The Family Research Council, and more generally the anti-gay right, can't have it both ways. Either words can incite violence or they can't. Falsely labeling someone a bad person can either provoke violence, or it can't. The FRC would have us believe that our admonitions incite violence but theirs couldn't.
But if words can incite violence, then it's fair to examine all the words of all the parties to the dispute, not just the words of one side.
And if you examine what the Family Research Council, and really the entire religious right, has said - lied - about gay and trans people for the past two decades, not only is what the they've said far worse than what any of their critics have said in response, but their language is so hateful, so damning, so incendiary on its face (and false, which only makes it all the more incendiary), that I believe it's difficult not to consider the possibility that the religious right might share some of the blame for recklessly inciting the violence that finally, and sadly, unfolded this past week.
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
John Aravosis on hate speech
John points out the ludicrous argument that FRC claims that the SPLC is to blame for the shooting because the SPLC exposed FRC's hate speech. That is, it isn't their own hate speech that is the problem, but someone pointing out that it's hateful. From America Blog, FRC's own speech brought this upon them:
Labels: FRC shooting