Matt Barber repeats the lie about Matthew Shepard

Gay columnist Andrew Sullivan does not agree with hate crimes legislation.

Sullivan's criticism of hate crimes legislation is not surprising. He is a conservative who from time to time criticizes the so-called leftwing intelligensia of the gay rights movement.

Sullivan's criticisms shouldn't be viewed as some out of the ordinary event because the lgbt community is not monolithic. However in the eyes of the religious right and their supporters, where conspiracy theories about the lgbt community are rampant, anything that gives the impression that a gay person is "rebelling" against the so-called lgbt group think is treated like Arlen Spector defecting from the Republican party. Liberty Counsel's Matt Barber (and One News Now) is treating Sullivan's comments like some incredible revelation:

A surprising revelation from a homosexual activist over the purpose of the "hate crimes" bill is drawing kudos from at least one pro-family spokesman.

The activist is Andrew Sullivan, one of the movers and shakers in the international homosexual movement. "The real reason for hate crime laws is not the defense of human beings from crime. There are already laws against that," Sullivan writes on his blog, "and Matthew Shepard's murderers were successfully prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law in a state with no hate crimes law at the time."

. . . "He is to be commended for his candor," says (Matt) Barber. "He has admitted publicly now that the hate crimes bill...is, among other things, simply a money-making scheme drummed up by the organized homosexualist lobby."

S. 909 is called the Matthew Shepard Act to honor a young homosexual man who was tortured and killed in 1998 not because of his sexual orientation, but during the course of a robbery. As Barber notes, the murder has been used as a money-raiser, too.

"Andrew Sullivan points this irony out and points out how ridiculous it is that they are using [Shepard's] name, exploiting this poor young man's horrible death to try to push a money-making scheme...a social ponzi scheme," says Barber.

For the record, while Sullivan speaks out against hate crimes legislation, at no time did he give an impression that the lgbt community is falsely exploiting Matthew Shepard's murder.

While I find it funny that the religious right are designating who our leaders are, I am also offended by this constant repeition of the inaccurate talking point that Shepard's murder was not due to his sexual orientation. It has been proven consistently time and time again that Shepard's killers targeted him because he was gay.

Barber and company continue to refer a highly criticized episode of ABC's 20/20 that merely speculated other motivations behind Shepard's murder. The episode changed nothing because it proved nothing.

It's ironic that Barber accuses the lgbt community of exploiting Shepard's death when he's clearly the one doing the exploiting.

Editor's note - The constant repeating an inaccuracy about gays and lesbians even after the meme is exposed as a lie is distorton technique two of the six distortion techniques I've outlined as to how the religious right stigmatizes the lgbt community.

Know your lgbt history - Flowers of Evil

Last Saturday, I posted a classic episode of The Jeffersons that presented what I thought to be a positive look at the transgender community.

I received such a positive response from it that I've decided that, from time to time, I will post clips of past movies and television episodes to give a feel as to how lgbts were and are represented in the media.

Today, I am posting something less positive.

In the 1970s, actress Angie Dickinson starred in the successful Police Woman television series. This particular episode, Flowers of Evil, was so controversial that it was only shown once due to protests by the lgbt community.

It dealt with Dickinson getting to the bottom of a case in which three lesbians running a retirement home were stealing money from their residents, drugging them, and then gruesomely murdering them.

As this minisode (an abridged version of a television episode)shows, there is a lot to be desired from this particular episode:



Trust me when I say that the full episode is much worse, specifically the stereotypical portrayals of the three villains:

The Bitch (Gladys) - The ringleader of the trio. Beautiful and sleek enough to supposedly "fool" men about her sexual orientation. She is the one who commits the only murder shown in the episode and it's not a nice scene. Her sadism is matched only by her lust; a quality that leads Dickinson to successfully go undercover at the retirement home.

The Butch (Mame) - Coarse, crude, and detached to a fault. She enjoys watching Gladys commit the murder.

The Femme (Janet) - The supposed "true woman" of the trio and as such, the one with a conscience and the "weak link." While Gladys strangles the victim and Mame watches, Janet stands outside in the rain crying in guilt. She can be prodded with kind words or a hard slap by Gladys.

Friday midday news briefs

We are going to fight against that bill here in South Carolina. But in the meantime, all is not doom and gloom for the lgbt community at large:

Gov. Lynch Statement Regarding Same-Sex Marriage Legislation - The New Hampshire governor will sign the bill if certain provisions are included giving added protections to religious communities. These are the same protections included in Vermont and Connecticut bills. I have no problems with them. The bill is as good as signed.

