Ignore and repeat, ignore and repeat

The Fox News Channel is in trouble dealing with a pro-Republican bias.

By now, you are rolling your eyes and saying "so what else is new" just as I did when I first read about the situation.

On several different programs, the channel repeated a discredited story about Senator Barrack Obama's schooling. According to Fox, Obama was trained in the art of anti-Americanism when he was a six-year old child.

Okay that is too severe but it's not off the mark as to what Fox News's inferences are about Senator Obama. Apparently "swiftboating" (I know its a jaded word but I couldn't resist) is something that can be to do someone besides John Kerry.

What makes this story relevant to me is that when it was discovered that the story about Senator Obama was not true, some pundits on Fox News continued to repeat it as truth.

Kind of reminds me of the anti-gay industry.

There is a constant drumbeat with the ant-gay industry about us. According to them, the gay and lesbian identity is indigenous with disease, irresponsible behavior, and general sadness. On almost every so-called "pro-family" web page, one will find this lie.

That is the thing we have to combat. Our identities as gay and lesbian people is not related to how we have sex but who we love.

But we have been dancing around this issue too much. The anti-gay industry has been lying about us from day one and we need to bring attention to this fact. As long as we focus on "winning hearts and minds" and ignore people like Pete LaBarbera, Lou Sheldon, and Matt Barber when they go for the jugular. we deserve to be "swiftboated."

When the lies about Senator Obama's schooling began, his people jumped on them before they had a chance to develop.

We should start taking that hint.

Quantifying discrimination

I see Pastor Ken Hutcherson is on the loose again.

Hutcherson, who obviously never met a microphone or self-aggrandizing adjective he didn't like, is getting help from Washington's Slavic community in his attempt to overturn the state law that bans discrimination against the state's gay and lesbian community. Hutcherson believes that if the law isn't overturned, it could lead to gay marriage.

Oh gasp and swoon!

Actually, of all the members of the anti-gay industry, I find Hutcherson the most refreshing. Unlike our friend Peter LaBarbera, James Dobson, et. al., Hutcherson does not hide behind patronizing rhetoric and lies.

He straight up don't like us gays and lesbians and he will not play games about it.

But Mr. Hutcherson is wrong, plain and simple.

The law Washington passed bans discrimination against the gay community in areas such as housing and employment. As I understand it (and someone please correct me if I am wrong) churches are exempt from this law, meaning Mr. Hutcherson will not be forced to hire anyone who is a gay or lesbian.

So why does Mr. Hutcherson feel that gays and lesbians don't deserve to work and live safe from discrimination? Using the excuse that Washington's anti-discrimination law could lead to gay marriage is a pitiful lie, designed to hide why Mr. Hutcherson wants to do away with these laws.

Apparently I should take back my earlier statement. Maybe Mr. Hutcherson did learn a bit of subterfuge and deception from LaBarbera and Dobson.

It is obvious he didn't learn it from the God he claims to serve.

An item for the echo chamber

According to news reports, U.S. Representative and wannabe presidential candidate Tom Tancredo wants to get rid of Congressional Black and Hispanic caucuses. He calls them racist because they supposedly focus on race.

Here we go; an item for Sean Hannity, John Gibson, and Bill O'Reilly to beat to death without courtesy of looking deeper at the issue.

Actually Tancredo's ignorance underscores an untalked about problem about race in this country. It used to be that some took the frame of mind of "so and so is from that race therefore he is inferior." Now people seem to be saying "so and so is from that race, but I can overlook it if he doesn't throw it in my face."

Seems to me that ignoring someone's cultural background is just as bad as discriminating against them because of it.

I am sure that sooner or later, the echo chamber of Fox News will focus on Tancredo's comments, conveniently ignoring the fact that story of the white legislator who turned down for membership in the Congressional Black Caucus (the story that started the entire mess) is not true. And I am sure that the guests they call to debate the point of view against Tancredo's comments will be "lukewarm liberals."

Or better yet, if these guests make even a substantial point against Tancredo's point of view, I am sure that O'Reilly, Hannity, Gibson, or whoever will conveniently interrupt them or try to lure them on some ideological tangent having nothing to do with Tancredo's comment.

So allow me to put my two cents in this situation.

If the controversy surrounding the government’s response time to the victims of Hurricane Katrina taught us anything, it’s that the idea that a color-blind society is a lie.

The color-blind society is a myth that ranks right up there with the idea that Columbus discovered America. Furthermore, it has been my experience that when someone talks about a "color-blind society," it is usually code words for "I wish those people would just shut up and take the role we want to give them."

No matter how many times people can talk about Martin Luther King Jr. and bastardize his "I Have A Dream" speech, power in this country is defined by access. I see that in every facet of American society, from politics to even the gay rights movement.

And those of us not in the majority tend to have to be creative (and at times downright rude) to get that access. Having those Congressional caucuses allows minority groups to focus on how we can better serve this government and how it can better serve us.

So I really don't take stock in Mr. Tancredo's complaints.

I am too busy trying to get what every American has a right to: what is mine.


