The Depths of One Man's Homophobia

Before I start, I would just like to say that the anti-gay industry's nastiness to Mary Cheney and her partner Heather Poe over the birth their son just goes to prove that these groups are solely interested in forcing us to acknowledge the lie that the only family unit that counts is the one they advocate. No one is immune to their mania.

Peter LaBarbera has made a name for himself by attending gay subcultural events and reporting on the alleged sexual activities he sees there.

Today he and his group, Americans for Truth (in name only) posted pictures from the International Mr. Leather convention.

The pictures are very interesting to say the least. But something else Peter said when he was describing the events caught my eye:

International Mr. Leather (IML) serves as an annual excuse for “leathermen” — mostly homosexual men but some “straight” SM couples — to engage in vile orgies that would make Sodom blush.

So where are the pictures of these "straight" couples? They aren't anywhere to be seen.

Peter tries to link International Mr. Leather to other gay events such as the Gay Games in an attempt to cast an image the "depraved homosexual" attempting to destroy American society but he seems to have listed the fact that heterosexual couples are as "depraved" as a mere afterthought.

And that is the best way to describe LaBarbera's prejudice.

He and others like him are always whining that they don't hate gay people and they are unfairly called homophobic for allegedly speaking the truth.

But what do you call denigrating gays for an interest in a sexual behavior (SM/bondage) while making light of the fact that heterosexuals are interested in the same sexual behavior.

Just where is the truth in that?

And for that matter, where are Peter's exposes on heterosexual events such as swinging conventions? Or how about SM and bondage clubs and conventions attended by heterosexuals.

Peter won't take up this challenge. No one in his group will.

And why?

Because they are homophobes. Pure and simple.


Misrepresentation: It's not just Janet Folgers' job

I joyfully give Janet Folger hell for misrepresenting current events in order to demonize the lgbt community.

But I am wrong if I inferred in any way that she is the only one in the anti-gay industry who engages in this type of behavior.

Case in point is a column today by Ed Vitagliano of the American Family Assocation.

It is the same nonsensical mantra about how the lgbt community is trying to keep Christians from speaking out against homosexuality.

Vitagliano engages in the standard anti-gay industry tactic in his column: distorting examples of incidents that allegedly prove his point. Many of his examples happen in foreign countries and therefore have nothing to do with the laws of this country. In one American example, he infers that the Repent America situation in Philadelphia was a case of Christians arrested merely for handing out pamphlets which call homosexuality a sin?

This is a lie that has been refuted time and time again. I cannot believe that it is accidental that Vitagliano, who has access to much information on the matter, continues to lie about this matter.

Another example he lists from this country is the following:

Regina Rederford and fellow city employee Robin Christy posted the announcement after a general e-mail to city employees publicizing the formation of a pro-homosexual employee association. But in a world where one view is promoted and another condemned, Rederford and Christy were told by city officials that the flyer announcing the forum was "homophobic speech" and promoted "sexual-orientation-based harassment," even though homosexuality was never specifically mentioned.

As to be expected, Vitagliano omits several details. Here is the true story. You can link to the other site and read the entire article. I bolded points that I felt were important:

Promoting their Good News Employee Association, the flier urged people to "preserve our workplace with integrity" and said their association "is a forum for people of faith to express their views on contemporary issues of the day with respect for the natural family, marriage and family values."

Another CEDA worker who is a lesbian complained to supervisors that the flier made her feel targeted and excluded; supervisors reviewed the flier and removed it, encouraging Rederford and Christy to revise and repost it.

Rederford and Christy sued, claiming their rights were violated by an Oakland anti discrimination policy that promotes homosexuality and denounces Christian values. A federal judge dismissed the city as a defendant in March 2004, and in February 2005 granted summary judgment in favor of then-City Manager Robert Bobb and CEDA Deputy Executive Director Joyce Hicks. Senior Circuit Judge Betty Fletcher on Thursday asked Lively whether his clients realize they have "a rather low level of protection" on potentially incendiary or discriminatory language in the workplace, and should "keep away from words that'll rile people up."

"But shouldn't that go both ways?" Lively replied, noting his clients hadn't complained about the National Coming Out Day e-mail.

Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta noted that e-mail had invited readers to "a rally against hatred and bigotry -- is that disparaging to your clients?"

Circuit Judge Richard Clifton said he believes "there are eggshells on both sides" of this argument, yet he doesn't see what the e-mail had done to vilify Rederford and Christy while it's not hard to see how their flier vilified gays and lesbians. "It's hard to avoid the inference, 'We lack ethics, we lack integrity because these people are here.'"

So was this a case of women getting into trouble for speaking out against homosexuality?

No. It was not the words but the context of the words that got these two women into trouble.

They had a right to form their group and put a flyer out. But in their choice of words, they attacked the company's gay and lesbian employees. They were told that they could revise the flyer but apparently chose not to.

These women should not be able to encourage a hostile work environment simply because of their Christian beliefs. Sorry, it's not fair.

But even more to the point, how Vitagliano listed this example proves yet again that members of the anti-gay industry will lie and misrepresent to get their agenda served.

Shrek is a radical gay activist!

Sometimes I wonder about the so-called "pro-family" forces.

No matter how much benefit of the doubt I try to give them, some are determined to make themselves look like people obsessed with the lgbt community.

Case in point, this new bit by Fran Eaton of the Illinois Review, and picked up by our friends at Americans for Truth (in name only) :

Shrek's not the problem. It's the awkward inclusion of a transvestite and the uselessness of the character himself (herself?) in the story that is troubling.

Right in the midst of a warm "traditional family" setting, the film writers place a man dressed as a woman in with Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Snow White (the good gals). The crossdressing character simply doesn't make sense, except as a ploy to desensitize children and parents to transgenders.

Homosexual activists now are careful to not only use the term "LGBTs" as a unit, they are more boldly now declaring lesbians-gays-bisexuals-transgenders as a unit pushing together as one for civil rights. Those confused about their sexual roles are pushing for equal rights to be free to publicly demonstrate their odd sexual behavior. For transgenders, appearing to be a different sex in public is their particular turn on. We need to understand that acceptance of this sexual behavior is just another step moving our world toward sexual chaos.

You read it right. She is attacking the movie Shrek 3 for including a "man dressed as a woman" as one of the characters.

Now at first I thought she was talking about the crossdressing Big Bad Wolf, but apparently she was describing one of Cinderella's ugly stepsisters.

I swear I don't know how she missed the Big Bad Wolf.

Anyway, I will ignore her blatant ignorance regarding our transgender brothers and sisters. Eaton's nasty comment is yet another attempt of the anti-gay industry to portray our lives as that of irreverent sexual pursuits.

She does have a "point" about the attempts to "sneak" homosexuality in popular culture. Cases in point:

Batman and Robin - Now this is a no-brainer. I always wondered why Batman made Robin dress in those tight green shorts, short shirt and cute green booties. Doesn't he know it ain't easy fighting crime when you are getting a perpetual wedgie.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs - Snow White was nothing but a big ole "fag hag." Remember, those dwarfs lived together in that cottage in the woods before she showed up. Sounds kinda butch to me.

The Smurfs - Same case as Snow White. And didn't you wonder about that close relationship between Brainy and Clumsy Smurf? In their defense, we know that at least one of the Smurfs was bisexual. A year after Smurfette showed up, Baby Smurf mysteriously appeared.

Huckleberry Finn - Come on now. A big black guy and a little white twink alone on the raft in the middle of the Mississippi River? Now we know the real reason why Huck didn't want to turn Jim in.

Pinocchio - The story of a fairy, an old man who wants a "real boy," and a nose that grows and recedes like a penis. Somebody call Peter LaBarbera!!!!!

Janet Folger distorts yet again: It's getting to be a habit for her

And I thought Harry Jackson was bad.

Unlike Jackson, who is content with exploiting his racial heritage to attack hate crimes legislation, Janet Folger and her group, Faith2Action, has a more sophisticated method attacking the legislation.

Folger takes current events and manipulates them to make it seem that people are being criminalized for merely speaking out against homosexuality. This manipulation involves omitting certain key facts.

Case in point, her new screed that attacks gays and lesbians because a few of us had ugly things to say to commemorate Jerry Falwell's passing. I do not condone what was said, but there is also no excuse for Folger's following deception:

Those kind of hateful statements are perfectly acceptable, free from any repercussions of any kind. They get their own forum at the ACLU. However, if two 16-year-old Crystal Lake girls say an unkind word about homosexuals and pass out a few flyers to their classmates, they are in "violation of an Illinois state hate crime statute." They face felony charges and are locked up in juvenile detention while bail is denied.

But here is the true story:

Two female 16-year-old Crystal Lake South High School students face hate-crime charges after allegedly plastering their high school’s halls and distributing anti-gay fliers directed towards a fellow student in the school’s parking lot.

The actions against their former male friend landed the two girls in juvenile court on May 15, after being arrested by Crystal Lake police on May 11. Both, unnamed due to their ages, also face charges of obstruction of justice and disorderly conduct, and one teen faces an additional charge of resisting a police officer.

McHenry County State’s Attorney Lou Bianchi told Windy City Times that despite arguments being made by many locals about the right to free speech, what the two girls did is clearly a hate crime.

“They had the intent to alarm and disturb another, and they were successful in that,” Bianchi said. “In alarming and disturbing, they also committed a hate crime. Their words ... were directed against a specific individual of a certain sexual orientation.”

Now there have been some disagreement whether or not what these two young ladies allegedly did constitutes a hate crime. Some gay blogs have taken opposing views of the situation.

I am of the opinion that if these two young ladies passed out the flyers in hopes of causing harm to the young man on the perceived notion that he was gay, then it can constitute a hate crime.

But one thing we can all agree on is the fact that Janet Folger distorted the situation.

Apparently in her world, who care about facts when your eyes are on the kingdom of Jesus.

Telling silence

Throughout last week's ado about Paul Cameron, there was a voice missing.

That of Paul Cameron's.

Other than a throw away comment from someone on Think Progress (comment 112), Cameron was conspicuously absent. And I was disappointed.

I was expecting him to make a comment about how the American Psychological Association did not dismiss him for bad research. For years, Cameron had asserted that he resigned from the group before being kicked out.

Of course this is another lie on his part. When Cameron supposedly resigned, he was under investigation and APA bylaws said that members under investigation were not allowed to resign.

Still, this lie gave Cameron a bit of legitimacy on sites like Free Republic when his research was challenged.

Not this time though.

And another telling thing about the situation was that no so-called "pro-family" group went public to defend Cameron.

Many of them, including Americans for Truth (in name only) published the press release announcing his "recent" study earlier this year but in this matter, they were silent.

Supposedly the San Francisco Chronicle unfairly linked Focus on the Family to Cameron's studies but this assertion didn't come from Focus on the Family. It came from Ex Gay Watch and Box Turtle Bulletin; two groups who don't exactly regard Focus on the Family as credible.

As admirable as it was for these groups to defend Focus on the Family, the fact that Dobson's group did not defend itself speaks volumes. Not because of the validity or non-validity of the claim, but because it seems that FOF choose to not get into a situation in which Cameron was involved.

It seems to me that so-called "pro-family" groups are slyly trying to divest themselves from Cameron and his studies.

In the late 80s and early 90s when the internet had not come into fashion, he was useful to them. They could use his work, despite the questions about it. There was very little work done to track Cameron

Now in the era of blogs, they can't get away with uncritically citing Cameron's research. So now, many so-called "pro family" groups are refusing to acknowledge him, pretending that they never used Cameron's work in the first place, and crossing their fingers in hopes that no one ever brings up the time when they did use Cameron's work.

I say we don't give them that luxury. The anti-gay industry house, if you will, is built on foundation of lies and bad studies.

And sooner or later, what happens to a house built on a bad foundation?


Harry Jackson and number four

For the fourth time in as many columns in conservative Townhall, black minister Harry Jackson has chosen to yet again attack adding lgbts to hate crime legislation.

This column in particular attack the recent polls that showed Americans approve of adding lgbts to hate crimes legislation.

I think the fact that in four consecutive columns, Jackson has chosen to attack hate crimes legislation underscores something.

He is trying to find a niche.

Unfortunately a bad side effect courtesy of Bush's re-election is the sideshow of black ministers jockeying for position in the Republican and conservative movement by attacking rights for gays and lesbians.

From Ken Hutcherson to Eddie Long to Harry Jackson, these ministers take it upon themselves to hold press conferences and rallies attacking gays and lesbians while at the same time holding their hands out for more "faith-based" initiative money and ignoring the needs of their lgbt church members.

Jackson's tear on hate crimes legislation is no doubt an attempt to put himself in the number one position.

Let's be real with the situation. Homosexuality in the black community is a divisive subject. And there will probably never be a concensus on the matter, despite the fact that many lgbts of color are present in the black community, including churches.

There needs to be a dialogue in the community about the issue.

But as long as those who are the leaders and who can start the dialogue (i.e. Jackson, Long, Hutcherson, etc.) take it upon themselves to shirk their duties and exploit the issue for maximum media saturation, there will never be any type of solution.

Reiteration of the purpose of my book

Someone from another site asked a very good question about my upcoming book, so I feel the need to reiterate the purpose of Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters.

My book is not out to attack anyone or demonize anyone. I do not criticize Christians or any other people of faith for believing that homosexuality is a sin. It is their God-given right to have such a belief.

Nor is my book a plea for "tolerance." I will not adopt the anti-gay industry's language, especially language that portrays me or any other lgbt as an outsider wanting someone to "accept" us. I don't need anyone's "tolerance" or "acceptance."

My book addresses the tactics of so-called "pro-family" groups in their efforts to hinder the passage of pro-lgbt laws and to portray us as outsiders of the American experience.

My book will cover the following points:

Six Distortion Techniques of the Anti-Gay Industry

1. Using nonrepresentative or out of date studies to make generalizations, or
distorting legitimate studies to give misleading conclusions

2. Repetition

3. Conspiracy Theory

4. Dire Consequences

5. Phony Experts

6. Dehumanizing Semantics

Top Anti-Gay Industry Lies

1. Homosexuality is a lifestyle more harmful than cigarette smoking

2. Gay men have a short life span

3. The gay and lesbian community have a high rate of domestic violence

4. Unhealthy behaviors (i.e. substance abuse, promiscuous sexual behavior) is
indicative of the gay or lesbian orientation.

5. Gay men molest children at a high rate.

6. Gays and lesbians want to silence Christians

7. Gays and lesbians recruit people, particularly children, to their “life style.”

8. Gays and lesbians are following a six-point plan to take over America.

9. Any judge who rules in favor of the gay and lesbian community in a case is
an “activist judge.”

10. Anal sex is “homosexual behavior.”

11. Robert Spitzer’s study confi rms that gays and lesbians can change their
orientation.

12. Gays and lesbians want to force acceptance.

13. Gay bowel syndrome is a legitimate medical term.

14. A man who molests a boy or a woman who molests a girl is automatically homosexual.

15. A convenience sample or out-of-date study can be used to generalize about
an entire community.

For more information about my upcoming book and myself, log on to this link.

Parallel Lies from our friend Peter LaBarbera

In keeping with the steady drumbeat of claiming that legislation protecting lgbts from discrimination would lead to the "attack of the she-males" in our nation's showers and bathrooms comes this tale from our friend Peter LaBarbera and Americans for Truth (in name only) :

The Transg-ENDA Agenda: Man in a Purple Pants Suit Invades the Ladies Room in Md

By Bunny Galladora

The hearing room of the Judicial Committee in Annapolis, Maryland, was overflowing with all sorts of unusual looking people hours before the hearing on a bill to add “sexual orientation” to the list of protected categories was to begin. It would be a very long day. After many people had testified giving their various positions on the issue, the Judicial Committee took a break.

Conrae Fortlage and I left the hearing room to “freshen up” in the ladies’ restroom. When it came time to wash our hands, I finished quickly and waited for Conrae inside the bathroom by the door, a few steps away. Conrae lingered slowly, applying lipstick and fiddling with her hair. She seemed to be staring in the mirror for an unusual amount of time. I paid little attention to the person dressed in a purple ladies pants suit with a white blouse standing next to Conrae — or to Conrae’s behavior which was out of character for her, but instead my thoughts were on the testimony I would be giving soon.

As we left the ladies’ room, the door shutting behind us, Conrae began to tell me that the person standing beside her in the bathroom was actually a man. Conrae said she first noticed that the person was unusually tall for a woman, then, while looking in the mirror, she had focused on his unusually large Adam’s apple — and other features normally found in a male. She noticed that the person was wearing a woman’s wig.

Sounds spooky, don't it.

Well there are a few things about this story that just don't sound right to me.

The alleged incident seems to have taken place in Maryland during a judicial hearing about anti-discrimination protection for gays and lesbians but author, Bunny Galladora, cannot remember the exact year:

Neither Galladora nor Fortlage can recall the year of the incident, but it was between 1999 and 2001, when Maryland’s legislature passed a “sexual orientation” nondiscrimination bill, later signed into law by the state’s Democratic governor, Parris Glendening.

The only thing I can think of is how "very appropriate" for this incident to be recounted during the time in which Congress will be talking about ENDA. Indeed, LaBarbera prefaces the story with the following:

When a society raises gender confusion (men in dresses) and its cousin, homosexuality, to the level of “civil rights,” it’s time to recognize that this nation is in a state of moral decline unheard of in our history.

So did this incident take place? Maybe, but until I see further proof, I will doubt its validity. The story reminds me of tactics done in the past.

Remember when Anita Bryant was attempting to repeal a gay rights ordinance in the 1970s This is what she said:

“homosexuals cannot reproduce—so they must recruit . . . the youth of America.”

Or how about when Paul Cameron was working against a gay rights ordinance in Nebraska in 1982. He told the tale of a four-year-old getting castrated in a bathroom attack by a gay man. When the police investigated and found the story to be false, Cameron said that a "friend" told him the story.

Back then, people did have a fear that gay men would try to harm children. It's safe to say that many Americans are less ignorant about gays and children.

But visibility in the transgender community is relatively new. So telling that story of a man in the lady's room does serve a purpose.

But not a very good one.

Fall out from yesterday's blog on San Francisco Chronicle and Paul Cameron

Yesterday, I wrote about how the San Francisco Chronicle cited Paul Cameron in its article about gay adoption. The article omitted his dubious history of rebukes and censures.

Several blogs, including Americablog, picked up the story.

And today, the error has been corrected:

CLARIFICATION: In an article about San Francisco's campaign to get more gays and lesbians to adopt foster children - as well as an opposing evangelical campaign to get more Christian families to adopt -- the Chronicle quoted Paul Cameron, director of the Family Research Institute. The article should have noted that Cameron, who believes gays make unfit parents and self-published dozens of articles he said were based on his research, was expelled from the American Psychological Association in 1983 when he refused to subject his work to peer review. The article also should have reported that his Family Research Institute was named a hate group in 2006 by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Of course that makes me happy for a number of reasons. The biggest reason is that it establishes the presence of a "watchdog" system of blogs that will spot and expose anti-gay industry distortions.

This is how you win a war; by being assertive.

In that spirit, I want to add more to the story of how Cameron's information can slip through and be thought of as credible. I talk about the following in my book and I know that the Southern Poverty Law Center made mention of it.

The following passage is from my upcoming book:

In July 2005, U.S. Senator Arlen Specter asked that the national Health and Human Services look at a certain web site because it allegedly showed inaccurate information about homosexuality and contraception.

The web site, 4parents.gov, received information from an organization called the National Physicians Center for Family Resources. The chairman of the National Physicians Center for Family Resources board, John Whiffen, said the organization was correct regarding what it had printed about homosexuality.

He said:

“It’s fairly well-accepted that smoking is not a good idea. It takes seven years off of your life. It appears that male homosexuality takes more than that off your life.”—Specter seeks review of teen health site, Washington Blade, July 29, 2005

So why is this significant? Because of this passage:

In May 2005, Cameron announced the completion of another study that supposedly proved that homosexuality is more dangerous than cigarette smoking and being overweight.

What he did was take over 10,000 obituaries from the gay newspaper the Washington Blade and compare them to a CDC report entitled AIDS Cases in Adolescents and Adults, by Age—United States, 1994-2000.

He claimed that this supported his gay life span study. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) said otherwise.

Ronald Valdiserri, deputy director of the CDC’s National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention, said Cameron uses bad methodology.

He also said:

“[The CDC] does not collect statistics on the life span of gay men. While gay men continue to be severely impacted by HIV and AIDS, AIDS-related death data cannot be used to indicate that homosexual men live shorter lives than heterosexual men overall.”

Now is it really fair to claim that Mr. Whiffen and his group received their information from Cameron? His name was not mentioned.

I think that it is fair. It is too much of a coincidence that Cameron would come out with a certain study and Mr. Whiffen just happens to make references to the findings of the study almost two months later.

If Mr. Whiffen and his group was citing Cameron, it would mean that the national Health and Human Services used information by a group that thinks Cameron, despite his infamous history, is legitimate.

That is scary.

New web page spotlighting my book

As I said Friday, I am working on a new web page that will solely spotlight my upcoming book.

The first phase of the site is finished. I invite everyone to log on to read excerpts from my book as well as a full explanation as to why I spent two years of my life on the subject of the anti-gay industry.

And by all means, invite others to look the webpage over:

Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry

Lastly, please don't forget to read my new post below if you haven't already

Odds and Ends:

Paul Cameron just won't go away

Our friend Paul Cameron was cited in an article today:

Focus on the Family's objection to same-sex parents is grounded in interpretation of biblical scripture and research by Paul Cameron, director of the Family Research Institute in Colorado. Cameron says gays and lesbians are unfit parents, are more likely to molest children of their same sex, switch partners frequently, have shorter life expectancies and cause their children embarrassment and social difficulties.

"Any child that can be adopted into a married-mother-and-father family, that's the gold standard," Cameron said. "An orphanage would be the second choice, and then a single woman."

I liked the fact that the article, dealing with more lgbts in San Francisco adopting children, linked Cameron with Focus on the Family. Unlike our friend Peter LaBarbera and groups like Concerned Women for America, FOF is usually very subtle as to how they cite Cameron.

But I did not like that the article gave no background on Cameron's infamous history of rebukes and censures for his bad methodology.

I sent the article's author an email and she sent me back a very polite reply. I don't think I made myself clear though. My problem was not her citing Cameron but omitting his negative history.

At any rate, the article is still an excellent read. Even though the author omitted Cameron's dubious history, she did include the personal stories of lgbts and their adopted children.

Despite what folks like to claim about us, lgbts have a tremendous commitment to the ideas of family and I commend those who take the responsibility of guiding the next generation.


Traditional Values Coalition's Ugly Desperation

Sometimes if you give your enemies enough rope, they tend to hang themselves.

Exhibit A of that point: The Traditional Values Coalition

In their zeal to defeat hate crimes legislation, the organization was not only caught lying about a Congressman's testimony but took the extra hysterical step of putting the image of Jesus on a wanted poster, claiming that He would be arrested under hate crimes legislation.

Now they have outdone themselves.

In attempting to defeat ENDA, TVC has lost its damned mind:

The Barney Frank She-Male Shower bill (Employment Non-Discrimination Act, ENDA [H.R. 2015] is to be debated soon in Congress.

“Homosexual Barney Frank’s bill will be devastating to businesses, day care centers, and even religious bookstores,” said TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty. “It will force employers with 15 or more employees to accommodate heterosexual cross-dressers, homosexual drag queens, transsexuals and even she-males – individuals who go through only half of a so-called ‘sex change’ operation.”

ENDA will require businesses to accommodate the wishes of these individuals to restroom facilities and even shower facilities – for example in large corporations or production plants.

A she-male? I don't think that term is appropriate for our transsexual brothers and sisters. How does having a personal belief that homosexuality is a sin translate to lying and intentionally using derogatory language to scare people? Perhaps someone can tell me that.

But don't get too outraged because it gets better. The following comic appeared on its web page today. It just defies description. Click on it to see a larger image.

I swear I am speechless. And these people are supposed to be Christians?

Harry Jackson just won't quite, even though some folks want him to

Harry Jackson, that lovely black pastor who is trying to exploit the lgbt community for his own purposes, seem to be getting a degree of backlash.

In Townhall.com, a conservative site, he has written yet a third column attacking hate crimes legislation.

I've been through it before with his lies, so I will not try to refute them this time. But I noticed something highly interesting regarding his comments.

If Jackson thinks he is preaching to the choir, he is sadly mistaken. He is being taken to the carpet by some readers of the site, being called everything from a liar to a race-baiter:

For those who want to defend Rev. Harry, here you go. Take a look at the paragraph on Jackson's findings that African Americans have “innate promiscuity”. How about his race baiting statement that “African Americans are spiritually superior to white Christians, in that their faith is more "integrated" into their everyday life.” Talk about racist. If Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would have said this, conservatives would have led a lynch mob toward Chicago and New York. Race Baiters come in all colors and political persuasions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hate to burst your bubble Reverend, but you like all the other Reverends before you have been imploring the Black Community to cease and desist from crime especially black on black crime and WHAT? Has it ceased? will they desist? it continues unabated with a myriad of excuses as to why it exist in the first place.The simple answer is Black folks behaving badly, we continue to do it-and I know somewhere there is supposedly some white man somewhere to blame for it, it's our only explanation after four hundred years, or maybe it's five hundred years, no six, it depends on which race baiter you talk too-pick one. "God forbid" religous Black Homosexuals and Lesbians get caught marching in support of this Bill in the "Hood" without police escort, and even with a police escort things could get dicey.

It probably doesn't mean anything but who cares! It's fun to watch!

Phase two of editing almost done

In all of the chaos about hate crimes legislation, ENDA, and Falwell's death, I almost forgot to give updates about the original reason this blog was created: my book.

I am sending the new batch of galley edits to the publisher Monday morning. It has taken me so long because this is the last round of editing and I want to make sure everything is perfect or at least close to perfect.

This means not only editing my galleys for grammatical errors but also checking my sources and information yet again.

It's a very meticulous process.

Also, I am developing a new web page. When this blog began in September, I originally wanted it to focus on the progress of my book. Since that time and over 7500 hits later, it has branched out into something more. I am proud of this blog.

While I continue to post here, my new webpage will focus solely on my book, including excerpts and an explanation as to why my book is vital to the lgbt community.

I will keep you posted on this. Until then, please keep reading and supporting me.

Jerry Falwell's legacy? Just ask Paul Cameron or Peter LaBarbera

Today, a friend at my job asked me a pointed but rude question:

"Are you gays happy that Jerry Falwell died?"

I told him of course not but his question gave me pause.

Not because of some of us who are popping the champagne over news of Falwell's death. Unfortunately some of us have chosen not to take the high road in this matter. It's an unfortunate happening but not indicative of the entire lgbt community.

His question gave me pause because it made me think about Falwell's true legacy. We have been inudated by columns and soundbites calling Falwell everything from a good Christian to a demagogue. And in the coming days, we all will continue have to hear how Falwell changed America for either better or worse.

Yesterday, I posted a quote from the Bible that said we should love our enemies and pray for those who use us in a negative fashion. I mean this with all of my heart. But I also don't believe that telling the truth about a deceased person is the same as dancing on his grave.

Jerry Falwell was a bully, plain and simple.

He was a pompous, self-righteous egomaniac who used religious doctrine as an excuse and a bully pulpit to beat up on a group of people whom he knew did not have the sufficient power to fight him back.

Anyone wanting to see Falwell's true legacy should read the following:

Why Should Homosexuals Have Super Rights?
By Dr. Paul Cameron, Chairman of the Family Research Institute

Is it fair, is it just to give those who live parasitic lives 'Super Rights?' After all, it is the duty of every member of society to contribute to the commonweal. Yet the empirical evidence indicates that those who engage in homosexuality 1) contribute less and cost more in goods and services, 2) disproportionately disrupt social functioning, and 3) have few children while being more apt to harm them. Thus, homosexuals not only fail to 'pay for their keep,' but by their negative influence on children, cloud society's future. . .

Falwell made it acceptable to tell lies and demonize the lgbt community, but with the incorrect self assurance that somehow God approves. His need to dehumanize the lgbt community gave birth to a progeny of liars (i.e. Paul Cameron, Robert Knight, James Dobson, Peter LaBarbera, Lou Sheldon) who will continue to taint Christianity with an "ends justify the means" mentality.

And if you ask me, that's a pretty shitty legacy for any minister to have.

It is the legacy you won't hear about at Liberty University, CNN, MSNBC, and especially not on FOX News.

So to those who are complaining that too much attention is on Falwell's opposition to homosexuality, I say the opposite; not enough attention has been given to it.

Jerry Falwell passes

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. evangelist Jerry Falwell, a leader of the religious right who battled in the political arena against abortion and homosexuality, died on Tuesday at age 73.
Falwell, who founded the Moral Majority as a conservative political force in 1979, was found unconscious in his office at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia, and was taken to a nearby hospital. He had a history of congestive heart problems.

Falwell had no heartbeat when he was found by colleagues at around 11:30 a.m., Dr. Carl Moore, his personal physician, said. He could not be resuscitated and was pronounced dead just over an hour later, Moore told a news conference.

Falwell was one of the most prominent figures in the religious right, a powerful movement that seeks to redraw public policy in the United States along evangelical Christian lines.

Fond of quipping that the Bible referred to "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve", Falwell provoked a storm of protest when he said gays, lesbians and health workers who provide abortions were partly to blame for the September 11 attacks.

"I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians ... all of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the finger in their face and say: you helped this happen," he said.

For decades, Falwell had been an influential conservative voice in politics.

Falwell founded the Thomas Road Baptist Church in his hometown of Lynchburg in 1956. He went on to found Liberty University in 1971 -- a conservative centre of higher learning -- and in 1979 started the Moral Majority organization, which became a major vehicle for getting out the vote for the Republican Party.

He disbanded the Moral Majority in 1989 but it was resurrected as The Moral Majority Coalition, with an explicit political purpose, after President George W. Bush's re-election in 2004.

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; - Matthew, 5:44

Enough said.

Monday venting

Geez I hate this fricking book.

There I said it.

Don't get me wrong because everything is still going according to plan. I am in the middle of my final editing before sending it back to the publisher. I told myself that I would be extremely brutal with my editing this time and I was.

So in short, I am tired. I work a 7.5 hour day and then come home, post on my blog and finally edit my book. This routine tends to get on one's nerves after while.

So pardon me for venting. My book will out this fall therefor despite my cantankerous mood, I am excited over it.

Meanwhile,

A girl and her grandparents have sued the Chicago Board of Education, alleging that a substitute teacher showed the R-rated film "Brokeback Mountain" in class.

The lawsuit claims that Jessica Turner, 12, suffered psychological distress after viewing the movie in her 8th grade class at Ashburn Community Elementary School last year.

The film, which won three Oscars, depicts two cowboys who conceal their homosexual affair.
Turner and her grandparents, Kenneth and LaVerne Richardson, are seeking around $500,000 in damages.

"It is very important to me that my children not be exposed to this," said Kenneth Richardson, Turner's guardian. "The teacher knew she was not supposed to do this."

My first impression is that barring the fact that this was not yet another anti-gay industry phony morale panic (i.e. Repent America and David Parker) it was absolutely stupid for that substitute teacher to do this. The lawsuit is frivilous but showing that film to minors was still a dumb thing to do.

My second impression was damn, did it have to be a gay-themed movie. Because it is a gay themed movie, every Tom, Dick and Peter will be coming out of the woodwork trying to link the teacher's bad judgement with gay/straight alliances and other legitimate attempts to help lgbt students.

At the very least, gay people will have to deal with comments like:

I saw Brokeback Mountain in the theater because I had to. It is a highly effective propaganda film well-suited to exploit today’s widespread confusion over “sexual orientation” and “same-sex love.” The film is about two male cowboys who “fall in love,” and features a sudden sodomitic encounter in a tent that is, well, let’s just say, biological and medical fantasy. The film, of course, seeks to advance the fiction that “gay” romantic love is just like the normal variety except with different genders. But that ignores, for one thing, the terrible damage that sodomy (i.e., anal sex) exacts on the body. That’s why many male initiates into homosexual sex get high on drugs or alcohol first — to dull the pain (and the shame) of this unnatural and sinful behavior.

Please note that Peter didn't say what heterosexuals do when they have anal sex. I doubt he will be giving us any information regarding that anytime soon.

Lastly,

Jim Burroway of Box Turtle Bulletin has written an excellent expose on our friend Paul Cameron. It should be required viewing for all of us who want to expose anti-gay industry lies.

Attack on First Amendment Liberties? I don't think so

Following the same pattern of lies they have been engaging in, members of the anti-gay industry is trying to frame ENDA, the law that would protect lgbts from discrimination, as a piece of disciminatory legislation:

Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA), warned, “This bill would force Christian, Jewish or Muslim business owners to hire people who openly choose to engage in homosexual or cross-dressing behaviors despite a sincerely held religious belief that those behaviors are dangerous, sinful and not in keeping with basic morality.

So exemptions for religious institutions is not enough for these groups. They are trying to break it down to the fact that business owners who have a personal aversion to homosexuality should be able to discriminate?

Sorry that just doesn't make sense.

What's the next step? Christian business owners with a "sincerely held religious belief" against Islam or Judaism should discriminate? And that crack about "behavior" won't help Barber's argument. Defining homosexuality by what one does rather than who one is actually hurts Barber's argument. After all, people choose to follow a particular religion. Should they be discriminated against because of it?

I think that Barber's poor argument for allowing discrimination against lgbts underscores just who we are dealing with here. Barber's group, Concerned Women for America, and other so-called pro-family groups aren't interested in fairness or any values that don't embrace their world view of things.

They have a right to believe that homosexuality is a sin but the way they go about trying to justify ways to codify their beliefs into public policy just goes to prove how un-Christian they are.

The next argument Barber brings up further insinuates my point:

For instance, female employees would have to endure both systematic sexual harassment and a hostile work environment by being forced to share bathroom facilities with male employees who get their jollies from wearing a dress, high heels and lipstick.

Barber's claim is a prime of example of anti-gay industry technique number five as outlined in my upcoming book - dire consequences, or predicting that pro-gay laws will cause all sorts of mayhem to take place. Barber offers no proof of his predictions because he is relying on the ignorance and fear that many have of the transgender community to quantify his lies.

The fact of the matter is that I really don't think that Matt Barber actually believes what he writes. I think he believes that homosexuality is a sin and therefore any technique or claim that keeps lgbts from being more protected and visible is permissible.

In other words, I think that Barber is looking at what he is doing as the job of a political operative trying to win an election.

Now for a political operative attempting to win an election, Barber's techniques are tolerable; awful, shameful, but tolerable. Politics is a world of compromises where sometimes the ends do have to justify the means.

But for a man such as Matt Barber and a group (i.e. Concerned Women for America) who puts themselves on a pedestal as being pro-family and the purveyors of morality, if the means are not pure then the ends cannot be pure. God does not like ugly, even if it is done in his name.

Using evasive claims about "sincerely held religious beliefs" and horror stories of abnormal crossdressers is yet another hole in Barber's and Concerned Women for America's careful built wall of integrity.

They obviously did not learn anything during their unsuccessful fight to keep the House from passing hate crimes legislation. How long will they continue to dig their well of lies before they fall in?

Framing the argument

An important part of winning an argument is the ability to frame the argument. Sometimes speed is of the essence.

That is how the anti-gay industry has beaten us time and time again.

With that in mind, I turn to an old canard; Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth (in name only):

Fast on the heels of the “Hate Crimes” bill (H.R. 1597, recently passed by the House) is the second of two top homosexual activist priorities: ENDA, the “Employment Nondiscrimination Act,” H.R. 2015, recently introduced by homosexual Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). Please read at the bottom of this story the homosexual newspaper Washington Blade’s analysis of the ”transgender” provision of this radical bill.

. . .Several giant corporations have already settled on pro-”transgender” bathroom and dress policies — probably the same companies who would subject their employees to biased, pro-homosexual “diversity” lectures – but can you imagine inflicting these “transgender” regulations on small and mid-level companies through federal law via ENDA?

This is one of the most perverse applications of “civil rights” to date – and it’s headed straight for your business if you have 15 or more employees. What female employee wants to share the company restroom with a big-boned man claiming to be “transitioning” to “womanhood”? Will companies have to build “transgender male” and “transgender female” restrooms (or “Designated GLBT Restrooms”) to accommodate the various “orientations” and avoid government prosecution?

So according to Peter, lgbts should not have protection from job discrimination because a "big-boned" man who is transitioning into a woman would have to share a bathroom with other women.

Or as his colleague Matt Barber said:

Imagine, if you will, a 280 lb linebacker who likes to wear a dress and high heels and lipstick, you know comes to church wanting a job at the front desk as a receptionist and they turn him away because they don’t feel that that represents their values or the image that they’re trying to hold at that church, under ENDA they could be held accountable for discrimination against that individual.

Comments like these are not funny, especially if they are coming in a huge amount by constituents to their area Congressmen as reasons why the said Congressman should vote against pro-gay laws.

Before our eyes, the anti-gay industry is forging an ugly argument against ENDA. No matter how untrue it is, I am willing to bet that by this time Monday, almost every so-called pro-family web page, blog, etc. will be repeating the transsexual fear stories.

And these people will encourage others to spread these lies around, as well as call their Congressmen repeating these lies.

ENDA is not about transsexual men using the ladies room. For a Christian to say this knowing fully well that he or she is appealing to fear and ignorance is a sin. ENDA is about ensuring that lgbts are able to enjoy the protections and freedoms that this country affords every citizen in pursuit of doing their jobs.

Other distortions the anti-gay industry repeat are:
.
ENDA will cause gay quotas

The boy scouts and religious groups will be forced to hire gays and lesbians

We need to get on the ball and stop these lies before they start. These are the provisions of ENDA:

This Act shall not apply to any of the employment practices of a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society which has as its primary purpose religious ritual or worship or the teaching or spreading of religious doctrine or belief.

this Act shall not apply with respect to the employment of individuals whose primary duties consist of teaching or spreading religious doctrine or belief, religious governance, supervision of a religious order, supervision of persons teaching or spreading religious doctrine or belief, or supervision or participation in religious ritual or worship.

Under this Act, a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society may require that applicants for, and employees in, similar positions conform to those religious tenets that such corporation, association, institution, or society declares significant.

In this Act, the term `employment' does not apply to the relationship between the United States and members of the Armed Forces.

This title does not repeal or modify any Federal, State, territorial, or local law creating a special right or preference concerning employment for a veteran.

And just who would be prosecuted in Janet Folger's version of a perfect world?

Janet Folger is going all out against the recent hate crimes legislation that passed through the House of Representatives. Even after losing that fight, she is bringing her hysteria to the Senate fight:

Janet Folger of the ministry Faith 2 Action says the hate crimes bill passed by the House is aimed at pastors or anyone else who has the "audacity" to disagree with the homosexual agenda. "Mike is standing at a football bar, or he's standing at a restaurant, watching a game," she posits; "Bruce comes out of the restroom, and he's touching up his makeup. He's a cross-dresser with red-nail polish and a five o'clock shadow. He comes out and hits on Mike. Maybe he puts his arm around him or maybe he brushes or puts his hand through his hair."

The average man would "maybe want to push off such unwelcome advances," Folger observes. However, she warns, "That, if you touch him, is a hate crime.

I think it's safe to assume that girlfriend has lost her damned mind.

But let's look at Ms. Folger for a second. She is so intent on stopping what she sees as Christian persecution, that I have to wonder just how she feels about other forms of persecution under the law.

In 1998, Folger voiced her opinion on the now defunct sodomy laws:

Forrest Sawyer, substituting as host of ABC's Nightline on July 30, moderated a debate between Andrew Sullivan, editor the New Republic and Center for Reclaiming America Director Janet Folger, who engineered the ad campaign. Sullivan asked repeatedly whether Folger supports laws allowing imprisonment for having sex with someone of the same gender. After Folger gave several non-responsive answers, Sawyer pressed, "Ms. Folger, forgive me. He is asking the direct question, 'Do you support laws that advocate the imprisonment of people who engage in homosexual behavior?'" Folger answered, "I guess if you're looking at sodomy laws, there are sodomy laws on the books that I very much support."

In other words, while Folger now feels that hate crimes legislation will lead to Christians being unfairly jailed for voicing their opinions, she obviously felt that it was not a problem for gays and lesbians to be jailed for private sexual behavior that heterosexuals also partake of.

Now there are those who would correctly say that her comments about sodomy laws were over 10 years ago and that her opinion could have changed.

As far as I know, Folger has not said whether or not she feels the same way.

I personally think that someone should ask her.

More lies about ENDA courtesy of Janet Folger

Janet Folger must be trying to win a special award for distortions. Case in point, her take on the recent controversy that Republican presidential candidate Tommy Thompson caused during a recent debate:

Then Thompson had a right answer for the loaded question about the freedom of conscience – at first. Asked if a private employer should be able to fire a homosexual because of their homosexual behavior, Thompson said yes; however, the next day on CNN, he retracted it . . .

Folger distorted the question given to Thompson. This is what was actually said:

Thompson was asked by the moderator: “If a private employer finds homosexuality immoral, should he be allowed to fire a gay worker?”

Therein lies the distortion. No one asked Thompson about behavior. He was asked about orientation.

Janet Folger is lying again. It is starting to become a common occurrence for her.

She is slyly inferring that ENDA will deal with sexual behavior rather than sexual orientation. The two are not the same:

I am gay - that is a sexual orientation.

I am typing this blog - I am engaging in any type of sexual behavior, be it gay or straight.

Phrasing the discussion over ENDA as one of sexual behavior rather than orientation seems to be the game plan the anti-gay industry wants to follow. It is an old one for them.

The following transcript of Robert Knight (formerly of Concerned Women for America) sparring with commentator Bill O’Reilly on The O’Reilly Factor is an example of this. This transcript is included in my upcoming book:

O’REILLY: Let me stop you there. Hold it. If a guy’s in a workplace [and] he gets fired because the boss doesn’t like gays, you think that should be legally allowed?

KNIGHT: I don’t think that’s what’s happening in the workplace. People are more likely to be hired [because they’re gay].

O’REILLY: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. I just asked you a very direct question.

KNIGHT: Do you have any evidence of [people who were fi red for being homosexual]?

O’REILLY: I don’t have any evidence. It’s a hypothetical. If a boss fires somebody because [he’s] gay, should that be allowed?

KNIGHT: Well it depends on what brought that to his attention. If he brought gay pornography into the office.

Knight's words (and Folger's for that matter) show the psychological game the anti-gay industry tries to play on us when it comes to our jobs.

They seem to be saying "gays wouldn't have a problem with being fired for their orientation if they would just shut up about it."

It's a cruel point of view that not only exploits stereotypes but also tells lgbts to put themselves on a different standard than straight employees. While heterosexuals freely talk about their lives and the progression of their families, we are supposed to shut up and isolate ourselves in a bubble.

Two years ago at my job, my boyfriend sent me a dozen roses to commemorate Valentine's Day. When my co-workers asked about them, was I supposed to lie? Too bad because I didn't. If they didn't want to know who sent me the roses, they should have not asked.

A young lady who worked in my building received roses from her boyfriend. She was upfront as to who sent them to her. She didn't have to lie. Why should I?

Across America, many gay couples are raising children. Why shouldn't they be able to put pictures of families on their desks? And even if they don't have children, why shouldn't gay couples be able to put pictures of their significant other on their desks? Heterosexuals have that right and so should we.

See these are the things we are speaking of when we express the need for ENDA, not lies like the following voiced by Concerned Women for America member Matt Barber:

Imagine, if you will, a 280 lb linebacker who likes to wear a dress and high heels and lipstick, you know comes to church wanting a job at the front desk as a receptionist and they turn him away because they don’t feel that that represents their values or the image that they’re trying to hold at that church, under ENDA they could be held accountable for discrimination against that individual

It is one thing for the anti-gay industry to believe that gays have no concept of family or monogamy but it is an entirely different thing for them to try to force that image on us.

We should reject that mental prison every chance we get.

The Emperor Continues to Wear No Clothes

Fresh from last week's battle over hate crimes legislation, the anti-gay industry continues to lie about the bill. Apparently they are determined to claim that the bill will try to hinder Christians from preaching against homosexuality no matter how many times their lies have been refuted.

Chief among them is African-American minister Harry Jackson. Jackson, if you remember from last week, led a group of black ministers in a press conference opposing the bill.

What it amounted to is a group of black folks willing to exploit their status as past victims of discrimination for some face time.

Today, a column by Jackson appeared in the Christian Post. It's the usual amount of claptrap and lies he pushed last week.

However, in the midst of his nonsense, he said something that makes sense of a surreal level:

A growing number of black church goers are aghast that their most powerful institution is being undermined by a handful of autonomous, self-appointed leaders. The black church is the most legitimate grass roots movement in our community. Unfortunately, its voice has not been heard in this debate.

Mr. Jackson, if the black church's voice is not heard in this debate it is only because it has allowed itself to be silent. Too many black churches focus on tithing and minsterial hooping disguised as praise.

That's right. I said it. Too many black churches have members content on dancing in the aisles and shouting about how much they are "praising God" while the problems affecting our community continue unabated.

Fresh from praising and paying their ten percent, some of church members go home and cheat on their husbands, beat their wives, and take drugs.

While other members play an emotional game with themselves because they have been programmed not to embrace their God given gay or lesbian orientation.

Then come next Sunday, they get to do it over again.

Meanwhile, black ministers like yourself get fat on faith based initiatives and move to the front of the arena hogging up media attention.

If the black church is aghast, as you put it, by autonomous self-appointed leaders, then it should take more of an effort to push those self-appointed leaders like yourself aside and start focusing on the issues that affect our community.

Heads up on ENDA

Don't forget to contact your U.S. Senator about hate crimes legislation. The battle is not over yet.

Meanwhile, the anti-gay industry is gearing up to fight ENDA.

I am personally looking forward to this fight more than that of hate crimes legislation.

In fighting hate crimes legislation, the anti-gay industry had somewhat of a ground to stand on, albeit shaky ground.

With ENDA, they don't.

This is what they are claiming about ENDA:

ENDA loosely defines "sexual orientation" as "homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality," and also includes "gender identity," defined as "the gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth."

For those who don't recognize this argument, it is a continuation of the ones they used against hate crimes legislation.

They seem to have replaced the hate crimes legislation will allow these nasty things to be protected line of argument to the ENDA will allow these nasty things to be protected line of argument.

Talk about lack of originality but fear tactics rarely do involve originality.

I am surprised they are not using this argument seen here.

As you can see, this argument has holes so big you can ride a truck through them, including the distortion of Robert Spitzer's study on sexual orienation (why do they always use that one.)

I wonder if Concerned Women for America and the rest of the anti-gay industry will focus on the scale down argument or use that larger one. Either way, it wouldn't surprise me.

Flyer Number 2 - The anti-gay industry and Paul Cameron

Enough said

My flyers - a work in progress

While posting on the hate crimes legislation vote, I have also been working very hard to complete the editing of my book.

And I have been working on advertising flyers.

The flyer to the left is the first of four. It is a work in progress that you can click on to see a larger version of. Tell me what you think.

Also, don't leave without reading my take on today's hate crimes legislation vote if you haven't already.

Relatively pleased about today's vote

By a vote of 237-180, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the bill adding lgbts to categories of protected classes under national hate crimes legislation.

President Bush has threatened to veto this bill.

I am very happy about the first situation and not at all displeased (nor rather shocked) by the second situation.

Let's be real: The only reason why so many opposed this legislation was because lgbts were included. That is the single reason for all of the controversy, opposition, and lies.

The anti-gay industry believes that anything that positvely affects gays and lesbians is something they should oppose, whether it be hate crimes legislation or gay/straight clubs in high schools.

Unfortunately there is a large group of people willing to blindly believe their accusations or pass along their lies.

This is witnessed through the flurry of last minute calls to legislative offices by people claiming that this legislation will curtail free speech, even though this notion was not true.

And let's not forget our "commander guy-in chief."

George Bush is a piss poor president who got us into a bad situation in Iraq. His approval rating is low and his administration is rife with scandal from the Attorney General to his adviser Karl Rove.

He has no choice in the matter but to act in a way that will appeal to his base.

But please note that in his statement threatening to veto the legislation, he did not mention any accusation regarding free speech, jailing pastors, weird sexual hang-ups; several things that the anti-gay industry trumpeted as an excuse to oppose hate crimes legislation.

Nor did their lies make any dent with the Congressional support that the legislation had, which means that all James Dobson, Lou Sheldon, Andrea Lafferty and company succeed in doing was to demonstrate how much they are willing to lie.

To paraphrase a character in the movie Anne of A Thousand Days, just how long can they use the "nasty, filthy, diseased homosexual" excuse before it comes a habit for them?

And seeing that their lies and hysterical attempts to stop hate crimes legislation played out to a larger audience this time, how long will it be before Americans see them as the hysterical fear mongerers that they are?

So I look at what happened today as a pivotal victory in a huge war and I would ask that those wanting lgbt equality not to get upset or frustrated at the threat of a Bush veto.

I read various anti-gay industry press releases congratulating and thanking Bush on his threat to veto the hate crimes bill. I think they are too quickly celebrating.

If Bush does veto this bill, they have won a Pyrrhic victory, that is if they want to call it a victory at all.

I say we work to give them more of these "victories."

Let's not stop pushing for what is ours.

On to the Senate hate crimes legislation and then to ENDA!

Hate Crimes Legislation Distortion Awards

Tomorrow will be a historic vote in the House of Representatives about adding lgbts to hate crimes legislation.

I thought that I would take time out to honor those who went far and beyond the call of duty to distort the law. I want to do this today because I may not be in a celebratory mood tomorrow.

How the anti-gay industry behaved in their zeal to defeat hate crimes legislation is not new on their part. During the 1993 hearings on gays in the military, they stooped to scaring people with Paul Cameronesque lies about gay and lesbian sexual habits.

This time, however, things were different.

Because of blogs, every lie they told was dissected and refuted. So lgbts can take comfort in the fact, regardless of how tomorrow's vote may turn out, that more Americans have seen the anti-gay industry for what they truly are and not the upstanding Christians they have claimed to be.

Now, onto the awards:

Except for in a few cases, I have already documented these lies in past blog postings so I don't feel the need to reference all of them. However, if anyone wants me to link any information I have to its original source, just ask.

Best exploitation of a religious image - The Traditional Values Coalition for their flyer featuring an image of Jesus. According to this flyer, Jesus would be prosecuted for "hate crimes" if lgbts are added to the categories protected under the legislation. The organization claimed this even though the legislation explicitly speaks against violent actions, not speech and Jesus never said a word about homosexuality.

Best lie told about hate crimes legislation - The Tradtional Values Coalition for their distortion of Congressman Louis Gohmert's question during the House Judicial Hearing last week.

As I chronicled in yesterday's post, Lou Sheldon sent out an action alert claiming that the legislation could cause pastors to get arrested if the said pastor preached against homosexuality and a member of his congregation went out and committed a crime against an lgbt.

This is what Sheldon said in his action alert:

Congressman (Louis) Gohmert asked, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”

This is the actual quote that Sheldon distorted:

". . .if a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation goes out and does an act of violence, and that person says that that minister counseled or induced him through the sermon to commit that act, are you saying under your amendment that in no way could that ever be introduced against the minister"

Special sell-out award - Ministers Harold Jackson and the other black ministers who held a press conference opposing the legislation. They claimed that the legislation would lead to pastors not being able to preach against homosexuality.

This is a lie. The legislation covers violent action, not speech.

Let me be clear on the fact that Jackson and company did not get this award because they oppose hate crimes legislation. They were chosen because they used the same fear tactics that white racists used to deny African-Americans their rights under law. Just like white racists made wild claims against integration, Jackson and company made wild claims against the hate crimes legislation. What's more, my cynicism tells me that Jackson and company were fully aware that what they were saying were lies:

White racists - we can't integrate because it will lead to mixing of the races. Black men will have sex with white women and that will lead to mongrelization. Both races will suffer.

Harold Jackson and the black ministers - We can't add lgbts to hate crimes legislation because it will lead to pastors not being able to preach against homosexuality.

If there is any difference in these claims, someone please let me know.

Best exploitation of current events/i.e. tragedies to stop hate crimes legislation
- Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and Matt Barber of the Concerned Women for America. Both of these folks tried to link the tragedy at Virginia Tech to their view of hate crimes legislation.

Tony Perkins - "Under this legislation, the crimes at Virginia Tech, which some are calling one of the deadliest rampages in U.S. history, would not be punishable to the level of these so-called "hate crimes." If the House approves H.R. 1592 and the Senate follows, a homosexual would have more federal protection under the law than the 32 victims of last week's massacre."

Matt Barber - "The FBI's latest statistics show that there were zero 'hate crimes' murders committed against homosexuals or those perceived to be homosexual in 2005; yet we already know of thirty-two so-called 'hate crimes' murders committed against perceived 'rich kids' in a single day. But under H.R. 1592, those 'rich kids' would shamefully be denied the same protections and justice as homosexuals. The whole 'hate crimes' concept really places logic and reason on its head"

Best distortion of the name of the hate crimes legislation- Tie - The Traditional Values Coalition - Cross Dressing Bill or Drag Queen Bill

Janet Folger and Faith2Action - Jail Grandma Bill

The Sexy Award - the attempt by the American Family Association to link hate crimes legislation to all sorts of freaky sexy behavior. It was a matter of time before someone got nasty:

Donald E. WildmonFounder and Chairman

May 1, 2007

Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire email list of family and friends.

A message from Chuck Colson

Dear XXX,

Please take the time to read the enclosed article by Chuck Colson. Click here.

This law does not define "sexual orientation," leaving open the definition of the term. To see all the behaviors covered by the term "sexual orientation," please click here. Warning! This listing is offensive.

There is still time to make your voice heard. Please call your representative in Washington today. The vote is scheduled for this Thursday. Tell him or her that you strongly oppose the Hate Crimes Act. Mr. Colson rightly refers to it as the Thought Control bill.

You can reach your representative at 202-224-3121. Please ask your friends to call also.
Thank you for caring enough to get involved.

Sincerely,
Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and ChairmanAmerican Family Association

Y'all can click if you want to but I wouldn't recommend it. Where in the hell did they find this stuff?

Donald Wildmon, Chuck Colson - you both need Jesus!

The obedient sheep award - To all of the so-called "pro-family" web pages and blogs who repeated anti-gay industry lies (especially Sheldon's distortion of the Congressman's quote) verbatim without reading the legislation in question.

The "you are a hypocrite and you know it but most of all, God knows it" award - To all of the web pages and blogs who repeated anti-gay industry lies about hate crimes legislation even after reading the actual legislation. You know who you are and most of all, God knows it.

For those of you who want success tomorrow in getting hate crimes legislation passed, don't forget to contact your legislators and inform them that people calling in against the legislation are being misled. And tell them to vote for the legislation because it the only fair thing to do:

The Hate Crimes Prevention Act

Hate is neither a Democratic nor an American Value. Hate crimes involve the purposeful selection of victims for violence and intimidation based on bias against their perceived attributes. These crimes are distinguished from, and go far beyond, mere expression of belief. They materially and unacceptably interfere with the full participation of all Americans in the fundamental liberties enjoyed in our democratic society.

As Americans, we must take a strong stand against violence committed against our neighbors for simply being themselves. The purpose of our government, first and foremost, is to protect all of our citizens - whether they are black, disabled, Christian or gay. While a random act of violence against any individual is always a tragic event, violent crimes based on prejudice have a much stronger impact because the motive behind the crime is to terrorize an entire community. These hate crimes chip away at the very foundations of our democracy - that all citizens are created equal and are afforded the same freedoms and protections. House Passage of HR 1592 will send the powerful message that the Democratic Party stands for tolerance and inclusion, and is opposed to prejudice in all its forms.

