|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 04/22/2009 : 13:46:38
|
The so-called "Religious Right," which tallies more scumbags in their leadership than is normal for any organization other than Aryan Nation or the Klan, has gone completely bugfuck over the proposed hate crimes amendments protecting gays, the disabled, et al. and I'm not sure I understand why. Here's John Aravosis of AmericaBlog's take on it:
"I've written before about the religious right's newest cause celebre, the Right to Kill. Extreme right fundamentalist Christian leaders are demanding that American civil rights laws provide an exemption for their "right" to kill their political opponents, or any other American they disprove of, provided they claim the murder was inspired by their faith.
(We tend to avoid the usually-overplayed Nazi comparison, here at AMERICAblog. But in this case, the notion of protecting the majority's right to murder and incite violence against minorities is historically troubling.)
It's not entirely clear why the religious right, which professes to care so much about "life," especially when its coffers are running dry, is now suddenly interested in the right to kill. Have there been a rash of religious right murders of gays, blacks, women and other minorities that they've historically oppressed? Or is the religious right planning, or hoping, to incite violence against those groups and others in American society? (And they wonder why Homeland Security is interested in their more violent members.)"
Does this mean that they want to reserve the right to execute out of hand the gay couple down the street because their faith tells them it's the thing to do? Or the twisted, vile-tempered, old veteran who snarled at them and told them to piss off during their latest witnessing endeavor? Seems unlikely, doesn't it, but never the less they are going bugfuck over laws that protect everybody including themselves.
I dunno.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2009 : 14:54:10 [Permalink]
|
| Essentially, they get bat-shit crazy has long has anybody seems like he might improve the lot of the 'omosessuals'... |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
 |
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
 Posted - 04/23/2009 : 08:02:51 [Permalink]
|
Really know, how many Religious Righters are actually calling for the right to kill people? Its got to be just an extremely few ultra-ultra right wingnuts, no?
I'm not sure its a good idea to tar the entire Religious Right with the putrid feathers of a tiny fringe group any more than I think its right to do the same with gay rights supporters and NAMBLA. It seems to me that that is what Aravosis is doing.
|
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2009 : 11:27:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by leoofno
I'm not sure its a good idea to tar the entire Religious Right with the putrid feathers of a tiny fringe group |
If, by association, you can shame moderate Christians into taking a firm stand against RR-radicals for being the lunatics they are, then we have managed to mariginalize them even more. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2009 : 11:44:35 [Permalink]
|
Aravosis has a follow-up on it: The latest on the religious right's "Right to Kill"
by John Aravosis (DC) on 4/23/2009 10:48:00 AM
Focus on the Family, one of the lead religious right groups, published an article yesterday, opposing adding gender, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity to the existing Hate Crimes law that already covers race, religion and national origin. |
They fear, you see, having some of their nastier preachers serving a little deserved jail time for inflammatory sermons. I think that's unlikely to happen, but, with the law explicitly covering more diverse groups, it could.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2009 : 12:10:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by leoofno
I'm not sure its a good idea to tar the entire Religious Right with the putrid feathers of a tiny fringe group |
If, by association, you can shame moderate Christians into taking a firm stand against RR-radicals for being the lunatics they are, then we have managed to mariginalize them even more.
|
I don't think he is trying to do that. He's saying that the RR wants the right to kill, NOT RR-radicals. Thats dishonest. Its exactly like saying gay-rights supporters want to have sex with children because NAMBLA does. He is setting up a strawman for ridicule. Yes, call out the RR-radicals for the lunatics they are, but don't paint the RR with that lunany, they have plenty of their own lunacy to ridicule them over. You are not going to shame someone into action if your accusation is false. |
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2009 : 13:13:33 [Permalink]
|
What the fuck are Gay-right activists supposed to have to do with NAMBLA?
The two movements are absolutely distinc. While the RR and the nazis RR are shade on a continuous spectrum.
I don't think that they are afraid of the consequences. I just think that they are opposed to everything that give any kind of legitimacy to the gay movement. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2009 : 14:59:41 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
While the RR and the nazis RR are shade on a continuous spectrum. |
My best guess is that the hue and cry from the Religious Right over any watchfulness by the government over the likes of Stormfront, the Klan and America's Nazis has this for a motivation:
The hard core of the RR (those who have not become disillusioned with political power) has largely given up on manipulating the electorate through democratic processes, and now seeks to forge alliances with violent, armed fascists and racists to accomplish its theocratic goals by other means.
I simply see no other reason for the RR to risk their remaining credibility by defending these Fascists. To say this is dangerous would be an understatement.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2009 : 07:04:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
What the fuck are Gay-right activists supposed to have to do with NAMBLA?
The two movements are absolutely distinc. While the RR and the nazis RR are shade on a continuous spectrum.
I don't think that they are afraid of the consequences. I just think that they are opposed to everything that give any kind of legitimacy to the gay movement.
|
A agree with your second paragraph. They certainly hate anything that does not express an unfavorable judgement on homosexuality.
