Somebody pull the plug, STAT!
May 31, 2011 § 12 Comments
Well, folks, I’ve long suspected it, but today I received confirmation: Pat Robertson has officially lost his fucking mind.
Before I label myself as a watcher of The 700 Club, please allow me to explain. I watch The Today Show most mornings, and especially on the mornings when I have to pay bills (oh, end-of-the-month payday, you fickle, fickle bitch). Sometimes I’ll be busy doing something else and will not change the channel in time to miss The 700 Club‘s ominous opening theme. Today was such a morning. I was caught up in the process of creating a new online account for one of my creditors when I heard the gravelly voice of top hatemonger Pat Robertson. I decided to tune him out, trying like hell to remember the new password I had just created. And then…I heard it. The most-fucking-ridiculous thing I have EVER heard anyone say in my entire life. Ever.
Segueing from a piece on the tragedy that is human sex trafficking in order to introduce a one-on-one interview with The Second Coming of Christ Tim Tebow, Pat Robertson makes the following statement:
“And, you know, people call it a ‘victimless’ crime because the girls want to do it. But, those children don’t want to be sex slaves. It’s disgraceful.”
Uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-whaaaaaaaaaa????
Friends, I would like for you to tell me precisely who calls the crime of human sex trafficking “victimless.”
Who believes that these kidnap victims would rather be whores, bought and sold on the whims of pimps, than, say, happy-go-lucky teenage girls or college students or professionals?
Who believes that these girls willingly go along with it because it’s their preferred choice?
Who believes that these girls haven’t been brainwashed or threatened or beaten into submission?
Who believes that, given the option between returning to their families or spreading their legs for a dollar, these girls prefer the latter?
Come on, Pat Robertson! The only rational adult who would call human sex trafficking “victimless” isn’t really all that rational. What you have described, Pat, is a sociopath.
Fuck you, Pat Robertson. Fuck you and your fucking stupid generalizations and divisive commentary.
So, let me kick this out to you guys, my readers. Is Pat Robertson a fucking liar who just likes to make others outside of his little realm appear to be barbarians? Or has ol’ A.Hab. just completely reamed a defenseless old man who was trying to make a nice point? Have you ever heard anyone call human sex trafficking a victimless crime?
A.Hab.'s View 
What a Holy Bag-O-Douche. I’m kind of shocked (and not even a little bit like the good shock of finding ice cream in the freezer).
Lol, his blonde cohort (I don’t know her name) was kind of shocked, too. And I can’t find a clip of it online…maybe I’ll be able to locate it later today. But, yeah, she sort of gave him this wide-eyed look.
I, for one, have never heard sex trafficking referred to as a victimless crime. I’ve heard smoking marijuana referred to as a victimless crime, but I’ve never heard sex trafficking referred to as such.
Pat is a small symbol of everything that’s wrong with extreme fundamentalism, though. As all of his “way off the reservation” remarks have demonstrated, mainstream Christianity has about as much in common with Robertson’s particular breed of cuckoo as it does with Hitler, and Robertson knows it, but he also knows that he (and others like him) controls a small-but-growing group of rabid (and rabidly evangelistic) followers.
These groups are not terribly good at subtlety, which is why you get him blaming everything from 9/11 to Katrina to the tragedy in Haiti on witches and gays, but they somehow manage to turn that lack of subtlety into, “No, we don’t HATE, we just love everyone so much that we can’t possibly allow them to be themselves.”
Consequently, sane people look at these groups, roll their eyes, and maybe chuckle at how quaint and backwards these kinds of statements are, all the while unaware that groups like Robertson’s are infiltrating our political spectrum until something happens like the vote to revise school curriculum in Texas.
The scariest thing to me is that Robertson is one of the least extreme figureheads in the Christian Right political movement. It’s why he makes such a fantastic face for the movement – he’s the doddering old grandpa with the quaintly backwards views. Sure, nobody wants to hear him yammer on, but to hear him speak, it’s difficult to comprehend anyone actually believing him, much less following him. More influential and subtle leaders in the movement are much more disturbing, to the point of being downright draconian in their beliefs (thinking of Bill Gothard and David Barton here, among others) – these figures have been almost completely under the radar of the mainstream for decades, and even now, very few people would register any recognition at Gothard’s name, and only Glen Beck’s fans might recognize Barton’s name outside of those who already espouse his “Judeo-Christian Heritage” bullshit.
These are true leaders amidst of the movement Pat Robertson’s craziness only hints at, and they wield a subtle influence that is nonetheless chilling in its scope. Gothard tours America, preaching his message to jam-packed auditoriums (when in Georgia, he typically uses either the Atlanta Omni or the Georgia World Congress Center – there were rarely seats free when I was forced to attend as a child and teenager). Perhaps these leaders are ignored because their message is, on the surface, less confrontational than Robertson’s, but even a glimmer of a second glance reveals that these groups are slowly and deliberately working toward a complete takeover of the American political spectrum, up to and including a complete rewriting of our history.
