'LGBTQ fight against false definition of 'religious liberty' will continue even after SCOTUS ruling' & other Wed midday news briefs

The video above from the Human Rights Campaign explains what's at stake in the upcoming SCOTUS decision about using the concept of "religious liberty" to discriminate. No matter what the decision is, this fight is far from over. That's why the video is needed. 

More LGBT issues loom as justices near wedding cake decision - I repeat, no matter how the court rules, this will NOT be over. It will be a pitched and ugly battle. Give no inch and give no quarter. Don't back away from our right to be treated with fairness and dignity. 

Congressman Predicts More 'Displaced' Children if ACLU Wins Faith-Based Adoption Lawsuit - This will be one of the next issues.  Religious based adoption agencies can discriminate against gays in accordance to their faith all they want. But they should NOT be able to receive tax dollars for doing it.

Report says school violence on the rise against LGBT students - This is awful. We need to do better.

Wales Is Leading the Way in LGBT-Inclusive Sex Education - Too bad we have so many roadblocks from decent LGBT-inclusive sex education here in America.

Forget 'Roseanne.' Let's talk about 'Frasier'

I don't know about y'all but I've had my fill of Roseanne and her now-canceled sitcom. She makes it difficult to remember that not all sitcoms are negatively controversial. Some, in fact, are very funny without being preachy or losing their comedic integrity.

 Take Frasier for example.

My friend Matt Baume has created a video focusing on an episode of the sitcom, "The Matchmaker," which features a gay theme:

 It wasn’t easy to put gay characters on TV in the 1990s. But one show managed to be gayer than pretty much any other mainstream sitcom of the time. Frasier had two huge advantages when it came to LGBT inclusion: first, a ton of gay people worked on it, from the cast to the writers to directors. And second, its comedy hinges on misunderstandings, farce, and unspoken social taboos -- and unspoken taboos just so happen to be something queer people know a thing or two about. 

 What's really interesting about Frasier in general is not only the two openly gay cast members who worked on the show, David Hyde Pierce and Dan Butler, but also the fact that the actor portraying Frasier - Kelsey Grammar - is a conservative Republican.

 Definitely from another time and universe when compared to the bunch present nowadays.

'Hate group Alliance Defending Freedom pushes skilled propaganda in video' & other Tue midday news briefs

Chinese general Sun Tzu once said you must know your enemy. In that spirit, I present a video from the hate group the Alliance Defending Freedom. The video features Washington State florist Barronelle Stutzman. Hers is not the case in front of the Supreme Court right now, but the video bears watching so it can show how skilled ADF is in making anti-LGBTQ discrimination sound reasonable and not as far reaching at it truly is.  A key thing to think about - ADF and Stutzman claims the gay  couple could have easily gone somewhere else, but as you can read via another article in these news briefs, ADF is steadily working to eliminate the "somewhere elses" that LGBTQ people can go to when it come to many businesses besides florists.(BTW the "dislikes" of the video is far ahead of the "likes." Feel free to add your opinion.)

Washington Supreme Court rules against florist who discriminated against same-sex couple - And by the way, here is the true and complete story of Stutzman.

Six key takeaways from The Nation's investigative report on Alliance Defending Freedom’s “legal army” - AND most importantly, let's talk about the Alliance Defending Freedom, the group propping Stutzman up, by way of summarizing a special report of its "activities" against the LGBTQ community.

 Turning Away Gay Homebuyers Isn’t Religious Liberty, It’s Discrimination - And this right here is why we must not be tricked by the narrative ADF is pushing. Last week, California Republican Dana Rohrabacher said homeowners should be allowed to turn away potential LGBTQ buyers. Michelangelo Signorile spells out what's dangerous about this and how it connects to Stutzman and the baker's case which will soon be decided by SCOTUS: 

 Last year a federal judge, in a first, ruled that LGBTQ people are in fact protected under the FHA. But if the Supreme Court rules that a baker may turn away a gay couple seeking a wedding cake ― and that seemed to be a very real possibility during oral arguments last fall ― all bets are off as to how the court might rule in other areas.  

 That’s because the arguments in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case center on the baker’s “religious liberty,” something that Justice Neil Gorsuch broadly views as allowing for discrimination ― and which the Supreme Court previously allowed for in the Hobby Lobby decision. That ruling allows employers to opt out of offering contraception to women in their health care plans based on corporate owners’ religious beliefs. 

  But if “religious liberty” is reason for a baker who’s open to the general public to say he can’t make a wedding cake for a gay couple, why should it be any different for a landlord or a home seller or a bank, all serving the general public? If religious liberty is paramount, then, as Rohrabacher said, a homeowner “shouldn’t be required to be in business with someone they think is doing something that is immoral.” Rohrabacher’s comments expose the slippery slope the Supreme Court might put us on. They also underscore how deeply rooted bigotry against LGBTQ people is, and how religion is used to exempt it.

Gay, black and HIV positive: America's hidden epidemic – video - Sad but necessary video.

In Poland, a Nation of Catholics, a Gay Atheist Mayor is a Presidential Hopeful - I'll believe it when I see it.

An anti-LGBTQ hate group is about to get jerked out of the shadows very soon

The Supreme Court is set to rule on a case (Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission) which should decide on whether businesses can exploit religious beliefs as an excuse to discriminate against certain customers, particularly LGBTQ customers. I don't know how they are going to rule, but regardless whether it's a defeat or victory for us, people are going to want to know all about the  anti-LGBTQ hate group which pushed the case, the Alliance Defending Freedom.




I've posted this video before, but I have no problems with posting it again. It was created in 2016 and I don't think it covered the full attack on the LGBTQ community masterminded by the ADF. It certainly didn't cover how the group has undertaken many more attacks since 2016.

All of this includes fighting for the right to sterilize transgender men and women in foreign countries and fighting for laws imprisoning gays simply for their sexual orientation in foreign countries such as India, Jamaica, and Belize.

In America, ADF crafted those awful "bathroom bills" which targets transgender high school and elementary school students. It has worked to pass "religious freedom" laws which discriminate against gays in states like Mississippi. It advocated denying our transgender soldiers their necessary medical care. In addition, ADF is also behind the laws passed in Kansas and Oklahoma which undermines gay adoption in the grounds of "religious liberty."

No more hiding in the shadows for this group And no more lies about them simply trying to protect religious views. No matter how the SCOTUS case is decided, the behind-the-scenes status of ADF will be changed forever. 

Let's remember LGBTQ veterans during Memorial Day weekend' & other Fri midday news briefs

 How's this for a novel idea - instead of attacking people who are kneeling in accordance to their First Amendment right to protest, why don't we remember those who fight for our freedoms this Memorial Day, especially the LGBTQ veterans.

No, Family Research Council. You don't get to to talk about patriotism after attacking transgender soldiers - And how about we speak out against those who disrespect them, like these SOBs right here.  

Democrats introduce bill to prevent use of religious exemptions to discriminate - This would be wonderful if it could get off the ground. 

Dana Rohrabacher says it’s okay to deny people housing because they’re gay - Just in case you didn't hear this mess. 

This conservative group advocates for LGBTQ rights. Can it make itself heard in today’s GOP? - I'll believe it when I see a black woman marry Rush Limbaugh.

No, Family Research Council. You don't get to to talk about patriotism after attacking transgender soldiers

As long as the Family Research Council attacks trans soldiers, its words about patriotism don't mean a thing.

I've never believed that you should force people to show patriotism. Patriotic acts must be performed freely and from the heart. That way, they are genuine rather than for show.

Of course the National Football League doesn't believe such with their recently announced policy of forcing players and staff who are on the field during the playing of the national anthem to stand. While those not wishing so can remain in the locker room, we all know how such things work out when peer pressure from other players, the fans, and some of the media come for these players.

This ridiculous policy is mostly likely because of the ruckus Donald Trump raised last year when former San Francisco 49er Colin Kaepernick began to kneel on one knee during the playing of the anthem. He did so to protest the problem of police brutality against black men and the rash of deaths it was causing. Other players in the NFL and other sports began to follow his lead.

Trump, who has never met an issue he wouldn't distort, made the issue one of disrespect of the nation's flag and anthem. And his further exploitation of the controversy is the reason why we are where we are today.

If the NFL thinks this issue is over, it is sadly mistaken. However, in Trump land (which is more mental than physical), right-wing and religious right groups such as the Family Research Council and its president, Tony Perkins,  are practically anointing Trump as the new savior of America akin to how Franklin Roosevelt guided us through World War 2. I will spare you the entire screed. A little should be enough to properly nauseate you:

President Trump, who scored the biggest victory in America's showdown with the $14 billion league, agreed that NFL owners did the right thing. But, like a lot us, doesn't think people should have to be prodded into showing their nation respect. "I don't think people should be staying in the locker rooms, but still I think it's good," he said in an exclusive interview on Fox News. "You have to stand proudly for the national anthem or you shouldn't be playing, you shouldn't be there. Maybe you shouldn't be in the country." 

FRC's Lt. General Jerry Boykin, who knows plenty of soldiers who wished they could stand for anything again, said, "I think it's sad that any American today is not willing to stand in honor of the flag," but, he went on, "I'm glad to see the NFL addressing the issue." The American Legion, whose veterans served so that these players had the freedom to disrespect their country, applauded the NFL's move -- wishing, like most Americans, that it had never been necessary. "While the issues that led to the controversy remain and deserve continued national dialogue, we hope that all Americans would stand united as one under our national symbol. Our flag and anthem belong to all Americans. While our country is not perfect, it remains the world's greatest beacon of freedom. We all have to work together to resolve our differences." 

Whether the NFL has learned its lesson about wading into the culture wars remains to be seen. What it has learned is not to tangle with proud Americans -- and the man working to make their country great again, Donald Trump. "This is a notable win for conservatives," Axios insisted, one that will hopefully make businesses think twice about mocking our values. "Trump outsmarted the Resistance," the Federalist pointed out, "but that doesn't seem to take much work. The Resistance has framed the issue so cleverly that they are on one side and Trump is on the other -- along with the national anthem, the flag, and military veterans." That's a fight no smart entrepreneur wants to pick. 

Meanwhile, if there is a bright side to this controversy, it's that Americans reminded the corporate elite just how painful their extremist politics can be. In business -- as in elections -- your choices matter. There's no downside to speaking up -- or, in this case, standing up and tuning out. Even one person can make a powerful difference.

The irony coupled with the hypocrisy of the Family Research Council burns through so many levels that I'm practically salivating when I think of what to take on first.

'Support of marriage equality enjoys a significant growth' & other Thur midday news briefs

More Americans Than Ever Support Same-Sex Marriage - And in the midst of all of the insanity of the Trump Administration comes 67 percent support of marriage equality. BUT we still face obstacles so don't waste too much time celebrating this news. The folks on the other side of the argument are so nasty, they would pass laws keeping married gay couples from getting cheese on their sandwiches.

Increase: 4.5% Of Americans Now Identify As LGBT - With more visibility comes a stronger ability to control our destinies.

Federal judge hands transgender inmates an important legal victory - Good! 

These Basketball Players Gave Up Their Dreams To Fight For LGBT Rights - This is what a lot of it is all about. Giving of yourself for the greater good of our people.

Transgender Iranians still face discrimination - Again, the struggle is real and it is universal.