“Homofascism should be crushed.”

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

“Homofascism should be crushed.”

Klavan starts out by bluntly saying that he thinks the government should stay out of the marriage issue, and that if gays want to marry it ain’t any of his business. All power to them. Then he continues.

Having said all this, I think Homofascism — this current movement to regulate and restrict opinions and outlooks toward homosexuality — indeed, toward anything — should be crushed. Lawsuits against photographers who won’t shoot gay weddings. Television show cancellations because the hosts oppose gay marriage. Attempts to silence anti-gay preaching or force churches to recognize gay marriages. Crushed, all of it. Crushed by the united voice of the people, crushed in courts of law, in legislatures, in businesses and in conversation. When someone is sued, attacked, shamed, boycotted or fired for opposing gay marriage or just opposing gayness in general, straight and gay people alike should protest. No one should lose his television show, no one should be dragged before a judge, no one should have his business threatened. Don’t tell me about a company’s right to fire its employees. It has the right, but it isn’t right. It’s unAmerican and it’s despicable.

Very well said.



  • David R. Jones

    I don’t get it Bob. All this time I had a health respect for what you published and how you looked at the world. This opinion is fascism. Do you really support that paragraph of hate?

  • Abe Windsor

    First you must stop Progressve Fascism, of which HommoFascism is just a minor subset.

  • I do support what Andrew Klavan has written. Read his whole essay. He has no hate or anger, only disgust at the vicious McCarthy-like tactics of today’s radical homosexual community.

    In a free society, we all have the right to disagree with each other. When one side or another decides that any disagreement justifies blackballing and personal destruction I get very angry. They are wrong. Their actions abuse freedom, and act to destroy it at its very roots. At that point, they lose my support and force me to do whatever I can to stop them from doing it.

    Note also that my position here (as well as Klavan) has nothing to do with gay rights or gay marriage. It has to do with the abuse of power and the squelching of freedom. The two can be separated.

  • Abe Windsor

    Three Cheers Sir Bob!

    Well Played!

  • I for one am sick of this multi-cult-OOO this aint your gampa’s AMERICA its time to make a STAND for
    yourself if you can’t find someone who you can stand for??? jbz says BOO (~~)

  • I approved both your comments, as they are the first you have posted here. However, I will not do so in the future if you repeat this kind of childish cursing. It really doesn’t take much good will or effort to debate these important issues of our time with civility and good manners. I encourage it here at Behind the Black. In fact, I like it when people disagree with me. However, I do not encourage this kind of offensive trolling.

    You have been warned.

  • Edward

    There was a time in this country when we had the attitude that is often mis-attributed to Voltaire:
    “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” — Evelyn Beatrice Hall, in her biography on Voltaire.

    In *my* civics classes in grade school, we were taught that even the NAZI party and the KKK should be allowed to speak, demonstrate, or parade, but that it was equally appropriate for us to counter with our own editorials of disagreement (including letters to the editor), speeches, counter-demonstrations, and parades. It was important that all points of view be allowed, and that we choose which ones to accept and which to reject. This is what it means to be free. Part of the price of freedom is allowing disagreeable and even hateful speech, otherwise you are not free.

    This attitude has been replaced by an attitude that only one side’s opinions are allowed and all other opinions must be pre-rejected and their expression disallowed.

    I first came across this attitude at UC Berkeley, when Gene Kirkpatrick was shouted down while giving a speech on campus. Liberals that I knew on campus patted themselves on the back for being intolerant only of intolerance. It turned out that intolerance was defined as those who disagreed with the liberal position at any given time.

    At this time, “Homofascism” is one of several liberal positions. I disapprove of this form of fascism, I defend the right to state the position, but I reject the ability to ruin the lives and careers of those who disagree with the position, and I am appalled that the courts are being used to extort agreement with the position.

    Fascism forcibly suppresses opposition and criticism: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fascism?s=t “1. a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.”

  • wodun

    “This opinion is fascism.”

    Uhh, noooo.

  • Hugh Mann

    It is no ones business what takes place in anyone’s bedroom (provided no harm takes place). I personally see nothing wrong with two people, who love each other, wanting to marry. It is none of my business and it doesn’t effect me in the slightest, so why should I care?

    We have all lived many lifetimes, as both male and female. So I ask those of you who are prejudge mental or bigots, what gender is your soul? For that matter, what race is your soul?

    It has no race or gender. The body you inhabit is just a vessel like a car or boat. It is not who or what you are. The world would be a much better place if everyone would just remember this.


  • Edward


    Read Klavan’s essay. You missed the topic.

    “Homofascism” is not who you are sleeping with or marrying, but it is the forced agreement with the currently popular position on the topic (or more generally, any topic). No alternate position on the subject is allowed. Your comments show that you, too, do not allow alternate opinions. The problem is that to disagree with the “accepted” position is to be hateful/prejudiced/biggoted/racist/homophobic/fascist/etc., and thus, freedom is lost.

    What opinion of yours are you going to have to change, in the not-too-distant future, in order to continue to fit in with the crowd, keep you business, or stay employed? What opinions have you already had to change? There goes *your* freedom, too.

    Here is another view on the topic:
    “Disagreement is not and cannot be tolerated. … If a person disagrees with a modern moralist, the only explanation the modern moralist can imagine is that this person is full of hate, that he is a raving bigot, or that he is insane.”

  • Hugh Mann

    I see says the blind man. I guess I’m not going to fit in very well with “the crowd” and I’m very okay with that. Thanks Ed for the eye opening link.


  • Cotour

    While your metaphysical and emotional observations may well ultimately prove true (who knows?) we live in the real world where individual opinion and actions, laws crafted by man, the concept of justice, culture and varying degrees of abuses of power collide. And it is our challenge as human beings to figure out ways of navigating through those difficult subjects and somehow respectfully live together in this reality.

    Your plea for “peace” and “can’t we all just get along?”, while noble, really does not get us any closer to finding a reasonable balance. But it does indicate that you have deep feelings about the subject.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *