Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Hate Crimes: Who is Expressing the Hate?

It's ironic. And tragic.

Last week our kids were asked to remain silent for a day in school to honor and remember the homosexuals who have been bullied. Today, Congress is hearing yet another expansion of so-called "hate-crimes" legislation that will give "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" the same federal protection as race, which Focus on the Family and Liberty Counsel say will undermine and challenge freedom of speech and religious freedom.

While the rush is on to expand everything homosexual, it's interesting that hate seems to have become a regular part of the homosexual agenda.

This past weekend at the Miss USA Pageant, things turned very ugly because contestant, Miss California Carrie Prejean did not answer a question properly. Perez Hilton, an openly homosexual writer asked her how she felt about gay marriage. She answered honestly, saying she personally believed that marriage was between a man and a woman. Because of her belief, she was called a "Dumb Bitch." Perez went on to say she has "half a brain" and had she won he would have stormed onto the stage and ripped off her tiara.

I believe he would have.

Last week during the "Day of Silence" event, Karen England, director of Capitol Resource Institute in Sacramento, began receiving vicious voice mail, including death threats, simply because she had advocated that parents consider keeping their children out of school that day.

Since the success of Prop. 8 in California, hate and violence toward anyone who stands for marriage between a man and a woman has dramatically increased.

England expressed a growing concern that many of us share---- her own safety.

"But," she said, "If I'm getting this just over encouraging kids to remain home, I can't imagine what it's like to send a junior high or high school student into an environment where everyone is participating, and they say, 'No, I'm not going to.'"

Behind the facade of love and benefits and the little kids they bring to the hearings, is a steel cold resolve to destroy anyone or anything that stands in their way of redefining marriage, re-engineering society and normalizing that which is not and has been rejected by every major civilization and every major religion.

They are using bigotry, hate and violence against any resistance to their agenda. And many of our lawmakers are skipping along with them down a very dark path.

Please check out the stories I have linked. Focus on The Family gives direction as to how you may voice your opposition to the "hate-crimes" bill being heard today. Take a moment and make a call.

God help us.

______________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom

Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.

27 comments:

  1. This is the kind of incident that endears gays to heteros. I hold the Miss USA pageant people responsible for not vetting this jerk adequately. Gays want tolerance, yet continue to pull crap like this. Perez is still angry over prop 8, and took it out on this innocent young lady. Well I can tell you Perez needs to be charged with a hate crime. If I called a gay a fag I would be thrown in jail post hast, and this is what needs to happen to Perez.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Talk about reverse discrimnation!
    She was honest. She should have the freedom to express her beliefs without his 'explicit' reaction!

    ReplyDelete
  3. So tolerance really is a one way street after all.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I work with two gay guys. As long as things go their way they are happy,happy, happy. But if thigs don't, they are mean. If anybody says something about the gay rights or disagree they blow up.

    ReplyDelete
  5. We had a lesbian start attending our church and when we told her we loved her and wanted to help her but did not approve or condone her lifestyle, she became angry and started trying to turn people against each other in our church. This is a very serious problem. I think people need to see it for what it is. It is a spiritual problem. They need deliverance.

    ReplyDelete
  6. How long before they start interrupting church services when they disagree with the sermon.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I saw this on the news . Also the comments of the political gay activist. Can you imagin if the question was about her political party preference or religious denomination and you had to answer it to agree with the persons party or religion who was asking the question ? Then make the commentor conservative . Rachel Maddow, The Daily Show, CNN would be all over it .

    What is strange is one time I think the vast majority of us would just say this was wrong . I don't see how people can say we are going forward .

    Selective right and wrong based on idealogical belief systems.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Since the success of Prop. 8 in California, hate and violence toward anyone who stands for marriage between a man and a woman has dramatically increased."

    And yet it is tiny compared to the amount of hatred and violence directed toward gay people. Funny how Gary only cares about the former, while dismissing the latter, as he did last month when whining about the PI covering an anti-gay attack on a Seattle bus instead of his little hate & bigotry fest on the Capitol steps.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "They are using bigotry, hate and violence against any resistance to their agenda."

    So I guess this means we won't have to listen to FFN supporters snivel about how we are being uncivil when we call them out on their disgusting anti-gay bigotry, and absolute indifference to anti-gay violence.

    "And many of our lawmakers are skipping along with them down a very dark path."

    Nice the way you followed up your post decrying bigotry with this little bit of bigotry, Gary. Or are we to believe you didn't choose the verb "skipping" specifically to reference bigoted stereotypes of effeminate gay men?

    But please, Gary keep up with the posts in this vein, they will highlight for the entire state the bigotry that motivates your referendum drive. It has nothing to with marriage and attacking lgbt people.

