Over at TPM, one Kathy Thompson writes that the head of the "Duck Dynasty" show, Phil Robertson, has "once again" stuck his foot in his mouth. His crime this time? Stating that "Biblically correct sex is safe".
“It’s safe. You’re not going to get chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, AIDS – if you, if a man marries a woman, and neither of you have it, and you keep your sex between the two of you, you’re not going to get ever sexually transmitted diseases.”
Here's what likely got Kathy all "wee-weed up", as Barack Ebola once famously called it:
He then attributed those "terrible, debilitating diseases" to "orthodox liberal opinion," which he defined thusly: "Just breed anything and anybody. Just have at it. Go for it."
Um, well...gosh, I don't see any mistake on his part, other than that it goes against the secular views of folks like Kathy. From a purely biological perspective, Robertson's absolutely correct: if you don't sleep around, it's unlikely that you'll ever acquire one of the gifts that keep on giving.
Of course, the same might be said of homosexuals, so it's not necessarily limited to the normal view of marriage as an institution involving one man and one woman - which might have contributed to Kathy's ire. On the other hand, the likelihood of encountering, say, two homosexual guys who've not had multiple partners seems rather small, given that they seem to emphasize their sexual orientation as a defining facet of their lives.
And it isn't denigrating to note that fact: I have never seen a "Hetero Pride" parade, for example. Normal people (and I say that because homosexuals comprise about three percent of the total population) simply don't define their lives in terms of their sexual orientation.
So exactly why Robertson's statements of the obvious are considered breaking news seems more than a little mystifying: apparently, the truth that monogamous couples are unlikely ever to acquire an STD is somehow controversial. Interestingly, many of these critics are the same people who continually claim that others are "science deniers", when those others don't share the currently popular opinions. Apparently, science doesn't apply to sexual activity. Oh, but they "celebrate diversity" - as long as that diversity is approved.