In the latest development in his campaign to show how dramatically the Tories have changed, David Cameron has published the party’s first-ever official list of openly gay MPs. The Conservatives say they have 20 openly gay candidates standing in the Election. Of those, 11 told party chiefs they were ‘happy’ to be named in the first authorised list of gay Conservative candidates.

…[Openly gay Tory MP Nick] Herbert said: ‘A successful political party ought to look like the country it seeks to govern. If we were truly representative, we would have 99 women, 16 black or ethnic minority and ten gay MPs.’

Since then she’s been denounced by the city of Beverly Hills and pretty much anyone else with a blog and a sense of humor.

But now she has spoken with NBC Ch 4 to clarify that she does really mean that the Bible should be taken literally. And in the process sh revealed a number of exciting revelations to report.

There’s the discovery that Lauren seems not to be able to quote the scripture she “quoted” to Fox News. In fact, she doesn’t know much about it other than that it was “from Leviticus”.

There was the exciting news that in Christianity there is “forgiveness and receipt* from Jesus, himself” which gives new meaning to “be sure to keep your receipt.” But she was a bit stumped when asked, “if they get to know Jesus, can they remain gay?”

But perhaps the most startling revelation of all is that apparently, Lauren Ashley seems to only own one top!

UPDATE:

No, Timothy, no. Jesus doesn’t give a receipt, he gives mercy. Mercy.

Sigh. It was so much more fun when I thought she said ‘receipt’.

Martin Ssempa showing gay porn (Photo via Warren Throckmorton)

We reported last week that Ugandan pentecostal pastor Martin Ssempa has been showing gay porn as part of his anti-gay campaign in support of that country’s proposed Anti-Homosexuality Bill. A columnist identified as “The Analyst” for Uganda’s independent Observer took that premise and ran with it with tongue firmly planted in cheek, claiming that gay porn is responsible for increasing attendance at his church.

This makes Makerere Community Church the only place in Uganda where watching pornography is “legal”. According to Uganda’s laws, even mere possession of pornographic material is a crime. It would appear that Makerere Community Church has got a special license to show porn. Moreover, perhaps following Jesus Christ’s example of welcoming children, even kids can watch porn at Makerere Community Church.

The, er, money shot is here:

“I can’t wait to get home and try it out. The men in the movie really seemed to be enjoying themselves,” one member of the congregation told The Analyst.

We’ve seen megachurches reinvent themselves into coffee houses, rave clubs and concert halls, all in an attempt to incorporate elements of popular culture to make themselves appear hip and relevant. Why not porn? Even the worst of it beats the treacly karaoke singers that have become so popular over the past couple of decades.

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

Here at Box Turtle Bulletin we occasionally make mistakes. Sometimes we misspell a word, get a reference wrong, or flub grammar (and are subjected to the resulting scorn). But we aren’t writing to the White House, and we don’t have paid proof-readers. However, ADF is supposed to be comprised of lawyers, with staff to review, so there’s just no excuse for the ADF’s laughably amateur letter.

So as to help them avoid future mockery, let me share a few tips on letter writing to ADF:

1. When writing to try and influence a powerful person, try to get their name right.

• The Secretary of the Air Force is not “Michael B. Donnelly”; his last name is Donley. Perhaps you have him confused with anti-gay activist Elaine Donnelly, but I doubt that he appreciates the comparison.
• The Secretary of the Navy is Raymond Edwin Mabus, Jr. If you are going to include his middle name, then for heaven’s sake include his suffix.
• Yes, Admiral Mike Mullen is an admiral in the Navy. But generally, “Navy” is not part of his name.

2. If you want mail to arrive, address it properly – even the “cc’s”

• The office of the House Republican Leader is at “H-204 The Capitol” not at “H0204 The Capitol”.
• The Secretary of the Navy is at “1000 Navy Pentagon”, not at “100 Nay Pentagon”.
• The office of the Secretary of the Army is not exactly at “1400 Defense Pentagon”. That is the address of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs.

I mean, really guys, it’s right there on the Department of Defense website. You can cut and paste it.

And while we’re at it, you only need to put “cc:” on the letter one time. Adding it in front of one name halfway down the list isn’t necessary.

3. Try and present your arguments in a consistent pattern

If you are numerating several points, use wording consistently. Don’t use “Whether chaplains could” three times but select “Whether chaplains can be allowed to” when there is no difference in meaning to be distinguished by different wording.

4. Try to avoid nonsensical and grammatically flawed language.

For example, the following sentence purports to introduce a “consequence”, but instead asks a question (which was not punctuated with a question mark):

That is a Constitutional offense that carries a very pragmatic consequence: just what will happen to recruiting efforts if Christians become second-class soldiers, sailors, airmen, or Marines.

And this sentence makes no sense whatsoever:

We urge you to reconsider your decision and avoid this collision with America’s most cherished and fundamental freedom of religious liberty.

What is “America’s most cherished and fundamental freedom of religious liberty?” It is the freedom to keep gays from the Military? Is it the freedom of chaplains to preach against “homosexual behavior?”

Or perhaps they were trying to say “American’s most cherished and fundamental freedom, that of religious liberty.”

We’ll never know.

5. And finally, try not to introduce off-subject and irrelevant matters into your conclusion.

After four pages of discussion about chaplains and “homosexual behavior”, ADF provided this, their second to last paragraph:

In fact, it is more than plausible that forcing the military to affirm homosexual behavior will prove unwise. Recently, hundreds of religious leaders in civil life—including many from the faith communities that supply many military chaplains—declared their reasoned and conscientious opposition to the normalization of homosexual behavior through the artifice of same-sex “marriage.” This opposition is deeply rooted in the theology of the faith communities represented by the signatories, and such conscientious opposition will come to a sharp head within a military that compels affirmation of homosexual behavior.

