Can you call anal sex between two men absolutely abhorrent and disgusting without violating laws that prohibit you from discriminating against gays? Canada’s Supreme Court will soon decide!
By “soon” we mean a year or so, because first an appeals court must issue its decision (sometimes Canada is just like America!), and it’s on its way to doing that having accepted a petition from the Human Rights Commission.
Bill Whatcott, an infamous Canadian anti-gay and anti-abortion activist, spent 2001 and 2002 distributing four different flyers on behalf of the Christian Truth Activists. The propaganda was distributed to Saskatoon and Regina arae homes — which had citizens filing complaints with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, saying the flyers were tantamount to hate speech, since they “promote[d] hatred against individuals based on their sexual orientation.” Whatcott successfully won his rebuttal in front of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, saying the flyers targeted acts, not identity.
“Our children will pay the price in disease, death, abuse and ultimately eternal judgment if we do not say no to the sodomite desire to socialize your children into accepting something that is clearly wrong,” reads one of the flyers, which certainly entered a arguably gray area by targeting on “sodomite desire”; does that refer to “sex” or the innate sexual desire that’s part of being a homosexual person?
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Let’s play this game: Could somebody legally distribute flyers warning against the dangers of “offering haircuts to blacks” because a person believes the way blacks grow their hair is abnormal and threatens to indoctrinate children? After all, the flyers would just be targeting an activity (haircuts), not an immutable characteristic (being of African origin). But it still sounds god awful. Now you go!
[Toronto Sun; Montreal Gazette; Yes, the bottom photo is likely from an American demonstration, not a Canadian one]
Luc Gendrot
This is rather ridiculous, I’ve seen the argument made before, but bigotry is bigotry, and It’s clear that this is just a thinly veiled excuse to be able to condemn the “gay lifestyle” (whatever that means).
gregger
just goes to prove that stupidity and bigotry are not exclusive to the US.
ron
Answer to question: Yes…..Now why do those stick people in the poster make me horny?
tallskin2
Oh no, not more CHRISTIAN bigotry
Well, that’s a surprise. Who’d have thought it, eh?
Strange how infrequently religious people are actually NICE.
fizzydrink
I don’t think it’s bigotry per se to hold the opinion that anal sex is gross. I think it’s gross, and I’m bi, and definitely not bigoted against GLBT people. I just don’t particularly like thinking about that part of the body when I don’t have to. 🙂
Cam
Again, this is similar to people who tried to say that Carrie Prejean wasn’t a bigot because she began her statement with “No Offense”.
Just because somebody tries to twist their logic around makes no difference. The flyer is anti-gay, end of story. The Bible also advocates beating children, so if this religeon was passing out flyers encouraging child abuse nobody would be claiming that it’s just their relegeous beliefs.
B
If you put up nearly the same sign, but replaced “No” with “Try”, they’d be up in arms about “obscene” signs being viewed by impressionable children – the sign shows 4 erections and two instances of fondling.
Rick Gold
After you are done attacking gay sex without attacking gays, you can attack a synagogue without attacking Jews!
pete
All 4 positions shown on the poster are also performed by heteosexuals. It’s not gay sex, it’s all sex these jerks have a problem with. I’d hate to be married to one of these frigid bastards.
wtf
@fizzydrink: then don’t think about, stupid. No one is forcing you to think about hot hairy man sex where one man plunders another man’s love-hole. And yes, you’re stupid.
Chris
@wtf: there really isn’t anything wrong with what he said. it was just a statement/opinion.
Roger Rabbit
Actually, most don’t understand this, but “Christians” are actually conflicted here.
Some object to the sex itself.
Some object to the sex outside of marriage, but anything in Marriage is good. And I mean ANYTHING according to my old pastor. However, he was also screwing his secretary – lol.
Some just can’t stand the two men concept (women are bad but they still look with lust), because it gives them the heebee-jeebees.
But lump them all together and you get the mess we have now.
And the easy way to find closet cases there is to simply look at the young unmarried adult groups. That’s where we all were trying to be good while the church members thought we would find girls to marry.
Kev C
@fizzydrink: All bodily functions are kinda gross, if you think about it. People who obsessively think about gay sex are called Christians.
codyj
the christian truth advocates??? lol, another hate mongering group,and whatcook says we’ll fry in hell? ah, gee i hope GOD uses olive oil, that commercial transfat stuff aint to good for yah….
Jack
This is nothing more than a loop hole, a way to be a dick and not get in trouble…
peteNsfo
yawn… more prejudice masquerading as religious fervor.
I’m so tired of that, ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’ baloney.
This dope probably would have the right in the US, but not all nations tolerate hate-speech. American Legislators are p*ssies, afraid to tell their holier-than-thou religious folk, that not everyone belongs to their club, nor should they have to- get over it.
Personally, free-speech be damned… I hope they rule against him.
adman
@fizzydrink: That’s because you are a nasty, filthy bottom in training. Guys like you age a little, and watch out! The filth becomes a must. How are your girlfriend’s panties working out for you at this stage? Are you dehumanizing her during sexplay yet? Freaking confused loser.
Andreusz
Yes.
Andreusz
Yes, of course you can ‘attack’ (denounce) gay sex acts without ‘attacking’ (assaulting) gay people.
ousslander
yes you can. Who cares if someone thinks what I do is disgusting? He has the right to say so. It’s called freedom of speech or is that reserved only for the those who know better?
straight sex skeeves me out!
jason
Why don’t these Christian activists attack lesbians? It’s always two men they attack, not two women. Perhaps this proves that religious objection to homosexuality is gender-based. Unlike girl-girl, which you often see in the adult literature of heterosexual males, guy-guy represents a challenge. It’s challenging, not aligning.
Guy-guy represents a challenge to the patriarchal male’s control over the social conversation. Guy-guy brings them down. Girl-girl doesn’t.
Daez
@tallskin2: Apparently, you haven’t been subjected to any real Christians in your life time, but stop confusing these xtian assholes for real Christians. Real Christians teach the teachings of Christ such as “love your neighbor” not the teachings of Fred Phelps.
ewe
Fundamentalists should not be speaking about this at all. They have no idea what they are talking about.
Daez
@fizzydrink: Seriously!?! You have no problem sticking your dick into a hole that bleeds once a month, gets shredded by the birth of children, and isn’t nearly as tight as it needs to be for enjoyable sex in the first place (hence why every straight man in creation wants to fuck his chick in the ass), but you think an asshole is dirty.
News flash, if you are with someone with a dirty asshole then they are unclean. Real bottoms make damn sure that part of their body is completely clean before usage.
Daez
@ewe: Actually if recent history has proven anything, fundamentalist know more about gay sex then a great deal of gay people…
Just ask Ted Haggart.
tallskin2
@Daez- “@tallskin2: Apparently, you haven’t been subjected to any real Christians in your life time, but stop confusing these xtian assholes for real Christians. Real Christians teach the teachings of Christ such as “love your neighbor” not the teachings of Fred Phelps.”
Daez, I was brought up atheist, luckilly for me, and so I look at religion from the outside and I don’t like what I see.
And it seems there’s quite an argument going on about what is the real christianity. Yes, some christians believe in the “love your neighbour” thing, but equally just as many are believers in an authoritarian fascist sky pixie who hates homosexuals. I am not interested in the argument.
But if you really want me to list here the reasons I think christianity as perceived by its adherents is evil, demented, and sheer wickedness then I will. Shall I?
You surely cannot deny that christianity started homophobia here in the west and continues to refresh homophobia whenever it shows signs of weakening? I refer to opposition to gay equality INVARIABLY coming from christian (and other religious) nutjobs. Certainly any derogatory comments about gays, here in the UK, or opposition to gay equality, always comes from the religious.
TikiHead
How come they never object to straight oral, or straight anal? Aren’t those just as icky? We gays, by the way, own the trademark on oral and anal. Straights really aren’t allowed to do those things without written permission from The Gay Agenda.
DR
I am so glad we in the US don’t have to deal with “hate speech” laws like Canada’s. Ugh, what a mess. I am so over this culture of victimization.
fizzydrink
@adman:
Whoa dude, sounds like you might need some anger management or other form of therapy.
@Daez:
Yep, seriously. I just really don’t think I can sexualize a part of the body that I know is used at least once a day for what it is. But I’m prone to hangups. I don’t eat meat because I can’t look at the food without thinking “that’s a plate of a cow’s muscle fibers. “)
skzip888
Can you attack crucifixes without offending Christians.
skzip888
Can you attack crucifixes without offending Christians?
thelonious
I think the real question is “Does preaching against gay sex mean you’re attacking yourself?”
ewe
@Daez: lol. that is so true. i did not think of it that way. But my point is that if one can attack gay people for the sex they have then one should be equally qualified to attack straight people for the sex they have and to say i disapprove of some whoring straight dirty pornographic fucking does not mean i am attacking heterosexuality. These people do not even think outside the box a little bit. Good for the goose, good for the gander type thing.
ewe
Gay people who disapprove of “gay” sex do not accept themselves as gay people. The fundamentalist quacks only know gay people who do not accept themselves because any self respecting joyous gay people would not associate with hateful homophobes who distort religion to irresponsibly discriminate.
Chris
I wonder if all these anti-gay sub-morons think that bottoms only take it on his hands and knees. They probably have no clue that we can fuck in every position they can, the ones that aren’t closeted traitor gays attacking other gays that is. Then again they all tend to believe that bottoms act like girls too. I kinda want that poster that says no gay sex so I can photoshop the “no gay sex” and the little circles with lines through them out. I would totally hang that in my hallway and maybe even add “Gay sex here!”.
Chris P.
I wrote the post about the anti-gay sub-morons. I saw there was another Chris posting and dont want my views to be confused with anyone elses or be confused for anyone elses…