Peter LaBarbera sinks to a new low

It is obvious that Peter LaBarbera cannot stand the lgbt community. No matter how many times he claims that he only wants to help us, his stridency and singleminded attempts to devalue our lives always gives him away.

But now he has sunken to a new low by devaluing the life of a man who cannot fight him back and using that man's memorial from his friends for political purposes.

In a recent posting in criticizing Surgeon General nominee James Holsinger for repudiating his 1991 paper about homosexuality, Peter said the following:

Statistics are easier to dismiss than the human victims of homosexuality: just ask Carolyn Groff, whose son Russell died at age 26 from AIDS after getting involved in a homosexual “relationship.

For those who don't know Russell Groff, a little background is in order.

Mr. Groff was an aspiring playwright who died of a staph infection in 2004. He was also HIV positive. Since his death, his partner has been in a time and money consuming legal fight with his parents over his burial site and who should be executor of his will.

And this is not just a simple battle:

Russell Groff’s parents have been virulently anti-gay, which is ostensibly motivating them in their pursuit to deny their son’s expressed wishes. They even did a Fred Phelps-like protest during Knoxville, TN’s LGBT "Come Out Knoxville" celebration.

According to the Knoxville Metro Pulse, Carolyn Groff blames the "destructive gay lifestyle" for the death of her son, an aspiring playwright. "He wasn’t like that until he got involved in the theater group at Maryville College," she explains. Several other members of her Bible Baptist Church brought signs denoting that gays are destined to hell. Their brand of Christianity drove Russell away from the Christian church and joined Kevin as a Quaker after they met.

While Peter references Mr. Groff's mother, the site he directs people to does not come from her.

It was created by a friend of Mr. Groff who wanted give a memorial to his life. If you click on Peter's link, you will see the following:

I have deleted content from my web page because I learned that someone was using it to further a cause I DO NOT believe in. I will not allow my love and compassion to be twisted into anything else. I will no longer add anything to this site for fear of its misuse. Thank you.

I had the pleasure of seeing the page before the information was removed and it was a moving tribute. Mr. Groff was a young man who had a lot of love from his friends and his partner. There was sadness about his passage but joy about the ability to be with someone (even for a brief time as it was) with so much going for him.

But what did it matter to Peter? To him, Groff was just another homosexual who died; another symbol to point to in his war against lgbts.

I also had the pleasure of talking to the person who set up the memorial and unfortunately choose to take it down. She is not happy about what happened.

I don't blame her. Her tribute had nothing to do with a cultural war. She was just celebrating the life of a someone who meant a lot to her. If Peter had any decency, he should have left her out of his mess.

My father was a prison guard who was murdered in 2000 by some inmates seeking to escape. I would be highly upset if any tribute I set up for him was used by a racist group to claim that African-Americans are violent individuals who kill each other.

What Peter did belongs solely in the realm of bad taste, pure and simple.

Willfully ignoring the obvious about James Holsinger

James Holsinger was never a favorite of the anti-gay industry.

They didn’t necessarily rush to his defense when the controversy came about his 1991 study. I personally think that they didn’t want to bring too much attention to themselves because its obvious that Holsinger copied their tactics of creating "research": authoring studies full of cherry picked sources to discredit the lgbt community.

Now they seem to be angry at his testimony, specifically the fact that he disavowed the 1991 study. Check out our friend Matt Barber from Concerned Women for America:

Holsinger gave several non-answers when asked if he still believed that homosexuality was “unnatural” and “unhealthy.” He seemed to try to distance himself from his 1991 paper by saying, “First of all, the paper does not represent where I am today,” he said. “It does not represent who I am today.” (What does that mean? Does it mean he no longer believes that homosexuality is “unhealthy” and “unnatural,” or does it mean that he is now MORE certain than ever that homosexuality is “unhealthy” and “unnatural”?) He completely dodged the question and provided a non-answer (which I suppose he was coached to do). His answer was prefaced by saying that he used the best medical information available at the time.

Incredibly, Barber seems to be angry at Fox News for reporting that Holsinger repudiated his paper. Now that is something I thought I would never see:

But I think the MSM [mainstream media], including Fox, have grossly exaggerated his statement. They’re reporting what they wanted to hear, not what he actually said.

Barber wrote this passage in order to clarify a point he made in an earlier email:

Enter the Mainstream Media. They are widely reporting that Holsinger has “disavowed” his belief that homosexuality is “unnatural” and “unhealthy.” They’ve apparently made that extrapolation based upon Holsinger’s above referenced quote (quite a stretch I think). Brit Hume, reporting on the Fox News Channel, said, “Holsinger also told senators in a confirmation hearing that he no longer holds the views about homosexuality that he expressed in a controversial paper in 1991, in which he called it unnatural and unhealthy.” Unless I totally missed something, he never even came close to saying that.

The entire Holsinger affair has been a serious smack in the face to the anti-gay industry. Nevertheless, Barber and the rest are stubbornly trying to find a victory out of this.

This stridency illustrates why it's easy for the anti-gay industry to create lies lgbts:

No, Holsinger didn't repudiate his paper, the lazy media made it seem that way.

No, Paul Cameron is not a bad researcher. The APA, the American Sociological Association, and William Bennett are conspiring to bring him down because they have been highjacked by the radical gay agenda.

If we cite research in a way that it was not intended, then we are not at fault. It is the researcher's fault.

Keep it up guys. Your bullheadedness is your biggest weakness and our biggest strength.


Give Gloria Gaynor the benefit of the doubt

Some of us are angry at diva Gloria Gaynor because she recently commented that she uses her concerts to try and bring lgbts to Christ.

Understandably, with all lgbts have had to deal with regarding so-called religious people, some of us have gotten ugly towards Ms. Gaynor, calling her everything but a child of God.

Lighten up folks.

Gaynor didn’t bash us a community. Her desire to lead us to Christ doesn’t necessarily mean she wants us to abandon our lgbt identity.

Many lgbts are Christians because they have learned to reconcile their faith to their orientation.

But the bottom line is that so many of us have bought into anti-gay industry lies. We believe the lie that God does not want us to be lgbt.

Why listen to wannabe substitute spokespeople when the real deal is there for you? We should embrace any and all chances to talk to God regarding who we are.

Christianity, or any type of religion for that matter, and the lgbt orienation aren’t necessarily independent of each other.

The behavior of some of us towards Gaynor only underscores how the anti-gay industry has damaged our community.

They are not the proxy voices of God, no matter how much they claim to be. In actuality, they are ticks to the body of Christianity, sucking out the spiritual blood for their own personal agendas.

So sheath your claws and save your catty comments until at least we know what she meant. Until Gloria Gaynor comes out specifically attacking us, let’s give her the benefit of the doubt.

Don’t let the anti-gay industry’s hatred of us transform us into a carbon copy of them.

As long as we attack Gaynor for her comments without any clarification as to what she meant, the closer we become to being exactly what the anti-gay industry wants us to be rather than who we should be.

You will always reap what you sow

I don’t know how the vote on James Holsinger will turn out but I am glad that he repudiated that study on lgbts he wrote:

Holsinger said the 1991 writing was not intended to be a scientific paper and relied on the information available to him at the time.

"First of all, the paper does not represent where I am today. It does not represent who I am today,'' Holsinger said.

I have to ask a question to our friend Peter LaBarbera, Matt Barber and the rest of the anti-gay industry: now that Holsinger repudiated his study, what is taking you so long to do the same?

The question is strictly rhetorical.

I know that many in the anti-gay industry won’t take back the discredited studies and the cherry picked legitimate studies they always cite when seeking to demonize lgbts.

In particular, they seem to not be able to help themselves in repeating Paul Cameron’s discredited studies.

In a recent appearance on the O’Reilly Factor, Concerned Women for America’s Sandy Rios said the following:

" . . .we all know that smoking is really harmful to your health. Well, what people don't understand is that the homosexual lifestyle, especially for men, is deadly. It takes their life 10 to 20 years earlier than straight men."

No matter how many times must we repeat the fact that this study has been discredited on several occasions, I don’t it matters to Rios and company. As long as the information puts the lgbt community in a negative light, then they are going to use it.

Maybe they own a secret copy of the Bible that advocates lying in the name of God.

Also Rios tried to slip in a little comment about David Parker, the parent in Massachusetts who manufactured a media event based on the lie that he was trying to guard his son from being forced to listen to talks about gay sexual intercourse in his kindergarten class.

One lie after another.

Meanwhile, I hear that some "Christian" folks disrupted the opening prayer in the U.S. Senate. Apparently they were upset because a Hindu minister was invited to give the prayer.

I'm not surprised their behavior.

After all, according to people like James Dobson and Rick Scarborough, this country belongs to them. All of us "heathens" are just here by their will and pleasure.

So much for Christian humility.

It’s kinda sad how these pseudo-Christians operate. First many of them go on news programs repeating to be studies they know to be incorrect.

Meanwhile, others are shouting down those who don’t share their beliefs.

And finally to top it off, they all whine about being persecuted for their religious beliefs.

What's next?

Are they going to compare their actions to the African-American civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s?

Sorry folks, but the comparison just doesn't wash.

The African-American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s was about fighting for the right to exist. Some psuedo-Christians in this country are fighting for something that doesn’t belong to them or anyone else - the right to dominate.

They don’t seem to understand that they are doing more to turn people against Christianity than any of the collective actions of the usual boogeymen (i.e. lgbts, ACLU) that they like to conjure up.

Sooner or later, their stridency and obnoxious way of acting is going to come back and haunt them. And rest assured, I will be there to make sure as many people as possible pays attention.

And speaking of health, more lies from the Bush Administration

I ran across an item today via Think Progress that I have to comment on:

Govt Website: Abortions Make Women Feel ‘Sad,’ Resort To ‘Drugs’ And ‘Alcohol’

Yesterday, NARAL discovered that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had revised a government website, 4parents.gov, with biased and misleading ideological claims about abortion. From new website:

Some teen pregnancies end in abortion. Abortions can have complications. There may be emotional consequences, as well: some women say that they feel sad and some use more alcohol or drugs than before.

The previous version of the site contained factual information about the rates of teen pregnancy. But these new “facts” on the site are misleading. As the Guttmacher Institute’s May 2006 report noted:

[T]he APA [American Psychological Association] found that “women who are terminating pregnancies that are wanted or who lack support from their partner or parents for the abortion may feel a greater sense of loss, anxiety and distress. For most women, however, the time of greatest distress is likely to be before an abortion; after an abortion, women frequently report feeling ‘relief and happiness.’”

. . . This is not the first time 4parents.gov has put forth misleading information. When the site launched in 2005, it told parents “to convince their teens to stop having sex by telling their children that they are ‘worth it.’” But no resources were provided for “parents whose teen remains sexually active, implying that these youth are not ‘worth it.’” It also referred to a “fetus” as an “unborn baby.”

UPDATE: In 2005, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) sent Leavitt a letter with reviews by scientific experts who concluded that 4parents.gov’s content appeared “to have been guided by ideology.” He also noted that the website was not created by government scientists, as the administration claimed, “but rather through a no-bid contract to the National Physician’s Center for Family Resources, an obscure organization that has taken positions against scientific agencies on important matters of public health.”

So why is this signficant? Because the National Physician's Center for Family Resources also pushes incorrect information about the lgbt community.

The following is a passage from my upcoming book (with information taken from the article, Specter seeks review of teen health site, The Washington Blade, July 29, 2005):

In July 2005, U.S. Senator Arlen Specter asked that the national Health and Human Services look at a certain web site because it allegedly showed inaccurate information about homosexuality and contraception.

The web site, 4parents.gov, received information from an organization called the National Physicians Center for Family Resources. The chairman of the National Physicians Center for Family Resources board, John Whiffen, said the organization was correct regarding what it had printed about homosexuality.

He said:

“It’s fairly well-accepted that smoking is not a good idea. It takes seven years off of your life. It appears that male homosexuality takes more than that off your life."

That claim, as many of you know, comes from a Paul Cameron study. Our discredited friend strikes again.

With former Surgeon General Richard Carmona claiming that the Bush Administration impeded him from doing his job combined with James Holsinger's hearing tomorrow, I can't help but to wonder about this administration's commitment to health care not ruled by psuedo-Christian ideology.

James Holsinger hearings

Tomorrow begins the James Holsinger hearings. Hopefully there will be an explanation regarding his anti-gay biased study that doesn't involve him clinging to the cross like a martyr.

I can only wish that my esteemed Senator Lindsay Graham doesn't repeat his behavior from the Supreme Court hearings and ask Holsinger strictly tongue-in-check:

"Mr. Holsinger, you don't hate gay people, do you?"

The issue is not about whether or not Holsinger hates gay people. The issue is about his credibility. Can he be trusted as the head physician of the United States and not let his personal religious beliefs warp his professional ethics?

He certainly failed that test when writing the Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality and he needs to answer for it.

For an excellent critique of that piece of rot, go to Box Turtle Bulletin.

Hate crimes legislation

And now this from HRC. I urge everyone to take action because the anti-gay industry will be out in numbers against it:

Today Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) offered the Senate hate crimes bill, the Matthew Shepard Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act, as an amendment to the Department of Defense Reauthorization bill currently being debated on the Senate floor. The House of Representatives version of the bill passed with strong bipartisan support on May 3. The Senate bill, S. 1105, could be voted on as early as today. Joe Solmonese issued a statement on today's filing.

The right wing is in high gear on Capitol Hill today to fight the bill's passage and Senate leaders need to hear strong - and repeated - messages of support for the hate crimes bill from our side.

Call your senators ASAP at 202/224-3121 and urge them to vote in favor of the Matthew Shepard Act, S. 1105.

Cheap personal attack courtesy of Americans for Truth (in name only)

Lastly, I see that my friend Peter and the Americans for Truth (in name only) has stooped to a new low, proving that there are more than nine circles in hell.

The group is personally attacking Amy Andre, Manager of Training and Professional Development for Out & Equal. Out & Equal is a group devoted to issues of lgbt in the workplace.

So what did Andre do?

Nothing. Apparently on her own time, Andre has a site devoted to and has written articles regarding bisexual health and sexual health.

But leave it to our friend Peter to make it sound sleazy:

You might be interested in understanding the philosophy and politics of this woman who is pressing for radical change in employer-paid benefits – especially if you happen to be a corporate executive or a human resources director dealing with the Out & Equal agenda in your company. Consider whether your employees and customers share Amy Andre’s perspective…

Amy Andre is one of four co-authors credited with authoring the report entitled “bisexual health,” published Mar 13, 2007, by the Task Force. Here are a few quotes excerpted from Amy Andre’s own website:

My mission in life, and the goal of this website, is to encourage the safe exploration of pleasure and create political change. Are these two separate things? I think they’re one and the same.
My philosophy on pleasure is that consenting adults should be able to engage in whatever activities they desire to do safely with one another.

But, whether you find pleasure in watching – or making – pornography, taking a sex ed class in college, being able to express a sexual minority identity, or having hot safe sex with your lover(s), in reality, going for any of these is a political act.

Peter infers that Andre is linked to introducing all sorts of wild sexual activity to children. Strange how he does not provide any concrete proof of these charges.

Whatever the case maybe, it has nothing to do with her work at Out & Equal. And I personally think what she is doing is no different than the actions of Dr. Ruth or any other sex advice columnist.

There is nothing wrong with advocating good healthy sexual behavior, which is possible irregardless of your sexual orientation.

So is this the next step in attacking the gay community, Peter?

Is trolling online and finding things you can spin as "smut" against someone a Christian principle all of the sudden?

Please show me where in the Bible did Jesus advocated such trash?

Hypocrisy is so un-Christian

I hope no one thinks that I am attacking Christians, but I ran across a few things today that has to be commented on. The following is from People for the American Way:

Recently we noted the blatant double standard exhibited by religious-right groups in the case of Albemarle County, Virginia schools’ "backpack mail" program: Last year, Liberty Counsel told the school that if it distributed secular materials by giving them to students to take home, it had to allow religious materials as well. The school complied. But when a summer camp for "atheists, freethinkers, [and] humanists" used the "backpack mail" program, Rick Scarborough’s Vision America pounced, directing its supporters to flood the school superintendent’s e-mail account and eventually causing the school to drop "backpack mail" altogether.

Scarborough declared a "major victory" for Vision America, but lamented that the victory was only partial: He would prefer that the school reject material from atheists while continuing to distribute material from Christian programs. Scarborough explained:

People for the American Way says we’re hypocrites who want to establish a different standard for Christians and atheists. Hypocrites, no. Different standards? Yes. Again, the court said the district didn’t have unbridled discretion, not that it shouldn’t exercise any discretion.

Why should a fringe minority have the same status as Christians? This country was not established by secular humanists. The Declaration of Independence appeals to the "Creator" and the "Supreme Judge of the World" -- not to Buddha or Mohammad or Madalyn Murray O’Hair. Christians constitute 90% of the American people. The people whose taxes pay for the Albemarle County School System are overwhelmingly Christian.

It gets worse.

Apparently the readers of One News Now are upset because for the first time, the US Senate will open with a prayer from a Hindu minister. Some of their comments are as follows:

The invocation of idolatrous gods is inherently offensive to members of the Judeo-Christian majority of the United States. The Second Commandment states, "You shall not make for yourselves and idol." Therefore, we should let our senators know that while we defend the right of others to practice their religions, we do not accept the imposition of minority religious practices upon us and our elected representatives.

"God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows" (Galatians 6:7). The same goes for a nation.

Inclusiveness NEVER was a part of God's will for His people. When the Israelites assimilated other religious beliefs, God turned a deaf ear to their crys. It cost Solomon his soul. Christianity likewise is an EXCLUSIVE religion. There is One God and One Savior. He is the Creator.

Are you serious? Why is it in this nation founded on Christian truth is prayer mentioned in Jesus' name the only one that offends? Now we must kowtow to a pagan false religion by allowing prayer to hindu gods? What is happening here? Why is our senate sticking a finger in the Most Holy God's eye? Doesn't anyone fear God anymore? One more big step on that slippery slope to divine judgement.

Sorry majority rules in this country and Christians are the majority. Please take your seat now.

And these some of the same people who claim that adding lgbts to hate crimes legislation discriminates against Christians?

So perceived discrimination against Christians is wrong but actual discrimination by Christians is okay.

Kind of hypocritical, don’t you think?

But unfortunately the mindsets of these folks are the reason why the anti-gay industry have been so successful in their lies about an alleged gay conspiracy to undermine American values.

Many people reading the comments of Scarborough and the commentators of One News Now will think that what was said is totally appropriate.

And that is a serious problem. Not for us so-called "Godless activists" but for those who call themselves people of faith.

Some Christians claim that they are viewed negatively in this country. If is a problem regarding people having a negative view of Christianity, it has nothing to do with gays, "secular humanists," the ACLU or the usual boogeymen called out by James Dobson and company.

The blame is solely on the lap of those Capitalistic Christians who have tied the Gospel of Jesus to the world view of success and conquest.

That is the type of Christian who, as demonstrated by the above examples, can speak out both sides of their mouths about discrimination and not feel the least bit guilty.

Why should they?

God blesses them above everyone else. They know this for sure because people like Rick Scarborough, James Dobson, James Kennedy, One News Now and so many others tells them so on a daily basis.

Well, this has never been a Christian country.

I don’t care how many Founding Fathers you find who claimed to have practiced the Christian religion, this country hasn’t necessarily been that close to God.

Those who cite the fallacy of a Christian nation seem to always forget slavery and segregation of African-Americans, as well as the grand scale genocide of Native Americans; practices that were many times aided and abetted by people of faith willing to either look the other way or rationalize these offenses.

And let’s not forget the Salem Witchcraft Trials, which is a perfect example of how some self-righteous people of faith ignored the voice of God and spiritually cannibalized each other.

So I question the idea that the United States is a Christian nation. I view this notion as an egotistical flight of fancy.

And, with all due respect, allow me to address those Christians in this country who seem to think that God mandated for them to replace the Israelites as the "chosen people:"

Jesus never said "pick up your Cross and follow me and I will give you a nice job, a nice house, 2.5 children and a Republican in the White House every four years.

Not getting a Constitutional Amendment passed outlawing same sex marriage doesn’t exactly rank up there with being crucified, stoned, or being fed to wild beasts.

Having your child go to a school that allows a gay/straight alliance doesn’t exactly put you in the category of "suffering for your faith." In fact even if Hilary Clinton or any other Democrat was elected president and you have to deal with a Democratic Congress to go with said election, you would still rank zero on the martyrdom scale.

Lastly, if Scarborough is correct and you do comprise a vast majority, then are you really being persecuted? Either you suffer from a serious narcissism complex or maybe God is trying to tell you something about your attitudes.

Did you miss me?

Well I’m back online at home via dial up. It’s not DSL and I am hating it. This phone line is slow as hell.

But the important thing is that I’m back online and just in time for the James Holsinger hearings, too.

My book

In the midst of all of this turmoil, I have been steadily working to publish my book. If all goes well, it should be out in the middle of September.

I am currently working on a press packet and would love to send it out to as many people as possible.

The press packet will contain:

press release,
excerpt from Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters,
a one page outline of anti-gay industry tactics and lies
two flyers,
and an interview with me

If you are interested in receiving this packet in the mail or email, please email me at CharleKenghis@aol.com

I am also working on a list who will receive the galleys of my book.

As you all know, the whole point of my book is not to make money but to arm the lgbt community with information and get the anti-gay industry to explain their tactics, rather than us explaining the validity of our lives for a change.

Retreat from hysteria yields a challenge

From the site my online buddy Joe Brummer, one of Bill O'Reilly's sources for his lesbian gang hysteria has retreated from his claims.

That’s good.

But what is bad is one of the comments he posted on his site reportedly coming from one of us. Allegedly a gay person sent him a nasty email attacking African-Americans on the whole.

The racist diatribe does nothing but play into the "divide and conquer" mentality that the anti-gay industry uses against the black and gay communities.

No matter how the anti-gay industry angers us, we shouldn’t stoop to the level of showing our asses more than our inteligence.

That "ACT-UP" mentality of protesting was useful back in the day, but it's wasn't useful all of the time.

And sometimes, like now, it's rather counterproductive.

This is an intellectual battle so any form of visibility is not necessarily a good thing. Let's practice positive visibility.

So I ask that if you feel the need to write and challenge those who oppose us, speak from your mind and with righteous indignation, but don't let their lies reduce you to their level.

If you feel that you have to call the opposition cheap names, then you really need to examine yourself.

Paul Cameron keeps popping up

Check out this diatribe from World Net Daily:

Even school boards, like that in Montgomery County, Md., are urging young students to accept this deadly habit and plying them with the message that anyone who perceives himself/herself as being of a certain sexual orientation is in fact stuck with that orientation and cannot escape. That's tantamount to a group of educators telling smokers that they were born to smoke, can't quit and shouldn't even try.

Of course, the promulgation of knowledge and data concerning the link between alternative sex and disease is hampered by the bullying tactics of the elite. Thus, only a few facts are known at all to some of the public (such as the results of a study in Scandinavia showing that men in same-sex marriages die 24 years earlier than their counterparts in the general population) . . .

As I am sure that many of you know, that claim about a short gay life span in Scandinavia comes from our pal Paul Cameron. It was his latest set of lies.

Gay blogs from my own to Box Turtle Bulletin beat down this latest lie of Cameron's months ago.

And it was fun.

But like a weed, Cameron's lies continue to come up.

And every time weeds come up, we need to knock them down.

It's the lesbian gangs I tells ya!!!!

Thank you to Peter LaBarbera and Bill O'Reilly for taking my mind off of my recent trials and tribulations.

Their attempts to start a moral panic by attacking our lesbian sisters (and I mean the community in general) has stirred me out of my Saturday doldrums and into the Barnes and Noble bookstore which was the only place I can be online right now.

I am sure everyone has heard Peter's latest:

Lesbian gangs are raping and bullying girls and engaging in criminal activity, but you probably haven’t heard about this story, right? Now a Memphis TV station and FOX News’ Bill O’Reilly have broken the silence

This lovely piece of nonsense is courtesy of Bill O'Reilly taking a situation and blowing it out of proportion (like he always does).

Peter even tries to claim that GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) tried to shut the story down.

For the record, Peter is lying (yet again).

GLAAD was only calling into question O'Reilly taking this story and making it sound as if an epidemic of female lesbian gangs is plaguing the country. The organization investigated and found the following:

The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) contacted the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department to research the statistics Wheeler cited and found that the information he reported is highly suspect. Sgt. Brett Parson, a member and the former commander of the D.C. Metro Police Department?s Gay and Lesbian Liaison Unit, says the numbers are grossly exaggerated.

Parson is quoted along with GLAAD in a Southern Poverty Law Center Intelligence Report article titled, ?The Oh-Really Factor,? which debunks the June 21 report, pointing out its numerous flaws and highlighting its sensationalistic tone.

"We have 150 to 175 total gangs in the D.C. area, and out of those only nine where the predominance of members are female," Parson said. "You simply can't make the jump that they are lesbians. I think it is fair to talk about violence and female gangs. But to sensationalize or marginalize a community by making a statement like that seems irresponsible."

Gaithersburg, Md., Detective Patrick Word is President of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Gang Investigators Network, an intelligence-sharing organization of 400 criminal justice professionals in Maryland; Washington, D.C.; and Virginia. He told the Intelligence Report, "there is no evidence whatsoever of a lesbian gang epidemic in this region...our membership reports only one lesbian gang."

So this is another case of our friend Peter whose singleminded purpose of dehumanizing gay people has led him to yet again look like a wild-haired looney on a street corner, complete with a "REPENT FOR THE END IS NEAR" sign.

But to me, it's more than that.

Check out how Peter tries to link the situation with another pet peeve of his:

Maybe the young lesbian thugs got some inspiration from “Vagina Monologues,” the vulgar feminist-lesbian play celebrated by liberal elites and performed by many female Hollywood stars.

I can see the scenario now:

Scene: A bathroom in a high school in Memphis. Gang member 1 is holding down a young girl. Gang member 2 is helping her.

Gang member 1: (to the young girl): Shut and don't make any noise. (to Gang member 2): I'm going to try something I saw from the Vagina Monologues.

Gang member 2: Girl, what is that?

Gang member 1: It's a play I heard about on Oprah. Then I went to see it when it played Off-Broadway (to young girl) Shut up. (to Gang member 2): Girl it was good. It's way existential. Gillian Anderson, Alanis Morrissette, Rita Moreno, Rosie Perez, Nell Carter, and Joy Behar was in it. When we get done with this trick, I want to have a deep philosophical discussion about our vaginas.

Yeah, Peter. That sounds about right.

Then to top it off, Peter engages in an old anti-industry trick: distorting a study to implicate the lesbian community:

“A study in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence examined conflict and violence in lesbian relationships,” says the report. “The researchers found that 90% of the lesbians surveyed had been recipients of one or more acts of verbal aggression from their intimate partners during the year prior to this study, with 31% reporting one or more incidents of physical abuse.”

That citation came from a "study" written by Timothy Dailey of the Family Research Council.

The following passage from my book talks about what Dailey did:

From this perspective, it sounds as if lesbians have a problem with partner violence. But if you looked at the source of Dailey’s citation, you get an entirely different perspective.

According to the Journal of Interpersonal Violence’s own web page:

The Journal of Interpersonal Violence offers the most up-to-date information on domestic violence, rape, child sexual abuse and other violent crimes . . . Focusing on both victims and perpetrators, the journal examines theoretical links between all types of interpersonal violence,
exploring the similarities and differences between these types of crimes.

In other words, the Journal of Interpersonal Violence tracks domestic violence, as well as other violent crimes. Of course those surveyed in it had been recipients of violence, verbal or otherwise, because this is what the journal is designed to track.

What is done here is the equivalent of taking the rate of a domestic violence study of African-Americans cited in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence and judging that entire African-American community solely on it.

It always amazes about how people like Peter LaBarbera can complain that they are "unfairly" thought of as homophobic. What do you expect for people to call you when you do things like denigrating all lesbians because of the actions of some?

If you look like a duck and act like a duck, I refuse to apologize for calling you a duck.

Michael Glatze emails me

Apparently recently "converted ex-gay" Michael Glatze got online and looked up all the blogs that talked about his story. I received the following email from him:

Dear sir,

This is Michael Glatze. I just want to tell you that, yes, you can be entirely free of the lie of homosexuality. I am a normal, heterosexual man. Yes. It can be done. With true faith and love of Christ.

Amen and God bless.Michael Glatze (P.S. If you don't believe me, pray.)

Now let me state for the record that I have no problems with someone thinking of themselves as "ex-gay." I don't agree with the notion but it's a free country.

I do have a problem with there being an industry of "ex-gay" spokespeople walking hand-in-hand with the anti-gay industry and attempting to make life more difficult for those of us who are comfortable with our lgbt orientation.

I do have a problem with "ex-gays" trying to use their so-called transformation as political leverage to turn back the passage of pro-lgbt laws and ordinances.

And I do have a problem with "ex-gays" who think that their negative experiences with their "former" lgbt orientation gives them the right to make judgements of my lgbt experiences.

Not all lgbts are promiscuous, abuse drugs and alcohol, and engage in all-around negative behaviors. These things are NOT indicative of the lgbt orientation. And I don't care who you are or what you "were," if you try to denigrate me or my lgbt brothers and sisters by inferring that negative behavior is indicative of lgbt orientation, I am going to scream foul because you don't know what you are talking about.

Live your life, but don't blame anyone or anything else for the choices you have made.

With that in mind, I wrote Michael the following as an answer to his letter:

Let me make this simple.

I respect your personal choices, but I resent your inability to accept responsibility for your personal behavior. I further resent you scarlet lettering an entire community of people based on your personal behavior. For the record, I am a happy gay male.

Homosexuality is NOT a lie.

My sexual orientation is as God made me.

And for the record, I acheived this peace with my gay orientation due to my relationship with God. When I was questioning my self, I turned to God rather than an outside source with a bias and He told me that I am as He made me so I should be proud of who I am.

I am sorry that your life has been negative and I wish you luck in your personal decisions, but I will not allow you to denigrate me or my lgbt brothers and sisters.

Good Luck To You but you need to check yourself. Your experiences as a gay man are not my experiences. So please do not disrespect me and mine.

What a drag! I can't get internet access and One News Now distorts like there is no tomorrow

It's Thursday and I'm mad at Time Warner.

To make a long story short, I don't have my DSL connected and I don't know how it is looking for the future. Looks like it's back to dial-up. I am currently looking into wireless connections, so I am optimistic.

And there are always coffee shops.

While I go through my trials and tribulations, I thought I would leave everyone with a little deception courtesy of our friends at One News Now.

The news organization used to be known as Agape Press and back in the day, it frequently cited Paul Cameron as a "pro-family expert."

I think with Cameron's history of lying being made more public, those days are gone.

However this does not keep the "news service" that began through the efforts of another friend of ours (Donald Wildmon and the American Family Association) from practicing some questionable journalistic tactics.

I ran over this recent passage in an article from the site criticizing Maryland State School Board for approving Montgomery County's sex education curriculum:

According to the Washington Post, many parents in Montgomery County oppose the new curriculum, which opponents say presents a favorable viewpoint of homosexuality and restricts religious expression by suppressing the view that homosexuality is a sin. The attorney believes the new curriculum may also be subject to litigation.

This is a misdirection. The original statement from the Washington Post reads as follows:

A spokeswoman for the community group Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, which led a consortium of opposition groups, said it was too soon to say whether it might take the matter to federal court. "There are many parents here in Montgomery County who are opposed to the curriculum," Michelle Turner said. She also said a growing number of parents outside the county are expressing concern with the lessons, which could be adopted in other Maryland counties.

So the Washington Post did state technically say that parents oppose the new curriculum. But the newspaper was quoting a spokeswoman of the group opposing the curriculum.

What One News Now did may not seem like a lie but it is bad journalism.

But hey, who cares about Earthly journalistic standards (i.e integrity and correct quote attribution) when you are fighting for the kingdom of God?

Don't get discouraged by the new model

I knew that something would happen while I am on hiatus.

Apparently one of our own has joined the other side.

Michael Glatze, called a rising star in gay leadership (and I will attribute this to him being former editor of Young Gay America rather than the fact that he is young, thin and blond like so many of our so-called leaders), has become an ex-gay.

Naturally this means that we will be inudated by Peter LaBarbera, One News Now, so-called "pro-family" webpage and blogs talking about how another person has found "freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus."

Was Glatze gay in the first place? I don't know because I never met the young man.

But I am disturbed by how he is now beating the drumbeat lies of the so-called promiscuous "homosexual lifestyle" complete with intestinal disorders.

So am I shocked by Glatze's change?

No.

Am I depressed at the company he now keeps?

No. A bit saddened but not depressed.

Let's face facts about the anti-gay industry and their partner in crime, the ex-gay industry. I have seen so many of these ex-gay spokespeople come and go. From Anthony Falzarano to John Paulk to Michael Johnston.

The anti-gay industry goes through ex-gay spokespeople like Henry VIII went through wives.

Glatze is just the latest model; a pretty boy whose story will allow the anti-gay industry to denigrate the lives of lgbts who have happy lives, unencumbered by the stereotypes and lies of oversexed gay men and violent lesbian women.

For the time being that is.

Glatze will have a time in the sun. But remember the light of that same sun also shines on us who are proudly gay and lesbian. So we must never forget who we are.

And by all means, do not fall for the lie that God does not want you to embrace your lgbt orientation. Homosexuality is not the enemy of faith or religion. I speak from personal experience when I say that this.

God created us all; heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered, to be exactly the way we are. What we do with the orientation that God gives us is our choice.

But as long as this cultural war over gay rights continues, we can expect to see more Michael Glatzes and unfortunately the Michael Glatzes of today will probably turn into the Ted Haggards of tomorrow.

But never forget that there are more of us than of them.

Almost there but not quite

Thank you all of those who sent me kind words and emails expressing your sympathy for my situation.

To reiterate the facts: My apartment was burned out. No one was harmed but my mother and I had to find a new place to stay.

We now reside at a new location so I am thankful that we are not homeless. However, it will be later this week before I am able to get my DSL and cable hooked back up. Therefore, I will be posting sporadically via the Public Library.

Nothing pretty much to tell. I hate that I am unable to post but I am patient. I will be roaring soon.

There is another bit of good news about the fire. Definitely the fact that no one was hurt tops the good news chart, but I am also happy to report that we didn't lose that much of anything. We received just a little smoke and water damage.

That means our personal possessions, and especially the notes for my book, are safe and moved to our new apartment.

It also means that my book continues to be on schedule to be published this fall.

Again, I want to thank you all for the support and love you have given me and my mother during this stresful time.

I also want to thank (in a offhand, sarcastic way) the Paul Cameron supporter who posted to my page. While I am not at full strength, I'm glad to see that I can still knock down your lies.

Will post again soon. Keep your fingers crossed as to me getting back online.

Forced Vacation from Culture War

Hopefully you all will forgive me if I take a very small sabbatical from posting.

Yesterday, my apartment building caught on fire. No one was hurt but the building was rendered unlivable.

Luckily, my apartment suffered only water and smoke damage. And also, my notes for my book were not damaged at all.

But subsequently, my mother and I are held up in a hotel room while we are searching for another place to live. We have until Friday before we have to move out.

So as much as I would love to talk about Peter LaBarbera and the anti-gay industry (my post yesterday was going to talk about our lovely friend/enemy Jeff Gannon), I am going to have to take a short leave.

I will hopefully be back later this week or early next. I'm pushing for later this week.

Peace.

George Will gets it wrong

It's bad enough that the lgbt community has to deal with the consistent spin from the anti-gay industry that we are trying to steal the liberty and freedom of Christians.

But when someone who is considered "mainstream" starts that type of spin, we have problems.

George Will is considered to be an intelligent columnist and an esteemed Washington insider. He has the respect of many of his jounalistic colleagues and is also the recipient of the Pulitzer Prize, probably the highest honor a journalist can receive.

So why, in his recent column, did he channel our friend and former Concerned Women for America employee Robert Knight.

Will talks about the recent case involving the city of Oakland vs. two Christian employees. I have talked about the case in past postings, but here is the gist:

Gay employees working for Oakland's government formed a group. In response, two Christian employees formed their own group. In the flyer advertising the Christian group, terms like "integrity" and "natural family" were used in ways that attacked gay employees.

The Christian group was told to revise the flyer. They refused and sued the city of Oakland.

Having lost their case in the 9th Circuit Court, the employees are now appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.

And that is the case. It sounds so simple that it involves gays and Christians, which means you have people coming out of the woodwork throwing out claims of a "gay agenda" trying to silence Christians.

Of course the anti-gay industry is trying to use this story in their litany of lies about the gay community.

Now they seem to have a friend with George Will.

In his column, he says:

Some African-American Christian women working for Oakland's government organized the Good News Employee Association, or GNEA, which they announced with a flier describing their group as "a forum for people of Faith to express their views on the contemporary issues of the day. With respect for the Natural Family, Marriage and Family Values."

The flier was distributed after other employees' groups, including those advocating gay rights, had advertised their political views and activities on the city's e-mail system and bulletin board. When the GNEA asked for equal opportunity to communicate by that system and that board, it was denied. Furthermore, the flier they posted was taken down and destroyed by city officials, who declared it "homophobic" and disruptive.

. . . The treatment of GNEA illustrates one technique by which America's growing ranks of self-appointed speech police expand their reach: They wait until groups they disagree with, such as GNEA, are provoked to respond to them in public debates, then they persecute them for annoying those to whom they are responding.

Will puts the same spin on this story that the anti-gay industry put on past situations like the David Parker and Repent America cases i.e. claiming that gays want to curtail the freedom of speech of Christians, but omitting the fact that the Christians in question acted in a way that went way beyond freedom of speech.

And what makes matters worse, he tries to tie the situation in with hate crimes legislation. One guess what position he took.

Will's address is georgewill@washpost.com

If you write him, please don't be rude or ugly. And please don't throw around tired phrases and words like "homophobic" and "bigot." Make your argument in a reasonable manner. The following is my letter:


For years, I have read your columns and many times disagreed with what you have said.

But there was always a respect for your opinion because you never gave the impression that you were feeding readers a line, so to speak.

Your recent column, Free Speech vs.Gay Rights, changes all of that.

You were derelict in your duty as a gatekeeper because you did not tell the entire facts of the case regarding the Good News Employee Association case in Oakland.

If you will forgive me for being so bold, I am of the opinion that you intentionally meant to deceive your readers.

Your first sentence, Marriage is the foundation of the natural family and sustains family values. That sentence is inflammatory, perhaps even a hate crime, can only be called for what it is; a damned lie.

This is from an article in the Oakland Tribune on Feb. 16, 2007:

Rederford and Christy sued, claiming their rights were violated by an Oakland anti-discrimination policy that promotes homosexuality and denounces Christian values. A federal judge dismissed the city as a defendant in March 2004, and in February 2005 granted summary judgment in favor of then-City Manager Robert Bobb and CEDA Deputy Executive Director Joyce Hicks. Senior Circuit Judge Betty Fletcher on Thursday asked Lively whether his clients realize they have "a rather low level of protection" on potentially incendiary or discriminatory language in the workplace, and should "keep away from words that'll rile people up."

"But shouldn't that go both ways?" Lively replied, noting his clients hadn't complained about the National Coming Out Day e-mail.

Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta noted that e-mail had invited readers to "a rally against hatred and bigotry -- is that disparaging to your clients?"

Circuit Judge Richard Clifton said he believes "there are eggshells on both sides" of this argument, yet he doesn't see what the e-mail had done to vilify Rederford and Christy while it's not hard to see how their flier vilified gays and lesbians. "It's hard to avoid the inference, 'We lack ethics, we lack integrity because these people are here.'"

Your explanation, The treatment of GNEA illustrates one technique by which America's growing ranks of self-appointed speech police expand their reach: They wait until groups they disagree with are provoked to respond to them in public debates, then they persecute them for annoying those to whom they are responding, is poorly reasoned and I feel intentionally vague.

The pro-gay group's flyers had no language attacking those who do not agree with homosexuality. Nor did the pro-gay group attack anyone opposing lgbt rights as having no integrity. Nor did they attack their families and accuse them of not being natural, unlike the flyer of GNEA that caused all of this ruckus.

So just how did the pro-gay group provoke Rederford and Christy?

And this case has nothing to do with the "gay agenda" or "hate crimes," but rather what actions an employer should take when employees feel that their religion allows them to demean the families of other employees not sharing their beliefs.

I would expect what you wrote to come from someone like Robert Knight, Brent Bozell, or Cliff Kincaid and not someone who is an esteemed Washington columnist and a Pulitzer Prize recipient.

A Paul Cameron supporter emails me

I wasn't going to post today but something happened that I just couldn't pass up commenting on.

A person who is obviously a supporter of discredited researcher Paul Cameron contacted me today. He sent me two emails. The most interesting of the two is the second:

Ha, 'lies of paul cameron'. Another response to your comment on Box Turtle Bulliten, maybe you should actually read the study, instead of believing (or making up) unfounded and brief statements by 'gay' controlled organizations.

I don't know who this person is (I have my guesses) but I do want to address his or her claim.

Apparently according to him, Paul Cameron's research has been discredited due to "unfounded" statments by "gay controlled organizations."

