Washington Post Fears: “Some Nut Will Walk Into an LGBT Center With a Gun and Mow People Down Just Because”

NewsBusters pointed out the irony of the Washington Post’s fear that some nut might walk into an LGBT center with a gun and mow people down just because. If you recall, it was an LBGT center volunteer, Floyd Lee Corkins, who walked into a Christian organization’s headquarters with a gun and 100 rounds of ammo with every intention of mowing as many people down as possible and then stuffing their faces with Chick-fil-A sandwiches…just because. And he used the SPLC’s “hate map” to identify his target.

But let’s not bring that up. I mean, that guy was just tired of all the marriage inequality. He was fighting for his rights and for the rights of others. His heart was in the right direction; he just took it a little too far. And let’s not forget that no one was even killed. It’s a non-story. So, let’s not even bring it up. It basically didn’t happen.

But let’s bring up things like what if some nut were to go into an LGBT center and shoot a bunch of people? That’s one of the questions homosexual journalist and “Civilities” column writer Steven Petrow at the Washington Post fielded from people who were concerned about how hateful straight people would react following the Supreme Court’s recent opinion on same-sex marriage.

Should LGBT people worry about a backlash?

Q: The Supreme Court said I’m normal, and that’s priceless. But I know we haven’t won the battle of public opinion, and I live in fear that some nut will walk into an LGBT center with a gun and mow people down just because. Are you worried about a backlash?

A: Actually, we have won the battle of public opinion: A June 2015 Pew survey reported that 57 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage, with 39 percent opposed.

Am I worried about a backlash? Yes — and in fact it began in advance of the court’s ruling. Michelangelo Signorile has documented well the rise of anti-LGBT hate crimes and violence in his recent book, “It’s Not Over.” And the efforts to pass “religious freedom” laws and legislation that allows magistrates to opt out of marrying same-sex couples are a direct response to our recent achievements.

After the horror in Charleston, S.C., a few weeks ago, I understand where your question is coming from, which is why it’s crucial to pass a federal anti-LGBT hate crimes law soon. We also need to continue to connect the dots between hateful language, bullying and violence.

Let’s never forget Harvey Milk, Matthew Shepard and the many others whose names we don’t know who were killed or maimed in this struggle. Please, let’s not add more names to this list of martyrs.

In the same way that the black robes arbitrarily decided to change the definition of marriage, officials can change the definition of hate crime to include only cases where the victim or victims are non-white, non-straight, and/or non-Christian. Every other case, regardless of how gruesome and blatantly obviously done out of hatred for the victim, will not be classified as a hate crime. The result will be a “rise” in hate crimes. Only because they ignore all the other cases.

And how additionally ironic is it that Petrow alluded to Harvey Milk (who had a thing for teenage boys) and Matthew Shepard. Milk’s murder had nothing to do with the fact that he was a homosexual. “He was instrumental in preventing a board of supervisors member from regaining his seat.” It was all political. As for Matthew Shepard, all evidence points to the fact that he was killed by fellow homosexual drug dealers. But let’s not let the facts get in the way.