General Discussion

JudyM

(29,192 posts)

30. All the other data points/evidence they have on him. If you were going to go out and kill

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 07:18 PM

Jun 2016

a bunch of LGBTs because you were offended by their kissing wouldn't you claim it was because of your religion?

That is what happens all the time with violence by the "Right"... That is how they justify oppressive laws, as well.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

98 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Calling it a terror attack as opposed to a hate crime. [View all] JudyM Jun 2016 OP

Indeed Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #1

It's about his goals... He had a rage issue and was upset at gays kissing. JudyM Jun 2016 #4

"and was upset at gays kissing." oberliner Jun 2016 #10

His father suggested that's what his motivation was. JudyM Jun 2016 #42

Perhaps his father is lying? oberliner Jun 2016 #43

Agree: a bit of both. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2016 #28

A lot of both 6chars Jun 2016 #31

Yes. By defining what group he is from will demonize that group. tecelote Jun 2016 #2

He was a Muslim. There's no need to "demonize." David__77 Jun 2016 #80

it might stop future deaths if we understood and dealth with the motivation patsimp Jun 2016 #83

Right, and promote education about it and a more peaceful society. JudyM Jun 2016 #93

Hopefully. patsimp Jun 2016 #95

what did they call the attack on the abortion provider? nt ellenrr Jun 2016 #3

Should have been called what it was Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #7

Agree 100% nt deathrind Jun 2016 #27

when was the last attack on the abortion providers? patsimp Jun 2016 #84

Yeah FDR_Liberal Jun 2016 #5

Why did he want gay people to die? oberliner Jun 2016 #11

I have no idea FDR_Liberal Jun 2016 #16

Maybe he followed an ideology that preached homophobia? oberliner Jun 2016 #23

Yeah youre right FDR_Liberal Jun 2016 #36

Huh? oberliner Jun 2016 #41

Nothing like dog whistles FDR_Liberal Jun 2016 #47

Dog whistles? oberliner Jun 2016 #48

Ughh FDR_Liberal Jun 2016 #55

OK oberliner Jun 2016 #60

Well in this case it was a Gay hating Islamic radical vermin scum King_David Jun 2016 #77

some background here 6chars Jun 2016 #38

There are many such ideologies - the common thread is hating gay people jberryhill Jun 2016 #78

And that kind of hate is not tolerated in Israeli or Jewish culture King_David Jun 2016 #85

So? That person clearly subscribed to an ideology in which hate is fine jberryhill Jun 2016 #98

Exactly. JudyM Jun 2016 #33

Well he wanted Disney but too many security challenges yeoman6987 Jun 2016 #97

They are not mutually exclusive. It seems like both. PeaceNikki Jun 2016 #6

ISIS "culture" condones hatred and violence against LGBT but but he wasn't religious. JudyM Jun 2016 #8

I believe his hatred of LGBT was rooted in extremist beliefs. PeaceNikki Jun 2016 #9

The reports on CNN are that he was *not* raised in a religious home. JudyM Jun 2016 #35

One does not have to be 'religious' to be an extremist. PeaceNikki Jun 2016 #39

Ok, extremist, then. JudyM Jun 2016 #44

CNN is reporting he regularly attended mosque 3-4 times per week. PeaceNikki Jun 2016 #65

Yes, this is coming out now. First reports were the opposite, which is what my post was directed JudyM Jun 2016 #70

How do you know that he wasn't religious? oberliner Jun 2016 #12

Reports that his lifestyle was not religious... "Chasing women," etc., that his family isn't JudyM Jun 2016 #22

And you are confident about the veracity of these "reports" ? oberliner Jun 2016 #24

Obvsly only based on what has been reported. Just how I'm putting it together. The loaded JudyM Jun 2016 #58

Understood oberliner Jun 2016 #62

Because the religious are never hypocrites who do as they wish while judging others for doing the Bluenorthwest Jun 2016 #51

