Bumpkins of faith: We alone deserve special protection

Always addled and ever rattled, the neurologically suspect mobsters at Stop the ACLU — possessed of a baseline eagerness to whine about the various ways in which the U.S. uniquely suppresses the aims of Jesus-mongerers — have expanded the scope of their gripes by becoming fully engaged in their annual yuletide ritual of complaining about “attacks” on Christmas itself. A few examples from just the past week:

  • See various grousings on the ACLU’s successful move to have a Nativity display removed in Berkley, Michigan here, here and here.

    These goons are eager to pin the blame for such legal actions on atheist scum, who — because they refuse to believe in ghosts, goblins and miracles despite the patent laughability of such things — are assumed to foster a deep hatred for all religious symbols (just as everyone who opts not to have kids must be fighting infanticidal urges).
    Personally, I don’t care from a sensibility standpoint whether religious symbols appear in public or not; of greater concern are the evangelasshats who knock on my door and leave garbage with words on it on my steps. Go ahead and throw up your nativity scenes and menorahs and crosses and lawn jockeys and animated statues of Stewie from The Family Guy if it floats your boat. But the legal precedent for not giving dominion to any one sect in taxpayer-supported places like city parks, government offices and schools is well-established and its pragmatism crystal-clear to the myelinated of neuron. Besides, churches have endless expanses of tax-free territory to decorate with ersatz virgins and magic talking asses trucked in from all four corners of the planet.

  • This muckheaded equivocator is likening very real attacks on gays by Christians at U.K. universities with Muslims’ alleged desire to stone them. Psst…jonjayray! That stuff about putting homosexers to death is in your Bible too!
  • An insightful fellow named ArrMatey complains that a plywood-covered cross in the Mojave Desert (a judge ordered it removed) is an “anti-religious display” and offends him. I myself tend to think of “anti-religious displays” as television shows in which Jesus gets his ass whipped by Satan, or cartoons depicting a deeply grateful Middle Eastern prophet being skillfully violated by a macrophallic equine in a great glass elevator to the accompaniment of Fatboy Slim tracks. Or maybe I’m thinking of planes smashing into occupied skyscrapers: pro-religious or anti-religious? Hell, I can’t keep straight what’s supposed to offend whom, but someone’s god must be right.
  • Next we have Jay Stephenson, once again putting the BAM! in Alabama, gloating about the fallout from the announcement of a new scholarship that would be offered only to partially (25% or more) white students at Boston University. (In case you haven’t figured this out, the $250 award is a publicity stunt). Says Jay: “I’ve always thought that those pushing for special treatments based on race would not like the idea as much if it were applied to whites. Now I see I was right.”
    Obviously, the partially aerosolized faeces his comrades are merrily spraying all around Jay doesn’t trigger his irony meter, the detection threshold of which is set somewhere between INFINITY and INFINITY PLUS ONE. In a post made a few days after Jay’s, jonjayray labels comedian Paul Mooney a “racist black” for opining that actor Michael Richards looks Jewish. Notably, jonjayray says nothing about the flagrantly racist tirade by Richards that triggered Mooney’s comments, which, while not warm and fuzzy (the guy is a comedian), don’t appear to be anti-Semitic.
    Then we have the contribution to the Berkley “crisis” of one John Bambinek, representing the consanguinity and special-needs platforms with heartwarming determination. Bambinek declares that Kwanzaa is “a joke” and claims that “If someone wants to put up a Kwanzaa display, they need to find a holiday that’s not a complete invention.” He does say that it’s okay to put up Hanukkah displays, though. But given his observation that “everyone gets off December 25th and the only holiday that is being celebrated is Christmas,” I hope that Bambinek– who claims, eerily enough, to be from the same city as both Kerwin Brown and the publisher of this garbage — goes to work on Martin Luther King Day.
    Bambinek is an unapologetic drama queen who screams that the ACLU is trying to snuff Christianity out of existence. That there is tremendous evidence to the contrary doesn’t stop this guy, nor does the fact that his own chosen version of the biggest lie ever told effectively compels its followers to legislate all similar but competing lies out of existence, using violence if necessary. Jay, in yammering about the shifting of “In God We Trust” from the face of the ever-popular dollar coin to its edge, overreaches in a similar manner when he asserts, “don’t think anything will satisfy the secular cleansing crowd besides totally erasing all reference to God from every single American mint.” It may be a coincidence, but you never hear these geniuses speak of “secular cleansing” when the interests of non-Christian faithful are at stake.

The lesson here (other than the basic prohibition on thinking, period) is that it’s wrong to stand up for your rights unless you’re white, Christian, male, and straight (or in Kerwin Brown’s case, cowering in a closet). Then it’s incumbent upon you not only to demand unique rights, but trample or malign the basic ones of others. Clueless hillbillies like Jay — who don’t even know they’re part of a majority, much less appreciate the fact that this is the only sound explanation for why they’ve even been allowed to advance to whatever irrelevant stations in society they occupy — are sublime examples of why it’s frivolous to pretend that legal protections and certain forms of recognition given to minority groups are categorically without merit. When Christopathic conservatives bemoan others’ supposed hunger to destroy religion, they’re only projecting their obvious desire for global supremacy on the rest of us.

2 thoughts on “Bumpkins of faith: We alone deserve special protection”

  1. Bravo. I truly admire a quality rant and that sir had some true gems. It was insightful and entertaining. You know, I often wonder why our culture seems to adore those who excel physically – professional athletes have a great deal of popular appeal- yet seem suspicious or even hostile toward those who excel intellectually or academically. After reading the line, “… is well-established and its pragmatism crystal-clear to the myelinated of neuron.” I could not help but think, perhaps it is because many know we are talking about them, but they’re not sure exactly what we’re saying. Keep up the good work.

  2. We alone reserve the right to post incorrectly spelled versions of the ten commandments on government property. Why is it that Fundy theocrats have such a hard time with the seventh commandment?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: