More lies, more aggravation

As soon as I get over anti-gay industry lies (see Monday's post), more come my way.

John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute wrote a piece today, Criminalizing Your Thoughts, that criticizes the recently passed Matthew Shepard Act.

Naturally he is touting the same "this law will lead Christians to be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality" lie. The following caught my attention:

For example, Christians have been prosecuted under a state hate crime law for “singing hymns” and peacefully “carrying signs” while attending a homosexual fair in Pennsylvania. Because the signs challenged the morality of homosexuality, these Christians were charged with three felonies and five misdemeanors and faced 47 years in prison for attempting to preach at a homosexual street fair. Indeed, a state judge determined that the prosecutions could go forward. His rationale was that the Christians’ speech constituted so-called “fighting words.”

This of course is not true. According to People for the American Way:

The story as told by Repent America and other Religious Right groups – most recently in two videotaped ads by grandmothers who participated in the Repent America protest against the festival – is that people were arrested merely for “sharing the gospel” on public property. The arrest of the protestors and subsequent charges against them on several counts – some under Pennsylvania’s hate crimes law – is, in the mythology of Repent America, proof that the goal of gay rights activists in general, and hate crimes laws in particular, is to outlaw the gospel.

The kernel of truth at the bottom of the propaganda pile is that the two grandmothers and others were in fact arrested while protesting Philadelphia’s OutFest, and a local prosecutor did charge them with violations of several laws, including the state’s hate crimes law.
But none of those charges were for “sharing the gospel.”

Repent America doesn’t mention that a federal court later found that the women “insulted individual attendees, blocked access to vendors, and disobeyed direct orders from the police, who were trying to preserve order and keep the peace.” The police arrested the protesters only after “their presence disrupted public order.” Unlike the organizers of OutFest, Repent America leaders failed to obtain a permit from the city. The city and the police gave the women great leeway, but they still overstepped the bounds of peaceful protest.

The First Amendment allows equality advocates to rally, and allows those with a different point of view to protest. But it doesn’t mean that protestors have the right to disrupt the rally or drown out its speakers. It is universally recognized that public safety officials can place reasonable “time, place, and manner restrictions” on people exercising their first amendment rights in order to preserve public order and prevent one group from trampling another’s rights. The court, which noted that Repent America did not get a permit for their protest, found that the police applied the law reasonably when the bullhorn-wielding Repent America protestors refused a request to move to another location and instead sat down in the street.

It is also important to note that the court dismissed the hate crimes charges in this case. In fact, the resolution of the situation proves the opposite of what the Right claims – despite their disruptive behavior and refusal to obey police requests, the protestors were neither convicted nor sentenced for breaking hate crimes laws.

The Rutherford Institute claims that it is a "civil liberties organization that provides free legal services to people whose constitutional and human rights have been threatened or violated."

Apparently telling the truth doesn't seem to fit into these noble goals.

Book update!!!!!!!!!!!

No I have not forgotten about my book.

It has been a little over a month since its publication and things are going better than I expected.

My book has been getting a bit of attention (though no word on whether or not Peter LaBarbera and company at Americans for Truth took my advice and actually bought a copy) through word of mouth.

I think it's safe to assume that Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters is becoming an underground favorite. A big thanks to those bloggers who believed in this project from the beginning and went out of their way to publicize my book on their sites (you guys know who you are!)

Also, thanks to my webmaster for setting up my page.

There have also been mentions in high profile lgbt sites such as PageQ and Americablog. So slowly but steadily, my book is building up steam.

I know that due to a variety of factors (such as my book being self-published), my book will not make a huge impact at first. Therefore, I set a goal of selling at least 100 copies before I kick things into high gear.

With the help of so many people, I am almost there.

And I know that the best is yet to come.

Ignorant people are aggravating the hell out of me

I apologize for the length of this post but I am aggravated.

