Here's some fireworks for your New Year's celebration.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Friday, December 28, 2007
Missionary Position
This should in no way be construed as an endorsement of presidential candidate Mitt Romney, but I gotta say Mormons are HOT! Peter's annual calendar gift to me ranks as one of the best all time calendars I've received and one of my favorite gifts this year! Everything about these men on a mission are golden, not just their plates.
Of course this all calls for this (non-Mormon-specific) classic.
This is not the first time Mormons have proved to be suprisingly and steamingly hot; the move Latter Days proved that.
Of course this all calls for this (non-Mormon-specific) classic.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
My Holiday Gift To You
Your present? Janice Dickinson's Twelve Days of Christmas.
See, I told you I loved you.
See, I told you I loved you.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
The Gay Holidays
Peterson Toscano is, among other things, an ex-gay survivor and shares his experience as well as posts about similar items on his blog.
This video is Peter recounting a very funny tale from his ex-gay days that he titles "A Homo No Mo Christmas."
I hope everyone has a very refreshing and Homo-Friendly Holiday!
Other holiday links you may enjoy:
Best Hot Cocoa Mixes
The Real Story of Rudolph
Wikipedia entry on "Santa Claus"
This video is Peter recounting a very funny tale from his ex-gay days that he titles "A Homo No Mo Christmas."
I hope everyone has a very refreshing and Homo-Friendly Holiday!
Other holiday links you may enjoy:
Best Hot Cocoa Mixes
The Real Story of Rudolph
Wikipedia entry on "Santa Claus"
Monday, December 17, 2007
It Looks Good, No Joke
The trailer for the new Batman movie The Dark Knight is now online. Go check it out.
Batman Begins was, I'd argue, about as good of a superhero movie as you can get. It got the tone of the movie right, pin-point characterization, good costuming, and it all didn't seem too silly at all. The only other movies that really come close to me as very well done super-hero films are Spider-Man 2 and the 1977 Superman movie.
The Dark Knight looks very well like it may be a very worthwhile sequel. I admit that Heath Ledger as the Joker initially seemed off to me, but Nolan did such a good job with the first movie, particularly with casting (well, I could have done without stepford-Cruise Katie Holmes, but she wasn't terrible), so I was willing to see how it worked out. Judging by the trailer, I'd say he's quite the impressive Joker, actually. What we can see shows a pretty scary Joker; he's calm until he has a fit of rage and seems genuinely homocidal. Jack Nicolson's much lauded Joker portrayal from Burton's Batman never sat well with me; he was far too campy (although, admittably, the performance fit the tone of the movie, which was a bit too campy for me as a whole) and over-the-top. Ledger's seemingly cool, brooding Joker is infinitely more frightening.
Warner has done a ton of viral marketing for this film. Take this interesting site for instance: The Gotham Times. Check out the "tear" on the front page and lots of interesting tidbits scattered among the other pages. Then compare it to: The Ha Ha Ha Times. I find it effectively creepy and morbidly humorous. A whole listing of the websites can be find here: Yahoo results. (Thanks to Mike Sterling for pointing this out.)
I'm looking forward to this movie
Batman Begins was, I'd argue, about as good of a superhero movie as you can get. It got the tone of the movie right, pin-point characterization, good costuming, and it all didn't seem too silly at all. The only other movies that really come close to me as very well done super-hero films are Spider-Man 2 and the 1977 Superman movie.
The Dark Knight looks very well like it may be a very worthwhile sequel. I admit that Heath Ledger as the Joker initially seemed off to me, but Nolan did such a good job with the first movie, particularly with casting (well, I could have done without stepford-Cruise Katie Holmes, but she wasn't terrible), so I was willing to see how it worked out. Judging by the trailer, I'd say he's quite the impressive Joker, actually. What we can see shows a pretty scary Joker; he's calm until he has a fit of rage and seems genuinely homocidal. Jack Nicolson's much lauded Joker portrayal from Burton's Batman never sat well with me; he was far too campy (although, admittably, the performance fit the tone of the movie, which was a bit too campy for me as a whole) and over-the-top. Ledger's seemingly cool, brooding Joker is infinitely more frightening.
Warner has done a ton of viral marketing for this film. Take this interesting site for instance: The Gotham Times. Check out the "tear" on the front page and lots of interesting tidbits scattered among the other pages. Then compare it to: The Ha Ha Ha Times. I find it effectively creepy and morbidly humorous. A whole listing of the websites can be find here: Yahoo results. (Thanks to Mike Sterling for pointing this out.)
I'm looking forward to this movie
Thursday, December 13, 2007
The 12 Gays of Christmas
Twelve abs you could drum on
Eleven models posing
Ten...lord my heart is leapin'
Nine lads a dancin' (and singing, naked, of course)
Eight maids a biking
Seven swains in swimwear
Six guys a-playin' (if I were bad, this would have been TOTALLY different)
FIIIIVVEE OOOOLLLDDDD QUEEEENS!
(And don't think I didn't have a naughty alternative to this one)
Four cut boys
Three wet friends
Two total dears
And a portrait of a bare tree (I guess)...
Six guys a-playin' (if I were bad, this would have been TOTALLY different)
FIIIIVVEE OOOOLLLDDDD QUEEEENS!
(And don't think I didn't have a naughty alternative to this one)
Four cut boys
Three wet friends
Two total dears
And a portrait of a bare tree (I guess)...
What's in your advent calendar?
Have a Mary Christmas!!
Sunday, December 09, 2007
The Religious Right is Oh So Wrong
The public image of the leaders of the religious right I met with so many times also contrasted with who they really were. In public, they maintained an image that was usually quite smooth. In private, they ranged from unreconstructed bigot reactionaries like Jerry Falwell, to Dr. Dobson, the most power-hungry and ambitious person I have ever met, to Billy Graham, a very weird man indeed who lived an oddly sheltered life in a celebrity/ministry cocoon, to Pat Robertson, who would have had a hard time finding work in any job where hearing voices is not a requirement.
—Frank Schaeffer, Crazy for God (selection quoted in "oldspeak," an online journal)
Frank Schaeffer is the son of evangelical minister Francis Schaeffer. Together they had a significant impact on American Evangelical Christianity, essentially forming the modern Religious Right movement. Frank's life journey, which has led him to be a filmmaker and prolific author, as well as the father of a marine who served in Iraq, has brought him to the writing of a memoir called Crazy for God that focuses not just on his life, but the lives of his parents, many Evangelical leaders and the Religious Right movement.
Below are select quotes of his during various interviews. These interviews are either printed in their entirety at or linked through his website. Please go visit FrankSchaeffer.com for more of his insights as well as to learn about him and his works.
I became aware of Schaeffer through the Bob Edwards Sunday (12/9/07) broadcast, where Schaeffer gave a fascinating interview. Unfortunately the Edwards broadcast requires purchasing a copy, but fortunately many of Schaeffer's points and insights are captured in other interviews, exerpts of which appear below.
I was profoundly impacted by his thoughts on how modern Christianity is a cult of personality; that all one has to do is say the right things at the right time to the right people to make millions virtually overnight. He describes modern Evangelicals as hungry for the next big person, forgetting those who become tainted or imbroiled in scandal; the focus has gone off of Christ and onto people. In a similar vein, in another radio interview (link below), he discusses the Disney-fication of American Christianity.
Schaeffer was particularly insightful about the Religious Right being anti-American. Members of the Religious Right are striving, hoping for, and amplyifying the signs for their apocyliptic vision of the world. He discusses how they revel in bad fortune and outcomes because it enforces their view that, as Jerry Falwell once put it, God has removed his hand of protection from America because of its sins.
Slightly less fascinating, but strangely comforting was his insight into the nasty character of figures like Dobson and Falwell. Both he and his father thought that Pat Robertson was just plain insane, a sad confirmation of what most people suspect. He certainly does not spare George W. Bush, pointing out that he believes Bush to be a sincere Evangelical, which makes him all the more dangerous as president since he believes in the rightness of his actions, sincerely believes that he is in league with God and so fails to properly contemplate and consider the situation fully and to look for points of compromise, so sure is he of his actions.
I had hoped to bring you some direct quotes from the interview; my personal summation is lacking; Schaeffer spoke far more eloquently. Hopefully, these other interviews will provide you with a good idea of his eloquence and pointed and unique insights. What follows are his words.
Interview with John W. Whitehead
A lot of people in the evangelical and fundamentalist communities speak theoretically about homosexuality being no worse than adultery or divorce. However, in practice, they are not undertaking national campaigns to single out evangelical people who were married to somebody else at one time and got divorced. So actually there is a tremendous moral hypocrisy there because the whole gay issue has been singled out for special treatment.
In other words, the Religious Right was as negative and anti-American as anybody I ever talked to on the Left. I personally came to believe that a lot of the issues that were being latched onto by the Christian Right, whether it was the gay issue or abortion or other things, were actually being used for negative political purposes. They were used to structure a power base for people who then threw their weight around.
[The Religious Right's] idea was that without fundamentalist Christian beliefs being absolutely imperative for everybody in the country, the country would go to hell in a handcart and that would be the end of everything. So negative things were always accentuated. ... By the time they tell you over and over about all the bad things happening, such as statistics on crime, teen pregnancy and so on, I begin to get the feeling that they don’t want things to get better. This is their shtick. This is the way they raise their money. This is how they maintain their central power base.
[George W. Bush] is arguably the worst president in the history of the United States. He is unfit for the office of president of the United States. He has trouble speaking the English language and articulating a point of view....It is ironic that someone who proclaims he is a Christian president has single-handedly started a war that has undone the last Christian minority in the Middle East.
Schaeffer to the Dallas Morning News
"Unless you know who you are and have a life outside of your ministry, you will be corrupted by the control you have over other people's lives. You can begin with the best intentions, but the success itself will take you farther away from God than any failure ever will.
Big-time American Christianity is incompatible with the Gospel. It is part of the entertainment business. No matter what you think you are doing, you are really just another celebrity in a celebrity-obsessed culture. If you want to serve God, get out of the evangelical machine while you still can and save yourself. "
No matter how good a cause, when you think you are on a mission from God you eventually get crazy. I wasn't exempt. The problem is that the evangelical world is really a series of personality cults. And for a while there I was a personality.
But this brings up another point: Evangelicals just don't "get" what writing – or art for that matter – is.
The problem with the evangelical slant on writing (and all art) is that in itself it isn't worthwhile, it must serve some "higher purpose." In the evangelical's case, that's "bringing people to Christ."
This reduces human expression to propaganda. It also means that no artistic conversation is honest. There is always an ulterior motive. Religious fundamentalists always look for what is not there.
Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back
Interfaith Radio Interview with Frank Schaeffer (about 20 mins)
FrankSchaeffer.com
Oldspeak
—Frank Schaeffer, Crazy for God (selection quoted in "oldspeak," an online journal)
Frank Schaeffer is the son of evangelical minister Francis Schaeffer. Together they had a significant impact on American Evangelical Christianity, essentially forming the modern Religious Right movement. Frank's life journey, which has led him to be a filmmaker and prolific author, as well as the father of a marine who served in Iraq, has brought him to the writing of a memoir called Crazy for God that focuses not just on his life, but the lives of his parents, many Evangelical leaders and the Religious Right movement.
Below are select quotes of his during various interviews. These interviews are either printed in their entirety at or linked through his website. Please go visit FrankSchaeffer.com for more of his insights as well as to learn about him and his works.
I became aware of Schaeffer through the Bob Edwards Sunday (12/9/07) broadcast, where Schaeffer gave a fascinating interview. Unfortunately the Edwards broadcast requires purchasing a copy, but fortunately many of Schaeffer's points and insights are captured in other interviews, exerpts of which appear below.
I was profoundly impacted by his thoughts on how modern Christianity is a cult of personality; that all one has to do is say the right things at the right time to the right people to make millions virtually overnight. He describes modern Evangelicals as hungry for the next big person, forgetting those who become tainted or imbroiled in scandal; the focus has gone off of Christ and onto people. In a similar vein, in another radio interview (link below), he discusses the Disney-fication of American Christianity.
Schaeffer was particularly insightful about the Religious Right being anti-American. Members of the Religious Right are striving, hoping for, and amplyifying the signs for their apocyliptic vision of the world. He discusses how they revel in bad fortune and outcomes because it enforces their view that, as Jerry Falwell once put it, God has removed his hand of protection from America because of its sins.
Slightly less fascinating, but strangely comforting was his insight into the nasty character of figures like Dobson and Falwell. Both he and his father thought that Pat Robertson was just plain insane, a sad confirmation of what most people suspect. He certainly does not spare George W. Bush, pointing out that he believes Bush to be a sincere Evangelical, which makes him all the more dangerous as president since he believes in the rightness of his actions, sincerely believes that he is in league with God and so fails to properly contemplate and consider the situation fully and to look for points of compromise, so sure is he of his actions.
I had hoped to bring you some direct quotes from the interview; my personal summation is lacking; Schaeffer spoke far more eloquently. Hopefully, these other interviews will provide you with a good idea of his eloquence and pointed and unique insights. What follows are his words.
Interview with John W. Whitehead
A lot of people in the evangelical and fundamentalist communities speak theoretically about homosexuality being no worse than adultery or divorce. However, in practice, they are not undertaking national campaigns to single out evangelical people who were married to somebody else at one time and got divorced. So actually there is a tremendous moral hypocrisy there because the whole gay issue has been singled out for special treatment.
In other words, the Religious Right was as negative and anti-American as anybody I ever talked to on the Left. I personally came to believe that a lot of the issues that were being latched onto by the Christian Right, whether it was the gay issue or abortion or other things, were actually being used for negative political purposes. They were used to structure a power base for people who then threw their weight around.
[The Religious Right's] idea was that without fundamentalist Christian beliefs being absolutely imperative for everybody in the country, the country would go to hell in a handcart and that would be the end of everything. So negative things were always accentuated. ... By the time they tell you over and over about all the bad things happening, such as statistics on crime, teen pregnancy and so on, I begin to get the feeling that they don’t want things to get better. This is their shtick. This is the way they raise their money. This is how they maintain their central power base.
[George W. Bush] is arguably the worst president in the history of the United States. He is unfit for the office of president of the United States. He has trouble speaking the English language and articulating a point of view....It is ironic that someone who proclaims he is a Christian president has single-handedly started a war that has undone the last Christian minority in the Middle East.
Schaeffer to the Dallas Morning News
"Unless you know who you are and have a life outside of your ministry, you will be corrupted by the control you have over other people's lives. You can begin with the best intentions, but the success itself will take you farther away from God than any failure ever will.
Big-time American Christianity is incompatible with the Gospel. It is part of the entertainment business. No matter what you think you are doing, you are really just another celebrity in a celebrity-obsessed culture. If you want to serve God, get out of the evangelical machine while you still can and save yourself. "
No matter how good a cause, when you think you are on a mission from God you eventually get crazy. I wasn't exempt. The problem is that the evangelical world is really a series of personality cults. And for a while there I was a personality.
But this brings up another point: Evangelicals just don't "get" what writing – or art for that matter – is.
The problem with the evangelical slant on writing (and all art) is that in itself it isn't worthwhile, it must serve some "higher purpose." In the evangelical's case, that's "bringing people to Christ."
This reduces human expression to propaganda. It also means that no artistic conversation is honest. There is always an ulterior motive. Religious fundamentalists always look for what is not there.
Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back
Interfaith Radio Interview with Frank Schaeffer (about 20 mins)
FrankSchaeffer.com
Oldspeak
New Revised Fundamentalist Bible Translation
From the Really New Testament:
1.And. lo, Jesus said, "Go forth and spit upon the homosexual. Curse him in public; defile his name to all. From him take from his property, job, family, and hope. Hit him upon the cheek; if he turns it, smite him yet again. Smite him with seven upon seven blows. Show no mercy; turn all against him. Once thou hast cast down the sodomite, feel free to indulge thy lust watching women who lie with women.
2. "Sit upon high in thy mega-church casting judgment upon all who art not members. Render unto the politicians what e'er may gain their favor to further my work. Impose my will upon all creation."
Well, it seems like this is what they are reading...
Russian Evangelicals responsible for Sacramento gay man's death.
1.And. lo, Jesus said, "Go forth and spit upon the homosexual. Curse him in public; defile his name to all. From him take from his property, job, family, and hope. Hit him upon the cheek; if he turns it, smite him yet again. Smite him with seven upon seven blows. Show no mercy; turn all against him. Once thou hast cast down the sodomite, feel free to indulge thy lust watching women who lie with women.
2. "Sit upon high in thy mega-church casting judgment upon all who art not members. Render unto the politicians what e'er may gain their favor to further my work. Impose my will upon all creation."
Well, it seems like this is what they are reading...
Russian Evangelicals responsible for Sacramento gay man's death.
Saturday, December 08, 2007
And I thought Dubya was backwards
Huckabee wanted to isolate AIDS patients (via Yahoo! News)
Who is more of a threat to progress: Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney? Discuss.
Who is more of a threat to progress: Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney? Discuss.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
You, Sissy?
I recently entered into a discussion about the appropriateness ofhumor about homosexuality in popular media. First, humor is subjective; I have on more than one occassion strongly disagreed with how gay organizations (GLAAD most notably) have reacted to gay depicitions. Still, I understand where the sentiment originates and why people are very sensitive about it.
I think that sensitivity comes from years of unbalanced representation. Most of the earliest American popular media depictions of homosexuals made us into predators or silly nancy-boys, worse than even women, perhaps even negroes. And, of course, very real societal /religious persecution doesn't help exposed nerves and raw sensitivities much.
I do sometimes think that over-reactions or getting up in arms about what I perceive as the wrong things hurt "the cause", as it were; after all, we don't want to show ourselves as the sissies they think we are, do we? There's nothing worse than being a sissy; nothing worse than not being able to take that "playful" punch on the shoulder; nothing worse than crying when the bully beats you up. Real men don't cry.
There is a concern among some of the brethren that we gays are pushing for legislated acceptance. While some may be trying to accomplish that, I don't personally need to legislate acceptance of my gaiety. I do think that a gurantee of my rights needs to be legislated; otherwise, hey, this is America and you are free to hate me as long as you like as long as you grant me my rights.
But really, in this quest for civil rights, do we have to be so uptight that we can't take a joke? We gays are pretty funny, right? The straights will like us better if they can make those hairdresser and interior decorator jokes about us, won't they? (See "not being a sissy" above.) For me, sure, we can joke all around all day if I know that you're in my corner or that you're at least an equal opportunity abuser (and also that I can joke about your secret desire for the lawn boy to blow you).
Recently I was watching a documentary on Don Rickles, a man who has been insulting everybody for the past 40 years or more. Many comedians noted that Rickles can "get away with it" because he applies the insults equally. I'm pretty okay with the fag jokes from him, because, hey, he's throwing it about every other minority (and majority) group. Does Kathy Griffin or Margaret Cho want to crack some gay jokes? Go ahead, they've shown their friend. Dave Chapelle? He takes a crack at just about everyone and does it intelligently (which often is another qualifying element about whether it is funny or tasteful, for me at least), so okay. South Park? Well, that show has offended me on a lot of stuff, so why not add homosexuality to the list.
Speaking of Chapelle, he once commented on the Actor's Studio that he received a lot of flack from his relatives about a lot of his skits and particularly his use of the "N" word. Although it didn't/doesn't stop him, he essentially said he understood their concerns, since sometimes he wants to punch out white guys using the word because they think it's okay since they saw it on TV (and they found it funny). I have a similar reaction; I'll be the first one to make a joke about us gays but damn it, straight boy, you better not say a word.
I've heard the accusation frequently: why can't we take a joke? Why are us gays drowning in a gloomy and unfriendly quagmire of PCiety? But we seem to be one of the few populations that the accusation sticks to (well, us, and women. Broads can be so uptight you know.) Don Imus was thrown off the air for (a very poor) "joke" about black women, and that's one example. Yes, some people thought it was an overreaction, but overall it didn't stick. These kind of "jokes" are not tolerated by society, and generally it is accepted that this is not a being overly sensitive, unless you're talking about the gays, who are, for some reason, perhaps because they're so feminine.
I think the questioning of gays' sensitivity by other gays is actually rooted in the need for acceptance. We may say we don't care if we are accepted, but if so, then why care if somebody lodges a complain we find baseless or unnecessary? Why label it with "whining" or as hyper-sensitive or PC? We do so because we're afraid we'll be seen as different, as a sissy, as not mainstream, as not being able to play well with others, and all of that leads to non-acceptance. If we truly didn't care about what people thought, we'd just ignore what we thought were baseless complaints instead of labeling it as "humorless" or "whining." We so badly don't want to be seen as a sissy.
I think that sensitivity comes from years of unbalanced representation. Most of the earliest American popular media depictions of homosexuals made us into predators or silly nancy-boys, worse than even women, perhaps even negroes. And, of course, very real societal /religious persecution doesn't help exposed nerves and raw sensitivities much.
I do sometimes think that over-reactions or getting up in arms about what I perceive as the wrong things hurt "the cause", as it were; after all, we don't want to show ourselves as the sissies they think we are, do we? There's nothing worse than being a sissy; nothing worse than not being able to take that "playful" punch on the shoulder; nothing worse than crying when the bully beats you up. Real men don't cry.
There is a concern among some of the brethren that we gays are pushing for legislated acceptance. While some may be trying to accomplish that, I don't personally need to legislate acceptance of my gaiety. I do think that a gurantee of my rights needs to be legislated; otherwise, hey, this is America and you are free to hate me as long as you like as long as you grant me my rights.
But really, in this quest for civil rights, do we have to be so uptight that we can't take a joke? We gays are pretty funny, right? The straights will like us better if they can make those hairdresser and interior decorator jokes about us, won't they? (See "not being a sissy" above.) For me, sure, we can joke all around all day if I know that you're in my corner or that you're at least an equal opportunity abuser (and also that I can joke about your secret desire for the lawn boy to blow you).
Recently I was watching a documentary on Don Rickles, a man who has been insulting everybody for the past 40 years or more. Many comedians noted that Rickles can "get away with it" because he applies the insults equally. I'm pretty okay with the fag jokes from him, because, hey, he's throwing it about every other minority (and majority) group. Does Kathy Griffin or Margaret Cho want to crack some gay jokes? Go ahead, they've shown their friend. Dave Chapelle? He takes a crack at just about everyone and does it intelligently (which often is another qualifying element about whether it is funny or tasteful, for me at least), so okay. South Park? Well, that show has offended me on a lot of stuff, so why not add homosexuality to the list.
Speaking of Chapelle, he once commented on the Actor's Studio that he received a lot of flack from his relatives about a lot of his skits and particularly his use of the "N" word. Although it didn't/doesn't stop him, he essentially said he understood their concerns, since sometimes he wants to punch out white guys using the word because they think it's okay since they saw it on TV (and they found it funny). I have a similar reaction; I'll be the first one to make a joke about us gays but damn it, straight boy, you better not say a word.
I've heard the accusation frequently: why can't we take a joke? Why are us gays drowning in a gloomy and unfriendly quagmire of PCiety? But we seem to be one of the few populations that the accusation sticks to (well, us, and women. Broads can be so uptight you know.) Don Imus was thrown off the air for (a very poor) "joke" about black women, and that's one example. Yes, some people thought it was an overreaction, but overall it didn't stick. These kind of "jokes" are not tolerated by society, and generally it is accepted that this is not a being overly sensitive, unless you're talking about the gays, who are, for some reason, perhaps because they're so feminine.
I think the questioning of gays' sensitivity by other gays is actually rooted in the need for acceptance. We may say we don't care if we are accepted, but if so, then why care if somebody lodges a complain we find baseless or unnecessary? Why label it with "whining" or as hyper-sensitive or PC? We do so because we're afraid we'll be seen as different, as a sissy, as not mainstream, as not being able to play well with others, and all of that leads to non-acceptance. If we truly didn't care about what people thought, we'd just ignore what we thought were baseless complaints instead of labeling it as "humorless" or "whining." We so badly don't want to be seen as a sissy.
If Pat Roberson is on it, it's the highway to hell
Certain fundamentalist Christians believe that Interstate 35 is related to prophecies in Isaiah 35 (Isaiah 35:8 refers to a "highway...of holiness") and so have set up ministries along its route.
Wayne Besen has the video (from Right Wing Watch).
These people think that an American interstate is mentioned in the Bible? That's just, well, arrogant, not to mention stupid.
I also found absurb the "converted" homosexual in the clip. He mentions that he was going from gay club to gay club prior to being on his way to see his fiance when he encountered the evangelists. He says he felt like he was "on acid" when the evangelists told him "fire" and touched him. A couple of things: gay men refer to their significant others several ways - partner, husband, boyfriend, etc., but I've never heard one refer to another many as "fiance." So, perhaps this allegedly converted homosexual was on his way to meet his female wife-to-be? I know that when I was about to become engaged that I very much thought that my feelings about men would go away; had an evangelist approached me during this time with the offer to "take away" my homosexuality, I would have been eager to take him up on the offer (and then act like it had been successful). And second, perhaps you were on acid if you were traveling between gay bars.
One of the other alleged converts was "a back slidden youth pastor." Think this guy might be feeling a little guilty? Think he might also be eager to think and act like he has been changed? Maybe a little.
And from a pure theological perspective, I'm tired of the claims of faith healing (prove it, guys, seems like it would be a huge news item) and the non-Biblical use of tongues and the Holy Spirit. Of course these people aren't interested in sound theology, just using Christianity as their modus operandi to impose their world vision and oppress people different from them.
Wayne Besen has the video (from Right Wing Watch).
These people think that an American interstate is mentioned in the Bible? That's just, well, arrogant, not to mention stupid.
I also found absurb the "converted" homosexual in the clip. He mentions that he was going from gay club to gay club prior to being on his way to see his fiance when he encountered the evangelists. He says he felt like he was "on acid" when the evangelists told him "fire" and touched him. A couple of things: gay men refer to their significant others several ways - partner, husband, boyfriend, etc., but I've never heard one refer to another many as "fiance." So, perhaps this allegedly converted homosexual was on his way to meet his female wife-to-be? I know that when I was about to become engaged that I very much thought that my feelings about men would go away; had an evangelist approached me during this time with the offer to "take away" my homosexuality, I would have been eager to take him up on the offer (and then act like it had been successful). And second, perhaps you were on acid if you were traveling between gay bars.
One of the other alleged converts was "a back slidden youth pastor." Think this guy might be feeling a little guilty? Think he might also be eager to think and act like he has been changed? Maybe a little.
And from a pure theological perspective, I'm tired of the claims of faith healing (prove it, guys, seems like it would be a huge news item) and the non-Biblical use of tongues and the Holy Spirit. Of course these people aren't interested in sound theology, just using Christianity as their modus operandi to impose their world vision and oppress people different from them.
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.
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.
Not Weight Loss, but Self Gain
Most of us have seen countless weight loss stories on TV; in some respects, this is no different but I was moved by this woman's perspective on her situation after losing 500 pounds without surgery.
Interview with Diane Sawyer (Yahoo / ABC)
Interview with Diane Sawyer (Yahoo / ABC)
Saturday, December 01, 2007
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
Gay Sci-Fi PSA
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Modern Millstones
Luke 17 : 1-2
Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offenses will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!
It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.
Matthew 18: 6
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea
What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality
Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offenses will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!
It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.
Matthew 18: 6
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea
I believe that many modern leaders of the religious right / Christian evangelical movement would be better off, for their own sake, with millstones around their neck. Although Jesus is referring to children in these versus, I believe it is easy enough to extrapolate that he probably also meant anyone who is a child of God. So many modern Christian leaders have led from their pulpits such an unrivaled persecution of gays and lesbians, driving them from the church and the love of God that they will be judged harshly for their crimes.
What is hard for me to understand is how they rationalize their hatred and seeming hold on the truth. The Bible offers much advice, some of it seemingly contradictory. How so then can these people be so sure that it is their interpretation that is the right one? Of course this kind of irrationality is nothing new; it is as old as time.
However, Biblical literalism is fairly new. The literal interpretation of the Bible is a 20th century invention and obviously creates many problems. As "Steve Falkenberg, Ph. D, professor of religious psychology at Eastern Kentucky University, says, 'I've never met anyone who actually believes the Bible is literally true. I know a bunch of people who say they believe the Bible is literally true but nobody is actually a literalist.' 'Taken literally, the Bible says the earth is flat and setting on pillars and cannot move (1 Chr 16:30, Ps 93:1, Ps 96:10, 1 Sam 2:8, Job 9:6). It says that great sea monsters are set to guard the edge of the sea (Job 41, Ps 104:26)...'" (from Wikipedia entry on "Biblical literalism")
Ultimately, I am arguing for what Professor Ehrmen, Biblical scholar and author, calls for in his radio interview (below), a tolerance for diversity and difference in interpretation. And furthermore, a rational and studied understanding of what the text actually says in opposition to the anti-intellectual approach of literal misunderstanding. Literalism has done nothing but hurt the church and hurt so many others, most recently and particularly gays and lesbians.
For the Bible Tells Me So movie website - an excellent documentary dealing with Christianity and homosexuality (and what the Bible really says about it), including "ex-gay" therapies and following the stories of several familiesDiane Rehm interviews Bart Ehrmen, author of Misquoting Jesus (audio)
This interview is an excellent discussion of how the Bible was constructed and even touches on briefly scriptual meaning relative to women in the church and passages on homosexuality.
On the Heresy of Literalism (article)
An evangelical minister discusses the hypocricy of modern evangelicals (Christianity Today, 2005)
Friends of God HBO documentary on the modern evangelical movement
Encyclopedia Britannica entry on modern Christian fundamentalism
Is the Homosexual My Neighbor? Revised and Updated: A Positive Christian ResponseWhat the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality
Monday, November 26, 2007
Linkblogging Beyond the Veil
Self-styled "psychics" remain immensely popular in modern times, claiming to impart "wisdom" (said wisdom almost never consists of any useful information). In our more enlightened times you may think belief in such stuff would be on the decline, particularly given the particularly awful representatives that seem to enjoy so much press time these days: John Edwards, Sylvia Browne, James Van Praagh and their ilk. Still unsteady times cause people to cling to irrational and comforting belief systems.
However, rather than displaying proven psychic ability, these individuals, Praagh and Edwards particularly, demonstrate no level of connection with the dead beyond that which closely resembles a technique that is centuries old called "cold reading." (Browne uses cold reading also, but also stakes out psychic predictions unlike Praagh and Edwards, although these wild pronouncements rarely have their veracityascertained.)
Cold reading boiled down to the most simple (and not its best) definition is eseentially using some basic psychology, making sweeping generalizations and guesses, and imploying some statistical likelihoods on individuals eager and willing to make and give importance to whatever strands of connection they can make out of these guesses to their deceased loved ones. This gives the appearance that the psychic has knowledge about facts, people, and situations that the psychic would not otherwise know or be able to know unless s/he was actually in touch with the dead.
Why do I care? Well, many of these people are making money off of the hurt and pain of individuals who have lost loved ones; others make wild claims that give false hope or hurt to people (like Browne's latest(and one of her most egregious) incorrect "prediction" of the death of Shawn Hornbeck, who later turned up alive); and they're just liars and I hate liars. If they claimed to just be entertainers with no real ability, I wouldn't care, but they claim true powers and abilities (all the guise of helping people) that they can't prove in controlled situations. They can't even prove them in self-controlled situations, with numerous incorrect guesses that don't rise above anything you or I could do.
I also believe that understanding how our own minds can deceive us and how our desire to want to believe certain things can color the way we take in and process information is vitally important to us in this day and age where our government keeps inching towards the newspeak and controlling eyes of Orwell's distopia and where we cannot rely on our media outlets any longer to bring us objective, well researched, factual and/or relevant news any longer. So understanding how this small sector of our society works informs us about greater and larger issues and how we should, could, and probably are approaching them.
In short, don't believe anything you hear, read, or see without knowing the facts behind it (and beware of whose "facts" they are).
A better definition of "cold reading" (along with other important associated concepts from The Skeptic's Dictionary)
Cold Reading Bingo (the most common techniques used in cold reading)
Professional Magician analysis of John Edward (humourous but serious analysis and some excellent thoughts on skepticism and beliefs in psychics by Ian Rowland)
John Edward reading analysis ("lay person" analysis - a little long)
Video presentation of James Van Praagh cold reading techniques (two parts - watch both)
Stop Sylvia Browne website
Related: Book review of Carl Sagan's The Demon Haunted World
Other resource: The James Randi Educational Foundation
However, rather than displaying proven psychic ability, these individuals, Praagh and Edwards particularly, demonstrate no level of connection with the dead beyond that which closely resembles a technique that is centuries old called "cold reading." (Browne uses cold reading also, but also stakes out psychic predictions unlike Praagh and Edwards, although these wild pronouncements rarely have their veracityascertained.)
Cold reading boiled down to the most simple (and not its best) definition is eseentially using some basic psychology, making sweeping generalizations and guesses, and imploying some statistical likelihoods on individuals eager and willing to make and give importance to whatever strands of connection they can make out of these guesses to their deceased loved ones. This gives the appearance that the psychic has knowledge about facts, people, and situations that the psychic would not otherwise know or be able to know unless s/he was actually in touch with the dead.
Why do I care? Well, many of these people are making money off of the hurt and pain of individuals who have lost loved ones; others make wild claims that give false hope or hurt to people (like Browne's latest(and one of her most egregious) incorrect "prediction" of the death of Shawn Hornbeck, who later turned up alive); and they're just liars and I hate liars. If they claimed to just be entertainers with no real ability, I wouldn't care, but they claim true powers and abilities (all the guise of helping people) that they can't prove in controlled situations. They can't even prove them in self-controlled situations, with numerous incorrect guesses that don't rise above anything you or I could do.
I also believe that understanding how our own minds can deceive us and how our desire to want to believe certain things can color the way we take in and process information is vitally important to us in this day and age where our government keeps inching towards the newspeak and controlling eyes of Orwell's distopia and where we cannot rely on our media outlets any longer to bring us objective, well researched, factual and/or relevant news any longer. So understanding how this small sector of our society works informs us about greater and larger issues and how we should, could, and probably are approaching them.
In short, don't believe anything you hear, read, or see without knowing the facts behind it (and beware of whose "facts" they are).
A better definition of "cold reading" (along with other important associated concepts from The Skeptic's Dictionary)
Cold Reading Bingo (the most common techniques used in cold reading)
Professional Magician analysis of John Edward (humourous but serious analysis and some excellent thoughts on skepticism and beliefs in psychics by Ian Rowland)
John Edward reading analysis ("lay person" analysis - a little long)
Video presentation of James Van Praagh cold reading techniques (two parts - watch both)
Stop Sylvia Browne website
New Yorker article comparing criminal profiling to cold reading (by Tipping Point author Malcolm Gladwell)
Related: Book review of Carl Sagan's The Demon Haunted World
Other resource: The James Randi Educational Foundation
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Tenacity
I will always associated my grandfather with a bulldog. Like a bulldog, he was at times pugnacious, and always tenacious and unafraid. He held on to almost anything he wanted to and wouldn't let go. He was big and broad like a bulldog and although a very handsome man in his youth, could look somewhat like a bulldog himself.
He owned a bulldog. He, for a part of his career, drove Mack trucks, whose symbol is a bulldog. The image you see is the exact image I tend to associate with my grandfather (whom at one time may have actually owned this exact ashtray). My father (his son) and I attended a university whose mascot is the bulldog and one of my favorite gifts from my grandfather is a set of cross pens with a bulldog emblem on them that were once his.
Two years ago the doctors told my family that my grandfather couldn't last but a few months. True to form, my grandfather outlasted that prediction. Nobody could tell him he couldn't do something.
"Paw Paw," as he was affectionately known by all the grandchildren, grew up with a rough life on a small very rural Mississippi farm. He tenaciously survived the horrors of the World War II Pacific rim fighting. He worked road construction on many of the highways in Mississippi and Southeastern Louisiana. If you travel on the interstate in that region, my grandfather likely helped build it. If you know anything about the hot summers in the South and what road construction entails, you'll know that it's a grueling, sweltering, nasty, difficult job.
Strong-willed to the end, in his last days, he admitted to what we always suspected he thought: "I have never made a mistake," he told his oldest daughter. Pausing a moment then grinning he continued, "And if I did, I would never admit it."
This past Sunday I had the honor of escorting my Paw Paw, Jesse "Josh" Leslie Denton Sr., a veteran of our great nation, to his final resting place. He held on firmly till the end. We love you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)