Pastor Wants to Hang ‘Bloody Scalps’ of Pro-Equality NY GOP Senators ‘Over the Senate Rail’ as Warning to Others

Following an interview with NOM's Maggie Gallagher on his radio show Wallbuilders Live with co-host Rick Green earlier this week, Evangelical pastor and conservative activist David Barton came up with a rather graphic solution to making an example of the four NY GOP Senators who voted to pass marriage equality.

Barton Said Barton:

"No disrespect to our Native American friends, but this is where you hang a bloody scalp over the gallery rail. You hang these four Republican scalps over the Senate rail and every other Republican senator looks up and sees those scalps and says, ‘my gosh, I’ll be hanging up there beside them if I don’t stay with this pro-family stuff.’ And that’s exactly what has to happen."

Listen to the audio at Right Wing Watch.


  1. say what says

    no offense to crazy xtinaistas but this is when you send in police detectives and at least 1 criminal psychologist to see if Mr. Barton needs a nice long vacation to protect the public from him

  2. David says

    I think we need to call out everyone who says they are pro-family or is try to save marriage…they need to corrected to say that they are Anti-Gay and Anti- Same Sex Marriage. It always sounds better if you are for something….like you are doing something to affect positive change – when actually it is just clever hucksterism.

  3. Ben says

    First off, this man is a pastor?? It’s VERY obvious in everything about his comments he does not read from the same Bible as I do. He started off by saying “no disrespect to our Native American friends” knowing that what he was going to say was certainly going to be disrespectful. And being Native American, I was offended. THEN, what about the commandment of “Thou shall not kill?” Pretty much doing what he said would be four killings. And being gay, I’m offended by the whole bunch of NOM. And Gallagher had better look at her life and think about the path she has taken and would she have had those options a few years back had it not been for equality fights.

  4. Chadd says

    I am absolutely Positive that is exactly would Jesus himself would recommend. After all, fictional characters in fictional books can be made to say anything.

    Have you ever met an anti-gay atheist?

  5. luminum says

    Look, he’s just speaking in metaphors. Violently cutting off someone’s scalp and hanging it as an example is just a metaphor for scaring people into doing what you want them to do otherwise they’ll face terrible consequences. Just a metaphor using murderous, violent imagery to make sure people are scared enough to do what you want them to do. What’s wrong with that? Seriously.

  6. ohplease says


    But: “they need to corrected to say that they are Anti-Gay and Anti- Same Sex Marriage”? Since there is no such thing as same-sex marriage (there’s just marriage, the one and only, which is what we’re fighting for and what NY state made available to gay couples through marriage equality), the truth is that people like this sad unfortunate psycho are simply “anti-marriage”. If he wasn’t anti-marriage, he’d want every couple to have access to it, wouldn’t he? He’d want every child to be protected by it. He’d be “pro-marriage”. But he’s not. So the question is: why does he hate marriage so much?

  7. say what says


    Till a criminal psychologist axctually7 checks the guy out, one can not assume he is not a sociopath and the threat was not serious

    Time to ready the net, straight jacket, meds, and a nice comfortable padded cell just in case

  8. pedro says

    @Chad, yes there are many anti-gay atheists. They use evolutionary arguments and the idea of natural law to justify their homophobia. You’ll find many of their videos on YouTube.

  9. Jack says

    @Say What:

    Irrelevant in terms of whether or not he can be punished for it. A reasonable recipient of that message would not believe it to be a serious expression of intent to commit violence on another person, and would understand that he is speaking metaphorically on a political issue.

    If you think any court would rule otherwise, you’re as crackers as the good Reverend himself.

  10. TampaZeke says

    Well at least he made it clear that he didn’t mean any disrespect to his blood thirsty, red skinned, savage, scalping Native Americans friends.

    Kinda the way he never means any offense to his dirty, perverted, disgusting and dangerous faggot Homa-sek-shul “friends” when he say something stupid about gay people.

    No offense taken Mr Barton. With no disrespect to my mentally challenged friends, I understand that you are simply a retarded, crazy, schizophrenic, sociopathic, paranoid, racist Christofascist, homophobe with Turret’s syndrome.

    That is all.

  11. David says

    The name of his radio show says it all “Wall Builders” — LOL.

    It’s axiomatic at this point that the most power-hungry people cloak themselves in religious language to bolster their crumbling egos. No use trying to reason with them, they’re half-asleep.

  12. Robert in NYC says

    He’s nothing more than a terrorist and should be arrested for issuing violent threats against a political figure. This is a criminal act, illegal to threaten any politician in our society with violence. Barton should be arrested and charged to the fullest extent of the law.

  13. johnny says

    Sure, sane people don’t see this as a death threat. It’s the INSANE, RABID ones that see it as a call to action, and that’s what is scary about his quote.

    Such a nice, Christian man.

  14. Jack says

    @David Ehrenstein:

    It was me, not Northoftheborder who told you to get real. And I’m telling you, as a lawyer, that the full force of the law can’t touch this guy, as stupid and reprehensible as his remarks were.

  15. jerry says

    I think Robert in NYC is correct. He is nut-job and a dangerous nut-job at that. Remember Sarah Palin’s rifle scope crosshairs, oh excuse me, “surveyor’s marks” and what they led to with Representative Giffords.
    He needs to be prosecuted for terroristic threats. the progressive people of this country can no longer be passive, they must start being more pro-active and not just reactive.

