Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Rep Barney Frank Calls Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia a "Homophobe".

US Representative Barney Frank, an openly gay lawmaker, has called Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia a "homophobe," confirming a common response toward those who do not support homosexual marriage or do not affirm their lifestyle.

Apparently Frank does not realize Scalia's actual position on moral issues.

Rep. Barney Frank called Scalia a homophobe in an interview with a gay news website. The Seattle PI is carrying the Associated Press story.

In discussing gay "marriage" and his expectations that the Supreme Court would some day be called upon to decide whether marriage exclusively between one man and one woman, therefore denying homosexual "marriage," is Constitutional said, "I wouldn't want it to go to the United States Supreme Court now because that homophobe Antonin Scalia has too many votes on this current court."

The AP reports that Scalia, who is known to be very conservative, actually dissented from the Court's ruling in 2003 that struck down state laws banning consensual sodomy.

Scalia feels that these kinds of moral issues should not be in the hands of judges, rather in the hands of the people.

It doesn't seem to matter to Frank. Scalia's a homophobe anyway because he probably doesn't support homosexual marriage and affirm the homosexual lifestyle.

This is a common response toward anyone who supports traditional marriage. They are called bigots, hateful and discriminatory because they do not support homosexual "marriage" and do not affirm the homosexual lifestyle.

It is sad, but true. Words such as tolerance have been turned around and are used as battering rams against those who hold a different view.

I am certain that for those who hold biblical worldviews on morality, the sanctity of life, marriage and family, the near future is going to be both trying and challenging.

May God help us.

_____________

Gary Randall

President

Faith & Freedom



Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.

24 comments:

  1. Why is it Barney Frank must resort to attacking and name calling. Could it be Barney Frank has no other means of attack? Could we call Barney Frank a heterophobe? I suppose we could, but we don't. Could we question Barney Frank's ties to Freddie Mac, and Fannie Mae while lenders were being forced under threat of lawsuit to hand out like candy bad mortgages leading up to the housing meltdown that started the downfall of our economy? I suppose we could. Could we question whether or not Barney is part of a great left wing conspiracy to destroy our society as we know it, in order to rebuild it in a socialist model? One which I might add has failed miserably in other parts of the world. I guess we could but we don't. No we don't attack, and call names underhandedly, we just question whether or not Barney Frank has an ulterior motive.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Definition of Homophobia from Websters

    Pronunciation:
    \ˌhō-mə-ˈfō-bē-ə\
    Function:
    noun
    Date:
    1969

    : irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals

    homophobia. (2009). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.

    Retrieved March 25, 2009, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homophobia

    ReplyDelete
  3. Words such as tolerance have been turned around and are used as battering rams against those who hold a different view.

    Gary, we've been through this many times - you have every right to hold a different view based on your religion, what you don't have is the right to say others have to act as if they share those purely religious views.

    You don't think being gay is ok, then don't be gay (for you its a choice, right?) If you don't want to marry a spouse of the same gender then don't do so. But don't think you can decide for other law-abiding citizens who have a constitutional right to not share your religious beliefs they must do the same.

    That's what tolerance is - letting someone do or believe things that you yourself won't. And that tolerance is part of how our government is supposed to be: all citizens have a right to choose their own legal life paths and still have equal access to government.

    As to the 'the bad words' a bigot is someone who is intolerant of different views and only your side is saying that someone else must act for themselves as if you were right. Again, you don't want to marry someone of the same gender then don't. You do want to marry someone of the opposite gender then do! When you will give others the same choices you are given then we can say the word 'bigot' is misapplied. Now is not that time.

    As to 'homophobia': "Homophobia (from Greek homós: one and the same; phóbos: fear, phobia) is an irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality, homosexuals, or individuals perceived as homosexual. Some definitions lack the "irrational" component."

    Again, please present a rational argument that justifies discrimination against gays. No one as yet has been able to in the years I have been here that didn't presuppose a shared religious belief as the keystone of its rationale, which others, by the Constitution, are not required to share. Justice Scalia has never presented one either other than 'that's they way we always did it before', more inertia rather than rational.

    Our recent discussion got me reading through the Jefferson Bible and I ran into an allegory attributed to Jesus about a field with wheat that had been sowed with tares by enemies - they were told not to root out the tares, that would be done at the harvest. He goes on to explain that the harvest was judgement, the harvesters were angels, etc.

    Doesn't that mean this obsession of yours towards other law abiding citizens you feel are tares shouldn't be happening at all? I mean if I am wrong and you are right isn't the final tally supposed to be happening at 'the harvest' and you aren't supposed to be trying to 'root me out' or disturb me at all - its just not your job?

    Just asking...

    ReplyDelete
  4. You're right Gary, homophobe isn't the best term to use. Anti-gay bigot perfectly and accurately describes Scalia and his positions on the rights of gays.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Perhaps Congressman Frank should have merely resorted to sleazy innuendo and rumor mongering about Judge Scalia. After all, that appears to be the FFN preferred method for dealing with public officials with whom you disagree.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "US Representative Barney Frank, an openly gay lawmaker, has called Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia a "homophobe"

    That is something I have not seen in the mainstream news . I would think considering all the attention he is getting with AIG , the loan crisis he would have been quoted . Ahhh the Audacity of Hope has so much hate involved in it .

    Mick

    ReplyDelete
  7. That is something I have not seen in the mainstream news . I would think considering all the attention he is getting with AIG , the loan crisis he would have been quoted . Ahhh the Audacity of Hope has so much hate involved in it .

    Oh please! Google News lists 244 news articles on this subject. I was on the Fox News cable channel, the Drudge Report, Raw Story, and even the Huffington Post for days!

    Don't mean to totally embarrass you on this but if Gary's blog was the first you heard of this you really need to expand your news sources.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I find it ironic that Gary is crying foul over the Representative's "homophobe" comment, when Gary repeatedly calls gay people "deviants" or "perverted," accuses us of wanting to destroy the family, and claims our equal access to the law is a "special right" that, if allowed, would destroy society itself.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Gary is not a United States Representative and he is not publically addressing a member of the Supreme Court of the United States.
    He is a minister speaking from his biblical beliefs.
    I would not expect you to understand that.

    ReplyDelete
  10. 1:12 PM,

    Haven't you figured it out yet? The operative principle behind the situational ethics on display here is IOKIYAAR (It's OK If You Are A Repulican)! You see despite the protests to the contrary, it is all about partisan politics here.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "He is a minister speaking from his biblical beliefs.
    I would not expect you to understand that.'

    Oh they do , thats why they hate him .

    Mick

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Oh please! Google News lists 244 news articles on this subject. I was on the Fox News cable channel, the Drudge Report, Raw Story, and even the Huffington Post for days!"


    LOL , The Huffington Post ? Raw Story ? You crack me up , google it sure , but you need to know what your googling silly boy . Barney Frank except for his econonmic policy oversight has little interest to me .

    This showed his lack of character and idealogical blinders.

    Come on Anneta, going back to the old ways ? Blame someone because a supporter of yours speaks inappropriataly ?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Educated said...
    Definition of Homophobia from Websters



    per·ver·sion
    Pronunciation: \pər-ˈvər-zhən, -shən\
    Function: noun
    Date: 14th century
    1: the action of perverting : the condition of being perverted
    2: a perverted form ; especially : an aberrant sexual practice or interest especially when habitual

    ReplyDelete
  14. That is something I have not seen in the mainstream news .


    Mick I listen to NPR and read the local papers . Its been no where there or on the local news either. I guess if Frank was on Leno and stated itthere we all would Know.

    ReplyDelete
  15. LOL , The Huffington Post ? Raw Story ? You crack me up , google it sure , but you need to know what your googling silly boy .

    Sorry assumed you kept track of both sides of the partisan fence like I do. Regardless it is old news that anyone paying even a bit of attention already knew.

    This showed his lack of character and idealogical blinders.

    It was in an article with a gay news media about gay issues. And Scalia is a homophobe, he's compared homosexuality with murderers. And he even descended 'I'm rubber I'm glue' defense by saying Frank of heterophobic, although there is no example where Frank has tried to deny heterosexuals rights as Scalia has.

    Mick I listen to NPR and read the local papers . Its been no where there or on the local news either.

    Hmmm it was in the Seattle Times on Monday, Mick.

    Come on Anneta, going back to the old ways ? Blame someone because a supporter of yours speaks inappropriataly ?

    You realize that statement makes no sense, right? Who is Anneta and who spoke inappropriately? Scalia is a homophobe as surely as the ground is down, no harm in stating the obvious is there?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Educated==
    Websters dictionary;
    Marriage=The legal union of a man and a woman:

    ReplyDelete
  17. Talk about selective quoting ;)


    mar·riage Pronunciation: \ˈmer-ij, ˈma-rij\
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
    Date: 14th century
    1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage {same-sex marriage} b: the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c: the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage.

    And if Webster says it it must be right, right? :)

    (strains of 'Dueling Dictionaries' plays in the backgroudn)

    ReplyDelete
  18. Y yes, if Webster says it--it's right-marriage--between a man and a woman--period!

    ReplyDelete
  19. 10:51 PM

    Do you have reading comprehension issues? as Oshtur's quote from WEBSTERS makes perfectly clear, they do not say "marriage--between a man and a woman--period!"

    ReplyDelete
  20. from websters; marriage-the legal union of a man and a woman

    ReplyDelete
  21. ::sigh::

    Merriam-Webster definition of marriage

    Possibly your dictionary is quite old, Webster has been 'just Webster' in quite awhile.

    ReplyDelete
  22. What are you homos worried about? If this wasn't the wrong thing to do, you shouldn't be worried about it!

    ReplyDelete
  23. What are you homos worried about? If this wasn't the wrong thing to do, you shouldn't be worried about it!

    Your statement seems odd - we are in agreement that DOMA is wrong? Odd that someone who uses the term 'homo' would recognize that.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Doma is not wroug, it's right on--one man and one woman=authentic marriages--period!

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.