With Oscar season and Black History Month rolling around at the same time, it's gratifying to see Lee Daniels get recognition for being the first black gay man nominated in the category of Best Director.

However, some media reports got it wrong when they claimed that he is the first gay black man to receive an Oscar nomination. The late actor Paul Winfield receives that honor because of his 1972 Oscar nomination for Best Actor for Sounder.

This error is especially poignant to me because it illustrates just how difficult it is for members of the black gay community to receive any type of recognition for what we have contributed to society.

Usually we are ignored during Black History Month. Or worse yet, our achievements are noted but our orientation is stepped over as if its dog dirt on a freshly manicured lawn.

This could happen for a number of reasons but I like to place a degree of blame on this ridiculous war that the black and gay communities find themselves manipulated into regarding who suffered the most. Regardless of the points made by either group, the one who receives the largest casualties in this battle for position is the gay community of color.

The richness of our lives and our contributions to America are diminished because we are seen as commodities in this tug of war.

Meanwhile, young black gays and lesbians are exploited and taught to hate themselves by either self-hating ministers or other black leaders with an agenda.
 

As usual, NOM's Brian Brown sees a homoconspiracy here where there is none. Note that there is no mention of the pitiful case and the ludicrous testimony of witnesses defending discrimination and Prop 8. And what about religion anyway - is a Christian judge not capable of rendering a pro-gay verdict?

That's a big fat accusation of unprofessional conduct NOM is lobbing, and it could turn around and bite them in the ass, after all, how many SCOTUS justices are Catholic? Is that relevant, Brian?

From: Brian Brown <bbrown@nationformarriage.org>
Date: Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 5:54 PM
Subject: Got Bias? San Francisco Chronicle Reports Prop 8 Judge Vaughn Walker is Gay

Got Bias? SF Chronicle Reports Prop 8 Judge Vaughn Walker is Gay

February 8, 2010

Dear Friend of Marriage, In a story this Sunday (Feb. 7), the San Francisco Chronicle reported that Prop 8 Judge Vaughn Walker is gay and called his orientation, "The biggest open secret in the landmark trial over same-sex marriage." We have no idea whether the report is true or not. But we do know one really big important fact about Judge Walker: He's been an amazingly biased and one-sided force throughout this trial, far more akin to an activist than a neutral referee. That's no secret at all. Protect Marriage, the defendants in this case are effectively being held hostage by Judge Walker and cannot really comment. But Judge Walker's bias from the bench includes: A series of rulings permitting deep and deeply irrelevant "fishing expeditions" into the private and personal motivations and secret campaign strategy of campaign proponents. It wasn't six guys at Protect Marriage that passed Prop 8 it was 7 million Californians. But Judge Walker went so far as to order the Prop 8 campaign to disclose private internal communications about messages that were considered for public use but never actually used. He even ordered the campaign to turn over copies of all internal records and e-mail messages relating to campaign strategy. Even though the Prop 8 supporters were forced to turn over private, internal documents and emails, Walker has refused to demand the same from opponents of the measure. In fact, Walker has refused to even rule on a motion to compel the discovery of this information, even though he has already closed testimony in the case. That alone is an unbelievable tilting of the playing field. Walker has presided over a show trial designed to generate sympathetic headlines and news coverage for gay marriage supporters. Witness after witness was allowed to testify about their "expert" opinion that homosexuals have been discriminated against, that they feel badly when society does not validate their relationships, and that the passage of Prop 8 was simply an echo of historic prejudice and bigotry foisted on society by religious zealots. To show the lengths that Walker has gone to create a "record" favoring the plaintiffs, he even allowed one "expert" witness -- a gay man from Colorado who has never lived in California and was never exposed to any Prop 8 campaign messages -- to testify that his parents' efforts to change his sexual orientation failed.  But the most egregious, and damaging, of all of Judge Walker's rulings was his determination to violate federal rules to broadcast his show trial worldwide. The US Supreme Court eventually blocked Walker's efforts (and rapped his biased knuckles sharply!) finding that he improperly changed the rules "at the eleventh hour" in violation of federal law. (Unfortunately, however, but by the time the Supreme Court issued a permanent stay two days into trial, the supporters of Prop 8 had already lost two-thirds of their expert witnesses who feared retaliation from the publicity). Judge Walker's bias has been so extreme, he's earned a rare judicial "twofer." Key elements of his "fishing expedition" rulings were already reversed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (notably one of the most liberal in the nation) and the Supreme Court had to step in to block his illegal attempt to broadcast the trial. It is highly unusual for a higher court to have to intercede in a trial judge's handling of a trial while it is going on -- yet Walker has had that "distinction" twice in the same case -- and we're not yet even at closing arguments.  There's only one saving grace to Judge Walker's bias. It's so big, and so obvious, not only the American public but the Supreme Court itself is already aware we have bias in the trial judge presiding.

Faithfully, Brian S. Brown Executive Director National Organization for Marriage 20 Nassau Street, Suite 242 Princeton, NJ  08542 bbrown@nationformarriage.org

©2010 National Organization for Marriage.

Even before I landed in Uganda, I got a taste of how much influence the Christian right has on the country.

On KLM flight 561 from Amsterdam to Entebbe, I was surrounded by Christian missionaries. The plane was literally packed with Bible-thumpers from Texas to North Carolina.

The camera angle widens to reveal the woman's son and his male partner sitting next to her and her grandchild. It is only then that you realize this is an ad asking you to vote no on a ballot initiative which would repeal marriage equality in Maine. (You can see the ad HERE.) The commercial said a lot. But it's what it did not say that was worth hearing. The ad didn't say a word about rights or benefits. It spoke of responsibilities and commitment.

Third Way recently partnered with Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research to conduct two statewide polls after the 2009 election: in Washington, where voters upheld an expanded domestic partnership law, and in Maine, where voters overturned marriage. By analyzing the poll results, we've come up with some insights about what we think is the best way forward to achieve relationship recognition and marriage in the future, and they sound an awful lot like that ad from Maine.

Although I've been personally aware of and pissed off at racism since kindergarten (I can remember my moment of awakening to it, in fact), I still found that this video had an impact on me.  In particular, the picture of the white stick figure placed in stark numerical minority to the black stick figures made the back of my brain squirm in unfamiliar discomfort.  And I find this interesting.  Here I am a person who not only has despised racism for a lifetime but also has a first-hand understanding of bigotry because I'm part of a sexual minority, and still I could be affected by the imagery.  What does this mean?

I'm tempted to conclude that it means that experience with one form of oppression doesn't automatically and totally translate into complete empathy for another form.  Because the truth is that as a white person, I've visited places where I'm a racial minority, but I've never lived as a racial minority in a racist society still struggling with a slavery legacy.

Perhaps the notion of "eternal vigilance" I was invoking last week in regard to the LGBT legal landscape applies to me as an individual as much as it applies to our community(ies) working for change on a broader scale.  I'm glad this video pinged me.  I will never know what it's like to grow up and live as a racial minority, but I can play the reality game and at least be reminded that my disapproval of racism doesn't mean that I can get lazy and forget the nuances of what racial minorities face daily.

Ok, enough about me.  What did you think of the video?  How did you respond to it on a gut level?  Anyone willing to meander a bit further with me along my stream of consciousness can continue below the fold.
When the video mentioned the de facto slavery that continued after emancipation, it reminded me of a chilling memory I had a few years ago while reading Douglas Blackmon's Slavery by Another Name.  The memory was of ancient jars of turpentine in my grandpa's garage.  This was the 60s and 70s.  Grandpa never threw anything away that might be useful, and those jars, which he occasionally asked me to fetch for him when he was working on some handyman project, were easily old enough to have been produced by the "free" Georgia black men described in Blackmon's book.  It is sobering to contemplate how we can unknowingly be using the products of something so horrific as home-grown slavery. ]]> Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:00:00 GMT http://xfruits.com/yhblogger/?id=77967&clic=493591106&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPamsHouseBlend%2F%7E3%2FMCsnFLILPjo%2Fracial-discrimination-the-reality-show http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/15154/racial-discrimination-the-reality-show Pam's House Blend - Front Page From his site come confirmation of sad news...

Congressman John Murtha Passes Away at Age 77

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Congressman John P. Murtha (PA-12) passed away peacefully this afternoon at 1:18 p.m. at Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington, VA. At his bedside was his family.

Murtha, 77, was Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense.

First elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in February of 1974, Murtha dedicated his life to serving his country both in the military and in the halls of Congress. A former Marine, he became the first Vietnam War combat Veteran elected to the U.S. Congress.

This past Saturday, February 6, 2010, Murtha became Pennsylvania's longest serving Member of Congress.

We might assume that people don't want to hear about gay rights or that they will attack us if we try to bring up who we are and what we're fighting for. Despite these fears, it's absolutely essential that we reach out to others. We're at a critical point in our fight for equality and we need all the soldiers we can get for the war on gay rights.

Gay advocates should take a cue from evangelicals because they've gotten the art of presenting their case down to a science, especially when it comes to converting others. The National Organization for Marriage website provides "Marriage Talking Points" that outline the best ways to talk about the dangers of same-sex marriage. These talking points are researched, they're thorough and they are absolutely frightening ... because they work.

At the Creating Change Conference in Dallas this past weekend, I was fortunate to sit in on a session hosted by the Williams Institute that taught activists how to neutralize gay-rights opponents with factual evidence and current statistics. The know-how to confidently and thoughtfully debate gay issues might allow us to win a few over to our side, but there are some things to keep in mind before trying to convert gay non-believers.

1. Know your audience
Not all conservatives are implacable and ignorant know-it-alls who won't listen to reason. But some are. When faced with someone who is unwilling to listen to any side but her own, it's of no use to debate the validity of gay issues. There's a difference between someone who shows reticence toward the cause and someone who's looking to pick a fight.

2. Get your facts together
Unlike opponents, we don't have a bible that we can turn to for all the answers. However, the Williams Institute damn near has provided us with a gay bible. You can learn everything from gay census data to the negative impact of anti-gay legislation. Armed with statistical proof of the harm of gay prejudice, even hard-core haters won't have much wiggle room in the debate.

3. Tell personal stories
Though factual knowledge is absolutely imperative in fighting anti-gay arguments, there's nothing that can change a person's view quicker than a testimony. Hearing firsthand how hurtful and harmful gay prejudice has been in your life can frame the gay debate in a deeply resonant way, especially for those who know you personally.

4. Don't get angry
Have you ever been writhing in rage when you hear the typical anti-gay propaganda? It's easy to get angry when others espouse backwards or downright hurtful views on gay issues. But reacting in anger will always give away your power and make what you're saying less effective. We're fighting for our right to love one another without facing discrimination. Make your cause about our love and not their hate.

5. Give it time and follow up
If you've told a family member, co-worker or friend about gay rights issues, they may seem unreceptive in the beginning. But many of us have known once-opponents who, given some time to mull things over, might reconsider their stance. Even if you're faced with someone who outright rejects you and your beliefs, be persistent and follow up with them regarding questions and arguments. Winning people over isn't a race. The more you talk to someone the more comfortable they will feel with what you're saying.

