Gays should never fear or avoid confronting the religious right

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's monumental speech on gay rights yesterday has gotten a lot of reaction. However, none is as strange, at least to me, than that of Jim Downs, Assistant Professor of History and American Studies, Connecticut College.

He seems to think that Clinton's speech did a disservice to the American gay community. His piece in The Huffington Post, Hillary Clinton Is Not Helping the Gay Civil Rights Movement, leaves little to the imagination.

Basically, Downs is saying that Clinton's speech is emboldening the religious right and conservatives in America, such as Rick Perry in a recent anti-gay ad, to target gays as the means to motivate the Republican base. The gist of his piece can be seen here:

Clinton's clumsy language enables Perry to get even clumsier. It also allows him to open the door and let the religious right and the Tea Party loose on gay people. Clinton is worried about violence against gays abroad, but how does Perry's language provoke the religious right to launch a crusade against "gay" Americans at home? Perry exclaims, "Investing tax dollars to promote a lifestyle many Americas of faith find so deeply objectionable is wrong." In the stroke of a sentence, Perry calls on Tea Party advocates with his references to "tax dollars" and he summons the religious right with his reference to "faith." All of which ends up with both groups tying gay people to the whipping posts in a symbolic gesture to broaden the Republican base. Put another, gay people once again reenter the election season as a political football in order to rally the right against the left.

There is a certain degree of abject cowardice in Downs' piece which I find incredibly distasteful.

Regardless of Clinton's speech, the gay community will be a target to motivate Republican voters. As long as we have the temerity to live openly and honestly without fear - you know, like taxpaying citizens - there will always be some demagogue out there exploiting fears about us to the ill-formed, ignorant, and willfully stupid.

That's how it's always been as long as I can remember it.

But we shouldn't allow these things to keep us from speaking out against injustice. Gays should never cower from bullies. And we should never put ourselves in some type of psychological stasis in hopes that we are ignored.

You have to put these things in perspective. In the case of Rick Perry's recent attacks on our community, we shouldn't be all that surprised. Perry was once the leading candidate in the Republican primary. Now he is the leading drip, exposed as a bad politician and an even worse campaigner. His sad attack on us is nothing more than a drowning man clinging to a slowly sinking life raft.

Gays should never fear the desperation of those who choose to be our enemies. But we should fight them head on. And Downs' column reveals a sad fact, not only about the gay community, but many of those we anoint as our leaders. Unlike our brothers and sisters in foreign countries, we have the means to fight back, but we rarely do.

And by fighting back, I don't mean solely street protests or acts of useless spontaneity fueled by rage. I mean a steady and consistent stream of calling out religious right lies.

We either sidestep confronting the religious right  as if we want avoid them. Or worse yet, we fight the battle on their grounds. We yield too much to them. We allow the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage to claim ownership of words like "morality" and "family" without raising the proper level of holy hell regarding the lies, distortions, and underhanded tactics they employ to acquire this license.

We let organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center do the hard work in calling out these groups and then will not support them loud enough with our voices, anger, and our media. Then we either scratch our heads or cry foul when these groups gain approval in the mainstream media.

Our problem is not that we are exploited to fuel a base of ignorance. Our problem is that we allow it to happen without a proper response, even though we know it's going to happen time and time again.

So Downs is way off base in his piece and whether he realizes it or not, he is causing more harm than Clinton's speech.

She told us that we are human beings. He is telling us that we should be cowards.

'Fake Christians continue to show their true colors regarding gay persecution' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

The two items below are the examples of silly desperation. Neither Rick Perry nor Rick Santorum will ever get to the White House. In fact, their behavior on the campaign trail makes one wonder just how did they attain their original elected offices in the first place. They are both like a bad dancer who has tripped his way through a recital and now thinks of himself as a Baryshnikov.

The polite word to describe both Santorum and Perry is demagogue.

Perry Launches New Anti-Gay Ad In Iowa:



Santorum: Gays ‘Destabilize The Family’ When They Have Children ‘Through Technology’:



For the lgbtq community and our allies - NEVER get angry at the desperation of fools. Use their ignorance to further your cause. In other words, don't get angry. Get educated.

Hat tip to ThinkProgress.

In other news:

Obama, Clinton to world: Stop gay discrimination - Awesome article on the new Administration policy.

US Pushes Hard on LGBT Rights Around the World - A very good break down on what it all means. As Box Turtle Bulletin says, fasten your seat belts.

Religious Right Explodes over LGBT Rights Initiative - One would think that truly Christian people would stand AGAINST persecution and not for it. Of course in all fairness, these are not Christian people. And true Christians need to open their mouths and put these phonies in check.

Press Coverage of Obama’s LGBT Human Rights Policy Was Muted - It's muted now but the historical perspective of this moment will overcome that.

Family Research Council 's hypocritical attack on the Obama Administration

Naturally the Family Research Council had to include its voice in the chorus of conservatives angry at the Obama Administration for its new policy of advocating the fair treatment of gays in its foreign policy:

Family Research Council criticized President Obama's memorandum today instructing federal agencies to promote the acceptance of homosexuality and gender identity disorder through its foreign policy.

FRC Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg made the following comments:

"It is startling that President Obama is prepared to throw the full weight and reputation of the United States behind the promotion overseas of the radical ideology of the sexual revolution. If he did the same on other issues, his own liberal allies would undoubtedly accuse him of cultural imperialism. Threats to withhold foreign aid from poor countries unless they conform their laws to the views of Western radicals are unconscionable.

"The United Nations, like the United States, remains sharply divided on the issue of whether special rights should be granted on the basis of sexual conduct, sexual orientation or gender identity. No treaty or widely accepted international agreement has established homosexual conduct as a human right, yet the Obama administration's actions seem guided by this fiction.

"President Obama should increase efforts to defend human rights that are widely recognized, such as religious liberty, rather than appeasing his domestic allies by imposing an alien ideology on other countries."

The huge irony is that FRC included a statement from Peter Sprigg, a man who has gone on record advocating that gays be exported out of the United States.

But more to the point, FRC seems to be saying that the Obama Administration shouldn't interfere with how a foreign country conducts its business.

How very ironic is it that earlier this year, FRC spoke out against a foreign country for doing just that:

According to the respected anti-persecution ministry Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), an Iranian Christian pastor has been sentenced to death in Iran for, to put it simply, being a Christian.

CSW says that “the death sentence handed down in 2010 for the crime of apostasy, to evangelical house pastor Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani, has reportedly been upheld by the third chamber of the Supreme Court in the Shia holy city of Qom. Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani of the Church of Iran denomination was arrested in his home city of Rasht on 13 October 2009 while attempting to register his church. His arrest is believed to have been due to his questioning of the Muslim monopoly on the religious instruction of children in Iran.”

According to the Voice of Martyrs, “With (Pastor Nadarkhani’s) sentence now upheld and confirmed, it is possible that the authorities will ask him to recant his faith and execute him without advance notice if he refuses — a typical pattern of action taken by authorities in such cases.”

This death sentence has been issued despite Iran being a signatory of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, whose Article 18 states:

“Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.”

Sadly, persecution of Christians in Iran is extensive

Certainly, I'm not saying that the persecution of gays is much more pressing than the persecution of Christians.

But FRC seems to be saying that the persecution of Christians is wrong while the persecution of gays should be allowed.

Violence against any group, be it gays or Christians, is wrong. There is no difference. Both need to be condemned equally.

And truly Christians groups know this.

Attacks on Obama Administration policy shames Christianity

 Today, the Obama Administration took a huge step against lgbt persecution worldwide:

The Obama administration is announcing a wide-ranging effort to use U.S. foreign aid to promote rights for gays and lesbians abroad, including combating attempts by foreign governments to criminalize homosexuality.

In a memorandum issued Tuesday, President Barack Obama directed U.S. agencies working abroad, including the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, to use foreign aid to assist gays and lesbians who are facing human rights violations. And he ordered U.S. agencies to protect vulnerable gay and lesbian refugees and asylum seekers.

Also, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a monumental speech  in Geneva in which she basically broke it all down to the simple fact that gays rights are human rights.

The Obama Administration was no doubt spurred by acts of lgbt persecution in such places as Nigeria, Uganda, Russia, and South Africa. In Nigeria, Uganda, and Russia, the legislature is considering laws which would imprison lgbts and those who support them. In South Africa is a practice called "corrective rape" in which a lesbian would be sexually assaulted in hopes of turning her heterosexual.

Naturally, religious right groups and some of those on the right in general aren't happy with the Obama Administration over this new policy or Clinton's speech.

Amidst the usual whinings about the so-called radical gay agenda, two statements stand out.

One is from Texas governor and presidential candidate Rick Perry:

“But there is a troubling trend here beyond the national security nonsense inherent in this silly idea. This is just the most recent example of an administration at war with people of faith in this country. Investing tax dollars promoting a lifestyle many Americas of faith find so deeply objectionable is wrong.

“President Obama has again mistaken America’s tolerance for different lifestyles with an endorsement of those lifestyles. I will not make that mistake.”

Aside from the usual offensive "real Americans should tolerate gays like one tolerates a dog which wets on the rug" semantics coming Perry is the sad fact that he totally omitted the reason why the Obama policy is necessary, i.e. the persecution of the gay community in other countries.

Bear in mind that this is the same guy who led a prayer rally earlier this year while claiming that America needs to call upon Jesus to save the country from calamities.

Apparently Perry seems to have overlooked the statement by Jesus which said:

For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

And then there is this statement by Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel:

It is "frankly offensive" . . . that President Obama feels "compelled to export American culture's decline in morality, and export that immorality to other nations that are trying to adhere to traditional principles relative to human sexuality."

So in Barber's world, is it a traditional principle to imprison a man simply because he is gay and his mother because she didn't report him as being gay? Is it a moral thing to beat a woman within an inch of her life and violently rape her because she is a lesbian?

Barber statement is a cruel irony when one takes into account that earlier this morning, the Liberty Counsel was whining about a Macy's employee who was fired for harassing a transgender customer in violation of the store's policy.

It's a strange world we live in when someone harassing a customer at a department store can be seen as a Christian martyr, but speaking out against injustice is seen as a evil plot to destroy values.

It's a sad statement on what Christianity has become in America.

And with all of the statements and vigorous adjectives thrown out, not one of these so-called upstanding morality groups  or people has said one word about the true victims - the lgbts worldwide who are being victimized, who are being chased out of their homes and beaten, who are being persecuted and raped, who are being brutally murdered and disposed of in humiliating and devaluing ways.

Oh sure, some of those folks practically break their backs in their eagerness to rise and talk about the "evils of gay marriage." They will clap their hands sore when some well-dressed charlatan gets them together in an expensive ballroom to wax about how they are being "stomped out" by the radical progressives. And they will practically raise blisters on their feet with their desires to march against their gay and lesbian neighbors being afforded the same protections under the law.

But what about true cases of persecution? True cases of people being forced out of their homes by an evil agenda of intolerance? True incidents of mothers losing their sons, fathers losing their daughters, and children losing their parents to hate wrapped up in a religious cloth?

Where are these Christians then?

The next time any of these folks get together in one of their silly rallies whining about persecution and godless homosexuals, I don't think they should expect Jesus to be there.

He will be in Nigeria. He will be in Uganda. He will be in South Africa. And He will be in Russia.

'Rick Santorum is talking about gay sex again' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Santorum Is Outraged That Gay ‘Sexual Activity’ Is ‘Being Seen As Equal’ To Heterosexual Sex - If Rick Santorum is concerned about anal sex (and of course anal sex is what he means by gay 'sex activity'), it's probably cause he is concerned that it if he were to try it, it would give him lockjaw.

President Obama directs all federal agencies to 'protect the human rights of LGBT persons' - Folks on our side will complain about this but I say good for the President. Now let's get those other things taken care of.

