Opposing a public official simply because he is gay? Come on guys, you gotta do better than that
It turns out that the man selected to be chief executive of Chicago's public school system is gay.
Pam's House Blend has an excellent breakdown of the article talking about him:
New Chicago Public Schools CEO Ron Huberman has now come out in a profile published in the Chicago Sun-Times. Here is some of the biography:
"Huberman was born in Israel to a family with Holocaust survivors on both sides. When he was 5, his family moved from Israel to Oak Ridge, Tenn., where his father, a scientist specializing in cancer research and cell mutation, took a research job. Seven years later, an offer at Argonne National Laboratories brought the family to La Grange.
At 15, while attending Lyons Township High School, Huberman made a declaration that, at first, was difficult for his parents to accept: He's gay.
"It's always difficult for kids. It was difficult for my parents at first. But they've become very accepting and very supportive," said Huberman, who lives with a partner who's a friend from college. They reconnected four years ago.
The question was inferred as to how long will it be before we will be hearing from the religious right ala phony gay expert Peter LaBarbera and phonier gay expert Laurie Higgins.
The answer is not long:
Chicago Public Schools New CEO Ron Huberman Openly Embraces Homosexual Immorality
I won't even try to recap this piece because the gist of it is short: LaBarbera and Higgins oppose Huberman simply because he is gay.
That's it.
No talk about Huberman breaking the law or engaging in impropriety of any kind. Just a lot of hypothetics backed up by the usual anti-gay nonsense (yadda yadda sexual deviancy, yadda yadda homosexuality being a dangerous lifestyle).
And it strikes me as sad. Someone's personal religious beliefs should have nothing to do with another person receiving a job. You believe homosexuality is a sin? Fine. But that is your belief and it shouldn't dictate whether someone is employed or not.
Huberman should be judged on his credentials, not his orientation. However in all fairness, I think his orientation is a plus. It's a tremendous psychological boost for lgbt children to know that he exists. He could be seen as a role model for a community of folks ( i.e. lgbt youth) who need to see some positive visibility.
But I doubt that his orientation was why he was hired. And it's not a good reason to oppose his hiring.
What's difference between opposing Huberman because he is gay and opposing him if he happened to be African-American?
Before you launch into some ridiculous argument about black people "not being to able to choose their skin color," how about if I put it a different way.
What is the difference between opposing Huberman because he is gay and opposing him because he is Jewish or Catholic, or even Southern Baptist? After all, isn't religion a choice?
There is no difference. All of these options are equally wrong.
Opposing the hiring of someone simply because they are gay is no different than opposing someone because of his/her race or religion.
And none of that sort of thinking should be allowed to dictate anything in this country.
(Forgive me if you think this piece is a bit simplistic, but sometimes you have to dismiss flowery prose and break things down to the basics.)
News briefs
Businessmen, lawyers and Church in challenge to gay adoption - Some ugly chicanery across the seas. I hate to see children caught in the middle of this. Hopefully it will work out.
Obama seeks assessment on gays in military - An outright executive order here would be disastrous, galvanizing the opposition and giving Elaine Donnelly some undeserved credibility. President Obama is doing the right thing by moving slow.
Steele: GOP should reach out to supporters of gay rights, abortion - I'll believe this when I see Matt Barber french kiss Micheangelo Signorile.
Bill would allow concealed guns in Arkansas churches - Perfect example of how Christianity is going down hill in this country. Who in their right mind would consider a law like this? My pastor would sit those lawmakers down and ask them where is their faith that God will protect them from all harm? Speaking of my church (yes I do attend church from time to time), we are having something quite opposite in which we encourage people to surrender their guns.
Monday, February 02, 2009
Monday after the Superbowl - news briefs for now
The Superbowl is over and my Steelers are champs again.
Yaaaay!
Of course I'm depressed that it seems everyone involved in the victory is younger than me (Coach Tomlin included.)
I'll just console myself with the fact that I'm prettier.
Seriously though, since things are moving slow, I thought I would throw out a few news briefs you may or not have heard about:
SC House leader scolds tourism agency head - As a board member of the South Carolina Pride Movement, I was in the middle of that controversy in which our state officials demonstrated just how scared they get at the mention of the word "gay." Now the controversy pops up again briefly in state budget talks. Rather than repeat known information about just how stupid the situation was, I would rather give huge props to Representative Gilda Cobb-Hunter for saying what should have been said by a state official when the madness took place.
Mormon church lists more Proposition 8 expenses - The religious right has tried to spin the tale of the Mormon church a victims of "radical homosexuals" due its spearheading of the pro-Proposition 8 vote. While I do not agree with some of the tactics that some of my fellow lgbts have engaged in, let's not forget the big picture. The Mormon church acted irresponsibly, unethically, and possibly illegal in their attack against marriage equality in California. The Mormon church is NOT the victim here.
Obama nominates homosexual activist for high federal post - brought to you by One News Now where every lgbt in a public position is a "homosexual activist."
Mayor won't vote for same sex marriage resolution - I just had to add this. Huge kudos to this mayor . . . for now.
The Superbowl is over and my Steelers are champs again.
Yaaaay!
Of course I'm depressed that it seems everyone involved in the victory is younger than me (Coach Tomlin included.)
I'll just console myself with the fact that I'm prettier.
Seriously though, since things are moving slow, I thought I would throw out a few news briefs you may or not have heard about:
SC House leader scolds tourism agency head - As a board member of the South Carolina Pride Movement, I was in the middle of that controversy in which our state officials demonstrated just how scared they get at the mention of the word "gay." Now the controversy pops up again briefly in state budget talks. Rather than repeat known information about just how stupid the situation was, I would rather give huge props to Representative Gilda Cobb-Hunter for saying what should have been said by a state official when the madness took place.
Mormon church lists more Proposition 8 expenses - The religious right has tried to spin the tale of the Mormon church a victims of "radical homosexuals" due its spearheading of the pro-Proposition 8 vote. While I do not agree with some of the tactics that some of my fellow lgbts have engaged in, let's not forget the big picture. The Mormon church acted irresponsibly, unethically, and possibly illegal in their attack against marriage equality in California. The Mormon church is NOT the victim here.
Obama nominates homosexual activist for high federal post - brought to you by One News Now where every lgbt in a public position is a "homosexual activist."
Mayor won't vote for same sex marriage resolution - I just had to add this. Huge kudos to this mayor . . . for now.
Sunday, February 01, 2009
Getting past awareness and totally into exhibitionism
Peter LaBarbera is a strange dude. And it's getting to the point where I can no be in shock at his tactics because they crack me up so much.
Take for example, his again attacking the Gay and Lesbian Task Force on whom they give their Leather Leadership Award to:
The Task Force presented Graylin Thornton, the co-owner of a company that sells homosexual porn videos, with its “leather” award at Creating Change, an annual conference for grassroots activists advocating the following sexual misbehaviors: male homosexuality; lesbianism; bisexuality; transsexuality; sadomasochism and other fetishes; prostitutes (”sex workers”); and “polyamory/nonmonogamy” (multiple-partner and open relationships).
Thornton runs Grey Rose Video Productions, which states on its website: “As active members of the BEAR, LEATHER, and AFRICAN AMERICAN communities, both Graylin and [business partner Chris Meister] are dedicated to continuing a standard of excellence in the production of videos featuring the hot, hung, hunky and hairy ‘real men’ that represent those communities.”
LaBarbera is trying to recreate a mess he nearly started with last year's Creating Change conference. Last year, he said that the Gay and Lesbian Task Force was presenting its “Leather Leadership Award” to Guy Baldwin, an advocate of “erotic” and “consensual slavery.”
His angle at that time was attacking the Democratic Party for donating to this conference. LaBarbera claimed that they advocated slavery.
Ironically his angle backfired when Rush Limbaugh picked up the story and, with his usual omission of truth, said that the entire Creating Change conference was a S&M event.
Hugely embarrassing, not for the Gay and Lesbian Task Force, but for LaBarbera.
But like a trooper, he soldiers on in another attempt to slur Creating Change.
For the record, Creating Change is the one and only time each year that more than 2,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights advocates from every corner of the country converge to strategize, socialize and mobilize for LGBT equality.It features top-level trainings, workshops, networking sessions and action-planning with our movement’s best thinkers and brightest innovators — oh yeah, there’s also tons of opportunities for socializing, meeting up with old friends and making lots of new ones.
It's funny and infuriating at the same time how LaBarbera tries to pick out one thing and brand the entire conference as some sex session. So I guess that every year, we can count on LaBarbera going through the Creating Change brochure and picking out things he can exploit and misrepresent.
He manipulates workshops to make it look as if lgbts are not only engaging in madness, but are trying to "indoctrinate children."
But anyone wanting to see an actual version of the workshops taking place (without LaBarbera's commentary) can go here.
Also, about the awards, Creating Change gives them to a wide variety of people. The list includes former South African President Nelson Mandela, Mrs. Coretta Scott King, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Ted Kennedy, former Sens. Carol Moseley Braun and Tom Daschle, Bishop Gene Robinson, film producer Bruce Cohen, actors Wilson Cruz, Alec Mapa, Sir Ian McKellan and Mathew St. Patrick, comedian Margaret Cho, and the Indigo Girls.
What is so comical is how Peter tries to play on the shock about the award given to Thornton. On his webpage are pictures of the videos coming from Thornton's company.
Now I have to ask, was those pictures necessary, especially that last one?
I am not a psychoanalyst but I really don't think posting those pictures weren't for anyone's benefit but his own.
Take what you can out of that statement.
The entire nonsense over last year's conference is here, particularly in the Feb. 8 and 11th entries.
Peter LaBarbera is a strange dude. And it's getting to the point where I can no be in shock at his tactics because they crack me up so much.
Take for example, his again attacking the Gay and Lesbian Task Force on whom they give their Leather Leadership Award to:
The Task Force presented Graylin Thornton, the co-owner of a company that sells homosexual porn videos, with its “leather” award at Creating Change, an annual conference for grassroots activists advocating the following sexual misbehaviors: male homosexuality; lesbianism; bisexuality; transsexuality; sadomasochism and other fetishes; prostitutes (”sex workers”); and “polyamory/nonmonogamy” (multiple-partner and open relationships).
