The New Forum For Hatred: INTERNET COMMENTS

I grew up in the civil rights era of the 60’s & 70’s. I witnessed one of the most powerful movements of non-violent protest and reform ever recorded in the USA and possibly even the world. I saw the emergence of a new breed of freedom fighters who fought hatred with non-violent civil disobedience. As the era of live television news coverage began I saw all the images of MLK and thousands of others who willingly allowed themselves to be beaten, bitten by dogs and jailed in order to make the point that the racist Jim Crow policies of segregation, discrimination and overt racial hatred could not be tolerated by a so called “free” nation any longer.

The effects of the uprising of both Black and White people against the latent remnants of slavery were powerful and long reaching. Because of the sacrifices of these great people who embraced the moral cause of equality for all Americans, I saw many changes take place. The in your face “Racist dogma” was no longer tolerable by the mainstream and the ugliness of racism was exposed for what it truly is. I saw many changes taking place as African Americans began to gain an electoral voice. Suddenly, the inequities of the past became fashionably “just” causes for White politicians and celebrities. It was a long battle and struggle that still continues even to this day. Even now that we have a bi-racial president (notice I didn’t say Black) we still have a constant stream of racist rhetoric being cast upon the masses through radio, TV and the newest medium: the internet. There have been many celebrity and political careers that have been destroyed by having their inert racist beliefs exposed to the public. Many comedians, actors, columnists, sports figures and other public entities have been caught making racist statements and have been punished by being ostracized by their professions and the public.

The result of this has caused the minions of hatred to retreat to more anonymous modes of hate speech. The single most frequent form of racist jargon has become the internet. In particular, racists have found a wealth of opportunity for hate speech through the comment sections on internet articles. This cowardly approach has become widespread due to the expansive nature of the internet as well as the ability to assign ones self an anonymous identity. They then scour the internet looking for any article about people of color and they leave their nasty racist comments for the world to see. I call these folks present day “bathroom stall ranters”. You know? The folks who use to write stuff on the bathroom stalls like “If Black is beautiful I just shi##ed a masterpiece”. They did their business and left their crap in the crapper knowing that some unsuspecting Black person would be forced to read it for a few brief moments. Now, these cowards have found a forum that guarantees they will get the exposure they crave for hatred. They look for any article about any Black, Hispanic, Asian or Arabic person and they write their little racist comments in the comment section. You can find this stuff on almost any web outlet including Yahoo, MSN, AOL and even on BET. A favorite place for racist banter has become sports web outlets. If there is an article about a Black athlete you are sure to find some racist comments beneath the article.

What bothers me most about these comments is the fact that most of these web outlets have clearly written rules about inappropriate posts. Yet, very few of them actually police and delete the racist crap. They will go on record as being non compliant to racist or religious bigotry but they actually have a “do nothing” policy when it comes to their comment pages. It is startling to see how many people of hate there are out there. They are the cyberspace KKK whose sheets are actually an anonymous I. D. If you don’t believe me, check it out for yourself. Go to any article on the internet about a person of color and you will find them there writing and spreading what they consider to be witty negative comments that are laced with overt racism. No one and nothing is sacred or shielded from these rants. They spread out right lies about public figures and do it knowing that their anonymous identity shields them from facing any adverse penalties for the despicable things they write. These cyber cowards have found a place to vent without having any repercussions.

So who are these people and why are there so many of them? I suspect that they are the racially frustrated folks in every community in America. They are the under mass that has always felt the things that they write but have been scared off by public civility and the possibility of getting their asses kicked if they said their beliefs to a Black mans face. They are the people you see every day in our stores, parks, churches, legislature, social service centers and practically any where you go. In some cases they are the your next door neighbors. They smile at you but are secrety calling you the “N” word under their breath. They are racist cyber bully’s who get immense pleasure by insulting any one who looks or believes anything different from how they look or believe. The internet “sheets” are covering their actions and their identities. The internet has become the new forum for hatred.

So, what can be done about it? Well, all anyone can do that may be effective in stopping them is to complain to the host site about it. Sometimes they will delete these racist rants and ban them from posting on their site. By adding their individual I.S.P.s to the ban they can prevent them from creating a new I.D. and starting all over again. The one thing we should not do is respond to them with a counter post. They love that! It gives them more ammunition and targets to literally attack. Reporting them and ignoring their rants will take away the power they have to incite and intimidate. We must force the web outlets to diligently police themselves. If they fail to do that then we must boycott the articles they write. When they see that their articles are no longer receiving the attention (hits) they have previously received, they will begin to enforce the written policies they have in place.

Unfortunately, there is not much we can do about the hatred that exists within the hearts of some people. Racial hatred has been around for many, many generations. It seems that it is human nature for people to look down on other folks just because they look or believe something different. It’s called ignorance. I believe that the only way we will ever be able to get rid of racial hatred is to breed it out over the course of many generations. When the entire world becomes mixed, there will be no one left to hate because we will all be the same. Of course I could be wrong, I have been before. But that’s how I see it.

Your comments are welcome here, but be aware that I screen them all. Shouldn’t everyone?

4 comments

  • thetexascorasnake

    thetexascorasnake

    Hello Stoneman, I am not sure that just because a person has a white face and has dissagreements that his comments should automatically be written off a "racist". We can all do without the name calling, and good manners are always a mark of having a civilized discussion, but even if a person is rude and foul mouthed doesn't mean he is hating. I do take some issue with the development of so called "hate crimes". As a Christian, I am often times accused of being a "hater" for saying that homosexuality is a sin. I can understand a person being accused of a hate crime he is being violent, but the way things are shaping up, we are going to see a body of laws soon that allows hatred towards Christians. ~Blessings

    Hello Stoneman,

    I am not sure that just because a person has a white face and has dissagreements that his comments should automatically be written off a "racist". We can all do without the name calling, and good manners are always a mark of having a civilized discussion, but even if a person is rude and foul mouthed doesn't mean he is hating.

    I do take some issue with the development of so called "hate crimes". As a Christian, I am often times accused of being a "hater" for saying that homosexuality is a sin. I can understand a person being accused of a hate crime he is being violent, but the way things are shaping up, we are going to see a body of laws soon that allows hatred towards Christians.

    ~Blessings

  • Stoneman

    Stoneman

    First of all let me say this. Hatred itself is not and should not be against the law or internet rules. However, the perpetration of hatred that inflicts harm (be it physical or emotional) should be and in most cases is against the written rules and laws. For instance, it is one thing to say that a person is a sinner for being homosexual. But, another thing to deny them the constitutional rights that all Americans have because they are homosexual. Not long ago Blacks and Whites could not marry each other because of unconstitutional laws. Those laws were stricken accordingly. I don't know what laws you are referring to that will allow hatred towards Christians but I will submit that hatred towards Christians is not something new. You cannot legislate the way people feel. I am Christian also but I am tolerant of other beliefs because I believe that religious freedom is a right that must be upheld for all Americans. Even Jesus gives us a choice. Whatever we choose we must personally be willing to face the eternal consequences of that choice. But it is rightfully unlawful to legislate our beliefs or lack there of on other Americans. I did not serve my country in the military just for all the straight Americans. I did it for the freedoms of all Americans and that includes Gays. Now, in regards to people of any color having disagreements, I am all for that right. But when the disagreements evolve into racial insults and racially derogatory stereotypes, name calling etc. I, and most reasonable people would in fact consider that to be hallmark examples of racism. For instance, it is one thing to say an athlete (who happens to be Black) is a morally corrupt criminal but something else to say that he and all of his kind are morally corrupt criminals. Throw in the "N" word, spook, darky etc. and there is no doubt that it is a racially charged attack. Add in the fact that the rules of the website clearly state that these kinds of derogatory attacks are not allowed and I think there is a clear case for censure and being banned. This is regardless to what color, creed religion etc. the offending party is. My blog is not about White people who disagree or say derogatory comments. It is about White people who use racially based wordings and stereotypes as a tool to inflict literal harm. That, in every sense of their words is in fact hatred and racist. Much Respect and Blessings back atcha! Stoneman

    First of all let me say this. Hatred itself is not and should not be against the law or internet rules. However, the perpetration of hatred that inflicts harm (be it physical or emotional) should be and in most cases is against the written rules and laws. For instance, it is one thing to say that a person is a sinner for being homosexual. But, another thing to deny them the constitutional rights that all Americans have because they are homosexual. Not long ago Blacks and Whites could not marry each other because of unconstitutional laws. Those laws were stricken accordingly. I don't know what laws you are referring to that will allow hatred towards Christians but I will submit that hatred towards Christians is not something new. You cannot legislate the way people feel. I am Christian also but I am tolerant of other beliefs because I believe that religious freedom is a right that must be upheld for all Americans. Even Jesus gives us a choice. Whatever we choose we must personally be willing to face the eternal consequences of that choice. But it is rightfully unlawful to legislate our beliefs or lack there of on other Americans. I did not serve my country in the military just for all the straight Americans. I did it for the freedoms of all Americans and that includes Gays.

    Now, in regards to people of any color having disagreements, I am all for that right. But when the disagreements evolve into racial insults and racially derogatory stereotypes, name calling etc. I, and most reasonable people would in fact consider that to be hallmark examples of racism. For instance, it is one thing to say an athlete (who happens to be Black) is a morally corrupt criminal but something else to say that he and all of his kind are morally corrupt criminals. Throw in the "N" word, spook, darky etc. and there is no doubt that it is a racially charged attack. Add in the fact that the rules of the website clearly state that these kinds of derogatory attacks are not allowed and I think there is a clear case for censure and being banned. This is regardless to what color, creed religion etc. the offending party is.

    My blog is not about White people who disagree or say derogatory comments. It is about White people who use racially based wordings and stereotypes as a tool to inflict literal harm. That, in every sense of their words is in fact hatred and racist.

    Much Respect and Blessings back atcha!
    Stoneman

  • thetexascorasnake

    thetexascorasnake

    Hello again Stoneman, Thanks for responding, a couple of questions if you don't mind. Before I ask them, I will say that it is my belief that "love covereth a multitude of sins" and I try to bear this in mind when blogging, or even speaking in person with those who may disagree with me. First, you say that homosexuals should not be denied constitutional rights; I do tend to go alonng with this. Do you also believe that they should have the right to same sex marriages? I am, politicly, a Libertarian and so are many homosexuals and lesbians. This is a point of debate and disagreement, and quite a few of them accuse me of being a hater because I don't recognize that they should have the right to marry. To me, this smacks of bigotry against Christians and leads to my second question: If homosexuals and lesbians have a right to be married, does this mean that Christian "clergy" should be forced to preform same sex marriages? These are a couple samples of but a few discussions I find myself in. As the "Gay Community" asserts their rights, we find ourselves becoming more tolerant of things that are unChristian. Yes, homosexuals should not be denied jobs and basic human rights, but not at the cost of one of God's institutions (Marriage) ~Blessings

    Hello again Stoneman,

    Thanks for responding, a couple of questions if you don't mind. Before I ask them, I will say that it is my belief that "love covereth a multitude of sins" and I try to bear this in mind when blogging, or even speaking in person with those who may disagree with me.

    First, you say that homosexuals should not be denied constitutional rights; I do tend to go alonng with this. Do you also believe that they should have the right to same sex marriages? I am, politicly, a Libertarian and so are many homosexuals and lesbians. This is a point of debate and disagreement, and quite a few of them accuse me of being a hater because I don't recognize that they should have the right to marry. To me, this smacks of bigotry against Christians and leads to my second question:

    If homosexuals and lesbians have a right to be married, does this mean that Christian "clergy" should be forced to preform same sex marriages? These are a couple samples of but a few discussions I find myself in. As the "Gay Community" asserts their rights, we find ourselves becoming more tolerant of things that are unChristian. Yes, homosexuals should not be denied jobs and basic human rights, but not at the cost of one of God's institutions (Marriage)

    ~Blessings

  • Stoneman

    Stoneman

    Sorry for the late response but I have been having a formatting problem with my website and had to wait for it to be fixed. But here is my response to your questions: All very good questions. Thanks for asking and for being civil in your responses. We are talking about issues that many folks get overly emotional and arguments often lead to unnecessary escalations and violent outbursts. Question: Do you believe that homosexuals should have the right to same sex marriage? My Answer: I believe that all citizens of the United States who meet the minimum requirements for marriage (age, citizenship, human) regardless to gender preference, should have the right to marry. I believe that the institution of marriage is not exclusively a Christian concept. Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Agnostics, Atheists and nearly all segments of American/World society marry. There are even some cultures that have never heard of Christianity that have marriage rituals and ceremonies. Many of these cultures/religions were getting married long before the times of Jesus. Therefore, to label marriage as being strictly a Christian ceremony would be an affront to all other cultures who have their own ceremonial concepts for marriage. There are many different ways that people marry. Some (former slaves) simply jump over the broom. Others stand before a judge, military officer, ships captain, shaman etc. But its all called marriage and each marriage that is preempted with a license is considered legal according to our laws. This only means the married couples are given all the legal rights that go with being married according to man‘s (not God‘s) laws. This is where the argument for Gay marriage takes center stage. By denying them the right to marry we are denying them a whole slew of other rights that all other Americans (regardless to their religion) have. I fail to see how Gay marriage is bigotry towards Christians because of the fact that marriage has never been strictly a Christian concept. It is a human concept that is practiced all over the world by thousands of cultures and nations. I have known Gay couples that have been together for decades and when one of them dies, their family comes in and kicks the other out of the house they bought together and takes all the money in the joint accounts. That is just plain wrong! Then there are those who need decisions to be made about their health but the Gay spouse gets excluded from that process. Even straight folks who have been together form many years but never married have more rights due to the “common law” marriage laws. Many folks get hung up on the terminology. They prefer that Gays be given different terminology such as “domestic partnership”. The problems with that for me are: 1. Domestic partnerships do not give you all the legal rights that marriage does. 2. No other segment of society has to have different terminology. Do we make other people such as Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists etc call it something different than marriage? After all, these people are not Christians. But they get to call their unions marriage. Many Gays are in fact Christians yet they should not be allowed to call their unions marriage? That would be inequality in its purest form. Question: If homosexuals and lesbians have a right to be married, does this mean that Christian "clergy" should be forced to perform same sex marriages? My Answer: Absolutely no! If the religious beliefs of any minister be he/her Christian or any other religion go against the concept of Gay marriage, they should not and cannot be forced to perform a ceremony. The rights and rules of the individual church should be adhered to accordingly. No one can regulate church doctrinal guidelines. For instance, if a Gay couple in your church wants to get married but the minister refuses, they have the right to go somewhere else where the practice is permissible. But no one should be forced to perform an act that is contrary to their personal religious conscience. Also, why would anyone want to be married under duress? It is their special day that should be a positive experience from start to finish. By the way, different denominations and faiths have a legal right to abstain from marrying couples when one is not of their faith. Some examples would be Catholics, Jews etc. So why wouldn’t the same rights be in place in regards to Gay marriage? I see you question as a totally non-issue. I believe that many Christians continue to put themselves in a bubble that says they are special because of their faith and that it entitles them to many perks that should not be afforded to others. Historically, this concept has proven to be dangerous. It was used to excuse the practice of slavery, wars against non-Christian nations, the attempts to exterminate Native Americans and all sorts of worldwide atrocities committed by Christians in the name of God. Does that sound familiar to you? Are you familiar with the concept of Jihad? Where is the love that Jesus commanded us to have not only for each other but for our enemies? As I stated before, I am not Gay. I am married to the most beautiful woman (in my eyes) in the world. But my marriage is not based on what others do. I don't feel threatened by the marriages of other cultures and religions. Gay marriage is between them and God. Not me, them and God. Equality is equality. There should be no "buts" or “exceptions” involved in the concept. We should treat all law abiding, tax paying citizens the same. Thanks so much for your questions. Please know that I understand your concerns about being persecuted because of your beliefs. But I urge you not to buy into the hysteria of many churches who teach that Gay marriage is an attack on Christian ideals. It is not! It is an attack on unconstitutional practices. Marriage will not be destroyed because Gay people start doing it. Straight people have done enough to destroy the institution of marriage. That’s why 50% of all marriages fail. Just as marriage was not destroyed when Blacks and Whites started doing it. Such will be the same with Gay marriage. As America’s most revered written document states: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. I am happily married. Why shouldn't Gay people have the right to pursue what I have? One my family members is a Libertarian and he is also Gay. My daily prayer is that some day he will be blessed with the kind of joy I now feel daily when I look into my wife's eyes. Because of his preference, he could never be happily married to a woman. Much Respect and Admiration To You! There is nothing wrong with what you believe in your heart to be true. It only becomes a problem if you try to mandate your beliefs on those who are different. When I see people doing things that I consider sinful I pray for them. I know that God is able to change them. Not me, I am just a man. You are only human also. Only God has the right to judge others. I Pray God's Continued Blessings On You Life Stoneman

    Sorry for the late response but I have been having a formatting problem with my website and had to wait for it to be fixed. But here is my response to your questions:

    All very good questions. Thanks for asking and for being civil in your responses. We are talking about issues that many folks get overly emotional and arguments often lead to unnecessary escalations and violent outbursts.

    Question: Do you believe that homosexuals should have the right to same sex marriage?

    My Answer: I believe that all citizens of the United States who meet the minimum requirements for marriage (age, citizenship, human) regardless to gender preference, should have the right to marry. I believe that the institution of marriage is not exclusively a Christian concept. Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Agnostics, Atheists and nearly all segments of American/World society marry. There are even some cultures that have never heard of Christianity that have marriage rituals and ceremonies. Many of these cultures/religions were getting married long before the times of Jesus. Therefore, to label marriage as being strictly a Christian ceremony would be an affront to all other cultures who have their own ceremonial concepts for marriage. There are many different ways that people marry. Some (former slaves) simply jump over the broom. Others stand before a judge, military officer, ships captain, shaman etc. But its all called marriage and each marriage that is preempted with a license is considered legal according to our laws. This only means the married couples are given all the legal rights that go with being married according to man‘s (not God‘s) laws. This is where the argument for Gay marriage takes center stage. By denying them the right to marry we are denying them a whole slew of other rights that all other Americans (regardless to their religion) have. I fail to see how Gay marriage is bigotry towards Christians because of the fact that marriage has never been strictly a Christian concept. It is a human concept that is practiced all over the world by thousands of cultures and nations. I have known Gay couples that have been together for decades and when one of them dies, their family comes in and kicks the other out of the house they bought together and takes all the money in the joint accounts. That is just plain wrong! Then there are those who need decisions to be made about their health but the Gay spouse gets excluded from that process. Even straight folks who have been together form many years but never married have more rights due to the “common law” marriage laws. Many folks get hung up on the terminology. They prefer that Gays be given different terminology such as “domestic partnership”. The problems with that for me are:

    1. Domestic partnerships do not give you all the legal rights that marriage does.
    2. No other segment of society has to have different terminology. Do we make other people such as Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists etc call it something different than marriage? After all, these people are not Christians. But they get to call their unions marriage. Many Gays are in fact Christians yet they should not be allowed to call their unions marriage? That would be inequality in its purest form.


    Question: If homosexuals and lesbians have a right to be married, does this mean that Christian "clergy" should be forced to perform same sex marriages?

    My Answer: Absolutely no! If the religious beliefs of any minister be he/her Christian or any other religion go against the concept of Gay marriage, they should not and cannot be forced to perform a ceremony. The rights and rules of the individual church should be adhered to accordingly. No one can regulate church doctrinal guidelines. For instance, if a Gay couple in your church wants to get married but the minister refuses, they have the right to go somewhere else where the practice is permissible. But no one should be forced to perform an act that is contrary to their personal religious conscience. Also, why would anyone want to be married under duress? It is their special day that should be a positive experience from start to finish.

    By the way, different denominations and faiths have a legal right to abstain from marrying couples when one is not of their faith. Some examples would be Catholics, Jews etc. So why wouldn’t the same rights be in place in regards to Gay marriage? I see you question as a totally non-issue.

    I believe that many Christians continue to put themselves in a bubble that says they are special because of their faith and that it entitles them to many perks that should not be afforded to others. Historically, this concept has proven to be dangerous. It was used to excuse the practice of slavery, wars against non-Christian nations, the attempts to exterminate Native Americans and all sorts of worldwide atrocities committed by Christians in the name of God. Does that sound familiar to you? Are you familiar with the concept of Jihad? Where is the love that Jesus commanded us to have not only for each other but for our enemies? As I stated before, I am not Gay. I am married to the most beautiful woman (in my eyes) in the world. But my marriage is not based on what others do. I don't feel threatened by the marriages of other cultures and religions. Gay marriage is between them and God. Not me, them and God. Equality is equality. There should be no "buts" or “exceptions” involved in the concept. We should treat all law abiding, tax paying citizens the same.

    Thanks so much for your questions. Please know that I understand your concerns about being persecuted because of your beliefs. But I urge you not to buy into the hysteria of many churches who teach that Gay marriage is an attack on Christian ideals. It is not! It is an attack on unconstitutional practices. Marriage will not be destroyed because Gay people start doing it. Straight people have done enough to destroy the institution of marriage. That’s why 50% of all marriages fail. Just as marriage was not destroyed when Blacks and Whites started doing it. Such will be the same with Gay marriage. As America’s most revered written document states: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. I am happily married. Why shouldn't Gay people have the right to pursue what I have?

    One my family members is a Libertarian and he is also Gay. My daily prayer is that some day he will be blessed with the kind of joy I now feel daily when I look into my wife's eyes. Because of his preference, he could never be happily married to a woman.

    Much Respect and Admiration To You! There is nothing wrong with what you believe in your heart to be true. It only becomes a problem if you try to mandate your beliefs on those who are different. When I see people doing things that I consider sinful I pray for them. I know that God is able to change them. Not me, I am just a man. You are only human also. Only God has the right to judge others.

    I Pray God's Continued Blessings On You Life
    Stoneman

Add comment

Copyright 2012 S. Towery