March 19, 2013

"Then the tone of the conversation became extremely religious and she began talking about the two things most important to her being Jesus Christ and freedom."

"Then she talked about how she had just come from a prayer meeting the night before, and the people in her prayer meeting were really worried because these are the end times, and they’re the end times because Prop. 8 is going to lead to ministers marrying gay people with a rifle to the head. At which people got a little riled up; then there started to be some call and response from the crowd about what she meant. She started exhorting the crowd very specifically to go ahead and tweet or write and say that Michelle Shocked says God hates f--s, and some other references to the Bible denouncing homosexuality as sinful and abhorrent."

214 comments:

1 – 200 of 214   Newer›   Newest»
Gahrie said...

The Left is going to rally around her and defend her like they did the Dixie Chicks.....right?

Heather said...

It is interesting to see liberals reaction when a political rant they disagree with breaks out in a non political forum.

gerry said...

I can't go to that site.

Who's the hateful "folk legend"?

God wishes all to be saved, and He loves to forgive sin when repentance is genuine. He does not hate homosexuals.

Shouting Thomas said...

The essentially fascist nature of the gay activist movement revealed. Much more to come.

Heresy cannot be tolerated.

The underlying principle of the fascist gay activist agenda is that heteros are to blame for the things that gays feel bad or ashamed about. It is heteros who are to blame for the failure of gays to find love and sexual satisfaction. Nothing that is bad in the life of gays is ever actually the fault of gays.

It is a scapegoating movement. A constant supply of scapegoats will be required. Althouse, you really don't see at all what's on the horizon. Since heteros are to blame for the failure of gays to find love and sexual satisfaction, all out war against the heretics is justified.

garage mahal said...

Shocked that she is a recent born again Evangelical. Not.

The Drill SGT said...

PR stunt?

bpm4532 said...

The Left vs Christianity. A religious war.

AJ Lynch said...

Yeah I like how they predict her career is doomed because of what she said. And that is OK yet, as Gahrie posted, it was a crime against free speech when people refused to buy Dixie Chicks merchandise and or got to their concerts.

Ann Althouse said...

"PR stunt?"

That's what I'm thinking.

Some kind of performance art.

Freeman Hunt said...

Garage, recent? The articles says,

"...it's worth noting that her conversion took place in the '90s at the West Angeles Church of God in Christ, one of the largest African-American congregations in California, where she would have been among the few white congregants. It's far more common among black evangelicals than among white churches for parishioners to steer well to the left on most political issues but still adhere to highly conservative views of sexuality."

wyo sis said...

Who is Michelle Shocked?

Mitchell the Bat said...

Now would be a good time to point out that Elvis Costello never actually did bite the hand that feeds him.

Freeman Hunt said...

No one should be shocked by anything someone with the name Shocked says.

Gahrie said...

it's worth noting that her conversion took place in the '90s at the West Angeles Church of God in Christ, one of the largest African-American congregations in California, where she would have been among the few white congregants.

Her conversion was not very recent, and her experience far from the typical.

Freeman Hunt said...

If her name were Michelle Hail Fellow Well Met, then this would qualify as a surprise.

Shouting Thomas said...

You got in on the scapegoating yesterday, Althouse, with the "oppression" BS.

You've lost your way completely, here. Betrayed by the vanity of intellect.

bpm4532 said...

Andy Kaufman style.

AJ Lynch said...

Freeman - I bet very few people your age are familiar with that phrase "Hail Fellow ...".

Writ Small said...

I saw her in concert back when her great "Short, Sharp, Shocked" album was just released. There was an odd moment when she seemed to be having a kind of breakdown on stage and many in the audience started calling out for her to keep it together as if what was happening was normal.

One of my favorites, "Memories of East Texas," was in part about alienation from her rural, southern roots:

Their lives ran in circles so small, they thought they'd seen it all

And they could not make a place for a girl who'd seen the ocean


Like Orson Scott Card, a liberal-in-youth artist who can't get behind SSM is excommunicated.

Mitchell the Bat said...

It's been a while since we've gotten a really good rant against mating different kinds of animals.

marvel said...

I do wish people who follow Christ would think about whether their words or actions are truly Christlike before they engage. No where, no where, no where in the New Testament did Christ behave like that. Okay, maybe the money changers in the temple but that was a deliberate thumb in the eye of governing authority taking advantage of those they were supposed to serve.

Grace, people, grace. Love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Those are the signs of a mature evangelical Christian.

I am not making a judgment about the authenticity of her faith, just commenting that her speech, as reported, is somewhat lacking in what would be considered the ideal characteristics of Christian witness.

Patrick said...

Shocked that she is a recent born again Evangelical. Not.

I seriously had no idea. Granted I haven't followed her career at all since about 25 years ago when she had a minor hit, but I would not have thought she'd go the evangelical route.

SJ said...

@Freeman, @garage,

If she was converted at a Church of God in Christ, I'd describe her as Pentecostal rather than just Evangelical.

It is probably true that Pentecostal is a subset of Evangelical. At least, they have lots in common.

But you look a little under-informed if you use the label Evangelical too loosely.

Geoff Matthews said...

Can we count her as someone who changed her mind about same-sex marriage?

Salamandyr said...

Like Orson Scott Card, a liberal-in-youth artist who can't get behind SSM is excommunicated.

The difference is, Card doesn't interject his politics into non-political forums.

Of course, Michelle Shocked's performances had apparently been political prior to this-they just fit her fans prejudices better. To me she sounds a bit like a twit.

marvel said...

Or, as others have pointed out, it was just a PR stunt.

garage mahal said...

@Freeman, I stand corrected. I was just reading a piece where it said she describes herself as a born again "in recent years".

SJ said...

@marvel,

I eagerly await believers deciding to take Jesus words seriously about marriage and divorce.

It would be nice to hear them speak in a way that is kind to those who have sinned, and emphasizes the possibilities for forgiveness and reconciliation with God.

Christ calls his followers to be holy. He doesn't say that peace with the culture they live in is to be pursued. Or that discord with the surrounding culture is to be avoided.

Though the Apostles did have something to say about being at peace with fellow men, as far as it is possible.

Jesus didn't even promise to His followers that they would always be liked and supported by non-believers.

And the United States, which used to be strongly religious in a way that was friendly to a broad spectrum of belief.

Now, it appears that much of the United States culture is religious about sexual pleasure. And is actively opposed to some parts of the old religiosity.

garage mahal said...

If it was a PR stunt, it was a stupid one. Her gigs are getting canceled.

AllenS said...

What piece were you reading? I'd be interested to know.

Drago said...

Freeman: "Garage, recent? The articles says,.."

garage never actually reads, or if he reads never comprehends, or if he comprehends never internalizes the contents of articles he links to or comments upon.

Achilles said...

Shocked pulled a PR stunt and now she gets to do a tearful apology on some leftist news program.

One wonders if Ann will stop trolling her own readers with this stupid subject. The EU is in the process of committing economic suicide and the New Zealand Parliment is discussing following them. But it must be sweeps week here because the host spends all of these posts on 2% of the population teaming up with leftists trying to ruin an institution and a bunch of conservatives who are too stupid to realize the government will destroy marriage if it remains involved.

The only way to save the institution of marriage is to get the government out of it. Stop letting the left and the host distract you with this troll subject.

creeley23 said...

I vote for crazy.

Not because she spoke out against gay marriage and homesexuality -- or participated in Occupy drumming circles for that matter. She is still a committed leftist as well as a Christian. From what I read, she was born-again in a mostly black church.

But this sounds like a person with mental problems. There is a thin line between religious conversion and religious mania.

Loved her "Short Sharp Shocked" album.

Shouting Thomas said...

One wonders if Ann will stop trolling her own readers with this stupid subject.

Why do you think that the issues of economic collapse and the collapse into decadence are separate?

Historically, the two go together.

garage mahal said...

What piece were you reading? I'd be interested to know.

Here

Shocked, who has identified herself as a born-again Christian in recent years (she joined the Pentecostal West Angeles Church of God in Christ in 2008)

Colonel Angus said...

Who is this person and why am I supposed to care/show interest?

Shouting Thomas said...

So, the past several decades of gays scapegoating heteros for their problems strikes you folks as sane...

but one utterance of this sort from a hetero strikes you as insane?

AllenS said...

Good link, garage. Good idea not to listen to anything CBS has to say. Most people probably already know that.

Colonel Angus said...

The only way to save the institution of marriage is to get the government out of it.

Does that mean once the government is out of the marriage business men can rejoice that the days if alimony and crushing child support payments are a thing of the past?

Patrick said...


Shocked, who has identified herself as a born-again Christian in recent years (she joined the Pentecostal West Angeles Church of God in Christ in 2008)


That was poorly written. The reader can be led to think that she joined the Church when she converted.

Emil Blatz said...

PR stunt - yes. To get some of that "I don't care what you say about me, just spell my name correctly, and OBTW, I'm appearing at the Smith Valley Music Fair through Thursday" kinda shid.

Shouting Thomas said...

And Althouse is a Dylan fan!

What an absurdity.

Do you have any idea, Althouse, how destructive to one's career it is to be a heretic on this subject?

The received wisdom is that heteros are to blame for the shame and failure in gay's lives.

This is a lie, Althouse. It's just a fucking lie.

Try to think back to 1967 and consider the hatred Dylan faced for his heresies.

marvel said...

@SJ

As do I. The pastor of the church I attend regularly comments on the sad fact that the divorce rate among self-proclaimed evangelicals is identical to the that of the wider US culture. I would argue that the culture of divorce and the view of marriage as a social contract to be dissolved at will has been far more damaging to personal happiness and the culture at large than any issues re homosexuality.

It is hard to persuasively argue for the sanctity of marriage when the divorce rate hovers around 30%!!!

"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" Matthew 7:3

If you look, you will find authentic believers who regularly preach the gospel -- all have sinned and fallen short, all are offered grace. They just don't make headlines. And it's easier (and more fun!) to mock the obvious hypocrites.

Jason said...

So we can't spell "fag," now?

Baron Zemo said...

"they’re the end times because Prop. 8 is going to lead to ministers marrying gay people with a rifle to the head"

That doesn't sound so crazy to me.

I never thought that religions were going to be forced to provide birth control and abortions services. Or that Catholic Charities would be forced to stop helping the poor, sick, widowed or orphaned because of their religious beliefs. Heck I never thought that homeless shelters would be forced to stop accepting food donations because the food had trans fats!

Lots of stuff that we never thought could happen in America are happening every day.

DADvocate said...

Never heard of her, but I'll go buy an album to demonstrate how tolerant and forgiving I am. I agree, it is funny to seel all the diverse, loving, tolerant lefties freak out when someone pulls a Sinead O'Connor on them.

Jason said...

Yeah, well Dylan went electric. So fuck him.

Shouting Thomas said...

I can remember when I was young that people went out to hear folk musicians speak the truth to power.

Now, young people go out to hear folk musicians kiss ass and swear allegiance to the reigning ideology.

No exceptions allowed. Heretics must be banished.

creeley23 said...

Who is this person and why am I supposed to care/show interest?

She's a minor folk-punk singer-songwriter who emerged in the eighties.

No reason you should care other than that the news story piqued Althouse's interest enough for a topic.

Shocked didn't sound like anyone else. Very talented. Fine melodies, good images, often plaintive lyrics, a mixture of different styles from folk to country to swing to experimental. She made it on word of mouth.

But it was hard to get a line on her. Like many people, I always assumed she was a lesbian. After her first hit album, mostly folk, she confused her base with an all-swing album. I lost track of her after that.

I'm sorry to read this story today. Time will tell, but this sounds like a breakdown and somehow I'm not surprised.

chrisnavin.com said...

She'd better get back into the fold. The Progressive Church Of The Latter Day Bay Area doesn't like heretics.

I'll send her my Brochures:

"Gay Marriage, The Environment, Non-Profits And You. How To Fit In The Community"

"Green Is The New Red"

"We Need To Have A Talk: Tolerance Doesn't Always Mean What You Think It Means"


Jason said...

"As a gay man, I can't allow this show to go on."

Who the fuck made this guy the arbiter of all expression?

Is he the venue owner?

mariner said...

Does that mean once the government is out of the marriage business men can rejoice that the days if alimony and crushing child support payments are a thing of the past?

Don't be silly, Colonel.

Nothing was said about getting government out of the divorce business: "there's gold in them thar men!"

chrisnavin.com said...

On second thought, if she had a breakdown, there are plenty of mental health professionals to treat her PTSD.

She can be reformed and accepted back into...er...the commune-ity.

Shouting Thomas said...

Ms. Shocked has earned a little respect from me for her courage.

I've never listened to her, but I will now.

n.n said...

Shouting Thomas:

The problem is generational rebels with a cause and without a clue. In each generation, there is a subset of people who, in order to find fulfillment, must rebel against the established tradition. This usually happens early in their life, long before they have sufficient experience with the world, or familiarity with themselves, which are required to exhibit good judgment.

Notice that in succeeding generations, the old guard rebels demonstrate a resistance to current generation rebels. Most people will not proceed to rebel in perpetuity. Eventually, they will reach a new state of conservatism, which will be the cause for rebellion of the next generation. These cycles persist until the population collapses under its own corrupt decadence or suffers an invasion by an alien force.

That said, this is the perfect time for them to strike. The majority of the population is distracted by political and economic uncertainty, and will grudgingly (especially in exchange for economic support) support social and biological dysfunction. The natural resistance to progressive corruption which normally controls extreme or fanatical change has been substantially degraded.

In any case, we will not have a fair hearing for either social, economic, or political issues under the present circumstances. The malignant financial crisis which touches every part of the world presents an opportunity for the rebels and their patrons.

Baron Zemo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
garage mahal said...

can remember when I was young that people went out to hear folk musicians speak the truth to power.

I doubt many young people want to go out and see/hear a Westboro Baptist Church doppelgänger like Shocked talking about how "God Hates Fags"

Shouting Thomas said...

garage,

Apparently she actually converted at the West Angeles Church of God in Christ.

Why do you persist in telling bald faced lies?

And, from the story:

She even told the crowd that they "could go on Twitter and say 'Michelle Shocked says God hates f--s'," although that particular line was interpreted differently by some on hand, as either ironic or completely sincere.

You're willing to tell just about any kind of lie, garage, in pursuit of partisan victory. That's been obvious for a long time.

Paul Zrimsek said...

Finally, someone else besides us gets the chance to say "Shut up and sing." (Still good advice!)

garage mahal said...

Why do you persist in telling bald faced lies?

You just pasted Shocked saying God Hates Fags, brainiac.

William said...

In my mature years, I have come to the conclusion that the words and music of drug addicts with a modicum of musical talent do not offer the best guide to a happy, fulfilled life. Jim Morrison did not die for my sins.....I don't know anything about this woman. Maybe her talent and pathology are inextrcably linked, but it would not be fair to judge her talent by her pathology or, for that matter, vice versa.

Shouting Thomas said...

Read the sentence, braniac...

The people at the event report that they don't know whether she meant the phrase ironically or directly.

Try reading the sentence several times, brainiac.

Shouting Thomas said...

I just spent the past week reading endless denunciations of the Catholic Church on FB by liberals.

They've suggested that the Church must abandon its basic principles and become indistinguishable from Protestant churches, that the Church should divest itself of all its properties and, essentially, cease to exist.

Some hatreds are allowed, in fact, praised.

Kit said...

I've seen her perform a few times, so, yeah, some kind of performance art, was my guess as well. We'll have to wait and see. Strange.

Shouting Thomas said...

The winner of this thread has to be the numerous statements that this is a piece of "performance art!"

For Christ's sake, a "performance" on a stage is a piece of "performance art!"

Did God appear to you in a dream and explain this to you?

Jason said...

Michelle Shocked gave a start to a wonderful young banjo player named Alison Brown. She has a fantastic quartet (and sometimes quintet) in her own right. Brown also went on to form Compass Records, which has signed a bunch of my favorite artists, some of whom I count as friends.

http://compassrecords.com/artists.php

If it wasn't for the indirect effects of Michelle Shocked... whom I don't think I've actually ever listened to, acoustic music would be much, much less rich.

So Michelle's got some excess karma points.

garage mahal said...

The people at the event report that they don't know whether she meant the phrase ironically or directly

Like I said, I doubt young people want to go out and hear this garbage. I'm not surprised anti gay rants appeal to you though.

Sam L. said...

Not preaching to the choir can be a hangin' offence.

Shouting Thomas said...

I'm not surprised anti gay rants appeal to you though.

You're a dumb, fucking partisan thug, garage.

No lie is beneath you.

Henry said...

