Did Jeffrey Dahmer commit a hate crime?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
 
By Donald Hank
 
Recently, senators put aside your objections and passed a defense authorization bill with an incongruous hate crimes addendum tacked onto it which would elevate several groups, including gays, to the coveted and lucrative status of victims. This is to make these groups safer, they say, since crimes committed by these groups would be handled by the FBI, not by those bungling local enforcement agencies who wouldn't recognize a killer if they tripped over one.
 
But in the event this bill somehow escapes President Bush's promised veto, I want to know how they would handle a case like Jeffrey Dahmer's.
 
Jeffrey Dahmer had the ones he loved, so to speak, in more ways than one. His modus operandi was to spike the drinks of his victims with debilitating drugs, have sex with them and then kill them and eat their flesh, although not always in that order. Sometimes he would kill them before having sex with them. He killed 17 men and boys between 1978 and 1991.
 
Before you go categorizing Jeffrey as a homosexual, you need to know that the establishment may not agree. Years ago, gay activists pressured the APA (American Psychological Association) into massaging the definition of "homosexual" to exclude pedophiles who rape boys. Their twisted logic is that these are exclusively pedophiles, who crave sex with youngsters but are not interested in what sex they happen to be. They further assert that the gender of a child is not clearly defined anyway and can change later according to the child's "orientation." If you say pedophiles who have sex with boys are homosexuals, they may smile condescendingly and say "no, no, they're pedophiles, not homosexuals." This is what we little people refer to as psychobabble, and it is based purely on politics, not science. But the APA and their activist cohorts know that most don't know this and can be easily bludgeoned into submission by a Harvard diploma.
 
The ulterior reason for this linguistic sleight-of-hand is to eliminate the otherwise damaging link that exists between homosexuality and criminal behavior.
 
So what would the APA say if a link appeared to exist between homosexuality and cannibalism, as it did in the case of Jeffrey Dahmer? Would they then declare that men having sex with men and then killing them and eating their flesh are not really homosexuals but exclusively cannibals? (The possibility of such a link may seem far-fetched, but there was a copy-cat case in <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Germany a few years after Dahmer's conviction. And let's not forget the father of modern gay cannibalism, Tobias Schneebaum).
 
If the APA made this minor change to natural language, in keeping with its past behavior, then a Jeffrey Dahmer imitator could still be said to have committed a hate crime. Chances are that would not be the case, since the press had already blessed the designation of Jeffrey as a homosexual. So no judge could call this a hate crime, and gays who get flayed and eaten by other gays are out of luck.
 
I want to show that by drafting and passing "hate crime" legislation, and hence, catapulting gays to the official status of victims, the government is once again cynically harming the very group they purport to help. I say "again," because we have seen how victim status works and should really know better by now. We have seen how welfare, which made a victim group predominantly out of minority women, hurt those women by turning the inner cities into their worst nightmare; how radical 60s feminists hurt women by seducing them into abandoning good enough husbands for the promise of "self fulfillment," thereby saddling them with a lifetime of endless workaday and child care stress-slavery in fact-that could have been shared with their mates, and also into aborting their children, leaving emotional scars, depression, guilt and oftentimes physical sequelae. Likewise we have seen how affirmative action seduced many minority young people into going to college after being pushed through the grades in high school on the basis of a pass-all system, only to find they couldn't cope on campus.  Despite these bitter lessons, we are now being conned again into believing that another victimization scam is going to somehow help the gay community. What we will inevitably do is make deluded gays think they are above the law, or that they can persuade judges and lawmakers into accepting their behavior, even if it is currently viewed as unlawful, and even when it strays far beyond mere homosexuality.
 
Jeffrey Dahmer himself and the gay men he enjoyed, both sexually and gustatorily, were hurt by a laissez-faire policy toward gays in law enforcement. In fact, regarding one of Jeffrey's victims, Konerak Sinthasomphone, one source says:
 
Sandra Smith, 18, and Nicole Childress, 18 her cousin, witnessed an incoherent Asian boy running around naked, and bleeding. Even though he couldn't speak English it was obvious that he was frightened of the white man following him out into the street trying to get him to return to the apartment. Dahmer, 31, told police the boy was his 19 year old lover, and they were having a lover's quarrel. After police escorted the child to Dahmer's apartment, they left him to die, despite the concerns of the two women who reported the incident.
 
