Brian Fischer is Totally Gay

Enlarge image

Bryan Fischer, formerly the executive director of the Idaho Values Alliance, is the host of the daily 'Focal Point' radio talk program on AFR Talk, a division of the American Family Association.

Brian Fischer, of "Renew America," is gay as a goose.
Gayer than Liberace guest-judging "Project Runway"
As queer as a three-dollar bill having gay sex with another three-dollar bill.

He must be. Why else would he be so obsessed with gaiety?

Seriously, look at the list of his recent columns:

Obama's new military: Gays showering with straights

Bryan Fischer

February 9, 2010

The bitter fruit of decriminalizing homosexual behavior

Bryan Fischer

February 6, 2010

If homosexuality were against the law

Bryan Fischer

February 5, 2010

Why homosexual behavior should be against the law

Bryan Fischer

February 3, 2010

Are legal sanctions for homosexual behavior biblical?

Bryan Fischer

January 31, 2010

Why CBS should reject pro-gay ads

Bryan Fischer

January 29, 2010

And so on and so on. . . .

Let's take a look at one of these recent columns:


If homosexuality were against the law

Laws proscribing homosexual conduct can be found in the Middle Assyrian Law Codes dating back to 1075 BC. . . which gives the lie to the myth that only blue-nosed prudes who believe in the Judeo-Christian tradition have ever found fault with sodomy.

Well, if it's good enough for the ancient Assyrians, it's obviously relevant to 21st Century America.

Here are some other laws the Assyrians had back then that Brian Fischer might like to bring back: (source)

Unless it is forbidden in the tablets, a man may strike his wife, pull her hair, her ear he may bruise or pierce. He commits no misdeed thereby.

If a man bring his hand against the wife of a man, treating her like a little child, and they prove it against him, and convict him, one of his fingers they shall cut off.

If a man have intercourse with the wife of a man either in an inn or on the highway, knowing that she is a man's wife, according as the man, whose wife she is, orders to be done, they shall do to the adulterer. If not knowing that she is a man's wife he rapes her, the adulterer goes free. The man shall prosecute his wife, doing to her as he likes.

Every state in the Union at the time of the Founding had laws
which made homosexual behavior illegal.

Also laws making slavery legal!

Sodomy was a felony offense in all 50 states as recently as 1962, and was still a felony in the other 49 states ten years later. Still today, 12 states have sodomy statutes on the books, although our meek acquiescence to judicially activist rulings from the Supreme Court have rendered those unenforceable.

Our "meek acquiescence?" Seriously? If the Supreme Court makes a decision you don't like, you're supposed to, what, just give them the finger and continue to enforce the unconstitutional law? George Wallace would be proud.

The fact remains, however, that in nearly 25% of the states in the Union, sodomy is still in the criminal code as illegal behavior.

And in Ohio, it is still illegal to get a fish drunk.

In Texas, the Encyclopedia Brittanica is illegal.

In Atlanta, GA it is illegal to tie a giraffe to a lamppost. (source)

This raises the question, then, as to whether sodomy laws should be, or legitimately have been, repealed just because they are rarely enforced.

The answer to this is a clear and unequivocal "No."

Right. Anti-sodomy laws have been and should be repealed because they are unconstitutional, stupid, and just plain wrong.

Think for a moment of the current social controversies that could potentially be avoided if homosexual conduct was still against the law

Gays in the military: problem solved. We shouldn't make a place for habitual felons in the armed forces. End of discussion, end of controversy.

I'm sorry, what?
So, if Truman had just made being black illegal, he could have avoided integrating the military. Controversy avoided!

What the Hell was I thinking?

Gay marriage: problem solved. We should never legalize unions between any two people when the union is forged specifically to engage in felony behavior. Would we sanction, for instance, the formation of a corporation whose stated purpose was to import illegal drugs?

Which is totally the same thing. Two same-gendered people spending their lives together is exactly like selling poison to children and destroying lives and sometimes killing people.

Gay indoctrination in the schools: problem solved. We don't want to raise a generation of schoolchildren to believe that felony behavior is perfectly appropriate. That's why we spend so much money warning students about the danger of drugs

.

Actually, the indoctrination problem is already solved, in that it never existed.

And why the drug comparison again? Is it because you find gay sex with men so addictive?
Are you in a 12-step program to kick your penis addiction?

Hate crimes laws: problem solved. We wouldn't throw a pastor in jail for saying that illegal behavior is not only illegal but also immoral. For instance, he's free to say that murder is not only contrary to man's law but also to God's law. End of the threat to freedom of religion and speech.

