AFA to air Hate filled TV show in Michigan

[sjbouza]

It is starting in Michigan and may be heading to a TV near you. The AFA is at it again with their hate speech. They are asking a local TV station, WOOD-TV in Grand Rapids, MI to air their one hour tv spot called "Speechless: Silencing Christians". It is suppose to be the "truth" about the big boogieman the "homosexual agenda".

Even though you may not live in Michigan I urge all of you to send this email to WOOD-TV urging them not to air this program. It is a letter from HRC to WOOD-TV.

You can see the video there too. However I believe it is a cut version. To view the full one hour spot go to the AFAs new site SilencingChristians.com.

Peace,
Scott

[originalgrissel]

WOW! Within an hour of the HRC announcing their action alert the station had pulled the offer to air the program off the table! I went to the HRC page that had the info about the program and watched about 5 minutes of it and then had to stop because it was making me so disgusted. I'm glad that the station came to it's senses.

[Rick336]

Read what the other side is saying:

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/De...aspx?id=418356


Rick

[Alecto]

::sigh:: I'm obviously going to be the only one to say it:

WOOD-TV? ::snerk::

[sjbouza]

This is just a big ploy by the AFA. They go to these stations and try to "buy" time to air their "program" and when they are denied they just turn around and say, "see we are being silenced! Why are they doing this to us? We just want to tell the truth. But they won't let us. Those "homosexual activist" are just trying to stop the truth from being told. See we told you so, now we have proof."

Now it seems that they are saying that WOOD-TV is "refusing" to air the program. They are in no way refusing. They made the offer of Saturday at 2 - 3pm and the AFA did not give any response. So it is the AFA that pulled the broadcast by not responding to WOOD-TVs offer. But it seems that the AFA and the ilk are leaving that little detail out. Isn't a half truth still a lie?

One other issue that I have is the fact that they are complaining about the disclaimers that run before and after their programs that do air. If you look at any infomercial on TV there is always a disclaimer. They are not being treated any differently than any other group or person out their that buys air time to show their programs. The station has every right to air or not air anything they wish. It is not silencing anyone. What if an Atheist group wanted to run an hour program on how there is not God. Or a Wiccan coven wanted to run an hour long program about witchcraft. You had better believe that the AFA would be the first ones out their protesting and boycotting those stations. Calling them every name in the book. They just seem to need to play the victim here once again. I applaude the station(s) that actually ran apologies before and after the airing.

They are just being a bunch of whiners. When I emailed the station, I couldn't get a call through, I asked them simply..."when will I be seeing an airing from the KKK or some anti-sametic group?" I also included some real truth for them about what the AFA is all about.

Peace,
Scott

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by Alecto

::sigh:: I'm obviously going to be the only one to say it:

WOOD-TV? ::snerk::

Yes. Their biggest sponsor is Viagra.


Rick

[tymejumper]

Well, they are so upset about free speech and an agenda, it's time we put up THEIR agenda!(as follows)

1)First things first, become a preist and molest and rape little boys, and then blame it on homosexuality. Look at history, it does repet itself so they can't say it's untrue.

2) Breed women and keep them at home with the male in power and them uncertian with no career of their own, so they can't leave and stay because of fear of being able to provide for themselves.

3) Silence all oposing opinions and use their majority of power to beat all others into submission and their way of believing.

Ok, now who wants to help me fund this program showing the Far Right Christian Agenda and how they are destroying the American Family? We could put it on WOOD 8 t.v.

Did you know I see one of their female anchors at the local gay bar from time to time?

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by tymejumper

Well, they are so upset about free speech and an agenda, it's time we put up THEIR agenda!(as follows)

1)First things first, become a preist and molest and rape little boys, and then blame it on homosexuality. Look at history, it does repet itself so they can't say it's untrue.

2) Breed women and keep them at home with the male in power and them uncertian with no career of their own, so they can't leave and stay because of fear of being able to provide for themselves.

3) Silence all oposing opinions and use their majority of power to beat all others into submission and their way of believing.

Ok, now who wants to help me fund this program showing the Far Right Christian Agenda and how they are destroying the American Family? We could put it on WOOD 8 t.v.

Did you know I see one of their female anchors at the local gay bar from time to time?

In all fairness, #1 is not a part of the design.

#s 2 and 3 though do seem to fit with what goes on.

[tymejumper]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

In all fairness, #1 is not a part of the design.

#s 2 and 3 though do seem to fit with what goes on.

I realize that all Christians can't be tarred with the same brush, however, the Radical Christian Right does not have a problem with putting out lies about us as homosexuals. Why should we not play their game? I am willing to perpetutate myths against them also. Maybe its time to get down and dirty with them, being nice is not helping.

Yes, I am very angry about the issue as you have guessed!


No Chrsitains were harmed in the making of this post.

[wmanion]

I, for one, do not advocate stooping to their level with myths and untruths. They are all ready on shaky ground because of their untruths. Our case is being made with truth and not lies. As time goes on our truth will stand the test of time, and their lies and scientific false statements will fall away. No one is trying to silence the gospel, but their hate should be silenced. We would be better served as a community by showing them the love that is inside us and not the revenge that could easily come from us. Maybe I am just overly optimistic, but I do believe it is the truth that will set us free, and this truth is slowly being revealed.

Bill

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by tymejumper

I realize that all Christians can't be tarred with the same brush, however, the Radical Christian Right does not have a problem with putting out lies about us as homosexuals. Why should we not play their game? I am willing to perpetutate myths against them also. Maybe its time to get down and dirty with them, being nice is not helping.

Yes, I am very angry about the issue as you have guessed!


No Chrsitains were harmed in the making of this post.

Because then everyone is lying.
The people not involved in either 'side' won't know what the truth is. We have to let people see the real truth that we aren't hurting anything or anyone. Then they'll get it (very gradually.)

I was talking like you are above for weeks after the election. I commented to someone that the lesson I learned from Prop 8 was that being nice and respectful and decent doesn't work. His response was "You learned the wrong lesson, then." I cussed him out a bit at the time, but he was right. The lesson I should have learned was that the no on 8 campaign (and our local no on 102 campaign) was wrong to avoid the issue. The vote was a referendum on gay relationships, and trying to 'sanitize' the gay relationship part out of the campaign was a fatal mistake in CA. (Here in AZ, nothing would have worked at this point in history, we were bound to lose in 2008.)

Anyway.

Nothing is served if we start adding to the lies. All that does is add to the pile of dishonesty and ugly smears. No way out but to clean it all up, beginning with the part we can control - ourselves.

All that being said, it's okay to be angry. It makes sense to be angry and I'm not suggesting you should silence that. If you're angry, let people know what hurt you to cause it.

[Matt Algren]

It's been pointed out that HRC's role in WOOD-TV pulling out (heh heh) was minimal. Most of the work, according to the timeline of events, was done by people from GLAAD.

Until yesterday afternoon I was of the opinion that TV stations should air the damn thing and let people see the underbelly of the anti-gay community for themselves. I've seen bits of episodes from the Speechless series, and they were silly, but not as bad as I was expecting.

In fact, I was planning on posting the program on my blog. They've got the thing up online for free viewing, and they allow embedding, so I was going to put it up with some running commentary.

Then I watched it. Well, the first ten minutes. Then I had to shut it off. It was just harmful lie after harmful lie after harmful lie. I try not to use the word too very often, but this thing is just unbridled evil, shockingly so. I know some people don't like it when we make the connection, but was this the level of rhetoric against African Americans in the 1950s and 60s?

Needless to say, I won't be posting it.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by Matt Algren

I know some people don't like it when we make the connection, but was this the level of rhetoric against African Americans in the 1950s and 60s?

Back in the 50s and 60s we didn't have the internet or emails or DVDs or YouTube. We also didn't have the American Family Association or Focus on the Family or the Traditional Values Colalition.

But, we did have the KKK and the White Citizens Council and the John Birch Society and George Wallace and Lester Maddox and mass resistance to integration. The Equality Ride for Civil Rights that traveled through the South was met with terrible violence.

African Americans were treated terribly everywhere, not just in the South. In 1910 after Jack Johnson, an African American, won the heavyweight boxing title against Jim Jefferies, who was white, this editorial came out in The LA Times:

A Word to the Black Man

Do not point your nose too high.
Do not swell your chest too much.
Do not boast too loudly.
Do not be puffed up.
Let not your ambition be inordinate.
Or take a wrong direction.
Remember, you have done nothing at all.
You are just the same member of society you were last week.
You are on no higher plain,
Deserve no new consideration, and will get none.
No man will think a bit higher of you.
Because your complexion is the same as before.

Keep in mind, this was not from the KKK. This was from The LA Times.

Rick

[tymejumper]

Zerbie,
Thankyou for your understanding and words of wisdom.

I can not resolve in myself, personally, why a person would go outside of themselves to try to take more things from me because of who I love. Why they would wish to put my life in danger with their lies. How can they say they are Christian? I hear about these types of things and I cry. It hurts me that someone can hate me so much when I am a law abiding citizen, I am a good and caring person, I pay my taxes and I take care of their loved ones and get them back home, I am good enough for that, good enough to be used by them, but I am still not good enough to be given a bit of respect. I am struggling with my anger and sadness to the point I am honestly considering going back for a few therapy sessions to work things through.

My co-workers said they could see me chained up to the White House doors wearing a tie dye shirt and protesting. It's true. I guess I would have been one of the first ones out of Stonewall bar during the police raid to fight. I am actually very self centered and mellow in personality. I take alot before I get angry, but I am angry for awhile once I do get to that point. I tend to not be very forgiving once I am there. Not one of my best quailties, but one I realize that is inherently me. I have meditated on it often.

My wife says it all takes time and just shruggs, saying I will get there soon enough with acceptance. I reminded her that even Jesus Christ got to that point and threw all the rich preachers out of the temple in anger.

A person can turn the other cheek and take the high road, but a human being only has 4 cheeks. You run out of patience and understanding and build up a healthy dose of anger. People say to not go down to their level, but you can't act honorably with someone who will stop at nothing to take everything from you. They are in the gutter and sometimes you have to go down there to get the point across about what they are doing.

I have joined with a small group here in the Grand Rapids area of like minded people who wish to change things for LGBT people. We have all emailed others to hit WOOD-TV site and send letters, I would like to believe that we made a difference. We also have done several protests that have been covered by the local news stations here. I have fired off letter after letter to the press editorials, and had them all published, but I do not know if they really make a difference except for the oppourtunity to vent my spleen a bit.

I only know that there is nothing wrong, or sinful or against God as anyone would understand him/her, with me being gay and I am not about to act ashamed for who I am or love.

Much Metta

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by tymejumper

Zerbie,
Thankyou for your understanding and words of wisdom.

I can not resolve in myself, personally, why a person would go outside of themselves to try to take more things from me because of who I love. Why they would wish to put my life in danger with their lies. How can they say they are Christian? I hear about these types of things and I cry. It hurts me that someone can hate me so much

:love :

(((((( Rebekkah ))))))


I am struggling with my anger and sadness to the point I am honestly considering going back for a few therapy sessions to work things through.

If you think it might help you feel better and be healthier emotionally, then why not?



I take alot before I get angry, but I am angry for awhile once I do get to that point. I tend to not be very forgiving once I am there. Not one of my best quailties, but one I realize that is inherently me. I have meditated on it often.

Some things are inherent to the personality. I read about Myers-Briggs (the personality profiles) and they mention at least one type that does not anger at all easily, in fact is extremely difficult to anger. But once something pushes them to a certain point, well God forbid, because then the anger is blinding and they are, to put it mildly, quite unfriendly in that state.

I thought of that from what you wrote. Sometimes personality traits are just built in to the person from birth, and this trait of yours sounds like one of those built in characteristics. If so, then you need to avoid situations that push you over that line, and when those situations CAN'T be avoided, then it is destructive for you. That's why systemic abuses that one can't avoid (like political oppression) are fairly labelled as evil. Extreme destruction on a multitude of levels.

I did not check out the latest from AFA. I've glanced over their materials in the past and found it unvarnished filth.



My wife says it all takes time and just shruggs, saying I will get there soon enough with acceptance. I reminded her that even Jesus Christ got to that point and threw all the rich preachers out of the temple in anger.

Yes.

A person can turn the other cheek and take the high road, but a human being only has 4 cheeks. You run out of patience and understanding and build up a healthy dose of anger.

Yes. Healthy anger is anger that is justified because it alerts you to wrongs, abuses, violations either physical or psychological. But it becomes unhealthy when it stays with us long-term, even if in response to a long-term unhealthy situation. The hormones the body secretes in anger can tear the body down if activated long term.

People say to not go down to their level, but you can't act honorably with someone who will stop at nothing to take everything from you. They are in the gutter and sometimes you have to go down there to get the point across about what they are doing.

I disagree that one can't act honorably. It's true you can't sit back and be all quiet, meek, and sweet. Even if we're angry though, we can - and have to - make sure that whatever we speak is true because there are people out there listening to the whole argument. Those people are going to figure out which side they want to support based on what they see and hear coming from the two sides.

When I was a teenager, 'gays in the military' was a constant political refrain. I had to walk past an ROTC recruitment post daily. There were gay activists protesting the ROTC, also there daily. What I saw every morning (at 7:30, ugh!) was a group of people in fatigues screaming invective at a group of gay activists who stood there red-faced screaming invectives right back.
While my first thought was that I supported the activists because I supported the right to serve in military, I began to question why I supported people who just stood around and screamed like a**holes all morning. The effect the whole scene had on me was to make me put off joining any activist group for about 5 years, since the impression I had was that activists are " all just a**holes."
You don't want to push away those who would like to support us but are insecure and hesitant. You want to be someone they admire and want to be around. That empowers them to speak out for equality also from within their personal context.
When we're in an argument with the AFA, we aren't really speaking to the AFA. We are speaking to the general public who is listening for what we are going to say, and evaluating the content of our responses.

I'm not saying we can never speak about our anger, or from our anger. Just that whatever we say must be true, and it must come from a desire for the right and good outcome, never sacrificing our own truth to get to an outcome. In the example you cited, Jesus acted out of anger because the sanctity of a worship temple was being polluted, and in his anger, he swept the place clear of those things that distracted from the goal (the goal being worship of the divine.) We can act from anger as long as the actions we choose embody right values. Like justice. Like equality. Like the all-American principle of fairness. Speaking only true things is one of those values.





I have joined with a small group here in the Grand Rapids area of like minded people who wish to change things for LGBT people. We have all emailed others to hit WOOD-TV site and send letters, I would like to believe that we made a difference. We also have done several protests that have been covered by the local news stations here. I have fired off letter after letter to the press editorials, and had them all published, but I do not know if they really make a difference except for the oppourtunity to vent my spleen a bit.

This is great! That's a healthy way to channel your energy, and it helps the community around you. Win-win.



I only know that there is nothing wrong, or sinful or against God as anyone would understand him/her, with me being gay and I am not about to act ashamed for who I am or love.

Much Metta

[Matt Algren]

Originally Posted by tymejumper

A person can turn the other cheek and take the high road, but a human being only has 4 cheeks. You run out of patience and understanding and build up a healthy dose of anger. People say to not go down to their level, but you can't act honorably with someone who will stop at nothing to take everything from you. They are in the gutter and sometimes you have to go down there to get the point across about what they are doing.

I only interject this because I think it might help: You misunderstand what Jesus was talking about when he said to turn the other cheek. From Walter Wink: (READ THE WHOLE THING!!!)

This passage has generally been understood by people as teaching non-resistance. Do not resist one who is evil has been taken to mean simply let them run all over you. Give up all concern for your own justice. If they hit you on one cheek, turn the other and let them batter you there too, which has been bad advice for battered women. As far as the soldier forcing you to take his pack an extra mile, well are you doing that voluntarily? It has become a platitude meaning extend yourself.

Jesus could not have meant those kinds of things. He resisted evil with every fiber of His being. There is not a single instance in which Jesus does not resist evil when He encounters it. The problem begins right there with the word resist. The Greek term is antistenai. Anti is familiar to us in English still, "against," "Anti"-Defamation League. Stenai means to stand. So, "stand against." Resist is not a mistranslation so much as an undertranslation. What has been overlooked is the degree to which antistenai is used in the Old Testament in the vast majority of cases as a technical term for warfare. To "stand against" refers to the marching of the two armies up against each other until they actually collide with one another and the battle ensues. That is called "taking a stand."

Ephesians 6:13 says, "Therefore put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand (antistenai) in that evil day and having done all to stand (stenai)."

The image there is not of a punch drunk boxer somehow managing to stay on his feet even though he is being pummeled by his adversary. It is to keep on fighting. Don't retreat. Don't give up. Don't turn your back and flee but stay in there and fight to the bitter end.

When Jesus says, "Do not resist one who is evil," there is something stronger than simply resist. It's do not resist violently. Jesus is indicating do not resist evil on its own terms. Don't let your opponent dictate the terms of your opposition. If I have a hoe and my opponent has a rifle, I am obviously going to have to get a rifle in order to fight on equal terms, but then my opponent gets a machine gun, so I have to get a machine gun. You have a spiral of violence that is unending.

Jesus is trying to break that spiral of violence. Don't resist one who is evil probably means something like, don't turn into the very thing you hate. Don't become what you oppose. The earliest translation of this is probably in a version of Romans 12 where Paul says, "Do not return evil for evil."

Jesus gives three examples of what He means by not returning evil for evil. The first of these is, "If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also." [Pay attention! This is brilliant! -MA] Imagine if I were your assailant and I were to strike a blow with my right fist at your face, which cheek would it land on? It would be the left. It is the wrong cheek in terms of the text we are looking at. Jesus says, "If anyone strikes you on the right cheek..." I could hit you on the right cheek if I used a left hook, but that would be impossible in Semitic society because the left hand was used only for unclean tasks. You couldn't even gesture with your left hand in public. The only way I could hit you on the right cheek would be with the back of the hand.

