Ryan Anderson: Houston’s LGBT Rights Law Would Impose “Ruinous Liability” On Anti-Gay Christians

“HERO would impose new, and potentially ruinous liability on innocent citizens for alleged ‘discrimination’ based not on objective traits, but on subjective and unverifiable identities. HERO would further increase government interference in markets, potentially discouraging economic growth and job creation. And, as to issues surrounding ‘gender identity’ and ‘transgender’ teachers, students and employees, HERO could require education and employment policies concerning schoolhouse, locker room, and workplace conditions that undermine common sense.

“But the damage of HERO is not only economic. It also threatens the freedom of citizens, individually and in associations, to affirm their religious or moral convictions—convictions such as that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, and that maleness and femaleness are objectively rooted in biology, and should be valued and affirmed, not rejected or altered. Under HERO, acting reasonably on these beliefs could be made illegal.” – Ryan T. Anderson, writing for the Heritage Foundation.

  • canoebum

    Words spoken by a man who clearly has little understanding of the complexity of the human mind and character.

  • Michael Smith

    “based not on objective traits, but on subjective and unverifiable identities.”

    Apparently whether you like dick isn’t verifiable and is subjective.

    • zhera

      I’d say religious belief is more subjective and less verifiable than sexual orientation…

  • zhera

    Is Houston the first city to enact such an ordinance? Do the anti-HEROs have any examples of how such an ordinance will ruin business and life of innocents?

    Or could it be that their only ‘innocents’ are people like Dim Kim, Cottonelle, the Kleins, etc?

    Business boom is a given fact when equality is enacted. But these people are allergic to facts.

    • Similar laws didn’t seem to hurt, Dallas, Ft Worth or Austin.

  • O Biscoitinho

    Fine. The moment Christians start lobbying to get religion removed from anti-discrimination laws, we can talk. Until then, they’re just asking for “special rights.”

    • JoeNCA

      Yeah, but THAT would be “persecution.”

  • crewman

    [HERO] threatens the freedom of citizens, individually and in associations, to affirm their religious or moral convictions[….]

    You can’t kill your disobedient children. You can’t stone adulterers to death. Etc. We are not a theocracy. Your religious rights end where they start trampling over other people’s civil rights.

    • JoeNCA

      I always wonder, what religion requires you to fire LGBT people?

      • NedFlaherty

        These Christianist sects typically (but not always) require the wholesale oppression of LGBT people, especially LGBTs inside the sect, and often even LGBTs outside the sect (of other faiths or no faith):

        SECT TYPES (partial list)
        Christian nationalists
        Christian supremacists

        DENOMINATIONS (partial list)
        Roman Catholics
        Eastern Orthodox
        Oriental Orthodox
        Jehovah’s Witnesses
        New Apostolic Reformationists

    • These Christianists who are anti-LGBT have *no* morality- even under their Bible, they will be condemned to be numbered among the goats and cast into the fiery pit because of the things they do to people who are different from them.

  • Justin

    Being enable to discriminate in employment and public accommodation = ruinous liability? How awful for the poor dears.

  • Judas Peckerwood

    He misspelled “lie ability”.

  • b

    Not harming a gay person because of a single trait? Eye color, too? Let’s go by Sharia law as well? How many religious roads, un-American roads, would you like to go down. Let’s just get arbitrary religious thinkding OUT of the American workplace, and let it be private belief, said, but not acted upon to hate other Americans? Let’s do that.

  • crewman

    None of the economic calamities he is faux-worried about have occurred anywhere else where LGBT citizens have rights, including run-away successful places like the California and Silicon Valley.

    • Gianni

      Let’s get real. We all know that actual facts and evidence and actualities don’t matter at all. Proof? What’s that? All they need is to put whatever frightening situations their pea brains can dream up into a speech and scream it all over and as often as possible. Facts don’t matter; nightmares do.

    • Soren456

      A “ruinous liability” is actually imposed on business, medical and education institutions which, if the repeal passes, will suddenly find that they can’t attract first-rate applicants for their open positions because people don’t want to live in that atmosphere—or raise their kids in it.

  • Wynter Marie Starr

    And by “acting reasonably” are we to assume that means you get to fire people for innate traits? Or perhaps beat the shit out of them. Or maybe deny them housing. How about killing them for failing to be what you require them to be? Just what is reasonable with insane people who believe in talking snakes and the like?

    • marshlc

      that’s the part that leapt out at me – “acting reasonably” for someone who disapproved of gays, would mean, one would think, something like “not inviting gay people to your home for dinner” and “not congratulating gay people on their marriages”.

      Firing people, throwing them out of their homes, and not allowing them to pee are not reasonable actions.

      • Wynter Marie Starr

        Unfortunately, given past rhetoric spewed by religious extremists, we both know it doesn’t mean anything as innocuous as not inviting gay people to your home for dinner. Given free rein, these people would not only see gays jailed, thrown out of homes and jobs, but would see every last gay person and their supporters executed. We have their own words as evidence. Since they are always so big on speaking the “truth,” I believe them and take them at their word.

        • marshlc

          Yeah, sure. But his wording was, specifically, “acting reasonably”.

          Most LGBT people would, I suspect, have little problem with anyone “acting reasonably” – the problem is that the actions are so often so far from reasonable.

          • Wynter Marie Starr

            Well, wanting to fire people for being gay is not reasonable. Refusing housing to LGBT people is not reasonable. Refusing to provide gay people with services because they are gay is not reasonable.

            This is certainly not about bathrooms. This is about proving they still have power and it’s about their egos and their imagined superiority. They don’t act reasonably and I wouldn’t expect them to start now. If you want to study an artist, you must study his or her body of work. In this case, studying what they consider reasonable leads one to the opposite conclusion. But as religious extremists indulge in warped thinking, perhaps all the things I’ve mentioned seem reasonable to them.

            It’s ridiculous the LGBT community must fight this battle on so many battlefields. All so a group of people can have a target to rally their idiot supports to fleece.

  • RossPDX

    Since HERO is an acronym for Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, I hereby dub Ryan Anderson the Village Idiot, Lying Liar And Ignorant Numbskull.

    • HanyBaal


    • IamM

      heh, VILLIAN. Excellent.

    • rusty57

      Clever boy.

  • ColdCountry

    “HERO could require education…”

    Oh, well, we wouldn’t want to do that….

    • David Walker

      That jumped out at me, too. God forbid anybody learn anything.

  • Sean



    • Sean


      • Sean


        • Sean


  • Six Pins Delores

    I love hearing a more than willing bottom moan, very much!

  • bkmn

    They are getting desperate, aren’t they?

  • JustDucky

    “maleness and femaleness are objectively rooted in biology”

    Isn’t it funny how these people suddenly love them some science as soon as the topic of trans* people comes up?

    And Ryan, I couldn’t agree more. Gender is objectively rooted in biology. But “biology” is objectively rooted in systematic study through observation and experiment. And systematic study through observation and experiment has confirmed that trans* people are right about themselves and that you’re completely full of shit.

    • vorpal

      I also love how they call sexual orientation a “subjective and unverifiable identity.”

      I can prove pretty easily and concretely that I’m gay. Just put me naked in a room with a hot guy to make out with, and I think you’ll note a definite physiological response in my pants. Repeat the experiment with any number of women, and you won’t. How much more objectively verifiable could this be?

      Religious affiliation, on the other hand? Completely subjective and unverifiable.

      • ChrisMorley

        Now are you ‘naked’ or ‘in your pants’ with this hot guy? He seems to have scrambled your brains or caused a wardrobe malfuntion!

        • vorpal

          I could easily be convinced to be either :-).
          But the thought of Ryan Anderson seeing me naked is a bit of a boner killer.

          • Piet

            Every time I look at his photo, I go through the same question in my head: would I hate-fuck this guy? He’s not ugly on the outside but I’m afraid the ugly inside would be the boner killer for me. Guess I’d have to put a ball gag on him.

          • Gest2016

            I guarantee you Ryan is a power bottom — or as they call them “bottomless bottoms” — there isn’t enough trouser beef in the world to satisfy this lustful cock monster and the void that he’s trying to fill with the lies his religion has taught him. There’s only deity that will truly slake Ryan’s thirst and he’s living in my pants.

          • Christopher Smith

            No, no, no, even a gag wouldn’t help. And the ugly inside shows through all too clearly to the outside.

      • Treg Brown

        Nailed it.

        It’s almost as if “subjective and unverifiable identity.” could be easily applied to christianists, and used by bigoted asshats as an excuse to exercise ‘personal and heartfelt religious beliefs’ to restrict human rights.

        Projection is strong with these people.

        • j.martindale

          Funny. I first read that as “personal and hurtful religious beliefs.” Wonder why?

          • Amanda Wagner

            .like Margaret answered I didn’t realize that somebody can make $25678 in 4 weeks on the web….A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, $17k Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over $83, p/h..Learn More right Here….
            ➤➤➤ http://GlobalEmploymentAtHomeTopReportsPointStart/Get/$97hourly… ❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦

          • agcons

            Flagged for spam.

        • Mihangel apYrs

          the correct term (to be promulgated) is “cry-stains”

      • zhera

        I think he means that trans* is ‘subjective and unverifiable’. As in, there’s no such thing as trans* and it’s just people who decide one day that they’re gonna be the opposite sex, for shits and giggles (and stalking children in bathrooms).

        Transphobia is the new homophobia and the fundies will fight this just as much and even more than they’ve fought gay equality.

        • GayOldLady

          They absolutely will fight it “just as much and even more”. Anyone who isn’t heterosexual scares the bejeebus out of them.

        • lymis

          The thing is that every one of these assholes who make unsupportable claims that things like sexual orientation and gender Identity are not “objective and verifiable” and therefore deserve no legal recognition, much less protection, are usually the first to demand legal protections and special deference given to religious beliefs – which NOBODY is even trying to claim are objective or verifiable by anyone but the person holding them.

        • Buford

          i think the most effective and simplistic counter to this ‘restroom panic’ is pointing out to these assholes that they are demanding that Chaz Bono use the ladies’ room and than Carmen Carrera use the men’s room.

      • david fairfield

        If you’re naked and we can still see a response in your pants, then that is some kind of magic that I would very much like to see!

        • Rumor has it that it’s so impressive that even if his pants are in another room tents will be pitched…just sayin’

    • Buford

      Again, worth pointing out that being gay is an innate characteristic, but being religious is a lifestyle choice. Yet, ironically, the religious folks are demanding laws which protect their rights over the rights of gay Americans.

      The mind reels.

    • BostonDotTom

      Yeah, they’re only interested in their very simplistic understanding of biology too. No matter how many times I ask people who make that argument whether someone with CAIS is a man or a woman, they never give an answer. 🙁 I really wish one of them would at least try.

      • RoFaWh

        ITYM “very simplistic misunderstanding of biology”

  • Oscarlating Wildely

    Oh, Ryan, put a cock in it.

    • Robincho

      IF you can find one whose owner would agree to it…

    • BudClark


  • anne marie in philly

    GOOD! I want these fuckers outta business!

  • LovesIrony

    ryan, sweetie your anti gay posturing doesn’t hide your homosexuality. How long do you think people will believe you just haven’t found the right woman yet?

    • Ron Robertson

      Every time I see his photo, for some reason the idea comes up that he so badly wants to be dominated by another man.

  • teeveedub

    Considering there has been no “ruinous liability” in other places where LGBT ordinances are in effect, what makes Houston so different? Is it the highly sensitive nature of the Xtians there? Are LGBT people in Houston more litigious?

    More bullshit from the Krazy Kristian Kabal.

    • Gianni

      Seems to me it’s not so much the LGB part. It’s the T part that scares the children. It’s also the T part that they are and will use to fuel the crazy objections.

      • Oscarlating Wildely

        For now, yes. They’ve moved past children’s illustrated books about Daddy’s roommate to bathrooms. Yes, where people take a dump is now the official lingua franca of the Right Wing.

        • BearEyes

          Everyone poops.

      • Friday

        Frankly, children aren’t afraid of trans people unless they’re *taught* to be.

        • JoeNCA

          Carefully taught.

      • Herald

        I am not convinced the T part scares the children. Actually, children are quite accepting unless they are taught otherwise by adults. It is the christianists that are positively freaking out.

        • vorpal

          Exactly. The only reason the children likely freak out is because they see their parents freaking out.

        • BillyDee4

          My two-year-old son saw a picture of a family friend in drag. He asked three times who it was. We told him it was Uncle John. Finally he said, “Oh, he’s a very nice lady.” Kids adapt.

      • IamM

        I think it’s more that T is still considered ‘weird’ enough that they can use it as a scare tactic against the whole LGBTQQ + friends, familes, and allies shebang.

      • JoeNCA

        Richard Carlbom, the head of Houston Unites, put it perfectly: Anti-gays are doing the same thing they always have been, misaligning LGBT people with pedophiles and sex offenders.

        The difference now is more people now know someone who’s gay or lesbian, but don’t know someone who’s trans. so that’s the only ones they are going after.

        Of course they’d do the same to us if they could get away with it.

    • Six Pins Delores

      It might be a Texas thing.

    • ChrisMorley

      Here’s the facts about that ‘ruinous liability’ imposed by HERO:

      Sec. 17-64. Criminal penalties for violation.
      (a) A person who violates a provision of this article commits a criminal offense, a
      Class C misdemeanor. A person is guilty of a separate criminal offense for each day or part of a day during which a violation is committed, continued, or permitted.
      (b) A criminal offense under this article is punishable in municipal court by a fine
      of not less than $250.00 nor more than $500.00. In no event shall the aggregate of all
      fines relating to the same complaint filed by a complainant exceed $5000.00.

    • Arkansan

      Everything’s bigger in Texas, including the lies.

      • Christopher Smith

        Except the family jewels, LOL! Why do you think they have to have such big GUNS?

    • JoeNCA

      Just last year, a similar ordinance in Dallas passed by a 3-to-1 margin.

      What happened since then is Obergefell, and the Christian Right has been just absolutely itching for a win, and so they’re going after even far more popular antidiscrimination ordinances.

      Tilting at windmills and all that.

  • TheManicMechanic

    Oh, how I wish that were the case.

  • Randy Left Brooklyn

    These people who claim such ruinous liability should have to show just how much it has caused in the states that enacted the laws so far. Because the number would be pretty close to zero. The reason why you never hear about the impact so far is because it is very hard to win a suit based upon sexual orientation even in states where it is already the law.

  • greenmanTN

    Based on science and the history of all known human civilizations, we KNOW that a segment of the population is going to be homosexual. OK, you can’t predict exactly where they will come from in the same you know where people of certain races will result, but it’s just REALITY that gay people exist and it’s not going to go away to suit you, your religious leaders, or your religious text. So given that fact of life, why not protect them/us?

    • Gil

      Spermatozoons go in and screaming red gay babies sometimes come out. Who can tell how that happens ?

      • greenmanTN

        I like to think a little magic is involved! 😀

  • Randy Left Brooklyn

    Why is he so pissed off? Is it because they closed is favorite club in Peru?

  • hiker_sf

    Girlfriend needs to get laid.

    • Oscarlating Wildely

      So incredibly true. Seriously, even a good rimming would do. Someone, anyone, take one for the team and help shut this guy up.

    • BudClark


    • fuzzybits

      Girlfriend needs some xanax.

  • geoffalnutt

    “ruinous liability”. I think we’re talking about money, here. Griftng/scamming money. The well’s drying up, Christers!!

  • Yeah but it won’t impose anything on the non-homophobic Christians that supported the law. Which is most of the people who supported the law, given that this is Texas we’re talking about.

    And given you fuckers are talking about laws that legalize murdering me, I have no sympathy.

  • TheManicMechanic

    Doth protesting too much again.

  • That’s price you pay for discrimination. If Christians insist on discriminating they will face criminal charges, pay large fines, lose their businesses. That’s the law. Live with it!

    • JoeNCA

      Exactly. A gay business owner would receive the exact same fine for doing so to a Christian.

  • Scott Holcomb

    Let me lay it out for you: if HERO doesn’t pass in the City of Houston then a national boycott will be called. Houston citizens will suddenly see their city depleted of income. Corporations, companies, small businesses will pull their events and put them elsewhere. Online there will be no sales, no sales tax, no shipping. On the tourist side hotels will go empty, tourist income will disappear. Houston taxes will go up, city services will be curtailed for lack of funding and Houston will become a ghost town.

