In just her first year in office, Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) has proven to be one of the most socially conservative members of Congress, and today she demonstrated just how intolerant she is of people who do not share her beliefs. In an interview, she and the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins were condemning the Air Force Academy for creating an outdoor worship space that accommodates “Earth-based” religions. Hartzler said she believes that her rabidly conservative brand of Christianity is “the main religion in our country” and condemned any attempt to accommodate “fringe religions”:

PERKINS: Do you see this as a part of a growing trend that we see that there is really kind of a marginalization of Christianity and almost a promotion of other forms of, I would have to say, fringe religions?

HARTZLER: I agree, I think so. Christianity is the main religion in our country and as a policy for the Department of Defense we need to defend the practice of religion but we do not have to obligate taxpayer funds to facilitate or accommodate it or pay for it.

PERKINS: Is it the government’s role to try to put all religions on the same plane?

HARTZLER: No, it’s not their role at all. Their role is to facilitate basic policy for our country and to not to try to lift up one religion over the other. They should be defending the basic rights that we have, that freedom of religion here, and certainly not facilitating or accommodating fringe religions. It’s crazy.

Listen, via Right Wing Watch:

Hartzler seems to believe it’s OK if the government accommodates her fringe brand of Christianity, as she has pursued legislative options to discriminate against same-sex couples in the military and applauded Speaker John Boehner for defending the Defense of Marriage Act using taxpayer funds. Perhaps she should spend some time with the First Amendment so she better understands how it’s unconstitutional both to establish her religious belief as law and to prevent others from the free exercise of their own beliefs.

Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) continues his quest to impose discrimination upon same-sex couples in the military through the Defense Authorization Act. He and 85 of his House colleagues have called upon the Senate to maintain the amendments he and Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) added, which extend the Defense of Marriage Act to prohibit same-sex marriages from being performed by military chaplains or on military bases:

We recognize that the national Defense Authorization Act is well underway and needed funds for our troops should be expedited without delay. However, we respectfully request that an amendment similar to that passed by the House be included to ensure that this administration follow the law as written and comply with DOMA. It is not the place of any citizen of this country to pick and choose which laws will be obeyed. We expect citizens sworn to defend those laws to set the example in their application.

Akin’s request is an overreach that directly targets servicemembers’ religious liberty. The Defense of Marriage Act defines what is recognized by the government as marriage, but in no way prohibits same-sex marriages from being performed.

Since being elected to Congress last year, Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) has been one of the most vocal opponents of LGBT equality, introducing an amendment to the Defense budget that would have prevented military same-sex marriages. More recently, she compared same-sex marriage to polygamy, polyamory, incest, pedophilia, and 3-year-olds driving, then doubled down on her slippery slop by clarifying that she meant 13-year-olds.

Yesterday, at a town hall in Butler, MO, a University of Missouri med student named Alex asked her about the impact on young gay people of making such statements:

ALEX: The 2004 amendment to ban same-sex marriage…in combination with the statement you made earlier this month where you said…allowing same-sex marriage would start us down a slippery slope toward things like sanctioned incest and bestiality. How do you think…

HARTZLER: No, no, no, you misunder…. That was a mis… a misunderstanding of the quote…. That was really taken out of context.

ALEX: How do you think that makes young people, like me, who are gay feel about ourselves, to come up in a society that to us seems like it doesn’t value us in the same way straight people are valued?

HARTZLER: We’re not the ones changing the policy. Ok, so you shouldn’t feel bad at all.

ALEX: Why shouldn’t I feel bad if there’s an amendment, if you champion an amendment prohibiting me from…

HARTZLER: Right now it has been the law of the land for a long time. Marriage is between a man and a woman. All we did in 2004 is just put that in the constitution. So we’re not changing policy at all. And, anyway, so you shouldn’t feel bad. Anyway, It was nice to meet you guys.

Watch the exchange:

(H/T: Joe.My.God.)

Last week, Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) compared marriage equality to polygamy, polyamory, incest, pedophilia, and 3-year-olds driving cars, saying, “Why not allow an uncle to marry his niece? Why not allow a 50-year-old man to marry a 12-year-old girl if they love each other and they’re committed?”

On Monday, Hartzler doubled down on her comments, but told PoliticMo that she meant to say 13-year-olds, not 3-year-olds:

“I was saying that if you change the standard in the country to having marriage be, which is what they want, that just anybody that has a loving and committed relationship, then you set yourself on a slippery slope legally in courts to having other people come forward with similar arguments that would be objectionable to almost everyone,” she said. “So, that’s another reason why it makes sense to just keep the traditional definition of a man and a woman and that it’s my main point there is that it’s wide public policy.

“So, obviously those comments are just being misconstrued by those,” she said.