Sleepycatz

Freekin Sad

It is often a sad fact of life that people who shine with brilliant insight at one moment remain imprisoned by their dark prejudices throughout their lives. Such is the fate of Dr. James Watson. In 1962 Dr. Watson won the Nobel Prize for his work on the discovery of the DNA double helix, this week Dr. Watson made the claim thats dark skinned people are less intelligent then lighter skinned ones:

The 79-year-old geneticist said he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really.”. He said he hoped that everyone was equal, but countered that “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true”.

Of course Dr. Watson’s opinions have no basis in scientific reasoning or fact. But the mere notion that a Nobel accredited scientist should utter such nonsense gives credence to racist theories and policies throughout the world. Dr. Watson has never been a good spokesman for the common humanity of man. In the past, he has suggested a link between skin-tone and libido, and has suggested that a woman may wish to abort her child if it can be shown the child would be a homosexual.

It’s not clear if Dr. Watson is simply so egomaniacle that he believes his discovery of fifty years ago is the golden key to understanding all of societies problems — and that we can ignore historical and economic movements like colonialism, slavery, and genocide to explain social/economic problems among people. Or if he is simply, like so many, a prisoner to the prejudices and racism of the culture of his youth. In either case, it is sad and disturbing to see a man who pioneered our understanding of the common biology of humanity to espouse discredited and divisive 19th century views. It all seems to suggest that no matter how far we extend our intelligence we must continue to fight the ignorance of our personal prejudices.

Jap Awareness Week

Ok, not quite that bad, but close. The David Horowitz Center for Freedom is sponsoring Islamo-Fascist Awareness Week on college campuses throughout the country in October. According to their guide this will be the “biggest conservative campus protest ever.” — meaning more then 100 people will participate.

The organizing guide for the event makes the agenda fairly clear:

If you are looking for a challenge this fall, if you want to break through the barrier of politically-correct doublespeak that prevails on American campuses, if you want to help our brave troops who are fighting the Islamo-Fascists abroad — bring Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week to your campus this October.

The list of planned events include:

1. A showing of Suicide Killers, Obsession, or Islam: What the West Needs to Know or the ABC mini-series The Path to 9/11
2. A panel on the Oppression of Women in Islam or any facet of the Islamo-Fascist threat
3. Distribution of materials on Islamo-Fascism including the pamphlets The Oppression of Women in Islam, The Islamic Mein Kampf, Why Israel is the Victim, Jimmy Carter’s War Against the Jews, and What Every American Needs to Know About Jihad.
4. A “sit-in” outside the offices of the Women’s Studies Department protesting the silence of feminists over the oppression of women in Islam

Somehow, I find it hard to believe that these conservatives actually care about the rights of women in the Middle East , or anywhere else. Rather, for these people the plight of women around the world becomes just another rallying cry for their race-baiting.

The real problem with all of this, aside from the dehumanization, is that these kinds of demonizations actually harm the security efforts of our country. America has not suffered from the disaffection of Arab or Muslim youth seen in Europe because we have not ghettoized these groups of immigrants. America has treated these immigrants no differently then others. By demonizing them we risk loosing their cooperation and isolating them from the rest of society. In general, isolation breeds radicalism. Mr. Horowitz and his followers don’t see this as a problem, the see it as a goal: they seem to like their Muslims as charactictures: bearded, turbaned, and bomb throwing. And the goal of an event like this is to get the rest of us to see the Muslim world with the same hateful stare that they have.

Blessed are the hateful

As I was poking about the nutty side of the blogosphere today , I came across the following invocation:

Father God,

In our hearts we believe that you will hear our prayers and will put all these curses upon our enemies and on those who hate us, who persecute us. We will keep not silence, for the mouths of the wicked and the mouths of deceit are opened against us; they have spoken against us with lying TONGUES. They have compassed us about also with words of hatred, mockery, and deciept; and have fought against all that is Holy without a cause. In return for our agape love they are my adversaries, but we now resort to prayer. They have rewarded and laid upon us evil and slander for good, and hatred for love. Set a wicked man over them as judge, and let a malisious accuser stand at their right hand come Judgment Day.

When Liberal talk show host Randi Rhodes and her followers; when the wicked and mockers at Democratic Underground are judged, let them be condemned, and let their prayers for leniency be turned into sins. Let their days be few; and let others take their offices and charge. Let their children be parentless and their souses become widowed. Let their children be continual vagabonds as was Cain and beg; let them seek their bread and be driven far from their ruined homes.

IN JESUS NAME, I BIND UP EVERY DEMON COMING ACROSS THE COMPUTER LINES, AND I RETURN THEM AND ANY CURSES.

In Your Name, Amen.

As an example of an imprecatory prayer, or curse, it’s pretty mediocre, but the mere idea of such a prayer would strike many as anti-christian. We can easily imagine that muslim fundamentalists pray for similar retributions� against American citizens. The barbarity of religion begins when hate turns to prayer and then prayer turns to action. It seems that we are two-thirds there.

