Friday, December 28, 2007

Peter LaBarbera's homophobia bites him in the ass

In recent pleas for money, Peter LaBarbera has claimed that we lgbts unfairly brand him as homophobic. Peter further claims that all he is doing to speak the "truth" regarding homosexuality:

Yes, they absolutely HATE us because we stand unapologetically against their sexual ideology as one that a holy Creator can have no part of. This “culture war” is not about us — it’s about right versus wrong . . .

To say that he is full of shit would be the overstatement of the decade. So how about a demonstration courtesy of his actions today.

This morning, he published an article spotlighting a hideous crime perpetrated against a gay man:

The victim, a gay man, was raped, attacked, and "sodomized" with a broomstick after leaving a party Friday night -The attacker, Felipe Rivera, had also been at the party. However, he was asked to leave because he had punched the victim in the face after, according to Rivera, the victim winked at him.

After being booted from the party, the attacker waited outside for the vicim to leave. The attacker claims the victim propositioned him for sex, but the victim denies this. In fact, the Chicago Tribune reports that "the victim alleged he had refused an offer from Rivera to pay him $50 for sex later in the evening." But regardless of who truly wanted sex from whom, the attacker proceeded to punch, rape, and stick the broom up the victim's rectum.

When asked why he did it, the attacker is alleged to have said, "because he hates 'faggots,' and this is what they get." The attacker is also said to have shouted anti-gay epithets at the victim while he was attacking.

That is awful. But here is what Peter said about the crime:

Our question: what percentage of “anti-gay hate crimes” are actually committed by people who themselves are involved in homosexual behavior? If this Chicago Tribune report is accurate, then this is no typical ”gay panic defense” – whereby a man blames his assault on a homosexual by claiming that the victim first made an unwanted sexual advance toward him — because the alleged perpetrator here offers to pay his victim for homosexual sex and then sexually assaults him.

We also know that some men may secretly (or even not so secretly) engage (or desire) homosexual perversions yet eschew the “gay” label for themselves – so the fact that Rivera told police that he “hates homosexuals” tells us little. He may hate that part of himself drawn to deviant homosexual acts.

Behavior, not self-labels, is what counts: we wonder how many cases like this end up on the FBI’s list as an “anti-gay” “hate-crime” statistic — to be exploited later, ironically, by “gay” activists lobbying for dubious pro-homosexual “hate crimes” laws … We’ll follow this story closely. — Peter LaBarbera

And the interesting part of the entire situation - later this day, Peter's post was "mysteriously" deleted from his webpage.

If you asked me, I think Peter slipped and showed his homophobia.

Here is an ugly crime committed against a gay man by an individual so psychotic that his mother called the police (i.e. that is how he was caught. Apparently his mother had an order of protection against him even before the alleged crime was committed.).

But the only thing Peter cares about is exploiting this crime as further proof of how "ugly" homosexuality is.

To Peter, the fact that someone was the victim of a crime ranks lower than the fact he can brand the perpetrator as gay.

How is that truth?

Sounds like homophobia to me.

And to make matters worse, when caught, he tries to make a quiet exit.

The Bible says that when you do wrong, you should apologize.

Peter's deletion of his article seems to be a small admittance of wrong. But Peter, if you are a true Christian, then perhaps you owe the lgbt community a public apology.

We are waiting.

Big thanks to for this story.

UPDATE - Apparently Peter has apologized for his sloppy work. But he has reprinted his nonsense. The following analyzation is from, who have been on top of this story:

One interesting note about Pete's new post: He reprints his old post with a line stricken through the part that he nw considers erroneous. However, in a curious move, he added a passage to his original post, as if it had been there all along. The new paragraph reads:
"One more question: if same-sex sexual assaults are classified as “hate crimes,” what about men who rape women (or vice versa)? Shouldn’t these sex crimes also be labeled “hate crimes” against women, as they are typically motivated by contempt and misogyny (hatred of women)? We’ll follow this story closely."

And as you can see from both our quoted text as well as the Google Cache of his original post, this paragraph was never in the original article. Why the duplicity, Peter?

And then Peter just can't seem to help himself but tell another deception:

We know there is a problem with homosexual-on-homosexual violence (hence the book, Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them). It seems ludicrous to call such crimes “anti-gay hate crimes” — for use in the “gay” propaganda cycle that feeds off exaggerated spinning of FBI data to imply an outbreak of (straight) “anti-gay violence” that doesn’t exist.

Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them was a book written 13 years ago. If there is a "big" problem with same-sex relationship abuse, then why couldn't Peter have found a more current source than a 13-year-old book?

More importantly, the book dealt with relationship violence. So why does Peter make reference to this book that deals with relationship violence when talking about a crime in which there was no relationship between the victim and the perpetrator?

Because Peter seems to be trying covertly insult the nature of lgbt relationships in general. He seems to be inferring that what happened to that young man is indicative of lgbt relationships.

Damn Peter, even when you apologize you make things worse.

No matter how you try to cover it up, your homophobia comes shining through.


Anonymous said...

I'm just waiting for Porno Pete to eventually get outed by some Rent-Boy. You know it's gonna happen - the question is, WHEN?

Anonymous said...

May I point out that men raping women should be considered hate crimes, its just that we as a society haven't evolved our thinking as yet as to considered women to be fully human. As for the vile analysis, all I can say that is that he and his kind are modern day Pharisees.