Video shows men attacking religious protesters at Pridefest

[SamH]

Perhaps gays and their supporters are tired of being attacked and ridiculed for the way they were born.

By beating people?

 

[SamH]

Much better than telling a group of people that they are going to hell.

No one is saying that the person who was attacked said any such thing.

 

[KrazyKat]

No one is saying that the person who was attacked said any such thing.

Watched the video again and I stand corrected. The voice that interpreted the sign " repent or else" as repent or go to hell was not the man who was attacked. Guess the or else could mean no ice cream for you tonight.

 

[Mark121359]

Here are the points I am trying to make:

1. That Christian homophobia is real;
2. That it is often exhibited on this forum and specifically in threads such as this;
3. That it is the work of Satan, because it is incompatible with faith, hope and love.

Which of these beliefs do you disagree with? I welcome your perspective. I too am looking for “Catholic Answers”.

This man makes a good argument against your assertion about homophobia. His name is Chris Kempling, and he has a PhD in Psychology living in B.C. He delivered this address on March 4, 2005 in New York City to a United Nations Commission on Human Rights. In it, he gives a very powerful speech about Religious persecution in Canada in which he himself fell victim. And here is a snippet where he discusses homophobia;

How about “homophobia”. It literally means an irrational fear, even terror, of homosexual persons. A phobia is a mental illness, which can be successfully treated. In Communist Russia, dissidents were sentenced to forced treatment in psychiatric hospitals, not because they were mentally ill, but because they had wrong thoughts. I believe it is no accident that the Gay Rights term for disapproval of homosexual behaviour is a mental illness term. In all my years as a mental health professional, however, I have never encountered anyone with an irrational fear of homosexuals. But the definition of homophobia, as defined by gay activists, is the unwillingness to approve of homosexuality. Even toleration without approval is defined as homophobic. So if you have a moral objection to homosexuality, you are “mentally ill” and require re-education. One homosexual activist, John McKellar, who opposes the Gay Pride movement, calls the use of the word homophobia, “a contrived slander” against religiously conservative people. But activists realize that religious people are unlikely to change, which is why they are focusing a tremendous amount of attention on re-educating children in public schools.

What’s going on up in Canada is absolutely stunning! But people on here will say well that’s Canada, not the U.S.! So why should we care? Because our Catholic brothers and sisters are being persecuted there…and if it can happen up there, why in the world couldn’t it happen here? The answer to that is, that it will most certainly happen here…and you can bank on it! And I’ll tell you something else. I for one am getting sick and tired of being unjustly labeled a homophobe on here because of my strong Catholic beliefs! Especially since the ones throwing around these accusations don’t know me from Adam!..Here’s the link to this article…

catholiceducation.org/articles/persecution/pch0080.html

Peace, Mark

 

[Schism_hater]

Life under Communist rule!
Prediction: Neither thug will receive justice. Not in Obama’s Amerika. Rob

Yeah, “gay pride” festivals started under Obama.

Also, if you look back at actual Communist regimes, they considered homosexual acts to be subversive and examples of “decadence”. And they were right.

But a certain type of mentality must lump all evils (real or imagined) together. Like people who think that Obama is communist and Muslim at the same time.

 

[SeannyM]

The “gay” activists can’t win an argument by trying to argue with what we actually say.

I’d beg to differ. I’ve not once seen a coherent argument on this forum defending the opinion that gay people do not deserve equal protection under the law. The only response I’ve seen to the assertion that gay people deserve equal rights is to call them disordered, claim persecution of Christians (which is just plain ridiculous), or outright refusal to recognize the difference between a religious definition of a sacrament and the civil definition of marriage. Even when people bring up the fact that there are religions that permit same sex marriage, all anyone on here does is say that their belief is somehow not valid

In short, all I see from opponents of marriage equality on this forum is denial of the validity of any opinion (even the courts and legislative bodies) that differs from Catholic teaching. In a diverse country like ours, this is very frustrating for those of us who support the principals our nation was founded on.

Lastly, nobody can “win” an argument with someone who refuses to utilize logic and is incapable of realizing they’ve lost the argument.

 

[the_phoenix]

Watched the video again and I stand corrected. The voice that interpreted the sign " repent or else" as repent or go to hell was not the man who was attacked. Guess the or else could mean no ice cream for you tonight.

You know, I used to pass by non-Catholic Christian protestors on the street and knew some who would use the phrase “Turn or Burn” as part of their message. Once I stopped to talk to these protestors … they were not too pleased to learn I was a Catholic. In their opinion, since I was not their brand of Christian, I was in need of their brand of salvation. Was I personally offended? No. Did I beat them up? No, of course not. Not even tempted. We each had our say, and peaceably went our separate ways.

 

[KrazyKat]

You know, I used to pass by non-Catholic Christian protestors on the street and knew some who would use the phrase “Turn or Burn” as part of their message. Once I stopped to talk to these protestors … they were not too pleased to learn I was a Catholic. In their opinion, since I was not their brand of Christian, I was in need of their brand of salvation. Was I personally offended? No. Did I beat them up? No, of course not. Not even tempted. We each had our say, and peaceably went our separate ways.

I would not hit a street preacher either. Most people wouldn’t. Amen

 

[PTL]

But a certain type of mentality must lump all evils (real or imagined) together. Like people who think that Obama is communist and Muslim at the same time.

Whatever he is, no one can deny he attacks the Catholic Church big time. That fact alone should alert the Catholics if they truly love their Church and faith.

 

[Stephen168]

I’d beg to differ. I’ve not once seen a coherent argument on this forum defending the opinion that gay people do not deserve equal protection under the law. The only response I’ve seen to the assertion that gay people deserve equal rights is to call them disordered, claim persecution of Christians (which is just plain ridiculous), or outright refusal to recognize the difference between a religious definition of a sacrament and the civil definition of marriage. Even when people bring up the fact that there are religions that permit same sex marriage, all anyone on here does is say that their belief is somehow not valid

In short, all I see from opponents of marriage equality on this forum is denial of the validity of any opinion (even the courts and legislative bodies) that differs from Catholic teaching. In a diverse country like ours, this is very frustrating for those of us who support the principals our nation was founded on.

The OP is not about same-sex marriage.

Lastly, nobody can “win” an argument with someone who refuses to utilize logic and is incapable of realizing they’ve lost the argument.

As we see in the OP, what the people do that can’t use logic is physically attack the people they disagree with.

 

[losh14]

I agree with previous posters that there were likely some guys there looking for a fight, figuring there would be protesters. I’m sure that at Seattle’s Pridefest there were more than two people holding up signs condemning homosexuals. These two happened to be easy targets to surround and intimidate.

I wonder if the street preachers were intending to be attacked and hoping someone would film it. This is taking a cue from the non-violent protest movements of last century. True, this isn’t 300 well-dressed Southern Blacks staring down a water cannon in Birmingham while NBC affiliates watched. But I do know that everyone has their trigger - the point at which yes, they too, will resort to violence. I’ve seen the Jack Chick tracts on my car after Mass and thought “yeah, if that guy was still here I’d break his nose”. I’ve seen the flyers with the giant rat on it when the unions picketed my workplace. All it took one of my coworkers to actually break a union picketer’s nose was seeing the guy snap the wiper a little too loudly on his windshield to put the flyer underneath. Not pretty and it takes a lot of maturity for your buttons to be un-pushable.

We see this constantly with Fred Phelps’ private little kingdom, and I noticed the taller street preacher had what looked like an ear-mounted microphone, perhaps attached to an amp nearby. If you shout enough at a group of people who are keyed up and emotional - whether excited about a baseball victory or agitated at an incident of police brutality - some will peel off and start fighting. Law enforcement treats parades and demonstration in very similar fashion, the difference between these two large groups of people who are gathered for a common purpose being the intent behind it, and it is not difficult for either to degenerate into a riot (which is essentially a parade or demonstration that is poorly organized).

No, I don’t think violence is an intrinsic part of being gay. As mean-spirited as it may be to hold “Repent or go to Hell” signs at a Pridefest, it’s not like gay rights groups haven’t picketed churches before. This is a tit-for-tat that isn’t going to convert people either way, just harden positions. But people are going to do it anyway on both sides.

 

[Seamus_L]

Without really studying the video, I’d say perhaps as many as 8 people committed arrestable offenses. And as for the peacemakers, at least 3 of them were also guilty of physical aggression at various points in the video.

 

[fix]

I am not afraid of homosexuals. I have some in-laws that are same sex “married.” I have civil conversations with them at family functions. They have as much to talk about with me as anyone. One of them does have “recovered Catholic” as his religion on FB. I try to steer clear of controversial subjects like that. That is more than I can say about many people who disagree with my view on redefining marriage.

It is a contrived made up political term use by those who promote the “gay” agenda. It is a club. It is a total fiction.

 

[Borealis]

It’s really a shame that some people cannot subdue their passions and learn to co-exist. Violence only breeds violence. Using violence is never a way to settle issues.

I’m sorry, but that last statement is absolutely wrong. Violence is never a way to settle issues? Tell that to the Carthaginians, if you can find them; the Romans ended their invasion by wiping them out and sowing the land with salt. How about Napoleon? Violence was necessary to settle that issue. Same with Lepanto, same with Salamis…and same with World War II. Violence was the ONLY thing that solved any of those issues.

Negotiations and trying to get along are never a way to settle issues…when the other guy is coming at you with a weapon and intent to harm or kill. The exceptions to that rule are few and far between. And yes, I know there are a few Saints who did settle issues that way. That makes maybe a dozen out of millions if not billions of incidents. Do you want to play those odds with your life, or your children’s lives, on the line?

Violence isn’t the nicest way to settle an issue, but it’s certainly the most effective. Even the threat of violence will deter many would-be assaulters. If there had been a dozen college football linebackers standing with (or even just behind) the anti-pride people, the odds of them being assaulted would have gone way down, wouldn’t they?

Negotiation is fine…as long as you have the means to defend yourself if negotiations fail. The bullying being perpetrated and condoned by the gay ‘rights’ movement needs to be met head-on and stopped. Bullies never go after someone who can fight back, at least not more than once.

 

[Borealis]

Christian homophobia is not the same thing as Christians who are homophobic. Christian homophobia is an irrational fear that an organized “gay agenda” exists, whose aim is to persecute Christians in particular for proselytizing their beliefs about marriage and chastity.

What if it isn’t an irrational fear? What if it’s based on logical deduction after dozens of incidents that indicate a definite pattern?

Perhaps you should take a look at what’s been going on in Canada, where the ‘Human Rights Tribunal’ (a.k.a. Star Chamber of Canada) has forced priests to stop preaching about Catholic teaching on marriage and homosexuality or risk prosecution. I suppose that Catholics in Canada who are concerned about this are just clinging to irrational fears, right?

This fear is fueled by propaganda reports such as the one in the OP. Putting aside the fact that such reports are seldom 100% accurate, simply having such reports “go viral” on the internet creates the illusion that a rare event is actually the norm. Posting then on internet forums is part of the process.

Then why are there so many of these reports going viral? And how many incidents like this don’t even make it to the internet?

If something happens once, it’s an isolated incident. Twice, it’s probably a coincidence. Three times, I’m starting to wonder. Twenty or more times? That’s a pattern, not a conspiracy theory.

The reality is that everyday, there are thousands of interactions between gay people and Christians, most of which are entirely peaceful even when the parties disagree. How many of your personal interactions with gay people have ended in violence? Why aren’t your gay in-laws trying to beat you up?

Because I don’t have any gay in-laws. My wife’s cousin is gay, and I avoid him. Not because I’m homophobic, but because I don’t appreciate him taking every opportunity to shove his ‘gayness’ in people’s faces.

Don’t buy into the illusion created by the master of illusions. There are places in the world were Christians are being killed for their beliefs. This obsession over the “gay agenda” is not only unfair to gay people, but distracts from the attention we should be paying to the real persecution of our brothers and sisters in places like China and Egypt.

Prayer can pay attention to more than one thing, and I’m not going to be distracted from pointing out that the Catholic Church always has, and always will, denounce homosexuality as wrong, evil, and of the devil.

 

[Borealis]

I’d beg to differ. I’ve not once seen a coherent argument on this forum defending the opinion that gay people do not deserve equal protection under the law. The only response I’ve seen to the assertion that gay people deserve equal rights is to call them disordered, claim persecution of Christians (which is just plain ridiculous), or outright refusal to recognize the difference between a religious definition of a sacrament and the civil definition of marriage. Even when people bring up the fact that there are religions that permit same sex marriage, all anyone on here does is say that their belief is somehow not valid

Well, this is a forum devoted to Catholic teaching, and Catholic teaching on the issue is pretty clear, and since even non-Catholic Christians most often insist on ‘the Bible Alone,’ and since the Bible itself is pretty clear on the wrongness of homosexuality…I really don’t see why you’re surprised that people who actually follow their faith would support the Church’s teachings on gay ‘marriage’ and reject other faiths as invalid. Should Muslims accept Catholic teaching as valid and binding? Well, yes, they should, but they don’t.

As for gays demanding ‘equal rights,’ they already have them. I have yet to see a law where gays are not permitted to marry. Now, that doesn’t mean that they can marry anyone THEY WANT TO MARRY. There are laws about who people are allowed to marry that apply to EVERYONE. You can’t marry a close relative, you can’t marry an animal, you can’t marry a child under the age of legal consent, you can’t marry more than one person, and you can’t marry someone of the same gender. That’s the only boundaries that I’m aware of in civilized society. And most of those boundaries have been in place long before the Catholic Church even existed; polygamy was a more recent exclusion, dating back to the Apostles. Even in a society where homosexuality was condoned and accepted (Athenian Greece), they still didn’t get married.

So in fact, homosexuals have equal rights already. What they want is to live on Animal Farm, where ‘all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.’

In short, all I see from opponents of marriage equality on this forum is denial of the validity of any opinion (even the courts and legislative bodies) that differs from Catholic teaching. In a diverse country like ours, this is very frustrating for those of us who support the principals our nation was founded on.

Cry me a river. This is a Catholic forum, not a Redefine Society as You See Fit forum. And since when are the courts the final arbiters of what is right? Ask Dred Scott about that when you see him. That stupidity was rightly overturned in time, and so were the Jim Crow laws. Roe v. Wade, hopefully, is next.

Lastly, nobody can “win” an argument with someone who refuses to utilize logic and is incapable of realizing they’ve lost the argument.

I agree. The funniest thing is when gays and their supporters claim that the argument is still ongoing. It was ended two thousand years ago; that’s a long time to hold your breath until you turn blue.

Incidentally, since when is ‘logic’ a determining factor in whether or not gays should be married? Logically, they have no business being married, nor do they have any logical basis for insisting they should. All they have is the tug of emotional heart-strings the likes of which would be envied by teenage girls all over North America. “But I LOVE him!!! We need to be together FOREVER!!!”

 

[fix]

Incidentally, since when is ‘logic’ a determining factor in whether or not gays should be married? Logically, they have no business being married, nor do they have any logical basis for insisting they should. All they have is the tug of emotional heart-strings the likes of which would be envied by teenage girls all over North America. “But I LOVE him!!! We need to be together FOREVER!!!”

I would add “immature” teen girl.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

I’d beg to differ. I’ve not once seen a coherent argument on this forum defending the opinion that gay people do not deserve equal protection under the law. The only response I’ve seen to the assertion that gay people deserve equal rights is to call them disordered, claim persecution of Christians (which is just plain ridiculous), or outright refusal to recognize the difference between a religious definition of a sacrament and the civil definition of marriage. Even when people bring up the fact that there are religions that permit same sex marriage, all anyone on here does is say that their belief is somehow not valid

In short, all I see from opponents of marriage equality on this forum is denial of the validity of any opinion (even the courts and legislative bodies) that differs from Catholic teaching. In a diverse country like ours, this is very frustrating for those of us who support the principals our nation was founded on.

Lastly, nobody can “win” an argument with someone who refuses to utilize logic and is incapable of realizing they’ve lost the argument.

There are logical arguments against gay marriage, that many advocates seem to ignore.

 

[Borealis]

I would add “immature” teen girl.

I stand corrected; I only have boys (four of them).

