Preacher with Man-Boobs wants to outlaw Woman-Boobs.

This skidmark on the underwear of Christianity clearly has a great rack:

But having a nice pair up there isn’t enough validation for this preacherman. Evidently, he has an issue with female chests-perhaps because he secretly envies them? A sort of competitive instinct at work?

Whatever the reasons, this Fundagelical nutbar hates female nudity, and makes no bones about it.

An Ohio pro-family anti-abortion activist wants to ban all public nudity, including public breastfeeding, not just because he has a problem with female nudity, but because he’s convinced that it leads to “gay pride.”

Patrick Johnson, who’s the director of Personhood Ohio, called for a ban on all public nudity after topless dancers from a gentleman’s club protested at his church in support of strip clubs. Johnson’s church has campaigned against strip clubs and harassed customers for years.

“I am sick that women can legally bare their breasts to children and to married men against their will in Ohio,” Johnson wrote on his Facebook page after the protest.  He then told ABC, “I think when we allow women to flaunt their sexuality to the public, flaunt their nudity to the public, it’s harmful to marriage.”

First of all, “skin” is not “sexuality”. Whether it’s ol’ Patty Johnson that is mowing the grass while shirtless, flaunting his C-cup Man-boobies, or a suburban housewife who mows her grass shirtless because it’s too hot to do otherwise doesn’t make the lawn mowing a sex act. It’s just people taking care of the yard.

Nor is breastfeeding a sex act: if it were, a lot of people would be guilty of incest. Nope, it’s just a cheap and healthy way to feed an infant.

Male skin is not inherently less sexual than female skin (ask any gay man if you don’t believe it). Female skin is not necessarily sexier than male skin, either. It’s just the stuff that keeps all of our internal organs from falling onto the floor at inopportune moments. Hiding it serves no purpose.

Now, in this cretin’s diseased, violent, paranoid little brain, perhaps skin is sexualized. But since the rest of us are fortunate enough to not live in his brain, its contents should not dictate our actions. If he hates women and/or their breasts, he should Just. Not. Look. At. Them.

He has all the boobies he could ever want already, anyhow.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Grammys to Right-Wing Fundagelicals: “In Your Face”.

That, friends, was the first Grammy awards show in years that was worth watching. Hoo boy, somebody must have grown a pair, and allowed some artists to take some risks for a damned change. From Steven Tyler singing Smokey Robinson in front of Smokey Robinson, to Taylor Swift bleeding all over the piano, to Macklemore and Ryan Lewis’ stinging bitch-slap to the major labels, some truly excellent moments occurred. Note to awards show producers near and far: safe sucks, risk rocks. Learn from this telecast.

But the best part wasn’t purely musical: it was the mass marriage of straight, LGBT, and multi-racial couples at the 2/3 mark of the broadcast. A good rap/gospel mashup number set up the ceremony, and the rap itself was a huge thumb in the eye to all the homophobes who are such an affliction on society.

There were some awesome musical moments, too: Nelson, Haggard, Kristofferson, and Shelton laid out a reminder of what country music used to be before it turned into classic rock sung through nasal cavities; Metallica with a classical pianist; and Imagine Dragons with a helluva hip hop artist, totally melting down the stage; those were just a few of the great musical moments of a rarely-watchable awards show. But it’s not what everyone will be talking about this morning.

And that’s a good thing, overall. Music isn’t just ear candy, you know: it’s part of the zeitgeist, and is as much influenced by as it is influential within it. Last night a few thousand music industry professionals, some of them pretty damned influential, all spoke with one voice. And what that voice said was:”up yours” to the regressive, repressive, and hate-ridden “Christian Conservative” community that wants us all to party like it’s 1499.

The courts, the people, and society as a whole are moving towards a rational, sane, and Constitutional policy on marriage equality. The Grammys added their considerable weight to the discussion, and it’s gonna be a fun week as the “Republicans”, Wingnuts, and Fundies go into full freakout mode, blathering, bullying, lying, shrieking, and generally acting like they can still bluster their way to victory.

That worked for a while, when the majority of the country tried to be civilized when dealing with these Repub barbarians. But people are getting tired of that losing approach. Last night, we saw what happens when we stand up for what is right: great art, great television, good politics, and oh yeah, a ton of money got made, all while serving the greater good and defending our Constitutional freedoms.

In your face, Fundies. In your face while dancing. In your face while we turn the volume up. Because you were right, back in the 50’s and 60’s: rock music IS revolutionary, and it WILL destroy your hateful, bigoted, backwards, hypocritical, lying society. In your face, boyo, because that is a very good thing.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Your vote matters, example five gazillion and three: Gay Marriage in Virginia.

The Democratic candidate won the Virginia Attorney General’s contest last fall by 163 votes, out of 2.2 million ballots cast. That means if a couple hundred Dems had stayed home, or a couple hundred more Repubs hadn’t, the “Republican” candidate would have won. Such a teeny tiny number of people deciding to vote made all the difference.

And because of those few extra Dems, gay marriage will soon be legal in Virginia. (Marriage Equality is a better term, so we will roll with it henceforth.) That is because new AG Mark Herring will fight to get rid of Virginia’s anti-equality law. You read that right: the new AG says the state’s marriage law is unconstitutional.

So tell us again that your vote doesn’t matter, please, do tell. Whether you are a Big Government Repub who wants the the State to monitor your bedroom activities, or a Small Government Dem who thinks that you have a right to privacy, your vote counts. Your individual vote counts. Your choices matter, especially when you choose to vote or not vote.

And because a very small number of freedom-loving people chose to get out and vote last November, Virginia will soon have more freedom for its dwellers than it does today. Marriage Equality is on the way in that state. You need no more proof, Gentle Reader: your vote matters.

So get the f*** out there and vote in the next election, so you can have the government you want. The freedom you save will very likely be your own.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Republicans admit it: they want to “regulate” your “sexual relationships”.

And they say government has the right to do so. In this link, the “Republican” government of Michigan says it straight out, with no shame or moderation:

“One of the paramount purposes of marriage in Michigan — and at least 37 other states that define marriage as a union between a man and a woman — is, and has always been, to regulate sexual relationships between men and women so that the unique procreative capacity of such relationships benefits rather than harms society.”

Got that? They are saying that they have the right to be bedroom police. And this is not some random pundit flapping his yap; this is an official court filing by attorneys for the state of Michigan. (Never mind that the Constitution says nothing at all about Government having such power.)

Even the most Leftish of all  Liberal Dems haven’t been THAT f***ing intrusive (pun intended). And these “Republicans” say that they are in favor of smaller government??? Bulls***. It doesn’t get more Big Brother than monitoring our bedrooms.

Plus, they are saying that procreation is the purpose of marriage. Mr. and Mrs. Blunt and Cranky can’t have more kids. Does that make our marriage null and void? Hell, some married couples can’t even have sex at all. How about any elderly couple –  is divorce mandatory?

We’ve heard this tripe before, from politicos trying to make a headline or get some free media time. But now, the Elephants are trying to make it the law of the land. If that doesn’t scare you, p*** you off, or both…well, you’re either a closet pervert peeping Tom bedroom cop yourself, or you’re just not paying any attention at all.

Vote these Big-Government “Republican” preeves out of office while you still have the right to do so. Unless you really like having somebody watch your every move, including what you do in bed.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

WTF, Ohio?

Ohio, a Purple State that was stupid enough to elect a 100% Red government, has been dealing with the consequences of that idiotic decision. And so it goes today, when Ohio’s AG has decided it is his Christian duty to harass, abuse, and discriminate against a legally-married couple, one of whom is about to die, because they are gay. And only because they are gay.

As noted here, a Federal judge ordered Ohio not to do this. And AG DeWine is telling them to pound sand. Of all the inhuman, unconstitutional, jackass things to do. An Attorney General should know better.

Because of this hateful course of action, a man may not be allowed a decent burial in his family plot. General DeWine has done some great work on human trafficking, sexual assault, pill mills, and other criminal matters, and had been praised (including on this blog) for so doing. But this action is beyond the pale.

The AG will waste taxpayer money, harm an Ohio family, go against the wishes of the local government and defy a federal judge, and will lose in the end. WTF?

Really, WTF, Ohio?

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Update: DeWine is not appealing the TRO, so some people think that means he is not out to shaft these poor guys. However, if Mr. Arthur lives past early August, he WILL fight a preliminary and permanent injunction to allow Arthur, who is in hospice care, to be listed as married on his death certificate and Obergefell to be listed as his surviving spouse.

So, he’s still a hateful, discriminatory dick for doing this.

Under Prop 8, My Straight Marriage Would Not Be Legal

Yesterday, at the Supreme Court, the backers of California’s gay-hating piece of crap Proposition 8 (which outlaws marriage between people of the same gender) came up with this ludicrous bit of specious nonsense legal rationale to justify their hatred of gays support of the law: they claim that the only reason to get married is to make babies and raise them. The Supremes (literally) mocked this notion and the audience laughed at Charles Cooper, the poor schlub who had to try to sell the Court on this idea.

Mr. and Mrs. Blunt and Cranky are not on their first marriage: indeed, their children were pretty much grown and had flown the nest by the time they crankily tied the knot. And they cannot have more children (although to be honest, at this time of life, grandbabies are a lot more fun anyway). So, since procreation is the purpose of marriage, this would seem to mean that this marriage between two straight Americans should be illegal according to the Prop 8 Backers.

When pressed by the Justices, Mr. Cooper could not talk his way out the hole he dug with his legal reasoning. Which means that whether you are gay or straight, if you can’t make babies, the backers of California’s Existing Constitutional Law are saying that your marriage is illegal.

Fortunately, the Cranky Fam does not reside in Californ-ai-ay, but in Ohio. Unfortunately, Ohio also has outlawed same-sex marriages, and for all we know, the backers of that law think the same way as the whackadoodles who are backing the Left Coast Law. Which would mean that millions of Americans could wind up getting ripped off by the IRS, Insurance companies, and lawyers; just like gay folk get ripped off right now.

Think you don’t have a dog in the same-sex marriage fight? Think again, Gentle Reader. This type of reasoning, if allowed to stand, could put straight people in the same second-class-citizen status that gay people presently occupy in our nation.

Yes, maybe you should care because of basic human kindness, Christian charity or some such reasoning. This writer does. But let’s say you don’t give two s***s about the Gays, Lesbians, and Transgender individuals who are your fellow citizens: you should at least be aware that after these thinly-disguised Puritans take away the rights of GLBT people, they will take away yours next.

Want your marriage rights protected? Stand up for the marriage rights of others. As Thomas Jefferson said, “If we do not all hang together, we shall all surely hang separately”.

Mr. B & C

If You Oppose Gay Marriage, You Are a Hateful, Hypocritical Bigot. Period.

The plaintiff in this week’s DOMA (“Defense Of Marriage Act”) case that hits the Supremes this Wednesday had $363,000.00  stolen from her by the government because, and only because, she was gay.  No other reason. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Windsor

You see, Ms. Windsor (an early computer scientist with IBM) and her partner got married legally, and their marriage was recognized by the State of New York. But the Feds don’t recognize such unions, and after her wife died, she was obliged to fork over a third of a million dollars that she would not have had to pay had she been a straight married woman. Think of it as a “Gay Tax”.

If you are a Republican who believes in lower taxes and smaller government, you cannot also support DOMA, because it imposes unjust taxes on certain citizens, and is a result of Big Brother governmental intrusion into our private lives. If you are a Repub, therefore, and  support DOMA, you’re a hateful, hypocritical bigot,

If you are a Christian whose church has tax-empt status  and you  support DOMA, you’re a hateful, hypocritical bigot who is making someone else pay your bills for you. Look up “usury” in the Bible and see what it says.

If you are a Libertarian and  support DOMA, you’re a  hateful, hugely hypocritical bigot.

If you are black and support DOMA, you’re you’re a  hateful, hugely hypocritical bigot who has no memory of anything that happened prior to this century. Read up on the Civil RIghts struggle, slavery, and such.

No matter who you are in our country, this writer is pretty sure you don’t like the idea of Uncle Sam jacking people out of thousands of dollars. Unless, of course, they are part of a group that you don’t like, in which case you’re OK with it.

Which makes you a hateful, hypocritical bigot.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Another Example of Smart Policy: Jim Nabors Gets Married

“So,” the Cranky One hears you ask, “what does an actor’s wedding have to do with policy”?. Quite a lot in this case. You see, Jim Nabors is gay, and has been in a relationship for 38 years.

38 years of being denied insurance benefits, access in emergencies, all the basic rights that married straights like this writer take for granted. Full disclosure: Mr. & Mrs. Blunt and Cranky have been married for a far shorter period of time than have Mr. and Mr. Nabors. But we have more legal rights than they have had. How messed up is that?

True to form, the legendary actor did not whine or preach. He just flew to Seattle and got hitched . Why Seattle? Because the smart folks in Washington State legalized equal marriage rights for gay folk. That is where the policy piece comes in.

You see, the Constitution says not one word about gays. So any law that discriminates against them is (you guessed ‘er, Chester) unconstitutional. More and more citizens, states, localities and jurists are acknowledging this simple fact and updating policies to reflect the law.

Bravo to The Nabors, Seattle, and any other people or places that live out the “created equal” phrase in our founding documents.

Mr. B & C