“REBEKAH” is a Virginian, and, we assume, a virgin to boot. Bless. On her Barefoot Bride blog she says she is a “stay-at-home daughter”, and recommends a visit to the Lady in Waiting magazine site (Motto: Encouraging stay-at-home daughters as they serve the King of kings).
Right now Rebekah is lying quite faint on the futon because another of her favoured magazines, Martha Stewart Weddings, had the gall to feature, in its latest issue, Jeremy Hooper and Andrew Shulman tying the knot in Connecticut.
- A detail from the Martha Stewart gay wedding spread
Rebekah laments:
As part of the large portion of the population who strongly believes marriage should be between one man and one woman, I was rather taken aback to see a homosexual wedding featured in the Winter 2010 issue. I may not always agree with the lifestyles and life choices made by all the people featured in every publication I read, but I do not appreciate picking up my favorite magazine to see photographs of homosexual couples being affectionate. For someone who believes that same-sex marriage is wrong, such articles and/or photos are offensive – and something I certainly would never knowingly pay money for.
She adds the following note:
I just wanted to clarify that I don’t hate homosexuals. I actually know a couple gay and lesbian people and they’re great folks. This, however, does not mean that I agree with their lifestyle choices …
Since so many of the folks who are for same-sex marriages have been boldly proclaiming how happy they are about this featured wedding, I thought it only fair that those of us on the flip side of the coin be allowed to share our opinions as well …
Meanwhile, word from the Vatican is that Pope Ratzinger, in an address focused mainly on envtronmental issues, called gay marriage “an attack on creation”.
Creatures, including humans, “can be protected or endangered”, the former boy Nazi told the Vatican diplomatic corps. He said:
One such attack comes from laws or proposals which, in the name of fighting discrimination, strike at the biological basis of the difference between the sexes.
He identified the guilty parties as “certain countries in Europe or North and South America”.
He made his views known just days after the Portuguese administration voted to legalise gay marriage.
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
January 11th, 2010 at 8:52 pm
Ratzinger’s “attack on creation” allegation is not as much an attack as his berserk insistence that his flock should breed like rabbits. What does he think these numbers of humans are doing to “creation”?
January 11th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
Has Ratzinger ever given a thought to all the millions upon millions of children who were never born because of forced celibacy on priests and nuns throughout the ages. My! My! All that wasted sperm! What an attack on creation! Think of all the money these “unborn” catholics would have contributed to the coffers of the Vatican! Why doesn’t this old drag queen just crawl back to his pope mobile and disappear somewhere in the sunset so that we don’t have to hear about him again! I’m ashame to say that I believed in the crap they fed up for all those years until I saw through them!
January 11th, 2010 at 9:38 pm
why the hell do homophobes (primarily americans) keep insisting homosexuality is a lifestyle choice? it’s a myth that can so easily be discredited (and has been). i still don’t know why fundies hate us gay folk so much either.
January 11th, 2010 at 10:40 pm
So ‘Rebekah’ is in her twenties, living with her parents and still a virgin?
Lets all chip in and buy her a ‘rampant rabbit’ for her birthday.
She will be a lot less aggressive.
January 11th, 2010 at 10:57 pm
Does ‘Rebekah’ consider her own attraction wholly to the opposite sex to be a hobby, fashion statement or form of worship or just The Way It Is. I very much suspect the last. Why then is being wholly attracted to one’s own gender incessantly referred to by Christians as a ‘lifestyle choice’? Most probably, excepting that it is a simple variant of the nature of Planet Earth – which ‘God’ created and controls – is too much for them to bear.
January 11th, 2010 at 11:21 pm
Lifestyle choice? What and still a virgin? Still living with Mummy and daddy? What is she some kind of moose id wager, no one probably wants to fuck the hound let alone want to be with the bigoted narrow minded bitch.
January 11th, 2010 at 11:42 pm
Put simply, the goodies are winning and the baddies are annoyed. Excellent.
Nice to see the Pope, a celibate old man who presides over a large paedophile network, explain that it’s biologically wrong for men not to get married to women. As for humans being endangered, I thought the end of the world and the extinction of us all was some sort of basic tenet of Christian belief? Or is that something the Catholics have dispensed with.
January 12th, 2010 at 1:27 am
WTF is a “stay at home daughter”? Do I even want to Google that?
January 12th, 2010 at 4:20 am
Buffy, if you care about women’s rights in the very least, you really, really, REALLY don’t. It’s sickening how backassward religion makes some people. Remember folks: I look this crap up so you don’t have to.
January 12th, 2010 at 5:06 am
I suspect, Buffy, that a stay at home daughter, is a good clean-living young lady who devotes herself to Daddy…oooh…shades of a little incestuous fancy there? Daddy being the head of the household, as god is the head of everything, and she of course, bows to Daddy’s wishes like a good submissive should. Christianity is the mindset of slavery and submission, of being submissive and obedient.
