God made me hate gay people..

awful

Thank you.

John S.

Thanks for Important Information !

I am glad that there is a New "Hate Crime" Law - Very Necessary and Important ( for a better world, there should be such a law in all countries of this sad planet )

I am a student of Horror, Brutality, Cruelty and Sadism, specially Racism, but I am also strongly interested in studying Homophobia, Ethnophobia and the Phobia and Hate against Women.

I feel a lot of sadness that these attacks occur and I express my solidarity with the victims.

I can not limit myself only to study Racism, because this world has been always very brutal and mad, and we have to understand all types of Hate.

All this carries us to the study of Murder and the Criminal Mind.

Raciality.com

Vicente Duque

I agree with you that homophobia is only one small part of the problem. There is the whole issue of verbal violence feeding on itself and ratcheting up into extreme physical violence, and hate crimes keep getting worse.

I was serious when I mentioned that the first incident was pretty minor. But no one STARTS at the level of the 2nd example. They start with hate speech, bounce it off their buddies, move on to small scale violence like the first example, and then keep going further and further.

A young friend of mine was the object of an intermediate version of this many years ago, where a gang of kids beat him with baseball bats and broke a number of bones. But he survived and healed.

So, God has created homosexuals for the sole purpose of being hated. Sounds like a truly twisted God to me. Rather than worshipping or obeying such a monster, we really ought to rise up against It.

I really do not believe that God approves of such action in any way. Unfortunately far too many religious figures promote that idea.

Well, where I worship there is absolutely no preaching of hate or violence against gay people. In fact we promote a foundation which councels homosexual preferences, gets alongside them to understand them.

God does not create homosexuals, just like he does not create blind or deaf people, for example. These things happen because we live in a fallen, broken world. God loves all his creation, he is love, he cannot deny himself.

Actually God id shown creating homosexuals in Romans 1, so you are mistaken there.

What is that thing about "counsels homosexual preferences"?

One thing I WOULD like to see is Churches everywhere preaching against hatred, bigotry, and violence. If we saw more of THOSE sermons, and less of the anti-gay ones, criminals like this one would stop using God as an excuse for violence. That would be a big step in the right direction.

I would like to see that in every institution, not just churches. And not just regarding gays, though heaven knows that kind of hatred needs to be condemned. But nearly every religion has demonized some other group, and I definitely wish it would stop.

I agree with you. Religion was used to oppress Blacks at least as much as they do Gays now, preaching that Blacks were descendants of Cain, or molested Noah, and were MEANT to be slaves. They also looked on Blacks as "animals" and made "miscagenation" a religious issue as well.

The Church COULD do a lot to end hate crimes. But they would need to put as much effort into solving the problem as was put into creating it.

The problem, as I see it, is that religion quite often is co-opted by tribalism, or by what Pascal Boyer calls "coalitional principles". What he means by this term is that preaching violence against some Others is a means of preventing defection among one's own people.

The problem is, as the world has gotten smaller, we can less and less afford to define humanity as Us vs. Them.

I saw the start of this one when I was young. My father was a Methodist minister, getting his Masters of Divinity at Bob Jones University. The school sent a newsletter with advice and proposed sermons. One day they sent one with a test to run. One week do a "sweetness and light" sermon meant to lift people up and improve them. The other was a "Fire and brimstone" one designed to get people fired up, angry, and hating. You were then supposed to count the take after each sermon.

We got a LOT more money from fire and brimstone.

The fire and brimstone sermon was the "Sodom" one.

Well, there is an interesting alchemy I have observed frequently in a family member who shall remain nameless. Every time this guy gets anxious, he magically transmutes that anxiety into fear.

I'm sure we all do this, but in his case, the pattern is so apparent it is impossible NOT to see it.

I think this is the cause of the phenomenon you describe above -- hatred helps people forget or at least quiet their fears. It is far more comfortable to be angry than to be afraid.

Americans seem to be particular masters of this process.

It is not limited to Americans by any means.

You are describing the standard "fight or flight" syndrome. The more hyped up you are, the more likely you are to choose one of those options rather than a more rational one.

I dont understand... When I was a kid, I went to church on a very regular basis and I dont recall any preacher ever teaching hatred or violence.... We were taught the ten commandments and the end times, but we were not taught to hate or discriminate against anyone..

I may be a lot older than you. :-) When I was a kid this was pretty standard. You also may belong to a Church which does not teach hatred or violence, but there are those which do that.

I think that many Churches feel that if they remain "neutral" that is all they need to do. But what that really means is that the VOCAL ones who DO preach violence and hate get all the air time.

Pretty standard fare? I've never heard a story before where someone said God made him/her attack someone who was gay. That's usually what we hear from women who kill their own children.

I guess you have not payed much attention to crimes where a gay man was murdered. I would say at least 80% of the time the murderer uses religion as his defense.

