A teachable moment in Kentucky

An anti-bias ordinance was recently passed in Jefferson County School Board in Kentucky. It was supposed to pass easily but ended up going through by one vote. And this is because of an interesting incident that took place during the hearing.

In speaking for the ordinance, Kat Crawford of Highland Middle School told of a situation where a person in her class said a derogatory comment about lgbts. According to Crawford, she talked to the young lady and told her how hurtful such comments could be. Possibly in attempting to prove her point further, Crawford came out to the young lady:

Crawford said she heard a girl tell other kids while on her way to scoliosis screening that "there are going to be lesbians working this," prompting snickers.

"I called the girl over and talked with her privately," Crawford told the board. "… I asked her what she said … and why she said it. I told her that I took offense to it (and said), 'How do you think that comment makes this lesbian feel?' "

Unfortunately, a board member used Crawford's story as an excuse to change her vote:

To me, that was the deal breaker," Linda Duncan said shortly after she voted against the policy.

"When I saw that this language could possibly protect those conversations, it was chilling to me. I could not support something (that) would put kids at risk," she said.

Duncan also said teachers "can't cross the line and discuss (their) sexual preference with a student -- it's just like religion, you can't take a moment and discuss it in school, it's not appropriate."

Unfortunately, others in the article also played the "teacher telling students their sexual preference" card. Luckily, there were folks who spoke to the media and told the difference between sexual orientation and sexual preference.

Personally, I am for the teacher. She had every right to do what she did. What if the student had said something negative about a certain religion that the teacher happened to be a believer in? It would have been totally appropriate for her to act in the same manner she did in this case.

But no one would be trying to accuse her of trying to "convert" the student, as they have in this case.

But I want to use the incident in order to play a game. I am going to pretend that I am Peter LaBarbera (I know, I am retching too) or some other anti-gay industry talking head. Taking that form, I am going turn this story into a series of talking points. After each talking point, I am going to point out the truth of the matter:

Anti-gay industry talking point 1 - The teacher was in the wrong because she talked about her sex life with the student.

Truth - No she did not. She did not mention anything regarding sexual activity to the student.

Anti-gay industry talking point 2 - The teacher embarrassed the student by calling her out simply because the student was giving her "deeply held religious beliefs" about homosexuality.

Truth - The student's comments had nothing to do with her religious beliefs.

Anti-gay industry talking point 3 - The student had a right to free speech.

Truth - The student had a right to free speech up to a point. Teachers and instructors have a responsibility to monitor the words of students in cases of profanity and derogatory language. The teacher was well within her rights to call the student out because the student's language was derogatory.

Anti-gay industry talking point 4 - The teacher should not be trying to force the student to accept homosexuality

Truth - The teacher was not trying to force the student to accept anything. She was simply telling the student that her language was hurtful, as was her responsibility as an instructor/teacher.

You see how the anti-gay industry works? That is why is it so important for us to know when incidents like this happen so that we can analyze how they distort the truth.

The point I was trying to make yesterday was . . .

I inadvertently failed to mention yesterday that exgaywatch.com was also one of the first to spot how the American Family Association is continuing to sell the fradulent video featuring Michael Johnston.

And I agree with the person who pointed this out when he said that it was old news.

That was the point of my post. Why is it old news? AFA was caught doing this in January and now, one day before December, they are still selling the fradulent video.

While it is true that the AFA have shown themselves to be liars, I still say they are getting away with it because those in our community with the power of the media hasn't pushed the issue.

Is our community so beaten down and blase about things like this that we have numbed ourselves to exposing liars?

Look at the One News Now site. While I totally disagree with what they stand for, I have to commend those who post comments on the site for their focus on the issues they feel are important.

When my post was mentioned on Americablog last night, some comments had nothing to do with the situation at hand. It is not funny when folks you are trying to reach don't seem to care.

Meanwhile, the fradulent AFA video continues to be sold at churches and venues unaware of Michael Johnston's history and deception.

That is the real story here.

American Family Association demonstrates the difference between winning and losing

I am in a better mood today and there is much to write about.

The Freepers are upset over a high school spirit week idea that has students dressing up as the opposite gender. They see it as a "plot by radical homosexuals" rather than good clean fun that is no different from a powderpuff football game.

In California, an anti-gay industry group has resurrected the image of the "cross dressing linebacker" in an attempt to defeat a pro-gay law.

But something on One News Now caught my attention.

As I perused the site, I saw one of their pop up ads. It was advertising the video "It's Not Gay." If you click on the ad, it will take you to this site.

For the benefit of those who are not aware of this controversial video, I will give a little background. It gives the testimonies of folks who have claimed to have "walked away from homosexuality." In fact, the cover of the video shows one of the people featured, Michael Johnston.

However, well after the video was made, Johnston was discovered to be having clandestine gay sexual encounters in hotel rooms. To compound this situation, Johnston is HIV positive. He has freely admitted his status as he traveled the country claiming to be "ex-gay."

Wayne Besen has taken the American Family Association to task for selling this fradulent video. He was the first to notice it. I have taken them to task. Several others have cried foul over the selling of this video.

When confronted with the truth behind the video, the American Family Association played the victim. But they pulled the video:

“It was with great sadness that AFA stopped selling It’s Not Gay at that time,” said AFA executive assistant Buddy Smith. “Michael remained a friend of ours, and we were so happy to hear that, following his fall, he had placed himself under the spiritual care of Steve Gallagher at Pure Life Ministries.”

Now it seems that they have snuck it back on the market. And why is Johnston still on the cover? How can they get away with this?

The answer may be something I saw today. I was looking through a gay magazine (I won't say which) that was commemorating the year 2007. It focused on the usual nonsense - celebrities, musicians, designers, parties, and clothing too damned expensive for me to buy.

Sometimes I wonder if we are focused as we should be.

The American Family Association has been selling a fradulent video even after they have been called on it simply because those in our community with enough power to bring attention to it don't give a shit.

I know our mindset seems to be focus on the positive and not think about the anti-gay industry, but to do so all the time is pure delusion. There are people and groups out there who are focused on stripping lgbts of our rights to life, health, and self determination. They want to put us in spiritual cages thereby making us define our lives by their ignorant definitions of homosexuality.
To ignore them is folly.

Or to put it another way, if our side had made such a blatant error, do you think that the anti-gay industry would ignore it?

Of course they wouldn't. They would harp on it every chance they got.

As we should in this situation. The American Family Association is knowingly selling a fradulent video and rather than ignore it, we need to bring it to public attention every chance we get.

It's called persistence and it is the difference between winning and losing.

A day with a 'radical gay activist' and his plan to take over America

It's such a slow news day today that our friend Peter LaBarbera is recycling news from a week ago.

As such, it's very slow with me also. Therefore, let me tell you about my day.

After being told yet again that my royalty check from the third quarter did not arrive in the mail, I called my publisher. I had to call back several times before reaching someone who directed me to the sales department.

Apparently everyone was buying books so they have a shitload of royalty checks to mail out.

I put on my best impression of Alexis from Dynasty (even wearing my imitation chinchilla coat while talking on the phone) and let the person from sales know that I am not happy with the situation. She assured me that all is well and that I will also know (hopefully by next week) how many copies of my book that wholesellers, such as amazon.com, have bought.

I know that my publishing company, Xlibris, is reputable. They are affiliated with Random House and have a profile with the Better Business Bureau. I also know how slow it can be when it comes to royalty checks and all.

However, I feel it is necessary to give them the "ole needle" every now and then.

After that long conversation, I was tempted to reward my diligence with a impulse purchase at Best Buy. I really shouldn't have but the purchase was the WWE Royal Rumble Collection Volume 1.

Apparently, a kindergarten class took a trip to Best Buy before I arrived because the DVDs were in disarray. The sales lady had to go in the back to get me a copy of what I wanted.

While waiting on her, I was tempted to buy a copy of the movie "Who's Your Caddy." I hear it has a long nudity scene with three guys.

Yes, I am so scandalous that I will buy a $19.99 movie just to see someone's ass. Sue me, I don't have a boyfriend.

After leaving Best Buy, I went to Piggly Wiggly and stood in line for almost half an hour while sister girlfriend in front of me attempted to cash her check. Meanwhile, there were two other lines backed up because of slack jawed cashiers who didn't know what they were doing.

By the way, the manager was present through all of this. Don't quote me on it, but I think he was trying to buy a bootleg copy of something or another.

I kinda wished the other manager was present. He usually doesn't deal with such nonsense. And he has a big butt.

Sue me already. I like big butts and I cannot lie.

After spending time in line for so long that I felt as if I died and was doomed to spend eternity in a Soul Plane like movie, my turn finally came.

And I came home without incident. And I still have to design a poster for my book signing on December 13 (more on that when I am in a better mood).

The good news throughout all of this is that my book is still the number one gay/lesbian nonfiction book on amazon.ca (amazon.com's Canadian site).

So why have I told you all this long story?

Just something to remember the next time someone like James Dobson or Peter LaBarbera mentions about how us lgbts are making plans and plots to "undermine" American values.

My day sounds insidious don't it?

Someone alert the FBI!

Dawn Stefanowicz's book: Homophobia defined

I saw this in One News Now:

A Christian woman from Canada has written a new book that details the trauma she suffered during her childhood as a result of her father's homosexual behavior.

Dawn Stefanowicz recounts her story of growing up in a homosexual home in Toronto, Canada, during the 1960s in Out from Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting (Annotation Press). Stefanowicz says she was prompted to write the book back in 2004 after testifying before a Canadian Senate committee against hate crime legislation and expressing public opposition to sexual diversity curriculum in her country's schools.

I have talked about Ms. Stefanowicz before. Now that her book is out, I will briefly refresh the situation. This is what I said in October 2006:

I don't know whether or not Ms. Stefanowicz is telling the truth. If she is, then my heart goes out to her. But I can't help but be suspicious about her and her motives. For one thing, she did not come virtually from nowhere.

In this article in Agape Press, she recounts her tale, but using the verbage the anti-gay industry uses against us: "According to Stefanowicz, the liberal media in Canada has done a 'very poor job' of presenting evidence on the influence the homosexual lifestyle has on children. 'Scientific data and negative personal experiences related to this issue that are obviously relevant -- they're ignored, they're not discussed,' she says."

And what studies are these? I noticed that on her personal webpage, she recounts her life. It is pretty much the same story she repeated in the August 2005 American Family Association Journal. But there is one difference.

Her American Family Association story contains endnotes and references to studies and columns by various so-called "pro family" groups and spokespeople including Family Research Council's Timothy Dailey (debunked on this and other sites), Stephen Bennett, and our friend Paul Cameron.

Frankly, my opinion of Ms. Stefanowicz has not changed. And part of me wants her to make the story of her alleged abuse more widespread. It would expose the distortive tactics of the anti-gay industry.

The anti-gay industry is always quick to portray themselves as simple Christians who are forced to speak out because of "radical homosexuals." They also claim that they are in the corner of the family unit.

But would One News Now have given a damn about Stefanowicz's story if her father wasn't gay? How many incidents of heterosexual parents abusing their children ever graced the pages of One News Now? I dare anyone to show me just one.

Many others have claimed that Ms. Stefanowicz's story is indicative of same-sex parenting, but is it?

I know of one gay male who became the adoptive parent of two young children. They proudly call him "daddy."

I also know of another who was selected as foster parent of the year.

And those are only two of the thousands upon thousands of lgbt parents raising children with love, support, and security.

But according to One News Now and others in the anti-gay industry, we should discount all of these parents.

According to the anti-gay industry, based on Ms Stefanowicz's childhood over 20 years ago, all of these examples of positive same-sex parenting are anamolies. Her one experience, which by the way has not been verified as far as I know, should be touted as the correct example of same-sex parenting?

No one should believe that ridiculous point of view.

However, a person who is inclined to believe the worst about lgbts would believe it, just like a racist would disavow the law-abiding African-Americans around him and focus on the one he may see in handcuffs.

I defy anyone to tell me the difference between the two prejudices.

Janet Folger predicts the future and it's a doozy

I hope everyone is having an excellent Thanksgiving holiday.

As for myself, I wanted to stay in bed and watch the Law and Order SVU, CI marathon on the USA Network, but I opted to visit relatives.

It was nice. They asked about my book and I told them. Later about that. Much, much later.

Anyway I ran across something written by anti-gay industry member Janet Folger. Folger has made a career with whining about how Christians are constantly victimized while at the same time seeing nothing wrong with Christians doing the persecuting.

This piece has to be considered as her magnum opus in hypocrisy and bullshit. It is a bastardized version of the legendary Michael Swift piece. Folger takes a different tact, however. According to her, the following is what could happen if Mike Huckabee isn't elected president.

I am posting the entire thing because it simply defies all attempts to describe it. Read it tongue in cheek because it is hilarious. And it just goes to show the hysterical mindset of many so-called "people of faith":

Letter from a future prisoner

To the Resistance:

I'm writing this letter from prison, where I've been since the beginning of 2010. Since Hillary was elected in '08, Christian persecution in America has gotten even worse than we predicted.

When the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" was signed into law, my radio program was yanked off the air along with all the others that dared discuss moral issues on Christian radio. The networks just couldn't bring themselves to air a pro-abortion program or one that advocates the homosexual agenda for the government mandated "balance" because broadcasting lies went against their basic beliefs – I don't blame them.

We knew "Thought Crimes" was in danger of becoming law back when it passed Congress in 2007, but thankfully, President Bush kept his promise to veto it. But, tragically, Hillary signed that most dangerous bill in America – ushering in the criminalization of Christianity. And now, even my book, "The Criminalization of Christianity," has been banned as "hate speech" just as I predicted when I wrote it back in 2005.

When the "Employment Non-Discrimination Act" ("Thought Crimes" for the Workplace) became law, businesses and ministries were targeted by homosexual activists and were forced to close when they wouldn't comply with a law forcing them to hire those opposed to their beliefs on moral issues.

When they canceled my program, banned my book and targeted my ministry, I knew it was only a matter of time before I'd be forced into "prison ministry" against my will. Unfortunately for our nation, that ministry is growing fast. A homeschooling mom was assigned the cell next to me. I try to comfort her, but she cries constantly at the thought of her kids being raised in government foster care.

The forced labor here makes me think that I should have done more for our brothers and sisters in China sent to labor camps for the crime of hosting a home church, or those imprisoned in every Muslim country for choosing Christ over Allah. We should have seen the writing on the wall when Yahoo turned over confidential searches to the Chinese government, sending people to prison, and when Google barred American Christian sites from its search engines as "haters." Finding allied ministries is now almost impossible.

Most didn't see it coming. I try not to think about how the 2009 "Freedom of Choice Act" wiped out every single pro-life law from parental notice to the ban on partial birth abortion. And how "anti-reproductive rights" was added to the "Thought Crime" statute, which, like California before the election, means a year in jail if someone claims to feel "intimidated" by anything a pro-lifer might do – like express their beliefs in public.

But, like the homeschool mom in the cell beside me, I cry too. I cry mostly because it didn't have to be this way. Just three years ago – in 2007 – we had a chance to unite and achieve our lifetime goals of restoring protection to children in the womb, and protecting our foundational relationship of marriage between a man and a woman. And now the suggestion of it is treated like the illegal mention of a "mom" or "dad" to the California School Board.

Martin Niemöller's words ring true. I see them with a modern twist:

When they came for the Chinese, I did not speak up because those slave-labor goods were so very cheap.

When they came for the Afghan and Iraqi Christians, I did not speak up because I didn't want to undermine the war effort.

When they came for the German homeschoolers, I didn't speak up because I live in America.

When they came for the Philadelphia 11, I didn't speak up, because I was from Cleveland.

When they came for me, speaking up had become illegal.

No, in 2007 and 2008, American Christians were so used to the status quo that they forgot we were in this to win. Compromised and divided, they choose to protest rather than protect.

When the Christian and conservative leaders couldn't stop fighting over their candidate of compromise or their favorite "tier two" pick, we missed our last chance at victory – victory for children facing the abortionists' knife and victory for the institution foundational to our society – marriage.

All the money in the world couldn't buy Mitt Romney's trust. And no one seemed to remember what Rudy Giuliani had said of the previous Clinton administration: "Most of Clinton's policies are similar to most of mine." Or how he praised the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, and offered up a citywide proclamation honoring the infamous racist eugenicist, whose organization has brutally killed more babies than any other in the Western Hemisphere.

Did they really think we would have a chance to beat Hillary with "Hillary-lite?"

There was a tier-one candidate that stood for our goals of life and marriage – that man was Gov. Mike Huckabee. Had we nominated Huckabee to run against Hillary, the stark difference between the two would have brought voters out in droves. And we never would have seen the Supreme Court appointments of Charles Schumer and Diane Feinstein. If only there were a way to go back in time to change … I've gotta go. The guard spotted me writing again.

I don't know about you all, but I am practically speechless. I do know one thing, however.

If I ever write a follow-up to Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, Janet Folger will be included.

She is eclipsing our other friend, Porno Petey, in hilarity.

Transgender Day of Remembrance

I would be remiss if I did not mention that today is Transgender Day of Remembrance.

As we remember the lives of our transgender brothers and sisters lost to violence, let us do all we can to make sure that we stop the ignorance and hatred that led to the loss of those precious lives.

Florida school to use 'expert testimony' in fight against gay/straight alliance

Some wild stuff is happening in Florida:

Attorneys for the Okeechobee County School Board plan to use experts who will testify about the "negative health effects of homosexual sex" in their fight to stop the Gay-Straight Alliance from meeting at Okeechobee High School.

. . . According to a summary . . . the school board plans to use four experts, who will testify on topics including:

"Negative health effects of homosexual sex."

"Serious consequences" of heterosexual teenage sexual activity, such as teen pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases and "poorer emotional health."

That "homosexuality lifestyle/relationships are appropriate topics beginning at college age."
The "need to prevent contact by underage students with adult-only material."

Attorneys for the school board have not shared the names of the experts.

In the first place, GSAs have nothing to do with sexual intercourse so this sounds like a ridiculous road that the school board is traveling.

Secondly, courts have consistently ruled for GSAs in cases such as this one, which will begin in June 2008. You see, there is a little something called the Federal Equal Access Act, that says if a school allows any student-initiated, non-curricular clubs to meet, it must allow all student-initiated, non-curricular clubs to meet.

So I really don't see why the school board is continuing with this case. Just allow the GSAs; it's easier and less expensive. And most importantly, there is nothing wrong with GSAs!

But I am interested as to who their "experts" will be and what testimony will they give.

But it really doesn't matter who the school district selects because I bet that the following lies will be used:

The distortion of the 1997 Canadian study to claim that gay men have a short life span. Never mind that the study had nothing to do with GSAs or the authors of the studies complained in 2001 about religious right distortion of their work

The distortion of the 1984-2000 Dutch study to talk about how "promiscuous" lgbts are. This study has nothing to do with GSAs or lgbt teens but no doubt the district's "experts won't disclose this fact to anyone.

Distortion of various studies that say lgbt teens have a problem with depression, drugs, and negative behaviors. The studies also attribute the at-risk behavior of the teens to a homophobic society; something that having a GSA could combat. No doubt the district's "experts" will conveniently omit this portion of the studies.

Various convenience sample and anecdotal citations from STD clinics that have nothing to do with GSAs.

Various convenience sample citations of lgbt sex partners that are neither indicative of the lgbt population at large or lgbt teens.

I have talked about these lies various times on this blog and in detail in my book.

When June 2008 rolls around, I will be watching the case with much interest to see if I am correct.

And I have a feeling that I may be.