One News Now publishes pro-Obama article - I think I am in the Twilight Zone
It is obvious that James Dobson chose to attack Barack Obama because Obama is appealing to some Christians.
This appeal highlights a split that has been hinted at in the media. Some Christians are simply getting tired of Dobson and his ilk boggarting the interepretation of family and values.
And they are speaking out on it.
But I never thought I would see the following:
A well-known black clergyman who supports Barack Obama says evangelical Christian leader Dr. James Dobson displayed a "holier than thou" attitude and "poisoned the waters" while assailing the presidential candidate's theological views.
During Tuesday's Focus on the Family radio show, Dobson accused Obama of "deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview." The Illinois senator and his supporters have been returning fire ever since. (See earlier stories)
Methodist pastor Kirbyjon Caldwell of Houston, who performed the benediction at both of President Bush’s inaugurations, has launched the website JamesDobsonDoesntSpeakForMe.com. He says although Dobson has been a "clear and clarion voice bringing attention to the spiritual and social value of the family," the pro-family leader was out of line in his criticism of Obama's interpretation of scripture and the Constitution.
And in typical One News Now fashion, the article does not present both sides of the argument. The interview with Caldwell, which is extremely pro-Obama, is the article.
Of course commentators to the article pretty much skewer Caldwell, but for one brief shining moment, it was Camelot.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
First event of SC Black Pride 2008 a success!!!!
The first event of the 2008 SC Black Pride was a HUGE success. It was a get together at a local hotspot. People slowly gathered in but once they did, we all had a good time.
Big shout out to my friends from Houston - Sean and Melissa. Told ya I would mention you!!!!
Also, every fourth Saturday in June is now officially Black Pride Day in the city of Columbia. Thanks to Mayor Bob Coble and the Columbia City Council for that awesome proclamation.
The rest of the week promises to be better and I can't wait.
FX network and changing the game plan
But all isn't happiness as far as I am concerned. There is a recent controversy that has been on my mind. I'm calling some folks out.
And these folks aren't the opposition:
30 Days, FX Networks’ original series produced by Morgan Spurlock, "examines social issues in America by immersing individuals in a life that requires them to see the world through another’s eyes,’" according to the show’s Web site. In 2006, the series won a GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Reality Program for the "Gay/Straight" episode.
During the June 24 episode, entitled "Same Sex Parenting," Kati, a woman who opposes gay and lesbian parents and their families, lives for 30 days with gay parents Dennis and Thomas and their four adopted sons. The episode includes the personal stories of kids raised by lesbian and gay parents.
Regrettably, the episode also features a defamatory statement by Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council, an anti-gay activist organization, who claims: "Homosexuality is associated with higher rates of sexual promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases, mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, and child sexual abuse, and those are all reasons for us to be concerned about placing children into that kind of setting." While there is no credible scientific research that backs Sprigg’s claim - and much that disputes it - the episode presents his assertion as if it were fact and offers no credible social science experts or child health authorities to challenge Sprigg’s assertion. Indeed, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, the Child Welfare League of America, and many other child health and social services authorities who support parenting by qualified lesbian and gay parents dispute Sprigg’s claim.
From what I understand, the episode was worse than thought. Apparently it also allowed Dawn Stefanowicz (whom I have blogged about on numerous occasions) to spout her "story" about being a child in a gay home where the father was an irresponsible sex addict.
Some of us are up in arms because Sprigg and Stefanowicz was able to spout their lies unchallenged.
Now I have not seen this program, nor do I plan to. But here is what bothers me.
Why are we wasting time bitching at FX? Don't we have our own magazines? Don't we have our own network?
We know that the anti-gay industry routinely lies about lgbts. We know that they either rely on the discredited studies of Paul Cameron or distort legitimate studies.
So why hasn't there been a special report on it in our magazines or some type of documentary on it on the LOGO channel?
True, I wrote a book on the subject and I have devoted two webpages on the same subject, but let's be honest. In the great scheme of things in our community, my voice doesn't really amount to much.
That is to say, no one really knows who I am. Where are our prominent folks on this subject?
Speaking of my book, it was self-published and thus rough around the edges so I got some legitimate criticism over it. However, one criticism really pissed me off.
I was told that I was saying things that people already knew.
Oh really? How many of us know the entire history of Paul Cameron? Or the distortion of the 1997 Canadian study? Or the list of prominent doctors and researchers whose complaints about the distortion of their work have been ignored?
The sad thing is that many of us do not know because those of us in the lgbt community with some stroke, some degree of power over what gets chosen as news aren't doing their jobs.
That's why we look like we have been caught with our dicks in our hands when lies are spun about how anti-discrimination ordinances will lead to predators boldly walking into women's bathrooms.
and that's why we focus on irrelevant shit like Sally Kern's allegedly gay son rather than why is Sally Kern relying on the studies of a man who talked about tattooing AIDS victims.
The point is that we shouldn't be wasting time complaining that networks like FX aren't doing their jobs when we have the means to get the information out ourselves.
There needs to be a concerted effort by us to document and catalogue the specific distortions of the anti-gay industry.
Let's put folks like Peter LaBarbera and Concerned Women for America on the defensive for a change.
The first event of the 2008 SC Black Pride was a HUGE success. It was a get together at a local hotspot. People slowly gathered in but once they did, we all had a good time.
Big shout out to my friends from Houston - Sean and Melissa. Told ya I would mention you!!!!
Also, every fourth Saturday in June is now officially Black Pride Day in the city of Columbia. Thanks to Mayor Bob Coble and the Columbia City Council for that awesome proclamation.
The rest of the week promises to be better and I can't wait.
FX network and changing the game plan
But all isn't happiness as far as I am concerned. There is a recent controversy that has been on my mind. I'm calling some folks out.
And these folks aren't the opposition:
30 Days, FX Networks’ original series produced by Morgan Spurlock, "examines social issues in America by immersing individuals in a life that requires them to see the world through another’s eyes,’" according to the show’s Web site. In 2006, the series won a GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Reality Program for the "Gay/Straight" episode.
During the June 24 episode, entitled "Same Sex Parenting," Kati, a woman who opposes gay and lesbian parents and their families, lives for 30 days with gay parents Dennis and Thomas and their four adopted sons. The episode includes the personal stories of kids raised by lesbian and gay parents.
Regrettably, the episode also features a defamatory statement by Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council, an anti-gay activist organization, who claims: "Homosexuality is associated with higher rates of sexual promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases, mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, and child sexual abuse, and those are all reasons for us to be concerned about placing children into that kind of setting." While there is no credible scientific research that backs Sprigg’s claim - and much that disputes it - the episode presents his assertion as if it were fact and offers no credible social science experts or child health authorities to challenge Sprigg’s assertion. Indeed, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, the Child Welfare League of America, and many other child health and social services authorities who support parenting by qualified lesbian and gay parents dispute Sprigg’s claim.
From what I understand, the episode was worse than thought. Apparently it also allowed Dawn Stefanowicz (whom I have blogged about on numerous occasions) to spout her "story" about being a child in a gay home where the father was an irresponsible sex addict.
Some of us are up in arms because Sprigg and Stefanowicz was able to spout their lies unchallenged.
Now I have not seen this program, nor do I plan to. But here is what bothers me.
Why are we wasting time bitching at FX? Don't we have our own magazines? Don't we have our own network?
We know that the anti-gay industry routinely lies about lgbts. We know that they either rely on the discredited studies of Paul Cameron or distort legitimate studies.
So why hasn't there been a special report on it in our magazines or some type of documentary on it on the LOGO channel?
True, I wrote a book on the subject and I have devoted two webpages on the same subject, but let's be honest. In the great scheme of things in our community, my voice doesn't really amount to much.
That is to say, no one really knows who I am. Where are our prominent folks on this subject?
Speaking of my book, it was self-published and thus rough around the edges so I got some legitimate criticism over it. However, one criticism really pissed me off.
I was told that I was saying things that people already knew.
Oh really? How many of us know the entire history of Paul Cameron? Or the distortion of the 1997 Canadian study? Or the list of prominent doctors and researchers whose complaints about the distortion of their work have been ignored?
The sad thing is that many of us do not know because those of us in the lgbt community with some stroke, some degree of power over what gets chosen as news aren't doing their jobs.
That's why we look like we have been caught with our dicks in our hands when lies are spun about how anti-discrimination ordinances will lead to predators boldly walking into women's bathrooms.
and that's why we focus on irrelevant shit like Sally Kern's allegedly gay son rather than why is Sally Kern relying on the studies of a man who talked about tattooing AIDS victims.
The point is that we shouldn't be wasting time complaining that networks like FX aren't doing their jobs when we have the means to get the information out ourselves.
There needs to be a concerted effort by us to document and catalogue the specific distortions of the anti-gay industry.
Let's put folks like Peter LaBarbera and Concerned Women for America on the defensive for a change.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Old lies never die - they just get repolished
An ugly trend sprouting up is how the anti-gay industry will exploit ignorance of the transgender community in order to beat back pro-gay laws:
Citizens in Gainesville, Florida, are trying to repeal an ordinance that lets anyone reject their biological sex simply by stating that they "feel like" a member of the opposite sex. At least one citizen argues that introduces some serious safety concerns for the public.
It gets even worse:
Cain Davis, chairman of Citizens for Good Public Policy, says the ordinance was not well thought out. "[A] man, for example, [can] walk into a women's restroom .... just by merely saying, 'I feel like a woman,' they can go into a women's restroom," he explains. In fact, Davis' group has been collecting reports of such incidents, including one in which an elderly woman using a wheelchair complained when an adult male followed her into the women's restroom at a local grocery store.
"And the manager said, 'He can legally do it,'" Davis relates. "The manager didn't even ask this person if he had a sexual or gender identity issue . . . "
I can't help but to question the veracity of this claim. The details are too vague. What store did this take place? What happened next? Were the police called?
It also reminds me of 1983 when discredited researcher Paul Cameron told the audience of the University of Nebraska Lutheran Church that a four-year-old boy was castrated due to a sexual attack by a gay man.
Cameron told this story as part of an attempt to defeat an anti-discrimination law in Lincoln, Nebraska. Police investigated and discovered the story to be false. But the anti-discrimination law was defeated.
So now, over 20 years after that incident, we have so-called Christians telling the same type of story and inferring that laws that would protect lgbts from discrimination would allow predators to attack our most vulnerable citizens in public areas.
I guess they figure why not go with the game plan that has been successful thus far.
Another reason to vote for Obama
James Dobson has gone on record criticizing Obama for daring to voice a version of Christianity that he doesn't agree with:
Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family -- who has stayed unusually quiet in this election cycle likely due to his loathing of presumptive GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz -- will tomorrow attack Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, on Tuesday for a speech the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee delivered in 2006 to the liberal Christian group Call to Renewal.
The AP was given an advance copy of Dobson's 18-minute radio segment, which has already been taped, and will air Tuesday.
In it, Dobson hammers Obama's views of religion, and says the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee is trying to govern by the "lowest common denominator of morality," and calls Obama's views "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."
Be honest. Is anyone surprised over this? If Dobson wanted to shock me, he could have said something positive about Obama.
Does Dobson really think that he is relevant to people who don't buy his phony bullshit?
He doesn't like Obama and he doesn't like McCain. If you ask me, I think Dobson may be cushioning folks for his declaration of an intent to run for president.
Okay, that is farfetched, but you have to admit - it would make things very interesting.
An ugly trend sprouting up is how the anti-gay industry will exploit ignorance of the transgender community in order to beat back pro-gay laws:
Citizens in Gainesville, Florida, are trying to repeal an ordinance that lets anyone reject their biological sex simply by stating that they "feel like" a member of the opposite sex. At least one citizen argues that introduces some serious safety concerns for the public.
It gets even worse:
Cain Davis, chairman of Citizens for Good Public Policy, says the ordinance was not well thought out. "[A] man, for example, [can] walk into a women's restroom .... just by merely saying, 'I feel like a woman,' they can go into a women's restroom," he explains. In fact, Davis' group has been collecting reports of such incidents, including one in which an elderly woman using a wheelchair complained when an adult male followed her into the women's restroom at a local grocery store.
"And the manager said, 'He can legally do it,'" Davis relates. "The manager didn't even ask this person if he had a sexual or gender identity issue . . . "
I can't help but to question the veracity of this claim. The details are too vague. What store did this take place? What happened next? Were the police called?
It also reminds me of 1983 when discredited researcher Paul Cameron told the audience of the University of Nebraska Lutheran Church that a four-year-old boy was castrated due to a sexual attack by a gay man.
Cameron told this story as part of an attempt to defeat an anti-discrimination law in Lincoln, Nebraska. Police investigated and discovered the story to be false. But the anti-discrimination law was defeated.
