A lie in Massachusetts

I'm shocked that the Concord Monitor chose to publish David Testerman's letter, "Homosexual agenda puts our values at stake". I'm always shocked when a paper publishes as an "opinion" piece something that is full of factual errors. To say "I believe gay people are immoral" is an opinion; specific claims about specific events that happened in a specific place are either facts or falsehoods.

I'm also tired of hearing about the Homosexual Agenda. The planning committee is still working on it, and we're stuck on whether we want to ask for pink triangle lanes at the supermarket or pink triangle parking spaces at the hair salon.

Mr. Testerman writes:

Homosexual activists have laid out a thorough plan to gain acceptance of homosexual behavior in America

Oh, darn it, and they forgot to invite me to the planning meeting again!

We all have seen what this 1 percent to 2 percent of our population has done to destroy the fabric of our country.

Yup, we have. Absolutely nothing at all.

A late-stage step in that plan is legislation that would create stiffer penalties for crimes against those who identified themselves as homosexual than against other citizens.

Where do they make this nonsense up? I've never met or even heard of a gay person demanding such an outrageous thing. What many gay people (and not all) do ask for is laws to create stiffer penalties for crimes in which the criminal has made clear their belief that the victim is gay and that they are committing the crime because of this belief. Such laws protect not only gay people, but also straight people who are incorrectly perceived to be gay. And, they are not applicable in cases where the victim is gay but the criminal did not know or perceive the fact, or in cases in which the victim is gay and the criminal did know but the fact was not related to their decision to commit the crime. Indeed, hate crime laws are difficult to apply to most cases, because unless the criminal specifically says something to indicate that hate was their motivation for committing the crime, there is usually no evidence to indicate that it was in fact a hate crime.

Mr. Testerman continues:

It has already happened in the United States, where local hate-crime laws have been enacted. In Philadelphia, Christians ranging in age from 17 to 72 were arrested and jailed for singing hymns and carrying signs encouraging homosexuals to repent.

I don't know if Mr. Testerman is ignorant of the facts or is deliberately lying, but his statement is untrue. What actually happened is that a group of people who claim to be Christian were arrested and jailed because they invaded a gay rights event (which had a lawfully issued permit to parade and assemble in a public place) without a permit and loudly attempted to disrupt the gay rights event, and then refused to leave when asked to. So, these supposed Christians walked into what legally amounts to being a private party and made a point to be as loud and annoying as possible, and then refused to leave... and they have the gall to try to make it look like it's the gay people's fault that they were arrested?

Mr. Testerman writes:

House Resolution 254 establishes a federal hate-crime law. It creates special protection and stiffer penalties for crimes motivated by someone's actual or perceived "sexual orientation." The law does not, in itself, criminalize speech against homosexual behavior.

That's correct. Remember that.

But it will open the door to criminalization of speech.

Last I checked, criminalization of speech was still prohibited by both state and federal constitutions in the United States, and no law passed by congress can change that fact. I consequently conclude that Mr. Testerman is either ignorant of this basic aspect of how our government works, or is trying to whip up hysteria to get people to act against laws protecting innocent people.