Joe The Plumber: “It’s Called ‘Queer’…It’s Not Like A Slur”
May 4th, 2009, 6:21 PM EDT
Who on the right, in addition to Meghan McCain, will stand up and say this guy doesn’t speak for them? Non-Joe the non-licensed plumber spoke with” Christianity Today” about his Christian faith and the future of the Republican Party.
Some highlights:
- As far as the government goes, the Founding Fathers based the Constitution off of Christian values.
- People don’t understand the dictionary-it’s called queer. Queer means strange and unusual. It’s not like a slur, like you would call a white person a honky or something like that. You know, God is pretty explicit in what we’re supposed to do-what man and woman are for.
- I’ve had some friends that are actually homosexual. And, I mean, they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn’t have them anywhere near my children.
- Every state has “In God we trust” or “With God’s help” in their constitution. God is recognized as, if you will, America’s religion.
- I would love to hear our leaders actually check with God before he does stuff.
Anyone who thinks the “founding fathers” based the constitution off of Christian values is a lunatic. Read Madison’s notes, helpfully compiled by Max Farrand (”The Framing of the Constitution of the United States”).
Additionally, the veneration of a group of white men who came together during a hot Philadelphia summer to correct an ineffective form of government has to stop. They were men, and they were flawed. Their governmental system is also flawed. To hold them up, and the constitution, as some sort of a-historical document that can guide a people over 200 years later is absurd. If we followed their every rule, we would still have slaves, no direct election of senators, and women in a subordinate position in society. Acting as if the rich white men who wrote the constitution were divinely inspired (or divine themselves) is just a form of ancestor worship. Oh, the Founders instructed us to do this. All hail the Founders and their illustrious document that allows for slavery.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
Wow, that sounds like a liberal call for revolution if I ever heard one…anti-american…treason…etc…
the beauty of the constitution is that it recognized it’s own fallibility and provided a mechanism to correct itself. If you really don’t like something try going to through the proper channels…yes it’s difficult and it’s meant to be.
Liberal equals Freedom Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Using complete sentences and logical reasoning, please point out the “anti-American,” revolutionary, or treasonous parts of my post.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
They were men, and they were flawed. Their governmental system is also flawed.
—
To hold them up, and the constitution, as some sort of a-historical document that can guide a people over 200 years later is absurd.
—
Oh, the Founders instructed us to do this. All hail the Founders and their illustrious document
just cut and paste homeslice.
besides, my first not quite a sentence was dry sarcasm, in an attempt to mock those that say similar things when people rally or call for changes. If you would have heard the voice in my head as I typed it, you would’ve laughed.
You of course have the right to say whatever it is that you please. but I do suggest that you take another look at the document that you metaphorically tread upon and see the genius that it is.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
“Using complete sentences and logical reasoning, please point out the “anti-American,” revolutionary, or treasonous parts of my post.”
Fail.
The problem here of course is that in the paranoid mentality of the radical evangelical extremists any criticism is treason, and any thought not endorsed by the NRA or the “bible” is evil.
Liberal equals Freedom Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Pointing out that the Constitution is a document made by flawed men is not treason. We constantly refer back to the “founders” like some sort of mythical race of super-humans, by whom we should base all of our modern decisions. Does no one else realize how crazy that is? They lived in a different world than we do, a vastly different world. Each historical epoch is unique to itself, and an over reliance on the past (and this extreme “founder worship”) is a growing problem. We should be focusing on how we can learn from the past while looking toward the future. We should never care what past leaders would think of us today, because they’d probably hate us for extending the franchise beyond rich white men.
The point I’m making here is the same one that Nietzsche made. Look to the past for inspiration and good examples, but do not look to it as a guidebook. The same can be said of the government handed down to us. I’m not implying a new constitution/revolution or anything like that (and I think it says a lot about you that you immediately jumped to that point), but a reminder that historical documents are just that – historical. Caveat lector.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 11:55 pm
so looking to an old dead man to justify your views on other old dead men…awesome…
like I said, read the constitution and find it’s brilliance. The founding fathers knew times would change, and laws that may be good today won’t be tomorrow, and as such you’ll find very little about what you should and shouldn’t do, but rather how to run government in the best possible fashion so we could decide day by day, year by year and location by location how we should live and enforce our laws.
