Attack on First Amendment Liberties? I don't think so

Following the same pattern of lies they have been engaging in, members of the anti-gay industry is trying to frame ENDA, the law that would protect lgbts from discrimination, as a piece of disciminatory legislation:

Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA), warned, “This bill would force Christian, Jewish or Muslim business owners to hire people who openly choose to engage in homosexual or cross-dressing behaviors despite a sincerely held religious belief that those behaviors are dangerous, sinful and not in keeping with basic morality.

So exemptions for religious institutions is not enough for these groups. They are trying to break it down to the fact that business owners who have a personal aversion to homosexuality should be able to discriminate?

Sorry that just doesn't make sense.

What's the next step? Christian business owners with a "sincerely held religious belief" against Islam or Judaism should discriminate? And that crack about "behavior" won't help Barber's argument. Defining homosexuality by what one does rather than who one is actually hurts Barber's argument. After all, people choose to follow a particular religion. Should they be discriminated against because of it?

I think that Barber's poor argument for allowing discrimination against lgbts underscores just who we are dealing with here. Barber's group, Concerned Women for America, and other so-called pro-family groups aren't interested in fairness or any values that don't embrace their world view of things.

They have a right to believe that homosexuality is a sin but the way they go about trying to justify ways to codify their beliefs into public policy just goes to prove how un-Christian they are.

The next argument Barber brings up further insinuates my point:

For instance, female employees would have to endure both systematic sexual harassment and a hostile work environment by being forced to share bathroom facilities with male employees who get their jollies from wearing a dress, high heels and lipstick.

Barber's claim is a prime of example of anti-gay industry technique number five as outlined in my upcoming book - dire consequences, or predicting that pro-gay laws will cause all sorts of mayhem to take place. Barber offers no proof of his predictions because he is relying on the ignorance and fear that many have of the transgender community to quantify his lies.

The fact of the matter is that I really don't think that Matt Barber actually believes what he writes. I think he believes that homosexuality is a sin and therefore any technique or claim that keeps lgbts from being more protected and visible is permissible.

In other words, I think that Barber is looking at what he is doing as the job of a political operative trying to win an election.

Now for a political operative attempting to win an election, Barber's techniques are tolerable; awful, shameful, but tolerable. Politics is a world of compromises where sometimes the ends do have to justify the means.

But for a man such as Matt Barber and a group (i.e. Concerned Women for America) who puts themselves on a pedestal as being pro-family and the purveyors of morality, if the means are not pure then the ends cannot be pure. God does not like ugly, even if it is done in his name.

Using evasive claims about "sincerely held religious beliefs" and horror stories of abnormal crossdressers is yet another hole in Barber's and Concerned Women for America's careful built wall of integrity.

They obviously did not learn anything during their unsuccessful fight to keep the House from passing hate crimes legislation. How long will they continue to dig their well of lies before they fall in?

Framing the argument

An important part of winning an argument is the ability to frame the argument. Sometimes speed is of the essence.

That is how the anti-gay industry has beaten us time and time again.

With that in mind, I turn to an old canard; Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth (in name only):

Fast on the heels of the “Hate Crimes” bill (H.R. 1597, recently passed by the House) is the second of two top homosexual activist priorities: ENDA, the “Employment Nondiscrimination Act,” H.R. 2015, recently introduced by homosexual Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). Please read at the bottom of this story the homosexual newspaper Washington Blade’s analysis of the ”transgender” provision of this radical bill.

. . .Several giant corporations have already settled on pro-”transgender” bathroom and dress policies — probably the same companies who would subject their employees to biased, pro-homosexual “diversity” lectures – but can you imagine inflicting these “transgender” regulations on small and mid-level companies through federal law via ENDA?

This is one of the most perverse applications of “civil rights” to date – and it’s headed straight for your business if you have 15 or more employees. What female employee wants to share the company restroom with a big-boned man claiming to be “transitioning” to “womanhood”? Will companies have to build “transgender male” and “transgender female” restrooms (or “Designated GLBT Restrooms”) to accommodate the various “orientations” and avoid government prosecution?

So according to Peter, lgbts should not have protection from job discrimination because a "big-boned" man who is transitioning into a woman would have to share a bathroom with other women.

Or as his colleague Matt Barber said:

Imagine, if you will, a 280 lb linebacker who likes to wear a dress and high heels and lipstick, you know comes to church wanting a job at the front desk as a receptionist and they turn him away because they don’t feel that that represents their values or the image that they’re trying to hold at that church, under ENDA they could be held accountable for discrimination against that individual.

Comments like these are not funny, especially if they are coming in a huge amount by constituents to their area Congressmen as reasons why the said Congressman should vote against pro-gay laws.

Before our eyes, the anti-gay industry is forging an ugly argument against ENDA. No matter how untrue it is, I am willing to bet that by this time Monday, almost every so-called pro-family web page, blog, etc. will be repeating the transsexual fear stories.

And these people will encourage others to spread these lies around, as well as call their Congressmen repeating these lies.

ENDA is not about transsexual men using the ladies room. For a Christian to say this knowing fully well that he or she is appealing to fear and ignorance is a sin. ENDA is about ensuring that lgbts are able to enjoy the protections and freedoms that this country affords every citizen in pursuit of doing their jobs.

Other distortions the anti-gay industry repeat are:
.
ENDA will cause gay quotas

The boy scouts and religious groups will be forced to hire gays and lesbians

We need to get on the ball and stop these lies before they start. These are the provisions of ENDA:

This Act shall not apply to any of the employment practices of a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society which has as its primary purpose religious ritual or worship or the teaching or spreading of religious doctrine or belief.

this Act shall not apply with respect to the employment of individuals whose primary duties consist of teaching or spreading religious doctrine or belief, religious governance, supervision of a religious order, supervision of persons teaching or spreading religious doctrine or belief, or supervision or participation in religious ritual or worship.

Under this Act, a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society may require that applicants for, and employees in, similar positions conform to those religious tenets that such corporation, association, institution, or society declares significant.

In this Act, the term `employment' does not apply to the relationship between the United States and members of the Armed Forces.

This title does not repeal or modify any Federal, State, territorial, or local law creating a special right or preference concerning employment for a veteran.

And just who would be prosecuted in Janet Folger's version of a perfect world?

Janet Folger is going all out against the recent hate crimes legislation that passed through the House of Representatives. Even after losing that fight, she is bringing her hysteria to the Senate fight:

Janet Folger of the ministry Faith 2 Action says the hate crimes bill passed by the House is aimed at pastors or anyone else who has the "audacity" to disagree with the homosexual agenda. "Mike is standing at a football bar, or he's standing at a restaurant, watching a game," she posits; "Bruce comes out of the restroom, and he's touching up his makeup. He's a cross-dresser with red-nail polish and a five o'clock shadow. He comes out and hits on Mike. Maybe he puts his arm around him or maybe he brushes or puts his hand through his hair."

The average man would "maybe want to push off such unwelcome advances," Folger observes. However, she warns, "That, if you touch him, is a hate crime.

I think it's safe to assume that girlfriend has lost her damned mind.

But let's look at Ms. Folger for a second. She is so intent on stopping what she sees as Christian persecution, that I have to wonder just how she feels about other forms of persecution under the law.

In 1998, Folger voiced her opinion on the now defunct sodomy laws:

Forrest Sawyer, substituting as host of ABC's Nightline on July 30, moderated a debate between Andrew Sullivan, editor the New Republic and Center for Reclaiming America Director Janet Folger, who engineered the ad campaign. Sullivan asked repeatedly whether Folger supports laws allowing imprisonment for having sex with someone of the same gender. After Folger gave several non-responsive answers, Sawyer pressed, "Ms. Folger, forgive me. He is asking the direct question, 'Do you support laws that advocate the imprisonment of people who engage in homosexual behavior?'" Folger answered, "I guess if you're looking at sodomy laws, there are sodomy laws on the books that I very much support."

In other words, while Folger now feels that hate crimes legislation will lead to Christians being unfairly jailed for voicing their opinions, she obviously felt that it was not a problem for gays and lesbians to be jailed for private sexual behavior that heterosexuals also partake of.

Now there are those who would correctly say that her comments about sodomy laws were over 10 years ago and that her opinion could have changed.

As far as I know, Folger has not said whether or not she feels the same way.

I personally think that someone should ask her.

More lies about ENDA courtesy of Janet Folger

Janet Folger must be trying to win a special award for distortions. Case in point, her take on the recent controversy that Republican presidential candidate Tommy Thompson caused during a recent debate:

Then Thompson had a right answer for the loaded question about the freedom of conscience – at first. Asked if a private employer should be able to fire a homosexual because of their homosexual behavior, Thompson said yes; however, the next day on CNN, he retracted it . . .

Folger distorted the question given to Thompson. This is what was actually said:

Thompson was asked by the moderator: “If a private employer finds homosexuality immoral, should he be allowed to fire a gay worker?”

Therein lies the distortion. No one asked Thompson about behavior. He was asked about orientation.

Janet Folger is lying again. It is starting to become a common occurrence for her.

She is slyly inferring that ENDA will deal with sexual behavior rather than sexual orientation. The two are not the same:

I am gay - that is a sexual orientation.

I am typing this blog - I am engaging in any type of sexual behavior, be it gay or straight.

Phrasing the discussion over ENDA as one of sexual behavior rather than orientation seems to be the game plan the anti-gay industry wants to follow. It is an old one for them.

The following transcript of Robert Knight (formerly of Concerned Women for America) sparring with commentator Bill O’Reilly on The O’Reilly Factor is an example of this. This transcript is included in my upcoming book:

O’REILLY: Let me stop you there. Hold it. If a guy’s in a workplace [and] he gets fired because the boss doesn’t like gays, you think that should be legally allowed?

KNIGHT: I don’t think that’s what’s happening in the workplace. People are more likely to be hired [because they’re gay].

O’REILLY: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. I just asked you a very direct question.

KNIGHT: Do you have any evidence of [people who were fi red for being homosexual]?

O’REILLY: I don’t have any evidence. It’s a hypothetical. If a boss fires somebody because [he’s] gay, should that be allowed?

KNIGHT: Well it depends on what brought that to his attention. If he brought gay pornography into the office.

Knight's words (and Folger's for that matter) show the psychological game the anti-gay industry tries to play on us when it comes to our jobs.

They seem to be saying "gays wouldn't have a problem with being fired for their orientation if they would just shut up about it."

It's a cruel point of view that not only exploits stereotypes but also tells lgbts to put themselves on a different standard than straight employees. While heterosexuals freely talk about their lives and the progression of their families, we are supposed to shut up and isolate ourselves in a bubble.

Two years ago at my job, my boyfriend sent me a dozen roses to commemorate Valentine's Day. When my co-workers asked about them, was I supposed to lie? Too bad because I didn't. If they didn't want to know who sent me the roses, they should have not asked.

A young lady who worked in my building received roses from her boyfriend. She was upfront as to who sent them to her. She didn't have to lie. Why should I?

Across America, many gay couples are raising children. Why shouldn't they be able to put pictures of families on their desks? And even if they don't have children, why shouldn't gay couples be able to put pictures of their significant other on their desks? Heterosexuals have that right and so should we.

See these are the things we are speaking of when we express the need for ENDA, not lies like the following voiced by Concerned Women for America member Matt Barber:

Imagine, if you will, a 280 lb linebacker who likes to wear a dress and high heels and lipstick, you know comes to church wanting a job at the front desk as a receptionist and they turn him away because they don’t feel that that represents their values or the image that they’re trying to hold at that church, under ENDA they could be held accountable for discrimination against that individual

It is one thing for the anti-gay industry to believe that gays have no concept of family or monogamy but it is an entirely different thing for them to try to force that image on us.

We should reject that mental prison every chance we get.

The Emperor Continues to Wear No Clothes

Fresh from last week's battle over hate crimes legislation, the anti-gay industry continues to lie about the bill. Apparently they are determined to claim that the bill will try to hinder Christians from preaching against homosexuality no matter how many times their lies have been refuted.

Chief among them is African-American minister Harry Jackson. Jackson, if you remember from last week, led a group of black ministers in a press conference opposing the bill.

What it amounted to is a group of black folks willing to exploit their status as past victims of discrimination for some face time.

Today, a column by Jackson appeared in the Christian Post. It's the usual amount of claptrap and lies he pushed last week.

However, in the midst of his nonsense, he said something that makes sense of a surreal level:

A growing number of black church goers are aghast that their most powerful institution is being undermined by a handful of autonomous, self-appointed leaders. The black church is the most legitimate grass roots movement in our community. Unfortunately, its voice has not been heard in this debate.

Mr. Jackson, if the black church's voice is not heard in this debate it is only because it has allowed itself to be silent. Too many black churches focus on tithing and minsterial hooping disguised as praise.

That's right. I said it. Too many black churches have members content on dancing in the aisles and shouting about how much they are "praising God" while the problems affecting our community continue unabated.

Fresh from praising and paying their ten percent, some of church members go home and cheat on their husbands, beat their wives, and take drugs.

While other members play an emotional game with themselves because they have been programmed not to embrace their God given gay or lesbian orientation.

Then come next Sunday, they get to do it over again.

Meanwhile, black ministers like yourself get fat on faith based initiatives and move to the front of the arena hogging up media attention.

If the black church is aghast, as you put it, by autonomous self-appointed leaders, then it should take more of an effort to push those self-appointed leaders like yourself aside and start focusing on the issues that affect our community.

Heads up on ENDA

Don't forget to contact your U.S. Senator about hate crimes legislation. The battle is not over yet.

Meanwhile, the anti-gay industry is gearing up to fight ENDA.

I am personally looking forward to this fight more than that of hate crimes legislation.

In fighting hate crimes legislation, the anti-gay industry had somewhat of a ground to stand on, albeit shaky ground.

With ENDA, they don't.

This is what they are claiming about ENDA:

ENDA loosely defines "sexual orientation" as "homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality," and also includes "gender identity," defined as "the gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth."

For those who don't recognize this argument, it is a continuation of the ones they used against hate crimes legislation.

They seem to have replaced the hate crimes legislation will allow these nasty things to be protected line of argument to the ENDA will allow these nasty things to be protected line of argument.

Talk about lack of originality but fear tactics rarely do involve originality.

I am surprised they are not using this argument seen here.

As you can see, this argument has holes so big you can ride a truck through them, including the distortion of Robert Spitzer's study on sexual orienation (why do they always use that one.)

I wonder if Concerned Women for America and the rest of the anti-gay industry will focus on the scale down argument or use that larger one. Either way, it wouldn't surprise me.

Flyer Number 2 - The anti-gay industry and Paul Cameron

Enough said

My flyers - a work in progress

While posting on the hate crimes legislation vote, I have also been working very hard to complete the editing of my book.

And I have been working on advertising flyers.

The flyer to the left is the first of four. It is a work in progress that you can click on to see a larger version of. Tell me what you think.

Also, don't leave without reading my take on today's hate crimes legislation vote if you haven't already.

Relatively pleased about today's vote

By a vote of 237-180, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the bill adding lgbts to categories of protected classes under national hate crimes legislation.

President Bush has threatened to veto this bill.

I am very happy about the first situation and not at all displeased (nor rather shocked) by the second situation.

Let's be real: The only reason why so many opposed this legislation was because lgbts were included. That is the single reason for all of the controversy, opposition, and lies.

The anti-gay industry believes that anything that positvely affects gays and lesbians is something they should oppose, whether it be hate crimes legislation or gay/straight clubs in high schools.

Unfortunately there is a large group of people willing to blindly believe their accusations or pass along their lies.

This is witnessed through the flurry of last minute calls to legislative offices by people claiming that this legislation will curtail free speech, even though this notion was not true.

And let's not forget our "commander guy-in chief."

George Bush is a piss poor president who got us into a bad situation in Iraq. His approval rating is low and his administration is rife with scandal from the Attorney General to his adviser Karl Rove.

He has no choice in the matter but to act in a way that will appeal to his base.

But please note that in his statement threatening to veto the legislation, he did not mention any accusation regarding free speech, jailing pastors, weird sexual hang-ups; several things that the anti-gay industry trumpeted as an excuse to oppose hate crimes legislation.

Nor did their lies make any dent with the Congressional support that the legislation had, which means that all James Dobson, Lou Sheldon, Andrea Lafferty and company succeed in doing was to demonstrate how much they are willing to lie.

To paraphrase a character in the movie Anne of A Thousand Days, just how long can they use the "nasty, filthy, diseased homosexual" excuse before it comes a habit for them?

And seeing that their lies and hysterical attempts to stop hate crimes legislation played out to a larger audience this time, how long will it be before Americans see them as the hysterical fear mongerers that they are?

So I look at what happened today as a pivotal victory in a huge war and I would ask that those wanting lgbt equality not to get upset or frustrated at the threat of a Bush veto.

I read various anti-gay industry press releases congratulating and thanking Bush on his threat to veto the hate crimes bill. I think they are too quickly celebrating.

If Bush does veto this bill, they have won a Pyrrhic victory, that is if they want to call it a victory at all.

I say we work to give them more of these "victories."

Let's not stop pushing for what is ours.

On to the Senate hate crimes legislation and then to ENDA!

Hate Crimes Legislation Distortion Awards

Tomorrow will be a historic vote in the House of Representatives about adding lgbts to hate crimes legislation.

I thought that I would take time out to honor those who went far and beyond the call of duty to distort the law. I want to do this today because I may not be in a celebratory mood tomorrow.

How the anti-gay industry behaved in their zeal to defeat hate crimes legislation is not new on their part. During the 1993 hearings on gays in the military, they stooped to scaring people with Paul Cameronesque lies about gay and lesbian sexual habits.

This time, however, things were different.

Because of blogs, every lie they told was dissected and refuted. So lgbts can take comfort in the fact, regardless of how tomorrow's vote may turn out, that more Americans have seen the anti-gay industry for what they truly are and not the upstanding Christians they have claimed to be.

Now, onto the awards:

Except for in a few cases, I have already documented these lies in past blog postings so I don't feel the need to reference all of them. However, if anyone wants me to link any information I have to its original source, just ask.

Best exploitation of a religious image - The Traditional Values Coalition for their flyer featuring an image of Jesus. According to this flyer, Jesus would be prosecuted for "hate crimes" if lgbts are added to the categories protected under the legislation. The organization claimed this even though the legislation explicitly speaks against violent actions, not speech and Jesus never said a word about homosexuality.

Best lie told about hate crimes legislation - The Tradtional Values Coalition for their distortion of Congressman Louis Gohmert's question during the House Judicial Hearing last week.

As I chronicled in yesterday's post, Lou Sheldon sent out an action alert claiming that the legislation could cause pastors to get arrested if the said pastor preached against homosexuality and a member of his congregation went out and committed a crime against an lgbt.

This is what Sheldon said in his action alert:

Congressman (Louis) Gohmert asked, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”

This is the actual quote that Sheldon distorted:

". . .if a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation goes out and does an act of violence, and that person says that that minister counseled or induced him through the sermon to commit that act, are you saying under your amendment that in no way could that ever be introduced against the minister"

Special sell-out award - Ministers Harold Jackson and the other black ministers who held a press conference opposing the legislation. They claimed that the legislation would lead to pastors not being able to preach against homosexuality.

This is a lie. The legislation covers violent action, not speech.

Let me be clear on the fact that Jackson and company did not get this award because they oppose hate crimes legislation. They were chosen because they used the same fear tactics that white racists used to deny African-Americans their rights under law. Just like white racists made wild claims against integration, Jackson and company made wild claims against the hate crimes legislation. What's more, my cynicism tells me that Jackson and company were fully aware that what they were saying were lies:

White racists - we can't integrate because it will lead to mixing of the races. Black men will have sex with white women and that will lead to mongrelization. Both races will suffer.

Harold Jackson and the black ministers - We can't add lgbts to hate crimes legislation because it will lead to pastors not being able to preach against homosexuality.

If there is any difference in these claims, someone please let me know.

Best exploitation of current events/i.e. tragedies to stop hate crimes legislation
- Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and Matt Barber of the Concerned Women for America. Both of these folks tried to link the tragedy at Virginia Tech to their view of hate crimes legislation.

Tony Perkins - "Under this legislation, the crimes at Virginia Tech, which some are calling one of the deadliest rampages in U.S. history, would not be punishable to the level of these so-called "hate crimes." If the House approves H.R. 1592 and the Senate follows, a homosexual would have more federal protection under the law than the 32 victims of last week's massacre."

Matt Barber - "The FBI's latest statistics show that there were zero 'hate crimes' murders committed against homosexuals or those perceived to be homosexual in 2005; yet we already know of thirty-two so-called 'hate crimes' murders committed against perceived 'rich kids' in a single day. But under H.R. 1592, those 'rich kids' would shamefully be denied the same protections and justice as homosexuals. The whole 'hate crimes' concept really places logic and reason on its head"

Best distortion of the name of the hate crimes legislation- Tie - The Traditional Values Coalition - Cross Dressing Bill or Drag Queen Bill

Janet Folger and Faith2Action - Jail Grandma Bill

The Sexy Award - the attempt by the American Family Association to link hate crimes legislation to all sorts of freaky sexy behavior. It was a matter of time before someone got nasty:

Donald E. WildmonFounder and Chairman

May 1, 2007

Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire email list of family and friends.

A message from Chuck Colson

Dear XXX,

Please take the time to read the enclosed article by Chuck Colson. Click here.

This law does not define "sexual orientation," leaving open the definition of the term. To see all the behaviors covered by the term "sexual orientation," please click here. Warning! This listing is offensive.

There is still time to make your voice heard. Please call your representative in Washington today. The vote is scheduled for this Thursday. Tell him or her that you strongly oppose the Hate Crimes Act. Mr. Colson rightly refers to it as the Thought Control bill.

You can reach your representative at 202-224-3121. Please ask your friends to call also.
Thank you for caring enough to get involved.

Sincerely,
Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and ChairmanAmerican Family Association

Y'all can click if you want to but I wouldn't recommend it. Where in the hell did they find this stuff?

Donald Wildmon, Chuck Colson - you both need Jesus!

The obedient sheep award - To all of the so-called "pro-family" web pages and blogs who repeated anti-gay industry lies (especially Sheldon's distortion of the Congressman's quote) verbatim without reading the legislation in question.

The "you are a hypocrite and you know it but most of all, God knows it" award - To all of the web pages and blogs who repeated anti-gay industry lies about hate crimes legislation even after reading the actual legislation. You know who you are and most of all, God knows it.

For those of you who want success tomorrow in getting hate crimes legislation passed, don't forget to contact your legislators and inform them that people calling in against the legislation are being misled. And tell them to vote for the legislation because it the only fair thing to do:

The Hate Crimes Prevention Act

Hate is neither a Democratic nor an American Value. Hate crimes involve the purposeful selection of victims for violence and intimidation based on bias against their perceived attributes. These crimes are distinguished from, and go far beyond, mere expression of belief. They materially and unacceptably interfere with the full participation of all Americans in the fundamental liberties enjoyed in our democratic society.

As Americans, we must take a strong stand against violence committed against our neighbors for simply being themselves. The purpose of our government, first and foremost, is to protect all of our citizens - whether they are black, disabled, Christian or gay. While a random act of violence against any individual is always a tragic event, violent crimes based on prejudice have a much stronger impact because the motive behind the crime is to terrorize an entire community. These hate crimes chip away at the very foundations of our democracy - that all citizens are created equal and are afforded the same freedoms and protections. House Passage of HR 1592 will send the powerful message that the Democratic Party stands for tolerance and inclusion, and is opposed to prejudice in all its forms.

Why the Law Is Needed. There's a reason why the bill has been supported by 31 state Attorneys General and the leading law enforcement organizations - because, despite progress toward equality in almost all segments of our society - hate crimes continue to spread fear and violence among entire communities of Americans and law enforcement lack the tools and resources to prevent and prosecute them. In 2003, the FBI announced that there were more than 9,000 reported hate violence victims in the United States - almost 25 victims a day, or approximately one hate crime every hour. Since 1991, the FBI has received reports of more than 113,000 hate crimes.


What the Law Will Do

Protects First Amendment Rights. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act protects the First Amendment rights of the accused by prohibiting the introduction of evidence of association or expression to prove that a crime has been committed, unless it specifically relates to the offense. The legislation does not punish, nor prohibit in any way, name-calling, verbal abuse or expressions of hatred toward any group, even if such statements amount to hate speech. It covers only violent criminal actions. During proceedings on the bill, the Judiciary Committee explicitly noted that nothing in this legislation would prohibit the lawful expression of ones deeply held religious beliefs. To further ensure that there was no ambiguity on this point, an additional amendment offered by Rep. Davis, was adopted by voice vote at markup explicitly stating that conduct protected under the 1st Amendment free expression and free exercise clauses was not subject to prosecution.
Expands Protected Crimes. It is time to bring hate crimes law into the 21st century. The current federal law, enacted nearly 40 years ago, limits federal jurisdiction over hate crimes to incidents directed against individuals on the basis of race, religion, color or national origin - but only when the victim is targeted because he/she is engaged in a federally protected activities, such as voting. The legislation broadens this provision to cover all violent crimes motivated by race, color, religion, or national origin when the defendant causes bodily injury, or attempts to cause bodily injury through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive device.

Extends Existing Protections to More Americans. HR 1592 expands current law to prohibit the same conduct, if such conduct were motivated on the basis of the victim's gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability under a wider range of federal jurisdictional circumstances than federally protected activities. The federal government - through decades of civil rights and criminal law-has a history of combating crimes based on prejudice. HR 1592 merely expands the current law to include groups that have historically been affected by violence. This legislation sends a strong and clear message that hate crimes will not be tolerated and brings more uniformity and fairness to existing law.

Assists Local Law Enforcement. State and local authorities currently prosecute the overwhelming majority of hate crimes and will continue to do so under this legislation. The special attention that these crimes require can stretch local law enforcement officials beyond their capacity. Thus, the major focus of the bill is allowing the Federal government to provide crucial federal resources to state and local agencies to equip local officers with the tools they need to prosecute hate crimes. The legislation also authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to state and local law enforcement agencies that have incurred extraordinary expenses associated with the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes.

Requirements for Federal Prosecution. The bill ensures that the Federal prosecution of hate crimes is limited to cases that implicate the greatest Federal interest and present the greatest need for Federal intervention. Only in specific, limited instances will the Federal government prosecute crimes under this Act. Furthermore, the bill requires certification, by the Attorney General or other specified high-ranking Department of Justice official, prior to prosecution. The certifying individual must have ''reasonable cause to believe that the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person was a motivating factor underlying the alleged conduct of the defendant.'' The certifying individual must also have consulted with State or local law enforcement officials regarding the prosecution and determined that one of the following situations is present:
(1) the state does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to exercise jurisdiction;
(2) the state has requested that the Justice Department assume jurisdiction;
(3) the state does not object to the Justice Department assuming jurisdiction; or
(4) the state has completed prosecution and the Justice Department wants to initiate a
Broadens the Collection of Important Statistics. HR 1592 would amend the HCSA to require that the FBI collect statistics on gender and gender identity-related bias crimes, as well as juvenile victims and offenders. Under current law, such statistics are collected on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and disability.


Supporters of the bill

The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act has broad public and bipartisan support. The Act was introduced on March 20, 2007, by Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Mark Steven Kirk (R-IL), Barney Frank (D-MA), Christopher Shays (R-CN), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), and Mary Bono (R-CA), with 137 cosponsors. Earlier versions of the bill have passed both houses of Congress in recent years, only to fall victim to partisan politics.

In fact, the Bill is supported by thirty one state Attorneys General and over 280 national law enforcement, professional, education, civil rights, religious, and civic organizations. Such notable associations and individuals who support the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act include: National Sheriffs' Association; International Association of Chiefs of Police; National District Attorneys Association (NDAA); Presbyterian Church; Episcopal Church; Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR); National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP); National Council of La Raza (NCLR); Human Rights Campaign (HRC); Parent's Network on Disabilities.

The Act also receives strong support by the majority of Americans. According to a new poll conducted by Peter Hart Research Associates, three in four (or 73 percent) of voters favor strengthening hate crimes laws to include sexual orientation and gender identity and to give local law enforcement the tools they need to prevent and prosecute these violent acts based on bigotry.


Examples of Crimes Not Covered by Current Law

Targeted for disability, Linden, TX
Billy Ray Johnson suffered severe permanent brain damage after an attack where he was left unconscious in a trash dump. Four white men lured Billy Ray, a mentally challenged African-American man, to a cow pasture where they harassed him with racial insults and beat him unconscious. The four men escaped any felony criminal charges. Billy Ray Johnson suffered serious brain injuries from which he will never fully recover. A Texas jury recently awarded Billy Ray $9 million in civil damages to cover his future medical needs. (April 21, 2007, Chicago Tribune)

Targeted for gender identity, Twin Falls, NE
Brandon Teena, 21, was raped and later killed by two friends after they discovered he was biologically female. After the rape and assault, Teena reported the crime to the police, but they called Teena "it" and did not allow his deputies to arrest the two men responsible. Five days later, on Christmas Day 1993, the two men found Teena and shot and stabbed him to death. The movie "Boys Don't Cry" was based on Teena's story.

Targeted for sexual orientation , Austin, TX
Four men attacked a gay man heading home from a gay bar. The attackers forced him to sodomize himself with a sex toy at knife and sword point while they recited biblical passages condemning such acts. Then, the attackers beat and robbed him. (Daily Texan via University Wire, August 4, 2005)

The Traditional Values Coalition and the distorted quote

I hear that a lot of legislators are getting phone calls about the hate crimes legislation vote from fearful constituents. Apparently these folks are buying into the lie that their freedom of speech will be at risk if this law passes.

And I think that I can pinpoint why.

Due to a distortion of a quote, some people believe that pastors will be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality

My online friend Jeremy at www.goodasyou.org pointed out what is going on. Allow me to simplify the situation.

Lou Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition sent out an action alert to the members of his group after last week's House Judicial Committee meeting about the legislation. According to him:

Congressman (Louis) Gohmert asked, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”

Gohmert was attempting to clarify and emphasize that the legislation would have an effect on the constitutional right to religious freedom and thus the Pence amendment was needed to protect religious speech.

And finally Democrat Congressman Artur Davis from Alabama spoke up and said, “Yes.”

Friends, that is what we have been warning you about and our legal advice was correct. It is evident what HR 1592 is about. It is not about homosexuals and cross dressers suffering with no food, shelter or jobs, it is about preventing Bible-believing people and pastors from speaking the truth.

And that is the lie that is scaring so many people.

This is Congressman Gohmert's actual quote with a bold emphasis on the portion Sheldon's action alert omitted:

if a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation goes out and does an act of violence, and that person says that that minister counseled or induced him through the sermon to commit that act, are you saying under your amendment that in no way could that ever be introduced against the minister?

Sheldon and TVC distorted Congressman Gohmert's quote to fit their agenda.

Nothing is saying that a minister would be arrested or prosecuted for speaking out against homosexuality. Of course if someone commits a murder and claims that someone else (be it a minister or not) told him to do it, that charge must be investigated.

And it does not mean that the minister in question would be arrested.

From what I understand, this action alert went out to countless blogs and so-called "pro-family" sites, leading to a bunch of phone calls to legislators.

I have already talked to the office of my legislator clarifying the matter and I suggest that everyone reading this do the same.

It is amazing what lies TVC will stoop to in order to further their agenda.

Lastly, I would like to point out that all I am doing is breaking the situation down for clarification. It was the web page www.goodasyou.org that did the research and digging to find out what the Traditional Values Coalition did.

Harold Jackson, God does not like ugly

There are so many things to write about today but I want to focus on something that is bothering me:

A coalition of conservative African American pastors is lobbying Congress to vote against a bill that would extend federal hate-crimes laws to cover gays, saying they fear it would prevent them from preaching against homosexuality.

One the ringleaders of this madness is Pastor Harold Jackson. In two consecutive columns, he has attacked adding lgbts to hate crimes legislation using the same mantra: that it would lead to pastors being persecuted.

Today was his latest effort:

We further challenge this proposed legislation on the basis that it does not assure our free speech rights to speak out against homosexuality as a sin. … the bill could curtail our speech.

I fear for my black community, particularly the church community. The desire for influence, faith-based money, and prosperity has made our pastors into agreeable puppets of the anti-gay industry.

When they were simply opposing same sex marriage, these folks could have gotten away with their antics. Their claim of not supporting same-sex marriage on a religious level was credible.

But now the stakes are higher.

They can’t say that they oppose hate crimes legislation for lgbts because of their religious beliefs. So they are repeating the lies manufactured by the anti-gay industry: that gays want to persecute Christians for speech.

I am very cynical person in matters such as these.

Jackson and the rest of these pastors have to know that they are lying.

They have to know that adding lgbts to national hate crimes legislation will not curtail their freedom of speech.

They have to know that gays and lesbians aren’t going to come storming in the church arresting pastors for speaking against homosexuality.

What’s next for them? Are they going to hold a press conference claiming that they will be persecuted if ENDA is passed?

This is not a case of a group of people trying to preserve Christian values.

It is the birth of a new monster: an industry of black pastors who can and will be called upon to oppose pro-gay laws while, at the same time, exploiting their history as victims of oppression.

Jackson and the rest of these pastors have allowed themselves to be the mouthpieces of a tissue of lies and why?

Because they think that stopping any form of gay or lesbian visibility is more important than their personal integrity?

They obviously feel that God will give them a pass because they are trying to speak in his name, even though they are using the tactics of the devil.

Meanwhile, they are ignoring the lgbts in their own community who are suffering from HIV, isolation, and a lack of pride? These people are the ones they should be using their influence to help.

LBGTs of color often times don’t want approval per se, but a dialogue. And we aren’t able to get it because pastors such as Jackson are too busy getting face time in front of television cameras repeating soundbites that are spoon fed to them by people like Lou Sheldon.

Keep it up guys. God does not like ugly, even if it is done in His name.

And He will make His presence known very soon.

Meanwhile, I would like to know something.

Who else are you going to sell out?

Exodus International repudiates Paul Cameron, but I am not satisfied

This article has been removed due to the inaccuracies surrounding the research of Paul Cameron.

This statement from the web page of Exodus International was the result of intense work of the web page www.exgaywatch.com

The web masters of the site noticed that Exodus International was using Cameron's work, so they made it known.

Exodus International removed the information and the head of the group, Alan Chambers, also said:

I appreciate EGW’s tremendous research skills. I saw your post on Exodus using Paul Cameron’s research and was embarrassed. We do not support the work of Paul Cameron nor desire to use flawed research. A member of my staff will remove these articles today and post a retraction. In the coming months we will be doing a survey of the content on our site to determine what if there are other articles or links that need to be removed.

Forgive me for being cynical, but I am not sold.

I seem to recall that in 2005, the Traditional Values Coalition told the Boston Globe in the article Beliefs Drive Research Agenda of New Think Tanks that it removed Cameron's work from its web page.

However, its head, Lou Sheldon, continues to sell his book The Agenda, which freely cites Cameron by name.

I suggest that Alan Chambers and Exodus International lead a call for all religious right organizations that use Cameron's data to publicly apologize and remove his work from their sites:

I further suggest he start first with Peter LaBarbera and Americans for Truth (in name only).

Or how about the Rev. Rod Parsley who, in 2005, said the following:

“Gay sex is a veritable breeding ground for disease. Only one percent of the homosexual population in America will die of old age. The average life expectancy for a homosexual in the United States discounting AIDS is forty-two years of age . . . A lesbian can only expect to live to be forty-fi ve years of age.”—Perry schmoozes with gay bashers, Austin Chronicle, June 10, 2005

Or how about the American Family Association, which continues to cite Cameron's work on its web page and via its news service, Agape Press (now One News Now) consistently cited Cameron as a "family expert."

Or how about Timothy Dailey and the Family Research Council, who cited Cameron's work in several studies which remain on the group's web page.

Or how about Robert Knight who, when he was with the Concerned Women for America, cited Cameron's work in front of Congress and in columns that still appear on the CWA web page.

It was Knight who, in 2004, personally told me "Yes we have used his work. So what?"

In using Paul Cameron's work, Exodus International helped to create a monster; a cottage industry of groups and spokespersons who used his studies to stroke the egos and prejudices of people against the gay and lesbian community and hinder the passage of pro-gay laws.

Exodus International owes the gay and lesbian community big time. And if it is serious about its repudiation, then Exodus International should take more of a key role in killing the monster it helped to create.

The momentum must be kept up!

I am busy trying to finish the second round of corrections of my book galleys. Almost done!

I have also been working on posters and flyers for my book. I figure if the Traditional Values Coalition can work on flyers, so can I. Only thing is that my flyers will be truthful

Speaking of TVC and other members of the anti-gay industry, I cannot emphasize enough how much we need to keep up the momentum for hate crimes legislation and other pro-gay laws.

Go here to show your support.

Today, TVC sent out a hysterically paranoid press release about the voting to send the hate crimes bill to the entire House. Apparently according to TVC, the bill will lead to the following:

Silence the Bible-believing Churches, Pastors and Christians

Criminalize so-called “hate speech,” – which is any speech that is critical of homosexuality or cross-dressing behaviors. The suppression of free speech will be justified by the claim that such speech “incites” individuals to commit violence against homosexuals, cross-dressers etc. Any remarks about homosexuality, such as reading Bible passages, preaching on these passages, telling a person they can come out of the homosexual lifestyle, etc. will be deemed critical remarks and will be ruled to be outside the bounds of First Amendment protections for pastors, business owners and individuals.

Elevate homosexuality and gender confused individuals such as drag queens, cross-dressers, she-males, etc. to the status of federally-protected minorities. These behaviors will be considered equal to race under the federal law.

Yeah, I know. You have heard it all before and I have talked about it before. This is true, but I am firm believer in consistency of momentum.

It's like a boxing match. When a boxer has his opponent on the ropes, does he slack up or continue to punch until the opponent falls down? He continues to punch until the referee comes in and stops the fight.

The referee hasn't come in to stop our fight just yet.

And also, I want something more to come from this than just a victory.

It would be excellent if this piece of legislation passed through Congress and President Bush signed it into law.

But I want something to be catalogued in a historical perspective. In the case of hate crimes legislation, the anti-gay industry laid themselves bare, abandoning their slick posturing for unabashed lies. Without any degree of shame, they went public with lies so bad that anyone with a small degree of sense can expose them.

I say we encourage this. When future generations look at how hate crimes legislation was played, they will see just how these groups lied in the name of God.

To these folks, the anti-gay industry will be seen as no different than those who massacred the Hugenots or the architects of the Spanish Inquisition.

To these folks, the anti-gay industry will not be seen as saviours of civilization but just another bunch of zealots who, while not stooping to violent means, manipulated and perverted the image of God for their own personal prejudices and desires.

I don't know about any of you but that gives me a taste of sweet satisfaction.

When black pastors attack gay folks

The Southern Poverty Law Center have just come out with an excellent expose on black ministers who have taken it upon themselves to make lgbts scapegoats for the ills in the African-American community:

Some black ministers have been attracted to the white-dominated religious anti-gay movement by the money and power of white Christian leaders, not to mention "faith-based" grants under the Bush Administration. But it's also obvious that a segment of the black community in America has long had its own negative attitudes toward gays and lesbians. "I'm sure [black ministers] are being co-opted, but they don't need a great deal of co-optation," is how the Rev. Peter Gomes, chaplain of Harvard University, put it to the Village Voice in 2004.

and farther down:

Fanning the Flames
White leaders of the Christian Right have long sought to recruit blacks into their anti-gay crusade. Conservative Christian organizations with multimillion-dollar budgets have funneled money to black anti-gay churches through programs such as the Christian Coalition's ill-fated "Samaritan Project," which aimed to raise millions of dollars for black churches that "promote family values." (The Samaritan Project disintegrated after black employees sued the Christian Coalition in 2001 for allegedly forcing black workers to enter through the back door and take their breaks in segregated rooms. The coalition settled the case out of court.)

The expose is an excellent piece of work. And I would recommend it to be read by everyone.

It just goes to prove that ignorance, greed, and the need to blame is unfortunately universal.

Sweet Trifecta

We are on the verge of some good stuff here in the lgbt community. Three pieces of legislation that will positively affect the lgbt community has a good chance of passing in Congress.

For the benefit of those who don't know, the pieces of legislation are:

Repealing of the ban on gays in the military,

Adding lgbts to hate crimes laws,

Passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, thereby keeping lgbts from being fired solely because of their orientation.

These pieces of legislation have an excellent chance of passing through Congress. Now whether or not our esteemed (and I say that as I roll my eyes) President Bush will sign them into law is another story entirely.

But I am being optimistic.

I like the fact that national gay rights organizations seem to be on the ball in defining the issue. And I especially like the fact that there are many bloggers on the internet (myself included) who are exposing how the anti-gay industry will try to distort the issue.

In 1993 when President Bill Clinton tried to over turn the ban on gays in the military, the anti-gay industry shot out propaganda like mad, freely citing Paul Cameron statistics and horror stories of gay men and fisting.

I want to see them try it now. I have a feeling that unlike in 1993, the pro-gay forces (there is no shame in calling ourselves that) are ready for them.

Already the anti-gay industry have tried to frame the pieces of legislation as capitulations that would eventually cause Christians to be jailed for speaking out against homosexuality. There is no truth in this and they know it.

There is a certain shrillness and a bit of desperation in their tones. Desperation comes from knowing that you are losing. And when you get desperate, you get careless and trip up.

In the meantime, I encourage everyone reading my blog post to support HRC, Lambda Legal and all the groups attempting to pass these laws. I encourage you all to write your Congressmen giving your support for these laws. And above all, get others to do so also.

Lastly, educate yourselves as to what the anti-gay industry is claiming. And refute their lies every chance you get.

There wont be a post tomorrow - Gay black author Keith Boykin is coming to the University of South Carolina to speak at a forum. Naturally, I will be there so I won’t have time to post. But knowing my luck, something extremely juicy will happen tomorrow and I will have to post an entry. But barring that, I am writing in two entries:

Frustrating as hell

It amazes me how the anti-gay industry will repeat a lie over and over again, as if repetition is the same as truth.

Harold Jackson, another black pastor who sold his integrity for faith-based money, wrote a column for the conservative TownHall in which he repeats the lie about adding sexual orientation to the list of categories protected by hate crimes legislation:

In contrast, gays already are a formidable force in the legal arena and courts are often extremely deferential to their cases. Additional protection for gays is not necessary. This legislation will not just over-protect them, it will bring the threat of invasive, governmental interference with the doctrines and practice of the Church. We have faced the removal of crosses and commandments from every public facility; this same pressure could be felt within the four walls of the church.

Mr. Jackson, hate crimes legislation have nothing to do with speech!

What will it take for these folks to be called on their lies? You would be surprised to see just how many people will buy into the lie that gay people want to put a moratorium on the speech of pastors. No matter how many times the truth is pointed out, some people are determined not to listen.

But Jackson’s lying column is especially distasteful because he is an African-American like myself. And he is indicative as to how the powers-that-be simultaneously set the black and gay community against one another while denying us lgbts of color a public voice.

Let’s get to brass tacks about this thing.

Black America does not give a damn about lgbts of color. They just don’t care about us. People like Jackson get carte blanche while many black oriented tv shows, magazines, news programs or organizations go out of their way to either shut down lgbts of color or treat us like the dreaded "other."

It reminds me of an incident with a talk show in my city. Two years ago, an African-American talk show in my area, Awareness, featured a guest who made negative comments about the gay community.

To rectify the situation, the show featured a leader in the gay community on the next week’s show. The show made it a point not to get an lgbt of color. And when the person they interviewed tried to talk about a local lgbt of color group, he was gently shut down by host.

Some folks just don’t want us to exist.

I see stuff like this all of the time and it gets frustrating.

But the gay community is not necessarily blameless in this matter.

Don’t think so?

Then why is it so hard for some of them to realize that a white guy who puts on black face pretending to be a black woman on welfare is so offensive?


Tyler Chase Harper and the proliferation of ignorance

Chase Harper is the perfect anti-gay industry spokesperson. He is young, white, attractive, articulate, and sounds like he is from one of those stereotypically "good families."

But most of all, he sounds so devoutly Christian that it can make people overlook his willful ignorance.

In him, the anti-gay industry has found their new Anita Bryant: a pretty face, an articulate talker, a devout spirit, and an empty mind ready to be filled with lies.

Harper received notoriety due to his failed lawsuit against his high school. He sued because he got suspended for wearing anti-gay statements on a t-shirt.

He recently wrote a letter to Wheaton College claiming to tell the truth about homosexuality.

Part of Harper’s version of the truth is as follows:

Homosexuality is dangerous. People who are given over to a homosexual lifestyle are far more likely to experience disease, mental illness, drug abuse, depression, alcoholism, suicidal tendencies, and even a shortened life span.

I don’t have a problem with someone speaking of homosexuality as a sin. Proponents of the anti-gay industry will claim that they are unfairly called homophobic just for voicing their opposition to homosexuality.

However their recent exploits in defaming the gay community to defeat hate crimes legislation (i.e. their inference that gay people want to arrest pastors in the pulpit for condemning homosexuality) demonstrates that they have no problem condemning people rather than the orientation.

So calling many of them homophobic is not off the mark.

But back to little Chase. Don’t let his blond locks and wristful smile fool you.

This ain’t Little Lord Fauntelroy. I found this interesting codicil farther down in his letter:

One could make the claim that some of these symptoms are caused by the “homophobia” of others; however, studies conducted in communities where homosexuality is widely accepted have concluded that symptoms are only aggravated in such a setting.-The dangers of homosexuality are validated by a large amount of research pulled from various sources. I encourage you to search the matter out more deeply.

In other words, little Chase is admitting that he does not know what he is talking about when he claims that homosexuality is "dangerous."

And I am sure that he does not care.

Let’s look at some of his claims using excerpts from my book:

Harper said: Homosexuality is dangerous. People who are given over to a homosexual lifestyle are far more likely to experience disease, mental illness, drug abuse, depression, alcoholism, suicidal tendencies, and even a shortened life span.

The following are excerpts from my book that deal with some of Harpers' claims:

Depression - On July 14th, 1998, the Family Research Council and 14 other so-called “pro family” groups, including the Christian Coalition and Focus on the Family, ran a full-page ad in The Washington Post. The ad, talking about the “dangers of homosexuality” was the second of a three-part campaign.

Full-page ads also appeared in The New York Times and USA Today. Research by Dr. Robert Garofalo was footnoted in the July 14th ad as scientific evidence that homosexuality is a “dangerous lifestyle.”

But Dr. Garofalo soon blasted the groups for what he called a misuse of his work. The ads were inferring that gay teenagers engage in drug abuse and other bad behavior (i.e., suicide) because such things are indicative of homosexuality.

“It’s a complete misrepresentation of my work,” he told The Boston Globe. “It was taken completely out of context. It comes to a complete opposite conclusion of what the paper actually said.”

Garofalo contended that his research was saying that when gay teenagers abuse drugs or contemplate suicide, it is because of the unaccepting culture they face.

Shortened Lifespan - When the anti-gay industry trots this claim out, they either rely on the discredited work of our friend Paul Cameron or the distortion of a 1997 Oxford study. Cameron’s lies have been catalogued extensively, so let me add detail about the 1997 Oxford study:

In 2001, the original researchers of the study wrote a letter to the editor in the International Journal of Epidemiology. In this letter, they said that any use of their research to prove that gay men have a shorter life span is incorrect and improper.

They said they were speaking of a hypothetical outcome that would take place if there were not better practices regarding safe sex in that particular area. They also said that conditions have improved; therefore the outcome they predicted (i.e. gay men not reaching their sixty-fifth birthday) had been averted.

Alcoholism - The chief study that has been cited for this claim is one by Professor Joanne Hall from the University of Tennessee. Timothy Dailey of the Family Research Council has used her sudy on more than one occasion. However, this is what Professor Hall said about the use of her work:

There were 35 women in the study. ONLY 35. They do not REPRESENT a population. My point was to try to get a handle on what they were experiencing—to UNDERSTAND their patterns . . . The point is—I, nor the journal Nursing Research, did not ‘find’ that the rate of substance abuse was 3 times higher for lesbians, and indeed—now we know it really is not that high at all. I, and Nursing Research, am not providing an epidemiological, quantitative statistic representing lesbians on the whole in terms of their drug use, or ability to parent a child. . .

Harper said that accepting cultures cause an increase in negative behavior amongts gays. This is a gross mischaracterization of a convenience sample from the Netherlands. The anti-gay industry often uses convenience sample studies to demonize the entire lgbt community.

It's a neat little trick they learned from Paul Cameron.

The question is just how long will Chase confuse religious aversion to homosexuality with an eagerness to be taken in by propaganda.

Paul Cameron's little boy responds

Someone from Paul Cameron's camp responded to the smackdown he has been receiving due to his latest junk science about lgbts.

His son, Kirk (not the actor) who aids Cameron on many of his so-called studies, responded on the site of Warren Throckmorton.

Kirk was trying to take Throckmorton to task for asking the opinion of a Danish epidemiologist about Cameron's latest "study." I guess Kirk was upset because the Danish epidemiologist recognized Cameron's hot mess for what it was:

It is no wonder why this pseudo-scientific report claiming a drastically shorter life expectancy in homosexuals compared with heterosexuals has been published on the internet without preceding scientific peer-review (http://www.earnedmedia.org/frireport.htm). The authors should know, and as PhD’s they presumably do, that this report has little to do with science. It is hard to escape the idea that non-scientific motifs have driven the authors to make this report public. The methodological flaws are of such a grave nature that no decent peer-reviewed scientific journal should let it pass for publication.

Kirk's very long and obtuse letter seems to be more concentrated on attacking the credibility of the epidemiologist than defending his and his father's work.

I will leave the analyzation of Cameron the lesser's letter to my online friend Jim Burroway at Box Turtle Bulletin.

However, one thing that did catch my eye was the ending of the letter:

The question as to how long on average homosexual practitioners tend to live is indeed a scientific and empirical one. Rather than being driven by "non-scientific motifs," we have simply followed the trail of empirical evidence. Can a subpopulation that more frequently engages in tobacco use, illegal drug abuse (including intravenously), more frequently consumes excessive alcohol, is more frequently criminal, is more frequently infected with STDs, tests more frequently as mentally disturbed, commits suicide and gets into auto and other accidents more frequently, more frequently drives under the influence, etc. be reasonably expected to live as long as either the general population or the married? Is this the "pure nonsense" to which Dr. Frisch is referring? The question is not whether the homosexual subpopulation will live as long as the married, but how many years fewer. Only time and further empirical tests will tell whether the differential will average 24 years, 20 years, or something else.

As you well know, we have been frequently criticized as being ‘non-scientific’ or for supposedly ‘misusing’ or ‘mischaracterizing’ scientific research. Almost all of our critics have had political or ideological axes to grind. Further, careful examination of our work and of the charges against us reveals that — while no one is perfect, including us — we have performed our work with scientific integrity and honesty. I would hope as a fellow scientist that you would display the wisdom and fortitude not to be led astray by those who do not wish to have the empirical spotlight shone on the effects and ramifications of homosexual behavior.

This led to the best laugh I have had all day. Or rather, all week.

Not only does Kirk refer to older studies done by his father (studies that have been discredited- www.boxturtlebulletin.com ), but he also seems to think that his father and himself are being attacked because of ideological differences.

Uh no.

Kirk, you and your father in particular have been repeatedly called to the carpet because you have continuously lied and distorted legitimate work in order to demonize innocent lgbts.

Giving you and your father credibility for any scientific work is like claiming that lobotomies were legitimate.

That is the reason why your father was kicked out of the American Psychological Association in 1983. It is also the reason why the Nebraska Psychological Association to pass a resolution in October 1984 that dissociated itself from him and his work.

It was the same reason why, in 1985, the Midwest Sociological Society censured your father. And it is the same reason why, in that same year, the American Sociological Association and the Society for the Study of Social Problems both passed resolutions against your father.

Just how long will it be before you stop spinning conspiracy theories against these groups and all the people who make up membership in them and take responsibility for your own lies.

And speaking of integrity and honesty, these are just a few of your father's comments:

What homosexuals do is so incredibly stupid, so patently absurd and antibiological, that only a foolish society would take their whimpering about ‘equal rights with heterosexuality’ seriously . . . Are we supposed to feel so sorry for them that we join them in the march to the
cemetery?"

“The evidence is that men do a better job on men, and women on women if all you are looking for is an orgasm.”

“Marital sex tends toward the boring end. Generally, it doesn’t deliver the kind of sheer sexual pleasure that homosexual sex does.”

“If I’d bought a bunch of AIDS victims’ policies ten years ago, I’d be a billionaire.”

So much for integrity and honesty.

Louie Sheldon and the Traditional Values Coalition continue to lie. Is anyone really surprised?

Lou Sheldon is a bold-faced liar.

I am sorry if that language is too severe for some but it’s the least profane way I could describe him.

Sheldon, his daughter Andrea Lafferty, and his group, the Traditional Values Coalition continue to prove just how extreme members of the anti-gay industry are in their vendetta against lgbts.

Lafferty made this assertion about legislation that only seeks to add lgbts to the categories of those protected under hate crimes laws:

"Most Christians might as well rip the pages which condemn homosexuality right out of their Bibles because this bill will make it illegal to publicly express the dictates of their religious beliefs."

There are sooo many things wrong what she said but, again, her hysterical comments are business as usual for the Traditional Values Coalition family.

Not to be undone, Lou Sheldon held a press conference on Tuesday with U.S. Congressman Louie Gohmert, in which he repeated the standard lies about hates crimes legislation. To help matters, these lies were even compiled in a list:

“Large fines and eventually jail time for anyone who publicly speaks out against homosexual activity or transgenderism, even as a minister…. This includes messages that cite Scripture….”

“Termination from one’s job if one does not support ‘coming out’ celebrations or ‘gay pride’ observances in the workplace, or if one does not attend mandatory ‘sensitivity’ or ‘diversity’ training sessions that espouse acceptance of homosexuality.”

“…[T]he threat of loss of accreditation for Christian colleges that do not condone homosexual behavior and transgenderism.”

For those not familiar with anti-gay industry propaganda, Sheldon is committing religious right distortion technique number four - claiming that any pro-gay law or ordinance will lead to "dire consequences."

Lying is a standard thing for Sheldon. Over two years ago, I reported on how his group told the Boston Globe that it took material related to discredited researcher Paul Cameron off of its web page.

This turned out to be an evasion. Cameron's name may have been taken off as a source but the group still appropriated his work. In addition, Sheldon referred to Cameron's name and work in his book, The Agenda and made no retractions even after the Boston Globe admission.

All I can say is that I hope there is a public hearing about hate crimes legislation and I also hope that those who support the bill have been paying attention to the lies Sheldon and company have been telling.

And please let it be that Sheldon, Lafferty, and Janet Folger for that matter be called as witnesses.

It would be nice to see them on the hot seat for a change.

And the ex-gays get involved

As if Sheldon's lies aren't enough, Alan Chambers from Exodus International comes in with a batch of nonsense. Apparently he is pushing the "the addition will make gays count more than ex-gays and grandmothers" lie.

I will not repeat his distortions. If you want to read what he says, go here.

Big shout out to my online friend who sent it to me, by the way.

I will not try to refute Chambers' lies. I will only say that he goes to prove just how much the so-called ex-gay movement is getting away with.

Ex-gay groups like to present themselves as merely being there for those who aren't comfortable with being gay. But their rhetoric and readiness to join those who are attempting to make life hell for us lgbts comfortable with our orientation clearly demonstrate that Chambers, Melissa Fryrear, Stephen Bennett, and the rest are lying hypocrites bought and paid by the anti-gay industry.

Just when will someone give them hell for it?

Life is not a James Bond movie

"There are several questions about the Virginia Tech situation yesterday. One of them is the blame game. The other one is gun control. The other one is -- and this is one that I've been reading up on a little bit this morning and have gained some insight, and I'm hoping -- I would love to get some psychological or somebody in the business that can answer this question: How the hell do 25 students allow themselves to be lined up against the wall in a classroom and picked off one by one? How does that happen, when they could have rushed the gunman, the shooter, and most of them would have survived?" - Neal Boortz

"As NRO's designated chickenhawk, let me be the one to ask: Where was the spirit of self-defense here? Setting aside the ludicrous campus ban on licensed conceals, why didn't anyone rush the guy? It's not like this was Rambo, hosing the place down with automatic weapons. He had two handguns for goodness' sake—one of them reportedly a .22." - John Derbyshire

Some tragedies bring out the best in people. During the Virginia Tech nastiness, there was a professor who sacrificed himself so that his students could escape.

Then there are people like radio talk show host Neal Boortz and National Review writer John Derbyshire. They are a part of a number of folks who for some reason feel the need to criticize the victims of the tragedy.

I wish I could say that they are the only two, but there are others, including Michelle Malkin who seems to be striving to be Ann Coulter's Asian sister.

No doubt they wil catch flack and when they do, they are going to give a spiel about the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

And they would have a point. But whatever happened to decorum and taste? Just because you have the right to say almost anything you want is no reason to shoot your mouth off at any occasion. There are times to talk and times to shut the hell up.

And this is one of those latter times.

Are these people even grounded in reality? Were they ever caught in a situation like what happened at Virginia Tech? Maybe they should be doing something other than writing columns and talking on the radio. Maybe there is an opening in the Navy Seals or the Marines?

Or better yet, why not be a secret service agent? It's so easy because I saw Pierce Brosnan do it on at least four occasions.

What happened at Virginia Tech was a tragedy rooted in real life. Batman didn't skillfully defuse the situation. Superman didnt swoop in with bullets bouncing off his chest.

The simple fact is that the people caught in the middle were victims and they couldn't do anything about it. No matter how much our chests swell or how much testosterone pumps in us, no one can rightfully say what he or she would do in a situation like that. Those students and teachers at Virginia Tech were the victims of a pathetic madman. So let's dispense with the psychobabble of not being victims and "taking control of the situation."

Some situations are beyond our control.

That's why prayer was invented.

Just a few things I noticed . . .

Paul Cameron got a major and much deserved smackdown today:

A recent report claiming that homosexuals have significantly shorter life spans than heterosexuals is drawing fire from an expert who describes the study as “severely methodologically flawed.”

We all knew that but guess where this article is coming from?

A Christian web page and one that, in the past, catered to the lies of the anti-gay industry. Check out its section on "gay issues."

It's a pretty damned big deal.

Maybe Godtube should take the hint.

Apparently this site that mimics Yourtube does not take criticism of what it posts kindly. In fact, if this story is true then the site has serious problems with truth and hypocrisy.

Godtube posted an address by Lou Sheldon (Traditional Values Coalition) telling the standard lies about hate crimes legislation.

www.asgoodasyou.org replied to the video giving the true story about hate crimes legislation. The reply was deleted. This took place on three occasions.

And here I thought it was gays and lesbians who wanted to stifle opposing viewpoints.

Lastly, today was the National Day of Silence and in some areas, there was controversy.

But I am a bit more concerned about tomorrow as the anti-gay industry will try to push what they call "Day of Truth," which supposedly allows those opposing homosexuality to give their side of the story.

Don't get me wrong because I think that regardless of where it originates, a dialogue about lgbt students is a good thing. I trust high school students to be mature and learn from an exchange of ideas.

But I am still bothered that the group that sponsors the Day of Truth, the Allied Defense Fund, will use the day to spread lies about gay students.

I noticed that students who want to know more about the Day of Truth are directed towards the ADF's web page where they can receive such materials as a handout called The Ten Biggest Myths of Homosexual Behavior.

Naturally this handout repeats Paul Cameronesque lies about the supposed gay life span as well as gay sexual activity and health. I talk about this handout in detail in my upcoming book.

There is a difference between opposing homosexuality and repeating lies about gays and lesbians.

I have faith that our young people will know the difference.