Thursday, April 07, 2011
NOM is Now Officially an Anti-Gay Hate Group
I have long believed that the National Organization for Marriage is little more than a thinly disguised anti-gay hate group akin to Family Research Council, the American Family Association and similar falsely labeled "Christian" organizations which pretend to worry about "family values" or in the case of NOM, allegedly "protecting marriage." Meanwhile, the beginning and end of their agendas is to fan hatred and contempt for LGBT Americans while pocketing lots of money in the process. Now, NOM has shown its true colors as it has waded into the ongoing debate over gay adoption in Virginia. The regulations at the heart of the furor in Virginia have NOTHING to do with same sex marriage (which is already banned under the infamous Marshall-Newman Amendment to the Virginia Constitution enacted in 2006). Thus, there is NO legitimate reason for a group like NOM - supposedly concerned solely about the "sanctity of marriage" - to wade into the adoption issue in Virginia. 
Unless, of course, denigrating, stigmatizing and punishing LGBT citizens has always been NOM's real agenda. Jeremy Hooper at Good As You shares my views of NOM's true hate based agenda. Here's a sampling of what Jeremy has to say about self-enriching whore (my words not Jeremy's) Maggie Gallagher and her lying extremists at NOM:*
While couched under a desire to protect religious-based adoption agencies from going against their beliefs, NOM's latest action is an undeniably anti-LGBT effort. They have voiced no real concern for the surplus of children in need of homes. No concern for the balance between civil and religious interests. Obviously they've shown no concern for the same-sex couples who deserve respect, ideally, and equality, constitutionally. NOM's sole focus has been on providing cover for those who'd rather discriminate than accommodate, with that set's supposed burden being the "protect marriage" group's only actionable interest. NOM's only answer to this situation: To put the faith-based desire to exclude some above a governmental desire to consider/accommodate all.
*
The increasingly fringe NOM has every right to admit that their gay-excluding focus goes well beyond civil marriage equality itself. But now that they're more fully revealing this hand, Brian Brown and Co. need to own their overreaching faith-based goals rather than pretending to be civil marriage equality proponents' equal counterpart. They need to stop the "protect marriage" canards and start getting real. But since NOM most surely won't bear out their own deep mission, the rest of us must.
*
Yes, I am hard on Ms. Gallagher. But anyone making well over a quarter of a million dollars per year marketing hate and seeking to keep other citizens unequal and despised by a majority of citizens is in my view worse than a whore. In fact, far worse.
While couched under a desire to protect religious-based adoption agencies from going against their beliefs, NOM's latest action is an undeniably anti-LGBT effort. They have voiced no real concern for the surplus of children in need of homes. No concern for the balance between civil and religious interests. Obviously they've shown no concern for the same-sex couples who deserve respect, ideally, and equality, constitutionally. NOM's sole focus has been on providing cover for those who'd rather discriminate than accommodate, with that set's supposed burden being the "protect marriage" group's only actionable interest. NOM's only answer to this situation: To put the faith-based desire to exclude some above a governmental desire to consider/accommodate all.
*
The increasingly fringe NOM has every right to admit that their gay-excluding focus goes well beyond civil marriage equality itself. But now that they're more fully revealing this hand, Brian Brown and Co. need to own their overreaching faith-based goals rather than pretending to be civil marriage equality proponents' equal counterpart. They need to stop the "protect marriage" canards and start getting real. But since NOM most surely won't bear out their own deep mission, the rest of us must.
*
Yes, I am hard on Ms. Gallagher. But anyone making well over a quarter of a million dollars per year marketing hate and seeking to keep other citizens unequal and despised by a majority of citizens is in my view worse than a whore. In fact, far worse.
Arkansas Supreme Court Strikes Down Gay Adoption Ban - What's Wrong with Virginia?
It is pretty sad when - and no disrespect to Arkansas - Virginia's Republican leaders appear to be poised to allow Arkansas to show a stronger reverence for equality and religious freedom than occurs in the home state of many of the brightest lights of the nation's Founding Fathers. Yet that appears to be what might well happen if Governor Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell and the Virginia GOP continue to be nothing more than tawdry whores to the likes of Victoria Cobb and similar religious extremists at The Family Foundation, Liberty Counsel and, of course, Taliban Bob's theocratic alma mater, Regent University. As The Advocate and many other news outlets are reporting, the Arkansas Supreme (the justices are pictured above) has struck down a 2008 state law that banned same sex and unmarried couples from adopting or foster parenting children. The ban had been approved by a state referendum. The ruling is a serious defeat for the Christofascists and underscores that merely because a bigoted majority wants to penalize a disliked minority, it does not make it right or constitutional. Meanwhile, here in Virginia we see the Christian Taliban faction endeavoring to block regulations that would make Virginia on a par with what is now legal in Arkansas. Here are highlights from The Advocate story:*
The Arkansas supreme court ruled Thursday that a 2008 ballot initiative that barred gay and lesbian couples from adopting children was unconstitutional. The court ruled that such a policy, while never enforced, would violate an adult's right to privacy in their bedroom,. .
*
"Act 1 directly and substantially burdens the privacy rights of 'opposite-sex and same-sex individuals' who engage in private, consensual sexual conduct in the bedroom by foreclosing their eligibility to foster or adopt children," Associate Justice Robert L. Brown wrote. The court also wrote that imposing a categorical ban on anyone who was not in a heterosexual marriage from adopting or fostering children, would keep many children away from suitable, responsible homes.
*
The ruling leaves Mississippi and Utah as the only two states that enforce adoption bans on unmarried couples, according to the Human Rights Campaign. The Virginia State Board of Social Services is also expected to decide whether to approve former governor Tim Kaine's proposed policy to prevent discrimination based on family status by child welfare agencies in the adoption process. Gov. Bob McDonnell has until April 16 to present his own suggestions to the board, but he has indicated that he opposes such regulations.
*
Of course, in truth, the Christianists care nothing about children in need of stable and loving adoptive or foster homes. No, it's truly all about punishing gays (and in this case unmarried couples) who do not tow the line and live their lives per Christianist dictates. It's religious based discrimination pure and simple when all of the smoke screens are stripped away. Should Taliban Bob torpedo gay adoption rights in Virginia, it will be indicative that he's unfit to hold the office of Governor much less any higher office since he is acting contrary to the Virginia and United States Constitutions each of which grant ALL - yes, that means gay and straight - citizens the right to freedom of religion and protection from religious based discrimination some would attempt to write into the civil laws.
New Study Focuses on Number of LGBT Americans
The Williams Institute at UCLA has released a new report on the number of LGBT citizens in the USA. The figures are a result of cross-referencing four recent national and two state-level population-based surveys and, in my view, are probably low because of the number of closeted individuals across the country - especially in the Bible Belt and states where LGBT citizens have few if any non-discrimination protections (e.g., social and intellectual backwaters like most of Virginia)- are in the category of the 25 million who admit same sex attraction. In addition, the figures do not include those under 18 years of age. Here are highlights of the report which can be found here:*
Key findings from the research brief are as follows:
*
An estimated 3.5% of adults in the United States identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual and an estimated 0.3% of adults are transgender.
*
This implies that there are approximately 9 million LGBT Americans, a figure roughly equivalent to the population of New Jersey.
*
Among adults who identify as LGB, bisexuals comprise a slight majority (1.8% compared to 1.7% who identify as lesbian or gay).
*
Women are substantially more likely than men to identify as bisexual. Bisexuals comprise more than half of the lesbian and bisexual population among women in eight of the nine surveys considered in the brief. Conversely, gay men comprise substantially more than half of gay and bisexual men in seven of the nine surveys.
*
Estimates of those who report any lifetime same-sex sexual behavior and any same-sex sexual attraction are substantially higher than estimates of those who identify as LGB.
*
An estimated 19 million Americans (8.2%) report that they have engaged in same-sex sexual behavior and nearly 25.6 million Americans (11%) acknowledge at least some same-sex sexual attraction.
*
The report itself recognizes that the figures may be low, but at least they provide some basis for addressing need policy changes and, of course, the provision of needed support. Here's a part of what the report says on under reporting:
*
Another factor that can create variation among estimates of the LGBT community is survey methodology. Survey methods can affect the willingness of respondents to report stigmatizing identities and behaviors. Feelings of confidentiality and anonymity increase the likelihood that respondents will be more accurate in reporting sensitive information. Survey methods that include face-to-face interviews may underestimate the size of the LGBT community while those that include methods that allow respondents to complete questions on a computer or via the internet may increase the likelihood of LGBT respondents identifying themselves.
*
The over all messages is that LGBT citizens are more numerous that the Christianists like to claim and that pretending otherwise leads to wrong headed policies and laws.
Key findings from the research brief are as follows:
*
An estimated 3.5% of adults in the United States identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual and an estimated 0.3% of adults are transgender.
*
This implies that there are approximately 9 million LGBT Americans, a figure roughly equivalent to the population of New Jersey.
*
Among adults who identify as LGB, bisexuals comprise a slight majority (1.8% compared to 1.7% who identify as lesbian or gay).
*
Women are substantially more likely than men to identify as bisexual. Bisexuals comprise more than half of the lesbian and bisexual population among women in eight of the nine surveys considered in the brief. Conversely, gay men comprise substantially more than half of gay and bisexual men in seven of the nine surveys.
*
Estimates of those who report any lifetime same-sex sexual behavior and any same-sex sexual attraction are substantially higher than estimates of those who identify as LGB.
*
An estimated 19 million Americans (8.2%) report that they have engaged in same-sex sexual behavior and nearly 25.6 million Americans (11%) acknowledge at least some same-sex sexual attraction.
*
The report itself recognizes that the figures may be low, but at least they provide some basis for addressing need policy changes and, of course, the provision of needed support. Here's a part of what the report says on under reporting:
*
Another factor that can create variation among estimates of the LGBT community is survey methodology. Survey methods can affect the willingness of respondents to report stigmatizing identities and behaviors. Feelings of confidentiality and anonymity increase the likelihood that respondents will be more accurate in reporting sensitive information. Survey methods that include face-to-face interviews may underestimate the size of the LGBT community while those that include methods that allow respondents to complete questions on a computer or via the internet may increase the likelihood of LGBT respondents identifying themselves.
*
The over all messages is that LGBT citizens are more numerous that the Christianists like to claim and that pretending otherwise leads to wrong headed policies and laws.
More Inconvenient Truths About "Traditional Marriage"
Even though Christianists will refuse to acknowledge historic truths because they so often threaten the Christianists' fear and hate based house of cards faith constructs, it is important that rational citizens and news outlets be pushed to know the real truth when it comes to the history of civil marriage. And the truth is not - what a shocker - what the Christianists shrieking against same sex marriage would have the public believe. It is crucial that the larger public come to face the reality that when Christianists rant, it is almost always a lie. Not only was "biblical marriage" typical polygamous, but the role of the secular government in regulating marriage long trumped the Church's control over marriage. If anything, the default mode of allowing churches to drive secular marriage that has been seen in the USA is more of an exception than the historic rule. A piece in Huffington Post looks at the real history of the interaction between church and state over the centuries and reveals (as always seems to be the case with the anti-gay religious extremists) that Maggie Gallagher, and company are once again lying. Here are some article highlights:*
*
It is widely claimed by the Religious Right that marriage is a "religious institution," not a civil matter. The facts, unfortunately, are not so simple. State control of marriage is much older than people think and Christianity never spoke with one voice regarding marriage.
*
The fourth century Christian emperor Theodosius, as part of what historian John Boswell called a campaign of "greater and greater totalitarian control over personal aspects of Romans' lives," decreed that only Christianity would be allowed to exist. He also banned gay marriage.
*
The increasingly theocratic despotism of the later Empire often led to intervention in matters such as personal religious convictions or private sexual expression which would have been considered entirely individual under the earlier emperors."
*
The Church got involved only after this intervention on its behalf. Christian law professor Daniel Crane wrote that, "as the power of the church grew, it gradually sought to establish control over marriage directly." But it was only in 1546 that the Roman Catholic Church declared that a marriage was only valid if performed by a priest, with two witnesses. Even this was more a slap at the Reformationists and a means of "wedding" believers to the Roman Church. The idea that marriage was a "sacrament" had more to do with the politics of the day than it did with theology.
*
The Protestants denied marriage as a sacrament entirely. Crane wrote that Reformationists saw the state, not the church, as the prime custodian "of matrimony as a civil institution." The authoritarian John Calvin passed the "Marriage Ordinance of Geneva" requiring a state permit to marry.
*
Catholics saw marriage as a church sacrament. Protestants said it was a relationship between a couple and the wider community, and thus more a political concern than a religious one. Witte wrote, "Enlightenment exponents emphasize[d] the contractual (or private) perspective."
*
Exponents of the Enlightenment advocated the abolition of much that was considered sound and sacred in the Western legal tradition of marriage. They urged the abolition of the requirements of parental consent, church consecration, and formal witnesses for marriage. They questioned the exalted status of heterosexual monogamy, suggesting that such matters be left to private negotiation. They called for the absolute equality of husband and wife to receive, hold, and alienate property, to enter into contracts and commerce, to participate on equal terms in the workplace and public square. They castigated the state for leaving annulment practice to the church, and urged that the laws of annulment and divorce be both merged and expanded under exclusive state jurisdiction.
*
The rise of classical liberalism, with its companion, capitalism, meant that income was no longer a function of the family as whole. Sociologist Barry Adams, in Christopher Street, observed: "Capitalism laid the groundwork for voluntary relationships based on personal preference, the precondition for 'romantic love.' Capitalism did not cause romantic love, it allowed it to flourish."
*
[M]odern conservatives see themselves as the heirs of the classical liberal/capitalist tradition. Yet that tradition is responsible for the evolution of marriage over the last few centuries. What modern conservatives are witnessing in the gay marriage revolution is just another logical step toward implementing the values of classical liberalism, with its emphasis on private contract and individual rights. Like it or not, it is the premises that they claim they share with classical liberals that have brought us to where we are today. I for one think that a good thing, even if conservatives don't.
*
It is widely claimed by the Religious Right that marriage is a "religious institution," not a civil matter. The facts, unfortunately, are not so simple. State control of marriage is much older than people think and Christianity never spoke with one voice regarding marriage.
*
The fourth century Christian emperor Theodosius, as part of what historian John Boswell called a campaign of "greater and greater totalitarian control over personal aspects of Romans' lives," decreed that only Christianity would be allowed to exist. He also banned gay marriage.
*
The increasingly theocratic despotism of the later Empire often led to intervention in matters such as personal religious convictions or private sexual expression which would have been considered entirely individual under the earlier emperors."
*
The Church got involved only after this intervention on its behalf. Christian law professor Daniel Crane wrote that, "as the power of the church grew, it gradually sought to establish control over marriage directly." But it was only in 1546 that the Roman Catholic Church declared that a marriage was only valid if performed by a priest, with two witnesses. Even this was more a slap at the Reformationists and a means of "wedding" believers to the Roman Church. The idea that marriage was a "sacrament" had more to do with the politics of the day than it did with theology.
*
The Protestants denied marriage as a sacrament entirely. Crane wrote that Reformationists saw the state, not the church, as the prime custodian "of matrimony as a civil institution." The authoritarian John Calvin passed the "Marriage Ordinance of Geneva" requiring a state permit to marry.
*
Catholics saw marriage as a church sacrament. Protestants said it was a relationship between a couple and the wider community, and thus more a political concern than a religious one. Witte wrote, "Enlightenment exponents emphasize[d] the contractual (or private) perspective."
*
Exponents of the Enlightenment advocated the abolition of much that was considered sound and sacred in the Western legal tradition of marriage. They urged the abolition of the requirements of parental consent, church consecration, and formal witnesses for marriage. They questioned the exalted status of heterosexual monogamy, suggesting that such matters be left to private negotiation. They called for the absolute equality of husband and wife to receive, hold, and alienate property, to enter into contracts and commerce, to participate on equal terms in the workplace and public square. They castigated the state for leaving annulment practice to the church, and urged that the laws of annulment and divorce be both merged and expanded under exclusive state jurisdiction.
*
The rise of classical liberalism, with its companion, capitalism, meant that income was no longer a function of the family as whole. Sociologist Barry Adams, in Christopher Street, observed: "Capitalism laid the groundwork for voluntary relationships based on personal preference, the precondition for 'romantic love.' Capitalism did not cause romantic love, it allowed it to flourish."
*
[M]odern conservatives see themselves as the heirs of the classical liberal/capitalist tradition. Yet that tradition is responsible for the evolution of marriage over the last few centuries. What modern conservatives are witnessing in the gay marriage revolution is just another logical step toward implementing the values of classical liberalism, with its emphasis on private contract and individual rights. Like it or not, it is the premises that they claim they share with classical liberals that have brought us to where we are today. I for one think that a good thing, even if conservatives don't.
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Bob Marshall: The Face of Theocracy and Hate in Virginia
Last night I attended a City of Hampton committee working on diversity issues and ways to attract the so-called creative class to both Hampton and Virginia as a whole. Meanwhile, Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell and Delegate Bob Marshall - the face of the Christian Taliban in Virginia - are making sure the state has plenty of negative news coverage that ought to send a strong message to LGBT citizens and progressive businesses that Virginia is NOT a place to live, work or relocate one's business. MyFoxDC has coverage of Marshall demonstrating to the world that religious based discrimination continues to thrive in Virginia. As for those in the media who foolishly claim that they like Marshall in person on a one on one basis, I'd remind them that Hitler could reportedly be charming in similar situations. They need to open their eyes to Marshall's true agenda which is very, very ugly. Here are highlights from Fox and a short video clip:*
Should gay couples have the right to adopt children in Virginia? Currently, only married couples or single men and women - regardless of sexual orientation - can adopt.
*
But a proposal by former Virginia governor Tim Kaine would change that. It would prevent child welfare agencies from considering sexual orientation or religion during the adoption process.
*
But, not everyone's on board with the plan. Republican Delegate Bob Marshall and Ellen Kahn, Family Project Director with the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the nation's largest gay rights organization debated this topic on FOX 5 News.
*
Should gay couples have the right to adopt children in Virginia? Currently, only married couples or single men and women - regardless of sexual orientation - can adopt.
*
But a proposal by former Virginia governor Tim Kaine would change that. It would prevent child welfare agencies from considering sexual orientation or religion during the adoption process.
*
But, not everyone's on board with the plan. Republican Delegate Bob Marshall and Ellen Kahn, Family Project Director with the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the nation's largest gay rights organization debated this topic on FOX 5 News.
*
Should Gay Couples Have The Right To Adopt Children in Virginia?: MyFoxDC.com
A True LGBT Ally Has Been Picked to Head DNC
I've never been a fan of Tim Kaine's when it comes to his fair weather support on LGBT issues. He will give a certain amount of lip service but time and time again he fails to act and get things done. The new adoption regulations currently causing a firestorm in Virginia - and again highlighting that Virginia is generally down right hostile towards its LGBT citizens - is a case in point. Kaine waited until only two months before his term ended to start the process. revising adoption regulations. Why wasn't is started far earlier in his terms? Now, with Kaine running for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Jim Webb (I will likely vote for Kaine merely because the GOP candidate will assuredly be an anti-gay Neanderthal), Debbie Wasserman of Florida has been tapped to head up the DNC. Her appointment may not bring all that many in the LGBT community might want, but at least we will now have someone at the top of the Democratic party who does seem to actually give a damn about LGBT citizens and their lives. Here are highlights from the New York Times:*
Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida was named Tuesday as the new chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, with President Obama selecting her to lead the party’s fund-raising and organizational efforts heading into the 2012 election cycle.
*
Ms. Wasserman Schultz, 44, accepted the position during an afternoon call with the president. She succeeds Tim Kaine, who served as the party’s national chairman for the last two years but announced earlier Tuesday that he is running for a Senate seat in Virginia.
*
Ms. Wasserman Schultz is known inside the party for her strong fund-raising abilities, and she represents South Florida, which will be a critical battleground in the 2012 presidential race. She also would become one of the few high-profile women to speak on television on behalf of the president and the party.
*
“She’s part of the next generation of Democrats,” said Jenny Backus, a longtime party strategist and former official at the Democratic National Committee.
*
[H]eading into the 2012 presidential election year, when women voters will be among the key constituencies, the president was encouraged by advisers to select Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
*
Four years ago, Ms. Wasserman Schultz supported Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary fight, but she quickly switched her loyalties to Mr. Obama when he became the presumptive nominee. She campaigned aggressively on his behalf for the rest of the 2008 campaign.
Military Chaplain Group Files Brief Opposing DADT
Frankly, it is long overdue for "good" Christians, if you will to get off their butts, and started speaking out against the constant narrative of hate and intolerance which is the principal message one hears coming from the lips of alleged Christians. They need to prove that professional hate merchants such as Maggie Gallagher, Tony Perkins, Bryan Fischer, et al, are not today's face of Christianity. I've made this argument before, yet too many "good" Christians refuse to counter the haters. That's why I belief it's a great thing that the Forum on the Military Chaplaincy, which is led by retired military chaplains, has filed an amicus brief in the Log Cabin Republicans v. United States case. We truly need a high court ruling striking down DADT as unconstitutional once and for all. The brief also makes the point that DADT tramples on the religious freedoms of non-gay hating Christians and tolerant denominations. In short, it's time to end the enshrinement of one toxic form of religious belief in the laws. Here are some highlights from The Advocate on the group's court filing:*
A group of military chaplains banded together Monday, informing federal courts that the law barring gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members from serving openly is "offensive to many religious organizations."
*
The Forum on the Military Chaplaincy, which is led by retired military chaplains, sent an amicus brief to the ninth circuit court of appeals Monday in support of the Log Cabin Republicans' lawsuit against the federal government challenging "don't ask, don't tell." This behind-the-scenes organization is now going public to counter the arguments from others in the religious community who are against repeal.
*
According to a statement from the group issued Tuesday, maintaining "don't ask, don't tell" would prevent "military chaplains from ministering to the needs of service members whose faith communities are welcoming and affirming to gays and lesbians."
*
“The right of anti-gay chaplains to preach their beliefs within their denominations is not being abridged,” chaplain Paul Dodd, the forum's cochair, said in a statement Monday. “But more importantly, military chaplains are trained to be pluralistic. They must respect the rights of others to hold and practice religious and moral values different from their own.”
*
The last paragraph quoted gets to the issue of the threat posed by Christianists - they want their views and only their views respected and given in effect special rights. In the view of Christianists, everyone else can go f*ck themselves. This mind set is directly opposed to the freedom of religion afforded to ALL under the U.S. Constitution.
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
Prosecute Those Responsible in the Priest Sex-Abuse Scandals
Since the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy has shown no inclination to clean its own cesspool like ranks and rank and file Catholics refuse to grow a backbone and demand reforms, the best way to solve the literally world wide conspiracy to protect predator priests is to start prosecuting both the sexual abusers and their enablers and protectors. The Seattle Times ran a point on editorial that has been reprinted in the Juneau Empire. It's worth a read and one can only wish that members of the Church hierarchy would begin to be arrested and criminally prosecuted. Here are highlights from the editorial:*
After decades of silence, deceit and settlements, the Roman Catholic Church’s sexual-abuse scandal might finally be headed where it truly belongs, U.S. criminal courts.
*
Church leadership has been granted extraordinary latitude in handling epic cases of sexual assault against children who put their innocence and trust in religious figures who violated them, sometimes for years. Again and again, bishops invested more loyalty in the clergy responsible for the assaults than in the people in the pews.
*
In the U.S. and elsewhere, the church was given authority and deference it did not deserve and repeatedly violated in the handling of cases that date back decades. Instances of abuse are still being revealed. Unconscionable acts with injurious results have been met with the most hypocritical behavior.
*
The church’s response has amounted to an international cover-up for heinous acts from California to Connecticut, as well as Australia, Poland, Spain, Switzerland, Ireland and Germany.
*
Worldwide the pattern has been to hide the truth, mount counterattacks about Catholic bashing and stall.
*
The outside world did not sully a sacred vocation. No more operating above the law. Turn those accused of assault and abuse over to secular authorities. Send the guilty to jail.
McDonnell and Neanderthal Members of the GOP Oppose Gay Adoption Proposal
I noted this morning the controversy raging here in Virginia over proposed changes to the rules of the Department of Social Services that would clearly permit same sex couples to adopt or be foster parents (same sex couple adoption is currently a gray area where no express prohibition exists) . In addition, church affiliated and private adoption agencies would be barred from discriminating against gay parents. Needless to say, paid political whores like Maggie Gallagher and Victoria Cobb at The Family Foundation who cracks her whip over Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell and others in the Republican Party of Virginia like some Nazi dominatrix had their panties in a major knot over the concept of treating gay couples as potential responsible parents. Add to that the verbal diarrhea issuing from Delegate Bob Marshall - who has admitted that he'd like to drive gays from Virginia - and it was only a matter of time before McDonnell knuckled under and embraced religious based bigotry that would make Thomas Jefferson vomit. Here are highlights from the Washington Post on McDonnell's sell to the propaganda of today's successors to the Nazi stigmatization and denigration of LGBT citizens:*
Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) told reporters at a Tuesday news conference that he opposes proposed regulations developed by his Democratic predecessor that would for the first time allow gay couples to adopt children in Virginia.
*
“I know I had said during the campaign that I would essentially keep our adoption laws -- which I think are good -- the way they are now,’’ McDonnell said. “I think the current regulations that are in place seem to be working well.”
*
Currently, only married couples and single men and women — regardless of sexual orientation — can adopt in Virginia.
*
The proposal, according to the governor’s office, would mandate that gay singles and unmarried couples be able to access faith-based groups, such as Catholic Charities and Jewish Family Services, to adopt children.
*
“I don’t think we ought to force Catholic Charities to make that part of their policy or other similar situated groups,’’ McDonnell said. “Many of our adoption agencies are faith-based groups that ought to be able to establish what their own policies are. Current regulations that say you can’t discriminate on the basis of race, color or national origin I think are proper. I think previous efforts to expand that to a number of other classes are going to have very strict scrutiny to make sure that we don’t inhibit the very fine work some faith-based organizations are doing.”
*
McDonnell has until April 16 to make a recommendation to the State Board of Social Services, a nine-member panel of which all but four members are holdovers from Kaine.
*
My suggestion - exempt the religious affiliated organizations, but only if they give up 100% of all state, federal and federal funding that they are receiving. They want the right to discriminate against citizens, then don't expect a single penny of public funds of any nature. Meanwhile, Bob Marshall - who I hope and pray gets caught some day in a Larry Craig like incident - does all he can to fan the flames of anti-gay hatred among the Kool-Aid drinker set. Here are highlights from The Advocate:
*
Bob Marshall (pictured), a member of the state house of delegates, wants Gov. Bob McDonnell to kill the measure, which Marshall calls a “radical antifamily proposal.” He claims it would allow unmarried couples, gay and straight, to adopt or foster children, something Equality Virginia disputes.
*
Marshall has said he is also concerned that faith-based agencies would have to place children with gay parents, in violation of their religious beliefs. In his letter to Sood, [[Equality Virginia's] Parrish contended that in placing children for adoption or foster care, these groups are acting as agents of the state, not engaging in private acts, as would be the case in employment decisions — and therefore they should be subject to anti-discrimination law.
*
It gets so tiresome living in Virginia where in all candidness, farm animals are given more consideration and legal protections than LGBT Virginians. Once again for those considering moving to Virginia, my advice is don't. And if you're already here, leave if at all possible.
Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) told reporters at a Tuesday news conference that he opposes proposed regulations developed by his Democratic predecessor that would for the first time allow gay couples to adopt children in Virginia.
*
“I know I had said during the campaign that I would essentially keep our adoption laws -- which I think are good -- the way they are now,’’ McDonnell said. “I think the current regulations that are in place seem to be working well.”
*
Currently, only married couples and single men and women — regardless of sexual orientation — can adopt in Virginia.
*
The proposal, according to the governor’s office, would mandate that gay singles and unmarried couples be able to access faith-based groups, such as Catholic Charities and Jewish Family Services, to adopt children.
*
“I don’t think we ought to force Catholic Charities to make that part of their policy or other similar situated groups,’’ McDonnell said. “Many of our adoption agencies are faith-based groups that ought to be able to establish what their own policies are. Current regulations that say you can’t discriminate on the basis of race, color or national origin I think are proper. I think previous efforts to expand that to a number of other classes are going to have very strict scrutiny to make sure that we don’t inhibit the very fine work some faith-based organizations are doing.”
*
McDonnell has until April 16 to make a recommendation to the State Board of Social Services, a nine-member panel of which all but four members are holdovers from Kaine.
*
My suggestion - exempt the religious affiliated organizations, but only if they give up 100% of all state, federal and federal funding that they are receiving. They want the right to discriminate against citizens, then don't expect a single penny of public funds of any nature. Meanwhile, Bob Marshall - who I hope and pray gets caught some day in a Larry Craig like incident - does all he can to fan the flames of anti-gay hatred among the Kool-Aid drinker set. Here are highlights from The Advocate:
*
Bob Marshall (pictured), a member of the state house of delegates, wants Gov. Bob McDonnell to kill the measure, which Marshall calls a “radical antifamily proposal.” He claims it would allow unmarried couples, gay and straight, to adopt or foster children, something Equality Virginia disputes.
*
Marshall has said he is also concerned that faith-based agencies would have to place children with gay parents, in violation of their religious beliefs. In his letter to Sood, [[Equality Virginia's] Parrish contended that in placing children for adoption or foster care, these groups are acting as agents of the state, not engaging in private acts, as would be the case in employment decisions — and therefore they should be subject to anti-discrimination law.
*
It gets so tiresome living in Virginia where in all candidness, farm animals are given more consideration and legal protections than LGBT Virginians. Once again for those considering moving to Virginia, my advice is don't. And if you're already here, leave if at all possible.
GOP Politician Calls GSA's "Sexual Meetup Groups"
The hatred of gay people remains palpable among Christianists and members of the GOP with one foul example after another bubbling to the surface with each passing day. The "godly Christian" set want the unfettered right to bully and abuse LGBT kids and teens - often driving them to suicide as in the local York County case I've mentioned frequently - and the crazies (or perhaps simply abject political whores) within the GOP seem only too ready to jump on board the let's stigmatize and denigrate gays band wagon. One of the latest sick examples is Rhode Island Republican state representative Dan Gordon. While disingenuously saying he's not anti-gay, Gordon supports the withdrawal of state funding for schools with GSA's which he refers to as "sexual meet-up groups." One can only hope that on Judgment Day Gordon to his horror discovers that God is either a black lesbian or really pissed off gay male. The Advocate has coverage on this bigotry. Here are some highlights:*
A Rhode Island state representative has received a barrage of criticism since posting comments online last week saying that a high school gay-straight alliance in his district is a venue for students to get “sexed-up” and should cause the school to lose state funding.
*
Club founder Cynda Martin, a senior, was quoted as saying, “With the bullying that goes on in schools today, especially for gay kids, it seemed appropriate to have a safe haven for them and their allies.” She added that she hopes to show that gays are not “horrible people.” The article also included complimentary quotes from a teacher and an administrator.
*
Republican state representative Dan Gordon. . . . said . . .if sexual meet-up groups are being promoted in our schools rather than improving test scores, that school is failing. Is it really more important for our children to get ‘sexed-up’, than learning advanced math?”
*
A war of words ensued between Gordon and other commenters on the site, with most of them defending the GSA and pointing out that the club is designed to offer students support and acceptance, not facilitate sexual hookups.
*
Gordon went on Providence radio station WPRO Thursday to explain his stance further. He said he is not antigay . . . Gordon made no apology for his statements, but he offered to attend a Tiverton GSA meeting — something about which the members have mixed feelings. Brown University radio station WBRU carried a story on the matter Sunday; listen here.
Will McDonald Derail Regulations to Allow Gay Adoptions?
Over the weekend I noted how Maggie Gallagher and the Christofascists at inappropriately named Liberty Counsel (which wants liberty only for right wing Christians) were beside themselves over the fact that the Virginia Department of Social Services is considering new regulations which would clearly allow Virginia LGBT citizens to adopt and be foster parents. Never mind that there is a pressing need for stable homes for children. It's all about stigmatizing gays and keeping us third or fourth class citizens. Heterosexual parents can be totally unfit in the eyes of these hate merchants since all that matters is that the sleep with someone of the opposite gender. Now, Governor Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell must decide whether or not to get involved in the fray. If he derails the regulations, he will be hard put to paint himself as a moderate conservative in his ambitions for higher office. If he doesn't, the Bible beaters will go into a gay hating frenzy. Sadly, my money is on McDonnell seeking to appease the anti-gay hate merchants at The Family Foundation and, of course, within the Catholic Church. leadership. If the regulations are derailed, it will be but another example of why LGBT Virginians who can do so ought to seriously consider leave Virginia - taking their money and other transportable assets with them. The Washington Post looks at McDonnell's dilemma. Here are highlights:*
Republican Gov. Robert F. McDonnell is considering whether to try to derail proposed regulations developed by his Democratic predecessor that would for the first time allow gay couples to adopt children in Virginia.
*
McDonnell has less than two weeks to act on the regulations that would force state-licensed private and church-run agencies to allow unmarried couples — heterosexual or homosexual — to adopt children. Conservatives, including Del. Robert G. Marshall (R-Prince William), are lobbying McDonnell to ask the State Board of Social Services to kill the proposal because they do not think it is healthy for gay couples to raise children.
*
McDonnell alienated gay rights activists shortly after taking office when he excluded sexual orientation from an executive order that barred discrimination in the state workforce, a break in tradition from his Democratic predecessors.
*
Later, when Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II advised the state’s public colleges to rescind policies that ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, McDonnell further angered gay rights activists when, in an attempt to quell the matter, he issued a nonbinding “executive directive” prohibiting discrimination in the state workforce, including on the basis of sexual orientation.
*
McDonnell must make his recommendation to the State Board of Social Services, a nine-member panel in which all but four members are holdovers from his Democratic predecessor, by April 16. . . . Kaine, who is expected to run for U.S. Senate next year, proposed the change to the regulations in November 2009, less than two months before he left the office to become the full-time chairman of the Democratic National Committee.
*
Victoria Cobb, president of the Family Foundation, said she contacted the governor’s office and is confident that the administration plans to recommend the removal of the language.
*
Cobb said her organization, which is against gay couples adopting children, opposes the regulations more strongly on the basis of religious freedom. She said private adoption agencies deserve to have the ability to screen prospective parents based on the agency’s beliefs.
*
Jeff Caruso, executive director of the Virginia Catholic Conference, the public policy arm of the state’s Catholic dioceses, said his organization also opposes the new regulations on the basis of religious freedom.
Monday, April 04, 2011
RNC Joins Hate Groups in Anti-Gay Propaganda
Sadly, the anti-gay propaganda of Christianist hate groups is slowly but surely spreading to the Republican National Committee. I guess one should not be surprised inasmuch as the GOP has basically become a quasi-religious party controlled, of course, by conservative religious extremists best defined by who they hate. And is always is the case, gays are one of the favorite bogey men to be paraded out as a threat to society and America in general. On an anti-Obama website called "Hope Isn't Hiring," paid for by the RNC, nearly half of Barack Obama's alleged offenses against the country involve policies that are either gay friendly or seek to afford LGBT couples minimal basic human rights. Even the right to hospital visitation to see one's life partner is deemed noxious by the RNC. As John Aravosis noted on America Blog, about the only anti-gay initiative not backed by the RNC is the public stoning of LGBT citizens. Here's a sampling of the RNC's take on LGBT individuals as members of the human family:*
Despite It Being The Law Of The Land, Obama Refused To Continue Defending The Defense Of Marriage Act In Court “President Obama, in a major legal policy shift, has directed the Justice Department to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act — the 1996 law that bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages — against lawsuits challenging it as unconstitutional.”
*
Obama Repealed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell While U.S. Troops Are Still On The Battlefield
*
Obama's New Regulation Eliminates The Cutting Off Of Federal Funding To Entities That Discriminated Against Individuals Who Refuse To Participate In Certain Practices Because Of “Personal, Moral Or Religious Beliefs.” "Calling the Bush-era rule 'unclear and potentially over broad in scope,' the new, much narrower version essentially leaves in place only long-standing federal protections for workers who object to performing abortions or sterilizations.
*
Obama Opposed California’s Proposition 8 And Has Expanded The Federal Government’s Recognition Of Same-Sex Couples
*
When Reading Obama’s Statements On Prop 8, “You Might Think President Obama Supports The Rights Of Gays To Marry.” “Judging by the White House statement after a federal judge struck down California's Proposition 8 on Wednesday, you might think President Obama supports the rights of gays to marry. The president ‘has spoken out in opposition to Proposition 8 because it is divisive and discriminatory. He will continue to promote equality for LGBT Americans,’ the White House said.”
*
Obama Supports Civil Unions, The Extension Of Legal Benefits To Gay Couples, Which He Says Provide Important Rights To Gays And Lesbians In Their Everyday Lives.”
*
Obama Issued An Executive Order Allowing Same Sex Couples Hospital Visitation Rights. “President Obama's decision Thursday night to grant same-sex couples hospital visitation rights is the latest and most visible example of a strategy to make concrete steps toward equality for gays and lesbians without sparking a broad cultural debate or a fight with Congress.”
*
Obama Has Been Acting On Policy Recommendations From The Human Rights Campaign Since Taking Office. “Over the next several months, the administration quietly began acting on the recommendations: The State Department started issuing embassy ID cards to same-sex partners of diplomats; Housing and Urban Development ended discrimination in housing assistance programs; HHS pledged to change its policies regarding HIV-positive visitors and immigrants.”
*
The nation's economy is still in the toilet, we have done nothing to address our frightening dependence on foreign oil, and we are about to fall behind other nations in scientific research, yet half of the RNC's concerns focus on measures that do nothing more than treat LGBT citizens as full human and recognize legitimate medical and mental health knowledge that clearly states that sexual orientation is not changeable and not a choice.
Despite It Being The Law Of The Land, Obama Refused To Continue Defending The Defense Of Marriage Act In Court “President Obama, in a major legal policy shift, has directed the Justice Department to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act — the 1996 law that bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages — against lawsuits challenging it as unconstitutional.”
*
Obama Repealed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell While U.S. Troops Are Still On The Battlefield
*
Obama's New Regulation Eliminates The Cutting Off Of Federal Funding To Entities That Discriminated Against Individuals Who Refuse To Participate In Certain Practices Because Of “Personal, Moral Or Religious Beliefs.” "Calling the Bush-era rule 'unclear and potentially over broad in scope,' the new, much narrower version essentially leaves in place only long-standing federal protections for workers who object to performing abortions or sterilizations.
*
Obama Opposed California’s Proposition 8 And Has Expanded The Federal Government’s Recognition Of Same-Sex Couples
*
When Reading Obama’s Statements On Prop 8, “You Might Think President Obama Supports The Rights Of Gays To Marry.” “Judging by the White House statement after a federal judge struck down California's Proposition 8 on Wednesday, you might think President Obama supports the rights of gays to marry. The president ‘has spoken out in opposition to Proposition 8 because it is divisive and discriminatory. He will continue to promote equality for LGBT Americans,’ the White House said.”
*
Obama Supports Civil Unions, The Extension Of Legal Benefits To Gay Couples, Which He Says Provide Important Rights To Gays And Lesbians In Their Everyday Lives.”
*
Obama Issued An Executive Order Allowing Same Sex Couples Hospital Visitation Rights. “President Obama's decision Thursday night to grant same-sex couples hospital visitation rights is the latest and most visible example of a strategy to make concrete steps toward equality for gays and lesbians without sparking a broad cultural debate or a fight with Congress.”
*
Obama Has Been Acting On Policy Recommendations From The Human Rights Campaign Since Taking Office. “Over the next several months, the administration quietly began acting on the recommendations: The State Department started issuing embassy ID cards to same-sex partners of diplomats; Housing and Urban Development ended discrimination in housing assistance programs; HHS pledged to change its policies regarding HIV-positive visitors and immigrants.”
*
The nation's economy is still in the toilet, we have done nothing to address our frightening dependence on foreign oil, and we are about to fall behind other nations in scientific research, yet half of the RNC's concerns focus on measures that do nothing more than treat LGBT citizens as full human and recognize legitimate medical and mental health knowledge that clearly states that sexual orientation is not changeable and not a choice.
Traveling Holocaust Exhibit Details Nazi Persecution of Gays
I've noted before the deliberate attempts by some in the Christian Right to tie gays to those responsible for the Nazi horrors of the "Final Solution" and World War II - even as they themselves utilize the same propaganda techniques used against Jews 70 some years ago by the Nazi regime against modern day LGBT citizens. The clinically insane (at least in my opinion) Scott Lively is one of the worse of such pathologically lying propagandists as exemplified by his book "The Pink Swastika" which has been thoroughly discredited by legitimate historians even if the ignorant and uneducated fall for Lively's lie in parts of Africa. The Seattle Times has an article that looks at the lesser recognized victims of Nazi persecution.; gays. A link to more information from the Holocaust Museum is here. Note the chilling parallels between what the Nazi propaganda said against gays and what is disseminated virtually daily by Maggie Gallagher and her cohorts at OM, Tony Perkins and FRC, Virginia Cobb and the bigots at The Family Foundation here in Virginia, and of course the Wildmons at American Family Association. These people and their organizations are indeed little better than the Nazi regime of Adolph Hitler in the lies disseminated against LGBT Americans. Here are some story highlights:*
A traveling exhibit by the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum sheds light on the Nazi persecution of gay Germans. Though the Nazis never intended to murder all gays, as they intended to eliminate all Jews, they nevertheless sent thousands of them to concentration camps and destroyed the lives of tens of thousands others.
*
Some attendees had no idea before hearing about the exhibit that Nazis targeted gays, Simon said. "With what's happening today, especially with the bullying of homosexuals in schools, people said they wanted to have a perspective of what it looked like during the Nazi era."
*
Within a month of taking power in 1933, the Nazis closed gay and lesbian publications and gathering places. Their aim was to terrorize gays into sexual and social conformity, according to the exhibit and a lecture Simon gave Sunday.
*
Nazis targeted gays partly because of Germany's declining birthrate; 2 million German men had died in World War I. They thought gays endangered public morality and they considered homosexuality an infection that could become an epidemic, particularly among youth. In forwarding their hateful agenda, the Nazis often cited "traditional family values," Simon said.
*
Under Nazi rule, more than 100,000 gay men were arrested; 50,000 were imprisoned. Thousands went to concentration camps. To avoid that fate, many gay men married, killed themselves or even castrated themselves, believing it would help them avoid prison, Simon said.
*
The next time you see Maggie Gallagher or Tony Perkins engaging in an anti-gay harangue, close your eyes and visualize the faces of some of their role models - Hitler, Goebbels and Himmler - in how to denigrate LGBT individuals. It's an ugly image but quickly puts today's virulently anti-gay "family values" advocates in context.
Get Ready to Say Good Bye to the Days of American Exceptionalism
The GOP base and the crazies of the Religious Right loved to talk about mythical"American Exceptionalism" - even as they (especially the latter) work tirelessly to drag the nation back to a 13th century level of science and knowledge through their quest for the supremacy of "intelligent design" and other bullshit disguises for creationism and a strong anti-science mindset. These folks would rather cling to the false certainty of their whacked out religious beliefs than deal with objective reality - and yes, the its attendant uncertainties that go with it. Meanwhile, other parts of the world are surging forward. Particularly China which by the estimates of Great Britain's Royal Society will surpass the USA in science achievement within roughly 2 years. That's right, as the GOP and its religious extremist and know nothing base seek to rush backwards in time and knowledge, China is moving to seize the future. It is yet another example of those who would claim to be "saving the nation" actually be the main forces behind its decline. Here are some highlights from the BBC (source of the chart above):
*
China is on course to overtake the US in scientific output possibly as soon as 2013 - far earlier than expected. That is the conclusion of a major new study by the Royal Society, the UK's national science academy. The country that invented the compass, gunpowder, paper and printing is set for a globally important comeback. An analysis of published research - one of the key measures of scientific effort - reveals an "especially striking" rise by Chinese science.
*
[T]his study shows that China, after displacing the UK as the world's second leading producer of research, could go on to overtake America in as little as two years' time. "Projections vary, but a simple linear interpretation of Elsevier's publishing data suggests that this could take place as early as 2013," it says.
*
Professor Sir Chris Llewellyn Smith, chair of the report, said he was "not surprised" by this increase because of China's massive boost to investment in R&D.
Chinese spending has grown by 20% per year since 1999, now reaching over $100bn, and as many as 1.5 million science and engineering students graduated from Chinese universities in 2006.
*
The report stresses that American research output will not decline in absolute terms and raises the possibility of countries like Japan and France rising to meet the Chinese challenge. "But the potential for China to match American output in terms of sheer numbers in the near to medium term is clear."
*
Some historians blame the rise of Christianity in part for the fall of ancient Rome. It will certainly be a strange irony if toxic conservative Christianity plays a major role in the fall of the USA in coming years. Being abjectly ignorant by choice is not something to be proud of by my reckoning. Indeed, it's an insult to God (if there is one) who gave humans intelligence and an ability to reason and use their intelligence. Yet, a refusal to use reason and intelligence are today's hallmark of conservative Christians.
*
China is on course to overtake the US in scientific output possibly as soon as 2013 - far earlier than expected. That is the conclusion of a major new study by the Royal Society, the UK's national science academy. The country that invented the compass, gunpowder, paper and printing is set for a globally important comeback. An analysis of published research - one of the key measures of scientific effort - reveals an "especially striking" rise by Chinese science.
*
[T]his study shows that China, after displacing the UK as the world's second leading producer of research, could go on to overtake America in as little as two years' time. "Projections vary, but a simple linear interpretation of Elsevier's publishing data suggests that this could take place as early as 2013," it says.
*
Professor Sir Chris Llewellyn Smith, chair of the report, said he was "not surprised" by this increase because of China's massive boost to investment in R&D.
Chinese spending has grown by 20% per year since 1999, now reaching over $100bn, and as many as 1.5 million science and engineering students graduated from Chinese universities in 2006.
*
The report stresses that American research output will not decline in absolute terms and raises the possibility of countries like Japan and France rising to meet the Chinese challenge. "But the potential for China to match American output in terms of sheer numbers in the near to medium term is clear."
*
Some historians blame the rise of Christianity in part for the fall of ancient Rome. It will certainly be a strange irony if toxic conservative Christianity plays a major role in the fall of the USA in coming years. Being abjectly ignorant by choice is not something to be proud of by my reckoning. Indeed, it's an insult to God (if there is one) who gave humans intelligence and an ability to reason and use their intelligence. Yet, a refusal to use reason and intelligence are today's hallmark of conservative Christians.
Exposing the Lie of Gay Promiscuity in Public Parks
One of the favorite lies of the far right and the perpetually lying professional Christian organizations is the ongoing effort to depict LGBT individuals - gay men in particular - as sexually promiscuous and constantly looking for sexual hook ups and trysts in public parks as well as similar public venues. All too frequently the irresponsible and incredibly lazy media reporters and talking head news anchors merely parrot the bullshit being mouthed by the Christianists and never bother to make any effort to fact check the claims to see if the alleged facts support by objective facts. That after all would require some effort and would likely result in less sensational and titillating stories. Matt Comer - another 2008 Blogger Summit participant I had the honor of meeting - decided to check out the sensationalized stories carried by WBTV-TV in Charlotte, North Carolina against the actual police records. Low and behold, it turns out that the WBTB-TV stories were NOT supported by the facts. Oh, and of the men arrested, the majority are married men on the down low. In short, if any problem of promiscuity and prostitution exits in Charlotte, by a vast majority of cases it is HETEROSEXUAL prostitution. NOT GAY SEX. Here are some highlights from Matt's post on QNotes:*
If Charlotte news station WBTV or Republican Mecklenburg County Commissioner Bill James were your only sources of information, you’d likely be led to believe the Queen City has a significant problem with men engaging in illegal sexual activities in the city’s and county’s public parks.
*
Fortunately, real journalism uncovers hard numbers — facts backed up by police records — that show an astonishingly low rate of arrests for men soliciting so-called crimes against nature in public places.
The myth that gay men are predators is nothing new. . . . . Armed with nothing more than anonymous online postings from a hook-up website, [WBTV reporter Steve] Crump took to southwest Charlotte’s James Boyce Park to interview concerned parents and community members.
*
Crump’s report included interviews with parents and the leader of a nearby neighborhood patrol, accompanied by several video images of young children playing on swing sets and other playground equipment, on a baseball field and with their parents. Copies of the website postings were shown to parents during interviews. In one scene, the reporter mentions the name of the website, “Cruising Gays,” followed by a parent’s, “Oh no!” Later, a young woman is heard saying, “This is awful.”
*
Following their initial report, WBTV aired another story after County Commissioner James publicly questioned how recreation officials were dealing with “sexual predators” and the “moral scourge” in Mecklenburg County parks. James claimed the parks had become home to “homos-xual infestations” and that the police still “arrest about 250 homosexuals a year.”
*
Following WBTV’s report, Qnotes decided to do what Crump and his colleagues chose not to. We immediately undertook an investigation of arrests and charges for solicitation of a crime against nature and requested information from CMPD for all of 2010 and 2011 through the end of February. According to CMPD’s Rob Tufano, a total of 325 people were charged in 2010 and 2011 with soliciting a crime against nature. Of the total, only 69 [21%] were men. Forty-seven men were arrested and charged, and the remainder were issued citations. . . . Only 15 cases [out of 325 in total] involved men charged with a non-prostitution-, non-drug-related solicitation of a crime against nature.
*
“What we generally, mainly enforce is the [heterosexual] prostitution. We have a proliferation of it on the internet. It used to be Craigslist; now it is Backpage. We also have a decent sized street prostitution problem here in Charlotte and at back massage parlors.” . . . The majority of arrested men, Hollar said, are either married or haven’t publicly acknowledged their sexual orientation.
*
The lopsided numbers all point to heterosexual prostitution as the primary issue of concern among sexual crimes in Charlotte — not men who have sex with men. Upon further investigation and upon being exposed to the public, these facts are clear to even the most casual of observers. Yet, reporter Steve Crump and WBTV opted to ignore calls for accuracy, chose to distort and mislead the few facts they cared to report and played into decades-old prejudices and stereotypes of gay men.
*
Such behavior is a clear violation of journalistic ethics and can do irreparable harm to LGBT people. That’s why Qnotes, unlike our colleagues at WBTV, opted to engage in real journalism, investigate the issue and report solid facts. We also sought to hold our colleagues at WBTV accountable.
*
The evidence points Charlotte — and, in particular, County Commissioner Bill James and WBTV — in one clear direction: stop scapegoating gay men and start looking in the mirror. Misbehaving heterosexuals are your problem. Leave us gay folk alone.
*
Kudos to Matt for exposing the lies of WBTV=TV and Commissioner James. Lies are lies whether or not the liar pretends to be a godly Christian like Commissioner James or not. As is so often the case, the real facts are so inconvenient to the Christianist agenda. When need to be constantly vigilant so that lazy journalists do not get away with regurgitating Christianist lies.
The Bogus "Religious Freedom" Ruse of Modern Day Pharisee Christians
Yesterday afternoon the boyfriend and I attended the funeral of one of his elderly clients in a beautiful old church in downtown Hampton. One of the banners hanging in the sanctuary had the statement "Love One Another as I Have Loved You." From what I know of this church, many of its members do indeed work to follow this motto which, if applied universally would transform society. Sadly, the professional Christian set and modern day Pharisees among conservative denominations - the Christianists if you will - act as if they have never heard the passage. Instead, their public pronouncements are almost without exception focused on hatred. Hatred towards gays. Hatred towards minorities. Hatred towards non-Christians. Hatred towards Hispanics and immigrants. It truly is all about who and what they hate. Closely tied to this underlying theme of hatred is a contempt for the right of others to hold different religious beliefs. Or - God forbid - wish to live their lives as they decide and not as the Christianists would dictate. This contempt carries over into the disingenuous mantra that gay rights is a threat to religious freedom. If anyone threatens religious freedom, its the ever lying Christianists. Alex Blaze at The Bilerico Project looks at this devious and knowingly disingenuous refrain. Here are some highlights:*
The point, time and time again, isn't about increasing freedom for everyone or even increasing religious freedom for everyone, but making sure that people deemed sufficiently Real American can't be criticized or forced to act with any decency to people deemed less American.
*
The jingoism is made obvious by the fact that the people who say that, say, a high school counselor who doesn't want to treat queer students should be allowed to keep their job because of religious freedom are the very same people who oppose the construction of Muslim community centers
*
Their appeal isn't to a higher principle when they say that LGBT rights mean less religious freedom - their appeal is for Americans to stop thinking and support the people who look and act most like them. Bryan Fischer, a rightwing crank and neo-Know Nothing, argued just that last week when he said that the First Amendment doesn't cover Muslims, just Christians.
*
His opinion is, of course, based on faulty data. He cites a fictional story about Thomas Jefferson realizing that Islam was going to destroy America and says that that means the Founders didn't want Islam protected by the First Amendment.
*
But being right or wrong isn't important here since most of Fischer's audience isn't going to look up what Jefferson thought about Islam. The reason I bring this up is that Fischer just plain says what we've been accusing the Religious Right of believing: that religious freedom is important to them insofar as it benefits them, not anyone else.
*
He put it right out there that claims for religious freedom are in fact about promoting Christianity. Last I checked, that was against the Constitution. Maybe someone should tell these folks.
Sunday, April 03, 2011
Anti-Gay Pastor Arrested for Rape and Torture of Boy Under 12
In yet another example of the real undercurrents of self-loathing that seem to be the real motivating factor for closet cases and disgusting pedophiles among the clergy, a former California pastor, Barry Albert Cook, was arrested in Alabama on charges of sexual torture and child abuse. These folks rant and rave against gays and those they deem as "other," yet meanwhile it is a ruse to camouflage their own own warped and screwed up mental conditions In this case, the supposed"man of God" liked sex with males - much, much young males. As Alabama television station WSFA-TV and the North County Times have reported, pastor Cook has been booked on charges that he sexually abused a boy younger than 12 years of age. Cook had been recently hired it seems by a church in Alabama. Personally, I am way past over these psychopaths trying to transfer their own psychosis to us normal and well adjusted gays, Here are highlights from the North County News:*
The former pastor of what was once a large church congregation in Oceanside was arrested in Alabama on charges of sexual torture and child abuse, a police captain in the southern state said.
*
Alabama television station WSFA reported that the victim was a boy younger than 12.
*
Police in Montgomery, Ala., arrested Barry Albert Cook on Thursday, Montgomery police Capt. Ron Cook said. Barry Cook, 47, was placed in the Montgomery County Detention Facility. He remained jailed Tuesday in lieu of $500,000 bail, according to online jail records. The former pastor also had an outstanding warrant for domestic violence in the third degree, the police captain said.
*
About a decade ago, Cook stirred controversy when, during a speech against racism, he said, "We must see through the leech causes ... like non-citizens who want the same rights and the homosexual agendas who try to equate immoral sexual practices with the issue of racism."
The former pastor of what was once a large church congregation in Oceanside was arrested in Alabama on charges of sexual torture and child abuse, a police captain in the southern state said.
*
Alabama television station WSFA reported that the victim was a boy younger than 12.
*
Police in Montgomery, Ala., arrested Barry Albert Cook on Thursday, Montgomery police Capt. Ron Cook said. Barry Cook, 47, was placed in the Montgomery County Detention Facility. He remained jailed Tuesday in lieu of $500,000 bail, according to online jail records. The former pastor also had an outstanding warrant for domestic violence in the third degree, the police captain said.
*
About a decade ago, Cook stirred controversy when, during a speech against racism, he said, "We must see through the leech causes ... like non-citizens who want the same rights and the homosexual agendas who try to equate immoral sexual practices with the issue of racism."
It's Time For Politically Active Churches to Lose Tax-Exempt Status
Having done a fair amount of legal work for non-profit organizations, one of the big no-no's is involvement in political activities in support or opposition of particular candidates and/or legislation. To be tax-exempt, one had to focus on charitable activities, not politics and candidate support. Increasingly, churches - principally conservative ones - have thrown this concept out the window and here in Virginia, many conservative (translated, anti-gay, anti-abortion, and anti-religious freedom for others) churches are now basically an arm of the Republican Party with activities orchestrated through the ever foul Family Foundation. Virginia is not unique, however, as a New York Times article makes clear as it focuses on the activities of religious extremists - inappropriately called religious conservatives - in Iowa. The Mormon Church and Catholic Church are increasingly just as guilty of violating the basic requirement for tax exempt status under Sec. 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. When the Hell is the IRS going to go after these churches and organizations? If the GOP is worried about the federal deficit, revocation of tax-exempt status to these bodies would bring in huge sums of money. Of course, it would also cripple the GOP which has become a sectarian party. Here are highlights from the Times article (NOTE: funding has come from AFA, a registered hate group; also note the reference to David Barton as a "Christian historian" - Barton's version of U.S. history is best described as fiction when compared to the actual truth):*
Hundreds of conservative pastors in Iowa received the enticing invitation. Signed by Mike Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor and 2008 presidential contender, it invited the pastors and their spouses to an expenses-paid, two-day Pastors’ Policy Briefing at a Sheraton hotel.
*
Nearly 400 Iowa ministers and many of their spouses accepted, filling a ballroom here on March 24 and 25. Through an evening banquet and long sessions, they heard speakers deplore a secular assault on evangelical Christian verities like the sanctity of male-female marriage, the humanity of the unborn and the divine right to limited government.
*
These meetings are part of a largely quiet drive to revitalize the religious right by drawing evangelical pastors and their flocks more deeply into politics — an effort given new energy by what conservative church leaders see as the ominous creep of laws allowing same-sex marriage and their sense that America is, literally, heading toward hell.
*
The Iowa pastors heard David Barton, a Christian historian, argue that the country was founded as explicitly Christian and lament that too few evangelicals get out and vote. They heard Newt Gingrich, a former House speaker and like Mr. Huckabee a possible 2012 presidential candidate, say that constitutional liberties like the right to bear arms were ordained by God.
*
He [Huckabee] and the other Republican speakers were careful not to sound too much like candidates in this officially nonpartisan forum, instead emphasizing the threats to conservative Christian values and the need for churches to be engaged.
*
“What we’re doing with the pastor meetings is spiritual, but the end result is political,” Mr. Lane said in a rare interview, outside the doors of the Iowa meeting. “From my perspective, our country is going to hell because pastors won’t lead from the pulpits.” . . . . Something of a stealth weapon for the right, he has also stepped in to assist in special-issue campaigns, like the successful effort in Iowa last year to unseat three State Supreme Court justices who had voted to allow same-sex marriage.
*
The meetings, which cost many tens of thousands of dollars, have been largely paid for by the Mississippi-based American Family Association, he said.
*
In perhaps no state has the mobilization of churches paid off more than in Iowa, where evangelical Christians now dominate the state Republican Party and presidential caucuses even though their share of the population, one in four, is at the national average.
*
Like all the pastor meetings, the recent one in Iowa was not advertised and was closed to the news media. But the speeches were streamed on the Web site of the American Family Association, and highlights were broadcast online on March 26 to crowds gathered in 177 churches around the country by a California-based group called United in Purpose, which shares the goal of drawing pastors into politics.
*
The audience heard how to push their flocks to register and vote along “biblical principles” without running afoul of tax laws against endorsing candidates from the pulpit. The Rev. Michael Demastus, 40, pastor of the Fort Des Moines Church of Christ, said he was energized: “I came out of there like Seabiscuit out of the gate, ready to do even more.
*
As the USA purports to be fighting religious extremism and religious based hatred in the Middle East, we are allowing it to flourish here at home. Indeed, by giving churches such as the ones involved in these meetings tax-exempt status, the rest of the citizenry is being forced to indirectly subsidize our enemies and the enemies of the U.S. Constitution. I find it very troubling.
Hundreds of conservative pastors in Iowa received the enticing invitation. Signed by Mike Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor and 2008 presidential contender, it invited the pastors and their spouses to an expenses-paid, two-day Pastors’ Policy Briefing at a Sheraton hotel.
*
Nearly 400 Iowa ministers and many of their spouses accepted, filling a ballroom here on March 24 and 25. Through an evening banquet and long sessions, they heard speakers deplore a secular assault on evangelical Christian verities like the sanctity of male-female marriage, the humanity of the unborn and the divine right to limited government.
*
These meetings are part of a largely quiet drive to revitalize the religious right by drawing evangelical pastors and their flocks more deeply into politics — an effort given new energy by what conservative church leaders see as the ominous creep of laws allowing same-sex marriage and their sense that America is, literally, heading toward hell.
*
The Iowa pastors heard David Barton, a Christian historian, argue that the country was founded as explicitly Christian and lament that too few evangelicals get out and vote. They heard Newt Gingrich, a former House speaker and like Mr. Huckabee a possible 2012 presidential candidate, say that constitutional liberties like the right to bear arms were ordained by God.
*
He [Huckabee] and the other Republican speakers were careful not to sound too much like candidates in this officially nonpartisan forum, instead emphasizing the threats to conservative Christian values and the need for churches to be engaged.
*
“What we’re doing with the pastor meetings is spiritual, but the end result is political,” Mr. Lane said in a rare interview, outside the doors of the Iowa meeting. “From my perspective, our country is going to hell because pastors won’t lead from the pulpits.” . . . . Something of a stealth weapon for the right, he has also stepped in to assist in special-issue campaigns, like the successful effort in Iowa last year to unseat three State Supreme Court justices who had voted to allow same-sex marriage.
*
The meetings, which cost many tens of thousands of dollars, have been largely paid for by the Mississippi-based American Family Association, he said.
*
In perhaps no state has the mobilization of churches paid off more than in Iowa, where evangelical Christians now dominate the state Republican Party and presidential caucuses even though their share of the population, one in four, is at the national average.
*
Like all the pastor meetings, the recent one in Iowa was not advertised and was closed to the news media. But the speeches were streamed on the Web site of the American Family Association, and highlights were broadcast online on March 26 to crowds gathered in 177 churches around the country by a California-based group called United in Purpose, which shares the goal of drawing pastors into politics.
*
The audience heard how to push their flocks to register and vote along “biblical principles” without running afoul of tax laws against endorsing candidates from the pulpit. The Rev. Michael Demastus, 40, pastor of the Fort Des Moines Church of Christ, said he was energized: “I came out of there like Seabiscuit out of the gate, ready to do even more.
*
As the USA purports to be fighting religious extremism and religious based hatred in the Middle East, we are allowing it to flourish here at home. Indeed, by giving churches such as the ones involved in these meetings tax-exempt status, the rest of the citizenry is being forced to indirectly subsidize our enemies and the enemies of the U.S. Constitution. I find it very troubling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
