Intentionally Causing Chaos

Yeah I know everyone is concerned over Mike Huckabee’s bullshit. And to a degree, I am too.

But I have to say something else about this staph infection mess that been in the news for the past couple of days.

I think the voices in our community have responded well to this nonsense, but I also think more needs to be said.

The first thing is that this exploitation of crucial medical information by the anti-gay industry is nothing new:

1979 - Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg publishes Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women. This was a study looking at gay men in the city of San Francisco in the early 1970s. Over 30 years later, the anti-gay industry cites the book as a correct representation of the sexual habits of the entire gay community. They do this despite the fact that Martin and Weinberg clearly said - “. . . given the variety of circumstances which discourage homosexuals from participating in research studies, it is unlikely that any investigator will ever be in a position to say that this or that is true of a given percentage of all homosexuals.”

The Gay Report is published. This book, looking at the sex habits of gays and lesbians, was based on 1,900 sex survey responses from gay men; 1,000 from lesbians; and 2,500 responses from a gay magazine questionnaire. The authors even say, “We agreed at the outset not to pretend that these percentages represented the practices and views of all gay people—they reflected only our respondents.” However, just like Homosexualities (see above entry), The Gay Report will be used to generalize about the sexual habits of all lgbts even 30 years after its publishing.

1994 - Joanne Hall, Ph.D. of the University of Tennessee’s College of Nursing publishes a study looking at the patterns of behavior for 35 lesbians who had self-identified alcohol problems. Her study is later used by various anti-gay industry groups to claim that lesbians in general have a problem with alcohol abuse and that gay adoption is not a good idea. Hall later writes a letter of complaint to one of the groups distorting her study (the Family Research Council). Her complaint is ignored.

2001 - Six researchers (Robert S Hogg, Stefan A Strathdee, Kevin JP Craib, Michael V. O’ Shaughnessy, Julio Montaner, and Martin T Schechter) write a letter to the editor to the International Journal of Epidemiology accusing the anti-gay industry of distorting a study they published in 1997 in order to claim that gay men have a short life span. They said they were speaking of a hypothetical outcome that would take place if there were not better practices regarding safe sex in that particular area. They also said that conditions have improved; therefore the outcome they predicted (i.e. gay men not reaching their sixty-fifth birthday) had been averted.

So there is a history of the anti-gay industry distorting credible medicinal information. And I am concerned as to what it can lead to.

Dealing with medical matters is walking a very thin tightrope. There is a fine line between informing segments of the public and demonizing them. And if that line is crossed, it builds mistrust.

For the most part, the medical community have done all they can to inform and educate about this staph infection without demonizing the lgbt community.

Then people like Americans for Truth (in name only), Concerned Women for America and the rest of the phony “pro-family” groups stick their dirty fingers into the situation.

These groups don’t care about the potential danger of the staph infections. Let’s face it; if there was not a gay angle, these groups wouldn’t care. They are only interested in the fact that gay men are affected; the better for them to hint Paul Cameronesque lies about gay man, anal sex, and feces.

I wonder how long it will before they start referring to gerbils?

To tell these groups to keep their shrill voices quiet probably wouldn’t do any good. I hate to say it, but a part of me thinks that they know what they are doing.

Part of me thinks that they are intentionally trying to sow seeds of mistrust between the lgbt and medical communities.

Many studies show that it is the lack of access to good healthcare information that spreads disease in the lgbt community. At the root of this mistrust is a fear coming from lgbts as to how their physicians will react if they out themselves.

Where there is no trust, there is no dialogue. Where there is no dialogue, there is no access to good healthcare. Where there is no access to good healthcare, there is disease.

That old adage about “for want of a nail” plays on an extreme level here.

And meanwhile, the anti-gay industry stands to benefit as they divest themselves from the self-actualizing dichotomy they have caused.

Very Machiavellian, but not very Christian.

UPDATE - Way to go, Centers for Disease Control!!!

The CDC has issued a statement on the staph infection. Part of it reads as follows:

CDC Statement on MRSA in Men Who Have Sex with Men

MRSA is a common cause of skin infections throughout the United States. These infections occur in men, women, adults, children, and persons of all races and sexual orientations, and are known to be transmitted by close skin-to-skin contact. In this issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine, Diep et al looked at isolates of MRSA - USA300 strains containing a particular plasmid associated with additional drug resistance. The paper shows that multidrug-resistant USA300 has emerged as an important source of disease among men with have sex with men in 2 geographically distinct communities.

The strains of MRSA described in the recent Annals of Internal Medicine have mostly been identified in certain groups of men who have sex with men (MSM), but have also been found in some persons who are not MSM. It is important to note that the groups of MSM in which these isolates have been described are not representative of all MSM, so conclusions can not be drawn about the prevalence of these strains among all MSM.

Anti-gay industry grabs on to story about bacteria and don’t let go
or
Homophobia In Action

To paraphrase one of the most excellent writers of all time, Rod Serling, submitted for your approval, a difference between two agendas.

One encompasses demonizing and other encompasses informing.

It is relatively easy to guess which is which. But just in case you can't guess, I drop a hint or two:

A so-called Christian newswire site in Canada:

SAN FRANCISCO, January 15, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A new medical study appearing in the Annals of American Medicine shows that homosexuals are spreading a new, highly-infectious and extremely dangerous bacteria amongst themselves, most probably through anal intercourse.

The bacterium, called MRSA USA300, is impervious to front-line antibiotics and can only be treated with rarer drugs, primarily Vancomycin. Researchers say that the bug, which is a type of staphylococcus, is primed to develop immunity to that drug as well. Infected patients may have inflammation, abscesses, and tissue loss in the affected areas. Although the bacterium does not literally "eat" the body, it manufactures toxins that can cause "necrosis" - the death of surrounding tissue.

The study's authors note that the strong link between unhealthy behavior, particularly among homosexuals, is the driving force behind the disease. "Spread of the USA300 clone among men who have sex with men is associated with high-risk behaviors, including use of methamphetamine and other illicit drugs, sex with multiple partners, participation in a group sex party, use of the internet for sexual contacts, skin-abrading sex, and history of sexually transmitted infections," the authors write.

"The same patterns of increased sexual risk behaviors among men who have sex with men - which have resulted from changes in beliefs regarding HIV disease severity with the availability of potent antiretroviral therapy - have been driving resurgent epidemics of early syphilis, rectal gonorrhea, and new HIV infections in San Francisco, Boston, and elsewhere," add the researchers.

The study, which focused on clinics in the San Francisco area, found that in some cases up to 39% of patients had the MRSA USA300 infections in their genitals or buttocks, although the disease can be spread by general skin-to-skin contact and can even be picked up from surfaces.

Observing that "Infection with multidrug-resistant USA300 MRSA is common among men who have sex with men," the study timidly concludes that "multidrug-resistant MRSA infection might be sexually transmitted in this population," and counsels "further research."

It is estimated that in San Francisco's Castro District, which has the highest concentration of homosexuals in the country, the infection rate is 1 in every 588 residents. One in every 3,800 residents of San Francisco are infected. Homosexuals are 13 times more likely to be infected than others in the city.

The disease is not only spreading in San Francisco, but also Boston, New York and Los Angeles. In addition to homosexuals, people who are ill or have weakened immune systems are particularly susceptible. MRSA and other types of staphylococcus bacteria, often spread in hospitals, kill more than 19,000 Americans each year, a rate higher than deaths due to AIDS.

Peter LaBarbara (yes they mispelled his name), president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, is hoping that the revelation of yet another homosexual epidemic will have an impact on the public's perception of homosexual behavior. "I think that the media, and Hollywood, and a lot of our policy makers and certainly academia are in a world of 'let's pretend' with regard to homosexual behavior and its consequences," he told LifeSiteNews. "They don't want to focus on the special risks that homosexual behavior, especially between men, have in the public health arena, and issues like this keep coming up."

However, LaBarbara acknowledges that the major media will "invariably spin things in a homosexual direction."

"We saw the identical thing happen 25 years ago with the reporting on AIDS," he said, "but ironically the whole AIDS crisis strengthened the homosexual lobby in this country."


The New York Times:

A new, highly drug-resistant strain of the "flesh-eating" MRSA bacteria is being spread among gay men in San Francisco and Boston, researchers reported on Monday.

In a study published online by the journal Annals of Internal Medicine, the bacteria seemed to be spread most easily through anal intercourse but also through casual skin-to-skin contact and touching contaminated surfaces.

The authors warned that unless microbiology laboratories were able to identify the strain and doctors prescribed the proper antibiotic therapy, the infection could soon spread among other groups and become a wider threat.

The new strain seems to have "spread rapidly" in gay populations in San Francisco and Boston, the researchers wrote, and "has the potential for rapid, nationwide dissemination" among gay men.

The study was based on a review of medical records from outpatient clinics in San Francisco and Boston and nine medical centers in San Francisco.

The Castro district in San Francisco has the highest number of gay residents in the country, according to the University of California, San Francisco. One in 588 residents is infected with the new multidrug-resistant MRSA strain, the study found. That compares with 1 in 3,800 people in San Francisco, according to statistical analyses based on ZIP codes.

A separate part of the study found that gay men in San Francisco were about 13 times more likely to be infected than other people in the city.

The San Francisco researchers suggested that scrubbing with soap and water might be the most effective way to stop skin-to-skin transmission, particularly after sexual activities.

MRSA, for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, was once spread chiefly in hospitals. But in recent years, a number of healthy people have acquired it outside hospitals.

Nearly 19,000 people died in the United States from MRSA infections in 2005, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported.

The infection can cause unusually severe problems, including abscesses and skin ulcers. The bacteria can invade through the skin to produce necrotizing fasciitis, giving them the popular name of flesh-eating bacteria. They can also cause pneumonia, damage the heart and produce widespread infection through the blood.

Among gay men in the study, MRSA was spread by skin contact, causing abscesses and infection in the buttocks and genital area.

The new strain is closely related to earlier ones. Both are known as MRSA USA300.

The strain is much more difficult to treat because it is resistant not just to methicillin, but also many more of the antibiotics used to treat the earlier strains, said Dr. Henry F. Chambers, an author of the new study.

The new strain contains a plasmid called pUSA03.

"This particular clone is resistant to at least three other drugs, clindamycin, tetracycline and mupirocin," Dr. Chambers said in a telephone interview.

Of the alternatives recommended by the C.D.C. and the Infectious Diseases Society of America, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (Bactrim), clindamycin and a tetracycline, "this strain is resistant to two of those three," he added. "In addition, the new strain is resistant to mupirocin, which has been advocated for eradicating the strain from carriers."

Going for blood out of the gate

My mother is doing well.Thanks to everyone expressing concern.

In the middle of yesterday's drama, I noticed the following:

A new variety of staph bacteria, highly resistant to antibiotics and possibly transmitted by sexual contact, is spreading among gay men in San Francisco, Boston, New York and Los Angeles, researchers reported Monday.

The study released online by the journal Annals of Internal Medicine found the highest concentrations of infection by the drug-resistant bug in and around San Francisco's Castro district and among patients who visit health clinics that treat HIV infections in gay men in San Francisco and Boston.

My eyes rolled for two reasons. First I get spooked when I hear of any new calamities that are out and could potentially affect us all.

The second reason is because I knew what would happen next. I was just telling a friend today that we can expect an one-sided article from One News Now. The article will most likely cite quotes from a so-called "pro-family" leader while omitting comments from any lgbts or anyone directly involved in the situation.

But of course our friend, Peter LaBarbera, had to be first on the list with his comments. I imagine him chomping at the bit as he wrote the following:

Is this not an eerie reminder of the initial stories about AIDS — then called GRID (Gay-Related Immunodeficiency Disease) – 25 years ago? It is unfathomable that after that plague, disease specialists and the media are now surprised at the correlation of new infections with homosexual behavior.

Wake up, medical and political establishment: homosexual behavior is unhealthy — no matter how many secular sermons you preach against "homophobia." Due to liberal political correctness, which insists on treating aberrant — even deadly — behaviors and lifestyles as a "civil right," we as a society don’t seem to have learned much from the AIDS pandemic. This latest news begs some serious questions:

Why aren’t all schoolchildren being taught that there are special health risks associated with homosexual behavior and that they should "just say no" to homosexuality? (Instead, schools are willy-nilly working to spread the PC idea among youth that certain people are naturally "gay," and that this is a harmless identity);

Why won’t the news media make the common-sense connection between these frequent stories about (male) homosexual behavior and disease — to the idea that perhaps it’s probably not smart for society and pop culture to celebrate homosexuality and bisexuality ?;Why isn’t there a concerted government effort — akin to the current anti-smoking campaigns — to reign in homosexual promiscuity – beginning with closing down all sex businesses (bathhouses) that facilitate homosexual perversion? (Of course, we favor closing down straight prostitution businesses as well.) We know that bisexual behavior (men on the "down low") help spread dangerous diseases to the general population: how many deaths and illnesses have to result from "second-hand sodomy" before authorities take corrective action? (Curiously, even President Bush’s White House spokeswoman, Dana Perino, recently abruptly cut off a question by reporter Les Kinsolving critical of homosexual bathhouses);

If any other behavior were as closely linked to death and disease as male homosexuality, would we be so careful not to criticize it – or would we offer healthy alternatives to it like abstinence and the ex-"gay" movement?

Well I am one never to get alarmed at a snake when he acts like a snake, so Peter's exploitation of this situation to promote his political bullshit does not surprise me.

But it does bother me a little.

I would suggest everyone read the entire San Francisco Chronicle article and not just Peter's rehashing of it. Amongst other things, it says the following:

Just why the new, more drug-resistant variety is concentrated among gay men is not yet known. Patients infected with HIV appear to run a higher risk of infection, but the study suggests that gay men are being infected with the staph germ regardless of whether they are HIV-positive.

One factor that could be in play is a medical history of heavy use of antibiotics, which creates conditions for breeding drug-resistant strains. Any patient, HIV-positive or not, who has had high previous exposure to antibiotics might be more susceptible.

The good news is that, once the public is aware of the risk, there are ways to prevent the spread of drug-resistant staph. It can be as simple as soap and water.

"Taking a shower after sexual contact may minimize contamination," said Dr. Chip Chambers, director of infectious diseases at San Francisco General, a co-author of the study. "Ordinary soap will do. It dilutes the concentration of bacteria. You don't need antibacterial soap."Chambers stressed that some people, no matter how fastidious, could be more prone than others to staph infections.

They could have unknown genetic traits or a history of antibiotic use that raises the risk. "Despite one's best efforts, it is still possible, of course, to get a staph infection," he said. "This is why if one has a cut or open wound that it is important to clean it out and keep it clean."

Peter is quick to point out the early history of AIDS and HIV.

He, however, conveniently omits that the demonization of lgbts via Anita Bryant's crusade, the Briggs Amendment, and various other petty correalations between homosexuality and anti-social behavior were small but crucial factors in the spread of HIV.

Some gays beaten down by those lies had no credibility in objetive information coming out telling them about HIV and AIDS. They viewed them as yet another attack.

And this a huge problem when it comes to lgbts and disease prevention, particularly in the case of STDs. Many times, while heterosexuals are given adequate care to prevent sexuallytransmitted diseases (STDs), the gay and lesbian community finds itself being blamed for the outbreak of STDs.

The anti-gay industry, in particular, blame gay sexual orientation rather than the sexual behavior of individual people or how societal rejection contributes to the sexual behavior of individual gay men.

This can contribute to a stumbling block to gay men receiving adequate health care.

According to the article Health Care Screening for Men Who Have Sex with Men, gay men can be at a high risk for preventable diseases for a number of reasons, including:

the patient being fearful to come out to his or her doctor, the personal discomfort the doctor may feel about having a gay or lesbian patient, possible open hostility of the doctor to having a gay or lesbian patient, and concern that the patient’s employer may learn his or her orientation and terminate their employment.

I would sincerely hope that no one takes Peter's nonsense seriously. No one, that is, except for the usual suspects. After all, isn't that what we have come to expect from them?

UPDATE - And it looks like all of the dipsticks are coming out the woodwork.

Okay, who the hell has roots on me . . .

I would love to address several things today, including the following I found on goodasyou.org

And I would like to announce and further elucidate on the fact that I posted a huge update on my other web page's time line.

But I won't.

My mother and I just came back from the hospital. She slipped earlier today and broke her ankle in two places.

She is fine right now. She is at home and resting. And I am very grateful that her injury wasn't worse.

So please forgive me for taking a break tonight. I will be back tomorrow.

Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters featured in Carolina lgbt publication

Q-Notes, a newsmonthly dealing with lgbt issues in the Carolinas, ran an article about my book. .

Click here if you are curious as to what I look like.

Don't laugh too long.

S.C. author takes on the anti-gay industry

Alvin McEwen’s new book details the Religious Right’s distortion tactics

by Jack Kirven . Q-Notes staff


Alvin McEwen put years of research into the tactics and strategies employed by the anti-gay industry to exploit misinformed and religion-based stereotypes about LGBT people.

There is a distinction between spirituality and bigotry based on “sacred” prejudices. This point is the focus of author Alvin McEwen’s new book, “Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry.”

Boiling the work down to a central thesis, McEwen says “there has been a consistent war waged on the gay community by people who hide behind their pseudo-religious beliefs.”McEwen posits that because it is not possible in this country to create laws that purely further religious thought, opponents of LGBT equality seek other means to demonize our community.

“Once these groups dehumanize LGBT people it then becomes easier to create a sense of need for regulations based on assumed religious justifications.”

In other words, by creating a notion that there is a “dangerous lifestyle” present, a need is then created to suppress that “danger.”McEwen does not use the term Religious Right. He prefers “anti-gay industry.” For good reason, too. The people and organizations who campaign the most furiously against LGBT equality make large amounts of money doing it. It is an industry, one that caters to fear and sells discredited research to people of faith who often do not have a chance to put a human face on LGBT family, friends and colleagues. Professional gay-bashers generate enormous amounts of cash to repay their efforts at fostering hate.

McEwen decided to examine the issue of institutionalized homophobia after he read a magazine article that quoted an hysterical mother who expressed concern for her children’s safety. In the middle of his own coming out process, McEwen was “upset that a woman whom I didn’t know would spout that kind of hate about me. She was telling lies about me. I was vulnerable at that time and I thought about it a lot. I realized how dangerous misinformation can be to LGBT people.”

After following stories in such publications as The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The Wall Street Journal, and various medical and scientific journals reporting that researchers are upset by the ways their studies are misused by hate mongers, McEwen realized that the anti-gay industry employs six primary distortion tactics. As detailed in his book, these deception tactics include: misinformation, repetition, conspiracy theories, dire consequences, phony experts and dehumanizing semantics.

“Understanding how the industry deceives people gives us a means to counter their tactics,” he says.

Misinformation
This includes taking studies out of context, purposefully misreading information, applying data to unrelated topics and other forms of abusing reputable studies by respected scientists.

One example that employs all of these strategies concerns a study that focused on approximately 35 lesbians with pre-existing alcoholism. The findings were misused by the anti-gay industry to argue that lesbians are more likely to develop addictions and express violent behaviors. This was, in turn, used to argue that lesbians should not be allowed to care for children.

Repetition
This tactic requires little explanation. As George W. Bush said in Greece on May 24, 2005, “See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.”

Conspiracy theories
This tactic is commonly used as the dreaded “Gay Agenda.” “By telling people that our country is a Christian country, and telling them what good Christians believe, it then becomes possible to say that someone who does not believe as you do is trying to take all that away from you,” says McEwen.

This tactic plays on social and political fears and usually focuses on extrapolations with no basis in reason or fact (i.e., the argument against same-sex marriage that says people will then be able to marry their dogs).

Dire consequences
This is a strategy that seeks to predict a terrible outcome after a chain of cataclysmic events arise from some undesirable change. An example might include the claim that the Roman Empire collapsed because homosexuality became universally practiced and accepted. To further the distortion, homophobes would equate current problems in the U.S. with that completely unrelated historical situation.

Phony experts
This tactic is exactly what it sounds like. Discredited researchers, outdated studies and disgraced leaders are quoted incessantly, despite the fact that they have no authority or credibility. An example is Michael Johnston’s continued appearance on the cover of the American Family Association’s (AFA) “ex-gay” video “It’s Not Gay.” In 2003, after the video’s release, Johnston was revealed to be participating in unsafe sex at drug-fueled, same-sex orgies without disclosing his HIV-positive status. He is still the “ex-gay” face used to sell the AFA video.

Dehumanizing semantics
The anti-gay industry’s use of language plays on assumptions and is tailored to exploit ignorance concerning the LGBT community. “If someone says, ‘…and this is because gay men live a destructive life,’ it is based on the assumed notion that God created heterosexuality, He disapproves of homosexuality, homosexuality is evil and therefore gay men are destructive,” explains McEwen.

In his book, McEwen highlights quotes from religious leaders that utilize dehumanizing semantics. Such as one evangelist who claims that Christians have been “bullied into submission” by the “aggressive homosexual agenda” that’s taking over public schools.

“Ultimately,” says McEwen, “as a person of faith I would tell people to not take the word of an outsider. Pray, talk directly to God yourself to find out what He has to say about your sexuality. We can’t dialogue with the anti-gay industry, but we can talk to other people of faith. The bigots will expose themselves soon enough. People can hear a lie only so many times before it begins to sound untenable to them. We need to educate ourselves and be informed about our enemies.

“For my part, I am documenting our history so that one day a young person can pick up from our first steps and go even further.”

info: For more information, visit http://www.holybullies.com/,

http://www.holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/

AntiGayLiesAndLiars.blogspot.com

“Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters” is available for purchase at http://www.amazon.com/.

Why can't Peter LaBarbera stop misrepresenting

I have talked to Peter LaBarbera via email and I can tell you this: he truly believes that homosexuality is a sin.

And there is nothing wrong with believing this.

However, Peter crosses the line when he stoops to misrepresentations to further his beliefs.

Today's post on his Americans for Truth (in name only) page further accentuates this point.

Peter takes a bunch of quotes from gay authors and columnists (many over 10 years old) to further the lie that lgbts on the whole are promiscuous and that we want to destroy the institute of marriage.

First of all, the opinions of a few lgbts do not speak for the entire community. Anyone with a small shred of common sense knows this.

But I guess Peter thinks that common sense don't matter when one is fighting a "holy war."

And to make matters worse, he misrepresents big time. I want to talk about two.

The first is when he pulls a quote from noted gay author Micheangelo Signorile:

“[Legalizing “same-sex marriage”] is also a chance to wholly transform the definition of family in American culture. It is the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statutes, get education about homosexuality and AIDS into public schools, and, in short, usher in a sea change in how society views and treats us.”–Michelangelo Signorile, “I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do,” OUT magazine, May 1996, p. 30.

The misrepresentation of this quote is nothing new and Peter is not the first to do it. Lou Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition used the same quote to claim that lgbts want to destroy marriage:

“Traditional marriage is under attack. Homosexual activist Michelangelo Signorile, writing in Out! in its Dec./Jan. 1994 issue, says that homosexuals should ‘fi ght for same-sex marriage
and its benefits and then, once granted, redefi ne the institution of marriage completely to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.’”—Lou Sheldon, Traditional Marriage Is Worth Protecting!, The Traditional Values Coalition

Signorile was quick to cry foul. The following passage is from my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters:

As it turns out, Sheldon’s usage of Signorile’s quote is a distortion. Signorile complained about it in a column entitled Opponents Peddling Selective, Defective Readings. He said the quote in question was written about a same-sex marriage controversy in Hawaii in 1993.

Signorile said he had interviewed people in the gay community with different opinions on same-sex marriage. He also said he quoted those who said same-sex marriage was oppressive and that gays should not attempt to partake in it. Others he talked to said marriage is a good way for gays to civilize and assimilate themselves.

He further said:

“Both of these positions, I found were pretty extreme. I looked at still other points of view and I also proposed what ‘might’ be a compromise— I didn’t even say whether or not I agreed with it or not—stating that redefining the institution of marriage to change its negative aspects while demanding full marriage rights was one way to go.”

In other words, Sheldon (and LaBarbera) took Signorile's comments out of context.

Now let's look at this second misrepresentation:

“Take sex. Traditionally, a commitment to monogamy — to the extent that it was not simply an adjunct of property law, a vehicle for guaranteeing property rights and succession — was the chief mode of sacrifice imposed upon or adopted by married couples as a means of showing their sacred valuing of their relation. But gay men have realized that while couples may choose to restrict sexual activity in order to show their love for each other, it is not necessary for this purpose; there are many other ways to manifest and ritualize commitment. And so monogamy (it appears) is not an essential component of love and marriage. The authors of “The Male Couple” found that:

[T]he majority of [gay male] couples, and all of the couples together for longer than five years, were not continuously sexually exclusive with each other. Although many had long periods of sexual exclusivity, it was not the ongoing expectation for most. We found that gay men expect mutual emotional dependability with their partners [but also believe] that relationship fidelity transcends concerns about sexuality and exclusivity.

The big question here is what exactly is The Male Couple and why didn't Peter give more information regarding the book.

Probably because The Male Couple was published in 1984 (over 20 years ago), which would make it an out-of-date source.

Also, the authors of The Male Couple, McWhirter and Mattison, said that their book should not be generalized to represent the entire gay community:

“We always have been very careful to explain that the very nature of our research sample, its size (156 couples), its narrow geographic location, and the natural selectiveness of the participants prevents the findings from being applicable and generalizable to the entire gay
male community.”

Maybe Peter missed that part.

Or maybe he just doesn't give a damn. You tell me.

Now his last quote is a hoot:

Make Anti-Gays Look Nasty

“We intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to disassociate themselves from such types.”–Marshall K. Kirk and Erastes Pill, “The Overhauling of Straight America,” The Guide (homosexual) magazine, November 1987.

Well Peter, when you lie as pathetically as you did in this column, you make our jobs easier.

Oh Lawd, not again!

No this column isn't about Ken Hutcherson.

Some may think that in light of the election primaries, what I am about to say is trite, but I disagree.

This Friday, there will a movie starring rapper Ice Cube and comedian Tracy Morgan entitled First Sunday.

It is a comedy about two men who decide to rob a church. It looked interesting.

And that is saying a lot from a person who has seen his share of African-American comedies.

But then comes the "required scene."

Not too many folks are aware of this but there seems to be an ugly standard of operation in many African-American oriented comedies to make fun of lgbts.

If the character is a gay man, then he is usually an oversexed man with a name like "Flame" or "Peaches" and he is portrayed as a nonthreatening flamboyant entity who is a part of the congregation of women gathered at either the hair saloon or other places that black women hang out.

If the character is a lesbian, she is portrayed a threatening figure who cannot figure out that she is a woman and therefore is required to wear something flimsy that highlights her tits or ass. In other words, she is a "threat" to "true black men."

But the worse stereotypes are reserved for our transgender sisters.

They are portrayed as deceivers who are always trying to "trick" black men into being intimate with them. The joke is that when the "luckless victim" discovers the ruse, he rushes out in disgust, eliciting extreme laughter from the audience.

This last degree of disrespect features prominently in the previews of First Sunday.

Now I could say something that is long, thoughtful, but I am too tired.

I am too tired from work and am especially tired of being asked to support movies that make fun of my orientation.

I don't care if the screenplay writer is black, the director is black, the majority of stars is black, etc. etc.

As I am concerned, First Sunday will never be on my menu.

And I sincerely hope that one day, more lgbts of color will feel the same way I do.

That "sweet" smell of politics in the air

Even Robet Duvall would probably gag if he ever took a whiff of the air when an election season rolls around.

Even though it's only the primaries, the 2008 election promises to be very interesting.

I am taking a sort of Machiavellian outlook on the entire process. I won't say who I am supporting.

But if you think I am support anyone Republican, you are insane.

After eight years of Super Shrub, I echo the tone of the Obama campaign (which when you really think about it, is rather smart) - change.

I will, however, admit that it is fun to watch the Republican candidates cannibalize each other. Teflon Rom and Bibleman Huckabee seems to be an excellent match.

But seriously, unless something serious happens, I am going to post as I always do on this site, but the majority of my energy will be devoted to updating my other webpage.

I will be updating that page at least once a week. And news of updates will on this blog as well as on the other page.

Look for a big update to come this weekend.

I tend to think that the Republican candidates are too busy attacking each other to focus on any interesting attacks on us.

By the time they put it in their heads to amass their base by telling lies on lgbts, I should have a good time line ready to throw truth on their claims.

The day after . . .

Thanks to everyone who made my new webpage a success.

But apparently not everyone is happy. Our friend Peter LaBarbera (who swore up and down that he would not read my "silly" page) is high HIGHLY upset over the comparison I included of Anti-Semitic speech and homophobic speech.

Get over it, Peter. No matter how angry you get, it still holds up.

(UPDATE - My bad! Apparently Peter is not mad at the comparison on my webpage. He is upset over what I said to him via email. You see, Peter and I had been emailing each other last night concerning my page. I wasn't about to give him the last word. He got angry about my following statement:

That truth will come out and nothing will ever change that. You made mention to Nazis in your response. When it is all said in done, in the eyes of many, people won't know the difference between you, your cohorts and them. Because really there is no difference, is there?

Well I stand by that comment. And looking at the rhetoric that Peter and his side uses, I can back it up.

And speaking of our friend Peter, apparently he is not done exploiting that 14-year-old who wrote him recently. Another pal of Peter, Laurie Higgins, wrote the child a letter.

Naturally Peter prints it on his site.

She repeats the usual nonsense about homosexuality. But there is one thing she said that I found hilarious:

Our bodies are not designed for homosexual sex. They are exquisitely designed for heterosex.

Apparently Higgins is channeling that same nonsense that is repeated constantly in anti-gay language (and I make reference to it on my other page):

That anal sex is "homosexual behavior." That train of thought is a serious lie.

All gay men do not have anal sex. But some heterosexuals do.

Does that make those heterosexuals gay?

And Higgins claims that she cares that others are teaching children lies.

Apparently she is not above telling a few herself.

I now present:

‘Holy Bullies’ author expands fight against anti-gay lies

New webpage will include a time line of distortions

January 2, 2008—South Carolina author Alvin McEwen is taking his fight against anti-gay rhetoric to another level with the launching of a new webpage.

In August 2007, McEwen published Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry. The book chronicled how the religious right, or anti-gay industry as McEwen refers to them, distorts studies and semantics to demonize the gay community.

"I have had tremendous success with my book," McEwen said. "But I want to create a wider understanding of the tactics of the anti-gay industry and their history of distortions.

The webpage page, Anti-Gay Lies and Liars, spotlights six distortion techniques of the anti-gay industry, the top lies they use against gays and lesbians, as well as a comparison between Anti-Semitic and homophobic language.

Central to the webpage is a historical time line of distortions, scientific complaints about religious right data, faulty media campaigns, and other things that McEwen say is crucial to the religious right’s war on gay America.

"And the time line isn’t done yet," he said. "It will be a continued work-in-progress. I want to include every lie and every distortion the anti-gay industry commits. I want to include information about Anita Bryant , Paul Cameron, every distorted study, every discredited study. If the anti-gay industry has lied about it, I want to include it."

McEwen calls the webpage a handy guide for anyone looking to disseminate religious right propaganda.

"The next time a press release or statement comes from these phony pro-family groups, I challenge anyone to not find at least two points of propaganda from my list," McEwen said.

He also said knowing religion right propaganda techniques are crucial if the gay community wants to win this so-called culture war.

"Simple functions like an office worker putting a up picture of his significant gay other or a child reared in a same-sex household writing a report about her family take on sinister undertones of an alleged conspiracy to shut down values," McEwen said. "And that is the big lie the anti-gay industry tries to sell to America. That ordinary things gays and lesbians do, things which make us no different than anyone else, are somehow insidious points of attack in a huge plan of invasion.If we are to refute this lie, then we need to educate ourselves on their tactics."

The address of McEwen’s new webpage is http://antigayliesandliars.blogspot.com/

Anyone wanting to reach McEwen can email him at CharleKenghis@aol.com

(Bear with my page guys because it is a work-in-progress which I hope can be used to educate and inform. By all means look it over, take the information in, and spread the word. Thanks!)

From the department of stupidity . . .

Still working on my project. Hope to have it finished by tomorrow evening.

But something I noticed today, that I have to put down something on.

Our friend Peter has reprinted a letter sent to him by a 14-year-old:

Please read the letter below, which we received Saturday from a 14-year-old atheist boy who hates Americans For Truth. Nothing makes my heart grieve more than a confused young person rejecting God and embracing an unnatural sexual identity (”gayness”) built around ungodly behavior that up until a few decades ago was viewed as so immoral that it wasn’t even discussed in public. I don’t know Joe, but I can safely say that his tragic life choice was made easier by the organized homosexual movement. This is the saddest end result of “gay pride” — corrupting the hearts and minds of young people and helping to put them in grave physical, emotional and spiritual danger:

To put it bluntly, I probably hate you more than anything else in the world. Like many others, I believe you have the moral equivalent of a modern-day KKK: hating people for being different and having opposing beliefs. I am a liberal, gay, atheistic 14 year old boy, and I believe I have more morals than you. You are a disgrace to humanity. I’m sorry that I am being so childish in my "argument” which is turning out like hate mail, but I just cannot put in words how much I disagree with you. Homosexuals should have rights because they are humans, capable of thinking logically and making decisions, just like you and me. And why does what other people do sexually concern you at all? I want you to tell me, from a non-religious standpoint, exactly how homosexuals are hurting you? Because if they are not negatively affecting you in any way (which is what a suspect) then you should have no problem with them. Most of America knows the truth about homosexuality, which is that it is a preference, not a choice, just like a favorite food to put it in simple terms. You like it, because it pleases you, not because you choose to like a certain food. I’m sorry that this message has stretched so long, and I would like a reply and a rebuttal to my claims. USING LOGIC, not religion. -Joe [————-]

The letter is not as dramatic as Peter makes it out to be. Seems to me that the child is just venting, as all children do.

I do kind of feel sorry for the child because I recognize a little of myself in him. When I was just coming out, I used to call the 700 Club, yell at the person on the other line and then hang up.

Such behavior is juvenile. This is not to say that the letter was inconsiderate. I am sure that it is more polite than some of the other letters Peter has been sent.

My point is that Peter refuses to recognize the fact that his rhetoric and lies created this situation. Don't blame gay pride or the "homosexual movement."

It isn't gay pride or the "homosexual movement" that dehumanizes and attacks the lives of lgbts on daily basis.

That's you, Peter. And that young boy's anger is your fault.

Goodbye 2007, Hello 2008

It has been a good year . . .

but I don't have time to recap now. I am working on something that I hope will help get information to our community about the lies of the anti-gay industry.

I hope to have it done by January 2.

Keep your fingers crossed and have an excellent new year!!!!!

Peter LaBarbera's homophobia bites him in the ass

In recent pleas for money, Peter LaBarbera has claimed that we lgbts unfairly brand him as homophobic. Peter further claims that all he is doing to speak the "truth" regarding homosexuality:

Yes, they absolutely HATE us because we stand unapologetically against their sexual ideology as one that a holy Creator can have no part of. This “culture war” is not about us — it’s about right versus wrong . . .

To say that he is full of shit would be the overstatement of the decade. So how about a demonstration courtesy of his actions today.

This morning, he published an article spotlighting a hideous crime perpetrated against a gay man:

The victim, a gay man, was raped, attacked, and "sodomized" with a broomstick after leaving a party Friday night -The attacker, Felipe Rivera, had also been at the party. However, he was asked to leave because he had punched the victim in the face after, according to Rivera, the victim winked at him.

After being booted from the party, the attacker waited outside for the vicim to leave. The attacker claims the victim propositioned him for sex, but the victim denies this. In fact, the Chicago Tribune reports that "the victim alleged he had refused an offer from Rivera to pay him $50 for sex later in the evening." But regardless of who truly wanted sex from whom, the attacker proceeded to punch, rape, and stick the broom up the victim's rectum.

When asked why he did it, the attacker is alleged to have said, "because he hates 'faggots,' and this is what they get." The attacker is also said to have shouted anti-gay epithets at the victim while he was attacking.

That is awful. But here is what Peter said about the crime:

Our question: what percentage of “anti-gay hate crimes” are actually committed by people who themselves are involved in homosexual behavior? If this Chicago Tribune report is accurate, then this is no typical ”gay panic defense” – whereby a man blames his assault on a homosexual by claiming that the victim first made an unwanted sexual advance toward him — because the alleged perpetrator here offers to pay his victim for homosexual sex and then sexually assaults him.

We also know that some men may secretly (or even not so secretly) engage (or desire) homosexual perversions yet eschew the “gay” label for themselves – so the fact that Rivera told police that he “hates homosexuals” tells us little. He may hate that part of himself drawn to deviant homosexual acts.

Behavior, not self-labels, is what counts: we wonder how many cases like this end up on the FBI’s list as an “anti-gay” “hate-crime” statistic — to be exploited later, ironically, by “gay” activists lobbying for dubious pro-homosexual “hate crimes” laws … We’ll follow this story closely. — Peter LaBarbera

And the interesting part of the entire situation - later this day, Peter's post was "mysteriously" deleted from his webpage.

If you asked me, I think Peter slipped and showed his homophobia.

Here is an ugly crime committed against a gay man by an individual so psychotic that his mother called the police (i.e. that is how he was caught. Apparently his mother had an order of protection against him even before the alleged crime was committed.).

But the only thing Peter cares about is exploiting this crime as further proof of how "ugly" homosexuality is.

To Peter, the fact that someone was the victim of a crime ranks lower than the fact he can brand the perpetrator as gay.

How is that truth?

Sounds like homophobia to me.

And to make matters worse, when caught, he tries to make a quiet exit.

The Bible says that when you do wrong, you should apologize.

Peter's deletion of his article seems to be a small admittance of wrong. But Peter, if you are a true Christian, then perhaps you owe the lgbt community a public apology.

We are waiting.

Big thanks to goodasyou.org for this story.

UPDATE - Apparently Peter has apologized for his sloppy work. But he has reprinted his nonsense. The following analyzation is from goodasyou.org, who have been on top of this story:

One interesting note about Pete's new post: He reprints his old post with a line stricken through the part that he nw considers erroneous. However, in a curious move, he added a passage to his original post, as if it had been there all along. The new paragraph reads:
"One more question: if same-sex sexual assaults are classified as “hate crimes,” what about men who rape women (or vice versa)? Shouldn’t these sex crimes also be labeled “hate crimes” against women, as they are typically motivated by contempt and misogyny (hatred of women)? We’ll follow this story closely."

And as you can see from both our quoted text as well as the Google Cache of his original post, this paragraph was never in the original article. Why the duplicity, Peter?

And then Peter just can't seem to help himself but tell another deception:

We know there is a problem with homosexual-on-homosexual violence (hence the book, Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them). It seems ludicrous to call such crimes “anti-gay hate crimes” — for use in the “gay” propaganda cycle that feeds off exaggerated spinning of FBI data to imply an outbreak of (straight) “anti-gay violence” that doesn’t exist.

Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them was a book written 13 years ago. If there is a "big" problem with same-sex relationship abuse, then why couldn't Peter have found a more current source than a 13-year-old book?

More importantly, the book dealt with relationship violence. So why does Peter make reference to this book that deals with relationship violence when talking about a crime in which there was no relationship between the victim and the perpetrator?

Because Peter seems to be trying covertly insult the nature of lgbt relationships in general. He seems to be inferring that what happened to that young man is indicative of lgbt relationships.

Damn Peter, even when you apologize you make things worse.

No matter how you try to cover it up, your homophobia comes shining through.

The perpetuation of dehumanization (Gotta love that title)

I'm back and I am still tired.

Not to mention almost burnt out. But leave it to the anti-gay industry to muster enough anger in me to post something.

Check out this gem from One News Now and Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America:

A spokesman for Concerned Women for America warns that yet another piece of legislation being promoted in the Democrat-led Congress would force taxpayers to subsidize immoral and dangerous behavior.

Senators Gordon Smith (R-Oregon) and Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) have introduced a bill that will extend domestic partner benefits to homosexual federal employees. The measure would allow an employee and his or her same-sex partner to be eligible for federal health benefits, the Family and Medical Leave program, long-term care, insurance, and retirement benefits. Representatives Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin), who is an open homosexual, and Tom Lantos (D-California) have introduced the bill in the House and included foreign service workers for the first time.

Matt Barber is policy director for cultural issues at Concerned Women for America in Washington, DC. He says the bill is the camel's nose in the tent for a litany of pro-homosexuality legislation, along the lines of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act.

"For the government to take a moral stance here [regarding] people who engage in homosexual conduct is essentially equating that conduct to natural sexual relations between married, heterosexual couples," states Barber. "This really introduces us to the whole idea of gay 'marriage' at the national level to federal ENDA."

I bolded Barber's statement because it emphasizes the same nonsense I talked about the last time I posted. That time, it was a statement by columnist John Derbyshire along the same vein:

I know myself well enough to be sure that I am not cruel, or bigoted, or intolerant. Nor am I aware of anyone who knows me that believes me to be any of those things. Like Thomas More: "I wish none harm, I say none harm, I do none harm." Do as you please in the privacy of your chambers . . .

As usual, when talking about lgbts, Barber, Derbyshire and their co-horts seek to dehumanize and reduce our lives and families to sexual acts. This is not an accident, but an intentional tactic; an appeal to fear and ignorance.

To them, we are not raising children and we do not have families. Our lives are defined by hedonistic sexual thrills. And we had better not do anything to change that image.

Not because it is the truth, but because it is how they think it should be.

I have noticed that members of the anti-gay industry get most angry at us when we don't reduce our lives to their low expectations.

It is when we want to break their stereotypes of the oversexed, pathetic gay man or the man-hating, violent lesbian, or the confused transgender that they come out blazing with their complaints as to how we are "in their face."

They seem to think that they are not only entitled to tell us how our lives are but to correct us when we don't pattern ourselves after their lies.

Not very Christian, it is?

I nearly make it out, but John Derbyshire pulls me back in

Yeah I know I said that I was taking a break. But I just can't resist responding when I read stupid shit.

For example this lovely piece by John Derbyshire:

All that aside, though, I can't say I care much about homosexuality one way or the other. If I examine my own motivations for saying anything at all on this subject, the main thing I am aware of is just contrarian cussedness. I get so goddam sick of all the movies, TV shows, and, yes, e-mails telling me how goddam wonderful homosexuals are, and how goddam normal homosexuality is, and how goddam cruel and bigoted and intolerant it must be not to whole-heartedly approve of homosexuals, and cheer them on, and applaud the things they do. Well, I know myself well enough to be sure that I am not cruel, or bigoted, or intolerant. Nor am I aware of anyone who knows me that believes me to be any of those things. Like Thomas More: "I wish none harm, I say none harm, I do none harm." Do as you please in the privacy of your chambers, but for heaven's sake stop pushing it in my face, stop telling me how wonderful you are, stop lying about the fact that the things you do have health consequences (were in fact responsible for introducing a horrible plague into our society), stop mucking up my language by introducing illiteracies like "homophobe" and imposing the stain of salacity on perfectly decent old English words like "gay", stop telling me that the things I say might be taken as incitement to crimes of violence. (What words that anyone says about anything might not be thus taken by some lunatic somewhere? What would we be permitted to talk about, on that criterion?) And don't even think about proselytizing your "lifestyle" to my kids.