This is exactly the kind of tragic nightmare that happens when you treat a group as "special" and grant them more rights than others. Does anyone doubt that had the boy been, for example, a naked and bleeding woman, intervention would have been swift decisive? In fact, Dahmer's madness may have ended then and there and the other gays he later murdered would still be alive.
 
Last week's gay bash in San Francisco's Folsom Street further illustrates how laws that apply to others simply do not apply to gays when officials grant them victim status.
 
But this Folsom Street bash serendipitously makes another point as well, namely, that the gay agenda will not stop with just gay marriage, hate crimes legislation and ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act). Gay activists are busy breaking down barriers not only to private homosexual behavior but also to public homosexual behavior. These people think they have a right to have sex on your sidewalk in your town in broad daylight. If you think that is an exaggeration, then click on the next link below regarding the Folsom Street bash in San Francisco. But be forewarned: this is the most graphic, disgusting, lewd imagery I have ever seen anywhere, and if you have a weak stomach, please don't click. If you are a minor or if there is a minor nearby, don't click. And if you do intend to click, despite these warnings, make sure a barf bag is within reach.
 
As a prelude to this I received an email from an internet friend. It is a copy of an email she received from a friend. The following is the first part, and I urge readers to make the call to Nancy Pelosi, for whom gays can do no wrong and who has excused this filth:
 
This past weekend, Sunday, in San Francisco two of my relatives were trying to leave the city and they had a two and one half hour delay.  They came to a halt due to the fact that a group of homosexual men were parading their nude wares and doing many obscene things to the point of some having intercourse on the streets.  After that part was over they did some kind of homage to bondage.  Think of the people who live near this filth.  Think of the children in the cars that could see any of this.  My kids would have been told to sit on the floor boards of the car.Why did no one take action?  At least all the cars should have laid on their horns.  My one relative got up close and saw only three police officers and they were not doing one thing to stop [my emphasis] any of this, then again I am told there are homosexual police in Sanny Fran.Now I understand all of us watch our pennies but I should think making two phone calls today would not break your bank.  The first call would be to Rep. Nancy Pelosi's office in Sanny Fran.  They only answer with a recording machine, guess she has been getting a lot of calls on various things.  The number for her is:415-556-4862. 
 
 
Obviously, this lewd party wasn't cordoned off. It was deliberately held in the open air in a busy street so that visitors would be forced to watch. America, you are being prepared for a major invasion of your privacy under the thin guise of "safety" for homosexuals.
 
If you need convincing, and have read my warnings above, you may click here.
 
How will gays ultimately be hurt by all the legislative pandering to their every whim?
 
The same ways women were hurt by the feminist agenda. People will get so sick and tired of seeing them everywhere demanding a litany of new rights no one else has, stealing the spotlight from legitimate causes, with lewd "gay parades" and "outfests" encroaching on every nook and cranny of our nation and with educators and public officials repeating the mantra that your child may be gay and need protection and by all means must "come out" so he or she can get help or figure out if he or she is a he or she. People will eventually realize it is just another government authorized protection racket.
 
Feminism taught us that people can only take so much obnoxiousness. By the early 90s, younger women on internet forums on women's topics were overwhelmingly prefacing their more contentious postings with "I'm not a feminist, but..."
 
Thus we learned the little lesson, namely, that radical feminism was an exercise in futility.
 
But we didn't learn the big lesson, and that is that all movements that treat any collective as a special victim group will inevitably fail, causing great harm to everyone, particularly the group they purport to assist.  For while we can fear the collective power of a group and can pass laws that give them special privileges, we can never love a group. And what is done without love will always come to naught, while what we do for a friend out of love will endure forever.
 
Some day, gays as a group will wake up and realize they're just Americans like the rest of us. They will put aside their rhetoric and start going about the business of simply being regular guys and gals. For the most part, they won't stop feeling that attraction for others of the same sex, but they'll be a lot more humble, and likeable, the way they used to be, the way they truly are down inside. Some will become ex-gays, and their old cronies won't mind that. Many will even be happy for them.
 
And then, Fellow American, with a little help from you and me, they'll find out they don't have to worry about people hating them any more.  What a wonderful day that will be!
 
 
Contact the author: don@zoilandonsplace.com