Comment (27)
Email
Print
del.icio.us
Technorati
diggFocus on gender politics: Seeing hate where there is none
When a homosexual person is the victim of a crime the law should not jump to conclusions.
The Democrat party, now the majority in the United States Congress, has responded to the demands one of its key constituencies --"sexual minorities" -- with legislation adding people who are subject to violence because of their "sexual orientation and gender identity" to the categories of persons covered by federal hate crime law. The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 has passed the House of Representatives and is on its way to the Senate, but President Bush has promised to veto it.
One of the problems with the legislation is that the new categories are not clearly defined. For example, the reference to "actual or perceived…gender identity" in the legislation is an effort to cover persons classified as transgender, transsexual, and transvestite, conditions that have been classified as psychological disorders.
Those pushing for the addition of sexual orientation and gender identity to protected categories insist that they are normal variants -- part of human sexual diversity. Others see these "variants" as deviations from the normal and evidence of underlying psychological disorders.
It is true that the American Psychiatric Association decided that "homosexuality per se" is not a sign of mental illness; however, subsequent research has found that persons with same-sex attractions (SSA) are more likely than the general public to suffer from a host of psychological problems. Four large well designed studies* found significantly higher rates of diagnosed psychological disorders among persons with SSA.
No one should be mean to the mentally ill, but when people suffer from mental illness they often interpret ordinary differences of opinion as personal attacks. By including sexual orientation and gender identity in the hate crimes legislation Congress would open the door for mentally ill persons to claim they are victims of intimidation or "hate" every time someone disagrees with them or opposes their political demands.
Gay activists consistently accuse their opponents of bigotry, discrimination, homophobia, heterosexism and hate. While it is possible that this is merely a tactic, it is also possible that at least some gay activists sincerely believe that those who uphold traditional religious teachings do have hatred in their hearts. The promotion of such thinking by federal legislation would only encourage those with psychological disorders to feel threatened even when no real threat exists.
There have already been instance of persons with SSA faking attacks and claiming they were victims of hate crimes. Consider the following cases:
• A Tamalpais High School student claimed she was pelted with eggs, had her locker and car vandalized, and has been flooded with handmade hate messages. The words "Die Fag" were spray painted on her school's wall. The school's students, teachers, and administrators responded with for an anti-hate vigil. Later the lesbian "victim" admitted to police that she faked the incidents to garner attention.
• Alex McGillis, a homosexual Boise State University (BSU) student told police in January an unidentified man beat him from behind with an object while shouting anti-"gay" epithets. Student and administration organizations organized a ‘No Oppression Tolerated, Not on Our Campus’ rally. He later confessed that his "hate crime" was a hoax and that he had used a stick and his own fists to injure himself.
• In introducing the hate crimes legislation Rep. John Conyer’s (D-Mich.) cited the death of 72-year-old homosexual Andrew Anthos in Detroit. Homosexual activists asserted that an unidentified African-American man called Anthos a "faggot" and struck him in the back of the head with a metal pipe, ultimately killing him. Investigators later determined that Anthos’ death was the result of an accidental fall brought on by severe arthritis in his neck. Anthos had also been diagnosed with mental illness and originally told police that he did not know how he was injured. He changed his story a week later to suggest that he was the victim of a "hate crime".
• At the University of Georgia in 1998, the door of resident advisor Jerry Kennedy was set on fire three times. Of the 15 hate crimes reported since 1995 at the school, Kennedy had reported 9, including the three fires, threatening phone calls and incidents of criminal trespassing. After a police investigation, Kennedy was arrested and charged with two counts of arson and four false reports of a crime, and a student who had been suspected of setting one of the fires was exonerated.
The kindest construction one can put on these episodes is that the perpetrators are suffering from a mental illness which impaired their judgment.
There are other problems with hate crime legislation. Persons with SSA are more likely to abuse alcohol, use illegal drugs, have sexual relations with strangers and/or in public places, and engage in prostitution. Those who choose these behaviors are more likely to be victims of crime than those who do not do these things. That does not mean that criminals hate persons with SSA, only that certain behaviors make a person more vulnerable to crime than others.
The tragic death of Matthew Shepard in 1998 is often cited as the reason for extending "hate crimes" protection to sexual minorities. He was a homosexual at the University of Wyoming who was savagely beaten and left to die by two thugs. However, his killers insist that they held no particular prejudice toward gays; rather they were high on methamphetamine and their aim was robbery.
Legislation which not only asks law enforcement to determine if a crime was committed, but which requires them to launch a separate investigation if the victim felt "hate" opens the proverbial can of worms. As Michael Bailey informs us in his book, The Man Who Would Be Queen, pre and post-operative transsexual males who are sexually attracted to men, frequently engage in prostitution, often without informing their clients that they are male. This can lead to a violent confrontation. Is this a "hate" crime? A man on crystal meth goes off with a stranger to have sex and the stranger robs him. Is this a "hate" crime?
Isn’t it better simply to prosecute the crime and not worry about what the perpetrator was thinking?
Dale O'Leary is a writer with a special interest in psycho-sexual issues. She is author of a soon-to-be-published book from Sophia Institute Press on marriage.
Notes
* David Ferguson et al, "Is sexual orientation related to mental health problems and suicidality in young people?" Archives of General Psychiatry, 1999, 56 (10), 876-888; Richard Herrell et al, "A co-twin control study in adult men: Sexual orientation and suicidality." Archives of general Psychiatry, 1999, 56 (10), 867-874; Susan Cochran & Vicki Mays, "Lifetime prevalence of suicide symptoms and affective disorders among men reporting same-sex sexual partners: Results from NHANES III," American Journal of Public Health, 2000, Vol.90 (4), 537-578; Theo Sandfort et al, "Same-sex Sexual Behaviour and Psychiatric Disorders: Findings from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (Nemisis)," Archives of General Psychiatry, 2001, 58, 85-91.
Robbie said: “Same sex behaviour is not normal, not natural and those who staunchly advocate its celebration are living in a world of deception.”
Luckily, your fellow citizens in Ireland don’t tend to agree with you. You’ll have Civil Unions within the next year.
David Page
I don’t understand your point. Are you implying that my name is not Robbie? If so, how would you know?
It is my name. And I reiterate what I have said in previous posts. Same sex behaviour is not normal, not natural and those who staunchly advocate its celebration are living in a world of deception.
There is no such thing as a gay identity. The very idea is in itself an ideological construct that has little to do with truth and much to do with so-called genderp politics.
Do your research.
Robbie said: “You don’t know me. You know nothing about me. My age, career, family status, religious affiliations, likes or dislikes. My sexual orientation. For authentic debate we need only one thing. Honesty.”
Wouldn’t honesty start with your real name?
Many of those who posted above seem to be engaging in 1984 double-speak. Hate is love, Bigotry is compassion, condemnation is concern. Luckily, more and more people disagree with them. Most of the civilized world is moving towards full acceptance of gay rights. Those who oppose it will, in the end, just discredit themselves.
many of those who experience same sex attractions feel that the criticisms of the gay agenda are a personal attack on them. You’ve got to be really careful here. many people in this position genuinely don’t want the attractions they experience. It’s a cross for them. Those who tell them that their salvation lies in “coming out” do them a grave disservice. Because from here the majority of these dear people go on the engage in a life of astounding homosexual promiscuity with all the risks and dangers to themselves and others. for an enlightening read check out ronald g. lee’s astonishingly frank essay “The Books Were a Front for the Porn”.
Robbie
If you follow Dale O’Leary’s ‘logic’, you could also assume there should be no laws against rape because false claims of rape exist. Dale O’Leary loves to say that people who don’t accept her narrow views of human sexuality are mentally ill.
I wonder if she knows that the inability to empathize is also a marker for mental illness.
Poor old Mekah Gordon must have serious self-esteem issues. For myself, I don’t demand to be liked, loved or even respected. I get all the like, love and respect I need from my family, my tribe and my friends. The rest of the world can do as it pleases. As long as I break no laws or seriously interfere with others’ enjoyment of life, I ask only to be left alone and tolerated. Good enough for me. In fact, if I were to develop a craving for everyone’s respect as deep as Mekah Gordon’s, I might be tempted to consult a therapist.
Paul Waters
Montreal
Marti-
1.) ‘Occuring in nature’ and ‘natural’ are not the same thing. If you had sex with a dog, would that make it natural by virtue of the fact that you did it? Our lungs aren’t designed to digest food; the rectum isn’t designed to be penetrated. To suggest that it is so is dishonest. So no, oral sex isn’t natural either.
2.) If something is ‘natural,’ is it therefore morally permissible? If I am ‘naturally’ attracted to my secretary at work, does that make it morally permissible to cheat on my wife? If I was just ‘did what came naturally’? Clearly, not gonna fly. Human beings have also had the regrettable tendency throughout history to ‘naturally’ want to kill each other. Is that ok? An act’s ‘occurence in nature’ clearly is not sufficient to make it morally permissible.
Note that, even if done poorly, I am addressing two claims, 1.) that homosexual sex is ‘natural’ and 2.) that an act’s ‘naturalness’ unexceptionally makes it morally permissible. This is to address the fundamental premise that underlies the political and social action of all homosexual advocates. This has nothing to do with hate, but rather honest, reasoned discourse, something the world needs more of. These means, if you take issue with my points or premises, address the promises, don’t blow them off under the guise of being offended, or calling them hate, or whatever. Like Robbie said, do be honest. I’d like to note that this is where honesty begins; in acknowledging when premises are true and arguments are sound. To some, even many, this may seem cold and impersonal, and inapplicable to everyday life and real people. But I say, how else to we go about determining how we should act? How we relate to one another? I had a philosophy professor who said once, countering a student who didn’t like hypothetical situations and cold proofs, that those are what constitutes ‘thinking.’
Regarding Marti’s comments to Robbie:
‘No, honesty isn’t the only thing you need for debate, you need an open mind.’
Pardon me if my perception is inadequate but isn’t your statement:
“your claim that homosexuality isn’t natural is just plain wrong” sound somewhat closed minded? Robbie has stated the verifiable scientific facts. Your statements however are wholly unverified- “Homosexuality and transexuality are normal variants found in nature.” Psychologically perhaps there is a case yet I have reservations regarding the word ‘normal.’ There is no evidence for a biological rationale for engaging in homosexual acts other than pleasure and the ‘gay gene’ remains ever elusive.
The question is not so much about homosexual orientation but acts- the part one has control over. Are these acts in accordance with the natural moral law or not? And I wouldn’t be so eager to dismiss ‘natural moral law’ as a criterion, for if one does, we have only majority consensus. And according to Marti’s opinion- that is not very much in your favour...(although i have to say I’m a bit dubious about that too...)
If anyone wants to understand the authentic Christian position I recommend ‘Beyond Gay.’ Info can be found at http://www.beyondgay.com. It is very helpful for people on both sides of the fence.
Marti,
Look up “The Medical Risks of Homosexual Sex by” Dr. John Diggs. Also, see The Bible, The Church & Homosexuality” by Timothy & Dailey. And regarding hate speech, two books are good: The Homosexual Agenda by Sears and Osten of the ADF and The Criminalization Of Christianity by Janet Folger. So much has been written about homosexuality. To Marti I’d say this: there is a reason that so many civilizations oppose homosexuality—who would procreat the race? And there’s a reason on 1.2% of males are homosexuals.
“The Corporate Resource Council endeavors to improve the work/life balance for employees and to enhance the ability of employers to attract and retain top talent. CRC’s resources provide objective analysis of the value to corporations of family- and faith-friendly employee policies. The goal of all CRC resources and programs is to equip corporate executives to establish family- and faith-friendly employee policies based on sound legal, financial and other business principles.
Current resources include White Papers and Brochures addressing the benefits that stable marriages provide to employers in comparison to domestic partner benefits, and other related issues.”
Your friend’s study has been discredited numerous times 1, 2, even by folks that are supportive of conversion therapy.
Glad you’re using a source that’s not benefiting from their “findings.”
But I can’t say I’m surprised. You’re going around spreading the lie that the new trend in gay is to have sex with infants, so your distortions aren’t really shocking.
“No, it is NOT found in nature apart from an anomaly every now and then.”
homosexuality in nature anomaly? Hardly.
“Catholics or Protestants were NOT persecuted and thrown into the death camps for simply existing, but gays and lesbians were.”
Shocking ignorance: go and read some history. Don’t try to make out that gays were somehow the saintly victims of Nazism: homosexuality and the Third Reich were hugely intertwined, and Nazis were very into destroying Christianity (or converting it into a non-semitic Aryanised form). Sexual decadence was one of the defining features of those in the inner circles of power, and this trickled down into other levels, e.g. the Hitler Youth. Funnily enough, plenty of other trendy causes were popular among Nazis, though you would never think it to listen to today’s left-wingers: if you criticise vegetarianism, neo-paganism or euthanasia you are invariably labelled a fascist, which is ironic seeing as the Nazis really digged these things.
Go to Poland and tell them that Catholics were not thrown into death camps. They will show you the very places where it happened.
Before claiming that everyone is persecuting you for being different, just remember two things: one, that people have always and will always persecute others for a wide range of different reasons, and yes, it’s always wrong; two, that plenty of homosexuals throughout history have been the persecutors, because, yes, homosexuals are just as human as everyone else.
Get over it. I was persecuted at school for being studious and not much good at sports. Do I want those who bullied me to be prosecuted for hate crimes? No! If someone thumps me, prosecute them for thumping me. If they burn my house down, throw them in prison. But for goodness’s sake, whether they love me or hate me, how can that ever be a crime? How can that ever be policed?
Marti said “First of all, your claim that homosexuality isn’t natural is just plain wrong. It may fit nicely into your religious belief, but it’s not fact. Homosexuality and transexuality are normal variants found in nature.” No, it is NOT found in nature apart from an anomaly every now and then. And if you want to learn about the pervasive medical risks of homosexual sex (which IS unnatural) see what an associate of mine researched and wrote: http://www.corporateresourcecouncil.org/white_papers/Health_Risks.pdf. Guy Adams, Dir., ValuesUSA
“Regarding hate speech, there should be no disagreement that the homosexual lobby wants to eleminate free speech, which is the main impedinent to their agenda. The only thing needed for them to succeed is our silence.”
You’ve got to be kidding me. In the USA the GLBT lobby is WEAK compared to the Christian lobby. The death of free speech would cost the GLBT community much more than it would Christians. If you haven’t noticed, there’s not an atheist or homosexual running for president. The Christian lobby is a Goliath that murders anything in its path, legislatively.
What even gives you less credibility is the fact that you quote Holocaust survivor, Pastor Martin Niemoller. You might want to take a stroll through the Holocaust museum and look for the pink triangles. Catholics or Protestants were NOT persecuted and thrown into the death camps for simply existing, but gays and lesbians were.
“Sadly, in much of my research I have found that most of the actual hostility emanates from the “GLBTQ community”.
Hostile? Hell yes, we’re hostile. We have great reason to be hostile. We are treated like trash by the criminal justice system. We don’t want MORE justice than anyone else, we simply want equal justice. Joel Robles was stabbed with a pair of scissors, TWENTY TIMES, and her murder got 4 years in prison. Chanelle Pickett’s murderer got 4 years for stuffing a sheet down her throat. You better bet we’re gonna be hostile until we have “equal protection” under the law.
“Homosexual behaviour is unnatural; that is to say that during homosexual sex persons use body parts to accomplish functions for which those body parts were not designed.”
Nice straw man argument. First of all, your claim that homosexuality isn’t natural is just plain wrong. It may fit nicely into your religious belief, but it’s not fact. Homosexuality and transexuality are normal variants found in nature.
“Medically speaking, we can say that homosexual sex is not a biologically authentic expression of human sexual complementarity.”
Neither is oral sex, is it unnatural?
“To those of you who read this and wish to believe that I must be driven by hate to write such things I say this.You don’t know me. You know nothing about me. My age, career, family status, religious affiliations, likes or dislikes. My sexual orientation. For authentic debate we need only one thing. Honesty.”
No, honesty isn’t the only thing you need for debate, you need an open mind. Circular reasoning and staw man arguments aren’t very good debate tactics and they don’t further the debate one bit.
We ought to love persons and be willing to understand the difficulties one is going through with regards to impulses contrary to one’s nature. But acting on those impulses which corrupts the real essence of being a man and the natural set-up of a family and society ought to be controlled, corrected and treated to avoid distortion, confusion, and desolation.
Names associated with discrimination is man’s way of protecting himself from error and harm. We cannot blame society in acts of discrimination against issues which has a tendency to harm itself. We discriminate towards disordered acts not towards the person.
Page 1 of 2 : 1 2 >