When Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern gave her now-infamous homophobic rant before a group of fellow Republicans, she remarked that "The very fact that I'm talking to you like this here today puts me in jeopardy." It may have been the truest thing she said that day.
Normally, I would dismiss this particular remark as a pathetic religious-right sympathy ploy. It's hard to take seriously the persecution complex of a group that wields so much power, especially in places like Kern's home state. In jeopardy for making homophobic comments in front of Oklahoma Republicans? Please.
Thanks to the marvel of YouTube, however, Kern's rant received a much wider audience than she anticipated. Listeners all over the country heard Kern claim that "the homosexual agenda is destroying this nation," that gays are indoctrinating our children, and that homosexuality poses a bigger threat to America "than terrorism or Islam, which I think is a big threat."
Kern later claimed, rather implausibly, that her comments were taken out of context, and that she was talking about gays around the country who were contributing money to pro-gay candidates in Oklahoma and elsewhere.
I look forward to joining that group of gays. More precisely, I look forward to sending a big fat check to whatever decent candidate aims to unseat Kern in the next election cycle. I'm sure I'm not alone in that plan. So Kern's remark about her speech putting her in jeopardy may have been surprisingly prescient. One can hope.
Unfortunately, Kern's speech offered little else in the way of insight, unless we're talking about insight into the fears, lies and stereotypes that dominate the religious right's thinking about gays. Kern claimed that "studies show no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted, you know, more than a few decades."
I don't know what "studies" Kern is referring to, but the claim is nonsense on its face. Can you name a now-extinct society that "totally embraced" homosexuality? Me neither. (While there have been societies in history that permitted particular homosexual practices, those practices were narrowly circumscribed.)
Kern added that "This stuff is deadly and it's spreading and it will destroy our young people; it will destroy this nation."
I share Kern's concern for our young people, which is one reason I'm eager to unseat her. I remember what it was like to hear such stereotypes as a teenager and to think, "No, no, no-that can't be me." I remember how ugly myths about homosexuality exacerbated my coming-out struggle. I don't want other youths to suffer that.
Kern also claimed that homosexuality "has deadly consequences for those people involved in it; they have more suicides, they're more discouraged, there's more illness [and] their lifespans are shorter."
Again we have unsubstantiated myths and outright falsehoods, this time mixed with a grain of truth. Who wouldn't be "discouraged" in the face of attacks like Kern's? Should anyone be surprised that in Kern's world, gay people-and especially, gay youth-find that their lives are more difficult than others'?
In this respect, Kern behaves like a bully who punches a kid on the playground and then justifies his attack by saying that he's troubled by his victim's bleeding. Yes, Rep. Kern, gay youth are at a higher risk for suicide. But their problem is not homosexuality. Their problem is people like you.
I realize that such accusations of "bloody hands" don't do much to promote dialogue. I have no doubt that Sally Kern is sincere in her beliefs. What's more, some of those beliefs may even stem from virtuous motives-respect for tradition, concern for future generations, love of country and so on. But virtuous motives don't make such beliefs any less false, ugly, or dangerous.
I'm particularly irritated-though by no means surprised-by Kern's attempt to cloak her homophobia in religion. At one point in her original screed she opines that "Not everybody's lifestyle is equal-just like not all religions are equal." She's right about that, too. I'd say that any religion that permits spreading lies or demonizing people because of whom they love is scarcely worthy of respect.
In the wake of this fiasco, Kern has complained that her critics want to deny her free speech. "Obviously, you have the right as an American to choose that lifestyle," she said, "but I also have the right to express my views."
Yes, Rep. Kern, you do. But free speech doesn't give anyone a free pass to say stupid things without repercussions.