    Is that what you want Houston? If so, we can sure give it to you.

    • DisT

      If we were that powerful, this ballot wouldn’t be there in the first place…

      • Kissmagrits

        No, but Apple had trouble with a north Texas municipality.
        Bidding for Apple’s new plant in the mid-’80s, the town council objected to Apple’s equal treatment of gay and straight employees. Apple threatened to pull out and almost did. Maybe next time.

      • Actually we are that powerful. You’ve seen the string of celebrities speaking out in support of HERO and you’ve heard from the big corporations like Apple, Google and others. We’ve banned together before and we can do it again. If it fails you can bet there will be a call for a boycott of Houston.

  • tcinsf

    Or you could stop discriminating….

  • Kissmagrits

    It really pisses them off that we refuse to hide or stay silent anymore. And now I’ve
    reached a certain age and I don’t care if I offend the mean spirited jerks. And on average, I’m ten times better informed. Unfortunately, being informed on any subject doesn’t impress the classic true believer who’s busily spouting his tribal nonsense from the “big book” of ignorance – another reason why Christianists hate Neil deGrasse Tyson – he makes science so much more appealing than dogma.

  • 2patricius2

    Cause “christians” like Ryan would have to start treating LGBT people the way they want to be treated. And they don’t want to have to treat people they hate so well. Cause after all, they are the only real good “christians.” LGBT people are just refuse and are not really human.

  • DisT

    Hmm..that’s funny….is Christianity a trait at all ?

    • Kissmagrits

      I’ve come to think of it as a genetic defect and I’m still holding out hope for gene splicing.

  • BearEyes

    And yet this little putz would scream bloody murder if he were treated like we are.

    • Christopher Smith

      Actually, this little putz desperately needs to be buttfucked. Repeatedly. and then have a butt plug locked into place. It’s so obvious….

  • Jean-Marc in Canada

    As if this man-child or any teabangelical could ever act reasonably. Bitch Please!

    • Robincho

      The man part needs its ass seriously fucked. The child part needs a ball gag. And then the whole package needs defenestration…

  • Friday

    So, you’re claiming that Christianist hatred against LGBT people is completely *arbitrary,* and that’s why you’re somehow oppressed if you can’t discriminate against people you perceive as not obeying your religious beliefs, sir? Gotcha.

  • Happy Dance

    Because God is very objective…..

  • Octavio

    And this is why Texas in currently under water. Let it rain.

  • Homo Erectus

    “It’s Halloween – I’m here to scare the bejezus out of you”!

  • BudClark



    KKKonservative KKKriSTAINist KKKultists would have to act like CHRISTIANS.

    Why doesn’t that little closet queen go out and get phuqued and get it over with?

    • Furface

      Perhaps he’s tried and there just wasn’t anyone desperate enough to lower their standards that much. Even three penny uprights have limits.

      • Reality.Bites

        I’m sure he’d have no problem as long as they didn’t know who he was.

        • Furface

          Possibly; but do you really think he’s capable of not making that introduction?

          • Reality.Bites

            If experience is a guide (and goodness knows it is, when it comes to right-wing scum on the down low) they’re pretty good at compartmentalizing their sex life from their political life.

        • Christopher Smith

          Nah. The inner hideousness comes right through.

  • James

    “Subjective and unverifiable identies.” Like “Christian” or “sincerely held religious belief”?

  • mercury613

    “…but on subjective and unverifiable identities.”

    You mean like religion?

  • Gerry Fisher

    Because similar laws enacted throughout the country since the 70s–including 19 or so state laws–have proven to be ruinous for many christians. Oh, wait a minute?!

  • OZ_in_TX

    And we’re into the home stretch. We’ve (my partner and I) talked to everyone we know – and some people we don’t, trying to convince people to go to the polls. We’ve posted to social media. We’ve endured the screaming hysterics-laden blitz of fearmongering of Teahadists while being tut-tutted and condescended to by Gays who live in states who already have these non-discrimination protections and massive waves of ‘meh, not interested’ from locals who really *should* be invested in what’s going on here. We early-voted. We’ve done everything – EVERYTHING – we possibly could.

    Regardless of what happens on Tuesday – my partner and I *will* take pride in that.

    • fuzzybits


  • Bill T.

