How far will the religious right take the 'religious liberty' argument?

An incident took place in Illinois recently which illustrates how dangerous this religious liberty card that the religious right pushes can be so dangerous:

A same-sex couple from Davenport, Iowa says they were banned from possibly renting a Moline, Illinois reception hall because they are gay.

The manager of the University Club in downtown Moline confirms she refused to let the couple see or rent the space for a reception because of her religious beliefs.

Taylor Shumaker says she called the University Club on Tuesday, June 19, 2012 to inquire about the place. She says bar manager Kristen Stewart offered to give Shumaker a tour and asked if her fiance would be coming.

“And she asked if ‘he’ would be coming and I just said, ‘No, it’s not actually a ‘he’, it’s a ‘she.’ And she said, ‘Excuse me?’” recounted Shumaker.

“I said, ‘It’s a woman,’ and she said, ‘Oh, we don’t rent to homosexual couples’”

 . . . In a phone interview with WQAD, Stewart says it is all true, and defended her right to refusal.

“I am a biblical Christian and I do not believe in homosexual marriage, that’s correct. And because marriage is a covenant that God created for man and woman, as a biblical Christian, I cannot help them into or celebrate that sin,” said Stewart.

But there is a problem with this. Stewart was the manager. She is not the owner of the hall.

Know Your LGBT History - Leonard Matlovich

It's my sad duty to report that on this day in 1988, the lgbtq community lost a warrior whose fight against injustice paved the way for gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military - Leonard Matlovich.

 He was the first gay man to demand his rightful place in the military. Before anyone even thinks of saying "thank you" to President Obama for the legislation allowing us to serve openly, they should say "Thank You Leonard" several times.

And loudly:





From Michael Bedwell, Matlovich's close friend:

Six weeks after telling a rain-drenched Sacramento gay rights rally that, “Our mission is to reach out and teach people to love and not to hate,” a year after being arrested in front of the White House protesting President Reagan's virtual passive genocide, more than a decade after telling his African-American Air Force supervisor that his letter outing himself meant, “Brown v. the Board of Education,” and twenty years after surviving a land mine explosion in Vietnam, AIDS' great black wings swept Leonard's last breath away beneath a large framed photo of Martin Luther King, Jr, at approximately 9:43 pm. On one side of his bed, holding one hand, was his roommate, Joe, a nurse cousin, and myself; on the other side, holding his other hand, his heartbroken mother still trying, like so many mothers during those relentless dark days, to fathom how she had outlived her son; and his father, the stoic conservative who, before retiring after 30 years in the military himself, had stood by his then 19-yr. boy as he was sworn in. Thirteen years before this day he’d opened the morning newspaper and found out for the first time that his son was gay . . . and that he was threatening to sue the United States Air Force for discharging him. He then locked himself in his bedroom, and cried for two hours. As he looked down now at the shriveled body finally at peace, his inconsolable grief gently rested against the shoulder of his immeasurable pride.

Learn more about Leonard Matlovich here.


Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

'NOM upset about comic book gay marriages' and other Friday midday news briefs

NOM Is Worried About The ‘Sanctity’ Of Gay Comic Book Weddings - And soon, Maggie Gallagher will be announcing a parternship with Dr. Doom and the Red Skull on the situation. Watch out Doom and Skull. NOM will turn on you. 

Marriage Equality: LGBT Religious Leaders Speak Out On The Spiritual Value Of Gay Marriage - Yet another nail in the coffin of the mindset that the lgbt and religious communities are separate entities forever at war with each other.

 Liberty Counsel/Liberty University's Matt Barber: Bestiality advocates just like gay activists - The Repulsive One, Matt Barber compares marriage equality to bestiality. (Editor's note - Okay I know The Repulsive One doesn't have the same zing as "Porno Pete," but I like the ring to it. I may use it from now on to describe Matt Barber.)

 Frenchie Davis Comes Out: 'The Voice' Singer Reveals She's Been Dating A Woman - Another celebrity comes out. My "gay ray" keeps missing Philip Seymour Hoffman. :(  

Experts Condemn Flawed Regnerus Study On Same-Sex Parenting - And I can't think of a study more deserving.  

New Lesbian Parenting Study Debunks ‘Fatherless’ Male Role Model Concerns - Now there is a much better study on the matter. 

'Porno' Pete LaBarbera is back again with funny photos of gays

Peter LaBarbera

Rabid anti-gay spokesman and hate group leader Peter LaBarbera has partly returned to the very thing which made him infamous - snapping pictures of gays and lesbians allegedly doing "naughty things" and posting them on his webpage as proof of the so-called gay agenda to harm children and corrupt values.

He hadn't done this in a while because of much deserved derision he received from all sides of the argument over gay equality (conservative and liberal) over his tendency to attend subcultural events such as leather festivals and take pictures of gays allegedly indulging in all sorts of lurid behaviors while ignoring the heterosexuals also in attendance.

Some folks have played armchair psychiatrists in their attempts to guess his motives behind such an obsession in gays and leather. And he was given the nickname of "Porno Pete."

So apparently LaBabera pulled back from this sort of thing for a while. Now, however, he has returned with a new bent. Supposedly, he attended Philadelphia’s Gay Pride Parade and “PrideDay”festival Sunday, June 10, 2012 and observed all sorts of interesting things there.

I should tell you, however, that the pictures - saving one - are relatively tame in comparison to the stuff LaBarbera used to publish. I  mean we are talking about a man who once published a close up photo of anal warts on someone's rear in an attempt to smear the gay community. But what makes it all funny are the captions LaBarbera uses in an attempt to make the photos seem more lurid than they really are.

For example:

Sadomasochist man in a gown of sorts marches along 7th Street in Philadelphia carrying "Leather Pride" black-and-blue flag. The man to his left is carrying a "Bear Pride" flag. "Bear" is slang for heavier, hairy homosexual men.

Sounds freaky, doesn't it? But check out the photo and ask yourself, does it really match the words:

It's a man in a homemade camouflage dress and while I doubt it would be a huge hit at the Oscars, it's hardly brings up images of whips, chains, and candle wax on the nipples.

And then there is what I like to call the bait and switch photo:

LaBabera says this about TLA:

PORN BOOTH - A banner at the booth for TLA, a distributor of homosexual pornographic videos, offers a "Gay Adult DVD" in its "TLAgaypack" goodie bag for PrideDay attendees.

I don't know the truth about what LaBarbera is claiming (it's interesting that he doesn't even take a picture of the so-called goodie bag), I do know that TLA sells other things besides pornographic movies. The company also sells mainstream movies and gay themed regular movies. 

What a pity that we don't know what was actually on TLA's table during the festival because LaBarbera didn't post any pictures of that either. How convenient.

LaBarbera may have actually struck some type of gold with this next photo:

He said the following:

Go-go boys grind to the music on a float in the Philly homosexual "Pride" parade. Young children both participated in the same parade and watched it from the side streets.

A photo taken of two men dancing can reveal a lot of things, but then it can also give a pretty false image. I don't see anything wrong with it, but I find it interesting that LaBarbera was so shocked by these men dancing that he chose to post two pictures of it. I wonder just how many pictures of these two men dancing did he take?

Now I won't post the last photo because it is extremely lurid. You can see it on LaBarbera webpage (and when you see it, you will know what I'm talking about), however, based upon his description of it, the subject in question may not have been a part of the festival:

The large poster drawing of a naked man wearing a condom was visible from afar at the Penn’s Landing ‘Pride” festival. There was NO warning at this booth that it was off-limits to children, but even if there was, young children would still see this inappropriate poster.

Is it just me or is LaBarbera starting to get boring. I almost miss the old Porno Pete.

Surely there must be another leather festival somewhere.

How much was NOM involved in creation and pushing of anti-gay parenting study?

Maggie Gallagher

A new article in The Huffington Post raises more questions regarding that recent study claiming that children in homes with gay parents have more negative outcomes than those with heterosexual parents.

The study, created by University of Texas professor Mark Regnerus, has caused a lot of controversy because of questions regarding its methodology. In addition, Regnerus has said repeatedly that the study does not establish a relation between same-sex parenting and negative outcomes.

But The Huffington Post article, authored by Andy Birkey of The American Independent, not only looks at those involved in the study's creation and promoting, but also makes the claim that the study's creation and usage may have been a part of an internal plan by the anti-gay group, The National Organization for Marriage:

The use of Regnerus' study by NOM and its allies aligns closely with the organization's 2009 internal strategy documents that were released in court filings earlier this year.

NOM outlined what it called its "Expert Witness Project," an effort to "identify and nurture a worldwide community of highly credentialed intellectuals and professional scholars, physicians, psychiatrists, social workers, and writers to credential our concerns and to interrupt the silencing that takes place in the academy around gay marriage and related family issues." According to NOM, "Marriage as the union of husband and wife has deep grounding in human nature, and is supported by serious social science."

This is the same infamous internal strategy documents which got NOM into trouble because in it, the organization talked about plans of playing the African-American and gay community against one another on the subject of marriage equality.

When it comes to Regnerus's study, several other things Birkey points out should raise eyebrows as to how close those involved with NOM was also involved with funding and promoting the study:

The study was funded by the Witherspoon Institute with a grant totaling $695,000. The Witherspoon Institute is a conservative think tank founded by prominent Catholic intellectuals Luis Tellez and Robert George. George, a professor at Princeton University, also sits on the board of the Bradley Foundation, which gave Regnerus another $90,000 for the study.

Groups closely connected to the Witherspoon Institute and Bradley Foundation touted the study last week as evidence that gay parenting poses risks for children, and that intact, opposite-sex couples make the best parents.

The National Organization for Marriage, which was co-founded by George and shares several board members with the Witherspoon Institute, devoted five blog posts to the study the week it was released.

NOM reprinted part of an article from the conservative Washington Times on the study as well as an article by NOM's other co-founder, Maggie Gallagher.

NOM blogged about an article and an editorial on the study published by the Deseret News, which is owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. George serves on that paper's "editorial advisory board."

Then he points out how statewide groups affiliated with NOM are conveniently using the study:

Minnesota for Marriage, a group campaigning for a state constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage, said the study showed "risks" to children of same-sex couples.

"New study suggests risks from same-sex parenting. '...empirical claim that no notable differences exist must go,'" the group said on Twitter.

And on Facebook, the group wrote, "New, highly respected, rigorous study shows that 'the empirical claim that no notable differences exist must go.'"

Preserve Marriage Washington, a group working to repeal Washington's recent law making same-sex marriage legal, took to Facebook to promote the study.

"Kids are in no way better off," Protect Marriage Washington wrote. "A new study on same-sex parenting by Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas was released yesterday."

On Facebook, Protect Marriage Maine -- which is opposing a ballot initiative that would legalize same-sex marriage -- posted an infographic created by the Washington Times along with a quote from Regnerus.

NOM has close ties to all three of these state groups.

Birkey also points out how Gallagher of NOM and other groups associated with the organization have pushing the study:

Gallagher has been especially active in promoting the study, writing three posts about it on the website of the conservative National Review.  She penned a column for the conservative Town Hall under the headline, "The Gay Murphy Brown Effect."

Gallagher's Culture War Victory Fund, which was incubated at the American Principles Project, a group founded by Robert George in 2009, promoted the same articles that NOM did on its blog.

Another NOM-connected group, the Love and Fidelity Network, also promoted the study.

The Love and Fidelity Network shares an office with the Witherspoon Institute. Gallagher and George, the founders of NOM, are on the Network's advisory board. Luis Tellez, who founded the Witherspoon Institute with George, is also on the advisory board of the Love and Fidelity Network.

For its part, the Witherspoon Institute wrote a lengthy analysis of Regnerus' study under the headline, "The Kids Aren't All Right: New Family Structures and the 'No Differences' Claim."

The Witherspoon Institute also launched a website featuring Regnerus' data.

Regenrus continues to say that the study's funders had nothing to do with its outcome.

We don't know the truth about that, one way or the other.

But what we do know is this:

• In 2009, an organization dedicated to stopping marriage equality (NOM) creates a strategy which calls for the creation of "expert witnesses" and "research" to use against marriage equality. 

• Two years later, a study comes out funded with big bucks by conservative organizations (the Witherspoon Institute and the Bradley Foundation) which has NOM's founder and chairman emeritus (Robert George) on their boards.

• NOM then pushes the study heavily through several posts on its blog and other publications (The National Review and Town Hall. It also funnels the study through several statewide and national organizations that it is connected with. One of these groups (The Love and Fidelity Network) just happens to share an office with the Witherspoon Foundation, one of the study's funders.

• Another publication which has NOM's founder and chairman emeritus (Robert George - he is on the board of both organizations who funded the study) on its board (Deseret News) writes an article and an editorial praising the study.

• The Witherspoon Institute - one of the study's funders  - writes a lengthy, and positive, analysis of the study and creates a webpage about it.

Regardless of what Regnerus may say, there are too many fingers in the bowl, so to speak, for folks to take his word at face value when it comes the objectivity of his study.

More questions need to asked to and definitely answered by Regnerus and those involved with NOM.

'GoProud taken to task for dumb Romney endorsement' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Dan Savage, my friend, slurring GoProud and allowing them to play the victim for endorsing Mitt Romney is NOT how you bring your point across. THIS is how you do it:



In other news:

 BREAKING: House GOP Leaders Will Ask Supreme Court By the End of June to Take DOMA Appeal - After losing FOUR cases in court in their attempt to defend that awful Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), House leaders seem to be begging the Supreme Court to put them out of their misery. 

 US State Dept Voices “Deep Concerns” About Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill - Remember that awful "Kill The Gays" bill in Uganda? It's not dead yet. 

 Shocker: Vast majority of Minn. For Marriage cash comes from Catholic conference, MFC, NOM - From the Department of No Shit, Sherlock. 

Jim Daly Claims Satan is Behind Push for Same-Sex Marriage - That very, very small bit of credibility Focus on the Family had when compared to groups like the Family Research Council just flew out of the window. 

Religious right suffering from 'gay on the brain' when it come to the military

Is it just me or do some members of the religious right think everything is a part of a gay conspiracy?

Witness this bizarre grouping together of two different issues having absolutely nothing to do with each other:

The Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty says it's a sad state of affairs when the U.S. military decides Bibles are out but "gay pride" is in.

The publishing arm of the Southern Baptist Convention reported last week that its Bibles will no longer display the official insignia of U.S. military branches. The Pentagon had originally granted permission in 2003, but withdrew that last year because of a complaint and legal threat from anti-Christian crusader Mikey Weinstein and his Military Religious Freedom Foundation.

. . . One day after the publisher's announcement regarding military insignia on Bibles, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced the military will honor the contributions of homosexual service members as part of "Gay Pride Month." Crews urges people of faith to stand firm.

"Evangelical soldiers, airmen, Marines, they're going to have to make some courageous stands right now to say to their commanders, 'Sir, I cannot participate in this type of ceremony because we believe this is a celebration of something that God's Word is clear about defining as wrong,'" he tells OneNewsNow.

According to Crews, such actions came about only because a lame-duck Congress forced the radical homosexual agenda on the military when it repealed the 1993 law banning homosexuals from serving in the armed forces.

So the removal of military insignias off of Bibles and the decision to honor gay military service members is connected because of THE CONSPIRACY by President Obama and the former Democratic-led Congress to destroy the military and thereby the United States by forcing heterosexual service members to hold ceremonies to honor gay and lesbian service members so that they are recruited in these ceremonies to a homosexual lifestyle.

Apparently the military insignias on the Bibles created a force field which made heterosexual soldiers impervious to the sly come-ons by members of the gay community, come-ons which they will receive at these Gay Pride ceremonies, which now thanks to Weinstein, they are susceptible to.

Or something like that.

Southern Baptist Convention doesn't know the meaning of the word 'irony'

Yesterday, the Southern Baptist Convention recently elected its first African-American president.

From The Washington Post:

When the Southern Baptist Convention met Tuesday, it elected its first African American president, Fred Luter Jr., a former street preacher and current pastor of a church in New Orleans’ Lower Ninth Ward.

Luter’s election marks a watershed moment for the SBC. The organization was founded in a split over slavery before the Civil War and for decades was a largely segregated, all-white denomination. It was not until 1995 that the organization adopted a resolution of racial reconciliation; it has come under scrutiny for racial insensitivity as recently as the Trayvon Martin case, when the president of its policy arm made racially charged comments about the case.

But the election of Luter will not be, at least primarily, about fixing the sins of the past. Rather, it will be about the future of an organization that has seen declining membership for five straight years. The denomination—the largest Protestant body in the United States—will need to seek new growth from urban centers and minority groups, or at the very least, maintain its size by helping struggling churches find ways to stay afloat. “I think they thought racial diversity would happen,” Ed Stetzer, the president of the SBC’s research organization, told the Associated Press. “Now they realize they have to make it happen,” he said.

I would probably applaud the SBC except for the following from The Associated Press:

 A day after electing their first African-American president, Southern Baptists were considering a resolution Wednesday opposing the idea that gay rights are the same as civil rights.

The resolution up for a vote at the denomination's annual meeting in New Orleans affirms Southern Baptists' beliefs that marriage is "the exclusive union of one man and one woman" and that "all sexual behavior outside of marriage is sinful."

It acknowledges that gays and lesbians sometimes experience "unique struggles" but declares that they lack the "distinguishing features of classes entitled to special protections."

"It is regrettable that homosexual rights activists and those who are promoting the recognition of 'same-sex marriage' have misappropriated the rhetoric of the Civil Rights Movement," the resolution states.

So let me get this correct.  An organization (the Southern Baptist Convention) which started over the question of slavery - it was for it -  and was heavily segregated during the Civil Rights Movement has now its first black leader and but is also presently thinking about passing a resolution accusing gays of  misappropriating the rhetoric of the Civil Rights Movement; a movement started in part because folks like the people in the Southern Baptist Convention justified the treating of black people as inferiors.

The irony boggles the mind, but it does justify an old saying.

You can't put a new auto body around a crappy engine and expect it to perform.

'GoProud sells out gay community for press coverage' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Purportedly pro-LGBT civil rights conservative org GOProud endorses Romney - No GoProud, endorsing Mitt Romney doesn't make you look edgy. It makes you look elitist, out-of-touch with your own community, and stupid. It's the equivalent of putting your head in the mouth of a hungry lion and then not expecting the lion to chomp down.  

Here you go: LGBT rights advances under President Obama that President Romney could undo - Just a reminder of how severe the bite of that lion can be. And remember that Romney did sign that National Organization for Marriage pledge.  

A Gay Couple weds at NYC's Midtown Comics Store - Go ahead. You know you want to say it - "Aw how cute!" 

 Obama is Not a Christian Because 'the Bible is Very Clear About Homosexual Acts Being a Very Evil Thing' - ONLY if they are done very early in the morning. Three a.m. is a very inhuman hour for "homosexual acts."

 Rubio: Society Shouldn’t ‘Tolerate’ Same-Sex Marriage - OH REALLLLLY! As long as society "tolerates" my tax dollars, it should (and will) tolerate my rights. 

Family Research Council destroys study's credibility

Peter Sprigg

The anti-gay parenting study authored by the University of Texas professor Mark Rengnerus just received another kiss of death aside from condemnation from social scientists.

Apparently the Family Research Council loves it.

FRC spokesman Peter Sprigg wrote a long love letter to the study, having this to say at the conclusion:

 The myths that children of homosexual parents are "no different" from other children and suffer "no harm" from being raised by homosexual parents have been shattered forever.

Of course that statement is strange, seeing that Regnerus - for all of the faults in his work - clearly said the study does not establish a relationship between same-sex parenting and negative outcomes (see point 2 in the Equality Matters link).

Also, according to the online publication The Daily Beast emphasis added:

In his Slate essay, Regnerus preemptively defends himself against  . . . criticisms with a limited interpretation of the results. “We didn’t have as many intact lesbian and gay families as we hoped to evaluate, even though they are the face of much public deliberation about marriage equality,” he writes. The results reflect on a previous generation of gay parenting, before the legalization of gay marriage in some states, he writes. “I’m not claiming that sexual orientation is at fault here, or that I know about kids who are presently being raised by gay or lesbian parents. Their parents may be forging more stable relationships in an era that is more accepting and supportive of gay and lesbian couples.” Regnerus says his study’s political implications are unclear and are not intended to undermine the legal parental rights of anyone.

But Sprigg has an interesting way of overlooking Regnerus's caveats. This is what he says:

While the Regnerus study is a vast improvement over virtually all the prior research in the field, it still leaves much to study and learn about homosexual parents and their effect on children. Author Mark Regnerus emphasizes the traditional caveat in social science, warning against leaping to conclusions regarding "causality." In other words, just because there are statistical correlations between having a homosexual parent and experiencing negative outcomes does not automatically prove that having a homosexual parent is what caused the negative outcomes--other factors could be at work.

This is true in a strict scientific sense--but because Regnerus carefully controlled for so many other factors in the social environment, the study gives a clear indication that it is this parental characteristic which best defines the household environment that produces these troubling outcomes. The large number of significant negative outcomes in this study gives legitimate reason for concern about the consequences of "homosexual parenting."

In other words, Sprigg is saying "Hey, the study does not say that same-sex homes causes negative behaviors and I won't say that they do either, but since the large number of significant negative outcomes in this carefully controlled study come from same-sex households, by all means feel free to make that assumption."

Herein we see the futility of Regnerus's caveats. Sprigg not only pushes them aside, he does it without apology, as does several other religious right groups and websites who are already claiming that Regnerus's study proves that same-sex households are somehow dangerous towards children.

I guess they didn't read Regnerus's caveats regarding causation. Or maybe, like Sprigg, they just don't care because they now have something which they can use against the gay community, caveats be damned.

Therein lies the immediate danger of Regnerus's work. It's not about science nor the slow process of coming to the conclusion about a social issue through research. It's about the impact of shock headlines and the assumptions that people like Sprigg and organizations like FRC will invite others to make; assumptions designed to denigrate same-sex households and distort images of the gay community before anyone has a chance to delve deeper into the issue.

I seriously wonder if Regnerus knows what he has gotten himself into with this. I also would suggest that Regnerus, if he is truly to be believed about the objectivity of his study, should step in and forcefully speak against the use of it to demonize same-sex households and the lgbtq community in general.

If he speaks out, we will know where he stands regarding the assumptions the religious right is making about his work.

If he is silent then I guess that will still let us know where he stands, won't it?

The danger of laughing at homophobia

We need to gain perspective on things when it comes to homophobia. For example, look at this video of a Los Angeles pastor at a pride parade claiming that gays eat human wastes:



It's hilarious, isn't it?

Then again, check out another scene just like it. From Youtube:

In this scene from Vanguard's "Missionaries of Hate," correspondent Mariana van Zeller attends a press conference during which Pastor Martin Ssempa shows graphic gay porn to a room full of international journalists. Mariana traveled to Uganda to learn more about the growing influence of American religious groups has led to a movement to make homosexuality a crime punishable by death:

Our struggle for equality is worldwide.  Let us realize that what may be funny to us is death to our brothers and sisters across the waters. It's something to remember that no matter how ludicrous homophobia may seem, don't spend so much time laughing that you forget how dangerous it truly is.

'Hate group leader embarrasses himself with attack on gay blog' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Game on, Tony Perkins! FRC leader attempts to smear me, draws more attention to his own smears - Hilarious! Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has accused my blogging pal Jeremy Hooper of distorting quotes in order to "smear" an NC pastor. As proof of the charge, Perkins pulls up the quotes Hooper supposedly distorted, proving that not only Hooper was accurate but Perkins has to be either clueless or "on that stuff" when he chose to initiate this war.

  Uganda Police Raid Gay Rights Meeting - Our brothers and sisters in Uganda need our prayers.

 Romney: Kids Are Better Off With Straight Parents - Speaking of someone else clearly "on that stuff." I thought he was FOR gay adoption a while back.

 NOM Launches Full Court Press For Discredited Gay Parenting Study - Raise your hands those who are surprised over this. Anyone? Anyone?

 Linda Harvey Dubs Same-Sex Relationships 'Pathetic' and 'Lifeless' - Poor Linda. She is having no fun so she tries to keep others from having fun. 

NOM helping to create bad hysteria about same-sex families, gay marriage

Editor's note - Today begins Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters' "March to One Million." In less than a month, this blog will have it's 1,000,000 hit. Not bad for a part-time blog, huh? Seriously though, on the right side of the blog are what I deem are some of the best postings of Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters during its five and a half year run. Feel free to read as many as you like.

Last Saturday, the National Organization for Marriage linked to a UK Telegraph article pulling the hysteria act about marriage equality:

UK Telegraph: Teachers Could be Forced to Promote Gay Marriage in Classrooms

Parents will be powerless to prevent their children being taught about gay marriage at school if ministers press ahead with plans to legalise the move, it has been claimed.

Aidan O’Neill QC has provided the Catholic Church with a legal opinion stating that equality laws mean teachers will be forced to emphasise the validity of same-sex marriages.

Mothers and fathers with “traditional and often religiously-based views” will be “hard pressed” to insist that their offspring are educated in line with their convictions, he said.

The Catholic Church in Scotland, which commissioned the opinion, said it raised the prospect of classrooms being “flooded” with teaching materials promoting gay marriage.

Although the opinion considers the position in Scotland, where Alex Salmond’s administration is expected to legalise same-sex marriage, it is thought it could apply south of the Border where David Cameron is planning to do the same.

It's fascinating the language used in this article. How does one "promote" gay marriage? Is talking about the fact that gays can marry the same as "promoting" it?

We are dealing with some serious semantic mind games here. The mindset seems to be that if marriage equality is legalized, then schools in the UK will be forced to talk about gay marriage. And of course through NOM's osmosis, this should send a scary message when it comes to allowing marriage equality in this country.

It's so easy to manipulate people through fear and the thought of their children being harmed has to be one of the biggest fears of many.

But in this case, there is really nothing to fear.

I don't think that I am making a wild guess when I say that children from same-sex households already attend UK public schools just like they attend American schools.

So if there is a worry that talking about marriage equality would mean talking same-families and homosexuality, then I got news for NOM and the Catholic Church in the UK:

Discussions about marriage equality AND homosexuality AND same-sex parenting are already happening in schools in the UK and America. Children from no matter whatever household they come from tend to talk about their families.

And these discussions should continue. Are children from same-sex households supposed to be quiet about their families as if they don't exist?  Are they supposed to be ashamed of their families? Of course not.

It always amazes me when folks like NOM and others pull the "our children will be corrupted" riot act, they always omit the simple but crucial facts that same-sex families exist,  their children attend public schools, and these children will not and should not be ashamed of their families.

The omission is deliberate and it says more about NOM and others allegedly attempting to "save children" than it does about the idea of marriage equality.

The next time gays are accused of being 'drama queens . . '

From Right Wing Watch:

Last month, the Family Research Council hosted its annual "Watchmen on the Wall" conference in Washington DC and, in conjunction, organized a press conference where event speakers would gather to announce their support for the Defense of Marriage Act.

Among the speakers at the press conference was Jim Garlow, who took President Obama to task for saying that his Christian faith played a role in his support for marriage equality.  Declaring that anyone can call themselves a Christian but still be ill-informed, biblically illiterate, and even an apostate, Garlow offered Obama a lesson in "Basic 101 of Christianity" to set him straight that marriage has always been, and always will be, a union between on man and one woman.

Garlow then closed out his remarks by likening those opposing marriage equality today to Revolutionary War pastors who fought the British because, just like them, these Religious Right activists are are willing declare "if necessary, here we die!"

Throughout history, people have been willing to die in defense of their country and from religious persecution (which in all honesty, no one can call marriage equality religious persecution because isn't being forced to marry another man), but there has to be a special type of individual who will put his life on the line to justify his ego.

Come on Garlow and the rest of you guys! It doesn't even have to come to that. If you don't agree with marriage equality, you don't have to come to my wedding. Nor do you have to bring a gift.

'Transgender man pops the question at White House reception' and other Monday midday news briefs

WATCH: A White House Pride Trans Marriage Proposal - This is too cool. Ordinarily I would make a joke about how the religious right react to something like this, but not now. I mean who really gives a crap about what they think about this awesome proposal. 

In other news:  

Target Sells Out - Hold up, folks. Don't get angry. Target has sold out all of its Pride t-shirts. Now I can ruminate how the religious right will react.
  
U.S. Senator, top conservative group call on Tony Perkins to revoke Ron Baity's award - This is hilarious. Infighting amongst religious right groups. Of course the media conveniently doesn't talk about this.
  
Kameron Slade, New York Fifth Grader, Prohibited From Giving Gay Marriage Speech At School - Including this for the update. He WILL be allowed to give his speech. Cool!
  
Michigan House Passes Anti-Gay ‘License To Condemn’ Counseling Bill - This right here is a nauseating disgrace. 

Matt Barber - The audacity of a fake Christian

Matt Barber

The Liberty Counsel's Matt Barber has a message to folks he calls "average everyday homosexuals:"

I write this not to professional homosexuals. That is to say, not to members of the well-funded, politically powerful homosexual activist lobby. They will mock and reject my words outright. They will twist and misrepresent what I say to further their own socio-political agenda. That’s fine. It’s to be expected. It merits little more than a yawn and an eye roll.

Instead, I write this to my fellow travelers in life – average, ordinary people, male and female, young and old – who happen to call themselves “gay.” I write this out of obedience to God.

It is my hope and prayer that you will consider what I have to say and take it at face value. My intentions are pure and my motives upright. If I can plant the seed of truth in just one person, and that seed begins to sprout, then I consider this letter a success.

I pray that you are that person.

What I write may offend you. It may even infuriate you. But I hope it makes you think. Know this: Your friends have lied to you. Christians do not hate you. We love you intensely. We love you because of who you are, not because of what you do or because of who you think you are.

Bear in mind that this is the same Matt Barber who said the following:

Same-sex families are basically evil:



Gays push pedophilia:



Gay adoption is tragic:



It only goes to show that not only is Matt Barber a hypocrite but he is also a dumb hypocrite. Either that or his hatred towards the gay community has him thinking that we are not sexually disordered but we are also mentally disordered so much we won't think of googling his name to see whether his deeds match his words.

Don't get me wrong. I like Matt Barber. He is good for our equality struggle. Whenever someone needs a perfect example of the naked hypocrisy of the religious right, I point him out as a shining example.

It amazes me that this man, who has spent an disorderly large amount of his professional life lying on, defaming, and dehumanizing the lgbt community, has the nerve to come to us with talk of love, Jesus, and holy righteousness.

I have a two questions for Matt.

Have you lost your damn mind? Or better yet, just how stupid do you think we of the lgbtq community are?

You really expect us to listen to your phony words when we have been made unfortunate targets of your real words and your vindictive attacks? How can you talk about Christian love and morality to us after all you have done to bear false witness against us continuously and without apology?

You don't throw rocks at someone and then come to them holding your hand out in a false mea culpa.

And since you are so interested in talking about Jesus, remember what He said in Matthew 7-5:

You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Matt, that beam in your eye is so huge and thick that it could up the roof of Madison Square Garden on its own without any help. It's a wonder how you can see out of both of your eyes.

Or maybe the words you spout just goes to prove that you can't see as much as you think you can.

Know Your LGBT History - Liberace

I may catch some flack for this one but I have always had a secret liking for Liberace.

Any man who could rock a fur like he did is awesome in my book.

The sad thing is that he never came out. Can you imagine what would happen if he were alive now and did come out. The following are clips from a BBC documentary on his life. Parts of it is not nice so I included a tribute to Liberace from Good Morning America shortly after he passed away:
















Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

'Fifth-grader not allowed to give speech supporting marriage equality' and other Friday midday news briefs

 Fifth-Grader Prohibited From Giving Speech Supporting Marriage Equality - Today, it's speeches about the topic. Will tomorrow bring children in same-sex homes prohibited from talking about their families? An ugly future to ponder but also a religious right dream. 
  
Express Delivery: The Regnerus “Gay Parenting” Paper Took The Fast Lane To Publication - Box Turtle Bulletin has come up with a theory about that fraudulent anti-gay parenting study which we should investigate more. What if it was created specifically to be used in the upcoming DOMA and Prop 8 cases?

APA Blasts Allegedly Biased Report on Gay Parents - Speaking of which, the American Psychological Association has just blasted that awful study.

COMMENTARY: South Africa’s “corrective rape” of lesbians - "Corrective rape" is how some countries maintain so-called "family values." Of course the religious right won't ever tell you that.  

Thorne-Begland 'humbled' by appointment as judge - Republicans in Virginia fail in their attempt to keep an openly gay man from being appointed as a judge.

 Leon Panetta, Secretary Of Defense, Salutes Gays In The Military - The loud popping you hear are a million anti-gay heads exploding.

NOM's flow chart reveals organization's empty arguments

I'm not saying that the National Organization for Marriage is ducking the heat regarding the recent fraudulent study bought and paid for by one of its founders and chairman emeritus Robert George, but I find it hilarious that NOM hasn't talked about the study on its blog as much as it did when the study first came out.

However, NOM is spotlighting a flow chart created by university research assistant (who shall remain nameless because with his name out there, NOM will no doubt claim that his life is being threatened even though no one will probably do so) on marriage equality. In all honesty, I have no idea what this young man's stance is on the issue. He could have created the flow chart as a class exercise.

NOM claims that the flow chart proves the duplicity behind marriage equality.

I disagree. The flow chart doesn't refute marriage equality, but it does reveal the empty animus of some of those who don't agree with marriage equality:

So according to this flow chart, marriage equality is similar to gladiator games and sterile couples can still procreate.

It has to be a joke, really. This chart is mere philosophical tripe which has no bearing on real world situations. It doesn't speak out the millions of same-sex couples who are leading happy lives and it certainly doesn't say a word about the same-sex couples raising children.

Best of all, what was the whole point of this thing? I would love to see someone present this trash in court just to see the judge either die laughing or choke in anger while espousing how his time has been wasted.

This is not to say that this chart doesn't have its uses.

It is nice to see the empty arguments of those against marriage equality in living color so they can be easily refuted.

By all means, please do so. And feel free to comment here.

When fake Christians attack - One News Now readers go crazy over refutation of bad study

On the phony news site, One News Now, there is a huge debate going on regarding that fraudulent study about gay parenting which just came out.

Like so many other things on that site, the article, Study: Youngsters of 'gay households' negatively affected, is laughably false.

Among other lies, the article says the study "is being hailed as the most scientifically credible study so far on the issue demonstrates that children are harmed by growing up in homosexual and lesbian households." The study has been roundly criticized by a host of social scientists for bad methodology and other falsehoods.

What makes the article even funnier is that it quotes only one source; not the author of the study, Mark Regnerus but Peter LaBarbera of the anti-gay hate group Americans for Truth.

I already talked about his comments this morning. What I want to talk about are the comments by some of those actually defending the study, particularly comments directed towards me.

Granted, these comments are not indicative of all Christians, but it should give you an idea of the hypocrisy of One News Now's readership.

My first comment:

Actually the study is not being hailed as very scientifically credible. It's been criticized for a lot of distortions - 1. 1. The Study Doesn’t Compare Married Gay Parents To Married Heterosexual Parents. 2.The Author Admits The Study Doesn’t Establish Causation Between Same-Sex Parenting And Negative Outcomes. 3. The Study Arbitrarily Ignores Overlaps In Its Subpopulations.4. The Study Doesn’t Accurately Define Gay And Lesbian Parents. 5. The Study’s Author And Funders Have An Agenda. A recent article says that young folks are abandoning Christianity in a large number. Can you blame them when those who profess to be Christians act in such a manner in which they approve of lies and distortions? Lies in the name of God are still lies.

Various responses:

Maybe true to a point but the Gays have an Agenda also.

Gosh, what a big sexy black gay man you are! Are you by chance into edging? If so, I can host. Piss-off with your blatant distortion of logic & facts, undoubtedly a result of too much anal poundage. (Editor's note - what the hell is "edging?")

Even if this study is biased it brings up the possibility of children being harmed in various ways at a much greater frequency in homosexual parented households versus heterosexual parented households. We should be doing what's best for the children not selfishly arguing to protect our sexual orientation viewpoint. If you are a hetero arguing against homos you are missing the most important point, children may be at risk and that trumps the orientation war. If you are a homo arguing against heteros to promote your GLBT agenda, then you are missing the most important point, children may be at risk and that trumps your orientation war. We should be demanding further investigations and unbiased studies for the sake of those innocent children who are harmed by adults daily. This study may or may not be biased, but it does focus on the effects the family environment has on children and if there is negative outcome we need to find ways to change that outcome. Stop the personal agenda garbage like the postings from Alvin A. McEwen and Rev. Anthony Smith. One of you seems to be supporting the "Gay" agenda and the other is supporting the "Christian" agenda and neither agenda addresses the emotional and physical harm to children.

My second comment:

Rev. Smith, all of what you say is irrelevant IF you and others on this site support a study which has multiple flaws and lack of honesty. Your words about accepting Jesus and Christianity are hypocritical if you abide by lies to get your message across.

Various responses:

Al-vin, you are still a pervert.

Actually the way to change the situation, is through Love and not preaching Judgement. God has given us Grace, yes which we have not earned because he loves us, but Rev don't you think you would gain more respect in your comments speaking from a loving view. Gay and Lesbian Life styles is sin like any other sin., and yes them raising children is NOT Healthy for the children, but God also has his hands on those children and through Love they will in the future pave the road to eliminate children being raised by Gays and Lesbians! God will balance this circumstance Ultimately he is always in control!

Alvin, don't tell me your queer too?

As I said before, not all comments from those defending the study are nasty, but they are certainly misguided. in that they are either defending or pushing aside the fact the details which have caused the study to be criticized.

How then can they talk to us about God and the supposed sin of homosexuality when they are embracing the sin of lying.

Editor's note - Wayne Besen of Truth Wins Out has drawn up a petition asking that there be an investigation by the University of Texas to assess whether or not Regnerus's study was independent or was he in collusion with religious right groups. I think it's a worthy petition in view of the fact that National Organization for Marriage founder and chairman emeritus Robert George has ties with organizations who gave Regnerus a grant for the study (over $700,000) and also with one newspaper who publicized the study.


I've signed the petition and I think others should too.