More Christian Terrorist FUD

Rep. Debra Maggart, a Republican state representative from Hendersonville, TN., said:

"We also have seen evidence that homosexual couples prey on young males and have, in some instances, adopted them in order to have unfretted [sic] access to subject them to a life of molestation and sexual abuse."

There's that trump card again. Listen bitch: being gay does not make you a pedophile. Period.

And, by the way, what exactly is "unfretted access"? Does that have something to do with a violin? Perhaps, did you mean unfettered? Get a dictionary you idiot.


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

Two "Straight Boys" Kissing

In the video, these two boys are making out, "snogging" as they say in England, and at one point the boy on the right does something, not sure what, and the boy on the left stands up and says to him, "You are gay."

Hellooooo...

Of course, he sits back down, and they start making out again.


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay

The I.D. and The Ego-maniac

There is no intelligence behind intelligent design. It's simply an ill-conceived plot to re-introduce biblical creationism into the classroom by masking it behind a pseudo-scientific veneer. The egomaniacal Christian terrorists behind this attack simply can't accept that teaching their outrageous myths in the secular classroom is wrong and will not be tolerated.


tags: creationism, intelligent design

I.D. (a.k.a. Idiot Design)

In this article, the author, Lynn Barton, tries to argue that I.D. (what the Christian terrorists call "Intelligent Design") is not religion:

First, what I.D. theory is not: It is not creationism. Full disclosure here: I am a creationist. As a Christian, I believe God is the author of life. But I.D. theory is a science-driven enterprise. It is not a deduction from Scripture but an inference from observation. It says that the intricate design found in living things and in the universe itself is best explained by an intelligent cause.

Let's see: according to anthropological and archeological evidence, mankind -- specifically the genus Homo (ironic isn't it) -- first appeared in the form of Homo habilis, also known as the handy-man, roughly 2.4 million years ago. Scientific evidence places the age of the Earth at roughly 4.5 billion years.

You know -- a lot can happen in 4,497.6 million years.

Let's consider Occam's Razor:

a rule in science and philosophy stating that entities should not be multiplied needlessly. this rule is interpreted to mean that the simplest of two or more competing theories is preferable and that an explanation for unknown phenomena should first be attempted in terms of what is already known.

So, we can either believe:

• That over the course of 4 billion years, the forces of nature took basic elements and aggregated them together to create the essential building blocks of life -- an experiment that has been duplicated in labs;
• And that, eventually, these build blocks came together to create a cell.

or

• That the answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything is 42 -- oh shit, I mean God.
  

Let me digress for a moment. Okay, let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that I.D. is not about creationism. Whose intelligence, then, is behind this deep, dark, fucked-up, played-out reality show we laughingly refer to as life? I guess the presumption is that it God's intelligence. So God designed the universe. Does that mean he created it too? And if so, what kind of fucked-up logic leads you to believe this is any different from creationism? So your not arguing from the scriptures; you're just asserting that there can't be any other explanation then God. How fucking dumb is that?


tags: creationism, intelligent design

"The Rite of Sodomy"

This article discusses a book by Randy Engel due to be published in July, 2006. In her book, Randy apparently plays the homophobe's trump-card right off the bat:

"Section I looks at pederasty, homosexuality in its most pervasive and universal form, from Antiquity to the Middle Ages, to the Renaissance, to the rise of the Modern State in the mid-to-late 1800s."

Here we go again. Yet another Christian terrorist casting FUD upon the masses once again by trying to equate pedophilia with homosexuality. This hateful bullshit is getting really old, and it still stinks.

The second section of the book:

"... exams the complex nature and causes of male homosexuality, describes homosexual acts and behaviors, and provides an in-depth look at the secular Homosexual Collective and the inordinate power it exerts over the individual homosexual."

She understands what causes male homosexuality? Oh, really? Reputable scientists have been debating this for decades, and suddenly she has the answer? She describes homosexual acts? What do fucking and sucking have to do with it? Oh, I know. She'll probably focus on some of the more extreme forms of sexuality like BDSM or fisting. And what's this secular "Homosexual Collective"? She makes it sound like we're the fucking Borg. Face it, bitch:

"We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."

