A man was shot for being gay.

[Duskmelt]

http://www.gayagenda.com/2008/11/syracuse-man-was-killed-for-being-gay/

“There was no previous argument between these individuals, there was no previous fight, there was no bad blood,” Miguel said. “Our suspect took a rifle and shot and killed this person, also wounding his brother, for the sole reason he didn’t care for the sexual preference of our victim. Isn’t that sad? Isn’t that a sad situation that that’s the sole reason why?

Yeah... this isn't okay. We don't just kill people because they're gay. After reading this article, I feel confused- what kind of a world are we living in today? I thought that abominable acts like these are primitive things of the past. The scariest part is that it could have been any one of us.

Guy 1: I hear that the person sitting in that car outside is gay.
Guy 2: Okay, let me go get my rifle and shoot him/her.

Unacceptable. What can we do?

[CaptainSnoopy]

I am honestly I little surprised that you were not aware this kind of junk was alive and well in the US.

There is no law, no amendment, and no protest that will stop things like this. Gay men are killed because they are gay, black men are killed because they are black, women are raped and then murdered because they are women, and children are killed because they are kids.

Sick people target innocent people over who they were born to love, their gender, the color of their skin, and their age. It is evil, it is reprehensible, and ain't fair. What we can do is follow the trial of hate crimes and make sure the judges and the da's and law enforcement are taking the matters seriously and not tossing it under the rug...which also still happens in this world.

[RedneckDyke]

I could not read the article because the filter on the library computer won't let me go to the site.

What we can do about this is refuse to be victims. Get organized and armed. There is a group called the pink pistols. It is a gay handgun club. There are chapters in several big cities.

[Alecto]

For starters, the victim's family identified that she was transgender.
Which brings me to my next point: I'm in no way saying that gay folks don't get beaten / shot / killed anymore, but it does seem to happen a lot more frequently to transfolk. It's like there's all these "holidays" associated with the gay community, but the ONE day a year that I know about that the trans community gets together nationwide is set aside to remember those who have died from transphobia. That says something. And the first part of what we can do is fight at least as hard for the right of transgender people to exist as we're fighting for marriage equality.

[Rick336]

The number of anti-gay incidents are on the rise in the US. Click here for related story on 356gay.com --> http://www.365gay.com/news/080508-hatecrimes-up/

Here are more examples of anti-gay violence in 2008:

* In February 2008, transsexual Duanna Johnson was beaten by a police officer while she was held in the Shelby County Criminal Justice Center. Johnson said the officers reportedly called her a “faggot” and “he-she,” before and during the incident. In November 2008, she was found dead in the street, reportedly gunned down by three unknown individuals.

*On February 12, 2008, Lawrence "Larry" King, a 15 year old junior highschool student was shot by a classmate at E.O. Green School in Oxnard, California. He was taken off life support after doctors declared him brain dead on February 15. According to Associated Press reports, "prosecutors have charged a 14-year-old classmate with premeditated murder with hate-crime and firearm-use enhancements".

* In Rochester, New York on March 16, 2008 police say Lance Neve was beaten unconscious because Neve was gay. A man attacked Neve at a bar leaving him with a fractured skull, and a broken nose.

* In Baltimore County, Maryland on May 29, 2008 eighteen year old Steven Parrish—a member of the Young Swans subgroup of the Bloods—was murdered by Steven T. Hollis III and Juan L. Flythe after they found "gay messages" on his cell phone. They felt having a gay member would make their gang appear weak and that by killing Parrish they could prevent that perception.

* September 7, 2008 - Tony Randolph Hunter, 27, and his partner were attacked and beaten near a gay bar in Washington DC. Hunter later died from his injuries on September 18th. Police are investigating it as a possible hate crime.

* On November 7, 2008 in Newton, NC the home of openly gay Melvin Whistlehunt was destroyed by arsonists. Investigators found homophobic graffiti spray painted on the back of the house.

*On November 14, 2008, Moses "Teish" Cannon was shot and killed in Syracuse, NY for being openly gay.


Rick

[Zerbie]

The transgender Day of Remembrance is today.

I thought it was next week - may not be able to get to a vigil.
But perhaps someone else reading this can. Check and see what's in your area.

[tdogg]

I also thought the Transgender Day of Remembrance was sometime next week?

Just a disturbing read: a comment made in regards to the article in our local paper on the Supreme Court accepting the Prop 8 issue, basically stated if Prop 8 is overturned, there will be a revolt like nothing this country has ever seen, people are going to get guns and take the law into their own hands, shooting and killing gay people.

Ok, perhaps one nutcase out of a pack, but there were a couple people that liked his comment. It is a bit scary, especially when one considers the number of people who believe hate crimes don't actually exist (they are probably the same people who don't believe in the holocaust either). So, do you think if Prop 8 is overturned, we should be prepared for a violent reaction?

I also hear about more hate crimes against transgender people than others.

[Alecto]

There's already violent reactions, and we should already be prepared. :- /

[Petrese]

Trannys seem to have the worst luck with bullets, knives and sticks because we are easy targets. Someone that is gay or lesbian walking down the street tends to blend in unless they are doing a butch thing or totally flaming. And even then there is a question whether they are or aren't queer. But a lot of trannys don't pass too well and it's like putting a big fat target on our backs. Or even if we do there are always a number of things to trip us up with lovers, friends jobs that are stare you in the face blatant, like the wrong genitalia for instance.

For an example:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=5487781&page=1

I just got off of a conference call with the human rights coalition which I am a part, a great bunch of people striving to make a change. But even with this enlightened group there are a few that don't get that I have had to deal with a 24/7 discrimination not quite like my gay counterparts. Some of what we discuss as far as how to negotiate and debate issues with the public I have already dealt with on a very personal level over and over again so I pretty much know what results to expect from a number of given approaches.

This type of hate, the kind that brings on a rage and violence towards GLBT people, is not going to dissapear until things like Measure 8 and debates from church leaders about why we are so bad are a thing of the past.

[BruceChris]

Our church was overflowing, we even ran out of folding chairs, and I think half of the whole trans community was there. There was even one married couple (surprisingly easy to pull off when you're both trans).

Trans voices was there, and they led us in a choris of "Over The Rainbow".

A list of 30 names was read, with details.

After the service, it was milk and cookies, and a renewing of old aquaintances. Minneapolis is usually gay and trans friendly, most places.

Peace and Love, Bruce Chris

[Petrese]

Stop The Hate !!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb2ZOozMnlQ

[Zerbie]

Just a disturbing read: a comment made in regards to the article in our local paper on the Supreme Court accepting the Prop 8 issue, basically stated if Prop 8 is overturned, there will be a revolt like nothing this country has ever seen, people are going to get guns and take the law into their own hands, shooting and killing gay people.

Ok, perhaps one nutcase out of a pack, but there were a couple people that liked his comment. It is a bit scary, especially when one considers the number of people who believe hate crimes don't actually exist (they are probably the same people who don't believe in the holocaust either). So, do you think if Prop 8 is overturned, we should be prepared for a violent reaction?


These propositions always bring out the haters. Hate crimes rise during campaigns when these initiatives are on the ballot - I've heard the correlation made several times and based on the hate mail and death threats I've known activists to receive, I believe that assessment.

What fascinates me about that fellow's comment saying if prop 8 is overturned, citizens will take the law in their own hands and kill gay people, is that he equates prop 8 with "it's okay to kill gays." Fascinating equivalence there, especially when prop 8's proponents love to tell us how they don't hate gays, but do in fact "love" them and are "protecting" them from themselves. Let these guys keep talkin', 'cause most folks will want to distance themselves from mass murder. Eventually, this kind of comment will cause people who voted yes to question just WHAT they aligned themselves with.


However, I think that actual physical violence such as you are worried about T, is a long-shot and would be an action of a really crazy fringe. Like, angry teenagers immersed in some kind of hate group and looking for a target, maybe on a Friday night thrill-seeking venture. Or a lone individual gone over the edge like the one who opened fire on a unitarian congregation not long ago.

The risk is ALWAYS there, and these kinds of 'wars' increase the risk. But I would not expect anything like what your crazy person suggested. The real tragedy of course, is that it happens at all.

There is so much hate and so many disgusting words sprawling around the internet. Folks say the rottenest things in that venue. It is extremely unhealthy. But no, I don't envision a mass of armed christians marching into the Castro and opening fire. They do so very well just using their Bible and portraying themselves as martyrs. They won't give that up.

[FoxInSox]

I used to think the reason I just couldn't understand lunch mobs and Jim Crow was because I wasn' alive then, I was never part of the cultre.

I don't think that's right any more. I grew up in a family that mostly pretended that the concept of GLBT didn't really exist and within a very intolerant church. Until I was in my mid-twenties, I aligned very well with these narrow and rigid beliefs, including that homosexuality is a choice, it's sinful, etc.

I grieve being part of that. I grieve the damage the legalism did to me, and that I, in turn, did to those around me.

Even still...even back then...the idea of killing someone...never entered my mind! Even coming from such conservative roots, I just can't wrap my head around it. It's like pre-cal...I feel like I'm missing a peice or something. I don't understand how intolerance of a minority or oppressed group grows into murder committed by the people with the power.

I know it does, though. Every day. All over the world. If I'm not careful, the sadness of it swallows me up.

[sauu4equality]

[QUOTE=FoxInSox;63629] I don't understand how intolerance of a minority or oppressed group grows into murder committed by the people with the power.
QUOTE]

Thoughts from Pastor Hagee:
the Catholic Church is the “great whore” of scripture, that New Orleans brought the devastation of Katrina on itself by sinfully planning a gay-pride parade, that all Muslims want to destroy Christianity, that God will punish the United States if our political leaders urge Israel to give up some of its land (“This nation is going to go through a bloodbath because of what you’ve done.”), and that God sent Hitler to help drive the Jews to the promised land.
-From an article in the San Antonio Current (http://www.sacurrent.com/news/story.asp?id=69534)

They get it from leaders like Hagee. When your pastor (someone you trust more than anyone) continues to blame gay people and others for the horrible things that happen to your country, hatred is born. It starts at the pulpit. If you truly believe that gays or muslims are responsible for hurricanes and economic downturns, then why wouldn't you kill them? That's the problem. Extremist Christian leaders. The sad thing is that the extremists tend to have the largest churches. That's why Soulforce exists.

[RedneckDyke]

There is so much hate and so many disgusting words sprawling around the internet. Folks say the rottenest things in that venue. It is extremely unhealthy. But no, I don't envision a mass of armed christians marching into the Castro and opening fire. They do so very well just using their Bible and portraying themselves as martyrs. They won't give that up.[/QUOTE]

I would love to see these people try such a thing in the Castro or in another heavily gay area. The fools would probably get themselves beat up. You'd think the stereotypes would scare them away. You know, that gay men go to the gym a lot. That lesbians all play golf. You'd think they'd be scared of tangling with a bunch of ripped muscle boys and lesbians with golf clubs.:D

[Gennee]

Violence against transgender people are on the rise also. Sinesha Stewart, a transgender woman was stabbed to death repeated in the Bronx. That is a 40 minute train ride from my home. At Trasgender Day of Remembrance, a transgender man related how he was attacked and raped.

Attacks aginst GLBTQ people have risen as we become more visible. In some cirlces the economic fallout is blamed on us. Most of the transgender victims were between the ages of 15 to 25. We need to look out for one another and don't let these events stop us from moving forward.

Gennee


:'(:pray:

[Zerbie]

But no, I don't envision a mass of armed christians marching into the Castro and opening fire. They do so very well just using their Bible and portraying themselves as martyrs. They won't give that up.

I would love to see these people try such a thing in the Castro or in another heavily gay area. The fools would probably get themselves beat up. You'd think the stereotypes would scare them away. You know, that gay men go to the gym a lot. That lesbians all play golf. You'd think they'd be scared of tangling with a bunch of ripped muscle boys and lesbians with golf clubs.:D[/QUOTE]

Red - you need to see the thread "No more Mr. Nice Gay" on the faith & nonviolence forum. I was alluding to it when I said that about Christians marching into the Castro using the Bible as a weapon. They DID go in there. And they got chased the heck out. Now they're acting surprised.

[FoxInSox]

sauu4equality,

You may be right about learning hate from the pulput. That's certainly a big part of where I learned my intolerance.

It just seems like a big leap to go from intolerant ass-hole to murderer.

Or, maybe I just see it that way to assuage my own guilt.

[CaptainSnoopy]

It just seems like a big leap to go from intolerant ass-hole to murderer.

No. I agree with you. I was intolerant due to lessons learned from the pulpit. But from the love the sinner but hate the sin thought process...we thought it was justified to deny you equal rights and we thought there was some super secret gay agenda...but no one in the intolerant churches I went to ever would have advocated violence...let alone murder.

Now, that said, no one would blink twice about a parent disowning their child for being gay...and the psychologically harmful ex gay programs are things we supported. Is this wrong? Yes. Is this loving? No. But I have never been to a church that would have ever endorsed violence on someone over sexual orientation. There is a stretch.

Mainstream evangelicals and general Christian culture has a long way to go and we are wrong on many points in this debate. But they are not murderers and they are not endorsing violence. There may be extremists churches out there. We know there are. But they do not represent the mainstream.

[antiochian]

Captain, I agree that most conservative Christians probably wouldn't endorse harming lgbt people. Yet they vote against hate crimes legislation. Is that not endorsing violence, even if in some indirect way? How many times have you heard Dobson or P. Robertson or any big preacher condemning the violence against us? Does their silence not = endorsing violence?

[CaptainSnoopy]

No, I heard the same logic used in the wake of 9/11. Many people wanted pretty much each and every high profile muslim to comdemn the actions of 9/11. Frankly, I think the tactics of of the gay advocacy group in Michigan were wrong and over the top, but I am not going to ask any other gay activist group or leader to condemn the actions.

Now, as far as hate crime legislation. Though I think some may have duplicitous intention in their opposition of the laws, there are some who have valid reasons for opposition against the laws. I would be one of them. It is a feel good passage of law that would be very difficult to prosecute. It is much easier to prove that someone committed assault and battery or murder with pre meditated intent than it is to prove someone committed assault and battery with pre meditated intent AND hated the victim over race or gender or orientation. A good defense attorney could have the whole case thrown out because the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt hate was involved. In time DA's would never go for it because of the lack of conviction.

We need stricter enforcement of laws already on the books and get certain counties and municipalities to stop looking the other way. It is a good thing to be for when you want to be elected, but a hard thing to follow through on once the law is in place. We have a lot of legislation on the books in our legal system that are largely ignored or underused because of the holes in enforcement.

Now, I highly doubt my reasons are the same as Dobson's...but I do not feel that what you posit is true.

There are valid criticism we can make against Dobson, Robertson, Christian Conservative political groups, and many denomination in Western culture up to and including hate and mass ignorance and propaganda...but endorsement of violence is a stretch.

[Zerbie]

It is no stretch to point out that the climate of anti-gay hysteria which such 'religious leaders' encourage (indeed, they are the primary initiators of the anti-gay hysteria) is a climate which permits the seeds of violence to grow. By creating a societal atmosphere of pervasive anti-gay hostility, such leaders are providing a target for frightened, angry, and/or unstable people to act against. That target is lgbt people.

[Alecto]

I feel that direct activism against anti-bullying laws in schools really is promoting violence. I see no other way to interpret that, especially once they're aware of exactly what most of these laws actually say.

[Zerbie]

Now, that said, no one would blink twice about a parent disowning their child for being gay...and the psychologically harmful ex gay programs are things we supported. Is this wrong? Yes. Is this loving? No. But I have never been to a church that would have ever endorsed violence on someone over sexual orientation. There is a stretch.
.

If parents toss a 14 year old child onto the street for being gay/lesbian/trans, leaving that child no means of support and no safe place to go at night, would you not consider that action one that endangers a child?
Perhaps placing a child into such a dangerous situation borders on violence. Their hands may not wield a knife or gun, yet their actions have placed the child within reach of violence. Thus they bear some responsibility.

[FoxInSox]

FWIW, I have heard even conservative pastors preaching against violence. They aren't famous or anything, though.

I'm not sure where I stand on hate crime laws. How is any crime against another person not born from hate? If we are legislating motives, is that different from thought crimes? It does seem to me that minorities do need special protection...how can we as a society provide protection, which would prevent crimes?

(Those aren't rhetorical or attacking...those are questions I ask myself whenever the topic of hate crimes come up).

[CaptainSnoopy]

If parents toss a 14 year old child onto the street for being gay/lesbian/trans, leaving that child no means of support and no safe place to go at night, would you not consider that action one that endangers a child?
Perhaps placing a child into such a dangerous situation borders on violence. Their hands may not wield a knife or gun, yet their actions have placed the child within reach of violence. Thus they bear some responsibility.

At the point a 14 year old is tossed to the street a parent is guilty of criminal activity unless they were legally declared wards of the state or granted emancipated adult status. Those parents need t be prosecuted by laws already on the books. If a minister encouraged them to take such action, then he is an accessory to child endangerment, and abuse.

This is apples and oranges compared to the original question put to me.

[Zerbie]

FWIW, I have heard even conservative pastors preaching against violence. They aren't famous or anything, though.

I'm not sure where I stand on hate crime laws. How is any crime against another person not born from hate? If we are legislating motives, is that different from thought crimes? It does seem to me that minorities do need special protection...how can we as a society provide protection, which would prevent crimes?

