Why do the religious right make the appropriate sound so nasty?

Thank you to all who read and spread my blog entry Message to the Religious Right to other blogs, their friends, and neighbors.

It was something that I felt needed to be said. I had no idea that it would have as much of an impact as it did.

But I am glad for it.

I do want to make something clear just in case I see my post as a religious right talking point (yeah I'm being presumptuous but never put anything past the religious right). In no way did I advocate violence of any kind in my post. I think I made it very clear when I said:

" . . .any display of violence on either side of the argument should never be tolerated."

And also when I talk about the religious right, I do not mean religious people in general. I do not mean Christians or anyone who thinks that homosexuality is a sin.

I respect these opinions. I may vigorously disagree but I respect them.

When I say the religious right, I mean the groups, organizations, and talking heads like the American Family Association, Americans for Truth (in name only), Concerned Women for America, Focus on the Family, Family Research Council, the Traditional Values Coaltion, Lou Sheldon, Peter LaBarbera, Robert Knight, Janet Porter, Matt Barber, Tony Perkins etc.

I am talking about the groups and folks who claim to be "pro-family" but have a very limited definiton of family. I am talking about groups who seem to think that James Dobson sits on the right hand of God and America belongs to them solely.

That's who I mean by the religious right.

Now some of the comments I have received have been supportive, some have been rude and others have been very thought-provoking.

The most annoying I have received embraces that old standby argument of capitulation, "you don't tolerate my intolerance so that makes you intolerant."

Before yesterday, my biggest annoyance used to be the song "One Bad Apple" by the Osmonds. Just the chorus was enough to make me cry in agony.

That has been replaced by the nonsense of folks who put up straw man arguments of the gay community as hypocrites simply because we dare to challenge someone's idea that we have no right to family and happiness.

The fact of the matter is there are things we should all be intolerant of; lies, dehumanization, and making the unknown seem like boogeymen.

Like the following from my friend P. LaBarbera:

President-Elect Obama Lays Out Pro-Gay Agenda President-elect Barack Obama is committed to creating special rights for homosexuals and trampling on traditional marriage. He laid out his agenda on his Web site [http://www.change.gov/agenda/civil_rights_agenda]:

Expand hate-crimes legislation (which would create a new category of crime for actions said to be motivated by bias toward a person’s actual or perceived “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” Sexual-orientation hate-crimes laws have been used to prosecute speech in the U.S. and abroad);

Support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (which would create special rights based on an employee’s actual or perceived sexual orientation and could force Christian employers to hire against their religious beliefs);

Oppose a federal marriage-protection amendment;
Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (which would open the door to forcing all 50 states to recognize same-sex “marriage”)

Expand gay adoption (which would leave vulnerable children without either a mom or a dad);
Repeal the so-called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy (which would jeopardize military readiness by allowing open homosexuality in the armed forces).

And here I thought Barack Obama was a man who was elected president and therefore is interested in helping folks. Peter makes him sound like Baron Samedi conjuring up zombies.

Why don't we see what President Obama really wants to do:

Expand Hate Crimes Statutes: In 2004, crimes against LGBT Americans constituted the third-highest category of hate crime reported and made up more than 15 percent of such crimes. Barack Obama cosponsored legislation that would expand federal jurisdiction to include violent hate crimes perpetrated because of race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or physical disability. As a state senator, Obama passed tough legislation that made hate crimes and conspiracy to commit them against the law.

Fight Workplace Discrimination: Barack Obama supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and believes that our anti-discrimination employment laws should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity. While an increasing number of employers have extended benefits to their employees' domestic partners, discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace occurs with no federal legal remedy. Obama also sponsored legislation in the Illinois State Senate that would ban employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples: Barack Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples legal rights and privileges equal to those of married couples. Obama also believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions. These rights and benefits include the right to assist a loved one in times of emergency, the right to equal health insurance and other employment benefits, and property rights.

Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage: Barack Obama voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006 which would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman and prevented judicial extension of marriage-like rights to same-sex or other unmarried couples.

Repeal Don't Ask-Don't Tell: Barack Obama agrees with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili and other military experts that we need to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve. Discrimination should be prohibited. The U.S. government has spent millions of dollars replacing troops kicked out of the military because of their sexual orientation. Additionally, more than 300 language experts have been fired under this policy, including more than 50 who are fluent in Arabic. Obama will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals.
Expand Adoption Rights: Barack Obama believes that we must ensure adoption rights for all couples and individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation. He thinks that a child will benefit from a healthy and loving home, whether the parents are gay or not.

Promote AIDS Prevention: In the first year of his presidency, Barack Obama will develop and begin to implement a comprehensive national HIV/AIDS strategy that includes all federal agencies. The strategy will be designed to reduce HIV infections, increase access to care and reduce HIV-related health disparities. Obama will support common sense approaches including age-appropriate sex education that includes information about contraception, combating infection within our prison population through education and contraception, and distributing contraceptives through our public health system. Obama also supports lifting the federal ban on needle exchange, which could dramatically reduce rates of infection among drug users. Obama has also been willing to confront the stigma -- too often tied to homophobia -- that continues to surround HIV/AIDS. He will continue to speak out on this issue as president.

Why does Peter have to use such spooky language? And better yet, what's wrong with Obama wanting to do these things?

Lastly, why can't the religious right use concrete evidence. I mean it. I want to hear a clear argument as to why these goals are bad.

And I don't mean phony talking points about the "uniqueness of families" or stupid comparisons between marriage and chocolate chip cookies. No fear stories about innocent boy scouts being led into the woods by leering scoutmasters. No anecdotes that are distorted and taken out of context. And above all, no phony studies.

Based on Peter's comments, I am sure the religious right will use the above examples in their attempts to stop Obama from implementing his plans.

And it will be more proof regarding their lack of a soul.

Remembering our fellow brothers and sisters

Today is Transgender Day of Remembrance.

Rather than dwelling on manufactured martyrs (see my post below), let's take this time to commemorate and honor the true victims of hatred.

You won't see Michele Malkin, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, or the phonies at One News Now speak out about these folks.

So it's our job, as it should be.

Go here for more information.

Not attacking that 69-year-old woman but there is more to the story

The story of Phyllis Burgess, the 69-year-old woman who had a confrontation with a crowd of anti-Proposition 8 folks is making its way through the blogsphere.

Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich referenced it in their television interviews and now Michelle Malkin is talking about it in her syndicated column:

In Palm Springs, a videographer filmed unhinged anti-Prop. 8 marchers who yanked a large cross from the hands of 69-year-old Phyllis Burgess and stomped on it.

That behavior was uncalled for but there is more to the story than a lot of people are willing to tell. I found the following on Mike Tidmus's site. He investigated the incident after seeing it on P. LaBarbera's site:

Peter LaBarbera, President of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality, renown gay porn aficionado, and ersatz critic of the queer equality movement, recently posted an article about an incident at an otherwise peaceful, Palm Springs candlelight vigil on the Friday following the passage of Proposition 8.

From Americans for Truth about Homosexuality:

Dear Readers, here’s more evidence that homo-fascism is coming out of the closet following the triumph of Proposition 8, which simply restores the traditional definition of marriage in California. “Gay” activists now rail against ANY opposition to their agenda as “hateful.” Watch this video from Palm Springs, California — a notorious homosexual Mecca. Note the anchorman’s politically correct summation, as if the “hate” on the video really came from “both sides”! Beneath the video is more background on this latest “gay” outrage; note that a commercial precedes the online video news story.

Here’s the report on this incident in The Desert Sun:

A candlelight service to protest the state’s recently enacted gay marriage ban turned hostile Friday night when a woman carried a cross into the crowd.

The crowd chanted, “Go home!” “Nazi!” and “Shame on you!” as organizers pleaded with the crowd to ignore the woman.

“God has given me a message, a word for all of us and it’s fidelity,” said Phyllis Burgen, a Palm Springs supporter of the gay marriage ban.

“I have a right to be here.”

The crowd saw things differently, pressed in on Burgen, ripped the cross from her hands and stomped on it. In the rush, protesters pushed one another and Burgen, who said she would not press charges although she was bruised in the exchange.

LaBarbera has removed the beginning of the second paragraph from the article that reads:

But as Phyllis Burgen, a Palm Springs supporter of the gay marriage ban, walked through the gathering with her cross, the crowd chanted, “Go home!” “Nazi!” and “Shame on you!” as organizers pleaded with the crowd to ignore the woman.

LaBarbera also fails to provide a link to the source, MyDesert.com, which incorrectly identifies Phyllis Burgess as “Phyllis Burgen.” What else does LaBarbera omit? Key points from the article, including this:

As reported on mydesert.com, organizers had planned a quiet service with speeches from elected officials to rally support after a disappointing loss at the polls. In May, the California Supreme Court ruled the gay marriage ban overwhelmingly passed by voters in 2000 was unconstitutional.

The article ends with this paragraph:

At the close of the event, participants snuffed out their candles to symbolize the passage of the same-sex marriage ban extinguishing gay civil rights.

LaBarbera provides a video segment of the aftermath of the incident in which Phyllis Burgess is shouted down by attendees of the event that Ms Burgess had just interrupted.

LaBarbera fails to note that another local TV news crew was on the scene conducting a live interview when Burgess pushed her way through the crowd, plastic cross in hand, to get the attention of the film crew. That video, from KESQ TV can be seen here.

According to an eyewitness iReporter:

At City Hall a woman with a huge styrofoam cross appeared screaming about YES on 8 at the back of the crowd of NO on 8 supporters — their rally. She wanted to get to where the speakers were up front and I saw her knock a disabled man, a NO on 8 supporter to the ground, screaming, “Get out of my way!” People in the crowd around her tore away her cross and threw it to the ground and began pushing her.

If you study the video from KESQ, you’ll see Ms Burgess emerge, not from the sidelines, but directly through the middle of the crowd. You’ll also note that the news anchor recognizes Burgess, because this is not Burgess’ first visit to an anti-Prop-8 event. She showed up to protest five days earlier at the Palm Springs Gay Pride Parade.

KESQ describes that appearance:

There is always two sides to every debate. Among the thousands against Prop 8, there are a few supporters fighting back with yes signs.

“They don’t see the sanctity in male-on-male or female-on-female,” says Phyllis Burgess, Prop 8 supporter.

Those against the ballot issue didn’t take kindly to the protestors displays.

“I was amazed with the hatred,” says Burgess.

Amazed with the hatred, but eager to get on TV again, Burgess came back and butted into a candlelight service intended to heal the community’s grief and anger over the passage of Prop 8.

Phyllis Burgess declined to press charges on 7 November, even though Lt Dennis Graham of the police department spent 40 minutes trying to persuade her to file a complaint.

According to MyDesert.com, “the 69-year-old Palm Springs resident originally declined to press charges when asked by police and joked that she felt lucky — that at least she didn’t lose her wig in the tussle like Cloris Leachman did on ‘Dancing with the Stars.’”

Then suddenly four days later on 11 November, Phyllis Burgess was eager to press charges. What could have happened in the meantime to change her mind? Phone call from the Alliance Defense Fund? Thomas More Law Center? Liberty Counsel? We may never know.

Incomplete mischaracterizations of the incident, along with accusations of “homo-fascism”spread like wildfire across right wing blogs, online forums like FreeRepublic, and radical religious right news sources like WorldNetDaily and OneNewsNow.

What has subsequently not been widely reported is that, following an apology from one gay man, Phyllis Burgess has opted not to seek assault charges. She also acknowledged contacting officials prior to her controversial intrusion at the candlelight vigil, and Ms Burgess now says “she would support ’some sort of marriage’ for those in a committed relationship.”

Like I said, I do not condone attacking anyone, but there is more to the story than Malkin and her cohorts are willing to admit.

You see folks, this is how lying is done. Enhance one part of your yarn while omitting crucial details. It happened with the Repent America controversy, it happened with the David Parker controversy.

And it is happening again.

Are the religious right the black community's best friend? Hardly

The religious right seem to be caught between two narratives in trying to define the argument over Proposition 8.

To them, we are either rampaging invaders or, as Mike Huckabee tried to press on the View today, trying to steal the legacy of the African-American civil rights movement.

I think that as time goes on, we are going to hear more about gays trying to steal the legacy of the civil rights movement. And I hope we don't fall for the trap. The narrative needs to be about US, not about how our movement for dignity and self-determination compares with movements of the past.

The narrative needs to be about how we are deprived HERE and NOW.

I really don't think that some African-Americans will be convinced about the similarities between our movements. And that is okay for me.

As long as these folks understand that gays should be able to work, have the ability to create families, and be free from crimes done against us because of our orientation, it is okay with me.

I am not trying to shake anyone away from their historical plateau nor do I want a piece of their heritage. I just want my own.

But this rush to "defend" African-Americans by the religious right has got me thinking.

Just what has the religious right done for the African-American community?

My fellow black brothers and sisters who are so intent on protecting their heritage from the supposed onslaught of lgbts need to take a good look at those pretending to be their friends.

When has James Dobson, Peter LaBarbera, Lou Sheldon or any of them has done anything to speak out against racial disparities in education, health care, the criminal justice system, or any of the systematic things done to pull down the black community?

True, they harp on religious similarities, but have they ever kicked in any cash when it comes dealing with the above issues?

I would suggest that before anyone in my black community allows the religious right to become their defenders, they take a good look at these folks:

See how they give aid and comfort to Jesse Jackson obsessed minister Jesse Lee Peterson who once said about the victims of Hurricane Katrina:

"When 75 percent of New Orleans residents had left the city, it was primarily immoral, welfare-pampered blacks that stayed behind and waited for the government to bail them out. This, as we know, did not turn out good results. . . ."

See how they laud people like Alan Keyes who is presently working to disenfranchise the African-American community's choice as president via some silly lawsuit

Read how wannabe ally Peter LaBarbera called a racist Anti-Semite a "pro-family advocate."

Go to One News Now and read how this supposed Christian service speculated that blacks would riot if Obama did not win. As a matter of fact, count how many blatant anti-Obama articles the news services carries on a daily basis.

Read comment after comment of their supposed Christian readers:

I work in downtown Baltimore and lately have seen many people wearing t-shirts that read, "Obama 2008 Or Else!" Or else what? Riots? Disruptions? Terrorism American style? What if he is elected? Are we going to pay either way? Who is going to pay? Only white Americans or anyone who doesn't believe or embrace your views? I think that it is ridiculous that after all these years every single white American is being held responsible for the sins of slave traders and anyone else who wronged another because of race. My forefathers were abused and enslaved by Germans...does that make every ancestor of German descent evil in my eyes? No, nore should it. I hold people responsible for their own actions, not the actions of their ancestors. The world has gone mad!

I don't understand this. What ever happened to winning based upon your qualifications NOT the color of your skin? And if you lose, why do your supporters automatically use the RACE card as an excuse for acting rudely and violently against others? This should not be about race, this should be about the best candidate for the job winning. Obama should be telling these people to knock it off NOW and channel their energies in another direction for the GOOD of America. He is wrong for not controlling this NOW before the election occurs. If he wants to UNITE America like he says, this is a GREAT place to start. Put his money where his mouth is. You won't see him doing this since he doesn't want to "offend" his supporters! You don't see McCain's supporters making the same threat if McCain loses! Wake up America!

I find it unbelievable that the black community would support Obama to the point of being terrorists in our own nation. And I do not understand how they (blacks) can support a man whose ideologies slaps them right in the face. Barrack supports abortion; ergo Planned Parenthood of which their charter targeted eliminating or reducing the black population. Finally, I disagree with one commentor that a McCain presidency will destroy this country. It is in fact our continued spiral into the depths of immorality of pro-death and the anti-natural family faction that will destroy this country. And the candidate that most represents a continued spiral into this immoral goo is Barrack Obama.

Oh...okay...lets vote for Obama because there "might be" a race riot if he doesn't win. Sounds logic.

Are these groups and individuals going to be suddenly anointed as black people's best friends and defenders?

God, I hope not.

Message to the religious right - this isn't just about marriage, it's about history

I keep hearing all of this nonsense about us lgbts attacking people, about us using intimidation and violence to oppress people, about us somehow being ugly aggressors. Newt Gingrich (who wrote the book on deceptive messaging during his tenure in the U.S. House of Representatives) actually accused us of being "secular fascists." Gingrich's attack on us seem to be the prevailing theme with those on the other side of the Proposition 8 argument.

And I think there needs to be some historical perspective on this matter.

 True, Proposition 8 has galvanized our community. We have become a bit more politically engaged in our anger. That is a good thing. However, any display of violence on either side of the argument should never be tolerated.

Nor should letting the religious right frame the moment. I have a few questions to people like Newt Gingrich, Bill O’Reilly, Chuck Norris, Gary Bauer, Peter LaBarbera and the rest who are trying to push this "gay intimidation" image.

Where were you in the late 1970s when Anita Bryant accused us of trying to “recruit” children?

Where were you in 1983 when Paul Cameron accused gay men of stuffing gerbils up our rectums and castrating children? Or afterwards when he went from state to state pushing his phony research papers all designed to make us the boogiemen of American society?

Where were you when Jerry Falwell exploited the AIDS crisis to generate more money for the Moral Majority? Or when those dying of AIDS were cast out of their communities and excommunicated from their churches?

Where were you when Colorado passed that law in 1992 that basically said cities in the state had absolutely no right to protect gays and lesbians from discrimination?

Where were you when over the course of 20 years all of those phony “pro-family” groups told lies in front of federal and congressional state houses in attempts to beat back pro-gay laws or spread discredited research that gave “upstanding, moral” families the perfect excuse to put their gay sons and daughters out on the cold streets?

Where were you when organizations like Concerned Women for America, the Family Research Council, the Traditional Values Coalition, and Focus on the Family unconsciously gave reasoning for groups of roaming thugs to bash our heads in, chase us out in heavy traffic, beat us to bloody pulps with nail embedded boards, and hang us from fences on dark and lonely roads?

How is it that you can dare call us aggressive when for over 30 years, you have done everything in your power to make America hate and fear us?

How it is that you can dare infer that we don't have a right to get just a tad angry when for over 30 years, you have done everything in your power to make us hate and fear ourselves?

Every lie, every indignity, every attempt to dehumanize the lgbt community has brought us to this point. The Proposition 8 vote was the last straw in a chain of indignities that stretch as long as Jacob's ladder.

This ain’t just about marriage. Nor is this a single moment in time.

We are not the aggressors. We are learning to fight back.

When I was coming out, it wasn’t the fact that I was gay that bothered me more than the knowledge that so many had already written my life for me; told me who I was, what I liked, what I didn’t like, and even where I was going after I died. Worst of all, they had the nerve to tell me that I had absolutely no rights to the words "values," "family," "tradition," or "honor."

 And you know what the saddest thing about this is? I was not alone.

Hundreds of thousands of lgbts went through the same experience. It was our "rite of passage." So while I may not have a media spin machine behind me and therefore very few will give a damn about what I say, while I may not be a member of a religious think tank who is presently working to use this moment to again dehumanize lgbts, and while I may not be considered as a "leading gay talking head," I am an American, a human being, and a child of God.

Therefore, I will never forget what has brought me to this point of outrage. And I will do my best to make sure that this country never forgets either. Lastly, I will do my best to make sure that YOU never forget.

Chuck Norris exposes his ignorance and the hypocrisy of the other side

Apparently we got actor Chuck Norris upset over our protests this weekend:

Of course, activists say they are merely utilizing their political freedoms and rights, but, the fact is, I see a lot of sore losers who are intolerant of any outcome but the one they desire. Some are acting like toddlers who throw a temper tantrum until they get their way. Are they fighting for their rights or at last showing true colors of intolerance against anyone who believes contrary to them?

That "they say they are tolerant but they are intolerant of my intolerance so that makes them intolerant" argument seems to be a popular one. It is one of the religious right's most effective.

But rather than roll my eyes from hearing that faulty argument yet another time, rather than make fun of Norris's acting career (which I won't because I loved Walker: Texas Ranger when Norris didn't get all preachy), I think it would be best to expose Mr. Norris's hypocrisy:

There have been many of us who have passionately opposed an Obama election, but you don't see us protesting in the streets, crying out unfair – rather we are submitting to a democratic process and now asking how we can support "our" president.

It is obvious that Mr. Norris doesn't pay attention to the publication in which his article appears, World Net Daily. Check out the headlines of the articles featured today in World Net Daily:

Communist Party strategist maps out Obama's agenda
Powerful unions, socialized medicine 1st crucial steps for long-term plans

'Constitutional crisis' looming over Obama's birth location
Alan Keyes lawsuit warns America may see 'usurper' in Oval Office

The enemy within (Editor's note - Yes this is another piece comparing Obama to Hitler)

Obama blockbuster: 'Audacity of Deceit' $4.95 today!
Save $21 on stunning blueprint for the new White House agenda

Obama camp: Lawsuits by citizens are 'garbage
'Legal challenges spring up across U.S., demand proof of eligibility for office

So much for supporting the new president. If Chuck Norris and his cohorts support Obama, then I'm secretly Paris Hilton undercover as a black gay man in order to write a Harvard thesis on racism and quantum physics.

Mr. Norris, do everyone a favor. Go back to making testosteroned driven television dramas and leave the deception to Peter, Matt, Janet, and company.

At least when they do it, they don't automatically come out looking like a horse's ass.

South Carolina helps to make an impact

Close to 200 people came out in Columbia, SC to protest the Proposition 8 vote. It was an awesome thing to see.
These are just pictures that were taken by Jennifer Sigman.

Use your heads, folks. The religious right is watching us.

Tomorrow is the day, folks - Join the Impact - keep it nonviolent and love-filled.

Today, my favorite anti-gay spokesperson (who am I kidding, I love 'em all) Matt Barber gave his "opinion" on Proposition 8.

According to Barber, my community is calling for wanton acts of violence. Strange because I didn't get that memo.

The funny part about Barber's screed is him running defense for black folks:

Don’t compare your sin to my skin," goes the African-American mantra. Or, as influential black pastor Ken Hutcherson notes, "It has been said loudly and proudly that gay marriage is a civil rights issue. If that’s the case, then gays would be the new African-Americans. I’m here to tell you now, and hopefully for the last time, that the gay community is not the new African-American community."

Understandably, blacks want all this nonsense to stop. Exit polls indicate that in the Democratic stronghold of "left coast" California, African-Americans - 96 percent of whom voted for Barack Obama - also voted to pass California’s marriage protection amendment (Prop 8) by an overwhelming 70 to 30 percent. As luck would have it, the unprecedented turnout of black voters for Obama very likely tipped the scale and restored the enduring definition of natural marriage to the Golden State. This has made "gay" activists mouth-foaming furious.

What's funnier? That Barber calls Hutcherson "influential" or that he is speaking for the African-American community.

Black folks who complain about gays appropriating the civil rights movement should really pay attention to Barber and his cohorts.

Just when did they ever speak out about education, inner-city violence or the other problems that face African-American community.

Maybe black folks would be best served not to pay as much attention to lgbts but to those claiming to be their friends.

A perfect example of what I am talking about is this lovely piece Barber also wrote about President-Elect Barack Obama:

Obama Vows Blood for Bloodshed

Seriously though, Barber alluded to several unfortunate incidents in order to enhance his lies about gays rioting in the streets. He also take several comments from pro-gay blogs out of context It just goes to show how the religious right monitors our web pages and how we need to be on the ball about monitoring them.

So be careful folks. Put a kibosh on nonsense posted on your sites:

Barber issued a news release, cited at various right-wing Christian sites and GLBT sites alike, in which he claimed that gays were actively advocating that hate crimes targeting Christians be carried out.

Striking an incredulous tone, the news release declared that “several self identified homosexuals on a number of homosexual blogs are advocating violence against Christians and other supporters of traditional marriage.”

The release went on, “Additionally, some homosexuals are calling for church burnings in response to yesterday’s three state referenda in defense of natural marriage.”

The release then cherry-picked from various comments posted to GLBT Web sites such as Queerty and JoeMyGod.

One posting at Queerty called for readers to burn Mormon temples, with the blogger writing, “Can someone in CA please go burn down the Mormon temples there, PLEASE. I mean seriously. DO IT.”

Responded Queerty, “No, don’t.”

Added Queerty, “First and foremost, violence solves nothing and obviously we don’t condone such thinking.

“Second, if people actually started attacking churches, it would do the gay rights movement a great disservice.

“We’re sure there are other ways to fight for our rights, like public protests, lawyers and other perfectly legal venues,” Queerty continued.

The religious right suggested that such expressions of anger be criminally prosecuted and tutted the gay community for asking for “tolerance,” only to post such commentary when their rights were taken from them by legal maneuvers and the use of the popular vote.

No such calls from the religious right for criminal prosecution have been noted in instances where right-wing bloggers suggested physical violence should be visited upon gays and lesbians.

The release also culled carefully excerpted text from blogger postings at JoeMyGod, including a comment that encouraged readers to “Burn their f-ing churches to the ground, and then tax the charred timbers.”

JoeMyGod responded by warning readers that, “The Christianists are monitoring this and other LGBT blogs and calling for the criminal prosecution of those calling for violent revenge against the religious right in the wake of yesterday’s vote on Proposition 8.”

Added JoeMyGod, “Please refrain from any possibly actionable calls to violence against our foul enemies and their property.

“There have been over 1000 comments today already, but I will go slog through them and remove any comments that might cause you legal repercussions, as remote as that prospect probably may be.”

At the right-wing religious site WorldNetDaily, a Nov. 5 article based on the release reveled in the claims made by Barber, who stated in the release that, “The homosexual lobby is always calling for ’tolerance’ and ’diversity’ and playing the role of victim.

“They claim to deplore violence and ’hate.’ Here we have homosexuals inciting, and directly threatening, violence against Christians.”

Added Barber, “This is not free speech; these are ’hate crimes’ under the existing definition.

“Imagine if Christian websites were advocating such violence against homosexuals. There’d be outrage, and rightfully so. It’d be national front-page news.

“Federal authorities should immediately investigate these threats and prosecute the perpetrators to the fullest extent of the law.”

Given that federal authorities have not, to date, launched any extensive investigations of Christian and conservative Web sites for similar user-posted language against gays, that outcome seems unlikely.

In the release, Barber also encouraged GLBT leaders to encourage that threatening language not be employed by angry gays whose rights have been curtailed.

With Queerty and JoeMyGod having done so, it remains to be seen whether the Liberty Council and other right-wing Christian organizations will issue a similar call for civility to members of their own ranks.

And on the offchance that Barber and company is monitoring Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters (and ooooooooh I hope that they are):

Guys, you have a momentary victory here and a chance to exploit the rage and anger your nonsense has caused and continues to cause in the lgbt community.

But be forewarned. The day is coming that everything you have done; all of the times you have cited Paul Cameron (while knowing that his work was false), all the times that you have distorted legitimate studies (and ignored the authors when they complain), all the times you have written columns and gone on news programs distorting current events and controversies to suit your agenda; all of these things will come back on your head.

You claim to speak for God but the God I know doesn't like lies even if they are told in His name and He doesn't like ugly. If He is merciful , all the wrong things you have done will come out in the open.

And you will have no one to blame but yourselves.

I don't care what Elton John said about Proposition 8

But first, an interlude:

I see that the phony news service One News Now are hiring black columnists. First Thomas Sowell and now Larry Elder.

For the record, Elder and Sowell are two black conservatives whose opinions are bought and paid for with Republican money.

They are a part of a cadre of black conservative writers and thinkers who, as Joe Conason paraphrases, settles in a clique amongst themselves and whines as to why black people in general don't give a damn about their opinions.

One would think that they were hired to exploit the alleged Proposition 8 divide between the lgbt and black communities. However I doubt this.

We now have a black president and even before he was elected, One News Now was doing its best to paint him as the younger brother of the Anti-Christ, if not the Anti-Christ himself.

So now they are apparently hiring "black conservatives" who will do their dirty work on Obama, or at least give One News Now some form of cover when they do another anti-Obama hit piece.

Larry Elder's inital column is a perfect example of what I am talking about - They shilled for Obama

Now for the main course:

Singer Elton John has weighed in on the Proposition 8 controversy and he wasn't exactly nice to the Proposition 8 opposers:

"What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage."

Now some folks are upset over this. Those who support Proposition 8 are using his comments to further their cause.

But you know what? Regardless of what John would have said, even if his words were a forceful indictment of Proposition 8, I wouldn't have given a damn.

Does Elton John even live in California? Does he live in America?

Please understand that I am not trying to put down Elton John for voicing his opinion. But I just get sick and tired when our community flips out over the lastest verbal pronouncement of an lgbt celebrity.

I have seen it too many times before: a celebrity whom none of us really gave a care for comes out and all of the sudden, he or she is anointed as our new spokesperson and we hang on their every word as if he or she is Moses coming down from Mount Sinai.

You think we would have learned that lesson with Lance Bass.

Just because someone has a successful talk show, is a successful actor, or a successful entertainer is no reason to make them the new gay spokesperson.

The glare of visibility does not magically make someone golden nor does it make the words flowing from their mouths sound like tinkling brass.

I hate to say it but this automatic canonization of lgbt celebrities reveals a certain degree of laziness. We should not want our spokespeople to be like instant food where you just have to add water.

We need to build our spokespeople from our own personal communities. We need to mentor and educate those who can and will lead us into the future.

And not just the pretty boys or those who fit a successful social strata. Some of us unconvential divas with bad credit and low income can also shake the world up if we are given the tools and the chance.

So let's start building leaders from the bottom up rather waiting for them to come from the top down. (and that's my Obama reference for today).

And above all, let's stop getting ourselves in a knot over what Elton said or what Melissa said or what Ellen said.

I mean it!

I ain't playing, y'all! (and that's my Boondocks reference for today).

Proposition 8 fall out - Stop whining and stand behind your donations

There is a lot of fallout over the Proposition 8 vote. Those who did donate to pass that awful referendum are now facing the consequences of their actions. This is one that you no doubt already heard about:

California Musical Theatre's artistic director, Scott Eckern, resigned from his post today amid controversy over a donation he made to the Proposition 8 campaign to ban gay marriage.

Eckern gave $1,000 in support of Proposition 8, a donation that sparked criticism from theater workers and the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community.

"We have released a statement that Scott resigned," said Chris McSwain, community affairs director for the theater company. He declined to comment further. . .

Eckern also released a statement today saying that he quit "after prayerful consideration to protect the organization and to help the healing in the local theatre-going and creative community."

To put it nicely, Eckern pissed off a lot of people, including Jeff Whitty (Avenue Q) and Marc Shaiman (Hairspray).

No doubt we will be inudated by the religious right who will wax about evil intolerant gay folks but please spare us your usual twists in logic.

You are the same folks who boycotted McDonalds and Ford Auto because of their supposed support of the "gay agenda."

I can only hope that in this juncture, the religious right won't be their usual hypocritical selves.

Eckern obviously thought that he could have it both ways; he can donate to a referendum that denies lgbts basic human rights but can also make money from the efforts of lgbts.

It's a classic case of what we learn as children about making choices. It was Eckern's right to make his donation but with his donations, like all things, there are consequences.

And in a general sense, I have no pity for anyone who suffers repercussions (albeit rational and logical repercussions) over their donations to Proposition 8.

If you as a business owner donated to Proposition 8, then you don't have the right to force angry lgbts to continue to cater to your business.

And you don't have a right to tell them that they cannot launch a boycott.

You only have the right to man up and stand by your donation.

If you can't then maybe you shouldn't have made said donation in the first place.

Thank you Nate Silver for saying what needs to be said

Certainly, the No on 8 folks might have done a better job of outreach to California's black and Latino communities. But the notion that Prop 8 passed because of the Obama turnout surge is silly. Exit polls suggest that first-time voters -- the vast majority of whom were driven to turn out by Obama (he won 83 percent [!] of their votes) -- voted against Prop 8 by a 62-38 margin.

More experienced voters voted for the measure 56-44, however, providing for its passage.Now, it's true that if new voters had voted against Prop 8 at the same rates that they voted for Obama, the measure probably would have failed. But that does not mean that the new voters were harmful on balance -- they were helpful on balance. If California's electorate had been the same as it was in 2004, Prop 8 would have passed by a wider margin.Furthermore, it would be premature to say that new Latino and black voters were responsible for Prop 8's passage.

Latinos aged 18-29 (not strictly the same as 'new' voters, but the closest available proxy) voted against Prop 8 by a 59-41 margin. These figures are not available for young black voters, but it would surprise me if their votes weren't fairly close to the 50-50 mark.

More here


Arkansas anti-gay adoption referendum may reap more problems than we realize

But while Californians march and gay activists contemplate a national boycott of Utah — the Mormon Church largely bankrolled Proposition 8 — an even more ominous new law in Arkansas has drawn little notice.

That state’s Proposed Initiative Act No. 1, approved by nearly 57 percent of voters last week, bans people who are “cohabitating outside a valid marriage” from serving as foster parents or adopting children. While the measure bans both gay and straight members of cohabitating couples as foster or adoptive parents, the Arkansas Family Council wrote it expressly to thwart “the gay agenda.” Right now, there are 3,700 other children across Arkansas in state custody; 1,000 of them are available for adoption. The overwhelming majority of these children have been abused, neglected or abandoned by their heterosexual parents.

Even before the law passed, the state estimated that it had only about a quarter of the foster parents it needed. Beginning on Jan. 1, a grandmother in Arkansas cohabitating with her opposite-sex partner because marrying might reduce their pension benefits is barred from taking in her own grandchild; a gay man living with his male partner cannot adopt his deceased sister’s children.

Social conservatives are threatening to roll out Arkansas-style adoption bans in other states. And the timing couldn’t be worse: in tough economic times, the numbers of abused and neglected children in need of foster care rises. But good times or bad, no movement that would turn away qualified parents and condemn children to a broken foster care system should be considered “pro-family.”

Most ominous, once “pro-family” groups start arguing that gay couples are unfit to raise children we might adopt, how long before they argue that we’re unfit to raise those we’ve already adopted? If lesbian couples are unfit to care for foster children, are they fit to care for their own biological children?

More here

And it begins - One News Now and Peter LaBarbera attacks the transgender community

I said it yesterday in my blog post and today I see it is happening.

Let me recap.

The religious right are scared over an Obama presidency and the positive possibilities it may have for the lgbt community.

So expect them to batten down all of the hatches and pull out all of their lies about hate crimes legislation, gays serving openly in the military, ENDA, and non-discrimination ordinances in general.

With non-discrimination ordinances, they are going to try and exploit ignorance and fear about our transgender brothers and sisters.

I see from an item on LaBarbera's Americans for Truth (in name only) web page and the One News Now webpage, they aren't wasting any time:

Americans for Truth - Will big-boned men in dresses and high heels like this fellow be allowed to use women’s restrooms in federal buildings under the Obama Administration? That’s what Obama’s plan to create “rights” based on gender confusion might bring. Obama’s pro-transsexual agenda — he favors federal rights based on “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” — was never discussed or debated seriously in the election campaign.

One News Now - Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, says Obama's new non-discrimination policy will be an "open door" for gender-confused and cross-dressing federal employees. "What's the Obama administration going to do to protect women in federal restrooms?" the activist asks. "Since men [wearing] dresses apparently are going to be protected under gender-identity provisions, what about the women in the restrooms in the White House and other federal buildings? What's going to be done to protect their rights?"

Apparently Obama's election has afforded Peter the privilege of getting around more than a whore on payday.

So expect us to hear more about the transgender community in lucid and ugly terms.

Oh brother.

Listen, the question here is not whether anyone approves with being transgender or not. So be careful not to let Peter and company turn it into that.

The question is should lgbts (and that includes transgendered brothers and sisters) be able to function and do their job without fear of discrimination.

And if Peter and company want to bring up the issue of bathrooms and such, let's make them be specific about it.

Starting now.

I know my blog preaches to the choir but just in case there are any opposition folks out there who read it, I dare you to challenge me on this point:

The bathroom issue is IRRELEVANT. The bathroom issue is a scare tactic brought up by the religious right. There has never a problem of women having to fear for themselves if someone transgendered used the bathroom.

And also, as I said yesterday, several cities (including my home city of Columbia, SC) has passed ordinances such as these. And there has NOT been any problems with bathrooms and the like.

Other than trying to exploit fear and ignorance, what concerns are reasonable about the bathroom argument?

I await your answer, even though I won't ever get it.

Peter is scared that he is being watched

Speaking of my friend LaBarbera, he has another interesting item on his webpage. Apparently a gay man wrote wannabe "Christian activist" and all-around nutcase Linda Harvey and said the following:

Comments: You are very much being watched! All you jeebus-lovin-christers rights will slowly be taken away one by one the more you try to press your beliefs down our throats. Beware. We are everywhere and you will never know it. Watch your mouth. Watch your actions. We are watching them my friend and we are many and we are rich and we are very well educated and very powerful.

Peter makes the comment sound ominous.

Oh please. Peter, I am watching you. I am watching Harvey. I am watching One News Now and the rest of the religious right.

Just like you watch us. Cause if you didn't, you wouldn't have any items to lie on us about.

Hell, Peter, you have made a career out of watching us and taking pictures no less.

For you to complain that a gay man has written saying that he is watching you or anyone else on your side is yet another sign of your hypocrisy.

We are angry. Now what to do with that anger

Despite the past blogs regarding the Proposition 8 controversy, part of me is pleased with the lgbt community's anger.

It reminds of that soul song "A Thin Line Between Love and Hate." In the song, the protagonist's girlfriend endures hurt after humiliation from him until he goes too far.

Then she took it upon herself to take care of the situation.

Historically, the lgbt community are like that. We endure insult after insult until we get really angry. And when we do, people start shaking.

It's not because we get violent (we usually don't) but because we get infused with that fiersome clarity that always comes with white hot righteous indignation. When that happens, your mind develops a sort of tunnelvision that, if used right, is like a cleansing fire that not only overwhelms everything in its wake, but also gives your enemies the realization that maybe this time, they have gone too far.

It's taking us a little time and despite the minor roadblock we have to deal with (i.e. the Proposition 8 blame game), the lgbt community is reaching that point of fiersome clarity.

It happened after the Anita Bryant/Dade County vote, it happened after the 1992 Colorado anti-gay discrimination vote and it's happening now.

But the question is where will it lead. I like the fact that our community is channeling Howard Beale from the motion picture Network (i.e. "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore"), but we need to take things into account.

These things are the difference between us running our anger out in useless sparks of wildcat rage and using the anger to become a disciplined united force:

1. We now have a president and a Congress who are a little more gay-friendly than the ones we have had to deal with in recent years. That being the case, we have a good chance of passing ENDA, hate crimes legislation, as well as legislation allowing gays to serve openly in the military.

2. The religious right is still out there. They still have the power to motivate on the basis of ignorance, albeit on a smaller scale. In other words, they are still dangerous.

How the lgbt community handles the second issue will determine how much success we will have with the first issue.

We need to have a real assessment of what the religious right can and will do - their strengths so so speak.

Allow me to offer up an opinion on the matter.

1. Expect to see and hear more lies regarding the transgender community.

2. Expect to hear more anecdotes about how the "gay agenda" is being marketed to children or how gays want to silence Christians. The religious right definition of an anecdote is a current event taken out of context (i.e. lies about parents getting arrested for "standing up against the gay agenda," people arrested for "simply preaching the gospel' at a gay pride festival," pastors arrested for "simply preaching against homosexuality").

I would suggest to combat this, we pre-develop talking points like the following:

Religious right - Hate crime laws are an excuse for pastors to be arrested in their pulpits for speaking against homosexuality.

Truth - Hate crime laws deal with violent action, not speech. Also there are already hate crime laws regarding religion and race. They aren't causing a problem, so why would a protection on sexual orientation cause a problem?

Religious Right - But a pastor in Sweden was arrested for speaking out against homosexuality.

Truth - Well that was Sweden. America has different laws regarding speech. Also, the pastor in question (i.e. Ake Green) was acquitted of the charges.

Religious Right - ENDA will force churches to hire drag queens to teach nurseries, as well as "she-males" and 300 pound linebackers with five o'clock shadow and make up.

Truth - Churches are exempt from ENDA. Also, don't you think your examples are a little extreme? What the heck is a "she-male?"

Religious Right - Non-discrimination ordinances will allow men to come into ladies rooms and locker rooms. All they have to say is "I feel like a woman."

Truth - That is a huge stretch. This sort of activity is not covered by non-discrimination ordinances. Also, several cities, including Columbia, SC , have passed these ordinances and there have been NO problems.

One more thing.

I think the possible exploitation of disagreements between the black and lgbt community may be a blessing in disguise. If anything, it challenges us to define the battle on our terms and not that of history. Forget historical relevance. Let the historians worry about that.

Our concern is not how our movement compare with the marches on Selma or Birmingham or the Montgomery Bus Boycott or the March on Washington.

I say we break out the facts and figures. Just how many children are in foster care and will not have a family because of a ban on gay adoption? How many sorely needed linguists have been dismissed due to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell?" How many lgbts fear reprisal at their job for simply putting up a picture of their loved ones?

Our concern is making sure Bobby or Sue can go to school without fear of being beaten up for their orientation.

Our concern is that Bobby or Sue are not prohibited from being all they can be at their jobs or prohibited from starting a family due, not to facts, but someone's "deeply held ignorance" regarding sexual orientation.

Our concern is that Bobby or Sue are not brainwashed by a self-actualizing dichotomy that tells them that they have no other recourse as lgbts other than to act hedonistic because they are not worthy of the words "values," "morality," or "family."

In other words, this battle is not about why lgbts should have our rights, but why should anyone dare to keep them from us.

Let's use all of our anger to make that the focus of the so-called cultural war.

What a week, what a week

First let's get the trifling mess out of the way. This is important because it illustrates the points I was making yesterday and the day before:

N-Word Hurled at Blacks During Westwood Prop 8 Protest

Not that this wasn't expected. The recent passage of California's Proposition 8 has exposed some of the latent racism of many within the LGBT community—instigated in part by many in the e-telligentsia such as proto-racist Andrew Sullivan and columnist Dan Savage. Unfortunately the "blame the blacks" meme is being commonly accepted by some so-called "progressive" gay activists. A number of Rod 2.0 and Jasmyne Cannick readers report being subjected to taunts, threats and racist abuse at last night's marriage equality rally in Los Angeles.

Geoffrey, a student at UCLA and regular Rod 2.0 reader, joined the massive protest outside the Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Westwood. Geoffrey was called the n-word at least twice.

It was like being at a klan rally except the klansmen were wearing Abercrombie polos and Birkenstocks. YOU NIGGER, one man shouted at men. If your people want to call me a FAGGOT, I will call you a nigger. Someone else said same thing to me on the next block near the temple...me and my friend were walking, he is also gay but Korean, and a young WeHo clone said after last night the niggers better not come to West Hollywood if they knew what was BEST for them.

Pam Spaulding gives her take on the situation:

The backlash is upon us, and it's going to get uglier unless our organizations step forward and say something. The desire to scapegoat blacks for Prop 8's defeat has exposed the now not-so-latent racism in our movement.

I have already blogged a lot about why the lack of effective communication (and I'm not even talking about outreach on gay issues to socially conservative blacks) between white people in general and people of color. That dearth of understanding and mutual respect for difference, and lack of desire to seek common ground through personal relationships ultimately leads to what we are seeing here.

The great irony over this entire thing is this item I found on PageOneQ:

San Francisco ranks 53 of 59 counties in voter turnout

San Francisco, considered by many to be the "gay capital" of the United States (perhaps the world), ranked close to the bottom of California counties in terms of turnout for Tuesday's general election, PageOneQ has learned. The balloting included Proposition 8, an effort to repeal marriage equality in the state. The proposition passed, making California the first state to affirm, then revoke, equal marriage rights for same-sex couples.

Personally I think the behavior of some lgbts, especially some lgbt bloggers, have been extremely irresponsible in pushing this mess up. And it brings a point to my mind.

Everyone wants to win but you have to sometimes learn how to lose. Losing shows your true character and if you can't lose with humility then don't count on winning because you will never win.

In other words, stop acting like a bunch of dumbasses. Wipe away your tears, fix your faces, and get ready to work.

But I am still in a good mood. For one thing, other leaders in the lgbt community have come out speaking against these racist actions.

For another thing, I don't think its over. Everyone seems to forget that in 1992 even with the election of Bill Clinton, Colorado passed an amendment that forbad the state from protecting lgbts from discrimination.

The Supreme Court overturned it two years later.

So we may be on the losing end now but we will win in the end.

And lastly:

WE HAVE A BLACK PRESIDENT, Y'ALL!!!!!!

I can't help being reminded of the movie Blazing Saddles (an excellent anti-p.c. comedy that still holds up) in which a racist white town received a black sheriff.

Naturally they treated him like shit until a monstrous villain (Mongo) invaded the town.

Forgetting all of their ugliness, the townspeople begged the sheriff to take care of the situation, which he did with a lot of aplomb.

What does that tell me? After so many years treating the black man like shit, America is now turning to him to help it through one of the most turbulent times in this country's history.

And I have faith that like that sheriff in Blazing Saddles, Obama is going to come through with flying colors.

Lift that barge, tote that bale, drive that wedge

Unfortunately as the lgbt community tries to deal with losing in California, ugliness is prevailing.

The scuttlebutt seems to be that the African-American community overwhelmingly supported the anti-gay marriage equality amendment.

Now the blogsphere on the left is filled with comments by some angry lgbts over this.

Part of me can say that I understand their anger. But I won't.

I simply will not give an ounce of sympathy. And here is why:

I live in South Carolina. When the marriage amendment hit us, nobody gave a damn because everyone figured that South Carolina was so homophobic, it wasn' t worth worrying about.

I guess what happened in California proves that not only your silence but your location will NOT protect you.

When we lost, we got demoralized but we got back up again and got united. We assessed why we lost and are better because of it.

All I can say in this matter is don't let your anger make you say things that are counterproductive and stupid - like the threats I read on the Queerty site. Very nice guys - you really did something special. Now Peter Labarbera and Matt Barber can plead victimhood for days.

I am of the opinion of Pam Spaulding. She wrote an excellent piece on how the defeats should make lgbts deal with the issue of race in their community:

For those of us who are black and gay, a group too often marginalized within a marginalized community, I see this as a clear signal to the LGBT advocacy community. There hasn't been enough outreach to those groups who voted against us. We haven't reached them; there hasn't been enough effort expended.

I've been blogging for years about the need to discuss race in regards to LGBT issues. I hope that this is now the wakeup call for our "professional gays" out there who represent us to come out of their comfort zones and help bridge this concrete education gap. The belief that white=gay is big part of the problem, and as long as black LGBTs are invisible in their own communities and there is a dearth of color in the public face of LGBT leadership, the socially conservative black community can remain in denial that I exist as a black lesbian.

This is a teachable moment people, so hush up and learn. The religious right is going to use your anger to drive a wedge where there should be a bridge.

The day after - the bad stuff and a challenge to the lgbt community

To those who fought the good fight in Arkansas, Florida, California, and Arizona, don't get discouraged. The battle ain't over yet.

But something needs to be said to my lgbt brothers and sisters at large.

So many in the lgbt movement want to adopt the terminology of the African-American civil rights movement because we are captivated by the visible aspect of this movement, i.e. the rallies, the marches, the speeches.

But we need to reconcile ourselves to the fact that we are not nor will we ever be like that movement. Certainly there are similarities, but we get so entranced by what happened back then that we don't seem to have perspective.

Black folks back then had to march and rally. Visibility was, at times, all they had. The lgbt struggle is different in that we have more tools for success. But we aren't taking advantage of them.

For example:

How many of you are familiar with Paul Cameron and how his bad research tactics influences religious right claims about lgbts?

How many of you know the name of the so-called pro-family group in your area? Do you know their leader or the policy issues they are pursuing now or will pursue in the future?

How many of you are mobilized to fight said iniatives should they come up against the lgbt community in the future? For example, I suspect the Arkansas success against gay adoption is going to cause a groundswell of the same type of legislation in other states.

Before you answer, let me tell you what the other side does.

They study us daily. They read our web pages and listen to our spokespersons in anticipation of getting an advantage that they can use against us. But mostly, they plan and strategize behind the scenes.

That is the reason for their continued ability to mobilize, exploit fear and ignorance even in the face of an electoral defeat, and keep a lock on the words "morality," "values," and "truth."

And us? Some of us (please notice that I did not say all of us) wait until we are threatened by ballot initiatives before we mobilize and concentrate on the enemy.

Some of us wait until our leaders (or celebrities, I get the two mixed up) comment on an issue before we give a damn.

Some of us think that it is more important to focus on the alleged sexual orientation of a legislator's son rather than the fact that the said legislator is using incredibly bad studies and research to demonize the lgbt community.

Some of us will give the religious right a pass when they distort studies and refer to discredited studies because we don't want to play "gotcha games."

And some of us get so filled up with righteous indignation that we don't channel it at the religious right but at our own and why? Because someone used the wrong semantics; i.e. slipped up and said "civil unions" instead of "marriage."

In other words, we are a community with much potential but right now, we are a hot mess.

And hot messes don't win ballot initiatives or elections.

The following tips are merely my opinion as to what we should do next:

1. Get away from the African-American civil rights movement terminology. Certainly we should use it as a blueprint but we should also be trying to establish our own style in fighting for our rights.

2. Educate yourselves about the religious right. Look at their arguments and study their talking points. Develop talking points to counter them and above all, call them out when they lie. Don't be afraid to say that they are distorting certain arguments. And keep on them when you do. Be as tenacious as a pitbull. Make them explain themselves.

3. Keep the passion we have but let's channel it in the right direction. We basically want the same thing but our community has diverse opinions as to how to reach our goals. Yelling at each other over semantic points only hurts us.

4. Don't wait for things to happen. Anticipate. Or hell, create. A letter to the editor over a bad talking point/study or a blogger alert does wonders in getting the conversation talked about on our terms

5. Don't rely on visibility for visibility's sake and avoid the lure of transient empowerment.

6. Don't wait for Ellen, Rosie, or T.R. to say something. Look for lgbt heroes and spokespeople in your own areas. They are out there.

Like I said, this is just my opinion, but that's what I think we need to go next.

And it's over!!!!!

Ladies and Gentleman, meet your 44th president

Election update - Lindsey Graham gets the chutzpah award

Yesterday, I talked about how Senator Lindsey Graham was encouraging black voters to "split their ticket" and re-elect him to the Senate.

Today, the story becomes murkier.

I have in my possession a flyer from the Graham campaign. It is an endorsement for Graham from A.M.E. Bishop Preston Warren Williams II which encourages black voters to re-elect Graham over his Democratic challenger.

One of the reasons why Williams feels that Graham should be re-elected is because his Democratic challenger (exact words in the flyer) "refuses to endorse Barack Obama."

But here is the kicker. Today, I received an email from the Graham campaign that said the following:

URGENT UPDATE: Early reports from numerous precincts across South Carolina reveal record-breaking Democratic turnout. Do not assume that any seat is "safe." If you have not yet voted, it is CRITICAL that you make it to the polls today to vote for Senator Graham and the entire Republican Team. According to state law, any registered voter in line by 7:00pm must be allowed to vote no matter how long it takes. Please head to the polls as soon as possible. Thank you.

So at the same time Graham is encouraging black voters not support his challenger because of he did not support Obama, he is telling Republican voters to get out and vote because of a "record-breaking Democratic turnout," a turnout that is most likely fueled by Obama's running for the presidency.

For the record I didn't vote for Graham or his challenger; Graham for obvious reasons and his challenger because he did not campaign hard enough to peak my interest. Candidates for national office in South Carolina seem to always try to out-Republican each other.

But regardless, you have to stand in awe of Graham's straddling the fence and juggling the voters at the same time.

I wonder what his next trick will be.


Election morning - Things nearly got shady in my district

(I am presently on my lunchbreak from my job so I thought I would share my morning's voting experience with you all. If there are any questions, I will answer them when I get home.)

When I arrived to my voting area 6:45 this morning, I wasn't surprised to see the very long line of voters.

I knew it would be an eventful morning, but I didn't have any idea how eventful it would be.

At a certain time the line stopped. I mean totally stopped as in I stood in my same area for almost an hour.

Needless to say standing an hour in the same place made a lot of us restless. And it got worse.

Sensing our restlessness, a poll worker came out and explained the delay:

Apparently our registrations had to be checked twice. There was a list of registrations for the general election and a list of registrations for the school board elections.

This didn't (and still doesn't even now) make a damned lick of sense. I had been voting at that same precinct since 1992 and we have never had to have our registrations checked twice.

That, and that fact that the two poll workers doing the checking were elderly women, made for a large crowd of angry folks who, in a little while, had the potential to make the storming of the French Bastille look like a walk across the street.

I am exaggerating of course, but there was a lot of anger; specifically from a black woman who I will now christen as Norma Rae. She got on her cell phone and began making calls; Representative Jim Clyburn's office, the State Election Commission, the Attorney General's Office.

I think sister girl was probably going to call Batman if she had his number.

To make a long story short, some people (probably members of the Election Commission) came by with new lists and when I got up to vote (the line started moving as if by "magic"), I had to have my registration checked only once.

I am not totally aware of the whys or whats, but one thing I did like about the situation was everyone's resolve. No one left the line. Hell, there was one black woman with a huge afro passing out Halloween candy.

My district is all African-American so that gives you an idea of how important this election is to us.

Like I said, keep fingers crossed.

Night before 2008 election - Mother gets a call from Joe the Plumber and other interesting South Carolina happenings

I am so glad this is almost over. And I will be ecstatic if and when Obama wins. My fingers are crossed and I won't be in the mood to celebrate until he hits that magic 270 number.

My mother on the other hand, is mildly pissed. She got her first robocall today.

Some recording from "Joe the Plumber" (though not the original Joe the Plumber but one from Rock Hill - ugh I feel like I'm talking about that 80's rap singer - Roxanne Shante, not the real Roxanne but the Real Real Roxanne) called to say that Obama will raise taxes.

It's not the fact that she got a call that bothers me more than the way she said "Joe the Plumber."

Between you and me, I am glad that it was a recording and not a real person. If it were, I would be bailing mother out of jail for yanking someone through the phone.

And there have been other "interesting" incidents which lead me to believe that the Republican party is a bit more worried about South Carolina than they let on.

For the past few weeks, I have heard ads on black Gospel radio stations from Senators Lindsey Graham and Representative Joe Wilson encouraging black voters to "split the ticket."

I believe one of the phrases were "no matter who you vote for as president . . ."

Keep in mind this was going on at the same time that Graham had been campaigning for McCain.

Robocalls and ads encouraging voters to split their ticket and not vote all Democratic but no words about supporting John McCain; things may get interesting in this state on Wednesday.

Although I won't hold my breath, it is a delicious possibility to consider.

A bit of good news and a reposting

Top Researcher: Ex-Gay 'Therapy' Group NARTH Distorted My Studies

(Editor's note: I think we are in double digits now with scientific complaints about the religious right)

Truth Wins Out released an exclusive video interview today with University of Utah professor, Dr. Lisa Diamond, who said that the National Association of Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) grossly and deliberately distorted her research on sexual orientation. Dr. Diamond's assertion comes one week before NARTH's annual conference in Denver, which will take place Nov. 7-9.

"Dr. Nicolosi, you know exactly what you are doing," said Diamond in the video, addressing NARTH's co-founder Dr. Joseph Nicolosi."This is a willful misuse and distortion of my research. Not an academic disagreement. Not a slight shading of the truth. It's willful distortion. And, it's illegitimate and it's irresponsible and you know that. And you should stop."
"We are fighting back against the gross distortions of our lives by anti-gay organizations who manipulate science for political gain," said Wayne Besen, Executive Director of Truth Wins Out. "These organizations claim to be moral, but often twist scientific research in the most shameless and dishonest ways imaginable. We are committed to exposing these lies and ensuring that science is accurately and honestly presented."

Lisa M. Diamond, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Psychology and Gender Studies in the Department of Psychology at the University of Utah. She has won a number of awards for her work. In 2000, Dr. Diamond published a study, "Sexual identity, attractions, and behavior among young sexual minority women over a 2 year period." This study was distorted by NARTH. The anti-gay organization falsely claimed that Dr. Diamond's work shows that sexual orientation is "amenable to change."

Let's not forget Arkansas

So much attention seems to be given to the "Last Battle of California" with Proposition 8 . Even the good witch of the religious right, James Dobson, ventured from his ivory tower to speak on it.
Proposition 8 must be defeated. But let's not forget the other states with equally disturbing ballot initiatives. With that in mind, I am referring to an earlier post I wrote regarding the anti-gay adoption initiative in Arkansas:

Arkansas makes a possible boo boo:

If the religious right wins this fight in Arkansas, expect to see more initiatives like it on a nationwide basis.

Obama tells truth about American climate during Brown vs. Board of Education

You have probably heard the latest smear about Obama:

Ooooh he compared the United States to Nazi Germany. See, he doesn't like America.

Well like the other smears, this one is a lie. But to me, an African-American, this is an extra insulting distortion:

In a radio interview in 2001, Barack Obama likened the United States to Nazi Germany . . .

The web site Little Green Footballs broke the scoop that Obama compares the "doctrines of Nazism... to what we have going on, back here at home." The remark came during a discussion of the United States at the time of Brown vs. The Board of Education.

Obama said, "...just to take a, sort of a realist perspective…there's a lot of change going on outside of the Court, um, that, that judges essentially have to take judicial notice of. I mean you've got World War II, you've got uh, uh, uh, the doctrines of Nazism, that, that we are fighting against, that start looking uncomfortably similar to what we have going on, back here at home."

Some folks have tried to use this comment as the lastest "Obama is not one of us" lies." But to me, this is more than a smear.

It is a slap in the face to all African-Americans. You see, Obama was not lying when he made his statement.

We all know the history of racism in this country. No matter how many folks like to say "it's in the past, forget about it," no one can.

And no one should. The fact of the matter is that during the Brown vs. Board of Education decision, the climate in this country can be compared to that of Nazi Germany.

During that time, some whites did not want to go to school with blacks. Some whites did not want blacks living in their neighborhoods. Some whites did not think of blacks as Americans worthy of the American dream.

They believed that there was a social, religious, and ethical order that made blacks inferior. And they lied, cheated, and murdered in horrible fashion to perserve this order.

The segregation, the lynchings, the dehumanization and victimization of entire group of people on the basis of race in America during that time is no different the victimization of entire group of people on the basis of religion during the time of Nazi Germany.

Sorry, but it is a fact. And no rallies, no flag waving, and definitely not mindful ignorance of that awful time in American history will make it go away.

We can give hell to the Nazis for what they did to the Jews and other groups, as we should. But when are we ever going to own up to our own history of racial discrimination?

So to those who criticize Obama for making this simple fact known, I have one thing to say:

How dare you.


Things are getting stinky down here in SC . . . and other issues via links

SC Senate Candidate Mick Mulvaney in Sick Robocalling Scheme (a South Carolina candidate gay bashes? It must be a week day)

Elizabeth Dole unleashes outrageous 'Love of God' ad (I'd never vote for someone named "Libby." That's like hiring someone named Scooter as your chief of staff)

McCain's Last Ditch Effort: Tying Obama To Muslim World (all of these attacks on Muslims due to 9/11 is something I don't understand. Was Timothy McVeigh or the Unibomber Muslims?)

Joe the Plumber pursued for record deal (Say what! The only way you can get famous around here is either butt in a rally with a distortive question or sleep with a Republican. I would do the latter but there aren't any who are attractive enough.)

And now a bit of lunacy brought to you by the religious right

With the election fast approaching, the word has come out that the religious right have opened all cynlinders of attack on Obama.

Fine by me. Let the world see how morally empty they are.

But just in case we need a few reminders, check this little tidbit out from People for the American Way.

This lovely bit is via our favorite female nut, Janet Folger (now she is known as Janet Porter. I am NOT going there):

Vote for Obama, Go To Hell

I would say that girlfriend has lost her mind, but based on Janet Porter's (when she was formerly Janet Folger) past behavior, I can't help but asking was she born with a few fries short of a Happy Meal?

And lest we forget, how about a couple of articles about Obama via the "Christian" One News Now:

Obama interview points to 'Marxism' philosophy

Obama's socialist past explored further

McCain must state obvious: Obama is a socialist

News media in bed with Obama?

And you gotta love these comments:

"That's exactly what I've been trying to tell people. I can't understand why he's so popular. Why can't everyone see what he wants to do to our country? I believe he'll turn our country into the next Russia, China, or Cuba. Socialism will not work in our country. There is too much greed and too many lazy people who expect the government to hand them everything. The few of us that try to make something of our lives will end up losing our savings so that the government can coddle those that don't deserve the car they drive. I already know plenty of people who abuse the welfare system and get away with it."

"Socialism is coming. America is already leaning too far left and will continue to do so. And one reason is Christians are lazy. A few work their hearts out while the rest are content to set in the pews. Redistribution of wealth should be through opportunities not taxes. But when Christians will not even do what it takes to start businesses and gain wealth then no one will. Stop burying your talents and start putting them to work."

"I hope America comes to it's senses and quickly. Obama is rushing everyone to vote early. He is so scared that more and more of his platform and ideas will be researched and people are going to see that he is not the savior/superstar that he appears to be. If they vote early, they can't change their vote. Like sheep to the slaughter...."

"It's true that the media once was in favor of McCain when he was running against real conservatives. Now with real conservatives out of the Presidential picture, McCain is running against their Messiah and McCain is now the bad guy. As far as the media is concerned, the earth is tilted on it's axis to the left. It's a garrantee that they will be on the left side of any issue. Remember the two little guys, one on each shoulder, that try to influence the way you think. They have earned the left shoulder...you know the guy with the the little red tights wispering the words Obama, Obama..."

"The very worst part of all of this bias is that the truth about Obama's history is not coming out and there are only scattered stories about his oppressive ways when it comes to his campaign. We need honest news, not dishonest and scheming twisting of words or mudslingling when it has no newsworthy purpose. There are very few reporters on TV or in print whose bias in favor of Obama is not clear, and they are downright vicious when it comes to McCain and Palin. Only one source, one speaker on Christian radio gave the complete story about who is who about Palin's accusers in Alaska. It was a very interesting and clear story, but never heard anyplace else."
"I am a Christian and also Barak should be on the FBI most wanted list. He is running in our country based on lies that have been proven. He has proven to be unpatriotic, a liar, and we are not even sure if he is allowed to run in this country! But being "in bed" with the media is what is helping. They can report any way they want, even if its lies, and they do just that. It is getting to close to the election to be playing games. The truth, the whole truth and nothing BUT the truth needs to come out about this Arab! And FAST! Not that it will be reported and even then they will make sure his silver tongue (with smoke breath)will sound like someone being "picked on" by other races. Thats how he plays! God help us all!"

"I don't believe I've ever witnessed a more deliberate attempt by the media to promote their liberal agenda than during this Presidential campaign. What I don't understand is the ignorance of the American people. Have our morals deteriorated to the point that we no longer value human life, that we no longer care whether we live in a democracy, that we no longer care who a Presidential cndidate associates himself with as long as he does something for the economy? To me, as a Christian, the choice is clear. I vote according to what the Bible tells me is right or wrong. I honestly don't see how anyone calling themselves a Christian could vote for Barack Obama."

"Does this actually surprise anyone? He is the liberal media's "Glory Boy" you can read about him in the book of Revelations. This election was bought and paid for months ago. God help us all."

"We may be beginning to pay the price for our rejection of the Lord. The recent collapse of our economy, the pain at the gas pump, terrorism an ever-present possibility, etc. Yes, we are beginning to reap the results of our rebellion."

"When a person refuses to swear in on the Bible and disrespects our U.S. Flag then that person should not be qualified to run in any election much less the President of The United States. Come on America THINK!"

"The "main stream" media has lost most of it's credibility among most folks who don’t lean left. Their subscriptions are in the tank and worsening monthly. They know they are on life support. Their only chance at resuscitation is to usher in their savior; Obama, for he bringeth forth the “fairness doctrine” to maketh all things fair again, like it was before “Talk Radio” when the only truth was what the 6:00 News said it was. Lord Obama, please maketh all things fair again…"

8 more days to go - Desperation brings out the ugliness in some people

No words, just links on how ugly it's going to be until Nov. 4:

Obama called a n***** at Palin Rally in Iowa (I don't know. It certainly sounds like it to me) - UPDATE - turns out the word may not have been used.

Transparently Backwards: The "Common Alliance" of Smearmongerers Strikes Again - you are going to hear about this ad naseum until November 4 on Drudge and Fox. It used to be that when people were doing character assasinations, they would have the good taste not to be so open about it. For the record, Obama actually said:

" . . . one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil rights movement, was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still stuffer from that."

And last but not least, this lovely bit of news:

Skinheads held over Obama death plot (Are you paying attention, Kevin McCullough)

Lastly, a bit of seriousness:

My heart goes out to Jennifer Hudson and family because of the tragedy that has affected them. Having lost my father through the violence of others, I know how hard it is to gain equilibrium and healing from such a tragedy.

The Hudson family are in my prayers.

This just in - Kevin McCullough is a hot mess

I will admit that the pandemonium from the other side over the possible election of Obama has been enjoyable.

And it gets more enjoyable when conservatives set their sites on the fact that there is a very high level of support in the African-American community for Obama.

On this point, all of the arguments the other side pushes seem to be "What is wrong with you stupid black people. How can you support this man rather than the candidate we want you to support. Why can't you be good puppies and do what we tell you."

Today, conservative writer Kevin McCullough takes the prize for inanity.

His piece, An Open Letter to Black Obama Supporters, is the usual self-righteous clap trap that black folks have heard from Republicans and conservatives this electoral season.

What makes McCullough's piece so special is this opening sentence, which by the way, negates anything point he makes in the piece:

As a man who has fathered a son whose skin is darker than the average African American, and has mild special needs on top that, I am guided in this election by more than just economics, security, and the right of all innocent human beings to life. This election I am burdened deeply by the manipulation of race, the impact of social justice, and the absolute disparity and reproach that an Obama administration would have in store for the African American families of this nation.

You got that, folks? Just because he has fathered a son whose skin is darker than the average African-American, McCullough feels that he has some credibility in the black community. He thinks that we should ignore American history, ignore all the talk of welfare queens, all of the Southern Strategies, all of the white hands commercials, and all of the Willie Horton scare tactics and embrace his point of view simply because his son has skin darker than the average African-American.

How very presumptous. And how very insulting. The fact that he has to justify his column by such a ridiculous opening says more about the Republican and conservative mind set than anything McCullough can dredge up by way of conversation.

The problem with folks like McCullough is that they want to ignore the parts of history that don't suit their agendas. They think that the pendulum of life should swing for them and actions done by those like them should have no negative consequences. They tend to think that black people are so stupid that we should roll over and forget history and common sense simply because someone like him says "bark."

A little tip, McCullough. Maybe you should have a talk with Pat Buchanan and others in your party who have gone out of their way to demonize African-Americans before you call yourself an expert in what can cause the black community harm.

UPDATE - McCullough is offended by this column. He told me so in the comments section. And of course I gave my answer back. This column is not about his son but how he tried to use his son to gain credibility in the black community. And for the record, the following link is a main reason why I give McCullough no credibility.