Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

You can’t love your country only when you win.

White supremacy is terrorism.

My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.

Hi god, it’s us. Thanks a heap, you’re having a great week and it’s only Thursday!

Proof that we need a blogger ethics panel.

It’s easy to sit in safety and prescribe what other people should be doing.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

Take hopelessness and turn it into resilience.

Let’s delete this post and never speak of this again.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

Spilling the end game before they can coat it in frankl luntz-approved dogwhistles.

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

Why is it so hard for them to condemn hate?

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

Second rate reporter says what?

Their freedom requires your slavery.

Conservatism: there are some people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

Everyone is in a bubble, but some bubbles model reality far better than others!

When do we start airlifting the women and children out of Texas?

The arc of history bends toward the same old fuckery.

You are here: Home / Foreign Affairs / Disgusting

Reader Interactions

30Comments

  1. 1.

    Rick

    Let me be the first to say “Dobson!” And “Focus on Family!”

    Discuss in re: Iran.

    Cordially…

  2. 2.

    db

    Dobson and the fanatics have not executed anyone. Albeit, their virulent hatred produces an environment that brings us one step away from this (perhaps, making an acceptable enviroment for more lynchings in Wyomings).

    But this!?!?!?

    I am so wanting to drop a bomb on those mofos in Tehran and then march onto Colorado Springs and make sure they get the frickin’ message that they could be the next ones wearing a lasso as a neck tie if they don’t tone their shit down.

    Now that I got that out, I want to know where the administration stands on this. I want them to make a public statement on this so we know where they stand!!

  3. 3.

    lily

    Was this a legal act, an execution for a “crime”? Or was it a hate crime like the murder of a gay man in Wyoming a couple years ago?
    I’m not trying to rationalize it,of course. Anti-gay prejudice is a big part of fundmentalism, Islamic or Christian, for some reason.

  4. 4.

    Nikki

    Lily,

    It was carried out by the ruling regime, so it would appear to be a legal act.

  5. 5.

    John S.

    Anti-gay prejudice is a big part of fundmentalism, Islamic or Christian, for some reason.

    That certainly does seem to be the case. In my opinion, this is entriely due to the fact that fundamentalism by its very definition:

    fun·da·men·tal·ism (n)

    A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.

    This doesn’t indicate any particular flavor of religion or ideology. What it is characterized by – at least in this case – is an intense hatred of views that are considered secular and outside the realm of their particular religion (whatever that may be).

    The bottom line is fundamentalists all exhibit the same traits and behaviors, regardless of the adjective attached to the beginning. Islamic fundamentalists that publicly hang homosexuals are no different than Christian fundamentalists that publicly blow up abortion clinics or Jewish fundamentalists that publicly abuse Palestinians.

    They are all cut from the same cloth.

  6. 6.

    Kimmitt

    In many Islamic countries, as in the US in many states until quite recently, the commission of “homosexual acts” and variations on that theme is illegal. Of course, our old laws only mandated jail time and were very rarely used.

    These kids’ real “crime” was speaking truth to power.

    I am curious, though, John, why these particular unjust deaths affect you so much. In a world with so much daily atrocity, they seem like just another horror to me, I guess.

  7. 7.

    Mike S

    What seems to be ignored is that Iraq is adding lagnguage on Islamic law to every provision of their new constitution. This is one of those worst case scenerios for the future of Iraq. An Islamic state, similar to Iran, bodes ill for the future of the ME.

  8. 8.

    Doug

    “Anti-gay prejudice is a big part of fundmentalism, Islamic or Christian, for some reason.”

    That’s because God hates gays. Or, so I’ve been told. Why he created them, I have no idea. But that’s God for you. Inscrutable.

  9. 9.

    metalgrid

    I know someone will accuse me of being homophobic and or anti-Islamic for saying this, but here goes:

    We cannot bring these people out of their own Dark Ages and lead them to some mythical secular democracy. They need to fight their way out of it. Yes there will be casualties – much like these kids are. They need to pay with their own blood and family for it. It’s just not the same when it’s my family that’s paying the price for their (general) freedom.

    Islam is a young religion. It’s current position is a close match to the Dark Ages of Europe. It’s proponents will need to find themselves out of it or perish. The sacrifice should be their own, not ours. I tend to think of Islam as a young kid who still finds special joy in burning small critters using a magnifying glass. The religion has yet to achieve maturity and give birth to a renaisance or enlightenment.

