Box Turtle Bulletin

Knoxville Shooter’s Manifesto Made Public

Jim David Adkisson, the gunman who opened fire in a Knoxville, Tennessee church killing two and injuring seven others, pleaded guilty last week to two counts of murder and six counts of attempted murder. He will spend the rest of his life behind bars for his July 27, 2008 rampage at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church.

During the course of the investigation, it was revealed that Adkisson left a hand-written manifesto in his pickup truck in which, according to police, he expressed “hatred of the liberal movement, Liberals in general, as well as gays.” Despite public calls for police to release the text of the letter, police kept it private as the investigation continued.

After last week’s sentencing hearing, Adkisson released the four-page letter to the Knoxville News Sentinel which posted it on its web site earlier this week. In the letter, which Adkisson intended to be a suicide note, he made clear that he hated all things “liberal”:

Liberals are a pest like termites. Millions of them. Each little bite contributes to the downfall of this great nation. The only way we can rid ourselves of this evil is kill them in the streets. Kill them where they gather.

I’d like to encourage other like minded people to do what I’ve done. If life ain’t worth living anymore don’t just kill yourself. do [sic] something for your Country before you go. Go Kill Liberals.

Tell the cop that killed me I said, “Thanks. I needed that!”

Adkisson was also clear that he considered his actions a hate crime. He made a special point in explaining that by emphasizing his hatred of “damn left-wing Liberals.” He also described his rampage as a “political act.” Matthew David Chamberlain, a 47-year-old nonviolent sex offender who shared a cell with Adkisson, told the News Sentinel, “He said if he got out (of prison), he’d do it again.”

In Adkisson’s letter, he listed all of the news networks that he believes are destroying America. His list included all major national broadcasters. Fox News was noticeably absent from the list. Adkisson also said he wanted to kill all Democrats in the House and Senate, as well as everyone listed in Bernard Goldberg’s book, 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken Is #37). But since he judged them to be inaccessible, he decided to go after “the foot soldiers” attending the Unitarian Universalist church that Sunday instead:

Don’t let the word church mislead you. This isn’t a church, it’s a cult. They don’t even believe in God. They worship the God of Secularism. These sick people aren’t Liberals, they’re Ultra-Liberals. This is a collection of sicko’s, weirdo’s + homo’s. [sic] The UU church is the Fountainhead, the veritable wellspring of anti-American organizations like Moveon.org, Code Pink, and other un-American groups.

Those people are absolute Hypocrits. [sic] They embrace every pervert that comes down the pike, but if they find out your [sic] a conservative, they absolutely Hate you.

… I’d like someone to do an exposé on this church, it’s a den of un-American vipers. They call themselves “Progressive.” How is a white woman having a niger [sic] baby progressive? How is a man sticking his dick up another man’s ass progressive?

Reading this screed reminds me of some of the more entertaining comments we’ve collected on this web site, as well as some of the more colorful emails I’ve received on a few occasions. Yes, they are out there, and they’re not as uncommon as you might think. Consider just about any comment left on the WorldNetDaily web site, or even this comment on the Sentinel’s web site:

Ya know, with the exception of killing people, which is wrong under any circumstance, even liberals, he’s pretty much right. This so-called liberal movement will destroy the American way of life. Liberals hate America and are extremely dangerous to our freedoms and liberty. Mark my words, check back here in a couple years, if this Obama-Nation has not yet utterly destroyed itself, so I can say I told you so.

The full text of Adkisson’s manifesto is after the jump.

Civil Unions Passed By Hawaii House

The Honolulu Advisor is reporting that the state House has passed legislation to enact civil unions.

The state House yesterday passed a bill to legalize civil unions among same-sex partners, a vote several lawmakers believe will help end discrimination against gays and lesbians in Hawai’i.

The bill, which now moves to the state Senate, would grant partners in civil unions the same benefits, protections and responsibilities as married couples under state law. The state would also recognize civil unions, domestic partnerships and same-sex marriages performed in other states.

It appears that the bill passed with veto-proof support but that, as we reported earlier, the fate of the bill in the Senate may be strongly influenced by one man.

State Senate President Colleen Hanabusa, D-21st (Nanakuli, Makaha), said yesterday she believes there are enough votes in the Senate for civil unions if the bill moves out of the Senate Judiciary and Government Operations Committee. The committee is currently divided 3-2 in favor of civil unions, with state Sen. Robert Bunda, D-22nd (North Shore, Wahiawa), undecided.

The suggests that the committee has moved towards support and now all that is needed is for Sen. Bunda to abstain of be absent for the vote if he cannot find it within himself to enact a more equal setting for his neighbors. And should that fail, it appears that the Hanabusa may take steps to get this bill though the Senate with Bunda’s support.

While the bill has many opponents – the usual crowd – it does have one unexpected supporter.

Debi Hartmann was the co-chair of Hawaii’s Future Together, the (secretly) Catholic-Mormon joint effort that successfully organized a referrendum in 1998 that changed the constitution to allow the legislature to deny marriage rights to same-sex couples. Since that time she has changed her position and now favors civil unions (and is considering marriage). From the Bay Area Reporter:

Last week, Hartmann testified before a legislative committee on behalf of HB444, Hawaii’s civil unions bill. The bill passed through committee and may be heard before the full House as early as this week.

It does appear at this point that Hawaii will have civil unions enacted in this legislative session.

Hawaii House Passes Civil Unions Bill

A bill to provide for civil unions in Hawaii has passed the state House yesterday. The House vote was 33-17, just one vote shy of a veto-proof outcome.

The bill now goes to the Senate, where the Senate Judiciary and Government Operations Committee is divided 3-2 in favor of civil unions, but one member, Sen. Robert Bunda (D-North Shore, Wahiawa), is undecided. If it makes it out of committee, Senate President Colleen Hanabusa believes there are enough votes for it to pass. Hanabusa said she would consider forcing the bill out if it fails in committee. Doing so only requires a one-third vote of the Senate.

The bill would grant partners in civil unions the same benefits, protections and responsibilities as married couples under state law. The state would also recognize civil unions, domestic partnerships and same-sex marriages performed in other states.

When The Son Of A Megachurch Pastor Gets Caught

I hesitated to post on this, mostly because Preacher’s Kids (PK’s) have it tough. They don’t get to grow up and make all the normal mistakes the rest of us are allowed to make. Everything they do can threaten their parent’s very job. If the kid screws up, everyone in the congregation knows about it, and all the weight of scrutiny falls on that pastor — and in turn, on that pastor’s kid.

Imagine that pressure compounded with growing up in an anti-gay church as a gay kid.

So here we have, a preacher’s kid screwing up. Actually, he’s not a kid anymore. He’s twenty-nine. But his father’s not just any pastor either. He’s T.D. Jakes, the pastor of the Dallas megachurch The Potter’s House and a best selling author.

The son of T.D. Jakes — the Dallas megachurch pastor who’s called homosexuality a “brokenness” and declared that he would never hire a sexually active gay person — was arrested in a gay sex sting in Kiest Park in January, according to Dallas police reports.

Jermaine Donnell Jakes, 29, faces a charge of indecent exposure after allegedly exposing himself in front of two undercover vice detectives shortly after 10 p.m. on Jan. 3. Senior Cpl. Janice Crowther, a DPD spokeswoman, confirmed Thursday, Feb. 12 that the detectives were both male.

Young Jakes grew up in a church that condemns homosexuality, and in a culture which is quite homophobic. People who don’t have the personal freedom to be out often turn to less legitimate outlets for sexual contact. In this case, a public park. The overwhelming majority of people who are picked up in these kinds of sweeps are those who claim to be heterosexual, and most of them are married. They are desperate to conceal their homosexuality, which is why anonymous sex in public parks is so appealing to them. Take away the need to conceal, and the public sex will diminish drastically.