Now the back of the hand is not a blow intended to injure. It is a symbolic blow. It is intended to put you back where you belong. It is always from a position of power or superiority. The back of the hand was given by a master to a slave or by a husband to a wife or by a parent to a child or a Roman to a Jew in that period. What Jesus is saying is in effect, "When someone tries to humiliate you and put you down, back into your social location which is inferior to that person, and turn your other cheek."

Now in the process of turning in that direction, if you turned your head to the right, I could no longer backhand you. Your nose is now in the way. Furthermore, you can't backhand someone twice. It's like telling a joke a second time. If it doesn't work the first time, it has failed. By turning the other cheek, you are defiantly saying to the master, "I refuse to be humiliated by you any longer. I am a human being just like you. I am a child of God. You can't put me down even if you have me killed." This is clearly no way to avoid trouble. The master might have you flogged within an inch of your life, but he will never be able to assert that you have no dignity.

The second instance Jesus gives is, "If anyone takes you to court and sues you for your outer garment, give your undergarment as well." The situation here is dealing with collateral for a loan. If a person was trying to get a loan, normally they would use animals or land as collateral for the loan but the very poorest of the poor, according to Deuteronomy 24:10-13, could hock their outer garment. It was the long robe that they used to sleep in at night and used as an overcoat by day. The creditor had to return this garment every night but could come get it every morning and thus harass the debtor and hopefully get him to repay.

Jesus' audience is made up of debtors -- "If anyone takes you to court..." He is talking to the very people who know they are going to be dragged into court for indebtedness and they know also that the law is on the side of the wealthy. They are never going to win a case. So Jesus says to them, "Okay, you are not going to win the case. So take the law and with jujitsu-like finesse, throw it into a point of absurdity. When your creditor sues you for your outer garment, give your undergarment as well."

They didn't have underwear in those days. That meant taking off the only stitch of clothing you had left on you and standing nude, naked, in court. As the story of Jonah reminds us, nakedness was not only taboo in Israel. The shame of nakedness fell not on the person who was naked, but on the person who observed their nakedness. The creditor is being put in the position of being shamed by the nakedness of the debtor. Imagine the debtor leaving the courtroom, walking out in the street and all of his friends coming and seeing him in his all-togethers and saying, "What happened to you?"

He says, "That creditor has got all my clothes," and starts walking down to his house. People are coming out of bazaars and alleys, "What happened? What happened?" Everyone is talking about it and chattering and falling in behind him, fifty-hundred people marching down in this little demonstration toward his house. You can imagine it is going to be some time in that village before any creditor takes anybody else to court.

What Jesus is showing us in these two examples so far is that you don't have to wait for a Utopian revolution to come along before you can start living humanly. You can begin living humanly now under the conditions of the old order. The kingdom of God is breaking into the myths of these people now, the moment they begin living the life of the future, the kingdom of God.

Jesus' third example is "If one of the occupation troops forces you to carry his pack one mile, carry it two." Now these packs weighed 65 to 85 pounds, not counting weapons. These soldiers had to move quickly to get to the borders where trouble had broken out. The military law made it permissible for a soldier to grab a civilian and force the civilian to carry the pack, but only one mile. There were mile markers on every Roman road. If -- and this is the part we have left out -- the civilian were forced to carry the pack more than one mile, the soldier was in infraction of military code, and military code was always more strictly enforced than civilian. So Jesus is saying, "All right. The next time the soldier forces you to carry his pack, cooperate. Carry it and then when you come to the mile marker, keep going."

The soldier suddenly finds himself in a position he has never been in before. He has always known before exactly what you would do. You would mutter and you would complain, but you would carry it. As soon as the mile marker came, you would drop it. Suddenly, this person is carrying the pack on. The soldier doesn't know why, but he also knows that he is in infraction of military law and if his centurion finds out about this, he is in deep trouble. Jesus is teaching these people how to take the initiative away from their oppressors and within the situation of that old order, find a new way of being.

It is interesting that Gandhi said, "Everyone in the world knows that Jesus and His teaching is non-violent, except Christians." What Jesus is articulating here is a way of living in the world without violence, a way of overcoming domination in all of its forms by using a way that will not create new forms of violence. In the past, we have thought we had only two choices, either resist evil or don't resist evil. Jesus seemed to be saying, "Don't resist evil," and, therefore, non-resistance seemed to be the only alternative. Be supine, submit, surrender, flee, give up. It seems as if Jesus were asking us to be a doormat for God, to give up all concern for our own justice as well as the justice of others. Now we see in this passage interpreted in a new light, Jesus is not calling on people to be non-resistant. He is calling on them to be non-violent. He is calling on them to resist, yes, but to resist in a way that is not injurious or harmful to the other person.

[Zerbie]

Totally.