Jesus statue the target of vandalism

[RedEarth]

Roman Catholic church in Rehoboth Beach has been repeatedly attacked

By MIKE BILLINGTON / The News Journal

12/08/2004A statue of Jesus holding two small children was discovered decapitated outside a Rehoboth Beach Roman Catholic church Tuesday morning.

The faces of the two children also were defaced, church officials said. The head of the statue of Jesus was smashed repeatedly with a blunt instrument until it was knocked off, they said.

Officials at St. Edmond Roman Catholic Church said the act of vandalism is the third in the past several weeks. Earlier, a window behind had been smashed. A church sign also was damaged, the Rev. Ray Forester said.

.......

Church Deacon John Smith, a retired New York City police officer and Korean War veteran, said the vandalism was so savage that it approaches the level of a hate crime, "against the church or maybe against religion in general."

Smith said the church has not received any hate mail or other communication that might have warned them about the attack.



http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2004/12/08jesusstatuethet.html

[Ian David]

1. Rehoboth Beach has a nasty history of anti-gay idiocy

That's not a "hate crime."

That's a politically motivated crime.

Well, that's what a "church" gets for meddling in politics.

[Moloch]

45. Ok, a lot of towns have an anti-gay history

that doesn't give people the right to deface statues. sheesh.

[Stinky The Clown]

59. That wasn't the point, I don't think

I think what was meant was that Rehobeth has a history of gay hate crime that isn't strongly dealt with, but that this vandalism is out of the gate being termed a hate crime.

There should be some balance in what hate crimes are.

[Traction]

142. It IS a hate crime

If it was on a Jewish temple or menora (or whatever), the media would be screaming hate crime. So what do you consider it then, an act of love?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. Hate crime? Give me a break

:eyes:

[Ian David]

8. Rehoboth Beach

Cape Gazette • Covering Delaware's Cape Region | Tue, Aug 10, 2004
Stonewall Democrats gather in Rehoboth Beach
By Glenn Vernon
Stonewall Democrats from all over the nation converged on the Rehoboth Beach home of Dr. Jim D’Orta Aug. 7, to raise funds for the Democratic party as well as to push for support for HB 99. Close to 300 people attended the event that featured guest speakers Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., Gov. Ruth Ann Minner and Chrissy Gephardt, daughter of U.S. Rep. Richard Gephardt.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:KA0sEHZ6TKIJ:www.cdow.org/102804.pdf+Edmond+Catholic+homosexual+Rehoboth+homosexual&hl=en


Frank spoke to the crowd of politicians, candidates and openly-gay Democrats about many issues facing the country during the upcoming elections, but focused mainly on the major differences between the Democratic and Republican parties. “The difference between the two parties regarding anything to do with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues is enormous,” said Frank, the first openly-gay member of Congress.
http://www.capegazette.com/storiescurrent/0804/stonedemocrats080604.html

[Bono71]

18. Why is it that if this were a church other than the Catholic or a

Christian church, I have a feeling that you would think it was a hate crime?

I mean, if this were a mosque it would be a hate crime, no?

[Jack_DeLeon]

31. I agree...

and I hate hypocrits.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

36. Because you are making shit up

If they had painted a swastika on the church, perhaps I would think it were a hate crime, but they vandalized a statue without any other message. If there is a Catholic school attached to the church, it is just as likely that school kids did it.

[DemBones DemBones]

51. Why do you assume school kids did it

"if there is a Catholic school attached to the church"? You assume kids who attend Catholic school vandalize statues of Christ?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

64. Yes..I went to a Catholic high school and some kids vandalized

a statue of Mary while I attended. They eventually confessed to it but the whole school was awash in fear that anti-catholic hatred via the John Birch society had done it

[Autobot77]

58. It depends

On the motivation of the people commiting the crime. If it were a mosque, I'd say there is a better chance of it being a hate crime as the current political climate has inspired several crimes against muslims or people the attackers think are muslim. In the US, attacking someone because they are Christian is rare.

[HuckleB]

46. If this isn't a hate crime, then what's the definition of a hate crime?

[Autobot77]

54. A hate crime is....

A crime where hatred of a particular group of people is the motivating factor of that crime.
This could be a hate crime or it might just be vandalism, its hard to say. If there were anti-Catholic and/or anti-Christian messages spray-painted then it would definetly be a hate crime.

[HuckleB]

57. I generally agree with your definition.

Though that's not what many hate crime laws use as their definition. Thus, by our general level of hate crime legislation, this is a hate crime.

[Autobot77]

65. Good point

What is the legal definition?Just curious.

[HuckleB]

81. Here's a fair piece on it, I suspect.

http://www.uslegalforms.com/lawdigest/legal-definitions.php/US/US-HATE_CRIME.htm

In writing, it seems much like your definition. However, in action, at least in the cases I have paid attention to, it seems like "motivation" is usually ascribed long beforehand.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

71. No...a hate crime is defined by the perp who did it

therefore, without knowing who the perp is, it does not fit a hate crime definition

[HuckleB]

79. So...

As long as we don't know who burned the cross in my African American neighbor's yard, we can't call that a hate crime?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

80. No because the act of burning the cross is self explanatory

not all vandalism is. The burning of a cross on an African American's yard has recently BEEN reaffirmed to be consistent with fighting words.

At this point, you have no clue who vandalized this church. There was no similar communication as there is when a cross is burned on an AA's lawn.

[Name removed]

83. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HuckleB]

89. Read below.

You and I both know that you are twisting and turning out of control. I haven't called anyone any names, so thanks for the false accusation.

Goodnight.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

91. Please go psychoanalyze yourself

Twisting and turning out of control? At least I answered your questions..all you can do is hurl personal insults and pretend it's a debate.

on edit: "you and I both know" ...uh, can the condescending crap..you and I BOTH know that is what you just did.

[HuckleB]

93. You're funny.

You psychoanalyze me, while making false accusations repeatedly, and then you pretend that's debate?

Oh my. It's clear that you reacted in haste, and now your pride is in overdrive.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

97. Please who the hell are you kidding?

[Cooley Hurd]

144. If an egg is splattered on a mosque, is it a hate crime?

Unless the egg runnings spell out "Go Home, Abdul," we have no idea what the intent of the egg thrower was. Same goes for the Jesus statue. There was no other clue as to motive in this case. A burning cross, however, is an oft-used method of terrorizing minorities. If there was a precedent in beheading Jesus statues by anti-Christians, then I would agree with you that this was a hate crime. But, I have to agree with NSMA - there was no message attached to this incident other than the statue damage itself. My guess is the local authorities are calling this a hate crime only to placate the fundies in their constituancy...

[DemBones DemBones]

62. When "black" churches were burned in rural areas of the South,

those were called hate crimes. I don't think there was any evidence that the burnings were racially motivated.

Since "white" churches in rural areas were also burned, I tended to think the arson was a crime but not a hate crime. Opportunistic crimes committed by people, possibly teenagers, with little common sense and nothing better to do.

If a synagogue is vandalized, does it have to have swastikas painted or drawn upon it s walls to be considered a hate crime? I don't think it does.

[HuckleB]

84. Exactly.

[DemBones DemBones]

49. Explain why it is NOT a hate crime.

It's a crime and it's clearly motivated by hate.

Just because you may have a grudge against Catholicism doesn't make this sort of act acceptable.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

63. IT was defacing a statue and could have just as easily been done

by kids...there was NO political message as there is when a black church is burned down in the south or as there is when a swastika is painted on a temple.

[HuckleB]

87. Hmm.

Could have been done by kids? Yeah, and goofy, out-of-control kids who really don't know any better could never burn down an old black church or burn a cross in someone's yard as a copycat of some adult asshole? Sorry, but what's so obvious to you, isn't so obvious to me.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

92. Sorry but it's the other way around..you're the one who has your mind

made up.

[HuckleB]

95. Wow.

What a logical response. Hmm. Sounds like you fold.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

98. No..I believe what you are doing is called triangulating

I stand by my prior posts. Prove it was a hate crime.

[HuckleB]

101. OK.

Stand all you want.

If you assume that a cross burning or the burning of a black church is a hate crime, then you have to assume that this is a hate crime. If you are willing to admit that one cannot assume that a cross burning or a the burning of a black church is a hate crime, then one cannot assume that this is a hate crime. However, you want to have it both ways. I'm sorry. You can't. Good law and justice doesn't flow from your double-standard, good-old-boy-style assumptions.

Goodnight.

Really.

Goodnight.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

106. There was no double standard, I explained exactly HOW a cross

burning could be a hate crime. You did NOT explain exactly HOW this was a hate crime.

Funny, for over a half a century crosses burning on the lawns of black people have been used as a means of intimidation.

Is there a similar standard for random statues defaced on church property? I don't think so but feel free to demonstrate it if you have evidence of such.

Sorry if actual logic is too difficult to compete with.

[HuckleB]

108. You used the example of kids doing something in ignorance.

Now you have distanced yourself from that. You've painted yourself into an illogical corner. Twist and turn all you want, the paint is hard to escape from.

Nice try, though.

Pride is a dangerous thing.

Goodnight, again, sweet prince of pride.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

112. I said it was a possibility..I did NOT say it was what occurred

and kids burning a cross on a black person's lawn would still probably qualify as a hate crime since they would have to have the concept of CROSS BURNING ON A LAWN and know what it is about in order to do it in the first place..in other words...if they had the PRESENCE OF MIND to burn a cross on a black person's lawn then they know what that CROSS burning represents.


Oh sweet prince of personal attacks..go pull your condescending crap on someone else


on edit: I never used the words "doing something in ignorance" - you ADDED that interpretation to my prior post in order to continue on this path. I simply stated there is no indication that this was anything more than vandalism. If a perp is caught and it is demonstrated otherwise, I would be more than happy to change my impression... of the crime..NOT the Catholic church.

[HuckleB]

115. Personal?

Nope. Only if your double-standard "arguments" are persons. Then, I suppose, it might be personal. It's funny. You can acknowledge the ignorance of kids who might desecrate a statue of Mary, but somehow you think it's impossible for kids to be ignorant about burning a cross?

Oh my, but that is funny. Call me condescending, if you will. I'm actually laughing. And laughter is healthy. No?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

117. Boy you are rapid cycling tonight

have fun

[HuckleB]

118. So...

you think it's not bigotry to attempt to slap another poster with a faux mental illness simply because you've got no argument and can't let your pride admit that? Sheesh. That's pitiful. You should truly be ashamed.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

119. As should you....how many sock puppets does this make?

[HuckleB]

121. "I know you are, but what am I..."

Come on. You can't even admit that you overstepped the bounds on that one? Sheesh.

I no longer put people on ignore, but I will ignore you, anyway.

:think:

[Traction]

143. It was an attack on Jesus

That's the worst act of hate that anyone can commit. Sorry, but not all Christians are on the far-right. I'm a Democrat and still am a good Christian with strong moral values.

[Misunderestimator]

146. The worst act of hate you can imagine someone committing is

destroying a statue?? Huh? I think murder and violence against actual people and threats of the same (e.g. burning crosses in blacks' yards) are for worse than the defacing of a statue that represents the beliefs of the majority in power in this country.

[Neoma]

3. person against the Jesus fan club?

boy ain't that rare:eyes:

[Worst Username Ever]

4. Ah, The Simpsons live.

[HuckleB]

90. LOL!

:hi:

[Cooley Hurd]

145. Someone goofed and confused "Jebediah" with "Jeebus..."

An oldie, but a goodie 'Simpsons.'

[Benhurst]

5. Round up the usual art critics. nt

[AlCzervik]

6. Gee, i guess O'Reilly has his lead story for tonight

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ian David]

9. Write to their local newspapers

Explain the difference between "hate crime" and "political vandalism"

[RedEarth]

10. Looks like this person did write to their newspaper in Delaware

Report of another hate crime in Delaware



Editor:

A significant number of 36th Representative Candidate Brian Dolan's campaign signs in the Milford area were vandalized with spray paint on or about Nov. 2. Nineteen of the signs read "No fags;" one sign read "Fag;" others were spray-painted without discernible words. This hate crime was reported to law-enforcement authorities as well as to a social justice organization. Before removal, the vandalized signs were seen by passing motorists, and the event was reported by a columnist in a Delaware newspaper.

The apparent reason behind this hate crime is that the candidate had supported sexual orientation antidiscrimination bill H.B. 99. Dolan himself is a heterosexual who was unfortunate enough to lose his wife to cancer and has not yet remarried in the less than two years since her death.

This blatant injustice against Dolan and against Delaware's gay community is self-evident to thinking people and should require no further comment from us except this: Our opponents themselves once again prove the need for legislation like H.B. 99. Will 2005 be the year when goodness wins out over hate in the First State?

Douglas and Corey

Marshall-Steele

Milton


http://www.delmarvanow.com/bethanybeach/stories/20041208/1714031.html

[Ian David]

13. Georgia Hate Crime Bill

Black Georgians hurt by homophobia
To the Editors:

Re “State supreme court strikes down hate crime law” (news, Oct. 29):
Here is an example of the unintended consequences of small-mindedness.

Georgia tried to introduce a hate crimes law to protect people from crimes “motivated by race, religion, gender, national origin or sexual orientation.”

Well, the forces of bigotry and homophobia didn’t like the word “orientation” being in there. Why? Apparently they wanted to be free to attack gay people, I guess.

So, they re-worded the law, and it passed, defining a hate crime as one where the where a victim is chosen because of “bias or prejudice.”

A white man and a white woman beat the daylights out of two black men, and received an additional two years on their sentence because it was a hate crime under the law, motivated by bias or prejudice.

But the sentence was overturned unanimously by the Georgia Supreme Court because the hate crimes law is “too vague.” Unintended consequences.

If the Georgia state legislature, progressive paragons of social justice that they are, had seen fit to leave the original wording intact, this would not have happened.

Sorry, black people of Georgia. It looks like you, too, are victims of homophobia.
http://www.sovo.com/2004/11-5/view/letters/index.cfm

See also:

State Supreme Court strikes down hate crimes law
Ban on crimes motivated by ‘bias and prejudice’ too vague, justices say

By LAURA DOUGLAS-BROWN
Friday, October 29, 2004

The Georgia Supreme Court on Monday struck down the state’s hate crimes law, ruling unanimously that the four-year-old statute creating enhanced penalties for crimes motivated by “bias or prejudice” is “unconstitutionally vague.”

“Because of the broad signification of these words and the absence of any specific context in which a person’s bias or prejudice may apply in order to narrow the construction of these concepts, we find fails to provide fair warning of the conduct it prohibits,” Justice Carol W. Hunstein wrote for the court.

Without a more specific definition, “any ‘bias or prejudice’ for or against the selected victim or property, no matter how obscure, whimsical or unrelated to the victim it may be … can serve to enhance a sentence,” Hunstein wrote, listing examples including a sports fan who attacks someone wearing an opposing team’s baseball hat or a sports car aficionado who stole a Ferrari.
<snip>
The version of the measure approved by the state Senate in February 2000 created enhanced penalties for crimes motivated by “actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation.”

But the measure was amended in the state House to simply ban crimes motivated by “bias and prejudice,” based on concerns that legislators would not approve a ban that specifically included sexual orientation. At the time, Georgia Equality leaders said the measure’s passage was still a victory for gay rights.
<snip>
Both defendants received six years in prison for the assault. The hate crimes law allowed the judge to increase their sentence by 50 percent or up to five years in jail, up to the maximum allowed for the underlying offense. Botts and Pisciotta received two additional years on the hate crime enhancement, but will not have to serve that extra time after the Supreme Court’s decision.

http://www.sovo.com/2004/10-29/news/localnews/supct.cfm

[AngryOldDem]

11. So the people in that particular parish

are to blame for all the sins of the Roman Catholic Church?

This is vandalism. Pure and simple. I won't speculate on a motive, but if it's like the attitude I see here, hate would be a good guess.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NYC Liberal]

16. So using your logic,

I am going to hold you responsible for what Bush does -- even if you had nothing to do with it. That's pretty much what you're saying about Catholics and the Church.

And you have no clue who does and doesn't donate, so don't just assume everyone does.

[Bono71]

20. Man..you are as bad as the repubs.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

24. Bullshit. I didn't turn Jesus into a symbol of hatred and oppression.

They did.

In the Indian culture a swastika has a very different meaning than it did to the Nazi's but guess what? The Nazi symbolism stuck. In America, Jesus has been turned into a justification for hatred, unequal treatment and oppression. Don't blame me. I didn't do that to Jesus, Christians did.

[NYC Liberal]

25. All Christians did?

Try again.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

27. Not all Christians, but they allowed their symbol to be hijacked

What's that saying that all that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing? well, Jesus has been being co-opted for right wing hatred for about a decade now....

BTW... I don't have an issue with Christians but for fundamentalists, but to the subject at hand..if JESUS is used in order to promote hatred then Jesus statues will be vandalized by those oppressed by Jesus' use.

[Bono71]

28. Isn't that like saying Muslims allowed their religion to be

hijacked and that destroying the property of a Mosque is karma?

Sounds a little hateful (and silly) to me.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

30. I didn't say it was right. I said it was to be expected.

And muslims EXPECTED shit to happen after 911.

BTW...I presume you are heterosexual and so the hatred of Christianity has cost you nothing..yeah..I'm a bit bitter by a bunch of hypocrites who use shit never once said by Jesus in order to discriminate.."My religion doesn't allow for it" has become the cop out of the century.

[Bono71]

34. There are millions of Christians who do not hate

gays/lesbians. There are also millions of Christians who believe homosexuals deserve all the respect and protections of society.

Yes, unfortunately, there are those Christians that some of us would like to lock in a closet for a few decades (or centuries).

Give it time. I would bet that in the next 25 years, some of the biggest gay activists will be Christian churches.

Oh, and as for the "God Hates Fags" crowd, as a Christian, I believe their time will come, and it won't be a good thing (for them).

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

37. It's easy for you to say, "give it time"..it's only my life

[Bono71]

38. Point taken.

[mitchtv]

47. those "millions" of Christians had better speak up and fast

It's getting pretty late in the game.BTW there is no more time left

[Lydia Leftcoast]

74. We do speak up, and nobody reports it

The loudmouth haters make better news copy, and besides, the bigots have no respect for liberal Christians and indeed, hate us worse than just about anybody, because they consider us heretics who had a chance to know "the truth" and rejected it.

They don't listen to us, and the media don't report us. :shrug:

[regnaD kciN]

77. No kidding...

In a way, our situation has become similar to that of African-Americans, who can, in the current climate, they can be dismissed with similar arguments -- where, according to White Conservative America, no African-American can be a worthy leader unless they spend 100% of their time attacking elements of their own racial group, and such "self-criticism" their primary (if not only) message. And, even then, it wouldn't be enough...

:crazy:

[NYC Liberal]

29. OK, then you need to say 'fundamentalists'

Bono71 is right. Are you saying that Al Qaeda's hijacking of the Islamic religion is the fault of peaceful Muslims? I for one would beg to differ.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

32. I usually make the distinction

But were there or were there NOT some very vocal bishops during this last election cycle professing bigotry toward gay people? Catholics have let Opus Dei drive a stake through the heart of their religion.

[mitchtv]

50. just trying to get Catholics to think of something other

than the epidemic of child molesting "priests" ; an oldgOP trick. There are no Archbishop Romeros in the US. Traditional role of RC hierarchy is to support power.

[Djinn]

40. surely no more than you

and every other liberal AMerican allowed your country to be hijacked.

