Citing Paul Cameron does make you a homophobe, Matt Barber

Editor's note - I haven't forgotten about the Know Your LGBT History segment. It will run either later tonight or tomorrow morning:

Much has been said and twisted the initial event that placed Liberty Counsel's Matt Barber in the anti-gay limelight.

The religious right are always quick to declare that the column which got Barber fired from AllState was one he wrote on "his own time."

Of course they never tell you that he used AllState equipment to write the piece nor the fact that he identified himself as an employee of AllState, thereby involving the company in his personal pursuits.

But what exactly was the column about?

Our other anti-gay friend, Peter LaBarbera, took the initiative to post "the column" on his webpage in anticipation of Barber giving an address to his Americans for Truth group later this month.

The piece, ‘Intolerance’ Will Not Be Tolerated, is the usual "homosexuality is evil and lgbts are plotting to push their lifestyle down everyone's throat" nonsense that I've come to expect from those pushing the religious right line.

And in that same spirit, it has some choice interesting statements:

There are those who hold to the theory that people who engage in homosexual behavior are “born that way” — that they’re merely acting upon intrinsic characteristics of their own, unique genetic make-up. They desperately cling to, and repeatedly cite various “studies” which seem to support the “born that way” theory. They entirely disregard the fact that to date, there has been no credible, empirical evidence to support the theory, nor has the “respectable” scientific community embraced even one study. In fact, the vast majority of studies have been debunked outright, and the associated “scientists” have been exposed as homosexual activists attempting to further an extremist agenda.

In his ridiculously vague style, Barber doesn't even give us one example of the so-called debunking.

Then there is this statement, the piece de resistance:

As a result of the concerted effort by liberals to mask the devastating effects of the gay lifestyle, many people are shocked to learn that the average life expectancy of a homosexual male is only about 45 years old - 30 years younger than that of a heterosexual male.

You recognize that citation? It's from Paul Cameron's "gay life span" study. You know, the same study discredited by so many others including former Reagan official William Bennett.

And we all know Paul Cameron, don't we? The man who said the following:

“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 . . . Marital sex tends toward the boring end. Generally, it doesn’t deliver the kind of sheer sexual pleasure that homosexual sex does.” - Rolling Stone, March, 18, 1999

He is also the man who has been censured and dismissed from organizations such as the American Psychological Assocation, the American Sociological Association, the Canadian Psychological Association, etc., etc.

Apparently these scientific bodies don't abide by horrendous research techniques or methodology.

Too bad Barber don't have their scruples. He even had the nerve to channel another Cameron distortion:

The men frequently suffer from other sodomy related injuries, and are far more likely to be murdered (likely by another homosexual) than their heterosexual counterparts; this, due to the typically raucous and oft anonymous nature of the gay lifestyle.

And the irony of it all? This portion of his piece:

But it’s predictable — any time anyone dare expose the aforementioned truths about the homosexual lifestyle, or criticize the homosexual lobby for its radical anti-marriage, anti-family agenda, there’s an enormous backlash. It’s an age-old tactic geared toward silencing one’s critics. It consists primarily of the ad hominem attack — Homophobe! Hate-Monger! Bigot! Gay Basher! Neanderthal!

So according to Barber, it's perfectly alright to cite the discredited studies of a researcher who couldn't be believed even if his blood was replaced with truth serum, but to call truth about these studies is wrong.

How dare those lgbts cry foul and defend themselves against lies! Why that's worse than African-Americans protesting when white racists accused them of wanting to integrate so that black men could have access to white women.

Why that's worse than the Jewish people getting angry at Anti-Semitic slurs.

Matt, a personal note from me to you (I know that from time to time, you google your name to see who mentioned you online), when you cite discredited studies designed to denigrate lgbts, it does make you a homophobe.

If you disagree, I would love to hear your opinion on the matter.