  16. Jack says

    @Robert in NYC and Jerry:

    It was plain that he was speaking on a political issue in metaphorical terms. There’s this thing called the First Amendment, and it protects speech like this, as much as we might find it irresponsible and reprehensible.

  17. jpeckjr says

    @luminum and @jack: Yes, he was using metaphorical language. But he could have made his point with a less bloody metaphor. “Those who oppose this immorality must become a great wave at the ballot box and wash these senators out of office.”

    The problem is with those who listen to preachers like this, will take the metaphor literally, and be inspired to violence, probably not against these four senators, but against a random gay man walking his dog in a usually safe Rochester neighborhood.

  18. walter says

    these people who profess to be christian spend more time hating anyone different than they are. these are real christian values. how did texas get more than its share of asshats?

  19. Jack says


    I agree that his phrasing could have, and should have been less violent. I’m 100% with you on that.

    @STEVE (and JPECKJR):

    It doesn’t matter if the actual recipient thinks it’s a threat. In order to lose First Amendment protection, a “reasonable recipient” would have to be able to interpret the statement as an actual threat to do violence. Not present in this case.

    And we punish the people who take the metaphor literally and commit acts of violence, not the speaker. This isn’t a true threat, nor is it likely to incite imminent lawless action.

    Legally, the preacher is untouchable on this one. Morally, he’ll burn in hell longer than any of us will.

  20. Hollywood, CA says

    No disrespect to the Native Americans??? That is a fking joke! The only minority group worse off in America and this idiot has the nerve to say something like this. I need an OLD WHITE MALE REPUBLICAN blocker for my computer… cannot deal.

  21. jerry says

    Jack, tell you what, why don’t you write a letter to an elected official and tell him or her, in writing with your return address and contact information available, that because of “x” action on their part, their bloody scalp should be nailed to a rail in their legislative assembly building. You do that and see who comes visiting you.

  22. Mike says

    First: Jesus says pay your taxes.

    Second: For those who say it’s not a serious threat? Only until someone takes him up on it.

    Third: Religious mania is a treatable psychological disorder.

  23. Jack says


    You’re an idiot. First of all, that wouldn’t be a true threat either. “Should” be nailed to a rail does not =/= I’m going to do it. See United States v. Bagdasarian, No. 09-50529, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14684 (9th Cir. 2011).

    Furthermore, assuming that the text would read “I will do X” instead of “X should happen,” sending a private letter to an individual is distinguishable from making a public comment on a highly politicized issue. The former being not so much indicative of making a metaphorical point as opposed to the latter.

  24. Mykelb says

    The scalps that need to be taken are those of the lying pastors, preachers, priests, rabbis, imams, cardinals, and popes. However, we should start with those that fund these nutballs organizaitons in the first place.

  25. Jack says

    Careful, MYKELB, some on this thread would say you’ve just committed an arrestable offense.

    Well, maybe not. They would probably only think that if they disagreed with you.

  26. Chuck Mielke says

    @ Luminum,

    I get the feeling your kidding but, just for my own peace of mind, I always thought it was the bad guys who ruled through fear and intimidation.

  27. Dback says

    I’d love to hear some Native American tribes and people comment on this statement, especially Two-Spirit people. I somehow doubt they’d be thrilled with his metaphor.

  28. jerry says

    United States v. Bagdasarian, No. 09-50529, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14684 (9th Cir. 2011)
    Circuit Judge wardlaw’s dissent from the majority, albeit concurring in part, was far more compelling having considered the totality of the circumstances that the majority clearly failed to do so.

  29. Jack says


    And yet, the dissent has absolutely zero legal authority. The majority opinion was in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Watts v. United States.

    You think the dissent is more compelling because you agree with it. But it is irrelevant. The majority opinion is in line with settled precedent across the nation.

    And this case is even more solid than Bagdasarian’s. No reasonable person can see this as an actual threat of violence. The only people who would interpret it that way are the ones who want him imprisoned because they don’t agree with him. I sincerely doubt you’d think there was an offense worthy of imprisonment if someone said they wanted to string up this kook, or Michele Bachmann, or any other villain on the right.

    You are transparent. You want someone punished by the law because they do not agree with you. I can’t imagine anything more un-American.

  30. Joseph Singer says

    Isn’t it interesting that saying “no offense intended” absolves the person making the statement and allows that person to use that language anyway? It’s like they give themselves the license to be vulgar.

  31. Peter says

    Hitler posing as a Christian. Get rid of this maniac and mad man NOW. Looking for power and money sacrificing things he doubts in himself, cause HE LOOKS SUPER GAY and probably is.

  32. Tanner says

    Oh YEAH?! Well I want to suspend Pastor Barton from an A320 by slamming his testicles in the cargo door, and flying from LaGuardia to Miami, but we can’t always get what we want now, can we?

    Too bad he wasn’t in Canada; he’d be jailed for saying things like that.

  33. billmiller says

    Good comments all!!! I was raised in the church, Presbyterian, and learned through life to hate myself, I’ve gotten over most of the guilt. This man is a danger to all who listen to him! Wallbuilders is a great name for his show, he is really doing that well! Psychopaths unite! What a pitiful excuse for a Christ-Like preacher he is!

  34. Frank says

    What does he mean “no disrespect to our Native American friends”? In what way is his statement disrespectful if he’s condoning a practice associated in the popular imagination with (some tribes of) Native Americans. Silly. I assume it’s just a matter of time before he’s found traveling with a young male “luggage carrier” or tapping his foot in a airport men’s room.

Leave A Reply