Tuesday, July 31, 2012

No one who embraces Islam gives a shit about gay rights.

Boston Mayor Tom 'Muslims probably really like gay marriage' Menino.

Mark Steyn has an essay on this most recent manifestation of the multiverse of liberal hypocrisy.


... mayor Tom Menino announced that Chick-fil-A would not be opening in his burg anytime soon. “If they need licenses in the city, it will be very difficult,” said His Honor. If you’ve just wandered in in the middle of the column, this guy Menino isn’t the mayor of Soviet Novosibirsk or Kampong Cham under the Khmer Rouge, but of Boston, Massachusetts. Nevertheless, he shares the commissars’ view that in order to operate even a modest and politically inconsequential business it is necessary to demonstrate that one is in full ideological compliance with party orthodoxy. “There is no place for discrimination on Boston’s Freedom Trail,” Mayor Menino thundered in his letter to Mr. Cathy, “and no place for your company alongside it.” No, sir. On Boston’s Freedom Trail, you’re free to march in ideological lockstep with the city authorities — or else... 
Mayor Menino subsequently backed down and claimed the severed rooster’s head left in Mr. Cathy’s bed was all just a misunderstanding. Yet, when it comes to fighting homophobia on Boston’s Freedom Trail, His Honor is highly selective. As the Boston Herald’s Michael Graham pointed out, Menino is happy to hand out municipal licenses to groups whose most prominent figures call for gays to be put to death. The mayor couldn’t have been more accommodating (including giving them $1.8 million of municipal land) of the new mosque of the Islamic Society of Boston, whose IRS returns listed as one of their seven trustees Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Like President Obama, Imam Qaradawi’s position on gays is in a state of “evolution”: He can’t decide whether to burn them or toss ’em off a cliff. “Some say we should throw them from a high place,” he told Al Jazeera. “Some say we should burn them, and so on. There is disagreement. . . . The important thing is to treat this act as a crime.” Unlike the deplorable Mr. Cathy, Imam Qaradawi is admirably open-minded: There are so many ways to kill homosexuals, why restrict yourself to just one? In Mayor Menino’s Boston, if you take the same view of marriage as President Obama did from 2009 to 2012, he’ll run your homophobic ass out of town. But, if you want to toss those godless sodomites off the John Hancock Tower, he’ll officiate at your ribbon-cutting ceremony.

Menino (and Mayor Rahm Emanuel of Chicago) have been humping the leg of any imam who applies for a mosque-building license. Mayor Menino actually spearheaded construction of "Menino's Mosque", built by a gay-hating imam who says he is undecided if homosexuals should be thrown off buildings rather than burned or stoned. Menino gifted the Mosque with $1.8 million from the hapless taxpaying citizen dhimmi of Boston ("separation of church and state" doesn't apply to mosques), and gave a fine speech alongside the gay genocide imams at the ribbon cutting ceremony.

You can bet there was no X-tian chicken served at the celebration. Menino supports gay marriage, presumably to streamline disbursement of survivor benefits when the Mayor's imam buddies toss gays off the John Hancock Tower.

If you thought that killing gays was just whimsical Muslim musing, you'd be wrong.


This inconsistency is very telling. The forces of “tolerance” and “diversity” are ever more intolerant of anything less than total ideological homogeneity. Earlier this year, the Susan G. Komen Foundation — the group that gave us those pink “awareness raising” ribbons for breast cancer — decided to end its funding of Planned Parenthood on the grounds that, whatever its other charms, Planned Parenthood has nothing to do with curing breast cancer. Within hours, the Komen Foundation’s Nancy Brinker had been jumped by her fellow liberals, and was strapped to a chair under a light bulb in the basement with her head clamped between two mammogram plates until she recanted. A few weeks back, Mark Regnerus, a sociology professor who “says he’s never voted for a Republican presidential candidate,” published a paper in the journal Social Science Research whose findings, alas, did not conform to the party line on gay parenting. Immediately, the party of science set about ending his career, demanding that he be investigated for “scientific misconduct” and calling on mainstream TV and radio networks to ban him from their airwaves.

As an exercise in sheer political muscle, it’s impressive. But, if you’re a feminist or a gay or any of the other house pets in the Democrat menagerie, you might want to look at Rahm Emanuel’s pirouette, and Menino’s coziness with Islamic homophobia. These guys are about power, and right now your cause happens to coincide with their political advantage. But political winds shift. Once upon a time, Massachusetts burned witches. Now it grills chicken-sandwich homophobes. One day it’ll be something else. Already in Europe, in previously gay-friendly cities like Amsterdam, demographically surging Muslim populations have muted leftie politicians’ commitment to gay rights, feminism, and much else. It’s easy to cheer on the thugs when they’re thuggish in your name. What happens when Emanuel’s political needs change?

Americans talk more about liberty than citizens of other Western nations, but, underneath the rhetorical swagger, liberty bleeds. When Mayor Menino and Alderman Moreno openly threaten to deny business licenses because of ideological apostasy, they’re declaring their unfitness for public office. It’s not about marriage, it’s not about gays, it’s about a basic understanding that a free society requires a decent respect for a wide range of opinion without penalty by the state.

The liberal agenda has nothing to do with human rights. The liberal agenda is power.

Liberals stop their opponents from speaking by using force. Integrity and consistency mean little or nothing. They are astonishingly intolerant of conservative or Christian viewpoints, and the intolerance is not motivated by any higher ethos. They boot-lick any gay-genociding clitoris-cutting Muslim nut who wants an imprimatur on a new mosque, but if a Christian leads a prayer in school or wants a license to open a chicken restaurant they call 911.

It would be easy to say that Mayor Menino and Mayor Emanuel are just stupid liberals. Their hypocrisy is beyond satire-- they make threats against a chicken restaurant because its Christian owner opposes gay marriage yet at the same time they embrace and fund the construction of mosques by imams who advocate gay genocide. But I don't believe that these mayors' advocacy is mere stupidity. This is a salient in a long struggle. These guys are playing to their donors and their political muscle, gay and gay-hating alike.

No one who embraces Islam gives a shit about gay rights.

What unites gay-marriage libs and gay-lynching imams is hatred of Christianity, which is what this is really all about.


  1. Liberals stop their opponents from speaking by using force.

    Exactly who was stopped from speaking in this instance by the use of force?

    1. By the force of law, ie the licensing process.

      This is the tyrannical use of governmental power to coerce orthodoxy.

      Next question, please.


    2. By the force of law, ie the licensing process.

      The only problem with your analysis is that no license has been denied to anyone. So, once again, who was stopped from peaking in this instance by the use of force?

    3. Sigh. The mayors of Boston and Chicago both said quite openly that the permits required to open a Chick-fil-A in their towns would not be forthcoming. And that because someone at the head of the Chick-fil-A company said something they didn't like. Now, so far the permits have not been denied, but then they haven't been applied for either, have they? So this would properly be described not as the use of force but as the THREAT of the use of force.

    4. Sigh. The mayors of Boston and Chicago both said quite openly that the permits required to open a Chick-fil-A in their towns would not be forthcoming.

      Sigh. Both backtracked when they were given legal advice to the effect that to do so would be illegal. So whatever intemperate remarks may have been made, the officials in question made clear that they would follow the law.

      But it is much easier to play the martyr than to actually deal with reality.

    5. Please give me a source.

      It's kind of a stupid point anyway. Two tyrannical dictator wannabes threatened a private business that they would have to submit to left-wing orthodoxy or be denied a license. That's the point. Yes, it's illegal. That's another good point. And when a lawyer finally advised them that they were acting illegally and without regard to the Constitutional rights of American citizens, they backed down. According to you. I still haven't seen anything about either of these tyrants changing their minds.

      And we're playing "martyrs."

      No, Anonymous. We're being kicked around and we're sick of it.

      The Torch

    6. "intemperate remarks"!
      how kind you are; now imagine the same 'intemperate remarks' made by a conservative christian mayor against a pro same-sex marriage businessman.
      You'll be so kind?

    7. Intemperate remarks. Ha, ha.

      Why don't we just have the mayor distribute a questionnaire to all business within city limits asking their opinions of any number of hot button issues.

      Answer one "wrong" and you can't do business in the city any more. There's no abuse of power there.

      Intemperate remarks is this clown's attempt to minimize the abusive nature of the mayor in question.

      This is why your talk of "tolerance" and "pluralism" rings so empty. Get back with us when you practice what you preach.


    8. Please give me a source.


      Menino backs down.

      Moreno and Menino back down.

      One should also note that the ACLU, which conservative Christians routinely and ignorantly lambaste, has supported Chik-fil-a on this issue, stating that viewpoint discrimination by the government would be illegal.

    9. Get back with us when you practice what you preach.

      You do realize that not discriminating when actually issuing the licenses would be "practicing what we preach", don't you? And that this is exactly what Menino and Moreno have said they will do.

    10. now imagine the same 'intemperate remarks' made by a conservative christian mayor against a pro same-sex marriage businessman.

      Note the next time a conservative Christian announces that they will violate the law. Heck, note a recent example. Were the conservative Christians given the opportunity to change their mind and follow the law after receiving legal advice? Yes, yes they were. Did they take that opportunity? No. Court action was required to get them to follow the law.

      In the case of Menino and Moreno, they said something stupid. They got legal advice. They then stated that they would follow the law. In short, they have done exactly the opposite of what conservatives did when they were given legal advice.

      But noticing this difference would require that you stop playing the martyr, so you ignore it.

    11. It seems that the school was threatened of a lawsuit and not the contrary... so please search again.

  2. I don't hate "gays."

    I disapprove of homosexuality. Disapproval is not hating and behavior is not identity.

    Too bad that you lack the critical thinking skills to understand the difference.


  3. Why is it acceptable for Muslims to speak openly of killing homosexuals but not for Christians to speak of disapproving of a redefinition of marriage?

    It isn't. For either.

    Why do they get licenses, but we don't?

    No one has been denied a license here. So your question is moot.

  4. Disapproval is not hating and behavior is not identity.

    Too bad you lack the critical thinking skills to realize that your evasions are unconvincing to anyone.

  5. The threat has been made. And that is not moot.

  6. And yet no one was denied a license, and the officials in question later stated that they would follow the law. So the question is entirely moot.

  7. "... What unites gay-marriage libs and gay-lynching imams is hatred of Christianity, which is what this is really all about."


  8. Meneno said expliticily that he would do what he can to deny them a license. The alderman in Chicago has said that he will not allow one to open in his ward.

    You're an idiot, Anonymous. You have not contributed on iota to this consversation.

    And by the way, you may not find the imam's lynching rheotric to be acceptable, but Menino obviously does. Explain.

    The Torch

  9. They do have an irrational hatred of your religion, TRISH. They're the KKK of Christian-hating.

    The Torch

  10. Meneno said expliticily that he would do what he can to deny them a license.

    And then backtracked when legal counsel explained to him that this would be illegal. No one has been denied a license. Menino and Moreno have stated that they will follow the law. The only idiots who have not contributed one iota to the conversation are the permanently offended Christians who are crying over a non-denial of a license that has not been applied for that government officials have said will not be denied on religious grounds.

    The real idiot here is you Torch.

  11. anonymous,
    are you claiming that an experienced mayor as Menino did not know the laws about the licenses?
    Are you really claiming that Menino needed a legal advice to know that a license could not be denied on religious grounds?
    Be serious please!