On Nov 29, 2004, at 2:24 PM, Richard Baker wrote:
Posting what I can only take to be not very serious incitements to kill religious people is certainly counterproductive and manifestly inflammatory.
I was wondering when someone would hit upon the idea that perhaps I was being more than a little facetious.
There's a serious intent, though, and it comes in the form of a question I really want answered. Suppose there's a group of people (such as the Klan, which does in fact still exist) that actively promotes killing those with whom they don't agree, and which in fact does so from time to time -- and which also strives, through every effort imaginable, to make the lives miserable, even unlivable, of those whom they hate.
I would like to know why it's considered so out of line to think of those people, those active oppressors, as viable targets for any kind of retribution, to any scale. I mean, where is the *opposite* line drawn? Where do we say, "okay, freedom of expression is one thing -- but you guys must cease this behavior immediately"? Is it after the first death? The fiftieth? What if we see it coming in a new cadre who hasn't even done anything yet? Because you *can* see it coming, usually months or even years in advance.
Perhaps the ones so strenuously objecting have never been the targets or organized hatred. Maybe that's why people who find my point of view shocking find it so shocking. But when you've lived under that shroud of bigotry, targeted hatred and incessant censure, believe me, your ability to put up with it becomes severely strained.
I should never have to hear things like "god hats fags" or "kill a queer for Christ" -- and when I do, I think it's entirely understandable that I feel personally targeted, personally threatened. Is it very surprising that I would feel utterly sanguine about eliminating, by any means necessary, those who promote such hateful views?
I think what I'm saying here is "don't judge me until you've walked a mile in my moccasins". How long am I supposed to put up with the hatred, the loathing, the lies and the threats? WHY am I supposed to put up with any of it? By what right do others condemn me to a life of fear and quiet acceptance of continued social assault? Under whose idea of morality is it appropriate for me to just be quiet and take what I deserve like a good little queer?
And do try to come up with better arguments than "it makes you no better than them" -- that's simply not an acceptable answer. Also try to come up with a better remedy than social discourse; while the ethicists talk, the bigots march and kill. I don't want to be a sacrifice to someone else's idea of nobility.
It's MY life and MY liberty that are on the line here. And it is a deeply personal issue that any GLBT person should be aware of and should be fighting like hell to change.
-- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