Have you heard of the Williams brothers who murdered a gay couple while they slept? Listen to what they said, in their own words:

"I'm not guilty of murder, I'm guilty of obeying the laws of the Creator."

"You obey a government of man until there is a conflict. Then you obey a higher law."

"It's part of the faith. So many people claim to be Christians and complain about all these things their religion says are a sin, but they're not willing to do anything about it. They don't have the guts."

I see that you gave the discussion a "1" rating marilyn. Don't you think that is pretty childish? Just because you are personally opposed to gays in any shape or form does not mean you have to stoop to this.

Most civilized countries realize that women who kill their infant children or kill their children shortly after giving birth are sufferring from an extreme version biochemical imbalance which affects their mentation -- it's diagnosed as postpartum depression, and when the imbalance is severe, their judgement, their grasp of reality and their ability not to harm themselves and others is compromised. It's treatable with therapy, activity and antidepressant medication in most instances.

Usually, it's backward countries where women who kill their children while in postpartum depression are treated without compassion and with violence.

The standard excuse for violence toward gay men and lesbians is that God told the perps that "queers don't deserve to live" or that the victim of their violence made a pass at them -- and both excuses are usually fictional.

There have been a number of cases where women have claimed they killed their children because the children were "possessed". I think that is more a case of rationalizing the post-partum depression among women who are extremely religious. If they had been born in earlier times it would have been because the children were "changelings". The mind latches on to whatever rationalization or superstition fits.

That's distressing, but not surprising. Recently, the Texas Alcoholic Beverages Commission and the Ft Worth PD found that their officers hadn't used excessive force in a raid on a gay bar on the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots this year. The raid resulting in one patron receiving life-threatening head injuries at the hands of the "officers."

That was pretty poor timing. I wonder if they KNEW it was the anniversary of the Stonewall riots.

Don't worry John, I gave you a 10. Wont the homophobes be suprized to see us entering the pearly gates while they will have to answer about thier hatred.

Thanks Lottie.

I am not sure they will be there to see. :-)

Excellent article. I have to wonder if the people who do their best to suppress discussion of their bigotry realize how transparently cowardly they are?

Thanks!

I tried to make the article forward-looking. How do we stop people from moving from the early stages of hate crimes to the more violent later stages? What can the Church do to oppose hate crimes done in the Church's name?

But I guess any message about gays which is not a violent attack on them just sets some people off.

The problem is that many churches movers, shakers and interpreters/formulators of dogma do not want to oppose what are hate crimes done in its name. They simply do not want accountability to fall at their doorstep for the criminal acts.

As for stopping people, people have to want to stop. In the interim there can be secular legal coercion, laws and *enforcement of laws, regarding property and persons and violence or damage to property and violence and damage to persons -- including motivation -- as secular law, in the US at least (as well as many other countries) has taken motivation as an element in degreee of crime and type of crime and what is appropriate punishment should a conviction ensue.

Short of criminal acts, however, shunning people who foment hatred and who create a climate of violence eventually works.

Funniest thing occurred to me. Cesar Millan trains dogs by "socializing" them. In order to make a puppy or even an adult dog stop jumping up on a person or engaging in other disruptive or destructive behavior, one first "shsssss"'s the canine to get its attention, then one turns one's back on the animal until the dog ceases its behavior and sits and pays attention waiting to be noticed. That's minishunnning. It works a right treat.

Perhaps if it's made clear to folks who influence public opinion that their lionizing loud and vocal and persistent haters, EVEN giving them air time or their own programs AS haters, isn't such a good idea; that it is enabling haters.

Perhaps when haters are no longer lionized.....

"The problem is that many churches movers, shakers and interpreters/formulators of dogma do not want to oppose what are hate crimes done in its name. They simply do not want accountability to fall at their doorstep for the criminal acts."

I did notice that many of the more vocal ones were worried that they would have to stop preaching hate at the pulpit.

However their SPEECH is protected. It is only the people who take action on those words who pay the penalty for their actions.

"As for stopping people, people have to want to stop. In the interim there can be secular legal coercion, laws and *enforcement of laws, regarding property and persons and violence or damage to property and violence and damage to persons -- including motivation -- as secular law"

I like the idea of the criminal's buddies listen to him whine about how "unfair" his punishment is. That will get the message to them better than anything else. The criminal is surrounded by enablers and friends on the verge of doing the same thing. This will discourage them.

They NEED something like that. People who commit hate crimes get an extra "kick" out of them -- more so than other criminals who commit the same crimes. It needs a bigger penalty to dissuade them.

>>Short of criminal acts, however, shunning people who foment hatred and who create a climate of violence eventually works. <<

I wonder if a sermon calling for the shunning of people who commit hate crimes would work. I really do think that most of the people who commit hate crimes do so because they feel they are "heroes" for doing so. Somehow that mindset has to change.

John, I agree with you and some Church's are radical themselves... SOme people murder in the name of religion, they are quick to blame others as to why, they do the things that they do, but slow on accepting responsiblities as to why, they do the terrible things that they do...

There are certainly plenty of sermons about personal responsibility, helping others. recognizing that those who are different can also be good people.

The story of the Good Samaritan (one of my favorites from childhood) shows people who were respected by the religious leaders of the time (a Levite) passing by without helping, but the Samaritan (a group the Jews did NOT like at the time) is the one who helped. You could always find good people in any group, and an act of kindness goes a long way.

It was the Romans who did not approve of the Samaritans, John. A left-handed jab at Jews might please you, but I will not let it go unnoticed.

It was not meant to be a jab at the Jews.

I was repeating the information given to me by my father -- a Methodist minister. The purpose was not meant to be a jab at ANYONE but rather to point out that members of a despised group can be a good person, while the ones who consider themselves "righteous" sometimes are not.

The fact that certain groups have been unpopular to other groups is not news.

A quick check of the facts also back up what I have said.

Samaritan appear in the Old Testament, in II Kings 17:29 where they are people who persist in their pagan ways.

Ezra 4:1-6, Ezra 4:7-24, and Neh 6:1-13 show them opposing the rebuilding of the Temple after their original offer to help was rejected. Samaritans were not allowed to worship at the Temple or to intermarry with Jews. In the time of Jesus the Jews considered it to be an insult to call Jesus a Samaritan in John 8:48. A Samaritan village refused hospitality to Jesus in Luke 9:51-56, and Jesus rebuked his followers for their anger at the Samaritans.

So I think it is possible you just have not researched this particular piece of history.

Nontheless there was no intent of any kind to give a left-handed jab at Jews. The attempt was merely to show Biblically that sometimes people in a despised group are still good people.

I would have said "A group the Christians did not like at the time" except that at that time Christianity as such did not really exist.

People are not born hating, they learn to hate. It's time to stop teaching the hate, and start teaching acceptance and tolerance. No, strike that: it is WAY PAST time!

Agreed.

I just wish that spreading hate was not such a big money maker.

The only teachers of hate are the religious people. Schools don't teach it. It comes from churches. It is quite annoying to hear people suggest differently. Most of the evil in history began with a religious leader. Religion affirms a type of moralizing that is directly responsible for murder and assault.

John, I believe you have danced all around the issue of homosexuality and religion without laying your cards on the table. That doesn't permit a fruitful discussion.

You say, an unnamed attacker said "God made him do it", and you describe his remark as "pretty standard fare. And later you make the accusation," One thing I WOULD like to see is Churches everywhere preaching against hatred, bigotry, and violence" implying that somehow churches don't preach against those evils and are somehow responsible for the unnamed person's behavior.

To my knowledge most churches subscribe to and preach "Thou shalt not kill" or an equivalent, and that includes violence. You may have some examples of fringe churches preaching violence, but you did not include them in your post. To my knowledge most churches also subscribe to and preach against hatred and bigotry.

It sounds like what you are really talking about is the fact many churches preach that homosexuality is sinful behavior. Since we have constitutional freedoms of religion and speech in this country, they are within their rights to do so.

It also sounds like you are implying that the church teachings about homosexuality are "hate speech" and deserve to be banned. That is what those who oppose freedom of religion have claimed in Canada in an attempt to silence those churches. But, Canada does not have a Bill of Rights, as our country does, and such legislation would be unconstitutional in this country.

Your attack on religion won't get very far in this country for two reasons. You haven't presented any evidence to support your claim that churches are not preaching against "hatred, bigotry, and violence", and you are attacking by implication the churches' constitutional right to preach what they believe.

You may not agree with the teachings of many churches, but blaming them for violence against gays just doesn't hold water.

In practically all instances of murder of gays and lesbians in this country, the murderer refers to the bible or the notion that gays and lesbians should be stoned to death. References to the sinfulness of the victims life are often made by these criminals. Violence against gays is often justified for religious reasons.

One of the worst cases of religious oppression against gays and lesbians that I have seen in my lifetime was when I attended a funeral for a former AIDS sufferer. The preacher saw fit to rail against the evils of homosexuality with the parents of this fine man in the front pew. I asked my companion at the time how the preacher could be so insensitive. He informed me that that particular preacher never misses an opportunity to moralize against gays and lesbians (even the funeral of a gay man). I will go to my grave appalled that a religious man could be such an ass. But, I am not surprised. Preachers, ministers, and priests rarely care about people's lives. They are much more focused on promoting their particular brand of religion and keeping the coffers full. Only a fool doesn't understand that.

>>John, I believe you have danced all around the issue of homosexuality and religion without laying your cards on the table. That doesn't permit a fruitful discussion.<<

That is a wierd accusation. If you have questions, why not just ask instead of making a completely baseless insult?

