Video: YouTuber takes the 'pro-family' bait

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

06/18/2007

by Jeremy Hooper

"What this bill does is it basically makes it a hate crime for a pastor of a church to tell his parishioners that homosexuality is a sin. That's unbelievable"

Wow, that is unbelievable. That's because this line of thought -- the argument being perpetuated by all of the social conservative groups -- is not to be believed! HR 1592 (which has already been passed by the House) and companion bill SB 1105 (which is awaiting Senate approval) would in no way, shape, or Leviticus make it any sort of crime for a pastor to breach against homosexuality until he is blue in the face! The only way this legislation could have any effect on a religious leader is if that particular leader said to a parishioner, "You need to go beat, kill, or maim a gay person in the name of God!" If a convicted perpetrator of bias-motivated violence claims that their religious leader DID make such a demand of them, then OF COURSE that religious leader -- just like anyone else -- would be questioned. However, preaching Romans I as irrefutably gay-unfriendly is not the same thing as preaching that "after this sermon, you need to go kick a lesbian's ass."

It is such an unrighteous injustice that certain politicians and the major "pro-family" groups have put this sort of reasoning out into the ether in order to muddy the waters of this debate. As you might remember, the Traditional Values Coalition has even gone so far as to pass around an altered House debate transcript, wherein they took this exchange:

GOHMERT: ...if a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation goes out and does an act of violence, and that person says that that minister counseled or induced him through the sermon to commit that act, are you saying under your amendment that in no way could that ever be introduced against the minister?

DAVIS: No.

...and changed it to read:

GOHMERT: “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”

DAVIS: “Yes.”

TVC conveniently left out the part where the perp "says that that minister counseled or induced him through the sermon to commit that act," so as to make it sound like Congressman Gohmert presented a situation wherein the preacher in question was merely asserting that "gay is a sin." And then TVC flipped the line of questioning so as to make it seem like Congressman Davis was giving an affirmative "Yes!" answer, when he seems to have been instead leaving room for possibilities that are of legitimate concern. The simple fact is that ANYONE who the perp says counseled him to commit an act of violence would have to be questioned (even now)! That is just basic common sense! But as "this will ban thought" is the anti-gay message on which our opposition is staying in this debate, they have to alter the facts so that they fit their mission.

What really sets us off about the argument that this legislation would have a chilling effect on speech is that the gay community, by and large, is made up of some of the biggest, truest free speech advocates on the planet. We have been condemned by Fred Phelps on a daily basis for almost two decades, yet when it came to debating laws that ban his progeny from protesting at funerals (wherein the tend to blame the deaths on this nation's acceptance of homosexuality), gay congressman Barney Frank was virtually alone in speaking out against the measure (on free speech grounds). If these bias crime-thwarting proposals TRULY were gunning for ANYONE's speech, you would see us joining you to condemn them. However, it is simply not the case.

We plead with folks like the gentleman who made this video to start listening to what proponents of these protections are saying. We are not trying to spin this situation into something it's so as to fulfill our "agenda" -- the anti-gay team is trying to spin it for the the sake of their own! We simply want to see bias-motivated crimes of ANY VARIETY dealt with in the manner that they deserve.

**For more on this issue and the ways the "pro-family" opposition have tried to sway public opinion, check out our Hate Crimes Legislation Archive

space