I don't know Mr. Derbyshire well enough to know for sure whether or not he is cruel, bigoted, or intolerant. But from what I am reading, he is ignorant.

Consider these facts:

As of 1990, 6 million to 14 million children in the United States were living with a gay or lesbian parent. (National Adoption Information Clearinghouse, a service of the U.S. Administration for Children and Families.),

Same-sex couples raising chidren live in 96% of all counties nationwide in the United States. (2000 U.S. Census analyses by the Urban Institute and Human Rights Campaign),

As many as 7.2 million Americans under age 20 are lesbian or gay,

45% of gay males and 20% of lesbians experience physical or verbal assaultin high school; 28% of these young people feel forced to drop out of schooldue to harassment based on sexual orientation.

But yet and still, people like Derbyshire are obsessed with defining the issue of sexual orienation to that of kinky bedroom habits.

That, my friends, goes beyond hatred. It is more diabolical than hatred. It is willful ignorance.

Of course Derbyshire can think of homosexuality in any way that he likes but the kicker is that he seems to demand that those of us who are lgbts conduct our lives in accordance to his ignorance.

And that will probably be the final fight over sexual orientation. Behind all of the lies about dangerous health consequences, behind all of the Biblical admonitions, behind all of the deceptions and distortions are people who cannot accept the fact that being an lgbt goes beyond sexual intercourse and stereotypes about leather and sadomaschism.

So rather than to accept the fact that maybe they are wrong, they rail against the rest of the world for daring to interrupt their stupid notions.

Well they, Mr. Derbyshire included, need to get over themselves. No matter how freaky they try to make us out to be, we are normal people who lead normal (and in my case - boring) lives. And we should not have to edit out any part of these lives.

The fact of the matter is that no one can tell the story of lgbt lives better than those who are living them. In matters of the media, we have every right to push for positive and correct stories about who we are. And we have every right to influence all facets of this country, from the media to our legislative bodies.

That is what being an American is all about

And one last thing to Mr. Derbyshire: if by chance any of your kids turn out to be gay, don't blame us. Be a good parent. Listen to that child, don't make assumptions, and by all means don't desert your child.

Maybe you will learn something for a change.

I am taking a break

I am burnt out.

With doing what I do almost every day, working at my regular job, and keeping tabs on how my book is selling, I am at my wits end when it comes to energy.

And keeping my ideas fresh.

So I am taking a break from it all until December 27.

During that time, I will be planning goals for 2008. I have big plans that I want to see come to fruition.

But before I go, I want you to read this excellent post from Jeremy at goodasyou.org

He has caught the anti-gay industry (yet again) telling a bunch of lies. (You mean they lie? So what else is new?)

Barring some incredible event that pushes me to post, I will see you all on December 27.

Happy Holidays!!!

And the whining continues

By now you all have heard about the conservative Princeton student who faked threatening notes and an attack on himself.

I won't recount the story. But there is an excellent article on the situation by blogger Max Blumenthal. You can read it here.

As for me, I don't feel the need to give my opinion of the matter. It has been the talk of the blogs for over a day now and I don't think that I can add to anything that I have read.

But I can't help but to feel sorry for the guy. He had advantages and wasted them. He was attending Princeton, one of the top universities in the country and in one swoop, destroyed that opportunity.

It is a sad situation when folks feel that they have to make up stories to further their cause. And it's even sadder when they are caught.

Now from the department of giving someone cheese to go with that whine comes our friend, Gary Bauer.

Bauer, a "pro-family" activist and former Presidential candidate is upset over the following:

A U.S. judge ordered the Secret Service on Monday to disclose records of visits by nine prominent conservative Christian leaders to the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's residence.

The ruling, in response to a legal watchdog group's suit, could shed light on the influence leaders like James Dobson of Focus on the Family have had on President George W. Bush's administration. It may also affect legal efforts to force the release of visiting records of convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and other similar cases.

"We think that these conservative Christian leaders have had a very big impact," said Executive Director Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which filed the case.

Bauer registered his anger with One News Now. I am sure he knew that this supposed news organization (which is an extension of the American Family Association) would print his comments without the courtesy of showing both sides of the story. He was not disappointed:

Bauer, the president of American Values, says he finds the freedom of information request by CREW "offensive."

"I do think it's quite telling that [this] organization ... wants to know about religious leaders visiting the White House,; and yet as far as I know, they did not request the names of Muslim leaders that have visited the White House," he observes. "And of course they would not dare file a request that would ask for [the names of] visitors of a particular race that had visited the White House or met with the president."

And of course he was quick to play the victim:

The American Values president says the request demonstrates "the ongoing effort by cultural elites to try to intimidate Christians out of the public square." He also says he is willing to tell anyone who wants to know how many times he has been to the White House to give President Bush advice on "the great issues facing our country."

Bauer may not have realized it but he answered his own question when he made that crack about Muslims.

Let me break it down this way:

I don't remember any Muslim leader bragging that Bush made them privy to why a potential Supreme Court judge (i.e. Harriet Miers) would be suitable to their base. James Dobson did.

I don't remember any time that Bush jumped into a private family issue to suit the Muslim community like he did with Terri Schiavo. He did this of course to appease Dobson, Bauer and the rest of that ilk.

I don't remember any time that Bush adopted any talking points forwarded by the Muslim community like he did for Dobson, Bauer, and company when talking about why he was for a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.

The fact of the matter is that CREW has a point and a right to view those visitation logs.

What is happening to you all is part and parcel of participating in a free and Democratic society, Bauer.

Get used to it.

Be afraid. Be very afraid because you deserve it

Via the Huffington Post, I ran across a very interesting piece:

This campaign is knee-deep in religion, and it's only going to get worse. I'd thought that the limits of professed public piety had already been achieved during the Republican CNN-YouTube debate when some squirrelly looking guy held up a Bible and asked, "Do you believe every word of this book?" -- and not one candidate dared reply: None of your damn business.

Instead, Giuliani, Romney and Huckabee bent a knee and tried appeasement with various interpretations of scriptural literalism. The right answer, the only answer, is that the very question is offensive. The Constitution prohibits any religious test for office. And while that proscribes only government action, the law is also meant to be a teacher. In the same way that civil rights laws established not just the legal but also the moral norm that one simply does not discriminate on the basis of race -- changing the practice of one generation and the consciousness of the next -- so the constitutional injunction against religious tests is meant to make citizens understand that such tests are profoundly un-American.

Who wrote that you may ask. Was it one of my fellow "Godless liberals?" Was it a fellow purveyor of the "gay agenda?"

Why no. It was neoconservative Charles Krauthammer. Apparently he took time out of his busy schedule of defending President Bush's hideous war in Iraq on Fox News to sound an alarm horn regarding religion in this campaign.

And it pinpoints a fear that is slowly gripping the Republican party this election cycle. Over this summer, we heard repeatedly from "Conservative Christian leaders (i.e. the anti-gay industry) that they disapprove of the Republican presidential candidates.

Now they seemed to have zeroed in on one that they will support: Mike Huckabee. Subsequently, he has moved up in the Republican polls. And this seems to have the Republican party on the whole scared because while Huckabee appeals to the "conservative Christian" base, it is that same appeal that makes him unelectable.

Interesting statements he has made regarding lgbts, AIDS, and variety of social issues (the newest being him comparing homosexuality with necrophilia) have made him more and more appealing to the "Christian conservative" base. But the problem is that Huckabee can't seem to temper that appeal with assurances to moderates that he won't go all Khomeni should he get elected.

It is definitely a different ballgame from 2004.

Remember that lovely election cycle when the Republican party used the "threat" of gay marriage of rally their base and give Bush a second term? Things are different now. The very thing that worked for the Republican party then has returned to bite them in the ass. (I am aware of the gay subtext so hush up)

So now we are at this point. Huckabee seems to be slowly gaining ground and as he does, he is turning on the piety even more, thereby appealing to more "Conservative Christians" but potentially alienating moderates and maybe even the majority of voters in the nation.

And the Republican party is scrambling behind the scenes to somehow control the situation.

Lawd, I am enjoying this.

Spotlight on a good cause

From time to time, I will be spotlighting sites and people who are fighting the anti-gay industry. I would be remiss if I caused anyone to think that little ole me is the only one in the mix.

There are others. And they have been at it longer and are more skilled than I am.

Wayne Besen is one of them. He is the author of Anything But Straight, the definitive book detailing the lies of the "ex-gay" movement.

He is also head of Truth Wins Out:

a non-profit think tank and educational organization that counters right wing disinformation campaigns, debunks the “ex-gay” myth, and provides accurate information about the lives of GLBT people. Our work includes:

Providing opposition research on the “ex-gay” myth
Discrediting right wing propaganda
Educating America about the GLBT community

The main vehicle the anti-gay industry uses to launder their lies is the so-called “ex-gay” ministries. The far right exploits these groups in an effort to present their disdain for gay people in the guise of love. However, this embrace of re-closeted homosexuals is no more than a veiled attempt to deny GLBT people equality under the law.

TWO’s vision is to create a world where the right wing is held accountable for their factual distortions and the “ex-gay” ministries are exposed as one of the greatest hoaxes in American history. We firmly believe in the principle that leaving the “Big Lie” unchallenged invites prejudice to prosper, falsehoods to flower and fiction to be confused with fact. TWO stands for the idea that education will overcome ignorance and truth will one day triumph.

At the present moment, Besen is having a holiday fundraiser in order to combat more lies of the "ex-gay" movement. Check it out.

You like me! You really like me!

Last night was a huge hit. I read a bit of my book to a packed house attending the SC Gay and Lesbian Business Guild meeting and they were very receptive to my message.

As well as generous.

I was able to sell many copies of my book and give out many more business cards. The most important thing is that my message went out and was received well.

I think I did relatively well seeing that it was my first time doing a book reading. Of course there are a few things I would change. I am not exactly Sidney Poitier or Morgan Freeman when it comes to verbal delivery.

I read somewhere that a great Greek orator used to practice saying speeches with pebbles in his mouth. Of course I am sure pebbles were cleaner back then than they are now.

Maybe I will try the same tactic with ice cream sandwiches.

Seriously though, I read today that our friend Peter is a little bit upset that Diversity Inc magazine co-founder Luke Visconti compared his usage of the Bible to demonize lgbts to slaveholders using the same holy text to justify slavery:

DiversityInc magazine co-founder Luke Visconti (lvisconti@diversityinc.com) showed his own (modern) bigotry and disrespect for people of faith by comparing Americans For Truth president Peter LaBarbera to a 19th Century Christian slavery advocate because LaBarbera opposes homosexuality and pro-homosexual corporate policies.

I'm confused. Apparently Visconti's piece was about Americans for Truth (in name only). So how can Peter take it that it was meant to insult people of faith. I really don't remember reading that part of the Bible that says God had appointed Peter as the new prophet i.e. spokesperson for anyone of faith.

Maybe he was sent a memo. Peter continues to say:

Did you know that in the eyes of some liberal, pro-homosexual advocates, you are the moral equivalent of the KKK? Actually, this is nothing new: radical “gay” activists have been making this absurd and hateful analogy for years. This is why I tell religious people all the time: disabuse yourself of the idea that homosexual activists and their liberal fellow travelers “respect” your faith or your right to live it out in the public square. They don’t; they despise your Bible-centered morality, and are quite willing to demonize you for it.

Let me put my little spin on this.

Peter, your belief that homosexuality is a sin does not make you a bigot like a member of Klan. It is your tactics. You are guilty of the following:

Aiding in the selling of a fradulent video because it featured a man who claimed that he was ex-gay while at the same time potentially infecting gay men with HIV

Spreading the studies of a man dismissed from the APA for bad research tactics, something that you are aware of

Giving an unfair connotation that all gays and lesbians are diseased, sex ridden maniacs by attending subcultural events like Folsom Street Fair and focusing on the gays you see there while ignoring the heterosexual engaged in the same behavior

Engaging in the distortion of credible research in order to demonize the lgbt community.

Your tactics make you no different than slaveholders. They thought their racial heritage justified keeping African-Americans physically shackled. You think your religious beliefs justify the tactics you use to keep lgbts spiritually shackled.

Do you get what I am throwing down? No? Let me put it another way.

I have friends who are very conservative. They home school their children and feel that homosexuality is a sin. But they respect me. They ask me about my life and if I am dating anyone. They even introduced me to their children. Sometimes we even have lunch where we have an excellent conversation about life and everything in between.

The difference between you and them?

When they walk into my office and see a plaque I received as volunteer of the year from the gay and lesbian organization in my city, they don't whine to me or anyone about how their religious beliefs are being "violated." When my boyfriend brought me flowers for Valentine's Day, they did not tell me that I was going to hell nor did they tell me that I had no right to tell where I got the flowers from.

They don't assume that their Christianity gives them the top floor in some sort of superior hierarchy. They don't think that the world revolves around their religious beliefs.

Nor do they stoop to deception in attempts to get folks to conform to their religious beliefs.

You should really try it sometime, Peter.

Tomorrow is the day!!!!

My mother came home from the hospital yesterday and is doing much better. Thank you all for your concern and prayers.

Well tomorrow is the day of my first book signing and I am naturally spooked. I haven't written down a game plan or anything.

Therefore I apologize for not posting anything new today. But I do want to direct your attention to a few items:

My buddies at Box Turtle Bulletin have instituted a new award, one which I hope that I am never the recipient of:

A lot of groups and individuals put out piles of misrepresented statistics and bogus research. Few can match Paul Cameron’s audacity, but from time to time we run across something that surely must put a smile on Cameron’s lips. One such email blast reached my inbox yesterday, and it was so good I thought it might be time to inaugurate a brand new award.

And so I’m announcing the Cameronesque Award, given for the individual or group who engages in the most egregious manipulation, misuse, or misrepresentation of research or statistics that would make Paul Cameron proud.

The first recipient of the award, The Christian Defense Coalition, truly deserves it.

Also, I rarely talk about the ex-gay movement on this blog. Mainly because there are many other excellent resources about the ex-gay movement, including Ex-gaywatch.com and this excellent book by activist Wayne Besen.

And now here is another good resource to add. The Southern Poverty Law Center has written two articles on the ex-gay movement. One dissects the lies of the movement and the other focuses on Scott Harrison, a man who survived the ex-gay movement.

Lastly, I would remiss if I didn't point out this article by the Worcester Telegram and Gazette. It focuses on something that our media should be talking about but for some reason refuses to: the lives of lgbts of color.

Huckabee shows how to manipulate the script

I dare anyone to tell me that the recent incident with presidential candidate Mike Huckabee wasn't timed.

Almost two weeks after Janet Folger's ridiculous wannabe Terminator fantasy of a future without Huckabee as president, someone "discovers" that Huckabee said some controversial things about AIDS sufferers as well as lgbts.

Leading of course to rebukes from folks on my side, but defenses by so-called "pro-family" figures.

A nasty way to shore up one's base indeed. I am expecting an article about the entire controversy (one-sided, of course) to come out soon in One News Now.

It wouldn't surprise me if the entire incident was planned. Huckabee is slowly but surely getting popular with the so-called "pro-family" groups. Therefore any rebuke he receives from the lgbt community can only make him look like a saint in their eyes.

So I would ask that while us lgbts get angry over Huckabee's comments, let's also recognize that we may be getting manipulated in order for Huckabee to get in the good graces of the anti-gay industry.

Let's recognize the game so that we are not pawns in it.

It's all coming together

Now I would usually talk about the anti-gay industry and I will later.

But today is too much of a good day to spoil with thoughts of Peter LaBarbera, Matt Barber, and the rest of the liars.

For today, I got my first royalty check. And of course I am giddy.

My books also came today. Last Friday, I got my business cards and poster. So I am now set for my first book signing on Thursday.

Also, my book jumped up a couple of spaces on amazon.com

And that is a good thing.

So I am now going to take this time to rest a little bit. Tonight, I am going to enjoy WWE Raw, eat, and give myself a psychological exfoliation.

Talk to you again tomorrow. I will be raring to go.

Will the David Parker lie ever die?

Yes, I know what happened today.

The Senate killed hate crimes legislation. I don't like it but I am not that angry over it.

Recently I bought a book giving the pictorial history of the African-American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s. And reading it gave me perspective.

I figure if people like John Lewis, Fannie Lou Hamer, Viola Luizzo, C.T. Vivian, etc. can withstand beatings and the like for their basic rights then lgbts can withstand a little legislative setback without going all to pieces.

We moved this legislation farther than it has ever been before. So let's just take a small breath and get ready to move it even farther to completion.

The anti-gay industry has hindered us just a little bit but they can't stop us. Time and progress is on our side.

Now onto other issues . . .

I see that our friend Peter is basking in all of the attention his appearance on Fox News last night gave him. Never mind the fact that Alan Colmes made him look like a nut (yeah THAT Alan Colmes - I am as shocked as you). It is obvious that Peter defines the word "narcissist."

But I think it reveals a little bit of desperation on his part. Wasn't Folsom Street Fair held in September? Why is he still ruminating on it now in December.

Could it be that his recent requests for donations need a jolt in the arm?

Mmmmmm Could be.

Seriously though, I read something today that is the theme of this post.

Sometimes, the press can act as an unofficial ally of the anti-gay industry. This happens when a reporter is too lazy to do any actual reporting and prints the soundbites of the anti-gay industry without the courtesy of an investigation.

Case in point is this November 26 piece regarding David Parker and King and King.

I talked about Parker extensively in my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, and on this blog. He is that parent in Massachusetts who was arrested for not leaving his child's school when asked to. Parker claimed that he did this because the school would not give him assurances that his child wouldn't be "exposed" to talks of homosexuality.

He subsequently sued the school, joined by another set of parents who objected to the fairy tale King and King (in which a prince falls in love with the brother of his intended bride) being read to their child (who was in the second grade.)

The lawsuit was dismissed earlier this year. However, Parker and company continues to pursue the situation.

Anyway, Cybercast News Service interviewed Parker for an article about the Presidential candidates' views of King and King. So I am going to take what was said and play that lovely game of truth vs. lie that I played earlier this week:

Distortion: The article said: Parker was jailed in 2005 after he insisted Lexington school officials follow Massachusetts' parental notification law and assure him they would not read such books (like King and King) to his then-kindergartner without prior notice.

Truth: Parker's individual situation had nothing to do with King and King. His son brought home what was called a "diversity bookbag." In the bookbag was a book that had included one same sex family. Parker complained about this. He received assurances that "learning about homosexuality" was not a part of his child's curriculum. However, he was told that some students attending his child's school lived in same sex households and mentioning these households did not violate the Massachusetts parental notification law. The school had checked and was told that the notification law dealt with matters of sex education, and not necessarily differing families.

Distortion: Parker said the following in the article - "We went into a meeting with the administration, they said they were not going to tell us, and I basically made the statement, 'I'm prepared to sit here all night until I get some form of accommodation for our little boy.' Then they called the Lexington police, who put me in handcuffs, and they took me to the Lexington jail. I opted out of paying bail, so they put me in jail over night."

Truth: According to a press release jointly issued by the interim superintendent of schools and area chief of police, Parker was informed of these things during the meeting. The press release also said that Parker was told that he could appeal this decision. Parker decided to take another form of action, i.e. not leaving until he was arrested.

I don't think any malice was intended on the part of the journalist who wrote this article. But his laziness still damages truth.

Okay, maybe I care a little bit . . .

There will be a short post today.

Peter had his press conference this afternoon and he brought friends. Matt Barber from Concerned Women for America and another person spoke.

From what I hear, it was sparsely attended. But for more information, check out The Washington Blade. Online Editor Rebecca Armendariz attended. Click on her name to read her thoughts about it.

Meanwhile, my mother is still in the hospital and I am still working to get everything ready for my first book signing next week. Wish me luck.

But all isn't frivolity and worry. I just found out some good news today.

It seems that my favorite actor, Philip Seymour Hoffman, is doing a nude scene in the new motion picture Before the Devil Knows You Are Dead.

I know what I am going to see this weekend.

So I like chubby pasty white men. Sue me already.

It's one of THOSE tuesdays

1. First of all, please pray for my mother as she is going to the hospital for yet another bout with diverticulitis.

Between her problems and mine, we channel Judy Garland and Liza Minelli. Of course I get to be Liza (the younger one).

2. I liked yesterday's game. In fact, I am going to play it again a few more times in the future.

3. A little over a week away from my first book signing and not only have my books not come yet but I haven't written down word one of my small speech.

And I hate the design of the poster that I am due to email to Kinko's tonight.

Can you say panic?

Well at least the sales from amazon.com are coming in. Very slowly, that is.

4. And I have a small conundrum. I am thinking about reconnecting with a dear friend of mine (shut your dirty minds, he is straight) whom I haven't seen or spoken to in over 10 years. Of course I would then have to tell him why I am 36 and have yet to meet the woman of my dreams.

And I don't know how he is going to take the news that I am gay. I hope if I tell him that he does not ask me did I ever look at him naked.

Well I can always say technically no. I never looked at him naked. Only certain parts of his body. And to answer your question, it looked spectacular.

All jokes aside, regardless of what anyone tells you, the rejection from a friend who finds out you're gay is like your soul getting sliced. And frankly, I am too old to be a victim of soul slicing. The wound may take longer to heal than it would if I were younger.

5. I hear our friend Peter LaBarbera is going to hold a press conference where he will show footage he took of Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco.

Please pardon me for not giving a shit.

6. Lastly (and yes this is a shameless plug), I encourage those who haven't already to check my site http://www.holybullies.com/ and buy a copy of my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry.

Trust me when I say that it is THE book to have when you are forced to do battle with the anti-gay industry.

Now forgive me for leaving. I have two boxes of ice cream sandwiches with my name on them.

After all, who needs sex when one has chocolate?

A teachable moment in Kentucky

An anti-bias ordinance was recently passed in Jefferson County School Board in Kentucky. It was supposed to pass easily but ended up going through by one vote. And this is because of an interesting incident that took place during the hearing.

In speaking for the ordinance, Kat Crawford of Highland Middle School told of a situation where a person in her class said a derogatory comment about lgbts. According to Crawford, she talked to the young lady and told her how hurtful such comments could be. Possibly in attempting to prove her point further, Crawford came out to the young lady:

Crawford said she heard a girl tell other kids while on her way to scoliosis screening that "there are going to be lesbians working this," prompting snickers.

"I called the girl over and talked with her privately," Crawford told the board. "… I asked her what she said … and why she said it. I told her that I took offense to it (and said), 'How do you think that comment makes this lesbian feel?' "

Unfortunately, a board member used Crawford's story as an excuse to change her vote:

To me, that was the deal breaker," Linda Duncan said shortly after she voted against the policy.

"When I saw that this language could possibly protect those conversations, it was chilling to me. I could not support something (that) would put kids at risk," she said.

Duncan also said teachers "can't cross the line and discuss (their) sexual preference with a student -- it's just like religion, you can't take a moment and discuss it in school, it's not appropriate."

Unfortunately, others in the article also played the "teacher telling students their sexual preference" card. Luckily, there were folks who spoke to the media and told the difference between sexual orientation and sexual preference.

Personally, I am for the teacher. She had every right to do what she did. What if the student had said something negative about a certain religion that the teacher happened to be a believer in? It would have been totally appropriate for her to act in the same manner she did in this case.

But no one would be trying to accuse her of trying to "convert" the student, as they have in this case.

But I want to use the incident in order to play a game. I am going to pretend that I am Peter LaBarbera (I know, I am retching too) or some other anti-gay industry talking head. Taking that form, I am going turn this story into a series of talking points. After each talking point, I am going to point out the truth of the matter:

Anti-gay industry talking point 1 - The teacher was in the wrong because she talked about her sex life with the student.

Truth - No she did not. She did not mention anything regarding sexual activity to the student.

Anti-gay industry talking point 2 - The teacher embarrassed the student by calling her out simply because the student was giving her "deeply held religious beliefs" about homosexuality.

Truth - The student's comments had nothing to do with her religious beliefs.

Anti-gay industry talking point 3 - The student had a right to free speech.

Truth - The student had a right to free speech up to a point. Teachers and instructors have a responsibility to monitor the words of students in cases of profanity and derogatory language. The teacher was well within her rights to call the student out because the student's language was derogatory.

Anti-gay industry talking point 4 - The teacher should not be trying to force the student to accept homosexuality

Truth - The teacher was not trying to force the student to accept anything. She was simply telling the student that her language was hurtful, as was her responsibility as an instructor/teacher.

You see how the anti-gay industry works? That is why is it so important for us to know when incidents like this happen so that we can analyze how they distort the truth.

The point I was trying to make yesterday was . . .

I inadvertently failed to mention yesterday that exgaywatch.com was also one of the first to spot how the American Family Association is continuing to sell the fradulent video featuring Michael Johnston.

And I agree with the person who pointed this out when he said that it was old news.

That was the point of my post. Why is it old news? AFA was caught doing this in January and now, one day before December, they are still selling the fradulent video.

While it is true that the AFA have shown themselves to be liars, I still say they are getting away with it because those in our community with the power of the media hasn't pushed the issue.

Is our community so beaten down and blase about things like this that we have numbed ourselves to exposing liars?

Look at the One News Now site. While I totally disagree with what they stand for, I have to commend those who post comments on the site for their focus on the issues they feel are important.

When my post was mentioned on Americablog last night, some comments had nothing to do with the situation at hand. It is not funny when folks you are trying to reach don't seem to care.

Meanwhile, the fradulent AFA video continues to be sold at churches and venues unaware of Michael Johnston's history and deception.

That is the real story here.