Box Turtle Bulletin

Purdue Professor Spews “An Economic Case Against Homosexuality”

Timothy Kincaid

November 6th, 2009

Purdue Professor of Library Science Bert Chapman wrote an article on his TownHall blogsite in which he sought to lay out an economic argument against the civil rights and liberties of gay men.

His premise is that AIDS is expensive so gay men should be denied any benefits, both from the government and from private employers. (He is all for “the biblical condemnation of the homosexual lifestyle”, but he seems unaware that Lesbians exist).

The money wasted on AIDS research could be returned to taxpayers or transferred to more worthwhile areas of public health research such as cancer, heart disease, and combating pandemic conditions like H1N1 flu.

Chapman’s rant is factually flawed, poorly contrived, based on false assumptions, and is void of exactly what he thinks an alternative might be (e.g. let sick people die in the street?).

Not only does he seem to think that all gay men have AIDS, the poor man also appears to think that US AIDS relief spending in Africa is somehow related to gay men. And in a leap of irrationality, Chapman suggests that gay people getting married would lead to increased rather than decreased sexual disease transmission.

Naturally, some Purdue students aren’t pleased. They expressed concerns about gay students and about the university’s commitment to non-discrimination policies.

But I think the bigger issue is that Purdue has a Professor of Library Science who seems incapable of researching even the most basic of facts. As an advocate for information access, Chapman has an obligation to use the information ready at his fingertips rather than rant on uninformed.

Which brings me to my favorite response. Kevin Casimer, a senior in the College of Liberal Arts, made a tongue in cheek economic case for getting rid of librarians. Frankly, of the two, his argument was stronger.

Getting rid of librarians makes economic sense. Walmart trusts people to check out their groceries, so surely we could implement self-checkout at our libraries. Replacing librarians with minimum wage workers to put books back on the shelf and assist people with self-checkout would save billions. This process could even generate new income if we allowed police to access these systems and fine those who don’t return books. Of course, a degree of service would be lost without librarians. However, I think we’ll manage locally as long as someone teaches the new workers to be as helpful as the last Purdue librarian I spoke to who offered to “help me do a search on ‘the Google.’”

Australian Senate Refuses to Oppose Uganda’s “Kill Gays” Bill

Timothy Kincaid

November 6th, 2009

From SXnews:

[South Australian Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young] moved that the Senate should “[call] on the Government to actively encourage the Ugandan Government to withdraw its Anti-Homosexuality Bill and respect the human rights of same-sex attracted people.”
…
The motion was rejected.

Click here to see BTB’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

My Prayer

Timothy Kincaid

November 6th, 2009

This weekend Focus on the Family will host their final Love Won Out ex-gay dog and pony show before washing their hands of the movement and turning it over to Exodus International. And, knowing that there will be the usual protest, Exodus Youth Director Randy Thomas is calling for prayer.

I (Randy) won’t personally be at this particular event but having been to about 20 of them, every single one had some sort of protest and every single time the LWO team responds lovingly. Would you add praying for Wayne and his friends to your prayers for the conference? We’d greatly appreciate it.

I’ve been around long enough to know exactly what sort of prayers that will elicit. They will either be of the “smite the heathen” variety, or, more likely, of the sanctimonious “convict the heathen” stripe:

Jesus, show Wayne your love. Convict him of his sin. Deliver him from the bonds of darkness and the confusion of homosexuality that Satan has wrapped him in. He’s so devoted to his sinful cause; oh how he could be a warrior for You. Jesus, tug at his heart. Bring him into a relationship with You and show him that he’s wrong and we’re right!!

Well, that last part is never really prayed out loud, but it is the unsaid message behind the rest of the prayer. Praying for someone else’s conviction just makes you feel so good. Not only does it confirm your own certainties, but you get to be all “loving” while you are being self-affirming.

And as an extra-special bonus, you get to tell others, “Oh, that poor young man. It’s so sad. I prayed for him today.”

Which got me thinking.

At times I find myself telling anti-gay activists that I will pray for them. And I’m sure that they assume that if I really do pray for them that my prayers are a mirror image of those above.

But I don’t pray for God to smite them or for God to change their minds. In fact, some time ago I worked out a very different prayer, one that works for me.

It goes something like this:

God, please bless Anti-gay Activist Joe.

Give Joe happiness. Bring him peace and prosperity. Take away any hurt or unhappiness or dissatisfaction with his life. In fact, fill Joe with so much joy that he has no room left over for hatred and anger and bitterness towards my community.

Fill his days with interesting things. Bring delight into his family and merriment into his friends. Make his day meaningful and fulfilling. Fill his life with so much interest and purpose that he has no time left over to spend trying to make the lives of those in my community unpleasant.

And finally, God, bring Joe close to you. Give him a complete understanding of who you are. Startle and shock him with the degree to which you love him. Fill him completely with your love, so full that he only can spill love over to all who come in contact with him. And let him know that whether I’m right, or he’s right, or neither of us is right, it just doesn’t matter. Because it all comes down to love.

Now I know that many of our readers don’t believe in any deities or value any prayers. Many, many, many times that has been made abundantly clear. And some of you are always on the lookout for an opportunity to mock the faith of others. I’m really hoping that you’ll give this one a pass and decide that this thread really isn’t for you, so much.

But for those readers who do believe in God and prayer, I offer you my prayer for consideration. It may not work for you. But if it does, please consider praying for the organizers and participants at this weekend’s Love Won Out Conference. I think they could use some joy, love, peace, and satisfaction.

Linda Harvey Fears Tolerance

Timothy Kincaid

November 6th, 2009

When it comes time for the annual Day of Silence, anti-gay activist Linda Harvey will be once again be calling for children to stay home from school. And Christian media will present her as a mild smiling pro-family advocate.

But don’t be deceived. Linda Harvey is one of the most strident opponents to equality, decency, and civil rights that our community faces.

Some of those who oppose equality do so out of a sense of religious obligation, yet also feel some remorse and can be persuaded to find some measure of accommodation for the difficulties that the put us through. Polls show that many conservative Christians who do not favor marriage equality will still find hospital visitation or inheritance issues to be matters of compassion and mercy. They oppose employment discrimination and favor open military service.

But not Linda.

In an article for WorldNetDaily, Harvey rages about a tactic employed by the organizers of the anti-gay marriage campaign in Maine. She is furious that an ad was run which expressed a message of tolerance.

Abandoning traditional marriage entails real consequences, yet we want to be tolerant of gays. Maine’s Domestic Partnership laws provide substantial legal protection for gay couples. Any problems remaining can be addressed without dismantling traditional marriage. It’s possible to support the civil rights of all citizens and protect traditional marriage at the same time.

Tolerant? Is Linda among those who wish to be tolerant? No, she most certainly is not! And as for “civil rights”, she thinks you should have none.

Are there indeed “rights” that need to be accorded to the behavior of homosexuality? No self-respecting Christian would take this position.

Linda goes on to delight in the lies that the campaign told about schoolchildren and the threat that gay people are to them. And she lists the sad tired (distorted and false) tales of the woe in Massachusetts and California. And then her venom spews:

But the student endangerment message made no sense paired with the last-minute, “We’re really tolerant” positioning of the campaign as cited above. Opponents would easily be able to see through the apparent hypocrisy: Why should parents
worry about their children being indoctrinated into homosexual acceptance, if “gays” ought to be tolerated? If we ought to respect their “rights”? This sudden shift had a desperation tinge to it and leaves pro-family forces vulnerable in the future to accusations of lying through our teeth. Christians do not do well with hypocrisy. We need to tell the truth.

The Catholic Church in Maine made similar foolish accommodations. In reacting to the victory, Bishop Richard Malone said that the church upholds marriage yet “respects and accepts gays.” Really? The Catholic Church accepts homosexual behavior? Two men having sex with one another? Women excluding men from their lives and shacking up as lesbians? This is respectable and acceptable in Catholic teachings? This seems to say there might be truth to the claim of “gay” identity, something homosexualists would love for Christians to embrace.

But amidst Linda’s hateful rantings (and yes, they are hateful), she sees something that we have long noted. The position of much of our opposition in inherently contradictory.

One cannot both tolerate and accept gay people and simultaneously exclude and segregate them. One cannot value the worth of the gay person and also relegate him to second class citizenship. If you “respect and accept” gay people as children of God worthy of His love, then you can’t call for sanctions, penalties, and punishments for the existence of those children.

And I believe that in time, perhaps a very short time, this delusion of “I love you but I want to treat you badly” will fall under its own weight. Ultimately, those who seek our civil exclusion will have to choose to either truly accept us as an equal member of the family of man, or stop pretending that they feel for us anything but contempt.

And I suspect that Linda sees the writing on the wall. I think she fears that she will in time be among but a small minority who selects the latter choice.

Uganda Women’s Group: “Kill the Gays”

Timothy Kincaid

November 6th, 2009

The Uganda Women Parliamentary Association is angry that anyone would think that they might show sympathy or mercy to gay people.

From UGPulse:

The chairperson of UWOPA, Jane Alisemera says that the association has received calls from civil society organizations asking UWOPA to denounce Anti Homosexual bill which they describe as anti human rights.

Alisemera says that UWOPA backs Anti Homosexual bill. She says the bill seeks to protect the unit of the family and marriage, something the association protects and advocates for.

MP Alisemera says that UWOPA supports the government to punish people, institutions of learning and organizations which promote homosexuality.

And yes, they are fully aware that the punishment for “repeat offenders” is death.

Click here to see BTB’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

Carrie Prejean’s Behavior is Disgusting

Timothy Kincaid

November 5th, 2009

Yesterday I was chided for calling opposite-marriage loving, NOM representing, values voter speaking, good ol’ Christian girl Carrie Prejean a skanky slut. Well, actually looking back, I said that the God she imagined had anointed her as his spokesman would call her a skanky slut, but nevertheless point well taken.

So today I’ll just say that I have it from a very good source that Carrie Prejean’s behavior is disgusting.

Who is the source, you ask? Why, it’s none other than Carrie herself. (TMZ)

When the video started playing, Carrie’s first reaction was “that’s disgusting” … and Carrie denied it was her.

Then, the camera angle changed … and panned up to her face. She was caught red-handed … so to speak.

Carrie was rendered speechless and immediately began talking with her lawyer. We’re told it took about 15 seconds for Carrie to drop her $1 million dollar demand.

Now I certainly can’t speak for all of our readers, but if this video showed what I think it showed, then I am sure that there are a number of the fellas that would agree with Carrie that, “Ewwww, that’s disgusting.”

Some Folks Are Never Satisfied

Jim Burroway

November 4th, 2009

You know, just when I think anti-gay nutcases can’t surprise me anymore, Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber proves that there just isn’t enough hatred — yes, Peter and Matt! I’m calling you out on hatred now — for some of these people. Anti-gay activists won their contest in Maine, denying marriage to LGBT citizens of that state. You’d think that LaBarbera and Barber would be thrilled at that victory.

Guess again. They’re mad that even though Stand for Marriage Maine won, they weren’t hateful enough:

Christians PROMOTING homosexual relationships and “gay civil rights”? Above is a frame from the Stand for Marriage Maine TV ad “It’s Possible,” effectively endorsing the state’s “domestic partnership” law and “civil rights” based on homosexuality. See controversial text of ad below, and view the full ad HERE.

I agree with my good friend Matt Barber, who is also a Board Member of Americans For Truth in addition to his important work at Liberty Counsel. It is not ethical nor good strategy for the “pro-family” movement to promote one evil and public-policy disaster (changeable and sinful behavior as a government-backed “civil right”) to fight another (homosexual “marriage”). Yet that is precisely what the Yes on 1 campaign’s pro-domestic partnership ad called “It’s Possible” did. …We who claim to follow God are lacking in integrity if we promote the normalization of homosexuality as part of some (perhaps well-intentioned) utilitarian plan to ostensibly “save” traditional marriage. [Garish colors and boldface in the original]

Don’t you get the idea that nothing could possibly make these two happy? I don’t know about you, but I would love for these two to run a p0liical campaign. It would seriously make my day.

Carrie Prejean, Even Sluttier Than You Thought

Timothy Kincaid

November 4th, 2009

It seems Carrie Prejean’s pretenses of superior moral character are as fake as her boobs or the National Organization for Marriage’s advertising.

From TMZ

Carrie Prejean demanded more than a million dollars during her settlement negotiations with Miss California USA Pageant officials — that is, until the lawyer for the Pageant showed Carrie an XXX home video of her handiwork.

The video the lawyer showed Carrie is extremely graphic and has never been released publicly. We know that, because TMZ obtained the video months ago but decided not to post it because it was so racy. Let’s just say, Carrie has a promising solo career.

Why, oh why, does this not surprise me?

Now for those of you who may have, in some moment of passion, pulled out the video camera to document your eternal love, I’m not criticizing your personal cinematic endeavors.

Unless, of course, you want to preach at me about “opposite marriage” or pretend that you have a hotline to God. Because if the creator of the universe has some special message for mankind that he wants to reveal through you, he’s probably first going to suggest that it might be more “biblically correct” if you weren’t a skanky slut.

The only down side to all of this is that Charles LiMondri, the San Diego Attorney / Anti-gay Activist is getting his legal fees paid.

Wisconsin to Keep Domestic Partnerships

Timothy Kincaid

November 4th, 2009

On this day that we mourn the loss of equality in one state, we can rejoice that another has had a victory in its efforts to provide some measure of protection to its gay citizens.

In 2006, Wisconsin voters passed a constitutional amendment by 59%-41% which banned both same-sex marriage and “legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage”. And anti-gay activists rejoiced, believing that this ensured that lifelong committed gay couples would be denied any and all rights that were given willy-nilly to any six times divorced, drunken Vegas chapel, heterosexual couple.

But in June, the governor signed a budget which included the authorization of a registry for domestic partners and which granted a very limited number of specific rights.

Determined that gay couples should not be allowed to enjoy hospital visitation rights, inheritance rights, joint tenancy rights, and the ability to take Family Medical Leave (FMLA) to care for a sick/injured partner or non-biological/non-adopted child, anti-gay activists sued claiming that such a registry violated the “no rights for gay people” clause of the state constitution.

And they appealed directly to the state supreme court, hoping that such protections could be denied promptly. The Wisconsin Supreme Court did not grant their wish. (KSTP)

The state Supreme Court has rejected a lawsuit challenging Wisconsin’s domestic partner registry.

The court offered no explanation in an order issued Tuesday.

But while this is a victory for decency and equality, it is not settled. They can still go through the process of trial court and appeals.

Owens Wins Over Spoiler

Timothy Kincaid

November 3rd, 2009

For the past century and a half, New York congressional seat 23 has been in Republican hands. But when the local Republican leadership selected a candidate for the special election who supported marriage equality, that was just too much for some conservative out-of-state Republicans. Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Dick Armey, and others built a national campaign in support of the Conservative Party candidate – all for the purpose of destroying Dede Scozzafava.

And, millions of dollars later and hours of talk radio ranting, that is all they accomplished.

Unwilling to accept a Republican that agreed with them sometimes, they handed the election over to a Democrat who would have otherwise had little chance. The final vote was:

Bill Owens – Dem. – 60,824 – 49.0%
Doug Hoffman – Con. – 56,450 – 45.5%
Dede Scozzafava – Rep. – 6,855 – 5.5%

(Even though Scozzafava withdrew from the race over the weekend and endorsed Owens, her name was still on the ballot and drew some protest votes)

But the extremists will not see this as a loss. Rather, they are delighted that they drove from the Party a long-time faithful and active Republican because she was “Republican In Name Only”. They embody the politics of exclusion, rejection, and arrogance. And if the Party caters to them, it does so at its own peril.

But although the most pro-gay candidate was driven out, there is a silver lining. Hoffman did not win. And when the extremists whine and moan about Nancy Pelosi, they will know deep in the back of their mind, that they gave her another vote. I can hardly wait for the day on which Owens’ one vote makes the difference on a bill they deeply care about.

Being Gay Grounds for Judicial Disqualification for Texas Republicans

Timothy Kincaid

November 3rd, 2009

Social conservatives will often tell you that they aren’t anti-gay, they just oppose the homosexual agenda. They don’t hate people, you see, just the sin they are committing.

Don’t believe them.

As an illustration, let’s look at what’s going on in Texas. There, Republicans are all up in arms about a judicial recommendation. (Dallas News)

Last month, Hutchison and fellow GOP Sen. John Cornyn endorsed two applicants for chief prosecutor in the Western District of Texas, which includes Austin, San Antonio and El Paso: Robert Pitman, a U.S. magistrate in Austin, and San Antonio criminal defense lawyer Michael McCrum.

Pitman is highly regarded in legal circles. In a recent bar poll, lawyers rated him the most competent judge in Travis County.

But Pitman is entirely unacceptable to socially conservative Republicans in Texas.

Tim Lambert, president of the Texas Home School Coalition, a former member of the Republican National Committee – and, like nearly all prominent social conservatives in Texas who have picked sides, a Perry supporter – called the recommendation “very unusual and disturbing.”

The “unusual and disturbing” thing? Pitman is gay.

That’s it. No scandal. No issue about qualification. No indication of judicial activism or unusual decisions. He’s just gay.

And in Texas, it may hurt Hutchinson’s campaign to replace Rick Perry as Governor. It has become a campaign issue.

Just to be clear, the sole motivation for conservative Texas Republicans opposing Pitman or criticizing Hutchinson’s endorsement of him is anti-gay bigotry. It is as simple as that.

Dobson To Quit Radio Broadcast

Jim Burroway

November 2nd, 2009

Focus On the Family founder James Dobson has announced that he will be leaving his radio program at the end of February. Last February, Dobson stepped down as chairman of Focus On the Family last February. Dobson will also stop writing his monthly newsletter and turn it over to Focus President Jim Daly. Daly insists however that Dobson is not moving into retirement and “will continue to make his voice heard in the public square.”

[Hat tip: Ex-Gay Watch]

Scozzafava Out, Hoffman Ahead, Republican Leadership Sends “Moderates Not Welcome” Message

Timothy Kincaid

November 2nd, 2009

Over the weekend, Dede Scozzafava, the very gay-supportive Republican candidate for the 23rd Congressional district in New York pulled out of the race. Faced by a Democrat with heavy party funding and a prior-Republican-now-Conservative with financing from hard-core right-wing party purists, Scozzafava was not receiving adequate funds run an adequate campaign and maintain her early lead.

In many ways, this highlights the problem that moderate candidates face. If they are not perceived as being “our guy in Congress” for some special interest or if the party doesn’t make their seat a priority, it can be difficult to finance a campaign. Representing the moderate views of your constituency is all fine and good, but moderate positions are not much inclined to get the average voting citizen fired up enough to give.

Unfortunately, the voters are now left with a choice between Bill Owens, an nonsupportive Democrat, and Doug Hoffman, a hard-core anti-gay Conservative. Scozzafava has endorsed Democrat Bill Owens but that may not be enough. Polls are suggesting that Conservative Hoffman may be leading in the now two-man race.

The most frustrating thing about the situation is that the right-wing extremists are now feeling justified and vindicated in their effort to destroy Scozzafava. They are “sending a message to all of the RINOs” (Republicans in name only) that they are not welcome in the Republican Party and that they will be driven out. Today Rush Limbaugh chortled that Scozzafava’s endorsement of the Democrat might lead to the “extinction” of RINOs.

Some Republican Party leadership had been showing signs lately that they are aware that moderates are needed in more liberal parts of the country in order for the Party to be competitive. But that may be more lip service than reality.

It will be interesting to see what they do. So far, there have been some very disturbing statements. (Bloomberg)

House Republican leaders embraced Hoffman after Scozzafava suspended her campaign. Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio, Republican Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia, and Texas Representative Pete Sessions, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said in a statement that they “look forward to welcoming Doug Hoffman into the House Republican Conference.”

Boehner and Cantor said in a separate statement they would support Hoffman to fill the next available vacancy on the House Armed Services Committee.

By promising Hoffman plum appointments, both Boehner and Cantor have sent the message that they will richly reward those who destroy the more moderate elements of the Party and drive out those who do not share their extremist views on social issues. If the leadership continues in that vein, they may well be successful in turning the Republican Party into an ideologically pure, but politically irrelevant, permanently minority party.

Uganda Religious Leaders All Calling for Anti-Gay Bill… But Maybe Not Death

Timothy Kincaid

October 29th, 2009

From New Vision

Leaders from the Church of Uganda, Orthodox, Pentecostal, Seventh Day Adventist, and the Uganda Muslim Supreme Council, unanimously supported the Bill, but called for a change in the penalties.

“Can death as a form of punishment help one to reform? Some people are convicted of murder but after they have been killed, it’s proved they were innocent. What would be done in such circumstances? We should emphasise life imprisonment,” said Aron Mwesigye, the secretary for the Church of Uganda.

So there is the call from the Anglican Church in Uganda: life imprisonment.

Seventh Day Adventist’s John Kakembo noted that homosexuality has been in Uganda since the 1960s. He called on Parliament to quickly enact the Bill into law, so as to curb the vice.

And what does the Seventh Day Adventist Church parent denomination in America have to say about this? I’ll let you guess.

We are still waiting for them, or any American Christian denomination, to denounce the bill…

yep, still waiting…

feel the love.

Who knows, maybe some mainstream press reporter will feel inspired to ask Jan Paulsen, the Seventh Day Adventist president, or Rick Warren, Martin Ssempa’s good buddy, or Rowan Williams, the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, just why it is that their brothers and affiliates in Uganda are calling for the cessation of freedom of speech or assembly and the life sentence – if not death – of all gay people.

Click here to see BTB’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

Maine AG to NOM: “What Is There To Hide?”

Jim Burroway

October 29th, 2009

As we reported a Federal Judge ruled against a lawsuit by the National Organization for Marriage claiming that Maine’s reporting requirements for ballot question campaigns are unconstitutional. In addition, the Judge ruled that Maine voters have a legitimate right to know how those campaigns are raising money and who’s behind it. That led Maine’s attorney general to challenge NOM to comply with the law before next week’s election.

Bolstered by the ruling, Maine’s attorney general challenged the advocacy group Wednesday night to make its records public before next week’s vote on Question 1.

“We are not going to give them legal advice. We trust that their legal counsel will advise them to comply fully,” said Attorney General Janet Mills. “The court has ruled that it is in the public interest to do so, and the law couldn’t be clearer.

“I would hope that they would file before the election,” Mills said. “Why not? What is there to hide?”

What indeed?

School Board Objects to Pictures of Gay Americans

Timothy Kincaid

October 28th, 2009

A school board in Michigan decided last week that a display by the Diversity Club had put up for gay history month which showed pictures of successful gay Americans was just too offensive for their precious high school aged children.

From the wildly homophobic Argus-Press *

The Corunna Board of Education voted Monday to remove a club project in a display case at Corunna High School that highlighted the acceptance of homosexuality and alternative lifestyles.

The Diversity Club’s display featured about nine photos of athletes, politicians and educators who live a homosexual lifestyle, Corunna Superintendent Dr. Mark Miller said.

It was just shocking, shocking!, that the little darlings were exposed to a picture of Neil Patrick Harris.

But it turns out that even school board members can get an education at a public school. And the ACLU was on hand to grade this little pop quiz.

From the Michigan Messenger

A local Shiawassee County school board plans to hold a meeting as soon as Monday to rescind a decision it made Oct. 23 to order the removal of an extracurricular club display honoring gay history month.

“We have violated the First Amendment rights of the students and the Diversity Club,” Maureen Stanley, president of the Corunna Board of Education, said. “We limited their expression.”

But it does make you wonder. Did the complaining parent really object to the existence of gay people at all? Did the school board really think that saying, “these Americans are gay” was something to refer to a health advisory committee?

I guess their “thinking” is best illustrated by this quote:

“We did not feel that was something that needed to be highlighted in the school, that’s basically it,” Trustee Lyle Brooks said.

UPDATE

* I am delighted to tell you that I was completely wrong in categorizing the Argus-Press as “wildly homophobic”. Dan Basso, the editor, contacted us to inquire as to why I made such a statement and to indicate that this does not reflect his intentions. We had a meaningful and useful correspondence about the use of certain words and terms such as “homosexual” v. “gay” and “lifestyle” and I think that Mr. Basso and I both have a greater understanding of each other.

I believe Mr. Basso when he tells us that it was not his intention to offend or report in a way that appears opposed to the gay community. And I am satisfied that he intends to update his stylebook and direct his staff on the use of language in stories related to our community. And I am appreciative of an editorial – not available online – in which the editor strongly disagreed with the action of the Board.

I was wrong. And sometimes it is great to admit being wrong.

A Call for Christian Action in Uganda – A Time to Show the Love

Timothy Kincaid

October 28th, 2009

Dr. Warren Throckmorton has written an article for Crosswalk.com in which he asks Should American Christians Care about Gays in Uganda? Throckmorton explains the excesses in the new proposed anti-gay law (banning speech, imposing the death penalty, requiring suspected homosexuals to be reported) and makes a strong case for why American Christians should own responsibility for the law and take action to oppose it.

While there are many cultural forces which oppose homosexuality in Uganda, a dominant one currently is the evangelical church. Most recently, in March of this year, three Americans were recruited by the Uganda-based Family Life Network to speak at workshops on ways to change people from gay to straight. Two of the Americans, Caleb Brundidge and Scott Lively, spoke in favor of keeping homosexuality illegal but giving those convicted an option of therapy to cure them of their gayness. Both Brundidge and Lively spoke to the Ugandan parliament regarding their view that homosexuality is learned and curable. Their ideas took hold. The proposed bill bases the need for stronger regulation on the concept that “same sex attraction is not an innate and immutable characteristic.”

Throckmorton also notes that the main evangelical cheerleader for this crackdown on civil liberties is Martin Ssempa, a darling of American evangelical leaders who is closely tied to Rick Warren and Saddleback Church. And, as we know, the government of Uganda has repeatedly listened to instruction and direction from American preachers.

Indeed, this latest anti-gay pogrom is directly tied to American evangelical Christian interference in the African nation. Throckmorton’s point is that because American evangelical Christians made this mess, they now must own it. And I agree.

But will Christians respond?

For years, those American Christians who espouse conservative theology in their social activism in opposition to civil equality for gay citizens have loudly proclaimed that such activism is not founded in hatred. Rather, they will assure you, they love you so very much that they are warning you away from the dangers and sinfulness of “the homosexual lifestyle”.

This argument is familiarized in the trite phrase, “Love the sinner, hate the sin.”

Though it might surprise some, I think it likely that most of those people who oppose your civil rights for religious reasons do not hate you. They don’t necessarily wish you ill. And if given a choice, they would prefer that you be happy, and healthy, and come to enjoy life (heterosexually, of course) as much as they do.

But I also believe that they don’t love you, either.

Rather, they do something worse than hate you; they don’t consider you – your life, your dreams, your loves, your hopes – at all. The extent to which their imposition of their faith system on your life will impact your ability to live freely never ever crosses their mind. Your health insurance, your immigration, your kids, your adoption, your hospital visitation, your inheritance rights, your military service, none of this enters the equation.

Not because they hate you, but because you don’t really matter to them at all. They don’t hate you; they’re just contemptuous of your existence or worth.

But, contrary to their assertions, they feel no love. It is impossible to love without caring about what the object of your love cares about. It is impossible to love without showing concern for injustice or unfairness. It is impossible to love without seeking to help those who are victims of oppression and attack.

I hope I am wrong. I hope that there is an abundance of love flowing from evangelical Christianity towards gay men and women.

And the situation in Uganda will tell us whether or not I am falsely accusing the Church. This situation provides us with a “put up or shut up” moment.

Should the Southern Baptist Convention and the Assemblies of God and Saddleback Church and all the other mega-churches stand up and speak out against this evil law, it will go far to show me that they feel love. Should conservative Republican Senators who ardently “defend marriage” against the threat of our relationships send a delegation to the African nation, I’ll consider that perhaps they do not base their policies on scapegoating of an unpopular minority. Should Maggie Gallagher and Peter LaBarbera and Laurie Higgins write stirring pieces about why Christians should oppose coercive laws, I may consider that their objection to my rights is not based in personal animus.

But should, as I suspect will be the case, Dr. Throckmorton be but one of a few voices willing to oppose evil – and this bill IS EVIL – then I will know what my heart will tell me the next time an opponent to fairness tells me that they love me.

Click here to see BTB’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

Judge Declares NOM Not Above The Law

Jim Burroway

October 28th, 2009

A federal judge has denied a request by the National Organization for Marriage for a temporary restraining order to suspend Maine’s campaign reporting requirements for ballot initiatives. NOM is currently footing nearly two-thirds of the total bill for Stand for Marriage Maine’s effort to pass Question 1. NOM complained that because they were not a Maine-based group, that they should be exempt from what they consider to be overbearing regulations for Political Action Committees.  The court disagreed (PDF: 187KB/32 pages):

Maine’s compelling interest in ensuring that the electorate knows who is financially supporting the views expressed on a particular ballot question cannot be satisfied by one-time reporting. Instead, Maine is entitled to conclude that its electorate needs to know, on an ongoing basis, the source of financial support for those who are taking positions on a ballot initiative. It will not do to say that a one-time disclosure in the week before the election is sufficient. That would not give the opposing viewpoint the opportunity to point out the source of the financing and seek to persuade the electorate that the source of support discounts the message.

This means that the Ethics Commission investigation will go forward, although the results will not likely be available before election day.

Hate Group Holds Press Conference At Maine Statehouse For Question 1

Jim Burroway

October 28th, 2009

Brian Camenker of MassResistance, one of only eleven anti-gay hate groups identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center, held a rally and press conference in the Hall of Flags at the Maine State House in Augusta. He will be joined by two other anti-gay extremists, Peter (”Porno Pete“) LaBarbera and Paul Madore of the Maine Grassroots Coalition.

According to the group’s press release, “Speakers at the press conference will expose the hidden aspects of the radical homosexual agenda, and will reveal how Maine is being manipulated into voting No on 1.”

Brian Camenker certainly has a knack for making the news. Last October, he an an accomplice, Michael Olivio, were chased by Andover, Mass., police who were responding to 911 calls from parents who were concerned about two men taking pictures at a middle school. For some reason, Olivio thought it would be smart to begin stripping his clothes while running through neighbors’ backyards during the chase:

We don’t know what his intention and purpose was around the school and the kids,” said police Lt. James Hashem.

But Michael Olivio’s employer has come forward to back up his story. Olivio, 48, works for the anti-gay rights group MassResistance.org. Brian Camenker, head of the group, said Olivio mistakenly went to West Middle School Tuesday to snap pictures instead of the high school.

Camenker said Olivio was to get pictures of the high school because the state Commission on Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual and Transgendered Youth held a meeting there Monday night.

“I figured I would do a write-up for the Web site and I wanted a picture of the high school,” Camenker said.

All three extremists have plenty of buffoonery in their history. Peter LaBarbera is particularly responsible for publishing among the most vile anti-gay tracts in the entire movement. He has long defended the discredited research of Paul Cameron, who has advocated the quarantining and medical extermination of gay people; he has deep connections with Holocauset revisionist Scott Lively, who insists that Nazism was, at its core, a homosexual movement; and he has openly defended White Supremacists when they assault LGBT people.

This press conference comes squarely on the heals of Stand for Marriage Maine’s attempt to project a softer and kinder image. Jeff Connely Jesse Connolly, Campaign manager for Protect Maine Equality issued a press release denouncing the true face of the anti-gay crowd:

This is not the new face of the Yes campaign, it’s been there all along. They can swap out their TV ads from attacks that have been called baseless by the Maine Attorney General and Maine newspapers across the state, to a gentler, softer approach, but the result is the same. They don’t believe in treating all Maine families equally and these national and local spokespeople represent some of the most vitriolic, anti-gay voices in the country.

“They can’t have it both ways — to pretend to back civil rights, yet stand behind a group like Mass Resistance which is one of only 11 designated anti-gay hate groups listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center. And they can’t stand behind Peter LaBarbera who has attacked Ben & Jerry’s, supported rescinding women’s right to vote and believes we should return to the Old Testament where gay people were stoned. And they can’t stand behind Paul Madore and the Maine Grassroots Coalition which is behind some of the most anti-gay hate speech over the last 20 years.

Carrie Sued for her… um… Enhancements

Timothy Kincaid

October 27th, 2009

It appears that Carrie Prejean, the face of the anti-gay marriage movement, just can’t help but be a national joke.

I’m not saying that she’s a blithering idiot. I’m not calling her a dunce. I’m not suggesting that she lends credibility to every blond joke I’ve ever heard. I’m just pondering whether her handlers have properly considered the possible ramifications of yet another public reminder that Carrie’s life in the recent past does not exactly align with the frilly necked, long sleeved Carrie that value voters so adore.

Because, if so, then they should have done a better job vetting. Cuz, really, if you cater to the Jesus Loves a Virgin crowd, you probably don’t much benefit from headlines that scream:

Miss California Officials to Carrie Prejean: You Owe Us for Those Boobs!

It turns out that Carrie forgot – in her desire to support Biblical Marriage – that suing your former employer after they’ve invested money into the contract you breached can result in them suing you right back. (E Online)

K2 Productions, which directs the Miss California USA pageant, has countersued the litigious former beauty queen, requesting that she return the $5,200 it gave her for breast-augmentation surgery.

“Had [Prejean] heeded the guidance of the Gospel of John, who admonished only those who are without sin to cast stones in judgment, she might have avoided this legal battle,” the suit states.

You just gotta love a lawsuit that quotes Scripture at the Holier-Than-Thou crowd.

And it makes me wonder about the priorities of the National Organization for Marriage. If they are willing to shell out millions in advertising campaigns and huge sums in legal fees to fight public disclosure laws, couldn’t they kick out a few paltry thousands to keep Carrie’s boobs out of the press again?

Someone needs to tell Carrie, “Girl, you’re being used. When they no longer have a use for a blond bimbo victim of the evil gays, they will kick you to the curb and you will have no one at all to turn to.”