Chimps and the Fairness Doctrine make for a strange Wednesday
Sometimes I hate work.
I love my job but I'm at it 7.5 hours a day for five days. By the time I get home, all of the good stuff seems to have already been posted about.
It's difficult not to become obsolete. But I will try.
Anger rises over NY Post cartoon that many think depicts President Obama as monkey shot dead by police - I wonder how much attention Fox News will devote to this madness. I defy anyone to even attempt to tell me that the cartoonist Sean Delonas didn't have racist intentions when he created this monstrosity.
And here is another piece of news that ought to aggravate those who think that racism and homophobia have no connection - Delonas has been known in the past for creating comic strips comparing gay marriage to bestiality.
Just something nice to remember the next time someone (such as Harry Jackson or Ken Hutcherson) plays that "you can't compare my skin to their sin" card.
And speaking of President Obama, what's the deal with the Fairness Doctrine? I've noticed that those two words seem to make not only the religious right but conservatives in general to wet their pants. It's not a new thing. I remember when they were calling it the "Hush Rush" Act.
One News Now seems to have devoted so much time to talking about it thatI'm getting jealous. And here I thought lgbts were the biggest threats (oh well - at least we still are to Utah State Congressman Chris Buttars):
ACLJ ready to do battle against 'Fairness Doctrine'
Author predicts backlash would accompany Fairness Doctrine (the author, by the way, is Bernard Goldberg who seems to have made a career whining about the so-called liberal media)
Christian radio - target of 'Fairness Doctrine'?
'Fairness Doctrine' comeback likely
Well today, President Obama spoke about the Fairness Doctrine:
President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday.
The statement is the first definitive stance the administration has taken since an aide told an industry publication last summer that Obama opposes the doctrine -- a long-abolished policy that would require broadcasters to provide opposing viewpoints on controversial issues.
"As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated," White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com.
You think that's going to be the end of it? Come on now. If you have read this blog or my book, then you know that a hallmark of religious right propaganda techniques is to repeat a statement, even after it's been proven to be false.
We will be hearing about the Fairness Doctrine again from the religious right.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Speaking of Utah - lgbts can get no love from the legislators there
And just a reminder that the flyer from America Forever is not an anomaly, this just came in:
Four down, one to go.
The Utah Legislature snuffed out two more gay-rights bills Tuesday.
After lengthy public hearings, House committees rejected two measures: HB288, which would have allowed same-sex couples and other unmarried pairs to adopt and foster children; and HB267, which would have protected gay and transgender Utahns from housing and employment discrimination.
The snuffing out of these bills would be bad enough. But the comments from legislators and others are beyond the pale:
In rejecting the latest measures, opponents painted being gay as a "choice" rather than an innate characteristic -- contrary to a broad consensus among psychological and medical experts.
"Adoption is not a right, it's a privilege. Those who choose alternative lifestyles suffer the consequences because they can't naturally produce between them," said Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, who joined a 5-1 vote to defeat HB288. "Heterosexual couples who cohabit also face consequences because they choose not to marry."
And on the anti-discrimination bill, Eagle Forum President Gayle Ruzicka made a similar case against adding sexual orientation to existing fair housing and employment laws.
"What we're talking about is choice -- someone's sexual choice," she told a House panel. "Why would we put into law someone's sexual choice? … This is not the right thing to do."
Here we go about comparing sexual orienation to sexual activity. It seems to be a stand by - it's simplistic and to the point. And it's also inaccurate. But when you can't make your points with truth, I guess sexual innuendoes are all you have left.
It's ironic to me how the religious right and those who support them accuse lgbts of being the aggressors when they are the ones passing the anti-gay marriage laws. And they are the ones in backroomss figuring out ways to work around the courts when they strike down ordinances that bar gay adoption.
Maybe I'm confused about definitions here, but just who are the aggressors and who are the ones having to deal with the onslaught?
And just who are the people with integrity?
And just a reminder that the flyer from America Forever is not an anomaly, this just came in:
Four down, one to go.
The Utah Legislature snuffed out two more gay-rights bills Tuesday.
After lengthy public hearings, House committees rejected two measures: HB288, which would have allowed same-sex couples and other unmarried pairs to adopt and foster children; and HB267, which would have protected gay and transgender Utahns from housing and employment discrimination.
The snuffing out of these bills would be bad enough. But the comments from legislators and others are beyond the pale:
In rejecting the latest measures, opponents painted being gay as a "choice" rather than an innate characteristic -- contrary to a broad consensus among psychological and medical experts.
"Adoption is not a right, it's a privilege. Those who choose alternative lifestyles suffer the consequences because they can't naturally produce between them," said Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, who joined a 5-1 vote to defeat HB288. "Heterosexual couples who cohabit also face consequences because they choose not to marry."
And on the anti-discrimination bill, Eagle Forum President Gayle Ruzicka made a similar case against adding sexual orientation to existing fair housing and employment laws.
"What we're talking about is choice -- someone's sexual choice," she told a House panel. "Why would we put into law someone's sexual choice? … This is not the right thing to do."
Here we go about comparing sexual orienation to sexual activity. It seems to be a stand by - it's simplistic and to the point. And it's also inaccurate. But when you can't make your points with truth, I guess sexual innuendoes are all you have left.
It's ironic to me how the religious right and those who support them accuse lgbts of being the aggressors when they are the ones passing the anti-gay marriage laws. And they are the ones in backroomss figuring out ways to work around the courts when they strike down ordinances that bar gay adoption.
Maybe I'm confused about definitions here, but just who are the aggressors and who are the ones having to deal with the onslaught?
And just who are the people with integrity?
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Show me the difference between the rhetoric - I dare youIs it just me or is the opposition getting more and more hysterical.
This flyer to the left is from a group in Utah, America Forever.
It's a vile piece of mess that exploits every anti-gay stereotype there seems to be (including the Michael Swift life). And also, don't think I didn't notice that the couple pictured is interracial. I guess a little racism on the side never hurts.
Just ugly. And the section in the flyer comparing lgbt openess in the workplace to sexual conduct is especially offensive to me.
For the record, I am open about my orientation at work. On my office wall, I hang an award I received in 2007 from the local lgbt community center as the Harriet Hancock Volunteer of the Year.
I received this award for many efforts, including taking part in a Richland County Sheriff Department committee that looked at how law enforcement can better serve lgbt communities. I also took part in panel discussions on college campuses about lgbt issues.
None of this has anything to do with sodomy, except for in the mind of a homophobe.
But you know what - let's make things more interesting. Take a look at words of this email I received from the Family Research Council:
Please stand with me now and send an immediate donation to help Family Research Council fight back
February 17, 2009 Share with Friends
Dear Alvin,
President Barack Obama has unveiled his massive plan to silence the moral voices of America and reshape our country. He calls it "The Agenda."
Please stand with me now and send an immediate donation to help Family Research Council fight back.
Obama says we are divisive--because we object to immoral and dangerous behavior.
He implies that we are not patriotic--because we won't compromise our values to suit the radical advocates of the homosexual agenda.
We must be silenced, the Left says, and "The Agenda" lays out their plans to do that.
Hate crimes laws that could lead to penalties for Christians who publicly criticize homosexual behavior
Employment laws forcing businesses, even churches, to hire homosexuals (and indoctrinate employees)
Abolish the federal Defense of Marriage Act and other laws against counterfeit marriage
Yet most Americans disagree with the President's extremist views. Most want to:
Preserve the biblical definition of marriage
Be free to voice their concerns and Christian values
Protect schoolchildren from indoctrination that promotes dangerous sexual behavior
If we work together--we can stop "The Agenda."
Dozens of new congressional Democrats in Congress now represent moderate and conservative districts. They--and most Republicans--are open to our concerns.
Your prayerful support enables FRC policy experts to educate citizens and these members of Congress who can stop this disastrous plan.
So please send your most generous gift immediately. The radical homosexual activists have a champion in the White House, and they are demanding action.
Thank you for standing for faith, family and freedom. It is an honor to serve alongside you in this critical hour for our nation.
It's the same set of lies put out by America Forever, only done in a "nicer" way. If FRC is being attacked by President Obama, then their claims about the desires of "radical gay activists" give him and others who criticize them more than enough reason.
No matter how you dress it up, you never can totally disguise the smell of trash.
The religious right claims that they are only trying to perserve their beliefs and heritage but if these things they believe in entails stigmatizing lgbt relationships and reducing the dignity of our lives to ignorant stereotypes then I really wonder if their beliefs and heritage are worth perserving.
Because whatever these beliefs are, it's not the Christianity I grew up to respect.
Lies, inneundoes, and fear tactics have nothing to do with Christianity or any religious beliefs.
Tuesday's news briefs
Pat Robertson denounces Rush Limbaugh’s comments: He’s ‘not exactly thinking rationally.’ - A sign of the Apocalypse - I agree with Pat Robertson on something.
Fundie org issues dismal report card for the work of the professional 'Christian' set - And here I thought the religious right should be getting a failing grade on integrity and honesty.
As per usual, FOF is condemning gay 'Children' - On daytime soap operas where there have been rapes, murders, thieving, lying, cheating and all sorts of bad behavior (you know you enjoy watching it), nothing is worse than a gay wedding. I'm glad Focus on the Family makes things so clear.
Culture Wars Today, Culture Wars Tomorrow, Culture Wars Forever - President Obama's potential judicial picks are facing opposition before he even picks them.
A Party Fractured, GOP Conservatives Regroup - A political version of Friday the 13th. Fast as you think they are dead, they spring up again.
Pat Robertson denounces Rush Limbaugh’s comments: He’s ‘not exactly thinking rationally.’ - A sign of the Apocalypse - I agree with Pat Robertson on something.
Fundie org issues dismal report card for the work of the professional 'Christian' set - And here I thought the religious right should be getting a failing grade on integrity and honesty.
As per usual, FOF is condemning gay 'Children' - On daytime soap operas where there have been rapes, murders, thieving, lying, cheating and all sorts of bad behavior (you know you enjoy watching it), nothing is worse than a gay wedding. I'm glad Focus on the Family makes things so clear.
Culture Wars Today, Culture Wars Tomorrow, Culture Wars Forever - President Obama's potential judicial picks are facing opposition before he even picks them.
A Party Fractured, GOP Conservatives Regroup - A political version of Friday the 13th. Fast as you think they are dead, they spring up again.
A short but interesting story on being black and gay in America
I suspect that the issue of being black and gay in America will be receiving more attention as the months go by.
We have seen certain incidents (i.e. the arrest of T.D. Jakes's son, the Morehouse column, the Proposition 8 vote that led to the absolutely ridiculous question "Is Gay the New Black") that points to the fact that this could be THE issue to discuss.
But let me tell you a short story from my perspective.
A couple of years ago (I think 2004), I read an issue of Ebony magazine featuring an article that asked the question "Is Gay Rights Civil Rights."
This article polled responses from six prominent African-Americans from poet Nikki Giovanni to civil rights legends Revs. Fred Shuttlesworth and Walter Fauntroy.
It was an interesting piece and all involved gave thorough and very intelligent answers on whether or not they considered gay rights the same as "civil rights" (meaning a comparison between gay rights and the Civil Rights Movement).
To me though, it wasn't what was said, but what wasn't present.
Not one of those six people were self-identified lgbts of color. This was something that I found difficult to fathom - the fact that Ebony magazine could not or chose not to find any lgbts of color to participate in this article.
It's not as if they weren't out there. I'm sure that Keith Boykin, Mandy Carter, Nadine Smith, Alex Robinson, or any prominent lgbts of color would have participated if asked to.
But Ebony magazine chose not to go that route. In a conversation where the voices of lgbts of color was vital and necessary, the magazine chose to send the connotation that somehow gay rights have nothing to do with the black community.
And that lgbts of color do not exist.
This short incident may not mean much to you but as an lgbt of color, it says volumes to me.
In all of these discussions about gay rights and black civil rights, that incident of forced invisibility always stays with me.
Even though sometimes I wish it didn't.
I suspect that the issue of being black and gay in America will be receiving more attention as the months go by.
We have seen certain incidents (i.e. the arrest of T.D. Jakes's son, the Morehouse column, the Proposition 8 vote that led to the absolutely ridiculous question "Is Gay the New Black") that points to the fact that this could be THE issue to discuss.
But let me tell you a short story from my perspective.
A couple of years ago (I think 2004), I read an issue of Ebony magazine featuring an article that asked the question "Is Gay Rights Civil Rights."
This article polled responses from six prominent African-Americans from poet Nikki Giovanni to civil rights legends Revs. Fred Shuttlesworth and Walter Fauntroy.
It was an interesting piece and all involved gave thorough and very intelligent answers on whether or not they considered gay rights the same as "civil rights" (meaning a comparison between gay rights and the Civil Rights Movement).
To me though, it wasn't what was said, but what wasn't present.
Not one of those six people were self-identified lgbts of color. This was something that I found difficult to fathom - the fact that Ebony magazine could not or chose not to find any lgbts of color to participate in this article.
It's not as if they weren't out there. I'm sure that Keith Boykin, Mandy Carter, Nadine Smith, Alex Robinson, or any prominent lgbts of color would have participated if asked to.
But Ebony magazine chose not to go that route. In a conversation where the voices of lgbts of color was vital and necessary, the magazine chose to send the connotation that somehow gay rights have nothing to do with the black community.
And that lgbts of color do not exist.
This short incident may not mean much to you but as an lgbt of color, it says volumes to me.
In all of these discussions about gay rights and black civil rights, that incident of forced invisibility always stays with me.
Even though sometimes I wish it didn't.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Ignorant Morehouse College column makes me wonder
I love my African-American heterosexual brothers and sisters but let's face some facts: the black community in general is highly ignorant when it comes to acknowledging and supporting gays and lesbians of color.
How else can one explain the words in this recent hot mess of a column by Morehouse University writer Gerren Gaynor:
It's not so much that "straight" men of Morehouse are uncomfortable with the gay lifestyle, but more so because it is constantly and quite robustly thrown in their face. Does being a gay man include adopting the traits of a woman? Because if that's the case, there's a more fitting school, and it's called Spelman College.
I'm all for being who you are. If you like women, go on and date women. If you like men, be my guest and date men. But if you are born a man, you should be just that--a man. If I have to look twice to tell if I'm looking at a man or woman on an all-male campus, then something is tragically wrong.
At this rate, Morehouse College may find itself in a difficult situation. What happens if and when one of our gay Morehouse brothers decides to go the next step and undergo a sex-change operation, and is then physically considered to be a woman? Does Morehouse have the right to ask that student to leave?
It's ironic that Mr. Gaynor claims to have support for gay men and then proceeds to throw out some of the most offensive stereotypes that could have only come from being locked up in a room for 24 hrs and forced to watch repeated clips from shows like In Living Color and movies like Soul Plane.
For the record, homosexuality and transgenderism are two different things entirely. Just because someone is openly gay doesn't necessarily mean will seek to have sexual reassignment surgery.
Mr. Gaynor's fickless bullshit is rooted in an unfortunate facet of the African-American community - this push to hypermasculinity.
You can see it in so many images on African-American oriented shows - it's not enough for a black man to be masculine. He must be hypermasculine. Everything about him must exude masculinity, even his gas.
But I really don't blame Mr. Gaynor for his ignorance regarding the gay community because it is prevalent in the black community.
Lgbts of color are nonexistent in the black community as far as our leaders, magazines, radio shows, and networks are concerned.
We are not people in the actual sense. We don't have lives or families. We are soulless props designed as warning stops to "real brothers and sisters." Or cariactures designed for laughter and amusement - clowns whose only functions are to induce laughter or pity.
We are constantly bombarded with either invisibility or negative stereotypes of weak feminine men or hypermasculine sexually aggressive men.
Yet this is the same community that cries about its high HIV rate in our community.
This is the same community who chuckles and says things like "we knew it all the time" when people like Pastor T.D. Jakes's son is arrested.
And we are the same community that gives birth to supposedly intelligent black men like Mr. Gaynor who will write ridiculous nonsensical filled columns.
So . . .
To Harry Jackson, Ken Hutcherson, Alveda King, and the rest of the black ministers and spokespeople who spout silly homilies like “don’t equate my skin with your sin” and help propagate the lie that the lgbt orientation and the African-American identity are mutually exclusive.
To all of the black ministers nationwide who knowingly have lgbt of color congregants but will not pursue private one-on-one nonjudgmental conversations with them
To Ebony, Essence, Jet, Emerge and other African-American oriented magazines who write very few articles regarding lgbts of color.
To all of the African-American social organizations who will not even mention lgbts of color.
To all of the African-American oriented television shows (such as House of Payne) who feature no lgbt of color characters.
To all of the African-American motion pictures who feature lgbt of color characters strictly as vehicles for the worst form of comedy.
To all of the civic minded African-American spokespeople and leaders who will not even address the fact that lgbts of color exist.
To all of those in the African-American community who reduce lgbt of color relationships to sexual innuendoes by their patronizing comments like "not caring about who someone sleeps with."
I lay Mr. Gaynor's ignorance as well as the ignorance of the entire black community at your feet.
What are you going to do about it?
I love my African-American heterosexual brothers and sisters but let's face some facts: the black community in general is highly ignorant when it comes to acknowledging and supporting gays and lesbians of color.
How else can one explain the words in this recent hot mess of a column by Morehouse University writer Gerren Gaynor:
It's not so much that "straight" men of Morehouse are uncomfortable with the gay lifestyle, but more so because it is constantly and quite robustly thrown in their face. Does being a gay man include adopting the traits of a woman? Because if that's the case, there's a more fitting school, and it's called Spelman College.
I'm all for being who you are. If you like women, go on and date women. If you like men, be my guest and date men. But if you are born a man, you should be just that--a man. If I have to look twice to tell if I'm looking at a man or woman on an all-male campus, then something is tragically wrong.
At this rate, Morehouse College may find itself in a difficult situation. What happens if and when one of our gay Morehouse brothers decides to go the next step and undergo a sex-change operation, and is then physically considered to be a woman? Does Morehouse have the right to ask that student to leave?
It's ironic that Mr. Gaynor claims to have support for gay men and then proceeds to throw out some of the most offensive stereotypes that could have only come from being locked up in a room for 24 hrs and forced to watch repeated clips from shows like In Living Color and movies like Soul Plane.
For the record, homosexuality and transgenderism are two different things entirely. Just because someone is openly gay doesn't necessarily mean will seek to have sexual reassignment surgery.
Mr. Gaynor's fickless bullshit is rooted in an unfortunate facet of the African-American community - this push to hypermasculinity.
You can see it in so many images on African-American oriented shows - it's not enough for a black man to be masculine. He must be hypermasculine. Everything about him must exude masculinity, even his gas.
But I really don't blame Mr. Gaynor for his ignorance regarding the gay community because it is prevalent in the black community.
Lgbts of color are nonexistent in the black community as far as our leaders, magazines, radio shows, and networks are concerned.
We are not people in the actual sense. We don't have lives or families. We are soulless props designed as warning stops to "real brothers and sisters." Or cariactures designed for laughter and amusement - clowns whose only functions are to induce laughter or pity.
We are constantly bombarded with either invisibility or negative stereotypes of weak feminine men or hypermasculine sexually aggressive men.
Yet this is the same community that cries about its high HIV rate in our community.
This is the same community who chuckles and says things like "we knew it all the time" when people like Pastor T.D. Jakes's son is arrested.
And we are the same community that gives birth to supposedly intelligent black men like Mr. Gaynor who will write ridiculous nonsensical filled columns.
So . . .
To Harry Jackson, Ken Hutcherson, Alveda King, and the rest of the black ministers and spokespeople who spout silly homilies like “don’t equate my skin with your sin” and help propagate the lie that the lgbt orientation and the African-American identity are mutually exclusive.
To all of the black ministers nationwide who knowingly have lgbt of color congregants but will not pursue private one-on-one nonjudgmental conversations with them
To Ebony, Essence, Jet, Emerge and other African-American oriented magazines who write very few articles regarding lgbts of color.
To all of the African-American social organizations who will not even mention lgbts of color.
To all of the African-American oriented television shows (such as House of Payne) who feature no lgbt of color characters.
To all of the African-American motion pictures who feature lgbt of color characters strictly as vehicles for the worst form of comedy.
To all of the civic minded African-American spokespeople and leaders who will not even address the fact that lgbts of color exist.
To all of those in the African-American community who reduce lgbt of color relationships to sexual innuendoes by their patronizing comments like "not caring about who someone sleeps with."
I lay Mr. Gaynor's ignorance as well as the ignorance of the entire black community at your feet.
What are you going to do about it?
Student sues college, religious right feeding frenzy begins
We will hear about this story repeatedly over the next few days:
A classroom dispute at Los Angeles City College in the emotional aftermath of Proposition 8 has given rise to a lawsuit testing the balance between 1st Amendment rights and school codes on offensive speech.
Student Jonathan Lopez says his professor called him a "fascist bastard" and refused to let him finish his speech against same-sex marriage during a public speaking class last November, weeks after California voters approved the ban on such unions.
When Lopez tried to find out his mark for the speech, the professor, John Matteson, allegedly told him to "ask God what your grade is," the suit says.
Lopez also said the teacher threatened to have him expelled when he complained to higher-ups.
In addition to financial damages, the suit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, seeks to strike down a sexual harassment code barring students from uttering "offensive" statements.
Jean-Paul Jassy, a 1st Amendment lawyer in Los Angeles, said a number of cases have explored the tension between offensive speech and the expression of religious views. Often, he said, the decision depends on the specifics of the situation.
"Free speech really thrives when people are going back and forth, disagreeing sometimes and sometimes finding things each other says offensive, but there are limits, particularly in a school setting," Jassy said after reviewing the lawsuit.
Lopez, a Los Angeles resident working toward an associate of arts degree, is described in the suit as a Christian who considers it a religious duty to share his beliefs, particularly with other students. He declined to comment. Matteson could not be reached.
Lopez is represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization based in Scottsdale, Ariz., and co-founded by evangelical leader James Dobson of Focus on the Family.
If the story turns out to be true, the professor should be reprimanded. That is if the story turns out to be true.
Unfortunately there seems to be a bigger issue here. The Allied Defense Fund and its allies are now engaging in a p.r. battle regarding this situation.
It's been done so many times before:
- An alleged incident of discrimination against a Christian takes place.
- The Allied Defense Fund sues "on behalf" of the innocent Christian and sends out a press release.
- The press release is "conveniently" picked up by right wing sources like World Net Daily, Free Republic, right wing blogs, etc.
- One News Now publishes a one-sided article making sure to add "details."
- The incident is featured on talk shows and radio shows featuring the "innocent Christian" giving only his or her side of the story.
- The incident will be used to incorrectly claim that pro-gay laws (such as hate crimes legislation) are going to lead to the imprisonment and persecution of Christians.