 

[Christian01]

Please share this important message with your friends and family

The Hidden Danger of Same-Sex Marriage:

In recent years, the Gay Rights movement has made tremendous headway to legalize same-sex marriage in several states by chanting sugary slogans such as “it’s just love” and “civil rights for all.” Such seemingly harmless mantras resonate positively with libertarian, left-wing

American ideologues, yet deceptively mask the LGBT movement’s darker, ulterior motives.
Beneath the melodious rhetoric of the LGBT movement is a grandiose plan to require all American public schools to teach impressionable prepubescent children that homosexual partnerships and intercourse are not only legal but an equally valid, healthy, and socially acceptable alternative to heterosexuality.

Justifying the use of taxpayer money to introduce and normalize homosexuality in public schools is nearly impossible in states where same-sex marriage is illegal. LGBT leaders know that, and it partly explains why they’re fiercely pushing for same-sex-marriage.

So, what’s the harm in teaching the next generation that homosexuality is a valid alternative to heterosexuality? A preponderance of scientific research reveals that gay sex, in terms of health and safety, is actually not a valid alternative. The danger of practicing deviant sexual relations is evident in the massive number of sexually active gays who have tragically died or suffered from HIV and AIDS in the past thirty years.

Unfortunately, the onslaught of infections continues to this day. For instance, in December of 2012, the U.S Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - an independent, non-partisan governmental organization- released data that showed HIV infections “had remained steady in the general public between 2008 and 2010, [while] infections had risen by an incredible 22 percent in young gay men.” (U.S News, Flock, July 3 2013)

Moreover, “Gay men represented two-thirds of new infections. And nearly 6,000 gay men were dying of AIDS every year.”

Despite Hollywood’s positive and glamorous portrayal of homosexual couples in sitcoms and films, the CDC revealed a less flattering exposé by stating,** “If HIV continues to spread at its current rates, more than half of college-aged gay men will have HIV by the age of 50.” **(U.S News, Flock, July 3 2013)

With millions of dollars being channeled to pro-gay marketing firms, political action campaigns, and sympathetic media outlets, the LGBT movement has successfully popularized the notion that sodomy between two men poses the same health risks as vaginal intercourse between a man and a woman. The LGBT movement knows that that popular perception is a myth, yet unconscionably perpetuates it to advance its same-sex marriage, and homosexuality-in-the-schools agenda, at the potential cost of millions of lives.

Indeed HIV and AIDS are significantly more common among homosexual men not because these virulent diseases are homophobic/prejudicial, but because the architecture of the human rectum was not designed for penile penetration rather for bowel evacuation. In addition, unlike the female genital canal, the anus did not evolve with built-in cellular properties to protect the male body from this deadly virus.

The LGBT movement is very aware of the disproportionate HIV/AIDS epidemic among the gay community, yet it continues to leverage its enormous political and financial power to uphold the Disneyesque fantasy that sexually active gay couples are just as healthy and functional as their heterosexual counterparts.

How will the legalization of same-sex marriage affect your family?

If same-sex marriage is made legal in your state – public schools will be legally required to teach your sons, grandsons, nephews etc. that homosexuality is a socially acceptable and equal alternative to heterosexuality. To avoid costly discrimination or defamation lawsuits from gay parents or federal and state authorities, school educators will deliberately avoid teaching the true health risks of male-to-male sodomy. Without knowledge of the full risks of MSM sodomy, the young male members of your family may feel recreational anal sex is safe enough to try, and by trying it just once, they could tragically join the fifty percent of young American gay men who are projected to contract HIV by the age of 50.

If you believe in freedom, then free your mind from the media elite’s false propaganda and politically-correct mythology, and purify it with pristine truth. If you’re motivated by justice, then advocate against the LGBT movement’s harmful crusade to promote high-risk homosexual behavior to our nation’s children. And if love guides your heart, then show love for your brethren by demanding LGBT leaders to place human life over political aggrandizement by making HIV/AIDS – not marriage- their first and foremost priority.

May peace be with you!

References:
Flock, Elizabeth. Gay Community Won Battles on Marriage, But May Be Losing the War on HIV/AIDS. U.S News, 3 July. 2013. Web. 9 July. 2013. ‹ usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/03/gay-community-won-battles-on-marriage-but-may-be-losing-war-on-hivaids >