Earlier this month, a small town Tennessee boy – a child only 14 years old – killed himself. His grieving parents and grandparents say that their child – who happened to have been born gay – took his own life because he could no longer deal with the bigoted cruelty of some other kids at his public school.
Only a week or so later – Tennessee state Sen. Stacey Campfield – a man without children of his own, and whose salary comes from tax dollars paid into state coffers by the dead child’s parents and grandparents – was asked about this recent child suicide and others like itin a national radio interview.
Sen. Campfield responded by saying, among other equally callous things, “That bullying thing is the biggest lark out there.”
Yes, he really said that.
+++++
Stacey Campfield is a very strange and sad man. Even most conservative Republicans here in East Tennessee – those people he likes to believe agree with him and support his bizarre legislative agendas – actually find him embarrassing, disturbing, and totally irresponsible in his waste of tax dollars on promotion of fringe issues.
But while many prominent East Tennessee conservatives will privately share how they feel about Campfield’s show-offy weirdness, for whatever reason, most have been unwilling to challenge him publicly.
But today, Campfield met his match in conservative Knoxville talk radio host, Phil Williams.
Phil Williams with his producer, Shelley Ellis-Farrell
Now if I had to guess, I’d say Phil Williams’ political and religious views are much closer to those of Sean Hannity than Rachel Maddow.
Gay rights activist, Phil Williams is not.
However, when Stacey Campfield appeared on his radio show this afternoon, Phil Williams proved what he is.
Phil Williams is an intellectually honest and principled man who is not willing to let a politician of any stripe come onto his show and say things that are provably,dangerously false regarding matters of critical public health importance – not without being challenged.
Stacey Campfield has gotten used to being the ratings-boosting, newspaper comment-generating sideshow act around Knox County. He’s been allowed to act like a dangerous buffoon while still being treated with neutral respect by mainstream local media, just because he somehow managed to win a seat in state political office representing our community. But today, Phil Williams became the first high-profile local conservative to say enough, putting Campfield on notice that just because they may belong to the same political party, or even attend the same kind of church, Campfield doesn’t get a free pass to say shameful, cruel or dangerous things whenever and wherever he wants.
Even though he and I likely don’t see eye to eye on various political issues, Phil Williams is a bit of a political hero to me today. And I sure do hope that others in our community from both sides of the aisle also appreciate the backbone and integrity he displayed in standing up to Stacey Campfield the way he did.
Thanks Phil. You’re a good guy, and a good American. And the principled stance you offered this town today knows no political party.
++++
If you agree with me, go thank Phil William yourself over on his show’s Facebook page.
Katie – your link to the show isn't working – can you fix please?
Wonderful post, Katie!
As you know, Rich likes to dig for the truth: http://bit.ly/y8tt3K
He also likes numbers, and he dug around for those too. What he found is closer to what Campfield actually said than what is being said that he said. But that doesn't quite fit the desired narrative ….
Lissa, just wanted to say thanks for throwing the truth out there. I'm ashamed to admit that I was one of the ravening wolves ready to throw the politician to the bottom of the political heap.
Also ashamed to admit I was one of those bigots cheering at all the hate being thrown his way.
Then I looked at the website you provided and saw what he actually said.
I'm ashamed of myself.
I too read "And the Band Played On" but no one is calling for Randy to be bullied out of local resturants.
Bigots. Hateful bigots we all are.
Perhaps one reason that no one is calling for Randy Shilts to be thrown out of local restaurants is that he'd long since dead.
"The Band Played On" (which I also read) was well done, but it's quite old, and we've learned a lot about AIDS since it came out. I wouldn't be using it as my source for AIDS info.
" I wouldn’t be using it as my source for AIDS info."
I'm ashamed that I was bigoted enough to believe that attacking Canfield was RIGHT because he talked about things written in a gay hero's book.
Vesta, I don't see your point here, or later in the thread. When someone says something contemptible, we are free in this country to express our contempt. We have the right, thanks to our Constitution, to freely associate and therefor the right to freely NOT associate. People are entitled to be treated equally by the law regardless of their contemptible ideas, but there is no law that we have to do business with jerks. If a guy insults you on the street and two hours later walks into your restaurant, yeah, feel free to tell him to get out.
While I agree that Stacey Campfield's quotes look worse out of context, they don't look THAT much better in context. I think he's willfully ignorant and cruel and I wouldn't do business with him. I think people who stand up to him in public and tell him THEY think he is ignorant and cruel should be applauded.
Being tolerant of other viewpoints doesn't mean keeping our disagreement with those viewpoints to ourselves. It means that we all get to express our point of view politely and we get to choose to hang out with the people we like. Maybe the restaurant owner will find that her community sides with Campfield and not her, that's her business.
If people were discriminating against Campfield because he is a Christian, you might have a point. Discriminating against someone who is a [insert rude word here] is still legal in this country.
I use the latest studies from the CDC which say that gay men comprise 61% of new HIV infections annually. The meta study from the Lancet says that the risk of transmission from heterosexual contact with an infected partner averages around .06%, (male female combined) where the risk for homosexual sex is 34 times higher. When the CDC lists the top 15 affected groups, heterosexual males don't even make the list. Heterosexual females barely make the list, and again, that's due to the high rate of infection in the bisexual male population.
These are facts and you can, and should, verify them for yourself.
While your facts are accurate – I think they are a bit misleading. This is the case in the United States. This is NOT the case worldwide – particularly in sub-Saharan African where the HIV epidemic is truly ravaging nations. There — most HIV is passed through heterosexual sex.
On another note – even knowing that your facts are true in the U.S. — most of his statements were completely wrong. It is NOT virtually impossible to get HIV from heterosexual sex. It is more rare – but no where near impossible. To say that in a public form is beyond dangerous. The reasons why HIV rates are highest in the U.S. in homosexuals is complex and is NOT just because anal sex is most dangerous. Heterosexual individuals in the U.S. do get HIV every single day. I know – I used to have to tell people their diagnosis (left that job to get a PhD so I could conduct research because it was soul-crushing to deliver bad news so often.). I told MANY women that they were HIV-positive. And – yes – I did this in East Tennessee.
FInally, the perpetuation of the MYTH that HIV came from homosexuals is dangerous and feeds the stigmatization of the homosexual community. I understand that many people believed that for some time – but it is the senator's job to be educated before speaking and a simple google search would have informed him that he is WRONG.
HIV is a terrible disease – affecting too many people of every sexual orientation. It is vital that people know the FACTS about HIV — and this thread has shown me that all too many people just aren't aware.
Again – please don't be offended by my comments. I am a couple of months away from finishing my PhD in public health and have a specialization in HIV/AIDS. I have worked in this field for the past decade — and am passionate about people being educated about the disease.
Sierra–likewise in eastern Europe and Russia. Estonia is confronted with an HIV epidemic driven by injection drug use that has led to the highest incidence of HIV infection in Europe. Several studies from the region including Estonia have found that IDUs are sexually active, having both injecting and non-injecting partners, and use condoms infrequently. Their sexual partners who are not IDUs are thus at substantial risk for HIV infection. This coupled with the high prevalence of IDUs in the adult population in the region (above 2% in Russia and Estonia) suggest that sexual transmission of HIV from the drug using population itself can lead to a self-sustained heterosexual HIV epidemic.
Yes, Marisa! Good point! I reference sub-Saharan Africa only because it is the place people are most familiar with as HIV-affected. But you are absolutely correct about Eastern Europe and Russia – and it is vital that anyone who wants to familiarize themselves with HIV facts understands that the epidemic is EVERYWHERE and looks a little bit different in different places – but ultimately affects everyone. Men, women, children, homosexual, heterosexual, drug users, non-drug users, etc.
Why so quiet, Rich? I thought you were usch a stickler for facts. Whatsamatter? Karma's a bitch, eh?
This is the kind of person Stacy Campfield is (link below) Before anyone here goes feeling like the man is just misunderstood or jumping on his bandwagon
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/26/stacey-c…
The man is completely ignorant and I wanted to vomit when I read this line….from Stacy Campfield.
"Most people realize that AIDS came from the homosexual community — it was one guy screwing a monkey, if I recall correctly, and then having sex with men. It was an airline pilot, if I recall."
"My understanding is that it is virtually — not completely, but virtually — impossible to contract AIDS through heterosexual sex…very rarely [transmitted]."
"What's the average lifespan of a homosexual? it's very short. Google it yourself."
The numbers on transmission rates support Campfield. The Lancet meta study found on overall rate of .04% female to male, or 1 in 2500. The rate for male to female was .08%.
Additionally, the article linked is manipulated, filled with deliberate misquotes and context changes to make Campfield look even worse than he is.
Listen to the interview, as Katie did and I did. Campfield still has some facts wrong, but nothing like what he's been accused of.
I just looked up the source for Campfield's claim that the life expectancy for gay men was significantly shorter. There are two studies used to support this claim; one is utter garbage, but one, by Robert S Hogg out of Vancouver, is a sound study. In it, Hogg and his colleagues calculated that the average life span for homosexual men was 8-20 years shorter than heterosexual men, and that while HIV accounted for much of the difference, it didn't account for it all. The study covered the 80s and 90s, and is now out of date, but it was accurate for the time period.
Once again, Campfield's information was correct, but out of date.
Imagine if instead of kicking him to the curb, Boggs had taken the time to show him some of these facts, correct his information, and given him good information from reliable sources. She might have found that Campfield isn't the monster she portrayed him as and he might have gained some useful knowledge.
But that didn't happen. Campfield will continue to rely on outdated info.
Hogg
I don't think the man was hounded out of a restaurant because he said that Gay men have a higher rate of AIDS transmission than heterosexual men. He was hounded out of restaurant for saying that AIDS comes from a gay man having sex with a monkey. And other vile things. Some of which were about a dead fourteen year old.
Somebody who says something like that is not misinformed because of "propaganda." He's not going to gain "some useful knowledge." Moreover, it's disingenuous to suggest he might.
For the record, I listened to every word Campfield said in the Signorile radio interview. I did not read anyone else's recap to come to my opinion of the veracity or intent of what Campfield stated in that interview.
Campfield is the one now trying to reframe his original radio remarks outside of the clear contextual intent in which he made them. When I have time (tomorrow, I hope ), I will elaborate on this.
I will say that my brother Robert's arguments in the thread about booting him from the restaurant have changed my mind on that specific piece of this story
Again, more later – Katie
My defense of Campfield isn't really about him. It's about two things. First, the facts.
Clearly, there is a level of ignorance about HIV that is quite understandable given the level of propaganda surrounding it for the last two decades. Getting the actual numbers out there is important. Policy based on propaganda is bad policy.
The second is about freedom and equal treatment under the law. Right now, out of moral indignation, a lot of people are supporting a bully. Whether her actions were legal or not is beside the point. Her grandstand play, although emotionally gratifying, did nothing to advance her cause and in the end, will actually damage it.
I don't know Campfield personally, and I generally don't like his grandstanding. However, he deserves the same protections under the law as every other citizen. And I can guarantee that any of the fine folks who are applauding Boggs today would scream bloody murder if a conservative restauranteur decided to ban all pro choice customers. Somebody would have the ACLU on the case in a heartbeat.
This is the problem with creating groups with special protections. It diminishes the protections available for the rest of us. It creates the classic Orwellian paradigm; all pigs are equal, but some are more equal than others.
That's why I'm so hot on this issue.
To Rich:
Your Comments are killing me. A few points.
1. What do you mean he deserves equal protection? Do you understand why we have protected classes? I can assure you he has been treated equally if not superior his whole life compared to the disabled, minorities, etc. He is a white male with power. He has the same rights as any other white male walking around, except he has power which makes his lies dangerous. Do you mean, that someone should be able to eat in a private establishment regardless of the danger to other people? Because many of us, consider this man a danger to society- he perpetuates LIES about AIDS, something we cannot afford to go back to. He IS a danger to MY child by telling kids it is virtually impossible to get HIV if you are hetero (wrong AGAIN and btw, many hetero people engage in high risk activities).
2. You are calling Martha a bully? She simply asked him to leave a private establishment. Look up the definition of BULLY. Mr. Campfield is a BULLY with Power who is hurting other people. She didn't hurt anyone, she just refused to make him lunch. Big difference dude.
3. CDC numbers are fine, but they don't account for a lot of different scenarios- they are used for general information. They certainly shouldn't be used to fuel to homophobic cause or encourage "straight" kids not to use protection. Be very careful with throwing stats around. 97% of people believe a stat on the spot.
Gotta agree with beej here. First, the owner of a private establishment has the right to kick people out or refuse to serve them food.
Second, if you look at the CDC statistics, which by definition are US only, the numbers do not really follow. (found here: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic….
Cumulative diagnosis of HIV through 2009:
Male to male sexual contact: 529,908 (48%)
IV drug use: 273,444 (25%)
Hetersexual contact: 198,820 (18%)
The chance of a homosexual male having HIV is 2.5x higher than a hetersexual person. And the ratio of infected persons in the last year is even smaller.
Estimated # of AIDS diagnoses in 2009:
Male to male sexual contact: 17,005 (50%)
IV drug use: 4,942 (15%)
Hetersexual contact: 10,393 (34%)
The percentage of people infected by hetersexual contact is getting larger! SIGNIFICANTLY.
Nice post. Although Robert gives a practical, logical argument (he's a lawyer, isn't he?) with a great Ghandi quote, i still am mighty impressed that this restaurant owner felt that she had to ask him to leave, not because he has expressed an opinion, but because he is speaking untruths and promoting legislation that will hurt people. Taking a stand against someone she feels is not only wrong, but dangerous. I think it was on the FB thread, or maybe a post on here, where someone said that they wouldn't service David Dukes car in their body shop either, because he was an advocate for hateful and dangerous behavior and beliefs.
In Stacey's defense, he & Phil were talking at cross purposes at the end, when each was using "special class" in a different context.
Other than that, Phil beat him like a drum.
