Homosexual Activists Disrupt Church Service, Bash Christians

Coming to a church near you. Lessons in “tolerance” from homosexual activists who show us just how peaceful, loving, understanding, fair, and unbiased they really are.

Catholic Online | Deacon Keith Fournier | Nov. 12, 2008

This past Sunday, during a Worship Service at the Church, a group of loud and intentionally disruptive homosexual activists stood outside of the sanctuary of Mount Hope dressed in strange pink attire. Using megaphones for amplification, they shouted epithets at those entering the service such as “Jesus is a homo”. They also mockingly carried an upside down pink cross.

Reports filed with the Eaton County Sheriff’s office indicate that other demonstrators had staged a further action intended to disrupt the Sunday Worship at Mount Hope. Dressed in clothing which would not have indicated their intention, they entered into the sanctuary and were seated with the community. Then, in an orchestrated manner, they left their seats, pulled fire alarms, distributed anti-Christian literature and stormed the Pastor’s pulpit waving a rainbow colored flag and shouting “It’s Okay To Be Gay! Bash Back”.

The organization behind this action is called “Bash Back”. They describe themselves as “a radical trans/queer/anarcha-feminist group” committed to “fight for liberation while rejecting all forms of state power.” In a news release, Bash Back referred to Mt. Hope Church as “a deplorable anti-queer mega church.” They further elaborated their disdain for the Christian community at Mt. Hope on their web site in these words: “The Mount Hope Church is a deplorable, anti-queer mega-church in Lansing, Michigan. The church works to institutionalize transphobia and homophobia through several repulsive projects including organized “ex-gay” conferences and so-called “hell houses”, which depict queers, trannies and womyn who seek abortions as the horrors. Mt. Hope is complicit in the repression of queers in Michigan and beyond.”

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization led by Bill Donohue, Ph.D., has called on the Attorney General of State of Michigan to institute an investigation. The catholic League issued the following release:

GAY FASCISTS STORM CHURCH
On Sunday, November 9, a band of about 30 gays stormed a church in Lansing, Michigan. Some were well dressed and were stationed inside Mount Hope Church; others were outside dressed in pink and black. The group of self-described homosexual anarchists, Bash Back!, claims the evangelical church is guilty of “transphobia and homophobia.”

The protesters outside the church were beating on buckets, shouting “Jesus was a homo” on a megaphone and carrying an upside-down pink cross. Fire alarms went off inside the church, protesters stormed the pulpit and a huge rainbow-colored flag was unfurled with the inscription, “IT’S OKAY TO BE GAY! BASH BACK!” The church was vandalized, obscenities were shouted and worshippers were confronted. There were no arrests.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue addressed this issue today:

“The real story here is the refusal of the mainstream media to cover what is surely one of the most disturbing events of 2008. If an organized group of gay bashers stormed a gay church, there is not a single sentient person in the United States who wouldn’t know about it.

“This is urban fascism come to America’s heartland. It must be quickly stopped before it gets out of control. We are contacting Mike Cox, the Attorney General of Michigan, calling for an investigation.”

. . . more

Comments

  1. Irony of ironies, the folks who cry out about not being tolerated aren’t tolerating others. What does one say?

  2. Harlemite,

    One says that these activists don’t advocate tolerance at all. I posit that they are actually incapable of being tolerant so long as people disagree with them or their agenda. They won’t rest until everyone believes as they do. Most people already tolerate them; the difference here is they are out to be completely accepted and want everyone to think that there’s nothing wrong with anything they do. They’re only trying so hard because they’re not even fooling themselves- they know their actions are wrong.

  3. And it looks like they make no exception for age! This is horrible!

  4. I have a muslim friend who says that we christians should perhaps rethink how we deal with homosexuals. Its a myth that Chrisitans are intolerant of course because if we were there would be no gays who would dare come to any church and do this. I dont see this happening in mosques . Maybe we SHOULD stop being tolerent and really show these gay scum what intolerance really looks like.

  5. Dimitri, there are militant social activists of every stripe. For the moment, let’s leave out the kooks like the Black Panthers, the “Bash Back” group mentioned here, the radical supporters of Timothy McVeigh and the Westboro Baptist Church that protests at the funerals of AIDS patients and American soldiers. These groups hardly represent society at large, would you not agree?

