Wayne Besen - Author, Activist, Columnist, Public Speaker

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

(Weekly Column)

It is easy to get depressed when analyzing the elections. With serious economic and international crises facing our nation, we have voters like Gordon Maddox who may vote against Barrack Obama because he wrongly fears that his wife Michelle isn't sufficiently proud of America. "Those things, for people who are patriotic and love their country, that turns them off," he told USA Today.

These are what I call "Pompom Patriots" - people who think that our complicated problems will be solved by their loud cheerleading. "Go America!" Yeah, that ought to extricate us from Iraq and bail out the financial markets.

In my view, the most patriotic Americans are those - like some gay activists or public interest grassroots organizers - who work to make this nation better than it was the day before. Boldly proclaiming that "we're Number 1" -- in instances when we are actually falling behind other countries -- only compounds our problems. Such attitudes breed complacency and a false sense of security which leads to stagnation. American exceptionalism should only occur in areas where we are truly exceptional.

If the past two elections are any indication, America is a divided nation and this presidential contest will be unnervingly close. When it comes to polling, race still matters and you can shave 3-6 points off Obama's numbers. However, Obama is such a charismatic figure, that he may bring in enough new voters -- young people, African Americans, and Independents -- to overcome the race factor.

The one major advantage Obama has over John McCain is the question of, "who America trusts with change." The collapse on Wall Street and continued economic woes favor Obama -- because people can vividly see that conservative government has not worked out so well. Given the current mood of the nation, if Obama outperforms McCain in the debates, he will likely be the next president.

Since the rise of modern Reagan/Falwell conservatism in 1980, which led to the Gingrich revolution, and crested with the nightmare of George W. Bush, the GLBT movement has grown used to bitter disappointments. Still, we have somehow made substantial social progress during this macabre political winter. This success makes landmark advancement palpable if the political stars finally align.

It is time to take a deep breath and imagine our lives in merely two months if we achieve a grand slam at the ballot box. Picture a trifecta in beating back three anti-gay marriage initiatives in California, Florida and Arizona. Envision Obama arriving in Washington in his motorcade, flanked by an expanded Democratic majority.

Within two years, it is conceivable that it will no longer be legal to fire someone for being gay. Sexual orientation will be included in federal hate crime laws. With marriage legal in trendsetting California, other states won't be far behind. Within a few years, a soldier's sexuality will not bar him or her from service. In short, we will have won the brutal culture war of the 1990s.

The question for gay rights advocates is where does the movement go after its main goals have been accomplished?

Marriage: Three marriage victories in this election cycle would decapitate the anti-gay marriage movement. It would show that they were on the wrong side of both history and public opinion. This would shift the fight to all 50 states -- where a patchwork of civil union and marriage laws will take form over the next twenty years. It is likely that entire regions of the U.S. will grant equal marriage rights, while others lag behind for decades -- with the Supreme Court eventually ruling on the issue.

Religion Battles: An intensification of the fratricidal warfare within mainstream denominations will occur. We got a glimpse of this ugliness in the fight over Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson. If most of the original goals of the movement are accomplished in America, it will free up the resources and time to wage a worldwide campaign for equality within churches.

International: The Internet allows us to see flagrant abuses of GLBT people across the globe. Gay activists at home will increasingly turn their attention abroad and launch campaigns against anti-gay countries. I predict a boycott against Jamaica, which could be successfully launched against cruise ship companies in Florida.

Transgender: Once equality has been largely achieved for gay and lesbian people, much energy will turn towards the inclusion of transgender Americans. Lobbyists, who now walk Capitol Hill on behalf of gay people, will turn much of their focus to educating legislators about trans issues.

Social Campaigns: You can change the laws of the land, but there will still be much work to do on changing attitudes. As less money is devoted to influencing legislation, more will be spent to create tolerant environments in schools and communities.

The alternative, of course, is three marriage defeats and a Palin/McCain victory. In that case, your best bet is to rent a U-Haul and move to Canada.

117 Comments:

I am totally convinced that Mccain will win this election. This will be worse then Bush and his regent, Cheney. But I am hopeful that prop 8 fails. That would make up for the presidential loss. California is a huge state. Mass is a large state. It could end up that only the hic states won't have gay marriage. Fortune 500 states would gravitate to gay marriage states.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/23/2008 9:03 PM

If McCain wins he likely won't make it a whole term. I don't think America can survive a Palin presidency. Inexperienced and nuts are a really bad combination. Time for Vancouver. I love this country too much to watch it sink - and that is what Republicans are doing to this country.
posted by Wayne Besen, at 9/23/2008 9:18 PM

Joey7777:

Please don't compare the two parties. It makes you look like you don't know a thing about politics.

