Box Turtle Bulletin

FRC’s Response To Ugandan Resolution Lobbying Efforts Leaves More Questions Than Answers

As Joe Jervis uncovered last night, the Family Research Council lobbied against a bipartisan House Resolution which expressed “unequivocal United States opposition to the ‘Anti-Homosexuality Bill, 2009’ introduced in the Ugandan Parliament.” It appears that the FRC’s position on Uganda’s proposal to impose the death penalty for gay people under certain circumstances was considerably more equivocal.

Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton contacted Tom McClusky, who was listed as one of the two lobbyists, in the FRC’s Lobbying Disclosure Report, and asked about their lobbying efforts:

While he declined to say which members were lobbied, he said, “We didn’t necessarily lobby against or for the resolution but tried to work with offices to make the language more neutral on homosexuality.” He added his recollection was that “the original language was incorrect on what Uganda was doing as well.” McClusky said the lobbying took place before the resolution was introduced but did not say what, if anything, was altered as the result of their efforts. As for the Ugandan bill, he said that the FRC has never taken a position on the death penalty. Regarding H.Res. 1064, he added, “We have not taken a public position on the current resolution.”

This opens far more questions than it answers. Here is what we still don’t know:

What “errrors” did the FRC seek to correct. As I read the current resolution, I see none. Were there, in fact, errors? This is important because we know very well that supporters of the bill have been disseminating false information about it. Was the FRC doing the same thing as well?

Now that we have a resolution that the FRC appears to have been concerned about, what is their position on it now? Do they still oppose its passage? Are they behind the reasons for resolution’s being stalled in the House?

And what is the FRC’s position on the Anti-Homosexuality Bill itself? Do they support the death penalty or life imprisonment? Do they still support criminalization? Do they support the provisions which target friends, families, co-workers, and healthcare providers of gay people? Do they support state-sanctioned censorship against speaking out on the behalf of gay people?

The FRC opened this can of worms by lobbying on this issue. They clearly have an opinion about it and cared enough to spend thousands of dollars on it. With Ugandan lives at stake, it’s time for the FRC to fess up. Otherwise, based on past experience with this outfit, it is not at all unreasonable to assume the worst.

McCollum Overruled His Own Staff to Hire Rekers for Florida Case

Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum, who is now a GOP candidate running for Florida’s governorship, overruled his own main attorney defending the state’s gay adoption ban, and hired the now disgraced anti-gay activists George Rekers for $120,693, according to new information published in today’s Miami Herald Tribune.

The e-mails released Thursday show that an attorney in McCollum’s own office warned against hiring Rekers, whose testimony had been deemed suspect in an earlier Arkansas lawsuit that challenged a ban on placing foster children in homes with gay parents. Assistant Attorney General Valerie Martin wrote in a July 2007 e-mail that after talking to Arkansas officials and reviewing the background of the former University of South Carolina professor that she would “recommend NOT using him.”

E-mails also show that during a conference call Martin — who said the state considered more than 30 possible expert witnesses — was ordered to hire Rekers “against my strong cautions.”

Records show that the Department of Children and Families, which brought in the Attorney General’s office to defend the lawsuit, didn’t want to hire Rekers as an expert witness in the lawsuit because he wanted to charge $300 an hour. DCF only agreed to his hiring based on McCollum’s strong recommendations.

The noted anti-gay activist and “expert” witness was later discovered returning from a European vacation with a male escort hired from Rentboy.com. Rekers claims he hired Jo-Vanni Roman to help him “lift his luggage.”

More Details on the Malawi Couple’s TV Interview

Yesterday, I posted a video from TV Malawi showing Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza speaking to a reporter. That video, which had been posted by the government-owned broadcaster has since been removed by Malawi TV. But not before an American expatriate living in Malawi emailed me to explain what was being said:

I speak Chichewa at an intermediate level, and while I had trouble picking up a lot of the dialogue in that video, I got the general gist. The whole thing looks like it was set up as a public humiliation for the two. They were made to recant their story and to apologize to all Malawians.

It starts with the presenter asking Tiwo why she, “as a man,” was taken as a wife to another man. The presenter asks why Tiwo chose to do such a thing. Tiwo says that AIDS is too rampant among Malawian women, so the presenter asks, to confirm, whether Tiwo has entered a same-sex relationship to escape AIDS, which Tiwo confirms.

Tiwo says Steven is the one who initiated the relationship (they met at church), and calls Steven her “da,” i.e. “darling.” The presenter clearly finds this amusing as he asks Steven to come over and stand next to his darling.

I’m having trouble following the next exchange, about the beginning of their relationship, but Steven does say that he had a wife prior to his engagement with Tiwo. The presenter asks if this was a “real” wife (mkazi weni-weni), to which Steven says yes. The presenter says “what about this one here?” and Steven says that his relationship with “this one” (Tiwo) must end. The presenter then asks Steven if his multiple relationships make him a polygamist; Steven says no, he’s ending his relationship with Tiwo.

Now, the presenter says, “What will happen with your real wife?” Steven says he’ll go to her and beg forgiveness.

Steven says he did the whole thing out of drunkenness, he was not of sound mind, and that he was tricked by “akunja” – foreigners – into marrying Tiwo, who he was told was a woman. He says that “today,” he will end the whole thing, and his message to all Malawians is that what he has done is a bad thing, an evil thing. He said he just followed what he was told to do. (the “foreigners made them do it” theory was widely circulated in the Malawi media).

The presenter asks Steven if he was after fame, or if he just wanted to mess around with the people of Malawi? He asks why Steven is ‘kukotakota’ (“flip-flopping,” in American parlance), one day saying he loves Tiwo, the next saying he did it out of drunkenness. Finally Steven “admits” that he just wanted to be famous, prompting the presenter to turn to the camera and say, “he admits it himself – he only did these things because he wanted to be famous.”

Now the presenter asks Tiwo what she thinks, and Tiwo says that they were just confused, and that it’s fine, no problem, they can end their relationship. He repeatedly asks Tiwo if she’s a man or a woman, prompting laughter from behind the camera. Tiwo says, “okay, I’m a man.” Under further questioning, Tiwo starts saying that she always identified as a girl since birth, but the presenter says, “look, a man can work in the kitchen, that’s called a ‘chef,’ that doesn’t make him a woman. Do you have the power to give birth?’ ” Tiwo says, no, she cannot give birth, and starts to try and explain further – but finally just says, “fine, I’m a man.”

The video is unfortunately cut off just as the presenter (I won’t say “reporter” – it’s widely known, anyhow, that TVM is nothing but a mouthpiece for government) asks Tiwo if she knows that she has done a wicked thing.

The reader requests anonymity, fearing swift deportation if his identity is revealed. He also suggests independent verification of his accounts, but with the video now removed, that won’t be possible.

Two things of note. First, it’s apparent that Steven and Tiwonge both are acutely aware of the dangers they still face for being re-arrested, particularly when Steven says that their relationship is “over” and Tiwonge acquiesces. Of course, saying anything else would subject them to new charges, trial and re-imprisonment. Perhaps this is intended to counter a possibly self-incriminating statement by Steven to the Malawi Voice shortly after their release. “Prison love cemented our love and whatever happened then remains the same now, ” Steven said. “I don’t regret falling in love with Chimbalanga. I love him and I will continue doing that.” As our Malawi reader suggests, this does appear to be set up to publicly humiliate the two and force them to recant.

The second thing to note is that if this reader got the conversation correctly, it appears extremely probable that Tiwonge is, in fact, transgender. In this exchange, the interviewer challenges her identity by pointing out that gender roles are immaterial, a point that she appears to reject but recognizes that any attempt to explain further will only result in further ridicule. As I discussed earlier, this element of her identification is key. When she says, “Okay, I’m a man,” or “Fine, I’m a man,” she’s clearly decided that this interview was going nowhere, so she just ends that part of it and hopes the subject will change.

It should be noted however that Tiwonge (and Steven) may not be aware of transgender as a concept, or if she is, it’s not something she’s all that concerned about right now. Steven still refers to Tiwonge using masculine pronouns. I doubt he would do that if she objected, but the fact is, staying out of prison and trying to figure out how to make a living are clearly far more important to them right now. Sorting out the proper etiquette of labels is undoubtedly far, far more important to us than it is to them. Steven and Tiwonge have far more pressing issues to worry about.

Family Research Council Supports Uganda’s “Kill the Gays” Bill

Joe Jervis was provided a copy of a 20-page Family Research Council lobbying report:

According to the FRC’s official lobbying report for the first quarter of 2010, they paid two of their henchmen $25,000 to lobby Congress against approving a resolution denouncing Uganda’s plan to execute homosexuals. The resolution passed in the Senate on April 13th, but remains languished in the House almost four months after being referred to the Foreign Affairs Committee. Did the FRC’s lobbying kill it?

It turns out that you can download the first quarter 2010 report yourself here. (You may have to change the filename extension to .pdf to view it) Right there on page 3, you will see House Resolution 1064, “Uganda Resolution, Pro-homosexual promotion” listed as the general lobbying issue area. Tom McClusky and David Christensen were listed as the lobbyists. McClusky is the FRC’s Vice President for Government Affairs. Christensen is the FRC’s Senior Director of Congressional Affairs.

I searched the Senate’s Lobbying reports and found a similar report filed by the FRC. (no direct link available, but you can search here for “Family Research Council” as the Registrant’s name to find the 4/12/2010 filing.) Page 3 of the Senate report for the fourth quarter of 2010  shows that McClusky and Christensen also lobbied U.S. Senators against the CIVH Res. 1064, which they list as “Ugandan Resolution, Pro-homosexual promotion.”

Both reports were filed on the FRC’s behalf by Paul J. Tripodi, FRC’s Vice President for Administration.

In a recent documentary, Ugandan MP David Bahati, who introduced the draconian Anti-Homosexuality Bill in that nation’s Parliament, told Current TV that American evangelicals have told him privately that they support his “kill-the-gays” bill, despite publicly distancing themselves from the controversial proposal.

In February 2010, Peter Sprigg, the Family Research Council’s “Senior Fellow for Policy Studies” has said that he fully supports criminalizing homosexuality in the United States. In 2008, he quipped that he wanted to see all gay people deported. He later apologized for that remark.

Nonetheless, we now know that Tony Perkins, Peter Sprigg, Kenneth Blackwell, McClusky, Christensen and the rest of that ilk want you dead.

Dead, dead, dead.

Rue McClanahan, 1934-2010

Actress Rue McClanahan, “comma, 39,” passed away early this morning following a massive stroke. She became a gay icon with her raunchy portrayal of Blanche Devereaux in the 1980’s Golden Girls.

McClanahan had suffered a minor stroke earlier this year following bypass surgery. Her manager, Barbara Lawrence, said that at the time of her death Thursday, McClanahan “had her family with her. She went in peace.”

Betty White, the last surviving Golden Girl, said: “Rue was a close and dear friend. I treasured our relationship. It hurts more than I even thought it would, if that’s even possible.”

Isabella Miller-Jenkins may be in El Salvador

Isabella Miller-Jenkins and Lisa Miller. Both are reported missing.

The attorneys for Lisa Miller, who kidnapped daughter Isabella Miller-Jenkins and fled, will be back in court this month to argue that the judge erred in reassigning custody to Janet Jenkins, Isabella’s other mother. But this may be a difficult sell, considering that Lisa and Isabella have not been seen from since last September.

Lisa Miller and Janet Jenkins were in a Civil Union living in Vermont when they decided to bring Isabella into the world. But after breaking up with Jenkins, Miller converted to conservative Christianity, decided that she was no longer a lesbian, and followed the encouragement of her fellow believers to deny Jenkins her parental rights.

Courts granted Jenkins visitation but for years Miller refused to comply and instead expressed in news media her contempt for the courts and her intention to ignore their rulings while her attorneys posted endless appeals. Eventually the US Supreme Court weighed in, upholding Jenkins’ rights and, after it was clear that Miller would never comply with visitation orders, full custody was granted to Jenkins.

But by then it was too late. Miller had disappeared with Isabella.

Her attorneys (Liberty Counsel), her church (the late Jerry Falwell’s Thomas Road Baptist Church), Isabella’s school (affiliated with the church), and her supporters sat on her disappearance for as long as they could, providing the illusion that Lisa was still living in Virginia. It was not until December of last year that the charade fell apart and it became clear to Janet and the courts that Lisa had fled several months prior.

Now there is a report that Miller, a fugitive with an arrest warrant, may have fled to El Salvador to thwart the court in its efforts to provide for Isabella’s best interests in her custody dispute with Jenkins. (WaPo)

The girl, Isabella Miller-Jenkins, and her birth mother, Lisa Miller, failed to appear for a court-ordered custody swap in January and are believed to have flown to El Salvador last September, said attorney Sarah Star, who represents ex-partner Janet Jenkins.

Star said a Virginia police officer told her that Miller and the girl flew to El Salvador’s capital, San Salvador, from Juarez, Mexico, which is across the Rio Grande from El Paso, Texas.

Miller has no known legitimate source of income and is not believed to speak Spanish. It is highly unlikely that Miller has pulled off this disappearing act without significant involvement, if not coordination, from members of the Thomas Road Baptist Church or perhaps other anti-gay activists. Considering that they all conspired to keep her disappearance unknown, it would be interesting to know if they were complicit in Isabella’s kidnapping.

The last known contact from Lisa was through Debbie Thurman, a ex-gay activist and church friend who had been administering Lisa’s website. Debbie posted a note from Lisa on December 4, 2009, about three months after Lisa disappeared.

However, while Miller has a rich, powerful, politically connected network on her side, Jenkins is not alone in her struggle to find her daughter and bring her home. Advocates for abducted children have joined the cause.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has turned its attention to Central America, distributing photos and information about Isabella to news outlets throughout the region, apparently believing she and her birth mother moved there, Star said Thursday.

Isabella, a pigtailed 4-foot-tall blonde, is listed on the Center’s website as a victim of a family abduction who may be in the company of Miller.

I very much hope that Isabella can be found and returned to her distraught mother and that Lisa Miller will be held responsible for her crimes.

Another Utah City enacts non-discrimination policy

Following in the footsteps of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County (unincorporated areas), Park City, and Logan, Utah’s second largest city, West Valley, has now voted to ban discrimination in housing and employment based on sexual orientation. (SL Trib)

The West Valley City Council, in a 5-1 vote, approved Tuesday an anti-discrimination ordinance similar to those recently passed in other Utah cities.

About 60 people attended the meeting at City Hall. Rep. Janice Fisher, D-West Valley City, and about seven others spoke in favor of the proposal to protect gay and transgender residents from housing and employment discrimination. No one spoke publicly against it.

It does appear that opposition to employment and housing discrimination against LGBT people may be becoming part of Mormon values.

Pardoned Malawi Couple Appear on TV

In the following video taken from TV Malawi and posted on YouTube, you will first see Tiwonge Chimbalanga talking to a reporter. After about a minute, Tiwonge is joined by Steven Monjeza. They are speaking in Chichewa, so if anyone can translate what’s being said that would be extremely helpful.

Steven and Tiwonge appeared at a brief news conference in which they thanked President Bingu wa Mutharika for pardoning them last week after they were convicted and sentenced to fourteen years at hard labor for “gross indecency and unnatural acts” following a traditional engagement ceremony last December. The news conference took place yesterday in the administrative capital of Lilongwe. AFP reports:

A Malawian gay couple who received a presidential pardon on a 14-year sentence for sodomy on Thursday called President Bingu wa Mutharika a “caring father” and a “tolerant president.”

“The president has demonstrated that he is a caring father, a considerate and tolerant president. We wish him good health in his everyday endeavours as he continues leading the country to respecting human rights and to economic prosperity,” the couple said in a statement.

… The couple asked the media and the general public to respect their privacy. “So much has been said and written about us, both positive and negative. We think this is the time for us to be given an opportunity to enjoy our freedom,” they said. They called their ordeal “the most stressful period in our lives.”

Chimbalanga told AFP in a phone interview that he was in Lilongwe to “have a breather”, while his partner had returned to his village.

The Malawi Voice had earlier quoted  Steven Monjeza as defiant, despite having been rejected by relatives following the couple’s release:

Prison love cemented our love and whatever happened then remains the same now. I don’t regret falling in love with Chimbalanga. I love him and I will continue doing that,” he said.

Also yesterday, President Mutharika called on reporters and everyone else to stop talking about the “satanic” gays. The story ends there,” he said. “I don’t want to hear anyone commenting on them. Nobody is authorized to comment on the gays. You will spoil things.”

Mutharika also acknowledged to the Malawi Voice that while there was tremendous pressure from foreign donor nations to release Steven and Tiwonge:

“Let me admit that there was pressure from the international community, who threatened to withdraw aid, so we have Zimbabwe to borrow a leaf from. Malawi needs their monies more than her morals to survive.

But despite that recognition, he painted his pardon as a humanitarian act:

“I’ve brought them back for the society to correct them and re-teach them our moral, if God, who we attach all these morals forgive, who are we to condemn them,” said Mutharika.

…”However on humanity, I believe these people have suffered enough emotional pain and the four walls of a jail will only inflict physical pain which is much laser than the emotional. So with the constitution powers vested in me as a president of the republic of Malawi, I therefore pardon them and order for their immediate release.” Said Mutharika.

Eat Da Poo-Poo! — The Martin Ssempa Remix

This Martin Ssempa, one of Uganda’s most hard-over supporting for putting gay people to death, has been pressing his point by showing gay porn in his church and news conferences. Ssempa’s porn-fixation got remixed and it just might become the latest gay dance circuit hit. Move over Lady Gaga. NSFW.

Obama authorizes benefits for federal employees

President Barack Obama is limited by federal law from treating the domestic partners of federal employees as spouses. However, his counsel has identified specific benefits which he can elect, as Executive, to offer.

Today the President issued a memo directing that such benefits be provided. (Reuters)

Obama said he had directed government agencies to offer a number of new benefits to the families of gay and lesbian federal employees, including family assistance services, hardship transfers and relocation expenses.

His directive builds on a move he made last year to offer healthcare benefits, sick leave and medical evacuation for same-sex partners of federal employees.

2010benefits.mem

The IRS changes tax rules to recognize CA same-sex relationships

For several years, California law has treated couples in domestic partnerships exactly the same as marriages, including in how income tax returns were filed. But the federal government’s DOMA has banned any recognition of same-sex couples as married and the Internal Revenue Service has treated them as though they were two unrelated individuals. This has resulted in the peculiar situation in which a couple files as married for state tax purposes, and then files separate federal returns in which each reports their own individual incomes and deductions.

While it is not true in all cases, quite often this results in same-sex couples paying much higher rates of federal income taxes than they would if they could file jointly, especially when one spouse earns significantly more than the other. It has also resulted in increased time and expense in complying with income tax return preparation.

Now the IRS has issued a memorandum revising its position on the reporting of income from domestic partnerships in California and providing an interpretation that will result in returns that are both easier to prepare and file and also which are more fairly taxed.

Because California is a community property state, and because individuals in domestic partnerships have, since January 1, 2007, had a community property claim on the earned income of their partner for both property law and state income tax purposes, then therefore the IRS has concluded that earned income by either is the joint property of both and should be reflected as such on federal income tax returns.

By 2007, California had extended full community property treatment to registered domestic partners. Applying the principle that federal law respects state law property characterizations, the federal tax treatment of community property should apply to California registered domestic partners. Consequently, for tax years beginning after December 31, 2006, a California registered domestic partner must report one-half of the community income, whether received in the form of compensation for personal services or income from property, on his or her federal income tax return.

This ruling is required in 2010, and couples may also opt to revise returns for 2007, 2008 or 2009. There are some open questions about non-community property and the treatment of certain deductions as well as variances in state law, so see your tax accountant or attorney for further clarification.

This is very good news for our community.

Many gay couples may find that this will offer a significant tax savings next April. And all of us benefit when our governmental institutions begin to recognize our relationships.

Ugandan Blackmail Message Released

You work for an organisation within Makerere University called the Computer Institute and you also do part time work as at Synoviate at Nakasero. Most friday evenings you are seen heading to that place at around 9 pm.

We could tell you more about where you live and what your lifestyle is like but we trust that you dont doubt we know all that too and so for now we shall go straight to why we have written this letter to you.

We have been tasked with the job of stopping the spread of homosexuality and identifying and dealing with all stubborn homosexuals and sexual deviants in Uganda. …We have zeroed in on you as one of those hard core homosexuals (your family status not withstanding) that we could use as an example to the rest and this is our offer to you.

That is just part of a blackmail message sent last March to an Ugandan who was presumed to be gay. Today, the anonymous blogger GayUganda has released the entire sanitized version of that email.

The email demands that the recipient reveal the names of every LGBT person he knows and to write a public letter denouncing homosexuality. The email’s author, Peter Karamaga of a group identified as the “National Anti-Homosexuality Task Force”, claims that George Oundo, the so-called “ex-gay” who was trotted out a year ago in a massive outing campaign, identified the recipient as gay. The email threatens public exposure — to friends and family, employer, and neighbors — if the recipient fails to cooperate.

It takes a very special kind of evil to try this sort of thing.

The reasons behind the denial of sexual orientation, and why they are not working

One common theme found in anti-gay rhetoric is the dismissal of sexual orientation. This can be seen from Exodus’ statement that “the opposite of homosexuality is godliness” to the Family Values Coalition’s redefinition of sexual orientation to include all paraphilia to the obsessive use of “homosexual lifestyle” by virtually every anti-gay activist.

And the reason is clear. It is not overly difficult to condemn people for their lifestyle or even to justify executing them for their “behavior”, but few modern Americans are comfortable mistreating others based on an innate and immutable attribute.

And they know it. Consider this aptly named piece in OneNewsNow by virulently anti-gay writer Peter Heck: Why we’re losing the ‘gay’ debate:

Because of their ceaseless onslaught of propaganda, a majority of Americans (some even within the church) have come to believe in the existence of a group of people whose natural state is “homosexual.” We now casually use this terminology, assuming that there are “heterosexuals” and “homosexuals.”

When we accept this baseline, we have detached ourselves from rational thinking. We have allowed the debates over “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” marriage rights, hospital visitation and other legislative objectives like adoption privileges to become ones of civil rights and fairness. And once those advancing homosexuality have successfully framed these debates in this way, those holding to traditional morality are helpless. They are easily portrayed as cruel, discriminatory, hateful bigots unwilling to extend the rights they want for themselves to others who are not like them. Needless to say, this is all by design. It has been the stated strategy of the homosexual agenda from the start.

Heck argues that the only way they will win is if they convince the populace that they are not discriminating against people but discouraging behavior.

But since what they do sexually is always chosen behavior, it has nothing to do with their identity. Who a person is, is different than what a person does.

Heck is right that they are losing, and why, but he’s wrong about the solution. Rebranding homosexuality as a behavior rather than a trait will not and cannot be successful for three reasons:

1) The horse is already out of the barn. Regardless of how you feel about gay people, virtually everyone already recognizes that such a group exists.

Even rabid anti-gay activists who rant about there being no such thing as sexual orientation distinguish between those who are gay and those who are not. In fact, anti-gay activists are among the quickest to assign category and announce differences. They’ve spent years ranting about the imagined mental illness, criminal activity, diseases, and predatory nature of the ever feared homosexual, and now it is too late to declare that such a creature does not exist.

Even Heck, in a desperate effort to avoid any suggestion of an innate trait, talks about “men having sex with men”. Not as a descriptive act, but in substitution for “gay men” or “homosexuals”. It’s kind of amusing once you recognize it.

You can call us gays and lesbians or “men having sex with men” or “those struggling with same-sex attraction” or “militant homosexual activists” or queers, fags, deviants, or dykes and ultimately the effect is the same. Gay people exist, are a distinct population, and everyone already knows it.

2) The attempt to distinguish between behavior and identity, if it were possible, would only work in the favor of gay rights.

One of the more bizarre aspects of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was that it pretended to be based on behavior. And part of the definition of “behavior” was having “a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts”. In other words, being a gay person was behavior. And there we are right back in a great big circle.

So assume for a moment that Heck’s imagined distinction were law. Suppose we took him at his word that “the debate should be held over whether or not those who do serve should be banned from participating in certain sexual behaviors.”

OK. Ban gay sex and not gay people… And just how would you go about enforcing such a law? Sex police?

Anti-gay discrimination in America has never really been about behavior. No gay person is fired from their job for having sex in the breakroom (or if they were, they should have been). And if you want to ban adoptions based on who uploads home porn to x-tube, you might even convince me.

Homophobes almost universally say, “I don’t care what you do in the privacy of your bedroom,” they just don’t want you to “shove it in their face.” And by that, they mean that they don’t want you to be a gay person. Because they don’t really truly care if you are engaging in homosexual acts, as long as you aren’t gay.

It isn’t behavior that is behind the adoption ban in Florida, or marriage in 45 states, or denial of benefits for federal employees, or denied hospital visitation, or any other anti-gay discrimination. A ban on “behavior” wasn’t enforced – or enforceable – in the states that had sodomy law before Lawrence v. Texas.

And behavior is not really Heck’s issue. He’s no more fond of the celibate single gay man that doesn’t sleep around outside a relationship than he is of the guy who is getting it on several times per day. In fact, he’d by far prefer a closeted shame-filled sexually active gay man sneaking off to the bathhouse than he would an out and proud celibate gay man.

It’s not really the behavior to which anti-gays object, it’s the kind of people who might possibly do that behavior, and especially the kind of people who aren’t ashamed of it.

3. Efforts to try and deny sexual orientation only make you look extreme, hateful, and lunatic.

The best thing that an anti-gay activist can do for us is loudly proclaim the ridiculous. It discredits them and those with whom they associate.

With each passing day, more people get to know their gay family, neighbors, friends and coworkers. And claims that “they’re not really gay, they’re just choosing aberrant behavior” are so far from their experiences that they fall on deaf ears.

Anti-gays are, on a rather rapid pace, losing influence on the culture around them. Now it seems that only like minded people will listen, and this reinforces extremism and positions that are further and further from the mainstream.

The more that they ratchet up the rhetoric, the less their positions are given credibility.

But what else can they do? I’m not sure that Heck or any of the others can really come up with a strategy that can, in the long run, allow them to implement or retain anti-gay legislation and discrimination.

As gay people are becoming more recognized as a demographic, a unique people with an innate and immutable attribute known as sexual orientation, the more that discrimination seems to be unAmerican and unChristian. And those who espouse it do, indeed, began to be seen as cruel, discriminatory, hateful bigots unwilling to extend the rights they want for themselves to others who are not like them

Malawi President Wants Everyone to Just Shut Up About Those “Satanic” Gays

Malawi President Bingu wa Mutharika, who pardoned Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza after they were sentenced to fourteen years at hard labor for gross indecency and unnatural acts,” has made it clear that he and everyone else should stop talking about those “satanic” gays:

“The story ends there… I don’t want to hear anyone commenting on them. Nobody is authorised to comment on the gays. You will spoil things,” Mutharika told reporters on arrival from the France-Africa summit.

He said the gay couple’s wedding was “satanic because they committed a crime against our culture, against our religion and against our laws.”

“I am looking at donors now… what will they say about the pardon?” Mutharika said.

…”Is it possible to stop aid to Malawi because of two people who are insane?” he asked.

Mutharika freed the couple following a meeting with UN General Secretary Ban Ki-moon on Saturday. Malawi had endured months of intense international criticism of couple’s prosecution. Foreign donors make up over half of Malawi’s development budget.

But that just telling you what I hear. After all, I’m authorized to comment on the gays…

Pakistani Police Stop Transgender Wedding

Malik Mohammad Iqbal (L) and Rani (R)

Police in Peshawar in Northwestern Pakistan last week broke up a wedding between a man and his transgender bride. The Associated Press reports that the two face seven years imprisonment for violating the Muslim country’s anti-sodomy law, while AFP says the penalty could be lifetime imprisonment.

Police arrested Businessman Iqbal Khan, 48, and his bride, who the AP describes as “an 18-year-old whose formal name is Kashif but goes by Rani.” Police also arrested 43 guests. AP has more details:

Police said the pair denied the gathering was a wedding

[police official Shaukat] Ali said it was apparent the two were getting married — pointing out that Iqbal Khan, a married father of five, paid 80,000 rupees ($940) to Rani’s “guru.”

In Pakistan, many transgenders are thrown out by their families and live in communal homes under the leadership of a “guru,” a fellow transgender who looks after their needs and takes a cut of their earnings.

…There are no official figures for the number of transgender people in Pakistan. Known as khusra, they live on the edges of society and are frequently harassed by police.

The groom reportedly owns the building that is being rented by a community of Khusra. “Khusra” appears to be Urdu slang for “Eunuch,” which has led most world news reports, including those from some rather reputable outlets, to refer to the bride as a Eunuch.

The 43 guests have been released on bail, but the couple remains in jail awaiting trial. In a hearing before a judge, Rani denied that a wedding was taking place. She said that the gathering was a birthday party being thrown in her honor.  According to Pakistani news reports:

The accused were charged under sections 377, 511, 294, 148 and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code, sections 3 and 4 of the Dance Act and Section 13 of the Arms Ordinance.

Police allege that an AK-47 was found at the venue. Automatic weapons are extremely commonplace in the Peshawar region.