Religious conservatives argued endlessly that the Matthew Shepard Act would infringe on religious freedoms because, if a pastor were to preach homophobia at the pulpit and a member of his parish went out and killed a queer, the murderer’s religious beliefs would be used against him in court. So now that LGBT hate crimes legislation has passed, what better way to test the theory than to make it happen?
The Christian Anti-Defamation Commission’s Gary Cass (pictured) says his group is planning something called the “Rally for Religious Freedom,” a demonstration in front of the Department of Justice in Washington, that will be shouting anti-gay rhetoric to the heavens. On Nov. 16, ministers will gather — with megaphones, or at least a podium, we’re guessing — and read from the Bible about how we’re all sinners, we’re ruining American families, and how we get too much airtime on Bravo.
It’s all in an attempt to get Attorney General Eric Holder to address what Cass & Co. view as conflicting legislation. Says Cass: “We’re going to declare the whole counsel of God, including those parts that some may consider ‘inciting a hate crime’ to see if the attorney general is going to come down and arrest a group of peaceful clergy exercising their First Amendment rights.”
Of course he won’t come down and arrest anyone. Until one of your minions goes out and assaults one of us. Because that’s the plan, isn’t it?
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
terrwill
Gary Cass: Another smilin’ scumbag!! Who is it going to turn out he diddles? A little boy or girl????
Attmay
Don’t tempt me, goyim!
ADS
@ No. 1:
I would think he is an overachiever and would choose one of each.
Bill
The audacity of this guy to present himself as a ‘man of god’ is astounding.
I hope they do this. And I hope all of America watches. Good times!!!
On a side note, as a 40 year old gay man, I have NEVER in my ENTIRE life been as HAPPY to be gay as I am at this time in History.
The thought that if I had been born differently, I could have turned out to be one of ‘them’ is so repulsive, so completely disgusting, that I will take whatever further abuse they wish to heap upon us with the knowledge that we truly are such better, smarter, more evolved human beings than they could ever wish to be.
Their house and wardrobes ain’t so hot, either. ; )
Jerry Priori
Another KKKristian asshole. If he incites violence, he should be arrested. I don’t know why the fact that he has a sincere belief in an imaginary friend should be an exception. Religion has been exempt from decency and reality for far too long. End the exceptionalism now!
tavdy79
@ No.1 & No. 2 – it won’t be the local elementary school that you’ll need to steer him clear of. It’s the local zoo.
HiredGoons
Oh God.
Mike
Commandment 4
You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God
I think that sums up what Gary Cass is doing.
PopSnap
Haha how cool! Thanks for the support. These people do more for us in the eyes of a nation that is increasingly nonreligious than we could ever do by campaigning.
And what will they say when nobody arrests them? That we were right? lol
jarvisbearcub
“peaceful”…. So as long as you don’t hit anyone, you’re being peaceful, I guess. Shouting anti-gay speech isn’t violent.
chukumunga
there is no freedom with religion…when will those dipshits ever get that???????
fuck marriage, I want religion dead and buried!
SoylentDIva
They’ll create a self-fulfilling prophecy so they can play the “persecuted Christians”. Fucking hateful morons.
hyhybt
I like it, and hope he does it every weekend from now on. Because you see how seriously people take Fred Phelps.
There’s nothing quite like having your opponents deliberately kill any credibility they may have had.
This assuming, of course, that nobody takes the bait…
PopSnap
Yeah, I really hope nobody takes the bait. That would be devastating for us, as it would make them right.
Steve
The only difference that I can see between the KKK and the current batch of “conservative Christians”, is that the KKK at least had enough sense to try to hide their faces.
The KKK taught that they were acting in God’s name. Most of them actually believed that white people were superior to black people, and that God had created black people to serve whites. They invoked the symbols of Christianity and read from the Bible. (They interpreted certain passages in the Bible, as approving of slavery, that slaves should obey their masters and that slaves should not seek to be free.)
Many of the KKK leaders were church pastors, mayors, sheriffs, city councilmen, police officers, and wealthy businessmen. In current terminology, they were “conservative Christians”.
To continue in power, they need to direct blame for all bad things toward someone else. Over the last few decades, those so-called “Christians” realized that they could no longer get away with blaming blacks, and so they just redirected their hate against gays. The have to blame somebody.
They have a right to speak, but not to incite hate or violence. The authorities should video those demonstrations, including both the speakers and the audience. If any member of that audience is arrested for any violent or hate crime against any gay person, that video should be used as evidence to also arrest the speakers.
Of course, they won’t, because the sheriff is one of them.
Vo Dong Cung
The religious groups always recall the family value base on the Bible. What is that value? Start from one man and one woman, how can there are almost 8 billion on this earth now. If brothers and sisters in Adam family did not have sex to each other, human will be gone after they all died. I can not trust the family value base on Bible, there are something really wrong to morality.
hyhybt
#14: From this side, it may not seem like a big difference, but I don’t recall the KKK believing that people chose to be black out of moral failure, and that if they just tried harder and/or accepted Jesus they’d turn white.
The actions aren’t that similar, either. Very few (though any is too many) from even the most anti-gay churches support the modern equivalents of cross-burning and lynching.
Fitz
Though I am not one of them, (the faithful), the best response would be to in fact show up– but in a very respectful, engaging, peaceful kind of way– and help protect them. Maybe even bring a buffet lunch.
dontblamemeivotedforhillary
A lot of fuss from people worshiping invisible Gods!
Attmay
@18 Fitz:
What, no lions? I thought you had a whole pride of lions ready to pounce whenever a Christian came by.
jason
i don’t know what’s wrong or right in all of this. but you know for sure that an awful lot of bad deeds have been done in the name of religion. history speaks for itself.
ericka v.
Oh yeah, another whole bunch of stupid asshats. Once again demeaning Christians. 47% of whom supported Maine equality, and here you all are demeaning religion ans believers. Without Christians the gay movement is DOA. Do any of you morons ever think that these hundreds of anti Christian blogs do not get back to believers? Are you all that stupid?
What a novel way to win more support from the very people you are courting when people vote, call them names and belittle their beliefs every day.
That tactic has worked 31 times in a row.
And thanks to you dipshits, it will every time in the future.
If D.C. is put to a vote of the people, the “gay marriage” question will go down in flames.
I Know why, do you? First co-opting a issue of sexuality as a civil rights issue, when it is NOT, infuriated many blacks who view same sex as a choice, and have evidence to support that belief. The “gay” is the new black meme crashed and burned among them.
Ohhh, and guess what? The same sex marriage activists are 80-90 percent white and far left progressives, in another words, no different than the KKK. And to top it off, the “gay” movement loves to brag about how prosperous and powerful its movement is. Shitting all over minorities, Christians or both, makes all of you plain ass stupid.
By all means keep up the good work.
FlopsyMopsyCT
OK, I have to admit, this resistance from the religious right is really does not make any sense to me. Maybe some more experienced lawyers on this board could shed some light.
First off, the rules of evidence do not have any per se exclusions of using a person’s religious identity. Thus, couldn’t a person’s religion come in as evidence as long as it comports with the rules? I could think of several cases where’s one’s belief’s, religious or not, could be introduced as relevant evidence. In all honesty, we allow cases of prior sexual conduct and provocative conduct in rape cases (I am rethinking the latter, so someone tell me if they know differently) and those are just as personal is not more so.
So that I do not understand. Religious beliefs have never (at least to my knowledge) been per se banned as long as their relevant, so why should these cases be any different? Because people commit them based on religious teachings? I really wonder how many violent crimes are committed against homosexuals as a direct result of a religious stance as opposed to a general dislike.
Further, I think the protesters are really missing the point here. They can go and say publicly whatever the heck they want about homosexuals. It’s their right. It’s the same reason why the Phelps org. is allowed to do so. It’s the incitation to violence that is disconcerting.
So yes, all in all, I think the efforts of these people is really gonna end up with nothing.
To Ericka:
In all honesty, I fervently agree that there are slanderous attacks from the left (of course not all from gays and lesbians) that are unnecessary and damaging to the cause.
However, I do find it a little disconcerting that you basically do in your post what you condemn. I think the more appropriate route would be to practice what you preach, but that is just my humble opinion.
I do disagree with your characterization of the “gay= black.” In all honesty, I’ve rarely heard a direct correlation between the earlier civil rights movement and the current one from any major gay org. Certainly comparisons, but never a real solid equalization between the two movements. So I think your rant is slightly irrelevant to the topic en general.
Further, although the black community en masse might have opposition to the advancement of gay rights due to evidence regarding choice, it is certainly not irrefutable, irrebuttable evidence. The black community’s dependence on choice evidence in deciding whether or not to support the cause is very premature. The truth is, scientists and researchers have come to absolutely no solid conclusion regarding what causes homosexuality. The black community can vote however it wants, just do it based on something more than non-thorough, unfinished research.
FlopsyMopsyCT
God, that last comment was a grammar nightmare, oops.
1EqualityUSA
Dear FlopsyMopsyCT,
In applying the California Constitution’s equal protection clause, on the ground that there is a question as to whether this characteristic is or is not “immutable.” Although we noted in Sail’er Inn, supra, 5 Cal.3d 1, that generally a person’s gender is viewed as an immutable trait (id. at p. 18), immutability is not invariably required in order for a characteristic to be considered a suspect classification for equal protection purposes. California cases establish that a person’s religion is a suspect classification for equal protection purposes (see, e.g., Owens v. City of Signal Hill (1984) 154 Cal.App.3d 123, 128; Williams v. Kapilow & Son, Inc. (1980) 105 Cal.App.3d 156, 161-162), and one’s religion, of course, is not immutable but is a matter over which an individual has control. (See also Raffaelli v. Committee of Bar Examiners (1972) 7 Cal.3d 288, 292 [alienage treated as a suspect classification notwithstanding circumstance that alien can become a citizen].)
Because a person’s sexual orientation is so integral an aspect of one’s identity, it is
not appropriate to require a person to repudiate or change his or her sexual
orientation in order to avoid discriminatory treatment.
Read the decision here: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S147999.PDF
Clearly, immutability is not the issue here, the central issue here is equal protection under the constitution.
1EqualityUSA
To Ericka V, Breath. Not all gays are saying negative things about Christ. Generalizing is a mistake. Anger is a by-product of frustration. Opinions of others need not be so challenging.
romeo
Certainly, not all gay people are saying negative things about Jesus. But what has He to do with most “Chrisian” churches? What’s called Christianity in these churches, white and black, is a perversion of Christ’s intent in the service of power and social control. Getting pretty desperate and forlorn now.
And, Ericka, there is a difference between “evidence” and opinion. If you choose to ignore inconvenient evidence, then all you have is an opinion. Our Constitution is designed to protect us ALL from mere opinion.