Thornton runs Grey Rose Video Productions, which states on its website: “As active members of the BEAR, LEATHER, and AFRICAN AMERICAN communities, both Graylin and [business partner Chris Meister] are dedicated to continuing a standard of excellence in the production of videos featuring the hot, hung, hunky and hairy ‘real men’ that represent those communities.”
LaBarbera is trying to recreate a mess he nearly started with last year's Creating Change conference. Last year, he said that the Gay and Lesbian Task Force was presenting its “Leather Leadership Award” to Guy Baldwin, an advocate of “erotic” and “consensual slavery.”
His angle at that time was attacking the Democratic Party for donating to this conference. LaBarbera claimed that they advocated slavery.
Ironically his angle backfired when Rush Limbaugh picked up the story and, with his usual omission of truth, said that the entire Creating Change conference was a S&M event.
Hugely embarrassing, not for the Gay and Lesbian Task Force, but for LaBarbera.
But like a trooper, he soldiers on in another attempt to slur Creating Change.
For the record, Creating Change is the one and only time each year that more than 2,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights advocates from every corner of the country converge to strategize, socialize and mobilize for LGBT equality.It features top-level trainings, workshops, networking sessions and action-planning with our movement’s best thinkers and brightest innovators — oh yeah, there’s also tons of opportunities for socializing, meeting up with old friends and making lots of new ones.
It's funny and infuriating at the same time how LaBarbera tries to pick out one thing and brand the entire conference as some sex session. So I guess that every year, we can count on LaBarbera going through the Creating Change brochure and picking out things he can exploit and misrepresent.
He manipulates workshops to make it look as if lgbts are not only engaging in madness, but are trying to "indoctrinate children."
But anyone wanting to see an actual version of the workshops taking place (without LaBarbera's commentary) can go here.
Also, about the awards, Creating Change gives them to a wide variety of people. The list includes former South African President Nelson Mandela, Mrs. Coretta Scott King, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Ted Kennedy, former Sens. Carol Moseley Braun and Tom Daschle, Bishop Gene Robinson, film producer Bruce Cohen, actors Wilson Cruz, Alec Mapa, Sir Ian McKellan and Mathew St. Patrick, comedian Margaret Cho, and the Indigo Girls.
What is so comical is how Peter tries to play on the shock about the award given to Thornton. On his webpage are pictures of the videos coming from Thornton's company.
Now I have to ask, was those pictures necessary, especially that last one?
I am not a psychoanalyst but I really don't think posting those pictures weren't for anyone's benefit but his own.
Take what you can out of that statement.
The entire nonsense over last year's conference is here, particularly in the Feb. 8 and 11th entries.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Possible appeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell attacked . . . by a former gay porn star
And now we have reached the realm of ridiculousness.
President Obama's pledge to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the policy that deals with gays in the military, has received much praise from some corners and much criticism from others.
But the criticism he received this week puts everything in Rod Serling territory.
From Fox Forum:
The repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) would force the United States military to accept the future same-sex marriages of those serving. Activists would use this federal recognition of gay marriage in the military to challenge and force a repeal of state constitutional amendments, but wedding bells are not the only reason why gay advocates and military officials should not be heading to the altar.
A 2008 Military Times poll of members of the armed forces found that the troops were opposed to the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell by a margin of 2 to 1.
The queer thing about Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is that President Bill Clinton mandated the policy after numerous campaign promises to the Clinton lesbian, gay and transgender constituency. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was designed to protect those who serve and participate in the LGBT lifestyle against unfair prosecution from their superiors.
Never mind that the Military Times poll was said to have been sloppy and biased (Participants in the survey were drawn from a volunteer pool of readers to the 'Military Times', instead of a random sampling of active duty personnel) because I am concerned with the author of this column - Matt Sanchez.
For the benefit of those who don't know, Sanchez served as a Marine reservist. He also used to be involved in gay porn under the names Pierre LaBranche and Rod Majors.
So from gay porn star to War Correspondent and Political Commentator. I guess anyone can achieve anything in America.
The entire thing confuses me. I liked it better when Elaine Donnelly was spinning tales black lesbians raping white service women.
As I understand it, Sanchez considers himself straight. That being the case, the evil side of me is just itching to make a bad joke.
What the hell:
Sanchez's very appearance more than proves that gays in the military isn't a bad idea. He is proof that all of us can put our sexual orientation aside when we have a job to do, whether that job be defending our country or sucking (shut your mouth)!
And now we have reached the realm of ridiculousness.
President Obama's pledge to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the policy that deals with gays in the military, has received much praise from some corners and much criticism from others.
But the criticism he received this week puts everything in Rod Serling territory.
From Fox Forum:
The repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) would force the United States military to accept the future same-sex marriages of those serving. Activists would use this federal recognition of gay marriage in the military to challenge and force a repeal of state constitutional amendments, but wedding bells are not the only reason why gay advocates and military officials should not be heading to the altar.
A 2008 Military Times poll of members of the armed forces found that the troops were opposed to the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell by a margin of 2 to 1.
The queer thing about Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is that President Bill Clinton mandated the policy after numerous campaign promises to the Clinton lesbian, gay and transgender constituency. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was designed to protect those who serve and participate in the LGBT lifestyle against unfair prosecution from their superiors.
Never mind that the Military Times poll was said to have been sloppy and biased (Participants in the survey were drawn from a volunteer pool of readers to the 'Military Times', instead of a random sampling of active duty personnel) because I am concerned with the author of this column - Matt Sanchez.
For the benefit of those who don't know, Sanchez served as a Marine reservist. He also used to be involved in gay porn under the names Pierre LaBranche and Rod Majors.
So from gay porn star to War Correspondent and Political Commentator. I guess anyone can achieve anything in America.
The entire thing confuses me. I liked it better when Elaine Donnelly was spinning tales black lesbians raping white service women.
As I understand it, Sanchez considers himself straight. That being the case, the evil side of me is just itching to make a bad joke.
What the hell:
Sanchez's very appearance more than proves that gays in the military isn't a bad idea. He is proof that all of us can put our sexual orientation aside when we have a job to do, whether that job be defending our country or sucking (shut your mouth)!
How anti-gay campaigns start
The Queer-Straight Alliance in East Chapel Hill High School (North Carolina) recently held an assembly that students were allegedly required to attend.
In doing so, they may have violated school policy:
The principal of East Chapel Hill High School said a gay-awareness club and its advisers violated school policy Wednesday by holding an assembly that hundreds of English students were required to attend.
Principal David Thaden said in an interview Thursday that he was unaware of the assembly, which was held several times during the day.
Thaden said he planned to talk with the teachers who work with the Queer-Straight Alliance and also the English teachers who brought their students to the assemblies.
Thaden said that any assembly involving material that is not part of the school curriculum must be approved by the administration, and this was not.
All of the details of this incident isn't known and for the record, only three parents complained. But if this does pan out the way it looks, simple reprimands are in order.
But from the comments under the article (some of which are proving the need for such an assembly), someone is already pushing for the Allied Defense Fund to be called in. And we know how they can exploit a situation like this.
How long will it be before One News Now or our friend Peter LaBarbera comes out with a one-sided article about the incident? How long will be before they inaccurately frame this incident as a "plot to indoctrinate children into the gay agenda?"
Or Bill O'Reilly to feature a biased news piece on the incident complete with his foaming at the mouth commentary and interruptions?
Or Michelle Malkin to write a nasty diatribe about the incident?
Or Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, the Liberty Counsel, or any of those other phony "pro-family" groups to start sending out press releases or making videos exploiting this incident in attempts to beat back gay-straight alliances nationwide.
I don't know what's worse: the possibility that this incident may be blown out of proportion or the knowledge that none of these folks would make a peep if the situation had to do with an lgbt child getting bashed.
The Queer-Straight Alliance in East Chapel Hill High School (North Carolina) recently held an assembly that students were allegedly required to attend.
In doing so, they may have violated school policy:
The principal of East Chapel Hill High School said a gay-awareness club and its advisers violated school policy Wednesday by holding an assembly that hundreds of English students were required to attend.
Principal David Thaden said in an interview Thursday that he was unaware of the assembly, which was held several times during the day.
Thaden said he planned to talk with the teachers who work with the Queer-Straight Alliance and also the English teachers who brought their students to the assemblies.
Thaden said that any assembly involving material that is not part of the school curriculum must be approved by the administration, and this was not.
All of the details of this incident isn't known and for the record, only three parents complained. But if this does pan out the way it looks, simple reprimands are in order.
But from the comments under the article (some of which are proving the need for such an assembly), someone is already pushing for the Allied Defense Fund to be called in. And we know how they can exploit a situation like this.
How long will it be before One News Now or our friend Peter LaBarbera comes out with a one-sided article about the incident? How long will be before they inaccurately frame this incident as a "plot to indoctrinate children into the gay agenda?"
Or Bill O'Reilly to feature a biased news piece on the incident complete with his foaming at the mouth commentary and interruptions?
Or Michelle Malkin to write a nasty diatribe about the incident?
Or Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, the Liberty Counsel, or any of those other phony "pro-family" groups to start sending out press releases or making videos exploiting this incident in attempts to beat back gay-straight alliances nationwide.
I don't know what's worse: the possibility that this incident may be blown out of proportion or the knowledge that none of these folks would make a peep if the situation had to do with an lgbt child getting bashed.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Friday news briefs
Steele Elected RNC Chair - Who would have thought? Black is the new black. However, before anyone starts popping the champagne, please be aware that Steele isn't exactly a good guy. How long will it be before he possibly starts exploiting the divisions between the lgbt and African-American community?
They're organizing to protect DOMA already - John Aravosis is spot on when he says "This is indicative of the difference between conservatives and liberals: The right organizes years on an issue years in advance, the left organizes after we've lost." And, if I might add, they don't think that studying the tactics of the opposition is beneath them (the opposition in this case being us). If only some of us took the same frame of mind when it comes to them.
Anti-gay Arguments We Don’t Bother With (And Should): Part 2 - The continuation of the Box Turtle Bulletin series.
Lesbian couple wins court round - Ending the week on a happy note.
and now for something having to do with absolutely nothing . . .
Rainn Wilson auditions for PARANOID PARK - The only thing I know about Rainn Wilson is that he is a cast member of The Office. I don't know what Paranoid Park is. But this is strange, especially at 1:04. But I figure a little homoeroticism never hurt anyone.
Steele Elected RNC Chair - Who would have thought? Black is the new black. However, before anyone starts popping the champagne, please be aware that Steele isn't exactly a good guy. How long will it be before he possibly starts exploiting the divisions between the lgbt and African-American community?
They're organizing to protect DOMA already - John Aravosis is spot on when he says "This is indicative of the difference between conservatives and liberals: The right organizes years on an issue years in advance, the left organizes after we've lost." And, if I might add, they don't think that studying the tactics of the opposition is beneath them (the opposition in this case being us). If only some of us took the same frame of mind when it comes to them.
Anti-gay Arguments We Don’t Bother With (And Should): Part 2 - The continuation of the Box Turtle Bulletin series.
Lesbian couple wins court round - Ending the week on a happy note.
and now for something having to do with absolutely nothing . . .
Rainn Wilson auditions for PARANOID PARK - The only thing I know about Rainn Wilson is that he is a cast member of The Office. I don't know what Paranoid Park is. But this is strange, especially at 1:04. But I figure a little homoeroticism never hurt anyone.
Laurie Higgins - yet another phony expert
One of the most annoying things about the religious right is how they seem to anoint every Tom, Dick, and Harry as an "expert" on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Credentials such as degrees and such are not needed here. All you need is a so-called Christian mind and the temerity to lie in the name of God.
I've seen this sort of thing before with Linda Harvey of Mission America. Harvey, a former ad executive who supposedly accepted Jesus in her heart, took it upon herself for develop some sort of "risk management" test for high schools who dared to acknowledge the existence of lgbt students and teachers.
I'm glad to say that her nonsense was pretty much ignored.
Now comes another phony expert, Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute.
She is angry that two transgendered women are suing the state in order to change the sex on their birth certificates. And she takes it upon herself to diagnose these two women with a medical condition, despite the fact that she has no expertise to do so:
In the Jan. 28, 2009 edition of the Chicago Tribune, there is a story about the two sexual amputees who are suing the state over the refusal of the state to change the “gender” designation on their birth certificates from “male” to “female.” Several important points must be made. First, it’s utterly reprehensible that anyone in the medical community would be complicit in facilitating a psychological disorder by amputating healthy body parts. There is a condition known as either apotemnophilia or Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID) that is characterized by the desire to amputate a healthy limb. It is useful for comparison in that it is thought by many to be closely related to Gender Identity Disorder (i.e., transsexualism), which society is increasingly accepting as a valid identity that emerges from biological influences and whose behavioral manifestations are morally legitimate.
Sexual amputees? You mean ugly language.
Higgins's unhinged commentary shines a light on just what direction the religious right will be going in order to exploit people's ignorance of the transgender community.
Oh these folks want to mutilate themselves. They want body parts sliced off.
What Higgins is doing is the old tactic of nauseating instead of educating. It's a cynical ploy and fits very well with the modus operandi of these supposed pro-family spokespeople.
The issues involving the transgender community have nothing to do with body mutilation. They are more complicated and frankly I think that there should be more education on who our transgendered brothers and sisters are.
That way, ignorant seeds, like those planted by Laurie Higgins, won't be allowed to sprout.
By the way, for more information about Higgins, including her unwarranted attacks on Illinois's Deerfield High School, go here.
One of the most annoying things about the religious right is how they seem to anoint every Tom, Dick, and Harry as an "expert" on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Credentials such as degrees and such are not needed here. All you need is a so-called Christian mind and the temerity to lie in the name of God.
I've seen this sort of thing before with Linda Harvey of Mission America. Harvey, a former ad executive who supposedly accepted Jesus in her heart, took it upon herself for develop some sort of "risk management" test for high schools who dared to acknowledge the existence of lgbt students and teachers.
I'm glad to say that her nonsense was pretty much ignored.
Now comes another phony expert, Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute.
She is angry that two transgendered women are suing the state in order to change the sex on their birth certificates. And she takes it upon herself to diagnose these two women with a medical condition, despite the fact that she has no expertise to do so:
In the Jan. 28, 2009 edition of the Chicago Tribune, there is a story about the two sexual amputees who are suing the state over the refusal of the state to change the “gender” designation on their birth certificates from “male” to “female.” Several important points must be made. First, it’s utterly reprehensible that anyone in the medical community would be complicit in facilitating a psychological disorder by amputating healthy body parts. There is a condition known as either apotemnophilia or Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID) that is characterized by the desire to amputate a healthy limb. It is useful for comparison in that it is thought by many to be closely related to Gender Identity Disorder (i.e., transsexualism), which society is increasingly accepting as a valid identity that emerges from biological influences and whose behavioral manifestations are morally legitimate.
Sexual amputees? You mean ugly language.
Higgins's unhinged commentary shines a light on just what direction the religious right will be going in order to exploit people's ignorance of the transgender community.
Oh these folks want to mutilate themselves. They want body parts sliced off.
What Higgins is doing is the old tactic of nauseating instead of educating. It's a cynical ploy and fits very well with the modus operandi of these supposed pro-family spokespeople.
The issues involving the transgender community have nothing to do with body mutilation. They are more complicated and frankly I think that there should be more education on who our transgendered brothers and sisters are.
That way, ignorant seeds, like those planted by Laurie Higgins, won't be allowed to sprout.
By the way, for more information about Higgins, including her unwarranted attacks on Illinois's Deerfield High School, go here.
Conflict resolution - it's a good thing
Joe Brummer has a new site .
Brummer, a good friend and supporter of mine from day one, has in the past brought an intelligent and calm perspective to this so-called cultural war.
Via his old site, Brummer consistently refuted religious right lies in a manner that gave the purveyors of these distortions respect but called them out for their dishonesty.
On his new site, Brummer wants to solely focus on conflict resolution and nonviolence training. Other services he provides are communication training, mediation, conflict coaching, facilitation, and web design.
I say more power to him, especially in this climate.
Joe Brummer has a new site .
Brummer, a good friend and supporter of mine from day one, has in the past brought an intelligent and calm perspective to this so-called cultural war.
Via his old site, Brummer consistently refuted religious right lies in a manner that gave the purveyors of these distortions respect but called them out for their dishonesty.
On his new site, Brummer wants to solely focus on conflict resolution and nonviolence training. Other services he provides are communication training, mediation, conflict coaching, facilitation, and web design.
I say more power to him, especially in this climate.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Stop misrepresenting the Lisa Miller/Janet Jenkins custody case
There has been a case going through the courts for the past couple of years regarding two lesbians and a child they agreed to raise.
Or rather, a lesbian, a "former" lesbian, and a child they agreed to raise.
This is how the religious right organization Liberty Counsel has described the case:
Activist judges in Vermont have declared that a legal stranger is a mommy to another woman's biological child. Now, a Vermont judge will decide whether to order the six year old little girl be stripped from the loving arms of the only mommy she has ever known - her biological mother, Lisa.
Lisa Miller left the homosexual lifestyle and became a Christian when Isabella was 17 months old. Janet Jenkins, who was Lisa's same-sex partner when Lisa gave birth to Isabella, then sought full custody of Isabella, claiming she was a parent even though she was not biologically related to Isabella and never sought to adopt her.
Not only did Vermont create new law from the bench to declare that Isabella has two mommies, but appellate courts in Virginia (the state where Isabella was born and has lived all but 13 months of her life) directed Virginia to fully recognize the Vermont orders giving Janet (who lives in Vermont) liberal unsupervised visitation. In doing so, the courts ignored Virginia's Marriage Amendment and marriage laws declaring all rights arising from same-sex relationships void and unenforceable.
However, like always with religious right groups, the Liberty Counsel omitted several things thereby distorting the case in pursuit of its own agenda.
In December 2008, Newsweek magazine featured a long article about the case. Here are some facts that the Liberty Counsel omitted:
Miller and Jenkins agreed to raise Isabella together.
Jenkins said the reason why she did not file for adoption was because she was told she didn't need to because they had the civil union (the two had married in a Vermont civil union before Isabella was born).
When the two broke up, Miller agreed to allow Jenkins to have visitation rights. Jenkins even paid child support. Miller allegedly began keeping Isabella away from Jenkins. Even now, she refuses to allow her to have unsupervised time with Isabella even though she has been ordered to.
The entire controversy is solely because Miller will not allow Jenkins to have unsupervised time with Isabella. Jenkins mainly won her case due to the Federal Kidnapping Prevention Law.
Miller has claimed she witnessed Isabella engage in disturbing behavior after vists with Jenkins. The claims were investigated by Virginia's Child Protective Services and were deemed "unfounded."
I hope that in the long run, things work out for little Isabella.
But in all honesty, how the Liberty Counsel is framing this case is extremely dishonest. These women agreed to raise the child together. And after they split up, they agreed on visitation, with Jenkins paying child support.
It seems that Miller decided that she didn't like what is going on and took it upon herself to void whatever agreement she and Jenkins had. My opinion is that Jenkins has a right to a say in the raising of her daughter.
The Liberty Counsel does no one justice in the way it attempts tug at emotions with inaccurate connotations of a crying child being ripped from the arms of her mother.
It's a shame that this "Christian group" feels the need to stoop so low. In a case where there should be no villains, the Liberty Counsel is doing its best to fill that role.
There has been a case going through the courts for the past couple of years regarding two lesbians and a child they agreed to raise.
Or rather, a lesbian, a "former" lesbian, and a child they agreed to raise.
This is how the religious right organization Liberty Counsel has described the case:
Activist judges in Vermont have declared that a legal stranger is a mommy to another woman's biological child. Now, a Vermont judge will decide whether to order the six year old little girl be stripped from the loving arms of the only mommy she has ever known - her biological mother, Lisa.
Lisa Miller left the homosexual lifestyle and became a Christian when Isabella was 17 months old. Janet Jenkins, who was Lisa's same-sex partner when Lisa gave birth to Isabella, then sought full custody of Isabella, claiming she was a parent even though she was not biologically related to Isabella and never sought to adopt her.
Not only did Vermont create new law from the bench to declare that Isabella has two mommies, but appellate courts in Virginia (the state where Isabella was born and has lived all but 13 months of her life) directed Virginia to fully recognize the Vermont orders giving Janet (who lives in Vermont) liberal unsupervised visitation. In doing so, the courts ignored Virginia's Marriage Amendment and marriage laws declaring all rights arising from same-sex relationships void and unenforceable.
However, like always with religious right groups, the Liberty Counsel omitted several things thereby distorting the case in pursuit of its own agenda.
In December 2008, Newsweek magazine featured a long article about the case. Here are some facts that the Liberty Counsel omitted:
Miller and Jenkins agreed to raise Isabella together.
Jenkins said the reason why she did not file for adoption was because she was told she didn't need to because they had the civil union (the two had married in a Vermont civil union before Isabella was born).
When the two broke up, Miller agreed to allow Jenkins to have visitation rights. Jenkins even paid child support. Miller allegedly began keeping Isabella away from Jenkins. Even now, she refuses to allow her to have unsupervised time with Isabella even though she has been ordered to.
The entire controversy is solely because Miller will not allow Jenkins to have unsupervised time with Isabella. Jenkins mainly won her case due to the Federal Kidnapping Prevention Law.
Miller has claimed she witnessed Isabella engage in disturbing behavior after vists with Jenkins. The claims were investigated by Virginia's Child Protective Services and were deemed "unfounded."
I hope that in the long run, things work out for little Isabella.
But in all honesty, how the Liberty Counsel is framing this case is extremely dishonest. These women agreed to raise the child together. And after they split up, they agreed on visitation, with Jenkins paying child support.
It seems that Miller decided that she didn't like what is going on and took it upon herself to void whatever agreement she and Jenkins had. My opinion is that Jenkins has a right to a say in the raising of her daughter.
The Liberty Counsel does no one justice in the way it attempts tug at emotions with inaccurate connotations of a crying child being ripped from the arms of her mother.
It's a shame that this "Christian group" feels the need to stoop so low. In a case where there should be no villains, the Liberty Counsel is doing its best to fill that role.
More on the Pink Swastika - showing my work
I was reminded by a commentator that if I make a comment that religious right work has been discredited, I should show my proof.
This is true. Yesterday, I said the Pink Swastika, a religious right tome claiming that gays influenced the Nazi Party in Germany, was discredited. However, I neglected to show proof.
Allow me to now:
From the Southern Poverty Law Center:
The Pink Swastika — whose cover has a swastika in place of the "x" in "homosexuality" in the book's subtitle — has been roundly discredited by legitimate historians and was thoroughly debunked in a 2005 Intelligence Report article. Stephen Feinstein, director of the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies at the University of Minnesota, said the book was "produced by a right-wing Christian cult and is as correct as flat earth theory."
From that 2005 Intelligence Report:
Written by fundamentalist activists Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams, The Pink Swastika says that rather than being victimized by the Nazis, gay men in Hitler's inner circle actually helped mastermind the Holocaust.
"While we cannot say that homosexuals caused the Holocaust, we must not ignore their central role in Nazism," write Lively and Abrams. "To the myth of the 'pink triangle' — the notion that all homosexuals in Nazi Germany were persecuted — we must respond with the reality of the 'pink swastika.'"
Historians agree that this "reality" is utterly false. But many anti-gay crusaders have used the "gay Nazi" myth as proof that gay people are immoral and destructive.
I was reminded by a commentator that if I make a comment that religious right work has been discredited, I should show my proof.
This is true. Yesterday, I said the Pink Swastika, a religious right tome claiming that gays influenced the Nazi Party in Germany, was discredited. However, I neglected to show proof.
Allow me to now:
From the Southern Poverty Law Center:
The Pink Swastika — whose cover has a swastika in place of the "x" in "homosexuality" in the book's subtitle — has been roundly discredited by legitimate historians and was thoroughly debunked in a 2005 Intelligence Report article. Stephen Feinstein, director of the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies at the University of Minnesota, said the book was "produced by a right-wing Christian cult and is as correct as flat earth theory."
From that 2005 Intelligence Report:
Written by fundamentalist activists Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams, The Pink Swastika says that rather than being victimized by the Nazis, gay men in Hitler's inner circle actually helped mastermind the Holocaust.
"While we cannot say that homosexuals caused the Holocaust, we must not ignore their central role in Nazism," write Lively and Abrams. "To the myth of the 'pink triangle' — the notion that all homosexuals in Nazi Germany were persecuted — we must respond with the reality of the 'pink swastika.'"
Historians agree that this "reality" is utterly false. But many anti-gay crusaders have used the "gay Nazi" myth as proof that gay people are immoral and destructive.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Wednesday news briefs
Attacks on faith are an opportunity, says Cameron - This is the actor Kirk Cameron, not my favorite phony researcher Paul Cameron. But this Cameron seems to have taken a tip from that Cameron. He claims that assaults on Christian faith is increasing in the public square, but he offer no proof of this.
If anything, it's that self-righteous claim of victimhood that's slowly but surely giving Christianity a bad name in this country. Pretty soon, when people hear the word "Christian," they aren't going to think of individuals who let their faith and love of God show in their daily lives . They aren't going to think of the Good Samaritan. And they are not going to think of Jesus.
They are going to think of a bunch of hypocrites whose talk of religious liberties only mean them and them only. They are going to think of a man like James Dobson in pictures where he holds the Bible like the hammer of Thor.
And they are going to think of intolerant boobs who use the government to hold back the rights of lgbts and ignore the needs of the homeless, hungry, and truly spiritually destitute while they themselves give aid and comfort to the forces of corruption (i.e. Jack Abramoff, Tom Delay, and Charles Keating) in pursuit of some bullshit idea of conquest in the name of God.
Okay, enough of my soap box.
Iceland to appoint gay woman minister to PM post - And here we are supposed to be the first in things like this.
Big trouble for Obama nod - Not necessarily a gay issue, but to me, it's taking anti-Obamaism to the extreme.
Anti-Gay Arguments We Don’t Bother With (And Should): Part 1 - The beginning of an excellent series by Box Turtle Bulletin and should be required reading for all lgbts.
Dumbass anti-gay comment of the week:
"Certainly there would be a mass exodus of normal men from a homosexualized military," said Lively, "probably leading to the reinstatement of compulsory service. . . . And yes there would be severe morale problems for normal men forced to live as the objects of sexual interest of other men with whom they share close quarters. However, the much bigger, longer-term problem is the threat of a homosexual takeover of the military branches." - Scott Lively, 'Gays' in the Military: A Revival of The Pink Swastika?
Attacks on faith are an opportunity, says Cameron - This is the actor Kirk Cameron, not my favorite phony researcher Paul Cameron. But this Cameron seems to have taken a tip from that Cameron. He claims that assaults on Christian faith is increasing in the public square, but he offer no proof of this.
If anything, it's that self-righteous claim of victimhood that's slowly but surely giving Christianity a bad name in this country. Pretty soon, when people hear the word "Christian," they aren't going to think of individuals who let their faith and love of God show in their daily lives . They aren't going to think of the Good Samaritan. And they are not going to think of Jesus.
They are going to think of a bunch of hypocrites whose talk of religious liberties only mean them and them only. They are going to think of a man like James Dobson in pictures where he holds the Bible like the hammer of Thor.
And they are going to think of intolerant boobs who use the government to hold back the rights of lgbts and ignore the needs of the homeless, hungry, and truly spiritually destitute while they themselves give aid and comfort to the forces of corruption (i.e. Jack Abramoff, Tom Delay, and Charles Keating) in pursuit of some bullshit idea of conquest in the name of God.
Okay, enough of my soap box.
Iceland to appoint gay woman minister to PM post - And here we are supposed to be the first in things like this.
Big trouble for Obama nod - Not necessarily a gay issue, but to me, it's taking anti-Obamaism to the extreme.
Anti-Gay Arguments We Don’t Bother With (And Should): Part 1 - The beginning of an excellent series by Box Turtle Bulletin and should be required reading for all lgbts.
Dumbass anti-gay comment of the week:
"Certainly there would be a mass exodus of normal men from a homosexualized military," said Lively, "probably leading to the reinstatement of compulsory service. . . . And yes there would be severe morale problems for normal men forced to live as the objects of sexual interest of other men with whom they share close quarters. However, the much bigger, longer-term problem is the threat of a homosexual takeover of the military branches." - Scott Lively, 'Gays' in the Military: A Revival of The Pink Swastika?
Anti-Gay Harrassment leads to poor adult health (and in other news, the religious right really doesn't give a %@!)
From Box Turtle Bulletin comes this news:
The Urban Men’s Health Survey (UMHS) has revealed a lot of useful information in the decade since it was conducted. Much of it “dismaying,” in the words of Ron Stall, who worked on the survey at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and is now at the University of Pittsburgh. Stall was one of four researchers from the University of Pittsburgh (joined by a fifth researcher from Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis) who analyzed a subset of that data and concluded that “experience of homophobic attacks against young gay/bisexual male youth helps to explain heightened rates of serious health problems among adult gay men.”
The UMHS was a telephone interview of a probability sample of men who have sex with men (MSMs) living in four cities: San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. The survey was conducted between November 1996 and February 1998, with 2,881 UMHS participants being asked a wide-ranging battery of questions resulting in 855 variables. The results of that survey were fed into a database, which scores of researchers have been mining ever since for dozens of studies covering many different topics. Dr, Mark Friedman, who has previously investigated the link between anti-gay hostility and suicide among young gay males, led a team which poured over responses to key questions in that database to see if a link could be established between anti-gay hostility against young gay men and adverse health outcomes as adults.
This study confirms a common sense idea that a child who has his/her self esteem destroyed (via name-calling or any other type of harrassment) will most likely grow up to participate in negative behavior.
It's an idea that isn't necessarily bound to sexual orientation. In his classic novel, Native Son, African-American writer Richard Wright demonstrated, through the turbulent life and death of his protagonist Bigger Thomas, that when society works against building the self esteem of youth, it usually creates criminals and those who engage in negative behavior.
Not that members of the religious right care about Bigger Thomas, Richard Wright, or this study.
To them, any attempt to stop such harrassment is a part of the BIG GAY CONSPIRACY.
Yesterday, Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel railed against an educator for daring to stop homophobic language in her class.
Today, Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), is bitching about "No Name Calling Week," a week where students are encouraged to treat each other with respect regardless of their differences:
Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), says while the event's name sounds innocent, it is a way of indoctrinating children so that they will support the homosexual agenda after they become adults. A PJI press release reveals the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN, is a key sponsor of the program.
"They're promoting, all the way down to the first-grade level, children to read and be exposed to books and material that is pro-homosexual -- and it's all under the guise of opposing name-calling," he contends.
. . . "The alleged homosexual kids are not the only ones being bullied," the attorney points out. "There's [sic] kids of faith being called 'homophobic' and 'homophobe,' and yet those words and that name-calling is not under attack and is not being addressed by this alleged week of tolerance that's being pushed."
Dacus urges parents to be aware of what happens in their children's schools and to opt out their children out if necessary.
That's right parents - opt your kids out of this event so that they can name-call other students with impunity. And why stop there.
Why don't you sit down with your child and draw up a list of slurs that he/she can use.
After all, family togetherness is so Christian.
Really though, if there are any incidents of Christian children being called names, they should be addressed. Of course like so many other things when it comes to the religious right, I am sure that this is an anecdotal story with little evidence or one intentionally taken out of context.
In my day, those who pushed conspiracies where there were none were looked at with caution.
Nowadays, it seems that they are given platforms as "pro-family" activists.
Seriously though, a week that encourages children to show respect for differences (religious, sexual orientation, race, or otherwise) should be encouraged, period.
If you ask me, I think it should be a mandatory week for adults also.
From Box Turtle Bulletin comes this news:
The Urban Men’s Health Survey (UMHS) has revealed a lot of useful information in the decade since it was conducted. Much of it “dismaying,” in the words of Ron Stall, who worked on the survey at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and is now at the University of Pittsburgh. Stall was one of four researchers from the University of Pittsburgh (joined by a fifth researcher from Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis) who analyzed a subset of that data and concluded that “experience of homophobic attacks against young gay/bisexual male youth helps to explain heightened rates of serious health problems among adult gay men.”
The UMHS was a telephone interview of a probability sample of men who have sex with men (MSMs) living in four cities: San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. The survey was conducted between November 1996 and February 1998, with 2,881 UMHS participants being asked a wide-ranging battery of questions resulting in 855 variables. The results of that survey were fed into a database, which scores of researchers have been mining ever since for dozens of studies covering many different topics. Dr, Mark Friedman, who has previously investigated the link between anti-gay hostility and suicide among young gay males, led a team which poured over responses to key questions in that database to see if a link could be established between anti-gay hostility against young gay men and adverse health outcomes as adults.
This study confirms a common sense idea that a child who has his/her self esteem destroyed (via name-calling or any other type of harrassment) will most likely grow up to participate in negative behavior.
It's an idea that isn't necessarily bound to sexual orientation. In his classic novel, Native Son, African-American writer Richard Wright demonstrated, through the turbulent life and death of his protagonist Bigger Thomas, that when society works against building the self esteem of youth, it usually creates criminals and those who engage in negative behavior.
Not that members of the religious right care about Bigger Thomas, Richard Wright, or this study.
To them, any attempt to stop such harrassment is a part of the BIG GAY CONSPIRACY.
Yesterday, Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel railed against an educator for daring to stop homophobic language in her class.
Today, Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), is bitching about "No Name Calling Week," a week where students are encouraged to treat each other with respect regardless of their differences:
Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), says while the event's name sounds innocent, it is a way of indoctrinating children so that they will support the homosexual agenda after they become adults. A PJI press release reveals the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN, is a key sponsor of the program.
"They're promoting, all the way down to the first-grade level, children to read and be exposed to books and material that is pro-homosexual -- and it's all under the guise of opposing name-calling," he contends.
. . . "The alleged homosexual kids are not the only ones being bullied," the attorney points out. "There's [sic] kids of faith being called 'homophobic' and 'homophobe,' and yet those words and that name-calling is not under attack and is not being addressed by this alleged week of tolerance that's being pushed."
Dacus urges parents to be aware of what happens in their children's schools and to opt out their children out if necessary.
That's right parents - opt your kids out of this event so that they can name-call other students with impunity. And why stop there.
Why don't you sit down with your child and draw up a list of slurs that he/she can use.
After all, family togetherness is so Christian.
Really though, if there are any incidents of Christian children being called names, they should be addressed. Of course like so many other things when it comes to the religious right, I am sure that this is an anecdotal story with little evidence or one intentionally taken out of context.
In my day, those who pushed conspiracies where there were none were looked at with caution.
Nowadays, it seems that they are given platforms as "pro-family" activists.
Seriously though, a week that encourages children to show respect for differences (religious, sexual orientation, race, or otherwise) should be encouraged, period.
If you ask me, I think it should be a mandatory week for adults also.
Reminder - I am continuing my experiment of posting three times a day. So please be sure to check back here to see the new posts.
Blackmail and homosexuality in the Palmetto State
From Blogactive via Pam's House Blend:
Quite an interesting story out of South Carolina. It involves alleged police brutality, extortion, secret gay sex and at least one anti-gay Republican elected official.Fitsnews.com has the story. I have decided to link to this story for two reasons. First, the writer has been clear to report only on what he has confirmed with law enforcement sources, not political folks. Second, it does not mention the politician's name.
Of course, coercion and extortion are illegal. From Fitsnews.com:
Law enforcement officials are trying desperately to apprehend - and save the life of - an alleged blackmailer who supposedly met with a bloody rebuke at the hands of state law enforcement officers after attempting to extort $200,000 from a prominent S.C. Republican official, multiple sources have confirmed to FITS.
In addition to these sources, a senior agent at the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) has confirmed details of the alleged extortion drama to FITS, and sources even closer to the top at SLED tell us that the agency has been in contact with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) requesting that they look into the matter.
Rumors of the alleged drama have been making their way through South Carolina political circles in hushed tones for several months now, first reaching our ears last November.We initially dismissed the accusations as too far-fetched to be true, however we began to dig deeper after sources at SLED confirmed details of the alleged incident to us.
If this story picks up and continues, things should get very interesting around here. And deservedly so. Between me and you, there have been rumors down here about certain in-the-closet officials for years.
The sky is going to fall - I actually agree with the religious right on something
RIVERSIDE, Calif. – A California appeals court has ruled that a Christian high school can expel students because of an alleged lesbian relationship.
The 4th District Court of Appeal in Riverside on Monday upheld California Lutheran High School's right as a private, religious organization to exclude students based on sexual orientation.
Two girls sued claiming they were discriminated against after they were expelled from the Wildomar school in 2005. A lower court said the school isn't bound by the same anti-discrimination laws as a business establishment.
John McKay, attorney for California Lutheran, says the school's goal is to educate based on Christian principles.
The attorney for the girls could not be immediately reached Tuesday.
If it's a private Christian school, then it should be allowed to pick and choose who attends. That is private and not paid for by taxpayers.
Of course the question is how long will it be before Matt Staver and company try to link this case to a "gay conspiracy to hurt Christians" despite the fact that some lgbts (me included) actually agree with them here.
Link to article here.
Blackmail and homosexuality in the Palmetto State
From Blogactive via Pam's House Blend:
Quite an interesting story out of South Carolina. It involves alleged police brutality, extortion, secret gay sex and at least one anti-gay Republican elected official.Fitsnews.com has the story. I have decided to link to this story for two reasons. First, the writer has been clear to report only on what he has confirmed with law enforcement sources, not political folks. Second, it does not mention the politician's name.
Of course, coercion and extortion are illegal. From Fitsnews.com:
Law enforcement officials are trying desperately to apprehend - and save the life of - an alleged blackmailer who supposedly met with a bloody rebuke at the hands of state law enforcement officers after attempting to extort $200,000 from a prominent S.C. Republican official, multiple sources have confirmed to FITS.
In addition to these sources, a senior agent at the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) has confirmed details of the alleged extortion drama to FITS, and sources even closer to the top at SLED tell us that the agency has been in contact with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) requesting that they look into the matter.
Rumors of the alleged drama have been making their way through South Carolina political circles in hushed tones for several months now, first reaching our ears last November.We initially dismissed the accusations as too far-fetched to be true, however we began to dig deeper after sources at SLED confirmed details of the alleged incident to us.
If this story picks up and continues, things should get very interesting around here. And deservedly so. Between me and you, there have been rumors down here about certain in-the-closet officials for years.
The sky is going to fall - I actually agree with the religious right on something
RIVERSIDE, Calif. – A California appeals court has ruled that a Christian high school can expel students because of an alleged lesbian relationship.
The 4th District Court of Appeal in Riverside on Monday upheld California Lutheran High School's right as a private, religious organization to exclude students based on sexual orientation.
Two girls sued claiming they were discriminated against after they were expelled from the Wildomar school in 2005. A lower court said the school isn't bound by the same anti-discrimination laws as a business establishment.
John McKay, attorney for California Lutheran, says the school's goal is to educate based on Christian principles.
The attorney for the girls could not be immediately reached Tuesday.
If it's a private Christian school, then it should be allowed to pick and choose who attends. That is private and not paid for by taxpayers.
Of course the question is how long will it be before Matt Staver and company try to link this case to a "gay conspiracy to hurt Christians" despite the fact that some lgbts (me included) actually agree with them here.
Link to article here.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Something worth knowing about NARTH
NARTH (National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality) is one of those religious right organizations masquerading as legitimate purveyors of science.
Amongst other things, it espouses reparative therapy, or the belief that homosexuality can be changed.
Recently Dr. Phil had the founder of NARTH, Joseph Nicolosi, on his show as a credible voice regarding gender identity.
Naturally a lot of us weren't exactly happy over this. Despite the fact that Nicolosi demonstrated his abject ignorance and was destroyed on the air by the mother of a transgendered child, the fact that he was deemed an expert didn't sit right with a lot of us.
And as far as I'm concerned, it still doesn't.
For the record, NARTH have been in a few controversies regarding the theories of its "experts."
In 2006, NARTH had two major controversies. In the first, psychiatrist Joseph Berger, MD, a member of their “Scientific Advisory Committee,” wrote a paper encouraging students to “ridicule” gender variant children.
In the second controversy, Gerald Schoenwolf, PhD, also a member of NARTH’s “Scientific Advisory Committee,” wrote a polemic on the group’s website that seemed to justify slavery.
(NARTH founder Joseph) Nicolosi is also known for his strange theories, such as encouraging his male clients to drink Gatorade and call friends “dude” to become more masculine. He also believes that “Non-homosexual men who experience defeat and failure may also experience homosexual fantasies or dreams.”
Schoenwolf, by the way, continues to be a member of NARTH's scientific committee.
And so does George Rekers.
You remember Dr. Rekers, don't you?
In 2004, he was an expert witness in a case involving gay adoption in Arkansas. The state had banned gays from adopting in 1999. In January 2005, Pulaski County Circuit Judge Timothy White ruled against the state of Arkansas. Furthermore, he called Rekers' testimony "extremely suspect." He also accused Rekers of testifying solely for promoting his "own personal agenda."
In 2008, Rekers was also an expert witness in a case defending Florida's gay adoption ban. Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Cindy Lederman ruled against the state. In her decision, she said "Dr. Rekers’ testimony was far from a neutral and unbiased recitation of the relevant scientific evidence. Dr. Rekers’ beliefs are motivated by his strong ideological and theological convictions that are not consistent with the science. Based on his testimony and demeanor at trial, the court can not consider his testimony to be credible nor worthy of forming the basis of public policy."
Despite this, not only is Rekers currently a member of NARTH's scientific advisory committee, but he is also listed as one of the organization's officers.
Now some people may think I'm trying to "kill the messenger because I don't like his message," but that's a serious breach of logic.
Rekers has been discredited by two different judges in two different cases, but NARTH seems to think nothing of having him as not only an officer but a scientific advisory committee member.
What's next? The APA having a purveyor of lobotomies on its committees?
My links to Rekers are here.
NARTH (National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality) is one of those religious right organizations masquerading as legitimate purveyors of science.
Amongst other things, it espouses reparative therapy, or the belief that homosexuality can be changed.
Recently Dr. Phil had the founder of NARTH, Joseph Nicolosi, on his show as a credible voice regarding gender identity.
Naturally a lot of us weren't exactly happy over this. Despite the fact that Nicolosi demonstrated his abject ignorance and was destroyed on the air by the mother of a transgendered child, the fact that he was deemed an expert didn't sit right with a lot of us.
And as far as I'm concerned, it still doesn't.
For the record, NARTH have been in a few controversies regarding the theories of its "experts."
In 2006, NARTH had two major controversies. In the first, psychiatrist Joseph Berger, MD, a member of their “Scientific Advisory Committee,” wrote a paper encouraging students to “ridicule” gender variant children.
In the second controversy, Gerald Schoenwolf, PhD, also a member of NARTH’s “Scientific Advisory Committee,” wrote a polemic on the group’s website that seemed to justify slavery.
(NARTH founder Joseph) Nicolosi is also known for his strange theories, such as encouraging his male clients to drink Gatorade and call friends “dude” to become more masculine. He also believes that “Non-homosexual men who experience defeat and failure may also experience homosexual fantasies or dreams.”
Schoenwolf, by the way, continues to be a member of NARTH's scientific committee.
And so does George Rekers.
You remember Dr. Rekers, don't you?
In 2004, he was an expert witness in a case involving gay adoption in Arkansas. The state had banned gays from adopting in 1999. In January 2005, Pulaski County Circuit Judge Timothy White ruled against the state of Arkansas. Furthermore, he called Rekers' testimony "extremely suspect." He also accused Rekers of testifying solely for promoting his "own personal agenda."
In 2008, Rekers was also an expert witness in a case defending Florida's gay adoption ban. Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Cindy Lederman ruled against the state. In her decision, she said "Dr. Rekers’ testimony was far from a neutral and unbiased recitation of the relevant scientific evidence. Dr. Rekers’ beliefs are motivated by his strong ideological and theological convictions that are not consistent with the science. Based on his testimony and demeanor at trial, the court can not consider his testimony to be credible nor worthy of forming the basis of public policy."
Despite this, not only is Rekers currently a member of NARTH's scientific advisory committee, but he is also listed as one of the organization's officers.
Now some people may think I'm trying to "kill the messenger because I don't like his message," but that's a serious breach of logic.
Rekers has been discredited by two different judges in two different cases, but NARTH seems to think nothing of having him as not only an officer but a scientific advisory committee member.
What's next? The APA having a purveyor of lobotomies on its committees?
My links to Rekers are here.
Family Research Council teaches us how to stigmatize lgbts
In commenting on the recent controversy regarding Portland's gay mayor Sam Adams and an admitted affair with a young man, Family Research Council head Tony Perkins said the following:
Another openly gay politician is snared in a sex scandal with a teen. Portland's first openly gay mayor, Sam Adams --- who just took office earlier this month --- has now acknowledge he lied to cover up a sexual relationship he had with a young man he was "mentoring" in 2005.
This is reminiscent of former Congressman Mark Foley, who was caught hitting on male teens who served as pages on Capitol Hill.
While I know that not every homosexual person preys on youth, it sure seems that many of the sex scandals involving homosexual public figures disproportionately involve young, easily influenced and impressionable teens.
Talk about your generalizations, especially in light of a recent incident:
A former Regent University law school assistant dean has been indicted on 13 felony sexual assault charges involving two girls, according to court records.
The allegations against Stephen L. McPherson, 39, of Chesapeake include object sexual penetration, forcible sodomy, and taking indecent liberties with a child by a custodian.
The charges, reported to Chesapeake police in July 2007, stem from events between May 2000 and May 2002, according to the indictments handed up Tuesday by a Chesapeake grand jury. The girls' ages weren't available Friday.
Using Perkins's power of logic, I guess we need to keep children away from religious right-oriented universities.
That is other than the usual reason that they teach distortions in the name of God.
Mike Huckabee pushes one-sided drivel - Good As You takes him down
Last weekend, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee featured Liberty Counsel lawyer Matt Staver in a one-on-one propaganda smear of President Obama's Administration.
I am ashamed to admit this but I refused to watch the show because I knew it would be biased -it was on Fox and Staver seemed to be the only guest.
I figured no sense in pissing myself off over the weekend.
But another on-line friend watched the show.
I have to commend Jeremy from Good As You for his refutations of Staver's lies as well as his strong stomach and disposition to sit through the nonsense.
And it reiterates several points I like to make.
LGBTs have truth on our side in this so-called cultural war, but all of the truth in the world won't help us if we are not permitted to get our stories out to the public.
Here you have Huckabee with a show where he does not have to be fair or accurate. And his guests are pushing bad information.
Where are our shows?
Several things Jeremy says includes the following:
FACT (:12): Including LGBT people within the realm of normalcy is unifying, Mike. Not to you, maybe. But to those of us who have been long-stymied under the cruel thumb of persecution, the idea that LGBT people will be respected as part of the world's spectrum represents both "change" and "unity."
FACT (3:04): The "fluidity" of gender identity is a ridiculous straw (trans)man! An inclusive Employment Nondiscrimination Act would prevent public employers from casting aspersions on the basis of an employee or potential employees' identity. For this purposes, it doesn't matter how "fluid" that concept may be for a particular individual. What matters is that merit, and not gender identity, will be the basis for employment decisions!
FACT (6:15): The Ocean Grove, New Jersey pavilion was NOT a church! The pavilion was open to public usage, without any hesitation in the matrimonial process until gays and lesbians wanted to start using the building for same-sex civil unions. So it's not a religious matter -- it's about allowing the heterosexual public to use your facility, but not the homosexual public!
FACT (6:36): The primary photographer in the New Mexico case is actually a she, not a he. And she was fined for refusing to shoot a gay couple's civil union because her business is a public accommodation (registered with the state as an LLC), much like a restaurant or any other store. Rather than say she wasn't available or make up an excused, the photographer expressly stated that she would not photograph a same-sex ceremony. This led the New Mexico Human Rights Commission to act in the only way they could under fair application of the law: To determine that the public accommodation was being unfair to a certain segment of the local public. If the commission had determined differently, then that would have set a very dangerous precedent (i.e. Could allow this public business to deny other types of faiths, deny on the basis of race).
**It should also be noted that the photographer has every right to file a lawsuit and challenge the constitutionality of the commission's findings.
For a complete breakdown go here.
In commenting on the recent controversy regarding Portland's gay mayor Sam Adams and an admitted affair with a young man, Family Research Council head Tony Perkins said the following:
Another openly gay politician is snared in a sex scandal with a teen. Portland's first openly gay mayor, Sam Adams --- who just took office earlier this month --- has now acknowledge he lied to cover up a sexual relationship he had with a young man he was "mentoring" in 2005.
This is reminiscent of former Congressman Mark Foley, who was caught hitting on male teens who served as pages on Capitol Hill.
While I know that not every homosexual person preys on youth, it sure seems that many of the sex scandals involving homosexual public figures disproportionately involve young, easily influenced and impressionable teens.
Talk about your generalizations, especially in light of a recent incident:
A former Regent University law school assistant dean has been indicted on 13 felony sexual assault charges involving two girls, according to court records.
The allegations against Stephen L. McPherson, 39, of Chesapeake include object sexual penetration, forcible sodomy, and taking indecent liberties with a child by a custodian.
