One News Now - My guilty pleasure

I enjoy reading One News Now.

I'm almost ashamed to admit it but that site is as fun to read as Perez Hilton's blog.

One News Now (formerly Agape Press) is the journalistic arm of the American Family Association. It supposedly gives the "Christian" side of today's news events. This, however, usually translates to one sided drivel which purpose is to scare or inflame people of faith through lies, distortions, and a dash of appealing to their egos.

But the site also has a comments section. And that is the part I enjoy reading.

Anyone can rate an article and to respond to what he or she has read.

In reading posted comments, I can gauge the mindsets of those who choose to believe the junk flowing from One News Now. And that is always fun.

In responding to articles, I, or anyone else, can point out inaccuracies. And many pro-gay comments end up printed, much to the consternation of some One News Now readers.

Some of these folks have even asked why gays read and respond to the site.

Well it's simple.

One News Now usually focuses on gay issues, albeit in an one-sided and inaccurate way. LGBTs have every right to respond. Especially if we are provided a forum to respond.

And I am happy to say that many of us tend to respond in an intelligent manner.

The "fun" article to read right now is the following:

Obama would use 'bully pulpit' to advance homosexual agenda

Some of the comments are "interesting," to say the least:

"Homosexuality is abnormal. This is confirmed by the biological incompatibility of two people of the same gender. No one knows why a person is gay, whether this flaw is of genetic or personality origin. No matter what causes it, it is nothing of which to be proud. Nor should it warrant special laws. I would never condone the infliction of physical harm because of a person’s choice of bedroom partners, but I also do not believe in same sex marriage, and I do not believe that gays should be in the military. Nor do I feel it is proper for gays to adopt children. Homosexuality is not an alternate lifestyle; it is an unhealthy perversion. We Christians, who incidentally are not ignorant losers, cannot be expected to embrace a culture adverse to our beliefs. Certainly, we pray for the homosexual, but we are entitled to withhold our approval."

"The church has fathers? Are these fathers supernatural or human?"

"Obama is the trogan horse of the Radical Left. Now we know what the real change he says he represents is. I will be voting for the presidential candidate of THE CONSTITUTION PARTY."

"It is obvious we need to Ask God to change these people or pour out his Wrath.As a Christian I'm just fed-up with these deviates in Leadership in this Country aswell as all over the world. We need to Be Pray Warriors for Revival in Pagan American Politicians"

"Before I became a Christian, I divorced my first wife and then married my current wife. Then I became a Christian. So what you are saying is that if I have sexual relations with my second wife then I am actually commiting adultery against my first wife who in the eyes of the Lord I am still actually married. I don't like the sound of this. Can we go back to talking about homosexuals again please?"

"Someone wrote: "I do not Hate you because you are Gay. I hate the sin , unnatural sex is immorral. You HATE me because I am a Christian. That is where we need to work on the laws in this country. There are many Christians being persecuted by Gays." This is preposterous. Gays are only working to get equal rights under the law. Some Christians are working to deny them these rights. Gays do not hate Christians (in fact most gays ARE Christian), but they are frustrated with the Christians that attack gays in the name of their religion. To suggest that Christians are persecuted by gays is laughable. Just in the last week, I heard of 2 gays that were murdered just for being gay. How often does that happen to Christians? And certainly not by gays."

"I can only say that the Christian voter must truly weep over the Pagan candidates running for the highest office of our land! Sad to say, not even our churches fight for morality anymore. Satan in hell is smiling!"

You mean it was staged? Gasp and swoon!

The situation in Maryland regarding the anti-discrimination law referendum continues to become interesting.

It amazes me how low folks who oppose the law will stoop to scare people.

A while back, an "incident" took place that supposedly proved the opposition's claim that the anti-discrimination law would lead to men being able to invade women's locker rooms and bathrooms.

Allegedly, a man dressed as a woman entered a local gym locker room.

Folks like myself said that it was a nasty hoax, while the opposition beat around the bush regarding it.

Until now:

Shower-Nuts Admit Rio Incident Was Staged

This situation keeps getting better and better. Who needs Marlena, Roman and the rest from Days of Our Lives when supposed "moral people" provides so much better entertainment.

The heel has become the face

Many who read this blog know that I have a thing for pro wrestling. I guess I love the soap opera quality combined with the wanton violence.

My favorite plot device is the changing of a heel into a face. A heel, in wrestling terminology, is a bad guy or the one who is booed because he cheats.

The face is the good guy who generally plays by the rules and tries to overcome the evil of the heel.

Every now and then, there comes a shift. A heel will be done dirty by other heels and will suddenly become a good guy. And the audience, who once booed him will cheer him with much fervor.

It's amazing how much reality can sometimes seem to be similar to pro wrestling.

Many of you know that I'm not exactly an Obama supporter due to that mess last year with Donnie McClurkin. It's not that I wouldn't vote for Obama should he get the nomination, it's just that I don't fully trust him.

But today, the heel (Obama) is slowly becoming a face in my eyes, thanks to a bigger heel - Kevin McCullough.

For those who don't know, McCullough is yet another one of those "conservative columnists" who are long on rhetoric, but short on facts.

I thought McCullough was busy. Many don't know this but he made a stupid comment about a video a while back and proceeded to get his ass verbally whipped from one end of the internet to the other by the gaming community.

So now he is moving back to the gay folks.

Obama had written an open letter to the gay and lesbian community pledging support.

McCullough responded with a nasty slur that can be seen here.

I will say this - I don't trust Obama totally just like I don't trust any candidate. Our community would be stupid if we blindly followed anyone to the White House. Support, yes. Trust, no.

Politics is a game and like all games, the winning comes with strategy and position, not blind allegiance.

But having said that, McCullough's ridiculous comments can only help Obama.

After all, it has folks like me leaning to his corner.

Eight seconds in the echo chamber

Yesterday, I didn't post an entry because I was sidetracked with a touch of the flu.

That doesn't mean that things weren't taking place.

The readers of this blog are aware of my keen interest in a situation in Maryland regarding an anti-discrimination law protecting members of the transgender community.

An organization seeking a referendum against the law apparently got enough signatures to force the vote. They accomplished this by claiming that the law would make it easy for men and pedophiles to enter women's restrooms and locker rooms.

They did this despite the fact that they were told the law would not allow such things to take place.

Almost immediately after they turned in petitions, their credibility came under a huge amount of scrutiny. Local council members went on record saying that the group was misleading people in order to get them to sign the petition.

So the group has now made a claim that they were harrassed by a council member's aide. They even have the alleged event on youtube.

You can see it here.

So was it harrassment? I doubt it. But judge for yourself.

The interesting thing about the entire situation is the echo chamber in which it played. The group's version of events played on World Net Daily, One News Now, and a press release by the Traditional Values Coalition - not necessarily gay friendly places.

And the Traditional Values Coalition was rather ugly in describing the alleged harrasser:

Hillary Clinton She-Male Advisor Harasses Maryland Signature Gatherers

These folks just gotta sneak Hilary Clinton in the situation. Talk about obsession.

And it gets more interesting. Apparently there is a chance that the signatures may be invalid if the petitioners misled potential signers.

It is too early to tell but that lie that bites you in the ass if you tell it long enough sounds like its beginning to sharpen its teeth.

Dawn Stefanowicz again?

It always amazes me how the anti-gay industry constantly complain that they are unfairly called bigots because they "merely oppose homosexuality on a Biblical basis" and then proceed to act out in ways that prove correct all arguments about their bigotry.

Case in point: This thing about Dawn Stefanowicz.

I have talked about this woman a few times here and here but her "story" bears repeating.

Stefanowicz claims that she suffered psychological abuse because of being raised in a same-sex household. She has not only written a book about it but also has a webpage.

The problem is that she (and many people who use her story) blame the gay orientation of her father for her abuse rather than the fact that he was a bad parent.

And it continues today with this link from our friend Peter.

Goodasyou.org breaks down this lie with its usual awesome candor, but I want everyone to check something out. It's something I noticed a while back and wrote concerning Stefanowicz's testimony:

In this article in Agape Press (editor's note -Thanks for the link, Emproph!), she recounts her tale, but using the verbage the anti-gay industry uses against us:

“According to Stefanowicz, the liberal media in Canada has done a ‘very poor job’ of presenting evidence on the influence the homosexual lifestyle has on children. ‘Scientific data and negative personal experiences related to this issue that are obviously relevant — they’re ignored, they’re not discussed,’ she says.”

And what studies are these? I noticed that on her personal webpage, she recounts her life. It is pretty much the same story she repeated in the August 2005 American Family Association Journal.

But there is one difference.

Her American Family Association story contains endnotes and references to studies and columns by various so-called “pro family” groups and spokespeople including Family Research Council’s Timothy Dailey (debunked on this and other sites), Stephen Bennett, and our friend Paul Cameron.

The version of her personal story present on her webpage have the endnotes and references conveniently omitted.

I used to give Stefanowicz the benefit of the doubt, but the more I hear about this woman, the more I am beginning to doubt the veracity of her story.

And constantly repeating her story as a correct indication of life for children in same-sex households says more about the homophobia of Peter LaBarbera and others like him more than we ever can.

The day after the Oscars

Sorry y'all but the Monday blaaaahs have a hold on me and it's the day after the Oscars so I am going to desist from talking about the anti-gay industry (just for today) and focus on what I saw last night:

John Stewart rocked as host and I don't care what anyone says. Of course I say this because a good friend of mine (and a writer on the Daily Show) helped write his jokes.

Jonah Hill is hot. Seth Rogen is hot. So is Philip Seymour Hoffman. You boys can have Colin Farrell. I know what I like.

I love that Tilda Swinton won. She should have been nominated for The Deep End a couple of years ago. Of course it's obvious that she didn't think she was going to win. Geez girl, put on a better dress and make up.

Cate Blanchette seems to be having a fun time even though she has lost her last three nominations. Last year, she was looking at Jennifer Hudson with a smile on her face when her name was called. This year, she practically leaped out of her chair when Marion Collitard won. Now that's an Oscar fan.

So the best picture is about a guy pursued by a psychopath with a bad haircut. Hell that's my life when I used to go to the clubs.

If you look closely at the mass of bling that Nicole Kidman wore around her neck, you can almost make out the phrase, "who the hell is Tom Cruise anyway?"

This message is to Jennifer Garner: Girlfriend, mace is a good friend to have. Gary Busey scares even me. And I'm the one who thinks Jonah Hill is hot.

Where the hell are my Edith Piaf records!

How could they snub Whoopi Goldberg during the montage of Oscar hosts!!!!

If you all think of any others, let me know

Situation in Maryland is nothing new

Peter LaBarbera's exploitation of African-American history (see below) was something I just had to comment on. But the following is the post I wanted to do for today:

The situation regarding the anti-discrimination law in Maryland is nothing new. Those seeking a referendum of the law got enough signatures on their petition because they made the false claim that the law created a loophole for men and pedophiles to invade women's restrooms and locker rooms.

This is an old tactic by the anti-gay industry known as dire consequences, or claiming that a pro-gay law would lead to all sorts of negative consequences. Usually the anti-gay industry relies on hypothetical sitautions and relie mostly on the fears and prejudices of their audience. I thought for today, I would print an excerpt from my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, that talks in detail about this tactic:

One of the most effective tactics of the anti-gay industry is to claim that pro-gay laws will lead to “dire consequences.” They claim that laws created to protect gays and lesbians 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 anti-gay industry data.

. . . so-called “pro-family” groups create the same illogical leap to form the same incorrect conclusions. They claim that pro-gay laws 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, Concerned Women for America, March 4, 2003

Knights’ replacement in Concerned Women for America, Matt Barber, made the same claims about the Employee Non-Discrimination Act in 2007:

“Imagine, if you will, a 280 lb linebacker who likes to wear a dress and high heels and lipstick, you know comes to church wanting a job at the front desk as a receptionist and they turn him away because they don’t feel that that represents their values or the image that they’re trying to hold at that church, under ENDA they could be held accountable for discrimination against that individual.”

The anti-gay industry also use the “dire consequences” claim in efforts to kill hate crimes legislation.

Hate crimes legislation already exists. It covers crimes based on race and religion. So-called “pro-family” groups have not expressed disagreements with these laws. They only have a problem with sexual orientation being added to the categories.

In December 2005, 20 so-called “pro-family” groups ran an ad in major newspapers claiming that hate crimes legislation places more importance on gays than those who call themselves “ex-gay.”


Playing up the slavery angle

Our friend Peter LaBarbera continues to attempt to milk the Creating Change conference:

Pastor Ken Hutcherson Calls on DNC to ‘Demand Its Money Back’ from ‘Gay’ Group that Honored S&M Slavery Advocate

“This is Dr. Kenneth Hutcherson responding to a donation made by the Democratic National Committee to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. I first heard from my good friend and fellow conservative, Rush Limbaugh that this had taken place. This has been confirmed by Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth. These are two sources that I trust and believe.

“The DNC gave at least $2,500 to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force so they could award Guy Baldwin, an advocate of sadomasochism and “consensual slavery.”

“As an African American leader and Pastor, I insist the DNC demand its money back. How can the DNC say they stand for African Americans and at the same time support a perversion that belittles and makes a mockery of our suffering under slavery?

“We must make sure we stand against all forms of tyranny and call out anyone who supports this agenda.”

So Peter is trying to push a "how dare the DNC promote something about slavery during Black History Month" angle.

Since when did Peter care about African-Americans. I know he doesn't give a care for African-American lgbts.

Now Hutcherson may be a black pastor but he has a reputation for egotism. This trait leads him to go off half cocked and make outrageous comments, many of which have been chronicled (with much amusement) here.

It was cute at first but his act is wearing thin.

And the inanity of this attempt by Peter doesn't exactly give Hutcherson any credibility. Nor does it help Peter.