To top it off, the article also mentions that, in addition to being 1318 pages long:

"The Rite of Sodomy contains 4,523 endnotes, a bibliography of over 350 books, and a full index."

Okay, so it's well organized bullshit.


see also:

• Gay Rights Group vs. Pedophilia
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

Homosexual adoption report written by 'pro-gay advocate'

This article seems to raise three issues:

• This AP news report fails to disclose what WND alleges to be a relevant fact.
• The paper discussed by the aforementioned news report, which advocates allowing gays and lesbians to become adoptive parents, was written by a "well-known pro-'gay' advocate".
• Time magazine committed a similar omission when it failed to disclose that it's Oct. 10 cover story on "gay teens", titled "The battle over gay teens" -- a positive portrayal of American youth coming out -- was written by a gay man.
  

The real issue here is the rabid homophobia of large segments of the American population. Their fear and hatred drives a wedge between prospective gay and lesbian parents and the children they would like to adopt.

The current furor is being stirred by the publication of a paper titled "Expanding Resources for Children: Is Adoption by Gays and Lesbians Part of the Answer for Boys and Girls Who Need Homes?", whose principal findings are:

• Against a backdrop of increasing public acceptance, social science research concludes that children reared by gay and lesbian parents fare comparably to those of children raised by heterosexuals on a range of measures of social and psychological adjustment.
• Studies are increasing in number and rigor, but the body of research on gay/lesbian parents is relatively small and has methodological limitations. Still, virtually every valid study reaches the same conclusion: The children of gays and lesbians adjust positively and their families function well. The limited research on gay/lesbian adoption points in the same direction.
• Though few states have laws or policies explicitly barring homosexuals from adopting, some individual agencies and workers outside those states discriminate against gay and lesbian applicants based on their own biases or on mistaken beliefs that such prohibitions exist.
• Laws and policies that preclude adoption by gay or lesbian parents disadvantage the tens of thousands of children mired in the foster care system who need permanent, loving homes.
  

This article lambastes the study, claiming bias on the part of its author and the organizations that funded it:

The author of the study is identified as "Illinois State University adoption expert Jeanne Howard." AP reports that the study was "funded by the Gill Foundation and the Human Rights Campaign, both active" in promoting a pro-homosexuality agenda into American society.

However, AP does not inform readers that author Jeanne Howard is passionately involved in promoting acceptance of homosexuality in her work with P-FLAG (Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays).

So, all of this homophobic bullshit boils down to the simple fact that the author of this paper, Jeanne Howard, is a P-FLAG mom? How fucking dumb is that?

The article goes on to quote Robert Knight, the spokes-dick for the Concerned Women for America:

"'Homosexual activists' handprints are all over this one," says Robert Knight, director of the Culture & Family Institute, an affiliate of Concerned Women for America. "Take it with a grain of salt. They funded it and will no doubt promote it, hoping the public will be too distracted to check its pedigree."

"Does this disqualify Ms. Howard's study?," Knight asks. "No, but it shows that the study did not emerge in a scientific vacuum."

Well Bob, this study, like any other piece of scientific research, should, can and will stand up to peer review. This process, Bob, focuses on the accuracy of the data collected, the methods used to compile and analyze the data and the cogency of the resultant conclusions.

The thing is, Bob, you really don't want it to stand up to peer review, do you? Because you're afraid that it will. You're afraid that other experts, whose impartiality you can't impugn, will concur with the study's findings. You would much rather stand in the center ring, bathed in lime-light, shouting your fucking bullshit FUD at the top of your lungs hoping that everyone will pay attention to you.

Okay. So, what's the up-shot? Well, let's face it: everyone is biased; that's a fact of life. The question, then, is "Who is more likely to either act upon their biases or allow them to influence their actions?"

Let's consider, for a moment, who's involved:

On the one hand, we have Jeanne Howard, an associate professor at Illinois State University, whose scientific study supports gays and lesbians as adoptive parents.

On the other hand, we have a bunch of homophobic fuck-heads who dispute the findings of this study and claim bias on the part of the author based on her involvement with P-FLAG.

Who are you going to believe?


see also:

• Google News search...
• AP news report
• Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute
• Jeanne Howard's Study
• Jeanne Howard
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia, gay adoption

Persecuted Christians

Christians persecuted? Oh, that's rich. Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?

He wants to protect the rights of Chinese citizens to pray to his hateful god, and he complains that the Chinese government is openly hostile to Christianity. Let's face it -- the Chinese government is a totalitarian regime whose main goal is to force its citizenry to believe the party line. You know -- like the Bush administration.


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

Brokeback High -- Lead In Clip

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, Brokeback High

Walgreen's and the Gay Games

Tom Kovach, pictured here, apparently takes issue with Walgreen's being an official HIV/AIDS Prevention Sponsor for the 2006 Gay Games in Chicago.

In response to what was quite likely little more than a thinly veiled letter of extortion, Tom received a personal message from the CEO of Walgreen's, conveyed to him by Michael Polzin, a representative from Walgreen's Corporate Communcations.

In response to Mr. Polzin, Tom writes:

He began the e-mail by addressing a Congressional candidate, whom he has never met, and with whom there is a somewhat adversarial relationship, by my first name. I don't expect people to kowtow to me, but I would think that someone in Mr. Polzin's position would want to maintain business decorum. The move was subtle, but set a condescending tone.

Oh Tom, don't mince words -- you don't want him to kowtow to you; you want him to kiss your ass first and THEN kowtow.

You admit that you don't own stock in Walgreen's. Okay. Fine. So, why the fuck do you care what they do?

Take off your black hat and crawl back under the slimey rock from whence you came.


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

Brokeback High -- Teaser

see also:

• Brokeback High -- Part 1
• Brokeback High -- Part 2
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, Brokeback High

Brokeback High -- Part 2

Okay, I try not to do "themes", but this shit is starting to piss me off. I've been reading some of the comments left on Brandon Flyte's website. While most are supportive, there are a few like the one left by Kenny from Rochester, NY:

Notice how many deliberately poorly written and spelled anti-gay comments there are here? Hint: they were left by liberals in a desperate attempt to portray conservatives (or anyone who disapproves of the gay lifestyle, including many liberals, actually) as retarded, hateful thugs. When you deliberately make a distasteful movie just to get a rise out of people and not to tell a good story, you deserve the criticism you get. You also broke a rule. Rules need to be enforced, otherwise we get anarchy. We see through you.

Well, Kenny, most conservatives are retarded, hateful thugs.

Here we go again: just like with Brokeback Mountain, we have assholes cropping up all over the place and criticizing a film that they've never seen. Can you say prejudice?

Then there's someone who commented under the name "Right-wing Zealot":

Brandon you really really REALLLLLY want to be known as the next Michael Moore don't you? A Liberal-in-training. Invent your own controversy strawman, blame it on the high muckymucks, and spread it around playing the fool. Priceless!

To all the gay supporters and bigots who swallowed the "Ameri-KKK-a is full of haters" lie: how does it feel to be taken for a ride? Hmm?? Joseph Goebbels was right, repeat a myth often enough and the lie becomes the truth.

Interesting, isn't it, that this guy actually quotes Joseph Goebbels. You have to wonder what he thinks about the holocaust.

Brandon's critics condemn him because they believe that he produced a controversial film and showed it in class merely as a publicity stunt. I don't know what Brandon's motives were, but, personally, I don't doubt them as others have, not for a minute, but even if I did, I'd say "So what!" Homophobia is a disease, and it's not going to cure itself. The only way we can eradicate it is to keep attacking it.

Segregation would have never ended had it not been for the actions of people like Martin Luther King, Jr., Rosa Parks and Bayard Rustin, who were willing to stand up to all of the racist bigots and say, "No!"

Okay, unwad your panties. I'm not trying to turn Brandon into some kind of hero -- or saint for that matter. He's a high school kid who did an assignment.

But the fact of the matter is, we need more guys like him: straight men who, for whatever reason, are willing to stand up and say, "Here -- here's a story about some gay boys -- get used to it, because it isn't going to fucking go away."



see also:

• Brokeback High (Part 1)
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, Brokeback High

Brokeback High

Brandon Flyte screened his film, titled Brokeback High, to his classmates. Produced as an English assignment, the film caught the attention of administrators who demanded that he edit out what has become known as the "snuggle scene". The scene in question was very tastefully done. And although it is suggestive, there is nothing overtly sexual about it, so there was no justification for the administrators to censor it.

Nevertheless, refusing to do so has earned Brandon an expulsion from West Linn High School. Administrators claim, however, that the expulsion was based on Brandon's poor attendance record.

Typical.


Check out the "snuggle scene" and make up your own mind:




see also:

• Brandon Flyte's website
  
• Brokeback High Teaser
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, Brokeback High

Tyranny of the Majority

How much time, effort and money have Christians spent defending marriage and opposing gays as adoptive parents?

Then consider, for a moment, that according to The National Center for Family Homelessness, at least 1.35 million children are homeless during a year’s time.

Let's get to the heart of the matter -- what about homeless gay teens? How many of them are there? According to this article, in 1999 ABC's news program 20/20 reported that roughly 63,000 gay teens are kicked out of their homes each year by their parents.

Here's an idea: stop defending marriage -- frankly, it doesn't need to be defended. And stop fighting to prevent gays from adopting -- same-sex partners can create a safe, stable and healthy environment for raising children. Then take all of the money that you would have spent and help those 1.35 million homeless children.

Here's another idea: let's find those 63,000 gay teens that are thrown away by their upstanding Christian parents each year. Then match them with married gay couples who want to be adoptive parents and can provide a loving and accepting home with positive role models.

It'll never fly -- it makes too much sense.


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, gay marriage, gay adoption

St. Pat's Day Organizer Compares Gays to Nazis

In a typical homophobic outburst, John Dunleavy, the chief organizer of the St. Patrick's Day parade, said that allowing gay groups to join the event would be like allowing Nazis to march at an Israeli parade.

He was quoted as saying:

"If an Israeli group wants to march in New York, do you allow neo-Nazis into their parade? If African-Americans are marching in Harlem, do they have to let the Ku Klux Klan into their parade?"

Hang on there a sec, Johnny me boyo.

The KKK is a hate group, responsible for the murder of thousands of black people.

The Nazis hated the Jews, blamed and persecuted them for all of the problems that befell Germany after WWI. The Jews, on the other hand, were upstanding and productive people who simply wanted to take their rightful place as members of German society. Nevertheless, the Nazis shipped them off to concentration camps and murdered them by the millions.

Oh, by the way, the Nazis also incarcerated some 50,000 gay men in prisons and concentration camps and were responsible for the death of least 15,000 of them.

So, Johnny, reflect for a moment on your attitudes and actions toward gays. Then consider the actions and attitudes of the gays that you seem hell-bent on excluding. Then decide for yourself which role best suits you.

Frankly, gays wanting to join in your little shindig is a lot like a group of black men wanting to crash a KKK rally. But, hey, that's just my opinion.


see also:

• Google New search...
  
• Nazis and the Pink Triangle
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia, John Dunleavy

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics

Warner Todd Huston, in this article, endeavors to dispel what he refers to as the "myth" that 10% of Americans are gay.

He quotes statistics from various studies:

• The CDC reported that a 2002 National Survey of Family Growth set the number closer to 2.8% of adults claiming homosexuality.
• In 1993, USA Today reported that only 2.3% of males ages 20 to 30 said they had a same-sex experience in the last decade.
• And the 2000 Census found that only .42% of American households consisted of same sex, unmarried couples as heads of households. This is less than 1%.

He goes on to write:

One might claim that these numbes [sic] must be far lower than reality would dictate. After all, being homosexual is a societal taboo and it might be assumed that a large portion of those who truly are homosexual may not wish to admit such out of fear.

But, this claim just does not wash with the social acceptance that homosexuality has attained over the last 20 or so years. Except for small sections of the US, being gay carries little if any stigma that might force people who are homosexual from answering truthfully on these often ananymous [sic] surveys.

Homosexuality has attained social acceptance? Being gay carries little if any stigma except for small sections of the US? What fucking planet do you live on you moronic fuck-head. Do you read the news? Do you follow the comical antics of your elected officials? Are you fucking stupid?

Then he really goes off the deep end. He quotes two statistics:

• The National Institute of Mental Health claims that 9.5% of the population suffers from depressive illnesses. That would translate to about 18 million Americans suffering from depression annually.
• The website for the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry claims that around 6 million Americans over 65 suffer from various untreated mental disorders.
  

He does some simple math and concludes:

These numbers total more than 20 million Americans classified as abnormal, or sick by mental health professionals.

He makes a patently homophobic observation:

Granted homosexuality was removed from being classified as a mental disorder in 1973 due to the efforts of gay advocates, but it stretches credulity to believe 20 million Americans could be considered mentally ill and, therefore abnormal, while a mere 3 to 5 million homosexual Americans are to be considered "normal." Rather than assessing "normal" scientifically it appears that the mental health officials are driven by politics as opposed to science.

And then he jumps to conclusions that would make Evel Knievel fucking jealous:

In any case, there you have it. The 10% statistic seems to be a myth instead of a reality. Instead of 20 some million Americans being homosexual we see that no more than 5 million could possibly be so. It's fairly hard to believe that homosexuality is "normal" if less than 5% of the population are such, isn't it?

Being different is not wrong. Being in the minority is not wrong either. Face it, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders because it is not and never has been an illness. These long-held opinions were born out of fear and hatred -- not science -- and there is no rational scientific evidence to support the bigotry that your Christian dogma dictates.

You insist that there are 20 million Americans that could be considered mentally ill. Correction: counting you, there's 20,000,001 Americans.


see also:

• Gays and the APA?
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

AFA Reinstates Boycott Against Ford

The fuck-heads are at it again. This time they're joined by 18 other Christian terrorist groups, including:

• Center for Reclaiming America
• Liberty Counsel
• CatholicVote.org
• Faith2Action
• Citizens for Community Values
  

It's ironic -- right-wing assholes like these fuck-heads are ususually the staunch defenders of unrestrained capitalisim. Yet when Ford goes after the $64 billion of disposable income that gays will spend in the year 2006, they get bashed by these hateful bigots for supporting human rights.

You know, I'm kind of conflicted -- if this boycott keeps just one fat, ugly, bible-thumping cow from driving a Ford FUV (fuck-u vehicle) down the road while talking on a cell phone, then maybe it's not such a bad thing after all.


see also:

• Google News search...
• Do You Trust Wal-Mart?
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

Gays and the APA?

This article accuses gay activists of:

... infiltrating influential professional groups and in the process, using bad science to turn them into political propaganda machines.

It claims:

Once a highly respected organization, the American Psychological Association now appears to be a front for the gay movement. Former President of the APA, Dr. Nicholas Cummings, takes exception with the group'’s stance on some very political issues.

"Any scientific professional organization should not speak as a scientific professional organization unless it has psychological evidence."

The eminent Dr. Nicholas Cummings obviously has strong ties to the ex-gay movement, in large part through his involvement with NARTH, an organization comprised of:

A wide variety of men and women who defend the right to pursue change of sexual orientation.

According to its website, the organization believes that:

• This right-to-change is currently under threat by all of the leading mental-health professional organizations.
• Homosexuality is not "inborn".

The so-called reparative therapy advocated by organizations like NARTH is inherently evil and destructive.

Think about it: why would a gay person want to stop being gay?

There are probably a lot of answers, which may seem different. Ultimately, though, being a gay person and living in our homophobic society can be very difficult. Unfortunately, not everyone has the strength to put up with the shit that we must face.

The real problem is society's fear and hatred of gays.

Rather than address this problem, the so-called professionals associated with NARTH and groups like it treat the symptom by brainwashing their gay victims into thinking they've changed their sexual orientation. These so-called professionals are monsters that prey on the fears and doubts that arise from growing up gay in our homophobic society. Worse, their attitudes and actions perpetuate the misconception that homosexuality is a pathological condition that should be treated.

These hypocritical monsters have the cajones to accuse gays of turning scientific organizations, like the APA, into propaganda machines, when they have created organizations, like NARTH, that spew their own hateful propaganda.

The dictionary defines malpractice as the "Improper or negligent treatment of a patient, as by a physician, resulting in injury, damage, or loss."

Think about it...


see also:

• American Psychological Association
• American Psychiatric Association
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

Parody Pisses Off Ex-Gays

This parody elicited a cease-and-desist letter from representatives for Exodus International.

I guess those queens got their panties in a wad. You gotta luv that...


see also:

• The original
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay

"Rome Seminar": Gay Marriage Poses Risk to Children

Priests accusing gays of being a threat to children? You're kidding, right? That sounds like the punch-line to a really good joke.

The article reads:

French Msgr. Tony Anatrella, a psychoanalyst and consultant to the Pontifical Council for the Family, said gay couples were unable to give children the model of sexual difference that any child needs to develop his or her own sexual identity.

This psycho anal-yst assumes that a child's sexual identity is exclusively a product of its parent's sexuality. As Lew would say, "How... fucking dumb is that?" If that were true, it would stand to reason that there would be no gays in the world. Right?

The article also mentions that:

He referred to one recent study, which he said showed that 40 percent of children raised by homosexuals became homosexuals themselves -- an assertion that was greeted by laughter from some members of the audience.

Every rigorously scientific study ever conducted clearly indicates that children raised by same-sex parents are no more or no less likely to be homosexual than children raised by heterosexual couples or in single-parent families.

Laughter? Yeah... I would have laughed all the way out the door, after a statement like that.

Here's were it really gets funny:

Msgr. Anatrella said there were other psychological "collateral effects" of being raised by a same-sex couple that show up only in adulthood.

"And among the young people who have lived this experience, within three or four generations this will bring some psychotic pathologies. I'm not saying these children will become psychotic, but they will experience an alteration of the sense of reality," he said.

"We could reach the point where we have violence, and what I call 'civilized delirious behavior,' " he said.

The only delirious psychotic around here Tony is YOU. Why don't you just shut the fuck up.

Then, the article discusses what David S. Crawford, a professor at the John Paul II Institute in Washington, said:

While arguments for legal recognition of gay marriage are often made in the name of tolerance, such a change would impact the rights of all members of society and lead to a form of "compulsory homosexuality."

When for legal and cultural purposes the person is considered fundamentally asexual, than "all relations -- including the man-woman relationship -- are therefore fundamentally homosexual. They all become in this sense essentially, or at least for legal and social purposes, gay," he said.

"Compulsory homosexuality?" Just because I think everyone should be gay -- especially the cute guy who sits at the guard station in the lobby of CCA14/15 -- that doesn't mean that everyone HAS to be gay.

Then he talks about people who, for legal or cultural reasons, are fundamentally asexual, and that these individuals would become, at least for legal and social purposes, gay. You mean like priests?


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, Catholic, homophobia

Do You Trust Wal-Mart?

Guest commentator Randy Sharp wrote in this Agape Press article:

Wal-Mart aggressively supports the promotion of homosexuality. Last December, corporate headquarters issued a staff memo inviting home office associates to a seminar entitled "Why Market to Gay America?" Earlier last year, Wal-Mart established a "gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender" (GLBT) group within the corporation.

Aggressively supports?

Let's see:

• Wal-Mart thinks it should market to gays -- Well, according to this Echelon Magazine article, gay buying power in 2006 is estimated at $64 billion. Randy, that's BILLION, with a 'B'.
  
• They established a GLBT group within the corporation -- Wow! I'm mean... that's really aggressive, isn't it?
  

He goes on to say:

Wal-Mart advances an unhealthy and dangerous lifestyle, whose members fight for homosexual marriage.

Unhealthy? Okay, I suppose you mean AIDS. Here's another uninformed asshole who assumes that AIDS originated in the gay community. Wake up Randy and take your head out of your ass.

Dangerous? Yes, gays and lesbians are in danger because of bigoted homophobes like you, men whose irrational fear and hatred drive them to violence.

So Randy is the director of "special projects" for the fuck-heads at the AFA. Go figure. I wonder what kind of "special projects" he directs?


see also:

• AFA -- Hate Groups
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

How Does Gay Marriage Harm Marriage?

Charmaine's blog says:

Stanley Kurtz answers the question at NRO today. He says the importance of marriage revolves around providing a stable place for children to be raised. . . and non-marital relationships -- "gay" or otherwise -- or [sic] just not as stable.

This presupposes that heterosexual marriage somehow assures a stable environment for children. Come on. Even you can't believe that, and if you do, I'd be glad to give you a really sweet deal on this bridge I own out in San Francisco.

If this is all about the welfare of children, then let's take a look at a really disturbing fact: as of 2004, US Census Bureau statistics show that 13 million children were living at or below the poverty level.

Okay, Charmaine, I have to ask: why the fuck are you spending any time worrying about gay marriage?


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

"Gay" Penguins Blindside Children

This article reads:

A children's book about two male penguins who raise a baby penguin has been moved to the nonfiction section of two public library branches after parents complained it had homosexual undertones.

The book in question, titled And Tango Makes Three, is based on the true story of two male penguins, Roy and Silo, who adopted an abandoned egg at New York City's Central Park Zoo in the late 1990s. Apparently, adoptions such as this are relatively common among penguins.

So, how can a book like this be a threat to children? It's not.

Christians, on the other hand, perceive it as a threat because it portrays gay characters in a positive light. This, of course, contradicts their messages of hate and condemnation, so they'll do anything to suppress it. I'm surprised they didn't demand that the book be banned entirely.

Parents: your children are YOUR responsibility. If you don't want them to read this book or books like it, then don't let them. It is your prerogative to disagree with the content of any book, but forcing libraries to move or remove materials with which you disagree is censorship, and that is unfair the rest of the community.


Gee, I wonder how the other penguins treated Roy and Silo.

see also:

• Google News search...
• Geography Club: BANNED!
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

Gay Rights vs. Civil Rights vs. Human Rights

In this article, Dwight McKissic, senior pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington, Texas, and founder of the "Not on My Watch" coalition was quoted as saying:

"When homosexuals have spent over 200 years in slavery, when homosexuals have been legally defined as three-fifths human, when homosexuals have been the denied the right to vote and own property because they are homosexuals, then we can begin a discussion of parallels [between the civil rights and gay rights movements]."

So, according to Dwight, members of the GLBT community must endure 200 years of hatred, persecution and discriminated before we should expect some right to equality.

Then, like all Christian terrorists, he lays down the patented homophobic smoke screen used by all rabid bigots:

He also pointed out the slippery slope America will find itself on if it decides homosexuality is an innate characteristic. "If I could be a homosexual by nature," McKissic said by way of example, "I could also be a polygamist, adulterer, pedophile, or child molester by nature. Should we pass laws to approve of these behaviors?"

Why can't we pass a law against sick and hateful men like this fuck-head Dwight?


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, homophobia

Gay Agenda -- Revealed

Let's see:

• Sleep late -- it's Saturday morning after all
• Do the laundry
• Update Quicken
• Blog
  
• Eat lunch
• Clean kitchen
• Read
  
• Take a nap
• Take a long, hot bath, and drink a refreshing beverage
  
• Watch Friday Night's Battlestar Galactic episode on TiVo
• Blog
• Read
• Go to bed
  

Sinister and fiendish, aren't I? One of these days, I'll start plotting the decline of western civilization, but I've got a few things to do before I can get around to that.


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay

School club based on sexual preference not appropriate

An editorial in the Decatur Daily reads:

A high school is obviously not an appropriate place for any club that has sex as its primary consideration.

A Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) is not a sex club. It's main purpose is to bring people together to discuss issues of hatred, bigotry and violence; the members work together to understand these issues, find ways to deal with them more effectively and help make their school and community a safer place to live.

Besides, students do NOT need a club to hook up and have sex; they do quite well the old fashion way, I can assure you.


see also:

• Gay-Straight Alliance Network
• CWA vs. GSA
  

tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, gay-straight alliance

You Too Can Be A Legally Ordained Minister

For a small "love offering" of only $19.50, you too can be legally ordained minister. Just call me "Reverend Ste".


tags: homosexuality, homosexual, gay, church