True Persecution

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

A Victory for Hate Speech.

This is Ruth Malhotra, Southern Baptist, College Republican and Hate Speech Advocate [photo & additional reporting courtesy of Southern Voice] ===>

The Georgia Institute of Technology had a portion of it's student community guide that prohibited students or groups from any attempt "to injure, harm, malign or harass a person because of race, religious belief, color, sexual/affectional orientation, national origin, disability, age or gender."

Seems pretty straight forward. Well not to Ruth Malhotra and her co-complainer Orit Sklar. They objected to the language that banned "denigrating written/verbal communications (including the use of telephones, emails and computers)." Basically they felt their God-given right to openly hate and persecute gays was being impinged.

For the record this restriction applied to the students living in the dorms, not to students in general. But shouldn't all students be allowed to spew hate speech and practice religious-based oppression? Apparently these two women thought so, so they sued the school and got their buddies at the Alliance Defense Fund to help out. Unfortunately they won.

U.S. District Judge J. Owen Forrester ruled against GATech and made them revise their rules. Thankfully Ruth and her College Republican friends can vomit all the hate speech they like against LGBT students and community members without having to face any pesky disciplinary action. Your parents and pastor must be very proud of you.

So what did the haters do with their new found freedom to hate? The turned around and sued the school again to block GATech's gay-friendly Safe Space program.

I guess we were wrong. Clearly this was all about free speech and had nothing whatsoever to with an agenda of religious-based LGBT persecution.

I think these folks all deserve a big round of applause for their victory and their success in destroying a small glimmer of hope, tolerance and unity in their little corner of the world.

7 Comments:

  • All the more reason that a federal hate statute is necessary, which means we need a new Congress. Can we get one? Possibly. We will see what happens in November regarding the built in advantage of redistricting.

    By Blogger Michael Bindner, at 8/23/2006 01:37:00 PM  

  • I am a free speech fundamentalist, so I applpaud their victory, although not their subsequent lawsuit. The complex arguments of Christian conservatives against the LGBT community are often self-contradictory, but we must not get into a position of denying even the most horrific haters from spewing their filth. At least we know them for who they are, and they can't hide.

    By Blogger Progressive Christian, at 8/24/2006 07:02:00 PM  

  • Yeah, as a gay American, I have issues with people who hate.

    But I have more issues balancing that with freedom of speech.

    By Anonymous durante vita, at 8/27/2006 02:15:00 PM  

  • This is the challenge, free speech is free speech, but that's why we make a designation between free speech and hate speech.

    Which is also why we need federal recognition of sexual orientation as a protected class so we can make that distinction. Free speech is about expression, but it should not be a blank cheque to spew whatever garbage you like - you should be free to say it but know that it comes with consequences - be that a punch in the mouth or arrest.

    I am all for freedom of speech, but not at the cost of someone elese's freedom.

    By Blogger Rudicus, at 8/27/2006 09:07:00 PM  

  • Sorry, rudicus, but "free speech" is exactly a "Blank check" to spew whatever filth you like. If these folks were beating the crap out of some poor young gay man and screaming "faggot", then I see a hate crime. Walking by a gay bar and shouting "Faggot!" is not a hate crime; it's stupid, moronic, rude, bigoted, but not a hate crime.

    By Blogger Progressive Christian, at 8/28/2006 04:36:00 PM  

  • I can definitely see your point, but if the same people walked by a club and shouted "Nigger" then it would be different there too - according to the law.

    I'm not saying they should be prosecuted, but the people who then chose to kick the crap out of them for saying it shouldn't be either.

    By Blogger Rudicus, at 8/29/2006 09:09:00 AM  

  • ...prohibited students or groups from any attempt "to injure, harm, malign or harass a person because of race, religious belief, color, sexual/affectional orientation, national origin, disability, age or gender."...

    So that's why the rape and death threats and reference to her colour? There's another word in this, beginning with H. Hypocrisy. This is typical of the politically correct.

    And I love the justification:

    This is the challenge, free speech is free speech, but that's why we make a designation between free speech and hate speech.

    In other words, you have free speech until I determine that what you said is hate. then I curb your free speech. Wonderful leftist logic.

    By Blogger Lord Trafalgar Rock Pigeon, at 8/06/2007 03:22:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home