So now, over 20 years after that incident, we have so-called Christians telling the same type of story and inferring that laws that would protect lgbts from discrimination would allow predators to attack our most vulnerable citizens in public areas.
I guess they figure why not go with the game plan that has been successful thus far.
Another reason to vote for Obama
James Dobson has gone on record criticizing Obama for daring to voice a version of Christianity that he doesn't agree with:
Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family -- who has stayed unusually quiet in this election cycle likely due to his loathing of presumptive GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz -- will tomorrow attack Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, on Tuesday for a speech the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee delivered in 2006 to the liberal Christian group Call to Renewal.
The AP was given an advance copy of Dobson's 18-minute radio segment, which has already been taped, and will air Tuesday.
In it, Dobson hammers Obama's views of religion, and says the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee is trying to govern by the "lowest common denominator of morality," and calls Obama's views "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."
Be honest. Is anyone surprised over this? If Dobson wanted to shock me, he could have said something positive about Obama.
Does Dobson really think that he is relevant to people who don't buy his phony bullshit?
He doesn't like Obama and he doesn't like McCain. If you ask me, I think Dobson may be cushioning folks for his declaration of an intent to run for president.
Okay, that is farfetched, but you have to admit - it would make things very interesting.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Hot mess in Irmo
The school board met regarding the GSA and other clubs. And if they thought their decision ended this thing, they are wrong.
It's too early to tell the repercussions, but here is what I do know courtesy of WIS TV:
A South Carolina school district has voted to allow all student clubs rather than risk a lawsuit by banning a gay-friendly student organization.
But another part of the policy approved Monday night by the Lexington-Richland School District 5 school board gives parents the option of not letting their minor children participate in any school club.
Another provision prohibits student clubs from discussing sexually explicit topics in keeping with the district's abstinence-based curriculum.
First of all, the second provision is irrelevant. Supporters of the GSA (myself included) have said all along that having the GSA doesn't necessarily mean that members will talk about sexual related matters.
Now the permission slips situation is another matter all together. Parents will be given a handout listing all the clubs and will be able to pick and choose which clubs to opt their children out of.
I don't agree with this because some students are not able to come out to their parents. I have heard of situations where children coming out to their parents have been beaten and kicked out of their homes.
Permission slips do not solve the problem. They are a very cynical way of sidestepping the Equal Access Act. In the long run, those who need the GSA will be denied.
This point was brought home during the newscast. A parent whose child attends one of the schools was interviewed. She was not happy with district allowing the GSA but she does like the idea of permission slips.
Her story gets better.
Apparently, her son is gay but she will not allow him to join the GSA. She said that they have been through counseling and continue to work through the issue.
I hope the irony of this doesn't escape anyone.
My prayers are with her child and her. Hopefully one day she will realize that the very thing she denies her son is what can keep him grounded and alive.
And I hope that one day, the people in my state will stop focusing on nonsense like "I Believe" license plates and saying that they are good people and start acting like it for a change.
The school board met regarding the GSA and other clubs. And if they thought their decision ended this thing, they are wrong.
It's too early to tell the repercussions, but here is what I do know courtesy of WIS TV:
A South Carolina school district has voted to allow all student clubs rather than risk a lawsuit by banning a gay-friendly student organization.
But another part of the policy approved Monday night by the Lexington-Richland School District 5 school board gives parents the option of not letting their minor children participate in any school club.
Another provision prohibits student clubs from discussing sexually explicit topics in keeping with the district's abstinence-based curriculum.
First of all, the second provision is irrelevant. Supporters of the GSA (myself included) have said all along that having the GSA doesn't necessarily mean that members will talk about sexual related matters.
Now the permission slips situation is another matter all together. Parents will be given a handout listing all the clubs and will be able to pick and choose which clubs to opt their children out of.
I don't agree with this because some students are not able to come out to their parents. I have heard of situations where children coming out to their parents have been beaten and kicked out of their homes.
Permission slips do not solve the problem. They are a very cynical way of sidestepping the Equal Access Act. In the long run, those who need the GSA will be denied.
This point was brought home during the newscast. A parent whose child attends one of the schools was interviewed. She was not happy with district allowing the GSA but she does like the idea of permission slips.
Her story gets better.
Apparently, her son is gay but she will not allow him to join the GSA. She said that they have been through counseling and continue to work through the issue.
I hope the irony of this doesn't escape anyone.
My prayers are with her child and her. Hopefully one day she will realize that the very thing she denies her son is what can keep him grounded and alive.
