Baloney

The leader of a local right-wing group claims in a podcast that gay people are not the targets of violence and that actual cases of anti-gay violence don’t exist.

Pointing to one case of a young adult in Missoula who made up the story of being attacked because he was gay, Montana birther Jeff Laszloffy tells us (clip) “these false claims are becoming all too frequent because actual cases don’t exist”:

The notion that it does comes from repeated claims by groups like the Montana Human Rights Network. The reason this latest case  got so much publicity was that the promoters of anti-gay discrimination ordinances thought that they finally had an actual case that they could point to. (clip)

Laszloffy, head of the far-right Montana Family Foundation, wants us to believe that non-profit organizations are ginning up fake claims of anti-gay violence in Missoula to to pass a non-discrimination ordinance in Helena.

He points to two other cases of anti-gay violence in Montana that he says were made up.

Though Laszloffy declines to cite his sources, presumably he means the 2001 case of the Carroll College student who,

was hit in the head with a bottle, knocked unconscious and further beaten, according to a report filed by the student with school administrators. The words “Die Fag” were written on his body, and the student later required surgery because of the cuts on his eye.

The 2001 Helena IR report on this case is pasted below the fold.

He claims that police believed that a lesbian couple in Missoula actually set their own house on fire. The couple was forced to escape through a window with their infant son.

Laszloffy presents no evidence to back up his statement that these people committed crimes by making false reports to police.   Instead, he says we should be suspicious of them because they left the state after the attacks.   However, as the Helena IR reports, the Carroll student left because he feared for his safety, “fearing for his safety, he withdrew from Carroll and returned to his Spokane-area home.” And in the case of the Missoula couple, the prosecutor, a Missoula County Attorney, found no evidence to back up the claims of those who said that they had made up their story.

Laszloffy doesn’t think we understand that people move away after becoming a hate crime victim because they want to distance themselves from that terrible experience. Who wants to be known mostly as a public reminder of fear and the existence of bigots?  They move away because they don’t want to be reminded every day of what happened to them and to avoid having to encounter the perpetrators.

Here’s where his remarks really go south. Laszloffy says that the Helena non-discrimination ordinance is not to protect people who are gay but rather to “put churches and those who oppose homosexuality on religious grounds at risk for  harassment.”   He says that, “The gay community is now pushing those in the faith community not only to accept what they see as sin, but to participate in it as well.”

Back in Montana on Planet Earth, people who are gay can be denied housing and employment, fired, or kicked out of establishments — all because of their sexual orientation.  Religion is a protected class by both bias-crime laws and non-discrimination laws in Montana.  This means laws already protect people from being discriminated against because of  their faith.   And if a religious person was attacked in a bias-based crime, the assailant would receive a sentence enhancement.

To find out more about Helena’s non-discrimination ordinance and how you can help, visit the Montana Human Rights Network website here.  

 

 

 

 

IR
021001

Attack shocks students

By LAURA TODE, IR Staff Writer

Some question college’s silence after hate crime

Carroll College is a community that for years has been described as a family – safe, secure and quiet – but a recent attack on a gay student in his own dorm room has sent shock waves of fear through the school and shattered the peace that once marked the campus.

Thursday, students and staff were informed of the attack, which occurred on Jan. 17 in one of the campus residence halls that is also home to several of Carroll’s retired priests. The student just returned from the shower to his room at 1:30 a.m. when he was hit in the head with a bottle, knocked unconscious and further beaten, according to a report filed by the student with school administrators. The words “Die Fag” were written on his body, and the student later required surgery because of the cuts on his eye.

Several days later, fearing for his safety, he withdrew from Carroll and returned to his Spokane-area home. He was an openly gay senior studying biology hoping to graduate this spring.

Some 200 students and faculty attended an open forum held at the school Thursday night where they were given the opportunity to comment on the incident and ask questions of administration. Much of the discussion surrounded campus security, and many students questioned the decision by Bob Pastoor, vice president of student affairs, to not involve the Helena City Police Department until the student had been gone from the campus almost 10 days.

“Would you have ever told us?” one student asked during the open forum. “We deserve the right to know this happened.”

“Until this time it was not my intention to share this information with the community at the student’s request,” Pastoor told students at the forum “If an error has been made it has been mine.”

Prior to Friday, security on Carroll’s campus consisted basically of a part-time student-manned security desk in each of the residence halls. Pastoor announced at the open forum that three security guards would be hired to patrol the campus full-time, and that the college intended to do a campus-wide security audit.

Several students brought up multiple alleged violent crimes that have occurred on campus in recent years that the students believed went unreported. Pastoor’s response was to assure the students that administrators aggressively pursue any crime reported, but that many go unreported on campus.

Of the 150-200 disciplinary actions Carroll’s administration deals with on average each year, Pastoor said most concern minor crimes like minors in possession of alcohol and drugs and the police are seldom involved. In the case of the few violent crimes Pastoor remembers, the police were not called because he said the victims did not want a police investigation. Pastoor said that most violent crimes that went unreported in recent years were rapes or acquaintance rapes.

“Except for the most severe cases, sexual assaults are always handled by the college review board,” he said.

Pastoor said the policy of the school has always been to encourage the victim to call the police in every instance, but it is not the policy of the school to report to the police every violent crime. A student at the forum asked Pastoor to review administration protocol and consider involving police sooner rather than later in the occurrence of violence on campus.

“Would it be possible to have a policy that the college initiates the call to police when these things happen?” he pleaded.

According to the Student Right to Know and Campus Security Act of 1990, Carroll College, and all other colleges nationwide, are required to keep and publish on-campus crime statistics. Carroll’s record is unblemished except in the area of alcohol and drug violations. The reason is because the reporting of violent crimes is based on law enforcement arrest records, Pastoor said. No students have been arrested for violent crimes like assault or rape, because the incidents were handled through the school’s disciplinary board of review.

Helena Police Chief Troy McGee said the Helena Police Department has a solid working relationship with Carroll and has collaborated with the college in several investigations. McGee said if the police were called by the school to investigate a violent crime they would, but it would be difficult to complete without cooperation from the victim “In the end it is all up to the victim,” he added.

The Jan. 17 attack is under investigation by the Helena Police Department at the request of the college, McGee said, and detectives have contacted the victim who has declined to file a criminal report. Anyone with information about this crime is encouraged to call Crimestoppers at 443-2000 or the Helena Police Department at 442-3233.

 

 

 

Posted: August 14, 2012 at 7:34 am

This post was written by Cowgirl

37 thoughts on “Baloney

  1. lisa o'conner

    So, we are expected to take a birther at his word? Isn’t there something ironic about that?

  2. D Gregory Smith

    This is dangerous- and inflammatory and false. Laszloffy can’t possibly know the worry and outright fear LGBT people live with daily in our state- mostly from people like him.
    What I find ironic is that Christian biblical teaching is VERY vocal on forbidding divorce, allowing slavery and teaching compassion and forgiveness, things that Laszloffy seems to conveniently forget.

  3. Paul S.

    This guy is a self-righteous blowhard desperate for a microphone. His lies may fool the dimwits in his tiny group of knuckle-draggers, but even the most superficial analysis shows his statement was full of false analogies, deception, and outright lies.

    Hey Laszloffy, lying makes you even less credible then you already are.

  4. Doug

    This Laszloffy tells lies accusing other people of lying in order to discredit their cause. I guess this is what people do when their own honest arguments have no merit, but still….

    Remember, this is the same dude who sent his kid to the Bethel School of Supernatural Ministry instead of college.

  5. Tragic City

    I wonder why it’s always this one guy spreading the hate message for what is presented as a group of people. If they had more than one guy, wouldn’t you think we’d be hearing from those other members too? It’s a little strange.

    1. Rob Kailey

      Pastor Harris Himes advocated the Biblically ordained murder of GBLT folks in front of the Montana legislature. If you’re not hearing from these folk then I suggest you’re not listening. Sadly, too many others are.

  6. Rob Kailey

    Mark Twain – “A lie can make it halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes.” And as with most successful liars, Laszloffy offers just enough truth to lend himself and his lies a particular air of credibility to those sympathetic. This is exactly what I was afraid of after the Baken stunt.

    I agree with Greg completely. This guy’s rhetoric is dangerous, for too many reasons to list. But there is one reason that needs to be noted, as Cowgirl touches on here. Anti-discrimination ordinances are not the same as hate crime statutes. It favors the jerkoffs like Laszloffy when the lines between them get blurred. People generally favor statute that ensures fair play and defends civil rights. People generally do not favor hate crime laws, regardless of their necessity, because they smack of ‘thought crimes’. The more these issues focus on whether or not GBLT folks are picked on, bullied or harassed, the less capable elected officials become to do anything about ensuring those civil rights. No one has a ‘civil right’ not to be assaulted. What they have is a right to just recourse if they are. People do have a civil right to fair treatment in employment, housing and government services, including the rights granted by marriage. Blurring that distinction allows the Laszloffys of the world to keep focus away from people getting what rights they are owed, and squarely on the ‘special treatment’ arguments. That is especially true if it can be shown that they are not worthy of “special treatment” because they are lying about the need.

  7. Norma Duffy (@Ilikewoods)

    The sad truth is Montana does not have hate crime laws on the Books. In Fact it is missing a ton of civil right laws and the necessary data collection laws needed in the state to prosecute civil rights cases in state court. The closest I was able to find were:

    Mont. Code Anno., § 45-5-222
    Describes enhanced sentences for offenses committed because of victim’s “race, creed, religion, color, national origina, or involvement in civil rights or human rights activities or that involved damage, destruction or attempted destruction of a building regularly used for religious worship.”

    Mont. Code Anno., § 45-5-221
    Criminalizes damage to another’s property motivated by “race, creed, religion, color, national origin, or involvement in civil rights or human rights activities.”

    Both kind of catch-all laws.

    Montana itself has no sexual Orientation Laws, No gender protection Laws, No disability civil rights laws, no statutes criminalizing interference with religious worship , No civil rights protection for political affiliation, No laws regarding data collection which include sexual orientation, gender bias, or gay rights.

    And finally Montana lacks laws like most other states have…. like regulations mandating Enforcement training, for the above kinds of unlawful activity. Violation of civil rights just isn’t really known by our Law enforcement personnel in Montana.

    So of course most kinds of civil rights cases against sexual orientation, gay, transgender people must be prosecuted in federal court, with federal laws.

    Those kind of laws have been on the books since 1994, and recently strengthened in October 2009 with Obama signing a law that makes it a federal crime to assault an individual because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity. The expanded federal hate crimes law, hailed by supporters as the first major federal gay rights legislation, was added to a $680 billion defense authorization bill that Obama signed at a packed White House ceremony.

    The hate crimes measure was named for Matthew Shepard, a gay Wyoming teenager who died after being kidnapped and severely beaten in October 1998, and James Byrd Jr., an African-American man dragged to death in Texas the same year.

    Some Christan religious conservatives and the GOP Tea partiers look upon hate crime laws as a serious threat to their religious freedom. They are concerned about their freedom to criticize others, promote discrimination against them, and/or to urge that the others’ civil rights be limited. They are concerned that if a pastor delivers a hate speech or composes a hate essay denigrating all Jews, or African-Americans, or gays, or some other group, that they might be prosecuted under the 2009 law.

    However, such speech or writing would probably not be legally considered a hate crime anywhere in the United States, because no criminal act has occurred. Hate speech itself — including religious hate speech — is protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

    1. Rob Kailey

      Just for the record, I completely disagree that Montana should have ‘civil rights’ laws on the books. If the term is to mean anything, than civil rights are to be defended universally, and that means at the federal level.

      1. Hi-Liner

        Although, in situations like ours, where our Congress is unlikely to pass such a law, it would make sense to have one at the state level. Although, our legislature is unlikely to do so either given its current make up…

        1. Rob Kailey

          No offense, my friend, but no. It doesn’t make any sense to have civil rights defined at the state level, any more than Jim Crow laws did.

          1. Norma Duffy (@Ilikewoods)

            So what that means is no one in Montana has any right to cry when the Feds step into Civil rights cases in Montana, Like the rape of a female student at UM. The federal government is the place to go if Raped, or Gay Bashed. Period!

            1. Rob Kailey

              You are a right-winger, Norma. Except probably more stupid.

              No, idiot. What it “means” is what was clearly written. Civil rights are not up to the state to decide, unless you think Jim Crow laws are all that and then some. Trust me on this, idiot, I wouldn’t put that past you. ‘Cause I don’t think you understand the law for shit.

              1. Norma Duffy (@Ilikewoods)

                Why do you go to all the trouble to twist what I am saying?

                Since when Am I a right winger?

                I talk about an Innocent victim, a woman at UM being raped and some football star almost got away with it…..till someone had the great graces to provide the FBI, and Attorney general of the US the facts.

                The first cry from every male Booster of that school was, “The Federal Government is coming to Usurp our rights!” they were blaming the victim for what turned out to be, a long trail of unanswered rapes, and other sundry crimes at that school.

                Thats the crap you want to throw on the wall in hopes the male dominated smell of chauvinism sticks to me? Really?

                The fact that the Miserable Missoula democratic AG did nothing for this poor woman, because he didn’t have the state laws, nor balls to take this to the Federal Government, or Bullocks office right away… was what pissed me off. I have written about this un-justice many times here and other blogs.

                Not all of the Democrats in our state are worthy Standard Bearers. You really need to look up the definition one day, because Democrats are people who believe in the political or social equality of all people.

                You are beginning to talk in tighter circuler blatant lies,and obvious fallacies about me almost daily now, and you still don’t know anything about me.

                My Guess is, it is either jealousy, or only so you can keep your head closer to the insertion point between those cheeks of yours Rob.

                You are the Kind of Democrat or Dino that gives us other hardworking lefties a bad name among the GOP.

                We don’t need another double talker like you. We need a doer! Fling your crap all you want. What happens to people like you is, eventually, they finally corner you (like the animal you really are)right next to the other Poop throwing weaklings we loathe.

                This state needs to shell out some protective laws against rape, against gender Bias, but you dont want to go there because you and your buddies feel you cant talk like Bigots behind closed doors.

                Unfortunately for all us ladies, your hate speech is protected by the constitution in your own home. and while I dont like it, I can live with it quite easily because it doesn’t cross the threshhold of my home or my personal liberties to speak truth to your Dung.

                I also gotta tell you…your proving to woman across the internet every day, that you are not ready to converse seriously about woman having the same rights as men.

                Separate but equal! That’s what stared segregation and then Jim Crow laws!

                By not having the insight to right those wrongs in Montana, by not writing protective laws, for women that are raped, or harassed for gender Bias, By not writing state laws that protect gays or transsexuals, you are still trying to keep segregation alive…. We all know Historically how well that equal thing went for blacks dont we?

                1. Rob Kailey

                  That was a whole lot of words to say absolutely nothing. The reason the JJ rape case has become a Federal matter is not because of the rape. It’s because this woman, and many many more, may have been denied their civil right to the recourse of the justice system. If that’s what you were trying to say, then you did so poorly.

                  To my thinking, Norma, you are the worst sort of Democrat. You are reactive, defensive, assumptive and thoughtless, exactly what the right-wing thinks we all are. Here’s a hint, just because you think your heart is in the right place doesn’t mean you get to turn your brain off.

                  At no point did I say that protectionary laws (so called hate crime laws) weren’t important or shouldn’t be passed. You only assumed that because I pointed out that they are not the same as civil right laws. Look at what the laws do. A hate crime law doesn’t protect the civil rights of a victim. They are punitive, effective only given the motivation of the ‘criminal’ AFTER the crime has been committed. They are ‘protection’ only in so far as they can cause fear of repercussion in the mind of a potential criminal. As such, they are civil rights laws only in that they apply to all – would be criminals.

                  Blurring that distinction helps people like Laszloffy, not because he can point to me and find fault. It’s because he can point to people like you who, failing to see the law for what it is, overreact with screams of “sexism” and wailing of the need to pass what will be framed as thought crime laws to elevate some above the rest. That’s not a good argument, but it is effective.

            2. Rob Kailey

              Let me write this using small words so that you might actually get it, Norma Huffy. “Civil Rights” are those that should apply to all citizens in a society. That would be American rights. States should not, ever, have the ability to claim who gets those rights and who doesn’t. If you are actually dumb enough to think that rape is a civil rights crime then yes, it should be a federal offense. However, it isn’t, and it isn’t.

              1. Bozeman Dem

                We are in agreement, Rob.

                A lot of these civil rights laws are nothing more than what is referred to as an “Elevation of Privilege”.

                Norma does not understand this and has about ZERO chance of winning her House seat against Welborn. Thank goodness.

              2. Norma Duffy (@Ilikewoods)

                And neither of you vote in my district! Thank goodness for that.

                Both of you still believe Women should be trained to speak softly and carry a lipstick.

                Fellas, those days were over thirty years ago.

                Just how out of touch with the real world are you?

                1. Rob Kailey

                  I’m glad I’m not in your district, too, Norma. Bozeman has a very egalitarian non-discrimination ordinance, one that we’re very proud of across party lines. We have the best educated population in the state, and the only one where that education is shared equally across gender. We have a growing reputation for sending smart, strong women to the legislature, many of whom are taking leadership roles. I’ve really learned to love this place. And Beaverhead county has …

                  Now come again about how you’re a ‘doer’?

              3. Dallas Reese

                I have to agree with Rob here regarding enumerating “civil rights”. Whenever you try to create, in effect, a “list of civil rights” (my words) something is going to be either left off or written poorly. It would be virtually impossible to construct language that would include the civil rights of all members of society. And for every “civil right” listed, someone will try to insert some type of exception (Jim Crow laws as example).

                To that point, and perhaps more effective politically, would be a statement: “Either you believe in civil rights or you don’t”. If you believe in them, then your belief is absolute and everyone is entitled to them. If you don’t, then, well, see Jeff Laszloffy statements.

              4. Jack Ruby

                Im not sure what you guys are even arguing about here or that you are either. States can have their own ‘civil rights’ in the sense they can grant more rights to citizens than does the federal government or federal constitution. What they can’t do is be more restrictive than the federal law and they cant encroach on the federally granted rights(in general). But if a state wants to grant more freedoms or civil rights (which would be enforceable against their own state govt) they certainly can. For example Montana has a right to privacy in our state constitution that goes above and beyond anything in federal law and it is commonly used by the state courts to restrain the state based police.

                1. Jennifer Davies

                  Thanks Jack, that’s helpful. I’m glad that Montana has better protections than the national average. It would be sad to be down there with Mississippi. Of course, I wish everyone had the protections we had in Montana.

                2. Rob Kailey

                  True enough, Jack, save in all instances where federal law conflicts with state grant of right. See medical cannabis. The Montana Constitution does guarantee a right to privacy worth absolutely nothing in the age of the Patriot Act. More to the point of the post, no state grant of GBLT marriage rights are secure as long as DOMA is still on the books. Even more to the point of the post, it should kept clearly in mind that jurisdictional grant of rights get increasingly weak the farther one gets from universality. Please remember that it was the fine delegates from Havre who tried to get the Missoula and Bozeman non-discrimination ordinances overturned by claiming state level authority over those rights.

                  With that last clearly in mind, that was the only point I was trying to make. No ‘civil right’ worthy of being called such, is defensible if it does not extend to all people. What point Norma thought she was making (other than that disagreement with her is sexism) I simply don’t know.

                  1. Jack Ruby

                    Well, in regards to instances where a federal law conflicts with a states granting of a right, thats why I specifically said: “if a state wants to grant more freedoms or civil rights (which would be enforceable against their own state govt) they certainly can.” Thats why I referred to the restraint on state govt. You are a bit over the top in claiming the Montana Constitution’s right to privacy as being worth “absolutely nothing”. It is worth nothing in regards to restraining the feds or the NSA in vacuuming up data but not in the every day application of criminal law enforcement & search and seizure which is something the average Montanan actually deals with on a regular basis.

                    I’m not sure what you and norma are arguing about. Is it settled now?

                    1. Rob Kailey

                      I am probably a bit hyperbolic in that I really really hate the Patriot Act(s), in part because the average Montanan never really knows how often their privacy is violated at the federal level.

                      As for arguing with Norma, I’m not really certain what it’s about either other than I’m a sexist or something. As for it being settled, without knowing what it’s really about, I can’t say.

  8. Jennifer Davies

    Here’s my question. How exactly is “the gay community” quote “pushing those in the faith community not only to accept what they see as sin, but to participate in it as well.”

    What does that even mean.

    1. Rob Kailey

      It’s not really that difficult to understand. Religious organizations see marriage as a holy right. But there is the civil component to it as well, that married couples share tax liability, property rights and legal obligation for each other. GBLT marriage extends those rights to many who find the very concept sinful. I certainly don’t agree with that view, but I have some sympathy for their existential angst.

      Still, regardless of the wailing about Chick-Fil-A, the organization which has put more money into denial of GBLT rights than any other is the LDS church. That is and remains political action. They want political protection as a religion but behave as a political organization, including taxing their members for political activity. Could somebody, please, for the love of Dog, explain to me why they remain tax exempt?

      1. lisa o'conner

        agreed. they clearly are involved in this election at many levels, including giving the names and membership information to the romney campaign. i have a friend whose parents are mormon, and she started getting romney fundraising mail – and she is a lifelong dem.

  9. Official Jeff Laszloffy Response to this blog

    Dear Sinners:

    Jeff Lazsloffy is absolutely not lying, as lying is a sin against the Lord. The reason Jeff Lazsloffy did not provide a list of sources in his official address is that the radio format does not lend itself well to a list of citations. Therefore, allow Jeff Laszloffy to provide the source of the entirely factual information Jeff Laszloffy was talking about here:

    [Source: Jeff’s butt.]

    In Jesus’ name I will pray for your souls,

    Jeff Laszloffy

    1. Jennifer Davies

      Dear Wheat – A “hate-crime” is a crime committed because of the bias the perp has against the victim. Couple of points. 1- Since the very story you posted here says the motivation is unknown, how could anyone possibly say. 2-What would be the bias at work here? Bias against Christians? They make up 80% of the population….

    2. Paul S.

      Dear Wheat Montana, Do you actually represent this business? If not, you shouldn’t be using their name to post such an ignorant comment. If you do, well, I guess that says it all.

        1. Dan T.

          I bet you this Wheat Montana guy thinks he can come on here, get people to say they’ll stop shopping there, and then rally the right to come and rally around Wheat Montana Fox News style. Dream on.

  10. Warrior9

    “Thou shalt not lie.” -The Bible

    One forgets these types just skip over the parts they find inconvenient.

Comments are closed.