Why the Law Is Needed. There's a reason why the bill has been supported by 31 state Attorneys General and the leading law enforcement organizations - because, despite progress toward equality in almost all segments of our society - hate crimes continue to spread fear and violence among entire communities of Americans and law enforcement lack the tools and resources to prevent and prosecute them. In 2003, the FBI announced that there were more than 9,000 reported hate violence victims in the United States - almost 25 victims a day, or approximately one hate crime every hour. Since 1991, the FBI has received reports of more than 113,000 hate crimes.


What the Law Will Do

Protects First Amendment Rights. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act protects the First Amendment rights of the accused by prohibiting the introduction of evidence of association or expression to prove that a crime has been committed, unless it specifically relates to the offense. The legislation does not punish, nor prohibit in any way, name-calling, verbal abuse or expressions of hatred toward any group, even if such statements amount to hate speech. It covers only violent criminal actions. During proceedings on the bill, the Judiciary Committee explicitly noted that nothing in this legislation would prohibit the lawful expression of ones deeply held religious beliefs. To further ensure that there was no ambiguity on this point, an additional amendment offered by Rep. Davis, was adopted by voice vote at markup explicitly stating that conduct protected under the 1st Amendment free expression and free exercise clauses was not subject to prosecution.
Expands Protected Crimes. It is time to bring hate crimes law into the 21st century. The current federal law, enacted nearly 40 years ago, limits federal jurisdiction over hate crimes to incidents directed against individuals on the basis of race, religion, color or national origin - but only when the victim is targeted because he/she is engaged in a federally protected activities, such as voting. The legislation broadens this provision to cover all violent crimes motivated by race, color, religion, or national origin when the defendant causes bodily injury, or attempts to cause bodily injury through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive device.

Extends Existing Protections to More Americans. HR 1592 expands current law to prohibit the same conduct, if such conduct were motivated on the basis of the victim's gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability under a wider range of federal jurisdictional circumstances than federally protected activities. The federal government - through decades of civil rights and criminal law-has a history of combating crimes based on prejudice. HR 1592 merely expands the current law to include groups that have historically been affected by violence. This legislation sends a strong and clear message that hate crimes will not be tolerated and brings more uniformity and fairness to existing law.

Assists Local Law Enforcement. State and local authorities currently prosecute the overwhelming majority of hate crimes and will continue to do so under this legislation. The special attention that these crimes require can stretch local law enforcement officials beyond their capacity. Thus, the major focus of the bill is allowing the Federal government to provide crucial federal resources to state and local agencies to equip local officers with the tools they need to prosecute hate crimes. The legislation also authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to state and local law enforcement agencies that have incurred extraordinary expenses associated with the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes.

Requirements for Federal Prosecution. The bill ensures that the Federal prosecution of hate crimes is limited to cases that implicate the greatest Federal interest and present the greatest need for Federal intervention. Only in specific, limited instances will the Federal government prosecute crimes under this Act. Furthermore, the bill requires certification, by the Attorney General or other specified high-ranking Department of Justice official, prior to prosecution. The certifying individual must have ''reasonable cause to believe that the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person was a motivating factor underlying the alleged conduct of the defendant.'' The certifying individual must also have consulted with State or local law enforcement officials regarding the prosecution and determined that one of the following situations is present:
(1) the state does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to exercise jurisdiction;
(2) the state has requested that the Justice Department assume jurisdiction;
(3) the state does not object to the Justice Department assuming jurisdiction; or
(4) the state has completed prosecution and the Justice Department wants to initiate a
Broadens the Collection of Important Statistics. HR 1592 would amend the HCSA to require that the FBI collect statistics on gender and gender identity-related bias crimes, as well as juvenile victims and offenders. Under current law, such statistics are collected on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and disability.


Supporters of the bill

The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act has broad public and bipartisan support. The Act was introduced on March 20, 2007, by Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Mark Steven Kirk (R-IL), Barney Frank (D-MA), Christopher Shays (R-CN), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), and Mary Bono (R-CA), with 137 cosponsors. Earlier versions of the bill have passed both houses of Congress in recent years, only to fall victim to partisan politics.

In fact, the Bill is supported by thirty one state Attorneys General and over 280 national law enforcement, professional, education, civil rights, religious, and civic organizations. Such notable associations and individuals who support the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act include: National Sheriffs' Association; International Association of Chiefs of Police; National District Attorneys Association (NDAA); Presbyterian Church; Episcopal Church; Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR); National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP); National Council of La Raza (NCLR); Human Rights Campaign (HRC); Parent's Network on Disabilities.

The Act also receives strong support by the majority of Americans. According to a new poll conducted by Peter Hart Research Associates, three in four (or 73 percent) of voters favor strengthening hate crimes laws to include sexual orientation and gender identity and to give local law enforcement the tools they need to prevent and prosecute these violent acts based on bigotry.


Examples of Crimes Not Covered by Current Law

Targeted for disability, Linden, TX
Billy Ray Johnson suffered severe permanent brain damage after an attack where he was left unconscious in a trash dump. Four white men lured Billy Ray, a mentally challenged African-American man, to a cow pasture where they harassed him with racial insults and beat him unconscious. The four men escaped any felony criminal charges. Billy Ray Johnson suffered serious brain injuries from which he will never fully recover. A Texas jury recently awarded Billy Ray $9 million in civil damages to cover his future medical needs. (April 21, 2007, Chicago Tribune)

Targeted for gender identity, Twin Falls, NE
Brandon Teena, 21, was raped and later killed by two friends after they discovered he was biologically female. After the rape and assault, Teena reported the crime to the police, but they called Teena "it" and did not allow his deputies to arrest the two men responsible. Five days later, on Christmas Day 1993, the two men found Teena and shot and stabbed him to death. The movie "Boys Don't Cry" was based on Teena's story.

Targeted for sexual orientation , Austin, TX
Four men attacked a gay man heading home from a gay bar. The attackers forced him to sodomize himself with a sex toy at knife and sword point while they recited biblical passages condemning such acts. Then, the attackers beat and robbed him. (Daily Texan via University Wire, August 4, 2005)

The Traditional Values Coalition and the distorted quote

I hear that a lot of legislators are getting phone calls about the hate crimes legislation vote from fearful constituents. Apparently these folks are buying into the lie that their freedom of speech will be at risk if this law passes.

And I think that I can pinpoint why.

Due to a distortion of a quote, some people believe that pastors will be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality

My online friend Jeremy at www.goodasyou.org pointed out what is going on. Allow me to simplify the situation.

Lou Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition sent out an action alert to the members of his group after last week's House Judicial Committee meeting about the legislation. According to him:

Congressman (Louis) Gohmert asked, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”

Gohmert was attempting to clarify and emphasize that the legislation would have an effect on the constitutional right to religious freedom and thus the Pence amendment was needed to protect religious speech.

And finally Democrat Congressman Artur Davis from Alabama spoke up and said, “Yes.”

Friends, that is what we have been warning you about and our legal advice was correct. It is evident what HR 1592 is about. It is not about homosexuals and cross dressers suffering with no food, shelter or jobs, it is about preventing Bible-believing people and pastors from speaking the truth.

And that is the lie that is scaring so many people.

This is Congressman Gohmert's actual quote with a bold emphasis on the portion Sheldon's action alert omitted:

if a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation goes out and does an act of violence, and that person says that that minister counseled or induced him through the sermon to commit that act, are you saying under your amendment that in no way could that ever be introduced against the minister?

Sheldon and TVC distorted Congressman Gohmert's quote to fit their agenda.

Nothing is saying that a minister would be arrested or prosecuted for speaking out against homosexuality. Of course if someone commits a murder and claims that someone else (be it a minister or not) told him to do it, that charge must be investigated.

And it does not mean that the minister in question would be arrested.

From what I understand, this action alert went out to countless blogs and so-called "pro-family" sites, leading to a bunch of phone calls to legislators.

I have already talked to the office of my legislator clarifying the matter and I suggest that everyone reading this do the same.

It is amazing what lies TVC will stoop to in order to further their agenda.

Lastly, I would like to point out that all I am doing is breaking the situation down for clarification. It was the web page www.goodasyou.org that did the research and digging to find out what the Traditional Values Coalition did.