Was that morally justifiable? If so, on what grounds? Quo III, why won’t you tell us?

Are you ignoring my response on purpose?

You know, the response where I agreed with you to an extent…

yet still made the point that anti-gay organizations misquoted the APA, attempting to create fear and keep H.R. 1913 from passing?

The anti-gay organizations, mind you, are the ones who came up with the claim that “sexual orientation” could protect paraphilias — harping especially on pedophilia — and specifically, themselves, said it would protect “Bizzare” sexual deviants?

I also said that the point is, overall, that these organizations harp on this legislation not because of principles, but because it includes a group against which they are personally biased?

One more thing. You said:
“Yes, no doubt they’re lying, but some lies are worse than others. If someone lies and claims that you are doing something that might in some ways be good, then it’s rather odd if you become as upset about that as you would be if someone lies and claims that you are doing something totally wrong.”

Thing is, from everything I’ve seen, the anti-gay groups harp on protecting PEDOPHILIA, specifically, — and almost everyone can agree that raping children is worse than consensual S&M. Just a thought.

If there is significant evidence that anti-S&M hate violence has emerged…then that’s something that should be looked at. But right now, that’s not the point.

Now that we are in agreement that the problem is all in your imagination and only supported by a quote from the early 80’s about “queer-bashing”, perhaps you’ll tell us:

Is is acceptable or justifiable to lie and say that paraphilias are protected by the hate crime bill?

So, I urge you, go on and prove, with police/federal records, that there is an ongoing problem with violence targeting specific paraphiliacs.

Then maybe a topic will be created for that discussion. Until the, it’s all in your imagination, and most people here don’t even seem to know where you’re going with it anyway.

Nope, not biting. You show your cards first. Prove it does exist. Then we’ll address the merits of the source and their methodology.

To make it quite clear, I did not claim that there was an ongoing problem with violence against sadomasochists. What I claimed, rather, was that individual people involved in sadomasochism have claimed that there was or is a problem. I have already substantiated this with the quote from Rubin in Coming to Power.

The request that I provide sources to support my claims wouldn’t have been necessary if you had looked more carefully at what I was actually claiming. Now, can you support your claim that there is, in fact, no problem of hate crimes against sadomasochists? What statistics are there that show that the problem doesn’t exist?

Our comments policy requires that claims be substantiated. Kindly provide the evidence that there is an ongoing problem with violence that is being directed towards S&M practitioners – but not because of their real or perceived orientation.

Federal tracking records will suffice. A single incident from the early 80’s that may have been an anti-gay target will not.

If you have evidence of paraphilia targeting, we’ll discuss whether a bill should address it. If you do not, we aren’t going to speculate over possible (but not evident) problems that exist only in your imagination.

If you don’t have anything to support this supposition about hate crimes based on paraphilias, then why are you seeking to change the subject?

Rather than discuss non-existent hate crimes that don’t need protection, let’s talk about why you think that some lies are not as bad as others and just what criteria you apply to decide whether lying about the hate crime bill is ok.

Because you sure seem to think that this lie was acceptable. Or am I mistaken? Is this an acceptable lie in your calculation?