Honest, Hawaiians, I used to be in favor of returning Hawaii to independent sovereignty because it was the right thing to do. These days, the more I hear about Hawaii, the more I want to give it back… for reasons that aren’t quite so positive. So, have at it — this is one less haole you’ll have to worry about. The Mormons, however, are still your problem.
Prejudice in Paradise Hawaii Has a Racism Problem Larry Keller Souther Poverty Law Center Intelligence Report, Fall 2009
Gary Frago: Thinks the assassination of Barack Obama is a funny joke.
But even we don’t use language like that.
One constituent did call him a “disgusting, humorless, racist sad sack of sh*t” (directly, in an email), but we think the fellow was being generous.
So we’ll just call Gary Frago what he is — a Republican — and let the news (which shows that Frago is hardly the only “joker” in Atwater seemingly oblivious to his own vile racism) tell the story. Video after the jump.
Actor Stephen Baldwin, brother of Emmy winner and “30 Rock” star Alec Baldwin, filed for bankruptcy in New York on Tuesday, according to a court document that says he is millions in debt.
The 43-year-old actor filed for Chapter 11 protection claiming he owes more than $2.3 million and owns a New York property valued at only $1.1 million. His wife, Kennya Baldwin, also is named in the document. …
Or: A Funny Thing Happened While Investigating the Lesbian Web Site That Ran Up Against the Mormon Web Host: I Stumbled Across an International Incident.
First things first: There are only five hard-and-fast rules I follow in life, without exception:
1. Keep your marriage vows.
2. Be nice to people until they give you a reason not to be.
3. Give money to homeless people, and never question what they’re going to do with it.
Actually, the perps are probably not from this sleepy little town of ours — it sounds like a gang from San Jose came up and did the dirty work — plus, we’ve also got a serious and growing gang problem right across El Camino in Mountain View, which at one time was as sleepy and safe as Los Altos. Now… Well, since the first drive-by murder (there’s been at least one more since) within a one-block area of Mountain View over the past year or so, I don’t go to my favorite 7-11 after dark anymore. Sad.
But what’s sadder — and IMO far more disturbing than rival gangs killing one another — is the sight of swastikas etched into storefront windows:
For instance, did you know that the government is run by secular humanists? And did you know that “a secular humanist believes he or she is a god and does not need the true God”? (Wow, I’m a god!)
And did you know that the “nearly 7 million American Muslims in our country today … enjoy incomes and educational levels that are higher than the American average”? (Where have I heard that before…? Oh, yeah! All gay people are rich, too! Which reminds me — I keep forgetting to inform my wife that we’re rich. We must be, because everyone who hates us keeps saying we are.)
“That’s Jeb’s kids from Florida, the little brown ones.”
— Vice President George H.W. Bush August 16, 1988
Geez Louise, you’d think every minority group within the Republican Party was stupid or something, awash in denial about the GOP’s— Oh, wait. Every minority group within the Republican Party is stupid and awash in denial. And it’s simultaneously sad, and funny, and encouraging, and frustrating, when one of these groups is slapped, hard, into the reality that they’re just a bunch of chickens working for Colonel Sanders.
If you haven’t had the unfortunate experience of running across Yasmin Nair before, consider yourself lucky.
My luck ran out when The Bilerico Project decided to allow this woman (who calls herself a “queer lesbian who loves c*ck,” whatever that means; to me it sounds like Nair is bisexual, doesn’t want to be, and assuages her own internalized biphobia by insisting she’s a lesbian) to whine about how she was criticized by readers at Queercents.com, after she posted a baseless, insensitive, and positively senseless op/ed denigrating the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), and the gay and lesbian couples torn apart by current U.S. immigration law.
And if that doesn’t get your hackles up, this will: She’s dead-set against marriage equality, this so-called “queer lesbian.”
The piece is one of those desperate “There’s hope yet!” denials-of-reality from the Wrong Wing, which contains lots of wild stretches (e.g., if Lehman Brothers hadn’t collapsed, John McCain would be president, and “Obama rode Bush’s coattails to victory. Had Bush been at 35 percent or 40 percent, McCain might have won”) — the sort of death rattle I usually dismiss with a Tsk! and a File, Close Tab. But then I got to the part about Proposition 8:
There’s so much this Don Surber person (who you’ll find all over the bigot sites if you Google him; he writes for the Charleston Daily Mail) says in a few short sentences, it’s overwhelming:
Jerry Brown to black and Latino voters: Screw you.
Let’s get down to what’s going down in California.
White voters overwhelmingly favor gay marriage.
Black and Latino voters overwhelmingly do not.
A ballot measure to overturn gay marriage passed 52.3%-47.7%, a little less than Barack Obama’s margin in the popular vote nationally.
It passed by 600,000 votes.
Now the white politicians are changing the rules and saying that it should have been required to have 2/3rds of the vote of both houses of the state legislature which is dominated by white men. …
There’s more, but let’s see if we can sort out this much.
First, let’s be aware that Don Surber is a white man, whose blogroll includes Drudge, Hot Air, Instapundit, Lucianne, Michelle Malkin, The National Review, Rush Limbaugh, and other Big Bigoted Bigots of the Bigotsphere.
That said:
Jerry Brown to black and Latino voters: Screw you.
Translation: Let’s attack Jerry Brown and reignite the “Black and Latinos Hate Gays” lie, and try to drive a wedge between Brown and blacks-and-Latinos. A triple play! And in just nine words!
Let’s get down to what’s going down in California.
Translation: Let’s pretend we care about California as a matter of principle, when we really live in West Virginia, and hope nobody figures out that we’re just scared about what might happen in California, because someday we could lose the right, here in West Virginia, to treat homos like animals.
White voters overwhelmingly favor gay marriage.
Translation: Let’s pull something completely out of my ass and present it as fact, when the truth is that the anti-gay movement is controlled by white Christians and Mormons, with an assist from various other religious bigots of all races, creeds, and colors. Oh, yeah, and while we’re at it, let’s pretend homophobia has nothing to do with religious bigotry, and everything to do with the color of one’s skin.
Black and Latino voters overwhelmingly do not.
Translation: See point #1; plus: Let’s make the gays hate blacks and Latinos, and pretend there are no gay African-Americans or gay Latinos, and pretend that blacks (6.2%) and Latinos (35.9%) singlehandedly passed Prop 8 all by themselves, with no help from the 59.8% of all Californians who identify as Caucasian. Whoa, another triple-play!
And let’s pretend there are no Asian-Americans (12.3%) in California at all, because Asian-Americans voted pretty much in line with whites, and acknowledging that would mess up the whole Let’s Start A War Between Gays and All Other Minorities agenda. (stats source)
… Now the white politicians are changing the rules and saying that it should have been required to have 2/3rds of the vote of both houses of the state legislature which is dominated by white men. …
Translation: Let’s mask our hatred for the Democrats — no matter what their color or ethnicity — who control the California state legislature by pretending that a white man in the Malkin-Limbaugh camp would give a damn about non-whites. (Well, maybe he does give a damn about Malkin, but only because Malkin is, inarguably, a race traitor. A “House Asian.”*)
*low whistle* Have you ever seen so much transparent garbage in one short right-wing post? I can’t remember the last time I did.
As I keep saying, the Radical Wrongies wouldn’t be grasping at strawmen like this if they weren’t running out of options. Oh, sure, they often spew such lunacy when things are calmer than they are now, but we’re seeing a lot more of this lately.
Expect them to get crazier.
Which, as I also keep saying, is a good sign. Never forget:
“First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win.”
Well, that is, if they don’t get crazy enough to kill you first. We all know what happened to the man who said, “First they ignore you…”
* To anyone who thinks I don’t have the “right” to call Michelle Malkin a “race traitor”: First, go educate yourself on the origin of the phrase “House” Anything. Second, if you’d be hard-pressed to disagree with a man who called, say, Phyllis Schlafly a “gender traitor,” then you have no argument with me.
Mike Huckabee — past and probably future GOP presidential contender, and of course host of a Fox News show — says gay rights is a “different set of rights” than civil rights, and notes that gays aren’t getting their “skulls cracked,” so nobody’s rights are being violated. Well, that’s not really true, as Think Progress notes, but, needless to say, physical violence shouldn’t be the bar for discrimination in this country.
Of course, there’s all this:
• In the course of his mocking diatribe, Fox News host Greg Gutfeld inserted an off-color, homophobic joke about Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): “Look, I don’t dispute that aliens exist, but there are more urgent threats than wrinkly creatures with a knack for anal probing. But enough about Barney Frank.”
• After Dennis Miller said that President-elect Barack Obama “ought to flatten these punks at AIG [American International Group],” Bill O’Reilly stated, “OK, and then arrest Barney Frank, correct?” Miller replied, “Barney might want to be arrested.” In response, O’Reilly said, “Oh, jeez. Ugh,” and shuddered. He continued, “OK, Dennis Miller, everybody. I told you to hide the kids.”
• On The O’Reilly Factor and in a FoxNews.com article, Bill Sammon suggested that Rep. Barney Frank allowed his relationship in the 1990s with Herb Moses, a Fannie Mae official at the time, to improperly influence his conduct as a member of the House Financial Services Committee.
• Radio host Lars Larson played a spoof “Barney Frank for President” advertisement, in which a person said: “Now remember, this Erection Day — Election Day, vote for Barney Frank for President. I’m Barney Fag — uh, Frank and I approve this massage — message.”
That’s how the Fox Network, which employs Huckabee and much of the right-wing media, treats one of America’s only openly gay politicians. But they don’t crack his head, so, who’s complaining, right?
And the hits just keep on coming.
Aside to Lars Larson: If you’re going to make a career out of being a despicable bigot, you should at least try to come up with original material — gay-hater Dick Armey took “credit” for the “Barney Fag” slur ages ago.
I hestitate to say, “Now I’ve heard it all,” because the equality-haters never fail to amaze me with their convoluted justifications for turning gay and lesbian Americans into permanent untouchables, nor with the blatant lies they use to do it, nor with their deliberate ignorance, which is so breathtakingly astounding one can only wonder if these people were all homeschooled* by Paul Cameron.
This next example of sheer idiocy does not come from the official anti-marriage campaign — but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this doozy ends up in their next attack ad.
On a blog promoting the elimination of our legal rights in California is a long essay by one “John A. Evans,” who asks if support for Proposition is “intolerant.” It begins, surprisingly enough, with this admission:
Probably the most relevant definition of “intolerant” is “an unwillingness to grant equal freedom” to others. Certainly married heterosexuals are granted a host of legal rights and obligations that would be denied to others if those in same sex relationships cannot be “married.” There is also a degree of legitimacy and respect, associated in our culture with the institution of marriage, that might be denied to same sex couples if they are denied “marriage.” Denying rights and legitimacy to some, while granting it to others, certainly appears “intolerant.”
Nothing wrong there — but the writer’s apparent sanity is an illusion; he quickly dissolves into a comparison of “tolerating” homosexuals and “tolerating” smokers. (That probably caught Frank Schubert’s attention.)
And here, dear reader, is where the writer makes his “point”: that it is right to be intolerant of things that kill, and smoking and homosexuality both kill.
Oh, but Evans doesn’t stop there — he posits that homosexuality also causes sterility
As you read, try to keep your eyes from rolling right out of their sockets:
… Now we have become so intolerant of smoking that smoking is illegal in public buildings and those who sponsored smoking—the tobacco companies—have been required to pay billions of dollars in damages to those they lured into the habit. Why is such pronounced intolerance for smoking so acceptable?
The obvious answer is that smoking kills people—not immediately, and not everyone, but irrefutably. Health costs for everyone are increased by smokers. Even non-smokers are harmed by being in the presence of smokers. The first question in every medical check-up is “Do you smoke?” Some smokers excuse their smoking with the confession that it is a habit—a physical compulsion—that they are helpless to resist. It is part of their inherent nature, they claim, that cannot be denied. The fact that others have ceased smoking is irrelevant to those who remain smokers—they do not accept that it is possible for them to stop smoking. …
So the problem with smokers is their behavior, when they claim they were born smokers. Gee, what a clever way to equate an acquired addiction with an inherent trait.
Not.
Fail.
I’ll tell you what’s often inborn: stupid. But without access to the writer’s psych workup, it’s impossible to know whether he was born stupid, or chooses to be stupid.
Is this societal intolerance of smoking, now crystallized into law, intolerance of smokers? Generally speaking it is not. Most do not condemn smokers for smoking.
Oh, really now? Tell me more.
Most recognize they have challenges in their own lives that are as great for them as is smoking for smokers. Smokers are not denied the right to vote, or to eat where they want, or even to employment in almost any job because they smoke. …
How is this relevant to Proposition 8? Smoking may kill people eventually—usually decades after they become addicted and long after they have reached the age of reproduction. Smokers have had many children—many people alive in the world today are children of smokers. In contrast, homosexuality has an instant medical resul [sic] —it causes sterility. Which is more damaging to society—cancer and heart failure caused by smoking or sterility caused by homosexuality?
Paul Cameron, that is you, isn’t it?
And, gee, where have I heard something like that before? Not from Paul Cameron, I mean, but… Oh, yeah, I remember — it’s right out of the ol’ Reasons to Pull Out of Your Ass for Banning Interracial Marriage Handbook:
“It is stated as a well authenticated fact that if the [children] of a black man and white woman, and a white man and a black woman intermarry, they cannot possibly have any progeny, and such a fact sufficiently justifies those laws which forbid the intermarriage of blacks and whites.”
— Supreme Court of Missouri, 1869
If a population of animals, let us say frogs, were faced with two diseases—one that caused cancer late in the life cycle of the frog and one that caused immediate sterility—which one would be the focus of major research grants searching for a cure? The frogs will suffer from the cancer, but they will become extinct from sterility.
OK, Einstein, first explain how homosexuality causes sterility, and tell us where you got this whopper.
Tell me why the bonobo (or dwarf chimpanzee), especially, still exists, when the entire species is bisexual, and 95% of the population is just as happy to establish a primary relationship with a MOTSS as with a MOTOS.
Tell me how the Amazon dolphin ever managed to survive, when its males are such big, gay perverts, they’ll happily penetrate each other through the blowhole, making the Amazon “the only example of nasal sex we have in nature.”
Oh, I know the old “reasoning”:
You: “Homosexuality is unnatural!”
Me: “Homosexuality is perfectly natural throughout the animal kingdom.”
You: (sputtering) “People are not animals!”
Finally, if this “homosexuality = sterility” idiocy were true, tell us why you might want to “cure” sterility in a group of people you’d rather see extinct in the first place.
Here’s a little tip, Skip: If you want to “cure” (i.e., eradicate) homosexuality, you can’t do it through these bullshit “ex-gay” programs you’re thinking of. They don’t work. If you want to “cure” homosexuality, you’ll have to kill all the heterosexuals, ’cause, Baby John, heterosexuality causes homosexuality.
With all the Radical Right’s yammering on about how only a penis and a vagina make a family, they just can’t handle the truth — the undeniable, unimpeachable truth — that 100% of all homosexuals are the result of heterosexual breeding.
Suck on that, Johnny.
Does the government have a legitimate role in opposing, or at least not encouraging, sterility? Admittedly many in America today support the nihilistic doctrine that humans are an ecological disaster and that the fewer humans there are, the better off the earth would be. That is the official policy of the Chinese government. But should that be the policy of our government? …
Is there an equivalent to Godwin’s Law for trying to equate the Demon Homosexual with the Yellow Menace? If not, there should be.
Or should our government support policies conducive to child bearing by Americans? Certainly that is the original basis for the legal privileges granted to “married” couples. It was intended to create a legally protected environment most conducive to the physical and emotional security of children where they would be most likely to receive the constant and sensitive nurture that is so essential to infants and children.
Never mind the reams of evidence that queerspawn grow up just as nice and normal as (and often more caring and compassionate than) the children of heterosexuals — the Radical Wrongys never listen to that in the first place.
Instead, Mister Wizard, tell me where your “best for the children” spiel leaves couples like my wife and me, who aren’t going to have children (and, yes, we could if we wanted to).
Every time the gay-bashers scramble for justification, it always comes down to “what’s best for the children.” And they always conveniently ignore childless-by-choice couples like Buffy and me — and like every heterosexual couple who choose not to have children.
Ya think marriage, or the lack of it, is going to change our minds? Or the minds of Mr. and Mrs. Childless-By-Choice next door?
“Golly, honey! I know we said we didn’t want kids, and nothing changed in the 15 years we lived together without benefit of marriage, but now that we are married, I suddenly have this overwhelming urge to whelp out more little brooders than the Duggars! Gosh, I never realized how conducive to childbearing man-woman marriage really is!”
Proposition 8, in effect, is a refutation of the California court’s approval for, and condoning of, a particular life style.
Don’t you love the way they get it exactly backwards? Proposition 8 is not a “refutation of the California court’s approval for, and condoning of, a particular lifestyle”; it is the “approval for, and condoning of, a particular—” chosen “—lifestyle” above all others: the Christian lifestyle.
Homosexuality is not a lifestyle, nor is it a choice. Religion, however, is very much a lifestyle, and very much a choice.
Of course, these same homophobes also insist that since gay people aren’t born gay, we have to “recruit” new members all the time to keep our membership up — when in reality that’s what religions, not gay people, do.
‘Phobes do have a bit of a problem with projection, don’t they?
Anyway…
Proposition 8 does not take away the right of anyone to live with anyone they please nor does it limit their ability to have whatever type of sexual relationships they choose. It does not restrict anyone’s right to a job…
John A. Evans, if you’re not deliberately ignorant, you are deliberately lying.
“While states as diverse as Iowa and California already protect LGBT Americans from employment discrimination, 31 states still do not,” which means that “in most of the nation, it is still perfectly legal for an employer or landlord to say ‘lesbians need not apply,’ or for the manager of a movie theater to say, ‘We don’t sell tickets to gays like you.’”
…or to receive any particular level of benefits from that job, such as health care.
I can’t imagine the arrogance it must take to state such garbage as if it were fact. Try selling this bunk to people like Robert Ryan and Ralph Martinelli or Nickie Brazier and Heather Aurand, to name just two couples who have discovered the hard way that inferior, second-class civil unions and domestic partnerships do not afford the same benefits — especially healthcare — as marriage:
“The New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission … concluded that civil unions create a little-understood, separate category of citizens that is often more vulnerable to federal discrimination. …
“First, many employers are not recognizing civil union partners for spousal health benefits because they are governed by a federal law, not the state one that requires them to.
“The federal Employment Retirement Income Security Act, or ERISA, uses words like ’spouses,’ ‘husbands and wives,’ and ‘married couples’ in its benefits guidelines for self-insured employers.
“While such companies may also cover civil union partners, the law — coupled with the federal DOMA — gives them a loophole to avoid it without obviously discriminating.
“Companies in New Jersey and Vermont are doing this, while in Massachusetts, with marriage equality, employers don’t question their obligation to the couples. …”
To boot, since the federal government refuses to recognize same-sex marriages, or domestic partnerships, or civil unions, couples legally joined in their own states are learning that when one spouse can add the other to his/her employer’s health insurance plan, the value of the dependent spouse’s coverage is taxed as income by the IRS:
“As a growing number of employers offer domestic partner benefits, gays and lesbians are discovering a hitch — domestic partner benefits, unlike health benefits provided to married heterosexual couples, are taxed as income. As a result, gay and lesbian employees take home relatively less income than their married heterosexual co-workers who perform exactly the same job.
“For example, a gay or lesbian employee earning $40,000 a year and receiving domestic partner health insurance benefits toward which the employer contributes $250 a month would owe income and payroll taxes on a total of $43,000 in income at the end of the year.
“A married heterosexual employee earning the same salary and receiving the same health benefits for his or her spouse would owe income and payroll taxes on only $40,000.”
“As a result, married workers who get family health insurance benefits get a double benefit — they get health insurance coverage for their spouses and children and are not taxed on the value of that coverage.
“In sharp contrast, workers who have an unmarried domestic partner are doubly burdened: Their employers typically do not provide coverage for domestic partners; and even when partners are covered, the partner’s coverage is taxed as income to the employee.
“Employers who cover domestic partners are also penalized under current law, since employer payroll tax responsibilities increase along with employees’ income and Social Security taxes.
“As a result, the taxation of domestic partner health care benefits sets up a two-tiered tax policy that costs many American families and their employers millions of dollars each year. This report estimates the financial impact of this extra tax on employees and employers.”
Now, Johnny, you tell me: How are we treated “equally” again? And what entitles you and yours to such special rights?
Proposition 8 does not deny anyone life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Gosh, why does that sound so famil—? Oh, yeah! I remember now — that’s from the Handbook of Justifying Racism, Or: We Don’t Hate Colored People, But We Don’t Want Them Using Our Water Fountains or Touching Our Lily-White Daughters:
“[Negroes’] rights, social, civil, political and religious, will be jealously guarded; but they must not marry or be given in marriage with the sons and daughters of our people.”
— Lonas v. Tennessee, 1871
“All this is not to say that any race, creed, or caste should be denied any inalienable rights. But it is to say that Deity in his infinite wisdom, to carry out his inscrutable purposes, has a caste system of his own, a system of segregation of races and peoples.”
— Bruce R. McConkie Mormon Doctrine: A Compendium of the Gospel, 1958
“Now we are generous with the Negro. We are willing that the Negro have the highest education. I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it. I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world. But let them enjoy these things among themselves.”
— Elder Mark E. Peterson Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints August 27, 1954
But tolerance for individuals who choose same sex relationships does not require tolerance (or worse, encouragement)…
Gosh, that sounds awfully familiar too!
“We must not … feel so sorry for Negroes that we will open our arms and embrace them…”
— Elder Mark E. Peterson Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints August 27, 1954
It is legitimate—intolerant or not—to fund school programs warning of the evils of smoking and encouraging students not to begin smoking. It is also legitimate to encourage child bearing and rearing and to create a privileged legal environment—called “marriage”—for those who undertake that most essential responsibility. Granting the same legal protections to sterile relationships is bad policy.
“Sterile relationships.” The only thing “sterile” is this guy’s synapses.
Well, at least he agrees that he has access to a “privileged legal environment” denied us. Disgustingly, his whole point is that it’s perfectly acceptable to discriminate against people he doesn’t think are as good as he is.
To ask the obvious, who is going to pay the taxes necessary to fund the social security benefits of same sex couples?
To ask the obvious, who is paying the taxes necessary to send your children to public school — and to private religious schools, thanks to “faith-based funding”? Last time I checked, I didn’t get a tax break just because I don’t have kids — I’m paying for your rugrats’ education, Johnny B. Dumb, and don’t you forget it.
And I’m paying for your mother’s Social Security check every month — when, frankly, I’d rather use the money to buy a time machine so I could duct-tape her knees together in time to stop her from giving birth to such a delusional homophobe of son.
Everyone knows the answer—the children of heterosexuals, because only heterosexuals have children.
That’s going to come as quite a surprise to Mary Cheney, and Melissa Etheridge, and Clay Aiken, and…
John-Boy, you are without a doubt the most delusional case I’ve encountered this week. And that’s saying a lot.
If citizens choose not to have enough children, or are discouraged by culture, economic pressures, etc. from having then, then the economic vacuum of unfilled jobs will be filled by immigrants.
OMG, look at this! He’s rolling all his phobias into one! Now gays are to blame for the so-called “illegal immigrant” problem!
Nature hates a vacuum of population as much as it hates any other type of vacuum.
The only vacuum is the one between your ears, Johnny.
Same sex marriage is sterile.
Then why am I still getting my period at 47 years old?
Sterility has worse than cancer.
John A. Evans has worse stupid than Forrest Gump.
It is legitimate not to condone behavior that has such dire consequences for individuals, families, society and the entire human race.
Like denying civil rights to a class of people for no other reason than that you hate them and fear them?
It is acceptable and legitimate for individuals and government to refuse to grant the same rights and status to sterility in our culture that is granted to heterosexual relationships that can and do produce children.
You know what’s scary, folks? For every John A. Evans who spews such garbage, there are countless more who swallow it like it was ice cream.
What’s worse is that you can never tell whether asses like John A. Evans really believe their own lies, or are just clever con artists who know how to manipulate the truly stupid among us. * Actually, I’m not kidding about the homeschooling thing. “Paula,” the blogger responsible to blame for propagating Evans’ lunacy, is indeed a homeschooler. What’s more, she follows the Charlotte Mason method, which eschews “dry, factual textbooks” in favor of “living books,” which are “usually written by one person who has a passion for the subject and writes in conversational or narrative style.”
