Something sure to turn a gay man straight - Tom DeLay shakes his butt

Whatever you do, close your eyes at 3:24 or at least hold a cross tight.

SOMEBODY GET ME A BETTE DAVIS MOVIE!!!!

Witnesses announced for tomorrow's ENDA hearing and other Tuesday midday news briefs

List of witnesses for tomorrow's ENDA hearing - This list of witnesses is very interesting. I'm almost disappointed in the witnesses/witness who will be speaking against ENDA.

Referendum 71 opponents use divorcees as poster children and insist they're not about hate - My God. Opponents of Washington's domestic partnership law actually used Ozzie and Harriet Nelson in their flyer. And then they pulled a deception about social science studies that claim to say that children suffer from not being in a home with a mother and a father. None of those studies even looked at same sex households.

They who remedy boo-boos are now working to prevent a historical one - Maine pediatricians stand for equality.

Judge Jerry Buchmeyer (1933-2009)- Just who is Judge Jerry Buchmeyer you ask? Why one of the greatest men in the world. He verbally bitchslapped discredited researcher Paul Cameron in court.

Ariz. Slashes Partner Benefits for 800 Workers - This is just wrong.

Census releases data on same-sex marriages for the first time in history - But on the flipside, this is good news.

Sorry Harry Jackson, but lgbts of color do exist

I resent the game that African-American pastor Harry Jackson plays when he pits the lgbt and African-American community against one another:

But my father is not the only one who understood civil rights. The unwed black mother, living on public assistance, understands true discrimination. She understands that there are privileged people in our culture and institutional barriers that prohibit whole segments of our society from experiencing the American dream. In DC, gay activists enjoy better education, better jobs, better housing, greater access to the system, and now – legislative power. Something is wrong when the privileged feign that they are the persecuted, when the powerful posture themselves as victims.

It's his modus operandi which no one has really questioned him on. In Jackson's world, that unwed black mother living on public assistance can't be a lesbian (even though in some parts of the country, that is her sexual orientation.) And his comments regarding the privileged pretending they are persecuted is higly ironic seeing that he has aligned himself with a group of organizations constantly whining about how they are being persecuted while they surreptitiously try to strip lgbts of our rights and humanity.

Jackson's tendency to work the lgbt and African-American communities against one another reveals himself to be the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing - he looks innoncent but his desires (i.e. the need for prominence and fame) are in the long run detrimental to the African-American and lgbt communities.

To combat self-deluded egotists like Jackson, it is important that lgbt of color be open and active.

And unfortunately sometimes even that is not enough.

We still get ignored by the black community (because they would rather see our ethnicity than our orientation) and the lgbt community at large (because they would rather see our orientation rather than our ethnicity).

Sooner or later, lgbts of color will have to come to the realization that before we owe the African-American community or the lgbt community anything, we owe it to ourselves to stake our own territory.

Rather than conform our needs and desires for the benefit of the African-American and lgbt communities, we must demand recognition and respect from both communities on our terms.

If we don't, people like Harry Jackson will continue to play their games.

But enough of the rambling, the following video shows the people who Jackson conveniently forgets in his phony concern about "true civil rights:"

Bathrooms, Church Exemptions, and Lies: Five ways the religious right misrepresents ENDA

I ran this post before but as hearing on ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act)take place this week, I reworked it as talking points which we can use to lobby Congressmen and educate the public on the deceptions about ENDA.

As the Congressional hearing on ENDA begin place this week, I have a source which tells me that the religious right will be working overtime to distort ENDA, from pulling the “sexual predators invading women’s bathrooms” card to claiming that churches will be "forced to hire flamboyant homosexuals."

Don't let them flip the script.

ENDA has nothing to do with bathrooms, gay men with wild fashion sense alarming old church mothers, or drag queens leading Christian nurseries in a chorus of "I Am What I Am."

ENDA is about ensuring that every American regardless of race, religion, national origin, or sexual orientation is treated fairly under the law.

Why anyone would have a problem with this is something I can’t understand. But then again, I can never understand the lies and motivations of religious right groups when they masquerade as “pro-family.”

I found some talking points via the American Family Association regarding ENDA. If I know religious right groups (and I think that I do), these talking points will be repeated in one form or another on other sites and blogs. And they will probably repeated at the Congressional hearing.

I have created some answers to their inaccurate statements. I implore everyone to read them, pass them along, and above all when you lobby Congress (and you had better if you want ENDA passed), use these refutations:

Distortion - ENDA (H.R. 2981 - H.R. 3017 - S. 1584) has been changed from the "gay-only" version the House passed in 2007 to include language banning job discrimination based on "gender identity" as well as sexual orientation - complete with special protections for the transgendered. It would mean your child's teacher, if he were a male but "felt" like a female, could go into the women's bathroom.

TRUTH - According to the Gay and Lesbian Task Force, over 100 localities (cities and counties) in the United States have trans-inclusive non-discrimination laws. There has never been a problem of a man "claiming to feel like a female" invading women's bathrooms. The claim is a non-issue created to scare people and distract from the true purpose of ENDA.

