I don’t write many local articles on my site because so many visitors are from around the country, and world, but this can’t go unsaid, and Facebook wasn’t a worthy forum for what I need to write.
So now elected officials in South Bend, who didn’t read the time consuming 4 page RFRA (Indiana Religious Freedom & Restoration Act), are referring to supporters of the bill as ‘violent’. Irresponsible hyperbole like that leads to actual violence against peaceful people and their property.
Local Democrats should be thrilled there’s such broad bipartisan support for a Democrat authored anti-discrimination bill throughout the country. And the RFRA is an ANTI-DISCRIMINATION law. One that’s been on the books for 22 years, and has allowed exactly 0 cases of discrimination.
Ad hominem, and borderline seditious, rhetoric like this serves no useful purpose but to whip the ignorant up into a frenzy built on a bed of lies.
There are 31 states with similar legislation, 20 of which are direct versions of the Democrat law from 1993, Indiana is in this latter category. Several other states are considering this legislation as I write. The only legal challenge to the federal law came from a church who wanted to expand its building. Not from a discriminated against party. There is absolutely zero examples of the alleged evils of this law materializing in its entire 22 year history at either the federal or state level.
Politicians often use aggressive rhetoric to gin up support from their base, but when it crosses the line like this it must be confronted.
Over the past several years we’ve seen a new play added to the playbook of Democrats and special interest groups around the country. This new strategy is just a more aggressive application of existing strategy. Instead of just using the spin machine to apply pressure to the opposition, Democrats, race-hustlers, the gay mafia, and others (who often don’t represent the bulk of their demographics) incite violence by painting a false picture of not just discrimination, but life-threatening discrimination.
When you convince the simple-minded their lives are in danger, human nature of self-preservation kicks in.
We saw it in Sanford, FL, Ferguson, MO, New York City, NY, Michigan (during their RFRA battle), and to a lesser extent right here in South Bend recently (Breathe Easy). In all cases, violence, death, and/or property destruction resulted from community organizers and elected politicians spreading falsehoods/lies/myths to foment fear and hate in order to register voters, win elections, and bully good innocent people into submission. Their MSM allies obliged in spreading their message of hate. All based on a false premise of saving lives through civil rights.
Well, Sanford wasn’t about whites hunting blacks in the dead of night. Ferguson wasn’t about innocent blacks being hunted down by white cops. Michigan wasn’t going to let gays be discriminated against or die in the streets. New York wasn’t about racist white cops choking innocent black men. South Bend wasn’t about racist white cops supporting choking out black citizens. Indiana is NOT about legalizing any form of discrimination.
Yet politicians issue press releases calling for boycotts of their constituents who haven’t done anything but continue to do business as usual without a sticker on their business’s door? Businesses that have never discriminated against anyone since this law’s passage 22 years ago. Constituents who are still subject to the same anti-discrimination laws they were a week ago.
Calling for boycotts of constituents is bad enough, but labeling them as ‘violent’ is beyond any intellectually honest person. Not only has there been no discrimination, but none of the ‘violent’ constituents have committed any acts of violence.
And no, there is no plausible deniability that supporters of this bill weren’t referred to as violent. If you label the law violent, then you are labeling its supporters as violent by association.
The great irony with this post from a councilman, and mayoral candidate, is that he consistently defended the Ferguson rioters. Oh I know, he only defended the peaceful protesters, not the large number of violent ones. He just chose not to devote much energy to condemning their actions. Of course, the truth about what happened in Ferguson didn’t mean much. There was a narrative to push. He’s also the same politician who said ‘Breathe Easy’ shirts shouldn’t be sold, and could lead to violence. He supported ‘I Can’t Breathe’ shirts … again, largely based on a lie.
Meanwhile, these same politicians call for policies that will attract more businesses to South Bend. Yeah, nothing says ‘come to South Bend’ like boycotting local businesses who haven’t done anything wrong, and labeling them as ‘violent.’ Sign me up!
While this type of dangerous strategy has been infrequent throughout our history, we have seen it used regularly by tyrants throughout the ages to control populations by pitting them against one another. You create an enemy where none exist, and you manufacture a threat to one’s safety and rights where none exist. This rhetoric has no place in a polite civilized society. It certainly has no place in Indiana, St. Joseph County, or South Bend.
Que the predictably vitriolic, hypocritical and ignorant comments below …