Blogging Against Senator Sam Brownback Since March 2005
In the wake of the Rolling Stone article on Senator Sam Brownback, the Human Rights Watch has called for Brownback to apologize for referring to gays and lesbians as “fruit”. Here is the original quote:
“You look at the social impact of the countries that have engaged in homosexual marriage.” He shakes his head in sorrow, thinking of Sweden, which Christian conservatives believe has been made by “social engineering” into an outer ring of hell. “You’ll know ‘em by their fruits,” Brownback says. He pauses, and an awkward silence fills the room. He was citing scripture — Matthew 7:16 — but he just called gay Swedes “fruits.”
HRC has responded with a letter condemning the remark and asking for an apology:
While you and I are far from agreement on issues of fairness for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans, I had hoped we could communicate our differences with dignity. Senator, your use of the term “fruits” to describe gays sank far below the level of dignified discourse Americans rightfully expect of their elected officials.
In an apparent attempt to use a biblical passage to derogatorily jab at gays and lesbians, you have stepped well over the line of decorum and common decency.
I don’t see why anyone is surprised by Brownback’s hateful speech. Most people are aware he is just that radical. Brownback spews hate and intolerance whenever he has the chance and in the coming months, as we hear more from him, his public displays of bigotry will only increase in frequency.
Shame on you, Senator Brownback.
[powered by WordPress.]
Blogging Against Senator Sam Brownback Since March 2005
I am a student of political science at the University of Kansas. Contact me with any questions, comments or tips.
21 queries. 0.331 seconds
January 30th, 2006 at 7:36 am
You’re kidding, right? Have you even bothered to look up the verse that Brownback is quoting? I’ll make the assumption, based your post, that neither you nor the Human Rights Campaign did, so I’ll post it:
“By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.” Matthew 7:16-20 (I included a little extra for contextual purposes.)
It’s claims like yours that boost Brownback’s stock among his supporters and those with common sense. Please, continue “savaging” Sen. Brownback!
January 30th, 2006 at 9:43 am
If Brownback had quoted “By their fruit you will recognize them.” then their would be no debate. However, by making fruit plural (in order to refer to multiple gays and lesbians in Sweden) he has brought this upon himself. Don’t put yourself in a position of defending a bigot.
January 30th, 2006 at 10:06 am
Brownback’s quote (while somewhat paraphrased) is legitimate. Here are a few translations that correspond very closely to what he said, i.e. use of a plural noun:
By their fruits you will know them. Do you gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? (WEB)
By their fruits ye shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? (ASV)
By their fruits you will get knowledge of them. Do men get grapes from thorns or figs from thistles? (BBE)
By their fruits ye shall know them. Do men gather a bunch of grapes from thorns, or from thistles figs? (DBY)
Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? (KJV)
Ye shall know them by their fruits: Do men gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles: (WBS)
By their fruits you will easily recognize them. Are grapes gathered from thorns or figs from brambles? (WEY)
From their fruits ye shall know them; do ‘men’ gather from thorns grapes? or from thistles figs? (YLT)
And please don’t tell me what position I should be in. Do you honestly believe that composing and maintaining a website “dedicated to the savaging of Senator Sam Brownback” is not bigotry defined? “Eye for an eye” is not a tactic that the left-wing should employ.
January 30th, 2006 at 11:41 am
Are you calling me a bigot? I am excersizing my right and responsibility as a citizen of the United States to be involved in the political process. I do not discriminate against any group of people. I hound Brownback because of his political decisions, not because of the color of his skin or his sexual orientation.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:33 pm
By the very definition of the word, you are indeed a bigot. Bigotry is not limited to race or sexual orientation, but can also include ideology, values, and political beliefs. That is the exact reason why liberals are often viewed as hypocrties: it’s perfectly okay for them to disagree with and hound the opposition, but if a conservative disagrees with their opinion they are automatically labeled as a bigot. (I have no problem with opinions that are different than my own, but to call someone a bigot simply because they disagree with your beliefs is a terrible misuse of the word and carries much stronger implications than truly exist.)
Anyway, are you willing to retract your statements after reading the various translations?
January 30th, 2006 at 12:45 pm
I think you misunderstand the point.
While I disagree with and hound Brownback, I don’t discriminate against him. I wouldn’t support a law to limit his rights. I support him having the same rights as all other American citizens.
I call Brownback a bigot because he actively attempts to restrict the rights of American citizens. I call him a bigot because he refuses to hire people based upon their sexual orientation. I call him a bigot because he judges people based upon who they love.
If I am called bigot for saying that all Americans should have the same rights, then so be it.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:55 pm
I think you have failed to address the original debate I raised about the context of Brownback’s quote. (And it appears we will have to agree to disagree regarding the definiton of the term “bigot.”)
Out of curiosity, what evidence do you have that Brownback won’t hire people based on their sexual orientation?
January 30th, 2006 at 4:51 pm
It has been reported by several other bloggers, the one I can find at the moment is:
http://www.pamspaulding.com/weblog/2005/10/wingnuts-at-tent-revival-kickoff-for.html
I haven’t reported it on the front page because Brownback’s press person will not confirm that be ever said it and I cannot find the original quote. But really, do you see the Senator hiring an openly gay man?
January 30th, 2006 at 5:16 pm
it seems as if using the “sword” to define a parable is more than some can handle…
of course you would have had to equip yourself with the armor to even grasp what was said..
once again if you put any reference to scripture in the “free” air you will be attacked, i think that is called conviction in some, not all cases..
just one fellas view point…
January 30th, 2006 at 6:47 pm
So the best source you have is a photo caption from a blog? If this is such a pervasive theme for the hiring in Brownback’s office, as you seem to indicate, I’m sure you could stumble upon a quote somewhere on his website or in the volumes of Lexis-Nexis.
“But really, do you see the Senator hiring an openly gay man?”
That’s a good question. Maybe you should ask yourself if a gay man would want to work for Brownback.
January 30th, 2006 at 10:05 pm
“I’m sure you could stumble upon a quote somewhere on his website or in the volumes of Lexis-Nexis.” Well, perhaps I could if I wasn’t taking 15 hours of class, working 20 hours a week, and volunteering.
Find it yourself.
Why wouldn’t a gay man want to work for Brownback? Huh? Why? Is it because of Brownback’s message of love and acceptance? Bullshit.
January 31st, 2006 at 8:16 am
“Well, perhaps I could if I wasn’t taking 15 hours of class, working 20 hours a week, and volunteering.” –If you don’t have time to do the proper research, then you shouldn’t make these claims.
Perhaps you should do a little more investigating as to who has actually worked in Brownback’s office.
January 31st, 2006 at 10:14 am
[…] The Brownback brouhaha is a little misguided. While he most likely does think of Sweden as a country full of fruits, he wasn’t saying that in the infamous Rolling Stone article. What he was doing is much more frightening from a secular nation/seperation of church and state point of view. He was quoting biblical scripture because he believes: “This” — being senator, running for president, waving the flag of a Christian nation — “is about serving one constituent.” He raises a hand and points above him.” […]
May 5th, 2006 at 9:47 am
Yes “Ye shall know them by their fruits”, let me see… hm…. What are the fruits which let us know what Sen Brownback is? That phrase is talking about the results of their actions or reasonably by what they do. Sen Brownback is a bigot. and that you know by what comes out of his mouth, and his voting record. It is said that a person who rants and raves so much about something is either crazy or ‘one of them’.
January 23rd, 2007 at 5:37 am
Best site to buy, cheap, order Cialis
Cialis Vs Viagra
Viagra Cialis
Cialis Side Effects
Cialis Levitra