Rick Perry: Opposing gays in the boy scouts is like opposing slavery.

I can’t make this stuff up:

“Perry, speaking from the library in the Governor’s Mansion, referred to a portrait of Sam Houston, whom he called Texas’ greatest governor. He told how Houston’s principled stand against slavery and Texas’ joining the Confederacy cost him his governorship.”

Said Perry: “That’s the type of principled leadership, that’s the type of courage that I hope people across this country on this issue of Scouts and keeping the Boy Scouts the kind of organization that it is today. If we change and become more like pop culture, young men will be not as well served, America will not be as well served and Boy Scouts will start on a decline that I don’t think will serve this country well as we go into the future.”

What Perry fails to realize is that the supporters of slavery were also taking a stand, it was just a less principled stand that paid no heed to the rights of a minority.  It’s not enough to merely take a stand, you need to make sure that you’re standing up for equality, like the abolitionists did.  Every Grand Dragon of the KKK is taking a stand just like Fred Phelps is taking a stand.  You can take a stand and still be a completely homogenous asshole who is an anchor, not a boon, to the progress of society.  History only remembers the moral stands kindly.

Perry clearly has more in common with the racists of the Antebellum South than their adversaries, and history will paint his legacy with equal shame.

About JT Eberhard

When not defending the planet from inevitable apocalypse at the rotting hands of the undead, JT is a writer and public speaker about atheism, gay rights, and more. He spent two and a half years with the Secular Student Alliance as their first high school organizer. During that time he built the SSA’s high school program and oversaw the development of groups nationwide. JT is also the co-founder of the popular Skepticon conference and served as the events lead organizer during its first three years.

  • dale otteson

    Perry is the legacy of the Texicans who rejected Houston and his principles.

  • Silent Service

    Well said.

  • baal

    What was Perry’s favorite hunting grounds called again?

  • Baby_Raptor

    Some of the things these people come up with literally make my brain hurt.

  • Glodson

    A few years ago, Perry causally mentioned that Texas has the right to secede.

    His statement is about what I suspect. This is how it will work. As long as people like him think they can reframe the discussion as to paint the picture that it is the bigots being persecuted by the legal and social acceptance of other lifestyles, we will continue to hear this nonsense.

  • beebdeed

    Being a governor, I assume he has somebody to tie his shoelaces for him……

  • Loqi

    Because if there’s one thing for which abolitionists are remembered, it’s their struggle to maintain the status quo.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001120221326 Oliver Twistd

    Opposing corruption in government is like opposing slavery. HINT HINT.

  • OhJustStop

    Take a stand against Perry, for one. Imbeciles like himself do not belong on the national stage.

  • http://www.facebook.com/timothy.e.wall Timothy E. Wall

    This kind of talk is good evidence for the importance of “nurture” vs. “nature”. There’s no way that white folks like Dick Perry would be this stupid, if they hadn’t been raised in the South.
    Given Dick’s recent dismissal of nationally-standardized test results on the grounds that “these tests [the ATC and SAT] don’t measure a Texas education”, this is also good evidence that the future of Texas’ schools is in the hands of those least competent to improve the situation.

  • Katet

    Wait. “Houston’s principled stand against slavery?”

    Correct me if I’m wrong, because I know he opposed Texas’ secession, but wasn’t Sam Houston a slave owner even at the time of his death, and an outspoken opponent of abolition? I mean, he may have voted against the expansion of slavery into other territories, but I wouldn’t exactly call that a “principled stand” against it when he owned slaves himself.

    Even if I grant that Houston was against slavery, I’m still not sure I understand what Perry is trying to say. It sounds to me like he is applauding a man who fought for civil rights, and in the same breath saying we should live up to that legacy by denying certain people their civil rights. How could he even think this made sense?

    Help me out here. Have I misunderstood something?

    • Glodson

      Don’t try to make sense of it. Perry doesn’t get that one could be opposed to secession but still support slavery. Don’t even bother trying to get into the deeper political discussion at the heart of the Civil War, with the waning power of the South coupled with the election of Lincoln which was more a function of the South splitting their vote between four candidates.

      It doesn’t make sense, but it did the job the statement was intended to do. I’ve mentioned this before. This is more about reframing this issue so that those opposed to equal rights for gay people can paint themselves as the oppressed party.

      It is a statement meant to reinforce the double think of the party.