More Monday Male Beauty

White House Endorses Unlimited Liability Cap For Oil Spillers

I guess it's a case of better late than never, but I cannot fathom why the White House did not get on board with removing the liability cap on oil spills a month ago or more. Oil well drilling - whether onshore or offshore - is an inherently dangerous activities which ought to face a strict liability standard. Even when evidence of negligence, possible false application statements, and sacrifices of safety to save money are not involved. Having been in Key West last week and lived on the Gulf Coast of Alabama, it makes me nauseated to think of the environmental damage that has occurred - not to mention what may yet occur. I am still dumbfounded, however, as to why the White House seems to be allowing BP to call the shots rather than the other way around. It still seems to me that destroying the well a month ago wasn't pursued - oh, I forgot, BP doesn't want to lose the well, even if it destroys the entire Gulf of Mexico. Here are highlights from Huffington Post on this belated move by Obama:
*
Democrats in Congress and officials in the White House are making yet another major push to pass legislation to make the liability for oil companies involved in damaging spills unlimited.
*
On Monday evening, the White House confirmed that it favors the most recent piece of legislation that would drop any numerical ceiling to the amount of money an oil company like BP would have to pay for economic damages caused by a spill. Currently, the cap is $75 million.
*
"The president supports removing caps on liability for oil companies engaged in offshore drilling," said spokesman Ben LaBolt. "Oil companies should have every incentive to maximize safety and arbitrary caps on liability create a disincentive to achieve that goal."
*
So far, votes to raise the liability cap -- first to $10 billion and then unlimited -- have failed to pass via unanimous consent in the Senate. But now, congressional negotiators are planning alternative legislative routes. On Wednesday, Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), the author of the liability-cap-raising bill, is set to testify before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works about his proposal.

Optima Health - A Health Insurer that Discriminates Against Same Sex Couples

It is only within the last couple of years that Virginia law has allowed employers to offer health insurance benefits to domestic partners of their employees. Sadly, even though the Virginia General Assembly has finally enacted legislation that allows employers - both large and small - to offer health care coverage to the domestic partners of their employees (it was the last state in the USA to do so), many health insurance providers continue to discriminate against same sex couples. A case in point is Optima Health - an affiliate of Sentara Health Care Systems which has a near monopoly in hospital care facilities in the Hampton Roads of Virginia. Yes, it's true that on the Virginia Peninsula Riverside Health Systems has dodged a Sentara take over so far, as has Chesapeake General Hospital and two Catholic owned hospitals in the region.

*

Obviously, the disingenousness of the Optima Health logo above is obvious if your business is a gay owned business or employs partnered gays as employees (i.e., like my business). In that case, one is SOL unless your company has over 100 employees. That's right, Optima does not offer coverage to partners of covered employees of businesses in small group plans. While individual policies for non-covered domestic partners may be available, they typically (1) cost considerably more and (2) have significantly inferior coverage. Personally, I find this situation outrageous.

*

I urge readers who believe that Optima's discriminatory practices need to go to contact Optima via one of the following avenues (locals also have the option of patronizing a non-Sentara controlled hospital until such time as Optima's anti-gay discrimination ends):
*
Optima Health
4417 Corporation Lane
Virginia Beach, VA 23462
Main number: (757) 552-7401
*
Carol Via Flynn
Corporate Director
Marketing & Communications
cavia@sentara.com

*
Emma Inman, APR
Director, Corporate Communications
eainman@sentara.com

*
Becky Lawson, APR
Corporate Communications Consultant
rrlawson@sentara.com

The Tone Deaf Catholic Hierarchy

I have commented at length on the inability of the Catholic Church hierarchy to grasp the public reaction to the sexual abuse scandal. These bitter old men in dresses just don't get it. Probably in part because they are celibate and have never children of their own. Nonetheless, one can only be shocked at the obtuseness of the hierarchy when you see a photo like the one above which comes from the cover of Vermont Catholic. Given what's exploding all around the world in the sexual abuse scandal, WHY would anyone place a photo of a young man with his face bowed to the crotch of a bishop? Whoever is handling Church PR needs to be shot.

*

Celibacy needs to go NOW and a full housecleaning of the Church hierarchy is needed NOW.

Children of Lesbians May Do Better Than Their Peers

The professional Christian set and Bible beaters time and time again disseminate self-serving and often totally unfounded arguments that two gay parents cannot provide as good of home for children as their heterosexual counterparts. Now, Time magazine has an article on a new study that documents that lesbian parents may out perform straight couple parents. Yep, that's right. Grab a raincoat so that you don't get drench with all the spittle flying from Christianist organizations like Family Research Council and Concern Women [Bitches] for America. Of course these organizations which continue to cite works of Paul Cameron who was discredited 25 years ago are whining that the study is flawed because gay related organizations helped fund it. Talk about a double standard! Here are some highlights from the Time article:
*
The teen years are never the easiest for any family to navigate. But could they be even more challenging for children and parents in households headed by gay parents? That is the question researchers explored in the first study ever to track children raised by lesbian parents, from birth to adolescence.
*
For their new study, published on Monday in the journal Pediatrics, researchers Nanette Gartrell, a professor of psychiatry at the University of California at San Francisco (and a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles), and Henry Bos, a behavioral scientist at the University of Amsterdam, focused on what they call planned lesbian families — households in which the mothers identified themselves as lesbian at the time of artificial insemination.
*
The authors found that children raised by lesbian mothers — whether the mother was partnered or single — scored very similarly to children raised by heterosexual parents on measures of development and social behavior. These findings were expected, the authors said; however, they were surprised to discover that children in lesbian homes scored higher than kids in straight families on some psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, did better academically and were less likely to have behavioral problems, such as rule-breaking and aggression.
*
Not surprisingly, the researchers found that 41% of children reported having endured some teasing, ostracism or discrimination related to their being raised by same-sex parents. But Gartrell and Bos could find no differences on psychological adjustment tests between the children and those in a group of matched controls. At age 10, children reporting discrimination did exhibit more signs of psychological stress than their peers, but by age 17, the feelings had dissipated.
*
Because their children are more likely to experience discrimination and stigmatization as a result of their family circumstances, these mothers can be more likely to broach complicated topics, such as sexuality and diversity and tolerance, with their children early on. Having such a foundation may help to give these children more confidence and maturity in dealing with social differences and prejudices as they get older.
*
Gartrell hopes to test some of these theories with additional studies. She is also hoping to collect more data on gay-father households; gay fatherhood is less common than lesbian motherhood because of the high costs of surrogacy or adoption that gay couples face in order to start a family.

