Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

If ‘To Be Gay = Death,’ the After Life Is Going to Be One Helluva Fabulous Party

It sort of sucks that some 100 Wyoming children walk by this sign every day en route to school, but we fully support Chris Trumbull’s right to be a bigot on his own property. But there is the argument that the freedom of expression should be reserved for those worth expressing something: “Trumbull said there was no specific incident that prompted him to paint the sign, though he spoke of a general disappointment in society. ‘I’m not doing it to be spiteful. Gay people are bashing themselves,’ Trumbull said. ‘My fence seems like the proper setting [to express an opinion].'” [Wyoming Tribune]

By:           editor editor
On:           Apr 20, 2010
Tagged: , , ,
    • Andy

      At least we know who the gay in Wyoming is.

      Apr 20, 2010 at 7:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andy

      That’s not nice. It would expose his child porn collection.

      Apr 20, 2010 at 8:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Geoff M
      Geoff M

      Usually there are plenty of city ordinances about that kind of ‘signage’. It makes you wonder who in power agrees with this jerk to the point of allowing this hate.

      Would they allow something pro gay to be painted/displayed in a similar fashion? Or what about a sign with an anti straight slogan?

      Apr 20, 2010 at 8:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • carsen tyler
      carsen tyler

      Man for a change in wording in the 1850’s Leviticus is really being abused as an excuse. In Aramaic (the language spoken by Jesus) the Bible says that having gay sex would make you unclean, not worthy of death. It pretty much meant make a sacrifice to God, get approved by those in charge, and no one touches you till that changes. IT DOESN’T MEAN YOU GET KILLED. I learnt this from a Catholic priest from Palestine who grew up speaking Aramaic, and it is widely accepted in the realm of academia as a change in wording from 150 years ago. But still every time I bring this up in a group of christians with closed minds I get chased out of the place. I wish people were smart enough to find the history of what they believe.

      Apr 20, 2010 at 9:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael

      Actually the correct translation of Leviticus reads “A man shall not lie with another man on a woman’s bed”. The previous poster is correct about it being unclean, ie the abomination is only used to convey ritually unclean offenses. According to Leviticus 15 a woman’s bed was sacred due to her monthly cycle and gives a long list of prohibitions on her bed. Leviticus 18:19 then brings up this menstrual issue again and Leviticus 18:22 comes right after God telling us not to sacrifice our children to Molech. It’s insane people are taking a scripture, which comes right after a command not to kill your children to appease some god, out of context in order to apply it to today’s culture.

      Apr 20, 2010 at 10:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tqe | Adam
      tqe | Adam

      You need to fix a factual error in the citation for this article.

      You link to the Casper Star-Tribune (trib.com–see http://www.trib.com/app/online/site-information/ if you want to see the masthead/flag) not the Wyoming Tribune. Technically there’s no such thing as the Wyoming Tribune, although there is the Wyoming Tribune-Eagle, which is a newspaper based out of Cheyenne.

      Apr 20, 2010 at 11:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Damien

      Wow, he really cares about homosexuality that much? Out of all the things to be concerned of in life, he is that interested in gay people. Interesting.

      Apr 20, 2010 at 11:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko

      CARSEN, how is believing homosex to be unclean much better than desrving the death penalty?! It’s the bible) still seeing gay sex in a negative light. How is that affirming? Is that as christian as it gets? I Why do you believe this?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 1:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No. 8 · nikko wrote, “CARSEN, how is believing homosex to be unclean much better than desrving the death penalty?! It’s the bible) still seeing gay sex in a negative light. How is that affirming? Is that as christian as it gets? I Why do you believe this?”

      I’ve no idea what Carsen personally believes but what he was talking about was the difficulties in translating an ancient language. The term “unclean” is a religious thing that
      doesn’t necessarily indicate a moral failing. Levicitus 15:16, for example, says, “Now if a man has a seminal emission, he shall bathe all his body in water and be unclean until evening.”
      Leviticus 15:19 says, “When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening.”

      The term translated as “unclean” is sometimes translated as “ceremonially unclean”. It meant you could not participate in certain religious ceremonies after some event until some other event occurred (whether an elapsed time or a ‘cleansing’ ritual of some sort). Don’t worry if it doesn’t make sense – we are living in the 21st century and probably none of us practice the rituals in vogue 3 or 4 thousand years ago for a few tribes living in what is now the Middle East. Furthermore the last sentence of Leviticus indicates that it applies to the “Israelites”, not anyone else.

      Basically, the “Christians” who are citing stuff in Leviticus to justify their prejudices don’t understand what their “sacred texts” actually say.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 2:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko

      I appreciate you trying to clarify the term “unclean’, but is it still not insinuating that same sex acts in the Old testament were to be considered unclean?! How is that a good thing? help me understand.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Artist
      The Artist

      Ignorant. PEACELUVNBWILD!

      Apr 21, 2010 at 9:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • samthor

      Someone needs to remind this guy of Matthew 6:1 where Jesus said “STFU”

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan

      I’m sure this guy also stones his children for disobeying him too, as it also says in Leviticus.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No. 10 · nikko wrote, “I appreciate you trying to clarify the term “unclean’, but is it still not insinuating that same sex acts in the Old testament were to be considered unclean?! How is that a good thing? help me understand.”

      It’s neither a good thing or a bad thing today because from a practical standpoint it is an irrelevant thing: just the taboos and customs of some desert tribes several thousand years ago.

      It isn’t surprising that they would have a religious taboo against male homosexual activity given that their neighboring tribes had male temple prostitutes, but it is simply ancient history – something only historians should care about, and then only to have something to write about to avoid perishing under a “publish or perish system.”

      Apr 21, 2010 at 6:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt

      @nikko: If I understand correctly, heterosexual sex also would make you unclean since it generally involves a ‘seminal emission.’

      But even in the modern world, you shouldn’t have (male) gay sex in a woman’s bed. It’s just rude. :)

      Apr 22, 2010 at 1:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Blake

      Of course the religious homophobes do not want to put the statements from The B.I.B.L.E. in context.
      If they did that then they would have no excuse to discriminate against us.
      And if they cannot discriminate against us, how else are they going to vent their frustrations about the failings of their own lives.
      This battle against discrimination is going to be the longest and most difficult, because unlike people of colour or woman, we have no general physical differences.
      This allows them to claim it is a choice!
      The most important fact is that it is our internal differences (unique personalities, etc.) that separate us the most from each other and they should be embraced, otherwise there is no point to being self-aware!
      Unfortunately we cannot breed ourselves into larger numbers, because to remain the unique individuals that we are, there can never be too many special people at once.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 1:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.