Hat tip to Brian at BlueNC for this news — homobigot Vernon Robinson, who tried and failed to unseat Congressman Brad Miller in the 13th District race here in 2006, has picked up something as a consolation prize — the “Willie” award for Worst Political Advertisement, given by progressive thinktank Growth & Justice.

Here’s what Vern actually put on the air to receive the honor; he does the NC GOP proud:

And a snippet the post I did back when that ad was first released (March 2006) is below the fold.
(more…)

When the United States Supreme Court invalidated all state sodomy laws in the landmark 2003 Lawrence v. Texas ruling it didn’t take those state laws off the books. Last night in my state, two men, in what appears to be a domestic dispute/sexual assault case that occurred in private, were charged by the police under the North Carolina’s ridiculous “crimes against nature” law (CAN). From the Raleigh N&O:

Raleigh police first charged Nelson Keith Sloan, 40, of Grand Manor Court, who called them to his apartment about dawn, saying he had been attacked.

Police later filed the same charge against Ryan Christopher Flynn, 25, of Glen Currin Drive. They also charged Flynn with simple assault for biting Sloan. And they charged him with communicating threats by telling Sloan he was going to disembowel him and show him his innards.

“This looks like a case of a consensual act that may have gotten out of hand,” said Raleigh police Capt. T.D. Hardy. “The law is still on the books. Our detectives got involved in it last night and decided this was the best thing to do. What the D.A.’s office will do with it, I don’t know.”

Sloan, however, said he was the victim of an assault. “I didn’t allow anything,” he said Saturday after being reached at home by phone. “They knew it and turned it around and arrested me. I have never been so humiliated in all my life. It’s just awful.”

And, in the ultimate outrage - the police did not charge Flynn with sexual assault. As you read, the police captain 1) doesn’t believe a sexual crime occurred; and 2) doesn’t have a problem with arresting the men under this law, when everyone knows a heterosexual couple would never be charged with CAN.

More below the fold.
(more…)

Jeremy of Good As You has the screenshots of the creative but too-late attempt by Save California (from gay marriage)’s Randy Thomasson to remove some serious sickness that was on his web site.

On it he compared ordering county clerks in California to marry same sex couples to a Nazi officer being ordered to gas the Jews during World War II. It’s so disgusting that someone probably told him it was a bit of a bad idea to run this, so rewrote the section — but not before the original had been cached by Google. Oops.

[UPDATE: One of Homosexual and Homosexualist HQ most seasoned operatives, Jim Burroway of Box Turtle Bulletin, saw the unforgiveable leak of The Homosexual Activism Overview and took quick action. See below the fold.]

Someone’s going to get a spanking from me! I want to know who has turned over one of our top secret strategy documents to the fundie Alliance Defense Fund. Reader Karen in Kalifornia alerted me to the security breach; click the image to see what has been leaked from Homo Headquarters:

Here are the other documents that got away…

(more…)

Ah, Rick Santorum, returning from his anti-”Islamofacism” post-Senate efforts to familiar homo-hate territory. He’s back in the news, penning a ridiculous op-ed in the Philly Inquirer, “The Elephant in the Room: A wake-up call on gay marriage after ‘03 alarm went unheeded.”

Bigot! Hate-monger! Homophobe!

Those were just a few of the terms hurled my way in 2003 when I said that the Supreme Court’s Texas sodomy decision opened the door to the redefinition of marriage.

When I wasn’t ducking the epithets, I was being laughed at, mocked, and given the crazy-uncle-at-the-holidays treatment by the media. Or I was being told I should resign from my leadership post by some Senate colleagues.

Five years later, do I regret sounding the alarm about marriage? No.

I’m just saddened that time has proved right those of us who worried about the future of marriage as the union of husband and wife, deeply rooted not only in our traditions, our faiths, but in the facts of human nature: as Pope Benedict said, “The cradle of life and love,” connecting mothers and fathers to their children.

(Cue epithets: Bigot! Hate-monger! Homophobe!)

The latest distressing news came last week in California. The state Supreme Court there ruled, 4-3, that same-sex couples can marry.

In doing so, four judges rejected a statute that passed in a referendum with 61 percent of the vote that defined marriage as a union of one man and one woman.

And look, he’s worried that the elimination of discrimination will make all of the heterosupremacists look back at the good old days when homos were on the run.

Let me go out on another limb here and make another crazy prediction. Within 10 years, clergy will be sued or indicted for preaching on certain Bible passages dealing with homosexuality and churches, and church-related organizations will lose government contracts and even their tax-exempt status.

The California judges also ruled, for the first time in American legal history, that sexual orientation is just like race.

The California court just declared that those of us who see marriage as the union of husband and wife are the legal equivalent of racists. And openly racist groups and individuals can be denied government benefits because of their views, including professional licenses (attorney, physicians, psychiatrists, marriage counselors), accredited schools, and tax-exempt status for charities.

Have fun with the rest.

(UPDATE: Now that he’s going to be the GOP’s nominee, John McCain finally “discovered” how radioactive Rod Parsley is and repudiated him as well. There will definitely be a fundie eruption over this one.)

Today John McCain finally gave the boot to batsh*t fundie Pastor John Hagee of the 17,000-member Cornerstone Church in Texas after audio was released of the televangelist saying that Hitler had been sent by God to help Jews reach the Promised Land via the Holocaust. This was nothing new, however, so one wonders what rock the Arizona senator and his staff have been hiding under:

[I]n his 2006 book “Jerusalem Countdown”, Hagee proposed the theory that “anti-Semitism, and thus the Holocaust, was the fault of Jews themselves — the result of an age old divine curse incurred by the ancient Hebrews through worshiping idols and passed, down the ages, to all Jews now alive.” He also wrote that “Most readers will be shocked by the clear record of history linking Adolf Hitler and the Roman Catholic Church in a conspiracy to exterminate the Jews.”

Of course it would be interesting to know why this particular insanity crossed the line for McCain, since he had previously refused to reject the endorsement of Armegeddon proponent Hagee, who has condemned Catholics, gays, women, blacks and more from the pulpit and on video.

We’ve been blogging about the juicy-mouthed Patriot Pastor for a long time now. Apparently this influential nutbag has finally caught fire on the blogs.

More below the fold.
(more…)

Other people who saw through “states’ rights”

God, I couldn’t be more sick of the disingenuous “states’ rights” argument, now being whipped out on the gay marriage decision in California. It’s bizarre watching wingnuts get into a self-righteous huff about the all-important rights of states, when they only care about it when dismissing the fundamental rights of people. Which of course is never explicitly said, but that’s the point of it: “States’ rights” only seem to matter to people who feel the states can do a better job of oppressing the people than the federal government can. Should the federal government take the opportunity to wield power against individual rights—as they did with the federal ban on certain kinds of late term abortions—nary a peep to be heard from the people who have great love for the right of states, but not for people.

It just so happens that I started reading Nixonland by Rick Perlstein. In it, he quoted LBJ’s speech supporting the civil rights movement on March 15, 1965. I thought Johnson’s contempt for the “states’ rights” argument has some relevance right now.

There is no issue of state’s rights or national rights. There is only the struggle for human rights.

Blunt and to the point, as was his habit. With the gay marriage debate, you have the opposition forever arguing that the institutions set up to serve the people should take precedence over the people they’re meant to serve. The institution of marriage—at least the conservative definition of it—is supposed to be so sacrosanct that it can’t be modified to serve the very people marriage is supposed to serve. The government is not about serving the interests of the people, all of the people, but about just mindless oppression in the name of rights held by institutions that have no reason to exist without the people.

I mean, it’s obviously bullshit. But it’s such tenacious bullshit, and I have to wonder how many people who spout off about “states’ rights” honestly think the state is something that exists for its own sake and that it has rights above and beyond the rights of the human beings it’s meant to serve. 5%? 2%? 80%? What’s the stupid to evil ratio on this argument? How many of them realize that they’re echoing an argument that was reinvigorated to deny black people the right to vote? How many of them feel twinges of guilt, and how many would probably get on board with the idea that the state should be able to deny the right to vote on the basis of race? I am honestly curious about this.

Do I even need to bother identifying U.S. Representative Paul Broun as a Republican? With an economic wasteland left by this president, as well as military carnage, waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption, of course this guy has to pull out the Homo Straw man — he has nothing else to run on. (Washington Blade):

Backlash from the California Supreme Court ruling in favor of gay marriage continued this week as U.S. Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.) said he plans to introduce an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. Broun, a freshman Congressman from Augusta, announced his intent May 20.

U.S. Rep. Paul Broun says an amendment to the U.S. Constitution is needed to protect heterosexual marriage from ‘activist judges.’

“What the activist judges in California have shown is that the traditional definition of marriage is under assault by a cadre of lawyers and judges who hold the will of the voters in contempt,” Broun said in a press release. “As a result, a political and social question that should be resolved at the ballot box is being imposed by a handful of liberal elites.”

…Broun’s proposed amendment states: “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any state, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.”

See him bleat about the California Supreme Court ruling after the jump.
(more…)

OK, folks, we all know Faux News is chock full of sick f*cks, but the cat box king of the week is Red Eye’s Greg Gutfeld, who has a conniption over Ellen DeGeneres announcing on the air that she plans to marry Portia de Rossi. He thinks she needs to closet herself rather than declare her love for her partner — because it offends him in a manner that is akin to jawboning about taking a crap. Thanks to folks at Media Matters, we have the clip of this, ahem, turd.

During the May 20 edition of Fox News’ Red Eye, host Greg Gutfeld criticized Ellen DeGeneres for “announc[ing] on her show that she’s marrying the stunningly hot Portia de Rossi.” Gutfeld said: “As you know, seeing Ellen happy makes me happy, for everyone should be happy with the one they love, be they straight, gay, transgendered, bicurious, master, slave, S&M, or even Belgian — especially Belgian, those miserable bastards deserve it.” Later, Gutfeld added, “For me, public exhortations of love are no different than telling everyone how great your bowel movements are since switching to All-Bran — no one gives a [bleep] except you.”

Gutfeld’s comments were previously noted by Michelangelo Signorile on his blog, The Gist.

Mike also notes at his pad that E.D. Hill, subbing for Bill O’Reilly, had a guest on intimating Ellen’s joyous announcement will drive sponsors away.

The crazed guest, Laura Ries, an “advertising expert,” says there is a “danger” to Ellen talking about getting married. Hill ponders something she finds more interesting: “How did a 50-year-old woman get a 35-year-old woman?”

As someone at my pad noted,

[T]he elaborate preface about how “everyone deserves to be happy, whether [long list of increasingly outré sexual practices]” really sounds like a contemporary version of the old saw “I’m not prejudiced, some of my best friends are members of the group I’m about to denounce.”)

But I think it’s only plausible for him to bother to make these comments in a homophobic context. Every day people announce publicly that they’re going to get married. Why does this particular announcement result in a tirade? Even he couldn’t possibly actually believe that publicly announcing a marriage makes it unlikely to succeed (which is not to say that he doesn’t demonstrate a level of idiocy that makes it pretty hard to imagine him tying his shoes unassisted), and as Media Matters points out, he talks quite a bit about his wife.

So to follow it all up with “you don’t see me going on publicly about my marriage”–that’s not only false, but the lamest het move on the books. It makes me scream when I hear people say things like ‘why do they have to flaunt their sexuality [by innocuous behavior like holding hands in public]? You don’t hear me discussing my relations with my wife’–when they’ve just referred casually to their children.

Ellen’s announcement was benign and unremarkable other than the legal news that make it possible to marry; certainly everyone has seen all sorts of on-air proposals, discussions about spouses, and talk about being pregnant/having a baby by celebs, anchors, etc. Do you see anyone saying a morning anchor announcing she’s going to have a baby is flaunting the fact she had to boink her husband to get knocked up? Of course not.

Gutfeld rode the heterosupremacy horse onto the set of Red Eye and let it take a dump on the air.

You might recall that Gutfeld is the same guy who hurled every nasty slur you can imagine about pregnant transman Thomas Beatie. See that below the fold.
(more…)

And I thought I was through with the Prada-wearing pontiff after his expected bleating about man-woman marriage in light of the Cali Supreme Court’s ruling.

While gay state-side Catholics are told by the church that they can be gay — but celibate, take a look at the “ex-gay” BS Papa’s reps are shoveling over in Poland, a country where half of the population believes homosexuality is a sin. It’s right out of the Exodus International playbook. (PageOneQ):

The Catholic Church has created rehabilitation centers in Poland to rehabilitate gay people and “get them back on the right path.”

The Odwaga Center uses therapy, prayer and chastity to teach its patients to resist their homosexual impulses. Men at the center are taught to play football and women are taught to cook.

“When you want a candy for example, you can resist and have it later,” said Lena Wojdan, a psychologist at the center. “And you can trade it for a piece of chocolate.

Good grief, what polluted thinking. Watch the AFP report on it below the fold.
(more…)

According to Town Hall columnist, racism apologist and author Dinesh D’Souza, the advancement of gay rights via the courts is undermining our democracy. I almost refrained from posting this asshattery, but I just couldn’t after reading:

Now the high court of California has made gay marriage into a right that is immune from restriction by the majority of citizens in the state. We already know what California citizens think about gay marriage: they oppose it. A referendum outlawing gay marriage was passed with the support of the state’s voters. More than 60 percent of voters cast their ballots against gay marriage.

How, then, can a court invalidate the referendum and over-rule the will of the people? Basically through a kind of legal fraud. The court has to pretend that there is a right to gay marriage even though it is nowhere evident in the state constitution.

And since when did the will of the majority become the standard for extending civil rights to a minority group? Oh yes, when the fundies said so. And look at this nonsense:

In the past Democrats have always appreciated courts doing their dirty work when it comes to issues like abortion, pornography, prostitution and gay rights. This way Democrats can advance their permissive agenda without having to take political responsibility for voting against the values of a majority of voters. It’s time to make the Democrats pay for this in the November election.

I guess Loving v. Virginia was “dirty work” in his book as well as Brown v. Board of Ed. Go read the rest of that insanity. I just cannot deal with this level of bigotry today.

The Republican stupid - it burns. From Kathleen Parker’s column at the WaPo:

Well, at least they didn’t kiss.

I was bracing myself for the lip lock Wednesday when John Edwards endorsed Barack Obama.

Don’t look at me. David “Mudcat” Saunders, Edwards’s former rural adviser, came up with the idea, saying Obama should kiss Edwards on the lips “to kill this 41-point loss,” referring to Hillary Clinton’s landslide victory in the West Virginia primary.

Instead, the two men exchanged a manly air-hug to commemorate the moment when Edwards threw Clinton under the upholstered sofa on his grandmama’s front porch.

Holy smoke, is the “Breck Girl” reference to the former NC senator going to make comeback? I leave it to Brad at Sadly, No to break this sh*t down.

It’s tough to list all the things that make this column so mind-crushingly stupid, but let’s give it a shot:

• Parker begins the column by calling Edwards and Obama fags.

• Then, not having the courage to stand by this novel and poignant insight, she claims that it wasn’t her idea to call them fags, but was instead the idea of one of Edwards’ advisers. But hey, they’re still gay homo fruits who like to take it up the homobutt.

• Next, she pulls out the oldest trick in the Wingnut Punditry Bible: she lectures us about what Real Americans think! Never mind that she’s spent her entire working life on the Wingnut Welfare circuit - she’s got her hand on the pulse of The People, baby!

• And what do Real Americans think, you ask? Why, they’re apparently super-duper happy about the state of the country! Even though, like, 85% of them are dissatisfied with the direction of the country. And even though Bush’s approval rating stands at a sterling 28%. And even though the Republicans just lost a goddamn seat in freaking Mississippi.

How come I don’t hear about this loving - ahem - male bonding:

Autumn and I have been passing on right-wing reaction yesterday’s historic Supreme Court ruling on marriage equality in California, but I wanted to reserve a post for this unique reaction from fundie Mike Heath of the Christian Civic League of Maine.

He’s basically cried uncle in terms of protecting the word “marriage,” and wants to get back to basics, which sounds a lot like extermination, if you ask me. Homos have been compared to all sorts of things, but I don’t think I’ve been referred to as a weed polluting a lawn. Via email from Blender Herb, who’s on the CCLM mailing list:

Some people are suggesting that California’s ridiculous Supreme Court decision on “marriage” yesterday is reason to renew Maine’s push for a constitutional amendment. Those people are dead wrong.

While I support any real efforts to amend the Federal Constitution to protect marriage, I don’t support a Maine constitutional amendment at this time. Anyone who has been paying attention to this issue in Maine for the past two decades knows that the entire Maine political establishment is in “love” with “gay” special interests.

The fight is over if we are going to protect the word marriage only. Most recommendations I hear for constitutional amendments will protect only the word marriage, and allow for civil unions and domestic partnerships. A cursory reading of the Massachusetts and California court decisions will reveal the folly of this approach.

We must attack this problem at its root. If you want to get rid of a weed you don’t pull off the leaves. You destroy the root. The root idea of so-called same sex marriage is special rights for citizens on the basis of sexual wrongdoing. That is where the fight must be engaged.

Our only hope in the short term is the people. If everyone will get behind the League’s referendum we can begin the process of righting the ship of state more quickly.

I call on all people of good will to support our referendum today. It is the loving thing to do. Let’s support marriage and equality. We can’t afford to wait.

And Mike’s apparently found yet another version of The Homosexual Agenda. See his discovery below the fold.
(more…)

UPDATE 2: Happy Happy Joy Joy! Here is The Peter:

How Will California Homosexual Couples Consummate their Counterfeit ‘Marriages’?

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM AT ITS WORST: This will always be immoral. California’s highest court has created a “fundamental” marriage right out of behavior - homosexuality - that is fundamentally wrong and destructive. At left is a homosexual male kissing scene as it appeared on the CBS soap “As the World Turns.” Everywhere Americans turn - TV, media, schools, in corporations and the courts - this unhealthy and immoral behavior is being promoted

(UPDATE: Bam Bam Barber of Concerned Women weighs in below the fold.)

Ah, before we get to the Freepi, how about this delicious reaction from the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins, who believes civil rights should be determined at the ballot box.

It’s outrageous that the court has overturned not only the historic definition of marriage, but the clear will of the people of California, as expressed in Proposition 22. said FRC President Tony Perkins. The California Supreme Court assumed the powers of a legislative body by imposing same-sex marriage. However, in 2000, the people of California spoke loudly and clearly on the value of marriage when 61 percent of voters approved Proposition 22.

The California Supreme Court has taken a jackhammer to the democratic process, and the right of the people to affect change in public policy. Four judges discarded the votes of 4,618,673 Californians who approved the states Defense of Marriage Act. Voters understand that children should not be deprived of a mother or a father, added Perkins.

I can’t wait for the flying spittle from Focus on the Anus, Bam Bam of Concerned Women for America and The Peter. Right now, take a look at the swamps of Freeperland as they wail, and in one case seems to be calling for violence (big surprise).

It’s below the fold.
(more…)

(UPDATE 1:15 PM: Equality wins!)

(NOTE: There will be real-time coverage at my place.)

At 1PM ET, California’s Supreme Court will on whether same-sex couples may marry in the state. The official document announcing the pending ruling is here. The question:

Does California’s statutory ban on marriage between two persons of the same sex violate the California Constitution by denying equal protection of the laws on the basis of sexual orientation or sex, by infringing on the fundamental right to marry, or by denying the right to privacy and freedom of expression?

The Governator opposes the current constitutional amendment ballot initiative that will go to voters in November, and has said that he will abide by the court’s decision. An impact of this ruling, if it is in favor of equality, is how the presidential candidates will respond, since both Clinton and Obama have clung to a life raft of “marriage is between a man and a woman” for religious reasons and/or letting the states decide the civil matter, which naturally brings up the precedent of Loving v. Virginia. One can only hope that we don’t see the kind of punt we witnessed in New York in 2006, though the legislature in California has already shown its ability to pass marriage equality legislation.

Here is interesting info emailed to me by The Williams Institute, a research center at UCLA School of Law. It’s a national think tank dedicated to research on issues of sexual orientation law and public policy.

• As of 2006, there are an estimated 109,000 same-sex couples in California (2006 American Community Survey, US Census Bureau).
• More than 41,000 California couples have registered as domestic partners, approximately 38% of all same-sex couples (Williams Institute).
• California same-sex couples are raising an estimated 70,000 children (Amicus Brief, Badgett and Gates)
• Marriage equality would add approximately $123 million to the California budget in the first three years that marriage is open to same-sex couples (Badgett and Sears, Stanford Law and Policy Review)
• Demographic characteristics of same-sex registered partners in California (Carpenter and Gates, forthcoming in Demography):
• Male same-sex registered partners in California have been partnered for an average of 12 years.
• Female same-sex registered partners in California have been partnered for an average of 9 years.
• The average age of same-sex registered partners is 44.
• A third of female registered same-sex couples are raising children.

Links:

* Amicus Brief (Gates and Badgett)
* Badgett CA State Senate Testimony
* Putting a Price on Equality: The Impact of Same-sex Marriage on California’s Budget (Badgett and Sears, Stanford Law and Policy Review)
* The Effect of Marriage Equality and Domestic Partnership on Business and the Economy (Gates and Badgett)

Meanwhile, the wingnuts in the state of North Carolina have introduced another marriage amendment bill. More below the fold.
(more…)

So I was listening to the latest episode of “On The Media” on Mighty Ponygirl’s suggestion (because they have a great report on the Cult of Ayn Rand and how they’re trying to buy themselves credibility they can’t generate honestly), and I heard this story that I think should be an iconic example of how the Bush administration is both evil and stupid. It’s about the corruption in the Office of Special Counsel, which is a whistleblower protection agency. As you can imagine, the Bush administration is opposed to whistleblowing (and puppies and kittens and sunshine), so they went out and found the craziest asshole wingnut possible to head up this office: Scott Bloch. He did an admirable job of refusing to do the job he was appointed, and in proper BushCo fashion, this exemplar of malfeasance is now facing a cavalcade of subpoenas and general calls for his head. Bloch ran into trouble when he squelched a complaint that came from the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, because it turns out they were able to get the FBI to care enough to raid Bloch’s offices, take his computers, and subpoena 17 employees to testify against him. The executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility is suggesting that Bloch successfully destroyed the office to the point where it’s easier now to dismantle it and rebuild how the government handles whistleblowers than to salvage the office.

(more…)

Jeebus! It must be Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality’s fundraising quarter as we’ve hit the jackpot again, along with Box Turtle Bulletin. It’s completely over the top batsh*t insane beauteous:

The Left knows hate

In their continuing effort to steal the legacy of the real civil rights movement, homosexual activists and their allies posit an analogy between racism and “homophobia” — their smear term of choice to denigrate traditionalists. It is a deeply flawed comparison: what does unchangeable skin color and ethnicity have to do with aberrant, immoral and changeable sexual behavior?

…Moreover, the homosexualists are in the uncomfortable position of making actual descendants of slaves — like Pastor Ken Hutcherson of Antioch Bible Church and ex-lesbian Janet Boynes… — the target of their opprobrium. Men and women of color (like Crystal Dixon, a Black woman who recently was suspended from the University of Toledo after publicly making points similar to these) are mere “religious anti-gay bigots,” according to the homo-fundamentalists’ warped formulations.

Being lectured on intolerance by anti-Christian bigots like Tim Kincaid and Barney Frank — or run-of-the-mill leftist hate sites like Daily Kos — is like the USA being scolded for human rights violations by North Korea. If you think I jest, check out the hate-filled comments and vile anti-Christian insults that flow liberally on lesbian Pam Spaulding’s blog (try doing a search on “Jeebus” — a substitute for “Jesus” that secular snobs use to mock Christians).

Pam’s and Tim’s sites are further proof that nobody hates like the Left. And few on the Left hate like the homosexual activists (with radical pro-abortion-on-demand feminists a close second).

Past endorsements:

A “vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist.”
(Concerned Women for America’s radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

“A nutty lesbian blogger.”
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)

Related:
* Pam’s House Blend’s Peter LaBarbera files
* This I believe

Hat tip, Eva.

It doesn’t seem like it’s been a whole year since the last International Mr. Leather. See The Peter’s report last year, “Photos Reveal Twisted Perversions at Chicago’s Palmer House Hilton Hotel.”

Since we know Peter LaBarbera reads my blog, I’ll just post the ticket information link for him (also, here’s the contest application form, Peter). The fetish event, which draws hets and homos, a fact that Peter tries to minimize, is celebrating its 30th year. It will be at the Hyatt Regency Chicago May 22 - May 26. If Peter plays his cards right, he might meet special guest Andy Bell of Erasure, who will perform on Sunday night at the International Mr. Leather Contest.

***

While we’re on the topic of the Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (in my basement) honcho, Jim Burroway at Box Turtle Bulletin has a couple of items on Peter. One is on a Christian web site’s embarrassment at the obsessive bleatings at AFTAH:

And why is it just homosexuality. They act as if that is the BIG sin in the scriptures, dismissing all other destructive behaviors and choices. So, I will faithfully be waiting for the following websites to emerge, if these people are really trying to get biblical truth out there

Americans for Truth about Lying
Americans for Truth about Gossip
Americans for Truth about Bitterness
Americans for Truth about Slander
Americans for Truth about Poverty
Americans for Truth about Widows

Jim’s other post concerns The Peter’s new interest in outing Florida Governor Charlie Crist, who has been rumored to be gay for quite some time. Since Crist’s stock has risen as a possible VP selection for McCain, LaBarbera apparently wants to ensure that homosexuals and/or homosexualists are crossed off the potential Veep list early on.

I say to McSame — please consider the recently heterosexually paired governor!

It’s been an interesting and enlightening last few days over at BlueNC since the state primary on the 6th. As you know, Dem U.S. Senate candidate Jim Neal was defeated by Kay Hagan, and the latter will face off against Liddy Dole in the fall. Incidentally, post-primary polls have Hagan at 48%, Dole at 47%. Do-Nothing Dole has a war chest that dwarfs Hagan’s, so Liddy will be able to carpet-bomb the airwaves with ads.

Anyway, the post-mortems over at BlueNC have included “thank you” posts by nearly every candidate who has participated in liveblog sessions over there during this cycle, and the one for Kay Hagan took a bizarre, contentious turn when the subject of those now-infamous questions I asked of the state senator during her liveblog came up.

More below the fold, including important Qs of the day for you all that I hope generates a lot of discussion and feedback I can take back to the folks at BlueNC.
(more…)

Washington University students and faculty are in an uproar over the decision to award anti-gay, anti-feminist Eagle Forum fossil Phyllis Schlafly an honorary doctorate at its May 16 commencement ceremony. A Facebook group created to protest the move has over a thousand members.

Mary Ann Dzuback, the director of the women and gender studies department at Washington University agreed, said it was “grossly inappropriate” for the university to honor Schlafly with a degree.

“She’s spent her entire career speaking against women in the workforce and for them remaining in the home,” Dzuback said of Schlafly, who rose to prominence during the successful campaign against the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s.

…The university issued a statement Sunday defending its decision, saying it — like many other universities — chooses to honor those “who have become a part of the broad public discourse on vital issues of the times.” The statement cited other controversial figures, such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson, whom the school has honored.

Steve Ralls of PFLAG National:

PFLAG and our St. Louis chapter are proud to join those on the ground in Missouri and call on school officials to do the right thing and, as executive director Jody Huckaby said today, “find a more suitable person to applaud.”

Steve also points out some of Mother Schlafly’s winning cultural touchstones:

On California’s SB-77, to protect GLBT students: The legislation “represent[s] a repudiation of 2,000 years of Christian moral teaching on human sexuality, marriage, and the family. The result is that California’s schools are now promoting behaviors and lifestyles that are physically and spiritually dangerous for children.”

On the idea of any protections for GLBT youth: “The bottom line is, don’t count on the courts to protect public school students from being subjected to the promotion of homosexuality.”

On sexual harassment laws: “Sexual harassment on the job is not a problem for virtuous women.”

Yeah. I think they could locate someone who isn’t terminally frozen in the dark ages.

Obama bested Hillary Clinton with ease last night here in NC, and you can see plenty of analysis about that all over the blogosphere. On primary night I liveblogged from Southern Rail in Carrboro, where U.S. Senate candidate Jim Neal held his after-party. Here are some thoughts from the evening — and observations about the big picture.

Folks gathering for the party at Southern Rail.

It was a festive atmosphere, even as results came in that made it pretty clear state Senator Kay Hagan would cross the finish line with a lot of distance between her and Jim, and she will face the useless, ineffective Elizabeth Dole in November.
(more…)

Those of us eagerly waiting for the day when same-sex marriage is finally legalized across the land owe a debt of gratitude to Mildred Loving, whose 1967 case (Loving v. Virginia) resulted in a landmark Supreme Court decision that broke down a major social and legal barrier - interracial marriage.

Mildred Loving, a black woman whose challenge to Virginia’s ban on interracial marriage led to a landmark Supreme Court ruling striking down such laws nationwide, has died, her daughter said Monday.

Peggy Fortune said Loving, 68, died Friday at her home in rural Milford. She did not disclose the cause of death.

…Richard Loving died in 1975 in a car accident that also injured his wife.

In a rare interview with The Associated Press last June, Loving said she wasn’t trying to change history — she was just a girl who once fell in love with a boy.

“It wasn’t my doing,” Loving said. “It was God’s work.”

Last year was the 40th anniversary of the landmark ruling. Mrs. Loving said this:

“When my late husband, Richard, and I got married in Washington, DC in 1958, it wasn’t to make a political statement or start a fight. We were in love, and we wanted to be married.

…Not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the ‘wrong kind of person’ for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry.

…I am proud that Richard’s and my name are on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.”

Here is her full statement, via Freedom To Marry..

I will give Ronald Rychlak props for one thing — bringing the objection of religious institutions to gay and lesbian couples marrying to the bottom $$$ line.

Regardless of what it is called, legal sanctioning of homosexual relationships creates a host of unintended consequences and constitutes a serious threat to religious liberty.

Consider what happened in Massachusetts in 2004: Justices of the peace who refused to preside over same-sex unions due to moral or religious objections were summarily fired. Since same-sex unions were entitled to be treated the same as traditional marriages, this refusal was discrimination and a firing offense.

What about a priest or minister who similarly refuses to preside at such ceremonies? Obviously the state can’t fire such people, but it is easy to foresee other sanctions — such as loss of tax benefits — being imposed on churches.

The piece cites the NJ complaint by a lesbian couple who wanted to use a Methodist ministry-owned pavilion for their civil union ceremony. While it was allowed to ban same-sex couples, the Garden State revoked the ministry’s tax-free status.

These people fail to realize that the government doesn’t have to subsidize, through tax-breaks, a church’s ability to discriminate. More whining:

If homosexual marriages or civil unions are the equivalent of traditional marriages, you can’t discriminate. If you do, at the very least you put your government benefits at risk.

This is the same rationale that was used by the Supreme Court in 1983 to uphold stripping Bob Jones University of its tax-exempt status due to its racial policies.

And so, this means what? Should BJU be allowed to ban interracial dating? It appears the world didn’t come to an end when that onerous policy was abandoned. These folks want Uncle Sam to subsidize their ability to discriminate.

Oh, my. Oh, my. Oh. my. god. Where do you even begin in this fact-free screed from South Carolinian Nancy Morgan, news editor of RightBias.com?

Personally, I cringe when I see two guys swapping spit. Or when half naked transsexuals flaunt their sexuality in public places. I always wonder what they’re celebrating. A lifestyle that takes 20 years off your life? A dangerous, deadly and costly way of life that effectively undermines traditional families? The fact that gays and lesbians experience twice the partner abuse of straight couples? No, they’re celebrating their empowerment, leaving all other Americans to pay the social and financial costs involved. After all, they’ve got rights.

I’ve got rights, too. I have the right to pick my nose in public and wave it in someone else’s face (unless they’re gay or black - then it would be a hate crime). Good manners and a decent upbringing keep me from exercising this right. I also have the right to object when someone shoves their personal sexual habits in my face and demand that I not only tolerate it, but endorse it. That’s just plain rude. Hey, I’m still trying to figure out why weenie waggers are arrested while half nude trans-sexuals sporting fake organs have the right to wave them in public.

Gays are portrayed as victims of an unfeeling society. As such, they have been granted special rights not available to other Americans. The right not to be offended, the right to automatic respect, and the right to offend any person or group that dares to object. Imagine the outcry if Christians were granted these same rights.

The gurus of political correctness have decided that anyone who is not in agreement with the increasingly blatant homosexual agenda is a homophobe. Color me homophobic. I not only disagree with flaunting ones privates in public, I also disagree with exposing this behavior to children and telling them its their right, if not their duty, to put their sexuality above all other considerations.

What do you make of the unhinged obsession with half-naked transsexuals and wagging naughty bits in public? I haven’t noticed any transgender weenie wagging in my state. Is there something more egregious going on when you cross the state line into SC?

So why didn’t my outgoing governor just go ahead and say “faggot“?

ABC News’ Eloise Harper Reports: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton received the endorsement of North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley Tuesday morning in Raleigh, NC. After touring a bio-manufacturing training center, Gov. Easley, First Lady of North Carolina Mary Easley and Clinton held a ceremony at NC State University. The Governor formally expressed his support saying that there was “nothing I love more than a strong powerful woman.” Easley concluded his remarks saying Clinton — “makes Rocky Balboa look like a pansy“.

Note that Hillary, who was right there with the NC gov, said nothing about his remark. Of course Easley infamously received the endorsement of Equality NC in his re-election bid, then in a debate said he’d sign a marriage amendment if it hit his desk, so why should we be surprised. And who is Hillary trying to court here — the “traditional Southern conservative.” Take the homo money and run, as it were. (The Politico):

Easley is a meaningful ally in the culture war she’s waging against Senator Barack Obama, as she seeks to cast him as a hopelessly unelectable liberal elitist and to persuade the Democratic Party leaders who will decide the nomination – the “superdelegates” – to choose her instead.

Both of the Dem candidates for governor here have endorsed Barack Obama, btw. I don’t see Easley’s nod to Clinton as significant; what matters are mayors and state reps, and the majority have publicly endorsed Obama as well.

Hillary Clinton was backslapping laughing with the NC governor. The same Hillary Clinton who has sucked millions of dollars out of the LGBT community. The same Hillary Clinton who cannot use the words gay or lesbian in front of general audiences, the same Hillary Clinton who has a web site where there’s no way to find any information on her LGBT positions.

Activist Phil Attey, former Human Rights Campaign staffer and online strategist, had a lot to say. It’s below the fold.

This release landed in my inbox:

Today in his endorsement of Senator Hillary Clinton, Governor Michael Easley of North Carolina ended his speech with an anti-gay epitaph. The hateful and sexist comment was that in his opinion, Senator Clinton makes Rocky Balboa look like a “pansy.” Directly following the word “pansy” the two veteran politicians burst into laughter and then embraced on stage.

When LGBT activists across the country heard this, our jaws literally hit the floor, as did our hearts. Since the Pennsylvania primary, we’ve been concerned that Senator Clinton is now courting and beholden to an anti-gay demographic, but never did we ever expect to be so whimsically made the butt of a joke nor blatantly thrown under the bus by politicians we once revered and some continue to support.

