What King fails to realize is that when he is called a ‘faggot’ (I’m guessing thats the term used), he isn’t then likely to get beaten up in an alleyway for being gay.
Barney Frank has to take that possibility into account.
The difference between King’s supposed situation and Frank’s is one has a violent threat as its subtext.
Lawmakers trade charges on threats – Jonathan Allen and Jake Sherman – POLITICO.com

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who shouted encouragement to tea party protesters through a megaphone during the weekend, said he had been yelled at last fall by fans at a University of Iowa football game. He would not repeat the words he said were hurled at him but said the tirade was “about sexual orientation” in response to his opposition to same-sex marriage.

“I would think that Barney Frank has a thick skin. I have thick skin. If he doesn’t, I’ll give him thick-skin lessons,” King said.

Its true, Christianity’s views on sex are as divorced from reality as, well, all its other views.
Rob Asghar: Bristol Palin And The Trouble With Christian Sex

Forget the tired notion that Christians are “against” sex. They’re as wildly for it as anyone; that’s what got Bristol into trouble. Christians simply have an idealized notion of sex and relationships, one that’s increasingly divorced from the reality and the direction of the larger society.

This is a nice little, what, survey of the out-of-touch-with-personal-reality the Republican Party appear to be suffering from.

An open letter to conservatives | AmericanDad’s Blog.

Yes, its true.  She can carry a baby and think at the same time, so long as by ‘think’ you mean ‘not able to answer simple questions about politics’ or maybe ‘able to say anything that isn’t out-and-out self-serving ignorance’.
But yeah, I suppose that makes her a threat then.
What Do Sarah Palin and Jesus Christ Have In Common? – Erick’s blog – RedState

With Palin, a lot of people got it right — she’s a solid Christian, a real agent of change, a threat to the secular left and feminist movement because she can carry a baby and think at the same time, etc.

I’m not going to quote from the article because I think its worth everyone giving it a good read all the way through.
pandagon.net: Battering Is Not Losing Your Head
Two important points.
First, all domestic violence is wrong.
Second, systematic abuse is different from ‘one off’ abuse.
As a rule, the screaming heard from people about the horrors of domestic abuse isn’t about the one time a husband smacked his wife.  Its about how he does it on a regular basis, along with doing everything he can to make sure that his wife can’t leave or feels like she can’t leave.
Thats very different from what we know Ms. Nordegren is doing (though she is very very wrong as well).
MRA (Men’s Rights Advocates) are taking this as a sign that women abuse men as well.  And therefor, its all the same.  This brings us around to the idea of ‘partial fairness’ that I come back to again and again.
If there is a gang of boys from the west side of town who, every day, come around and beat the tar out of boys on the east side of town, steal their toys, money, and rip their clothes and such, and then, one day, a boy from the east side goes and steals 10 bucks from the boys on the west side, we would hardly think that the west side boys should be handled the same as the east.  That would be nuts.  Does the east side boy deserve to be punished?  Sure, but only a very flawed system would think that the systematic abuse perpetrated by the westies should be handled the same as the one-off of the easties.  Especially after years, lets say, of the powers that be allowing the westies to continue their poor behavior.
The situations are not, in fact, the same, UNLESS you decide to completely ignore the big picture.
Thats the core idea of partial fairness.  Ignore the big picture, look only at the very specific incident in question.
On the plus side, if you are the one in power, that works out pretty damn well for you.

So, for those of you who missed this, a City Councilman in Asheville, NC may lose his seat because he is an athiest and, apparently, that makes him a second class citizen.  Not just socially, but legally.
Foes say atheism disqualifies pol – BostonHerald.com

That has riled conservative activists, who cite a little-noticed quirk in North Carolina’s Constitution that disqualifies officeholders “who shall deny the being of Almighty God.”

I really don’t understand this position at all.  While I do understand the idea that the atheist movement might need to deal more politely with those of faith (’understand’, not necessarily ‘agree with’), the idea that somehow saying that one can be good without god is too strong an attack on religion is ludicrous.  It seems to me that if that is too aggressive, even the statement that its OK to be an atheist is too much of an assault.  If that is true, then saying “I believe in Jesus” is anti-semitic, or saying that “I’m a moral person even though I am an atheist” is too derogatory towards theists (which is all the ad campaign is, in fact, saying).  It sounds to me like this gentleman wants atheists to ‘keep it to themselves’.  Which would be more than OK if theists would do the same.  But, as always, religion is the trump card and anyone who says anything about alternatives is just being a jerk.  Apparently, Humanism only worries about the tender feelings of the theist, and atheists can go fuck themselves.
Atheists’ ad campaign embarrasses humanism leader

Writing in the NY Times (Dec. 9/09), Mr. Doerr commented that “…I am embarrassed by the A.H.A.’s “good without God” campaign of signs on transit vehicles. Humanists are philosophical naturalists, but more important than advertising, one item of the humanist worldview is emphasizing the many positive positions we hold in common with a wide range of religious believers. I refer to such matters as peace, civil liberties, religious freedom, the environment, social justice, democracy, women’s rights and so on.”

Which is sadder…the fact that the distinction between the Washington Times and Fox News is virtually non-existent, or that the Times has simply stopped trying to do anything resembling responsible reporting and is simply reposting from blogs without doing any fact-checking?  At what point do should you be required to no longer refer to yourself as a journalist?  When does a newspaper stop being a newspaper?
Wash. Times posts doctored transcript to claim Jennings called for mandatory “LGBT course” for teachers | Media Matters for America

Continuing her paper’s witch hunt against Department of Education official Kevin Jennings, The Washington Times’ Kerry Picket reprinted a doctored transcript — originally posted by a conservative blog — of 2008 comments by Jennings to falsely claim Jennings had said he wanted teachers to be required to “take an LGBT course” — a claim also echoed by the Fox Nation.

I often disagree with Melissa (though, more often than not, I actually agree with her), but this is just spot on.  its a response to a woman who is drowning in a mortgage she direly wants to get out of, and, of course, this woman wanted to go to the whole 9/12 thing in DC and couldn’t.  At the end, she says “I’ve paid my mortgage every month.  And I’m getting no help.  I’m just saying, Let capitalism work”

Shakesville: OFFS

The truth is that she expects her government to be helping her, as well she should. But the rightwing media machine has played three dirty tricks on people like Ms. Frankowski:

1. They’ve convinced them that the government is helping people other than them.

2. They’ve convinced them those other people are undeserving of that help, by virtue of their alleged laziness, entitlement, desire for “special rights,” immigration status, or some other bigoted bullshit.

3. They’ve convinced them, by concealing the reality that the only “people” the government helps anymore are corporations, that “capitalism” is the answer, which creates more demand for the government to capitulate to free marketeering and abandon industry regulations that protect consumers.

In other words, they’ve convinced people like Ms. Frankowski to demand that the government help them less, even as she desperately wonders why, despite playing by the rules and paying her mortgage every month, she’s still hurting and no one’s helping her out.

It would be hilarious, if it weren’t so fucking tragic.