Tag Archives: Hatred

News

Floyd Lee Corkins II is a left-winger, admired atheist philosopher Nietzche

7 Comments

More details of the Family Research Council shooting from Life Site News.

Excerpt:

The suspect, a 28-year-old male from Virginia named Floyd Lee Corkins II, said, “Don’t shoot me, it was not about you, it was what this place stands for.” AP later confirmed that Corkins is a liberal activist who volunteers with a left-wing group in the D.C. area.

Now, Corkins has been charged with assault with intent to kill and with bringing a firearm across state lines. According to an FBI affidavit, Corkins allegedly said words to the effect of “I don’t like your politics” when he encountered Johnson.

“The FBI said Corkins had 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches, a Sig Sauer 9mm pistol, two additional magazines loaded with ammunition and an additional box of 50 rounds of ammunition when he came into the building,” according to a report on the FBI intel. “His parents told the FBI that Corkins “has strong opinions with respect to those he believes do not treat homosexuals in a fair manner.”

Corkins definitely comes from the left side of the political spectrum.

According to the Washington Post: “Allan P. Chan, 28, a former George Mason student, said he met Corkins at a campus gym about six years ago. They worked out together, lifting weights, and began to socialize and watch television together. Chan described Corkins as secretive and somewhat odd. Corkins’s Facebook page included no photos, not even his own, and he displayed an intense interest in the 19th-century German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche.”

Militant atheism may also be a factor in the shooter’s motives. Nietzsche is the well-known atheist philosopher who decried the “slave morality” of Christianity and proclaimed “God is dead”. The shooter in the Garielle Giffords case (Jared Lee Loughner) was a militant atheist. Militant atheists like Richard Dawkins and the American Atheists group have even called for the eradication of Christianity. But the vast majority of atheists are not violent.

On the other hand, aggressive violence is forbidden to authentic Bible-believing Christians because Jesus did not shed anyone’s blood. Authentic Christians debate and persuade using evidence, because that’s what Jesus did. The most we could do is participate in a just war like the Korean War or the Gulf War. Christians stopped slavery. Christians save unborn babies. We’re for strict non-violence.

American Power Blog has more on the left’s continued smearing of the Family Research Council as a “hate group”:

More from Kerry Picket, “Human Rights Campaign posted Ryan would speak at ‘hate group’s annual conference’ day before shooting at FRC.” And At Twitchy, “Dangerous: Left screeched about Ryan speaking at ‘hate group’ FRC; HuffPo labels FRC hate group again.” And, “Shooting at Family Research Council, suspect in custody; Update: Bomb squad enters building; Update: Mitt Romney issues statement; Update: Shooter ID’d.”

More at Legal Insurrection, “HuffPo attacks Family Research Council just hours after shooting.”

At this point, I think that anyone who uses the word “hate” to describe supporters of traditional marriage should be careful that they are not inciting anyone to violence. We have to do more to promote tolerance and oppose anti-Christian / anti-conservative bigotry on the extreme left. Almost no one on the right calls people who disagree with them names like “hater”. We need to stop with the name-calling and just discuss things civilly and agree to disagree. Every person deserves respect no matter what they think.

Related posts

News

Even after Family Research Council shooting, leftists continue “hate” rhetoric

Leave a comment

Here’s an excellent post from Sooper Mexican, one of my new favorite blogs – he looks at what the Daily Kos and leftists on Twitter are saying about social conservatives in the wake of the shooting. (H/T Bad Blue)

Excerpt:

If we applied the same principle they apply to shootings to the left, we’d no doubt find plenty to blame, including the headline above at Daily Kos, the leftwing hate group that calls the Tea Party the “American Taliban” on a regular basis, even though, they probably believe Christians and Tea Partiers are much worse than the Taliban.

Here are some inflammatory sections from the article [emphasis added]:

Well, it’s a radical country where a guy can put his head on another guy’s shoulder on a trolley for two seconds and not face public execution for it, which sounds pretty good to me. I understand some people are working to change that, though.

Accusing the FRC of wanting gays to be publicly executed.

All of those people, though, are people whose mere presence pisses Tony Perkins off. His branding would be more like “America: We won’t stone you for having different beliefs,but trust me, we’re working on it.” And trust me, they’re working on it.

