The Same Old Stuff PLUS Michigan AFA: Gays are employment risks

I don't usually post much from the likes of the AFA (American Family Association) or its ilk (e.g., the Traditional Values Coalition,  Family Research Council, Exodus International, Catholic League, National Organization for Marriage); the rhetoric is pretty much the same regardless of the organization or event to which these groups respond. 

The Best "It Gets Better"

A few weeks ago I blogged my critique of the "It Gets Better" project.  As well intentioned as it is, many of the stories reinforce some kind of happiness script rooted in heterosexual ideas of happiness. It also stands to lose ground long term in favor of some short term gain.  That's a valid ethical choice, but I'm not sure we want to leave people who see it isn't getting better out to hang, perhaps literally, because they then assume that it's their fault that their life hasn't gotten better.

So, imagine my joy to be directed to this video, which I think better says it. Gabrielle Rivera explains why it might not get better but we do get stronger.  (She is included in Savage's written compilation, but, unfortunately, he dismisses her contribution as just another way of say "it get's better." Thanks for not listening to what she's saying at all, Dan.)

Homophobia

With the recent spat of suicides and bullying incidents that have been focused on or associated with gay or gay-identified individuals, I've had the opportunity to engage in a tremendous amount of discussion about homophobia.  And, not surprisingly, there are different perspectives and understanding of what homophobia is, what is looks like, how pervasive it is, and what the effects of homophobia are.  Certainly a discussion that covers all of these bases well would constitute volumes and is well beyond my scope.  However, I would like to briefly describe my perspective and understanding.

Informing my understanding of homophobia is Dr. Beverly Tatum's definition of racism in her seminal work "Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?"  Tatum (1997) first distinguishes between racism and prejudice.  For Tatum, racism is "a system of advantage based on race" (p. 7).  It goes beyond personal prejudices, "personal ideology" in Tatum's words; rather it is "a system involving cultural messages and institutional policies and practices as well as the beliefs and actions of individuals" (p. 7).  Even when individual people in the dominant group (white or heterosexual) aren't in positions of power or actively act against the interests of black or gay people, they still benefit from the systematic advantages for their group.

Tatum cites Peggy McIntosh's well-known article "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack" (p. 8) wherein McIntosh details the advantages to being white in every day life.  At minimum, such advantages include the ability to be around people like you at almost any time, to speak with authority and not be questioned by people sharing that identity, being certain that unfavorable institutional practices or decisions by people in authority aren't made because of my identity, no need to question if any negative interactions were because of that identity, and so on. Oppression does not have to be overt and/or hostile - it does not have to be prejudicially based - to effect its force.

Tatum makes note that this definition is "antithetical to traditional notions of an American meritocracy" (p. 9).  While we may not like to bust the myth that all men are created equal, "notions of power or privilege" must be addressed (p. 9).  Tatum also interrogates the interests of those who resist such a definition of racism (and by implication all "isms") :   by not understanding "whose interests are served by a 'prejudice only' definition of racism,...the system of advantage is perpetuatued" (p. 9). She later distinguishes between passive and active racism: failure to interrupt a racist joke would be an example of passive racism while telling such a joke would be an active form (p. 13). 

Although not the sum of her arguments, I will finish highlighting Tatum's definition with her caveat: "It is important to acknowledge that while all Whites benefit from racism, they do not all benefit equally.  Other factors, such as socio-economic status, gender, age, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, mental and physical ability, also play a role in our access to social influence and power" (p. 12).

So, using Tatum's definition, I define heterosexism as systematic advantage based on sexuality or sexual orientation.  Homophobia, for me, is the fear or hatred of non-heterosexual people or the philosophy that such people are morally corrupt or psychologically abberant.  Homophobia, in my mind, informs heterosexism in almost every instance and is the larger problem.

There are people who may be heterosexist without being, or meaning to be, homophobic.  Non-homophobic heterosexism may show itself in such ways:

• Asking if you have a significant other (this is both nosey and heterosexist)
• Assuming your significant other is the opposite sex of you
• Social events that presume only opposite sex couples will attend
• Marketing that targets couples and only show opposite sex couples
• The ability to find a community or group of straight people anywhere at almost any time
• The ability to see representations in any form of media of (well adjusted) heterosexual people (in stable, healthy relationship or sexual active in a socially acceptable way, or...)
• Ability to enter a locker room and not have others presume you're interested in their bodies
• The ability to easily find, read, hear or otherwise access the history and contributions of heterosexuals
• Forms with forced choices such as  "married, single, divorced" that don't recognize the validity or existence of different forms of same-sex relationships might be non-homophobic
• Some individuals who say "that's so gay" (although the phrase is rooted in homophobia, some may say it in ignorance of the implication)

And so on...

Listing non-homophobic heterosexist manifestations is actually pretty difficult, because so few of them exist. Even the last two examples must come with the caveat that it is difficult, if not impossible to tell, if they are products of homophobia or simply a heterosexist society.  I will briefly mention that a specific brand of homophobia impacts straight-identified men as well: sissyphobia.  This is a more direct expression of the misogyny that underlines homophobia.  A fear, hatred, or dislike of men who have effeminate characteristics or personalities betrays the hatred of women that is the basis for homophobia.  I heard a rabbi once say that "homophobia is a room in the greater house of misogyny" and I firmly believe this.

I've been inclined in my discussions to use blatant examples of the pervasiveness of homophobia, but homophobia manifests itself in the smallest of interactions and assumptions, just as heterosexism does.  Still the homophobic, active oppression of gays and lesbians is a major force in society today.

Homophobia manifest itself in some obvious ways; here are just a few:

• National and global religious leaders frequently make speeches regarding the evils of homosexuality.
• National and global religious leaders often talk about some perceived agenda homosexuals persue to destroy traditional societal institutions and roles.
• National, locals (and sometimes global) politicians claim that homosexuals are unfit for certain jobs, especially those around children.
• National and local politicians and national and local religious leaders and organizations advocate and advance anti-gay legislation, including opposing legislation that would protect homosexuals from being fired and denied housing or medical care because of their sexual orientation.
• National and local politicians and national and local religious leaders and organizations oppose legislation that would allow same-sex couples hospital visitation rights or the ability for same-sex couples to make financial and health decisions for their significant others.
• National and local politicians and national and local religious leaders and organizations oppose legislation that would allow same-sex couples who seek the legal rights, responsibilities and protections that a civil marriage provides to have access to the same rights and protections they enjoy.
• National and local politicians and national and local religious leaders and organizations oppose legislation that would allow same-sex couples to adopt children, advancing the idea that a child in foster care or an orphanage is better off than with a loving gay or lesbian parents.
• Religious and secular leaders of all levels promote the idea that homosexuals are (more likely to be) child molestors /pedophiles and/or seek to convert people, but especially children, to homosexuality.
• Religious and secular leaders of all levels promote research that does not meet well-established scientific criteria or backing to advance lies and falsehoods about gays and lesbians.
• Religious leaders of all levels promote that homosexuality is a sin that is worse than any other sin simply by the amount of attention they devote to it compared to all other sins.
• National religious leaders have declared that homosexuals are responsible for 9/11, Katrina, and other disasters that have befallen the United States.
• National and local politicians and national and local religious leaders and organizations have found legislation that would establish anti-bullying regulations because they believe such legislation would silence their abusive depicitions of homosexuals.
• Gay and lesbian military service members are not allowed to express or share their feelings for their significant others or their sexual interests, unlike their heterosexual counterparts, who may do so with impunity.  Debate over repeal of DADT often centers around the implicit idea that gay service men (in particular) will be sexually predatory on or inappropriate with their heterosexual peers. 

I could go on, but the picture is clear and obvious to anybody who pays the least bit attention to these things.  But some of these are all too easily dismissed as being uttered by clearly fringe individuals or organizations and that they don't impact the day-to-day lives of gay and lesbian people.  But homophobia is more insidious and dangerous than obvious attacks on gays and lesbians. 

Homophobia is deadly because on a daily basis, it causes some people to:

• Lie about their lives to continue to live and/or associate with their family and/or friends.
• Be thrown out on the street without money because they come out to their family when young.
• Be sent against their will to ex-gay ministries or psychotherapy to "cure" their sexuality.
• Be ostracized from religious and other organizations they have been members of all their life.
• Be unable to find other positive representations of other gays and lesbians.
• Be unable to find people in their community who will be supportive of them.
• Be rejected by some family members, even if other family members are supportive.
• Be rejected by some friends, even if others are supportive.
• Be told that they are "okay" but can't bring their significant other around children (because it would be too hard to explain).
• Be told they are loved, but are still going to hell or are sick/perverted/etc.
• Be fired or not hired for jobs they are qualified for because they are gay/lesbian or appear to be.
• Be unable to find someone to date or otherwise establish a romantic and/or sexual relationship.
• Be unable to find someone who can understand the issues being gay or lesbian causes for them.
• Dress to fit in rather than how they would prefer to dress.
• Not be trusted around children.
• Enter into unfulfilling opposite-sex relationships in order to "fit in" or because that it what they've been taught is ideal.
• Cheat on their opposite-sex spouse because their sexual and emotional needs can't be met.
• Be called names by people who disapprove of their identity.
• Be assumed to be the expert of and for all gay and lesbian people.
• Wonder whether disclosing they are in a same-sex relationship will result in some negative repercussion.
• Wonder if publicly holding hands, hugging, kissing or other appropriate display of affection with their same-sex other will result in violence or other negative repercussion.
• Prevent some people from publicly displaying affection for fear of such repercussions.
• Wonder how new neighbors will react if you disclose you are gay or lesbian.
• Strategize and wonder about places (states and cities) where it is safe and supportive to live as a gay or lesbian.
• Speculate and keep on guard for areas where one must move into, whether it is safe or supportive or not.
• Plan their career around professions that are generally accepting of gays and lesbians.
• Look only for companies that will not discriminate against their sexual orientation and/or offer benefits for same-sex couples.
• Wonder if other people speak negatively about them when they are not around.
• Wonder if other people judge their same-sex relationship differently than heterosexual relationships.
• Wonder if decisions made against them by authorities were because of their sexual orientation.
• Wonder if they were pulled over by a police officer because they have a pro-gay or gay- identifying sticker on their car. (Or fearing they will be, do not put one on their car.)
• Wonder if a negative interaction with another person was because of their sexual orientation.
• Worry that they will burn in hell forever.

Not all gay and lesbian people experience these things, but most of us do experience some of them, to varying degrees.  I have personally experienced many, if not most, of these.  And certainly the list is not comprehensive or halfway complete.

As Tatum mentions, our other areas of privilege mediated the degree to which homophobia and heterosexism impacts us.  An older, white, middle income, highly educated, Protestant male like me may experience any or all of those impacts, but have enough power and privilge through our other identities to deal with those, or most of those, issues.  A young, Hispanic, lower middle class woman who is lesbian may experience them much more profoundly and deeply because she does not have the support systems or financial or other resources to off-set their impact.  And so, she may be forced to live in a community where she must hide her true self and forego a romantic relationship in order to sustain herself and simply survive.

Regardless of one's other privileged identities, these things, big and small, to take a psychic toll. It can wash over some like a raging river or slowly wear on others, eroding them like a stream does a rock over time.  Being able to be in communion with those who understand and who are supportive and loving can help counteract a lot of this, but not all.  For those who do not have such connections or those who may be too young to know how to get out or lack the experience to counterbalance homophobia, it may be a sudden drowning experience.

Why we can't address only bullying; we must address homophobia

The tragic situation of Tyler Clementi has received special attention lately for several reasons, but I suspect mostly because he is one in a recent string of suicides with young gay or gay-perceived people who were bullied. I also think he has received particular attention because of the sensationalistic nature of how it happened  In other words, people think: "it happened at a college!"; "it could happen to anybody!"; "sex was broadcast on the internet!"  The believed sacred and protective bounds of the white tower have been violated; who among us might be the next victim?  Why, this could even happen to straight people!  Clearly, I am tempted to make a case that it receives attention despite the fact that it happened to a young gay man; other more overtly homophobic acts of bullying are receiving less attention than Tyler's case. A possible explanation is that media and its consumers believe that those were just some poor fags and I don't have to worry about them because I'm not one.

For those who are emphasizing the homophobia involved in the Rutger's case, I don't think most people are trying to make a martyr out of Tyler, but rather to use his case as one in a series of examples of how homophobia impacts people.  From the facts that we know, I would say that we can't tell if the webcam broadcast was done because Tyler was having sex or because he was having sex with a man.

I think it's largely irrelevant. The act was a form of bullying and invasion of privacy. That needs to be addressed. Period. We need to quit making excuses for bullying ("boys will be boys" etc) and address the fundamental unacceptability of bullying. (For more on this particular point, see Kate Harding's excellent profanity-laced post.)
What needs to be understood, however, is how a pervasively homophobic society adds a crushingly oppressive element that results in some young people being unable to handle the bullying. Although suicide is not a rational choice, the conditions under which many of these kids are taking their lives are cruel and inhumane and they likely see no recourse, no hope for escape.

There was a study done on North Korean POWs that implicates the denial of “the emotional support that comes from interpersonal relationships by using “self-criticism” and the “withholding of all positive emotional support “(Rath, 2005). Those POW camps had the highest death rate in US military history despite the relatively little use of physical torture.

So, imagine if you can that you are a young gay person who is being bullied. You have people directly telling you that you are worthless: you are worth only abuse. Even if that abuse isn’t directly tied to your sexual orientation – you have a society where on a daily basis you receive negative messages about your worth. Politicians and religious leaders on a local, national, and global scale talk about your moral depravity – your assurance to go to hell – and that during your time on earth you aren’t worth basic civil rights (job protection, housing protection, protection from bullying) and they’ll actively fight to deny you those rights.

On top of that, you may not be able to tell family, friends, teachers, counselors, or ministers about your sexual orientation because those people believe - from the messages they’ve heard – that you’re sick. Your family might throw you out – it happens frequently – or they might try to “cure” you by forcing you to go through psychotherapy or worse, ex-gay ministries. Friends and trusted authorities may also reject you.

So, you’re isolated, with nobody to turn to, and few, if any, resources. You’re isolated, you’re being constantly criticized about your identity and your future prospects seem bleak. You are, in fact, a POW of a homophobic society. At this point, suicide could seem pretty fucking rational. You’re already in hell; why not take your chances with the next life? It could only get better, right?

Bullying in all forms and for any reason must be stopped.  But homophobia is what contributes to making an irrational choice seem rational. We must not and cannot deny the power that homophobia exerts on young people not being able to endure the bullying.

Rise of $3 Dollars: American Taliban Update

An upcoming change in my life will hopefully prompt me to revive my blogging career. More on that in a few days... for now, this article was enough to get me to post an entry.

Via Joe.MyGod.:

American Family Association radio host Bryan Fischer has called for sending homosexuals to prison for forced reparative
therapy, a move he says is sanctioned by the Bible.

[Mr. Fischer clarifies:] It might be worth noting that what I actually
suggested is that we impose the same sanctions on those who engage in homosexual
behavior as we do on those who engage in intravenous drug abuse, since both pose
the same kind of risk of contracting HIV/AIDS. I'd be curious to know what you
think should be done with IV drug abusers, because whatever it is, I think the
same response should be made to those who engage in homosexual
behavior.

If you believe that what drug abusers need is to go into an
effective detox program, then we should likewise put active homosexuals through
an effective reparative therapy program.

Mr. Fischer then goes on to quote one of our favorite of the "clobber passages", (passages that are frequently brought up to dismiss non-heterosexuals as deviant, corrupt, immoral, or less than) 1 Timothy 1: 8-11. Mr. Fischer's Bible translates the unlawful as being among murders, liars, profaners, enslavers, people who hit their parents, and "men who practice homosexuality."

We'll skip for now how the Bible NEVER addresses female same-sex activity (not even in Romans) and look briefly at how the word homosexual could possibly show up in the Bible. The term homosexual, was created in Germany around the mid to late 1860's and became more widely known through Nazi literature and the rise of psychoanalysis (not to conflate the two).

Daniel Helminiak in What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality concludes that the two words that Paul uses are completely debatable. One term is very unclear and the other doesn't refer to "homogenitality" but rather "soft" or "effeminate" and then only in the sense that effeminacy was opposite to a virtuous man (so it is rooted in negative concepts about women, not same sex behavior). The other fairly unknown and uniique term likely refers to sexual perversion, prostitution, pederasty or sexual abuse.

The best argument against this term being applicable today is we we would view as modern forms of homosexual expression were not forms Paul (or anyone of that day) would know about - which is not, IMO and as an aside, a basis to make a case for the politically expedient but potentially dangerous "hey we're just like you but gay" argument.

One of my other favorite arguments against Biblical condemnation of homosexuality is that while the Bible may have injunctions against us, the Bible teaches a lot of things that we do not endorse in modern Western society.

All of that to say this: 1) these kinds of arguments make little if ANY headway against members of the American Taliban /Religious Right and 2) the great thing is that, so far, our country's laws are not based on any religious text, so in terms of who has what rights or who gets sent to jail, what does it matter what the Bible or Koran, or Talmud or any similar religious work (Dianetics?) say?

To answer my own rhetorical question, what matters of course is that there is at least a percentage or concentration of individuals who think our laws should be based on their particular interpretation of their (usually the Bible) religious work and there are politicians who either agree with that viewpoint or are willing to pander to it for votes. The religious right should not be ignored or trivialized. It is still a movement with some degree of power and influence, although that seems to be waning. However, the calls to action and voice of the leaders of the religious right has become more strident and intolerant than ever - hopefully because they see their power diminishing - but things can get much worse before they get better. It will still be a while until these fascists are fully and completely disregarded as the hate mongers they are.

Debra Chasnoff Interview on NPR

In the wake of recent incidents the last few weeks in the movement to address prejudice and homophobia among youth, GroundSpark is pleases to announce the long-awaited arrival of It's Elementary and It's STILL Elementary on DVD. As we continue to mourn the murder of Lawrence King, the 8th grader in Oxnard, California who was harassed for being gender non-conforming, along with other anti-LGBT hate crimes against youth, our hope is that the media explore the potential solutions to decrease bullying and harassment in our schools and communties.

Our new curriculum guides have printed and the DVDs made, and we are thrilled to start shipping them later this week to everyone who has pre-ordered the DVD set!

In a lengthy segment that aired last week on National Public Radio, executive director Debra Chasnoff called on educators across the country to learn from the preventable death of Lawrence King. To hear her interview, you can visit
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19357474.

For more information, to obtain a screener copy or to interview Debra Chasnoff, please contact cathy@rennacommunications.com

The Real Threat to America

Kern's remarks in conjunction with the CMS anti-bullying policy debate has made this quite the fun week for anti-gay remarks. I like Wolfe's letter; he sums it all up nicely.

As I said in my last post, Kern and people like her wouldn't know Jesus if he fell on her face and wiggled: something I'm sure has NEVER happened to Sally Kern.

The fact that this woman is an elected official is odious. To paraphrase Frank Schaeffer, politicians, religious leaders and others who traffic in fear-mongering, hate speech, and outright lies are anti-American. They want to see our nation fail so they can rationalize their apocalyptic fervor. They want to see our nation destroyed so they can maintain their fear-based power. These people are the true threat to America; they seek to turn citizen against citizen. They want to destroy the very principles of our great nation: liberty and dignity for all human beings. What is more anti-American than that?



OPEN LETTER TO OKLAHOMA REP. SALLY KERN FROM CHUCK WOLFE, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE GAY & LESBIAN VICTORY FUND (via Renna Communications)


WASHINGTON, DC - The Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, the nation's largest gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender political action committee, sent an open letter today to Oklahoma Rep. Sally Kern in response to her inflammatory virulently anti-gay remarks and her refusal to issue an apology. Rep. Kern's remarks, recorded in audio and posted on the Victory Fund's Web site, have received national attention and over half-a-million hits.

To listen to Rep. Kern's comments, please visit: http://www.victoryfund.org/files/listening.html
March 11, 2008

Rep. Sally Kern
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd.
Room 332
Oklahoma City, OK 73105

Dear Sally,

I saw the statement you released yesterday in which you said your "hate speech" is merely "free speech." That's kind of gross, but it's also beside the point.

The point is this: your words have consequences. Ask Judy Shepherd - her son, Matthew, was viciously murdered ten years ago by people who think like you. Ask the parents of Lawrence King, an openly gay eighth-grader who was gunned down in school last month by a classmate whose fear was stoked by words like yours. Just this past fall, Steven Domer, a 62-year-old gay man was brutally murdered right in your home state of Oklahoma.

What you said is not okay, but that's not because most sensible people disagree with it. It's because your words give aid and comfort to those who would hurt, maim and even kill people who are different from you. Comparing gays and lesbians to cancer and terrorism and saying they are the "biggest threat to America," gives license to others to treat us that way, especially given the leadership position you hold in your community.

I also read that some of your colleagues in the Republican caucus stood and cheered you as you entered their meeting yesterday. How odd and depressing. This isn't a partisan issue; I know plenty of Republicans who were outraged at your comments, because they themselves are parents, friends and family to gays andlesbians who are at risk when people of your stature say the kinds of things you did.

Whether or not you agree that gay people deserve halfway decent treatment(the fact that you said we were destroying America implies that you don't), what I want you to understand is that the words you said will have real life implications. Your speech can lead to the murders of more young people. You have outraged hundreds of thousands, but you may have inspired a few people, too. That's not just sad, it's evil.

The point of the Victory Fund's releasing your speech was to draw attention to the fact that even elected leaders like you are saying some nasty and potentially dangerous things about your fellow citizens. Our mission is to elect people to counter your hate and bigotry with honesty and courage.

You may have been applauded by a handful of your colleagues, but more than a half million people are now listening. They heard you loud and clear, and they're not clapping.

Sincerely,

Chuck Wolfe

President and CEOThe Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund

About the Victory Fund

The Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund is the nation's largest LGBT political action committee and the only national organization dedicated to increasing the number of openly LGBT elected officials at all levels of government. Since 1991, the Victory Fund and its national donor network have helped hundreds of openly LGBT candidates win election to local, state and federal offices. For more information, please visit http://www.victoryfund.org/.

Stay Thy Hand

Christian fanatics would rather sacrifice the children of Charlotte and Mecklenburg county than pass anti-bullying legislation. Apparently more than willing to follow the tradition of Abraham, these homophobes are trying to lay not just the gay, lesbian, and transgendered children, but all children on the altar of religious hatred and intolerance.

In an effort to stop bullying, the CMS (Charlotte Mecklenburg School) superintendent proposed a new policy that would prevent harrassment based on any number of criteria. What criteria has (of course) drawn the most opposition and criticism? The inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity and expression has drawn the fire of homophobes and religious zealots who accuse the school system of trying to set or at least setting the basis for whatboard member Ken Gjertsen calls a "pro-homosexual agenda." Gjertsen also objects because "'There's plenty of instances where (a gay student) could say, `I feel oppressed at school,' " he said. "I would like to see us define bullying to say someone actually has to be bullying you."

I wonder what he thinks bullying is. Did Gjerstsen actually finish high school himself? However, it's not too surprising that Gjertsen opposes the anti-bullying policy since he's obviously quite found of trying to bully gay people himself. Had he been slightly less PC, he would have just proposed open season on fags.

The superitentent stated that he believes that identifying protected groups that he will empower teachers, counselors, and staff to stand up for these children in a city where defending a gay or transgendered student could cost them their job and/ or reputation. Three school board members oppose the measure as do many in the community. Board member Kaye McGarry, like others, tries to explain away their oppostion to the proposal based on the concept that bullying is bullying and that all children should be protected.

McGarry has also stated that you are "either a boy or a girl" and that sexual orientation is "just a feeling." No matter how Ms. McGarry tries to hide behind words of inclusiveness, it's clear that she would have no problem with this bill if it did not include gays and transgendered students.

It's clear that what the opponents of the bill are trying to do is force their religion down the throat of CMS students and parents. They are trying to protect their bigotry. If passed, they would have to defend bullied or harrassed gay and lesbian students. They might have to stop spewing their anti-gay sentiments. They might have to fight for the oppressed, certainly not a modern Christian value.

One might suspect that even if they consider homosexuality a sin that they might demonstrate Christian values by acting to protect the sanctity of human dignity and the preciousness of life (gay and lesbian youth have higher than the normal teenage suicide rate). No, these faithful followers are conent to spill the blood of gay, lesbian, and transgendered youth on the rock of their false piety. I would ask that they realize the harm they are doing, that they would stay their hand and sacrifice their personal objections for the greater good of our children. I'm sad to say that unless others stop them, however, they will not hesitate to plunge their dagger into the collective hearts of all oppressed children.

Not a Funny Video: Homohatred from Oklahoma State Republican Representative Nancy Kern

Both Pam's House Blend and Joe.My.God have sufficient commentary on this sad example of irrational hatred and fear-mongering by public officials (and in this case a former teacher: scary!) that I'll just post the video, courtesy of The Victory Fund.

Thanks, Ellen

Ellen Degeneres: A Tragedy That Should Never Have Happened

I'm proud that Ellen Degeneres used her celebrity to make this important statement regarding the death of 15 year old Larry King.

Sometimes a Lollipop is Only a Lollipop

More Woes For Larry Craig

According to the Associated Press, the newspaper the Idaho Statesmen reports that eight men have said that Senator Larry Craig made sexual advances toward them, with two actually having sex with him. One of these eight is now famed male prostitute Mike Jones, known for bringing down the Reverend Ted Haggard. Craig, of course, denies the accusations (yet again).

Do I believe at least that some of the accusations are true ? Yes.
Do I believe Mike Jones? Not really.
Does it matter? Not really.

I think it's been pretty well established that Craig is a major self-loathing homosexual, trapped in a closet made out of two-way glass. (We can see in, he can't see out). It would be easy to feel sorry for him except that he has used his political power to bash other gay people.

This development really is of minimal interest except to see how Craig continues to twist in the wind, with no supporters (except his in-denial wife), and works to save...what, I'm not sure. His political career is in shambles now, his public persona is completely discredited, so the only thing left that I can think of left to save is his personal self-image. If he can continue to shake off the accusations, he can convince himself somehow that he hasn't been after dick all this time, he's just been misunderstood.

Denial is a powerful force and leads to the dark side, Luke. I'm sure when Senator Craig takes a copy of Men's Health into the bathroom, he's just wanting the latest workout tips.

Interesting PSA

A glaad PSA was aired on the Sci-Fi channel after the season premiere of Battlestar Galactica, which (apparently, I don't watch it) had a lesbian relationship. Check the link (which I found via Comic Gays) out to see the PSA (which include Eric Mabus of recent Ugly Betty fame):

Gay Sci-Fi PSA

The Bully Pulpit

Yes, over three months have passed since my last entry. Life has been...difficult...to say the least. I won't go into details here, or at least for now, but let me say that a week long vacation/business trip (v/k for me; work for Peter) perfectly symbolized our life by having half of it wiped out. We lost two days because of a very odd episode involving me fainting (more on that in a later post) and three days because Peter was bitten/stung by some unknown insect that luckily found me not as tasty. Poor Peter has continued to struggle with the fallout from the bite for ten days now and it's still not over for him yet. A symbolic, if not restful, vacation.

What has prompted me to post now, however, falls perfectly in line with my previous post. (Hi, anyone out there still??)

Not ere a month since the reverend Ted Haggard's disclosure of "sexual immorality," another evangelical has come out of the closet, also in Colorado, a bastion of the religious right. The Denver Post reported on December 11th that the Rev. Paul Barnes, the minister of a 2100 member church, has resigned because he continues to struggle with homosexualilty. Barnes is a 54 year old man, married with two daughters in their twenties. Barnes said in a videotaped segment that he had struggled with being gay since the age of three.

Barnes apparently still rejects the idea that people are born this way and is searching for childhood influences on how he became gay. I'm not sure what could possibly influence someone at the age of three to become gay; I don't remember anything really before I was in kindergarten, but clearly Barnes isn't ready to accept that perhaps God made him that way. Tragically he recounts one childhood incident where his father talked about what he would do if a "fag" approached him. Barnes recounts how this impacted him; how he wondered what his father would think of him.

It's unfortunate that Barnes cannot see that it wasn't childhood circumstances that made him gay, but instead childhood circumstances that caused him to hate himself. Although Ted Haggard did not recount a similar conversation in his letter to his church, he did mention that "there's a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I have been warring against it for all my adult life." Somebody told him that his life was repulsive and I honestly don't think it was God.

Initially, I was very angry with Haggard and happy to see another anti-gay hypocrite brought down. That was not the right response. Soulforce correctly models the proper Christian attitude of forgiveness and compassion. And, honestly, when I read Haggard's letter, my anger melted away. His letter is filled with sadness; it's easy to see how much he hates himself and how much he thinks he is unworthy of respect and love. I suspect Barnes feels the same way. That any human feels that way is intensely sad. I'm afraid that being under the control of the hate spewing and fact-distorting supervision of James Dobson will not help Haggard feel differently about himself any time soon. I hope he can come to realize that his life is not over and that he, as a gay human being, is worthy of God's love and acceptance.

Societal and religious discrimination and homophobia are the real culprits here. The failure of the average church-goer to understand what God's Word really says about gay people and the purposeful use of distorted facts and scripture for personal and political gain by religious and political leaders are the factors that cause people to have less meaningful, less fulfilled lives. They promote a culture that damages and harms people, children, youth, and adults alike.

Evangelical culture actually encourages people to act very un-Christian. Evangelicals become obsessed with rules and regulations; they are the modern pharisees and sadducees that Jesus reprimanded time and time again. They are concerned with who is and isn't going to Heaven through obeying The Rules rather than focusing on service, love, sacrifice, and compassion. These were the values of Christ, whom I cannot believe would endorse the repeated aggressive attempts of modern Evangelicals to enact legislation that denies gays and lesbians even basic civil protections.

Evangelical culture promotes followers who will send you e-mail, such as I recently received, telling you that you are "full of confusion" and despite comparing you to pedophiles and practioners of bestiality insist that they are still "not writing to you to make you feel condemned or unloved or even unaccepted." My e-mailer seems far more confused than I am. I suspect that my admirer finds me confused becaause I readily express that there are mysteries of faith that I don't and can't understand. That I unashamedly admit that I find myself conflicted sometimes in matters of faith. Evangelicals like certainty: right and wrong clearly defined. There is no place for honest reactions, doubt, or thinking that maybe our finite minds cannot fully understand the infinite mind of God. Like many Evangelicals, my writer readily pronounced me as not being a Christian, as if Jesus had called her up to let give her the inside scoop. She pretends to know my heart and mind; something I thought only God could do. But passing judgment is a favorite past-time of Evangelicals, who prefer to gloss over verses such as "judge not lest ye also be judged" but love verses that seem to suit their purposes.

Ah, but I digress from my original purpose, which is to highlight how the misuse of scripture, religion, and homophobia have created a pressure cooker that is starting to crack. It's been leaking for almost a decade now, but I think this one is finally getting ready to blow. I wish it didn't take people having to undergo such traumatic events. I hope that a brighter dawn emerges from the storm we are all in.