Box Turtle Bulletin

Brandon McInerney’s trial begins

Today the judge in the trial of Brandon McInerney refused to give defense attorneys an additional delay. (VC Star)

Judge Charles Campbell turned down the request from McInerney attorneys who were seeking more time so they can interview witnesses for the high-profile school shooting case.

McInerney, 16, is facing murder and other charges in connection with the February 2008 fatal shooting of classmate Larry King, 15, in a class at E.O. Green School in Oxnard.

Scott Wippert, McInerney’s attorney had already received a delay from May 14th in order to interview witnesses.

McInerney, who owned neo-Nazi and white supremacist materials, is accused of killing King because of King’s sexuality. Larry, a young gay boy (or perhaps, transgender), had been tormented for months by McInerney and his friends. When King finally responded making sexual taunts to McInerney, this appears to be motivation for McInerney to murder Larry King.

Which he did in February 2008, in class, with two shots to the back of the head.

National Organization for Marriage gets paltry welcome in Maine

NOM’s Bus of Animus has rolled into Augusta, ME. And thousands hundreds a hand full of people came out to greet them and support their wackadoodlery. (WCSH)

The National Organization for Marriage, a group which helped local efforts to overturn Maine’s law, made Augusta its first stop on a 20-city tour, targeting areas where it feels traditional marriage is under attack. Brian Brown, the organization’s executive director, told his crowd of about 50 people that court cases in Massachusetts and in California affect the marriage issue across the country.

Across town, a counter protest pulled in about 150 folks with the Governor making a surprise appearance. (Maine Watch Dog)

Should NOM be as successful in ever stop as they were with the launch of their 29 city tour, they have the potential to reach up to 1,000 people and change hundreds of dozens of no minds.

Uncle Silly’s Celibacy

July 23, 1992. That’s the last time that Randy Thomas, Exodus’ VP, had sex with another person. He was 24.

But he doesn’t mind. He’s fine being celibate and he doesn’t even mind not having any form or romantic or sexual relationship; he has other people’s kids to meet that need.

I can’t imagine myself at 50 either! But when I was 24, EIGHTEEN years ago :) I wouldn’t have imagined I would be single at 42 years old and not having sex with another person for the next 18 years!

As a matter of fact, if I had know that at 24 my brain might have exploded.

But let me ask you this, even if you are gay … is it possible to be alone … and gay … at 50? Is it possible to be with a partner but still lonely or miserable at 50? In fact, is it possible neither of us could make it to fifty? OR live to 100 and have a blissful life?
…
I also don’t envy my married friends anymore. I enjoy being “Mr. Randy” or “Uncle Silly” to kids all across North America. My relational needs are met and being met abundantly.

I’ve known plenty of people who find contentment in celibacy. And I fully support the right of each person to find the life that gives them meaning and fulfillment.

I just wish that Randy didn’t use his decades of celibacy as a tool to deny me my civil rights. I wish that he agreed with me that each person has the right to find the life that gives them meaning and fulfillment, even if it does not fit his god’s expectations.

Argentine Senate votes on marriage equality today

Today the Argentine Senate is scheduled to vote on the marriage equality bill. The bill passed the house in May by a vote of 125 to 109, but the passage in the Senate is expected to be more difficult.

In lead up to today’s vote, advocates for the bill and activists against it have been trying to pressure Senators to vote according to their wishes. And, of course, the international leaders in the battle to deny rights to gay people – the Catholic Church and the Mormon Church – have weighed in.

Oddly, the Mormons seem to have made but a perfunctory effort. The President of the LDS sent a letter to the Mormons in Argentina, but it was starkly different from that which was sent during California’s Proposition 8 battle. (SL Tribune)

It definitely reaffirms the church’s commitment to traditional marriage, says Brigham Young University law professor Fred Gedicks. “But it doesn’t take as strong a position on the legal question [of same-sex marriage] in Argentina.”

Nor does it ask members to contact their lawmakers or give their all to the opposition cause, adds University of Utah law professor Clifford Rosky, who serves on a legal panel for the gay-rights group Equality Utah. “And that’s significant.”

In fact, according to a spokesman, the LDS Church “has taken no official position on the legislation being considered.”

The Catholic Church’s approach has been loud, shrill and bizarre. But ascribing demonic motivations may not have served in the Church’s best interests. In response, the nation’s president became more vocal in support.

However, Argentinian president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, who supports the legislation, said the church’s tone was reminiscent of “medieval times and the Inquisition.”

“It is disturbing to hear phrases like war of God or the devil’s projects, which are things that take us back to medieval times and the Inquisition,” she told reporters during an official visit to China.

In addition to ranting about Satan, the Catholics have joined with Evangelical groups in leading marches and holding rallies. The even let out students from Catholic schools to pump up the number of protesters.

Taking a cue from the pre-wackadoodle NOM, they were careful with their rhetoric and made sure that message appeared not to be anti-gay but pro-everyone-else. (Buenos Aires Herald)

Catholic and Evangelic organizations protested the same-sex marriage bill in a demonstration held at the Congress square under the motto “Kids have the right to have a mother and father.”

The demonstration was organized by the Lay Department of the Argentine Episcopal Conference (DEPLAI), the Christian Alliance of Evangelic Churches (ACIERA), the Pentecostal Evangelic Confraternity Federation (FECEP), and self-convened families, that were joined by representatives of the Muslim and Jewish communities.

“We’re not against any community, but we want to be clear: marriage is between a man and a woman, and children’s rights -to have a mother and a father- cannot be violated,” one of the organizers explained to media.

In response, students who support marriage engaged in a counter-demonstration (I’m not sure whether the methods are the wisest choice. In the US this would be counter-productive but it may be different in Buenos Aires)

A large group of university students along with representatives of the homosexual community are blocking the corner of Rivadavia and Callao avenues showing their support to the same-sex marriage bill after last night thousands of demonstrators along with Catholic and Evangelic organizations protested against the bill when they gathered at the Congress square under the motto “Kids have the right to have a mother and father.”

The debate is livestreamed here and Blabbeando is tweeting in English for those who do not speak Spanish.

UPDATE: It is 11:00 pm in Los Angeles and 3:00 am in Buenos Aires. The Senators are still talking and I don’t know that a vote will occur before I go to bed.

Currently, those counting votes believe that this bill will pass 33 to 31, but nothing is certain until the vote is taken.

NOM’s new message

National Organization for Marriage’s new facebook site, Protect Marriage: One Man, One Woman, has an interesting new message:

Protect Marriage: One Man, One Woman

Mike, in part I agree with you. It will cost a lot of money to fight this fight. However, no one is taking rights away from homosexuals. They are wanting rights that heterosexuals don’t have. There are no laws provided to heterosexuals based on their sexuality.

Next, they are “first-class citizens” like the rest of us. They are not being repressed, discriminated against. There is no and never has ever been a homosexual man hunt for them. Jews, Christians, and Blacks were hunted down and murdered. Homosexuals have nothing in common with the three.

Are they completely delusional?

Peter Barber Gallagher-Sprigg Updates Us On Prop 8 Trial

Rob Tisinai hits one out of the park:

Update: Do you want to know what’s even funnier? Someone posted this video on NOM’s facebook page, and now there’s a vigorous debate on whether the video is “genuine” or not.  And that, my friends, is the essence of successful satire. It’s funny because it’s true.

Charges against Choi and Pietrangelo Dropped

Breaking news from AmericaBlog’s Joe Sudbay indicate that prosecutors dropped the charges against Lt. Dan Choi and Capt. Jim Pietrangelo. According to Joe Sudbay, everyone was in the room and ready to go — prosecutor, witnesses, arresting officers — but the case was dropped. No further explanation is available.

Choi and Pietrangelo are eached charged with two counts of failure to obay a lawful order, stemming from their arrests while handcuffed to the White House fence on two separate occasions as part of protests against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

More Tea Partiers not upset about the overturn of DOMA

Last week the NY Times interviewed leaders of various Tea Party factions, noting that many found Judge Tauro’s decision that marriage is a state decision rather than a federal decision to be consistent with their own views. Now the Washington Times has interviewed more and found much the same.

“I do think it’s a state’s right,” said Phillip Dennis, Texas state coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots. The group does not take a position on social issues, he said, but personally, “I believe that if the people in Massachusetts want gay people to get married, then they should allow it, just as people in Utah do not support abortion. They should have the right to vote against that.”

Everett Wilkinson, state director for the Florida Tea Party Patriots, agreed: “On the issue [of gay marriage] itself, we have no stance, but any time a state’s rights or powers are encouraged over the federal government, it is a good thing.”

Heterosexual Menace: Mother and Child Reunion

She was twenty years old when she gave her son up for adoption. Fourteen years later, she tracked him down and found him on facebook:

“When she saw this boy, something just touched off in her — and it wasn’t a mother-son relationship, it was a boyfriend-girlfriend relationship,” the newspaper quoted attorney Mitchell Ribitwer as saying. “Aimee’s searching for a reason why this happened. She can’t understand it. She’s going to get some counseling.”

Aimee L. Sword, 36, pled guilty to one charge of sexaul misconduct in Pontiac, Michigan, and was sentenced to 9 to 30 years in prison.

Log Cabin v. DADT case begins

Today Log Cabin Republicans’ lawsuit against the federal government over the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy went began. And the opening statement reveal an interesting approach. Log Cabin will argue that the policy is unconstitutional, while the administration will counter with, ummm, nothing at all. (AP)

Woods said he plans to use the remarks of Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and other top military commanders as evidence the policy should be overturned.

Woods argued the policy violates the rights of gay military members to free speech, due process and open association.

“If they wish to serve in our armed forces, homosexuals must conceal the core of their identity, they must lie — in violation of their honor and duty,” Woods said. “Our military excludes these men and women from service solely on the basis of status and conduct that is constitutionally protected.”

U.S. Department of Justice attorney Paul G. Freeborne said that the government will present only the legislative history of the policy and no witnesses or other evidence during the trial. Their defense consists only of insisting that the policy is in the process of being repealed and the court is overstep its bounds to hear the case at all.

U.S. District Judge Virginia A. Phillips decided that the “possibility that action by the legislative and executive branches will moot this case is sufficiently remote.” Sadly, she may be right. Until the legislation is voted through by the Senate, clears reconciliation, is signed by the President, and then the policy change is deemed by both the administration and the military to be sufficiently non-disruptive, there is no repeal.

I am appreciative that the administration is not seeking to argue from the perspective of bigotry or the presumption of heterosexual superiority and is presenting no substantive defense. Perhaps they should consider this approach for all discriminatory anti-gay legislation they feel they have an obligation to defend.

NOM goes completely wackadoodle

In the grand spectrum of anti-gay activism that ranges from relatively respectful disagreement through nasty and spiteful on its way to ragingly hateful and on to bizarre and downright insane, Maggie Gallagher and her National Organization for Marriage have managed to retain the appearance of being rational and principled. While their intentions were hostile and based in animus and the presumption of superiority, their rhetoric was more mainstream and avoided trips into the realm of paranoia, villainizing, or blatant hatred.

Until recently.

But increasing Maggie has been losing it, demonstrating an increasingly bitter and hostile persona and saying things that she never would have just a year or so ago.

And things have changed for NOM, as well. No longer behaving like a marriage advocate, NOM now seems to have morphed in to a radical anti-gay activist group with views and opinions similar to those of Peter LaBarbera or Brian Camenker. The new NOM doesn’t love heterosexual marriage anywhere near as much as they dislike gay people in general.

A few weeks ago we let you know about NOM’s merging with an anti-gay extremist group, One Man, One Woman, headed by Louis J. Marinelli. Although at first it seemed that NOM was trying to downplay their affiliation, this tactic has been abandoned and Marinelli’s facebook site is now at least semi-officially the voice of the National Organization for Marriage.

And a nasty voice it is, indeed.

Language about “the best interests of children” has been replaced with ranting about “the homosexual agenda” and posts about how violent gay people are. And Jeremy at Good_As_You has extensively documented Marinelli’s extremism from trying to equate gay people to pedophiles and prostitutes to repeating the old Paul Cameron lies.

Yes, NOM has decided it’s time to attach its bus to the wackadoodle train… and I marvel at that decision. Frankly, I thought Maggie was smarter than that.

NOM’s double standard on public exposure

NOM's Bus of Animus

Maggie and crew over at the National Organization for Marriage were furious when the courts ruled that Washington State was not incorrect in wanting to release the names of the signatories on public referenda. She was aghast that the courts did not shroud the identity of those who wanted to testify in favor of Proposition 8. And she was apoplectic when the Maine courts told her that she could not keep secret the identity of those who funded the campaign to block marriage equality in that state.

They Could Be in DANGER! They might lose business or have people say mean things to them if the public came to know that these individuals sponsored anti-gay discrimination!

But it seems that NOM’s concern for privacy and secrecy extends only to those who agree with them. When it comes to those who oppose NOM’s agenda, all concerns for privacy, security, or “participating in the democratic process” no longer matter.

This week, activist Louis Marinelli and NOM President Brian Brown are traveling about in a big Protect Marriage bus and a little Protect Marriage van, seeking to encourage and rally those who are dedicated to keeping you, your family, and your rights inferior to their own. And here is what NOM had to say on Thursday:

Yesterday, a handful of teenagers packed into a small white car beside the NOM van at a red light took notice of the van’s exterior design which reads “Protecting Marriage Between One Man and One Woman”.

“Hey, you guys are against gay marriage!” one girl yelled out, calling the NOM van to the attention of her friends, who proceeded to yell out vulgarities and show their middle fingers to us. Then they got camera shy when Louis started taking photos of them from inside the van. The girl in the front passenger side tried to cover her face.

Real courageous group.

This was accompanied by a photograph of the car and its passengers. I’ll not include it here.

Haggard’s church is growing

At one time Ted Haggard ran the largest church in Colorado. Then came revelations about sex sessions with a male escort and methamphetamine usage and it all went away. New Hope, the church he created, promptly booted Haggard out the door.

Well that was in 2006 and his non-compete agreement with New Life is expired. So Ted Haggard is back in Colorado Springs and has started over with St. James Church. He’s now adopted a more inclusive and friendly approach, one that does not engage in anti-gay rhetoric or activism.

And it seems to be working. (Denver Post)

Pastor Ted Haggard is moving his burgeoning new St. James Church out of his Old Ranch Road barn in Colorado Springs to the city’s Pikes Peak Center for the Performing Arts beginning July 25.

St. James, marking its sixth week of existence as a church last Sunday, drew 230 congregants to Haggard’s barn. Haggard said he expects the church, at first, will require one of the smaller rooms at Pikes Peak for weekly 10 a.m. services.

The center’s main auditorium holds more than 2,000, and Haggard hopes to be able to fill it soon. The Board of New Life must be pooping cinder-blocks.

A debate in Guyana

Guyana is a small South American nation of less than a million people just north of Brazil. But in culture and attitude it is worlds away from some of its neighbors.

Unlike many South American countries, Guyana is not primarily an ethnic blend of indigenous and European peoples. Rather, it’s largest ethnic subgroup are descendants of immigrants from India, followed by people of African heritage. And while half of the population is Christian, less than 10% are Roman Catholic and between a quarter and a third are Hindu.

