Thursday, April 11, 2013

Rape Crisis Center Puts Out Unwelcome Mat

Something strange  happened to the Rape Crisis Center.


It shot itself in the foot.


Here's  what I'm talking about.


Every year the Rape Crisis Center in Cleveland holds its main annual fundraiser in which tickets are sold to a huge gala event.


The Rape Crisis Center is a worthy organization.


This year's special guest speaker was identified as Michael Reagan.


Mr. Reagan is the oldest son of former President Ronald Reagan and has enjoyed a very successful career as a conservative talk show host.


Some people were mystified when Reagan's son was invited to deliver the featured address because they did not know his real life experience as the target of a pedophile.


As a youngster sent away to camp for the summer, he was  sexually abused by a male adult camp official.


Reagan has written extensively about the trauma he experienced as a result of these crimes perpetrated on him during his youth.


He also commented about these events on his nationally syndicated radio programs, drawing much praise for his sensitive treatment of this often hushed-up atrocity.


So the Rape Crisis Center selected this very articulate conservative to appear at their annual function.


To many observers it was a  brilliant move.


Mr. Reagan would create the opportunity for people to understand that rape is a problem for more than just women.


Young men are frequent victims as well, and this unique speaker selection would cause the national media to focus on society's need to reach out to this category of crime victim.


But the involvement of Michael Reagan offered an additional benefit.


Reagan's arrival from the right side of the political spectrum would  communicate to the public that rape is a nonpartisan issue,  deserving solutions created by Republicans as well as Democrats.


So what did the Rape Crisis Center do with this fantastic opportunity?


It threw it away.


The high power Rape Crisis Center function takes place today.


Without Michael Reagan.


The Rape Crisis Center disinvited Michael Reagan because it "discovered" that Mr. Reagan was opposed to  gay marriage.




Reagan has been identified as an extreme conservative for many years of broadcasting as a radio  host.


He  also embraces the family values that became the hallmark of his father's presidential administrations.


This is no secret to anyone who's paid any attention to the universe of talk radio over the last several years.


A third grader using Google could have identified Reagan's position on gay marriage in about 30 seconds.


I don't believe the Rape Crisis Center when they say they had to scratch Reagan because  Reagan's very recent statements on  gay marriage were inconsistent with their belief in equality.




This is political correctness run amok.


Shame on you, Rape Crisis Center.


There are people from conservative America that would like to help you.


And you just told them to buzz off.


Let's stamp out rape and help rape victims.


Even if that means letting right wingers help you in that task.


You might even learn something.





  1. Tolerance! I was informed and saddened to learn that President Reagan's son was a victim of sexual abuse. (See, I refer to that recent Republican leader of our country, as President, not Reagan, his last name as a sign of respect; i.e. - "Obama"). I feel that he definitely would contribute valuable insight to the rape discussion tht he was supposed to attend. However,I cannot help but wonder if you are again spouting off your theory that sexual abuse of young boys has some correlation to homosexuality. Why is it that everytime I begin to read your article, I think to myself, "Where is he going with this?". I agree that Michael Reagan should not have been "dropped" from the schedule. Being a successful survivor of such a foul crime gives him a perspective that few of us could ever comprehend, but as I read and shook my head in agreement, I was once again made aware of your "hidden agenda". Any chance that you have to preach your anti-homosexual, anti-democratic will! I understand that you are entitled to your opinion, and I respect it, but please stop trying to relate pedophile crimes with homosexuality. You did it with your "Boy Scout" article, and your subliminal message is again displayed in this article. Really, I think you need to read the blog that was recently written on your Lynch Log and also practice some tolerant behavior when it comes to homosexuality. That slam directed at "gay" Anderson Cooper did not go unnoticed by the way.

  2. Michael Reagan and David Lynch are exactly right. Reagan correctly points out the facts on homosexuality. Lynch on why he was not allowed to speak by those liberal paragons of "tolerance."

    Homosexuality was a sin. Is a sin. Always will be a sin. Marriage always has been between one man and one woman an always will be. Homosexual marriage will also be illegitimate.

    Why? Because say so? My opinion doesn't matter. God is the only source of right an wrong. He alone determines morality. Absolute truth exists. It is found in only one place-the Bible.

    Whether everyone or no one accepts that truth doesn't change the fact that it is the truth.

    God created each one of us. He created us male and female. He also created marriage.

    God makes it clear that homosexuality is a sin. He calls it an "abomination." But any and all sin can be forgiven. Anyone can have eternal life in heaven. But there is only one way and that is by Biblically believing in Jesus Christ. Want to find out how? Visit:

    As Christians we need to speak the truth but to do so with love. We need to remember that we to are sinners. We are sinners forgiven by God's grace though faith in His Son Jesus Christ. If you haven't received that forgiveness, why not do so today. God says today is the day of salvation. Don't wait until it is too late.

  3. * I'm a frequent reader as well as above, I believe this is what the first comment is refering to. Elequently put.

    April 3, 2013 at 7:37 AM
    Mr. Lynch

    I have read a few of your recent opinions aand I personally am bewildered that some of them are published due to the strong anti-gay rheotric contained within many. Like yourself, I am an attorney who is a strong supporter of both the freedom of religion and freedom of speech. However, I do not believe that those two tenants of our democracy should be used to bully others and be utilized to deny fellow citizens of basic rights. In your February 6, 2013, article entitled "Mud Throwing Opponents Diminish Their Own Effectiveness,” you plead for tolerance, and encourage your detractors to "attack the content" of your message. I find it funny that you plead for tolerance despite being so intolerant yourself. I believe that your consisent attacks on gays are the only intolerance displayed in any of your articles or the comments attached.

    Gay couples and straight couples actually have a lot in common. Yes, we might have two walk-in closets instead of one, and our dvr’s might be at capacity thanks to Bravo programs rather than Sports Center, but we actually want the same things as opposite-sex couples when we decide to marry a partner. We want our love and commitment to one another to be broadcast to the world around us. We seek only validation from our family and friends and, just as importantly, we seek protection and equal treatment from our government. Gay couples are neither demanding to be married in a religious institution nor are they demanding that their union be recognized under the Bible.

    You label gay marriage as a threat to “the sanctity of marriage,” or as you so eloquently put it, an agent that "disintegrates the moral fiber of America." You wholly ignore the fact that more than 50% of "Straight marriages" currently end in divorce. You also ignore the fact that gays are not seeking to end religion or the Bible, but to end the discrimination against them and obtain equal protection under the law. Did you know, due to the Defense of Marriage Act and other laws prohibiting gay marriage, that straight couples have over 1,000 rights and protections that gay couples do not. Do you really want to prevent a gay man from visiting his partner of 50 years in the hospital and his ability to make life decisions about his partner? Do you hope to preclude that grieving man from collecting Social Security benefits and for that man to suffer greater monetary hardships in the form of estate taxes?

    I am bewildered, as a fellow attorney, that your overlook the Constitution and point to the Bible when you reason that gay marriage should not be legalized. The 14th Amendment's Equal Protection clause should strike down California's ban, just as the Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause should force Ohio to recognized a gay couple married in New York. Quoting Levitcus or another passage of the Bible does not work, as the Bible holds no standing in the Court of Law in this Country.

    Lastly, I have a strong assumption that part of the reason you hold such anti-gay views is because, like many before yo who've changed their stances on gay rights, you probably have never met a gay person or gay couple. I am in a committed relationship with a man. A man who I love, and hope, if our relationship continues to flourish, to marry. Unlike her, I happen to be a man. I invite you to talk with me, to better understand gays and gay couples. Maybe I can change your mind, maybe not. But what I hope is that after meeting a gay person, or a gay couple, you can become a little more tolerant in your views. Please give this letter some thought. I am not expecting a Rob Portman change of heart, but what I am expecting is that reflect on your undersanding of what is and is not "tolerant."

    Matthew Brandt
    Columbus, Ohio
    440.5377482 (personal e-mail)

  4. The Rape Crisis Center should 'center' on rape crisis and topics of this nature only. You gave great reasons why Michael Reagan would have been a great speaker. How a person feels about homosexuality has nothing to do with that. I, for one, am getting extremely bothered by 'the left' in this country PUSHING their lack of morals down the throats of those who 'gave up' their rights to their own 'worldly' opinions when they decided to ask God to forgive them of all of THEIR sins, and began to follow Christ and let him in the driver's sea of their lives. We cannot call something 'good' that the Lord has already deemed to be sinful. It's just that simple. Yes, it's obvious in this day and age, that persecution will come with the decision to agree with God (as he has revealed himself to us, in the Bible)and therefore, disagree with the direction that most of our country seems to be heading these days. God loves us ALL...we say this over and over, and God and Christians don't hate homosexuals...we say this over and over...but it's just NOT enough. I know personally some very nice people who are attracted to their same sex. I know some that have been 'commmitted' for years, some that pretend that they are, but go out on each other when the other is away, and I know another who played life risky, with MANY partners, and died a tragic death from aids. A very nice looking, and very LOVED young man. Just KNOWING and having homosexual friends is not enough for someone who believes it to be sinful. Just like homosexuals used to say, don't you think I would be straight if I could? It would be easier for me if I could...well, don't you think that Christians would love to relent and say homosexuality is fine, nothing wrong with it, and it's okay for 'marriage' to be defined any old way...if they could? It would be so much 'easier' for them if they would. It's a matter of conscience, not 'tolerance.'