This was probably just some knobs with a destructive bent - they probably spent the rest of the evening breaking stuff with no religious/political connotations at all

[Bono71]

26. You love those blanket statements.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

33. and that wasn't one?

Didn't Jesus say something about the beam in your own eye? You like him so much? Take his advice.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

96. NOT all christians act that way...

When you get pissed off that people think of Gays as pedophiles or atheists as rude ass people trying to get God wiped out of existance in the US, your argument is that they are a few who make the rest of them look bad....Well, so is this. And I agree...You are no better than a republican the way you are acting. I've been tolerant about everyone else's lifestyles and beliefs....But why is it I can't get the same treatement? :grr:
Duckie

[mmonk]

35. As long as Protestants don't mind being held

responsible for Falwell, Robertson, or bush.

[Cheswick2.0]

88. sorry but that does not compute

which protestants? If you said the Baptists and Methodists you'd have a point.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

60. Your loss as well

The Catholic church was quite vocal against me this past election season...give me ONE GOOD REASON why I should defend them as I HAD DONE for the past 4 years on DU.

Wanna talk about MY bigotry? Fine then acknowledge the bigotry of your "spiritual leaders" It's there for the confronting.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

99. Wow...I'm amazed at all the hypocrisy...

You are pissed off they weren't tolerant of you, but those of us who have been tolerant of you are being treated like shit by you? WOW... I'm AMAZED.
Duckie

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

102. And you just justified your religion's bigotry further up in the thread

by claiming it is sanctioned by the bible... nice cop out...

[YellowRubberDuckie]

104. Nope...I was just saying that that's how they feel...

I never said that's how I feel. I can show you in the bible where it's at if you want. Because I do have a bible like three feet from me.
Way to shirk talking about your hypocrisy.
On edit: I'm not justifying the fact that it's in the bible. I'm telling you it's in there and THAT is where their view comes from.
Duckie

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

114. I'm telling you it's in the bible, and that's why they did it...

I'm saying you're a hypocrite because you want people to be tolerant of you and your lifestyle/beliefs/views, but when it comes to doing the same to others, you can't seem to allow yourself to be tolerant of theirs. Because you're generalizing all catholics. And that's wrong.
And Dembones is offended, and I don't blame her for putting you on ignore.
Duckie

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

116. I haven't noticed all catholics making any exceptions for certain gay folk

so..suffice it to say..it is OK for ALL CATHOLICS to discriminate against me and hide behind the dogma of their church...but I should turn the other cheek?

What difference does it make that people say nice flowery things of support to me on the board if they then go financially support an institution hell bent on using their dogma to discriminate against me?

[DemBones DemBones]

67. Since you're now on Ignore, all I see is "Ignored"

where your post would be.

I'll repeat that I am deeply disappointed in you. You went way too far this time.

[regnaD kciN]

75. I suspect that will now be true for quite a number of people...

:evilgrin:

[HuckleB]

113. In other words,

it's OK if you live a life based on double-standards, but it's not OK for anybody else.

[Tacos al Carbon]

128. Ah, now I understand your earlier posts

For a while there, your logic wasn't all that clear, but now I understand you.

[jellybelly]

17. If only Christians were liberals

It is a hate crime. If someone vandalized a Martin Luther King Jr. statue it would be a hate crime. The people responsible for this hate Christians. You can't justify it as being political because some followers of that statue aren't liberal. Vandalizing GOP headquarters is political. Defacing a religious statue is a hate crime.

[Bono71]

19. Agree 100%

[0rganism]

22. Many Christians are liberals, and many liberals are Christians

> If someone vandalized a Martin Luther King Jr. statue it would be a hate crime.

That depends entirely on the motivations of the perpetrator, as established in court, rather than the object of the crime.

> The people responsible for this hate Christians.

Perhaps. Or perhaps they are fundamentalists who hate what they call "idolatry" of the Catholic church. We don't know.

> Defacing a religious statue is a hate crime.

It certainly could be, if the motivation is a religious hatred. At the very least, it is a property crime.

[mitchtv]

53. nonsnse vandalism until there is evidence of otherwise

at least that's what they tell victims of gay bashing

[DemBones DemBones]

69. It is indeed a hate crime to deface a religious statue or a

building such as a synagogue, mosque, or church. There are legal and socially acceptable ways to disagree with any religious group's policies.

Many Catholics are liberal, by the way.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AngryOldDem]

48. Sorry, this does not justify vandalism or destruction of property

Nor does it justify the trashing of an individual's faith or belief system, which this statue represented to this particular parish.

But vandalism and violence is okay, I guess, as long as you're pissed off at the target. Makes perfect sense to me.

[politicat]

129. Retribution, which is a central tenet of Judeo-Christianity, does allow

for the destruction of other's property in retribution or revenge. An Eye for An Eye, the dashing of infants' heads against the stones, the destruction of cropland. Even Christ said he came with a sword. It didn't end with the New Testament; the violence advocated in the New Testament is just ignored.

In their belief system, they feel they would be justified in destroying a pagan shrine, a torah or a synagogue or a mosque because those places are not holy. The tables are turned. They're getting what they preach is acceptable.

I'm an atheist humanist. I don't believe in trashing other people's property. But that is because I treat people as I wish to be treated and don't ever advocate the destruction or damaging of others, their property or their egos.

Again, I was Catholic. I left because I could not stand the willful advocacy of destruction of others.

Pcat

[regnaD kciN]

72. As someone else has already pointed out...

If they disagreed with the policies of the Church, they could have left; in fact should have left.

(...)

They do not, and so are responsible for standing by and doing nothing.

(...)

They get what they deserve.

...the EXACT same logic can implicate you for whatever Bush has done so far (not to mention what he may do before leaving the White House).

For you could have left the country and moved to Canada or whereever; in fact, you should have left the country and moved.

You did not, and so are responsible for standing by and doing nothing.

And, should you or someone in your immediate family become the victim of a terrorist attack motivated by anger at Bush's policies, you get what you deserve.

[politicat]

127. See post #126. I do consider myself and every american responsible.

EOM

[DemBones DemBones]

76. In that case, all Americans are personally responsible

for all the evil the U.S. has ever done. YOU are guilty because you're here. Hope you're ready to pay for George Bush's sins.

[politicat]

126. I am... with every tax dollar, with my brothers' lives, and with the

terrible consequences of our involvement.

I, and every other american, have let him get away with murder. I am not innocent. We should have been in the streets in December of 2000. We weren't. Now we're reaping our whirlwind.

I do consider myself culpable, and thus, I work like a fiend for the Democrats and other liberal causes.

Do you?

Pcat

[DemBones DemBones]

52. That is possibly the coldest, most bigoted statement I have ever read.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

78. I totally agree....

[HuckleB]

103. Indeed.

Hear. Hear. er Here. Here.

I never know which one it is.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

70. You obviously aren't catholic...

The true principals of the church are not anti woman or anti child. The anti gay policy comes from the bible. They do not, however, turn them away or treat them like crap, and if they are doing such things, they are not following the true Christian doctorine, which is love the sinner, hate the sin. I'm not saying that this is right, I'm saying that this is how it is. As a person who has recently joined the Catholic Church, I've been researching church doctrine and the catacism, and everything you are saying is offensive and not actually true. Just because a few idiots are perverting the church, it doesn't make it right or true.
On edit: It amazes me how much some people want everyone to be tolerant of them, but they don't have to be tolerant of anyone else. Talk about hypocrisy
Duckie

[Cheswick2.0]

94. the anti gay policy does not come from the bible

and the RCC is anti woman and anti-child. The RCC is very sexist and discriminates against women and there for also children.

Did you actually join a church that teaches you the "love the sinner hate the sin" nonsense?

PS...... I do think it was a hate crime.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

100. Um, the bible DOES say that a man shall not lie down with another man...

I've read it, I've heard it, I've seen it.
Duckie

[HuckleB]

105. Yeah, sure, but what about the women?

I don't think there's anything in the Bible that directly speaks against lesbians.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

107. I'm apt to agree with you.

[HuckleB]

110. Smile.

Hey, that Rubber Duckie with a Hat rules!

[YellowRubberDuckie]

111. Thanks.

[Behind the Aegis]

130. Simplistic interpretation

It is true that there is a part of the Levitican Code that prohibits "man lying with man," but that is just the surface. It is more a law that was created to distinguish Jews from Pagans, as well as promote procreation. The thought was that semen carried small "people" in it; therefore, a male on male encounter would "kill" or "murder" the unborn. This is was also the justification for anti-masturbatory laws.

In 2000 years, I would think we as a society would have progressed past this bigotry, but it seems not. People will still use that archaic "law," while violating the other 364 laws of the Levitican Code. It is the height of hypocrisy. You must adhere to a "law" based on "my" religion, but I don't have to follow the others laws that are also outlined there.

[DemBones DemBones]

123. Cheswick, you're not Catholic yet you claim to know what

the Roman Catholic Church does. . .

Oh, never mind, you once tried to tell me that something that happened in a Presbyterian church I attended never happened. Why waste time with you?

[politicat]

133. I was Catholic - birth to age 17. Educated by Jesuits. Considered the veil

The true principles of the Church are anti-woman.
1. Women have no leadership role.
2. Women have no right to leave abusive situation without condemnation. Women who leave abusive marriages are denied sacraments. Women who leave the convent are denied sacraments, even if they leave because they've been physically or sexually abused by priests or other nuns. Women are denied absolution for leaving abusive situations.
3. Women have no right to determine when and if they should bear children, regardless of economic or physical restraints. Women who violate this edict are guilty of a mortal sin and, depending on the parish, may not be able to get absolution without risking untimely childbearing.
4. Women have been told they committed a sin (usually venial, sometimes mortal, depending on the priest) for refusing to have sex with their husbands in an attempt to control their fertility. Other women who were forced by their husbands have found no support from the Church when they pressed charges for marital rape.
5. Rape is still considered fornication to some priests.

