Peter LaBarbera is mad at me

I think our friend Peter LaBarbera is mad at me.

From time to time, I email Peter when I feel that his anti-gay postings are stepping a little too over the line of truth.

Today, I simply had to email him about something he put on his Americans for Truth webpage:

American Psychological Association Backtracks on ‘Gay Gene’ Claim

Peter is referring to a ridiculous article published by that lovely to-the-right of Atilla the Hun publication World Net Daily. The article claimed that the APA is now saying that there is no "gay gene."

Jeremy from Goodasyou destroyed this nonsensical piece of work before it even got off the ground:

. . . essentially WND is enabling NARTH and other "ex-gays," suggesting that a non-new, non-change from an organization that still very much stands against their work is somehow a "sudden" shift in policy. Once again, their side is using complexity to their advantage, simplistically and duplicitously presenting the scientific community's inability thus far to find one certain gene as "proof" that their own scientifically-shunned work has merit.

It's a good smackdown which I suggest you read (after you finish reading this post, naturally).

Jeremy's piece came out before Peter's post so rather than go into a long expository as to why he was misreprenting the APA's work, I sent LaBarbera this email:

Peter,

the more you misrepresent, the more you shame the body of Christ.

http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2009/05/but-what-about-grasping-at-straws-wnd----is-that-genetic-or-a-choice.html#more

And you wonder why Bill O'Reilly won't have you on his show any longer.

Imagine my surprise when I received a reply in less than five minutes:

You think you were born homosexual, Alvin? What about developmental factors in your life? Did you have a healthy relationship with your father? Would you say you had a “normal” or stable upbringing? I’m curious. As for the Body of Christ, it’s odd to get lectured in such a way (“you shame the Body of Christ”) from someone who is not a part of it. I know that’s God’s ultimate call to make, but if you claim to be a faithful Christian AND a pro-homosexuality activist, that makes about as much sense as being a “faithful Christian and a swinger activist,” or a … pro-adultery Christian. In other words, it’s a lie and your fooling yourself if you claim to be a follower of Christ. However, you can become a Christian, but you would need to humble yourself and repent of your homosexual behavior and advocacy. I hope and will pray that you do that. Your feelings don’t decide Truth; God does.

PS. Get your facts straight: I was never on O’Reilly’s TV show. --pl

Now long time readers of this blog know that my father was a prison guard who was murdered in 2000 during an inmate escape attempt. Subsequently, the prison was named after him - the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center.

I am not saying that Peter knew this when he asked the question about my father - although I know for a fact that he has, from time to time, read my blog.

Nonetheless, I found it surprising as well as funny as to how vicious he tried to be in his email.

I think it was the O'Reilly thing.

Peter has a problem with the O'Reilly Factor inviting gay activist Wayne Besen on the show on several occasions while he hasn't been invited even once.

LaBarbera has taken out his anger against Besen with several "hit pieces" on his webpage like the pieces here and here.

So maybe my mentioning of the O'Reilly Factor was the equivalent of the magic mirror reminding the Wicked Queen that Snow White was much better looking than she.

Who knows.

Anyway, I did answer his silly email:

I seem to have struck a nerve.

Kinda rude don't you think to inquire about my family life in such an ugly way.

By the way, I am a person of faith. And it isn't really up to you to decide whether or not I am of the Body of Christ. That is unless you can point out a verse which says that you sit on the right hand of God.

Let me guess - you do have a Bible which says those words. And it's next to the verse which says it's okay to lie in God's name.

That would explain why you do it often.

But seriously, before you can even talk to me about repenting, maybe you need to acknowledge all of the lies you have told against the lgbt community, all of the times you have referred to bad studies (i.e. Paul Cameron), and all of the times you have misrepresented credible work - such as the American Psychological Association's pamphlet which seems to have started this brouhaha.

Thou shalt not bear false witness, Peter.

God made me gay and I am blessed for it. But I have never had to lie to defend this notion. You believe that homosexuality is a sin and you have lied as well as distorted to prove this notion.

How about you gain some integrity before you feel the need to lecture me.

But I guess I do stand corrected about the O'Reilly thing. Not that it matters any.

I really didn't see the need to get angry at LaBarbera. After all, I had fun messing with his head.

Sometimes it's so easy that I'm almost ashamed of myself.

Wednesday midday newsbriefs

N.Y. Assembly Passes Gay Marriage Bill - They can have Prejean. We'll take New York.

But what about grasping at straws, WND - Speaking of chicanery, the Family Research Council has nothing on World Net Daily.

The 'best of' batsh*t anti-marriage equality talking heads - Look at this one if and only if you have a strong stomach.

IFI Corrects Paraphilias Claim - Box Turtle Bulletin gets the Illinois Family Institute to admit its error. One down and a %!(load of religious right groups to go.

City council OKs domestic partner certificates - Moving right along.

Family Research Council = oblivious

In a recent post of the Family Research Council's blog is the following:

Two Parents = Happy Children

The headline is extremely deceptive. This is what the post says:

In the latest Mapping America, the General Social Survey shows that adults who lived with both biological parents as adolescents are more likely to be very happy than those who did not.

So the truth is that the study says children living with their biological parents are most likely to be happy, not necessarily two parents in general.

This is important because when organizations like FRC speak against gay adoption they use talking points like "studies show that children do better in a home with a mother and father."

How much do you want a bet that this "study" will be used against gay adoption even though it has absolutely nothing to do with children in foster care?

And it gets better. The Mapping America study was done by Patrick F. Fagan, Ph.D. & Althea Nagai, Ph.D.

I've talked about Althea Nagai before and how she and her husband "conducts" studies for right wing groups, including an interesting one on race. The Mapping America webpage says that she is a visiting fellow at the Family Research Council

Fagan, according to the Mapping America webpage is senior fellow and director of the Center for Family and Religion at Family Research Council.

Both facts are conveniently absent from the FRC blog posting.

My guess is that when and if FRC tries to manipulate this study, that lovely fact about the authors' lack of objectivity will continue to be conveniently not mentioned.

Tuesday afternoon news briefs

Carrie's unique take: An ongoing series - a humorous look at the entire controversy courtesy of Goodasyou.org

The religious right seem to be determined to try and write some ridiculous story of innocent Carrie triumphing against the big bad gay folks. From the moment when I heard that Trump would give the final decision, I knew that he was going to let her keep the crown. And I'm glad he did. Maybe finally the religious right will stop whining about how there is some conspiracy to silence them.

Of course who am I kidding. The truth is the majority of the lgbt community did not care how this controversy ended one way or the other. There was no organized attempt to make Prejean lose her title. Hell there wasn't even an unorganized attempt.

If anything, we found the entire thing comical. Comical as to how some folks were trying to make Perez Hilton the voice of the lgbt community. Comical as to how the religious right put Prejean on a pedestal and then stooped to logical gymnastics to explain away her moral shortcomings. Comical as to how NOM made a huge media gaffe again. Comical as to how Prejean worked the media and then pleaded ennui when she found herself a target because of too much exposure.

I don't know about the rest of you but I had a fun time with this story. If only all anti-gay controversies were this fun. But next time, can the controversy involve a cute guy? I've never been so tired of seeing one woman's breasts in my entire life.

Right Wing Follows Deceptive Script On Supreme Court - Take note. THIS is what secret plotting looks like.

Janet Porter Plays the Victim, Literally - Janet Porter claims to be the victim of a hate crime. I didn't know hate crimes legislation covered the socially ill.

Will Maryland Follow DC in Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages in Other States? - Meanwhile in the real world . . .

Carrie Prejean story- the winners and losers

Miss California will keep title, Trump decides

Miss California Carrie Prejean, whose comments about gay marriage set off a firestorm, will keep her crown, Donald Trump announced today.

The controversy began nearly a month ago, when Prejean was asked about her views on same-sex marriage during the nationally televised Miss USA pageant. Although she said she believed people were entitled to do as they liked, she said marriage should only be recognized as an institution between a man and a woman.

Trump said he had no problem with Prejean's comments. "She gave a very honest answer when asked a tough question," he said at a New York press conference with Prejean sitting next to him. "It was the same answer the president of the United States gave... She has to be commended."

It's just as I figured and this is NOT something to freak out about.