(Those aren't rhetorical or attacking...those are questions I ask myself whenever the topic of hate crimes come up).

It depends upon how the legislation is written. I strongly supported (and lobbied for) passage of the last federal hate crimes bill that was considered.

What we need is proper enforcement of the laws we already have. Unfortunately, we sometimes need more laws just to enforce the ones we already have.
I'm well acquainted with the argument that hate crimes warrant heavier sentencing than non-bias-motivated crimes because they target and terrorize entire communities, not just a single victim, but since it's my belief that heavier penalties are not successful deterrents to someone hell-bent on a violent crime, I do not support increased penalties for bias crime.

What I do support is stronger enforcement. Too many local jurisdictions have turned a blind eye to hate crimes, especially against the gay community, in essence giving a free pass to the perpetrators. The last federal hate crimes bill that was considered would have involved the federal government in investigating and prosecuting hate crimes, thus greatly improving the odds that justice will be done in those cases.

[Zerbie]

At the point a 14 year old is tossed to the street a parent is guilty of criminal activity unless they were legally declared wards of the state or granted emancipated adult status. Those parents need t be prosecuted by laws already on the books. If a minister encouraged them to take such action, then he is an accessory to child endangerment, and abuse.

This is apples and oranges compared to the original question put to me.

You said "no one would blink twice" if a parent disowned a child for being gay. That's where my comment came from. And fyi, this still happens extraordinarily often.

Additionally, an authority in the Mormon church has allegedly been telling mothers that it is their obligation as Mormons to throw their gay children out of the home if they 'refuse' to stop being gay.

[CaptainSnoopy]

FWIW, I have heard even conservative pastors preaching against violence. They aren't famous or anything, though.

I'm not sure where I stand on hate crime laws. How is any crime against another person not born from hate? If we are legislating motives, is that different from thought crimes? It does seem to me that minorities do need special protection...how can we as a society provide protection, which would prevent crimes?

(Those aren't rhetorical or attacking...those are questions I ask myself whenever the topic of hate crimes come up).

I have heard a few of those as well. Legislating motives is an argument I have heard and though it is a valid one...it is not the area of my largest concern. The difficulty of prosecution allows criminals to walk. It is feel good securtity as opposed to real ones. What is feel good security?

After 9/11 we were told only ticketed passengers can enter the terminal and they need to have 2 forms of identification. The terrorists were ticketed passengers with two forms of identification. We now have longer lines with the random inspections. Now we have a new vulnerable point. I can walk into the airport with explosives strapped all over me...get to the middle of the line and pull my deadmans switch. I feel more exposed at the airport than ever before when I am in a terminal over the feel good security. But the executions of this has not only done nothing to address the problem, but it creates a new vulnerability point.

You want real security on planes. No carry on luggage. Period. Nursing mothers and people with special needs are exceptions. If you cannot carry it in your hand...you do not need it on the plane. You can carry a magazine, a pad of paper, a sub notebook...what else do you need?? This reduces likelihood of contraband, allows the TSA to focus on people and their reactions, reduces amount of bags to be searched, and speeds up the lines reducing a hit point.

Back to the original hate crimes issue. It will make a lot of people feel good if it si passed, but it will be difficult to execute and allow criminals to run free. What we need is stricter enforcement of laws already on the books in regards to assault and battery and murder.

[CaptainSnoopy]

You said "no one would blink twice" if a parent disowned a child for being gay. That's where my comment came from. And fyi, this still happens extraordinarily often.

Additionally, an authority in the Mormon church has allegedly been telling mothers that it is their obligation as Mormons to throw their gay children out of the home if they 'refuse' to stop being gay.
My assumtion was that the child was a legal adult when I made my statement. My 19 year old is still my child. When my 8 year old is 37 she will still be my child. Sorry. A person would and should blink twice when a child is turned away under the age of 18. That is abuse and child abandonment. You prosecute for those you have a chance at winning...you prosecute as a hate crime..the parents will likely win in court, be found not guilty, and never have to answer for their crimes.

[Zerbie]

My assumtion was that the child was a legal adult when I made my statement.

Given the frequency with which minor children are abandoned by their parents for their sexuality or gender identity, my assumption was you meant children under 18. Got that cleared up.

My 19 year old is still my child. When my 8 year old is 37 she will still be my child. Sorry. A person would and should blink twice when a child is turned away under the age of 18. That is abuse and child abandonment.


Good. They should.