The statement was calculated and hateful. Americans over the age of 50 are fully aware that the word “pansy” is that generation’s polite way of publicly saying the word “faggot.” Both Governor Easley and Senator Clinton are of that generation, and both of them know what he meant by the word. This was not a slip of the tongue. This is part of Senator Clinton’s new “Rocky theme” … a theme that sadly includes now gay bashing.

On behalf of the LGBT community, I demand the following three things:

1. Governor Easley immediately issue a public apology for his use of hate speech and commit to launch a new state-wide campaign in North Carolina to educate the public on the issue of anti-LGBT hate speech and hate crimes.
2. Senator Clinton make good on a previous campaign ascertain that that she would strongly “reject and denounce” any endorsement from someone who engages in hate speech by immediately rejecting and denouncing Governor Easley’s endorsement.
3. Governor Easley face me in a public boxing ring in Raleigh, NC this weekend, so I can show him and the those who make such hateful comments, that if you go up against a real “pansy,” you’re going to end up pushing daisies. And, yes, I double yellow dog dare him.

It’s getting down to the final days before North Carolina’s primary on May 6, so Matt Hill Comer of the Tar Heel gay news outlet Q-Notes is featuring NC LGBT leaders and their presidential race picks. The format features two endorsements per day, one from a Clinton supporter, one from an Obama supporter.

I was asked to contribute and the result probably isn’t a surprise to anyone at this point. It’s below the fold.
(more…)

Ah, Birmingham’s in the news again as a result of the airing of 20/20’s experiment on public displays of affection by same-sex couples last Friday. We’re not talking about public sex, mind you, just arms around the shoulder and some nuzzling kind of thing. A male couple was stationed on a park bench at Five-Points with a camera rolling. Wouldn’t you know it — someone called 911 to complain about the PDA. The emergency?

Operator: “Birmingham Police operator 9283″

Caller: “We have a couple of men sitting out on the bench that have been kissing and drooling all over each other for the past hour or so. It’s not against the law, right?”

Operator: “Not to the best of my knowledge it’s not.”

Caller: “So there’s no complaint I could make or have?”

Operator: “I imagine you could complain if you like ma’am. We can always send an officer down there.”

Yes, they sent a patrol car down there, and the officer, after calling his superior (the Birmingham PD was in on the 20/20 experiment) backed down, but told the couple “Just don’t do that in public.”

The remarks of two Birmingham women passersby when 20/20 has a lesbian couple sit on the bench are predictable. That’s below the fold.
(more…)

Oh nooees! In a Christian Broadcast News report, the ace bankroller of the Homosexual Agenda, the man name-checked by Sally Kern herself, Tim Gill is further exposed as the arch enemy.

You probably haven’t heard the name Tim Gill. And that’s just the way he wants it.

Carrie Earll, Senior Director of Issues Analysis for Focus on the Family explains, “Tim Gill is stealth. He’s under the radar. When he goes after a candidate he doesn’t make homosexuality the issue. He picks something else because he knows the issue of homosexuality is still risky among the electorate.”

A Colorado native, Gill still calls Denver home. He made his millions in the 80s and 90s as the founder of the publishing software giant Quark.

…Gill’s no secret in the gay world. Out magazine just named him the fifth most influential gay in the country. But Gill, his spokesperson, and big-time gay rights organizations all refused requests from CBN News to talk about Gill.

The tinfoil hattery is below the fold.
(more…)

He’s at it again. This time the “like-minded man” with Concerned Women for America is comparing homosexuality to smoking, drinking, toking and hitting the crack pipe. This, friends, is how he objects to the Day of Silence.

Can you imagine officials at a middle school, junior high or high school setting aside a day to promote “tolerance” for heavy smoking and drinking among children? How about a day where teachers encourage kids to “embrace who they are,” pick up that crack pipe and give it a stiff toke?

Neither can I. The public would go ballistic, and for good reason.

But that hasn’t stopped officials in thousands of schools across the country from promoting other politically correct and socially “in-vogue” behaviors that - both statistically and manifestly - are every bit as dangerous as the aforementioned frowned-upon behaviors.

That’s exactly what the homosexual activist “Day of Silence” is all about - advancing, through clever, feel-good propaganda, full acceptance among children of the homosexual lifestyle.

More below the fold.
(more…)

One can only hope that this is satire. However, after the public ex-gay therapy madness of Richard Cohen (discredited even by his peers), this video about a “service” to help recloset gay men is easily plausible.

“The WorkOUT is a unique program that helps a man who is dealing with homosexual issues to go deep and understand that below the homosexual issues lies a lack of his own inherent masculinity and manhood.

The Workout offers a man three main things…the first thing it offers him is a Lifecoach. A mentoring relationship for each man. The second thing is it offers him a series of accomplished tasks whereby a man can feel his own sense of increasing manhood.

The third thing is what I call the 911 calls whereby a man can call anytime, day or night, to his mentor, in case he needs to talk to him for a few minutes if he is having a particular problem or challenge.

I love helping other men BE MEN. I feel great when I help another man really understand himself — and really help him see that change is absolutely possible…IF he’s willing to go through the tasks, and the accomplishments and the relatio