Distortion - ENDA is aimed at providing heightened protections for a particular sexual behavior - homosexuality. It would grant special consideration on the basis of "sexual orientation" that would not be extended to other employees in the workplace.

TRUTH - ENDA says nothing about sexual behavior. Potential employees are already federally protected in cases of race, religion, gender, and national origin. Heterosexuals would be protected under ENDA along with lgbts because adding sexual orientation does not single out gays and lesbians any more than gender singles out solely women or men.

Distortion - ENDA violates employers' and employees' Constitutional freedoms of religion, speech and association. The proposed legislation would prohibit employers from taking their deeply held beliefs into account when making personnel decisions. This would pose an unprecedented intrusion by the federal government into people's lives.

TRUTH - "Deeply held beliefs" are no excuse for discrimination of any stripe. A capable employee should not be fired simply because his or her boss has a “deeply held belief” against homosexuality. Also one could argue there is already "federal intrusion" in people's lives with the protections in the cases of race, religion, gender, and national origin. And ENDA does contain exemptions for religious groups and organizations.

Distortion - ENDA would approvingly bring private behavior considered immoral by many into the public square. By declaring that all sexual preferences are equally valid, ENDA would change national policy supporting marriage and family.

TRUTH - If "national policy supporting marriage and family" is changed, then it is a good thing. Not all families are heterosexually-oriented. Also, several states already offer lgbts either the right to marry or enter domestic partnerships. A national policy regarding families and marriage should embrace this change.

Distortion - HRC claims that ENDA does not apply to religious organizations, but the 2007 version of the law only provided a religious exemption for religious positions that were involved in actual teaching or proclamation of doctrine. Such a limited exemption, some pro-family legal experts argue, would mean that a Christian school that was hiring a secretary, janitor or football coach would not be allowed to reject a homosexual who applied for the slot.

TRUTH - The religious exemption of the 2009 version of ENDA (Section 6) has the same exemptions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964:

This Act shall not apply to a corporation, association, educational institution, or society that is exempt from the religious discrimination provisions of title VII of the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 pursuant to section 702(a) or 703(e)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 2000e-1(a); 2000e-2(e)(2)).

Any unproven fear stories about churches being forced to hire anyone not conducive to their message or beliefs are just that - unproven fear stories.

Related posts:

Exposing an anti-gay ENDA lie before it gains traction

Another 'Gathering Storm' parody and other Monday midday news briefs

Another 'Gathering Storm' parody because any reason to make fun of NOM is a good thing.

Voter Values Summit: All Porn Is Gay Porn - You gotta admit that it explains a heck of a lot.

Gay, Bisexual Teens at Risk for Eating Disorders - Pay attention to this article. It's sure to be distorted by the religious right.

Boy, 12, is having sex change, school announces - This is an interesting story.

Harry Jackson to Religious Right activists: Please stop sounding like racists - Me to Harry Jackson: stop pitting lgbts and African-Americans against one another.

Another 'ex-gay' refusing to take responsibility for his own actions

(Edward) Delgado speaks about his life of homosexuality as a Southern California teen, when he’d had 10 male sex partners by age 19. He said a suggestion by a friend to read the New Testament led to a religious awakening, which has allowed him to live happily as a straight man.

Delgado said the homosexual lifestyle leads to promiscuity, abuse, alcoholism and drug abuse.

“The things that I speak are not a lie, because I’ve lived these things,” he said.

The faces are different but the narrative is always the same. You can always predict what these paid "ex-gay folks" will say.

The latest model, Edward Delgado, was speaking at the University of Alabama Fairbanks as a part of a series of lectures. Delgado, who was invited by Campus Bible Ministries, is a "ex-gay" who is now a deacon at Dimond Boulevard Baptist Church and has been married to a woman for 16 years and has two sons.

Well good for him but pardon me for yawning. Naturally some students and faculty members were upset at his comments, as they should be.

Granted, I'm all for his first amendment rights to speak and I'm all for the group who invited him.

But I would have taken another direction altogether when it comes to protesting his visit. I would have taken the opportunity to question him directly and publicly because Delgado's narrative is so repetitive.

I'm sure you have heard it all before:

"I did a lot of drugs, I drank like a fish, I had sex with everything but the trees. But it's not my fault. It was the homosexuality in me."

Almost every supposed ex-gay who has resurrected themselves as a preacher or a religious right spokesperson has told the same narrative. And don't get me wrong, I think that if they stopped with the bad behavior of drug abuse, alchoholism, etc, it's a good thing.

But for once, can they ever take responsibility for their own actions? I mean maybe their sexual orientation had nothing to do with their decision to take that drink, snort that drug, or bend over for anyone with a pulse.

Maybe they themselves made the individual decision to engage in bad behavior just like many lgbts across the nation make the decision not to do these things.

Delgado can believe what he wants but I resent his implication that being an lgbt is to blame for his personal choices. For him to do so impugns the reputation of myself and the many lgbts who are living our lives sans the bad behavior of alcoholism, illicit drugs, and promiscuous sex.

For once, I would like to see people like Delgado questioned on this. Forget protesting their appearances because to do so only gives them power. It makes their message more palpable in terms of "oooh what he has to say gets so many people angry so I want to hear it."

To expose "ex-gays" like Delgado, we shouldn't discourage their right to speak. We should encourage them to speak with as much detail as possible. And we should question them as much as possible.

Exposing an anti-gay ENDA lie before it gains traction

Congressional hearings on ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act)are coming up this week and I have been working on a few talking points to beat back the negative ones we are sure to hear from the religious right.

In scanning their distortions about ENDA, I found this one via a recent Focus on the Family press release:

If passed, ENDA will require employers to police the workplace to eliminate viewpoints contrary to the promotion of homosexuality and "transgenderism." This means the bill will inevitably threaten the religious beliefs of those who oppose homosexual behavior. What will happen when homosexual or "transgender" employees object to: religious articles on employees' desks; water cooler discussions about biblical morality; Bible verses taped to cubicle walls; fliers on company bulletin boards advertising discussions concerning traditional marriage? Religious liberty violations have already occurred in states with ENDA-type laws, including California, Minnesota, Colorado, and Idaho, and many of these cases are in litigation.

The FOF press release provided a link to a listing of cases which supposedly proves that ENDA would be bad for Christians.

If you pardon me for saying so, a lot of the cases FOF mentions seems to involve employees saying rude things about homosexuality and not taking into account that some of their co-workers are lgbt, then trying to cover up their behavior by saying that "my religious beliefs tell me that homosexuality is a sin."

To me, what happened in some of these cases is no different than employees being reprimanded for attacking a co-worker's religion. And I don't see anything wrong with that.

But there is a huge distortion in one of the cases FOF mentions:

Oakland city employees posting a flier on a company bulletin board advertising a meeting to discuss the "natural family" and "family values" are forced to remove flier and threatened with discipline after complaint from lesbian.

Oakland, Calif., city employees Regina Rederford and Robin Christy formed a group called the "Good News Employee Association" and posted a flier on a company bulletin board advertising a "forum for people of faith to express their views on contemporary issues of the day, with respect for the natural family, marriage and family values." After a lesbian employee complained of being offended by the flier, the city removed the flier and threatened the two women with adverse employment action for placing the fliers "in public view which contained statements of a homophobic nature and were determined to promote sexual orientation based harassment." A federal court upheld the city's action.

Of course FOF misrepresented this case and they weren't the only ones. Columnist George Will also misrepresented the case.

In a column criticizing the ruling, he said that judges had declared the sentence Marriage is the foundation of the natural family and sustains family values as inflammatory and even a "hate crime."

But FOF's and Will's claims did not reveal the workings of the entire case.

What happened was this via a press release from the city of Oakland after the ruling (and I took the liberty to bold what I felt was an important part of the press release):

The Good News Employees Association was formed in response to an openly gay councilmember’s e-mail inviting both gay and straight employees to support a National Coming Out day. Two Oakland city employees formed the association as “a forum for people of faith to express their views … with respect for the Natural Family, Marriage and Family Values” and generated a flyer titled: “Preserve Our Workplace Integrity”.

The flyer’s language judges homosexuality as something that hurts the “integrity” of the workplace.

. . . The employees who drafted the flyer actually declared under oath that they wanted to inject their intolerant worldview into the workplace. This point resonated, in particular, with Circuit Court Judge Richard Clifton, a Bush appointee. He said, “It’s hard to avoid the inference, ‘We lack ethics, we lack integrity because these people are here.’.”

Supervisors reviewed the flyer and explained to the plaintiffs why the flyer had been removed. . . . the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit complaining their free speech rights had been obstructed and that the city’s anti-discrimination policy “promotes homosexuality” and “openly denounces Christian values.” Ultimately, the association wanted to use city time and resources to validate their personal neurosis — which is that heterosexual marriage can only be validated by invalidating same-sex marriage.

Furthermore, the seemingly harmless flyer was not an isolated incident but part of a deliberate pattern of harassment. The association’s flyer was specifically posted outside of a lesbian co-worker’s cubicle, placed on her desk and in the restroom. The plaintiffs went out of their way to harass their lesbian co-worker as well as to proselytize about their belief on city time and on the taxpayer’s dime.

Ultimately, the four judges (again, three of whom are conservative) recognized that the city has a responsibility to protect all of its employees from discrimination and harassment.

The court emphasized that the city has “significant interests in restricting discriminatory speech about homosexuals … (and has) a duty under state law to prevent workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.” In addition, the court also found that the city had “a more substantial interest in maintaining the efficient operation of their office than the appellants had in their speech.”

I should also point out that the case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and they refused to hear it. So clearly this was not a case of "homosexuality trumping a Christian's right to free speech in the workplace."

It was a case of an employer stepping in to keep an employee from being harassed.

But getting back to the original point, ENDA does not "promote homosexuality, etc." What is says is that lgbts are employees deserving full protection just like every other employee. Just like employees of different religions must respect each other by not saying derogatory comments, lgbts and heterosexuals in the workplace should be encouraged to do the same.