>>You say, an unnamed attacker said "God made him do it",<<

If you want the attackers name, click on the link in the title of my post. It provides a link to the news story.

>>and you describe his remark as "pretty standard fare.<<

It IS pretty standard fare. Surely you are aware of that if you follow any of the stories about assaults on gays. In the vast number of cases the criminal claims the Bible or God hates gays, so his anger and the assauult are justified.

>>And later you make the accusation," One thing I WOULD like to see is Churches everywhere preaching against hatred, bigotry, and violence" implying that somehow churches don't preach against those evils and are somehow responsible for the unnamed person's behavior.<<

Actually I said specifically that I did NOT think that was the case in this particular crime. Nonetheless many religious leaders DO create the atmosphere where such crimes are possible or even encouraged.

Have you ever read through Focus on the Family's official statement on violence against homosexuals? It is crammed full of homophobic and inflamatory statements about gays and that is their OFFICIAL policy on violence against gays. They are constantly sending out fundraisers demonizing gays. This is fairly common among similar religious groups. They foment hatred and bigotry as a means of raising money.

>>To my knowledge most churches subscribe to and preach "Thou shalt not kill" or an equivalent, and that includes violence. <<

Except in the case of homosexuals. You will find many of these Churches ranting and raving about Leviticus, and how homosexuality is so horrible that God calls for the death of homosexuals.

Here are just a few of the comments I have had from various religious people over the years:

"Isaiah 55 shows us that the Almighty God Jehovah doesn't change. He has destroyed and commanded to be destroyed persons who practice homosexual conduct in the Mosaic Law."

"What I believe is that GOD is Truth, the Bible is the Word of GOD and Lev 20:13 prohibits men having sex with men and makes the punishment death with their blood on their own hands."

"There are several things that a gay could do to prevent engaging in man/man sex. Jesus Christ said that it was better to cut off a body part than go to hell. Suicide can be the right thing to do."

"I believe that men who have sex with men are committing an abomination so terrible that God demands that society punish the offenders with death."

"I do believe that Leviticus Laws with the exception of those parts specifically modified by Jesus Christ with the power and authority of God applies to everyone who wants to follow God's Will. This includes the death penalty for those legally found to have violated capital offenses. "

"The law makes man/man sex a capital offense. It says nothing about desires, however an argument could be made concerning the projection of Jesus' teachings that if you commit adultery in your heart it was the same as actually doing it."

"What does GOD and the Bible say about capital punishment? Isn't that what we should follow as Christians? For example, Lev 20:13 says that the violators shall be put to death and their blood shall be on their own hands. Doesn't the remove any responsiblity from the lawful executioner?"

"What are the deeds of the Nicolaitanes that Jesus Christ hates (Revelation 2)? Could it be the claiming that men having sex with men is not an abomination demanding of the death of the violators with no liability to the lawful executioners See Lev 20:13?"

"Looking at the Bible, we find that the second worst deed a person could do based on it being both an abomination AND demanding of the death of the violators, with no responsiblity on the lawful executioner is the abomination of a man having sex with a man, see Lev 20:13."

"Leviticus 20:13- If a man lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an obomination, they shall surely be put to death, their blood shall be upon them. Thats the way I read it also! The laws still stand according to the word of Christ, He said I did not come to destroy the word of the (OT) But to fulfill it."

"Now if you want to know if I believe that God demands the death penalty for men who have sex with me, then my answer is "Yes."

"the prohibition against men having sex with men is the ONLY one that is considered both an abomination and demanding of the death of the violators with their blood being on their own hands."

"In the Old Testament God said, to kill rapist, and those that PRE-meditate murder, and homosexuals. It is a perversion, God did not make any one Gay. They choose it! IF they had of killed all those of Israel that were participating in the stuff. There would not be any of it Today."

"Yes, I believe that God clearly prohibited men from having sex with men and Demands their death with absolution of liability of the lawful executioners. See Lev 20:13."

"He is a God of hatred, hatred for sin."

"Homosexual behaviour is as disgusting to me as I know it is to God. Under the Mosaic law covenant he commanded that persons who practiced such things should without fail be put to death. The judges of Ancient Israel did exactly that too."

>>>You may have some examples of fringe churches preaching violence, but you did not include them in your post. To my knowledge most churches also subscribe to and preach against hatred and bigotry.<<

Check any of the televangelists you see on TV. VIrtually all of them spew venom and hate as the primary part of their message.

>>It also sounds like you are implying that the church teachings about homosexuality are "hate speech"<<

Your misinterpretations of the Bible should not be used to deny human rights to others.

What they spew is hate speech because it is purposely arousing hatred of gays. The fact that they lie about the contents of the Bible while doing it is a separate issue, though an important one.

