Goodbye 2007, Hello 2008
It has been a good year . . .
but I don't have time to recap now. I am working on something that I hope will help get information to our community about the lies of the anti-gay industry.
I hope to have it done by January 2.
Keep your fingers crossed and have an excellent new year!!!!!
Monday, December 31, 2007
Friday, December 28, 2007
Peter LaBarbera's homophobia bites him in the ass
In recent pleas for money, Peter LaBarbera has claimed that we lgbts unfairly brand him as homophobic. Peter further claims that all he is doing to speak the "truth" regarding homosexuality:
Yes, they absolutely HATE us because we stand unapologetically against their sexual ideology as one that a holy Creator can have no part of. This “culture war” is not about us — it’s about right versus wrong . . .
To say that he is full of shit would be the overstatement of the decade. So how about a demonstration courtesy of his actions today.
This morning, he published an article spotlighting a hideous crime perpetrated against a gay man:
The victim, a gay man, was raped, attacked, and "sodomized" with a broomstick after leaving a party Friday night -The attacker, Felipe Rivera, had also been at the party. However, he was asked to leave because he had punched the victim in the face after, according to Rivera, the victim winked at him.
After being booted from the party, the attacker waited outside for the vicim to leave. The attacker claims the victim propositioned him for sex, but the victim denies this. In fact, the Chicago Tribune reports that "the victim alleged he had refused an offer from Rivera to pay him $50 for sex later in the evening." But regardless of who truly wanted sex from whom, the attacker proceeded to punch, rape, and stick the broom up the victim's rectum.
When asked why he did it, the attacker is alleged to have said, "because he hates 'faggots,' and this is what they get." The attacker is also said to have shouted anti-gay epithets at the victim while he was attacking.
That is awful. But here is what Peter said about the crime:
Our question: what percentage of “anti-gay hate crimes” are actually committed by people who themselves are involved in homosexual behavior? If this Chicago Tribune report is accurate, then this is no typical ”gay panic defense” – whereby a man blames his assault on a homosexual by claiming that the victim first made an unwanted sexual advance toward him — because the alleged perpetrator here offers to pay his victim for homosexual sex and then sexually assaults him.
We also know that some men may secretly (or even not so secretly) engage (or desire) homosexual perversions yet eschew the “gay” label for themselves – so the fact that Rivera told police that he “hates homosexuals” tells us little. He may hate that part of himself drawn to deviant homosexual acts.
Behavior, not self-labels, is what counts: we wonder how many cases like this end up on the FBI’s list as an “anti-gay” “hate-crime” statistic — to be exploited later, ironically, by “gay” activists lobbying for dubious pro-homosexual “hate crimes” laws … We’ll follow this story closely. — Peter LaBarbera
And the interesting part of the entire situation - later this day, Peter's post was "mysteriously" deleted from his webpage.
If you asked me, I think Peter slipped and showed his homophobia.
Here is an ugly crime committed against a gay man by an individual so psychotic that his mother called the police (i.e. that is how he was caught. Apparently his mother had an order of protection against him even before the alleged crime was committed.).
But the only thing Peter cares about is exploiting this crime as further proof of how "ugly" homosexuality is.
To Peter, the fact that someone was the victim of a crime ranks lower than the fact he can brand the perpetrator as gay.
How is that truth?
Sounds like homophobia to me.
And to make matters worse, when caught, he tries to make a quiet exit.
The Bible says that when you do wrong, you should apologize.
Peter's deletion of his article seems to be a small admittance of wrong. But Peter, if you are a true Christian, then perhaps you owe the lgbt community a public apology.
We are waiting.
Big thanks to goodasyou.org for this story.
UPDATE - Apparently Peter has apologized for his sloppy work. But he has reprinted his nonsense. The following analyzation is from goodasyou.org, who have been on top of this story:
One interesting note about Pete's new post: He reprints his old post with a line stricken through the part that he nw considers erroneous. However, in a curious move, he added a passage to his original post, as if it had been there all along. The new paragraph reads:
"One more question: if same-sex sexual assaults are classified as “hate crimes,” what about men who rape women (or vice versa)? Shouldn’t these sex crimes also be labeled “hate crimes” against women, as they are typically motivated by contempt and misogyny (hatred of women)? We’ll follow this story closely."
And as you can see from both our quoted text as well as the Google Cache of his original post, this paragraph was never in the original article. Why the duplicity, Peter?
And then Peter just can't seem to help himself but tell another deception:
We know there is a problem with homosexual-on-homosexual violence (hence the book, Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them). It seems ludicrous to call such crimes “anti-gay hate crimes” — for use in the “gay” propaganda cycle that feeds off exaggerated spinning of FBI data to imply an outbreak of (straight) “anti-gay violence” that doesn’t exist.
Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them was a book written 13 years ago. If there is a "big" problem with same-sex relationship abuse, then why couldn't Peter have found a more current source than a 13-year-old book?
More importantly, the book dealt with relationship violence. So why does Peter make reference to this book that deals with relationship violence when talking about a crime in which there was no relationship between the victim and the perpetrator?
Because Peter seems to be trying covertly insult the nature of lgbt relationships in general. He seems to be inferring that what happened to that young man is indicative of lgbt relationships.
Damn Peter, even when you apologize you make things worse.
No matter how you try to cover it up, your homophobia comes shining through.
In recent pleas for money, Peter LaBarbera has claimed that we lgbts unfairly brand him as homophobic. Peter further claims that all he is doing to speak the "truth" regarding homosexuality:
Yes, they absolutely HATE us because we stand unapologetically against their sexual ideology as one that a holy Creator can have no part of. This “culture war” is not about us — it’s about right versus wrong . . .
To say that he is full of shit would be the overstatement of the decade. So how about a demonstration courtesy of his actions today.
This morning, he published an article spotlighting a hideous crime perpetrated against a gay man:
The victim, a gay man, was raped, attacked, and "sodomized" with a broomstick after leaving a party Friday night -The attacker, Felipe Rivera, had also been at the party. However, he was asked to leave because he had punched the victim in the face after, according to Rivera, the victim winked at him.
After being booted from the party, the attacker waited outside for the vicim to leave. The attacker claims the victim propositioned him for sex, but the victim denies this. In fact, the Chicago Tribune reports that "the victim alleged he had refused an offer from Rivera to pay him $50 for sex later in the evening." But regardless of who truly wanted sex from whom, the attacker proceeded to punch, rape, and stick the broom up the victim's rectum.
When asked why he did it, the attacker is alleged to have said, "because he hates 'faggots,' and this is what they get." The attacker is also said to have shouted anti-gay epithets at the victim while he was attacking.
That is awful. But here is what Peter said about the crime:
Our question: what percentage of “anti-gay hate crimes” are actually committed by people who themselves are involved in homosexual behavior? If this Chicago Tribune report is accurate, then this is no typical ”gay panic defense” – whereby a man blames his assault on a homosexual by claiming that the victim first made an unwanted sexual advance toward him — because the alleged perpetrator here offers to pay his victim for homosexual sex and then sexually assaults him.
We also know that some men may secretly (or even not so secretly) engage (or desire) homosexual perversions yet eschew the “gay” label for themselves – so the fact that Rivera told police that he “hates homosexuals” tells us little. He may hate that part of himself drawn to deviant homosexual acts.
Behavior, not self-labels, is what counts: we wonder how many cases like this end up on the FBI’s list as an “anti-gay” “hate-crime” statistic — to be exploited later, ironically, by “gay” activists lobbying for dubious pro-homosexual “hate crimes” laws … We’ll follow this story closely. — Peter LaBarbera
And the interesting part of the entire situation - later this day, Peter's post was "mysteriously" deleted from his webpage.
If you asked me, I think Peter slipped and showed his homophobia.
Here is an ugly crime committed against a gay man by an individual so psychotic that his mother called the police (i.e. that is how he was caught. Apparently his mother had an order of protection against him even before the alleged crime was committed.).
But the only thing Peter cares about is exploiting this crime as further proof of how "ugly" homosexuality is.
To Peter, the fact that someone was the victim of a crime ranks lower than the fact he can brand the perpetrator as gay.
How is that truth?
Sounds like homophobia to me.
And to make matters worse, when caught, he tries to make a quiet exit.
The Bible says that when you do wrong, you should apologize.
Peter's deletion of his article seems to be a small admittance of wrong. But Peter, if you are a true Christian, then perhaps you owe the lgbt community a public apology.
We are waiting.