But she's still progressive!

In the opening act, Peter Yarrow belted out "Reefer, the Fucked Up Dragon".

Performance art.

garage mahal said...

ST
You honestly don't think you're anti gay?

Shouting Thomas said...

You honestly don't think you're anti gay?

The term is absurd.

I like some gay people and don't like other gay people, just like any other sane person.

creeley23 said...

Whatever it was, it was not a PR stunt or performance art, unless one defines any controversial act as such.

She has been taking stands of conscience since she was arrested at the 1984 Democratic convention.

She has not been a canny operator with respect to her music career. She had talent to burn and was positioned, I believe, to be a much bigger star, but insisted on going her way and avoiding major labels. She sued her first record company on the basis of the 13th amendment which forbids slavery.

At best her SF performance was another act of conscience, to speak the truth as she believed it in the light of her conversion.

But she did it in such a poorly thought-out way that she didn't do herself, her career, her faith, or her audience any good. This, combined with the vulnerability and instability I sense in her music, leads me to believe it's a breakdown. Or maybe revealing a craziness that's always been there.

Freder Frederson said...

That's what I'm thinking.

Some kind of performance art.


If it is, it is one of the stupidest pieces of performance art since Michael Richardson went on his racist rant.

Shouting Thomas said...

But she did it in such a poorly thought-out way that she didn't do herself, her career, her faith, or her audience any good. This, combined with the vulnerability and instability I sense in her music, leads me to believe it's a breakdown. Or maybe revealing a craziness that's always been there.

She's venturing out into the most taboo territory in the music biz.

You don't think that that would scare you a little bit?

Breakdown might be better described as "She's changed her mind, and she's afraid of the consequences."

I think that the anti-fracking hysteria that has taken hold of folk musicians in New York is absolutely stupid. Endless songs about it out there. The last fucking person in the world I want making decisions about how I heat my house or power my car is some folk musician.

I'm pretty hesitant to express that opinion within the music biz... can you see why?

Youngblood said...

Given the context, it's obvious that Shocked's comment was more or less ironic. She was talking about people being fearful that the government will force their churches to perform gay marriage and she knew that people in the audience and elsewhere would characterize any deviation from the party line as "God hates fags."

Although I am very much for gay marriage, I think that the fear she is talking about is a legitimate one. Seven or eight years ago, I wouldn't have said that, but after Sandra Fluke, I have to acknowledge the possibility.

creeley23 said...

If it is, it is one of the stupidest pieces of performance art since Michael Richardson went on his racist rant.

Richrdson was just taking a leaf from Lenny Bruce's famous "Are There Any Niggers Here Tonight?" routine.

Richardson's mistake was not realizing how ignorant and reactionary today's progressive audiences are.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

There there bitchtits the uneducated. Someday everyone will accept the pale tubby love between you and Andy R. that dare not speak its name.

You still have to pay alimony though.

Freder Frederson said...

Although I am very much for gay marriage, I think that the fear she is talking about is a legitimate one.

Bullshit. Almost fifty years after Loving v. Virginia, no religious institution has ever been forced by the government to perform an interracial marriage.

Renee said...

@ Jay

We shouldn't spell out f*g. I'm happy it is gone. If you use that word you're a jerk. Gay people shouldn't use it either.

Same with words like c*nt. Unacceptable.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Renee,

People who want to censor any word as "unnacceptable" are cunts.

Who died and elected you the word police?

I have no tolerance for your intolerance of language.

creeley23 said...

Here's a YouTube of Shocked singing, "Yes God is real," at her church.

Whatever else may be true, that girl is born-again.

TMink said...

I am an Evangelical Christian. I hold the Bible to be God's inerrant communication with us, his children. And Michelle is completely wrong. 8)

Christian scripture is very clear that homosexual behavior is unacceptable to God. It is clearly stated in the Old and New Testaments. Jesus expounded on the sin of adultery by saying that anyone who looks on a woman with lust in his heart has committed adultery.

This labels me, Jimmy Carter, and every other straight man I know as a sinner who cannot please God. But this is the state of humanity as a whole! The best we can do is as filthy rags before God, the only good being. Sin is the state of humanity. It is completely inclusive except for Jesus.

God does not hate people who sin, he loves us so much he sacrificed his perfect son for us. Jesus, the one without sin, without blame, the perfect son of God was tortured and crusified for me, and for you.

We are accepted into God's grace by claiming this redemption, by thanking Christ for suffering for me so that I would not have to, and asking him to save me and change me by entering into my life and heart. That is what appeases God. And that redemption is freely offered to everyone who will accept it. To me, a horrible sinner, and to every other person on this earth.

I am glad she is starting to know Christ, but I will be much more glad when she starts to exhibit Christ's love toward everyone, gay and straight and inbetween and whomever. We all really are precious in his sight.

Trey - end of sermon

David said...

So much red meat in that article. My fave:

Shocked's career as a concert performer is clearly in some jeopardy, since much of her audience consists of gay people or sympathizers—and she was even identified as lesbian herself for much of her career (falsely, she's repeatedly said).

Daily Kos wrote: "I think it is safe to assume that she has effectively soiled herself to the point of only attracting folks from Westboro Baptist Church, NOM and the Family Research Council to future concerts."


Gotta love the way they hate.

ken in sc said...

Bob Jones University lost its tax exempt status because it refused to lift its interracial dating ban. The ban has been lifted now for many years, but BJU has not applied for tax exempt status because of the many other strings and reporting requirements. They have learned to get along without it.

Churches that go along with SSM, deserve what they get.

creeley23 said...

Trying to post this again:

Here's a YouTube of Shocked singing, "Yes God is real," at her church.

Whatever else may be true, that girl is born-again.

edutcher said...

Where's Hatman on this important issue?

Braiding the noose?

So much for freedom-loving, tolerant Liberals.

On the bright side, all this started in San Fiasco, this may be the beginning of the end.

Youngblood said...

"Bullshit. Almost fifty years after Loving v. Virginia, no religious institution has ever been forced by the government to perform an interracial marriage."

Before the whole dust-up with Catholic charities being expected to pay for contraception, I'd have been much more comfortable brushing off the possibility. Before several big city mayors vowed to block Chick-Fil-A in clear violation of the First Amendment, I'd have been much more comfortable brushing off the possibility.

Renee said...

Censor as in disciplining and correcting students who bully with words. Yes I'm the intolerant language police.

Alex said...

So she's a leftist who has historically bashed Reagan/Bush, got arrested at Occupy and now this?

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

DADvocate,

Never heard of her, but I'll go buy an album to demonstrate how tolerant and forgiving I am. I agree, it is funny to see all the diverse, loving, tolerant lefties freak out when someone pulls a Sinead O'Connor on them.

Funny. Sinead O'Connor was my first thought too.

I've known of Michelle Shocked for ages -- must be the name :-) -- but haven't heard any of her work.

Youngblood said...

"Gotta love the way they hate."

It's not hatred to point out that Michelle Shocked's fanbase is primarily liberal and left wing and that her comments are certainly going to drive those fans away. That's the reality of it. People will pay to be entertained by performers who are apolitical. People will pay to be entertained by performed who agree with them. However, people generally won't pay to be preached at by their opposition. That's the reality.

hombre said...

God doesn't hate fags and neither do true Christians. She knows that and was probably making a sarcastic reference to the likely reaction of the moronic lefties in her audience and elsewhere to her comments.

Terry said...

Shouting Thomas wrote:
The underlying principle of the fascist gay activist agenda is that heteros are to blame for the things that gays feel bad or ashamed about.
Until the early 70's, homosexuality was classed by the APA as a psychological disorder. This was because it was associated with certain pathologies, both biological and psychological. It was not because the APA was a bigoted, regressive organization. To the contrary.
In the early 70's, after years of pressure by members of the gay liberation movement (remember that?) the APA members relented. The pathologies associated with homosexuality were still acknowledged, but, for the first time, a causal relationship was identified: society's bigotry.
This is not science. It's not even social science. It's politics.

Jason said...

I don't use the word "fag" to apply to people, no.

But I'm sure as shit not afraid of it, or any other word, and I'm sure as hell not going to let anyone browbeat me into not spelling it out. Consider me a sworn enemy over every form of tyranny over the mind of Man. That includes asteriskers.

There is only one word I accept can be elevated to that status... I think the practice of religious Jews of leaving vowels out of the word "God" and His scriptural names is fine.