I personally couldn't care less on whether or not she lost the crown but in assessing the situation, let's look at the winners and losers:

The Winners

Winner: Carrie Prejean - Sometimes any press can be considered as good press. Her controversy has overshadowed the winner of the pageant. She has become a cause celebre of the religious right.

Winner: Donald Trump - You just know that Donald Trump enjoyed the role of the "decider."

Winner : The Miss USA Pageant - Controversy creates attention and cash.

The Losers

Loser: Miss North Carolina - she is being overshadowed by the first runner up, big time.

Loser : Carrie Prejean - While she has garnered a lot of attention for her stance, she is not an untarnished figure. The semi-nude pictures and the breast implants came back to haunt her and will continue to do so. So while she travels the country talking about her "values" and how "Satan was trying to tempt her with the question," people are no doubt thinking, "didn't Satan already tempt you with those breast implants and semi-nude photos?" In the Scarlet Letter, character Hester Prynne had to wear a red "A" for adulteress. For a long time in some people's minds, Prejean will be wearing a red "H" for hypocrite.

BIG LOSER: Maggie Gallagher and the National Organization for Marriage - The "Gathering Storm" debacle made them laughing stocks. This situation makes them look downright sleazy. The organization did make Prejean their spokesperson and then backtracked when the nude photo controversy began to come out. Add to that the tongue lashing Gallagher received from pageant official Shanna Moakler on Larry King Live and the revelation yesterday that she benefits greatly on a monetary basis from NOM.

Loser: Anti-gay marriage movement - A while back, it had James Dobson leading it. Look who is in charge now. If folks like Gallagher and NOM continue to make big mistakes like "Gathering Storm" and this situation with Prejean, it won't be long before I will be able to register my gifts at Bloomingdales.

Okay folks, the circus is over for now. Might I suggest we get to more pertinent issues.

Religious right distortion techniques - a reposting

In the ongoing battle over hate crimes legislation, religious right organizations and their allies claimed that pedophiles are protected under the legislation. They continued to claim this irregardless of the fact that the assertion had been refuted.

This repetition of an inaccurate talking point is one of six distortion techniques that religious right groups use to stigmatize the lgbt community.

As the battle over lgbt rights get more intense, I thought it would be appropriate to repost all of the six distortion techniques that I outlined in my book Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters.

See how many of them you recognize from recent battles:

1. Using nonrepresentative or out-of-date studies to make generalizations, or distorting legitimate studies to give misleading conclusions

Example 1 - Anti-gay industry talking point - Same sex marriage and gay adoption are bad ideas because research shows that the best places to raise children are in homes with a mother and a father.

The truth - The research only looked at heterosexual two-parent households as opposed to single parent heterosexual households. Same-sex households were never included.

Point of fact - The following researchers, physicians, and Ph.D.s have complained about how the anti-gay industry has misused their work - A. Nicholas Groth, the six researchers of a Canadian study (Robert S. Hogg, Stefan A. Strathdee, Kevin J.P. Craib, Michael V. Shaughnessy, Julio Montaner, and Martin T. Schehter), Dr. Robert Garofalo, Lisa Waldner, Patrick Letellier, Dr. Kyle Pruett, Dr. Joanne Hall, Dr. Elizabeth Saewyc, Carol Gilligan, Dr. Robert Spitzer, Dr. Francis Collins, Gary Remafedi, Professor Michael King, and Professor Lisa Diamond.

2. Repetition - Despite the fact that several physicians and researchers complain about the distortion of their work by the anti-gay industry, corrections are usually not made.

3. Conspiracy Theory - Claiming that gays and lesbians are consistently plotting to "erode traditional values"

Example - “The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior. It is an agenda that they basically set in the late 1980s, in a book called After the Ball, where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior—in a decade-long time frame." - Craig Osten, Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda, Focus on the Family, July 25, 2003

4. Dire Consequences - Claiming that a pro-gay law or ordinance will lead to negative consequences without proof that the consequences will take place:

Example 1 - “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.” - Matt Barber, Concerned Women for America, 2007

Example 2 - “H.R. 254 elevates one group of Americans above others, creating a special class of victims. All things being equal, it means that if a 5-foot-2-inch grandmother is violently attacked on the street, she is less worthy of justice than the 6-foot-4-inch homosexual man who is attacked by the same assailant.” - Matt Barber, Concerned Women for America, 2007

5. Phony Experts - Creating their own "experts" on the gay and lesbian community.

6. Dehumanizing Semantics - Consistently using language (i.e. demonstrative verbs and adjectives) in their talking points, sound bites, and press releases to make gays and lesbians seem like impersonal, threatening outsiders

Example 1 - “But unfortunately, the evangelist observes, many Christians have been bullied into submission on the aggressive homosexual agenda in public schools.”—Evangelist Proposes to Combat Homosexual Agenda in Public Education, Agape Press, May 11, 2005

Example 2 - “Elsewhere in the battle against the homosexual agenda, the Broward County School Board in Florida has voted to allow a pro- homosexual group to indoctrinate its teachers on tolerance.”— Children Adopted by Homosexuals Suffer, Family Advocate Says, Agape Press, April 25, 2002

Example 3 - “The ACLU continues to use a law license to bully school districts and harass parents in order to brainwash their kids abut the ‘normalcy’ of homosexuality.”—Jan LaRue, ACLU Seeks Mandatory Homosexual Sensitivity Training, Concerned Women for America press release, July 14, 2005

It's all up to the Donald

Well today's press conference will lead to tomorrow's press conference:

Officials of the Miss California USA pageant strongly criticized some of the actions of titleholder Carrie Prejean on Monday but said it's not their decision whether she should be stripped of her crown.

Co-executive directors Keith Lewis and Shanna Moakler told a press conference that only Miss USA pageant owner Donald Trump can make that decision. He plans to hold a press conference at 11 a.m. Tuesday in New York City.

The officials said Prejean has been "unavailable" and so in the meantime they have appointed the state pageant's runner-up, Tami Farrell, as a "Beauty of California Ambassador" to fulfill any duties the winner normally would handle.

Lewis said that if Trump allows Prejean to retain her crown, state pageant officials would welcome her back and encourage her to take part in her normal duties.

"We're still going to be able to fulfill our duties no matter if Mr. Trump offers a second chance or utters his famous line from `The Apprentice,'" Lewis said (meaning, of course, "You're fired").

Prejean, 21, of San Diego, created controversy during the Miss USA pageant when she answered a judge's question by saying she believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

The state pageant has been investigating whether she violated her contract by making public appearances with groups opposed to same-sex marriage. Prejean also failed to reveal that she posed in her underwear as a teenager.

Personally I think that Donald will be a nice guy and allow Prejean to keep her crown. And I hope he does, with a strong admoninition that the crusade against same-sex marriage is not a part of her duties as Miss California. If she refuses, then get rid of her. Many may want Prejean to lose her title but for her to lose it now takes attention off of the fact that it was her actions, not words, that forced the situation to this point. By giving her a chance to conduct herself in a better fashion, Trump would help to remove the "she is being persecuted because of her beliefs" factoid.

For now, that factoid is being milked to its fullest extent by religious right groups.

And why not? It generates a lot of controversy and no doubt it's a good fundraising tool for the religious right. Who cares if she has broken her contract and have been derelict in her duties as Ms. California? Why let a good angle be spoiled by truth.

But something bothers me

I keep hearing that "the left" is trying to destroy Prejean. Just who are these people on "the left" who are trying to allegedly destroy Prejean?

Of course the lgbt community is angry at Prejean's comments but it's too much of a generalization to call all lgbts members of the left.

Perez Hilton? Come on now. The man draws doodles on pictures of celebrities.

TMZ? Please. It's a celebrity sheet and Prejean is a celebrity. The only plan TMZ has is to make money.

Prejean's situation illustrates the laziness of American culture. My journalism professors always told me to look deeper when looking at issues. But it seems that many in the media haven't gotten the same instructions. It's easier and sexier to talk about how "the left" or "the right" is after someone; to make false generalizations instead of exposing complex truths. It's easier to hire a pundit to tell people what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear.

Basically it all comes down to cotton candy journalism - it's sweet and tasty but melts before you know it. Then all you are left with is hard gummy junk that you can't get rid of.

And speaking of religious right groups - Miss California Director Indicts Maggie Gallagher