Michigan bill could harm potential same-sex families

It looks like potential same-sex families may have a serious upcoming problem due to the Michigan legislature. According to Equality Michigan:

Extremists in the Michigan House of Representatives have scheduled a hearing on November 27th for a bill in the House Committee on Families, Children, and Seniors, which would allow adoption agencies the ability to deny an adoption placement based on that agency's moral or religious beliefs. However, the bill acknowledges that denying a couple based on religious or moral convictions does not imply "that the proposed adoption is not in the best interests of the adoptee."

Additionally, the bill protects public funding for agencies choosing to discriminate. Giving any government-funded agency a license to discriminate is immoral and unethical. With 14,000 children in Michigan seeking a safe home to prosper in, our focus should be on cultivating stable environments to raise these children, and not turning away capable and willing families eager to love and support a child in need. The strength of one's convictions alone is not justification in and of itself for any action - it is a despicable excuse for damaging another human being. The fact that the proposed bill specifically states that this biased filter does not imply the couple are unfit to adopt shows this is merely providing a license to discriminate based on an unlimited array of arbitrary criteria and not actually an attempt to protect children.

The primary sponsor, Representative Kenneth Kurtz (R-Coldwater), is wasting our money on a bill which does nothing to help the 14,000 children residing in foster care in Michigan. Rather than addressing that actual problem, they are fabricating a new one by offering this vile solution. 

As far as I know right now, this is purely a legislative move, rather than one finagled by religious right groups. However, one wonders as this situation gains attention, just how many so-called pro-family groups will come sniffing.

The bill itself is ridiculous but any inclusion of religious right groups would make it worse because it would be yet another attack on gay families thus revealing yet again the contradiction behind the mindsets of these groups who attack the gay community.

Allow me to explain - some  believe that based upon religious grounds, homosexuality is a sin and should be not looked at positively, but instead should be shied away or stamped out in all forms. This includes pro-gay laws, actions which would protect our lgbt children from bullying, and anything that would advance same-sex families.

The problem with this idea is that when they do this, these folks (whether they be by themselves or formed in groups) who have a religious belief against homosexuality are acting as the aggressors because they are demanding that their personal beliefs be codified in law, regardless of the fact that there are millions who do not believe as they do.

And many of these religious folks recognize this, so what do they do?  They create a false medicinal belief that homosexuality is a "dangerous lifestyle." Based on upon lies, junk science, and legitimate science that are in some cases deliberately cherry-picked, they have created a body of medicinal quackery that compares to the belief that lobotomies are healthy.

Lastly, when they can't turn to this, they create false media panics, such as this one  - i.e. adoption agencies should not be "forced" to violate their own personally held beliefs, even if this means they are allowed to discriminate against same-sex households even if said households pose no danger to children and that there are many children waiting to be placed in good homes.

This is the grand contradiction of the religious right when it comes to homosexuality - in order to hold what they feel God's commandment against homosexuality, they willingly break His commandment against lies, deception, and bearing false witness.

It makes as much sense as tossing a pocketful of dollar bills up into the air and expecting more than you tossed in the air to land magically in your hand.

We should all keep our eyes on Michigan. It may be a bellwether for future actions against gay families.

Anti-gay pastor scorches NOM in choice interview

Ken Hutcherson

Anti-gay Washington state pastor Ken Hutcherson has been described by many (this blogger included) as a homophobic, self-conceited loudmouth.

How strange it is that two of those attributes which has been seen as a bane to lgbt equality has now become positive qualities.

Whatever the case may be, the National Organization for Marriage has clearly done something to infuriate Hutcherson and he does not plan to go "gently into that good night."

 Instead, he is becoming vocal as to how that anti-gay group lost their fight against marriage equality in Washington state two weeks ago, including hurtling charges of racism against NOM. 

In probably his most public interview to date on the matter - with gay activist Michelangelo Signorile on Signorile's SiriusXM OutQ radio program - Hutcherson continues not to hold back anything back.

 Highlights:

 "I said to [the National Organization for Marriage], 'You think I’m controversial because I don’t look white. I don’t talk white. I don’t act white. And I am not that milquetoast-looking kind of guy that’s is going to be calm about everything. I’ve got a passion on what’s right. I’ve got a passion, and I will stand on what I think biblical principles are. If that’s controversial, then we’ve got a problem, and we’ll never win another election on anything.”

 “I think they (NOM) went weak, extremely, to the point where the national organizations wanted to be a little bit more loving, to look more to point of putting no bad taste in anyone’s mouth.”

“The National Organization for Marriage tried to win the moderates. And if you’re going to win the moderates then you got to stay away from what they call hard-line biblical principles.So they tried to come with the psychological and sociological argument." 

Hutcherson claimed he was especially against NOM's infamous wedge strategy of pitting the black and gay communities against each other on the subject of marriage equality:

 "I was totally against that approach, because it’s wrong. That’s not what we do to win, is to show our prejudice." 

You can listen to the entire interview here (and might I suggest that you wear a bib because it is CHOICE!)

I'm personally interested as to how NOM going to taper this down. The lgbt community has dealt with Hutcherson as an antagonist, so he can't really hurt us.

However, as a seemingly ally of NOM who has turned his back on the group and is now labeling them as racist, Hutcherson is like a nuclear bomb.

