Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 100
  1. #21  
    Senior Member Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Matthew Shepard was a poster boy for hate-crimes legislation. He was also a poster boy because the judge refuse to allow a gay-panic defense.

    Honestly Elspeth, your position seems to be that if the March Of Dimes had an ad with a kid who didn't actually have polio, then polio clearly doesn't exist, never existed, and wasn't worth worrying about.




    Show me where the defendant identifies as gay, I missed that. It's not relevant, but you state it with such certainty that I would like to see it.





    How much money would he make from a book that wasn't sensational?



    You said "one more time with logic". You clearly have no concept of logic. Even if absolutely everything about the Matthew Shepard murder was a lie, up to and including the fact that Matthew Shepard actually is alive and owns a Baskin Robbins franchise in Portland, it doesn't change the reason for gay activism regarding attacks on gay people. Are you blind, stupid, or legitimately ignorant on this subject? Matthew Shepard was not the body of the problem, he was presented as the picture of it. If he's not what he appeared to be, it doesn't mean that anti-gay hate crime is made up.

    What you cannot and will not admit to is that in this country violence and discrimination against gay people is fomented by Christianity and certain churches and religious political groups.



    For all you know he's a serial killer who moonlights as a clown. All you care about is that you ignorantly believe that his book somehow justifies your stupidity.


    So to you its ok to be dishonest to push a perverted agenda? thats good to know. Its also good to know integrity is still alive and well.
    We're from Philadelphia, We Fight- Chip Kelly
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    9,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Matthew Shepard was a poster boy for hate-crimes legislation. He was also a poster boy because the judge refuse to allow a gay-panic defense.
    Let's go through this one more time.

    • Matthew Shepard was the "poster boy" for something he hadn't suffered.
    • The murder was a community-internal matter which had nothing to do with straights.
    • Because of the Shepard fraud, straights were made to feel that innocent young gay males were being murdered at a rate deserving a rush job into hate crimes legislation and into other elements of the gay agenda.

    What's wrong with this picture?


    your position seems to be that if the March Of Dimes had an ad with a kid who didn't actually have polio, then polio clearly doesn't exist, never existed, and wasn't worth worrying about.
    You jumped a logical step. Here's the logic, assuming the March of Dimes raises funds for polio:

    • Polio is rare, but still exists.
    • The March of Dimes collects money for polio; some of this money goes to the disease and some goes to operating expenses.
    • If the March of Dimes solicits money for polio by putting up a poster child that does not have the disease, they are perpetrating a fraud.
    • Polio may still exist, but people have the right to refuse money to the March of Dimes and to get them prosecuted for fraud.
    • Because of the fraud, doubts are raised about the prevalence of polio, since the charity had to find a fake victim to drum up donations.



    That last one is why the media hasn't touched "The Book of Matt"; if people learn that Matthew Shephard was not a victim of "homophobia", but murdered by a fellow GLBT drug addict to whom he was selling, they will wonder exactly how prevalent "homophobic hate crime" is since the activist movement had to find a fake victim to drum up support for their cause.





    Show me where the defendant identifies as gay, I missed that. It's not relevant, but you state it with such certainty that I would like to see it.
    The defendant was bisexual and had had sex with Matthew. That alone qualifies him as GLBT. (That would be the "B" portion.) He was well known in the gay bars of Laramie. This was a community-internal matter.



    Even if absolutely everything about the Matthew Shepard murder was a lie, up to and including the fact that Matthew Shepard actually is alive and owns a Baskin Robbins franchise in Portland, it doesn't change the reason for gay activism regarding attacks on gay people.
    Everything about Matthew Shepard was lie. So the question is why did the gay activists have to lie? If hate crime against gay males is so prevalent, there should be a large number of available real cases for activists to exploit. Why create a lie?

    The only answer to that is that gay males are not being murdered just for being gay on a regular basis.



    Matthew Shepard was not the body of the problem, he was presented as the picture of it. If he's not what he appeared to be, it doesn't mean that anti-gay hate crime is made up.

    See above. If you have to create a fake case, then that sheds doubt on your claims that there are a lot of these cases.

    Think of Rosa Parks for a minute. She was an activist, a leader of the NAACP in Alabama. So, she was no innocent lady who was just tired and wanted a seat on the bus. She planned her move; in fact the NAACP planned her move and had her legal defense ready.

    Nonetheless, Rosa Parks was the real deal. She was a black woman, living under Jim Crow laws, in a state that made her sit at the back of the bus because, and only because, of her color. So no matter what her motives were, she was indeed arrested for being black and sitting in a "white" seat. She may have been the pre-planned "poster child", but she was still the genuine article.

    Matthew Shepard was never the genuine article. He was a gay meth dealer, dealing drugs within the GLBT community. His killer was bisexual, had had sex with him and had bought drugs from him. His killer was well known in local gay bars. His killer pistol-whipped another male on the same night that he killed Shepard and for the same reason: he needed a fix.

    There is NO genuine article in any of this. There was no straight "homophobe" who killed Matthew because he was gay. The "gay defense" could have been broken down in a few minutes with the testimony of local bartenders and members of the GLBT community. Then the murder would have been seen for the community-internal matter that it was. However, that would not have served the agenda.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    If Matthew Shepard wasn't a saint it has no bearing on the larger issues. If Rosa Parks was having an affair with MLK and being followed by a limousine it doesn't change the reason for the bus boycott.
    It does if the reason that she was asked to give up her seat was because she was having an affair on it. Parks was arrested because she refused to give up her seat, and was ordered to do so because she was black. Therefore, she was harassed for being black. Shepard was not murdered for being gay, he was murdered as a result of his drug dealing. That's the critical and obvious difference, which you are trying to obscure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    The reason the right wing is jumping on this is because the religious right steadfastly refuses to acknowledge the role of their religion and churches in the violence against gay people.
    I wasn't aware that the Bible had anything to say about violence against crystal meth dealers. That must have been the Book of Heisenberg, in the Breaking Bad Gospels. The reason that the left jumped on this was to create the narrative that Christianity and Judaism are the cause of violence against gays (while the left refuses to acknowledge the one religion that is virulently anti-gay, and which does exhort violence, i.e., Islam). Now that the truth is out, it absolves religion of any culpability in this death, and puts unwanted scrutiny on the left's habit of faking hate crimes in order to advance its agenda.

    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    Nova was right about the defendant in the Matthew Shepard case using the gay panic defense-even if they were all a bunch of drug addicts, the defendant stated he killed him because Matthew made homosexual advances to him. It helped him avoid the death penalty.

    Then Fred Phelps and his wacky cult family showed up for the funeral and the story started changing.

    Murder is murder in my book. If the defendant's claims were true, and he killed Matthew out of panic because Matthew expressed homosexual desires in his direction, does that mean the defendant had the right to kill him? I know what some here would say, but I'm pretty sure you wouldn't say that.

    If the article is right and the whole thing was due to a drug deal gone wrong, then isn't the defendant still guilty of murder? He thought he could get sympathy for the homosexual panic claim and he did-he's still alive and not on death row.
    You're missing the fact that the murder led to a series of hate crimes laws and cultural responses, all of which were based on the assumption that the murder was the result of hatred for LGBTs, rather than a meth deal gone bad. Would there be a Matthew Shepard Foundation, or a Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act if the truth had been known? Nobody here is advocating for the murderers, but the murder was used as propaganda against a fictitiously bigoted America that had to kowtow to LGBT activists in order to shed the stigma of complicity in this death. That is dishonest, and if it proves anything, it's that Americans are so un-bigoted that they will put up with almost any lunacy in order to protect people who are different. The whole aftermath of the Shepard trial was one long insult to American tolerance and decency, and now that it's been shown up as a fraud, the least that those who made the false claims can do is apologize.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post



    You're missing the fact that the murder led to a series of hate crimes laws and cultural responses, all of which were based on the assumption that the murder was the result of hatred for LGBTs, rather than a meth deal gone bad. Would there be a Matthew Shepard Foundation, or a Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act if the truth had been known? Nobody here is advocating for the murderers, but the murder was used as propaganda against a fictitiously bigoted America that had to kowtow to LGBT activists in order to shed the stigma of complicity in this death. That is dishonest, and if it proves anything, it's that Americans are so un-bigoted that they will put up with almost any lunacy in order to protect people who are different. The whole aftermath of the Shepard trial was one long insult to American tolerance and decency, and now that it's been shown up as a fraud, the least that those who made the false claims can do is apologize.
    Incorrect. The hate crimes laws and cultural responses were already in motion and would have found another vehicle in the absence of Mathew Shepard. If you want a damning truth, it's about our society in general that it takes a wispy blond boyish man being killed by a WHITE man to get people upset and start changing minds. As long as America could convince themselves that the victims were street hustlers or park lurking perverts then they could blame the victims for being attacked. The simple truth is that anti-gay violence has continued unabated since Matthew Shepard, so his place in the picture really isn't more than symbolic.

    Long before Matthew Shepard, Trev Broudy was attacked by negroes who stole a car in Los Angeles and drive over an hour to find victims in West Hollywood. The most anger the gay community could manage over that was that the district attorney wasn't able to declare it a hate crime despite the victims being white and gay and the perps being black and heterosexual. As it turns out, the criminals went to prison. But more recently in Washington DC we have the case of a straight black male attacking a gay black male outside a DC gay bar and getting prosecuted for battery despite the victim being dead as a result of the attack. That criminal got six months.

    If you are legitimately ignorant of the body of crime being committed against gay people then you can be forgiven, if however you are being deliberately blind to it then you are complicit.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Incorrect. The hate crimes laws and cultural responses were already in motion and would have found another vehicle in the absence of Mathew Shepard. If you want a damning truth, it's about our society in general that it takes a wispy blond boyish man being killed by a WHITE man to get people upset and start changing minds. As long as America could convince themselves that the victims were street hustlers or park lurking perverts then they could blame the victims for being attacked. The simple truth is that anti-gay violence has continued unabated since Matthew Shepard, so his place in the picture really isn't more than symbolic.

    Long before Matthew Shepard, Trev Broudy was attacked by negroes who stole a car in Los Angeles and drive over an hour to find victims in West Hollywood. The most anger the gay community could manage over that was that the district attorney wasn't able to declare it a hate crime despite the victims being white and gay and the perps being black and heterosexual. As it turns out, the criminals went to prison. But more recently in Washington DC we have the case of a straight black male attacking a gay black male outside a DC gay bar and getting prosecuted for battery despite the victim being dead as a result of the attack. That criminal got six months.

    If you are legitimately ignorant of the body of crime being committed against gay people then you can be forgiven, if however you are being deliberately blind to it then you are complicit.


    There was also a time period in the early 90s when gay men were getting the crap beat out of them in NYC. One of our family's friends was a victim in Central Park. It was in the same time frame as the "wilding" attacks on women in NYC/CP.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    9,626
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    There was also a time period in the early 90s when gay men were getting the crap beat out of them in NYC. One of our family's friends was a victim in Central Park. It was in the same time frame as the "wilding" attacks on women in NYC/CP.
    The fact that attacks on gay men and women were occurring around the same time speaks more to general urban violence than to specific hate crime.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    9,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Incorrect. The hate crimes laws and cultural responses were already in motion and would have found another vehicle in the absence of Mathew Shepard.
    Then why didn't they?

    If these attacks are so prevalent, why did they not find an honest case?

    Why take a sordid, little, community-internal murder over drugs and pretend it was a hate crime?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
    Then why didn't they?

    If these attacks are so prevalent, why did they not find an honest case?

    Who is "they"?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
    The fact that attacks on gay men and women were occurring around the same time speaks more to general urban violence than to specific hate crime.
    Elspeth, I don't actually know what your problem is but you are indeed an idiot if you think that anti-gay violence is "general urban violence". You sound like the bunch who dismiss black on white crime as being generated by poverty, social justice issues, or income disparity. In short, you're like a Duer.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Senior Member Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Elspeth, I don't actually know what your problem is but you are indeed an idiot if you think that anti-gay violence is "general urban violence". You sound like the bunch who dismiss black on white crime as being generated by poverty, social justice issues, or income disparity. In short, you're like a Duer.

    Why do you find it ok to lie and make drama for members that number less than 3% of the population? So what if someone got beat up every now and again, its not an excuse to lie and to compare to true civil rights struggles because minorities can't choose what color they are while gays do choose.
    We're from Philadelphia, We Fight- Chip Kelly
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •