email misinterpreted my point entirely. Or maybe I simply wasn’t as clear as I’d hoped to be. Here’s the meat of his email:

It’s long past time people started saying fuck you to Muslim terrorists. They should republish every comic that insults Mohammed.

I wasn’t saying ‘fuck you’ to Muslim terrorists. Well, yeah, okay, I was saying that, but not JUST to Muslim terrorists. I was saying ‘fuck you’ to ALL extremists who think violence is an acceptable way to express disagreement or to silence those who disagree with them. That same ‘fuck you’ applies to Christians who shoot abortion providers, to Sovereign Citizens who shoot law enforcement officers, to environmentalists who set traps that hurt or kill loggers, even to that woman in Vancouver who put logs and rocks on mountain bike trails.

Let me also say this: if anybody is using the attack on Charlie Hebdo to justify their hatred of Islam, then that ‘fuck you’ applies to them too.

Little Jesus

Little Jesus

Finally, there’s this — a comment addressed to me on Facebook that was unfortunately removed before I could respond:

Greg, respectfully, if someone firebombs Westboro Baptist Church, are you going to change your avatar to ‘Je Suis GodHatesFags” by the same rationale? They operate under the same freedoms and would have been attacked by the same type of motives.

It’s a tragedy that this all happened; to pretend it was an attack on free speech is naive. It was an attack by twisted people against deliberate antagonism and provocation. I’m not excusing anything; the murderers were wrong in the worst of ways. But nobody gains anything by cartoons showing Muslim women with burkas shoved up their asses, or someone else’s prophet being born out of a man’s asshole, or posing in a pornographic film, or whatever, unless bigotry and dehumanizing people for the sake of doing so is your thing. It’s not for me.

That’s a perfectly valid response, and those are valid opinions. Would I change my avatar to Je suis GodHatesFags? No, of course not. But I would defend (and have defended) the right of the Westboro Baptist Church to express their ugly opinions. Here’s the difference between the WBS and Charlie Hebdo: the WBC is claiming only one viewpoint (theirs, of course) is valid and deserving of respect, whereas Charlie Hebdo has been saying no viewpoint is deserving of unqualified respect.

Nobody gains anything from the Charlie Hebdo cartoons? I disagree. Yes, many of them are offensive. Deliberately offensive. Intended to offend. But Charlie Hebdo has been an equal opportunity offender; they offended everybody with equal enthusiasm. I’d argue that society at large gains from that approach, if only because it expands the range of acceptable opinions.

hebdo offensive4

Is this offensive? Yes, totally.

 

Here’s a true thing: the writers and cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo did nothing to elevate the marketplace of ideas. But they certainly contributed to it. They actively participated in the marketplace of ideas. They took the position that nothing is so important that it can’t be mocked. They said the more important a person or an idea is, the more that person or idea needs to be mocked. Nothing is sacred.

Yes, a lot of their cartoons are offensive and childish and mocking and unfair — and bless them for it. Are some of their cartoons racist? Yes…and no. They certainly used racial and ethnic stereotypes, but from what I’ve seen they used them to mock racial and ethnic stereotypes (which, by the way, is the same approach used by R. Crumb). Are some of the cartoons cruel? Yes. Do they make a point? Yes. We may not all agree with their point or the way they make it, but it’s hard to argue that the cartoons are…well, pointless.

Is THIS racist? Well, yeah, it is.

Is THIS racist? Well, yeah, it is.

One way to look at Charlie Hebdo is through the lens of that Hans Christian Anderson tale of the Emperor’s New Clothes. Charlie Hebdo is the crude, irritating, badly-behaved child along the parade route who makes farting noises and points and laughs and makes fun of the Emperor’s bare ass.

Are there better ways to point out the Emperor’s bare ass? Yes, absolutely. But if we’re to protect free expression, we have to defend the right of publications like Charlie Hebdo to be offensive. It’s not necessary to approve of Charlie Hebdo. But it is important to support them — especially now.

 

 

je suis charlie

I’m only vaguely familiar with Charlie Hebdo, the French satirical magazine — and I’m only familiar with it at all because it’s so often been involved in controversy. I became aware of the magazine in 2011 when the magazine’s office was firebombed for publishing an edition with this cover:

charia_hebdo

100 lashes if you are not dying of laughter.

It’s a cheezy cartoon, but a great line. One hundred lashes if you’re not dying of laughter.

Today at least twelve people died — were killed, to be exact — in another attack on the magazine, Three more were wounded and are in critical condition. Two of the dead are police officers — one who was detailed to protect the magazine office, and another who apparently responded to the scene on a bicycle. The rest of the dead were employees of the magazine — the editor, cartoonists, writers, support staff.

They were killed by two or three masked men armed with Kalashnikov rifles. Killed for publishing cartoons and articles that offended some Muslim extremists. The operative term there is extremists. It’s always the fucking extremists who engage in this sort of cowardly bullshit. And it IS cowardly, and it IS bullshit.

Stéphane Charbonnier, one of today's dead, outside the firebombed office of Charlie Hebdo in 2011.

Stéphane Charbonnier, one of today’s dead, outside the firebombed office of Charlie Hebdo in 2011.

It’s cowardly because this is the act of people who are afraid. If you’re confident in your faith, then an insult to it can’t hurt you. Be offended by the insult, certainly, but to silence the people who made the insult — to silence them by killing them, to hope to silence others by the killing — is effectively saying your faith and your religion are too weak to withstand mockery. And it’s bullshit because all this does is heap more scorn and loathing on the religion these jackasses are trying to ‘protect’.

Charlie Hebdo attackers killing a police officer as he's defenseless on the ground.

Charlie Hebdo attackers killing a police officer as he’s defenseless on the ground.

People will talk about finding an ‘appropriate’ response to this attack. There IS NO APPROPRIATE RESPONSE to extremists killing people over cartoons and caricatures. There is only a range of inappropriate responses. Here’s my personal inappropriate response:

Fuck you.

Fuck you, if you think this is going to help your cause. Fuck you for being so stupid and hateful and afraid. Fuck you if you think this will stop people from mocking Islam or the Prophet Mohammed. Fuck you, because I’m going to buy a subscription to Charlie Hebdo, even though I don’t read French. Fuck you with a passion for thinking you can silence people who disagree with you. Fuck you for thinking you have the right to shut people up. Fuck you and your pathetic guns, and fuck you and your stupid masks, and fuck you for shitting on Paris and on France and on the world. Fuck you, you gutless jerkwads, you deserve any ridicule that’s directed at you. Fuck you in the neck.

jesuischarlie

You think you did something brave? You think you struck a blow for Islam? Well, fuck you. You made Charlie Hebdo famous. You made people all over the world stand up and say “Je suis Charlie.”

And when I say “I am Charlie” what I’m really saying is this: fuck you. I hope you and every other extremist in every cause and in every religion is listening. Fuck you. All of you. Fuck. You.

my morning, interrupted

So I’m sitting here, right? It’s 9:30 on a Saturday morning, I’m drinking a cup of cold brew, looking out the window at drizzly-cloudy day, getting ready to read my students’ work. And the doorbell rings.

Guy in a suit. Young guy, white, earnest glasses, unsmiling. Right, Jehovah’s Witness. I open the door, he mutters something, hands me a pamphlet, and turns away. I didn’t even get a chance to say ‘Good morning.’ Not much of a witness — but hey, it’s 9:30 on a Saturday morning and it’s drizzly-cloudy. Who can blame him for wanting to finish his chores and go find a dry place where he can get a cup of…do Jehovah’s Witnesses drink coffee?

JW

Where can we find answers to life’s big questions? The pamphlet seems to suggest we can find them on our smartphone. Android phone, by the looks of it. Sorry, Siri. But what ARE life’s big questions? They’re listed on the back. Which of these big questions concerns you most? They’re not the questions I would have asked. Which is maybe one of the many reasons I’m not a Jehovah’s Witness.

What is the meaning of life?

Is God to blame for our suffering?

What happens when you die?

I’m a tad disturbed by the way the last two questions are phrased. Is God to blame for OUR suffering, and what happens when YOU die. Our suffering, your death. They don’t want to come right out and say ‘Dude, we know what’s going to happen when WE die, but you? Different story, bud.’

I don’t know…all I wanted was a cup of cold brew coffee, a few minutes to scan the news, then get my homework out of the way. Now I’m faced with these three questions. Fucking doorbell. Never should have answered the door. Never get out of the boat (no idea why Apocalypse Now popped into my brain).

Okay…meaning of life. I don’t know. Not very concerned about it. Eat well, get to know some interesting people, be curious, help other folks when you can. That ought to do it.

