ENDA | Family Research Council | Louie Gohmert | News

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) Says ENDA is 'War on Religion', Rips Those Who Ignore 'Plumbing God Created': VIDEO

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) had a chat with Family Research Council hate group leader Tony Perkins today, and Perkins asked Gohmert about the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which had a hearing today in the Senate, Right Wing Watch reports.

GohmertAsked Perkins:

"What this would do is give special employment benefits and protections based upon their sexual behavior and orientation. What do you see as the outcome of this? I mean, are you concerned increasingly that this is a way to essentially punish religious freedom in the business environment, in the business sector?"

Replied Gohmert:

"It continues to be part of this administration’s ongoing war on religion, on particularly Judeo-Christian values. But of course this is one that even is extremely contrary to the Muslim religion as well. I mean, Islam, Judaism, although there are plenty of people in Judaism and Christianity who think despite the plumbing that God created, that as the Iowa Supreme Court said, there is no biological evidence of a preference for a man and a woman being married as opposed to a man and a man...It also means that Christian schools will be forced to hire openly homosexual individuals, and it’s kind of tough to teach biblical principles in Romans 1 in a school if you are of the persuasion of being homosexual."


Feed This post's comment feed


  1. @ DAWS - he's still in his fifties. He can be around messing things up for quite awhile.

    Posted by: Mike in the Tundra | Jun 13, 2012 8:24:34 AM

  2. If your morality is based on plumbing, I think you've sort of missed the point.

    Posted by: Hunter | Jun 13, 2012 8:49:59 AM

  3. He was probably bullied in school.

    Posted by: anon | Jun 13, 2012 11:22:02 AM

  4. What low-level life forms would vote for this ignorant and deeply uneducated bigot?

    Not a single thing this man said make any sense whatsoever.

    Posted by: Tyler | Jun 13, 2012 11:36:45 AM

  5. I really wonder if these guys get what religious freedom has historically meant? That they can choose or make a church, attend, and worship as they see fit. That the king or Pope cannot tell you what to believe. That you will not be killed for disagreeing with the majority religion of a country. Yet what they want to do is impose their narrow minded anti science, anti history, anti scholarly understanding of religion on everyone. And they do not speak for all Christians.

    Posted by: Tom in long beach | Jun 13, 2012 12:19:30 PM

  6. Although it might not matter, I think it is interesting that Rep. Gohmert, a proclaimed evangelical christian and social conservative, gives an oblique, almost respectful "shout out" to Muslims.

    It must be noted that prior to the infamy of 9/11, there was a concerted behind-the-scenes effort by a group of pro-business Republicans led by Grover Norquist to reach out to the Muslim community in America in the hopes of influencing them to vote for Republican candidates.

    Muslims were then, and still are now, a fast-growing ethnic group in America. Norquist et al felt that the Muslim community was fertile ground for recruitment into the Republican Party. Muslims, as we know, are socially conservative, but they are also pro-business and distrustful of government--just the type of group that would be likely to vote Republican.

    Muslims do share the same socially-conservative values as evangelical, fundamentalist christians (the GOP's vaunted base) and many are the evangelicals and other social conservatives who have expressed an almost envy and an approving attitude that gays are imprisoned and executed in Muslim countries.

    If the Republican base can change its attitudes toward having a Mormon as its presidential standard-bearer, then it can change its attitudes towards Muslims. Both Mormons and Muslims could very easily be brought into the Republican fold, not as outsiders to be viewed suspiciously even if their votes are needed, but as welcome participants, which would spell big trouble for the Democratic Party and for liberal, progressive values--which are the values that America was founded upon (despite Republican propaganda to the contrary).

    Never underestimate the power of the hatred that social conservatives of any stripe have for LGBT people and the possibility of that power to unite the disparate but socially-conservative elements of the Republican party.

    LGBT people, by our very existence and humanity, expose the three Abrahamic faiths for what they are: spiritually-decadent, psychopathic, misogynistic patriarchies that deviously cloak the evil pathology of their religions in the banalities of "revealed knowledge" and "infallible truth".

    It is frightening enough to contemplate a Romney presidency possibly supported by a Republican congressional majority. But, to contemplate that the Republicans could convert their religious and theological differences into a unifying ideology that guarantees electoral superiority for generations is downright terrifying.

    Posted by: jamal49 | Jun 13, 2012 12:30:26 PM

  7. "it’s kind of tough to teach biblical principles in Romans 1 in a school if you are of the persuasion of being homosexual."

    It's really not hard at all, since Romans 1 expresses Paul's opinion about an orgy by straight, married men at a religious seevice, in which the orgy is a ritual for the worship of animals. It has NOTHING to do with gay couples.

    It would be tricky, though, for a woman to teach boys and girls Timothy 2:12, since it forbids her from taking a job as a teacher and says she has to stay silent.

    It would also be tricky for any teacher with a garden to teach Leviticus,, since most every garden has at least two kinds of seeds planted, which Leviticus calls an abomination.

    And it would also be impossible for a teacher to wear a cotton-polyester blend shirt and still teach Leviticus, wouldn't it, Gohmert.

    Oh yeah, we don't have toconcern ourselves with that because we don't live in a theocracy like Afghanistan. So I guess teachers can wear what they want to wear, plant what they want to plant and go home to the person they love. And kids can learn how to add and subtract and spell and not worry about the teacher's religion. It's called freedom.

    Posted by: Gregv | Jun 13, 2012 2:19:12 PM

  8. Oh, they know the end is coming for their HATE and bigotry hurting GLBT Americans. They can continue to twist words all they want, bu their pathetic HATE and desperation makes them look even more RIDICULOUS.

    Posted by: FunMe | Jun 13, 2012 3:58:44 PM

  9. Religion seems to be a war on the world and it's people

    Posted by: Keith Richard Radford Jr | Jun 13, 2012 6:32:51 PM

  10. Perkins asks Gohmert a stupid question, "...this is a way to essentially punish religious freedom in the business environment, in the business sector?" Gohmett then replies with a stupid answer that doesn't even answer Perkins' question, covering such "relevant" topics as Christian schools, the Iowa Supreme Court, and the plumbing that God created.

    These two are straight out of "Deliverance."

    Posted by: ROBERT K | Jun 13, 2012 8:47:31 PM

  11. People might wish to call for the immediate death of this man but, as a federally elected official, he's protected by special laws against such threats. In addition, should he be assaulted, he's also protected by a law mandating extra charges when injuring a federal official.

    Posted by: mike flower | Jun 14, 2012 3:18:30 AM

  12. « 1 2

Post a comment


« «Betty White Talks About Her Meeting with Obama, Gay Marriage« «