Monday, March 04, 2013

Dear NOM, PLEASE, PLEASE allow this guy to speak at your marriage march



I have the perfect speaker for the National Organization for Marriage's upcoming March Marriage - E.T. Williams, the self-described "doctor of common sense."

As a matter of fact, I will probably begin a campaign asking NOM to invite him . . . as soon as I figure out what a "lebesian" is.

'Gay legislator getting hate mail because of Bill O'Reilly's lies' and other Monday midday news briefs

O’Reilly Targets Colorado’s Gay House Speaker, Suggests He’s Protecting Child Molesters - This is vile. It is what happens when irresponsible journalists get caught up in their own "power."  Thanks to O'Reilly's lies, the legislator has been getting ugly messages, including one hoping that his 14-month-old foster daughter gets raped.

On NOM's reliable erasure of Coretta Scott King - Dear NOM, your dastardly plan to play African-Americans and gays against one another will not work if folks know about it. No style at all.  

Perkins: LGBT-Inclusive Schools Will Have 'Teenage Boys Invading Girls' Locker Rooms' - Apparently Perkins has been watching the movie Porky's. Isn't that a sin to watch an R-rated movie?
  
United Nations Report Considers The Possibility That Practicing Reparative Therapy On Minors Is Torture - This would be VERY interesting.

 Rep. Carole Murray Votes 'Yes' On Colorado Civil Unions Bill, Explains Why In Emotional Speech (VIDEO) - Sweet!

Family Research Council giving spotlight to flawed study

Peter Sprigg of FRC
 (The following is a repost from three years ago, but since the Family Research Council has not corrected this study and instead has moved it into a spotlight position, this repost is needed.)

On its webpage, the Family Research Council has what it calls "resources" to supposedly "defend marriage."

However, like so many other things FRC pushes, the "resources" are rather flawed.

A perfect example is a pamphlet on the page entitled The Top Ten Myths About Homosexuality.

According to its author Peter Sprigg:


The homosexual movement is built, not on facts or research, but on mythology. Unfortunately, these myths have come to be widely accepted in society—particularly in schools, universities and the media. It is our hope that by understanding what these key myths are—and then reading a brief summary of the evidence against them—the reader will be empowered to challenge these myths when he or she encounters them.

According to Sprigg, these "myths" include the following:

  • People are born gay.
  • Sexual orientation can never change.
  •  Homosexuals do not experience a higher level of psychological disorders than heterosexuals.
  • Homosexuals are no more likely to molest children than heterosexuals.

Sprigg isn't necessarily unbiased when it comes to the lgbt community. At one time he said that "homosexual behavior" should be declared illegal. Another time before that, he publicly said that lgbts should be exported out of the United States.

However, even excluding  Sprigg's dubious comments, there is enough problems with Ten Myths to question its credibility.

At first glance, Ten Myths looks legitimate. However, a more intensive look reveals it to be a mishmash of inaccurate theories, cherry-picked work, and studies taken out of context created to justify homophobia

The following are just a few of the problems with Ten Myths:

1. Ten Myths repeats the lie that the Robert Spitzer study proves that homosexuality is changeable, excluding the fact that Spitzer has said on more than one occasion that his research was being distorted. Spitzer later disavowed this study and apologized to the lgbt community for creating it.

2. Ten Myths utilizes the work of  the organization National Association for  Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). The website Truth Wins Out calls NARTH  a discredited “ex-gay” fringe organization that peddles fraudulent “cures” for homosexuality.

According to Truth Wins Out, several NARTH members have been embroiled in controversies including:

Gerald Schoenwolf, PhD, a member of NARTH’ “Scientific Advisory Committee,” who wrote a piece on the group’s website that seemed to justify slavery

NARTH psychiatrist Joseph Berger, MD, another member of its “Scientific Advisory Committee,” who wrote a paper encouraging students to “ridicule” gender variant children.

Also, according to Truth Wins Out:

NARTH’ co-founder, Joesph Nicolosi encourages male clients to become more masculine by drinking Gatorade and referring to friends as “dude”. NARTH therapists have been known to practice rubber band therapy, where a gay client is made to wear a rubber band and snap it on his wrist when sexually stimulated. It is a mild form of aversion therapy meant to “snap” the client out of the moment of attraction. NARTH members have also been known to practice “touch therapy”, where a client sits in the therapist’ lap for up to an hour, while the therapist caresses him.

Earlier this year, another member of NARTH, George Rekers, resigned from the organization after caught coming from a vacation overseas with a "rentboy."

3. Ten Myths cites Ex-gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation by Stanton L. Jones and Mark A Yarhouse as proof that people can change their sexual orientation. However in 2009, the American Psychological Association repudiated this study for bad methodology. Furthermore, Ten Myths does not address the conclusion by the APA last year that programs created to change a person's several orientation does not work.

4. Ten Myths pushes the inaccuracy that a man who molests a boy is automatically gay even though the American Psychological Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Child Psychiatrists and the Child Welfare League of America, all say that the homosexuality and pedophilia are not linked

5. But the most egregious inaccuracy in Ten Myths - and also something that says a lot about the mindset of its author, Peter Sprigg - is the following passage:

Even the pro-homosexual Gay & Lesbian Medical Association (GLMA) acknowledges:

• “Gay men use substances at a higher rate than the general population . . .”
• “Depression and anxiety appear to affect gay men at a higher rate . . . .”
• “ . . . [G]ay men have higher rates of alcohol dependence and abuse . . . .”
• “ . . . [G]ay men use tobacco at much higher rates than straight men . . . .”
• “Problems with body image are more common among gay men . . . and gay men are much more likely to experience an eating disorder . . . .”

The GLMA also confirms that:

• “ . . . [L]esbians may use tobacco and smoking products more often than heterosexual women use them.”
• “Alcohol use and abuse may be higher among lesbians.”
• “ . . . [L]esbians may use illicit drugs more often than heterosexual women.”

Homosexual activists generally attempt to explain these problems as results of “homophobic discrimination.” However, there is a serious problem with that theory—there is no empirical evidence that such psychological problems are greater in areas where disapproval of homosexuality is more intense.

So Sprigg's point is that the lgbt orientation itself is indicative of negative behaviors (i.e. drug and alcohol abuse) and not the homophobia that lgbts face.

But strange enough, the source which he cites - the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association - says that homophobia is the reason for many of these health problems. Sprigg deliberately omits information pointing this out:

Sprigg:

“Depression and anxiety appear to affect gay men at a higher rate . . . .”

GMLA:

Depression and anxiety appear to affect gay men at a higher rate than in the general population. The likelihood of depression or anxiety may be greater, and the problem may be more severe for those men who remain in the closet or who do not have adequate social supports. Adolescents and young adults may be at particularly high risk of suicide because of these concerns.

Sprigg:

“ . . . [L]esbians may use illicit drugs more often than heterosexual women.

GMLA:

Research indicates that lesbians may use illicit drugs more often than heterosexual women. This may be due to added stressors in lesbian lives from discrimination. Lesbians need support from each other and from health care providers to find healthy releases, quality recreation, stress reduction, and coping techniques. 

So basically The Top Ten Myths of Homosexuality is a fraud.  And the mythology that Sprigg spoke of has nothing to do with lgbts but with the mindset of anyone who takes his paper seriously and sees it for more than what it is - blatant homophobia wrapped up in phony science.

Friday, March 01, 2013

Robert Jeffress : tone-deaf homophobe for Christ?

We all know what the religious right and those who are anti-gay say about the lgbt community. We all know the lies and the distortions they stoop to in order to demonize us. But what if, just what if, they were challenged on these distortions with the facts? Would they attempt to refute with other facts? Would they agree that they were wrong? Or would they stick to their guns under the mistaken idea that being "Christ-like" is refusing to admit you are wrong even in the fact of being pointed out that you are wrong. Robert Jeffress, who has been in the news lately because of the Tim Tebow controversy, is the test subject to my question. Watch what he does when he is presented facts about the lgbt community which refutes his conjecture.



Where to start? First of all, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental illness in 1973, not 1976. And research was involved thanks to folks like the late Evelyn Hooker who was a pioneer in the study of homosexuality.

The basic point is that Jeffress is a sad man. He reminds me of the pharisees and the Sanhedrin council who spoke out against Jesus and plotted his death. He wraps himself so hard in the phony guise of being a steadfast warrior for good that he has abandoned all humility and common sense.

He thinks he is so close to God that he has become interchangeable to God. Jeffres forgets that he is just a man and as such is subject to mistakes in thought and actions. And when confronted with these mistakes, he refuses to yield just a little. He refuses to say "maybe I should take a look at this" or "perhaps I am wrong." He holds firm to his beliefs, which can be at times can be an admirable quality.

However, in this juncture, it's not so admirable. In fact it demonstrates a prime reason why so many are leaving the Christian religion. Jesus called men to preach the gospel, not be stubborn jackasses.

Too many "Christian" pastors have mistaken one for the other.

Hat tip to Jeremy Hooper.

'Murder of black, gay politician is sad learning experience' and other Friday midday news briefs

Marco McMillian's Death Highlights Mississippi's Slow And Inconsistent Evolution - The sad case of murdered black gay politician raises questions about Mississippi's evolution.

 Bryan Fischer: President Obama should be impeached over DOMA - Bryan Fischer is ALWAYS good for a laugh!  

Bigotry On Display: Mississippi Students Protest Transgender Classmate - Sad things happen when children are not properly educated. 

 Colorado Civil Unions Bill Passes House Committee With One Republican 'Yes' Vote - Good news from Colorado.

Anti-gay leader Tony Perkins whines about 'Jewish lobby'

The Family Research Council's Tony Perkins seems to skirting on the lines of Anti-Semitism with his comments about the Democrats and the Jewish community:



Transcript:

But here’s the irony. Is that the Democratic Party and the Democratic senators that supported Hagel, in spite of the fact that he has a record that’s deplorable on Israel, it comes from Democratic senators who are mostly aligned with a lot of the Jewish lobby here in Washington and around the nation, enjoy the money coming from the Jewish community. The Jewish community tends to be liberal, not all, but a lot of it is, and it supports Democratic candidates. But yet the Democratic Party works against the benefit of Israel in many ways, and this is an example of it.

Right Wing Watch breaks down the interesting "significance"  of Perkins' words:

Speaking about the confirmation of Chuck Hagel, Perkins mused about the ‘irony’ that Hagel, whom he considers to be anti-Israel, was backed by Democratic senators who are “mostly aligned with a lot of the Jewish lobby” and “enjoy the money coming from the Jewish community.” Hmmm, “Jewish lobby,” where have I heard that before? Hagel has been savaged in recent weeks for having used the phrase in a 2006 interview. He has since apologized and said he should phrased his comments differently. In case it isn’t obvious, the ADL’s Abe Foxman explains the many problems with saying “Jewish lobby.” Notwithstanding Hagel’s apology, Sen. Lindsey Graham grilled him about his use of the phrase during his confirmation hearing. FRC also cited Hagel’s use of “Jewish lobby” in its background document opposing his confirmation. Meanwhile over at the website of the American Family Association, which broadcasts Perkins’ show, David Limbaugh railed against Hagel’s “bigoted accusation” about the “Jewish lobby” and said he failed to provide a “satisfactory explanation for his disgraceful terminology – because there is none.” “Bigoted” and “disgraceful” sounds about right, but don’t hold your breath waiting for conservatives to denounce Perkins’ comments.

My guess is that since it's rare that lgbt organizations call out Perkins for his continuous spoutings of homophobia, maybe he is getting so bold that he thinks the Jewish community will act the same way.

Let's hope not. 

Thursday, February 28, 2013

President Obama, sociological association deals Prop 8 case a one-two punch

The case for Prop 8, the California law outlawing marriage equality in California received a serious one-two punch today courtesy of President Obama and the American Sociological Association. Both the Obama Administration and the ASA are filing briefs asking the Supreme Court to overturn Prop 8.

First from the Obama Administration:

California’s Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriages in the state, should be overturned, the Obama administration plans to tell the Supreme Court.

An administration official confirmed that the Justice Department will file a brief in the case today. Officials would not discuss the legal arguments the brief would contain. The decision to enter the case comes despite the president’s past position that marriage rights should be a state matter. In recent weeks, however, Obama increasingly has referred to same-sex marriage as an issue of civil rights.

Other administration officials have taken the same stance. In a television interview to be aired next week, for example, Atty. Gen. Eric Holder said that he saw marriage equality as “really the latest civil-rights issue.”

The American Sociological Association has already filed its brief and it destroys claims made that same-sex households are inferior when it comes to raising children, which is a major argument for those pushing Prop 8. The ASA especially calls out the Mark Regnerus study, which is the recent controversial study claiming children raised in same-sex households suffer adverse efffects. Supporters of Prop 8 made this study a huge part of their arguments in spite of fact that it has been discredited.

ASA said the following about the Regnerus study in its brief (pgs. 26-29):

 First, the Regnerus study does not specifically examine children born or adopted into same-sex parent families, but instead examines children who, from the time they were born until they were 18 or moved out, had a parent who at any time had “a same-sex romantic relationship.” . As Regnerus noted, the majority of the individuals characterized by him as children of “lesbian mothers” and “gay fathers” were the offspring of failed opposite- sex unions whose parent subsequently had a same-sex relationship. In other words, Regnerus did not study or analyze the children of two same-sex parents.

Second, when the Regnerus study compared the children of parents who at one point had a “same-sex romantic relationship,” most of whom had experienced a family dissolution or single motherhood, to children raised by two biological, married opposite-sex parents, the study stripped away all divorced, single, and stepparent families from the opposite-sex group, leaving only stable, married, opposite-sex families as the comparison. . . Thus, it was hardly surprising that the opposite-sex group had better outcomes given that stability is a key predictor of positive child wellbeing. By so doing, the Regnerus study makes inappropriate apples-to-oranges comparisons.

Third, Regnerus’s first published analysis of his research data failed to consider whether the children lived with, or were raised by, the parent who was, at some point, apparently involved in “a romantic relationship with someone of the same sex” and that same-sex partner. Instead, Regnerus categorized children as raised by a parent in a same-sex romantic relationship regardless of whether they were in fact raised by the parent and the parent’s same-sex romantic partner and regardless of the amount of time that they spent under the parent’s care. As a result, so long as an adult child believed that he or she had had a parent who had a relationship with someone of the same sex, then he or she was counted by Regnerus as having been “raised by” a parent in a same-sex relationship.

 Fourth, in contrast to every other study on same-sex parenting, Regnerus identified parents who had purportedly engaged in a same-sex romantic relationship based solely on the child’s own retrospective report of the parent’s romantic relationships, made once the child was an adult. This unusual measurement strategy ignored the fact that the child may have limited and inaccurate recollections of the parents’ distant romantic past.

Finally, the study fails to account for the fact that the negative outcomes may have been caused by other childhood events or events later in the individual's adult life, particularly given that the vast majority (thirty-seven of forty) of the outcomes measured were adult and not childhood outcomes. Factors other than same-sex parenting are likely to explain these negative outcomes in the Regnerus study. Regnerus himself concludes that “I am thus not suggesting that growing up with a lesbian mother or gay father causes suboptimal outcomes because of the sexual orientation or sexual behavior of the parent.”

 In sum, by conflating (1) children raised by same-sex parents with (2) individuals who reportedly had a parent who had “a romantic relationship with someone of the same sex,” and referring to such individuals as children of “lesbian mothers” or “gay fathers,” the Regnerus study obscures the fact that it did not specifically examine children raised by two same-sex parents. Accordingly, it cannot speak to the impact of same-sex parenting on child outcomes. 

The fact that President Obama is supporting efforts to overturn Prop 8 is a major deal, but the ASA denunciation of the Regnerus study is also a huge victory for the lgbt community. When religious right groups find a piece of information to use against the lgbt community, they tend to use it continuously. Thanks to the ASA, whenever they cite the Regnerus study, the lgbt community now have a huge caveat we can make use of. 

'AFA: Gay-Muslim-Atheist Alliance trying to destroy America' and other Thursday midday news briefs

'Project 2026' to Fight the Gay-Muslim-Atheist Alliance Destroying America - Say whaaaat!? Aw hell, I betcha i was the gay folks who told them. We just can't keep secrets.

 Minnesota Republican Legislator: Homosexuality Is A ‘Sexual Addiction’ And An ‘Unscientific Lie’ - Every time someone says we should ignore comments by the AFA's Bryan Fischer or Linda Harvey, or Matt Barber, I like to include a new brief like this one. You can't ignore it when state legislators say the same trash.  

Pediatrician On CNN: Transgender Girls Will Walk Around Bathrooms With Their Genitals Exposed - Vile lie for which he got called out for. And for the record, when I used the boys bathroom in school, I never walked around with my genitals exposed and neither did anyone else I knew.  

FRC prayer: Marriage equality = 'onslaught of evil' - The Family Research Council routinely lies and bears false witness against the lgbt community, yet it feels it can go to God and repeat its slanders. The old African-American phrase "they are going to bust hell wide open" comes to mind. 

 House Dems to urge Supreme Court to strike down DOMA - Good for House Democrats!

NOM's bought and paid for African-American group to lead march

Bill Owens
In its upcoming supposed "March for Marriage," the National Organization for Marriage is pulling out all of the stops, including teaming up with several religious right groups, such as the Family Research Council, having Catholic dioceses bus members to Washington, and this very interesting last item via press release:

Civil Rights activist Reverend Bill Owens has joined with the National Organization for Marriage to promote and lead the March for Marriage occurring in Washington, D.C. next month. 

 . . . Gay activists are wrong to claim the mantle of the civil rights movement in their push to redefine marriage for all - the most important civil right related to marriage is the right of every child to a mother and father," said Rev. Owens in a Feb. 25 statement.

Owens is the founder of the Coalition of African-American Pastors, a group that describes itself as "a grass-roots movement of Christians who believe in traditional family values such as supporting the role of religion in American public life, protecting the lives of the unborn, and defending the sacred institution of marriage."

He also was a participant in the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and 1960s in Nashville Tennessee.
 
So in order to give some degree of historic relevance to its march,  NOM is including its own bought and paid for African-American leadership to participate.

Owens and CAAP are not necessarily independent participants. 
 
We already know that Owens is NOM's liasion to the black churches. We also know that NOM was using CAAP last year in a failed attempt to sabotage President Obama's African-American support during the 2012 election.

Owens has admitted to being paid by organizations like NOM ($20,000), the Family Research Council, and the American Family Association to be a shill.


But it really doesn't matter. In this age of Obama, some folks have no problem with cashing in on their black skins. No matter how much of their integrity it costs them.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Bill O'Reilly's attack on school transgender policy is BAD journalism

Not trying to sound like a cranky old man, but I remember a time in which journalists actually researched things before they went on television and ran their mouths. But thanks to people like Roger Ailes, the standards which journalists used to aspire to have gone down the toilet. Witness Fox News' Bill O'Reilly's ignorant rant about a Massachusetts policy to protect trangender students:


Transcript: 

O'REILLY: This is truly madness, ladies and gentlemen. You're telling me that a kid can go to a public school in Massachusetts, immediately upon entering the school take off the kid's shirt and put on a dress, alright, go to the girls' room when he's a boy, and then change his name from John to Tiffany, and then after school, put the shirt back on, go home, and he's still John.
[...]
O'REILLY: There's a difference between a conversation and a lifestyle. That's such a violation of parental rights by the state of Massachusetts. It's off the chart violation.
[...]
O'REILLY: We don't even want to get into the locker room situation here, okay? Because I know a lot of wise guys who would exploit this in a way that we're not even going to talk about.

Media Matters breaks down how many errors O'Reilly commits with his rants.

 . . . in his rush to condemn the new policy, he overlooked a few important facts about the directive and what it means to be transgender:

1. Gender Identity Is Innate And Largely Inflexible, Even In Young Children. As the MA directive explains, children who identify as transgender are typically responding to an "innate, largely inflexible" characteristic of their personality - not a random or casual "lifestyle" choice . . . This position is supported by experts at the American Psychological Association (APA).

 2. Students Aren't Allowed To Casually Change Their Gender Identity. The MA directive also establishes that schools should only accept the assertion of a student's gender identity when there is "consistent and uniform assertion of the gender-related identity"

3. Ignoring A Student's Gender Identity Is A Bad Idea. Allowing schools to acknowledge the appropriate gender identity of transgender students is an important step in protecting transgender youth from a host of negative consequences. Studies show that unwelcoming environments do serious damage to transgender youth, and simply refusing to acknowledge transgender children has been discouraged by medical experts. Instead, the APA encourages schools to provide support to vulnerable LGBT youth. This is especially true considering the "extreme harassment" already faced by many transgender students.

4. It's Dangerous To Inform Parents About Their Child's Gender Identity Without The Child's Consent. As the MA directive explains, allowing teachers to reveal their students' transgender status to their parents without permission is a terrible idea.

 5. Schools Are Allowed To Question A Student's Gender Identity In Appropriate Circumstances. The MA directive also instructs school staff to question a student's gender identity in the highly unlikely circumstance that a student claims to be transgender for inappropriate reasons, like "wise guys" trying to get into the girls' locker room. 

I don't care whether you are a reporter or a blowhard commentator like O'Reilly, when millions of people count on you for news and views, you have a responsibility to do the proper research in order to inform them correctly.  There is just simply no excuse for spreading misinformation even if you couch your errors as simply being your opinion.

But sadly, there is no accountability for O'Reilly and others who get paid megabucks for lazy journalism

In the early 1980s, a Washington Post reporter, Janet Cooke, was drummed out of the business after she admitted to making up a story about an eight-year-old heroin addict. To this day, she doesn't write for any newspaper.

If Cooke had committed her lie in this era of irresponsible journalism, she would probably end up not only still in the business but making more money than those who do abide by the standards of good journalism.


'NOM spokesperson uses Tyler Clementi's suicide against lgbts' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

NOM’s Morse Uses Tyler Clementi's Suicide To Discuss Exploitation Of "Confused" Adolescents By Gay Activists - Dear Bryan Fischer, move out of the way because Jennifer Morse has now taken your place as the top religious right embarrassment. 

 American Christian Legal Group Exports Anti-LGBT Agenda To Brazil - For those who laugh at Pat Robertson's televised verbal antics, keep this in mind - he is the founder of an anti-gay "Christian legal group" which has a presence in Africa and Eastern Europe. And it has now moved into Brazil.  

Family Research Council: Transgender People Need Therapy, Not Nondiscrimination Protections - I would absolutely KILL, I said KILL to hear an interviewer ask  FRC's Peter Sprigg for his credentials before he/she lets him go on his homophobic monologue. The man has none. He is not a medical professional so why he is labeled as an expert? 

NY state senator Rubén Díaz bussing crowds to NOM's #marchformarriage - Great. More people to be bussed to NOM's March for Marriage.  

Over 100 Prominent Republicans Have Signed Brief Supporting Same-Sex Marriage - And the list grows.

 Camenker: Educators Who Support LGBT-Inclusive Schools Like 'Nazi Concentration Camp Guards' - The hyperbole! Oh Lord, the hyperbole!

Jennifer Morse - bad for NOM, good for the lgbt community

Last night, the Illinois House committee advanced the marriage equality bill to the full House for a vote. This came after much testimony for and against the bill. One of the folks testifying was Jennifer Morse of NOM's Ruth Institute. From what I gleaned from twitter, her testimony was bizarre and she was cut off because she went over her time. But more than that, the idea that Morse would be chosen by NOM to testify isn't a good sign. She has a history of outrageous statements. I've covered several of them and thanks to Equality Matters, here are two more: She compared supporting marriage equality to Nazism:

 

And then comes this clip, which is not necessarily lgbt indigenous but does give an idea of how cold-hearted she is. In this clip, she is telling women facing unwanted pregnancies to "suck it up."

 

Jennifer Morse is a terrible person, but she is exactly the type of person the lgbt community needs to be on the forefront of the opposition. She makes our job easier.

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Republican case FOR marriage equality explained

While the religious right have been silent - no doubt in shock - over the news that over 75 prominent Republicans signed on to a brief asking the Supreme Court to overturn Prop 8, the Republicans in question haven't been so silent. The following is a New York Times interview with one of the Republicans, Margaret Hoover:


Hat tip to Jeremy Hooper.

'NOM puts its hypocrisy on full display' and other Tuesday midday news brief

The National Organization for Marriage takes the cake with this nonsense:


Perhaps the denizens of NOM are living in a bizarro universe because the following statements have not come from supporters of "gay marriage" (marriage equality):

"The idea of same-sex marriage is troubling even to some homosexuals, let alone those who hold a biblical conviction that marriage is intended by the Creator to be between a man and a woman. . . Every time Western civilization seems to reach the bottom, one discovers a new low even farther down the pit. If Western populations don’t wake up, before long they will find themselves all the way in the Lake of Fire with the devil laughing his head off". - Michael Youssef, televangelist

"This is a really pernicious lie of Satan to say that the gender part of humanity doesn’t really matter because the gender part of humanity is really denying the distinct God imaging in each of us as males and females. We need to understand that as Christians. That’s the biggest thing. The other is that, ‘you know kids don’t really need a mom and a dad they just need any configuration of loving adults who care for them,’ in fact, and this has already been in the case, we all know about what hate speech is, the fact of saying a child needs a mother and a father will be deemed hate speech because that is a statement against same-sex marriage and parenting." - Glenn T. Stanton, Focus on the Family

"We need to remember that in the time leading up to the Flood what the rabbis teach about the last straw for God before He brought the Flood was when they started writing wedding songs to homosexual marriage and Jesus said that you’ll know the End Times because it will be like the days of Noah. There’s never been a time in the history of the world since before the Flood when homosexual marriage has been open and celebrated, and that’s another sign that I believe that we’re close to the end." - Scott Lively (Editor's note - there is NO verse in the Bible which validates Lively's assertions regarding marriage equality songs and Noah's flood). 
In other news: 

Scores Of Republicans Sign Legal Brief Supporting Gay Marriage Ahead Of Supreme Court Argument - This story practically blew up my twitter and facebook last night. For that reason, it needs a repeat for those who haven't heard about it yet.

 If you're going to DC to counter NOM's marriage march… - Be forewarned. IF you are going to DC to counter NOM's march, the organization will attempt to goad you into acting foolish so they can catch it on film. They admit it. DO NOT ALLOW THEM TO DO THIS!

Student Suspended For Participating In ‘Day Of Silence’ Sues School - Oh this is gonna be good!

Fischer: 'There Is No Right to Engage in Immoral Behavior' - Bryan Fischer is talking about sex again. Whoop te do.

TWO Slams Quack Therapist Christopher Doyle For SPLC Hit Piece In The Christian Post - SPLC is really getting on the nerves of the anti-gay industry. Good!

Homophobe's plan for 'pro-family' victory involves shutting down gays

Lively
One has to give anti-gay activist Scott Lively points for chutzpah.

After spending the longest time attempting to deny his involvement in how Uganda created it's "Kill the Gay" bill, Lively is now peddling the same mindset which led to the bill's creation.

In a recent issue of World Net Daily, Lively advances what he calls a theory which will ensure a "pro-family" victory. It's actually a repeat of what he wrote to Russia in 2007.

Are you ready for two of his suggestions? :

1.  . . . begin training doctors, psychologists and therapists in the techniques of helping homosexuals to recover, and offer this therapy as a public service. Promote recovery for homosexuals in public advertising and reach out to young people who may suffer from same-sex attraction. Catch it early and spare these youths a lifetime of pain and suffering. Importantly, if Russian authorities publicly promote recovery for homosexuals, the “gays” will not be able to deceive the public with their “born the way” propaganda.
2.   . . .  criminalize the public advocacy of homosexuality. My philosophy is to leave homosexuals alone if they keep their lifestyle private, and not to force them into therapy if they don’t want it. However, homosexuality is destructive to individuals and to society and it should never publicly promoted. The easiest way to discourage “gay pride” parades and other homosexual advocacy is to make such activity illegal in the interest of public health and morality. 

In other words, leave gays alone. Just pass laws which make it absolutely impossible for them to function other than clandestine sexual encounters in bathrooms, rest stops, etc.  Destroy their ability to function openly in society, have public relationships, and families. Make their lives so intolerable that while you are not forcing them to seek ex-gay therapy per se, you are manipulating them in that direction. 

That's the most brazenly dishonest idea I've heard since Romney's desire for undocumented immigrants to choose "self-deportation."

This madness will never happen. But let's ask ourselves something. With all of the "Don't Say Gay" bills lurking about in state legislatures, the constant attacks by organizations like the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage, and the attempts to allow discriminatory behavior under the guise of "religious liberty," one wonders whether or not other religious right figures and supporters are a step ahead of Lively in the idea of making the lives of gays so intolerable that we practically trip over ourselves to rush into "ex-gay" therapy.

Monday, February 25, 2013

Family Research Council pushes meanspirited video against marriage equality, gay families



If you want to see all of the inane arguments against marriage equality wrapped up in one video, check out the above monstrosity from the Family Research Council.

It is a four minute rush of almost every anti-gay point, every anecdotal horror story, and every lame argument against marriage equality.

The gist of the video is that homosexuality is a "behavior" therefore marriage equality contributes nothing to society. The video compares marriage equality to dealing drugs.

The video basically makes the following points, which I took the liberty to refute in parentheses.

Heterosexual marriage supposedly:

Creates children (Because in the world of the Family Research Council, gays and lesbians cannot create children. Apparently our "parts don't fit"),

Best raises children (That is if one ignores the millions of gay households raising children in this country as well as worldwide),

Protects women (Except for the wives who get beat up by their husbands),

Civilizes men (Except for the husbands who treat their wives like punching bags),

And lowers crime, poverty, and welfare, which reduces government spending and deficits (which is really a reason to support marriage equality if you think about it).


On the other hand, marriage equality:

Validates sex partners (Because married heterosexual couples don't have sex. If you think I'm wrong, ask Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage, his wife and their multitude of children which they got from a cabbage patch in their backyard.),

Harms children by supposedly denying them a mother and a father (Because apparently a household with two fathers or two mothers is spooky),

Schools will subject children to "mandatory homosexual curricula" (Because apparently children in gay households don't attend public schools and if they do, who cares about letting them read reports about their families anyway. After all, they are inferior.),

Business and taxes will fund homosexual relationships (Because we all know that gays and lesbians don't own businesses and are exempt from paying taxes),

Freedom of religion and speech are gagged (Didn't they say this about lgbt-inclusive hate crimes legislation? Generally non-discrimination laws have less to do with marriage equality and more to do with fairness and taxes. An adoption agency receiving tax monies should not have the right to discriminate, regardless of which religion it serves).

This video is a colossal error on the part of the Family Research Council in that is provides arguments easier to poke through than Kleenex.

And more than that, the video comes across as just plain mean. It's dripping with a lot of naked animus towards same-sex couples and their families.

For one thing, it deliberately ignores the reality that children are raised in same-sex households. To me, implying that a child's family is nonexistent or inferior is more harmful than being raised in a same-sex household.

In addition, the video implies that gay couples know nothing about stability and fidelity. Maybe FRC should remember Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin, who after 55 years together were married in 2008 in California before Prop 8 was passed.

Or Edie Windor, who is seeking dignity for her over 40 year relationship with her late partner, Thea Spyer, by attempting to overturn DOMA.

And the thousands of couples in the states which passed marriage equality laws who stood in line in joyous celebration, tears, and accompanied by their children and family who were happy that finally their relationships were being treated with validity and respect.

But we all know that FRC won't do these things.  The group is too busy creating caste systems for God.

All I can say is keep it up, FRC.  If you keep showing America what you really think of same-sex couples and their families in such nakedly ugly details, we will receive marriage equality in practically no time at all.

'Gay self-acceptance compared to a roach motel' and other Monday midday news briefs


This unbelievably nasty tweet by so-called "ex-gay" activist Linda Jernigan is a prime of example of why I started this blog. Regardless of what folks like Jernigan say about them being 'Christian' and the lgbt community being bullies the opposite is true. My advice to my fellow lgbt brothers and sisters and our allies not to slam them with profanity on the Internet or anywhere else. USE these people. USE their words. SHOW people what they say. TELL people what they say. They are their own worst enemies and our best weapon for lgbt equality.

'Ex-gay' Linda Jernigan compares gay people's self-acceptance to a roach motel commercial - More details about Jernigan and that awful statement. I wonder will she be speaking at the NOM/FRC rally.

U.K.’s Top Cardinal Resigns Amid Sexual Harassment Complaints From Priests - And of course he is anti-gay. And guess how far back these allegations go?

Kansas Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Same-Sex Adoption - I do love Kansas.

Texas Republicans Threaten Funding For Schools With Pro-LGBT Policies - Let them try.

Harvey: Gay 'Deception' Going Global - Linda Harvey is yet another example of what I'm talking about. USE the liars. Their words are our weapons against them.

Family Research Council resurrects old claim attacking same-sex families



For whatever reason, the Family Research Council has decided to resurrect the distortive story of supposedly what will happen if marriage equality is declared legal throughout the country, i.e. children will be "taught" about homosexuality.

Those who are familiar with how the right distorts this claim should know just who are the stars of the above video - two families from Massachusetts, the Parkers and the Wirthlins.

In 2005, the Wirthlins were supposedly upset that their child was read a story about a prince who marries another prince (instead of the customary stories of a young girl and her grandmother being eaten by a wolf or two children being abandoned by their parents in the forest and nearly cannibalized by a witch).

And the Parkers are really special. In 2005, the father, David Parker, was arrested for not leaving his son's school.  He claimed that he wanted some type of parental notice which would exclude his child from discussions of gay families, even if those discussions happened by accident. However, there are some (this author included) who believed that Parker had conspired with a local anti-gay group (Mass Resistance) to blow the entire incident out of proportion.

Both families sued the schools, claiming that parents had the right to opt out their children when lessons like these were taught. And they lost in front of the Supreme Court, who found that while Massachusetts did have a law allowing parents to opt their children out of lessons regarding human sexuality, learning about different families is not a lesson about human sexuality.

However, the story didn't die. The National Organization for Marriage used the Parkers and Wirthlins in its successful attempt to pass Prop 8 in California. And the families were used in ads last year in Maryland, Maine, Washington state, and Minnesota - all failing efforts by the way.

This particular video starring Parker and Wirthlins runs like a conversation with FRC head Tony Perkins. However, I think it fails. Other than the ominous music and the fake tears at the end from Parker and his wife, I think the viewer will wonder what exactly is the problem.

If anything, the video makes the Parkers and Wirthlins look clueless and bigoted. While FRC tries to make the video seem like homosexuality will be "taught" to children as if this would be a calamity, the Parkers and Wirthlins freely admit that they object their children knowing about same-sex households.

And therein lies the difference. It is the reason why both families lost their lawsuit in court. Learning about different families has nothing to do with human sexuality. According to the Seattle Times, who wrote about an ad featuring the Parkers and the Wirthlins last year:

In reality, in classrooms across the state and the country, teachers are already having conversations with children about different kinds of families — those of mixed race or religion, or those headed by single parents, grandparents, two moms or two dads.

And lessons about families are already part of the grade-level requirements for first-graders in Washington schools — the idea being that it helps prepare them to function as citizens in a diverse society.

But those requirements say nothing about any kind of marriage, and schools typically don't raise the subject — in deference to students who come from homes where the adults may not be married. Perhaps more importantly, there's no direct link between school curricula and same-sex-marriage laws . . .

And while the video focuses on the Parkers' children - making free use of footage showing them playing and walking with their parents  - this footage again undercuts the message FRC tries to present because the actual message it is saying is that same-sex households and the children who live in those households are somehow inferior and should not be type of respect that two-parent heterosexual households are given.

No doubt, FRC will sway the minds of those who are already in its camp, but that's a given.  If the group was attempting to win over new converts to its side, then it will fail miserably. All in all, the video is archaic and the Wirthlins and Parkers come across as mean-spirited and selfish people determined to push second-class status on families who are not like their own.

Friday, February 22, 2013

Know Your LGBT History - WKRP in Cincinnati: 'Les on a Ledge'


WKRP in Cincinnati _ Les On A Ledge by hulu

As seen by this 1978 episode of WKRP in Cincinnati, members of the transgender community and the idea that someone would attempt suicide after being called gay were funny topics once upon a time without hardly any reprisal.  Not so much today.

While we continue to do the work to gain equality, let's never forget how far we have come or where we have come from.

Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

'NOM teams up with anti-gay hate group for march' and other Friday midday news briefs

NOM joins forces with Family Research Council, undeniable anti-LGBT animus - The era of the Maggie Gallagher passive-aggressive homophobia is officially over for the National Organization for Marriage. And let's not forget one of the many statements made by FRC about lgbts:



Philly Archbishop To Bus Parishioners To NOM Hate March On SCOTUS - And unfortunately, some members of the Catholic Church will be busing people in.

And what are we doing to counter it? This, which I fully support!
 
Pope Benedict XVI Resigned Partly Because Of Powerful Vatican Gay Lobby, Italian Paper Claims - I definitely missed the memo from national headquarters on this one. 

 Scott Lively Finds More 'Proof' That Obama is Gay, Having an Affair with Reggie Love - That Scott Lively! Always good for a laugh!