Erin Davies' Fagbug-contrived or coincidence or absurd
On the 4th of May 1925, John T. Scopes did not find himself caught and arrested for breaking Tennessee’s newly enacted antievolution law. Scopes became the defendant by agreement to an idea by George W. Rappleyea—a man with his nose out of joint by disdain of the law—and conspiring attorneys Herbert E. Hicks and Sue K. Hicks to manufacture his arrest, facilitating the ACLU to begin argument with intent for an eventual constitutional test through the courts, effectively bypassing the will of the people. The deception supplants minimal or non-occurring offenses, tolerant balances, and processes of critical, rational thinking with artificially generated offenses tuned to raise feverish panic, relative moral ground and victim status.Arguably, the case may never have occurred due to a balance between the law’s toothless penalties and the state’s approved text for biology complete with a section on human evolution. Such a balance irritated the agenda of social engineers intrigued with eugenics. When one knows what precipitated it, the convenient time of “discovery” of Scope’s “crime” calls for questioning coincidence. In this case, the actors attempted no clandestine operation, freely admitting their purpose; but if they had not, it would be just and prudent to consider that they had.
On September 17, 1998, Harris County sheriff's deputies, responding to a false report of an armed intruder, coincidently broke into the apartment at just the right time to catch two men breaking the state’s sodomy law. Inflammatory fallout came quickly, widespread, and remarkably organized in final draft quality asserting routine invasion of privacy and, for that reason, ostracizing anyone opposed to buggery. Rebutters became villains, accused by a tide of the beleaguered.
Since activists and attorneys could cite no Texas case in which consenting adults were prosecuted for engaging in private sexual conduct (two or three sodomy law cases had been prosecuted over the last 30 years, witnessed by others in a public jail), it was a fortuitous opportunity for a group which “needs to get this off the books…to see it move all the way up the ladder and be declared unconstitutional.” (Bagby, HGLPC)
More recently Erin Davies, residing in Albany, New York, appeared with “UR GAY” and “FAG” spray painted on her car. She reported having no enemies. She believes the vandals do not know her since words used usually describe male homos and not female. She thinks the vandals did the deed upon seeing a rainbow sticker on her car. A routine vandalism by any consideration. In such cases police would normally advise the victim that they have encouraged the problem by putting controversial statements on their property and file the report. Not very newsworthy.
What does this share with the first two stories? First, we are to believe that with all the inciting stickers on cars-—ie. Abortion statements—and the huge number of rainbow stickers representing everything from Jesse Jackson to God’s promise through Noah to Homosexual behavior, that someone saw Erin’s rainbow, went and obtained spray paint, came back and painted the car, and they got the meaning of the sticker right even though they didn’t know her or her gender. This happened while the thousands of other vehicles with inflaming messages are left alone.
And then by coincidence news of this petty crime spreads into major circulation. Although "gay" and "fag" are not words associated with "hate", in no time flat Erin appeared in Metroland, an alternative publication, with her story, fluffed with disbelief, emphasizing accusations of hate speech, and stated intentions to really go big with this ground shaking crime; local news carried the “hate speech” story; she suddenly has this idea to drive the car as is and supposedly has many people regularly consoling her; messages came within days from across the world bearing sympathy and encouragement (imagine, a routine vandalism and the report turns up in places like Australia, moving people to make contact; horrors and disasters happening everywhere in the world pale next to this chance to be a victim); she conveniently has the time and financial fundraising to drive her fagbug, as she now calls it, across country with a film crew that is apparently instantly available and funded, to raise awareness (awareness of what, her over the top reaction to ordinary vandalism?); T-shirts with pretty pictures of her car are already out and for sale.
Isn’t it amazing, all this instant, ready availability of time, publicity, money, and organized promotion and film crews just fell into place when most groups plan months in advance just to try and get a chicken BBQ reasonably organized? How remarkable of a coincidence, how convenient for the homosexual crusade, which seeks to have any written or stated objection to their lifestyle prosecuted as hate. These are the folks that, in this land of liberty and free speech, silenced the popular Dr. Laura remember?
Note: Harris County District Attorney John B. Holmes Jr. said two or three cases had been prosecuted over the last 30 years, although those involved homosexual contact witnessed by others in a public jail.
Gay activists have tried for years to have the sodomy statute struck from the books, arguing that it is often used to justify anti-gay discrimination in such areas as hiring and adoptions. But with no defendant in a criminal case, efforts to remove the law have met with mixed success.
Clarence Bagby, president of the Houston Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus. "We certainly hope to move this forward, and we'd love to see it move all the way up the ladder and be declared unconstitutional. We need to get this off the books."
*The willingness of a group to create such events requires that some purpose for deception be considered when there is one or more of the following: exceptional vigor applied by law; sudden, unprecedented far reaching interest; a remarkably instantaneous, well organised response plan; a litigious organisation affected.
posted by Smith @ 9:31 AM
1 comments
