This just in: Donnie McClurkin evades the issue
Donnie McClurkin has finally gone on record regarding the controversy with presidential candidate Barack Obama's concert this weekend in South Carolina. Obama has come under fire for inviting McClurkin, who has claimed that he is an "ex-gay."
McClurkin addresses the situation in the Chicago Tribune. But, at least in my mind, Mr. McClurkin's statements raises more questions. I think he is evading the issue:
"I don't believe that even from a religious point of view that Jesus ever discriminated toward anyone, nor do I," McClurkin said in an exclusive interview with the Tribune. "Most of the things that were said were totally out of context and then other things weren't true."
. . . For years, McClurkin has talked from the pulpit about how he was raped by a male family member as a child. It was that act, he has said, that sent him into living as a gay man for the better part of 20 years. He now says he is straight and that his ministry is open to those who say they no longer want to live as a gay person. What he doesn't do, he says, is crusade against homosexuality.
McClurkin conveniently did not mention his statements on the 700 Club that accused gays of harming children. As far as I know, he has never repudiated the following comment:
"The gloves are off and if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose? I'm not in the mood to play with those who are trying to kill our children."
Mr. McClurkin, as they say in the street, you need to recognize.
Your evasions are foul and they put your credibility in serious jeopardy.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Does Donnie McClurkin still believe gays are trying to hurt children?
It was just a matter of time before the other side of the "cultural war" starts lying to defend Donnie McClurkin.
The following comes from a PFOX press release:
"Ex-gays have the same right to participate in the political process as other Americans and should not have to endure this type of abuse because they chose to leave homosexuality," said Regina Griggs, PFOX executive director. "Gay rights groups demand hate crimes laws and sexual orientation non-discrimination legislation, but would deny the same protection to ex-gays who want full inclusion in society at the same level that gays currently enjoy."
"This irrational behavior towards those who have overcome unwanted same-sex attractions perpetuates misunderstanding and harm against ex-gays. It also demonstrates a disregard for diversity and a refusal to respect a basic human right to dignity and self-determination," said Griggs.
I am sure that Peter and Americans for Truth (in name only) won’t be far behind saying the same thing.
To me, the situation is not what Donnie McClurkin chooses to refer to himself as. I don’t care what he calls himself whether it be "ex-gay" "super 'ex-gay'," or "super duper 'ex-gay.'"
My post yesterday was a way to tell folks to know the intricasies of the entire situation. The fact of the matter is that this controversy could still turn into a divide and conquer against lgbts and the mainstream African-American community.
Maybe one way to prevent this is to be clear on why we are angry at Senator Obama for his embracing of McClurkin.
McClurkin used his personal story to demonize the lgbt community as a whole. During an appearance on the 700 Club in 2003, he accused the lgbt community of wanting to harm children:
From GayWired:
McClurkin has accused gays of “trying to kill our children” and has called homosexuality “a curse”. The gospel singer who says he is a "reformed homosexual" in a 700 Club interview said he was ready to declare war on homosexuality.
From Wayne Besen:
McClurkin, currently a senor pastor at Perfecting Faith in Freeport, N.Y., was particularly outspoken against New York's funding of Harvey Milk, a gay high school in New York, suggesting that the school will lead to molestation of children.
"The gloves are off," he said on the Sept. 23, 2003 episode of Rev. Pat Robertson's 700 Club. "And if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose. This is not a privately funded school. It is a public school funded by taxpayers' money. Why isn't anyone else speaking out? Everyone knows that everyone at the high school is homosexual. That makes for an easy target."
World Net Daily:
HRC condemns Mr. McClurkin . . . for the sin of publicly laying out the threat that the homosexual agenda poses to families and children
. . . But what really sticks in homosexual activists' craw is Donnie McClurkin, who, they say, on "The 700 Club" "has accused gay Americans of trying to kill our children." Mr. McClurkin, an accomplished gospel singer and author, overcame homosexuality himself.
Was McClurkin misquoted? Did he say those comments but later repudiated them?
I don't know, but one thing is for sure.
He certainly isn't a victim in this matter.
And he needs to clarify his beliefs on gays and children.
It was just a matter of time before the other side of the "cultural war" starts lying to defend Donnie McClurkin.
The following comes from a PFOX press release:
"Ex-gays have the same right to participate in the political process as other Americans and should not have to endure this type of abuse because they chose to leave homosexuality," said Regina Griggs, PFOX executive director. "Gay rights groups demand hate crimes laws and sexual orientation non-discrimination legislation, but would deny the same protection to ex-gays who want full inclusion in society at the same level that gays currently enjoy."
"This irrational behavior towards those who have overcome unwanted same-sex attractions perpetuates misunderstanding and harm against ex-gays. It also demonstrates a disregard for diversity and a refusal to respect a basic human right to dignity and self-determination," said Griggs.
I am sure that Peter and Americans for Truth (in name only) won’t be far behind saying the same thing.
To me, the situation is not what Donnie McClurkin chooses to refer to himself as. I don’t care what he calls himself whether it be "ex-gay" "super 'ex-gay'," or "super duper 'ex-gay.'"
My post yesterday was a way to tell folks to know the intricasies of the entire situation. The fact of the matter is that this controversy could still turn into a divide and conquer against lgbts and the mainstream African-American community.
Maybe one way to prevent this is to be clear on why we are angry at Senator Obama for his embracing of McClurkin.
McClurkin used his personal story to demonize the lgbt community as a whole. During an appearance on the 700 Club in 2003, he accused the lgbt community of wanting to harm children:
From GayWired:
McClurkin has accused gays of “trying to kill our children” and has called homosexuality “a curse”. The gospel singer who says he is a "reformed homosexual" in a 700 Club interview said he was ready to declare war on homosexuality.
From Wayne Besen:
McClurkin, currently a senor pastor at Perfecting Faith in Freeport, N.Y., was particularly outspoken against New York's funding of Harvey Milk, a gay high school in New York, suggesting that the school will lead to molestation of children.
"The gloves are off," he said on the Sept. 23, 2003 episode of Rev. Pat Robertson's 700 Club. "And if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose. This is not a privately funded school. It is a public school funded by taxpayers' money. Why isn't anyone else speaking out? Everyone knows that everyone at the high school is homosexual. That makes for an easy target."
World Net Daily:
HRC condemns Mr. McClurkin . . . for the sin of publicly laying out the threat that the homosexual agenda poses to families and children
. . . But what really sticks in homosexual activists' craw is Donnie McClurkin, who, they say, on "The 700 Club" "has accused gay Americans of trying to kill our children." Mr. McClurkin, an accomplished gospel singer and author, overcame homosexuality himself.
Was McClurkin misquoted? Did he say those comments but later repudiated them?
I don't know, but one thing is for sure.
He certainly isn't a victim in this matter.
And he needs to clarify his beliefs on gays and children.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Mess and stuff for Monday
Let's get the small stuff out of the way first.
My book has been available on amazon.com for a few weeks now and it is looking good. If you do not want to order Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters via xlibris then by all means go to amazon.com
Secondly, how do you all like the new look of my blog? I needed a change in something and since I don't have a man and can't get my hair done (black men generally have two choices with hair - to cut or not to cut), I figured why not give my blog a change.
Now onto the important stuff - and the fact that Dumbledore is gay does not rank up there as "important stuff:
We need to support ENDA
Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202.224.3121 to be connected to your representative based on your zip code. Here is a suggested message:
Hello, my name is _____ and I live in your district. I am calling to ask the representative to support the Baldwin amendment to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The Baldwin amendment adds gender identity protections back into ENDA and it is critically important to me that all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are protected by this legislation. This amendment is the only way to fix this bill, and I only support passage of H.R. 3685 if the amendment passes
Donnie McClurkin was wrong, but let’s think before acting
Apparently presidential candidate Barack Obama may be stepping into a big pile of manure due the selection of Donnie McClurkin as a performer at one of his campaign events.
The Grammy-award winner has in the past claimed to be "delivered from homosexuality." Following this tone, he has written a biography and made appearances on programs such as the "700 Club."
So naturally many of us aren't happy that Obama seems to be having dealings with him, so to speak.
But let's use some savvy about the situation before we read the riot act.
I think when McClurkin began speaking out against us, he was yet another Christian who let his ego overtake his humbleness.
I also think that Mr. McClurkin may have regretted some of his wannabe "righteous indignation." He realized that he did not know what the hell he was talking about.
This isnt' the first time this sort of thing has happened. I remember two gospel singers by the names of Angie and Debbie Winans writing a song, "It's Not Natural," in which they protested Ellen DeGeneres's coming out and homosexuality in general.
The controversy led to appearances on radio shows, talk shows, appearing in newspapers ads speaking out for the "ex-gay movement," and finally speaking in front of state Congressional committees against pro-gay ordinances.
The end of the controversy saw the Winans sisters declaring publicly that they were "used" by people they were trying to help.
In short, Angie and Debbie's religious beliefs coupled with their egos led them to make giant homophobic asses of themselves.
So this is nothing new regarding Donnie McClurkin. And maybe he was paying attention to the Winans controversy. He has tried to temper the outrage over his claims about the gay community:
"What I say in the book is simply this: If you're gay, and you're happy, if you don't think you need to change, stay just how you are. But there are some people who are in the gay and bisexual lifestyle that are broken . . ." - Donnie McClurkin puts the focus back on traditional gospel - in secular music, The Associated Press, 2005
But like I said before, let’s use some savvy before rushing to jump at Donnie McClurkin. I don't say this because I feel sorry for him or agree with his statements. When you talk about issues you don't understand and end up saying stupid shit, you deserve almost all of what you get.
However, picture the scenario of what this situation can lead to:
Donnie McClurkin appears on African-American oriented radio talk shows talking about the situation. And who is there to give our side of the issue?
Probably no one because the African-American community as a whole generally don't recognize the existence of lgbts of color.
Remember, the African-American community has no out lgbt leaders gracing the covers of Ebony, Jet, or Essence. The African-American media does not necessarily take it upon itself to present issues indigenious to the lgbt of color experience.
And for the most part, neither does the mainstream lgbt community.
So McClurkin can easily portray himself as a victim and the lgbt community as religious oppressors in these avenues.
And this could lead to another possible distraction to divide the mainstream lgbt and the heterosexual African-American community.
If the scenario sounds familiar, it should.
It was one (with deviations) that led to Bush being re-elected in 2004.
Granted, if this situation was to come to pass like I have just fortold, it won’t be on the same scale as marriage equality.
But divide and conquer tactics have a habit of being destructive on any scale.
The fact of the matter is that McClurkin has extreme popularity in the African-American community. And the lack of lgbts of color to give our side of the issue only makes the entire community look not only anti-religious but racist.
It also underscores how much the lgbt leadership (i.e. HRC, Lambda Legal, GLAAD, etc.) needs to make a serious effort to recruit and train potential lgbt of color spokespeople with enough autonomy to appeal to the heterosexual African-American community.
This is not to give McClurkin any leniency. He may have been speaking of his own experience, but there is no excuse for him to demonize the lgbt community as a whole.
I don’t care how many songs he sings, or how many Bible he reads, McClurkin should have taken it upon himself to learn more about the issues before running his mouth. He should have remembered the verse that says "my people perish for the lack of knowledge."
Let's get the small stuff out of the way first.
My book has been available on amazon.com for a few weeks now and it is looking good. If you do not want to order Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters via xlibris then by all means go to amazon.com
Secondly, how do you all like the new look of my blog? I needed a change in something and since I don't have a man and can't get my hair done (black men generally have two choices with hair - to cut or not to cut), I figured why not give my blog a change.
Now onto the important stuff - and the fact that Dumbledore is gay does not rank up there as "important stuff:
We need to support ENDA
Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202.224.3121 to be connected to your representative based on your zip code. Here is a suggested message:
Hello, my name is _____ and I live in your district. I am calling to ask the representative to support the Baldwin amendment to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The Baldwin amendment adds gender identity protections back into ENDA and it is critically important to me that all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are protected by this legislation. This amendment is the only way to fix this bill, and I only support passage of H.R. 3685 if the amendment passes
Donnie McClurkin was wrong, but let’s think before acting
Apparently presidential candidate Barack Obama may be stepping into a big pile of manure due the selection of Donnie McClurkin as a performer at one of his campaign events.
The Grammy-award winner has in the past claimed to be "delivered from homosexuality." Following this tone, he has written a biography and made appearances on programs such as the "700 Club."
So naturally many of us aren't happy that Obama seems to be having dealings with him, so to speak.
But let's use some savvy about the situation before we read the riot act.
I think when McClurkin began speaking out against us, he was yet another Christian who let his ego overtake his humbleness.
I also think that Mr. McClurkin may have regretted some of his wannabe "righteous indignation." He realized that he did not know what the hell he was talking about.
This isnt' the first time this sort of thing has happened. I remember two gospel singers by the names of Angie and Debbie Winans writing a song, "It's Not Natural," in which they protested Ellen DeGeneres's coming out and homosexuality in general.
The controversy led to appearances on radio shows, talk shows, appearing in newspapers ads speaking out for the "ex-gay movement," and finally speaking in front of state Congressional committees against pro-gay ordinances.
The end of the controversy saw the Winans sisters declaring publicly that they were "used" by people they were trying to help.
In short, Angie and Debbie's religious beliefs coupled with their egos led them to make giant homophobic asses of themselves.
So this is nothing new regarding Donnie McClurkin. And maybe he was paying attention to the Winans controversy. He has tried to temper the outrage over his claims about the gay community:
"What I say in the book is simply this: If you're gay, and you're happy, if you don't think you need to change, stay just how you are. But there are some people who are in the gay and bisexual lifestyle that are broken . . ." - Donnie McClurkin puts the focus back on traditional gospel - in secular music, The Associated Press, 2005
But like I said before, let’s use some savvy before rushing to jump at Donnie McClurkin. I don't say this because I feel sorry for him or agree with his statements. When you talk about issues you don't understand and end up saying stupid shit, you deserve almost all of what you get.
However, picture the scenario of what this situation can lead to:
Donnie McClurkin appears on African-American oriented radio talk shows talking about the situation. And who is there to give our side of the issue?
Probably no one because the African-American community as a whole generally don't recognize the existence of lgbts of color.
Remember, the African-American community has no out lgbt leaders gracing the covers of Ebony, Jet, or Essence. The African-American media does not necessarily take it upon itself to present issues indigenious to the lgbt of color experience.
And for the most part, neither does the mainstream lgbt community.
So McClurkin can easily portray himself as a victim and the lgbt community as religious oppressors in these avenues.
And this could lead to another possible distraction to divide the mainstream lgbt and the heterosexual African-American community.
If the scenario sounds familiar, it should.
It was one (with deviations) that led to Bush being re-elected in 2004.
Granted, if this situation was to come to pass like I have just fortold, it won’t be on the same scale as marriage equality.
But divide and conquer tactics have a habit of being destructive on any scale.
The fact of the matter is that McClurkin has extreme popularity in the African-American community. And the lack of lgbts of color to give our side of the issue only makes the entire community look not only anti-religious but racist.
It also underscores how much the lgbt leadership (i.e. HRC, Lambda Legal, GLAAD, etc.) needs to make a serious effort to recruit and train potential lgbt of color spokespeople with enough autonomy to appeal to the heterosexual African-American community.
This is not to give McClurkin any leniency. He may have been speaking of his own experience, but there is no excuse for him to demonize the lgbt community as a whole.
I don’t care how many songs he sings, or how many Bible he reads, McClurkin should have taken it upon himself to learn more about the issues before running his mouth. He should have remembered the verse that says "my people perish for the lack of knowledge."
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Busy Thursday - Time for an amusing story
I wrote something this morning that I wanted to post but I decided not to.
At least not the entire thing. Just one item:
I really wish that Ellen DeGeneres kept that dog controversy to herself. I mean it may be sad to her but it's not something that needs a public forum. And you know that with the lack of visibility in our community, if a gay celebrity even accidentally passes gas on air, some of us will be talking about it for an unbearably long time.
So with the fight over ENDA (it passed committee but the transgender community is somewhat left out), hate crimes legislation (we just know the dipstick-in-chief will veto it), and all the other things that inhibit lgbts from full lives, I really don't give a shit about Ellen or the dog.
No offense, but I really don't.
But how about a humorous story regarding me and amazon.com
My book is now available on amazon.com but there was one problem.
The book's description on the site said it was for ages 9-12.
This is not true of course. And corrections have been made. However, you know how things get talked about online and how a story travels all over the web before the truth is discovered.
The last thing I want is to read Peter LaBarbera's or the Traditional Values Coalition's webpage claim that I am trying to "indoctrinate"(I think that's the word they like to use) children "into homosexuality."
So let me say now that my book is not for children ages 9-12. Now if any teenagers happen to want to read it then by all means please do.
Uh oh.
Oh well, I do need that toaster oven national headquarters gives us for meeting the quota of "new recruits."
I wrote something this morning that I wanted to post but I decided not to.
At least not the entire thing. Just one item:
I really wish that Ellen DeGeneres kept that dog controversy to herself. I mean it may be sad to her but it's not something that needs a public forum. And you know that with the lack of visibility in our community, if a gay celebrity even accidentally passes gas on air, some of us will be talking about it for an unbearably long time.
So with the fight over ENDA (it passed committee but the transgender community is somewhat left out), hate crimes legislation (we just know the dipstick-in-chief will veto it), and all the other things that inhibit lgbts from full lives, I really don't give a shit about Ellen or the dog.
No offense, but I really don't.
But how about a humorous story regarding me and amazon.com
My book is now available on amazon.com but there was one problem.
The book's description on the site said it was for ages 9-12.
This is not true of course. And corrections have been made. However, you know how things get talked about online and how a story travels all over the web before the truth is discovered.
The last thing I want is to read Peter LaBarbera's or the Traditional Values Coalition's webpage claim that I am trying to "indoctrinate"(I think that's the word they like to use) children "into homosexuality."
So let me say now that my book is not for children ages 9-12. Now if any teenagers happen to want to read it then by all means please do.
Uh oh.
Oh well, I do need that toaster oven national headquarters gives us for meeting the quota of "new recruits."
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Paul Cameron gets hit in the 'comfort zone'
Today's post is going to be short mostly because I am hoping that more attention will be devoted to my last post regarding the incorrect term "gay bowel syndrome."
But I want to point something out about our "friend" Paul Cameron.
Last week, an online buddy of mine pointed out that Cameron sent out a press release trumpeting a "new study."
For those of us who are used to Cameron's lies, it is yet another old study of his packaged with new distortions.
This one has to do with the claim that gay men molest children at a high rate.
Rather than go into details as to how ridiculous this study is, I want to point something out that I saw today via another online friend.
And it had me reeling.
Apparently a webpage that would probably be seen as right wing and evangelical (i.e. "the enemy") published a piece by someone actually criticizing the study for being wrong.
And to make matters even better, the author, Warren Throckmorton, talks about Cameron's other distortions.