    In terms of “tolerance”, a certain level of discrimination is expected in society, and it should even be protected when engaged in by private organizations. Churches discriminate don’t they? They define who gets to join, remain a member and move up within its ranks based on gender, ideologies, behavior and a whole host of other criteria. If they don’t want gays or Jews or women, personally, I would defend their right to say as such. Likewise, if a private organization wants to enforce rigid “PC” ideologies within their ranks, so be it.

    The questions of free association and free speech become more difficult when talking about universities which receive government funding which is received by all segments of society. Many here have complained about the liberal bent and censorship in universities, but this happens on both sides of the political spectrum. Liberty University (Jerry Falwell’s) must “approve on-campus petitions, pickets and demonstrations” whether the student is on campus or off. How is this not a direct violation of free speech (assuming a student with a contrary opinion to the university’s exists)? On the flip side, you have certain religious groups denied similar things on other large universities. In both instances, I think the universities need to be less restrictive because as institutions of learning, they need to be able to encourage discourse and the flow of free ideas.

    Either way, I think your remarks were a bit heavy-handed. Keep in mind that for many years, gays couldn’t assemble even in private without a direct threat of violence or imprisonment. Bars have been raided by police even if no actual sexual conduct was occurring within it. A group of gay people who had gathered in Russia were physically assaulted and bloodied by counter-protesters (look it up on YouTube). This occurred relatively recently.

    I don’t agree with the actions of this group, and if they were violating the law, they should be arrested and fined. However, let’s not insist that gays by-and-large are on the offense within society.

  6. Keep in mind that for many years, gays couldn’t assemble even in private without a direct threat of violence or imprisonment.

    Well, now that they can I think hardly qualifies as society getting better.

    But the media cannot hide this. They had no problem telling the story of Matthew Sheppard, but they never even mentioned Jesse Dirkhising. Who was he? You don’t know because the media didn’t hold a memorial for him as they did Matthew Sheppard. Why didn’t they hold a memorial for him? Because when two gay men rape and torture a 13 year old boy it doesn’t fit the agenda. So the story, just like Jesse Dirkhising, was buried in 1999.

    13 year old Arkansas boy abducted and raped to death by 2 homosexuals

    BENTONVILLE — Rope bound Jesse Dirkhising’s hands to the ends of a baseball bat, and duct tape secured his mouth, which had a pair of underwear shoved inside.

    Joshua Macabe Brown propped pillows under the 13-year-old’s midsection and sodomized him with several items, Benton County Prosecuting Attorney Bob Balfe said Wednesday during opening statements in Brown’s capital murder and rape trial.

    Then, Brown, 22, left the bedroom of the Rogers apartment he shared with his older, homosexual lover and made a sandwich in the kitchen.

    “And while he ate that sandwich in the other room, Jesse slowly suffocated and died,” Balfe told jurors.

    Brown is on trial in the Sept. 26, 1999, death of Jesse, a Lincoln seventh-grader who prosecutors said was drugged when he died in the apartment shared by Brown and Davis Don Carpenter, 39.

  7. Jim Holman says:

    Robert quotes: “13 year old Arkansas boy abducted and raped to death by 2 homosexuals”

    Are you aware that the version you are quoting is from a white supremacist, neo-nazi-lite web site? They have a number of other interesting articles there, including “Letter To The White Race,” and “The Lying Negro Mayor Must Resign.” According to the web site the story in question was not reported because the “Zionist media mongers” suppressed it.

    Also, it’s not clear to me what that nine year old story has to do with this article, other than being a way to “stick it” to the gays. I’m sure that gays murder and rob banks and do all the other crimes that heterosexuals do, but so what?

  8. Blog-Editor says:

    Jim, As you oftern do, you insert an irrelevant comment and try to divert discussion into a meaningless direction. The location of the link is irrelevant, the truth about the horrible murder of Jesse Dirkhising is relevant.

    Here’s many other links that document this horrible incident which was largely ignored by the mainstream media:

    The Death of Jesse Dirkhising
    http://www.covenantnews.com/dirkhising.htm

    The tragic story of Jesse Dirkhising
    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29026

    No Media Memorial For Jesse Dirkhising
    http://www.mrc.org/bozellcolumns/newscolumn/1999/col19991029.asp

  9. Blog-Editor says:
  10. In terms of Eckern, are you saying it’s permissible to be able to fire or not hire someone simply because of perceived or actual sexual orientation, but it’s NOT permissible when they rudely return the favor and suggest they don’t to work with someone because their disapprove of their beliefs? I’m just trying to understand your point other than that gays should not only be forced legally to work with people who make them uncomfortable but enjoy it too (while Christians should be able to willy-nilly not hire or fire people based on whatever they happen to feel like basing it on). The AFA has boycotted private corporations who offer domestic partner benefits and who spend THEIR corporate money on whatever they feel like. If you’re trying to say that Christians aren’t in the practice of using political bullying to get what they want, you need to get a clue.

    Personally, I think people should suck it up and work out their differences, but what do I know.

    Also, I’m still intrigued as to how the young man’s murder has “relevance”. Should I start quoting statistics on heterosexual rape, murder, abortion, infanticide, theft, etc. etc. etc.? What relevance does it have to the discussion other than your disgust with the MSM (which is completely unrelated)?

    You know, for a site that’s supposed to be a voice box for the TRUTH, I’m not sure how much of it I’m getting here. I’ve always attempted to critique fairly whether it’s Christians, atheists, gays or whatever. It would be nice if you had a similar interest.

  11. Blog-Editor says:

    James, If you can’t see the difference between a boycot by groups due to stances by organizations and parents being forced to have their children indoctrinated by a public school against their religious and moral beliefs or someone being forced out of a job because they voted for a proposition, then there’s no point arguing this any more. I’m wasting my breath.

  12. James, what gives? Forgive me, but it appears you’re either too close to want to see what concerns us, you’re taking it personally for some reason, or both.

    If you can’t see the cause of concern of people like myself and others, that is, the connection between the bullying tactics of the gay lobby (see the main story, and the many links provided here), combined with the blatant “here no evil, see no evil, speak no evil” behavior being practiced by the media, so much to the point they would ignore the murder of an innocent 13 year-old, then you must be choosing not to see it.

    There is a clear pattern. To deny that is to insult ours and your own intelligence. Some of us believe this pattern needs to be addressed because of their danger to both free speech and more. The job of a free press is to make its public aware. Our press doesn’t seem to be doing that when it comes to issues putting gays in a negative light. While the Jesse Dirkhising case may have been rare and extreme, it’s no less relevant nor does it deserve any less media attention than the Matthew Sheppard tragedy.

    If you want to be critical of this site on matters of the “Truth”, then be true to yourself and the rest of us. I haven’t seen, at least in this thread, anyone denying how tragic the Matthew Sheppard case is; however, I personally think you should be fair and honest. No offense, and nothing personal.

  13. Harlemite: I’m not saying there could not possibly have been an intentional overlook on the part of the media, it’s just that based on other sensational news events, I have no reason to assume that was so. Remember Jeffrey Dahmer? He was a serial killer who killed mostly gay men (and ate them, for good measure). The media still recounts the stories to this day. What about Andrew Cunanan (sp?), the homosexual gigolo who killed Versace? There was quite some media coverage on that as well. Eileen Wournos? The made a movie about her, and she was also a lesbian serial killer.

    I have no clue as to why the media picks the stories it does. Some stories of deaths and murders get little attention, whomever the victim or whatever the killer’s intent. Others get major headlines.

    Are you trying to tell me that the media is covering up something about gays that the public needs to hear? Are you suggesting that, in fact, gays are predominantly murderous pedophiles and the media is just shoving that fact under the rug, or are you simply suggesting that the media refuses to acknowledge that not all gays rival Mother Teresa in charity or good will? The latter seems obvious. The former is simply untrue.

    Please clarify.

  14. James: You’ll never be accused of lacking zeal for your position; however, a few things need to be pointed out about the cases you bring up:

    - Jeffrey Dahmer canabalized his victims. Unfortunately, this overshadowed everything else related to the horrific murders.

    - The murder of Versace was bound to receive a tremendous amount of press regardless if his murderer had been straight or gay. Again, another case of overshadowing. Versace’s fame overshadowed everything else.

    - Eileen Wournos. What stuck out/sticks out more than anything was her being the first FEMALE serial killer in the U.S. (at least in modern times, as far as I know).

    For someone seemingly as smart as you are, I have a hard time believing you “have no clue why the media picks the stories it does”. They pick them to sell their product. Their selling a product means they also have to be careful and get to know their customer base. The gay lobby is very outspoken, as everyone knows, and won’t hesitate to confront when they feel offended. No one in the media business wants to be at the end of their wrath of demonstrations and everything else we see surrounding Prop 8. As a black American (my nick is true through and through) coming from a people familiar with the same tactics, I know it when I see it. The pendulum seems to have swung the other way regarding reporting of crimes committed by blacks. They used to report everything and then some, and now they’re afraid to report just about anything that may be seen as “hate”ful or racist. Unfortunately, the end result proved bad for blacks who tend to be the victims of black crime, not mention everyone else.

    My approach is the same regarding this issue and all others: be fair and report the news, good and bad, on everyone, no matter how much it might offend. We used to hold up and admire our press for this reason. Now we distance ourselves from them more and more for this very behavior, and head to the internet for news.

    So, while I’m not at all accusing all gays of being murderous pedophiles (your words, not mine or anyone else’s in this thread), I am saying I believe the media may be comfortably avoiding putting them in a negative light for the same reason they’re cautious about putting black Americans and muslims in that same light: fear of retaliation.

    Have I cleared it up for you?

  15. Jeffrey Dahmer That was a huge story, there was no way that could be ignored and is still a topic due to the heinousness of the crime.

    Andrew Cunanan He murdered a fashion designer Gianni Versace. I dount highly if he hadn’t murdered someone who was as world famous as Versace that the media, other than the local news, would have covered the story. Cunanan murdered 4 other people while on his killing spree, can you name them? I couldn’t because their deaths were eclipsed by Versace. If Versace hadn’t been one of the victims, the story would never have made the national news.

    Eileen Wournos was a female serial killer. Firstly, there are not really any female serial killers. Second, the move was created to create sympathy for Wournos.

    Are you trying to tell me that the media is covering up something about gays that the public needs to hear?

    No, but the media really isn’t to concerned in accuracy in reporting either.

    What has the MSM taught us? Gay priests in the Catholic Church: BAD. Gay scout leaders in the Boy Scouts: GOOD

    Thousands of gay men died and the blood is on the hands of the so-called AIDS activists and the MSM who thought it was more important to push their political and social agendas then it was to educate gay men about the dangers of public, anonymous, promiscuous, multiple-partner unprotected sex. Or, as it is known in West Hollywood, “Friday Night.”

  16. Harlemite writes: “I believe the media may be comfortably avoiding putting them in a negative light for the same reason they’re cautious about putting black Americans and muslims in that same light: fear of retaliation”

    In a sense you may be right, although I doubt it’s part of a sinister plot of any sort. It may simply be that there’s a hyper-awareness on the part of the media about how crimes committed by minorities are portrayed, sometimes for fear of getting angry calls by activists but sometimes out of a wariness of being blamed for negative reactions to that minority.

    People have a tendency to overgeneralize when it comes to minorities. When you see “crime committed by African-American” or “robbery against jogger committed by gang of Latinos” or “vandalism of church by homosexuals”, we have a tendency to think “Ah, a reinforcement of my idea that those people are a bunch of wicked thugs”. Being human, I’m not sure such thinking is entirely avoidable, and it’s very easy to do. I will admit to thinking such things myself in the past. The problem is that generalizations are going to be inaccurate about much of the population, and there’s a real injustice done both to ourselves and the others involved when this sort of thing occurs because it is primarily a denial of the truth. It taints our view of others to the extent that we assign guilt where there may be none.

    How do we remedy this? Unfortunately, I don’t have a quick and easy answer, but I don’t condemn the media for cowardice in not reporting everything. I might suggest that there are ways of reporting facts that can deflect from incidental aspects about something that are not pertinent in and of themselves (such as race or gender, etc.).
    I’ve always suggested that a balanced reporting of the facts is important, so I’m not suggesting these details necessarily be left out. The problem with the media (all of it) is that it gravitates towards the sensational, so portraying something fairly and accurately is sometimes impossible for them, unfortunately.

  17. JamesK,

    I agree with pretty much everything you’ve written. It’s the “ways of reporting facts that can deflect from incidental aspects about something that are not pertinent in and of themselves (such as race or gender, etc.)” that I’d like to see more of in the media. I don’t like seeing editorials on the front page of the NY Times, Washington Times, or any other newspaper. I also think that editorializing during televised news doesn’t help matters. But this is the very sensationalizing you point out, so I’ll steal no more of your thunder and simply agree. :)