'We changed history,' says Gallagher; 'Change doesn't mean bettered,' says dictionary - I have to agree with Miss Mags on this one. But her comments demonstrate just how oblivious she is. Of course they changed history. They are making marriage equality a possibility with their piss poor defense of Prop 8 in the courts and obviously stupid tactics which are turning people against them.

University of Utah professor: NARTH article “unscientific and irresponsible” - Not surprising seeing that NARTH is the main organization groups like the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage refer to on a regular basis.

Puerto Rico's Hate Crime Law May Soon Exclude LGBT Protections: Report - Uh excuse the hell out of me!

Macy's stands up for the lgbtq community

Recently, as far as I can tell, Macy's department store allegedly fired an employee for not allowing a transgender woman to use the changing facilities.

The reason why I say "as far as I can tell," is because all of the spin I am reading about it is coming from the right-wing Liberty Counsel:

A young woman was fired from a Macy’s department store in San Antonio, TX for refusing to violate her religious beliefs by permitting a young man dressed as a woman from entering the women’s dressing room. Natalie Johnson claims she saw the young man walk out of the women’s fitting room and politely told him that he could not go back in because it was for women only. The cross-dressing young man claimed that he is a “female.” Johnson said that he was wearing make-up and girl’s clothing, but clearly he was a male. The cross-dresser was accompanied by five other individuals. The group argued with expletives that Macy’s is LGBT-friendly, to which Johnson replied that Macy’s is also non-discriminatory toward religion, and that it would go against her religious beliefs to lie that he was a woman or compromise with homosexuality. The group then demanded to speak with a manager.

When Johnson was confronted by her employer, she explained that she could not allow a male to change in a female’s fitting room. Johnson’s boss referred her to Macy’s LGBT policy which allows “transgender” people to change in any dressing room they want. However, Johnson pointed out that the same policy also protects against religious discrimination and, in this case, it protects her right to her beliefs that were being violated. The manager demanded that she comply with the LGBT policies or lose her job. Johnson refused to go against her sincerely held religious beliefs and was terminated from her job.

Macy’s policy which allows men to use the women’s dressing room is fraught with problems. This policy will cause significant problems and will alienate the majority of Macy’s customers. Macy’s has essentially opened women’s dressing rooms to every man. The LGBT agenda has become the theater of the absurd.

The Liberty Counsel's version of this story is presently making the rounds in the right-wing publications and news sites.

Generally, I am extremely reticent when hearing a story coming solely from the Liberty Counsel (or One News Now, or any other religious right source).

However, in this case, I will make an exception and, for now, not question the version I hear.

It sounds like Macy's did right by our community and we need to support  the store for standing up for us.

A company has a right - within reason - to establish certain policies which it feels would better suit the needs of its prospective clients. If employees object to those policies, then maybe it would be better for the employee to work somewhere else.

It seems to me that the only problem in this case was the stubborness of the former employee. Macy's didn't hire Johnson for her religious beliefs. The company hired her because it felt she could do the job.

She couldn't do the job, or rather wouldn't, and therefore was terminated.

End of story.

North Carolina expose on anti-gay group NOM should be required reading for us all

Okay while this isn't as glamorous as a Lady Gaga song or as shocking as Neil Patrick Harris (or NPH for those who want to perpetrate like they know him)'s slur against the transgender community, an expose published today by the North Carolina gay publication QNotes on the National Organization for Marriage  and its campaign against marriage equality in the state is very important and very vital for us all to read.

Enough of the "we already know this" chatter.  The fact of the matter is that many of us don't know the things we should know about NOM and a lot of us who do aren't taking the time to educate our friends and families, or making a loud enough stink about it,  or supporting the publications which bring this information out (full disclosure - I contributed to this expose):

In past campaigns, NOM has been caught pushing obvious misinformation, lies and spin.

This year, the group came under fire for misrepresenting supposed “legal scholars” opposed to marriage equality. Each of the several scholars cited by the organization were extremely biased and one, Robert George, is a former NOM board chairman.

NOM has also regularly exploited children in their political quests.

Also this year, the Pulitzer Prize-winning Politifact knocked the group for their repeated claims that legalization of same-sex marriage in New York would lead to kindergarteners learning about same-sex relationships.

The group has also attempted to link homosexuality to pedophilia — not once, but twice. The NOM-affiliated Ruth Institute has also claimed that homosexuality is a “learned” and “addictive” behavior.

In August, NOM accused gay activists of engaging in “jihad” to take away anti-gay Christians’ rights.

One of NOM’s first campaigns featured a billboard comparing a marriage equality supporter to Judas and Benedict Arnold. The group reincarnated the theme this year for mailers targeting pro-gay legislators in New York.

Equality Matters has provided a more in-depth run-down of NOM’s efforts in New York.

And here is where I am quoted:

South Carolina blogger and anti-gay watchdog Alvin McEwen told qnotes that he expects a strong NOM presence in the lead-up to the May 8, 2012, vote on the amendment.

How NOM goes about instituting their campaign strategy is a question still left unanswered. McEwen said the group’s past rhetoric and actions provide some clues.

“Look for them to push that nonsense about how ‘the best research says that children belong in a home with a mother and father,’” McEwen said. “Also, I expect them to push the lie about the Catholic Charities ‘being forced’ to give up helping to place adoptive children. The thing about NOM and other religious right groups is that they are big on ambushing people with anecdotes and horror stories about situations that allegedly happen because of marriage equality and the like. The big thing is to remember that they never tell the entire story.”
NOM’s campaigns often take a three-pronged approach, McEwen said.

“My guess is that NOM is going to target three angles — ‘gay marriage will harm children,’ ‘gay marriage will destroy religious liberty’ and ‘gays are trying to piggyback off of the Civil Rights Movement.’”

The entire expose is here.

Sometimes our community takes things for granted. In order to defeat NOM, we must expose the organization's lies every chance we get, as well as support the publications which do the same thing.

'Michele Bachmann gets schooled on same-sex families' and other Monday midday news briefs

Rep. Bachmann's Twisted Logic On Support For LGBT High School Kids - What bothers me about Bachmann's recent comments is that very few challenged her on the insult of reducing same-sex relationships and families to sexual intercourse.

