Winking at The Gayocaust

I call on radical queers all over the country to go to churches and just start having sex in the pulpits. Make out during the sermon! Do it at the church BBQ! Do it on Fish Fry Friday! Forget “Glitter Bombing”—why don’t we Fuck Bomb!

Obviously, there is absolutely no reason to oppose same-sex marriage. Charles Worley, a sanctified Christian pastor in North Carolina has come under media and legal scrutiny this week for a Mother’s Day sermon he gave that was about confiscating all the gay cocksuckers and lesbian scissor sisters and cordoning them off behind bedazzled electrified fences. Pastor Worley does not like homosexuality: “The bible’s again it, God’s again it, I’m again it, and if you’ve got any sense, you’re again it.”

(Note: Apparently in this particular region of North Carolina, it is not customary to pronounce the “st”).  

But it’s not enough to just be against homosexuality. Worley adds: “I found out a way to get rid of all of the lesbians and queers, but I couldn’t get it passed through Congress.” Put the lesbians behind one electrified fence, drop some food on them. Do the same for the queers. The point of this Gayocaust? Why, so that all us queers will die out, of course! And once that happens, Ellie Mae, who do you think is going to be creating your flawless church hats?

Coming on the heels of President Obama’s announcement of support for marriage equality and North Carolina’s ban on gay marriage, the scariest aspect of Worley’s remarks are not even his hateful sermon. There are hateful individuals. It’s his congregation of 1200 “saved” Christians shouting and punctuating various moments in the sermon with “Amen’s and “That’s right’s. THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE VOTING FOR MITT ROMNEY, and it’s very frightening.

As we know, Obama got in some deep trouble with many gays and lesbians who felt that his coming out in support of gay marriage was an empty political gesture to activate his base. But he’s a politician! He needs votes! That’s like calling Beyoncé out for wearing a lace front. Stop hating.

When Obama came out in favor of gay marriage I was worried for days that it could cost him the election. So of course I started thinking about how if Romney got elected I would simply move to, I don’t know, St. Bart’s. But I knew that his people must have had numbers and pie charts and screens and flow charts and graphs and surveys, all of which calculated various outcomes for the decision for Obama to come out. Since Obama made the announcement, a number of key people announced support: Colin Powell, Jay-Z, Chris Rock, Julian Bond and Benjamin Jealous, both of the NAACP. Whatever your stance on the issue, the fact is that marriage equality is a civil right, meaning that a gay person’s rights as a citizen are not up for debate or a moralist, popular vote. What the announcement did was to create a seismic shift in the conversation so that now anyone who opposes marriage equality seems completely out of touch, and their rationale for the anti-gay stance holds no teeth.

In a debate on Hardball with Chris Matthews, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council, duked it out over gay marriage when Perkins said that his kids would never be gay because a) being gay is not biological if you “look” at the “social science research”; b) because being gay is a product of your environment; and c) if you can control that environment with one mommy and one daddy who makes you do gender appropriate stuff, you don’t get a gay kid! So then Barney asks Tony, “So, does that mean that Dick and Lynne Cheney have failed at parenting because their daughter is lesbian?”

You better read him, Congressman Frank! The library is open.

Then, last night on AC360, Stacey Pritchard, one of the members of Pastor Worley’s lynch mob, appeared on the program to defend the pastor’s remarks. When Anderson Cooper asked her if she felt that gays should be put behind electrified fences, Pritchard unflinchingly agreed. “If they can’t get the message that that’s wrong, then, you know, they can’t reproduce and eventually they would die out.”

And then Anderson really came for her. “So... you believe that gay people are only born of other... gay people? Don’t gay people get born to straight parents?” And like that, the debate was over. The library, closed. Ingeniously backed into a corner, Pritchard fumbled and searched for words, becoming increasingly agitated.

My point is that if Pastor Worley’s sermon is any indication, these radical, hateful, Evangelical Christians are going to protest Obama and more specifically give Mitt Romney a base of support, even if they don’t know, like the rest of us, his position on anything. And so it raises one very important question: does the Republican party want to be associated with this kind of vitriol against progressive social issues? In my circles, if you say you’re a Republican, people take 10 steps away from you, like you have really bad breath. But what purpose does that serve? This is not to say that all Democrats are socially liberal, but why are there almost never any Republican candidates who are fiscally conservative but with an eye for progress for relevant social debates?

An anti-gay marriage stance has nothing to do with gay marriage at all. In the few states where gay marriage is legal, noting has happened. Children are not leaving their gay parents so they can at last have one mommy and one daddy. Churches practicing same-sex marriages have not burst into flames. The earth has not opened up. In fact, nothing has happened. This means that being anti-gay marriage is only a disavowal of gay sex. Opponents just can’t believe that two men or two women would get together and sex each others brains out, and it’s the regulation of that line of thought that the anti-gay marriage stance is about. This is why even when gay characters appear on popular television shows, we almost never see any affection or even the slightest hint of sexual awakening. Gay sex scares people!