web analytics
Menu Close

Jack Dundee’s All-Gay, Straight Adults Only, Arizona Fun Shoppe! Conan O’Brien

Jack Dundee's All-Gay,Straight Adults Only, Arizona Fun Shoppe! Conan O'Brien

Welcome to Jack Dundee’s All-Gay Straights-Only, Adult Emporium and fun house…”For God-fearing straight dudes.” Gov. Jan Brewer is making business opportunities like Jack Dundee’s possible. The question is – will she or won’t she? If Jan Brewer signs Senate Bill 1062, or the ‘right-to-refuse-service-bill’ into law, things are really going to change in Arizona! Jack speaks for many when he proudly proclaims:  “We’re here, we refuse to serve you if you’re queer, get used to it.”

Things are looking up for Jack Dundee and his ilk in a state like Arizona that’s so homophobic that they’re hiding behind religion to justify what is basically a Jim Crow law.
As they say, those who deny the loudest, have a gay man inside screaming to get out and do something about that camo – and these tacky window coverings!  With no gay shops, only ‘straight’ shops, with gay material like Jack’s, straight men can peruse their favorite media and meet other straight thinking American men!

They’ll need the companionship. If the bill passes, the Super Bowl will give Arizona a pass, and businessmen, who aren’t as far-sighted as Jack Dundee are already seeing the folly of taking such a position.

Now hold on! There are others who promoted the law, who encouraged sweet, kind Jan Brewer to take this action, who are now doing a complete turn-around! Sen. Bob Worsley, R-Mesa, Sen Steve Pierce, R-Prescott, and Senate Majority Whip Adam Drugges, R-Phoenix, sent Brewer a letter asking for a veto. Pierce said earlier that when he first read the bill he didn’t see anything prejudicial in it. A second reading, (coincidentally, after constituents urged him to reverse the bill), enabled him to realize the nature of the law was – well, it was not popular with voters.
The letter to Jan Brewer went a little like this:
“While our sincere intent in voting for this bill was to create a shield for all citizens’ religious liberties, the bill has instead been mischaracterized by its opponents as a sword for religious intolerance,” the three wrote. “These allegations are causing our state immeasurable harm.”

Note: It is the ‘allegations’ which are causing the state immeasurable harm,” not the true and fuzzy intention to dehumanize an entire group of people. Secondly it’s not the cruel and stupid bill, it is the way it has been “mischaracterized by its opponents as a sword for religious intolerance.” That’s where they’re wrong – again. I don’t believe it’s a sword for religious intolerance, as much as a move to harm a group of people cloaked in the shield of religious intolerance…Which oddly, is even worse..