I reject any attempts to elevate any other word to that status.

Charlie said...

Wow, I guess lefties aren't a very tolerant bunch, are they? It all depends on who you're trashing, I guess. Cat Stevens, The Dixie Chicks and now Michelle all get different treatment.

X said...

Alex said...
So she's a leftist who has historically bashed Reagan/Bush, got arrested at Occupy and now this?


it's like you two were made for each other.

chickelit said...

Freeman Hunt said...
No one should be shocked by anything someone with the name Shocked says.

Nor should anyone be shocked to hear someone speak in a Shockely way, especially if it's semi-conducive to communication.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

"Censor as in disciplining and correcting students who bully with words. Yes I'm the intolerant language police"

I weep for whatever children are exposed to your "discipline." Part of the public education racket I would guess.

Good luck with your enforcement of your self appointed language rules amongst non captive audiences of children paid for by tax dollars.

Perhaps you can give me a citation for this:

You are a sanctimonious twat.

Freder Frederson said...

Before the whole dust-up with Catholic charities being expected to pay for contraception, I'd have been much more comfortable brushing off the possibility. Before several big city mayors vowed to block Chick-Fil-A in clear violation of the First Amendment, I'd have been much more comfortable brushing off the possibility.

Catholic charities are not the same as Catholic religious institutions (which are exempted from the law requiring contraception coverage).

And how many of those mayors carried through on their threats once it was pointed out to them that such a ban would be clearly unconstitutional?

Jason said...

IF THEY OUTLAW VOWELS IN DEROGATORY EPITHETS, ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE VOWELS IN THEIR DEROGATORY EPITHETS!!!

Jason said...

Catholic charities are not the same as Catholic religious institutions

Fuck off.

Bob said...

It seems to me that Michelle Shocked is "a bit touched in the head," as southern grandmothers would phrase it. I remember during the Iraq War years she was a member of Code Pink, may even have been one of the ones that dressed up as a vagina and demonstrated. She's erratic, lost in the woods; more to be pitied than scorned, as Tolkien might phrase it.

For any of you who haven't heard her music before, Short Sharp Shocked is the essential album to buy. I went looking for stuff on YouTube, but there isn't much there, as if she's made a conscious decision to keep her stuff off of there.

garage mahal said...

Hey Bob
Fuck off.

garage mahal said...

Just kidding dude. I think you nailed it actually.

Renee said...

How is Catholic Charities not a religious entity? The religious doctrine calls to be charitable in a manner that applied to their faith.

chickelit said...

SJ said...@Freeman, @garage,

If she was converted at a Church of God in Christ, I'd describe her as Pentecostal rather than just Evangelical.


She speaks in forked tongues. Seriously forked up.

creeley23 said...

I went looking for stuff on YouTube, but there isn't much there, as if she's made a conscious decision to keep her stuff off of there.

That's my impression too.

It fits. Even as a new artist she fought to keep control of her material and now she owns all her songs, which is something the Rolling Stones can't say.

Kirby Olson said...

About ten years ago Shocked had a hit called Peach Fuzz about a gay teen sexual affair or so it seemed to me. I think she was trying that out. But she has an earnest and powerful heart. That leads people to stick up for core convictions no matter what it costs them. There is a tremendous band width inside of traditional Christian music. She will probably transition and make hits at about the same level. Perhaps she's planning to make the switch. The lyrics are here:

http://www.michelleshocked.com/lyrics_peachfuzz.htm

That's quite an incredible blues song. It seems to longer be easy to find it online anywhere. She must have had it removed.

Freder Frederson said...

How is Catholic Charities not a religious entity? The religious doctrine calls to be charitable in a manner that applied to their faith.

It is a well established legal principle. Look it up or have Althouse explain it to you.

Paul said...

I played a couple of shows with her 7 or 8 years ago. She is more than just "erratic". She's quite nutty. I was impressed by her talent, though. She was a great performer with a well honed sense of dynamics and really had the audience under her spell. She went into a moonbat anti-Bush rant and the demonic hatred on the faces of her grey haired pony tail set audience was quite disturbing. That level of hate is only satisfied by murder. She is definitely not a lesbian as she busted a move on me. Ugh.

creeley23 said...

I'm now on the fence between Shocked as kinda crazy and or Shocked taking a stand on her convictions -- not that the two are mutually exclusive.

Clearly she is a serious born-again Christian, although still a leftist. I read that she converted in the nineties. I was thinking that it was more recent. People can be somewhat bizarre after a conversion experience. By now I would expect her to have settled into her Christian identity more gracefully.

OTOH, the gay marriage battle has gotten pretty nasty of late, and I do sympathize with her concern that the government will be coming after those who don't go along.

phx said...

I've never been a fan so all this was news to me when I first got wind of it. I figured based on an incomplete report she probably just went off her meds or had some mental illness or meltdown - like that Kramer guy from Seinfeld.

But apparently it's a principled stand. Some principles. "God hates fags." Could have gotten that from Westboro Baptist.

Paul said...

Could have gotten that from Westborough Baptist, or pretty much any Black Baptist church for that matter.

Of course lefties won't go there...

jr565 said...

TMink wrote:
I am an Evangelical Christian. I hold the Bible to be God's inerrant communication with us, his children. And Michelle is completely wrong. 8)

Christian scripture is very clear that homosexual behavior is unacceptable to God. It is clearly stated in the Old and New Testaments. Jesus expounded on the sin of adultery by saying that anyone who looks on a woman with lust in his heart has committed adultery.

Exactly. Even if christians think gayness is sinful they aren't supposed to hate gay people. WHo among us isn't sinful. If looking at women means I've commited adultery then I've committed adultery every time I walk down the street (wait, does it still apply if I"m not married?).
What gays have to realize is that not all opposition to gay marriage means that the person opposing it hates gay people. I've heard a lot of gay people say they aren't for gay marriage.
Michelle Shocked is allowed to have her opinion as is anyone else. She just happened to voice her views in the worst possible outlet as far as her career is concerned. Maybe she just wanted to burn all the bridges for her old life at once.

Patrick said...

And how many of those mayors carried through on their threats once it was pointed out to them that such a ban would be clearly unconstitutional?

While you are correct that the answer is either "very low" or "zero," it seems more than a bit ridiculous that such things need to be pointed out to anyone in the US, let alone elected officials.

jr565 said...

Jason wrote:
"As a gay man, I can't allow this show to go on."

Who the fuck made this guy the arbiter of all expression?

Is he the venue owner?

THat's a good point. Did he pay for the concert? How is he able to halt a concert simply because, as a gay man, he doesn't like what he's hearing.
Gay man as destroyer of free speech. As odious as what Shocked might have said was (and I'm not 100% sure since I'm only reading second hand accounts) that strikes me as more reprehensible.

jr565 said...

Michelle Shocked will be the new Cat Stevens. The next 10,000 maniacs will have a cover of her song on their album that they won't play because of her views.

jr565 said...

ONly, unlike Cat Stevens, many on the left will not be forgiving of her views like they were of Cat Stevens.

Youngblood said...

To Jason and jr565:

Yes. According to the article, the guy who said that and pulled the plug is the operator of Yoshi's, the club where the event took place. He runs the club, so he gets to shut down the show if he doesn't like it. That's how these things work.

jr565 said...

For example, would Jon Stewart invite Michelle Shocked to sing at once of his rallies? Or did she step so far over the line in not endorsing the gay party line view that she must be excommunicated from all civil society?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/alana-goodman/2010/11/02/jon-stewart-doesn-t-regret-inviting-fatwa-endorsing-singer-rally

jr565 said...

youngblood wrote:
Yes. According to the article, the guy who said that and pulled the plug is the operator of Yoshi's, the club where the event took place. He runs the club, so he gets to shut down the show if he doesn't like it. That's how these things work.

Fair enough then. Though, I don't see why if that is permissable we should have any problem with how the Dixie Chicks were treated when they spoke out against Bush.
Will Rolling Stone put Michelle Shocked on their cover with a story about silencing free speech?

Youngblood said...

"Catholic charities are not the same as Catholic religious institutions (which are exempted from the law requiring contraception coverage)."

Right. I understand that, at the state level at least, there is a distinction between Catholic charitable organizations and the Catholic church itself. The argument is that, since such charities serve non-Catholics and hire non-Catholics, they're subject to laws mandating coverage for contraception.

