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

Alveda King

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Go figure.

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

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

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

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


Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

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

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

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

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

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

In other news:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No initiatives. No sponsorship of legislation. Nothing

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

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

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

Rhode Island House of Representatives overwhelmingly pass marriage equality bill

From the San Diego Gay and Lesbian News:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 LANKFORD: Wow.

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

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

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

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




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

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

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

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

Right tries to historically revise Stonewall Riot

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

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

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



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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I was wrong:



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

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

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

But people like Bryan Fischer sees this:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brian Brown, NOM pouts over Obama's inauguration speech

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

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

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

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

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

Family Research Council pouts over Obama's inauguration speech

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

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



This is what President Obama said:

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

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



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

 

Hat tip to Jeremy Hooper.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The 'Case for Mammy/Daddy Marriage'

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

'Attempt to defend Tony Perkins' bigotry backfires' and other Friday midday news briefs

My gosh some on the anti-gay right are practically on another planet when it comes to logic. Take Porno Pete LaBarbera for example. On his webpage, he lays a charge that GLAAD distorted Tony Perkins (Family Research Council president)'s words to make it look as if he is attacking gays. LaBarbera takes Perkins' original statement:

“Those that understand the homosexual community — the activists — they are very aggressive … everything they accuse us of they are in triplicate. They’re [intolerant], they’re hateful, they’re vile, they’re spiteful…Our response to them should be one of love and of compassion….We’ve got to be very careful to guard our hearts — that we in the midst of this battle don’t become so [callous], that we realize they’re not the enemy. The enemy is simply using them as pawns. They are held captive by the enemy….”

and then compares it to what GLAAD reported to claim that the organization distorted Perkins' statement:

I fail to see the difference between the two statements, except one. The longer statement makes Perkins look worse. And on that note, LaBarbera's attempt to defend Perkins makes him look clueless as well as foolish.

In other news:

Video: Brian Brown thanks NOM supporters for buying him a French vacation - This is pitiful. NOM leads a successful anti-marriage equality March in France but then spoils it by lying about the number of attendees.

 WATCH: Transgender Tween Tackles Challenge Of Dating - This is so cute. I love this!

California Health Insurance Company Sued For Barring HIV Patients From Pharmacies - Sock it to them!

 Rev. Steven Chalke, Evangelical Minister, Calls On Christians To Support Gay Community - Hmmmmmm

Hate group leader Tony Perkins lies about gay depression and suicide research

One of the most tedious things about organizations like the Family Research Council is how they will either distort legitimate research or question the outcomes of said research if doesn't back up their negative claims about homosexuality.  But in this case, Tony Perkins, president of FRC does one worse. He pretends that such research  which contradicts his claims about homosexuality doesn't exist:




Perkins claims that there is no link between homophobia and negative behaviors in gays, such as depression and suicide. As far as I know, Perkins has never done any research on the issue. However, Massachusetts pediatrician Robert Garafalo conducted a study which found the link. And his name should be of interest of Perkins.

 In 1998, he complained that FRC and several other religious right groups were distorting his report on sexual orientation and at-risk behavior among gay youth. The groups used Dr. Garafalo’s study in a full page ad as proof that homosexuals are substance abusers and all-around violent people. Garafalo contended that his research was saying that when gay teenagers abuse drugs or contemplate suicide, it is because of the homophobic society they face. Regarding the distortion of his work, Garafalo said the following :

 “It’s a complete misrepresentation of my work. It was taken completely out of context. It comes to a complete opposite conclusion of what the paper actually said.” - Boston doctor says ads distorted his work on gays, The Boston Globe , Aug. 4, 1998

Furthermore, several other studies AND medical groups have also confirmed the link between homophobia and depression and suicide amongst gays including:

A 2011 study from Concordia University:

New research from Concordia University suggests that the stress of being rejected or victimized because of sexual orientation may disrupt hormonal responses in lesbians, gays and bisexuals. Recently published as a doctoral thesis in clinical psychology, this investigation examined environmental risks and protective factors that counterbalanced them in LGB youth. "Compared to their heterosexual peers, suicide rates are up to 14 times higher among lesbian, gay and bisexual high school and college students," says Michael Benibgui, who led this investigation as part of his PhD thesis at Concordia's Department of Psychology and Centre for Research in Human Development.

