Montana | News

BigGayDeal.com

'Not Homophobic' Montana Lawmaker Compares 'Deviate' Gay Sex to a Pen That Retracts: VIDEO

2_hagstrom

Yesterday I reported that after many years the Montana legislature finally repealed its unenforceable statute criminalizing gay sex. One of the nuttier speeches during the 25 minute second reading of the bill came when Rep. Dave Hagstrom stood up to explain his 'no' vote and compared gay sex to a pen in its retracted position. Hagstrom prefaced his remarks by saying that he has "a lot of love and respect for a whole number of homosexual friends, so there’s no homophobic issues going on here at all."

Said Hagstrom:

“I don’t think that homosexual sex is necessarily not deviate. Bad word? Deviate simply means it’s not normal, it’s not typical....This pen has two purposes. The first purpose, of course, is to write. The second purpose is to retract, so that it doesn’t leave a stain on your shirt or your purse. So it has two purposes, but one is primary and the other is secondary. To me, sex’s primary purpose is to produce people, that’s why we’re all here. Sex that doesn’t produce people is deviate. That doesn’t mean that it’s a problem. It just means it’s not doing its primary purpose. So I’m just speaking to the bill and I encourage people to vote red.”

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

I've also posted the entire 25 minutes if you have the time - it's quite interesting.

Mtvote

Here's yesterday's full debate, which is quite fascinating:

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. "Gay sex is not a problem, and I love gay people, and I'm not a homophobe...but come on. You gotta vote no, guys."

    Posted by: Mike8787 | Apr 11, 2013 9:27:48 AM


  2. Someone needs to learn about Bonobos. Our closest simian relative.

    Posted by: Steve | Apr 11, 2013 9:32:08 AM


  3. Morons have no legitimate arguments. This one is reeeeaaaaaly out there. But 1 point for trying, nutcase ;)

    Posted by: TheNeighbor | Apr 11, 2013 9:32:10 AM


  4. So couples who use contraception are 'deviates' as well?

    Posted by: Uger | Apr 11, 2013 9:34:35 AM


  5. These right-wingers and their bizarre analogies are just too much. Retracting pens and stains?

    Posted by: Jack M | Apr 11, 2013 9:42:14 AM


  6. Do these people actually think thse tortured analogies are really going to be some kind of A-Ha momentthat would turn the argument from human rights to -oh we can't have this because of the pen"? Sad really that they are reduced to this.

    Honestly all I got out of it was - oh a retractible pen is uncircumsized.


    Posted by: Rob | Apr 11, 2013 9:47:26 AM


  7. First, the right has NO logical defense against SSM.

    Second, the right wing talking point only in favor of opposite sex marriage is that "sex’s (and marriage's) primary purpose is to produce people". Yes, many times sex between a male and female will produce offspring.

    Third, if the right wing believes sex has a "primary" purpose, then they must believe there are secondary purposes as well. Sex between consenting opposite sex adults doesn't always result in offspring be they infertile, too old or just not interested in bearing children. So, is this unlawful sex in these eyes of these extremists?

    Fourth, the same applies to SS couples so get over it!

    Posted by: HadenoughBS | Apr 11, 2013 9:49:06 AM


  8. So sex that doesn't result in reproduction should be illegal? Punishable by up to 10 years in prison? Everyone knows that criminalizing gay sex is just a cute way of criminalizing being gay.

    The same politicans voting against this bill, are the same ones opposed to marriage equality. Proving our point that being opposed to marriage equality makes one a bigot.

    Posted by: Chris | Apr 11, 2013 9:56:42 AM


  9. He could also use that pen to gouge out his eye, and save me the trouble.

    Posted by: Bic | Apr 11, 2013 10:01:28 AM


  10. I'd love to meet his (most likely non-existant) gay friends. He literally wants to throw them in jail for being gay. Does he tell them that?

    Posted by: Bill S. | Apr 11, 2013 10:04:17 AM


  11. I love this new conservative ploy of claiming not to be a homophobe/bigot and really liking gay folks...BUT...then going into the most insane reasons for why we are really a bunch of disgusting, disturbed, deviants. If this is the way you think about all your gay "friends" they aren't going to be your friends for long.

