Marriage equality = open season on Christians? Bull!

Talk about your slanted reports. Forget the ridiculous talking point that marriage equality is wrong because "marriage brings two halves of humanity together." Let's just concentrate on the "marriage equality means gays will declare open season on Christians." This video is full of lies, which I already covered in several posts. The major one has to do with implying that the Justice Department is forcing employees to celebrate Gay Pride Month.  Also, please note how the vast majority of so-called horror stories are not being told by the people supposedly involved in the incidents, but rather repeated by religious right talking heads. It reminds me of high school students gossiping in the cafeteria. It's sad when supposed people of God stoop to propaganda and lies:

Related post - How They See Us: Unmasking the Religious Right War on Gay America

'Daily Caller writer supports violent crackdown on gays in Russia' and other Monday midday news briefs

Daily Caller Celebrates Russia’s Violent, Draconian Crackdown On LGBT People - I've had a run-in with the author of this piece and he is simply a nasty person. In case you need a reminder, this is the crap the Daily Caller is supporting. 
 

Louisiana Police Sting Targets, Arrests Gay Men For Sex Using Unconstitutional Anti-Sodomy Law - This hot mess blew up online last weekend.

Sheriff’s Office Defends Anti-Gay Entrapment With Comparisons To Public Masturbation - Nope. Sorry. You screwed up my friend and don't even try to pull the "won't someone protect the children" card.

Pope: 'Who am I to judge' gay people? - Breakthrough? Who knows, but it's a lot better than what the last Pope used to say.

Don Lemon reminds me of sad similarity between black, gay communities

I was so angry at CNN's Don Lemon last weekend because of the ignorant way he chose to voice a few comments.

Lemon took it upon himself to underline ways that the black community can improve itself. His suggestions were that we should stop wearing baggy pants, using the n-word, dropping out of school and having children out of wedlock.

They were good points, but the way he phrased them came across as a patronizing lecture which talked down to African-Americans because the majority of us don't act in those manners.

 I felt he could have used the power of his pulpit to have a nuanced discussion about the problems in the black community, rather than sounding as ignorant as Fox host Bill O'Reilly, who pretty much repeated the same stereotypes about African-Americans.

However in the midst of my raging anger,  an inner thought kept running throughout my mind.

For all of the arguments and discussions asking is the struggle for lgbt equality comparable to that of the African-American civil rights movement, there are times when very few notice the similarities.

And this is one of those times

 Lemon's condescending lecture does nothing for the African-American community. Sagging pants and bad English are not indigenous to the African-American community. And children out of wedlock and the drop-out rates are not problems that's not centered solely based in the African-American community.

If there are going to be serious discussions about problems facing the black community, then they don't need to start with a pundit wagging his finger while sequestered behind a desk. There needs to be discussions as to why things such as out of wedlock births are happening. The discussions should have more context by mentioning socioeconomic factors such as unemployment, not having access to good education and healthcare, and systematic racism so ingrained that it practically works by itself. And there needs to be viable solutions voiced.

All Lemon (O'Reilly for that matter) actually did was to exacerbate racism against African-Americans by allowing those with biases against black folks to flood the comment boards with vulgar displays of gloating.

And they both reminded me of how the religious right exacerbates homophobia against the lgbt community.

So many religious right groups and leaders, from Tony Perkins and Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council to Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel, are quick to point out Centers for Disease Control statistics which talk about health risk factors in the lgbt community as proof that homosexuality is a supposed dangerous lifestyle.

However, these so-called defenders of truth and morality always seem to deliberately omit that the CDC says that homophobia and its negative effects on the lgbt community are clearly to blame for the health risk factors, and not the so-called gay lifestyle. I've always believed that they omit this simple fact because it destroys their argument. They don't seek to have a nuanced discussion on being gay because they want to dehumanize the lgbt orientation.

Certainly this is not what Lemon was trying to do to the African-American community,  but that is in fact what he did. Lemon dehumanized the African-American community into stereotypes, much like the religious right does to the lgbt community.

It's something which strikes at the heart of my soul because of my dual identity as a black gay man. It was something that Mr. Lemon maybe should have thought of seeing that he is also a black gay man. That tidbit hurt me the most because I once looked up to Lemon as a role model. With O'Reilly, such nonsense is to be expected. He is nothing more than a high maintenance Morton Downey, Jr. whose  rage and bluster conceals the fact that he just that - rage and bluster without a semblance of nuance or integrity.  And thus, his analyses of the arguments of the day are as soggy and weak as a bag of cotton candy caught in a rain storm.

Instead of agreeing with O'Reilly, Lemon should have aspired to give his audience something more intelligent.

Lemon's patronizing sermon is definitely something both the lgbt and African-American community should keep in mind instead of being tricked into playing another bout of the "oppression Olympics." Let's not allow ourselves to be fooled by segments of society who sees both of our communities as either children needing to be lectured or undesirables. And let's not allow ourselves to be pawns of pundits who see us as commodities to increase their ratings.

There is an unfortunate dichotomy in America which looks at both the black and gay communities as entities to be talked about rather than talked to and commodities to be used and abused like tissue paper. To defeat this dichotomy, both communities must do all they can to not only solve their problems  but also wrest control of the conversation from those who would seek to define us in ugly and simplistic terms.

Because they simply don't have our best interests at heart.

Know Your LGBT History - Rock Hudson's Mysterious Illness

Many times at Know Your LGBT History, the posts are not celebratory but passages of history we need to know. In the 80s, many people didn't know what HIV/AIDS was and there was a lot of fear and repulsion because the disease exacerbated the stigma against lgbts by pushing the implication that they were nasty people and God was punishing them.

However, on July 25, 1985, many people got a serious shock to their system when it was announced by the publicist of legendary actor Rock Hudson that he had AIDS.  Though he at first speculated that he caught it through a blood transfusion, soon after his death later that year, the open secret of his homosexuality became public.

The legacy of Hudson dying from AIDS brought the disease from the shadows to the public eye and forced many people who wouldn't talk about it - including Hudson's friend, President Reagan - to at least realize that this disease couldn't be thought of as a deserved sentence given to a bunch of so-called "undesirables."

According to Wikipedia:

Shortly after his death, People reported: "Since Hudson made his announcement, more than $1.8 million in private contributions (more than double the amount collected in 1984) has been raised to support AIDS research and to care for AIDS victims (5,523 reported in 1985 alone). A few days after Hudson died, Congress set aside $221 million to develop a cure for AIDS." Organizers of the Hollywood AIDS benefit, Commitment to Life, reported after Hudson's announcement that he was suffering from the disease, it was necessary to move the event to a larger venue to accommodate the increased attendance

 

Past Know Your LGBT History Posts:

'Buzzfeed publishes viciously homophobic comments from Russia article' and other Friday midday news briefs

This Is What Happens When You Write About Homophobia In Russia - Buzzfeed wrote about homophobia in Russia and some of the comments left will chill your bones, raise your blood pressure, or simply make you weep at the thought of how cruel people can be to each other.

NOM’s Ruth Institute: Marriage equality will ‘treat mothers like slaves, children like chattel’ - Oh for Pete's sake! NOM sinks again.  

Klingenschmitt: 'The Demonic Spirits Inside The Homosexual Agenda' Are Trying To Recruit Your Kids - With rhetoric like this on video, no wonder there is so much homophobia in places like Russia.  

Ohio Plans Unspeakably Cruel Appeal Of Dying Man’s Last Wish - Oh come on, Ohio! Have a heart!  

San Diego Lawmakers And Residents Object To Their Anti-Gay County Clerk - See what happens when you don't do your job.

Religious right spreading false story about San Antonio ordinance

The following item from a Family Research Council email caught my eye:

A controversial proposal in San Antonio may be the first step to banning Christians from public office! In a move that took locals completely by surprise, the city council is proposing a sweeping ordinance that would disqualify anyone who has ever "demonstrated a bias" from serving on local boards or commissions. The measure, which some have couched as an "updated non-discrimination" policy, suggests that "No person shall be appointed to a position if the city council finds that such person has, prior to such proposed appointment, engaged in discrimination or demonstrated a bias, by word or deed, against any person, group or organization on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran status, age, or disability."

Several Texas pastors are outraged by the measure, which seems to prohibit any religious or even nonbelieving conservatives from serving the city simply for holding a natural view of marriage and sexuality. At no point does the proposal define what a "bias" is, instead leaving it open to the subjective interpretation of the council. On top of barring those people from public service, the ordinance also outlaws city contracts with those deemed "intolerant" to the classes listed.

And not to be outdone by its counterpart, the American Family Association is also sounding the alarm by claiming that the ordinance would bar Christians from serving public office:

According to Pastor Charles Flowers of Faith Outreach International, the city leaders want to add two categories to the policy: sexual orientation and gender identity. “The ordinance also says that if you have at any point demonstrated a bias – without defining what a bias is or who will determine whether or not one has been exercised – that you cannot get a city contract,” he tells OneNewsNow. “Neither can any of your subcontractors [who have demonstrated a bias] sign on to the contract.” Moreover, according to a draft of the revised policy, no one who has spoken out against homosexuality or the transgender lifestyle can run for city council or be appointed to a board. 

Of course this claim is a lie and it sounds like a desperate one if you ask me. According to Equality Matters:

 . . .  the San Antonio proposal simply adds sexual orientation and gender identity to existing civil rights protections. As Councilman Diego Bernal, the proposal's sponsor, told the San Antonio Express-News, the sole aim of the proposed ordinance is to ensure that city officials don't "reserve the legal right to" discriminate against individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Only the obsessively conspiracy-minded would see in the ordinance a sinister plot against Christians. Alas, "obsessively conspiracy-minded" is a fair description of much of the right-wing media.

Paralleling the misguided right-wing attacks on ENDA, several pastors have claimed that the proposal poses a threat to religious liberty. They - and their right-wing media allies - have seized on the language pertaining to those who have "demonstrated a bias" against any of the protected groups, claiming that merely holding conservative religious views on homosexuality could lead to charges of bias and disqualification from city office. As reported in the WND (World Net Daily) article, local pastors are concerned that the ordinance would "prohibit those that speak their religious beliefs regarding homosexuality from serving on city boards."

That horror story isn't supported by the evidence. San Antonio's current ordinance hasn't been used to police city officials' personal views on race, gender, or religion. That's because the ordinance is meant to prohibit clear cases of professional discrimination and bias - not bad personal thoughts.

So, to reiterate, there is no potential ordinance in San Antonio which will bar Christians from public office and any organization pushing this claim is merely exploiting the ignorance and fear of its supporters.

In other words, plan on hearing this lie from members of the religious right consistently over the next few days.

SPLC Report: Religious right groups attacking gays in foreign countries

This is not good:

As LGBT people continue making strides toward equality in the United States, hard-line U.S. religious-right groups that have spent decades demonizing them are focusing their attention – and propaganda – on a legal battle over the criminalization of LGBT sex in Belize, the outcome of which could affect criminal statutes in as many as a dozen other Caribbean countries, according to a SPLC report released today.

Dangerous Liaisons: The American Religious Right & the Criminalization of Homosexuality in Belize examines how these groups are working in countries where anti-gay attitudes are strong and violence against the LGBT community is common. Several prominent groups have descended on the tiny Central American country of Belize to prevent Section 53, a statute criminalizing gay sex, from being struck down in court. Their efforts already have intensified anti-LGBT attitudes in the country, where the plaintiff in the case has been threatened and physically assaulted.

“Many of these American religious-right groups know they have lost the battle against LGBT rights in the United States, and they’re now aiding and abetting anti-LGBT forces in countries where anti-gay violence is prevalent,” said Heidi Beirich, report author and director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project. “These groups are pouring fuel on an exceedingly volatile fire.”

You can read the entire report here.