by Jack
I sure hope this isn’t a sign of things to come. . .A Virginia man has been charged in federal court in the shooting of a security guard at the headquarters of Family Research Council, a conservative Christian lobbying group.
Floyd Lee Corkins II told a guard at the Family Research Council, “I don’t like your politics” before shooting him in the arm. The guard and others helped subdue Corkins, who was taken into custody. I wonder if he will be charged with a hate crime? So far he’s been charged with assault with intent to kill and with bringing a firearm across state lines.
Attorney General Eric Holder’s protected group the Black Panthers have boosted their violent rhetoric.
Kill Them All-
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/new-black-panthers-play-vile-radio-opening-kill-all-white-men-women-babies-blind-cripple-faots-lesbians-then-dig-em-up-kill-em-again/
Our Feet Will Be On Your Necks –
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/08/14/NBP-Threaten-Cracker-Republican-Tampa-Convention-Wont-Be-Tolerated-Our-Feet-Will-Be-On-Your-Necks
Ah, me … seems the Southern Poverty Law Center, what keeps a list of “hate groups” and monitors their doings … well, the Family Research Council has managed to get themselves on it.
Mr. Corkins’s behavior would seem to be a fine example of the gun-toting vigilanty thing you’re so enamored of. That is, if people who tell hateful lies about other people thought they might get shot, maybe they wouldn’t do it … right?
No, can’t have it. In no time at all, we’ll all be blind and toothless.
If someone opened fire on a Klan meeting (which is basically what the FRC is), it would still be wrong. I deplore this act of violence. The solution to speech one does not like is more speech, not assault and possible attempted murder. I am thankful no one was killed, and I hope the shooter is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And despite the guard’s alliance with a hate group, I do have to admire his heroic actions in this one instance.
“Hate Group”
Fellow Americans take note:
If you disagree with progressive opinion on an issue and you dare to speak out about your own opinions and beliefs you will be labeled a hater.
If you organize with others of like mind, you will be labeled a “Hate Group”.
Progressives have thus rendered themselves one of the most intolerant of all groups in America.
This man is another nutcase but as Chris has demonstrated in her condemnation it isn’t enough to disagree.
Demonizing, with the intent to socially destroy, remains the goal. Is that because they cannot win in debate or in popular sentiment…or is it just that they are incapable of finding solutions to problems that also allow others the space to live and think as they choose?
Those interested in the issues underlying this terrible mindless shooting might enjoy the perspective of this man:
“The Soul-Crushing Scorched-Earth Battle for Gay Marriage”
By Robert Oscar Lopez
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/08/the_soul-crushing_scorched-earth_battle_for_gay_marriage.html#ixzz23GqecEHm
The apparent shooter, Corkins, was carrying 15 Chick fil-A sandwiches in his bag when he was taken into custody.
I’m not sure what that is all about, but it’s bizarre.
“If someone opened fire on a Klan meeting (which is basically what the FRC is…”
Intolerant, ugly, adolescent and wrong.
WOW I have to apologize for something. Until this very minute I did not know Chris was a female. I thought Chris was one of those wimpy, castrated liberal man/child things. This explains a lot, now I know how those people on TV feel when they deal with Pat.
“If you disagree with progressive opinion on an issue and you dare to speak out about your own opinions and beliefs you will be labeled a hater.”
No. If you assert as fact, in print, that homosexuality is pedophilia, which is manifestly untrue, and slanderous, then you do get yourself labeled a purveyor of hate speech.
It is, in fact, the FRC that goes around demonizing people, and we have all taken note.
It is also, unhappily, likely that if you go around making such a spectacle of yourself, some sad unhinged person might shoot you … cause it’s way too easy for unhinged people to get their hands on weaponry in this country.
Toby, not that it matters much, but I am male. I am not sure why Tina used the term “her,” it was probably a typo.
Tina: “If you disagree with progressive opinion on an issue and you dare to speak out about your own opinions and beliefs you will be labeled a hater. If you organize with others of like mind, you will be labeled a “Hate Group”.”
Tina, you should inform yourself better before making such sweeping generalizations. The SPLC does not name every single organization that disagrees with gay marriage as a hate group, and neither do I. Mere disagreement is not enough.
If you want to know the actual reasons the FRC has been named a hate group, you should read the explanations from the SPLC:
“Perkins accusation is outrageous. The SPLC has listed the FRC as a hate group since 2010 because it has knowingly spread false and denigrating propaganda about LGBT people not, as some claim, because it opposes same-sex marriage…
…As the SPLC made clear at the time and in hundreds of subsequent statements and press interviews, we criticize the FRC for claiming, in Perkins words, that pedophilia is a homosexual problem an utter falsehood, as every relevant scientific authority has stated. An FRC official has said he wanted to export homosexuals from the United States. The same official advocated the criminalizing of homosexuality.
Perkins and his allies, seeing an opportunity to score points, are using the attack on their offices to pose a false equivalency between the SPLCs criticisms of the FRC and the FRCs criticisms of LGBT people. The FRC routinely pushes out demonizing claims that gay people are child molesters and worse claims that are provably false. It should stop the demonization and affirm the dignity of all people.”
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/splc-family-research-council-license-to-kill-claim-outrageous
The SPLC also lists several quotes from leading members of the FRC on its website:
Gaining access to children has been a long-term goal of the homosexual movement.
Robert Knight, FRC director of cultural studies, and Frank York, 1999
[Homosexuality] embodies a deep-seated hatred against true religion.
Steven Schwalm, FRC senior writer and analyst, in Desecrating Corpus Christi, 1999
One of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the prophets’ of a new sexual order.
-1999 FRC pamphlet, Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex with Boys.
[T]he evidence indicates that disproportionate numbers of gay men seek adolescent males or boys as sexual partners.
Timothy Dailey, senior research fellow, Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse, 2002
While activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two. It is a homosexual problem.
FRC President Tony Perkins, FRC website, 2010
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/family-research-council
These are false accusations that have been utterly discredited by the scientific community at large. This is simply anti-gay propaganda–not a reasonable difference of opinion. People can be against gay marriage without being bigoted–David Blankenhorn was an active opponent of gay marriage for years, and yet he always made it clear that he believed in the equal dignity of gay people, and took a stand against extremists who tried to demonize them. (He has since changed his position on gay marriage.)
Tina, you are using the “hate group” designation of the FRC as evidence that the left is “intolerant,” and that we attempt to “demonize” those we disagree with. After reading the information I posted, do you not think those critiques apply better to the FRC itself? It is an organization bent on demonizing gays and lesbians with false propaganda, and has even argued that homosexuality be criminalized! Don’t you think your accusations of intolerance are better leveled at the hatred of the FRC, rather than those who call out that hatred? Or is their behavior justifiable because they claim to fight for the Christian conservative cause?
Chris: ” because it has knowingly spread false and denigrating propaganda about LGBT people…”
Chris I’ve observed you assuming hate when you didn’t agree about a different opinion or religious belief. I have no reason to think the LGBT people are any different than you on this subject.
The Chic-Fi-A incident is a prime example. The owner expressed his personal opinion in an interview for a religious publication. The LGBT community wanted to destroy him and his business…that activist demonstration was hate made manifest and from my perspective amounts to religious persecution.
Those who believe the pertinent passages in the Bible are from God, and should not be taken lightly, have a right to that opinion. They have a right to express it without being harassed and persecuted. They also have the same right to attempt to influence public policy as any other group especially when that group is using the public school system to forward their agenda with their own propaganda.
The difference in how the LGBT community thinks about itself is its own business but since it also insists on making it everyone’s business, and since it insists on involving its own form of propaganda (lies) in the public schools, it is bound to get some resistance from religious and other concerned people.
Pedophilia is a problem. It is a problem in every community. It is a problem in the church. It is a problem in our schools. It is a problem in scouting. It is a problem in the homosexual community.
Wherever it is a problem it needs to be addressed!
Sorry to upset your apple cart but not all LGBT people are snowy white with sweet intentions:
http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=11517
Memebers of the LGBT community have made public decicration of religious symbols, including Christ, part of their activism. They refuse to just accept the right of religious people to hold different ideas and beliefs.
When activism within the LBGT community takes steps to change legal definitions to make sexually preying on minor children “just another lifestyle” I will not remain silent nor will I be bullied into silence…and I will defend anyone who is willing to speak out about this issue. All American Blogger is one such person and his research cites many prominent doctors, legislators, legal organizations and activists:
http://www.allamericanblogger.com/682/the-shadow-sexual-revolution-the-push-to-legalize-pedophilia/
The cite also notes the 1972 gay rights platform that included the following “state level” goals:
The 1972 Gay Rights Platform
Platform created at the National Coalition of Gay Organizations Convention held in Chicago in 1972
http://www.rslevinson.com/gaylesissues/features/collect/onetime/bl_platform1972.htm
You have a right to think as you do Chris but others do also. This bit of information tells me that the people at FRC have plenty of reasons to be concerned and that their concerns are not based on lies but opinions and perceptions. The people that speak for and support the Family Research Council that I have heard speak are fine, decent people.
I think labeling any group a hate group in simple conversation as a method to discredit is a bit silly. I’m not particularly impressed with constant appeals to authority or the opposite where you claim so-and-so “has been completely discredited”. There are plenty of dissenting voices with equal (or better) credentials in most debates. Certainly not all people in the GLBT community think exactly alike but they do present themselves as a group and as such may be subject to criticisms that they don’t deserve because of the activism of certain sub-groups.
As I have often written here, I wish everyone would put their private sexual lives back in the closet. I wish we would learn, once again, to comport ourselves in public with greater reserve and restraint. I think our kids are being harmed and confused by a constant barrage of sexually explicit information, propaganda, opinion, and and images. We used to have greater respect for individual (adult) choice when privacy was also respected and practiced. And we used to have more respect for parents to be able to teach their own children about such things as they saw fit. The LGBT community is stepping on a lot of toes and acting like they can and should be able to do it with impunity. It isn’t going to happen.
Tina, this NAMBLA junk, the gay rights platform re sex with children is on par with the savages in Afghanistan and I felt their culture should be exterminated.
How can we allow such demented evil to co-exist with us?
Sometimes I think what we really need is a culling of the herd, a purge…like a society-wide reset button. Imagine if one day we woke up and all the violent predators in prisons were gone, all the mentally disordered sex offenders on watch lists across America had vanished…would that really be so terrible?
What a brave young woman to speak out against wrongs and for what is right and civil behavior.
An Open Letter to Toure of MSNBC From a Black Conservative:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dc1xrKLlOwo
Liberals will always start out by showing the proper amount of “outrage” over a given situation. Next they will explain why these things happen while doing so make excuses for the perpetrator. Wouldn’t it just be easier and cut to the chase by saying “the guy deserved to get shot and the shooter is a hero”?
I am guessing the bag of chicken sandwiches is part of his well thought our plan. The He Man Woman Haters Club, had the hand under the chin wave. I guess this guy figured the Chic Fil A bag would do the trick.
This is clearly a “hate crime”, good luck getting the newest liberal hero charged with it.
I do not know anything about this group that was targeted by the Left but I will be researching them. The way I have it figured if Liberals want them dead they must be outstanding people.
Speaking of hate are we going to get into MSNBC and it’s newest word? lol
Hate of any kind is unacceptable and should not be tolerated in a civilized society.
It doesnt matter if its coming from a person with a gun or Toure using a version of the N-word against an individual or a group they dont agree with.
Our problem today is in large part because of the perceived acceptable feeding frenzy created by the left-wing media churning up that hate by promoting in it against conservatives. We see it over and over again from the shooters in Dallas to New York. Will the massacre in Dallas ever be classified as a terrorist act? Probably not, because we wouldnt want to offend individuals by being PC insensitive. But you can bet your bottom dollar if hed been a Baptist it would be a whole different story.
Never dreamed that being a conservative would put me in a position of being treated like a minority where Im being treated with scorn and hate because my differing political views are unacceptable to the liberal/progressive majority in control of my state and country.
Just like the young lady in the video said to Toure, his words and actions are not acceptable. And neither is the behavior of anyone treating another human being disrespectfully. Not agreeing is normal, but treating someone with contempt and hate is just an adult version of bullying. Lots of people need to grow up and behave accordingly. The world really would be a better place.
After reading Tina’s post I’m amending what I just submitted to exclude pedophilia and any behavior that would harm another human being as acceptable.
If anyone had hurt my sons in this way I’m sure would have landed me in prison for life.
Hate of any kind is unacceptable and should not be tolerated in a civilized society.
I totally agree!
Toby…MSNBC’s new word? (I’ve been out of the loop awhile)?
Tina, It’s in the video I posted above.
Here is another link.
MSNBC’s Tour: Romney Engaged in ‘Niggerization’ of Obama
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/08/16/Toure-MSNBC-N-word-Romney
Peggy, sorry I didn’t see your link or I would have thanked you for posting it. I am not up on all the new hate speech but that sounds like a made up word to me. I defer to our resident hate specialists aka Libby and Chris for clarification.
This story doesn’t offend me as much as it amuses me. The Left have lost what little grasp on reality they had and are now just fun to watch.
“Hate of any kind is unacceptable and should not be tolerated in a civilized society.” Get rid of Liberalism and the rest will take care of itself.
“Get rid of Liberalism and the rest will take care of itself.”
Hate is usually based on greed and ignorance.
Greed; to take or have what another earned and worked for.
Ignorance; lack of understanding that America was founded on equal opportunity NOT equal outcome.
According to a report I read today 50% of Americans are not living off the benefits paid for by the other 50%. That, Hope and Change sure has a different meaning now after four years of Obama and his European-style form of government. The very type of government our ancestors, and even those legal and illegal immigrants coming to day are trying to escape from.
“… in Perkins words, that pedophilia is a homosexual problem an utter falsehood, as every relevant scientific authority has stated.”
This sort of thing is particularly galling when one thinks about (and, lord, I try not to) Jerry & Dottie … exemplars of midwestern, hetero, Repug-voiting, respectability. Ick.
Tina, you said this:
“Pedophilia is a problem. It is a problem in every community. It is a problem in the church. It is a problem in our schools. It is a problem in scouting. It is a problem in the homosexual community.
Wherever it is a problem it needs to be addressed!”
But Tony Perkins said this:
While activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two…It is a homosexual problem.
Do you not see a significant difference between those two statements?
You’re saying that pedophilia is a problem in every community, which is not a controversial statement. Perkins, and many others in the FRC, are saying that pedophilia is a “disproportionate” problem in the gay community. Perkins believes that those who see pedophilia and homosexuality as “completely distinct” are wrong, and that gay people are far more likely to be pedophiles (even though all available scientific evidence shows that this is not correct).
The evidence you cite does not support Perkins’ claims that gay people are more likely than any other group to molest children.
It simply isn’t true that one of the “primary” goals of the gay rights movement is to legalize pedophilia! One of the bloggers you cite uses a document from 1972 in order to make that claim. Do you really find that convincing?
Imagine if this were any other minority group being impugned this way. If the FRC argued that blacks or Jews should be denied rights because they are more likely to be pedophiles–even though there is no evidence that they are–we would not be having this discussion, Tina. You and I would both agree that they were a hate group. If they said that Catholics were a danger to children because of the priest scandals, that would be outrageous; you and I both know that Catholics by and large pose no special danger to children, and it is wrong to use the actions of a few to impugn every other member of that group.
But somehow it’s OK to make this false and inflammatory allegation against gays, and when that allegation is correctly identified as hatred, you act like the FRC is the one being victimized.
I just do not understand your idea that in the gay rights struggle, the gays are the primary bullies and groups like the FRC are the primary victims. That makes no sense to me. This is literally the first time we have heard of someone being shot because of their membership in an anti-gay organization. In comparison, how many documented instances have there been of kids being murdered, abused, bullied, kicked out of their homes, and driven to suicide simply because they were attracted to members of the same sex? It is clear that if anyone has been “persecuted” here, it’s the gay community. They were forced into the closet for generations. Their love was declared illegal and could get them sent to jail (and according to some members of the FRC, this should still be the case). They are just barely starting to assert their rights. Not all of them will behave well, just as not all black civil rights activists behaved well. Oppression creates a lot of resentment and bitterness, and there is often a backlash. People become radicalized. There is still some element of that in the gay community, but it is mostly fading as they become more accepted into the mainstream.
“Those who believe the pertinent passages in the Bible are from God, and should not be taken lightly, have a right to that opinion.”
Yes, of course religious people have the right to believe that gay marriage is immoral. They also have the right to believe that divorce is immoral, as Jesus preached. They have the right to believe that re-marriage is immoral. They have the right to believe that interfaith and interracial marriage are immoral. They have the right to believe that everyone should live in accordance to all Biblical teachings about marriage: for instance, that polygamy is not only tolerable, but ideal, especially for great and powerful men; that a widow should marry her husband’s brother; and that a rapist should marry his victim. These are all requirements in Biblical marriage law.
Christians who take a literal view of Leviticus’ proclamation that homosexuality is an “abomination” also have the right to believe the same thing about shellfish, since that is also called an abomination just a few verses before.
What they don’t have the right to do is force the rest of the country to follow their religious beliefs, ESPECIALLY when they are so selective in which portions of the Bible they take literally, and which they do not. There is no national movement, led by the religious right, to ban shellfish. Nor is there a national movement to enforce any aspect of Biblical marriage law other than the “one man one woman” rule, which–surprise!–doesn’t actually exist anywhere in the Bible, and which is directly contradicted by the Bible’s frequent, unqualified celebration of polygamy.
When Christians claim that by supporting marriage between a man and a woman, they are supporting “the Biblical definition of marriage,” they really have no idea what they are talking about.
But that’s fine. They have the right to not know what they’re talking about. I think most religious people who oppose same-sex marriage genuinely believe their Bible compels them to do so, and don’t notice the contradictions and holes in that argument. Most people don’t think that much about their positions–they absorb their ideas and opinions through osmosis, not through a concentrated logical effort. So I don’t think all of these people are bigots.
But I do think that they vastly overstep their bounds when they attempt to ban same-sex marriage. You can be against same-sex marriage and still believe it should be legal, just as I am against Justin Bieber’s music, but still believe it should be legal. This is America; you don’t have to like the things people do, but as long as those things don’t violate anyone else’s rights, we support their right to do it. Christians have accepted legal divorce, legal interfaith marriage, legal premarital sex, legal remarriage, legal unmarried cohabitation, and legal shellfish-eating. Many Christians indulge in these themselves, despite the fact that Bible calls all of them sinful. Why can’t Christians also accept legal same-sex marriage? Is it because they don’t see any direct benefit to themselves from such an arrangement, while the other arrangements are all things they might see themselves using some day?
I believe the special emphasis on denying gays their rights cannot be fully explained by religious objection alone. I believe this is an issue because of a general climate of bigotry and discrimination against gays and lesbians that has existed in many societies for many centuries. I repeat: this does not make every single person opposed to same-sex marriage a Bigot with a capital B. But we are all products of the societies we live in. I hold a lot of prejudices, some of them unconscious, that I’d rather not have. We all do. To say that bigotry plays no part in the same-sex marriage debate is just as ridiculous as saying that everyone who is against it is a bigot.
That said, there are genuinely bigoted people and organizations out there who DO traffic mostly in hatred toward LGBT people in order to make their case. The FRC is one such group. Denying that doesn’t help us move the conversation forward. You should distance yourself from these extremists if you don’t want to be seen as one yourself.