Thus, although their language is English, the Guyanese have a culture more similar to the Caribbean and do not consider themselves to be “Western.” And recently, like many other Caribbean nations, Guyana has become engaged in a national debate over homosexuality.

Guyana may be the only nation in South America in which homosexuality is illegal; however, this may be largely unenforced, and the Society Against Sexual Orientation Discrimination actively advocates for gay rights. Currently there is a flurry of attention over the issue in the culture and in the papers.

On July 29th the Inter-Religious Organisation, through its spokesman Bishop Juan Edghill, condemned a series of films being presented by SASOD. He said that while gay people should have rights “to education, to health care… they must be able to have access to housing and the right to rent an apartment… they must have the benefits like every other citizens,” they should be restricted from “attempting to corrupt young minds in society by using its gay and lesbian film festival to promote homosexuality.” (Stabroek News)

He said the fact that gays and lesbian are internationally accepted and are allowed certain rights, even marriage, does not mean that Guyana has to “subscribe to the western culture. We cannot allow the western world to come and foist their lifestyles and thinking on to us. This will simply mean that we are just allowing a new form of colonialism.

This may have passed with little more attention than the rantings of the AFA except for three things. First, Edghill is the Chairman of the Ethnic Relations Commission, and the press release was on government property, which sparked an editorial response.

No right thinking organization can properly conceive that a film festival examining gay and lesbian relations endangers society any more than any other type of festival. No right thinking organization can properly perceive that SASOD via the film festival would try to impose its mores and views on reluctant persons. No right thinking person can apprehend that religions should be able to dictate to any freely composed group what films aren’t to be offered to members of the public as long as no law is transgressed.

The greater danger however is that the IRO’s sententious declarations at the press conference will lead to an atmosphere that is even less accommodating of the views and rights of people with alternative lifestyles. That would be a dangerous development and one that should give the IRO pause for thought.

Second, the equation of homosexuality with Westernism triggered a rebuttal from Dr. Christopher Carrico, a professor in the Department of Language and Cultural Studies at the University of Guyana:

One of the great ironies is that traditions that were imposed upon non-European societies through the violent process of colonialism are today thought of in neo-colonial societies as ‘traditional values’ to be defended against the onslaught of Western ‘cultural imperialism.’ Current debates surrounding gender roles and sexual orientation provide us with clear examples of these processes.

And third, the pronouncement of the Inter-Religious Organisation failed to take into consideration the Hindu perspective. Swami Aksharananda clarified.

We also have to be concerned about what is glibly and uncritically invoked to be the position of scriptures on homosexuality. There is hardly any consensus here. While it is true that some religious books consider homosexuality as an abomination, Hinduism, for example, offers a much more nuanced and sophisticated perspective on the matter. While Hinduism does not approve of homosexuality, it admits of a wide range of sexual orientation possibilities and therefore the vehemence and stridency with which the IRO has expressed its anti-homosexual sentiments cannot be shared by Hindus.

Rationality is all I am advocating. Religious people often decide which things are right and wrong based on what they believe and imagine to be true, which in turn is based on what is stated in their religious texts. How does one know whether a religious scripture is right? The answer is that it is the inviolable, unalterable word of God. And, how does one know that it is the word of God? The only answer is because God says so. Quite an eternal conundrum!

Rationality, therefore, must be the only sound base for our relationship and for understanding one another. No religious scripture, no matter how sacred we hold it to be, which elevates itself beyond the scrutiny of reason, can be accepted as a standard by which to judge human conduct. It can never be a safe ground on which to decide important issues that may have implications in matters of life and death.

This is a fascinating cultural development and it will be interesting to see which set of ideas prevails.

Nevada Health Officials Sever Ties with Megachurch Over Martin Ssempa

Top: Canyon Ridge Community Church in Las Vegas Bottom: Canyon Ridge's "dearly beloved family and friend" wants to kill you for being HIV-positive.