Oh, to be free to hate! But wait a minute. . . we already are free to hate. On Sunday mornings all across America, despicable ministers will be railing from the pulpits about the evilness of the gay people. If pastors could be thrown in jail for being hatemongers, wouldn't Fred Phelps be doing hard time?

This list could actually be extended, but you get the point. Laws not only curb dangerous and risky behavior, they keep such behavior from being normalized, sanctioned and endorsed by the rest of society, and as such render an enormous benefit to a healthy culture.

If by healthy, you mean repressed men and women living lives of misery and lies, then yeah. healthy.


So, it seems safe to say that Brian Fischer is totally gay.

Gayer!

Gayer. . . .

There. That's how gay Brian Fischer is.

For the record, I have no objection to Brian Fischer's gaiety, or anyone else's. I object to his being a self-loathing asshole.

This New Hampshire Lady is Creeping Me Out

(from Wonkette)


Dammit! All those years in school and no one ever taught me how to do anal! What the hell did my parents pay taxes for?

Now This Is a Depressing Headline

(from Yahoo News)

Momentum Shifts to Skeptics on Global Warming Debate

Eroding confidence in climate science punctuated by a pair of blizzards has global warming skeptics across the United States calling for a sharp rollback to years of political and industrial efforts to curb greenhouse emissions thought to contribute to global warming.

Why are we required to act as though there is some sort of legitimate debate about this?

If we're going to pretend like these anti-science troglo-tards have some sort of a point, why don't we open up a debate on whether the moon landing was fake? Some people really believe the moon landing was fake, so why not pretend that the jury's still out on that question? Honestly, their logic isn't any worse than the climate deniers'. Both groups think NASA is full of shit, and believe that their "common sense" holds as much weight as scientific data.

Hey, why not have a representative from the Flat Earth Society on TV debating a geologist?

How does anyone take people seriously who think that a couple of snowstorms disprove Climate Change? That's like saying, "Hey, Payton Manning threw a big interception and lost the Superbowl. So much for that 'Manning's a good quarterback' theory!" You'd be laughed out of any sports bar in America.

So this is the debate. On the one side, we have every living Nobel Prize-winning scientist, NASA, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and decades of research and data.

On the other side: Hey, it's snowing!

And honest to God, that's the argument they're making on FOX "News."




And somehow, people are buying this line of BS:

In a survey released last month, the percentage of Americans who think global warming is happening declined 14 percentage points vs. the year prior, to 57 percent.

So, if Climatology were something we got to vote on, then we'd be getting close to solving the problem.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of climate scientists still agree the data on global warming is solid

Oh, like that matters. Scientists! What the hell do they know? Can't they see it's snowing?

We have to grow up in this country and realize that people who have spent their adult lives studying the subject know a little more about it than some guy who looks out the window and sees snow. Otherwise, we're screwed.

The Entire Inhofe Family are Ignorant Jerks

Senator James "If I don't understand it, it can't be true" Inhofe's Facebook page is proudly featuring photos of his horrid little grandchildren in a homemade igloo.



Ordinarily, kids playing in the snow should be adorable,but this is the Inhofe family, so you know it's going to be something awful or stupid or both.


And sure enough, here is the title of this set of photos:

Senator Jim Inhofe's Photos - Inhofe Family Pokes Fun at Al Gore, Global Warming During DC Feb Blizzard

Classy move, Senator. Getting little kids involved in your smear campaign against science!

Hahaha, hilarious!

Because Al Gore invented global warming and it's cold today, so he has to, um, live in an igloo? Or something, I guess?

Honk if you love Global Warming? I don't even get that one.

So here, I think, is what we're supposed to take away from this demonstration:

1) It's cold today, so Global Warming can't be real.

2) If you mock the messenger, the message becomes untrue.

3) Al Gore is a weiner.

4) Ignorance is a virtue.

5) Children needn't respect their elders if those elders believe in science, or are otherwise weiners.

6) Every legitimate scientist in the world is wrong because Grandpa says so.

Honest to God, Inhofe is such a dunce it's barely worth pointing out how wrong he is.

First of all, pretending that Al Gore came up with the idea of Global Warming is like saying that the Rolling Stones invented the Blues.

Secondly, the fact that the DC area is having a lot of snow is not only not evidence against global warming, it's actually one of the things you'd expect to see on a planet whose climate is getting warmer.

Don't take my word for it, ask climate scientist Amanda Staudt:

As National Wildlife Federation climate scientist Amanda Staudt notes, winter storms are getting fiercer even as the season gets warmer. “The last few years have brought several unusually heavy snowstorms as warmer and moister air over southern states has penetrated further north, colliding with bitter cold air masses,” she explains.

Warmer air holds more moisture. More moisture means more precipitation. It's pretty simple, I don't know anything about climatology, and I can understand this simple concept.

Plus, NASA just announced this:

2009: Second Warmest Year on Record;

End of Warmest Decade

Jan. 21, 2010

2009 was tied for the second warmest year in the modern record, a new NASA analysis of global surface temperature shows. The analysis, conducted by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City, also shows that in the Southern Hemisphere, 2009 was the warmest year since modern records began in 1880. . . January 2000 to December 2009 was the warmest decade on record.

So, even if we use the Inhofe method of anecdotal evidence (Uh, seems pretty cold to me, so fuck you, Al Gore) the evidence of the last decade overwhelms the data of these last few days being snowy.

Honest to God, Oklahoma, aren't you embarrassed to have this obtuse windbag representing you? Can't you find anyone else to send to Washington? Don't you know that when people see this asinine ignoramus with "R-OK" next to his name that they laugh at you? Seriously, you've gotta find someone else.

Send this guy. He'd be taken more seriously.

Or this guy. Sure, he's an inanimate object, a pen and ink drawing, but at least he won't spew the kind of ridiculous BS that makes your state a laughingstock.

The Most Horrible Person Ever

First nominee: Lisa Miller of Lynchburg, VA.

Lisa Miller wasn't always horrible. In 2000, Lisa Miller was happily living in a committed civil-union relationship with Janet Jenkins in Vermont. Through some sort of procedure, she became the biological mother of baby Isabella.

And they should have all lived happily ever after, but in 2003, the couple split up and Lisa Miller moved to Virginia with little Isabella to be near family. Okay, that sort of thing happens to a lot of couples. It's sad, but not villainous. But wait. there's more. So much more.


At some point, Lisa Miller got religion. And decided that she was going to just stop being a lesbian. (Also stop having brown eyes and being right-handed)

Okay, that's really sad, but if Ms. Miller wants to suppress her sexuality and live a life of lies and misery, that's her choice. But here's where it gets really horrible. In a fit of self-loathing, Ms. Miller decided

"I do not feel safe leaving my daughter with her, and I believe I have a God-given and constitutional right to raise my child as I see fit. There is a homosexual agenda at work here, and Isabella is a pawn in their game. It has nothing to do with the law."

(source)

So just because she is pretending to not be a lesbian anymore, suddenly lesbians are not safe to leave children with? Ms. Miller, when you were still being honest about who you are, how many times did you abuse little Isabella? Were you ever neglectful of your daughter during the gay part of your life? Was Janet Jenkins? Of course not. So where the hell do you get off saying that you don't feel safe leaving her with her other mommy?

So that's pretty horrible. But it gets worse. Much worse.

Miller has, since her conversion, tried to keep Jenkins from seeing their daughter. According to the Rutland, VT Herald:

[Her] biological mother has only brought her to two visits
with her nonbiological parent during the last two years.

Then Miller went so far as to file for sole custody of Isabella, stating that Ms. Jenkins had no parental rights since she was not a biological parent.

"It would be like handing my child over to the milkman," she says. (source)

The court refused her petition and granted visitation rights to Ms. Jenkins. Ms. Miller has repeatedly refused to comply with the court's order.
It got so bad, that back in November, a judge ordered that custody be given to Janet Jenkins.

In a 21-page order, Judge William Cohen granted sole custody of 7-year-old Isabella Miller to her nonbiological but court-recognized parent, Janet Jenkins. . . After finding Miller in contempt of court earlier this year for denying Jenkins access to Isabella, Cohen said he decided the only way to ensure the child equal access to both parents was to switch custody. [because Janet Jenkins, after all she's been through, still wants her daughter to have visitation with Lisa Miller]


"In the long term, the change in custody will be in (Isabella's) best interests as she will have the opportunity for maximum continuing physical and emotional contact with both parents," he said, adding that both parents were equal in terms of stability, financial resources, emotional availability and other considerations required for child rearing.

Where they weren't equal, he said, was in their willingness to work together. While Miller has repeatedly and consistently blocked Jenkins' access to Isabella, the judge said Jenkins has agreed to allow Miller access and would allow Isabella to continue to attend church events with her other parent.

But Lisa Miller never met a court order she didn't want to violate, so she has taken young Isabella and disappeared. She was to have turned over the child on Jan. First. On Jan. 22, Judge Cohen gave Ms. Miller 30 days to appear in court with the child. Surprisingly, Ms. Miller has yet to comply.

"Every day I wonder where she is, and if she's OK," said Janet Jenkins, of Fair Haven, Vt. "Every time the phone rings, I hope it is someone calling to tell me they have found her."