They refer to Muslims and Hindus, so they accuse the FRC of wanting Muslims and Hindus to be stoned. Amazingly, they don’t have much anger over people in the Middle East who are actually doing such things. Only those they imagine to be advocating such when they’re not.

[…]Doesn’t take much to think someone could read this kind of rhetoric and believe the FRC so evil that they need to be taught a lesson. But that would be jumping to conclusions, and that only works when it’s against Christians and the Tea Party.

Don’t believe me? Newsbusters documents how Huffington Post continued to smear the Family Research Council by calling it a hate group 3 hours after the shooting.

If you can stomach it, click on through and read some of the tweets on Twitter from people on the left.

Related posts

News

Should Simon Fraser University build a Men’s Center to match the Women’s Center?

4 Comments

Political correctness gone mad at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, BC.

Excerpt:

The student union at Simon Fraser University in B.C. has made the apparently contentious decision to finance the creation of a Men’s Centre on campus. Motivated, surely, by deep-seated patriarchal values, the union approved a budget of $30,000 to launch the project — the exact same amount conferred on the university’s Women’s Centre, which was established back in 1974. The idea for the Men’s Centre was proposed by fifth-year accounting student Keenan Midgley, who told SFU’s student newspaper that he believes men, too, are entitled to safe space on campus.

Unsurprisingly, however, not everyone at SFU is thrilled with the decision. The Women’s Centre, for one, coolly brushed off the idea of a stand-alone Men’s Centre on its website, simply stating that, “the men’s centre is everywhere else.” They did say they would welcome a men’s centre that focused on “challenging popular conceptions about masculinity, confronting homophobia, sexism, racism, classism, and ability issues.” In contrast, they would oppose a men’s centre that “focussed on maintaining the old boys club … that promotes the status quo, encourages sexual assault, or fosters an atmosphere of competition and violence.” Oh. OK, then. Good to know.

Several other students have taken a more direct approach, compiling their objections to the Men’s Centre in widely-circulated five-minute YouTube video. Deeming the project “not financially responsible,” students take turns expressing their grievances. One woman with seemingly impeccable foresight declares that, “The Men’s Centre will end up being a place to celebrate hegemonic masculinity.” She later attacks the credibility of the Centre’s proponents, scoffing that they have, “no experience being in a gender-studies class.”

Men, too, join in the criticism of the proposed Centre, one curiously warning that it may “become a highly masculinized space.” Another cautions that the project risks creating a “heteronormative space,” while yet another critical male dismisses the Men’s Centre as simply, “a room with a PS3 and a bunch of douchebags playing games.”

[…]While statistics show that comparatively, far fewer university-aged men are diagnosed with depression than women, the rate of suicide among men is four times as great. It’s not hard to connect the dots: men are suffering in silence. And it’s not hard, either, to see why. If the assumption on campus is that men have no use for a resource centre other than meeting up with new PlayStation buddies, it becomes that much more difficult for them to break down the barrier of bravado.

Men, like women, struggle with issues of victimization, anxiety, and depression, but they must battle in addition with a societal expectation of stoicism. In short — it’s not manly to talk about your feelings. And it’s precisely for that reason that a Men’s Centre on campus is such a necessary initiative.

I think if there is this much anti-male hatred coming from the students and faculty, then Men should get a resource center. Or abolish them both, and abolish all the other taxpayer laws and programs that discriminate in favor of women and gays and against heterosexual men.

And furthermore, it makes no sense for these secular leftists women to bash masculinity, and the traditional male roles of protector, provider and moral/spiritual leader, then complain that men won’t commit to them for life and stay faithful. You can’t bash chivalry, chastity and enterprise and then expect men to be ready and willing to marry. To be a feminist is  to be opposed to marriage, fidelity and parenting. if feminists hate men, then they shouldn’t be surprised when men don’t love them or commit to them or protect them or provide for them.  You can’t expect to be treated kindly by people you hate – they will just ignore you and withdraw. You can’t tell a man that he has no special role and responsibility to be a protector, provider and moral/spiritual leader and then complain when he refuses to protect, provide or lead on moral and spiritual issues. If men aren’t expected to be anything special, then they won’t be anything at all.