Analyzing and refuting the inaccuracies lodged against the lgbt community by religious conservative organizations. Lies in the name of God are still lies.
Using religion to distract is the unkindest cut of them all so why should we be surprised that Amendment One supporters in North Carolina are doing just that.
That has been their modus operandi since the beginning, but now they have stooped exceedingly low.
Legendary pastor Billy Graham has endorsed Amendment One in full page ads set to appear in 14 newspapers across the state:
“At 93, I never thought we would have to debate the definition of marriage,” the national religious leader says. “The Bible is clear — God’s definition of marriage is between a man and a woman. I want to urge my fellow North Carolinians to vote FOR the marriage amendment on Tuesday, May 8.”
I mean no disrespect to Rev. Graham, but it disappoints me that he is lending his name and reputation to this deceptive campaign. His statement is deliberately simplistic and ignores several issues, including the fact that Amendment One is not a Biblical issue and that marriage equality is already outlawed in North Carolina.
However, I would prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt. I personally don't believe that he would endorse Amendment One if he was educated on the realities of what would happen should it pass.
Legal experts across the state, even those who are conservative, have spoken out against Amendment One, calling it extreme because it "threatens a range of other protections for unmarried partners and their children, including domestic violence protections and child custody law."
University of North Carolina law professor Maxine Eichner, during a recent press conference on Amendment One, said:
. . . as indicated in the “Statement from Family Law Professors,” which was signed by family law professors from every law school across the state, every one of us believes that the Amendment One threatens domestic violations protections for unmarried couples, whether they are same-sex or opposite-sex.
I sincerely doubt that Rev. Graham would knowingly endorse something which could harm not only children, but also women trapped in domestic violence relationships.
I also sincerely doubt that Rev. Graham would endorse Amendment One had he known the parties involved in its attempted passing, included:
Rev. Graham, these are the people on your side, sir. And maybe it's just me but there is something really, really wrong with that.
There is a saying that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" and it is very apt here. Rev. Graham's supposed "good intentions" in endorsing this sham of an amendment would definitely send innocent North Carolinians down a road to hell paved with harmed children, damaged domestic violence laws, racism, and the stigmatization of the state's gay community
I know in my heart that this is not the future he intends for North Carolina.
Presumptive Republican nominee for president Mitt Romney and his campaign are embroiled in a scandal regarding the resignation of an openly gay man, Richard Grenell, as Romney's national security and foreign policy spokesman. Grenell only had the job for two weeks. There is a huge belief that Grenell was let go to appease members of the religious right. Here are three voices on the matter:
I don't condone the way this young man in Indiana defended himself but I understand and am totally in his corner:
Darnell "Dynasty" Young's classmates at Tech High School cursed at him in the school hallways and taunted him with homophobic slurs.
They followed him home from his bus stop and threatened to beat him up.
One night, as he walked home from his after-school job, they threw rocks at him.
When the 17-year-old and his mother, Chelisa Grimes, told school officials, she said, teachers and administrators seemed to blame Young for being openly gay.
His behavior and the way he dressed called attention to himself, they said.
He accessorized his outfits with his mother's purses and jewelry. And he loved to dance.
His dance routine to Beyonce's "Single Ladies" won second place at Tech's talent show in December.
"They said that the problem was he was too flamboyant, with his bags and his purses and his rings," Grimes said.
Desperate to protect her son from bullies, Grimes gave him a stun gun to carry, just in case.
"I had to do something," she said. "They throw bottles and rocks at him."
Now Young faces expulsion from school.
"It has been a nightmare," Grimes said. "I'm trying to fight for my baby's education."
Young's story is one that could unfold in countless schools across America.
You know what? Who cares if the young man is flamboyant. There are worse things you can be in life. And if the child carries himself with pride and no shame, then more power to him.
It's a terrible thing when adults blame the teen victims of bullying for their abuse. And it's even worse when a child is made to feel that he or she is a freak and that their creative deserves to be stifled.
From my online buddies Jeremy Hooper and Louis Marinelli , comes proof that some folks are getting out of hand in voicing their support for Amendment One in North Carolina - the bill which would not only outlaw marriage equality (which is already outlawed in the state as it is) but would cause chaos with unmarried couples and domestic violence laws.
Recently, a teen was filmed shooting down an anti-Amendment One sign (causing a justifiably negative reaction). THIS particular young man, Chris Kaliber, goes farther.
He states on his video page that he is "voting for the Bible."
But the way he chooses to do so has nothing to do with the Bible or the ballot box, but demonstrating that he chooses not to control his water
This is not a joke. I asked him on his video page - "Regardless of how you feel, was it really necessary to do this thing. Make your choice at the ballot box."
This is what he said - "Yes, yes it was."
As disgusting as what this young man does, I don't blame him more than I blame the National Organization for Marriage.
History has shown us that instigators generally come into communities and exploit people's fears, beliefs, and prejudices until chaos arises.
Take a good look, Maggie Gallagher, Brian Brown, and the rest of the folks at NOM. This is what YOU helped cause.
Editor's note - Again, the only way we can speak out against this madness is to make it known, regardless of how angry we may get.
TFP street group creates questionable incidents of alleged 'pro-gay' violence.
