Dobson resigns, Obama pushes out bad regulations - who says Fridays aren't good days?

Dobson resigns as chairman of Focus on the Family - two words - good riddance

Obama Set to Undo ‘Conscience’ Rule for Health Workers - The rule was a BAD IDEA. Double good riddance

Just in case you get too happy, folks - please check out my last post (that is if you haven't already). Mindsets like that of the man who created the monstrosity I spoke of still exists.

And you just know that now, these folks are doubly pissed.

Something guaranteed to piss you off

I ran into something a while back that I have been itching to show on this site.

This 1986 comic was created by a man named Dick Hafer and it is a vile representation of some of the most evil anti-gay lies out there.

This is for the many young folks who don't remember what it was like in the 1980s when the AIDS crisis was in full bloom, ignorance was all around and Paul Cameron was a credible name.

It is a representation of how far we have come and how far we have to go. You will recognize how some of the same arguments are still being used, although not as explicitly. Check out the comic's list of supporters shown on the last graphic.

You can click on the pictures to get a better view of the pages - more are at the bottom (even though I don't think it's work safe). And if you want to see the entire comic (God help you) go here.

Editor's note - The webpage featuring this comic is not anti-gay. It's a site that looks at "problem-based comics" from the past.

CPAC conference churning and so is my stomach

Right now as I speak, The Conservative Political Action Conference is underway.

This conference is where conservatives get together, plan, and generally complain about those "Godless liberals."

The following is basically the conference:

Blah blah blah, Jesus was a conservative, blah, blah, blah, liberals like to squeeze the Charmin and snatch tags off of matresses, blah, blah, blah, a gay man felt my ass while I was coming here.

Okay maybe I'm exaggerating a bit:

CPAC is expected to draw nearly 9,000 activists and college students from across the country, up from the record 7,000 who attended last year, when the main attractions were personal appearances by President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and the four remaining Republican presidential nomination hopefuls - former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

To get a good view of what these folks are going to talk about, I will present links from People for The American Way's Religious Right Watch.

Religious Right Watch deserves much kudos for having the high tolerance level to stand the nonsense going on at the CPAC conference (even though it has yet to add my blog to its list of links - hint, hint, hint).

Proceed at your own risk with barf bag in hand:

CPAC: Marriage Equality Will Create a Generation of Violent Criminals

CPAC: Obama's a Communist and a Foreigner, Bush was a "Pseduo-Socialist President"

CPAC: Carlson Attempts to Defend the New York Times, Gets Booed

CPAC: Bay Buchanan Calls DC Conservatives a Bunch of Sell-Outs

And from John Aravosis at Americablog:

Bush UN ambassador jokes about nuking Chicago since Obama is from there

Ah yes. Nothing like a good traditional family values gathering - that is if your family is the Sawney Beane clan or the Bloody Benders.

Concerned Women for America exploits scholarship program for the sake of fear and hyperbole

Some members of the religious right are especially unhappy with the Democratic party. They are claiming that a spending bill passed by the House will strip disadvantaged children of educational opportunities:

Disadvantaged children in the District of Columbia will be losing an educational lifeline if a new spending bill is passed on Capitol Hill. At the same time, abortionists and homosexual activists stand to gain from the Omnibus bill.

Dan Lips, a senior policy analyst with The Heritage Foundation, warns that the new Omnibus bill -- passed by the House on Wednesday essentially along party lines -- will terminate the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program.

The article continues to brag on the attributes of the scholarship program and tells of attempts to stop its possible elimination.

Now the next part of the article is confusing:

Joining the ranks of groups opposed to the Omnibus spending bill is the Washington, DC-based group Concerned Women for America. The pro-life/pro-family organization notes that the bill includes a $7-million raise for Planned Parenthood, the non-profit, federally-funded abortion organization that makes a sizeable annual profit. In addition, says CWFA president Wendy Wright, it pumps $50 million into the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), an agency she says is "intimately involved in the forced abortion, forced sterilization program in China."

The United Nations agency will receive the money regardless if it engages in coercive abortion activities. The pro-life activist cites several other objections to the legislation.

"This Omnibus bill would eliminate funding for school-choice programs that have helped to rescue children from dangerous and failing inner-city schools," says Wright. "[In addition] it has language that will reintroduce the Fairness Doctrine, and it has funding for controversial 'school bullying' programs which in the past have promoted homosexual programs to children."

So does that mean CWA wants to save the scholarship program or is the organization using its possible demise for another attack on so-called Godless liberals, "homosexual activists," and "abortionists?":

In short, says Wright, the Omnibus bill is loaded with spending for "liberals bent on destroying American values."

You tell me.

Janet Porter's pathetic attempt to connect hate crimes legislation and ENDA

From Pam's House Blend and Tips Q comes news that one of my favorite religious right spokespeople, Janet Folger-Porter, has gone on a tear about the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA):

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or “ENDA” is “hate crimes” – or more accurately, “thought crimes” – for the workplace. It means the “ENDA” freedom of speech, the “ENDA” freedom of religion, the “ENDA” freedom of association and the “ENDA” freedom of conscience.

And like pretty much all religious right spokespeople, Porter provides "examples" of cases in which people's freedoms have been "trampled" by us "evil homosexuals."

All of her examples are vague rehashing of actual events - so vague that we don't know the truth behind the cases. And a lot of them are from foreign countries - you know, countries that don't have our Constitution, laws or legal system.

One of Porter's examples that come from the United States has to do with the Ocean Grove Pavilion controversy:

. . . the Christian Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association in New Jersey, which was found “guilty of discrimination” for standing by their beliefs instead of renting their facilities to a homosexual couple who wanted to use the Christian camp for their same-sex union in March 2007.

Of course Porter is being highly deceptive about this situation. I will let Tips-Q tell you why:

Janet sort of forgets that the gay couple wanted to rent an oceanfront pavilion that is owned by the Christian organization but is open to the public. Indeed, as part of their zoning law variance, the organization entered into a written agreement to comply with New Jersey’s anti-discrimination laws.

Another example caught my eye:

The 16-year-olds who were charged with felonies in Chicago for handing out flyers that criticized homosexuality . . .

Just like in the case of Ocean Grove, Porter leaves out crucial details:

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

. . . McHenry County State's Attorney Lou Bianchi told Windy City Times that despite arguments being made by many locals about the right to free speech, what the two girls did is clearly a hate crime.'They had the intent to alarm and disturb another, and they were successful in that,' Bianchi said. 'In alarming and disturbing, they also committed a hate crime. Their words ... were directed against a specific individual of a certain sexual orientation.'

Bianchi would not comment on the exact wording of the flier because it is evidence. However, other sources quote those who have viewed the flier as containing a picture of the male student kissing another male, with the wording 'God hates fags.'

The hate crimes charges were dropped because the two girls pleaded to lesser charges. For Porter to attempt to make them poster children for "gay oppression" is beyond the pale.

I'm more concerned about the target of their vendetta.

If Porter was any type of Christian, she would have been too instead of attempting to distort the case to suit her agenda.

Wednesday news briefs

Where Are the Black Gay Men? - from the article: "Two weeks ago individuals and organizations across the nation marked National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day. Judging by many of the articles, press releases and events commemorating the day, however, you might never guess that the highest percentage of new HIV infections in 2006 was among black gay men.

Why, even on a day dedicated to black AIDS awareness, do black gay men remain a footnote?"

Those are my sentiment exactly

Buttars Has a Friend in Matt Barber - Well at least Chris Buttars has one friend. It's kinda sad when even Peter LaBarbera won't defend your anti-gay words. But never fear, Matt Barber will be a friend to homophobes the world over.

Perkins Contemplating Primary Challenge to Vitter - Great. Jason vs. Freddy part 2.

Bobby Jindal Response Panned By Pundits, Republicans And Democrats Alike - I tried watching Bobby Jindal last night in an attempt to be fair but I couldn't finish. It was a disaster. And let's face it - him mentioning Hurricane Katrina as proof of government ineptness is like the Pittsburgh Steeler quarterback throwing an interception twice to the same Dallas Cowboy player in Superbowl XXX.

Schultheis: HIV testing for pregnant moms rewards ‘sexual promiscuity’ - First Renfroe, now this. Have Colorado legislators lost their damned minds?

Another state legislator, another show of 'Biblical' disrespect

The Chris Buttars situation continues to cause controversy in Utah.

And the religious right continues to be silent about it.

Which is totally opposite of their behavior last year in the case of Oklahoma legislator Sally Kern. When Kern made and defended her comments comparing gays to terrorists, the religious right all but made her a patron saint, including having a huge rally for her in the Oklahoma State House.

Whether it be the stark nature of Buttars's comments or the fact that he is a Mormon rather than an "evangelical Christian," the religious right hasn't given him the time of day.

But now comes a situation where I dare them to sink their sanctimonius teeth in:

On the floor of the State Senate, right-wing Senator Scott Renfroe (R-Greeley) actually referred to gay and lesbian people as an "abomination" and an "offense to God."

It gets worse:

Renfroe equated gay and lesbian people with murderers and quoted the Book of Leviticus suggesting that gay people should be put to death.

He also said that women were created to be "helpers" for men, quoting the Book of Genesis.

Renfroe was referring to Senate Bill 88, a bill that would extend healthcare coverage to the same-sex partners of state employees. SB 88 is about healthcare. It's about gaining some measure of equality for gay and lesbian state employees. And regardless of how people like James Dobson and Scott Renfroe feel about gay people, their shameless hate-mongering has no place in public debate and we should reject them completely.

Now I could say that Renfroe's absolutely stupid comments proves that the opponents of gay marriage lie when they say their position is only to clarify the "fact" that marriage is between one man and one woman.

In so many cases, they have used the anti-gay marriage laws to keep gay couples from job benefits, healthcare benefits, and adopting children.

But I would be preaching to the choir and highlighting something that has been said on much better blogs than this one.

I really want to commend Renfroe for saying it all. Usually when someone cites Leviticus while making the statement that homosexuality is against God's will and that we should listen to "God's word," they leave that part out about death.

If there's anything I hate, it's a lukewarm Christian.

At any rate, just as in the case of Buttars, I don't suspect that there will be any call to make Renfroe the new icon of gay "intolerance."

For one thing, his speech was nasty. I don't think anyone in their right mind would try and spin his words as simple Christian truth.

Of course we are talking about the religious right so I reserve the right to take back my "right mind" statement.

But secondly, and most importantly, how many times must this sort of thing happen?

The routine of religious right groups is to portray themselves and their supporters as innocent upholders of moral values who are beset by "intolerant radical homosexual activists."

But in the cases of Buttars, Renfroe, and even Kern, it hasn't been the gay community who have started the fight - it's been the "Christian" politicians.

I don't care what your biblical or world view is of homosexuality, no community should have to be put up with being called terrorists or disrespected in any form.

Gays are not criminals, so you cannot compare us to murderers. Gays are not mentally sick so you cannot compare us to alcoholics.

We are thriving, successful members of the American community and as such, we have every right demand respect from our leaders and politicians even if they disagree with what they think our so-called lifestyle entails.

If the religious right continues to defend every politician who attacks the gay community, how long will it be before this country stops buying into their phony claims of innocence and finally realizes that they are inciting the problem?

After all, you can't continue to clutch the pearls in shock when you are the ones doing the shocking.

Editor's note - This is the only post I will write today because I am sidelined with a nasty fever. Enjoy the post, respond if you deem it necessary, and by all means, check out last night's post on the definition of bigotry.

Anger over Milk's Oscar wins yields ignorance and evasion

I am disappointed.

When Milk won two Oscars (Best Original Screenplay and Best Actor), I knew some members of the religious right would register their disappointment and anger.

But I didn't realize how pathetic some of this anger would be.

Ted Baehr of Movieguide has written a piece attempting to scold Hollywood for its Oscar picks.

First of all, who is Ted Baehr and what is Movieguide?

If you type in http://www.movieguide.com/, you will come to a legitimate Hollywood site.

That's not Baehr's Movieguide. The address for his site is http://www.movieguide.org/

Not that I am accusing Baehr of attempting to piggyback credibility on a legitimate site or anything.

According to Wikipedia:

Baehr began publishing MOVIEGUIDE as a biweekly magazine of movie reviews "from a biblical perspective" aimed at helping parents use informed judgment when deciding what entertainment products are suitable for their families' enjoyment. Movieguide's reviews address not only specific portrayals of sex, violence, and profanity, but also address the "worldview" implicit in a movie's theme.

In other words, Baehr's scolding is going to be a hatchet job perpetrated by a phony pro-values group attempting to be credible while putting its biases on the front shelf.

And that's what it is:

Hollywood Denounces God and Applauds Pedophilia at the Oscars

The Academy Awards showed its support for sexual perversions last night at its annual Oscar ceremony.

And, the Academy wrongly painted the Entertainment Industry as a bunch of Commie rats, as it applauded Communist sympathizer Sean Penn’s gleeful greeting after winning an award for portraying an assassinated homosexual leader, “You Commie, homo-loving sons of guns!”

For the record, what Penn said was strictly tongue-in-cheek. That's why the audience applauded - it was a funny line.

At the beginning of the show, host Hugh Jackman described the message of MILK as, “It’s okay to be gay.”

Of course, Jesus Christ believes otherwise.

“Haven’t you read,” he says in Matthew 19:4-6, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So, they are no longer two, but one. Therefore, what God has joined together, let man not tear apart.”

Actually, Jesus never said a word about being gay. You won't find anything in the Bible proving so.

But then Baehr really gets cooking with his "how dare Hollywood show filth-flarn-filth" whine:

The movie industry also gave an Oscar to Kate Winslet for playing an illiterate escaped Nazi war criminal and pedophile who repeatedly seduces a 15-year-old boy.

Even though she played a pedophile, Hollywood decided that Kate Winslet finally deserved to get an Oscar for her performance in THE READER.

Gee I don't know. Maybe they gave her the Oscar because it was a good performance. Baehr makes it seem that Hollywood is honoring her for playing a pedophile rather than creating an excellent portrayal.

Baehr continues the criticism with an attack on Meryl Streep:

The attack on biblical values continued as Meryl Streep was praised for portraying a strict Catholic nun who struggles with herself and the fact that modern times are passing her by.

How is this an attack on Biblical values? Showing a nun who is concerned with modern times? I guess in Baehr's world, only nuns like those portrayed in The Story of Bernadette and Come to the Stable should warrant Oscar nominations.

But the next part is where Baehr trips up. And it's always where these so-called pro-family types make their biggest errors - when they manipulate the data to suit their point of view. Baehr contends that based on his group's figures, films with lgbt or "anti-Christian" (his words) content are not as successful as films with what he calls "very strong Christian worldviews."

. . . statistics show that movies with very strong Christian worldviews like PRINCE CASPIAN and FIREPROOF averaged $43.5 million at the box office while movies with very strong atheist or anti-Christian worldviews like Maher’s RELIGULOUS averaged only $11.2 million and movies with very strong pro-homosexual content like MILK averaged even worse, only $6.3 million.

In fact, the more homosexual content a movie had, the less it earned at the box office, according to MOVIEGUIDE®’s Annual Report to the Entertainment Industry, which examined the Top 250 English-language movies at the box office:

First of all, what constitutes "very strong pro-homosexual content?"

Secondly, Baehr's contention about the "more homosexual content a movie had, the less it earned at the box office" is ridiculous because it does not take into account the movie's budget, how many screens it is shown on, or reviews.

Baehr is clearly channeling Paul Cameron here.

Also, RELIGULOUS is a documentary and documentaries usually do not get a much push or are shown on as many screens as movies like Prince Caspian.

But RELIGULOUS was a successful documentary - It's budget was $2,500,000. It made $11,478,638 - which constitutes a profit.

Milk has only been in wide release since January. Before then, it was in limited release. It's budget was $15 million and it has already made $28,853,456. Most likely this will increase.

Baehr is being highly deceptive by including Prince Caspian in the mix because it was a big budget studio feature in wide release from its first day at the box office.

The worldwide total for Prince Caspian was $419,649,113 but its budget was $225 million.

The other "positive" movie, Fireproof, was pushed heavily by religious right groups such as Focus on the Family and Christian groups (the two sets of groups are not similar).

On a budget of $500,000, it made $33,351,975.

But Fireproof's success still does not prove Baehr's theory, especially when one takes into account just how much Prince Caspian figures into his numbers.

By the way, Iron Man and the Dark Knight made more money than all of these films combined.

I wonder if Baehr would label them as movies with "strong Christian worldviews."

But the bottom line is Baehr's piece is poorly done.

And unfortunately, so damn typical of the religious right.

We call them bigots because they act like bigots

Utah State Senator Chris Buttars has been on my mind lately. Mainly because of this comment he made last week:

In recent years, registering opposition to the homosexual agenda has become almost impossible. Political correctness has replaced open and energetic debate. Those who dare to disagree with the homosexual agenda are labeled “haters,” and “bigots,” and are censured by their peers. "

Or as Peter LaBarbera put today in an attack on Georgia Log Cabin Republican head James Ensley:

Once again, the hypocrisy of the claims of homosexual groups’ commitments to tolerance is laid bare in all its ugliness in Mr. Ensley’s letter . He has charged Mr. LaBarbera and anyone else who shares the orthodox Christian, mainstream, historical view of homosexual behavior as immoral with being bigoted, anti-American, anti-Christian, fringe, radical, extremist domestic terrorist.

This tendency to feign innocence and claim victimhood is a common tactic of religious right groups and their supporters. “Why are we being attacked when we are simply expressing our Biblical opposition to the radical homosexual agenda.” “It’s the homosexual activists who are intolerant. They attack everyone who oppose their agenda by calling them ‘haters’ or ‘bigots.’”

In his attack on Ensley, LaBarbera included a column from fake lgbt expert Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Council. What was interesting about it was this part:

The Merriam Webster Dictionary defines a bigot as a person who is “obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.” Clearly, there is a distinction between bigotry and moral views. Bigotry cannot simply refer to holding opinions or being in possession of moral precepts, for if it did, everyone but sociopaths would have to be considered bigots because everyone but sociopaths holds certain behaviors as moral and others as immoral. Moreover, “prejudice” refers to “an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.”

So apparently LaBarbera, Higgins and Buttars think that they and others who share their beliefs about gays are unfairly being called bigots?

Well rather than a long expository on why this is not correct, allow me to let these folks speak for themselves. Using the definition of bigot laid about by the Webster dictionary (by way of Higgins), what do you think?:

Homosexuals cannot reproduce, so they must recruit. And to freshen their ranks they must recruit the youth of America." - Anita Bryant from a 1970s Save Our Children statement

For the sake of our children and society, we must OPPOSE the spread of homosexual activity! Just as we must oppose murder, stealing, and adultery!" says one such recent fundraising letter. "Since homosexuals cannot reproduce, the only way for them to 'breed' is to RECRUIT! And who are their targets for recruitment? Children!" - American Family Association direct mail appeal

"[O]ur poor boys on the front lines will have to face two different enemies, one from the front and one from the rear." - the late Jerry Falwell On President Clinton's proposal to lift the ban on gays in the military.

And speaking of calling people Nazis:

'Hitler and his supporters were Satanists and homosexuals. That's just a true statement.' He added, 'The notion that is involved in homosexuality, the unbridled sort of satisfaction of human passions' leads to 'totalitarianism,' 'Nazism,' and 'communism.' " - Alan Keyes , People for the American Way, "Hostile Climate," 1997, p.26.

“If you look at the footage from Operation Rescue, um, vigils outside abortion clinics, you will see that the anti Operation Rescue demonstrators invariably have a pink triangle on and they are usually pretty big heavy set women who look like they’ve been over working October Fest for the last six years . . .” - Robert Knight, Reclaiming America For Christ Conference, “Homosexuality” panel, February 28, 1999

“If you isolate sexuality as something solely for one’s own personal amusement, and all you want is the most satisfying orgasm you can get—and that is what homosexuality seems to be—then homosexuality seems too powerful to resist. The evidence is that men do a better job on men, and women on women if all you are looking for is an orgasm.” - discredited researcher Paul Cameron, Rolling Stone, March, 18, 1999

The “alphas” in homosexual relationships, be they men or women, are many times recruiting younger partners. A vast percentage of those who enter the homosexual life do so after having been sexually initiated by an older person of their sex—be it consensual or not—it usually has the feel of enticement or seduction. - Town Hall columnist Kevin McCullough, The ‘Gay’ Truth, May 30, 2003

"I've never seen a man in my life I wanted to marry. And I'm gonna be blunt and plain: if one ever looks at me like that, I'm gonna kill him and tell God he died." - Jimmy Swaggart in a September 2004 evangelism television broadcast

“You really think that a pool of people (homosexuals) where 45% of them eat feces from the rear end of another male is “normal”? If you do, you are frankly nuts. A lifestyle where one of their past times is buying gerbils and hamsters from the pet store and cramming them up
their rears in an activity called feltching? - Mecklenberg County Board Commissioner Bill James, 2005

“The newest thing in Chicago, it’s becoming a trend, and you’re gonna find this hard to believe . . . sex with infants . . . It’s not enough that they have . . . you know when you engage in perversion, and homosexuality is perversion, we don’t hate the gays mind you, we don’t hate them, we hate what they’re doing . . . pretty soon that perversion is like addiction,
it’s not enough, so you need to graduate to something else. You need to move on. So now they’re having sex with animals, a small group that’s getting bigger, sex with infants, sex in the street in Chicago out in the open, it’s just getting more and more perverted.” - former Renew America columnist Guy Adams, August 2, 2006

“Sodomites and perverted ones,” - Traditional Values Coalition head Lou Sheldon when asked at a 2006 conference what designation should “Christians” use to describe gays.

“God hates soft men” and “God hates effeminate men. . . If I was in a drugstore and some guy opened the door for me, I’d rip his arm off and beat him with the wet end.” - Rev. Ken Hutcheron, 2008

“What is the morals of a gay person? You can’t answer that because anything goes . . . “They’re probably the greatest threat to America going down I know of.” - Utah State Senator Chris Buttars, 2009

And one more from our friend LaBarbera. Since he likes to complain about being called names, check what he said last year about the Gay Mens Health Crisis receiving federal funding (bold emphasis added by me):

"One of the recipients was the Gay Men's Health Crisis [Center]," notes LaBarbera. "[The Crisis Center] is a typical, radical, homosexual activist/AIDS organization that opposes abstinence and supports homosexual funding and subsidizing -- effectively, promotion of homosexual sex acts."

Bear in mind that I haven’t even touched the constant use of discredited studies ala Paul Cameron or the distortion of legitimates studies by LaBarbera and others on his side of this so-called cultural war.

But I will say this: seems to me that if something walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it should wear the designation of being a duck without argument.

Hat tip to the Southern Poverty Law Center and Wired Strategies.

Monday mid-day news briefs

AP: Did TV News Miss Point In Covering Stimulus Plan? - Well I'm sure that people with actual experience in matters such as this couldn't get a word in with all of the self-serving think tank denizens, talking heads and overrated media types jockeying for position.

Educators fail gay students of color - Unfortunately at times I feel that they aren't the only ones who are failing these children. - Hat tip to Deb Price who writes extensively on lgbt issues.

Transgender vets a hidden population - An excellent article on our transgender brothers and sisters.

Supreme Court won't hear anti-gay speech case - Religious right martyr of the month coming up.

Kudos to Milk's Sean Penn and Dustin Lance Black - Yes! Again and again! This needs to be played continuously, especially Black's speech. Our youth need to know how special they are.

The morning after the Oscars - religious right bitch fit to come

Wait for it cause you know it's going to happen.

Last night, actor Sean Penn won the Oscar for Best Actor for his role as gay icon Harry Milk.

And we know what is going to happen next:

"Hollywood, as usual, has proven itself to be at the beck and call of the radical homosexual agenda," - the soon-to-be words of Donald Wildmon, James Dobson, Peter LaBarbera, Matt Barber, or some other phony pro-family talking head.

As I understand it, the zombies at Free Republic are already flipping out over Penn's win, his speech and the speech of Dustin Lance Black, who won Best Original Screenplay for Milk.

And here I thought it was going to be a bad Monday.

One more thing - after months of sounding the alarm of hysteria over the Fairness Doctrine, One News Now finally addressed the fact that President Obama does not support the law:

A conservative author and magazine editor warns that although Barack Obama says he "does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated," the president wants to impose comparable regulations on radio broadcasters.

Okay, never mind.

Am I the only one who thinks what Alan Keyes said is dangerous?

Everyone seems to be laughing at Alan Keyes's comments about President Obama. To reiterate, here is what he said:

“Obama is a radical communist and I think it is becoming clear. That is what I told people in Illinois and now everybody realizes it is coming true,” said Keyes who ran unsuccessfully against Obama for the Senate in 2004. “He is going to destroy this country and we are either going to stop him or the United States of America is going to cease to exist."

For the record, I never liked Alan Keyes because I think he is a phony. He reminds me of a restaurant trying to fill its patrons on appeitizers because it lacks entrees.

I know he can tout his credentials (he is a former ambassador or something or another) but what has he really done besides make speeches about "America's moral crisis."

That's his schtick, you see. Just about in every second speech, he whines that this country is on the onset of doom and despair.

To paraphrase Rod Serling, Keyes has put America at death's door so many times he has worn out the welcome mat.

On more than one occasion, he has given many of us a reason to laugh at him and poke fun.

But his recent comments are not funny:

“He (President Obama) is going to destroy this country and we are either going to stop him or the United States of America is going to cease to exist."

Someone should ask Keyes what exactly does he mean by stopping Obama. I know that he is leading the charge in a lawsuit opposing Obama's election on citizenship grounds, but his comments go far beyond this action.

I know that there are going to be some who will pull the "they said the same thing about President Bush" card with the "they" in question meaning "liberals" and "the left."

But to do this only clouds the issue.

Let's be honest and frank here. Many people aren't happy with Obama's election to the presidency. For whatever reason it may be, they view him as more than a person whose policies they oppose.

They view his victory as evil defeating good with Obama owning the horns, tail, and pitchfork. A perfect example of these people are on World Net Daily.

The last thing they need is goadings of their paranoid fears. And the very last thing they need is encouragement to "stop" the so-called evil of Obama.

This is not to say I don't support Keyes's right to speak as he wishes. But I also wish that he and others who oppose President Obama would use restraint and common sense.

Keyes, in particular, should follow his own advice and act like an adult.

I fear that if this type of rhetoric keeps up, none of us will be laughing later on.

Saturday news briefs

AL: Birmingham mayor slapped with lawsuit for discrimination against Pride Fest - The story is clear. The mayor is discriminating against Pride Fest. Amongst other things, he has refused to let city employees city workers hang banners for the Pride festival from city light posts, which was allowed for other events.

I can just hear the arguments from the religious right now - "It's his personal beliefs. Why should he sacrifice his deeply held religious beliefs?"

He wasn't elected as a Christian but to be mayor for all citizens. How long is it going to be before people start saying "personal deeply held religious beliefs" is no excuse for being disrespectful or discriminatory?

‘Ex-Gay & The Law’ Released by Truth Wins Out and Lambda Legal - A landmark kick in the crotch to the so-called ex-gay groups and the religious right groups behind their planning and funding. It should be a required document for all lgbt centers and groups across the country.

Now let's work on a publication outlining all of the religious right's phony positions and arguments regarding the lgbt community as well as its history of misinformation and lies.

Ready for his close-up: Vintage black gay film unveils a ‘Portrait of Jason’ - Just in time for Black History Month.

Anti-gay forces work to regain national influence - They want us to forget about Paul Cameron, the phony studies, the stereotypes and the legitimate studies they intentionally took out of context. I say don't let them forget it.

Hey Pete: First apologize for your own Nazi comparisons, brother! - Peter LaBarbera shown to be a hypocrite? We must be on planet Earth.

Chris Buttars needs to get off of the cross - he brought it all on himself

Utah legislator Chris Buttars lost his committee chairmanship today after anti-gay comments he made to a documentary filmmaker. He of course took the tone of a martyr:

In recent years, registering opposition to the homosexual agenda has become almost impossible. Political correctness has replaced open and energetic debate. Those who dare to disagree with the homosexual agenda are labeled “haters,” and “bigots,” and are censured by their peers.

The poor thing. What exactly did he say again?:

Homosexuality will always be a sexual perversion. And you say that around here now and everybody goes nuts. But I don’t care.”

…”They’re mean. They want to talk about being nice. They’re the meanest buggers I have ever seen.”

And just seconds later, Buttars draws a comparison between some gays and radical Muslims. “It’s just like the Muslims. Muslims are good people and their religion is anti-war. But it’s been taken over by the radical side.”

…Buttars: “What is the morals of a gay person? You can’t answer that because anything goes.”

And finally, this is how senator Buttars refers to the “radical gay movement.” “They’re probably the greatest threat to America going down I know of.”

What Buttars did was conduct unbecoming of an elected official. It's one thing to think that homosexuality is a sin, but his comments were something altogether different.

Buttars isn't being called to the carpet because of a "gay agenda." He is being called to the carpet because he let his mouth speak before his brain had time to tell his mouth to shut up.

If he had said the same thing about women, or Jewish people, or those of another religon or African-Americans, I really don't think he would be getting as much sympathy.

And it leads me to ask this question - Why is it that some people feel that they can say anything negative about lgbts and then try to gain sympathy when they are criticized for it?

Is it that much of open season on lgbts that we have to allow ourselves to be disrespected in ways that no other group would?

This has nothing to do with "opposing the gay agenda." It has to do with respect and no matter how you feel on the issue, no group should have to sit and allow themselves to be disrespected.

Buttars needs to get off of the cross and take his lumps like a man.

Note to the African-American community - The religious right doesn't care about you

A quick quiz:

The New York Post just published a highly racist editorial cartoon depicting the first black president of the United States as a dead chimpanzee.

What do you do?

A. Criticize the cartoonist for creating the racist cartoon?

B. Criticize the New York Post for publishing the racist cartoon?

C. Ignore the racist cartoon entirely and criticize U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder for commenting (pretty much at the same time frame that the cartoon was published) that when it comes to discussing racial issues, the country is a nation of cowards?

If you are One News Now and Rev. Harry Jackson, the answer is C:

Bishop Harry Jackson, Jr., a Maryland pastor and chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition, disagrees with Holder and says it was "horrible" for the attorney general to read those comments as a prepared speech.

"He intended to give us a signal, however, that he was going to overcome cowardice as he administrates and adjudicates the law of the land. And he began to list, somewhere toward the end, that blacks had opened the door for women's rights, for other groups," he notes. "And I can't help but think that he is going to try to prosecute affirmative action cases and even cases that deal with gay rights and issues such as hate rimes in the days ahead."

There is no big point to be made here.

But it's something to remember the next time One News Now, Jackson or anyone connected with religious right groups pretend as if they are the black community's savior against those so-called "evil gays who are trying to exploit the civil rights movement to validate their sinful lifestyle."

The black community should remember that sometimes those who claim to be your saviors are the ones you should be wary of.

Religious right attacking United American Families Act through semantics

Yesterday, Peter LaBarbera referred to a certain bill as the "Foreign Homosexual Lovers Importation Act of 2009."

This bill is actually called the “United American Families Act” and it would make a small change to existing immigration law to close a loophole barring gay and lesbian Americans in committed relationships with foreign partners from sponsoring their partner for a green card. These same-sex binational couples are denied the right that opposite-sex couples have been afforded for decades - the right to legally keep their families together in the United States.

LaBarbera's inaccurate and very rude phrasing of the bill (Foreign Homosexual Lovers Importation Act of 2009) seems to be the first step in trying to defeat it - i.e. branding the bill as something negative.

I sincerely doubt that LaBarbera has thought of this on his own. Someone has looked at this bill and reduced it to a single factoid - those homosexuals don't have stable relationships. They just want to use this law to try and force acceptance for their lifestyle.

Now comes the press releases and the news articles from places like One News Now, Lifesite and World Net Daily.

Then comes the one-sided radio shows brought to you by Focus on the Family and the Liberty Counsel.

And let's not forget the television talk shows, conservative columnists, and blogs.

Not bad in terms of planning.

Not very Christian either, but I guess it doesn't matter.

Peter LaBarbera makes our case for us (again)

Sometimes I can't help wondering whether or not Peter LaBarbera is a mole working for HRC.

Either that or he can't grasp the idea that his words help our cause more than his.

For example, his post advertising an appearance on the Liberty Counsel's radio program:

I will be the guest on Liberty Counsel’s outstanding new radio program, “Liberty Live” – airing today at 4:00-5:00 PM Eastern Time (3:00-4:00 Central). The host (in Liberty Counsel Founder Mat Staver’s absence) will be my good friend, Matt Barber, LC’s Director of Cultural Affairs and an AFTAH Board Member. (Matt is the guy who was fired by Allstate a few years back after writing a private web article against “gay marriage”– on his own time; this was God’s way of launching him into full-time pro-family work!)

For the record, Peter is being highly deceptive. Barber may have written his article on "his own time," but he included his place of employment in his bio, thereby involving AllState in his screed.

So the idea that Barber was blameless in that matter is up for conjecture. However, Peter's careful omission of that fact isn't.

Judging from Peter's advertisement, he is going to whine about President Obama's potential plans for aiding the lgbt community, including (Peter's words):

Transsexuality-Promoting ENDA (think men in dresses entering corporate female restrooms);

The pro-homosexual immigration bill euphemistically called the “United American Families Act of 2009” – which would allow Americans caught up in immoral homosexual relationships to sponsor their foreign-living homosexual lovers for immigration into the United States. We might rename this last bill the “Foreign Homosexual Lovers Importation Act of 2009.”

The linking of ENDA (which would give lgbts protection against discrimination in housing, employment, etc.) to men "dressed as women" invading bathrooms is no different than racists claiming that integration will lead to black men having sex with white women.

And spare me the nonsense about how homosexuality is different from race. That's not the issue here. The issue is that Peter's claim is a cynical tactic and while it may be successful, it's highly un-Christian. And it's untruthful too. I know this for a fact.

My city, Columbia, passed a transgender inclusive nondiscrimination policy and there has not been a problem of "men invading women's restrooms." For the record, there has never been a problem with "men invading women's restrooms" due to transgender inclusive nondiscrimination laws.

If there is, then I challenge Peter to show me.

Then there is the “United American Families Act of 2009." Peter's rather immature phrasing of this bill is yet another attempt by him and folks on his side to reduce the validity of lgbt relationships to that of sex acts.

According to HRC:

The legislation amends the definitions sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act to include definitions for “permanent partner” and “permanent partnership.” The Act defines “permanent partner” as an individual who is at least 18 years of age who is in a committed relationship with another individual at least 18 years of age who is not a first, second or third-degree blood relative, with the intent that this be a lifelong commitment. The individual must be financially interdependent with his or her partner, cannot be married or in another permanent partnership and must be unable to enter into a marriage recognized under the INA with the partner.

UAFA will provide lesbian and gay individuals the same opportunity as different-sex, married couples to sponsor their partner. Like different-sex couples, there are requirements such as providing proof of the relationship — including affidavits from friends and family or evidence of financial support. As with current immigration laws for married couples, UAFA would impose harsh penalties for fraud, including up to five years in prison and as much as $250,000 in fines.

The irony of the entire thing is that on occasion, Peter has whined that the gay community attacks him personally rather than give reasonable arguments to his opposition of gay rights.

He should talk, huh.

Personally I'm all for him talking. The more LaBarbera (and for that matter - Sally Kern, Chris Buttars, Matt Barber) talk, the more they reveal just what their true motives are.

Sooner or later, America is going to get tired of these phony Christian activists, their conspiracy theories, and especially their need to stoop to the lowest hyperbole.

UPDATE - Jeremy from GoodAsYou has just published the transcript and the audio from the show. He is a better man than I. And has a stronger stomach too.

Thursday mid-day news briefs

And One News Now still has not reported on President Obama being against the Fairness Doctrine.

GOP Governors Consider Turning Down Stimulus Money - Not necessarily an lgbt issue per se but isn't it interesting how two of these governors (Jindal and Sanford) have potential future presidential aspirations. And neither are lgbt's best friends.

UPDATE - Sanford will take the money - I guess every now and then, the big bad wolf has to let everyone know that he exists by blowing the smoke.

The Blend picks up a Lezzy - Much congrats to Pam's House Blend and a big thanks for all of the support you have given me and my blog.

Bigotry on parade - Geez, not another anti-gay adoption bill disguised as something "good for the children."

Will the religious right defend Chris Buttars?

Quick note - For days One News Now has been speculating about the return of the Fairness Doctrine - about how it will harm Christian broadcasters and lead to censorship.

Yesterday, President Obama said he was against reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.

And there isn't even one article about it at One News Now.

How typical.

But the events over the past few days remind me about how delicious irony can be on occasion.

Last year around this time, Oklahoma legislator Sally Kern gave a speech where she said gays were worse than terrorists.

When the lgbt community complained, the religious right made her into the modern Joan of Arc.

It culminated into a huge rally for Kern at the Oklahoma State House that was attended by over 1,500 people.

A year later comes Utah State Senator Chris Buttars. In an interview with a documentary filmmaker, he said the following:

– To me, homosexuality will always be a sexual perversion. And you say that around here now and everybody goes nuts! But I don’t care.

– They say, I’m born that way. There’s some truth to that, in that some people are born with an attraction to alcohol.

– They’re mean! They want to talk about being nice — they’re the meanest buggers I ever seen. It’s just like the Moslems. Moslems are good people and their religion is anti-war. But it’s been taken over by the radical side. And the gays are totally taken over by the radical side.

– I believe that you will destroy the foundation of American society, because I believe the cornerstone of it is a man and a woman, the family. … And I believe that they’re, internally, they’re probably the greatest threat to America going down I know of. Yep, the radical gay movement.

Buttars has never been a friend to the lgbt community. In the interview, he also claimed that he "killed" gay/straight alliances in high schools, calling them places where gays "recruit."

But now he seems to be using the Donnie McClurkin defense (i.e. saying you were misquoted even when you are on video saying the remarks), so it's obvious that he realizes just how much trouble he is in.

Last year, the attention over Kern's remarks, especially the way she hid her lies (i.e. citing Paul Cameron studies) behind her religious beliefs and how some in the lgbt community dwelled on nonsense (i.e. whether or not her son was gay) bummed me out.

I refuse to be bummed out this year. I'm waiting for the religious right to defend Buttars.

But I suspect that they won't though for two reasons.

His comments were just ignant (i.e. something so dumb it doesn't deserve more than two syllables in the description of its ineptitude). I don't think anyone Christian (even if the person didn't "approve" of homosexuality) would want to associate themselves with Buttars's comments.

Most importantly, Buttars's comments ruins the religious right's schtick. Their entire image depends on being portrayed as innocent Christians being attacked by "rabid homosexual activists" simply because they are trying to uphold traditional values and morality.

Kern reminded people of a nice grandmother who occasionally gives out quarters and penny candy to children because of the nature of goodness in her heart.

Buttars reminds people of a crotchety old man who wildly waves his cane as he spews venom and tries to keep from soiling himself.

Everyone wants to defend the sweet old grandmother. But no one cares about the pissy old fart.

It just goes to show that sooner or later, kismet has a way of coming around.

Chimps and the Fairness Doctrine make for a strange Wednesday

Sometimes I hate work.

I love my job but I'm at it 7.5 hours a day for five days. By the time I get home, all of the good stuff seems to have already been posted about.

It's difficult not to become obsolete. But I will try.

Anger rises over NY Post cartoon that many think depicts President Obama as monkey shot dead by police - I wonder how much attention Fox News will devote to this madness. I defy anyone to even attempt to tell me that the cartoonist Sean Delonas didn't have racist intentions when he created this monstrosity.

And here is another piece of news that ought to aggravate those who think that racism and homophobia have no connection - Delonas has been known in the past for creating comic strips comparing gay marriage to bestiality.

Just something nice to remember the next time someone (such as Harry Jackson or Ken Hutcherson) plays that "you can't compare my skin to their sin" card.

And speaking of President Obama, what's the deal with the Fairness Doctrine? I've noticed that those two words seem to make not only the religious right but conservatives in general to wet their pants. It's not a new thing. I remember when they were calling it the "Hush Rush" Act.

One News Now seems to have devoted so much time to talking about it thatI'm getting jealous. And here I thought lgbts were the biggest threats (oh well - at least we still are to Utah State Congressman Chris Buttars):

ACLJ ready to do battle against 'Fairness Doctrine'

Author predicts backlash would accompany Fairness Doctrine (the author, by the way, is Bernard Goldberg who seems to have made a career whining about the so-called liberal media)

Christian radio - target of 'Fairness Doctrine'?

'Fairness Doctrine' comeback likely

Well today, President Obama spoke about the Fairness Doctrine:

President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday.

The statement is the first definitive stance the administration has taken since an aide told an industry publication last summer that Obama opposes the doctrine -- a long-abolished policy that would require broadcasters to provide opposing viewpoints on controversial issues.

"As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated," White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com.

You think that's going to be the end of it? Come on now. If you have read this blog or my book, then you know that a hallmark of religious right propaganda techniques is to repeat a statement, even after it's been proven to be false.

We will be hearing about the Fairness Doctrine again from the religious right.

Speaking of Utah - lgbts can get no love from the legislators there

And just a reminder that the flyer from America Forever is not an anomaly, this just came in:

Four down, one to go.

The Utah Legislature snuffed out two more gay-rights bills Tuesday.

After lengthy public hearings, House committees rejected two measures: HB288, which would have allowed same-sex couples and other unmarried pairs to adopt and foster children; and HB267, which would have protected gay and transgender Utahns from housing and employment discrimination.

The snuffing out of these bills would be bad enough. But the comments from legislators and others are beyond the pale:

In rejecting the latest measures, opponents painted being gay as a "choice" rather than an innate characteristic -- contrary to a broad consensus among psychological and medical experts.

"Adoption is not a right, it's a privilege. Those who choose alternative lifestyles suffer the consequences because they can't naturally produce between them," said Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, who joined a 5-1 vote to defeat HB288. "Heterosexual couples who cohabit also face consequences because they choose not to marry."

And on the anti-discrimination bill, Eagle Forum President Gayle Ruzicka made a similar case against adding sexual orientation to existing fair housing and employment laws.

"What we're talking about is choice -- someone's sexual choice," she told a House panel. "Why would we put into law someone's sexual choice? … This is not the right thing to do."

Here we go about comparing sexual orienation to sexual activity. It seems to be a stand by - it's simplistic and to the point. And it's also inaccurate. But when you can't make your points with truth, I guess sexual innuendoes are all you have left.

It's ironic to me how the religious right and those who support them accuse lgbts of being the aggressors when they are the ones passing the anti-gay marriage laws. And they are the ones in backroomss figuring out ways to work around the courts when they strike down ordinances that bar gay adoption.

Maybe I'm confused about definitions here, but just who are the aggressors and who are the ones having to deal with the onslaught?

And just who are the people with integrity?

Show me the difference between the rhetoric - I dare you

Is it just me or is the opposition getting more and more hysterical.

This flyer to the left is from a group in Utah, America Forever.
It's a vile piece of mess that exploits every anti-gay stereotype there seems to be (including the Michael Swift life). And also, don't think I didn't notice that the couple pictured is interracial. I guess a little racism on the side never hurts.

Just ugly. And the section in the flyer comparing lgbt openess in the workplace to sexual conduct is especially offensive to me.

For the record, I am open about my orientation at work. On my office wall, I hang an award I received in 2007 from the local lgbt community center as the Harriet Hancock Volunteer of the Year.

I received this award for many efforts, including taking part in a Richland County Sheriff Department committee that looked at how law enforcement can better serve lgbt communities. I also took part in panel discussions on college campuses about lgbt issues.

None of this has anything to do with sodomy, except for in the mind of a homophobe.

But you know what - let's make things more interesting. Take a look at words of this email I received from the Family Research Council:

Please stand with me now and send an immediate donation to help Family Research Council fight back

February 17, 2009 Share with Friends

Dear Alvin,

President Barack Obama has unveiled his massive plan to silence the moral voices of America and reshape our country. He calls it "The Agenda."

Please stand with me now and send an immediate donation to help Family Research Council fight back.

Obama says we are divisive--because we object to immoral and dangerous behavior.

He implies that we are not patriotic--because we won't compromise our values to suit the radical advocates of the homosexual agenda.

We must be silenced, the Left says, and "The Agenda" lays out their plans to do that.

Hate crimes laws that could lead to penalties for Christians who publicly criticize homosexual behavior

Employment laws forcing businesses, even churches, to hire homosexuals (and indoctrinate employees)

Abolish the federal Defense of Marriage Act and other laws against counterfeit marriage

Yet most Americans disagree with the President's extremist views. Most want to:

Preserve the biblical definition of marriage

Be free to voice their concerns and Christian values

Protect schoolchildren from indoctrination that promotes dangerous sexual behavior

If we work together--we can stop "The Agenda."

Dozens of new congressional Democrats in Congress now represent moderate and conservative districts. They--and most Republicans--are open to our concerns.

Your prayerful support enables FRC policy experts to educate citizens and these members of Congress who can stop this disastrous plan.

So please send your most generous gift immediately. The radical homosexual activists have a champion in the White House, and they are demanding action.

Thank you for standing for faith, family and freedom. It is an honor to serve alongside you in this critical hour for our nation.

It's the same set of lies put out by America Forever, only done in a "nicer" way. If FRC is being attacked by President Obama, then their claims about the desires of "radical gay activists" give him and others who criticize them more than enough reason.

No matter how you dress it up, you never can totally disguise the smell of trash.

The religious right claims that they are only trying to perserve their beliefs and heritage but if these things they believe in entails stigmatizing lgbt relationships and reducing the dignity of our lives to ignorant stereotypes then I really wonder if their beliefs and heritage are worth perserving.

Because whatever these beliefs are, it's not the Christianity I grew up to respect.

Lies, inneundoes, and fear tactics have nothing to do with Christianity or any religious beliefs.

Tuesday's news briefs

Pat Robertson denounces Rush Limbaugh’s comments: He’s ‘not exactly thinking rationally.’ - A sign of the Apocalypse - I agree with Pat Robertson on something.

Fundie org issues dismal report card for the work of the professional 'Christian' set - And here I thought the religious right should be getting a failing grade on integrity and honesty.

As per usual, FOF is condemning gay 'Children' - On daytime soap operas where there have been rapes, murders, thieving, lying, cheating and all sorts of bad behavior (you know you enjoy watching it), nothing is worse than a gay wedding. I'm glad Focus on the Family makes things so clear.

Culture Wars Today, Culture Wars Tomorrow, Culture Wars Forever - President Obama's potential judicial picks are facing opposition before he even picks them.

A Party Fractured, GOP Conservatives Regroup - A political version of Friday the 13th. Fast as you think they are dead, they spring up again.

A short but interesting story on being black and gay in America

I suspect that the issue of being black and gay in America will be receiving more attention as the months go by.

We have seen certain incidents (i.e. the arrest of T.D. Jakes's son, the Morehouse column, the Proposition 8 vote that led to the absolutely ridiculous question "Is Gay the New Black") that points to the fact that this could be THE issue to discuss.

But let me tell you a short story from my perspective.

A couple of years ago (I think 2004), I read an issue of Ebony magazine featuring an article that asked the question "Is Gay Rights Civil Rights."

This article polled responses from six prominent African-Americans from poet Nikki Giovanni to civil rights legends Revs. Fred Shuttlesworth and Walter Fauntroy.

It was an interesting piece and all involved gave thorough and very intelligent answers on whether or not they considered gay rights the same as "civil rights" (meaning a comparison between gay rights and the Civil Rights Movement).

To me though, it wasn't what was said, but what wasn't present.

Not one of those six people were self-identified lgbts of color. This was something that I found difficult to fathom - the fact that Ebony magazine could not or chose not to find any lgbts of color to participate in this article.

It's not as if they weren't out there. I'm sure that Keith Boykin, Mandy Carter, Nadine Smith, Alex Robinson, or any prominent lgbts of color would have participated if asked to.

But Ebony magazine chose not to go that route. In a conversation where the voices of lgbts of color was vital and necessary, the magazine chose to send the connotation that somehow gay rights have nothing to do with the black community.

And that lgbts of color do not exist.

This short incident may not mean much to you but as an lgbt of color, it says volumes to me.

In all of these discussions about gay rights and black civil rights, that incident of forced invisibility always stays with me.

Even though sometimes I wish it didn't.

Ignorant Morehouse College column makes me wonder

I love my African-American heterosexual brothers and sisters but let's face some facts: the black community in general is highly ignorant when it comes to acknowledging and supporting gays and lesbians of color.

How else can one explain the words in this recent hot mess of a column by Morehouse University writer Gerren Gaynor:

It's not so much that "straight" men of Morehouse are uncomfortable with the gay lifestyle, but more so because it is constantly and quite robustly thrown in their face. Does being a gay man include adopting the traits of a woman? Because if that's the case, there's a more fitting school, and it's called Spelman College.

I'm all for being who you are. If you like women, go on and date women. If you like men, be my guest and date men. But if you are born a man, you should be just that--a man. If I have to look twice to tell if I'm looking at a man or woman on an all-male campus, then something is tragically wrong.

At this rate, Morehouse College may find itself in a difficult situation. What happens if and when one of our gay Morehouse brothers decides to go the next step and undergo a sex-change operation, and is then physically considered to be a woman? Does Morehouse have the right to ask that student to leave?

It's ironic that Mr. Gaynor claims to have support for gay men and then proceeds to throw out some of the most offensive stereotypes that could have only come from being locked up in a room for 24 hrs and forced to watch repeated clips from shows like In Living Color and movies like Soul Plane.

For the record, homosexuality and transgenderism are two different things entirely. Just because someone is openly gay doesn't necessarily mean will seek to have sexual reassignment surgery.

Mr. Gaynor's fickless bullshit is rooted in an unfortunate facet of the African-American community - this push to hypermasculinity.

You can see it in so many images on African-American oriented shows - it's not enough for a black man to be masculine. He must be hypermasculine. Everything about him must exude masculinity, even his gas.

But I really don't blame Mr. Gaynor for his ignorance regarding the gay community because it is prevalent in the black community.

Lgbts of color are nonexistent in the black community as far as our leaders, magazines, radio shows, and networks are concerned.

We are not people in the actual sense. We don't have lives or families. We are soulless props designed as warning stops to "real brothers and sisters." Or cariactures designed for laughter and amusement - clowns whose only functions are to induce laughter or pity.

We are constantly bombarded with either invisibility or negative stereotypes of weak feminine men or hypermasculine sexually aggressive men.

Yet this is the same community that cries about its high HIV rate in our community.

This is the same community who chuckles and says things like "we knew it all the time" when people like Pastor T.D. Jakes's son is arrested.

And we are the same community that gives birth to supposedly intelligent black men like Mr. Gaynor who will write ridiculous nonsensical filled columns.

So . . .

To Harry Jackson, Ken Hutcherson, Alveda King, and the rest of the black ministers and spokespeople who spout silly homilies like “don’t equate my skin with your sin” and help propagate the lie that the lgbt orientation and the African-American identity are mutually exclusive.

To all of the black ministers nationwide who knowingly have lgbt of color congregants but will not pursue private one-on-one nonjudgmental conversations with them

To Ebony, Essence, Jet, Emerge and other African-American oriented magazines who write very few articles regarding lgbts of color.

To all of the African-American social organizations who will not even mention lgbts of color.

To all of the African-American oriented television shows (such as House of Payne) who feature no lgbt of color characters.

To all of the African-American motion pictures who feature lgbt of color characters strictly as vehicles for the worst form of comedy.

To all of the civic minded African-American spokespeople and leaders who will not even address the fact that lgbts of color exist.

To all of those in the African-American community who reduce lgbt of color relationships to sexual innuendoes by their patronizing comments like "not caring about who someone sleeps with."

I lay Mr. Gaynor's ignorance as well as the ignorance of the entire black community at your feet.

What are you going to do about it?

Student sues college, religious right feeding frenzy begins

We will hear about this story repeatedly over the next few days:

A classroom dispute at Los Angeles City College in the emotional aftermath of Proposition 8 has given rise to a lawsuit testing the balance between 1st Amendment rights and school codes on offensive speech.

Student Jonathan Lopez says his professor called him a "fascist bastard" and refused to let him finish his speech against same-sex marriage during a public speaking class last November, weeks after California voters approved the ban on such unions.

When Lopez tried to find out his mark for the speech, the professor, John Matteson, allegedly told him to "ask God what your grade is," the suit says.

Lopez also said the teacher threatened to have him expelled when he complained to higher-ups.

In addition to financial damages, the suit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, seeks to strike down a sexual harassment code barring students from uttering "offensive" statements.

Jean-Paul Jassy, a 1st Amendment lawyer in Los Angeles, said a number of cases have explored the tension between offensive speech and the expression of religious views. Often, he said, the decision depends on the specifics of the situation.

"Free speech really thrives when people are going back and forth, disagreeing sometimes and sometimes finding things each other says offensive, but there are limits, particularly in a school setting," Jassy said after reviewing the lawsuit.

Lopez, a Los Angeles resident working toward an associate of arts degree, is described in the suit as a Christian who considers it a religious duty to share his beliefs, particularly with other students. He declined to comment. Matteson could not be reached.

Lopez is represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization based in Scottsdale, Ariz., and co-founded by evangelical leader James Dobson of Focus on the Family.

If the story turns out to be true, the professor should be reprimanded. That is if the story turns out to be true.

Unfortunately there seems to be a bigger issue here. The Allied Defense Fund and its allies are now engaging in a p.r. battle regarding this situation.

It's been done so many times before:

- An alleged incident of discrimination against a Christian takes place.

- The Allied Defense Fund sues "on behalf" of the innocent Christian and sends out a press release.

- The press release is "conveniently" picked up by right wing sources like World Net Daily, Free Republic, right wing blogs, etc.

- One News Now publishes a one-sided article making sure to add "details."

- The incident is featured on talk shows and radio shows featuring the "innocent Christian" giving only his or her side of the story.

- The incident will be used to incorrectly claim that pro-gay laws (such as hate crimes legislation) are going to lead to the imprisonment and persecution of Christians.

- We find out that the incident was blown out of proportion, but after all of that build up and hype about "Christians being persecuted," no one really gives a shit.

This incident has already hit One News Now complete with the usual whiny comments about "intolerant purveyors of tolerance," "Christians are being persecuted all over" and other things we can come to expect from One News Now supporters and readers.

I don't remember comments being posted to a One News Now story so quickly. It's obvious that the phony news service will be pushing this situation hard.

And the right wing blogs have gone haywire over it. I cringe to see how many entries on Free Republic have been dedicated to the incident.

My guess is that Mr. Lopez will be featured in a new AFA video on "silencing Christians."

But as I reiterated before, I want to hear the entire story. If Mr. Lopez's version of the story is true, then I hope a suitable solution is reached.

However, given the track record of his allies, I have more than enough reason to doubt Mr. Lopez's version of the story.

For now that is.

Fears of a phony 'homosexual agenda' even encompasses school janitors

At times, I can't help but to laugh at religious right groups because of how they interpret situations with the most extreme forms of hyperbole.

Take for example, a recent incident in Massachusetts.

At the beginning of the year, parents of children attending the Clara Barton Elementary School received a reasonable letter informing them that an employee, a janitor, had transitioned from male to female:

Dear Clara Barton Families,

Welcome back to a new school year! I hope that you all had a safe, rest filled and refreshing summer. A lot of work has taken place over the summer to get the school ready for this year.

Although we do not usually make formal announcements about our employee's [sic] personal lives, a matter has come up that has the potential to impact the school environment. We believe that it is important to inform everyone openly. Our night custodian has informed us of his decision to change his gender and, as we begin the school year, he will begin living and working as a woman. He has been a valued employee of the Oxford Public schools for many years, and we expect his exemplary performance to continue as he changes gender roles.

The custodial uniform is the same for men and women. However, our students may notice and ask about the differences in our custodian from last year to this. If they ask at school, they will be given a simple and straightforward answer. The best thing to tell them is that our custodian used to be a man. She has changed her gender role and is now a woman.

This can be a difficult topic about which to talk and likely a conversation that no one expected to have. Included with this letter are some resources that provide information about transgender issues that will be helpful should you choose to learn more.

Whether or not one agrees with or supports the decision of our custodian, it is important to note that the Oxford Public Schools does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability. We expect our custodian to be treated with the same respect as every other employee. We teach respect by demonstrating respectful behavior.

If you have any questions or concerns that are not addressed by this letter or by the resources provided, please do not hesitate to contact either one of us.

Sincerely,

Ernest Boss
Superintendent, Oxford Public Schools

Norman Yvon
Principal, Clara Barton School

The school deserves kudos for the professional way it handled the matter.

But the local religious right group, Mass Resistance (an official hate group according to the Southern Law Poverty Center), said the following (You will forgive me for adding my little editorial critiques in the middle of Mass Resistance's ramblings):

The radical transgender agenda is proceeding quickly into the schools, now reaching the youngest of children. (Editor's note - That's right. Our 'agenda' is to take over the school janitor's union. And next year, it will be the cafeteria workers.) What was completely unthinkable just a few years ago is now being forced as mainstream by public officials. And as usual, no one cares how this affects the fragile psychology of children. Pushing the political ideology as fast as possible takes precedence over everything. . .

. . . Written simply in an eerie informational style, the parents were told that one of the male custodians will now be coming to school dressed as a woman, and is now considered a "woman", and that parents should inform their children of this because the school intended to tell them if they asked about it. "The best thing to tell them is that our custodian used to be a man. She has changed her gender role and is now a woman," the letter said to parents. It's extremely Orwellian. (Editor's note - Yes, I am sure that George Orwell had the proliferation of transgendered janitors in mind when he wrote 1984).

. . . This is where the homosexual movement is taking your children. It's like a science fiction movie . . . (Editor's note - I resent that. This is like a James Bond movie).

Mass Resistance's love of hyperbole seems to be matched by that of One News Now's coverage of the situation:

Transgender janitor shocks elem. school parents

I would be beating an old horse if I told you all that the headline is blatantly misleading. The One News Now article offers no proof that parents are shocked. It doesn't quote parents of the students attending Clara Barton Elementary School.

The only person quoted is Brian Camenker, who just happens to be the head of Mass Resistance. Camenker claims that parents are "afraid" to speak out because their children may face reprisals - shades of the David Parker lie indeed.

How convenient.

Tony Perkins figures out our plan

Okay who dropped the ball on this one?

Someone has linked a portion of our plans for world conquest to Family Research Council head Tony Perkins. Naturally I'm angry, seeing that it was one of the greatest, far reaching plans of it's time.

And the best part was that no one would have connected it to the lgbt community because it had to do with a heterosexual woman:

When Nadya Suleman became a mom for the 14th time, she raised more than a few eyebrows. The drama grew by national proportions when details trickled out that Suleman was not only unmarried, but chose to have multiple embryos implanted in her womb through in-vitro fertilization. Last week, taxpayers learned that they would be partially liable for the family's care through hundreds of dollars in food stamps and disability payments. The news fueled even more conviction that the fertility doctor should have refused the procedure.

But is he really to blame--or are our courts? In California, the state Supreme Court made it virtually impossible for a physician to exercise his own judgment after two lesbians sued in 2001 for the right to be artificially inseminated over the doctors' personal or social objections.

Last year, in Benitez v. North Coast Women's Care Medical Group, the justices ruled that anti-discrimination laws trumped physicians' rights. In so doing, the court tied the hands of the medical field, leaving little recourse against irresponsible and unhealthy decisions like Suleman's.

Okay, leaked the memo to Perkins. I mean how else could he have found out that Nadya Suleman's decision to have octupulets by assisted reproductive technology was actually a goal of the lgbt community.

What else does Perkins know?

He doesn't know about the hypnotic suggestions our operatives gave Suleman and the doctors involved in the case to go through with the procedure, does he?

Or that we were the ones who talked her into having six more before those eight.

Or we were the ones who was behind her mother's gag order.

Or that it is our operatives in the press who continues to fuel this controversy to take attention away from the secret passage of hate crimes legislation, ENDA, gay adoption, and the building of jails to house all of the conservative Christians we imprison when we take over.

Who leaked Perkins the memo outlining all of these things?

I mean he is not the type who would spin inaccurate conspiracy theories. Why that would make him a cynically, dishonest man desperate for any advantage in a cultural war that he is steadily losing.

And that would make FRC seem a bit ridiculous in that the group tries to link everything negative to an alleged radical gay agenda. That's almost like knowingly putting out inaccurate "studies" about the lgbt community.

No matter. Just keep a handle on the Michael Phelps memo.

Friday's news posts

Fiery plane crash in upstate NY kills 49 people - No words. Only prayers

Details in gay student's slaying are revealed in prosecution brief - On the first year anniversary of the murder of Lawrence King, details are emerging. And it's about time too. For a while, this was beginning to look like another case of the "gay panic defense." The prosecution's case includes this tidbit:

"Witnesses said King was usually not the aggressor. But after months of teasing by McInerney and other male students who called him "faggot," he had began to retort, according to prosecutors."

Christian TV special being stifled - There they go. You can set your watch to the lies the AFA tells.

Gays and the black church - show some honesty or at least some dignity

In light of what has happened regarding the son of Pastor T.D. Jakes, I think it may be time for the lid to be taken off of something.

Not that I am outing anyone but there is a paradox that must be addressed.

We have seen how the religious right plays the black and lgbt communities against one another. And sometimes their ally has been the black church.

Well to me, that is the height of irony because of one thing.

So many "mainstream" (i.e. white) lgbts say that they cannot find any gays and lesbians of color who will be open.

The reason is that many of them are in the church. Many of them are prominent in the black gospel music scene (Yes that includes BET and the Stellar Awards).

As an lgbt of color, I am privy to many things and I can honestly tell you that the main ones hooping and hollering in church and on the gospel records tend to do so for more than reasons of salvation.

A lot of it is guilt. But I really don't blame them as much as I blame the black community at large for its intentional inability to address the needs of lgbts of color.

So let me throw out a few suggestions:

Stop giving speeches about the evils of homosexuality when you know that you are on the dl or know of someone on the dl.

Stop making comments about not comparing blacks to gays when you are engaging in the same behavior that white racists did to African-Americans - i.e. the stigmatization of an entire group of people based on stereotypes and Biblical interpretations of God's words.

Stop puffing out your chests because you support endeavors to end AIDS/HIV when it isyour lack of support of lgbts of color that is the very thing which can lead to new cases of the disease.

What happened to T.D. Jakes's son may be the subject of juicy gossip amongst "upstanding church folks," but we all know that it is part of a larger problem - the intentional dehumanization of the lgbts of color in the black community.

When is the black community going to get off of its collective asses and work on solving it?