True Persecution

Not Anti-Gay Enough.

2006-08-31T08:47:00.000-05:00

You know you must be in Florida if your opponent charges your anti-gay platform with being not anti-gay enough.

In a sick game of who's the better Nazi, Florida gubenatorial candidates, Tom Gallagher and Charlie Crist are in a battle over which of the Republican candidates is the true "true conservative."

Both candidates are anti-gay of course, but one Crist, while absolutely wanting to ban gay marriage, is ok with civil unions or some other form of legal arrangement. Gallagher on the other hand is not only opposed to gay marriage, but civil unions or any other arrangement.

I guess you win, Tom!

This is about the dumbest campaign fight I've ever seen, but I would expect no less from the state where brains go to die. The state that brought you Jeb Bush, Kathryn Harris and the Coral Ridge hour has seen no shortage of idiocy in it's long career.

What really interests me is that in a state filled with dangerous hurricanes, economic challenges, immigration issues along with the usual suspects of taxes, crime, education and fraud against the elderly - the TOP issue is which candidate REALLY hates homosexuals.

Not only does this tell me that the Republicans in this state are devoid of substance, but if this actually works and hate is the #1 top issue that people are voting on then I have very little hope for the future since it would indicate that we really are a nation of reactionary and easily manipulated sheep that are about two steps away from the slaughterhouse.

Lambchop anyone?

A New Idea For Anglican Homosexuals.

2006-08-28T11:38:00.000-05:00

The Archbishop of Canterbury has come up with a new solution for homosexuals to help stem the divisive split going on within the Church of England. His solution:

STOP BEING GAY!

Well now that that's settled, we can all go to church together.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams has decided to pull a 180 on his flock in what former supporters are calling an '"astonishing" U-turn over the homosexual issue.'

You see, Williams used to a be a supporter of the consecration of Gay Bishops and was widely hailed when he was appointed to be the new Archbishop, but suddenly he has reversed his position.

I do believe conversion means conversion of habits, behaviours, ideas, emotions," he told a Dutch journalist.
"Ethics is not a matter of a set of abstract rules, it is a matter of living the mind of Christ. That applies to sexual ethics."

So in other words, STOP BEING GAY.

When asked to explain his previous position in light of his current one, the Archbishop said "That was when I was a professor, to stimulate debate,"

I see so for all that time he was merely playing devil's advocate.

Let's see, do we believe that?

In 1989, while professor of divinity at Oxford University, he founded the Institute for the Study of Christianity and Sexuality - a group that set out to combat bigotry towards homosexuals, this newspaper has learnt. At the time it was launched, he said: "The pressure that some church figures put upon people of differing sexual identities is a greater disgrace than anything else seen in the church."

I guess we don't.

It's pretty simple. Somebody "got" to him. This is a gigantically contentious issue within the church. It's also one that the anti-gay haters can't bear or afford to lose. If they do not come out victorious, then it will strengthen the idea that LGBT people are equally valid and have the same rights. This would be disastrous to a hate group. As a result they will do everything they can to "win." Even if that means "turning" the Archbishop of Canterbury.

I'll say it again, if you have to hold on so tight to your beliefs that they can withstand no opposition, then they are weak beliefs and shouldn't be supported by anyone.

**special thanks to PageOneQ for additional reporting and quotes.

A Victory for Hate Speech.

2006-08-23T11:50:00.000-05:00

This is Ruth Malhotra, Southern Baptist, College Republican and Hate Speech Advocate [photo & additional reporting courtesy of Southern Voice] ===>

The Georgia Institute of Technology had a portion of it's student community guide that prohibited students or groups from any attempt "to injure, harm, malign or harass a person because of race, religious belief, color, sexual/affectional orientation, national origin, disability, age or gender."

Seems pretty straight forward. Well not to Ruth Malhotra and her co-complainer Orit Sklar. They objected to the language that banned "denigrating written/verbal communications (including the use of telephones, emails and computers)." Basically they felt their God-given right to openly hate and persecute gays was being impinged.

For the record this restriction applied to the students living in the dorms, not to students in general. But shouldn't all students be allowed to spew hate speech and practice religious-based oppression? Apparently these two women thought so, so they sued the school and got their buddies at the Alliance Defense Fund to help out. Unfortunately they won.

U.S. District Judge J. Owen Forrester ruled against GATech and made them revise their rules. Thankfully Ruth and her College Republican friends can vomit all the hate speech they like against LGBT students and community members without having to face any pesky disciplinary action. Your parents and pastor must be very proud of you.

So what did the haters do with their new found freedom to hate? The turned around and sued the school again to block GATech's gay-friendly Safe Space program.

I guess we were wrong. Clearly this was all about free speech and had nothing whatsoever to with an agenda of religious-based LGBT persecution.

I think these folks all deserve a big round of applause for their victory and their success in destroying a small glimmer of hope, tolerance and unity in their little corner of the world.

Full-Time Hate!

2006-08-22T11:11:00.000-05:00

It's a pretty sad day when the head of an anti-gay hate group leaves to form another group because his original hate group wasn't hating enough.

That's the new deal for Peter LaBarbera, former director of the Illinois Family Institute. The new group called Americans for Truth whose sole full time job is going to be disabling and stopping the "homosexual activist agenda"

Jeez, Pete, quit harshing everyone's mellow.

We all now know what "homosexual activist agenda" means. It's the fight for basic human rights, civil rights and the right to live without being beaten or killed because you were born different.

Good God, we have to stop it. If Americans for Truth sounds like a Nazi name to you too, then I leave you to draw your own conclusions. I love the fact that this guy has just formed a group dedicated to the oppression and persecution of the LGBT community and everyone in it. How does this continue to go on without anyone seeing it?

How does it happen that we continue to condone hate groups brazenly perpetrating their message without any consequences. I guarantee if this guy started a group to fight the "Jewish Activist Agenda" or "African-American Activists Agenda" He probably wouldn't have even gotten press, and he certainly would come into the crosshairs of people who would shut him down.

I defy any Christian to call themselves such if they support this guy or anyone like him. If the first tenet of your religion is hate, you are the lowest and most despicable of all life forms and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I only wish there was a rapture coming to see the look on all of these people faces when they realize they aren't getting on that plane.

**photo courtesy of Todd Winters and Chicago Business

A Dent in the Anti-Gay Armor?

2006-08-21T10:25:00.000-05:00

Anti-Gay rhetoric has spewed forth from the mouths of the church fathers for some time now. These words of hate have echoed through every aspect of society and the media. But it is as really well received as people think?

Hate is easy to maintain as long as it is impersonal. Many god-fearing, church going, gay-hating people don't know any gay people, and they don't want to know them - probably because it would give their hate a face. For those that have gay friends, it's hard to look at your friend and say "this person is an abomination."

With that in mind it seems like some of the tables may be turning within the confines of the church hall. We've already seen what is going on in the Episcopalian and Anglican churches over gays in the clergy, and now the same is happening in the Presbyterian church and other welcoming churches around the world. And while it is fueling the fight, it also shows that there ARE people and churches out there that are willing to welcome, even if it means going against the traditions and hate espoused by others.

Now we have a similar issue going on right here in Atlanta at the Saint John's Lutheran Church. Gay pastor, Reverend Bradley Schmeling has served this congregation since 2000, but now that he has a partner, the church asked him to resign. Apparently his being gay was fine, but now that he has a partner, suddenly it's not ok. Obviously you can be gay as long as you don't do anything with it.

What makes this story interesting is that, he refused to resign. Now the church is in the uncomfortable position of having to terminate him if they want him out. To add another wrinkle, the congregation doesn't want him to go either.

"When we first brought in Bradley, we already knew he was gay. And we knew of his gifts for ministry, and his gifts for preaching and his gifts for teaching. His incredible pastoral gifts and that's what we wanted and that's what we got," said congregation president, Laura Crawley.

"We want Bradley to be our pastor, we made that decision in 2000 and we have no reason to reconsider it now," said Crawley.

Well now, doesn't that throw a monkey wrench into it? What does this tell us? I think this shows that now only can LGBT people contribute so much that a congregation is willing to let go of hate-inspired beliefs in favor of what's right and good for them, but also that some recognize that you can't have a living belief system that is never examined or changed to suit the needs and community in which it is supposed to serve. The church was always supposed to be about bringing people together to lead them on a path to whatever God they believed in. It's only selfish and power-hungry men who have continually sought to corrupt that purpose to theor own ends.

Harmony and equality are good for everyone, hate and strife only brings conflict and disunity - which do you think is better for the church, the community or the world?

We applaud Reverend Bradley Schmeling for not resigning and further applaud his congregation for standing by him. For those who are continuing to fight with all their might of oppress and persecute the LGBT community on behalf of their church like James Dobson or Pope Benedict, I leave you with this question - are you really representing and serving the people of your faith or are you serving a more selfish personal persuit?

Don't Let It Hit You On The Way Out!

2006-08-17T07:23:00.000-05:00

Strange things are afoot in Cincinnati. The Ohio city has had a long and troubled history with respect to LGBT issue, but it looks like they are finally coming out of the dark and into the real world.

In 1992, the city passed an ordinance protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination. But not to be left behind by the anti-gay hate train, voters turned around and voted to remove gays as a protected class and even added a one of a kind provision to specifically prevent LGBT people from being added as a protected class in the future. Nice!

Everything changed in 2004 when that provision was repealed. It took some time, but the council in March, 2006 finally voted to add LGBT protection back into the anti-discrimination laws. Unfortunately, that change could not take effect because a hate group called Equal Rights Not Special rights halted it's enactment while they gathered signatures to put the matter to another election year vote, similar to the 1993 reversal.

fortunately for all of us, they failed and have withdrawn their petition, clearing the way for the ordinance to take effect.

While this is a big hooray, it brings up several other issues that should give the rest of us pause. First off, it once again underscores the need for federal anti-discrimination protection for the LGBT community. If there is anyone out there who still thinks that gays and lesbians are not openly persecuted in this country they are either in denial or part of the hate groups.

Secondly, another interesting issue is why the group withdrew it's efforts to get their hate vote on the ballot. It turns out many of their signatures were suspect, and according to the Gay.com report, even included "Cuban President Fidel Castro and Cincinnati Reds owner Bob Castellini."

It strikes me as horribly wrong that any group could halt a measure like this just so they could get enough signatures to try and repeal it, but I suppose if it was an unjust ordinance on the other end, it would be good to have some immediate recourse action too.

In the end it was a victory for the Cincinnati LGBT community, and also for many other communities embroiled in the same fight. Hopefully there is still an opportunity for people to realize that hating gays is not only wrong but bad for society as a whole. When any member of society is discriminated against then it erodes the whole.

Nice work Cincy, there's hope for Ohio yet!

The Rainbow Flag War Continues.

2006-08-16T11:43:00.000-05:00

It always amazes me the lengths people will go to to preserve their pristine beliefs. It amazes me further still how a rainbow flag that served as nothing more than a child's colorful gift has become the Cindy Sheehan of a rural Kansas town and the fight for LGBT rights.

You can catch up with this story here.

Now we have some new developments in this ongoing saga. As you might recall this entire circus began when a 12-year-old boy gave his parents a rainbow flag that he purchased in California for no other reason than it was colorful. The flag was installed by his parents, the Knights, outside their new Bed and Breakfast in Meade, Kansas. The flag was only supposed to be to remember their son, but of course they are now in the middle of a gay rights fight where there wasn't one before.

When we last left the Knights, their flag had been stolen, but they vowed to replace it and keep it flying, if for no other reason then not to give into the hate of some of their neighbors.

Now the two boys who stole the flag have confessed and vowed to replace the flag. While that is great, it underscores the escalating issue that this flag has created. In addition to the stolen flag and massive attention this has created, the Knights have also sustained over $1500 worth of damage when a brick labeled "fag" was thrown through their plate glass window shattering it and two neon signs.

Now we have the granddaddy of all hate coming to town. That's right, Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church will be coming to town and the BBC is coming with them. For those that don't know Fred, he is the leader of the "God Hates Fags" group that has been picketing funerals around the country. Apparently the BBC is doing some sort of expose on them so this should be interesting. Nothing says you are on the side of right, when one of the premier hatemongers is supporting you.

What continues to amaze me is the idea that letting people have basic human rights and live in peace is so abhorrent to some folks that they have to steal and destroy and persecute anything and everything associated with it.

What kills me even more is the hypocrisy. I wonder what would happen if someone stole the American flag from the Town Hall and threw a brick through the window with the word "fascist" scribbled on it. I'll bet Homeland Security and the FBI would be down there in a heartbeat.

I continue to applaud the Knights for their efforts and hope that they keep fighting, even if they never wanted to be involved in this debate to begin with.

And while I have no idea why you would, but if you ever find yourself in and around Meade Kansas, please give them your business at The Lakeway Hotel.

These Are The People Running The Country!

2006-08-15T12:41:00.000-05:00

In a great chapter from the "I'm taking my ball and going home" school of sportsmanship comes this little gem.

You're not going to believe this one.

The California State Assembly took the time to honor 6 members of the LGBT community for their accomplishments in their fields with the first ever Pride Recognition Awards.

Nothing serious, just a small ceremony to honor a handful of prominent gay people and recognizing their contributions. Well leave it to the GOP babies to mess even something as small as this up.

Apparently frothy with indignance, 10 Republican members of the assembly refused to participate, some even storming out of the chamber.

What kind of four year old acting jerk do you have to be that you can't even allow people to be given an award for their hard work without you boo hooing out the door in protest. Is this the behavior you want to model? Is this the way you run the government? If someone votes against you, do you throw your bowl of spaghetti-o's and pout.

"...it's a great disappointment that they're acting like such children." said Assemblyperson Mark Leno, D-San Francisco.

You said it Mark. What a bunch of losers. There is absolutely no excuse for this kind of behavior - it's hateful and reprehensible and is a perfect example of the mindless hate promoted and supported by both the church and the government. I hope somebody comes and heckles their kids 5th grade play or their daughters sweet sixteen party. Get a life! Go home and leave the governing to adults.

The Price of Persecution.

2006-08-14T13:14:00.000-05:00

Do religious people truly believe that there are that many children and adults out there making the "choice" to be homosexual? Do they really believe they are in some way helping the world by hating and persecuting the LGBT community? Here is one of the many negative aspects of all that hate (there are only negative aspects by the way). Gay children turned out on the streets by gay-hating parents and/or communities and forced to live any way they can, simply because they were born different.

We have already discussed some states attempts and failed attempts to bar homosexuals from adopting children, but fortunately they have thus far been unable to block them from being foster parents. Now some advocacy groups are trying to take advantage of this in an effort to help these children get off the street and have a shot at a normal life (or at least as close to it as you can get in this country).

You can read a full story about this here.

The saddest thing about this is that we have a big enough problem with homelessness and runaways as it is without adding to it unnecessarily. These children don't as often come from homes where there was sexual abuse or physical abuse or drug and alcohol abuse or neglect as a general rule. They simply ran afoul of the hate and misunderstanding instilled in everyday people by the church and the social conservatives of the world.

Thanks to that philosophy, a 14 year old child from a perfectly stable and potentially healthy home life could end up penniless on the streets, exposed to abuse and drugs and prostitution and having to choose how to survive. That's the only "choice" these kids are really getting to make.

If we do not think that a 14 year old is developed enough to get married or vote or drink alcohol or have sex, how do we suppose they are old enough to "choose" a lifestyle that would get them evicted from their home and their community? And while the truth is that some children know their sexuality very early on, how could they be allowed to pay for that - potentially with their lives, when the same society tells them that they are too young to know better in every other case?

Is the hatred of gays so strong that we throw out everything for the opportunity to persecute just one more? Entire populations erupt in protest when war is make on children, well this is not different. If children were being killed in the streets of other countries, there would be an uprising regardless of what religion or ethnicity those children were. This is no different. When you adopt a policy of hate and persecution toward gays and lesbians, this is one of the results.

Is the persecution of a group of people that have done nothing to you, really worth the lives of these kids?

Santorum Flip-Flops.

2006-08-10T09:13:00.000-05:00

He actually voted for it, before he voted against it. Our old pal Rick Santorum threw everyone into a tizzy when he signed a pledge circulating around Washington that he wouldn't discriminate against gays and lesbians in his office.

Of course his signing shocked the world considering that this was the same man who felt allowing gay marriage would lead to bestiality, he also still thinks there are WMD's in Iraq.

Santorum, who has an out gay man on his staff, has never before come anywhere near doing anything but hate on the LGBT community. This move seemed to signal at least a politically motivated acquiescence in a token effort. Alas it was not to be.

It turns out that an aide to Santorum signed the declaration on his behalf thinking that the pledge was constant with the employee handbook. Oh how wrong you were! Apparently Rickey-boy doesn't want to have to protect the rights of transgender citizens in his office. I guess some animals are still more equal than others.

This does not surprise me in any way. At least we have the Rick Santorum we all know and love back in his rightful place on the anti-gay brigade bus. You can read a full article on this issue here.

But I have to say, you have to be a pretty hateful and silly individual to actively say that certain people don't deserve basic human rights and protections, but this should be no surprise to anyone familiar with Santorum's track record.

The good news is that we probably won't have to deal with this guy much longer, according to polls he is on the way out the door. Good riddance.

Rule #1 Don't Elect Bigots or Morons.

2006-08-09T09:57:00.000-05:00

Welcome to Rhea County, Tennessee! Home of...well, I have no idea actually. At least it's not home to any illegal homosexual activity. Fortunately they rescinded that one. That's right, the county commission of Rhea County, Tennessee unanimously supported a proposal that criminalized homosexuality as a crime against nature in Tennessee.

That's not just a ban on gay marriage, it's a ban on gays, period. Nothing says progress like throwing people in jail for being gay. I imagine slavery and debtors prison were probably also on the list as well.

As frightening as this is to even consider, there are several pieces of good news associated with it.

First, the legislation was rescinded two days after it was proposed - supposedly because the county commissioners didn't understand that they were voting to ban homosexuality. Talk about lesser of two evils - either you're Nazis or idiots - neither option would inspire any confidence in an elected official.

The second bit of good news is that these j/o's were booted in elections yesterday. Voters booted 3 incumbents who joined the two that did not seek re-election. Nice!

I don't hold out any hope that Tennessee is somehow becoming a gay-friendly place, but I think the message here is that if you point out extremism wherever it occurs, rational people will respond - at least I hope so. Just like anti-science School Board members being booted, or federal gay marriage bans being thwarted, I hope it shows that rationalism can still have a place in America.

I know that there will be people who will never approve of homosexuality, regardless of the reality of it, but at least they can learn to live in peace and not actively hate and persecute. Most people do not like to be make to look like fascists or idiots, so I think the more we call extreme social and religious conservatism for what it is, the more rational people will move away from that dogma and back to reality with the rest of us.

Backfire!

2006-08-08T12:00:00.000-05:00

It's a sad day in America when a good, honest, down-home bigot can't escape the evil homosexuals and their "ways." At least that's how some residents of Meade, Kansas are feeling right about now.

This is an amazing story for a number of reasons, here it is in a nutshell:

A couple from southern California, J.R. and Robin Knight, move to Meade, KS to open a B&B. No they aren't a gay couple, no it isn't a gay B&B. It's a heterosexual couple and a regular run of the mill B&B in a small Kansas town.

The couple's 12-year-old son (who still lives in CA) came across a rainbow flag at a store and purchased it for his parents because it had pretty colors. Even though the parents knew it was a gay rights symbol, they put it up anyway to remind them of their son and as a showcase for his thoughtful gift. And that's when it all went haywire.

