Connect with us

Facebook Or Hate Book?



Facebook, the six-year old social networking site that helps more than 350 million friends, families, colleagues, and companies keep in touch, is fast becoming the online home to another type of social network: anti-gay hate groups.

Fast-forming, often created by people who post false profiles just to gain the ability to create their hate group, anti-gay hate groups on Facebook are filled with claims of religiosity, or just plain unadulterated ignorance, bigotry, and hate. Facebook management has been criticized for their slow response and poor monitoring of new groups and content, despite the fact that these groups violate Facebook’s “Statement of Rights and Responsibilities,” its Terms of Service (TOS) which states,

“You will not post content that is hateful, threatening, pornographic, or that contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.”


“You will not use Facebook to do anything unlawful, misleading, malicious, or discriminatory.”

And yet, despite many, many attempts to report these groups, they still exist. Facebook, it seems, all but refuses to remove them.

Eighteenth century Parisian writer and philosopher Voltaire is (mistakenly) credited to have said,

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Those days are long gone. The rest of Western Society has evolved. In 2008, the New York Times ran an article titled, “Hate speech or free speech? What much of West bans is protected in U.S.

In O’Reilly, a well-respected tech blog, discussing Facebook’s “Holocaust denial and racist ‘white pride’ groups,” Caitlyn Martin writes,

“The Facebook pages in question do appear to violate the laws of at least 15 nations and the European Union as a whole. Despite clear prohibitions against hate and illegal, misleading or discriminatory activity Facebook continues to allow and indeed defend pages that violate it’s own terms.”

But here in the U.S., surprisingly, “free speech,” codified in our Bill Of Rights as part of the First Amendment to the Constitution, is not especially well-understood. For example, former-Governor Sarah Palin, famous for so many misstatements, exhibited her ignorance during the 2008 presidential campaign, stating,

“If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations,” Palin told host Chris Plante, “then I don’t know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media.”

Glenn Greenwald reminded Palin, and us, what our “First Amendment rights” are:

“The First Amendment is actually not that complicated. It can be read from start to finish in about 10 seconds. It bars the Government from abridging free speech rights. It doesn’t have anything to do with whether you’re free to say things without being criticized, or whether you can comment on blogs without being edited, or whether people can bar you from their private planes because they don’t like what you’ve said.

“If anything, Palin has this exactly backwards, since one thing that the First Amendment does actually guarantee is a free press. Thus, when the press criticizes a political candidate and a Governor such as Palin, that is a classic example of First Amendment rights being exercised, not abridged.”

But when someone claims they can write or post whatever they want, on Facebook, Twitter, or a blog, they may be unaware that there actually are limits. And those limits can be dictated by the platform or website’s owners, like Facebook. Once an organization adopts service rules, it becomes their responsibility to administer them fairly and evenly and consistently. And Facebook has neglected to do so, despite numerous reports and requests.

In a litigious society such as ours, where libel and slander cases are often merely opportunities for financial gain, it’s amazing Facebook executives, who employ more than one thousand people and had revenue in excess of $300 million in 2008, have been so slow to react.

There are dozens, at least, of active anti-gay hate groups. Some have just a few members, some have a few hundred. Some, thousands.

Some, like “WE DONT WANT TO LEARN ABOUT NO LESBIAN’S OR GAYS AT SCHOOL!!!” offer this as their official description:

“beeing gay is an sickness, the goverment should use time to show them the right path, instead of just accepting it!!
give a lesbian girl some time with an boy,let her get to know him,let her use some time with him,sexually and the same thing with the boy and SEE THE DIFFERENCE!!
beeing gay, is just an confusion that has been created in the mind of the human, because HUMANS are afraid of the unknown!”

That’s verbatim, spelling errors and stupidity unedited.

Then there’s “Death Note,” a group with 575 members. It’s purpose?

“if you want 2 kill s 1 join this group
y3ni if u hate gays ; boyaas or anything like that just come here and write his/her name on the post and with 40 seconds the person will die of a heartattack

u can change the time and type of death as you like”

I started to make a list of the anti-gay hate groups, but realized that there were just too many. “HELP US REPORT HOMOPHOBIC HATE GROUPS ON FACEBOOK” has an excellent list, most of which are still active, which means Facebook isn’t doing much, if anything, to shut these groups down, again, despite that these groups violate Facebook’s own TOS.

Here’s a partial list — only a small spattering — of anti-gay hate groups:

I’m against gay marriage, and I will not keep quiet about it!

Keep Queers Out of America


I Bet I Can Find 1,000,000 People Who Are Anti Gay Rights


I hate Faggots

people who hate fags

GAY ? news flash : we fuckin’ hate you !!

Kill All Gays

join if you hate homosexuals


AnTi GaYs!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You may choose to dismiss these as tiny, or inconsequential, but I would disagree. Despite their obvious stupidity, inability to gather a large base, or spell, they empower their members to feel comfortable with their hate. And that’s dangerous, because hate breeds more hate. It multiplies, exponentially.

Facebook anti-gay hate groups simply embolden their readers and members to “come out” from any societal suggestions that hate is wrong. Even prominent members of mainstream groups like the GOP, and right-wing bloggers have taken to likening “political correctness” to “a war on Judeo-Christianty” and “Shariah law.” Shorter version: It’s OK to publicly spew your hate.

Because the net effect of their actions breeds acceptability of hatred toward the LGBTQ community, I believe groups like the National Organization for Marriage can be labeled hate groups. I believe working to ban same-sex marriage is a hate crime.

Also dangerous is a group like “Ban Same-Sex Marriage.” I first came upon it and for a split-second wondered if it were fair to include it here. I mean, I spend my days, and nights, working to advance civil rights and marriage equality, so of course a group like, “Ban Same-Sex Marriage” is anathema to my work and my life. But can you call it a “hate group” on the same plane as, for example, “Kill All Gays” if they are (“merely”) advocating banning same-sex marriage? Well, yes, you can.

But the group “Ban Same-Sex Marriage” is even worse. They pretend to be a Christian forum for discussing banning same-sex marriage:

“Well, being a Christian, I believe that marriage is a sacred union between a man and a wife, as described in the Bible. Therefore, same-sex marriage is an affront to the Bible and Godly standing, and therefore should not be allowed to stand.”

Blah, blah, blah, heard it a million times before.

But then, in their rules, they include this:

“This group only refers to the United States. Not the world, not foreign countries, not anywhere else. We as Americans cannot pass foreign laws on other nations and impose our will on them. However, in this nation, we can stop homosexuality right now. All framers of debate should keep this in mind when posting. We may make arguments about homsexuality [sic] as it applies to the world, but as for banning same-sex marriage, we are only talking about the U.S.A.”

Catch that?

“we can stop homosexuality right now.”


So, this group, shrouded in the bible, well-written, and well-populated (1786 members as of this writing) wants to “stop homosexuality right now.” Not just “Ban Same-Sex Marriage,” but “stop homosexuality right now.”

What to do?

Well, first, visit all these sites, and the ones on “Get these anti-gay groups off facebook!” and click the link in the bottom left-hand corner that says, “Report Group.”

Second, tell all your friends, your neighbors, your family. Share this post with them. Repost it on Facebook, Twitter, email it, etc.

Third, join the following Facebook groups, and ask your friends and family to also. There is strength in numbers.

Petition to Remove All Anti-Gay Groups

Report Gay Hate on Facebook

Stop gay hate speech on facebook

Get these anti-gay groups off facebook! (Great site!)

And finally, take solace knowing that over 20,000 have joined the group, “Ban the “GAY EXTERMINATORS” from Facebook.”

Success! Facebook shut down most of these anti-gay hate groups just hours after this post was published! Read, “Facebook Or Hate Book? Facebook Shuts Down Anti-Gay Hate Groups!

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


Evangelical Pastor With Ties to DeSantis Denies He’s Endorsing Biblical Call for Death to Gays



A Florida pastor with ties to GOP Governor Ron DeSantis insists his recent remarks attacking U.S. Senator Ted Cruz should not be viewed as an endorsement of the biblical call for gay people to be executed. But he’s not saying he is opposed to it either.

As The Daily Beast first reported, Tom Ascol, the senior pastor of Grace Baptist Church in Cape Coral, Florida, blasted the Texas Republican Senator, who surprised many when he called Uganda’s new “Kill the Gays” law “horrific & wrong.”

“Any law criminalizing homosexuality or imposing the death penalty for ‘aggravated homosexuality’ is grotesque & an abomination. ALL civilized nations should join together in condemning this human rights abuse,” Cruz actually tweeted.

That would be the same Ted Cruz who in 2015 claimed gay people were waging a “jihad” against Christians.

Pastor Ascol, who delivered the invocation at Governor DeSantis’ second inauguration, has been called the man who could bring evangelicals from Donald Trump and deliver them to Ron DeSantis.

On Tuesday Ascol tweeted, “Tell it to God, Ted.”

READ MORE: Watch: Ron DeSantis Travels to New Hampshire to Claim Kids Are Being ‘Forced’ to Choose Pronouns

He then quoted the Book of Leviticus, writing: “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

“Was this law God gave to His old covenant people ‘horrific and wrong’?” Ascol asked.

Ascol two hours later tweeted, “Amazing how many professing Christians, even self-designated ‘conservative’ ones, are embarrassed by God’s Word. Just quote some unpopular words of God & watch what happens. Many so-called Christians react the same way that unashamed unbelievers do. It’s a commentary.”

Cruz did not reply, but some others did.

David Smith, whose Twitter bio reads, “25 yrs trusting Jesus!” replied: “We no longer live under the Levitical laws @tomascol.”

“If so, we would have to apply the same standard to adultery. (Leviticus 20:10) I agree that all of these things are sin, but where does grace come in? Jesus was clearly in no hurry to condemn in John 8:1-11.”

Pastor Ascol apparently liked the reply from Steven Hasty, which reads: “Many of you are missing the point. If you’re understanding this Tweet to mean Pastor Tom thinks we should start executing homosexuals, you’re missing it. Instead, he’s challenging the standards of Cruz. Where does Cruz derive his standards?”

READ MORE: ‘Barking’: DeSantis Mocked as His Crew Races to Protect Him From Criticism After He Attacks Reporter

Apparently whether or not it’s acceptable to execute LGBTQ people isn’t an issue (except it is, since the entire “debate” its based on Uganda’s new “Kill the Gays” law.)

“Pastor Tom” told Hasty, “You are exactly right. Some people don’t read carefully. Others, evidently, don’t reason well. Thanks for clarifying & accurately expressing what I *actually* wrote. Keep pressing on.”

Ascol didn’t say whether or not he supports the execution of LGBTQ people, he’s merely debating, as Hasty put it, “standards.”

The Daily Beast also reports, “Ascol’s tweet…certainly seemed to suggest that the execution of gay people had a biblical blessing,” and notes that “even on careful reading, most reasonable people would assume Ascol was suggesting that Uganda’s anti-gay law is not intrinsically ‘horrific and wrong.'”

Ascol, The Beast adds, “has repeatedly called for homicide charges against any woman who has an abortion for whatever reason. He has compared choosing to terminate a pregnancy to retaining a killer for hire.”

“’It’s like saying if I don’t murder someone, but I just contracted a murderer to murder someone, I’m not culpable,’ Ascol said on a Christian radio show in 2022.”

The tweet posted to the top of Ascol’s Twitter page says, “If your commitment to the authority of Scripture is limited by cultural sensitivities then it’s not really Scripture’s authority to which you are committed.”

Supporting or opposing the execution of LGBTQ people isn’t about “cultural sensitivities.”


Continue Reading


‘Barking’: DeSantis Mocked as His Crew Races to Protect Him From Criticism After He Attacks Reporter



Continuing his official presidential campaign kickoff this week, Florida GOP Governor Ron DeSantis delivered a speech to New Hampshire voters Thursday morning but refused to take questions from the audience. Afterward, when a reporter simply asked why, DeSantis blasted him, saying repeatedly, “Are you blind?” because he was talking to individual supporters at the time.

The candidate’s campaign team immediately swarmed to protect him on social media.

NBC News senior national political reporter Jonathan Allen on Twitter posted the video (below) and wrote that DeSantis had “lashed out at a reporter for asking him about it while he was chatting with members of the crowd individually.”

At NBC News, Allen’s headline reads: “Ron DeSantis loses his temper with a reporter: ‘Are you blind?'”

Allen reports DeSantis “became noticeably agitated” and “lashed out at a reporter — twice barking ‘Are you blind?'”

The reporter who had asked DeSantis why he wouldn’t take questions was Steve Peoples, chief political reporter for The Associated Press, who tweeted: “Here in Laconia, NH at his first stop in state as presidential candidate, DeSantis speaks for 58 minutes. He takes no questions from audience.”

READ MORE: Grassley Admits He Doesn’t Care if GOP’s Accusations Against ‘Vice President Biden’ Are True or Not – He Vows to Pursue Them

“People are coming up to me, talking to me,” DeSantis said. “What are you talking about? Are you blind? Are you blind? People are coming up to me, talking to me whatever they want to talk to me about.”

Allen adds that the Florida governor’s decision to not take questions “was surprising and frustrating to some Republicans who came to hear DeSantis speak.”

On social media, many were also not impressed.

“Some of us warned that DeSantis wasn’t ready for the national media or public spotlight, that he had been coddled in Florida for far too long, and that his media team of Pushaw, Redfern, et al spend too much time trolling on Twitter and not helping him,” observed MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan.

But the question really is why wouldn’t a candidate for president, who has been in politics for over a decade, be excited to talk to prospective supporters and take their questions, especially given the history of states like New Hampshire and Iowa, where establishing that personal relationship historically has been critical to the success of a candidate’s campaign?

Former federal prosecutor, former DeSantis administration official, and former Republican Ron Filipkowski noted, “Ron DeSnowflake lost his cool again and had another freakout. This guy can’t deal with people.”

READ MORE: ‘Absolutely Blockbuster Evidence’: Experts Stunned Over Trump ‘Espionage Act’ Bombshell That Pressures ‘DOJ to Indict’

Observing DeSantis is “so out of his depth,” former journalist Ed Moltzen writes: “There are towns in New Hampshire with the official title ‘Town Moderator’ – people who assist with fielding audience questions to political candidates during forums. That’s how much open Q & A is in the political DNA of New Hampshire.”

Huffpost White House correspondent S.V. Dáte had warned, “Just watch. DeSantis’ social media arsonists will fan this interaction for days.”

And indeed, DeSantis’ crew was quick to attack, which Dáte pointed to.

Governor DeSantis’ press secretary Bryan Griffin quickly moved to falsely frame the interaction.

“This @AP reporter asked this question while @RonDeSantis was surrounded by voters in New Hampshire asking him questions and taking pictures,” Griffin tweeted. “Perfectly illustrative of the modern media shutting their eyes and ears to the truth to push their narrative.”

The question was clearly about DeSantis’ refusal to take questions from the audience, so the audience could hear his answers.

Christina Pushaw, DeSantis’ far-right former press secretary who moved to his presidential campaign as his rapid response director, responded to Griffin to attack the reporter.

“Very diplomatic of you to refer to the AP activist as a reporter!” she said.

But journalist Marcus Baram replied to Griffin: “You KNOW what the reporter meant.
Not a meet-and-greet with lots of people in a crowded room.
Questions asked in a setting where the person has time to ask the governor without distractions, and he has the time to respond with a substantive answer.
Campaigning 101.”

Watch DeSantis below or at this link.

Continue Reading


Grassley Admits He Doesn’t Care if GOP’s Accusations Against ‘Vice President Biden’ Are True or Not – He Vows to Pursue Them



Promising to continue his demands on FBI Director Chris Wray, U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) admitted on Thursday he does not care whether or not conservatives’ accusations against President Joe Biden are true or not.

Grassley and House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer have teamed up to pursue what they claim is a document held by the Federal Bureau of Investigation that allegedly accuses President Biden of a corrupt act.

The two Republicans have been ratcheting up their attacks on FBI Director Chris Wray, threatening him with contempt of Congress if he does not hand over the alleged document, which Grassley calls an “unclassified, FBI-generated record alleging a criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Joe Biden and a foreign national.”

On Wednesday, Director Wray, according to Grassley and Comer, discussed the document with them, and has offered to allow them to view it in person. He is, they say, still refusing to release it to the House Oversight Committee. It’s unclear why Grassley is even involved; he is not a ranking member on any Senate Committee that has oversight responsibilities for the FBI, except the Budget Committee.

READ MORE: ‘Absolutely Blockbuster Evidence’: Experts Stunned Over Trump ‘Espionage Act’ Bombshell That Pressures ‘DOJ to Indict’

House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) requested to join Grassley and Comer on the call Wednesday, but Comer reportedly refused to allow him access, Punchbowl News’ Max Cohen reported. NBC News also reported Comer refused to allow Raskin to join the call with Director Wray.

Ranking Member Raskin in a statement characterized the lone document as containing “unsubstantiated, second-hand claims,” and called it a “tip.”

Noting Director Wray’s “extraordinary accommodations” to Comer and Grassley, “and the fact that Republicans have claimed to have access to the very information subpoenaed,” Raskin points out in his statement, “Chairman Comer has continued to insist he will hold the FBI Director in contempt.”

“It is increasingly clear that Committee Republicans have always planned to hold Director Wray in contempt of Congress to distract from the obvious fact that they do not have evidence to support their unfounded accusations against President Biden. This latest political maneuver underscores Chairman Comer’s determination to use the Committee to help former President Trump’s reelection efforts and pander to extreme MAGA Republicans.”

Cohen also reports Raskin said, “Chairman Comer has crafted a hyper-partisan narrative that depicts the FBI as obstructionist. This is a radical distortion of the situation.”

CNN reports that even then-Attorney General Bill Barr questioned the validity of the alleged document, which “has origins in a tranche of documents that Rudy Giuliani provided to the Justice Department in 2020, people briefed on the matter said.”

READ MORE: ‘Sure Wasn’t by Drag Queens’: DeSantis Slammed for Ignoring Florida Mass Shooting That Included Children

“We can’t take anything we received from Ukraine at face value,” Barr said at the time.

“While the 1023 form documents the claims from the informant, it doesn’t provide proof that they are true, people briefed on the matter said. The FBI and prosecutors who reviewed the information couldn’t corroborate the claims,” CNN adds.

“The allegations of wrongdoing by the then-vice president, many originating from sources in Ukraine, were dubious enough that Attorney General William Barr in early 2020 directed that they be reviewed by a US attorney in Pittsburgh, in part because Barr was concerned that Giuliani’s document tranche could taint the ongoing Hunter Biden investigation overseen by the Delaware US attorney.”

Ian Sams, a White House spokesperson, told CNN Chairman Comer “has already admitted this isn’t about uncovering facts but about trying to hurt the President’s poll numbers, so the only question left is how long he will waste time, energy, and taxpayer dollars to support a fact-free politically-motivated goose chase simply to get media attention and the Fox News spotlight.”

Indeed, late last month Comer appeared to tell Fox News that his investigations into Hunter Biden are actually designed to help Donald Trump win the 2024 presidential election.

Asked by Fox News if his investigations are “what’s moved this needle with the media?” – meaning Biden’s poll numbers, Comer replied: “Absolutely. There’s no question.”

“You look at the polling, and right now Donald Trump is 7 points ahead of Joe Biden and trending upward, Joe Biden’s trending downward,” he said, referring to one poll. “And I believe that the media is looking around, scratching their head, and they’re realizing that the American people are keeping up with our investigation.”

Meanwhile, Senator Grassley also appeared on Thursday to make clear he was not interested in the validity or accuracy of the claim against “Vice President Biden.”

“We aren’t interested in whether or not the accusation against Vice President Biden are accurate or not,” Grassley told Fox News, claiming his pursuit of the single document is merely to ensure “the FBI does its job.”

READ MORE: ‘Will Make a Great Trial Witness’: Experts Thrilled Jack Smith Is Investigating Trump’s Firing of Election Security Expert

Even the Fox News host sounded surprised.

“Senator, let me stop you right here. You just said you read the document, is that right?”

“Yes,” Grassley replied.

When asked what it said, Grassley refused to discuss it.

“I’m not going to characterize it,” he declared.

Watch below or at this link.


Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.