Sikh Man Shot in Own Driveway by Apparent Trump Supporter

An Indian tech worker in the Mid-West was murdered last week by a white male who shouted racial slurs and told the victim to "go back to your country."  A gay couple in Key West, Florida was attacked by a white North Carolinian who yelled to them that they "were in Trump country now." Now, the Washington Post is reporting about the shooting of a Sikh man who was in his own driveway.  The attacker shouted at his victim to "go back to your country."  Such attacks are becoming increasingly frequent and thankfully are being treated in many instances as hate crimes. Yet Donald Trump supporters refuse to admit that their foul leader - and they themselves - bears any responsibility for this surge of hatred and violence.  The truth, however, is that we did not see so many acts of hatred prior to Trump's appeals to racism, religious extremism and general misogyny throughout his presidential campaign.  If Trump supporters are honest with themselves and the rest of us, they would concede that "make America great again" really means "make America white and Christian again."  Don't hold your breath for such honesty to be on display anytime soon.  Here are highlights from the Post on this latest hate driven attack:  

The 39-year-old Sikh man was working on his car in his driveway in Kent, Wash., just south of Seattle, when a man walked up wearing a mask and holding a gun.

According to a report in the Seattle Times, there was an altercation, and the gunman — a stocky, 6-foot-tall white man wearing a mask over the bottom part of his face — said “Go back to your own country” and pulled the trigger.

Authorities are investigating the shooting as a suspected hate crime, the newspaper reported.

The victim, whose name hasn’t been released, was shot in the arm at about 8 p.m. Friday and suffered injuries that are not life-threatening, the newspaper reported. The man who shot him is still on the loose. Kent Police have reached out to the FBI and other law enforcement agencies for help.

The Washington state shooting comes just weeks after an Indian man in Kansas was killed and another was injured by a gunman who told them to “get out of my country” before opening fire in a bar.

In the Kansas case, Srinivas Kuchibhotla, 32, died from his wounds. Alok Madasani, 32, was released from the hospital Thursday. A third person, Ian Grillot, a patron at the bar, was shot while trying to intervene, The Washington Post reported.

Authorities there were also investigating whether the shooting was motivated by bias, a widely held suspicion among the victims’ family members.

Family members of the two men said in interviews that they feared the current atmosphere in the United States. “There is a kind of hysteria spreading that is not good because so many of our beloved children live there,” said Venu Madhav, a relative of Kuchibhotla. “Such hatred is not good for people.”  Madhav said that “something has changed in the United States.”

Sikhs have faced similar fears since Sept. 11, 2001, worried that they are singled out for persecution because of their religious head coverings, according to Sikhnet, a global virtual community for the religion’s adherents. Sikhs, who wear turbans as part of their religion, are from northern India and are neither Hindu nor Muslim, according to Sikhnet.

America is becoming an increasingly ugly place.  As noted recently, foreign tourism is down by 17% as foreign travelers opt to go to more friendly and safe countries instead of America. 

Philadelphia Anti-Gay Attack Suspects Arrested

On September 11, 2014, a gay couple was severely beaten in Philadelphia by a band of white 20 somethings after the couple was taunted by anti-gay slurs.  Now, three of the attackers have been arrested.  One is the daughter of Chalfont, Pennsylvania Police Chief Karl Knott, which makes one wonder what gays must face in Chalfont from police.  The take away is that it is still dangerous to be gay in America even in progressive cities like Philadelphia. Too many of us forget the danger that lurks out on the streets.   The New Civil Rights Movement reports on the arrests:

The three, left to right, are Kevin Harrigan, 26, Kathryn Knott, 24, and Philip Williams, also 24. They are all charged with aggravated assault, simple assault, recklessly endangering another person (REAP), and criminal conspiracy in the September 11, anti-gay hate attack that left a same-sex couple in the hospital.

At least one of them is accused of of having called the two gay men "dirty faggots," and asking one of the victims if the other victim was his "fucking boyfriend" before allegedly assaulting them.  

It is perhaps telling that the police chief's daughter, Kathryn Knott has a history evidenced by her twitter account of embracing the usual Christofascist/Tea Party agenda:

In addition to the homophobic tweets, there appears to be evidence of excessive drinking, a belief she is owed things, including money, anti-immigrant beliefs, and disturbing claims of privilege for being the daughter of a police chief.

Here's how police described the incident that gave rise to the arrests:

On September 11, 2014, at 10:45 pm, the complainant, a 28 year-old male, along with a friend, a 27 year-old male, were on the 1600 block of Chancellor Street when they were approached by a group of unknown white males and females. As the group approached the complainants they made disparaging remarks about their sexual orientation. The group then attacked the complainants holding them while other members of the group punched them in the face, head and chest. During the assault one of the complainants dropped his bag containing his cell phone, wallet and credit cards. When police approached one of the suspects picked the bag up from the ground. The group then fled and were last seen north on 16th Street towards Walnut Street. Both complainants were transported to Hahnemann Hospital for multiple injuries. One complainant was treated for fractures and deep lacerations to his face requiring surgery and his jaw wired shut.

Suspect Description: A group of approximately 10-12 white male and females all in their early 20′s “clean cut” and well dressed. One suspect was described as having a husky build, brown hair, wearing a brown shirt and shorts.

One member of the group is believed to have been Fran McGlinn, a former student and assistant basketball coach for Archbishop Wood Catholic High School. It is suggested that a number of the attackers were former students at Archbishop Wood Catholic High School.  Thankfully, McGlinn has been fired from his assistant coach position.

Quote of the Day: WaPo - Mr. Cuccinelli Has Only Himself to Blame

As noted in this morning posts, the blame game has exploded within the GOP for the Ken Cuccinelli's loss in Tuesday Virginia gubernatorial election.  The Christofascists/Tea Party are blaming the so-called GOP establishment while the establishment types are throwing responsibility for the defeat at the feet of the Christofascists/Tea Party.  Meanwhile, the poor loser, Ken Cuccinelli seems to want to blame anyone but himself.  A main page editorial column in the Washington Post looks at the accusations being lobbed by both sides within the GOP's very small tent.  The opinion piece also zeros in on the man ultimately to blame.  Here is the money quote:

Fundamentally, what caused Tuesday’s Republican wipeout was Mr. Cuccinelli himself and the record he compiled — a clear, consistent right-wing agenda forged over a decade in Richmond.

The Cuccinelli record had nothing to do with job-creation or the state’s economic well-being or alleviating deepening transportation problems, all of which are central to Virginians’ well-being. It was mainly about bashing homosexuals, harassing illegal immigrants, crusading against abortion, denying climate change, flirting with birthers and opposing gun control. A hero to the tea party and a culture warrior of the first rank, Mr. Cuccinelli lost because he was among the most polarizing and provocative figures in Richmond for a decade. That made him the wrong candidate for Virginia.

It goes without saying that the usual far right talking heads will shriek and deny the truth stated in the Washington Post piece, claiming that the Post is a liberal propaganda machine.   But the Post isn't the only outlet placing the blame ultimately on Cuccinelli.  Here are some highlights from The Week written by Matt K. Lewiswho  writes for The Daily Caller which is anything but a liberal mouth piece:

To quote Don Corleone, "Never tell anybody outside the family what you're thinking."

Yet Cuccinelli went out of his way to tell everybody outside the family what he was thinking by literally publishing it. (And this wasn't some sort of touchy-feely, heartwarming biography that campaigns sometimes put out to soften up a candidate before running, either.)

In reviewing the book, Last Line of Defense, Politico touched on a fundamental problem: "Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli," James Hohmann observed, "has no intention of modulating his uncompromising conservatism to get elected governor. He just needs to explain it better than others have."

The "explain it" part is telling. Why? A maxim in political campaigns is that "if you're explaining, you're losing."

The obvious problem, of course, is that the political environment has changed dramatically in the last few years — especially in the Old Dominion.  It ain't George Allen's Virginia any more.

The cynical part of me hopes that the GOP doesn't get the message that the Christofascists/Tea Party need to be thrown overboard.   Only by further destruction to the GOP will the GOP donor class cease giving money to flawed candidates.  It make take a number of additional election cycles, but ultimately the Christofascists/Tea Party must be sent into permanent political exile if the GOP is to ever regain its role as a responsible national party.

Poll: Gay Bashing by Churches Fuels Americans' Flight from Religion

Click image to enlarge

One of the ironies is that in their effort to deny LGBT individuals equality not to mention freedom from state sponsored discrimination as exists here in Virginia, the Christofascists claim that gays will destroy civilization and society.   A new poll suggests that the only thing being destroyed is the Christofascists' and religion in general's grip on American society.  And what is hastening religion's decline is the Christofascists and their constant bashing of gays (I'd also add blacks and minorities in the case of hate groups like FRC and The Family Foundation).  That's right, it is the pious folks themselves who are destroying the Christian brand.   Here are highlights from a piece in Huffington Post that looks at the poll findings:

A new poll by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life reveals that a record number of Americans (19.3 percent) have abandoned faith and now consider themselves unaffiliated with any particular religion.

If you want to understand the reasons behind this trend, take a moment to read a disturbing letter that Twin Cities Catholic Archbishop John Nienstedt sent to the mother of a gay son. In it, the holy man told the mother that her "eternal salvation" might depend on whether or not she embraced the anti-gay teachings of the Catholic Church, thus rejecting her own child. Talk about family values!

Such a callous admonition might have worked in the past, when people had little education. It might have resonated in bygone eras, when gays and lesbians were invisible and easy to demonize as the "other." It might have held sway had the Catholic Church's credibility not been left in tatters after the church spent more than $2.5 billion to clean up the wreckage wrought by pedophile priests and their enablers.

While Nienstedt's arrogance and cruelty stands out as particularly odious, it isn't just Catholicism that is in decline. In a world that is increasingly more complicated, with infinite possibilities and pitfalls, as well as seemingly unlimited access to information, the idea that one faith owns absolute truth is a notion that is slowly becoming obsolete.

Religious extremists have long claimed that the acceptance of homosexuality would bring down the fundamentalist church -- and they have been proven correct, albeit not for the reasons they proffered. The downfall occurred not because gay people stopped heterosexuals from reproducing or recruited their children. It didn't happen because LGBT individuals hate families, which they have always been part of. And it didn't happen because homosexuals despised faith; the abundance of deeply religious gay people proves that this is not true.

The fundamentalists undermined their legitimacy by worshiping anti-gay bigotry long after it had been exposed as a false God. In this unholy obsession the sacrifices left bleeding at the altar were truth and justice. When people see their own sons and daughters and friends and co-workers coming out, it creates a crisis of credibility for religious institutions. It leads to countless situations where mean-spirited men like Nienstedt demand blind, irrational obedience and say "take it or leave it" -- and more people are now following their consciences and walking away.

The political coalition of the future is non-dogmatic, mainstream people of faith and the Nones. In the coming decade these two groups will forge bonds and create a dynamic force that rivals the holy-book literalists who presently hold power disproportionate to their numbers. This will be a much-needed correction to the outmoded ideas and celebration of ignorance that is holding back our nation's promise and progress.

Yes, there are many good and decent Christians.  I lease space to the ELCA Bishop of Virginia and I see daily the quiet good works that denomination undertakes.  Sadly, the hate and bigotry of their fundamentalist brethren is what is seen by the younger generations in particular.  To survive, the decent denominations need to stand up and challenge the hate merchants and they need to be more visible in their good works if Christianity is to survive.

Bahamian Bishop: Treat Gay People As Human

Outside of parts of Africa and Islamic countries one of the most homophobic regions of the world is the Caribbean.  And, as is the case more or less universally, the homophobia derives from the toxic evil of religion that is more focused on condemning and stigmatizing others than heeding the Gospel message of loving others and feeding the hungry, sheltering the homeless and caring for the sick.  Thus, it is a pleasant surprise to see Bahamas Christian Council president, Bishop Simeon Hall (pictured at left), make an about face and state that Christians need to treated gays with respect and as fully human.  Even sweeter is his suggestion that those who rail against gas and homosexuality may, in fact, be latent homosexuals themselves.  Tribune242  has details.  Here are highlights:

FORMER Bahamas Christian Council president Bishop Simeon Hall has lashed out against those who criticize the lifestyle choices of homosexuals.

Admitting to The Big T that as a younger pastor he too “acted in ignorance” by constantly chastising gays and lesbians, Bishop Hall said it was now evident that homosexuality was a fast growing subculture in the Bahamas.

He said every homosexual should be treated as a human being. Yesterday Bishop Hall, who serves as pastor emeritus at New Covenant Baptist Church, in a press statement said everyone stands in need of God’s grace.

“The demonisation of homosexuals by some pastors is the greatest hindrance to any positive dialogue or efforts the church might establish with them,” he said.

“The Bahamian public in general, as well as pastors in particular, must be careful of what we demonise and protest. Psychologists tell us that sometimes the things we strike out against, we do so because a bit of it lies within us on a subliminal level.

“I also believe that of the 133 sins listed in the Bible, if a pastor can only preach on one of them it could very well be that he has that problem – if not in practice then perhaps dormantly.”

Just last year, Bishop Hall took a different tone toward gays and lesbians. In response to newly released HIV/AIDS statistics in November 2011, he urged them to “seek help in turning away from their non-productive and deadly practice.”

Bishop Hall insisted that the church must consider changing its method of outreach.  If the Christian church is to reach the un-churched as our Lord commands, then, without changing our message we must change our methods and affirm our common humanity with all persons.”

Now he says that without a revamp, the church will fail in its mandate to reach all.  “If we see them and we treat them as human beings it would then be easier for us to treat the other problems that they might have. But if from the onset we treat them as sub-human, then we, the church, have already lost the battle.”

I am not sure what has prompted this changed think on the bishop's part, but one can only hope that it spreads to other religious leaders.  The Vatican could certainly stand to learn this lesson.

Is Gay Bashing By Churches Driving the Flight From Organized Religion?

I have frequently made the argument that the flight of the under 30 generations from organized religion bears a direct correlation to the anti-gay jihad that many denominations continue to conduct against LGBT citizens.  Many more of this age bracket have LGBT friends and/or know LGBT individuals.  As a result, they are repulsed by the standard depiction of gays disseminated daily by "family values" groups and church organizations like the Southern Baptist Convention and the Roman Catholic Church (both of which are suffering from membership losses - especially if non-active members are stripped from church rosters).  Indeed, many of these supposed Christian groups and churches represent the strongest argument for not being a Christian that one can find.  Wayne Besen has a column in Huffington Post that sets forth thoughts like my own on this topic.  Here are some highlights:

A new poll by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life reveals that a record number of Americans (19.3 percent) have abandoned faith and now consider themselves unaffiliated with any particular religion. According to USA Today:

This group, called "Nones," is now the nation's second-largest category only to Catholics, and outnumbers the top Protestant denomination, the Southern Baptists.

If you want to understand the reasons behind this trend, take a moment to read a disturbing letter that Twin Cities Catholic Archbishop John Nienstedt sent to the mother of a gay son. In it, the holy man told the mother that her "eternal salvation" might depend on whether or not she embraced the anti-gay teachings of the Catholic Church, thus rejecting her own child. Talk about family values!

Such a callous admonition might have worked in the past, when people had little education. It might have resonated in bygone eras, when gays and lesbians were invisible and easy to demonize as the "other." It might have held sway had the Catholic Church's credibility not been left in tatters after the church spent more than $2.5 billion to clean up the wreckage wrought by pedophile priests and their enablers.

While Nienstedt's arrogance and cruelty stands out as particularly odious, it isn't just Catholicism that is in decline.

I, for one, believe that the 19.3-percent figure for Nones is too low. A substantial number of people identify themselves in surveys as belonging to a particular faith for one of three reasons:

• Habit: People over 30 were brought up in a world where everyone was presumed to have a religious affiliation as both a mark of faith and cultural identity. So, when asked whether they belong to a faith group, they reflexively check the box, with little thought to their own belief system or actual adherence to the religious convictions they claim. As the "Nones" make themselves more visible, it gives these folks a new box to check -- and many of them will.
• Fear: For centuries it was dangerous for people to acknowledge their genuine beliefs. "Today, there's no shame in saying you're an unbeliever," Southern Baptist Theological Seminary president Albert Mohler complained in USA Today.
•  Politics: Even today, if an ambitious person wants a successful career in politics, it is easier to fake having faith than to acknowledge being a nonbeliever. The result is that politicians appear significantly more devout than the general population. Once this taboo falls, which is likely to occur in the next decade, it will open the door to a more honest dialogue about the role of religion in public life.

When people see their own sons and daughters and friends and co-workers coming out, it creates a crisis of credibility for religious institutions. It leads to countless situations where mean-spirited men like Nienstedt demand blind, irrational obedience and say "take it or leave it" -- and more people are now following their consciences and walking away.  

Add to this premise the reality that science is proving that the Adam and Eve of the Bible are fictional characters and that, therefore, there was no Fall through Adam, and the whole literalistic approach to the Bible begins to collapse.   And it is happening most rapidly in the mainline churches which as I have noted before have the highest levels of education (see the charts below).  It is no coincidence that anti-gay bigotry and Bible inerrancy are increasingly confined to the most conservative denominations which also happened to be those with the lowest educational levels.    

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

8 Ways Christian Fundamentalists Make People Become Agnostics or Atheists

While surveys have shown that religious fundamentalism tends to inversely related to education levels (Episcopalians and Evangelical Lutherans are among the best educated denominations and least likely to believe in the Bible as inerrant), science, reason and knowledge are not the only things that drive individuals from Christianity.  No, the Catholic hierarchy and their Christian fundamentalist allies are do a great job all on their own as they daily demonstrate that the hallmarks of their style of religion are hate and hypocrisy.  And ironically, their constant jihad against gays is one of the leading reasons why people are increasingly converting to agnosticism or atheism.  Yes indeed, rather than "converting people to God's word" they are driving them away.  An article in AlterNet looks at the leading reasons people walk away from Christianity.  Here are excerpts:

If the Catholic bishops, their conservative Protestant allies, and other right-wing fundamentalists had the sole objective of decimating religious belief, they couldn’t be doing a better job of it.

 

[I]f you read ExChristian testimonials you will notice that quite often church leaders or members do things that either trigger the deconversion process or help it along. They may turn a doubter into a skeptic or a quiet skeptic into an outspoken anti-theist, or as one former Christian calls himself, a "devangelist."Here are some top ways Christians push people out the church door or shove secret skeptics out of the closet. Looking at the list, .you can’t help but wonder if the Catholic bishops, Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann and their fundamentalist allies are working for the devil.

 1. Gay Baiting.   Ignorant and mean-spirited attitudes about homosexuality don’t drive just gays out of the church, they are a huge deconversion issue for straight friends and family members. When Christians indulge in slurs, devout moms and dads who also love their gay kids find themselves less comfortable in their church home. Young people, many of whom think of the gay rights issue as a no-brainer, put anti-gay churches in the “archaic” category. Since most people Gen X and younger recognize equal rights for gays as a matter of common humanity, gay baiting is a wedge issue that wedges young people right out of the church.

2. Proof texting. People who think of the Bible as the literally perfect word of God love to quote excerpts to argue their points.  .   .   .   .   They proceed to quote whatever authoritarian, anti-gay or anti-woman verse makes their point, like,    .    .    .     .   In doing so, they call into question biblical authority, because the Bible writers so obviously got these issues wrong. Literalists who prooftext are a tremendous asset to those who would like to see Bible worship fade away – because prooftexting on one side of an argument invites the same in return, and it is easy to find quotes from the Bible that are either scientifically absurd or morally repugnant.

3. Misogyny. For psychological and social reasons females are more inclined toward religious belief than males. They are more likely to attend church services and to insist on raising their children in a faith community.   .    .   .    but fortunately for atheists, this fact hasn’t caused conservative Christians to back off of sexism that is justified by – you got it – proof texting from the Old and New Testaments.    .    .    .   Between 1991 and 2011 the percent of women attending church in a typical week dropped by 11 points, from 55 to 44 percent.

4. Hypocrisy. Christians are taught – and many believe—that thanks to the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit they are a moral beacon for society.   .    .    .    But the added pressure on those who call themselves the "righteous” means that believers also are prone to hiding, pretending, posing, and turning a blind eye to their own very human, very normal faults and flaws.  .     .      .    People who desperately want to be sanctified and righteous, “cleansed by the blood of the lamb” – who need to believe that they now merit heaven but that other people’s smallest transgressions merit eternal torture—have a lot of motivation to engage in self-deception and hypocrisy.    .    .   .   Backbiting and social shunning are part of the church-lady stereotype for a reason. They also leave a bitter taste that makes some church members stop drinking the Kool-aid. 

5. Disgusting and Immoral Behavior. The priest abuse scandal did more for the New Atheist movement than outspoken anti-theists like Christopher Hitchens (God is Not Great), Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion), Sam Harris (The End of Faith) or Bill Maher (Religulous) ever could.  .    .    .   .   The Freedom from Religion Foundation publishes a bi-monthly newspaper that includes a regular feature: The Black Collar Crime Blotter. It features fraud, drug abuse, sex crimes and more by Protestant as well as Catholic clergy. 

6. Science Denial. One of my former youth group friends had his faith done in by a conversation with a Bible study leader who explained that dinosaur skeletons actually are the bones of the giants described in early books of the Bible.  .   .   .   .   science denial doesn’t just move believers to nonbelief; it also rallies opposition ranging from cantankerous bloggers to legal advocates. It provides fodder for comedians and critics: “If the world was created 6,000 years ago, what’s fueling your car?” It may produce some of the most far-reaching opposition to religious belief, because science advocates argue that faith, even socially benign faith, is a fundamentally flawed way of knowing. 

 7. Political Meddling. If you look at religion-bashing quote-quip-photo-clip-links that circulate Facebook and Twitter, most of them are prompted by church incursions into the political sphere.   .   .   .   .   I myself give George W. Bush credit for transforming me from a politically indifferent, digging-in-the-garden agnostic into a culture warrior. He casually implied that, when going to war, he didn’t need to consult with his own father because he had consulted the big guy in the sky, and my evangelical relatives backed him up on that, and I thought, oh my God, the beliefs I was raised on are killing people. The Religious Right, and now the Catholic bishops, have brought religion into politics in the ugliest possible way short of holy war, and people who care about the greater good have taken notice.

8. Intrusion.  [S]erious intrusions, in deeply personal beginning- and end-of-life decisions, for example, generate reactive anti-theism in people who mostly just want to live and let live.  Catholic and evangelical conservatives have made a high-stakes gamble that they can regain authoritarian control over their flocks and hold onto the next generation of believers (and tithers) by asserting orthodox dogmas, making Christian belief an all-or-nothing proposition.   .   .   .   .   the more they resort to strict authoritarianism, insularity and strict interpretation of Iron Age texts, the more people are wounded in the name of God and the more people are outraged. By making Christian belief an all-or-nothing proposition, they force at least some would-be believers to choose “nothing.” Anti-theists are all too glad to help.

Nowadays, when I hear someone proclaim that they are a Christian - frequently in inappropriate settings where such statements ought not even be made -  it's usually one or more of the foregoing characteristics/actions that springs to mind.  Believe me, it's almost nothing of a positive nature.  Let's hope the bishops and their Christianist allies continue killing Christianity - or at least their foul version of it.

Will Americans Elect a Jerk to the White House?

There was a time when I actually thought that Mitt Romney might be somewhat acceptable as president.  Unfortunately, the more I've learned about him, the more mistaken I realized I was - the guy, in truth is a total unfeeling jerk.  And the stories about his gay bashing and abuse in high school was the final straw.  That's not to say that I'm in love with Barack Obama, but despite his failings, he's not a creep who has not empathy for others and is clueless as to the daily challenges most Americans have to deal with.  And then there's the issues of gay marriage and gay adoption.  Romney basically cannot even accept my common humanity nor can he admit that gays have lives, loves and children just like everyone else.  A column in The Daily Beast looks at Romney's "jerk factor."  Here are excerpts:

Very few votes are going to be cast on the basis of what Mitt Romney did or didn’t do to John Lauber in 1965. So that, per se, isn’t Romney’s problem. But this is: The story lands as another brick on pile of evidence amassing that he’s just a disagreeable human being. A few days ago I wrote about Barack Obama’s biggest problem, which is that despite all the many areas in which Americans rate him higher than Romney, the one on which they give Romney the edge happens to be pretty important: handling the economy. Now we get to Romney’s biggest problem. The likability factor. He ain’t got it. And he ain’t got much of a way to get it.

Historical question: When is the last time the clearly less likeable candidate beat the clearly more likeable one for the White House? The answer is, a long time. I put the question to Gallup, which didn’t have historical numbers at hand. But doing some noodling around on my own suggests that you have to go back to 1968 to find such a result.

This is the biggest washout of modern times, folks. Gallup just this week put the likeability ratings at Obama 60, Romney 31. It’s not that Obama’s number is unusually high.  .  .  .   they Do. Not. Like. Mitt. Romney.  .   .   .  Every time he says something off the cuff he says something obnoxious. Corporations are people, pal. I like firing people. Where on earth did you get those Godforsaken cookies?

He also—and this actually is interesting, because it’s something our normal public discourse does not like to admit or allow for—is way too rich. We’re constantly told that Americans don’t have any class envy, and compared to some European nations they don’t. But even Americans have limits. A few million, even $50 million; okay. But a quarter billion dollars? A house with an elevator . . . for the cars? It also matters to people how the money was made. It’s okay to be worth a gajillion dollars if you’re Bill Gates or Steve Jobs and have made everyone’s lives more interesting and cooler. But what’s Mitt Romney done?

[H]e has no grasp of the one crucial reality of class in America: you can be filthy rich as long as you don’t look or act like it. Gates doesn’t comb his hair, much. Jobs wore sneakers. Romney just looks too pressed.

And this brings us back to the Cranbrook School incident. We might have learned from The Washington Post this week that Romney gallantly interceded on poor Lauber’s behalf. Or even, maybe, that he did the awful deed, but a few years later he got in touch with Lauber to say, “Gee, old scout, went a bit overboard there.” Or even that he acknowledged to one of his confederates that he regretted the incident. In other words, we might have learned something that showed he knows he behaved like an asshole. But all we learned is that he behaved like an asshole and is now pretending to forget it. A jerk is one thing. But a jerk who takes no responsibility for his jerkitude is pretty much the definition of an unlikeable person.

[T]here’s something very reassuring about this country reposing in those numbers, that the black guy with the weird name who’s been called everything under the sun is twice as likeable as the rich white guy. This is the America that drives the wingers crazy, but that the rest of us—the majority—live in, and love.

Whitewashing the Democrats' History on Gay Rights

While today's Republican Party has made it easy to picture that party as the party of anti-gay bigotry and intolerance in general, the Democrats have a less than pretty history of their attitude towards LGBT citizens if one looks back not all that far back in time. Indeed, some of the laws that continue to deny LGBT Americans full equality such as DOMA were put in place under a Democrat President and for cynical and calculating political purposes. Yes, the Democrats have improved and 21 U.S. Senators support making marriage equality part of the Democratic Party plank. But we need to ever mindful that politicians often do things for perceived political expediency as opposed to because it's the right thing to do. Many who now are viewed as champions of LGBT equality have a less than pretty past record and have shown that political expediency is their true god. Frank Rich has a long piece in New York Magazine that reminds us of the convenient amnesia that some Democrats like to exhibit. Here are some highlights:

When the news came last June that the New York State Senate had voted to legalize same-sex marriage, I was at a dinner party that felt like New Year’s Eve, only with genuine emotions. Everyone at the table—straight, gay, young, old—was elated. Later, as my wife and I headed home past an Empire State Building ablaze in the rainbow colors of Pride Week, we were still euphoric at having witnessed one of those rare nights when history is made. Same-sex-marriage adversaries constantly proclaim that gay unions threaten “traditional” marriage.

[T]he dawning of marital equality and the demise of “don’t ask, don’t tell” are twin peaks in the checkered cavalcade of American social justice. Since that night, the good news on gay civil rights has kept coming. This month alone, legislative and judicial actions have made same-sex marriage the law in Washington State and Maryland and nudged it closer to reality in California and, Chris Christie notwithstanding, New Jersey. A Valentine’s week New York Times–CBS News poll, echoing others over the past year, found that Americans now favor marriage over separate-and-unequal civil unions as the legal option for gay couples; less than a third of the public believes that gay families should be denied both.

Compared with the other civil-rights battles in America, especially the epic struggle over race that has stained and hobbled the nation since its birth, the fight over gay equality is remarkable for its relative ease, compact chronology, and the happiness of its pending resolution. There’s no happier ending to any plot than a wedding. But, as last June’s celebration has gradually given way to morning-after sobriety, it’s also clear that something is wrong with this cheery picture. Two things, actually.

The first is obvious: Full equality for gay Americans is nowhere near at hand. One of America’s two major political parties is still hell-bent on thwarting and even rolling back gay rights much as Goldwater Republicans and Dixie Democrats (on their way to joining the GOP) resisted civil-rights legislation and enforcement in the sixties. In most states, sexual orientation can still be used to deny not only marriage but also jobs and housing, as well as to curtail adoption rights. America’s dominant religions remain largely hostile to homosexuality, and America’s most cherished secular pastime, professional sports, is essentially a no-gay zone. The bullying of gay and transgendered children remains a national crisis.

The second thing that’s wrong with the picture is far less obvious because it has been willfully obscured. In the outpouring of provincial self-congratulation that greeted the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York, some of the discomforting history that preceded that joyous day has been rewritten, whitewashed, or tossed into a memory hole. We—and by we, I mean liberal New Yorkers like me, whether straight or gay, and their fellow travelers throughout America—would like to believe that the sole obstacles to gay civil rights have been the usual suspects: hidebound religious leaders both white and black, conservative politicians (mostly Republican), fundamentalist Christian and Muslim zealots, and unreconstructed bigots. What’s been lost in this morality play is the role that many liberal politicians and institutions have also played in slowing and at some junctures halting gay civil rights in recent decades.

It was, after all, the trustees of the Smithsonian Institution, not a Bible Belt cultural outpost, who bowed to pressure from the militant Catholic League just fifteen months ago to censor the work of a gay American artist who had already been silenced, long ago, by AIDS. It was a Democratic president, with wide support from Democrats on Capitol Hill, who in 1996 signed the Defense of Marriage Act, one of the most discriminatory laws ever to come out of Washington. It’s precisely because of DOMA that to this day same-sex marriages cannot be more than what you might call placebo marriages in the eight states (plus the District of Columbia) that have legalized them.

The history of liberal culpability in such government-mandated discrimination should not be locked in a closet now. To forget any history is to risk repeating it. To forget this particular history is to minimize or erase the struggles of gay men and lesbians whose lives and fundamental rights were trampled routinely for decades in America, with cruel and sometimes deadly results.

Remembering what happened is essential if politicians, particularly liberal politicians, are to be prodded or, if need be, shamed into bringing the unfinished tasks of equality to the finish line.

One relevant chapter of this often-obscured past unfolded during the not-so-distant year of 1977. . . . It was also in 1977 that Anita Bryant, a pop singer and onetime Miss America runner-up, mounted her “Save Our Children” campaign to repeal a Miami ordinance protecting homosexuals from discrimination in jobs and housing. Bryant called gay people “an abomination,” but such invective didn’t prevent her cause from winning the endorsement of the Dade County Democratic Party—or of Florida’s governor, Reubin Askew, a Democrat so progressive that George McGovern had offered him the vice-presidential slot on the 1972 ticket. The anti-gay rage whipped up around Miami by this crusade inspired the bumper sticker KILL A QUEER FOR CHRIST and the beating and hospitalization of a gay man.

What most New Yorkers did not know about gay people in 1977 could — and did—fill a five - column article in the Times (albeit relegated to page 41). It breathlessly reported that “increasingly, the homosexual community is very much one of lawyers, physicians, teachers, politicians, clergymen, and other upper-class professional men and women,” many of whom “tend to live like their heterosexual counterparts.”

In 1978, The Village Voice published a front-page polemic arguing that gay civil rights shouldn’t be a matter of public concern.

It’s this atmosphere that explains why another woman of Miss America fame—Bess Myerson, who, unlike Anita Bryant, had won the crown—was dragged into a New York mayoral contest between two liberals. Koch was a Greenwich Village bachelor, at the time a scarlet letter of assumed homosexuality second only to being a hairdresser. Myerson was drafted as his steady campaign companion—if not a girlfriend, exactly, a hand-holding BFF—to stave off the accusation that dare not speak its name except in below-the-radar whispers. . . . As Election Day approached, posters of mysterious provenance reading VOTE FOR CUOMO, NOT THE HOMO appeared in Brooklyn and Queens.

Both Cuomos have long denied having anything to do with those posters. They could not, however, deny their ostentatious playing of the “family man” card. Whatever went down in 1977 was enough to move Andrew Cuomo to later apologize privately to Koch for the tone of the race.

What we do know is that Andrew Cuomo deserves every bit of credit he has received for making same-sex marriage a top priority of his young governorship and for moving heaven and earth—deep-pocketed donors, recalcitrant Albany politicians, and sometimes-disorganized gay activists—to get the job done. If that feat of governance, among others, makes Cuomo a likely presidential prospect for the post-Obama Democratic Party, it’s well earned. But it doesn’t obliterate the record of what came before, including his standoffish relationship to gay-civil-rights battles for much of his preceding three-decade public career.

By the time Cuomo could act as governor, the issue was a win-win for him in Democratic politics, locally and nationally, the path having been paved by other fighters before him and by fast-moving polls confirming an ever more gay-friendly America. Yet even the preeminent gay magazine The Advocate failed to confront him on his record in its worshipful cover story marking New York’s marriage law; that past was journalistically Photoshopped out of existence.

Bill Clinton has also worked hard to spin and skate away from his history on gay issues. His presidential record looks good only when contrasted with the literally lethal passivity of Ronald Reagan, who didn’t think AIDS warranted a speech until 1987, six years into the epidemic and his presidency. Reagan is a very low bar, and that lets Clinton off the hook for a legacy that’s had a far more lasting and egregious impact than any failings, youthful or otherwise, of Andrew Cuomo. Clinton knows it, too. In his thousand-page memoir, My Life, he somehow didn’t find the space to so much as mention the Defense of Marriage Act.

The bill was strictly a right-wing political ploy cooked up for the year of Clinton’s re-election campaign. It had no other justification. In the spring of 1996, same-sex marriage wasn’t legal anywhere in the country or a top-tier cause for many gay leaders; it was solely in play in a slow-moving court case in Hawaii. But fear and demonization of gay men was off the charts: In 1995, a record 50,877 Americans with AIDS died—a one-year count rivaling the 58,000 Americans lost in the entire Vietnam War. The Christian Coalition, under the Machiavellian guidance of the yet-to-be-disgraced Ralph Reed, saw an opening to exploit homophobia to galvanize a Republican base unenthusiastic about Bob Dole. In a consummate display of bad taste, Clinton announced that he would sign DOMA that spring just two days after the Supreme Court, in a rare national victory for gay rights, struck down a Colorado constitutional amendment that had barred anti-discrimination laws benefiting gay men and lesbians. In the months to come, Clinton’s stand on DOMA gave political permission to many nominally liberal Democrats to join Rick Santorum, Jesse Helms, and Larry Craig in voting for the bill that September—among them Charles Schumer (then in the House) and the senators Joe Biden, Tom Harkin, Frank Lautenberg, Patrick Leahy, Joe ­Lieberman, Carl Levin, Barbara Mikulski, Patty Murray, and Harry Reid. Only fourteen senators, also Democrats, had the courage to vote against it.

Two years later, Matthew Shepard would be strung up in Wyoming, and a decade later George W. Bush, in league with Karl Rove, would make a statement almost identical to Clinton’s when he endorsed a constitutional marriage amendment in a similar election-year pander. “As this debate goes forward,” Bush intoned in 2006, “every American deserves to be treated with tolerance and respect and dignity.” Like Clinton, he knew he was enabling the exact opposite.

It’s Clinton who has done the rewriting, and not slightly, claiming that DOMA was “a reasonable compromise in the environment of the time.” Reasonable for his own political calculation, yes, but hardly for the gay Americans who have paid for it ever since.

Andrew Cuomo has traveled far from the late seventies—as so many of us have—and so has Bill Clinton from the nineties. The former president came out for same-sex marriage in 2009. But words are cheap. Clinton’s lip service might actually mean something if he spent his own current financial and political capital to help undo the second-class citizenship for gay Americans that was codified on his watch. Whatever his good works overseas, it’s past time for the entrepreneur of the Clinton Global Initiative to phone home—and to galvanize the liberal Democrats who followed his lead in ratifying DOMA, many of them still in office.

We are now in another election year, and one in which both leading presidential candidates in the GOP preach the most hard-line anti-gay positions of their respective churches. Nothing is ever certain in politics and, unlikely as it may seem, one of them could win. . . . . Though a cadre of conservative financiers, at least one with a gay son, helped bankroll Cuomo’s successful strong-arming of Republican same-sex-marriage votes in Albany, there doesn’t seem to be a single major Republican donor or leader, or even a mainstream conservative pundit, with the guts to call out these candidates or the party’s congressional leadership on their corrosive anti-gay rhetoric and agenda.

The GOP is on the wrong side of history for sure, with gays no less than Hispanics and every other minority group. Generational and demographic turnover is remaking America even as the right tries to turn back the clock. But over the shorter term, the party’s hard line will continue to inflict real injustice on citizens of all stripes—not just on gay adults (whether they are seeking marriage or not), but on gay kids struggling to find a safe place for themselves in the world and straight children who love their gay parents. So uninhibited is the animus of the Republican base that it thought nothing of booing a gay Army captain serving in Iraq when he presumed to ask a polite question via YouTube during a campaign debate on Fox News. Not one of the nine presidential candidates onstage spoke up to defend the soldier.

That’s why the celebrations in New York last June, while merited, must be seen as provisional. That’s also why Democratic leaders who profess fierce advocacy of gay civil rights must be held to account. Back in a day that was only yesterday, too many of them also fell silent—and when it counted most.

Rich makes many good points and the reality s that LGBT citizens need to be vigilant and ALWAYS go out in vote. Bitching amongst themselves doesn't cut it if they've stayed home on their ass while the Christofascists have gone out in droves on a modern day anti-gay crusade. And it's important that Democrats know that we are only too aware of their past failings and we are watching their every move.

New Southern Baptist Curriculum Bashes Gays

Sometimes it's hard to know which Christian denomination treats gays more horridly. Having been raised - and brainwashed - as a Catholic, I'm fully aware of that denominations hominid attacks against gays, especially under the current morally bankrupt Pope and his henchmen bishops. The Southern Baptist Convention ("SBC") is little better and I've known quite a few gays struggling to recover from what can only be described as psychological abuse during their religious upbringing. But apparently, the SBC feels that the "princes" of the Catholic Church are out dong it in terms of striving to demonize gays and making our lives a living Hell. Not ironically, the SBC seems to have sex abuse by clergy issues only topped by those of the Catholic Church, a far larger denomination. Hence, apparently, a new SBC curriculum that is particularly heinous in its treatment of gays. Religion Dispatches looks this hate filled and lie filled curriculum. Here are highlights:

Today, teenagers in many Southern Baptist churches are hearing about homosexuality through a curriculum called “Known.” . . . . One module, however, stands out for its sheer nastiness. The module on homosexuality (contained in the Insights, Options, Bonus section of Known 13) reads like something that could have been produced by the Family Research Council or Americans for Truth About Homosexuality. That is to say, it’s completely hateful.

I am horrified because teenagers coming to terms with their sexuality will be told that homosexuality is “vile and shameful” and “against God’s design for godly, holy living.” They will also be told that gay and lesbian people “consistently choose what is morally wrong.”

[T]he creators of Known are not interested in letting the facts get in the way of scaring the hell out of young people who may be struggling with their sexuality. They simply want to drive home the message that homosexuality is “vile” and all gay people are morally suspect not just in their sexuality but apparently in every aspect of their lives.

the homosexuality unit degrades and debases gays and lesbians—and loving them is only mentioned in the last paragraph. "We must also choose to love people in spite of their sin. If we love people, we will seek ways to share the gospel with them. What steps will you take to share the gospel with people you know who are enslaved to sexual sin?" Got that? Love them—by sharing the condemnation that you have just learned.

Some will certainly take the SBC bait, hook, line, and sinker, becoming the anti-gay zealots of the next generation. But for others, this may be the unit that pushes them away from the church—especially those closeted teens—and that is sad. Still others—those struggling teens, perhaps—could even be driven to suicide by this hateful and bullying lesson.

Has I have noted many times, today's conservative Christians - be they Catholic or Baptist - are best defined by their hatred of others. They have betrayed the Gospel message and are the strongest argument to be found for why one would not want to be known as a Christian.

Is the Navy Making Owen Honors Its Fall Guy?

I and many outlets have previously addressed the story of former U.S.S. Enterprise executive officer Owen Honors and his production of sleazy videos that were played aboard the Enterprise during various deployments. For those new to the story, the videos included sexual jokes, subordinates parading in drag, anti-gay slurs, and sailors pretending to masturbate, shower together and perform rectal exams. When the story first broke, it seemed hard to believe that Honors' superiors were not aware of his video productions. Now, Honors - who was relieved of command of his ship - has submitted a statement that his superiors- including two admirals - knew of the videos and had even encouraged their production. True to form, the members of the higher brass are claiming to have had no knowledge of the videos and it looks like Honors is being slated to take the fall as the Navy true to form plays damage control. One thing one learns quickly living in this region is that the Navy never takes responsibility for misdeeds and/or mistakes and will look for an individual to fall on their sword instead. Honors doesn't seem to want to fall on his sword alone. Here are highlights from the Virginian Pilot:
*
In a statement to investigators, Capt. Owen Honors said he had "affirmative and tacit approval of senior Navy leadership" when he made and broadcast a series of videos to the crew of the carrier Enterprise in 2006 and 2007.
*
The former Enterprise commander said in his 15-page statement to Fleet Forces Command that the ship's two commanding officers, two strike group admirals and "myriad other senior military and civilian distinguished visitors" were aware of the videos, the Navy Times reported on its website Sunday.
*
David Brown, managing editor of the Navy Times, said Honors' statement includes two points - that senior leadership encouraged the videos by discussing them weekly and that Honors was never told to stop making them - that contradict what the Navy has reported.
*
"After personally reviewing the videos Capt. Honors created while serving as executive officer, I have lost confidence in his ability to lead effectively," Adm. John C. Harvey Jr., the four-star head of the Navy's Fleet Forces Command, said during a news conference Jan. 4. "He is being held accountable for the poor judgment and inappropriate actions repeatedly demonstrated in those videos."

*

Honors may be a boorish idiot, but somehow I suspect that he's telling the truth about his superiors knowing about what was going on and that they likely just laughed it off.

Thugs Versus the Gays

The New York Times has a follow up story on the horrible gay torture story from yesterday. What is striking is that the story makes it pretty obvious that the attackers involved are a bunch of worthless losers who need someone to denigrate in order to make themselves feel good about themselves. It's a phenomenon that seems to be the norm with bullies and gay bashers. Meanwhile, the 30 year old victim by all accounts is a far more productive and decent member of society. It is sad that only by abusing and/or denigrating others can some stroke their own sick and maladjusted egos, be the abusers/bashers thugs like the ones involved in this story out of the Bronx or professional Christians who seem to only feel self-congratulatory when demeaning others. Oh, and note the way that the parents of these dead beats try to claim that their brutish sons are "good boys." Obviously, these parents failed miserably in raising such monsters - such violence and bigotry had to have been learned somewhere. Here are some highlights from the follow up story:
*
The most severely brutalized victim was a gay 30-year-old Hispanic immigrant known in his Bronx neighborhood as “la Reina,” Spanish for “the Queen.” He was playful, flirty and always ready for a party, neighbors said. At the bodega below the apartment he shared with his brother, he often bought sodas for teenagers.
*
The ringleader of the street crew was known on his block as a stocky 23-year-old thug with tattoos all over his arms and a pit bull at his side, a marijuana dealer who would hang out on a fire escape and would put teenagers to work selling drugs. He had previous arrests for gun possession and robbery and, as a neighbor put it, “looked like trouble.”
*
Relatives of some of the suspects expressed shock at the charges on Saturday, describing them as young men who went to school and steered clear of trouble. . . . “Bryan is not a bad kid,” she said. “If he was there, he didn’t do anything.”
*
Steven Caraballo’s parents said that he had enrolled in a G.E.D. program, lifted weights and played basketball with his three brothers. “He told me nothing is going on in the streets,” said his father, Jose. “He’s in school. He never got involved in this kind of thing.”

Arrests Made in Two Violent Anti-Gay Attacks

The Christianists and professional Christian set make all kinds of untrue statements about gays and that we are a treat to marriage, the family and/or society. Unfortunately, there are those who listen to such hate filled language and sometimes they act on it, feeling justified in inflicting violence against innocent gays who are no threat to anyone. Other perpetrator of anti-gay violence in my view may also be taking their own self-hating homophobia on others since they cannot come to terms with their own sexuality. If you beat a gay severely or kill them, then naturally, you cannot be one of them - or so I suspect the thinking goes. It is disgusting and it is one of the direct fruits of Christianist anti-gay propaganda. First some highlights concerning an arrest in Florida where an 18 year old is alleged to have beaten a gay man to death via the Miami Herald:

*

An 18-year-old was arrested Tuesday in the beating death of an Oakland Park man, according to the Broward Sheriff's Office. Chad Alexander Olah, who was 17 at the time of the April assault, is being held at the Juvenile Assessment Center on a charge of murder and strong arm robbery in two attacks.
*
Craig Cohen, 47, was beaten in the early hours of April 6 and left on an Oakland Park sidewalk. He was in a coma for months after the attack and died last week. Cohen was gay, but authorities did not charge the attackers with a hate crime, saying he was the victim of a group of drunk attackers looking to beat and rob someone. Olah and two other men had been hanging out at a nearby home, talking about how it'd be fun to rob and beat someone, BSO said.

*

Closer to home, Daniel Rodriguez (pictured above), who authorities say was involved in the savage beating of a Queens, New York man last week, was arrested here in Norfolk, Virginia after apparently fleeing the New York area. The Virginian Pilot has the following:

*

A second suspect has been arrested in the apparent hate assault that left a 49-year-old New York City gay man in a medically induced coma. Police say 21-year-old Daniel Rodriguez was taken into custody in Norfolk on Tuesday night. Charges are pending and NYPD detectives are in the process of returning him to New York. Rodriguez waived extradition in Norfolk General District Court Wednesday morning, according to an e-mail from the Norfolk Commonwealth's Attorney's Office.

*
Earlier Tuesday, 26-year-old Daniel Aleman was arraigned on a charge of assault as a hate crimes. He faces up to 15 years in prison if convicted. A telephone call to his attorney was not immediately returned. Investigators say the two Queens men taunted Jack Price and yelled anti-gay slurs before punching and kicking him last Thursday after he left a 24-hour deli near his home in Queens. Price suffered a fractured jaw and ribs, the collapse of both of his lungs, and a lacerated spleen.

*

Yes, there are bad seeds everywhere, but it does seem that there has been a spike in anti-gay violence that coincides with all of the Christianist anti-gay propaganda. With the constant message being disseminated that gays are a hazard to marriage, society and civilization itself, it is not surprising that bigots feel they have a licence to harm us and kill us.

Budget Woes Force Focus on the Family Layoffs

Apparently hate and intolerance are not as profitable as once was the case. In yet another round of layoffs, Focus on the Family will be leting go another 75 employees and not filling another 57 vacant positions. While I feel some empathy for those soon to be joining the ranks of the unemployed, I cannot help but wonder who would want to work for an organization that principally markets lies, bogus science, deliberate untruths and hate and intolerance. As for Daddy Dobson, I suspect that he has set aside a very nice nest egg for himself so that even if his Christianist empire were to fall, he would continue to live quite comfortably off of his ill gained monies - blood money if you will in light of the number of LGBT lives Dobson has likely ruined or negatively impacted. One can only hope that the financial woes of FOTF and similar organizations that denigrate other citizens continue to falter as older bigoted generations die off and are replaced by younger, more tolerant generations that believe in the concept of the separation of church and state. Here are some highlights from the Washington Post:

*

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. -- Focus on the Family announced Wednesday it is laying off 8 percent of its work force, casualties of the latest budget shortfall at the influential conservative Christian group. Seventy-five employees will lose their jobs and an additional 57 vacant positions will remain unfilled, said Gary Schneeberger, spokesman for the evangelical ministry founded by child psychologist James Dobson. The cutbacks are necessary because projections show the group will fall 5 percent short of a $138 million budget for the fiscal year ending this month, Schneeberger said.

*

The cutbacks include a staffer at "Love Won Out," a conference series about "overcoming" same-sex attractions that Focus on the Family announced last month would be ceded to another religious organization.

*

An in-house ad agency also will be closed, Schneeberger said. The layoffs will leave Focus on the Family with about 860 employees, down from a peak 1,400. Last fall, budget problems prompted the group to eliminate more than 200 positions, the largest staff reduction in its history.

Finding Gay Friendly Legal Counsel

As one of only two attorneys in the area who is openly "out" and not hiding behind the "gay friendly" label, I receive many calls from LGBT residents seeking legal representation in areas of the law that I do not handle. I endeavor to refer these people to other counsel that I know are both competent and gay friendly if not actually gay. Lately, I have been hearing tales of opposing attorneys - particularly in divorce cases - who advertise themselves as "gay friendly" yet who willingly and viciously play the gay card to harm their client's gay former spouse to the maximum extent possible in the divorce case. Obviously, most attorneys who do this hope to prejudice the court and/or brutalizing the opposing party. In this vein, I received a call yesterday from a gay man whose estranged wife is being represented by an allegedly "gay friendly" attorney with a large area firm that advertises on Equality Virginia's legal resource page. This attorney reportedly is playing the gay card for all it is worth in the divorce hearings - even to the point of representing that the gay father can only have supervised visitation. Moreover, he is with a law firm that, in my opinion, is not only extremely homophobic, but would never have an openly gay attorney in its employ.

*

Unfortunately, as the economy has nose dived, cynical attorneys and firms that are seeking to bolster falling revenues are waking up to the fact that the gay community is a potentially lucrative market niche. These attorneys and firms in reality care NOTHING for the LGBT community or individual LGBT clients and are after one thing only: gay dollars. As a result, they are not invested in seeing that LGBT clients receive justice in the courts. It's all about money and when a client comes along who wants to engage in vicious gay bashing to win in a case, these attorneys and firms quickly jump right on board (even though such conduct is probably a violation of the Code of Ethics).

*

With the growing awareness of the size and purchasing power of the LGBT community, numerous websites are springing up that allow attorneys to advertise themselves as gay friendly (some sites allow the attorney to advertise that they are gay and out) . Similarly, some LGBT organizations such as Equality Virginia, provide legal resource listings as well. The problem is, no one seems to check behind attorneys and firms seeking to be listed. In the situation I mentioned, the Virginia Beach firm has itself listed as a legal resource on Equality Virginia's website.

*

So what should the LGBT client seeking legal counsel do? The first advice is to check behind the listing with people in the LGBT community. Is the attorney advertising to the LGBT market out professionally? If not, does the attorney claiming to be "gay friendly" support local LGBT organizations as a member, sponsor or through other means? If in doubt, the LGBT client should call local LGBT organizations to see what, if anything, is known about the attorney advertising to the community. Likewise, call other advertising attorneys in other areas of legal specialization to determine what they know of the attorney/law firm in question. Bottom line: do your homework to make sure you will truly be hiring an attorney who will advocate your case and who is not afraid to call out the opposing counsel and/or the presiding judge if they engage in or allow gay bashing to occur in the case. Gay bashing and playing the gay card is NEVER appropriate. Do not allow yourself to fall victim of a cynical and opportunistic attorney who only wants your money and who will disparage you behind your back while happily taking your money.