However, that does not mean that they in any way support violence against gays. And by "they" I mean the majority of the Religious Right (RR). Thats the meat of my disagreement with what John Aravosis is doing. As with any movement, liberal or conservative, there can be some minor extreme elements that take things too far. I'm sure you can think of a few examples.
The reason I responded to this thread is that I am tired of the RR characterizing the majority of liberals by the actions of an extreme few, and I think that is exactly what John is doing, only to the RR. Maybe turn-around is fair play, but I don't think two wrongs make a right.
He is not talking about a radical fringe. He says the RR (with no qualifications) supports inciting violence against gays. He even ups the ante by saying that they support the right to kill anyone if the killer is acting on religious belief. And whats his evidence for this? Nothing but assertion in his "The Right To Kill" article. If you click the "I've written before" link in the article, you'll find only an unattributed quote that says... nothing of the sort. The quote shows concern that the hate crimes bill would make pastors preaching against homosexuality liable to prosecution. It says nothing about being allowed to incite violence. There is a big difference between saying something is wrong and inciting violence.
John is making serious accusations without any evidence that I can see beyond mere assertion. His one quote does not say what he implies. I need to see some evidence.
As for NAMBLA - I should have said "gays" instead of gay rights supporters. After all, I am a gay rights supporter, but I am not gay. NAMBLA is an organization of men who support the right of men to have sex with young boys. As such, it is an example of a fringe homosexual movement. I know, there are plenty of straight pedophiles too, and sexual motivations can be complicated and confusing, but NAMBLA sometimes participates in gay parades and is highlighted by RR groups as an an example of what gays are like. They are an extreme group used by the RR to condemn all gays. And that, it seems to me, is just what John is doing to the RR with these right-to-kill conservative idiots.
Like I said, I need to see some actual evidence. |
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2009 : 07:36:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by leoofno
He is not talking about a radical fringe. He says the RR (with no qualifications)... |
Read the second sentence of the new piece again:Extreme right fundamentalist Christian leaders are demanding... There are at least four qualifying words in there along with "right." And in the older piece,... radical right ... one of the large religious right groups ... religious right bigots ... lead religious right groups ... I think it's qualified plenty, so the average reader won't forget all those other adjectives when John simply says "the religious right." It's pretty clear he's talking about a select few.
But damn if Aravosis isn't an idiot. Lobbying against hate-crime laws is equivalent (to him) to trying to create a right to murder. That's just brilliant. 
Especially after he makes statements that make it clear he knows his hyperbolic rhetoric is wrong. But he doesn't want to "get all lawyerly" in a discussion of laws.
**headdesk** |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2009 : 08:52:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by leoofno
Originally posted by Simon
What the fuck are Gay-right activists supposed to have to do with NAMBLA?
The two movements are absolutely distinc. While the RR and the nazis RR are shade on a continuous spectrum.
I don't think that they are afraid of the consequences. I just think that they are opposed to everything that give any kind of legitimacy to the gay movement.
|
A agree with your second paragraph. They certainly hate anything that does not express an unfavorable judgement on homosexuality.
However, that does not mean that they in any way support violence against gays. And by "they" I mean the majority of the Religious Right (RR). Thats the meat of my disagreement with what John Aravosis is doing. As with any movement, liberal or conservative, there can be some minor extreme elements that take things too far. I'm sure you can think of a few examples.
The reason I responded to this thread is that I am tired of the RR characterizing the majority of liberals by the actions of an extreme few, and I think that is exactly what John is doing, only to the RR. Maybe turn-around is fair play, but I don't think two wrongs make a right.
He is not talking about a radical fringe. He says the RR (with no qualifications) supports inciting violence against gays. He even ups the ante by saying that they support the right to kill anyone if the killer is acting on religious belief. And whats his evidence for this? Nothing but assertion in his "The Right To Kill" article. If you click the "I've written before" link in the article, you'll find only an unattributed quote that says... nothing of the sort. The quote shows concern that the hate crimes bill would make pastors preaching against homosexuality liable to prosecution. It says nothing about being allowed to incite violence. There is a big difference between saying something is wrong and inciting violence.
John is making serious accusations without any evidence that I can see beyond mere assertion. His one quote does not say what he implies. I need to see some evidence.
As for NAMBLA - I should have said "gays" instead of gay rights supporters. After all, I am a gay rights supporter, but I am not gay. NAMBLA is an organization of men who support the right of men to have sex with young boys. As such, it is an example of a fringe homosexual movement. I know, there are plenty of straight pedophiles too, and sexual motivations can be complicated and confusing, but NAMBLA sometimes participates in gay parades and is highlighted by RR groups as an an example of what gays are like. They are an extreme group used by the RR to condemn all gays. And that, it seems to me, is just what John is doing to the RR with these right-to-kill conservative idiots.
Like I said, I need to see some actual evidence.
|
Paedophilia has nothing to do with homosexuality.
From what I know, the straight of gay qualificative simply does not apply to paedophilia. Paedohpiles want to rape children. Some might prefer boys, some might prefer girls, as a matter of taste, but it has no bearing on their arousal and sexual identity.
You might prefer blonde, you might prefer brunettes, but I suspect you would be able to make love to either. It has not bearing on you arousal and sexual identity.
