WingNutDaily agrees with Colorado State Senator Scott Renfroe (R) that gays should be put to death. Or, more accurately, "gays," since WND doesn't acknowledge the use of that word as the rest of society does at this point. It's no surprise, of course, that the conservative "Christian" news service would back up the bigoted, ignorant and inappropriate injection by Renfroe of his religious beliefs into public policy. WND's Chelsea Schilling believes he's taking a stand for biblical truth.
When Colorado's Legislature considered granting benefits to same-sex partners, one lawmaker took a stand, calling homosexuality an "abomination" and a sin the government should not condone - and now "gay" activists have countered with a full-fledged attack.
Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, stood before the state Senate Feb. 23 just before it passed SB 88, a bill granting insurance benefits to homosexual partners of state employees. He read scripture to lawmakers - including the bill's openly "gay" sponsors, Democrats Sen. Jennifer Veiga and Rep. Mark Ferrandino.
"I oppose this bill because of what my personal beliefs are," Renfroe said. "I think that what our country was founded upon was those beliefs also."
He told the Senate God created woman as a helper for man and commanded his children to "be fruitful and multiply."
Now it's time to stop pussyfooting about what Renfroe and professional "Christian" outfits like Focus on Your Family and WND are doing by incessantly quoting Leviticus as justification for discrimination.
Ye shall not lie with a man as one lies with a female. It is an abomination," he read. "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act, and they shall surely be put to death.
If they believe that the Bible is the literal word of God, then they do believe gays must die. You can't pick and choose (though we all know these literalists do so all the time). I assume, then, that adulterers should be stoned for their sins. Actually, it looks like Renfroe is down with that as well.
"Obviously we have sin - we have murder, we have, we have all sorts of sin, we have adultery, and we don't make laws making those legal, and we would never think to make murder legal."
And as we see, homosexuality, to the fundies, is lumped in with murder.
Remember, folks -- these so-called Christians are people that David Blankenhorn and Jonathan Rauch want the LGBT community and supporters of marriage equality to compromise with. Let's do a rewind to their recent NYT op-ed:
It would work like this: Congress would bestow the status of federal civil unions on same-sex marriages and civil unions granted at the state level, thereby conferring upon them most or all of the federal benefits and rights of marriage. But there would be a condition: Washington would recognize only those unions licensed in states with robust religious-conscience exceptions, which provide that religious organizations need not recognize same-sex unions against their will. The federal government would also enact religious-conscience protections of its own. All of these changes would be enacted in the same bill.
The bible-beaters concede nothing whatsoever, their bigotry accommodated when they already have their religious freedom protected under current law at this time. Given the absolute fixed position of fundamentalists (after all, gays and lesbians have been compromising all along the way -- the existence of second-class institutions known as domestic partnerships, registries, and civil unions, are proof of this), and their belief that gays are an abomination and should be put to death, I have a hard time seeing how Blankenhorn and Jonathan Rauch's little reconciliation plan has a chance in hell of becoming a reality.
Again, the LGBT community is the favorite whipping boy of the Religious Right, but as I said in my first post about the op-ed, their goal doesn't stop with the fight against the purported Homosexual Agenda. Witness the utter ignorance and cruelty of State Sen. Dave Schultheis, who as an alleged man of faith, believes that pregnant women should not be tested for HIV because it "rewards promiscuity", and that if as a result, a baby contracts AIDS, well, too damn bad.
"What I'm hoping is that, yes, that person may have AIDS, have it seriously as a baby and when they grow up, but the mother will begin to feel guilt as a result of that," he said. "The family will see the negative consequences of that promiscuity and it may make a number of people over the coming years begin to realize that there are negative consequences and maybe they should adjust their behavior."
Talk about an abomination; have you read anything so depraved, amoral, oh, heck, evil? Regular readers here know we cover fundies like this all the time. The archives are full of the sheer hatred and ignorance -- based on that op-ed, it's clear that Blankenhorn and Rauch either have no research skills, or willfully choose to remain ignorant that the anti-marriage equality side has no ability to compromise. For these people there is no separation of church and state. How can you compromise when the other side holds that view?