Analyzing and refuting the inaccuracies lodged against the lgbt community by religious conservative organizations. Lies in the name of God are still lies.
Not necessarily an lgbt issue per se but an important one as far as I am concerned.
Turns out that President Carter's statement about how racism plays a part in the criticism of President Obama has a supporter - Bill Cosby:
I agree with President Carter that racism is playing a role in recent outbursts against President Obama. During President Obama’s speech on the status of health care reform, some members of congress engaged in a public display of disrespect. While one Representative hurled the now infamous “you lie” insult at the President, others made their lack of interest known by exhibiting rude behavior such as deliberately yawning and sending text messages.
Health care reform is the most important domestic issue facing America today. Disease does not discriminate. African American, White, Asian, Latino, Republican, Democrat, no one in America is immune. So it seems obvious that a debate on health care reform should not include views born solely of partisanship or bigotry.
Various polls prior to the election indicated that between five and ten percent of Americans would never vote for an African American president. That number, of course, only includes those who actually admitted to their prejudice. How many others harbored such feelings but did not respond honestly when asked the question? And how many people oppose Obama’s plan because the President is African American?
In "Birth of a Nation," D.W. Griffith used white actors in black face to portray black legislators as having low intelligence and acting like fools. Today, we have a band of real life congressional fools seemingly bent on blocking any meaningful reform of the health care system. But if we allow even one American to die simply because he or she cannot afford treatment, we are creating a shameful scenario that could aptly be called “Death of a Nation.”
Cosby, because of his harsh assessment of some behaviors of my fellow African-Americans a while back, had been a cause celebre of some conservatives. In several speeches he has come down hard on some black parents concerning the morals instilled in their children and also has made criticism regarding the goals and aspirations of some black youth.
Those on the right salivated over the idea of a black man criticizing his own community, quickly placing Cosby as a "substitution" for such black leaders as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, while ignoring the fact that both Jackson and Sharpton have also made the same type of statements regarding the black community.
No doubt Cosby's recent statements will end the love affair that some on the right have with him.
Of course reasonable people will assess Cosby's past and present comments as proof of the complexities of race and self-empowerment in America.
Too bad there seems to be a dearth of reasonable people in America these days.
I know the Values Voters Summit is going on now and I will have postings on it tommorrow.
But it's Friday, so it's time for another episode of Know your lgbt history.
For this particular posting, I continue my unofficial look at "Psychotic Queens" by going into movie obscurity.
Come Back Charleston Blue (1972) is an obscure but interesting motion picture about two detectives, Coffin Ed Johnson and Gravedigger Jones, investigating a string of murders supposedly perpetrated by the ghost of a 1930s gangster, Charleston Blue.
Their investigations lead them to a photographer-cum-community leader who has secretly organized a taking over of the Harlem drug trade.
All in all, it's a blase movie, but it does have it's moments.
And the majority of them has to do with one of the photographer's henchman. His name is not known but he is referred to as "freak," soley because he likes to dress in women's clothing, particularly nun habits.
In this first scene, he is recounting to his prisoner (the photographer's former girlfriend who he is holding hostage) how he met the photographer during Vietnam. He also hints on a relationship between the two but since it's 1972 so he has to be as vague as possible. But I think you get where he is coming from:
Now I personally like this second scene. He and a bunch of other henchmen wipe out a hearse full of gangsters.
Video: Going rogue - More news from Maine. Goodasyou.org is in rare form today. And it's a good question Jeremy asks - just what are these people afraid of?
For those who like live train wrecks, the so-called Values Voters Summit begins today and offers a live telecast.
Amongst the usual "Obama, the illegal immigrants, global warming, and the rest of the Godless folks are out to get us" hysteria are two things of interest to me.
A showing of that dreary propaganda movie, Speechless:
SPEECHLESS - SILENCING THE CHRISTIANS:
Americans are at a greater risk of losing their basic freedoms today than ever before in the history of this nation. Political correctness and the voice of the liberal minority are undermining the morals and values of main-stream America. Christians are being silenced all across America: in the political debate, the public square, the schools, the workplace, and even in the sanctuary of their own churches. Through video, renowned author and commentator, Janet Parshall, takes you on a journey across the country to meet citizens who have been arrested for speaking out at a public rally, students who are being forced to attend classes that require them to recite verses from the Koran and to stage their own Jihad and activists pushing social tolerance to such an extreme that the Bible itself is being labeled "hate speech."
Just like all propaganda videos, this one centers on half truths and lies.
The problem with Speechless is that it exploits the feeling of entitlement that some Christians have in this country. They have had their minds filled by James Dobson and company with the idea that America is their country and the rest of us are here by their will and pleasure.
That idea of entitlement makes them susceptible to any anecdote or lie that comes down the pike about them being silenced.
We have seen this so many times with the religious right taking incidents and manipulating them to claim that lgbts are out to get Christians.
A perfect example is the Ocean Grove Pavilion. The religious right claimed that the church who owned this pavilion was "forced" to allow gays to have marriage ceremonies there. However the true story was that the church was getting tax breaks for the pavilion and a requirement of those tax breaks was that the facility should be open to all.
If I were a Christian, I would be less worried about being "silenced by lgbts" and more worried about the untruths put out by those who claim to also be Christians.
God never likes ugly.
Then there is this session:
TRUE TOLERANCE: COUNTERING THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
With the recent tea bagging craziness and attacks on Obama appointed officials, I'm sure this session will focus on Kevin Jennings, GLSEN and assorted nonsense.
All in all, the so-called Values Voter Summit promises to be interesting, if not truthful.
I don't know how to feel about this clip. The incident happened two years ago and I couldn't find anything else on the situation.
This is what I think happened. Some of our transgendered sisters went to McDonalds to get a snack. Some employees may have laughed at them and boom, it was on.
Please bear in mind that I am not excusing anything that may have happened and I am merely speculating on the incident.
But I don't believe that anyone would act the way these sisters did if they weren't provoked.
It definitely gives you something to think about regarding the nonsense some of our transgendered brothers and sisters have to go through.
On September 17, 2000, correctional officer Alvin S. Glenn was murdered during an escape attempt at the Richland County Detention Center. He was the first correctional officer in over 50 years to be murdered during an escape attempt.
In his honor, the Richland County Detention Center was renamed the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center.
That's all very good, but speaking as one of his children, I would rather have my father back.
When I told my father, Alvin S. Glenn, that I'm gay, I didn't come out and say it.
I really should have though. My father was a former military man. He served 29 years in the United States Army and had an aversion to being dramatic. No tears, no dramatic pauses, and no beating around the bush. Just say what you need to say and be done with it.
But to say that I was nervous as we drove to the grocery store was an understatement.
"Pop, I said. I don't think you need to worry about grandchildren when it comes to me."
Granted, that this was during the time when I inaccurately thought being gay meant that you could not have a family complete with little rugrats (I say that word with much affection) running all over the place. I figured that statement was the best way the best way to break the news to him.
My father, however, said three words to me that made it all unnecessary:
"I knew that already."
To tell the truth, I was a little shocked. But I really shouldn't have been. No matter how I try, I'm not the most butch fellow in the world.
Maybe it's my diva fascination.
During Halloween in second grade, I borrowed my mother's ratty bathrobe, my aunt's cold cream and went as Bette Davis in the dressing room scene of All About Eve.
When I was in fifth grade, I had a Diana Ross fascination.
By seventh grade, Ms. Ross was replaced by Stevie Nicks.
So needless to say that I'm not exactly the "straight-acting" gay man type.
But still, my father saying that he already knew that I'm gay floored me. Apparently he and my younger brother had been discussing the matter for some time before I came out to him.
After the revealing that he already knew of my sexual orientation, my father proceeded to tell me that while he does not particularly understand why I am gay, he accepted me as his son.
I didn't have a problem with his honesty because of two reasons. I wanted my father to be honest concerning how he felt. If you can't be honest with family, then who can you be honest with?
Secondly, he never rejected me. This was probably because my father and I didn't spend that much time together as we should have. We only really got to know each other during my first year in college.
Still, the main thing was the fact that he made it clear that I was still his son. Forget this mess about "God doesn't want you to be that way," or "how could you do this to the family."
By the way, my father wasn't that squeamish about my relationships either. I even got to introduce him to the man I was dating at the time.
Today, the day of my father's death, haunts me and it will continue to do so until my dying day. But it doesn't get me as sad as it used to.
I hate how my father was taken from me but I'm blessed to have known him and to have spent as much time as I did with him.
