Apparently, boorishness is acceptable in defense of the faith.
The latest polemicist at the blog of International Organization for the Family is Rossello Gesa. Apparently Brian S. Brown is a lunatic magnet or he has a unique talent for finding and exploiting lunatics.
In any event, Rossello Gesa will do nothing to remove the “hate group” stigma from International Organization for the Family. And, no, religious piety is not an excuse for bigotry.
Mr. Gesa is terribly distressed that there are now two transgender MPs in the German Bundestag. According to Gesa this means that “Europe continues to trend with a hard left.” There are right wing transgender people. We would be happy to export Caitlyn Jenner if it would be helpful.
About that hate group designation: The link to Gesa’s diatribe includes the language “two-trannies.” Stay classy.
On the subject of class, Gesa deadnames one of these MPs. He is frustrated that he is unable to deadname the second. Misgendering both is a given. This schmuck has some major malfunction:
For the first time in the history of the Bundestag, there will be two male members of parliament who call themselves women. In fact, one of them was already a member of parliament. …
The transgender MPs are 44-year-old Bavarian Markus Ganserer, who calls himself “Tessa”.
And now “Nyke” Slawik from North Rhine-Westphalia will take a seat in parliament. The 27-year old’s real name cannot be found. Ganserer’s was already hard to find on an internet search, and the mainstream media purposefully keeps quiet on it. …
The reason that media do not deadname transgender people is that doing so is rude. Uncivil.
“my hypothesis is that they cause more people to turn away from religious fundamentalism than they attract.”
Lest I forget, this dummy’s subheading reads:
The Socialists have come out on top for the first time in more than a decade and a half. And with that, LGBT+ ideology has taken a giant step forward.
Who knew that gender identity and sexual orientation were “ideologies?” It is understandable why Rossello Gesa is so profoundly confused. Gesa is an adherent to a fundamentalist ideology. Hence, everyone must be an adherent to an ideology of some sort.
Okay, that not the real reason. Calling sexual orientation and gender identity ideologies is a Christian methodology intended to marginalize LGBTQ people. It doesn’t work, stupid.
The only people who might accept that preposterous rationale are already predisposed to be anti-LGBTQ bigots. I suppose that Mr. Gesa thinks that he is being informative as a Defender of the Faith™.
Rossello Gesa’s dishonest phrasing does not alter the scientific fact that gender identity and sexual orientation are independent components of human sexuality. Both are continua. There are infinite points of intersection.
Indeed, even Mr. Gesa has a gender identity and a sexual orientation. It is highly unlikely that they are at the extreme borders: Absolute male and heterosexual respectively within their spectra. I suppose that if Gesa pondered that fact then he would have difficulty sleeping.
I get it. The Catholic Church does not approve of LGBTQ people. Gay people are “objectively disordered.” Moreover, transgender people do not really exist. That doesn’t mean that we should invent a new form of language in order to conform to religious doctrine. Furthermore, the dogma does not license boorishness. At least not in civil, polite society.
“Calling sexual orientation and gender identity ideologies is a Christian methodology intended to marginalize LGBTQ people.”
The efforts of people like Brian S. Brown and Rossello Gesa are unlikely to result in many converts. In fact, my hypothesis is that they cause more people to turn away from religious fundamentalism than they attract.
Nevertheless, their behavior is characterized — as you can see — by the promotion of prejudice, discrimination and overall bigotry. That is harmful to a civil society and they couldn’t care less. It’s all about the doctrine for them. The dogma is worshipped as incontrovertible truth regardless of evidence to the contrary.
Some would say that the dubious “ability” to dismiss evidence makes people obtuse. I would argue, more simply, that the willingness to dismiss evidence makes people stupid. It also makes them incurious robots incapable of critical thinking.
The funny thing is that these ignorant fools consider themselves deep thinkers. Uh huh.