Above all, we must be fearless and confident when it comes to telling others about our cause. As the saying goes, "There's no zealot like a convert," and if we're able to change even one mind we might find a remarkable ally in the cause.

Photo credit: lighttripper

It's time that these elected officials let the people see them answering questions about policy and legislation without all of the hired guns behind the curtain -- aides, consultants and pollsters ready to coach them on dodging a direct answer. We'll be able to see who the empty suits are on the Hill, and perhaps break through some of these legislative logjams.

We live in a world that increasingly demands more dialogue than monologue. President Obama's January 29th question-and-answer session with Republican leaders gave the public a remarkable window into the state of our union and governing process. It was riveting and educational. The exchanges were substantive, civil and candid. And in a rare break from our modern politics, sharp differences between elected leaders were on full public display without rancor or ridicule.

This was one of the best national political debates in many years. Citizens who watched the event were impressed, by many accounts. Journalists and commentators immediately responded by continuing the conversation of the ideas put forward by the president and his opponents - even the cable news cycle was disrupted for a day.

America could use more of this - an unfettered and public airing of political differences by our elected representatives. So we call on President Barack Obama and House Minority Leader John Boehner to hold these sessions regularly - and allow them to be broadcast and webcast live and without commercial interruption, sponsorship or intermediaries. We also urge the President and the Republican Senate caucus to follow suit. And we ask the President and the House and Senate caucuses of his own party to consider mounting similar direct question-and-answer sessions. We will ask future Presidents and Congresses to do the same.

It is time to make Question Time a regular feature of our democracy.

Please join us by signing the Demand Question Time petition.

You can follow Question Time on Twitter (#QuestionTime)
]]> Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:00:00 GMT http://xfruits.com/yhblogger/?id=77967&clic=493591108&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPamsHouseBlend%2F%7E3%2FSY60bYOLqsM%2Ftired-of-seeing-your-elected-officials-spinning-the-issues-demand-question-time http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/15152/tired-of-seeing-your-elected-officials-spinning-the-issues-demand-question-time Pam's House Blend - Front Page "She is more concerned about her reelection than helping people. She actively discourages any government attempt to stimulate development. This may explain why only three of 12 counties in the 5th District are targeted for new broadband infrastructure and access funding. We need a representative in Washington who helps bring jobs back home, not someone who actively discourages that! ... [Foxx] cheer leads a business culture where the rich and well-connected get richer while employees, shareholders and customers get left in the dirt."

But make no mistake -- this is unfortunately a conservative district, one that is ill-served by Foxx. She needs to go, and Billy Kennedy has stepped up to the challenge and he filed to run this morning.

Does he have a chance? The stars are aligning for change because she hasn't been able to garner the fringe teabaggers, a real one --  Republican Brad Smith (a big fan of Glenn Beck btw) is running as a third party candidate. That means all Billy Kennedy has to do is draw a small slice, maybe 10%, of GOP voters his way he will easily bump Foxx off of her wingnut horse.

Howie Klein did a great piece on Kennedy, interviewing him to show that unseating Foxx will bring the kind of change to the 5th that it needs. Howie on how the change is needed because of DEM strategists who think Foxx is a good foil for them -- enough to leave the residents of the 5th stuck with garbage in-garbage out Foxx.

As I mentioned in November when I first heard that Smith was taking on the wild-eyed hellion, there is no list existent of the half dozen most lunatic fringe members of Congress that doesn't include this homophobic sociopath. I have literally been in strategy sessions where Democrats have said that her bizarre and extremist presence in Congress does them more good than harm and that there's no reason to run any candidates against her since she is probably the single least effective member of Congress and a warning signal to moderates across party lines that, at its core, the Republican Party offers nothing but extremism, fanaticism and a world turned upside down by ignorance, hatred and fear.

Dishonest politicians try to divide us and pit us against each other in order to win an election on wedge issues. Politicians of both political parties emphasize wedge issues so they can distract us and avoid talking about the serious problems we face. It is a tactic used to confuse us in order to hide how they really vote about bread and butter issues.

More and better jobs, a commitment to Medicare and Social Security, real discussions about whether or not we should commit our young people and our nation to war, health care reform, and the failure of bailouts and subsidies to corporations are not wedge issues.

I will not run a wedge campaign. I want to focus on what all of us can do to improve our lives. I plan to listen to my constituents and hear what's important to them because I respect other people's points of view. I will not allow my opponent to play "gotcha" politics on these questions of individual liberty.

I want to make it clear. I support freedom and equal rights for all people. I will protect all individual constitutional rights, without allowing politicians to pick and choose which Amendments deserve to be taken seriously.

Even when a candidate or political party wins an election through the use of a wedge issue, once they arrive in Washington they do nothing to further its cause. That is when it becomes painfully clear that the candidate never had any real commitment to the issue itself. The candidate simply used the issue to try to fool the people and win the election at any cost.

Washington isn't working because people there are greedy. They've forgotten what real Americans learn every day of our working lives that we expect real value for the money we pay. So we're paying taxes, and not getting value back for our dollar. Instead of working on real reform in banking or health care or farm policy, Congress wastes time debating toothless laws, written by lobbyists, for the very industries the laws are meant to regulate.

I believe we must replace the culture of corruption in Washington with a renewed culture of service. That's why my campaign will tithe 10 percent of our volunteer hours directly to local charities.

I've worked all my life. I haven't spent time rubbing elbows with celebrities and paid lobbyists, and I don't intend to start now. This country has real problems that affect my family and my neighbors' families, and I want to go to Washington to work on real solutions.

It's time to stop the Beltway architects of failure. We've seen enough of that crap. That's why, if you feel so inclined, can donate to Billy Kennedy's campaign directly through ActBlue.

Billy Kennedy is a popular radio talk show host-- and a farmer and carpenter-- with a fiery populist message that sounds a lot like the saner noises coming from the Tea Party movement-- but without the racism, hatred, and Fox-stoked paranoia. Kennedy's speaking authentically for working Americans like himself-- and that could spell real trouble for Big Business shill Virginia Foxx.

Perhaps the most notable anti-gay celebrity speaking at the Tea Party Convention was former Alabama Judge Roy Moore. He became famous last decade for refusing to remove a statue of the Ten Commandments from his courthouse, despite being ordered to by federal officials. In the time since that dust up, Gov. Moore has gone on a crusade, one might say, toward what he sees as a perversion of American values. And boy, does Moore really not like the steps that President Barack Obama has taken toward advancing LGBT equality.

"[Obama] has ignored our history and our heritage, arrogantly declaring to the world that we are no longer a Christian nation," Moore declared in his Tea Party gig. "He has elevated immorality to a new level, setting aside the entire month of June to celebrate gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender pride. He now threatens to change our law to allow homosexuality in our military."

Word has it that President Obama is also considering changing the name of June to, simply, "Debauchery." At least in Roy Moore's head.

OK, so maybe Tea Party organizers didn't know Roy Moore was going to get on stage and dither on about social issues. Good thing they turned his microphone over to ... Pastor Rick Scarborough? You mean the guy who consistently compares homosexuals to drunkards, thieves, and swindlers?

So much for the Tea Party Movement being about economics. Pastor Scarborough even led the crowd in Nashville in a prayer condemning homosexuals -- to the tune of "Amens" from the crowd, according to Time Magazine.

Forget this being a new movement. Forget this being the wave of political activism of the future. Tea Party? No, it's just an extension of the same old religious right politics rooted in racism and homophobia. Call it this decade's version of the 1980s so-called "Moral Majority," only with different clothes.

There's definitely a space for independent-minded folks who are fed up with the stagnation in Washington. But the Tea Party movement isn't it.

Photo credit: a1mega

Peter Sagal (Show Host): Duncan Hunter: He's a Republican Congressman and military veteran, He went on All Things Considered and he said...

Well, if you let the gays in, then you'll have to let in the quote 'transgenders and hermaphrodites.' Unquote."

Carl Kasell: Huh.

Peter Sagal: He said that. He was worried about the hermaphrodites. He doesn't understand that hermaphrodites would be a tactical asset: They can pursue enemies into both men's and women's restrooms.

Adam Felber: That's true. Yeah.

Julia Sweeney: Then maybe...

Peter Sagal: The Taliban would have no place to hide.

Adam Felber: I don't think we have any laws on the books preventing hermaphrodites from serving in our military, do we?

Peter Sagal: Well...he's afraid that they will figure that out.

Mo Rocca: They fall under the Don't Ask, Can't Tell policy.

Julia Sweeney: *Laughs*

What I don't like about this bit is fourfold. To begin with, i understand the quoting Rep. Hunter using the term "hermaphrodite," but I don't understand repeating the term when the North American Intersex Society had identified hermaphrodite as a term to avoid:

The words "hermaphrodite" and "pseudo-hermaphrodite" are stigmatizing and misleading words. Unfortunately, some medical personnel still use them to refer to people with certain intersex conditions, because they still subscribe to an outdated nomenclature that uses gonadal anatomy as the basis of sex classification. In a paper titled Changing the Nomenclature/Taxonomy for Intersex: A Scientific and Clinical Rationale, five ISNA-associated experts recommend that all terms based on the root "hermaphrodite" be abandoned because they are scientifically specious and clinically problematic. The terms fail to reflect modern scientific understandings of intersex conditions, confuse clinicians, harm patients, and panic parents. We think it is much better for everyone involved when specific condition names are used in medical research and practice.

...One more thing: While some intersex people seek to reclaim the word "hermaphrodite" with pride to reference themselves (much like the words "dyke" and "queer" have been reclaimed by LBGT people), we've learned over the years it is best generally avoided, since the political subtlety is lost on a lot of people.

So, media stylebooks generally take the tack of indicating reporters should only directly quote derogatory or problematic terminology, but otherwise these derogatory or problematic terms should be avoided. I personally believe the reporters and comedians on Wait, Wait...Don't Tell Me! went beyond just quoting terms the INSA identified as potentially stigmatizing. Certainly Rep. Hunter initially used the phrase "transgenders and hermaphrodites" specifically to stigmatize transgender and intersex people.

Secondly, I don't appreciate how that joke about the bathrooms intersexed people follows the Bathroom Meme. There has been much use of this Bathroom Meme -- that transsexual women, as well as other transgender people presenting as women, are potential bathroom predators -- in arguing against basic civil rights not just for trans people of all stripes, but also against basic civil rights for lesbian, gay, and bisexual people.

By the way, does anyone remember this radio ad by Focus On The Family which talks about bathroom predators?

Using the Bathroom Meme in a segement regarding intersexed people seems to me to be making intersex people as a public bathroom suspect class -- in a similar manner as trans people have been defined by the religious right as a public bathroom suspect class.

Thirdly, the Taliban reference. The host, the reporters, and comedians may think it's funny to link transgender and/or intersex people with terrorism, but this is actually serious subject matter. From a 2004 DHS Advisory to Security Personnel:

Previous attacks underscore Al-Qaeda's ability to employ suicide bombers - a tactic which can be used against soft targets and VIP's. Terrorists will employ novel methods to artfully conceal suicide devices. Male bombers may dress as females in order to discourage scrutiny. Al-Qaeda operative Richard Reid employed a novel and unique "shoe bomb" device in an attempt to destroy a transcontinental airliner in December 2001.

I would argue transsexual women, other transgender women, and intersexed people of all stripes aren't anymore likely to be terrorists than other people in the general public, so it matters when gender expression is tied into terrorism -- even in a joke.

Lastly, the "Don't Ask, Can't Tell" comment. There is an assumption that intersex people are gender confused because of genetics, ambiguous genitalia, or other biological factors. I would argue that just as transsexuals aren't gender confused about their gender identities, neither are intersexed people.

Gender confusion, as well as bathroom predation, are terminology and arguments by the religious right to stigmatize people for sex and gender variance; it's a way that has been used against intersex, transsexual, and other transgender people to be portrayed as less than fully human.

It would seem that NPR's Wait, Wait...Don't Tell Me! mocking of intersex people wasn't done based not upon the behaviors or character of intersex people as a group or community, but due to the human conditions of intersex people. We wouldn't find it acceptable to mock African-Americans for the color of their skin; we wouldn't find it acceptable to mock physically disabled people for their disabilities; we wouldn't find it acceptable to mock women for being women -- so why would the host, reporters, and comedians on Wait, Wait...Don't Tell Me find it acceptable to mock intersexed people for being intersexed?

I know I'd like to know.

~~~~~
Related:
* Rep. Duncan Hunter's Concern With DADT Includes "Hermaphrodites" And "Transgenders"
]]> Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:30:00 GMT http://xfruits.com/yhblogger/?id=77967&clic=493591110&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPamsHouseBlend%2F%7E3%2FVAlyIyQZb9Q%2Fwait-wait-please-do-tell-us-npr-what-is-so-funny-about-intersexed-people http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/15148/wait-wait-please-do-tell-us-npr-what-is-so-funny-about-intersexed-people Pam's House Blend - Front Page ]]> Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:05:00 GMT http://xfruits.com/yhblogger/?id=77967&clic=493591169&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.advocate.com%2FNews%2FDaily_News%2F2010%2F02%2F08%2FAaron_Carter_Poses_for_NoH8%2F http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/02/08/Aaron_Carter_Poses_for_NoH8/ Daily News Sometimes "the Twitter" reveals all. In this case we have the candid words of Erick Erickson, proprietor of Red State ("the most widely read right of center blog on Capitol Hill") regarding the Focus on the Family Tebow ad:

Erick Erickson also serves as a Deacon at Vineville Presbyterian Church. I wonder how his wife feels about those tweets? I'm sure she agrees.
]]> Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:00:00 GMT http://xfruits.com/yhblogger/?id=77967&clic=493591111&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPamsHouseBlend%2F%7E3%2FKp6a9GgdY08%2Fcnn-talking-headred-states-erickson-ugly-feminists-return-to-their-kitchens-after-tebow-ad http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/15147/cnn-talking-headred-states-erickson-ugly-feminists-return-to-their-kitchens-after-tebow-ad Pam's House Blend - Front Page Would allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the U.S. military really hurt unit cohesion like supporters of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" say it would?

Not if you look at the more than two dozen foreign militaries that have already integrated their militaries to allow openly lesbian and gay troops. From South Africa to Israel to Canada, no foreign government that allows openly gay soldiers has reported one lick of distress when it comes to unit cohesion or morale. In fact, it's quite the opposite.

According to Reason magazine (not necessarily known as a bastion of liberalism), foreign militaries showed nothing more than a shrug when it came to allowing folks to serve openly. The British government observed "a marked lack of reaction." The Canadian government reported "no effect." And in Australia, a group that worked hard to keep a ban on gay soldiers in place eventually came around to say that straight Australian troops never had a lot of difficulty accepting openly gay colleagues.

So that sentiment about how letting troops serve openly could threaten unit cohesion? It seems about as much of an urban legend as the idea that the kid from the Life Cereal commercials died eating Pop Rocks, or that Walt Disney is cryogenically frozen.

Gay service in foreign militaries is also shaping up to be a cornerstone of the work that The Palm Center, a research outfit in California dedicated to overturning "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," plans to do this Spring. They just announced a Spring symposium that will spotlight how gay troops have been successfully integrated into militaries around the world, and how this had absolutely no effect on unit cohesion or troop morale.

"As military and political leaders anticipate the end of 'don't ask, don't tell,' the lessons from the twenty-five foreign forces that allow open gay service are instructive," said Dr. Aaron Belkin, Director of the Palm Center. The Palm Center is also preparing to launch a behemoth report on foreign militaries who welcome gay troops. It's expected to drop next week.

So the next time you hear someone talking about troop morale or unit cohesion, just remember that at least 25 militaries around the world have yet to show any problem with allowing gay and lesbian troops to serve openly. What makes the United States think that it will be any different?

Photo credit: The U.S. Army

Smarting over the state Senate's refusal to pass marriage equality and disillusioned at the moment with the Democratic Party majority, Garden State Equality's 85-member Board of Directors unanimously decided against giving financial contributions to political parties and their affiliated committees.  

Under the new policy, Garden State Equality will make financial contributions only to individual candidates and to non-party organizations that further equality for the LGBT community, according to a release issued this morning by the organization.

...Infuriated with Democrats who shied away from the [marriage equality] vote during last year's lame duck session, including Senate President (then-Senate Majority Leader) Steve Sweeney (D-West Deptford), Goldstein said the party floundered helplessly even when it came to basic courtesy.

For anyone who missed her Tea Party Convention  keynote speech, Media Matters did an excellent job slicing through her baloney.

Oh, and for the record- according to Sarah, Rush Limbaugh was being "satirical" in using the R word on-air recently...

CHRIS WALLACE (host): OK, but, Rush Limbaugh weighed in this week, and he said this: "Our politically correct society is acting like some giant insult's taken place by calling a bunch of people who are retards, retards."

PALIN:He was satirical in that --

WALLACE: Wait, let me finish. "I mean, these people, these liberal activists are kooks." Should Rush Limbaugh apologize?

PALIN: They are kooks, so I agree with Rush Limbaugh. Rush Limbaugh was using satire to bring attention to what this politically correct --

WALLACE: But he used the "R" word.

PALIN: Using satire. Name-calling by anyone -- I teach this to my children. You teach this to your children and your grandchildren, too. Name-calling by anyone, it's just unnecessary. It just wastes time. Let's speak to the issues and again, let's move on.

WALLACE: But you know what some people are going to say, Governor, and have said. They say, look, when it's their political adversary, Rahm Emanuel, she's going to call him out -- he's indecent, apologize. But when it's a political friend like Rush Limbaugh, oh, it's satire.

PALIN: I didn't hear Rush Limbaugh call a group of people whom he did not agree with "f-ing retards," and we did know that Rahm Emanuel, it's been reported, did say that. There's a big difference there.

My name is Adam Rogers and I live in the United States of America. I am writing because your country’s government is currently debating a bill that I consider to be extremely dangerous and morally reprehensible. It is my understanding that a significant majority of Ugandans support the Anti-Homosexuality Bill that MP David Bahati has introduced, but I believe your support of this bill is based on only one side of the story. The leaders of my country, as well as many others, have urged your leaders to drop this effort, but I would like the opportunity to address you, regular citizen to regular citizen.

I plead with you to continue reading, because the lives and safety of your fellow Ugandans are at stake. After such a despicable history of imperialism, I understand that you are weary of anything you perceive to be a Western export, but I assure you that homosexuality is not the export. Though not always accepted, same-gender affection has been detailed in every culture throughout history. The Western exports you should be concerned with are the lies you have been told by the American evangelical leaders who have been visiting your country.

The message that “homosexuality is changeable” is a fringe and extreme viewpoint that is not based on any reputable science. You have been taught that the gay movement is “an evil based entity” and that our goal is to “defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of promiscuity.” This could not be further from the truth. We do not want to defeat the marriage-based society, we simply want to be a part of it.

Let me clear up some other lies that you have heard. Pastor Martin Ssempa has worked hard to convince you of how different and scary gay people are. He has repeatedly said that we are trying to recruit your children and he has tried to make you afraid of us by saying that we eat each other’s poop. I beg you not to listen to anything this man has to say. He does not spew these lies to fight for Ugandans, he lies because he knows it gets him global headlines. Ssempa has a long history of using his country’s challenges to gain fame -– including burning condoms in the name of Jesus.

The reality is that homosexuals and heterosexuals are not different at all. We all value the same things: family, friends, happiness, freedom and love. I assure you that gay people are not to be feared or hated -– we are painfully normal, as evidenced by my story.

Since I was a young child, I have been attracted to men in the same way that many young people develop an attraction for members of the opposite sex. I fought against these feelings in my early years and I tried to force myself to have feelings for women, but it was a lost (and unnecessary) cause. When I was 18-years-old, I told my parents, family and friends that I was gay and I was blessed with their support and love.

Now years later, I work at a University and my husband is an elementary school teacher. We have been committed to each other for over seven years and we were recently married in front of 150 members of our friends and family. We live a very quiet and peaceful life and the fabric of the traditional family has not been destroyed because of our love for each other.

Pastor Ssempa has urged Ugandans to not use the word “gay” because it means “happy” and “these people are not happy.” I personally am extremely happy because I am able to spend the rest of my life with the person whom I love. I fear it is your fellow Ugandans who will never know happiness, because they are being forced to live their lives in secrecy out of fear that they will be imprisoned or killed because of who they are.

I call upon you to not let Pastor Ssempa and MP Bahati speak for you on this subject. Please do not rob gay Ugandans of the same chance at happiness that you enjoy.

Thank you for listening,

Adam Amel Rogers

Photo credit: freeuganda

Anti-gay folks in Iowa have been chomping at the bit to have the legislature pass a measure that would create a statewide ballot initiative on whether same-sex marriage should remain legal. Call it the Prop 8 or the Question 1 of the Midwest. But Iowa voters? They just don't want legislators wasting their time on such frivolous -- not to mention homophobic -- measures.

A new poll from the Des Moines Register shows that among six issues that could come before the legislature this session, a repeal of same-sex marriage is dead last, with nearly two-thirds of the state saying let's let gay marriage become settled law in the state. The most important issue, according to voters? Adopting a measure to ban text messaging while driving.

Still, despite overwhelming evidence that Iowa voters just don't want legislators wasting their time on criminalizing gay marriage, a handful of anti-gay Republicans are looking to force a ballot measure through. They'll need help from about seven Democrats in order to make it happen.

Photo credit: D3 San Francisco

Was the advertisement the extreme anti-choice message that some folks feared? No, it wasn't. But the content of the advertisement was never entirely the sole issue here. The controversy was sparked mostly by the double standard that CBS created in order to air the ad, rewriting their own internal advertising policies in order to accommodate Focus on the Family. In years past, CBS refused advocacy advertisements from MoveOn, as well as the United Church of Christ.

As far as advertisements go, the United Church of Christ ad rejected a few years back was equally as tame as the Focus on the Family advertisement last night. But beyond that, the issue here has always been about the organization behind the advertisement. Last night, 100 million viewers were told at the end of the Focus on the Family commercial to go visit their Web site. And while Tim and Pam Tebow might not have had anything controversial to say during their 30 seconds last night, the Focus on the Family Web site doesn't waste any time in getting their homophobia on.

The Focus Web site is full of nuggets that belittle and dehumanize LGBT people. From the "God created marriage as a loyal covenant between one man and one woman only" speak to commentary that "gay marriage and civil unions" have put marriage in a state of crisis, there's a lot more behind the curtain of the Tim and Pam Tebow ad. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Focus on the Family also writes on their Web site that gay marriage will lead to recognition of polygamy, and they openly advocate for ballot measures that take away civil rights for lesbian and gay couples.

But the homophobic comments don't stop there. Wait 'til you see Focus on the Family's section dedicated to the evils of gay adoption. There you'll find out that Focus on the Family believes that gay adoption hurts children, and that same-sex parents can't provide the right kind of love for their children. You'll even find a knock that same-sex families are unhealthy, and that kids raised in same-sex parent households have a higher rate of emotional abuse, suspension from school, and drug abuse.

Yup, that's the Web site that was flashed before 100 million people last night. And that's the real tragedy behind the Focus on the Family advertisement. Pam and Tim Tebow may have been the sugar-coating, but there's a really bitter pill behind the message that viewers who made their way to Focus on the Family's Web site likely found.

The ad's tagline that appeared with the Web site was "Celebrate Family. Celebrate Life." It might as well have said Celebrate Homophobia, too. Because that's a good chunk of what you'll find at Focus on the Family when you look behind the Pam and Tim Tebow curtain.

Photo credit: zap2it

And now tomorrow, a new poll of 3,000 active duty troops will show that support for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is at an all-time low inside the ranks of the military. Combined, it all begs the question: have we reached the tipping point on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell?"

In physics terms, a tipping point means that an object has moved irreversibly from one state to another. For "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," has debate moved so far to the side of repeal that there's no turning back?

Frank Rich seems to think so. He writes in the New York Times today that opponents of allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military had no idea what to do this week, given the onslaught of repeal sentiment from military leaders. How do you argue, Rich asks, against the heartfelt language used by Adm. Mike Mullen during his testimony before the U.S. Senate, where Mullen plain-spokingly said that forcing soldiers to lie compromises the integrity of the U.S. military?

Let's not forget that Admiral Mullen and Defense Secretary Gates were both appointed to their positions by President George W. Bush. Colin Powell? Yeah, he was a Republican official, too. And Joe Lieberman? He endorsed Sen. John McCain in 2008. In other words, these aren't individuals that can be easily branded as socialists by the Tea Party sect.

These are folks that conservatives have respected for eons, and folks who have been heralded among military audiences for just as long.

Have their voices, coupled with the fact that upwards of 75 percent of the U.S. thinks that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" should be repealed, been enough to create a tipping point -- a point at which support for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in its current form becomes toxic?

U.S. politicians would be wise to find out. Let's see GOP candidates for the U.S. Senate in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Nevada, Colorado and Florida (to name a few) answer whether they'd support a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Put them in the uncomfortable position of having to cuddle with the anti-LGBT crazies in their party, or take an independent stand on behalf of what up to three-quarters of the country sees as a civil rights issue.

As Rich argues, most independents -- the flavor du jour in American politics -- support progressive stands on social issues. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" seems like a softball one.

Democrats would be wise to have a spine on this one. Folks like Adm. Mike Mullen and Defense Secretary Gates do. And if they can stand up, look John McCain in the eye, and tell him that he's flat wrong on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," there's no reason progressives around the country can't do the same, too.

Photo credit: U.S. Coast Guard

The organization started in the late 1970s, inspired by Brooklyn Catholic Bishop Francis Mugavero's call that gay and lesbian people should be treated equally in society.

But what a difference thirty years makes. That spirit of inclusion and finding a new way for LGBT people and the Church to come together has been replaced by a Church leadership that routinely works to take away the civil rights of LGBT people. In Maine. In California. In New Jersey. In Hawaii. And now the head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is aiming his target at New Ways Ministry, telling the organization that they should no longer consider themselves legitimately Catholic because they support and are pastoral to LGBT people.

"[New Ways Ministry's] claim to be Catholic only confuses the faithful regarding the authentic teaching and ministry of the Church with respect to persons with a homosexual inclination," said Bishop Francis George. "Accordingly, I wish to make it clear that, like other groups that claim to be Catholic but deny central aspects of Church teaching, New Ways Ministry has no approval or recognition from the Catholic Church and that they cannot speak on behalf of the Catholic faithful in the United States."

But here's a newsflash. Bishop Francis George is just a man. He might have a title in front of his name, but when I look up the word pastoral, I don't see his brand of condemnation. Instead, I see the mission of folks like New Ways Ministry who have worked to build bridges between the Church and queer people for thirty years.

For their part, New Ways Ministry issued a statement saying that they were surprised by Bishop Francis George's comments. Turns out the Bishop never opened a conversation with the group, instead deciding to pen a statement from abroad. How very passive aggressive.

"We are astonished that Cardinal George released such a statement, since New Ways Ministry has never been contacted by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to discuss the nature of our work," said Francis DeBernardo, Executive Director of New Ways Ministry. "We were not even extended the basic courtesy of being informed of the statement as it was being released to the press. Instead, we learned about it only by reading a press account."

What has happened to the U.S. Catholic Church? Thirty years ago, Bishop Mugavero called on society to treat LGBT people as equal. Heck, even as recently as 1997 the Church issued a statement affirming that LGBT people were "always God's children."

Now, if Bishop Francis George is to be believed, you can't even be pastoral to LGBT people and still consider yourself officially Catholic. Where's the love, sir?

Catholics believe in Jesus. If biblical accounts are to be believed, Jesus was a man who loved his enemies, worked with those who were oppressed and suffered violence, and a man who treated people equally. He's also a man that during the course of his lifetime, never said one thing disparaging about homosexuality.

Maybe Bishop George, and the entire institutional Church, could use a refresher course. Meanwhile, I don't care what Bishop George says. The principles behind New Ways Ministry are the very reason I still feel a connection with the church. No man, whether he's got the word Bishop, Deacon, Cardinal or Pope before his name, is going to tell me otherwise.

Photo credit: andycoan

At least, that's what you'll learn if you're inside the classroom of Professor Dr. Bradley Lopez, who teaches an introductory health class at the college. The ACLU sent a letter to Fresno City College today, documenting some rather homophobic and unscientific curriculum from Lopez's classroom.

According to the ACLU, in addition to telling his students that homosexuality is evil and that gay folks should become ex-gay folks, Dr. Lopez has told his students that homosexuality is a threat to society, and that instead of global warming, students should worry about hellfire and damnation. Oh, and the ACLU says that Dr. Lopez has used quotes from the Bible as empirical evidence to teach his health class students that life begins at conception, and that abortion is murder.

Let Fresno City College's President and Vice President know that this type of academic experience is far from academic excellence. Allowing someone to co-opt a health class in order to teach homophobia is damaging to students, and to the reputation of Fresno City College.

One student who took Professor Lopez's class said that she did not expect to be taught religion inside a health seminar.

"I feel very let down by my school,” said Jacqui Mahaffey, a 24-year-old student. “I signed up for health science because I was interested in the subject, but what I got was hateful lecturing based on Professor Lopez’s personal beliefs. I am in school to learn, not to be indoctrinated with one professor’s religious views and anti-gay beliefs.”

Fresno City College is also a public school, which means that not only is Dr. Lopez's salary supported by public funds, but that there should be measures of accountability put in place to make sure that professors are teaching students a curriculum that will benefit them in the real world.

That's exactly what staff attorneys with the ACLU are arguing. If Fresno City College doesn't respond, there will be further action in the works.

“The college class room of a state school should be a welcoming environment for all students, and courses, especially health courses, should be based on objective and medically accurate information, not religiously-based bias,” said Elizabeth Gill, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California. “While Professor Lopez is free to talk about his religious beliefs outside of the classroom, Fresno City College has an obligation to protect its students from religious indoctrination and anti-gay bias presented as ‘science’ or ‘fact.’ Professor Lopez’s health class fails students in both regards.”

If you agree that Fresno City College has an obligation to make sure their classrooms are safe spaces, not to mention places where facts and science are taught in the classroom instead of personal belief and opinion, send Fresno City College a message. The only thing on the line is their academic reputation.

Photo credit: newzar

Turn to Montgomery County, just outside of Washington, D.C., where a group of high school students were officially given literature from Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX), an ex-gay organization that believes that sexual orientation is a self-chosen identity, and collaborates with organizations who view homosexuality as destructive. What did the flier given to students say?

According to teachthefacts.org, the flier told students that if they were LGBT or knew someone who identified as LGBT, that they could change. Oh, and of course, that scientists have yet to discover the "gay center of the brain."

"Every year thousands of people with unwanted same-sex attractions make the personal decision to leave a gay identity through gender affirming programs, including therapy, faith based ministries, and other non-judgmental environments," the PFOX flier stated. "No 'gay gene' or gay center of the brain has been found. No medical test exists to determine if a person is homosexual. Sexual orientation is based on feelings and is a matter of self-affirmation and public declaration."

Huh, maybe next week the Montgomery County Public Schools would like to hand out fliers suggesting that the world is flat? Because that carries about as much scientific fact as what PFOX is saying. Tell the Montgomery County Public Schools that peddling propaganda from ex-gay organizations is not only harmful to LGBT students, it's also an affront to science.

PFOX claims to have distributed the flier as a means of drawing attention to the discrimination that ex-gay people face. But as the Washington City Paper's Amanda Hess points out, PFOX doesn't really have all that many ex-gays among its membership. Just a lot of straight people who talk about how gay people can change their sexual orientation.

But PFOX and their bad science aside, what was the Montgomery County Public School system thinking? The President of the School Board even admitted that these fliers "probably" ran counter to what children are taught in the classroom.

"These fliers are probably counter to what is available in our health curriculum," said President Patricia O'Neill. Really? So would you hand out a flier that says 2+2=67 too?

The school district said they were forced by a previous lawsuit to distribute the fliers. But does litigation really mean giving your students misinformation? As teachthefacts.org notes, that's just not a good enough justification.

"This is damaging both to gay adolescents who need understanding and accurate information at a time in their lives when they are most vulnerable, and to the others, who are forming attitudes and stereotypes, and are likely to believe this junk about gay people choosing not to be gay, especially since it is handed out by their teachers, at school," they write.

If you agree, send the Montgomery County Public Schools a message that ex-gay fliers -- fliers that counter what's being taught in student health classes -- don't deserve to be distributed like the lunch menu.

Photo credit: allancaplan