He may be "not gay" but he’s definitely an asshole
The Cavalier Daily is home to plenty of obnoxious, reactionary writers, but frequent contributor Alex Cortes is definitely the worst of the bunch.
First a bit of background for those of you who aren’t U.Va students. Until recently, it has been accepted “tradition” to – at football games – yell “not gay” at the end of our fight song, the “Good Old Song”:
That good ole’ song of Wahoo-wah, We’ll sing it o’er and o’er, it cheers our hearts and warms our blood to hear them shout and roar. We come from old Virginia, where all is bright and gay. Let’s all join hands and give a yell for dear old UVa. Wahoo-wah, wahoo-wah, Uni-v Virginia, hoo-rah-ray, hoo-rah-ray, ray! ray! U-Va! [Emphasis mine]
In the last few years, LGBT students and allies have successfully brought greater attention to the offensiveness of the “not gay” chant, and for the most part, the chant is considered homophobic and unacceptable.
Of course, there are those who feel that publicly stigmatizing oppressed communities should remain an acceptable part of college life. Cavalier Daily contributor Alex Cortes writes:
The “not gay” chant has been completely written off on Grounds. Some call it a drunken joke while others refer to its adherents as homophobes. Unfortunately, in doing so, this University has completely disregarded the religiously and politically-minded like myself who say the chant out of disgust for the gay lifestyle and support for our natural heterosexuality given to us by God.
Shorter Cortes, “How dare you call me out for being a bigot?”
Not surprisingly, the chant’s opponents found it much easier to write us off as drunks and homophobes then address our intellectual concerns.
“Intellectual concerns” is code for “I find gay people icky and want them to go away.”
In doing so, the majority suggests that we are only to take the viewpoints of the sober and so called “tolerant.” However, if we were to only take the viewpoints of this selective leftist group, there wouldn’t be many viewpoints, for few of us are completely sober and tolerant to the point of failing to address flaws, especially among politicians. And of course we don’t want a limited scope of purely liberal viewpoints.
It’s writing like this that makes me wonder if the Cavalier Daily even reads columns before they’re submitted. I’m not even entirely sure what this paragraph means. He equates the “majority” with the “tolerant,” but then goes on to say that the “tolerant viewpoint” is that of a liberal minority. I will give him points for being consistent though, he’s still upset that it’s not okay to be a bigoted douchebag.
If everyone’s thinking the same thing, then no one’s thinking, which is exactly what is occurring on the topic of the “not gay” chant. Is anyone else in this University ready to defend the use of the “not gay” chant with academic language?
Only Alex Cortes stands ready to defend homophobes and hatred from the overwhelming forces of decency and respect. (As a quick aside, I wonder if Cortes thinks we should apply this logic to everything. For example, slavery. We need someone to stand ready against the oppressive conformity of the anti-slavery majority.)
As a Catholic I believe in natural law — morality derived from the nature of human beings. With this belief in mind, man was made to become one with his female counterpart in the act of intercourse for the purpose of procreation. That is how we were intelligently designed by God and thus are to live. Any deviation from natural law, like homosexuality, is in effect saying that God created us wrong and is sinful.
I think Cortes has his Catholic theology (as well as his basic terminology), well, wrong. From Wikipedia:
Natural law or the law of nature (Latin: lex naturalis) is an ethical theory that posits the existence of a law whose content is set by nature and that therefore has validity everywhere.
Cortes seems to be equating natural law with God’s law. What I think he means to say is, “As a Catholic, I believe in divine law – morality derived from the nature of the divine.” If you agree that God intended heterosexuality to be normative, then homosexual acts are contrary to the intention of the divine. But, Cortes didn’t actually say any of that, so we can only conclude that Cortes is
- an idiot
- A first-year taking a 100-level philosophy class who got his terms mixed up.
This column gets a hell of a lot better though.
Jesus, the divine inspiration of the New Testament, taught us to love the sinner but hate the sin (leading a gay lifestyle). One of the main reasons he embodied himself was to rid of verses like the one quoted above. Jesus disproved of Judaism’s treatment towards homosexuals and would surely disprove of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s current campaign to wipe out homosexuality in Iran.
When proudly shouting, “I’m not gay” during the “Good Ol’ Song,” I am simply publicizing my religiously-informed belief that it is wrong to act homosexual. I am not taking away anyone’s life as Ahmadinejad is attempting to do, nor am I suppressing their beliefs as happens so often on these “academical” grounds.
You are dumb.
I understand that the word “gay” in the “Good Ol’ Song” is meant to translate as happy, but why is it wrong to assert our religious and political views at the juncture, as we should be able to at any juncture? Clearly there is nothing wrong with exerting our freedom of speech — especially responsible speech supported in Christianity.
I find it pathetic that our Christian American majority, in this case shown at the University, is willing to set aside their religious beliefs for political correctness. The movement against the “not gay” chant is just another example of liberals, for which universities tend to be a hotbed, trying to suppress religious views in the public square.
I like how Cortes equates “religious views” with rampant homophobia and prejudice. I would say that it is insulting to the many Christians who don’t derive bigotry from their faith, but that would be ignoring the unfortunate reality that there are too many Christians who do.
Cortes would be well-served by taking a religious studies course (U.Va has the best undergraduate program in the country) that focused on the differences in Christian theological beliefs, especially regarding things like homosexuality.
During the second half of the football season I have felt uncomfortable saying the “not gay” chant, not because of the content, but because of the stares and criticisms I receive after doing so. Despite this discomfort, I will continue to press on as one of the last beacons of strength and morality. [Emphasis mine]
HAHAHAHA
Cortes is seriously upset that people aren’t tolerating his bigotry. The shame and humiliation must be overwhelming. It’s almost as if were LGBT at an event where thousands of people shouted “not gay” to signal there opposition to the “homosexual lifestyle.”
The irony is painful.
That may sound too pompous for the rather insignificant matter at hand, but courage on any level is hard to find these days. Political correctness, a weakening morality and lack of courage are suffocating our once-great nation. You have an opportunity to stop the suffocation. Promote the “not gay” chant.
Only Cortes has the strength necessary to continue the struggle against those cowardly, morally compromised PC police and those students complicit in their jihad against intolerance and exclusion.
I hope more stalwart defenders of hatred will join him in his crusade.
Until then though.
Thank you Alex Cortes.
Thank you.
You know, it’s sad that a bunch of narrow-minded idiots have to take the perfectly-valid expression “bright and gay” and turn it into a comment about sex at all.
Beyond even engaging his pseudo-philosophical point, perhaps he doesn’t know what the word “gay” means in context? Or perhaps he’s the closeted type who has to express his “not-gay”-hood constantly. Methinks he doth protest too much.
It’s a fight song! It’s not meant to be a comment about sexuality. Cortes is clearly trying to interject an argument where it doesn’t belong. I say this as someone who is often labeled homophobic because I do disapprove of homosexuality. That being said, I can go weeks without having to bring the point up. I can even use the word “gay” in poetry and music without thinking of homosexuality. I guess I have a different obsession than Mr. Cortes does.
You know, the Westboro Baptist Church just lost that multi-million-dollar lawsuit, maybe he could go help them raise money. That might take him out of the picture for a while.
Haha. There has actually been quite a bit of speculation – on part of the students here – on whether or not Cortes is himself closeted.
Sorry to derail, but Cortes and his ravings illustrate well the point I was alluding to earlier – that religious attitudes should be kept well away from politics. Notice how convinced Cortes is that his bigotry is justified; and how can it not be, when it is divinely ordained? This is not to say that religion engenders bigotry, though in Cortes’ case it might have. The moral here, as I see it, is that religion turns regular bigotry into especially deep-seated bigotry, anchored by claims upon the authority of an otherworldly being. This is not the sort of thinking which should be encouraged in the political sphere, where the persuadability of participants is essential.
Since all the cool kids are doing it, let me also join the “find stupid bullshit in the article” game:
“Jesus disproved of Judaism’s treatment towards homosexuals and would surely disprove of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s current campaign to wipe out homosexuality in Iran.”
Keep using that word “disprove,” Alex. It does not mean what you think it means.
To some degree I disagree with you – I don’t think religious attitudes are necessarily incompatible with politics – but, point well-taken.
he also took everything that my friend rick santorum said and basically substituted gay/homosexual in for muslim.
i heart uva.
Dmitry,
You may or may not know this, but not all of religion’s involvement has been negative. The Abolition movement was almost entirely led from pulpits. You might have noticed that “Rev.” in front of Martin Luther King’s name. To be perfectly honest with you, what you have just said sounds more bigoted than most religious speech. (I can’t say “any,” since I just mentioned the Westboro Baptist Church, and very few people are in their league.)
religion is for the weak minded. anyone who justifies their bigotry with “god” is an idiot.
… and what part of busytimmy’s comment isn’t bigoted?
I said: “This is not to say that religion engenders bigotry.”
You said: “You may or may not know this, but not all of religion’s involvement has been negative.”
Thanks for clearing that up, buddy. Your reading comprehension skills are impeccable.
You said: “What part of busytimmy’s comment isn’t bigoted?”
busytimmy said: “Anyone who justifies their bigotry with “god” is an idiot.”
This one.
It’s time to support the “not roar!” movement, to be sung after “to hear them shout and roar!” It gives drunks and the boisterous a place to belt out during an otherwise soft song while not offending anybody (except perhaps lions). We used to do this at the games in my day once it occurred to our feeble little First Year minds that “not gay” is offensive and close-minded, but I don’t think it ever caught on. I just hope Cortes learns something from all of this.
>You said: “What part of busytimmy’s comment isn’t bigoted?”
>busytimmy said: “Anyone who justifies their bigotry with “god” is an >idiot.”
>This one.
Touche.