But, but but...it's the FAGS that are persecuting Christians

[Scooter]

one guy filing a paper is not quite the same thing as the worldwide jihad movement is it?

Except that it is becoming a worldwide movement, largely fuelled by right-wing Christian activists from the U.S. exporting their venom to susceptible cultures, like Russia and a number of African states. One thing that Islamofascists, right-wing Christians and Orthodox Jews agree on, in spite of all their other differences, is that gays need to be exterminated. Death penalties for being gay used to be something confined to "barbaric" Islamic countries; Christian countries have now decided that is something worth emulating and have enacted anti-gay death penalty statutes of their own, under the influence of the Christian Taliban from the U.S.

And that is just what is happening officially. I am unable to draw any distinction between a Youtube video of an ISIS beheading and a Youtube video of a gang of Russian thugs, sanctioned by the state in fact if not in law, setting upon a gay teen, forcing him to drink urine and smearing him with feces before beating him to death. But for some reason, the former justifies going to war while barely a word is spoken in opposition to the latter.

It would not surprise me in the slightest if the proposal in the OP or one similar to it were to be voted into law somewhere in the U.S.

[Lord Jim]

It would not surprise me in the slightest if the proposal in the OP or one similar to it were to be voted into law somewhere in the U.S.

It would shock the hell out of me...

[Scooter]

Well, for example, I look at Alabama, which only a few years ago voted down attempts to remove segregationist language from its state constitution, and which today is provoking a modern-day nullification crisis over same-sex marriage, and it's not much of a leap for me to believe that voters would enact anti-gay death penalty law and that an Alabama Supreme Court under Chief Justice Moore would uphold it.

[Lord Jim]

it's not much of a leap for me to believe that voters would enact anti-gay death penalty law and that an Alabama Supreme Court under Chief Justice Moore would uphold it.

Well, fighting against gay marriage versus enacting a death penalty for gays looks like a leap across The Grand Canyon to me...

BTW, though it's often asserted as though it were a fact, does anyone have any actual proof that right-wing American Christians have been recommending the death penalty for homosexuality in Africa or anywhere else?

And Vladimir Putin certainly doesn't need American fundamentalists to decide to inflame and exploit Russian prejudices...Nor do African despots need them to decide to create scape goat diversions for the failings of their corrupt regimes...

I'm willing to bet those are things that those odious dictators could have come up with without a single US right-wing Christian ever setting foot in their countries...

This argument sounds to me like saying that because anti-semitic American activists visited Germany in the 20s and 30s, (which I'm sure they did) they were responsible for the polices of the Nazi regime...

And I take serious issue with this:

One thing that Islamofascists, right-wing Christians and Orthodox Jews agree on, in spite of all their other differences, is that gays need to be exterminated.

Well, I am not a right wing Christian or an Orthodox Jew, but I strongly doubt that any thing approaching a majority, (or even a significant minority) of either group (no matter how opposed to homosexuality they might be) would support the mass murder of people for being gay...

Do you have some polling that would indicate otherwise?

[Scooter]

Well, fighting against gay marriage versus enacting a death penalty for gays looks like a leap across The Grand Canyon to me...

Does it? I imagine in Germany in the 1930s it would have seemed a similarly-sized leap, from what in retrospect were relatively mild restrictions placed the rights of certain populations, to their mass extermination, and yet we got there, step by step. Find the comparison to be as odious as you wish, I don't care. I would cringe when gay Jewish author and activist Larry Kramer made similar comparisons in the early 1980s, but it did not take long for politicians to be seriously discussing the prospect of confining a group of people who were predominantly gay to concentration camps.

BTW, though it's often asserted as though it were a fact, does anyone have any actual proof that right-wing American Christians have been recommending the death penalty for homosexuality in Africa or anywhere else?

Scott Lively admits to having a hand in the Russian anti-gay laws. And he has been charged in U.S. federal court for crimes against humanity for his role in the Ugandan laws - charges which withstood a motion for dismissal by his lawyers, meaning that judge has decided there is sufficient evidence of his culpability in the Ugandan persecution of gays to stand trial.

And Vladimir Putin certainly doesn't need American fundamentalists to decide to enflame and exploit Russian prejudices...Nor do African despots need them to create scape goats for the failings of their corrupt regimes...

I'm willing to bet those are things that those odious dictators could have come up with without a single US right-wing Christian ever setting foot in their countries...

Yes, a smart evangelist will go where he/she believes that his gospel will bear fruit. After the tide began to turn against them in the U.S., Christian anti-gay activists turned their attentions to countries where their message was more likely to be embraced. I liken it to AIDS denialists like Peter Duesberg, who were eventually made into laughingstocks in the U.S. because of the success of antiretroviral therapy in treating HIV, and so went to places like South Africa where their gospel was embraced by governments eager to avoid having to bear the cost of treating their HIV+ citizens.

Were U.S. Christian Talibangelists responsible for planting the seeds of anti-gay persecution in the minds of the leaders of those countries? Probably not, but their paw prints are all over the tactics and the rhetoric used to justify it. Does that make them any less complicit?

And I take serious issue with this:

One thing that Islamofascists, right-wing Christians and Orthodox Jews agree on, in spite of all their other differences, is that gays need to be exterminated.

Well, I am not a right wing Christian or an Orthodox Jew, but I strongly doubt that any thing approaching a majority, (or even a significant minority) of either group (no matter how opposed to homosexuality they might be) would support the mass murder of people for being gay...

Those who do support it have had enough success to concern lots of gay people and their allies around the world. Should we sit on our collective hands waiting until even more support it, before raising the alarm?

[Scooter]

Scott Lively's "Report from Uganda"

And his "Letter to the Russian People"

Notice how, in the latter, he looks towards the re-absorption of Poland and the Baltic States into Russia. No wonder why Putin was so willing to take his counsel.

[Lord Jim]

Well, I think it can fairly be said that this Lively character has every reason and incentive to inflate his importance, influence and significance, both in Africa and Russia...(the more important and effective he makes himself sound, the more money he is likely to be able to raise from the knuckle dragging bigot crowd)

And it's also not surprising that he would curry favor with Putin by spouting positions embraced by the despot...(good way to make sure that you can operate freely there; David Duke spends a lot of time in Russia as well.)

I think Putin may see him as being of marginal propaganda value, but I seriously doubt that he has any significant influence in Putin's decision making, no matter what he claims his influence to be...

And oh yes, I almost forgot...

rube:

The path to perpetual ignorance leads through self-delusion.

I'm gonna save that one; I suspect it will come in handy....

ETA:

And he has been charged in U.S. federal court for crimes against humanity for his role in the Ugandan laws - charges which withstood a motion for dismissal by his lawyers, meaning that judge has decided there is sufficient evidence of his culpability in the Ugandan persecution of gays to stand trial.

Well okay, but in looking into this, even though it has the ominous sounding title "crimes against humanity" Lively isn't really being criminally charged or prosecuted for anything; he's being sued:

Excerpted from:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014 ... erica.html

With the help of the Center for Constitutional Rights, Lively is being sued by Ugandan human rights organization Sexual Minorities Uganda for violating international law by intentionally contributing to the persecution of Ugandan homosexuals and seeking to deprive LGBT members of the Ugandan population of their basic human rights....

Potentially a landmark case, since it is the first of its kind to address human rights violations based on sexual or gender orientation, Sexual Minorities Uganda v. Scott Lively has been brought into U.S. federal court under a centuries old, yet unusually modern act: the Alien Tort Statute.

One of America’s earliest statutes, passed in 1789 by the first Congress, the ATS provides non-U.S. citizens with jurisdiction for violations of international law. Human rights abuses were not part of legal discourse 200 years ago, but the 20th century witnessed a widening of accountability for abuse. Today, the ATS is used in cases of torture, genocide, war crimes, inhumane treatment, violence against women, and crimes against humanity....

As the Center for Justice and Accountability explains, ATS cases give plaintiffs “the chance to tell their stories and the stories of those who did not survive.” These cases provide a means for exposing abuses, entering them into the public record, and helping plaintiffs “put an end to the culture of impunity that exists in their home country.”...

Since ATS cases are civil lawsuits, guilty verdicts return monetary awards to the plaintiffs. If convicted, Lively will not serve jail time; rather, he will have to pay damages.

[Joe Guy]

Well, for example, I look at Alabama, which only a few years ago voted down attempts to remove segregationist language from its state constitution, and which today is provoking a modern-day nullification crisis over same-sex marriage, and it's not much of a leap for me to believe that voters would enact anti-gay death penalty law and that an Alabama Supreme Court under Chief Justice Moore would uphold it.

Do you believe that a judge in this country has the ability to enact a death penalty that is aimed at gay people (or any group) just because they exist? That sounds way over the top to me.

I'm absolutely positive there are people that would like to eradicate homosexuals. There always has been. There are people in the U.S. who would like to eradicate black people and maybe even Canadians but I don't expect for a law to be enacted to allow that anytime soon (or ever).

[Scooter]

Well okay, but in looking into this, even though it has the ominous sounding title "crimes against humanity" Lively isn't really being criminally prosecuted for anything; he's being sued:

Well whatever it is, first a federal and then the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals found that there was enough evidence to go forward to trial. We'll have to see whether his defence rests on disputing whether he was involved (unlikely, given his writings), or whether he will assert a 1st Amendment religious freedom to orchestrate genocide based on sexual orientation.

Do you believe that a judge in this country has the ability to enact a death penalty that is aimed at gay people (or any group) just because they exist? That sounds way over the top to me.

I look at the record of someone like Chief Justice Moore in Alabama, who was already removed from office once for ethical violations for refusing to recognize the primacy of federal law (since re-elected to office by the morons-ejected-from-their-mothers'-syphilitic-uteruses brigade), with a LONG history of antipathy towards gay people, and I could very easily see him attempting to subvert any challenge to a gay death penalty law under the U.S. Constitution. So what then? Is the federal gov't going to send troops to save gays from the firing squad? A Democratic president might, a Republican president almost assuredly would not. Will straight people take to the streets of Birmingham and Montgomery and Mobile and stand fast against the water cannons and the dogs and storm troopers in riot gear, as they did 50 years ago, in defence of their gay fellow citizens? I don't count on it.

[Big RR]

Scooter--as I recall, Eisenhower (a republican) sent troops into Little Rock to enforce Brown; JFK needed to wait for the freedom riders to shame him into doing the right thing re desegregation in 1961. I wouldn't think the actions would depend on the party in power, but on the president him (or her) self.

As for straight citizens standing up for gays, don't downplay the chances of it--especially if it were over something as outrageous as illegal executions. How many people went to Florida on both sides of the Bush/Gore divide pretty much knowing it would make little difference? This would mobilize a lot more people.

[MajGenl.Meade]

The suggestion that USians (of all persuasions) would tolerate laws requiring the execution of men and women for being homosexual is both insulting and insane. Were it to happen, I'd be right there with LGBT folks in the struggle to take such people down and am certain that all manner of Christians of whatever orientation would stand alongside as well.

It is interesting (to me) that the general classification "Christian" is acceptable to use when describing the activities of a handful of aberrant persons (who claim that name) and to imply that it comments upon all of the class.

However, if we were to substitute the class name "American" and indicate that Americans are supporting the criminalisation of homosexuality in XYZ (and by extension all Americans think the same way and support it)... why then it would be totally out of order. Or liberals - or libertarians... or republicans. (Well, that last would probably get a cheer).

The whole idea goes along with the moronic suggestion that anyone believes homosexuals are persecuting Christians. I have to say I've not seen that even from some of the more rabid and detestable idiots on the lunatic fringe of their self-created false religion.

[Scooter]

And speaking of the Cradle of the Confederacy:

Today, Alabama’s House Judiciary Committee advanced H.B. 56, which allows probate judges and public officials to cite a religious reason for denying marriage licenses, putting interfaith couples, interracial couples, same-sex couples and unions where one partner is a divorcee at risk. HRC Alabama strongly condemns the legislation, which opens the door to a wave of lawsuits.

“H.B. 56 does not represent Alabama values like fairness and loving your neighbor as yourself. The bill’s foundation is rooted in a motivation to discriminate,” said HRC Alabama state director R. Ashley Jackson. “H.B. 56 will open the door to a wave of unintended consequences for countless Alabamians, and we strongly urge members of the Alabama House to reject the bill.”

The bill would also allow a religiously-affiliated hospital or other institution to refuse to recognize marriages it disagrees with. This would empower a religious hospital to refuse to allow a legally-married spouse to make medical decisions for their incapacitated partner—or allow a religiously-affiliated university to refuse to provide appropriate tax documents to an employee who has divorced or remarried.

The Hobby Lobby decision let a very dangerous genie out of the bottle.

[rubato]

Every nation must have its hindmost part.

Alabama is striving to be the asshole of the nation; led by Christian fundamentalists.




Yrs,
Rubato

[Lord Jim]

I had heard of this Lively person before, (I think in an article I read about him a while back about his involvement in the anti-gay legislation in Uganda) but I didn't know much about him...

So I had a little time on my hands this afternoon and thought I'd do some digging....

There's so much here, that I'm not going to have the time to present it all in one post, but regarding his early life:

This from Wikipedia:

Scott Lively was born and raised in the village of Shelburne Falls, Massachusetts, the oldest of six children. He became an alcoholic aged 12 as a means of coping with an unhappy family situation. When Lively was 16, his father was committed to a mental institution, never to return. After graduating from high school in 1976, Lively spent the next 10 years "drifting around the United States, often homeless, sometimes sleeping under bridges and begging for spare change on street-corners."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Lively

Now, my immediate reaction to that (cynical fellow that I am) was that this was probably a biography made up by Lively or his supporters to "romanticize" his personal story...

But I also found this from Mother Jones (certainly not a publication that would have any reason to be sympathetic to Lively)

Lively has an unusual history for a family-values crusader. A former alcoholic, he spent his late teens and 20s drifting around the country, occasionally sleeping under bridges and begging for spare change.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... law-uganda

What I have not been able to find, is an article that says, "that story is completely made up; Scott Lively grew up in a very stable middle class home"...

(Perhaps someone else can find that...)

Now, assuming that this personal history is accurate, one does not need to be Sigmund Freud or Karl Jung, or Lieutenant Colombo, to figure out what most likely happened here...

Scott Lively was sexually molested as a child, (quite possibly by his own father)...

That would certainly explain his obsessive rage about gay people...

[Gob]

Hmmmm...

"Scott Lively's Bio". The Pro-Family Resource Center of Abiding Truth Ministries. Abiding Truth Ministries. 2002–2008. Retrieved 13 November 2008.

I'd trust that as far as I could spit a cow.

long with Kevin E. Abrams, he co-authored the book The Pink Swastika, which states in the preface that "homosexuals [are] the true inventors of Nazism and the guiding force behind many Nazi atrocities."

Wow, a historian too!

[Scooter]

Yeah, that's the classic "let's try to make gays out to be oppressors" schtick that the Christian Talibangelists have taken up in various forms in the past decade or so.

[Gob]

Lots of fun stuff here; http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scott_Lively

Lively is also keen to rewrite reality as needed - if called on the fact that 15,000 gays were killed in the Holocaust, Lively will argue that the Nazis in power were butch homosexuals seeking to purge the "femmes" from the population.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Good Lord... the man is demented. Usually one doesn't judge any group by their worst "adherents" but it's easy to see how some can do that.

[Lord Jim]

long with Kevin E. Abrams, he co-authored the book The Pink Swastika, which states in the preface that "homosexuals [are] the true inventors of Nazism and the guiding force behind many Nazi atrocities."

Yeah, I found all that stuff, as well as links to his websites:

http://www.defendthefamily.com/

http://www.scottlively.net/

Appalling hate filled trash...

I hope nobody thinks I'm trying to defend this guy, or make excuses for his actions....

As I've said before, I'm a student of aberrant human psychology ; it's a hobby of mine...

I'm just trying to understand him, and put his behavior in a context...(much like the only way one could understand DBA's virulent attitude against gays and blacks was to know that he blamed a gay black man for giving him AIDS)

[Lord Jim]

What I find really fascinating about this guy, is that as public and provocative as he has been, he has no foot prints...

He claims that after drifting across the country and winding up in Oregon, he "somehow" went down to California, where he earned both a law degree, and a Doctorate in Theology...

There's no record I can find of where he was supposed to earn either of these degrees...

But neither can I find where any of the organizations opposed to him are claiming that he didn't...

I would love to find a "the truthaboutscottlively.com" website that would clear this up....

This is the truly odd conundrum....

Even his most virulent opponents don't seem to question anything about his personal history or his education...

While at the same time, there doesn't seem to be any real evidence for either...