Oikophobia - How the West Learned to Hate Itself

Gen Z Hates The US In Record Numbers

Gooden EXPOSES SPLC: "Burn a Catholic Church — NOT Hate. Hold a Christian Rally — HATE GROUP?"

Inside Congress

Jun 13, 2026 
Rep. Gooden left the SPLC president speechless after exposing a shocking double standard — conservative Christian groups like Alliance Defending Freedom and Turning Point USA are on the SPLC hate map, but Antifa and Jane's Revenge — the group that burned down Catholic churches and pregnancy resource centers — are not. 

Then came the bombshell — the FBI used SPLC material to classify Catholics as violent extremists during the Biden administration. 

Gooden's response? "Add me to your hate map. I'd be honored." What do you think? Is the SPLC still credible? Drop your thoughts in the comments below.

Suspect shot by Pierce County sheriff's deputies after allegedly stabbin...

Border czar Tom Homan holds press conference in Minneapolis

Southern Poverty Law Center Names Well-Known Christian Organization an “Active Hate Group”. Say What??

kingsjester

August 25, 2017 7:00

“In our polarized times, radicals use the SPLC’s hate-group designations to justify violence. Politicians and corporations use the designation to marginalize and punish good men and women. Not long ago the Family Research Council narrowly avoided mass murder when a man tried to attack its headquarters. He was inspired in part by the SPLC’s hate-group designation, and his plan was to shoot FRC employees and stuff Chick-fil-A sandwiches into their dead, bleeding mouths.” – David French, Senior Writer, National Review, July 13, 2017

Foxnews.com reports:


A prominent evangelical ministry has filed a federal lawsuit against the left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), saying it defamed the Christian organization as an “active hate group” because it endorses the biblical view of homosexuality.

The clash marks the latest chapter in a growing feud between those who embrace historic monotheistic beliefs, whether Christian, Jewish or Muslim, and progressive activists who have begun targeting mainstream Christian groups that hold traditional beliefs about sex and other issues.

Officials of the D. James Kennedy Ministries, based in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., accuse the SPLC of deceptive practices, saying that it wrongly asserts that some organizations breed or fuel hate because of their religious positions on such things as same-sex marriage and other social issues.

“It’s completely disingenuous to tag D. James Kennedy Ministries as a hate group alongside the KKK and neo-Nazis,” Kennedy Ministries spokesman John Rabe said to Fox News. “We desire all people, with no exceptions, to receive the love of Christ and his forgiveness and healing. We unequivocally condemn violence, and we hate no one.”

“It’s ridiculous for the SPLC to falsely tag evangelical Christian ministries as ‘hate groups’ simply for upholding the 2,000-year-old Christian consensus on marriage and sexuality,” Rabe said. “It’s nothing more than an attempt to bulldoze over those who disagree with them, and it has a chilling effect on the free exercise of religion in a nation built on that. We decided not to let their falsehoods stand.”

Kennedy Ministries filed the lawsuit Tuesday in the U.S. District Court in Montgomery, Ala., where the SPLC is headquartered.

The SPLC did not immediately respond to requests for comment.So, just who is this bunch of foaming-at-the-mouth, snot-nosed Liberals known as the SPLC?

The EU Has A Plan To Get Rid Of Racist Comments On Social Media For Good. Will It Work?

BY LAUREN C. WILLIAMS MAY 31, 2016 4:37 PM

CREDIT: AP PHOTO/SILVIA IZQUIERDO, FILE



Tech juggernauts Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft have agreed to take down hateful content within 24 hours of reviewing it, according to new conduct rules the European Commission announced Tuesday to align with national laws criminalizing violent online speech.

The new rules require social media companies to remove posts or disable accounts, when necessary, that reference violence or hatred targeting individuals or groups based on race, color, ethnicity, religion, or nationality. Tech companies must also develop and display clear guidelines outlining the sites’ prohibition of violent and hateful speech, and train employees on how to flag the illegal content.

The joint commitment between American tech companies and European Union comes after French Jewish youth group UEJF sued Facebook, Twitter, and Google for the companies’ failure to quell hateful and threatening speech on their platforms in the wake of the Islamic State’s (ISIS) attacks in Paris and Brussels.

Before Tuesday’s agreement, the EU has repeatedly called on internet companies to reduce ISIS’ propaganda on their platforms. Twitter suspended125,000 accounts linked to ISIS over the last year to combat the group’s widening influence on the microblogging site. Facebook began working with the German government last year to moderate anti-refugee xenophobic speech following the country’s acceptance of nearly a million Syrian and Afghani war refugees.But content moderation is difficult to execute due to the sheer volume of content published online each day.

Social media companies are criticized for unevenly moderating content that is violent, sexually suggestive, or that which is perceived potentially offensive. Twitter unrolled a slew of policy changes last year to address years of criticism that the company doesn’t take harassment seriously, and Facebook banned graphic contentmonths after video of ISIS beheading photojournalist James Foley spread online.

Content moderation, in general, is difficult to execute due to the sheer volume of content published each day. For example, 300 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube each minute, and at least 10 percent of Facebook’s billion users updates their status daily. But the practice also raises ethical and moral concerns, including censorship and varying or frequently changing standards. As a result, tech companies have shied away from heavy-handed moderation, in favor of a case-by-case approach.

Despite pressure to reduce threatening and harassing speech, social media companies have been able to dodge legal mandates for content moderation in the United States. A provision tucked in the 2016 intelligence fiscal authorization bill that would require companies to report terrorism-related social media posts to intelligence agencies is awaiting a Senate vote nearly a year after it was first approved by committee.

Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a man who posted threatening language stylized as rap lyrics targeting his estranged wife. The decision was a win for free speech supporters and a blow to civil liberties advocates who were looking to the ruling to set a precedent that would outlaw violent speech.

The EU’s new rules, however, could be an impetus and blueprint needed to push for broader legal and policy changes elsewhere.

Source