 Bigot of the Week: Armstrong Williams
I blame SZ at World O’Crap for my Town Hall addiction. It has gotten to the point to where my inner masochist will not be still without the daily dose of far right demagoguery that TH provides.
Now I am not going to say that every word by every columnist printed at Town Hall is pure lunacy. There is the occasional piece that I agree with, and the frequent piece that makes me think. I like having my opinions challenged, and that challenge can come from left or right, because I am a bit of a hybrid in my beliefs. But lunacy is alive and well at Town Hall, and it rears it’s head most every day. Come on down, Armstrong Williams!
Dance Mary, Dance is a real piece of work, I’ll tell you, managing to eclipse even Ann Coulter’s touching tribute to Max Cleland. You see, Armstrong has taken it upon himself to denigrate millions, instead of just one unfortunate man. He has been made ill by this whole gay marriage thing. As he told us a couple of days ago, “the nightly news has been saturated with images of gay couples rushing to the altar. This sickens me.” Let’s see just how ill he is.
One moment gay and lesbian protesters are demanding that we regard them not by their insipid sexual acts, but as complex human beings deserving of the same inalienable rights the constitution reserves for all "humans." The next moment they are labeling and dismissing any human who breaks ranks with their cause.
I’ve never heard of an ‘insipid sexual act’, so I’m having trouble with this whole concept. My dictionary defines insipid as ‘lacking zest, flavor, excitement, interest…’, so I don’t see where any sex act would qualify. <ed. – Perhaps masturbating into a keyboard?> But maybe the rules only apply to “humans”. Yeah, we read you loud and clear, buddy.
Exhibit A: Mary Cheney, the openly gay daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney. Amid the hubbub over the proposed gay marriage amendment, gay protesters have trained their scorn on Mary. A new website, dearmary.com, attempts to shame her for not publicly opposing the administration's support of an amendment banning same sex unions. A proposed ad on the web site features Mary's picture on a milk carton. The caption reads, "Have you seen me?" and suggests that she is a coward for not joining their cause. The site also posts thousands of emails imploring Mary to speak out for homosexual rights…
Wait a second… What is Williams doing defending Mary Cheney? Does she qualify as being a real person by virtue of being sired by the Veep? Interesting concept. It’s hard to know which ass to kiss and which to kick. This is one outrageous web site we’re talking about, having the audacity to suggest that Mary Cheney act to protect her own rights. Sheesh. BTW, since Williams couldn’t bring himself to include a real link, I’ll do the honors.
[blah…blah…blah] …Never mind that they've completely objectified Mary. Never mind that they've distilled this complex human being into a symbol designed solely to solicit a knee-jerk reaction. Or that they've shown no respect for her right to privacy. Or that they've put her sexuality on a public stage and demanded that she sculpt it to meet their idea of proper gay etiquette-as defined not by an abiding respect for human privacy or civil rights, but by what they think a homosexual ought to do.
In other words, it’s not up to homosexuals to suggest what a homosexual ought to do. It’s up to Armstrong Williams.
Get it? Mary doesn't act as gay as they feel she should so they label and dismiss her. How neat and easy and ridiculously absurd.
Get it? I get it. Mary doesn’t act gay enough. What the hell is that supposed to mean? And how can they be dismissing her at the same time that they are pleading for her to be a leader?
I mean, isn't this precisely the sort of reductive stereotyping that the homosexual activists are supposed to be fighting against? I mean, isn't that their thing?
Isn’t that their thing? This guy must be tough in a debate. I’d like to say that I’ve wasted enough time here, but it’s time for the last paragraph. The money shot.
[blah…blah…blah] …After all, why do gay couples want the church's blessing? They could go about their business just fine without having been "wed" in a church, right?
Don’t gay couples understand that God has already condemned them to eternal damnation? How dare they ask to be “wed” in a church? You listen to me, faggots, you can’t be religious and homosexual. Now get on about your business.
Unless there is more to it. It is political, and often economic. They want greater standing and treatment among the heterosexual majority. The best way, they believe, to achieve that end is through a union like marriage.
Williams is no dummy, just a bigot. Those lines show that he understands the issue pretty clearly. Which makes him all the more despicable. Ride it on home, Armstrong.
So much the better if anti-gay institutions are destroyed as a result. They see it as another victory. But if you look behind the rhetoric about civil rights, it becomes clear that they are acting at the expense of what is best for society, and to grant them victory, would be to rip our most sacred religious and cultural ideals to shreds. This no one owes them!
Anyone whose religious and cultural ideas can be ripped to shreds so easily has obviously built their house upon the sand, and if this wave doesn’t take him out, the next one surely will. This someone owes him. | 
