Death Threats Follow Historic Marriage Win in Maine

mike_heath

Mike Heath, of the Maine Family Policy Council, has led two successful statewide drives to turn back “sexual orientation” (homosexuality) laws in Maine, in 1998 and 2001, and most recently was involved in the Question 1 effort to support marriage between a man and a woman.

Reprinted from the Christian Civic League of Maine website:

Nov 6, 2009

The normal routine of the League was interrupted Friday afternoon, when an anonymous caller called to say he owned guns and his next target was the former director of the League, Mike Heath (above). The death threat was apparently related to the recent win on Question 1, which revoked the right of homosexuals to be married in Maine.

The caller said the following:

“I am calling about Mr. Mike Heath, the Executive of your Christian Civic League of Maine.  He thinks that gay people should have our rights revoked that we already have. Well I can tell him this – I’m a gay guy who owns guns, and he’s my next target.”

In a second round of threats,

Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel’s Director of Cultural Affairs, issued a statement shortly after Maine’s marriage victory (posted with additional commentary at AmericansForTruth.com). In reaction to that statement, blog poster “ColdCountry” wrote: “Will someone please give me a gun?” Poster “Fritz” warned: “What I fear is that once gay and lesbian people give up hope of achieving equality through nonviolent means, there will be radicals who will begin to hunt down haters… All it will take is a small group of radical zealots who are willing to kill for their cause.”

In reply to Fritz, “tex” posted: “Fritz….you say this like it’s a bad thing? Maybe a bit of well organized terrorism is just what we need.”

“This happens in all cases where people are oppressed and lack representation,” continued Fritz. “We will have gay and lesbian people strapping bombs to their chests and blowing up churches. All it will take is one or two more losses like this. If marriage equality is taken away in one of the landmark states, we will see domestic terrorism arise very quickly. … In 1991, I witnessed gay and lesbian activists setting fire to buildings and beating people with baseball bats in Los Angeles.”

“tex” reiterated: “Still not seeing this as a bad thing Fritz … [African gay activists] didn’t gain their civil rights through being passive.”

In addition to Barber, pro-family leaders Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth and Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage were specifically named targets. (source)

Everyone is free to believe as they wish, and to act upon those beliefs, even to promote them. That is all guaranteed under the freedoms of the Constitution. What is not guaranteed is the right to impose those beliefs on others.  Threats, intimidation, slander, libel and licentious tyranny have become the new standard for the activist gay movement.

Where’s the tolerance?  Better yet, where is the condemnation by the leaders of the activist gay movement of these types of tactics?  What?  Don’t hear anything?  Maybe it’s because their leaders feel the same way.  See No on 1 leader, Jesse Connolly’s tolerance on parade here:

“In a defiant speech to several hundred lingering supporters, No on 1 campaign manager Jesse Connolly pledged that his side “will not quit until we know where every single one of these votes lives.” —Bangor Daily News

How many instances will it take before the activist gay movement reigns in their supporters?

—Beetle Blogger

Advertisements

5 Comments

  1. Taylor said,

    November 11, 2009 at 7:08 pm

    Somehow this doesn’t suprise me, it is always so one sided. They want what they want and tolerance or not they are going to intimidate all those who oppose them. The true measure of any individual is not when they are winning but when they lose. How do they react? Then you can tell who they really are. Their actions are speaking much louder than their words. Start showing the same tolerance to us that believe differently than they do and then we’ll talk, until then, we shall stand peacefully yet resolutely by and let them show the world their true character.

  2. Mathew said,

    November 22, 2009 at 3:17 pm

    I also caught that quote from lobbyist Jesse Connolly – for what reason other than intimidation and harassment do gay activists wish to know the addresses of those who voted Yes on 1?

    The fallout of the Prop 8 in California was nothing short of intolerant, militant behaviour against those who voted pro-traditional marriage.

  3. Chairm said,

    November 23, 2009 at 12:42 pm

    You are correct Taylor: The true measure of any individual is not when they are winning but when they lose. How do they react? Then you can tell who they really are.

    Where pro-SSM court opinions conjured up victories for SSMers, we marriage defenders did not engage in the initimidation tactics that have been on display in California and Maine.

    We stand on firm ground. SSMers run from pillar to post and flounder in quicksand.

  4. Bill said,

    December 6, 2009 at 9:08 am

    This information was great, thank you for taking the time to write it.

  5. batboy said,

    January 25, 2010 at 8:33 am

    This is crazy.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: