Tuesday, June 26, 2012
More Evidence that NOM is a Catholic Church Front Organization
I have long had the gut feeling that the National Organization for Marriage ("NOM") is actually a front organization doing much of the dirty work for the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy's jihad against LGBT individuals. This relationship would certainly explain NOM's strenuous - almost hysterical - efforts to keep the sources of its funding secret. Just imagine if it were documented that the Catholic bishops were pouring millions of dollars into efforts to influence legislation and oppose candidates for political office. It could mean the Church - or at least many diocese - could be looking at a loss of their tax-exempt status for clear violations of the restrictions of Sec. 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Now that General Mills has come out in opposition to the Minnesota constitutional amendment to make LGBT Minnesotans inferior citizens, NOM has launched a boycott against the food giant. But, as my blogger friend Jeremy Hooper happened to discover NOM may have screwed up and helped confirm the NOM/Catholic Church connection. Here's Jeremy's comments on his discovery revealed in the image below:
[I]f one looks at the HTML code [of NOM's laughably ill-advised Dump General Mills petition], he or she will see this hidden text:
 |
| Click image to enlarge |
One can only hope that this relationship will be investigated by the IRS and appropriate steps taken to revoke tax-exempt status for the diocese of Washington, D.C., and any other diocese and Church affiliated tax-exempt organizations implicated in violations of the Internal Revenue Code.What, is Cardinal Wuerl a Kellogg's fan? Or is it that this uber Catholic organization is finally starting to own the real, really faith-based thinking that has always guided its resistance to civil marriage equality?
Life Magazine’s “Homosexuality In America”: 1964.
Over the weekend I was talking to a straight friend of the boyfriend's who asked me if I ever knew that I was gay when I was growing up. I answered "yes and no." Yes, part of my knew the truth, but it was something I simply could not consider acceptable. It was something just too horrible to be true. The consequences were just to terrible. You see, I was 12 years old in 1964 and just at the point of realizing that while many of my male friends were becoming attracted to girls I was feeling attraction to some of my male friends. Being raised in conservative Central New York in a fairly traditional Catholic family, I already pretty much knew that same sex attraction was NOT something that one wanted to be experiencing. And then comes along Life Magazine's lengthy feature story on "Homosexuality in America." Yes, my family subscribed to Life Magazine and I recall seeing the story to my absolute horror. If I had inclinations to stay in the closet and deny who and what I was, this article certainly underscored the need to do so. The message to me and I suspect many other young gays of that era was that we could never, ever, admit to our feelings and that I/we needed to do everything possible to not be one of these people so maligned in the article. Box Turtle Bulletin looks at the piece as does Ronslog.com where the full article can be found. Here are some excerpts from the Life piece which along with Catholic Church brainwashing helped drive me deep into the closet for 37 years:
“Homosexuality shears across the spectrum of American life — the professions, the arts, business and labor. It always has. But today, especially in big cities, homosexuals are discarding their furtive ways and openly admitting, even flaunting, their deviation. Homosexuals have their won drinking places, their special assignation streets, even their own organizations. And for every obvious homosexual, there are probably nine nearly impossible to detect. This social disorder, which society tries to suppress, has forced itself into the public eye because it does present a problem — and parents especially are concerned. The myth and misconception with which homosexuality has so long been clothed must be cleared away, not to condone it but to cope with it.”
Over the next fourteen pages, Life magazine explored what they called the “sordid world” of the gay community.
Homosexuals everywhere fear arrest -- and the public exposure that may go with it. In Los Angeles, where homosexuals are particularly apparent on city streets, police drives are regular and relentless. The running battle between police and homosexuals has produced bitter feeling on both sides. Leaders of homophile societies in Los Angeles and San Francisco have accused the police of "harassment, entrapment and brutality" toward homosexuals.
Civil Service regulations – which govern 93 per cent of federal employees – state that a person is unsuitable for government employ if he is guilty of “criminal, infamous, dishonest, immoral or notoriously disgraceful conduct.” The Civil Service Commission maintains that homosexuals can be a disruptive influence in a government agency, that a homosexual in a position of influence is likely to bring other homosexuals into government service, and that where security is necessary they are a greater risk than heterosexual co-workers. When the commission has evidence than an employe or prospective employe is a homosexual, he is denied a job – or fired – for “immoral conduct.”
A Catholic viewpoint, which does not condone homosexuality but does regard it as a psychological problem, has been provided in a book, Counselling the Catholic, written for U.S. parish priests by Father George Hagmaier, C.S.P. and Father Robert Gleason, S.I. The book makes the point that in order to “bring one’s activity into accord with objective morality, one needs knowledge and one needs freedom. A defect in either will ordinarily imply some lessening of responsibility.” The authors conclude that, because they are subjected to this psychological disturbance, homosexuals do not have this freedom.
[I]in Florida early this year the Legislative Investigation Committee’s consideration of homosexuality produced an inflammatory report, calling for tougher laws to support the conclusion that “the problem today is one of control, and that established procedures and stern penalties will serve both as encouragement to law enforcement officials and as a deterrent to the homosexual [who is] hungry for youth.” Its recommendations would make psychiatric examination of offenders mandatory and create a control file on homosexuals which would be available to public employment agencies throughout the state. The report, which included an opening-page picture of two men kissing and photographs of nude men and boys, was so irresponsible that it brought attacks from the Dade County state’s attorney and the Miami Herald, which described it as an “official obscenity.”
You get the drift: why would any youth want to be gay when this is what a national magazine that came into your home every week had to say about gays? It goes without saying that the years in the closet were damaging for me emotionally and psychologically. They were no less unkind to those I loved and kept behind a glass wall so that they would never learn my horrible truth. Finally, it got to the point where I had to either try to face reality or end my own life )something I came close to doing twice).
Cyndi Lauper vs. Maggie Gallagher and NOM: Who Actually Practices the Gospel Message?
At times the hypocrisy and unwarranted self-congratulation of the "godly Christian" set and the defenders of "the sanctity of marriage" is enough to make me want to vomit. Time and time again it is those who wrap themselves in religion and feigned piety and act like modern day Pharisees whoin fact make a mockery out of both Christianity and the Gospel message of Christ. Meanwhile, those deemed secularists by the pious frauds actually implement the Gospel message much in the way of the Good Samaritan in the Gospel parable. Two instances underscore this reality. The first is the announcement by the National Organization for Marriage ("NOM") that it intends to expend $2 million to unseat pro-gay legislators and reverse same sex marriage in New York State. Meanwhile, NOM doesn't spend a penny on the causes dictated by Christ: feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, caring for the sick and providing shelter for the homeless. That's right, not a penny even though Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown have milked NOM for very plush salaries, And then in contrast, we have Cyndi Lauper who has founded a foundation called the Forty to None Project, a national program to educate the public and support homeless LGBT youth. I ask you, who is following the path of the Good Samaritan and who is acting like the Pharisees that Christ condemned according to the Gospels. Here are highlights from Towleroad on Cyndi Lauper's efforts:
Cyndi Lauper today launched the Forty to None Project, a national program to educate the public and support homeless LGBT youth. The project's name comes from the disturbing number of LGBT homeless youth. With up to 1.6 million youth who are homeless each year, 40% identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender. Lauper wants that number to be "none".
Dan Savage on GOProud and the Hate Merchants of the Far Right
I've often equated being a gay Republican to being something akin to being Jewish and belonging to the Nazi Party or being black and seeking to be a part of the KKK. Why would anyone in their right mind want to engage in such self-defeating masochism? And the truth is the GOP is NOT going to "change from within" as the puppets at GOProud like to pretend. Only sustained electoral defeats are going to force a rejection of the GOP's anti-gay agenda (ditto in respect to its racist agenda). As a former GOP activist, I can assure you that all of the rational people who might listen to reason left the GOP years ago leaving only the crazies and those who are driven by love of their money more than anything else. Dan Savage has a great piece that looks at the bizarre dysfunctions of those in GOProud. He also attacks the far right which demonize gays and then point to the fruits of their foul handiwork as proof that gays are inferior. Not surprisingly, the GOProud crowd isn't happy since Dan's remarks hit all too close to home. Here are some highlights:
Gay people abuse drugs, alcohol, and tobacco at higher rates than straight people do. We also commit suicide at higher rates. The haters on the religious right argue that these higher rates of self-harming behaviors are proof that the gay "lifestyle" is inherently dangerous and unhealthy.
The haters have it backwards. It's not that self-hatred in many gay people causes personally-destructive behavior. It's that the external hatred all gay people have to endure—discrimination, oppression, bigotry, and rejection by family members poisoned by "faith"—can lead to substance abuse, punishing sexual excess, and suicide. Being gay doesn't damage us. It's the way we are treated for being gay that leaves many of us damaged. Johann Hari said it best:
Being subjected to bullying and violence as children and teenagers makes gay people unusually vulnerable to depression and despair. The homophobes then use that depression and despair to claim that homosexuality is inherently a miserable state—and we shouldn’t do anything that might “encourage" it. They create misery, and then use it as a pretext to create even more misery.[H]ere's something I've noticed about the self-hating, self-destructing gay guys I've known: it wasn't good enough for them to destroy only themselves. They had to destroy other gay men too. Using meth wasn't enough—they wanted their friends to use meth too. Abusing alcohol wasn't enough—they insisted that their friends match them drink-for-drink. And spinning out of control sexually wasn't enough—they wanted their friends to join them down at the bathhouse.
Which kindasorta brings me to my recent dustup with GOProud. The hard-right gay Republican organization—a rightwing front group that exists to pinkwash the GOP—endorsed Mitt Romney last week. Romney, of course, opposes marriage equality. Romney supports DOMA. Romney has pledged to write anti-gay bigotry into the U.S. Constitution. Romney opposed the repeal of DADT. Romney opposes the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). Romney opposes adoptions by same-sex couples. GOProud's endorsement of Romney, while not a surprise, was annoying, and it prompted me to send out this tweet: "The GOP's house faggots grab their ankles, right on cue. Pathetic." The boys at GOProud accused me of using a hate term and claimed that I had bullied them. For the record, boys, this is what the bullying of an adult looks like. Politically-active adults taking the piss out of each other—and you guys have called me all sorts of lovely names—isn't bullying.
Anyway, mixing it up with GOProud last week got me thinking about why a gay man would endorse—much less "commit significant resources" to help elect—a man who has pledged, if elected, to do as much harm as he possibly can to gay people. I mean, what kind of faggot supports a politician who would do him harm?
Oh, right: the same kind of faggot who would harm himself with drugs or alcohol or sex. The kind of gay men who don't like themselves or other gay people much. But while most self-loathing, self-destructive gay men are content to abuse booze, drugs, or dick, the self-hating GOProud boys abuse themselves with politics. And . . . . They want to harm other gay people—they want to harm all gay people—by getting Mitt Romney elected. And just like your meth-addicted friend who pushed the drug on you, or your drunk friend who mocked you for stopping at four, or your sexually out-of-control friend who insisted that you were a prude if you didn't play the come dump with him down at the bathhouse, the GOProud boys want you to abuse yourself the same way that they're abusing themselves. . . . . Because they're damaged.
Yes, the boys at GOProud are none to happy with Dan Savage, but I'd say his analysis is dead on. Sometimes the truth hurts, but it doesn't make it any less the truth. The GOProud ought to save their contributions to the GOP and instead get some good therapy so that they can finally escape their internalized homophobia. A good description of internalized homophobia can be found here.
The GOP's Immigration Quandary
With the Supreme Court striking down three sections of Arizona's racially motivated immigration law, the GOP is faced with the quandary of where to go next on an issue that is not going away and which pits the GOP's aging racist base with the fastest growing demographic segment of the nation's population. Pretending that America can return to some fictional version of the 1950's plays well with elderly whites and psychologically disturbed Christianists, but it is long term suicide for the GOP. An article in the Washington Post looks at the situation now facing the GOP and would be liar-in-chief, Mitt Romney. Here are excerpts:
Monday’s Supreme Court ruling on Arizona’s tough anti-illegal-immigration law stirred a growing debate among Republicans over how to navigate an issue that has energized the conservative base and turned off Hispanic voters.
Some on the right were taken aback to see Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., an iconic figure to many conservatives, side with the court’s liberals to reject several key provisions in the law and even declare that as a “general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States.”
The ruling came as Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been struggling to connect with Hispanics after courting conservative primary voters with sharp rhetoric against illegal immigration. A survey published Monday showed him favored by just one-fourth of Hispanics.
The quandary for Romney and the GOP is clear from recent polling. The Arizona law is very popular with whites and independent voters, according to data from the Pew Research Center, while many GOP strategists think their party has little chance for success in battlegrounds such as Colorado, Nevada and Virginia if Romney doesn’t win close to 40 percent of Hispanics.
In recent weeks, President Obama has increased the pressure on Romney, announcing that he would halt deportations of hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants — action that Hispanic activists had been urging for a long time.
And some leading Republicans, including former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour, have publicly expressed concern that Romney’s positions allow Democrats to portray the GOP as anti-Hispanic.
Romney appeared to be walking a careful line after the ruling. Though he once called Arizona’s approach to immigration a “model” for the country and vowed to reverse the Obama administration’s challenge to the law, his support for the measure seemed more muted Monday.
Even the GOP’s biggest Hispanic star, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, has struggled to find the right balance, jousting in Spanish over his past support for the Arizona law with the country’s most important Hispanic newsman in an interview that aired Sunday. Jorge Ramos, an anchor on Univision, the widely watched Spanish-language network, told the senator that he “took the side of the victimizers who are persecuting Hispanics.”
It will be interesting to watch to see whether more in the GOP come to grasp that long term, the party's less than subtle racism is going to push the GOP toward permanent minority status as elderly whites literally die off and its anti-gay mantra drives away younger voters.
Of Skeletons and Closets - The Poisonous Effects on Married Gays
The Christofascists go to great lengths to continue to foist the "ex-gay" myth and "change" myth on the public at large not to mention those unfortunate enough to have been raised in their psychologically disturbed denominations. The damage done to gays who marry out of fear or a desire to do "what is expected" of them by family and society is immense. I know, because I was one such gay man who tried to believe the lie and be something that I was not. The inner conflict and years of self-hate took a toll both on me and those around me that I loved and cared about. Not that any of this type of associated damage means a thing to the Christofascists whose anti-gay hatred knows few boundaries. A piece in the Sydney Morning Herald takes a good look at the consequences for gays who marry as I did and try to lie a lie. Here are some excerpts:
Coming out – it’s an emotional minefield. Accepted by some, rejected by others, confused about who to trust and where to turn. How much harder if you were a gay man who had to ‘'come out'’ to your wife and children?
It is estimated roughly two million lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in the United States have married someone of the opposite sex. One-third of these couples break up immediately after disclosure, one third stay together for a year and then separate and another third attempt to make it work (although three years later, only half of this group were still together).
Psychologist Paul Martin from Brisbane's Centre for Human Potential has spent 25 years working with men and women of mixed-orientation marriages. Mr Martin said the impact of suppressing or denying homosexuality was wide-reaching, resulting in both physical and mental health issues. “This story needs to be told. It’s something that’s happening underneath our noses all the time, more than anyone would imagine,” he said.
As the acceptance of homosexuality increases, it is expected the number of married men coming out will continue to rise. “These men have a heightened level of internalised homophobia and are responding to a discomfort with who they are. They develop many defences,” Mr Martin said.
“Everything they say and do and every person they interact with is an act of deception because they have a conflict between the real self and the projected self. “They become masters of deception. They can quite often be loveable and popular, but the problem for that person is that people are interacting with an ‘avatar’ and not the ‘real’ person. It is the loneliest place in the world.” Mr Martin said the leading motivation for a man to deny his homosexuality was the fear of rejection.
Monday, June 25, 2012
Teenage Lesbian Couple Shot in Apparent Targeted Attack
A teenage lesbian couple were shot over the weekend in a park in Portland, Texas near Corpus Christi, Texas. One girl has died and the other remains in serious condition with a gun shot to the head. KRISTV.com has coverage here.
Police remain closed mouthed about the shootings but have said that the crime appeared to be a targeted attack. There is no word yet as to whether it was a hate crime based on the victims' sexual orientation. If such turns out to be the case, it will be yet another example of the foul fruits of the constant stigmatization and denigration of LGBT individuals by GOP politicians and the Christofascists.
Needless to say, the thought of a young life snuffed out and another life at best seriously damaged sickens me. Meanwhile, the likes of Tony Perkins, Bryan Fischer and the mouthpieces fro anti-gay hate groups are likely rejoicing that there's one less LGBT person in the world regardless of the motivation behind the attack. Here are some highlights from KRIS-TV:
No arrests have been made in a weekend shooting at Violet Andrews Park that left one teen dead and another hospitalized in Portland. Two park visitors stumbled upon the two young women lying in the grass.
19-year-old Mollie Judith Olgin was pronounced dead at the scene. Her girlfriend, 18-year-old Mary Christine Chapa, was rushed to the hospital with a single gunshot wound to the head. At last report she was listed in serious but stable condition.
Investigators believe they were shot some time around midnight on Friday. They were found about 9 hours later. Friends say the girls hade been dating for about five months. Investigators do not believe this was a random incident, but are not saying much about a potential motive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)