  10. 10.

    Pan is a non...

    This is truly fucked up, but I don’t see what we can do about it. For all his reasonable characteristics, Andrew Sullivan is deluded if he thinks the west is engaged in a war against ‘Islamofascists’. We can use our laws to their fullest extent to crack down on hate crimes within our borders, but suggesting some ambitious global war based on notions of liberty and human rights is about as naive as the left can get.

  11. 11.

    james richardson

    i have gay friends iran…. they say it’s hell there…. these two KIDS were publicly hanged as a spectacle… in this day and age where anything close to this in this country would spark a national outcry, in iran two gay kids are used as a public spectacle…but it’s a good thing we took out saddam and left iran’s tyrannical leaders in charge… boy it’s a good thing they didn’t hang an oil executive or we might have gotten upset.

  12. 12.

    John S.

    his is one of those worst case scenerios for the future of Iraq. An Islamic state, similar to Iran, bodes ill for the future of the ME.

    This is truly the greatest irony of the conservative notion that Iraq would be a bastion of Dmeocracy in the ME. Because naturally, if Iraq does turn out to be an excellent model for Democracy, then that means Iraqis are free to choose whatever form of government they desire. And if that happens to be an Islamic state, then that is the will of the people. That doesn’t necessarily bode ill for the ME as much as it will bode ill for America’s continued relations in the region.

    But, I don’t recall there being any caveat to the concept of Democracy that would require American approval.

  13. 13.

    p.lukasiak

    Sullivan writes:

    And I’m saddened that more gay organizations haven’t rallied to the war against Muslim religious fanatics. This is our war too.

    y’know, if we really were at “war” with Muslim religious fanatics, I’m sure that most gay organizations would be 100% behind that effort.

    But we’re not. Many of our muslim “allies” have extremely repressive laws against gays, but they remain our allies. And insofar as we gay folks are fighting our own “war” here at home against an administration that exploits homophobia for political gain at every opportunity, its far more important for American gays and lesbians to deal with the threat to their own freedoms, than to selectively focus on Islamic regimes where institutionalized homophobia is only one reason to find them objectionable.

  14. 14.

    Kimmitt

    And if that happens to be an Islamic state, then that is the will of the people.

    For a democracy to be more than a tyrrany of the majority, certain forms need to be followed. That said, anyone who really thinks that we had planned to let Iraq decide to do whatever it wanted with itself can contact me at the homepage above to discuss a bridge I’ve recently acquired and need to unload — cheap.

  15. 15.

    texas dem

    My loyalty is easy to buy. John Cole has got my back, and it makes me feel good.

    Wish my Limbaugh-holic dad felt the same way.

  16. 16.

    Steve

    We can’t fix Iran and their backward ways unless we somehow find another batallion of National Guard Reservists to invade them with. But what’s troubling is that we have bolloxed the reconstruction in Iraq so badly that they are turning to Iran for help with their own security. And politically, they’re drawing ever closer.

    I thought all the neighboring countries were supposed to catch the magical Democracy Bug by now. A different storyline might be playing out.

  17. 17.

    John S.

    For a democracy to be more than a tyrrany of the majority, certain forms need to be followed.

    I think at its most basic level, Democracy is tyrrany of the majority. However, I am curious as to what “forms” you think need to be followed in order to have a Democracy exceed these lowered expectations.

    And I certainly am not espousing that the administration really expected to let Iraq do whatever it wanted with itself, but therein lies the irony I pointed out. Or perhaps, it would be better to term it as hypocrisy, since publicly we declare we are fighting for Iraq to have freedom and Democracy, when really the administration wants to enforce strict limits to that freedom…

    But as the saying goes, you can’t have it both ways.

  18. 18.

    Sojourner

    “I think at its most basic level, Democracy is tyrrany of the majority.”

    It depends. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are intended to protect the minority. Unfortunately, too many people in this country don’t understand that.

  19. 19.

    John S.

    Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are intended to protect the minority.

    True enough. The very existence of the Senate is proof that our founders were concerned about minority rights. That is American History 101.

    But remember, we are not a true Democracy – certainly not the parliamentary flavor, anyway. We are a Federal Republic with a strong tradition of Democracy, which means we invest far more power in our executive branch than true Democratic institutions do (read as we are more Roman than Greek). That is a very large distinction that many forget when the word “democracy” is bandied about.

  20. 20.

    BinkyBoy

    Pan outted himself with this single comment:
    We can use our laws to their fullest extent to crack down on hate crimes within our borders, but suggesting some ambitious global war based on notions of liberty and human rights is about as naive as the left can get.
    I’d sure like to know what “left” Andrew Sullivan belongs to, it sure isn’t the left I’m familiar with. Maybe pan is so far right that everything is left of him. I’m pretty sure the view from there is pretty dang messed up.

  21. 21.

    Steve

    The philosophical point is, if we ensure that Iraqi women are given the vote, and then they vote for a government that limits womens’ rights, is that a good result or a bad result?

    The idea that a representative democracy necessarily means everyone has rights is hopelessly naive. Our own country has evolved towards that point only over the course of centuries. And I don’t see how the answer can be anything other than saying that equality would be nice for Iraq, but they need to get there themselves.

    If we give the Iraqi people sovereignty, but then we start requiring them to do certain things with it, that’s not really sovereignty. So what other option is there?

  22. 22.

    neil

    Now that’s the kind of international standards on execution of minors that James Dobson can really get behind!

  23. 23.

    Sojourner

    But remember, we are not a true Democracy – certainly not the parliamentary flavor, anyway. We are a Federal Republic with a strong tradition of Democracy, which means we invest far more power in our executive branch than true Democratic institutions do (read as we are more Roman than Greek). That is a very large distinction that many forget when the word “democracy” is bandied about.

    Point well made. Thanks.

  24. 24.

    Kimmitt

    I’d say we’re equally Roman and Greek, with an awful lot of Locke and Hobbes thrown in for good measure.

    That said, I was of course speaking colloquially when saying “democracy” — referring to any form of government, be it more of a democracy or a republic, in which the power of the state is explicitly derived from its capacity to represent its citizens, and in which the category of “citizen” encompasses nearly all of the denizens of that state.

  25. 25.

    John S.

    One HUGE difference between a Republic and a Democracy – as I have previously pointed out – is that a Republic places far more power in its executive branch than a Democracy does.

    If we were a Parliamentary Democracy, there would be the much greater possibility that Bush could be removed from office under a vote of no confidence based on his numerous “errors” in the runup to war. This sharply contrasts with the extremely difficulty we would have removing him from office under our Federal Republic, where it is highly unlikely he will lose his post regardless of his behavior.

    Unless he gets oral sex from an aide and lies about it. Then, he’s in big trouble.

  27. 27.

    Pan is a non...

    Sullivan is a New Republic type liberal hawk. I’m not that familiar with his economic stances, but culturally speaking, he is very much a progressive. I don’t see how I outed myself as anything, since I am a liberal democrat.

  28. 28.

    Peter T.

    Is there some substantiation for this photo and claim? The link is to a docment in Arabic put out (purportedly) by an Iranian students organization. The IP address of the web site is assigned to a Canadian ISP. Given Iran’s many enemies, I’d think if they were hanging gay children this information would have been out long ago, and would have been documented by major news organizations and government agaencies.

  29. 29.

    SengF

    Peter T.:
    Unfortunately such events almost never register with the mainstream media, despite the fact that such sentences are quite common and are indeed carried out. As a side effect, the documentation by news agencies is quite poor.

    Some more information can be found at:
    http://www.iranian.com/Letters/1999/September/gay.html
    http://www.globalgayz.com/g-iran.html

    I suspect, that this would only become ‘news’, if someone from a western country where arrested and/or executed in Iran for being gay.

  30. 30.

    Peter T.

    SengF

    The links you give provide nothing in the way of documentation. I’m troubled that a photo supposedly of two young men about to be hanged for being gay is being accepted as such based on little supporting evidence. Frankly I can’t imagine the NY Times, for instance, not being all over a story like this, particularly accompanied by photos. I recall a story about an adulterous couple being stoned to death by the Taliban being featured prominently in the MSM. If this photo is legit I want to know. If not, I also want to know.
    As to gays being subject to criminal sanctions – I have be no doubt that in most countries of the world this is still the case.

Comments are closed.