Sunday, November 16, 2008

Gay Pride or Hate Crime

A woman, holding a cross, recently attended a gay marriage protest to voice her support of the California ban against same sex marriage. While at the protest rally, the older woman was attacked by gay marriage supporters.

Phyllis Burgess showed up at the rally last week carrying a large, Styrofoam cross. She was there to show her belief in traditional marriage.

Within minutes, however, angry protesters swarmed around the Palm Springs resident, yanked the cross from her hands and trampled on it.

Palm Springs police have made no arrests yet, but said they spent time trying to convince Burgess to file charges against some of the demonstrators.

What do you think? Was her freedom of speech trampled upon as well as her cross? Was this a hate crime against her?

Now, if the situation was reversed, and she had trampled upon a gay pride flag, would the national media be casting her action as a hate crime? Where is the national media on this story? Have you even heard about it until now?

Interesting how these stories get buried, isn’t it?


  1. I had heard about this before and then last night on Huckabee he showed the footage. What was ironic was the TV commentators calling it a hate crime on both sides. The lady said nothing, yelled nothing and gestured nothing. And yet...well you get the picture. We might as well face it that the media is stacked against people of faith and expect more of this type of reporting.

  2. In this world we will have trouble.

    I come back to that time and again. Jesus said we'd be hated because of Him. And we are.

    I say it was a massive display of homosexual intolerance -- but "hate crime"? Well, I don't know. Maybe?

    She had to have known she'd be condemned the minute she stepped foot at their rally. Maybe that's why she won't press charges? But they shouldn't have attacked her. They were wrong in doing that.

    I also don't think those people who attacked her represent the majority of gay people. I know gay people and most of them are non-violent just like the rest of mankind.

    The media? There are a significant amount of people in that line of business who are gay or liberal supporters of the gay lifestyle. There is no surprise in this story for me.


  3. Most people are good people, I agree Heidi. If I didn't believe that, I'd have trouble living day to day, I think. Whether a person is gay or straight, the media has a way of blowing things out of proportion to sell air time or newspapers. I think that part is sad. I also think it is sad when we focus on the vocal minority!

  4. There is no doubt in my mind she would be demonized if the situation had been reversed. However, I don't believe in "hate crimes". A crime is a crime-punish crime according to the law.

    There, I said it. :-)

  5. When the details of a situation or event is twitsted or partially reported to sway the audience to a particular belief, it's called sensationalism. News outlets are supposed to be partisan, not sensationalists, but we all know they are not, because sensationalism sells.

    I like Foxnews, because they are more republican-angled than democrat, and I feel they do a better job of balanced reporting than some of the other media outlets (IMHO). It is often interesting to look at the "slow news day" stories that get published, in lieu of the controversion ones.

    Considering who rules this earth right now, I'm not surprised at much any more.


Thank you for sharing your thoughts! I can't wait to read what you have written.