Look, I really don't care what Stacey says 99% of the time, but letting folks think there is no danger of contracting AIDS through heterosexual sex is just plain dangerous and irresponsible.
He's a public official, and we deserve better from those folks.
As for the Bijou thing, I'm kind of on the fence, but come down slightly on the Martha side. She threw him out not because of his politics (she said he'd eaten there before), but because she also thinks he's being dangerous and irresponsible.
That kind of behavior needs to be called out.
When bullies like Martha are allowed to flourish, then we all lose something beautiful in ourselves.
He quotes something he read that he thought was correct. He had no intent or ability to harm.
She did, and she did.
He had no intent or ability to harm.
Srsly?
First of all, he's a public official and a state legislator. He has plenty of ability to harm.
As for his intent, neither of us know his heart. Unless, of course, Vesta is a psuedonym for Stacey.
A deluded closet case. Thank Jesus he doesn't have children. However, I wonder about the other deluded closet cases who voted him into office who DO have kids.
Link should be fixed now.
Please stop categorizing the risk as gay or hetero, hetero people have lots of anal sex too. Stop using CDC stats to fit your agenda.
Wish my wife would once
the BULLY is Senator Campfield, not a hardworking business woman who took a stand against LIES and hurtful actions.
Why does he deserve equal protection? He is a white male with power in Knoxville, TN. He isn't in a protected class (unless he is over 40 or disabled). I am beginning to think perhaps he does have a serious mental disability.
You don't get to hurt people and freely visit private establishments. THANKFULLY!!!!!
If you think the media treats Campfield in a neutral manner, I am not sure what you are reading. The KNS trashes him every chance they get. I am not a fan of him but your statement in regards to the media is way off.
To the poster above that states a restaurant owner can serve who these please : you are right & wrong. Say I own an eatery & hate black people, does that mean I can throw them out ??? What she did was crap. If you disagree with someone's policitcal leanings & you throw them out it is no different than the race example I used.
As I said before, he didn't get thrown out because of his "political leanings." That's the important part of this that I think you and Rich are overlooking. He wasn't refused service because he was Catholic, he was refused service because he was a hate-stirring demagogue.
I don't think that you, or Rich, should see this as a threat to your right to be Catholic, or Pro-Life, or a card-carrying Communist. It IS a threat to people who want to spout shite and then be accepted in polite company.
Legally, I think this is complicated. Ethically, I think it is complicated. At one point does being "tolerant" stop being a virtue? My own philosophy is that when someone's behavior harms other people, I should stop tolerating it. But that's just me, and I go back and forth over this ground pretty often deciding where I am going to draw lines.
This broad-based argument about the risks of homo v hetero sex is so male-centric it makes me want to hurl. When Stacey (and his defenders) talk about life-shortening, risky gay lifestyles, they're leaving out half the human race — women. Lesbians have a lower incidence of STDs than anybody but nuns( I don't know about lesbian nuns).
Stick that into your equation and factor it. God must love lesbians better than anybody.
And equating the hard-working Martha Boggs tossing poor Stacey out of the business where she busts her ass 80 hours a week with the real, honest-to-God damage Campfield is in a position to inflict as a lawmaker is just ludicrous. His position on bullying is obscene.
For the record, I've been to the Bistro twice this week and seen Republicans, conservatives and known Catholics chowing down, with nary a one of them in fear of getting the boot.
It's pretty amusing to hear people who wouldn't admit a damn cross burning was racially motivated try to claim that Stacey Campfield has been legally wronged and should entertain thoughts of suing. As my bud R Neal says, redheaded nincompoops aren't a protected class.
This broad-based argument about the risks of homo v hetero sex is so male-centric it makes me want to hurl. When Stacey (and his defenders) talk about life-shortening, risky gay lifestyles, they're leaving out half the human race — women. Lesbians have a lower incidence of STDs than anybody but nuns( I don't know about lesbian nuns).
Stick that into your equation and factor it. God must love lesbians better than anybody.
And equating the hard-working Martha Boggs tossing poor Stacey out of the business where she busts her ass 80 hours a week with the real, honest-to-God damage Campfield is in a position to inflict as a lawmaker is just ludicrous. His position on bullying is obscene.
For the record, I've been to the Bistro twice this week and seen Republicans, conservatives and known Catholics chowing down, with nary a one of them in fear of getting the boot.
It's pretty amusing to see people who wouldn't admit a damn cross burning was racially motivated try to claim that Stacey Campfield has been wronged. As my bud R Neal says, redheaded nincompoops aren't a protected class. And the suggestion that Martha, in the middle of her Sunday brunch rush, has some obligation to gently instruct Campfield in the error of his ways is, well (trying to think of a nice way to put it), a little, umm, — I'll settle for ridiculous (it's late).