Peter Sprigg, the National Organization for Marriage (and no doubt many others in the religious right) are touting the following video of a religious right organization supposedly being attacked by those who favor marriage equality:
If you don't want to seen the entire video (called Attacked by Tolerance), I don't blame you. It merely shows snippets of incidents We don't really see many of these incidents in their entirety. This is what its summary says:
In this video, volunteers with the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (TFP) describe how they were violently assaulted by pro-homosexual "marriage" advocates while supporting traditional marriage on college campuses and in the public square.
No doubt, TFP hopes to make the video go viral and it probably will. But let's put some truth in. No doubt, Sprigg, NOM, and other who push this video will omit the following facts:
What exactly is the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family, and Property (TFP)? David Badash of The New Civil Rights Movement, a pro-gay blog, did some research and found the following:
TFP Student Action is a project of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property. Founded in 1973, the American TFP was formed to resist, in the realm of ideas, the liberal, socialist and communist trends of the times and proudly affirm the positive values of tradition, family and private property. The American TFP was inspired by the work of the Brazilian intellectual and man of action Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira.
What We Do
Networking with thousands of students and concerned parents, TFP Student Action defends traditional moral values on college campuses. Inspired by the teachings of the Holy Catholic Church, TFP volunteers are on the front lines of the culture war, working to restore the values of Christian civilization.
TFP activities are carried out by 75 full-time volunteers and have the support of 120,000 members nationwide. The director of TFP Student Action is John Ritchie.
Now, here’s what else you need to know about TFP.
According to the UN Refugee Agency, “[i]n a 1986 article, The Washington Post described TFP as an “all-male, extreme right-wing group with chapters in 13 countries” (15 May 1986). The Brazil-based organization was financed mainly by wealthy South American families and supported the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile (ibid.). It was banned for its paramilitary activities in Venezuela, where it was implicated in 1984 in a plot to assassinate the Pope, a charge that the group denied.”
Now the following is what I have discovered - TFP has a history of creating contrived incidents of supposed violence by gay equality supporters and videotaping these alleged incidents for use by religious right groups.
During a recent Leadership Triangleforum regarding Amendment One (which would wreak havoc in North Carolina for unmarried couples and domestic violence laws if passed) blogger Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend had a very interesting conversation with one of the leading supporters of this amendment, Pastor Patrick Wooden.
Pastor Wooden of Upper Room Church of God in Christ in Raleigh, NC has been very vocal in his support of the amendment. In past interviews, he claimed that gays engage in so much anal sex that they have to wear diapers and also they use instruments such as cell phones as sexual aids:
. . I know of a case where in a hospital a homosexual male had a cellphone lodged in his anus and as they were operating on him the phone went off, the phone started ringing!
After the forum, Pam questioned Wooden directly on his spurious claims regarding gays and sex, particularly the cell phone claim. The following is what she said took place:
Wooden’s defense is that he was asked to go on the program and he told “an anecdote." I reminded him that he had no data or evidence to support this claim, and that this is only supporting the notion that he thinks being gay is all about sex, and that heterosexuals engage in all sorts of sexual behaviors that don’t have any impact on their civil rights. All he could say was that he has to talk about it in these terms because, by definition, “homosexuals as a group are defined by who they sleep with” and by extension, since his religious view is that homosexuality is a sin, this is what drives him to speak out.
So basically Wooden did not supply any evidence of his claim because there was none. Wooden admitted that the only reason he made the claim was to create an image of the gay community which is conducive to his religious beliefs that gays are immoral sinners.
In other words, Wooden lied. Deliberately and unashamedly.
Wooden was not interested in giving logical reasons why Amendment One should be passed. In fact, Wooden has never been interested in defending Amendment One through logic at all. He has only been interested in pushing Amendment One through any means, even if it meant demonizing the gay community through fear tactics and ugly stories of sex, diapers, and cell phones. And why did he do this? Because his religious beliefs dictated that homosexuality is a sin.
Where in the Bible does it say that Christians should lie in accordance to their beliefs?
Seems to me that if a truly Christian man feels that the position he takes on an issue is correct, he should not have to stoop to lies in order to defend it.
Wooden's admittance calls into question not only his integrity, but also his character.
Gays and lesbians partaking in the sacred institution of marriage in no way damages it. We merely want protection for our loved ones and the right to love without fear.
What's so immoral about that?
However, if anyone fears a danger of marriage being corrupted, they would be best served to look in Pastor Wooden's direction and remember his shameless ability to deceive without a shred of impunity.
Marriage is about love, support, and truthfulness. Pastor Wooden is nothing but lies.
To call on him to "protect marriage" is like asking a thief to guard Fort Knox.
The grand irony is that Wooden, according to Pam, said that the pastors who were against Amendment One didn't know how to read their Bibles. Wooden also had some ugly words to say about Rev. Dr. William J. Barber II of the NC NAACP who has been a vocal opponent of Amendment One:
He (Wooden) spoke dismissively onstage about other religious leaders who oppose Amendment One, and when I asked him about the NC NAACP’s Rev. Barber’s Open Letter to North Carolinians and very forceful advocacy against A1, he said that Rev. Dr. Barber is a demagogue (that’s a quote), and is not telling the truth about the harms of the amendment.
So Wooden seems to think that Rev. Barber is a demagogue huh? Well let's just put that one to a visual test:
I'm sure the Rev. Barber and the other pastors who oppose Amendment One know the Bible just as well as Wooden.
Particularly the verse about bearing false witness.
The following is just plain sick. Pam Spaulding describes the scene:
There are many, many people of faith, progressive houses of worship fighting out and proud against Amendment One in solidarity with their LGBT neighbors who will be hurt by it, should it pass. On the other side? A man reveling in shooting up an anti-amendment sign, and now this news of a pastor in Fayetteville, Sean Harris, of Berean Baptist Church, whose loving message for parents of a child who might be gay — just beat it out of him. Sickening. (Via JMG and Good As You):
"So your little son starts to act a little girlish when he is four years old and instead of squashing that like a cockroach and saying, “Man up, son, get that dress off you and get outside and dig a ditch, because that is what boys do,” you get out the camera and you start taking pictures of Johnny acting like a female and then you upload it to YouTube and everybody laughs about it and the next thing you know, this dude, this kid is acting out childhood fantasies that should have been squashed.
Can I make it any clearer? Dads, the second you see your son dropping the limp wrist, you walk over there and crack that wrist. Man up. Give him a good punch. Ok? You are not going to act like that. You were made by God to be a male and you are going to be a male. And when your daughter starts acting to Butch you reign her in. And you say, “Oh, no, sweetheart. You can play sports. Play them to the glory of God. But sometimes you are going to act like a girl and walk like a girl and talk like a girl and smell like a girl and that means you are going to be beautiful. You are going to be attractive. You are going to dress yourself up.”
You say, “Can I take charge like that as a parent?”
Yeah, you can. You are authorized. I just gave you a special dispensation this morning to do that."
You may hear folks laughing in the background, but this is hardly funny. Perhaps Harris (I refuse to dignify this sick man by calling him a pastor) should read about children beaten and murdered for being gay or suspected of being gay,
Pay attention particular attention to the story of Ronnie Harris:
Ronnie Paris Jr. was a three-year-old boy who died after repeated abuse from his father, who feared that the boy was gay. The abuse that eventually led to the death started as early as when the boy was one year old. In May 2002, Paris was removed from his parents' home after the Florida Department of Children and Family Services found him malnourished and with a broken arm.
More than two years later, Paris was returned to his birth parents and the abuse continued. Just six weeks after he was moved back into his parents' home, Paris slipped into a coma while the parents were at a bible study. The child remained on life support for six days before the support was removed and he died.
Paris' mother, Nysheera Paris, told authorities that the boy's father, Ronnie Paris Jr. abused the boy because he was afraid that the son would grow up gay. This conversion abuse involved father-son boxing matches to toughen up the child but was nothing more than slapping and hitting Paris until he would cry and shake.
If Amendment One passes, that would mean North Carolina would supposedly "save marriage," right?
Then who is going to save our children from the supposed "defenders of marriage?"
(Editor's note - if this makes you mad, then good. But I implore you not to trade evil for evil. Do what you can to bring attention to this awful mess. Blast this all over!)
Jeremy Hooper has been documenting the manyvile, incendiarythings that proponents of North Carolina’s Amendment One have been saying about the LGBT community.
Al Mohler’s truly stupid bigoted statement - Dr. Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary makes an eyebrow raising implying statement regarding gays in the Boy Scouts and pedophilia.
In 2008 in the aftermath of the Proposition 8 vote, the National Organization for Marriage was able to spin a story of gays allegedly assaulting an old woman to raise its profile and embarrass the gay community.
Four year later, this tactic has backfired in North Carolina regarding the fight over Amendment One - an amendment that if passed would cause chaos in North Carolina
Yesterday, Maggie Gallagher herself wrote the following post:
The Vote YES For Marriage NC campaign is reporting on Facebook that an elderly woman who refused to surrender her "vote yes" sign was beaten by a gay marriage advocate.
I knew of at least one case like this in California. This comes from "de-legitimizing" your opponents, claiming there is no possible argument for any point of view but your own.
I hope North Carolina does not become a repeat of the harassment and occasional violence we saw in California:
Gallagher was probably referring to the case of Phyllis Burgess, a woman who was allegedly assaulted by gay equality supporters during the aftermath of the Proposition 8 vote. On camera, Burgess was shoved and had a styrofoam cross ripped from her hands.
NOM and the rest of the religious right consistently brought up this camera footage as proof that gays are pushy and violent when we allegedly can't get our way.
However, they only told part the story. The real story was that Burgess did not inflame the crowd by her views, but her actions. She allegedly elbowed her way to the front of the group so that she could be seen on camera. And in doing so, she allegedly knocked a disabled man to the ground.
How the religious right spun that story was no doubt fresh in the mind of Joe Jervis from the blog Joe.My.God because he investigated the North Carolina incident. This is what he found:
Guess what? The story was a lie.
According to Detective Branch, the woman in question was not in her own yard, as was implied by Vote For Marriage NC, she was at another house "looking for her sister." Branch told me that there the woman may have argued with a man about a yard sign, but Branch didn't know where that sign may have been located or for which side of the marriage issue it advocated. It's possible that she was complaining about the other man's own yard sign. There may have been no yard sign at all.
Robeson County officers advised the woman that if she wanted to pursue charges about having her car door slammed on her as she left the man's house, she could file for a misdemeanor charge of simple battery. Branch said no such claim was yet on record.
Does anybody want to take odds that Vote For Marriage NC confesses to their numerous outrageous lies about this concocted event?
Check out the rest of the Jervis's blog entry for how many times Vote for MarriageNC changed its tweets on the matter.
The irony is that while NOM and Vote for MarriageNC spins their false story, they conveniently miss an actual story of a man shooting an anti-Amendment One sign allegedly on his neighbor's property:
As some of you know, yesterday, I published two posts from a Truth4Time member -LTP - who was offended by my story regarding the secret group.
The first post was him spouting all sorts of rambling nonsense about "evil homosexuals." Short of refusing to allow him to place the link to his dumb page, I published his words as is to demonstrate just off the rail some of these people are.
He didn't appreciate it because he sent me a second post in which he detailed supposed truthful information as to why homosexuality is supposedly a dangerous lifestyle. The information he sent contained straw man arguments about the supposed "gay gene" and citations from discredited organizations as to how homosexuality can be changed. He dared me to post it as is.
I took his words as a challenge to not only post the information but to also refute it, which I did, specifically AND implicitly.
To put it nicely, I mopped up the floor with the child. It was a slaughter, a massacre, a tidal wave of truth which totally dismantled his nonsense and left him figuratively naked.
So what does he email me as a response or refutation? The follow two emails:
Email 1: Wikipedia is not a source kids, as for expelling mistakes keltic, cuantas lenguaguas habla usted fluentemente? un, deux, trios ...yep, it figures, nice try!
It is what it is, and I am not surprised for the responses of the all of you... as expected!
One of the most difficult things is for anyone to be truly honest with themselves, to then admit wrong doing, or that their lives may be not quite correct, or a sad passage in their lives, etc, and then have the courage and strength to make a course correction. I don't expect any of you to do that, since your psychological response was to latch out at the messenger of the truth, me.
As for all the other information and science pointing out the detrimental outcome of the homosexual behavior, well kids I have given you links, specially the links of my book, where in one of the chapters there is page after page of documented and corroborated examples of the detriments of homosexuality... but I do not expect any of you to admit when you are wrong...that requires and education higher than the one demonstrated by your responses, and by your responses you all seem very emotional and not very logical, so sorry.
And Alvin I give you at least credit for having the courage to at least post my side of the story, more than I can say for the responses by the other posters here. .. facts are facts people, there is no gay gene, multiple studies now prove that to be the case, therefore all that is left according to logic is that it a condition generated after birth... I know, it is not something easy to confront, and for many of you perhaps for the first time, a person that is not an echo like in the homosexual/progressive circles you are clearly navigate in.. but it is what it is. No emotional repose, no politics, just pure logic and analysis of the evidence, and then the results... so sorry. It is what it is...!
Now you can all go back and insult me...lol.... it doesn't hurt me a bit. Good night, Buenas noches.
Talk about tone deaf. He didn't even address the points I made in regards to his citation of a discredited organization (NARTH) or the legitimate organizations who have spoken against "ex-gay" therapy, or even the simple fact that the concept of the alleged "gay gene" is merely a religious right talking point. But you will love email number two.
I consider myself a person of faith. I credit my faith in God with accepting my sexual orientation. But here is something that I have never understood about some of my fellow Christians. How is it that they can cite passages regarding the supposed sin of homosexuality, but will ignore the ones advocating slavery, children obeying their parents, keeping women silent in church, divorce, and other things that they will not talk about which is clearly in the Bible. Why didn't Jesus say one word about homosexuality? And for that matter,why didn't God Himself?
How is it that they can cite the story of Sodom and Gomorrah as proof that God hates homosexuality when it is clearly said in the Bible that God decided to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah long before the passages regarding homosexual rape appeared? How is it that when other passages in the Bible talk about why Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed, you don't see anything regarding homosexuality? And why won't they discuss that chapter in the book of Judges (Judges 19) which pushes forth the theory that one of the reasons why Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed was not because of homosexuality but because of how the city treated visitors. You see a similar incident happened in the book of Judges where men in a city wanted to rape a visitor. But the visitor escaped by handing over his concubine whom the men brutalized until she died.
Why is it that so many folks call the Bible the unquestioned word of God but won't talk about parts of the Bible which would actually challenge their notions of who God is. God does want obedience but He doesn't want blind obedience and those secure in their faith should know that seeking the answers to questions would only work to enhance the faith rather than destroy it.
So my question to those offended by Savage is basically simple. What are you afraid of?
Remember a certain moment in February 2012 when the National Organization for Marriage's Maggie Gallagher was interviewed on Up With Chris Hayes?
It was a contentious interview, by the way, punctuated by Gallagher accusing commentators from the show of "making up" facts to use against her and NOM, particularly when it comes to "reparative therapy," or the practice of trying to change the sexual orientation of lgbtqs:
Well, I've never advocated for gay reparative therapy, and the National Organization for Marriage does not. We focus on fighting for laws that define marriage as the union between a man and a woman.
Someone should ask Gallagher about a certain post on NOM's blog which appeared on Friday:
New California Law Would Forbid Professionals from Helping Teens with Unwanted Same-Sex Attraction
Parents and/or teens' wishes notwithstanding:
An unusual assortment of groups are beginning to express alarm over a bill moving through the California legislature that has sweeping implications for both free speech and family rights.
Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute, is not mincing words. "I can honestly say this is one of the most outrageous, speech-chilling bills we have ever seen in California-and that's saying a lot," he said.
The main purpose of the bill, SB 1172, is to limit the ability of psychologists, therapists and other counselors to assist adult or minor clients with sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE). SB 1172 flatly bans SOCE for minors-regardless of the parents' or minors' wishes-and requires a new consent form for adults containing statements about sexual orientation that many counselors would dispute. The bill then creates significant liability for professionals who proceed with SOCE. -- Pacific Justice Institute press release
The actual story, by the way, has to do with a proposed California law which would outlaw reparative therapy for those under 18-years-of-age. Reparative therapy, while popular amongst many religious institutions, is frowned upon by mental and medical associations such as the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Counseling Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy.
The person who I talked about in my last post - who by the way is a member of the Truth4Time site - can't seem to take a hint. He didn't exactly appreciate me mocking him. Subsequently, he sent me a long post and dared me to publish it.
I will, with a few additions of my own. Now I have given the poor child the initials of LTP. Never mind why. LOL
LTP:
I dare you Alvin to post my response... lets see if you are as open minded as you people say you are.
My friend - "Homophobe", "sad ignorant fool", subpar intelligence"..."nice" (sarcastic).. insults, typical of the responses from this kid of crowd... well, here is an education on facts:
First… there is no "gay gene".... if you are a homosexual you were not born one, you are made, a fact explained by geneticists like Dr. Neil E. Whitehead PhD in YouTube:
Type in the search box: [ Dr. Neil Whitehead answers, "Is there a gay gene?"]
Dr. Neil says that even after decades of looking:“ No statistical significant gene has been found, and they even looked at the whole human Geno…”
Another is large “Identical Twins Studies” in the Netherlands and Holland also prove homosexuality not to be genetic, since only less than 10% of the time if one identical twin is gay the other one is also gay, meaning 90% of the time if one is gay the other is not… in a situation were b-o-t-h beings (the twins) are genetically identical, and cooked in the mothers belly at the same time (under the same hormonal environment).
Even England's leading gay activist Peter Tatchell recently stated that: "Homosexuality isn’t natural. Ignore those researchers who claim to have discovered a ‘gay gene’, gay desire is not genetically determined". (Spiked, Tuesday 24, 2008).
My answer - First of all, my friend, you didn't give any information on Dr. Neil Whitehead. Whitehead is a member of the discredited group NARTH (National Organization for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality). No one in the scientific community takes that organization seriously because it pushes "reparative therapy" - the false notion that homosexuality is a condition which can be changed. According to Truth Wins Out:
NARTH relies on outdated studies and frequently confuses stereotypes with science. Dr. Nicolosi, for example, often tells audiences that people are gay because they have a rift with a same-sex parent or a have domineering opposite sex parent. It has been decades since any serious scientific body subscribed to these views and there is no contemporary research to uphold these anachronistic theories. Yet, NARTH’ co-founder Dr. Joseph Nicolosi repeats the empty mantra, “We advise fathers, if you don’t hug your sons, some other man will.”
. . . NARTH also has bizarre theories, such as encouraging male clients who drink Gatorade and call their friends “dude,” because this will supposedly make them more masculine. Dr. Nicolosi also espouses the bizarre idea that, “Non-homosexual men who experience defeat and failure may also experience homosexual fantasies or dreams.”
In 2006, NARTH had a meltdown after two major controversies. In the first, psychiatrist Joseph Berger, MD, a member of their “Scientific Advisory Committee,” wrote a paper encouraging students to “ridicule” gender variant children. “I suggest, indeed, letting children who wish go to school in clothes of the opposite sex–but not counseling other children to not tease them or hurt their feelings,” Dr. Berger wrote on NARTH’s website. “On the contrary, don’t interfere, and let the other children ridicule the child who has lost that clear boundary between play-acting at home and the reality needs of the outside world. Maybe, in this way, the child will re-establish that necessary boundary.”
In the second controversy, Gerald Schoenwolf, PhD, also a member of NARTH’s “Scientific Advisory Committee,” wrote a polemic on the group’s website that seemed to justify slavery.
Two years ago, a member of NARTH's board, George Rekers, had to resign after being caught coming from a European vacation with a male escort.
But even without your citation of NARTH, your entire claim about a "gay gene" is merely a tactic for you to attempt to control the argument.
Far be it from me to put someone in a spotlight as a subject of derision to be made fun of, but this child deserves it.
He kept sending me messages on the Signorile video until I blocked him, so he took the time to send me this long rambling message. This is sad homophobia defined.
Just read and understand the ignorant mindset behind some people's reasonings of why they treat us lgbtqs like freaks:
.. you blocked my responses to your post Alvin in YouTube, but I am not surprised, people like you want to block the Truth, to silence it like Chris Mathews even said in his video.
No matter, here it is anyway...
Do you know what it will take for a t-r-u-l-y better world to happen? Brutal honesty, and then Responsible Behavior from everyone! It will take for every single person to look at their lives, identify what they are doing wrong, and correct it, no excuses, ...none!
And what is correct and what is wrong behavior? Easy, look at the outcomes of the action, and then it becomes clear as daylight. And we all have flaws, things we need to work on, we assume too much, we care too much about our own selves and not enough for others, we pursue material things when we should we working more on our own selves, we consume too much, we rape the land too much, we neglect one another, we indulge on physical pleasures too much, when we should be more spiritual and protect and not abuse our bodies, and on and on.
And of course, out of those many flawed lives, many negative "side-effects" blossom, like children raised in neglectful environmental/dysfunctional/abusive environments, hell... some of the people having children are themselves children! Many children (like the case of homosexuals) are atrophied by those bad environments, and make the incorrect Gender Identification, or what is called Gender Identity Disorder in Philology, which later blossoms into full homosexuality. Remember, there is no “gay gene”.
