The Gay Last Supper and Concerned Women for America

Apparently, there's a small (yet predictable) uproar among the conservative community over this picture.

The Concerned Women for America have something to say about it in their article "'Gays' Mock Jesus with Last Supper Take-Off."

There are many entertaining bits in this article, the first being the unnecessary use of quotation mark around "Gays" in the title of their article. Is the CWA implying that the people in the picture are not really gay? Are they mocking the fact that many gay people call themselves "gay" and not "homosexual"? Is the conservative label "homosexual" the only true descriptor and any other label, other than fag, an example of political correctness gone awry?

Inquiring minds want to know.

But that's all a digression from the true humor in the article.

The first quote is this:

"A picture's worth a thousand words," said Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA). "Scripture says that God is not mocked, yet it doesn't stop people from trying. As evidenced by this latest stunt, open ridicule of Christianity is unfortunately very common within much of the homosexual community."

Thanks, Matt. Ladies, gentlemen, let's all listen to what Matt Barber of the Concerned Women for America says women in America should be concerned about.

Does anyone else think it's weird that the policy director of a so-called woman's group is... not a woman?

To be fair, the "vision statement" of the CWA is this:

The vision of CWA is for women and like-minded men, from all walks of life, to come together and restore the family to its traditional purpose and thereby allow each member of the family to realize their God-given potential and be more responsible citizens.

Let's dissect that.

"The vision of CWA is for women and like-minded men...."

You know, I'm all for open-minded men joining "women's causes." Unfortunately, I don't see CWA as a women's cause- or at least not a woman's cause that promotes gender equality.

"...restore the family to its traditional purpose and thereby allow each member of the family to realize their God-given potential and be more responsible citizens."

I see it as an anti-feminist organization that is more concerned with putting women back in their traditional, subordinate-to-men roles in society than anything else. For a man to be part of such an organization is not exactly noble, in my eyes, as his place in the "traditional" family is supreme. Wouldn't it, in fact, be in the interest of men to promote this conception of the "traditional" family? (I don't believe it's in their interest, but that's a blog for another day).

So yeah, I'm more impressed by men who really do care about true equality for women. And, I'm more impressed by men who realize that feminism can benefit both men and women, and that traditional family roles harm and limit both genders.

Alas, Matt continues:

"'Gay' activists disingenuously call Christians 'haters' and 'homophobes' for honoring the Bible, [rant about how the picture makes the Baby Jesus cry]"

Matt, I object. "Gay" activists call some "Christians" haters and homophobes because some "Christians" truly are haters and homophobes. There's nothing disingenuous about that.

And let me repeat, calling some "Christians" bigots is a reaction to fundamentalist "Christian" intolerance. Our intolerance is of fundamentalist "Christian" intolerance of gay people.

Shall we continue?

Matt does:

"We're calling on California's elected officials - Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Governor Schwarzenegger and Senators Feinstein and Boxer - to publicly condemn this unprovoked attack against Christ and His followers."

Nope. There's that pesky separation of Church and State bit, remember? This CWA challenge is meant for our elected, tax-payer funded officials to prove how "Christian" they are and how free speech doesn't really mean free speech and certainly doesn't apply to artistic freedom.

"We further challenge the media to cover this affront to Christianity with the same vigor as recent stories about cartoon depictions of Mohammed and other items offensive to the Muslim community."

Everyone remember the offensive Muslim cartoon incident? It was offensive because in the Muslim faith it is blasphemous to draw Mohammed.

This Gay Last Supper is so offensive to some Christians that the CWA posted multiple links on its site urging viewers to check it out!

In fact, what is most funny about conservative websitse is that they cover gay events and goings-on so comprehensively that they often inform gay people that a popular gay event took place! Want to find out where the "it" party of the season is? See the CWA's website for details!

And, they will take pictures at these events, post them on their websites, and with a tattling tone say "Look here! Everybody look at the gays! Look how immoral, vile, and disgusting they are!" When one can't help but wonder why some Christians would want to look at such immorality in the first place. Seriously. It's like manhunt for the Christian crowd.


Sweet baby Jesus!