BREAKING - As the video shows, Bachmann meets a child in one of those families she reduced to sex acts. It's doubtful that she will give this family and other like it the respect they deserve, but it's still nice to see her schooled:



 And in other news:

How he became a she - A very impressive feature expose on the transgender community.

If Newt Gingrich is the nominee, the GOP loses the marriage debate - No comment on whether or not I'm rooting for Newt. I don't want to jinx it.

DELAWARE: For state's same-sex couples, end of wait near - January promises to be interesting for Delaware.

Outrage – Church tells HIV+ patients to stop taking meds, claiming they were ‘healed’ - And the "healing process" was nauseating.

NOM lands in North Carolina, allies already pulling the pedophilia card

According to the North Carolina gay publication, QNotes, I have some interesting neighbors up north:

A referendum committee formed by several anti-gay religious groups is among the latest official campaign organizations set up for an impending ballot initiative on an anti-LGBT state constitutional amendment banning marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships for same-sex couples.

The committee, Vote for Marriage NC, was formed last week by a coalition of groups including the N.C. Baptist State Convention, Christian Action League, NC Values Coalition, a coalition of African American pastors and the National Organization for Marriage.

 . . . “We very much look forward to a dialogue with North Carolina voters about the importance of preserving marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of NC Values Coalition, said in a release. “The marriage amendment ensures that voters and not activist judges will decide the definition of marriage in our state. Marriage as the union of one man and one woman has served North Carolina well since before we were a state, and it’s time we respected the institution of marriage enough to protect it in our state constitution.”

Fitzgerald is a former lobbyist for the Christian Action League and N.C. Family Policy Council, groups affiliated with national organizations named as hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Fitzgerald’s NC Values Coalition led the fight for legislative approval of the amendment, which came in September. The group has provided the new committee’s first $1,000 in funding.

 . . . “We are going to keep it on a positive note: keeping marriage as marriage and keeping it from being redefined,” she told the paper.

Of course we all know it means when anti-marriage equality folks say that they want to "keep the discussion on a positive note."

Should they accuse gays of wanting to corrupt children,  wanting to imprison Christians, or maybe both?

Luckily, however, QNotes is already starting to raise questions about the finances of this group in light of the fact that NOM continues to hide its donors - in violation of the law - in several other states. (Full discloure - this blogger is quoted in that article).

As for "positive discussion," according to Pam Spaulding, that nonsense has already been thrown out of the window after a debate yesterday on a radio show between two African-American community leaders - Dr. Patrick L. Wooden, Sr. of the Upper Room Church of God in Christ in Raleigh, NC who supports the amendment and Rep. Marcus Brandon (D-60, Guilford County), who opposes it

I'm willing to bet that Wooden is a part of that newly-formed coalition. According to Pam, Wooden made a number of interesting statements:

He stated statistics (providing no source) that gay men in relationships have 8 partners outside of relationship. Too bad no one asked him about Herman Cain’s fidelity. (Editor's note - Wooden is distorting the Netherlands study which looked at casual relationships between gay men in the years before gay marriage was legalized in that area. It excluded lesbians and gay men in monogamous relationships).

He compared same-sex marriage to pedophilia.

. . . My favorite howler from Wooden: ”They are going to have to teach anal sex in the public school classroom” if gays can marry.

In contrast, Brandon came off as reasonable (hell, a badly bleating horn would come off as reasonable compared to Wooden):

Marcus Brandon did an excellent job of addressing the hypocrisy of the religious objection, noting Wooden has not called for an amendment to ban adultery and divorce, two sins that are in the Bible, as well as throwing back in Wooden’s face charges that the black civil rights movement has nothing to do with LGBT rights, saying ‎“these are all false arguments; Rosa Parks was tired because she was treated differently…That is what the civil rights movement was about.”

Whatever the case may be, the question of marriage equality in NC is heating up. And it would do the gay community well to start preparing now. As idiotic as Wooden sounded, he was getting those statistics from somewhere. And we are probably going to be hearing more of them.

It's not going to be pretty. But then again, the best victories are never pretty.

What about the gay members of Eddie Long's church?

The situation with Eddie Long and his wife continues to get interesting. Long is the minister of the New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in GA embroiled in a scandal which led to him paying off four young men who claimed that he sexually coerced them. Yesterday, Long's wife said she plans to file for divorce. She then retracted the statement.

Now, it has been announced that the plans for divorce is on again.

It's a sad situation regarding hypocrisy in the black church which no one wants to address. The black church will knowingly embrace gang members, drug dealers, people who have sex outside marriage while attending church. But an upstanding openly gay or lesbian is enemy number one to it. To this day, there is have been no adequate discussions on this conundrum.

Long's scandal is also a case of possible kismet. He benefited immensely from his very public stances - including a huge rally - against marriage equality, even to the point of conveniently getting some of that "faith-based initiative money" doled out by the Bush Administration.

Long's ministry received over $1 million.

But now Long is losing more than just money. He has lost his name, his reputation, and standing.

However, there are victims in this situation in which no one is talking about - the African-American gay and lesbians members of Long's church and other churches like his.

Let's focus on them for a change.

The following interview is from when the scandal began with a gay member of Long's church. It's hard to watch, particularly when he states the reason why many gay men still attend the church.

His words underscore the fact that the reason why black gays and lesbians flock to negative environments like Long's church because it's difficult for them to find any support or positive reinforcement in regards to their sexual orientation from any other place - even those which are supposed to be "gay-friendly."

The interview with this young man should send a message to the lgbtq community at large that we need to do more to embrace our all of own, even those who don't fit the stereotypical "white-bread" supposed normal definition of being gay in America:



Related posts:

Eddie Long wants his money back

Eddie Long's accusers speak out even after settlement

Anti-gay pastor Eddie Long's fifth accuser in lawsuit

Eddie Long scandal underscores failure of the black church

Eddie Long scandal - Chronology of what has happened and where we are now  
 

Know Your LGBT History - Shameless

One of the problems with having to deal with negative gay images on television and in the movies is that it taints efforts to push three-dimensional images.