My problem with people like you is that the dysfunction you have you seem to try justify it, to excuse it, when in reality if you look at it... A-L-L of it, it is clearly a bad behavior. High disease rates, high mortality rates, high cost to the individual and society, unstable relationships, physical damage to the body due to the erroneous sexual acts, and on and on... and on! It is all here: (Editor's note - the poor child supplied his page but I refuse to give it out. I've seen it and it's the same cherry-picked or discredited junk science we have seen repeatedly but ths time grouped together in one sad package. The young man obviously took so much work in gathering together his statistics that he didn't read them thoroughly or derive where they came from. A little note, my friend. There is no such thing as "gay bowel syndrome." Dumb ass.)
You tell the doctors that have to deal with the many diseases being spread in the population more and more by highly sexually promiscuous homosexuals, since many of homosexuals happen to be asymptomatic, carrying disease most are not even aware of, but are spreading it on to others thanks to your reckless sexual behaviors that homosexuality is good... go on and tell them...
You go on and tell the taxpayer that the health care cost going higher and higher every year due to more and more homosexuals (and other liberals as well) doing reckless sexual behaviors, causing more people to get sick with preventable disease it is a good thing... you go ahead... you tell them (just look at the HIV cost numbers in Canada in that webpage)...go ahead tell them...
Wrongs are wrong, no matter how much you make like doing it, no matter how much you may "feel" you have no choice but to do it! The same thing has happen to other groups like the alcoholics and smokers, people that would say they had "no control over their actions"... "they couldn't help it"... And just because others may be doing other things wrong still does not make a wrong right... that is the mentality of a child.
In the end, humanity will never achieve a better world as long as groups like the homosexuals stay in denial and keep pushing their dysfunction upon society as an "OK" thing", as a "harmless thing", ignoring and even blocking the data again and again that point and says, hey you have a problem...
I leave you with this thought by the great Greek philosopher Socrates (469–399 B.C.E.) that said that the biggest endeavor for a person in life is to “TRULY know thyself” or what he called, to have an Analyzed Life, he wrote: "...The unexamined life is not worth living..."
And please note that I have refuted his claims in a myriad of past posts, including this one which addresses in particularly the lies of "shortened mortality rate," the "unstable relationships," and the "promiscuity argument."
My prime objective for posting this child's pathetic ramble is for you see the folks who have dived headfirst into the pool of lies pushed by the religious right.
But with this posting comes a caveat. Not everyone believes this mess and the wilder these folks get, the more mainstream we are becoming.
So in essence, you are witnessing death throes of archaic ignorance.
But I'm feeling a little guilty about it. Who knew watching the death throes of archaic ignorance would be so much fun to watch?
One more thing that someone just pointed out to me. What's the definition of stupid irony? Using a quote from a gay man (Socrates) to end a ramble criticizing gays.
A little background - I had received some information a while back that there was a secret Facebook group, Truth4Time, comprised of members of the religious right. A member of the group sent me screenshots of members, the venomous things they were saying about the lgbtq community, and also plans they were making, including the following two:
It was these two ideas, coupled with the members of the group which caught my attention and convinced me that someone needed to post something on this. I was intimidated by this information because I knew it had the potential to be a big story. I told no one about this but one individual who I trusted - and continue to trust - immensely.
I was also concerned about one thing - reprisal. There were private individuals who were involved with this group as well as public figures. So when I finally decided to post on it, my original goal was to focus on the fact that this group existed, that there were plans out there to disrupt the gay community, and that there were some religious right bigwigs as members. But I wasn't going to be so eager to name names. I had another concern also, but I will get into that later.
Needless to say, the story exploded in a way I didn't expect. I had a feeling that the reponse would be huge, but had no idea just how huge it would be.
I got a lot of praise, but I also got a lot of negative feedback. Many were angry that I wasn't revealing names. One particular wannabe activist - who shall be named the TOAD - claimed that I faked the entire thing to garner attention for my blog.
Then things got interesting.
Part 2 - Michelangelo Signorile comes calling
Legendary gay activist Michelangelo Signorile contacted me to do a radio interview and asked would I be interested in at least two names. At that time, I was thinking "what the hell." I am more comfortable with the idea provided that the folks I revealed were public figures, rather than private figures.
And the interview was wild. Needless to say, I revealed more than two names, including Oklahoma legislator Sally Kern, Peter LaBarbera, Bradlee Dean, Matt Barber, Scott Lively, Jennifer Morse, Maggie Gallagher, Brian Brown, Phyllis Schafly , and several other religious right public figures:
Phase 3 - The story goes into orbit
The next day, I realize just how much of an effect the interview had when I looked at the Huffington Post and realized that it was the leading article of the Gay Voices section.
That's when folks in the Truth4Time group began to respond. Small free member, mind you. I knew that no one like Maggie Gallagher or Bradlee Dean would talk about this group. A supposed Christian radio show host, Stacy Harp spent over 30 minutes of her show declaring me a "nothing" and claiming that I was pushing a bad conspiracy theory. Of course the irony that if I were truly a "nothing" spinning a conspiracy theory, why did she need to spend 30 minutes of her show stating those things was something she conveniently didn't mention.
An administrator of Truth4Time, Michael Brown spun the same talking points in an addendum added to the Huffington Post article - i.e. this was not a big deal, I was misrepresenting the group and its members, the pieces I posted talking about getting pro-gay pages kicked off of Facebook as well as jamming pro-gay pages and bombarding school boards and physicians' offices with inaccurate and negative information about the gay community were mere "suggestions."
He managed to stretch that nonsense in a longer column on the conservative Town Hall where he compared my original post to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the legendary fraudulent document which claimed that members of the Jewish community were plotting to take over the world.
The irony was that very few people - except Brown's supporters - were actually believing his explanation. Many of us lgbtqs have been around the block too many times with the religious right to fall for their explanations when they are trying to pull some nonsense.
The larger irony was that Brown's insistence in talking about the story only generated more interest for it. Gradually, his attempts to quell the story actually led to more people reading and believing my article.
That's not to say that there were some gays who didn't take his side. The TOAD (who I alluded to earlier) went from accusing me of lying about the charges to taking Brown's side. At this point, I should tell you that the TOAD only did what he did because he has a personal grudge against me . . . and a martyr complex the size of the planet of Jupiter.
4. What would I have done differently - Not a thing. You see, the weekend before I published the post, I gave it some heavy thought, AND heavy prayer. I had a lot of trepidations about revealing names for more reasons than the ones list above. When I calmed down mentally and realized that there would be nothing wrong with revealing public names, I was still reticent when it came to private figures.
I'm still not clear whether or not I would have been in the right legally to reveal private names, but I do know what could have happened. There was a lot of anger from this story. What if one of us had recognized one of the names and proceeded to boycott their business, or conduct a writing campaign against them.
Then the story "Radical homosexual activists attack Christians for merely expressing their opinion on Facebook" would have been the talking point of the religious right.
The basic essence of this story - the fact that a secret Facebook group was plotting mischief against the gay community - would have been lost because the religious right is skilled at generating fake crap. When something like this happens, some of us, in the name of righteous indignation, play into the hands of the religious right. And in our "righteous indignation, we forget that we are dealing with moneyed, skilled individuals who can take a pound of mud, peddle it as ice cream, and get a face time in the media who will not call them out for lying.
The possibility that my story could have taken a huge detour in a direction which would work against the lgbtq community was a HUGE concern of mine.
But as it is, God answers prayers. I consider my article a win. The basic gist of my story was not lost or obscured. The religious right ended up in a rare position of playing defense - rather badly. And it turned out to be a significantly large chink in their armor of lies.
I am featuring a rather sad edition of Know Your LGBT History
From Wikipedia:
Venus Xtravaganza (died 1988) was a transgender American saving up money for sex reassignment surgery while earning a living as a prostitute in New York City. Venus Xtravaganza came to national attention appearing in Jennie Livingston's Paris Is Burning, a 1990documentary film about New York City ball culture. The story of her life as a transgender person living in New York City and subsequent murder form a story arc within the film. Venus was featured on the original 1990 theatrical release poster in for the film.
Born to an Italian American family, she took the female name Venus in her early teens. As is the tradition of the gay ball culture, she took the name Xtravaganza upon becoming a member of the House of Xtravaganza in 1983. The house, like similar houses, is named in the style of European fashion houses (e.g. House of Chanel) and is an affiliation of young drag queens, transgender and gay youth who have come together around the underground Harlemdrag ball scene.
In Paris Is Burning, she says she wanted to be "a spoiled, rich, white girl living in the suburbs." [1] She shares a story of her time as a prostitute where one of her clients became enraged upon the discovery that Venus was not a cissexual woman. Venus fled through a window and, fearing for her life, claims to have left the prostitution business as a result, opting instead to work as an escort. On her life as a prostitute, she claims "If you're a married woman living in the suburbs, a regular woman, married to her husband...and she wants him to buy her a washer and dryer set, in order for him to buy that I'm sure she'd have to go to bed with him anyway - for him to get what he wants, for her to get what she wants. So in the long run, it all ends up the same way".
According to her transgender adopted House mother Angie Xtravaganza as told in the film, Venus Xtravaganza was found strangled and stuffed under a bed in a New York hotel room in 1988.Her body was discovered by a stranger four days after her death.
To me Venus was an awesome child with a lot of potential. She made bad choices and those choices subsequently caused her death. But she was led into those choices by an ignorant and uncaring world.
It's something we should all remember. We justifiably get shocked when we hear about our lgbtq brothers and sisters getting beaten up or murdered, but what about those whose spirits are slowly crushed by ugly words, nasty stares, and deliberate isolation? What about those who have the potential to change the world for the better but are never given the chance because of boot of the haters on their necks?
Venus was one and unfortunately she isn't the only one. Let's never forget to encourage each other every now and then. Give a smile or a kind word to one of your lgbtq sisters you may see passing on the street. It doesn't matter whether you know them or not.
Whether it meant to or not, the National Organization for Marriage just demonstrated how ugly they are when it comes to children living in same-sex households:
Kalley Yanta of the Minnesota Marriage Minute explains why marriage should not be redefined because some same-sex couples are raising children:
"Very few same-sex couples are raising children. According to the Williams Institute, only 22% of same-sex couples are raising children. Many if not most of those couples involve children from a previous heterosexual relationship. The census bureau shows only 0.55% of all U.S. households are households of same-sex couples. Only 0.12% of U.S. households are same-sex couples raising children."
Yanta sums up the coldness of NOM's anti-marriage equality campaign beginning at 1:14 with this statement:
"Why should the definition of marriage that has served us so well be redefined for the 99.88 percent of households in order to accommodate the desires of the 0.12 percent?"
First let's get that question out of the way. Protecting same-sex families in no way redefines the marriages of heterosexual families. Nor does protecting same-sex families cause harm to heterosexual families.
I'm just struck by the basic callousness of Yanta's statement. I refuse to argue whether or not her points are accurate because it is irrelevant. It doesn't matter how many percentages of same-sex families raising children exist in America. Shouldn't these families be treated equally as heterosexual families?
Not according to Yanta and definitely not according to NOM. To hear them, since same-sex families are not as numerous as large as heterosexual families, they don't deserve protection under the law.
To Yanta and NOM, these families and their children don't matter. It's a contradiction of the statements made by former NOM head Maggie Gallagher during a Congressional hearing last year. Remember when she said that "there are some gay people who are wonderful parents."
So Gallagher thinks that gays make wonderful parents, but according to her organization, they don't deserve protections for their partners and especially their children.
Is this the new Christian ethic in which we value families not by the love and support they give, but by the number of them exist?
It's an ugly thing to ponder, especially when one remembers the Biblical story of the lost sheep. According to the Gospels of Matthew (18:12–14) and Luke (15:3–7), Jesus told a story of a shepherd who left his flock to find one lost sheep because he cared about that one lost sheep as much as he cared about those 99 others.
The shepherd did not say "forget that sheep. It's just one and I have 99 others." No, the shepherd looked for that sheep until he found it.
The point is that we all have value, not by the number of us who may exist, but because we exist, period.
And that's a value which needs to be upheld. It doesn't matter how many same-sex families raising children exists in this country. They count just as much as heterosexual families raising children. And they should be treated with the same amount of fairness because it is the right thing to do.
A truly ethical and Christian organization would know this. But what does NOM know about true Christianity and true ethics?
No matter how much NOM tries to deceive us, the organization's mask seem to always fall off, showing its true ugly face.
Ebony finds gay religious Atlantan Darian Aaron- Don't let the National Organization for Marriage and their band of liars fool you. Many African-Americans support lgbtq equality and there are many African-American oriented magazines focusing on our issues. Ebony magazine is one of many.
For anyone dumb enough to think that the American Family Association's One News Now is a Christian publication, today's articles should erase that notion.
The fake news publication is on a tear about the gay community. Let's look at two items.
In the article, EEOC's 'gross distortion' of Civil Rights Act, One News Now quotes the Liberty Counsel and Truth4Time member Matt Barber to make gross distortions regarding a recent case in which a transgender woman won a landmark case against discrimination. First the actual story courtesy of ABC news:
A Bay Area woman has won a landmark discrimination case in favor of transgender rights.
Mia Macy applied for a job at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms while she still identified herself as a man.
During the hiring process, Macy revealed that she was transitioning to life as a woman. Days later, the ATF said it eliminated the position. Macy later learned someone else was hired for that job.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled the former police officer had been discriminated because of her gender identity.
"It's important because every person from this point forward falls under that federal protection and that was something that maybe I had a part in," said Macy.
This is what Barber said the case would lead to:
"This ruling basically says that a Bible bookstore owner, for instance, could not turn away a homosexual, cross-dressing man, a man who likes to wear a miniskirt and lipstick -- this would protect that man from being denied a job at a Bible bookstore that holds sincerely held religious beliefs that are opposed to that individual's lifestyle," Barber explains.
That, according to the attorney, is another example of the Obama administration stomping on religious rights and "using the EEOC as his henchman to get the job done."
Barber isn't interested in discussing the case on its merits. He is only interested in inflaming fear by appealing to stereotypes about our transgender brothers and sisters.
But believe it or not, that article is merely a prelude to an attack which I found to be ugly, even for One News Now.
Jay Bakker, son of former televangelists Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker, is himself an evangelist and, as far as I am concerned, a breath of fresh air from the preachers collecting gobs of money while simultaneously whining about being persecuted.
He is also a supporter of the gay community. He was in North Carolina recently holding a rally against that awful Amendment One. In an article, One News Now quoted Mark Creech, a supporter of Amendment One, to make a low attack on Bakker:
Rev. Mark Creech of the Christian Action League of North Carolina is not surprised by Bakker's "feel-good" stance that requires "no real holiness."
"It's unfortunate that, as a child, he was injured … by a lot of hypocrisy that he witnessed in the church, and I think he was also the innocent victim of forms of unjust religious condemnation that seriously, negatively impacted him and made him vulnerable to acceptance of a false message.
Creech is referring to the PTL scandal which took place over 20 years ago which led Bakker's father to serve time in jail for fraud.
I don't know what's worse - the fact that Creech felt the need to throw that mess up in Bakker's face (he was only a child when it all took place) or the fact that he tries to make his comments seem that of a concerned Christian.
Why was it necessary for Creech to make such a nasty dig at Bakker's family? At his father and his deceased mother (Tammy Faye Messner died of cancer in 2007)?
Bakker's father served his time and has returned to the ministry. His mother became a gay icon after spreading a message of love and self-acceptance. And I might point out that she had more Christian love and charity in one mascaraed eyelash than Creech has in his entire Bible thumping body.
Creech and One News Now epitomizes the phoniness of some American Christians and give adequate reasons why so many folks are abandoning the religion.
Who wants to be associated with such nasty hypocrites?
