SPLC Tells Americans to 'Fight Hate' by Voting Democrat
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
On the eve of the midterm elections, the far-Left smear group the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) urged Americans to "fight hate" by voting — and they don't mean voting to support President Donald Trump or his party. In fact, the group clearly intended to convey the message, "To fight hate, vote Democrat."
"The midterm elections on Tuesday are not about partisan politics," SPLC President Richard Cohen said in post called " To fight hate, vote ." Cohen argued that the midterms are "about the future of our country. Whatever your political persuasion, reject hate and vote."
The post began by referencing three horrific attacks and suggesting that President Trump was the source behind them:
First, a white gunman killed two African Americans in Jeffersontown, Kentucky, after trying to break into a black church.
Then, a man who reportedly identified as a white supremacist was arrested for mailing pipe bombs to President Barack Obama, George Soros, Hillary Clinton and other people President Trump has criticized.
And on Saturday morning, as worshippers gathered at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, a white gunman shouted “All Jews must die” as he opened fire, killing 11 people .
Behind each attack was the same kind of naked hate.
Notice the subterfuge. The SPLC only mentioned Trump in the case of Cesar Sayoc, the alleged "MAGA bomber." The political affiliation of the alleged Jeffersontown shooter remains unknown, and it seems unlikely this hater of black people would be glad to hear Trump hosted a huge meeting of black conservatives at the White House just last week. The Pittsburgh synagogue shooter loathed Trump, attacking him as controlled by Jews.
The SPLC previously attempted to tie Trump to the synagogue shooter, despite the fact that shooter hated Trump. The group also suggested Trump's opposition to "globalism" is coded language for anti-Semitism . Trump, the proud father of a convert to Judaism and a staunch supporter of the state of Israel, seems an odd target for charges of anti-Semitism. Trump's opposition to globalism has everything to do with the UN and loss of national sovereignty and nothing to do with anti-Semitism.
The SPLC's post went on to describe other horrific acts of terror:
Last week’s terrorist attacks were far from the first of their kind. Three years ago, white supremacist Dylann Roof massacred nine African Americans at a church in Charleston. Three years before that, neo-Nazi Wade Michael Page killed six at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin. And there have been many other far-right attacks and plots in recent years.
"This irrational fear that 'the other' — minorities and people of color — will take the country away from whites is the through-line connecting a spate of violence targeted at houses of worship across different religions in just the past six years," Heidi Beirich, director of the SPLC's Intelligence Project, argued.
If it were not clear the SPLC's remarks against "hate" were aimed at Trump and his party, the group made it clear Tuesday morning by tying Trump's immigration policy to "white supremacist goals."
The SPLC focuses on "hate crimes," and this obsession blinds them to the fact that there have been 1,705 deadly force attacks against religious organizations — churches, mosques, synagogues, temples — since 1999, only 5.87 percent of which were motivated by animus against people groups.
None of this diminishes the utter disgusting evil of the Pittsburgh shooter, the MAGA bomber, the white supremacist Charleston shooter, or others. It does suggest, and underscore, the fact that the SPLC specifically chooses the attacks that fit their narrative, conveniently ignoring those that do not.
According to Carl Chinn , founder of the Faith Based Security Network, the deadly-force attacks were motivated by robbery (25.97 percent), domestic disputes (16 percent), personal conflict (13.6 percent), mental illness (10.97 percent), or gang-related issues (8.89 percent).
Chinn remarked that "the Southern Poverty Law Center is a flagship for what's wrong with the study of hate crimes." The SPLC brands mainstream conservative and Christian groups "hate groups," and focuses on instances of apparent animus against people due to their skin color, sexual orientation, or other characteristics. The group has been known to fall for "hate" hoaxes and to fail to correct the record afterwards.
Most important for any description of fighting "hate," however, the SPLC has published a "hate map" plotting every "hate group" across America. One terrorist used this "hate map" to attack the Family Research Council (FRC), intending to shoot everyone in the building. The man who shot Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) at the congressional baseball game shooting last year, and aimed to kill many congressional Republicans, also "liked" the SPLC on Facebook . The SPLC had repeatedly attacked Scalise specifically.
In its haste to fight "hate," it seems the SPLC has itself inspired a great deal of "hate." Furthermore, the SPLC wrongly listed Maajid Nawaz , a Muslim reformer, as an "anti-Muslim extremist." The group paid Nawaz's organization $3.375 million in a settlement, and about 60 organizations immediately began discussing whether or not they have a defamation case against the SPLC.
The SPLC has wielded the "hate group" label as a cudgel against anyone brazen enough to oppose liberal orthodoxy on issues ranging from Islam to immigration to LGBT activism. The group branded ACT for America a "hate group," leading Hyatt Hotels to ban them last month .
The Left-wing smear group has branded Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a Christian law firm that won nine Supreme Court cases in the last seven years, a "hate group," twisting out of context decades-old quotes about homosexuality. The SPLC also placed D. James Kennedy Ministries on their "hate group" list, leading Amazon to exclude the nonprofit from its charity program, Amazon Smile. D. James Kennedy Ministries responded with a lawsuit .
The SPLC branded the small Catholic nonprofit the Ruth Institute a "hate group," citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church's position against same-sex marriage. By the SPLC's logic , 1 billion human beings belong to an anti-LGBT hate group headed by Pope Francis.
After the white nationalist riots in Charlottesville, Va., last year, the SPLC published a "hate map" plotting Confederate monuments. This map, released at a time when protesters were targeting these monuments for violent protest and vandalism, included elementary schools , middle schools, and high schools. The map even included Stonewall Elementary , which was named after a stone wall, not General Stonewall Jackson.
As Americans vote on Tuesday, they would do well to discount any advice from the SPLC. Voting Democrat does not constitute voting "against hate."
Indeed, Shane Mekeland, a Republican candidate for Minnesota's state House, blamed Democrats for inspiring the incivility that led a man to punch him out of nowhere, leaving him with a concussion and the inability to campaign outside without getting a headache.
"They're constantly driving this narrative of 'It's okay to be violent,'" Mekeland said. How do they drive this narrative? Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) called on activists to harass members of the Trump administration in public places like gas stations and restaurants. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) encouraged activists to "get up in the face" of Republican candidates and office-holders. Hillary Clinton said Democrats "cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for." Eric Holder declared , "When they go low, we kick them."
America's civility crisis is a good reason to vote Republican , not Democrat. The SPLC, in seeking to find any excuse to connect Trump to the latest domestic tragedy, seems utterly blind to the dangers of a Democratic mob. They're too busy finding anti-Semitic "dogwhistles" uttered by a president who welcomed Jews into his family with open arms.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
104 visitors
Holy crackers. The pipe bombers van in Florida is emblazoned with the Trump message of peace, harmony and love. Dems must be nuts. The SPLC is funded by the Saudis and Russians, right?
s/
Correct! And what about the other billion who are in hate groups not headed by the Pope (Peace be Upon Him)
Warning: When I get bored I like to engage in a bit of gentle trolling...hehehe
Except that the SPLC has never designated the Catholic Church a hate group.
There is a concerted effort to delegitimize the SPLC by certified hate groups...
Do not buy the rank bullshit being sold here. The SPLC legitimately certifies real hate groups. When mistakes are made, the SPLC is a big organization and there are a whole lot of dangerous hate groups out there, they admit it and correct it. This is indicative of a good organization trying to do great works which naturally draws criticism from the real haters they identify, certify and track. Of course the KKK and Skin Heads hate the SPLC. Taking such criticism goes with the territory. Knowing what I know of the SPLC, I would be very leery of any groups the SPLC has officially certified as official hate groups. Which are, unsurprisingly, those most often seen being critical of the SPLC. Full Disclosure - Morris Dees is a friend and my real name is inscribed on The Wall of Tolerance at SPLC HQ in Montgomery, AL...
Do religious conservatives feel threatened by the SPLC?
Ah, so when they only complain about the last twenty rows of people at a Trump rally, then everything's a-okay... Those front 20 rows, totally different people. Sure, those guys in the back twenty will openly tell you about how much they hated having a black man as President for 8 years while the front twenty rows will only tell you how much they hated having a "liberal" as President for 8 years, who, for some reason, doesn't represent their values, you know, those of being born white.
When these bigoted organizations want to bring about Christian Sharia laws, then yes, they are HATE groups.
What bunch of hyperbolic nonsense. Christian Sharia law in the US? Hilarious!
You want to see good examples of Sharia type law? Go to places like Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. You'd shit your pants in places like that. In the USA? Not so much.
When these organizations want to take away rights of people they don't like because the bible tells them so, then yes, that is trying to impose Christian Sharia laws.
I have no reason to go to those countries thank you very much.
Damn right right you don't ..... those freedoms aren't really under attack here in the US.
In those countries your "freedoms" would already be heavily regulated by such laws ..... so give me a call when this country starts to become even remotely like that (which it isn't, not even close) and i'll be right there to help defend the folks being oppressed.
I don't want what happens in those countries to ever happen here, so these so called religious groups need to be called out for what they really are.
I wouldn't break out the worry jar quite yet but like i said. If that ever becomes reality here, i'll be right there with you to help stop it. And i know i'm not alone.
Oh and by the way, i'm Christian.
You are really angry because you cannot post articles1/* from The Stream, aren't you?
Legislating conservative Christian beliefs as secular law is just as tyrannical as legislating Islamic beliefs as secular law in the countries that you mentioned. That is why we refer to it as Christian Sharia. The fact that not even all Protestant Christian sects agree with those Christian Sharia ideas is lost on you and many others. All religion is to be kept separate from secular law and the state because of the Establishment Clause that creates a wall separating church and state unless you know more than Thomas Jefferson, John Adams,, and James Madison.
We cannot possibly have guaranteed equal religious rights for all people, regardless of their faith or lack thereof if the government is enforcing the religious beliefs of one group as secular law. If the government would enforce the religious beliefs of even a Protestant sect then the members of every other Christian belief, even those who are also Protestant have fewer rights and that leads to fighting, social upheaval and instability of the government. The only stable and rational stance on religion is to keep all religion and the government absolutely separate at all levels of the government. People have the right to believe and worship as they see fit but the government must be secular. If you work for the government then you must keep your religious beliefs separate from your job. If you cannot do that then find a job in the private sector that allows you to exercise your religious beliefs as you choose.
You are unhinged today.
There is no proof to support your beliefs.
so you are upset because Dave Van Zandt doesn't indulge and believe in your mythology as fervently as you do - he doesn't lockstep with your beliefs so you have branded him, logic and facts as your enemies since they don't agree with your unproven mythological beliefs ?
The Catholic church does not teach any of those ideas in their private schools. They do teach evolution.
This is their idea on the Great Flood,
On the subject of angels,
How is this guy a bigot? He is about as white bread as is possible.
Nah, actually none of it is lost on me.
What is however lost on many is the level of real religious freedom (or not, everyone is free to choose) here in this country is unparalleled when compared to countries that can be defined to have real "sharia" type laws. It's not even in the same zip code here and its an absolutely ridiculous comparison to make
So when progressive asshats comes on here and try to make that comparison, they are just pushing more of their usual progressive, batshit crazism.
Nothing more. nothing less.
Religious freedom, like others rights has limits to protect the equal religious and secular rights of others from being trampled on. Our religious rights are the right to believe in or not to believe god(s) and the right to worship as we choose to do. Our rights end when they come into contact with the equal rights of others because your religious beliefs do not allow you to force others to take part in your religious beliefs, just as they do not have the right to force their religious beliefs on you. I used to think that this idea, as well as the strict separation of church and state, were self-explanatory, but I have since learned that is not the situation.
Too bad neither you nor anyone else has ever been able to even remotely empirically support such claims. They're just plain absurd!
If the shoe fits. Although, pseudoscience is still giving your beliefs too much credit. And your beliefs are not free from logical analysis or scrutiny simply because it's a belief.
Nice ad hom attack and whining. But you can disagree all you want. The difference is, those who accept evolution have scientific facts and evidence on their side, while your beliefs are just...belief (or wishful thinking). You have no objective empirical support. See the difference?
Apparently those Catholics aren't entirely stupid.
That may be because the Genesis account is a lie, or more accurately, a myth. It seems there are some Catholics with common sense to know that.
Yet you believe the stories depicted in Genesis? So that doesn't really change the fact of what I said.
i never mentioned anything about Dave Van Zandt's personal belief's or personal belief system. Try reading this again:
Dave Van Zandt looks for facts and evidence - two things your favorite mythology lacks. His personal belief system is irrelevant. So i guess we have established that facts, logic and evidence are your enemies, correct ?
That's been well established long ago.
that's quite a conspiracy theory your conservative mind has dreamt up. i'm not sure why you can't comprehend that your mythological beliefs lack facts/evidence/logic which is why they are categorized accordingly. Just because you fervently believe in them doesn't make them verifiably true due to lack of evidence/facts/logic. Plus, as pointed out to you on other threads, there are Christian sites he doesn't label as fake since they stick to actual facts/evidence/logic. It seems you are opposed to facts/evidence/logic since they seem to disagree with your mythological beliefs.
And you also just affirmed what Phoenyx said too. But as I said, Genesis (as with many other biblical stories) is just a myth, with ZERO supporting evidence. So you can believe whatever you want. But belief does not equal fact, nor is it free from scrutiny!
Wow, that's some active imagination you have there. Conspiracy theory anyone?
Willie Sutton was once asked why he robbed banks and his answer was "that's where the money is." So it is with the SPLC --it goes where the hate is.
No shit?!
Why do you believe a book of myths, when much of it was plagiarized from earlier religions? Why do you choose to believe verbatim a book that was written almost 1900 years ago by very mortal men who didn't have the education level of an associates degree? Most of high school math and science was unknown to them. The Bible is not the literal word of god, despite what you may wish to believe, because it didn't drop out of the sky and be found beside of the 15 (scratch that..)10 commandments. Which translation do you believe is true?
There are many contridictions in the Bible, so what passage do you believe in that situation?
There are many other religious books that are much older than the Bible, so why don't you believe them instead? Books such as the Bhagavad Gita. The Chinese book I Ching is even older.
Secular freedom, like others rights has limits to protect the equal secular and religious rights of others from being trampled on. Secular rights are the right to not believe in or to believe in god(s) and the right to worship as we choose to do. Our rights end when they come into contact with the equal rights of others because your non religious beliefs do not allow you to force others to take part in those non religious beliefs, just as they do not have the right to force their secular beliefs on believers. I used to think that this idea, as well as the strict separation of church and state, were self-explanatory, but I have since learned that is not the situation. Since so many secularist have a problem with and sanctimoniously mock believers who practice their own chosen faith.
See what i did there? What you apparently don't realize is, that knife cuts both ways. Not really that hard to understand for a truly unbiased mind.
All rights logically must have limits to prevent others from being harmed or their rights from being trampled. The question is where that line is drawn, and it usually goes to the SCOTUS to do it when they rule on Constitutional interpretation. You should have learned this is your high school civics requirement.
Do you believe that your religious rights are being threatened by the actions of others?
do you think it depends on how those believers choose to practice their chosen faith ? what if their chosen way to practice their chosen faith violates secular laws - which prevails ?
I believe that's what all their hysteria is about. The SPLC goes after people who are, if not directly involved in KKK or white nationalist/supremacist groups, are certainly sympathetic to them.
The name is enough to make me distrust the organization, sounds like they want to make laws to keep southerners poor. They could have come up with something better
Only the ones who make hatemongering their stock-in-trade.
Well, of course, that completely false but we also completely understand why you have to keep peddling that lie.
Do you have a copy of the WaPo article? I refuse to trust the abridged version on WND or Breitbart.
I went to the WaPo site but I also do not have a subscription so I can't read it and verify that it says what you claim that it does. If you are going to cite a written work as proof of your ideas then you need to post that same work for others to read.
Oh please, give it a rest !
And, the SPLC will keep lighting up intolerant cockroaches of hatred...
That's not something I'd be proud of. More like embarrassed.
You mean hate groups.
Of course you are proud to associate with hate groups. Not surprising. it also speaks volumes about you.
You mean just like those other conservative based groups too.
The difference is, your organizations only want to deny rights to certain groups. There's nothing honorable about that.
So now you have to resort to juvenile ad hom attacks. How typical.
You don't actually address anything I said, much less refute my post or support yours. No surprise either.
Oh, sure there is (as well as being a pack of lies) and that's trying to mount an attack on the SPLC which has been the tip of the spear against hate and bigotry, and at great personal risk for obvious reasons, in the South and the entire country for decades. That's obviously the reason has become such a target of hatred by the alt-right.
While said conservative group/s try to prohibit or deny other groups their rights.
What rights have been denied exactly? Last I checked, individual rights are still in full effect.
Pot meet kettle.
Well, you can dream.
Jesus, HA. You keep using rightwing garbage sources and then wonder why you can't be taken seriously.
You can keep repeating that lie until your last breath but it will still be a lie.
I see you're didn't even bother citing one of your seemingly endless supply of rightwing pukefunnel sources for that one. Did you manufacture it yourself?
That's just one of the reasons that 99% of what you put up here as articles and comments is complete bullshit, a substance to which you seem to be completely addicted--so much so, that no amount of fact or truth seems to have any effect on you.
That's obvious and explains why your comments are so devoid of anything resembling fact but chock full of evidence for why you really hate the SPLC--it fights bigotry, racism and hate groups and that really gets under your skin, right?
Why this author continues to put up extreme rightwing lies like this one and pretend they have any factual basis and expect this garbage to be taken seriously is beyond rational explanation.