Federer: Gay Rights Leads to Islamic Takeover

Bill Federer, the poor man’s David Barton who now writes a column for the Worldnetdaily, went on an American Family Radio talk show this week and provided a truly dizzying argument for why protecting gay rights leads inevitably to a Muslim takeover of America.

Federer claimed that Europe “went from a Judeo-Christian past into a neutral-secular-gay-agenda present and now it’s going into an Islamic future,” arguing that “the sexual confusion agenda is simply a transition phase” that will soon “be taken over by Islam.”

The U.S. military, Federer said, is undergoing such a process, claiming that Christian service members are being “pushed out or into the closet” as the result of gay rights laws, “and now we are seeing the introduction of Islam and these proselytizing classes under the guise of teaching you to be sensitive to the Muslim, but they are making large numbers of converts to Islam in the military.”

As Right Wing Watch points out, this is also the guy who predicted in 2012 that Obama was going to fake an assassination attempt in order to win reelection. His grasp on reality doesn’t even reach the level of tenuous.

[soundcloud url=”https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/205451116″ params=”color=ff5500″ width=”100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /]

"Wishful thinking on the part of McConnell and the GOP. Trump will be there for ..."

McConnell Thinks Trump May Be Gone ..."
"If they want statutes and memorials to commemorate the Civil War, then why not a ..."

Barton’s Bizarre Diatribe on Confederate Statues
"As much as I hated reading her chapters (it's what ultimately made me quit the ..."

Trump Aides: It Could Be Worse
"Hopefully, his own party will realise he's as crazy as you, and smother him with ..."

Trump Wars 4: A New Hope
Follow Us!
POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    His grasp on reality doesn’t even reach the level of tenuous.

    Yeah. It’s a wonder he isn’t more popular.

  • laurentweppe

    a truly dizzying argument for why protecting gay rights leads inevitably to a Muslim takeover of America.

    The argument can be translated as such:

    Only bullies can fight bullies: ergo, only homophobic christian white bullies can oppose homophobic muslim bullies of arabic descent, by refusing to submit themselves to homophobic christian white bullies, Europeans are dooming themselves to be beaten into submission by homophobic muslim bullies of arabic descent

    Yes, it’s little more than self-serving, self-righteous, and last but not least deceitful ego-stroking. But it’s pretty much the core of the far-right’s argument since there’s been a far right: “Give us power because Only We are ruthless enough to stand a chance against Bolsheviks/Al-Quaeda/Angry-black-men/Castrating-radical-feminists

  • Chiroptera

    Makes sense to me. Visigoth Spain would never have gone Muslim if they hadn’t legalized gay marriage first.

  • sigurd jorsalfar

    Actually it makes perfect sense. If America allows gay marriage then that means America is gay. Being gay means that America is soft, weak and effeminate. At which point it becomes inevitable that the Mooslims will take over because everyone knows how badly they treat women and gays. So America needs to treat women and gays as badly in order to stay tough in the face of the Mooslim threat.

  • blf

    Ironically, many Islamic / Muslim-majority countries aren’t very keen on LGBT rights, and apparently, criminalize various aspects. (However, not all do, which is not to say LGBT people aren’t marginalized, harassed, and so on.) I presume this Federer nutter more-than-less approves of that common situation, and hence, presumably, the “real” problem being he isn’t allowed to be anywheres near as nasty. (Plus those icky unwhite people, and the mooslin, not to mention Teh Gay, commies, Trilateral Commission, Area 51 aliens, et al.)

  • zenlike

    Since when does Europe have a “Judeo-Christian” past?

    Small hint for RWA’s: “Judeo-Christian” does not mean “jews are a minority which are occasionally slaughtered by the christian majority”.

  • http://www.ranum.com Marcus Ranum

    Small hint for RWA’s: “Judeo-Christian” does not mean “jews are a minority which are occasionally slaughtered by the christian majority”.

    They know that. “Judeo-Christian” means “christians came from jews, but why are there still jews?”

  • Michael Heath

    Ed concludes:

    [Bill Federer’s] grasp on reality doesn’t even reach the level of tenuous.

    What conservative Christian’s grasp does?

  • colnago80

    Re Marcus Ranum @ #7

    They know that. “Judeo-Christian” means “Christians came from Jews, but why are there still Jews?”

    Well, the Christians have been working on that for 1900 years and have been largely successful.

  • grumpyoldfart

    “the sexual confusion agenda is simply a transition phase” that will soon “be taken over by Islam.”

    Is he saying that the Muslims will just move in and take over while the Christians give up without a fight? Or is he saying that the Christian faith is so weak that true believers will casually throw away their bibles and take up the Koran instead? He doesn’t think much of his fellow Christians if he thinks they will give up that easily.

  • laurentweppe

    Since when does Europe have a “Judeo-Christian” past?

    Psssssst: “Judeo-Christian” is a codeword for White.

    Want to prove it? Take any proud defender of their “Judeo-Christian” heritage and ask them what they think about the Eid al-Adha: Every-Fucking-Time you’ll see the self-proclaimed paragons of the “Judeo-Christian” culture telling you that a celebration in honor of Abraham has no place in their society.

  • carpenterman

    The more invested you are in a tribal, Us vs. Them philosophy, the more the distinctions between the Others starts to blur. It doesn’t matter if these disparate groups are allies or enemies of each other; they are Not Us, and therefore they are A Threat, and that’s all you need to know.

  • amadan

    Is this ‘Europe is being overrun by the Mooslum Hordes’ thing really current among US wingnuts?

    I understand that empirical evidence is far inferior to the Gospel accoding to Hannity, but for what it’s worth, I can tell you that the only people here in Europe who subscribe to that view are the likes of Marine Le Pen and a few former East Germans who never really got to terms with that ‘not everyone speaks your language’ thang.

    Is ‘the creeping sharia of secularism’ (sorry, I can’t type that without fits of the giggles) just another peg the wingnuts use to hang a general condemnation of Yurrp and its decadent ways?

  • blf

    amadan@13, I haven’t seen much(? any?) “Europe(/EU) being overrun by Teh Moolsin / Gay / rabid fungi /…” for multiple years now, but yes, it did used(?) to be a big thing among the USArse nutters. I concur with your observations, the Le Pens/FN and a handful of other hate groups/parties here in Europe (I’m in France) still seem to be pushing — or at least paying lip-service to — that(or similar) meme.

  • laurentweppe

    @amadan

    Well, nowadays, western european far-rightists are trying to follow the Maher/Ali playbook, claiming “We are the Real True Paragon of Secularism!” and trying to argue that only by disenfranchising minorities will secularism be secured. The problem is that, since more than a few “moderate” rightwingers see religious minorities as inherently dangerous plebeians, they find this notion compelling, not much because they agree with it, but because they perceive it as a way to make their “let’s protect ourselves by browbeating the dangerous class into submission” urges appear principled, leading this discourse to seep out of the fascist sphere and into the realm of socially acceptable discourses.