The stupid Daddy’s tart doesn’t seem to think that HER lifestyle is offensive does she? Or that HER bloody opinions are what matters. Poor ickle little baby didums, got her knickers in a twist over two men in love…what a silly bunt…
January 12th, 2010 at 6:52 am
A stay-at-home daughter is probably a girl who really loves her daddy. Plenty of examples in the Bible for that.
Or maybe she’s just ugly as sin?
January 12th, 2010 at 7:11 am
“Lifestyle choice” it is … same as “sex before marriage” or marrige itsself.
The Rebekahs of this world know perfectly well that sexual orientation is rarely a choice, however, like priests, one can choose to be publicly celibate (will privately doing what they want).
I personally am deeply offended every time a women marries a man and gives up her identity to become Mrs John Smith. Any chance we can pass an amendment forbidding it?
We could say it is against Gaia’s Will because it makes polyandry impossible.
January 12th, 2010 at 7:55 am
I myself know many Christian people and while I don’t hate them I am offended by their lifestyle choice.
Why do they have to keep throwing it in my face and continually trying to convert others to their lifestyle?
Not only that but they are always trying to recruit children, without whom the lifestyle would soon disappear.
I don’t care what adults do in the privacy of their own homes or in private spaces where they can indulge their bizarre behaviour but don’t come knocking on my door and telling me how much better my life would be if I would just ask Jesus into my life.
January 12th, 2010 at 9:04 am
Isn’t unnarural for Rebekah to still live at home, while it would have been more natural if she’d married at the age many biblical girls did? She would have been the proud mother of at least six children by now!
As for the pope: I live in one of the ‘certain countries’ he mentioned and nobody in his right mind here gives a hoot, as long as the Vatican doesn’t start arming itself, and starts accusing other countries of producing weapons of gay destruction (WGD).
January 12th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
I think Rebekah did the right thing, Whether you agree with her or not, she simply stated her beliefs and stood by them as 200+ people cursed her and virtually spat on her beliefs. Yes, she still lives at home, and what not, think of that what you will, but she is doing what anyone would do, deciding what she believes, and sticking to it, even if you don’t agree. This talk of her fiance being gay is pointless though. Yes, he is involved in drama and he does teach ballroom, but not everyone that does drama or teaches ballroom is gay. So I think those who made those comments are simply not helping their cause. IF you wanted to help the cause the most, don’t you think you’d form your thoughts, rid them of emotional statements, and then, in a manner that is respectful, submit your disagreement and then offer to have her contact you if she wanted to speak further? At least, that is what I would do. I bet it would give more credibility than cursing or simply making stuff up about her or her fiance would do.
If you look at their website, clearly he is Christian, as is she, how could he be gay?
January 12th, 2010 at 2:42 pm
Randy, I think you might have posted your comment on the wrong blog. While some people have had some harsh words for her, no-one here that I can see has suggested that Little Miss Purity has a gay sweetheart.
As for your comment that her fiance could not be gay as he was a Christian, well, thanks for giving me my best laugh of the day. Google Pastor Ted Haggard if you have a moment to spare.
January 12th, 2010 at 3:39 pm
Barry. Like you I loved that couldn’t be gay as he was a christian. My, my, they do show themselves to live in a weird, ignorant and cruel little world. I suppose all those christian paedo-priests in Ireland could not be paedophiles; or vicious child beating brutes, nor could the the Christian nuns be no better than employers of child slaves in their laundries; nor the fundy pastors ripping off their flocks with TV appeals so they could live like millionaires etc.etc.etc….
Let me explain: all wickedness is perpetrated by atheists; all goodness is done by christians. An atheist who does good is “really a christian as he/she will discover. A christian who vistits the most appalling agony on children is “not a true christian.”
Not too difficult, now, is it? And so very, very convenient for fundies.
January 12th, 2010 at 5:36 pm
I honestly believe that many of the Christian fundies who are overtly critical of homosexuality almost invariably harbor secret homosexual/bisexual desires themselves. Criticising other people who share their tendencies is often their attempt to exorcise their feelings of shame and to reinforce their denial.
Sometimes, however, they’re simply heterosexual, ignorant and bitter.
)
January 12th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
A “stay at home daughter” sounds very much like a “stay at home mother” except being a mother is a job and being a daughter usually isn’t (unless your aged parents need a lot of care). “Barefoot Bride” and “Lady-in-Waiting” seems to indicate she’s just waiting to get married and let her husband take care of her.
In other words, she’s unemployed and living at home. What if she was a man doing this? Would a man stay at his mom’s house waiting for some woman to come along and marry him, and call himself a “stay at home son”? Would he sit around writing a groom blog?
She’s just diverting attention away from herself so her parents won’t tell her to go out and get a real job.