Huh?

How, exactly, does (sect specific) religious opposition to civil marriage relate to gay personnel in the military? ADF never tells us, other than to suggest that it has something to do being “unwise”. Or perhaps ADF is assuming that anything gay relates to everything gay, though polls on marriage and military service certainly show otherwise.

Ugh.

Who wrote this thing? And why on earth would they actually consider sending it?

I guess that we can all just be glad that when it comes to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, our opposition is addicted to appearing like blithering idiots.

- Lady Gaga, Speechless

This Sunday is St. Valentine’s Day, a time for romance and love. And, perhaps, a time to reflect on the value of your relationship.

In a recent post, we analyzed the claims made about how half of gay marriages are not monogamous and found that the sample was not adequate to tell us anything whatsoever about gay marriages. But it did engender a lengthy and heated discussion about the prevalence of monogamy in the community. And various positions were argued from the perspective of the experiences of those opining.

As we saw, while the readership at Box Turtle Bulletin is very diverse, many readers experienced a very emotional connection to the commentary. Several shared their own relationship structure.

Which got me wondering: is your own perspective on monogamy set in stone? If your beloved came to you on Sunday and asked you to change your agreement, how flexible could you be?

If you strongly believe that an open relationship is healthier and that outside sexual release keeps you stronger, could you give it all up to please the one you love? And if you think that a relationship built on monogamy and fidelity is sacred and smart, how would you react to your Valentine if they expressed a desire, or even a need, to have extra-relationship experiences?

(Please be courteous to others and as respectful of their choices as you wish them to be of yours.)

“Intrepid amateur sociologist Mike Albo” wanted to make the point that gay folk have fled from big cities and now are now scattered to unlikely places (an unlikely assumption).

About 10 years ago everyone else moved back into these nicely gentrified metropolises, and the lavender diaspora began. Now a slew of secondary cities are becoming gay epicenters.

So to identify these secondary epicenters and find which is gayest, he came up with seven measurements, some of which are reasonable, some of which are perplexing, and some of which make me sad at heart.

First the reasonable: same-sex households per capita and gay elected officials. These both seem like good things to consider. A city is likely “gayer” if it has more gay couples and if it’s residents are more open to gay elected officials. gay bars per capita – while I might think that this is not the best criterion, gay bars are to some extent a measurement of gay social life, although I would compare them to the total number of bars, not the total number of people.

Now the perplexing: statewide marriage equality – I can see how this might make sense in a small homogenous state, but I find it odd that by this measure Fresno is gayer than Atlanta. gay films in Netflix favorites – I guess one might measure anti-gay hostility by who was willing to watch Milk, but this is in many ways based in a ghetto mindset. Those who feel “outside” or “other” may be more inclined to need the connection brought by gay specific cinema, while those who are in welcoming communities might be less inclined to watch films based solely on their gay content.

And now the self-loathing categories. First let me say that I’m not accusing Mr. Albo of being self-loathing; he may be the most happy and secure guy out there. And I do recognize that this was not intended to be anything other than a fun exercise. But caveats aside, the following two measurements are based on stereotypes that are tragic and reminiscent of the tales of woe from ex-gays and self-hating drama queens of the 70s. gay dating and hookup profiles for single male population – that is not a measure of gayness, that’s a measure of the extent to which that community discounts relationships or has limited alternatives to meeting someone. And the saddest is cruising spots per capita. First, cruising spots are frequently frequented by those who do not identify as gay and those who are married. And also, cruising spots are most frequent in places where there are no safe ways for gay people to meet. This is not a measure of gayness, this is a measure of the closet in a hostile environment.

A measure of gayness might include a wide variety of gay social groups, citywide laws about discrimination or benefits or couples registry, supportive churches and synagogues, estimations of the gay population, the presence of an active community center, programs for gay youth or elders, and a lack of hate crime incidences. Perhaps even some comparison of the way the city voted on gay marriage bans would be informative.

But not guys lurking furtively in the bushes. That’s not gay, that’s just sad.

No, Mr. Burns is not building a solar shield over the town of Springfield. He’s not bribing Homer to ignore safety precautions with donuts fried in the rendered fat of endangered species. But it is a plan as nefarious. (WTOP.com)

A Baltimore County delegate is sponsoring legislation that would prohibit Maryland from recognizing gay marriages validated by other states or countries.

Del. Emmett C. Burns Jr.’s measure would also declare that marriages between individuals of the same sex are against the public policy of the state of Maryland.

I can almost see him rubbing his hands exclaiming “excellent“.

I’m not sure why Mr. Burns is so worried about marriage. Perhaps he thinks that with rights and equality, Smithers may find internal peace and contentment and no longer be his toady.

But whatever the reason, his evil plan must be foiled.

(oh, and isn’t it strange how he looks even scarier when he’s not a cartoon)

Miller told Newsweek two years ago that letting Isabella live with Jenkins would be like giving her child to the milkman.

Well, yeah — if you lived with the milkman, made love to him, bought a house with him, entered a civil union with him at a quaint resort blanketed in snow and bedecked with greenery, sat through fertility treatments that he helped pay for, let him catch the baby as you pushed and shared midnight burping and diaper duties — it would be just like giving your child to the milkman.

and my favorite:

Miller’s legal team said in court that a move to Vermont, with a new school and new friends, would be disruptive for a 7-year-old.

And going into hiding isn’t?