Breaking News: Pa. grants domestic-partner benefits - Hot damn! We win one in Pennsylvania

Good News: Liberty Counsel Loses - And another nail is put in the coffin of Florida's anti-gay adoption law.

Watergate jailbird Chuck Colson's hysteria over 'saving marriage' from 'radical gays' - Chuck, baby, sweetheart, the Federal Marriage Amendment ain't gonna happen.

'Hate crimes' bill targets ex-'gay' community - This One News Now article reminds me of an episode of Family Guy when one of the main characters was running for Mayor. She decided to hell with the facts and started using buzzwords like "the terrorists" and "9/11." I think Regina Griggs of PFOX saw the same episode because she does not go into detail just how the bill will target "ex-gays" (probably because it doesn't). She just repeats talking points and buzzwords.

James Dobson surrenders the fort - whoop te do

While we fight the SC Legislature over that mean spirited bill, it's difficult to remember that things aren't totally bad for lgbts.

After all, James Dobson has given up the fight, so to speak:

Politically, James Dobson has surrendered. At least for the time being. Today, the Focus on the Family founder devotes his typically family-focused radio show to what he calls "the utter evil that's coming out of the United States Congress." He's referring to the hate crimes bill that recently passed the House.

That's not so unusual.

What's surprising is that Dobson tells his listeners that they're politically helpless:

I want to tell you up front that we're not going to ask you to do anything, to make a phone call or to write a letter or anything.

There is nothing you can do at this time about what is taking place because there is simply no limit to what the left can do at this time. Anything they want, they get and so we can't stop them.

We tried with [Health and Human Services Secretary] Kathleen Sebelius and sent thousands of phone calls and emails to the Senate and they didn't pay any attention to it because they don't have to. And so what you can do is pray, pray for this great nation... As I see it, there is no other answer. There's no other answer, short term.

So much for Christianity being the religion of hope. In reality, I think Dobson is being overly dramatic. I don't buy his phony surrender.

And apparently neither do many of the commentators:

Dobson speaks of conservative Christians as entering "their most discouraging" period, but he needs to return to the bible to see the political environment that birthed his religion, Jesus; entire ministry, indeed hes life, was spent under Roman occupation, but this didn't make an iota of difference in his mission. In fact, the church began awash with the blood and suffering of its martyrs. And this brand of Christianity becomes "discouraged" in the face of a Liberal Congress and Democrats in power? Tsk, tsk, Mr. Dobson...

Did I miss James Dobson's complaints when Republicans under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush controlled all three branches of government? Dobson takes the position of a spoiled, cowardly, cry-baby. Hypocrisy is his religion.

Dobson is just stoking the victim mentality his ilk feed off of. Underlying his taunt is "I say we're helpless but I'm just waiting for one of you brave souls to step up and prove me wrong". This kind of nonsense has nothing to do with religion. Clowns like Dobson are to Christianity what Bin Laden is to Islam - cunning manipulators of people too ignorant or intellectually lazy to know better. Turn of the TV and radio if you've got any guts and educate yourself. You don't need people like Dobson telling you what to do and think.

The hard right has led the utter decimation of the Republican party with their middle-ages mentality. Mr. Dobson, please don't give up hope and keep fighting, we need you to keep the Republicans out of step with majority of Americans.

Yes - repentance and prayer. That worked well during the Bush administration. It'll work just as well now. Get a grip people! The country is changing and doesn't want these old fashioned views anymore.

Having a spirited debate about the morality of government policy and initiatives is one thing. Characterizing anyone who doesn't believe as you do as a Godless immoral heathen is quite another. Dobson's decline was brought on by his own prejudices. He always did shill for the right wing of the Republican Party and so it is fitting that any pretense of being above the political aspirations of the GOP has been dropped. Reverend Doson, please retire to a life of prayer and reflection...and I will pray you come to realize how much you contributed to a divided United States of America.

I'm sick and tired of the evil, controlling Christian Right acting as if people that support Democrats are Godless and non-Christians. I am a Christian, raised in the Lutheran church, and I refuse to associate with any organized religion bc I don't need a church or a man telling me how to worship and how to vote. The Christian Right exhibit the most unChristian behaviors I can imagine. I would never associate myself with their version of Christianity. WWJD? He would not condone hatred, bigotry, and worship of a greedy pastor of a mega-church.

