« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


Folger: Sanctity of football viewing threatened by trans protections

by Jeremy Hooper

 Coast2Coast Images JanetfolgernavyJanet Folger is gunning for the proposed hate crimes legislation yet again. Here is her latest, as quoted by One News Now (which you can also hear at this link):

Janet Folger of the ministry Faith 2 Action says the hate crimes bill passed by the House is aimed at pastors or anyone else who has the "audacity" to disagree with the homosexual agenda. "Mike is standing at a football bar, or he's standing at a restaurant, watching a game," she posits; "Bruce comes out of the restroom, and he's touching up his makeup. He's a cross-dresser with red-nail polish and a five o'clock shadow. He comes out and hits on Mike. Maybe he puts his arm around him or maybe he brushes or puts his hand through his hair."

The average man would "
maybe want to push off such unwelcome advances," Folger observes. However, she warns, "That, if you touch him, is a hate crime.

Oh yes, Mike the poor, innocent red-blooded football fan who is hit on by the evil man in a dress. A "pro-family" tale as old as time itself! But just like with her other attempts to discredit hate crimes legislation, Ms. Folger is again wrong, wrong, wrong. Or at the very least, she's being deceptive, deceptive, deceptive. Here's why.

If "Mike" were to push the "cross-dresser" -- let's call her Suzette -- and say "Not interested, pal," then that is in no way a hate crime. If Mike and Suzette are to come to blows because of the unwanted advances, then this is not even a hate crime. If Mike is the sort of human being who holds true hate in his heart for the trans community, which leads him to deliberately attacks Suzette because of her gender expression, then it would be then and only then that a hate crimes charge could ever be considered. For example, if Mike blows off Suzette's advance, waits for her to leave, follows her home, then rounds up his buddies to deface her property with sentiment like "Trannies deserve to die" -- that would be more along the lines of something possibly punishable under proposed legislation.

We're so tired of folks like Ms. Folger presenting these phony scenarios, and talking about them in the most simplistic of terms. They act as if under proposed guidelines, the entire criminal-judicial process is going to be thrown out the door in the name of "The Gay Agenda™." They make it sound like any future crime in which an S and an LGBT member are involved will automatically fall under the "hate crimes" banner. None of us want to see this! If Mike and Suzette get in a bar fight merely because Suzette is getting all up in his face and acting like an uber-annoying, obnoxious louse, then Mike has nothing more to worry about than he does under current law. Unfortunately, those of us who actually swim in LGBT infested waters know that the Suzettes of the world are all-too-realistically hit up for reasons far more hate-filled and frightening then a simple lack of barroom chemistry. Both those targeted incidents of hate and Ms. Folger's misrepresentations: Yea, we want to see them stopped!

Campaign under way to derail Senate 'hate crimes' bill [ONN]

**RELATED: We ask that folks like Janet Folger please read this personal story from Chris Rico. Gay hate crimes are real and frightening, no matter how much the "pro-family" crowd claims otherwise.

Technorati Tags: ,

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

I don't think many gay men are stupid enough to continue to press an unwelcomed advance on a straight man after being told that such a thing makes said straight man uncomfortable. Heck, most gay guys I know are both intelligent and observant enough to know which guys are going to be made uncomfortable by those sorts of advances in the first place, and not bother. I appreciate that there are one or two incompetent jerks in ANY group who might push an issue too far - but a shove and a shout along the lines of "I SAID I'm not interested, mate!" isn't a hate crime.

Heck, you can push a sexual harrassment suit in a scenario like that nearly as easily as an assault case... Not a hate crimes one in either event - the attempt to paint it as one is kind of laughable...

Posted by: Anon | May 8, 2007 6:32:54 PM

Janet Folger wouldn't know integrity if it came out of the bathroom in red nail polish and a five-o-clock shadow and ran its hand through her badly bleached hair.

Posted by: Timothy | May 8, 2007 7:49:31 PM

What a scenario Janet created, I am sure there is a bar that caters to people just like Mike and Bruce, sorta a "big-tent" bar, just like the "big-tent" of the Republican party.

Posted by: gleeindc | May 9, 2007 7:10:43 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails