We saw this coming. When the gay activists at KnowThyNeighbor put the petition for the protection of marriage amendment up on a web site, I noted from the beginning that there were overtones of intimidation, even as they encouraged other activists to use the list to find out which of their friends, family, and neighbors had signed and use that as a means of confronting them. We saw how that worked out back in December when one gay activist threatened to “beat the ‘Catholic’ out of” her mother when she found she had signed.
Today’s Boston Globe shows the intimidation is escalating. In the gay enclave of Provincetown, the gay majority is openly harassing and intimidating the tiny Portuguese Catholic minority of St. Peter the Apostle Catholic and others who signed the petition. Among the lovely tactics is calling straight people “breeders” or “bigot”.
One St. Peter’s parishioner, Yvonne Cabral, was verbally accosted last Friday by Provincetown Magazine publisher Rick Hines after Hines learned that Cabral signed the petition, according to police.
Police Chief Ted Meyer plans to seek charges of disorderly conduct against Hines, who saw Cabral shopping and loudly called her a ``bigot,” according to both Hines and Meyer. Other people who signed the petition—and subsequently had their names posted on the same website—said manure has been spread on their properties in recent months, Meyer added.
... The Rev. Henry J. Dahl, pastor at St. Peter’s, heard about what happened to Cabral, and about another parishioner who said she felt intimidated after a flier was stuck on her car in the middle of the night with a list of the names of petition signers—including her own. Dahl decided to call the police chief.
Ah yes, the vaunted tolerance of liberals. This is nothing more than a crime. Hate crime is a category of thought crime invented by liberals, but it fits the definition they have applied to it too. Will the authorities treat it with the same vigorous attention if the situation were reversed? Will we see anti-Catholicism given the attention that “homophobia” receives?
So what do you call it when a minority (gay activists) persecutes a majority (believers in traditional morality)? In the past it’s been called “brownshirt” tactics. I think the moniker still fits. And it’s not just in Provincetown either, but the denial of democratic rights to the voters by a political elite is another example.
[Thanks to Harry Forbes for the link.]Technorati Tags:anti-Catholic, homosexuality, marriage, Massachusetts, politics, religious persecution, same-sex marriage
bk_keywords:anti-Catholicism.
Elderly folks in my former parish told me that a “couple” of lesbians who lived next to them screamed at them in public after reading their names on the list. This after the elderly gent had, for years, shoveled their sidewalk and driveway after every snowstorm, had helped them repair their fence and done countless acts of charity for them—including bringing them food from time to time because they were regularly ‘out of work.’
After saying “hello” one afternoon, the pair of lesbians yelled, “Don’t you ever talk to me again, you (bleeping) bigots! Catholics are (expletives) and have no business being alive.”
Tolerance, thy name is gay-dom.
They’re panicking because they know the end is near. The legislature has to vote and if the people are allowed to vote, same-sex marriage will go down in flames.
I know we have a long ways to go but it would appear that some gays are cracking under the pressure.
There are several pro- and anti- gay partnership referenda on Colorado’s ballot this year. I hope the intimidation doesn’t repeat itself here. The gay rights folk are getting tons of money from wealthy liberals, and they might have the resources to pull a knowthyneighbor clone.
Renee said:
So please we must always use charity and address the person’s behavior not their orientation.
Why not their orientation? I don’t get it?
Actually Renee, you can say whatever you want. And in fact they can say whatever they want. Ultimately, societal norms get set by a vigorous open debate/discussion. If what they say encourages, incites, or leads to violence that is a completely different story and obviuosly a problem. But DO NOT BE AFRAID to stand up for what you believe and to speak the truth. I would suggest that you not limit your topics of discussion, because that is the purpose of the threats and intimidation tactics. At the same time, make sure that you say whatever you do with kindness and love and make sure that if you feel unsafe to protect yourself. There are a number of ways to do that.
But suppression of your right to vote, or your right to sign a petition or your right to speak is the only way they can win this battle. They cannot win it on logic and they cannot win it on truth. So they resort to basic instincts of scare tactics. This by the way is exactly how they changed the mental disorder of homosexuality to be no longer listed as a mental disorder by the American Psychiatric Association (in 1973) whose members were threatened (for 2 years at their annual convention and intimdated into changing a medical finding into a political decision to no longer “offend” the minority and to end the harrasment. So much for scientific integrity. Tolerance . . . what a joke.
It is not a civil right todisenfranchise voters. We must demand that our legislators permit us our vote. And if they don’t we must inflict pain on them (from the voting booth to lawsuits, to scorn) for such an injustice.
Kevin said:
The gay rights folk are getting tons of money from wealthy liberals, and they might have the resources to pull a knowthyneighbor clone.
Kevin, I am sorry to tell you . . . we are in a spiritual battle. It involves pain. That’s why they call it a battle. Bad news is . . . the other side is going to use every tactic they can to get you to fear what they have coming next. The worst news is . . . although we all know we are in the battle, we are going to accept that treatment. We are unwilling to do whatever it takes to win. We will get the sand kicked in our face over and over again. We will ask them to stop. We will say, if you stop we will do this and this and this. And they will kick the sand right into our faces and we will offer more and more concessions. We will surrender, retreat and offer compromise after compromise until there is nothing else to give up, nowhere left to go, and nothing left to compromise. And they will continue to demand we give up more.
But our side is “nice”. Our side is “kind.” Our side would never tell all of the truth, because we might be called “mean” or “bigots.” Or we might be called intolerant or uncaring. Or we might be shunned. Or we might be looked at the wrong way. Our side would never stand up for what is right and demand that we get it.
Well, if that’s the case, we have lost. Notwithstanding our stewardship, we will endlessly relinquish what is good and what is right with the hopes of being called tolerant and “nice.” And we will never be fulfilled, because we can not meet their standards of good and nice. We will beg and beg but never achieve the goal. God help the society and troubles we leave to our children and our grandchildren.
We live in a free country. There is a cost to freedom. If you are unwilling to pay the price, you will lose your freedom.
Congratulations. good luck with everything. You have much more important things to do to raise your family . . . a great way to fight the battle.
I have to give the Globe credit for reporting this story!
Dear Margret and Renee,
I want to thank you for the Christian witness that you are both giving by living Christian, Catholic, Motherhood and Womanhood. This is the greatest arguement that can be put forward, happy loving Christian families. One of the reasons that I think we are loosing this battle for the moment is the breakdown of families and the scandal this has caused modern man. So thank you for living your vocation.
And, I would not be too concerned about giving up this debate for the sake of your family, Renee. I was down at the State Capitol for the hearings about marriage in 2004, and was abused by homosexuals (one of whom even interupted the Mass I attended at the Paulist center). One thing I learned that day is that for the most part we are not dealing with rational people. We can argue all day until we are blue in the face but it won’t change the fact that the people we are arguing with/about are sick. They are emotionally and psychologically involved in a disordered lifestyle that is addictive. And, having been told by many sexual free thinkers (many of whom themselves are/were homosexuals) that their lifestyle is normal, e.g. Kinsey, there is little chance that they will be won over by arguements (but they may be won over by our Christian witness).
The fact of the matter is that from a strictly biological point of view man like all animals is meant to reproduce. “Be fruitful and multiply,” is not just from the book of Genesis but also from the book of Darwin. Failure to reproduce in humans as in all animals is a sign of defect, physical not moral. Celebacy (or homosexuality for that matter) makes absolutely no sense from a natural point of view, and while some of us our celebates “for the sake of the kingdom” (for supernatural reasons), homosexuality for the sake of pleasure lacks any basis natural or supernatural.
Homosexuals will always quickly point out that man is also meant to be in relationship, to love, but this arguement also betrays them. Love is about seeking the good for the other, and obviously if it leads to a failure to reproduce—as well as the long list of emotional, psychological, and physical problems that homosexuals are prone to—then homosexuality can’t be authentically about love. A homosexual truely loving relationship is call friendship, and involves no genitality.
So thank you again, and remember to pray for those who persecute you.
In Christ Jesus
“They might have the resources to pull a knowthyneighbor clone.”
Kevin, they already did. If you go check out the website, you’ll see that they now have a Massachusetts section and a Florida section.
MaryJane, I’ll be emailing you shortly…
I was thinking of ordering “Know Me Neighbor” I signed the petition signs and selling them. I can get cheap.
Any takers?
great idea, give them out to people at the November concon.
Have you seen the don’t write discrfimination into the constitution ones that MassEquality puts out. I was thinking that they have found a great way of putting people on our side on the defensive. Why don’t we ever do that?
So I have two more ideas for you:
1. “Disenfranchising voters is NOT a civil right.”
and
2. “Give me Liberty or Give me the Massachusetts Legislature.”
Robert Paine, Esq.
This one however might get confused with Thomas Paine’s famous statement.
I suspect you’d want royalties from that one.