Bachmann-approved Christian rocker Bradlee Dean’s ministry says he’s suing Rachel Maddow and MSNBC for defamation, claiming that she misrepresented his position on executing gays. He only noted approvingly that Muslims want to do it! Dean’s lawyer told the far-right WorldNetDaily, “This case is filed as a matter of principle. We need more Bradlee Deans in the world and hateful left wing television commentators must be made to respect not only his mission but the law.”
Call me naive, but I like to think that, at least here in the fact- and reality-based world, saying something about someone that the person in question finds offensive or insulting shouldn’t be grounds for legal action if those words are true. You shouldn’t be able to sue someone ($50 million?? Really??) simply because you think they’re a flaming Librul who hates Jesus and, by extension, AmeriKKKa.
Bradlee Dean is the worst sort of hateful scum, the kind of bigot who cloaks himself in Christianity in order to camouflage his hatred and his bastardization of the teachings of Jesus Christ. If he’s a Christian, then I’m the Queen of England. Dean claims to have “respect and love for all people,” though this statement could really only be true if Dean simply doesn’t consider homosexuals to be people, which is not at all out of the realm of possibility. I mean, how else could you justify this:
Muslims are calling for the execution for homosexuals in America, this was just released yesterday and it shows you that they themselves are upholding the laws that are even in the Bible, the Judeo Christian God. They seem to be more moral than even the American Christians do.
I don’t begrudge Dean’s right to believe as he sees fit. This is still (as long as he and people who think like him aren’t in power) a free country, and Dean may delude and make an ass of himself as he sees fit. What he does NOT have the right to do is to claim that his particular flavor of uber-Jesus-y hatred is actually love based on Scripture and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Granted, I didn’t exactly major in theology, but I grew up surrounded by a coterie of repressed Lutherans, and I think I absorbed enough Bible study to understand that Jesus Christ was about love and tolerance and acceptance. Bradlee Dean, whether he will admit it or not, is accepting of the idea of executing homosexuals, even if he’s not coming out and saying those actual words. Plausible deniability doesn’t change the fact that Dean’s an intolerant zealot whose idea of tolerance is the theological equivalent of executing heretics.
Just as Dean has the right as an American to believe as he sees fit, Rachel Maddow has the right to say what she sees fit on the air…as long as she can back it up. To her credit, few pundits are more obsessive about fact-checking, accuracy, and reasonableness as Maddow. Dean may not like being called out by her, but I watched the episode in question, and I didn’t think she was at all out of line. In fact, my feeling was that she was far more even-handed than Dean deserved. A few others (Keith Olbermann and Lawrence O’Donnell come immediately to mind) would have torn Dean a new one…and deservedly so.
Bradlee Dean represents everything that’s wrong with modern Christianity. Calling himself a Christian in an effort to camouflage his hateful religious bigotry is roughly equivalent to saying Adam Richman has a gluttony problem. Simply calling yourself something doesn’t make it so. Dean’s no more a Christian than I am a member of the Trilateral Commission. Regardless of what Dean’s lawyer may say, no one who’s speaking the truth “must be made to respect not only his mission but the law.” I respect people who demonstrate themselves worthy of it. Bradlee Dean has only proven himself amply worthy of scorn and derision. With any luck, people will come to see him for the bigot and zealot he is.
