Friday, March 23, 2007

Traditional Values Coalition Attacks Hate Crime Bill

If WorldNetDaily can be called 'WingNutDaily,' then the pinheads over at the Traditional Values Coalition are nothing less than your average patients in an insane asylum. Sure, it's a compressed asylum, but one that churns out some of the most mind-boggling insanity I've read. A prime example is their latest rant concerning the House of Representatives' bill, The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crime Prevention Act, a bill which addresses hate crimes instigated on the basis of any bias. I was immediately offended by the organization's title of choice, because I can't understand how or why any hate crime legislation could be demonized in any form or fashion...especially in the abusive manner TVC employed. I was even more offended and disgusted as I read...

H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007, is a
rehash of his 2005 bill, according to sources in Congress.H.R. 1592 claims there
is an epidemic of “hate” against homosexuals and cross-dressers that is so
pervasive throughout our nation, that local law enforcement officials are
overwhelmed in dealing with the problem.

Do these people not read any newspapers or watch any news programs? Of course there have been incidents of hate against homosexuals and transgendered people! Here are just a few examples...

Gay beaten to death...headline, Arizona Daily

Two CU Students Charged With Hate Crimes...headline, Fox
News Colorado

Trans Woman Found Dead...headline, Bay Area

These are what I found in an impromptu search...imagine what I would find if I made a more comprehensive search. TVC goes on to say...

Contrary to what John Conyers claims, there is no epidemic of hate against
individuals because of their sexual orientation. FBI hate crime statistics from
2005 (the latest available) report only 1,171 cases of sexual orientation bias
against individuals. Of those, 301 were listed as “intimidation,” which is
name-calling. Another 333 were listed as “simple assault,” which is pushing or
shoving. Only 177 were listed as aggravated assault against a person because of
his sexual orientation.

Interesting. I wonder if an African-American or anyone from any other ethnic group would shrug their shoulders in the same manner TVC has over those statistics. In the language of the bill, as I mentioned earlier, the measure is to be extended to cover crimes based on any prejudicial bias...not just that of homosexuality and/or transsexuality. It's the final statement of their manifesto that just makes my blood boil...

“The ultimate goal of Conyers’ bill is to silence all opposition to the
homosexual/transgender political agenda. So-called ‘hate speech’ will be
suppressed because it supposedly incites individuals to violence against
homosexuals/ transgenders. Defined by homosexuals, hate speech is any verbal or
printed materials that criticize the normalization of sodomy in our culture. The
goal is to undermine the First Amendment and persecute Christians who oppose

Where is their evidence of such a definition by homosexuals, I wonder? I looked for a hyperlink, a footnote...something...but didn't find anything. Again...and I hope someone over at TVC who is capable of taking coherent notes is paying attention...the bill covers ALL hate crimes. How, then, is it an attempt to silence or end anything other than hate? Further, if they really want to get into a discussion about First Amendment rights, they'd better reread their own writing and reevaluate their own positions first. Historically, it has been the minority group or the group seeking an equal footing who has had their First Amendment rights trampled, or has been publicly criticized for having the audacity to assert them. It has been the maltreated who have had to fight for a platform from which to speak. Pull your heads out of your asses, TVC, and stop this ridiculousness!

Monday, March 19, 2007

More WingNut Madness

I have seen and read some asinine things from the competency-impaired WingNut bunch (and I've yet to write about their five part series on how soy makes people gay, lol), but this latest offering from Mr. Wingnut himself, Pat Buchanan has me rolling my eyes so emphatically that I might just throw myself out of my chair.

A little background...

Gen. Peter Pace (the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs), in an interview with the Chicago Tribune, weighed in on the issue of homosexuality...not just in the military, mind you...but in general. I just love it when officials use their power and position as a pulpit from which to air their personal beliefs...kinda what the framers were trying to avoid with that whole 'separation of church and state' idea, but I digress. Here's a snippet of what the enlightened General had to say...

"I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we
should not condone immoral acts," Pace said in a wide-ranging discussion with
Tribune editors and reporters in Chicago. "I do not believe the United States is
well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way."

Things got a little more interesting when Senator John Warner of Virginia (a Republican, no less) openly and loudly disagreed with the top military official. Here's a snippet of what he had to say...

"I respectfully, but strongly, disagree with the chairman's view that
homosexuality is immoral," Warner said in a statement released by his office."

So, now that we're all caught's where Mr. Wingnut comes into play. In his usual scathing, but nauseating manner, Pat Buchanan jumped all over the Senator and, in the process, all but made the assertion that the country was essentially on the brink of civil war.

Who, Sen. Warner, are the moral authorities for your assertion that homosexual
conduct is moral – other than the Bishop Robinson wing of the Episcopal Church?
What this uproar tells us is that America is no longer a moral community. On
the most fundamental issues – abortion, promiscuity, homosexuality, euthanasia,
sterilization, cloning, and the creation of, and buying and selling of, fetuses
for research – we are at war. What part of the nation sees as progress, the
other sees as depravity.
And where there is no moral community, there will
not long be one country. For in a religious or culture war, there is no peaceful
One side wins, the other side loses.
As President Bush
said, he who is not with us is against us.

First of all, I find it incredible that homosexuality is once again being placed in the same category with behaviors which are choices. Perhaps it's not being explained clearly enough or loudly enough, but homosexuality is not a choice...plain and simple. To continue to lump it in with what are considered sinful behaviors is not only getting's insulting.

Second, Buchanan is really walking a fine line when quoting anything Dear Leader has to say...especially when it's taken out of context. Bush made that comment, "he who is not with us is against us," in reference to the terror attacks of September 11, and the coalition building that followed. To take that and apply it to one's own culture war is repugnant and, frankly, antagonistic.

Finally, while he stops just short of saying the words, Buchanan seems to be calling for civil war...if not suggesting that one isn't already in the offing. Those of us who dare to speak out for equality where homosexuality and it's related issues are concerned have long been vilified as the divisive ones...the ones who won't rest until the country is ripped apart. Unless he's been endowed with some prodigious moral authority himself, Mr. Buchanan has no more clout than any of the rest of us when it comes to what is moral or immoral. By asserting that our human differences of opinion cannot be settled and that there cannot be any peaceful coexistence while such differences remain, Buchanan has made himself the ultimate divisive one.

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Genetic Cleansing?

I ran across this on Pam Spaulding's site, and I just had to do a little ranting and raving. While this report honestly belongs in the 'too stupid to be believed' file, I was alarmed enough by the underlying intents being pushed. There is a small faction of wingnuts who have decided that homosexuality can be fixed in the womb...

"If a biological basis is found, and if a prenatal test is then developed, and
if a successful treatment to reverse the sexual orientation to heterosexual is
ever developed, we would support its use as we should unapologetically support
the use of any appropriate means to avoid sexual temptation and the inevitable
effects of sin."-- Rev. R. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY

So, homosexuality is a defect...a disability. And to think I could have been getting disability income all this time, lol. Fortunately, there have been some wonderful rebuttals, and Richard Rothstein gave us a really good one...

One of the nation's leading Southern Baptists has called for a policy that
would support medical treatment, if it were to become available, to change the
sexual orientation of a fetus inside its mother's womb from homosexual to
heterosexual. This latest assault on our dignity and existence comes from no
less a personage than Rev. R. Albert Mohler, the president of the prominent and
influential Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. The
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is the flagship school of the Southern
Baptist Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world.
Acknowledging the strides that genetic science is making in identifying and
isolating genetic abnormalities, defects and diseases, Mohler embraces this
advance in medical science as yet another tool in the war to root out and
cleanse sin.

Here's the thing that infuriates me. These are the same people who
are so adamantly against stem cell research, abortion under any circumstances
and have generally balked at every genetic research successes. Yet, it
seems perfectly acceptable to obliterate the God given genes of a homosexual
fetus...all in the name of cleansing sin.

Following that logic, we should do the same for the genes that produce this sort of anger and hate. Hell, let's just start rooting out all evil by aborting every fetus who has a 'negative' genetic makeup. Ah, but then...we'd root out all of humanity.

Julia Sugarbaker had an excellent line in one of the 'Designing Women' episodes...

"If God were handing out diseases as punishment for sin, then you'd be at
the free clinic everyday...and so would the rest of us."

Once one of these theologians becomes sinless, then we'll talk...maybe.

Thursday, March 01, 2007

A Serious 'Julia' Tirade On The Way

I've been seeing more and more of this lately, but what I read this morning has just sent me completely over the edge. In an attempt to somehow discredit a group of bloggers, a radio host for KTLK blasted the website Dump Michele Bachmann, which is primarily geared toward the hopeful defeat of the republican congresswoman. In his little rampage, Jason Lewis targeted Eric Black of the Minneapolis Star Tribune and labeled him a 'tool' of the DMB organization.

Normally, I wouldn't be surprised or upset about the remarks of a conservative, but take a look at what he had to say...

It's a website run by a bunch of angry lesbians and radical pacifists...A
radical, lesbian, militant organization...pathetic left wing scribes...a
conglomeration of radical, marxist leftist and gays and radical gays and

This is just a snippet of what was said, but the level of fear mongering in his language combined with the increase in this sort of...hell, I'm gonna call it what it is...hate speech has started to get out of hand. Just in this brief excerpt, homosexuals are, again, painted as a group to fear...a bunch of lunatics who will inevitably be responsible for the downfall of democracy as we know it. Once again, and like many of his conservative colleagues, Lewis shows his ignorance by opening his mouth without bothering to research the target of his verbal barrage first. Eva, of DMB, sets the record straight in a response to Lewis:

There is one other lesbian contributor (Lavenderblue) besides me. Otherwise
the demographics are a number of straight men, and some gay men. 3 of the four
gay people who write for Dump Bachmann are Republican or independent (and the
Independents had been Republican in the recent past, but left the party because
it had become the party of Bachmannistas).
...Jason (and Bachmann) know very
well I've been active with Log Cabin Republicans. In fact, Lewis had me on his
show as a guest in that role.

Fox News should really take notes on the demographics here, but I digress.

It's one thing to openly disagree with what someone says or believes...that sort of dialogue is, honestly, the most important element of free speech. It becomes a different thing entirely, however, when your disagreement is replaced with with empty name-calling and fear mongering. I will come up with or borrow some disparaging names for some of the conservatives I write about, but I won't open my mouth unless I can back up what I write.

More and more conservatives have adopted this tactic lately, and I'm angered to no end by it. So, here's my two cents...

Conservatives: Disagree with us all you want. Engage us in
intelligent debate...please! But stop this pattern of pointing out what
you think is wrong, picking a group or an individual to blame for it and telling
your fellow Americans to be afraid of it (them). It's sophomoric and
despicable. If you can't back up what you're alleging...please do us all a
favor and shut the fuck up!