Miller attorney Rena Lindevaldsen said she had no recent contact with Miller and asked to withdraw from the case, saying she couldn't represent her adequately without knowing what Miller wants. (source)

Rena Lindevaldsen is a member of something called the 'Liberty Council."

Adjust Font Size:

I think they have aome affiliation with Liberty University which was founded by Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell or one of those ass-hats.

Here is what Ms. Lindevaldsen has to say about the case:

I know you are busy, but trust me when I tell you that the few minutes it will take to read this letter will be well-spent and life-changing. I’d like to tell you about Lisa Miller — my client, my friend, my sister in Christ, and mother of six-year old Isabella.

My friend, my sister, but I have no idea where she is!

On October 27, 2008, a Vermont judge is holding a hearing to determine whether little Isabella will be stripped from her mother’s care and given to a woman, Janet Jenkins, who is openly living the homosexual lifestyle.

Oh my God! Stripped away from the repressed, self-loathing closeted homosexual and given to a woman who is comfortable with who she is? Say it ain't so!

You see, Lisa Miller is one of thousands across this nation who have left the homosexual life through the redeeming power of Jesus Christ.

Also known as the redeeming power of guilt, shame, and brainwashing.

Now, because Lisa has refused to comply with a court order giving Janet liberal unsupervised [I know what you're implying, and it's despicable] visitation with Isabella, Janet has asked the court to transfer custody of Isabella from her only biological parent (Lisa) to Janet, who is openly living a homosexual lifestyle.

Refusing to comply with a court order - also known as committing a crime.

Lisa could be thrown in jail for refusing to expose her child to Janet’s
harmful and destructive lifestyle

Since Lisa is the one who is a fugitive from justice, and using her daughter as a weapon to punish her ex, I'm not sure that it's Janet's lifestyle that's harmful and destructive.

Before I begin, I want you to know that I am not exaggerating when I say that Isabella will be harmed by visitation with Janet.

Um, you've already begun. This line is from the third paragraph of your message. And no, you're not exaggerating, you're just full of shit. An exaggeration is at least based on something true.

During one of the few court ordered visits that did take place, Isabella tells us that Janet: made then five year old Isabella bathe naked with Janet; had Isabella watch R-rated movies that depicted drug use and bloody murder scenes; and had Isabella watch Janet go to the bathroom.

Without having met you or Janet or Isabella, I feel pretty safe in saying that none of that is true. That is exactly the sort of nonsense that someone like you would coach a child to say. And it seems to be based on your bizarre ideas of what it is that gay people do when they're alone together. "Well, gosh, they couldn't possibly engage in healthy lovemaking activities, oh I bet they force little girls to watch them pee. That's the sort of perverse thing I bet the gay people do."

Others have testified in court documents that Janet lost Isabella at a county fair

My mother once lost me at K-Mart. Should she have lost custody? nless she lost her in a poker game, this is the sort of thing that happens to every parent.

After a very difficult childhood and a failed, abusive heterosexual marriage, Lisa, at near bottom, was told by a psychological professional that she must be a homosexual. As a result of that, Lisa plunged feet first into the homosexual community.

That's about the stupidest thing I ever heard. Someone told her she must be a homosexual, so she starts dating women, and even marries one? How easy do you think it is to talk someone into being gay? Believe me, I've had offers. But I've never taken anyone up on them. Why do you people think that it's somehow possible to just sort of accidentally become gay? If it were that easy, couldn't you just suggest to the gay people that they are probably breeders? Oh, yeah. That's what you did to Lisa Miller. Touche' homophobes!

As you can tell, Lisa and Isabella need your help. Lisa’s desire to raise her child according to the truths of Scripture are under attack: at one point during the Vermont litigation, Janet’s attorneys argued that Lisa shouldn’t be allowed to keep primary custody of Isabella because Lisa believed that God had a plan for Isabella’s life and that God would protect Isabella.

That never happened. Janet Jenkins did not argue that Lisa Miller should lose custody because she taught Isabella that God would protect her. Let's for a moment pretend that Janet really was nutty enough to make that argument. Her lawyer would never trot that shit into court. It's a guaranteed loser. If you were trying to lose your case, you couldn't come up with a worse argument.


Anyway, the Liberty people and the Family Research Council people and other assorted nuts are urging people to pray for Lisa Miller. Not pray that she come to her senses, but pray that she continue to be able to evade the law to impose her own twisted hateful views on the little girl. Just like Jesus would want! (sarcasm)

So, all that being said, hereby nominate Lisa Miller of Virginia for the Most Horrible Person Ever.