This isn’t to excuse what Jermaine did, but it does explain a lot why he and others like him do what he did. I hope he takes this episode as the impetus he needs to break free from his trap. After all, what is there left to conceal now?

This continuing condemnation and rejection is toxic. It entraps people who don’t experience the safety of being true to themselves. As long as that continues, there will be more Jermaines making the news. Jermaine screwed up. He’s responsible for what he did. Nevertheless, I can’t help but feel bad for Jermaine’s humiliation. He’s not only being humiliated locally where this sort of exposure is normally limited, but his humiliation is nationwide. And that national exposure is strictly because of who his father is, and because of the message of exclusion and condemnation his father preaches.

Which is why I don’t feel sorry for T.D. Jakes. Those are his chickens he’s seeing in the morning paper, each and every one of them coming home to roost.

Bill Clinton Will Cross A Picket Line To Collect His Speaking Fees

We asked yesterday whether Clinton will honor a boycott of the Manchester Grand Hyatt in San Diego, or speak before the International Franchise Association which is holding a convention at the hotel. The other alternative, of course, would be to move the venue for his talk as others have done.

The Manchester Hyatt boycott began when it was revealed that Doug Manchester contributed $125,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign to strip thousands of Californians of the right to marry. Manchester owns the Manchester Grand Hyatt as well as the San Diego Marriott Hotel and Marina, which are also being boycotted. Yesterday, eight prominent supporters of organized labor and gay marriage released an open letter to Clinton requesting that he call off or move the speaking engagement.

But a spokesman for the former president said yesterday that Clinton will speak at the Hyatt. I wasn’t aware that franchisees were one of his favored causes. It can only be his exorbitant speaking fees. Money before principle.

Anti-gay Arguments We Don’t Bother With (And Should): Part 4

This is the fourth post in a five-part a series about anti-gay arguments that get the short shrift in public debate. We examine them here. Readers are encouraged to contribute to the discussion below.

#4: Being gay is a choice.

That old canard. In the past few years, the question of whether being gay is a choice has been posed to many politicians. Most recently, Gov. Sarah Palin, referring to an openly gay friend, said that being gay is “a choice I would not have made.”

It is really a two-part question. First, are homosexual feelings a choice? Second, is engaging in “homosexual acts” a choice?

1. The debate is really about whether being gay is a central, immutable component of one’s identity or whether it is malleable, subject to change. Even ex-gay therapists acknowledge that homosexual feelings aren’t chosen, but they do think you can choose to change them. Many groups — primarily religious ones, but also some professional organizations like NARTH — champion ex-gay therapy and argue that homosexuality is the product of psychological trauma during childhood (i.e. being too close to mom, not close enough to dad). Despite scientific evidence, they resist any acknowledgment of the role biology plays in sexuality, perhaps because if something is viewed as biologically encoded, then it is less likely to be changeable.

As someone who underwent ex-gay therapy for many years, I can confidently say that all the bonding time with my dad did nothing to change my sexual orientation — and there is little independent evidence that it does. Ex-gay therapists rattle off success percentages, but no one of them keeps track of how their patients do years out of therapy. To date, there are no long-term studies showing that gays can change except for the dubious Spitzer study. Many people involve themselves in the nature-versus-nurture argument about the origins of homosexuality, but it’s really academic: does it matter? Whatever the origin of homosexuality, for at least a good number of gay people, it is not something subject to change. And why change? The only reason people try to do so is because of social pressure.

One counterargument that I’ve always found slightly offensive is: if being gay were a choice, no one would choose to be gay; look, being gay is so awful and makes your life so hard. Without dismissing the actual hardship that many gay people across the country face, perhaps this response could be reformulated in a way that doesn’t make being gay sound like an affliction.