Throckmorton is not necessarily an "ally" of lgbts. He is supposedly a proponent of the "ex-gay" movement.
Still, this is nice.
Being attacked for being inaccurate on what may seem to be "home turf" may not sit well with Cameron.
I am hoping to see one of his lengthy and rambling "rebuttals" published.
And I await with baited breath and popcorn in hand.
Today's post is going to be short mostly because I am hoping that more attention will be devoted to my last post regarding the incorrect term "gay bowel syndrome."
But I want to point something out about our "friend" Paul Cameron.
Last week, an online buddy of mine pointed out that Cameron sent out a press release trumpeting a "new study."
For those of us who are used to Cameron's lies, it is yet another old study of his packaged with new distortions.
This one has to do with the claim that gay men molest children at a high rate.
Rather than go into details as to how ridiculous this study is, I want to point something out that I saw today via another online friend.
And it had me reeling.
Apparently a webpage that would probably be seen as right wing and evangelical (i.e. "the enemy") published a piece by someone actually criticizing the study for being wrong.
And to make matters even better, the author, Warren Throckmorton, talks about Cameron's other distortions.
Throckmorton is not necessarily an "ally" of lgbts. He is supposedly a proponent of the "ex-gay" movement.
Still, this is nice.
Being attacked for being inaccurate on what may seem to be "home turf" may not sit well with Cameron.
I am hoping to see one of his lengthy and rambling "rebuttals" published.
And I await with baited breath and popcorn in hand.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Sorry Peter and Conservapedia, but 'gay bowel syndrome' still does not exist
Our friend Peter LaBarbera is practically falling over himself over in his latest post:
Conservapedia, a new online encyclopedia seeking to become a conservative alternative to the very liberal-biased Wikipedia takes a politically incorrect look at the medical phenomenon known as ‘Gay Bowel Syndrome’ — a term that homosexual activists are trying to purge from scientific and popular usage. Gay Bowel Syndrome describes a “clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients,” according to Conservapedia, which cites mainstream medical sources such as Johns Hopkins’ ‘HIV Guide’ in its article with 93 footnotes.
I talk about "gay bowel syndrome" in my book. I say the following:
According to the “Free Online Dictionary and Thesaurus,” http://encyclopedia.
thefreedictionary.com:
“Gay bowel syndrome was a term fi rst used in 1976 prior to the discovery of AIDS, to describe a series of parasitic disorders caused by oral/anal contact and allegedly related to gay male sexual activity. The term was abandoned by the medical community in the 1980s because the problems that attributed to it were not specific to homosexuals, not confined to just the bowels, nor did it meet the medical definition of a syndrome.”
First of all, Conservapedia is not necessarily an accurate or objective source of information. It was founded by Andrew Schlafly, son of well-known conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly stated that he founded the project because he felt Wikipedia had a liberal, anti-Christian, and anti-American bias.
In other words, Conservapedia is another case of a someone attempting to manufacture his version of the truth when reality does not suit him.
In this particular case, Conservapedia claims the following:
Gay bowel syndrome is a clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients . . .
Conservapedia uses three sources for this claim and all of them are over 10 years old; two of them are from the 1970s.
Let's break this down some more.
Peter makes a huge point to note that the Conservapedia article contains 93 footnotes that, according to him, proves that "gay bowel syndrome" is a legitimate term.
Let's look at those footnotes:
Footnotes 1, 5, 15, 25, 31, 40, 47, 58 are the same - an article published in 1976 entitled The gay bowel syndrome: clinico-pathologic correlation in 260 cases.
And that is not the only case in which the article uses duplicate footnotes, including the following examples:
Footnotes 2, 7, and 11- Clinical features and diagnosis - Inflammatory Bowel Disease, part 1 American Family Physician, Feb 15, 1993 by Glen E. Hastings, Richard J. Weber
Footnotes 10 and 12 - Dr. Michael Heller, The gay bowel syndrome: a common problem of homosexual patients in the emergency department. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1980
Conservapedia also says:
in 2004 Medscape stated that gay bowel syndrome is a significant issue in regards HIV infection (The Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website also features an article which is essentially a duplicate of the aforementioned article at Medscape).
The Medscape piece and the John Hopkins article says the following:
This is a retrospective review of clinical proctitis in gay men seen at a STD clinic in San Francisco. The review included men with rectal symptoms of pain, itching, tenesmus, rectal bleeding or discharge who underwent clinical evaluation including anoscopy with diagnostic tests for C. trachomatis, N. gonorrhoeae, HSV and syphilis. The results show relatively high rates of gonorrhea, chlamydia, and HSV. No pathogen was found in 46 of the 101 patients studied.
Yes, I bolded that first sentence to make a point. Examples of gay men seen at STD clinics (especially in one city) are not necessarily indicative of the lgbt community at large. It is the same as using examples of African-American men in prison to gauge the habits of African-American men not incarcerated.
The articles also say the studies of those men in STD clinics took place in the years 2000-2001. That is six to seven years ago.
Now the articles do use the phrase "gay bowel syndrome," but they are vague as to the legitimacy of the term. And that does give Peter and Conservapedia a little raft to stake their lies.
But other than those two articles, does Conservapedia have any recent information?
Not necessarily. Conservapedia mentions 2007 articles regarding STDs, but only as an attempt to link those STDs together as an example of "gay bowel syndrome."
As a matter of fact, a good portion of the information Conservapedia has regarding the term "gay bowel syndrome" itself is from the 1970s and 80s; the years that the term was thought to be legitimate.
And Conservapedia even contradicts itself by saying the following:
Gay bowel syndrome is a clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients (the diseases are not exclusive to male homosexuals).
Doesn't that last statement contradict the entire tone of the Conservapedia article?
Lastly, Conservapedia says the following:
Although the term gay bowel syndrome is not used as frequently as the 1980's, as mentioned previously Medscape has an article on gay bowel syndrome that was published in 2004 that was entitled ''New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome". Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website has a duplicate of the aforementioned article by John G. Bartlett, M.D. at Medscape which was entitled New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome". In addition, an online medical dictionary has an entry on gay bowel syndrome. Also, the website Biology-Online.org has an article on gay bowel syndrome.
As I said before, John Hopkins and the Medscape articles was talking about data that is close to seven years old and solely dealt with gay men in an STD clinic in San Francisco. And neither article goes into detail regarding the legitimacy of the term "gay bowel syndrome."
Lastly, both online dictionaries mentioned by Conservapedia (particularly Biology-Online.org) looks like online dictionaries in which anyone can add terms.
Basically, Conservapedia is taking advantage of online technology to pass along distortions and untruths as reality. And Peter is just loving it:
We at Americans For Truth believe that it is long past time for federal and state governments (and academia) to study the serious health risks associated with male homosexual sex and promiscuity, just as federally-sponsored studies helped educate the public on the significant dangers of smoking. Allowing homosexual activists a “protester’s veto” over legitimate medical inquiry and research will only cost more men’s lives, as larger society and especially young men are denied clear information on the additional health risks of “gay” sex viz a viz normal, natural straight sex.
Peter, if there should be any investigations, they should focus on why you and folks like yourself obsess over what you think lgbts do in the bedroom.
And let's not forget Conservapedia.
I guess its next goal will be attempting to give Paul Cameron some degree of credibility.
Our friend Peter LaBarbera is practically falling over himself over in his latest post:
Conservapedia, a new online encyclopedia seeking to become a conservative alternative to the very liberal-biased Wikipedia takes a politically incorrect look at the medical phenomenon known as ‘Gay Bowel Syndrome’ — a term that homosexual activists are trying to purge from scientific and popular usage. Gay Bowel Syndrome describes a “clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients,” according to Conservapedia, which cites mainstream medical sources such as Johns Hopkins’ ‘HIV Guide’ in its article with 93 footnotes.
I talk about "gay bowel syndrome" in my book. I say the following:
According to the “Free Online Dictionary and Thesaurus,” http://encyclopedia.
thefreedictionary.com:
“Gay bowel syndrome was a term fi rst used in 1976 prior to the discovery of AIDS, to describe a series of parasitic disorders caused by oral/anal contact and allegedly related to gay male sexual activity. The term was abandoned by the medical community in the 1980s because the problems that attributed to it were not specific to homosexuals, not confined to just the bowels, nor did it meet the medical definition of a syndrome.”
First of all, Conservapedia is not necessarily an accurate or objective source of information. It was founded by Andrew Schlafly, son of well-known conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly stated that he founded the project because he felt Wikipedia had a liberal, anti-Christian, and anti-American bias.
In other words, Conservapedia is another case of a someone attempting to manufacture his version of the truth when reality does not suit him.
In this particular case, Conservapedia claims the following:
Gay bowel syndrome is a clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients . . .
Conservapedia uses three sources for this claim and all of them are over 10 years old; two of them are from the 1970s.
Let's break this down some more.
Peter makes a huge point to note that the Conservapedia article contains 93 footnotes that, according to him, proves that "gay bowel syndrome" is a legitimate term.
Let's look at those footnotes:
Footnotes 1, 5, 15, 25, 31, 40, 47, 58 are the same - an article published in 1976 entitled The gay bowel syndrome: clinico-pathologic correlation in 260 cases.
And that is not the only case in which the article uses duplicate footnotes, including the following examples:
Footnotes 2, 7, and 11- Clinical features and diagnosis - Inflammatory Bowel Disease, part 1 American Family Physician, Feb 15, 1993 by Glen E. Hastings, Richard J. Weber
Footnotes 10 and 12 - Dr. Michael Heller, The gay bowel syndrome: a common problem of homosexual patients in the emergency department. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1980
Conservapedia also says:
in 2004 Medscape stated that gay bowel syndrome is a significant issue in regards HIV infection (The Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website also features an article which is essentially a duplicate of the aforementioned article at Medscape).