In other words, who needs pesky facts when you can get yore larnin’ from a single “authority” who, gosh darnit, prolly talks all real folksy an’ everything, like that Sarah Palin gal?
Gee, I’ve got a “passion” for both psychology and genetics, and I always write in a conversational style — I guess that makes me qualified to write a “living book” on curing religious insanity through fetal brain surgery.
We normally wouldn’t waste the pixels on Jennifer Roback Morse, a longtime foe of equality who makes her living writing about how horrible and mean gay people are, and spends a lot of time praising fellow activist homophobes like Doug Manchester — but this latest blog post of hers reveals that she’s not just a bigot — she’s an equal-opportunity bigot:
I have been doing a lot of interviews and speeches in support of Prop 8. I am going to be letting me readers know about some of my adventures in this blog.
I want to start with something that happened just today.
This afternoon, I saw an African American man in the parking lot of a Rubio’s restaurant where I was going for lunch. … The man was wearing an Obama t-shirt. I approached him and asked him, “sir, are you planning to vote for Obama?” He hesitated and said yes, probably. I said, “may I ask you, to please, please consider voting yes on Proposition 8?” He didn’t know what it was. I knew from all the polling that blacks support natural marriage and Prop 8 at higher rates than any other ethnic group. I told him it was the proposition that says marriage is only the union of a man and a woman, and would he please consider voting yes on Prop 8. He said, “I don’t even need to consider it. there is only one way to vote on that.” I thanked him and smiled and went on my way.
African Americans don’t expect social conservatives to be nice to them, even though they are natural allies on many issues. The presidential race is not in play in CA: Obama will win in California, no matter what the Republican Party does. Social conservatives and traditionalists might as well take the opportunity to talk to and work with as many African Americans as possible on the marriage issue, which obviously concerns us all.
Forget for a moment the ludicrous “natural marriage” line…
“I knew from all the polling that blacks support natural marriage…”
“African Americans don’t expect social conservatives to be nice to them…”
Jennifer Roback Morse, this may come as a shock to you, but you’re not just a nasty, shrill homophobe — you are a nasty, shrill, homophobic racist.
And if that kind of sweeping “blacks are a monolith” generalization doesn’t take the cake, here’s the cake topper:
“Social conservatives and traditionalists might as well take the opportunity to talk to and work with as many African Americans as possible on the marriage issue…”
Translation: “Those black folk are a lost cause when it comes to the presidential race, ’cause they’re all gonna vote for the black candidate, ’cause that’s just what those people do — but maybe we can get them on our side to bash the homos, so we’re gonna have to lower ourselves to actually speak to them.”
I’m surprised she didn’t call the guy in the parking lot a “colored man.”
By the way, if the incident took place at all (and that is highly questionable), the response, “I don’t even need to consider it. [T]here is only one way to vote on that,” is the most noncommital non-answer there is.
If you’re wearing an outfit that looks like a cat puked on an unmade bed and you ask me what I think of it (and if I don’t want to hurt your feelings), I’ll likely respond: “Wow! That is some outfit, all right! I tell you, only you could wear something like that!” No harm, no foul, see?
If I’ve ever received a more offensive comment on a YouTube video — and, believe me, I’ve had plenty of the “I’m glad gay people get murdered! You all deserve to die!” variety (most of which I believe are lame trolling attempts by 14-year-olds) — I can’t remember it.
You took the time to research all the gay victims of 9/11 and decided to make a gay only 9/11 memorial video? I mean it’s not enough to make a video that includes all the 9/11 victims, you have to go the extra mile and make a “special” gays only one. You can’t be serious…it’s fine to be gay, but when people start to pride themselves and show extreme in your face bias for living a lifestyle it get’s old real fast.
This has to be a joke, right?
My reply:
lavenderliberal
You don’t get it: The point is we are no different from you. We live, love, work — and die — just like you. If you can’t understand that, there’s no explaining it to you. Would you say the same things to Ken Burns for making a “special” film about Latino veterans’ contributions to World War II? (He did just that, you know.) Or is it just that you don’t like gays? You think we’re not good enough to be recognized as friends, family, and heroes? Is that your real problem? I think it is.
I think some folks just can’t stand the idea that the person in the next seat — or flying the plane — could be queer.
I think it drives them crazy to be forced to look into the eyes of the gay people who died, because, well, gee, they all look so normal. They don’t have big red GAY tattoos on their foreheads, so, like, how can you tell if somebody’s one of those dangerous homosexuals?
I think some people get scared when they look at those dead lesbians and think, “Hey, that one looks like she could have been my mother, or my aunt…”
I think some people are disappointed that three-year-old David Brandhorst-Gamboa looked like a happy, lively, well-loved little boy, because that might just mean there are other gay parents out there who are doing a fine job of raising their children.
Normally, I breeze by the homophobic garbage on Democratic Underground, partly because I don’t haunt the halls of DU anymore (unless I’m tipped off to a particularly interesting meltdown going on in real-time), and mostly because I don’t see the point in torturing myself watching my people battle those hopelessly (and happily) entrenched in their own bigotry. I wasted six years battling the “Some of my best friends are gay, so I’m an expert on what’s homophobic and what’s not” brigades myself, and it was, indeed, a complete waste of time I could have spent doing something, anything, more productive… like trying to teach goldfish to drive.
Hearing there was something of a meltdown going on (again), I ran across a post by a gay DUer I’ve long liked and respected, who (for the umpteenth time for any LGBT DUer) pointed out the pervasive compulsion to label George W. Bush, or Karl Rove, or pretty much any right-winger as “gay.” This is different from outing a right-winger who really is gay (or at least a verifiable down-low type like Larry Craig); this is the Everyone We Hate is Gay syndrome, and it’s ugly, and extremely offensive to gay people.
After reading the usual “I don’t see any homophobia, so it doesn’t exist” replies from DUers who either have a serious memory disorder, or feign blindness to the neverending stream of homophobia right in front of their keyboards, I thought I’d ever-so-helpfully dredge up a few examples of what they’re “not seeing”… which, apparently, is too herculean a task for the Google-impaired.
Here are 1) the original post in question, and 2) two of the nastiest, most insensitive replies:
LeftCoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-04-08 02:57 PM Original message
I’ve been around here for years and it just never stops. Virtually every foul Republican is referred to as “gay”. It happens over and over. It’s against the rules and the mods do try, but it never ends. Why?
They say that doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result is the definition of insanity so I don’t know why I keep expecting it to change.
I don’t know what to do, but I don’t like how DU makes me feel.
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-04-08 03:08 PM Response to Original message
15. Virtually every foul Republican is referred to as “gay” - By whom?
Quit painting everyone with one brush stroke please.
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-04-08 03:21 PM Response to Original message
22. Do you always make shit like this up?
I have been here quite a while and can’t recall a single instance of a Republican being called gay for the hell of it. Now, if they are gay AND closeted AND a homophobe, I can see that.
You probably wanna run back to FR if you wanna concoct fables out of whole cloth.
For these “I can’t recall” folks (who can never again claim that DUers just don’t do this sort of thing), here’s a memory-refresher (and this, my friends, only scratches the surface):
And the winner of the Most Offensive Asshat on DU in 2008 (So Far) Award goes to “kurtboss,” who — to the credit of the DU admins — has since been banned:
kurtboss (361 posts) Mon Aug-04-08 09:05 PM Original message
Okay, let’s just make clear that there is nothing wrong with being Gay, however employing this strategy does make use of the negative cultural stereotypes about homosexuality. It’s exploiting it…but, to a good end.
So, here’s the deal. I want opinions. I don’t know if he’s really gay, but it doesn’t matter. This is hardball politics. A war, healthcare, the economy, etc all ride on this election…so it’s probably worth getting dirty for a couple months. I believe this can destroy his chances for victory by putting this seed of doubt in the minds of bigots.
1. The GOP Evangelicals HATE gays
2. Obviously easy to exploit McCain’s obsession with Obama–it’s practically pathetic at this point and noted everywhere in the media
3. He’s in the Navy. Village People anyone? It gets awfully lonely on ships.
4. To tie this up for you…McCain is already questioned by the Evangelicals and absolutely requires they turn out for him in droves. It’s his weakness.
How to attack it? Viral email. Youtube some effete moments put together…perhaps the infamous hug?? McCain is pretty pro-gay as GOP guys on policy isn’t he??? Check out the four photos below in what my FIRST and only google image search turned of of McCain hug
As for transphobia (or: Everyone We Hate is Transgender), there are far too many references to “Mann Coulter” to waste my time listing them all; see for yourself.
Don’t even get me started on the “prison rape is funny” posts — or the “Gays will lose us the next election! / Gays lost us the election!” scapegoating that happens every two years, like clockwork.
* While Hillary Clinton is not a right-winger, she is loathed as much as Bush, Rove, and all the rest by a substantial portion of DU. Remember, the ploy is called Everyone We Hate is Gay.
“You needed that job, and you were the best qualified, but they had to give it to a minority, because of a racial quota. Is that really fair?”
— Jesse Helms’ 1990 “Hands” ad, used to beat Democratic (and black) Senate candidate Harvey Gantt, 1990
“What really sets Jesse Helms apart is that he is the last prominent unabashed white racist politician in this country — a title that one hopes will now be permanently retired. A few editorials and columns came close to saying that. But the squeamishness of much of the press in characterizing Helms for what he is suggests an unwillingness to confront the reality of race in our national life.”