2. It is, however, a choice to engage in “homosexual acts.”

But the burden is really on those who hold anti-gay views to show why it is wrong for gay people to express themselves sexually. Sexual expression is a natural human inclination — and a basic feature of adult life. Depriving someone of this strikes at the heart of human dignity. What is interesting is that no one loves to talk about gay sex like anti-gay activists, who dissects it in vivid, pornographic detail. The disgust at things like oral or anal sex is nothing short of juvenile. It evinces discomfort with the human body; it takes the “eww” of fifth grade sex ed. and amplifies it.

Often people who say being gay is a choice refer to a ridiculous fantasy world they call the gay lifestyle — ah, those free-for-all nights of high-stylin’, drunk dialin’ on Fire Island, oral sex in Central Park, AIDS. It would be silly to deny that gays party on Fire Island or that anyone has ever had sex in Central Park, but this is not required of gay people. Gay people have stable relationships, some have families; the lifestyles of gay people are as diverse as they are for straight people. Straight sex clubs exist, straight people engage in public lewd acts. If you want to see promiscuity, go to the m4f section on Craigslist’s “casual encounters.” Yet we do not refer to this as the “straight lifestyle.” Anti-gay activists say being gay is a choice because they imagine a false dichotomy: you either live a morally upright straight life or you descend into the miasma of sex, drugs, disease and death that is the gay world. The real choice is between living a lie and not.

FRC: Lesbians Led To Octuplets’ Birth

Everyone’s talking about Nadya Suleman. She was the California single mother of six who gave birth to eight more. These octuplets were a result of fertility treatments. Comments have been all over the map. Pro-lifers questioned her decision but praised her for giving life to six more children. Ta-Nehisi Coates, on the other hand, asks us to imagine the reaction if she had been a black woman. Meanwhile, the Onion recoiled, “Uh oh. Eight Aquariuses living under the same roof for the next 18 years—yikes.”

It didn’t take long however for someone to finally getting around to blaming the gays. Leave it to Tony Perkins at the the homo-obsessed Family “Research” Council to do it:

Last week, taxpayers learned that they would be partially liable for the family’s care through hundreds of dollars in food stamps and disability payments. The news fueled even more conviction that the fertility doctor should have refused the procedure. But is he really to blame–or are our courts? In California, the state Supreme Court made it virtually impossible for a physician to exercise his own judgment after two lesbians sued in 2001 for the right to be artificially inseminated over the doctors’ personal or social objections.

Update: The problem, of course, is that the Surpreme Court only held that a physician cannot withhold treatment because of the patients sexual orientation. It said nothing about any other considers outside of the state’s protected classes of race, creed, color, sexual orientation, national origin, etc. Physicians can find many reasons to withhold treatment, including ethical ones. Discrimination however is not legal. And since Suleman’s case had nothing to do with discrimination, the FRC’s argument is utterly senseless. But you probably knew that, didn’t you?

More Details Come Out on Larry King’s Killer

A year ago this week, 14 year old Brandon McInerney calmly walked up and shot two bullets into the back of 15 year old Larry King’s head. The students who knew both children said that King was killed because he was gay.

Almost immediately, McInerney’s lawyer started an image campaign designed to present King as the aggressor and McInerney as the victim. The pinacle of his efforts came in July of last year when Newsweek’s gossip writer Ramin Setoodeh ran a hit piece on King, claiming that he “flaunted his sexuality” and engaged in “inappropriate, sometimes harmful, behavior” and insinuating that King was a sexual predator who pushed McInerney beyond his breaking point.

Many in the gay community, being kind of heart and sympathetic to those who are hurting, joined the voices of those who called for leniency for McInerney.

And unless you’re heartless, one can feel badly for a kid who was raised economically disadvantaged in a family without structure and perhaps subjected to teasing. It is easy to think that this is just an otherwise good kid that snapped and in a brief moment acted impulsively. Maybe compassion would be a better response than incarceration in a cold penal system.

But in October, the LA Times revealed some information that suggested that perhaps Brandon McInerney wasn’t the all American good kid that his defense team would have us believe. We learned that he had a fascination with Adolf Hitler and like to doodle swaztikas. And the prosecution’s insistance on trying the child as an adult – with hate crimes enchancements – seemed less callous.

Until now the district attorney has not told the prosecution’s side of the story. But now the LA Times has reviewed court documents which tell of a very different Brandon McInerney and a very different Larry King.

Lawrence “Larry” King wasn’t sexually harassing fellow eighth-grade student Brandon McInerney in the weeks leading up to King’s shooting death, prosecutors contend in court documents.

McInerney was the aggressor, teasing the effeminate King for weeks and vowing to “get a gun and shoot” him, according to a prosecution brief.

The additional charges of the prosecution include:

• McInerney looked for other to join in a gang beating of King in the days before the shooting. Unable to find others interested he decided to kill King.
• McInerney was familiar with the gun with which he killed King, having used it for target practice.
• It wasn’t until King had suffered months of being called “faggot” by McInerney and others that he began to retort by making sexual taunts to McInerney.
• Other students heard McInerney threaten to shoot King in the days before he did so.
• In addition to the skinhead and neo-Nazi materials, McInerney also had a training video called “Shooting in Realistic Environments”.

It is difficult to know the appropriate response when a very young kid commits a premeditated act of murder, especially when the motivation appears to be bias based. But as more of this story comes out, it seems less like a mystery of children behaving impulsively and more of a cautionary tale about cauldrons of hate and the tragedies they brew.

This is, for all, a tragic story and a time for introspection. I truly wish all of those who are called to serve justice on this case much wisdom, compassion, and the ability to look to what is best for society.

BREAKING: Lesbian Couple Obtain Marriage License In Arizona

In what was supposed to be a demonstration on National Freedom to Marry day yielded a surprising turn of events for one Tucson couple (KGUN9):

A demonstration to make a point about same sex marriage led to a surprise at the Pima County Courthouse Thursday.  As part of what’s called Freedom to Marry day, same sex couples around the country attempted to get marriage licenses. Two men say the clerks turned them down after they crossed out female on the forms and replaced it with male, but two women walked out with license in hand.  The couple says they made it clear they were both women but did not try to cross out the word male.  Superior Court Clerk Patti Noland says she doesn’t ask clerks to verify gender. She says she regards the couple’s application as a fraud.

Arizona voters passed Proposition 102 last November, which added a constitutional amendment which restricts marriage to a man and a woman.

Here’s some amateur video of the some reactions of disbelief:

The couple have been identified only as Theresa and Sheri. They have been together for two years. According to Rainbow Footsoldiers:

Clerk of Court claims that the couple lied about both being women and that the license was issued as a result of  “fraud.” This is not true. Michael and I were being denied a license at the same time two windows away. Originally the couple filled out a form with the same information we did by scratching out the gender portion. Then they returned for a second form that they filled out without the scratch out. Neither appear to be a man and they clearly told the clerk they were both female and she issued the license with her supervisor watching.

Also, Marriage Equality USA has consulted a local family lawyer who says that the license application in Pima County is not legal as the statute does not require someone to swear to their gender. Therefore, the license should be valid because the form exceeds the statute laying out how the form should be worded.

I’m no lawyer, but I doubt that “local family lawyer’s” reasoning will get very far in court.

Salt Lake Trib Columnist Speculates on Huntsman’s Motivations

When Utah Governor Jon Huntsman Jr. announced his support for civil unions, I wondered whether this might be an indication of his assessment of the future of Republican politics. Rebecca Walsh, a columnist for the Salt Lake Tribune wonders along a similar vein:

But [Huntsman] knows a little something about timing. After his spokeswoman’s low-key response to a Tribune reporter’s question, Utah’s moderate governor will be one of few nationally prominent Republicans open to civil unions for gay couples. Simultaneously, the governor becomes more palatable to a Democratic president who touts bipartisanship. And if that doesn’t work, Huntsman is positioned at the forefront of a Republican Party that’s getting a makeover in time for the 2012 elections.

“It immediately hurts him with core Republican voters. But long term, he has at least four years for this to play out,” says Kirk Jowers, director of the University of Utah’s Hinckley Institute of Politics. “Gov. Huntsman feels the calling to be a leader of the rethinking and reshaping of the Republican Party. He’s concerned about the future.”

Whether Hunstman is seeking to reshape the Republican Party for a 2012 run or is simply stating his heart-felt convictions, his support is a very positive affirmation that one need not be anti-gay to be a successful conservative politician.

Utah Anti-Gay Protesters Hate the Sinner

Anti-gay activists in Utah were outraged that their Governor, Republican Jon Huntsman Jr., supported – at least in principle – gay citizens and couples having rights up to and including civil unions.

This is hardly new. Plenty of conservatives have objections to equality based on their fears about what this might mean to them. Any time an issue relating to gay rights arises, ministers worry about being jailed, parents about children being exposed to the insideous homosexual agenda, and protectors of marriage fear that allowing folks to care for each other may lead to the end of Western Civilization.

Well the Utah anti-gays have given up on those fears, or pretenses of those fears. They are letting their true lights shine. (SL Trib)

Several protesters wore T-shirts that read “homosexuals are anti-species.”

The reason gay people should not have anti-discrimination jobs protection? Because they are anti-species. The reason a dependant partner should be barred from wrongful death lawsuits: anti-species, of course. And why a couple can’t make medical decisions for each other? Surely you know; it’s because they’re anti-species.

I give no credence to the nonsensical fear-based “defense” arguments. But I do acknowledge that not all of them come from a place of malice or contempt.

But “Homosexuals are Anti-Species”… yeah, that one is just bald-faced bigotry and unbridled hatred.

Twenty OK Legislators Hate The Sinner

They love to say, “Love the sinner, hate the sin.” But twenty conservative Oklahoma legislators, including our dear Rep. Sally Kern, demonstrated clearly the utter charade behind that platitude.

Scott Jones, pastor of the Cathedral of Hope-Oklahoma City, was asked to deliver the opening prayer for the Oklahoma House of Representatives on Monday. (The Cathedral of Hope-Oklahoma City was spun off from Dallas’ Cathedral of Home, the world’s largest gay church and a member of the United Church of Christ.) Rev. Jones was invited to give the prayer by Rep. Al McAffrey, who is openly gay. At the close of business on Monday, Rep. McAffery made a routine motion to have Jones’ prayer recorded in the House Journal. A Republican legislator objected, so a roll call was taken:

It was an interesting moment, and rather chaotic. One legislator commented, “We always enter the remarks.” Others wanted to read what I had said, and came over to where I was and read my hard copy and kept saying, “What are they objecting too?” Others came over to apologize. One legislator made a point of order to remind colleagues that if they were in the room, they had to vote, at which some of them fled, as some of the colleagues pointed out.

Twenty legislators, including Rep. Kern voted against recording the prayer. Sixty-seven voted in favor. And get this: as many as seventeen fled the room so they could be counted as absent. The prayer wasn’t controversial as far as I can tell. The only objection I can discern was the fact that the speaker was gay.

Love the prayer, hate the “pray-er”.

[Hat tip: Dallas Voice Blog]

Former Pres. Clinton To Break Manchester Hyatt Boycott?

Former President Bill Clinton makes a lot of speeches and gets paid a lot of money to speak. This Sunday, he’s scheduled to speak before the International Franchise Association in San Diego, which just happens to be meeting at the Manchester Hyatt.

The Manchester Hyatt has been under a boycott ever since it was learned that Doug Manchester contributed $125,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign to strip thousands of Californians of the right to marry. Manchester owns the Manchester Grand Hyatt as well as the San Diego Marriott Hotel and Marina, which are also being boycotted.

A coalition of advocates and community leaders have signed an open letter asking President Clinton to move his speech so as to not violate the boycott.

Sean Kennedy Murderer Denied Parole

We reported last month that Stephen Moller, Sean Kennedy’s murderer, was seeking parole this month. We’ve now learned that Moller’s request for parole was denied Wednesday morning.