Big thanks to goodasyou.org for this story.
UPDATE - Apparently Peter has apologized for his sloppy work. But he has reprinted his nonsense. The following analyzation is from goodasyou.org, who have been on top of this story:
One interesting note about Pete's new post: He reprints his old post with a line stricken through the part that he nw considers erroneous. However, in a curious move, he added a passage to his original post, as if it had been there all along. The new paragraph reads:
"One more question: if same-sex sexual assaults are classified as “hate crimes,” what about men who rape women (or vice versa)? Shouldn’t these sex crimes also be labeled “hate crimes” against women, as they are typically motivated by contempt and misogyny (hatred of women)? We’ll follow this story closely."
And as you can see from both our quoted text as well as the Google Cache of his original post, this paragraph was never in the original article. Why the duplicity, Peter?
And then Peter just can't seem to help himself but tell another deception:
We know there is a problem with homosexual-on-homosexual violence (hence the book, Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them). It seems ludicrous to call such crimes “anti-gay hate crimes” — for use in the “gay” propaganda cycle that feeds off exaggerated spinning of FBI data to imply an outbreak of (straight) “anti-gay violence” that doesn’t exist.
Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them was a book written 13 years ago. If there is a "big" problem with same-sex relationship abuse, then why couldn't Peter have found a more current source than a 13-year-old book?
More importantly, the book dealt with relationship violence. So why does Peter make reference to this book that deals with relationship violence when talking about a crime in which there was no relationship between the victim and the perpetrator?
Because Peter seems to be trying covertly insult the nature of lgbt relationships in general. He seems to be inferring that what happened to that young man is indicative of lgbt relationships.
Damn Peter, even when you apologize you make things worse.
No matter how you try to cover it up, your homophobia comes shining through.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
The perpetuation of dehumanization (Gotta love that title)
I'm back and I am still tired.
Not to mention almost burnt out. But leave it to the anti-gay industry to muster enough anger in me to post something.
Check out this gem from One News Now and Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America:
A spokesman for Concerned Women for America warns that yet another piece of legislation being promoted in the Democrat-led Congress would force taxpayers to subsidize immoral and dangerous behavior.
Senators Gordon Smith (R-Oregon) and Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) have introduced a bill that will extend domestic partner benefits to homosexual federal employees. The measure would allow an employee and his or her same-sex partner to be eligible for federal health benefits, the Family and Medical Leave program, long-term care, insurance, and retirement benefits. Representatives Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin), who is an open homosexual, and Tom Lantos (D-California) have introduced the bill in the House and included foreign service workers for the first time.
Matt Barber is policy director for cultural issues at Concerned Women for America in Washington, DC. He says the bill is the camel's nose in the tent for a litany of pro-homosexuality legislation, along the lines of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act.
"For the government to take a moral stance here [regarding] people who engage in homosexual conduct is essentially equating that conduct to natural sexual relations between married, heterosexual couples," states Barber. "This really introduces us to the whole idea of gay 'marriage' at the national level to federal ENDA."
I bolded Barber's statement because it emphasizes the same nonsense I talked about the last time I posted. That time, it was a statement by columnist John Derbyshire along the same vein:
I know myself well enough to be sure that I am not cruel, or bigoted, or intolerant. Nor am I aware of anyone who knows me that believes me to be any of those things. Like Thomas More: "I wish none harm, I say none harm, I do none harm." Do as you please in the privacy of your chambers . . .
As usual, when talking about lgbts, Barber, Derbyshire and their co-horts seek to dehumanize and reduce our lives and families to sexual acts. This is not an accident, but an intentional tactic; an appeal to fear and ignorance.
To them, we are not raising children and we do not have families. Our lives are defined by hedonistic sexual thrills. And we had better not do anything to change that image.
Not because it is the truth, but because it is how they think it should be.
I have noticed that members of the anti-gay industry get most angry at us when we don't reduce our lives to their low expectations.
It is when we want to break their stereotypes of the oversexed, pathetic gay man or the man-hating, violent lesbian, or the confused transgender that they come out blazing with their complaints as to how we are "in their face."
They seem to think that they are not only entitled to tell us how our lives are but to correct us when we don't pattern ourselves after their lies.
Not very Christian, it is?
I'm back and I am still tired.
Not to mention almost burnt out. But leave it to the anti-gay industry to muster enough anger in me to post something.
Check out this gem from One News Now and Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America:
A spokesman for Concerned Women for America warns that yet another piece of legislation being promoted in the Democrat-led Congress would force taxpayers to subsidize immoral and dangerous behavior.
Senators Gordon Smith (R-Oregon) and Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) have introduced a bill that will extend domestic partner benefits to homosexual federal employees. The measure would allow an employee and his or her same-sex partner to be eligible for federal health benefits, the Family and Medical Leave program, long-term care, insurance, and retirement benefits. Representatives Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin), who is an open homosexual, and Tom Lantos (D-California) have introduced the bill in the House and included foreign service workers for the first time.
Matt Barber is policy director for cultural issues at Concerned Women for America in Washington, DC. He says the bill is the camel's nose in the tent for a litany of pro-homosexuality legislation, along the lines of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act.
"For the government to take a moral stance here [regarding] people who engage in homosexual conduct is essentially equating that conduct to natural sexual relations between married, heterosexual couples," states Barber. "This really introduces us to the whole idea of gay 'marriage' at the national level to federal ENDA."
I bolded Barber's statement because it emphasizes the same nonsense I talked about the last time I posted. That time, it was a statement by columnist John Derbyshire along the same vein:
I know myself well enough to be sure that I am not cruel, or bigoted, or intolerant. Nor am I aware of anyone who knows me that believes me to be any of those things. Like Thomas More: "I wish none harm, I say none harm, I do none harm." Do as you please in the privacy of your chambers . . .
As usual, when talking about lgbts, Barber, Derbyshire and their co-horts seek to dehumanize and reduce our lives and families to sexual acts. This is not an accident, but an intentional tactic; an appeal to fear and ignorance.
To them, we are not raising children and we do not have families. Our lives are defined by hedonistic sexual thrills. And we had better not do anything to change that image.
Not because it is the truth, but because it is how they think it should be.
I have noticed that members of the anti-gay industry get most angry at us when we don't reduce our lives to their low expectations.
It is when we want to break their stereotypes of the oversexed, pathetic gay man or the man-hating, violent lesbian, or the confused transgender that they come out blazing with their complaints as to how we are "in their face."
They seem to think that they are not only entitled to tell us how our lives are but to correct us when we don't pattern ourselves after their lies.
Not very Christian, it is?
Monday, December 24, 2007
I nearly make it out, but John Derbyshire pulls me back in
Yeah I know I said that I was taking a break. But I just can't resist responding when I read stupid shit.
For example this lovely piece by John Derbyshire:
All that aside, though, I can't say I care much about homosexuality one way or the other. If I examine my own motivations for saying anything at all on this subject, the main thing I am aware of is just contrarian cussedness. I get so goddam sick of all the movies, TV shows, and, yes, e-mails telling me how goddam wonderful homosexuals are, and how goddam normal homosexuality is, and how goddam cruel and bigoted and intolerant it must be not to whole-heartedly approve of homosexuals, and cheer them on, and applaud the things they do. Well, I know myself well enough to be sure that I am not cruel, or bigoted, or intolerant. Nor am I aware of anyone who knows me that believes me to be any of those things. Like Thomas More: "I wish none harm, I say none harm, I do none harm." Do as you please in the privacy of your chambers, but for heaven's sake stop pushing it in my face, stop telling me how wonderful you are, stop lying about the fact that the things you do have health consequences (were in fact responsible for introducing a horrible plague into our society), stop mucking up my language by introducing illiteracies like "homophobe" and imposing the stain of salacity on perfectly decent old English words like "gay", stop telling me that the things I say might be taken as incitement to crimes of violence. (What words that anyone says about anything might not be thus taken by some lunatic somewhere? What would we be permitted to talk about, on that criterion?) And don't even think about proselytizing your "lifestyle" to my kids.
I don't know Mr. Derbyshire well enough to know for sure whether or not he is cruel, bigoted, or intolerant. But from what I am reading, he is ignorant.
Consider these facts:
As of 1990, 6 million to 14 million children in the United States were living with a gay or lesbian parent. (National Adoption Information Clearinghouse, a service of the U.S. Administration for Children and Families.),
Same-sex couples raising chidren live in 96% of all counties nationwide in the United States. (2000 U.S. Census analyses by the Urban Institute and Human Rights Campaign),
As many as 7.2 million Americans under age 20 are lesbian or gay,
45% of gay males and 20% of lesbians experience physical or verbal assaultin high school; 28% of these young people feel forced to drop out of schooldue to harassment based on sexual orientation.
But yet and still, people like Derbyshire are obsessed with defining the issue of sexual orienation to that of kinky bedroom habits.
That, my friends, goes beyond hatred. It is more diabolical than hatred. It is willful ignorance.
Of course Derbyshire can think of homosexuality in any way that he likes but the kicker is that he seems to demand that those of us who are lgbts conduct our lives in accordance to his ignorance.
And that will probably be the final fight over sexual orientation. Behind all of the lies about dangerous health consequences, behind all of the Biblical admonitions, behind all of the deceptions and distortions are people who cannot accept the fact that being an lgbt goes beyond sexual intercourse and stereotypes about leather and sadomaschism.
So rather than to accept the fact that maybe they are wrong, they rail against the rest of the world for daring to interrupt their stupid notions.
Well they, Mr. Derbyshire included, need to get over themselves. No matter how freaky they try to make us out to be, we are normal people who lead normal (and in my case - boring) lives. And we should not have to edit out any part of these lives.
The fact of the matter is that no one can tell the story of lgbt lives better than those who are living them. In matters of the media, we have every right to push for positive and correct stories about who we are. And we have every right to influence all facets of this country, from the media to our legislative bodies.
That is what being an American is all about
And one last thing to Mr. Derbyshire: if by chance any of your kids turn out to be gay, don't blame us. Be a good parent. Listen to that child, don't make assumptions, and by all means don't desert your child.
Maybe you will learn something for a change.
Yeah I know I said that I was taking a break. But I just can't resist responding when I read stupid shit.
For example this lovely piece by John Derbyshire:
All that aside, though, I can't say I care much about homosexuality one way or the other. If I examine my own motivations for saying anything at all on this subject, the main thing I am aware of is just contrarian cussedness. I get so goddam sick of all the movies, TV shows, and, yes, e-mails telling me how goddam wonderful homosexuals are, and how goddam normal homosexuality is, and how goddam cruel and bigoted and intolerant it must be not to whole-heartedly approve of homosexuals, and cheer them on, and applaud the things they do. Well, I know myself well enough to be sure that I am not cruel, or bigoted, or intolerant. Nor am I aware of anyone who knows me that believes me to be any of those things. Like Thomas More: "I wish none harm, I say none harm, I do none harm." Do as you please in the privacy of your chambers, but for heaven's sake stop pushing it in my face, stop telling me how wonderful you are, stop lying about the fact that the things you do have health consequences (were in fact responsible for introducing a horrible plague into our society), stop mucking up my language by introducing illiteracies like "homophobe" and imposing the stain of salacity on perfectly decent old English words like "gay", stop telling me that the things I say might be taken as incitement to crimes of violence. (What words that anyone says about anything might not be thus taken by some lunatic somewhere? What would we be permitted to talk about, on that criterion?) And don't even think about proselytizing your "lifestyle" to my kids.
I don't know Mr. Derbyshire well enough to know for sure whether or not he is cruel, bigoted, or intolerant. But from what I am reading, he is ignorant.
Consider these facts:
As of 1990, 6 million to 14 million children in the United States were living with a gay or lesbian parent. (National Adoption Information Clearinghouse, a service of the U.S. Administration for Children and Families.),
Same-sex couples raising chidren live in 96% of all counties nationwide in the United States. (2000 U.S. Census analyses by the Urban Institute and Human Rights Campaign),
As many as 7.2 million Americans under age 20 are lesbian or gay,
45% of gay males and 20% of lesbians experience physical or verbal assaultin high school; 28% of these young people feel forced to drop out of schooldue to harassment based on sexual orientation.
But yet and still, people like Derbyshire are obsessed with defining the issue of sexual orienation to that of kinky bedroom habits.
That, my friends, goes beyond hatred. It is more diabolical than hatred. It is willful ignorance.
Of course Derbyshire can think of homosexuality in any way that he likes but the kicker is that he seems to demand that those of us who are lgbts conduct our lives in accordance to his ignorance.
And that will probably be the final fight over sexual orientation. Behind all of the lies about dangerous health consequences, behind all of the Biblical admonitions, behind all of the deceptions and distortions are people who cannot accept the fact that being an lgbt goes beyond sexual intercourse and stereotypes about leather and sadomaschism.
So rather than to accept the fact that maybe they are wrong, they rail against the rest of the world for daring to interrupt their stupid notions.
Well they, Mr. Derbyshire included, need to get over themselves. No matter how freaky they try to make us out to be, we are normal people who lead normal (and in my case - boring) lives. And we should not have to edit out any part of these lives.
The fact of the matter is that no one can tell the story of lgbt lives better than those who are living them. In matters of the media, we have every right to push for positive and correct stories about who we are. And we have every right to influence all facets of this country, from the media to our legislative bodies.
That is what being an American is all about
And one last thing to Mr. Derbyshire: if by chance any of your kids turn out to be gay, don't blame us. Be a good parent. Listen to that child, don't make assumptions, and by all means don't desert your child.
Maybe you will learn something for a change.
Friday, December 21, 2007
I am taking a break
I am burnt out.
With doing what I do almost every day, working at my regular job, and keeping tabs on how my book is selling, I am at my wits end when it comes to energy.
And keeping my ideas fresh.
So I am taking a break from it all until December 27.
During that time, I will be planning goals for 2008. I have big plans that I want to see come to fruition.
But before I go, I want you to read this excellent post from Jeremy at goodasyou.org
He has caught the anti-gay industry (yet again) telling a bunch of lies. (You mean they lie? So what else is new?)
Barring some incredible event that pushes me to post, I will see you all on December 27.
Happy Holidays!!!
I am burnt out.
With doing what I do almost every day, working at my regular job, and keeping tabs on how my book is selling, I am at my wits end when it comes to energy.
And keeping my ideas fresh.
So I am taking a break from it all until December 27.
During that time, I will be planning goals for 2008. I have big plans that I want to see come to fruition.
But before I go, I want you to read this excellent post from Jeremy at goodasyou.org
He has caught the anti-gay industry (yet again) telling a bunch of lies. (You mean they lie? So what else is new?)
Barring some incredible event that pushes me to post, I will see you all on December 27.
Happy Holidays!!!
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
And the whining continues
By now you all have heard about the conservative Princeton student who faked threatening notes and an attack on himself.
I won't recount the story. But there is an excellent article on the situation by blogger Max Blumenthal. You can read it here.
As for me, I don't feel the need to give my opinion of the matter. It has been the talk of the blogs for over a day now and I don't think that I can add to anything that I have read.
But I can't help but to feel sorry for the guy. He had advantages and wasted them. He was attending Princeton, one of the top universities in the country and in one swoop, destroyed that opportunity.
It is a sad situation when folks feel that they have to make up stories to further their cause. And it's even sadder when they are caught.
Now from the department of giving someone cheese to go with that whine comes our friend, Gary Bauer.
Bauer, a "pro-family" activist and former Presidential candidate is upset over the following:
A U.S. judge ordered the Secret Service on Monday to disclose records of visits by nine prominent conservative Christian leaders to the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's residence.
The ruling, in response to a legal watchdog group's suit, could shed light on the influence leaders like James Dobson of Focus on the Family have had on President George W. Bush's administration. It may also affect legal efforts to force the release of visiting records of convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and other similar cases.
"We think that these conservative Christian leaders have had a very big impact," said Executive Director Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which filed the case.
Bauer registered his anger with One News Now. I am sure he knew that this supposed news organization (which is an extension of the American Family Association) would print his comments without the courtesy of showing both sides of the story. He was not disappointed:
Bauer, the president of American Values, says he finds the freedom of information request by CREW "offensive."
"I do think it's quite telling that [this] organization ... wants to know about religious leaders visiting the White House,; and yet as far as I know, they did not request the names of Muslim leaders that have visited the White House," he observes. "And of course they would not dare file a request that would ask for [the names of] visitors of a particular race that had visited the White House or met with the president."
And of course he was quick to play the victim:
The American Values president says the request demonstrates "the ongoing effort by cultural elites to try to intimidate Christians out of the public square." He also says he is willing to tell anyone who wants to know how many times he has been to the White House to give President Bush advice on "the great issues facing our country."