I was very lucky to have Alvin S. Glenn as my father.
There is no doubt that last week's South Carolina Pride was a huge success.
We even had coverage by the news media, as seen by this video via WLTX News 19:
But with all good things comes other things you have to keep one eye on.
We had very few protestors at the event, but some folks got angry that News 19 even dared to cover South Carolina Pride. The feedback page is full of interesting comments. Not all comments were anti-gay but here are a few of the funniest which were not necessarily lgbt supportive (Editor's note - I made no changes to spelling or syntax):
A few dozen people gather in Finley Park, LTX gives it instant coverage.
One democrat today said possibly two million people marched on Washington to protest big government spending and LTX has no article. LTX your true liberal side is showing. By the way LTX, I see no new article on Sanford today, either.
What's up with that?
SHAME, SHAME, SHAME on Colunbia and South Carolina. Just remember friends, Judgement day is just around the corner. REPENT today while you still have an opportunity. He who has ears to hear let him/her her what God says about the heinous sin of this kind of sexual immorality. May God forgive us all.
God does love everyone. But when he created Adams mate he did not name her Steve. It was Adam and Eve. Not Adam and Steve.
I don't agree with this. God made Adem and Eve not Adem and Steve.This is wrong and I belive it makes sc look sick for suporting this if you are gay fine why do you have to put it in the open. I dont see a festival for straight people. I guess the straight is like white people we are the minority. blacks have the NAACP and gays have a yearly festavail what does the white and straight people have?
Gay Pride in South Carolina. Leave these liberals alone because they have rights too even though I loathe the ground they walk on.
They should have held this at a rest area restroom. I wonder how many blow jobs were administered in the tunnel next to the park. Sick twisted freaks. (Editor's note - by this commenter's profile picture, I guess he doesn't care for African-Americans either.)
As you can read, we've got work to do in South Carolina.
With all of this "get Obama's czars" mania going around courtesy of Glenn Beck and company, it may be a matter of time before the lgbt community has to deal with an attack on the reputations on the President's gay and lesbian appointees.
If this starts to happen, first on that list will be Kevin Jennings, assistant deputy secretary for the office of Safe & Drug Free Schools in the U.S. Department of Education.
Even though they have been steadily pushing tea parties and town hall disruptions, members of the right (especially the religious right) have been covertly pushing the inaccurate information they compiled on Jennings, including:
he hates Christians,
his group, GLSEN, is teaching children nasty sexual behavior,
he covered up the sexual abuse of an underaged child.
None of this stuff is true and it has been refuted. Unfortunately, as we have seen consistently, refutations mean nothing when you have pundits, conservative activists, and bloggers constantly repeating inaccurate information without mention of the truth.
The newest "controversy" is that Jennings gave a speech in 1995 explaining how to introduce lgbt supportive groups in schools:
In 1995, he gave a speech in which he described how he has used the concept of "safety" in schools to promote homosexual advocacy in public schools in Massachusetts. He gave a speech called "Winning the Culture War" at the Human Rights Campaign Fund Leadership Conference on March 5 of that year.
Excerpts have been posted on the website of MassResistance, where chief Brian Camenker has worked to oppose the demands of homosexual activists.
In the speech, Jennings described how he was concerned about being described as promoting homosexuality, so he chose to campaign on the idea of "safety" instead.
"If the radical right can succeed in portraying us as preying on children, we will lose. Their language – 'promoting homosexuality' is one example – is laced with subtle and not-so-subtle innuendo that we are 'after their kids,'" he told the conference. . . "
Actually there is nothing wrong with the speech. In fact, it's a very good speech which should be remembered.
But in the hands of such right wing luminaries as World Net Daily and Mass Resistance (the organization officially declared a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center), even the words of a girl scout selling cookies can be twisted to mean a world take over.
How long will it be before you see Glenn Beck standing in front of a huge photo of Jennings and pontificating about the corruption of children's innocence?
Watch this footage and feel free to laugh or shake your head. But remember one thing:
If these folks can be easily manipulated against President Obama, just think how equally easy it can be to manipulate them against the lgbt community.
The move from "save our country from socialism" to "save our children from perverts" isn't such an impossibility when one takes into account the ignorance and gullibility of these folks
And also some people's eagerness to exploit these protests when talking about ENDA and DOMA.
It's definitely something for the lgbt community to think about and be prepared for.
Well the anti-marriage equality forces in Maine is pushing their first ad tonight for "Yes on 1" and it tells a huge lie.
At 22 seconds, the commercial cites the Massachusetts case of Parker vs. Hurley to claim that if the anti-gay marriage referendum does not pass, "homosexual marriage will be taught in public schools whether parents like it or not."
That is a huge lie. The case of Parker vs. Hurley had nothing to do with gay marriage. The case had to do with a parent (David Parker) creating a phony moral panic because he didn't want the school to acknowledge the fact that same-sex families exist. The following is a breakdown of the situation:
The Legend of the Mad Dad of Massachusetts
I've written about the David Parker controversy a few times so allow me to regurgitate my breakdown of the situation yet again. This time, however, I want to put it in another context.
David Parker cares so deeply that he is willing to go to jail and endure a lengthy court process for the right to be a parent. In a world where a myriad of social problems can be traced back to parental abuse or indifference, it is incredible that Parker is being treated as a criminal and not as the hero he is. - Wendy McElroy, Parental Rights vs. Public Schools
Well, homosexual relationships are, by their nature, sexual. The, you know, the movement is trying to say no, it's not. But you know, there's a big elephant in the middle of the room here, and we're not recognizing it. - Brian Camenker, head of Mass Resistance
I don't want the school to determine the timing and manner when this stuff is brought up. I want him to play on the swing set and make mud pies. I don't want him thinking about same-sex unions in kindergarten. - Massachusetts parent David Parker
Does an elementary school have the right to indoctrinate children in their view of controversial moral issues without the knowledge or consent of parents?
That is the issue that the U.S. Supreme Court may decide. Matt Barber, CWA's Policy Director for Cultural Issues, speaks with David Parker, a Lexington, Massachusetts parent, who is petitioning the high court, hoping it will accept his appeal of a First Circuit Court decision on his case.
In 2005, Parker was arrested at his son's school following a classroom lesson on same-sex marriage using the book King & King. The principal at Esterbrook Elementary School in Lexington defended the King & King lesson and denied parents the right to be informed about it and to opt their kids out. - Concerned Women for America
When a controversy happens regarding gay rights, religious right organizations are quick to jump into the situation and exploit it for their own purposes regardless of what the truth may be. A perfect example would be the case involving Massachusetts parent David Parker.
In April 2005, Parker was arrested for trespassing when he refused to leave his son’s school, Eastabrook Elementary, in Lexington, MA. He was angry that his son, who was at the time in kindergarten, was sent home with a “diversity book bag.” He objected to a book in the package because it showed a child in a same-sex household.
Parker contended that the school was encroaching on his right as a parent to talk to his son about issues of sexuality. He met with school officials and was arrested when he refused to leave after the meeting. He claimed that any mention of same-sex parents constituted a talk of human sexuality and that Massachusetts law guaranteed that he could opt his child out of the discussion. Parker also claimed that school officials were not giving him assurances that this would happen.
At first glance, it seems that the case of David Parker was one of a concerned father attempting to be able to raise his child in the way he sees fit. As you can see, religious right groups certainly claimed that was the case. And unfortunately they were aided by folks like Wendy McElroy and Bill O'Reilly who apparently never realized journalism involves more than just writing and interviewing folks. A little investigation never hurts matters.
Which is what I did. And what I found was a case a bit more complex.
Distortion—David Parker objected to his child being exposed to homosexuality because it was an issue of sexuality and Joseph Estabrook Elementary refused to accommodate him
Truth—In a January 17, 2005 email to the school, Parker said: “There is a book included entitled, Who’s in a Family (with pictures) that include lesbian and homosexual couples with children—implicitly equating this family structure as a morally equal alternative to other family constructs. We stand firmly against this book or any other subject matter pertaining to homosexuality ever being indoctrinated to our child, discussed in school, or sent home. We don’t believe gay parents constitute a spiritually healthy family and should not be celebrated.”
Joseph Estabrook Elementary principal, Joni Jay, wrote Parker an email clearly saying homosexuality is not a part of the kindergarten curriculum. She also said she cannot control what students say to one another and that many children attending Joseph Estabrook Elementary live in same-sex households.
Point of fact: The entire controversy began because Parker’s son brought home a “diversity bookbag” with several items in it. Among them was a book showing certain types of families, including same-sex families. It was the only book in the packet that talked about anything of a homosexual nature.
Distortion—Parker was well within his rights because Massachusetts laws says parents must give permission to have their children discuss any issue involving human sexuality.
Truth—Parker was not well within his right because discussions of differing families, including gay-led households are not included in the parental notification policy. This is because it is not an issue about human sexuality. Principal Jay informed Parker of this on March 4, 2005. Jay said she confirmed this with the district assistant superintendent and the director of Health Education. She was answering an email in which Parker said that neither he nor his wife authorize any teacher or adult to “expose” his sons (Parker has two sons) to “any sexual orientation/homosexual material/same sex unions between parents.”
Point of fact: The night before Parker’s arrest, he addressed the Lexington School Committee during their public meeting. In his speech, he attempted to link gay-led households to sexual behavior:
“Children who are successfully indoctrinated that same-sex marriage is normal and correct will eventually understand that sexual intimacy is a part of this union. Let’s not be naive about the implied human sexuality aspect of same-sex unions. Let’s be honest with ourselves. When we accept same-sex unions, we accept its implied . . . sexual intimacy. These concepts are indeed inextricably linked.”
Distortion—David Parker was arrested because Joseph Estabrook Elementary did not respect his rights as a parent.
Truth—David Parker was arrested for trespassing. Even though his initial questions were answered, Parker persisted and finally received another meeting with school officials. According to a press release issued by William J. Hurley, Interim Superintendent of Schools and Christopher Casey, Chief of Police in Lexington, Parker and his wife requested that the school, in the future, ensure that teachers automatically remove their children from discussions of same-sex households, even if the issue rises spontaneously. It was explained to Parker and his wife that the policy allowing students to opt out of discussions of human sexuality was not relevant here and the Parkers’ request was “not practical” because children could discuss “such matters among themselves at school.”
When Parker and his wife were told that they could appeal the response to the Commissioner of Education, Parker did not want to. It was then that the two decided not to leave the school. The Lexington Police were called. Parker’s wife went to the couple’s car but he stayed. Two plain-clothed detectives came at 5:20 p.m. and a police lieutenant came at 6 p.m. All asked Parker to leave but he refused.
Distortion—David Parker did not intentionally get arrested. According to his lawyer, Jeffrey Denner:
“He (Parker) was invited to come in, he came in, there was a dialogue going back and forth, there were faxes sent back and forth to the school committee. His intent was not to get arrested. His intent was to establish a dialogue to protect his own children and other children as well.”—Father faces trial over school’s ‘pro-gay’ book, WorldNetDaily, August 4, 2005
Truth—According to the press release submitted by Hurley and Casey, Parker said “If I’m not under arrest, then I’m not leaving.” The press release also said Parker began calling people on his cell phone and a small group of people began arriving with cameras. Parker was finally arrested at 6:24 p.m. The group with the camera was waiting behind the police station and photographed his arrival.
Mass Resistance (Massachusetts conservative group) claimed that Parker was using his cell phone in order to keep his wife up to date with the meeting while she sat in the couple’s car. Point of fact: There are pictures of Parker being arrested and led away by police on the Mass Resistance web page. Now how could any of this have happened by chance? For that matter, there are pictures of Parker addressing the Lexington School Committee the night before his arrest. The fact that these pictures are on the web page do give an impression of premeditation by Parker and Mass Resistance.
Distortion—David Parker got into this fight solely because of his concern for his children and what they are being exposed to in school.
Truth—Since his arrest, Parker has been speaking against gay rights in other states. On June 13 and 14 of that same year, he was the speaker in a six-town “Wake UP Maine” tour with Brian Camenker, the head of Mass Resistance. The purpose was to aid a Maine referendum against the recently passed bill outlawing discrimination against the gay community. A flyer was distributed showing Parker in handcuffs. The flyer also claimed that Parker “questioned the homosexual rights movement.”
The image of Parker in handcuffs had made its way around several web pages like some sort of bastardized picture of Che Guevera. He also appeared in a commercial in another effort to overturn the Maine anti-discrimination bill. In addition, the Family Research Council filmed an interview with Parker as a part of a successful effort to pass Proposition 8 in California. The organization referenced the Parker controversy in writings about gay marriage in California.
And then don’t forget this interesting addendum:
In May 2006, Parker’s son was involved in a fight at school with a friend over seating in the school cafeteria. His son and the other student made peace with each other and continued to be friends. They even had a play date later that week. In addition, Parker was informed as to what happened.
However, less than a month later, the Mass Resistance sent out a press release claiming that Parker’s son was set upon by eight to 10 students who did not appreciate his fight against Joseph Estabrook Elementary. The press release generated considerable buzz with the anti-gay industry, as it was either run or referenced by many so-called “pro-family” web pages, including the Traditional Values Coalition and Concerned Women for America.
Joseph Estabrook Elementary School explained the true story in a press release. However, none of the so-called “pro-family” groups, including Mass Resistance and the Traditional Values Coalition, apologized for any of their claims about a conspiracy to hurt Parker’s son nor did they correct the error.
By the way, in 2007, a federal judge dismissed Parker's case against the school and in 2008, the Supreme Court also denied his case.
However, it is clear that when controversy involving us take place, the lgbt community must be highly vigilant in getting the truth out as soon as possible.
Otherwise the situation becomes another file in the religious right cabinet of lies.
As if the teabaggers didn't shoot themselves in the foot by lying about attendance numbers at last weekend's anti-Obama protest, they receive more help with that gun courtesy of our friend, Peter LaBarbera:
Just in case you are still relying on establishment liberal media like the Associated Press (AP) to get your news, here are some startling photos and links documenting the mammoth, conservative “Tea Party Express” march in our nation’s capital Saturday, September 12th. This was a grassroots taxpayers’ protest of historic proportions — not in the “tens of thousands,” as AP misreported, but between one and two million people coming to make their voice heard in Washington.
That's right. It's not the fault of Matt Kibbe, president of FreedomWorks, who spread the lie that ABC News had reported that between 1 million to 1.5 million people had gathered to protest.
Nor it is Michelle Malkin's fault even though she helped to spread this lie. Nor is it the fault of the assorted nuts of conservative talking heads and bloggers.
It's the "damned liberal media" again.
And LaBarbera has "proof " of this.
But like so much of his information, his "proof" is inaccurate:
Obviously moved by the enormity of the 9/12 march, the British newspaper Daily Mail — hardly sympathetic to American conservatives — reported (emphasis added): “A million march to US Capitol to protest against ‘Obama the socialist.’” However, the Daily Mail’s original headline was: “Up to two million march to US Capitol to protest against Obama’s spending in ‘tea-party’ demonstration” (it appears that the DM’s editors made some politically correct revisions);
To dwell on the alleged political leanings of the Daily Mail is an evasive tactic. If one looks at the article, they would find that it does not cite any sources for its claim
If you clicked on this link, you would see that Malkin updated the "article" saying that the 2 million number was inaccurate - something that LaBarbera conveniently omits.
Isn't World Net Daily the same group that's pushing the "Obama is not an American citizen" lie?
Rather than pushing factual information courtesy of Politifact, such as this piece questioning a photo of the event, and Mediamatters.org, which tracked the attendance number lie put out by conservatives, LaBarbera does a poor job of trying to bring relevancy to this madness by reprinting refuted information and then blaming the media for the ineptitude of the tea baggers in their attempts to deceive.
And of course he tries to link it all to lgbts:
What does all this have to do with the fight against the Homosexual Lobby? Well, for one, beyond the health care debate, the Obama Administration is pushing to enact a comprehensive “gay” agenda that would greatly expand the government’s power to effectively force businesses and individuals to approve of or subsidize homosexual and “transgender” lifestyles. The Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA) — slated for hearings next week — would create federal homosexuality- and transsexuality-based “rights” for employees. This would invariably circumscribe the liberties of business owners who oppose homosexuality as a matter of conscience.
We trust that the same people who oppose Big Government intruding into our lives will resist the idea that the Government should be forcing businessmen and businesswomen to support homosexual behavior and gender confusion or risk getting sued.
This is the point where I usually attempt to bring clarity to LaBarbera's nonsense.
But I can't right now because I'm too busy laughing.
South Carolina celebrated 20 pride Saturday and over 6,000 attendees marched through downtown Columbia, SC and settled in to Finlay Park for a day on fun, frolic and fellowship with recording star and former American Idol contestant Frenchie Davis, 80s pop diva Tiffany, and from Ongina from RuPaul's Drag Race.
It was a rousing success!
This will be the picture of the year. SC Pride President Ryan Wilson proposes to his partner on stage in front of SC Pride attendees. He said yes! And yes, the ring is (as a friend of mine would say) FAABULOOUUUSSSS! Joan Rivers would approve.
Who is that gorgeous black man at the end who has no idea how to hold a sign. Next year, South Carolina Black Pride will be riding a float, even if we have to commandeer one!
Nadler to unveil DOMA repeal bill Tuesday - Rep. Barney Frank does not agree with how it's being done. And personally I respect his opinion. Please, no hyperbole of "Barney Frank sold gays out." The swiftness in which some of us like to get the knives out is not necessarily a community saving grace.
Obama lied, his credibility died- Not necessarily an lgbt article per se, but it is written by LaBarbera's replacement (that's his new name) Matt Barber. There is a line in this piece about Obama and Chappaquiddick (the scandal with Mary Jo Kephecne's death that haunted Sen. Ted Kennedy until his dying day) that illustrates the phoniness of those who oppose lgbt rights. No doubt Barber thought he was being amusing. He comes across as disgusting. But he is what passes for Christianity in America these days.
I missed this two-week old but very important story:
Angry Parents Suing California Schools Over Mandatory Gay-Friendly Classes
Parents in the Alameda Unified School District were refused the right to excuse their kids from classes that would teach all kids in the district's elementary schools about gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender alternative families.
The parents say they are concerned about "indoctrination" in the schools, but administrators say the course is needed to protect against sexual discrimination — and that the lessons are protected by laws in California and 10 other states.
Those states, which stretch from Washington to Maine, will now be eyeing the court results in California in a case that warring sides say pits parents' rights against a schools' responsibilities
Shades of the David Parker incident, but without the histronics of a parent orchestrating a phony moral panic and engaging in lies about his child "being taught about gay sex."
But one wonders if that implication of children "being taught how to be gay" is behind all of these concerns.
As this story continues to be known, this little detail will probably be obscured:
The contested California curriculum includes an annual 45-minute LGBT lesson taught to kids from kindergarten through the fifth grade. The kindergartners will focus on the harms of teasing, while the fifth graders will study sexual orientation stereotypes.
The move toward the new classes began two years ago, when teachers noticed that even kindergarten students were using derogatory words about sexuality, such as "fag."
We'll probably hear talking points about "corrupting children" and questions of "why can't schools just focus on reading, writing, and arithmetic."
I've already seen carefully phrased comments about kindergartners "learning about sexual behavior."
One of the parents opposinig the curriculum does have a point regarding what children should be taught:
"My child has been the product of bullying because she's black," said Dion Evans, who noted that students have "never viewed a single video in the classroom" that deals with racism.
I don't know if Evans's claim is totally accurate (about racism not being dealt with in his child's class), but there does need to be something in place which teaches students to show respect for all people and all positive family environments.
And here is the problem. If such a mechanism was in place, just how long would it be before some phony pro-family group, some self-appointed guardian of the definition of "traditional values" would lobby school districts to exclude lgbt families?
But to put things in the here-and-now, just which one of these "morality groups" are behind the parental lawsuit?
The problem here does not lie with the school, but with some of the parents. They seem to be embracing an inaccurate notion that lgbts aren't raising children; that we aren't parents with concerns about how our children and family situations aren't being acknowledged in the classrooms. And these parents are also embracing the more deadly notion that lgbt children do not exist.
This is not a situation involving parents' rights because the schools aren't infringing on them. And yes these classes should be mandatory. What's wrong with teaching kindergartners the harm of teasing their classmates? What's wrong with breaking down sexual orienation stereotypes? What's wrong with acknowledging the existence of so-called alternative (but still highly beneficial) families?
Yesterday, the teabaggers had their big March on Washington, which officially caused those who participated in legitimate marches on Washington to either roll their eyes or roll in their graves.
And now comes the echo chamber of lies that will be propagated no doubt by Fox News, the phony religious folks at One News Now, and other right wing battle stations.
Such as the claim pushed by Matt Kibbe, president of FreedomWorks, the group that organized the event. He said that ABC News reported that 1 million to 1.5 million people were in attendance.
However, ABC News has come out swinging against this claim:
Conservative activists, who organized a march on the U.S. Capitol today in protest of the Obama administration's health care agenda and government spending, erroneously attributed reports on the size of the crowds to ABC News.
Matt Kibbe, president of FreedomWorks, the group that organized the event, said on stage at the rally that ABC News was reporting that 1 million to 1.5 million people were in attendance.
At no time did ABC News, or its affiliates, report a number anywhere near as large. ABCNews.com reported an approximate figure of 60,000 to 70,000 protesters, attributed to the Washington, D.C., fire department. In its reports, ABC News Radio described the crowd as "tens of thousands."
Brendan Steinhauser, spokesman for FreedomWorks, said he did not know why Kibbe cited ABC News as a source.
I know why Kibbe cited ABC News as a source for his lie. Because of this:
As a result of Kibbe's erroneous attribution, several bloggers and commenters repeated the misinformation.
Now that these bloggers and commenters know the truth (and I suspect a number of them knew that Kibbe's claim was specious at best) how many of them will:
A. do the right thing and correct what they said about attendance numbers,
B. accuse ABC News of being in on "THE CONSPIRACY to make the country socialist,"
C. entirely ignore the situation over Kibbe's comments.
I wonder how Kibbe would feel if people followed him around screaming "You Lie!" or created t-shirts and bumper sticker with the phrase emblazoned across his picture?
Whatever the case may be, it's a sad commentary for any movement who feels that it has to fight distortions by engaging in a few of its own.
This piece ran on June 4 of this year. It may seem funny but notice the subtle similarities between the Chick Publications (the creator of the awful comic seen below) and the implications raised by Maggie Gallagher and the National Organization for Marriage that marriage equality will be "forced on children."
And notice how neither entity wants to acknowledge the existence of lgbt children and same-sex families that include children.
Maybe it's just me but marriage equality coming to New Hampshire seems to have left some members of the religious right a bit dazed.
One News Now has yet to report on it and my usually reliable anti-gay Peter LaBarbera hasn't said a word yet.
Even Focus on the Family have been strangely silent.
But not everyone is silent.
Someone alerted me to this tract from Chick Publications. Chick Publications is a site that publishes cartoon gospel tracts. You may have seen these various tracts in a doctor's office or at the bus stop.
It is an old tract (it was created in 2004) and while it does not address marriage equality in New Hampshire per se, it's safe to say that the creator doesn't exactly care for gay marriage at all.
The following are some snippets from the tract:
Judge for yourself but I tend to think that minus the little imps, this is exactly the argument the religious right uses against marriage equality.
It's not exactly a logical argument when drawn out, is it?
For today's edition of Know your lgbt history, I wanted to feature something different, eclectic and semi-empowering.
Not too many people are aware of this but the motion picture Diamonds Are Forever (1971) is probably the gayest, most campiest movie in the James Bond series.
It's one of my favorites, although seeing how it fits into the James Bond chronology, campy wasn't necessarily a good way to go.
Diamonds Are Forever came after On Her Majesty's Secret Service starring George Lazenby who took over the role of James Bond from Sean Connery.
I won't even talk about the behind-the-scenes drama that led to Lazenby not doing another James Bond movie and producers wooing Connery back for one last go at Bond.
The onscreen drama was enough. At the end of On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Bond has just become a groom but quickly became a widower when villain Ernst Stavro Blofeld machine-gunned his bride.
Diamonds Are Forever should have been what later Bond movie License to Kill was - a movie devoted to vengeance. Instead, only the first five minutes was devoted to Bond finding and killing Blofeld.
Then he proceeded to stop diamond smugglers.
And by the power of strange screenwriting, it turns out that he didn't kill Blofeld after all (who do you think was leading the diamond smuggling operations?)
I won't rehash the plot. I just want to focus on my favorite James Bond henchmen, Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint.
Wint (jazz musician Putter Smith) and Kidd (actor Bruce Glover) are definitely a gay couple, as seen by the end of the first scene after they put a scorpion down the back of a diamond smuggler and blow up a helicopter.
Subtlety is not this couple's strong suite and they cut a path of destruction, killing everyone who is a part of the diamond smuggling operation per instructions of Blofeld who will be using the diamonds as a part of a new plan of world conquest.
Although I find their deaths insulting - particularly that of Mr. Kidd, I still have a guilty pleasure of watching the two wreak havoc.