All that is to say this: though even HE isn’t crazy enough to say it, Robertson and those like him are completely and utterly convinced, beyond any shadow of a doubt, as undeniably as you and I are convinced that a cloudless mid-day sky is some shade of blue, that every single person that does not believe EXACTLY the way they do is:
1. A godless heathen
2. A barbarian
3. Less than human unless and until they convert to Robertson’s way of thinking
4. Unworthy of being allowed free will
5. Therefore, worthy only of being dominated by Robertson et al.
6. In desperate NEED of being dominated by Robertson et al.
7. Doomed to be UNHAPPY until they are dominated by Robertson et al.
8. So utterly caught up in their blind unhappiness that they will be completely UNAWARE of their unhappiness or basic need for domination until they have been fully subjugated and dominated.
To a staggering extent, points 4-8 (in their eyes) also DIRECTLY apply to women as they relate to men. Women are “precious,” but they are viewed hardly better than chattel – to these people, a woman who is unmarried should live under her father’s roof until she gets married, and she can ONLY be happy in their eyes if she is completely submissive to her father when unmarried or her husband when married.
I have been straight-forward with everything I’ve said in this (rather long) comment, but I want to say something for emphasis: NOTHING that I have said in the preceding three paragraphs is an exaggeration, nor even the barest tweaking of the truth. No matter how ridiculous some of what I said may sound, not one ounce of sarcasm or humor was used in those three paragraphs. Every word was deadly serious. I grew up with these groups trying to indoctrinate me, and they absolutely terrify me.
Extremists of any kind terrify me, especially when the dialogue turns to condemning people and deciding whose soul would end up where. This is particularly troubling because Robertson didn’t clarify who exactly it is that would claim that sex trafficking is “victimless,” but I got a pretty clear implication. Maybe that’s unfair bias on my part, but still. He’s divisive through and through.
You, sir, are right on the money. The level of fanaticism that has taken over the religious right is terrifying, and that fanaticism IS spreading into every sphere of public life.
I’m not one to rock the boat in terms of belief. I’m not an atheist that wishes to “convert” believers into being non-believers. I respect religious beliefs and those that openly admit to being men and women of faith; hell, I’m very happy that, when we have children, they will be raised Catholic. That’s fine with me. But I had a very unpleasant experience when I was co-teaching in Columbus, working in the classroom of a self-proclaimed evangelical christian teacher, and her beliefs read exactly like the beliefs that you numbered out here. While I never made my beliefs known to her (because I don’t think it’s professional to talk about one’s religion at work and, frankly, I knew she wouldn’t like what I had to say and my grade was hinging on how well she reviewed me), the atmosphere that she created in her classroom was VERY hostile towards any non-evangelical christians.
True story: After Osama bin Laden was executed, a teacher in Texas (I believe) asked one of his Muslim students if she was sad about the death of her uncle Osama. My friends and family expressed complete shock and horror at the story, but I guarantee he is someone who matches up with the religious right, and, sadly, there are probably 20 more teachers just like him who were waiting for his job to open up.
It sucks to think that we’re living in our own episode of Sick Sad World.
Ok, I’m no Pat Robertson fan, but I think in his old man mind, he got two practices mixed up…prostitution is often called a victimless crime, whereas no one would call human sex trafficking thus…so I think he might have conflated those two, hopefully unintentionally, based on this quote you list.
I hope it was unintentional, too. But I just can’t let that kind of conflation go, you know? Whether or not he himself is confused is one thing. To broadcast it to a bunch of people who hang on his every word…that’s quite another.
I have to admit, I thought the same thing as AMo, that Robertson got sex trafficing and prostitution just a wee bit confused. Sort of like how he gets history and fantasy just a wee bit confused. And science and fantasy. And,uh, reality and fantasy. Robertson is a one-man mental institution.
Yeah. I absolutely agree, Renee. This is why I think we ought to pull the plug on Robertson’s contribution to The 700 Club. I think it’s time somebody retired.
Wow! Okay-thank you for this post, Amanda! I know how FUCKING crazy these people can be! I taught at Oral Roberts University, for God’s sake! You are completely sane and 100% on target!
(No wonder I lost my fucking mind–right!?)
Kathy
I’m sure the same people who want to redefine rape, and want women to take responsibility for the possibility that they may be raped would call sex-trafficking a victimless crime. I don’t like to use the word hate, but I truly hate what Pat Robertson represents.
I’m sure it’s all of us baby-hatin’, America-bashin’, tax-raisin’, tree-huggin’, Christian-hatin’, drug-legalizin’, commie-lovin’, Obama-votin’ dirty stinkin’ liberals who say that sex trafficking is a victimless crime. Because, you know. We’re heartless heathens. So of course we would say that. Because what’s more convenient than a straw man?
The term ‘bat-shit crazy’ comes to mind.
As a UF alum who does think that Tebow’s tears cure cancer (kidding! But I still like Tebow), I have to say that he went down a notch when I read that he was appearing on the 700 Club. Oh Tim, what were you thinking??