| Speaking of faux Christians...
Why is Peter LaBarbera allergic to the truth? This pitiable man, who ironically runs an organization with the word "Truth" in its name, is unfortunately so desperate for media attention that he continues the half-truths and slurs, even as he whines about name-calling.
Look at this interview. DZ: Recently, you received some death threats posted on an Internet blog. The threats were obviously serious; your address was published on the blog for over three weeks and the thread went so far as to describe how snipers could lay in wait for you. How has this affected you on a personal level?
PL: This will not deter me in any way. Actually, I have heard from several pro-family activists and groups that fight the self-styled "queer" agenda and many others have received death threats. My old boss, Beverly LaHaye, founder of Concerned Women for America, used to travel with bodyguards, as I'm sure other pro-family leaders do today. The Left in America is an evil force. It's that simple: the blog that Barry Wick, the guy who made the "sniper" threat, posted on is run by a fanatical lesbian activist named Pam Spaulding who is quite open with her anti-Christian bigotry. She's a hater, through and through. Because the Left defines "hatred" in ideological terms - in this case the Judeo-Christian worldview that homosexual behavior is wrong - they take an ends-justifies-the-means approach toward their enemies. And so Spaulding heaps the most vile accusations against Christians - she agreed with one post on her blog that compared an African-American minister who prayed against "gay marriage" to mass-murdering cultist Jim Jones - yet somehow she views herself as tolerant. With the Left being as extreme and radical as they are, we have to be careful but we will never let them intimidate us from telling the truth. He has no idea what my beliefs are. Perhaps he should read my post on my faith, This I believe; the sad truth is that the Dominionists attempt to deny LGBT people and pro-LGBT allies their sincere beliefs and faith because it doesn't jibe with the vengeful hateful God that the fringe worships. I don't need to wear my religious beliefs on my sleeve, and certainly don't need to impose them on anyone.
The man whose knickers get in a twist over "name-calling" has no problem dishing them out ("vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist" and "A nutty lesbian blogger" are just a couple of them), and tries, along with his insecure friends, to create controversy where none exists.
This is the "professional 'Christian' set" at work.
How about some facts:
1) LaBarbera's address and the "threat". They were left in the comments by commenters, not me, in an otherwise innocuous news roundup I posted called Saturday this and that. One item in the roundup linked to blogger Kevin Kaatz's discovery that Peter's organization, Americans for Truth about Homosexuality, is listed as as a gay advocacy non-profit. As Kevin noted in a subsequent post, LaBarbera himself provided his home address as the business address for AFTAH, so it was available to anyone searching the Guidestar.org non-profit database at the time; and the information is part of the government's records for the non-profit. The better part of wisdom suggests that LaBarbera should have used a PO Box if he didn't want someone to inadvertently assume it was a business location in the database, not a home address.
That said, I have never endorsed publishing anyone's private information (phone or home address) online and certainly don't endorse making threats. There are too many crazies across the political spectrum who will act out inappropriately, even illegally with little provocation.
2. The comments were taken down as soon as I was alerted to them. LaBarbera keeps harping on how the offending comments were left up for three weeks, declaring my tacit endorsement of them. This is absurd. Perhaps he has 24/7 to scour the internet, surf and work on defeating The Homosexual Agenda, but I simply have no time to venture back into every comment thread to read or reply to what people are chatting about. I have a full time job (more on that later), and spend the little free time I have while online to writing content, and reading/answering email. Not only that, I am not responsible for someone else's commentary, any more than any blog community. Does Peter have a problem with the commenters over at Free Republic or Red State or Little Green Footballs?
When someone sent me a link to the original inflammatory Concerned Women for America article about the "threat" by Wick (btw, neither Peter nor CWA's Barber bothered to contact me prior to running the hit piece), I immediately went back and searched, found the post and deleted the comments. I've had trolls post my home address and phone number before, and because of that there is zero incentive for me to allow that crap on my blog. I took it down immediately and wrote LaBarbera personally to tell him that I was removing it, and banned the commenter for violating the Blend's community guidelines. I wrote about it here.
LaBarbera replied, posted that information to that effect on his site, but then started harping on the three weeks that the comments were up anyway. I guess he already had this storyline written up for maximum drama queen effect. So much for good faith efforts.
3. The "threat" angle deflates, so they try again. Wick apologized and also wrote an apology that was faxed to Peter via the CWA offices. LaBarbera then posted the letter on his site, accepting the apology. Law enforcement found that the threat was too vague to prosecute, so the matter was closed.
Unfortunately, I guess that wasn't in the script, so Peter and Co. had to move on another front -- to try to discredit me by mounting a media/email/calling campaign to my employer about me, painting the portrait of this "fanatical lesbian anti-Christian activist" to them, hoping to 1) get a response/condemnation, or 2) get me fired, or 3) both. Never mind that my employer is not connected to the Blend's content in any way, shape or form. The misleading articles kept coming anyway.
While in the end, none of the above worked, the disturbing thing here is that we're talking about attempts to silence voices of dissent through intimidation and fear. My pointing out religious hypocrisy by simply quoting the unhinged, faux Christians of these fringe organizations, discussing the never-ending stories of pastors and priests abusing their position by sexually assaulting and molesting innocent children, or even calling LaBarbera "Porno Pete" doesn't prevent them from writing the hateful, misguided, rants about "homosexualists" or going undercover in gay bathhouses to do "research." Peter has little credibility and he knows it -- what is the point of comparing me to Fred Phelps, for example -- does he think anyone will take that seriously?
What are they afraid of -- that my critique of their less-than-Christian behavior might be seen by someone and called out for what it is? All I have to do is share with readers what these folks are saying to show how far off the rails these moralists are, and how embarrassing they are to people of faith who want no part of the hateful garbage and junk science. The religious right takes no responsibility, and have no sympathy for the LGBT victims of violence, crimes often perpetrated often by people who do it in the name of religion. That's the Base readership of these fringe AmTaliban movements, those are the people that keep their organizations afloat. They are not the ones denied civil rights and freedom -- they are the ones who have been lobbying to ensure that LGBT citizens are denied rights.
4. Another example of making something out of nothing. ("she agreed with one post on her blog that compared an African-American minister who prayed against "gay marriage" to mass-murdering cultist Jim Jones"). What is Peter talking about here? Notice the description of it is vague. He's referring to this post: Crazy NJ clergyman rants over passage of civil union bill. It was about Pastor Vincent Fields, who was booted from the NJ legislature after spouting an anti-gay "prayer" on the floor of the state Senate, where he "cursed the spirit that would come to bring about gay marriage," and said "is there going to be polygamy? Should we have five wives? I don't know what they're going to do next."
Commenter kevinbgoode wrote a several paragraph entry responding to the post: I can't imagine anyone's "marriage" struggling more than
one which involves two of these nutcases mated together. We've seen plenty of news stories about the most unhinged of the superstitious producing children who they later abuse, neglect or physically and/or mentally torture - yet these crazies are still allowed to tie the knot and produce children "in Jesus' name."
As usual, the bible beaters deliberately miss the real questions which are involved in forming committed, life-affirming relationships - but since they are so wrapped up in surface appearances rather than spiritual substance, it's easy to see they've never explored those before making their own relationships. How many Ted Haggards can sit in an automobile and suddenly confess his meth/massage sin to a reporter with his wife and children sitting right there? How many gay couples throw their children in cages (like a case in Ohio, I believe) and torture them into memorizing bible passages with little access to decent food or physical freedom? How many married gay couples have taken their three year old son (like another Godly looney tune in Florida a year or so ago) and beat him to death out of fear the child may grow up to be a (shudder) homosexual?
Wackos like "Rev" Fields aren't any better than the Jim Jones cult which lured followers to Guyana and kool-aided them to death in the name of the "Lord." These evildoers, who seem to be oblivious to the closeted activities in their own organizations, within their own churches and parishes, thrive on operating a business by promoting misery and hate.
This is the "Christmas" season - a time when we are supposed to think of others and wish them joy and peace and happiness. That is, unless you are a member of a fundie organization. To them, this is the season to step up the hate rhetoric, proclaim utter disaster, drain the pockets of their duped followers of even more cash, and shun the poor and the meek with the same viciousness which they use to condemn the gay community.
It can also be the loneliest time of year for single gay Americans - mostly because of the "tradition" of these hate organizations to encourage division within families, create conflict among relatives, and purge gay christians from their neighborhood churches. And this is a story, naturally, which is never told in the "mainstream" media - in fact, it is too seldom told in our OWN media. But for as long as I can remember, any single gay person who is rejected and ostracized by their controlling, christo-fascist families during this season of evangenital purity, always knows that the gay bars are open. And many of them sponsor buffets and dinners so that patrons can celebrate the holiday with acquaintances and strangers, rather than those brainwashed by the satanic hatemongers who promote the evangenital agenda.
Those celebrations were a direct result of the con-servative "Christian" agenda - one which encouraged so much destruction within families that siblings were separated from each other and children ostracized from their parents. It is a tradition which con-servatives celebrate every time someone like Fields opens his piehole and starts to bray on about others - in the name of the white baby Jesus.
If we had a genuine holy day wish this year - and one for the New Year - it should be that the sinful nature of these charlatans be exposed for the rabid, hypocritical social leeches they are, and that every would-be follower of this man's nonsense be held just as socially accountable for their religious choices as they hold all of us for being born.
by: kevinbgoode @ Sat Dec 16, 2006 at 14:02:57 PM EST
Here's my entire comment in response to kevinbgoode that PP is citing as my agreement: here, here
As always, Kevin, a spot-on excellent rant. These "Christians" are blinded by their hate agenda.
by: pam @ Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:21:21 AM EST Cherry-picking and stretches of this sort destroy the credibility of Peter's argument. I was in agreement with the scope of Kevin's rant because it points out hypocrisy. That's it. In the context of LaBarbera's statement (and he's cited this "example" of my supposed anti-Christian bigotry in other articles), it sounds like a call-and-response agreement specific to a statement about Jim Jones -- that doesn't exist in that comment, but that's just a technical detail for Peter.
It's clear that people in the fringe homo-obsessed anti-gay movement can't work with the facts, so they make things up to get attention that their movement doesn't deserve and doesn't receive. They continue to hang themselves with their own words.
Isn't there a little something in the bible about bearing false witness?
Also:
* This I believe
* Letter from Peter LaBarbera
* Glenn Greenwald: A hallmark of idiocy
* Arianna @ HuffPost: Limbaugh, Hannity, and the Right's Faux Fury Over Anonymous Comments |