The Medscape piece and the John Hopkins article says the following:
This is a retrospective review of clinical proctitis in gay men seen at a STD clinic in San Francisco. The review included men with rectal symptoms of pain, itching, tenesmus, rectal bleeding or discharge who underwent clinical evaluation including anoscopy with diagnostic tests for C. trachomatis, N. gonorrhoeae, HSV and syphilis. The results show relatively high rates of gonorrhea, chlamydia, and HSV. No pathogen was found in 46 of the 101 patients studied.
Yes, I bolded that first sentence to make a point. Examples of gay men seen at STD clinics (especially in one city) are not necessarily indicative of the lgbt community at large. It is the same as using examples of African-American men in prison to gauge the habits of African-American men not incarcerated.
The articles also say the studies of those men in STD clinics took place in the years 2000-2001. That is six to seven years ago.
Now the articles do use the phrase "gay bowel syndrome," but they are vague as to the legitimacy of the term. And that does give Peter and Conservapedia a little raft to stake their lies.
But other than those two articles, does Conservapedia have any recent information?
Not necessarily. Conservapedia mentions 2007 articles regarding STDs, but only as an attempt to link those STDs together as an example of "gay bowel syndrome."
As a matter of fact, a good portion of the information Conservapedia has regarding the term "gay bowel syndrome" itself is from the 1970s and 80s; the years that the term was thought to be legitimate.
And Conservapedia even contradicts itself by saying the following:
Gay bowel syndrome is a clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients (the diseases are not exclusive to male homosexuals).
Doesn't that last statement contradict the entire tone of the Conservapedia article?
Lastly, Conservapedia says the following:
Although the term gay bowel syndrome is not used as frequently as the 1980's, as mentioned previously Medscape has an article on gay bowel syndrome that was published in 2004 that was entitled ''New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome". Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website has a duplicate of the aforementioned article by John G. Bartlett, M.D. at Medscape which was entitled New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome". In addition, an online medical dictionary has an entry on gay bowel syndrome. Also, the website Biology-Online.org has an article on gay bowel syndrome.
As I said before, John Hopkins and the Medscape articles was talking about data that is close to seven years old and solely dealt with gay men in an STD clinic in San Francisco. And neither article goes into detail regarding the legitimacy of the term "gay bowel syndrome."
Lastly, both online dictionaries mentioned by Conservapedia (particularly Biology-Online.org) looks like online dictionaries in which anyone can add terms.
Basically, Conservapedia is taking advantage of online technology to pass along distortions and untruths as reality. And Peter is just loving it:
We at Americans For Truth believe that it is long past time for federal and state governments (and academia) to study the serious health risks associated with male homosexual sex and promiscuity, just as federally-sponsored studies helped educate the public on the significant dangers of smoking. Allowing homosexual activists a “protester’s veto” over legitimate medical inquiry and research will only cost more men’s lives, as larger society and especially young men are denied clear information on the additional health risks of “gay” sex viz a viz normal, natural straight sex.
Peter, if there should be any investigations, they should focus on why you and folks like yourself obsess over what you think lgbts do in the bedroom.
And let's not forget Conservapedia.
I guess its next goal will be attempting to give Paul Cameron some degree of credibility.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Charlene Cothran lied to me
I am sure you all are aware of Charlene Cothran, the African-American publisher of Venus Magazine who is now claiming that she is an "ex-gay."
Let me make you aware of something else.
When Cothran announced her "change," I wrote her a letter. She answered my letter. The following is our exchange:
My letter:
You are Being Used
While I do not agree with your latest exploits, I respect them. However please be advised as you claim to look towards Heaven that you do not allow yourself to be deceived by those with an agenda. Already some folks are using your story in attempts to deny those of us who are comfortable with our orientation our basic rights.
You see that is the paradox involving those claiming to be "ex-gay." Many of us gays have no problem with your decisions. However, groups like Focus on the Family, etc try to use your experiences to keep job-protection ordinances and the like from being passed.
Your situation reminds me of Angie and Debbie Winans. First, they wrote a song criticizing homosexuality called "It's Not Natural," then they begin speaking in legislative committees against laws that would protect gays and lesbians from discrimination in employment and housing.
Where is the line drawn? Please remember my point as you go about your days. Don't allow yourself to be used to deny me my rights as a gay black man.
Her response:
I am acutely aware that many on the 'right' want to use me/my story for their own narrow benefit. In many interviews I remind them that every gay or lesbian person...every PERSON deserves basic HUMAN RIGHTS. The right to NOT be fired from their jobs for being gay, the right to declare whom ever they please as their 'next of kin' for medical emergency, property exchange, insurance privileges etc.
