Fundies Dance on JonBenet Ramsey’s Grave
I try to minimize the amount of ink (pixels?) I give to the sensationalistic stories that the media blows out of proportion to their true significance. I don’t like to add to the noise that obscures the important stories, so hopefully this will be the only post I ever make on the JonBenet Ramsey case.
(Case in point: Yesterday — August 17th — a federal circuit court ruled that the Bush mis-Administration’s secret wiretapping of American citizens was unconstitutional. This story has huge implications, not only for its effect on King George, but for the civil rights of generations of Americans to come. And what was the lead story on most of the news broadcasts, and what have the 24-hour news channels spent all their time on? An arrest in a 10-year-old murder.)
I read with disgust the latest vile vomited out by Tony Perkins of the “Family” (a.k.a. Fundie) Research Council. His latest email says:
The media has been obsessed with the 1996 murder of JonBenet Ramsey for years.
Which good old Tony has no problem with exploiting himself.
Her parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, endured a decade in the media spotlight.
So let’s increase the sorrow by opening old wounds and seeing how far we can slide on the misery that oozes out, eh Tony? After all, we’re doing God’s work. Sensitivity and compassion aren’t important when there are souls to save! (I sincerely doubt that fundies really care about “saving” anybody — and nobody asked to be saved anyway, except maybe from the fundies — No, I think they’re really more interested in controlling other people’s private lives. Anybody who gets hurt in the process is just collateral damage. Collateral for the LORD!)
Patsy Ramsey died of ovarian cancer in June.
Cancer that maybe — just maybe — we would be able to cure in the future, if we were allowed to do stem cell research? What was that, Tony? You didn’t put that tidbit in the letter to point out how hypocritical you are? You put it in the letter so we’re supposed to feel an extra dose of compassion because of the added tragedy? That’s OK, Tony. I have enough compassion for the two of us, so I’ll carry your load (of compassion, not that other load you’re shoveling). You go right ahead with your crocodile tears and pretend compassion. I’ll do the heavy lifting, by advocating for:
- Medical research to heal the sick
- Protection of all civil rights (not just the ones that you like) of all Americans (not just the ones that you like)
- The rights of all women to control their bodies
- The right to marry the person that you love
- The right of religious freedom, which includes religions other than Christianity
And dozens of others, way too numerous to mention. Somehow (and he must work really hard at this), Tony is on the wrong side of almost all of these many issues. If you doubt this, go check out his “policies”.
Anyway, back to the letter:
[...] media reports point to [the suspect’s] previous involvement with child porn in the U.S.
PAYDIRT!!!! Now we get to the crux of Tony’s little tirade! He’s exploiting the tragedy of a murdered child to further his ridiculous crusade against pornography. Now we have to read the letter very carefully, because here is where he throws cow turds into the pot and calls it beef stew.
This tragic case points to several alarming facts. First the increase in such shocking cases corresponding to the availability of hardcore porn on the Internet.
I agree that there is a lot of very hardcore porn on the Internet, and it is disgustingly easy to get (and some of it is just plain disgusting).
But he’s making an assertion here: the “increase in such shocking cases”. Which shocking cases, specifically? There’s only one case with all of these dreadful characteristics. Does he mean it in a more general sense; that is, child murder? Pedophilia? He isn’t clear. He leaves it up to you to choose whatever you find most heinous about this case, and then he leads you to assume that there is an increase in incidents. This is a do-it-yourself shocker.
Let’s assume that he had a particular type of crime in mind, and that he’s just a poor writer and is unable to convey what he had in mind (BTW, unclear writing is usually a sign of unclear thinking). OK, then, prove to me that whatever crime you had in mind is really on the increase. Where’s your data? Show me some statistics.
He also says that this unsubstantiated increase of undefined shocking crimes “[corresponds] to the availability of hardcore porn on the Internet.” Big leap here. Does he provide any evidence that there is a link? No. You are supposed to take it on faith.
Also, the suspect was nabbed in an area of Bangkok notorious for the availability of children for sex.
OK, the guy was a perv. Not all of them are priests, you know. Notice the connection that Tony is starting to form here. First he tells you how much pornography there is, then he tells you that the guy is a pedophile. The implication is that normal, legal adult pornography turns people into pedophiles. No it doesn’t! There is no credible evidence that this occurs!
News reports have said that the suspect was previously arrested for possession of child porn. Here’s how it works: Pervos are drawn to kiddy porn. In fact, they’re unable to get their rocks off with adult porn. Adult pornography doesn’t create child molesters. Readers of adult porn have a normal sexual response to healthy adult porn. That’s as far as it goes. The tiny percentage of the population that has something wrong with their brains doesn’t respond to adult pornography. They seek out perverted illegal kiddy porn.
Pornography isn’t the cause; it’s the symptom! Furthermore:
- Adult pornography ≠ child pornography
- Adult pornography ≠ pedophilia
- Adult pornography ≠ child molesting
Continuing with his letter:
I hope this arrest, with cooperation of local authorities, signals a new resolve by the Thais to address the sexual exploitation of children and will prompt greater enforcement of obscenity laws in our country.
Whoa! Total disconnect. By obscenity, does he mean the smut that really is illegal? I’m not aware of any law enforcement agency that takes that stuff lightly. They pounce hard (poor choice of words!) and fast on the pervs and sickos when they find them.
What Tony is really trying to do here, though, is connect the horrible murder of a six-year-old girl to the sorts of legal free expression that he personally defines as obscene. Yes, Tony. Save us from Janet Jackson’s nipple! I’m sure the 100 million people (or whatever the number is) who saw the Super Bowl are now ticking timebombs, waiting for the final trigger to molest and murder.