Analyzing the religious right's war on lgbt children

Editor's note - I apologize to those who were expecting my daily midday news briefs. But as you can see, religious right groups and figures are especially ornery today. It must be the beginning of a season.

The People for the American Way has come out with an excellent report on the ways religious right groups are attempting to undermine efforts to protect lgbt children in schools.

The report, Big Bullies: How the Religious Right is Trying to Make Schools Safe for Bullies and Dangerous for Gay Kids, should be mandatory reading for all of us who care about keeping our lgbt children safe.

Among the highlights is a detailed table of contents listing a host of religious right distortion techniques used to derail anti-bullying efforts:

• Introduction
• Facing the Problem
• The Indoctrination Myth
• The “Special Rights” Smear
• Playing the Victim
• Blaming the Victims
• Conclusion

The introduction says it all:

Students deserve an education that is free from bullying and harassment, and in many districts parents, teachers, principals, community members and students are working together to create a safe and welcoming environment for all children. Bullying can impede learning and ruin lives. As Education Secretary Arne Duncan has said, “bullying is doubly dangerous because if left unattended it can rapidly escalate into even more serious violence and abuse.” Close to nine in ten Americans believe that bullying is a “serious problem,” and many communities are directly challenging harassment and violence in schools.

However, many Religious Right activists want to derail efforts to combat bullying. An increasing number of conservative leaders and organizations have fiercely opposed anti-bullying programs developed by schools and education groups for the sole reason that such programs identify and attempt to combat the widespread bullying of LGBT youth.

Rather than recognize and address the problem of bullying against students who are gay or perceived to be gay, Religious Right groups want schools to embrace a policy of inaction. Many resort to repeating discredited lies about sexual orientation and vilifying the LGBT community and its allies to back up their opposition to anti-bullying programs that mention anti-gay bullying. Concerned students, families, teachers, education professionals, and public officials should not be fooled by the far-right’s attempt to smear anti-bullying programs, and should instead ensure that schools address bullying with a direct, honest and comprehensive approach.

So apparently that nonsense we saw this morning from Peter LaBarbera about GLSEN only scratches the surface of religious right chicanery and lies.

Again, read this report, save it, and send it out to as many people as possible.

Peter Sprigg accuses Perez Hilton of having 'a known interest in children'

Gossip columnist Perez Hilton

Those who read this blog know that I'm not necessarily that much a fan of gossip columnist Perez Hilton.

I will admit that at times I look at his site, but mostly he is a bit too juvenile for my tastes. And his unnecessarily crude comments towards beauty pageant contestant Carrie Prejean started a controversy which made Prejean a religious right cause celebre (that is before those pictures came out).

However it seems that in light of the situation involving lgbt teen bullying, Hilton is attempting to soften his image. And that includes writing a children's book entitled The Boy With Pink Hair.

The news of this has elicited many comments - some positive, others negative.

But for my money, none are more negative than that of Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council. Sprigg, who usually busies himself manufacturing inaccurate studies about lgbts, took the time to make a sly suggestion in The Washington Times regarding Perez and "an interest in children:"

Peter Sprigg, Family Research Council

“He does have a known interest in children,” says Peter Sprigg, a senior fellow for Family Policy Studies at the Family Research Council, “having published a photo of teen star Miley Cyrus that could have been considered child pornography.

The picture Sprigg is speaking of is that of Cyrus which Hilton published in 2010 while she was getting out of a car while supposedly not wearing any underwear. Cyrus at the time was 17.

Hilton asserted that she was in fact wearing underwear and he published the picture "to teach her a lesson about getting out a car in a ladly-like fashion."

For all of the talk  about Hilton and "child pornography," the controversy died out. And that's because it was a stupid controversy pushed by a stupid need by Hilton to gain attention for his blog.

And I am by no means defending Hilton's actions. But for Sprigg to assert in any fashion that Hilton is a pedophile is nasty. Of course Sprigg never came out and said the word "pedophile," but we all know what he means by "interest in children."

Hilton is a gossip columnist and subsequently he publishes salacious items and pictures regarding celebrities. The credibility of him writing a children's book is definitely subject for discussion. But Sprigg's assertion of pedophilia seems to be more directed towards Hilton's sexual orientation rather than his vocation.

It only goes to prove that no matter what the situation may be regarding the lgbt community (like this morning's post about GLSEN), members of the religious right just have to work in a dig about lgbts wanting to "harm children."

It's like a sickness. They can't seem to help themselves.

GLSEN the victim of a homophobic smear days before annual event

This morning, Peter LaBarbera came out with what he called a "breaking story" on his Americans for Truth webpage:

A Facebook page affiliated with the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) — to support homosexual student clubs and GLSEN’s upcoming activist “Day of Silence” in schools nationwide (Friday, April 15) — was linked for several weeks to a pornographic “gay” hook-up website containing full-frontal nudity and personal ads expressing interest in dangerous homosexual practices including anal sodomy, “rimming” and various sadistic sex fetiishes popular in the homosexual male subculture.