10 Comments for “Sally Kern’s Free Speech”
posted by Jimbo on
In a perverse way, I’m glad Rep. Kern’s comments have been widely disseminated. One motto I go by is “sunshine is the best disinfectant”. By having her comments exposed to a much wider audience than she expected, she is showing people the extreme degree that homophobia has taken over some elected officials. Better for people to see it than have it lurk underground. One thing’s for sure, her political career will remain at the state level & hopefully cut short (via an electoral defeat).
posted by Kevin on
I live in Oklahoma City. Overall, I think Victory Fund’s posting of the recording has done more harm than good to gay rights locally.
This entire affair reminds me yet again why I’ll never again be a Christian or a Republican. The state GOP held a closed-door meeting shortly after this story broke and reportedly gave Sally a standing ovation, and are actively pushing the “free speech” Sally-as-victim canard. Meanwhile, with the exception of the small number of “gay” churches, not a single local religious leader or institution has condemned her statements. In fact quite a few are showing support. The national Christianist-Republican groups such as FotF and CWA are mobilizing to actively help her.
Thanks to the local media and talk radio, Sally has successfully played the victim card around here. I overheard a middle-aged straight couple at a restaurant the other day saying how awful it was “those gays” were trying to take away her right to free speech. The Democrats around here are hopeless and pathetic and it is quite accurate to say her words reflect the views of her constituents. She has endured a lot of headaches but she is in a much stronger position in local politics than she was 3 weeks ago. Considering the things Sens. Coburn and Inhofe have said in the past about gays, I would bet she now has new hope for higher office.
My prediction is gay rights groups nationally will forget about this in a few weeks, and soon we’ll have to endure another article on IGF bashing us for not looking past the active anti-gay efforts still ongoing in the GOP, written by someone sitting comfortably in a big city where gay acceptance is the norm.
posted by Rob on
Thanks to the local media and talk radio, Sally has successfully played the victim card around here. I overheard a middle-aged straight couple at a restaurant the other day saying how awful it was “those gays” were trying to take away her right to free speech. The Democrats around here are hopeless and pathetic and it is quite accurate to say her words reflect the views of her constituents. She has endured a lot of headaches but she is in a much stronger position in local politics than she was 3 weeks ago. Considering the things Sens. Coburn and Inhofe have said in the past about gays, I would bet she now has new hope for higher office.
Perhaps you have to see it from a long term and also more global perspective from where you reside. What are the younger generations thinking about Sally Kern’s speech? I can confidently say that her actions have seriously contributed to the image problem of Christianity.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0801013003/igcu-20/
posted by KamatariSeta on
They have an image problem? Too bad. They should get better PR people.
posted by Brian Miller on
Someone should ask the right wing how criticism and boycotts of Kern are “violations of her freedom of speech,” but criticism and boycotts of Ford Motor Company due to its nondiscrimination policy in employment is not a “violation of its freedom of speech.”
Watch their heads explode.
posted by anon on
Hi Kevin in OKC,
It doesn’t look like either of your two “statewide” equality groups, Oklahoma Equality and Cimmarron Alliance, has bothered to make sure you have a full-time lobbyist in your state capitol. Community centers and pride parties and all that are nice, but if you’re not in the Capitol every day of the session, making sure your voice is being heard, this is exactly what happens. You get your asses kicked.
And FYI, I’m not writing this from some comfortable “big city” on one of the coasts – I’m writing this from central Kansas, where we’ve learned these lessons the hard way.
posted by Jason on
“written by someone sitting comfortably in a big city where gay acceptance is the norm.”
Kevin, it would be nice if there was such a city, but I’ve yet to hear of one. I live in Chicago, there are two gay neighborhoods, they alternate between being “safe” and being a target, depending on the day. It’s not like you can skip down the gay streets blissfully unaware of your surroundings. You still have to watch your back, just like everywhere else.
This big city in a blue state is not a place where “gay acceptance is the norm”. It certainly has pockets of acceptance, but so does the rest of the country. I’ve been to LA and the story is the same. So where’s this magic city where gay acceptance is the norm?
posted by Kevin on
“It doesn’t look like either of your two “statewide” equality groups, Oklahoma Equality and Cimmarron Alliance, has bothered to make sure you have a full-time lobbyist in your state capitol. Community centers and pride parties and all that are nice, but if you’re not in the Capitol every day of the session, making sure your voice is being heard, this is exactly what happens. You get your asses kicked.”
