Detroit Free Press columnist Desiree Cooper says it doesn't matter if a dead elderly homosexual died of gay-bashing, as he claimed, or, as the autopsy found, of a degenerative disease that caused his spine to compress. What really matters, she says, is that he's a useful symbol for pushing hate-crimes legislation.
There is no evidence that this man was gay-bashed, but Desiree Cooper finds it so useful to believe that she's decided the truth does not matter. And she's a journalist! What would Desiree Cooper say to the US military officials who decided to play Pat Tillman's friendly-fire death as a death-by-Taliban, because it was more politically useful that way?
By the by, I'm completely against hate-crimes legislation, which is really just criminalizing thought. All crime is in some sense hate crime. I resent the idea that one beating is somehow worse than another because of the motive of the thug who committed the crime.

Add to Newsvine
Add to StumbleUpon
Looking back at this, I wonder why it is that the Right, namely of the theistic sort, has absolutely no problem whining and pandering to lawmakers over some perceived outrage, demanding that someone take action (usually followed by a *sob* and a sniffled "for the chidren!") would balk at other gorups exercising their right to participate in the completely effed up process that has become the law in this country?
Two words, TV: Self-righteous moral certitude. Okay, three words. [No smileys here; I am sadly quite serious.]
And hasten to add: I don't accept your restriction to "the Right". I see it on both sides.
Well, to be fair, one doesn't often hear the left adding "for the cheeeeeldren!" *sob* after their demands for injunctions against books being in libraries or potty mouth on television. One does, however, hear it in relation to environmental causes and war.
Hmmm. Interesting. At any rate, it's effective, especially in the world of the sound bite. While we can certainly bemoan the loss of reasoned discourse, in the meantime, those who play the game well win the immediate battles. I don't think there's any choice but to play the game by the rules as they exist. If we play the game by the rules we *wish* were in place, we'll get stomped by those who know the game better than we. Can't have *that*.
Well, to be fair ;), we do hear the Left pouting and sobbing about the poor little cheeldren's self-esteem because they score poorly on standardized tests, or because they are stigmatized because they can't run as far or jump as high... From my POV, there are laudable and ridiculous examples galore on both sides. As for rules, I prefer to point out the emperor's undersized genitalia hiding under the oversized paunch, and actually mention that I know this because he is, in fact, naked. There's truth, ugly truth, and ways of expressing truth that serve to hide it. You and I, TV, will only ever argue over methods of expression; I have no doubt that we see the same truth.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.