Monday Male Beauty

Gay Exorcisms and Religious Based Child Abuse

I have long viewed parental efforts to “pray away the gay” through “ex-gay” ministries or exorcisms as for minor children a form of child abuse. While I myself tried to pray away the gay during my closeted years, no one ever tried to forcibly turn me straight and, even if I had shared my unacknowledged orientation with my parents, I doubt that they would have resorted to the crazy practices of the ex-gay myth crowd. Now, Details - has an article that looks at the real life experiences of a man who was subjected to repeated exorcism attempts to drive out the “demons” that were said to be causing him to be gay. I have known several guys who have been through similar experiences and it seriously scarred them emotionally and psychologically – something that can years of therapy to overcome, if at all. I fully agree with Jack Dresher, M.D., that parents who subject minor children to such “cure” programs and exorcisms ought to be criminally prosecuted for child abuse. Here are some story highlights:

*
The prophet had come up from Georgia. She stood at the front of the Holy Ghost Temple Church and called for parishioners to come forward. On this Sunday in February, roughly 100 worshippers filled the white-walled Pentecostal sanctuary that sits on a wooded hill beside a BMW dealership. Among them was 20-year-old Kevin Robinson. He stepped out from his pew, walked up the lavender carpet, and joined the line in front of the prophet. He wanted to be prayed over, as is common in the Pentecostal tradition, by this powerful preacher. In the eyes of believers such as Kevin, a prophet speaks the very word of God and can divine the future.Yes, Kevin repeated, he was gay.

*
"You need to be delivered from homosexuality," the prophet said into a microphone so that all the church could hear. Kevin was embarrassed, but he stayed put. This was no normal preacher—she spoke God's truth. According to church dogma, homosexuality is a sin foisted on humans by demons who take possession of their bodies and compel them to act against God's will. These evil spirits can be exorcised by those trained in spiritual warfare in a ritual known among Pentecostal Christians as deliverance. Perhaps, Kevin thought, this prophet could finally deliver him from his demons.

*
The prophet placed her hands on Kevin and began to pray over him. "Come out, come out!" she shouted. "In the name of Jesus, I command you to come out! You gonna free him right now!"
Kevin closed his eyes, thinking to himself, "There's something wrong with me; I need to change." A part of him believed this prophet could do what no one else had been able to do during previous deliverance attempts—make him heterosexual. But the prophet was loud and she looked at him with disgust and contempt as her chants became more and more belligerent. Even now Kevin can't bring himself to repeat the most hurtful things she said. He soon began to cry.

*

And then, with the prophet still exhorting the demons in him to depart, he blacked out and collapsed. When he regained consciousness, he stood up and returned to his seat. His shame was turning to rage. He searched his mind and thoughts and found he was unchanged—he was still attracted to men. In the past it had been family members—his mother, his aunt, or his uncle, the church's pastor—who performed deliverance on him. This time it was a stranger, and she had pushed him beyond the breaking point. Never again, he decided, would he allow himself to be treated this way.

*
It's impossible to know how many young gay people have undergone exorcism in the thousands of Pentecostal and Evangelical churches across the country—not all of which, to be sure, condone the practice. However, youth workers say they regularly deal with the aftermath of these rituals. And not just in the parts of the country where Evangelical Christianity is traditionally strong. Kevin Robinson's church is located in West Springfield, Massachusetts, just across the border from Connecticut, where he lives—gay marriage is legal in both states.

*
Many of those who undergo gay deliverance are minors, and critics like Herrington and Toscano question whether child abuse is taking place. "For a young person, being told that you house evil, that you're basically a mobile home for evil spirits—that is a very, very damaging concept," says Toscano. "It's one of the most extreme manifestations of the anti-gay rhetoric within the church."Prosecutors and child-welfare agencies are reluctant to interfere in any religious ritual, given the protection afforded by the First Amendment. . . . Jack Drescher, an associate professor of clinical psychiatry at New York Medical College and an expert in sexual orientation, points out that there may be precedent for authorities to intercede. "Some courts have determined that Christian Scientists who withhold mainstream medical treatments from their children for religious reasons may be found criminally negligent if the child dies," Drescher says. "So all religious activities are not protected if they cause harm to children."

*

During the six-month stay in the state psychiatric hospital for children that followed, Kevin joined a support group that made him feel more at peace with his sexuality. When he was discharged, he decided to get his own apartment and enroll in college. He now lives alone in a sparsely furnished walk-up in Windsor Locks, Connecticut. Kevin loves singing and he's studying music and voice as a freshman at Manchester Community College, where he is out to his classmates. . . . I ask Kevin if he is now 100 percent sure that being gay is not a sin. “Not 100 percent," he says. "It'll always be in the back of my mind.

New Polls Shows Tea Party Members to be Homophobic and Racist

A new poll confirms that like, the majority of Christianists, the majority of the “true” Tea Party crowd are homophobic and racists. It’s a theme that has long been visible if one follows the websites of “pro-family” and professional “Christian” organizations such as Family Research Council, American Family Association, etc.: gays are to be kept stigmatized (and preferably criminalized) to the fullest extent possible and, in their view, the USA should only belong to white conservative Christians. All others are unwelcome and should be deported from the country. This theme was evident in the hate filled rallies with Sarah Palin during the 2008 campaign, but the mindset has been a common thread long before that amongst the Christian Right, which is neither right nor Christian. Here are some highlights from the Huffington Post on the poll results which ought to send a chill through all minorities in this country:
*
A University of Washington poll finds that a majority of "true" Tea Party supporters say it's not the responsibility of government to guarantee equal rights to African Americans and other minorities.
*
According to the survey, 74% of Tea Party supporters say they agree with the following statement: "While equal opportunity for blacks and minorities to succeed is important, it's not really the government's job to guarantee it."
*
Fifty-two percent of respondents also said that "compared to the size of their group, lesbians and gays have too much political power."
*
Other noteworthy findings from the University of Washington poll include:
*

88% of Tea Party supporters approve of the controversial immigration law recently enacted in Arizona.
*

Only 18% of those surveyed say gay and lesbian couples should have the legal right to marry.
*

73% of Tea Party backers disapprove of President Obama's policy of engaging with Muslim countries.
*

Almost half of the respondents believe "if blacks would only try harder, they would be just as well off as whites."