Oh really?

Let's take a look at these "gay controlled organizations:"

“(Cameron) misrepresents my fi ndings and distorts them to advance his homophobic views. I make a very clear distinction in my writing between pedophilia and homosexuality, noting that adult males who sexually victimize young boys are either pedophilic or heterosexual, and
that in my research I have not found homosexual men turning away from adult partners to children . . . I consider this totally unprofessional behavior on the part of Dr. Cameron and I want to bring this to your attention. He disgraces his profession.” - A. Nicholas Groth, 1984


“Given what I now know, I believe there are fl aws with Paul Cameron’s study. One cannot extrapolate from his methodology and say that the average male homosexual life span is 43 years.”— former Secretary of Education and author of The Book of Virtues William Bennett, the New Republic, February 23, 1998

On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that “Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists” by the APA Board of Directors.In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA) adopted a resolution which asserted that “Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism” and noted that “Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research.”

The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, “The Paul Cameron Case,” is to be published in Footnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron’s frequent lecture and media appearances.

In 2005, the Boston Globe spotlighted Cameron in an article entitled Beliefs Drive Research Agenda of New Think Tanks. According to the article, when the Traditional Values Coalition was asked about Cameron, the organization responded by allegedly removing all references to Cameron from its web page. A spokesperson for the organization, Daniella Lopez, said the research had been placed on the web page by mistake.

Cameron and Cameron’s report on “life expectancy” in homosexuals vs heterosexuals is severely methodologically flawed. . . 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. - Morten Frisch, Danish epidemiologist, April 2007

"We do not support the work of Paul Cameron nor desire to use flawed research"- Alan Chambers, Exodus International, April 26, 2007

I linked only the Alan Chambers comment but if anyone wants the links to other ones, email me.

My point is this: different people from different ideologies and backgrounds have all condemned Paul Cameron's "research."

The only conspiracy that exists is solely in the mind of Mr. Cameron and those guillible enough to support his lies.

Nothing too much to talk about today

This has been a busy week for me because my group, Palmetto Umoja, is helping to conduct South Carolina's second annual Black Pride.

That being the case, my postings have been a bit sparse and will probably continue to be for the remainder of the week.

But I encourage everyone who hasn't already to read yesterday's posting on Charlene Cothran. And also, this link that gives an excellent dissertation of her appearance on today's episode of The 700 Club.

It looks like the question I posed yesterday is being answered and it ain't good.

Charlene Cothran

Today, I am going to talk about something I have avoided.

I avoided talking about this issue because I did not want it to seem that I am attacking someone for their personal choice.

But after my post two days ago about black ministers poisoning the African-American community against lgbts, I have been thinking.

There is a lot of unfortunate potential for ignorance in the black community about gays and lesbians. Black folks don't want to acknowledge that gay folks exist in their midst.

Therefore the community is susceptible to believe anyone claiming to be an expert on the "gay agenda." And yes, that includes Paul Cameron.

It also includes someone coming to them claiming to have "lived the gay lifestyle but got deliverance through Jesus."

Many black folks, due to the inability of the community to acknowledge lgbts of color, would actually believe those lies.

And a potential belief that lgbts can change our orientation would work to further dehumanize us in a community that has a problem acknowledging our existence, but one many of us look to for support and love.

It is for this reason that I want to talk a little about Charlene Cothran.

For those who do not know, she is the publisher of Venus Magazine, a publication that once dealt with gay issues from an African-American perspective.

However, Charlene now claims she is no longer gay. Subsequently, the magazine's focus has changed.

This also means that she is referred to by people like Peter LaBarbera as someone who has been "freed from homosexuality:"

Please be a part of the wonderful story of former lesbian Charlene’s Cothran’s rebirth in Christ by subscribing to her magazine VENUS - which has been transformed from a publication that celebrated “gays and lesbians” to one that tells that stories of people like herself who have overcome homosexuality with God’s help.

I have no problem with Cothran's personal decision, but I have a problem with her allowing herself to be used by the anti-gay industry. Especially when it looks like she is not even sure of her choices, as seen by this interview:

I think what many are saying, gay and straight, about your experience is that you are not saying, "I was a practicing lesbian, and now I love men because of Christ." You've said you are celibate. So, what about you now really makes you heterosexual?

Charlene: Nothing. You’ve spoken a piece of truth. Right now I am completely satisfied with my walk, which is me and God. My prayer wasn’t—Lord make me heterosexual. My prayer was not fix me, repair me and make me straight—that was not my prayer. My prayer was God make me whole in every sense of the word, make me whole mentally, make me whole spiritually, make me whole completely! Take this mean tongue out of me, you know; I had this mean spirit where I could just take a person down on a few short comments. That was just as dynamic a change as the gay thing…make me whole financially, you send me plenty of provisions, but why is it that I don’t prioritize things the way I should at this stage in my life? Make me whole in every area. I asked God for complete wholeness. He doesn’t come to save a piece of you.

Are you saying that you are not heterosexual?

Charlene: I am saying that I am celibate right now. I’m not saying there won’t ever be a man in my life. You’re asking me about where I am and that's all I can speak to. Today I am celibate. Again, I don’t say I will never have a man in my life, I’m not saying I will never be married to a man. Who knows what the Lord has in store for me. But…there is one thing I can say and one thing I will go on record and say—I will never be entangled with the bondage of lesbianism again. You can put me on record for that and I know that people are going to be turning over every stone, looking and magnifying and trying to find some dirt. I invite you to continue to look and see if you can find something on me. I will never be entangled with lesbianism again! Right now I’m celibate, now, where the Lord's going to move me, what opportunity he's going to place in my path for me from here on—I don't know.

Are you physically attracted to men?

Charlene: [pauses] I am physically attracted to the spirit of Christ right now. You're trying to take me down a road that I won't go down right now

Charlene's story is more intricate than what has been put out there. The spin has been that she has been "delivered" from homosexuality. But her story is a bit more complicated.

I have a personal opinion of Ms. Cothran's choice, but I will not voice it and I hope that what I am saying will not be considered to be a personal attack because my intent is not to demean her.

But the question has to be asked: will she talk truthfully about her decision publicly or will she go on a tangent about the "gay influence" in public schools?

Will she explain that she considers herself not heterosexual but celibate, or will we see her on press releases criticizing pro-gay laws or on posters gagged and falsely claiming that adding lgbts to hate crime laws will lead to her arrest for "telling her story."

Will Ms. Cothran work try to establish a dialogue about the intricacies of sexual orientation or will she be featured in public campaigns repeating lies about lgbts and promiscuity, child molestation, or life spans?

So my problem does not lie with Ms. Cothran's past choice, but her future choices.

There is a danger in my black community. There is a groundswell of people (i.e Harry Jackson, Ken Hutcherson, Wellington Boone) who think that since they believe homosexuality to be a sin, anything they do or say to hinder pro-gay visibility is a good thing, even if the words coming out of their mouths are lies.

The black community needs education on the lives of lgbts of color, not showcasers or attention grabbing demagogues. We have enough of those.

And I want to know just where does Ms. Cothran stand on this issue?

I don't ask that of myself. I ask that question in the name of the millions of lgbts of color who have to deal with the choices she makes.

Do the right thing, Ms. Cothran.

Brian Camenker knows the answer!

By now, everyone has heard of the recent decision by the Massachusetts Legislature not to put the issue of same sex marriage up to a vote for a constitutional amendment.

It was a great victory and one that has the anti-gay industry reeling.

But one member is sure he knows why lgbts won.

Brian Camenker is a very interesting person to say the least. He is the head of Mass Resistance, an organization dedicated to stopping the so-called "gay agenda" in Massachusetts.

I like to think of him as a statewide Peter LaBarbera. Camenker has a very sordid history in the state; one of his many endeavors involve taking pictures of pride parades and posting them on his web page, complete with interesting comments regarding the "sinfulness" of the person in the picture.

According to him:

VoteOnMarriage's campaign failed because the debate was boiled down to "letting the people vote" and ensuring "children have both a mother and a father." But it left out the important truth about homosexual "marriage": It's based on immoral and unhealthy sexual perversions. Morality and public health needed to be part of the debate.

That's right. According to Camenker, there should have been more talk about how nasty gay folks are, how we have short life spans, how we molest children at a high rate, how we practice blood sacrifices, etc. etc.

Paging Paul Cameron!

Apparently when the organization pushing for the vote appealed to what they thought was common sense, real common sense took hold and legislators realized that gay folks just want what everyone else wants: comfort, stability, and a right to protect our loved ones.

Ain't reality grand?

It's Monday so it's time for another one of Harry Jackson's lies

Yet again, black minister Harry Jackson writes another column falsely claiming that adding lgbts to hate crimes legislation will lead to ministers being jailed for speaking out against homosexuality.

But his column this week is also a little bit more whiny than usual.

It seems that USA Today published an article Friday about his claims regarding hate crimes legislation. And the publication actually dared to present both sides of the issue.

This led to a huge smackdown of Jackson's claim by Harry Knox from HRC's director of Religion and Faith Program:

(Harry) Jackson's argument "is a lie, and it should not be told in the name of the Gospel," he said.

Now I like that. No big production, no corny "let's win the hearts and minds of America," and no mincing of words.

And the words struck Jackson to the heart apparently, as witnessed by what he wrote.

But for a better deconstruction of Jackson's latest lies, go here.


But sad to say, Jackson is not alone.

On this site, I found this thing to my left. I won't even try to analyze it.

I will just say the eight commandment - Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Just who does she think she is?

From an online buddy comes something I just couldn't resist talking about.

Andrea Lafferty of the Traditional Values Coalition took it upon herself to try and correct a legend in the African-American civil rights movement.

Angry because U.S. Representative John Lewis commemorated the anniversary of the historic Loving vs. Virginia decision (that made interracial marriages legal in the United States) to push a resolution that speaks out in favor of same-sex marriages, Lafferty said the following:

“Rep. Lewis is a member of the Old Guard of civil rights activists who have sold out to the homosexual movement . . ."

Okay this bothers me on so many levels.

And before anyone even tries to claim victimhood status for Mrs. Lafferty, I would like to say that she has a right to say whatever she wants. I do not want to silence her.

But I want to call attention to that fact when every time one opens his or her mouth to comment on something, there are such things as discernment and credibility.

Or in other words, you can say what you want but if someone can spot how you look like a damned fool for what you said, pointing out your ignorance is not censorship.

Or to simplify it more, just who in the heck is Andrea Lafferty to criticize John Lewis on matters of civil rights.

John Lewis has given his time, energy, and much of his blood (I've seen pictures of him after he was beaten bloody) to ensure that African-Americans have basic human rights. From the founding of SNCC (Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee) to the Freedom Riders to the 1963 March on Washington and finally to the halls of Congress, Lewis is the very epitome of a tireless worker for good.

It is more to Lewis's credit that he recognizes the similarities that we all have when it comes to wanting basic rights and the means for self-determination.

Andrea Lafferty, on the other hand, has been involved in a group that relies on bad studies and outright lies to demonize the lgbt community.

The most suffering for the "cause of civil rights" she probably had to undergo was having a hair out of place when throwing out soundbites on a pseudo news show that generously lets her ramble without courtesy of a rebuttal guest.

Or breaking a nail while writing a column due to the excitement of listing salicious details of "homosexual encounters" in attempts to scare the potential reader.

Or maybe breaking a heel when she is walking the halls of Congress and "monitoring" committee meetings.

Her criticizing Lewis on the state of civil rights is like a b-movie actor criticizing Meryl Streep on her performing skills.

Lastly, Lafferty has the nerve the say the following:

Homosexuals have no shame when it comes to exploiting every noble social movement in our culture. These radical groups routinely come up with a new ‘holiday’ or special week in order to push their agenda upon the rest of us—and if you protest against this callous exploitation of important historical events, you’re labeled a homophobic bigot.

Okay Andrea, I won't label you as a homophobic bigot.

But I will label you as confused.

Just because your father, Lou Sheldon, got some black ministers teamed up against gay marriage does not give you any credibility to start attacking a black man whose very life has been dedicated to fighting injustice.

If you had any sense, you would hush your mouth, pay attention, and take good notes while Lewis is talking.

But speaking of those black ministers aligned with your father, if you want to have a good conversation about selling out, I suggest you confer with them.

200 posts and over 10,000 hits later . . . .

Forgive me for bragging but today is a milestone. This is my 200th post and what a strange trip it has been.

When I initially started this blog, it was to publicize my upcoming book (out this fall). I had no idea that it would last this long.

But I am proud of the work I have done, however miniscule it is in the huge landscape of the lgbt community.

Which reminds me of the bad mood I am in.

Apparently my publisher hasn't begun working on my corrections yet. This problem is compounded by the fact that if my corrections were worked on upon, they would have been finished and I would be receiving them now.

I'm not exactly a popular person at the publishing house right now. It's not like I used bad language or anything, but I let them know that I was very angry at their error.

My anger is a huge problem. I rarely get very upset but when I do, I get into scorched earth mode. This means I was so mad at my publisher, I was threatening to demand a refund and take my manuscript somewhere else.

But cooler emotions prevailed. It's too late in the game to pursue a new publisher. So I suffciently calmed down by cleaning my house (yeah I know, it's a Joan Crawford stereotype. So sue me already.)

And tomorrow I will have a nice polite conversation with my publishing house.

But for tonight, no talking about my book, no talking about James Holsinger or Peter LaBarbera, no railing on the anti-gay industry.

Just rest.

PFOX gets into the act. Does Holsinger really need this group as an ally?

Apparently James Holsinger has allies that maybe he does not need.

PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays) have gotten into knee deep into the argument, issuing a press release claiming that Holsinger and ex-gays in general are being discriminated against:

Ex-gays and Americans who support the right to self-determination of same-sex attraction are routinely ridiculed by the very people who claim to be victims themselves. “Gay activists lobby to be included in tolerance policies, hate crimes and employment non-discrimination legislation, but work hard to deny ex-gays the right to the same treatment,” said Regina Griggs, executive director of PFOX.

. . . “Americans need to face the growing issue of bigotry perpetrated upon ex-gays and their supporters. Gay activists cannot claim sympathy as victims when they attack ex-gays for political purposes of their own,” said Griggs. “Tolerance is not a one-way street. All individuals with unwanted same-sex attractions deserve the right to self-determination and happiness based on their own needs, and not the political inconvenience of others.”

Oh really?

Before PFOX contends itself to play Joan of Arc, I want to remind it of this press release from 1996:

FRC Creates PFOX To Counter PFLAG (fwd) WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 /PRNewswire/ --

"For too long, many people have come to believe that people with homosexual desires cannot change. The `once gay, always gay' fiction has persuaded more than a few Americans to support so- called `gay rights' out of a misdirected sense of compassion. But it is anything but compassionate to tell someone that have no hope of change and that they might as well indulge in sexual behavior that is unhealthy, immoral and in many cases, even fatal," Bob Knight said Thursday during a ground breaking news conference.

Knight, Family Research Council Director of Cultural Studies, participated in a 9:30 a.m. news event to unveil PFOX -- Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (Contact: Anthony Falzarano) -- a new, national parents group that will counter the pro-homosexual PFLAG. The news event, which included former homosexuals and lesbians, also highlighted the Second Annual National Coming OUT OF Homosexuality Day. (Contact: Michael Johnston)

Knight made the following comments during the news event at the National Press Club: "Over on the mall this week, the AIDS quilt is a silent and wrenching testimony to the hundreds of thousands of people struck down with premature death. The quilt also symbolizes tragic choices made by many people who were misled into believing they had no other option. How many of these sons, daughters, fathers, brothers or sisters would be alive today if they had had access to compassionate people like these around me who have been caught up in sexual or drug addiction but have broken the deadly pattern?

"Today's message is very simple: No one has to be `gay.' No one should reject a family member because that family member is `gay.' But love does not require accepting behavior that is harmful. In fact, real love in action is a conscious effort to steer someone away from behavior that can hurt or even kill. It isn't always easy, but it can be done, as evidenced by the many who have. "

Parents, Family and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX), which is being introduced today, has been formed to aid people who have family members struggling with homosexuality. PFOX is dedicated to correcting the many distortions and increasingly abusive assertions made by homosexual activist groups against those with whom they disagree.

The homosexual activist movement despises and attacks the ex-gay movement out of fear that these people are exactly who they say they are: people once in bondage to homosexuality but now freed to pursue a fuller life. But their lives are evidence of options rarely discussed by very real."

Let's look at the cast of characters mentioned in the 1996 press release:

Family Research Council - on more than one occasion cites bad studies and cherry picked research to demonize the gay community.

Robert Knight - freely used Paul Cameron's work as well as other cherry picked work to demonize the gay and lesbian community. He has also been known to verbally attack physicians who complain about the distortion of their work (i.e. Dr. Robert Garafalo - as mentioned in my upcoming book)

Michael Johnston - traveled the country talking about how he was delivered from the "evils of homosexuality" while at the same time having clandestine hotel encounters with gay men and exposing them to the HIV virus.

PFOX was created not to preserve the right of self-determination of ex-gays, but to act as a stumbling block for those of us who are comfortable with our lgbt orientation.

For the group to try and claim victimhood status in the case of James Holsinger defies all logic.

And the fact that the group got involved in this matter demonstrates why gay community's concerns about Holsinger are valid.

You can't run away from your past, no matter how you try to pretty yourself up.

Box Turtle Bulletin nails Holsinger paper

Just as I knew they would, Jim Burroway and Box Turtle Bulletin revealed James Holsinger's paper on homosexuality for the farce that it is.

Burroway reveals things about the paper that I didn't even notice:

The whole point of Holsinger’s paper is to draw a sharp contrast between gay relationships and heterosexual relationships.

But to do so, he he culls his evidence largely from papers which describe injuries from nonconsensual intercourse to denigrate consensual relationships, he describes odd sexual practices that are enjoyed by heterosexual couples to denigrate the minority of gay couples who indulge in those same practices, and he misleads his readers by padding his bibliography with more references to papers explicitly describing injuries experienced by heterosexual men and women to imply that they describe gay men instead.
In other words, to describe gay sexual acts, more often than not he turned to papers which describe injuries sustained through heterosexual activity.

And then he used this evidence from heterosexual activity to say that “when the complementarity of the sexes is breached, injuries and diseases may occur as noted above.” But what does this evidence suggest about “complementarity” in heterosexual relationships? Holsinger doesn’t answer.

Now some folks have continued to try and make the case one of Holsinger's religious beliefs but don't be fooled by such platitudes.

Holsinger manipulated credible scientific work to denigrate gay males. His paper appealed to bad stereotypes and urban legends about gay men and anal sex. I'm surprised he didn't try to prove the notorious "gerbil" story.

Is this the man we want as surgeon general?

And speaking of Holsinger's defenders, I noticed that One News Now hasn't said a thing about the story.

In that past when the news service was Agape Press, it freely reported Paul Cameron's studies and other notorious bits of junk science regarding the lgbt community.

For that matter, has the Family Research Council made a statement about Holsinger? I don't see why the group shouldn't. In the past, members such as Robert Knight and Timothy Dailey published a bunch of studies about the lgbt community.

Some of these studies still exist on the FRC web page.

Why so silent, boys?

James Holsinger has some explaining to do

It seems that the controversy over Bush's surgeon general nominee, James Holsinger, continues unabated.

And the issue is getting more cloudy.

Several of his defenders are coming out of the woodwork defending Holsinger, making it seem that he is a latter-day Mother Teresa. These defenders include a lesbian:

Maria Kemplin, a former colleague of Dr. Holsinger’s who is a lesbian, is familiar with the 1991 report. But in a letter she sent to Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, she wrote of Dr. Holsinger as a friend who helped without judging her.

“I am a liberal Democrat and a member of gay and women’s rights organizations,” Ms. Kemplin wrote. “Still, I strongly support Dr. Jim Holsinger as a leader and administrator who is able to see across divisive issues and relate with integrity to people, no matter their life circumstance.”

Good, then Holsinger won't have any problems answering questions about that paper he wrote demonizing gay men.

One of the biggest calamities of the American media is the abject laziness of our journalists. Sometimes in pursuit of "popular" stories, they miss the stories that, with a little time and effort given to them, can bring much needed attention to important issues.

And to me, one of the biggest underreported stories have been how the anti-gay create phony scientific studies to push forth a religious point of view, much like Holsinger did in 1991.

The lgbt community has had to deal with "scientific papers" put out by groups like the Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, etc. accusing us of molesting children, having a short life span, and other assorted ills.

These papers either use bad sources or cherry pick credible information to reach a conclusion already frought in the author's mind - that gays and lesbians are sick people and anything that protects us is a bad thing.

Case in point is a recent article talking about gays adopting children:

Judith Stacey, a sociology professor at New York University and co-author with Tim Biblarz of "(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter?" in the American Sociological Review, says conservative groups distorted the findings of her 2001 study, which found some slight differences in children of lesbian mothers in terms of career choices and sexual experimentation. And while some of her ongoing work is finding "minor differences in sexuality and possibly in the range of comfort, but just barely, with non heterosexual behavior," a European study of daughters of lesbians has found a skew toward more heterosexual partners. . .

When Dr. (James) Dobson, in his Time magazine essay criticizing Ms. Cheney, cited research from Kyle Pruett at Yale University to state that children need fathers, Dr. Pruett, author of "Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child," was furious, claiming Dr. Dobson had misrepresented his findings to suggest that children of gay parents would somehow suffer developmentally. After attempts to contact Dr. Dobson proved fruitless, he taped an interview and posted it on YouTube.com excoriating the conservative leader.

. . . Mr. (Peter) Spriggs (from the Family Research Council) remains unrepentant about his and Dr. Dobson's use of research to bolster their contention that children do best with a mother and a father.

"No scholar has the right to dictate how another person will use his data, just because he happens to disagree from a political point of view," he said.

On the contrary Mr. Spriggs. If a scholar's work is being used incorrectly, he or she has a right to call foul.

And a community who has been maligned by usage of said work has a right to complain and demand answers, particularly if the alleged perpetrator is vying for a position to represent this community.

So Holsinger's defenders can trot as many lesbians as they want out of the woodwork. And I don't even care if it's discovered that Holsinger was the one who really parted the Red Sea and performed the miracle of the loaves and the fishes.

If he wants to be my surgeon general, he needs to answer for his attempts to call me and mine sick people.

Anything you don't want to do, let the black folks do it for you

(Sidebar - If you haven't already, please read yesterday's post on Bush's surgeon general nominee)

I guess Kenneth Blackwell considers himself a lone wolf. No doubt it's not easy being a black conservative in today's environment.

But I am sure it can get quite lucrative when it comes to what you can get away with.

His column in Townhall is a good example of what I am talking about. It is yet another diatribe filled with lies about hate crimes legislation:

A bill making it illegal for people of various faiths to freely hold and profess their respective religion's teaching on sexual morality is working its way through Congress. Regardless of your politics, every American who cares about free speech and religious liberty should tell their U.S. senators to oppose this legislation. This bill has already passed the House of Representatives on a largely party-line vote with a Democrat majority. It is now pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee, and is expected to be voted on by the entire Senate in a month.

This bill would criminalize beliefs. If signed into law, H.R. 1592 would create a new class of crimes.

He also says the following:

As a country, do we want to be in the business of "proving" what someone thinks or denying them freedom of conscience? Do we want to rip the heart out of the First Amendment of our Constitution? Do we want to deconstruct our public square where progress has been advanced by a dialogue between faith and reason? Do we really want to embolden a 21st century secular fundamentalism by forcing religious expression from the public square?

The answer to these questions is a simple and emphatic no! What is driving the controversy associated with this bill ultimately comes down to one issue: Can the government punish a person for a "thought crime" whose religious faith includes the belief that homosexual behavior is immoral, and same sex marriage is morally objectionable?

Hate crimes legislation covers violent action not thought, as I am sure Blackwell knows. Also bear in mind that hate crimes legislation already exists in cases of race and religion. Nothing in Blackwell's column talks about those two distinctions. He only talks about hate crimes legislation being wrong when it comes to sexual orientation.

How dare lgbts want the protections that African-Americans enjoy!

Blackwell's being duplicitious. But it seems to be the role that some black conservatives want. They allow their heritage to be exploited for the status quo. They seem to be saying "we got our rights, now we will use the same prejudices, duplicitious arguments and lies that held us down to hold others down."

"And if we do it well enough, the white conservatives will give us status."

First you have Harry Jackson raging against hate crimes legislation in four or five consecutive columns. Now Blackwell is into the act as the designated black man out to put gays in their place for daring to compare themselves to black folks. Who is next to talk about it? Alan Keyes? LaShawn Barber?

With Jackson's recent columns comes the advertisement to buy his book, Black Contract with America. By accident? I don't think so.

Blackwell and Jackson may seem like men standing up for what they believe in. But I disagree.

Sounds like two guys who found a nice racket.