Stephen Moller was originally charged with murder for the death of Sean Kennedy, 20, who was attacked outside a Greenville County, S.C. bar on May 16, 2007. Witnesses said that Moller shouted anti-gay epithets at Kennedy before attacking him. Sean died of his injuries. While Moller was originally charged with murder, a grand jury reduced the charges to involuntary manslaughter. Moller pleaded guilty to those reduced charges and was sentenced to five years. That sentence was then reduced to three, minus seven months for time served. Moller’s attorney said that when all is said and done, Moller will probably serve about a year and a half. With credit for time served, he is due to be released in September.

South Carolina has no hate crime law covering sexual orientation, but it does have a law that says torturing animals can get you five years in prison. Killing a gay man? Half that.

Michigan TV Station Declines To Air Anti-Gay Propaganda

The American Family Association has been flogging a paid program to television programs called “Speechless: Silencing Christians” Already one television station had agreed to air the special before backing down from a national outcry.

WOOD-TV in Grand Rapids, Michigan originally scheduled the program to air right before President Barack Obama’s Monday news conference. Program director Craig Cole decided to move it to Wednesday, saying “We didn’t feel it was an appropriate place, leading into the presidential event.” After receiving hundreds of emails, the station’s general manager acknowledged that the show “slipped through our filters,” and offered the AFA a Saturday afternoon time slot. Now we learn that the offer to air the infomercial has been taken off the table:

“We made a gesture of the 2-3 p.m. Saturday time period. It’s been 24 hours and we had no response,” Kniowski said. “Our station is being bombarded with calls and messages, and we find ourselves in the middle of someone else’s fight. Ours was a fair offer and we are removing ourselves from this matter.”

“Speechless” is a veritable tour-de-force of false accusations that the “homosexual agenda” seeks to destroy Christianity. It begins by citing Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen’s book “After the Ball” as the very agenda itself. The book, published in 1989, simply offers gay activists a set of more professional public relations techniques — the very same public relation techniques that anti-gay activists have been using for decades.

The offense that Kirk and Madsen committed, of course, is in denying anti-gay activists a monopoly on those techniques. And boy are they outraged. This latest television program is a perfect example of the AFA’s following Kirk and Madsen’s formula to a tee — with the added mix of false accusations, one-sided reporting of events, and the time-honored fear-mongering slander that gay activists pose a sinister threat to children.

All of this effort is directed towards convincing Americans that Christians are under assault by “homosexualists”, and that if we’re not all careful everyone will be “forced” to accept LGBT people as citizens deserving of civil rights, freedom from bullying, assault and murder, or even the simple right to visit dying partners in hospitals.

Of all the nerve!

“Speechless” is the latest attempt among anti-gay activists to portray Christians as a persecuted minority, even though they make up more than three-quarters of the population — and a rather religious population at that. According to the American Religious Identification Survey taken in 2001 (PDF: 452KB/47 pages), only 16% of Americans described themselves as secular or somewhat secular, while 75% regarded themselves as religious or somewhat religious.

And if there’s any question as to who’s being persecuted, all we need to do is revisit the latest hate crime statistics. According to the FBI, hate crimes against gays and lesbians continued to increase in 2007, contradicting the overall trend of fewer hate crimes since 2006. Crimes based on sexual orientation very nearly tied those based on religion for second place:

Of the religion category for 2007, anti-Jewish offenses 1,010 of the total. Anti-Catholic and anti-Protestant combined make up only 124 offenses for an anti-Christian total. And of those, only 23 were attacks against persons. The rest were crimes against property.

In fact, we noted earlier that hate crimes based on sexual orientation continue to be the most violent type of hate crime by far. Attacks based on sexual orientation are much more likely to be physically violent than in any other category:

While we are still disturbed that WOOD-TV continued to offer to air the AFA’s hate-filled propaganda, we nevertheless congratulate them for listening to the outcry raised in this debacle. Let’s hope other station managers around the country don’t fall into the same mistake.