Needless to say, many members of the town went into a coniption fit over the idea that there might be a gay-friendly inn in town. What stated out as a simple show of affection for a son's gift, with no political or religious meaning behind it, has turned into a gay rights fight.

Waitress Vicky Best says such a flag has no place in Meade. "It's hard enough to keep your kids on the straight and narrow without outside influences like that," she complains. "We stay in a small town to stay away from the crap like that that's happening in big cities," she says.

Lord, knows we wouldn't want those kids getting the idea that all people are created equal and that you should seek to love and understand everyone and not judge them before you have any idea about them.

While the Knights were embroiled in this outpouring of anti-gay hate, it began to stiffen their resolve to keep the flag up.

Flying the flag not only protests discrimination, they say, but they also believe that giving in to the pressure would send the wrong message to their son Anthony.

Now that's REAL parenting in action.

The flag was torn down by vandals, but the Knights are determined to keep the flag flying.

What kills me more than anything is that this all started because two parents basically hung up their child's gift. No different than putting up a picture from school on the fridge or hanging a art project in the den. Nothing political, nothing antagonistic, just a nice gesture. It cracks me up that NOW the Knights have accidentally become gay rights activists. If the residents of Meade, KS had just left it alone, there would be no issue, the flag would fly and no one would care. But because the just had to get it's hate on, they not only turned a non-issue into an issue, but the polarized the town and created new activists over a 3x5 piece of nylon with a bunch of primary colors on it.

Now I know what the flag represents, so I am hugely in favor of it flying in rural Kansas, but from the perspective of the opposition, you must really be frothed over with hate to get this bent out of shape over a flag - especially if they know the story behind it. Plus to have the glaring message to children be the values of hate, discrimination, segregation and inequality is about the most despicable thing I can think of. I'm sorry, but any day that love, acceptance, understanding and inclusion are evil, bad and wrong, something has gone terribly wrong with society.

How anyone can defend that point of view and still consider themselves a rational person is beyond me. There is no way that those values build community, they only tear it apart. And we need look no further than what is now happening. By their own admission, this town was a peaceful small community in Kansas, and it would have remained so if they hadn't jumped on their high horse. Now we have hate speech, intolerance, community division and vandalism - that's your family values at work again.

I hope the Knights keep flying the flag, and if the next one gets torn down, I'll personally send them another one. Wouldn't it be great if others in the town started flying the flag too to show support. Who knows, maybe they can have a pride rally next year.

**Additional reporting courtesy of The Advocate.

True Persecution.

2006-08-07T09:56:00.000-05:00

I always love to listen to Christians moan and groan about being persecuted and how they are being prevented from spreading their religion to every tiny corner of the world. And while there are certainly legitimate cases of attacks and other unacceptable behaviors toward these folks and their "mission," Each one came as the result of prosthelytizing. While that doesn't mean that they deserved what they got or that they had it coming, but at the same time, when you wag you bible in someone's face you are asking for them to react.

The thing we talk about on this site is True Persecution. Persecution that does not come as a result of a particular belief or activity. True persecution is persecution that happens for no apparent reason and can come as a result of such innocuous activities as shopping or walking or going to the movies. It is the systematic oppression at the hands of the government, the people and other interest groups (like the church for example).

That's what it is like for most people in the LGBT community. You see it everyday in the news. People beaten and killed, just for trying to live their life. The next time 3 men jump out of a bush and attack you when you are minding your own business and beat you until you go to the hospital, then you can complain about Christian persecution. **Special Note: please refer to that line about minding your own business before you make that next comment.**

Now we have brutal attacks, executions and death squads running around the Middle East all targeting gays.

Homosexuality is seen as so immoral that it qualifies as an 'honour killing' to murder someone who is gay - and the perpetrator can escape punishment. Section 111 of Iraq's penal code lays out protections for murder when people are acting against Islam.

Bone chilling. You can read more about this developing issue here.

This is the real deal folks. There are parts of the world where you can't even be allowed to exist. But then things are not much better here in the west.

Persecution is wrong no matter what the cause. But rather than being the generators of the persecution, churches and religious groups should be working to put an end to it. Unfortunately we are not going in the right direction. Now more than ever it seems not only permissible that we spew the worst kind of dogma imaginable and then sit back and watch the world polarize and tear itself apart.

It all starts with ideology and then turns to action. The culture that exists where we have Ann Coulters, Alan Keyes', Marcus Kindleys, James Dobsons and even Mel Gibsons helps to create a divisive society that also permits all sorts of wrong doing and allows it to continue until it infects the hearts and minds of the uneducated. We see it as free speech, but we also see how those same ideals translate into murder and death and misery. Everyone has the right to say whatever they like, but the question is should they. Not from a moral standpoint, but for the good of society. Causing extreme division and hatred among people whether it be African-Americans, Jews, Muslims, Latinos, Asian or Gays & Lesbians - it all amounts to the same thing. Our divisions and our hatred tear us apart. The world is infected with a disease. An open flame that we keep throwing gasoline on. But will we be able to stop it in time, or does the world need to suffer a global cultural catastrophe before some of us see the error of our ways?

Vote BIGOT for Attorney General!

2006-08-04T06:59:00.000-05:00

<== You know the guy on the left, the guy on the right is Perry McGuire.

What do you get when you mix bigotry with supreme idiocy? You get Christian Conservative Politicians. In today's example we bring you Georgia Republican Attorney General Candidate Perry McGuire.

Apparently running on the hate and disunity platform, good old boy Perry has made his daily headline quota with this gem.

'allowing gay clubs to meet in schools is "much like allowing a pedophile club."'

Ahhh the sweet smell of bullshit. I wonder how long people can keep trotting this crap out. It's not that Perry here is so filled with hate and stupidity that his comments are as laughable as they are deplorable, but the idea that enough people actually still equate homosexuality with pedophilia that this is still a viable rallying point is the real scary part.

So beyond the fact that this is nothing more than simple hate speech, what concerns me more than anything else is that this individual is running for State Attorney General i.e. the top lawyer in the state. As such, shouldn't this guy be the best lawyer? Wouldn't you think that he would be the one to hold up the clear and painfully obvious legal decision that banning GSA clubs in Georgia Public Schools was a violation of the law? Shouldn't this guy be the FIRST one to uphold the law?

Oh I forgot, Perry reports to a higher authority. And shouldn't that give us pause? Whether it is a politician, a judge or even a President. Should we be not only skeptical but terrified of any person who not only thinks they are above all earthly laws, but also believes that their responsibility is to God more than the people that elected them to watch out for their interests? How can we possibly trust a person in a position of authority if that person doesn't even recognize that authority?

In the meantime, Perry continued with "Homosexual activist clubs in schools are detrimental to students and to the moral well-being of society."

According to whom? This is the place where you need to break out your critical thinking skills. The above is a pretty bold statement. It doesn't leave any room for doubt. But what is that statement based on. I can guarantee you that there is no study anywhere discussing this topic not even for the very fact that these folks won't let enough GSAs meet to even study their impact. This is the danger of this kind of nonsense. Perry can make a completely non-sensical statement with absolutely no basis in anything, but he can say it with enough authority that it sounds like it actually has some merit.

But let's make a quick translation here and I think we can see what it really means. "Homosexual activist clubs in schools are detrimental to students and the moral well-being of society." Loosely translated this means that a GSA or similar club might not only encourage people to think, but may also erase some of the stigma that social conservatives created around homosexuality. "Moral" as we all know is the Christian Conservative word for hate. Also you will notice the reference to "homosexual activist clubs" and not Gay/Straight Alliance clubs - one being confrontational and divisive and the other being harmonious and inclusive.

So in the end, we can rewrite this statement to say "GSA clubs bring people together and encourage them to think and let go of their hatred, misunderstandings and prejudice leading to a more harmonious co-existence, thus deeply threatening the stranglehold the church and the Republican party have over the hearts and minds of everyone. And to allow these groups to exist and meet threatens our control, but also shows us for the small minded, hatemongering bastards that we are.

So this November, Georgians can vote to uphold the law and for freedom for all or they can vote for a hatemongering bigot. I wonder which way this one will go?

**Additional reporting courtesy of Gay.com and The Advocate.

Suspected San Diego Gay Bashers Caught!

2006-08-02T09:15:00.000-05:00

Suspected "lowlife" scumbag gay basher James Allen Carroll ===>
photo courtesy of the San Diego Union Tribune

Nothing announces to the world that you are a man's man quite like hiding in the bushes and sneaking up on unsuspecting people and hitting them in the head with a baseball bat. But that's exactly what James Allen Carroll and his friends in the gang called the "Lowlifes" allegedly did. Carroll and his friends are accused of being the gay bashers in last weeks attack on 6 men leaving the gay pride festival last weekend.

Carroll and three other men, two of which boys aged 16 and 17 are also in custody, are accused of savagely attacking 6 men who were minding their own business and simply attending a public event.

The community was shocked by the brutality of the attacks and the alleged attackers were caught thanks to witnesses who came forward.

Thankfully in addition to the charges of attempted murder and other assault charges, the accused will also be facing hate crime enhancements. This attack, like all the others underscores the need for federal hate crimes legislation for sexual orientation. To deny that the LGBT community faces a greater risk of attack and or persecution than average citizens is not only to deny reality, but smacks of a similar mentality to that held by these attackers.

Here is the simple truth of it. Regardless of your feelings about homosexuality, you cannot believe that any person deserves to have their head randomly bashed in - no matter what their beliefs or lifestyle are. Saying someone deserves the same kind of safety and right to life as everyone else is a basic human right and a tenant of what this country was supposed to be about.

No society that treats it's citizens unequally can hope to survive. And while many may decry the methods used by these attackers, actively campaigning against the LGBT community to deny them rights and privileges which should be common to all citizens as well as deny them protections under the law is no different than holding the bat yourself, it just swings slower.

If you don't think that preaching, teaching and beseeching hatred of gays and supporting their open persecution at every turn led directly to that boy and that bat, you better think again. Rhetoric begets action and action begets violence.

Wake up!

Is America's National Pastime Baseball or Hating Gays?

2006-08-01T14:28:00.000-05:00

It seems like we won't have to ask this question anymore thanks to Focus on The Family. That's right true believers, it seems that James Dobson and his world class hate group have infiltrated Major League baseball. It turns out that last weeks "Faith Day" at the Atlanta Braves vs Marlins game was co-sponsored by Dobson's group.

It's ironic and almost prophetic that we covered this over at The Rudicus Report. There we mused whether this was the beginning of Christian Baseball and also pointed out that it was a slap to Atlanta's gay population. At the time, we did not know of FOF's involvement. Now that we do, this is even more astounding and inappropriate.

Not only was this "Faith Day" preaching Christianity to their captive audience, but it turns out FOF was handing out literature, ostensibly turning this sporting event into a giant anti-gay rally.

You can read the full Washington Blade story here.

This kind of thing is not only hateful and hurtful, but also sends the worst kind of message to children. So now in addition to church and school and home, we are now telling our kids in the sporting world that hating gays is ok. How the hell can anyone, Christian or otherwise get to a place (on a mass scale) where not only openly persecuting gays is ok, but actively campaigning for it and teaching it to your children. I wish there actually was a hell so you could all burn in it!

I am officially grouping any Christian that supports FOF or condones this type of practice in with Nazi's, Skinheads and the KKK. That's excellent company for you to be in - Jesus would be proud.

In a post-game note - the Braves LOST their "Faith Day" game 6-1. Serves you right, fuckers!

GOP Tactics As Usual: Sleaze, Lies & Homophobia

2006-07-28T16:57:00.000-05:00

<== Ted Strickland, victim of GOP gutter politics. courtesy of AlterNet

It's been a tough life for GOP strategists of late. The days of running on big business, small government and tax breaks for the rich have been gone since the original GOP made a deal and threw in with the Christian Conservatives. These days God and Gay-Hating are the only issues left to run on since Iraq and ALL the other military and foreign policy fiascos, a crap economy, spiraling exploding gas prices and corrupt a soulessly corrupt business world have pretty much killed off their other big ticket items.

With this in mind, The Ohio Republican Party hired Gary Lankford to be their new "Social Conservative Coordinator" Presumably this position was basically to be an agitator and play on the fears of non-critically thinking Republicans and use any means necessary to get them and anyone they know to vote Republican. So what's the best way to tittie-twist social conservatives? Make someone or something gay.

While I am consistently amazed that people keep falling for this crap and consistently sickened by the idea that all you have to do is insert "gay" into the discussion and it becomes the worst kind of evil - you have to wonder about an organization whose primary strategy is to paint their opponent gay.

But that's exactly what Lankford did. One of his first actions was to fire off an email about Democratic Gubenatorial Candidate, Ted Strickland. Lankford attacked Strickland's church attendance, work ethic, voting record and the validity of his marriage. He linked to a website that claimed that since the Stricklands chose not to have children, then they were both gay.

I don't even know where to go with this. What's worse, the not even marginally plausible grounds to call someone gay, or the idea that not having or wanting children makes you gay. If not wanting children is a sure sign of homosexuality, then I guess the pro-gay groups should be getting a huge influx of members, now that Mr. Lankford has notified these wayward couples that they were not making a life choice, they were actually both gay.

Another big question for me is that this guy is the headmaster of a Christian School. A school that I assume is teaching children about ethics and being good citizens - aka training the next generation of hatemongers.

The good news is that the outpouring of antagonism toward this type of gutter politics has forced Ohio GOP Chairman Bob Bennett to finally fire Lankford.

"I will not tolerate anything like that. That's not how I run the party," Bennett said. "Unfortunately, I was a little slow to react to this."

No Bob, your timing was perfect - hire a rabid dog to play sleazeball, wait to see if there is any fallout, when it gets too hot disavow and cut him loose. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

Hasn't this guy been following the long string of CEO BS that has littered the courts for the past few years? Nobody believed that the CEO's were completely unaware of their underlings activities and nobody believes you, Bob.

This was a tactic and a resolution right out of the Republican Book of Dirty Tricks. Shame on you for playing dirty, shame on you for trying to weasel out of it, and shame on you for once again using the LGBT community as your personal boogeyman.

Go Ted Strickland - Kick The Bastards Out!

Are You Gay?

2006-07-27T09:01:00.000-05:00

N'Sync's Lance Bass is gay, but Oprah isn't. George Michael is gay and doesn't care who knows it now, but at one time he did (even though anyone with even marginally functional gaydar really didn't have any doubt. Coming out can be a liberating experience for some and the beginning of a nightmare for others. Recently there have been several stories about military officers who were axed due to Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And big news has been made out of gay politicians being elected in Alabama and Georgia. So it leaves me with the question of why are people so obsessed with who's gay?

I know famous people coming out helps by putting a familiar face on homosexuality and gives people struggling with their sexuality a role model (hopefully), but how does it change them? They were gay before they announced it, or were outed. And while that clearly has all sorts of ramifications, it doesn't change the substance of those people. Oprah didn't become a better host because we now know she isn't gay. Lance Bass hasn't become a better or worse singer because he's now officially gay. And none of the soldiers let go from the armed forces were suddenly worse at their job because they came out.

That radio operator who had been a great brother in arms and excellent at his job, did not all of a sudden become dangerous or unreliable because you now know he's gay. He didn't hit on you for the 4 years before you found out, I think you're safe.

It's a fine line. On the one hand, the more people who are openly gay in the public means hopefully a decline in the hate (although Washington still voted to support discrimination and bigotry yesterday). On the other hand, being gay has somehow become a litmus test. Once people find out someone famous is gay, then there is a great fanfare and then everything marches into obscurity. I bet we don't see much more press on Lance Bass a week from now.

It so odd that people are perfectly fine despite massive gay speculation right up until the second before they come out. Take CNN's Anderson Cooper, a great journalist regardless of who he's in a relationship with, but currently on the top 5 of most suspected queers. The odd thing is, here is a person widely respected and revered for what he does, even by people who "really don't like gays". I guarantee you though, the second he ever came out, his popularity would slide dramatically. Not because he suddenly became a bad journalist.

It's like those people who are having the best meal of their life and then ask what it is and the waiter says "elephant penis." Instead of grabbing another bite and saying "damn, this is the best elephant penis in the world." they get all pukey and spit it out.

I applaud Lance Bass for coming out. If George Michael wants to be a Rest Stop Ho, cheers to him. But the idea that you have to announce to the world that you aren't gay is a tragedy. Oprah has lost points to me. Instead of using the speculation and her massive influence to open a dialogue about homosexuality and what it means to be gay in this world, she chickened out. This woman has the power to change minds through what she says and the books she recommends. I don't begrudge her because she could have tanked herself by doing that, but she's already massively powerful and wealthy enough - if she couldn't survive it and actually have an impact, who could?

Hopefully someday it won't matter, but for now since it seems to matter so much, we should really be looking at how much we all contribute to this stigma and what we can do to lessen the impact as well as educate others both by communication and example.

Misery Loves Company in North Carolina.

2006-07-26T10:12:00.000-05:00

<== Rev. Mark H. Creech (more on him later)

Apparently the LGBT community is not alone in their being persecuted by Christians and their warped ideas of morality combined with their burning obsession to control everyone's life down to the smallest detail.

So imagine police dispatcher Deborah Hobbs' surprise when she walked into work and was told by Pender County, North Carolina Sheriff, Carson Smith, that her living with her boyfriend was unacceptable on moral grounds citing a 201 year old law and said she would have to marry, move out or give up her job.

Of course she fought it, and of course she won. As of today, there is no legal precedent to support the legal imposition of moral standards by a state office.

What scares me the most though is the comments of Rev. Mark H. Creech who expressed his displeasure with the ruling in his article for Agape Press (for those of you unfamiliar with this band of yahoos - they are a Christian Conservative group that reports on items of interest to the fascist Christian sect. I presume they are called Agape Press in reference to the drop jawed expression exhibited by any rational person reading their articles)

You can read the full commentary here.

Some of the things that stood out, beyond the idea that he felt this woman should have been forced to get married against her will are as follows:

But before that, I just want to ask the question of exactly how forcing someone to get married against their will is in someway strengthening the institution of marriage, but two gays or lesbians who actually want to get married because they love each other and want to build a life together somehow weakens it.

And now onto the thoughts of Rev. Mark H. Creech:

First off he opens with a well known salvo from the Christian Rights Spin Handbook in which any court ruling that is based on law and/or reason is called...say it with me - Judicial Activism. You all know this one, this is where any Judge who actually uses common sense and reality to determine the appropriateness of laws is considered a activist who is ruling apart from the will of the people. Well forgive me for pointing this out, but I for one would rather not be put in front of a judge who was placed there because he was as stupid as everyone else.

And then we get to this bone-chilling distortion of reality

"Judge Alford's ruling is also significant as a reflection of the state's departure from what traditionally has been its moral compass -- the Judeo-Christian ethic. Of course, some would argue it's never right to impose one's morality on others by codifying it into law. Yet such is the very purpose of law. No public policy or legislation operates in a moral vacuum. The law has always been the means by which cultures state their values and what it is they want to protect."

Thank you for so clearly illustrating the flaw in your thinking Mark. The very purpose of secular law IS NOT to impose morality on anyone, nor is it a means by which cultures state their values. The purpose of law is to maintain the flow of society and protect it's citizens. Murder is not against the law because it was one of the ten commandments, it's against the law because murder is adverse to the society we live in. It removes from society people who could potentially contribute or fulfill a function. Also because it robs another person of their liberty against their will. The above is the rationale for most of our laws. Speeding is not against the law because it represents a moral or ethical obligation based on some judeo-christian compass - it's because speeding endangers citizens and makes roadways potentially unsafe, which could lead to unintended detriment to unsuspecting citizens.

Any "law" which seeks to impose values or morals on the populace are signs of oppression and persecution because they are NOT based on protecting society or ensuring the freedoms and liberties of it's citizens. Whether a person is gay or married or goes to church has nothing whatsoever to do with their ability to function in society. You can trot out all the so-called "studies" you like, but the fact is that married gay couples do not harm society or impede the liberty of anyone, however barring them from marriage does harm society and impedes their liberty - so who would really be more moral in this case I wonder?

Let's move on:

'The Seventh Commandment, "Thou shalt not commit adultery," which could also be correctly translated, "Thou shalt not commit sexual immorality,"'

No it can't, please try again spinmeister.

"God gave this law because it's the only way that sex works properly."

I'll be right back with several billion people who will prove this statement completely false.

If you continue to read the rest of this article - you will notice one over-arching theme or belief which actually destroys his entire argument. Rev. Mark goes a long way toward making the case for marriage over cohabitation, but makes one crucial error. He is operating from the premise that all cohabitations are purely sexual in nature and not based on any kind of loving togetherness or life building. All of his arguments fall apart if we see that a cohabitating couple or a gay couple that is legally barred from being married is couple that wants to build a life together and have a committed love partnership where sex is a part of that.

Here again we have another shining example of how the haters use every trick in the book from misrepresentation to misdirection to fabrication to justify their hate, but in the end reason and common sense show them for what they are.

I guess that makes me an activist judge too.

Children Are Taught To Hate.

2006-07-25T07:20:00.000-05:00

It's nice to know we can rely on good old family values when it comes to teaching our children right and wrong. We often hear from the AFA and other so-called "family" groups how wrong, horrible and terrible it is for gays to marry or adopt or have anything whatsoever to do with children.

Now I understand why; if they did, we wouldn't have our own little "Boys from Brazil" club.

So it is with great pleasure that we celebrate these "baby geniuses" for so perfectly representing the hearts and minds and future of American family values.

Two boys, aged 12 and 14 were charged with a hate crime under Maine's new hate crime law which now includes sexual orientation protection. The boys are accused of vandalism on the Poland, Me., home of Linda Boutaugh and Keri Fuchs, a lesbian couple.

The boys allegedly destroyed the interior of the home, breaking furniture and writing anti-gay slurs on the walls. Feces and urine were also found in the home and the car which was also severely damaged.

Fuchs and Boutaugh were already planning to leave Poland, ME due to anti-gay harassment. It had gotten so bad that they stopped sitting on their own porch due to the rash of anti-gay abuse they would receive from the neighborhood children.

Our hearts go out to this couple for their loss and for the idea that anyone would have to come home to this kind of destruction and hate. You can see the damage firsthand and read about the struggle and the rally of support on Boutaugh's son, Matthew Leavitt's website Unlockable Box.

The worst thing about this is not only that this couple was subjected to this kind of abuse, but that the vast majority of the abuse was coming from children. These children were indoctrinated into a world of hate by their parents. These children were taught to hate gays and lesbians. What do you think will happen when you teach your children that members of the LGBT community are an abomination against God and threatening the entire world (if you listen to some people). Children do not know hate to start with. Hate must be learned and taught from a young age by the parents, by the church, by the schools and by the community.

This is the exact reason why the idea that educating children on LGBT issues and lifestyle is not part of some "gay agenda" it's a combination of self-preservation as well as an attempt to bring the world to it's senses and hopefully prevent just this type of event.

Nothing can be gained from persecuting anyone for any reason. All we can succeed in doing is turning our children into hatemongers. If that is the message of Christianity and an example of the so-called "family values" then they and everyone who supports them are the true abomination. When all one group wants to do is live and love in peace how can that possibly be wrong?

The problem is, these kids are NOT an aberration - they are the direct product of years of indoctrination into a culture of hate by the very people who are supposed to be teaching them right from wrong. If all these children, and the ones who commit other hate crimes against gays and lesbians are all the product of Christian homes with good values, what does that say about their parenting? I haven't heard any stories about children of gay parents destroying anyone's house just because they were gay - so who are the better parents?

Stacking the Deck.

2006-07-24T10:43:00.001-05:00

Already a lock for the title of Worst President Ever, George W. Bush doesn't seem content with basking in the glow of his victory, he wants to keep screwing up the country for generations to come. We already saw what he's done to the Supreme Court whose sole responsibility from this point forward is playing a game called "who can be more rabidly conservative." We already know that he's gotten rid of all the actual scientists at the FDA and other advisory groups in favor of non-sensical "yes-men" with no apparent compunction to base any of their decisions on reality. And we've also seen the FCC rollback it's activities to the 1950's.

Now we have a new development that threaten to keep us all down for a long long time.

This is a great piece of investigative journalism by Charlie Savage over at the Boston Globe.

You can read the full article here:

In a nutshell, what he's outlined is a frightening trend "The Bush administration is quietly remaking the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, filling the permanent ranks with lawyers who have strong conservative credentials but little experience in civil rights."

Basically he's booted the non-partisan lawyers who have staffed this division through both Republican and Democratic administrations and is quietly replacing them with conservative political appointees. Not only is this shifting the balance heavily in favor of people who have no background or understanding of the issues involved, but also placing serious weight to people with a track record of decisions that are in line with the Christian Conservative movement.

This is already having an impact on the cases being brought according to Savage: "The division is bringing fewer voting rights and employment cases involving systematic discrimination against African-Americans, and more alleging reverse discrimination against whites and religious discrimination against Christians."

You see where this is going. If this is the group that is currently charged with protecting the civil rights of African-Americans, this will also be the group looking out for civil rights for the LGBT community if there is ever a time when civil rights include sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes.

What's worse, since these are permanent appointments and not limited to the Presidential term, this division can be ignoring people's rights for years and years after Bush has gone back to Texas.

So how did this happen? Well, John Ashcroft decided in 2002 to disband the hiring committee that had overseen this division and emphasized fairness in hiring. Mush in the same way the administration chose to ignore scientists that conflicted with their views on global warming and pharmaceuticals or the lawyers arguing for detainee rights and torture legislation. Long the best Bush Administration tactic, if they don't like what you have to say, you just go away.

Slowly but surely we are all, regardless of our heritage or preferences being left with nowhere else to go if our rights are in any way infringed upon, unless you are a white Christian conservative, at which point you can pretty much do whatever you like.

It makes you wonder if there is some kind of set up going on here. Would you put it past any of these folks to someday down the road vote in favor of gay civil rights as a political tactic once they are assured that there is absolutely no way there will actually be any because they have removed anyone who might be sympathetic to those rights.

Makes you wonder.

Apparently Dogs are Bigots Too.

2006-07-21T16:44:00.000-05:00

It's a sad sad day when you can't even put a light hearted equality education program out there without some hate group slamming it down.

The folks over at www.borndifferent.com have a great showcase to help people understand the idea of other people being born gay - in reference to the myriad of research affirming biological differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals. It's a neat site and they bring up some great points. It's all done in a fun and non-confrontational way and is centered around a dog named Norman who says "moo" instead of "woof". The campaign aired in the Colorado Springs area.

Of course without missing a beat, one of the pre-eminent hate groups, Focus on the Family trotted out a rebuttal with their own dog Sherman, who barks as "biology intended." The counter-site goes on allegedly refute the scientific claims.

We all know James Dobson and FOF are notorious for fabricating and misrepresenting research, so I don't think there is anything really big there. But the real issue for me is the very idea that they had to counter this. It's not enough that they hate gays and lesbians. It's not even enough that they encourage and manipulate others to hating gays and lesbians. No these people now feel they have to go after people for NOT hating gays and lesbians. When you can't even stomach the idea of anyone making their own choice to hate or not to hate, then you have a serious problem.

You have to ask the question if they are so confident in their position that the LGBT community is the embodiment of sin and an abomination - why do they need to fight so hard to prove it? Is the idea that someone might make their own decision so scary that you feel you need to discredit and refute every idea that is incompatible with your hate machine?

I say if you think your position is God-inspired and strong then let the chips fall where they may - stop manipulating people through fear and lies and let them make their own decisions. I guess it's no fun playing if you might lose.

Ignore FOF and keep on Mooing, little doggies!

The Queers Did It!

2006-07-20T19:42:00.000-05:00

Now I've heard everything. Like a game of 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon, it appears that everything can be can be blamed on gays. Senior Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch has declared that the bombing of Israel by Hezbollah and the subsequent war with Lebanon was the fault of...wait for it - gays. That's right buckaroos, the International Gay Pride Festival scheduled for Jerusalem is responsible for the rocket attacks - and no, I'm not kidding.

You can read the full story here.

Just like Hurricane Katrina, last years Tsunami, and the terrorist attack on an Indonesian hotel - blame for all can be laid at the feet of gays, if you listen to the right people.

The worst thing about this is not that this person is clinically insane, or that the very idea that this is some God inspired reprisal is beyond laughable to anyone with an IQ over 3, no the worst thing is that there actually people who will read this and say "you know he's right."

It doesn't matter how silly it sounds, it will never take away from the fact that this is pure hate speech designed to turn people against the LGBT community, but it's homosexuals who are the abomination - yeah, right.

What saddens me is not that they put a man who's brain is made out of oatmeal in charge of anyone's salvation, it's the fact that this Rabbi, who should know better than anyone what it's like to be on the business end of oppression, hatred and murder would have the chutzpah to turn around and do it to someone else.

Evil Empire.

2006-07-20T09:24:00.000-05:00

Do you remember the good old days when the U.S. used to be a world leader in human rights and was often seen and heard chastising other nations on their human rights records? Well it looks like we are day by day becoming that which we used to fight against. We used to fight against imperialist nations and totalitarian nations, and now we have become them.

But, it looks like we are also becoming the big violators of the international human rights standards that we helped develop. That's right kids, Cowboy George and his posse have pretty much eradicated everything that this country once stood for, including human rights.

Remember the days when we were the world leaders of the U.N.? Now we not only saddled them with a tyrannical ambassador (John Bolton), but we have now come under fire on our own human rights record against gays and lesbians.

We were already in trouble over Gitmo and the myriad of human rights violations going on there, now a new U.N. report titled "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender & Intersex Human Rights in the United States" has tagged us for human rights violations and what it calls "major gaps" in protection for the LGBT community as well as "substantive violations" of the International Covenant for Civil & Political Rights.

You can read the full story here.

This may come as a shock to some, but it's no surprise to anyone around here.

The U.S. has long lagged behind when it comes to human rights for gays and lesbians. The report also cites something we have all been screaming about for years, namely the abysmal failure of the U.S. to include sexual orientation and gender identity in the list of hate crimes and offer any protection to those citizens. The report says that this fact "creates the impression that those crimes are less serious than other bias motivated crimes."

You don't say.

On top of that it also cites the so-called "gay panic" defense and "don't ask, don't tell" as other example of this country's failure to protect it's own citizens.

As expected, the U.S. has completely blown off or ignored the criticism, and is expected to not react or respond in any demonstrable way when the U.N. Human Rights Committee releases it's recommendations next month - which are also expected to be highly critical.

It is sickening to see how much of our honor and international standing this nation has lost in such a short time. If this is what those nations who are currently having "democracy" spread to them have to look forward to, I don't feel very positive about that. Then again, if they are already used to totalitarian rule where the government lies, cheats and steals from them as well as hates and kills members of their own population, maybe it won't be that big of a difference.

An Open Question on Gay Marriage.

2006-07-18T23:04:00.000-05:00

Yesterday we saw the proposed constitutional to ban gay marriage defeated in the House by a vote of 236-187 (hooray for our side!). While this is certainly good news on some level, the fact remains that while this amendment probably won't go anywhere, many states are easily passing and upholding bans on the state level, and even trying to eliminate the possibility of civil unions.

But as I listened to Dennis Hastert saying "Be assured that this issue is not over," and then to Joe Pitts of PA saying, "We must not allow an institution of such great importance to be arbitrarily redefined for the entire nation by a small number of unelected judges," I was left with the same question that I always seem to be left with on this issue. What's the big deal?

If the Republicans and their friends want to be honest and just say "We hate queers and we just don't want them to have any rights whatsoever," then I can understand. But this whole issue of the sanctity of marriage or this so-called "institutution of such great importance" - I'd really like to know why and how.

Forget that the Bible allegedly comes out against homosexuality, forget that they really really hate gays, I'd like to know from someone exactly how anyone from the LGBT community getting married actually impacts anyone.

Gays have been marrying in Massachusetts for over a year now and so-called "traditional" marriage has not collapsed. I haven't heard anyone saying "well, we were going to get married earlier this year, but now that gays can marry in MA it just cheapens the whole thing so we didn't do it."

In fact I don't think there has been a single incidence of married gays having any impact on ANY "traditional" marriages. It's not like there are armies of fanatic gays trying to outlaw "traditional" marriage. I haven't seen any "Make Every Marriage a Gay Marriage" bumper stickers out there. In fact the only thing that gays getting married seems to do is have certain people frothing at the mouth and getting a certain Pope's panties in a bunch.

I realize that the idea of gay marriage having any impact at all on traditional marriage is in reality non-sensical, but they keep trotting it out there so I would like an explanation. I'd even settle for some fake research from James Dobson. Give me SOMETHING to show me that what you say has any value other than as a smokescreen for good old bigotry and discrimination.

I think I know the real reason. If a gay or lesbian couple is allowed to marry and receive all the benefits of "traditional" marriage, as well as adopt children and do all the same things "traditional" people can do, then it forces the haters to see gays and lesbians as just like them and not as different or less than.

There's you real reason - if they think you are like them, then they can't hate you. So instead, they trump up all this nonsense about endangering "traditional" marriage, misuse and make up research to prove nothing more than their own hate and stupidity and use every dirty trick in the book to try and get everyone to see the LGBT community as some sort of threat. All it does is give them a common enemy - coincidentally, rule number one from the fascist handbook.

So while we wait (in vain) for any legitimate answer to the above questions. I would ask them to drop the pretense and just be honest and come out and say "Yes we hate gays and lesbians and we will do whatever we can to deny their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." At least that way we can co-exist from a place of honesty. And wouldn't this be so much easier than these lame attempts to frame the issue in some silly "defense of marriage" act. Just call it the "We hate gays" act - it's easier and unambiguous.

The comments are anxiously awaiting your thoughts.

Another Republican Bigot.

2006-07-17T21:58:00.000-05:00

I guess this is a good month for Republican Anti-Gay bigotry. First we had Marcus Kindley, now we have State Sen. Richard "Dick" Roeding of Kentucky. State Senator Roeding thinks gays are the "wrong kind of people."

After The University of Louisville's Board of Trustees decided by a 14-1 vote to offer domestic partner benefits to gay and lesbian couples as a way to attract more and better candidates, our pal, "Dick" had this to say: "I find this very repulsive. "I don't want to entice any of those people into our state. Those are the wrong kind of people."

Don't hold back "Dick" tell us how you really feel.

Apparently Sen Roeding's big mouth had room for another foot when after the Kentucky Log Cabin Republicans called for his resignation over the "wrong kind of people" comment, he then dismissed their request calling them "a bunch of queers"

You can read the original story here.

And the follow up story here.

Now while I don't have a lot of warm fuzzy feelings for Log Cabin Republicans, I hope they continue to support the party that obviously loves them so much and is really in touch with their issues.

But isn't it interesting that we again have another prominent state Republican opening his big yap to spew anti-gay hate speech. We know that homophobic Congresspeople and Senators know better than to be caught in public saying this, but at the state level..Well lets just say it's a little more real.

This is not an issue of whether or not many (if not all) Republicans seem to be rabidly anti-gay (with the exception of the Log Cabin Republicans, who are just self-loathing collaborators). It's not even an issue of a few dumb politicians actually telling us all how they really feel (it's not like we didn't already know). No, the real issue is that they seem to be at their liberty to do so without any consequences.

It's so easy - say your hate message, LGBT groups protest, Democrats say "oh how terrible", your party says "hey don't say that anymore (at least not for a couple weeks anyway)."

Wash, Rinse, Repeat: That's your formula for how to be a bigot in America 2006.

Imagine if "Dick" was talking about blacks instead of gays being the "wrong kind of people" Let's ask Trent Lott how that one would have turned out. What if it was Jews or Women (both of whom could have been targeted like this in the past)

Fortunately we've moved on to a point where you can't say this kind of thing about African-Americans or Jews or women and get away with it anymore. But unfortunately for many people, it's perfectly fine to say it about gays and lesbians. Hopefully it won't be alright someday, but this is why we fight.

My only hope is that someday Sen. Roeding will have some sort of calamity befall him and he'll have to be saved by one of the big queer doctors that came to teach at the University of Louisville because of the domestic partner benefits they offered (yes, we know they won't be getting married in Kentucky).

Remember kids, hating gays is not cool, don't be a "Dick."

As Expected, the AFA is Full of Crap.

2006-07-14T16:25:00.000-05:00

Remember our friend Don Wildmon from the post about how the AFA's alleged boycott of the Ford Motor Company was causing a them to lose sales - read it here if you missed it.

Well it turns out old Don is wrong again. You can read all about it here.

Remember folks, all you need are critical thinking skills and some thoughtful insight and you will see through most of the nonsese that is thrown at you.

Is The Travel Channel Homophobic?

2006-07-14T07:36:00.000-05:00

I was watching an interesting program on Alaskan travel on The Travel Channel last night when an advert for the next program Gay Getaways came on. So I stayed tuned. Just before the show began, A viewer discretion warning appeared on the screen and warned of mature subject matter. Then the intro came on and the TV14 rating appeared in the upper right hand corner. I also realized that the program was coming on at 10pm, the time usually reserved for more spicy television fare. All of this seemed to indicate that this program was going to be something special.

In truth it was a great program about gay-specific vacations and destination - no different than any other program that I've seen on the Travel Channel. I enjoyed the show, but every time we returned from commercial, I was greeted with that same viewer discretion warning and TV 14 rating for language.

The more I watched, the less I could understand the rating or the warning. There certainly weren't any of the FCC's myriad or inappropriate words, nor was there anything that would warrant a warning. No blood, guts, violence, intense emotions, nudity or anything that would normally warrant this type of warning. So what could it be? The entire show was light and mostly featured couples enjoying the sun, recreation, food and dancing at a a variety of locations. Nothing in there was any more racy or challenging than any of the commercials being shown during the show.

So, is the only reason for the warning and the rating because the show was about gays and lesbians? Do we need to protect viewers from images of two gay men eating pastry or two women dancing? And what was the TV 14 rating for - what language did children under 14 need to be protected from, the word "Gay"?

In the program it showed gay couples holding hands and occasionally kissing (peck on the cheek kissing, not making out kissing). Is this the action that needed to be kept from our kids? I found it curious then, that the commercial for Royal Caribbean that played during one of the breaks featured straight people kissing and holding hands and also a guy with a video camera taking a butt shot of his girlfriend and make a lewd comment about it. This commercial has been shown at all hours nationally without a warning, so what could it be?

To find out I went to the source, however The Travel Channel did not respond to requests for an explanation. The only conclusion I could draw was that the rating and the warning were exclusively there because the show talked about gays and lesbians and showed gays and lesbians engaging in everyday vacation activities. And not even activities that could be considered questionable - far more racy and suggestive material appears daily on MTV at all hours.

I would like to know why The Travel Channel felt it was ok to show this show, but then also felt compelled to subject it to a double standard just because it was about gays and lesbians. And if the FCC was also involved then it suggests that the federal government is once again targeting homosexuals for political and social reasons - none of which is acceptable.

What do you think - is The Travel Channel employing special treatment for gay themed programs or are they simply doing what they are told?

Pyrrhic Victory.

2006-07-13T07:21:00.000-05:00

For those of you who have been following the LIFEBeat benefit concert story, there was some good news, the LGBT community spoke up and Beenie Man and TOK will NOT be playing the LIFEBeat AIDS prevention benefit. Unfortunately, neither will anyone else.

If you are not familiar with this story, you can catch yourself up here.

That's right, instead of addressing the concerns of these two on the bill, they just up and cancelled the whole thing. You can read THAT story here.

Well at least they won't be playing, but there are so many deeper issues associated with this that I can't even begin to tell you, but I will.

First off let's look at LIFEBeat itself. Regardless of any issues associated with gays, there should never be a space for anyone preaching violence and hatred toward anyone. This is the crux of it. I'm sure it would never have occurred to them to sign two White supremacist/Neo-Nazi musical acts so why would it even be a consideration with these two? We all know the answer of course, hatred and persecution of gays and lesbians is perfectly acceptable and even condoned and promoted by schools, governments, businesses and churches. Can you imagine the uproar if instead the artists were talking about hanging African-Americans or murdering Jews? It would be a national scandal. Come to think of it, can you imagine any musical acts like that even being signed by a major label?

LIFEBeat defends their inclusion of these artist to "encourage dialogue." What dialogue do you think there can between a person who wants to shoot or burn someone and the person that wants to live? LIFEBeat is ignorant and stupid and hateful, period.

So now they decided rather than get rid of the two artists in question, they went and cancelled the whole thing. Doesn't this sound a bit like a kindergarten squabble? "That's it, the game's over, I'm taking my homophobic hatemongering murder-promoters and going home." As a result, no one gets helped by whatever funds would have been raised.

In their statement, LIFEBeat claimed the reason for the cancellation was Âthe possibility of violence at the concert from the firestorm of protest incited by a select group of activists.Â

WOW! If they are so concerned about inciting violence - why would they book two artists whose message is inciting violence? Also, it makes it sound like this "select group of activists" is some crazy fringe group. I hate to break this to you, but defending yourself and others from people promoting your murder is not activism, it's seldefensece. But worse than that is the idea that there is even a select group - if there are people that think this is perfectly ok, or in the case of LIFEBeat, beneficial then something far more sinister is lurking under the water.

AIDS is not a gay disease. Hatemongers and other groups might want you to believe that gays are to blame for it, but AIDS affects everyone. HIV+ people and people with AIDS regardless of their orientation are persecuted, so the very idea of connecting hate-promoters to any function is an act of cruelty of the utmost offensiveness. And to then cancel the event that would help so many others rather than let go of hate is beyond spiteful and signals fundamentalal lack of humanity and understanding.

The one good thing to come of this is to show the power of a united voice and what it can do to instigate change. Keep speaking up - if a firestorm from bloggers is the only way to motivate change then so be it.

Gimme That Old Tyme Religion (err...Government).

2006-07-12T09:45:00.000-05:00

Here we go again. I know we have all heard this one before, but it never gets less ridiculous each time. That's right kids, we have found another idiot that somehow got into a position of power and is now using that position to not only preach hate, but dangerous nonsense.

Marcus Kindley, Chairman of the Republican Party for Guilford County North Carolina, felt compelled to post this thought on his blog.

"We now say that homosexuality is ok. That it is natural. Yes it is as natural as pedophilia."

Two great tastes that taste great together huh. People just love to trot out pedophilia - it always gets a reaction every time. Forget that it has nothing to do with anything, it's just shock and awe propaganda designed to get a non-critically thinking person (i.e. Christian Conservative or GOP sheep) to make that gasping noise they so love to make.

"The Chairman" goes on to discuss some more choice bits in his article, which you can read here. I'll be discussing some of his finer points on Disorganize, but for now let's focus on this attack.

Kidley goes on to say "If it were natural then we wouldn't be having a conversation about it, because there would be no procreation. It really is that simple. All the other studies and written articles are the justification for the actions of this group of individuals."

I think we need to make a few distinctions, and while I realize this is purely cut and paste rhetoric, I think it will help to dissect this a little so you can see how they like to twist and shout.

When someone says "natural" they mean biological, not natural as in "excuse me sir would you like a side of homosexuality with that." But this guy obviously wants to use "natural" to make it sound more like it's "natural" so everyone should be doing it. It couldn't be further from the truth. Just because something is biologically/genetically based - does not mean that it affects every single person. Just because a group of people have blue eyes, does not mean that blue eyes are natural or that everyone should have blue eyes or that people with blue eyes want everyone to have them either. All it means is that one group of people were biologically/genetically pre-disposed to blue eyes - that's it. Now imagine if we substitute blue eyes for gay in this guys argument - you can see how utterly idiotic it is.

"We now say that blue eyes are ok. That they're natural. Yes blue eyes are as natural as pedophilia."

Sounds pretty dumb doesn't it.

And's what's with this whole no procreation thing? I'm sorry Marcus, but do you know the percentage of homosexuals to heterosexuals in the world? I think your ever-expanding global population will be safe for many eons to come. Besides, it's not like there are gay missionaries out there trying to turn the world gay (unlike Christian's I might add) - so you're only going to get as many queers as "naturally" occur.

This is all I ask, simply to look at what people are saying and the context it is said in. When you strip away moral posturing, biblical justification (real or imagined), propaganda and the good ole' spin - you can see that it is nothing more than hate speech designed to incite the non-thinkers and get them to continue oppressing and persecuting people for no reason except to further their own politicall aspirations and find a common group to rally around - just like some Germans and Austrians did back in the 30's and 40's.

I guess those are the traditional values they keep referring to.

Just Like Clockwork.

2006-07-10T22:02:00.000-05:00

I couldn't have planned it better if I tried. Barely did we finish discussing the illusion of the whole "Gay Agenda" angle and we get this little gem:

Read all about it here.

So a local grocery chain (H-E-B) is no longer worthy of patronage because they chose to be one of the sponsors of the local Pride event. So now local Christian Hate talk show host Adam McManus has mobilized his listenership to boycott the chain for their support of the evil queers and their annual sin festival.

I want you all to get a good clear picture of what this group is saying before I share with you what some of them actually said. Imagine if you will someone looking you straight in the eye and saying "I can no longer support you because you have said that it was ok for one of my fellow human beings to be happy. It is not ok for them to be happy or have any rights whatsoever, even the most basic rights that we give to animals, even those are not ok for this group. I will not rest until they are purged from the face of the earth, they are a blight on humanity." That is what they are saying. Can you imagine God or Jesus - in who's name all these people are spewing this kind of hate language? I sure can't.

But let's hear some of the actual voices from some good Christian people who support traditional family values.

"I was surprised and sickened to hear that H-E-B is one of the sponsors of the San Antonio homosexual PrideFest. I had always thought you were a family-oriented institution that understood the difference between right and wrong. Apparently I was wrong to assume that. There is nothing good to celebrate about the homosexual life. It is full of sickness, early death, sin, deception, abomination, promiscuity, and especially judgment from God. You will have to answer to God for sponsoring this event promoting such immorality. Please come to your senses and stop alienating the majority of consumers who have strong Christian values."

"We will no longer shop at H.E.B. until you stop your sponsorship of homosexual activities. As a Christian, we feel that our continued spending of our money at your store violates our conscience. We believe that if we continue to shop at H-E-B, we are participating in this sponsorship."

"We feel that encouraging values contrary to Biblical teaching is detrimental to the community, as well as detrimental to those persons who are trapped in immoral behavior."

And then we have McManus' own hypocritical comments "McManus notes that no one would argue with H-E-B that it should treat its customers and employees with dignity and respect, regardless of their sexual preference. "But in no way," he says, "does that translate to agreement with and financial support of having unnatural, immoral, unbiblical sex with one's own gender."

So basically, the LGBT community should be respected while they are shopping and spending money in stores, but as soon as they leave, they become the sick animals they know them to be.

I especially like how McManus then goes on to equate donating to a Pride event with sponsoring Al Qaida.

Throughout his hate speech McManus consistently uses terms like "radical homosexual agenda" and refers to homosexuals as "a group of people defined by their sin."

So tell me exactly what's so radical about wanting to be treated fairly and with decency and to have the right to celebrate life just like anyone else? If anyone has an agenda it's this guy, and it's a fascist agenda.

Here once again we have a Bible-quoting hatemonger using scripture to justify persecution of gays. But wait, doesn't that same Bible also say "love thy neighbor" and "judge not lest ye be judged" and also "leave judgment to God"? I guess that was all inconvenient drivel.

I'm sorry folks but all we really have here is yet another hatmongering bigot masquerading as a Christian, cherry-picking scripture to justify persecution and oppression of others. But he'll keep doing it as long as he has the approval of the people and the government, and if you don't like it speak up and speak out!

The Gay Agenda.

2006-07-10T04:30:00.000-05:00

As you read or watch the news, you can't avoid hearing talk by conservative groups about the so-called "Gay Agenda." This term is always used in a negative context as some secret plan to do something sinister that we must now be protected from by great champions like James Dobson and the AFA.

But what is this "Gay Agenda" and why is it so dangerous to typical God-fearin' Americans?

If you listen to the Christian Conservatives, you would think that the "Gay Agenda" was some kind of communist manifesto combined with the anarchist,s cookbook - no doubt to precede incursions by the mythical Gay Army that will take over America and turn it into a Queer Nation and kidnap all the children and convert them to homoism and turn them away from God and the Church while they summarily eradicate everything the Bible and the founding fathers had stood for.

At least that's what they would have you believe.

In short I would imagine the so-called "Gay Agenda would go something like this:

Love who you love
Be happily married and raise a family
Be free to live your life without fear
Be free from verbal, emotional and physical attacks
Be treated fairly and equally by all.