>>It also sounds like you are implying that the church teachings about homosexuality are "hate speech" and deserve to be banned.<<

Hate speech is protected speech in the US. I do think that the Church should avoid the use of hate speech because using hate speech is incompatible with the teachings of Jesus Christ.

>>Your attack on religion won't get very far in this country<<

I have not attacked religion. I have attacked the idea of engaging in hate crimes, and I also disaprove of encouraging hate crimes.

If you think that YOUR religion is all about engaging in and encouraging hate crimes, then in my opinion that thing you worship is not God.

<<You may not agree with the teachings of many churches, but blaming them for violence against gays just doesn't hold water. <<

Cause and effect is pretty obvious.

It is really a shame that so many religious leaders have decided that making money is more important that following what the Bible actually says. Instead they spew venom that leads to comments like the ones I quoted to you earlier.

Joe, so you blame religion in general for the remarks of one insensitive preacher?

I agree that his remarks had no place in that setting and, if he was a Christian, he was not following Jesus admonition to "Love one another". I am truly sorry the parents had to endure his tirade.

But John's remarks were directed at religion in general. We can always identify on preacher or one gay person who acted like a jerk to make a point. But, the point is only made about that person, not the group or institution they belong to.

John, in response to your first couple of comments ...

First, I intended no insult. I merely stated what I believed your message to be, and I listed my reasons.

Second, Focus on the Family's policy statement on violence against homosexuals says:

"In light of the increasingly volatile nature of the public debate on homosexuality, Focus on the Family calls upon all Christians, and indeed, all citizens to recognize that moral opposition is not a license to engage in any form of slander, harassment or violence against those with whom we disagree. Morally and legally speaking, a crime against a homosexual is no less a crime against humanity, and deserves to be punished to the full extent of the law.

From the perspective of the biblical witness, which is of fundamental importance for Focus on the Family, homosexuality is just one form in which the brokenness of humanity reveals itself, along with greed, hatred, fear, dishonesty and intemperance, to name a few. What people with homosexual desires need above all else is the truth, compassion and acceptance. Focus on the Family stands in solidarity with all people against any form of evil, including prejudice, bigotry and violence."

http://www2.focusonthefamily.com/docstudy/newsletters/A000000225.cfm

You say "It is crammed full of homophobic and inflammatory statements about gays and that is their OFFICIAL policy on violence against gays."

I fail to see the "homophobic and inflammatory statements". Perhaps you can point them out to me so that we can continue the discussion.

>>Second, Focus on the Family's policy statement on violence against homosexuals says:

"In light of the increasingly volatile nature of the public debate on homosexuality, Focus on the Family calls upon all Christians, and indeed, all citizens to recognize that moral opposition is not a license to engage in any form of slander, harassment or violence against those with whom we disagree. Morally and legally speaking, a crime against a homosexual is no less a crime against humanity, and deserves to be punished to the full extent of the law.<<

You have to realize that the mealy-mouthed comment you pulled out of their official policy on violence against homosexuals was buried under piles and piles of vitriol directed at gays. The first paragraph of their official statement was an all out verbal assault against gays. The 2nd paragraph of their official policy was an outright verbal assault against gays. Their summary paragraph was an all-out assault against gays.

One thing they could never bring themselves to say on that long official policy, EVEN ONCE, was that violence against gays was wrong. The best they could come up with is that violence IN GENERAL is wrong, but it was surrounded and buried under heated hatred directed at gays.


http://www.family.org/cforum/research/papers/a0002963.html


This official position about violence against gays starts off with a paragraph slamming gays. The first paragraph is supposed to explain the underlying idea of his stand, so his basic idea about violence against gays is that gays are nasty and evil.

The first paragraph is as follows:

Focus on the Family believes that all expressions of sexual intimacy outside the bonds of heterosexual marriage are both unbiblical and immoral. This applies equally to heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Therefore, Focus on the Family does not believe that homosexuality is deserving of greater disapproval than any other sexual sin. Neither are those involved in homosexuality deserving of special condemnation; as the Bible states, "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." More importantly, we believe that Jesus did not come to condemn anyone, but to redeem and free all people from the particular forms of bondage in which they find themselves. (copywrite FOTF)

And that is the offical stance on violence against gays. "unbiblical and immoral" "sexual sin" "particular forms of bondage". All of these are slams against homosexuality. Notice that NOWHERE in that paragraph is there a statement saying that violence against homosexuals is wrong. This is NOT supposed to be their stance on how they condemn homosexuality. This is their OFFICIAL policy on VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS, yet even though that paragraph is filled with slams against gays, NOWHERE does it slam violence against gays.

The second paragraph, which you would expect to be an expansion of the details about his official position about violence against gays is again filled with anti-gay comments assaulting gays.

