Tag Archives: Activist

When does a hate-crime not count as a hate-crime?

The hate crime that wasn’t

The American Thinker had this article about the hate-crime that wasn’t. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Late one night, a black woman living in a predominately white neighborhood was startled awake by the sound of breaking glass. Inside her 4-year-old son’s room, she found a brick. Attached to it was a note:  “Keep Eastside White. Keep Eastside Strong.”

Yes, a clear-cut case of racism. A hate crime. Yet incredibly, the police decided otherwise. Why? Police said the note did not constitute “hate speech.” Accordingly, the crime “probably would be criminal mischief and deadly conduct, both misdemeanors,” according to police.

No doubt, the brick-throwing incident — and the police’s handling of it — would surely make a good story for Harvard’s Henry Louis Gates, Jr to include in yet another essay or book on America’s deep-seated racism. Racism that he recently experienced first-hand.

The forgoing incident, by the way, occurred not long ago in Austin, Texas. However, two small details were changed to make a point: The mother was in fact white, and she was living in a predominately black neighborhood. This may help to explain why police decided there was no hate crime: Hate crimes, of course, can only be committed by whites against other racial and ethnic minorities.

It doesn’t fit the left’s narrative.

The attempted rape that wasn’t

Here is another American Thinker article about a rape that didn’t count as a rape. (H/T Andrew)

Excerpt:

There is a young man imprisoned in the California State Prison system whose story has to be told again and again until he is pardoned or otherwise released from his sentence.  His story really boils down to one question:  Should not our sons be accorded the same legal protections as our daughters if they are raped or fighting off an attempted rape?

This is the story of Steven Nary, an 18-year old sailor who stood nary a chance after a night on the town turned horribly wrong.

It doesn’t fit the left’s narrative.

FRC opposes Obama’s school safety nominee

Democrat President Barack Obama has nominated Kevin Jennings to head the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools.

The Family Research Council has issued a press release announcing their disapproval. I found it linked at Muddling Towards Maturity.

Excerpt:

As the former president of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, Mr. Jennings worked tirelessly to bring the homosexual agenda into our nation’s classrooms, even in grades as young as kindergarten. In addition, in his autobiography, Mr. Jennings expresses no regret about his past drug abuse or recognition of its risks. Instead, he seems amused. In his words, “[W]atching the planes take off and land is actually quite fun when you are drunk and stoned.”

Jennings has spoken publicly about a high school student he once counseled who was in a sexual relationship with an older man he met in a bus station – yet Jennings never reported this abuse to the authorities, the school, or the child’s parents.

Muddling linked to the FRC’s ad here.

How could Christians vote for Obama?

It might be worth reflecting for a moment on who put Obama into office. (Source: First Things)

Should Christians have voted for Obama?
Should Christians have voted for Obama?

I’m sure that many of these Christians (?) voted for Obama because they didn’t like spending 550 billion dollars on two wars to protect America from Islamic fascism while liberating people living in dictatorships. Or maybe because they didn’t see how taxing the greedy rich could be bad. Or maybe they thought that Obama was pro-life and pro-family regardless of his actual voting record.

Ideas have consequences. Elections matter.

UPDATE: Whoa! Just noticed this story at Pamela Geller’s blog. It turns out that Jennings is worse than described by the FRC! Warning: the link describes extreme sexual practices supported by Jennings.

Are things beginning to turn around in Alberta?

Political Map of Canada
Political Map of Canada

I blogged before about the California school district that is indoctrinating 5-year olds with homosexual propaganda in kindergarten. Well, Canada had a similar problem in the province of British Columbia, where the entire curriculum was going to be designed by gay activists. Now, you might think that the Canadians would be a lot more leftist on such issues, you’d be wrong.

Alberta has a bill in the works to give rights to parents to opt out of programs like this.

Check out this story from the Globe and Mail. (H/T My friend Andrew)

Bill 44, which proposes amendments to Alberta’s Human Rights, Citizenship, and Multiculturalism Act, contains two significant changes. The first adds sexual orientation to proscribed grounds of discrimination. This would bring Alberta’s human rights legislation into conformity with a Supreme Court of Canada ruling that “read in” sexual orientation after it had been deliberately omitted three times by the Legislative Assembly in Edmonton. The amendment has been widely praised.

Section 11 of the new act is more controversial. It requires that parents be notified whenever instructional materials are taught dealing “explicitly with religion, sexuality or sexual orientation.” If parents object in writing, the student can be excused from class.

According to Rob Anderson, Conservative MLA from Airdrie-Chestermere, a riding just north of Calgary, Bill 44 “is one of the most positive and meaningful advances for human rights that this province and this country has seen for many years.” Specifically, he explained, the “parental rights clause” enshrines Article 26 (3) of the United Nations universal declaration of human rights: “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.” Premier Ed Stelmach added that his government “supports a very, very fundamental right and that is parental rights with respect to education.”

This article was written by a political science professor at the University of Calgary, which is the school where their prime minister Stephen Harper got both his degrees in economics. They are known for their conservative views. They even have a special name: the “Calgary School” of economics, just like you might talk about the “Chicago School” and the “Austrian School”. Awesome!

Here’s a letter to the editor from a University of Lethbridge (Alberta) professor that I found in the National Post, (H/T Blazing Cat Fur)

Bill 44 is a response to a B. C. Human Rights Tribunal decision mandating two gay activists to commandeer the Ministry of Education in that province to impose a “social justice” course into the curriculum. Parents’ rights, never mind those of local school boards, were overridden.

The B. C. example and Alberta’s Bill 44 indicate how HRCs have poisoned politics in those two provinces.

Now everyone, not just Christian preachers, has to worry about getting dragged before an HRC. A former chairman of the Calgary School Board once proclaimed the state “owns” children who must be liberated from the supposedly claustrophobic viewpoints of their parents. This goes to show how little this debate has to do with promoting critical thinking or cosmopolitanism, as the Post’s article suggests.

If there is an upside to this, perhaps now there will be sufficient support across the political spectrum to dismantle the HRCs.

Go Canada, eh?