Hate Crimes

Nearly two months ago Kenneth Cummings Jr disappeared outside of Cypress, TX. His burnt remains were discovered recently on property linked to Terry Mark Mangum, who had used Mr. Cummings credit cards on the night of the disappearance. Mr Mangum was arrested and confessed to murder:Mangum, who described himself as “definitely not a homosexual,” said God called on him to “carry out a code of retribution” by killing a gay man because “sexual perversion” is the “worst sin.”

Mangum believed Cummings to be gay.

“I planned on sending him to hell,” he said.

There can be little doubt that Mr. Mangum is a bit touched in the head; yet, what is the difference between a man who brutally murders another because he is inspired by ‘god’ and a man who blows himself up in a crowded bus because he is inspired by ‘god’? Ultimately, the only difference lies in the volume of lives maimed and killed. Mr. Mangum may have only barbarically snuffed out one life, but he left behind the maimed lives of Mr. Cummings’ friends and family. Mr. Mangum’s act was designed to do more then kill one man, like a jihadi bomber, the act was framed to carry out divine justice.

I have written previously that the hate filled rhetoric of conservative christians will, eventually, lead to acts of violence. Many will dismiss Mangum as an extreme case, an aberration, but in fact Mangum was following the religious principles he was taught. He was following the literal Word of God, and as a principle of faith the Word cannot be questioned.

Mangum’s faith in the Word cannot really be questioned but his actions, and those who will follow him, should be treated most harshly. Conservative christians have been fighting the passage of HR.1592 (The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007) for the past several months on the grounds that the law represents infringement upon their religious speech. As I have pointed out elsewhere, the present hate crimes statutes (see 18 U.S.C. § 245 and § 247) include religious belief and race among the protected classes. The current bill before congress simply adds gender identity and sexual orientation to the existing classes, as well as expanding local resources and federal jurisdiction. It is completely disingenuous to suggest that this law would somehow prevent religious leaders from criticizing homosexuality. Existing laws have stopped no one, including myself, from criticizing religious belief or behavior; I know of no atheist arrested under these laws for mocking religion or speaking out against God.

HR.1592 adds additional penalties to existing crimes committed for reasons of bias. Some will argue that a ‘crime is a crime’, and no additional prosecution is needed. As a society we separate classes of the same offense all the time — the rape of a child is treated vastly differently then the rape of an adult. In a pluralistic society it seems prudent that we should treat some crimes as more heinous than others because they seek to undermine the fabric of our civil society. A murderer, for instance, targeting Jews simply for their religious beliefs commits a worse crime then a murderer who targets individuals for their money. This is because our society values religious diversity and it is cognizant of the historic tragedy of anti-semitic crimes. Sexual preference and gender identity are as core to ones identity as race or religious belief. There exists mountains of historical evidence to show that crimes based upon these two classes are prevalent and and often under prosecuted. The cold blooded murder of Mr.Cummings is simply the most recent, public, testament to this fact.

As Tom, at PurpleScarf, has pointed out: conservative christians seem to believe the entire notion of hate crimes is a joke. At the same time they argue that additional penalties to crimes motivated by the hatred of a victim’s sexual orientation constitute a burden upon their religious rights. The only conclusion that can be drawn by this argument is that conservative christian leaders seek to promote some level of violence. There is really no other explanation: we tolerate abhorrent speech regularly but action is prosecuted. As a society, we tolerate — and even accommodate — groups such as the Klu Klux Klan, neo-nazis, as well as numerous other supremest groups. Legal prosecutions of these groups have only occurred when criminal action was taken on behalf of the group. Ultimately, this is what concerns these religious leaders: that either they will be deterred from inciting criminal violence, or that their bigotry will be relegated to the same acceptance levels as that of the Klan. In either case, civil society wins, and perhaps the the brutalization that Mr. Cummings suffered won’t be repeated.

Mainstream Hatred

I have been extremely busy with work and personal issues, so I haven’t had time to post here for a bit. However, there arise such ideas in our day and age that immediate outrage and condemnation is so necessary that to hold one’s tongue, even in moments of personal entanglement, is to ignore our responsibilities as Americans and human beings.

This week, conservative commentator, Debbie Schlussel penned an essay which in times of reason and compassion would have appalled even the most cynical American. Ms. Schlussel believes that as Senator Obama’s father was Muslim, and that as his middle name is Hussein, he is not only unfit for public office, but should be suspected as an enemy of the state:

So, even if he [Obama] identifies strongly as a Christian, and even if he despised the behavior of his father (as Obama said on Oprah); is a man who Muslims think is a Muslim, who feels some sort of psychological need to prove himself to his absent Muslim father, and who is now moving in the direction of his father’s heritage, a man we want as President when we are fighting the war of our lives against Islam? Where will his loyalties be?

Schlussel’s updated application of the Nuremberg Laws is about as un-American and offensive as one can imagine. Within her logic of hatred is the notion that our enemies may be judged not by actions but by religion and then by bloodline. A premise which violates the very founding principles of our republic — let us not forget Hamilton — who was the bastard child of a woman imprisoned for her adultery — who was instrumental in the passage of our constitution and the founding of the our treasury system, and is a favorite of conservatives.

Whenever conservatives make such outrages claims as this they inevitably claim that they were were joking or tweeking the nose of political correctness. But make no mistake what Schlussel — and others — are doing is equating racism and bigotry with patriotism. For it the the contention of the Schlussels, the Becks, the Pragers that all those who practice Islam are America’s enemies as are all those who share their heratige. At best, these commentators are the same as those heard on Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines whose hatred and fear mongering led to death of 1,000,000 people in 100 days in Rawanda. At worst, there little difference in their logic and that of those who built the death chambers of Auschwitz or Buchenwald.

It has been said over and over that September 11th changed everything. Apparently is has. When racism and hatred become a symbol of patriotism, any compassion or morality which this country may have stood for has been lost for all times.

It Came From the Closet

For the past five years those who seek power and influence have used every imaginable specter to engender fear among their followers and the nation at large. At some point much of this ‘wolf crying’ becomes a parody of itself, and frequently it has become so hyperbolic that many of us just snicker to ourselves and walk away. Pam, at Pandagon, documents one such recent extraordinary warning. The pronouncement of peril comes from Americans for Truthiness:

Men are having perverted ’sex’ with other men all over America–in parks, public restrooms (at places like department stores) and highway rest stops–i.e., in your community “backyard.” There is a well-organized Internet networks that guides men on where to engage in their anonymous, sodomitic [sic] acts. Many of these men are not publicly “gay,” or do not identify as homosexual, so they put their unknowing [sic] wives or girlfriends in danger of contracting sexually-transmitted diseases.

We’ll tell you where these homosexual “public sex” spots are in your state, and what you can do about it.

Yes indeed, the greatest danger our country - nay our civilization - faces is the prospect of men having sex in a Walmart bathroom. Nonetheless, this type of statement is so outrageous and hyperbolic, that it almost borders on camp. If we simply replace the words ’sex’ with ‘plot’, and ‘gay/homosexual’ with ‘communist’ we have a nice piece of cold war propaganda. Take for instance the following paragraph from “Communists Should Not Teach in American Colleges” (1949):

The real issue between Communism and education is the effect of Communist Party membership upon the freedom of the teacher and upon the morale and professional standards of the profession of teaching. Many would have us believe that it is an issue of civil liberty. This, I believe, it is not. No man has a constitutional right to membership in any profession, and those who maintain that he has are taking a narrow, legalistic point of view which sees freedom only as a privilege and entirely disregards the duties and responsibilities that are correlative with rights and privileges. The lack of freedom permitted the Communist has a great deal more than a mere passing or academic bearing upon the duties of a teacher.

If we simply make the object of this paragraph homosexuals instead of communists, we have a contemporary conservative argument. One which has been used to force teachers out of public education.

Of course, when the statements, like AFT’s, are so blatant in their bigotry and fear mongering it is easy to walk away from them. However, like all propaganda, the need to re-define language and control any debate has become more sophisticated in these diatribes. Take for instance a recent Agape Press article about a North Carolina school district’s ban on Gay-Straight student organizations:

A Christian attorney says, contrary to the claims of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a North Carolina school board’s policy banning sex-based student clubs is clearly constitutional and within the boundaries of the law.

The Rowan-Salisbury Board of Education enacted the ban in response to the formation of a Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) club at South Rowan High School. The new policy is based on the school district’s existing abstinence-only sex education policy.

In order to insure that high school teenagers remain unaware of real gays and lesbians in their schools, the author has redefined GSA student organizations as ’sex clubs’; conjuring up the absurd notion that these clubs exist to provide a gathering for student engage in sexual activity and erotic banter. For UN-scrutinizing moderates this argument carries significant weight — who for instance would like their child to participate in a ’sex club’?

GSAs, and similar student led organizations, serve a vital purpose when formed and run by students. They help to educate students about their classmates and the issues facing gay and lesbian teenagers; but more then anything else they allow students to see one another as individuals and not as a demonized monolithic groups. This, most of all, is what drives the opposition to these types of groups.

The rates of suicide and depression among gay and lesbian teenagers are staggering. For those of us who can remember the awkwardness and anguish of our teenage years, it is difficult to imagine how much worse it would have been had we been taught to fear and hate our own identities.

The propaganda released daily by these groups may at times seem silly and even campy, but we should all remember that it is designed to have real world effects and consequences.