Barber Wants to ‘Metaphorically’ Punch FFRF in the Face

Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel gave one of his typically irrational rants on his radio show, targeting Dan Barker, Annie Laurie Gaylor and the Freedom From Religion Foundation. He calls them “bullies” and says that the only way to respond to a bully is to — metaphorically, of course — punch him in the face.


He claims this is a metaphor, but what exactly is it a metaphor for? The only thing the FFRF does is file lawsuits over possible establishment clause violations. So how could they be metaphorically punched in the face? Liberty Counsel and other Christian right legal groups already provide free representation to the government entities that are sued (funny, isn’t it? They’re anti-government but all for it when the government is helping them impose their religious beliefs on people) by the FFRF. So how exactly does he propose to metaphorically punch them in the face?

"> Sounds like mental masturbation and an unwillingness to admit he really knows nothing and ..."

Trump Again Names Press the ‘Real ..."
"A Nazi walks into a bar – and instantly lowers it."

White Supremacists Love Putin Too
"> The god of Abraham did not give his people stone tablets engraved with the ..."

Trump Again Names Press the ‘Real ..."
"And yet Hitler would have had them in labour camps in very short order. He ..."

White Supremacists Love Putin Too

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • eric

    I suppose getting an FFRF suit ruled as frivolous or vexatious, or forcing FFRF to pay for some major legal fees would count – those things would impact FFRF’s future behavior, sort of like a punching someone will likely make them want to avoid you in the future.

  • Chiroptera

    I’d kinda like to see Barber’s hair metaphorically set on fire.

  • Barber is welcome to try and literally punch me in the face. After all, isn’t that what Jesus would have done?

  • baal

    Barber’s comments are an excellent example of why violent imagery doesn’t belong in public discourse (unless you’re like telling me about a battlefield or equivalent). I suppose a SLAPP suit against the FFrF could be considered a metaphorical punch.

  • Who would Jesus deck?

  • Gregory, if I remember right only people who make money from religion (Mark 11:15–19, 11:27–33, Matthew 21:12–17, 21:23–27, Luke 19:45–48, 20:1–8, John 2:13–16)

  • John Hinkle

    Well ok, Matt, go ahead and take a metaphorical swing. After you whiff and metaphorically succumb to gravity, no one will mention how metaphorically impotent you are… well, at least not more than once or twice. Loser.

  • Sastra

    Why, you ‘metaphorically’ punch atheists in the face every time you mention God, of course. The church/state issue is only cover. In reality, atheists are supposed to be like vampires confronted by a cross: we know in our hearts that we are under God’s authority and someday there will be hell to pay. Literally.

    Theists take metaphors far too seriously for them to play around with them.

  • left0ver1under

    Barber says such nonsense for one reason: to incite someone to commit violence, to actually punch someone in the mouth.

    If you don’t believe that, read up on Neal Horsley’s anti-abortion site of the 1990s. He gave out the names and home addresses of doctors who performed abortions. Anytime a doctor was murdered, a strikethrough tag was put on his name. The site was shut down by a judge who declared it an incitement to commit violence.

    Barber’s stupid statement is no different.

  • anubisprime

    The tried and tested xtian way…when debate and argument fail…smite they their enemy, then blame jeebus!

  • He claims this is a metaphor, but what exactly is it a metaphor for?

    It’s a metaphor for “internet tough guy” except on the radio.

  • Can we all metaphorically have a belly-laugh at his expense? What a maroon.

  • eric @ 1:

    I suppose getting an FFRF suit ruled as frivolous or vexatious, or forcing FFRF to pay for some major legal fees would count …

    First he and Staver actually have to win one of these cases. Not only is that unlikely, their record explains the frustration that leads to fantasies of punching their tormentors.

  • tmscott

    The minute you resort to violence or intimidation, you have conceded the failure of your argument.

  • Sastra

    @tmscott #14:

    That should have been Job’s reply.

  • haitied

    @tmscott Exactly right.

    I’m so sick of these people projecting their own problems onto others, be it “You’re the bullies”, “You’re the ones with Faith”, “You’re trying to secularize ‘Merica” It’s so dishonest it makes me sad that people really believe it.

  • Ichthyic

    you have conceded the failure of your argument.

    failure, yes, accuracy? not necessarily.

    how many times have you gotten frustrated trying to argue with a creationist?

    failure in argument doesn’t necessarily imply your position was wrong, only that you failed to communicate it to whoever you were speaking to.

    that can depend as much or more on who you are speaking to, as to how you presented your argument, or even what it was.

  • Ichthyic

    … people argued with Hitler long before a fist was used.

  • Ichthyic

    *watches video*

    *sees nothing more than a bunch of projection*


  • Grumpy Cat


  • dingojack

    If the Liberty Council gets SLAPPed aren’t they supposed to ‘turn the other cheek’?

    🙂 Dingo

  • StevoR

    # Liberty Counsel bullies?

  • StevoR

    Metaphorically speaking o’course!

  • A member, I love FFRF. I’m old, but I’m wiry, and I’ve dripped blood in a number of bar brawls. If he’d like, he could look me up.

  • Neal “Muleman*” Horsle, that Neal Horsley. Oh, yeah, he IS an exemplar of MurKKKan KKKritianity.

    “I’d kinda like to see Barber’s hair metaphorically set on fire.”

    Oh, I don’t know about the “metaphorical” part. Me, I see a world where, without asshats like Barber we don’t NEED unicorns laying golden eggs and singing “Kumbaya”.