The GLSEN ”Gay-Straight Alliances” Facebook page was also linked to a  “Gay Trip Thailand” Facebook page with shirtless Thai males — luring men to that notorious sex-tourism destination — as well as a movie about two male lovers that is sponsored by a leading “gay” pornographic video distributor. When the salacious links were exposed April 11 by Mission America, a pro-family group, they were quickly removed from the GLSEN Facebook page. 

Here is the clip he saved:

 

There are so many things wrong with LaBarbera's assertion. First and most importantly, GLSEN had nothing to do with this page. It has several banners advertising GLSEN events, such as the Day of Silence, but there is nothing on this page calling it an "affiiliate of GLSEN" or - as LaBarbera put it - The "GLSEN "Gay-Straight Alliance" page.  The page, Gay-Straight Alliances, seems to be a generic page supporting gay/straight clubs.

Furthermore if you will notice - the pictures which allegedly appeared were in the photo section of this page. Anyone can join this page and place photos there. Also, notice how those alleged photos are grouped together, as if someone put there all there at the same time.

What I am saying is that the most, this was an ugly practical joke by someone with a nasty sense of humor. And at the very least, this was a nasty set-up created to harm GLSEN days before its annual Day of Silence event.

According to LaBarbera, the group Mission America discovered the photos. Mission America is a vicious anti-gay group led by one Linda Harvey. Mission America was one of the sponsors of LaBarbera's latest so-called Truth Academy. Furthermore, Harvey has said lgbts or anyone supporting lgbt equality shouldn't be around children because they would cause children to be molested. Recently she said the so-called "gay agenda" was responsible for the spate of lgbt teen suicides.

I am not saying definitely that LaBarbera and Harvey conspired here. But there is something fishy about the fact that Harvey's group - which has affiliated with LaBarbera in the past - just happened to find semi-pornographic pictures on this page.

The sick irony of the entire thing is that it allowed LaBarbera to return to his "roots," so to speak. LaBarbera is known in lgbt circles as "Porno Pete" for his penchant of going to leather conventions and subcultural sex-events, taking pictures, and going into details about what supposedly the gays did there (while conveniently ignoring the heterosexuals in attendance).

This faux GLSEN controversy allowed LaBarbera to list all sorts of graphic details about gay sex - which I won't publish here - like he used to do in his olden days.

Furthermore, he also repeats several religious right lies about GLSEN, including:

the alleged Fistgate controversy, which the organization had nothing to do with,

and the false claim that GLSEN founder Kevin Jennings did not report an underage child having sex with an adult male. The young man - Brewster - was not underage at the time and in a later interview credited Jennings for being there for him at a time at which it was difficult for young lgbts to confide in anyone.

Here is the gist of this so-called controversy:

The alleged Facebook page is NOT affiliated with GLSEN other than giving support to some of its events.

Secondly, we don't know HOW those pictures got on that page (they have been scrapped off as of now, so my guess is that as soon as the page administrator saw them, he or she deleted them).

LaBarbera and Harvey have a lot of questions to answer. Just how did Mission America just happen find these pictures. And if these pictures were on the page for "several weeks" - like LaBarbera asserted - why are we just hearing about it now.

One thing is clear though - if this turns out to be a manufactured controversy (and I am not saying by whom), the parties behind it - and they who know they are - are pretty damned pathetic.

National Organization for Marriage twists professor's word, bars his correction from its blog

This took place last week, but more attention needs to be paid to it. It's not just the Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, the American Family Association, or the Traditional Values Coalition who likes to distort the words of credible experts. The National Organization for Marriage also stoops to this level of deception

From nomexposed.org:

 . . . Widener University Law Professor John Culhane wrote an article looking at the many societal benefits tied to and associated with marriage. NOM pounced on Culhane’s working, firing off a blog post titled “After SSM, What Next? Half Marriage and Ending the “Privileges” of Marriage”


Not surprisingly, NOM twisted Culhane’s actual points. When Culhane himself tried to correct NOM on this, they censored his comment from their blog. Check out his follow-up piece, with excerpts below:

…The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) took my article, and butchered – I mean edited – the piece down to focus only on an exaggerated version of (2), in furtherance of their project of saying that what “we” really want is the abolition of marriage. (You can find their blog piece here.) And so as to make it harder for anyone to compare the original to the NOM version, they didn’t link to the piece. (They did provide the url for the general 365 cite, not for the article; and it wasn’t hot-linked.)

I responded with a ritual act of futility: I commented on their actions, and provided a link to my piece in case any of their readers wanted to compare the original with the twisted NOM version. As usual, my comment was “moderated” into some cyber-purgatory, where it will exist in perpetuity

Of course, I’ve long known that NOM isn’t interested in exposing its readers to anything that might contradict the party line. But this unwillingness to post a comment from the very author you’re quoting seems to me a new low. The message it sends is: “We like it here in this bubble. And we’re not going to let any outside forces question our intellectual honesty.”

NOM claims to be interested in dialogue, but this act of obliteration through “moderation” conclusively shows that they’re only interested in bouncing their own voices around in an echo chamber.

Gays blamed for Catholic priests abusing children and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Chris Meloni was always cool:



In other news briefs:

Vineland schools lift ban on gay websites - Way to go, ACLU!


Dr. Ablow Launches Inaccurate, Transphobic Attack On J. Crew Advertisement - A stupid attack over pink toenails.

We’re CRUISING w/ Donnie McClurkin! - I wouldn't go on a boat with Donnie McClurkin on a bet.

Catholic Abuse? Blame Gays - Bill Donohue blames gays for Catholic priests abusing children. Yeah, we gave them secret codewords to do it. What a  #@!&;*!

Gays control Congress and other things I learned last weekend

This is slightly nauseating.

Last weekend, a bunch of social conservatives got together to combat the so-called gay agenda. And just about all of the "talking heads" were there from Robert Knight to Matt Barber to Greg Quinlan.

It was held at Liberty University and was called the Awakening. But if I had to attend, I would have cracked myself over the head so that I wouldn't have to be awake. Amongst the highlights, according to the American Independent:

The one self-described ex-gay on the panel, Greg Quinlan — who founded the Pro Family Network in 1996 and is now the president of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) but spent his gay years lobbying for the LGBT-rights group Human Rights Campaign – explained that his foray into homosexuality was caused by abuse from his father and looking at Playboy magazine as a young boy.

 . . . Matt Barber, the panel’s moderator and a dean at Liberty University, said he served in the military for 12 years. Barber made a case that promoting gays in the military presents a national threat because most gay military men will be more focused on their attraction to other men than on their military duties, saying it comes down to the soldier who “has your back or the one who wants to rub it.” (Alvin's note - there he goes again).

But if you wanted to give a prize for the most obnoxious homophobic tripe uttered, you would have a tie between Ryan Sorba of the Young Conservatives of California and perennial homophobe Robert Knight.

From this clip, Sorba advocates that the "gay identity" does not exist so folks combatting the so-called gay agenda should stop using the word "gay:"



 According to the American Independent:

Sorba proposed alternatives to the word “gay,” which received approval by a unanimous show of hands by the 40-some audience members:

• “Same-sex attraction”
• “Same-sex intercourse”
• “Sodomy”
• “Unnatural vice”

Congressman Trent Franks and his anti-gay hate group friend

This picture was taken during one of those dreary right-wing " How To Take Back America" conference in 2009.

The man in the picture to the left is Brian Camenker of the SPLC - declared hate group Mass Resistance. Amongst so many other anti-gay exploits, Camenker and Mass Resistance has:

made a claim in 2006 that "gays were trying to get legislation passed to allow sex with animals" in Massachusetts,

Manufactured a phony panic about "schools teaching children about homosexuality,"

Claimed in 2005 on Comedy Central's Daily Show that if given time, Camenker would be able to connect gay marriage in Massachusetts to the "reduction" of the quality of life in the state, a spike in homelessness rates, or and a lowering the quality of the air in the state

Also, according to Media Matters, Mass Resistance also

 . . .  previously called on parents to keep their children home from school during an event promoting awareness of, and opposition to, anti-gay bullying and has stated that suicide prevention programs for gay and lesbian youth have no "legitimate medical or psychological basis." The organization was also a major source behind the right-wing's false attacks on Department of Education official Kevin Jennings back in 2009.

Camenker, the group's longtime leader, has viciously attacked gays in the past. In 2007, he reportedly denied that gays and lesbians were targets of the Holocaust and has compared his supporters to the Allies and the gay rights movement to Nazis. In 2008, Camenker wrote that [s]ame-sex marriage "hangs over society like a hammer with the force of law."

Now why is all of this important? The man to the right in the picture is Congressman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) On April 15th, Franks will be holding a hearing before the House Judiciary subcommittee. The title of the hearing is "Defending Marriage."

Now I'm certainly not saying that Camenker will be a witness at the hearing, but based on the fact that they seem to attend the same conferences - and are cordial enough to take pictures together - I think it's safe to say that this upcoming hearing won't necessarily be lgbt-friendly.

According to the Washington Blade:

Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), chair of the committee, has said President Obama could be impeached for his decision to drop his administration’s defense of the Defense of Marriage Act in court, and the upcoming hearing would likely represent his views.

In a March interview with Think Progress, Franks said he supports defunding the Justice Department if it doesn’t defend DOMA and added he would “absolutely” favor impeaching Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder if support for doing so “could gain collective support.”

Oh what "fun" this hearing is going to be!

More homophobia than you can shake a stick at and other Monday midday news briefs

Video: The whiteboard is empty; still more instructive than the 'expert' discussion - Religious right groups have a nauseating conference. Don't read if you have a weak stomach.