Bill with anti-gay amendment passes

I got this email from Ryan Wilson, head of SC Pride:

The House of Rep. just passed H. 3543 . . . amended to exclude same-sex dating relationships from education and reporting requirements in school districts in the state. The amendment to exclude passed by a vote of 87 to 13. The bill passed 75 to 25. Third reading is tomorrow.

According to the State newspaper:

Bill sponsor Rep. Joan Brady, R-Richland, said she's fine with the amendment to her bill because most dating violence occurs in girl-boy relationships.

That's a load of nonsense. What would the harm be to include lgbt relationships in this bill?

What I want to know is what's the deal with South Carolina's government. Why do our elected officials go out of their way to attack the lgbt community?

Last year, it was Governor Sanford vs. the "South Carolina is so gay" ad campaign. But that's frivilous when compared to this situation.

It doesn't feel good to know that the people we elect to represent us don't think that much of us to do their job.

Regardless of anyone's religious beliefs about homosexuality, lgbt children deserve protection just like heterosexual children.

I don't see what's so complicated about this.

Thursday midday news briefs

Barack's door: They knock Knox, we knock noxious attacks - You just know the religious right didn't like Harry Knox on President Obama's faith-based committee. It was just a matter of them finding the right lie to spin.

APA revises 'gay gene' theory - Leave it to One News Now to spin the APA revision lie. The truth of the story can be found here

FL winger Congressman files bill, still thinks Obama isn't a citizen - The birthers are like Jason Voorhees. They don't ever go away.

Uganda’s Anti-Gay Campaign Snares LGBT People and Rival Pastors, Tabloid Promises More “Outings” - They've declared war on lgbts in Uganda.

SC legislator wants to exclude gays from teen dating violence bill

Leave it to the South Carolina Legislature to shock my system this morning:

A bill, sponsored by Rep. Joan Brady, R-Richland, would require school districts to send home information or include in their student handbooks information about teen dating violence — including how to recognize whether a student is in an abusive relationship and where to go for help.

According to a 2007 state Department of Education survey, nearly 14 percent of S.C. students reported being “hit, slapped or physically hurt on purpose by their boyfriend or girlfriend” in the previous 12 months.

So far so good. It sounds like a productive idea. But then comes the shock:

The bill hit an unexpected roadblock Wednesday when Rep. Greg Delleney, R-Chester, introduced an amendment requiring the material to address only heterosexual relationships.

“I don’t want the Department of Education or school districts to teach children in grades six through 12 about (same-sex) relationships,” Delleney said.

I don't know where to begin to tell you what's wrong with Delleney's mindset. But I will try.

1. It stands to reason that if children are in a same-sex relationship (and I'm sure there are many who are), I don't think the school can't teach them something they already know. And even if they aren't in a same-sex relationship, children are not naive. Remind me to tell you the theories my 10-year-old cousin relayed to me about some of the characters of High School Musical.

2. Delleny's mindset is pure ignorance. His statement implies that learning about same-sex relationships will be mandatory in classrooms. This is what the bill says:

By Dec. 1, the S.C. Department of Education would have to develop a model dating violence policy to assist school districts in developing policies for reporting and responding to dating violence.

• By the 2010-2011 school year, each school district would establish a specific policy to address incidents of dating violence.

• Each school district’s dating violence policy would have to be published in school and school district handbooks or any publications on the school or district Web site that provide the rules, procedures or standards of conduct for students at school.

3. Delleny's mindset is also offensive. Gays are constantly hit with the barrage of nonsense that we want "special rights," but Delleny went out of his way to exclude us. He doesn't want to help us combat potential violence in our relationships because he doesn't care about us. It's bad enough when this comes from an ordinary citizen but the fact that a legislator publicly voices this notion without any shame is awful.

Delleny wasn't elected for his personal and religious beliefs. He was elected to serve the people of South Carolina regardless of race, religion, national origin, gender, or sexual orientation. He can't pick and choose who to serve. Or, in this case, who to protect.

His words emphasizes just how difficult it is for gays to live not only in South Carolina but in the United States in general. No other group is subject to the level of disrespect that we generally receive. Delleny wouldn't have gotten away with his public "screw you" if he had made any other group the subject of his tirade.

He will probably get a pat on the back by like minded homophobic individuals. Yes, Delleny is homophobic. I don't really see how anyone can use buzzwords to defend his actions. He isn't protecting traditional relationships or upholding morality.

Delleny is making it acceptable for South Carolina to cover it's ears so as not to hear the pleas of help coming from victims of relationship violence.

In a broader sense, he is making it acceptable to discriminate against South Carolinians simply because he has a personal problem with their sexual orientation.

And this is just basically wrong.