A bit of good news and a reposting

Top Researcher: Ex-Gay 'Therapy' Group NARTH Distorted My Studies

(Editor's note: I think we are in double digits now with scientific complaints about the religious right)

Truth Wins Out released an exclusive video interview today with University of Utah professor, Dr. Lisa Diamond, who said that the National Association of Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) grossly and deliberately distorted her research on sexual orientation. Dr. Diamond's assertion comes one week before NARTH's annual conference in Denver, which will take place Nov. 7-9.

"Dr. Nicolosi, you know exactly what you are doing," said Diamond in the video, addressing NARTH's co-founder Dr. Joseph Nicolosi."This is a willful misuse and distortion of my research. Not an academic disagreement. Not a slight shading of the truth. It's willful distortion. And, it's illegitimate and it's irresponsible and you know that. And you should stop."
"We are fighting back against the gross distortions of our lives by anti-gay organizations who manipulate science for political gain," said Wayne Besen, Executive Director of Truth Wins Out. "These organizations claim to be moral, but often twist scientific research in the most shameless and dishonest ways imaginable. We are committed to exposing these lies and ensuring that science is accurately and honestly presented."

Lisa M. Diamond, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Psychology and Gender Studies in the Department of Psychology at the University of Utah. She has won a number of awards for her work. In 2000, Dr. Diamond published a study, "Sexual identity, attractions, and behavior among young sexual minority women over a 2 year period." This study was distorted by NARTH. The anti-gay organization falsely claimed that Dr. Diamond's work shows that sexual orientation is "amenable to change."

Let's not forget Arkansas

So much attention seems to be given to the "Last Battle of California" with Proposition 8 . Even the good witch of the religious right, James Dobson, ventured from his ivory tower to speak on it.
Proposition 8 must be defeated. But let's not forget the other states with equally disturbing ballot initiatives. With that in mind, I am referring to an earlier post I wrote regarding the anti-gay adoption initiative in Arkansas:

Arkansas makes a possible boo boo:

If the religious right wins this fight in Arkansas, expect to see more initiatives like it on a nationwide basis.

Obama tells truth about American climate during Brown vs. Board of Education

You have probably heard the latest smear about Obama:

Ooooh he compared the United States to Nazi Germany. See, he doesn't like America.

Well like the other smears, this one is a lie. But to me, an African-American, this is an extra insulting distortion:

In a radio interview in 2001, Barack Obama likened the United States to Nazi Germany . . .

The web site Little Green Footballs broke the scoop that Obama compares the "doctrines of Nazism... to what we have going on, back here at home." The remark came during a discussion of the United States at the time of Brown vs. The Board of Education.

Obama said, "...just to take a, sort of a realist perspective…there's a lot of change going on outside of the Court, um, that, that judges essentially have to take judicial notice of. I mean you've got World War II, you've got uh, uh, uh, the doctrines of Nazism, that, that we are fighting against, that start looking uncomfortably similar to what we have going on, back here at home."

Some folks have tried to use this comment as the lastest "Obama is not one of us" lies." But to me, this is more than a smear.

It is a slap in the face to all African-Americans. You see, Obama was not lying when he made his statement.

We all know the history of racism in this country. No matter how many folks like to say "it's in the past, forget about it," no one can.

And no one should. The fact of the matter is that during the Brown vs. Board of Education decision, the climate in this country can be compared to that of Nazi Germany.

During that time, some whites did not want to go to school with blacks. Some whites did not want blacks living in their neighborhoods. Some whites did not think of blacks as Americans worthy of the American dream.

They believed that there was a social, religious, and ethical order that made blacks inferior. And they lied, cheated, and murdered in horrible fashion to perserve this order.

The segregation, the lynchings, the dehumanization and victimization of entire group of people on the basis of race in America during that time is no different the victimization of entire group of people on the basis of religion during the time of Nazi Germany.

Sorry, but it is a fact. And no rallies, no flag waving, and definitely not mindful ignorance of that awful time in American history will make it go away.

We can give hell to the Nazis for what they did to the Jews and other groups, as we should. But when are we ever going to own up to our own history of racial discrimination?

So to those who criticize Obama for making this simple fact known, I have one thing to say:

How dare you.


Things are getting stinky down here in SC . . . and other issues via links

SC Senate Candidate Mick Mulvaney in Sick Robocalling Scheme (a South Carolina candidate gay bashes? It must be a week day)

Elizabeth Dole unleashes outrageous 'Love of God' ad (I'd never vote for someone named "Libby." That's like hiring someone named Scooter as your chief of staff)

McCain's Last Ditch Effort: Tying Obama To Muslim World (all of these attacks on Muslims due to 9/11 is something I don't understand. Was Timothy McVeigh or the Unibomber Muslims?)

Joe the Plumber pursued for record deal (Say what! The only way you can get famous around here is either butt in a rally with a distortive question or sleep with a Republican. I would do the latter but there aren't any who are attractive enough.)

And now a bit of lunacy brought to you by the religious right

With the election fast approaching, the word has come out that the religious right have opened all cynlinders of attack on Obama.

Fine by me. Let the world see how morally empty they are.

But just in case we need a few reminders, check this little tidbit out from People for the American Way.

This lovely bit is via our favorite female nut, Janet Folger (now she is known as Janet Porter. I am NOT going there):

Vote for Obama, Go To Hell

I would say that girlfriend has lost her mind, but based on Janet Porter's (when she was formerly Janet Folger) past behavior, I can't help but asking was she born with a few fries short of a Happy Meal?

And lest we forget, how about a couple of articles about Obama via the "Christian" One News Now:

Obama interview points to 'Marxism' philosophy

Obama's socialist past explored further

McCain must state obvious: Obama is a socialist

News media in bed with Obama?

And you gotta love these comments:

"That's exactly what I've been trying to tell people. I can't understand why he's so popular. Why can't everyone see what he wants to do to our country? I believe he'll turn our country into the next Russia, China, or Cuba. Socialism will not work in our country. There is too much greed and too many lazy people who expect the government to hand them everything. The few of us that try to make something of our lives will end up losing our savings so that the government can coddle those that don't deserve the car they drive. I already know plenty of people who abuse the welfare system and get away with it."

"Socialism is coming. America is already leaning too far left and will continue to do so. And one reason is Christians are lazy. A few work their hearts out while the rest are content to set in the pews. Redistribution of wealth should be through opportunities not taxes. But when Christians will not even do what it takes to start businesses and gain wealth then no one will. Stop burying your talents and start putting them to work."

"I hope America comes to it's senses and quickly. Obama is rushing everyone to vote early. He is so scared that more and more of his platform and ideas will be researched and people are going to see that he is not the savior/superstar that he appears to be. If they vote early, they can't change their vote. Like sheep to the slaughter...."

"It's true that the media once was in favor of McCain when he was running against real conservatives. Now with real conservatives out of the Presidential picture, McCain is running against their Messiah and McCain is now the bad guy. As far as the media is concerned, the earth is tilted on it's axis to the left. It's a garrantee that they will be on the left side of any issue. Remember the two little guys, one on each shoulder, that try to influence the way you think. They have earned the left shoulder...you know the guy with the the little red tights wispering the words Obama, Obama..."

"The very worst part of all of this bias is that the truth about Obama's history is not coming out and there are only scattered stories about his oppressive ways when it comes to his campaign. We need honest news, not dishonest and scheming twisting of words or mudslingling when it has no newsworthy purpose. There are very few reporters on TV or in print whose bias in favor of Obama is not clear, and they are downright vicious when it comes to McCain and Palin. Only one source, one speaker on Christian radio gave the complete story about who is who about Palin's accusers in Alaska. It was a very interesting and clear story, but never heard anyplace else."
"I am a Christian and also Barak should be on the FBI most wanted list. He is running in our country based on lies that have been proven. He has proven to be unpatriotic, a liar, and we are not even sure if he is allowed to run in this country! But being "in bed" with the media is what is helping. They can report any way they want, even if its lies, and they do just that. It is getting to close to the election to be playing games. The truth, the whole truth and nothing BUT the truth needs to come out about this Arab! And FAST! Not that it will be reported and even then they will make sure his silver tongue (with smoke breath)will sound like someone being "picked on" by other races. Thats how he plays! God help us all!"

"I don't believe I've ever witnessed a more deliberate attempt by the media to promote their liberal agenda than during this Presidential campaign. What I don't understand is the ignorance of the American people. Have our morals deteriorated to the point that we no longer value human life, that we no longer care whether we live in a democracy, that we no longer care who a Presidential cndidate associates himself with as long as he does something for the economy? To me, as a Christian, the choice is clear. I vote according to what the Bible tells me is right or wrong. I honestly don't see how anyone calling themselves a Christian could vote for Barack Obama."

"Does this actually surprise anyone? He is the liberal media's "Glory Boy" you can read about him in the book of Revelations. This election was bought and paid for months ago. God help us all."

"We may be beginning to pay the price for our rejection of the Lord. The recent collapse of our economy, the pain at the gas pump, terrorism an ever-present possibility, etc. Yes, we are beginning to reap the results of our rebellion."

"When a person refuses to swear in on the Bible and disrespects our U.S. Flag then that person should not be qualified to run in any election much less the President of The United States. Come on America THINK!"

"The "main stream" media has lost most of it's credibility among most folks who don’t lean left. Their subscriptions are in the tank and worsening monthly. They know they are on life support. Their only chance at resuscitation is to usher in their savior; Obama, for he bringeth forth the “fairness doctrine” to maketh all things fair again, like it was before “Talk Radio” when the only truth was what the 6:00 News said it was. Lord Obama, please maketh all things fair again…"

8 more days to go - Desperation brings out the ugliness in some people

No words, just links on how ugly it's going to be until Nov. 4:

Obama called a n***** at Palin Rally in Iowa (I don't know. It certainly sounds like it to me) - UPDATE - turns out the word may not have been used.

Transparently Backwards: The "Common Alliance" of Smearmongerers Strikes Again - you are going to hear about this ad naseum until November 4 on Drudge and Fox. It used to be that when people were doing character assasinations, they would have the good taste not to be so open about it. For the record, Obama actually said:

" . . . one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil rights movement, was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still stuffer from that."

And last but not least, this lovely bit of news:

Skinheads held over Obama death plot (Are you paying attention, Kevin McCullough)

Lastly, a bit of seriousness:

My heart goes out to Jennifer Hudson and family because of the tragedy that has affected them. Having lost my father through the violence of others, I know how hard it is to gain equilibrium and healing from such a tragedy.

The Hudson family are in my prayers.

This just in - Kevin McCullough is a hot mess

I will admit that the pandemonium from the other side over the possible election of Obama has been enjoyable.

And it gets more enjoyable when conservatives set their sites on the fact that there is a very high level of support in the African-American community for Obama.

On this point, all of the arguments the other side pushes seem to be "What is wrong with you stupid black people. How can you support this man rather than the candidate we want you to support. Why can't you be good puppies and do what we tell you."

Today, conservative writer Kevin McCullough takes the prize for inanity.

His piece, An Open Letter to Black Obama Supporters, is the usual self-righteous clap trap that black folks have heard from Republicans and conservatives this electoral season.

What makes McCullough's piece so special is this opening sentence, which by the way, negates anything point he makes in the piece:

As a man who has fathered a son whose skin is darker than the average African American, and has mild special needs on top that, I am guided in this election by more than just economics, security, and the right of all innocent human beings to life. This election I am burdened deeply by the manipulation of race, the impact of social justice, and the absolute disparity and reproach that an Obama administration would have in store for the African American families of this nation.

You got that, folks? Just because he has fathered a son whose skin is darker than the average African-American, McCullough feels that he has some credibility in the black community. He thinks that we should ignore American history, ignore all the talk of welfare queens, all of the Southern Strategies, all of the white hands commercials, and all of the Willie Horton scare tactics and embrace his point of view simply because his son has skin darker than the average African-American.

How very presumptous. And how very insulting. The fact that he has to justify his column by such a ridiculous opening says more about the Republican and conservative mind set than anything McCullough can dredge up by way of conversation.

The problem with folks like McCullough is that they want to ignore the parts of history that don't suit their agendas. They think that the pendulum of life should swing for them and actions done by those like them should have no negative consequences. They tend to think that black people are so stupid that we should roll over and forget history and common sense simply because someone like him says "bark."

A little tip, McCullough. Maybe you should have a talk with Pat Buchanan and others in your party who have gone out of their way to demonize African-Americans before you call yourself an expert in what can cause the black community harm.

UPDATE - McCullough is offended by this column. He told me so in the comments section. And of course I gave my answer back. This column is not about his son but how he tried to use his son to gain credibility in the black community. And for the record, the following link is a main reason why I give McCullough no credibility.

Obama will probably take Pennsylvania, thanks to Ashley Todd

By now, I am sure that many of you have heard the story of the McCain campaign worker who was allegedly robbed by a black Obama supporter who then carved a "B" in her face.

Especially the part about her now admitting that the story was a hoax.

As a black man, there is a certain degree of exasperation about this sort of thing. I attended Winthrop University when Susan Smith falsely accused a black man of stealing her car with her two children in tow.

I never believed her story. But I was shocked and disgusted when it came out that she not only made up her story but drove her car in a lake, allowing her two children to drown.

I know the story of Charles Stuart accusing a black man of murdering his wife when he was guilty of the crime. I also know the story of Emmett Till who was mutilated for allegedly whistling at a white woman.

So I am not shocked about today's revelation.

Exasperated but not shocked.

But with one thought in my mind.

Throughout different times in this country's history, the false accusation of assaulting a white woman have led black men to be castrated, burned alive, and butchered beyond recognition.

How very fitting that it can now help lead to a black man's election to the White House.

Kismet indeed.


Thank you Mass Resistance for making my life very interesting (and rewarding)

In my post yesterday about the anti-gay group in Massachusetts, Mass Resistance, I neglected to mention that the Southern Poverty Law Center considers them an official hate group.

Of course the head of MassResistance, Brian Camenker, does not particularly like that designation.

But how can he object when things like what happened today takes place:

A Wakefield man claimed he was standing outside a local school snapping photos of students for a documentary, but after a foot chase through backyards while stripping his clothing, police aren't buying his story.

"We don't know what his intention and purpose was around the school and the kids," said police Lt. James Hashem.

But Michael Olivio's employer has come forward to back up his story. Olivio, 48, works for the anti-gay rights group MassResistance.org. Brian Camenker, head of the group, said Olivio mistakenly went to West Middle School Tuesday to snap pictures instead of the high school.

Camenker said Olivio was to get pictures of the high school because the state Commission on Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual and Transgendered Youth held a meeting there Monday night.

"I figured I would do a write-up for the Web site and I wanted a picture of the high school," Camenker said.

Police said the incident happened at West Middle as children were being let out of school. As parents watched, Olivio parked his car, got out, and began taking many pictures of the school and the students.

Police received a flood of 911 calls from parents and soon the school called. A gym teacher tried to talk to Olivio, who fled toward the high school, police said.

Camenker said Olivio realized he was at the wrong school and jogged over to the high school to get the picture.

"I didn't even want any pictures of the kids,'' Camenker said.

He said Olivio did not recall hearing the gym teacher trying to talk to him.

When police caught him, Olivio said he was taking pictures for a documentary and he would not elaborate on it," Hashem said. Hashem said police could not associate him with any media organization.

"The answers were somewhat vague and suspicious," he said.

Olivio was ordered to leave the area because police had no reason to detain him further. But then the man began to act erratically, Hashem said.

After being told to leave the area, Olivio ran through yards on Shawsheen Road and nearby side streets, shedding clothing as he ran, police said.

He had removed several items of clothing before officers finally caught him on North Main Street and placed him in handcuffs, Hashem said.

"He was not completely naked," Hashem said.

More here

Again, thank you Brian Camenker and Mass Resistance for all you do to help the gay community in Massachusetts.

Peter LaBarbera's friends are our best allies

I think our friend Peter LaBarbera takes pride in the fact that sometimes he exasperates a lot of people.

To me, its not his tendency to intentionally ignore lgbt families while seeking leather daddies in the corners of the latest Folsom Street festival.

Nor is it his desire to reduce the richness and the history of lgbt lives to stereotypes about anal sex.

It is his tendency, as it is with the rest of the anti-gay industry, to repeat a point continuously even in the face of it being exposed as a lie.

But he more than makes up for it by the company he keeps.

Like the lastest screed for Proposition 8 in California, What ‘Gay Marriage’ Has Done to Massachusetts, he placed on his webpage.

There is no need to rehash it. It's the same crop of lies that the forces for Proposition 8 have been repeating over and over again. The ole "gasp and swoon, children are going to be forced to learn about homosexuality if we don't do something" lie.

Which by the way has been debunked. However, when have the anti-gay industry ever let the truth get in the way of a good talking point?

The piece is by Brian Camenker, a phony pro-family activist in that state. To put it nicely, Camenker has done more to help the cause of lgbts in Massachusetts than any group or organization.

His organization, Mass Resistance, is a laughing stock of Massachusetts. Forget the "gang who couldn't shoot straight," Mass Resistance is the "gang that continuously shoots itself in the ass."

They have accused gays of everything from attacking their members to stealing their credit cards.

And they have this bizarre (but fun to watch) tendency of accusing everyone of a conspiracy when they don't get their way. Subsequently, they have alienated just about everyone in Massachusetts; Democrats, Republicans, conservatives, liberals, zipoids, wastoids, smurfs, elves, pixies, etc. etc.

They even got on Mitt Romney's bad side. And that simply amazes me.

And lest I forget, they are behind the David Parker controversy, including conveniently being there when Parker was arrested while at the same time feigning ignorance of the entire situation. By the way, Camenker continues to spin the Parker controversy in the piece.

To get a good idea Camenker's mind, check out this transcript of when he appeared on Comedy Central's Daily Show:

Ed Helms: So the quality of life has decreased?

Brian Camenker: Yeah.

Ed Helms: Homelessness gone up?

Brian Camenker: I could, you know...

Ed Helms: Crime rates?

Brian Camenker: Crime rates?

Ed Helms: Air quality?

Brian Camenker: I mean, let me put it this way, I could, if, I could sit here, and I could probably, you know, find some way of connecting the dots to gay marriage, to all of these, if I had enough time, and I did some research.

Ed Helms (voice-over): Yeah! Why take time to do the research, when saying it is so much faster!

Falsely blaming gays for everything? I can see why Peter thinks of him as the most principled and effective pro-family advocate in (the People’s Republic of) Massachusetts.

Of course Peter has gone on record calling a racist Anti-Semite a "pro-family advocate," so his embracing of Camenker isn't unexpected.

But you know what, Peter? Continue your behavior that you probably do not necessarily in truth, but in spite.

But don't forget to bring along your friends. They more than make up for it.

Mass Resistance Watch is the premiere site in all things regarding Mass Resistance. Big ups to them on the work they do.

Election notes from friends

I am burned out.

So instead of writing a post, I am linking to several articles about the election that I think will interest you all.

Go Obama!!!

NY Post Smears Michelle Obama With Caviar (the New York Post writes something negative about the Obamas? We must be in planet Earth)

Chuck Todd: There's a "tenseness" between McCain and Palin (trouble in paradise? More like trouble in hell)

Blithering Idiot Watch (first Michelle Bachman and now this. I'm starting to love Chris Matthews . . . . I don't mean on a physical sense, you dirty minded individuals)

Bachmann Doubles Down: ‘Barack Obama’s Views Are Against America’ (Can this woman make up her mind? She can always say that Chris Matthews is using mind control on her)

GOP donors critical of Palin's pricey threads (come on now. sista gotta get her hair did and her clothes tight)

One word - OUCH!! (feel free to pass this one around)

Study: McCain coverage mostly negative (nobody's fault but his own)

Will Obama carry South Carolina?

As a lot of you know, I reside in South Carolina, a state that is habitually written off in presidential elections.

A Democratic presidential candidate hasn't carried this state since Carter in 1976. Hell, our elected state officials try to out-Republican each other, be they Democrat or Republican.

And I have always felt that despite all, Obama will not carry South Carolina.

But now, I have to wonder.

I sense a serious degree of interest from South Carolina's black population in this election. As November rolls around, I see and hear conversations regarding the elections in places where I have never seen it before.

In a store where I usually shop, which is situated in an African-American neighborhood, the radio was running full blast about early voting in North Carolina and other places. The announcers also took it upon themselves to run audio clips of comments from people at McCain/Palin rallies.

And I don't think I have to rehash those comments.

The curious thing is that usually when the radio is playing in the background, people don't pay attention. They usually go about their business, treating what they hear as background noise.

But not today. Shoppers were actually stopping to listen. The young woman with the children, the old man looking for rubbing alcohol, the young couple who probably just became legal voters, the two elderly women.

All seemed to be interested in what they were hearing. And not just them, but the stockers.

Hell, if someone had started jotting down notes, I think I would have dissolved in pride.

They are even talking about this election at the city bus terminal.

Yes, despite the images put out there by Republicans about "real Americans," people who ride the city buses are generally hard working individuals who just happen not to own a car. They trod every day to and from their jobs.

And the election has been the serious topic of discussion there.

Now some may say "big deal" because the African-American population of South Carolina is not that numerous. Well it's numerous enough to turn the tide of an election if combined with other voters.

Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part. Or maybe it's something more.

Either way, if McCain does try to carry South Carolina, he is going to know that he was in a fight.


Where is David Parker and the Wirthlins on this matter?

So if Proposition 8 is not passed, students will be" indoctrinated" about gay marriage in schools eh?

Some Proposition 8 supporters aren't even waiting that long:

A Salinas High School teacher who distributed “Yes on Proposition 8” literature to her students last week has been asked to refrain from doing so by administrators.

Proposition 8 on the November ballot in California would make same-sex marriages illegal.

Salinas Union High School District Superintendent Roger Antón said this afternoon that Principal Michael Romero reminded the teacher that faculty members’ political beliefs may not be expressed during work hours.

The teacher’s name was not disclosed by the district.

Anton said the district’s policy allows for political discussion in the classroom only when it is objective and relevant to the curriculum being taught.

The literature that was passed out to students says it is important to protect marriage as an institution between a man and a woman.

The one-page statement also says it is critical to vote yes on Proposition 8, saying its failure would eventually force the state to approve “polygamy, polymory, incest, group and other ‘creative’ arrangements for marriage.”

Hat tip to Box Turtle Bulletin

Free Republic spins conspiracy theories about Obama's grandmother

The news that Barack Obama is taking time off from his campaign to visit his ailing grandmother doesn't really mean that much except for concern for his family.

But the members of the ultra, to-the-right of Atilla the Hun site Free Republic seem to know why Obama is really postponing his campaign.

I must apologize to my online buddy Pam Spaulding for copying her tactic. She is the one who usually posts the outrageous comments from Free Republic. This time, I thought I would save her the trip.

These folks are so crazy that I am almost hesistant to post some of these comments. I don't want them trying to "investigate" me:

I was under the impression that she was practically under house arrest ever since That One began his campaign.Curious that no one has so much as even seen her, much less get a few words from her.

He has no birth certificate. And his grandmother will mysteriously die while he is there. You know she holds secrets that cannot be revealed...... “Here, Grandma, let me put this pillow over your head. Nice grandma”

“Grandma, you F’n racist!”

Innocent people do not act this way.

Maybe he just needs desperately to get away from Michelle.
What guy wouldn’t?

Time for the Hillary hit.

Hillary is going and to pay off her campaign debts and to get the Supreme Court post she has to whack grandma.

He can work on his tan.

Oh Dear God...he’s not going there to kill her himself is he? I pray for the dear lady.

Could he have a condition which would be considered embarrassing? Sexually transmitted?

UPDATE: According to Americablog, the comments on Fox News website are equally nasty. What's wrong with these people?


A quick lie vs. slow truth - The Wirthlins case and Proposition 8

It has been said that a lie can travel around the world before the truth has time to put on its shoes.

How true it is even when supposed Christians play with the facts.

I have talked about the David Parker case in Massachusetts on many occasions. Parker was the parent who tried to make it seem that his son was "forced to learn about homosexuality" and he was arrested for simply trying to push an opt-out policy.

Well Parker's story was a lie of course but there was another component to the lawsuit he unsuccessfully brought against his son's Massachusetts school.

Another family, the Wirthlins, joined Parker's lawsuit after an incident where their second grade son was read a book in class, King and King, where a prince ended up marrying another prince.

Personally, as a young man who was read all versions of Little Red Riding Hood (including the one with the sad ending where the wolf ate everyone), Hansel and Gretel, The Three Little Pigs (the version where the wolf eats the two pigs and the third pig eats the wolf), and Jack and the Beanstalk before reaching first grade, I don't see anything wrong with a fairy tale as light as King and King.

But that is neither here nor there.

The Wirthlins claimed that reading the book, King and King, violated the opt-out policy where parents could opt out their children in the case of sex education.

The courts, as I have pointed out, ruled against Parker and as such ruled against the Wirthlins. Neither the Parker case nor the Wirthlins case had anything to do with sex education, but a simple acknowledgement of lgbt families.

Now here is where the lies start:

The Wirthlins have filmed a campaign ad pushing for the passage of Proposition 8 in California.

In this ad, which can be seen here, they claim that if Proposition 8 is not passed, then children will be "forced to learn about gay marriage."

The most pernicious part for me was when the father said:

"The courts said we had no right to object or pull him out of class."

Actually that is a clever misconception. Yes the courts did say that the reading of King and King was not an issue of human sexuality, therefore it had nothing to do with the opt-out policy.

But Mr. Wirthlin is clearly deceiving people when he said the courts said the parents could not pull their children out of class. The courts actually advised parents who object to do just that:

In the 38-page decision, Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf, of the U.S. District Court, said that families who don’t agree with the teachings of the public school, have the choice of private schools or homeschooling.

And like I said before, the reading of King and King had nothing to do with marriage equality in Massachusetts. It had to do with the fact that there were children who attended the school and lived in same-sex households.

People like Wirthlin, Parker and the rest of that bunch always seem to forget that despite the fact of whether or not gay marriage is legalized, children will still be brought up in same-sex households. And they should not have to feel like there is something wrong with their families, because there isn't.

Of late I think of Deerfield

During the battle over marriage equality in California, the religious right have been making noise about a recent incident involving school children attending the same-sex wedding of one of their teachers.

They inferred that the children were forced to go and their "innocence" is being corrupted by having been made to view such a thing. They also claim that this incident will be a common occurrence if Proposition 8 (anti-gay marriage amendment) is not passed.

But like always when they create a moral panic, the religious right intentionally left out an important detail to the story.

The children had permission slips from their parents to attend.

This point was brought up in the San Francisco Chronicle article speaking of the event and also highlighted by my good friend Jeremy from GoodAsYou.org

So of course that would make the entire argument of "children being indoctrinated" null and void, right? After all, the parents not only knew of the wedding but allowed them to attend.

But why let the truth get in the way of a good talking point.

The situation reminds me of the Deerfield High School/Angels in America controversy that took place earlier this year.

The religious right, especially our friend Peter LaBarbera, accused Deerfield High School in Illinois of forcing children to read Angels in America, the Pulitzer Prize winning play that spotlights the early years of the HIV/AIDS crisis.

Peter even ran snippets from the play that highlighted not necessarily clean language in an attempt to stoke the emotions of his readers.

Of course Peter and the rest of the moral crusaders conveniently omitted that:

A. No one was forced to read the book. It was an elective

B. It was only offered in a Senior Honors English class, and

C. Parents had to give permission for their children to read Angels in America.

Needless to say when I sent an email to Peter and company highlighting this last point, I was all but ignored.

So it's not about families is it? Nor is about protecting children.

It's all about entitlement and control.

The case about the recent wedding and the Deerfield situation says less about the lgbt community and the American culture than it does about the supposed defenders of morality and truth like Peter, Concerned Women for America, and the rest of the religious right.

They like to talk about "parental rights" and "embracing the family" only when it suits their purposes but there is nothing there but lip service.

They don't care about any family that doesn't look like their own (and that includes ethnicity) or adheres to their Ozzie and Harriet nonsense.

Behind the fascades of truth and morality are petty people with petty plans to try and force American society to conform to their caste system of life and families simply because someone has told them that their religion entitles them to dictate policy on these matters..

They think they own the patent on the words "family," "truth", and "morality."

Not true.

They don't own the patent on any of those words. But if I could, I would gladly give them the patent on the word "bullshit."

After all, they are certainly full of it.

UPDATE - It's over and I am so glad

Say what you want, but Obama played a smart game tonight. McCain was obviously trying to rattle him, but with no success.

I think the victory belongs to Obama but since the spin was on "McCain HAS TO DELIVER tonight," I am sure much will be said about his "feistiness."

Sorry but he came across partly as a gassy grandfather who whines too much. And what's the deal with those sounds he kept making when the camera wasn't focused on him.

One last thing - that Joe the Plumber is kinda cute. After tonight, he will be PAID.

I wonder does he like black guys?


Last debate - Thank God

One more debate between Obama and McCain and I am on pins and needles.

Desperate people do desperate things and that being the case, all bets are off regarding what McCain will try tonight.

I have faith in Obama, though. Probably his greatest asset is how he is underestimated.

But I am worried about the tone of this entire campaign.

Today, a friend of mine at work told me something disturbing. While he was at the fair he had heard a comment from someone about taking an Obama poster and using it for target practice.

Based upon the things I have heard going on around the country, I don't think anyone can take this lightly.

The tone of elections in this country got extremely ugly when Clinton was elected. It wasn't about electing someone whose policies would better suit the country. Thanks to the religious right and their cohorts, every election seems to be a mini episode of Star Wars where the United States stands on the brink of annihilation if the right person is not elected.

And it's getting uglier.

But concerning Obama, there is a elephant in the room that no one wants to address - race.

Whether we want to admit it or not, there are a lot of folks who have lost their minds over the idea of a black man possibly becoming president.

And I think we need to admit that to ourselves.

But we won't. Because in doing so, we have to face up to the darkside of America, i.e. our history of racism and violence committed in the name of ethnic supremacy.

It gets white folks defensive and black folks angry.

But sooner or later, we need to address it.

I just hope nothing drastic happens that makes us have to address it.

One News Now's readers sound off about Obama (and yes it's hateful)

You don't have to go to a McCain rally to show how supposed Christian conservatives feel about Obama.

You can always go to the One News Now site.

Readers of the site posted comments to a blog post Did Obama Mock the Bible?

For the record, he did not. The blog post is clearly distorting a speech Obama made. Hell, that's obvious from watching the clip.

But check out the comments from these so-called Christians (I am printing these comments verbatim. I did not change a word):

HE STUDIED FROM THE KORAN, WHAT ELSE DO YOU EXPECT. THE GUY IS A MUSLIN SOCALIST.

Yes, He did mock the Bible. I hope U.S. open the eyes and understand we should not vote for him. Obama is false, arrogant, disrespectful to God and very dangerous. Lets pray that He won't be the President, God Bless U.S.A. and God have mercy on us.

This man is a very dangerous man hiding behind a big smile and smooth words. He is not only mocking God and the bible...he is demeaning God's power- and true Christians fundamental beliefs. He is deceiving many and laughing at what's righteous and true. We have to keep praying that God will protect our great nation from Obama's destructive ideals & deceit. This is not an issue of a black or white president...it is an issue of flippancy, hatred, pride, arrogance, & lies Against Morals, Values, Integrity, Faith in a Righteous God & Protection of our Great Nation from terrorist ideals and attacks. Our great nation will be in serious trouble if Obama were elected. Christians - Kneel Together & Pray that God will protect us under McCain and Palin's faithful christian service and leadership to keep us "One Nation Under God" then VOTE!

Louis Farrakhan just announced Obama as the Messaiah... for the Nation of ISLAM!!!

This only further emphacizes Obama's lack of knowledge about the Bible and Christianity. Whether this is a result of Rev Wright or his Muslim background I do not know.

Mr. Obama is NOT a Christian. PRAY to God that this man may never sit in the Oval office of this great Nation. And PRAY that God heals our land and has Mercy on us and Mr. Obama who has mocked God. And God will NOT be mocked.

Obama is truly NOT a Christian. He's an african muslim and don't let him fool anyone. God save us from Obama.

He is the ANTICHRIST come to steal, kill, and destroy

To me he is mocking the Bible. I believe he is a muslim.

Regardless of what Obama says, all data indicates that he is a practicing muslin and what are muslins doing in Iraq now?--they are killing the Christian people over there. If he is elected, he will probably be the antichrist.

I feel the world in be in despiration if Obama is elected. He, to me, is the right hand of satan.


There is NOTHING WRONG with children attending same-sex wedding ceremonies

Our opponents are in a tither over the fact that members of a first grade class attended the same sex marriage of their teacher:

In the same week that the No on 8 campaign launched an ad that labeled as “lies” claims that same-sex marriage would be taught in schools to young children, a first grade class took a school-sponsored trip to a gay wedding. Eighteen first graders traveled to San Francisco City Hall Friday for the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian partner, The San Francisco Chronicle reported. The school sponsored the trip for the students, ages 5 and 6, taking them away fromtheir studies for the same-sex wedding. According to the Yes on 8 campaign, the public school field trip demonstrates that the California Supreme Court’s decision to legal same- sex marriage has real consequences.

Naturally neither this press release nor our friend Peter (who pushed the press release on his site) had anything to say about whether or not the parents of these children gave their permission for the children to attend.

If this was not the case, I would have a problem with the children going as I do with any field trip that takes place without parental approval.

But if parents did give permission, then what's wrong with those children attending the wedding?

Yet again this another bit of nonsense from the religious right: Oh this sort of thing will happen if Proposition 8 in California is not passed. Children will be forced to attend weddings of homosexuals.

Those children don't look like they are being forced to me. As a matter of fact, they look like they are having a good time.

Unlike the religious right, these children get it. A wedding is a joyous occasion.

And what's wrong with a joyous occasion?

Cut McDonalds some slack!

So now we are starting to get the story from McDonalds on whether or not it capitulated the American Family Associations's boycott:

McDonald's Denies U-Turn on Gay Rights Support

It looks like the American Family Association is again taking credit for a victory it didn't really achieve.

Back in March, the Christian-values lobbying group announced that it had successfully mau-maued Ford into cutting off its marketing efforts targeting the gay community. Ford said it had done no such thing.

Now AFA says it has ended a long-running boycott of McDonald's after the fast-food giant agreed "to no longer support political activity by homosexual activist organizations."

The cessation of the boycott was evidently triggered by the resignation of McDonald's vice president Richard Ellis from the board of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. "McDonald's also said that the company has no plans to renew their membership in NGLCC when it expires in December," claimed the group.

But a McDonald's spokeswoman disputed details of AFA's account. McDonald's, she said, was never a corporate "member" of NGLCC; its relationship with the organization consisted of Ellis's board seat and a sponsorship he arranged. "McDonald's sponsored a table at an event at an NGLCC gala fundraiser," said the spokeswoman. "That's what they're labeling a sponsorship. That was the extent of our involvement."

Now we all know the anti-gay industry's mode of behavior. No matter what has been said, the AFA will continue to claim that their boycott against McDonalds was successful.

So their bullshit don't concern me.

What bothers me was the ease in which folks on our side started spewing venom against McDonalds.

I read so many nasty things about the restaurant on pro-gay blogs that my head began to spin.

And why did my head spin? Because of the following:

The announcement about McDonalds' alleged capitulation came from the AFA itself in a press release, which leads me to ask a question:

JUST WHEN DID WE START BELIEVING THE AFA?

WHEN DID THE GAY COMMUNITY START THINKING THAT THE AFA WAS CREDIBLE?

In an incredible show of laziness, some of us practically broke our fingers in condemning McDonalds over the alleged capitulation on the words on the AFA, an organization:

who routinely uses a phony news source to distort current events against the lgbt community,
who refers to the studies of a man ( Paul Cameron) who was not only kicked out of the American Psychological Association but actually believes that gay men stick gerbils up their rectums and that lesbians are master seducers,

who continued to sell a video that claimed that a certain individual "walked away homosexuality" even after it was discovered that the man (Michael Johnston) was having sex with men and possibly infecting them with HIV.

Plainly speaking, if I was in the middle of a hot burning desert with AFA head Donald Wildmon and he remarked on hot it was, I would start trying to build an ark.

What I want to know though is why did so many of us take the AFA at its word without even trying wait for more of the truth to come out?

When I get the answer to that question, I will most likely have a better understanding as to why we are having difficulty defeating the religious right in this alleged culture war.


Whip his ass, girlfriend!!!

Our community could learn a lesson in noncapitulation from Chicago Sun-Times columnist Mary Mitchell.

Recently, she caught some flack from Rush Limbaugh because of a column she wrote about how Sarah Palin stokes up negative emotions at campaign rallies:

"Mary Mitchell, a wuss, wimp columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times says that Sarah Palin should be censured. She says that 'Sarah Palin should apologize to the Obama campaign and the American people for her role in bringing out the worst in her supporters.' This is laughable.
"Come on, Mary. Grow up. This is the big leagues. How about the people in your party? I know you're a Democrat, Mary Mitchell. You can't deny it, all you liberal media people are Democrats. What about the incitement of this whole country that you and your fellow journalists have engaged in along with the Democrat Party? You have gendered up hate for this president. You have ginned up a despise for the US military. You have sought to convince the American people their country is worthless and sinking into an abyss. You have been doing it for six years."

How did Ms. Mitchell respond?

She called out Limbaugh using fire and poise that is sorely lacking sometimes in our community when the religious right attacks us. Folks, pay attention to how it's done:

When you step on a pig's tail, it squeals. Rush Limbaugh is a squealer.

And why is he squealing?

Because John McCain and Sarah Palin are losing ground in a contest that they thought was theirs.

And they are losing it to a black man.

Of course, Limbaugh won't say that. Instead, on Thursday he spent his time berating me for saying Palin needs to apologize for inciting crowds that hurled racial epithets at black members of the press.

I'm a "wuss, wimp columnist," Limbaugh says.

So why would a multimillion-dollar squealer use his air time on a "wuss and a wimp?"

The reason Limbaugh is squealing like the pig he is, is because he's the epitome of white privilege.

Hat tip to Pam's House Blend

Lastly, I would like to congratulate Jeremy from Goodasyou.org and his partner, Andrews, on their engagement.

Damn, I need me a man. I wonder if Frank Luntz, Seth Rogen or Jonah Hill is free?

Hush up. I know what I like.

McDonalds caves to the AFA - riiiiiiiiiiight

The American Family Association is claiming victory today. It's claiming to have received "assurances" that McDonalds will now pursue a policy of neutrality in the so-called culture wars.

AFA has been pursuing a boycott of McDonalds accusing the restaurant of "embracing the gay agenda."

Knowing AFA's history of spinning and lying, I will choose to wait for the rest of the story.

Unfortunately, the AFA will get a bit of mileage out of their claim. It is already posted as an article on the phony news site One News Now.

And regardless whatever the official statement from McDonalds will be, expect to hear AFA, Peter LaBarbera and the rest claim that their boycott was successful.

Repeition of lies is a hallmark for the anti-gay industry as well as incorrectly spinning current events.

Take for example the situation involving David Parker that I talked about Monday. Despite the fact that his lies has been turned away on every level, including the Supreme Court, Parker's story is still being spun as the case of a man who "tried to save his child from the gay agenda."

And it's even being used to try and defeat marriage equality in California, which was much like how the Repent America story was used by those who tried to keep the lgbt community from being added to hate crimes legislation.

I don't get depressed over this mess. Lies have a way of being exposed eventually.

But I can't help wishing that our community, especially our leaders, were a bit more vigilant in keeping an eye on these situations and getting the correct information out before the lies have a chance to take root.

If not, even our victories in these cases come back to haunt us.

Thoughts from Obama vs. McCain II

I have never seen my mother so interested in an election. But it's starting to get scary. When Tom Brokaw wouldn't allow Obama to respond to a McCain attack, she screamed at Brokaw to let him finish.

She hasn't shown that much intensity since she stopped watching pro wrestling. I had to remind her that Tom Brokaw wasn't Ric Flair.

McCain should not tell jokes. Those were the flattest moments of the debate.

And you just know that I simply have to talk about THE MOMENT.

I really didn't catch the impact of McCain's "that one" line. Shows you how dense I can be. It wasn't until that five minutes later when it was posted as a clip on my favorite sites that I realized just how much impact the line will have.

And it did, particularly amongst my fellow African-Americans. There were times during the day in which I forgot exactly what McCain said due to hearing constant interpretations of from fellow black folks.

It all came down to the same principle: they were insulted by the inference. As one of my friends put it, "you just know McCain wanted to say "that little ni . . er over there."

Personally, I think McCain got caught up in the excitement and was trying to be witty. But these things do have a habit of taking on another life.

And I do remember cosmically hearing two sounds when McCain said "that one."

One was the sound of numerous black women snatching off their earrings.

The other: the last little bit of good will the Republicans had with the black community going down the drain.

But basically it was a good night for Obama. Which means things are going to get more nastier than they were before.

Heck, it's starting now:

MN radio host Baker goes 2 for 2 - boosts video of pastor calling Obama's mom 'trash'

McCain rally speaker refers to Obama's middle name

The upcoming election is the most critical election in the history of our nation. The very future of our nation’s foundation is at stake. Every person will be affected. If the liberals win, then our foundation will no longer be based on the traditional Judeo-Christian morality. It will gradually but assuredly be based on an ever shifting, ever moving foundation. If the liberals win, the damage can’t be stopped with elections two, four or forty years from now. America will forever be changed. We will keep seeing a gradual and growing hostility toward people of faith, especially Christians. The morals of our nation will continue to decline. Our children and grandchildren will pay the price. - American Family Association in a fundraising email sent to me

All I can say is keep your fingers crossed and your nose plugged locked in tight.

David Parker's last stand (Supreme Court kicks him to the curb)

Word has come down that our favorite liar in Massachusetts, David Parker, played his last hand in his lawsuit against his son's school.

The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to look at his case. Last year, federal judge dismissed Parker’s lawsuit, saying that schools are "entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy."

Parker had sued his son's school, Joseph Estabrook Elementary in Massachusetts, after he was arrested in 2005 for not leaving campus. He claimed that school officials refused to give him assurances that his son would not be "taught" about homosexuality.

At least that is the spin Parker and members of the anti-gay industry have tried to turn the incident to.

And of course the claims are blatant lies.

Even though Parker lost at the highest level, his case won't die per se. It will continue to be incorrectly cited by the anti-gay industry as an example of parential rights sacrificed on "altar of the gay agenda."

As recent as today, Bishop Harry R. Jackson mentioned it in a Town Hall column:

The dangers of primary school “re-education” of children are illustrated by the true story of David Parker who was outraged when he opened up the book Who's in a Family? This book was given to his 5-year-old son in 2005 at the Joseph Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington, Mass. Parker deemed that both the message and the method of the book were highly inappropriate. The book depicted different kinds of families, including same-sex couples raising children.

Jackson's column was claiming that if Proposition 8, a dreary "marriage amendment" in California isn't passed, things that "happened" to Parker could be a common occurrence.

Of course Jackson is wrong on sooo many levels, but let's focus on the Parker story. In order to combat stories that are going to be coming out about it ad naseum, allow me to push a brief summary of truth and lies about the Parker controversy:

Distortion—David Parker objected to his child being exposed to homosexuality because it was an issue of sexuality and Joseph Estabrook Elementary refused to accommodate him

Truth—In a January 17, 2005 email to the school, Parker said: “There is a book included entitled, Who’s in a Family (with pictures) that include lesbian and homosexual couples with children—implicitly equating this family structure as a morally equal alternative to other family constructs. We stand firmly against this book or any other subject matter pertaining to homosexuality ever being indoctrinated to our child, discussed in school, or sent home. We don’t believe gay parents constitute a spiritually healthy family and should not be celebrated.”

Joseph Estabrook Elementary principal, Joni Jay, wrote Parker an email clearly saying homosexuality is not a part of the kindergarten curriculum. She also said she cannot control what students say to one another and that many children attending Joseph Estabrook Elementary live in same-sex households.

Point of fact: The entire controversy began because Parker’s son brought home a “diversity bookbag” with several items in it. Among them was a book showing certain types of families, including same-sex families. It was the only book in the packet that talked about anything of a homosexual nature.

Distortion—Parker was well within his rights because Massachusetts laws says parents must give permission to have their children discuss any issue involving human sexuality.

Truth—Parker was not well within his right because discussions of differing families, including gay-led households are not included in the parental notification policy. This is because it is not an issue about human sexuality. Principal Jay informed Parker of this on March 4, 2005. Jay said she confirmed this with the district assistant superintendent and the director of Health Education. She was answering an email in which Parker said that neither he nor his wife authorize any teacher or adult to “expose” his sons (Parker has two sons) to “any sexual orientation/homosexual material/same sex unions between parents.”

Point of fact: The night before Parker’s arrest, he addressed the Lexington School Committee during their public meeting. In his speech, he attempted to link gay-led households to sexual behavior:

“Children who are successfully indoctrinated that same-sex marriage is normal and correct will eventually understand that sexual intimacy is a part of this union. Let’s not be naive about the implied human sexuality aspect of same-sex unions. Let’s be honest with ourselves. When we accept same-sex unions, we accept its implied . . . sexual intimacy. These concepts are indeed inextricably linked.”

Distortion—David Parker was arrested because Joseph Estabrook Elementary did ot respect his rights as a parent.

Truth—David Parker was arrested for trespassing. Even though his initial questions were answered, Parker persisted and finally received another meeting with school officials. According to a press release issued by William J. Hurley, Interim Superintendent of Schools and Christopher Casey, Chief of Police in Lexington, Parker and his wife requested that the school, in the future, ensure that teachers automatically remove their children from discussions of same-sex households, even if the issue rises spontaneously. It was explained to Parker and his wife that the policy allowing students to opt out of discussions of human sexuality was not relevant here and the Parkers’ request was “not practical” because children could discuss “such matters among themselves at school.”

When Parker and his wife were told that they could appeal the response to the Commissioner of Education, Parker did not want to. It was then that the two decided not to leave the school. The Lexington Police were called. Parker’s wife went to the couple’s car but he stayed. Two plain-clothed detectives came at 5:20 p.m. and a police lieutenant came at 6 p.m. All asked Parker to leave but he refused.

Distortion—David Parker did not intentionally get arrested. According to his lawyer, Jeffrey Denner:

“He (Parker) was invited to come in, he came in, there was a dialogue going back and forth, there were faxes sent back and forth to the school committee. His intent was not to get arrested. His intent was to establish a dialogue to protect his own children and other children as well.”—Father faces trial over school’s ‘pro-gay’ book, WorldNetDaily, August 4, 2005

Truth—According to the press release submitted by Hurley and Casey, Parker said “If I’m not under arrest, then I’m not leaving.” The press release also said Parker began calling people on his cell phone and a small group of people began arriving with cameras. Parker was finally arrested at 6:24 p.m. The group with the camera was waiting behind the police station and photographed his arrival.

Mass Resistance (Massachusetts conservative group) claimed that Parker was using his cell phone in order to keep his wife up to date with the meeting while she sat in the couple’s car.
Point of fact: There are pictures of Parker being arrested and led away by police on the Mass Resistance web page. Now how could any of this have happened by chance? For that matter, there are pictures of Parker addressing the Lexington School Committee the night before his arrest. The fact that these pictures are on the web page do give an impression of premeditation by Parker and Mass Resistance.

Distortion—David Parker got into this fight solely because of his concern for his children and what they are being exposed to in school.

Truth—Since his arrest, Parker has been speaking against gay rights in other states. On June 13 and 14, he was the speaker in a six-town “Wake UP Maine” tour with Brian Camenker, the head of Mass Resistance. The purpose was to aid a Maine referendum against the recently passed bill outlawing discrimination against the gay community. A flyer was distributed showing Parker in handcuffs. The flyer also claimed that Parker “questioned the homosexual rights movement.”

The image of Parker in handcuffs had made its way around several web pages like some sort of bastardized picture of Che Gueverra. He also appeared in a commercial in another effort to overturn the Maine anti-discrimination bill.

And then don’t forget this interesting addendum:

In May 2006, Parker’s son was involved in a fi ght at school with a friend over seating in the school cafeteria. His son and the other student made peace with each other and continued to be friends. They even had a play date later that week. In addition, Parker was informed as to what happened.

However, less than a month later, the Mass Resistance sent out a press release claiming that Parker’s son was set upon by eight to 10 students who did not appreciate his fight against Joseph Estabrook Elementary. The press release generated considerable buzz with the anti-gay industry, as it was either run or referenced by many so-called “pro-family” web pages, including the Traditional Values Coalition and Concerned Women for America.

Joseph Estabrook Elementary School explained the true story in a press release. However, none of the so-called “pro-family” groups, including Mass Resistance and the Traditional Values Coalition, apologized for any of their claims about a conspiracy to hurt Parker’s son nor did they correct the error.

Parker should chalk this entire experience up as a lesson that all of us, no matter what age, can learn.

When you lie, you lose. And you deserve to lose.

Articles and web pages used for this post:

www.massresistance.org

www.lexingtoncares.org

www.davidparkerfund.org/

Arrested father had point to make, The Boston Globe, April 29, 2005

Wake UP Maine Tour announced, www.MaineToday.com, June 10, 2005

Massachusetts Men Speak Against Homosexual Rights, www.MaineToday.com,
June 14, 2004

Coalition for Marriage to host David Parker at Littlefi eld Baptist Church, www.
MaineToday.com, November 3, 2005

Father faces trial over school’s ‘pro-gay’ book, WorldNetDaily, August 4, 2005

Report: Christian Parent Arrested After Being Denied Say-Son in Son’s Education,
Agape Press, April 28, 2005

Dad Becomes Icon in Battle over Homosexual Agenda in Schools, Agape Press,
May 18, 2005

School dispute persists after plea deal is struck, The Boston Globe, October 27, 2005
Press release, Lexington Public Schools, May 2, 2005

David Parker’s Son Beaten Up on the Playground, Traditional Values Coalition,
June 15, 2006

New liberal strategy: Assault 7-year-olds, Kevin McCullough, June 16, 2006

Press release, Lexington Public Schools, June 16, 2006

Damn the skies, watch the smears

Just something that I have noticed:

Saturday - Sarah Palin accuses Barack Obama of "palling around with terrorists."

Sunday - GOP announces lawsuit against Obama for illegal "foreign contributions"

Monday - One News Now runs article talking about "pro-Obama" registration in mosques.

Tell me again how John McCain and his cohorts want to talk about issues. Apparently the issue that most interest them is character assassination.


Paging Paul Cameron, paging Paul Cameron

The chaplain to the London Stock Exchange is under pressure to quit today after demanding gay men should be forced to have "sodomy" warnings tattooed on their bodies.

The suggestion is contained in a series of comments on the internet blog of the Rev Peter Mullen.

The Bishop of London today branded Mr Mullen's comments "highly offensive" and Stonewall, the gay rights charity, said he should resign.

Mr Mullen, 66, wrote on his blog: "It is time that religious believers began to recommend ... discouragements of homosexual practices after the style of warnings on cigarette packets.

"Let us make it obligatory for homosexuals to have their backsides tattooed with the slogan SODOMY CAN SERIOUSLY DAMAGE YOUR HEALTH and their chins with FELLATIO KILLS."

Jeremy from goodasyou.org covers this story with his usual excellence.

I am personally speechless.

Libraries should not cave in to the anti-gay industry in book selections

The anti-gay industry has taken an interesting approach to getting their opinions heard. They are now attacking libraries for daring to have standards:

During a week that librarians nationwide are highlighting banned books, conservative Christian students and parents showcased their own collection outside a Fairfax County high school yesterday -- a collection they say was banned by the librarians themselves.

More than 40 students, many wearing black T-shirts stamped with the words "Closing Books Shuts Out Ideas," said they tried to donate more than 100 books about homosexuality to more than a dozen high school libraries in the past year. The initiative, organized by Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family was intended to add a conservative Christian perspective to shelves that the students said are stocked with "pro-gay" books.

The article also says:

"the collection should support the diverse interests, needs and viewpoints of the school community." But library officials said donated and purchased books alike are evaluated by the same standards, including two positive reviews from professionally recognized journals.

None of the donated titles met that standard, said Susan Thornily, coordinator of library information services for Fairfax schools. Some librarians also said that the nonfiction books were heavy on scripture but light on research, or that the books would make gay students "feel inferior," she said.

I’m usually not one for censorship but I am for standards. And I have a hard time believing that anything put out about the lgbt community by the anti-gay industry or their allies belong in a public library without extreme scrutiny on its credibility.

The anti-gay industry has a track record of relying bad research (Paul Cameron) or distorting legitimate research (i.e. Elizabeth Saewyc, Robert Spitzer, Patrick Letellier, Robert Garafalo, Carol Gilligan, Lisa Waldner, Joanne Hall, Francis Collins, etc. )

And this track record of lies should not be ignored simply because the anti-gay industry was able to find enough guillible students and their parents to try and play a game of semantics.

These are the inferences I got from the press conference :

“Why are we being censored?”

“I thought libraries for free speech”

“I thought gays were supposed to be tolerant.”

All that’s missing was the louding weeping, elaborate fainting, and the bloodhounds snapping at their rear ends.

Sorry but I am also not buying this phony appeal for “tolerance” pushed by Dobson, LaBarbera and their allies.

And frankly, I wouldn’t mind seeing a full listing of these books they are pushing. We aren’t talking about mere tolerance here; we are talking about the possible codification of lies.

I don’t think a book should be included in a library’s selection simply because a group holds a press conference and sidesteps the issues of accuracy by appealing to emotions and religious beliefs

When choosing books, libraries should always adhere to high standards and the highest of all of these are veracity, or truth.

Or more to the point, would libraries have to allow books by David Duke to be carried simply because some parents feel there are too many “pro black” books on the shelves?

**Note - one of the books is Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting. I may try and find a copy of it and see how many distortions I can link via my Anti-Gay Lies and Liars timeline.

UPDATE: I'm glad that's over

The debate is over and I am full of ribs and macaroni.

My thoughts - Palin will be declared the winner solely on the point that she didn't faint at the beginning. I actually think she did well at the beginning but as time ran on, Biden started zeroing in on her and she began to channel Tina Fey. I got a little confused as to who was debating Biden.

I am sure there will be sheafs of written copy and volumes of words said, but for my money, I came away with the belief that she needed to do better than adequate and she was unsuccessful.

Another update - Stith admits error.

I am eager (very eager in fact) to jump on the anti-gay industry when they distort and lie about lgbts.

But what about when one admits when he or she is wrong?

In my defense, I cannot remember when this has ever happen; that is until now.

Last week, I wrote about a controversy involving the distortion of research by Dr. Francis Collins.

Today, one of the principals involved, Bob Stith of the Southern Baptist Convention, sent a letter to Ex-Gay Watch apologizing for the misusage for the work.

Not only does he get kudos for doing this but he also gets special pat on the back for saying that he does not use Paul Cameron statistics.


Pardon for the short post today but I am in a rotten mood.

And it has nothing to do with the election or the debate later tonight (which I will be posting on later).

Bad moods happens to everyone and I am no different. So I will try to make myself feel better by making a huge pan of bar-b-que ribs.

Meanwhile, don't give up on me yet. Look to this site later for my thoughts about the debate.

But until then, look at the following for very good reading material regarding what's going on today:

One News Now declares Biden as debate winner before it even takes place

Those lovely transphobic liars in Maryland dealt another kick in the teeth (and you would think that it would put me in a good mood)

Right-wing lying machine targets Sandra Bernhard

Defending my sista

I have fixed the Mandy Carter, Pepper LaBeija, and Dorian Corey links that weren't working. I wasn't aware of it until it was brought to my attention. I also added a new link that gives a list of lgbts of color via wikipedia.

Okay, this isn't an lgbt issue, but it is an issue.

Everyone in the blogsphere has gone election crazy while I have chosen to stay focused on ways to throw wrenches at the anti-gay industry (and I mean in a figurative sense. I want to make that clear. Otherwise, Peter and company will be sending out an email about the "radical gay activist" who wants to injure "pro-family" folks with wrenches.)

However, I simply have to defend journalist Gwen Ifill.

Apparently McCain feels that the election is slipping away so he is getting so desperate that he is relying on nonsense by sites like Free Republic.

To recap: There are rumblings that Ifill will not be impartial in tomorrow's vice presidential debate because she is the author of a book that looks at the impact of African-Americans on the political process.

Some are even construing the book as a "pro-Obama" tome.

And it hasn't even come out yet. Here is what the summary says. Judge for yourself:

In THE BREAKTHROUGH, veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama’s stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power.

Ifill argues that the Black political structure formed during the Civil Rights movement is giving way to a generation of men and women who are the direct beneficiaries of the struggles of the 1960s. She offers incisive, detailed profiles of such prominent leaders as Newark Mayor Cory Booker, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and U.S. Congressman Artur Davis of Alabama, and also covers up-and-coming figures from across the nation. Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Senator Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the "black enough" conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history.

THE BREAKTHROUGH is a remarkable look at contemporary politics and an essential foundation for understanding the future of American democracy.

We all know what's going to happen. Conservative bloggers and phony news sites are going to dig up anything that can be construed as anti-conservative bias on Ifill's part.

Hell, it's happening now via the Media Research Center:

As we learned in the first debate, moderators can help shape the outcome. PBS host Jim Lehrer asked tough questions to President Bush about his record, but failed to do the same for John Kerry. He asked Kerry to list Bush's “colossal misjudgments,” and then to list the President's lies. But he never once asked Kerry about his 20-year Senate record. Will PBS’s Gwen Ifill do better in the running-mate debate? The evidence suggests here comes liberal moderator number two . . .

How fitting. The Media Research Center now houses Robert Knight. For years, Knight made his bones conducting the same tactics against the lgbt community. If you breathe in deeply, you can smell his odor on this smearing of Ifill.

There will probably be more attempts to pile on. I see that Michelle Malkin (who seems to always be curiously at the front of the pack when conservatives take the guise of attack dogs) is trying to get her shots in.

For the record, I have enjoyed watching Ifill for years and she has never shown a bias. She reminds me of what journalism was like before Hannity, O'Reilly and the rest of the pundits took over.

And I know that tomorrow night, she will continue to show America what a true journalist should be like irregardless of this pathetic attempt by conservatives to "work the ref."

UPDATE - Ifill responds and becomes one of my heroes

PBS journalist Gwen Ifill, moderator of the upcoming vice presidential debate, dismissed conservative questions about her impartiality because she is writing a book that includes material on Barack Obama.

Ifill said Wednesday that she hasn't even written her chapter on Obama for the book "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama," which is to be published by Doubleday on Jan. 20, 2009, the day a new president is inaugurated.

"I've got a pretty long track record covering politics and news, so I'm not particularly worried that one-day blog chatter is going to destroy my reputation," Ifill said. "The proof is in the pudding. They can watch the debate tomorrow night and make their own decisions about whether or not I've done my job."

More here . . .

That's class defined.