Pretending like Hutcherson doesn't exist will not help NOM's image. And Hutcherson has never been one being quiet about his "existence."

Poor NOM. The anti-gay group is slipping BADLY

Maggie Gallagher of NOM

A friend showed me the following tweet from the National Organization for Marriage:

NOM ‏@NOMupdate

Problems with #SSM in the Netherlands: little demand, instability, losing rights to religious exemptions.. http://myop.us/XzhrZI  @MarriageNZ

Collapse 

•  Reply 
•  Retweet 
•  Favorited
•  

The tweet links to New Zealand version of an anti-marriage equality webpage (which I am certain NOM has a lot to do with. The title of the page is called Protect Marriage - One Man. One Woman. That's Marriage.)

The page in question outlines supposed problems with marriage equality in the Netherlands by spotlighting certain statistics. One in particular stood out. It was about the supposed instability of gay men:

Instability of relationships

Recent research from a major British medical journal AIDS on male same-sex relationships in the Netherlands — arguably one of the most gay friendly cultures on earth — indicates gay men have a very difficult time living by the values of marriage. This study found that steady homosexual relationships in the very gay-friendly city of Amsterdam, on average, last only 1.5 years. The study also found that gay men in steady relationships there have an average of eight partners a year outside of their current relationships.

The footnote says this citation is:

Maria Xiridou, et al., “The Contributions of Steady and Casual Partnerships to the Incidence of HIV Infection Among Homosexual Men in Amsterdam,” AIDS, 17 (2003): 1029.38.

Now some of you will point out the easy distortion with this study, i.e. the date. The study is nine years old.  So much "recent research."

However, don't leave it at that. There are so many other morsels of distortion behind the usage of this study.

Xiridou's study was not designed to look at married gay couples. It was designed to "access the relative contribution of steady and casual partnerships to the incidence of HIV infection among homosexual men in Amsterdam and to determine the effect of increasing sexually risky behaviours among both types of partnerships in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy."

No lesbian couples were interviewed. For this study, Dr. Xiridou received her information from the Amsterdam Cohort Study of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and AIDS Among Homosexual Men. To gain this information, researchers studied 1,800 gay men between the years of 1984- 2000. Same sex marriage was legalized in the Netherlands in 2001, thus making the information irrelevant to points about gay marriage. Information for the Amsterdam Cohort Study is found here.

In other words, Xiridou's study is being used to demonize married gay couples when in fact no married gay couple took part in the study.

Way to go, NOM.  In your eagerness to demonize same-sex couples, you take part in a distortion that easy to refute.

Happy Thanksgiving, you turkeys.

Let us all commemorate Transgender Day of Remembrance

Today is Transgender Day of Remembrance and with that in mind, let us ALL remember that "justice" does not mean "just us."

Please click on the graphic to learn some history. I enjoyed reading it myself.

And while we celebrate history, let's not forget those who were deprived of their right to make history due hatred. Let's all do what we can to protect all of our brothers and sisters:


 

'Christian magazine claims that demon rape can cause homosexuality' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Can You Be Raped by the Devil? - An interesting article from the "Christian" magazine called Charisma. A choice excerpt for your edification: 

The two most identifiable sexual demons are the incubus, which is a male sexual demon that traditionally assaults women, and the succubus, which is a female sexual demon that assaults men. Sometimes they also lure people into homosexual behavior. (Contessa)Adams notes that one evangelist, whose name she would not divulge, was so troubled by the sexual pleasure the succubus gave her that she even contemplated suicide.Adams says the succubus spirit that used to attack her confused her so much that she contemplated becoming a lesbian. 

Years from now when lgbt equality is a reality, our sons and daughters will ask us "How in the hell did you lose to these people for so long?" 

 New ridiculous talking point: More out gays = less credibility for science of sexual orientation - Aw Peter Sprigg, I miss your bad studies. On the risk of blowing my own horn, I like to think that since  I have debunked your lies numerous times  (and you have mentioned it in an offhand manner) that I've spooked you from playing researcher. Still, this latest explanation of yours makes no sense AT ALL.

 HIV Testing Will Now Be Covered Under Obamacare - As it should be! 

 Liberty Counsel: God's Judgment is on America for Electing Obama and 'Adopting Sin as Official Public Policy' - In other words - blah, blah blah, whine, whine, whine. 

Homosexuality can be explained through plumbing and extension cords

Everyone is talking about how the Republican Party needs to do some "soul searching" after its electoral humiliation. If you ask me, I think the same holds for some folks who call themselves Christians. In three states, voters clearly showed that they have no problems with gays getting married. However, to hear Franklin Graham (a whisper of a shadow of what his father Billy Graham ever was) breaks down why these voters are supposedly wrong. And it all has to do with plumbing:



And the reduction of gay relationships to matters of sex even filters down to the obscure pastors blessed with a camera and a youtube account as you will see with this guy who not only uses props (extension cords) but links Obama with the anti-Christ in a manner which reminds one of PBS programs Sesame Street and The Electric Company:

 

I am of two opinions about this entire thing. I am thrilled that members of the religious right are going bonkers over the re-election of Obama.

But then I get a little spooked about the conviction of their mania.

Second clip courtesy of Joe Jervis.

Thank you Bryan Fischer for all you are doing for gay equality

Forget 'Porno' Pete LaBarbera, Matt Barber, Linda Harvey. Forget Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher. This guy above is the one we need to spotlight more than the others. By his ignorant words and egotistical nature, Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association is doing more for the cause of lgbt equality than Cher with magic powers.

In this particular juncture, he is being interviewed by an online buddy David Pakman, who has this incredible talent of letting members of the anti-gay right make themselves look like fools by simply asking questions and allowing them to bloviate on and on.

According to Pakman:

“Today I interviewed Bryan Fischer, and it was quite extreme. He repeatedly cited the Regnerus study regarding gay parenting even though I continued to tell him the study is bogus. I also asked him which other anti-gay ideas he agrees with. He DISAGREES with “God hates fags” and that gays and lesbians should be put to death, but AGREES that gay exorcisms like those discussed by former Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt are a valid way of “helping” people. He also said that he isn’t worried about more and more states passing marriage equality, that most states still DON’T allow it.”

Ah yes the Regnerus study, which continues to be destroyed for its lack of credible information about gay families.

And that's just a tidbit of Pakman's interview. Let the title of the video clip, Anti-Gay Exorcisms Work, People Never Born Gay, Gay Parents Bad, clue you in.

Thank you Bryan Fischer for all of the work you have done to progress the cause of lgbt equality.

You dumbass.

'"Ex-gay" youth minister suspected in sex cult murder of wife' and other Monday midday news briefs

“Ex-Gay” Christian Youth Leader Suspected In “Religious Sex Cult” Murder Of Wife - Does the religious right want more discussion of these "ex-gay" ministries? Let's start here.  

Secrets of Tyler Deaton's prayer group emerge - And here is more information about the above scandal.

 Black support for gay marriage growing - Good for us. Now let's have more discussion of lgbt of color issues in the black community. And be sure to include us in those annual "State of Black America" reports.  

Florida Lesbian and Gay Adoptive Parents Tell Their Stories - These stories are important to tell and to hear so that SOME FOLKS don't get to boggart the conversation in regards to gay parenting. 

 Conservative ‘Justice’ Group Encourages Clerks To Discriminate Against Same-Sex Couples - Do it at your own electoral peril my friends. 

Anti-gay pastor's charges of racism ignites a verbal feud with religious right

What was once a war of words between anti-gay Washington state pastor Ken Hutcherson, the National Organization for Marriage, and Focus on the Family has now developed into a full-scale ugly feud complete with charges of racism.

 On election day two weeks ago, NOM lost four ballot initiatives. In Minnesota, voters turned back efforts to add an anti-gay marriage amendment to that state's constitution. In Maryland, Maine, and Washington state, voters approved ballot initiatives which would legalize gay marriage.

NOM faced criticism over what was called "moderate" tactics in opposing marriage equality. Ken Hutcherson, senior pastor of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond, WA and an extremely vocal opponent of gay equality in general,  said groups like NOM and Focus on the Family practically handed the victories their opponent:

"Their intention was to be moderate, non-controversial," Hutcherson told OneNewsNow in an exclusive interview, pointing out that the National Organization for Marriage, Focus on the Family and Family Policy Institute's unbiblical strategy was a severe departure from the state's churches' aggressive campaign to stop same-sex marriage using the weight of family values and Scripture. He notes that the groups essentially told him and other local Christian leaders' that their message on marriage and social issues was too offensive. "They did not want me involved basically in the top leadership, so I took a back seat and let them run with it," Hutcherson shared. "And that really hurt our unity out here." 

Hutcherson later turned the criticism up a notch in an interview with The Christian Post by accusing the organizations of racism. He said he was excluded from the fight because he is an African-American:

"When I knew my involvement was going to generate controversy, I offered to step back and suggested others who were on the frontlines do so as well for the sake of unity. They refused, leaving me as the odd man out. If you look at them, they were all the same color with the same moderate views. It just didn't make sense why they would not include a person of color who was willing to fight." "I believe there are conservatives of all colors, but the leadership from NOM, Focus and Mission Public Affairs, wanted to run being a moderate campaign where everyone felt warm and fuzzy. But we know that sin is never satisfied and always wants more. These guys just looked and acted too much like the GOP – old and white."

Brian Brown, president of NOM, told The Christian Post that Hutcherson's charges were reckless:

Brown . . . called Hutcherson's comment "absurd and reckless," and that he never heard any complaints from the Washington pastor. He also pointed to others such as Maryland's Bishop Harry Jackson, Jr. who is also black and was out front in his state's effort to overturn a new state law. "In the body of Christ I think if we have differences they need to be aired out between us and not in the public arena." 

Of course Brown omitted the fact that NOM has been paying Jackson for his efforts.  According to Mother Jones, Jackson has received $20,000 from the National Organization for Marriage's "education fund" for his efforts to exploit the opinions of those in the black community who do not agree with marriage equality. In addition, in 2010, Jackson attempted to get a measure on the ballot opposing marriage equality in D.C. In pursuit of that effort, he led the group Stand for Marriage DC. According to documents attained by Mother Jones, NOM gave $60,000 for that effort.

In the same Christian Post article, Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family also voiced a disagreement with Hutcherson's claim of racism. Both he and Brown expressed the wish that Hutcherson should have come to them with his complaints.

Though Hutcherson has a point when it comes to the small number or lack of African-American in leadership positions in these organizations, those familiar with the pastor's past antics - myself included - should probably chalk up his accusations of racism to sour grapes that he wasn't given a larger role in the fight against marriage equality.

Still, the fact that Minnery and Brown made a point to tell Hutcherson to keep disagreements "in house" definitely proves that he struck a nerve.

And I think that's what Hutcherson wanted. Don't be surprised if he attempts to strike more nerves.
 

Know Your LGBT History - The sad hysteria over the 'down low'

 In 2004, African-American author J.L. King published On the Down Low: A Journey Into the Lives of Straight Black Men Who Sleep with Men and ignited a controversy.

The book basically talked about how some married men were having gay relationships on the side. Now for those of us familiar with people like Jim McGreevey and Ted Haggard, this wasn't anything new. A lot of us call it "being in the closet."

However, in the African-American community, which rarely addresses gay issues as it should, the book was a virtual firebomb.

To say folks went crazy was an understatement. King's book was an instant success, was the subject of a multitude of discussions, seminars, and television programs.

And unfortunately, a lot of the information was wrong. For a long time, men on the supposed "down low" was blamed for the HIV rate in the African-American community, particularly amongst black women. However, in 2009, the Centers for Disease Control debunked this belief.

In the meanwhile, so many folks were cashing in with their own plays, screenplays, and even new books about the supposed "down low" phenomena. The most ludicrous without question had to be that of Nation of Islam member Shahrazad Ali.

Ali, in her book How To Tell if Your Man is Gay or Bisexual, gave a few "tips" on spotting "down low men," including:

How does he sleep at night, what position does he sleep in? Does
he sleep like a woman, or like a man? What does he talk about in his
sleep?

You can touch his rectum to see if he has those tell-tale humps
on his anus from having it stretched open with a penis. Then later on
ask him if he's ever had hemorrhoids really bad.

If he asks you to "toss his salad" and you agree, and his legs go
up too quickly, he's probably used to doing it.

Looking back at it, my guess is that the "down low" nonsense became hysteria in the black community because it challenged some notions that you can "spot" a gay man. Some folks were expecting the limp wristed, swishy stereotype and it never occurred to them that gay men come in all forms.

The saddest thing to me is that almost throughout the entire hysteria (which has abated at least a little), while sexual health education  of the black woman became a big part of the discussion, very few people talked about the needs of the black gay man, i.e. why some gay men felt the need to be in the closet in the first place.

Except for this excellent documentary shown above (which I have included clips of), the mindset behind the "down low" hysteria seemed to be "how dare those men infect and lie to our women."

It was a seriously missed opportunity to educate members of the African-American community on the visibility and issues of black gay men.

Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

'Religious right lashes out at black voters for pro-Obama, pro-marriage equality votes' and other Friday midday news briefs

Religious right lashes out at African-Americans over pro-Obama, pro-marriage equality votes:

 Linda Harvey - Ninety-three percent of African Americans voted for Obama in this election. Where are the Christians? Where are those who choose candidates based on the content of his or her character? Is it safe to conclude that ninety-three percent of African Americans are now in favor of homosexuality as marriage, late-term and sex-selection abortions, and they love the idea of limiting opportunity be penalizing success in this country? Do all this ninety-three percent agree that people of faith should be forced to pay for other people’s abortion-causing drugs? These are drugs that kill unborn babies. This is a human rights issue of the first magnitude and I am guessing there are plenty of black women and men who would have a problem with this if they chose to open their eyes about these policies aggressively supported by Obama and his administration, and now America has signed on for four more years of this.  

Michael Brown - I simply do not understand how my black evangelical friends who so staunchly oppose same-sex marriage and who stand against abortion could cast their vote for the most radically pro-abortion, pro-gay-activist president in our history. Was there no moral compromise involved in voting for him? Are there no issues that could disqualify him in your eyes? And must Barack Obama be elected and then reelected in order to make up for past injustices, as one black evangelical woman claimed?

Well gee, maybe it's because not all African-Americans are monolithic. Maybe we have our minds and don't jump every time some religious right organization pays off a greedy pastor to undermine our support of a candidate. And to answer Mr. Brown's question, we didn't vote for Obama for revenge. We voted for him because we felt he was the better candidate. And he was, too. It's nice to see these folks show their true faces. I wonder how many other religious right groups and figures feel this way but won't publicly say so.


 In other news:

 Fox News Downplays Major Election Night LGBT Victories - Color me not surprised. Personally I think the network was too busy trying to recover from Obama's victory. 

 Boykin: Gays, the left to blame for heterosexuals' inability to keep it in their pants - So in other words, gays are mind controlling heterosexuals to cheat with each other. Okay, that's another secret revealed by some big mouthed queen. I swear it's so hard to conduct an evil plan to destroy "normal society" when your fellow gays can't keep their mouths shut! 

 Oregon Democrats Nominate Country’s First Lesbian House Speaker - Sweet! 

NOM's election losses creating division in religious right

Ken Hutcherson is mad at NOM.

The National Organization for Marriage is dealing with heavy criticism from the right after losing four ballot initiatives against marriage equality.

Two days ago, Mass Resistance, an anti-gay hate group in Massachusetts, seemingly claimed that NOM was not anti-gay enough in opposing marriage equality. Brian Camenker, Mass Resistance's president said:

 . . . both NOM and the state pro-family groups went to great lengths not to criticize homosexual behavior. They were very fearful of being perceived as "anti-gay" or "homophobic" especially in the liberal press. So they insisted on moderating everyone's messages. In Minnesota, for instance, activists were specifically told, "Don't make this a gay issue." Those who deviated from this and took a more direct approach were shunned and even publicly criticized by the pro-family establishment.

And yesterday, that sentiment was echoed by Washington state pastor Ken Hutcherson. Hutcherson has been an extremely vocal opponent of gay equality in general, opposing not just marriage equality, but also gay/straight alliances in schools.

Hutcherson said groups like NOM and Focus on the Family practically handed the victories to marriage equality supporters in Maine, Maryland, Washington state, and Minnesota - the four states who had either laws regarding marriage equality on the ballot:

"Their intention was to be moderate, non-controversial," Hutcherson told OneNewsNow in an exclusive interview, pointing out that the National Organization for Marriage, Focus on the Family and Family Policy Institute's unbiblical strategy was a severe departure from the state's churches' aggressive campaign to stop same-sex marriage using the weight of family values and Scripture. He notes that the groups essentially told him and other local Christian leaders' that their message on marriage and social issues was too offensive.
"They did not want me involved basically in the top leadership, so I took a back seat and let them run with it," Hutcherson shared. "And that really hurt our unity out here."

While it sounds like "sour grapes" on the part of Hutcherson, who he gave the interview to is significant. One News Now is the online publication owned by the American Family Association.  And while One News Now gave Hutcherson an unchallenged platform to challenge NOM, it did not seek any comment from NOM.

'Scary' video demonstrates the consequences of gay marriage in America

The above video correctly illustrates the consequences of what will happen if America allows marriage equality. And no there are no mistakes. It lays down the consequences exactly as they will be. And I happen to agree with it totally. Keep telling yourself "it's only a possibility, it's only a possibility."

'Marriage equality a plot to destroy religious liberty?' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Controversial pastor Scott Lively considers running for governor of Massachusetts - This hateful individual is part responsible for the hell Ugandan lgbts are going through right now. He isn't going to win should he choose to run, but still . . . DAMN!

 Barber: Gay Marriage is a Weapon Designed to Destroy Religious Liberty - Aw hell! Who told him? I swear dishy gay men CANNOT stop revealing our secret plans! 

 Today in religious freedom: MN Catholic church denies confirmation to 17-year-old equality backer - I suppose some folks may find this appropriate but it is probably the main reason why Christianity is losing a lot of points in America.  

Worldwide Transgender Murders Increased By 20 Percent In 2012 - This ain't good. Stay strong, brothers and sisters.  

Sharing the Stories of LGBT Youth: Izabela, 17, From Lincoln, Neb. - Let's end these news briefs on a positive note. Anytime our lgbt children can speak out and share their stories is positive. 

Obama nominates gay black man for federal court

Obama makes history for both the African-American and gay communities:

The White House announced on Wednesday that President Obama has nominated Judge William Thomas, an out gay man, to serve on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Thomas would be the first out LGBT black man to serve as a lifetime-tenured federal judge. In a statement, Obama noted the diversity of Thomas and six other nominees, saying, "They ... represent my continued commitment to ensure that the judiciary resembles the nation it serves." He added, "These individuals have demonstrated the talent, expertise, and fair-mindedness Americans expect and deserve from their judicial system. I am grateful for their willingness to serve and confident that they will apply the law with the utmost impartiality and integrity. Too many of our courtrooms stand empty. I hope the Senate will promptly consider all of my nominees and ensure justice for everyday Americans."

Thomas is the first out LGBT black judge to be nominated by Obama, but, if approved by the Senate, he would be the second out LGBT black judge. The first, Judge Deborah Batts, also was the first out LGBT federal judge. She was nominated by President Clinton and sat on the Southern District of New York bench. She took "senior status," a near retirement, earlier this year. 

 Yes this is a big #^@ deal, particularly to THIS black gay man and others who are like me because rarely do we see lgbt of color role models. It's not as if they aren't out there. It's just that very few folks focuses on them.

Certainly Mr. Thomas will not be seen as the "black gay judge" and Obama did not pick him because of those designations. However, in a world where gay black men have little visibility either sometimes by accident (by the gay community) or sometimes deliberately (by the African-American community), it's nice to see a spotlight on one of us who is successful.

And speaking of those of us who are successful:


 

Hate group leader blasts NOM for not being sufficiently anti-gay

Brian Tashman at Right-Wing Watch beat me to this, but it's so hilarious that it needs more attention. Apparently Mass Resistance, a venomous SPLC-declared hate group in Massachusetts is angry at the National Organization for Marriage.

According to its founder, Brian Camenker, NOM lost the recent four ballot initiatives for several reasons, including not being anti-gay enough. Cameneker, in fact, called NOM' strategy "flawed."

 In sharp contrast to the homosexual lobby's slick, sophisticated propaganda machine, the pro-family overall approach was largely the same moderate, inoffensive, often logically incoherent approach that they've coasted on until now. A number of activists made it a point to complain to us about that. For example, most of the pro-family message was some variation of: Every child needs a father and a mother; the word "marriage" is special; marriage is about procreation; marriage is a timeless institution; gays already have all the rights marriage brings; etc.

These arguments are not emotional, fairly general, and not very compelling. In contrast, the homosexual lobby made the arguments in their ads emotional and personal. At its root, "gay marriage" is really about the forced acceptance of homosexuality as a normal part of society. But both NOM and the state pro-family groups went to great lengths not to criticize homosexual behavior. They were very fearful of being perceived as "anti-gay" or "homophobic" especially in the liberal press. So they insisted on moderating everyone's messages. In Minnesota, for instance, activists were specifically told, "Don't make this a gay issue." Those who deviated from this and took a more direct approach were shunned and even publicly criticized by the pro-family establishment.

This included some of the vocal black churches in Maryland who wanted to quote the Bible, and activists in Maine and Minnesota who felt compelled to discuss the negative aspects homosexual behavior. Except for some material posted on websites of the local pro-family groups, there were no attempts at all that we know of to persuade the public through advertising that homosexual behavior was perverse, dysfunctional, and unhealthy.

Our side basically conceded that argument completely, and even went to lengths to state that "we're not anti-gay." The homosexual lobby took full advantage of that by aggressively portraying homosexuality as just another facet of normal human behavior. This tactic is not sustainable, as it soon became clear. It certainly does not effectively counter the emotional strategies put forth by the homosexual lobby. At some point you have to engage in the real battle at hand.

It sounds to me as if that Camenker is angry that NOM didn't talk go for the jugular with the anti-gay stuff. In other words, Camenker sounds sore that NOM didn't take the route that Mass Resistance is famous for, i.e. making up horror stories about gays invading schools and harming children like so:

The "Little Black Book" - Hard-core pornographic homosexual "how-to" booklet given to kids at high school!

 

Elementary school teaching cross-dressing and transgenderism in 3rd grade

 

Politicians, corporations honor BAGLY director - cross-dresser who works with kids - as Grand Marshal of Gay Pride Parade.

Or running repulsively insulting videos like the following:



Needless to say that Mass Resistance does worse. The organization makes it a point to take pictures of and videotape youth participation at pride events to push the ridiculous "gays indoctrinate children" lie.

And this group is criticizing NOM for not partaking in this madness. Between you and me, I kinda wish NOM would have because it would have led us to win by a larger margin.

However, as it is, I doubt NOM will be taking Mass Resistance's advice any time soon. NOM believes in subtle homophobia, not the in your face kind.

'Teacher unfairly attacked for protecting gay student' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Florida Teacher Accused Of Turning Student Into Lesbian - What kind of world do we live in when teachers are falsely attacked for protecting gay students from abuse?

 Illinois Hate Group Encourages Bullying And Rejection Of Transgender Students - Apparently a world that anti-gay hate groups would love. 

 Tony Perkins gets another mainstream media pass - This is a hot mess. What the hell is The New York Times doing spotlighting FRC's Tony Perkins without giving a good view of the lies he and his organization, the Family Research Council, undertakes against the gay community? Indeed, evil triumphs when those who have the power to expose it do nothing.  

LaBarbera: Tammy Baldwin 'Hardly a Role Model,' Lacks 'Healthy, Wholesome Behaviors' - And Tammy Baldwin is also a United States Senator, Mr. LaBarbera. Meanwhile, you are a poor, pathetic man who masks his inner turmoil with homophobia. Let that stick in your craw.

Hate group has bad priorities when it comes to the Boy Scouts

The Family Research Council can't help itself when it comes to smearing gays. Maybe it's a clinical thing.

In this particular scenario, the organization is not exactly happy that UPS has decided not to donate to the Boy Scouts due to its policy of not allowing gays to be members.  According to FRC, UPS is punishing the Boy Scouts because the organization is supposedly trying to keep boys safe from pedophiles:
 

What UPS and other corporations refuse to acknowledge is that the Scouts' policy isn't a matter of intolerance--but security. After hundreds of cases of child sex abuse plagued the organization, the BSA tried to create a membership criteria in the best interest of kids' safety and parents' rights. Over the years, the Boy Scouts have paid millions--possibly hundreds of millions--to boys victimized by same-sex predators. And the financial toll was nothing compared to the emotional trauma of these children, whose lives are forever scarred by those encounters. For more than 100 years, the Scouts have focused on instilling character and leadership into America's boys. They aren't about to compromise that mission just to placate liberal companies and activists. 

Note what FRC says here - "same sex predators," i.e. making the inaccurate point that a man who molests a boy should be automatically considered as gay. 

And the sad thing about what FRC did? Other than blaming gays for the situation with the Boy Scouts, this organization has made no comment on the scandal created when it was learned that the Boy Scouts has been shielding potential pedophiles for decades, even after barring gays to be members or serve in leadership positions..

Why is FRC even defending the Boy Scouts at all?

Sorry religious right, but the gay community isn't buying what you are selling

As far as I am concerned, it's always a good thing when religious right figures trot their hypocrisies out in the public square.

My only concern is that we as a community don't take advantage of this more. Take former Family Research Council head Janet Parshall for example:



The above excerpt is from a ridiculous documentary she filmed with the American Family Association in 2009 entitled Speechless - Silencing the Christians. The documentary, with her as the host, makes inaccurate charges that gay equality will lead to the silencing and "persecution" of Christians. As you hear her ramble, please be aware that many of her claims are false, but I am sure you already know that.

But what I take from it is the false theme of "persecution" Parshall trots out. Using it, she implies the gay community are the aggressors. That we are the ones who use threats and ugly language against those we oppose.

It's a bizarre thing to take in when one listens to the following recent interview Parshall conducted with FRC's Peter Sprigg:

In case you need to keep to itemize certain realities, Parshall believes that gays gaining any form of equality is dangerous to Christians' rights of free speech. But her calling marriage equality a tool of the devil is right on.

Parshall's hypocrisy reminds me of the Kirk Cameron controversy earlier this year when he attacked gays, was criticized heavily for it, and then pleaded victimhood while hiding behind his so-called Christian beliefs.

And it made me realize a point which we hardly discuss.

To Parshall, Cameron, and other religious right talking heads and organizations, it's not enough for them to feel the negative way they do about the gay community. They seem to not only be angling to denigrate us unchallenged but also want their world view of homosexuality to be the prevalent view.

Think about it. Every time there is something which remotely puts the gay community in a positive light, these people and their groups trot out a stupid argument in which they push offensive phraseology like:

"Americans don't want the gay agenda rammed down their throat," or "parents don't want their children indoctrinated in the homosexual lifestyle."

The way they talk, the gay community sound like we are not Americans, we don't pay taxes, we aren't raising children, and we have no say whatsoever in the making of the laws which would govern our lives.

Let me put it as succinct as possible. People like Janet Parshall and organizations like the American Family Association want to control our lives. They want to put us in a box of sadness and self-hatred, where we settle for dangerous fumblings in public restrooms and parks for good relationships. Where we are content to grow old and alone because we feel that we are not worthy of creating families. Where we accept whatever so-called "tolerance" they give us because we feel that we don't deserve dignity.

Sorry guys, but I feel safe in speaking for the vast, vast majority of the gay community when I say get over  yourselves.

You see, many of us have had that taste of sweet champagne which comes with the revelation  that we are worthy of equality. And when you taste that champagne of equality, you don't go back to the bitter, lukewarm water of low self-esteem and self-denial.

You don't settle for a place in the corner when you have just discovered that you are part owner of the castle.

So my advice to the Janet Parshalls of the worlds, the Peter Spriggs, the American Family Associations is simple:

Give it up. Turn it loose. Because sooner or later, equality will be ours, regardless of you.

Hat tip to Goodasyou.org

'Catholic Bishops, Bill Graham group in trouble for role in 2012 election' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Billy Graham Group, Catholic Bishops Come Under Scrutiny For Blurring Election Lines - No offense to anyone of any faith, but I have SERIOUS problems with people in church leadership roles telling people that they are going to hell if hey don't vote a certain way.  

Failed SNL Comedienne Victoria Jackson Continues Being Not Racist Or Crazy At All - I would say that Victoria Jackson has lost her mind but you have to have a mind to lose it. 

 Push Expands for Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage - Good. Don't waste this momentum.

Congrats to Kyrsten Sinema - Another victory. Congress has its first bisexual member!

 United Parcel Service to Boy Scouts of America – no funds for your anti-gay org - Sorry Boy Scouts, you want our tax dollars while you seek to harm our gay children. I don't feel sorry for you.

NOM's attack on gay families subtle but dangerous

For an organization created to supposedly "defend marriage," the National Organization for Marriage seems to be going into hyper drive in an effort put the disappearing dust on same-sex families.
Check out three recent posts on its blog:

UK Survey Aims to Make Pre-School Classes "Gay Friendly"

French Primary School Kids to Get Lessons in Gay Parenting

Ontario Judge: Parents Have No Right to Know What Gay Activist Taught Their Children

The claims made by these headlines and the articles they are talking about are highly specious, coming from what appears to religious right sources. For example, take the one about UK survey attempting to make pre-school classes "gay friendly." NOM links the story from The UK Christian Institute and it is as follows:

Parents in the East End of Glasgow were shocked to be asked about their sex lives, so that their pre-school children would get “gay-friendly” lessons. Mums and Dads were offered free theatre tickets in exchange for answering a survey about their sexual orientation. The study was carried out by a local arts group which is part-run by the city council. The aim of the Platform charity’s questionnaire, was to help “monitor the degree to which our programmes are gay-friendly”. 

Please note that the article claims that parents were being asked about their sex lives but in reality, they were asked about their sexual orientation. Two other publications verify that the question asked was merely about sexual orientation, not sexual activity. Unfortunately however, both publications also featured hysterical and inaccurate headlines about sexual activity.

What's happening here is subtle but nonetheless dangerous. NOM is conflating any questions designed to help same-sex families to that of scurrilous questions about sexual activity.

Granted, I can understand a tad the trepidation some may feel about being asked about their sexual orientation. But to automatically assume that these questions are a gateway to being asked about sexual activity is an extreme stretch.

NOM's 'victim for hire' calls Obama the 'Terrorist-in-Chief'

How did I miss this one? It seems that one of the National Organization for Marriage's "victims for hire" wasn't happy with Obama's re-election.

In fact, he called the President a terrorist. Equality Matters gives us the full story:

Damian Goddard – spokesperson for NOM’s Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance (ADA) – published a post on his blog chastising Americans considering moving to Canada as a result of President Obama’s reelection. In his November 8 post, Goddard urged conservatives to stay in America and fight against Obama, who he called “the Terrorist-in-Chief”:

[S]top your complaining.  Please.  For the love of God.

