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!

Faith 2 Action Goes Too Far and Shows Their Ignorance

This story has angered me, not so much because it's yet another feeble minded attempt at quashing the hate crimes legislation, but because it's just gone too far. Janet Folger of the organization Faith 2 Action, has been vocal in her fight against the hate crimes bill, but something new and disturbing has popped up on her site. Following the flawed notion that a grandmother, pregnant woman or other non-homosexual would receive inadequate justice for any crime committed against them, Folger has designed a 'coupon' for criminals.

Excuse me while I take a deep breath here, lol.

The coupon indicates that upon redemption, any criminal can receive a reduced sentence for committing an act of violence against the sort of groups I mentioned above. Not only do I find this campaign morally (yes, I used the word morally) offensive, I am also angered that such an organization would give their tacit approval of such violent acts. Furthermore...and I can't seem to reiterate this enough...the legislation does nothing more than the previous laws protecting racial and ethnic groups from hate motivated crimes. I can't understand why it's suddenly inappropriate for homosexual, transgendered and disabled individuals to receive the same protection.

The answer that is most commonly given is that this legislation would affect the speech and/or teachings of religious leaders. That argument has one glaring fallacy, though. When the original hate crime legislation was passed in the '60s, groups such as the KKK had roots firmly embedded in the church. Check your history...look up precedents...you won't find any occurrence of a pastor or other religious leader being fined or jailed because of their lawful (albeit despicable) hateful speech.

So, what is the conclusion to be drawn here? These organizations are far less concerned with having their right to free speech and expression curtailed, and much more concerned with granting the GLBT community any concessions. Bottom line...they're bigots. Take a moment and write to these organizations. Let them know that you're on to their game.

*Faith 2 Action: CONTACT@F2A.ORG
*WorldNetDaily: letters@worldnetdaily.com
*Concerned Women for America: You have to fill out a form after following this link.
*Traditional Values Coalition: mail@traditionalvalues.org
*American Family Association: Another form to fill out at this link.
*Family Research Council: Ugh...another form and link.
*Americans for Truth: Yep, you guessed it...another form and link, the cowards!
*Focus on the Family: I'm not even going to say it...here's the link.

Help Protect the Rights of Bloggers

Since the inception of blogging, we now have a truly free press. Individuals are able to report and sound off on the issues that affect us on a daily basis without the constraints of sponsor pressures with which the major media outlets deal. There is a movement, however, that is looking to restrict or curtail the liberties bloggers have enjoyed.

Because of this reality, I've donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and I've placed a 'button' in the sidebar of this blog to encourage all of you to donate and support this organization. They are fighting for bloggers everywhere, trying to make sure our free speech rights are not infringed upon.

So, take a moment and visit their site...find out what they're all about and give your support. Even if it's five dollars, every little bit helps!

Take My Blog Survey

I'm participating in a survey which will give me an idea of who's reading my blog. It doesn't collect any information that would identify you, but it will provide me with demographic information. It only takes a few minutes to fill out, and I'd appreciate your help. You can find the survey here.

Thanks for reading and for helping me with this survey!

Bush Insults Queen Elizabeth

I can't make this stuff up, lol! In a speech honoring Queen Elizabeth and celebrating the US alliance with Britain, the Chimperor misspoke and insinuated that Her Majesty was about 200 years older than she actually is. Citing the bicentennial celebrations in which the Queen participated, Bush said...

"The American people are proud to welcome your majesty back to the United
States, a nation you've come to know very well. After all you've dined with 10
U.S. presidents. You've helped our nation celebrate its bicentennial in 17 -- in
1976,"

The Queen shot him a look that was absolutely hilarious, and Bush tried to save face. There was a pause in the speech during which the two exchanged facial expressions, and Bush continued...

"She gave me a look that only a mother could give a child," Bush said as the
crowd burst into laughter."

This is just another in a long list of incidents where Bush has embarrassed himself and, by extension, the United States. Kudos to the Queen for putting him in his place with that look...it speaks volumes, lol. Check out these other incidents...they're worth reading for a laugh or two...

*July 21, 2006 - Bush gives an inappropriate shoulder massage to German Chancellor
*January 31, 2007 - Bush nearly runs over press corps with tractor
*May 4, 2007 - Bush says he's the "commander guy"

Concerned Women of America Obssessing Over Orientation

Leave it to a bunch of "concerned" women to come up with this one, lol. Still reeling from the passage of the Hate Crimes Bill, an unnamed member of the CWA staff has an article up on the site dealing with some perceived, semantic problems with the bill. What problems could they possibly be talking about, you ask? Well, here's a quote...

"H.R. 1592, the "hate crimes" bill just passed by the House, defines "gender
identity" vaguely as "actual or perceived gender-related characteristics." The
bill, however, does not offer a definition for "sexual orientation." In one
ironic way, that makes it the more honest of the two bills. While ENDA covers three "sexual
orientations," 23 "sexual orientations" actually exist."

What follows this excerpt is a list of what CWA is calling "sexual orientations," including pedophilia, necrophilia and beastiality. Once again, homosexuals are lumped into the same stereotypical category as child molesters and the like. I suppose those poor, concerned women are losing hours of sleep over this trumped up semantic issue. Honestly, I don't have much to add except this...Come on ladies...your dreams miss you!

Another Day...Another Dose of WingNut Madness

Tornadoes ripped through the plains states over the weekend, an explosion rocked a Vegas parking garage and Queen Elizabeth is wrapping up her visit to the US. Lots of big stories in the news today, but leave it to the folks over at WorldNetDaily to veer off the beaten path.

The top story at WND today involves cups used at Starbucks shops around the world. You read that right...a customer didn't like the words printed on the cup of coffee she purchased. An opinion campaign started by Starbucks, in the interest of sharing ideas and generating discussion, gathered comments and selected some to be featured on the cups as part of their "The Way I See It" project. This particular story is about an Ohio woman who didn't appreciate the "anti-God" sentiment printed on her cup. Here's the actual comment...

"Why in moments of crisis do we ask God for strength and help? As
cognitive beings, why would we ask something that may well be a figment of our
imaginations for guidance? Why not search inside ourselves for the power to
overcome? After all, we are strong enough to cause most of the catastrophes we
need to endure."

How dare someone have an opinion different from hers? Honestly, what would this woman have said if someone complained about an evangelical comment on their Starbucks cup? Lady...you've got too much free time!

In other WND news, fundies are still trying to decry gay rights groups through misinformation and general fear-mongering. In this story of interest on today's WND front page, gay activists are accused of telling a California group that they'd "BURY" them. Well, that's what the headline said, anyway. Here are the facts...

The players: Equality
California vs. Capitol
Resource Institute

The issue: SB
777, legislation that would require California schools to remove anything
that reflects negatively on homosexuality.

The quote: 'Gay'
activist says 'We will BURY you'Threats made against Christian workers opposing
homosexual agenda

The actual quote: "I
am a firm supporter of freedom of speech, and therefore I support yours, even if
it in direct contrast with my own. However, we all use the media and the internet to spread our
message: and with no hubris intended, I advise you -- if you continue your
efforts, we will BURY you ... with public opinion, with media, and ultimately
with legislation. EQCA passed NINE bills last year to protect basic
dignities and we have every intention of yours going down, as have others who
oppose decency and human rights."

If any threat exists in that quote (and I'm using the word 'threat' very, very loosely), it's the exact same penalty with which gay activists are threatened. At one time or another, the major organizations have all used similar language and directed it at various gay advocacy groups. I find it humorous that they have a problem with and feel so threatened by having the tables turned.

Penguins Terrorize Fundies...Again

Apparently, penguins...especially the gay ones, lol...are just too scary to be allowed on the shelves of school and public libraries. To avoid confusion, let me back up just a bit and give you some background. In 2005, a children's book entitled, And Tango Makes Three was released. It tells the true story of two male penguins in New York's Central Park Zoo who were a couple. The zoo staff even provided an egg for the two to hatch after watching them try to "hatch" an egg-shaped rock. The point of the book was to teach children that not all families are the same and that families with same-sex parents can be as warm and loving as any other family.

Sounds harmless (and downright cute!), right? Alas, wherever fundies dwell...stupidity will inevitably follow. Since the book's publication, it has been challenged in a variety of arenas and was listed as the American Library Association's most challenged book in 2006. Here is an overview of the controversy surrounding these little guys...

*November 17, 2006 - Shiloh, IL - Parents insist that the school district administration restrict access to the book.

*December 20, 2006 - Charlotte, NC - Charlotte schools superintendent orders the book's removal from all school shelves.

*May 5, 2007 - Lodi, CA - Parents claim the book's presence on the public library shelves is detrimental to their children...or was it just offensive to the adults? Hmmmm.

These are just a few examples, but the story is the same...one, small minded group attempts to force their personal moral standards and objectives on the rest of us. Funny, isn't that what the fundies constantly accuse gay rights groups of doing?

The Day After...Hate Crimes Bill Fallout

Following yesterday's passage of HR 1592, the Hate Crimes Bill, the ultra-conservative pundits were foaming at the mouth....just waiting to launch yet another mass media assault. Here is an overview of the various groups and their statements on the bill...

• My favorite nutcases at WorldNetDaily have an article up today, under the heading "Life With Big Brother," no less. They also refer to the bill as a "discriminatory federal plan," and try to take credit for the news that Dear Leader would veto. The White House released a statement saying that 1592 was "unnecessary and constitutionally questionable," but my favorite quote comes from none other than Chuck Colson...a man who is apparently better suited for pontificating than for covering up presidential scandals, lol.

"Former White House insider Chuck Colson, in his Breakpoint
commentary, called it a 'Thought Crimes' plan.
'It's called the Local
Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. But this bill is not about hate.
It's not even about crime. It's about outlawing peaceful speech – speech that
asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong,' he said. "

Wow, another public figure who apparently can't read!

• Concerned Women of America were a little more modest, in that they shared responsibility for the president's veto pledge with other likeminded groups. BUT...they have an incredibly insulting article up, insinuating that activists are knowingly reporting false anti-gay crimes to build up the hate crimes statistics. The most concerned woman of all, Matt Barber, says...

"Although there may be very isolated incidences of legitimate bias-motivated
crimes against homosexuals, they're anything but epidemic as homosexual
activists would have you believe. Truth be told, the whole 'needle in a
haystack' thing comes to mind."

Read it for yourself and see if you can find any substantive proof...I didn't find any.

• Louis Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition was all upset that the vote on HR 1592 was held on the National Day of Prayer , saying that it was a slap in the face of Christians everywhere. He must have gotten over that, though, since the top story on TVC's site has to do with his appearance on the "Glenn Beck Program." I saw the screen-cap...but hard as I tried, I couldn't find a slap mark anywhere on that strange little man's face!
• The American Family Association didn't have much on the passage of the bill except for an audio link to the comments made by Bishop Jackson following the vote. This is the guy who was on C-SPAN yesterday presenting scenario after scenario of how this bill would be used to fine or jail pastors and, subsequently, Christians. He mentions real incidents that occurred in Sweden, Australia and Canada and misrepresents an incident that happened in Philadelphia. I wish someone would ask him to name one example of someone being fined or jailed for uttering a derogatory epithet. He won't be able to, and that proves that the hate crimes legislation that is already in place (this one just adds crimes against gender, sexual orientation or disability), has not and will not stifle the speech...no matter how inflammatory it is...of any citizen. Hop over there and listen to it, just take your bottle of Pepto-Bismol with you, lol.
• Last, but not least...the Family Research Council's homepage is completely devoted to the story of 1592. There point of contention is that the bill is unconstitutional on the grounds that it violates the 14th amendment which provides for equal treatment under the law. I've alluded to this before, and I'll say it again. If the 14th amendment really does grant every citizen equal protection under the law, then why were the initial hate crime laws necessary? Oh, and as John over at AmericaBlog was good enough to point out...there are already laws in place that protect every member of Congress from even being threatened. Talk about hypocrisy!

It's on to the Senate now, as HR 1592 (renamed Matthew Shepard Act) will be up for debate and a subsequent vote. No date has been set for the vote yet.

Hate Crimes Bill Hits the Floor

I was going to wait until the vote was in, and from the look of things on C-SPAN right now it's going to be a while until the vote on the bill itself takes place. So far there's been a flurry of discussion on various amendments that Republicans wanted to make, followed by a couple of votes on procedures and rules. The general debate has just begun (btw...John Conyers really needs to stick to writing his opinions rather than reading them. It's been painful to sit and listen to him, even though I'm on his side, lol.), and there are a few things I haven't talked about concerning this bill that have been brought up this morning on the House floor and in related interviews that C-SPAN has shown.

First, those opposed to this bill have attempted to prove that the lives of certain groups are being held as more valuable to the lives of ordinary citizens (ie...grandmothers, pregnant women, etc) who are victims of violent crime. This has been batted around extensively, and something I wish the proponents had brought up was that the bill does not and will not preclude any prosecutorial body from imposing the "special circumstances" provision available for crimes of a heinous nature. The bill will aid local officials in investigating and prosecuting crimes deemed to be hate related as opposed to random acts of violence. The latter can still be prosecuted with stiffer penalties using the existing provisions.

Second, proponents of the bill have tried virtually everything to convince religious advocacy groups, private citizens and fellow lawmakers that this bill does not and will not infringe on anyone's freedom of written or verbal expression. Honestly, I don't know how else to say it...the language in the bill is clear, as a specific first amendment provision was included to avoid any conflict. Various religious groups have come up with some very creative, yet hypothetical, situations in which a member of the clergy is jailed or otherwise impugned because of what they said from the pulpit. No religious leader has been able to substantiate these worries with any actual event that occurred in this country. Instead, they have brought up examples from other countries (including some countries which have never protected the speech of any of its citizens) as their basis for attacking this legislation. All I can say is...READ THE BILL!!

Finally, the Congressional Quarterly has reported (via C-SPAN and reporter Keith Perine) that President Bush has already signaled his intention to veto this bill should it make it to his desk. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, as Dear Leader's sanity is seriously in question. Apparently, the dementia is affecting his ability to read a bill as well. Either that, or he's truly giving in to the pressure from the various religious groups who used to love him more than they do now.

**Insert exaggerated sigh here**

I'll update this post once the vote is in.

*****UPDATE*****

The bill has passed the House vote (237-180), so we just have to wait and see if Bash...I mean Bush, lol, will be pulling out his veto pen again this week. No vetoes in 6 years...now two in one week? Unbelievable!

WingNut Nugget of the Day

I just love it when those lovable little nutcases start bloviating...it gives me so much material to work with. Just looking at the title makes me shake my head.

"Teachers insist: Being 'gay' good"

I don't think that any advocacy group is asking anyone to pronounce homosexuality as good or bad. Acceptance, respect and support have always been the goals of our so-called agenda, despite what the pundits might say.

This article, true to historical WingNut form, tries to make a point without providing much in the way of proof or other substantive content. The opening statement is an excellent example...

"A nationally distributed training video produced by a "gay" advocacy group –
which claims it's been shown on more than 100 public television stations –
advises teachers to promote homosexuality as normal
and healthy to children as young as kindergarten age, regardless of what values
the child has been taught at home. "

First of all, what is with putting the word gay in quotes? It seems that most of the fundie groups have started doing that, and I just don't get it. So, if there are any fundies reading this...please send me an email explaining that to me.

Now that I've addressed that bit of stupidity, let's take another look at that opening paragraph. Notice that neither the "training video," nor the advocacy group are named, but the author (who is also unnamed) opens the article with this proclamation about the group's claims. My favorite part of this paragraph, though, is the phrase, "promote homosexuality as normal and healthy." To the WingNut audience, that phrase is the equivalent of telling a group of Democrats that Dear Leader is the best president this country's ever had. I'm sure that they were all just frothing at the mouth, lol. It's clear from the outset that the author's intention is to inflame the readers, rather than offer any insight or meaningful debate.

Continuing to read, I expected to find out more about the video and the people who produced it. Instead, the author pulled out a couple of quotes from teachers in the training video who seemed to have a problem with what they were being asked to teach. My favorite is this one...

"I don't know what to do about this but, as a school are we saying that
kids have to support this? I guess that's what it sounds like to me that we're
saying. If a child comes from a background that says homosexuality is not
correct, are we telling that child that they're supposed to, this is what you
are supposed to do?"

I realize that this teacher was a bit flustered and knew she was on camera (I did finally manage to find the video online...I'll get to that in a second.), but do you know of any mainstream homosexual rights or advocacy groups that are telling anyone...particularly children...that they're supposed to be gay? I don't understand how this leap is made. Yes, we want to teach children to be respectful and supportive of another person's identity, but we certainly are not trying to convince every child that they, themselves, are gay.

Further along in the article is a quote from Brian Camenker, the founder of the Mass Resistance organization.

"Camenker said the videos originally were posted on Youtube, but were taken
down suddenly to be replaced with some pro-homosexual promotions. 'It's some
really nasty stuff. The gays have put up things calling anybody who doesn't
[endorse homosexuality] bigots,' he said."

Well, Mr. Camenker...what should we call you, then. No one is asking for your personal approval or the approval of anyone else for that matter. Rather, we'd like to be treated the same way you would want your son or daughter to be treated. For the same reason that you wouldn't use a racial or ethnic epithet to describe someone whose skin color or nationality doesn't match yours, we simply ask you extend the same courtesy and respect to a person who has a sexual orientation that is different from yours. Choosing not to extend that level of respect does, in fact, make you a bigot...it's just that simple.

The author does finally, yet surreptitiously, reveal the name of the video and identifies its producer. The film is called, "It's Elementary," and it's produced by Women's Educational Media. Not only can the film be viewed, but an abundance of resource materials are also available to aid teachers. WND lamely attempts to cast a dark shadow over this organization by mentioning that they made films, "promoting homosexuals as parents and the 2004 San Francisco debacle where thousands of same-sex couples were given marriage licenses that later were declared invalid by the state Supreme Court." Funny that no mention was given to the films, books and other forms of mass media the WingNuts themselves have used to promote their bigoted views.

The closing paragraph paints what most would consider to be common sense as some radical activist agenda...

"The homosexual activist strategy is stated plainly in the film's
promotion. "Waiting to teach children to accept differences of all kinds until
middle school or high school is too late; statistics show that by sixth, seventh
and eight grades, harmful stereotypes already have begun to take hold …"

Precisely, which is why such films and other teaching tools are so necessary. Nice try, WND, but I can see what your agenda is here and it's not pretty.

Thursday's This and That

**It's amazing to me how the wingnuts have come out of the woodwork this week to display their ignorance and distort the facts concerning the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. I've expounded on this issue quite a bit, so I won't get overly repetitive. Compare the claims made with the actual text of the bill, and see for yourself. Here are a few examples...

*The Traditional Values Coalition (crazier than the folks over at
WingNutDaily) have an article up on their site claiming that the bill will
result in the persecution of
Christians. They also have a 'Wanted' poster up on their site,
claiming that Jesus would be in violation of the proposed legislation.

*Concerned Women of America claim that the bill is, 'an assault on equal
protection,' in their most recent bulletin. My favorite "talking
point" is their claim that the bill politicizes crimes. It's amazing to me
that they don't see the protection afforded to racial/ethnic groups in the bill
as a problem...but protecting homosexual and transgendered individuals is
motivated by a political agenda. Unbelievable.

*Not to be outdone, lol...WingNutDaily has yet another epistle
pointing out how Christians will be targeted under this legislation. Funny
thing is, they use a whole lot of the article from the Traditional Values
Coalition. So much for original thought, lol.

**The head wingnut, Joseph Farah, is talking about the evil that is Google...while pimping his book yet again. Likening the kids' search engine, KinderStart with David and Google with Goliath, Farah tries to portray Google as some major porn proliferater, and a bully. If you want a laugh...give it a read, lol.

**With all the voting going on in the house and senate this week on the hate crime legislation and the Iraq funding bill, what do you think is the big topic of discussion on Fox News? Looking at their front page, it seems Rosie O'Donnell is the big story for 3 of the 6 prime time shows. Again...Unbelievable!

Middle School Prank or Hate Crime?

I can't make this stuff up, lol. Just leave it to a few wingnuts and overzealous administrators to take an admittedly stupid prank committed by a middle school student and turn it into something it just isn't.

After seeing this story told over and over this morning on both FoxNews and CNN, I decided to put together this post. The interesting thing is, I was unable to find any text from either channel's website on the story...in fact, I couldn't find it mentioned anywhere on any of the 'major' news outlet sites. I did finally manage to find a write-up on the story on Associated Content's site, but here are the highlights...

A middle school student in Maine placed a ham sandwich, wrapped in a brown, paper bag, on a table in the school's cafeteria. The table was occupied by a group of Somali students who are Muslims. Since anything related to pork is considered highly offensive to Muslims, the Somali students were understandably upset by the incident. The sandwich-wielding student was suspended, and that should have been the end of the story, in my opinion.

Here's where it gets interesting....the local police are launching a hate crime investigation and are considering charges against the student. Since the long discussed hate crime legislation is due for a vote in both the house and senate this week, this incident is incredibly ill timed. The actions taken by the local authorities in Maine are exactly what the wingnuts have been blathering about since the hate crime bill's inception. Should the student be punished...absolutely, but the incident simply can't be put in the same category with the beating death of Matthew Shepard. The student's act was stupid and insensitive, but doesn't come anywhere near the magnitude of the Shepard killing or other true hate crimes for which the current legislation was created.

That's the first thing that bothers me about this story. What bothers me more is the sudden silence from the major media outlets after shining such a glaring light on it this morning. The crew over at FoxNews went so far as to have a ham sandwich sitting out on the coffee table in front of them for the better part of an hour of their "Fox and Friends" broadcast. Did someone suddenly decide that this was and untouchable subject? Was a threat made? Perhaps some advertising dollars were put at risk, not unlike the whole Don Imus/MSNBC ordeal, forcing these outlets to drop the subject. I doubt we'll ever know the answer, but it's this sort of reporting that reinforces what the wingnuts have been saying about the much needed hate crime legislation. If enough molehills get turned into mountains, the wingnuts might just get their way and citizens who are victims of crimes related to their race, nationality, gender or sexual orientation will be left without the legal recourse that they and their families deserve. I suppose, in the end, advertising dollars are much more important than justice, though...right?

Westboro Update

Due to some copyright infringement issues, YouTube has yanked the "God Hates the World," music video I referenced yesterday. I hate the idea of giving their website any extra hits, but this video is worth watching once...just so you get an idea of who these idiots really are. You can Google Westboro Baptist Church and look for the link to the video on their page...just try not to vomit when you read the drivel you'll find.

As for an interesting side note, YouTube has been flooded with uploaded video responses to the Westboro 'musical.' I only looked at a few, but I found it interesting how much of a response the video had gotten. Unfortunately, I think that's exactly what these lunatics want...publicity, and as many 15 minute blocks of fame they can get their hands on. Thanks to people like Mike Gallagher, they're getting exactly what they want. In lieu of picketing the Virginia Tech funerals, the church accepted an offer from the radio host to appear on his show. A similar offer was made by Gallagher to prevent the church from picketing the funerals of the Amish children killed last fall.

I find myself a little torn on this issue. While they're pickets are despicable, degrading and bring only more anguish to the families who have already lost loved ones, the church does have the right to show up and make whatever statement they want. Protecting everyone's right to free speech is something that is very near and dear to my heart...even if what someone is saying makes my blood boil. In this particular case, though, I think the church is more interested in shock-jock type headlines and publicity than actually making a statement. Mr. Gallagher seems to be playing right into that line of thought by offering the church a huge public forum from which to opine, while racking up huge ratings for himself.

Westboro Baptist Church - God Hates the World...And Monday's This and That

Just too unbelievable. On the heels of announcing they'd be picketing the funerals of those killed in last week's Virginia Tech massacre, the 'church' released this little musical gem for our enjoyment. YouTube has it up...for some reason I can't get it uploaded directly here, lol...so here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETpnHnK9Eis

I've come across so much idiocy today, that I've decided to list them here and give a few brief (Okay...maybe not so brief, lol) comments on each one...

**Concerned Women for America...you know, the group whose 'talking head' is Matt Barber (I still fume over the notion that a group of women need a man to be their spokesperson)...has lashed out at last week's "Day of Silence." In their most recent rant, CWA takes yet another opportunity to point to that ever elusive agenda of the LGBT community as the absolute root of all evil and the ultimate corrupter of all that is good and decent. No wonder I'm so damn tired at the end of the day!

**WingNutDaily's founder, Joseph Farah, has an article up condemning the search engine Google as being 'evil.' Of course, a great deal of this little journalistic tidbit is nothing but pure, unadulterated pimping for his latest book, but that's beside the point. If you've got the stomach for it and an urge to get in a good laugh or two, check out some of his other articles...

Dump the 'gay' beat - 2/24/07

Google censors China criticism in U.S. - 4/10/07

And, of course...a typical 'the sky is falling' rant... It's not just Imus - 4/13/07

**Americans For Truth ...the ones who have committed themselves to exposing and defeating the homosexual agenda, have posted a response to the "Day of Silence," aptly named "Day of Truth." It's worth a read, but try as they may...they're incapable of promoting anything other than their very clear-cut agenda...debasing, degrading and promoting hatred.

WingNut Founder Blathers Away

Back on April 10, WorldNetDaily and its founder Joseph Farah published an article in which he pointed fingers at various "activist pressure groups," he believed were shaping or, rather, controlling press coverage and the media in general. In his attempt to point out the various forms of bias that exist in the media, something that anyone with a functioning brain stem should be aware of and able to recognize, Mr. Farah decided to address specific groups...pointing out how they distort the truth and pressure news outlets to do the same. Starting with the Society of Environmental Journalists, Farah implied that the media are shamelessly bullied into reporting only what would bolster their stance on global warming and other hot-button environmental issues.

Now, like any self-serving demagogue, he skipped over the part where he should have offered some substantive evidence to back up such an egregious claim and went right to promoting his latest book...

"If you really want to understand how America's great and unique institution of
a free press has been deliberately undermined by radical activists masquerading
as journalists, backed by big business and encouraged by big government, you
have to examine this phenomenon," says Farah, author of "Stop the Presses: The
Inside Story of the New Media Revolution," hitting the nation's bookstores
for official release today. "

Nice, objective reporting...right? The next group on his hitlist was the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association. Farah says....

"Not only is the organization successful at working inside the media to ensure
favorable coverage of homosexuals and their political agenda, it even persuades
the corporate press barons to pay their freight,"

The first thing I notice is the word 'favorable.' I honestly think we are way past looking for favorable reporting and simply want equal reporting...something other than a raving politician screaming about how giving equal rights to homosexuals would, in fact, bring about the end of civilization. The part of this quote that bothers me the most his comment about gaining corporate sponsorship. If being well funded is a sin, I know of several current presidential candidates who need to seek some serious retribution. I suppose being well funded is palatable only when the cause is just in the eyes of those who weild the power.

Farah continues his rambling and attempts to say that homosexuals don't want opposing viewpoints to be allowed in any open media forum. I find this assertion ridiculous for one very glaring reason...wherever homosexual rights activists gather, the opposing viewpoints inevitably follow. What usually happens is the activists spend their time responding to and debunking the opposing viewpoints. How that should be interpreted as a refusal to allow the other viewpoints is beyond me. If an opposing group doesn't want their viewpoints challenged, then they need to stay out of the public debate arena. The exchanging and debate of varying opinions and convictions is the cornerstone of free speech.

Today on WNDs site is a new article by Farah attacking the site Queerty.com for a blog article which took exception with the article I referenced above, as well as a comment Farah made equating homosexual activists with "fascist mind-control freaks." Avoiding my initial impulse to mail Mr. Farah a dictionary so he could discover the meaning of the word fascist, then recognize it when he looks in the mirror every day, I decided to hop over to Queerty and see what they had said that had all the little WingNuts in such an uproar...

"He curiously concludes that the gay agenda will lead to the "implosion" of
"lamestream" media, a destruction of which Farah infuriatingly remarks, "...It
couldn't happen to a more arrogant bunch of fascist mind-control freaks." What's
funny about all of this is that Farah has never made any secret of his Christian
conservative slant. This group, we feel, has a much bigger claim on "fascist"
mind-control. They do have about 2007 years of practice, after all."

Okay, so they quoted Farah and then had the audacity to point out that he has an enormous conservative Christian slant, proving that he definitely has the whole fascist thing down to a science. Of course, Farah and his fellow WingNuts were aghast and interpreted Queerty's remarks as and attack on his Christianity...

"Their opposition is not so much to me and what I say, it is opposition to
Christianity itself, which people like this believe has been practicing fascist
mind control for two millennia," he said. "Christianity, and its older brother,
Judaism, formed the very foundation for Western Civilization, for the moral code
that has guided us and defined freedom in this fallen world. When you get right
down to the bottom line, it is Christianity, Judaism, the moral code they gave
humanity and the Western Civilization that sprang from it that is the enemy of
these people. They are fundamentally at war with God."

Here's where I have to just throw my hands up in disgust at the utter ignorance of Farah and his entire organization. No one is attacking his or anyone else's Christianity. In fact, there are many homosexuals who are Christians. What we take exception with is the notion that one segment of the Christian population thinks they have the divine right to inflict their own beliefs on everyone else. There are many Christians who are open, loving and accepting of homosexuals, and they are unfortunately being lumped into this category of fundamentalists who seem to have nothing better to do than lord over the rest of humanity, pointing out each and every fault.

While Mr. Farah is looking up the word 'fascist,' perhaps he should consider researching the Pharisees.

The Terminator May Have a Benefactor

Recently, I was approached by a very generous person who has offered to help me in my blogging and writing efforts by funding my writing. We're working out the details, but this should be a positive step in expanding my blog and allowing me the flexibility to get some of my fictional works to finally be dusted off and finished...then hopefully published, lol.

Expanding my blog will take money, and this generous offer will help me do that while I seek out advertisers and such to pick up the costs involved in running a fully functional blog site. Any way you look at it, this is a very exciting development...especially since blogging has now become the only true source of a free press.

To my new benefactor...Thank you very much!!!

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
Star
Two CU Students Charged With Hate Crimes...headline, Fox
News Colorado
Trans Woman Found Dead...headline, Bay Area
Reporter

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
homosexuality”

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!

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 up...here'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
coexistence.
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 old...it'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.

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.

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
lesbians."

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!

Hate Crime Bill Equals Homosexual Agenda?

I don't know about you, but I've long wondered what, exactly, our homosexual agenda was. Thanks to the American Family Association, it seems we all now have the answer. Citing HR254, which calls for homosexuals to be included as a protected class...just as the existing protected classes related to race, religion and gender, the AFA have given us a laundry list of 'talking points.'

Sounds pretty damn reasonable, right? Leave it to the AFA to find a way to twist a decent piece of legislation into something that paints homosexuals as an insidious group just waiting for the opportunity to overthrow the government.

Here are some of the pertinent points of the 'homosexual agenda' that the AFA insists (in its latest 'Action Alert') will come to haunt the country should this legislation pass...

*Preaching that homosexuality is a sin from the pulpit will result in the
preacher being charged with “hate speech.”

Because saying something that another doesn't agree
with is the same as beating the shit out of someone because they're gay,
right?

*Churches will have their tax-exempt status revoked if they oppose
homosexuality.

Nothing in the legislation states that any
group cannot oppose the idea of homosexuality. Again, it's a hate
crime bill...so unless church groups start going out and attacking
homosexuals, I don't see the threat here.

*Homosexual marriage will be legalized and recognized in all states.

Aside from the fact that homosexual marriage should be legalized and recognized in all states, I wonder what the AFA
was smoking when they read this bill. Take a look for yourself...do you
see it anywhere?

*Polygamy will be legalized.

This should just be filed away as stupidity run
amok. Not only are all homosexuals polygamists, but this hate crime bill
will legalize it? Give me a fucking break!

*Landlords will be forced to rent to homosexuals.

Well, shouldn't they? Fifty years ago, landlords
were allowed to refuse rental based on a person's skin color. I suppose we
still haven't gotten past the issue of discrimination. Oh, and again...how
does this fit in with the hate crime bill?

*Scouts, and all non-profit organizations, will be required to hire
homosexuals as leaders.

Oh dear God...you mean to tell me that our children
might actually encounter homosexuals in leadership positions? Heaven
forbid that a teenager struggling with his or her sexual orientation might be
able to receive some support and guidance from a trusted adult. But, then
again...all homosexuals are pedophiles, so I suppose that idea wouldn't
work. Have you found the link to the hate crime bill with this
one?

*Biblical language used to define homosexuality will be considered “hate
speech.” City officials have already had a billboard removed in Long Island, NY,
because it was classified as “hate speech.” The billboard read: “If a man also
lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an
abomination.” (Leviticus 20:13)

Oh, that's right...I completely forgot about our plan
to rewrite the Bible. Wait, while we're at it, why don't we just censor
everything that paints homosexuals in a poor light? Because we're not
fascists, that's why! Oh, and choosing to follow Biblical teaching
is, of course a hate crime, right?

*Employees will not be allowed to say anything negative about homosexuality
in their workplaces.

Just as certain derogatory remarks regarding a person's
ethnicity or gender wouldn't be appropriate in the workplace...am I missing
something here?

*Classes promoting the homosexual lifestyle will be included in school
curricula beginning with the lower grades

I just love the phrase, "promoting the homosexual
lifestyle." Translated, that means schools will be trying to teach
children to treat homosexuals as human beings...much like schools had to do
during the civil rights era. Again, how is this a hate crime?

*Employers will be forced to hire homosexuals.

Have these people not heard of the EEOC? How in the world will this hate
crime legislation affect a government policy that's already in
place?

*Adoption by homosexuals will be legalized in every state

Just as with marriage, why shouldn't homosexuals be
allowed to adopt? Adoption is a loving act, so how can it be equated with
a hate crime?

So, to recap...the homosexual agenda consists of the following:

*Preventing members of the clergy to refer to homosexuality as a sin.

I'm sorry, but I just don't spend much time worrying
about what a preacher or anyone else has to say about my sexual
orientation. I don't believe in censoring speech of any kind...no matter
how insidious it may be.

*Remove all tax-exempt privileges for churches who
condemn homosexuality.

What the hell? Again...churches, like
individuals, are completely entitled to their opinions. Since churches do
contribute to their communities in positive ways (i.e. food banks, shelters,
etc), I don't see why they're tax exemptions should be threatened.


*See that homosexual marriages and adoptions are
legalized.

Well, duh! At least they nailed one part of our
so called 'agenda.'

*See that polygamy is legalized.

I couldn't make this shit up! All I can say about
this is there are far too many people over at AFA with too much time on their
hands.

*Landlords and employers will be forced to rent to and
employ homosexuals.

Wow, they managed to get a couple of other things
right! But how dare we suggest such fair and equal
opportunities?

*Make sure that there are some homosexual scout
leaders.

So we can mass produce miniature homosexuals,
right? Seriously, some homosexuals in leadership positions might just
prove to reduce some of the confusion and hate that is so prevalent among our
youth.

*Change all biblical language that speaks ill of
homosexuality.

Once again...nothing should be censored. Either
this is a country whose citizens can enjoy the right to free speech or it's
not...it's up to us to decide.

*See to it that derogatory language isn't used in the
workplace.

Got to give them points there...even if they weren't
really looking for them. This is just a no brainer.

*Create curriculum that will teach tolerance for
homosexuals.

Points again here...sounds like a winner to
me.

There you have it, folks...the AFA has finally let us in on the homosexual agenda mystery. Aren't you relieved?

Beyond this whole agenda discussion, I'm really puzzled as to how much of what they've listed would even be related to any hate crime legislation. Perhaps the AFA just can't read, or perhaps they're just so full of hate themselves that they can't see anything else. At any rate, support HR254 so that victims of homosexual related hate crimes will be prosecuted with the same vigor as those related to race and gender.

Fundies Just Don't Get It

When I sat down to write this post, I intended to focus on Matt Barber's attack of H.R. 254 which would provide stiffer penalties for those convicted of committing a hate crime. Barber whined and essentially suggested that this bill (which covers ALL hate crime...not just crimes against homosexuals) put the life of a homosexual over the life of a murdered child. The more I thought about all he had to say, the angrier I got.

Barber and other outspoken fundies are touting this bill as an attempt to create some version of thought police, making even anti-gay thought punishable. While this bill does nothing of the sort (and I wouldn't be supporting it if it did), it does raise an interesting question that every fundie should seriously consider. Even though it's a perceived threat rather than an actual one, I want to ask every single fundie how it feels to have their personal freedom threatened.

The rhetoric emanating from fundies contradicts several fundamentals of personal freedom, and those coming from the more anti-gay factions are seemingly more deliberate. Specifically, fundies tend to trample on anything that might benefit the GLBT community in the areas of free speech, and legal issues affecting family life.

For all of his ranting and raving, Barber cannot assert that H.R. 254 will in any way curtail the speech of any American. He and other fundies seem to be preoccupied with retaining the right to say whatever they wish about homosexuals that they cannot see the entire issue of free speech and censorship as a whole. For the record, censorship of any kind cannot be allowed in a free society, and will only result in incongruent application. I've always said that we can't simply censor speech or ideas we disagree with because, sooner or later, one of our own closely held beliefs may be targeted. Organizations such as Barber's want to claim moral superiority and legislate that morality by making it difficult for GLBT issues to be discussed in certain public arenas, yet wail and gnash their teeth the moment they perceive their own right to free speech infringed upon.

How does it feel, Matt?

In addition to the issue of free speech, fundies are intent on keeping the legal rights of GLBT individuals/couples at a criminally discriminatory level. Everything from the basic right to marry to inheritence laws are either nonexistent or inadequate, leaving homosexual Americans with very little legal recourse when it comes to this cornerstone of human life. Fundies justify this gap in the law by quoting the Bible or regurgitating some rewarmed talking point, but fail to acknowledge that their inaction and their resistence to action violates the simplest of human rights standards...the right to marry and raise a family, free of government influence or interference.

Ironically, Matt and his fundie buddies claim the aforementioned, cornerstone right any time a liberal politician or media figure suggests anything that is contrary to their set of beliefs. Their insistence on their portrait of the American family is promoted incessantly and is, apparently, under constant attack by the so called 'homosexual agenda.' This agenda, which is really nothing more than gross ignorance allowed to fester, supposedly attempts to subvert the rights of Americans by imposing the specific ideas of one sector upon the whole of society.

Stop and think about that for a second...Subverting the rights of some by imposing a set of ideas on the whole. If Matt were being honest, surely he would see that his fundie friends are the ones trying to impose their beliefs on the rest of the country.

When was the last time a GLBT group called for Christians to lose the right to marry because of their beliefs? When have GLBT groups called for supervision of children in Christian households or asked for adoption restrictions?

The answer...it hasn't happened, and this is where Matt and his friends completely miss the point. The only 'agenda' being pushed is theirs...that every family should look like and behave in the same manner as theirs.

We don't agree with each other on many issues, but we don't believe that our ideas MUST be the same as everyone else's. Part of what makes this country so much different and so much more ideologically advanced is that we can disagree and still manage to peacefully coexist. Unfortunately, until people like Mr. Barber have the chance to see life with the tables turned to discriminate and punish them, it's doubtful that anything will change.

Americans For Truth...Or, So They Say

Over the weekend, Peter LaBarbera (President of Americans For Truth) released an unbelivable article aimed at Wayne Besen and his efforts to debunk the so called 'ex-gay' movement. To give a bit of background, the 'ex-gay' organization is supposedly comprised of men and women who have decided to stop being gay and now encourage others to do the same. What jumped out at me when I went to their site was their opening statement:

You are not alone.
If you are struggling with gay, lesbian,
bisexual or transgendered feelings, you need to know that there are millions of
us who have shared your journey.
You do not have to believe what are you
being told about yourself in your counseling or restorative
therapy.

The funny thing about that statement is that it's missing a disclaimer about the veracity of it's own content...something Wayne Besen and Ex-Gay Watch have been so good at pointing out. He's right, a person doesn't have to believe what they're told in therapy, just as I don't have to sit and swallow this anti-gay drivel. But I'm left wondering how someone with nothing in his credentials bank except for some insane desire to vilify anyone who has a differing opinion can sit there and tell a person to ignore what their health professionals are telling them and embrace some self-loathing philosophy based on his ideology instead. Mr. LaBarbera (I'm just gonna call him Babs, lol) launched this ridiculous article after Besen pointed out that Mike Johnston, an Ex-Gay 'success' story, had lost his ministry due to a homosexual 'relapse.' Babs lashed out with this...

Besen and his fellow homosexual activists have everything invested in the
politically correct idea that people are naturally (born) “gay” -– and that
“sexual orientation” (another misleading term inspired by homosexual activism)
is unchangeable. They are downright cruel in hoping for and exploiting failures
in the ex-“gay” movement.

It seems that Babs, himself, is so overly invested in demonizing the GLBT community that he refuses to see anything else. Besen isn't hoping for or exploiting anything, but he is intent on debunking the false 'science' on which the Ex-Gay movement has based their entire ideology. Johnston and the others that Besen has written about are simply examples of the fact that one's sexual orientation is something that is encoded within an individual's genetic make-up and isn't something a person can just decide to ignore or walk away from.

The next little tidbit is even more mind boggling...

Why do “gay” advocates celebrate failure? Because sadly, like the
pro-abortion lobby, they are on the side of sin and against God and nature,
having convinced themselves that homosexuality (“being gay”) is a big part of
“who they are.”

Ah, but you protest: homosexuality is so complex. How can we judge it?
Why would a person “choose” that lifestyle with all the hardships that come with
it? Well, why does a man or woman “choose” to embrace any wrong
lifestyle/behavior: bulimia, porn addiction, alcoholism? We can sympathize with
the person who faces intense personal struggles, but it is not our right to
normalize and celebrate homosexuality or ANY aberration/sin just because we
don’t fully understand its genesis. Doing so runs counter to several millennia
of understanding of humanity as fallen beings whose hearts tend toward
wrongdoing.

Damn right, we protest! How Babs can equate bulimia, porn addiction or alcoholism with a person's sexual orientation is beyond me. I suppose that during his extensive education, none of which is listed on AFT's site, Babs never learned how to make valid comparisons.

*Shaking my head*

Come on, Babs!!! A person's genetically determined sexuality...APPLES. All that other stuff you listed...ORANGES.
If the Ex-Gay organization and AFT want to continue floating these feeble arguments then people like Wayne Besen will have no choice but to be incredibly vocal in quashing them. With enough practice, maybe...just maybe...Babs will learn how to respond with some degree of intelligence.

Thanks, WingNutDaily!!

Normally, I'd be ranting and raving about something those lovable little nutcases over at WorldNetDaily had written. Today, however, I'm turning their article listing companies who are 'gay-friendly' into something positive...or trying to, at least.

The 2006 report from the Human Rights Campaign, which
advocates for homosexual issues, was released yesterday and notes that "an
unprecedented" 138 major U.S. corporations earned the top rating of 100 percent,
up from 101 last year.

Wow! So, based on the HRC's 2006 Corporate Equality Index, 138 major corporations received perfect scores for their policies concerning GLBT employees. I realize that the folks over at WND had very different intentions, but their publicizing this list of companies is actually a very helpful thing for the GLBT community. Rather than demonizing these companies, WND has given us a wonderful list showing us exactly who we need to give our business and support. I'll come back to that point later.

When I first read this article, I wondered how significant the HRC's findings were. More specifically, I wanted to examine what portion of corporate America was represented in this index. Looking soley at the Fortune 500 listings (and recognizing that this isn't the only index available), some interesting statistics involving the companies listed appear. First, this 'unprecedented' number of gay-friendly companies would comprise a whopping 13.8% of the entire Fortune 500 index. Interestingly enough, 46 of these companies aren't on the Fortune 500 list, so the actual figure is 9.2%. Keep an eye out, folks...the sky should start falling at any moment!

Before you get discouraged, here's the second thing I noticed. Five of the companies on HRC's list are in the top 10, and a total of 40 are in the top 100. Those two stats are encouraging, as they show that more and more truly 'major' corporations are creating workplace policies that are beneficial to GLBT employees.

Here's where we can try and use this list to our benefit...

I tried to take note of which companies' products I had in the house, and had the idea of listing as many as I could, giving them links and challenging others to do the same. If WND and their various readers plan to launch a boycott, we should counter it with our own advertising campaign. Here's my example:

Sitting here in my Levi's jeans, Nike tennis shoes and freshly
spritzted with my Estee
Lauder perfume, I've pondered whether I need to reorder my prescriptions
(one manufactured by Eli Lilly) from Walgreens. As I'm writing
this (on my Dell computer which has an Intel processor), I'm sipping a Diet Coke and munching on some dry Honey-Nut
Cheerios. I was recently speaking with Wells Fargo (the bank that holds
my mortgage, lol) using my home phone service provided by AT&T, while I
perused HRC's report (which is an Adobe Acrobat file).

Well, you get the idea. It's amazing how many of these companies are regular fixtures in our daily lives, and knowing that they are also advocating equal workplace benefits makes them all the more appealing. So, thumb your noses at all those wingnuts and show them that their hateful rhetoric won't be a discouragement.