Mary Cheney and Heather Poe's Baby Unleashes a 'Sinful Fury'

As tired as I am of even discussing this ridiculousness, today's comments from both the WingNuts and the Concerned Women of America just have to be addressed. Amazingly, the caption below that lovely photo of the Cheneys, holding their new grandchild and looking like genuinely proud grandparents, has now become the focus more ugliness in what should be a happy and endearing family event. WND says...

"The caption included the words: "...His parents are the Cheneys' daughter Mary, and
her partner, Heather Poe. White House photo by David Bohrer."

You guessed it, the fact that Heather Poe was acknowledged as one of the child's parents is what the fundies are all upset about. The article goes on to say...

"I say shame on the White House, shame on the president and shame on the
vice president for allowing such a caption to be 'officially' added onto the
White House website and such a beautiful photo of two happy grandparents and
their new grandchild," said Stephen Bennett, founder of Stephen Bennett Ministries, which
advocates for those who choose to leave the homosexual lifestyle."

First of all, notice the "Ex-gay" label aversion in the description of the ministry founded by Mr. Bennett. More importantly, though, shame on you Mr. Bennett for once again overshadowing the fact that this child was born into a stable, loving family. You may not like the make up of this particular family, and you are more than entitled to that opinion. But why must you continue to essentially condemn this precious little boy to what you deem a life of sin and spiritual misguidance? Sure, you'll say that isn't what you're saying at all...but isn't it?

It's beyond time for the fundamentalist base to back off and let this family...that's right, I said FAMILY...celebrate the new life they've brought into this world.

Soon We'll Have 11 Little Republican Monkeys...

Seems Fred Thompson is planning to enter the presidential race sometime around the 4th of July, according to information released by his advisors. It sort of screws up my little nursery rhyme, lol...but I'll still have fun watching the little monkeys drop along the way.

Don't know the nursery rhyme? Oh, let me share then, LOL...

11 little monkeys sitting in a tree...teasing Mr. Crocodile, "You can't catch me, you can't catch me!" Then along comes Mr. Crocodile, just as quiet as he can be...and...SNAP!!!
10 little monkeys sitting in a tree...

See how much fun this can be?

New Executive Order Grants the Presidency Unprecedented Powers...Has the WingNuts All Paranoid

In case you missed it, the Chimperor recently signed an executive order which would grant a great deal of power to the the executive branch in the event of some sort of national emergency or disaster. I'll have to argue the whole executive order in another blog, but I had to mention this article that popped up on WingNutDaily today. It's funny how even the nutcases...I mean the base of Bush's support...are looking at this with suspicion.

The article itself doesn't really point to WND's paranoia, but the headline does...

"THE NEW WORLD DISORDER Emergency detention plan: 'This way to the camps!'
Directive from Bush allows president extraordinary powers in national
crisis"

Anyone else smell the fear? As I said, I'll expand on this issue at a later date because I don't like the wording or premise behind the executive order either...but I think that this story being promoted by some of the Chimperor's biggest fans is just hilarious!

Americans For Truth Attack 'Shrek'

I've read this little article twice now, and I'm just seething at the conclusions that were drawn and how the LGBT community is...once again...the absolute root of all evil. In making her point...sort of, lol...the author, Fran Eaton says...

"Shrek’s not the problem. It’s the awkward inclusion of a travestite
and the uselessness of the character himself (herself?) in the story that is
troubling.
Right in the midst of a warm “traditional family”
setting, the film writers place a man dressed as a woman in with Sleeping
Beauty, Cinderella, Snow White (the good gals). The crossdressing
character simply doesn’t make sense, except as a ploy to desensitize children
and parents to transgenders."

Honestly, had she stopped there I might have shrugged my shoulders and agreed to disagree. It's what she says next that is just unbelievable...

"Homosexual activists now are careful to not only use the term “LGBTs” as a
unit, they are more boldly now declaring lesbians-gays-bisexuals-transgenders as
a unit pushing together as one for civil rights. Those confused about
their sexual roles are pushing for equal rights to be free to publicly
demonstrate their odd sexual behavior. For transgenders, appearing to be a
different sex in public is their particular turn on. We need to understand
that acceptance of this sexual behavior is just another step moving our world
toward sexual chaos."

LGBT individuals are not confused about their sexual roles, Ms. Eaton, because those roles are part of their identity. Likewise, transgendered people appear as they do in public because it is their identity. For you to stoop to the phrase, "turn on," is not only insulting, but shows your gross ignorance as well. Before I move on to the next paragraph, does anyone know what Ms. Eaton could possibly mean by the term, "sexual chaos?" Please, give me your insights on this one, 'cause I'm stumped! The last little bit of Fran's tirade reads as follows...

"It’s disturbing there’s not more outcry about this sly tactic being used
in a movie made for children. But I suppose after being
reminded recently of Jerry Falwell’s concern about the Teletubbies
characters’ sexual orientations and the post-heaven going ridicule and hatred
those who dare to question LGBTs tactics are likely to endure in the mainstream
media after their passing, some have shyed away from publicly tackling the
topic. That’s understandable.
But well-meaning parents who plan to take
their kids to see a movie that grossed $122 million in the opening weekend
should be aware . . . it’s the subtlety of the movie makers’ agenda to
desensitize that could be more harmful to your children than encouraging them to
eat sugary cereals in the morning."

Once again, I must hang my head in shame, for I missed the day in "How to be a Lesbian" school where they taught us to search for and employ "sly" tactics in children's movies. While Fran wants a pat on the back for "publicly tackling the topic," she is completely blind to the fact that we are not interested in somehow tricking her or any of God's other children into becoming lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered. Frankly, it's the constant negative and ignorant bloviating on this issue that is more harmful to children than eating sugary cereal, Ms. Eaton...but while one habit may rot your little one's teeth, the other will rot their hearts.

WND's Judge Roy Moore Shows His Ignorance

Anyone who knows me well, knows I'm no fan of Hilary, but this swipe at her wanting to mandate Pre-Kindergarten for all 4 year olds only serves to point out the Judge's ignorance on the subject. It also makes the point that Senator Clinton doesn't know much about what's going on in the nation's schools, but the Judge's underlying argument is what is really in question here...

"Last week, U.S. Sen. and Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton
unveiled a new proposal to fund state pre-kindergarten programs for all
4-year-old children in America. Calling the benefits of these pre-kindergarten
programs "astonishing," Clinton claimed such programs would not only reduce
child behavioral problems, but would also make children less likely to enter
special education programs, drop out of school or enter the welfare system.
However, pre-kindergarten programs have been around for many years, and such
grandiose claims have been refuted by several studies on the effectiveness of
such programs. The truth is government-run pre-kindergarten programs are another
huge burden on taxpayers, and, in fact, they are detrimental to children and our
country."

Judge Moore is right, pre-kindergarten programs have been around for some time...a fact which Senator Clinton seems to be oblivious to...but in these opening statements, I find two huge problems. First, the "studies," mentioned are not identified or otherwise referenced, bringing into question not only the validity of the Judge's argument, but the very existence of the studies themselves. Second, and I'm going to reference my background in education and my years of classroom experience here...pre-kindergarten curriculum content does provide an excellent foundation for early cognitive development. Notice I did not endorse public programs specifically. As a homeschooler, although not in the religious sense, I recognize that not all local school districts or programs are what they should be. But to assert that pre-kindergarten programs...even the less than stellar examples...are detrimental to children is absurd. The cognitive elements alone, even when not entirely mastered, can only be beneficial.

As a brief example, learning early on that all reading and writing begins on the left-hand side of a page and moves to the right is an essential and previously overlooked element of pre-reading education. Giving a child an extra year to learn that concept as well as many other pre-reading concepts can hardly be described as detrimental.

Judge Moore continues...

"Proponents of universal pre-kindergarten offer early childhood
education as a remedy for declining test scores and repeated poor showings in
academic comparisons to students in other countries. They claim that by starting
public education at age 3 or 4 rather than 5 or 6, children will enter
kindergarten with better reading, language, math, cognitive and social skills,
they score better on standardized tests, and they are more likely to mature into
responsible citizens – likelier to be married, with higher education attainment
and better-paying jobs."

I consider myself (as well as a large group of current and former colleagues) a proponent of pre-kindergarten, but not for all the reasons the Judge mentions. Since I'm in Texas, I'll use my state's pre-kindergarten curriculum guidelines as an example and say that the majority of children who successfully complete these benchmarks will, in fact, have an advantage in the areas mentioned in the quote above. Standardized testing and the other examples mentioned are in entirely different ballparks, though. Putting the social issues aside, standardized testing has become something of a money game in many states (mine included), and the bar is set so low that teachers...forced to adhere to a very rigid teaching schedule that does not allow for enrichment or the type of higher order thinking skill reinforcement one would expect...are teaching to the lowest common denominator. Honestly, I could do an entire post solely on the subject of state mandated testing, but I'll leave it at that for now. I doubt, though, that any one with a modicum of common sense would believe that one year in a pre-kindergarten program will turn out more socially mature adults.

Judge Moore goes on for a few more paragraphs, mentioning unnamed studies which claim to refute benefits in the cognitive, behavioral and social realms before coming to his real point...

"Why, then, do social liberals like Hillary Clinton push so hard for the
expansion of preschool programs? Perhaps they understand the truth of Proverbs
22:6 better than most parents: "Train up a child in the way he should go: and
when he is old, he will not depart from it." When the mind of a young child is
subjected to state control before fundamental concepts and basic beliefs are
formulated, the child is much more likely to learn a liberal social and
political philosophy with the state as his or her master. Creation and God-given
rights are more easily replaced with evolution and government-granted rights.
Totalitarian regimes like those of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin knew well the
value of a "youth corps." As Hans Schemm, leader of the Nazi Teacher's League,
once observed, "Those who have the youth on their side control the future."

Suddenly, anyone who suggests legitimate educational programs, devoid of any underlying attempts at indoctrination, is guilty of attempting just that...indoctrination. It's this type of fundamentalist paranoia that turns seemingly intelligent and capable people into blithering idiots. Hilary Clinton was wrong when she made the assertion that such educational programs weren't already in existence, but Judge Moore completely went off the deep end and seriously damaged his credibility with his linking of pre-kindergarten to the totalitarian motives of such nefarious regimes as Hitler and Stalin.

Bottom line...it's pre-kindergarten, folks. Whether you send your child to a publicly offered program or teach them at home, we're talking about basic, foundational skills and nothing more. To insist it's anything other than just that smacks of fear-mongering and paranoia...period.

AFA Upset About Abstinence Education Funding

I just love the AFA's little 'Action Alerts,' and this one just makes me chuckle. Looking at their first paragraph...

"The Democratic leaders of the House Energy & Commerce Committee have
reportedly decided to kill the abstinence education program this year in favor
of so-called “comprehensive” programs that emphasize “safe sex” and
contraception"

Well, I can see the logic there, lol. I mean, what we need in America today is more cases of AIDS and other STDs, as well as unplanned pregnancies, right?

Like any other political issue, for every study one side has stating their plan is better...the opposing side has just as many. But thanks, AFA, for the post-Memorial Day weekend laugh. All of us trying to get back into a normal work routine greatly appreciate it!

Update...CWA Chimed in on Mary Cheney After All

I suppose I breathed a sigh of relief too soon Thursday when I saw that CWA hadn't commented on the birth of Mary Cheney's baby. It turns out, they just waited until later in the day to post Matt Barber's response. In his opening paragraph, Mr. Barber shows his unadulterated contempt for this new family while covering his ass by referring to Samuel David as a, "beautiful child of God." The last sentence of this paragraph (still talking about his opening paragraph, mind you) makes my blood boil...

"But the conditions under which Ms. Cheney has chosen to bring this child
into the world are to be condemned."

Did Mary give birth in a manner that was somehow unhealthy? Perhaps she had preconceived plans to move her newborn child into the heart of Baghdad, placing him in mortal danger. No? Well, then, surely she is using funds given to her by the government for the purpose of feeding herself and her newborn to buy drugs or alcohol. What? You mean none of those things are true? So, what could Mr. Barber possibly see as the condemning conditions Ms. Cheney has chosen?

The deeply intellectual answer you're searching for here is...a father. Matt tries to spin his wheels about the, "physical impossibility," for a homosexual couple to conceive...insulting infertile, heterosexual couples along the way, I would imagine, but the basis of this most recent rant is the lack of a father in the active, parenting picture. I would be willing to bet that there are thousands of American children who would tell you that having their abusive fathers around isn't (or wasn't) such a rosy way to grow up, but I fear that might be just one too many facts and would only leave Mr. Barber confused. Clearly, not only is his mind the size of a tiny grain of sand, but he is also just as bigoted as his recently fallen colleague, Rev. Falwell.

Janet Folger Misses the Point...Again

I'm rapidly tiring of the fundies attempting to capitalize on the death of Jerry Falwell. You read that right...they're trying every lame ass trick in the book to use the Reverend's death to its absolute fullest extent. This time, after invoking the same quotes made by some of my fellow bloggers, Janet Folger brings up the murder of a woman, committed at the hands of a 19 yr. old homosexual...

"It reminds me about what happened after the murder of Mary Stachowicz.
Ever hear of her? Didn't think so. Mary Stachowicz, a 51-year-old wife and
mother of four, was described by friends as soft-spoken, "concerned about the
good of her parish, always seeking things for the poor as well as spiritual
welfare for people." Mary Stachowicz also believed what the Bible and the
Catholic Church taught about homosexuality. She verbalized her belief, and for
that crime, she was murdered. Mary was murdered by 19-year-old homosexual
Nicholas Gutierrez in Chicago for the crime of disagreeing with his lifestyle.
According to police reports, Stachowicz asked Gutierrez, who lived in an
apartment above her, "Why do you [have sex with] boys instead of girls?" That
was when he "punched, kicked, stabbed and strangled" her before stuffing her
body into a crawl space under the floor of his apartment, where it remained for
two days until he confessed to police."

I will be the first to raise my hand in saying I didn't recall this story, and I'll even go so far as to say that the absent condemnation from the homosexual community is appalling...bet ol' Janet didn't see that coming, lol. Here comes one great big "BUT," lol...

As horrific as the murder of Stachowicz was, it was isolated...unlike the same types of murders and other vicious attacks against homosexual and transgendered people. DO NOT misunderstand me...I am in no way diminishing the tragedy of this woman's death. Rather, I'm using it as the stepping stone to the point of my argument, something Ms. Folger was all to eager to do, herself.

So far, Ms. Folger has started with the free speech of those with whom she disagrees (specifically, the bloggers who expressed their less than warm, fuzzy feelings for Jerry Falwell), links that to the death of Ms. Stachowicz, and then attempts to draw a very crooked line linking those events to the suspended students I blogged about last week...

"Haven't you heard? Words of disagreement with the homosexual agenda are
now illegal. Just ask more than 100 kids who were suspended for wearing T-shirts
that expressed their biblical views on the topic. Shirts with Bible verses and
such sayings as "Don't touch God's rainbow" threw San Juan High School students
in California out of school."

Ask any adolescent, and you'll quickly find out...if you couldn't figure it out to begin with, that is...those shirts were intended to start a controversy, if not a confrontation. Free speech is something that is and should be granted to everyone, but to use this example of children trying to make a religious statement is absurd. It makes me wonder, honestly, if that's all she really had in the way of argument. Surely Ms. Folger, a seasoned columnist, would be able to put together a stronger argument than what she has presented here. Unfortunately, she...like many other fundies...chose to dance on the grave of Falwell, use flimsy examples of free speech infringements and invoke the almighty, yet elusive, homosexual agenda to do one thing...

" S. 1105, the so-called "hate crimes" bill, is the most dangerous
bill in America. It will revoke what used to be called the freedom of speech. I
don't agree with all the speech I hear. You may not agree with mine. But if we
don't stop this bill together, we will all lose the right to disagree, to quote
the Bible and to speak the truth. Speak up before you are locked up."