As we reported over the past month, Canyon Ridge Christian Church, the Las Vegas megachurch which has been providing financial support for Uganda’s “kill-the-gays bill” cheerleading pastor Martin Ssempa, was found to be simultaneously attempting an outreach program to Las Vegas’s LGBT and HIV/AIDS constituencies by being a test site for National HIV Testing Day on June 27.

In other words, the Las Vegas church that wanted to test you for HIV, is the same church whose strategic partner and “dearly beloved friend and family” wants to put you to death if you are HIV-positive. Despite widespread condemnation for their conflicting stance, Canyon Ridge defended Ssempa, saying they “do not believe Martin Ssempa to be the man the media and others have portrayed him to be.” We, who have been following Ssempa’s role closely through every twist and turn of Uganda’s proposed Anti-Homosexuality Bill, have countered by skipping how Ssempa was portrayed in the media, and instead reminded viewers of how Ssempa portrayed himself directly. That appears to have made no impression on Canyon Ridge’s leaders.

Southern Nevada Health District, which partnered with Canyon Ridge for National HIV Testing Day, however has announced that they are severing ties with Canyon Ridge. According to a letter from the health district posted on Warren Throckmorton’s blog:

Pastor Ssempa’s support of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, which would criminally penalize homosexuals, is in direct conflict with the overarching public health goals of the health district. It is with regret that I feel compelled to dissolve the health district’s relationship with your church as long as you continue this partnership.

One of the central tenets of public health is to provide services without judgment. We also apply this principle in working with our various partners. However, we are profoundly concerned about your partnership with Pastor Ssempa as it contradicts this central tenet in that it amounts to tacit approval of activities that violate the basic human rights that should be afforded to all Ugandans.

Canyon Ridge continues to stand behind Ssempa. That same day Canyon Ridge was notified that the health district was severing ties with them, Teri McCoy, Executive Assistant to pastors Kevin Odor and Doug Parks, sent the following response to a BTB reader:

Martin has given us some documentation to clarify his position as he has represented it to us. We also have included this link to a radio interview where he discusses his position. (http://lineoffireradio.askdrbrown.org/?s=ssempa)

Because of the documents he has given us and our interactions with him, we do not believe Martin Ssempa to be the man the media and others have portrayed him to be. He has, with other pastors in Uganda, publicly expressed objection to the death penalty in the Anti-Homosexuality bill and made recommendations to Parliament to remove the death penalty from the bill and reduce the severity of other penalties in it. (Please see attached documents.)

We have worked with Martin for several years, making trips to Uganda to see his ministry first hand. He has welcomed and ministered to homosexual people in his church. He has championed the cause of abstinence, sexual purity and faithfulness in marriage that has been instrumental in pushing back the scourge of HIV/AIDS in Uganda. This work has now become a model for other African nations in stemming the tide of the HIV/AIDS pandemic on that continent. This work of saving lives in Africa was the genesis of our partnership in Uganda.

As you know, we have, through recent face to face (March 11, 2010) and video phone conversations, questioned Martin about the controversial issues and asked him to provide additional video and written statements that further clarify his positions. He has asked for and graciously received our counsel and correction and committed to continue pursuing balanced teaching of the grace and truth of God.

However, since March 11, we have diligently recorded several instances in which Ssempa has continued to support the Anti-Homosexuality Bill without modifications, while publicly displaying hard core pornography in a campaign to vilify LGBT people. Ssempa continues to insist that the bill does not target gay people with the death penalty — a lie that Canyon Ridge repeated when they defended Ssempa to a local newspaper — and a lie that he attempted to repeat on Michael Brown’s radio program that Canyon Ridge referred the BTB reader to. While BTB has repeatedly posted the official text of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill and referred to the actual text of the bill to test Ssempa’s claims of what it would do, Ssempa and his supporters have refused to do the same despite repeated calls to do so.

It’s hard to imaging a church turning a blind eye to a truly disturbed man pushing an evil agenda. One can only speculate what Canyon Ridge’s true motivation might be to ignore the mountain of evidence that is available to them.