60 organizations consider suing the SPLC for defamation

[Patooka]

Where the fuck is the left wing version of Arthur Jones? Or Patrick Little? You're right about mission creep. You're dead wrong about where it is coming from. The SPLC shouldn't feel obligated to move its goalposts simply because the right is openly pandering to hate groups.

The problem is not all their targets are hate groups.

Cool. Name three. This is kinda my point. If these groups are so offended by being labelled a hate group by the SPLC, they could at least have the balls to say so publicly. Instead, all I'm hearing are invisible cries of persecution by the evil hateful left. Meh. Fuck em.

The SPLC also had Ayaan Hirsi Ali on its list.

That's right. My apologies. And yet there was no mention of her in the pjmedia article or the WND story. Even though she was labelled as an anti muslim extremist the exact same time as Maajid Nawaz. I'm honestly confounded why neither right wing source brought her up.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Especially as the one verifiable instance listed in either article of SPLC wrongdoing in the last 46 years is what happened to Maajid Nawaz.

The SPLC also had Ayaan Hirsi Ali on its list.

Hirsi Ali's views understandably were very anti-Muslim initially and we had a discussion in this forum and quoted her writing about bombing ALL Muslims wholesale. No exceptions. Here's Wikipedia:

In a 2007 article in Reason magazine, Hirsi Ali said that Islam, the religion, must be defeated and that "we are at war with Islam. And there's no middle ground in wars."[111] She said, "Islam, period. Once it's defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It's very difficult to even talk about peace now. They're not interested in peace...There comes a moment when you crush your enemy."[111] She reiterated her position that the problem isn't just a few "rotten apples" in the Islamic community but "I'm saying it's the entire basket." She stated that the majority of Muslims aren't "moderates" and they must radically alter their religion.[112] Max Rodenbeck, writing in The New York Review of Books, notes that Ali's view of Islam has shifted and "mellowed," ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayaan_Hirsi_Ali

Emphasis added.

 

[ZiprHead]

So you think freedom of speech means no repercussions for your speech?

Usually Libertarian repercussions mean not doing business with the organization you object to. Free market and all.

Don2 seems to think that even saying "you're wrong" is limiting freedom of speech.

I don't speak for Don2. One of my libertarian rights.

 

[Emily Lake]

The article doesn't specifically disclose any of the groups that were referenced as potentially suing SPLC. IT does, however, reference some likely candidates:

Family Research Council
The Ruth Institute
Alliance Defending Freedom


The article also links to a second article: 47 Nonprofit Leaders Denounce the Southern Poverty Law Center's 'Hate List' in Open Letter to the Media. That article lists out several organizations that have denounced SPLC.

I haven't done a huge amount of research on this, but at a glance, it appears that several of the organizations on SPLC's list are religious organizations that are either anti-abortion or are opposed to gay marriage. While I personally disagree with those perspectives, I don't think it's reasonable to cast them as hate groups.

 

[laughing dog]

The Alliance Defending Freedom is virulently anti-gay. It actively defends discrimination against gay people. It funds anti-gay "information". It promotes gay conversion therapy. The Family Resource Council is part of the ADF. I am not very familiar with the Ruth Institute but it is very anti-gay.


According to Wikipedia ( Hate_group )

A hate group is a social group that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, nation, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or any other designated sector of society.

. I can see how someone would conclude that the ADF and the FRC are hate groups. I don't know enough about the Ruth Institute.

 

[Bomb#20]

The SPLC also had Ayaan Hirsi Ali on its list.

That's right. My apologies. And yet there was no mention of her in the pjmedia article or the WND story. Even though she was labelled as an anti muslim extremist the exact same time as Maajid Nawaz. I'm honestly confounded why neither right wing source brought her up.

Well, the obvious speculation would be that she's not suing the SPLC, because she doesn't agree with what they say but she'll defend to the death their right to say it, and consequently the right wing sources don't find her particularly useful to their cause.

 

[Bomb#20]

Hirsi Ali's views understandably were very anti-Muslim initially and we had a discussion in this forum and quoted her writing about bombing ALL Muslims wholesale. No exceptions.

Cite?

Here's Wikipedia:

In a 2007 article in Reason magazine, Hirsi Ali said that Islam, the religion, must be defeated and that "we are at war with Islam. And there's no middle ground in wars."[111] She said, "Islam, period. Once it's defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It's very difficult to even talk about peace now. They're not interested in peace...There comes a moment when you crush your enemy."[111] She reiterated her position that the problem isn't just a few "rotten apples" in the Islamic community but "I'm saying it's the entire basket." She stated that the majority of Muslims aren't "moderates" and they must radically alter their religion.[112] Max Rodenbeck, writing in The New York Review of Books, notes that Ali's view of Islam has shifted and "mellowed," ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayaan_Hirsi_Ali

Emphasis added.

And this is different from the SPLC's attitude toward White Supremacy, how? Do they consider themselves a hate group?

We have a cultural practice in the West of treating theistic religions with kid gloves. Religions don't deserve that. What the heck is the intellectual or moral difference between thinking non-whites ought to submit to whites and thinking non-gods ought to submit to gods? We know it isn't extremist or hateful to recognize Naziism and Communism as religions that need to be stopped. But all a religion needs to do is say "God" and all of a sudden recognizing it for what it is magically becomes "hate", why exactly?

 

[Patooka]

Threadmancy ahoy! But still pretty relevant:

DOJ's New Religious Liberty Arm Set to Investigate the SPLC?

Sessions emphasized that the new religious liberty task force represents a sea change from the Obama administration, under which federal agencies often used the SPLC "hate group" markings. His direct reference to the SPLC in his remarks suggested that the new task force may investigate the left-wing smear group.

Now, I live on the other side of the planet, but why do I have the sneaking suspicion that the religious liberty wing of the US DOJ will only specifically target "hate crimes" against white christians? I'm sure libertarians will be outraged about this overreach of government autocracy. Libertarians will be shouting from the rooftops. Not only because this is contrary to their ideology; but because they are smart enough to realize that being silent about this whilst taking the moral high ground for people like say Alex Jones makes them look like worthless pieces of hypocritical shit.

With zero credibility.