Ann Coulter is a Talking Sphincter

Unable to comment on the "Duck Dynasty" controversy last week due to my hectic Kwanzaa schedule, I am able to sweep in at the end and comment on the commentary.

Anyone who utters the mind-numbingly obvious point that A&E's suspension of "Duck Dynasty" star Phil Robertson doesn't involve the First Amendment because a TV network is not the government, should be prohibited from ever talking in public again. You can bore your few remaining friends with laborious statements of the obvious, but stop wasting everyone else's time.

We know A&E is not the government. It may shock your tiny little pea brains, but free speech existed even before we had a Constitution. Free speech is generally considered a desirable goal even apart from its inclusion in the nation's founding document.

Suppose TV networks were capitulating to angry Muslims by suspending people for saying they opposed Sharia law? Would that prompt any of you pusillanimous hacks to finally take a position on the state of free speech in America?

Or would you demand that we stop the presses so you could roll out your little cliche about a television network not being the government? That fact has very little relevance to someone whose life has just been ruined. Hey! Don't worry about it -- at least it wasn't the government!

Instead of the government censoring speech, what we have is shock troops of liberal agitators demanding people's heads for the slightest divergence from Officially Approved Liberal Opinion.

Evidently, the word of God is on the banned list. As Robertson himself has said, all he did "was quote from the Scriptures, but they just didn't know it."

His offending remarks delivered to GQ magazine were:

"Everything is blurred on what's right and what's wrong. Sin becomes fine ... Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men. Don't be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers -- they won't inherit the kingdom of God. Don't deceive yourself. It's not right."

There's absolutely no question but that Robertson accurately summarized biblical strictures. But liberals can't grasp that God is not our imaginary friend, who says whatever we want Him to say, when we want Him to say it. (I promise you, except for venereal disease and eternal damnation, life would be a lot more fun if we were making it up as we went along.)

So they blamed Robertson for Holy Scripture. True, God created the universe and every living thing, but liberals think they can improve on His work.

Since Robertson's interview appeared, I haven't heard as much sophistical nonsense about the New Testament not condemning fornication since I was a teenager in the backseat of a car.

The book of Romans, called "the Cathedral of the Christian faith," provides the clearest explanation of the doctrines of sin. Here are a few catchy verses:

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven ... so that people are without excuse.

"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error ...

"Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

Also, keep these citations in your back pocket for the next time some sweaty teenage boy tries to convince you Jesus didn't condemn fornication: 1 Corinthians 7:2; Galatians 5:19-20; Jude 1:7; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Romans 13:13; 1 Corinthians 6:13, 18; 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5; and Matthew 5:32.

The lake of fire and burning sulfur (Revelation 21:8) may not sound like a day at the beach, but judging by their hysterical attack on Robertson, our new earthly gods are a lot less forgiving than the real God.

GLAAD instantly condemned Robertson's totally accurate rendition of Holy Scripture as "vile." With refreshing originality, CNN's Piers Morgan called Robertson a "vile bigot."

And it's not just "vile" to cite Holy Scripture. Evidently, it's also vile not to appreciate the joys of anal sex.

What seemed to set liberals off as much as Robertson's Biblical summaries was his statement that he doesn't find anal sex appealing. He said:

"It seems like, to me, a vagina -- as a man -- would be more desirable than a man's anus. That's just me. I'm just thinking: There's more there! She's got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I'm saying? But hey, sin: It's not logical, my man. It's just not logical."

So now, not only do we all have to support gay marriage, gay wedding cakes and gay soldiers -- but we also have to agree that anal sex sounds peachy! It's like being denounced for saying you prefer vanilla ice cream to chocolate.

To paraphrase an old Jewish line: This is not good for the gays.

Gays have gone from being the bullied to the bullies -- a modern American phenomenon detailed in my book "Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America."

Yes, we know you used to be unfairly victimized. But being beaten up for being gay is simply not the same as having to endure hearing someone opine that anal sex isn't his cup of tea.

A&E didn't dare cross the gays, never anticipating that the Robertson family wouldn't back down -- and the rest of the country wouldn't, either. Even non-Christians can have only contempt for the network's utter cravenness in suspending Robertson for stating basic Christian doctrine.

The first time someone stands up to a bully and the sky doesn't fall, the tyranny is over. The gay mafia was out of control, drunk with power. This time, they got their wings clipped.

Christians, 1; Angry gays: minus 1,000. Cliche-spouting hack TV pundits: I recommend capital punishment. 
 - Ann Coulter: The Anus Monologues

I can't write out my response without boring you people to tears, so let me just highlight the essentials, okay?

1. "Unable to comment on the "Duck Dynasty" controversy last week due to my hectic Kwanzaa schedule, I am able to sweep in at the end and comment on the commentary."  Hectic Kwanzaa schedule? Really? Somehow I find it highly unlikely that you celebrate Kwanzaa...in fact I suspect that Kwanzaa messes with your schedule as much as Rosh Hashanah messes with it. Also, you're going to sweep in and sound important by commenting on a massive cluster fuck of opinions with your 20/20 hindsight.
2. "It may shock your tiny little pea brains, but free speech existed even before we had a Constitution" Umm...no. No it did not. If I said I was an atheist before there was a Constitution, I’d be labeled a heretic and be metaphorically thrown to the wolves.
3. "Would that prompt any of you pusillanimous hacks to finally take a position on the state of free speech in America?" Oh good, you used a big word, I was afraid that you were incapable of using a thesaurus. Well this pusillanimous pea brain thinks that you're the hack in this situation, and you're abusing the power of free speech.
4. “So now, not only do we all have to support gay marriage, gay wedding cakes and gay soldiers -- but we also have to agree that anal sex sounds peachy! It's like being denounced for saying you prefer vanilla ice cream to chocolate.” OH MY GOD. NO. Support gay marriage because it's the friggen decent thing to do. Just let people be happy. You don't have to like anal sex, but you shouldn't verbally and/or physically bash someone who does. And maybe you should try having anal sex, or sex of any kind, because I'm sure you wouldn't be such a dink if you weren't sexually frustrated. Also what does a gay cake look like?

   

   is this what you mean by a gay cake?

Those are the main things I have a problem with, but if I think of more, I'll certainly add to the post

My Mom is Getting Married.....and she "forgot" to tell me....

 So I haven't been posting anything recently, for like six months, so this is relatively old news, but my mom got married and she neglected to tell me of her pending nuptials. I found out through her girlfriend's Facebook page which stated "August we will be married, it is official" Isn't that nice? Finding out through social media that your mother is getting married. So I decided to sit on it for a few days, although stew on it would probably be more appropriate. And then suddenly I got a Facebook message from my mom that said "I just wanted to chat with you about a few of the pics on FB. I understand that it is your choice not to interact or have any of us actively in your life at this point. So we all understand that and will respect your wishes. We all wish it could be differrent but understand completely. I think that you might still want to know that Penni and I will be married on August 9th of this year. I understand your need for space and we will let you continue with therapy so that maybe some where down the road we can again be a family that interacts with each other and actually enjoys the time we have. We wish you all the best for the end of the year wrap up you are trying to get done and hope you have a great summer."

 

So let me pick apart the problem I have with this message, and there is quite a bit.

1. "I understand that it is your choice not to interact or have any of us actively in your life at this point." It is not my choice. I can't tolerate the insensitive things that constantly roll of your tongue, without a seconds hesitation. Your girlfriend (and I'm fairly sure you are too) is a man hater. She complains about men like they are a scourge of the earth. When I came out, she refused to acknowledge me as Nathan, and referred to me as "a confused butch lesbian." There is a distinct difference between being butch lesbian and being transgender. Whenever I come around, I always have an immediate feeling that I am unwelcome. 
2.   "we all understand that and will respect your wishes" mmm... no you clearly don't. In fact you constantly ask why I don't come around, and when I respond with the truth you tell me that it is my fault I feel that way, that you aren't doing anything wrong.
3. "we will let you continue with therapy" Well how kind of you. I was unaware that you had any say in my life now that I no longer live with you. Oh that's right, you don't. But thank you for letting me continue with something I need because of you and your psycho babble bullshit.
4. "some where down the road we can again be a family that interacts with each other and actually enjoys the time we have"  Right, well can you refer to me as "Nathan/Nate"? Instead of calling me "Naomi Catherine" how about you call me "Nathan Connor"? And that will be a start. But I will not expect such change anytime soon.