The charges, reported to Chesapeake police in July 2007, stem from events between May 2000 and May 2002, according to the indictments handed up Tuesday by a Chesapeake grand jury. The girls' ages weren't available Friday.
Using Perkins's power of logic, I guess we need to keep children away from religious right-oriented universities.
That is other than the usual reason that they teach distortions in the name of God.
Mike Huckabee pushes one-sided drivel - Good As You takes him down
Last weekend, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee featured Liberty Counsel lawyer Matt Staver in a one-on-one propaganda smear of President Obama's Administration.
I am ashamed to admit this but I refused to watch the show because I knew it would be biased -it was on Fox and Staver seemed to be the only guest.
I figured no sense in pissing myself off over the weekend.
But another on-line friend watched the show.
I have to commend Jeremy from Good As You for his refutations of Staver's lies as well as his strong stomach and disposition to sit through the nonsense.
And it reiterates several points I like to make.
LGBTs have truth on our side in this so-called cultural war, but all of the truth in the world won't help us if we are not permitted to get our stories out to the public.
Here you have Huckabee with a show where he does not have to be fair or accurate. And his guests are pushing bad information.
Where are our shows?
Several things Jeremy says includes the following:
FACT (:12): Including LGBT people within the realm of normalcy is unifying, Mike. Not to you, maybe. But to those of us who have been long-stymied under the cruel thumb of persecution, the idea that LGBT people will be respected as part of the world's spectrum represents both "change" and "unity."
FACT (3:04): The "fluidity" of gender identity is a ridiculous straw (trans)man! An inclusive Employment Nondiscrimination Act would prevent public employers from casting aspersions on the basis of an employee or potential employees' identity. For this purposes, it doesn't matter how "fluid" that concept may be for a particular individual. What matters is that merit, and not gender identity, will be the basis for employment decisions!
FACT (6:15): The Ocean Grove, New Jersey pavilion was NOT a church! The pavilion was open to public usage, without any hesitation in the matrimonial process until gays and lesbians wanted to start using the building for same-sex civil unions. So it's not a religious matter -- it's about allowing the heterosexual public to use your facility, but not the homosexual public!
FACT (6:36): The primary photographer in the New Mexico case is actually a she, not a he. And she was fined for refusing to shoot a gay couple's civil union because her business is a public accommodation (registered with the state as an LLC), much like a restaurant or any other store. Rather than say she wasn't available or make up an excused, the photographer expressly stated that she would not photograph a same-sex ceremony. This led the New Mexico Human Rights Commission to act in the only way they could under fair application of the law: To determine that the public accommodation was being unfair to a certain segment of the local public. If the commission had determined differently, then that would have set a very dangerous precedent (i.e. Could allow this public business to deny other types of faiths, deny on the basis of race).
**It should also be noted that the photographer has every right to file a lawsuit and challenge the constitutionality of the commission's findings.
For a complete breakdown go here.
Okay, you got two gay guys running for the same office. Which one do you focus on?
Two men are running to succeed the anti-gay Robo-bathroom Mayor of Fort Lauderdale, Jim Naugle.
Apparently one has an alleged penchant for porn and bondage. Leave it to our friend, P. LaBarbera to say a few words about it:
“What makes Earl different from others?” Earl Rynerson asks on his campaign website. Well, for one, he’s sure to be the only candidate for mayor of Ft. Lauderdale whose credit card records show a connection to the International Masters Association, an organization created because “there was no one place where a Master or a slave could go and learn from the other members of his community.” Rynerson needs God to change him before he tries to change
OK, can we all agree that its fair to call a man with ties to a sadomasochistic “master-slave” group a “pervert,” or has that word been banished by the Gay Thought Police (GTP)? Good, then at the risk of offending the accomplished whiners at GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation), here are some excerpts from a FOX News story about Earl Rynerson, one of two homosexual men running to succeed pro-family hero Jim Naugle as mayor of Ft. Lauderdale.
Now that homosexuality is “out of the closet” in such a big way, think about how much of their related perversions are also out in the open. Deviance begets deviance, and it’s all about the behavior (as opposed to that strategic euphemism: “orientation”). Note Rynerson’s lack of shame below.
Peter gleaned his commentary via an article about Rynerson that he also posts. I found that commentary about homosexuality and perversion very interesting because of the article's ending:
Rynerson isn’t the only candidate who was stirred by Naugle’s comments to run for office. Dean Trantalis, a former city commissioner and local gay activist, has also thrown his hat in the ring.
All of this build up about Rynerson and his alleged perverted habits and all of this commentary and linkage between homosexuality and bondage. And when another gay candidate is introduced who doesn't seem to have the same "interesting" background, LaBarbera says nothing about him.
Why should he? It would ruin the smear.
Peter, dearest - you simply must do better than that if you want to keep up with Matt Barber.
Two men are running to succeed the anti-gay Robo-bathroom Mayor of Fort Lauderdale, Jim Naugle.
Apparently one has an alleged penchant for porn and bondage. Leave it to our friend, P. LaBarbera to say a few words about it:
“What makes Earl different from others?” Earl Rynerson asks on his campaign website. Well, for one, he’s sure to be the only candidate for mayor of Ft. Lauderdale whose credit card records show a connection to the International Masters Association, an organization created because “there was no one place where a Master or a slave could go and learn from the other members of his community.” Rynerson needs God to change him before he tries to change
OK, can we all agree that its fair to call a man with ties to a sadomasochistic “master-slave” group a “pervert,” or has that word been banished by the Gay Thought Police (GTP)? Good, then at the risk of offending the accomplished whiners at GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation), here are some excerpts from a FOX News story about Earl Rynerson, one of two homosexual men running to succeed pro-family hero Jim Naugle as mayor of Ft. Lauderdale.
Now that homosexuality is “out of the closet” in such a big way, think about how much of their related perversions are also out in the open. Deviance begets deviance, and it’s all about the behavior (as opposed to that strategic euphemism: “orientation”). Note Rynerson’s lack of shame below.
Peter gleaned his commentary via an article about Rynerson that he also posts. I found that commentary about homosexuality and perversion very interesting because of the article's ending:
Rynerson isn’t the only candidate who was stirred by Naugle’s comments to run for office. Dean Trantalis, a former city commissioner and local gay activist, has also thrown his hat in the ring.
All of this build up about Rynerson and his alleged perverted habits and all of this commentary and linkage between homosexuality and bondage. And when another gay candidate is introduced who doesn't seem to have the same "interesting" background, LaBarbera says nothing about him.
Why should he? It would ruin the smear.
Peter, dearest - you simply must do better than that if you want to keep up with Matt Barber.
Monday, January 26, 2009
More on affair le Barber - Did he say homophobia is a made up term?
I was so busy trying to defend the actions of Wisconsin teacher Sarah Arnold from Matt Barber's ridiculous attack in my last post that I neglected to talk about the inanity of his comments:
"The term 'homophobia' is a made-up term, made up by homosexual activists, that has no scientific value, no clinical value whatsoever. It's merely a propaganda term."
Is he for real?
Well I guess the cat is out of bag.
All of those times lgbts have been beaten and murdered for our orientation,
All of the times that lgbts have been kicked out of our homes,
All of the times we have been accused of having a short life span, having too much sex, molesting children, stuff gerbils in our rectums, beating the hell out of each other because we had nothing better to do.
All of the times our lives and relationships have been devalued are the result of a huge plot from the Mothership coming from the planet Homosexual.
If Barber keeps this up, he will most likely do more to help our cause than we ever could.
I was so busy trying to defend the actions of Wisconsin teacher Sarah Arnold from Matt Barber's ridiculous attack in my last post that I neglected to talk about the inanity of his comments:
"The term 'homophobia' is a made-up term, made up by homosexual activists, that has no scientific value, no clinical value whatsoever. It's merely a propaganda term."
Is he for real?
Well I guess the cat is out of bag.
All of those times lgbts have been beaten and murdered for our orientation,
All of the times that lgbts have been kicked out of our homes,
All of the times we have been accused of having a short life span, having too much sex, molesting children, stuff gerbils in our rectums, beating the hell out of each other because we had nothing better to do.
All of the times our lives and relationships have been devalued are the result of a huge plot from the Mothership coming from the planet Homosexual.
If Barber keeps this up, he will most likely do more to help our cause than we ever could.
Matt Barber attacks an educator for doing her job
Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel seems to be positioning himself as the go-to anti-gay spokesperson of the religious right.
I bet Peter LaBarbera would love that.
Several times, Barber has been throwing himself in the limelight to comment on things such as President Obama's embracing of lgbt rights and this recent situation in which he criticizes a Wisconsin English teacher's fight against homophobia:
According to LifeSiteNews.com, Sarah Arnold created the curriculum called "Exposing Hidden Homophobia" when she noticed what she calls "anti-gay undertone[s]" in student conversations. The regimen asked students to examine depictions of homosexuality in mass media, to view numerous homosexual-themed films, and read pro-homosexual books and novels. Arnold even issued questionnaires to the students that featured questions that are commonly asked of homosexuals but instead were given to heterosexuals, such as "When did you decide to become heterosexual?"
Nothing wrong with that, is there? Except of course in Barber's eyes:
Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel says the program is really intended to indoctrinate children into thinking that homosexual behavior is okay. "The term 'homophobia' is a made-up term, made up by homosexual activists, that has no scientific value, no clinical value whatsoever," he contends. "It's merely a propaganda term."
Barber, who has absolutely no training or expertise in this sort of thing, seems to think that he can prognosticate why Ms. Arnold chose to create the course. It's a part of the big homosexual agenda conspiracy, he says.
God forbid she, as an educator, notices how her students are saying ugly things with anti-gay undertones.
God forbid she, as an educator, takes steps to divert a potential situation in which a child is being bullied.
And God forbid, she, as an educator, takes proactive steps to prevent a potential situation in which violence may be the outcome.
All that seems to matter to Barber is that students can't be permitted to say ugly anti-gay words without recourse.
Friends, Barber typifies the lunacy and hysteria of the religious right.
A little note to Barber and company - everything that is pro-gay need not be taken as an attack or an assault on you or your beliefs. We occupy this nation too and we have a right to take steps to ensure safety in our homes and in our schools.
We have a right to protect our children.
And if an educator wants to help us with this, then that educator should be given a medal, rather than be made the central figure in a conspiracy theory sprung from a bad X-Files episode.
BTW - here is a better article regarding the situation.
Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel seems to be positioning himself as the go-to anti-gay spokesperson of the religious right.
I bet Peter LaBarbera would love that.
Several times, Barber has been throwing himself in the limelight to comment on things such as President Obama's embracing of lgbt rights and this recent situation in which he criticizes a Wisconsin English teacher's fight against homophobia:
According to LifeSiteNews.com, Sarah Arnold created the curriculum called "Exposing Hidden Homophobia" when she noticed what she calls "anti-gay undertone[s]" in student conversations. The regimen asked students to examine depictions of homosexuality in mass media, to view numerous homosexual-themed films, and read pro-homosexual books and novels. Arnold even issued questionnaires to the students that featured questions that are commonly asked of homosexuals but instead were given to heterosexuals, such as "When did you decide to become heterosexual?"
Nothing wrong with that, is there? Except of course in Barber's eyes:
Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel says the program is really intended to indoctrinate children into thinking that homosexual behavior is okay. "The term 'homophobia' is a made-up term, made up by homosexual activists, that has no scientific value, no clinical value whatsoever," he contends. "It's merely a propaganda term."
Barber, who has absolutely no training or expertise in this sort of thing, seems to think that he can prognosticate why Ms. Arnold chose to create the course. It's a part of the big homosexual agenda conspiracy, he says.
God forbid she, as an educator, notices how her students are saying ugly things with anti-gay undertones.
God forbid she, as an educator, takes steps to divert a potential situation in which a child is being bullied.
And God forbid, she, as an educator, takes proactive steps to prevent a potential situation in which violence may be the outcome.
All that seems to matter to Barber is that students can't be permitted to say ugly anti-gay words without recourse.
Friends, Barber typifies the lunacy and hysteria of the religious right.
A little note to Barber and company - everything that is pro-gay need not be taken as an attack or an assault on you or your beliefs. We occupy this nation too and we have a right to take steps to ensure safety in our homes and in our schools.
We have a right to protect our children.
And if an educator wants to help us with this, then that educator should be given a medal, rather than be made the central figure in a conspiracy theory sprung from a bad X-Files episode.
BTW - here is a better article regarding the situation.
AFA on Facebook - big deal
I am trying something new - posting at least three times a day rather than once a day. There will still be huge posts (how can I keep away from my friends in the anti-gay industry) but there will also be small posts which will include my take on lgbt issues.
So the American Family Association has gone and joined Facebook.
I know some of us want to either laugh or wring our hands over the new development.
Neither action is necessary. I say let them have their facebook page with their 30,000+members (yes I know that's a lot of folks).
There are so many other lgbt friendly facebook pages with good information about our community and about the lies of the religous right.
Rather than gripe about the AFA, let's make it a point to join these pro-lgbt facebook pages. Some of which are:
Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters - You really didn't think I wasn't going to include my page, did you? Soon to be adding a discussion board.
Good As You
Truth Wins Out
I know this isn't all of the groups. Never fear because I will give a near to complete listing at a later date.
I am trying something new - posting at least three times a day rather than once a day. There will still be huge posts (how can I keep away from my friends in the anti-gay industry) but there will also be small posts which will include my take on lgbt issues.
So the American Family Association has gone and joined Facebook.
I know some of us want to either laugh or wring our hands over the new development.
Neither action is necessary. I say let them have their facebook page with their 30,000+members (yes I know that's a lot of folks).
There are so many other lgbt friendly facebook pages with good information about our community and about the lies of the religous right.
Rather than gripe about the AFA, let's make it a point to join these pro-lgbt facebook pages. Some of which are:
Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters - You really didn't think I wasn't going to include my page, did you? Soon to be adding a discussion board.
Good As You
Truth Wins Out
I know this isn't all of the groups. Never fear because I will give a near to complete listing at a later date.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Remembering TVC's lies about hate crimes legislation
Last week, I emailed the Traditional Values Coalition about their usage of a Family Research Council study, Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse .
The problem with this study, amongst other things, is that FRC removed it from its webpage because of "outdated sources."
Despite this, the study remains on TVC's webpage as a part of its Homosexual Urban Legends portion (rest assured, there are plenty of distortions there including citations from Paul Cameron, which I will talk about at a later time).
Including a discredited study is just par for the course when it comes to TVC.
This organization thinks nothing of using the words "she-males" and "crossdressers" as verbal weapons against the lgbt community. So why should a little bad study be a big deal?
That being the case, with hate crimes legislation possibly returning to Congress, a small controversy that erupted two years ago is important to remember.
In 2007 when Congress was considering adding sexual orientation to hate crimes legislation, TVC sent out a bulletin claiming that this action will lead to pastors being arrested for preaching against homosexuality:
Republican Congressman Louis Gohmert of Texas moved to remove “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” from the bill. It failed on a recorded vote of 19 to 13.
Congressman Mike Pence from Indiana offered the important amendment on Freedom of Religion. “Nothing in this section limits the religious freedom of any person or group under the constitution.”
A number of Republicans spoke in support of it. But the Democrats Jerrold Nadler, Tammy Baldwin and Chairman John Conyers kept evading the issue.
Finally, Congressman Gohmert asked, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”
Gohmert was attempting to clarify and emphasize that the legislation would have an effect on the constitutional right to religious freedom and thus the Pence amendment was needed to protect religious speech.
The Democrats continued to explain why they could not accept the amendment. Lundgren continuously shot down their answer. He said, “What is your answer? Would there be incitement charges against the pastor?”
And finally Democrat Congressman Artur Davis from Alabama spoke up and said, “Yes.”
However TVC distorted Gohmert's question. This is what he actually said (and it changes things considerably):
Mr. Gohmert: . . . And if I understood the gentleman's amendment—and I will put the question back to you—if a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation goes out and does an act of violence, and that person says that that minister counseled or induced him through the sermon to commit that act, are you saying under your amendment that in no way could that ever be introduced against the minister?
On its webpage, TVC now terses the exchange as such:
Furthermore, Representative Davis admitted during the markup that the legislation will not protect a pastor from prosecution under this bill. During the debate, Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX) forced Representative Davis to admit that if a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation causes bodily injury to a person, that the sermon or teachings could be used in evidence against the minister.
In short, Rep. Davis has admitted that H.R. 1592 could be used to prosecute pastors for their sermons if they incite or are an “inducement” to violence. This threat applies to S. 1105.
For example, a pastor can be targeted for prosecution if his sermon somehow “induced” or “counseled” a member of his church to go out and commit bodily injury against a homosexual or a cross-dresser. Bodily injury can be something as simple as touching or brushing up against a homosexual protester. Under both H.R. 1592 and S. 1105, bodily injury is considered violence—and is prosecutable.
With enemies like this, it's going to be a looooong year.
Jeremy from Good As You has an excellent breakdown of what happened.
Last week, I emailed the Traditional Values Coalition about their usage of a Family Research Council study, Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse .
The problem with this study, amongst other things, is that FRC removed it from its webpage because of "outdated sources."
Despite this, the study remains on TVC's webpage as a part of its Homosexual Urban Legends portion (rest assured, there are plenty of distortions there including citations from Paul Cameron, which I will talk about at a later time).
Including a discredited study is just par for the course when it comes to TVC.
This organization thinks nothing of using the words "she-males" and "crossdressers" as verbal weapons against the lgbt community. So why should a little bad study be a big deal?
That being the case, with hate crimes legislation possibly returning to Congress, a small controversy that erupted two years ago is important to remember.
In 2007 when Congress was considering adding sexual orientation to hate crimes legislation, TVC sent out a bulletin claiming that this action will lead to pastors being arrested for preaching against homosexuality:
Republican Congressman Louis Gohmert of Texas moved to remove “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” from the bill. It failed on a recorded vote of 19 to 13.
Congressman Mike Pence from Indiana offered the important amendment on Freedom of Religion. “Nothing in this section limits the religious freedom of any person or group under the constitution.”
A number of Republicans spoke in support of it. But the Democrats Jerrold Nadler, Tammy Baldwin and Chairman John Conyers kept evading the issue.
Finally, Congressman Gohmert asked, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”
Gohmert was attempting to clarify and emphasize that the legislation would have an effect on the constitutional right to religious freedom and thus the Pence amendment was needed to protect religious speech.
The Democrats continued to explain why they could not accept the amendment. Lundgren continuously shot down their answer. He said, “What is your answer? Would there be incitement charges against the pastor?”
And finally Democrat Congressman Artur Davis from Alabama spoke up and said, “Yes.”
However TVC distorted Gohmert's question. This is what he actually said (and it changes things considerably):
Mr. Gohmert: . . . And if I understood the gentleman's amendment—and I will put the question back to you—if a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation goes out and does an act of violence, and that person says that that minister counseled or induced him through the sermon to commit that act, are you saying under your amendment that in no way could that ever be introduced against the minister?
On its webpage, TVC now terses the exchange as such:
Furthermore, Representative Davis admitted during the markup that the legislation will not protect a pastor from prosecution under this bill. During the debate, Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX) forced Representative Davis to admit that if a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation causes bodily injury to a person, that the sermon or teachings could be used in evidence against the minister.
In short, Rep. Davis has admitted that H.R. 1592 could be used to prosecute pastors for their sermons if they incite or are an “inducement” to violence. This threat applies to S. 1105.
For example, a pastor can be targeted for prosecution if his sermon somehow “induced” or “counseled” a member of his church to go out and commit bodily injury against a homosexual or a cross-dresser. Bodily injury can be something as simple as touching or brushing up against a homosexual protester. Under both H.R. 1592 and S. 1105, bodily injury is considered violence—and is prosecutable.
With enemies like this, it's going to be a looooong year.
Jeremy from Good As You has an excellent breakdown of what happened.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)