How to write an anti-gay tract courtesy of Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle Bulletin is a highly useful site that doesn't get all of the props it deserves.

From a complete listing and refutation of Paul Cameron's lies to a break down of how the religious right distorts legitimate studies, Box Turtle Bulletin should be required viewing for all those interested in countering religious right lies.

I ran across something from the site that I think needs more attention.

You ever notice how almost all anti-gay tracts and talking points seem to have the same theme to them? And also how people with no credentials (i.e. Peter LaBarbera, Laurie Higgins, Linda Harvey, Matt Barber) can suddenly be considered "experts" on sexual orientation?

You too can become an "expert" on sexual orientation by following Box Turtle Bulletin's How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps

People should not only read this report, but study it for future reference.

But allow me to break down its main points:

Step 1: Set the stage

Step 2: Talk about sex. A lot.

Step 3: Use plenty of references.

Step 4: Cite authoritative sources, such as national probability-sampled surveys or governmental statistics.

Step 5: Slip in other less reliable “random” surveys.

Step 6: Cite casual surveys.

Step 7: Add behavioral statistics using convenience samples from clinical research, especially STD/AIDS and other medical studies.

Step 8: Manipulate the data.

Step 9: Use your opponents’ words and actions against them.

Step 10: Get really kinky.

Step 11: Cite a threat to marriage and the family.

Step 12: Cite a threat to health.

Step 13: Cite a threat to children.

Step 14: Cite a threat of a societal breakdown.

Step 15: Close on a compassionate note.

Oh sure, there is so much more you can do once you put your imagination to work. There are rhetorical flourishes to explore, strawman arguments to knock down, red herrings to catch and release. You can add guilt by association, urban myths (gerbils anyone?), religious condemnations — these and more, depending on the audience you’re trying to reach. With a little work and creativity, you too can become an “authority” on just about anything.

I tell you, it's easier than baking a cake!

Black History Month - did you think that I would forget

First Michael Phelps, now Christian Bale.

Somedays I am so glad that I'm not famous. You can't get away with anything these days with all of the cellphones and the like that tape your every move.

Somewhere, George Orwell must be laughing his head off.

Anyway, February is Black History Month so rather than dividing identities (which is done so often, unfortunately), I want to take this time to demonstrate just how the lgbt and African-American identities intersect by spotlighting key lgbt of color figures.

You can see a list of figures on the right of this blog, but with this list, I'm adding more detail:

Paul Winfield - Oscar nominee and Emmy award winning actor who portrayed Martin Luther King, Jr. in a 1970s miniseries. Amongst other things, had a successful 30-year relationship with his partner, Charles Gillan, Jr. - something you aren't allowed to hear about when it comes to lgbts of color and relationships.

Barbara Jordan - Congresswoman from Texas from 1973-1979, proving that sometimes good things do come to Washington from Texas. If it weren't for bad health, she would have been the first African-American female and lesbian U.S. Supreme Court Justice. She wasn't open about her orientation but who can blame her with how things were back then? Had a successful 20-year relationship with her partner, Nancy Earl.

Peter J. Gomes - Harvard theologian and author of The Good Book. When people say that there are no visible lgbts of color, Gomes's presence serves as a reminder of just how lazy they are. Visible lgbts of color are out there - you just have to look for them (i.e. that message is for you, BET, Ebony, and Essence magazines).

Wanda Sykes - I've liked Ms. Sykes since the Chris Rock Show and even through the debacle of her own show. Funny though, I haven't heard anything else about her since she came out. Where is the Advocate, if not Ebony. Proof yet again of selective visibility.

Opposing a public official simply because he is gay? Come on guys, you gotta do better than that

It turns out that the man selected to be chief executive of Chicago's public school system is gay.

Pam's House Blend has an excellent breakdown of the article talking about him:

New Chicago Public Schools CEO Ron Huberman has now come out in a profile published in the Chicago Sun-Times. Here is some of the biography:

"Huberman was born in Israel to a family with Holocaust survivors on both sides. When he was 5, his family moved from Israel to Oak Ridge, Tenn., where his father, a scientist specializing in cancer research and cell mutation, took a research job. Seven years later, an offer at Argonne National Laboratories brought the family to La Grange.

At 15, while attending Lyons Township High School, Huberman made a declaration that, at first, was difficult for his parents to accept: He's gay.

"It's always difficult for kids. It was difficult for my parents at first. But they've become very accepting and very supportive," said Huberman, who lives with a partner who's a friend from college. They reconnected four years ago.

The question was inferred as to how long will it be before we will be hearing from the religious right ala phony gay expert Peter LaBarbera and phonier gay expert Laurie Higgins.

The answer is not long:

Chicago Public Schools New CEO Ron Huberman Openly Embraces Homosexual Immorality

I won't even try to recap this piece because the gist of it is short: LaBarbera and Higgins oppose Huberman simply because he is gay.

That's it.

No talk about Huberman breaking the law or engaging in impropriety of any kind. Just a lot of hypothetics backed up by the usual anti-gay nonsense (yadda yadda sexual deviancy, yadda yadda homosexuality being a dangerous lifestyle).

And it strikes me as sad. Someone's personal religious beliefs should have nothing to do with another person receiving a job. You believe homosexuality is a sin? Fine. But that is your belief and it shouldn't dictate whether someone is employed or not.

Huberman should be judged on his credentials, not his orientation. However in all fairness, I think his orientation is a plus. It's a tremendous psychological boost for lgbt children to know that he exists. He could be seen as a role model for a community of folks ( i.e. lgbt youth) who need to see some positive visibility.

But I doubt that his orientation was why he was hired. And it's not a good reason to oppose his hiring.

What's difference between opposing Huberman because he is gay and opposing him if he happened to be African-American?

Before you launch into some ridiculous argument about black people "not being to able to choose their skin color," how about if I put it a different way.

What is the difference between opposing Huberman because he is gay and opposing him because he is Jewish or Catholic, or even Southern Baptist? After all, isn't religion a choice?

There is no difference. All of these options are equally wrong.

Opposing the hiring of someone simply because they are gay is no different than opposing someone because of his/her race or religion.

And none of that sort of thinking should be allowed to dictate anything in this country.

(Forgive me if you think this piece is a bit simplistic, but sometimes you have to dismiss flowery prose and break things down to the basics.)

News briefs

Businessmen, lawyers and Church in challenge to gay adoption - Some ugly chicanery across the seas. I hate to see children caught in the middle of this. Hopefully it will work out.

Obama seeks assessment on gays in military - An outright executive order here would be disastrous, galvanizing the opposition and giving Elaine Donnelly some undeserved credibility. President Obama is doing the right thing by moving slow.

Steele: GOP should reach out to supporters of gay rights, abortion - I'll believe this when I see Matt Barber french kiss Micheangelo Signorile.

Bill would allow concealed guns in Arkansas churches - Perfect example of how Christianity is going down hill in this country. Who in their right mind would consider a law like this? My pastor would sit those lawmakers down and ask them where is their faith that God will protect them from all harm? Speaking of my church (yes I do attend church from time to time), we are having something quite opposite in which we encourage people to surrender their guns.

Monday after the Superbowl - news briefs for now

The Superbowl is over and my Steelers are champs again.

Yaaaay!

Of course I'm depressed that it seems everyone involved in the victory is younger than me (Coach Tomlin included.)

I'll just console myself with the fact that I'm prettier.

Seriously though, since things are moving slow, I thought I would throw out a few news briefs you may or not have heard about:

SC House leader scolds tourism agency head - As a board member of the South Carolina Pride Movement, I was in the middle of that controversy in which our state officials demonstrated just how scared they get at the mention of the word "gay." Now the controversy pops up again briefly in state budget talks. Rather than repeat known information about just how stupid the situation was, I would rather give huge props to Representative Gilda Cobb-Hunter for saying what should have been said by a state official when the madness took place.

Mormon church lists more Proposition 8 expenses - The religious right has tried to spin the tale of the Mormon church a victims of "radical homosexuals" due its spearheading of the pro-Proposition 8 vote. While I do not agree with some of the tactics that some of my fellow lgbts have engaged in, let's not forget the big picture. The Mormon church acted irresponsibly, unethically, and possibly illegal in their attack against marriage equality in California. The Mormon church is NOT the victim here.

Obama nominates homosexual activist for high federal post - brought to you by One News Now where every lgbt in a public position is a "homosexual activist."

Mayor won't vote for same sex marriage resolution - I just had to add this. Huge kudos to this mayor . . . for now.

Getting past awareness and totally into exhibitionism

Peter LaBarbera is a strange dude. And it's getting to the point where I can no be in shock at his tactics because they crack me up so much.

Take for example, his again attacking the Gay and Lesbian Task Force on whom they give their Leather Leadership Award to:

The Task Force presented Graylin Thornton, the co-owner of a company that sells homosexual porn videos, with its “leather” award at Creating Change, an annual conference for grassroots activists advocating the following sexual misbehaviors: male homosexuality; lesbianism; bisexuality; transsexuality; sadomasochism and other fetishes; prostitutes (”sex workers”); and “polyamory/nonmonogamy” (multiple-partner and open relationships).

Thornton runs Grey Rose Video Productions, which states on its website: “As active members of the BEAR, LEATHER, and AFRICAN AMERICAN communities, both Graylin and [business partner Chris Meister] are dedicated to continuing a standard of excellence in the production of videos featuring the hot, hung, hunky and hairy ‘real men’ that represent those communities.”

LaBarbera is trying to recreate a mess he nearly started with last year's Creating Change conference. Last year, he said that the Gay and Lesbian Task Force was presenting its “Leather Leadership Award” to Guy Baldwin, an advocate of “erotic” and “consensual slavery.”

His angle at that time was attacking the Democratic Party for donating to this conference. LaBarbera claimed that they advocated slavery.

Ironically his angle backfired when Rush Limbaugh picked up the story and, with his usual omission of truth, said that the entire Creating Change conference was a S&M event.

Hugely embarrassing, not for the Gay and Lesbian Task Force, but for LaBarbera.

But like a trooper, he soldiers on in another attempt to slur Creating Change.

For the record, Creating Change is the one and only time each year that more than 2,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights advocates from every corner of the country converge to strategize, socialize and mobilize for LGBT equality.It features top-level trainings, workshops, networking sessions and action-planning with our movement’s best thinkers and brightest innovators — oh yeah, there’s also tons of opportunities for socializing, meeting up with old friends and making lots of new ones.

It's funny and infuriating at the same time how LaBarbera tries to pick out one thing and brand the entire conference as some sex session. So I guess that every year, we can count on LaBarbera going through the Creating Change brochure and picking out things he can exploit and misrepresent.

He manipulates workshops to make it look as if lgbts are not only engaging in madness, but are trying to "indoctrinate children."

But anyone wanting to see an actual version of the workshops taking place (without LaBarbera's commentary) can go here.

Also, about the awards, Creating Change gives them to a wide variety of people. The list includes former South African President Nelson Mandela, Mrs. Coretta Scott King, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Ted Kennedy, former Sens. Carol Moseley Braun and Tom Daschle, Bishop Gene Robinson, film producer Bruce Cohen, actors Wilson Cruz, Alec Mapa, Sir Ian McKellan and Mathew St. Patrick, comedian Margaret Cho, and the Indigo Girls.

What is so comical is how Peter tries to play on the shock about the award given to Thornton. On his webpage are pictures of the videos coming from Thornton's company.

Now I have to ask, was those pictures necessary, especially that last one?

I am not a psychoanalyst but I really don't think posting those pictures weren't for anyone's benefit but his own.

Take what you can out of that statement.

The entire nonsense over last year's conference is here, particularly in the Feb. 8 and 11th entries.

Possible appeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell attacked . . . by a former gay porn star

And now we have reached the realm of ridiculousness.

President Obama's pledge to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the policy that deals with gays in the military, has received much praise from some corners and much criticism from others.

But the criticism he received this week puts everything in Rod Serling territory.

From Fox Forum:

The repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) would force the United States military to accept the future same-sex marriages of those serving. Activists would use this federal recognition of gay marriage in the military to challenge and force a repeal of state constitutional amendments, but wedding bells are not the only reason why gay advocates and military officials should not be heading to the altar.

A 2008 Military Times poll of members of the armed forces found that the troops were opposed to the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell by a margin of 2 to 1.

The queer thing about Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is that President Bill Clinton mandated the policy after numerous campaign promises to the Clinton lesbian, gay and transgender constituency. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was designed to protect those who serve and participate in the LGBT lifestyle against unfair prosecution from their superiors.

Never mind that the Military Times poll was said to have been sloppy and biased (Participants in the survey were drawn from a volunteer pool of readers to the 'Military Times', instead of a random sampling of active duty personnel) because I am concerned with the author of this column - Matt Sanchez.

For the benefit of those who don't know, Sanchez served as a Marine reservist. He also used to be involved in gay porn under the names Pierre LaBranche and Rod Majors.

So from gay porn star to War Correspondent and Political Commentator. I guess anyone can achieve anything in America.

The entire thing confuses me. I liked it better when Elaine Donnelly was spinning tales black lesbians raping white service women.

As I understand it, Sanchez considers himself straight. That being the case, the evil side of me is just itching to make a bad joke.

What the hell:

Sanchez's very appearance more than proves that gays in the military isn't a bad idea. He is proof that all of us can put our sexual orientation aside when we have a job to do, whether that job be defending our country or sucking (shut your mouth)!

How anti-gay campaigns start

The Queer-Straight Alliance in East Chapel Hill High School (North Carolina) recently held an assembly that students were allegedly required to attend.

In doing so, they may have violated school policy:

The principal of East Chapel Hill High School said a gay-awareness club and its advisers violated school policy Wednesday by holding an assembly that hundreds of English students were required to attend.

Principal David Thaden said in an interview Thursday that he was unaware of the assembly, which was held several times during the day.

Thaden said he planned to talk with the teachers who work with the Queer-Straight Alliance and also the English teachers who brought their students to the assemblies.

Thaden said that any assembly involving material that is not part of the school curriculum must be approved by the administration, and this was not.

All of the details of this incident isn't known and for the record, only three parents complained. But if this does pan out the way it looks, simple reprimands are in order.

But from the comments under the article (some of which are proving the need for such an assembly), someone is already pushing for the Allied Defense Fund to be called in. And we know how they can exploit a situation like this.

How long will it be before One News Now or our friend Peter LaBarbera comes out with a one-sided article about the incident? How long will be before they inaccurately frame this incident as a "plot to indoctrinate children into the gay agenda?"

Or Bill O'Reilly to feature a biased news piece on the incident complete with his foaming at the mouth commentary and interruptions?

Or Michelle Malkin to write a nasty diatribe about the incident?

Or Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, the Liberty Counsel, or any of those other phony "pro-family" groups to start sending out press releases or making videos exploiting this incident in attempts to beat back gay-straight alliances nationwide.

I don't know what's worse: the possibility that this incident may be blown out of proportion or the knowledge that none of these folks would make a peep if the situation had to do with an lgbt child getting bashed.