Mary Cheney is pregnant. Yawn.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0f5ff/0f5ff4bc8fca26bdcd18e35ba19fad8cdb4e2986" alt="Printer-friendly version Printer-friendly version"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9dc0e/9dc0e271ab5bede78f79af1bade40829ef02b5b1" alt="Send by email Send by email"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3ef18/3ef18fe05d0a0664d9cc2a04884d5c1810800625" alt="PDF version PDF version"
Amidst all the white noise on the Iraq report, the blogosphere still appears to have found some time to shout a big ‘ah-ha’ on Mary Cheney’s pregnancy. See! She’s gay and a single mom! We surely gotcha now! Honestly, all this hooplah really gets to me. It’s annoying enough when the right-wing blogs bemoan the wretched stain on the Cheney family's good name, but it’s even worse when such malarkey comes from ordinarily progressive bloggers.
Aside from being a simpering little apologist for her dad’s administration, this girl has done nothing that we ourselves are not fighting for. Yes, she is gay. Yes, she will now be an “unwed†mother. But come on, in what stretch of the imagination does this somehow “win†an argument that Cheney – and right-wingers by extension – are all hypocrites? Our entire argument is that being gay is not a choice, so how is it possible that her dad could have had any influence over her sexuality? Besides, do we really need to manufacture another excuse to criticize right-wingers that we must exploit the private life of this woman whose only real fault is being the progeny of the Prince of Darkness?
We shouldn’t be gloating about this, we should feel sorry for Mary Cheney – she is about to be victimized even further by her father’s policies.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/92aed/92aedf4d426f5df3c94a2479985e33a884fbbfa0" alt="Share this"
Comments
I feel sorry for her, actually.
Re: Mary Cheney is pregnant. Yawn.
but you call them sodomites?!
Re: but you call them sodomites?!
Calling people sodomites is ok if it's biblical?
The quote from your site is "Saying it is against the Laws of GOD isn't enough for these people [sodomites], since they obviously don't swear any allegiance to GOD and it is doubtful they believe in the TRUE GOD." I have many friends from them LGBT community that both embrace and are embrace by the church.
Do you think that just because Sodomite is a biblical word that somehow it is less insulting and dehumanizing, particularly when you use it in an intentionally derogatory manner? As far as being wrong no matter what you say, this has so much less to do with the label you choose than with the dehumanizing venom behind your words. You're wrong because you're hateful towards an entire group of people, not because of the label you apply to them. If you were an earnest truth-seeker (rather than someone dangerously assuming they have a monopoly on the truth) than you would be more than forgiven for a slightly (though unintentionally) offensive label. Either way, I'm sure you realize that sodomite is far more insulting that homo or even queer, don't you?
Finally, you keep trying to hide behind McCollough's column as though that absolves you of your own intolerance and bigotry while also claiming to hold a monopoly on truth ("calling truth what it is"). Stop trying to have it both ways!
Re: Calling people sodomites is ok if it's biblical?
Honesty IS good, but hatred begets hatred
Thanks for the link...
Many apologies Todd
Sometimes...
Cheney and the baby
Cheney and the baby
If Newt says...