Let the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission wallow in the filth of its own ignorance

Next week, there will be a "challenge" to the new lgbt-inclusive hate crimes bill recently signed by President Obama. The "challenge" is being led by the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission:

On November 16th, CADC, along with other pro-family leaders and ministers, will go to Washington DC for a Rally for Religious Freedom. It will occur immediately in front of the Department of Justice.

Ministers, from various denominations, will preach the truth of the Word of God, especially the “politically incorrect” truth of the sin of homosexuality! We will challenge U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to charge this group of peacefully assembled clergy with a hate crime for simply preaching the Bible.

We will clearly establishing that this law cannot and will not silence God’s servants. We will continue to declare the whole counsel of God both publicly and in our pulpits. If we are arrested, we challenge the law in court.

This bold, public stand for Christ and freedom of speech will cost thousands of dollars. We need to pay for permits, rent a sound system and generators. We will need to send out press releases and get the word out to as many pro-family leaders and ministers as possible. There will be travel expenses and we also need to cover our ongoing overhead.

For those who need a reminder, the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission is that group which defends churches trying to exorcise lgbt children.

It's that same group which defends anti-gay hate groups run by discredited researchers who accuse gay men of molesting children and wallowing in feces.

In short, the CADC is a colossal joke.

And that is how we should treat its protest.

Hate crimes  legislation protects free speech and religious freedom. And I don't think that the CADC or any other group who will participate in this protest are actually dumb enough to advocate violent action against lgbts.

At least I hope not.

What CADC and the other groups are doing is ridiculous grandstanding.

However, I think that these groups are attempting to exploit the lgbt community's anger. I think that they are counting on some of us to be there at their "protest." They are counting on us to be extremely angry and extremely vocal. They are counting on us to shout them down so that they can portray themselves as innocent Christians beset by "evil homosexuals."

The solution to this reminds me of a story told to me about when the Ku Klux Klan came to a small town. The community leaders got together and organized a boycott. When the Klan came, no one was there to greet them, shout at them, or allow themselves to be exploited by the ugly words emanating from the hate group.

Certainly I am not saying that we should be absent when the CADC and their allies come to the Justice Department. What I am saying is that we should let them wallow in the filth of their own ignorance.

Everything is on our side here. If they advocate violent action against lgbts, then their Christian guise is eliminated. If they merely speak as to what they say are "Biblical words" about homosexuality and nothing happens to them (which it won't), then there is egg on their faces.

And if any of us is there when the latter happens, I think we should not only take note of the egg on their faces but also remind the nation of it every chance we get.

Related posts:

Christian Anti-Defamation Commission defends exorcists and hate groups from the 'scary gays'

Gaybasher blames God and other Monday midday news briefs

Cops: Beating suspect said 'God made me hate gay people' - Number one of the "now I've heard it all" charts

Conservatives cry foul over Fort Worth policy proposals that are gay-friendly - Oh Heaven forbid!

House Passes Health Reform Bill with Key LGBT Provisions - This is good news!

Providence exhibit examines achievements of gay black men - About time, too. Now others need to follow suit!

Tampa council grants protections to transgender people - Nothing makes me smile more than a huge crop of good news.

Should the right to call a fellow employee 'a deviant' be protected under law?

Last week, I talked abut Peter Vadala, a young man claiming that he was fired from his job at Brookstone (a Massachusetts retailer store) for "merely" voicing his so-called Christian beliefs abut a colleague's legal gay wedding.

Well now many religious right groups and organizations have picked up on the story, making sure to make Vadala seem like an innocent victim. The most lurid headline coming from World Net Daily:

Man fired after saying homosexuality wrong
Accused of 'harassment' even though lesbian approached him

In World Net Daily's usual lying style, the headline gives the inaccurate impression that Vadala was somehow sexually harrassed.

Now this incident has sparked a lot of discussion in the lgbt community. I got into a huge discussion with some folks who felt that either the lesbian employee should have kept her mouth shut or that what Vadala said was not ground for termination.

I'm personally of the opinion that Vadala deserved to have some reprimand for to his actions and if that reprimand was his termination, then so be it.

It bothers me, however, that people want to simply gloss over this for the sake of either being overly nice to Vadala or exploiting his situation for their own purposes.

The question remains was Vadala fired for his beliefs?

No he wasn't.

He was fired for the unprofessional way he expressed his beliefs.

I have a copy of his termination letter, which Vadala provided to the anti-gay group Mass Resistance. Mass Resistance posted the letter on its webpage no doubt thinking that it would help Vadala's cause. In my opinion, it did just the opposite.

From the letter, we learned that (click on the graphics to read the letter):

* Vadala acknowledged calling the lesbian employee "deviant."

* in explaining the incident to a member of the Human Resource Department, Vadala contradicted himself.

* another sales associate offered a written letter saying that while she did not witness the incident, Vadala told her about the lesbian employee marrying another woman and said he hates people like that.

If you look at the letter, you will notice that Mass Resistance adds ridiculous editorial comments disputing several claims in it.

But this is irrelevant. The letter goes on to acknowledge that while Vadala has a right to his religious beliefs, his comments were inappropriate and unprofessional.

I think what is happening here is that people are being blinded by:

* the need to be overly courteous due to a belief that while lgbts seek our rights, we shouldn't seem pushy, or

* the inability to acknowledge that lgbts make up a considerable amount of the American workforce and just like heterosexuals, we deserve the same type of protection.

What if the employee was heterosexual, unmarried, and bragging about her children's success in school.  If Vadala had approached her and said something like "you are denying your child a chance to have a father. You and your children are deviants," there wouldn't be any discussion of whether or not he deserves termination.

Until someone explains to me how this situation is any different from the one I described, then I am all for the notion of Vadala seeking other employment.