I don't know about you, but this doesn't sound like a "gay agenda" to me, it sounds like an agenda for all human kind. So, to openly be opposed to this so-called "Gay Agenda" would seemingly signal your opposition to what would amount to basic human rights.

In truth, what is often referred to as the "Gay Agenda" is simply the belief that all people are created equal and that they have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit if happiness. (Gee, that sounds familiar)

I find it particularly disturbing and chilling that a not insignificant number of people believe that somewhere sandwiched between the pages of their Bible or scribbled in the margins of their constitution is the justification to deny basic human rights to an entire group of people and openly discriminate and persecute them in such a way as to deny their ability to live with freedom and equality by believing they are an aberration or somehow less than human.

If you want a better explanation of this idea, go find an elderly Jewish person who may have resided at a special camp in Germany or take trip back a few generations to have a chat with someone working in a non-paying plantation job somewhere in Georgia. It's the same thing people.

We went to war to help the "Black Agenda" and the "Jewish Agenda" and stop the oppression, persecution and murder of these humans, it's time we did the same thing for the "Gay Agenda" and stand up for the people currently being crushed under that bootheel of oppression. All these agendas are agendas of freedom and equality and should be embraced by everyone.

The day we decide to allow basic human rights to be a subject of derision is the day we have become bankrupt as a culture and as a nation. If the government won't even stand up for the basic human rights of it's own citizens, how can it dare to speak to others about the very same thing. Because if you think for one second that the systematic oppression and persecution of gays and lesbians in this country is fundamentally any different than the massacre of students in Tianneman Square or the ethnic cleansing in Darfur, you are wrong...dead wrong.

The Accidental Supporters.

2006-07-10T04:00:00.000-05:00

This article has been cross-posted on Disorganize since it seemed to serve both populations.

The fight for gay rights and the church-sponsored persecution of homosexuals has already met with conflict in the Episcopalian and Presbyterian Churches, but full-scale persecution of gays and lesbians appeared to still be going strong, that is until Pastor Woody Hingle tried to make an official declaration at the Louisiana United Methodist Church Annual Conference.

You can read the full story here.

Apparently Pastor Hingle overestimated his fellow United Methodists when he tried to pass a new anti-gay affirmation: "local church membership in the United Methodist Church is open to all persons and requires repentance of sin, which includes racism, heterosexual sexual relations outside the marriage bond, and the practice of homosexuality."

He seemed to believe that this was a nice all-inclusive maneuver, but was surprised when his fellow UM's overwhelmingly rejected the proposal. But let's take a little bit closer look at this and see what is really going on. "Open to All Persons" That seems perfectly reasonable. "Repentance of Sin, which includes racism" also seems fine and even praiseworthy, especially considering Louisiana has had problems with racism toward members of the African-American community. "Heterosexual relations outside the Marriage Bond" we're starting to get a little out there now - certainly the church has vainly attempted to get this one going for centuries, but don't hold your breath. And finally "The Practice of Homosexuality" NOW we're seeing the real deal.

But wait you say, he had this whole list of prohibitions, why do we think this was actually an anti-gay message. Well first off, it is not really loving or being open to all persons if you have a laundry list of things that are unacceptable, but I think the true meaning can be found in what Pastor Hingle was most upset about when his measure was defeated.

He didn't get upset about the idea that his fellow Methodists turned down his proposal because they WANTED to be racist. Nor does he go with the obviously because they didn't want to give up their beloved premarital sex )and who would, frankly) No his first reaction was: "Hingle believes the petition failed because United Methodist delegates were uneasy about declaring that homosexuality is "incompatible with Christian teaching."*

So that's really it isn't it? He was pissed because his anti-gay proposal got shot down, especially since he worked so hard to couch it in this larger platform where open discrimination against gays was only a part of it. However by his own admission, Pastor Hingle decided to make this proposal after a pastor was suspended by the UMC for denying membership to an unrepentant homosexual. (That pastor was later reinstated).

If we want more proof that this proposal was just a cleverly disguised hate message, look no further than how Pastor Hingle then equates homosexuality with some other "lifestyle" choices.

"What other sins then don't have to be repented of for membership?" the pastor asks. "You know, if someone's...unrepentant about having a lifestyle of lying or thievery or whatever -- where are you going to draw that line?"*

So being a homosexual is akin to having a lifestyle of lying or thievery. Wow. Don't sugar coat it Woody, tell us how you really feel!

I guess in his mind persecution and discrimination and intolerance are not sins at all and truly the work of good Christian Disciples of Christ.

Pastor Hingle goes on to say that his larger concern is that his fellow parishioners believe that their own "reasoning and experience" trump scripture and church authority. And we find ourselves once again back to that staggering commentary on the dangers of organized religion. He is actually saying that people who have the audacity to think for themselves are wrong and going against the church.

So my condolences to Pastor Hingle for his loss and kudos to the UMC membership for voting this down, even if it is as I suspect more about the other elements of the proposal than any pro-gay solidarity.

And I leave you with this. If homosexuality is so powerfully wrong in the eyes of God, so much so that it seems to be the greatest focus of almost every church and almost every church-related group, why wasn't it mentioned in the Ten Commandments? If God saw fit to making sure to specify that you shouldn't be coveting your neighbors slaves and/or farm animals - wouldn't you think he might have remembered to mention something about homosexuality.

*Courtesy of Jim Brown, AgapePress.

Burn, Baby Burn.

2006-07-09T08:52:00.000-05:00

The next time the authorities come across a burning cross with a hate message attached, they may have to knock on the door to see who lives in that home. If the owner is homosexual, then it's too bad, so sad, there's nothing we can do.

That's right, the hatemongers and persecutors of Gays have a friend in the U.S. Government (or should we say lots of friends.) A fact that Brandon Waters of Tennessee learned the hard way, when he found a cross with an anti-gay message burning on his lawn.

When local authorities called the FBI for help in catching the hatemongering cowards who did it, they replied that "under federal hate crime law there is no provision for crimes against gays, lesbians or the transgendered."*

Well isn't that nice. The reason? The Senate once again dropped the hate crime legislation from the agenda. You heard right, your U.S. Senators do not think it is at all important to protect the LGBT community from hate crimes and other targeted attacks. If you ever wanted proof of government sponsored persecution and discrimination look no further.

How can anyone in good conscience call themselves a representative of a free country if someone doesn't even have the right to live safely in their home without being subjected to hate crimes, and furthermore being told that those hate crimes were just fine with the federal government.

It's on people - do not stay home in November.

*additional reporting courtesy of 365Gay.com.

Hate Is NOT a Family Value.

2006-07-08T08:42:00.000-05:00

<==== This Man is a Bigot. Just so we're all together on that. That's Don Wildmon founder and chairman of the hate group American Family Association.

Masquerading as a Christian family group, it is simply a pulpit to preach hate and lead an anti-gay crusade to take the simple right to live in peace and have a loving relationship and family away from a group of people. That's not very Christian, Don.

So not only is our pal Don a bigoted, persecuting, hatemonger, he's also apparently delusional.

In an article he's written for Agape Press he is claiming that the "homosexual ties" is taking the Ford Motor Company "downhill." He is also putting the credit for this squarely at the feet of Ford's so-called support of "homosexual and liberal causes" and the ensuing boycott of Ford by his AFA members. You can read the full article here.

Apparently he says "...the sales slump the company is now experiencing is a direct result of its decision to continue promoting a family-unfriendly, pro-homosexual agenda." I'm sure that he would like to believe this. And I am also sure that the board members at Ford got together and tried to think of the most family-unfriendly maneuver they could make and this was the result. I would love to hear how being a homosexual or supporting their right to live as others do has any impact at all on any family. The only thing anti-family is teaching and preaching hate, which leads to conflict and anger and family dissolution, not the other way around.

But let's also be honest, the real reason Ford is having financial problems has nothing whatsoever to do any support of anyone. The real reason Ford is failing (along with most other U.S. car makers) is three fold. One, gas prices are at an all time high meaning Ford's heavy investment in SUV automobiles and other large gas guzzling vehicles like Pick-ups and other ginormous land cruisers the size of a small South American country, is not compatible with our petroleum reality. Two, Ford's are notoriously unreliable and not as well built as many other vehicles from other car makers. Three, the economy is still slow and many people are out of work and the war on terror is draining our supply of discretionary income so sales of cars and declining and people are waiting longer between car purchases.

So you can claim victory all you want, but it ain't necessarily so.

As for the rest, I find it particularly ironic that Don's preaching of hate and open persecution of gays and lesbians and anyone who supports them will most likely earn him a one-way ticket to hell - right along side all of the people he thinks are going there. That's going to be one heck of a party.

Welcome!

2006-07-07T15:22:00.000-05:00

Welcome to True Persecution.

After years of writing on other blogs about Gay Rights and the Anti-Gay Crusade, I finally couldn't stand it anymore and decided to start a blog dedicated to reporting on this war of freedom and ideology and persecution of an entire culture.

I will be looking at the ongoing campaign to deny civil rights, family rights, work rights and in some cases the rights to simply be, based purely on who a person chooses to love. Make no mistake, this is a war even more real than the so-called war on terror. While the U.S. government sees fit to unlawfully attack other countries for the purpose of "liberating" their citizens and giving them "freedom," right here at home they have not only condoned and sanction, but actively pursued the oppression of gays and lesbians across the country and throughout the world.

Recently I have been seeing more and more about the so-called persecution of Christians, but in fact the opposite is true, Christians and other organized religious groups along with others are committing wholesale discrimination and persecution upon Gays and Lesbians not only without sanctions, but with the full support of the government and many of it's people. So in opposition to this, I am calling their claims of persecution a fraud and now shining the light on True Persecution committed by those very people who would seek to claim it themselves.

We cannot sit idly by while others are being held down, it's time to stand up and fight.