However, that doesn't mean that I agree with the distinction. I happen to think that state supreme court decisions on the issue do represent a violation of the First Amendment. We'll see what the supreme court at the federal level has to say.

"And how many of those mayors carried through on their threats once it was pointed out to them that such a ban would be clearly unconstitutional?"

None. However, you can understand how threats from public officials, even if they're not carried out, can have a chilling effect on people exercising their freedom of conscience, correct?

phx said...

Fine. Let the extreme rightwingers cast this as a free speech issue and trumpet her cause.

I'm sorry for you moderate Republicans. I'm just not that sorry.

jr565 said...

Also, what were her actual words. Was the view that she expressed one that was simply against gay marriage, and that's why Yoni decided to end the show? Or did she say something even more outrageous about fags.

Was her statement "you can say on facebook that god hates fags" a statement that she thinks god hates fags, or people are going to misinterpret her views to say that god hates fags.
If it's the latter, then what Yoni did was, while perfectly acceptable as the club owner, as much about his intolerance to speech he doesn't like as about Michelle Shocked's intolerance of gays.

jr565 said...

phx wrote:
Fine. Let the extreme rightwingers cast this as a free speech issue and trumpet her cause.

I'm sorry for you moderate Republicans. I'm just not that sorry


You ever heard the phrase "I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it"?
Probably not.

Do you believe that? probably not.

jr565 said...

Phx,
what words in particular are you suggesting are indefensible. Do you even know the words that were said (i don't). Is it the idea that you are against gay marriage that is indifensible.

phx said...

You ever heard the phrase "I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it"?

I pick and choose my battles. I'll bet you do, too.

The right is consistently choosing the wrong social battles to fight. At least they're wrong from a moderates point of view - and single voting females under 30.

Shrug.

phx said...

I don't find anything indefensible. I'm saying if you're Republican say it loud, say it proud: Michelled Shocked is just all right with me.

jr565 said...

phx wrote:
pick and choose my battles. I'll bet you do, too.

The right is consistently choosing the wrong social battles to fight. At least they're wrong from a moderates point of view - and single voting females under 30.

You pick and choose your battles? sign of a hypocrite, especially when arguing over free speech principles. All the battles you seem to pick seem to be the ones where you get to call the righties names. Way to stand by your principles.

Youngblood said...

jr565:

For the most part, I don't have a problem with how the Dixie Chicks were treated. They said things that pissed off a significant chunk of their audience and paid the price for it, just like Michelle Shocked pissed off a large segment of her audience and will pay the price for that. (I say "For the most part" because the Dixie Chicks apparently received death threats, which is unacceptable.)

And also, I've said upthread that I think what Shocked said was clearly intended as being semi-ironic. That doesn't change the fact that the club's operator was well within his rights to shut the show down; it really doesn't matter what his motivation actually was. You and Jason were claiming there was something unseemly about that, and there isn't.

Baron Zemo said...

According to this story in that liberal rag New York Times religious institutions are not required to provide birth control but are required to offer it from insurance companines who will give it for free. The insurance companies don't think that can work and want to know how they are going to get paid. The question of churchs who self insure is also not addressed.

As usual the Obama administration fucked it up and is lying. They will force religious institutions to provide birth control and abortion services unless the courts rule otherwise.

A simple agreement to leave religious institutions alone will not happen.

It is just another front in the continuing attack on religious freedom in this country by the forces of the progressive Democrat party.

jr565 said...

Lets take a few other musicians who also said some incendiary things.
Morrisey, the extremist vegetarian (remember Meat is Murder? No, no no it's murder") said that the "Chinese are a sub species" for their treatment of animals. By they way, I bought Meat Is murder despite knowing what a cunt Morrisey is because I liked some of their other songs, and because Morrisey can be a cunt and still make good music.

And then just recently Moe Tucker, of the Velvet Underground fame spoke out, as a tea partier over how we were being led towards socialism.
And then said of the reaction to her views
I'm stunned that so many people who call themselves liberal yet are completely intolerant … Peace, love, bull! You disagree and you're immediately called a fool, a Nazi, a racist. That's pretty f***ed up!"
Lefties seem to have the attitude towards free speech that PHX does. They're for it unless it offends one of their sacred cows, then they are all for supressing speech by calling people racists for espousing the view.

phx said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
phx said...

By they way, I bought Meat Is murder

That's your problem.

jr565 said...

youngblood wrote:
And also, I've said upthread that I think what Shocked said was clearly intended as being semi-ironic. That doesn't change the fact that the club's operator was well within his rights to shut the show down; it really doesn't matter what his motivation actually was. You and Jason were claiming there was something unseemly about that, and there isn't

Actually when I first read the comment about Yoni talking about how he as a gay man can't allow the concert to go forward, I thought he wast he guy who was twittering the concert who also walked out.

But as a club owner you can end a concert that is going badly. Still, I do sometimes have a problem when that happens. I, as a concert goer, have no problem hearing views that I don't agree with. I've seen Rage Against the Machine a few times and probalby disagree with about 90% of their views. Imagine if I was a club owner and realized as they were singing their songs that Zach De La Rocha was a hard core socialist and I had a problem with those views and said "as a capitalist or as an American I can't allow this concert to go forward" and turned off the lights, I'd imagine i'd get a lot of guff for it.

phx said...

then they are all for supressing speech by calling people racists for espousing the view.

Funny. I wouldn't call that supressing speech. That sounds like exercising speech.

jr565 said...

phx wrote:
By they way, I bought Meat Is murder

That's your problem.

What can I say. I was into 80's alternative and the Smiths had some tasty guitar lines and evocative lyrics. BUt Morrisey was always a self righteous twat.

Alex said...

So she was into the sapphic delights huh?

jr565 said...

phx wrote:
Funny. I wouldn't call that supressing speech. That sounds like exercising speech.

Callling people racist is often an effort to silence people from speaking again. You know that, right? Calling someone racist is essentially saying "Shut Up".
And also, if you shout someone down you are excercising speech but you are also denying people the right to speak (because you are shouting them down).

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
phx said...

And also, if you shout someone down you are excercising speech but you are also denying people the right to speak (because you are shouting them down).

Well sure. Now you're moving the goal posts.

Calling someone racist is essentially saying "Shut Up".

So what if it is? Saying shut up is exercising speech, too, isn't it?

I know. We shouldn't call people racists. It violates their rights. Or something.

jr565 said...

And let me state that I bought Meat is Murder long before Morrissey ever made his utterance about the Chinese.
It was well known that he was a twat long before he ever made his statement about the Chinese.

Matt said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jason said...

You and Jason were claiming there was something unseemly about that, and there isn't.

Ok, show me where I claimed there was something unseemly about the venue owner pulling the plug, when I specifically asked if he was the venue owner.

Matt said...

Dixie Chicks said: "We don't want this war, this violence, and we're ashamed that the President of the United States [George W. Bush] is from Texas".

Michelle Shocked said: "I live in fear, that the world will be destroyed if gays are allowed to marry....You can go on Twitter and say ‘Michelle Shocked says God hates f*gs'."

How exactly is what the Dixie Chicks said worse? These are two very different statements.

That said, this is NOT a free speech issue folks. She can say it and we can call walk out of her concert. You can do the same with the Dixie Chicks.

Note that when you go off on a whole segment of the population [in San Francisco no less] that's far worse and far more bizarre than saying something about the president to a crowd that agrees with you. Ted Nugent does this often. He is close to insane, of course, but that is a different issue.

jr565 said...

phx wrote:
So what if it is? Saying shut up is exercising speech, too, isn't it?

I know. We shouldn't call people racists. It violates their rights. Or something.

I never said we should NEVER call people racists. I said people who call people racists (usually on the left) are often doing so becuase its' their way of marginalizing that person and their ability to speak.

Jason said...

Ted is not insane at all. He has principled views that are internally consistent, rooted in sound premises and natural rights doctrine He's a clear thinker.

Muddle-headed intellectual weakies can't figure that out, so they THINK he's crazy.

Youngblood said...

Jason, sure you asked if the guy was the venue owner, after writing this:

"Who the fuck made this guy the arbiter of all expression?"

You can claim all you want that you weren't implying there was something unseemly about the dude pulling the plug, but that doesn't mean the rest of us are going to buy it.

jr565 said...

youngblood wrote:
You can claim all you want that you weren't implying there was something unseemly about the dude pulling the plug, but that doesn't mean the rest of us are going to buy it.

She was also an Occupy Wall Streeter and a virulent anti Bush Code Pinker. Why didn't the clubs pull the plug on any of her shows when she uttered THOSE views?

Jason said...

no, you used the word "claimed" Youngblood. There was no such claim. You should retract.

jr565 said...

If Yoni were the club owner and she was in her Code Pink phase would he, as a gay man, have said the concert couldnt' go on if she were on her attack on Bush and the repubs?
So, it's ok to insult repubs and capitalists, but suddenly when she says something about gays the concert must be over?

Tim said...

Not a very long term or well studied christian. God does not hate fags. We are taught to hate the sin, love the sinner, and in all the Sundays I have sat in my Assembly of God congregation, I have NEVER heard our pastor or any of the guest pastors preach hate against homosexuals. Yes, they will preach that homosexualal acts, just like fornication or adultery, is a sin and you need to repent and turn from your sinful ways and accept Jesus as your personal savior, but that is NOT saying God hates fags, far from it.

That said, marriage has a meaning and homosexuals do not get to change it to suit themselves. I do not care if they have something else with the same rights and privileges, but they do NOT get to tell ME that I must refer to them as being married or being husbands or any of that nonsense. Tolerance they are entitled to. NOT acceptance. The problem is, they want Christians to accept their way of life as moral and right and that my friends is infringing upon MY rights.

Alex said...

jr - interesting how you conflate sexual orientation with income level.

Jason said...

Freder It is a well established legal principle. Look it up or have Althouse explain it to you.

It's not nearly as well-established as the underlying Catholic principles. Look them up or have your local parish priest explain it to you.

jr565 said...

Yoni, therefore comes across as a totally self serving jerk. When Michelle was insluting people on MY Side of the aisle he had no problem letting such concerts go forward, despit the fact that I or people like me (not that I'd go see Michelle Shocked) are offended.

Youngblood said...

"She was also an Occupy Wall Streeter and a virulent anti Bush Code Pinker. Why didn't the clubs pull the plug on any of her shows when she uttered THOSE views?"

Because that was part of the package. You've seen the cover of "Short, Sharp, Shocked", right? You know that she has positioned herself over the course of her career as a left-wing folk singer, right?

That didn't drive her audiences away. In fact, that's what they were coming to see.

The lecture she offered the crowd at Yoshi's, however, not only made people walk out, it pissed off the club's operator to the point that he pulled the plug. (And yes, it was a lecture. She was not entertaining her audience, she was lecturing them.)

Youngblood said...

"So, it's ok to insult repubs and capitalists, but suddenly when she says something about gays the concert must be over?"

Yeah, exactly. People are allowed to make their venues available for people they agree with and not make them available for people that they disagree with.

Jason said...

Tim: It has not been established that Michelle hates fags.

Indeed, if some people who were there detected an ironic statement, I'm inclined to consider that the more likely statement, because most libtards wouldn't recognize irony if it bit them on the ass.

jr565 said...

Youngblood wrote:
Yeah, exactly. People are allowed to make their venues available for people they agree with and not make them available for people that they disagree with.

I never said that they don't.

jr565 said...

The lecture she offered the crowd at Yoshi's, however, not only made people walk out, it pissed off the club's operator to the point that he pulled the plug. (And yes, it was a lecture. She was not entertaining her audience, she was lecturing them.)

If her lecture was directed at targets that the audience agreed with, you probably wouldn't define it as a lecture, and even if it were a bore, I doubt that Yoni would end the concert over it.

Matt said...

Jason said...
Ted... He's a clear thinker.

Hilarious. Ted Nugent is in no way a 'clear thinker'. He is pretty clueless in a lot of ways. Recently heard an interview he gave when he attended the POTUS address and he completely misunderstood where Obama stands on gun rights and on what Obama proposes and he had facts wrong. His idea of fixing the problem of extreme gun violence is to throw everyone in jail and keep them there if they show signs that they might someday resort to gun violence or if they have done something violent in the past. Is he going to start building jails? That's not clear thinking. That's simplistic thinking at its best. But it SOUNDS nice.

jr565 said...

I wonder what Natalie Maines would say if she were in the audience at the Michelle Shocked show. (hey maybe the Dixie Chicks are fans of Michelle Shocked).

Jason said...

That conclusion is where Ted's premises lead him. If you believe the right to bear arms is inalienable, and you also believe we need nut control, then there is one solution set. You may not like it or agree with it. But that doesn't mean it's not clear or linear.

Chef Mojo said...

Well, I hate to break it to Michelle and the rest of you, but there's no god to hate fags.

Just sayin'...

The whole thing is kind of irrelevant.

Jason said...

Youngblood is ascribing views to people that they clearly don't hold. And is trying to cling to the lie, despite being corrected.

Youngblood is exhibiting the same misrepresentation thinking that Michelle Shocked apparently grasped the people in attendance would embrace.

If you believe there was a level of ironic removal in her statement, she knew that the libtards in the audience would write "Michelle Hates Fags" and compare her to Reverend Phelps no matter what her actual words were.

There is a particularly vicious kind of intellectual dishonesty: People tend not to engage with what you actually say, but what they fantasize you said.

jr565 said...

Matt wrote:
Dixie Chicks said: "We don't want this war, this violence, and we're ashamed that the President of the United States [George W. Bush] is from Texas".

Michelle Shocked said: "I live in fear, that the world will be destroyed if gays are allowed to marry....You can go on Twitter and say ‘Michelle Shocked says God hates f*gs'."

How exactly is what the Dixie Chicks said worse? These are two very different statements.

That said, this is NOT a free speech issue folks. She can say it and we can call walk out of her concert. You can do the same with the Dixie Chicks.


Was the Dixie Chicks issue a free speech issue is my question to you.

Note that when you go off on a whole segment of the population [in San Francisco no less] that's far worse and far more bizarre than saying something about the president to a crowd that agrees with you.

It may be worse in the sense that it's potentially more damaging to your career, or your safety while you are in the lions den. But we're not talking about p.r. are we? Other than that what 's the diff?

I guess those religious nuts who burned beatles records when john Lennon said they were bigger than Jesus are the same as fans who get mad at Michelle Shocked are the same as the fans who went after the Dixie Chicks. Usually, when it comes to the left, what those Christians did was an example of intolerance. And what happened to the Dixie chicks was intolerance and stifling of speech.

So then, its really only about agreeing or disagreeing with the message, right?

jr565 said...

If you disagree with the message then you can burn the records. if you agree then burning the records is wrong.

Jason said...

Lots of idiots were outraged when Dylan came out as a Christian.

James said...

The problem with Catholic Charities is that they accept government funds... he who pays the piper call the tunes.

Charity is supposed to come directly from the church and its congregants; not from funds expropriated by the government and the "redistributed" to them.

jr565 said...

Lets not forget that Michelle SOUNDS a little kooky. She is strident and polite often in the same sentence. Perhaps what she said was misconstrued by her audience to be a god hates fags message.

Look at her statement again. What she talks about is about "how she had just come from a prayer meeting the night before, and the people in her prayer meeting were really worried because these are the end times, and they’re the end times because Prop. 8 is going to lead to ministers marrying gay people with a rifle to the head.
That is not her saying she thinks thats what happens, thats her saying people in her prayer group are saying that is their fear (founded or unfounded).

WHether that is Michelle Shocked's fear or the fear of her prayer group having the discussion, it is not an unfounded fear.

If its a civl right can a church refuse to marry a couple simply because they are gay? LEts take the hypothetical that gay marriage is legal throughout the land. Would gays stand with a church who refuses to marry a gay couple or the gay couple who wants to be married in the church.
And considering how for example the Obama admin is trying to force catholic organizations to pay for contraception essentially with a rifle to the head is that fear something that is beyond the pale?

If Michelle Shocked is expressing her church's fear to a largely gay friendly audience it may be a start the dialogue type conversation not a fuck the gays type conversation.

Granted this took place in 2008, but the Michelle Shocked of this interview doesn't exactly sound lke she hates gays or lesbians. And she had already been born again by this time:

http://www.edgedallas.com/index.php?ch=entertainment&sc=music&sc3=&id=73235&pf=1

For example, she says:
There are some inconvenient truths that I’m now a born again, sanctified, saved-in-the-blood Christian. So much of what’s said and done in the name of that Christianity is appalling," she says. "According to my Bible, which I didn’t write, homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is no more less a sin than fornication. And I’m a fornicator with a capital F."
and:
"I’m here to say, not that homosexuality is wrong. I’m here to say that there is reconciliation through the blood of Jesus Christ for every human being on the face of this earth. And no one is entitled to speak on God’s behalf and say who does and who doesn’t have that right. Because that price was paid - purchased by the blood of Jesus Christ."
Unless she suddenly joined Phelps church, she probalby holds the same views that she did when she was in this interview.

Matt said...

jr565

I have no issue with people doing and saying stupid things [within reason]. That's the beauty of free speech. It can be entertaining. But I would hope you would agree that there are different levels of free speech and different levels of stupidity. There is also a difference in the level of acceptance by others to the view being expressed.

I find it odd that a bunch of people compare what Shocked said to what the Dixie Chicks said. Let me ask you this. I agreed with what the Dixie Chicks said. Do you agree with what Michelle Shocked said?

I'm guessing not. Therein lies the difference between the two views. Shocked won't become a defiant hero to anyone except people way out of touch.

Steve said...

"Short sharp shocked" is almost a direct quote of a line in "The Mikado", a comic opera on the consequences of punishing by death any flirtation between persons not married. It is set in Japan but is meant to satirize Victorian England. Anne, I recommend you hear this operetta and have in hand a copy of the lyrics. As a lawyer, I laugh at the humor no matter how many times I hear it. I recommend you get a copy of the version including members of the Monty Python crew, made in the 1980s. Michelle must be a Gilbert and Sullivan fan!

chickelit said...

Someone said: As a gay man, I can't allow this show to go on.

Fine. I get that. But how about as an American and not a subset thereof? Otherwise perhaps San Francisco should enact some specialized hate speech rules and codify what's allowed and what's not. See how long it goes unchallenged.

Sheesh, Ferlinghetti would roll in his grave if he were dead.

jr565 said...

Matt wrote:
I find it odd that a bunch of people compare what Shocked said to what the Dixie Chicks said. Let me ask you this. I agreed with what the Dixie Chicks said. Do you agree with what Michelle Shocked said?



She said that people in her prayer group feared that Prop 8 (or perhaps the overturning of prop 8) would lead to ministers being forced to marry gays at the point of gun (not literally but compelled by govt to do so or face punishment). Insofar as that is what her prayer group feels I'd have to agree that that is what the prayer group feels.
The opinion expressed was not in fact Michelle's. SHe was relaying what her prayer group said. Do I agree with what the prayer group said? Well, I'll put it this way. This administration in particular, I would think would have no problem holding churches to account for not marrying people that are allowed to be married constitutionally. Do I think that gay marriage will lead to end of days? No. But I'm not a christian evangelical.
And you agree with what the Dixie Chicks said. Do you also agree that if they were boycotted and had their careers ruined it was ok? Or was that a stifiling of free speech to you. If the only differentiating thing you can find about the speech is that in one case you agree with it and in the other case you don't, then really free speech and who is entitled to speek out really only applies to speech you agree with.

I'm guessing not. Therein lies the difference between the two views. Shocked won't become a defiant hero to anyone except people way out of touch
Define people who are out of touch. isnt' that your opinion, and people who share your opinion.So then, what does that mean for people who are in touch with your views? And those not in touch with your views?

Youngblood said...

"Fine. I get that. But how about as an American and not a subset thereof? Otherwise perhaps San Francisco should enact some specialized hate speech rules and codify what's allowed and what's not."

Private citizens are allowed to do whatever the fuck they want with their property, which includes shutting down a show when they disagree with the message and it's chasing customers away.

Shocked wasn't arrested. She wasn't fined. She wasn't harassed by the authorities in even the most minimal way. This isn't a free speech issue. Deal with it.

jr565 said...

But I would hope you would agree that there are different levels of free speech and different levels of stupidity. There is also a difference in the level of acceptance by others to the view being expressed

This actually reminds me a lot of the other case Althouse just linked to ,namely the soccer player being bannded for life for doing what looks like a sig heil.

Now, what view when it comes to gay marriage is unacceptable. Is saying you disagree with gay marriage the equivalent of saying sig heil. According to whom? Those who are for gay marriage?

If Michelle Shocked went out and said "I think fags should be murdered and have their bodies hung from lamposts becuase they are evil fornicators" that would be one thing. But did what she say rise to that level? I don't think so.
Based on what is being quoted I don't even know that waht she was saying was even attributed to her. It was a discussion of a conversation that her prayer group had, not necessarily a discussion of her own personal view. Perhaps the opening to a dialogue Shocked wanted to have about allaying the fears of people of religion that having gay marriage legalized woudlnt' compel them into some sort of action. And then when the audience turned on her, she then said "tweet that Michelle Shocked says that God hates fags". i.e you're going to print that anyway.


In the case of the soccer guy who gave the salute, what if he wasn't in fact giving a salute? Should he lose his job forever, because his salute reminds people of the nazi salute. And even if he is giving the nazi salute should he be banned for life?

What was the problem then with having communists stand before the House of Unamerican Activities, and naming names? Isnt' the reason it was wrong, was because most of the people objecting to the naming of communists were in fact communist sympathizers? If it were a discussion of whether or not a soccer player ever used a sig heil, many people have no problem bannning him for life.

jr565 said...

Youngblood wrote:
Private citizens are allowed to do whatever the fuck they want with their property, which includes shutting down a show when they disagree with the message and it's chasing customers away.

Shocked wasn't arrested. She wasn't fined. She wasn't harassed by the authorities in even the most minimal way. This isn't a free speech issue. Deal with it.


But then neither was the Dixie Chicks. ANd yet how did many on the left view the issue?

Youngblood said...

"Youngblood is ascribing views to people that they clearly don't hold. And is trying to cling to the lie, despite being corrected."

You didn't correct me, though. Upthread, you got pissy that an uppity gay guy shut down the show, and it's clear from the context of your comment that you assumed that he wasn't the one in charge of the venue.

You can get all sullen that I called you on that and claim that I'm lying, but people can scroll up and look at the evidence.

"Youngblood is exhibiting the same misrepresentation thinking that Michelle Shocked apparently grasped the people in attendance would embrace."

Huh? I already pointed out that what she said was clearly semi-ironic. She was voicing her support for Proposition 8 and stating her opposition to gay marriage, and she basically predicted that people in the audience would mischaracterize what she was saying by comparing her to Fred Phelps.

And... well... The people in the audience seem to have done just that.

We're not actually in disagreement about that part of what happened, so if "I'm exhibiting ... misrepresentation thinking" then you must be, too.

The difference is that I don't think it's all that big of a deal that the club's operator called off the show. Call me an old-fashioned supporter of property rights.

jr565 said...

Youngblood wrote:
The difference is that I don't think it's all that big of a deal that the club's operator called off the show. Call me an old-fashioned supporter of property rights.

What if he called off the show because the artists were kissing each other and happpened to be Frankie Goes to Hollywood? I.e. because he was offended that they were open about their gayness.
Gay people in the audience would certainly be offended.

jr565 said...

What if the establishment didn't serve black people because they were black? Like say Denny's not serving black folks.
Property rights only goes so far.

Matt said...

jr565

"When they stop Prop 8 and force priests at gunpoint to marry gays, it will be the downfall of civilization, and Jesus will come back. I live in fear, that the world will be destroyed if gays are allowed to marry....You can go on Twitter and say ‘Michelle Shocked says God hates f*gs'

THAT is out of touch. If you don't think that is out of touch or that that is somehow a 'normal' view then you are possibly out of touch. Granted it might be in touch with some evangelicals.

Do you also agree that if [Dixie Chicks] were boycotted and had their careers ruined it was ok?
It's not my concern so yes it would have been okay. There are consequences for certain actions and certain speech. Most people know that. Society and the media will always take their toll. I DO find that problematic but it's part of the fame game.

phx said...

Lots of idiots were outraged when Dylan came out as a Christian.

I just love you guys talking nonsense about this.

Youngblood said...

"But then neither was the Dixie Chicks. ANd yet how did many on the left view the issue?"

I don't give a fuck. Allow me to quote what I said a bit earlier, since you didn't bother reading it:

"For the most part, I don't have a problem with how the Dixie Chicks were treated. They said things that pissed off a significant chunk of their audience and paid the price for it, just like Michelle Shocked pissed off a large segment of her audience and will pay the price for that. (I say "For the most part" because the Dixie Chicks apparently received death threats, which is unacceptable.)"