THe second paragraph is as follows:

Focus on the Family recognizes the important distinction between persons and policies. While echoing the Biblical message of compassion and forgiveness and redemption for individuals, we nonetheless stand firm in our objection to social policies that have the effect of legitimizing homosexual behavior. We reject and oppose the attempts of pro-homosexual activists to legitimize homosexuality through such matters as the redefinition of the family, the legalization of same-sex marriages, and the instruction of children and youth that homosexuality and bisexuality are morally equivalent to heterosexuality. We believe such policies are detrimental to individuals and families, and undermine the welfare of society. Therefore, as citizens we speak and act to block the political agenda of pro-homosexual movement, but we harbor no ill will toward individuals, even those who disagree with us concerning the morality of homosexuality. (copywrite FOTF)

OK. Here is the 2nd paragraph of their OFFICIAL position about VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS. This expansion upon their basic ideas about VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS says: "we stand firm in our objections to... legitimizing homosexuality". This OFFICIAL position on VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY again slams gays by trying to bring in bestiality, pedophilia, which they claim is the moral equivalent of homosexuality, and they claim that marriage and homosexuality is incompatible. This OFFICIAL position paper about VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS then talks about how homosexuality is "detrimental to individuals and family" and "undermine the welfare of society". They continue (remember this is their OFFICIAL position about VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS) to say"we speak and act to block the political agenda of pro-homosexual movement". Since this is the OFFICIAL position on VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS, how would YOU interpret "we... act to block the political agenda of pro-homosexual movement"? Even though they CLAIM no ill-will towards individuals (note they cannot bring themselves to say individual HOMOSEXUALS), throughout this piece they have dehumanized gays, and clearly feel that ANY action (including violence against gays BECAUSE they are gay, not because they are individuals) is acceptable if it winds up opposing equal rights for gays.

If you go to the summary paragraph, where you expect to see the meat of his official position you find him slamming and slandering gays again.

The summary paragraph is as follows:

From the perspective of the Biblical witness, which is of fundamental importance for Focus on the Family, homosexuality is just one form in which the brokenness of humanity reveals itself, along with greed, hatred, fear, dishonesty and intemperance, to name a few. What people with homosexual desires need above all else is truth, compassion and acceptance. Focus on the Family stands in solidarity with all people against any form of evil, including prejudice, bigotry and violence. (copywrite FOTF)

OK. Now we have the summary paragraph for the OFFICIAL position paper about VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS. In this summary of their OFFICIAL position about VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS they say that homosexuality is "the brokenness of humanity" and in this OFFICIAL position on VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS they compares homosexuality to "greed, hatred, fear, dishonesty, and intemperence, to name a few".

Their OFFICIAL stance on VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS is that homosexuality is the equivalent od greed, hatred, fear, dishonesty, intemperance, pedophilia, bestiality, destroys the family, and FOF acts to block anything positive to do with homosexuality. They cannot bring themselves to say "violence against gays is wrong". They feel they are being FORCED to put out an official position about violence against homosexuals, and they insist throughout in diminishing that fact.

Since this is their OFFICIAL position about VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS, I would hate to see what they have to say in those areas where they are NOT trying to pretend to be compassionate towards gays.

John

>>But John's remarks were directed at religion in general. <<

What remarks were those? The one where I said that I would prefer the Church t openly oppose violence and hate speech?

What is so bad about that? Do you think the Church SHOULD openly ADVOCATE violence and hate speech?

What is wrong with wanting people to be better and more compassionate?

John, the link you provided did not work. You keep referring to an "Official Statement", while I am referring to their "Official Policy". Could you give me a link to their "Official Statement"?

But, you say, "One thing they could never bring themselves to say on that long official policy, EVEN ONCE, was that violence against gays was wrong."

Their policy says, "Morally and legally speaking, a crime against a homosexual is no less a crime against humanity, and deserves to be punished to the full extent of the law."

That is a pretty clear statement against violence. What is it about this statement that you believe doesn't say violence against gays is wrong ?

But it is as wishy-washy a statement as it is possible to come up with. How about if they said this as their FIRST statement in their official policy on violence against gays: "Violence against gays is wrong". Instead they buried the piece YOU referred to deep in the body of the statement. People checking out their official policy would check the first paragraph for the meat of the policy (which is an anti-gay screed). They would look at the 2nd paragraph to see the expanded concepts (another anti-gay screed), and the last paragraph to see the summary of their position (another anti-gay statement). Most people do not bother reading through the whole thing. They read THOSE paragraphs to get the real meaning, and the real meaning of the official policy on violence against homosexuals is that homosexuals are evil.

Take a look at this extract from their statement:

While echoing the Biblical message of compassion and forgiveness and redemption for individuals, we nonetheless stand firm in our objection to social policies that have the effect of legitimizing homosexual behavior. We reject and oppose the attempts of pro-homosexual activists to legitimize homosexuality through such matters as the redefinition of the family, the legalization of same-sex marriages, and the instruction of children and youth that homosexuality and bisexuality are morally equivalent to heterosexuality. We believe such policies are detrimental to individuals and families, and undermine the welfare of society. Therefore, as citizens we speak and act to block the political agenda of pro-homosexual movement

Notice that in this statement about VIOLENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS they add a caveat about how even though they believe the Bible they think gays should be treated differently.

This is not their "official policy on how gays are all evil and going to hell". This is their official policy on VIOLENCE AGAINST GAYS. Presumably the people reading this are people who are contemplating violence against gays, but are looking for guidance here.

Of FoF opposed violence against gays, that is what it would say, and that is ALL it would say. It would not be filled with comments designed to inflame such a person to violence -- and their official policy is LOADED with such emotion-laden, hate-filled concepts.

Imagine for the moment that the KKK was giving their official policy on violence against Jews, and that official statement kept repeating comments about how the Jews were trying to control the world, kill Jesus, enslave us through their control of banks, etc. To protect themselves from the accusation that they were openly advocating violence, chances are they would include a statement about how violence in general is bad, but their meaning would be pretty clear. The same is true with the FoF statement about violence against gays.

http://web.archive.org/web/19990219194352/http://www.family.org/cforum/research/papers/a0002963.html

From their last paragraph:

From the perspective of the Biblical witness, which is of fundamental importance for Focus on the Family, homosexuality is just one form in which the brokenness of humanity reveals itself, along with greed, hatred, fear, dishonesty and intemperance, to name a few. ...

And after tagging homosexuality as evil in their official policy on violence against homosexuals, they say: "Focus on the Family stands in solidarity with all people against any form of evil"

John, so your response is that you agree that the F on F policy statement is clearly against violence to gays.

What you seem to take issue with is their teaching that homosexuality is sinful behavior. That is what religions and religious organizations do. They teach about moral behavior.

So whether or not you agree with them, you do agree that their teaching is constitutionally protected speech. You say that F on F' teaching is "designed to inflame such a person to violence -- and their official policy is LOADED with such emotion-laden, hate-filled concepts."

Many people would disagree with you.

Just as you have the right to advocate for the homosexual lifestyle, F on F has the right to teach against that lifestyle.

No. I agree that the FoF policy is clearly encouraging violence against gays. There is absolutely no other reason to include so many inflamatory hate-filled messages in their offical policy on violence against homosexuals.

>>Just as you have the right to advocate for the homosexual lifestyle, F on F has the right to teach against that lifestyle.<<

Yes, they are allowed to lie about the Bible as much as they want to promote the demonstrably evil anti-gay message.

"What you seem to take issue with is their teaching that homosexuality is sinful behavior.""

They are certainly WRONG about that. The Bible does not condemn homosexuality, and Jesus Christ himself says there is nothing wrong with homosexual acts.

However, what I object to is the fact that they loaded their official statement on violence against homosexuals with hate speech.

This is supposed to be their OFFICIAL policy on VIOLENCE AGAINST GAYS, not their policy on how homosexuals are completely evil. They have loads of other official policies stating their hatred of gays. That does NOT belong in an official policy on violence against gays UNLESS they mean to encourage that violence.

When will people stop being blinded by such ignorance?

I think there has to be a cultural change where such people realize that they are NOT heroes for engaging in hate crimes.

I think its human nature... SOmeone is so bitter that they feel they have to lash out and anyone close by will be their victims....these people are ususally unbalanced and usually are not found out until they do something this bad as to kill..
Its not just about gay people though John, its about everyone... You can be of color, or a female, Spanish, gay, etc... I still think that someone who blames the church for their sick actions, is looking to place the blame on anyone but themselves and this is what is wrong with society today... If you ever listened to prisoners, they all have an excuse for why, they are there... It starts out, I was an abused child, or they had a prositute or a druggie for a parent, they will high on drugs.... the excuses goes on and on and on.. Instead, of them taking the responsiblity and just say, I did it and now I have to accept my punishment... We can rise above most problems that life deals us, if we want to... I have seen some people pick themselves up out of the gutter, dust themselves off and be productive, while others, lay around in self pity, with an attitude of feel sorry, for me....
So , I dont think that the church or religion has anything to do with this... Religion also, speaks of turning the other cheek , being thy brothers keeper, forgivness, etc... so they chose the path to follow...

Actually I think a lot of them ARE caught out, but because the victim is gay, they usually get off with a warning. If stronger punishment was meted out at the beginning, they may well never get to the point where they wind up torturing and/or murdering people.

In this case, unfortunately, many religious leaders have created the atmosphere where such crimes are not uncommon, and where the people think they are HEROES for engaging in such crimes.

I agree they should not blame the Church for their actions. I just wish so many religious leaders did not make it EASY for them to do so.

>>I think its human nature... SOmeone is so bitter that they feel they have to lash out and anyone close by will be their victims....these people are ususally unbalanced and usually are not found out until they do something this bad as to kill..<<

When you see the really violent hate crimes, you are looking at only the final stage of the process. Believe me, it does NOT start there. If you LIVED this you would know what it was like, and most likely experienced it personally.

When I was a lot younger I was once walking in a gay neighborhood of Washington DC. I did not KNOW it was a gay area at the time. I was new there. I got jumped by a gang of seven guys. They took my watch and wallet and took off. I gave chase, and actually caught one of them.

Someone called the police and I said I would press charges.

An investigator came out to interview me. I expected questions like: "What was stolen and what was the value"? "Can you identify the people who attacked and robbed you?" "Were you badly hurt in the assault?"

Instead he asked: "Are you married?" " Do you have a girl friend?" "Did you know this is an area where homosexuals hang out?" "Are you yourself homosexual?" NOTHING about the crime.

Then I was told charges had been dropped for a "technical" reason -- apparently because I was gay.

What lesson do you think those guys learned from that example?

To me it appears they learned that if they attacked and robbed a homosexual they could get off free with it. They would be ready to do it again and again, because they COULD. In fact, they would be encouraged to move to a more violent stage.

And they DO move on to more violent phases. Police will pretend to be prostitutes or pimps or drug addicts or gang members or members of organized crime to catch the criminals. But they have found that it is too dangerous to pretend to be gay in order to catch gay-bashers.

Try searching [Charlie Howard + Maine] and [Matthew Shepard + Laramie, Wyoming] for more information about the hideousness of crimes against gay men for no other reason than the criminals knew that they could. And, they are just a couple of examples of how widespread these hate crimes are. What is always amazing to me is that it is the preachers, ministers and priests who rewrite the facts of these crimes to justify continuing to preach hatred and bigotry. The founders of this nation understood very well that religious leaders were not able to effectively make law that would inspire liberty and justice. That is why the no establishment clause exists in the US Constitution. These idiots understand freedom of religion, and always ignore that it means all people choose how to practice religion as they see fit. As an American who appreciates my freedoms, I will never practice any religion that espouses disrespect for anyone. My religious and personal values have no room for it. Sadly, many people don't see how these divisions create disharmony and that ultimately, it provides the perfect cover for those who would murder gays and lesbians if given half a chance.

There is an unending list of them.

Here is another:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Gary_Matson_and_Winfield_Mowder

In his account of the murders, Tyler Williams said that his brother did not consider the killing of Matson and Mowder to be murder, but a "judgement" instead.[15]

In November 1999 Matthew Williams began giving interviews to various media outlets. In an interview with The Sacramento Bee, he admitted to the murders and said that when he killed Matson and Mowder he was "obeying the law of God." Williams said that he committed the murders because he believed their homosexuality violated God's laws, and he hoped his actions would incite more killings. [16]

Williams insisted that his actions did not constitute murder. Because the Bible holds that homosexuality is a sin that must be punished by death, he claimed, the responsibility lies with the victims. Williams expressed regret that more "people who claim to be Christians" didn't "have the guts" to act as he had. Facing the possibility of execution, he said he hoped to become a "Christian martyr" whose death would inspire others to lash out against Jews, homosexuals, and other minorities.[17]

Thank you for the time you put into this fine post!

Thanks Leo. I appreciate the complement.

yes, good job, John.

Thanks Chris. I tried to cover the problem from early stages to later stages, and what could be done to break the chain.

I get the impression some people do not WANT to break the chain, and are more interested in looking for loopholes and justification for encouraging hate crimes than in taking action to put an end to hate crimes.

Excellent post, John. And I agree - if violence is dealt with before it is allowed to escalate to murder, then all the better for our society. Sociopaths, when outed by a particularly violent act, often have long histories of violent behavior leading up to the latest one that finally got them prosecuted. Mental health professionals as well as law enforcement specialists have tombs of documentation profiling people like this. Yet, for some reason, their early transgressions seem to go unpunished or untreated.

For instance, when a child clearly shows lack of empathy or compassion for others and has a history of harming animals, it is a clear sign of sociopathy. That child, if untreated, will grow into an escalation of violent acts, usually culminating in severe physical harm to or murder of another person.

It should be mandatory that early acts of hatred and 'minor' hate crimes are dealt with quickly and appropriately, before things escalate. As you say, if they are not, the perpetrator gets a clear message that what they are doing is somehow acceptable and can easily justify it with religious messages preached about sin and abomination.

You have really hit on the main point of the post. If those crimes can be caught and addressed early, before they get to the final stages, we will not have anywhere near as many violent unprovoked murders.

The history of harming animals is also one of the signs, as you pointed out. That is one reason why we have laws against animal cruelty -- basically hate crime laws covering animals as victims.