Oh you’re absolutely right about that. But in their defense, it would be a waste of time and money. They could send hundreds of great lobbyists to OKC to provide the most clear-headed, foolproof argument against whatever horrible anti-gay legislation is up this week, but they know that it won’t matter. Any hint that a legislator is siding with the “Gay Agenda” is political suicide in the vast majority of districts. Until there is a fundamental change in culture any such efforts are counter-productive.
Jason from Chicago: You’re confusing local security with local politics. In every city there is certainly the risk of gay bashers showing up in the local gay enclaves at any time. My point is about local politics. In NYC, Boston, Chicago, SF, etc., alliances can be formed to stand up against virulent anti-gay politics. Even if they aren’t perfect, local politicians at least show up at gay rights events, march in pride parades, etc. Even many Republicans are open to reasonable discussion and compromise. Accepting gays, or at least tolerating us, is considered a reasonable position, even if not universally agreed-to. Having visited Chicago many times I know that to be the case there. It’s still a foreign concept in a Christianist society like OKC. I’d love to see more IGF authors who live in a place like this to get some badly needed perspective on this site.
It’s all about culture. If a politician meets with gay rights groups and decides to vote against an anti-gay adoption bill, that’s acceptable in NYC or SF culture, but it would be political suicide in OKC. The opposite is true for a politician going on an anti-gay tirade. I hope the next IGF author will think about this the next time he/she wonders why so many of us vote against Republicans in a knee-jerk fashion, or bash the gay 20-something from Oklahoma who prefers the closet over being labeled “worse than a terrorist” by the local majority political party’s opinion.
posted by anon in Kansas on
Kevin,
There are LGBT activists here in Kansas that echo what you said about lobbying being “counterproductive.” But I want to tell you that they, and you, are wrong about that.
LGBT activists have had a lobbying presence in our statehouse since 2004. They managed to stop a marriage ban from being passed that year, only to fail by two votes in 2005. In 2006, they successfully kept an adoption ban off the legislative calendar, and in 2007 they were openly backing a school anti-bullying bill that eventually became law. This year, they defeated an attempt to ban domestic partnership registries, and just last week, were invited by a Republican committee chair to speak in support of an amendment to the previous year’s anti-bullying legislation.
You said: It’s all about culture. If a politician meets with gay rights groups and decides to vote against an anti-gay adoption bill, that’s acceptable in NYC or SF culture, but it would be political suicide in OKC.
I’m writing you from KANSAS. You know, just up the road from you. Our marriage ban was passed by the voters with a 70% margin. This is hardly a gay mecca. The point I’m making is this: Don’t give up. Don’t give in. Don’t walk or run or crawl from the fight just because you’ve lost in the past, or might lose in the future. In addition to Kansas successes, our statewide group has been trying to get a non-discrimination law passed since 2005, and they can’t even get it out of a committee. But that doesn’t stop them.
It shouldn’t stop you.
posted by Jimbo on
Hey Kevin, cheer up. Places & people change. OKC will not be homophobic forever. You overheard a MIDDLE AGED (emphasis mine) couple support Ms. Kern. Who cares? I’d be more concerned with the younger generation (18-30). They’re the future. Yes, the gay community needs a lobbyist in Oklahoma. Or two, or more. Just don’t give up. Look at my state of Maine. We first tried to get a gay rights bill passed in 1977. Every 2 years we tried & failed. Finally in 1997 on the 10th try, we passed a bill only to have it repealed by the voters. Another repeal happened in 2000. In 2005, we passed the bill yet again & was put before the voters. This time the voters kept the law by a 10-point margin. Don’t slink off simpering as what the Democrats in OK seem to be doing. Fight the good fight & eventually you will prevail.