Now the rest of her letter goes on about gays recruiting children but since it is not relevant to my point, I will not not include it.
So Ms. Cothran believes that lgbts have a right to employment, etc. Too bad that many whom she now calls allies don't believe the same thing. Cases in point:
A vote is expected soon on H.R. 2015, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA). If passed, the bill would grant special employment rights and protected minority status to individuals who define themselves based upon chosen sexual behaviors and others who — among other things — suffer from clinical self-delusion. It would force employers to abandon their First Amendment civil rights at the workplace door.
TAKE ACTION: If enacted into law, The Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA, H.R. 2015) and the federal “hate crimes” bill, H.R. 1592 (recently passed by the House), would be the first time that “gender identity rights” are recognized in federal law. This would usher in a new wave of persecution for people opposed to homosexuality and gender confusion . . .
At bottom is the religious exemption language for H.R. 2015, ENDA, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, which would use federal government powers to ban “employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.” (Emphasis is added below.) ENDA would apply to businesses with 15 or more employees.
We at Americans For Truth generally oppose the concept of religious exemptions to pro-homosexual laws because religious people alone should not be able to exercise their freedoms to oppose aberrant sexual behavior.
These hateful and untrue statements came from our friend Peter LaBarbera and his group Americans for Truth (in name only).
Ms. Cothran spoke at a recent fundraiser for the group.
So while Ms. Cothran claims to believe that lgbts should have job protection, she does not have a problem with aligning herself with a group who tells lies to prevent said job protection.
Her actions remind me of a man who claims not believe in lynching, but not only does subtle things to incite the mob but also benefits from their bloodlust.
Apparently being a hypocrite has become a characteristic of being an "ex-gay."
I am sure you all are aware of Charlene Cothran, the African-American publisher of Venus Magazine who is now claiming that she is an "ex-gay."
Let me make you aware of something else.
When Cothran announced her "change," I wrote her a letter. She answered my letter. The following is our exchange:
My letter:
You are Being Used
While I do not agree with your latest exploits, I respect them. However please be advised as you claim to look towards Heaven that you do not allow yourself to be deceived by those with an agenda. Already some folks are using your story in attempts to deny those of us who are comfortable with our orientation our basic rights.
You see that is the paradox involving those claiming to be "ex-gay." Many of us gays have no problem with your decisions. However, groups like Focus on the Family, etc try to use your experiences to keep job-protection ordinances and the like from being passed.
Your situation reminds me of Angie and Debbie Winans. First, they wrote a song criticizing homosexuality called "It's Not Natural," then they begin speaking in legislative committees against laws that would protect gays and lesbians from discrimination in employment and housing.
Where is the line drawn? Please remember my point as you go about your days. Don't allow yourself to be used to deny me my rights as a gay black man.
Her response:
I am acutely aware that many on the 'right' want to use me/my story for their own narrow benefit. In many interviews I remind them that every gay or lesbian person...every PERSON deserves basic HUMAN RIGHTS. The right to NOT be fired from their jobs for being gay, the right to declare whom ever they please as their 'next of kin' for medical emergency, property exchange, insurance privileges etc.
Now the rest of her letter goes on about gays recruiting children but since it is not relevant to my point, I will not not include it.
So Ms. Cothran believes that lgbts have a right to employment, etc. Too bad that many whom she now calls allies don't believe the same thing. Cases in point:
A vote is expected soon on H.R. 2015, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA). If passed, the bill would grant special employment rights and protected minority status to individuals who define themselves based upon chosen sexual behaviors and others who — among other things — suffer from clinical self-delusion. It would force employers to abandon their First Amendment civil rights at the workplace door.
TAKE ACTION: If enacted into law, The Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA, H.R. 2015) and the federal “hate crimes” bill, H.R. 1592 (recently passed by the House), would be the first time that “gender identity rights” are recognized in federal law. This would usher in a new wave of persecution for people opposed to homosexuality and gender confusion . . .
At bottom is the religious exemption language for H.R. 2015, ENDA, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, which would use federal government powers to ban “employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.” (Emphasis is added below.) ENDA would apply to businesses with 15 or more employees.
We at Americans For Truth generally oppose the concept of religious exemptions to pro-homosexual laws because religious people alone should not be able to exercise their freedoms to oppose aberrant sexual behavior.
These hateful and untrue statements came from our friend Peter LaBarbera and his group Americans for Truth (in name only).
Ms. Cothran spoke at a recent fundraiser for the group.
So while Ms. Cothran claims to believe that lgbts should have job protection, she does not have a problem with aligning herself with a group who tells lies to prevent said job protection.
Her actions remind me of a man who claims not believe in lynching, but not only does subtle things to incite the mob but also benefits from their bloodlust.
Apparently being a hypocrite has become a characteristic of being an "ex-gay."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)