No one is completely good nor evil, and the images we see should reflect that. However when a group is faced with having to see nothing but negative images, it makes them hypersensitive to the point that they rail against any image deemed negative while totally forgetting that a good two-shoes image of the gay community is as debilitating as a negative image.

With that in mind, I bring you Shameless, a Showtime television drama which is based on a British drama of the same name.

It tells the story of a dysfunctional family led by an alcoholic father. All of the characters are interesting, to say the least.

However for the purpose of this blog, I want to focus on one of the children, Ian.

Ian (Cameron Monaghan) is a 15-year-old gay young man working at a grocery store. He is having an affair with his employer, the Muslim owner. He is also messing around with the local thug, Mickey.

He is a perfect example of what I was talking about earlier. Ian is a very complex character.  One could say that he is the anti-Glee character. No doubt, he would give both folks on the left and the right in this so-called culture war extreme palpitations.

I personally like the characterization. He is merely a young man dealing with life has thrown his way, whether it be a dsysfunctional family life, or a gay orientation.

The following clips shows several scenes in Ian's life, particularly his relationship with Mickey. The thing I really like about this relationship is how it's not sugarcoated. Pay special attention to 2:30 to 4:10. Some folks may find it a bit intense:



Past Know Your LGBT Posts:

'NOM pushing phony google polls' and other Friday midday news briefs

NOM Fail: 'What sound does cash make?' edition - The irony is rich. NOM attacks Cuomo for getting campaign donations due to his push for marriage equality while it continues to hide ITS donors.

Nicolosi Retracts Claim of Gay Cure through Antidepressants - Another anti-gay lie down the drain.

Minnesota for Marriage pushes “polls” via web ads - So NOM is now pushing phony push poll ads in Minnesota. Love what that secret money can buy. Of course the goal of these ads is not to gauge response but to push NOM's phony talking points into the minds of Minnesotans.

Anti-Gay Justice To Georgia: ‘You Can’t Discriminate’ Against A Transgender Person - Holy smokes! You have to read this one.

AFA Warns That Same-Sex Marriage Leads to Building, Car and Dog Marriage - Ugh, I say. UGH!

'Porno Pete' tries to besmirch World AIDS Day

Yesterday was World AIDS Day and while there were much necessary information put out there, there was also some unnecessary nonsense.

Our friend, Porno Pete LaBarbera is exploiting the day to whine about the supposed "high risk" of being gay.  It's really nothing we haven't heard before. We all know it's his obsession with gay sex.

And following that obsession, LaBarbera is into demonizing gays and throwing out his idea of what exactly gay sex is rather than solving the problem. Let's break down the fallacies of his points:

1. LaBarbera:  

Recognize HIV/AIDS as a predominantly “gay disease” in the USA (as some LGBT leaders like Matt Foreman have admitted)

Problem - LaBarbera distorts Foreman's call for gays to do more to stop AIDS. What Foreman said is no different than what Phil Wilson, executive director of the Black AIDS Institute, wrote in this brilliant piece, part of which reads:

There are many reasons why we are so disproportionately impacted by AIDS. But, chief among them is that we've not taken ownership of the AIDS epidemic and responsibility for ending it. Many of us continue to believe that AIDS is someone else's problem. Even as our brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, get infected with HIV, develop AIDS and die.

I get the sister from the Black Philanthropy conference's concern about stigma and image. But we can't be more concerned about 'our image' than we are about our lives. Having a raging epidemic run through our community unchecked is actually the last thing we need.

Wanting something to not be so is not the same as it really not being so or doing something about it. AIDS in America today is a Black disease ... unless we do something about it.

Or when Julian Bond said the following:

It is time for the African-American community "to face the fact that AIDS has become a black disease" and find ways to defeat it, the chairman of the NAACP said at the international AIDS summit.

This speaks to another point. LaBarbera cites a CDC fact sheet on AIDS which shows that new infections are higher among young black men than they are among younger white men.


2. LaBarbera:

Stop pretending that all lifestyles are at equal risk for AIDS – because HIV is NOT behaviorally- or lifestyle-neutral. Instead, teach students in school health classes the DOCUMENTED REALITY that certain behaviors, especially male homosexual sex, are especially high-risk for contracting HIV (and other STDs like hepatitis).

 LaBarbera conveniently omits the reasons why people are at risk. The CDC flyer which LaBarbera cites above also says that lack of proper information and social discrimination leads some MSMs (men having sex with men) into high risk behaviors. LaBarbera seems to be saying "stop gays from having sex" when the problem is a bit more complex than that.

Religious right group posts article celebrating passage of anti-gay Nigerian bill

Apparently the Alliance Defense Fund isn't too busy trying to keep graduate students from having to learn about counseling gays.

The right-wing organization is also all about passing along articles celebrating the persecution of gay and lesbians abroad.

From its webpage is the following:

Nigeria: Citizens Celebrate Ban of Same-Sex Marriage

All Africa Global Media: Nigerians have continued to celebrate the banning of same-sex marriage by the Senate, commending senators for outlawing what they regard as abnormality and a licence for immorality.

The link in question is to a very biased article about the recent decision by the Nigerian Senate to outlaw marriage equality. The bill also outlaws gay advocacy and public displays of same-sex affection

According to the AP:

Under the measure, couples who marry could face up to 14 years in jail, and witnesses or anyone who helps couples marry could be sentenced to 10 years behind bars.. 

The article cited by the Alliance Defense Fund only quotes supporters of this bill. They call gay marriage something that is degrading and detestable. The article even admits that the bill is to discourage homosexuality and also that the idea of imprisoning gays and lesbians is a good thing.

The irony is stark.

At the same time the Alliance Defense Fund is claiming to defend graduate students against religious persecution, the organization seems to be celebrating the actual persecution of gays and lesbians.

What would Jesus do, indeed.

'Marriage equality will lead to women marrying computers?' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Maryland, Marriage, Appliance: 'What's to stop a woman from marrying a computer?' - You aren't reading this wrong. An anti-marriage equality spokesperson actually said that marriage equality could lead to women marrying computers. Good Lord.

Maryland Religious Leaders Launch Anti-Marriage Equality Coalition - And speaking of those same zany folks from Maine . . .

Obama On World AIDS Day: We Need To Do More To Show Young Black Gay Men ‘That Their Lives Matter’ - You damn right we do!

CPAC And The Religious Right Kiss And Make Up - At the expense of GoProud. GoProud is that conservative gay group always whining about the "Gay Left." As you can see, GoProud has it arrow aimed at the wrong target.

Imagine a world without AIDS

I can't talk. I won't talk. All I can do is pray:



A big hat tip to Vision Video Productions

Family Research Council: DADT repeal could lead to military approval of bestiality

The Family Research Council should really give up the ship regarding gays in the military.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell was repealed and according to Marine Gen. James F. Amos, a top marine official who was initially against it, the repeal is working just fine.

God forbid, however that the Family Research Council is letting go. From an email by the group and its president, Tony Perkins:

The dust is finally starting to clear over the rubble of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal, and our military is beginning to see what's on the horizon: a campaign to radicalize the country from the Pentagon out. It started by toppling the barrier to open homosexuality. And it continues with an assault on marriage and religious freedom. Now, in its rush to accommodate the Left, Congress may have inadvertently opened the door to even more perversion. As part of the Defense Authorization bill, liberals are pushing to make sodomy a legal activity under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). In its haste to make gay sex an official part of military life, the Left could be unintentionally repealing the ban on bestiality too. Article 125 of the UCMJ, which Democrats are targeting, clearly states: "Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy."

Don't you just love how Perkins uses conditional words in the sentence "In its haste to make gay sex an official part of military life, the Left could be unintentionally repealing the ban on bestiality too."

That gives him an out to say "hey, I am just speculating" when someone calls him and FRC on the nonsense behind the statement.

Well before he even begins, let me just say:

"Tony, you aren't speculating. You are bullshitting You all lost this one. Get over it."

Will gay students be 'collateral damage' to the cause of 'religious liberty?'

The lgbtq community would do well for itself to pay attention to two lawsuits fueled by religious right organizations. From an article in today's Augusta Chronicle:

An attorney for a graduate school counseling student told federal judges in Atlanta on Tuesday that the student’s First Amendment rights were violated when professors at Augusta State University sought to punish her for her biblical views on gay rights.

ASU put Jennifer Keeton on academic probation for saying it would be hard for her to work with gay clients, and threatened to expel her unless she attended events such as Augusta’s gay pride parade, Keeton’s attorney Jeff Shafer told the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Keeton initially sued ASU  when she was expelled from its graduate student program because she refused to take part in a mediation program. It required her to read material about counseling gays and increase her exposure to the gay community. The mediation program was set up after Keeton said that she would tell gay potential clients that their orientation was wrong and then try to help them "change" their sexual orientation.

Her lawsuit was struck down by U.S. District Judge Randal Hall last year. Hall said that the university had every right to set requirements for students. Hall also said that Keeton provided no proof that she was discriminated against because of her religious faith. According to The Augusta Chronicle in an article at the time:

In an Aug. 11 hearing, ASU professors testified that the plan was not a punishment for voicing her beliefs, but a tool to teach Keeton how to counsel clients while not imposing her views.

"All three professors testified that they never told (Keeton) that she was required to change her religious beliefs in order to stay in the counseling program," Hall wrote.

He noted that Keeton did not testify at the hearing nor present any witnesses in support of her motion.

Hall said Keeton's unwillingness to adhere to the school's viewpoint-neutral code of ethics set by the American Counseling Association constitutes a refusal to complete the curriculum.

Keeton is now appealing this ruling. Today's article goes on to say that she allegedly told other students that she was interested in practicing "conversion therapy," or therapy which claims to change someone's sexual orientation. It also said that there was some concern that since Keeton was scheduled to practice in middle and high schools as a part of her degree program, her views could pose problems to students.

Keeton's case is very similar to that of Julea Ward, who was removed from Eastern Michigan University's counseling program in 2009 because she did not want to counsel to gays for the same reason as Keeton. She is also studying to be a guidance counselor. She sued EMU but lost last year for the same reason as Keeton. Her case is also being appealed.

The counseling programs by Eastern Michigan University and Augusta State University are guided by a code of ethics by the American Counseling Association. It is this code which both universities say are at odds with  Keeton and Ward. It forbids counselors from discriminating in their practices or imposing their view on potential clients.

Interestingly enough, the same anti-gay organization, the Alliance Defense Fund, is handling both Keeton and Ward's case. David Kaplan,the chief professional officer for the ACA, had this to say about the Alliance Defense Fund:

"The driving force behind this is the Alliance Defense Fund. They are specifically looking for legal cases, not just in counseling, to promote their agenda"

In both the Keeton and Ward case, it is being demanded that the university counseling programs in question give allowances based on someone's religious beliefs, even though these allowances would be against the code of ethics which govern these programs.

What's more, these are cases in which both defendants have expressed a desire to be school guidance counselors.

It leaves me asking one question.

If universities can be successfully sued by individuals who don't want to learn about counseling to gays on the grounds of "religious beliefs,"  what would stop middle and high schools from being sued by individuals who may not be hired if they state that they will not counsel gay students on those same grounds?

Where would that leave the lgbtq students who would undoubtedly be collateral damage to this supposed adherence to "religious liberty?"


Related post:


Why I get a nagging feeling every time I hear the phrase 'religious liberty'

'NOM's embarrassing loss in Iowa is punctuated' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Exclusive: Secret Conference Held to ‘Save Exodus International’ from Ruin - This, my friends, is MAJOR.

Iowa’s Republican House Speaker Says He Won’t Bring Up Marriage Repeal In Next Session - And NOM's embarrassing defeat in Iowa is complete.

Fischer Wonders How Many Men Died Of AIDS Because Of Barney Frank - The gay community can always count on Bryan Fischer to allow us to be morally superior.

Welcome Beck: NJ state Sen. embraces history's right side - An adversary becomes an ally.

Anti-Gay Russian Lawmaker: ‘The Issue Of Same-Sex Love Is Somewhat Like The Jewish Problem’ - Homophobia, anti-Semitism, racism. It's all the same.

The families they don't want you to see

It always amazes and angers me that every time organizations like Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, or the National Organization for Marriage talk about the importance of families, they conveniently omit same-sex families.

And always amazes and angers me to count the times we allow them to get away with it:

CA religious right group channeling Anita Bryant to stop pro-gay law

SAVE California is the one of the organization behind attempts to derail SB48, the law which would push for lgbt-inclusive public schooling.

This is what the organization is trying to emphasize about SB48:

Believe it or not, it gets worse.

On its webpage, SAVE California has links to all sorts of junk science, including the fraudulent Facts About Youth organization which tried to push such claims as gay men "sexualize" feces into America's schools and other discredited work about homosexuality and pedophilia from junk science researcher Paul Cameron.

I guess we know what route that organization is going:

 The truly vile lies never die, do they?

Hat tip to Goodasyou.org

'Nigerian Senate pushing awful anti-gay bill' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

African-American Pastor Rebukes NOM’s Anti-Gay Bigotry - A welcomed smack down to the charge about gay men adopting black children.

Walker Appointee: Wisconsin Law Doesn’t Protect Gays From Harassment - Ugh.

Nigerian Senate Passes Anti-Gay Bill After Increasing Penalties - This is terrible and the bill also outlaws public displays of affection and advocacy. And folks, don't get stupid by thinking this is solely a problem in Africa. Remember that it wasn't long ago that Paul Cameron was spreading his lies in Moldova, a European country.

Tennessee Tea Party Calls Barney Frank ‘Perverted Sodomite POS’ - I'm guessing that they are glad that Frank is retiring.

Religious right spokesman omit facts about AIDS to smear gay men

Peter Sprigg

The Family Research Council anoints its spokesperson Peter Sprigg as a professional on matters of the lgbtq community, which also means the health of those in this community.

However, through his statements, we see the danger in giving this charlatan a degree of credibility. This is what he said recently about how to solve the AIDS crisis:

It was encouraging to read Michael Gerson’s column in The Washington Post recently on scientific advances which raise the prospect of “Putting AIDS on the road to extinction.” He is right to say, “Religious conservatives have no objections to treatment and are neither shocked nor alarmed by circumcision.”

However, he ignores two huge “elephants in the room.” The first is the role of behavior change in reducing infections. A Ugandan AIDS prevention official wrote in the Post in 2008 about his country’s success in dramatically reducing AIDS prevalence through use of the “ABC” message—“Abstain” from sex until marriage, “Be faithful” to your spouse, and “use Condoms” only if you fail at A and B. Gerson celebrates that the cost of treatment is now less than $350 per person; but Sam L. Ruteikara noted, “Our successful ABC campaign cost just 29 cents per person each year.”


Gerson noted that circumcision has reduced “the risk of transmission from women to men,” and that early treatment reduced “transmission to a heterosexual partner.” This may be encouraging for Africa, but is less so at home, where the CDC reports that “more than half (53%) of all people living with HIV” are men who have sex with men (MSM), “the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily.” Discouraging anal intercourse and sex with multiple partners—practices not unique to homosexual men, but more prevalent among them—are part of “the only morally acceptable strategy” to help America share in the end of AIDS.

It doesn't take a palm reader to figure out that Sprigg seems to be less worried about solving the AIDS crisis and more about blaming on alleged gay male sexual habits.

Perhaps I wouldn't question Sprigg's credibility if he had cited all of the information from the CDC report he used to draw his conclusion. Particularly the following:

Stigma and homophobia may have a profound impact on the lives of MSM, especially their mental and sexual health. Internalized homophobia may impact men’s ability to make healthy choices, including decisions around sex and substance use. Stigma and homophobia may limit the willingness of MSM to access HIV prevention and care, isolate them from family and community support, and create cultural barriers that inhibit integration into social networks.

Racism, poverty, and lack of access to health care are barriers to HIV prevention services, particularly for MSM from racial or ethnic minority communities. A recent CDC study found a strong link between socioeconomic status and HIV among MSM: prevalence increased as education and income decreased, and awareness of HIV status was higher among MSM with greater education and income.

What Sprigg did was an offense he has committed before (in his pamphlet The Top Ten Myths About Homosexuality), i.e. take information a credible source to form a negative theory about gays, but making sure to omit crucial parts of that information which would destroy his theory.

Sprigg is no expert and those attempting to fight the scourge of AIDS should disregard his opinion.

The Thanksgiving Video War Massacre - competing messages about marriage equality over the Thanksgiving holiday

Maggie Gallagher handed the lgbtq community a victory over the Thanksgiving holidays in what turned out to be a contest of dueling videos.

Did I say contest? A contest would mean that two equal entities would be competing for superiority. What happened last week was a massacre.

Gallagher began the contest with a video she put out giving supposed tips on how to handle discussions of marriage equality during Thanksgiving. By tips, I guess Gallagher meant repeating the same tired talking points about people on her side of the argument unfairly being labeled as "bigots" and making false platitudes on respectful discussions while all the while folks on her side paint lgbtqs as folks seeking to corrupt children and (stop me if you heard this one) attempting to destroy the "special uniqueness of marriage being between one man and one woman:



To say that Gallagher's video wasn't popular would be an understatement. To say that she created the youtube version of Battlefield Earth and Plan 9 from Outer Space (two motion pictures renowned for how bad they were) would be more to the point.

Some folks have said that her delivery wasn't exactly comforting. Also, Gallagher simply didn't say anything we haven't heard before. If her aim was to tug at hearts, then my guess is that she used how the Snow White's wicked stepmother wanted to tug at her heart as a model.

And forgive for saying so because I am certainly not trying to rag on Gallagher's looks but the way her hair would bob in her face when she made what she thought were emphatic points totally distracted from her message. All the while Gallagher was talking, I kept thinking about that scene in the motion picture Valley of the Dolls when actress Pattie Duke was singing at a telethon and her dancing caused her necklace to bob and weave as if it took a life of its own.

Gallagher's video alone was poor, but the artificiality behind it was made evident due to another youtube video. This video, from Australia, featured  real situation where a gay couple meet, share time and family crises together, and then eventually get married:



The difference between the two videos speak for themselves. One featured a polarizing talking head repeating tiresome talking points behind a bland backdrop while punctuating her points with annoyingly flopping hair which didn't say "traditional marriage defender" but rather screamed "camp."

The other video featured a real-life situation involving a gay couple sharing time together, crises together, and finally wanting to share their lives together.

There was no competition.

Now there are some who call me biased for how I have criticized Gallagher's video. Well the facts bear me out. Gallagher's video, while at present time seen by less than 30,000 people, is tanking badly in terms of support.

In comparison, the Australian video has been seen by over 1 million people and has a vast number of supporters.

The simple fact of the matter is that this was a head-to-head competition and Gallagher's video lost because she didn't have an argument.

The other video simply didn't need one. It merely showed love, commitment, and devotion - all of the qualities which should make up a marriage.

All of the talking points in the world can't compete with that.

'Barney Frank's best youtube moments' and other Monday midday news briefs

Barney Frank Will Not Seek Reelection In 2012 - By now you have heard that Barney Frank, a Congressional powerhouse and a hero to us younger lgbtqs is retiring. Aw hell. But in all honesty, the brother deserves his rest. Thank you Barney.

Barney Frank’s best YouTube moments - The quality which made Frank such an awesome figure was his honesty and director candor, whether it be about his sexual orientation or dealing with trifling folks. The Washington Post counts down his best moments caught on youtube. Pay special attention to how he deals with folks who attack his sexual orientation.

GOProud On Barney Frank's Retirement - Meanwhile, the conservative gay group GoProud calls Frank an embarrassment. Barney Frank spent decades in valued service in Congress and being an excellent role model for the lgbtq community. All GoProud does is kiss up to a GOP base which hates its guts. If the group did as much work trying to change the Republican party from within than wailing at the supposed "Gay Left," it would have some degree of credibility.

Don't Ask Don't Tell: Top Marine Says Service Embracing Gay Ban Repeal - Don't tell the religious right. It would ruin their day. Then again, feel free to tell them.

I've never seen a Youtube video with 0% like... - Maggie Gallagher's silly Thanksgiving video is TANKING!

Prop 8 supporter fears the courts

With California's Proposition 8 looking very likely to be decided by the Supreme Court, supporters of it are not liking their prospects. Right now, the case is headed towards Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal:

Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com, suggests the Ninth Circuit judges will not side with supporters of traditional marriage.

"It doesn't look very good there," he warns. "Stephen Reinhardt, he's heading up this three-judge panel, he's the ultimate judicial activist." And Thomasson is not sure about how Justices Michael Daly Hawkins and Norman Randy Smith will vote on the merits of the case.

. . . Thomasson argues that this is an issue that should have never been taken to a federal court "because marriage is a state jurisdiction."

Ultimately, he says the court must decide whether the definition of marriage is something that should be decided at the state level.

We all know why Thomasson fears the courts. Probably because if the judges did look at the merits of case, Prop 8 supporters would continue to lose. At the very best, their case was weak. Many of those pushing for the law demurred when it came to testifying as to why the law was needed. They only could get two witness. One, David Blankenhorn, under cross examination made the case against Prop 8. Also, during closing arguments, proponents of Prop 8 said that they didn't need any evidence to prove their case.

Thomasson's whine speaks to what scares those against marriage equality the most. They like to sound the horn and cry "let the people vote" because they have the means and the money to manipulate that vote. They have enough pull to spread false stories about gays and children across any state, as well as cite junk science to prove their points.

In a court of law, however, things are different. In the words of David Boies, one of the lawyers who defeated Prop 8 in courts:

"In a court of law you've got to come in and you've got to support those opinions, you've got to stand up under oath and cross-examination," Boies said. "And what we saw at trial is that it's very easy for the people who want to deprive gay and lesbian citizens of the right to vote [sic] to make all sorts of statements and campaign literature, or in debates where they can't be cross-examined.

"But when they come into court and they have to support those opinions and they have to defend those opinions under oath and cross-examination, those opinions just melt away. And that's what happened here. There simply wasn't any evidence, there weren't any of those studies. There weren't any empirical studies. That's just made up. That's junk science. It's easy to say that on television. But a witness stand is a lonely place to lie. And when you come into court you can't do that.

Thomasson fears the simple fact that in the courts, where is there is no room for distortions or lies, the folks defending Prop 8 will continue to come up short.

And they deserve to.

Hey T.I., violence against gay children is NOT funny

I cringe to write about this, but it's necessary.

A rapper by the name of T.I. is pulling the "gays want to shut down everyone who disagrees with them" card.

T.I. said the following in an upcoming issue of Vibe magazine:

Man, I will say this, the funniest joke I ever heard Tracy (Morgan) say during a stand-up was, ‘C’mon man, I think gay people are too sensitive. If you can take a dick, you can take a joke.’ [Cracks up laughing.] That shit was funny to me. And it’s kind of true.’

While T.I. makes clear that he supports anyone’s sexual preference, he then connects, in his opinion, a current oversensitivity among gay people with a consequential and ironic offense of the First Amendment. “They’re like,‘If you have an opinion against us, we’re gonna shut you down.’ … That’s not American. If you’re gay you should have the right to be gay in peace, and if you’re against it you should have the right to be against it in peace.’

Earlier this year, comedian Tracy Morgan got into trouble due to a viciously nasty comedy routine about gays. Amongst other things, Morgan said he would stab his son if the child was gay.