The Poor, Persecuted Proponents of Proposition 8 (waaaa!)
I’m not homosexual, which I think helps make my point here. When it comes to something like this, personal incentives are not required to tell right from wrong.
‘Gay fascists’ storm church, attack members
‘Gay’ activists engage in ‘hate crimes’ against Christians
Cass admits he wonders why the incidents have not been called hate crimes. “Had the same level of violence and rhetoric been directed toward homosexuals or their groups, there would be accusations of hate crimes,” he suggests.
OK, now for a thought experiment. Let’s say it’s 40 years ago and a state or two just passed a law making it illegal for black men and women to get married to each other. They are understandably upset, and some of them protest. Some protests are peaceful, some are a bit intrusive. There is no actual violence involved. Now, some proponent of this law makes the following statement.
Cass admits he wonders why the incidents have not been called hate crimes. “Had the same level of violence and rhetoric been directed toward [blacks] or their groups, there would be accusations of hate crimes,” he suggests.
I hope this makes it evident how utterly ridiculous statements like this are. The current situation with the liberties of homosexuals is just as much about civil rights. The point to ponder is this….
Which group is trying to take civil rights away from the other, rights that they themselves wish to keep?
Ask yourself the above question when trying to discern who is being persecuted.
Nov 23rd, 2008 at 7:50 am
Decent point you’re making, but your choice of title makes it sound like you’re being snarky. These days, “poor persecuted” is generally a sign of mocking. Maybe that’s your point, you’re trying to catch people who wouldn’t normally read this sort of piece because they don’t agree, I dunno. I found it off-putting, and thought you were against gay marriage up until the penultimate sentence.
Nov 23rd, 2008 at 7:53 am
Thanks for the comment Hel. I suppose I could have done a better job at making the sarcasm more obvious in the title. Any ideas of how to reword it? I’d be happy to.
Nov 23rd, 2008 at 8:22 am
I added (waaaa!) to the end of the title…hopefully that gives people a better idea of what to expect. Thanks Hel!
Nov 23rd, 2008 at 10:58 am
“Gay fascists’ storm church, attack members” – verbally! “‘Gay’ activists engage in ‘hate crimes’ against Christians…Homosexual militants have been conducting legal demonstrations in opposition to Proposition 8’s victory in the election” And they’re asking to have it called a hate crime? After HOW MANY homosexuals have been killed or brutally beaten by Christians, yelling and protesting is a hate crime?!?!? Ooooooh, they made noises and carried signs in a LEGAL protest. Oh, God, no, they beat….. buckets!
But you know it’s perfectly fine for the Phelps crew and the Westboro Baptist Church to attend funerals and block the movement of mourners and scream at them that “God loves dead soldiers” or such niceties as “Faggots burn in Hell”.
Nov 23rd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
“Which group is trying to take civil rights away from the other, rights that they themselves wish to keep?”
Really? What about the right to vote in a free election without fear of retribution? Without fear of losing your job security? (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/theater/13thea.html)
When people take things into their own hands and take it to the level that they have, it says that there is no respect for the democratic process. We won’t have any guarantee that our elections will be free and fair when they are dominated by fear.
Nov 23rd, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Also, sorry for the second comment, but in response to Kalyssa:
It’s not just “verbal attacks.” That’s the point. Several LDS churches have been vandalized since the election and white powder was sent in envelopes to their offices in Salt Lake City, creating an anthrax scare. That’s not a respectable way to protest an election. That’s hateful fear mongering, and unlikely to produce positive results. (http://www.sacbee.com/crime/story/1399018.html)
If you disagree with the outcome of a free and fair election, then by all means, protest, but don’t spread violence and hatred. The answer to prejudice and bigotry is never more of the same.
Nov 23rd, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Since you have chosen to follow me on Twintter I felt the need to respond.
As you know, I am boycotting ANY business that supported YES on 8 and I’m asking you to watch this: http://tinyurl.com/3q2prx Afterwards, I would simply ask the same question as Keith did. What’s all this to you?
