Bad news, Good news

Before I start, let me point something out about the Jim Naugle situation.

Isn't it "convenient" that all of the so-called "pro-family" sites and blogs talking about the situation are omitting the comments of the area police. You know, the comments that say "gay public sex" is not a problem in Fort Lauderdale.

And isn't is also "convenient" that so-called Christians are using the issue to condemn homosexuality on the whole when the situation is about "gay public sex."

Just another example as to how the anti-gay industry (i.e. Janet Folger, Peter LaBarbera, One News Now, etc.) and their supporters are lying and distorting in the name of God.

Now onto my bad news, good news.

Bad news - My interview on the radio show The Agenda (that was supposed to take place on Monday) has been postponed to next month. Actually I don't see it as bad news. By next month, my book should be out.

Good news - and speaking of my book, my author's copy (my book in it's final form) came yesterday. It looks good! My mother looked at it and is afraid that I am going to get sued by the groups and persons I accuse of distortions.

I say let them try. I have proof of my charges.

Of course seeing that this is my first book, I am wary of looking at it too much for fear that I am going to find a HUGE grammatical error. After a few more books under my belt, I will have more confidence in my work.

The main fact of the matter is that my book should be out by next month and the anti-gay industry is going to have a lot of explaining to do.

And I am looking forward to that.

Jim Naugle returns (ugh)

Maybe Ft. Lauderdale Mayor Jim Naugle felt pushed to the side because of the San Diego firefighters lawsuit.

Or maybe he just likes looking like an idiot.

For whatever reason, yesterday, Naugle passed the threshold of nauseatingly annoying to being a complete moron when he held yet another press conference. And just like his last one, Naugle used this opportunity to rail against Florida's lgbt community.

And this time, he brought a posse, including John R. Diggs (author of the distorted study The Health Risks of Gay Sex) and Janet Folger (the wannabe 20th century version of Joan of Arc).

However we found out something new from this press conference. Apparently Naugle was using outdated studies (surprise, suprise) in his claims about AIDS in his area:

A health department official said some of the statistics used by the mayor are outdated.

For example, the county is no longer first in the nation in AIDS cases per 100,000 residents, said the official, AIDS surveilliance manager Pat Callahan Taylor.

Broward County does have an HIV/AIDS crisis, she said, and has had one for years. But it's not isolated to gay men.Black, heterosexual women make up a significant number of new HIV cases. Women make up a third of the 6,913 HIV cases diagnosed in Broward in the past 10 years."

I think it's really important when you're looking at the numbers to not just look at parts of it,'' said Taylor. "One of our favorite quotes is if you torture a statistic long enough, it will confess to anything. And I think that's what we've seen.''

But hey, why let a little thing like correct statistics stand in the way of getting into the kingdom of God. Naugle is obviously learning the tricks of the trade from Diggs and Folger.

The press conference left me confused. Is Naugle and company complaining about gay sex in public places (which area police continues to say is not a problem) or homosexuality in general.

I tend to think that they are intentionally distorting the issue. Naugle and company are doing this because they don't care about truth. As long as people come away with image of lgbts as disease ridden oversexed fiends, then their work is done.

And it's downright vulgar how they take a self righteous view of their own behavior:

"We are concerned of the moral fiber of this city,'' said Pastor Willie McBride, of the Lauderdale Christian Center in Plantation. " ... We have no hatred in our hearts toward you,'' he said. "When I lie, steal or cheat, God doesn't start hating me. But he hates the act.''

Meanwhile, expect a bunch of positive press to come Naugle's way from the anti-gay industry media machine.

Our friend Peter LaBarbera and his group, Americans for Truth (in name only) have been practically stewing in their own juices over the press conference. LaBarbera in particular describes Naugle's public sojourn as if it's the Second Coming complete with Gabriel blowing his horn and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse in tow.

Of course One News Now has a very biased view of the situation:

The mayor of Fort Lauderdale is standing firm in his conservative beliefs, despite being hammered in the press and by homosexual activists. For one thing, they don't like the fact that the mayor plans to crack down on illegal sexual activity in public.

And at Florida Baptist Witness, there is this bit from Executive Editor James A. Smith, Sr.:

Fort Lauderdale Mayor Jim Naugle happens to believe that sex acts should not be permitted in his city's public restrooms. For that "bigoted" belief and others that have offended South Florida's—indeed, the nation's—homosexual lobby, Naugle is under intense criticism, including protest rallies, a recall effort and the scorn of Broward County elected officials.

I say, thank you, Mayor Naugle.