- We find out that the incident was blown out of proportion, but after all of that build up and hype about "Christians being persecuted," no one really gives a shit.
This incident has already hit One News Now complete with the usual whiny comments about "intolerant purveyors of tolerance," "Christians are being persecuted all over" and other things we can come to expect from One News Now supporters and readers.
I don't remember comments being posted to a One News Now story so quickly. It's obvious that the phony news service will be pushing this situation hard.
And the right wing blogs have gone haywire over it. I cringe to see how many entries on Free Republic have been dedicated to the incident.
My guess is that Mr. Lopez will be featured in a new AFA video on "silencing Christians."
But as I reiterated before, I want to hear the entire story. If Mr. Lopez's version of the story is true, then I hope a suitable solution is reached.
However, given the track record of his allies, I have more than enough reason to doubt Mr. Lopez's version of the story.
For now that is.
We will hear about this story repeatedly over the next few days:
A classroom dispute at Los Angeles City College in the emotional aftermath of Proposition 8 has given rise to a lawsuit testing the balance between 1st Amendment rights and school codes on offensive speech.
Student Jonathan Lopez says his professor called him a "fascist bastard" and refused to let him finish his speech against same-sex marriage during a public speaking class last November, weeks after California voters approved the ban on such unions.
When Lopez tried to find out his mark for the speech, the professor, John Matteson, allegedly told him to "ask God what your grade is," the suit says.
Lopez also said the teacher threatened to have him expelled when he complained to higher-ups.
In addition to financial damages, the suit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, seeks to strike down a sexual harassment code barring students from uttering "offensive" statements.
Jean-Paul Jassy, a 1st Amendment lawyer in Los Angeles, said a number of cases have explored the tension between offensive speech and the expression of religious views. Often, he said, the decision depends on the specifics of the situation.
"Free speech really thrives when people are going back and forth, disagreeing sometimes and sometimes finding things each other says offensive, but there are limits, particularly in a school setting," Jassy said after reviewing the lawsuit.
Lopez, a Los Angeles resident working toward an associate of arts degree, is described in the suit as a Christian who considers it a religious duty to share his beliefs, particularly with other students. He declined to comment. Matteson could not be reached.
Lopez is represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization based in Scottsdale, Ariz., and co-founded by evangelical leader James Dobson of Focus on the Family.
If the story turns out to be true, the professor should be reprimanded. That is if the story turns out to be true.
Unfortunately there seems to be a bigger issue here. The Allied Defense Fund and its allies are now engaging in a p.r. battle regarding this situation.
It's been done so many times before:
- An alleged incident of discrimination against a Christian takes place.
- The Allied Defense Fund sues "on behalf" of the innocent Christian and sends out a press release.
- The press release is "conveniently" picked up by right wing sources like World Net Daily, Free Republic, right wing blogs, etc.
- One News Now publishes a one-sided article making sure to add "details."
- The incident is featured on talk shows and radio shows featuring the "innocent Christian" giving only his or her side of the story.
- The incident will be used to incorrectly claim that pro-gay laws (such as hate crimes legislation) are going to lead to the imprisonment and persecution of Christians.
- We find out that the incident was blown out of proportion, but after all of that build up and hype about "Christians being persecuted," no one really gives a shit.
This incident has already hit One News Now complete with the usual whiny comments about "intolerant purveyors of tolerance," "Christians are being persecuted all over" and other things we can come to expect from One News Now supporters and readers.
I don't remember comments being posted to a One News Now story so quickly. It's obvious that the phony news service will be pushing this situation hard.
And the right wing blogs have gone haywire over it. I cringe to see how many entries on Free Republic have been dedicated to the incident.
My guess is that Mr. Lopez will be featured in a new AFA video on "silencing Christians."
But as I reiterated before, I want to hear the entire story. If Mr. Lopez's version of the story is true, then I hope a suitable solution is reached.
However, given the track record of his allies, I have more than enough reason to doubt Mr. Lopez's version of the story.
For now that is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)