Against it or for it…how does prop 8 and equal rights for all hurt you? It’s the same question I have been asking everyone. I will say that the Christians and Gays alike who are hating and who want to take anything from another will all be judged equally one day if they believe in God correct? So perhaps it is to that gate, and that end they need to be looking first and then considering why they need to be directing the hate at all towards any group, ultimately wondering now about how that choice may effect them in the future and for all eternity.
For me? I can use my money, my own shopping choices as well as my voice to express outrage and disappointment at narrow thinkers. The world has been full of them for centuries. But like any person who thinks they are better than another because of who they are or what they believe, they at the end of the day have no power, they are nothing more than bullies. Either side of the issue applies here because it is about inequality for a human being.
Nov 23rd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Jordan, the religious groups who put this on the ballot and those who voted for it are the ones seeking to take civil rights away from homosexuals.
Eckern – you are confused. How someone votes is not a matter of public record. Their donations are, however. Eckern worked in an industry and with many people who believe he was overtly supporting an effort to take civil liberties away from Americans…and they were right. If I were in a city with a strong religious right, and I worked for a company with a strong influence there, do you honestly believe that everyone would just have to shut up and take it if I overtly supported a measure to prohibit them from practicing their religion publicly?
Democratic process – again, you and all those who supported making this a ballot issue are confused. This is a civil rights issue, plain and simple. Hitler was elected democratically…. do you think we should/could have a ballot issue to outlaw marriages between people who are more than 2 years apart in age? What if 52% of the nation felt this way?
Lastly, I certainly do not condone any physical attacks, vandalism, or terrorism for any cause. You are picking out a few individuals, sir. It would be like me equating an abortion clinic bomber with all christians. Ridiculous. The same thing happened with the civil rights movement in the 60’s…there was violence perpetrated by a few individuals and small groups in the name of the cause…that is why people like MLK were so respected for non-violent resistance. If you would equate the actions of a few to the multitude in the contemporary situation, tell me why you would not do the same for the 60’s?
Nov 23rd, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Mark, thanks for the comment. A friend sent me Keith’s video awhile ago and it was a well articulated monologue of exactly how I feel about this issue. It boggles my mind why any individual or organization, religious or otherwise, would feel the need to intrude this way in peoples’ lives.
Nov 24th, 2008 at 10:09 am
The Catholics are whining as well:
http://tinyurl.com/6njmd8
The martyr complex is stunning. They want to yank the rights of the individual based upon their own hateful bigotry and then whine when people do not agree with them.
Stunning.
Also stunning is the way that they do not see the same tactics in their so-called “War on Christmas” used against businesses and the same violence that they advocate against Women’s Medical Clinics. It burns, doesn’t it?
Nov 25th, 2008 at 11:55 am
It’s amazing the ignorance that has spread amongst a community who claims to be enlightened and so aware of the world. There’s some facts that you all should know.
First of all, 70% of African Americans voted to support proposition 8. As a result, opponents of proposition 8 said to blacks when coming to support the protests “Nigger! We’re calling you nigger because they are calling us fags!” That is not appropriate in the least. When you resort to hate crimes when you are fighting “hate crimes” (of which the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS has done none, nor the Catholics, nor the baptists) it is NOT justified.
You talk about replacing blacks in that sentence, that’s stupid. There might have been a few people who fought for black rights the wrong way but the moral, correct way is the approach Martin Luther King took. He held rallies and protests but they were silent and peaceful protests. They had training classes specifically for the purpose of teaching those involved NOT to be violent even if they are getting beat up by a cop or mob. Then you stand here and tell me that it’s the same thing? It absolutely is not.
I served as an LDS missionary in the South (of the US) and had lots of violence occur. I was literally conspired against and kicked out of a town by the police and town hall, only to learn that I had every right to be there and knock on doors. I had a companion who had a beer bottle thrown at his head. I’ve been threatened by various types of weapons. I had people drive by and yell insults from their cars all the time at me. I related this to a homosexual friend of mine once and he responded:
“What would you say to those people in Tennessee who were justifying their behavior on their belief that they were protecting God’s people, his law, and the community’s children from your “evil” influence as a Mormon. Is that equitable? Or is it bigotry? You’re right: it’s completely unfounded!
Those people have NO room to tell you not to be angry about how you were treated as a Mormon minority, either. You have every right to stand up to your bullies. ”
He was justifying the homosexual actions of vandalism, hate speech, terrorist threats, and so on. And he’s right, I have every right to stand up to bullies, but in the RIGHT WAY. I simply kept my cool and where safely possible I taught my beliefs or answered calmly and kindly and went on my way. It’s not my place to respond to hate with hate, and that’s what the homosexual community should see. They are doing wrong, and will continue to do wrong in these sorts of acts. Otherwise they can never compare themselves to black people and be taken seriously.
Atheistik you are unrealistic. There is currently legislation going on in utah to give homosexuals their rights for civil unions and the Church has not made ANY attempt to disrupt it. They haven’t read a note over the pulpit, they are fine with it.
You talk about a ‘few’ doing these terrible acts, it’s completely different than the black retribution. Those were literally a few here and there, as in a handful of people. Here we are talking about thousands of people performing these acts. Spray painting walls, breaking into churches, and all those other things are supported and perpetuated by members of the gay community. And they continue to do so. They ALL are participating in the hate by calling the supports of prop 8 bigots. I’ve been called a bigot more times than I know in the last several weeks, and everyone involved is being called a bigot by the masses of protests.
You can’t even compare, and you shouldn’t compare. Black people were literally mistreated when walking down the streets. People looked on them with fear and disgust constantly and made them leave restaurants or would seat others hours before they would seat a black family. This simply does not happen today to homosexuals. They claim to be oppressed and so sorely mistreated yet I have never mistreated them and every one I know or have seen has never been treated differently then others around them. Yet in the case of blacks it was a constantly, always thing. Every single time they tried to do anything it was ruined and the so called ‘attacks’ on homosexuals are miniscule and not even comparable.
Get a reality check.
Nov 25th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
In response to how it effects me:
A doctor in california was fined because based on a religious background he refused to do a voluntary procedure (artificial insemination) based on religious beliefs. The lesbian couple sued him even after he referred them to another doctor. He didn’t mistreat them he didn’t disrespect them he simply didn’t want to promote something he considered morally wrong. He was told by the courts he would lose his license if he ever did that again. It is important to note that this was not any kind of medical emergency and he wasn’t treating the patients for a disease of any kind.
In Massachusetts the Catholic adoption agencies shut down because they refused to give a child to a lesbian couple. They offered alternative agencies and were as kind as possible but they sued anyways. The state told the Catholic agencies that if they didn’t offer to homosexual couples they’d lose their tax exempt status, so they shut down instead of compromising their morals.
Also in Massachusetts a child came home from kindergarten with a pamphlet about homosexuality. Opponents of prop 8 claim it’s a lie that it will be taught in schools and yet this is happening and the parents weren’t even aware. When the father went to complain he was arrested and taken from the school.
This hasn’t effected me yet, but it definitely has the potential. Don’t start spreading falsehoods that it has no effect on anyone. That’s the whole reason that this has been supported — people aren’t trying to take away rights. The organizations supporting prop 8 also supported civil unions so homosexuals had the same rights as married couples. It was never about rights, it was about morals and protecting religion which is what you’re now assaulting. Waaaaa is right. How about you stop waaaaaing.
Nov 25th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Zachary:
- please read my comment about my not supporting any kind of violence.
- violent protest is not the primary method being used to protest. If you think it is, you are either living in a bubble or inflating the “newsworthy” minority as representing the majority
- if you think homosexuals are not discriminated against, you are living in a bubble
- if it’s not a medical emergency, I would support the doctor in his decision to refer the patients elsewhere
- a publicly subsidized institution should not be able to discriminate based on sexuality, period. If they were a private organization, it would be their choice. Tax-exempt status is, in effect, using my tax dollars and can not be used in discriminatory ways.
-MA dad thingy – you may want to actually do some research before blabbering. This happened back in 2005, there was no pamphlet, and the guy was arrested for trespassing because he wouldn’t leave the school grounds, not because of his complaints. http://www.proudparenting.com/node/706
It’s obvious that the last one had elements pieced together and some fabrication thrown in. I have no idea if the other items you mentioned are true at all, but based on the last one I am dubious, and feel they are probably red herrings you are throwing out. Your verbosity does not make you right.
Nov 26th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Josh…
Saying that the church is wrong is complaining about the violent acts is supporting violence.
Violent acts were becoming more and more prominent, but I wasn’t only referring to violent acts I was referring to racial slurs that were yelled during the protests as well as violence that did occur.
Just because YOU would support the doctor doesn’t mean that everyone would. I’m pointing out the reasons why proposition 8 not passing could’ve effected me.
I simply stated that the father was arrested and taken from the school when he went to complain, I didn’t say the reasons that he was arrested. Don’t put words into my mouth as I’m fully aware of the situation.
And you say that my other complaints are probably not true because of a misconception you took from reading my comment.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/012/191kgwgh.asp?pg=1
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/apr/08042306.html
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1815820715?bctid=1822459319
http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2008/08/20/benitez_victory/index.html
I’ve done this research, and here are some articles. You can claim they aren’t reputable yet they source the AP.
Your ignorance doesn’t make you right.
Nov 26th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Also, reading the very same article you linked, there was a book involved depicting a homosexual family. So there wasn’t a pamphlet, my bad, it was a book. This is a HUGE difference.
Nov 26th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
I never said anyone was wrong in complaining about violence. I said you were wrong in attributing violent activities to the majority of the current civil rights movement.
What did proposition 8 have to do with the doctor?
Where did the “pamphlet” statement come from?
If you the AP makes something reliable, you are mistaken.
We’ll have to agree to disagree and just think the other one is ignorant, I see no other way around it. Let me know if you do.
Nov 27th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Zachary….so the topic was family and types of families. And you believe that children should not be taught the TRUTH that there are families out there with two moms or two dads, or even single moms and dads? Do you feel homosexuality is a choice? If so, how do you back that up? Is your reasoning completely based on your faith, or do you have some actual substance behind your position?
Dec 3rd, 2008 at 2:20 pm
First of all I don’t have a particular opinion on whether homosexuals are able to choose their sexuality. Do I have proof for one way? No, but I have evidence. Many lesbians have confessed to being wronged by men and it has lead them to engage in lesbian activities which put them down that path. They literally chose to be lesbians. You can hardly blame them in those circumstances. Don’t try to put me in a boat with people who think simply “NO THEY CHOOSE AND THERE’S NO OTHER POSSIBILITY.” Genetics could be involved, I wouldn’t deny it. But there’s no evidence for that either. Just people claiming they didn’t choose. And there’s people claiming they did choose. Are you willing to admit that both are possible as well? (as a note I know one such lesbian who chose to be one due to her abusive husband, and her mother struggles to tell her it’s wrong because the lesbian lover is incredibly more loving than any man in her daughter’s life had been previous to that — I’m not unaware.)
I believe children should be taught the truth. I also believe parents should be privy to the information given to their children. In cases, even that don’t include homosexuality, many parents have been upset over the content presented to their children either too early or in an overtly graphic manner. My POINT in bringing it up is that the opponents of proposition 8 called the supporters liars for even saying that it’d cause education about it in schools. Yet, it’s true, and not a lie. If you read my post then I mention that as a problem.
Anyways, I probably won’t be checking this too often but I wanted to answer your questions.
Dec 3rd, 2008 at 2:37 pm
This entire discourse has been sad and pathetic. The very idea that any of you want to take rights of any kind away from any human being is sad. You should all be ashamed. No God will look down on you favorably for that. You can rewrite your books, and your bibles and extract sopportive sentences that you feel allow you to hate all you want and at the end, if you believe in that nonsense at all then using your own rules and your own beleifs, you will be judged for your hatred in the end.
Dec 11th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Get over yourselves.
One of the reasons why it is so important that same sex marriages be legal, is well, the legal reasons. If you don’t believe me, try getting insurance when you’re common law, it’s not as easy and costs more than if you are married. It opens up different tax situations, it opens up health benefits from one’s job, it opens up much more than a civil union does. This is important on the individual level, this is about being a person who can marry who they choose (as long as they are not too related to that other person). This is about choice. On the society level, it is about choice as well. The choice to become a bit closer to being equal to those who are in the majority.
To the doctor who refused to do HIS JOB, it makes perfect sense that he would be told to DO HIS JOB. It’s like an atheist taxi driver refusing to drive an old lady to church. They’re going to do it because they’re getting paid to. It’s their job, they don’t like it, they change jobs. Simple enough. I’m sorry, I don’t have respect for that doctor because his job is to perform his duties laid out by whatever contract he is in. After he signs that contract, it’s not his choice what duties he can and cannot do without fear of repercussion.
For the catholic adoption centers being closed down, that is a bit surprising. If I wanted to adopt a child with my lesbian girlfriend, that’s the last place I would go because of the catholics closed-mindness (usually). It wouldn’t be an option to me and it surprised me that it would be to others.
In any case, yes, both sides lied. It’s easier to get your voice heard when you’re lying through your teeth. This has been the case with many, many different things. This also happens when both sides don’t really know what’s going to happen.
The people who were against 8 said “no, we’re not going to require that it’s in schools” but that wasn’t quite what they said.
I don’t believe that parents are always right and I don’t believe that the parents should automatically be able to choose exactly what their children are learning unless they are home-schooled. Then they only get to choose partially and shield them from the rest of society. I believe that a committee should choose what the students are going to learn, the librarian should choose what books are in the library. Did this child bring home a book because they had do? Doubt it, they were probably shielded from anything different at a young age and so were curious. Kids are, it’s a good thing.
Ok, I’m done my late rant on the subject. Just sometimes, things need to be thought through more.
Dec 11th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
I can’t tell if Zach is flamebaiting or if he’s just a moron. Though his near-masochistic desire to keep responding makes me lead toward the moron end, he IS willingly posting on a clearly marked atheist blog, and I can’t imagine that not being a premeditated decision.
Hmm…maybe he’s trying to count this toward his Witnessing hours?
Dec 28th, 2008 at 11:58 am
In matters that affect us all, it sad to see that a difference in opinion is referred to flamebaiting. Who is narrow minded when someone expresses his point of view and then railed upon for having a different way of thinking? Does this blog invite a reply only if it is the same point of view? It is the same with right leaning blogs as well. It makes me wonder if anyone who posts have friends who think differently than him or herself. If so, chances are, you are all pretty decent people. While you may disagree with various points of view, you probably all have the same goal of trying to do the right thing. Of course, right is subjective to us, isn’t it (each of us believes in a universal right)? So how do we get along then?
By the way, the atheist cab driver doesn’t have to go into the church, but the doctor has to perform the procedure which he disagrees with. Unless atheist also feel that others can’t worship, the cab driver isn’t really in a moral dilemma. The patient always have choices (some of them may not be convenient) on the doctors chosen. When the government forces a person to perform something against religious beliefs for a job, then there is a problem. Imagine yourself in the reverse.
Jun 21st, 2009 at 8:20 pm
I know this post has been dead for half a year, but tea’s statement, “To the doctor who refused to do HIS JOB, it makes perfect sense that he would be told to DO HIS JOB” is incredibly sick. Any person living under our Constitution who would advocate any form of government coercion is a very twisted individual.