They even knew a time would come when the constitution itself may need to change, and they provided that ability within itself, a sacred and important mechanism that we’ve seen fit to invoke 16 times in the past 221 years (omitting the bill of rights since in many ways they are part and parcel with the constitution)
You lack the ability to admire what a fine job they did.
VegasLib Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Liberal equals Freedom, go away! You’re gonna scare all the cons away with your brilliance and this site will cease to be fun in trying to prove them wrong. It’s already starting to lag.
Haha. Seriously, though, good points. No. Great points!
michael Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
Thank you for making the point I’ve been trying to make for months around here in much more eloquent fashion than I could ever dream of.
blissfulconservative Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Too bad those documents you want to dismiss so easily are the foundation of this country. Too bad so many have shed blood to ensure what is in those documents carries to future generations. Too bad so many Americans have lost the fire and love of country to actually stand up and defend the documents and foundations that have ensured greatness in this country since it’s founding.
Sad, sad, sad.
michael Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Don’t put words in my mouth Blissful. The Constitution is the greatest foundation for a government that exists in the world. That doesn’t mean that we need to worship the founding fathers as gods as if they could do no wrong. Even they recognized that they could, which is why they included the ability to amend the Constitution as part of the document (perhaps its greatest strength). Are you saying that you’d rather still have senators be appointed by state legislatures and legal slavery?
May 4th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
This guy is a jerk and Constitution may be based on Christian values,but alot of the writers own slaves and made spirits. LIBERAL EQUALS FREEDOM HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.
blissfulconservative Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Since a lot of the writers owned slaves and drank you want to spit on the foundation of this country?
May 4th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Wasn’t there a show called “queer eye for the straight guy”. pretty sure noone was offended by that. I guess only liberals are allowed to use that word?
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
only queers can use the word queer…wait, I’m not queer, that should read– only *****s can use the word *****
Um Cara Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
Bliss,
I guess only liberals are allowed to use that word?
What makes you think the Queer Eye guys are liberal?
trees are people too Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 2:58 am
What makes you think they’re not?
Um Cara Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Where did I offer an opinion that they were not liberal?
May 4th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
I am conservative and will stand against this guy. As someone who opposes the gay lifestyle, I would have no problem with my children being around a gay person. What a bigot! So he thinks that gays are child molestors? What a jerk. It is called tolerance. Our nation is not a Christian nation. It was founded on a Judeo-Christian philosophy. This guy is an ignoramus.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
I don’t think he said homosexuals were molestors…
If I thought purple dinosaurs were evil, would I let my kids hang out with purple dinosaurs…
and for the record Joe the plumber is a retard.
Delaine Lutz Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
He never said specifically that homosexuals were molesters, but the implication is there.
Danielle Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
It’s pretty heavily implied that he thinks homosexuals are molesters.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 11:57 pm
and no ones ever made a mistake guessing what people are implying….
take a step back and see that you are being extremely judgemental.
I don’t know what he was saying…but to jump to the worst possible implication of his words is a pretty snarky thing to do.
Delaine Lutz Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 10:34 am
I agree with you Danielle.
What is he afraid of if he doesn’t think that gays are child molestors? Does he think that they will work their gay voodoo and turn his kids gay? It is one thing to have an opinion that the gay lifestyle is not moral according to a Biblical world view, it is quite another to say that you will not allow your children around them.
GuidoVanHorn: Isn’t it rather judgmental to say that I am extremely judgmental? Hmm….
Sarah Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
What’s hilarious is “I’ve HAD some friends who are actually homosexual.”
Like, these friends are past-tense now. Perhaps because he kept shielding his children’s bodies and backing away from them so their “gay germs” wouldn’t infect.
Delaine, you’re right on.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
ahh…delaine, the perfect circular argument…
I’ll let you all in on the truth, not only is it ok to judge people, but you should, however your judgement should be based on facts and be a righteous judgement.
Each of us makes hundreds of judgements on any given day, and it’s perfectly fine, in fact can you imagine a world in which you don’t make any judgements of character or use reason in your decisions (judgements).
This is the reason I used the term extremely judgemental. You’ve taken a little tidbit of information and assumed that Joe thinks all gays are molestors…which is founded on no fact, nor was it said or even closely intimated. The only thing we know is that Joe doesn’t want his kids being around homosexuals, he doesn’t tell or even hint as to why. So we all guess and some people come up with the most heinous conclusion.