    Posted by: e.c. | Apr 11, 2013 10:05:33 AM


  12. I'm certain he has a number of immutable traits that would fall under the same definition of "deviate" that he is using.

    His vertex balding, for example, has been recently linked to premature cardiac death. Just how is this helpful for the future of our species to be reproducing with such dangerous genetics?

    Posted by: Sean in Dallas | Apr 11, 2013 10:10:38 AM


  13. The retracting of a pen is a feature not a purpose.

    Posted by: Andy | Apr 11, 2013 10:17:28 AM


  14. Thoroughly offensive and objectionable, my ancesters, found on documents throughout history, would take issue with this especially our forefathers the cap and cross brand of our family tree -humphf!

    Posted by: Mr. Black Flair Finepoint | Apr 11, 2013 10:27:04 AM


  15. "To me, sex’s primary purpose is to produce people, that’s why we’re all here. Sex that doesn’t produce people is deviate. That doesn’t mean that it’s a problem. It just means it’s not doing its primary purpose."

    So.... If the gentlemen is being honest (!) and he really doesn't think "sex that doesn't produce people" is not a problem, as he claims - then why would he still vote NO?

    Why would he want to maintain a state law that has been unenforceable since Lawrence v Texas (2003)?

    Posted by: AdamTh | Apr 11, 2013 10:33:10 AM


  16. What a nut job, & with a straight face. These fools.

    Posted by: terryp | Apr 11, 2013 10:33:40 AM


  17. OK, so why have an unenforceable making this variety of "deviate sex" a felony? Why equate it with sex with animals? Why exclude straight "deviate sex"?

    Posted by: Kyle | Apr 11, 2013 11:01:38 AM


  18. So if I leave a certain kind of stain on his shirt or purse he'll vote in favor of repealing an unconstitutional law?

    Posted by: D | Apr 11, 2013 11:02:23 AM


  19. "Do you want to know how simple-minded I think you, my fellow Montanan legislators, are? I'm reducing this issue to something you can perhaps understand. See this pen...?

    Posted by: Dastius Krazitauc | Apr 11, 2013 11:21:46 AM


  20. Wait...I thought it was a paper towel/napkin dichotomy. At least that's what Santorum said during the primaries. Which is it?

    Posted by: Anastasia Beaverhausen | Apr 11, 2013 11:27:34 AM


  21. Whenever I hear arguments like this, I always think "what about the lesbians?" the forgotten part of the "gay population." you know, half of the entire gay population.

    Posted by: jj | Apr 11, 2013 11:43:50 AM


  22. the day that Uruguay legalizes marriage Equality is the same day that 34 (?) Republicans voted to keep consenting sexual activity between two adults of the same sex/gender a felony.

    it's a good thing the GOP is the party for smaller less-intrusive government that respects the individual, eh?

    and JJ, YES! there's a VERRRRRYYYY specific reason these anti-gay types don't get up in front of their crowds and graphically describe lesbian sex acts. word.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Apr 11, 2013 11:51:07 AM


  23. his logic is so monstrously flawed it laughable - "To me, sex’s primary purpose is to produce people, that’s why we’re all here. Sex that doesn’t produce people is deviate."

    does he realize that he has just eliminated ALL sex by the vast majority of straight people? he also has given the perfect objection for anyone who wants to marry but can't 'produce people'. hear that, ye ole farts?

    Posted by: mike/ | Apr 11, 2013 12:02:37 PM


  24. Sex with contraceptives is deviate for this guy...are you listening heterosexuals?

    Posted by: Gus | Apr 11, 2013 12:02:45 PM


  25. Why the fear of decriminalizing gay sex? That's kinda the definition of a phobia; so...yes, you are a homophobe. And though "deviate" may classically mean to go against the "norm", it also has a connotation that's not so nice....like "santorum". So, don't play cutesie with the English language when you obviously haven't the skills. Oh, and by the way, don't be in a leadership position when you're so bad at it.

    Posted by: woodroad34d | Apr 11, 2013 12:03:18 PM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Rick Santorum Invited Back to Michigan High School After Cancellation« «