So we don't forget what this is all about

A good friend of mine, Joe Brummer, wrote something today that I felt is worth repeating. I hope he will forgive me for adding a little bit more to it.

Just like Joe, my argument is not against America's Christian community. When I make references to the anti-gay industry, I am not referring to people of faith.

If someone believes according to their religious beliefs that homosexuality is a sin, then that is alright with me. I have friends who believe this, but yet they know of my orientation and show me no disrespect.

Nor do they feel the need to place ridiculous parameters on me in fear that just because I am gay, I am going to launch into an itemized list of my sexual happenings. They know me better than that and they have the presence of mind to know that being honest about my orientation is not the same thing as talking about sexual intercourse.

But there are a bunch of groups in this country who exploit the beliefs and egos of people of faith for political power. Using a standpoint that homosexuality is a sin, they rely on distortions of legitimate scientific work and junk science to influence public policy as it pertains to the gay community.

For that reason, they (i.e. Concerned Women for America, Focus on the Family, Traditional Values Coalition, American Family Association, etc) are the anti-gay industry.

Not only do they distort Christianity, but the common theme for these folks when they are caught in their lies is to claim that those who refute them are trying to "silence Christians."

One does not have to be a rocket scientist to know the difference between silencing someone and refuting someone's lies. No one should be given a free pass to influence public opinion and policy unchallenged. Especially if they:

refer to the studies of a discredited researcher as truth,

misuse the work of the legitimate researchers and physicians and ignore them when they complain, or

sell copies of a tape featuring a man who claimed to have been "freed from the bondage of homosexuality" when he was having sex in hotel rooms with gay men at the time he made the claim.

I personally don't want to shut up the anti-gay industry. By all means, keep talking. It makes the job of those trying to expose you easier.

Every day, I hear all of these strange things

For those who don't know, my title is the title of a gospel song I heard while growing up.

And it is so apropo as to what is going on now. I don't know what's worse: the gay sheep controversy or the Donnie Davies controversy.

That sheep thing is so out of space for me so I think I will talk about the Davies thing. I am guessing that I don't have to rehash it.

When I first saw the video, I was speechless.

If it was satire, then I think it's brilliant. If it was real, I felt sorry for the guy.

To tell the truth, I kinda felt sorry for myself. I'm ashamed to admit it, but the rhythm of his song was catchy. I guess I have seen too many of those I Can Only Imagine: Songs of Faith commericals.

But I would rather focus on something less controversial but more important:

We won another case.

Today, a federal judge sided with a school that suspended a student for wearing an anti-gay t-shirt to class.

If I am not incorrect, the Allied Defense Fund is handling the case so my guess is that it's not going to die yet. But still, after the Repent America victory, the judge ruling against the student is nice.

Now I know that some may have a problem because the first amendment, etc. etc., but I am rooting for the school in this matter.

Meanwhile, those "beloved" ex-gays from PFOX are taking advantage of the first amendment and getting schools to distribute their literature.

This has gotten some folks angry but others are saying it is their first amendment right to be able to distribute their mess.

I am on the fence a bit with this. Personally, I think that there is no first amendment right to pass on lies. No credible physician or medical board has ever said someone can change his or her orientation.

But no one really ever presents the fact that allowing PFOX to push their lies is like the school nurse advocating lobotomies for mentally troubled students.

On the other hand, I think that allowing PFOX to distribute their lies makes it more difficult for school districts to invent ways to not allow gay/straight alliances.

Also, from what I understand, the actions of PFOX are actually turning students against their message.

Well if your enemy cuts his own throat, don't try to stop him.

And this just in: Wayne Besen is filing a complaint with the Mississippi Attorney General against the American Family Association. The complaint stems from the organization selling copies of the video, "It's Not Gay."

As covered by this site and others, "It's Not Gay" features several individuals claiming that they are ex-gays, including Michael Johnston. However, after the creation of "It's Not Gay," it was discovered that Johnson was allegedly having unprotected sex with other gay men in hotel rooms, despite the fact that he is HIV positive.

Way to go Wayne!!!!!

Closer to the end and it feels so damned good!

I see that our friend Peter LaBarbera is complaining about yesterday's decision against Repent America. I also noticed that in his rehashing of the situation, he omitted several facts. If you want to know the true story, check my post yesterday and hit the link for the article.

But on a happier note, hopefully by this time next month, my manuscript will be at the publisher. To say that I am happy is an understatement. It's been a long, complicated process and I still have so much left to do before this book is finished to my satisfaction.

Through my book, I intend to answer the following questions:

Why does the Traditional Values Coalition continue to plagiarize incorrect studies?

Why did Concerned Women for American distort a Dutch study to make the case against same-sex marriage when the study had nothing to do with marriage?

Why does the Family Research Council simultaneously claim that Alfred Kinsey is not a credible research and use his work against the gay community?

Why have several physicians and researchers gone on record claiming that the religious right distorts their work? (and if you think I am only talking about the recent cases involving Carol Gilligan and Kyle Pruett, think again.)

What is the relationship between the religious right and a discredited researcher who once allegedly advocated the “extermination” of the gay community in 1983 and 1985?

How do the religious right distort credible sexual health information in order to demonize the gay community?

What were the facts behind the Repent America and David Parker controversies and how did the religious right manipulate both to make a case against gay equality?

I hope you all are excited about this as I am.

Where is Agape Press?

I don't know what's going on. First Robert Knight leaves Concerned Women for America and now this.

Agape Press, the American Family Association's tribute to yellow journalism, is gone.

But don't break out the champagne yet because it hasn't totally disappeared.

Agape Press seems to have been swallowed up by a new news service, One News Now.

One News Now claims to "to present the day's news from a Christian perspective." In other words, it's a one-stop shop for all right wing news services from World Net Daily to News Max.

To me, it sounds like what would happen if Freddy Krueger, Jason Voorhees, and Michael Myers decided to pool their efforts.

Take that, Repent America!

The anti-gay industry just lost a reason to denounce hate crimes legislation.

Today, in Pennsylvania, a federal judge ruled that the city of Philadelphia was well within its rights to arrest Repent America protestors who disrupted a gay pride parade in 2004.

I cover the Repent America controversy in my upcoming book as a case of how the anti-gay industry manipulates current events to claim that gays are out to "silence" Christians.

In this case, they claimed that Repent America members were arrested merely because they "preached the gospel" to the gay community. The anti-gay industry also said that this scenario (i.e. Christians arrested for speaking out against homosexuality) would be commonplace if hate crimes legislation was passed.

What Concerned Women for America, Agape Press, and others who cried foul over Repent America's arrest conveniently forgot was that the group was not arrested for preaching the gospel, but doing it in a loud, obnoxious, and threatening manner.

Luckily for us, the judge ruling against Repent America choose not to omit this fact.

Get off the cross, Peter!

It took some time, but our friend Peter LaBarbera has answered back to the charges that his group, Americans for Truth (AFT), had joined the American Family Assocation (AFA) in selling a fradulent video tape, "It's Not Gay."

For those who aren't aware, the video features an HIV positive man, Michael Johnston, who made claims that he was no longer gay. In 2003, after the making of the tape, it was discovered that Johnston was having unprotected gay sex.

This means that Johnston's claims were wrong. Since his discovery, Johnston fled the public eye, retreating to a ministry where he hoped to receive "help."

However, AFA is still selling copies of "It's Not Gay." Also, one can get to the AFA page selling the tape from a link on the AFT site. Neither site acknowledges Johnston's fall, even though both groups were aware of it at the time. Johnston, in fact, is on the cover of the "It's Not Gay" tape.

Gay activist Wayne Besen and others (little ole me included) have been making a stink about this. Wayne even filed a complaint with the state of Illinois, accusing AFT and AFA of selling a fradulent tape.

As to be expected, Peter's letter is a whiny, shrill claim that the "Gay Mafia" is trying to silence his positive message of "freedom from homosexuality."

In other words, Peter is trying to change the subject of the argument. For claritys' sake, I will try to simplify Peter's claims.

Besides his claims of martyrdom, LaBarbera says his group merely linked the tape on the AFA webpage to its webpage. He said Americans for Truth is not getting any money from the sale of the video. He also said:

American Family Association stopped selling “It’s Not Gay” in 2003, when Mike Johnston’s scandal was revealed, but began reselling it when they were convinced after meeting with Mike about the genuineness of his restoration through Pure Life Ministries (I spoke with two top AFA officials yesterday on this point)

First of all, it does not matter whether or not AFT gets any money from the sale of "It's Not Gay." By having a link for that video on its webpage, the organization is complicit with any sale of the video. After all, someone could get on the AFT site, see the video, click the link and purchase it from the AFA site.

Sounds like a sale to me.

And most importantly, Johnston is in the tape making claims that were not true. We know that Johnston claimed to be free from homosexuality. And we know that while he was making those claims, he was engaging in unprotected gay sex. All of that has been documented.

But how do we know if he has, as LaBarbera says, "repented?"

You see, that's the problem: Johnston has no credibility. No matter how many times he claims to have repented and no matter how many times he claims to be free from being gay, his past escapades make him unreliable. His hotel exploits are now the albatross around his neck.

And this also diminishes the credibility of AFA and AFT.

The selling of "It's Not Gay" was wrong. At the very least, it is highly unethical. AFA and AFT had a responsibility to inform any potential buyer of the tape about Johnston's fall. But they didn't. Claiming that it is okay to sell the tape because he "repented" just doesn't cut it.

Nor does it take away the fact that these two groups, by selling the tape as it was, pretended like nothing had happened. Something did happen. While claiming that he was not gay, Johnston was having gay sex and potentially sharing his HIV positive status to other men.

Peter's letter omitted any mention of those men. I guess to him, they don't matter.

But rest assured, Peter. I don't wish to shut down your voice or that of your organization. In fact, I encourage you to be even more generous with your opinions and claims.

After all, every time you open your mouth, you give away more of your ignorance.