More Saturday Male Beauty

Is Homophobia a Factor in HIV Racial Gap?

I serve on the local Ryan White committee and the brother of one of best friends in college heads up the HIV/AIDS program at Eastern Virginia Medical School and, based on all I have seen and heard, the answer to the question posed in this post is a loud YES! In this area, other than the Kool-Aid drinkers at Pat Robertson's coven of crazies at Regent University and CBN, no one is more loudly anti-gay and homophobic than the local black ministers. The pontificate against every pro-gay piece of legislation proposed and worked overtime for their white masters at The Family Foundation to pass Virginia's vile Marshall-Newman amendment which wrote religious based discrimination into the state's constitution. The same cynical manipulation by racists occurred in the Prop 8 battle in California. The result? As is the case nationally, HIV/AIDS is an epidemic in the local black community - for BOTH men and women - and for the most part the black churches do nothing except rant against gays. These "men of God" are killing their own people and time and time again allowing themselves to be manipulated by the descendants of the segregationist of the past. It drives me crazy! Here are highlights on the problem from MSNBC:
*
Among gay men in the United States, blacks are more likely than whites to believe that homosexuality is "wrong" - and these feelings might be contributing to the black men's higher risk of HIV infection, researchers suggest.
*
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2006 African-Americans accounted for nearly half (45%) of new infections in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Also, according to recent estimates, they account for a disproportionate 24 percent of reported HIV cases among gay and bisexual men in the U.S. The reasons are not clear. Studies have not found a higher rate of risky sexual behavior among black men versus white men -- but a range of factors are likely at work.
*
Using data from a U.S. health survey conducted periodically since 1972, the researchers found that, in general, African-Americans were more likely than whites to report a negative attitude toward homosexuality. In 2008, 72 percent of black adults said that homosexuality was "always wrong" -- a rate that had changed little since the 1970s. Among whites, 52 percent expressed that view in 2008, which was down from 71 percent in 1973.
*
A similar pattern was seen among men who reported having sex with other men. Of these men, 57 percent of African Americans said they believed homosexuality was always wrong, versus 27 percent of whites. When the researchers looked at the men's reported rates of HIV testing, they found that those who regarded homosexuality as wrong were less likely to have ever been tested: 36 percent, versus 73 percent of those with a more favorable view of homosexuality.
*
This pattern . . . does raise that possibility, they say. For one thing, men who know they're infected with HIV are likely to change their behavior to avoid infecting others. Also, they're likely to seek treatment. According to the researchers, other studies have shown that black men who have sex with men tend to prefer other black partners - who would inevitably bear the brunt of any reluctance to go for HIV testing.
*
Roque did agree that homophobia, in general, may be a factor in HIV transmission among gay and bisexual men. Men may be less likely to take care of their health, he told Reuters Health, "if they are hearing that they don't matter, or if they don't feel good about themselves." One issue, according to Roque, is the lack of positive media representations of gay and bisexual men of color.
*
Even if the researchers' suspicions are confirmed, homophobia is certainly not the only factor to blame for the particularly severe burden of HIV in American blacks. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says on its web site that it is presently "conducting research to better understand and plan interventions to address the social, community, financial, and structural factors that place many African Americans at risk (for HIV) and hinder access to prevention and care."
*
Once again, we see religion as a force for evil. One has to wonder if and when the black churches will wake up to the damage they are doing.

Outgoing Marine Corps Commandant is a Bigot and Good Riddance

I'm of an age where I spent most of my teen years watching the evening news which had coverage of the daily carnage in Viet Nam - and the constant statements of senior U. S. military personnel that "we are winning," we just need a little more time, blah, blah, blah. None of these statements were true, of course, but it's the nature of the top U.S. military brass to always lie so that they can continue their war games which claim the lives of young service members and squander the nation's financial strength. The same thing is happening now in the Middle East except we no longer have the nightly video of wounded and dead Americans on the screen. If we did, we'd have been out of the fool's errand launched by Chimperator Bush long ago. So why do Americans even listen to the lies and pontifications of the senior military brass? It baffles me, personally, because they have an accuracy/truthfulness that makes weather forecasters look like prophets with near 100% scores of accuracy. Yet Obama and others in civilian government pander and kiss the asses of these jerks. And the media gives them a platform to spout their bullshit ideas all to frequently with no anchor willing to challenge them factually.
*
A case in point - Gen. James Conway, outgoing commandant of the Marine Corps. General Conway - who might be better called Gen Bigot - shot off his mouth on Fox News on DADT and whined that "as many as 95 percent of Marines would be uncomfortable serving alongside openly gay troops." Does He have any hard data to support this statement? Of course not. But that never stops the senior military brass. Maybe a better question to the good general would be how many young and women he and his senior brass cronies have wrongly sent to their deaths over his career. Now there's a number that could likely be supported with hard data. I suspect the number would be shocking and strip Conway of any credibility on any issue. Here's a sampling of Conway's verbal diarrhea from Fox News:
*
Gen. James Conway told Fox News' Jennifer Griffin that a majority of his men and women think a repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy barring gays from serving openly will be problematic, so he has to believe that, too.
*
"When we take a survey of our Marines, by and large, they say that they are concerned that it will cause potential problems with regard to their order and discipline -- that it will impact their sense of unit cohesion," Conway said.
*
Gen. Conway was the first member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to speak out against a repeal earlier this year after Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen publicly endorsed President Obama's desire to change the law.
*
Conway is known for being outspoken, sometimes a renegade, and didn't always agree with the advice being given from the field about the way ahead in Iraq and Afghanistan. He often butted heads with Gen. David Petraeus over the surge in Iraq.
*
"Frankly, David Petraeus and I disagreed a little bit on this," Conway said. It was Conway's belief that the Marines stationed in Anbar were well on their way to turning the war's momentum. "So we have said that the surge reinforced successes that were already happening in the Anbar."
*
Conway is still singing the Viet Nam era script both militarily and in terms of social issues. My thoughts on him? Good riddance. His retirement next week cannot come soon enough.

Saturday Male Beauty

How Religion Is Killing Our Most Vulnerable Youth

Bishop Gene Robinson has a great piece at Huffington Post that mirrors some of the thoughts I and others have also expressed in terms of the responsibility of the Religious Right for gay teen suicides. He also calls out progressive denominations and pastors for failing to do more to counter the toxic and deadly message that is a daily drum beat coming from the Mormon Church, Catholic Church, Southern Baptist Convention and similar anti-gay denominations and faith traditions. While the United Church of Christ, Unitarians, Metropolitan Community Church, ELCA and Episcopal Churches have all taken real steps to accept LGBT individuals and clergy, more is needed to counter the hate flowing from falsely named "family values" organizations and the parasites of the professional Christian set who specialize in hate and intolerance. Readers should read the full column. Here are some highlights:

*

An increasingly popular bumper sticker reads, "Guns Don't Kill People -- RELIGION Kills People!" In light of recent events I would add religion kills young people: gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender young people. Perhaps not directly, though. And religion is certainly not the only source of anti-gay sentiment in the culture. But it's hard to deny that religious voices denouncing LGBT people contribute to the atmosphere in which violence against LGBT people and bullying of LGBT youth can flourish.

*

[W]hy this rash of bullying, paired with self-loathing, ending in suicide? With humility and heartfelt repentance I assert that religion -- and its general rejection of homosexuality -- plays a crucial role in this crisis.

*
On the one hand, Religious Right hatemongers and crazies are spewing all sorts of venom and condemnation, all in the name of a loving God. The second-highest-ranking Mormon leader, Boyd K. Packer, recently called same-sex attraction "impure and unnatural" in an act of unspeakable insensitivity at the height of this rash of teen suicides. He declared that it can be cured, and that same-sex unions are morally repugnant and "against God's law and nature." Just as many gay kids grow up in these conservative denominations as any other.

*

They are told day in and day out that they are an abomination before God. Just consider the sheer numbers of LGBT kids growing up right now in Roman Catholic, Mormon, and other conservative religious households. The pain and self-loathing caused by such a distortion of God's will is undeniable and tragic, causing scars and indescribable self-alienation in these young victims. You don't have to grow up in a religious household, though, to absorb these religious messages.

*

[W]hat's the role of more mainline, more progressive denominations such as mainstream Christianity, Judaism, and Islam in these recent tragedies? Mostly silence. And just like in the days of the AIDS organization Act Up, "silence equals death."

*

It is not enough for good people -- religious or otherwise -- to simply be feeling more positive toward gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. Tolerance and a live-and-let-live attitude beats discrimination and abuse by a mile. But it's not enough. Tolerant people, especially tolerant religious people, need to get over their squeamishness about being vocal advocates and unapologetic supporters of LGBT people. It really is a matter of life and death, as we've seen.

*

Ministers who remain in comfortable silence on sexuality must speak out. Churches that have silently embraced gay and lesbian members for years must publicly hang the welcome banner. How long will we continue to limit and qualify our messages of acceptance, inclusion and embrace for the most vulnerable in order to maintain the comfort of those in our communities of faith who are well served by the status quo?

*

These bullying behaviors would not exist without the undergirding and the patina of respect provided by religious fervor against LGBT people. It's time for "tolerant" religious people to acknowledge the straight line between the official anti-gay theologies of their denominations and the deaths of these young people. Nothing short of changing our theology of human sexuality will save these young and precious lives.

David Mixner: President Obama's Shameful Moment

Our false "fierce advocate" in the White House has betrayed us again by appealing the DADT ruling of Judge Virginia Phillips - no surprise to me since I am increasingly convinced that Obama does give a rats ass about LGBT Americans outside of how many votes we can deliver and how much money we can be duped into ponying up for Democrats. David Mixner has a column on his blog that properly takes Obama to task. Meanwhile, The Advocate has coverage on the disingenuous bullshit coming out of the Obama Justice Department as efforts are made to stay Judge Phillips' injunction against the enforcement of DADT and any further discharges under DADT. First, here are highlights from David's post:
*
As you listened to President Obama on MTV yesterday about DADT, you couldn't help but feel he was whispering sweet nothings into your ear and seeing someone else on the side. Nothing in his words match his actions. In fact, the decision to appeal the DADT Federal Court decision is tragic with powerful consequences. The Department of Justice, in appealing the case, is morally wrong and cowardly. The message being sent by Secretary of Defense Gates and the Obama team deeply is ingrained with homophobia.
*
in this time of tragic suicides and brutal hate crimes, the President couldn't have sent a worst message. Instead of standing up for justice, freedom and human dignity, he reinforced the concept that the LGBT community is indeed different from other Americans and needed a special process to be integrated into American life. Every young LGBT American will see a Democratic President making a decision involving their lives in a process that separates us from other Americans and not brings us together.
*
Empty promises of action in the future no longer work Mr. President. The odds of either a lame duck Congress or a new Republican dominated Congress tackling DADT after this year's elections is not promising. You know it and so do I.
*
The President had a moment where he could have exercised greatness and powerful moral leadership. Instead, he chose 'process' and 'politics' over justice and freedom. . . . . He has failed us miserably. This could have had been all over yesterday.

*

As I said, in this alternate universe of late, it is the Log Cabin Republicans, not the Democrats who are doing the heavy lifting for LGBT equality. While Obama & Co. seek to uphold the religious based anti-gay discrimination (something that ought to be obviously unconstitutional to anyone outside of right wing religious extremist circles) , the Log Cabin Republicans are the ones upholding the U.S. Constitution's principles. Here are highlights from The Advocate:
*
In the latest legal back-and-forth over "don't ask, don't tell," attorneys for the Log Cabin Republicans urged a federal judge Friday to reject arguments by the Justice Department to keep the policy in place pending appeal in the case.
*
On Thursday the Justice Department asked U.S. district judge Virginia A. Phillips to stay her decision barring enforcement of "don't ask, don't tell," which she ruled unconstitutional in September.
*
A senior Pentagon personnel official warned the court that an immediate end to DADT "will cause significant disruptions to the force in the short term and, in the long term, would likely undermine the effectiveness of any transition to accepting open service by gays and lesbians in the event the law is repealed or eliminated."
*
Nonsense, replied lead Log Cabin attorney and White and Case partner Dan Woods, who called the government's claim of hardship "a red herring" in a Friday court filing.
*
"[T]he heart of the government’s argument in its application [for a stay of the injunction] is to bemoan the administrative and rulemaking burden that would supposedly be placed on the military if the Court’s injunction remains in place, and to plead that the current military Working Group be allowed to complete its 'orderly,' if ponderous, research and recommendations project without interference from courts fulfilling their constitutional function," Woods wrote. "Homosexual servicemembers are fighting and dying today in two wars for their fellow Americans’ Constitutional rights; their own Constitutional rights should not be held hostage to an uncertain bureaucratic process that wants time to develop educational and training materials."
*
Log Cabin Republicans believes that the Department of Justice is severely underestimating the professionalism of our men and women in uniform. The United States military is the most powerful, most adaptable armed force in the world. It has dealt with racial integration and greatly expanded opportunities for women, and has grown stronger because of it. Open service for gay and lesbian Americans will be no different.
*
Personally, my view is that Obama cannot leave office soon enough. He's a very slick liar and in the final analysis just as homophobic as his BFF Rick Warren. A pox on him and similar cynical liars.

Friday Male Beauty

Zack Ford Excoriates Obama on Gay Issue Disingenuousness

Zack Ford is a yound blogger from a far different generation than I am. But we both have something in common: we've come to beleive that Barack Obama and the Democrats cannot be trusted to do right by LGBT Americans. And yes, we have compared notes and communicated with each other directly. Zack has a piece cross posted at Pam's House Blend that looks at the troubling reality of the Obama administration on LGBT issues. Oh sure, Obama's defenders will rush to his defence and point out the "Cinderella crumbs" that Obama has thrown to the LGBT community in the form an appoint of an LGBT individual to some executive branch post or the implementation of some pro-gay policy that can be immediately undone by his successor. On the big issues, what has Obama delivered? Nothing. Moreover, if one listens carefully to some of what Obama says, it is beyond troubling - especially his wishy washy statement on sexual orientation being a choice. I guess the positions of EVERY legitimate medicala nd mental health care association isn;t enough to make this a no brainer for our liar-in-chief. He may say he's our "fierce advocate," but watching his actions versus disingenuous statements tells the lie of this claim. Here are some highlights from Zack's piece:
*
At an MTV Town Hall this afternoon, President Obama answered several questions about the LGBT community, Don't Ask Don't Tell, and bullying/cyber-bullying. It was full of spin and a complete lack of conviction about the LGBT community. Not only was it as if he just learned what sexual orientation is last week, it was also as if he knew less about our identities than the way he talked about us back during the campaign. He also ignores addressing gender identity, gender presentation, or transgender people at all, despite being asked about them.
*
According to Kevin Jennings, Assistant Deputy Secretary for the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools (and GLSEN founder): The Department of Education has funds set aside for any school in crisis including bullying and harassment. They just have to ask for our assistance. It is unclear whether these funds actually exist, whether any school administrators even know about them, how they are even accessed, and whether they have ever been distributed. . . . So, what are you really doing to help make schools safer, Mr. President? Holding meetings without concrete results. That's not saving our LGBTQ youth.
*
Then, Obama was asked whether being gay or trans was a choice. Here is his incredibly weak response which completely ignores trans people. I am not obviously -- I don't profess to be an expert. This is a layperson's opinion. But I don't think it's a choice. . . . He doesn't think it's a choice. This is troubling. Maybe other people think other things, and that's okay.
*
The answer is no. Being gay is not a choice. AND being trans is not a choice. There is scientific consensus on these points. There's a problem with his implication people can still have differing opinions on this. This is not a fierce answer; it's an answer that panders to people who "think" (believe) something different. And yes, it really is a big deal that he left trans issues unaddressed.
*
The final relevant question was about DADT. In fact, it specifically addressed issuing an executive order to end discharges. The President totally dodged the question. . . . While it's true that the President cannot "simply end the policy," he can simply end implementation of the policy for as long as he is President. There is no good reason that he cannot use an executive order to suspend discharges until he accomplishes repeal. He has refused to address this as he did again in this answer. He also shared some of the same bunk from the DOJ's application for an emergency stay filed earlier today [yesterday]
*
Not only does he [Obama] have the choice not to enforce and defend laws he finds unconstitutional, there is a very relevant precedent for it. John Aravosis already beat me to making this point this evening, but let me refer to his other post from earlier today: I've just been sent a White House transcript from 1996 showing the Clinton administration, explaining in detail, how it was not going to defend in court any cases kicking HIV+ service members out of the military because it believed the law requiring such discharges to be unconstitutional. Did you get that? The President (President Clinton) did exactly what The President (President Obama) refused to do today.
*
Zack does a great job of pointing out what Joe Solmonese and other Democrat enablers don't want said. The Democrats and Obama continue to actively betray LGBT Americans yet expect LGBT voters to rush out and vote for their sorry asses so that we can have more of this bullshit from the president. I don't think so. Betrayal must have a consequence even if in the short term it helps our enemies in the GOP. We as a community will achieve our goals only when we have sufficient anger to stop being played for fools and simpletons by our supposed "friends."

Even Virginian Pilot Calls for DADT to End NOW

It's not often that I agree with the local newspapers in this area which generally provide lousy news coverage of anything other than local news - and even that's less than wonderful. Much of the national news coverage is a day or more old by the time it appears locally. And in the op-ed pages, all too often the editorial boards seem to be afraid of incurring the wrath of the knuckle draggers in such plentiful abundance throughout the region. But once in a while the editorial boards get it right. Today's Virginian Pilot main editorial is a case in point. It calls for enforcement of DADT to end now, today. It also chides Obama for stepping in the way of the ruling of Judge Virginia Phillips in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States. Too many careers of honorable service members have been destroyed already and too many needed service members have been expelled to stroke the egos of religious bigots who are the ones behind DADT in the first place. It's a sad day when the Virginian Pilot is more progressive than a Democrat in the White House. Here are a few key highlights:
*
Ideally, this dispute should be resolved by Congress, not the courts. The House voted to repeal the ban this spring, but the Senate bungled its response amid partisan bickering unrelated to the substance of the issue.
*
Congress can revisit that vote when it reconvenes after the elections. In the meantime, the Obama administration should have stepped aside, rather than delay the inevitable with further court battles.
*
Between 1997 and 2008, more than 10,500 service members were discharged under "don't ask, don't tell." A 2005 Government Accountability Office report found that more than 750 men and women drummed out in the policy's first 10 years possessed skills defined as critical, including expertise in Arabic and other languages.
*
[D]riving good, qualified soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines out of the military solely because of their sexual orientation - at wartime or any other time - infringes on their fundamental rights and is against America's best interests. That practice should end now.

More Thursday Male Beauty

Fort Worth City Councilman Gives Moving Message to Gay Teens

I had not viewed Fort Worth city councilman Joel Burns' message to gay teens in its entirety until tonight. If you haven't wated the whole thing, you need to do so. The boyfriend and I were in tears by the end of it. Burns reviews each of the recent gay teen suicides and then gives his own personal testimonial. It is amazing and highly troubling. Amazing because of its power and authenticity. Highly disturbing because the forces that led these youth and young men to take their own lives are alive and well and, in fact, are likely being stoked by the actions of the President of the United States through his appeal of the federal court rulings on DADT and DOMA . It should be mandatory that EVERY member of Congress watch this entire video. The same goes for the liar-in-chief in the White House. Here is a video of Burns' amazing speech/statement:

The Case for Not Voting on November 2nd

I first cast a vote in an election over 38 years ago and since that time I have, never ever failed to vote in any city, state or federal election. That track record may change on November 2, 2010, as I seriously consider not voting. Yes, that's right, I may not vote in the coming election. From conversations with others I am not the only one who is leaning toward staying home from the polls. The common statement I hear is that voting will "make no difference." Typically, the speakers making these remarks then launch into the debacle of the Democrats, who were given a mandate and commanding margin in both houses of Congress and control of the White House only to see it all pissed away. Obama blames the Congress; the House blames the Senate; and the Senate blames the White House and everyone else. No one takes responsibility either individually or on the part of the national Democrats as a whole.

*

Candidly, I share the above sentiments of these individuals to some extent myself. My larger reason for staying home, however, if that is what I choose to do, is that I refuse to once again be played for a fool and a cretin by the Democrats. Yes, most say all the right words while campaigning but then deliver nothing once in office. As a community, LGBT Americans are rewarding the Democrats for their lies and betrayal if we yet again and again give them what they want - our money and votes - with no accountability demanded or consequences being inflicted for betrayal and broken promises. The message to the Democrats from the LGBT community is clear: you can lie with impunity, don't need to keep any of your campaign promises, and you don't need to deliver on anything because the idiot LGBT voters will still come out and vote for them no matter what. With this constant message being sent by the LGBT community to Democrats of all stripes, why on earth should the Democrats ever change? They are getting exactly what they want and do not need to do anything to get it. Indeed, at times I believe the Democrat goal is to keep LGBT citizens inferior indefinitely so that each campaign cycle the bogey man in the form of the GOP can be trotted yet again. Yes, the GOP may be worse, but then Democrats haven't done anything of substance for LGBT Americans either.

*

My second reason for not voting relates to the recent wave of gay teen suicides. It's true that the Christian Right, Mormons and Roman Catholic Church bear the great responsibility for the unrelenting anti-gay message that forces youth to see suicide as their best solution - a point I reached myself twice in the past. But by failing to act to repeal DADT, enact ENDA and repeal DOMA the Democrats also bear responsibility. First and foremost among the Democrats sending out a message of hopelessness to LGBT youth is Barack Obama. Oh yes, he says nice things in pretty speeches, but if one follows his actions, it becomes clear that the pretty words mean NOTHING to him. Just as, in my opinion, LGBT lives and the careers of LGBT servicemembers mean NOTHING to Obama. And I suspect our gay youth are savvy enough to figure out that we are all being played. They realize that there is no guarantee that "it gets better." Their proof: the continuation of DADT and DOMA and the fact that ENDA has gone nowhere even in the Democrat controlled House of Representatives.

*

As for my open disgust with Obama, I believe that it is justified. Moreover, in my view, he IS part of the problem no matter what his apologists in Gay, Inc., may say. Let's look at his actions versus his disingenuous rhetoric - which I experienced first hand when he spoke in Virginia Beach in February 2008 - aimed at securing votes and money. First, during the campaign, who does Obama select for appearances at campaign functions? Anti-gay, ex-gay supporter Donnie McClurkin. And when confronted with McClurkin's anti-gay positions and slimy ex-gay past, what does he do? Obama keeps McClurkin on the program. Then lets move to the inauguration. Who does Obama select to deliver the invocation? Rick Warren, homophobe extraordinaire whose finger prints are all over anti-gay agendas in Africa and whose church website had anti-gay rhetoric all over it. Then, of course, we have the on going DOMA and DADT litigation. What do we see from Obama? A vigorous defense of the anti-gay policies and, based on the latest reports, and appeal of the DADT ruling and worldwide injunction against DADT discharges.

*

Even as I write this post, Obama is promising that DADT "will end on my watch" yet he has ZERO ability to make that happen if he proceeds with an appeal of Judge Phillips rulings. There is ZERO guarantee that the Senate will ever repeal DADT. Likewise, given the Christian extremists among the conservative block on the Supreme Court, there is ZERO guarantee that DADT will not be upheld if the case makes it to the Supreme Court. Ditto for DOMA.

*

The sad truth is that the LGBT community is being played again. Obama believes that we are simpletons and fools and wants us out voting on November 2, 2010. My message to Obama and ALL Democrats: you want my vote, then ALL Democrats as a whole need to start delivering. I want to hold them jointly and severally responsible. I am over being played and cynically lied to.

“Ex-Gay” is Anti-Gay, Disguised as Compassion

Earlier this week the Washington Post gave op-ed space to Tony Perkins, the head of the virulently anti-gay Family Research Council. The same Tony Perkins who has a documented history of racism and fraternizing with racists and who is a feel documented liar. Had anyone at the Washington Post bothered to Googled Mr. Perkins, they'd have realized that no legitimate and credible publication should ever give editorial space to Tony Perkins. After being severely criticized and hit with brickbats, the Post decided to do so CYA by allowing a piece by Sirdeaner Walker who lost her son to suicide as a result of anti-gay bullying. Walker challenges Perkins' bullshit lies. An unrelated piece in Religion Dispatches likewise redirects the blame for anti-gay bullying to its real source: anti-gay Christianists who continue to peddle the "ex-gay" myth, often enriching the proponents of these bogus "ministries" in the process. First these highlights from Ms. Walker's Washington Post response to the gay-hating, Klan loving Tony Perkins:
*
I came to know about an organization called GLSEN--the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network--about a year and a half ago in the midst of the most difficult time of my life. My 11-year-old son Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover had just taken his life after enduring anti-gay bullying in school. His school had not taken the bullying seriously enough. Eliza Byard, GLSEN's executive director, offered her support.
*
[S]ome of my friends and family members expressed concern about the organization's work to address anti-gay bullying in school. They voiced religious opposition to GLSEN. . . . And they're all wrong.
*
Mr. Perkins' tactic, and that of others like him, is to use faith and religion to divide us. They seek to thwart efforts to deal with a problem at the heart of this current crisis--anti-gay bullying and harassment.
But Perkins goes further--his "facts" are taken out of context and are, frankly, untrue.
*
And we need to be clear on one thing - addressing anti-gay bullying is not a controversial issue. If you move through the smoke screen organizations like Family Research Council try to create, you realize addressing anti-gay bullying is simply the right thing to do if we care about all of our young people.
*
I could not be more grateful to my friends at GLSEN for their unwavering support, and I marvel at their determination. They do not allow themselves to be discouraged by the attacks of their crucial work, God's work, by people like Perkins.
*

The piece from Religion Dispatches takes Ms. Walker's argument further and slams the snake oil merchants of the "ex-gay" ministries. Here are highlights from this piece:
*
Few of the commentaries about Clementi, Brown, Walsh, Lucas and others address the broader context of responsibility for their suicides. What did the family and religious lives of these teens tell them about sexuality and religion? What produced despair so profound that death seemed their only avenue of escape from bullying?
*
It’s obvious to condemn the anti-gay hatemongering of Westboro Baptist church . . . More troubling is the subtle and pernicious rhetoric espoused by religious communities and organizations that advise young people to transform their sexuality from gay to straight. Exodus Youth, an entire branch of the Christian ex-gay movement targets those at the most vulnerable and precarious points in their lives, arguing that instead of being gay, they are merely experiencing what they call SSA or same-sex attraction; a temporary malady that can be fixed through ministry, counseling, and prayer.
*
The most recent post on the Exodus Youth blog by Chris Stump “Tragic Losses: Enough is Enough!” exemplifies how anti-gay sentiment masquerades as love and compassion.
*
I knew a man who took his life after struggling to transform his sexuality in an ex-gay ministry for years. The ideas of “hope for healing” and “freedom from homosexuality” promulgated by Exodus Youth, religious organizations, families, and social communities are deeply entrenched and powerful. Even men and women I met in the course of my research who attended ex-gay ministries and later self-identified as LGBT still struggled. No matter how many years separated them from their experiences as young people in churches, the beliefs of their upbringing and their own same-sex desires still felt irreconcilable.
*
By focusing on bullying, Exodus Youth and its supporters avoid the truth that their organization endorses insidious forms of hatred cloaked in the language of compassion.

NASA Langley Engineers Helped Design Miners' Rescue Pod

NASA Langley here in Hampton, Virginia, is one of the regions crown jewels even though it often fails to receive the recognition that it is due. Indeed, the City of Hampton needs to talk up NASA Langley far more than is usually the case since the installation is a strong counter point to the ignorance and backwardness embodied by Pat Robertson and Regent University over in Virginia Beach. Clint Cragg (pictured) is one of the NASA Langley personnel who assisted in the design that helped result in the amazing rescue. Here are highlights from the Virginian Pilot:
*
Clint Cragg spent Wednesday glued to his desk, but he didn't get much work done. He was too busy taking calls from the media and watching the live feed from Chile on his computer.
*
Reporters wanted to know the same thing: How does it feel to see the miners coming up alive? "It's a relief," Cragg said in an interview as rescuers pulled the 17th miner from the ground. "The capsule is working the way we hoped it would."
*
Cragg is an engineer at NASA's Langley Research Center, and he helped design the 13-foot-long pod that carried the miners to safety. "To see them in good health, to see them coming out smiling - it's a good day." Cragg, who is 55 and spent 26 years in the Navy, became involved with the miners soon after they were discovered to be alive. It was mid-August and the Chilean government had called the U.S. State Department looking for help. So the State Department called NASA headquarters, which called Cragg, who seemed a natural choice for the assignment.
*
Cragg quickly assembled a team of 20 engineers. Roughly half worked from Hampton. The others were scattered in NASA offices across the country. They toiled 16 hours a day for three days, then sent the Chileans a paper containing 75 specific suggestions for the design of the capsule.
*
Among their ideas: The pod should move on spring-loaded rollers so it doesn't grind against rock as it travels up and down the rescue shaft. A loose harness should be installed in case a miner loses consciousness during the ascent to the surface. The capsule must be built so one person can operate it alone; someone's going to have to be the final person pulled from below. The Chileans used many of NASA's suggestions in their final design. "We're just glad we could help," Cragg said.

Christine O’Donnell Likens Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell To Adultery

In my view, Christine O'Donnell is a certifiable nutjob. On gay rights, however, she's at least honest and voices her contempt for LGBT Americans - something that's refreshing compared to Barack Obama who says he's for LGBT equality but then throws obstacles in the path of progress. Personally, I prefer a known enemy any day over a back stabbing liar who disingenuously claims to be your ally. Given O'Donnell's lunacy and "ex-gay" ministry past, it's not surprising that her views on DADT repeal are beyond nasty. Think Progress has some highlights of O'Donnell's batshitery in which she - unlike Obama who I think actually agrees with her based on his actions to date - doesn't hide her bigotry and rejection of modern medical and mental health knowledge on sexual orientation. I can't help but wonder how many gay teens hearing this garbage from O'Donnell or Valier Jarrett's "lifestyle choice" statements and coverage of Obama's likely appeal of the DADT ruling may be convinced that it does NOT get better. These people have blood on their hands. Here are highlights of O'Donnell's verbal diarrhea:
*
During this evening’s Delaware Senate debate, Christine O’Donnell — who has a spotty record on LGBT rights — repeatedly compared allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military to “adultery” and condemned the recent court decision which banned the military from enforcing the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy:
*
O’DONNELL: A federal judge recently ruled that we have to overturn Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. There are a couple of things we need to say about that. First of all, judges should not be legislating from the bench. Second of all, it’s up to the military to set the policy that the military believes is in the best interest of unit cohesiveness and military readiness. The military already regulates personal behavior in that it doesn’t allow affairs to go on within your chain of command. It does not allow it you are married to have an adulterous affair within the military. So the military already regulates personal behavior because it feels that it is in the best interest of our military readiness. I don’t think that Congress should be forcing a social agenda on to our military. I think we should leave that to the military.
*
“People are created in God’s image. Homosexuality is an identity adopted through societal factors. It’s an identity disorder,” O’Donnell told the Washington Post four years ago, taking a position that has been universally rejected by science and psychology since the early 1970s.

*

Rachel Maddow Sums It Up On DADT - Obama Will Be Responsible if DADT Remains For Years to Come

Anyone who has read recent posts on this blog should know that I am so over Barack Obama and his lies and actions that are holding back the movement to full LGBT legal equality under the nation's laws that I'm about to pull my hair out. Likewise, I'm to the point of advocating all forms of civil disobedience to cause Obama non-stop embarrassment. Combined with that, I believe the LGBT community - at least outside of the ass kissers at Gay. Inc. - need to make a part that the Democratic Party as a whole will be held accountable for the lack of support and lack of action by ANY of its elected official members at the national level. That's right, if Obama appeals the DADT ruling, it should equate to ZERO votes being cast to support Democrats nationwide. Short term, this might result in a step backwards, but I see no other way to end the constant lies and broken promises which are the norm with the Party's representatives in Congress and the White House. The LGBT vote may not be huge, but in close races, staying home could well doom Democrats. As a community, we need to stop acting like Pavlov's dog and voting for Democrats no matter what abuse they throw at us. Rachel Maddow via Towleroad summarizes what is about to likely happen to us at the hands of the liar-in-chief (the following is at about the 5:00 mark):
*
"Unless you believe that the United States Senate after this year's elections is going to do the right thing by gay service members — HA! — then the decision by the Obama administration whether or not to appeal this ruling is likely a decision between killing this policy, now, and letting it survive, probably forever. This is not the conclusion I expected to reach after today's report on the subject and after today's interviews...
*
...Everybody says the Justice Department appealing this ruling is an inevitablity. It does not have to be. It is not inevitable. If the administration believes the law is unconstitutional, there is precedent that supports the administration not appealing it and letting the law die. An orderly timeframe for the death of a law can be arranged with the court. I hereby declare that I will never get another call back in Washington ever again for putting it this way to you, but it is the way it is. A plan that has no chance of becoming reality is not a real plan, no matter how much you say it is. You can either end it, or you can stop saying you will.

*

More Wednesday Male Beauty

Obama Likely to Appeal DADT Injunction = Gays Thrown Under the Bus AGAIN

It's to the point where I feel I almost need a Valium before I read more articles on Obama's continued betrayal of LGBT Americans. Merely days after many LGBT Americans rejoiced over Judge Virginia Phillips' worldwide injunction against the enforcement of DADT, leaked coming out of the White House indicate that liar-in-chief, Barack Obama's Justice Department is going to appeal Phillips' DADT ruling. For a politician who used the promise of hope to lure voters, Obama repeatedly dashes the hopes of LGBT Americans with one betrayal after another. Worse yet, each time Obama and company appeal well reasoned pro-gay court rulings supported by overwhelming evidence, I suspect the set backs are enough to send many unknown LGBT citizens to the point of despair and suicide. True, we may never know the names of such suicide victims, but I believe in my heart that they are there and that our liar-in-chief bears DIRECT responsibility for such deaths. Perhaps anti-Obama LGBT protesters need to start throwing bags or balloons filled with blood at Obama's motorcades and at his appearances. Here are highlights from CNN on Obama's expected betrayal:
*
The Obama administration is expected to appeal as soon as Wednesday a federal judge's ruling that halted the Defense Department from enforcing its policy that bars openly gay people from military service, according to senior administration officials familiar with the government's plans.
*
While the government has up to 60 days to file an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court in San Francisco, California, officials familiar with the case said that could happen in the next day or two.
*
The Hill has similar warnings that Obama is poised to f*ck LGBT citizens over yet again:
*
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs acknowledged the Justice Department is preparing to appeal a court’s decision against the law preventing gays from serving openly in the military, but said President Obama is still committed to ending the policy.
*
Note how Gibbs continues to hold the false promise of DADT repeal out in the effort to dupe LGBT voters to going to the polls on November 2, 2010. From past performance, anyone who believes anything coming from the White House is either a fool or has been bought off (think HRC). Keori at Pam's House Blend sums up the truth about Obama as follows:
*
Let's be honest: this President hasn't set up jack shit, preferring instead to let his Bush-holdover SECDEF run the show. This President doesn't want repeal to happen. This President has lied repeatedly, and undermined the repeal process at every turn. We were told that he had set up that "required" Pentagon study group in March of 2009. He hadn't. This President said he wanted Congress to repeal DADT. He bullied Congressmen into withdrawing repeal language from legislation instead. This President could have included repeal language in his transmittals to the House for inclusion in the Defense Authorization act. He refused. This President could have respected the rule of law and instructed to DOD to follow the Witt standard. He didn't. When it came down to the wire, instead of expending a bit of effort to get the votes in the Senate to repeal DADT, this President chose to instead call the WNBA champions and congratulate them. And now, when he has been handed an opportunity on a silver platter to end DADT, he's fighting back.
*
As I said, if Obama appeals the DADT ruling, I am done supporting him - and likely any other Democrats. I am simply over the lies and betrayals. Yes, I will be excoriated for this stance, but at some point anyone with a shred of self-respect ought to stop allowing them self to be played as a fool.

The White House Thinks Being Gay Is a "Lifestyle Choice"

Yes, you read the caption of this post correctly. The White House - and our liar-in-chief, Barack Obama - believe that sexual orientation is a "lifestyle choice." That's what Senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett (pictured at right), stated in an interview with the Washington Post's Jonathan Capehart, while discusses the recent string of suicides related to anti-gay bullying and Minnesota teen suicide victim Justin Aaberg in particular. One can only assume that Obama's BFF, Rick Warren, a promoter of ex-gay reparative therapy - is now in charge of LGBT issues at the White House. The video here shows Jarret making this utterly f*cked up statement that flies in the face of EVERY legitimate medical and mental health association. WTF is wrong with Obama? Is he trying to make LGBT voters stay home in droves on November 2, 2010? If that's his goal, then I say "let's give him all that he what he wants." Seriously, this statement sounds like it is right out of Family Research Council or Focus on the Family. Could a Republican in the White House be much worse?

*

Michael Petrelis rightly rips Ms. Jarret and indirectly Barack Obama a new as the saying goes. Here are some highlights:
*
Today the Washington Post's gay kapo Jonathan Capehart shares a video interview he conducted on Monday with senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett. She clearly states a belief that Minnesota gay teen Justin Aarberg, who committed suicide in July after being bullied, made a "lifestyle choice."
*
What an outrage to claim that the 15-year-old Aarberg made a choice to be gay, and that sexual orientation is a lifestyle. Did she get her talking points from Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council? It's doubly offensive that Capehart makes no effort to point out how dangerous Jarrett's thinking is.
*
If Capehart were willing to risk his White House access to events like a Latina Fiesta night, he might have taken his tongue off Jarrett and Obama's posteriors and challenged her employment of "lifestyle choice" in speaking about the support of the Aarberg family for their gay son and brother.
*
With friends like Jarrett and gay reporters such as Capehart, why worry about our enemies at the Family Research Council, National Organization for Marriage and the Mormon Church?
*
Andrew Sullivan has these further thoughts on this batshitery and utter betrayal of LGBT citizens:
*
Those are the words Obama aide Valerie Jarrett uses to describe one of the recent gay suicide victims. "Lifestyle choice." Yes, the Obamaites mean well, even if they've done so little. But they really are completely clueless, utterly tone-deaf, and completely out to lunch on gay issues, aren't they? Lifestyle choice? A 15 year old boy is gay, and has a sexual orientation, not a "lifestyle choice," for Pete's sake. What's next: sexual preference?
*

All of this begs the question of when are LGBT voters going to open their eyes to the fact that Obama and the national Democrats do not give a flying f*ck about the lives or rights of LGBT citizens. They will say whatever they think will secure our votes and monetary contributions, but they have ZERO intention of doing ANYTHING to move LGBT equality forward. It's all lies and and bullshit which HRC and other Obama and Democrat apologists continue to eat out of the trough. It is beyond disgusting.

Wednesday Male Beauty

Will Obama Resrrect Dead DADT Policy?

Barack Obama's ability to duck and weave and talk out of both sides of his mouth about DADT repeal has run out. Judge Virginia Phillips has set the stage where LGBT Americans will know within the next 60 days whether or not Obama has played us for fools since his campaign launch in the run up to the 2008 presidential election. Yesterday's ruling entering a worldwide injunction against enforcement of DADT and the discharge of gay servicemembers allows Obama to sit back and do nothing if he truly supports LGBT equality. If instead, his Justice Department appeals Phillips' injunction, I'd like to see all LGBT Americans publicly abandon Obama and stop providing him political cover and myriad excuses for broken promises. Admittedly, this would be an effort for the folks at HRC who, in my opinion, have their noses a mile up Obama's ass. But it needs to be done and communicated loudly to the Democratic Party as a whole. There needs to be NO forgiveness EVER if an appeal is filed. Meanwhile 21 Senators have delivered a letter to Obama urging him to NOT file an appeal. These Senators - who apparently understand that the U.S. Constitution protects ALL citizens, not just evangelical Christians - are as follows:
*
Udall (CO)
Gillibrand
Kerry
Schumer
Burris
Whitehouse
Landrieu
Sanders
Merkley
Shaheen
Johnson
Franken
Boxer
Feingold
Lautenberg
Durbin
Menendez
Bennet
Mikulski
Sherrod Brown
Cardin
*
The sad truth is that if the Obama administration files an appeal and a stay of Judge Phillips' injunction is granted, DADT could be around for many more years. And during the interim, more anti-gay witch hunts and disgusting discharges will ensue. The buck truly stops with Obama at this point. Andrew Sullivan has an apt analysis of what an Obama appeal could mean. Here are highlights:
*
Here's the thing. We have no guarantee that the Senate will pass legislative repeal of DADT in this session; and there's every chance that a radically Christianist GOP will win majorities in one or both Houses and definitely be able to sustain a filibuster against repeal in the next session if necessary. This is not because even most Republican voters back DADT; it is because it is a party hijacked by religious fundamentalists who cannot conceive of openly gay people serving their country. Look at the party of Paladino and DeMint and Palin. You think they will support anything that could remotely be deemed pro-gay?
*
In the long run, this will hurt the GOP - and watching the Log Cabin Republicans fight this battle is heartening. But in the short run, it could very well mean that this awful policy, opposed by 75 percent of the country, that imposes intolerable burdens on servicemembers risking their lives for us ... could be in place for the indefinite future. And Obama will be the commander-in-chief enforcing it.
*
Yes, the GOP is the main party to blame. But no, this does not excuse the extra-cautious, gays-are-radioactive mindset of the Obama administration. This ruling therefore represents a chance for the president. He has the executive authority simply to issue a stop-loss order to end the firing of gay troops until further notice. If the Senate does not pass legislative repeal this session, he should use it.
*
These men and women are putting their lives at risk for us. Every day we wait, they are victimized and stigmatized. It is immoral, wrong, and damaging to national security. And if Obama thinks gay voters and our families are going to be happy when he ends his first term with nothing accomplished except the lifting of the HIV ban (backed by Bush) and a hate crimes bill that has so far had zero prosecutions, he is mistaken.
*
Or perhaps it is better put this way: if this president cannot take a stand on civil rights when it is supported by three quarters of the public, when will he?

*

If I were a betting person, I unfortunately believe that Obama will betray LGBT Americans because he never meant a single thing he said during the campaign. It was solely about garnering money and votes.

Progressive Parents in Alabama - Who Would Have Thought

Since I lived in Alabama right after graduating from law school, that state seems to have become increasingly reactionary and backwards. With public lunatics like Judge Roy Moore of the Ten Commandments controversy some years back it is easy to be inclined to write off the entire state as a backwards cesspool to be avoided. Apparently that inclination might be premature. It seems that some parents are unhappy with the social backwardness that tends to be indoctrinated in the state's public schools and want the state Board of Education to put in place anti-gay bullying policies. Like many states now, Alabama has anti-bullying measures - they just act as if LGBT students do not exist, probably because at the mere mention of the word "gay" or "homosexual" the holy rollers and Christofascists begin foaming at the mouth. The Anniston Star has a story on some parents that believe that this needs to change, if for no other reason than to prepare children for the real world where they will encounter LGBT members of society. Here are some highlights:
*
Oxford resident Jason Childs is a new kind of disgruntled parent. For more than a week, Childs has been calling the Alabama Board of Education, trying to get on its meeting agenda. A professional truck driver, former Baptist minister and parent of two Oxford students, Childs, 39, wants to talk to the board about gay rights in Alabama public schools. The kicker? Childs is pro-gay.
*
He wants the board to lay down the law on anti-gay bullying once and for all. “We’re not preparing our kids for the real world,” he said. “When these kids go out into the workplace, they’re going to be working alongside people of all different backgrounds, but they can’t learn to do that if we won’t teach them.”
*
Childs’ quest to talk to the board is just the latest round in a fairly hush-hush debate about anti-gay bullying that has been percolating in Montgomery for more than a year.
*
It all started when the Legislature – at the behest of anti-bullying groups around the state – passed a law that requires every school system in the state to draft a policy for dealing with bullying. The law even described some specific types of bullying that should be specifically addressed in the law – like bullying based on race, religion or gender. Anti-gay bullying was absent from the list. Conspicuously absent, in the opinion of many anti-bullying groups, who note that anti-gay harassment is one of the biggest slices of the bullying pie.
*
Earlier this year, Sen. Ted Little, D-Auburn, told The Star he kept gay references out of the bill because he thought they would generate “opposition” and he wanted a bill that would pass. If you have to ask where the opposition would come from, you don’t live in Alabama.
*
So far, only two school systems in the state appear to have outlined specific policies for anti-gay harassment. Elliott says Baldwin County did, and, according to press reports, the Birmingham schools did, too. Why are the discussions about this topic so hush-hush? In a conservative, Bible-Belt state, advocates say, administrators fear backlash from the public if they even mention the word “gay” in a non-negative light. But Alabama administrators may soon have to deal with pressure from pro-gay parents, if recent trends are any indication.
*
Jason Childs – the Oxford parent who wants to talk to the state school board – thinks there are lots of parents out there who aren’t going to take it anymore. Childs is a former Baptist minister, who left the evangelical world shortly after his divorce in the 1990s. Since then, his politics have changed quite a bit. He recently founded a group called the Center for Progress in Alabama, which he hopes to turn into a catch-all advocate for progressive causes.
*
“There are lots of parents who are really concerned about anti-gay bullying,” she said. “They’ll tell you privately, but they won’t come out in public because they’ll lose face with their friends, their relatives, their church.”
*
“I’m afraid it may never happen until something horrible occurs, and leads to a lawsuit,” she said. “What we’re doing, really, is promoting policies that could prevent both a tragedy and a lawsuit. I wish we could make the school system understand that.”

More Tuesday Male Beauty

Anti-Gay Fundamentalist Christian Hypocrisy - Do They Embrace the Bible As Justification for Slavery Too?

The Boyfriend and I are watching the PBS special "God in America" and one thing that has struck me so far in Part Two that looks at the Civil War period is the parallels between the Southern Christian argument in support of slavery and the current Christianist whining that the Bible requires anti-gay prejudice and bigotry. Somehow, society for the most part - Tony Perkins and similar Christianists and professional Christians possibly excepted - has moved on and jettisoned the excuse that the Bible supported slavery. Yet the same type of rants that the Bible is "inerrant" and must be applied" literally" once used to justify slavery are still in active daily use by homophobes like Maggie Gallagher. One could even argue that the Christianists and similar "godly Christians" who cling to a few Bible passages in the Bible - Leviticus in particular - to condemn gays are in many ways the successors of the pro-slavery Christians.

*

To restate this point, just as the homophobes of today cling to the Bible to justify their bigotry and prejudice so too did the pro-slavery elements in Christian Churches. In fact, there are MANY MORE passages in the Bible that support slavery than there are in the Bible purportedly condemning homosexuality. Don't believe me? A sampling is set out below. So the next time a Christianist or other self-congratulatory professional Christian condemns gays based on the Bible, demand that they state their position on slavery. (Ditto in respect to Barack Obama who places his personal religious sensibilities above the U. S. Constitution.) If, as these individuals claim, the Bible is inerrant and must be applied literally, to be intellectually honest and consistent, they MUST say that they support slavery. If the Bible is inerrant and to be applied literally, they have no choice according to their own statements but to hold true to the literal words of the Bible. If these people do embrace slavery based on the Bible, then they have conceded the falsity of their claims that the Bible requires the condemnation of homosexuality.

*

Here are the Bible passages in support of slavery, first from the OLD TESTAMENT (NOTE: It is important to realize that the term "servant" or "maid" in the King James Version of the Bible refers to slaves, not employees):
*
Genesis 9:25-27: "Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers. He also said, 'Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem. May God extend the territory of Japheth; may Japeth live in the tents of Shem and may Canaan be his slave'. "
*
Exodus 20:17: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's."
*
Deuteronomy 5:21: "Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbor's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbor's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbor's.
*
Beating and Killing Slaves: Although an owner could beat a male or female slave, she/he would have to avoid serious injury to eyes or teeth. The owner would have to avoid beating the slave to death. But it was acceptable to beat a slave so severely that it only disabled him or her for two days:
*
Exodus 21:20-21: "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money [property]."
*
Exodus 21:26-27: "And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake. And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake."
*
Emancipation of Slaves: Slaves in ancient Israel were automatically emancipated after 6 years of slavery, but only if they were Jewish. However, if the slave owner "gave" the slave a wife, the owner could keep the wife and any children as his property.
*
Exodus 21:1-4: "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself."
*
Deuteronomy 15:12-18: "And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee.And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him."
*
Exodus 21:7: "And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do."
*
Leviticus 25:44-46: "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly." (NIV)
*
Leviticus 25:48-53: "After that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one of his brethren may redeem him: Either his uncle, or his uncle's son, may redeem him, or any that is nigh of kin unto him of his family may redeem him; or if he be able, he may redeem himself. And he shall reckon with him that bought him from the year that he was sold to him unto the year of jubilee: and the price of his sale shall be according unto the number of years, according to the time of an hired servant shall it be with him."
*
Leviticus 19:20-22: "And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free. And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the LORD, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, even a ram for a trespass offering. And the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering before the LORD for his sin which he hath done: and the sin which he hath done shall be forgiven him."
*
And the NEW TESTAMENT is not a great deal better from an anti-slavery perspective:
*
Luke 12:45-48: "The lord [owner] of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."
*
Ephesians 6:5-9: "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him."
*
Colossians 4:1: "Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven."
*
1 Timothy 6:1-3: "Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort. If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;"
*
1 Corinthians 12:13: "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit."
*
Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."
*
Colossians 3:11: "Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all."

*

It is time to turn the Bible against our enemies. They seek to brandish it like a club against gays, yet their own arguments lead to the unavoidable conclusion that they are either liars and hypocrites or closet racists and segregationist. The do NOT get to have it both ways.