Get the picture yet?

You keep challenging me to speak for "the left", but I'm basically a Goldwater conservative. Generally speaking, I think that the left is made up of a bunch of whiny bitches. I don't give even the whisper of a fuck that people on the left got butthurt when people stopped listening to the Dixie Chicks.

jr565 said...

Matt wrote:

THAT is out of touch. If you don't think that is out of touch or that that is somehow a 'normal' view then you are possibly out of touch. Granted it might be in touch with some evangelicals.

so your view is that evangelicals are out of touch. I take it then you are not particularly religious. The out of touch part is simply your assertion based on your viewpoint. How is it that your view point is the one that needs to be heeded. When it gets into ideas of acceptable and unnaceptable speech I think it would boil down to things you agree with are acceptable and things you don't are unnaceptable.

jr565 said...

Youngblood wrote:
You keep challenging me to speak for "the left", but I'm basically a Goldwater conservative. Generally speaking, I think that the left is made up of a bunch of whiny bitches. I don't give even the whisper of a fuck that people on the left got butthurt when people stopped listening to the Dixie Chicks.

I didn't ask you to speak for the left. I said what the lefts position was and you argued with me as if I attributed it to you. You didn't have to respond to that point of the argument,and in fact it sounds like you agree with me on that point.

The argument I made was that the left is being hypocritical on arguing for certain things along free speech grounds but then are ok, with stifling speech along grounds that they find, as Matt would say "out of touch"

Either you agree or disagree with that.

William said...

The strong opinions that some artists express are more an expression of mental fragility than of political philosophy. I never thought that the vagaries of Sinead O'Connor had much to do with religion or that Brittney was looking for publicity. These girls have. real problems. I don't know anything about Ms Shocked, but it looks more like she blew a fuse than that there was anything cold blooded or forethought in her outburst. Any chance of any liberal giving her a pass on mental health grounds.

Youngblood said...

jr,

I hope that one day you get over your need to be a member of an aggrieved minority like all the cool kids. That's about all I can say.

jr565 said...

For example Youngblood I'm espousing an argument roughly along the lines of what DADvocate wrote:

Never heard of her, but I'll go buy an album to demonstrate how tolerant and forgiving I am. I agree, it is funny to seel all the diverse, loving, tolerant lefties freak out when someone pulls a Sinead O'Connor on them.


Exactly right. Now granted, people can boycott whatever they want and an artist isn't guaranteed and audience simply for existing, and what you say can have a backlash.

But there were many on the left I particular who thought that Sinnead was punished for "speaking the truth" about the evil out of touch religion. And Matt might agree with Sinnead since she too is speaking truth to power.
And that her being punished was stifling of free speech (if you don't think so, hen you don't have to respond as if I'm saying YOU agree with those views)
So insofar as people applauded Sinnead for speaking truth to power, perhaps they should applaud Michelle for the same thing. And note, Sinnead suggested the Catholic Church was the enemy. Michelle said her prayer group was worried that prop 8 would compel them to marry people that they didn't beleive could be married under govt threat. That isn't even an argument against gays at all, but against govt.

Blue@9 said...

Oh well, know your audience. The Dixie Chicks paid the price and so will Michelle Shocked.

I personally don't care about the political beliefs of my favorite artists and musicians, and I feel sorry for people who filter their entertainment that way. That being said, I'd be put out by any artist who chose to include in the performance an irrelevant rant about politics. If you've got a song about starving babies in Africa, fine, but I don't want to hear lectures about it between songs.

chickelit said...

Youngblood responded: Private citizens are allowed to do whatever the fuck they want with their property, which includes shutting down a show when they disagree with the message and it's chasing customers away.

Oh see where you're going with that. Private business is inviolate and I agree. I hope you have the courage the stand up for that too.

San Francisco Third City To Keep Out Chick-Fil-A. I know that was a while ago, but did they ever allow/invite them back? Your precious Bay Area economy can't float the entire state. :)

jr565 said...

personally don't care about the political beliefs of my favorite artists and musicians, and I feel sorry for people who filter their entertainment that way. That being said, I'd be put out by any artist who chose to include in the performance an irrelevant rant about politics. If you've got a song about starving babies in Africa, fine, but I don't want to hear lectures about it between songs

in other words, Shut up and sing (wasnt that a book by Laura Ingrham). You're right, Michelle learned the hard way. But lets be honest, the audience was there to have Michelle give them lectures about politics in between the songs. They just thought they would be lectures about occupy Wall Street and not anti gay marriage.

Matt said...

jr565

Are white supremacist views out of touch to you? Where do you draw the line?

That isn't even an argument against gays at all, but against govt.

Um no. An argument against government would criticize the government directly for getting involved in marriage rights. Saying that: it will be the downfall of civilization, and Jesus will come back....the world will be destroyed if gays are allowed to marry.... falls under homophobia and crazy. And not crazy because I don't agree with it. Crazy because it is weird and possibly hysterical.

On a similar note there some conspiracy nuts on the left who thought the Bush administration had a hand in the tragedies of 9/11. They are stupid and crazy. Even though I may agree with them on other issues.

SGT Ted said...

I can remember when I was young that people went out to hear folk musicians speak the truth to power.

Now, young people go out to hear folk musicians kiss ass and swear allegiance to the reigning ideology.



yes, yes, yes, a thousand times yes.

What I loved about rock and roll in ther 60s-70s era(folk music too) was that the musicians very much had a "fuck you" attitude towards authority. That inspired my own life, musically as well.

That changed in the 80s, starting with with 'Feed the World" and then going Full Stupid Ahead into leftist cause advocacy. It's been downhill ever since.

Now they cheer leftwing politicans on stage. They make me want to puke.

Youngblood said...

"Oh see where you're going with that. Private business is inviolate and I agree. I hope you have the courage the stand up for that too.

San Francisco Third City To Keep Out Chick-Fil-A. I know that was a while ago, but did they ever allow/invite them back?
"

I hit that pointearlier. Do a search on this page for 'Chick-Fil-A' and you'll find that I blasted the mayors who said that they were going to block Chick-Fil-A earlier.

Follow the comment thread a little past that, and you'll see where I said that politicians pulling that shit, even if they don't follow through, has a chilling effect on freedom of conscience.

I know that you thought that was going to be a great "gotcha", but... yeah... sorry for ruining that, I guess.

Of course, you can't keep yourself from turning Shocked's concert appearance into a free speech issue, if by implication this time. As I said earlier, public officials who threatened to block Chick-Fil-A were in clear violation of the First Amendment. That's a free speech issue.

The owner of a private venue refusing to allow his venue to be used as a forum for speech that he disagrees with (and which is driving off his customers on top of that) is not a free speech issue. Nobody arrested Shocked, she wasn't thrown in jail or fined and (unlike Chick-Fil-A or Dan T. Cathy) no public officials made any threats.

SGT Ted said...

No, no, no.

This is not about speech, people.

This is about the hypocricy and one-way-street political bullshit of the "Diversity and Tolerance" crowd.

SGT Ted said...

Opposition to The Cause will not be tolerated.

jr565 said...

Matt wrote:
Um no. An argument against government would criticize the government directly for getting involved in marriage rights. Saying that: it will be the downfall of civilization, and Jesus will come back....the world will be destroyed if gays are allowed to marry.... falls under homophobia and crazy. And not crazy because I don't agree with it. Crazy because it is weird and possibly hysterical.

well that true. But in fact, the prayer group made the argument that they would be forced to maryr gays through govt coercion. Leaving aside what they might think about the end of he world, is that a) an argument that is that far fetched and b) one that can't be uttered in polite company without it being a sign that you hate gays?

jr565 said...

Youngblood wrote:
I know that you thought that was going to be a great "gotcha", but... yeah... sorry for ruining that, I guess.

for someone who,is therefore in agreement with the point, you seem to be awfully argumentative.

phx said...

This is about the hypocricy and one-way-street political bullshit of the "Diversity and Tolerance" crowd.

This is just my opinion and I could be wrong.

Politically that's a big fat losing argument for the right. Just for one thing they always have to end up defending the worst people in order to make it. And then it becomes apparent a lot of them DO like those people after all.

Philosophically, or ethically, that would be an interesting argument for some objective and nonpartisan skilled thinkers to hash out. Although I'm not very smart I'll bet it's pretty simple shit. It's been done a million times but even coming on it for the first time the answer isn't difficult.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 214   Newer› Newest»