Same thing for Paedophiles and the sex of the children. It simply does not matter for them, as a rule. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2009 : 11:31:29 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by leoofno
He is not talking about a radical fringe. He says the RR (with no qualifications)... |
Read the second sentence of the new piece again:Extreme right fundamentalist Christian leaders are demanding... There are at least four qualifying words in there along with "right." And in the older piece,... radical right ... one of the large religious right groups ... religious right bigots ... lead religious right groups ... I think it's qualified plenty, so the average reader won't forget all those other adjectives when John simply says "the religious right." It's pretty clear he's talking about a select few.
But damn if Aravosis isn't an idiot. Lobbying against hate-crime laws is equivalent (to him) to trying to create a right to murder. That's just brilliant.
Especially after he makes statements that make it clear he knows his hyperbolic rhetoric is wrong. But he doesn't want to "get all lawyerly" in a discussion of laws.
**headdesk**
|
DAMN! You are, as usual, correct. I guess I was overly influenced by the first line which read: "I've written before about the religious right's newest cause celebre, the Right to Kill. " No qualifications there. I fact, "religious right" (or similar) is used 8 times in the original article, and only once, in the quote you provided, is it qualified. (I'll ignore the obvious pedentry involved in citing "Christian" and "leaders" among the qualifiers  )
So I don't feel too bad about my misunderstanding... if thats what it is. I suspect John knew what he was doing: pumping up the controversy factor to get some eyeballs, while being able to say "hey, I SAID 'extreme fundamentalist'".
Anyhoo, that any of this translates to a right to kill is "extreme" nonsense indeed. He presents no evidence that even the "extreme fundamentalists" want such a right. I find this all rather disgusting.
|
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2009 : 12:19:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
Originally posted by leoofno
As for NAMBLA - I should have said "gays" instead of gay rights supporters. After all, I am a gay rights supporter, but I am not gay. NAMBLA is an organization of men who support the right of men to have sex with young boys. As such, it is an example of a fringe homosexual movement. I know, there are plenty of straight pedophiles too, and sexual motivations can be complicated and confusing, but NAMBLA sometimes participates in gay parades and is highlighted by RR groups as an an example of what gays are like. They are an extreme group used by the RR to condemn all gays. And that, it seems to me, is just what John is doing to the RR with these right-to-kill conservative idiots.
|
Paedophilia has nothing to do with homosexuality.
From what I know, the straight of gay qualificative simply does not apply to paedophilia. Paedohpiles want to rape children. Some might prefer boys, some might prefer girls, as a matter of taste, but it has no bearing on their arousal and sexual identity.
You might prefer blonde, you might prefer brunettes, but I suspect you would be able to make love to either. It has not bearing on you arousal and sexual identity.
Same thing for Paedophiles and the sex of the children. It simply does not matter for them, as a rule.
|
You know, in that post I almost went into a bit about how I thought that pedophilia might not really be a gay/straight thing at all, that an adults preference for small children may be something quite seperate. But that is neither here nor there in regard to my point that NAMBLA is often used by the RR, unfairly, to taint the gay rights movement. As I said, "...NAMBLA sometimes participates in gay parades and is highlighted by RR groups as an an example of what gays are like." Thats all I am trying to say with that example, that John is guilty of doing the same.
OK, I did say they were an "example of a fringe homosexual movement", which may not be quite correct, and that's no doubt what has your knickers in a twist. We can quibble about it, but even if they do not belong on the spectrum of gayness, they are seen as gay by a large segment of society and are used by the RR for propaganda. |
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2009 : 13:12:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by leoofno
You know, in that post I almost went into a bit about how I thought that pedophilia might not really be a gay/straight thing at all, that an adults preference for small children may be something quite seperate. But that is neither here nor there in regard to my point that NAMBLA is often used by the RR, unfairly, to taint the gay rights movement. As I said, "...NAMBLA sometimes participates in gay parades and is highlighted by RR groups as an an example of what gays are like." Thats all I am trying to say with that example, that John is guilty of doing the same.
OK, I did say they were an "example of a fringe homosexual movement", which may not be quite correct, and that's no doubt what has your knickers in a twist. We can quibble about it, but even if they do not belong on the spectrum of gayness, they are seen as gay by a large segment of society and are used by the RR for propaganda.
|
Ok, but the difference is the gay movement shuns NAMBLA and it's the opposition who unfairly makes the association. In this case, it's the Christians themselves who making the association between them and the hate groups that this legislation is meant to crack down on. How can it be an unfair comparison when it's the Christians who are loudly proclaiming the association?
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2009 : 13:37:46 [Permalink]
|
Gays and NAMBLA= Apples and Orange.
RR and fanatic RR= Apples and Pears.
That's how I see it anyway. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2009 : 16:34:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
Gays and NAMBLA= Apples and Orange.
RR and fanatic RR= Apples and Pears.
That's how I see it anyway.
|
Graft a pear branch onto an apple tree and it will thrive. Not so with an orange branch. (Agronomists can correct this if I'm wrong.)
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
The right to kill…