    Those anti-gay haters just simply hate laws that they perceive will prevent them from telling us how much they hate us.

  • TheSpinMonkey

    I assume it will also bring plagues, locust and turn the rivers to blood.

  • IamM

    No, Ryan. That’s not how it works. That’s not how any of this works.

  • Mike in Texas

    Ryan, you have a very twisted sense of what of “acting reasonably” means. The actions you promote are many things, but “reasonable” is not one of them.

  • What

    You know, Ryan, there is one sure-fire way to verify if someone is gay. I suspect that’s what you’re angling for.

  • bryan

    How many times have we heard that christianity is a personal relationship with a god. In effect, each individual religious person has a ‘subjective and unverifiable’ moral code. And as for male and female being biological.. so is being transgender.

  • Michael

    We already protect against “alleged ‘discrimination’ based not on objective traits, but on subjective and unverifiable identities” when we protect on the basis of ‘religion.” Moreover, a hundred other places in the US protect on the basis of sexual orientation and there has not been one case of “ruinous liability.”

  • BobSF_94117

    that maleness and femaleness are objectively rooted in biology whatever is or was hanging or not hanging between your legs

  • delk

    …that marriage is the union of one man and one woman—

    Keep up with the news much?

  • Given the choice, how many people would conclude “You know what, I really don’t want self-righteous moral scolds and clueless bible-thumpers patronizing my business anymore! From now on, I’m kickin’ ’em out!”?

  • Scott Wyant

    Just a quick note, there is still a large component of the LGB community who themselves suffer from Transphobia. I do not expect the rest of the nation to get ahead of us on this issue. We still have a lot of work to do in our own house, but we can all get better together.

    • Priya Lynn

      Thank you for your support.

  • lukefromcanada

    explain to me how then other cities towns states, and countires have laws that protect everyone from discrmination but yet those who live in Houston will suffer greatly if this law is upheld. What kind of bubble do they live in?

  • TexasBoy

    “…but on subjective and unverifiable identities. ”

    Ryan, take off your clothes and I’ll verify it for you.

  • Phil

    Clueless asswipe….

  • bob

    I sure hope the people of Texas don’t fall for these LIES the bigots are coming up with!

  • unklespunky

    Privileged little ferret whining again

  • Ninja0980

    If you feel that way Ryan, then’s let remove religious protections from anti-discrimination laws.
    Religious beliefs are a choice after all.

  • BillyDee4

    He’s right. Just look how equal rights has destroyed San Francisco, New York, Canada, most of Western Europe, etc. What? They are thriving?
    And, BTW, Ryan: go suck a cock. You know you want to.

    • Hue-Man

      The christianists would have been screaming about it for nearly 40 years if
      the situation were as dire as this RWNJ claims.

      “In 1977, the Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is both a charter of rights and a human rights act, was amended to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Thus, the province of Quebec
      became the first jurisdiction in the world larger than a city or county
      to prohibit sexual orientation discrimination in the private and public


      • Reality.Bites

        And since then both the Quebec Nordiques (1995) and Montreal Expos (2004) moved away. Don’t tell me that wasn’t related! 😉

    • Ben in Oakland

      I’m not sticking anything in a potty mouth like that.

  • sherman

    I always get the young white male religious twerps confused. Is this the wheelchair one?

    • TrollopeReader

      no, that’s Thomas Peters, The American Papist ….

      • Reality.Bites

        I believe his legal name is “Little Tommy Peters.”

  • Mihangel apYrs

    so we can get rid of protections for sex, race, and, especially, religion? Or is that different?

    PS I think someone protests too much!

  • bambinoitaliano

    Oh look who’s gag ball got remove and finally get to speak up.

  • Tammy Rainey

    “…and that maleness and femaleness are objectively rooted in biology, and should be valued and affirmed, not rejected or altered.”

    Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that this is a reasonable point of view over a matter that is in dispute. I’ve yet to hear one of these bozos explain to me why it is ethical or even logical that holding that point of view gives one the obligation to try and enforce it upon those who hold a different view.

    Let’s say you are Pentecostal and you do not believe it is moral for women to wear make-up or jewelry. Fine. No problem. Believe as you will. But do you therefore have a moral obligation to refuse employment, or service, to any woman you encounter wearing make-up? Not even Anderson or Tony Perkins would advance such a nonsensical position but it’s exactly the same thing.

    • Menergy

      Many “up votes”!

  • Jarle Tveitan

    Biologically, there are 2 genders. Does it matter? No. We can decide for ourselves how we choose to idenitify ourselves.

    • JustSayin’

      Actually intersex is also a viable biological sex classification, or gender if you prefer. For example hermaphrodites are both male and female, I.e. intersex.

      • Jarle Tveitan

        Fair point. Snails f.ex are hermaphrodites, as far as I remember.

    • Biologically, there are way more than two sexes – it is society that imposes a cultural binary. Those who do not fit entirely into one official box or the other, should get to choose which box they want to be classed in – and should have the option of being classed as “outside the boxes” as well.

      • Jarle Tveitan

        Biologists disagree with you.

        • Amusing, that. Recommended reading for you:


          Yes – I know. There are certainly some biologists who see and interpret everything through the cultural binary. They’re out of date, and out of touch.

          • Jarle Tveitan

            You’re using Joan as a source? She promotes theistic evolution (which is completely unscientific) and her “social selection” theory has been widely criticized by other biologists because of its many flaws.

            The majority of biologists interpret data to reflect reality, not wishful, unsubstansiated thinking.

          • I didn’t see anything theistic in the book (for that’ I’d recommend Uta Ranke Heinemann’s Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven but that’s a Catholic/Christian thing). I’d focus on the first few chapters, where she explains the straight/cisgender and even anthropomorphic assumptions made in many papers.

            But Dr. Roughgarden isn’t my only source. So, exactly how do *you* see biologists rationalizing the binary? is it the gross shape of chromosomes, or birth genital shape?

  • sfmike64

    And once again the spokes-douche looks like he probably sucks cocks in glory holes of truck stops. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that…. 😉

  • The Milkman

    Ruinous meaning we can no longer treat gays like shit with impunity? You’re right. Get over it.

  • It’s interesting that he would claim that HERO would be bad for business when major businesses are all endorsing the law. The negative impact will only happen if this referendum fails (which polling shows it may and badly).

  • Phil

    Maybe, just maybe, anti-gay behavior just isn’t very cool anymore.

  • Craig C

    Whatever, Mary. The same law exists in most large cities and about half the states, yet I don’t see anything “ruinous” happening in those places.

  • Dale

    The scientific illiteracy of christian cunts is now just laughable.

  • Dale

    How old are you now, 34? Haven’t found the right woman yet?

  • nocadrummer

    I call “gay face”.

  • Amanda Wagner

    .like Margaret answered I didn’t realize that somebody can make $25678 in 4 weeks on the web….A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, $17k Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over $83, p/h..Learn More right Here….
    ➤➤➤ http://GlobalEmploymentAtHomeTopReportsPointStart/Get/$97hourly… ❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦❦

    • agcons

      Stop spamming about McLarens and switch to Bentleys. It would make a nice change.


    • Necessitas

      Here is the person who owns the domain (replace-your-job.com) that all these ads are coming from:

      Perhaps you’d like to contact him and tell him how you feel!

      John D Shaver is Realtor or real estate agent, broker located in Diamond Valley, UT, Washington county. John D Shaver real estate company, agency is ST GEORGE GMAC REAL ESTATE, located in 1060 S Main St, Ste 200, Diamond Valley, UT, 84770. If you are looking to buy, rent or sell real estate (home, apartment, villa, condo) in Diamond Valley, UT, feel free to contact John D Shaver at (435) 628-2200, or by email: [email protected], to request an appointment, get working hours, prices & available properties.

      Listing Details
      Agent Name
      John D Shaver
      Real Estate Company
      1060 S Main St, Ste 200, Diamond Valley, UT, 84770
      (435) 628-2200
      (435) 628-2594
      [email protected]

  • NedFlaherty

    Ryan Anderson is an arch-conservative, authoritarian, science-denying, permanent Roman Catholic. He has spent his entire professional career oppressing LGBT people as prescribed by his clergy in the Vatican.

    Everything Anderson says or does is always aligned with his religious superstitions, and nothing he says or does ever contradicts those superstitions.

    Roman Catholic doctrine denies that any LGBT people even exist at all (paragraphs 2333, 2337, 2351, 2352, 2357, 2358, 2359, 2360, 2366, 2376, 2396).

    The official doctrine and highest clergy insist that every human being is always a heterosexual, and that all LGBT people are just:

    demonic, and

    American cities, counties, and states have adopted hundreds of Houston-style non-discrimination laws over the last half century, and none of the ignorant fears that Anderson imagines ever materialized.

  • Dale

    Ah yes, christian asswipes with their bogus claims of impending wrath with non-discrimination laws.

    Here’s a question for you you closeted queer: in which major city with non-discrimination laws in effect did any of the bullshit you claim will happen occur?

    I’m waiting….

    Oh, and shove your fucking imaginary skyfairy up your queer ass.

  • “The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

    Well, it’s going to. Really — any minute now. Just you wait — and wait — and wait. . . .”

  • Mark

    Aw geez. STFU.

  • Blake Jordan

    Has any city / state / country / … economy ever diminished by the introduction of protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity???

  • Blake Jordan

    They want to be unjustifiably rewarded for being straight and cis-gendered.

    • Tor

      They want to keep their Special Rights.

  • oikos

    I wondered where he had been?

  • Buford

    Lots of disgusting in those two paragraphs, but my vote for the part which most readily removes all doubt that Anderson is an idiot is this part – “(HERO) threatens the freedom of citizens… to affirm their religious or moral convictions… that marriage is the union of one man and one woman”.

    Guess what, Fuqtard. Citizens have never gotten to apply their individual, subjective convictions when it comes to defining marriage. Marriage is a state-defined institution… a matter of law, not a matter of religious opinion.

  • Thorn Spike

    Huh. I thought they believed maleness and femaleness are objectively rooted in theology.

  • John Calendo

    Yes, yes, it’s the end of world…again. Your world Ryan (“The ‘T’ stands for Teensy) T. Anderson.

  • BostonDotTom

    Uh… religion is not an “objective trait”, so….

  • “ruinous liability on innocent citizens ” – really? Kind of like how laws against lynchings and cross burnings “create ruinous liability on innocent white citizens.”

    Religion, while constitutionally protected *is* a matter of choice – and perhaps choosing a religion other than the “Church of God the Creator” (whites only) or any church that hates on LGBTQ people, might be a good idea.

    “maleness and femaleness are objectively rooted in biology” – the problem is that this dimwit, like Richard Dawkins or Germaine Greer, does not actually understand biology. Genetics isn’t the gross shape of the “23rd chromosome pair” – it has to do with the genes that are on the chromosomes, and the way they express themselves during pre-natal development. Society creates a cultural assumption that there are only two sexes – and those who don’t fit exactly into one or the other should be allowed the choice of which to fit into – or the choice to *be* “other.” (Brave folks who do that – but it is a legitimate one).

  • i love that this guy is being touted as “the NEW face of the GOP!”
    What’s new about a hypocritical moneyed ignorant white christian bigot?

    oh boo hoo. bigots are scared they’ll be treated the way they treat LGBT people. boooo HOOOO.

  • Christopher Smith

    ‘Subjective and unverifiable’ is the exact definition of Xtofascist ‘beliefs.’
    Since uncountable species in nature demonstrate ‘homosexual beliefs’ and only one species exhibits rampant homophobic bigotry, what exactly is ‘unnatural’ here?
    LOL. What a pitiful hatemonger, screaming that his freedom to be an ignorant and discriminatory ASSHOLE might be infringed!

  • Terry

    He was supposed to be a fresh voice for opposition to homosexuality…he’s just a pseudo intellectual who says all the same things the Religious Right says

  • david fairfield

    Btw, the spread collar and the 5:00 shadow are clear indicators that he is not as straight as he would like people to think…we should make it clear that when he is outed, and he will be, he is not welcome to play in our sandbox…

    • Ben in Oakland

      Mr. Sparky has volunteered his litter box. Will that be OK for Aw-Ry-T?

  • DaveMiller135

    I’m not aware of any “ruinous liabilities” imposed on anti-gay Christians for breaking anti-discrimination law. But you should definitely consider whether your ideal constituency really is criminals and scofflaws.