Why a book like the one I am writing is needed.
First of all, I would like to thank all of my readers. This is my eleventh post and I will be reaching 300 hits within this week.
It just goes to show that so many of us are interested in taking on the anti-gay industry . I am all for educating Americans about who we are but I won't do it in a way that reduces me to a beggar. "Please tolerate me" is not a phrase that will ever come out of my mouth.
I have reconciled myself to the fact that some Americans will never accept the gay community.
And that is fine.
What I am talking about through my book and blog is the fact that religious belief alone is no reason to dictate to anyone how their lives are going to be. And I as a gay man will not apologize for my desires to have a good family, children, or any of parts of that lovely American Dream that I believe so much in.
And I will not allow anyone to make me live my life based on their interpretations of how they think I live or what they think I do in the bedroom.
In accordance to that, I think we as a community need to expose the lies of James Dobson, Lou Sheldon, Peter LaBarbera, and company. We need to be unapologetically aggressive, but also show discipline and resolve.
We need to make them justify the fact that they are lying in the name of God.
But I think I can put it better through a rough excerpt of my book:
Gays and lesbians make up to two to 10 percent of the American population and come in every age and ethnic group. These are people with real lives. They work, eat, sleep, and pay bills just like everyone else. In fact, according to the 2000 Census, over 300,000 of them are raising children in this country.
But despite all of this, the United States is not educated as to who exactly they are. Many don’t know any out-of-the-closet gays and lesbians. Many who do know out-of-the-closet gays and lesbians do not take the time to learn about them or their lives.
Also, many Americans regard themselves as Christians and to many of these Christians, homosexuality is a sin. Therefore when people like Timothy Dailey and Robert Knight put forth their lies and propaganda about the gay community while at the same time claiming that they are on the side of righteousness, it is relatively easy to persuade people of faith that they are speaking the truth.
Backed by this propaganda, those who call themselves "people of faith" often repeat some of the most vicious, un-Christian lies with not only a straight face but a self assurance that what they are saying is the gospel truth:
"The "alphas" in homosexual relationships, be they men or women, are many times recruiting younger partners. A vast percentage of those who enter the homosexual life do so after having been sexually initiated by an older person of their sex – be it consensual or not – it usually has the feel of enticement or seduction." - Kevin McCullough, The ‘Gay’ Truth, May 30, 2003
"... there is an abundance of evidence that homosexual couples do not make the optimum family unit. We have also seen evidence that homosexual couples prey on young males and have in some instances adopted them in order to have unfretted access to subject them to a life of molestation and sexual abuse." - Tennessee State Representative Debra Young Maggart to a constiuent, February 25, 2006
"The newest thing in Chicago, it's becoming a trend, and you're gonna find this hard to believe...sex with infants" ... "It's not enough that they have...you know when you engage in perversion, and homosexuality is perversion, we don't hate the gays mind you, we don't hate them, we hate what they're doing...pretty soon that perversion is like addiction, it's not enough, so you need to graduate to something else. You need to move on. So now they're having sex with animals, a small group that's getting bigger, sex with infants, sex in the street in Chicago out in the open, it's just getting more and more perverted." - Guy Adams, August 2, 2006
. . . If someone wants to believe that gays and lesbians are going to hell, then that is his or her right. After all, this is America and the First Amendment guarantees anyone the right to espouse whatever beliefs they want. In this country, we have Jehovah Witnesses, Seven Day Adventists, snake handlers, Muslims, Jews, etc.
But the passage of laws is a more complicated process.
Laws are created to guard the public trust and to protect that same public from harm. Jewish people in this country cannot pass laws based upon their interpretation of the Talmud anymore than Muslims can pass laws based on their interpretation of the Koran. In that same spirit, Christians cannot pass laws in this country based on their interpretation of the Bible. Just because one’s religion tells him that homosexuality is a bad concept does not mean he can pass laws discriminating against gays and lesbians.
That is, unless he can prove that the public good is preserved by such laws.
Therefore, in order to prove that gays and lesbians should not have any protection of laws, so-called "pro-family" organizations have created a written and oral pattern of deception that is not only blatant in its attempts but shameful in its audacity. In their zeal to prove the worst about the gay community, the anti-gay industry runs roughshod over science and truth. They have created a houses of pseudo-scientific studies based on distortions, lies, headless monsters, and legitimate studies taken out of context , which are then pushed by fake experts, Ph.D.s, conservative columnists and bloggers, and ignorant people of faith all willing to sacrifice their integrity on the altar of an alleged higher calling.
And to make matters worse, they work to undermine credible information that has proven time and time again that their ideas of the gay community are fallacies.
And the effects of their propaganda campaign can only be described as damaging.
Children who tell their parents they are gay are being kicked out of their homes or shipped to "reparative therapy" camps where they are supposed to be transformed into heterosexuals because Concerned Women for America has "research" that says that homosexuality is a "destructive lifestyle."
Legislation that would keep gays safe from job-discrimination face the accusation that it is just a backdoor way to force acceptance for the "homosexual agenda" because the Family Research Council has "research" that says so.
Schools across the country are ignoring the well-being of gay students in that they are not allowed to mention the word "homosexual" in sex education classes because Timothy Dailey, Robert Knight, or Peter LaBarbera has "research" that says homosexuals are coming into schools to indoctrinate the next generation and cause them to become infected with diseases like "gay bowel syndrome."
These so-called "pro-family" organizations are using phony statistics and half truths almost on a daily basis in attempts to defeat pro gay laws, deny gay children the right to form support groups, to hinder correct safe sex information from being made public, and any other way they feel they can stop the so-called gay agenda; an agenda that does not exist.
I have always believed that the truth in every situation will come out. I also believe in sometimes giving that truth a little nudge to the light.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Monday, September 18, 2006
Paul Cameron, the anti-gay industry and pedophilia
One of the charges I make consistently in my book is that when the anti-gay industry are not using discredited researcher Paul Cameron's work, they copy his bad tactics or his outrageous theories.
Nowhere proves this more than in the subject of gays and pedophilia. Cameron believes the theory that if a man molests a boy then that man is automatically gay. Bear in mind that he distorted a study by Dr. A. Nicholas Groth to prove his theory and Groth complained vehemently about the misusage of his work. (see earlier post)
Unfortunately, as this May 4, 2005 letter to the editor to the Wall Street Journal, Cameron still believes his theory to be accurate:
“When the perpetrator and the victim are of the same sex, you are looking at a homosexual perpetrator. (When the victim is of the opposite sex, there is some uncertainty because homosexuals often molest children of both sexes) . . . Most people understand that a thief is someone who steals. Even though he loudly proclaims his honesty, a man is known by his actions. . . . Action trumps claims. Likewise , to most of us . . . a homosexual is someone who has sex with his own sex. Whether he’s married, also has sex with women, etc. - - if he has sex with boys or men, he’s a homosexual. Action trump claims.”- (Paul) Cameron responds to ‘Numbers Guy’, The Wall Street Journal, May 4, 2005
But other more credible researchers have said just the opposite. American Psychological Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Child Psychiatrists and the Child Welfare League of America, all say that the homosexuality and pedophilia are not linked.
However, this means nothing to members of the anti-gay industry. When having to decide between credible research and research that caters to their religious beliefs about the "evils" of homosexuality, so-called "pro family groups" pick Cameron every time:
"The ‘gay agenda’ targets children. They’re luring kids into homosexual behavior. There is a strong undercurrent of pedophilia in the homosexual subculture." – Robert Knight, Rolling Stone, March, 18, 1999
Homosexual activists, of course, have created a propaganda tool that helps them avoid taking the blame for same-sex molestations. Whenever a boy is molested by a man, homosexuals label him a “pedophile,” which is supposedly distinct from homosexuality. This propaganda technique has blinded many journalists and academics to the truth: A person who molests a same-sex child is a homosexual. - Lou Sheldon, Big Brothers-Big Sisters Organization Faces Homosexual Child Molester Threat
"If he's (a man) into molesting boys, that's homosexual behavior. It's academic nonsense to talk about these people as heterosexuals.” Peter LaBarbera, Homosexuals more likely to molest kids, study reports, BP News, May 30, 2001
“Most cases of sexual abuse of children and adolescents involve boys being assaulted by men. This is by definition 'homosexual' since it involves same sex sexual abuse.” - Linda P. Harvey, Homosexual Agenda Escalates in Public Schools, June 21, 2001
And one more thing: while the quotes may be old, some even over five years old, none of these people or organizations have gone on record changing their positions.
I never knew Jesus approved of lying.
One of the charges I make consistently in my book is that when the anti-gay industry are not using discredited researcher Paul Cameron's work, they copy his bad tactics or his outrageous theories.
Nowhere proves this more than in the subject of gays and pedophilia. Cameron believes the theory that if a man molests a boy then that man is automatically gay. Bear in mind that he distorted a study by Dr. A. Nicholas Groth to prove his theory and Groth complained vehemently about the misusage of his work. (see earlier post)
Unfortunately, as this May 4, 2005 letter to the editor to the Wall Street Journal, Cameron still believes his theory to be accurate:
“When the perpetrator and the victim are of the same sex, you are looking at a homosexual perpetrator. (When the victim is of the opposite sex, there is some uncertainty because homosexuals often molest children of both sexes) . . . Most people understand that a thief is someone who steals. Even though he loudly proclaims his honesty, a man is known by his actions. . . . Action trumps claims. Likewise , to most of us . . . a homosexual is someone who has sex with his own sex. Whether he’s married, also has sex with women, etc. - - if he has sex with boys or men, he’s a homosexual. Action trump claims.”- (Paul) Cameron responds to ‘Numbers Guy’, The Wall Street Journal, May 4, 2005
But other more credible researchers have said just the opposite. American Psychological Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Child Psychiatrists and the Child Welfare League of America, all say that the homosexuality and pedophilia are not linked.
However, this means nothing to members of the anti-gay industry. When having to decide between credible research and research that caters to their religious beliefs about the "evils" of homosexuality, so-called "pro family groups" pick Cameron every time:
"The ‘gay agenda’ targets children. They’re luring kids into homosexual behavior. There is a strong undercurrent of pedophilia in the homosexual subculture." – Robert Knight, Rolling Stone, March, 18, 1999
Homosexual activists, of course, have created a propaganda tool that helps them avoid taking the blame for same-sex molestations. Whenever a boy is molested by a man, homosexuals label him a “pedophile,” which is supposedly distinct from homosexuality. This propaganda technique has blinded many journalists and academics to the truth: A person who molests a same-sex child is a homosexual. - Lou Sheldon, Big Brothers-Big Sisters Organization Faces Homosexual Child Molester Threat
"If he's (a man) into molesting boys, that's homosexual behavior. It's academic nonsense to talk about these people as heterosexuals.” Peter LaBarbera, Homosexuals more likely to molest kids, study reports, BP News, May 30, 2001
“Most cases of sexual abuse of children and adolescents involve boys being assaulted by men. This is by definition 'homosexual' since it involves same sex sexual abuse.” - Linda P. Harvey, Homosexual Agenda Escalates in Public Schools, June 21, 2001
And one more thing: while the quotes may be old, some even over five years old, none of these people or organizations have gone on record changing their positions.
I never knew Jesus approved of lying.
Saturday, September 16, 2006
The anti-gay industry can't stop lying
An article in Friday's Agape Press demonstrates yet again the tendency for so-called "pro family groups" and their cohorts to spread propaganda about the gay community.
Agape Press is yet another tentacle of the anti-gay industry. This so called "news source" is an extension of Tim Wildmon's American Family Association and is another place where the anti-gay industry can spread lies about the gay community unchallenged.
This Friday's article, Surveys Reveal Sex Practices of Homosexuals (http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/9/152006g.asp) claims that a sex survey in the August 15, 2006 edition of The Advocate reveals that "the homosexual lifestyle continues to be plagued by promiscuity and unsafe sexual practices."
First of all, a sex survey in one magazine cannot be taken to be indicative of an entire community. I for one did not fill out the survey and I know that many others didn't. So what does that say about us?
But the use of sex surveys in order to demonize the entire gay community is an old canard of the anti-gay industry. Our friend Paul Cameron used a sex survey as one of his cites of information in his refuted piece, Child Molestation and Homosexuality.
The survey Cameron used was a book published in 1979, The Gay Report. Now according to the webpage Box Turtle Bulletin (linked below):
"The Gay Report was modeled after many other informal sex surveys which were popular in the 1970s and 1980s. Magazines like Cosmopolitan, Redbook, and Playboy often conducted reader surveys."
In fact, 2,500 of the survey answers from The Gay Report came from a gay pornographic magazine, Blueboy.
Gay pornographic magazines cannot be considered as indicative of the gay community any more than Hustler magazine can be considered as indicative of the heterosexual community.
And andendum to this is the fact that the Traditional Values Coalition continues to claim that the The Gay Report is indicative of the gay community - i.e. The Gay Report: A Survey of Homosexual Sexual Habits. - http://traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/GayReport.pdf
But more about that later.
My segueway into the history of the anti-gay industry using sex surveys to demonize the gay community was to show that when so-called "pro family" groups do not cite Cameron by name, they copy his bad research tactics.
As it is, Agape Press's usage of the sex survey from the Advocate is filled with distortions that can only be meant as intentional.
For example, look at this quote from the article:
"The poll found that 20 percent of homosexuals said they had had 51-300 different sex partners in their lifetime, with an additional 8 percent having had more than 300."
This is true but the way Agape Press cited the survey findings in this case was a misrepresentation.
The original question was:
"During your lifetime, how many different same-sex partners have you had sex with?"
The 51-300 range given by Agape Press is actually a combination of different answers. The original answers were:
9.92 percent of gays and lesbians said they had 51-100 sexual partners
9.58 percent of gays and lesbians said they had 101-300
Agape Press combined these two totals to make a 20 percent figure.
These other answers were ommitted:
5.6 percent of gays and lesbians said they had no sexual partners
6.95 percent of gays and lesbians said they had one sexual partner
20.24 percent of gays and lesbians said they had two to five sexual partners.
12.72 percent of gays and lesbians said they had six to 10 sexual partners
12.18 percent of gays and lesbians said they had 11 to 20 sexual partners
14.4 percent of gays and lesbians said they had 21-50 sexual partners.
Now if I used the same tactic that Agape Press used to garner its 20 percent figure, then I could say that a very large percent of gays and lesbians have a low promiscuity rate (0-50 partners in a lifetime.)
Another distortion is as follows:
"A survey in Ireland by the Gay Men's Health Project found that almost half of homosexuals said they were having unprotected sex.
The Advocate survey seemed to underscore that. It found that 55 percent of homosexuals said they never (20%), occasionally (10%) or usually (25%) practiced so-called "safer sex."
Agape Press does not give any more information regarding the Ireland survey. And of course the attempt to connect the Advocate survey to this is another distortion.
The actual survey question was "how often do you practice safe sex."
The answers given was as follows:
19.93 percent of gay and lesbians said never
44.65 percent of gays and lesbians said always
10.35 percent of gays and lesbians said occasionally
25.06 percent of gays and lesbians said usually.
So we see that Agape Press combined three of the survey answers to get its total. When the answers stand alone, the great majority of gays and lesbians say that they are practicing safe sex.
Now in its zeal to demonize the gay commuity, Agape Press omitted the following findings:
81.96 percent of gays and lesbians said they would get married if same sex marriage was legalized.
If having to choose, 84.18 percent of gays and lesbians would live without sex rather than living without love.
65.03 percent of gays and lesbians said they never visit bathhouses, sex clubs, sex parties, or backrooms. The answer with the second highest total in that category was "rarely" -17.20 percent.
Two points are obvious from the Advocate sex survey: gays and lesbians are not as sexually wild as people think and members of the anti-gay industry seem to never miss an opportunity to make life harder for us.
An article in Friday's Agape Press demonstrates yet again the tendency for so-called "pro family groups" and their cohorts to spread propaganda about the gay community.
Agape Press is yet another tentacle of the anti-gay industry. This so called "news source" is an extension of Tim Wildmon's American Family Association and is another place where the anti-gay industry can spread lies about the gay community unchallenged.
This Friday's article, Surveys Reveal Sex Practices of Homosexuals (http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/9/152006g.asp) claims that a sex survey in the August 15, 2006 edition of The Advocate reveals that "the homosexual lifestyle continues to be plagued by promiscuity and unsafe sexual practices."
First of all, a sex survey in one magazine cannot be taken to be indicative of an entire community. I for one did not fill out the survey and I know that many others didn't. So what does that say about us?
But the use of sex surveys in order to demonize the entire gay community is an old canard of the anti-gay industry. Our friend Paul Cameron used a sex survey as one of his cites of information in his refuted piece, Child Molestation and Homosexuality.
The survey Cameron used was a book published in 1979, The Gay Report. Now according to the webpage Box Turtle Bulletin (linked below):
"The Gay Report was modeled after many other informal sex surveys which were popular in the 1970s and 1980s. Magazines like Cosmopolitan, Redbook, and Playboy often conducted reader surveys."
In fact, 2,500 of the survey answers from The Gay Report came from a gay pornographic magazine, Blueboy.
Gay pornographic magazines cannot be considered as indicative of the gay community any more than Hustler magazine can be considered as indicative of the heterosexual community.
And andendum to this is the fact that the Traditional Values Coalition continues to claim that the The Gay Report is indicative of the gay community - i.e. The Gay Report: A Survey of Homosexual Sexual Habits. - http://traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/GayReport.pdf
But more about that later.
My segueway into the history of the anti-gay industry using sex surveys to demonize the gay community was to show that when so-called "pro family" groups do not cite Cameron by name, they copy his bad research tactics.
As it is, Agape Press's usage of the sex survey from the Advocate is filled with distortions that can only be meant as intentional.
For example, look at this quote from the article:
"The poll found that 20 percent of homosexuals said they had had 51-300 different sex partners in their lifetime, with an additional 8 percent having had more than 300."
This is true but the way Agape Press cited the survey findings in this case was a misrepresentation.
The original question was:
"During your lifetime, how many different same-sex partners have you had sex with?"
The 51-300 range given by Agape Press is actually a combination of different answers. The original answers were:
9.92 percent of gays and lesbians said they had 51-100 sexual partners
9.58 percent of gays and lesbians said they had 101-300
Agape Press combined these two totals to make a 20 percent figure.
These other answers were ommitted:
5.6 percent of gays and lesbians said they had no sexual partners
6.95 percent of gays and lesbians said they had one sexual partner
20.24 percent of gays and lesbians said they had two to five sexual partners.
12.72 percent of gays and lesbians said they had six to 10 sexual partners
12.18 percent of gays and lesbians said they had 11 to 20 sexual partners
14.4 percent of gays and lesbians said they had 21-50 sexual partners.
Now if I used the same tactic that Agape Press used to garner its 20 percent figure, then I could say that a very large percent of gays and lesbians have a low promiscuity rate (0-50 partners in a lifetime.)
Another distortion is as follows:
"A survey in Ireland by the Gay Men's Health Project found that almost half of homosexuals said they were having unprotected sex.
The Advocate survey seemed to underscore that. It found that 55 percent of homosexuals said they never (20%), occasionally (10%) or usually (25%) practiced so-called "safer sex."
Agape Press does not give any more information regarding the Ireland survey. And of course the attempt to connect the Advocate survey to this is another distortion.
The actual survey question was "how often do you practice safe sex."
The answers given was as follows:
19.93 percent of gay and lesbians said never
44.65 percent of gays and lesbians said always
10.35 percent of gays and lesbians said occasionally
25.06 percent of gays and lesbians said usually.
So we see that Agape Press combined three of the survey answers to get its total. When the answers stand alone, the great majority of gays and lesbians say that they are practicing safe sex.
Now in its zeal to demonize the gay commuity, Agape Press omitted the following findings:
81.96 percent of gays and lesbians said they would get married if same sex marriage was legalized.
If having to choose, 84.18 percent of gays and lesbians would live without sex rather than living without love.
65.03 percent of gays and lesbians said they never visit bathhouses, sex clubs, sex parties, or backrooms. The answer with the second highest total in that category was "rarely" -17.20 percent.
Two points are obvious from the Advocate sex survey: gays and lesbians are not as sexually wild as people think and members of the anti-gay industry seem to never miss an opportunity to make life harder for us.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Dire Consequences or the lie of the "War on Christians"
Members of the anti-gay industry are now claiming that churches and pastors will soon find their religious freedoms in jeopardy for speaking against homosexuality -http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/14/ap/politics/mainD8K4PFTO3.shtml
What a load of garbage.
Even though the article did not speak to someone with a differing point of view, the author did acknowledge that this ploy is just a way for so-called "pro family" groups to galvanize voters against marriage equality.
For lack of a better phrase, it is the Dire Consequences tactic. The Dire Consequences claim is a reliable ploy in the arsenal of the anti-gay industry. When they can't sway people with logic, they play the "they are out to get us because we are Christians" card.
I devote an entire chapter of my upcoming book on this tactic. I think it is very appropriate to feature an excerpt from it:
One of the most effective tactics of the anti-gay industry is to claim that pro-gay laws will lead to dire consequences. They say that laws created to protect gays would either a: cause homosexuality to be “forced” on everyone, particularly children or b: cause those who supposedly speak out against homosexuality to be jailed. Possible coercion by an “aggressive homosexual lobby” is a constant theme in all their data.
The “dire consequences” argument is an old fear tactic that was used in other battles. Just as white racists claimed that any elimination of Jim Crow laws would lead to mixed couples and “mongrelization,” the anti-gay industry claim that any law or ordinance that protect gays and lesbians from discrimination or give them any form of visibility is a capitulation that would lead America down a pathway to destruction.
The anti-gay industry constantly raise the notion that creating law protecting the interests of gays and lesbians will lead to negative consequences, but it hardly ever provide actual proof as to the validity of the charges. Rather, so-called “pro family” groups use illogical leaping. In chapter three I talked about how Paul Cameron used his “research” to accuse the state of California of not only “sanctioning” homosexuality but also exposing many to the AIDS virus by hiring a gay professor at one of its universities. Cameron made this accusation without any proof that the professor had HIV. He made an illogical connection. Just because the professor may have been hired does not mean that the state of California was “sanctioning” his homosexuality. For that matter, just because the professor was openly gay did not mean he was HIV positive.
In this same manner so-called “pro family” groups create the same illogical leap to form the same incorrect conclusions. They claim that laws protection gays and lesbians from discrimination or that would afford the community visibility would lead to all sorts of bad consequences. Then they list some of the most extreme examples of what could happen while not giving any evidence as to how the hypothetical events would take place. For example:
“ Few public officials and businessmen realize that when they allow the addition of “sexual orientation” to their nondiscrimination codes, they are tying their own hands when it comes to objecting to:
A man in a highly visible sales job coming to work in a dress and high heels;
A woman in a highly visible position coming to work in men’s clothes;
A person of indeterminate sex who insists on using either the men’s room or the women’s room;
A person of either sex who indulges a taste for extreme sexual promiscuity and pornography during working hours despite being charged with representing the company’s tone and character;
A man who frequents prostitutes while on business trips and claims that it is none of the company’s business, regardless of the company’s public image.” - Why Nashville Should Reject the ‘Sexual Orientation’ Law, Robert Knight, March 4, 2003
Members of the anti-gay industry are now claiming that churches and pastors will soon find their religious freedoms in jeopardy for speaking against homosexuality -http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/14/ap/politics/mainD8K4PFTO3.shtml
What a load of garbage.
Even though the article did not speak to someone with a differing point of view, the author did acknowledge that this ploy is just a way for so-called "pro family" groups to galvanize voters against marriage equality.
For lack of a better phrase, it is the Dire Consequences tactic. The Dire Consequences claim is a reliable ploy in the arsenal of the anti-gay industry. When they can't sway people with logic, they play the "they are out to get us because we are Christians" card.
I devote an entire chapter of my upcoming book on this tactic. I think it is very appropriate to feature an excerpt from it:
One of the most effective tactics of the anti-gay industry is to claim that pro-gay laws will lead to dire consequences. They say that laws created to protect gays would either a: cause homosexuality to be “forced” on everyone, particularly children or b: cause those who supposedly speak out against homosexuality to be jailed. Possible coercion by an “aggressive homosexual lobby” is a constant theme in all their data.
The “dire consequences” argument is an old fear tactic that was used in other battles. Just as white racists claimed that any elimination of Jim Crow laws would lead to mixed couples and “mongrelization,” the anti-gay industry claim that any law or ordinance that protect gays and lesbians from discrimination or give them any form of visibility is a capitulation that would lead America down a pathway to destruction.
The anti-gay industry constantly raise the notion that creating law protecting the interests of gays and lesbians will lead to negative consequences, but it hardly ever provide actual proof as to the validity of the charges. Rather, so-called “pro family” groups use illogical leaping. In chapter three I talked about how Paul Cameron used his “research” to accuse the state of California of not only “sanctioning” homosexuality but also exposing many to the AIDS virus by hiring a gay professor at one of its universities. Cameron made this accusation without any proof that the professor had HIV. He made an illogical connection. Just because the professor may have been hired does not mean that the state of California was “sanctioning” his homosexuality. For that matter, just because the professor was openly gay did not mean he was HIV positive.
In this same manner so-called “pro family” groups create the same illogical leap to form the same incorrect conclusions. They claim that laws protection gays and lesbians from discrimination or that would afford the community visibility would lead to all sorts of bad consequences. Then they list some of the most extreme examples of what could happen while not giving any evidence as to how the hypothetical events would take place. For example:
“ Few public officials and businessmen realize that when they allow the addition of “sexual orientation” to their nondiscrimination codes, they are tying their own hands when it comes to objecting to:
A man in a highly visible sales job coming to work in a dress and high heels;
A woman in a highly visible position coming to work in men’s clothes;
A person of indeterminate sex who insists on using either the men’s room or the women’s room;
A person of either sex who indulges a taste for extreme sexual promiscuity and pornography during working hours despite being charged with representing the company’s tone and character;
A man who frequents prostitutes while on business trips and claims that it is none of the company’s business, regardless of the company’s public image.” - Why Nashville Should Reject the ‘Sexual Orientation’ Law, Robert Knight, March 4, 2003
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Permeation of Lies
It is extremely important to expose the anti-gay industry. Unfortunately, with the exception of a few, the mainstream gay advocacy groups don't seem to devote that much energy with putting people like Dobson, LaBarbera, and Sheldon on the defensive. They seem to be busy with "winning the hearts and minds" of America.
While "winning hearts and minds" and taking the high road per see is a good thing, ignoring your enemy when they take shots at you could be very detrimental.
Especially when the ammunition is as bad as the studies the anti-gay industry uses to demonize us.
Maybe we need more Genghises than Gandhis
A perfect example is the following press release I wrote detailing how the anti-gay industry is using the "Day of Truth" event to get school children to spread propaganda about the gay community:
‘Day of Truth’ or ‘Day of Lies?’
Religious right organizations continue to lie in order to demonize the gay community
It is extremely important to expose the anti-gay industry. Unfortunately, with the exception of a few, the mainstream gay advocacy groups don't seem to devote that much energy with putting people like Dobson, LaBarbera, and Sheldon on the defensive. They seem to be busy with "winning the hearts and minds" of America.
While "winning hearts and minds" and taking the high road per see is a good thing, ignoring your enemy when they take shots at you could be very detrimental.
Especially when the ammunition is as bad as the studies the anti-gay industry uses to demonize us.
Maybe we need more Genghises than Gandhis
A perfect example is the following press release I wrote detailing how the anti-gay industry is using the "Day of Truth" event to get school children to spread propaganda about the gay community:
‘Day of Truth’ or ‘Day of Lies?’
Religious right organizations continue to lie in order to demonize the gay community
April 20, 2006 --According to the Allied Defense Fund and other so-called "pro family" groups, the "Day of Truth" is created to counter the success of GLSEN’s "Day of Silence" and to tell supposed truths about homosexuality.
Apparently truth to the Allied Defense Fund means passing out incorrect information about the gay community.
"The information they are giving out that supposedly tells the truth about homosexuality are nothing but lies," said researcher Alvin McEwen.
McEwen has studied so-called "pro family" studies and research papers pertaining to the gay community. He claims to have found a pattern of deception. According to him, the information those supporting "Day of Truth" are giving out is no different.
They also invite people to give out this information during the "Day of Truth."
McEwen points to a handout offered on the "Day of Truth" webpage entitled The Ten Big Myths of Homosexual Behavior:
"homosexual behavior are at much higher risk for many sexually transmitted diseases, including not just HIV, but also syphilis, gonorrhea, human papilloma virus (HPV), hepatitis, chlamydia, and a whole group of infections called "gay bowel syndrome."
"Gay bowel syndrome" is an obsolete medical term that is no longer used by any credible physician. According to an April 8, 2005 edition of the Washington Blade, the Centers for Disease Control does not even recognize the term.
In another handout, Homosexuality FAQ Sheet, is the following charge:
"The Centers for Disease Control have found that 60 percent of new cases of HIV infection are men who have had sex with men, and also that the number of homosexual men who admittedly neglect to use condoms is rising. Homosexual victims of AIDS, they found, had an average 1,100 sexual partners in their lifetimes. They estimated that 30 percent of 20-year-old homosexual men will be HIV positive or dead before they reach their thirtieth birthday."
"There are so many inaccuracies in that statement," McEwen said. "The main thing is that the gay lifespan claim is a lie."
McEwen points to an article in the June 17, 2005 edition of the Washington Blade. In this article, Ronald Valdiserri, deputy director of the CDC’s National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention told the newspaper:
"[The CDC] does not collect statistics on the lifespan of gay men. While gay men continue to be severely impacted by HIV and AIDS, AIDS-related death data cannot be used to indicate that homosexual men live shorter lives than heterosexual men overall."
"The anti-gay industry are like cockroaches." McEwen said. "For every lie that they tell that you spot, there are probably five others you didn’t see. The sad thing is that well meaning people of faith, especially children, are going to repeat these lies."
McEwen points to a handout offered on the "Day of Truth" webpage entitled The Ten Big Myths of Homosexual Behavior:
"homosexual behavior are at much higher risk for many sexually transmitted diseases, including not just HIV, but also syphilis, gonorrhea, human papilloma virus (HPV), hepatitis, chlamydia, and a whole group of infections called "gay bowel syndrome."
"Gay bowel syndrome" is an obsolete medical term that is no longer used by any credible physician. According to an April 8, 2005 edition of the Washington Blade, the Centers for Disease Control does not even recognize the term.
In another handout, Homosexuality FAQ Sheet, is the following charge:
"The Centers for Disease Control have found that 60 percent of new cases of HIV infection are men who have had sex with men, and also that the number of homosexual men who admittedly neglect to use condoms is rising. Homosexual victims of AIDS, they found, had an average 1,100 sexual partners in their lifetimes. They estimated that 30 percent of 20-year-old homosexual men will be HIV positive or dead before they reach their thirtieth birthday."
"There are so many inaccuracies in that statement," McEwen said. "The main thing is that the gay lifespan claim is a lie."
McEwen points to an article in the June 17, 2005 edition of the Washington Blade. In this article, Ronald Valdiserri, deputy director of the CDC’s National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention told the newspaper:
"[The CDC] does not collect statistics on the lifespan of gay men. While gay men continue to be severely impacted by HIV and AIDS, AIDS-related death data cannot be used to indicate that homosexual men live shorter lives than heterosexual men overall."
"The anti-gay industry are like cockroaches." McEwen said. "For every lie that they tell that you spot, there are probably five others you didn’t see. The sad thing is that well meaning people of faith, especially children, are going to repeat these lies."
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Paul Cameron, the Traditional Values Coalition, a little game that I like to call "Time Line"
Paul Cameron is a controversial "researcher," who has provided the anti-gay industry with much of its propaganda.
He has also been censured countless times for the misuse of his colleagues' work - http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron.html
Paul Cameron is useful to people like Peter LaBarbera, Robert Knight, Lou Sheldon, and James Dobson because of the lies he tells. Even when they repudiate his work, the anti-gay industry still finds him useful:
July 31, 2005
"(Paul)Cameron's work is controversial even among conservative groups. For example, the Traditional Values Coalition claims to speak for 43,000 churches. For three years, the coalition has quoted Cameron's studies on its website in an article headlined, ''Report Shows Homosexual Foster Parents Apt To Molest Children," and has told its membership to 'read and distribute Dr. Cameron's report.'
But when The Boston Globe asked the Traditional Values Coalition last week about Cameron, the group responded within minutes by removing all references to Cameron from its website. The group's spokeswoman, Daniella Lopez, said Cameron's research had been ''mistakenly" put on the website." - Beliefs Drive Research Agenda of Think Tanks, The Boston Globe
March 31, 2006
I order a copy of Traditional Values Coalition head Lou Sheldon's The Agenda. One of the passages from The Agenda is as follows:
"In 1993 and 1994, Dr. Paul Cameron conducted an important study of the mortality rates of homosexuals . . . what he found ws that the median age of death was the late thirties for those who acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). For those who had not developed AIDS, the median age of death was only slightly longer, in their early forties."
September 12
While The Agenda was published before the Boston Globe interview, neither Sheldon nor his organization has made any type of public comment regarding the usage of Cameron's work in The Agenda. Nor is it known whether or not the Traditional Values Coalition issued any type of recall of The Agenda.
September 12
The report, Exposed:Homosexual Child Molesters, remains on the Traditional Values Coalition webpage. The report contains these two passages:
“Drs. Freund and Heasman of the Clark Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto reviewed two studies on child molesters and calculated that 34% and 32% of sex offenders were homosexual. In cases these doctors handled, 36% of the molesters were homosexual.”
“In 1987, Dr. Stephen Rubin of Whitman College conducted a ten-state study of sex abuse cases involving school teachers. He studied 199 cases. Of those, 122 male teachers had molested girls, while 14 female teachers had molested boys. He also discovered that 59 homosexual male teachers had molested boys and female homosexual teachers had molested girls. In other words, 32 percent of those child molestation cases involved homosexuals. Nearly a third of these cases come from 1-2 percent of the population.”
Now check out these two passages from Paul Cameron's study, Child Molestation and Homosexuality:
“Drs. Freund and Heasman of the Clark Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto reviewed two sizeable studies and calculated that 34% and 32% of the offenders against children were homosexual. In cases they had personally handled, homosexuals accounted for 36% of their 457 pedophiles"
“In 1987, Dr. Stephen Rubin, associate professor of psychology at Whitman College, conducted a 10 state survey and found 199 sexual abuse cases involving teachers. 122 male teachers had abused female pupils and 14 female teachers had abused male students. In 59 cases, however, male teachers had abused male pupils and in 4 cases, female teachers had abused female students (overall 32% were homosexual).”
To paraphrase Rod Serling, "nothing more to be said here."
Paul Cameron is a controversial "researcher," who has provided the anti-gay industry with much of its propaganda.
He has also been censured countless times for the misuse of his colleagues' work - http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron.html
Paul Cameron is useful to people like Peter LaBarbera, Robert Knight, Lou Sheldon, and James Dobson because of the lies he tells. Even when they repudiate his work, the anti-gay industry still finds him useful:
July 31, 2005
"(Paul)Cameron's work is controversial even among conservative groups. For example, the Traditional Values Coalition claims to speak for 43,000 churches. For three years, the coalition has quoted Cameron's studies on its website in an article headlined, ''Report Shows Homosexual Foster Parents Apt To Molest Children," and has told its membership to 'read and distribute Dr. Cameron's report.'
But when The Boston Globe asked the Traditional Values Coalition last week about Cameron, the group responded within minutes by removing all references to Cameron from its website. The group's spokeswoman, Daniella Lopez, said Cameron's research had been ''mistakenly" put on the website." - Beliefs Drive Research Agenda of Think Tanks, The Boston Globe
March 31, 2006
I order a copy of Traditional Values Coalition head Lou Sheldon's The Agenda. One of the passages from The Agenda is as follows:
"In 1993 and 1994, Dr. Paul Cameron conducted an important study of the mortality rates of homosexuals . . . what he found ws that the median age of death was the late thirties for those who acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). For those who had not developed AIDS, the median age of death was only slightly longer, in their early forties."
September 12
While The Agenda was published before the Boston Globe interview, neither Sheldon nor his organization has made any type of public comment regarding the usage of Cameron's work in The Agenda. Nor is it known whether or not the Traditional Values Coalition issued any type of recall of The Agenda.
September 12
The report, Exposed:Homosexual Child Molesters, remains on the Traditional Values Coalition webpage. The report contains these two passages:
“Drs. Freund and Heasman of the Clark Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto reviewed two studies on child molesters and calculated that 34% and 32% of sex offenders were homosexual. In cases these doctors handled, 36% of the molesters were homosexual.”
“In 1987, Dr. Stephen Rubin of Whitman College conducted a ten-state study of sex abuse cases involving school teachers. He studied 199 cases. Of those, 122 male teachers had molested girls, while 14 female teachers had molested boys. He also discovered that 59 homosexual male teachers had molested boys and female homosexual teachers had molested girls. In other words, 32 percent of those child molestation cases involved homosexuals. Nearly a third of these cases come from 1-2 percent of the population.”
Now check out these two passages from Paul Cameron's study, Child Molestation and Homosexuality:
“Drs. Freund and Heasman of the Clark Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto reviewed two sizeable studies and calculated that 34% and 32% of the offenders against children were homosexual. In cases they had personally handled, homosexuals accounted for 36% of their 457 pedophiles"
“In 1987, Dr. Stephen Rubin, associate professor of psychology at Whitman College, conducted a 10 state survey and found 199 sexual abuse cases involving teachers. 122 male teachers had abused female pupils and 14 female teachers had abused male students. In 59 cases, however, male teachers had abused male pupils and in 4 cases, female teachers had abused female students (overall 32% were homosexual).”
To paraphrase Rod Serling, "nothing more to be said here."
Monday, September 11, 2006
More on Timothy Dailey
Yesterday's revelation that Peter LaBarbera used a bad fallacy about the gay men and pedophilia via Family Research Council member Timothy Dailey only scratches the surface.
Throwing out lies against the gay community is not a new thing to Mr. Dailey. Dailey has spread negative propaganda about the gay community on many instances and every time he has taken the guise of a concerned Ph.D. when doing it.
Dailey has a Ph.D. in religion. With all due respect, he should have a Ph.D. in lying.
A perfect example is a study he created entitled Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples (http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02).
Yesterday's revelation that Peter LaBarbera used a bad fallacy about the gay men and pedophilia via Family Research Council member Timothy Dailey only scratches the surface.
Throwing out lies against the gay community is not a new thing to Mr. Dailey. Dailey has spread negative propaganda about the gay community on many instances and every time he has taken the guise of a concerned Ph.D. when doing it.
Dailey has a Ph.D. in religion. With all due respect, he should have a Ph.D. in lying.
A perfect example is a study he created entitled Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples (http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02).
If there is one example of this study that proves Dailey's shoddy work and lack of credibility, it has to be in the portion where he compares the promiscuity levels of gay and straight couples.
Let me break it down in a nutshell for you:
Dailey’s theory - Homosexual couples are less monogamous than heterosexual married couples
Dailey’s examples of married heterosexual couples:
A nationally representative survey of 884 men and 1,288 women published in the Journal of Sex Research in 1997
Another 1997 national survey appearing in the Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States
A telephone survey conducted for Parade magazine of 1,049 adults selected to represent the demographic characteristics of the United States published in 1994.
Dailey’s examples of homosexual couples:
A Dutch study of gay men in steady and casual partnerships in the Netherlands. The researcher, Dr. Maria Xiridou, took her data for this study from the Amsterdam Cohort Studies (ACS). The ACS collected data between the years of 1984-2000. http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/Articles/000,003.htm
(One more thing: same-sex marriage was legalized in the Netherlands in 2001)
Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women, published in 1979. The authors of the study, Bell and Weinberg went on record saying that their study was not indicative of all gay couples. Their exact words, which is included in the book are: ". . . given the variety of circumstances which discourage homosexuals from participating in research studies, it is unlike that any investigator will ever be in a position to say that this or that is true of a given percentage of all homosexuals."
A study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in the Journal of Sex Research published in 1997. The study included homosexual men in other countries. More than three quarters of men were born in Australia or New Zealand (78.1%), a high number of the men were from United Kingdom or elsewhere in Europe (19.5%) and a small percentage of men surveyed were from other countries (Asia, Africa, Oceania, North, Central or South America - 2.3%).
A survey conducted by gay magazine Genre. Dailey did not study the results himself, but received them from a web page created by your friend and mine, Peter LaBarbera.
Dailey is clearly creating piecemeal trash.
In the first place, the Dutch study is not a fair comparison with any the three examples used for heterosexual couples because the data was collected over a span of 16 years (for gays who were not even married or counted as monogamous) in contrast with a span of one year (married heterosexual couples).
Also, all surveys for heterosexual couples originated in the United States, while the studies featuring gays were mostly from other countries. Lesbians are not even included.
The truly sad thing is that these studies are repeated by other so-called "pro family" groups and supporters as proof of the "abnormality" of the gay community.
How sad indeed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)