SC legislator wants to exclude gays from teen dating violence bill

Leave it to the South Carolina Legislature to shock my system this morning:

A bill, sponsored by Rep. Joan Brady, R-Richland, would require school districts to send home information or include in their student handbooks information about teen dating violence — including how to recognize whether a student is in an abusive relationship and where to go for help.

According to a 2007 state Department of Education survey, nearly 14 percent of S.C. students reported being “hit, slapped or physically hurt on purpose by their boyfriend or girlfriend” in the previous 12 months.

So far so good. It sounds like a productive idea. But then comes the shock:

The bill hit an unexpected roadblock Wednesday when Rep. Greg Delleney, R-Chester, introduced an amendment requiring the material to address only heterosexual relationships.

“I don’t want the Department of Education or school districts to teach children in grades six through 12 about (same-sex) relationships,” Delleney said.

I don't know where to begin to tell you what's wrong with Delleney's mindset. But I will try.

1. It stands to reason that if children are in a same-sex relationship (and I'm sure there are many who are), I don't think the school can't teach them something they already know. And even if they aren't in a same-sex relationship, children are not naive. Remind me to tell you the theories my 10-year-old cousin relayed to me about some of the characters of High School Musical.

2. Delleny's mindset is pure ignorance. His statement implies that learning about same-sex relationships will be mandatory in classrooms. This is what the bill says:

By Dec. 1, the S.C. Department of Education would have to develop a model dating violence policy to assist school districts in developing policies for reporting and responding to dating violence.

• By the 2010-2011 school year, each school district would establish a specific policy to address incidents of dating violence.

• Each school district’s dating violence policy would have to be published in school and school district handbooks or any publications on the school or district Web site that provide the rules, procedures or standards of conduct for students at school.

3. Delleny's mindset is also offensive. Gays are constantly hit with the barrage of nonsense that we want "special rights," but Delleny went out of his way to exclude us. He doesn't want to help us combat potential violence in our relationships because he doesn't care about us. It's bad enough when this comes from an ordinary citizen but the fact that a legislator publicly voices this notion without any shame is awful.

Delleny wasn't elected for his personal and religious beliefs. He was elected to serve the people of South Carolina regardless of race, religion, national origin, gender, or sexual orientation. He can't pick and choose who to serve. Or, in this case, who to protect.

His words emphasizes just how difficult it is for gays to live not only in South Carolina but in the United States in general. No other group is subject to the level of disrespect that we generally receive. Delleny wouldn't have gotten away with his public "screw you" if he had made any other group the subject of his tirade.

He will probably get a pat on the back by like minded homophobic individuals. Yes, Delleny is homophobic. I don't really see how anyone can use buzzwords to defend his actions. He isn't protecting traditional relationships or upholding morality.

Delleny is making it acceptable for South Carolina to cover it's ears so as not to hear the pleas of help coming from victims of relationship violence.

In a broader sense, he is making it acceptable to discriminate against South Carolinians simply because he has a personal problem with their sexual orientation.

And this is just basically wrong.

Peter LaBarbera is mad at me

I think our friend Peter LaBarbera is mad at me.

From time to time, I email Peter when I feel that his anti-gay postings are stepping a little too over the line of truth.

Today, I simply had to email him about something he put on his Americans for Truth webpage:

American Psychological Association Backtracks on ‘Gay Gene’ Claim

Peter is referring to a ridiculous article published by that lovely to-the-right of Atilla the Hun publication World Net Daily. The article claimed that the APA is now saying that there is no "gay gene."

Jeremy from Goodasyou destroyed this nonsensical piece of work before it even got off the ground:

. . . essentially WND is enabling NARTH and other "ex-gays," suggesting that a non-new, non-change from an organization that still very much stands against their work is somehow a "sudden" shift in policy. Once again, their side is using complexity to their advantage, simplistically and duplicitously presenting the scientific community's inability thus far to find one certain gene as "proof" that their own scientifically-shunned work has merit.

It's a good smackdown which I suggest you read (after you finish reading this post, naturally).

Jeremy's piece came out before Peter's post so rather than go into a long expository as to why he was misreprenting the APA's work, I sent LaBarbera this email:

Peter,

the more you misrepresent, the more you shame the body of Christ.

http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2009/05/but-what-about-grasping-at-straws-wnd----is-that-genetic-or-a-choice.html#more

And you wonder why Bill O'Reilly won't have you on his show any longer.

Imagine my surprise when I received a reply in less than five minutes:

You think you were born homosexual, Alvin? What about developmental factors in your life? Did you have a healthy relationship with your father? Would you say you had a “normal” or stable upbringing? I’m curious. As for the Body of Christ, it’s odd to get lectured in such a way (“you shame the Body of Christ”) from someone who is not a part of it. I know that’s God’s ultimate call to make, but if you claim to be a faithful Christian AND a pro-homosexuality activist, that makes about as much sense as being a “faithful Christian and a swinger activist,” or a … pro-adultery Christian. In other words, it’s a lie and your fooling yourself if you claim to be a follower of Christ. However, you can become a Christian, but you would need to humble yourself and repent of your homosexual behavior and advocacy. I hope and will pray that you do that. Your feelings don’t decide Truth; God does.

PS. Get your facts straight: I was never on O’Reilly’s TV show. --pl

Now long time readers of this blog know that my father was a prison guard who was murdered in 2000 during an inmate escape attempt. Subsequently, the prison was named after him - the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center.

I am not saying that Peter knew this when he asked the question about my father - although I know for a fact that he has, from time to time, read my blog.

Nonetheless, I found it surprising as well as funny as to how vicious he tried to be in his email.

I think it was the O'Reilly thing.

Peter has a problem with the O'Reilly Factor inviting gay activist Wayne Besen on the show on several occasions while he hasn't been invited even once.

LaBarbera has taken out his anger against Besen with several "hit pieces" on his webpage like the pieces here and here.

So maybe my mentioning of the O'Reilly Factor was the equivalent of the magic mirror reminding the Wicked Queen that Snow White was much better looking than she.

Who knows.

Anyway, I did answer his silly email:

I seem to have struck a nerve.

Kinda rude don't you think to inquire about my family life in such an ugly way.

By the way, I am a person of faith. And it isn't really up to you to decide whether or not I am of the Body of Christ. That is unless you can point out a verse which says that you sit on the right hand of God.

Let me guess - you do have a Bible which says those words. And it's next to the verse which says it's okay to lie in God's name.

That would explain why you do it often.

But seriously, before you can even talk to me about repenting, maybe you need to acknowledge all of the lies you have told against the lgbt community, all of the times you have referred to bad studies (i.e. Paul Cameron), and all of the times you have misrepresented credible work - such as the American Psychological Association's pamphlet which seems to have started this brouhaha.

Thou shalt not bear false witness, Peter.

God made me gay and I am blessed for it. But I have never had to lie to defend this notion. You believe that homosexuality is a sin and you have lied as well as distorted to prove this notion.

How about you gain some integrity before you feel the need to lecture me.

But I guess I do stand corrected about the O'Reilly thing. Not that it matters any.

I really didn't see the need to get angry at LaBarbera. After all, I had fun messing with his head.

Sometimes it's so easy that I'm almost ashamed of myself.

Wednesday midday newsbriefs

N.Y. Assembly Passes Gay Marriage Bill - They can have Prejean. We'll take New York.

But what about grasping at straws, WND - Speaking of chicanery, the Family Research Council has nothing on World Net Daily.

The 'best of' batsh*t anti-marriage equality talking heads - Look at this one if and only if you have a strong stomach.

IFI Corrects Paraphilias Claim - Box Turtle Bulletin gets the Illinois Family Institute to admit its error. One down and a %!(load of religious right groups to go.

City council OKs domestic partner certificates - Moving right along.

Family Research Council = oblivious

In a recent post of the Family Research Council's blog is the following:

Two Parents = Happy Children

The headline is extremely deceptive. This is what the post says:

In the latest Mapping America, the General Social Survey shows that adults who lived with both biological parents as adolescents are more likely to be very happy than those who did not.

So the truth is that the study says children living with their biological parents are most likely to be happy, not necessarily two parents in general.

This is important because when organizations like FRC speak against gay adoption they use talking points like "studies show that children do better in a home with a mother and father."

How much do you want a bet that this "study" will be used against gay adoption even though it has absolutely nothing to do with children in foster care?

And it gets better. The Mapping America study was done by Patrick F. Fagan, Ph.D. & Althea Nagai, Ph.D.

I've talked about Althea Nagai before and how she and her husband "conducts" studies for right wing groups, including an interesting one on race. The Mapping America webpage says that she is a visiting fellow at the Family Research Council

Fagan, according to the Mapping America webpage is senior fellow and director of the Center for Family and Religion at Family Research Council.

Both facts are conveniently absent from the FRC blog posting.

My guess is that when and if FRC tries to manipulate this study, that lovely fact about the authors' lack of objectivity will continue to be conveniently not mentioned.

Tuesday afternoon news briefs

Carrie's unique take: An ongoing series - a humorous look at the entire controversy courtesy of Goodasyou.org

The religious right seem to be determined to try and write some ridiculous story of innocent Carrie triumphing against the big bad gay folks. From the moment when I heard that Trump would give the final decision, I knew that he was going to let her keep the crown. And I'm glad he did. Maybe finally the religious right will stop whining about how there is some conspiracy to silence them.

Of course who am I kidding. The truth is the majority of the lgbt community did not care how this controversy ended one way or the other. There was no organized attempt to make Prejean lose her title. Hell there wasn't even an unorganized attempt.

If anything, we found the entire thing comical. Comical as to how some folks were trying to make Perez Hilton the voice of the lgbt community. Comical as to how the religious right put Prejean on a pedestal and then stooped to logical gymnastics to explain away her moral shortcomings. Comical as to how NOM made a huge media gaffe again. Comical as to how Prejean worked the media and then pleaded ennui when she found herself a target because of too much exposure.

I don't know about the rest of you but I had a fun time with this story. If only all anti-gay controversies were this fun. But next time, can the controversy involve a cute guy? I've never been so tired of seeing one woman's breasts in my entire life.

Right Wing Follows Deceptive Script On Supreme Court - Take note. THIS is what secret plotting looks like.

Janet Porter Plays the Victim, Literally - Janet Porter claims to be the victim of a hate crime. I didn't know hate crimes legislation covered the socially ill.

Will Maryland Follow DC in Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages in Other States? - Meanwhile in the real world . . .

Carrie Prejean story- the winners and losers

Miss California will keep title, Trump decides

Miss California Carrie Prejean, whose comments about gay marriage set off a firestorm, will keep her crown, Donald Trump announced today.

The controversy began nearly a month ago, when Prejean was asked about her views on same-sex marriage during the nationally televised Miss USA pageant. Although she said she believed people were entitled to do as they liked, she said marriage should only be recognized as an institution between a man and a woman.

Trump said he had no problem with Prejean's comments. "She gave a very honest answer when asked a tough question," he said at a New York press conference with Prejean sitting next to him. "It was the same answer the president of the United States gave... She has to be commended."

It's just as I figured and this is NOT something to freak out about.

I personally couldn't care less on whether or not she lost the crown but in assessing the situation, let's look at the winners and losers:

The Winners

Winner: Carrie Prejean - Sometimes any press can be considered as good press. Her controversy has overshadowed the winner of the pageant. She has become a cause celebre of the religious right.

Winner: Donald Trump - You just know that Donald Trump enjoyed the role of the "decider."

Winner : The Miss USA Pageant - Controversy creates attention and cash.

The Losers

Loser: Miss North Carolina - she is being overshadowed by the first runner up, big time.

Loser : Carrie Prejean - While she has garnered a lot of attention for her stance, she is not an untarnished figure. The semi-nude pictures and the breast implants came back to haunt her and will continue to do so. So while she travels the country talking about her "values" and how "Satan was trying to tempt her with the question," people are no doubt thinking, "didn't Satan already tempt you with those breast implants and semi-nude photos?" In the Scarlet Letter, character Hester Prynne had to wear a red "A" for adulteress. For a long time in some people's minds, Prejean will be wearing a red "H" for hypocrite.

BIG LOSER: Maggie Gallagher and the National Organization for Marriage - The "Gathering Storm" debacle made them laughing stocks. This situation makes them look downright sleazy. The organization did make Prejean their spokesperson and then backtracked when the nude photo controversy began to come out. Add to that the tongue lashing Gallagher received from pageant official Shanna Moakler on Larry King Live and the revelation yesterday that she benefits greatly on a monetary basis from NOM.

Loser: Anti-gay marriage movement - A while back, it had James Dobson leading it. Look who is in charge now. If folks like Gallagher and NOM continue to make big mistakes like "Gathering Storm" and this situation with Prejean, it won't be long before I will be able to register my gifts at Bloomingdales.

Okay folks, the circus is over for now. Might I suggest we get to more pertinent issues.

Religious right distortion techniques - a reposting

In the ongoing battle over hate crimes legislation, religious right organizations and their allies claimed that pedophiles are protected under the legislation. They continued to claim this irregardless of the fact that the assertion had been refuted.

This repetition of an inaccurate talking point is one of six distortion techniques that religious right groups use to stigmatize the lgbt community.

As the battle over lgbt rights get more intense, I thought it would be appropriate to repost all of the six distortion techniques that I outlined in my book Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters.

See how many of them you recognize from recent battles:

1. Using nonrepresentative or out-of-date studies to make generalizations, or distorting legitimate studies to give misleading conclusions

Example 1 - Anti-gay industry talking point - Same sex marriage and gay adoption are bad ideas because research shows that the best places to raise children are in homes with a mother and a father.

The truth - The research only looked at heterosexual two-parent households as opposed to single parent heterosexual households. Same-sex households were never included.

Point of fact - The following researchers, physicians, and Ph.D.s have complained about how the anti-gay industry has misused their work - A. Nicholas Groth, the six researchers of a Canadian study (Robert S. Hogg, Stefan A. Strathdee, Kevin J.P. Craib, Michael V. Shaughnessy, Julio Montaner, and Martin T. Schehter), Dr. Robert Garofalo, Lisa Waldner, Patrick Letellier, Dr. Kyle Pruett, Dr. Joanne Hall, Dr. Elizabeth Saewyc, Carol Gilligan, Dr. Robert Spitzer, Dr. Francis Collins, Gary Remafedi, Professor Michael King, and Professor Lisa Diamond.

2. Repetition - Despite the fact that several physicians and researchers complain about the distortion of their work by the anti-gay industry, corrections are usually not made.

3. Conspiracy Theory - Claiming that gays and lesbians are consistently plotting to "erode traditional values"

Example - “The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior. It is an agenda that they basically set in the late 1980s, in a book called After the Ball, where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior—in a decade-long time frame." - Craig Osten, Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda, Focus on the Family, July 25, 2003

4. Dire Consequences - Claiming that a pro-gay law or ordinance will lead to negative consequences without proof that the consequences will take place:

Example 1 - “Imagine, if you will, a 280 lb linebacker who likes to wear a dress and high heels and lipstick, you know comes to church wanting a job at the front desk as a receptionist and they turn him away because they don’t feel that that represents their values or the image that they’re trying to hold at that church, under ENDA they could be held accountable for
discrimination against that individual.” - Matt Barber, Concerned Women for America, 2007

Example 2 - “H.R. 254 elevates one group of Americans above others, creating a special class of victims. All things being equal, it means that if a 5-foot-2-inch grandmother is violently attacked on the street, she is less worthy of justice than the 6-foot-4-inch homosexual man who is attacked by the same assailant.” - Matt Barber, Concerned Women for America, 2007

5. Phony Experts - Creating their own "experts" on the gay and lesbian community.

6. Dehumanizing Semantics - Consistently using language (i.e. demonstrative verbs and adjectives) in their talking points, sound bites, and press releases to make gays and lesbians seem like impersonal, threatening outsiders

Example 1 - “But unfortunately, the evangelist observes, many Christians have been bullied into submission on the aggressive homosexual agenda in public schools.”—Evangelist Proposes to Combat Homosexual Agenda in Public Education, Agape Press, May 11, 2005

Example 2 - “Elsewhere in the battle against the homosexual agenda, the Broward County School Board in Florida has voted to allow a pro- homosexual group to indoctrinate its teachers on tolerance.”— Children Adopted by Homosexuals Suffer, Family Advocate Says, Agape Press, April 25, 2002

Example 3 - “The ACLU continues to use a law license to bully school districts and harass parents in order to brainwash their kids abut the ‘normalcy’ of homosexuality.”—Jan LaRue, ACLU Seeks Mandatory Homosexual Sensitivity Training, Concerned Women for America press release, July 14, 2005

It's all up to the Donald

Well today's press conference will lead to tomorrow's press conference:

Officials of the Miss California USA pageant strongly criticized some of the actions of titleholder Carrie Prejean on Monday but said it's not their decision whether she should be stripped of her crown.

Co-executive directors Keith Lewis and Shanna Moakler told a press conference that only Miss USA pageant owner Donald Trump can make that decision. He plans to hold a press conference at 11 a.m. Tuesday in New York City.

The officials said Prejean has been "unavailable" and so in the meantime they have appointed the state pageant's runner-up, Tami Farrell, as a "Beauty of California Ambassador" to fulfill any duties the winner normally would handle.

Lewis said that if Trump allows Prejean to retain her crown, state pageant officials would welcome her back and encourage her to take part in her normal duties.

"We're still going to be able to fulfill our duties no matter if Mr. Trump offers a second chance or utters his famous line from `The Apprentice,'" Lewis said (meaning, of course, "You're fired").

Prejean, 21, of San Diego, created controversy during the Miss USA pageant when she answered a judge's question by saying she believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

The state pageant has been investigating whether she violated her contract by making public appearances with groups opposed to same-sex marriage. Prejean also failed to reveal that she posed in her underwear as a teenager.

Personally I think that Donald will be a nice guy and allow Prejean to keep her crown. And I hope he does, with a strong admoninition that the crusade against same-sex marriage is not a part of her duties as Miss California. If she refuses, then get rid of her. Many may want Prejean to lose her title but for her to lose it now takes attention off of the fact that it was her actions, not words, that forced the situation to this point. By giving her a chance to conduct herself in a better fashion, Trump would help to remove the "she is being persecuted because of her beliefs" factoid.

For now, that factoid is being milked to its fullest extent by religious right groups.

And why not? It generates a lot of controversy and no doubt it's a good fundraising tool for the religious right. Who cares if she has broken her contract and have been derelict in her duties as Ms. California? Why let a good angle be spoiled by truth.

But something bothers me

I keep hearing that "the left" is trying to destroy Prejean. Just who are these people on "the left" who are trying to allegedly destroy Prejean?

Of course the lgbt community is angry at Prejean's comments but it's too much of a generalization to call all lgbts members of the left.

Perez Hilton? Come on now. The man draws doodles on pictures of celebrities.

TMZ? Please. It's a celebrity sheet and Prejean is a celebrity. The only plan TMZ has is to make money.

Prejean's situation illustrates the laziness of American culture. My journalism professors always told me to look deeper when looking at issues. But it seems that many in the media haven't gotten the same instructions. It's easier and sexier to talk about how "the left" or "the right" is after someone; to make false generalizations instead of exposing complex truths. It's easier to hire a pundit to tell people what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear.

Basically it all comes down to cotton candy journalism - it's sweet and tasty but melts before you know it. Then all you are left with is hard gummy junk that you can't get rid of.

And speaking of religious right groups - Miss California Director Indicts Maggie Gallagher

Monday midday news briefs

Man, this is a slow news day. I guess everyone is resting before THE PRESS CONFERENCE

Harry Jackson: Carpetbagger? - You mean Harry Jackson is being deceptive about his place of residency when he attacks same sex partnership in DC? I'm shocked.

Boycotted hotel gives gays gigs - Trying to get back in lgbts' good graces.

New ads from Cali. rights group - In anticipation for the possible Proposition 8 challenge loss, send that sucker back to the voters!

Maine Bishop Richard Malone: "Same Sex Marriage is Dangerous" - No Catholic priests jokes!

Wanda and Carrie makes the beginnings of a wild week

Today I am at home because of a bizarre agreement in the SC Legislature. In order to pass a holiday commemorating Martin Luther King Jr., legislators also agreed to pass a holiday commemorating the Confederacy.

This is that day - Confederate Memorial Day. While I'm not necessarily cottoning a holiday honoring the Confederacy, the pragmatist in me says "shut up and enjoy a day off from work."

So the pragmatist wins.

Anyway, Wanda Sykes, who has still yet to make the cover of the Advocate magazine, killed this weekend at the White House Correspodents Dinner. While some may not have liked what she said about Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity, I say deal with it. It was funny.

And yes I am saying that partly because I am biased. It was a great moment in gay and black history because Sykes was the first openly gay person to be the featured entertainer at this dinner.

Now in the territory of "God won't this thing just end," Miss California Carrie Prejean will probably lose her crown today:

Miss California USA co-directors Shannon Moakler and Keith Lewis are to hold a news conference in Beverly Hills today, presumably to discuss the controversy surrounding Prejean. While Prejean is not on the list of expected attendees, Tami Farrell, the first runner up to Miss California USA 2009, is.

. . . Prejean came under further scrutiny last week after semi-nude photos of her purportedly taken when she was a teenager emerged. Her contract contains a clause that asks participants whether they have conducted themselves "in accordance with the highest ethical and moral standards." For example, it asks if they have ever been photographed nude or partially nude.

. . . The beauty queen may also have violated her contract by working for a group that opposes gay marriage and making publicly speaking out against it. Last week, pageant officials said they were looking into whether Prejean violated the 12-page contract all contestants are required to sign before the November state contest.

The document prohibits whoever holds the title of Miss California from making personal appearances, granting interviews or making commercials without permission from pageant officials and gives the pageant's directors the right to revoke her crown for breaching any of the document's provisions.

If pageant officials decide to strip Prejean of her crown, they had better make damnmed sure that they have their reasons out there and clearly articulated.

Maggie Gallagher and NOM are just chomping at the bit right now. I bet they have already created the new commercial featuring Prejean as the new St. Catherine on the wheel.

The Jeffersons and the transgender community

The first time I ever saw anything about the transgender community was this episode of The Jeffersons.

The main character, George Jefferson, is going to meet his old navy buddy. Little does he know that his friend has had a sex change operation. George acts predictably uncomfortable but finds that he must rely on his friend because Louise, George's wife, believes that he is having an affair.

I personally thought that this episode was well ahead of its time on so many regards. A transgendered woman did not play George's friend but I still loved her performance. While she was definitely wanting to keep George's friendship, she did not take any disrespect.

If there is anything that can be seen as offensive in this episode, it would have to be the sequence where George tries to pass off a male employee as his friend. However, I don't think the sequence was making fun of the transgender community, but people's ignorance of them.

Anyway, I loved the episode, especially the ending. There was one thing I noticed about the character of Louise Jefferson that I particularly liked. See if you can guess what it is.

Funny or offensive? Part 2

As many of you can tell, I seem to be on a tangent today. It could be because it's Friday and all of the other interesting lgbt news have been covered by better blogs such as Pam's House Blend and Good As You.

Or it could that I'm pissed because of an incident last night. I was channel surfing and ran across a movie on Black Entertainment Network called 3 Strikes.

The plot was stupid but a scene really caught my eye and made me wish that I was a member of the NRA.

One of the characters in the movie had been shot in his rear by the police, so he was in a hospital suspended over his bed while wearing a bloody diaper. For some reason, whoever wrote 3 Strikes thought that it would be funny to show a gay black hospital worker lusting after the character (yes even after seeing the bloody diaper) and subsequently attacking him.

This was shown on Black Entertainment Network, a place that is supposed to uplift the race.

Which bring me to the clip above. It is a scene from Soul Plane, a black oriented movie so bad that it set African-American films back to the era before Birth of a Nation.

In the movie is a stewardess called Flame - a chubby oversexed black gay man wearing purple with matching lip gloss. Every time we see him, he is talking about sex (which is funny because he ends up being turned down hard by a blind guy at the end of the movie).

The very "interesting" part of this clip begins at 7:40.

BET continues to show this movie at least twice a month (I am not exaggerating).

Isn't it "nice" to be an lgbt of color and see such "fun" images on a network that is supposed to lift up your self esteem. And isn't it "nice" to be a member of a community who will not even acknowledge your existence.

The black community NEEDS a Mike Rogers desperately.

Friday midday news briefs

Gaywatch - Marion Barry - Go get him, John Stewart!!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Gaywatch - Marion Barry
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

TVC pedo-ing even more offense - You know the whole point of telling a lie is ruined when everyone knows it's a lie.

McDonald's settles gay discrimination case - Get up off the money, Ronald McDonald.

Dan Choi on The Rachel Maddow Show - and the Freepi eruption - I'm quickly changing my opinion on how President Obama should address Don't Ask, Don't Tell. We can't lose good people over a bad policy.

Outrage reviews hit big city papers: New York Times names closeted pols - L.A. Times, too! - God help me for feeling this way but I wish someone would do the same thing to the black gospel community.

Obama urged to appoint first 'gay' to Supreme Court - Via One News Now, those heads are spinning about now ;p.

Obama Mustard Attack Becomes Full-Blown Right-Wing Talking Point - Not an lgbt situation per se but I just had to include it. Every now and then, you get a sign that the lunatics are running the asylum. This is several of those signs.

Funny or offensive?

This clip from an episode of Martin underlines the negative images that seem to be numerous in black entertainment regarding lgbts of color. The "fun" begins at 40 seconds.



You tell me - is it funny or offensive.

How the religious right exploits the black community

In 1991, writer-director John Singleton came out with the landmark motion picture Boyz N The Hood which analyzed the plight of inner city African-Americans, particularly young black males.

I remember the scene in which one of the characters asked about why there were so many gun shops and drugs in the black community when African-Americans didn't own these gun shops or the poppy fields that produced the drugs.

His implication was that outside forces were exploiting poverty in the black community for profit while not caring about the effects of their exploitation.

It was a good point and I think it can be made when one assesses how the religious right exploits the black community's inability to have a decent conversation about homosexuality.

I know I am not saying anything unfamiliar when I say that the black community avoids conversations about this subject as if even mentioning the word "gay" would conjure up the devil in a puff of sulphur.

Those of us in the black community know that lgbts of color exist and their needs aren't being met because of the wall of invisibility created by this fear.

The religious right also knows this. In fact, they count on it. That's why it's so easy for conservative talking heads such as Mike Huckabee, Maggie Gallagher, Matt Barber, and Harry Jackson to take an aura of phony concern when they accuse the lgbt community at large for supposedly piggybacking on the African-American civil rights movement.

They can play gays against blacks in a "divide and conquer" strategy because the black community is afraid to admit that it and the lgbt community are more alike than they are different, especially with the existence of lgbts of color.

But I want to ask a question similar to the one asked by the Boyz N The Hood character.

How much ownership and access does the black community have with religious right groups? Where are these pro-family groups and their state affiliates when it comes to actually tackling the issues of the inner city? What is their stance on racial inequality in education or employment?

Or how about the sadly high rate of HIV/AIDS in the black community?

That is my point exactly. These phony pro-family groups, these supposed defenders of the black community are nowhere to be seen.

And why should they? They've gotten what they wanted.

Why should the owner of the gun shops mentioned in Boyz N The Hood care that his wares are leading to death and destruction? He has made his money.

Why should the owner of the poppy fields care that the drugs produced from these fields will put more addicts on the streets looking to steal, sell their bodies, or do anything else for their next fix? After all, he has made his money also.

By that same token, why should the religious right care if the rhetoric in their game of "divide and conquer" leads to more lgbt of color invisibility or black gay men being susceptible to fears of coming out, low self esteem, or worse - bad behaviors which lead to diseases such as HIV/AIDS. They've gotten what they wanted - more influence, more power, more credibility and the black and gay communities at each other's throats.

Thursday mid day news briefs

Greg, no on 'hates' you. We detest anti-scientific anti-truths! - This piece underlines why many lgbts including myself have a serious problem with the ex-gay movement. Folks like the person in this piece, Greg Quinlan, falsely claim that gays attack them because we have a problem with their ex-gay status.

No Greg, we have a problem with your duplicity. If you are ex-gay, then what are you doing at a PepsiCo shareholders meeting speaking against the company donating money to pro-gay causes such as PFLAG? If you are an ex-gay, why are you doing things to make it difficult for lgbts to attain the same type of peace that you claim you have? You can't speak against us and then claim that we won't leave you alone. Being tolerant and being a doormat are two different things.

WTF: DC TV newscaster tells Mike Rogers he wants to take him outside and punch him over 'Outrage' - Mike Rogers works to denounce the hypocrisies of closeted gay politicians who will then work against their own brothers and sisters. Some may think it's wrong, but I approve of what he does.

CNN poll: Generations disagree on same-sex marriage - works for me as long as we have the younger generation on our side.

Effort To Repeal Washington DP May Lack Support - All together now - AAWWWWWWWWW!

Sessions open minded on gay justice - This probably won't happen (it nearly did in the case of President Clinton and Barbara Jordan) but just the idea of it would be fun if only to see how fast the religious right's head would spin.

Family Research Council send me a big ole lie

I got this via email from the Family Research Council. They are wanting me and others to sign a petition to keep the U.S. Senate from passing the sexual orientation inclusive hate crimes legislation:

The enactment of so-called "hate crimes" legislation is a long-stated objective of the homosexual agenda. It is one step closer to being law.

The House of Representatives passed the Hate Crimes Bill 249-175. When the Republicans tried to stop protections from possibly going to pedophiles and other suspect categories the supporters of the bill voted to protect those perversions. When Representatives tried to insert protections for religion, protecting the Bible from being described as hate speech, the Democrats voted those protections down!

The "hate crimes legislation protects pedophiles" meme is one folks on the right have been trying to push. James Dobson went on video pushing this lie and even Fox News got into the act.

The factoid is more than a lie; it's a huge distortion. Accordng to mediamatters.org:

Discussing the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which defines as a crime acts of violence or attempted violence "motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim," Fox News hosts Sean Hannity and Bill Hemmer, and The Fox Nation, have all recently advanced the false claim that House Democrats voted to "protect" or "defend" pedophiles by voting against an amendment to the bill by Rep. Steve King (R-IA) stating that "the term 'sexual orientation' shall not include pedophilia."

In fact, as Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) noted during an April 23 House Judiciary Committee hearing, the term "sexual orientation" is already defined by federal statute as applying only to "consensual homosexuality or heterosexuality," thereby excluding pedophiles, who engage in nonconsensual sexual relationships with children. In providing her reasons for opposing King's amendment, Baldwin said that it "is unnecessary and, I would add, inflammatory in terms of insinuations."

So pedophiles are already excluded from being covered under hate crimes legislation. Also if the hate crimes bill is against acts of violence, then adding an addendum keeping the Bible from being called "hate speech" is also unnecessary.

FRC loves to trumpet the idea that homosexuality is a sin but apparently has no problem with another sin (i.e. bearing false witness) in pursuit of its goals.

Did Liberty University Remove Official Video of Miss California?

Yeah I know this issue is getting on your nerves but this is an interesting development.

Apparently Liberty University has allegedly removed the official video of Carrie Prejean's chapel appearance from Youtube.

The news comes from this religious site which tears Prejean and the religious right to shreds. You can't blame gays for this one:

It is a tragedy for Carrie. If she truly knows Christ, she is poorly taught and in real need of discipleship and mentoring by older Christian women in the faith. Instead, she was given the spotlight and a role she was not ready for. Also, just as fast as she was embraced and used by many of these groups, she risks now being dropped due to the appearance of these shameful photos, both those from the past and those she defends in her “Christian” modeling. Welcome to the evangelical celebrity circuit where souls and hearts don’t matter as much as an effective PR blitz for the “cause.” People are expendable.

Friends, as believers, our cause is the honor and glory of our Savior, King Jesus. The haste with which the present Religious Right leadership jumped on the bandwagon is resulting in unnecessary additional ridicule and mockery of Christianity. We didn’t need this. The cause of Jesus Christ did not need this.

Ouch!

Wednesday afternoon news briefs

Ugh is all I can say about today.

Those who keep up with this blog know that it is a part time gig which I do not get paid for. I post three times a day - when I get up in the morning, on my lunch break, and when I get home.

So imagine my surprise when I discovered that the library, the place where I do my noon postings, was closed.

Subsequently, my search for another library downtime led me to go on one of those legendary mythical journeys that's doomed for failure from the start (i.e. Orpheus and Gilgamesh).

But whereas Orpheus and Gilgamesh went to the underworld, I had to slog through the hot downtown area and lawns of dog crap (people really need to clean up after their pets) where my journey had an unsurprising unsuccessful end.

So here I am a post behind and I just know something good would happen today that I probably missed out on (like pictures of Peter LaBarbera in drag).

But bear with me while I try to catch up and thank you for your support thus far. Please continue to support this blog ;p.

Maine governor signs bill allowing same-sex 'marriage' - We get marriage in Maine and the One News Now commentators are pissed. Suddenly this day is looking up.

House passes same-sex marriage, 178-167; bill now moves to governor's desk - Hot damn! We almost get marriage in New Hampshire too. The governor needs to sign this bill.

If It Smells Like Coffee & Tea Here, It's Time To Cool Baser Instincts & Practice Counting To Ten - A good conversation on Pam's House Blend regarding us as community. When we attack others and ourselves with nasty language, we become exactly what the religious right says we are.

M*A*S*H star comes out - Welcome to the family, David Ogden Stiers. However that gay ray I hit you with was set for Phillip Seymour Hoffman.

James Dobson's Hate Crimes Freak-Out - What's the deal with James Dobson? It's one thing to lie but it's another thing entirely to lie even when folks know you are lying.

Homosexual demon my foot!!

In the video clip below, this so-called reverend, overseer, prophetess (I don't know which name the silly woman prefers) is taking it upon herself to "exorcise" an alleged "demon of homosexuality." (Editor's note - The video has been removed but I posted another video that tells of the account).



Scenes like this that make me sad. On one hand, it's funny the depths of ignorance that some so-called Christians are stooping to.

And on the other hand, it's a reason why it's so hard for lgbts of color to be accepted for who we are in the black community.

All I can say is that if someone tries to play that "cast out" game with me, that someone is getting cut.

One more thing - feel free to share this hot mess of nonsense with others.

Monday afternoon news briefs

Today has been wild with so much stuff going on. So I am going to make a special new briefs edition of events happening today:

BREAKING: Confirmed, Mormon Web site shows Obama's mother as baptized after death - The controversy I linked to today regarding the Mormon Church and President Obama's mother has been confirmed. Batten down the hatches!

Photos Taken of Me as a Teenager - So was Carrie underaged when she took the pictures or not? I also hear that she may be in trouble for contract violation. Oh well, she can always blame THE GAYS.

Gov. Lynch at center of gay marriage debate in NH - Look at this! The New Hampshire House Committee just endorsed the marriage equality bill. Will the Governor sign it?

Washington, D.C., Council Approves Recognition of Out-of-State Gay Marriage - And the vote wasn't even close.

Same-Sex Marriage Advances in Maine - One more step to go! All we need is the Governor's signature.

The Irish Association of Social Workers Reject ‘Ex-Gay’ Therapy - There is NO such thing as too much good news.

Tuesday midday news briefs

Will Maine house accommodate its gay residents? - Keep your fingers crossed.

Uganda Gays Arrested, Blackmail Attempts Reported - Things are getting worse in Uganda.

Did the Mormons baptize Obama's mother, after her death, without his knowledge or consent? - This ain't good.

'You spin it right wing Maggie, right wing (like a record, Maggie) right wing, right wing' - Oh look! Maggie Gallagher tries to sidestep Carrie Prejean's newest controversy.

Petition filing in new fight for rights - And the fight against our rights never stop.

Larry Stickney's Referendum off to a Bumbling Start - But apparently the effort isn't going so well for those who are against us.

NC congresswoman claims Shepard murder 'not a hate crime' - One News Now's take on the Virginia Foxx controversy. One guess what position the article takes. Here is a hint - Peter LaBarbera is the only person interviewed. The article has a comments section so feel free to comment away. But be nice.

Sorry Carrie Prejean but you brought this on yourself

Unless you have been in a cave on Mars with your fingers in your ears (sorry Simpsons), you have no doubt heard about the newest controversy involving Miss California and National Organization for Marriage "spokesperson" Carrie Prejean.

The web is abuzz over a series of racy photos that she took, including the one featured here.

Now before anyone thinks that this photo is fake, please be aware that Prejean sent out a statement acknowledging the fact that it is her in the picture. And it's not the only thing she said:

I am a Christian, and I am a model. Models pose for pictures, including lingerie and swimwear photos. Recently, photos taken of me as a teenager have been released surreptitiously to a tabloid Web site that openly mocks me for my Christian faith. I am not perfect, and I will never claim to be. But these attacks on me and others who speak in defense of traditional marriage are intolerant and offensive. While we may not agree on every issue, we should show respect for others’ opinions and not try to silence them through vicious and mean-spirited attacks.

Save it, Carrie. No one forced you to take those pictures and I sincerely doubt that this entire thing is a plot to destroy you because of your Christian beliefs. What probably happened is that someone is cashing in on your notoriety. No one is out to get you, because you are too profitable.

This is known as "game," Carrie. And you should know it well. You have been playing the "game" ever since this entire thing began.

When this controversy started, I was in your corner. I never did like Perez Hilton and I felt that his comments were uncalled for. And after all, you were merely stating your opinion.

But now you have been shown to be a hypocrite and though there will be some who will engage in all sorts of logical gymnastics and finger pointing to push blame off of you, the fact remains that this embarrassment is your fault.

Not for stating your opinion but for the position you took afterwards. You allowed yourself to be manipulated by Maggie Gallagher and the National Organization for Marriage into being their spokesperson.

You soaked in all of the adulation and praise from your church, various religious right groups while fully aware that you may not have been worthy of such canonization.

Remember how they called you brave for supposedly standing up for Christ and traditional values. Remember how they called you a "modern day Queen Esther?"

Remember all of those friendly interviews you conducted with Fox News, the Today Show and other various news sources in which you channeled Joan of Arc seconds before she was burned at the stake?

You allowed yourself to become a symbol, a paragon for virtue. You allowed yourself to be placed on the pedestal that you may not have deserved.

That's why I don't feel sorry for what's happening to you now.

You are now what folks call a cash cow. I suggest you learn how to moo.

I also suggest that you buck up and stop portraying Fay Wray on King Kong. The damsel in distress routine is so old.

And it's no longer working.

Two anti-gay nuts for Monday afternoon

1. What's the deal with Joe The Plumber?

Joe The Plumber: I Would Never Let "Queers" Near My Children

Joe the Plumber, aka Samuel Wurzelbacher, sat down for an lengthy interview with Christianity Today to discuss his views on the future of the Republican party. Wurzelbacher took the opportunity to speak out against gay marriage, which he says is wrong. The unlikely conservative spokesman went so far as to say he doesn't allow openly gay people "anywhere near" his children.

The word "queer," Wurzelbacher noted, "means strange and unusual."

Christianity Today: In the last month, same-sex marriage has become legal in Iowa and Vermont. What do you think about same-sex marriage at a state level?

Wurzelbacher: At a state level, it's up to them. I don't want it to be a federal thing. I personally still think it's wrong. People don't understand the dictionary--it's called queer. Queer means strange and unusual. It's not like a slur, like you would call a white person a honky or something like that. You know, God is pretty explicit in what we're supposed to do--what man and woman are for. Now, at the same time, we're supposed to love everybody and accept people, and preach against the sins. I've had some friends that are actually homosexual. And, I mean, they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn't have them anywhere near my children. But at the same time, they're people, and they're going to do their thing.

No he didn't! If I wasn't so mature, I would be going for my razor right now.

THIS is what the Republican Party is reduced to? Sad.

I'm going to put it more succinctly. I refuse to believe that Wurlzebacher has any gay friends. That's right - I think he is lying and channeling the standard I'm not really prejudice because I am friends with THOSE people line that I've heard on occasion when some whites talk about African-Americans.

But just in case he is telling the truth, someone needs to give those "gay friends" a talking to about self respect.

2. Hey Stephen Baldwin! THIS is what persecution looks like

Last weekend, former actor, born-again Christian, and dismal talking head Stephen Baldwin claimed on Larry King Live that folks like him and Carrie Prejean who are against gay marriage are being "persecuted." However, when pressed about said persecution, Baldwin couldn't give any details.

Persecution, you dipstick, looks a little like this:

‘THEY KILL PEOPLE LIKE US,’ SAYS GAY IRAQI

Widespread violence is down across Baghdad, but not for one minority group.

Iraq’s gay population is being targeted by militia groups in a wave of killings that has claimed the lives of up to 25 young men and boys in the past month.

"They know I am gay. I don’t know if I am going to be killed, this is up to God," said Moyad, a 38-year-old Baghdad resident who would not give his last name out of fear for his safety. Visibly frightened, he said that he has many friends who have been sadistically tortured, some even murdered. "They are sticking glue up their anuses; some hospitals refuse to treat them. Is it a war waged against homosexuals?" he asked.

International outrage Most of the attacks have happened in Baghdad’s Shia neighborhoods, and many believe that religious leaders have used Friday sermons in Sadr City as a platform to incite hatred and violence toward homosexuals. The bodies of three gay men were reported to have been found in Sadr City in April with pieces of paper bearing the word for "pervert" attached to them.

Posters and leaflets have been distributed in the Baghdad neighborhoods of al-Shola, al-Hurya and Sadr City with orders to, "Cleanse Iraq from the crime of homosexuality."

Baghdad police didn’t respond to inquiries from NBC News about the attacks, but the surge in violence has gained attention by the international media. In a letter to Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki in April, Amnesty International called for "urgent and concerted action" to stop the killings of men because of their sexual orientation.

More here.

Maybe it's just me but being booed at a pageant doesn' t exactly rank up there with what's happening to gays in Iraq.

Monday midday news briefs

Oh, the shameless irony - This is a huge lie. Marriage equality advocates do not want to silence those who are against it. Hell, if NOM shut up, who could I laugh at?

Is Cantor suggesting that the GOP will go pro-gay and pro-choice? - All together now - HAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!!!!!

Pro-LGBT clergy to hold press conference to support hate crimes legislation and ENDA - Now THIS is how it should be done.

Bill would extend medical leave law to LGBT families -Support this bill!

One News Now tries to make Prejean a hate crimes martyr

Still smarting over the U.S. House of Representatives passing lgbt inclusive hate crimes legislation, the phony news site One News Now have decided to use the quickly passing Carrie Prejean/Perez Hilton controversy to make an illogical point:

A Virginia congressman says the anti-Christian hatred and bigotry of homosexual blogger Perez Hilton and his supporters underscores one of the fallacies undergirding federal "hate crimes" legislation.

. . . Congressman Randy Forbes (R-Virginia) is a former ranking member of the Judiciary Crime Subcommittee, and founder of the Congressional Prayer Caucus. He recently took to the House floor and provided a powerful example of how the "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act" does not ensure equality under the law.

Congressman Forbes compared the protection Miss California Carrie Prejean would receive under the bill to the special protection homosexual blogger and Miss USA judge Perez Hilton would have been afforded.

"Had [Hilton] done what he said he would do and stormed that stage and pulled that tiara off [Prejean's] head and [inflicted] bodily harm when he did it, there would not have been one ounce of protection under this piece of legislation for that young girl," Forbes stated.

First of all, the article is solely about Hilton. Whoever his "supporters" are, there is no further mention of them.

Secondly, I never believed Hilton when he made that statement. It's very easy to talk about what you would have done after the fact. But had Prejean won, Hilton would have kept his seat with his mouth open, no doubt thinking of nastier invectives to make against Prejean on youtube.

The Congressman really reaches for straws when he says this:

. . . if she had in response made a statement back about the very sexual orientation that had led him to his hatred and dislike for her, and if she had responded by slapping him or any physical injury, she would have had the potential of a ten-year federal piece of legislation coming against her."

The Virginia Republican also argued that if beauty contestant's father had rushed onto the stage at the Miss USA pageant and responded to Hilton's hatred in a physical way, he would have been open to prosecution under the hate crimes bill as well.

I take it that the Congressman is saying that if Prejean has made an anti-gay slur while slapping Hilton, she would be in trouble. I don't think so.

As much as it would have been fun to see Prejean snatch off her earrings and heels and get "ghetto" on Hilton, I seriously doubt she would be arrested on hate crimes violations no matter what she said while doing it. Hilton's actions would have clearly been assault and Prejean would merely be defending herself.

Also, as much as I hate to admit, she would have a few gays in her corner for taking care of business against someone who would dare try to "snatch her crown."

As for her father, hate crimes legislation probably wouldn't apply either.

You gotta admit though, it would be a very interesting clip on youtube.

However in all honesty, this controversy is petering out. One News Now and those on the right would do themselves a huge favor by letting it die a silent death.

Maggie Gallagher, NOM get destroyed on Larry King Live

This is just pitiful. A few thoughts:

1. Where is Carrie Prejean? Apparently her moment in the spotlight is over.

2. Maggie Gallagher got wrecked twice. First was a full speed dressing down by former Miss USA Shanna Moakler. Moakler takes Gallagher to task for exploiting Prejean. I found myself saying "get it girlfriend!" while snapping my fingers in a "Z formation."

The second wrecking was a bit more subtle by substitute host Joy Behar. Behar asked her a simple question about why focusing on gays wanting to get married rather than divorce. Gallagher hems and haws big time. Of course she pushes her tried and true diversionary argument of "they think we are bigots for defending traditional marriage."

3. Stephen Baldwin was much more useful when he was freely showing his buttcheeks in movies. "God wrote the Bible?" Come on now. And then he talks about being persecuted. Pullleaze!

4. Former Miss California, the Rev. Nicole Lamarche, defends marriage equality with intelligence, poise, and the utmost grace. Awesome lady!

But the main thing I took out of the segment is this - NOM is swiftly leaving Heaven's Gate territory and careening towards Plan 9 From Outer Space land.

Transcript added via the efforts of Pam Spaulding:

The transcript:

BEHAR: The gay marriage debate has been front and center this week.

Joining us for a debate of our own are Shanna Moakler, director of Miss California USA. She's a former Miss USA who's in a new ad slamming Proposition 8. It bans gay marriage in California.

Reverend Nicole la March. Nicole was Miss California in 2003. She supports gay marriage.

In Los Angeles, actor Stephen Baldwin, starring in "I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here," joins us. He is opposed to gay marriage.

And Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, is here.

A new anti-gay marriage ad featuring Miss California, Carrie Prejean, I believe is the way you say it, was launched this week.

Listen to Carrie's remarks that reignited the issue.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, COURTESY NBC)

PEREZ HILTON: Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage.

Do you think every state should follow suit?

Why or why not?

CARRIE PREJEAN: Well, I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land that you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, in my country and in -- in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman -- no offense to anybody out there.

CARRIE PREJEAN, MISS CALIFORNIA: Well, I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land that you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And, you know what, in my country, and in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there. But that's how I was raised, and that's how I think that it should be, between a man and a woman. Thank you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BEHAR: Shanna, what's your reaction to Carrie Prejean. How do you say her name?

MOAKLER: Carrie Prejean. Prejean, Prejean. I say Prejean.

BEHAR: What's your reaction to those remarks?

MOAKLER: I'm very proud of Carrie that she stood up for what she believes in and she followed her heart. And I told her that that night. I'm not going to lie and say that it hurt my feelings a little bit. Everyone is right. Everyone has the freedom to their speech, the freedom of speech. I applaud her for that.

BEHAR: Right, OK. Maggie, you had a press conference for the National Organization of Marriage, where you released that new ad called "No Offense With Carrie Prejean." Let's take a look at that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She's asked her opinion about marriage.

PREJEAN: I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offense to anybody out there.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Then is attacked.

PEREZ HILTON, CELEBRITY GOSSIP: She's a dumb (EXPLETIVE DELETED), OK?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A pro-marriage group talks about how gay marriage will impact religious groups.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's no longer palatable in this country or OK to be an outright bigot. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They attack if you oppose gay marriage because they don't want to debate the consequences.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BEHAR: OK. That was -- that's a harsh ad.

GALLAGHER: Is it a harsh ad? I think it's an honest ad. I think the reason Carrie's story is resonating with so many people, besides how young and nice that she is and beautiful, is that a lot of Americans who think marriage means a man and a woman are feeling like it doesn't matter how nicely you say it, how civilly you say it, you get slammed. You get treated as if you are -- you get name-called. After Prop 8, people's names were put up on the Internet, and we had people saying, go after these people.

We had a waitress who gave 100 dollars to support marriage and people were calling for her job. They wanted her to lose her job, because she supported marriage as a man and a woman. So the reality is I don't blame gay people for this. I know many gay people. No way this is the way they want this movement to be acting.

But we do have a gay marriage movement right now that if you disagree with them, they tend to treat you like you were the Ku Klux Klan or something. And that's what happened to Carrie. I think most of us think that's wrong.

BEHAR: Nicole, you've been in Carrie's position. You were a beautiful Miss California.

LAMARCHE: Thank you, thank you.

BEHAR: Then you became a reverend. I'm fascinated by that. Was she correct to speak her mind like that, do you think?

LAMARCHE: Oh, absolutely.

BEHAR: Free speech?

LAMARCHE: Absolutely. I think the place where I enter the conversation is when she went on "The Today Show" and then said that the Bible condones what she said. And that's a little tricky. The Bible -- any reading of the Bible is a selective reading. And so I always want to make sure to offer an alternative position, which is that god is the god of love, and that marriage should be something that's available for each and every loving adult committed couple.

BEHAR: Do you agree with that, Steven?

BALDWIN: Absolutely not. The Bible clearly indicates that when two of the same sex lie down together, that is sin. Now, God wrote the Bible. So, therefore, that is what God has to say and God is the judge.

The thing that's very interesting to me, Joy, is just because I believe in the Bible means that I'm now being persecuted if I believe in traditional marriage. So I'm here to --

BEHAR: How are you being persecuted?

BALDWIN: Joy, let me finish. I'm here to represent all of those people who are being persecuted for believing in traditional marriage.

BEHAR: Tell me how you're being persecuted exactly, Stephen. What's happening to you?

BALDWIN: Exactly like Miss California. Just simply because who she is and what she believes is that traditional marriage is what is right, according to who she is and what she believes. Look what's happening. She's being persecuted.

MOAKLER: I need to interject in here.

BALDWIN: She's being persecuted.

BEHAR: Go ahead, Shanna.

MOAKLER: First and foremost, Carrie didn't lose the pageant because her answer. She was behind in numbers, behind in scores. Carrie is being persecuted because she has a title, and that title is Miss California USA. She has responsibilities as Miss California USA that she has now basically kind of forgone, and has aligned herself with an organization that has -- it's already a heated and polarizing issue. So to align yourself with this right after all the heat, you can't complain of getting all this heat and then go do something so drastic.

BEHAR: OK, Maggie.

GALLAGHER: It's not drastic to say marriage means a man and a woman, nor to stand with other people who are doing that. I was going to compliment you, Shanna, on the change in your tone in respecting Carrie's rights here. But I have to say you're now sounding exactly like you did when she appeared on "The Today Show," accusing her of pursuing an opportunistic agenda. Then you released private medical information about her to the press to try to smear her.

MOAKLER: I think you're pursuing an opportunist agenda when you hire a 21-year-old that has --

(CROSS TALK)

MOAKLER: -- who has never even had a long-term relationship, and you put her in a press junket that she's unprepared for. You were not only damaging her. This is a bright, young, talented young woman that has -- is going to be left with a legacy of being an Anita Bryant. She should be back home in California, and she should be doing her responsibilities.

BEHAR: I'm going to let you talk as soon as we come back, OK?

What do you think of gay marriage. That's tonight's quick vote question. Go to CNN.com/LarryKing and tell us what you think. We'll be back after this with more.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BEHAR: OK. We're back. Maggie, what did you want to say to Shanna?

GALLAGHER: I wanted to say, first of all, that Carrie does not work for the National Organization for Marriage. She's a spokesman for her own views, as anyone watching her is perfectly clear. It's the Miss USA California officials who, instead of backing her up and dealing with this judge, who went on the Internet and videotaped himself cursing her out, saying he wanted to rip the tiara off -- for you to go around Shanna and say that her legacy is divisive and polarizing, you will not meet a better human being than Carrie.

I'm honored that she chose to stand with us at the National Organization for Marriage, as we released this ad calling for people to account.

BEHAR: I want to ask you about the National Organization for Marriage. It's set up to protect marriage, right?

GALLAGHER: Our mission is protecting marriage and the faith communities that sustain it.

BEHAR: Then why don't you focus on Mel Gibson's divorce, Bristol Palin's single parenthood, and she should be married -- maybe she should be getting married? Why are you focusing on gay marriage?

GALLAGHER: I spent 20 years on the problem of family fragmentation, divorce and married child -- there really isn't anyone who has gone around the country more.

(CROSS TALK)

GALLAGHER: The reason I cared about that is I used to go around the country and say marriage really matters because children need a mom and dad. After after Massachusetts, I think I'm not going to be able to say that anymore. The law -- you change the definition of marriage, you change it for everyone. And this ancient and honorable idea, marriage is about bringing together the two halves of humanity, male and female, so that children have a mother and father. That's going to be treated as bigotry.

MOAKLER: What's wrong with a mother and a mother and what is wrong with a father and a father? I don't think anyone can define marriage, except two people who are in a union together who love each other. -- as an organization that can do that.

BEHAR: Nicole, get in here.

LAMARCHE: Those of us who are celebrating marriage equality believe in marriage. I mean, marriage is an institution that creates healthy children, healthy families, which is why I would say that it should be an option for any adult, loving, committed couple. And it is because we're all -- we're all celebrating marriage and we believe it is so important that it should be an option for each and every couple.

(CROSS TALK)

BEHAR: I understand that, but you're sort of saying the words mother and father as a nouns. It's also a verb, to mother, to father, so you could have two women mothering a child or fathering a child. It's a role really.

GALLAGHER: No, I don't think so. I think that, in fact, there's something special about unions of husbands and wives. There's a reason marriage has been this way. Not only our own, but in almost every known human society. And that this vision of marriage -- it's your point. It's a fine point.