Jeff Allen, a “senior editor” at Matt Barber’s new wingnut site Barbwire, has a rather obvious problem with dishonesty and/or reading comprehension. In a recent column he goes full Godwin, complete with a rainbow swastika — get it, gay people are Nazis! — and completely distorts a column by Mark Joseph Stern at Slate.
Two recent articles written by Mark Joseph Stern (Slate) and John Saul (Huffington Post) reveal what the homo-fascists have in mind and what they would love to sadistically do to those who have been, or still are, in opposition them.
Seeing right through Douthat’s kiss-up “punishment” comment, Mark Joseph Stern is not in a charitable mood, and he has no room for any of Douthat’s groveling for the generous treatment of Christians. Sensing blood in the water, Stern lambasts Douthat and Christians for their “disgusting raw hatred” and “base bigotry,” and instructs his sycophantic followers to “make ‘homophobes’ the real victims.” Trafficking in his own actual religious bigotry, Stern’s contempt for anyone who holds to a moral view of marriage is palpable, and his plans are retaliatory in nature.
Now let’s look at those words in quotes in context. First, Stern does not say “disgusting raw hatred” at all. He says disguising raw hatred. In fact, he is offering advice to those who are trying to pass laws allowing Christians to discriminate against gay people. Here’s the whole section:
To make their job easier, I’ve laid out the most effective means of disguising raw hatred as religious liberty and rounding discrimination down to “dissent.” If you’re thinking about introducing an anti-gay discrimination bill to your own state’s legislature, you should pay close attention.Step 1: Put your tail between your legs.
Douthat’s piece is so self-pitying that he actually has to spend a paragraph explaining why he doesn’t mean to be self-pitying. This is a brilliant move. By conceding straightaway that nationwide gay marriage is basically inevitable, and describing anti-gay conservatives “negotiat[ing] surrender,” Douthat immediately earns our sympathy. This pity distracts us from the absurdity of his claims: That the “national debate” over gay rights is nearly over, that gays will soon have won, and that what’s left of the anti-gay “religious subculture” could be crushed by “state power” in the near future. Given the horrifying ubiquity of LGBT workplace discrimination, the jarring lack of state and federal laws protecting gay people, and the continuing lack of marriage equality in most states, Douthat’s theory is ludicrous at best and insulting at worst. But because he waves the white flag so early on, we’re tempted to accept his premise as realistic pragmatism.
Step 2: Make homophobes the real victims.
Only a tiny handful of business owners have been sued under LGBT anti-discrimination laws in the minority of states that have them. Douthat, like most state legislators who have defended “religious liberty” bills, explicitly cites that infamous trio: a florist, a photographer, and a baker, who claimed their Christianity required that they deny service to gay couples. There’s a reason these same three cases pop up time and time again: They tell a very human story of a small-business owner suddenly trapped in the labyrinth of a lawsuit, the victim of the gay rights movement run amok. Never mind that the real victim isn’t the business owner who acted on his hatred, but the customer who suffered from his discriminatory policies. If you tilt the looking glass just right, you can reverse these roles, turning a bigot into a principled entrepreneur and a wronged minority into entitled bullies.
He didn’t say that we should “make homophobes the real victims,” he said that those trying to pass such laws should try to pretend as thought homophobes are the real victims. He is either lying or he has absolutely no reading comprehension skills whatsoever. Which makes him completely qualified to be an editor for a site owned by Barber.