Is God to blame for our suffering? I don’t know. I don’t believe in god. But sure, why not? If you’re going to go to all the fuss and bother of believing in god, you might as well give him something to do. Shoulder the blame–that ought to keep him busy. And everybody who claims to speak for god, let’s hand them a share of the blame too. And let’s give a portion to all those young guys who ring doorbells at 9:30 on a Saturday morning — they sure as hell added to my suffering.

Right, what’s next? Oh…what happens when you die? I don’t know. Does it matter? I mean, regardless of what happens you’re still going to do it. It’s not like it’s optional. I totally get the idea that a lot of folks believe that if you live your life a certain way, then after you’re dead you get to join god’s special club. Like if you practice the clarinet, maybe you’ll get to play with the marching band. Or maybe you’ll just piss away a lot of time playing the clarinet. I don’t know. Can’t get very concerned about it.

By the way, I did a Google image search of ‘god clarinet’ to find a visual to include in this post. So okay, I don’t know the meaning of life and I don’t know what happens when you die, but I think this has to figure into it somehow:

clarinet cries for mercy

Seriously, you ought to do that image search. Brilliant. And that earnest young man who rang my doorbell this morning? If not for him, I’d have never seen this. Maybe there really is a god and this is his plan.

Her plan.

One of those. Praise Jeebus.

the war on religious liberty (also, the speed on the outside)

Shhh…listen. Listen carefully. Can you hear that? No? No, of course you can’t. But that sound you don’t hear — it’s war, you guys. A silent war.

Bobby Jindal, Republican Governor of Louisiana

Bobby Jindal, Republican Governor of Louisiana

It’s so silent you probably didn’t know about it. So it’s a good thing Bobby Jindal, pencil salesman Republican Governor of Louisiana, whispered about it to a capacity crowd during his commencement address to the graduates of Liberty University. He told them:

Today the American people, whether they know it or not, are mired in a silent war…. It is a war — a silent war — against religious liberty.”

Mired, you guys! You’d think if you were mired in something, you’d know it. But no! See, that’s how tricky a silent war is. We are SO mired in this totally Silent War Against Religious Liberty (SWARL).

Jeebus and random minorities in a boat in outer space

Jeebus, some white folks, and random minorities in a boat in outer space

Well, mostly silent. I mean, it’s not a War Against Religious Liberty in Space (where nobody can hear you scream). Every so often you can hear the SWARL squeak a little. A tiny squeak. Hardly noticeable. Like if, say, Jiminy Cricket had a sore throat. Teensy little squeak. But other than that,pretty much totally silent, this War on Religious Liberty.

Well, yeah, okay, there are people giving speeches about the SWARL. And they have demonstrations and protests. And sure, they wave signs and put up billboards. And open business meeting with prayers. Business meetings and Congress. And occasionally somebody will talk about SWARL on the radio. Or television. On one of the half-dozen non-commercial television networks exclusively devoted to Christian broadcasting.

But mostly, the WARL is S.

Jason and David Benham (allegedly not clones)

Jason and David Benham (allegedly not clones)

Just as in every war, there are innocent victims. The most recent victims of (S)WARL are the Benhams, cloned from stormtrooper DNA in secret underground laboratories hidden beneath Liberty University twin brothers who graduated from Liberty University. The Benhams (David and Jason — or maybe the other way around — who can tell, they’re fucking clones twins) were supposed to be the stars of a new show on the Home and Garden Television network.

But no! You guys, the network stopped production of the show. Why? Because the Benham brothers love Jeebus SO MUCH. We know they love Jeebus on account of they occasionally stand outside of mosques and shout “Jesus hates Muslims.” The Benham clones twins objected to the interfaith memorial service for the Sandy Hook shooting victims because it didn’t mention Jeebus enough — that’s how much they love Jeebus (hint: you cannot ever mention Jeebus enough). Also? Just like Jeebus, the Benhams love the gays. They just don’t think gays folks should get married. Or have jobs that allow them to come into contact with normal people. Or show any icky gay affection in public.

christians silenced

And because of how much they love Jeebus, the Benham brothers have been denied their First Amendment right to host a television show about flipping foreclosed houses. That’s tyranny. And discrimination against Christians. Also too? Bullying.

But those plucky Benham clones twins will not be bullied or silenced. No sir, they are warriors in the Silent War Against Religious Liberty. They will not be collateral damage in (S)WARL. They will continue to flip foreclosed houses for Jeebus, even if HGTV won’t let them do it on television. Their courage and conviction are evident in their motto:

If the speed on the outside is greater than the speed on the inside, the end is soon near.

I have no idea what that means. None at all. But I’m pretty sure Jeebus does.

Literally!

You guys, did you know you were paralyzed? Literally paralyzed. Oh, and scared too. Why are you paralyzed (literally) and scared? I’ll tell you. It’s totally on account of the Socialist President of Islamic Ameriqa, Baraq Hussein Obama. Also, gay folks.

Paralyzed while pointing!

Rush Limbaugh — paralyzed while pointing!

Seriously. I wouldn’t make that up. I literally would NOT make that up. I have proof. It’s what Rush Limbaugh said, his ownself. Literally.

The fact that we are living in the historic era with the first African-American president has everybody paralyzed and everybody scared. Political leadership in Washington is literally paralyzed.  Political consultant leadership in Washington literally paralyzed. The Republican Party is literally paralyzed.  Many American citizens are literally paralyzed, frightened to death to say anything to anybody about what they really think.

Frightened to death, you guys. And literally paralyzed. Nobody — not the political leadership, not the political consultants, not the Republican Party (oh, and also many citizens) — absolutely nobody is willing to say what they really think. Because if people were to say what they really think, other people might really think they’re literally hateful bigots and asshats (and of course, they’d be wrong — but those other folks, who are probably literally gay, would totally say what they think about hateful bigoted asshattery because they’ve apparently got some sort of gay anti-paralysis gene, or something).

Rod Dreher -- paralyzed after stealing Harry Potter's spectacles! Stupefy!

Rod Dreher — paralyzed after stealing Harry Potter’s spectacles! Stupefy!

How bad is it? It’s so bad that Christians are terrified (probably literally) to voice their belief that same-sex marriage is going to totally destroy America and make Jeebus have grand mal seizures. Serious Conservative Thinker Rod Dreher weeps (figuratively) for the oppressed and silenced Christians:

Christians and other traditionalists were wrong to have demonized gay people in the past, and forced them to live in the closet for fear of their careers. Gay rights activists did a lot of good work to end this climate of fear, and to wake the rest of us up to the humanity of our gay brothers and sisters, and to increase tolerance for them. But it is to their great discredit that they have created a climate of intolerance and, yes, hatred, that sends traditionalist Christians into professional closets of their own.

C’mon gay folks! See? Christians admit they may have made some mistakes! You know, in the past. Sure, there are still a few Christians who may have politely suggested y’all shouldn’t be getting married to each other (and okay, maybe y’all should be literally stoned to death), but is that any reason to make them feel bad about their opinions? Gay folks, you are literally oppressing Christians by making them feel they can’t voice their opinion that y’all don’t deserve to get married and be happy (and, you know, that whole stoning to death business). Is it their fault y’all are possessed by demons? Is it!!??

Too paralyzed by fear to speak -- must hold up sign!

Too paralyzed by fear to speak — must hold up sign!

Okay, okay, maybe some of the things Christians have been saying (literally for centuries) about gay folks might have led to some youthful high spirits and occasional harmless hazing (and yeah, okay, maybe some taunting and beatings, and yeah, okay, terrorizing some gay kids until they literally committed suicide), but surely that should have taught y’all some compassion. Y’all know how it feels to be ostracized — so c’mon, gay folks, practice a little tolerance. You know…toward Christians.

A paralyzed crowd of Christians, too terrified to speak!

A paralyzed crowd of literal Christians, too terrified to speak!

This is America, gay folks! Literally America! Where everybody has to right to free speech (unless, you know, it offends Jeebus). It’s America, and the Constitution of These United States specifically says Christians shouldn’t have to bake cakes for gay weddings (it’s in one of those Article things, or maybe an amendment or something).

So loosen up, gay folks! Don’t take it personally when Christians refuse to bake your wedding cakes. Don’t be so sensitive when they point out that demon-possession thing! It’s not Rush Limbaugh’s fault that Jeebus and the Constitution won’t let Christians do any gay cake-baking (not a euphemism for anything). It’s hurtful to Rush when y’all suggest he’s a bigot. Hurtful, you guys! In fact, I have it on high authority that Rush took the Zimbio Celebrity Boyfriend quiz…and nailed George Clooney (he makes Rush feel like the only girl in the world while it lasts).

Like the only girl in the world -- literally

Like the only girl in the world — literally

It’s a shame, gay folks, that you have Christians so paralyzed and fearful. It’s a shame Christians don’t feel they can express their truest and deepest feelings with the people they care most about. It’s a shame they’ve been forced to hide who they really are.

It’s just such a shame. Literally.