Democrats would never make up a fake patriotism issue about wearing flag pins, for example. That is a Republican thing.

The Republican electorate is made up of the greedy suckering the dumb. That is why these wealthy tycoons launch culture wars - so they can distract the idiots in order to get tax cuts. It really is that simple. So, if you are defending this situation, you are either greedy or dumb. Which is it?
posted by Wayne Besen, at 9/23/2008 9:33 PM

The fact remains that if McCain wins and the Democrats do not secure enough seats in both Houses -- then we will see SCOTUS turn the corner to the dark side.

SCOTUS' scope reaches decades into the future - decisions made by SCOTUS will affect this nation and the world for the next half century.

This is more than Pro-Life - vs - Pro-Choice. The GOPs argument attacks the underpinnings of the Roe V Wade decision -- and if that underpinning is attacked and reversed - the civil rights advances for the last 40 years are now called into question - in the courts.

Do not forget that Lawrence also relies upon this foundation.

The regret is that the GOP is directly responsible for the destruction of so many of the levers of government -- that it is hard to see clearly what is at stake.

I fear a McCain/Palin Presidency because without a Democratic force in Congress - the likelihood of Scalia being the benign justice is something to fear.

I'm just saying.

Sounds good Wayne - but we have to put Obama in the White House. Else you are right -- Vancouver ain't sounding that bad.

--
Paul in Atlanta
posted by Anonymous, at 9/23/2008 10:29 PM

Whoever makes it into the oval office - he won't be coming out of there alive. McCain is too old and Obama is at risk from a maniac.

Everyone should be ready with funds to move quickly and take advantage of either event.

America is at one of it's most internally weakest places in history (except maybe at the formation of the union.)

The economy should be at the forefront.

And we need to keep an eye on private funding, grants, expenses etc... a few with most of the money are now calling the shots. And they don't care about us regular folks whether we are gay, ex gay , jewish, messianic jew, muslim, women, children or veteran. This country is on the brink of total failure.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 1:09 AM

I dunno. I'm getting my papers ready for Canadian home ownership. There is no such thing as a patriot on a hungry (empty?)stomach.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 2:36 AM

Well said Wayne and know that those of us in Canada are hoping for best as well.....if however, the stars do not align, you'll always be welcome here.
posted by Jon, at 9/24/2008 7:06 AM

Joey:

I did not insult you. You insulted yourself by comparing the Republicans to the Democrats.
posted by Wayne Besen, at 9/24/2008 8:19 AM

This is what we'll get if McCain is elected. One of the biggest liars and flip-floppers in the GOP of hate.

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/325.html
posted by Robert, NYC., at 9/24/2008 10:26 AM

All logic and (not so) common sense dictate that Obama/Biden should breeze into the White House, but there is a very good chance that McCain/Palin will win, because as Bill Maher said last week on Real Time, "Americans are just too fuckin' DUMB!" I almost got into an argument at work the other day because someone insisted that Obama was secretly a Muslim, despite all my attempts at rationality, and critical thinking skills. And I consider this guy to be an 'average Joe'. If I were young, instead of approaching retirement age (assuming we are ever able to retire in the future after what the past week or so has revealed about our so called economy), I would absolutely consider moving to Canada or Europe. I dont recognize America anymore, a land where torture is ok, habeus corpus, the Constitution and the rule of law are fading memories and we can still see the slow creeping in of fascism. Public protest can now be considered 'inciting a riot' or terrorist activity. I heard on Randi Rhodes yesterday that the army is now going to be stationed in places in the US to 'help' if there is a natural or 'man made' disaster, as in people protesting or rioting to get food or basic rights back. This is what the National Guard is for, the active US Army has never had this assignment before, because the Founding Fathers knew it was a big step toward a totalitarian police state. And so it is. Take me to Vancouver with you Wayne.
November 5th will either be very happy for us, a very sad, dark and dangerous day for all of America and the world.
One last comment, McCain proved how unpresidential he is during the financial meltdown last week by acting hysterically and calling for the decapitation of the head of the SEC! Can you imagine if Obama had said that!!!
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 11:26 AM

Ethan, you are aj/theo and you have been banned. So go away. This is not a christianist blog and we are not debating whether gays should be celebate. There is no reason for you to be here.

I would like to ask Wayne to ban this guy from the site.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 1:04 PM

we are not all georgians, we are not all Israelies. we are Nato, however.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 1:06 PM

Anonymous, the nice one....watch out, Theo and his other aliases may just accuse you of a conspiracy obsession just as he did me once again yesterday. Others have accused him of it, not just myself. Next, he'll say you can't dialog with anyone as an attempt to shut you up or put you down. He'll ever succeed. He's a sad closet case, pity him.
posted by Robert, NYC., at 9/24/2008 1:22 PM

Paul in Atlanta said "decisions made by SCOTUS will affect this nation and the world for the next half century.".

Ah...NO. The world will be unaffected by decisions by SCOTUS. Its authority ends at the U.S. border. The free world doesn't take orders from the U.S. What's with this egomania from some U.S. citizens? The U.S. is not some sort of global dictator, we are free independent countries, we do what we want.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/24/2008 1:55 PM

Hahahaha. this is too funny.

If someone claims to be a christians (notice the word claims) and says anythings like gays are frilly - then any other things they say will be discounted.

Now, notice this, there are many gay christians and many frilly gays - but whatever any who claims to be gay say (notice claims to be gay) then it is considered absolutely truthful and valuable.

Too funny.

That's like me, who loves cats, saying to the person who loves dogs - "You must hate cats, then. And everything you say is not true because you don't see things my way."

This blog is filled with some ridiculous arguments from the posters.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 2:29 PM

Ethan may not be 'theo(crazy)' or whatever other aliases these "christian" taliban freaks use, but he's still just another drone from the same hive who is wasting his life blogging here to people who will never listen to anything he as to say anyway. He's just another green-head fly at the beach whenever there's a land breeze. (You all who live near the shore will know what I mean). And yes Wayne, I think it's time to get out the swatter or the Black Flag.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 2:36 PM

...contained nothing about Christianity. And it contained nothing about gay celibacy...

Thos is typical aj/theo. You have posted on these issues elsewhere on this blogsite. now as Glinda the wicked witch said, "be gone you have no power here"
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 3:12 PM

Anonymous, Ethan is Theo. He's been saying the same things as Theo on the economy, abolishing this, abolishing that, under another post. Words such as conspiracy, obsession....come up fairly frequently, identical to Theo's comments. Now how coincidental is that?

Ben, its possible they are not the same but my hunch is they are. They're very devious, cunning but they can't outfox any of us, we see through it and don't buy anything they're saying.

I still find it odd, that he claims he's straight, which I doubt, but persists in posting here or better yet thinks he's agitating. So far, he's not succeeded and never will. He's outnumbered and always will be.
posted by Robert, NYC., at 9/24/2008 3:30 PM

Ethan/AJ/THEO

do you think that it is the same crime for someone to paint a smily face on a synagogue (a prank by a 22 year old punk that doesn't even know what the building is)as it is for a KKK member to paint a swastika on the same building?

Unless you are able to state that you promise to jesus the risen christ that you have not posted under aj or theo, then you should be banned.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 4:40 PM

A smiley face is a vandalism but not hate vandalism. Akin to writing JP + MB on a tree. No harm is intended but obviously harm has been done.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 5:37 PM

Well acording to Ethan/aj/theo, they should both be punished the same.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 6:06 PM

Ethan/aj/theo, there are two victims in a hate crime, the immediate victim and the broader community the perpetrator attempts to victimizes and succeeds in so doing by instilling fear in that community for every individual's safety. This is the reason for a more serious punishment, its a greater crime given that an entire community is attacked by the crime. Bigots like you like to claim you're against hate crimes in general, but the proof of the pudding is in that you never raised a concern about them before it was suggested that gays be included in them. Its only when and because gays are about to be protected that you suddenly "discover" you think they're a bad idea. Once again your attempts to oppress gays and gays alone are abundantly apparent.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/24/2008 6:32 PM

And I should add that if people like ethan/aj/theo get the legislation to add gays to hate crimes protection blocked that's the last they ever complain about the law, they're perfectly fine with leaving the hate crime law in effect to protect every other group except gays. Such transparent hateful hypocrites.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/24/2008 6:35 PM

Ethan/aj/theo you couldn't have piled the BS on any thicker. For starters there's no such thing as a "radical" "homosexual" activist. There's nothing radical about promoting equal rights, only in your bigoted brain is that an untoward idea. And gay people preferr to be called gay, "homosexual" is considered an insult by many in the gay community because its used by people like you to refer to gay people in a negative way. If you had any morality you'd stop using that epithet but you don't so you won't - your type is all too predictable.

Ethan/aj/theo said "These bills are not about hate. They're not even about crime. They're about outlawing beliefs and speech - in our context here, the belief and speech that asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong."

What an outrageous lie. These bills have nothing to do with restricting free speech. If you're not assaulting a gay person there you're under no threat from a hate crimes law. If you punch a gay person in the face while screaming "the bible says you're an abomination" then you will be charged with a crime and should be charged with a hate crime for the terror you inflict upon a community. Don't attack any gay person and you're free to rant to your heart's content about how terrible gays are and no one will stop you.

Spare us your insane fantasies about orwell and your lies about how the committe refused to adopt an amendment granting religious freedom of speech, the law already included such langauge and the amendment was redundant that that's why that political ploy was rejected. It was as dishonest as you are.

Ethan/aj/theo said "under "hate crimes" legislation beliefs and speech will be redefined as a violent attack worthy of punishment.".

How preposterous. Utter nonsense. No one can monitor your beliefs or force you to change them and a violent attack involves physical contact which mere speech doesn't qualify as under any circumstances. Its one outrageous lie after another with you.

Also spare us your lie that the only group the committee wanted to protect was gays. The existing law covers a variety of groups including race, ethinic origin, sex, and religion. None of those groups were struck from the act the only change was to add sexual orientation to the aforementioned list. The proposals to add other non-oppressed groups to the list was merely another political tactic to derail adding gays, it was totally disingenous.

And in the ultimate insult you want to tell me about immorality?! Puhhh leeeze. The essence of morality is do whatever you want but harm no one. Gays are behaving morally by definition and your attempts to interfere in their lives, equality and protections is by definition immoral. All your false claim that gays are immoral is grotesqly immoral in itself but is by no means illegal. You have a legal right to be the disgusting immoral hatemonger that you are - it is however sad that you choose to do. so.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/24/2008 9:21 PM

Well, First of all, I have to admit that Ethan does have a point with the thought police. . .but I am a borderline 'conspiracy' wingnut. But Priya Lynn had a wonderful reply. . .YEAH PL

But something about Gay Hate Crimes. Many victims of gay hate crimes or assault, attacked on the assumption that the person is gay or presents themselves 'gender-bending', do not report assaults to the police, especially in smaller communities. Many gay men and lesbians and TransFOLK will not subject themselves to police interrogation, public reports and even stories in the local community publications. One of the benefits of a federal hate crimes law, is that victims can turn to law enforcement outside of their community. Much like underreported rapes, people who are assaulted because of perceived sexual orientation ambiguity ( or a same-sex couple on a evening walk) often keep friends and family at bay following an attack because of the embarrassment. Even when attackers are apprehended, charges are often dropped or not even pursued because it would mean more public scrutiny for the assaulted person(s).

ETHAN, spend some time with some people who have been bashed. THEN come back and discuss this issue of HATE CRIMES . . . and yes, military folk, our seniors, and even our overweight brothers and sisters are victims of abuse by random 'bullies' living amongst us. But our homeless folk rarely have any one to turn to, when they get rolled.

Knock on wood, for I am 6'2" 220 lbs and grew up in a rural community and rarely back down from anyone or group, and I have never been assaulted. But as an advocate/HIV educator and community organizer, I have helped and assisted many who have been bashed by strangers and/or beaten by their partners, gay-bi-lesbian-trans folk.

ETHAN, another question, for you. . .you were a BIG Palin supporter. . .and I reminded you that things might come into play that would not only expose Palin as not a competent VP. . .why is she still hiding under the McCain Skirt?
posted by rusty, at 9/24/2008 10:28 PM

" Ah...NO. The world will be unaffected by decisions by SCOTUS. Its authority ends at the U.S. border. The free world doesn't take orders from the U.S. What's with this egomania from some U.S. citizens? The U.S. is not some sort of global dictator, we are free independent countries, we do what we want."
Priya Lynn, at 9/24/2008 1:55 PM

You are correct, "its authority" does end at the border. No dispute there.

But I am proud to say that there was a time when SCOTUS decisions were used a Case Law by other free nations - and there was a time when America set a good example and began to take the lead on Human Rights and Civil Liberties.

Having SCOTUS turn back the clock on advances made - certainly will not be a shining example for others.

--
Paul in Atlanta
posted by Anonymous, at 9/24/2008 10:36 PM

Joey:

Your becoming unhinged. You are banned for two weeks.

Wayne
posted by Anonymous, at 9/25/2008 12:04 AM

Wayne,
and Ethan stays. He still won't claim that he has never posted as aj/theo. If he can't swear to the god he belives in that he never posted under those names, he should be banned also.

This homosexual is signing off of this homosexual site that debates whether homosexuals should be celebate. If I wan't to debate the udgodleness of the homosexual, then I will go to the non homosexual focus on the family site. They love to educate the public of the evil of the homosexual. So once again, this homosexual is outta here.

P.s.
do I win the prize for useing the word homosexual in a single post, or is that still held by aj/theo/ethan?
posted by Anonymous, at 9/25/2008 12:37 AM

Ethan, Theo,AJ...there you go again in your usual dismissive arrogant manner, trying to turn the conspirary obsession around on me and others. We see through you Ethan/Theo/AJ. Come out of that dark closet you've been hiding in, find yourself a nice man, settle down and be happy. You're here far too much to be straight. What is it about us you find so irresistible?
posted by Robert, NYC., at 9/25/2008 7:52 AM

Such a gifted speaker: Palin with K Couric. . .

Couric: You've said, quote, "John McCain will reform the way Wall Street does business." Other than supporting stricter regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, can you give us any more example of his leading the charge for more oversight?

Palin: I think that the example that you just cited, with his warnings two years ago about Fannie and Freddie - that, that's paramount. That's more than a heck of a lot of other senators and representatives did for us.

Couric ends with:

Couric: I'm just going to ask you one more time - not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation.

Palin: I'll try to find you some and I'll bring them to you.

So, There you go Ethan. . .Palin is on a roll. She just gets 'better and better'. And with the pending shift of the PRES Debate to 'bump' the VP debate. . .we might get to hear Palin speak, oh say around Halloween.

But back to your rant about Hate Crimes: according to the APA

Lesbian and gay victims suffer more serious psychological effects from hate crimes than they do from other kinds of criminal injury. In their case, the association between vulnerability and sexual orientation is particularly harmful. This is because sexual identity is such an important part of one's self-concept.

The most socially acceptable, and probably the most widespread, form of hate crime among teenagers and young adults are those targeting sexual minorities, says Dr. Franklin. She has identified categories of assaulters involved in such crimes, as follows:

Ideology assailants report that their crimes stem from their negative beliefs and attitudes about homosexuality that they perceive other people in the community share. They see themselves as enforcing social morals.

Thrill seekers are typically adolescents who commit assaults to alleviate boredom, to have fun and excitement, and to feel strong. Peer-dynamics assailants also tend to be adolescents; they commit assaults in an effort to prove their toughness and heterosexuality to friends.

Self-defense assailants typically believe that homosexuals are sexual predators and say they were responding to aggressive sexual propositions.

http://www.apa.org/releases/hate.html

Again, ETHAN, you should share some of your personal background to enlighten the folk as to where you keep your compassion, empathy and simple humanity.
posted by rusty, at 9/25/2008 12:48 PM

Joey7777 said "I'd much rather be called "homosexual" rather than "gay"."

And you are decidedly in the minority. There's a reason why the style guidelines of all the major newspapers say the word gay should be used rather than "homosexual", that's because the vast majority of gay people find that term offensive.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/25/2008 1:34 PM

Ethan/aj/theo said "all that "Hate Crimes" laws would do is undermine the protection of the rights of all of us by using the criminal law to enforce a certain ideological.".

Oh, give it up already, that's a lie and you know it. The hate crimes law deals strictly with VIOLENT crimes. It has nothing to do with enforcing any ideology. If you're not committing a violent crime you can't be charged with a hate crime. You're free to have and promote whatever ideology you want. Hate crime laws have been around for 40 years and the white supremacists and KKK still publicly denounce blacks and jews to their hearts contents and have never been charged with a hate crime. You and your "chrisitian" cronies will be just as free as always to denigrate gays to fufill your pathetic need to pretend you're superior to someone.

Ethan/aj/theo said "The laws declare that criminals motivated by a government-designated set of intolerable ideas deserve special prosecution and additional punishment".

Another lie. Get this through your thick head, the hate crimes law only applies WHEN A VIOLENT CRIME TAKES PLACE. The hate crimes law specifically states that free speech is exempt and that nothing in the law shall be construed as to impinge on the first amendment. The hate crimes law never has and never will punish ideas. You're just so desperate to deny gays equal protections you'll make up one outrageous excuse after another to do it.

Ethan/aj/theo said "Why, for example, should a racist be prosecuted for the special crime of targeting blacks, while the Unabomber is not subject to special prosecution for his hatred of scientists and business executives?".

Because scientists and business executives are not members of historically oppressed groups such as blacks and gays. Blacks, gays, jews, etc have historically been targeted by the wider society for special abuse and attacks as a group, the same is not true for your aforementioned groups. When those groups become widespread systematic targets of hate then they should rightfully be added to hate crimes protections.

Ethan/aj/theo said "After all, which crimes aren't motivated by hatred? Are assaults and murders usually committed out of benevolence toward the victim?".

Many, if not most crimes are committed out of greed, including assaults and murders to facilitate robberies. The difference between a hate crime and a regular murder or assault is that in a regular murder only the immediate victim is an object of hate and a target. In a hate crime the immediate victim is almost a secondary concern, the main target and secondary victim is the wider community which is terrorized. THERE ARE TWO CRIMES COMMITTED IN A HATE CRIME VERSUS ONLY ONE IN A REGULAR MURDER OR ASSAULT. The crime against the community deserves to be punished just as much as the crime against the individual.

Ethan/aj/theo said "A "hate crimes" law would expand the law's concern from criminal action to "criminal thought." It would institute the premise that the purpose of our legal system is not to defend the rights of the victim, but to punish socially unacceptable ideas."

Yet another lie. Hate crimes laws do not make any thought criminal. They punish a crime against two victims, the immediate target and the wider community to which that victim is a member, a community who is forced to live in fear that they are being targeted merely for who they are. Once again, contrary to your lies as long as you don't commit a violent crime you're welcome to whatever evil ideas, beliefs, and speech you want.

Ethan/aj/theo said "If a man convicted of an actual criminal act can be sentenced to additional years in prison simply for his ideas - then, in logic, why can't someone be punished solely for his ideas?".

He is NOT convicted for his ideas, he is convicted for the additional crime of targetting and terrorizing the community that the indivicual victim belonged to. STOP LYING.

Ethan/aj/theo said "Even if he has not committed a single action against another person, why can't he be tried simply for being a "purveyor of hate"?".

Because as has been made painfully clear to you the hate crimes law only deals with VIOLENT CRIME - FREE SPEECH IS SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTED.

Now no doubt you'll respond with more of the same lies, not because the truth isn't clear to you, but because you're willfully blind, blinded by your hatred of gays, blinded such that no lie is too great for you in your effort to oppress those you despise who hurt no one.

The ironic part of this is that even if your worst fears came true and you were denied the right to denigrate gays it would deprive you of nothing. Denigrating gays adds nothing to your life. If you were to be forced to stop denigrating gays it wouldn't interfere in your pursuit of happiness in the slightest. If you think it does it just shows how seriously messed up you are. Get psychiatric help Ethan, no mentally stable person has such a driving need to pump himself up by oppressing others.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/25/2008 2:11 PM

Ethan, do you swear to the risen Christ that you have never posted as AJ or Theo? If you can't answer this question, as there is ample evidence that you have, you should be kicked off this blog.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/25/2008 9:01 PM

Wayne, I thought that you banned joey, yet he is posting and using his old moniker at that. I am loseing respect in you, since you seem to have lost control of your own blog. You are being made to look silly.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/25/2008 9:02 PM

"So let me get this straight. Ethan is AJ, who is Theo, who is Joey, who is Kathy? Am I the only gay person on this site who finds Robert's accusations tiring and have the guts to finally say it?"
posted by Anonymous, at 9/25/2008 12:35 PM

Anonymous, the not so nice one....so you think you have "guts"? Please, please, grow a pair and have the "guts" to come out of your dingy closet, you hypocrite! Seems like I've hit a raw nerve and NOBODY here is coming to your defense, don't expect them to unless of course, you choose to use another alias, AJ, Theo, Ethan! Yes honey, we'll keep on saying that until you grow tired of it, give up and just disappear to the confines of your self-loathing closet that you love so much.
posted by Robert, NYC., at 9/26/2008 7:50 AM

Robert, I was never in the closet. As I said, I'M GAY! I'm just tired of your accusations that don't do anything except make you look like a fool. I think Ethan-AJ-Theo is an ass, but your posts are just stupid and tiring. Let Wayne organize his blog. Leave a meaningful comment or shut up. You're embarrassing yourself.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/26/2008 9:36 AM

Joey7777 is making threats against wayne. If I were him I'd get a restraining order. This toilet troll closet case is scary.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/26/2008 1:39 PM

Ethan/aj/theo said "Every violent crime should be punished, and no violent crime should be punished more based on the motives - real or perceived - of the perpetrator.".

No one's suggesting any violent crime shouldn't be punished. The justice system has long punished people based on motive - note the differences between first degree and second degree murder and manslaughter. If one pre-planned a murder it is a more serious crime than if one did not, if one murdered another by careless accident it is a less serious crime than if one did it intentionally and spontaneously.

Ultimately the hate crimes law is not about punishing motive, its about punishing two crimes, the violent crime against the individual and the terrorizing of the community that individual belongs to. When someone attacks a gay, black, or jewish person because of who they are they are doing so in a successful attempt to assault the entire community that person belongs, they are sending a message to the entire community that your kind is not wanted and will be viciously attacked for no reason so you'd better disappear. That and the original assault both deserve punishment.

And Ethan/aj/theo you are a liar. You shamelessly repeated the lie that adding gays to hate crimes laws will lead to people being punished merely for their thoughts and beliefs. You know there's no way that's going to happen when a violent crime must take place before there can be a hate crime charge and yet you repeat that lie over and over. The fact is you don't give a damn about how much gays are abused you'll do anything to further the abuse by claiming they're immoral and providing justification for those who'd attack an entire community through an individual.

This has nothing to do with politics, its about punishing the crime against the individual AND the community they belong to, just as the law has done for 40 years for blacks and Jews. Liars like you try to hide behind the facade that you're against any one being protected by hate crimes laws but you never once opposed them until it was proposed to add gays to them - its clear what your real motivation is.

The fact is that after 40 years of hate crimes laws no member of the KKK, no white supremacist has ever been charged with a crime for their beliefs or for expressing hate against a minority. They're free to denigrate blacks and jews to their hearts content just as a hate crimes law that includes gays will allow you to rant day and night about how evil gays are. The essence of morality is do whatever you want but harm no one. Gays are by definition behaving morally and you by attempting to interfere in their lives, equality, and protection are by definition behaving immorally. Your constant demonization of harmless gays is grotesquely immoral but it is by no means illegal and never will be. And you know it.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/26/2008 1:46 PM

Joey7777 is an idiot. He's unhappy about being banned for a relatively trivial two weeks but he's taking actions that he knows will result in a much longer banning.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/26/2008 1:48 PM

ETHAN,

We do increase the penalty based on the intent and the actions/consequences of the act. If a criminal act brings about continued consequences for either the individual or the group the individual belongs to. . .hate crimes legislation has a positive effect and in no way is the 'thought police'. IF there is
with a state of mind known as "malice aforethought" or conduct involving a reckless indifference to human life and a conscious disregard of an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily injury a homocide can be charged as murder. If a crime in which the perpatrator has malice toward a person because they are of a specific sexual orientation or perceived sexual minority, hate crimes legislation would be morally just.
posted by rusty, at 9/26/2008 3:10 PM

from earlier post

Do you think that it is the same crime for someone to paint a smily face on a synagogue (a prank by a 22 year old punk that doesn't even know what the building is)as it is for a KKK member to paint a swastika on the same building?

should they carry the exact same punishment? This is a tough one.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/26/2008 3:36 PM

Defacing private property is usually considered a misdemeanor.

from wikipedia: Hate speech is a term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance (such as height, weight, and hair color), mental capacity and any other distinction-liability. The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society.

KKK known as the calling card for Ku Klux Klan sought to degrade, intimidate, and look to incite violence toward people who were not "WHITE". and in some cases, toward people who supported people who were not "WHITE". The KKK also considers Jewish folk sub-standard and also subjected people of Jewish faith to similar denigration,intimidation and often times violence.

Their actions were premditated with the intention of causing harm, shame, and fear.

If we, the US, was the only country on this planet contemplating Hate Crimes legislation. . .I would say, let's stop the nonsense. but
THE US is not alone in watching for hate speech, and hate crimes.

We are not the only ones on the planet considering these issues as relevant and important.
posted by rusty, at 9/26/2008 4:03 PM

I hope this post OK. If so, is the really the same crime as if a smily face was painted? If not then you support hate crime legislation.

http://www.ajn.com.au/news/news.asp?pgID=2386
posted by Anonymous, at 9/26/2008 4:24 PM

Ethan/aj/theo said "We have always punished the ACT - NEVER the thoughts accompanying it. And that is what makes so-called "hate crime" legislation immoral and irrational, and will lead to the punishing of thoughts outside any accompanying action."

Once again, and read it slowly this time so you understand - hate crimes laws do not punish thoughts, THEY PUNISH THE CRIME OF TERRORIZING A COMMUNITY.

And like the immoral degenerate you are you lie again and again. The proposed hate crime law UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES PUNISHES THOUGHTS OUTSIDE OF AN ACCOMPANYING VIOLENT ACTION. The Mathew Shepard act deals SOLELY with violent crimes. Never in the 40 year history of the existing hate crimes law has anyone ever been punished for "thoughts outside of an acompanying action". The KKK and white supremacists still spew bile and hate and demonize blacks and jews to their hearts content just as you will be free to do so regarding gays. STOP WITH THE LIE THAT HATE CRIMES LAWS "WILL LEAD TO THE PUNISHING OF THOUGHTS OUTSIDE ANY ACCOMPANYING ACTION". God you're one degenerate lying M.F. Go on, lie again for Jesus. No lie is too immoral for you to use in your pursuit of the oppression of gays, is it?!
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/26/2008 6:46 PM

This post has been removed by the author.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/26/2008 6:57 PM

Oh yeah, and I forgot this: Ethan/aj/theo said "And I'm glad you brought it up, because you quite clearly misunderstand the root LEGAL issue here - that being the difference between "intent" and "motive."".

You really are a moron. The point was, contrary to your constant ranting insistence that "We have always punished the ACT - NEVER the thoughts accompanying it.", CLEARLY THOUGHTS ARE PUNISHED IN MURDER CASES. You get the most serious penalty if you thought about doing the murder in advance, a less serious penalty if you purposely killed someone spontaneously and a less serious penalty if you killed someone accidentally. We also treat murders differently depending on your beliefs. If you believe (even erroneously) a person was trying to kill you your murder of him is less serious than if you believed the person you murder was no threat to you. If you can think of the difference between right and wrong and you kill someone you are punished more severely than if you can't think of the difference between the two and you kill somone (legally insane or incompetent). Once again, contrary to your constant lies BELIEFS AND THOUGHTS HAVE ALWASY BEEN PUNISHED BY THE JUSTICE SYSTEM.

And I take it back, you're not a moron. Moron's come about their stupidity honestly, they're born into it. You weren't naturally endowed with such stupidity, you've had to work at it, you are a case of applied stupidity, you are willfully stupid.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/26/2008 7:21 PM

EThan/aj/theo said " Hate crime laws criminalize thought, not conduct.".

No, no, no NO! Hate crimes laws punish the violent crime against the individual and the crime of terrorizing the community that individual belongs to. ABSENT VIOLENT CONDUCT THERE CAN BE NO HATE CRIME.

STOP LYING FOR JESUS.

Ethan/aj/theo said "Thoughts cannot be made criminal.".

Another lie. You know full well that the justice system has long punished thought in murder trials. What the defendent was thinking determines the difference between first and second degree murder, manslaughter and not guilty by reason of insanity.

You call yourself a christian. You set one pitiful example of christianity. No lie is offlimits to you in your efforts to promote hate and oppression against gays. Your actions are grotesquely immoral but under hate crimes laws not illegal.
posted by Priya Lynn, at 9/27/2008 1:49 PM

Ethan will you state, as god is your witness that you have never posted as AJ or Theo? If you can't answer this question, as there is ample evidence that you have, you should be kicked off this site. The way this question is framed you don't have to "swear".

by not answering this you are being deceitful. Just answer.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/27/2008 3:47 PM

Hi:

I've been on the road, so I could not take out the trash. I had the chance today, and deleted all of Theo/AJ/Joey/Anonymous garbage. These (same person)are truly the biggest loser(s) in America.

They are all banned for life. This is now a moron free zone. These buffoons are probably paid staff for a right wing group.

bye bye
posted by Wayne Besen, at 9/27/2008 4:04 PM

Yes, we do punish the intent. That's why hate crimes bills are not anything new. They just spell out specifically that you cannot pick on people and if your intent is to put fear, bring harm, or damage the well being of another because of their difference from you or your beliefs, then you get more of the book slammed on you.

It's what is called a deterant bill. It won't prevent all such crimes but hopefully curb a lot of it.

No gays are not asking for special rights. They are asking for the same freedom to walk down the street as any white male protestant in America has - uninhibited by fear, threats, and danger.
posted by Anonymous, at 9/29/2008 1:22 AM

徵信社,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣精品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,威而柔,自慰套,自慰套,SM,充氣娃娃,充氣娃娃,潤滑液,飛機杯,按摩棒,跳蛋,性感睡衣

 威而柔,自慰套,自慰套,SM,充氣娃娃,充氣娃娃,潤滑液,飛機杯,按摩棒,跳蛋,性感睡衣,情人歡愉用品,情人用品性哥,情惑用品性哥,視訊交友90739,情人視訊網,情人節禮物,情人用品性哥,情人歡愉用品,情色交友,視訊交友,辣妹視訊,美女視訊,aio交友愛情館,情色論壇,成人論壇,免費視訊聊天,辣妹視訊,視訊交友網,美女視訊,視訊交友,成人視訊,情趣用品,情人歡愉用品,情人節禮物,成人聊天室,情趣,情趣,視訊聊天室
posted by Anonymous, at 10/01/2008 2:55 AM