    ReplyDelete
  10. anon 10:51
    Thank you for making the point. Was Gary whining when he pointed out that the PI didn't even mention the rally for marriage on the steps in Olympia.
    Do you really believe that the 2400 people who gathered on the steps in defense of marriage were there to express hate and bigotry?

    ReplyDelete
  11. gays call white black and black white and right wrong. very confused, i think.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I saw this girl on NBC this morning. She is a beautiful young lady who is a Christian and believes marriage is between a man and a woman. For that she probably lost the competition and was slamed on television all over the world.
    Gays are real caring and loving. Give me a break. This is not isolated. You should live in California. We know what hate is. We experience it every where.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I read this blog every day, but have not posted on it. I am struck by the silence of those who are usually on here criticizing Gary and what he believes and every one else who also believes in Christian beliefs.
    Where are all these people who are usually burning up the comment column?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Where are all these people who are usually burning up the comment column?Because as of late Gary has been like that NOM ad, a parody of itself that you want to have heard. The more he talks, the more people turn away from his brand of reasoning.

    Dept. of Justice stats 2007
    1,477 offenses motivation of religious-biased:
    68.4% were anti-Jewish.
    9.5% were anti-other religion.
    9.0% were anti-Islamic.
    4.4% were anti-Catholic.
    4.3% were anti-multiple religions, group.
    4.0% were anti-Protestant.
    0.4% were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

    2007 reported 1,460 hate crime offenses based on sexual-orientation bias.
    59.2% anti-gay male bias.
    24.8% anti-gay bias.
    12.6% anti-lesbian bias.
    1.8% anti-heterosexual bias.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "I am struck by the silence of those who are usually on here criticizing Gary and what he believes and every one else who also believes in Christian beliefs."

    Kind of hard to defend what this gay activists did with Miss California. Hard to defend those who defend the Day of Silence because of bullying and then defend listing donor names in order to intimidate people .

    But don't worry , some will change the subject or some are so hateful who blog here will actually defend that .

    ReplyDelete
  16. Kind of hard to defend what this gay activists did with Miss CaliforniaWhat did 'gay activists' do? You aren't considering the gossip blogger Perz Hilton as an 'activist' are you? Ha! I guess he's active, and he is gay, but still if all non-dead gay people meet your definition the question then is 'what's your point?' She voiced her opinion, other people voiced theirs - where is your complaint?

    defend listing donor names in order to intimidate people??? What are you taking about? People listing contributors to a political campaign? Prop 8? You do realize that California newspaper websites had databases of every contributor supporting and opposing Prop 8, right? And that the largest prop 8 'gay activist' groups spoke out against threats against even those that would take away other citizen's rights. You aren't pretending that all gay people are the same again are you Mick?

    And I remember when 'your side' was 'hateful' enough to publish confidential lists of people with HIV - might this be either a 'pot kettle black' or 'trying to paint those I disagree with one big paint stroke' situation, couldn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  17. It no suprise to see gay activists who clearly are trying cto silence opposition or limit comments into non-confrontational comments.I see similar behavior coming from the "anti-prop 8 hate crowd" , who use tactics of fear and intimidation to stifle their opposition.Do you think it is acceptable for gay activists to call for the boycott of business who have had employees who have supported prop 8?Do you think it is acceptable for gay activists to publish "black lists" of people who they consider enemies because they supported prop 8.Do you think it is proper for gay activist to demonize, intimidate and try to destroy honorable and positive institutions, such as the Boy Scouts and the Mormon Church, because they disagree with their views?The behavior on this forum regarding my previous posts proves that this tactic of intimidation, hate and fear is prevalent even on this forum and it has successfully cowered those who disagree into polite silence

    ReplyDelete
  18. Do you think it is acceptable for gay activists to call for the boycott of business who have had employees who have supported prop 8?Of course it is - this is the US you can call for anything. I get emails from Christian organizations calling on boycotts (what's the latest one - Pepsi?) for their support of equal rights. You guys do it all the time - odd that you are only worried about the gay activists and not the Christian ones.

    Do you think it is acceptable for gay activists to publish "black lists" of people who they consider enemies because they supported prop 8.Again, that's an activity our founding fathers indulged in - we are back to the alternate universe scenario - what world are you living in where your side doesn't do the exact same kind of things? There's a word for only being upset with one side that does it and I know you know it.

    Do you think it is proper for gay activist to demonize, intimidate and try to destroy honorable and positive institutions, such as the Boy Scouts and the Mormon Church, because they disagree with their views?The Boy Scouts? They deserve to be treated like every other private religious youth group that discriminates - the only times they get in trouble is when they try and get on the public dole when such groups have no right to such handouts.

    And 'honorable positive institutions' don't campaign to remove other citizens equal rights. When they do people who are for equal rights have every right to call them on it and think less of them because of it.

    The behavior on this forum regarding my previous posts proves that this tactic of intimidation, hate and fear is prevalent even on this forum and it has successfully cowered those who disagree into polite silence If mere words, moderated words, can make them 'cower' then they are cowards - that's their own personal failing, not yours or mine. And again, why not do a scan on how many times the words 'sinner, pervert, 'end of the world', etc have come from your side of the table.

    You only see what you want to see - you can't decry only one side of a discussion where both sides do the same things.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Oshtur, Pirz Hilton called this lovely, sweet young lady a BITCH--this is just plain wrong--this shows how 'intolerant' HE is, calling her names, because she just happens to not agree with him, while answering a question in a truthful way!!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Oshtur, Pirz Hilton called this lovely, sweet young lady a BITCH--this is just plain wrongIn the same way someone a 'sinner', or 'pervert' or whatever is. But I see your point, one person called a person you like a name you don't like is upsetting - you are just upset with Perez Hilton, right?

    --this shows how 'intolerant' HE is, calling her names, because she just happens to not agree with him, while answering a question in a truthful way!!Oh pleeze - look back in the F&FN archives and see how people react when I answer things in truthful ways. Its human nature - shoot the republicans are shooting around worse language about the president every single day.

    We are in:
    Pot. Kettle. Black, sauce. goose. gander. territory here, AND

    What he called her is a common epithet that people of all genders are called in some circle, he is a entertainment media gadfly clown by profession - it would be like getting upset over something Rush says.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Homosexuals have always had the same right as all other citizens to the rights of marriage. Everyone has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex.Larry that is transparent sophistry - our biological mechanism of attraction are to male or female. To tell someone who only marries men that they can only license a female spouse is like telling a fish they have a right to ride a bicycle anytime they want.

    I cannot marry my brother. I cannot marry two other people. Three women cannot marry each other.Ah but assuming you are male and a heterosexual you can license the contract with a female spouse. No matter what the restrictions on licensing you are allowed to license it with someone you could reasonably be expected to have as a spouse, some citizens are given no such reasonable option.

    Same-sex marriage is not about marital rights or marriage equality.So you are calling me a liar? Nice. Sorry it is about marriage equality - every citizen being able to license the civil contract of marriage with their spouse regardless of their own gender.

    And if they can call homosexual relationships marriage and place them on the same level as heterosexual relationships, they achieve legitimacy.Oh please they already are called marriages - you aren't of the notion that the state 'marries' you are you? I mean show of hands here who think that 'marriage' comes from the state?

    It doesn't matter what name the state gives the license the couple is still married. My husband and I referred to ourselves as such, we'd have our wedding anniversaries. The state doesn't decide who's married, it merely licenses a contract in support of marriage. It always amazes me that people who say they are Christian think the state decides who's married - its a laugh riot. ;)

    If any type of relationship can be called marriage then homosexual relationships are no longer held up as special.Shoot what are you talking about? As of this moment we have two sets of contracts with the same features giving two sets of citizens two sets of special rights.

    ReplyDelete
  22. If procreation is not part of marriage then using children as hostages to promote same-sex marriage is a convenient but illegitimate argument.I'm calling strawman. If children being raised by other than their 2 genetic contributors is 'illegitimate' then so are those with adopted children, single parents that marry the child's non-genetic parent, parents who use fertility technology using another's genome, etc.

    Reality check: having children doesn't require marriage, raising them does and parents can and do a wonderful job regardless of their gender combinations.

    Those that try to have it both ways are revealing that they will say whatever they have to in whatever context they are in to insure the position that makes them feel good wins.That statement is totally ironic but I bet you can't see it. :)

    ReplyDelete
  23. 9:07
    This is different. This was a well watched yearly program, seen by families. The people who are the judges need to be professional and not make such 'gutter' type comments later via interviews!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Thanks much for working w/ Focus on the Family. It's so refreshing to see like minded banding together, rather than each running their own show! God bless both organizations!

    ReplyDelete
  25. As an openly gay man there seem to be very few times I agree with FFN --- that said I do agree that Perez Hilton is a a frustrating and attention seeking individual who unfortunately is one of only a handful of high-profile lgbt individuals in the country.

    His actions do not represent us all and many lgbt people are just as sick of him as heterosexuals.

    One thing to chime in on about hate crimes ---- simply using a word such as "fag" is not enough to qualify under hate crime statutes in most states. For a crime to be a "hate crime" (and yes all crimes are out of hate on some level but bear with me on the lay term used to describe the law and since the topic is gay hate crimes that will be the example) there needs to be proof that the REASON for the physical attack of another person is due, in part, to their homosexuality (or due to their heterosexuality for that matter in the State of Washington).

    I've struggled my whole life on my views of hate crimes laws but at the end of the day I think they are a necessary evil. Many argue that when "white male is hit his attacker gets x punishment but that when white gay male gets hit his attacker gets x+y punishment" and that is unfair. I agree EXCEPT when the reason for the second attack is DUE to the victim's sexual orientation. When the crime is due to the existence of the trait then that is an extra element of the attack and is the rationale for the extra "y punishment".

    Hate crimes laws are not about treating people differently -- they are about recognizing that sometimes the malice behind an assault has other motivations and when those motivations are extremely clear by evidence then punishing that behavior because society doesn't believe it is morally right to hurt someone for his/her inherent identity.

    I feel like a fairly rationale lgbt person and I often engage in conversation with ffn and religious and non-religious people who don't share my beliefs. I want to engage in the dialogue it is is a shame that someone so erratic like Perez Hilton has the microphone instead of someone like me.

    I can't say if I were to meet Miss California that either of us would be swayed by the others points but I would listen and engage in the debate with her. And I'll say this - I wouldn't be focusing on marriage equality issues in the conversation. Instead, I would be focsuing on her reent remarks about sexual orientation being a learned behavior or choice.

    I'm not angry or upset by the frequent nature/nurture debate because really I just don't understand it. I grew up in a rural area in a medium sized family with everyone else being straight and I knew no one who was gay until I was about 16. At the same time I recognized I was different and attracted to men when I was 9 years old. My parents were (and are still) very present and equally involved in my life and formative upbringing. As a side note they were pretty religious and active in our church. So where did I learn this alleged behavior? I had no examples of it in my life and the media certainly wasn't what it is today with lgbt shows and news so it couldn't have been that either.

    Looking at this from a different angle......Why would I choose to be part of a minority group that is so divisive in our culture? Why would I pick to make my life harder than it has to be? I love who I am and I wouldn't have it any other way even if I could.

    I simply don't understand the nature/nurture debate. I wish I could and I hope that everyone reading this hear it in the soft tone in which it was written. There is to much angry speech, from both sides, on these issues and I hope that people, on both sides, will try to be open to the possibility that people, on both sides, are willing and wanting to have non-confrontational discussions on these issues.

    Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  26. FYI---this is a 'choice' lifestyle--God don't make mistakes. He made man=He made woman-to be a family-period!
    There are not sides. It is what it is--God help those who 'don't see' --yet as to the harm of being in a diviant behaviour relationship! There is NO compromise--forget THAT idea!

    ReplyDelete
  27. For context I am the same person posted the long response a couple of comments above.

    The comment following mine provides some good examples of the very confrontation that is more subtle yet pervades discussion about these issues. Use of the "fyi" and select quotation marks around words like "don't see" only add unnecessary condescending aspects to one's argument. These words unnecessarily inflame discussion that could otherwise be civil, more open-minded, more engaging, and, ultimately, more enlightening for both sides.

    To respond specifically, while I don't think this is your exact point I will give you that lgbt individuals make a choice to act on their same-sex attractions rather than suppress them------ but I do not give you that the feelings of same-sex attraction themselves are a choice.

    Additionally, not acting on the innate same-sex sexual attraction feelings does not mean that lgbt individuals would then choose to pursue opposite-sex relationships. Such pursuits would be void of any innate opposite-sex sexual attraction. I wonder how many people would want their daughters to marry a man and have children with him when that man has absolutely no physical attraction or feelings of physical love for the woman?

    Also, having grown up fairly religious and having read the bible cover to cover before I was 23, I don't believe that homosexuality is a mistake by God. I must infer from the commentator's argument that the point of life as dictated by God is to have a family and procreate. I believe that a better understanding of the bible reveals a theme of living life with a goal of better all mankind's life --- and this does not require everyone to have a family or procreate. God's will works in mysterious ways but nothing that exists is a mistake.

    Finally, I'll say that maybe I am more calm and willing to engage in discussion on these issues even if sometimes hostility is directed toward me because deep inside I know that my position will ultimately prevail and that gives me peace. Poll after poll shows that as our society ages and the demographics shift that lgbt civil rights issues will be a thing of the past because the vast majority of the younger generation simply support lgbt issues. There will be a demographic tipping point and it will be very soon --- probably within the next 5 years.

    Sometime very soon the voting people of a state will support an lgbt issue (whether that marriage or something else) and that will be the sign that the tipping point has come. Then we can all move on to more important issues such as higher education and health care.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.