Halloween gets even more strange - Guess who is reading my book
I was checking the progress of my book via amazon.com and discovered something both interesting and disturbing.
It seems that some of the same folks who bought my book could be purchasing books from such luminaries as
(wait for it)
Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Robert Novak, Dinesh D'Souza, and Ronald Reagan.
Not exactly pro-gay and not exactly progressive.
So on one hand, it is good that folks who view themselves as the opposition are paying attention to my book. But on the other, the community I wrote the book for seems to not have taken to it.
So come on folks and support me! You can pretend I'm Lance Bass.
Seriously though, I guess it's time for phase three - book tours.
That means I will probably need to get a haircut, join a gym, and buy new clothes.
Nah, too much work. I'll just get a face lift.
One more thing - if you have seen my book and liked what you read (or didn't like what you read), feel free to tell others how you feel via a review on amazon.com or other places.
Geez I sound like such a tool.
Oh well, it could be worse. I could be reduced to appearing on morning talk shows wearing an 8 p.m. cocktail dress.
Although that's not a bad idea. I do have nice legs.
Look out Matt Lauer!
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
What is a sodomite exactly?
Okay I know it's Halloween but Max Blumenthal took it too far.
I would rather sit through a showing of three Lucio Fulci movies (look it up) and five back-to-back showings of Soul Plane rather than do what he did.
Max Blumenthal attended and filmed the recent anti-gay industry Values Voters summit.
An online buddy clued me in to Mr. Blumenthal's journey through the real shadow of the valley of death.
Blumenthal's video captured the usual cast of deplorable characters (including a more animated than usual Janet Folger - who will figure greatly in a second volume of Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters should I decide to write one), but the one who attracted my attention was Star Parker.
Ms. Parker is a member of the segment of the black community not really talked about. These folks (Jesse Lee Peterson is one, Walter Williams is another, Harry Jackson is a third) take advantage of religious right influence and money to build and become part of "think tanks."
In exchange for this money, prominence and influence, they allow themselves to be prostituted bia columns, appearances on television shows, and books where they occasionally bitch at Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, make comments about how white people caught in racially embarrassing situations aren't really racist, and generally give the incorrect connotation that black folks are stupid cause all we do is bitch at white people and if we didn't, our lives would be more fulfilling.
Ms. Parker is very interesting in her odiousness. This is seen through an appearance on ABC's The View where she rambled on so long that even Barbara Walters wanted to slug her.
Anyway, in Mr. Blumenthal's video, she has a very interesting name for gays.
I could comment but all my energy was drained as I kept from screaming:
"Just who is this heifa calling a sodomite!"
Okay I know it's Halloween but Max Blumenthal took it too far.
I would rather sit through a showing of three Lucio Fulci movies (look it up) and five back-to-back showings of Soul Plane rather than do what he did.
Max Blumenthal attended and filmed the recent anti-gay industry Values Voters summit.
An online buddy clued me in to Mr. Blumenthal's journey through the real shadow of the valley of death.
Blumenthal's video captured the usual cast of deplorable characters (including a more animated than usual Janet Folger - who will figure greatly in a second volume of Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters should I decide to write one), but the one who attracted my attention was Star Parker.
Ms. Parker is a member of the segment of the black community not really talked about. These folks (Jesse Lee Peterson is one, Walter Williams is another, Harry Jackson is a third) take advantage of religious right influence and money to build and become part of "think tanks."
In exchange for this money, prominence and influence, they allow themselves to be prostituted bia columns, appearances on television shows, and books where they occasionally bitch at Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, make comments about how white people caught in racially embarrassing situations aren't really racist, and generally give the incorrect connotation that black folks are stupid cause all we do is bitch at white people and if we didn't, our lives would be more fulfilling.
Ms. Parker is very interesting in her odiousness. This is seen through an appearance on ABC's The View where she rambled on so long that even Barbara Walters wanted to slug her.
Anyway, in Mr. Blumenthal's video, she has a very interesting name for gays.
I could comment but all my energy was drained as I kept from screaming:
"Just who is this heifa calling a sodomite!"
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Tuesdays can be stranger than Mondays
Idiotic comment of the day:
ENDA "will ultimately force people of faith to go to sensitivity training" and threatens Christian employees "who may wear a cross or talk about Christ at work." - Andrea Lafferty, The Traditional Values Coalition
That comment is a blatant lie on so many levels. ENDA will not prevent people from wearing crosses are talking about Jesus at work. And Ms. Lafferty knows this. ENDA has nothing to do with religious expression.
The ironic thing is that even if it did, a Christian talking about Jesus would still be safe from the alleged "gay menace."
Jesus never said a word about gays.
Dan Abrams and why he is my hero
A lot of times, I tune out television journalism. I am a print man and to me, television journalism can sometimes devalue the entire industry by reducing issues to soundbites.
But every now and then, I get happy when television commentators do something awesome.
I am not really aware of who Dan Abrams is but he is my hero.
Recently, my undeclared nemesis and one of the reasons why my book was written, Robert Knight made an appearance on Abrams's MSNBC show.
He was there to criticize J.K. Rowlings for declaring that one of her Harry Potter characters, Dumbeldore, was gay.
Now for the record, Knight is a rude interview subject. He talks for a long time (a cynical tactic when you are debating an issue on a television show with a time limit) and tries to interrupt when other talk.
I feel that the Dumbledore controversy is ridiculous and even though Abrams didn't come out and say such, he not only demonstrated this point but showed just how dopey Robert Knight can be.
Take a look at it here.
And for the record, I met Knight in person (as chronicled by my book) and he is just a dreary and deceptive in person.
Idiotic comment of the day:
ENDA "will ultimately force people of faith to go to sensitivity training" and threatens Christian employees "who may wear a cross or talk about Christ at work." - Andrea Lafferty, The Traditional Values Coalition
That comment is a blatant lie on so many levels. ENDA will not prevent people from wearing crosses are talking about Jesus at work. And Ms. Lafferty knows this. ENDA has nothing to do with religious expression.
The ironic thing is that even if it did, a Christian talking about Jesus would still be safe from the alleged "gay menace."
Jesus never said a word about gays.
Dan Abrams and why he is my hero
A lot of times, I tune out television journalism. I am a print man and to me, television journalism can sometimes devalue the entire industry by reducing issues to soundbites.
But every now and then, I get happy when television commentators do something awesome.
I am not really aware of who Dan Abrams is but he is my hero.
Recently, my undeclared nemesis and one of the reasons why my book was written, Robert Knight made an appearance on Abrams's MSNBC show.
He was there to criticize J.K. Rowlings for declaring that one of her Harry Potter characters, Dumbeldore, was gay.
Now for the record, Knight is a rude interview subject. He talks for a long time (a cynical tactic when you are debating an issue on a television show with a time limit) and tries to interrupt when other talk.
I feel that the Dumbledore controversy is ridiculous and even though Abrams didn't come out and say such, he not only demonstrated this point but showed just how dopey Robert Knight can be.
Take a look at it here.
And for the record, I met Knight in person (as chronicled by my book) and he is just a dreary and deceptive in person.
Monday, October 29, 2007
A reiteration of the purpose of my blog and book
I would like to thank everyone who have read this blog and have supported me. I would also like to thank those who bought my book.
Lastly, I want to thank those who choose not to put a "hit" out on me for sending them so many posts on the Barack Obama/Donnie McClurkin situation.
I feel that I am blessed to be able to comment on this controversy and to bring attention to voices and issues that have not been heard.
But I would like to reiterate something.
This controversy is only a small part of a huge problem.
For a few days, I have huffed and puffed at Senator Obama and Donnie McClurkin.
But now, I want to reel myself back in by reposting the following main points of my book. The reason for my reposting is to remind myself as to the focus of my blog and book:
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
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.
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.
I would like to thank everyone who have read this blog and have supported me. I would also like to thank those who bought my book.
Lastly, I want to thank those who choose not to put a "hit" out on me for sending them so many posts on the Barack Obama/Donnie McClurkin situation.
I feel that I am blessed to be able to comment on this controversy and to bring attention to voices and issues that have not been heard.
But I would like to reiterate something.
This controversy is only a small part of a huge problem.
For a few days, I have huffed and puffed at Senator Obama and Donnie McClurkin.
But now, I want to reel myself back in by reposting the following main points of my book. The reason for my reposting is to remind myself as to the focus of my blog and book:
The 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.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Thoughts from Sunday's vigil - that little story we never notice
A couple of hours ago, I took part in the South Carolina Gay and Lesbian Pride Movement's vigil that was held outside Columbia's Township Auditorium.
The vigil was held to voice disappointment with Senator Barack Obama aligning himself with gospel singer Donnie McClurkin through a series of concerts.
McClurkin, in the past, has claimed to have been "delivered" from homosexuality. He has also gone on record comparing gays to pedophiles.
I am pleased with what happened. We had a small but determined group who used dignity and order to get our message out. It is interesting as to the spin that may be put out by the anti-gay industry, as well as the media, about the controversy.
No matter how many times it was emphasized that none of us care about McClurkin's personal decisions regarding his orientation, folks have continued to claim that we are angry at McClurkin's belief that he is "ex-gay" rather than his statements against the lgbt community.
But I am not upset over that. I am a very cynical person about such things.
However in this controversy, there was another story that will probably not see the light of day.
A black woman who stood in line for the concert marched over to us and declared:
"God made man for woman and woman for man."
She said a couple of other things of a Biblical nature (how homosexuality is ugly in God's sight, blah blah blah), but I tuned her out. I have learned that little trick over the years.
The ironic thing is that if this vigil was held in the 1950s, the subject would be about segregation and her role would be played by a white person claiming that the "separation of the races" was Biblically mandated.
The other ironic thing was that as she went on her tirade, I recognized a few of the faces going into the concert as those belonging to gay black men I knew.
As more attendees went in, I recognized quite a few more gay black men.
And let me tell you from the start that these men were not going into this concert looking to embrace McClurkin's message of being "delivered."
These men probably went in, clapped loudly, danced in religious ecstacy . . .
and then went back home to their psychological closets.
And that puts things in perspective.
The woman who came at us preaching probably thought she was doing God's will.
But who exactly did she think she was helping?
Certainly not those gay black men who stood in line for the concert.
If anything, her words told them that they have to choose between their lgbt orientation and their ethnic identity; an vicious and harmful lie.
For every so-called religious statement coming from her mouth, I could hear closet door after closet door slamming shut.
I could see even more black gay men (many of them married) trolling down the streets in the darkness of the night looking for a physical fix because they have been bamboozled to think that a quick thrust in the dark is all they deserve as gay men.
I could see more black women assembling themselves in "down low spotter groups" and doing inane things like checking their men's underwear for blood.
And I see the HIV/AIDS rate in the African-American community going sky high.
South Carolina's lgbt community took a stand today against ignorance and lies.
However in the middle of it all, God's Word was used as a whip to beat someone down, a chain to keep someone in a place that others thought he or she should be.
And to me, that's just sad.
This woman will probably go back to her church and claim that she stood up for God; as if God was just waiting on her to save Him.
Meanwhile, the gay organist will most likely play his usual song. The gay men in the church choir will probably sing as excellently as they do every Sunday. And those other gays and lesbians who attend her church will stay in their private miseries.
From what I understand, Mr. McClurkin distorted the issue at the concert.
He claimed that the issue was one about his personal decision to be "ex-gay" and did not address his comments linking homosexuality and pedophilia.
I am not surprised. Mr. McClurkin has continuously shown himself to be a huge charlatan. Why should he change? After all, lying in the name of God is very lucrative.
As to be expected, the audience gave him a loud applause.
And these are the same people who will, in the future, scratch their heads and wonder just how HIV/AIDS has become a scourge in the black community.
I have to ask myself
How can so many of my black brothers and sisters come so far and yet still be so far behind?
A couple of hours ago, I took part in the South Carolina Gay and Lesbian Pride Movement's vigil that was held outside Columbia's Township Auditorium.
The vigil was held to voice disappointment with Senator Barack Obama aligning himself with gospel singer Donnie McClurkin through a series of concerts.
McClurkin, in the past, has claimed to have been "delivered" from homosexuality. He has also gone on record comparing gays to pedophiles.
I am pleased with what happened. We had a small but determined group who used dignity and order to get our message out. It is interesting as to the spin that may be put out by the anti-gay industry, as well as the media, about the controversy.
No matter how many times it was emphasized that none of us care about McClurkin's personal decisions regarding his orientation, folks have continued to claim that we are angry at McClurkin's belief that he is "ex-gay" rather than his statements against the lgbt community.
But I am not upset over that. I am a very cynical person about such things.
However in this controversy, there was another story that will probably not see the light of day.
A black woman who stood in line for the concert marched over to us and declared:
"God made man for woman and woman for man."
She said a couple of other things of a Biblical nature (how homosexuality is ugly in God's sight, blah blah blah), but I tuned her out. I have learned that little trick over the years.
The ironic thing is that if this vigil was held in the 1950s, the subject would be about segregation and her role would be played by a white person claiming that the "separation of the races" was Biblically mandated.
The other ironic thing was that as she went on her tirade, I recognized a few of the faces going into the concert as those belonging to gay black men I knew.
As more attendees went in, I recognized quite a few more gay black men.
And let me tell you from the start that these men were not going into this concert looking to embrace McClurkin's message of being "delivered."
These men probably went in, clapped loudly, danced in religious ecstacy . . .
and then went back home to their psychological closets.
And that puts things in perspective.
The woman who came at us preaching probably thought she was doing God's will.
But who exactly did she think she was helping?
Certainly not those gay black men who stood in line for the concert.
If anything, her words told them that they have to choose between their lgbt orientation and their ethnic identity; an vicious and harmful lie.
For every so-called religious statement coming from her mouth, I could hear closet door after closet door slamming shut.
I could see even more black gay men (many of them married) trolling down the streets in the darkness of the night looking for a physical fix because they have been bamboozled to think that a quick thrust in the dark is all they deserve as gay men.
I could see more black women assembling themselves in "down low spotter groups" and doing inane things like checking their men's underwear for blood.
And I see the HIV/AIDS rate in the African-American community going sky high.
South Carolina's lgbt community took a stand today against ignorance and lies.
However in the middle of it all, God's Word was used as a whip to beat someone down, a chain to keep someone in a place that others thought he or she should be.
And to me, that's just sad.
This woman will probably go back to her church and claim that she stood up for God; as if God was just waiting on her to save Him.
Meanwhile, the gay organist will most likely play his usual song. The gay men in the church choir will probably sing as excellently as they do every Sunday. And those other gays and lesbians who attend her church will stay in their private miseries.
From what I understand, Mr. McClurkin distorted the issue at the concert.
He claimed that the issue was one about his personal decision to be "ex-gay" and did not address his comments linking homosexuality and pedophilia.
I am not surprised. Mr. McClurkin has continuously shown himself to be a huge charlatan. Why should he change? After all, lying in the name of God is very lucrative.
As to be expected, the audience gave him a loud applause.
And these are the same people who will, in the future, scratch their heads and wonder just how HIV/AIDS has become a scourge in the black community.
I have to ask myself
How can so many of my black brothers and sisters come so far and yet still be so far behind?
Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters a bestseller on amazon.com!
I bet you thought that this was going to be another Obama post. Rest assured I do have one more thing to say because I was one of the spokespeople at today's Columbia, SC vigil.
But allow me to indulge in a bit of self celebration.
The sales of my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, have gone practically through the roof on amazon.com
So I am happy to say that my book is a bestseller. Granted, a bestseller on amazon.com but I ain't mad at it.
One victory at a time, I always say.
In fact, there is only one more copy of the paperback left to be bought (hint, hint, hint.)
Now just in case by some magical coincidence, this last copy (and the used copies and hardback copies) are sold out, interested people can still buy my book at xlibris.com and barnesandnoble.com
I bet you thought that this was going to be another Obama post. Rest assured I do have one more thing to say because I was one of the spokespeople at today's Columbia, SC vigil.
But allow me to indulge in a bit of self celebration.
The sales of my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, have gone practically through the roof on amazon.com
So I am happy to say that my book is a bestseller. Granted, a bestseller on amazon.com but I ain't mad at it.
One victory at a time, I always say.
In fact, there is only one more copy of the paperback left to be bought (hint, hint, hint.)
Now just in case by some magical coincidence, this last copy (and the used copies and hardback copies) are sold out, interested people can still buy my book at xlibris.com and barnesandnoble.com
Friday, October 26, 2007
Oh stop it, Paul! Just stop it!
I am all Obamaed out.
And luckily for me, an old "friend" has come to my rescue.
Paul Cameron has come out with yet another "new" study:
Teacher-Pupil Sex Across the World: How Much Is Homosexual?
Paul Cameron, Ph.D.
Family Research Institute
PO Box 62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962
Abstract: In news stories in English across the world for 1980-2006, 902 teachers engaged in sex with 3,457 pupils. Teachers engaging in same-sex sex constituted 63% of perpetrators in Ireland, 62% in New Zealand, 60% in Canada, 54% in Scotland, 48% in Australia, 47% in England, and 35% in the U.S.; in smaller samples, homosexuals accounted for 71% of perpetrators in mainland Europe, 26% in Africa, and 13% in Asia.
Proportionately more same-sex sexual activity with pupils occurred in the West as compared to Asiaand Africa.Most (54% of 810 male, 83% of 92 female) teachers violated only opposite sex pupils; 43% of perpetrators engaged in homosexuality; and 55% of victims were boys. Findings for each country or set of countries were consistent with U.S. studies based on superintendent report, principal report, self-report, and convictions indicating that a male homosexual is the most and a female heterosexual the least apt to have sex with pupils.
This nothing more than Cameron's usual "gays are diseased freaks" spiel that he has been doing since the early 1980s. I have documented Cameron's lies on many occasions on this site and my book that it tires me out to do it this time.
Thank you again Barack Obama.
But you gotta give Cameron points for persistence. He apparently loves to bang his head against that brick wall.
No matter how you try, Paulie, you will never get your credibility back.
And for those who will claim that I am attacking Cameron without showing how his study is wrong, I encourage you to check out past posts here or on www.boxturtlebulletin.com
I am all Obamaed out.
And luckily for me, an old "friend" has come to my rescue.
Paul Cameron has come out with yet another "new" study:
Teacher-Pupil Sex Across the World: How Much Is Homosexual?
Paul Cameron, Ph.D.
Family Research Institute
PO Box 62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962
Abstract: In news stories in English across the world for 1980-2006, 902 teachers engaged in sex with 3,457 pupils. Teachers engaging in same-sex sex constituted 63% of perpetrators in Ireland, 62% in New Zealand, 60% in Canada, 54% in Scotland, 48% in Australia, 47% in England, and 35% in the U.S.; in smaller samples, homosexuals accounted for 71% of perpetrators in mainland Europe, 26% in Africa, and 13% in Asia.
Proportionately more same-sex sexual activity with pupils occurred in the West as compared to Asiaand Africa.Most (54% of 810 male, 83% of 92 female) teachers violated only opposite sex pupils; 43% of perpetrators engaged in homosexuality; and 55% of victims were boys. Findings for each country or set of countries were consistent with U.S. studies based on superintendent report, principal report, self-report, and convictions indicating that a male homosexual is the most and a female heterosexual the least apt to have sex with pupils.
This nothing more than Cameron's usual "gays are diseased freaks" spiel that he has been doing since the early 1980s. I have documented Cameron's lies on many occasions on this site and my book that it tires me out to do it this time.
Thank you again Barack Obama.
But you gotta give Cameron points for persistence. He apparently loves to bang his head against that brick wall.
No matter how you try, Paulie, you will never get your credibility back.
And for those who will claim that I am attacking Cameron without showing how his study is wrong, I encourage you to check out past posts here or on www.boxturtlebulletin.com
Thursday, October 25, 2007
There goes that ugly juxtaposition again. Thanks a lot Senator Obama
In an attempt to quell the controversy over putting on a concert with anti-gay gospel singer Donnie McClurkin, Barack Obama has recruited Columbia Pastor Andy Sidden to take part.
Sidden is openly gay and the pastor of Garden of Grace United Church of Christ.
He is also white.
I know folks are getting uncomfortable because I made that observation. Well don't waste good uncomfortability because I am about to put you more ill at ease.
Inviting Pastor Sidden is a huge faux pas. Why couldn't Obama's people have found an openly gay black pastor?
Yes, I know. I sound racist. But I don't care. I am just one of many people who have voiced this concern. In fact, there has been a lot of justifiable anger over it. However, I don't think folks have correctly articulated the reason for the distress.
Allow me to break it down.
When Obama first included McClurkin in his campaign, he made himself look like a hypocrite. Here is a man who onced addressed homophobia in the black church now inviting a purveyor of it to raise money for him via a series of black gospel concerts.
And when he is criticized for this decision, he seeks to soothe wounded feelings by inviting an openly gay white pastor to take part.
So on one side of Obama is Donnie McClurkin, who represents the black church. On the other side is Pastor Sidden, who represents the lgbt community.
That is the wrong symbol to put forth.
Inviting an openly gay black pastor would have been an excellent way to demonstrate the commonalities between the lgbt and African-American struggles for self-determination.
Obama's clumsy invitation to Pastor Sidden only perpetuates the myth that being black and being gay are two separate identities that don't overlap.
Furthermore, it means that folks like myself (lgbts of color) are once again shown how invisible we are.
No. More than that.
We have been given the hook, pushed to the side, had the trapdoor to the alligator pit released under our feet.
LGBTs of color haven't been just pushed to the back of the bus in this controversy. We have been kicked off of the bus and told to find our own way home.
Perhaps Obama's people couldn't find an openly gay black pastor in time for the event? I don't know. I guess I will give them a little slack.
But I won't give slack to the Human Rights Campaign. In their statements regarding this issue, I don't think the group even once addressed the fact that lgbts of color exist. And whether anyone wants to admit it or not, we are the ones who will suffer the most from this controversy.
We already know that the mainstream African-American community doesn't give a damn about us. Now we see that the mainstream lgbt leadership may feel the same.
Apparently we don't exist except when it is convenient to fit someone's agenda.
But back to Pastor Sidden. Of all the parties involved, he is the least guilty (by that I mean he has done nothing wrong.)
I implore the blogging community as well as the lgbts angry over this situation not to sharpen their knives on him or his reputation.
I know Pastor Sidden. He is a good guy who probably jumped into the middle of this situation because he wants people to know that God loves them no matter what orienation they are.
The ironic thing is this entire controversy could have been avoided if Donnie McClurkin had practiced that same principle.
In an attempt to quell the controversy over putting on a concert with anti-gay gospel singer Donnie McClurkin, Barack Obama has recruited Columbia Pastor Andy Sidden to take part.
Sidden is openly gay and the pastor of Garden of Grace United Church of Christ.
He is also white.
I know folks are getting uncomfortable because I made that observation. Well don't waste good uncomfortability because I am about to put you more ill at ease.
Inviting Pastor Sidden is a huge faux pas. Why couldn't Obama's people have found an openly gay black pastor?
Yes, I know. I sound racist. But I don't care. I am just one of many people who have voiced this concern. In fact, there has been a lot of justifiable anger over it. However, I don't think folks have correctly articulated the reason for the distress.
Allow me to break it down.
When Obama first included McClurkin in his campaign, he made himself look like a hypocrite. Here is a man who onced addressed homophobia in the black church now inviting a purveyor of it to raise money for him via a series of black gospel concerts.
And when he is criticized for this decision, he seeks to soothe wounded feelings by inviting an openly gay white pastor to take part.
So on one side of Obama is Donnie McClurkin, who represents the black church. On the other side is Pastor Sidden, who represents the lgbt community.
That is the wrong symbol to put forth.
Inviting an openly gay black pastor would have been an excellent way to demonstrate the commonalities between the lgbt and African-American struggles for self-determination.
Obama's clumsy invitation to Pastor Sidden only perpetuates the myth that being black and being gay are two separate identities that don't overlap.
Furthermore, it means that folks like myself (lgbts of color) are once again shown how invisible we are.
No. More than that.
We have been given the hook, pushed to the side, had the trapdoor to the alligator pit released under our feet.
LGBTs of color haven't been just pushed to the back of the bus in this controversy. We have been kicked off of the bus and told to find our own way home.
Perhaps Obama's people couldn't find an openly gay black pastor in time for the event? I don't know. I guess I will give them a little slack.
But I won't give slack to the Human Rights Campaign. In their statements regarding this issue, I don't think the group even once addressed the fact that lgbts of color exist. And whether anyone wants to admit it or not, we are the ones who will suffer the most from this controversy.
We already know that the mainstream African-American community doesn't give a damn about us. Now we see that the mainstream lgbt leadership may feel the same.
Apparently we don't exist except when it is convenient to fit someone's agenda.
But back to Pastor Sidden. Of all the parties involved, he is the least guilty (by that I mean he has done nothing wrong.)
I implore the blogging community as well as the lgbts angry over this situation not to sharpen their knives on him or his reputation.
I know Pastor Sidden. He is a good guy who probably jumped into the middle of this situation because he wants people to know that God loves them no matter what orienation they are.
The ironic thing is this entire controversy could have been avoided if Donnie McClurkin had practiced that same principle.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Things I have learned from the Barack Obama/Donnie McClurkin controversy
How is this for a wild juxtaposition:
Rod McCullom (thank you Pam Spaulding) is noticing that the African-American media have been conveniently silent about the Obama/McClurkin controversy:
The black non-response is to be expected, given the hisoric black church's uneasy relationship with the many black gays who pack the church choirs on Sunday mornings. "I long for the day when blacks gays and lesbians stop supporting their music," Darian Aaron writes in his post on the McClurkin backlash. Aaron is a young black gay activist, blogger, and contributor to Clik, and also grew up in the Pentecosal Church. "And find the courage to walk out of the churches that turn a house of prayer into a house of pain." It's a good that chuches such as Kendal Brown's Church of the Open Door and Kevin E. Taylor's Unity Fellowship Church have welcomed black gay men and lesbians.
At the same time, a gay man posting on a blog site (which shall remain nameless) took it upon himself to call black people in general "un-intellectual" as well as "uneducated, unrestrained homophobes."
Dealing with homophobic black people and racist gay people is standard occupation when you have an identity in both communities.
But we should learn from the Obama/McClurkin mess. I know I have:
4. Senator Obama's people are either very stupid (or very shrewd).
3. "I was misquoted" is becoming a more popular excuse than "we were just following orders."
2. I love my black ministers but some of them have a habit of saying stupid shit (this point is further illustrated by the comment of Pastor Gregory Daniels featured in the template under my profile).
1. Donnie McClurkin is a stone cold liar.
How is this for a wild juxtaposition:
Rod McCullom (thank you Pam Spaulding) is noticing that the African-American media have been conveniently silent about the Obama/McClurkin controversy:
The black non-response is to be expected, given the hisoric black church's uneasy relationship with the many black gays who pack the church choirs on Sunday mornings. "I long for the day when blacks gays and lesbians stop supporting their music," Darian Aaron writes in his post on the McClurkin backlash. Aaron is a young black gay activist, blogger, and contributor to Clik, and also grew up in the Pentecosal Church. "And find the courage to walk out of the churches that turn a house of prayer into a house of pain." It's a good that chuches such as Kendal Brown's Church of the Open Door and Kevin E. Taylor's Unity Fellowship Church have welcomed black gay men and lesbians.
At the same time, a gay man posting on a blog site (which shall remain nameless) took it upon himself to call black people in general "un-intellectual" as well as "uneducated, unrestrained homophobes."
Dealing with homophobic black people and racist gay people is standard occupation when you have an identity in both communities.
But we should learn from the Obama/McClurkin mess. I know I have:
4. Senator Obama's people are either very stupid (or very shrewd).
3. "I was misquoted" is becoming a more popular excuse than "we were just following orders."
2. I love my black ministers but some of them have a habit of saying stupid shit (this point is further illustrated by the comment of Pastor Gregory Daniels featured in the template under my profile).
1. Donnie McClurkin is a stone cold liar.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
This just in: Donnie McClurkin evades the issue
Donnie McClurkin has finally gone on record regarding the controversy with presidential candidate Barack Obama's concert this weekend in South Carolina. Obama has come under fire for inviting McClurkin, who has claimed that he is an "ex-gay."
McClurkin addresses the situation in the Chicago Tribune. But, at least in my mind, Mr. McClurkin's statements raises more questions. I think he is evading the issue:
"I don't believe that even from a religious point of view that Jesus ever discriminated toward anyone, nor do I," McClurkin said in an exclusive interview with the Tribune. "Most of the things that were said were totally out of context and then other things weren't true."
. . . For years, McClurkin has talked from the pulpit about how he was raped by a male family member as a child. It was that act, he has said, that sent him into living as a gay man for the better part of 20 years. He now says he is straight and that his ministry is open to those who say they no longer want to live as a gay person. What he doesn't do, he says, is crusade against homosexuality.
McClurkin conveniently did not mention his statements on the 700 Club that accused gays of harming children. As far as I know, he has never repudiated the following comment:
"The gloves are off and if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose? I'm not in the mood to play with those who are trying to kill our children."
Mr. McClurkin, as they say in the street, you need to recognize.
Your evasions are foul and they put your credibility in serious jeopardy.
Donnie McClurkin has finally gone on record regarding the controversy with presidential candidate Barack Obama's concert this weekend in South Carolina. Obama has come under fire for inviting McClurkin, who has claimed that he is an "ex-gay."
McClurkin addresses the situation in the Chicago Tribune. But, at least in my mind, Mr. McClurkin's statements raises more questions. I think he is evading the issue:
"I don't believe that even from a religious point of view that Jesus ever discriminated toward anyone, nor do I," McClurkin said in an exclusive interview with the Tribune. "Most of the things that were said were totally out of context and then other things weren't true."
. . . For years, McClurkin has talked from the pulpit about how he was raped by a male family member as a child. It was that act, he has said, that sent him into living as a gay man for the better part of 20 years. He now says he is straight and that his ministry is open to those who say they no longer want to live as a gay person. What he doesn't do, he says, is crusade against homosexuality.
McClurkin conveniently did not mention his statements on the 700 Club that accused gays of harming children. As far as I know, he has never repudiated the following comment:
"The gloves are off and if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose? I'm not in the mood to play with those who are trying to kill our children."
Mr. McClurkin, as they say in the street, you need to recognize.
Your evasions are foul and they put your credibility in serious jeopardy.
Does Donnie McClurkin still believe gays are trying to hurt children?
It was just a matter of time before the other side of the "cultural war" starts lying to defend Donnie McClurkin.
The following comes from a PFOX press release:
"Ex-gays have the same right to participate in the political process as other Americans and should not have to endure this type of abuse because they chose to leave homosexuality," said Regina Griggs, PFOX executive director. "Gay rights groups demand hate crimes laws and sexual orientation non-discrimination legislation, but would deny the same protection to ex-gays who want full inclusion in society at the same level that gays currently enjoy."
"This irrational behavior towards those who have overcome unwanted same-sex attractions perpetuates misunderstanding and harm against ex-gays. It also demonstrates a disregard for diversity and a refusal to respect a basic human right to dignity and self-determination," said Griggs.
I am sure that Peter and Americans for Truth (in name only) won’t be far behind saying the same thing.
To me, the situation is not what Donnie McClurkin chooses to refer to himself as. I don’t care what he calls himself whether it be "ex-gay" "super 'ex-gay'," or "super duper 'ex-gay.'"
My post yesterday was a way to tell folks to know the intricasies of the entire situation. The fact of the matter is that this controversy could still turn into a divide and conquer against lgbts and the mainstream African-American community.
Maybe one way to prevent this is to be clear on why we are angry at Senator Obama for his embracing of McClurkin.
McClurkin used his personal story to demonize the lgbt community as a whole. During an appearance on the 700 Club in 2003, he accused the lgbt community of wanting to harm children:
From GayWired:
McClurkin has accused gays of “trying to kill our children” and has called homosexuality “a curse”. The gospel singer who says he is a "reformed homosexual" in a 700 Club interview said he was ready to declare war on homosexuality.
From Wayne Besen:
McClurkin, currently a senor pastor at Perfecting Faith in Freeport, N.Y., was particularly outspoken against New York's funding of Harvey Milk, a gay high school in New York, suggesting that the school will lead to molestation of children.
"The gloves are off," he said on the Sept. 23, 2003 episode of Rev. Pat Robertson's 700 Club. "And if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose. This is not a privately funded school. It is a public school funded by taxpayers' money. Why isn't anyone else speaking out? Everyone knows that everyone at the high school is homosexual. That makes for an easy target."
World Net Daily:
HRC condemns Mr. McClurkin . . . for the sin of publicly laying out the threat that the homosexual agenda poses to families and children
. . . But what really sticks in homosexual activists' craw is Donnie McClurkin, who, they say, on "The 700 Club" "has accused gay Americans of trying to kill our children." Mr. McClurkin, an accomplished gospel singer and author, overcame homosexuality himself.
Was McClurkin misquoted? Did he say those comments but later repudiated them?
I don't know, but one thing is for sure.
He certainly isn't a victim in this matter.
And he needs to clarify his beliefs on gays and children.
It was just a matter of time before the other side of the "cultural war" starts lying to defend Donnie McClurkin.
The following comes from a PFOX press release:
"Ex-gays have the same right to participate in the political process as other Americans and should not have to endure this type of abuse because they chose to leave homosexuality," said Regina Griggs, PFOX executive director. "Gay rights groups demand hate crimes laws and sexual orientation non-discrimination legislation, but would deny the same protection to ex-gays who want full inclusion in society at the same level that gays currently enjoy."
"This irrational behavior towards those who have overcome unwanted same-sex attractions perpetuates misunderstanding and harm against ex-gays. It also demonstrates a disregard for diversity and a refusal to respect a basic human right to dignity and self-determination," said Griggs.
I am sure that Peter and Americans for Truth (in name only) won’t be far behind saying the same thing.
To me, the situation is not what Donnie McClurkin chooses to refer to himself as. I don’t care what he calls himself whether it be "ex-gay" "super 'ex-gay'," or "super duper 'ex-gay.'"
My post yesterday was a way to tell folks to know the intricasies of the entire situation. The fact of the matter is that this controversy could still turn into a divide and conquer against lgbts and the mainstream African-American community.
Maybe one way to prevent this is to be clear on why we are angry at Senator Obama for his embracing of McClurkin.
McClurkin used his personal story to demonize the lgbt community as a whole. During an appearance on the 700 Club in 2003, he accused the lgbt community of wanting to harm children:
From GayWired:
McClurkin has accused gays of “trying to kill our children” and has called homosexuality “a curse”. The gospel singer who says he is a "reformed homosexual" in a 700 Club interview said he was ready to declare war on homosexuality.
From Wayne Besen:
McClurkin, currently a senor pastor at Perfecting Faith in Freeport, N.Y., was particularly outspoken against New York's funding of Harvey Milk, a gay high school in New York, suggesting that the school will lead to molestation of children.
"The gloves are off," he said on the Sept. 23, 2003 episode of Rev. Pat Robertson's 700 Club. "And if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose. This is not a privately funded school. It is a public school funded by taxpayers' money. Why isn't anyone else speaking out? Everyone knows that everyone at the high school is homosexual. That makes for an easy target."
World Net Daily:
HRC condemns Mr. McClurkin . . . for the sin of publicly laying out the threat that the homosexual agenda poses to families and children
. . . But what really sticks in homosexual activists' craw is Donnie McClurkin, who, they say, on "The 700 Club" "has accused gay Americans of trying to kill our children." Mr. McClurkin, an accomplished gospel singer and author, overcame homosexuality himself.
Was McClurkin misquoted? Did he say those comments but later repudiated them?
I don't know, but one thing is for sure.
He certainly isn't a victim in this matter.
And he needs to clarify his beliefs on gays and children.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Mess and stuff for Monday
Let's get the small stuff out of the way first.
My book has been available on amazon.com for a few weeks now and it is looking good. If you do not want to order Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters via xlibris then by all means go to amazon.com
Secondly, how do you all like the new look of my blog? I needed a change in something and since I don't have a man and can't get my hair done (black men generally have two choices with hair - to cut or not to cut), I figured why not give my blog a change.
Now onto the important stuff - and the fact that Dumbledore is gay does not rank up there as "important stuff:
We need to support ENDA
Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202.224.3121 to be connected to your representative based on your zip code. Here is a suggested message:
Hello, my name is _____ and I live in your district. I am calling to ask the representative to support the Baldwin amendment to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The Baldwin amendment adds gender identity protections back into ENDA and it is critically important to me that all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are protected by this legislation. This amendment is the only way to fix this bill, and I only support passage of H.R. 3685 if the amendment passes
Donnie McClurkin was wrong, but let’s think before acting
Apparently presidential candidate Barack Obama may be stepping into a big pile of manure due the selection of Donnie McClurkin as a performer at one of his campaign events.
The Grammy-award winner has in the past claimed to be "delivered from homosexuality." Following this tone, he has written a biography and made appearances on programs such as the "700 Club."
So naturally many of us aren't happy that Obama seems to be having dealings with him, so to speak.
But let's use some savvy about the situation before we read the riot act.
I think when McClurkin began speaking out against us, he was yet another Christian who let his ego overtake his humbleness.
I also think that Mr. McClurkin may have regretted some of his wannabe "righteous indignation." He realized that he did not know what the hell he was talking about.
This isnt' the first time this sort of thing has happened. I remember two gospel singers by the names of Angie and Debbie Winans writing a song, "It's Not Natural," in which they protested Ellen DeGeneres's coming out and homosexuality in general.
The controversy led to appearances on radio shows, talk shows, appearing in newspapers ads speaking out for the "ex-gay movement," and finally speaking in front of state Congressional committees against pro-gay ordinances.
The end of the controversy saw the Winans sisters declaring publicly that they were "used" by people they were trying to help.
In short, Angie and Debbie's religious beliefs coupled with their egos led them to make giant homophobic asses of themselves.
So this is nothing new regarding Donnie McClurkin. And maybe he was paying attention to the Winans controversy. He has tried to temper the outrage over his claims about the gay community:
"What I say in the book is simply this: If you're gay, and you're happy, if you don't think you need to change, stay just how you are. But there are some people who are in the gay and bisexual lifestyle that are broken . . ." - Donnie McClurkin puts the focus back on traditional gospel - in secular music, The Associated Press, 2005
But like I said before, let’s use some savvy before rushing to jump at Donnie McClurkin. I don't say this because I feel sorry for him or agree with his statements. When you talk about issues you don't understand and end up saying stupid shit, you deserve almost all of what you get.
However, picture the scenario of what this situation can lead to:
Donnie McClurkin appears on African-American oriented radio talk shows talking about the situation. And who is there to give our side of the issue?
Probably no one because the African-American community as a whole generally don't recognize the existence of lgbts of color.
Remember, the African-American community has no out lgbt leaders gracing the covers of Ebony, Jet, or Essence. The African-American media does not necessarily take it upon itself to present issues indigenious to the lgbt of color experience.
And for the most part, neither does the mainstream lgbt community.
So McClurkin can easily portray himself as a victim and the lgbt community as religious oppressors in these avenues.
And this could lead to another possible distraction to divide the mainstream lgbt and the heterosexual African-American community.
If the scenario sounds familiar, it should.
It was one (with deviations) that led to Bush being re-elected in 2004.
Granted, if this situation was to come to pass like I have just fortold, it won’t be on the same scale as marriage equality.
But divide and conquer tactics have a habit of being destructive on any scale.
The fact of the matter is that McClurkin has extreme popularity in the African-American community. And the lack of lgbts of color to give our side of the issue only makes the entire community look not only anti-religious but racist.
It also underscores how much the lgbt leadership (i.e. HRC, Lambda Legal, GLAAD, etc.) needs to make a serious effort to recruit and train potential lgbt of color spokespeople with enough autonomy to appeal to the heterosexual African-American community.
This is not to give McClurkin any leniency. He may have been speaking of his own experience, but there is no excuse for him to demonize the lgbt community as a whole.
I don’t care how many songs he sings, or how many Bible he reads, McClurkin should have taken it upon himself to learn more about the issues before running his mouth. He should have remembered the verse that says "my people perish for the lack of knowledge."
Let's get the small stuff out of the way first.
My book has been available on amazon.com for a few weeks now and it is looking good. If you do not want to order Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters via xlibris then by all means go to amazon.com
Secondly, how do you all like the new look of my blog? I needed a change in something and since I don't have a man and can't get my hair done (black men generally have two choices with hair - to cut or not to cut), I figured why not give my blog a change.
Now onto the important stuff - and the fact that Dumbledore is gay does not rank up there as "important stuff:
We need to support ENDA
Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202.224.3121 to be connected to your representative based on your zip code. Here is a suggested message:
Hello, my name is _____ and I live in your district. I am calling to ask the representative to support the Baldwin amendment to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The Baldwin amendment adds gender identity protections back into ENDA and it is critically important to me that all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are protected by this legislation. This amendment is the only way to fix this bill, and I only support passage of H.R. 3685 if the amendment passes
Donnie McClurkin was wrong, but let’s think before acting
Apparently presidential candidate Barack Obama may be stepping into a big pile of manure due the selection of Donnie McClurkin as a performer at one of his campaign events.
The Grammy-award winner has in the past claimed to be "delivered from homosexuality." Following this tone, he has written a biography and made appearances on programs such as the "700 Club."
So naturally many of us aren't happy that Obama seems to be having dealings with him, so to speak.
But let's use some savvy about the situation before we read the riot act.
I think when McClurkin began speaking out against us, he was yet another Christian who let his ego overtake his humbleness.
I also think that Mr. McClurkin may have regretted some of his wannabe "righteous indignation." He realized that he did not know what the hell he was talking about.
This isnt' the first time this sort of thing has happened. I remember two gospel singers by the names of Angie and Debbie Winans writing a song, "It's Not Natural," in which they protested Ellen DeGeneres's coming out and homosexuality in general.
The controversy led to appearances on radio shows, talk shows, appearing in newspapers ads speaking out for the "ex-gay movement," and finally speaking in front of state Congressional committees against pro-gay ordinances.
The end of the controversy saw the Winans sisters declaring publicly that they were "used" by people they were trying to help.
In short, Angie and Debbie's religious beliefs coupled with their egos led them to make giant homophobic asses of themselves.
So this is nothing new regarding Donnie McClurkin. And maybe he was paying attention to the Winans controversy. He has tried to temper the outrage over his claims about the gay community:
"What I say in the book is simply this: If you're gay, and you're happy, if you don't think you need to change, stay just how you are. But there are some people who are in the gay and bisexual lifestyle that are broken . . ." - Donnie McClurkin puts the focus back on traditional gospel - in secular music, The Associated Press, 2005
But like I said before, let’s use some savvy before rushing to jump at Donnie McClurkin. I don't say this because I feel sorry for him or agree with his statements. When you talk about issues you don't understand and end up saying stupid shit, you deserve almost all of what you get.
However, picture the scenario of what this situation can lead to:
Donnie McClurkin appears on African-American oriented radio talk shows talking about the situation. And who is there to give our side of the issue?
Probably no one because the African-American community as a whole generally don't recognize the existence of lgbts of color.
Remember, the African-American community has no out lgbt leaders gracing the covers of Ebony, Jet, or Essence. The African-American media does not necessarily take it upon itself to present issues indigenious to the lgbt of color experience.
And for the most part, neither does the mainstream lgbt community.
So McClurkin can easily portray himself as a victim and the lgbt community as religious oppressors in these avenues.
And this could lead to another possible distraction to divide the mainstream lgbt and the heterosexual African-American community.
If the scenario sounds familiar, it should.
It was one (with deviations) that led to Bush being re-elected in 2004.
Granted, if this situation was to come to pass like I have just fortold, it won’t be on the same scale as marriage equality.
But divide and conquer tactics have a habit of being destructive on any scale.
The fact of the matter is that McClurkin has extreme popularity in the African-American community. And the lack of lgbts of color to give our side of the issue only makes the entire community look not only anti-religious but racist.
It also underscores how much the lgbt leadership (i.e. HRC, Lambda Legal, GLAAD, etc.) needs to make a serious effort to recruit and train potential lgbt of color spokespeople with enough autonomy to appeal to the heterosexual African-American community.
This is not to give McClurkin any leniency. He may have been speaking of his own experience, but there is no excuse for him to demonize the lgbt community as a whole.
I don’t care how many songs he sings, or how many Bible he reads, McClurkin should have taken it upon himself to learn more about the issues before running his mouth. He should have remembered the verse that says "my people perish for the lack of knowledge."
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Busy Thursday - Time for an amusing story
I wrote something this morning that I wanted to post but I decided not to.
At least not the entire thing. Just one item:
I really wish that Ellen DeGeneres kept that dog controversy to herself. I mean it may be sad to her but it's not something that needs a public forum. And you know that with the lack of visibility in our community, if a gay celebrity even accidentally passes gas on air, some of us will be talking about it for an unbearably long time.
So with the fight over ENDA (it passed committee but the transgender community is somewhat left out), hate crimes legislation (we just know the dipstick-in-chief will veto it), and all the other things that inhibit lgbts from full lives, I really don't give a shit about Ellen or the dog.
No offense, but I really don't.
But how about a humorous story regarding me and amazon.com
My book is now available on amazon.com but there was one problem.
The book's description on the site said it was for ages 9-12.
This is not true of course. And corrections have been made. However, you know how things get talked about online and how a story travels all over the web before the truth is discovered.
The last thing I want is to read Peter LaBarbera's or the Traditional Values Coalition's webpage claim that I am trying to "indoctrinate"(I think that's the word they like to use) children "into homosexuality."
So let me say now that my book is not for children ages 9-12. Now if any teenagers happen to want to read it then by all means please do.
Uh oh.
Oh well, I do need that toaster oven national headquarters gives us for meeting the quota of "new recruits."
I wrote something this morning that I wanted to post but I decided not to.
At least not the entire thing. Just one item:
I really wish that Ellen DeGeneres kept that dog controversy to herself. I mean it may be sad to her but it's not something that needs a public forum. And you know that with the lack of visibility in our community, if a gay celebrity even accidentally passes gas on air, some of us will be talking about it for an unbearably long time.
So with the fight over ENDA (it passed committee but the transgender community is somewhat left out), hate crimes legislation (we just know the dipstick-in-chief will veto it), and all the other things that inhibit lgbts from full lives, I really don't give a shit about Ellen or the dog.
No offense, but I really don't.
But how about a humorous story regarding me and amazon.com
My book is now available on amazon.com but there was one problem.
The book's description on the site said it was for ages 9-12.
This is not true of course. And corrections have been made. However, you know how things get talked about online and how a story travels all over the web before the truth is discovered.
The last thing I want is to read Peter LaBarbera's or the Traditional Values Coalition's webpage claim that I am trying to "indoctrinate"(I think that's the word they like to use) children "into homosexuality."
So let me say now that my book is not for children ages 9-12. Now if any teenagers happen to want to read it then by all means please do.
Uh oh.
Oh well, I do need that toaster oven national headquarters gives us for meeting the quota of "new recruits."
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Paul Cameron gets hit in the 'comfort zone'
Today's post is going to be short mostly because I am hoping that more attention will be devoted to my last post regarding the incorrect term "gay bowel syndrome."
But I want to point something out about our "friend" Paul Cameron.
Last week, an online buddy of mine pointed out that Cameron sent out a press release trumpeting a "new study."
For those of us who are used to Cameron's lies, it is yet another old study of his packaged with new distortions.
This one has to do with the claim that gay men molest children at a high rate.
Rather than go into details as to how ridiculous this study is, I want to point something out that I saw today via another online friend.
And it had me reeling.
Apparently a webpage that would probably be seen as right wing and evangelical (i.e. "the enemy") published a piece by someone actually criticizing the study for being wrong.
And to make matters even better, the author, Warren Throckmorton, talks about Cameron's other distortions.
Throckmorton is not necessarily an "ally" of lgbts. He is supposedly a proponent of the "ex-gay" movement.
Still, this is nice.
Being attacked for being inaccurate on what may seem to be "home turf" may not sit well with Cameron.
I am hoping to see one of his lengthy and rambling "rebuttals" published.
And I await with baited breath and popcorn in hand.
Today's post is going to be short mostly because I am hoping that more attention will be devoted to my last post regarding the incorrect term "gay bowel syndrome."
But I want to point something out about our "friend" Paul Cameron.
Last week, an online buddy of mine pointed out that Cameron sent out a press release trumpeting a "new study."
For those of us who are used to Cameron's lies, it is yet another old study of his packaged with new distortions.
This one has to do with the claim that gay men molest children at a high rate.
Rather than go into details as to how ridiculous this study is, I want to point something out that I saw today via another online friend.
And it had me reeling.
Apparently a webpage that would probably be seen as right wing and evangelical (i.e. "the enemy") published a piece by someone actually criticizing the study for being wrong.
And to make matters even better, the author, Warren Throckmorton, talks about Cameron's other distortions.
Throckmorton is not necessarily an "ally" of lgbts. He is supposedly a proponent of the "ex-gay" movement.
Still, this is nice.
Being attacked for being inaccurate on what may seem to be "home turf" may not sit well with Cameron.
I am hoping to see one of his lengthy and rambling "rebuttals" published.
And I await with baited breath and popcorn in hand.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Sorry Peter and Conservapedia, but 'gay bowel syndrome' still does not exist
Our friend Peter LaBarbera is practically falling over himself over in his latest post:
Conservapedia, a new online encyclopedia seeking to become a conservative alternative to the very liberal-biased Wikipedia takes a politically incorrect look at the medical phenomenon known as ‘Gay Bowel Syndrome’ — a term that homosexual activists are trying to purge from scientific and popular usage. Gay Bowel Syndrome describes a “clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients,” according to Conservapedia, which cites mainstream medical sources such as Johns Hopkins’ ‘HIV Guide’ in its article with 93 footnotes.
I talk about "gay bowel syndrome" in my book. I say the following:
According to the “Free Online Dictionary and Thesaurus,” http://encyclopedia.
thefreedictionary.com:
“Gay bowel syndrome was a term fi rst used in 1976 prior to the discovery of AIDS, to describe a series of parasitic disorders caused by oral/anal contact and allegedly related to gay male sexual activity. The term was abandoned by the medical community in the 1980s because the problems that attributed to it were not specific to homosexuals, not confined to just the bowels, nor did it meet the medical definition of a syndrome.”
First of all, Conservapedia is not necessarily an accurate or objective source of information. It was founded by Andrew Schlafly, son of well-known conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly stated that he founded the project because he felt Wikipedia had a liberal, anti-Christian, and anti-American bias.
In other words, Conservapedia is another case of a someone attempting to manufacture his version of the truth when reality does not suit him.
In this particular case, Conservapedia claims the following:
Gay bowel syndrome is a clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients . . .
Conservapedia uses three sources for this claim and all of them are over 10 years old; two of them are from the 1970s.
Let's break this down some more.
Peter makes a huge point to note that the Conservapedia article contains 93 footnotes that, according to him, proves that "gay bowel syndrome" is a legitimate term.
Let's look at those footnotes:
Footnotes 1, 5, 15, 25, 31, 40, 47, 58 are the same - an article published in 1976 entitled The gay bowel syndrome: clinico-pathologic correlation in 260 cases.
And that is not the only case in which the article uses duplicate footnotes, including the following examples:
Footnotes 2, 7, and 11- Clinical features and diagnosis - Inflammatory Bowel Disease, part 1 American Family Physician, Feb 15, 1993 by Glen E. Hastings, Richard J. Weber
Footnotes 10 and 12 - Dr. Michael Heller, The gay bowel syndrome: a common problem of homosexual patients in the emergency department. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1980
Conservapedia also says:
in 2004 Medscape stated that gay bowel syndrome is a significant issue in regards HIV infection (The Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website also features an article which is essentially a duplicate of the aforementioned article at Medscape).
The Medscape piece and the John Hopkins article says the following:
This is a retrospective review of clinical proctitis in gay men seen at a STD clinic in San Francisco. The review included men with rectal symptoms of pain, itching, tenesmus, rectal bleeding or discharge who underwent clinical evaluation including anoscopy with diagnostic tests for C. trachomatis, N. gonorrhoeae, HSV and syphilis. The results show relatively high rates of gonorrhea, chlamydia, and HSV. No pathogen was found in 46 of the 101 patients studied.
Yes, I bolded that first sentence to make a point. Examples of gay men seen at STD clinics (especially in one city) are not necessarily indicative of the lgbt community at large. It is the same as using examples of African-American men in prison to gauge the habits of African-American men not incarcerated.
The articles also say the studies of those men in STD clinics took place in the years 2000-2001. That is six to seven years ago.
Now the articles do use the phrase "gay bowel syndrome," but they are vague as to the legitimacy of the term. And that does give Peter and Conservapedia a little raft to stake their lies.
But other than those two articles, does Conservapedia have any recent information?
Not necessarily. Conservapedia mentions 2007 articles regarding STDs, but only as an attempt to link those STDs together as an example of "gay bowel syndrome."
As a matter of fact, a good portion of the information Conservapedia has regarding the term "gay bowel syndrome" itself is from the 1970s and 80s; the years that the term was thought to be legitimate.
And Conservapedia even contradicts itself by saying the following:
Gay bowel syndrome is a clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients (the diseases are not exclusive to male homosexuals).
Doesn't that last statement contradict the entire tone of the Conservapedia article?
Lastly, Conservapedia says the following:
Although the term gay bowel syndrome is not used as frequently as the 1980's, as mentioned previously Medscape has an article on gay bowel syndrome that was published in 2004 that was entitled ''New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome". Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website has a duplicate of the aforementioned article by John G. Bartlett, M.D. at Medscape which was entitled New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome". In addition, an online medical dictionary has an entry on gay bowel syndrome. Also, the website Biology-Online.org has an article on gay bowel syndrome.
As I said before, John Hopkins and the Medscape articles was talking about data that is close to seven years old and solely dealt with gay men in an STD clinic in San Francisco. And neither article goes into detail regarding the legitimacy of the term "gay bowel syndrome."
Lastly, both online dictionaries mentioned by Conservapedia (particularly Biology-Online.org) looks like online dictionaries in which anyone can add terms.
Basically, Conservapedia is taking advantage of online technology to pass along distortions and untruths as reality. And Peter is just loving it:
We at Americans For Truth believe that it is long past time for federal and state governments (and academia) to study the serious health risks associated with male homosexual sex and promiscuity, just as federally-sponsored studies helped educate the public on the significant dangers of smoking. Allowing homosexual activists a “protester’s veto” over legitimate medical inquiry and research will only cost more men’s lives, as larger society and especially young men are denied clear information on the additional health risks of “gay” sex viz a viz normal, natural straight sex.
Peter, if there should be any investigations, they should focus on why you and folks like yourself obsess over what you think lgbts do in the bedroom.
And let's not forget Conservapedia.
I guess its next goal will be attempting to give Paul Cameron some degree of credibility.
Our friend Peter LaBarbera is practically falling over himself over in his latest post:
Conservapedia, a new online encyclopedia seeking to become a conservative alternative to the very liberal-biased Wikipedia takes a politically incorrect look at the medical phenomenon known as ‘Gay Bowel Syndrome’ — a term that homosexual activists are trying to purge from scientific and popular usage. Gay Bowel Syndrome describes a “clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients,” according to Conservapedia, which cites mainstream medical sources such as Johns Hopkins’ ‘HIV Guide’ in its article with 93 footnotes.
I talk about "gay bowel syndrome" in my book. I say the following:
According to the “Free Online Dictionary and Thesaurus,” http://encyclopedia.
thefreedictionary.com:
“Gay bowel syndrome was a term fi rst used in 1976 prior to the discovery of AIDS, to describe a series of parasitic disorders caused by oral/anal contact and allegedly related to gay male sexual activity. The term was abandoned by the medical community in the 1980s because the problems that attributed to it were not specific to homosexuals, not confined to just the bowels, nor did it meet the medical definition of a syndrome.”
First of all, Conservapedia is not necessarily an accurate or objective source of information. It was founded by Andrew Schlafly, son of well-known conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly stated that he founded the project because he felt Wikipedia had a liberal, anti-Christian, and anti-American bias.
In other words, Conservapedia is another case of a someone attempting to manufacture his version of the truth when reality does not suit him.
In this particular case, Conservapedia claims the following:
Gay bowel syndrome is a clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients . . .
Conservapedia uses three sources for this claim and all of them are over 10 years old; two of them are from the 1970s.
Let's break this down some more.
Peter makes a huge point to note that the Conservapedia article contains 93 footnotes that, according to him, proves that "gay bowel syndrome" is a legitimate term.
Let's look at those footnotes:
Footnotes 1, 5, 15, 25, 31, 40, 47, 58 are the same - an article published in 1976 entitled The gay bowel syndrome: clinico-pathologic correlation in 260 cases.
And that is not the only case in which the article uses duplicate footnotes, including the following examples:
Footnotes 2, 7, and 11- Clinical features and diagnosis - Inflammatory Bowel Disease, part 1 American Family Physician, Feb 15, 1993 by Glen E. Hastings, Richard J. Weber
Footnotes 10 and 12 - Dr. Michael Heller, The gay bowel syndrome: a common problem of homosexual patients in the emergency department. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1980
Conservapedia also says:
in 2004 Medscape stated that gay bowel syndrome is a significant issue in regards HIV infection (The Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website also features an article which is essentially a duplicate of the aforementioned article at Medscape).
The Medscape piece and the John Hopkins article says the following:
This is a retrospective review of clinical proctitis in gay men seen at a STD clinic in San Francisco. The review included men with rectal symptoms of pain, itching, tenesmus, rectal bleeding or discharge who underwent clinical evaluation including anoscopy with diagnostic tests for C. trachomatis, N. gonorrhoeae, HSV and syphilis. The results show relatively high rates of gonorrhea, chlamydia, and HSV. No pathogen was found in 46 of the 101 patients studied.
Yes, I bolded that first sentence to make a point. Examples of gay men seen at STD clinics (especially in one city) are not necessarily indicative of the lgbt community at large. It is the same as using examples of African-American men in prison to gauge the habits of African-American men not incarcerated.
The articles also say the studies of those men in STD clinics took place in the years 2000-2001. That is six to seven years ago.
Now the articles do use the phrase "gay bowel syndrome," but they are vague as to the legitimacy of the term. And that does give Peter and Conservapedia a little raft to stake their lies.
But other than those two articles, does Conservapedia have any recent information?
Not necessarily. Conservapedia mentions 2007 articles regarding STDs, but only as an attempt to link those STDs together as an example of "gay bowel syndrome."
As a matter of fact, a good portion of the information Conservapedia has regarding the term "gay bowel syndrome" itself is from the 1970s and 80s; the years that the term was thought to be legitimate.
And Conservapedia even contradicts itself by saying the following:
Gay bowel syndrome is a clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients (the diseases are not exclusive to male homosexuals).
Doesn't that last statement contradict the entire tone of the Conservapedia article?
Lastly, Conservapedia says the following:
Although the term gay bowel syndrome is not used as frequently as the 1980's, as mentioned previously Medscape has an article on gay bowel syndrome that was published in 2004 that was entitled ''New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome". Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website has a duplicate of the aforementioned article by John G. Bartlett, M.D. at Medscape which was entitled New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome". In addition, an online medical dictionary has an entry on gay bowel syndrome. Also, the website Biology-Online.org has an article on gay bowel syndrome.
As I said before, John Hopkins and the Medscape articles was talking about data that is close to seven years old and solely dealt with gay men in an STD clinic in San Francisco. And neither article goes into detail regarding the legitimacy of the term "gay bowel syndrome."
Lastly, both online dictionaries mentioned by Conservapedia (particularly Biology-Online.org) looks like online dictionaries in which anyone can add terms.
Basically, Conservapedia is taking advantage of online technology to pass along distortions and untruths as reality. And Peter is just loving it:
We at Americans For Truth believe that it is long past time for federal and state governments (and academia) to study the serious health risks associated with male homosexual sex and promiscuity, just as federally-sponsored studies helped educate the public on the significant dangers of smoking. Allowing homosexual activists a “protester’s veto” over legitimate medical inquiry and research will only cost more men’s lives, as larger society and especially young men are denied clear information on the additional health risks of “gay” sex viz a viz normal, natural straight sex.
Peter, if there should be any investigations, they should focus on why you and folks like yourself obsess over what you think lgbts do in the bedroom.
And let's not forget Conservapedia.
I guess its next goal will be attempting to give Paul Cameron some degree of credibility.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Charlene Cothran lied to me
I am sure you all are aware of Charlene Cothran, the African-American publisher of Venus Magazine who is now claiming that she is an "ex-gay."
Let me make you aware of something else.
When Cothran announced her "change," I wrote her a letter. She answered my letter. The following is our exchange:
My letter:
You are Being Used
While I do not agree with your latest exploits, I respect them. However please be advised as you claim to look towards Heaven that you do not allow yourself to be deceived by those with an agenda. Already some folks are using your story in attempts to deny those of us who are comfortable with our orientation our basic rights.
You see that is the paradox involving those claiming to be "ex-gay." Many of us gays have no problem with your decisions. However, groups like Focus on the Family, etc try to use your experiences to keep job-protection ordinances and the like from being passed.
Your situation reminds me of Angie and Debbie Winans. First, they wrote a song criticizing homosexuality called "It's Not Natural," then they begin speaking in legislative committees against laws that would protect gays and lesbians from discrimination in employment and housing.
Where is the line drawn? Please remember my point as you go about your days. Don't allow yourself to be used to deny me my rights as a gay black man.
Her response:
I am acutely aware that many on the 'right' want to use me/my story for their own narrow benefit. In many interviews I remind them that every gay or lesbian person...every PERSON deserves basic HUMAN RIGHTS. The right to NOT be fired from their jobs for being gay, the right to declare whom ever they please as their 'next of kin' for medical emergency, property exchange, insurance privileges etc.
Now the rest of her letter goes on about gays recruiting children but since it is not relevant to my point, I will not not include it.
So Ms. Cothran believes that lgbts have a right to employment, etc. Too bad that many whom she now calls allies don't believe the same thing. Cases in point:
A vote is expected soon on H.R. 2015, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA). If passed, the bill would grant special employment rights and protected minority status to individuals who define themselves based upon chosen sexual behaviors and others who — among other things — suffer from clinical self-delusion. It would force employers to abandon their First Amendment civil rights at the workplace door.
TAKE ACTION: If enacted into law, The Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA, H.R. 2015) and the federal “hate crimes” bill, H.R. 1592 (recently passed by the House), would be the first time that “gender identity rights” are recognized in federal law. This would usher in a new wave of persecution for people opposed to homosexuality and gender confusion . . .
At bottom is the religious exemption language for H.R. 2015, ENDA, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, which would use federal government powers to ban “employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.” (Emphasis is added below.) ENDA would apply to businesses with 15 or more employees.
We at Americans For Truth generally oppose the concept of religious exemptions to pro-homosexual laws because religious people alone should not be able to exercise their freedoms to oppose aberrant sexual behavior.
These hateful and untrue statements came from our friend Peter LaBarbera and his group Americans for Truth (in name only).
Ms. Cothran spoke at a recent fundraiser for the group.
So while Ms. Cothran claims to believe that lgbts should have job protection, she does not have a problem with aligning herself with a group who tells lies to prevent said job protection.
Her actions remind me of a man who claims not believe in lynching, but not only does subtle things to incite the mob but also benefits from their bloodlust.
Apparently being a hypocrite has become a characteristic of being an "ex-gay."
I am sure you all are aware of Charlene Cothran, the African-American publisher of Venus Magazine who is now claiming that she is an "ex-gay."
Let me make you aware of something else.
When Cothran announced her "change," I wrote her a letter. She answered my letter. The following is our exchange:
My letter:
You are Being Used
While I do not agree with your latest exploits, I respect them. However please be advised as you claim to look towards Heaven that you do not allow yourself to be deceived by those with an agenda. Already some folks are using your story in attempts to deny those of us who are comfortable with our orientation our basic rights.
You see that is the paradox involving those claiming to be "ex-gay." Many of us gays have no problem with your decisions. However, groups like Focus on the Family, etc try to use your experiences to keep job-protection ordinances and the like from being passed.
Your situation reminds me of Angie and Debbie Winans. First, they wrote a song criticizing homosexuality called "It's Not Natural," then they begin speaking in legislative committees against laws that would protect gays and lesbians from discrimination in employment and housing.
Where is the line drawn? Please remember my point as you go about your days. Don't allow yourself to be used to deny me my rights as a gay black man.
Her response:
I am acutely aware that many on the 'right' want to use me/my story for their own narrow benefit. In many interviews I remind them that every gay or lesbian person...every PERSON deserves basic HUMAN RIGHTS. The right to NOT be fired from their jobs for being gay, the right to declare whom ever they please as their 'next of kin' for medical emergency, property exchange, insurance privileges etc.
Now the rest of her letter goes on about gays recruiting children but since it is not relevant to my point, I will not not include it.
So Ms. Cothran believes that lgbts have a right to employment, etc. Too bad that many whom she now calls allies don't believe the same thing. Cases in point:
A vote is expected soon on H.R. 2015, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA). If passed, the bill would grant special employment rights and protected minority status to individuals who define themselves based upon chosen sexual behaviors and others who — among other things — suffer from clinical self-delusion. It would force employers to abandon their First Amendment civil rights at the workplace door.
TAKE ACTION: If enacted into law, The Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA, H.R. 2015) and the federal “hate crimes” bill, H.R. 1592 (recently passed by the House), would be the first time that “gender identity rights” are recognized in federal law. This would usher in a new wave of persecution for people opposed to homosexuality and gender confusion . . .
At bottom is the religious exemption language for H.R. 2015, ENDA, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, which would use federal government powers to ban “employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.” (Emphasis is added below.) ENDA would apply to businesses with 15 or more employees.
We at Americans For Truth generally oppose the concept of religious exemptions to pro-homosexual laws because religious people alone should not be able to exercise their freedoms to oppose aberrant sexual behavior.
These hateful and untrue statements came from our friend Peter LaBarbera and his group Americans for Truth (in name only).
Ms. Cothran spoke at a recent fundraiser for the group.
So while Ms. Cothran claims to believe that lgbts should have job protection, she does not have a problem with aligning herself with a group who tells lies to prevent said job protection.
Her actions remind me of a man who claims not believe in lynching, but not only does subtle things to incite the mob but also benefits from their bloodlust.
Apparently being a hypocrite has become a characteristic of being an "ex-gay."
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
More lies, more aggravation
As soon as I get over anti-gay industry lies (see Monday's post), more come my way.
John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute wrote a piece today, Criminalizing Your Thoughts, that criticizes the recently passed Matthew Shepard Act.
Naturally he is touting the same "this law will lead Christians to be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality" lie. The following caught my attention:
For example, Christians have been prosecuted under a state hate crime law for “singing hymns” and peacefully “carrying signs” while attending a homosexual fair in Pennsylvania. Because the signs challenged the morality of homosexuality, these Christians were charged with three felonies and five misdemeanors and faced 47 years in prison for attempting to preach at a homosexual street fair. Indeed, a state judge determined that the prosecutions could go forward. His rationale was that the Christians’ speech constituted so-called “fighting words.”
This of course is not true. According to People for the American Way:
The story as told by Repent America and other Religious Right groups – most recently in two videotaped ads by grandmothers who participated in the Repent America protest against the festival – is that people were arrested merely for “sharing the gospel” on public property. The arrest of the protestors and subsequent charges against them on several counts – some under Pennsylvania’s hate crimes law – is, in the mythology of Repent America, proof that the goal of gay rights activists in general, and hate crimes laws in particular, is to outlaw the gospel.
The kernel of truth at the bottom of the propaganda pile is that the two grandmothers and others were in fact arrested while protesting Philadelphia’s OutFest, and a local prosecutor did charge them with violations of several laws, including the state’s hate crimes law.
But none of those charges were for “sharing the gospel.”
Repent America doesn’t mention that a federal court later found that the women “insulted individual attendees, blocked access to vendors, and disobeyed direct orders from the police, who were trying to preserve order and keep the peace.” The police arrested the protesters only after “their presence disrupted public order.” Unlike the organizers of OutFest, Repent America leaders failed to obtain a permit from the city. The city and the police gave the women great leeway, but they still overstepped the bounds of peaceful protest.
The First Amendment allows equality advocates to rally, and allows those with a different point of view to protest. But it doesn’t mean that protestors have the right to disrupt the rally or drown out its speakers. It is universally recognized that public safety officials can place reasonable “time, place, and manner restrictions” on people exercising their first amendment rights in order to preserve public order and prevent one group from trampling another’s rights. The court, which noted that Repent America did not get a permit for their protest, found that the police applied the law reasonably when the bullhorn-wielding Repent America protestors refused a request to move to another location and instead sat down in the street.
It is also important to note that the court dismissed the hate crimes charges in this case. In fact, the resolution of the situation proves the opposite of what the Right claims – despite their disruptive behavior and refusal to obey police requests, the protestors were neither convicted nor sentenced for breaking hate crimes laws.
The Rutherford Institute claims that it is a "civil liberties organization that provides free legal services to people whose constitutional and human rights have been threatened or violated."
Apparently telling the truth doesn't seem to fit into these noble goals.
As soon as I get over anti-gay industry lies (see Monday's post), more come my way.
John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute wrote a piece today, Criminalizing Your Thoughts, that criticizes the recently passed Matthew Shepard Act.
Naturally he is touting the same "this law will lead Christians to be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality" lie. The following caught my attention:
For example, Christians have been prosecuted under a state hate crime law for “singing hymns” and peacefully “carrying signs” while attending a homosexual fair in Pennsylvania. Because the signs challenged the morality of homosexuality, these Christians were charged with three felonies and five misdemeanors and faced 47 years in prison for attempting to preach at a homosexual street fair. Indeed, a state judge determined that the prosecutions could go forward. His rationale was that the Christians’ speech constituted so-called “fighting words.”
This of course is not true. According to People for the American Way:
The story as told by Repent America and other Religious Right groups – most recently in two videotaped ads by grandmothers who participated in the Repent America protest against the festival – is that people were arrested merely for “sharing the gospel” on public property. The arrest of the protestors and subsequent charges against them on several counts – some under Pennsylvania’s hate crimes law – is, in the mythology of Repent America, proof that the goal of gay rights activists in general, and hate crimes laws in particular, is to outlaw the gospel.
The kernel of truth at the bottom of the propaganda pile is that the two grandmothers and others were in fact arrested while protesting Philadelphia’s OutFest, and a local prosecutor did charge them with violations of several laws, including the state’s hate crimes law.
But none of those charges were for “sharing the gospel.”
Repent America doesn’t mention that a federal court later found that the women “insulted individual attendees, blocked access to vendors, and disobeyed direct orders from the police, who were trying to preserve order and keep the peace.” The police arrested the protesters only after “their presence disrupted public order.” Unlike the organizers of OutFest, Repent America leaders failed to obtain a permit from the city. The city and the police gave the women great leeway, but they still overstepped the bounds of peaceful protest.
The First Amendment allows equality advocates to rally, and allows those with a different point of view to protest. But it doesn’t mean that protestors have the right to disrupt the rally or drown out its speakers. It is universally recognized that public safety officials can place reasonable “time, place, and manner restrictions” on people exercising their first amendment rights in order to preserve public order and prevent one group from trampling another’s rights. The court, which noted that Repent America did not get a permit for their protest, found that the police applied the law reasonably when the bullhorn-wielding Repent America protestors refused a request to move to another location and instead sat down in the street.
It is also important to note that the court dismissed the hate crimes charges in this case. In fact, the resolution of the situation proves the opposite of what the Right claims – despite their disruptive behavior and refusal to obey police requests, the protestors were neither convicted nor sentenced for breaking hate crimes laws.
The Rutherford Institute claims that it is a "civil liberties organization that provides free legal services to people whose constitutional and human rights have been threatened or violated."
Apparently telling the truth doesn't seem to fit into these noble goals.
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Book update!!!!!!!!!!!
No I have not forgotten about my book.
It has been a little over a month since its publication and things are going better than I expected.
My book has been getting a bit of attention (though no word on whether or not Peter LaBarbera and company at Americans for Truth took my advice and actually bought a copy) through word of mouth.
I think it's safe to assume that Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters is becoming an underground favorite. A big thanks to those bloggers who believed in this project from the beginning and went out of their way to publicize my book on their sites (you guys know who you are!)
Also, thanks to my webmaster for setting up my page.
There have also been mentions in high profile lgbt sites such as PageQ and Americablog. So slowly but steadily, my book is building up steam.
I know that due to a variety of factors (such as my book being self-published), my book will not make a huge impact at first. Therefore, I set a goal of selling at least 100 copies before I kick things into high gear.
With the help of so many people, I am almost there.
And I know that the best is yet to come.
No I have not forgotten about my book.
It has been a little over a month since its publication and things are going better than I expected.
My book has been getting a bit of attention (though no word on whether or not Peter LaBarbera and company at Americans for Truth took my advice and actually bought a copy) through word of mouth.
I think it's safe to assume that Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters is becoming an underground favorite. A big thanks to those bloggers who believed in this project from the beginning and went out of their way to publicize my book on their sites (you guys know who you are!)
Also, thanks to my webmaster for setting up my page.
There have also been mentions in high profile lgbt sites such as PageQ and Americablog. So slowly but steadily, my book is building up steam.
I know that due to a variety of factors (such as my book being self-published), my book will not make a huge impact at first. Therefore, I set a goal of selling at least 100 copies before I kick things into high gear.
With the help of so many people, I am almost there.
And I know that the best is yet to come.
Monday, October 08, 2007
Ignorant people are aggravating the hell out of me
I apologize for the length of this post but I am aggravated.
No matter how I try to be calm over the situation, I never fail to get angry and exasperated when I see an ignorant Christian spouting anti-gay industry lies about lgbts.
I get angry because I hate when my people are lied on and I get exasperated because I really wonder when oh when will they ever learn?
So what got me upset today?
A piece on the site Virtue Online called 20 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality.
The author of the piece, John F. McKenna, is described as a member of St. Paul's Church in Darien, Connecticut, one of the "Connecticut Six" churches that oppose their bishop's stand in favor of a non-celibate gay bishop consecrated as bishop of New Hampshire.
To me he is a classic case of what is wrong with Chrisitianity in this country - someone so caught up in ego regarding his relationship with God that he allows himself to be used in order to spread lies and propaganda.
Let's take this piece apart bit by bit:
2. Who is harmed by supporting such relationships?
Most importantly, those who are inclined toward homosexuality are harmed if they act on those impulses. A widespread myth is that AIDS is the main danger, but AIDS is actually just a small part of the health hazard. Consider some of the others:
They include 26 types of diseases other than AIDS (Journal of Adolescent Medicine); a life expectancy equal to that experienced in 1871 (Oxford University's International Journal of Epidemiology); high risk of three types of hepatitis (Centers for Disease Control); proctitis associated with the gonorrhea, chlamydia, herpes, & syphilis widespread among homosexuals (Journal of the American Medical Association); an incidence of anal cancer 35 times higher than usual (Dr. Joel Palefsky, an expert in that field); among lesbians, a higher prevalence of bacterial vaginosis and hepatitis C (Sexually Transmitted Infections, a journal).
Some of the health hazards exist even in the extremely unusual situations in which there is complete faithfulness with neither of the partners having had prior relationships. The inherent weakness of the body results in its inability to withstand gay sex without a serious risk of damage, including tearing of the sphincter, fistular infections of the rectum, and incontinence. Support for physical relationships among members of the same sex is a false benevolence, a well-meant gesture that is very often a death sentence .
There are so many things wrong with this passage. Let's take that part about the supposed gay life span. McKenna is distorting a 1997 Canadian study to claim that gays have a short life span? And how do I know that he is distorting this study? Because in 2001, the creators of the study went on record complaining about how the religious right were misusing their work in the exact way McKenna was. Their letter is here.
As for the rest of McKenna's claims regarding diseases, please note that he does not give an exact notation of the studies he got the information from. Given how he distorted the 1997 Canadian study, his vague citations have no credibility.
But the most grevious error McKenna makes in this section is inferring that anal sex is "homosexual behavior. Not only does he make the mistake of thinking that anal sex is a fixture in gay sexual intercourse (which it is not) but he omits the fact that many heterosexuals have an interest in the sexual act.
16. Isn't it obvious that in raising children, all that matters is love, regardless of gender? Why not two mommies?The fact remains that gender matters--perhaps nowhere more than in regard to child rearing.
The unique value of fathers has been explained by Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School in his book Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child. Pruett says dads are critically important simply because "fathers do not mother."
Psychology Today explained in 1996 that "fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children."
A father, as a male parent, makes unique contributions to the task of parenting that a mother cannot emulate, and vice versa. According to Harvard educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, mothers tend to stress sympathy, grace and care to their children, while fathers accent justice, fairness and duty.
Moms give a child a sense of hopefulness; dads provide a sense of right and wrong and its consequences. Other researchers have determined that boys are not born with an understanding of "maleness." They have to learn it, ideally from their fathers. (Research done by Focus on the Family)
I purposely bolded the names of Kyle Pruett and Carol Gilligan. I think many reading this blog knows why. Last year, they both went on record complaining how Focus on the Family distorted their work to make the claims that McKenna is now alluding to in his piece. Their complaints are here.
17. But supporting gay rights in the church and in general is really very benign. Where's the real harm?
Let's say there are six million American gays dying at the usual American death rate of .8%, and so 48,000 are dying each year. According to the official Danish statistical agency, 80% of married gays do not reach old age, and if that applies to the U.S., then 38,400 American gays are dying young each year. (Compared to fewer than 4000 Americans over the entire history of the Iraq war.)
Now that is untrue. That citation comes from yet another bad study from our friend the discredited Paul Cameron. In this particular case, not only did Cameron distort his findings, but he also distorted how and where he presented them. That is here.
19. But won't same-sex marriage alter the whole social pattern of homosexuality?
According to researchers studying same-sex marriage in Scandinavia over the past 15 years, marriage has had no discernible impact on homosexual patterns of instability. The rapid breakup of same-sex marriages is parallel to the rapid breakup of same-sex couples who haven't been married. Very few avail themselves of same-sex marriage to begin with, and of those who do, the liaisons have usually been quite short-lived.
Now that is a bold-faced lie. The fact of the matter is that no one was married in the study McKenna was talking about. I go into more detail about this in my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters.
The study in question looked at casual gay partnerships. It was conducted between the years 1984 and 2000. Same sex marriage was legalized in the Netherlands (i.e. Scandinavia) in 2001.
I apologize for not having blog links for it but I have the information available for anyone who wants to know more or wants to challenge me.
The fact of the matter is that McKenna does not know what the heck he is talking about. It is apparent that he shopped for data that enhanced his beliefs. He did not even attempt to see about the legitimacy of the so-called facts he was citing.
And I don't think he cared. As long as it enhanced his belief that homosexuality is a sin, then the data he found is correct, according to him at least.
Not very Christian, is it?
I apologize for the length of this post but I am aggravated.
No matter how I try to be calm over the situation, I never fail to get angry and exasperated when I see an ignorant Christian spouting anti-gay industry lies about lgbts.
I get angry because I hate when my people are lied on and I get exasperated because I really wonder when oh when will they ever learn?
So what got me upset today?
A piece on the site Virtue Online called 20 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality.
The author of the piece, John F. McKenna, is described as a member of St. Paul's Church in Darien, Connecticut, one of the "Connecticut Six" churches that oppose their bishop's stand in favor of a non-celibate gay bishop consecrated as bishop of New Hampshire.
To me he is a classic case of what is wrong with Chrisitianity in this country - someone so caught up in ego regarding his relationship with God that he allows himself to be used in order to spread lies and propaganda.
Let's take this piece apart bit by bit:
2. Who is harmed by supporting such relationships?
Most importantly, those who are inclined toward homosexuality are harmed if they act on those impulses. A widespread myth is that AIDS is the main danger, but AIDS is actually just a small part of the health hazard. Consider some of the others:
They include 26 types of diseases other than AIDS (Journal of Adolescent Medicine); a life expectancy equal to that experienced in 1871 (Oxford University's International Journal of Epidemiology); high risk of three types of hepatitis (Centers for Disease Control); proctitis associated with the gonorrhea, chlamydia, herpes, & syphilis widespread among homosexuals (Journal of the American Medical Association); an incidence of anal cancer 35 times higher than usual (Dr. Joel Palefsky, an expert in that field); among lesbians, a higher prevalence of bacterial vaginosis and hepatitis C (Sexually Transmitted Infections, a journal).
Some of the health hazards exist even in the extremely unusual situations in which there is complete faithfulness with neither of the partners having had prior relationships. The inherent weakness of the body results in its inability to withstand gay sex without a serious risk of damage, including tearing of the sphincter, fistular infections of the rectum, and incontinence. Support for physical relationships among members of the same sex is a false benevolence, a well-meant gesture that is very often a death sentence .
There are so many things wrong with this passage. Let's take that part about the supposed gay life span. McKenna is distorting a 1997 Canadian study to claim that gays have a short life span? And how do I know that he is distorting this study? Because in 2001, the creators of the study went on record complaining about how the religious right were misusing their work in the exact way McKenna was. Their letter is here.
As for the rest of McKenna's claims regarding diseases, please note that he does not give an exact notation of the studies he got the information from. Given how he distorted the 1997 Canadian study, his vague citations have no credibility.
But the most grevious error McKenna makes in this section is inferring that anal sex is "homosexual behavior. Not only does he make the mistake of thinking that anal sex is a fixture in gay sexual intercourse (which it is not) but he omits the fact that many heterosexuals have an interest in the sexual act.
16. Isn't it obvious that in raising children, all that matters is love, regardless of gender? Why not two mommies?The fact remains that gender matters--perhaps nowhere more than in regard to child rearing.
The unique value of fathers has been explained by Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School in his book Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child. Pruett says dads are critically important simply because "fathers do not mother."
Psychology Today explained in 1996 that "fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children."
A father, as a male parent, makes unique contributions to the task of parenting that a mother cannot emulate, and vice versa. According to Harvard educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, mothers tend to stress sympathy, grace and care to their children, while fathers accent justice, fairness and duty.
Moms give a child a sense of hopefulness; dads provide a sense of right and wrong and its consequences. Other researchers have determined that boys are not born with an understanding of "maleness." They have to learn it, ideally from their fathers. (Research done by Focus on the Family)
I purposely bolded the names of Kyle Pruett and Carol Gilligan. I think many reading this blog knows why. Last year, they both went on record complaining how Focus on the Family distorted their work to make the claims that McKenna is now alluding to in his piece. Their complaints are here.
17. But supporting gay rights in the church and in general is really very benign. Where's the real harm?
Let's say there are six million American gays dying at the usual American death rate of .8%, and so 48,000 are dying each year. According to the official Danish statistical agency, 80% of married gays do not reach old age, and if that applies to the U.S., then 38,400 American gays are dying young each year. (Compared to fewer than 4000 Americans over the entire history of the Iraq war.)
Now that is untrue. That citation comes from yet another bad study from our friend the discredited Paul Cameron. In this particular case, not only did Cameron distort his findings, but he also distorted how and where he presented them. That is here.
19. But won't same-sex marriage alter the whole social pattern of homosexuality?
According to researchers studying same-sex marriage in Scandinavia over the past 15 years, marriage has had no discernible impact on homosexual patterns of instability. The rapid breakup of same-sex marriages is parallel to the rapid breakup of same-sex couples who haven't been married. Very few avail themselves of same-sex marriage to begin with, and of those who do, the liaisons have usually been quite short-lived.
Now that is a bold-faced lie. The fact of the matter is that no one was married in the study McKenna was talking about. I go into more detail about this in my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters.
The study in question looked at casual gay partnerships. It was conducted between the years 1984 and 2000. Same sex marriage was legalized in the Netherlands (i.e. Scandinavia) in 2001.
I apologize for not having blog links for it but I have the information available for anyone who wants to know more or wants to challenge me.
The fact of the matter is that McKenna does not know what the heck he is talking about. It is apparent that he shopped for data that enhanced his beliefs. He did not even attempt to see about the legitimacy of the so-called facts he was citing.
And I don't think he cared. As long as it enhanced his belief that homosexuality is a sin, then the data he found is correct, according to him at least.
Not very Christian, is it?
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Something worth knowing about the Folsom Street Fair and our friend Peter
Yesterday, an online buddy of mine wrote me saying that he attended the Folsom Street Fair. His observations are very interesting:
I have to say I went to the Folsom Street Fair (and this was my third year).
It is clear from these pictures that the whippings and such that occurred on Folsum Street were not the popular parts of the Street Fair (his pictures of the flogging shows 4 people watching, plus himself and Allyson Smith). He might find them exciting, but it isn't the focus of the Street Fair.
And most people who went were fully dressed. It is extremely rare to see fully naked people on the street. One thing that Peter LaBarbera didn't mention in his complaining about nudity--it is legal in San Francisco to walk around fully nude.
I've only seen it once outside of Folsom Street. There were also volunteers who were asked to go around and ask people who were having sex to stop. It is not condoned at the street fair. It is possible that Peter LaBarbera was standing in the way of these volunteers as he excitedly filmed the oral sex for at least 1/2 hour!
It is also clear from these pictures that Peter LaBarbera asked most of these people to pose for him.
My friend was wrong about one thing. Peter did not say the oral sex went on for half an hour. He was talking about the "mutual masturbation:"
Naked “leathermen” fondle each other in a public sex scene as passers-by stop to watch and take pictures. This scene (see next photo) went on for at least a half hour, as new men would come and join in the mutual masturbation.
However the question still remains. Just how did Peter know how long the "mutual masturbation" went on.
Let me guess. He was watching and timing it for "research purposes."
Yesterday, an online buddy of mine wrote me saying that he attended the Folsom Street Fair. His observations are very interesting:
I have to say I went to the Folsom Street Fair (and this was my third year).
It is clear from these pictures that the whippings and such that occurred on Folsum Street were not the popular parts of the Street Fair (his pictures of the flogging shows 4 people watching, plus himself and Allyson Smith). He might find them exciting, but it isn't the focus of the Street Fair.
And most people who went were fully dressed. It is extremely rare to see fully naked people on the street. One thing that Peter LaBarbera didn't mention in his complaining about nudity--it is legal in San Francisco to walk around fully nude.
I've only seen it once outside of Folsom Street. There were also volunteers who were asked to go around and ask people who were having sex to stop. It is not condoned at the street fair. It is possible that Peter LaBarbera was standing in the way of these volunteers as he excitedly filmed the oral sex for at least 1/2 hour!
It is also clear from these pictures that Peter LaBarbera asked most of these people to pose for him.
My friend was wrong about one thing. Peter did not say the oral sex went on for half an hour. He was talking about the "mutual masturbation:"
Naked “leathermen” fondle each other in a public sex scene as passers-by stop to watch and take pictures. This scene (see next photo) went on for at least a half hour, as new men would come and join in the mutual masturbation.
However the question still remains. Just how did Peter know how long the "mutual masturbation" went on.
Let me guess. He was watching and timing it for "research purposes."
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Porno Petey strikes again
There he goes again.
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth (in name only) has just published his eyewitness report of San Francisco's Folsom Street Fair complete with pictures.
For those who us who are aware of Peter's proclivities, it is business as usual, as he makes us all aware of every "depraved" sexual act we missed as we go about with our boring lives.
In other words, business as usual.
For the record, I have never been to Folsom Street Fair and I don't plan on going soon. I am not into bondage or seeing half dressed people in chains and leather walking the streets.
Not that it matters to Peter or any of his supporters. In their eyes, my boring life as a gay man is a dodge, an illusion put forth by some secret gay empire.
And it is up to Peter (like some reluctant hero of a Stephen King novel) to "expose" the true face of lgbt America. Which, according to him, is all about baccanalia and hedonism.
Never mind that there are many other lgbts like me who have no interest in Folsom Street Fair or that there are a good number of heterosexuals (as evidenced in the pictures Peter took) that do have an interest in such goings on, laws determining lgbt self-determination should be decided solely on the anti-gay spin Peter try to put forth from his "investigation."
It would be ludicrous if Peter wasn't so damned serious and the implications of his innuendoes weren't so damned scary.
There he goes again.
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth (in name only) has just published his eyewitness report of San Francisco's Folsom Street Fair complete with pictures.
For those who us who are aware of Peter's proclivities, it is business as usual, as he makes us all aware of every "depraved" sexual act we missed as we go about with our boring lives.
In other words, business as usual.
For the record, I have never been to Folsom Street Fair and I don't plan on going soon. I am not into bondage or seeing half dressed people in chains and leather walking the streets.
Not that it matters to Peter or any of his supporters. In their eyes, my boring life as a gay man is a dodge, an illusion put forth by some secret gay empire.
And it is up to Peter (like some reluctant hero of a Stephen King novel) to "expose" the true face of lgbt America. Which, according to him, is all about baccanalia and hedonism.
Never mind that there are many other lgbts like me who have no interest in Folsom Street Fair or that there are a good number of heterosexuals (as evidenced in the pictures Peter took) that do have an interest in such goings on, laws determining lgbt self-determination should be decided solely on the anti-gay spin Peter try to put forth from his "investigation."
It would be ludicrous if Peter wasn't so damned serious and the implications of his innuendoes weren't so damned scary.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Oh no! Not another ENDA post!
Yes another ENDA post but it's a short one.
By now, I am sure everyone is aware of how the House of Representatives is gutting the ENDA bill due to the reluctance of some members to support the part about our transgender brothers and sisters.
Apparently anti-gay industry instigations about "she-males" wanting jobs in churches and "300 pound linebackers" dressing in drag and using the women's bathroom is getting to some people.
I don't like how the House Democrats acted.
I understand it, but I don't have to like it.
Strangely though, the anti-gay industry seems to be silent as to how their scare tactics worked. I think a lot of them are either reeling from the low attendance of their "Values Summit" or attending the Folsom Street Fair.
Be sure to take some interesting pictures, Peter.
I have a feeling that the lgbt community has not heard the last of the Folsom Street Fair controversy. Poll numbers and experts show that the anti-gay industry pissed away the advantage they gained from the 2004 elections.
Well that could have been easily predicted.
I am sure that in the coming weeks, we can probably expect to hear more about "she-males" and men in leather.
I sincerely hope that some of us in pursuit of "personal freedom" don't provide the anti-gay industry with ammunition that could destroy us all.
There is one thing though about this fight over ENDA that I am very proud of. I was wrong (so far) about "brutally honest" gay folks who would use the opportunity to voice their prejudices about the transgender community and play into the hands of the anti-gay industry.
From what I have seen, lgbts (major organizations included) have formed a united front in defending the dignity of our transgender brothers and sisters.
Let's see more of that unity in defending those in our community who don't fit the personfication of a "perfect lgbt."
But at the end of the day, we would do best to remember that it's all politics.
And politics is like sticking your hand in a pile of manure in search of a diamond.
When you find the diamond, how in the heck do you get the smell off of your hand?
Yes another ENDA post but it's a short one.
By now, I am sure everyone is aware of how the House of Representatives is gutting the ENDA bill due to the reluctance of some members to support the part about our transgender brothers and sisters.
Apparently anti-gay industry instigations about "she-males" wanting jobs in churches and "300 pound linebackers" dressing in drag and using the women's bathroom is getting to some people.
I don't like how the House Democrats acted.
I understand it, but I don't have to like it.
Strangely though, the anti-gay industry seems to be silent as to how their scare tactics worked. I think a lot of them are either reeling from the low attendance of their "Values Summit" or attending the Folsom Street Fair.
Be sure to take some interesting pictures, Peter.
I have a feeling that the lgbt community has not heard the last of the Folsom Street Fair controversy. Poll numbers and experts show that the anti-gay industry pissed away the advantage they gained from the 2004 elections.
Well that could have been easily predicted.
I am sure that in the coming weeks, we can probably expect to hear more about "she-males" and men in leather.
I sincerely hope that some of us in pursuit of "personal freedom" don't provide the anti-gay industry with ammunition that could destroy us all.
There is one thing though about this fight over ENDA that I am very proud of. I was wrong (so far) about "brutally honest" gay folks who would use the opportunity to voice their prejudices about the transgender community and play into the hands of the anti-gay industry.
From what I have seen, lgbts (major organizations included) have formed a united front in defending the dignity of our transgender brothers and sisters.
Let's see more of that unity in defending those in our community who don't fit the personfication of a "perfect lgbt."
But at the end of the day, we would do best to remember that it's all politics.
And politics is like sticking your hand in a pile of manure in search of a diamond.
When you find the diamond, how in the heck do you get the smell off of your hand?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)