Bauer may not have realized it but he answered his own question when he made that crack about Muslims.
Let me break it down this way:
I don't remember any Muslim leader bragging that Bush made them privy to why a potential Supreme Court judge (i.e. Harriet Miers) would be suitable to their base. James Dobson did.
I don't remember any time that Bush jumped into a private family issue to suit the Muslim community like he did with Terri Schiavo. He did this of course to appease Dobson, Bauer and the rest of that ilk.
I don't remember any time that Bush adopted any talking points forwarded by the Muslim community like he did for Dobson, Bauer, and company when talking about why he was for a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.
The fact of the matter is that CREW has a point and a right to view those visitation logs.
What is happening to you all is part and parcel of participating in a free and Democratic society, Bauer.
Get used to it.
By now you all have heard about the conservative Princeton student who faked threatening notes and an attack on himself.
I won't recount the story. But there is an excellent article on the situation by blogger Max Blumenthal. You can read it here.
As for me, I don't feel the need to give my opinion of the matter. It has been the talk of the blogs for over a day now and I don't think that I can add to anything that I have read.
But I can't help but to feel sorry for the guy. He had advantages and wasted them. He was attending Princeton, one of the top universities in the country and in one swoop, destroyed that opportunity.
It is a sad situation when folks feel that they have to make up stories to further their cause. And it's even sadder when they are caught.
Now from the department of giving someone cheese to go with that whine comes our friend, Gary Bauer.
Bauer, a "pro-family" activist and former Presidential candidate is upset over the following:
A U.S. judge ordered the Secret Service on Monday to disclose records of visits by nine prominent conservative Christian leaders to the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's residence.
The ruling, in response to a legal watchdog group's suit, could shed light on the influence leaders like James Dobson of Focus on the Family have had on President George W. Bush's administration. It may also affect legal efforts to force the release of visiting records of convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and other similar cases.
"We think that these conservative Christian leaders have had a very big impact," said Executive Director Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which filed the case.
Bauer registered his anger with One News Now. I am sure he knew that this supposed news organization (which is an extension of the American Family Association) would print his comments without the courtesy of showing both sides of the story. He was not disappointed:
Bauer, the president of American Values, says he finds the freedom of information request by CREW "offensive."
"I do think it's quite telling that [this] organization ... wants to know about religious leaders visiting the White House,; and yet as far as I know, they did not request the names of Muslim leaders that have visited the White House," he observes. "And of course they would not dare file a request that would ask for [the names of] visitors of a particular race that had visited the White House or met with the president."
And of course he was quick to play the victim:
The American Values president says the request demonstrates "the ongoing effort by cultural elites to try to intimidate Christians out of the public square." He also says he is willing to tell anyone who wants to know how many times he has been to the White House to give President Bush advice on "the great issues facing our country."
Bauer may not have realized it but he answered his own question when he made that crack about Muslims.
Let me break it down this way:
I don't remember any Muslim leader bragging that Bush made them privy to why a potential Supreme Court judge (i.e. Harriet Miers) would be suitable to their base. James Dobson did.
I don't remember any time that Bush jumped into a private family issue to suit the Muslim community like he did with Terri Schiavo. He did this of course to appease Dobson, Bauer and the rest of that ilk.
I don't remember any time that Bush adopted any talking points forwarded by the Muslim community like he did for Dobson, Bauer, and company when talking about why he was for a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.
The fact of the matter is that CREW has a point and a right to view those visitation logs.
What is happening to you all is part and parcel of participating in a free and Democratic society, Bauer.
Get used to it.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Be afraid. Be very afraid because you deserve it
Via the Huffington Post, I ran across a very interesting piece:
This campaign is knee-deep in religion, and it's only going to get worse. I'd thought that the limits of professed public piety had already been achieved during the Republican CNN-YouTube debate when some squirrelly looking guy held up a Bible and asked, "Do you believe every word of this book?" -- and not one candidate dared reply: None of your damn business.
Instead, Giuliani, Romney and Huckabee bent a knee and tried appeasement with various interpretations of scriptural literalism. The right answer, the only answer, is that the very question is offensive. The Constitution prohibits any religious test for office. And while that proscribes only government action, the law is also meant to be a teacher. In the same way that civil rights laws established not just the legal but also the moral norm that one simply does not discriminate on the basis of race -- changing the practice of one generation and the consciousness of the next -- so the constitutional injunction against religious tests is meant to make citizens understand that such tests are profoundly un-American.
Who wrote that you may ask. Was it one of my fellow "Godless liberals?" Was it a fellow purveyor of the "gay agenda?"
Why no. It was neoconservative Charles Krauthammer. Apparently he took time out of his busy schedule of defending President Bush's hideous war in Iraq on Fox News to sound an alarm horn regarding religion in this campaign.
And it pinpoints a fear that is slowly gripping the Republican party this election cycle. Over this summer, we heard repeatedly from "Conservative Christian leaders (i.e. the anti-gay industry) that they disapprove of the Republican presidential candidates.
Now they seemed to have zeroed in on one that they will support: Mike Huckabee. Subsequently, he has moved up in the Republican polls. And this seems to have the Republican party on the whole scared because while Huckabee appeals to the "conservative Christian" base, it is that same appeal that makes him unelectable.
Interesting statements he has made regarding lgbts, AIDS, and variety of social issues (the newest being him comparing homosexuality with necrophilia) have made him more and more appealing to the "Christian conservative" base. But the problem is that Huckabee can't seem to temper that appeal with assurances to moderates that he won't go all Khomeni should he get elected.
It is definitely a different ballgame from 2004.
Remember that lovely election cycle when the Republican party used the "threat" of gay marriage of rally their base and give Bush a second term? Things are different now. The very thing that worked for the Republican party then has returned to bite them in the ass. (I am aware of the gay subtext so hush up)
So now we are at this point. Huckabee seems to be slowly gaining ground and as he does, he is turning on the piety even more, thereby appealing to more "Conservative Christians" but potentially alienating moderates and maybe even the majority of voters in the nation.
And the Republican party is scrambling behind the scenes to somehow control the situation.
Lawd, I am enjoying this.
Via the Huffington Post, I ran across a very interesting piece:
This campaign is knee-deep in religion, and it's only going to get worse. I'd thought that the limits of professed public piety had already been achieved during the Republican CNN-YouTube debate when some squirrelly looking guy held up a Bible and asked, "Do you believe every word of this book?" -- and not one candidate dared reply: None of your damn business.
Instead, Giuliani, Romney and Huckabee bent a knee and tried appeasement with various interpretations of scriptural literalism. The right answer, the only answer, is that the very question is offensive. The Constitution prohibits any religious test for office. And while that proscribes only government action, the law is also meant to be a teacher. In the same way that civil rights laws established not just the legal but also the moral norm that one simply does not discriminate on the basis of race -- changing the practice of one generation and the consciousness of the next -- so the constitutional injunction against religious tests is meant to make citizens understand that such tests are profoundly un-American.
Who wrote that you may ask. Was it one of my fellow "Godless liberals?" Was it a fellow purveyor of the "gay agenda?"
Why no. It was neoconservative Charles Krauthammer. Apparently he took time out of his busy schedule of defending President Bush's hideous war in Iraq on Fox News to sound an alarm horn regarding religion in this campaign.
And it pinpoints a fear that is slowly gripping the Republican party this election cycle. Over this summer, we heard repeatedly from "Conservative Christian leaders (i.e. the anti-gay industry) that they disapprove of the Republican presidential candidates.
Now they seemed to have zeroed in on one that they will support: Mike Huckabee. Subsequently, he has moved up in the Republican polls. And this seems to have the Republican party on the whole scared because while Huckabee appeals to the "conservative Christian" base, it is that same appeal that makes him unelectable.
Interesting statements he has made regarding lgbts, AIDS, and variety of social issues (the newest being him comparing homosexuality with necrophilia) have made him more and more appealing to the "Christian conservative" base. But the problem is that Huckabee can't seem to temper that appeal with assurances to moderates that he won't go all Khomeni should he get elected.
It is definitely a different ballgame from 2004.
Remember that lovely election cycle when the Republican party used the "threat" of gay marriage of rally their base and give Bush a second term? Things are different now. The very thing that worked for the Republican party then has returned to bite them in the ass. (I am aware of the gay subtext so hush up)
So now we are at this point. Huckabee seems to be slowly gaining ground and as he does, he is turning on the piety even more, thereby appealing to more "Conservative Christians" but potentially alienating moderates and maybe even the majority of voters in the nation.
And the Republican party is scrambling behind the scenes to somehow control the situation.
Lawd, I am enjoying this.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Spotlight on a good cause
From time to time, I will be spotlighting sites and people who are fighting the anti-gay industry. I would be remiss if I caused anyone to think that little ole me is the only one in the mix.
There are others. And they have been at it longer and are more skilled than I am.
Wayne Besen is one of them. He is the author of Anything But Straight, the definitive book detailing the lies of the "ex-gay" movement.
He is also head of Truth Wins Out:
a non-profit think tank and educational organization that counters right wing disinformation campaigns, debunks the “ex-gay” myth, and provides accurate information about the lives of GLBT people. Our work includes:
Providing opposition research on the “ex-gay” myth
Discrediting right wing propaganda
Educating America about the GLBT community
The main vehicle the anti-gay industry uses to launder their lies is the so-called “ex-gay” ministries. The far right exploits these groups in an effort to present their disdain for gay people in the guise of love. However, this embrace of re-closeted homosexuals is no more than a veiled attempt to deny GLBT people equality under the law.
TWO’s vision is to create a world where the right wing is held accountable for their factual distortions and the “ex-gay” ministries are exposed as one of the greatest hoaxes in American history. We firmly believe in the principle that leaving the “Big Lie” unchallenged invites prejudice to prosper, falsehoods to flower and fiction to be confused with fact. TWO stands for the idea that education will overcome ignorance and truth will one day triumph.
At the present moment, Besen is having a holiday fundraiser in order to combat more lies of the "ex-gay" movement. Check it out.
From time to time, I will be spotlighting sites and people who are fighting the anti-gay industry. I would be remiss if I caused anyone to think that little ole me is the only one in the mix.
There are others. And they have been at it longer and are more skilled than I am.
Wayne Besen is one of them. He is the author of Anything But Straight, the definitive book detailing the lies of the "ex-gay" movement.
He is also head of Truth Wins Out:
a non-profit think tank and educational organization that counters right wing disinformation campaigns, debunks the “ex-gay” myth, and provides accurate information about the lives of GLBT people. Our work includes:
Providing opposition research on the “ex-gay” myth
Discrediting right wing propaganda
Educating America about the GLBT community
The main vehicle the anti-gay industry uses to launder their lies is the so-called “ex-gay” ministries. The far right exploits these groups in an effort to present their disdain for gay people in the guise of love. However, this embrace of re-closeted homosexuals is no more than a veiled attempt to deny GLBT people equality under the law.
TWO’s vision is to create a world where the right wing is held accountable for their factual distortions and the “ex-gay” ministries are exposed as one of the greatest hoaxes in American history. We firmly believe in the principle that leaving the “Big Lie” unchallenged invites prejudice to prosper, falsehoods to flower and fiction to be confused with fact. TWO stands for the idea that education will overcome ignorance and truth will one day triumph.
At the present moment, Besen is having a holiday fundraiser in order to combat more lies of the "ex-gay" movement. Check it out.
Friday, December 14, 2007
You like me! You really like me!
Last night was a huge hit. I read a bit of my book to a packed house attending the SC Gay and Lesbian Business Guild meeting and they were very receptive to my message.
As well as generous.
I was able to sell many copies of my book and give out many more business cards. The most important thing is that my message went out and was received well.
I think I did relatively well seeing that it was my first time doing a book reading. Of course there are a few things I would change. I am not exactly Sidney Poitier or Morgan Freeman when it comes to verbal delivery.
I read somewhere that a great Greek orator used to practice saying speeches with pebbles in his mouth. Of course I am sure pebbles were cleaner back then than they are now.
Maybe I will try the same tactic with ice cream sandwiches.
Seriously though, I read today that our friend Peter is a little bit upset that Diversity Inc magazine co-founder Luke Visconti compared his usage of the Bible to demonize lgbts to slaveholders using the same holy text to justify slavery:
DiversityInc magazine co-founder Luke Visconti (lvisconti@diversityinc.com) showed his own (modern) bigotry and disrespect for people of faith by comparing Americans For Truth president Peter LaBarbera to a 19th Century Christian slavery advocate because LaBarbera opposes homosexuality and pro-homosexual corporate policies.
I'm confused. Apparently Visconti's piece was about Americans for Truth (in name only). So how can Peter take it that it was meant to insult people of faith. I really don't remember reading that part of the Bible that says God had appointed Peter as the new prophet i.e. spokesperson for anyone of faith.
Maybe he was sent a memo. Peter continues to say:
Did you know that in the eyes of some liberal, pro-homosexual advocates, you are the moral equivalent of the KKK? Actually, this is nothing new: radical “gay” activists have been making this absurd and hateful analogy for years. This is why I tell religious people all the time: disabuse yourself of the idea that homosexual activists and their liberal fellow travelers “respect” your faith or your right to live it out in the public square. They don’t; they despise your Bible-centered morality, and are quite willing to demonize you for it.
Let me put my little spin on this.
Peter, your belief that homosexuality is a sin does not make you a bigot like a member of Klan. It is your tactics. You are guilty of the following:
Aiding in the selling of a fradulent video because it featured a man who claimed that he was ex-gay while at the same time potentially infecting gay men with HIV
Spreading the studies of a man dismissed from the APA for bad research tactics, something that you are aware of
Giving an unfair connotation that all gays and lesbians are diseased, sex ridden maniacs by attending subcultural events like Folsom Street Fair and focusing on the gays you see there while ignoring the heterosexual engaged in the same behavior
Engaging in the distortion of credible research in order to demonize the lgbt community.
Your tactics make you no different than slaveholders. They thought their racial heritage justified keeping African-Americans physically shackled. You think your religious beliefs justify the tactics you use to keep lgbts spiritually shackled.
Do you get what I am throwing down? No? Let me put it another way.
I have friends who are very conservative. They home school their children and feel that homosexuality is a sin. But they respect me. They ask me about my life and if I am dating anyone. They even introduced me to their children. Sometimes we even have lunch where we have an excellent conversation about life and everything in between.
The difference between you and them?
When they walk into my office and see a plaque I received as volunteer of the year from the gay and lesbian organization in my city, they don't whine to me or anyone about how their religious beliefs are being "violated." When my boyfriend brought me flowers for Valentine's Day, they did not tell me that I was going to hell nor did they tell me that I had no right to tell where I got the flowers from.
They don't assume that their Christianity gives them the top floor in some sort of superior hierarchy. They don't think that the world revolves around their religious beliefs.
Nor do they stoop to deception in attempts to get folks to conform to their religious beliefs.
You should really try it sometime, Peter.
Last night was a huge hit. I read a bit of my book to a packed house attending the SC Gay and Lesbian Business Guild meeting and they were very receptive to my message.
As well as generous.
I was able to sell many copies of my book and give out many more business cards. The most important thing is that my message went out and was received well.
I think I did relatively well seeing that it was my first time doing a book reading. Of course there are a few things I would change. I am not exactly Sidney Poitier or Morgan Freeman when it comes to verbal delivery.
I read somewhere that a great Greek orator used to practice saying speeches with pebbles in his mouth. Of course I am sure pebbles were cleaner back then than they are now.
Maybe I will try the same tactic with ice cream sandwiches.
Seriously though, I read today that our friend Peter is a little bit upset that Diversity Inc magazine co-founder Luke Visconti compared his usage of the Bible to demonize lgbts to slaveholders using the same holy text to justify slavery:
DiversityInc magazine co-founder Luke Visconti (lvisconti@diversityinc.com) showed his own (modern) bigotry and disrespect for people of faith by comparing Americans For Truth president Peter LaBarbera to a 19th Century Christian slavery advocate because LaBarbera opposes homosexuality and pro-homosexual corporate policies.
I'm confused. Apparently Visconti's piece was about Americans for Truth (in name only). So how can Peter take it that it was meant to insult people of faith. I really don't remember reading that part of the Bible that says God had appointed Peter as the new prophet i.e. spokesperson for anyone of faith.
Maybe he was sent a memo. Peter continues to say:
Did you know that in the eyes of some liberal, pro-homosexual advocates, you are the moral equivalent of the KKK? Actually, this is nothing new: radical “gay” activists have been making this absurd and hateful analogy for years. This is why I tell religious people all the time: disabuse yourself of the idea that homosexual activists and their liberal fellow travelers “respect” your faith or your right to live it out in the public square. They don’t; they despise your Bible-centered morality, and are quite willing to demonize you for it.
Let me put my little spin on this.
Peter, your belief that homosexuality is a sin does not make you a bigot like a member of Klan. It is your tactics. You are guilty of the following:
Aiding in the selling of a fradulent video because it featured a man who claimed that he was ex-gay while at the same time potentially infecting gay men with HIV
Spreading the studies of a man dismissed from the APA for bad research tactics, something that you are aware of
Giving an unfair connotation that all gays and lesbians are diseased, sex ridden maniacs by attending subcultural events like Folsom Street Fair and focusing on the gays you see there while ignoring the heterosexual engaged in the same behavior
Engaging in the distortion of credible research in order to demonize the lgbt community.
Your tactics make you no different than slaveholders. They thought their racial heritage justified keeping African-Americans physically shackled. You think your religious beliefs justify the tactics you use to keep lgbts spiritually shackled.
Do you get what I am throwing down? No? Let me put it another way.
I have friends who are very conservative. They home school their children and feel that homosexuality is a sin. But they respect me. They ask me about my life and if I am dating anyone. They even introduced me to their children. Sometimes we even have lunch where we have an excellent conversation about life and everything in between.
The difference between you and them?
When they walk into my office and see a plaque I received as volunteer of the year from the gay and lesbian organization in my city, they don't whine to me or anyone about how their religious beliefs are being "violated." When my boyfriend brought me flowers for Valentine's Day, they did not tell me that I was going to hell nor did they tell me that I had no right to tell where I got the flowers from.
They don't assume that their Christianity gives them the top floor in some sort of superior hierarchy. They don't think that the world revolves around their religious beliefs.
Nor do they stoop to deception in attempts to get folks to conform to their religious beliefs.
You should really try it sometime, Peter.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Tomorrow is the day!!!!
My mother came home from the hospital yesterday and is doing much better. Thank you all for your concern and prayers.
Well tomorrow is the day of my first book signing and I am naturally spooked. I haven't written down a game plan or anything.
Therefore I apologize for not posting anything new today. But I do want to direct your attention to a few items:
My buddies at Box Turtle Bulletin have instituted a new award, one which I hope that I am never the recipient of:
A lot of groups and individuals put out piles of misrepresented statistics and bogus research. Few can match Paul Cameron’s audacity, but from time to time we run across something that surely must put a smile on Cameron’s lips. One such email blast reached my inbox yesterday, and it was so good I thought it might be time to inaugurate a brand new award.
And so I’m announcing the Cameronesque Award, given for the individual or group who engages in the most egregious manipulation, misuse, or misrepresentation of research or statistics that would make Paul Cameron proud.
The first recipient of the award, The Christian Defense Coalition, truly deserves it.
Also, I rarely talk about the ex-gay movement on this blog. Mainly because there are many other excellent resources about the ex-gay movement, including Ex-gaywatch.com and this excellent book by activist Wayne Besen.
And now here is another good resource to add. The Southern Poverty Law Center has written two articles on the ex-gay movement. One dissects the lies of the movement and the other focuses on Scott Harrison, a man who survived the ex-gay movement.
Lastly, I would remiss if I didn't point out this article by the Worcester Telegram and Gazette. It focuses on something that our media should be talking about but for some reason refuses to: the lives of lgbts of color.
My mother came home from the hospital yesterday and is doing much better. Thank you all for your concern and prayers.
Well tomorrow is the day of my first book signing and I am naturally spooked. I haven't written down a game plan or anything.
Therefore I apologize for not posting anything new today. But I do want to direct your attention to a few items:
My buddies at Box Turtle Bulletin have instituted a new award, one which I hope that I am never the recipient of:
A lot of groups and individuals put out piles of misrepresented statistics and bogus research. Few can match Paul Cameron’s audacity, but from time to time we run across something that surely must put a smile on Cameron’s lips. One such email blast reached my inbox yesterday, and it was so good I thought it might be time to inaugurate a brand new award.
And so I’m announcing the Cameronesque Award, given for the individual or group who engages in the most egregious manipulation, misuse, or misrepresentation of research or statistics that would make Paul Cameron proud.
The first recipient of the award, The Christian Defense Coalition, truly deserves it.
Also, I rarely talk about the ex-gay movement on this blog. Mainly because there are many other excellent resources about the ex-gay movement, including Ex-gaywatch.com and this excellent book by activist Wayne Besen.
And now here is another good resource to add. The Southern Poverty Law Center has written two articles on the ex-gay movement. One dissects the lies of the movement and the other focuses on Scott Harrison, a man who survived the ex-gay movement.
Lastly, I would remiss if I didn't point out this article by the Worcester Telegram and Gazette. It focuses on something that our media should be talking about but for some reason refuses to: the lives of lgbts of color.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Huckabee shows how to manipulate the script
I dare anyone to tell me that the recent incident with presidential candidate Mike Huckabee wasn't timed.
Almost two weeks after Janet Folger's ridiculous wannabe Terminator fantasy of a future without Huckabee as president, someone "discovers" that Huckabee said some controversial things about AIDS sufferers as well as lgbts.
Leading of course to rebukes from folks on my side, but defenses by so-called "pro-family" figures.
A nasty way to shore up one's base indeed. I am expecting an article about the entire controversy (one-sided, of course) to come out soon in One News Now.
It wouldn't surprise me if the entire incident was planned. Huckabee is slowly but surely getting popular with the so-called "pro-family" groups. Therefore any rebuke he receives from the lgbt community can only make him look like a saint in their eyes.
So I would ask that while us lgbts get angry over Huckabee's comments, let's also recognize that we may be getting manipulated in order for Huckabee to get in the good graces of the anti-gay industry.
Let's recognize the game so that we are not pawns in it.
I dare anyone to tell me that the recent incident with presidential candidate Mike Huckabee wasn't timed.
Almost two weeks after Janet Folger's ridiculous wannabe Terminator fantasy of a future without Huckabee as president, someone "discovers" that Huckabee said some controversial things about AIDS sufferers as well as lgbts.
Leading of course to rebukes from folks on my side, but defenses by so-called "pro-family" figures.
A nasty way to shore up one's base indeed. I am expecting an article about the entire controversy (one-sided, of course) to come out soon in One News Now.
It wouldn't surprise me if the entire incident was planned. Huckabee is slowly but surely getting popular with the so-called "pro-family" groups. Therefore any rebuke he receives from the lgbt community can only make him look like a saint in their eyes.
So I would ask that while us lgbts get angry over Huckabee's comments, let's also recognize that we may be getting manipulated in order for Huckabee to get in the good graces of the anti-gay industry.
Let's recognize the game so that we are not pawns in it.
Monday, December 10, 2007
It's all coming together
Now I would usually talk about the anti-gay industry and I will later.
But today is too much of a good day to spoil with thoughts of Peter LaBarbera, Matt Barber, and the rest of the liars.
For today, I got my first royalty check. And of course I am giddy.
My books also came today. Last Friday, I got my business cards and poster. So I am now set for my first book signing on Thursday.
Also, my book jumped up a couple of spaces on amazon.com
And that is a good thing.
So I am now going to take this time to rest a little bit. Tonight, I am going to enjoy WWE Raw, eat, and give myself a psychological exfoliation.
Talk to you again tomorrow. I will be raring to go.
Now I would usually talk about the anti-gay industry and I will later.
But today is too much of a good day to spoil with thoughts of Peter LaBarbera, Matt Barber, and the rest of the liars.
For today, I got my first royalty check. And of course I am giddy.
My books also came today. Last Friday, I got my business cards and poster. So I am now set for my first book signing on Thursday.
Also, my book jumped up a couple of spaces on amazon.com
And that is a good thing.
So I am now going to take this time to rest a little bit. Tonight, I am going to enjoy WWE Raw, eat, and give myself a psychological exfoliation.
Talk to you again tomorrow. I will be raring to go.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Will the David Parker lie ever die?
Yes, I know what happened today.
The Senate killed hate crimes legislation. I don't like it but I am not that angry over it.
Recently I bought a book giving the pictorial history of the African-American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s. And reading it gave me perspective.
I figure if people like John Lewis, Fannie Lou Hamer, Viola Luizzo, C.T. Vivian, etc. can withstand beatings and the like for their basic rights then lgbts can withstand a little legislative setback without going all to pieces.
We moved this legislation farther than it has ever been before. So let's just take a small breath and get ready to move it even farther to completion.
The anti-gay industry has hindered us just a little bit but they can't stop us. Time and progress is on our side.
Now onto other issues . . .
I see that our friend Peter is basking in all of the attention his appearance on Fox News last night gave him. Never mind the fact that Alan Colmes made him look like a nut (yeah THAT Alan Colmes - I am as shocked as you). It is obvious that Peter defines the word "narcissist."
But I think it reveals a little bit of desperation on his part. Wasn't Folsom Street Fair held in September? Why is he still ruminating on it now in December.
Could it be that his recent requests for donations need a jolt in the arm?
Mmmmmm Could be.
Seriously though, I read something today that is the theme of this post.
Sometimes, the press can act as an unofficial ally of the anti-gay industry. This happens when a reporter is too lazy to do any actual reporting and prints the soundbites of the anti-gay industry without the courtesy of an investigation.
Case in point is this November 26 piece regarding David Parker and King and King.
I talked about Parker extensively in my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, and on this blog. He is that parent in Massachusetts who was arrested for not leaving his child's school when asked to. Parker claimed that he did this because the school would not give him assurances that his child wouldn't be "exposed" to talks of homosexuality.
He subsequently sued the school, joined by another set of parents who objected to the fairy tale King and King (in which a prince falls in love with the brother of his intended bride) being read to their child (who was in the second grade.)
The lawsuit was dismissed earlier this year. However, Parker and company continues to pursue the situation.
Anyway, Cybercast News Service interviewed Parker for an article about the Presidential candidates' views of King and King. So I am going to take what was said and play that lovely game of truth vs. lie that I played earlier this week:
Distortion: The article said: Parker was jailed in 2005 after he insisted Lexington school officials follow Massachusetts' parental notification law and assure him they would not read such books (like King and King) to his then-kindergartner without prior notice.
Truth: Parker's individual situation had nothing to do with King and King. His son brought home what was called a "diversity bookbag." In the bookbag was a book that had included one same sex family. Parker complained about this. He received assurances that "learning about homosexuality" was not a part of his child's curriculum. However, he was told that some students attending his child's school lived in same sex households and mentioning these households did not violate the Massachusetts parental notification law. The school had checked and was told that the notification law dealt with matters of sex education, and not necessarily differing families.
Distortion: Parker said the following in the article - "We went into a meeting with the administration, they said they were not going to tell us, and I basically made the statement, 'I'm prepared to sit here all night until I get some form of accommodation for our little boy.' Then they called the Lexington police, who put me in handcuffs, and they took me to the Lexington jail. I opted out of paying bail, so they put me in jail over night."
Truth: According to a press release jointly issued by the interim superintendent of schools and area chief of police, Parker was informed of these things during the meeting. The press release also said that Parker was told that he could appeal this decision. Parker decided to take another form of action, i.e. not leaving until he was arrested.
I don't think any malice was intended on the part of the journalist who wrote this article. But his laziness still damages truth.
Yes, I know what happened today.
The Senate killed hate crimes legislation. I don't like it but I am not that angry over it.
Recently I bought a book giving the pictorial history of the African-American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s. And reading it gave me perspective.
I figure if people like John Lewis, Fannie Lou Hamer, Viola Luizzo, C.T. Vivian, etc. can withstand beatings and the like for their basic rights then lgbts can withstand a little legislative setback without going all to pieces.
We moved this legislation farther than it has ever been before. So let's just take a small breath and get ready to move it even farther to completion.
The anti-gay industry has hindered us just a little bit but they can't stop us. Time and progress is on our side.
Now onto other issues . . .
I see that our friend Peter is basking in all of the attention his appearance on Fox News last night gave him. Never mind the fact that Alan Colmes made him look like a nut (yeah THAT Alan Colmes - I am as shocked as you). It is obvious that Peter defines the word "narcissist."
But I think it reveals a little bit of desperation on his part. Wasn't Folsom Street Fair held in September? Why is he still ruminating on it now in December.
Could it be that his recent requests for donations need a jolt in the arm?
Mmmmmm Could be.
Seriously though, I read something today that is the theme of this post.
Sometimes, the press can act as an unofficial ally of the anti-gay industry. This happens when a reporter is too lazy to do any actual reporting and prints the soundbites of the anti-gay industry without the courtesy of an investigation.
Case in point is this November 26 piece regarding David Parker and King and King.
I talked about Parker extensively in my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, and on this blog. He is that parent in Massachusetts who was arrested for not leaving his child's school when asked to. Parker claimed that he did this because the school would not give him assurances that his child wouldn't be "exposed" to talks of homosexuality.
He subsequently sued the school, joined by another set of parents who objected to the fairy tale King and King (in which a prince falls in love with the brother of his intended bride) being read to their child (who was in the second grade.)
The lawsuit was dismissed earlier this year. However, Parker and company continues to pursue the situation.
Anyway, Cybercast News Service interviewed Parker for an article about the Presidential candidates' views of King and King. So I am going to take what was said and play that lovely game of truth vs. lie that I played earlier this week:
Distortion: The article said: Parker was jailed in 2005 after he insisted Lexington school officials follow Massachusetts' parental notification law and assure him they would not read such books (like King and King) to his then-kindergartner without prior notice.
Truth: Parker's individual situation had nothing to do with King and King. His son brought home what was called a "diversity bookbag." In the bookbag was a book that had included one same sex family. Parker complained about this. He received assurances that "learning about homosexuality" was not a part of his child's curriculum. However, he was told that some students attending his child's school lived in same sex households and mentioning these households did not violate the Massachusetts parental notification law. The school had checked and was told that the notification law dealt with matters of sex education, and not necessarily differing families.
Distortion: Parker said the following in the article - "We went into a meeting with the administration, they said they were not going to tell us, and I basically made the statement, 'I'm prepared to sit here all night until I get some form of accommodation for our little boy.' Then they called the Lexington police, who put me in handcuffs, and they took me to the Lexington jail. I opted out of paying bail, so they put me in jail over night."
Truth: According to a press release jointly issued by the interim superintendent of schools and area chief of police, Parker was informed of these things during the meeting. The press release also said that Parker was told that he could appeal this decision. Parker decided to take another form of action, i.e. not leaving until he was arrested.
I don't think any malice was intended on the part of the journalist who wrote this article. But his laziness still damages truth.
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Okay, maybe I care a little bit . . .
There will be a short post today.
Peter had his press conference this afternoon and he brought friends. Matt Barber from Concerned Women for America and another person spoke.
From what I hear, it was sparsely attended. But for more information, check out The Washington Blade. Online Editor Rebecca Armendariz attended. Click on her name to read her thoughts about it.
Meanwhile, my mother is still in the hospital and I am still working to get everything ready for my first book signing next week. Wish me luck.
But all isn't frivolity and worry. I just found out some good news today.
It seems that my favorite actor, Philip Seymour Hoffman, is doing a nude scene in the new motion picture Before the Devil Knows You Are Dead.
I know what I am going to see this weekend.
So I like chubby pasty white men. Sue me already.
There will be a short post today.
Peter had his press conference this afternoon and he brought friends. Matt Barber from Concerned Women for America and another person spoke.
From what I hear, it was sparsely attended. But for more information, check out The Washington Blade. Online Editor Rebecca Armendariz attended. Click on her name to read her thoughts about it.
Meanwhile, my mother is still in the hospital and I am still working to get everything ready for my first book signing next week. Wish me luck.
But all isn't frivolity and worry. I just found out some good news today.
It seems that my favorite actor, Philip Seymour Hoffman, is doing a nude scene in the new motion picture Before the Devil Knows You Are Dead.
I know what I am going to see this weekend.
So I like chubby pasty white men. Sue me already.
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
It's one of THOSE tuesdays
1. First of all, please pray for my mother as she is going to the hospital for yet another bout with diverticulitis.
Between her problems and mine, we channel Judy Garland and Liza Minelli. Of course I get to be Liza (the younger one).
2. I liked yesterday's game. In fact, I am going to play it again a few more times in the future.
3. A little over a week away from my first book signing and not only have my books not come yet but I haven't written down word one of my small speech.
And I hate the design of the poster that I am due to email to Kinko's tonight.
Can you say panic?
Well at least the sales from amazon.com are coming in. Very slowly, that is.
4. And I have a small conundrum. I am thinking about reconnecting with a dear friend of mine (shut your dirty minds, he is straight) whom I haven't seen or spoken to in over 10 years. Of course I would then have to tell him why I am 36 and have yet to meet the woman of my dreams.
And I don't know how he is going to take the news that I am gay. I hope if I tell him that he does not ask me did I ever look at him naked.
Well I can always say technically no. I never looked at him naked. Only certain parts of his body. And to answer your question, it looked spectacular.
All jokes aside, regardless of what anyone tells you, the rejection from a friend who finds out you're gay is like your soul getting sliced. And frankly, I am too old to be a victim of soul slicing. The wound may take longer to heal than it would if I were younger.
5. I hear our friend Peter LaBarbera is going to hold a press conference where he will show footage he took of Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco.
Please pardon me for not giving a shit.
6. Lastly (and yes this is a shameless plug), I encourage those who haven't already to check my site http://www.holybullies.com/ and buy a copy of my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry.
Trust me when I say that it is THE book to have when you are forced to do battle with the anti-gay industry.
Now forgive me for leaving. I have two boxes of ice cream sandwiches with my name on them.
After all, who needs sex when one has chocolate?
1. First of all, please pray for my mother as she is going to the hospital for yet another bout with diverticulitis.
Between her problems and mine, we channel Judy Garland and Liza Minelli. Of course I get to be Liza (the younger one).
2. I liked yesterday's game. In fact, I am going to play it again a few more times in the future.
3. A little over a week away from my first book signing and not only have my books not come yet but I haven't written down word one of my small speech.
And I hate the design of the poster that I am due to email to Kinko's tonight.
Can you say panic?
Well at least the sales from amazon.com are coming in. Very slowly, that is.
4. And I have a small conundrum. I am thinking about reconnecting with a dear friend of mine (shut your dirty minds, he is straight) whom I haven't seen or spoken to in over 10 years. Of course I would then have to tell him why I am 36 and have yet to meet the woman of my dreams.
And I don't know how he is going to take the news that I am gay. I hope if I tell him that he does not ask me did I ever look at him naked.
Well I can always say technically no. I never looked at him naked. Only certain parts of his body. And to answer your question, it looked spectacular.
All jokes aside, regardless of what anyone tells you, the rejection from a friend who finds out you're gay is like your soul getting sliced. And frankly, I am too old to be a victim of soul slicing. The wound may take longer to heal than it would if I were younger.
5. I hear our friend Peter LaBarbera is going to hold a press conference where he will show footage he took of Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco.
Please pardon me for not giving a shit.
6. Lastly (and yes this is a shameless plug), I encourage those who haven't already to check my site http://www.holybullies.com/ and buy a copy of my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry.
Trust me when I say that it is THE book to have when you are forced to do battle with the anti-gay industry.
Now forgive me for leaving. I have two boxes of ice cream sandwiches with my name on them.
After all, who needs sex when one has chocolate?
Monday, December 03, 2007
A teachable moment in Kentucky
An anti-bias ordinance was recently passed in Jefferson County School Board in Kentucky. It was supposed to pass easily but ended up going through by one vote. And this is because of an interesting incident that took place during the hearing.
In speaking for the ordinance, Kat Crawford of Highland Middle School told of a situation where a person in her class said a derogatory comment about lgbts. According to Crawford, she talked to the young lady and told her how hurtful such comments could be. Possibly in attempting to prove her point further, Crawford came out to the young lady:
Crawford said she heard a girl tell other kids while on her way to scoliosis screening that "there are going to be lesbians working this," prompting snickers.
"I called the girl over and talked with her privately," Crawford told the board. "… I asked her what she said … and why she said it. I told her that I took offense to it (and said), 'How do you think that comment makes this lesbian feel?' "
Unfortunately, a board member used Crawford's story as an excuse to change her vote:
To me, that was the deal breaker," Linda Duncan said shortly after she voted against the policy.
"When I saw that this language could possibly protect those conversations, it was chilling to me. I could not support something (that) would put kids at risk," she said.
Duncan also said teachers "can't cross the line and discuss (their) sexual preference with a student -- it's just like religion, you can't take a moment and discuss it in school, it's not appropriate."
Unfortunately, others in the article also played the "teacher telling students their sexual preference" card. Luckily, there were folks who spoke to the media and told the difference between sexual orientation and sexual preference.
Personally, I am for the teacher. She had every right to do what she did. What if the student had said something negative about a certain religion that the teacher happened to be a believer in? It would have been totally appropriate for her to act in the same manner she did in this case.
But no one would be trying to accuse her of trying to "convert" the student, as they have in this case.
But I want to use the incident in order to play a game. I am going to pretend that I am Peter LaBarbera (I know, I am retching too) or some other anti-gay industry talking head. Taking that form, I am going turn this story into a series of talking points. After each talking point, I am going to point out the truth of the matter:
Anti-gay industry talking point 1 - The teacher was in the wrong because she talked about her sex life with the student.
Truth - No she did not. She did not mention anything regarding sexual activity to the student.
Anti-gay industry talking point 2 - The teacher embarrassed the student by calling her out simply because the student was giving her "deeply held religious beliefs" about homosexuality.
Truth - The student's comments had nothing to do with her religious beliefs.
Anti-gay industry talking point 3 - The student had a right to free speech.
Truth - The student had a right to free speech up to a point. Teachers and instructors have a responsibility to monitor the words of students in cases of profanity and derogatory language. The teacher was well within her rights to call the student out because the student's language was derogatory.
Anti-gay industry talking point 4 - The teacher should not be trying to force the student to accept homosexuality
Truth - The teacher was not trying to force the student to accept anything. She was simply telling the student that her language was hurtful, as was her responsibility as an instructor/teacher.
You see how the anti-gay industry works? That is why is it so important for us to know when incidents like this happen so that we can analyze how they distort the truth.
An anti-bias ordinance was recently passed in Jefferson County School Board in Kentucky. It was supposed to pass easily but ended up going through by one vote. And this is because of an interesting incident that took place during the hearing.
In speaking for the ordinance, Kat Crawford of Highland Middle School told of a situation where a person in her class said a derogatory comment about lgbts. According to Crawford, she talked to the young lady and told her how hurtful such comments could be. Possibly in attempting to prove her point further, Crawford came out to the young lady:
Crawford said she heard a girl tell other kids while on her way to scoliosis screening that "there are going to be lesbians working this," prompting snickers.
"I called the girl over and talked with her privately," Crawford told the board. "… I asked her what she said … and why she said it. I told her that I took offense to it (and said), 'How do you think that comment makes this lesbian feel?' "
Unfortunately, a board member used Crawford's story as an excuse to change her vote:
To me, that was the deal breaker," Linda Duncan said shortly after she voted against the policy.
"When I saw that this language could possibly protect those conversations, it was chilling to me. I could not support something (that) would put kids at risk," she said.
Duncan also said teachers "can't cross the line and discuss (their) sexual preference with a student -- it's just like religion, you can't take a moment and discuss it in school, it's not appropriate."
Unfortunately, others in the article also played the "teacher telling students their sexual preference" card. Luckily, there were folks who spoke to the media and told the difference between sexual orientation and sexual preference.
Personally, I am for the teacher. She had every right to do what she did. What if the student had said something negative about a certain religion that the teacher happened to be a believer in? It would have been totally appropriate for her to act in the same manner she did in this case.
But no one would be trying to accuse her of trying to "convert" the student, as they have in this case.
But I want to use the incident in order to play a game. I am going to pretend that I am Peter LaBarbera (I know, I am retching too) or some other anti-gay industry talking head. Taking that form, I am going turn this story into a series of talking points. After each talking point, I am going to point out the truth of the matter:
Anti-gay industry talking point 1 - The teacher was in the wrong because she talked about her sex life with the student.
Truth - No she did not. She did not mention anything regarding sexual activity to the student.
Anti-gay industry talking point 2 - The teacher embarrassed the student by calling her out simply because the student was giving her "deeply held religious beliefs" about homosexuality.
Truth - The student's comments had nothing to do with her religious beliefs.
Anti-gay industry talking point 3 - The student had a right to free speech.
Truth - The student had a right to free speech up to a point. Teachers and instructors have a responsibility to monitor the words of students in cases of profanity and derogatory language. The teacher was well within her rights to call the student out because the student's language was derogatory.
Anti-gay industry talking point 4 - The teacher should not be trying to force the student to accept homosexuality
Truth - The teacher was not trying to force the student to accept anything. She was simply telling the student that her language was hurtful, as was her responsibility as an instructor/teacher.
You see how the anti-gay industry works? That is why is it so important for us to know when incidents like this happen so that we can analyze how they distort the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)