Oh Lawd, not again!

No this column isn't about Ken Hutcherson.

Some may think that in light of the election primaries, what I am about to say is trite, but I disagree.

This Friday, there will a movie starring rapper Ice Cube and comedian Tracy Morgan entitled First Sunday.

It is a comedy about two men who decide to rob a church. It looked interesting.

And that is saying a lot from a person who has seen his share of African-American comedies.

But then comes the "required scene."

Not too many folks are aware of this but there seems to be an ugly standard of operation in many African-American oriented comedies to make fun of lgbts.

If the character is a gay man, then he is usually an oversexed man with a name like "Flame" or "Peaches" and he is portrayed as a nonthreatening flamboyant entity who is a part of the congregation of women gathered at either the hair saloon or other places that black women hang out.

If the character is a lesbian, she is portrayed a threatening figure who cannot figure out that she is a woman and therefore is required to wear something flimsy that highlights her tits or ass. In other words, she is a "threat" to "true black men."

But the worse stereotypes are reserved for our transgender sisters.

They are portrayed as deceivers who are always trying to "trick" black men into being intimate with them. The joke is that when the "luckless victim" discovers the ruse, he rushes out in disgust, eliciting extreme laughter from the audience.

This last degree of disrespect features prominently in the previews of First Sunday.

Now I could say something that is long, thoughtful, but I am too tired.

I am too tired from work and am especially tired of being asked to support movies that make fun of my orientation.

I don't care if the screenplay writer is black, the director is black, the majority of stars is black, etc. etc.

As I am concerned, First Sunday will never be on my menu.

And I sincerely hope that one day, more lgbts of color will feel the same way I do.

That "sweet" smell of politics in the air

Even Robet Duvall would probably gag if he ever took a whiff of the air when an election season rolls around.

Even though it's only the primaries, the 2008 election promises to be very interesting.

I am taking a sort of Machiavellian outlook on the entire process. I won't say who I am supporting.

But if you think I am support anyone Republican, you are insane.

After eight years of Super Shrub, I echo the tone of the Obama campaign (which when you really think about it, is rather smart) - change.

I will, however, admit that it is fun to watch the Republican candidates cannibalize each other. Teflon Rom and Bibleman Huckabee seems to be an excellent match.

But seriously, unless something serious happens, I am going to post as I always do on this site, but the majority of my energy will be devoted to updating my other webpage.

I will be updating that page at least once a week. And news of updates will on this blog as well as on the other page.

Look for a big update to come this weekend.

I tend to think that the Republican candidates are too busy attacking each other to focus on any interesting attacks on us.

By the time they put it in their heads to amass their base by telling lies on lgbts, I should have a good time line ready to throw truth on their claims.

The day after . . .

Thanks to everyone who made my new webpage a success.

But apparently not everyone is happy. Our friend Peter LaBarbera (who swore up and down that he would not read my "silly" page) is high HIGHLY upset over the comparison I included of Anti-Semitic speech and homophobic speech.

Get over it, Peter. No matter how angry you get, it still holds up.

(UPDATE - My bad! Apparently Peter is not mad at the comparison on my webpage. He is upset over what I said to him via email. You see, Peter and I had been emailing each other last night concerning my page. I wasn't about to give him the last word. He got angry about my following statement:

That truth will come out and nothing will ever change that. You made mention to Nazis in your response. When it is all said in done, in the eyes of many, people won't know the difference between you, your cohorts and them. Because really there is no difference, is there?

Well I stand by that comment. And looking at the rhetoric that Peter and his side uses, I can back it up.

And speaking of our friend Peter, apparently he is not done exploiting that 14-year-old who wrote him recently. Another pal of Peter, Laurie Higgins, wrote the child a letter.

Naturally Peter prints it on his site.

She repeats the usual nonsense about homosexuality. But there is one thing she said that I found hilarious:

Our bodies are not designed for homosexual sex. They are exquisitely designed for heterosex.

Apparently Higgins is channeling that same nonsense that is repeated constantly in anti-gay language (and I make reference to it on my other page):

That anal sex is "homosexual behavior." That train of thought is a serious lie.

All gay men do not have anal sex. But some heterosexuals do.

Does that make those heterosexuals gay?

And Higgins claims that she cares that others are teaching children lies.

Apparently she is not above telling a few herself.

I now present:

‘Holy Bullies’ author expands fight against anti-gay lies

New webpage will include a time line of distortions

January 2, 2008—South Carolina author Alvin McEwen is taking his fight against anti-gay rhetoric to another level with the launching of a new webpage.

In August 2007, McEwen published Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry. The book chronicled how the religious right, or anti-gay industry as McEwen refers to them, distorts studies and semantics to demonize the gay community.

"I have had tremendous success with my book," McEwen said. "But I want to create a wider understanding of the tactics of the anti-gay industry and their history of distortions.

The webpage page, Anti-Gay Lies and Liars, spotlights six distortion techniques of the anti-gay industry, the top lies they use against gays and lesbians, as well as a comparison between Anti-Semitic and homophobic language.

Central to the webpage is a historical time line of distortions, scientific complaints about religious right data, faulty media campaigns, and other things that McEwen say is crucial to the religious right’s war on gay America.

"And the time line isn’t done yet," he said. "It will be a continued work-in-progress. I want to include every lie and every distortion the anti-gay industry commits. I want to include information about Anita Bryant , Paul Cameron, every distorted study, every discredited study. If the anti-gay industry has lied about it, I want to include it."

McEwen calls the webpage a handy guide for anyone looking to disseminate religious right propaganda.

"The next time a press release or statement comes from these phony pro-family groups, I challenge anyone to not find at least two points of propaganda from my list," McEwen said.

He also said knowing religion right propaganda techniques are crucial if the gay community wants to win this so-called culture war.

"Simple functions like an office worker putting a up picture of his significant gay other or a child reared in a same-sex household writing a report about her family take on sinister undertones of an alleged conspiracy to shut down values," McEwen said. "And that is the big lie the anti-gay industry tries to sell to America. That ordinary things gays and lesbians do, things which make us no different than anyone else, are somehow insidious points of attack in a huge plan of invasion.If we are to refute this lie, then we need to educate ourselves on their tactics."

The address of McEwen’s new webpage is http://antigayliesandliars.blogspot.com/

Anyone wanting to reach McEwen can email him at CharleKenghis@aol.com

(Bear with my page guys because it is a work-in-progress which I hope can be used to educate and inform. By all means look it over, take the information in, and spread the word. Thanks!)

From the department of stupidity . . .

Still working on my project. Hope to have it finished by tomorrow evening.

But something I noticed today, that I have to put down something on.

Our friend Peter has reprinted a letter sent to him by a 14-year-old:

Please read the letter below, which we received Saturday from a 14-year-old atheist boy who hates Americans For Truth. Nothing makes my heart grieve more than a confused young person rejecting God and embracing an unnatural sexual identity (”gayness”) built around ungodly behavior that up until a few decades ago was viewed as so immoral that it wasn’t even discussed in public. I don’t know Joe, but I can safely say that his tragic life choice was made easier by the organized homosexual movement. This is the saddest end result of “gay pride” — corrupting the hearts and minds of young people and helping to put them in grave physical, emotional and spiritual danger:

To put it bluntly, I probably hate you more than anything else in the world. Like many others, I believe you have the moral equivalent of a modern-day KKK: hating people for being different and having opposing beliefs. I am a liberal, gay, atheistic 14 year old boy, and I believe I have more morals than you. You are a disgrace to humanity. I’m sorry that I am being so childish in my "argument” which is turning out like hate mail, but I just cannot put in words how much I disagree with you. Homosexuals should have rights because they are humans, capable of thinking logically and making decisions, just like you and me. And why does what other people do sexually concern you at all? I want you to tell me, from a non-religious standpoint, exactly how homosexuals are hurting you? Because if they are not negatively affecting you in any way (which is what a suspect) then you should have no problem with them. Most of America knows the truth about homosexuality, which is that it is a preference, not a choice, just like a favorite food to put it in simple terms. You like it, because it pleases you, not because you choose to like a certain food. I’m sorry that this message has stretched so long, and I would like a reply and a rebuttal to my claims. USING LOGIC, not religion. -Joe [————-]

The letter is not as dramatic as Peter makes it out to be. Seems to me that the child is just venting, as all children do.

I do kind of feel sorry for the child because I recognize a little of myself in him. When I was just coming out, I used to call the 700 Club, yell at the person on the other line and then hang up.

Such behavior is juvenile. This is not to say that the letter was inconsiderate. I am sure that it is more polite than some of the other letters Peter has been sent.

My point is that Peter refuses to recognize the fact that his rhetoric and lies created this situation. Don't blame gay pride or the "homosexual movement."

It isn't gay pride or the "homosexual movement" that dehumanizes and attacks the lives of lgbts on daily basis.

That's you, Peter. And that young boy's anger is your fault.

Goodbye 2007, Hello 2008

It has been a good year . . .

but I don't have time to recap now. I am working on something that I hope will help get information to our community about the lies of the anti-gay industry.

I hope to have it done by January 2.

Keep your fingers crossed and have an excellent new year!!!!!

Peter LaBarbera's homophobia bites him in the ass

In recent pleas for money, Peter LaBarbera has claimed that we lgbts unfairly brand him as homophobic. Peter further claims that all he is doing to speak the "truth" regarding homosexuality:

Yes, they absolutely HATE us because we stand unapologetically against their sexual ideology as one that a holy Creator can have no part of. This “culture war” is not about us — it’s about right versus wrong . . .