Isn't terrorism in itself Texasgal Jun 2016 #13

Definition of hate crime: JudyM Jun 2016 #19

So, are these not things that terrorism Texasgal Jun 2016 #25

It was both. alarimer Jun 2016 #14

Agree 100%. Miles Archer Jun 2016 #34

What I know is that so far every dead person is Hispanic malaise Jun 2016 #15

I assume the former is because it was Latin Night MadBadger Jun 2016 #21

President Obama and HRC have called it both mcar Jun 2016 #17

It is clearly a hate crime. That should be the lead. JudyM Jun 2016 #26

He's been on FBI watch list for being an ISIS sympathizer for several years. PeaceNikki Jun 2016 #32

That could as well be about hatred and violence. Reports are that he was not a practicing Muslim. JudyM Jun 2016 #40

occam's razor 6chars Jun 2016 #50

Hate crimes are terrorist attacks. kysrsoze Jun 2016 #18

that's exactly what they are. nt TheFrenchRazor Jun 2016 #73

If he pledged allegiance to ISIS, how can you say he's not particularly religious? MadBadger Jun 2016 #20

All the other data points/evidence they have on him. If you were going to go out and kill JudyM Jun 2016 #30

The language police will weigh in soon Cayenne Jun 2016 #29

Sadly, it is both Marrah_G Jun 2016 #37

IMO there really is no difference. deathrind Jun 2016 #45

We should call homophobic violence: homophobic violence. JudyM Jun 2016 #46

Well the gunman meant to cause terror and it was a hate crime. Rex Jun 2016 #49

The definition is a planned attack to achieve ideological, religious, etc goals, not just JudyM Jun 2016 #52

Isn't that exactly what the gunman did? Planned attack. Check. Achieve ideological goal Rex Jun 2016 #53

ISIS does have some goals it uses terror like this for. 6chars Jun 2016 #57

It downplays the horror of homophobia. And is more convenient for conservatives and the MSM. JudyM Jun 2016 #59

Ah 6chars Jun 2016 #69

Yes, the big discussion is about finding his terrorist roots, as opposed to his homophobic roots. JudyM Jun 2016 #74

Would the definition be important in determinig who gets to lead the investigatio? annavictorious Jun 2016 #54

It is both still_one Jun 2016 #56

It was a Muslim terror attack and for the group ISIS, what is confusing about that? braddy Jun 2016 #61

Most don't see ISIS as an enemy and Christians are the real enemy. ileus Jun 2016 #79

It's both a terrorist attack and a hate crime. Odin2005 Jun 2016 #63

JudyM, calling it only a terror attack kinda erases the group of people that were terrorized justiceischeap Jun 2016 #64

Wonderful reply! Rex Jun 2016 #66

It's true, the OP doesn't seem to grok there are all types of terrorism justiceischeap Jun 2016 #67

Plus all the discussion in the press is about finding his terrorist roots. Nothing about the roots JudyM Jun 2016 #75

Because the only people that really care about the issue justiceischeap Jun 2016 #88

Yes, most people do not care about the LGBT community, even if they feel we should have rights, JudyM Jun 2016 #91

Yes, completely agree. You said it well. JudyM Jun 2016 #71

The media and the political establishment are looking for terrorism. hay rick Jun 2016 #68

Yes, it doesn't fit and also amplification of the terrorist narrative. But he was foremost a bigot. JudyM Jun 2016 #72

Foremost a bigot and not foremost what? David__77 Jun 2016 #82

As between Islamic terrorist and bigot. That was the context. He is certainly also a killer. JudyM Jun 2016 #87

Thank you. I understand. David__77 Jun 2016 #90

IMO it's in fact a *critically important* distinction, for reasons expounded above by others as well JudyM Jun 2016 #92

Looking for terrorism? David__77 Jun 2016 #81

Please read the rest of the thread for development of the idea, it's more layered than what's in JudyM Jun 2016 #89

There's no reason it can't be both. Act_of_Reparation Jun 2016 #76

There is no difference between a hate crime and a terror attack. w4rma Jun 2016 #86

It is more subtle. Explained in other DUers' comments above. JudyM Jun 2016 #94

President called it a terror attack. Good enough for me. I trust him to know yeoman6987 Jun 2016 #96