• Gay BlogAds


  • Gay News Watch


  • Chris Tweets



  • « I know he's being sarcastic… | Main | Dandy Dan redux »

    May 05, 2007

    Dandy Dan's diatribe

    Posted by: Chris

    Danriehl Apparently I touched a nerve over at the conservative blog Riehl World View by having the temerity to defend hate crime laws. I had posted yesterday in response to Dan Riehl, whoever he is, because he had misinterpreted both me and Andrew Sullivan on the issue.  Rather than read what I actually wrote in response, Riehl vented in one of those rambling, indignant blog-atribes that give the web a bad name — second only to the "Amen corner" commenters who of course high-fived him for standing up to the sissy.

    In "Confession: I've Been Gay Bashed," Riehl accuses me of calling him a "Christianist," which is funny because (a) I only used the word in quotes to relate back to an Andrew Sullivan post and (b) never at all about Riehl.  In my concluding paragraph, I did use the phrase "conservative Christians," which I prefer to Sully's "Christianist," but I was summing up the whole post, not labeling Riehl, whatever he believes.

    Riehl takes some serious umbrage that I would assume to be a Christianist, but it doesn't stop him from making a major "ass" out of "u" and "me" in return.  Without even bothering to skim my blog bio,  he guesses I grew up with little access to organized religion: wrong, I was raised in a church-going, deeply religious, loving Southern family.  He assumes I have no respect for Judeo-Christian values: wrong, I am a firm believer in many of them, though I do loathe how they have been and are being twisted to justify all sorts of division. He labels me on the Left: wrong, I am recovering Republican now proudly independent, though like Andrew I am forever being pushed Left by the likes of Riehl.

    Regardless, Riehl spends very little time actually addressing the issue of hate crime laws, except to repeat his silly suggestion that they're useless since we were gay-bashed in Amsterdam despite the existence of such legislation in Holland — as if the continued existence of crime proves the futility of laws against it.  He does, however, manage to suggest two fairly creative reasons why we were apparently asking for a good beating:

    Were the Left and its now affiliated minority groups to expend half the energy it does in shouting Look at me, I'm a fag, or a Black, or I'm fat! and direct that energy into constructive dialog around how to foster and retain the morals and values we require as a society to survive, I suspect, given time, the assorted members of your too many to here name special interest groups wouldn't find themselves being beat up on the streets at night.

    And I doubt very much that's it's really happening at the hands of genuine church goin' folk now, Crain. It was 2 AM. I suspect for the most part, they were home in bed. Just curious, were you by any chance out catting about in what some might call a decadent slice of Netherlands night life you no doubt rejoiced in helping to bring about? Perhaps not, and I'm not suggesting it excuses the crime, though it might help to explain it.

    Be careful what you wish for, Crain. One tremendous irony I have discovered in life, is that, when you get it, it can come back to kick your ass.

    Finally, there it is.  If we'd spend less time flaunting and — God forbid — enjoying ourselves, then maybe I wouldn't have wound up with a broken nose and two black eyes.  Nice.  Kiss your mother with that mouth?

    Best of all, Riehl proves my point about the way conservative Christianity (and Islam) foster intolerance in society generally.  He writes:

    Crain, and the Left, cite thug-ism and waywardness as one root of evil, blame that on Religion - WITH ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF AT ALL - because they either fear or detest religion, it's as simple as that. Yet, a not formally religious-ized conservative like myself sees the very values religion engenders as the only effective way to combat thug-ish-ness and waywardness in modern man, because I have observed it happen, time after time.

    Since Riehl wasn't actually raised in religion, or apparently spent much time reading the Bible, he has missed entirely Jesus' central message of love and compassion, especially for those different from yourself.  Instead, he hones in on the judgmental, law and order version preached by conservative Christians and right-wing mullahs. How else can you explain why a religious man like Riehl would call the Dixie Chicks "the Dixie Clits," and when he disagreed with a blogger named Matthew Ortega, call him "a water boy" "ringing the Taco Bell" and question the legality of his parents.

    Mmmmm, feel the conservative Judeo-Christian love.

    For an educated person like Riehl, conservative Christianity's judgmental, love-only-thy-like-thinking-neighbor message gets translated into immature misogynist bigotry. To his less intellectually endowed, more inebriated brethren, it can translate into yelling slurs at a gay couple holding hands in the street, spitting in their faces and, sometimes, beating the crap out of them.

    |

    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834527dd469e200d834ffa63853ef

    Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dandy Dan's diatribe:

    1. MyCrain Headaches from Riehl World View on May 5, 2007 3:40:35 PM

      Based upon another post directed at this one of mine, Citizen Crain seems a bit cranky today.Dandy Dan's diatribeDandy? How cliche. I'd of hoped for better, something a bit more creative with some flair, perhaps. But that aside, we do [Read More]

    Comments

    1. Tim Hulsey on May 6, 2007 1:37:24 AM:

      Well, to be fair, the Dixie Chicks are annoying ....

    1. Andoni on May 7, 2007 4:50:40 AM:

      Riehl just proves the point that these consevative Christian Christianists believe what they want to believe regardless of the facts. Unfortunately this is also the way the country has been run over the past 6 years........and look at the result.

    1. Dante on Jan 8, 2010 6:52:14 PM:

      Hate crime is thought crime. There is no defense of hate crime.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    © Citizen Crain - All Rights Reserved | Design by E.Webscapes Design Studio | Powered by: TypePad