A 2009 study listed on  the American Psychological Association's online site:

Many studies find a higher rate of health and mental health problems among lesbian, gay and bisexual and transgender (LGBT) teens than in heterosexual youth, often fingering social rejection as the culprit. A new study of lesbians, gays and bisexuals, however, suggests another major possible cause: parental rejection. The research, published in the January Pediatrics (Vol. 123, No. 1), found that LGB adults who reported high rates of parental rejection in their teens were 8.4 times more likely to report having attempted suicide, 5.9 times more likely to report high levels of depression, 3.4 times more likely to use illegal drugs, and 3.4 times more likely to have had unprotected sex than LGB peers who reported no or low levels of family rejection, reports the study team, headed by Caitlin Ryan, PhD, of San Francisco State University.

The Centers for Disease Control:

 Homosexuality  is not a mental disorder, but homophobia, stigma, and discrimination have negative effects on the health of MSM, lesbians, and other sexual minorities. The negative effects of social marginalization can be found in adolescent and adult MSM, for example, research has shown that MSM and other members of the LGBT community are at increased risk for a number of mental health problems.

Perkins vaguely cites a study of gays in the Netherlands to back up his claim that suicide and depression are indicative of the lgbt sexual orientation because according to him, the Netherlands is more accepting of gays, but they still engage in negative behaviors there.

By listening to Perkins, one would not know what study he was talking about and who conducted it.

But as it happens, I think I know the study and its author because I talked to him a couple of years. The study was  Same-Sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders. It appeared in the Archives of General Psychiatry in 2001 and looked at psychiatric disorders in gay adults from the Netherlands.

If so, this is the part Perkins was alluding to:

It is unclear to what extent findings from this Dutch study can be generalized to other cultures or nations. Compared with other Western countries, the Dutch social climate toward homosexuality has long been and remains considerably more tolerant. To the extent that the level of social acceptance of homosexuality induces differences in mental health status in relation to homosexuality, the observed differences might be greater in other Western countries than in the Netherlands.

In 2009, I contacted the author of the study, Professor Theo Sandfort. At the time, I was writing a post about how another religious right spokesperson (Regina Griggs of PFOX) was distorting his work. Via email, Sandfort said the following:

There is a difference between the U.S. and the Netherlands in terms of acceptance of homosexuality. That does not mean that there is no homophobia (and homophobic damage) in the Netherlands. It is not clear how difference in climate affects the prevalence of mental disorders. We don't know the final answers, but in the U.S. as well as the Netherlands, homophobia is related to mental health problems.

In his radio address, Perkins  was distorting and misleading to attack the famous "It Gets Better" program, which works to keep gay youth from committing suicide.  Perkins calls the "It Gets Better" program a "deceptive lie."

No, Mr. Perkins.

Pretending that research which contradicts your point of view doesn't exist is a deceptive lie.

Hat tip to Jeremy Hooper.

NOM tells Rhode Islanders - 'Gays want your children!!'

I don't think Jeremy Hooper will mind me stealing this from his blog.

You know, no matter how nice Maggie Gallagher and company tries to dress up NOM's rhetoric, when the organization is not successful, it always goes back to basic homophobia and fear tactics such as the following "gays are coming after your children" ad it ran in Rhode Island recently:

 

No matter how much sweet frosting you put on manure, it is always manure. But here is the thing that I like. The group in Rhode Island pushing for marriage equality, Rhode Islanders United for Marriage, didn't sit on its ass.

Instead, it refuted NOM's junk extremely quick:

RIUnited Press Release on fallacious NOM ad by

'More proof that NOM is branching out in the UK' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Video: The UK gets its own Kalley Yanta - First the French anti-marriage equality march and now this. It looks like the National Organization for Marriage is branching out in Europe big time. Maybe not necessarily NOM, but whoever is behind NOM.  

Religious Extremism On Display At Rhode Island’s Same-Sex Marriage Hearing - This was just vile. And so many errors too. Marriage has not been the same since the beginning of time even if you followed the Bible (who married Adam and Eve for instance?) And I won't even talk about that caterwauling in the hallway of the Rhode Island legislative capitol building. Lastly, you KNOW someone had to work in something about sexual intercourse.
 
Air Force Veteran Fired Under DADT Named As Inauguration Citizen Co-Chair - Outstanding! 

Buster Wilson Warns Obama Might Confiscate Guns of Anti-Gay Activists - What would Jesus do, indeed?  

Seattle's Mars Hill Church Moves Close To Gay Neighborhood To Preach To Those 'Infected By AIDS' - You wouldn't have to move to a gay neighborhood for that.

Should 'Christians' have the right to harass gay couples?

The hypocrisy stings when it comes to some folks who call themselves Evangelical Christians.

Most specifically, I mean the folks at the American Family Association's fake news source One News Now.

The news source constantly inundates its readers with anecdotal tales - some true, some extremely spurious - about how some "Christians" in America are picked on or "persecuted" for their beliefs.

But it strangely makes a 180 degree turn when those who call themselves Christians are the aggressors.

In a recent controversy in New Bern, NC, a lesbian couple was eating at a restaurant, The Stingray Café  After they had finished and paid their bill, the owner, Ed McGovern,  handed them a note attacking their relationship.

The note told them that their relationship was hurting their loved ones and that his daughter was involved in a lesbian relationship and it reportedly destroyed her.

According to Think Progress:

McGovern said he wrote the letter because he did not approve of the McPhails’ kissing and confirmed that he has done something similar for a lesbian couple in the past. The McPhails say they weren’t kissing — just holding hands — but that’s besides the point.

One News Now is claiming that the couple is urging folks to boycott the restaurant.  I'm sure if that's true or not. However, they have gone public with a beautifully written piece telling their side of the story:

Lesbians and gays are not monsters lurking among the normal people in your restaurant, monsters from whom you need to protect your children. We are normal people. We have children. Instead of focusing on what separates us, look at what brings us together. With the freedom to speak comes the responsibility to recognize intent, and the responsibility for the effects of your words. What was the intent of this letter? What is the intent of those who single out gays and lesbians to condemn them? If it is to pass on love and compassion, then evaluate how you do so. Writing a letter was a selfish act on his part. Handing a letter to someone you do not know and then washing your hands of the situation so that you can pat yourself on the back for doing "the right thing" is a cop-out. Do you want to spread love? Try a conversation -- not one of attack or analysis but of equal discussion. 

However, what if this couple did call for a boycott? Would you blame them?

If you was a supporter of One News Now, you would.  The news source posted a slanted story quoting only one source - our friend "Porno" Pete LaBarbera - in defense of the restaurant owner's actions:

"The women had the audacity to say that he wouldn't do this to any other married couple. Well, that's because homosexuality is not marriage and they're not really married. The homosexual lobby, you've got to believe, they want to start suing people like this bold Christian man who merely wanted to tell these lesbians that they're in sin."

"Christians needs to support this man -- Christians all over the country -- but especially in this town," LaBarbera urges. "They're going to try to put him out of business. This is the time for Christians to rally around this man who was merely exercising his right to speak out and speaking out as a concerned Christian."

First of all, I don't know where LaBarbera got the lawsuit idea from. The couple did not indicate that they wanted to sue McGovern.

But more to the point, where is the common decency here? Folks like LaBarbera and "news sources" like One News Now are constantly whining that gays are "forcing" people to accept homosexuality.

This couple was merely eating at a restaurant. So what if they were kissing or hold hands. It certainly doesn't matter because the owner took their money.

The unfortunate fact here is that what McGovern, One News Now, and LaBarbera objects to is the couple's existence. It's not enough for them to disagree with homosexuality. They seem to want gays to alter our lives in order to support to their standards of morality.

And if we don't, they should have the right to "correct" us without reprisal because . . . well God said they can.

That doesn't make a damn lick of sense to me.

Outtakes - The images I couldn't put in 'How They See Us'

My booklet, How They See Us: Unmasking the Religious Right War on Gay America, is very popular on Scribd. It has already gotten close to 59,000 reads and embedded views as well as 558 downloads.

Not bad for a little over a week.

So in celebration, I thought I would share some outtakes. The following images are the clips I didn't use from the book Deathstyle (if you read my booklet, you would know what Deathstyle is) because I felt they were so comical that they would distract from the seriousness of How They See Us.

Remember that horror movie which proclaimed "tell yourself it's only a dream."  Well in the spirit of that, when looking at these images, tell yourself "someone thought that these were true facts about gays. Some still do:"

'Bishop admits religious exemptions argument is a crock' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Illinois' Bishop Paprocki: No religious exemption will ever satisfy us (*but we'll demand you give them to us anyway) - I always knew the "you're not giving us enough religious exemptions from gay marriage" whine was a crock.

Dobson: 'Everything I Have Fought For is On the Line and is in Danger Now' - Awwww poor baby! 

Pentagon Allows Military Spouses Group To Continue Discriminating Against Same-Sex Spouses - Okay this right here is some bull@!%#

Focus On The Family President Concedes Homosexuality Is ‘Not A Super Sin’ - I don't care what Focus on the Family says. I'm not giving up my red cape and monogrammed "S" for nobody.

Jesus Days: Photos of the World Through the Lens of a Closeted Young Gay Man - Fascinating photo journal.

Peter Sprigg exposes his anti-gay group's hypocrisy again

Peter Sprigg

Perhaps the Family Research Council's Peter Sprigg should quit while he is ahead. As he continues  to milk the recent controversy involving Pastor Louie Giglio - whose  inauguration invitation to give the benediction was rescinded due to past anti-gay sermons he preached - he opens himself and FRC up for scrutiny.

Which, of course, is perfectly fine with me.

Sprigg wrote a piece complaining about how Giglio was supposedly treated wrong for "merely" giving the supposed Christian view of homosexuality:

What many people do not understand is that when a conservative says “homosexuality is a sin,” it is a reference to their chosen sexual behavior, not to their inherent human dignity. Christian theology teaches that all people, including those with same-sex attractions, are created in the image of God, but it also teaches that all people—liberal or conservative, homosexual or heterosexual—are sinners who can be saved only by the grace of God.

If only it were that simple, I wouldn't have a successful blog. Sprigg conveniently forgets the time when he said gays should be exported out of the United States:



or the time he said "gay sex" should be outlawed:



And I would be remiss not to mention the statements of FRC's president, Tony Perkins, which speak for themselves:




 

So you see, when it comes to Giglio, Sprigg, Perkins, FRC, and so many other anti-gay entities, it goes beyond calling homosexuality a sin. They smear gay people as the "dreaded other" out to cause mayhem and destruction.

I naturally disagree with all of their statements, but especially Perkins' last one. I'm a happy gay guy. And at times, I get downright delirious with joy.

That generally takes place every time I am able to demonstrate how hypocritical folks like him are. 

Religious right group wants YOUR money to fight Lady Gaga

Lady Gaga

People for the American Way's Religious Right Watch just posted this:

Yesterday, the Florida Family Association hired a plane to fly above a Lady Gaga concert in Tacoma, WA with a banner reading “NOT BORN THIS WAY.” “How would you feel if your child or grandchild went to a concert where unbeknownst to you they were convinced to embrace a homosexual or transgender lifestyle for a lifetime?” the FFA told members when asking for contributions to run additional advertisements. “The fact that someone these kids do not know spent significant resources to fly a plan to tell them they are NOT born that way will prayerfully speak to their souls,” read the appeal for donations.

And here is the piece de resistance from the FFA's site itself:

Florida Family Association would like to fly more banners to counter Gaga’s hedonistic, Godless message at more concerts.  You can click here to see the schedule Ladygaga.com. It will cost $1,900 to fly this banner for four hours before sunset.  The goal is not to fly banners at every concert but at enough concerts to make a difference. Please consider making a designated donation for this project by clicking here or mailing your donation to Florida Family Association, PO Box 46547, Tampa, FL 33646.  All donations received through this solicitation will be used exclusively for the NOT Born this way banner at Lady Gaga Concerts.

And why are they doing this? Because according to them, with citations from the Family Research Council and discredited research Paul (gays stuff gerbils in their rectums) Cameron, children could get "tricked" into thinking that they are gay when in fact homosexuality is supposedly caused by "being introduced to the homosexual lifestyle by aggressive homosexual adults."

One wonders if anyone is even going to pay attention to those FFA's banners.

'NOM posts then pulls extremely bigoted videos' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

NOM RI posts shocking, must-be-seen videos; clips claim gays are ‘lethal’, not going to heaven, more - Videos pushing discredited claims about gays and cigarette smoking, "indoctrination of children," and how gays aren't going to Heaven? Way to go, NOM. And please note that your scrubbing of said videos didn't do any good. Copies have been attained.

DOMA: House Republicans Poised To Spend $3 Million On Legal Defense - Republicans - "we simply HAVE to cut spending. How else are we going to get the money to keep those nasty gays from getting married."  

E.U. Court of Human Rights: Religious beliefs may not be used to refuse service to same-sex couples - I believe the word you are looking for here is BOOM!  

Utah School Realizes Book About Lesbian Family Helps Prevent Bullying - More good news!  

G. Craige Lewis: The Most Dangerous Preacher in the Black Church - A truly vile individual. He goes after everyone, including those you would think are his allies.

Editor's note - Last night, the document on the right of my blog - How They See Us: Unmasking the Religious Right War on America reached 50,000 reads and embedded views. While not as vital to some members of the lgbt community as Jodie Foster's coming out, it does prove that there is a need for this information. On the risk of acting like President Obama continuously asking for money for his re-election campaign, I encourage folks to read this document if they haven't already, to embed it in their blogs if they feel so inclined, download it, print it out, send it to their friends, and especially our lgbt youth. I have been getting several positive messages from young lgbts who have said that this information encourages them to feel good about themselves. Let's go for 100,000 reads and embedded views!

'Religious protection' argument is a dangerous con

The battle over marriage equality in Rhode Island is heating up. The governor, Lincoln Chaffee, said he will not put up marriage equality for a public vote, therefore it will be decided by the legislature.

And already religious right groups are using the "religious protection" argument as a way to derail the potential bill.  Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Kellie Fiedorek told One News Now the following:

"Religious freedom belongs to everyone, not just a handful of people. The government cannot limit constitutionally protected religious liberties in a way that's foreign to our Constitution. This bill fails to ensure that those liberties of every Rhode Island citizen will be respected. The First Amendment's guarantee of religious freedom for all Americans is not limited to the four walls of a church."

That sounds nice, but what the article says next should be looked at with much negative scrutiny:

The legislation contains protections for clergy who refuse to do homosexual "wedding" ceremonies, but not people of faith who serve as justices, judges, or court commissioners.Another provision in H. 5015 prohibits penalties against churches and religious denominations that oppose same-gender marriage, but it fails to protect businesses operated by people of faith and Christian counselors who do pre- or post-marriage counseling.

So it seems that some people's ideas of "religious protection" is to discriminate against gays, even though they may be elected or appointed officials or own a secular business such as a restaurant and an apartment complex.

Elected or appointed officials should not get to pick and choose who they serve and secular businesses should not have the option to discriminate, not matter the faith of the owner.

Where exactly is the line drawn when it comes to "religious protection."  If you allow discrimination against gays under the guise of "religious protection," then just which group of Americans would be next?






 

Does NOM want to dictate 'religious liberty' to other faiths?

 The clip above is the first time I have ever seen an interview with the National Organization for Marriage chairman John Eastman.

He was on Fox News today criticizing the National Cathedral because of its decision to offer services to  gay couples. To me, the points he makes are irrelevant because they emphasize his hypocrisy as well as that of NOM.

We have heard ad naseum from NOM about how marriage equality would interfere with the "religious liberty" of churches and people with faiths which tell them that homosexuality is a sin.

In an interview last year, Eastman identified himself as a Catholic. The National Cathedral is from a different faith, i.e. the Episcopal Church.

So why is Eastman and NOM meddling into the affairs of those who practice a different religion which chooses to welcome gay couples with open arms?

That's a question which should have been asked during the interview and needs to be asked of Eastman in the future.

Does NOM really believe in the concept of "religious liberty," or does the group want to dictate its beliefs to those of other faiths in regards to marriage equality?

'Vatican newspaper launches hypocritical attack on gay adoption' and other Monday midday news briefs

Vatican Paper Criticizes Gay Adoption After Italy Ruling - No offense to my Catholic brothers and sisters (what I am going to say is not meant to be ugly to you), but with the problem the Catholic Church is having regarding priests molesting children, I feel the need to stand on a mountain top with a huge megaphone and scream "YOU GOTTA CENSORED KIDDING ME! WHO THE CENSORED ARE YOU TO CRITICIZE!"

  Fox Hosts Mock, Laugh At Transgender Inmate’s Appearance - I fail to see the humor in this.

 'The homosexual movement corrupts our country' - Except in my corner of the world cause I can't find a man. I'm currently taking applications. 

 Illinois Business Leaders Endorse Marriage Equality - It's a good thing.  

Fischer Says the Anti-Gay Right is Tired of Getting 'Pushed Around' and 'Backing Down' and Vows to Push Back - Apparently all of those years of calling us diseased, oversexed child molesting, bullying freaks were their way of being nice. To put it in my childhood vernacular, Mr Fischer - AIN'T NOBODY SCARED OF YOU OR YOUR GOONS.

NOM makes a cruel attack on gay families

In case some of you do not know, there is a huge controversy in France regarding the possible legalization of marriage equality and gays adopting children and naturally the National Organization for Marriage is over there causing chaos and exploiting fears about gays and children in hopes of driving down the percentage of those who support the efforts.

Yesterday, there was a huge march against marriage equality in France in which NOM took part in or had something to do with causing - we know how this organization is when it comes to astroturfing. In fact, Jeremy Hooper has proof of NOM's filthy fingerprints with the anti-marriage equality doings in France.

But what catches my attention - and makes me absolutely nauseous, are some comic strips on NOM's blog which supposedly comes from French artists:

OK, I will accept that I have 2 Moms"
"But, then where is my Dad?"

Man on the left: “This child makes me feel hopeless”
Child: “Mommy?”
Man on the right: "Yes, she refuses to open to modernity”

But actually…. I would have loved to have a Mom”
“You are selfish! You should be happy to know that you provided happiness to your two Dads!”

Where does these comic strips come from? NOM doesn't say. Instead, it offers an interesting stereotype about the French -

The French people love satire and these three cartoons are examples of artists satirizing the proposal for gay marriage in France.

We don't know if those comic strips truly came from France or someone associated with NOM.

And it gets worse. Now for those who are not aware, NOM has a strict policy on its blog's comments section. The organization generally bars people, probably some for being rude, but mostly for making comments that the organization does not agree with. Subsequently, NOM's blog seems to have "regular" commentators who can always be counted on to attack gays in general and gang up on the one or two pro-marriage equality commentator which NOM allows through.

These regulars include (I am listing their nicknames. These may not be their real names):

Good News, Randy E. King, Barb Chamberlain, Thomas Aquinas, Son of Adam

And naturally, these folks have only good things to say about the attack on gay families:

Randy E. King -  They tried therapy dogs; now they want therapy children. Well whatever it takes to keep these people from killing themselves over the innate and immutable sense of guilt they carry for living self indulgent lives. Indentured infancy.

Barb Chamberlain -  Many children raised in the custody of same-sex guardians are asking these questions. And they're not too pleased that they've been lied to their entire lives. Children are not pets.

Of course in NOM's twisted world, children in orphanages and foster homes, as well as special needs children never seem to come up. The way NOM, and its surrogates pushes it, gays treat parenthood like going to the mall and picking out clothing and other items. And with that implication comes the next one that gays will neglect the children they care for because they only wanted them so as to be seen as "normal."

It's an ugly thing to connotate and presses the case that perhaps NOM's multitude of losses in November is causing the organization to rip off its mask of false respectability and show itself to be the vindictively homophobic group that we've all known it was to begin with. 

The similarity of the Civil Rights Movement and the Gay Rights Movement? Refuting the idea of 'behaving correctly'

On the Huffington Post, there is an excellent article which spotlights how civil rights legend Julian Bond feel about how closely linked the black and gay civil rights movements are.

The article itself is a must read.  However there was a point made in the comments section which was so insightful that I simply had to post it in order to give it more attention. It hits the nail on the head:

The notion of "choice" about "behaving correctly" has direct parallels to the Civil Rights Movement. Black people were required to behave in a particular way: to sit at the back of the bus, to obey their master, to drink from a particular water fountain. It was this expected and required behaviour which was in and of itself oppressive, hence those requirements were ultimately relaxed; they were unjust. This has exact parallels to the gay experience: the required behaviour is in and of itself oppressive. Of course gay people could choose to marry opposite sex partners and live with the oppression of misery, of course they could choose to live a life of celibacy and live with the oppression of desolate loneliness. And if they do not, they live with the oppression of disapproval, ostracism and abuse. It doesn't matter what gay people "choose", oppression is their reality. Just as black people yearned have the freedom to determine their own destiny instead of having it determined by others, so do gay people. The requirement of gay people to behave in a manner which denies their true desires is in and of itself oppressive and unjust - a direct parallel to the Civil Rights Movement.