Of course both pieces makes it seem as if Ft. Lauderdale's lgbt community is angry at Naugle because of his "stand against public sex." Neither piece has any quotes or comments from Ft Lauderdale's lgbt community.

And neither piece has any comments from the area police who (and I repeat) have said again and again that public gay sex is not a problem in Ft. Lauderdale.

Let me state again that the anger over Naugle's behavior is not a defense of any type of public sex.

Ft. Lauderdale's lgbt community and many others (myself included) are angry because Naugle is using a moral panic to demonize an innocent community of people.

His eagerness to pander to ignorance and stereotypes is not the behavior of a decent human being, much less an elected official.

Naugle is a demagogue, pure and simple. He is a vile, media obsessed monster no different than any other figure in history who used religion to control people or torture innocents for their own sadistic purposes.

Sooner or later, if he hasn't already, Naugle is going to overplay his hand.

And I hope to be here to record it.

The Magical and Mystical World of Kevin McCullough

My ennui is over and I owe thanks to conservative columnist Kevin McCullough.

You will remember that yesterday, I talked about how he distorted a quote from National Gay and Lesbian Task Force spokeswoman Roberta Sklar as well as the article from which the quote was derived to yet again denigrate the lgbt community.

Last night, I emailed him regarding his distortions. The following email exchange took place last night and this morning:

Email exchange 1:

Me:

mr. mccullough,

regardless of what those bloggers did say, you clearly misrepresented sklar's quote and the article it came from. She and the article was talking about bisexual women, not gays and lesbians.

despite what you may think, there is a difference between those orientations. I just wanted to bring that to your attention.

Kevin McCullough:

Listen A - or Charle - or whoever you are...

Reread the first line of my column. I clearly disclose that the context of the comments came from just such a piece. SO I clearly did not misrepresent anything... unless you folks are just so willing to lie that no matter what is on the page in front of you - you are going to say something other than that.

Please...

Email Exchange 2:

Me:

On the risk of going back and forth, you still distorted the piece and the quote. While you may have made clear the name of the article in terms of it being about bisexuality, you used the article to castigate gays and lesbians:

"For the past thirty years radical homosexual activists have sought out a way to justify their desires and behaviors beyond pure human choice. And by all measure they have been quite effective - at least in moving public opinion - though they've made little headway on fact. They have sought from science a biological explanation of their sexual behavior. They have sought to find medical, genetic, even DNA related origins. These searches have been in vain as there is still no biological, genetic, or cellular explanation for their sexually related behaviors."

Mr. McCullough, the article was about bisexual females, not homosexuality.The only thing you accomplished by naming the article was not only using an unrelated source to castigate gays and lesbians, but also letting everyone know how unashamed you are about committing such a blatant distortion.

a.m.

p.s. i am not one of those who will speculate on your orienation. I don't care about that. But I do care about how you distort and misrepresent the lives of lgbts.

Kevin McCullough:

A M,

Or whoever you are.

Proper credit was given. None of the woman's words were taken out of context.

And for women to engage in "bisexual" acts/relationships - MEANS that they are dabbling in homo-erotic behavior. The same behavior that is used to identify homosexuals.

You want to strain at gnats. The only defining point of homosexuals or heterosexuals - (and there is nothing else) - is who they choose to engage, fantasize about engaging, or desire to engage sexually with.

Since most gay men - have had sexual interaction with women. (look it up) And many gay women have interacted sexually with me (sic - I think this was an error on his part) the distinction between purely homosexual and purely heterosexual is almost never 100% true.

Hence - it IS a choice. Hence my point in the column. Hence the fact that I did not misrepresent any aspect of what the woman was saying.

She's the one that said more or less flatly that young women's sexual choices today are "fluid" "not fixed" etc. etc. - meaning THEY CHOOSE.

As do we all.

Because you choose not to hear the larger truth that she accidentally communicated - you've turned the issue on to me saying I distorted what she said.

Which I didn't.

I quoted her exactly. I referenced the fact that it was lifted from a piece that was on bisexuality.

And every one of the points I made was valid. For you to attempt to discredit them because you don't like the outcome is not my concern.

The facts do not lie, and did not change.

Only your desire to see them for something other than what they were.

Best,
~KMC

For the record, Mr. McCullough did distort Sklar's comment. He "magically" found proof that Sklar revealed that being gay is a choice. She was not commenting about being gay or lesbian, but a specific subset of the bisexual community. The article here bears that up.

Apparently Mr. McCullough not only felt he was correct using the article to generalize, he also felt there was nothing wrong with continuing to generalize about gay men in his letter to me (the article in question never even talked about gay men) .

Apparently, being gay and bisexual is the same thing to Mr. McCullough.

He sounds like Paul Cameron.

I posted the email exchange because I wanted to point something out. McCullough's behavior regarding his distorted column is indicative of the anti-gay industry.

Groups like Concerned Women for America, Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, and others manufacture ideas and "truths about the lgbt community. And when they are challenged on it, they either engage in verbal jousting to comb over their behavior or jump on the mantle of martyrdom and complain about how they are being "persecuted" because of their religious beliefs.

No doubt, Mr. McCullough is carving his cross even as I speak.

It's a sad mindset.

It's the same mindset that leads Florida Mayor Jim Naugle to rail against "gay public sex" despite the fact that area police have said it is not a problem in their area.

It's that same mindset that leads so many to claim that hate crimes protection for lgbts will lead to the persecution of pastors even though the law strictly forbids this to happen.

It's the same mindet that led the American Family Association to continue to sell a tape featuring "ex-gays" even though one of the men featured continued to have gay sex in hotel rooms.

And it's the same mindset that keeps Paul Cameron churning out lie after lie about the lgbt community.

In the long run McCullough and company will not be hurting us but themselves. More to the point, by stooping to misrepresentation and lies, they are hurting the integrity of Christianity.

Maybe that is the reason why Jesus wept. If I had "followers" like McCullough and company, I would cry too.

This has never happened before but . . .

In over 240 posts, I have never had this problem. But for some reason, today is different.

I have nothing to write about.

It's not that there is nothing to comment on. The anti-gay industry misrepresents our lives on a daily basis so there is always something new to point out.

I guess I am a little burnt out.

With my daily job combined with my nightly posting and getting everything ready for my upcoming book, I find myself stretched to the limit.

However, I have a feeling that I am speaking too soon.

No doubt while I rest my nerves, one of our friends in the anti-gay industry (i.e.Matt Barber, Janet Folger, Peter LaBarbera or whomever else) will say do something so absolutely reckless that it will shake me from this momentary ennui (if I am using that word wrong, don't tell me).

Meanwhile, I do want to make everyone aware of this interesting bit I read from an online friend:

Conservative columnist and master of the outrageous, unsubstantiated comment (one of which helps to form the hypothesis of my book) Kevin McCullough wrote a column this weekend claiming that gays are admitting that our orientation is a choice.

The basis of his column was a comment from National Gay and Lesbian Task Force's Roberta Sklar:

"These young women see sexuality as a fluid thing," said National Gay and Lesbian Task Force spokeswoman Roberta Sklar. "It's not just between your legs. These relationships are physical, emotional and intellectual, and the boundaries are not hard set," she said. Sklar said a growing number of young women have a "more flexible view" of their sexual partners, and their early choices of gender may not be a "fixed path."

"I know a woman who had relationships of depth with members of both sexes," said Sklar. "She didn't put a tag on what her sexuality identity was. Recently, I saw her at her wedding to a young, lovely man. In no way does she deny her history or say she has found her true sexuality. It was all her true sexuality

However, in a standard anti-gay industry propaganda technique, McCullough distorted her comment.

Sklar was talking about bisexuals, not gays and lesbians:

But here's the key ingredient that Mr. McCullough annoyingly, conveniently overlooks: Ms. Sklar and the ENTIRE ABC NEWS PIECE are speaking specifically about one particular sect of the population. In fact, the subject of the article is one particular subset of not just the human population, but of the bisexual population. Ms. Sklar is talking about those young women who clearly have some sort of an internal attraction to other women, but who reject the traditional labels that would try and define them as "bisexual." It is no more reasoned to use these women to represent the entire LGBT rainbow than it is to use them to represent the entire spectrum of femininity!

Business as usual indeed.

More lies about hate crimes protection courtesy of black folks

The lie about hate crimes legislation causing ministers to be arrested for preaching against homosexuality seems to be gaining traction in the communities of some black ministers:

The Memphis Baptist Ministerial Alliance is angry at U.S. Representative Steve Cohen for supporting the bill. They sent him a letter that reads in part:

"The Memphis Baptist Ministerial Association stands in total opposition to any legislation that will silence or restrict freedom of speech on the part of the churches. It is our belief that the new Hate Crime Bill is a subtle attempt on the part of the gay community to further legitimize itself as an acceptable lifestyle."

This is the latest salvo in a back and forth between Representative Cohen and black ministers in his area regarding hate crimes legislation. And every time, Cohen has assured the ministers that the legislation does not affect them being able to preach against homosexuality. This time is no different:

"... The legislation does nothing to inhibit the free speech of ministers,'' Cohen said in his statement, emphasizing that he supported the bill after consulting with the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, the Urban League, legal and judicial experts and the various religious groups.

"I can understand the ministers wanting to ensure that their First Amendment rights remain untouched. Having always been a champion of free speech, I appreciate their diligence. However, I will continue to assure the BMA that infringement upon their ability to preach or speak is neither the intent nor the reality of the legislation, which only extends to acts of violence, not to speech. I will always be opposed to violence against anyone based upon race, color, national origin, or sexual orientation.''

I also noticed in their letter that the ministers revisited the unfortunate death of Matthew Shephard. They are claiming that Shephard's death was a drug deal gone wrong.

The ministers are not the only ones making this claim. The following is from today's issue of One News Now:

The murder, in fact, occurred during "somewhat of a drug deal that went bad," Deo claims. "It involves basically an issue of drugs ... and that's why you had that horrendous crime," states (Len Deo) the Family Policy Council spokesman.

I have even seen Minister Harry Jackson make that claim.

It comes from a 2004 report on the ABC show 20/20. The episode claimed to shed new details on the murder of Shephard.

And what were those new details? They were the unsubstantiated words of Shephard's murderers and a woman who was an accesory to the crime. They made the claim that Shephard's murder was a drug deal and robbery gone wrong. Bear in mind that there was no proof that this was the case and their claims contradicted what they all said in 1999.

The report boiled down to mere hearsay that added nothing to the case.

But it did provide an anchor for the anti-gay industry to claim that Shephard's murder was not a hate crime.

Now ordinarily, who would believe the words of murderers, especially when their statements contradict earlier testimony?

I guess when you are trying to "fight the evils of homosexuality," you can make those leaps of logic.

The Joy of Being a Parent

Apparently our friend Peter and the folks at Americans for Truth (in name only) are having a sparse week.

The crux of their comments today seems to be against lesbian actress Sara Gilbert and her newborn child:

One of the more irritating things about Politically Correct culture is when the media pretend that abnormal is normal — and then expect the rest of us to play along. That’s sort of what being PC is all about, right? Nobody can judge anything — except the “judgers” (that would be us “religious right” folks). It’s perfectly OK for liberals and homosexual activists to slam us because, well, we’re so intolerant of things like Hollywood stars intentionally creating fatherless households and becoming lesbian “mommy” role models who are going to confuse the heck out of these children who, through no fault of their own, are now part of some bizarre social experiment called “same-sex parenting.”

It always amazes and irritates me when those who oppose lgbts expect us to govern our lives in accordance to their bullshit.

Peter further says:

We yearn for the good old days when lesbian radicals railed against “patriarchal” marriage and family, mocked “breeders” (heterosexuals with kiddos), and said the great thing about being a lesbian was that you didn’t have to reproduce.

I have no idea where Peter is coming from with this outrageous train of thought but here is what I do know:

The responsibility of being a parent should be available to those who have the maturity and means to have children. The desire to raise and nurture a child is something that is ingrained in all of us, regardless of sexual orientation.

In fact, despite the anti-gay industry's semantics of lies of gays raising children being an "untested social experiment," we are raising children at a high number. In fact over 300,000 of use are raising children in this country even as we speak.

This column is not to debase the importance of fathers or mothers or two parent homes. This coumn is to point out the reality of the sitaution.

The fact of the matter is that while two-parent mother and father home may be the desire for some, it is not the reality for many. Families encompass a wide defintion because there are many versions of family.

There are homes with a mother and father, grandparents, single mothers, single fathers, relatives and yes, even lgbts.

All of these families are valuable and all offer some form of love AND support.

Rather than chasing an Ozzie and Harriet image across the desert, Peter and his cohorts would do themselves well to support all families rather than just the ones fitting their definition.

In that way, they would be truly "pro-family," for a change.

My first radio interview!!

I am very pleased to announce that on Monday August 27, I will be appearing on The Agenda on XM Satellite Radio 120.

I will be discussing my upcoming book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry.

Naturally I am excited and a little fearful. I am sure that last emotion will pass. And I am hoping that this interview will be the first in a long line of many.

When and How to Listen

Live Monday evenings from 6 - 8 p.m. eastern on XM Live channel 120

Rebroadcast Tuesdays from 4 a.m. - 6 a.m. eastern and Sundays 6 p.m. - 8 p.m. eastern on Take 5 channel 155

Saturdays from 12 p.m. - 2 p.m. eastern on Air America channel 133

Online24/7 on XM Online channel 134(New show posted at 10 p.m. eastern every Monday evening)

Also, I have a new webpage.

Stay tuned for more announcements.

Slowly but sure, it is all coming together.