An excerpt from Rob’s Soapbox – Foreign Terrorists Targeting LGBTQ During Pride Month:
First of all, real men wear pink . Or real men aren’t afraid to wear pink.
Now, if you disagree with that sentiment, as I did for 40-ish years of my life, I would love for you to meet my father-in-law.
He did an entire career in the U.S. Armed Forces. He also was a contractor in Iraq.
He’s a few years older than me.
Yes, I married way young, and so I’m closer in age to my wife’s parents than I am to my wife.
Deal with it.
Oh, by the way, my mother-in-law was also a lifer in the Armed Forces as well. My father-in-law would have some very interesting words for you if you wanted to tell him he wasn’t a real man because he was wearing pink, because he has no problem doing it.
Pulls off the look, too, as do I.
And maybe that’s the thing is, if you can pull it off, it works.
One of the dumber arguments that we’ve had over the last few decades in this country, asinine assignment of colors to gender, because I’ve always been curious, why doesn’t it work in the other direction?
So pink‚ “is for girls, Pink is for women, pink,” for, believe it or not, for a long time gay men. Right.
Because it’s all feminine based. Oh, but blue.
Wait.
Blues for boys? No, but. But women can have blue, too.
Women on blue. Hmhm.
That alone should point out the stupidity of certain colors are for certain genders. But it does remind me of a bunch of asinine arguments that we’ve had and I’ve engaged in.
I, man, five years, five years. I’ve railed publicly against gay marriage. I look back on it. I made the most asinine arguments. I never I never made the argument of, “gays, we’re going to ruin the sanctity of marriage‚” because the first time that came up, I think it was actually Dawn who said, “oh, really? Because heterosexuals have done such a GREAT job of honoring the sanctity of marriage!”
Yeah, that… that that argument doesn’t work, and it wasn’t biblical.
I have my, my spirituality.
I’m a deist.
For those of you who haven’t heard me talk about it, like the Founding Fathers were, the Founding Fathers were not Christian, even though far right-wing Christian Radicals want you to believe that. It’s not true, Proven by all sorts of documents that they wrote in and, transcribed in those who did believe.
And that was most of them. They were deists.
In other words, they had their own belief system, and many of them were Christians, but they didn’t say it out loud, and they certainly didn’t believe that everybody should be. And they did not find this nation on Christian principles. They found it that on a variety of principles, many of them based in religions, but religions around the world.
That’s what a deist is.
It also doesn’t sit there and tell you what you should believe, and doesn’t often share what they believe. In fact, some ideas actually kind of pull from a variety of beliefs. They might cling more to one, so a deist might believe in God, vis-à-vis, the traditional Christian, story and Jesus and all that. But he also might or she might have, take some tenets, from, from, other from other forms just of Christianity. Right?
Catholicism is a version of Christianity and so is Mormonism. But boy, are they all different. Right? And so I was certainly not arguing, even though I’ve read the Bible three times front to back, and I own five of them, and I, I look at them now and then, but I also do the same thing with the Koran and other books of, not just religious beliefs…
“Mein Kampf.”
Yeah. Hitler’s book, for those of you don’t know, read that more than once.
