It has been over three-and-a-half years since the Supreme Court found, in Obergefell v. Hodges, that gay people have the right to marry. Most people who were opposed to this, we thought, have since gotten their divorces (because of how unspecial their marriages feel now) and moved on to yelling at trans people for going to the bathroom. And yet there are still a few holdouts, searching in the shadows for a perfect, unassailable legal argument that will reverse everything and make everything go back to the way it used to be. Back when they could look themselves in the mirror and say, "Look at you! You may not be smart, or funny, or talented in any way -- but you are legally better than an entire group of people! The law says you are special!"

Or, you know, whatever the hell is they got out of it, I don't know.

Anyway, some lawmakers in Kansas think they've finally created a bill with a genius legal argument that would not only allow them to ban same-sex marriage again, but also make it legal to discriminate against all LGBTQ people, keep trans people out of bathrooms, eliminate any government funding for gender-affirming medical treatment, and keep drag queens out of library story time. That legal argument is that LGBTQ people are actually a religion, and that by giving them the same rights as everyone else, the United States is violating the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Strange, given that people of their ilk usually deny that such a clause even exists. Plus the fact that they usually believe (and a rightwing Supreme Court has agreed) that "religion" usually means you can do whatever the hell you want. We are going out on a limb that these people are not great "thinkers."

HB 2320, or the "Marriage and Constitution Restoration Act," has absolutely no chance of becoming law with Democrat Laura Kelly as governor, but that is not going to stop these weirdos from trying. Clearly, they think they're really onto something here, that if it doesn't work for them, now, it may work for others or in the future, and that this is what their constituents want them to spend their time doing.

The gist of their argument is that LGBTQ people (even the religious ones, I suppose) all subscribe to the religion of "secular humanism," and that the existence of LGBTQ people is an "unproven" religious belief. Why? Because "persecuted Christians" say there is not a "gay gene." Are we kidding at you? Reader, we are not.

WHEREAS, The sworn testimonies of ex-gays, medical experts, persecuted Christians and licensed ministers demonstrate that there is no real proof that a gay gene exists, that the idea that sexual orientation is predicated on immutability is not proven and that sexual orientation is a mythology, dogma, doctrine or orthodoxy that is inseparably linked to the religion of secular humanism.

Oh! Well then!

For the record, no one is saying there is a "gay gene." That's not how sexual orientation works.

The bill goes on to explain what the LGBTQ religion is, and boy, is it ever fascinating!

WHEREAS, Secular humanism is also commonly referred to as postmodern western individualistic moral relativism, expressive individualism, and by other names and is centered on the unproven idea that there are no moral absolutes.

Now, I have been an atheist for all of my life, and at no point have I ever, ever heard anyone use the term "postmodern western individualistic moral relativism." I Googled it, to see how "common" it was. Curiously, the only references I could find for it was in news stories about a Louisiana lawsuit against a public library for holding a Drag Queen Story Hour filed by members of two very sane sounding groups, Warriors for Christ and Special Forces of Liberty:

"The Plaintiffs object to self-identified transgenders exploiting the state's endorsement of their religious ideology in an government endorsed effort to brainwash and indoctrinate minors to a religious worldviews on sex, faith, truth, gender, morality, and marriage in a manner that excessively entangles the government with the religion of postmodern-western-individualistic-moral relativism — referred to mainly by the Plaintiffs and the United States Supreme Court as 'Secular Humanism.' By endorsing transgenderism in the manner complained of the city of Lafayette is relegating Christians to second class citizens."

So, basically, they're making up a religion, claiming that LGBTQ people practice it, and then saying that this justifies being legally able to discriminate against them.

Does this "postmodern western individualistic moral relativism" have tenets and practices like a regular religion? You bet it does! Were these tenets and practices completely made up in the fever dreams of a bunch of weird bigots? They sure were!

WHEREAS, The lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) community is organized, full and has a daily code by which members may guide their daily lives, which makes it a denominational sect that is inseparably part of the religion of secular humanism; and

WHEREAS, Instead of having a cross, the ten commandments icon, or star and crescent, the LGBTQ secular humanist community has the gay pride rainbow colored flag to symbolize its faith-based worldview; and

WHEREAS, The ideas that "a person is born homosexual," or that "a person can be born in the wrong body," or that "a person can come out of an invisible closet and be baptized gay," or that "to disagree with homosexual orthodoxy premises makes you a bigot" are a series of unproven faith-based assumptions and naked assertions that are implicitly religious and inseparably linked to the religion of secular humanism.

A DAILY CODE. Is that what they've been meaning by "the gay agenda" all these years? What is this "daily code?" What do they imagine it entails? Honestly, I am extremely curious.

The bill goes on to allow the legislators some space to whine about how unfair it is that this "religion" says they are jerks, which they are.

WHEREAS, In the wake of the government's endorsement of LGBTQ ideology, many citizens who object to the government's endorsement of LGBTQ secular humanism is not based on "bigotry," but on "biology"; and

WHEREAS, In the wake of the government's endorsement of LGBTQ ideology, when a secular humanist says that "love is love," what they really mean is that they are amenable to government assets being used to oppress and marginalize anyone who disagrees with their beliefs, which is a position that is categorically "unloving"; and

WHEREAS, In the wake of the government's endorsement of LGBTQ ideology, we have learned that people who are "intolerant" of "intolerant people" are "intolerant," people who are "judgmental" against "judgmental people" are "judgmental," and people who are "dogmatic" about not "being dogmatic" are "dogmatic"

Help! My head is exploding! Is yours? OK, let's let it explode some more, as this group of seven wacky white people cap all of this crazy off with a steaming pile of "This is not the world Dr. King wanted."

WHEREAS, Those who seek to end the government's unconstitutional entanglement with the LGBTQ secular humanist religion are defending the integrity of the civil rights movement lead by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. from an emotional ploy and an unprincipled misapplication of the 14th amendment of the constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, For any person to suggest that the homosexual civil rights movement, which is not based on immutability or genetics, is equal to the race-based civil rights movement, which was actually based on immutability and genetics, has engaged in an act of fraud and racial animus in-kind that is intellectually, emotionally, sexually and racially exploitative; and

WHEREAS, People of color at one point in this country had to ride on the back of the bus, walk to school and drink from colored water fountains, and for anyone to equate the race-based civil rights plight to the goal of many secular humanists to entangle the government with their religion is a per se act of racial animus that is deeply offensive to many people in the state of Kansas.

The stupid. It burns.

I have an idea, though, that may solve all of our problems. Instead of inventing an imaginary religion so a bunch of losers from Kansas can discriminate against gay, bi and trans people, we invent an entirely imaginary group of people for them to get to be legally better than. Let's say they are "purple" -- you know for all the color blind people out there who like to talk about how they don't care if people are "black, white or purple"? And people like these legislators can be free to discriminate against purple people to their heart's content. Proudly put a sign on your door saying "Purple People Need Not Apply." No marriage for purple people! No cakes for purple people, either! You can even eat purple people and be a purple people eater, if you so choose. And we'll even make it so it is illegal to call someone a jerk for saying mean things about purple people. Purple People haters/eaters will be able to once again look themselves in the mirror and say, "Hey, I may be a total fucking loser, but you know who I'm better than? Purple people!"

Then they can just leave everyone else the hell alone to marry and live as they choose. It's so stupid, they might just fall for it.

Now relax, it is your OPEN THREAD.

[ThinkProgress]

Wonkette is independent and fully funded by readers like you. Click below to tip us!

How often would you like to donate?

Just once Monthly

Select an amount (USD)

$2$25$5$50$10$100$15$500$20$1000