And I hope that one day, the people in my state will stop focusing on nonsense like "I Believe" license plates and saying that they are good people and start acting like it for a change.
Countdown to South Carolina Black Pride
This Monday is very interesting.
The Lexington-Richland School District 5 board is expected to vote on a new policy regarding school clubs. This comes as a result of the controversy involving a GSA at Irmo High School, which I have talked about on many occasions.
Rest assured that when word comes down as to what they do, I will have something to say about it.
Meanwhile, the same folks who wrote that book about John Kerry (remember the Swiftboaters) will be writing one on Barack Obama.
As if anyone is surprised. No doubt, the book will be a hit for people who read One News Now. That phony news site is getting highly shrill in their anti-Obama fervor.
From commentators, to columns, to "news" articles, not a day goes by where readers aren't seeing something new and very negative about Obama.
The last I checked, he has been confirmed as the anti-Christ.
And here I thought the anti-Christ was the person who invented cell phones.
But this day finds me waiting in anticipation.
On Wednesday, the opening ceremony of South Carolina Black Pride will take place.
To tell the truth, I am optimistic about the entire week.
This will mark the third occasion of black pride. The first black pride was mildly successful. We did a good job in many things but had a problem getting the lgbt community of color completely involved.
The second year was a hot mess which I will not speak of.
This year, we went all out. Making sure we learned lessons from the first two, the committee worked its ass off getting the community involved. Many of us went out on weekday nights to hand out flyers and network to the "children" despite the fact that we had to be at work early the next day.
We bent over backwards to involve all facets of the lgbt community of color (hence an excellent mini-ball will be taking place during the expo on Saturday) while at the same time getting press coverage and support from the lgbt community at large.
And we were highly successful. The word is definitely out.
Also, this year, I have not heard any complaints about black gays "segregating themselves" by having a black pride. Maybe I am being too optimistic, but I really think folks are starting to get where we are coming from. I think that people are understanding that black pride does not subtraction but addition.
So keep your fingers crossed because this week is going to be very interesting.
http://www.southcarolinablackpride.com/
This Monday is very interesting.
The Lexington-Richland School District 5 board is expected to vote on a new policy regarding school clubs. This comes as a result of the controversy involving a GSA at Irmo High School, which I have talked about on many occasions.
Rest assured that when word comes down as to what they do, I will have something to say about it.
Meanwhile, the same folks who wrote that book about John Kerry (remember the Swiftboaters) will be writing one on Barack Obama.
As if anyone is surprised. No doubt, the book will be a hit for people who read One News Now. That phony news site is getting highly shrill in their anti-Obama fervor.
From commentators, to columns, to "news" articles, not a day goes by where readers aren't seeing something new and very negative about Obama.
The last I checked, he has been confirmed as the anti-Christ.
And here I thought the anti-Christ was the person who invented cell phones.
But this day finds me waiting in anticipation.
On Wednesday, the opening ceremony of South Carolina Black Pride will take place.
To tell the truth, I am optimistic about the entire week.
This will mark the third occasion of black pride. The first black pride was mildly successful. We did a good job in many things but had a problem getting the lgbt community of color completely involved.
The second year was a hot mess which I will not speak of.
This year, we went all out. Making sure we learned lessons from the first two, the committee worked its ass off getting the community involved. Many of us went out on weekday nights to hand out flyers and network to the "children" despite the fact that we had to be at work early the next day.
We bent over backwards to involve all facets of the lgbt community of color (hence an excellent mini-ball will be taking place during the expo on Saturday) while at the same time getting press coverage and support from the lgbt community at large.
And we were highly successful. The word is definitely out.
Also, this year, I have not heard any complaints about black gays "segregating themselves" by having a black pride. Maybe I am being too optimistic, but I really think folks are starting to get where we are coming from. I think that people are understanding that black pride does not subtraction but addition.
So keep your fingers crossed because this week is going to be very interesting.
http://www.southcarolinablackpride.com/
Friday, June 20, 2008
Just do your damn job!!
I ran into the following disturbing news item yesterday:
They went to the doctor's office for an exam, but a same-sex couple said they got a lecture on lifestyle instead.
Ashleigh Haberman and Erica Schaub have made a life-long commitment to one another after getting married in Canada.
The openly lesbian couple has been together for nearly two years. They say their lifestyle and raising four children from previous relationships has its challenges, but they had never experienced discrimination, they say, until now.
"He asked who I was to her and I said, 'She's my partner,'" said Haberman.
The discussion took place at Spectrum Health South Pavilion Urgent Care Center in Grand Rapids. Schaub was there to get checked out for a lingering cold.
But instead of her symptoms, they say the doctor was more interested in the couple's relationship and how they felt about the recent California ruling allowing same-sex marriage.
"And he proceeded to give his opinion on how he felt that marriage, gay marriage, shouldn't be called a marriage because it's a religious based word, and he's a Christian, and there's no way that marriage could be considered legal in the gay sense," said Haberman.
While the couple's marriage is not legally recognized in Michigan, they say that's not the point, rather, the doctor's office is not the time nor place for a debate. They were there for an exam - not a lecture on lifestyle.
What's more disturbing were some of the comments on the page. Some have said that the doctor was in the right because of the alleged "health problems of homosexuality."
But no credible studies has ever said that the lgbt orientation is indicative of negative health problems.
Studies actually say that outside factors can lead to members of the lgbt community developing bad health choices. For instance, studies done by Drs. Elizabeth Saewyc and Robert Garafalo (talked about on this site at various times) blame homophobia for the rate of suicide amongst lgbt teens.
But more to the point of this article, the American Cancer Society have said that lesbians do have a greater risk of developing cancer. However, the group also says this is partly due to:
Many health insurance policies do not cover unmarried partners. This makes it harder for many lesbian and bisexual women to access quality health care.
Some women may not want to tell their health care providers that they are lesbian or bisexual because they don’t want discrimination to affect the quality of health care they receive.
Past negative experiences with providers may cause lesbians and bisexual women to wait too long before seeking health care. As a result, they may miss out on early detection tests and have cancers diagnosed at a later state, when the disease is more difficult to treat.
That last point is apropo to this situation.
Just like African-Americans who are less likely to trust physicians due to incidents in the past, such as the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, members of the lgbt community face potential danger if they cannot trust members of the medical community to do their jobs.
I only hope that the physician in question receives a serious reprimand for his breach of ethics.
The sad thing is that members of the anti-gay industry will most likely come out on the side of the physician, while at the same time exploiting the possible negative consequences of his unprofessional behavior.
I ran into the following disturbing news item yesterday:
They went to the doctor's office for an exam, but a same-sex couple said they got a lecture on lifestyle instead.
Ashleigh Haberman and Erica Schaub have made a life-long commitment to one another after getting married in Canada.
The openly lesbian couple has been together for nearly two years. They say their lifestyle and raising four children from previous relationships has its challenges, but they had never experienced discrimination, they say, until now.
"He asked who I was to her and I said, 'She's my partner,'" said Haberman.
The discussion took place at Spectrum Health South Pavilion Urgent Care Center in Grand Rapids. Schaub was there to get checked out for a lingering cold.
But instead of her symptoms, they say the doctor was more interested in the couple's relationship and how they felt about the recent California ruling allowing same-sex marriage.
"And he proceeded to give his opinion on how he felt that marriage, gay marriage, shouldn't be called a marriage because it's a religious based word, and he's a Christian, and there's no way that marriage could be considered legal in the gay sense," said Haberman.
While the couple's marriage is not legally recognized in Michigan, they say that's not the point, rather, the doctor's office is not the time nor place for a debate. They were there for an exam - not a lecture on lifestyle.
What's more disturbing were some of the comments on the page. Some have said that the doctor was in the right because of the alleged "health problems of homosexuality."
But no credible studies has ever said that the lgbt orientation is indicative of negative health problems.
Studies actually say that outside factors can lead to members of the lgbt community developing bad health choices. For instance, studies done by Drs. Elizabeth Saewyc and Robert Garafalo (talked about on this site at various times) blame homophobia for the rate of suicide amongst lgbt teens.
But more to the point of this article, the American Cancer Society have said that lesbians do have a greater risk of developing cancer. However, the group also says this is partly due to:
Many health insurance policies do not cover unmarried partners. This makes it harder for many lesbian and bisexual women to access quality health care.
Some women may not want to tell their health care providers that they are lesbian or bisexual because they don’t want discrimination to affect the quality of health care they receive.
Past negative experiences with providers may cause lesbians and bisexual women to wait too long before seeking health care. As a result, they may miss out on early detection tests and have cancers diagnosed at a later state, when the disease is more difficult to treat.
That last point is apropo to this situation.
Just like African-Americans who are less likely to trust physicians due to incidents in the past, such as the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, members of the lgbt community face potential danger if they cannot trust members of the medical community to do their jobs.
I only hope that the physician in question receives a serious reprimand for his breach of ethics.
The sad thing is that members of the anti-gay industry will most likely come out on the side of the physician, while at the same time exploiting the possible negative consequences of his unprofessional behavior.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Peter's friends
Peter LaBarbera is a huge hypocrite. We all know this. He is so wrapped up stopping the alleged "gay menace" that he, on occasion, makes a supreme ass of himself.
So why should today be any different:
Folks, in many ways I think Michael Savage is one of the freest voices in America. He talks boldly about things — like America’s moral rot — that even many “conservative talkers” avoid or sidestep with their calculated, politically correct, “I’m-not-intolerant” timidity on tough issues like homosexuality. (Some leading conservative talk show hosts refuse to confront the “gay” agenda or do so only on the margins — whatever happened to “conserving” our Judeo-Christian sexual ethic?)
The following are examples of Savage's free voice:
Savage's answer to homelessness: "Why not put them in work camps?" Monday, June 9, 2008
Savage plays Dead Kennedys song again after asserting he "is now being persecuted for refusing to take the party line" on Sen. Kennedy's illness Thursday, May 22, 2008
Michael Savage plays Dead Kennedys song "in some respect for" Sen. Kennedy Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Savage: "[L]oving, kind lesbian" is "the type that stuffed ovens in Hitler's concentration camps" Friday, November 9, 2007
Savage: "You're telling me there's no possibility of a conspiracy by the Democrats" to cause Roberts' seizure? Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Savage: Madeleine Albright is a "traitor" who "should be hung" Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Savage lauds Wash. Times employee allegedly soliciting girl for sex as a "normal pervert" who "should get a reward that it wasn't a boy" Friday, September 29, 2006
Michael Savage is a loud mouth bully who mistakes hyperbole for intelligent conversation. He is the McDonalds of talk radio; cheap and fast, but having no substance and ultimately not good for you.
But to Peter, Michael Savage is a bold and free person, just like anti-Semitic author Ted Pike is a "pro-family" advocate.
Of course Peter swore up and down that he doesn't share the same beliefs as Pike , just like he will most likely disavow Savage's ramblings.
But birds of a feather do flock together.
Peter LaBarbera is a huge hypocrite. We all know this. He is so wrapped up stopping the alleged "gay menace" that he, on occasion, makes a supreme ass of himself.
So why should today be any different:
Folks, in many ways I think Michael Savage is one of the freest voices in America. He talks boldly about things — like America’s moral rot — that even many “conservative talkers” avoid or sidestep with their calculated, politically correct, “I’m-not-intolerant” timidity on tough issues like homosexuality. (Some leading conservative talk show hosts refuse to confront the “gay” agenda or do so only on the margins — whatever happened to “conserving” our Judeo-Christian sexual ethic?)
The following are examples of Savage's free voice:
Savage's answer to homelessness: "Why not put them in work camps?" Monday, June 9, 2008
Savage plays Dead Kennedys song again after asserting he "is now being persecuted for refusing to take the party line" on Sen. Kennedy's illness Thursday, May 22, 2008
Michael Savage plays Dead Kennedys song "in some respect for" Sen. Kennedy Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Savage: "[L]oving, kind lesbian" is "the type that stuffed ovens in Hitler's concentration camps" Friday, November 9, 2007
Savage: "You're telling me there's no possibility of a conspiracy by the Democrats" to cause Roberts' seizure? Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Savage: Madeleine Albright is a "traitor" who "should be hung" Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Savage lauds Wash. Times employee allegedly soliciting girl for sex as a "normal pervert" who "should get a reward that it wasn't a boy" Friday, September 29, 2006
Michael Savage is a loud mouth bully who mistakes hyperbole for intelligent conversation. He is the McDonalds of talk radio; cheap and fast, but having no substance and ultimately not good for you.
But to Peter, Michael Savage is a bold and free person, just like anti-Semitic author Ted Pike is a "pro-family" advocate.
Of course Peter swore up and down that he doesn't share the same beliefs as Pike , just like he will most likely disavow Savage's ramblings.
But birds of a feather do flock together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)