No matter how I try to be calm over the situation, I never fail to get angry and exasperated when I see an ignorant Christian spouting anti-gay industry lies about lgbts.

I get angry because I hate when my people are lied on and I get exasperated because I really wonder when oh when will they ever learn?

So what got me upset today?

A piece on the site Virtue Online called 20 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality.

The author of the piece, John F. McKenna, is described as a member of St. Paul's Church in Darien, Connecticut, one of the "Connecticut Six" churches that oppose their bishop's stand in favor of a non-celibate gay bishop consecrated as bishop of New Hampshire.

To me he is a classic case of what is wrong with Chrisitianity in this country - someone so caught up in ego regarding his relationship with God that he allows himself to be used in order to spread lies and propaganda.

Let's take this piece apart bit by bit:

2. Who is harmed by supporting such relationships?

Most importantly, those who are inclined toward homosexuality are harmed if they act on those impulses. A widespread myth is that AIDS is the main danger, but AIDS is actually just a small part of the health hazard. Consider some of the others:

They include 26 types of diseases other than AIDS (Journal of Adolescent Medicine); a life expectancy equal to that experienced in 1871 (Oxford University's International Journal of Epidemiology); high risk of three types of hepatitis (Centers for Disease Control); proctitis associated with the gonorrhea, chlamydia, herpes, & syphilis widespread among homosexuals (Journal of the American Medical Association); an incidence of anal cancer 35 times higher than usual (Dr. Joel Palefsky, an expert in that field); among lesbians, a higher prevalence of bacterial vaginosis and hepatitis C (Sexually Transmitted Infections, a journal).

Some of the health hazards exist even in the extremely unusual situations in which there is complete faithfulness with neither of the partners having had prior relationships. The inherent weakness of the body results in its inability to withstand gay sex without a serious risk of damage, including tearing of the sphincter, fistular infections of the rectum, and incontinence. Support for physical relationships among members of the same sex is a false benevolence, a well-meant gesture that is very often a death sentence .

There are so many things wrong with this passage. Let's take that part about the supposed gay life span. McKenna is distorting a 1997 Canadian study to claim that gays have a short life span? And how do I know that he is distorting this study? Because in 2001, the creators of the study went on record complaining about how the religious right were misusing their work in the exact way McKenna was. Their letter is here.

As for the rest of McKenna's claims regarding diseases, please note that he does not give an exact notation of the studies he got the information from. Given how he distorted the 1997 Canadian study, his vague citations have no credibility.

But the most grevious error McKenna makes in this section is inferring that anal sex is "homosexual behavior. Not only does he make the mistake of thinking that anal sex is a fixture in gay sexual intercourse (which it is not) but he omits the fact that many heterosexuals have an interest in the sexual act.

16. Isn't it obvious that in raising children, all that matters is love, regardless of gender? Why not two mommies?The fact remains that gender matters--perhaps nowhere more than in regard to child rearing.

The unique value of fathers has been explained by Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School in his book Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child. Pruett says dads are critically important simply because "fathers do not mother."

Psychology Today explained in 1996 that "fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children."

A father, as a male parent, makes unique contributions to the task of parenting that a mother cannot emulate, and vice versa. According to Harvard educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, mothers tend to stress sympathy, grace and care to their children, while fathers accent justice, fairness and duty.

Moms give a child a sense of hopefulness; dads provide a sense of right and wrong and its consequences. Other researchers have determined that boys are not born with an understanding of "maleness." They have to learn it, ideally from their fathers. (Research done by Focus on the Family)

I purposely bolded the names of Kyle Pruett and Carol Gilligan. I think many reading this blog knows why. Last year, they both went on record complaining how Focus on the Family distorted their work to make the claims that McKenna is now alluding to in his piece. Their complaints are here.

17. But supporting gay rights in the church and in general is really very benign. Where's the real harm?

Let's say there are six million American gays dying at the usual American death rate of .8%, and so 48,000 are dying each year. According to the official Danish statistical agency, 80% of married gays do not reach old age, and if that applies to the U.S., then 38,400 American gays are dying young each year. (Compared to fewer than 4000 Americans over the entire history of the Iraq war.)

Now that is untrue. That citation comes from yet another bad study from our friend the discredited Paul Cameron. In this particular case, not only did Cameron distort his findings, but he also distorted how and where he presented them. That is here.

19. But won't same-sex marriage alter the whole social pattern of homosexuality?

According to researchers studying same-sex marriage in Scandinavia over the past 15 years, marriage has had no discernible impact on homosexual patterns of instability. The rapid breakup of same-sex marriages is parallel to the rapid breakup of same-sex couples who haven't been married. Very few avail themselves of same-sex marriage to begin with, and of those who do, the liaisons have usually been quite short-lived.

Now that is a bold-faced lie. The fact of the matter is that no one was married in the study McKenna was talking about. I go into more detail about this in my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters.

The study in question looked at casual gay partnerships. It was conducted between the years 1984 and 2000. Same sex marriage was legalized in the Netherlands (i.e. Scandinavia) in 2001.

I apologize for not having blog links for it but I have the information available for anyone who wants to know more or wants to challenge me.

The fact of the matter is that McKenna does not know what the heck he is talking about. It is apparent that he shopped for data that enhanced his beliefs. He did not even attempt to see about the legitimacy of the so-called facts he was citing.

And I don't think he cared. As long as it enhanced his belief that homosexuality is a sin, then the data he found is correct, according to him at least.

Not very Christian, is it?

Something worth knowing about the Folsom Street Fair and our friend Peter

Yesterday, an online buddy of mine wrote me saying that he attended the Folsom Street Fair. His observations are very interesting:

I have to say I went to the Folsom Street Fair (and this was my third year).

It is clear from these pictures that the whippings and such that occurred on Folsum Street were not the popular parts of the Street Fair (his pictures of the flogging shows 4 people watching, plus himself and Allyson Smith). He might find them exciting, but it isn't the focus of the Street Fair.

And most people who went were fully dressed. It is extremely rare to see fully naked people on the street. One thing that Peter LaBarbera didn't mention in his complaining about nudity--it is legal in San Francisco to walk around fully nude.

I've only seen it once outside of Folsom Street. There were also volunteers who were asked to go around and ask people who were having sex to stop. It is not condoned at the street fair. It is possible that Peter LaBarbera was standing in the way of these volunteers as he excitedly filmed the oral sex for at least 1/2 hour!

It is also clear from these pictures that Peter LaBarbera asked most of these people to pose for him.

My friend was wrong about one thing. Peter did not say the oral sex went on for half an hour. He was talking about the "mutual masturbation:"

Naked “leathermen” fondle each other in a public sex scene as passers-by stop to watch and take pictures. This scene (see next photo) went on for at least a half hour, as new men would come and join in the mutual masturbation.

However the question still remains. Just how did Peter know how long the "mutual masturbation" went on.

Let me guess. He was watching and timing it for "research purposes."

Porno Petey strikes again

There he goes again.

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth (in name only) has just published his eyewitness report of San Francisco's Folsom Street Fair complete with pictures.

For those who us who are aware of Peter's proclivities, it is business as usual, as he makes us all aware of every "depraved" sexual act we missed as we go about with our boring lives.

In other words, business as usual.

For the record, I have never been to Folsom Street Fair and I don't plan on going soon. I am not into bondage or seeing half dressed people in chains and leather walking the streets.

Not that it matters to Peter or any of his supporters. In their eyes, my boring life as a gay man is a dodge, an illusion put forth by some secret gay empire.

And it is up to Peter (like some reluctant hero of a Stephen King novel) to "expose" the true face of lgbt America. Which, according to him, is all about baccanalia and hedonism.

Never mind that there are many other lgbts like me who have no interest in Folsom Street Fair or that there are a good number of heterosexuals (as evidenced in the pictures Peter took) that do have an interest in such goings on, laws determining lgbt self-determination should be decided solely on the anti-gay spin Peter try to put forth from his "investigation."

It would be ludicrous if Peter wasn't so damned serious and the implications of his innuendoes weren't so damned scary.

Oh no! Not another ENDA post!

Yes another ENDA post but it's a short one.

By now, I am sure everyone is aware of how the House of Representatives is gutting the ENDA bill due to the reluctance of some members to support the part about our transgender brothers and sisters.

Apparently anti-gay industry instigations about "she-males" wanting jobs in churches and "300 pound linebackers" dressing in drag and using the women's bathroom is getting to some people.

I don't like how the House Democrats acted.

I understand it, but I don't have to like it.

Strangely though, the anti-gay industry seems to be silent as to how their scare tactics worked. I think a lot of them are either reeling from the low attendance of their "Values Summit" or attending the Folsom Street Fair.

Be sure to take some interesting pictures, Peter.

I have a feeling that the lgbt community has not heard the last of the Folsom Street Fair controversy. Poll numbers and experts show that the anti-gay industry pissed away the advantage they gained from the 2004 elections.

Well that could have been easily predicted.

I am sure that in the coming weeks, we can probably expect to hear more about "she-males" and men in leather.

I sincerely hope that some of us in pursuit of "personal freedom" don't provide the anti-gay industry with ammunition that could destroy us all.

There is one thing though about this fight over ENDA that I am very proud of. I was wrong (so far) about "brutally honest" gay folks who would use the opportunity to voice their prejudices about the transgender community and play into the hands of the anti-gay industry.

From what I have seen, lgbts (major organizations included) have formed a united front in defending the dignity of our transgender brothers and sisters.

Let's see more of that unity in defending those in our community who don't fit the personfication of a "perfect lgbt."

But at the end of the day, we would do best to remember that it's all politics.

And politics is like sticking your hand in a pile of manure in search of a diamond.

When you find the diamond, how in the heck do you get the smell off of your hand?

It's been a good day - The Senate passes hate crimes legislation and my radio show appearance is online

As the headline hinted, I am in an unusually good mood today. The following is one of the reasons why:

Senators voted Thursday morning to give the federal government more jurisdiction to prosecute hate crimes and included protections for gay, lesbian and transgender victims, attaching the measure to an annual defense policy bill.

Sixty Senators -- just enough to override a Republican filibuster -- voted to attach the Matthew Shepard Act, named for the gay Wyoming college student murdered in 1998, as an amendment to the 2008 Department of Defense authorization bill. The measure was sponsored by Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Gordon Smith, R-Ore.

The next step is getting our beloved president (and I say that with utmost sarcasm) to sign the bill. He has already indicated that he may veto it and I am sure that the anti-gay industry will lobby him hard to do so.

Not a problem as far as I am concerned. The big step has been taken and the die has been cast. History has been made and there is no going back.

Sooner or later, whether with or without this president, the hate crimes legislation will be passed.

Now let's work on ENDA.

My second piece of good news is more personal. My appearance on a local radio show, Rainbow Radio, is now online.

It was taped last week and aired last Sunday but I finally got a chance to listen to it this morning.

I think I did rather well seeing that it was my first (but hopefully not last) radio interview about my book.

Big ups to Rainbow Radio for devoting the entire show to my book. Check the show out sometime. It does excellent work in educating South Carolina on the issues and needs of its lgbt community.

In particular, enjoy 30 minutes of me and hosts Bruce Converse and the Rev. Candace Chellew-Hodge as we talk about Paul Cameron, Michael Johnston, gerbils, alleged gay sex habits and the rest of the hot messes the anti-gay industry creates about lgbts. The link is below. And by all means tell me what you think (but no snide remarks about my nasal tone.)

Show 103 - Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters