Peter LaBarbera tries to regain relevancy through lies

I think our friend Peter LaBarbera from Americans for Truth (in name only) is scrambling for attention.

Fresh from the disappointment of Hurricane Gustav killing his attempts to take pictures of "naked gay men" during Southern Decadence, Peter has been mute for a while. That is except for pathetic attempts to make Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin the new Christian martyr.

And now low and behold comes the Ray Boltz situation.

Boltz, a gospel singer who has come out as a gay man, seems to have gotten LaBarbera's undivided attention:

Ray Boltz Buys the Lie, Says God Made Him Homosexual

An excerpt reads as follows:

(Self-styled “queer” activists will say that Boltz was living a lie, but his four children do not owe their existence to a “gay” lifestyle.) I read the entire Blade story, but all you really need to know is in the final paragraph:

“This is what it really comes down to,” [Boltz] says. “If this is the way God made me , then this is the way I’m going to live. It’s not like God made me this way and he’ll send me to hell if I am who he created me to be … I really feel closer to God because I no longer hate myself.”

Wow, talk about presumption! This talented man is lost and he needs our prayers. Boltz may “feel” closer to God, but if you believe the Scriptures, he’s farther than ever from Him. We understand that the radical “gay” movement exalts its collective “feelings” over the Bible’s clear teaching — and certainly they are not alone in that regard — but each of us must choose between the truth and lies every day, and homosexual behavior is egregiously sinful, according to God’s Word. (See www.robgagnon.net if you are tempted to rationalize away the Bible’s clear condemnation of homosexual practice.) You just can’t sugarcoat that verdict, although these days even many Christians try.

Peter seems to go out of his way to bring up "success stories" of gays who have "changed" as if that negates Boltz's life story.

The fact of the matter is they don't. But that's not what attracted me to Peter's screed.

The subject of this blog has to do with how the anti-gay industry distorts studies and science to make some sort of case that homosexuality is a "dangerous lifestyle."

And Peter's piece perfectly illustrates my point. Particularly this part:

Would society ever hold up the men and women who tried to overcome addictions but then failed and returned to their destructive habit as the norm and role models for others? (Yes, homosexual practice is a destructive habit, as attested by the drastically shortened lifespans and high incidence of disease among men who practice same-sex sin.)

No Peter.

Now the links that Peter uses to make this case comes from earlier posts on his blog.

The link about "high incidence of disease" comes from a post where former Concerned Women for America spokesman Matt Barber castigated former National Gay and Lesbian Task Force head Matt Foreman because Foreman called HIV/AIDS a "gay disease" in a speech at the time. Barber infers that Foreman was admitting that homosexuality is a "deadly lifestyle."

In actuality, Foreman was challenging the gay community to take the initiative to prevent HIV/AIDS in our community.

Much like NAACP head Julian Bond wanted the black community to do when he called HIV/AIDS a "black disease."

Later in the post, Barber says the following:

To the consternation of “gay” activist flat-earthers and homosexual AIDS holocaust deniers everywhere, one such study - conducted by pro-”gay” researchers in Canada - was published in the International Journal of Epidemiology (IJE) in 1997.

While the medical consensus is that smoking knocks from two to 10 years off an individual’s life expectancy, the IJE study found that homosexual conduct shortens the lifespan of “gays” by an astounding “8 to 20 years” - more than twice that of smoking.

“[U]nder even the most liberal assumptions,” concluded the study, “gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871. … [L]ife expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men.”

That is only half the story.

In 2001, those same researchers went on record complaining that folks like Barber was distorting their work.

And Barber knows this because he says a few paragraphs later:

Not surprisingly, that same homosexual lobby and its codependent enablers in the mainstream media moved quickly to sweep the IJE study under the rug. Under tremendous pressure, the researchers who conducted the study even jumped into the political damage control fray issuing a statement which read, “[W]e do not condone the use of our research in a manner that restricts the political or human rights of gay and bisexual men or any other group.”

Matt Barber is a liar. There was never any "pressure" on these researchers.

And please bear in mind that Barber never went into detail as to what the pressure was. He tries to dimiss the letter as "political spin.

The letter is here. Read it and determine if it sounds like spin.

The second link Peter uses to try in order to refute Boltz's declaration of his homosexuality is one having to do with the controversy regarding Bush's pick for Surgeon General, James Holsinger.

You will remember that the Holsinger nomination failed because of intense scrutiny regarding his personal opinions about homosexuality and a paper he wrote about it. Holsinger disavowed the paper to the intense consternation of the anti-gay industry, LaBarbera in general.

In attacking Holsinger's decision to disavow the paper, Peter said:

So desperate are pro-”gay” advocates to force their Bible-rejecting myth on the culture that they downplay even serious health risks that result from embracing behaviors that a loving God proscribes. The result is that children in schools across the country are NOT being taught that there are special dangers, including HIV/AIDS, associated with homosexual behaviors. (See Dr. John Diggs’ paper, “The Health Risks of Gay Sex,” for more information.)

I talk about Diggs' paper in my book and have mentioned it several times in this blog. But the truth always stands repeating. This is the caliber of work that Peter finds credible regarding lgbts.

For those who have not read my book, let me give you an excerpt:

Twice, John R. Diggs includes the study done by Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg in their book, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women, as indicative of the entire gay population. In one passage, he even refers to it as “a far ranging study of homosexual men . . .” But Bell and Weinberg never said that their findings were indicative of all gay men. They actually said “. . . given the variety of circumstances which discourage homosexuals from participating in research studies, it is unlikely that any investigator willever be in a position to say that this or that is true of a given percentage of all homosexuals.”

Diggs cites a Canadian study twice in order to claim that gays have a shorter lifespan than heterosexuals. But his citation of the study is a mischaracterization. In 2001, the six original researchers (Robert S. Hogg, Stefan A. Strathdee, Kevin J.P. Craib, Michael V. O’Shaughnessy, Julion Montaner, and Martin T. Schechter) who conducted that study have gone on record saying that religious conservatives (like Diggs) was distorting their work. - That's right. Just like Barber, Diggs is distorting the Canadian study.

In another section entitled Physical Health, Diggs claims that gays are victims of “gay bowel syndrome.” The term is an obsolete medical term. exist and even the CDC does not use it. In fact, if one was to look at the endnotes of Diggs’ study, he would find that two of the sources he quoted concerning “gay bowel syndrome” were from articles in published in 1976 and 1983, which is consistent with the years that the term existed. One last source was a letter to the editor printed in 1994 but Diggs does not make it clear as to whatwere the circumstances surrounding it.

Diggs generalizes convenience sample studies as indicative of the gay population at large. Diggs takes studies done in foreign countries and claims that they are indicative of the gay population at large.

Diggs claims that there are five distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual populations including levels of promiscuity, physical health, mental health, lifespan, and monogamy. However, he spends very little time comparing the two dynamics. He uses all of his time castigating gay populations.

Diggs uses an out of date book, The Gay Report (published in 1979) to claim that gays are engaging in deviant sexual practices. Only once does he attempt to tie the alleged deviant practices of gays in 1979 to present day; and to do so, he cites two events that took place regarding bondage workshops. However, there is a strong indication that heterosexuals took part in these events as well as gays. Diggs ignores this dynamic.

Nothing that I am saying is new to Peter. He knows that he is using bad sources because I as well as others have pointed it out to him.

But he continues to ignore what we say as if that will make his distortions true.

I think in the case of his attack on Ray Boltz, he has taken a page from the McCain campaign: repeat a lie even after the truth has been discovered.

Sorry Peter but it's not working for them. What in the world makes you think it will work for you?

Tuesday fall out and other gay stuff

Today's post is dedicated to the memory of Alvin S. Glenn. He was a 29-year Army veteran who served in the Korean War and gave his life in 2000 to protect the citizens of South Carolina.

He was my father and a MAN in every sense of the word.

We have gotten all sorts of positive comments from yesterday's press conference. I also noticed a very interesting exchange on SC Politics Today including the following comment:

Being a sodomite is nothing to be gay or proud of. It's an immoral, disgusting chosen lifestyle. They should be classified with all the other sexual perverts and pedophiles and run out of SC.

Of course I had to jump on the responder in a dignified fashion. One cannot take off one's shoes and earrings in every situation.

The lady's comments don't bother me. For one thing, we have supporters who let her know her comments were stupid (for those who watch Designing Women, feel free to channel Dixie Carter's'pronunciation of the word "stupid").

For another, I like the fact that we are getting the state to talk about OUR issues. Debate is the first step in finding solutions.

And on another front . . .

I haven't messed with One News Now in a while (and when I do, it's only because the phony news service makes it so easy), but something caught my eye.

It seems that a popular gospel singer, Ray Boltz , has come out of the closet. Personally, even though I have never heard of him, I support the guy. He is being honest.

Please take a tip from him anonymous black male gospel singers who shall remain nameless.

Anyway, One News Now is all up in arms about this. Particularly offensive to me is the comment by columnist Matt Friedeman:

Boltz' addiction apparently is men . . .

Excuse me? Boltz came out of the closet. That does not denote an addiction.

It is here that we can see the semantics of the anti-gay industry. It is not enough for them to disagree with homosexuality on a religious basis. With their words (including discredited and misrepresented studies), they try to cast the image that being an lgbt is an addiction.

That's why you hear them talk about the supposed "gay agenda" or the "gay lifestyle."

It reminds me of "welfare queen" or "reverse discrimination."

Not a bad idea on a cynically political basis, but very petty when it comes from supposed Christian people.

As usual, Jeremy from Goodasyou.org breaks down the situation better than I ever could:

So let's see here: Molesting a kid, uncontrollably wacking it to porn, boozing it up in excess, hitting a crack pipe, burning down a house, having a crippling addition to intercourse, or -- loving someone of the same sex in the way that others love someone of the opposite sex?! These are all birds of the same feather that deserve similar form of address? Wow, we don't know who should be more offended by that: Gay people who know it's far more apt to compare their orientations to their heterosexual peers, or credible counselors and therapists whose authentic work is far too important to be hampered by biased fallacy!

But hey, why choose? There's enough offense in the "pro-family" community's self-created, self-propagated, highly unscientific views to offend multiple groups of people.

SC Pride press conference goes well

The press conference was over hours ago and it went well. The media was all over the place. We had television news, the State (area newspaper) and the AP there asking questions, filming, and taking notes.

I was going as a supporter and spectator but the chairman of Black Pride called and asked me to read a statement because he couldn't attend.

Talk about a minor shock. I think I did well though. While our president (Ryan Wilson - an absolutely incredible young man who will do a lot of positive things for our community) read his statement, I stood in the background giving off my "I'm security so don't fuck with me" look.

My statement was brief so I was able to go through it without peeing in my pants.

But wouldn't you know it. I was shopping for shoes (yeah, yeah, its a gay thing to do) and missed the newscasts. Oh well. My aunt called and told my mother everything.

At this point, my mother doesn't freak out over any of my community activities. Of course she worries that some dumb ass may take it upon himself to try and be physically homophobic. She has mentioned it slightly on more than one occasion.

But she knows I will be safe. My mother is one of those old fashioned black women from the country, where they have more churches than houses. I know she prays for my well being.

It's good to have a mother like that.

So as you can tell, I am psyched for Pride this year. It's going to be fun.

UPDATE - I was emailed a clip of the press conference. Everyone did well. I especially liked what Harriet Hancock (the founder of SC Pride and PFLAG in Columbia) said.

SC Pride is here - all Mondays should start like this!!!!!!

When I woke up this morning, I was ready to go through another dreary Monday with my spirit down and my dander up. Then this lovely bit from Daily Kos caught my attention.

Can you say "rope-a-dope, bitch!"

Don't count Obama out.

I was fired up and have been all day. And just in time too because tomorrow is a special day.

SC Pride (which I have been a proud board member of for five years) will be holding a press conference on the steps of our state capitol. We will be presenting Governor Mark Sanford with an "award."

Pick your mouths up from the floor. It ain't exactly a good award. We will be presenting Sanford an "award" for his dubious efforts to kill an ad campaign designed to bring more lgbt tourists to the state:

Of course, knowing our governor's penchant for baby pigs, I was going to include that maybe we should give him a few baby sows to go with his award.

But after last week, I don't even want to think about pigs.

Now if tomorrow's press conference is interesting, expect a full report here online.

For more information regarding SC Pride, including RuPaul coming to our festival on Saturday, go to www.scpride.org

One News Now, allies manipulate numbers on referendum count

Apparently the recent decision to stop a referendum against a Montgomery County law that would protect the transgender community have members of the anti-gay industry a bit loopy.

Check out this headline. It's insulting and funny at the same time:

Sexual Deviants Given Green Light in Maryland

Court decides 900,000 petition signers can't challenge the controversial "gender identity" law allowing any man to use the women's shower by just claiming he felt like a woman at the time.

900,000 petition signers?

The blog in question claims to have received the story from the Washington Post. However, if you look at the Post article (feel free to do so by this link) you will see that there is no mention of any number of petition signers.

So where did the blog get the 900,000 number? Why from my favorite phony news page - One News Now:

Baltimore residents have lost their battle against an ordinance protecting transgendered people.

Under the controversial "gender identity" law, a man would be allowed to walk into a women's restroom or shower room claiming he believes himself to be a woman, essentially opening the door for rape or sexual molestation. In July a lower Montgomery County court agreed more than 900,000 petition signers had the right to see it on the ballot to choose whether to overturn it -- but it was appealed.

So much for truth.

Now the reasoning behind the decision has not been published as of yet, but to get a good idea of the situation, I looked at teachthefacts.org, a web page created by those fighting the referendum.
This is what was said before the decision was rendered. As you can say, the number of petition signers are far below 900,000:

The Citizens for a Responsible Whatever were told by the county Board of Elections that they needed 25,001 signatures to get a referendum on the November ballot to relegalize discrimination on the basis of gender identity in Montgomery County. They got that many and a few extra, submitted them on time, and did their victory dance. Opponents of the referendum went through the signatures, found a lot of problems, and sued the Board for not correctly verifying petition signatures. In the process of arguing back and forth in court, it came out that the Board of Elections had given the CRW the wrong number, and now they didn't have enough. The Board had counted only active voters, ignoring the considerable number of voters who are registered but have not voted in a general election recently. Today, even the Board's attorney, Kevin Karpinski, said, "The sponsors didn't get enough signatures." But -- the Circuit Court judge said that the complaint had been filed too late, and so it didn't matter that there weren't enough signatures.

So the court might need to require the Board to enforce the law, if they rule that because the CRW failed to produce 27,615 valid signatures -- the actual target number based on all registered voters -- the referendum should not be on the ballot.

This fudging of the numbers by One News Now doesn't surprise me. Since when has this phony news site ever let accuracy get in the way of a good "those evil people are out to hurt us decent Christians" spin.

Oink, oink - Give me a break

Put your nose up in the air and sniff.

That smell you are taking in is the 2008 election. I was wondering when the mess was going to start.

Who knew it would be pig mess?

It's a real shame that the campaign has come to this. I used to think that John McCain was a man with integrity, but yet during this campaign, I have seen him forsake all forms of decency including resorting to the tactics used against him in South Carolina in 2000.

On September 11, 2008, we will be commemorating the worse attack on American soil in history. On September 17, 2008, I will be commemorating the worse day of my life - when my father was murdered during an attempted prison break.

Therefore, I absolutely refuse to comment further about pigs and lipstick. I will just cite a line from the Boondocks:

This here is some bullshit!!!!

I would rather spotlight a good piece of news out of Florida. A judge overturned the state's ban on gay adoption:

A Florida judge shook up that state’s 31-year-old ban on gay adoption, ruling it unconstitutional. But the ruling doesn’t necessarily mean that the state, one of two remaining that forbid gay adoption, will overturn the statewide ban.

Monroe Circuit Court Judge David J. Audlin Jr.'s decision will allow an openly gay Key West foster parent to adopt the teenage boy he has raised since 2001, according to the Guardian.co.uk.

Florida’s ban on gay adoption has been declared unconstitutional twice before in 1991, but an upcoming gay adoption hearing in Miami, could further challenge the law.

Audlin stated that the adoption was in the 13-year-old, special needs boy’s “best interest.” He also said the law that bars gays and lesbians from adopting children is contrary to the state constitution because it singles out and punishes a group of people.

Victory in Maryland - Anti-gay referendum is stopped!!!!

Everyone is either losing their minds over the election or getting into the act of losing their minds.

Our friend Peter LaBarbera (who never really had that much of a mind to begin with) has been posting sporadically and those posts are attacking the Huffington Post. Apparently Peter is trying to spin a "they are after Sarah Palin because they want to bash Christians" line.

I think he is pissed cause the Hurricane Gustav stopped Southern Decadence from taking place.

Well in the midst of the prognosticating and nailbiting over polls, a bit of good news just took place in Maryland:

Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) applauded a Maryland Appeal Court ruling today which dismissed attempts to roll back landmark protections for transgender residents in Montgomery County, Maryland, by way of a November ballot initiative. The court's unanimous ruling ends a campaign by anti-transgender activists to strip the county's civil rights law of protections based on gender identity. The law was amended in November 2007 and, because of today's ruling, will now be enacted to include the transgender community.

"The anti-transgender campaign in Montgomery County was based on bigotry and fueled by misinformation," said Jody M. Huckaby, executive director of PFLAG. "It was being forced onto the ballot with no regard for state law or the fundamental rights of our transgender neighbors and allies. Today's ruling sends a clear message that opponents of equality are not above the law, and our transgender loved ones are not below it. Montgomery County's civil rights law offers important protections to transgender and gender-variant people. We join our allies in Maryland and the transgender community in celebrating its long over-due enactment."

I blogged about this referendum drive before. You will remember that those pushing for it was able to get enough signatures by falsely claiming that the law will allow men to go into women's lockerrooms and restrooms. The proponents said that all the men had to do was say "I feel like a woman."

This was the same group that organized a phony moral panic by claiming that a man dressed as a woman had entered an local lockerroom gym. Of course no one saw the incident but it caused a lot of controversy.

In this crazy world, it's nice to see good triumph over bullshit.