To say that he is full of shit would be the overstatement of the decade. So how about a demonstration courtesy of his actions today.

This morning, he published an article spotlighting a hideous crime perpetrated against a gay man:

The victim, a gay man, was raped, attacked, and "sodomized" with a broomstick after leaving a party Friday night -The attacker, Felipe Rivera, had also been at the party. However, he was asked to leave because he had punched the victim in the face after, according to Rivera, the victim winked at him.

After being booted from the party, the attacker waited outside for the vicim to leave. The attacker claims the victim propositioned him for sex, but the victim denies this. In fact, the Chicago Tribune reports that "the victim alleged he had refused an offer from Rivera to pay him $50 for sex later in the evening." But regardless of who truly wanted sex from whom, the attacker proceeded to punch, rape, and stick the broom up the victim's rectum.

When asked why he did it, the attacker is alleged to have said, "because he hates 'faggots,' and this is what they get." The attacker is also said to have shouted anti-gay epithets at the victim while he was attacking.

That is awful. But here is what Peter said about the crime:

Our question: what percentage of “anti-gay hate crimes” are actually committed by people who themselves are involved in homosexual behavior? If this Chicago Tribune report is accurate, then this is no typical ”gay panic defense” – whereby a man blames his assault on a homosexual by claiming that the victim first made an unwanted sexual advance toward him — because the alleged perpetrator here offers to pay his victim for homosexual sex and then sexually assaults him.

We also know that some men may secretly (or even not so secretly) engage (or desire) homosexual perversions yet eschew the “gay” label for themselves – so the fact that Rivera told police that he “hates homosexuals” tells us little. He may hate that part of himself drawn to deviant homosexual acts.

Behavior, not self-labels, is what counts: we wonder how many cases like this end up on the FBI’s list as an “anti-gay” “hate-crime” statistic — to be exploited later, ironically, by “gay” activists lobbying for dubious pro-homosexual “hate crimes” laws … We’ll follow this story closely. — Peter LaBarbera

And the interesting part of the entire situation - later this day, Peter's post was "mysteriously" deleted from his webpage.

If you asked me, I think Peter slipped and showed his homophobia.

Here is an ugly crime committed against a gay man by an individual so psychotic that his mother called the police (i.e. that is how he was caught. Apparently his mother had an order of protection against him even before the alleged crime was committed.).

But the only thing Peter cares about is exploiting this crime as further proof of how "ugly" homosexuality is.

To Peter, the fact that someone was the victim of a crime ranks lower than the fact he can brand the perpetrator as gay.

How is that truth?

Sounds like homophobia to me.

And to make matters worse, when caught, he tries to make a quiet exit.

The Bible says that when you do wrong, you should apologize.

Peter's deletion of his article seems to be a small admittance of wrong. But Peter, if you are a true Christian, then perhaps you owe the lgbt community a public apology.

We are waiting.

Big thanks to goodasyou.org for this story.

UPDATE - Apparently Peter has apologized for his sloppy work. But he has reprinted his nonsense. The following analyzation is from goodasyou.org, who have been on top of this story:

One interesting note about Pete's new post: He reprints his old post with a line stricken through the part that he nw considers erroneous. However, in a curious move, he added a passage to his original post, as if it had been there all along. The new paragraph reads:
"One more question: if same-sex sexual assaults are classified as “hate crimes,” what about men who rape women (or vice versa)? Shouldn’t these sex crimes also be labeled “hate crimes” against women, as they are typically motivated by contempt and misogyny (hatred of women)? We’ll follow this story closely."

And as you can see from both our quoted text as well as the Google Cache of his original post, this paragraph was never in the original article. Why the duplicity, Peter?

And then Peter just can't seem to help himself but tell another deception:

We know there is a problem with homosexual-on-homosexual violence (hence the book, Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them). It seems ludicrous to call such crimes “anti-gay hate crimes” — for use in the “gay” propaganda cycle that feeds off exaggerated spinning of FBI data to imply an outbreak of (straight) “anti-gay violence” that doesn’t exist.

Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them was a book written 13 years ago. If there is a "big" problem with same-sex relationship abuse, then why couldn't Peter have found a more current source than a 13-year-old book?

More importantly, the book dealt with relationship violence. So why does Peter make reference to this book that deals with relationship violence when talking about a crime in which there was no relationship between the victim and the perpetrator?

Because Peter seems to be trying covertly insult the nature of lgbt relationships in general. He seems to be inferring that what happened to that young man is indicative of lgbt relationships.

Damn Peter, even when you apologize you make things worse.

No matter how you try to cover it up, your homophobia comes shining through.