‘Southern Poverty Law Center’ Prepares to Doxx Writers from Christian News Org. ‘Not the Bee’
“The discredited, scandal-ridden smear factory known as the SPLC is about to publish a hit piece doxxing several of our ‘Not the Bee’ writers who wished to remain anonymous so they could speak freely, without fear” according to owner Seth Dillon, who shared the email sent to one of their writers:
Not the Bee, a humor-based news, opinion, and entertainment site that has featured our content on a few occasions garbed in the most click-batiest of titles, is basically what you’d get when you combine a baptized front page of Reddit with Buzzfeed.
It’s a mood, and it’s great, and the race-baiting leftwing group that routinely labels Christian organizations that oppose LGBTQ propaganda as “hate groups,” such as American Vision, James Kennedy Ministries, Liberty Counsel, Family Research Council, etc are seeking to expose their private lives.
Dillon, who also operates sister-site the Babylon Bee, writes that “The SPLC extracted sensitive information from our site, then used that information to contact our writers directly” and that “They did it because they’re left-wing activists masquerading as journalists. They did it because they lack principles. They did it because they’re vindictive bullies who’ve admitted their aim is to “completely destroy” individuals and organizations they disagree with by making them pay a steep price for speaking freely.”
The discredited, scandal-ridden smear factory known as the SPLC is about to publish a hit piece doxxing several of our “Not the Bee” writers who wished to remain anonymous so they could speak freely, without fear. The SPLC extracted sensitive information from our site, then used… pic.twitter.com/toQLfga5SU
— Seth Dillon (@SethDillon) November 19, 2024
Dan Dillon, Seth’s brother and the CEO and Co-Founder of Not the Bee, likewise chimed in:
About Author
The SPLC is a joke, and everybody knows it. The threat is an attempt to corral the writers into using affirming language, and any language that doesn’t implicitly affirm, endorse, and support sin is deemed to be hate speech.
I have no problem with using creative language to avoid anything that affirms or endorses sin. I do the same myself, and sometimes it’s harsh enough to strongly get the point across that the subject is perverted, degenerate, abominable sin. But there have been some articles at NTB that had me shaking my head, on occasion. I remember one several years ago praising the transvestism of Bruce Jenner, as some sort of “gotcha” to the left. Every once in a while they’ll platform somebody like Andy Ngo, and when you go to the article, you see a bunch of tweets prominently displaying the flag of sin. It seems they have a tendency to get a bit too giddy, and way too carried away with politics. The Lord and His word are tossed out the window in order to try to throw a political punch or advance a political cause.
Trouble is, things have become so polarized these days, that if you criticize anything or anyone whatsoever on your own side, you’re deemed to be secretly working for the other side.
I visit NTB every day. It’s a part of my routine every morning, and every evening after I get home from work. They’re great. It’s a great site. Yet every once in a while they get a bit too insober and carried away, which I imagine can be very easy to do if you’re in the comedy business, but they do indeed need to reign in. Not in the manner SPLC would prefer. But in the manner the Lord would prefer.
And there’s no excuse. It’s slothful, in addition to insober. For example. if you’re embedding tweets, and you think you have no choice but to credit the source of information, then you can do something such as creating a script to remove the sin-flag character after the page has rendered, or in response to applicable events. It would take about 10 minutes to write that code. There are several things that you could do. And don’t try to tell me you can’t do anything. I’ve been there and done that sort of thing a thousand times over.
So I’ll defend NTB, absolutely. But I can’t do so without writing a book, because I cannot endorse everything they do.
While some may look at things I say, and suspect me of secretly working for the left, I’m looking right back at things they do and wondering whether or not they’re secretly working against the Lord. And as far as that goes, I sometimes wonder the same about the busybodies who pitch a fit because I may post something more than three sentences long. Because you cannot say what needs to be said in a short little comment.
Just this morning. They have an article posted ‘Ninth circuit judge says restricting female spa to “biological women” is the same as putting up a sign that reads “white people only”‘
The Judge’s statement was …
“And you can’t have “white people only” come into my restaurant, and then you say, “Well, no, we have a religious, spiritual nature to our restaurant, and when you get there, we serve you special food.”
Then NTB claims the correct response should be …
“The right response to McKeown’s inquiry is that it is correct to say that race and sex are inherent, immutable traits, which the law says cannot be discriminated against. That is the very definition of what makes them protected categories.”
No, that is nowhere near the correct response a Christian should give, particularly since religion is not an inherent trait but is also a protected category by Title IX. Should it be removed from Title IX, because it isn’t an inherent trait? Do we not believe and know that a sinful wicked heart is an inherent trait with which all are born? Do we not also understand that certain inherent traits, such as sociopathy, cannot be protected?
The correct response is simply “it’s not a sin to be non-white”, followed by “And here’s the scripture to back that up … ”
The correct response is simply “it is sin” (Duet. 22:5)
But there is a compulsion to try to play the world’s game on the world’s field. As if we have an obligation to try to make a secular and worldly argument. No, we have no such obligation. And will inevitably back ourselves into all sorts of corners when we try to do so.
I would expect arguments such as that given in the article this morning from the secular news. But for those claiming to be Christians, it is unacceptable. Plain and simple. It’s just flat-out unacceptable.
By trying to make that secular legal argument (which falls short even by secular standards), the author essentially undermined the entire Gospel. The foremost principle of which is that we are all born sinners, and are not all inherently born good.
Why go there? SMH
… I’m looking right back wondering whether or not some are secretly working against the Lord
It creates all sorts of problems. Obfuscates the matter. Creates a diversion such that people will spend the rest of their born days arguing over whether or not it is an inherent trait, playing right into the hands of the technocratic “experts” who claim it is. It authors confusion. It just feeds and grows the evil, ensuring its perpetuation. But first and foremost, it undermines the Gospel.
Who are they really working for?
Now, they’re going to argue, from now to the end of days, whether or not gender dysphoria is inherent or learned, when it is entirely irrelevant.
So what if it is or isn’t? It’s sin.
When I was about 3 years old, I stole a toy from the grocery store. My parents found it and caught me. Did they say, “oh well, he must’ve been born a kleptomaniac, so it’s ok for him to steal”? No, they disciplined me, and my Mother marched me right back to the store the next morning, made me give it back and apologize to the manager.
If they’re going to make arguments like that, then they should call themselves a Christian news site.
The Bible is very clear on the fact that the flesh is inherently wicked.
It’s also very clear on the proper “categories” defining when, where, why, and how discrimination is not only acceptable, but should take place, according to that which is sinful and that which isn’t. It defines it for us. All we’ve got to do is read it and heed it. Yet with the understanding that this is different than the sin of partiality, which is the hypocritical application of different/double standards.
It’s all in the scripture, we’re just not paying attention …
Col. 3:11
Gal. 3:28
1 Tim. chapters 5 and 6
James 2:1-7
On and on and on … It spoon-feeds the categories for us, with very clear specificity, defining what is sin and what is not. Ethnicity, Male or Female, Wealth, Vocation, and so on …
Pretty much very similar “protected categories” as existed in Title IX, before the Biden admin decided to unilaterally redefine it. We all know and understand that sin is not a protected category. But if we start trying to use the world’s language, and the world’s understanding, to define categories based on the flesh, we’re already way off track. God defined them. Stick to that. And if you must try to find some sort of natural, scientific, or worldly delineation, apart from the fact that God designed it all and defined it all, then you’d better be darned sure you’re covering all the bases, otherwise all you’re doing is working against Him. There’s not even a common thread to be found in the existent in Title IX, prior to the Biden admin’s bastardization of it. Pretty much only what we know is right and wrong. As all law in existence is pretty much the same. It all has moral basis. Right, if we didn’t understand this fact, that there is a concrete standard, we would be ungrounded moral relativists.
I don’t mean to hog the comment section. If anyone else wants to step up and say what needs to be said, please do so.
But it’s a worthy reminder that God’s word already defines the “protected categories” for us. We should stick with those.