The principles of the Church end up being anti-child when the economics of unrestricted childbearing begin to take a toll on family resources. St. Vincent de Paul's and Catholic Charities can't make up for the gap entirely for families that can't afford the children they have because they could not limit their family size. It does a child no good to grow up without basic needs being met, even with the Church's support. It harms the entire society.

Your parish may not turn gay Catholics away, but it's an exception. Every parish I've ever been in - in Arizona, California, Florida and Indiana, as well as overseas - has been pretty uniform in rejecting their gay parishoners. Further, the anti-gay doctrine falls under the same category as the slavery doctrine. Just because in the Bible slavery's okay, doesn't mean it's fine now. Prejudice against the GLBT community is equally inhumane because it's based in rules for shepherds in the Fertile Crescent written 5000 years ago. We've moved on.

I left the Church when it failed to live up to my standards of right living, when I could no longer accept that they could preach hatred for others and then demand tolerance for themselves. (The claims of "anti-Catholic bigotry" get a lot hard to believe...)

I wish you luck in the Church, but don't expect miracles. Those seem to have ended in the 16th century.

Pcat

[Just Me]

12. Now, that is truly sad: people directing their anger at the wrong ICON.

Who released such demonism? :freak:

[Ian David]

15. Hate is different from "hate crime"

[patdem]

21. You are right...hate is different than a hate crime

to hate a statue and lope off it's head is not the same as hating a black/gay/woman and loping of their head...a statue cannot be hated..only the ideology behind it!

[Canuckistanian]

23. Well, look at it this way

If the vandals had attacked a statue of Buddha, would you consider that a "hate crime"? Would you consider it a symbolic act of hate against Buddhists?

Or is this a bad analogy?

[The Sheik]

39. I dont know.

For me the differance of hate crimes and politcally motivated crimes are different in this case by a very thin line.

If this chruch has a anti-gay or strong position that offends many people, I would categorize the smashing of the window as a polically motivated crime. However, the smashing of Jesuses head is a hate crime due to the fact that Jesus likely did not endorse any hate coming from that church that would offend anybody enough to do something like smash his head.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[robre]

43. All premeditated crimes are "hate crimes."

A better word for hate in law is malice.

[Autobot77]

61. I disagree

If someone planned to rob a bank, it would not be a hate crime since the robbers don't hate the bank or bank owners, they are motivated by money. People commit crime for several reasons greed,lust,love,opportunity,revenge or the criminal could be a psycho. To say all premeditated crime is motivated by hate is inaccurate.

[HuckleB]

120. Indeed! Exactly! BINGO! THIS IS THE POST OF THE NIGHT!

:hi:

[Zero Division]

44. Anti-Catholic Christians or anger from the child abuse scandals?

Anti-Catholic Christians may align with right wing Catholics for political purposes but the hate is still there, regardless of political alliances. The vandalism sounds consistent with those who condemn Catholics as "idol worshipers" and such.

Of course, it could also simply be someone enraged by the recent child abuse scandals.

Why assume it was someone who was "angry at religion" or angered with the Church's stance on GLBT issues or anything like that?

[Carni]

55. Right wingers trying to blame this on Democrats and liberals

Remember the 911 tribute wall that was *desecrated* by freepers so they could scream that the liberals did it?

Same thing IMO

[DemBones DemBones]

66. And look at the Democrats and liberals DEFENDING the vandalism.

The world grows more upside down all the time.

[Zero Division]

122. Very likely, I agree. (see my post above)

But apparently many DUers are just as ready as the RWers to assume that it's part of the "culture war" between the right and left, and more disturbingly, some even seem to want that to be the case.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

68. Psy-ops Christmas season. Advancing the theocracy.

The football of the 'moral values' meme in the mainstream media post-Nov. 2 is being run down the field as far as possible during this year's Christmas season to accomplish several things:

1) Empty our pockets into the weaponized economy as usual
2) Inflame the Culture War aka 'red vs. blue'
3) Entrench support in the evangelical base who are about to see their kids killed overseas in large numbers before the 1/30/05 'elections' in Iraq and for a long time after that bloodbath.

Irrational thinking and hatred are fascist tools used to divide and conquer the public. You can read this in the US Army's psy-ops manuals written by both Machiavelli and Hitler in 'The Prince' and 'Mein Kampf' respectively.

The Dominionist alliance between the Chosen Few, Master Race, and Pentagon is in every Orwellian corporate Christmas display that embodies the exact opposite of Christ's teachings of peace and nurturance.

Challenge for liberals:
Embrace Christ's teachings called the Beatitudes and beat conservatives over the head with them.

"Blessed are the peace makers..."

[DemBones DemBones]

73. The hate expressed in this thread by several

posters, including two I've previously respected, is so shocking that I may just give up entirely on progressive politics.

Why should I ever again give money or work for Democrats, knowing how much my religion is hated by Dems at DU?

It is more than clear that Catholics are not welcome at DU.

I will point out to the haters that when you direct hate at someone, you'll eventually get it directed back at you. Don't expect me to defend you then. I'm done with you.

[regnaD kciN]

82. I'd say the hate expressed in this thread...

...is pretty damn typical, based on what I've seen over the past week.

:-(

And it isn't just Roman Catholics who aren't welcome in that group's eyes. It's fundamentalist and evangelical Protestants (of course), but it's also mainstream or progressive Christians who would seem to be the antithesis of the fundies.

The fact is that there are just some (not all) posters here who have a knee-jerk anti-Christianity bias (for some of whom, it's a knee-jerk anti-religion-of-any-kind bias) that applies to Episcopalians and members of the UCC just as much as Southern Baptists or Assembly of God fundamentalists. If you post any topic dealing with Christianity, you can pretty much predict what they will say about it, no matter what the topic. Why, if this board had been around back in 1980, when the four Maryknoll sisters were raped and murdered by U.S.-backed right-wing death squads in El Salvador, you can bet that some posters here would be rushing to find some way to blame the victims. (After all, if they'd been smart enough to not get involved in "superstition" and adopted atheism, they'd never have been down there in the first place.) :eyes:

[DemBones DemBones]

124. I feel better now, having been reminded by a

thread in GD of all the times Jesus said that He and His followers were hated, and would be hated in the future. I guess I need to remember that.

[Tacos al Carbon]

131. "It is more than clear that Catholics are not welcome at DU."

LOL!!

Over 11,000 posts and you're just now noticing this?

[fleabert]

140. I won't try to speak for everyone, and am not a longtime DU'er,

but I have to say that I don't hate Catholics, and would hate to see you go. please remember that these are only two of how many? Not that we 'know' each other online or anything, but I hope that this small gesture means something amid the fray.

Any positive voice and presence in progressive politics is a good thing. I don't know if I am saying it well, but I am basically saying not to lose faith in DU. I may be naive, you have a much longer history here than I do, but it seems to me that this is isolated and not indicative of the majority of members.

I know it doesn't represent my views. And I am not religious. Hope you stick around and fight the good fight. :-)

[RetroLounge]

85. I see the picture, but I don't see the vandalism

RL

[DemBones DemBones]

125. Is that your idea of a clever riposte?

It's quite lamebrained.

[Behind the Aegis]

132. As I see it...

This is not a hate crime! It could be, if the person(s) responsible say they defaced the statue because they hate Catholics or religion. There seems to be much confusion on this thread about what a hate crime is. Perhaps it is because the laws are often vague and politicians have made understanding it difficult. So, I will attempt to make it a little more simple.

A gay man is robbed at gun point. The robber takes his money and leaves (or kills him..outcome is not relevant at this point). A crime has occurred, one of opportunity or motivated by greed. This is NOT a hate crime!

A gay man is robbed at gun point. The robber CHOSE his victim BECAUSE he was gay, and in the process of robbing him, degraded him because he was gay. This IS a hate crime!

A statue of Jesus is vandalized. The motivation of the perps is unknown. This is NOT a hate crime!

A statue of Jesus is vandalized. The perps targeted the statue as a way to express HATE for the Catholic Church (or religion, in general) --OR-- the vandalized statue has inverted crosses painted on it and anti-Catholic statements. That IS a hate crime.

Those who have brought up the swastikas on synagogues, yes, that is a hate crime. It is a symbol used to express hate of Jews. It can apply to other groups, but it is Jews who are more often the victims! However, if a statue in front of a synagogue was defaced (a statue, if we had those in front of our buildings), and nothing else was there, it is simply vandalsim...unless the perps provide motivation after they are caught.

This is a crime of vandalism. It could evolve into a hate crime, but at this point, it is not. This is another reason hate crimes and the understanding of them is watered down.

[RandomKoolzip]

134. This incident of vandalism is NOT a hate crime;

This thread IS a hate crime.

[Tacos al Carbon]

135. Against who?

By who?

[Behind the Aegis]

136. I agree...in some way

This incident is not a hate crime, but it could become one! This thread is not a hate crime because no crime was committed. Thought some of the posts may be interpreted as hateful, I haven't seen any crime committed.

[RandomKoolzip]

137. I'm talking metaphorically.

[RandomKoolzip]

138. I'm talking metaphorically.

[cleofus1]

139. bad things happen to good art...

If you handed out this photo in a creative writing class and told them to right a story behind it you would come out with a wide variety of different scenarios. There's no telling why this happened...probobly some drunk knuckleheads walking home from a drinking binge and just playing the fool.

Or it could be conservative goons doing counter terrorist propoganda...

[Cronus Protagonist]

141. Might have been done by an Iraqi exile?

The new statue sure reminds me of the Bush administration's foreign policy... Jesus' head would surely explode if he saw what his followers are doing these days.




http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13
Buttons for brainy people - educate your local freepers today!

[Moderator]

147. Locking

This thread is no longer providing productive discussion