Florida AG Hired George "Rentboy" Rekers Despite Staffer Warnings

As if the George "Rentboy Lover" Rekers scandal wasn't salacious enough, the scandal continues to wrap its tentacles around Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum who is running for Governor. As the Miami Herald is reporting, McCollum hired Rekers as an expert witness even though staffers told him the Rekers was a crackpot. Plus, McCollom paid Rekers twice as much as what his contract specified. Was McCollum trying to kiss up to the Christianists or was something more going on. As the saga continues to unfold, Rekers' rentboy comes across as far more honorable and with more integrity than Mr. McCollum. Indeed, the herald's secondary headline reads "State documents show attorney general Bill McCollum hired an anti-gay witness and paid the expert witness double his contract with no questions asked." Obviously, plenty of questions are now being asked of McCollum. Here are some highlights from the Herald story:
*
TALLAHASSEE -- Disgraced psychologist George Rekers was labeled a ``right-wing, religious-based'' expert witness and rejected for months by state attorneys defending Florida's gay adoption ban.
*
But when they couldn't find anyone else to replace him on the witness stand, Attorney General Bill McCollum overruled his trial attorneys, quickly hired Rekers, and paid him twice his agreed upon contract with no questions asked, according to documents released this week by McCollum's office.
*
[R]ecords obtained by The Miami Herald and St. Petersburg Times, show that despite repeated objections from the Department of Children and Families, the attorney general agreed to advance Rekers $60,900 to get him to take the case and another $59,700 a year later as the case dragged on.
*
The payments included $9,000 for 30 hours of searching journal articles and books, $27,000 to ``read the relevant publications since Sept. 2004 and evaluate and critique the methodological quality.'' A year later, he charged for nearly 30 hours for reading the same materials again.
*
Hannah said Rekers asked for the money up front so that his fees would not be contested, as had happened in previous cases in which he testified. But the attorney general had to find a creative way to get the money to him. ``Our finance folks said the only way to do that is through a purchase order,'' Hannah said. The hiring of Rekers and other expert witnesses became a top priority of the attorney general's office shortly after they took over the case.

Confessions of a Former "Fixer" for the Catholic Church

I'm not exactly sure why my Google search agents did not pick up this story sooner, but nevertheless a several sites - including a U.S. based law firm, CBC Radio, a long running atheist news site and iNewsP.com - all have coverage of statements by a former Benedictine priest whose prior mission was to clean up the messy details of sexual abuse scandals from parish to parish. CBC Radio has an interview with the former priest, Patric Wall, where he discusses his former mission before deciding to leave the priesthood. He now serves as a consultant to California law firm. Here's the CBC Radio synopsis of the show featuring Wall:
*
Bishop's Man - Patrick Wall
*
For almost a decade, Patrick Wall played a special role in the Roman Catholic Church. A priest and a Benedictine Monk... he was also what's known as a "Fixer." He would be parachuted into a parish in the aftermath of allegations of sexual abuse. His job was to right the situation. And quickly, he became adept at making scandals go away.
*
But over time, Patrick Wall became conflicted about the role he was playing. Eventually, his concerns pushed him to leave the Priesthood. Now, Patrick Wall spends his days helping people who have been abused by Church officials. He's a legal consultant and a Canon Lawyer with the U.S. law firm Manly and Stewart. He's also the author of Sex, Priests and Secret Codes: The Catholic Church's 2000-Year Paper Trail of Sexual Abuse. Patrick Wall was in Los Angeles.
*

Does any of this surprise me? Unfortunately, not in the least and what Wall was charged with doing was very much along the lines of what Cardinal Egan, former Archbishop of New York, and Thomas Daly, former Bishop of Brooklyn and Supreme Chaplin for the Knights of Columbus, did while stationed in the Boston Archdiocese: threaten, intimidate and pay hush money to victims and their families to keep them quiet. The Church's reputation came first and foremost and to hell with the molested children and youths. iNEWSP's article contains the following passages:

*
Figures from the John Jay School of Criminal Justice, for example, estimate that since 1950, about 280,000 children have been sexually abused by Catholic Clergy and deacons. With the shame and denial that accompany sexual abuse, the real number must be much higher.
*
Worse, this is NOT just a recent phenomenon. Father Thomas Doyle, a priest, and Richard Sipes and Patrick Wall, former monks, have written that the Catholic Church has recognized the problem of abuse by priests for 2,000 years. Their book, Sex, Priests and Secret Codes: The Catholic Church’s 2000 Year Paper Trail of Sexual Abuse (Volt Press, 2006) was based on the Church’s own documents.
*
And far from being the case of a few bad apples, Brooks Egerton and Reese Dunklin have reported that two-thirds of sitting US Bishops have been accused of moving pedophile priests to new assignments.[Dallas Morning News June 12, 2002] It is not the apples that are bad, it’s the barrel.
*
The consistent abuse of children by priests is not a peripheral facet of the Catholic Church; it is the logical consequence of an entrenched male hierarchy’s inbred sense of its own privilege. Of course such behavior is the antithesis of the high ideals Jesus taught. But that is another way of saying that the Catholic Church has too often become the mortal enemy of those high ideals that are the Church’s only justification for existing.
*
As for Wall's actions while serving as a "fixer,", here are some passages from the CBC Radio interview as reported by The Free Thinker:
*
It was a job he did for almost a decade. He said that protecting the Church was paramount and that little or no concern was ever shown for the victims.
*
Victims were regarded as a liability – a huge financial liability – and a big problem.Asked whether he ever considered reporting abuse to the police or child protection services, Wall said “never”.
*
It was always about keeping the problem in-house and dealing with it in-house … it has been for centuries. The solution was always to move an abusive priest on, and to keep lay members in the dark with “pious answers” when they questioned the sudden disappearance of a priest from their parish, he said.
*
You can listen to the broadcast here.

Sunday Male Beauty

Farewell to Key West

This morning the boyfriend and I are saying farewell to Key West - at least for now - and heading back to the Hampton/Norfolk area. It has been a great trip and very relaxing. The resort where we have been staying, The Oasis, is filling up to capacity as Key West Pride approaches next week and obviously, we wish we could stay longer. As has been the case with past visits, we have met a number of great guys here at the guest house, including a couple from Richmond, Virginia. Like the boyfriend and I, they talk of one day leaving anti-gay Virginia for a more welcoming place to retire.

*

For anyone who has never visited Key West, I recommend it highly. The laid back, live and let live attitude is wonderful. So is the natural beauty of the island and the surrounding area. We'll be back again - of that I'm certain. Provided we get home on schedule, I will post this evening.

More Saturday Male Beauty

2nd District GOP Contenders Target Ken Cuccinelli Want to Be Scott Ridgell

I've previously written about Scott Rigell - who I suspect is a Ken Cuccinelli clone trying to campaign as a "moderate" - as he attempts to buy the GOP nomination for Virginia's 2nd Congressional District with his own personal wealth. Rigell is in a six way contest with only one gay friendly candidate, Jessica Sandlin (pictured at left and who I will vote for), in the fray. Also in the contest are a tea party candidate and far right extremists of the type one would expect to find in Mississippi or Alabama. With the primary on Tuesday, June 8, 2010, the rhetoric is heating up and the ultra far right contenders are in a feeding frenzy going after Rigell. Actually, it's something that's fun to watch and I personally hope that Rigell doesn't win. If he does prevail, many will by default support incumbent Glenn Nye rather than see a Cuccinelli clone go to Washington. The fact that Rigell is supported by Bob McDonnell and Eric Cantor ought to frighten voters. It is critical that all registered voters vote on Tuesday and stop Rigell - anyone can vote in the GOP primary since voters do NOT register by party in Virginia. Here are some highlights from the Virginian Pilot on the free for all:

*

With the Republican primary in the 2nd District days away, several of the six candidates are stepping up efforts to weaken the contender who has the biggest bank account and the backing of state party leaders.
*
In mailings, radio spots, Internet videos and speeches, their focus is Scott Rigell, founder of Freedom Automotive, whose $1 million-plus campaign - funded in part by more than $600,000 of his own money - far exceeds the combined expenditures of the other candidates.
*
Rigell has the support of Gov. Bob McDonnell, Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling and U.S. Rep. Eric Cantor, the House whip.
*
"We're really trying to take a bunch of dings at Scott Rigell because his hope is to float above the five of us like we're all fighting against him," candidate Ed Maulbeck said during a debate Thursday on 1650 WHFT-AM. "We need to basically destroy him as a group."
*
All voters in the district, which includes Virginia Beach, the Eastern Shore and parts of Norfolk and Hampton, can participate in the primary Tuesday. The winner will take on U.S. Rep. Glenn Nye, a first-term Virginia Beach Democrat, and independent Kenny Golden in the November general election.
*
Rigell, who has been critical of the federal economic stimulus plan, said he participated in the Cash for Clunkers program because if he hadn't, customers would have bought cars from his competitors and his employees would have suffered. His business sold 107 cars under the program, he said.

LGBT Community Needs New Rules for Democrats

This past Thursday I was asked to consider joining the local Democratic City Committee as a voice of the LGBT community. In addition, I was asked to attend an event on this coming Tuesday evening where the state party leadership will be in attendance. I accepted the invitation with a warning that I am none too happy with the Democrats and, in fact, am an advocate for the "Don't Ask, Don't Give" campaign. I asked are you sure you want to hear what I've got to say, because the Democratic leadership probably isn't going to like what I have to say. On issues ranging from DADT repeal to employment non-discrimination protections, Democrats give plenty of lip service in terms of supporting full legal equality for LGBT citizens, but fall miles short on delivering real action. The sell-out DADT repeal compromise that might not even pass the U.S. Senate is a perfect example of nice talk but only less than half measure action. Ironically, Act on Principles has a new post on what the LGBT community needs to tell the Democrats are the new operating rules. They mirror my own thoughts and I will certainly deliver this message come Tuesday. Here are some highlights:
*
RULE ONE(Democratic Treasurer rule):
*
Old Rule: It is more important to win a Democratic House and Senate Majority than lose that majority or potential majority fighting for LGBT equality. And both are mutually exclusive of one another. This rule can also apply to the Presidential race.
.
New Rule: It is AS important to fight for LGBT equality, as winning or keeping a House and Senate Democratic Majority. And neither are mutually exclusive. This rule also applies to the Presidential Race.
*
RULE TWO:
*
Old Rule: Money and support will be given by the LGBT community to Democratic candidates, in turn for the expectation that they will be supportive of LGBT issues.
.

New Rule: Money and support will “earned” by Democratic candidates who demonstrate CONTINUED SUPPORT of LGBT issues.
*
RULE THREE:
*
Old Rule: LGBT donors will give to Democratic candidates and Committees first (DNC, DSCC, DCCC) and expect leadership on LGBT equality later.
.
New Rule: LGBT donors will FIRST expect Democratic candidates and Committees (DNC, DSCC, DCCC) SUPPORT for equality, and will DONATE LATER.
*
RULE FOUR (Harold Ford Rule):
*
Old Rule: African American and/or Southern Democrats get a pass on advocating for LGBT equality.
.
New Rule: African American and Southern Democrats are expected to be MORE VOCAL for LGBT equality as those communities are disproportionately impacted by homophobia and inequity.
*
RULE FIVE:
*
Old Rule: It is ok and understandable if a Democrat refers to his or her culture, religion, or upbringing as reasons not support full LGBT equality.
.
New Rule: It is offensive and no longer acceptable if candidates embrace the bigotry of their culture, religion and/or upbringing as reasons not to support full LGBT equality.
*
RULE SIX:
*
Old Rule: If LGBT community supports Democratic candidates and the candidate is successful in their race, the LGBT community can then ask the newly or re-elected Democrats to support equality. If key votes or legislation are not delivered, the candidate should continue to receive the same support during re-election.
.
New rule: If LGBT community supports Democratic candidates and the candidate is successful in their race, the LGBT community will demand the newly or re-elected Democrats to support LGBT equality. If key votes or legislation are not delivered, the candidate WILL NOT and SHOULD NOT receive similar support during re-election.
*
Will the Dems like the new rules? I doubt it, but it is time for LGBT Americans to stop being used by Democrats who claim to be gay supportive and then never follow through. Barack Obama's broken campaign promises illustrate the cycle that must be broken. How many times do we have to be played for suckers before we say NO MORE?

Saturday Male Beauty

Oil from Gulf Spill Hits Alabama Beaches

Having lived on the Alabama Gulf Coast years ago, I know how beautiful the beaches are and how important the seafood industry and tourism are to the area. Thus, the photo above on the beach at Gulf Shores makes me sick. At the same time, I cannot help but recognize the irony that Alabama - a consistently far right Republican, anti-regulation minded state is now reaping the fruits of its own misguided behavior. Will anyone learn a lesson from this disaster? I can only hope so. The Mobile Press Register has more details here.

Changing Attitudes Towards Gays - And Views of Homophobes as Closet Cases

I have mentioned in passing a recent Gallup poll that must be making the fundies truly convulse on the floor with spittle flying: For the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the fifty percent (50%) mark. The Gallup survey also shows that gay acceptance among men has increased, particularly among younger men who do not even remember the days when being gays was considered a form of clinical mental illness. All of this is tangible proof that the Christianists are losing the culture wars even if they continue to win some battles. In a New York Times op-ed column that looks at this development, the other encouraging trend is that increasingly the most focal homophobes are being perceived as closet cases reacting against their own homosexual urges. Maybe Tony Perkins, Robert Knight Peter Sprigg, et al, need to wake up to the fact that their loud protestions against gays say more about them than your avaeage gay American. Here are some column highlights:

*
Last week, while many of us were distracted by the oil belching forth from the gulf floor and the president’s ham-handed attempts to demonstrate that he was sufficiently engaged and enraged, Gallup released a stunning, and little noticed, report on Americans’ evolving views of homosexuality. Allow me to enlighten:
*
1. For the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the 50 percent mark. (You have to love the fact that they still use the word “relations.” So quaint.)
*
2. Also for the first time, the percentage of men who hold that view is greater than the percentage of women who do.
*
3. This new alignment is being led by a dramatic change in attitudes among younger men . . . the percentage of men ages 18 to 49 who perceived these “relations” as morally acceptable rose by 48 percent, and among men over 50, it rose by 26 percent.
*
W]hat’s driving such a radical change in men’s views on this issue . . . Here are three theories:
*
1. The contact hypothesis. As more men openly acknowledge that they are gay, it becomes harder for men who are not gay to discriminate against them. And as that group of openly gay men becomes more varied — including athletes, celebrities and soldiers — many of the old, derisive stereotypes lose their purchase.
*
2. Men may be becoming more egalitarian in general. As Dr. Kimmel put it: “Men have gotten increasingly comfortable with the presence of, and relative equality of, ‘the other,’ and we’re becoming more accustomed to it. And most men are finding that it has not been a disaster.”
*
3. Virulent homophobes are increasingly being exposed for engaging in homosexuality. Think Ted Haggard, the once fervent antigay preacher and former leader of the National Association of Evangelicals, and his male prostitute. . . . Or George Rekers, the founding member of the Family Research Council, and his rent boy/luggage handler. Last week, the council claimed that repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” would lead to an explosion of “homosexual assaults” in which sleeping soldiers would be the victims of fondling and fellatio by gay predators. In fact, there is a growing body of research that supports the notion that homophobia in some men could be a reaction to their own homosexual impulses. Many heterosexual men see this, and they don’t want to be associated with it.
*
As for the aversion among men, it may be softening a bit. Professor Savin-Williams says that his current research reveals that the fastest-growing group along the sexuality continuum are men who self-identify as “mostly straight” as opposed to labels like “straight,” “gay” or “bisexual.” They acknowledge some level of attraction to other men even as they say that they probably wouldn’t act on it, but ... the right guy, the right day, a few beers and who knows. As the professor points out, you would never have heard that in years past.
*
All together now: stunning.

Mexico City Hopes to Attract Gay Tourism

While Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell and Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli continue to do all in their power to drive LGBT Virginians from the state - not to mention make the state toxic from the perspective of potential LGBT tourists - Mexico City, the capital of Catholic Mexico, is working to make itself a gay travel destination. Sadly, it is yet another instance of what used to be considered part of the "third world" now outstripping most of the states in the USA in terms of tolerance and progressiveness. One has to wonder when the USA is going to wake up. Hate merchants like Tony Perkins are given platforms for their poison by the mainstream media again and again and NEVER challenged on the illegitimacy of their anti-gay positions (CNN just did this yet again here). Here are some highlights from EnTerra.com on Mexico City's new LGBT tourism push:
*
Mexico has traditionally been a conservative Catholic country but Mexico City has developed a popular and vibrant gay scene in recent years. Gay tourism is seen as a valuable asset to cities. In the US, it is estimated that the yearly economic impact of gay and lesbian visitors is $70 billion.
*
Mexico City tourism minister Alejandro Rojas is planning for the increase in gay tourism that he says will result from the city's recent decision to legalize same-sex marriage.
*
Tourism officials in Mexico say they hope to attract gay couples who want to marry in the capital city. According to Press Association, Alejandro Rojas, the city's tourism secretary, said: "Mexico City will become a centre, where (gay) people from all over the world will be able to come and have their wedding, and then spend their honeymoon here.
*
"We are already in talks with some travel agencies that are planning to offer package tours that include flights, hotels, guides, and everything they need for the wedding, like banquets. We are going to become a city on a par with Venice or San Francisco."
*
Rojas says that the city will be investing 100 million pesos into a new gay-friendly hotel in the Zona Rosa and will support the development of other businesses that cater to the GLBT market.
*
Mexico City will become a truly 'gay friendly' city, one in which all GLBT people can live and visit with safety, dignity, and joy.
*
I can't help but ask myself WTF is wrong with so much of the USA?

More Friday Male Beauty

The Trial of Pope Benedict XVI

As a former Catholic who left the Church because of the leadership's homophobia and hypocrisy and - worse yet - utter indifference to the sexual molestation of children and youths, I am glad that Time Magazine has run a cover story on Benedict XVI that looks at the Church's unlimited amounts of dirty laundry, cover ups and lies. There are some gays like Andrew Sullivan - who I respect immensely - who refuse to leave the Catholic Church because they do not want be "driven from their faith." I chose to leave instead and found a denomination much like the Roman Catholic Church which while not perfect allowed me to feel I was not remaining a part of something that was vile and, in fact, a force for evil under the present (and past) Pope and hierarchy. Anyone who gives funds to their local parish ultimately provides funding to the diocese and then the Vatican. Other than by ceasing to contribute entirely can one say they are not financially underwriting what I view as criminal and certainly non-Christian conduct. The entire world needs to know of the Church's sins and demand change. The Church must be recognized as the victimizer rather than the victim which its supporters would have people believe. Otherwise the hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy will continue. Here are highlight's from Time:
*
[A] well-placed Cardinal has publicly speculated that Benedict will deliver a mea culpa in early June [about the sex abuse scandal] . . . It is unlikely to satisfy the many members of Benedict's flock who want a very modern kind of accountability, not just mealymouthed declarations buttressed by arcane religious philosophy. "Someone once told me that if the church survived the Inquisition, it can survive this," says Olan Horne, 50, an American victim of priestly abuse. "But these are different times. And right now, the modern world is wrapping its head around the Catholic Church in a major way."
*
The crisis facing the church is deeply complicated by the fact that in 1980, as Archbishop of Munich, the future Benedict XVI appears to have mismanaged the assignment of an accused pedophile priest under his charge. That revelation — and questions about Ratzinger's subsequent oversight of cases as a top Vatican official — has been the trigger in turning a rolling series of national scandals into an epic and existential test . . .
*
Benedict now seems to understand the stakes. But Alberto Melloni, a church historian at the University of Modena, says other power brokers in the Vatican think the church can just ride out the storm. "They don't realize the deep bitterness among the faithful, the isolation of the clergy. We can't predict where this is going to wind up." Speaking to TIME, a senior Vatican official foresees immense consequences for the entire church. "History comes down to certain key episodes," he says. "We're facing one of those moments now."
*
The Gospel of St. Mark prescribes a fate for those who harm children: "And whoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea." But the outrage embodied in those words has been absent in much of the church's response to crimes committed by its priests.
*
A truly successful mea culpa and penance for the abuse scandal must preserve the magisterium while dealing with these facts: Ratzinger, both in his role as the local bishop in Munich from 1977 to 1981 and as the overseer of universal doctrine in Rome, was very much part of a system that had badly underestimated and in some cases enabled the rot of clergy abuse that spread through the church in the past half-century.
*
[N]owhere was there a more systemic tendency to cover up the shame and scandal than in Catholic parishes and orphanages entrusted with the care of the young — which showed no compunction about avoiding the civil authorities altogether.
*
In 1995 he [Ratzinger] managed to force the removal of Cardinal Hans Hermann Groër as the Archbishop of Vienna, but, according to the New York Times, he did not fight to set up a fact-finding commission to investigate Groër's alleged molestation of young boys after it was blocked by John Paul II's personal secretary, Stanislaw Dziwisz (now Archbishop of Krakow) and the powerful Secretary of State, Cardinal Angelo Sodano (now dean of the College of Cardinals).
*
But in March 2010, German journalists revealed a record that complicates the Pope's reputation. In Munich in 1980, then Archbishop Ratzinger had personally authorized the transfer of an abusive priest, Peter Hullermann, from another part of Germany to his own archdiocese, ostensibly for therapy. But just days after his arrival, the priest was allowed to serve among the flock. Hullermann would be convicted of subsequent sexual assaults in 1986. . . . But defending the Pope by pointing out that he was following the standard operating procedures of the day or that he was not focused on his oversight duties no longer cuts it for most Catholics. "The impression it leaves is that these things simply weren't very important to the bishops and Cardinals," says Melloni. "To say he didn't know is not a defense; it's the problem."
*
Even if Benedict forces the Curia to be more forthcoming, he will not have caught up with many believers. Though their church is still run top-down, Catholics now carry the expectations of a kind of faithful citizenry rather than an obedient flock. Plans are afoot for thousands of abuse victims and their loved ones to travel to Rome in October for a "Reformation Day" to pressure the Vatican to act.
*
Father Thomas Whelan, a professor of theology at Dublin's Milltown Institute, points out that . . . If the church doesn't clean house, the consequences will be dire. The scandals in deeply Catholic Ireland have led to a massive emptying of churches. Controversies in Germany, Austria and other parts of Europe have had a similar effect. "This memory [of sexual abuse] will now be forever encased in history," says Whelan. "In Ireland, at least, theology can't ever be the same without mentioning it — not just the abuse but how it was handled by the church."

When Will Family Research Council be Classified as a Hate Group?

I've been following the lies and and anti-gay viciousness peddled by Tony Perkins (at right) and Family Research Council ("FRC") - one of whose co-founders was George "Rentboy Lover" Rekers - for roughly a decade. Honestly, I thought it was possible to stoop lower than FRC does on a virtually daily basis. Or so I had thought. Now it turns out that FRC spent $25,000 lobby Congress in an effort block a resolution condemning the proposed Ugandan "Kill the Gays Bill." That's right - $25,000 in an attempt to secure passage of legislation that would subject gays to prison and, in some cases, the death penalty. Personally, I do not see how anyone who advocates death for others because they don't conform to a particular religious beliefs can call themselves Christian. Joe Jervis at Joe By God has the details and here are highlights:
*
It's time for the Southern Poverty Law Center to reclassify the Family Research Council as an official hate group, not merely anti-gay as they are now listed. According to the FRC's official lobbying report for the first quarter of 2010, they paid two of their henchmen $25,000 to lobby Congress against approving a resolution denouncing Uganda's plan to execute homosexuals. The resolution passed in the Senate on April 13th, but remains languishing in the House almost four months after being referred to the Foreign Affairs Committee. Did the FRC's lobbying kill it? As we learned last week with Malawi, international pressure CAN sway even the most virulently anti-gay government.
*
Below are three screencaps of the 20-page Family Research Council lobbying report supplied to me by Duncan Osbourne at Gay City News. Among the other items they lobbied against are the overturn of DADT and DOMA, which is to be expected. But it's almost astounding, almost, that they would lobby the members of Congress against denouncing the death penalty for LGBT people. THIS needs to fucking THROWN in Tony Perkins' and Peter Sprigg's smirking faces the next time they appear on cable television to speak in soothing voices about the FRC's godly gentle love for homosexuals. The proof is right below on official United States government stationery.

Friday Male Beauty

Religious Based Discrimination and the Moore v. Virginia Museum of Natural History Case

The Washington Blade has a story on the Michael Moore v. Virginia Museum of Natural History case wherein the Supreme Court of Virginia refused to hear Moore's appeal. For those not familiar with the case, Moore was fired by the Museum after its executive director discovered that Moore was gay and even the investigation by the Virginia Department of Human Resource Management found that Moore's sexual orientation was a factor in his firing. The case is important because it shows that currently LGBT Virginians have no employment non-discrimination protections - even when they are state employees. It is likewise important because the Supreme Court of Virginia lacked the courage to even write an opinion laying out its reasoning - I believe because once it began to do so, it would have been impossible to avoid getting into the real underlying bigotry against LGBT citizens: religion.

*

While it is true as Greg Nevins of Lambda Legal points out that some courts in other jurisdictions have found for gay plaintiffs under the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution - an argument that was made extensively in Moore's briefs - the Supreme Court of Virginia lacked the courage even on this issue to take the step of recognizing the rights of gay Virginians much as it lacked courage in Loving v. Commonwealth when it upheld Virginia's ban on interracial marriage in 1966, only to be reversed a year later by the United States Supreme Court.

*

From my research, only two recent appellate court decision have touched on the source of anti-gay discrimination. One such case is Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). In that case, in striking down the Texas sodomy statute – and indirectly Virginia’s own statute as well – the Court stated in relevant part as follows:
*

The condemnation [of homosexuals] has been shaped by religious beliefs, conceptions of right and acceptable behavior, and respect for the traditional family. For many persons these are not trivial concerns but profound and deep convictions accepted as ethical and moral principles to which they aspire and which thus determine the course of their lives. These considerations do not answer the question before us, however. The issue is whether the majority may use the power of the State to enforce these views on the whole society through operation of the criminal law. “Our obligation is to define the liberty of all, not to mandate our own moral code.”
*

The other case is Varnum v. Brien, 763 N.W.2d 862 (Iowa 2009), where the Iowa Supreme Court recognized that the underlying animus against homosexuals is religious based. Specifically, the Iowa Supreme Court stated in relevant part as follows:
*
State government can have no religious views, either directly or indirectly, expressed through its legislation. . . . This proposition is the essence of the separation of church and state. As a result, civil marriage must be judged under our constitutional standards of equal protection and not under religious doctrines or the religious views of individuals. This approach does not disrespect or denigrate the religious views of many Iowans who may strongly believe in marriage as a dual-gender union, but considers, as we must, only the constitutional rights of all people, as expressed by the promise of equal protection for all.
*
Protection against discrimination based on religious belief - or non belief - are already on the books in every state. Sadly, until courts across the board are willing to tackle this reality of religious based discrimination against LGBT citizens head on, we can expect more cop outs like that of the Supreme Court of Virginia in the Moore case. Here are highlights from the Blade story:

*
The Virginia Supreme Court has denied a gay man’s effort to obtain restitution after he allegedly was forced to resign from his job at a state museum because of his sexual orientation.
*
In a two-paragraph notice issued May 17, the state’s high court said it wouldn’t hear the case of Michael Moore v. Virginia Museum of Natural History because there’s nothing in the situation the justice system could rectify.
*
Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, general counsel for Equality Virginia, said the failure of the Virginia Supreme Court to take up the case shows the need for the passage of state legislation that would help protect LGBT Virginians against workplace discrimination.
*
“The bottom line is this decision just demonstrates what we’ve held for years — that LGBT employees don’t have any meaningful law to seek redress for discrimination, and frankly, they don’t have any cause of action under the old executive order, either,” she said.
*
When he took office this year, Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell didn’t renew the executive order for workplace protection against gays and instead replaced it with a less forceful executive directive.
*
Gastanaga said if there weren’t any meaningful protections under Kaine’s order, “there really, really isn’t any protection now” under McDonnell’s directive.

"Ex-Lesbian" Has Fled USA With Daughter

I've been following the Lisa Miller/Janet Jenkins story for several reasons: (1) because the case has involved the few rare occasions where the Supreme Court of Virginia has ruled in favor of LGBT litigants, (2) it highlights the lies and deceptions that go hand in hand with the ex-gay myth disseminated by Christianists, and (3) it demonstrates the fact that Christianists feel that they can ignore the law whenever it suits them. Now, the Houston Chronicle is reporting that Lisa Miller - who has a warrant out for her arrest - has kidnapped Isabella and fled to El Salvador. I doubt that Miller pulled this off on her own. Instead, I suspect she was aided by far right religious groups that ought to face criminal charges if such turns out to be the case. The whole sad saga underscores the fact that ALL "ex-gay" ministries need to be shut down by state licensing agencies and that therapists who engage in this snake oil conduct ought to lose their licenses. Here are highlights from the Chronicle:

*
The girl, Isabella Miller-Jenkins, and her birth mother, Lisa Miller, failed to appear for a court-ordered custody swap in January and are believed to have flown to El Salvador last September, said attorney Sarah Star, who represents ex-partner Janet Jenkins.
*
Star said a Virginia police officer told her that Miller and the girl flew to El Salvador's capital, San Salvador, from Juarez, Mexico, which is across the Rio Grande from El Paso, Texas.
*
The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has turned its attention to Central America, distributing photos and information about Isabella to news outlets throughout the region, apparently believing she and her birth mother moved there, Star said Thursday.
*
Isabella and Miller, of Forest, Va., were supposed to appear Jan. 1 for Jenkins, of Fair Haven, Vt., to take custody of the girl. When they didn't appear, a contempt citation and arrest warrant were issued for Miller in Vermont, and a Virginia court has issued a show cause order against her.
*
Personally, I believe that Miller is focused solely on herself and obviously cares nothing about the turmoil and instability to which her daughter is exposed. She's more concerned about screwing over her ex-partner than the welfare of her child. Sadly, it's too typical of the self-proclaimed "born again" Christians who act in the most un-Christian of ways.

Reckoning in the Gulf of Mexico

My post yesterday on the Gulf of Mexico oil spill catastrophe focused on the local concerns of residents here in Key West and my own misgivings in terms of trusting BP with control of anything going forward. The lead editorial in the Key West Citizen underscores local distrust of BP. From what has been made public to date, it sounds as if BP broke rules and engaged in actions that the head of the Transocean drill team objected to - and 11 individuals likely paid with their lives when the objected procedure caused the well and platform to explode. The environmental loses since then have been staggering. The New York Times has a spot on editorial that lays out the federal government's much belated response to the disaster. The sad reality, however, is that no amount of money will replace the lost wildlife or the damage to delicate ecological systems. The second sad reality - one that locals here are very much afraid of - is the fact that even if they prevail in lawsuits against BP and other responsible parties, it could be decades before any money is received by those whose livelihoods have been destroyed in the interim. Those who want to see the cap on BP's liability removed should sign the petit1on to Congress here. Now, here are Highlights from the Times:

*
The spill, the worst in United States history and growing more damaging by the day, cries out for accountability and appropriate punishment. Attorney General Eric Holder did not name specific targets, but BP, Transocean — the rig operator — and other important subcontractors like Halliburton are obvious candidates.
*
Justice’s investigation will run parallel to an inquiry by a special commission appointed by President Obama to discover the causes of the disaster, assess the performance of federal oversight agencies and recommend ways to prevent similar calamities. The White House must take special care that both are allowed to do a complete job.
*
Unlike the Justice Department, the commission does not have subpoena powers. Congress should grant that power if only to make sure that witnesses from an industry that is accustomed to going its own way actually show up.
*
As Mr. Holder knows, the legal journey will be long and arduous. Exxon did not finally settle up for damages related to the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill — in addition to the billions it paid in cleanup costs — until a Supreme Court decision in 2008. BP is responsible for containing the gulf spill and cleaning it up, but the fines it must ultimately pay, as well as compensatory damages to injured parties, will depend in part on the whether the company can be shown to have broken the law.
*
One relevant law is the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, enacted after the Exxon Valdez spill, which imposes monetary penalties for every barrel of spilled oil — even if negligence is not found, but more if it is. Another is the Clean Water Act, which carries both civil and criminal penalties for polluting waterways. BP could also be found negligent under the Marine Mammal Protection Act because it failed to obtain necessary federal permits to drill in areas inhabited by endangered whales.
*
Senator Barbara Boxer, who was pressing Mr. Holder to act, raised one more ominous possibility: that BP may have made false and misleading statements to federal authorities in the 2009 exploratory drilling plan it submitted to the Minerals Management Service. The plan asserted that the company had “proven equipment and technology” to respond to a blowout. Given the ad hoc nature of BP’s response, Ms. Boxer has suggested, that assertion now seems misleading or even false.
*
There are extraordinarily tough times ahead for the gulf and the region’s residents. That BP will also suffer does not trouble us in the least.

Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli Sides with Westboro Baptist Church

Being that he's a religious nutcase himself, it should be no surprise that Virginia Attorney General Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli has refused to join in an amicus brief to be filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in a case brought by the father of a service member whose funeral was protested and disrupted by Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church of "God Hates Fags" infamy. Kookinelli is one of only two state AG's to not join in the brief and claims he is doing so in support of Phelps' right of freedom of speech. Apparently, Kookinelli supports free speech unless it falls in the realm of academic freedom or otherwise counters Kookinelli's extremist religious beliefs. It's a case of transparent hypocrisy for certain, yet all to typical of folks like Kookinelli who have ZERO regard for the right to freedom of religion for others. Indeed, Kookinelli believes that Virginia gays should be punished for nonconformity to Christianist religious views and deserve no employment protections. The full brief that Cuccinelli declined to support can be found here. Channel 12 news has coverage on Kookinelli's latest idiocy. Here are some highlights:
*
Never one to follow the crowd, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has decided against filing an amicus brief in a case before the Supreme Court involving the controversial Westboro Baptist Church (WBC). Cuccinelli is one of only two State Attorneys General in the entire country who have declined the opportunity to support Albert Snyder. Snyder sued WBC after the hate group protested at his son’s funeral. Snyder’s son was killed serving in Iraq.
*
Snyder won his first case, but the decision was turned back by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, based on the 1st amendment. In addition to the overturned decision, he was ordered to pay the court costs of the Phelps family, the leaders of WBC.
*
Snyder has gained the support of many politicians, including 42 U.S. Senators and every State Attorney General (including the District of Columbia) except for Maine and Virginia.