You should watch the movie Doubt…watch it at least 2 times. Watch it once assuming the Priest is guilty and watch it again assuming he’s innocent. You’ll see why we shouldn’t be so judgemental.
May 4th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
3 guesses on which part of the horse Joe is.
@DELAINE LUTZ [Our nation] was founded on a Judeo-Christian philosophy.
Ah…no.
Delaine Lutz Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
Ah…yes.
Read the founding documents. Read the Constitution. Read up on your U.S. History. Our country is not a Christian nation and never has been. We have always been a nation that has respected freedom of religion and has embraced a Judeo-Christian philosophy.
I don’t want to argue this much. Seems like you have your mind made up and it isn’t worth the time.
EricG Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 12:17 am
Actually the term ‘Judeo-Christian’ is not found in American History up until 30-40’s, as I understand it.
“I don’t want to argue this much. Seems like you have your mind made up and it isn’t worth the time.”
Why are earth are you on a political website if you don’t want to argue!?!
Read the Constitution again. Look for a book by Hobbes entitled Leviathan and read that first. Remember that while the Bible influenced the Constitution as did this piece of writing.
I believe it short-sighted to say that our nation was founded on any specific religious philosophy. We are founded on the the simple HUMAN philosophy that freedom is not exclusive.
I don’t think the nation has ever embraced a Judeo-Christian philosophy as a government. As a culture and a people perhaps but not as national foundation of our government.
May 4th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
“People don’t understand the dictionary-it’s called queer. Queer means strange and unusual.”
People don’t READ the dictionary, much less “understand” it.
Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate:
Main Entry: 3queer
Function: noun
Date:circa 1812
: one that is queer; especially, often disparaging : HOMOSEXUAL, usage see 1QUEER
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
May 4th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
it is a definition but it is far from the only definition, much like many years there are legitimate good uses for the word and then there are the mean and hateful uses.
queer /kwɪər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kweer] Show IPA adjective, -er, -est, verb, noun
–adjective 1. strange or odd from a conventional viewpoint; unusually different; singular: a queer notion of justice.
2. of a questionable nature or character; suspicious; shady: Something queer about the language of the prospectus kept investors away.
3. not feeling physically right or well; giddy, faint, or qualmish: to feel queer.
4. mentally unbalanced or deranged.
5. Slang: Disparaging and Offensive. a. homosexual.
b. effeminate; unmanly.
6. Slang. bad, worthless, or counterfeit.
–verb (used with object) 7. to spoil; ruin.
8. to put (a person) in a hopeless or disadvantageous situation as to success, favor, etc.
9. to jeopardize.
–noun 10. Slang: Disparaging and Offensive. a homosexual, esp. a male homosexual.
11. Slang. counterfeit money.
—Idiom
12. queer the pitch, British Informal. to spoil the chances of success.
——————————————————————————–
Origin:
1500–10; perh. < G quer oblique, cross, adverse
Related forms:
queerly, adverb
queerness, noun
Synonyms:
1. unconventional, curious, freakish, eccentric, weird. See strange.
Antonyms:
1. ordinary.
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
Cite This Source |Link To queer
EricG Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 12:09 am
“Slang: Disparaging and Offensive. a homosexual, esp. a male homosexual”
MW backs me up. Joe is bigot. Tons of so-called Christians are bigots. Followed up by bus-loads of conservatives who are also bigots.
(That means you hate someone for a belief kids … yuck yuck yuck!)
May 4th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
“”I would love to hear our leaders actually check with God before he does stuff. “”
Well, Joe must be thrilled with DubYA…he was on a “divine mission” to invade Iraq.
Astounding, really, that the US was lead into the state it’s in right now by a man who couldn’t trust himself with a drink and heard “god” talking to him.
And who, when heard that a plane had crashed into the first tower, actually said “That’s some terrible pilot”.
May 4th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
This guy is such a moron it’s breathtaking.
May 4th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
Joe the Plumber: Gay People Totally Are Queer, Meaning “Strange & Unusual & Possibly Harmful to Kids”…
photo, scary clown garbage can, by Mack Male/mastermaq, used pursuant to CC license] Self-appointed mouthpiece of white working men Joe the Plumber (Samuel Wurzelbacher) thinks “queer” is a fact, not an insult. (Think Progress) Gay people, he opines,…
May 4th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
[...] Tune In Also To: Alan Colmes of Liberaland [...]
May 4th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
I never use this word to describe anybody, but this man is trash.
Regarding these “gay friends” he has: I don’t think the definition of a friend includes someone they wouldn’t even allow their children around.
It just amazes me at how stupid and ignorant this man is.
Palin/Joe the Plumber – 2012
Please!!!!
May 4th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
Congratulations on feeding him, ALAN…now he’ll never go away.
May 4th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Joe the Bigot wants to throw gas on the gay-hate storm … that’s just lovely.
“People don’t understand the dictionary”
He doesn’t understand the word ’socialist’ so I don’t see why he should he talking about the issue of English comprehension in the media.
“God is recognized as, if you will, America’s religion”
‘God’ is not a religion. And this country has freedom of religion and freedom FROM religion.
May 5th, 2009 at 12:07 am
I think he wants to position himself to be the secretary of health and human services in a prospective Palin/Coulter administration. If we added Newt as potentional secretary of state, Rush as press secretary, and Jindal as Interrior secretary…why, we’re lookin’ at a grand prospective ticket, by gum….lookin’ grand……
Dare to dream.
May 5th, 2009 at 1:05 am
He is just plain dumb and why out of his league.
May 5th, 2009 at 1:33 am
That tent of the republican party is getting really small, soon it could be an umbrella. Wonder who will be left holding it?
Sarah Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Freedom is a big tentdress.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:15 am
The word “queer” is not a politically correct term. There is nothing wrong with the word, it is just a word liberals don’t like.
Same with the word retarded. Not politically correct so we cannot use it.
EricG Reply:
May 5th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
There is something indeed wrong with the word ‘queer.’
It denotes that something or someone is not normal.
Gay people are perfectly normal. It’s not about PC bullshales.
It’s about equality and not spreading hate.
Only the liberals do this.
May 5th, 2009 at 8:48 am
The Fake Plumber: “As far as the government goes, the Founding Fathers based the Constitution off of Christian values.”
The Founding Fathers never actually specified to Christianity as their base for the Constitution. They have pretty general words like “our creator” and “God”, words which are general and can apply to anyone’s beliefs. They made the Freedom of Religion and the seperation of church and state a SPECIFIC requirement because they saw the importance of the People’s freedom to choose what they want to believe. A Christian theocracy would never allow that.
—–
The Fake Plumber: “You know, God is pretty explicit in what we’re supposed to do-what man and woman are for.”
Explicit is far from what The Bible is with the homosexual subject. There is no SPECIFIC condemnation of homosexuals in The Bible. “Thou shalt not lay with a man as one does with a woman.” Homosexuals do NOT lay with women. There is too much room for interpretation there and not enough clarity. If God wanted to instantly condemn all the gays, he would have been more clear in His Word here.
—–
The Fake Plumber: “I’ve had some friends that are actually homosexual. And, I mean, they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn’t have them anywhere near my children. ”
Then they’re not your friends. Friends are people you can trust; people you can be around and who are not banished from your family. If you can’t trust you’re gay ‘friends’ around you’re children then they’re not your friends. Friendships require trust.
—–
The Fake Plumber: “Every state has ‘In God we trust’ or ‘With God’s help’ in their constitution. God is recognized as, if you will, America’s religion.”
God can pertain to ANY religion. Catholics. Jews. Muslims. Whatever. Even atheists. No-God can be considered the atheists God. God can be a very general word, Fake.
—–
The Fake Plumber: “I would love to hear our leaders actually check with God before he does stuff.”
What you don’t understand about our Constitution, Fake, is that the Founding Fathers WERE specific in the seperation of church and state. Although I don’t see a problem with a leader saying a prayer or, if in session, quietly asking God for a better wisdom or what have you, it SHOULD NOT be a requirement for our leaders to have to be forced to ask God first before they make decisions.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:58 am
“I’ve had some friends that are actually homosexual. And, I mean, they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn’t have them anywhere near my children.”
Is he afraid the “gay” might rub off on his children? You know, like his “stupid” rubbed off on the republican party?
May 5th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
The real genius of our founding fathers was their understanding that the Constitution needed to be malleable for future generations of Americans.
The founding fathers were men, not gods. Surely no thinking person, (past or present), could believe that a document could be created to cover every eventuality or need of future generations.
Finally, who cares what the founding fathers vision was? We are the Americans living today, and the country is what we choose to make it.
May 5th, 2009 at 3:56 pm