NOM Spokesman: Marriage Equality Will Ban Preaching - And here I thought hate crimes legislation would do all of that.


Watch: School Takes Field Trip to the Castro District, Parent Freaks About Gay Sex, Calls Local News - One ignorant parent amongst many good ones freak out. And suddenly its a news story. Come on now!

Bill recognizing domestic partnerships signed - Good for Washington state!

Bachmann And Gingrich Will Address Anti-Gay Organization That’s "Proud To Be A Hate Group" - Be still my intestines.

The National Organization for Marriage owes me an apology for lying about Marinelli

 Editor's note - this post originally inaccurately accused Marinelli of making the offending comment regarding how "gays were never hunted down and murdered like Jews, Blacks, or Christians." It was another administrator who made this offensive comment. However, this doesn't take away from the gist of the story, i.e. NOM falsely claiming that the facebook page was "operated by a private party" which was independent of the organization.

By now, we have all heard the uplifting story of Louis J. Marinelli, the former National Organization for Marriage strategist who defected from the group and now supports marriage equality.

It's a story which demonstrates that actually getting to know lgbts can change one's mind about who we are as a people.

There is also another story involved which demonstrates the duplicity of the NOM, the organization which Marinelli was once affiliated with.

Jeremy Hooper from Goodasyou covered this story but since I am principally involved, I feel the need to comment on it.

When the story of Marinelli's defection broke, Brian Brown, president of NOM, issued this statement:

"Louis worked in a volunteer capacity as a bus driver during our summer marriage tour. Around this time, he started pushing Facebook supporters towards NOM and we paid him as a part-time consultant for helping us expand our internet reach.”

Now during that abysmal Summer Marriage Tour, I wrote a piece in the Huffington Post commenting on an unbelievable comment on NOM's Facebook page (which was run by Marinelli) - National Organization for Marriage: Gays Were Never Hunted Down and Murdered Like 'Jews, Christians, and Blacks'

NOM got furious at my article and sent the following missive (I highlighted the crucial parts):

"The Huffington Post on Wednesday falsely attributed statements to the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) about discrimination faced by gays and lesbians. The statements were apparently posted by an unnamed "administrator" of the "Protect Marriage: 1 Man 1 Woman" Facebook account. Huffington Post falsely claims that this is NOM's Facebook page. The Facebook account on which these statements were reportedly made is not NOM's Facebook page and neither NOM nor anyone representing NOM made these statements. The Facebook account in question is operated by a private party and NOM does not control what is allowed to be posted on the account, a fact that could have been easily known to Huffington Post had they reached out to NOM to verify the report

Now at the time, which the help of the webpages Goodasyou and Box Turtle Bulletin, I was able to point out the duplicity of  NOM's  statement:

As this link courtesy of Box Turtle Bulletin and Goodasyou proves, the page "Protect Marriage: 1 Man 1 Woman" is associated with NOM. From its Twitter page, NOM is pushing the page as its own. Furthermore,  Louis J. Marinelli - self identified "NOM strategist" is the general manager of the page.

 But now I guess my proof is unnecessary. That "private party" operating NOM's facebook page was Marinelli, who the organization has just admitted to have paid as a "part-time consultant for helping them expand their internet reach."

NOM clearly owes me an apology for calling into question my journalistic integrity. The organization obviously wasn't telling the truth when it tried to disavow itself from Marinelli back then.

It's okay though. My guess is that right now, NOM is too busy eating and digesting all that crow to make a suitable apology to me.

Related post:

Of course NOM's misrepping Louis' role. It's the one constant of the Brown/Marinelli marriage - Jeremy Hooper goes into more detail regarding Marinelli's Facebook page and NOM.

Government Shutdown - The Lament of a Tired American

As the details of the near government shutdown come filtering in, I am reminded of the words of actress Kathrine Hepburn in the movie The Lion In Winter. In this movie she portrayed English queen Eleanor of Acquitaine and was explaining to her sons why it is so hard for leaders to do their jobs:

 . . . we are the origins of war: not history's forces, nor the times, nor justice, nor the lack of it, nor causes, nor religions, nor ideas, nor kinds of government, nor any other thing. We are the killers. We breed wars. We carry it like syphilis inside. Dead bodies rot in field and stream because the living ones are rotten. For the love of God, can't we love one another just a little - that's how peace begins. We have so much to love each other for. We have such possibilities, my children. We could change the world.

Hepburn’s assessment reverberated through my mind when watching and reading overpaid pundits deconstruct the so-called winners and losers of the budget crisis with the frenzy of a horde of George Romero zombies.

“Boehner won because he held his factions together and got more than he asked for.”


“The Democrats won because they managed to hold fast against the $61 million demand, save Planned Parenthood,  climate change legislation, NPR and revealed the Republicans to be extremists”


“President Obama won because he showed calm leadership and stayed above the fray.”


“The tea party won because they didn’t completely show their asses.”

And then came the armchair responders with their annoyingly rude but predictable names for President Obama - President chimp, Obozo, Barry Sotero.

They were rivaled by angry progressives whining about how the president sold them down the river, how they will never vote for him again, how he is secretly a Republican, or how the Republican party has been taken over by the Koch brothers in a way which rivals Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Who really gives a shit? The entire thing was a damn disgrace. I find it hard to believe in the richest country in the world, where some folks repeat the phrase “American exceptionalism” like it’s a magic word which will open a cave of riches, that the people we elect  to hold our interests bickered like the women on an episode of “The Housewives of Beverly Hills."

And what makes it worse is the mentality shown by us Americans. The nasty words, the taunting poses we throw at each other. This isn’t the damn Superbowl. It isn’t the World Series. This was a possible government shutdown where many lives would have been negatively affected. Yet we treated it like a game, rooting for the “home team” when both sides should have been considered as the home team worth rooting for. I'm tired of politics being a bloodsport. And most of all, I'm tired of folks just allowing this to be the case with comments  like "that's how it's always been."

We don’t have anyone to blame for this but ourselves.

Let’s face it. Washington is a guilded sewer which yields riches for those who don’t mind the smell of the filthy cash they are collecting through their side deals. I'm intentionally not being nice here. In the olden days, folks used to throw the contents of their slop jars in their backyards. Now we have gotten to the point where we elect the contents of slop jars to public office.

And then we expect them to act any different than the contents of those slop jars.

But we help them along by being so naïve.

The American voter swoon over whatever new face which is foisted on us by the overpaid media, who will come to us with a hackneyed slogan about “newness” or will wax philosophical about his or her faith and values, making sure to trot his or her family out center stage while secretly hoping that no one will discover that they are getting a “piece” on the side.

Then, as expected, we swoon over them like the bobbysoxers used to swoon over Frank Sinatra. Only no one is paying us to do it like Sinatra’s handlers paid those folks. We do it on our own stupid volition.

Then, when the person doesn’t turn out to be Superman or the Second Coming of Christ, we sharpen our swords, arm our pistols, and fire verbal barbs at them talking about how we have been betrayed or screwed without the courtesy of a reach around Then something else happens which changes our mind and we go through the entire cycle all over again like a predictable yo-yo.

If Americans is angry or embarrassed over this near shutdown or disenchanted about what’s to come, then we have no one to blame but ourselves. Because we are so damn gullible.

We don’t recognize the ugly realities of the American political system:

• Where he who has the goals generally makes the rules,

• Where our media has subscribed to the philosophy that there is no money in “trying to save the world.”

• Where the loudest, most outrageous voice repeating the same lies over and over again gets more credibility than calm, rational discussion of the truth.

Nor do we recognize that we have the ability to change all of that.

But between you and me, I really don’t think we have a desire to make a change.

We'll just kick our legs up and get information fed to us in tubes like hospital patients who can't take care of or think for themselves.

Know Your LGBT History - I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry

It was 2007 and lgbts still had to deal with awful comedies in which our sexual orientation is a punchline like in this movie I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry. Adam Sandler (who is not funny) and Kevin James (ditto) plays two heterosexual firefighters who enter into a civil union for the insurance. It was a hit, which doesn't say much for the mentality of some people who go to the movies.

Just awful:

The "Gay Inspector"


I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry
at MOVIECLIPS.com

Past Know Your LGBT History Posts:

NOM suffers major defection and other Friday midday news briefs

G-A-Y Exclusive: National Organization For Marriage tour organizer/Facebook moderator does startling about-face; Exposure to NOM could lead to unintended side effects - This is MAJOR! A member/supporter of NOM, Louis J. Marinelli (whom I have criticized many times on this blog) has made a serious about face. He now supports civil marriage equality and on top of that, retracts many anti-gay things he has said. And best of all are his choice words for Peter LaBarbera. Sweeeeeet!

An Enemy Defects - A very good friend of mine makes a crucial point about the above situation. How we treat someone like Marinelli who has changed his position says as much about us as a community than it does about him. Some people may be tempted to be nasty, but we are a much better people than that.

Watch: Military Service Chiefs Report 'No Issues' with 'DADT' Repeal Implementation - The Family Research Council will be all upset. Good.

Judge rules gay rights group can picket Target - Excellent ruling!

For the Family Research Council, government shutdown is all about abortion

The Family Research Council seems to be taking time from its "busy schedule" of gay-baiting in order to inform folks about the possibly imminent government shutdown.

And the organization's actions seem to indicate the prevailing story coming out of Washington, i.e. the possibility of a government shutdown isn't about deficits but the social issue of abortion.

At the FRC's Cloakroom - the blog of FRC Action, which is an offshoot of the organization itself, there are several posts which connect the government shutdown to efforts - no doubt pushed by FRC and other like-minded groups - to strip funding from Planned Parenthood, including a not very nice post on Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY):

Rep. Slaughter is one of the top defenders of abortion giant Planned Parenthood. According to heir own figures Planned Parenthood has killed over 5 million babies since they started profiting from the abortion business. If you say even half of those where girls (the figure could be higher when you take in that evidence points top more girls are aborted than boys) the Rep. Slaughter is defending the, well . . . slaughter of at least 2.5 million women.

Then there is a post on the History of Shutdowns, which begins with this very telling sentence:

As a shut down looms, apparently over taxpayer funding of abortion for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and for President Obama over funding of the troops . . .

Then there is another piece which supposedly calls Democratic Senators hypocrites over their past abortion votes.

Lastly, there is the post with this headline:

Senator Reid champions taxpayer funded abortions while President Obama declares war on our troops

Certainly I'm not saying that FRC is hoping for a government shutdown. But the idea, which the organization is helping to push, that the government shutdown isn't about deficits or controlling spending levels, but placing restraints on reproductive care and controlling what a woman can do with her body leaves me kinda uncomfortable.

There is a train of thought which is blaming the tea party for what may happen and while this group deserves a degree of blame, let's not omit organizations like FRC, folks like Lila Rose and that ridiculous organization of hers, Live Action, and especially Congressmen like Mike Pence whose idea of morality is widening his eyes like saucers as he pontificates on camera regarding how its so hard for him to make other people uphold HIS moral code.

I guess what I'm saying is that I can almost understand a possible government shutdown over monetary disagreements. But shutting down the government over social issues, particularly when it comes to the issue of reproductive care and the right of a woman to control her own body, is something that should piss off every American.

Mostly because it proves the fact that some in Washington aren't working for the American people, but special interest groups - like FRC - who really don't care how pushing for their pet causes affects us "common folks."

To them, we seem to be collateral damage.

Facebook declares Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters 'abusive' and 'spammy'

I usually talk the exploits of the religious right but something happened on my blog this morning that's highly "interesting."

After writing my morning post, I went to place it on Facebook but got the following message:

This message contains blocked content that has previously been flagged as abusive or spammy. Let us know if you think this is an error.

It's been like this all day, leading me to ask is it conceivable that some folks aren't happy with what I am posting.

I wouldn't be surprised. It's been a "fun" week with the Family Research Council making a complete fool of itself and Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association competing for the jester's title.

Of course it could be anything from a Facebook glitch, to someone striking back because Glenn Beck got fired, to someone getting angry at the plain truth of my anti-religious right words.

I mean let's count down the five most potentially offensive things I have said recently:

5. In the piece Scott Lively has a vicious homophobic breakdown, I said the following:

I have a certain classification when it comes to homophobes I talk about.

Peter LaBarbera is fun to laugh at. Matt Barber is a useful idiot. Paul Cameron is stewing in a sauce of irrelevancy. Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown are fishes who soon will be hooked by their own carelessness. Peter Sprigg and Tony Perkins are bumbling fools.

But when it comes to Scott Lively, I think of crosses, garlic, and holy water.

4. In the post Sorry Newt, but the American Family Association IS a hate group, I said:

. . .if the American Family Association is a Christian organization, then God must have lowered his standards.

3. Then there this comment in the piece Family Research Council accidentally admits truth about hate group charges:

FRC is not as blatantly hateful as the Klan, but that makes the organization more dangerous. Under the veneer of respectability and morality, FRC either passes off junk science or presents social science in a wrong manner to deliberately smear the lgbt community and make us appear - inaccurately - as a public health risk and a threat to religious liberty.

2. And then there is the consistent way I always seem to pick on anti-gay spokesman Matt Barber (or as I call him, my pet). Hey! It's not my fault that he seems to always be talking about gay sex and then implying that God has led him to do such like he did in the post  Matt Barber - 'Homosexuals are picking on me!'

All I did was make the observation that if Barber obsesses about gay sex because of God, then God has a warped sense of humor.

1. Or it could have been my simple observation of those who took part in Peter LaBarbera's "Truth Academy" in the post Porno Pete LaBarbera's Hate Academy begins today

All I said was:

These are not Christian people. These are liars motivated by vicious homophobia and anti-gay animus so pathological that they probably should seek psychiatric care.

I mean come on, Facebook. Were these comments truly abusive?

It doesn't because I figured out a way to place my posts on Facebook regardless. Still just the idea that someone thinks my blog posts are "abusive" or "spammy" just boggles my mind.

And I'm just getting started, you daisy-headed freaks!

UPDATE - It looks like the Facebook no longer considers me "abusive" or "spammy" anymore. At least for now. LOL

Ark. court rules against anti-gay adoption law and other Thursday midday news briefs

Ark. court strikes down law barring gay adoptions - Awesome! Children have a right to a good home and this law prevented that.

Ssempa, Oyett Press Uganda’s Parliament on Anti-Homosexuality Bill - GO AWAY, MARTIN SSEMPA!

The Military's Secret Shame - Before the religious right has a chance to exploit this article about male-on-male rape in the military, check out this passage from it - "While many might assume the perpetrators of such assaults are closeted gay soldiers, military experts and outside researchers say assailants usually are heterosexual. Like in prisons and other predominantly male environments, male-on-male assault in the military, experts say, is motivated not by homosexuality, but power, intimidation, and domination. Assault victims, both male and female, are typically young and low-ranking; they are targeted for their vulnerability. "

Andrea Lafferty calls Wasserman Schultz 'a junkyard dog'; one of the nicest things Lafferty's said in years - Andrea Lafferty is definitely her father's daughter.

FAIR Education Act and Gender Nondiscrimination Act Pass Key California Legislative Committees - Ending the news briefs with really good news.

Republicans embarrass themselves at DADT hearings

This week, House Republicans held hearings over the implementation of DADT.

From what I understand, it didn't go well for them.

However, don't tell that to long-time anti-gay activist and Paul Cameron enabler Robert Knight. According to him, the hearings were a slam dunk:

Rep. Allen B. West (R-Florida) belled the cat neatly during a hearing last Friday on the military's breakneck pace in implementing the new lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) law.

Mr. West, whose 20-plus years in the U.S. Army included combat commands, noted that he and others at Fort Bragg had to endure "sensitivity training" in the 1990s. It didn't enhance the "warrior ethos," he recalled.

What became clear at the hearing of the House Armed Services Committee's Personnel Subcommittee chaired by Joe Wilson (R-South Carolina) is that the Pentagon is forging into unknown territory, driven by political correctness, not military need.

Mr. Wilson, Mr. West and Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colorado) were openly skeptical about how honest the process has been. Mr. West noted that political correctness can prove costly, as when commanders ignored Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's plunge into radical Islam before the Fort Hood shootings. Likewise, people are afraid to share qualms over the LGBT law, Mr. West said.

I'll say one thing for Knight. What he doesn't have in truth, he makes up in creativity.

In reality, according to the site Equality Matters, the Republicans were hoping to use the hearings to find something - anything - that they could use to delay the repeal of DADT. And they couldn't find a thing:

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Clifford Stanley said he saw "no issues or problems" with the repeal of DADT, which is expected to be completed by midsummer. "All is going well," Stanley said.

Republicans weren't pleased.

Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA) attempted to make the case that under DADT gay and lesbian service members were being discharged for violating standards of conduct rather than for simply being gay and that training for repeal was costing the military too much money. He was rebuked, not once but twice, by Vice Admiral William E. Gortney, who testified that the majority of soldiers discharged under DADT had not violated standards of conduct and that training had only cost about $10,000, a minuscule amount considering the military's annual budget.

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) tried to rehash the issue of troops showering together, criticizing Vice Admiral Gortney for "not being consistent" in his responses.

Extremely embarrassing to Republican efforts to derail the DADT repeal was the following exchange between Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA) and  Vice Admiral William E. Gortney. Scott was trying to prove that gay soldiers had been discharged for violating standards of conduct rather than their sexual orientation.

Needless to say, he wasn't successful:

Transcript:

SCOTT: Did you discharge him from the service because he was gay or because he violated a standard of conduct?

GORTNEY: Because he was gay.

SCOTT: He did not violate a standard of conduct before he was dismissed?

GORTNEY: He did not.

SCOTT: That's not the answer I thought you would give to be honest with you, Admiral.

From what I understand there will be another hearing today. I'm hoping that Republicans will end up with more egg on their faces, while Knight will continue to sing their praises from whatever alternate universe he is viewing the hearings.

Anti-gay stalker Andrew Shrivell getting sued by victim of his bullying campaign

From the department of "hell yeah, stick it to him" comes this good news:

Andrew Shrivell

University of Michigan student body president Chris Armstrong has filed a lawsuit against former Michigan Assistant Attorney General Andrew Shirvell, who was fired in November of last year for a series of blog posts that targeted Armstrong for being gay.

The suit was filed on Friday in Washtenaw County Circuit Court, and asks for more than $25,000 in damages for "defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, abuse of process, invasion of privacy, and stalking."

According to David Jesse of the Detroit Free-Press, Armstrong's attorney Deborah Gordon said of Shirvell: "At this point, it's not about the money. Mr. Shirvell has refused to retract any of his bizarre and untruthful points. We want to set the record straight."

Beginning last April, Shirvell began posting on his blog about Armstrong, describing him as "a radical homosexual activist" who wants "to promote a very deeply radical agenda at the University of Michigan." He also photoshopped a picture of Armstrong with the word "resign" over his face, alongside a rainbow flag with a swastika in the middle. Over the next few months, Shirvell continued reporting on Armstrong and his friends' Facebook activity, and showing up at school events, parties where Armstrong was present, and even outside of Armstrong's parents house with picket signs.

Shirvell was fired from the Attorney General's office in November.

NOM caught being hypocritical twice and other Wednesday midday news briefs

NOM knocks pro-gay Facebook spoof; we see that indie effort and raise them their official one - The National Organization for Marriage caught being hypocritical Part 1.

Hypocrisy: NOM Outraged That Pro-Equality Groups Use Same Tactics They Do - The National Organization for Marriage caught being hypocritical Part 2.

Right-Wing Continues To Panic Over Repeal Of Don't Ask Don't Tell, Warns It Will "Destroy Our Military" - Give it up guys, you lost this one.

Attack on 2 at Swarthmore seen as gay-bashing - What the hell?

Metro approves anti-discrimination bill - Good for Nashville!

Scott Lively has a vicious homophobic breakdown

It is a well-known fact that homophobe Scott Lively's exploits in Uganda played a huge part in that country nearly passing that dreadful "kill the gays" bill.

Lively faced a lot of deservedly negative feedback because of his actions, especially in light of the fact that Ugandan gay activist David Kato was viciously murdered because of drama Lively helped to cause.

Lively even tried to downplay his homophobia and for a time was talking about "retirement."

However in a recent issue of the American Family Association's One News Now, Lively seems to have had a breakdown akin to that of Humphrey Bogart's character in The Caine Mutiny.

The only way to describe what you are about to read is that it's a free-flowing, existential rant from a man whose naked hatred of lgbts should make him pitied more than feared:

Lively says the goal of many homosexual activists is not only to gain a vote in favor of homosexuality, but to punish those who are in opposition.

"They're really the driving force behind all the different elements of what we call 'the culture war,'" he shares. "They haven't been visible in doing this, but they've been the driving force -- because their essential goal as a movement is the overthrow of the biblical model of family."

Lively explains that the city of San Francisco has a high concentration of homosexual power, and the city has taken direct action against the Catholic Church and against businesses that do not support homosexuality. He expects the same radical agendas to be prevalent throughout the state in the near future.

He points out that during the signature collection process for Proposition 8 -- a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman -- those who penned their support for the initiative were openly targeted. "They posted [the names of supporters] on the Internet," he exclaims. "They encouraged all their activists to go after those people -- and that's before they even have consolidated power entirely."

Supporters of Proposition 8 were criticized and labeled as hateful and discriminatory, and some employees were fired for supporting traditional marriage. The battle against homosexuality, Lively notes, is a politicized battle like no other.

I have a certain classification when it comes to homophobes I talk about.

Peter LaBarbera is fun to laugh at. Matt Barber is a useful idiot. Paul Cameron is stewing in a sauce of irrelevancy. Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown are fishes who soon will be hooked by their own carelessness. Peter Sprigg and Tony Perkins are bumbling fools.

But when it comes to Scott Lively, I think of crosses, garlic, and holy water.

Why are the Republican presidential candidates embracing a vicious hatemonger?

I've said it once and I will say it again:

Singlehandedly, Bryan Fischer is confirming all of what the Southern Poverty Law Center has said about the American Family Association being a hate group.

One has to wonder whether or not he is holding some good information over the head of AFA head Donald Wildmon. It's the only explanation I can garner about why the organization continues to allow him to speak for them. So far, Fischer has:

• made an ugly racial slur about President Obama,  

• viciously attacked a Medal of Honor recipient, and  

• wrote a ridiculous piece about the supposed lack of morals of Native Americans.

And that's not even counting all of the ugly things he has said about lgbts, particularly his comment about us being associated with Hitler and the Nazis:

So Hitler himself was an active homosexual. And some people wonder, didn't the Germans, didn't the Nazis, persecute homosexuals? And it is true they did; they persecuted effeminate homosexuals. But Hitler recruited around him homosexuals to make up his Stormtroopers, they were his enforcers, they were his thugs. And Hitler discovered that he could not get straight soldiers to be savage and brutal and vicious enough to carry out his orders, but that homosexual solders basically had no limits and the savagery and brutality they were willing to inflict on whomever Hitler sent them after. So he surrounded himself, virtually all of the Stormtroopers, the Browshirts, were male homosexuals.

But apparently there is one group which Fischer has failed to call out and offend - African-Americans. That is until today.

According to Raw Story, he said the following:

Fischer added that welfare had destroyed the African-American family by providing incentives for fornication instead of marriage. "It’s no wonder we are now awash in the disastrous social consequences of people who rut like rabbits," he wrote.

"Welfare has destroyed the African-American family by telling young black women that husbands and fathers are unnecessary and obsolete. Welfare has subsidized illegitimacy by offering financial rewards to women who have more children out of wedlock."

Fischer's comments would be hilarious except for the fact that prospective Republican presidential candidates such as Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Tim Pawlenty, Haley Barbour, and Michele Bachmann has appeared on his radio program.

I think certain questions need to be asked. Not to Fischer of course because that would be like trying to get a straight answer from a corpse.

Questions need to be asked of Gingrich, Huckabee, Pawlenty, Barbour, and Bachmann. How do they feel that they are the right individuals to lead this country if they rub shoulders with such a vindictive hate monger?