Don't believe Santorum's claim about not hearing the audience boo the gay soldier

There continues to be so much fall out from the recent Republican presidential debate in which the candidates stood by and said nothing while members of the audience booed a gay solder. The gay soldier was merely asking will the candidates make it harder for folks like him to serve openly in the military in spite of the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Now a few candidates, John Huntsman and Gary Johnson,  have gone on record saying that they thought the booing was inappropriate. Others, such as Michele Bachmann and Mitt Romney, have dodged responding to the controversy. But one candidate, Rick Santorum, really stepped into it with his answer:

“I didn’t hear it. I didn’t hear the boos,” Santorum told ABC News. “I heard the question and answered the question, so I’ve heard subsequently that happened. I’ve heard varied reports about whether they were booing the soldier or the policy.”

“I don’t know what they were booing,” he said. “If you can go out and find the people who were booing and find out if they were booing because a man was gay or because of a policy they don’t agree with.”

Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson simply isn't buying Santorum's explanation:

Johnson added that he could hear the boos from the stage and believes that the other candidates – despite Santorum’s denial – could as well.

Frankly, I don't buy Santorum's explanation either. And even though Santorum later went on record condemning the boos, I think the entire situation reveals something about his character; or lack thereof.

Folks like Santorum claim that they are ridiculed because they believe in "values" and "morality" in a society in which such things are not trendy.

But that's a lie. Folks like Santorum are ridiculed because so many of us don't buy their chest thumpings and phony martyrdom. You see folks like Santorum talk a good game when they can attack other people and call other people's values into suspect. But when it comes down to showing a little integrity, little humility or - in this case - a little honesty, they fail miserably.

To them, Christianity is merely a pedestal to place themselves above others. Christianity is merely a club used to bash others. Christianity is like a barrier which separates them from those of us they consider "untouchables" or the "undesirables" who shall never - at least in their minds - be seen at the same level as them.

But it's always about actions, never words. And  Santorum's actions in this situation - claiming that he did not hear the boos of the audience - is an outrageous lie.

In other words, Rick my friend, many of us don't like you because you are a hypocrite and a liar.

Frank Turek is a liar

The National Organization for Marriage has began a new project which it calls Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance. This project will spotlight folks who are the supposed victims of imaginary gay intolerance:

“If you have been threatened, harassed, or made to feel afraid because you believe in the great, foundational truth of Genesis –we are born male and female and called to come together in love to give children mothers and fathers—Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance is here to help you: you are not alone.

We want to hear your story, connect you with others who share your deepest beliefs, with legal and other practical help, and with other Americans of good will, who (regardless of their views on marriage) want to put a stop to the shaming and the fearmongering of our fellow citizens. The goal of the Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance is to create a supportive community for those who have been threatened for standing for marriage, to nip the climate of fear being created in the bud, to expose for fair-minded Americans on both sides of the debate the threats being made, to conduct high-quality qualitative and quantitative research documenting the extent of the harm, to develop legislative and community proposal to protect Americans right to engage in the core civil rights: to organize, to vote, to speak, to donate, and to write for marriage.

Isolated and alone, we can be suppressed and intimidated. Together we are too many to be treated as second-class citizens.“

In other words, this group will exploit controversies to create new religious right cause celebres who have been supposedly victimized because of their "morality" and push them hard on the American public before the truth comes out that these folks are not victims but individuals who think that their beliefs regarding homosexuality should shield them for normal consequences of acting like homophobic fools.

And first up in the MADA spotlight is a man called Frank Turek. Turek was consultant who lost several lucrative gigs because of his sidework of denigrating the gay community. Take the following video with a grain of salt.



Turek makes himself sound like a pitiful victim. I am of the belief that private companies - who employ gays - have every right to pick and choose who they have as consultants. Some may disagree.

But what we cannot disagree with is the simple fact that Turek is being highly misleading. He makes it seem that his dismissals and inability to get gigs is due to his stance on gay marriage. But he omits the time when he:

said that gays and "radical Muslims are teaming up to destroy Western Civilization because they hate "Judeo-Christian natural law"



Or the time he compared homosexuality to alcoholism and pedophilia:

[B]eing born a certain way is irrelevant to what the law should be. Laws are concerned with behaviors not desires, and we all have desires we ought not act on. In fact, all of us were born with an “orientation” to bad behavior, but those desires don’t justify the behaviors. If you are born with a genetic predisposition to alcohol, does that mean you should be an alcoholic? If you have a genetic attraction to children does that mean you should be a pedophile? What homosexual activist would say that a genetic predisposition to anger justifies gay-bashing? (Don’t blame me—I was born with the anti-gay gene!) Certainly, those that oppose alcoholism, pedophilia and gay bashing are not “bigots”—they are wise.

Or the time he compared gays to sociopaths and gay bashers:



 The question is why didn't Turek - or NOM for that matter - mention his other comments on the video.

But the real fact of the matter is this - Turek has every right to speak his mind, but no company is bound to hire him, particularly if the company has lgbtq employees.

Furthermore, if Turek had said the same awful comments about African-Americans or people of the Jewish faith, we would not be having this conversation.

Is Turek a victim of "gay intolerance?" No. He is a liar who tries to make himself out to be a victim. And he is a man who seems to think that he should be shielded from the normal consequences of being a homophobic bigot - i.e. ostracization from the job market.

Know Your LGBT History - Gay characters from children's television show and movies

I found the following hilarious video on youtube which looks at characters from children's television shows and movies who supposedly show lgbtq sensibilities.

What do you think of the choices?




Past Know Your LGBT Posts: 

GOP candidates condemned for not sticking up for gay soldier and other Friday midday news briefs

Conservatives And Media Criticize GOP Candidates For Not Condemning Audience Boos Of Gay Soldier - How is this for a day of miracles? Me, GoProud, and the Christian Post actually agree on something.

NOM's new Chair: Homosexuality is modern day 'barbarism'- NOM's new chairman is channeling Marcus Bachmann . . . shut up.

Ugandan First Lady Affirms Support For “Kill The Gays” Bill - Here is a first lady we all can dislike.

LaBarbera Joins Mefferd To Lash Out At "Homo-Fascism" - A day we can drive Porno Pete crazy is always a good day.

Perry Endorser Suggested New Hampshire ‘Sold’ Adoptees To Same-Sex Couples - Lord, hammercy!

FLASHBACK: Before He Was At Fox, Keith Ablow Embraced Transgender People On Television - Can you say phony, boys and girls?
  
Gay people, get your heads in the game! - I am only adding this because I don't think that I pissed off a sufficient enough amount of people when I posted it this morning. LOL

Gay people, get your heads in the game!

The moment that everyone is talking about regarding last night's Republican debate is below when the audience booed a gay soldier who asked a question about DADT:



And candidate Rick Santorum didn't help matters by giving a sleazebag answer conflating gays serving openly in the military to sexual intercourse.

This piece is not a sell for Obama but a plea for the gay community to recognize who our true enemies are. I know that so many of us are angry at the president because we think he has not moved fast enough on our issues. Fair enough. But those always ready to lodge a comment on how worthless Obama is forget one thing:

Electing Obama was only half the work.

Let's be honest. So many of us expected that when Obama won, the sky would open, heavenly choirs would cascade down from the skies, and automatically the lgbtq community would gain instantaneous equality.

It doesn't work like that. It never has and it never will. The mistake of so many of us in the community is the simple fact that we viewed Obama's election as an end rather than yet another facet in the plan which would ensure our equality.

We sat back as if we ordered a meal in a restaurant and expected Obama, as the waiter, to bring us what we ordered, specifically to our specifications.

The struggle for equality is not that easy. Obama needed to be prodded to do the right thing, but instead of recognizing this simple fact, some of us complained about it.

I personally didn't give a crap that he needed to be prodded. I did care that he responded to our prodding. You think "President John McCain" would have cared that several folks chained themselves to the White House fence? You think any Republican president for that matter would respond to any protest by Get Equal?

Of course not.

Last night's shameful moment should send a signal to the lgbtq community that our equality is not dependent one person, no matter how powerful they are. Furthermore, if we are waiting for a magical moment such as when President Lyndon Johnson adopted the language of the civil rights movement during one of his presidential address in a show of solidarity, we are going to be waiting for a long time.

It's time we stop expecting a hero and be our own heroes. It's time we start talking into account the cold fact that our struggle for equality is like a game of chess.

And it's time we stop pussyfooting and start mastering the game.

Good riddance to Maggie Gallagher

This afternoon, as probably many of you have probably heard, Maggie Gallagher has stepped down as chairwoman of the National Organization for Marriage.

Details are extremely sketchy, but NOM has put on a brave face on the announcement by giving accolades to Gallagher and introducing, with much fanfare, her replacement - law professor and tea party favorite, John Eastman.

Personally, I am not impressed. Most likely, Gallagher stepping down is probably the best thing for the organization. I for one have never bought into the idea that Gallagher herself personally founded NOM.

Let's face facts - Gallagher was probably more likely a figurehead, a puppet picked by shadowy individuals out to stomp out the progress of marriage equality. And if that was the case, she wasn't a good one.

Gallagher had an awful television presence in that she was combative and evasive. She did well in front of audiences who agreed with her opinions regarding marriage, but on televised debates when faced with someone from the Human Rights Campaign or any other lgbtq group, Gallagher came across as phony. She tended to talk over folks, shout a bit, and if all else failed, pretended to be personally offended when someone actually called her out on her lies.

Other times when questioned about NOM's tactic, she deferred to an absent Brian Brown - NOM's president, leaving folks to wonder how much was she in the loop as NOM's chairwoman if she couldn't answer basic questions about how the organization is spreading its message.

It didn't matter to the lgbtq community that Brown was president. With her faults outnumbering her attributes, we did good job of "gingriching" Gallagher, i.e. making her the persona folks would think of when NOM's name came up.

Any success NOM has had is due to only one thing - its deep pockets. When it's all said and done, one could easily pinpoint NOM's finances as the reason why the organization is able to motivate so many "leaders" to its cause and blanket each area of its choosing with so much inaccurate literature via brochures and commercials.

To this day, NOM continues to fight tooth and nail in order to hide its funders even after losing several court cases. So in hindsight maybe it is a good idea for NOM to pick a lawyer to lead it. I have a feeling that the organization will need a good one very soon.

The Catholic Church and the 'political process' and other Thursday midday news briefs

North Carolina's leading 'protect marriage' group: Gays die early -- see, Paul Cameron says so! - Ugh. Do you notice a trend amongst these "morality groups" and junk science?

NC Anti-Marriage Amendment Language Leaves Off Key Provision - Speaking of NC, look what those "we need to protect marriage" dunces forgot to do.

Thomasson Suggests Larry King Provoked His Own Murder - Blaming a murder victim for his own death. So classy.

Catholic Priests Removed Over Anti-Gay Remarks - From the article - "The Catholic Diocese condemned Rodriguez’ 'intervention in the political process,” saying that it “is not permitted under Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code.'" Oh really? Well what's the explanation regarding NY Archbishop Timothy Dolan's letter to President Obama? We need some clarification here.