Comments on: Be a Real Man, the Mike S. Adams Way

By: PG

PG — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 21:23:32 +0000

Quick update on Adams: he’s suing UNC-Wilmington for employment discrimination, claiming that they didn’t give him tenure because they discriminate against Christians. Does anyone want to count the number of tenured Christians on the faculty?

Bizarrely, the incident that he describes in lengthy detail as the first offense against him was actually one in which a student who was the child of faculty members sent out an email calling for mercy toward our perceived enemies after 9/11, which one might think was a fairly Christ-like sentiment. Adams sent her a nasty reply and forwarded it to his like-minded friends, urging them to make their similar opinions known to her.

Part of his complaint notes that one of the defendants “is of Jewish descent,” while those who wrote positive evaluations of Adams were Christians. The relevance of Jewish descent is not explained overtly, but the implication seems to be that such Jews will crucify the good Christian trying to bring truth to the benighted. Indeed, the complaint as a whole has no references to situations in which people around Adams had a problem with him for espousing *Christian* ideas; they only became antagonistic toward him when he started writing in a national publication about how stupid they all were. He didn’t name names, but he would state their positions at the school, making them reasonably identifiable.

Unsurprisingly, his lawyers are from Alliance Defense Fund, the same outfit that is convinced that churches should get tax exemptions even if they engage in political activity like advocating for specific candidates. ADF isn’t saying that ALL nonprofits should retain tax-exempt status; just the religious ones.

TAKEAWAY POINT: If someone doesn’t like you or give you what you want, it must be because you’re a persecuted Christian.

By: Genevieve

Genevieve — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:39:52 +0000

well . . . I don’t know about that. maybe us lesbians can do some contaminating of the future-wife pool ourselves.

Which reminds me…Adams is really fucking heteronormative. I mean, compare his litanies of “men and women this, men and women that” with Jeff’s mentioning lesbians, gay men, bisexuals…his daughter’s future ‘partner.’ I mean, it is seriously annoying how some people refuse to accept that not everyone is straight.

By: marmelade

marmelade — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 05:36:46 +0000

Maybe it has something to do with my husband putting on his best Smokey Bear voice and intoning solemnly, “Remember, men, only you have the power to stop contaminating the future-wife pool.”

well . . . I don’t know about that. maybe us lesbians can do some contaminating of the future-wife pool ourselves. that is, assuming that someday some of us perverts will come to jesus and turn straight and get married (to men). talk about contamination!

By: rivercat30

rivercat30 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:03:33 +0000

The ‘douche’ label is well-deserved for this character. I read an article of his a few years back in which he described a hunting trip during which he killed some wild boar, or something. Anyway, he mentioned that he had to leave a few of them in the field because they couldn’t be found or were too heavy to drag. That wasn’t really the point of the article, but I distinctly remember thinking at that moment what a special sort of asshole this guy must be. I’m all for hunting, but that is some shit no responsible hunter would ever do.

By: sara no h.

sara no h. — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:43:47 +0000

This line - Men have it within their power to stop contaminating the future-wife pool - has had me in stitches all morning. Seriously. Howls of laughter.

Maybe it has something to do with my husband putting on his best Smokey Bear voice and intoning solemnly, “Remember, men, only you have the power to stop contaminating the future-wife pool.”

Then again, maybe I’ve just imbibed so much of teh stooopid that the only reasonable response I have left is manic laughter. Kind of like how some people become angry drunks, and some people become giggly drunks. Or something like that.

Also, re:

The whole point of Jesus is to sacrifice himself for everyone, throughout time, whether they deserve it or not, and this guy is saying that the quality of men’s salvation is better because Jesus’s mortal body was male?

I’ve actually heard this used by members of the Roman Catholic Church (from priests, nuns, and other assorted adults) to bolster the practice of only allowing men to join the priesthood. It disturbs me.

By: Decnavda

Decnavda — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:16:36 +0000

I have used Mike S. Adams as an example of how the crazies on the right are far crazier than the crazies on the left. More specifically, how the crazies on the left are neurotic while the crazies on the right are psychotic. He will write collumn after collumn decrying such things as feminists performing plays about their genitals or multiculturists supporting repressive cultures like Islam, sometimes mixing in good points along with misogyny and bigotry. Then he will write a collumn defending young earth creationism and claiming that evolution is not scientific.
Now, people can make pro and con points about whether it is a good or bad idea to write a play about your genitals, and probably one side or the other will have points that are more reasonable than the other, or will be more in line with your preferred values than the other. But no one can deffinately prove scientifically that it is “good” or “bad”. However, a person who believes the universe is less than 10,000 years old is just flat out wrong. Not wrong as in “unreasonable”, or as in “uniformed”, or as in “based on hateful values”, but wrong as in “contradicts clearly established facts about physical reality.”
I can almost see why people on the far left are the subject of more anger than the people on the far right. If someone is intelligent and well-informed, but is expressing opinions that are based in what you believe to be twisted values or appear to be a result of clear errors of logic, that can really make you angry because it is hard to understand why they disagree with you. But arguing with someone who believes in young earth creationism feels like arguing with someone who thinks they are Ghengis Khan.

By: Cecily

Cecily — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:23:46 +0000

Wow. I’m not a Christian, nor do I play one on TV, but this: “Nor did He send his only begotten daughter to save womankind.” in the context of Christianity is really disturbing, and not something I’ve heard before. The whole point of Jesus is to sacrifice himself for everyone, throughout time, whether they deserve it or not, and this guy is saying that the quality of men’s salvation is better because Jesus’s mortal body was male?

Seriously, I think I’ve heard 18th century religious sentiments that were more even-handed, and some of those dudes thought women didn’t have souls.