Booklet on anti-gay propaganda an online success

COLUMBIA--On January 8, South Carolina blogger Alvin McEwen published an online booklet designed to take a new direction in refuting anti-gay propaganda.

Three weeks later, he is astounded as to how successful the booklet, How They See Us: Unmasking the Religious Right War on Gay America, has been.

Since being published on the online site Scribd, the booklet has generated over 8,000 reads, over 81,000 embedded views and over 600 downloads.  It was also named to Scribd’s Rising List, which is a list of publications on the site generating many reads and views in a short amount of time.

McEwen credits the booklet’s success to fellow bloggers who, like himself, embedded the booklet on their sites and publicized it by word of mouth.

“This booklet wouldn’t have been as successful as it was without the help and promotion of many of my friends and people who believe in the work which I am doing. So I am extremely grateful for their help and encouragement,” McEwen said.

However, mainstream gay media attention has eluded How They See Us.  

McEwen sent press releases to various large scale gay magazines and blogs with little success.  He said he understands the lack of attention by the mainstream gay media because of so many things happening in the gay community and the fact that he has neither a national name nor reputation.

For the most part, McEwen has received much positive feedback for How They See Us.  But as with all projects, there were a few complaints. Two complaints bothered McEwen tremendously.

A good gay = pedophile lie NEVER dies

With news from coming in that the Boy Scouts may rethink its policy of keeping gays out, it didn't take long for the religious right to start pulling the pedophile card.

Allow me to decode what they are saying via Right Wing Watch:

Bryan Fischer from the American Family Association:

Tony Perkins from the Family Research Council:

"The Boy Scouts of America board would be making a serious mistake to bow to the strong-arm tactics of LGBT activists and open the organization to homosexuality. What has changed in terms of the Boy Scouts' concern for the well-being of the boys under their care? Or is this not about the well-being of the Scouts, but the funding for the organization?

"The Boy Scouts has for decades been a force for moral integrity and leadership in the United States. Sadly, their principled stances have marked them as a target for harassment by homosexual activists and corporations such as UPS which are working to pressure the Boy Scouts into abandoning their historic values.

"The mission of the Boy Scouts is 'to instill values in young people' and 'prepare them to make ethical choices,' and the Scout's oath includes a pledge 'to do my duty to God' and keep himself 'morally straight.' It is entirely reasonable and not at all unusual for those passages to be interpreted as requiring abstinence from homosexual conduct.

In other words:

 Lies unchallenged never change and they never die. Don't be fooled by the mock concern of Perkins and Fischer. I would bet my paycheck that when they heard of what the Boy Scouts were considered , they rubbed their hands thinking about the fundraising they are going to do off of it.

And trust me, they will fundraise. Why let a good gay = pedophile lie go to waste?

'Politifact TORCHES NOM' and other Monday midday news briefs

Politifact: NOM's Pants Are On Fire - The National Organization for Marriage is a sleazy organization which gets away with its continuous lies because the lgbt community and media is too blase to care and therefore the mainstream media follows suit. I mean really, how many of you just yawned while thinking of a snarky comment about NOM being caught in a lie again? We have to take this stuff more seriously and point it out every chance we get.  

Boy Scouts Of America Forces Local Troop To Remove LGBT-Inclusive Nondiscrimination Clause - Well that sucks.  

Non-discrimination bill passes in Va. Senate - Good for the Virginia Senate. But the Virginia House isn't necessarily looking in our favor.  

Family to memorialize slain trans woman - We need to stand up for our transgender brothers and sisters.

Maryland Marriage Equality Leads To Big Paydays For Wedding Vendors - Sweeeeeet!

Martin Luther King, Jr.'s niece makes wild claims about Obama, NAACP

Alveda King

According to Alveda King, Martin Luther King, Jr.'s niece, African-Americans are angry at Obama and the NAACP for their stances on abortion, contraception, and, of course, marriage equality.

In fact, she is claiming that African-Americans are taking drastic action. King said the following in an article in the American Family Association's One News Now:

 King says the NAACP could turn itself around, but only through repenting. The movement of African-Americans calling for repentance from the NAACP is growing. "African-Americans are coming out and burning membership cards to the NAACP," King says. "Thousands of African-Americans across this land have spoken out against the president's agenda, which includes homosexual marriage, abortion, contraceptives."

It is sad that national figures seem to always be followed by family members who do nothing more than ride their coattails to fame.

Former President Jimmy Carter had Billy Carter and former President Bill Clinton had Roger Clinton.

Fortunately, President Obama doesn't seem to have that problem with a personal relative. But, as a proxy, Martin Luther King, Jr's niece seems to be wanting to fill in the role.

Last year, I had to check Ms. King because I suspected that she told a blatant lie about Bayard Rustin, an openly gay aide to MLK and the coordinator of the 1963 March on Washington. At the time, she claimed that Rustin tried to persuade MLK into supporting gay equality and when he refused, Rustin resigned.

As a black gay man whose sees Rustin as a role model, I couldn't let that claim pass without calling her out. Subsequently, my demands for the truth led to a personal interview with Ms. King. This interview led me to believe that she was not only being deceptive about Rustin, but also her involvement in the Civil Rights Movement. She tried to talk over me when I asked her questions and ended the interview by hanging up on me.

This time, I don't think anyone needs an interview to refute Ms. King's charges about Obama and the NAACP. After all, Obama was elected with a landslide of electoral college votes as well as the popular vote. And an enormously large part of that was the black community.

Furthermore, just how many African-Americans are burning their NAACP membership cards? One person? Two people? Three? And just where is this "growing" movement of African-Americans calling for the NAACP to "repent?"

Ms. King seems to be speaking in generalities but if one asked her for particulars, I doubt she could point out any of them.

She really should give it up because she is fooling no one but the willfully ignorant. She is a poseur and a fake. And not even a good one.

WOW! NOM posts a rude pic, wants to make ugly history

From my online buddy Jeremy Hooper comes something from the National Organization for Marriage which is just so (my Julia Sugarbaker voice)- STUPID:

It's stupid because it's half-sighted. So a man and a woman copulating creates a child. But it says nothing about the well-being or caring of the child.

Any man or woman can make a child, but it takes a real mother or father to be a parent. And in that respect, the gay community has done very good for itself.

But this ridiculous poster from NOM enhances the sad fact of how the organization is attempting to play heterosexual households and same-sex households who are raising children against one another.

The raising of a child is not a competition. It is a blessing which belongs to everyone who can partake in it.

By the way, boys and girls. I hear that NOM is planning a national march on Washington at the same time the Supreme Court will be deliberating on DOMA and Prop 8.

You realize that if this happens, NOM will make history.

Generally, marches on Washington are about attaining rights which are deserved but not given, such as the 1963 Civil Rights March on Washington (organized by a gay man by the way - Bayard Rustin) and the several marches for gay equality. Marches on Washington are about bringing attention to an injustices such as war and poverty.

With NOM's march, this will probably be the first time there will a march on Washington demanding that  inequality, discrimination, and second-class status be foisted on a group of Americans (lgbts).

Go figure.

Know Your LGBT History - Tales from the Crypt - 'The Assassin'

 Let's have a little fun today. Having a character in a movie or tv show being revealed as lgbt is always a good plot twist, even though sometimes it's not necessarily a positive one for the community.

Check out this episode of Tales from the Crypt entitled  "The Assassin" and tell me what you think. The plot twist is probably easy to tell, but I want to know how do you feel about it?

Is it offensive, empowering, or just a plot twist which shouldn't be made a big deal out of.


Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

'Prop 8, DOMA Supreme Court briefs distorts parenting study' and other Friday midday news briefs

Anti-gay legal briefs ‘mischaracterized’ parenting study - Well will you look at this. Lawyers defending Prop 8 and DOMA distorted a study to claim that same-sex parents are less able to raise children than heterosexual parents. This distortion is in  briefs they submitted to the Supreme Court. And this news comes from the organization who conducted the study via The Washington Blade:

 “We have pointed this out repeatedly, yet to our dismay we continue to see our 2002 research mischaracterized by some opponents of same-sex marriage.” - Carol Emig, president of Child Trends.

My beautiful gay community, this is huge and if it does not receive as much or more attention than Jodie Foster's speech at the Golden Globes, well then I guess we can point out a problem as to why things are so difficult in the fight for equality.  

Editor's note - Distorting legitimate research for their own ends is an unfortunate hallmark of religious right groups. Pages 8 - 10 of my booklet, How They See Us, spotlights 12 times in which religious right groups have engaged in this specious practice.

In other news:

Alveda King claims marriage equality as facet of 'reproductive genocide' - Jimmy Carter had Billy Carter. Bill Clinton had Roger Clinton. And now the Martin Luther King, Jr. family has Alveda.

Russian Parliament Advances National Bill Banning ‘Propaganda of Homosexualism’ - Oh brother!

If You Could Refrigerate Homosexuality, It Wouldn't Be A Sin - I. . . I just can't comment on this. I just can't.

Do religious right groups really care about placing children in homes at all?

The above graphic supplied by my blogging comrade Jeremy Hooper has me thinking about children and the religious right

It is from the National Organization for Marriage and encompasses a standard religious right talking point used when the organization attempts to stymie marriage equality, i.e. claiming that allowing gays to marry would deprive children of the "right" to have a mother and a father.

I have heard that same talking point used extensively by other religious right organizations such as the Family Research Council and politicians and public figures who carry their water, so to speak, such as Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee.

I am of the personal belief that a child needs a good home, regardless of whether that home encompasses the mother/father dynamic, single parent dynamic, or the gay parent (s) dynamic. No matter how much research groups like NOM can manufacture or cherry-pick, the fact is a home with love and support is what matters most.

And it's better than no home at all, which brings me to my point.

According to several groups involved in the adoption of children, there are over 120,000 children waiting to be adopted. In fact, one group, Children Awaiting Parents,  says:

Most are school-aged or older. There are brothers and sisters who need to stay together. More than 60% of the children come from minority cultures. The majority are boys. Many have emotional, physical, learning disabilities or mental retardation. All are waiting for the love and security that only a permanent family can offer. 

For all of their pronouncements that "every child has a right to a mom and a dad" and "children need homes with mothers and fathers,"  I am not aware of any effort by NOM, FRC, or any religious right group or their supporters working to get children out of the foster care system and into that mother/father dynamic they preach so fervently about.

No initiatives. No sponsorship of legislation. Nothing

The only time I hear these groups and individuals suddenly care about children having decent homes at all is when they are attempting to them away from gay households.

That tells me either these religious right groups and their supporters are willfully forgetting children in foster care or that they don't really care about whether or not children actually are placed in good homes.

Just as long as they aren't placed in gay homes.

Rhode Island House of Representatives overwhelmingly pass marriage equality bill

From the San Diego Gay and Lesbian News:

The Rhode Island House of Representatives, led by openly gay Speaker Gordon Fox, today passed a bill that supports marriage equality. The House voted 51-19 to approve the measure.

 Rep. Joseph M. McNamara told a personal story of holding a lesbian couple's twin daughter, looking at the happy little girl, and saying that's when it dawned on him that marriage equality was also family equality. McNamara said the twins deserve the same equality of any straight family, and that by providing marriage equality was the right thing to do.

 Rep. Arthur J. Corvese, a Catholic Democrat who loudly and angrily railed against the bill and against gay activists and the ACLU, shouted out all the usual suspect arguments on why same-sex marriage will open Pandora's box for marriage. He said marriage isn't about gay rights, or civil rights, or about love, but about procreation. He also used the phrase, "the criminal media," leading one pundit to utter, "Is this man crazy?"

 Rep. James N. McLaughlin attempted to substitute an amendment to the bill to essentially gut it and keep marriage between a man and a woman. He gave a rambling and incoherent speech, then the parliamentarian ruled that his amendment was not germane and was out of order. Rep. Joseph Almeida, who is Cape Verdean American who was born in Providence, said the issue was a "civil rights struggle" and "don't divide us" to opponents of the bill.

Minority Leader Brian C. Newberry said he supported the bill and urged the Senate not to play politics with their vote on the measure, accusing the high chamber of drawing up a wish list to use a vote on the marriage bill as a bargaining chip.

Openly gay Rep. Frank Ferri, who said he and his "husband" have been together for 32 years, called today: "This is an exceptional moment, and it's taken a long time." He praised Speaker Fox for his patience since 1997 in getting to this moment in Rhode Island history.

The marriage bill now goes to the state Senate, where its President, Teresa Paiva Weed, a Democrat, opposes the measure. Weed, however, has agreed to allow a vote, which may take weeks or months before it clears the Senate Judiciary Committee.

'Stanford researchers create HIV-resistant cells' and other Thursday midday news briefs

HIV-Resistant Cells Created By Stanford Researchers Could Protect Patients From AIDS - This is really good news! 

Bryan Fischer is hijacking the civil rights movement (is what I would say if I adopted his own movement's tactics) - Dear Mr. Fischer, "Christian is not the new Black" That is all. One more thing - you dumb ass!

NOM – Rhode Island Insults The Very Legislators They’re Lobbying - NOM plays both sides of the coin in Rhode Island. 

Minnesota Columnist Claims LGBT Students Don’t Need Bullying Protections - First they said we have no need for marriage equality because we already have civil rights. Now they say our children don't need protection from bullies. I cringe to hear the next thing they will claim that we don't need.

Religious right - 'gays have bad health issues, so let's undermine attempts to discover why'

According to Think Progress, Rep. James Lankford (R-OK) had a very interesting exchange with a constituent about how a workshop which counsels lgbts with substance abuse problems and mental health issues is allegedly pushing the "homosexual agenda:"

CONSTITUENT: I want to know if you’re aware of the Substances and Mental Health Services Administration that has a book called the Provider’s Introduction to Substance Abuse Treatment for Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay and Transgender Individuals.

 LANKFORD: Wow.

CONSTITUENT: They are going around the nation, they just did this here in Oklahoma, December 7th, and having conferences that are educational. [...] About 2 percent of the conference is dealing with substance abuse and mental health issues. 98 percent is doing indoctrination or pushing the homosexual agenda. This is what our president is doing. He has a federal agency doing it. Our state, the Oklahoma Mental Health and Substance Abuse Department, put this conference on and is indoctrinating our citizens who are totally against this. Is there any way you can look into this?

LANKFORD: Oh yes, sure. You know I can absolutely get a chance to take a look at it. We’ll start the process, try to see what we can do to identify it. Some of those things you have the power of humiliation where you can raise it and put in sunlight. They love functioning in the dark. You put some sunlight on it, that does help. But, we’ll see. I’m glad to take that on. 

It has not been confirmed whether or not the woman speaking was Sally Kern - although it does look like her. And those of us who are lgbt know Sally Kern very well. She is the Oklahoma legislator who once said that homosexuality is more dangerous than terrorism, causing a huge uproar and a boon for religious right organizations who anointed her as a victim "unfairly vilified"  for merely expressing an opinion.

I'm pretty sure we are going to be hearing more about this, but regardless of who this constituent was, the fact that she is attacking a program which would help lgbts fight substance abuse and mental health problems is something we should remember, especially in light of the fact that a huge argument used against the gay community by people like the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins is the idea that we are susceptible to substance abuse and mental health issues: 




And there you have an interesting conundrum which very few point out regarding the hypocrisy of the religious right and those who support their efforts to keep us under heel.

On one hand, you have them calling us "dangers to society" because we are supposedly more susceptible to substance abuse and negative mental health issues. And on the other, they object to any program which would help us conquer these negative behaviors, claiming that they are in actuality a plot to "indoctrinate" or push the alleged homosexual agenda.

They seem to be attacking us for negative health issues while undermining attempts to  create solutions to these issues.

And I have a hard time believing that this is not intentional.

Right tries to historically revise Stonewall Riot

Because of President Obama's inaugural speech, the famous Stonewall Riot of 1969 has officially taken its place as one of the great moments in American history.

However, some people have taken it upon themselves to demonize what exactly happened at that bar in 1969 to help spark the modern day gay rights movement even to the point of rewriting history.

Buster Wilson of the American Family Association inaccurately claims that Stonewall was a hotel full of homosexuals who got violent during a police raid (no doubt implying that the police found gays having all sorts of illegal sex):



Then there is Pat Buchanan (who once described AIDS as nature's retribution on gays). Now you would think that he gets it wrong. But (and I fainted when I heard him describe it), he actually kinda gets what Stonewall was right. He was wrong by calling it a barroom brawl, but he was right when he said the police were harassing gays and the gays stuck up for themselves:

 

But in all honesty, describing what happened at Stonewall, including the events which led up to it, belongs to those who were there. I think they should have precedent in telling the story:

 

'AFA cheers on Russia's attempt to criminalize homosexuality' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

AFA Headline Of The Day - From Joe Jervis comes something I saw this morning and it frankly got me nauseated. The American Family Association, via its phony news site One News Now, is cheering on Russia's efforts to "criminalize" homosexuality.  

Sadie, 11-Year-Old Transgender Girl, Writes Essay In Response To Obama's Inauguration Speech - This is so awesome that this child has the courage to not only come out but also to so such a positive thing when so many adults won't even get off their butts.  

Audio: You guys, stop hurting Tony and Tim's feelings. They just want to call you unnatural and deny you of rights—gah!- And THIS post is when I really wish the adage about lightning striking would prove true.  

Sandy Rios Mourns Obama's Inauguration and Equality for Non-Christians - Rios manages to attack Obama, those who practice religions other than Christianity, atheists, gays, and African-Americans all at the same time. Someone give her an award!

How many times can Bryan Fischer mention 'gay sex' during an Obama tirade?

I thought I had seen it all when it comes to members of the religious right using Obama's inauguration speech to reduce gay equality to something stupid about sexual intercourse.

I was wrong:



Bryan Fischer is not a researcher, he is not a medical doctor, nor is he a psychiatrist or a psychologist. Just who in the heck is he to call someone ignorant about homosexuality and the gay community?

And what's with this constant emphasis on the alleged sexual behavior of gay males?

It's like I said yesterday, when ordinary Americans think about gay couples, they generally see this:

But people like Bryan Fischer sees this:

 I'm not a psychiatrist either but if I were, I would probably be able to write a book on Fischer.

Obama's speech gives the religious right 'sodomy on the brain'

You gotta give the religious right credit for one thing - when they get a talking point, they hammer it to death.

To hell with truth. They seek to dominate the conversation by repetition.

With President Obama's mention of gay equality in his inaugural address, several groups are hammering the point home that the mention was not needed because "gays already have civil rights."

Of course this is a dumb point which is easily refutable - that is if lgbt groups such as GLAAD and HRC put out a press release in response (hint, hint, hint, guys)

But in pushing this talking point, several religious right figures can't help but push forward their bigotry. Take former Family Research Council head and religious right journeyman Gary Bauer for example:

And then there is Peter Sprigg from the Family Research Council during an interview this morning on CNN:

"We as social conservatives do not agree with the president’s attempt to link the modern homosexual movement with the women’s rights movement or the civil rights movement for African Americans,” Sprigg said. “The irony is that homosexuals already have all the same civil rights as anyone else.” Sprigg continued to say that "all sexual behavior" is not created equal, nor do "all personal relationships have an equal value to society at large, that serve the same public interests."

Obama didn't say a word about sexual intercourse in his speech.  But while ordinary Americans see the family below, they think "how ordinary and loving."

When people like Peter Sprigg and Gary Bauer look at the above photo, they see this:

Sprigg, Bauer, and those who support their madness can believe what they want, but it doesn't make what they believe as fact. And it certainly doesn't make what they believe a model this nation should follow.

'Tax dollars going to schools which bar gays' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Backed by State Money, Georgia Scholarships Go to Schools Barring Gays - Uh excuse the @!# out of me!  

Peter Sprigg gets on CNN again; plays the victim—again #glaadcap - Peter Sprigg from the Family Research Council whines that President Obama has made "working together" impossible with yesterday's speech. Why in the hell would the President want to work with an anti-gay hate group?  

LGBT Group Petitions Fox News To Drop Its Transphobic Coverage - A noble pursuit, no doubt. 

Lewiston, Twin Falls, Id. ban sexual identity discrimination - Sweet!!

 Lively: 'True Human Rights Will be Finished' if the Gay Rights Movement Succeeds - That bigot gives me gas.

Brian Brown, NOM pouts over Obama's inauguration speech

Obama's speech yesterday is something else for Brown to cry about.

The National Organization for Marriage and its president, Brian Brown, recently released what I call a whiny statement voicing its anger over President Obama's support of marriage equality in his inauguration speech:

"Gay and lesbian people are already treated equally under the law," Brian Brown responded. "They have the same civil rights as anyone else; they have the right to live as they wish and love whom they choose. What they don’t have is the right to redefine marriage for all of society. In fact, six federal courts have rejected the idea that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court in a summary decision in 1972. Furthermore, that vast majority of states have codified the commonsense view held for thousands of years that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. The President is profoundly wrong to imply that those who have acted to protect marriage have denied anyone's rights by doing so."

"A presidential inauguration should be a time for the nation to come together; instead President Obama chose to voice his support for a radical agenda advanced by some of his biggest campaign contributors to redefine marriage for everyone. Marriage brings our nation together. The concept of gay ‘marriage’ would have been totally alien to our founding fathers, and the protection and advancement of marriage between one man and one woman will immeasurably serve the common good of this country and further strengthen our Union. 

NOM wants to seem to be forever the victims. At no time did President Obama attack those who do not support marriage equality. Just like Tony Perkins and the FRC did yesterday, Brown and NOM falsely spins his inauguration speech to make it seem that he has declared war on those who oppose marriage equality. How ironic is it that NOM is angry at President Obama, seeing that the organization did all it could to get his opponent Mitt Romney elected.

Family Research Council pouts over Obama's inauguration speech

I guess it's safe to say that some members of the religious right are over any shock they have regarding President Obama linking gay equality with women's equality and the Civil Rights Movement during today's inauguration speech.

On his radio show today, FRC president Tony Perkins and FRC employee Kenneth Blackwell totally misrepresented President Obama's speech to make it seem that he personally called them out as bigots:



This is what President Obama said:

 "We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths -- that all of us are created equal -- is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall... It is now our generation’s task to carry on what those pioneers began. For our journey is not complete until our wives, our mothers, and daughters can earn a living equal to their efforts. Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law -- for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well."

 At no time did President Obama call out the Family Research Council or the rest of the groups who claim that they are "merely trying to preserve traditional marriage." I personally wouldn't have had a problem if he had because the way I see it, organizations like FRC and personalities like Blackwell and Perkins are in fact bigoted. How much so? Let the evidence speak for itself:



That clip was bad enough, but the following from last year involving Star Wars reveal the mindset of a man and a group obsessed with attacking gays. I hope no one informs Perkins that the seven little dwarfs lived together and shared a bedroom before Snow White showed up:

 

Hat tip to Jeremy Hooper.

Obama gives gay equality an inauguration shout out. Now what?

President Obama's inauguration speech is going to make things interesting in the coming days:

President Obama made history today when he mentioned both the Stonewall uprising and gay and lesbian people being treated "like anyone else under the law" during his second inauguration speech. "We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths -- that all of us are created equal -- is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall..." he said.

 He continued: "It is now our generation’s task to carry on what those pioneers began. For our journey is not complete until our wives, our mothers, and daughters can earn a living equal to their efforts. Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law -- for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well."

This the first time that a president has addressed gay rights during an inauguration speech.

For now, I think members of the religious right are passed out in an apoplectic coma. But on our side, there are those already with their fists up proclaiming "action speaks louder than words."

While I understand where they are coming from, I am also not so jaded that I ignore historical moments. And a president mentioing gay equality in his inaugural address is a TRUE HISTORIC MOMENT.  It signals the simple fact that we must admit that we are no longer total outsiders of the American experience who have to scream louder than others to get attention.  If we didn't believe it before, we had better start believing it now - lgbts are a part of the mainstream.

It's safe to say we have all of the attention we want or need. The question is where does our community go from here. What do we do with the attention because there are so many areas in our struggle which need it.

Are we going to continuously fight amongst ourselves, evoking the boogeyman of "Gay Inc?"

 Are those who have "stroke and power" in our community in terms of what issues get addressed going to diversify their mindsets or continue soak to themselves in wine-soaked cliques and fundraising parties of the so-called beautiful people while feeding our minds with cotton candy confections  about which celebrity came out or didn't come out enough?

Is our media going to talk about real issues such as self-esteem, the worldwide struggle of gay equality which touches every age, color, creed, and gender or continue to focus on materialistic things which look good and smell good on our bodies but the majority of lgbts neither can afford or have any desire to care about?

 And finally, are we going to initiate an unprovoked public conversation about the propaganda spread by some in the name of religion, i.e. the lies about our families and our health. Or are we going to continue to fail to respond to these lies except for a vulgar comment printed on a facebook page?  Is the majority of the lgbt community and our allies ready to take on (with intelligence and dignity) the propaganda artists at those religious right groups who have stolen and co-opted not only the name of religion but also that of family?

 It's wonderful that Obama mentioned us in his inaugural speech, but let's never forget that ultimately the success of gay equality lies in our hands. We own it and whatever President Obama does in his last four years in office will never change that.

The point is not what is President Obama prepared to do. The point is what is the lgbt community prepared to do.

The 'Case for Mammy/Daddy Marriage'

Check out this video and don't be so quick to get angry before watching the ENTIRE thing.