You live in the freest country ever known to mankind.  As the anthem states, America is the land of the free but freedom comes with bravery, not running and hiding.   Your job is to stay.  And fight.  For the battle is still ongoing.

You leave, the terrorists win.  And heck, isn’t that what the Terrorist-in-Chief wants, anyway?

For those who are not aware, Damian Goodard was a Canadian sportscaster who was let go from his job. Goodard claimed that it was because of a tweet he sent out against marriage equality. However, the company that fired him, Sportsnet, denied that this was the case.  The company said he was fired for personal matters which it will not reveal because of its policy to not talk about personnel matters to the press.

Since the time of his firing, Goodard has made a name for himself by teaming up with NOM as a supposed victim of marriage equality:



Goodard's vicious attack on President Obama is not surprising. Instead it rather fits in well with the hypocrisy that is NOM's Anti-Defamation Alliance.

I suppose Maggie Gallagher and company will now label Goodard a larger victim. After all, whatever happened to the good old days when one could label the president as a terrorist with impunity?

 

'Uganda to pass homophobic law as Christmas gift?' and other Monday midday news briefs

Uganda to pass anti-gay law as 'Christmas gift'? - Stop the celebration. Looks like we've got work to do.  

NOM rounds out losing week by admitting intent to stir up international animus - Just in time for NOM to exploit international homophobia.  

How the Minnesota marriage amendment was defeated -- money, passion, allies - Read and take notes. We are going to need to do this again and again. 

 Veterans Day Highlights Persisting LGBT Inequities In The Military - Let's honor our veterans for the sacrifices they have made for our freedoms. ALL of our veterans. 

Dan Savage dares Tony Perkins, Family Research Council to sue him

Say what you will about Dan Savage, he is doing what needs to be done here.  For too long, members of the lgbt community - especially those in positions of power - have dodged taking on the Family Research Council and all of the other anti-gay groups for whatever reason.

They seem to ignore the old adage that a good defense is always an offense. In other words, we tend to wait until Perkins and company call us out before engaging them in a discussion or, what I like to call, a much needed verbal war.

Our path to equality will not be shortened by ignoring FRC, NOM, or any of the other groups who deliberately peddle homophobic junk science. They are the roadblocks and sometimes you need to confront roadblocks without provocation with the expressed goal of knocking them out of the way.

Dan Savage is trying to do that here and it is my hope that others follow in his footsteps.

Know Your LGBT History - The Stonewall Riots of 1969

As we celebrate the hard-earned victories we attained this week, let's not forget those who paved the way for us to reach this point. While gay history began millenniums before the Stonewall Riots, this incident in 1969 was the beginning of the American gay rights movement, when we first learned the sweet taste of satisfaction which comes from standing up for one's self in the face of oppression.

Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

'Ex-gay counselor arrested for molesting patients' and other Friday midday news briefs

Rev. Ryan J. Muelhauser, Ex-Gay Counsellor, Arrested For Molestation Of Two Young Men - Absolutely fiendish. Something to remember the next time Linda Harvey and that bunch start whining about the CA law prohibiting the subjection of our children to ex-gay therapy.  

New NOM talking point: It wasn't a fair fight - For once NOM was right, but not in the way it thinks. They had more access to money and resources and still got their asses kicked.

 Rep. Mark Ferrandino: Colo. Democrats Pick State's 1st Gay House Speaker - Sweet! And the gold from Tuesday keeps raining down.  

How Major State Newspapers Covered The Fight For Marriage Equality - State newspapers aren't doing the job they need to when talking about anti-gay groups. And to me, the main reason this is happening is because we aren't doing a better job of exposing them. Don't wait for them to do stuff to us. Put THEM on the defensive for a change. We have enough information on these groups, i.e. how they lie and distort science. The problem is that the only folks who are pushing this info are the bloggers like myself. Where are the supposed "A-list" gay journalists?  Maybe if many of them stop disrespecting and hating on gay bloggers and work with us instead, a lot can be accomplished.

Hate group leader predicts violent revolution because of marriage equality

One of the delicious side effects to Tuesday's monumental marriage equality victories is watching the opposition freak out and prognosticate how the gay community will lead to America's destruction. In the following clip, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, still stinging from the gay community's victories in Minnesota, Maine, Maryland, and Washington state, predicts revolution if the Supreme Court ultimately rules in favor of marriage equality:



Whatever, Tony. There will be a revolution, just as sure as the passage of lgbt-inclusive hate crimes legislation led to pastors being arrested for publicly calling homosexuality a sin. Or the overturning of DADT would led to folks leaving military service because they can't fight off sexually aggressive gays and lesbians in their units.

Oh wait. Neither of those things - predicted by FRC and other anti-gay groups - never came true.

That's the thing with Perkins and FRC. They are always eager to predict negative outcomes if gay equality is advanced, but are never called to the carpet when their dire predictions don't come true. And their predictions never come true.

Most likely when the Supreme Court does declare marriage equality legal (and I hope that they do), there will be some anger, but for the most part, Americans will shrug their shoulders and go about their business. Leaving Perkins and company with egg on their faces yet again.