And Speaking of Not Having Sex in Public Restrooms...

... it's time, once again, to turn our attention to Jim Naugle, whose supporters have launched a new website devoted to... well, it's hard to tell what they're devoted to. Supporting Jim Naugle, obviously. And, according to their press release, they think AIDS is a bad thing. No argument there. They think people shouldn't have sex in public. Okay so far. So how does that translate into slandering the gay community and lying about a non-existent problem? And what does any of this have to do with building a robotic toilet that costs more than some people's houses, exactly?

You can read all about this new brain trust here.

Here's Jim Naugle, in his own words. And, you know, with some of my commentary.

"I've taken a stand against sex in public restrooms, particularly in parks or at the beach where people want to take their children to the bathroom." He said Broward's bathroom sex "has exclusively been men having sex with men."

Actually, it's been exclusively "nobody having sex with anybody else," if you trust the police. But I guess police officers can't really be trusted when it comes to homosexuality-- one of their own was in the Village People, for God's sake!

Although this does bring up an interesting point-- Naugle claims that public sex is a distinctly homosexual phenomenon. I disagree-- I happen to know quite a few heterosexual people who have committed sexual acts in places where they might be discovered. As I type this, experts estimate that, somewhere, 4.2 American teenage girls are going down on a teenage boy in a car. And by "experts" I mean "no one." But still-- if Jim Naugle gets to make stuff up, so do I.

"They're accusing me of being a homophobe, a bigot and engaging in hate speech... Speaking out against an illegal act has become hate speech in the minds of many in my city.''

Jim, Jim, Jim... sometimes it's hard to tell when you're being dishonest, and when you're just truly dim. You can understand that, can't you? No? Oh, okay. Dim, then.

No one has accused you of "hate speech" because you've spoken out "against an illegal act." We've accused you of hate speech because you've suggested that homosexuals are unhappy degenerates whose orientation compels them to have sex in public places. Do some gay people have sex in public? Undoubtedly, yes. Do some straight people? Based on people I've known (and purely scientific Internet research looking for photographic documentation), the answer, again, seems to be yes. Should these people be arrested and charged when they commit these crimes? Yes, absolutely. Can we make broad generalizations about gay people just because some of them enjoy the same kink as some straight people?

No. No, no, no, no!

Seriously, you're not the victim in this situation, Jim. You're the liar who has tried to attack an entire group of people just because you think their sexual preferences are "icky." You do realize that you're completely empowered to not imagine the sex other people are having, right? It's quite easy-- I do it all the time. And if the police receive a complaint or discover people having sex in public, then yeah-- enforce the law. But we don't need robot toilets that cost a quarter of a million dollars. That idea was just moronic. And we certainly don't need a mayor who think it's his duty to attack and insult innocent, law-abiding people just because he thinks he's better than they are.

Newer Post Older Post Home