Know Your LGBT History - I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry

It was 2007 and lgbts still had to deal with awful comedies in which our sexual orientation is a punchline like in this movie I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry. Adam Sandler (who is not funny) and Kevin James (ditto) plays two heterosexual firefighters who enter into a civil union for the insurance. It was a hit, which doesn't say much for the mentality of some people who go to the movies.

Just awful:

The "Gay Inspector"


I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry
at MOVIECLIPS.com

Past Know Your LGBT History Posts:

NOM suffers major defection and other Friday midday news briefs

G-A-Y Exclusive: National Organization For Marriage tour organizer/Facebook moderator does startling about-face; Exposure to NOM could lead to unintended side effects - This is MAJOR! A member/supporter of NOM, Louis J. Marinelli (whom I have criticized many times on this blog) has made a serious about face. He now supports civil marriage equality and on top of that, retracts many anti-gay things he has said. And best of all are his choice words for Peter LaBarbera. Sweeeeeet!

An Enemy Defects - A very good friend of mine makes a crucial point about the above situation. How we treat someone like Marinelli who has changed his position says as much about us as a community than it does about him. Some people may be tempted to be nasty, but we are a much better people than that.

Watch: Military Service Chiefs Report 'No Issues' with 'DADT' Repeal Implementation - The Family Research Council will be all upset. Good.

Judge rules gay rights group can picket Target - Excellent ruling!

For the Family Research Council, government shutdown is all about abortion

The Family Research Council seems to be taking time from its "busy schedule" of gay-baiting in order to inform folks about the possibly imminent government shutdown.

And the organization's actions seem to indicate the prevailing story coming out of Washington, i.e. the possibility of a government shutdown isn't about deficits but the social issue of abortion.

At the FRC's Cloakroom - the blog of FRC Action, which is an offshoot of the organization itself, there are several posts which connect the government shutdown to efforts - no doubt pushed by FRC and other like-minded groups - to strip funding from Planned Parenthood, including a not very nice post on Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY):

Rep. Slaughter is one of the top defenders of abortion giant Planned Parenthood. According to heir own figures Planned Parenthood has killed over 5 million babies since they started profiting from the abortion business. If you say even half of those where girls (the figure could be higher when you take in that evidence points top more girls are aborted than boys) the Rep. Slaughter is defending the, well . . . slaughter of at least 2.5 million women.

Then there is a post on the History of Shutdowns, which begins with this very telling sentence:

As a shut down looms, apparently over taxpayer funding of abortion for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and for President Obama over funding of the troops . . .

Then there is another piece which supposedly calls Democratic Senators hypocrites over their past abortion votes.

Lastly, there is the post with this headline:

Senator Reid champions taxpayer funded abortions while President Obama declares war on our troops

Certainly I'm not saying that FRC is hoping for a government shutdown. But the idea, which the organization is helping to push, that the government shutdown isn't about deficits or controlling spending levels, but placing restraints on reproductive care and controlling what a woman can do with her body leaves me kinda uncomfortable.

There is a train of thought which is blaming the tea party for what may happen and while this group deserves a degree of blame, let's not omit organizations like FRC, folks like Lila Rose and that ridiculous organization of hers, Live Action, and especially Congressmen like Mike Pence whose idea of morality is widening his eyes like saucers as he pontificates on camera regarding how its so hard for him to make other people uphold HIS moral code.

I guess what I'm saying is that I can almost understand a possible government shutdown over monetary disagreements. But shutting down the government over social issues, particularly when it comes to the issue of reproductive care and the right of a woman to control her own body, is something that should piss off every American.

Mostly because it proves the fact that some in Washington aren't working for the American people, but special interest groups - like FRC - who really don't care how pushing for their pet causes affects us "common folks."

To them, we seem to be collateral damage.

Facebook declares Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters 'abusive' and 'spammy'

I usually talk the exploits of the religious right but something happened on my blog this morning that's highly "interesting."

After writing my morning post, I went to place it on Facebook but got the following message:

This message contains blocked content that has previously been flagged as abusive or spammy. Let us know if you think this is an error.

It's been like this all day, leading me to ask is it conceivable that some folks aren't happy with what I am posting.

I wouldn't be surprised. It's been a "fun" week with the Family Research Council making a complete fool of itself and Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association competing for the jester's title.

Of course it could be anything from a Facebook glitch, to someone striking back because Glenn Beck got fired, to someone getting angry at the plain truth of my anti-religious right words.

I mean let's count down the five most potentially offensive things I have said recently:

5. In the piece Scott Lively has a vicious homophobic breakdown, I said the following:

I have a certain classification when it comes to homophobes I talk about.

Peter LaBarbera is fun to laugh at. Matt Barber is a useful idiot. Paul Cameron is stewing in a sauce of irrelevancy. Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown are fishes who soon will be hooked by their own carelessness. Peter Sprigg and Tony Perkins are bumbling fools.

But when it comes to Scott Lively, I think of crosses, garlic, and holy water.

4. In the post Sorry Newt, but the American Family Association IS a hate group, I said:

. . .if the American Family Association is a Christian organization, then God must have lowered his standards.

3. Then there this comment in the piece Family Research Council accidentally admits truth about hate group charges:

FRC is not as blatantly hateful as the Klan, but that makes the organization more dangerous. Under the veneer of respectability and morality, FRC either passes off junk science or presents social science in a wrong manner to deliberately smear the lgbt community and make us appear - inaccurately - as a public health risk and a threat to religious liberty.

2. And then there is the consistent way I always seem to pick on anti-gay spokesman Matt Barber (or as I call him, my pet). Hey! It's not my fault that he seems to always be talking about gay sex and then implying that God has led him to do such like he did in the post  Matt Barber - 'Homosexuals are picking on me!'

All I did was make the observation that if Barber obsesses about gay sex because of God, then God has a warped sense of humor.

1. Or it could have been my simple observation of those who took part in Peter LaBarbera's "Truth Academy" in the post Porno Pete LaBarbera's Hate Academy begins today

All I said was:

These are not Christian people. These are liars motivated by vicious homophobia and anti-gay animus so pathological that they probably should seek psychiatric care.

I mean come on, Facebook. Were these comments truly abusive?

It doesn't because I figured out a way to place my posts on Facebook regardless. Still just the idea that someone thinks my blog posts are "abusive" or "spammy" just boggles my mind.

And I'm just getting started, you daisy-headed freaks!

UPDATE - It looks like the Facebook no longer considers me "abusive" or "spammy" anymore. At least for now. LOL

Ark. court rules against anti-gay adoption law and other Thursday midday news briefs

Ark. court strikes down law barring gay adoptions - Awesome! Children have a right to a good home and this law prevented that.

Ssempa, Oyett Press Uganda’s Parliament on Anti-Homosexuality Bill - GO AWAY, MARTIN SSEMPA!

The Military's Secret Shame - Before the religious right has a chance to exploit this article about male-on-male rape in the military, check out this passage from it - "While many might assume the perpetrators of such assaults are closeted gay soldiers, military experts and outside researchers say assailants usually are heterosexual. Like in prisons and other predominantly male environments, male-on-male assault in the military, experts say, is motivated not by homosexuality, but power, intimidation, and domination. Assault victims, both male and female, are typically young and low-ranking; they are targeted for their vulnerability. "

Andrea Lafferty calls Wasserman Schultz 'a junkyard dog'; one of the nicest things Lafferty's said in years - Andrea Lafferty is definitely her father's daughter.

FAIR Education Act and Gender Nondiscrimination Act Pass Key California Legislative Committees - Ending the news briefs with really good news.

Republicans embarrass themselves at DADT hearings

This week, House Republicans held hearings over the implementation of DADT.

From what I understand, it didn't go well for them.

However, don't tell that to long-time anti-gay activist and Paul Cameron enabler Robert Knight. According to him, the hearings were a slam dunk:

Rep. Allen B. West (R-Florida) belled the cat neatly during a hearing last Friday on the military's breakneck pace in implementing the new lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) law.

Mr. West, whose 20-plus years in the U.S. Army included combat commands, noted that he and others at Fort Bragg had to endure "sensitivity training" in the 1990s. It didn't enhance the "warrior ethos," he recalled.

What became clear at the hearing of the House Armed Services Committee's Personnel Subcommittee chaired by Joe Wilson (R-South Carolina) is that the Pentagon is forging into unknown territory, driven by political correctness, not military need.

Mr. Wilson, Mr. West and Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colorado) were openly skeptical about how honest the process has been. Mr. West noted that political correctness can prove costly, as when commanders ignored Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's plunge into radical Islam before the Fort Hood shootings. Likewise, people are afraid to share qualms over the LGBT law, Mr. West said.

I'll say one thing for Knight. What he doesn't have in truth, he makes up in creativity.

In reality, according to the site Equality Matters, the Republicans were hoping to use the hearings to find something - anything - that they could use to delay the repeal of DADT. And they couldn't find a thing:

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Clifford Stanley said he saw "no issues or problems" with the repeal of DADT, which is expected to be completed by midsummer. "All is going well," Stanley said.

Republicans weren't pleased.

Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA) attempted to make the case that under DADT gay and lesbian service members were being discharged for violating standards of conduct rather than for simply being gay and that training for repeal was costing the military too much money. He was rebuked, not once but twice, by Vice Admiral William E. Gortney, who testified that the majority of soldiers discharged under DADT had not violated standards of conduct and that training had only cost about $10,000, a minuscule amount considering the military's annual budget.

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) tried to rehash the issue of troops showering together, criticizing Vice Admiral Gortney for "not being consistent" in his responses.

Extremely embarrassing to Republican efforts to derail the DADT repeal was the following exchange between Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA) and  Vice Admiral William E. Gortney. Scott was trying to prove that gay soldiers had been discharged for violating standards of conduct rather than their sexual orientation.

Needless to say, he wasn't successful:

Transcript:

SCOTT: Did you discharge him from the service because he was gay or because he violated a standard of conduct?

GORTNEY: Because he was gay.

SCOTT: He did not violate a standard of conduct before he was dismissed?

GORTNEY: He did not.

SCOTT: That's not the answer I thought you would give to be honest with you, Admiral.

From what I understand there will be another hearing today. I'm hoping that Republicans will end up with more egg on their faces, while Knight will continue to sing their praises from whatever alternate universe he is viewing the hearings.

Anti-gay stalker Andrew Shrivell getting sued by victim of his bullying campaign

From the department of "hell yeah, stick it to him" comes this good news:

Andrew Shrivell

University of Michigan student body president Chris Armstrong has filed a lawsuit against former Michigan Assistant Attorney General Andrew Shirvell, who was fired in November of last year for a series of blog posts that targeted Armstrong for being gay.

The suit was filed on Friday in Washtenaw County Circuit Court, and asks for more than $25,000 in damages for "defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, abuse of process, invasion of privacy, and stalking."

According to David Jesse of the Detroit Free-Press, Armstrong's attorney Deborah Gordon said of Shirvell: "At this point, it's not about the money. Mr. Shirvell has refused to retract any of his bizarre and untruthful points. We want to set the record straight."

Beginning last April, Shirvell began posting on his blog about Armstrong, describing him as "a radical homosexual activist" who wants "to promote a very deeply radical agenda at the University of Michigan." He also photoshopped a picture of Armstrong with the word "resign" over his face, alongside a rainbow flag with a swastika in the middle. Over the next few months, Shirvell continued reporting on Armstrong and his friends' Facebook activity, and showing up at school events, parties where Armstrong was present, and even outside of Armstrong's parents house with picket signs.

Shirvell was fired from the Attorney General's office in November.