Ms. Folger, ask yourself a few questions...were the bloggers who made disparaging comments against Rev. Falwell in any way fined or jailed? No? So mentioning them was just to somehow give your article more credibility then, I see. Was Falwell, himself, ever fined or jailed for his comments regarding homosexuality? No, again? So free speech for you and other adults who do disagree isn't and hasn't been impugned or in any way infringed upon. Did the 19 year old who murdered Ms. Stachowicz get away with his crime? Still no? Then why are you so afraid of this bill, and why do you feel it necessary to use your own as some sort of scare tactic?

I have an answer, although I doubt you'll appreciate it, Janet. You're losing the battle by warning against the loss of free speech rights, so now it's time to stoop to an even lower level...capitalizing on the death of one of your own to renew that initial fear mongering tactic among your other fundie friends and hoping to god it works.

Once again, Janet...you've gotten caught.

From the 'Most Ridiculous' File...

Just a few stories that will hopefully give you a giggle...

*MSNBC is reporting that the Polish government is now upset about the Teletubbies. In a statement released by Ewa Sowinska...

"In comments reminiscent of criticism by the late U.S. evangelist Jerry
Falwell, she was quoted as saying: "I noticed (Tinky Winky) has a lady's purse,
but I didn't realize he's a boy."
"At first I thought the purse would be a
burden for this Teletubby ... Later I learned that this may have a homosexual
undertone."

Apparently, child psychologists will soon be consulted to insure that no Polish children are in any way injured, lol. I have to admit, though...MSNBC really should have taken another look at their headline on this story, "Uh-oh! Teletubbies under gay probe again." What, exactly, is a gay probe? Tsk, tsk, tsk...someone in the editing department should have picked up on that misplaced modifier...unless it was intended, lol. Ah, the plot thickens!

*In another case of headline hilarity, the Associated Press reported on a 49 year old man's encounter with a leopard. This headline reads, "Man Clad in Underwear Pins Leopard," and while the story is serious and the man was a hero to his sleeping family...I wonder if he'd appreciate being known as the man clad in underwear? I'm just saying, lol.

*Seems there will be a conference in Washington this week on global warming. Normally this event wouldn't fall under the category of 'most ridiculous,' but this one is made up of conservative speakers including the author of the book What Would Jesus Drive? Interestingly enough, I don't notice Al Gore on the list of speakers. Hmmmm...I wonder why?

WingNutDaily's 'On This Day in History' Piece Highlights the Beginning of the World's End, Right?

Today's highlighted, historical event was CBS's inclusion of a married, gay couple on their show The Amazing Race 4. This happened in 2003, and as WND asserts by its headline...unexplained quote marks and all...these two gay men were "thrust" upon the public along with the whole idea of gay marriage. I love how CBS handled the questions...

"Yes, they are a married, gay couple," a CBS spokeswoman said. "They're
married and they're gay. Is there an issue?"

WND maintained, in its 2003 article, that CBS was being somehow dishonest since no same-sex marriage laws had been passed at the time...

"This is profoundly dishonest and is intended to persuade Americans that
so-called 'gay marriage' is already a reality, when no jurisdiction in America
has legalized it."

I have just a couple of questions regarding all this ridiculousness. First, do the writers over at WND hold the basic intellect of their readers (and Americans, in general) at such a low level that they feel they need to worry about widespread confusion over what is or isn't a reality? From this 2003 offering, I think the answer is a resounding YES. Second, do you think anyone over at WND noticed that the sky didn't fall in 2003? And, amazingly, civilization as we know it hasn't collapsed! I suspect that a trite reference to CBS's daring social experiment (pausing to roll my eyes) being just the tip of the iceberg would be the response to anyone who dared pose the question...followed by an offer of prayer for the obviously lost soul of the question poser.

With that, let me just say (to the tune of Don't Cry For Me Argentina, lol)...don't pray for me, WingNutDaily!!

Westboro The Target of a Bomb Plot?

As I mentioned in an earlier post, Westboro Baptist planned and did picket the funeral of Rev. Falwell. Jeremy over at Good As You communicates quite frequently with the completely unhinged daughter of Fred Phelps, Shirley, and posted the emails they exchanged involving what did, in fact, turn out to be a bomb attempt against the folks of Westboro. I'll let you surf over to Jeremy's site (I'm all for giving other bloggers hits, lol) to read the email, but I have to share his last comment...

"Leaving us with only one real question (which we've passed along to
Shirley): "Why does Westboro EVER need police protection if the Living
God they serve is willing and able to deliver them from every evil work?"

Excellent question, Jeremy! Shirley did reply (scroll down, and you'll see it), and she didn't really give a great answer. It was pretty much her usual, "Everyone is against us," reply that left me rather nonplussed.

What I find most humorous about all this, is that it turned out to be a Liberty University student who tried to carry out the plot. I don't think I need to explain the irony there, lol.

The Terminator Will Be Taking a Holiday Break...

Since it is Memorial Day weekend, I will be taking a break from blogging until Tuesday. Enjoy the weekend, and don't forget to stand up for your rights!

Matt Barber's On a Roll...

Unfortunately, the majority of this article is only available by downloading the actual radio broadcast, but the brief write-up given on the Concerned Women of America's site is enough to infuriate me. Two Crystal Lake, IL teens are in hot water and subject to hate crime charges because of some fliers they circulated at their school. Well, I'll let Matt speak since it's short, lol...

"While lawmakers are repeatedly told that adding homosexuals to federal
hate crimes law would not be used to silence speech, but would only be employed
when acts of violence occur. However, two teens in Crystal Lake, Illinois have
learned differently, when they were charged with felony hate crimes for
distributing a flier attacking a fellow student. While the flier, its intent,
and its wording are deplorable and deserving of disciplinary action, Matt
Barber, CWA’s Policy
Director for Cultural Issues, says making this act a felony signals how
homosexual activists intend for such laws to be used."

Did you catch what he admitted? He admits that the flier, including the wording on it, and its intent was, "deplorable." Matt, you're trying to create yet another fictitious, agenda-based assumption about the homosexual community, and we're not falling for it! Had the fliers been directed at someone of a minority ethnic group, you wouldn't be blathering away about how the homosexuals are trying to misuse legitimate and necessary legislation...and you know it. Try to sleep well tonight, Mr. Barber...although I don't know how you possibly can.

Mary Cheney's Baby Causes More Ridiculous Bloviating

For starters, I would like to extend my congratulations to Mary and Heather, as well as the proud grandparents, on the birth of their baby boy. It's unfortunate, however, that certain fundies just couldn't help but make disparaging comments about the birth.

First, we have the nuts over at WingNutDaily putting in their two cents...

"Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, gave
birth today to a baby boy."

Perhaps I'm being petty, but why is it necessary to stick that label on Mary? Why couldn't the article simply have said, "the daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney?" At any rate, the comments continue...

"According to reports, Mary's homosexual partner of 15 years, Heather
Poe, "will have no legal relationship with her child. She can't adopt as a
second parent. She won't have her name on the birth certificate."

I'll give them points for pointing out that huge problem that needs to be remedied, but, again, why was is necessary to essentially rub the couple's faces in that fact? Here's more...

"We should not enter into yet another untested and far-reaching social
experiment, this one driven by the desires of same-sex couples to bear and raise
children," Dobson
said last December. He said his position was not intended to "harm or insult
women such as Cheney and Poe."

All those who think Dobson meant what he said about not harming or insulting women, raise your hands. Yep, didn't think I'd see many. It was so nice of those lovable little wingnuts to remind us of what Daddy Dobson had to say, though. There is one redeeming quote, albeit brief, in this particular article...

"At a New York forum last winter, Mary Cheney said: "This is a baby. This
is a blessing from God. It is not a political statement. It is not a prop to be
used in a debate by people on either side of an issue. It is my child." But she
added that "every piece of remotely responsible research" had shown "no difference between
children who are raised by same-sex parents and children raised by opposite-sex
parents."

Good for you, Mary. I couldn't have said that better myself.

Then, there was an article from the Americans For Truth. Without going into the bulk of the article which just angered me to no end, I will share one quote that I found especially denigrating...

"There should be no touch of sadness when a healthy baby boy is born
into a home with two parents, but in this case, we’re afraid, there is."

How dare they? This child was born into a healthy, loving family...a benefit that many children born to heterosexual couples aren't as fortunate to receive. The rest of the article is just so deprecating that I can't bear to discuss it, so, if you have the stomach for it...surf on over and read what those homobigots had to say.

Thank God the CWA weren't concerned enough to speak on the issue. I don't think I could have stomached that today either.

California Students Suspended For Anti-Gay T-Shirts

In what is nothing more than a ridiculous and adolescent spectacle, a California school district is under fire for the suspension of students who wore t-shirts which bore anti-gay sentiments. As the wingnuts report...

"One shirt that caused an uproar was emblazoned with, "Don't touch God's
rainbow." The student said he wore the shirt to school because he was offended
homosexual activists had stolen the biblical symbol of promise and turned it
into an icon of perversion."

Of course, free speech infringement is the hot topic among the parents and students involved, which brings up two essential questions.

*Would the same uproar have occurred if the shirt mentioned above had a Confederate flag on it and made a reference to the days of slavery and oppression of African-Americans? For that matter, would any disparaging image or comments against an ethnic group be allowed in a public school setting? I would guess the answer would be a resounding, "No."

*Why are the students being allowed to take part in school board proceedings on this or any other matter? According to WorldNetDaily...

"Board member Larry Masuoka presented the resolution at the meeting.
Parents and students demanded that their fundamental right to free speech and
religious expression be upheld, and students told of being harassed by peers and
teachers because of their message."

I'm all for children (and high school students are, in many ways, still children) having and expressing strong opinions, but the discussions conducted in school board meetings should involve only adults who are, hopefully, more capable of addressing serious issues without being blinded by adolescent dramatics. I believe that the parents of the students involved are better suited for representing any free speech issues they may have.

Bottom line...this is just another in a litany of examples of double standards. Christians can hold to their beliefs without being overtly demeaning...and that is where the line was crossed in this case.

Ohio Family Advocacy Group Upset Over Governor's Support for Anti-Discrimination Policy

An Ohio group is all up in arms over an executive order that governor Ted Strickland signed last week, adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the state's non-discrimination policy for employers. How shocking!

It gets better, though. The Citizens for Community Values, hold that since there is no "test" for homosexuality, innocent employers (certainly not bigoted ones, though) will be sued right and left if they refuse to hire a homosexual individual. Phil Burress, a spokesman for the CCV, tried to bolster the organization's contention by adding...

"...his organization has been unable to find one case in his state or
elsewhere in the United States in which discrimination because of sexual gender
or identity in employment-related cases has been proven. For him that makes
Governor Strickland's new executive order very suspect."

First, since when are we testing people for anything other than illicit drug use prior to employing them? I simply have to laugh at that bone of contention, because it's absolutely ridiculous. Second, CCV apparently didn't try very hard to find cases of discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity...and they haven't paid any attention to pending legislation based on that very issue. Here's the proof...

*Lamba Legal initiated the "Clock in For Equality" event back on May 15th to address the very issue of discrimination in the workplace.

*Congress has put together the Employment Non-Discrimination Act because of and to prevent future cases of discrimination in the workplace.

*Soulforce has a listing of cases and actions being taken to prevent this sort of discrimination.

All that aside, the real truth comes out at the end of this article...

"This is really just a stepping stone; this isn't about discrimination,"
Burress offers. "This is about furthering the homosexual agenda -- and the end
result of the agenda, under the stair-step approach to this, is to get people
used to thinking about sexual orientation as a minority class."
The
pro-family activist claims that is so that some day "they can force their
behavior on all of us."

Right, that ever-elusive agenda of ours is really what's at play here. Once again, the same rights fundies would expect for themselves aren't reasonable or acceptable for homosexuals or transgendered individuals. Once again, the fundies chose to hide behind mindless rhetoric before getting to the real truth. Once again, they've been found out and their actual, hateful agenda is exposed. Nice try CCV, but you haven't fooled anyone!

Concerned "Man" Baffled by Negative Feelings Toward Falwell

Matt Barber, who has a new title mentioned at the end of the article...

"Matt Barber is one of the
“like-minded men” with Concerned Women for
America. He is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law and serves as CWA's policy director
for cultural issues."

I only bring it up because he was previously known as just the policy director and has always been the public face of the CWA....a fact I've poked fun at on more than one occasion, lol.

Back to Mr. Barber's blathering, though...Like other fundies, he seems completely baffled by the animosity that the left, and homosexuals in general, had for Jerry Falwell. In the title of this article, Barber seems to contend that we are all consumed with hate and self-loathing over our subconscious realization that our lives are inherently sinful. While I wouldn't and haven't made some of the more vicious comments some of my fellow bloggers have made (and that Barber references in this article), I certainly understand where the anger comes from.

Barber, however, seems baffled by it all...

"What causes a heart to become so blackened? Why such hatred for a man who
spent his entire life in service to both the Lord he loved and to his fellow
man? True, he was unapologetically blunt in his defense of objective
truth and unwavering in his opposition to sin, but Rev. Falwell showed – in word
and deed – that he truly cared for those who hated him. He exposed them to the
compassion and love of Christ, who freely offers salvation from the spiritual
and physical death which is a natural consequence of immoral
self-indulgence."

Or is Mr. Barber really all that confused? In questioning the angry sentiments expressed by those who have felt nothing but rejection and condemnation from Falwell, Matt seems to answer his own question when he refers to the, "objective truth," with which homosexuals were constantly bombarded and beaten. He goes even further in answering that question with his next paragraph...

"It’s not Rev. Falwell they hate so much as the truth he delivered. And as
much as they hate that truth, they hate the Author of that truth. Scripture
tells us that God’s natural law – His objective truth – is written on the heart
of every man, woman and child. Our innate understanding of that absolute truth –
whether we acknowledge it or not – coupled with our accountability to a
sovereign but loving Creator, becomes like a virus to those who deny it. That
denial of reality in turn manifests itself in a visceral hatred of those other
equally broken and fallen souls who, by contrast, do acknowledge His
truth."

And this is where Mr. Barber diverts from the actual truth and spouts the same bigoted dialogue we heard from Rev. Falwell. What we truly hated was the fact that a man who called himself a servant of God...a God he would fully admit is a loving God...not only repeatedly preached of our eternal condemnation for our God-given sexual orientation, but encouraged others to do so as well. His organization, the Moral Majority, was and is well known for its unwavering fights against any legislation which would recognize and protect the rights of homosexuals or allow for any marriage or domestic partnership provisions. Churches that decided to accept and welcome homosexuals who identified as Christians were demeaned and ostracized by Falwell and his organization as well.

Plain and simple, Mr. Barber, we are angry with not only Falwell, but all the homobigots (yourself included) who insist on the daily discrimination, the condemnation and rebuke of what is our biological identity. Before you bloviate about our ire, ask yourself the question...would you advocate the same speech and treatment of a person of a different ethnic background, gender or socioeconomic status as yours? Then reflect on all you've said about homosexuals and decide if your words really are that "objective truth" you love to invoke, or purely hate filled speech.

The Agenda Has Finally Been Explained...But You'll Have to Pay to Read it!

Rev. Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition has announced his new book entitled, The Agenda, The Homosexual Plan to Change America. According to the write-up on TVC's site,

"THE AGENDA describes how homosexual activists plan on recruiting your
children into the lifestyle; how they’re undermining traditional marriage; and
how they will eventually criminalize any public criticism of homosexual conduct.
(It’s already happening in Canada where the gay agenda is well advanced.)"

You know, if this so-called agenda of ours is so nefarious, you'd think Rev. Sheldon would want to make sure every innocent soul had this information for their own protection. I suppose that the almighty dollar wins out even with the most unhinged of the fundies.

**On a slightly related note, Sheldon has a new comic strip (and I use that term very loosely) directed at transgendered bathrooms. It's so ridiculous that it's worth a look. If you have a few minutes and want a good laugh, check out all his comics.

CWA Claims ERA Would Strip Women of Rights...Eventually State Their Worry Over Same-Sex Marriages

If Matt Barber's ladies over at CWA were trying to gather attention with their headline, then they certainly succeeded. What woman wouldn't stop and read something with the heading, "Equal Rights Amendment Strips Women of Their Rights?" If you're asking yourself, "don't we already have an equal rights amendment," you're right...but this version seeks to fill in the gaps that the 1964 legislation left. With the usual alarmist style writing, the author (Sarah Rode) opens her article with this paragraph...

"In a debate where "equal" means repressive and "right" means agenda,
Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-New York) is leading the charge to demand
a constitutional amendment that will "finally guarantee women equality." The
Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) endeavors to remove all differences - social,
biological and sexual - between males and females, while granting enormous
flexibility to increasingly activist judges to interpret the amendment as they
deem appropriate. Several states that have already ratified a state ERA are
finding that they've done little more than pave the way for homosexual marriage,
federally funded abortion, the inclusion of women in the draft and co-ed
prisons. This amendment is not about rights; it is about the promotion of a
gender-neutral agenda through the suppression of natural differences between men
and women."

First, the conservatives (men and women alike) in 1964 would hardly have used the term "repressive." Frankly, that's how they wanted things to stay...women at home, barefoot and pregnant...pick a catch-phrase. So, I find it rather ironic that a conservative women's group would now be calling an equal rights bill repressive. Moving on, I see the usual buzz words and phrases..."activist judges," "abortion," and the like, but the most telling phrase is, without a doubt, "Several states that have already ratified a state ERA are finding they've done little more than pave the way for homosexual marriage."

There you have it, something as basic as an equal rights bill or amendment is being linked with the dastardly institution of same-sex marriage. The article itself, which I found to be rambling and redundant, makes a few points about the current proposition having overlapping elements. Inevitably, though, the author comes back to her key issues of abortion and same-sex marriage.

It shouldn't take a literal act of Congress to allow for these basic human rights, and I say "human" because this honestly isn't a gender related issue. Same-sex marriage and its related rights and responsibilities is something that should be made available to everyone. Notice I mentioned the responsibilities that come with marriage...something the fundies insist homosexuals aren't interested in...because that's truly what we want. Bottom line...the fundies are now going to twist the intent of this legislation because it may allow for something they are completely set against. Twist all you want, ladies...but we see what you're trying to do and we won't allow you to get away with it.

LaBarbera Says Falwell Loved 'Gays'

Again, what's with the quotes around the word gay? LaBarbera (hell, I'm just gonna call him Babs, lol) just can't bring himself to use the word without putting it in quotes...sort of like not wanting to touch something contaminated without first donning protective gear. But, again, I digress, lol.

Our dear friend Babs is trying to convince the world that Falwell loved homosexuals, and the "Immoral Majority," as he called it is taking advantage of Falwell's untimely death to, " heap(ed) instantaneous (and horrifyingly wicked) scorn upon this man of God." Why on earth would the homosexual community want to do such a thing, you ask? Take a look at what Babs had to say about Falwell's beliefs and actions...

"What explains the outpouring of homosexual hatred at Falwell’s death?
Well, he was one of the first to speak out when he saw that people
proudly practicing homosexuality were starting to organize, and he led
American Christians in responding to the explosion of this new
sin movement. He knew that the “gay” political and cultural
agenda would harm the nation — as does the proud defense of abortion,
pornography or any sin — and he was right. (If you doubt that he was right, just
read today’s headlines.) Through the Moral Majority, he helped elect one of
America’s greatest presidents, Ronald Reagan, and gave voice to millions of
Americans who simply view the practice of homosexual behavior and its
advocacy as wrong."

Is it just me, or is the animosity toward Falwell not abundantly clear? I will admit that some bloggers may have been too harsh in their statements about Falwell, but I can certainly understand where the animosity comes from. In short, I cannot understand how Babs can claim Falwell showed love toward the homosexual community and, in fact, is making a fool of himself by making that assertion.

2007's Anti-Gay Hall of Shame

Since today is the International Day Against Homophobia, it only seems fitting to point out those who seem to dedicate their lives to demeaning homosexuals. UK Gay News has posted their "Hall of Shame," letting us all know which world leaders are working against us. UK News says...

“This ‘hall of shame’ does not claim to include the worst offenders, but it
highlights leaders who have lent their authority to denying basic human rights,”
said Scott Long, director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights
Program at Human Rights Watch."

Of course, the obvious offenders, Bush (The Chimperor) and the Pope are at the top of that list...but the article lists others who constantly undermine the advances in equality that the homosexual community has made. Among those on the list are...

* "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: for creating public and private
scandals. President Ahmadinejad has overseen a widening campaign to “counter
public immorality,” arbitrarily arresting thousands of Iranians for dressing or
behaving differently. In recent weeks, for example, thousands of women have been
detained for not conforming to “correct” Islamic dress. In Iran’s surveillance
society, Ahmadinejad also uses religious vigilantes to raid homes and other
private places in search of “deviant” behavior – including homosexual conduct.
The Iranian regime polices public behavior and violates the right to privacy on
a massive scale."

* "Roman Giertych, Polish Minister of Education and Deputy Prime Minister:
for endangering children. Part of a right-wing government that has made
homophobia a centerpiece of policy, Giertych’s education ministry has proposed a
law to fine or imprison teachers, school officials, or student human rights
defenders who even mention homosexuality. Vital facts about safer sex and
protection against HIV/AIDS could be banned from schools under the new
law."

* "Bienvenido Abante, Member of the Philippine House of Representatives and
Chair of the House Committee on Civil, Political and Human Rights: for trying to
force his sexual orientation on others. Representative Abante has urged that
homosexuals be “cured” and turned into heterosexuals. He has repeatedly blocked
a landmark bill that would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and
gender identity in the Philippines. He has also suggested that lesbian, gay,
bisexual and transgender people are excluded from the “definition” of human
rights"

The article goes on to describe other atrocities (and I don't use that word lightly) that have occurred worldwide. I simply cannot understand why those in positions of leadership are so hell bent on eradicating homosexuality. Perhaps someone on this year's Hall of Shame list will step up and honestly answer that question without hiding behind religion and political correctness. I'm not holding my breath, though.

Today is International Day Against Homophobia

I've mentioned this in a previous post today, but I wanted to reiterate how important today is. It's the International Day Against Homophobia today, and I'm challenging everyone to take some step toward dispelling the various stereotypes and forms of discrimination that are so prevalent in the world today. Whether you decide to take a bold, verbal stand or make a donation to one of many organizations who fight for us on a daily basis...do something!

Some legitimate organizations you could make a donation to are...

Human Rights Campaign
Marriage Equality USA
National Center for Lesbian Rights
PFLAG
Lambda Legal

Please take some time today to consider taking action!

More Hate Crimes Madness

First off, I absolutely detest the phrase Ms. Martin, of OneNewsNow, used...

"The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania will hear oral arguments next month
in a lawsuit brought by Repent America in an effort to overturn hate crimes laws
in the state."

What, exactly, is an oral argument? Does someone intend to bite one of their opponents? Again, I digress, lol.

The premise of this article is based on an incident that occurred three years ago when some Christians were arrested for witnessing and/or preaching during an organized homosexual pride event. Those involved were associated with the group, Repent America, a group who believes our nation is in rebellion toward God.

As I read the article, I began to wonder if the author actually sat and read what she wrote, because she completely debunked her argument...

"The case was prompted after 11 Christians were arrested nearly three years
ago as they witnessed in a public area during Outfest, a homosexual pride event
in Philadelphia. Repent
America president Michael Marcavage was among those arrested and charged
under Pennsylvania's hate crimes law; however, the charges were later dismissed
by a Common Pleas Court judge as being without merit."

Did you catch that? The charges were dismissed because they were without merit. Why, do you wonder, were the charges deemed meritless? Is it because all speech is protected under the first amendment? Where have I heard this argument before, lol?

It gets better too, when the president of Repent America, Michael Marcavage, basically states that Christians are ignorant when it comes to the issue of hate crime legislation...

"I believe that a lot of churches have not been properly educated on
the dangers of hate crimes legislation," Marcavage observes, "and I think that
there is a fear of getting involved in what they would consider political
matters, but this is a spiritual battle that we are fighting."
It is very
important that Christians pray about what is happening in America, Marcavage
says. And it is likewise important that believers be "educated on what is
happening, and ... take action when necessary," he adds."

In reality, it's the Christian community (the unhinged, far right members, that is) who have twisted and maligned any and all hate crime legislation. Their goal isn't to educate, but to spread hatred. It's just as simple as that.

If You Didn't Agree With Falwell, Then You're Guilty of Hate Speech?

I expected this, but not to the degree I'm seeing today. The fundies over at OneNewsNow (I'm so going to have to come up with a nickname for them, lol) have implied that anyone who disagreed with Rev. Falwell is guilty of hate speech. Here's an example...

"In some of these things I've been looking at he's being called a bigot;
[and] some people are absolutely sure that he's going straight to hell," she
says. That reaction, she continues, is to be expected. "I'm not surprised by
this level of vitriol because it seems like it's [coming from] all these people
who've just been very angry at him for holding up a standard to which they
couldn't achieve."

I hate to break it to these folks, but Falwell was a bigot, plain and simple. As for where his soul now resides...I wouldn't even hazard a guess. But what I'm most insulted about is the statement toward the end of that quote...that I'm angry with Falwell because I couldn't achieve his standard. What makes this author think that I or anyone else was ever interested in achieving his so-called standard?

If anyone is guilty of hate speech, it's the faction which holds Falwell and other similar religious icons up as models for the rest of us "lost sheep" to follow. To the fundies I say, you can't have it both ways. You simply can't call upon your rights to free speech while insisting that those who oppose you should be silenced...period.

Unhinged Folger Lashes Out Again

According to Janet Folger of Faith2Action, not only is pride not a parade...but it, "goeth before a fall." In last Tuesday's article written for her fellow wingnuts over at WorldNetDaily, Folger attempts to make the assertion that not only the homosexuals (operating under that ever elusive agenda we supposedly have), but the Democrats in Congress intentionally scheduled the vote on H.R. 1592...the Hate Crimes Legislation which passed and about which I've discussed copiously...for the National Day of Prayer as a prideful and arrogant statement of power. Take a moment and let out a good laugh...I know I did, lol!

Still bloviating about the ficticious damage the bill would do to free speech and continuing to refer to it as, "the thoughts crimes bill," Folger intimated that the date of the vote was what lead to the veto promise from the Chimperor. She refers to the 19 million Christians who chose not to vote last November, and insinuates that those 19 million will now rise up from the conservative ashes, admit their, "sin of omission," and take back the right to free speech that they still believe was lost. She even goes so far as to suggest constituents send handcuffs to their Congressmen and Senators since the passage of H.R. 1592 will result in the mass arrests and subsequent handcuffing of pastors all over the country. I'll give her some credit...it is a colorful and creative idea, but one that is also incredibly misguided.

My favorite paragraph of this article, though, is this one...

"Pride is the thing God hates the most. It's what got Satan kicked out of heaven. But not only does God hate it, the American people hate it, too. And I predict it will be what gets this Congress kicked out of power."

You know what God hates as well? Hateful speech and actions. Janet used a passage from the book of Proverbs, but I seem to remember another couple of very relevant passages that would put quite a chink in Ms. Folger's armor...

* "When they kept on questioning Him, He straightened up and said to them,
'If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at
her.'" John 8:7 (New International Version) Obviously, "He," is Jesus and
he was speaking to a group of teachers and Pharisees who intended to stone to
death a woman who had been caught in adultery.

* "The Pharisees challenged Him, "Here you are, appearing as your own
witness; your testimony is not valid." Jesus answered, "Even if I testify
on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where
I am gong. But
you have no idea where I come from or where I am going. You judge by human
standards; I pass judgement on no one." John 8:13-15 (New International
Version)

Perhaps Ms. Folger and the 19 million absent Christian voters should consider these passages before attacking others...just a thought.

Concerned Women Allude to the Ficticious Homosexual Agenda

I still wonder what our agenda is, exactly. I suppose I missed that session during the National "How to be a Lesbian" convention, lol. At any rate, the Concerned Women for America (who I'm fairly sure aren't lesbians, but you never know, lol) have announced that the homosexual agenda was the definitive winner in the first 100 hours of the 110th Congress. In a rather entertaining article which really only reiterates the assertions CWA previously made. The reason I'm posting on this yet again is because of a paragraph added to their update dated May 16th...

"It is not new for liberal Members of Congress to actively promote the
homosexual agenda, but a key difference in the last four months is that a shift
in the balance of power has given liberals the political power to pass their
legislation. Three especially destructive bills have been introduced since
January, and without a groundswell of support for righteousness and Biblical
principles, the homosexual agenda will continue to creep forward and erode our
constitutional freedoms."

Those three destructive bills mentioned are...

*H.R. 1592: The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007...This bill, as I've discussed extensively, adds violent crimes committed on the basis of gender, sexual identity or disability to the already existing 1968 legislation.
*H.R. 2015: Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007 (ENDA)...Introduced by Rep. Barney Frank, this bill would make it illegal for an employer to reject a potential employee or fire an existing one because of their sexual orientation.
*H.R. 808: Department of Peace and Nonviolence Act...Infused with phrases such as, "celebrate diversity," and "promoting tolerance," this bill suggests that a Federal Department of Peace or Peace Education be established.

So, I have a few questions for CWA. First, would you be equally incensed by the introduction of legislation that would include religion-based, violent crimes? Second, since employers cannot discriminate against a potential or existing employee on the basis of religious belief, why shouldn't the same protection be extended to people of differing sexual orientations? Finally, would you raise as much of an uproar if Congress were to suggest establishing a federal department overseeing religious tolerance or education?

I seriously doubt that Mr. Barber's ladies at CWA would fight so vehemently against any of what I have suggested, so the only question left to be answered is where is the erosion of constitutional protections? As I see it, the first 100 hours of this Congressional session have done nothing but reinforce and enhance constitutional protections for everyone. Perhaps CWA was too busy obsessing over the mystical homosexual agenda to notice.

Clock in for Equality

Lambda Legal, the organization of lawyers specializing in protecting and fighting for the rights of the GLBT community, have launched a new initiative. "Clock in for Equality," is the organization's effort to protect and enforce workplace fairness, and they are calling on everyone regardless of sexual orientation to join in. There are several action opportunities from which to choose, and their website offers tips and ideas on creating a more comfortable workplace environment for GLBT individuals.

Please, take time to visit the site and make that step toward equality in the workplace.

AFA Releases List of Gay Friendly Television Sponsors

I love it when these fundies come out with these lists! Not only did the AFA provide a list of the top ten gay friendly sponsors, but they included contact information for each corporation on the list. Thanks to their hard work, including the creation of a formula to calculate the "supportiveness" of these companies, we now know what programs to watch and who to contact at each of the offending corporations to congratulate them on not cowering to right-wing pressure.

In case you're wondering, the programs listed were...

"Ugly Betty" "ER" "Desperate Housewives" "The Simpsons" "The Office"
"Brothers & Sisters" "Grey's Anatomy" "The Class"

On another note, doesn't it make you wonder why these folks spend so much time watching programs which depict positive homosexual models? Well, I suppose, in their case...it's a dirty job, but someone had to do it.

**Surf on over to AFA's site and use the information they provided. Contact the corporations and commend them on their stance. The more noise we make, the better!

AFA Still Badgering the Ford Corporation

Hold on to your seats...Ford has hosted yet another gay oriented function, and the AFA is all up in arms over it! Once again, we should all watch for the sky to fall, lol! Here are the details...

"Ford, taking an in-your-face attitude, continues its support for
homosexual marriage and the homosexual agenda by making yet another contribution
to a homosexual event. Meanwhile, the Ford family is at odds with one
another over company's future."

The Ford Corporation contributed to the 2007 Out and Equal Workplace Summitt, and to PFLAG, and the AFA insists that this is the reason Ford's earnings have taken a hit...

"While Ford is losing billions and laying off scores of thousands of their
employees, the company still has money to give to help promote homosexual
marriage and the homosexual lifestyle. In April, Ford sales dropped 13% over the
same period in 2006. This was the 10th month out of the last 12 (since AFA
began the boycott) that Ford sales have been down."

My question is this...has anyone at AFA given any thought to the rising cost of gas? Could that be a contributing factor to the drop in Ford's earnings? Common sense would say yes, but apparently we're dealing with a group who is more concerned with Ford's charitable contributions than the obvious economical issues the country is faced with currently.

A brief search yielded the following findings...

*May 3, 2007 - GM Profit Falls 90
Percent From Year Ago
*May 14, 2007 - Chrysler
on Verge of Sale to a Private Firm
*May 16, 2007 - UPDATE
1-Progressive Corp. posts lower April earnings

Right, AFA...it's the contributions to homosexual friendly efforts that's doing in the automotive industry!

Yolanda King Dies

Yolanda King, eldest daughter of Martin Luther King, Jr., died yesterday...ironically, the same day as Jerry Falwell. CNN reports that the family is uncertain as to the cause of death, but certain relatives believe her death was most likely the result of heart failure. Following in the footsteps of her father, Yolanda worked tirelessly to develop and maintain racial harmony. Those efforts resonated in a statement released by the King family...

"She was an actress, author, producer, advocate for peace and nonviolence, who
was known and loved for her motivational and inspirational contributions to
society,"

Funeral arrangements have yet to be disclosed, but sentiments of condolence and tokens of love for the entire King family have been pouring in. Take a moment to reflect on her life and the lives of both her parents today and remember all they have accomplished for civil rights.

Westboro to Picket Falwell's Funeral

Is there any group that this church (and I use that term very loosely) doesn't hate? According to their latest manifesto (and, no...I won't give you a link to their site), not only will the extreme, batsh*t crazies at Westboro Baptist be picketing Falwell's funeral, but they've given a litany of reasons as to why he is now burning in hell. I was never a fan of Falwell, but no grieving family deserves the kind of treatment that Westboro is notorious for giving.

Not only do they regularly picket the funerals of fallen soldiers, but they do so bearing signs reading such hateful things as, "Thank God For Dead Soldiers." Their behavior is abominable and heartless. Mr. Phelps, your behavior bears absolutely no resemblance to the love that Christians and their God are supposed to have. Either walk the talk or shut up!

Someone Needs to Nudge Rev. Sheldon...

Ever since his appearance on the Glenn Beck show, Sheldon hasn't posted anything new (except a 'statement' on the passing of Jerry Falwell, that is) on his Traditional Values Coalition website. In a way, I'm relieved since he is one of the most unhinged fundies I've come across. I don't normally advocate giving attention to certain nutcases, but Sheldon is still running an article (if you can call it that) about "Homosexual Urban Legends." It's really worth reading, even if it makes your blood boil, because you can't fight successfully unless you understand what the other side believes. Knowledge truly is power, and the more we know the stronger we'll be.

I Told You...Ten Little Monkeys

I make it a point not to watch any news after a certain hour, because I tend to get so riled up that I can't sleep, lol. So, when I started my usual morning news round-up, I found several reports and accounts of last night's Rethug debate. Since Fox News hosted and moderated the debate, I opted to use CBS as my main source, and what I read simply boggled my mind. I expected the usual "one-liners," and sophomoric one-upmanship, but last night's exchanges were just ridiculous. CBS reports...

"Tuesday night's feisty
debate saw several sharp exchanges as veiled criticisms replaced by direct
language, and motives questioned, as well as several sharp exchanges. And while
there were no clear-cut winners, there were memorable moments and perhaps one
loser, at least in the eyes of many in the audience."

One such exchange was between Rudy Giuliani and Ron Paul, in which Paul suggested that U.S. foreign policy was to blame for the 9/11 attacks. In response, Giuliani said...

"I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't
really mean that."

That statement garnered a great deal of applause from the audience, and rendered, if only unofficially, Paul the debate's loser. The usual issues were discussed...abortion, immigration, campaign finance and the like, but I give the gold star for the comment of the night to Mike Huckabee, who said...

"We've had a Congress that's spent money like John Edwards at a beauty shop."

Like I said...ten little monkeys, lol.

Help Promote The Terminator!

You'll notice that several buttons have appeared in the sidebar. Please, take a few minutes and sign my guestbook, subscribe to the blog or even rate what I write. I welcome your feedback, and will do my best to respond to everyone. I'm still looking to expand, but I can't do that without you. I appreciate your readership, and hope you'll spread the word about my blog.

GOP Debate to Air on Fox News Tonight

I suppose it's my Early Childhood Education background, but I can't seem to get this little song out of my head when I think about this debate.

Ten little monkeys sitting in a tree...teasing Mr. Alligator, "You can't catch me, you can't catch me!"

In a sense, that's what you'll be able to see tonight on Fox News when all ten candidates take their places at their lecterns tonight. It seems that debates have become less and less influential and relevant. Instead, we'll have ten pretty faces, all trying to "one-up" each other. Don't get me wrong, the Democrats are just as bad when it comes to building up their images while saying absolutely nothing. Call me a cynic, but these endless debates have really begun to serve very little purpose. If you really want to know where a candidate stands on any particular issue, Google them and check out not only their personal campaign websites, but any and all public statements they might have made. Another alternative is to read various blogs (many of which are listed on my blogroll) and get some information you might not come across in mainstream media.

It should go without saying, but plan to vote! Do your homework beforehand, so you can make an informed decision.

Concerned Women Are Concerned About Television

Again, I have to shake my head at this one. Concerned Women of America are all upset about what they deem to be unsuitable programming on TV. They believe that family friendly programming is dying, and blame the FCC and the various politics surrounding the issues of programming and ratings...not to mention the advertising dollars that inevitably flow based on the FCC's choices. That said, I've a couple of points to make.

First, parents have the responsibility to monitor what their children are watching...period. As the saying goes, the buck stops with them. Too many parents are using television programs containing adult themes and language as convenient babysitters. To those parents I say, do your job and stop blaming others for what your children are watching!

Second, CWA seems to be walking a fine line on the issue of censorship. I firmly believe that NOTHING should be censored because, one day, someone will decide something you say, read, watch or otherwise enjoy is offensive and needs to be monitored or censored altogether.

Simply put, if you are uncomfortable with the content of a particular program...don't allow your children to watch it. Be a parent, and make the "no brainer" decision, but don't try to tell me what I should watch or let my children watch.

Yep, the Sky is Falling

My favorite little nutcases over at WorldNetDaily have posted an article involving a questionnaire given to 19 candidates for open positions in the Idaho Supreme Court. The organization responsible for the questionnaire, the Idaho Values Alliance, presented some of the following questions...

"Question 1 asked whether the candidates would agree with the statement:
"The Founders of the state of Idaho were grateful to God for our freedom."
Question 4 asked the candidates to agree or disagree with the statement:
"All political power is inherent in the people, not the courts."

Not one of the candidates responded to the questionnaire, which has the Idaho organization up in arms. Frankly, from what I see...the questions are so loaded that no candidate in any race could possibly come up with an answer that wouldn't offend someone. As for WND's assertion that the candidates are refusing to endorse the Constitution...Grow up and stop twisting the truth!

Jerry Falwell Dies at Age 73

CNN is reporting that Jerry Falwell has died due to heart failure. While I and others who share my points of view have consistently disagreed with Falwell's viewpoints, I think it's appropriate that we take time for a moment of silence on his behalf. I don't relish the death of any of my adversaries, and I extend my condolences to the entire Falwell family.

Women Who Use Their Brains Are a Threat?

The president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Paige Patterson, is in an uproar over women choosing to exist in places other than the kitchen...barefoot and pregnant, that is. In an article featured on OneNewsNow, another bunch of unhinged wingnuts, Patterson refers to the fact that 60% of college students are female, and Americans should be deeply concerned over this fact...a fact I couldn't validate, mind you. His biggest bone of contention is that leadership roles will be relinquished to women rather than the long held precedent of men shouldering the leadership burdens. In fact, Patterson makes the statement...

"Mom and hot apple pie have been replaced by institutional daycare centers and
cold apple turnovers at McDonald's."

I can't help but roll my eyes dramatically at that statement, but his next assertion is even more insane.

"A biblical model of the family is key to restoring social order in the
world, stated the Southern Baptist leader. Although innocents continue to be
executed in the womb by their mothers and divorce is "eviscerating family life
on every hand," said Patterson, there is still hope for the world.
"As
promising social and education programs have cratered along with promised noble
deeds, [and] more sophisticated and determined evils proliferated, have we no
place to turn?" he asked rhetorically. "The family remains -- both the first and
the most important social unit created by an all-wise, omniscient God."

If these God-fearing men were truly doing the job Patterson says they should be, women wouldn't have to step up and fill in the gaps. He can bloviate all he wants, but the fact remains that someone has to take the leadership role and too many men are simply unwilling to take on that responsibility. By the way, this speech was given in Warsaw, Poland. I suppose Patterson didn't have the guts to make his statements here in the U.S....but I digress.

Bottom line...the Biblical model is just one option for families, and I hold no ill will to those who choose that for their families. But to insist that the Biblical model is the one and only option is absurd.

Ladies, keep learning...keep growing your minds and follow your desires!

Support the Human Rights Campaign

Okay...one more "public service announcement," lol. Today I donated to and joined the Human Rights Campaign. They do a wonderful job of fighting for the rights of gay, lesbian and transgendered people. In addition to their website which provides detailed information about legislation and such, HRC also helps citizens mobilize at the local level with letter writing campaigns other means of political influence.

These folks work tirelessly for us, so think about what you might be able to do to support them. They have options other than financial donations available, so check them out and get involved.

CWA Caught Twisting the Truth

On the front page of Concerned Women of America's site today is a story about a California football player who was released by his team because of his Christianity.

"Christian wide receiver Troy Vermillion has been released from the roster of the
Colorado Ice, an indoor football team based in the Greeley, Colorado area. The
release came following a disagreement between Vermillion and the coaching staff over pornographic
films shown on the team bus. Vermillion, wishing not to be exposed to the
material, asked to be allowed to travel in other team vehicles, but was denied.
Instead, he was released. Hilda Vermillion, Troy’s wife, shares his story; the story
of a Christian husband and father paying a high price for his efforts to honor
Christ. Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues spoke with
Hilda, who shares Troy’s testimony and how you can support the family in
prayer."

Taken at face value, even I would have to raise an eyebrow and wonder about the team's motivation on this one. Being the cynic that I am, though, I decided to check the local news source and check out the story. I was amazed at the discrepancies between the accounts. According to the Greely Tribune, the "pornographic film" was, in fact, an unrated version of the movie The Wedding Crashers...Fact twist number one.

CWA also says that Vermillion was released because he objected to the film and wanted to ride in another vehicle if the team staff insisted on showing the film. According to the Tribune, the decision to release Vermillion also had to do with the caliber of new players that had been added to the team.

"The Colorado Ice head coach, who has been involved in indoor football for the
past 10 years on one level or another, said the drama surrounding Vermillion since the
incident and the level of athletes added to the team at the wide receiver
position since the second week of the season were the main factors behind Vermillion's release."Come
and watch the game on Saturday night and tell me if the three receivers on the
field are not the real deal," said Sanders of the three receivers starting in
their game at 7 p.m. Saturday against the Omaha Beef at the Budweiser Events
Center. "Troy was not going to play in front of any of them. I have continued to
get e-mails from numerous people regarding different matters, and it has turned
into something like a T.O. situation."I am not going to deal with the
distraction any longer." It has nothing to do with his beliefs," Sanders said.
"It has nothing to do with the movie we watched on the bus. It has everything to
do with his ability to fit in with this team and play at the level we are
playing at."

The coach referred to the drama that has surrounded pro player Terrell Owens, but made it clear that Vermillion was out of a job anyway since the new receivers were apparently better. Vermillion disagreed, saying...

"I can play football," Vermillion said. "They are not giving me an
opportunity to play purely based on discrimination."

Obviously, this is a case of "he said/he said," but shame on CWA for exploiting the situation and trying to turn it into something it just isn't. Perhaps they should focus on a real case of discrimination instead. There are thousands to choose from, but they all involve homosexual and transgendered individuals. I guess CWA isn't all that "concerned" after all.

***UPDATE - I mistakenly stated that Mr. Vermillion was in California when, in fact, he's in Colorado. I regret the mistake and apologize for the mishap.

WND Goes After Amazon and Starbucks

Once again, there are awful things going on in our country today...a scare at a Boulder high school, floods of epic proportion in Missouri and wildfires in both California and Georgia. What do our favorite wingnuts decide to highlight on their site today, you ask? Let's take a look...

On their front page, in huge, bold print no less, is a headline about those "anti-God" cups that Starbucks is using. I went and read the story, expecting to be exasperated, and while I did feel exasperated, I also felt angry at some of the statements made. The opening paragraph is a good example...

"Coffeehouse giant Starbucks
is standing by its campaign to put thought-provoking messages on its coffee cups
despite a national uproar and threat of boycott over a message some felt was
"anti-God."

Of course they're standing by the campaign! It's their company, and the messages printed on the cups consist of comments made by average citizens wanting to express a viewpoint and open up some dialogue. The comments are chosen carefully and DO NOT malign Christians or their beliefs. They are simply opinions stated in a very diplomatic way. Furthermore, I have no idea what national uproar the author (Joe Kovacs - Executive News Director) is talking about. Sure, the story has made the news recently, but aside from FoxNews I haven't heard of any grand outrage. Starbucks even provided examples of cups bearing viewpoints that countered the comments WND and the like were so upset over.

"The Way I See It #92:
You are not an accident. Your parents may not
have planned you, but God did. He wanted you alive and created you for a
purpose. Focusing on yourself will never reveal your purpose. You were made by
God and for God, and until you understand that, life will never make sense. Only
in God do we discover our origin, our identity, our meaning, our purpose, our
significance, and our destiny. -- Dr. Rick Warren, author of "The Purpose-Driven
Life."

"The Way I See It #158:
It's tragic that extremists co-opt the notion
of God, and that hipsters and artists reject spirituality out of hand. I don't
have a fixed idea of God. But I feel that it's us – the messed-up, the
half-crazy, the burning, the questing – that need God, a lot more than the
goody-two-shoes do. -- Mike Doughty, musician."

To the fundies, I have only this to say...Grow up and stop skewing the truth to fit your agenda!

Another story on today's WND front page, albeit much further down, involves an 8 year old child who stumbled on some risque products while doing a search on Amazon.com. The child was doing a search for a science video and found a more "adult" selection amongst the search results offered.

"Of the three pages of selections returned one was: 'Adult videos' and another
was 'Eclectic Views on Gay Male Pornography: Pornucopia,' both a hardback and paperback book. My
child wanted to know what this stuff was all about. Imagine my shock and awe?"
Chapman said."

I have just one question...Ok, two, lol. First, why was an 8 year old conducting an unsupervised search for anything in the first place? Yes, I'm blaming the parent on this one. Anyone with a modicum of common sense knows not to allow children to surf without supervision. Why? Because accidents happen...kids can and will unwittingly stumble on something they shouldn't see. Second, why is the parent in this case blaming Amazon? After all, the company has the right to sell products that contain mature content, and no search engine or agent is foolproof.

The answer to both questions seems clear...the parent dropped the ball and is looking for someone other than himself to blame for what his child found and was exposed to. It's really that simple. As for the folks at WingNutDaily...stop exploiting this child for your own ideological gain!