Jesse Helms, the former North Carolina senator whose courtly manner and mossy drawl barely masked a hard-edged conservatism that opposed civil rights, gay rights, foreign aid and modern art, died early Friday. He was 86. …
In a 52-year political career that ended with his retirement from the Senate in 2002, Helms became a beacon for the right wing of American politics, a lightning rod for the left and, often, a mighty pain for presidents whatever their political leaning. …
Perhaps his most visible accomplishments in the Senate came two decades apart. One was a 1996 measure that tightened trade sanctions against the government of Fidel Castro in Cuba. The other, a 1973 amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act, prevented American money from going to international family planning organizations that, in his words, “provide or promote” abortion. He also introduced amendments to reduce or eliminate funds for foreign aid, welfare programs and the arts. …
In the 1980s he took on the National Endowment for the Arts for subsidizing art that he found offensive, chiefly that of the homosexual photographer Robert Mapplethorpe and of the artist Andres Serrano over his depiction of a crucifix submerged in urine. He later led an ill-fated attempt to take over CBS, exhorting conservatives to buy up stock to stop what he said was a liberal bias in its news reporting. …
In campaigns and in the Senate, Helms stood out in both his words and his tactics. He fought bitterly against federal aid for AIDS research and treatment, saying the disease resulted from “unnatural” and “disgusting” homosexual behavior.
“Nothing positive happened to Sodom and Gomorrah,” he said, “and nothing positive is likely to happen to America if our people succumb to the drumbeats of support for the homosexual lifestyle.” …
“Dear Jesse: I left North Carolina in 1990… but even in New York, whenever I tell someone I’m from North Carolina, they mentioned you…”
I won’t go out of my way to dance on his grave, as I do acknowledge that everybody — even Hitler — was loved by somebody.
But I won’t fake any grief over the death of a man who hated my guts with a passion unsurpassed by anyone short of Fred Phelps.
As I wrote elsewhere on the death of Jerry Falwell, I’m not going to apologize for feeling a sense of relief that someone who spent his entire life trying to destroy the lives of others has finally left this world. There is one less oppressor, one less persecutor, one less hater, one less Grand Inquisitor among us.
And, while I don’t put much faith in “signs,” I can’t let pass without note that the death of Jesse Helms comes on our nation’s 232nd birthday. For lovers of equality and freedom everywhere, we just attained a little more independence this Independence Day.
With that, I’ll leave the rest of the comments to Jesse himself — and perhaps those horrified by my apparent callousness will have a better understanding of my lack of faux grief:
On People of Color
“University of Negroes and Communists”
— Jesse Helms’ interpretation of “UNC” (a.k.a. University of North Carolina), 1950
“To rob the Negro of his reputation of thinking through a problem in his own fashion is about the same as trying to pretend that he doesn’t have a natural instinct for rhythm and for singing and dancing. …
“The Negro cannot count forever on the kind of restraint that’s thus far left him free to clog the streets, disrupt traffic, and interfere with other men’s rights.”
— Jesse Helms, 1956
“They should ask their parents if it would be all right for their son or daughter to marry a Negro.”
— Jesse Helms, in response to Duke University students holding a vigil after Martin Luther King, Jr., was assassinated, 1968
“I’ve been portrayed as a caveman by some. That’s not true. I’m a conservative progressive, and that means I think all men are equal, be they slants, beaners, or n*ggers.”
— Jesse Helms, North Carolina Progressive, February 6, 1985
“All Latins are volatile people. Hence, I was not surprised at the volatile reaction.”
— Jesse Helms on protests against his visit to Mexico, 1986
“I was with some Vietnamese recently, and some of them were smoking two cigarettes at the same time. That’s the kind of customers we need!”
— Jesse Helms, promoting North Carolina’s tobacco industry, 1996
“There is not one single case of AIDS in this country that cannot be traced in origin to sodomy.”
— Jesse Helms, States News Service, May 17, 1988
“Because she’s a damn lesbian.”
— Jesse Helms, explaining why he would not vote for HUD Assistant Secretary nominee Roberta Achtenberg, 1993
“Homosexuals are weak, morally sick wretches.”
— Jesse Helms, radio broadcast, 1995
“This bill attempts to make sure that President Clinton is not allowed to do by Executive Order what Congress has declined to enact in the past two congressional sessions namely, to treat homosexuals as a special class protected under various titles of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
“These people are intellectually dishonest in just everything they say or do. They start by pretending that it is just another form of love. It’s sickening.”
— Jesse Helms
On Art and the Media
“What is really at stake is whether or not America will allow the cultural high ground in this nation to sink slowly into an abyss of slime to placate people who clearly seek or are willing to destroy the Judaic-Christian foundations of this republic.”
— Jesse Helms, on funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, 1990
“The New York Times and Washington Post are both infested with homosexuals themselves. Just about every person down there is a homosexual or lesbian.”
— Jesse Helms, 1995
On Choice
“Nevertheless, if the Administration insists on funding these programs I shall not stand in the way, so long as you agree to the following conditions: 1) that no funds be obligated to any affiliate of the International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) in Haiti, including PROFAMIL; and 2) that no funds be provided directly or indirectly to any group whose programs include producing material intended to be used in a voodoo ceremony … AID is funding programs that endorse or legitimize what amounts to witchcraft.”
“Mr. Clinton better watch out if he comes down here. He’d better have a bodyguard.”
— Jesse Helms, quoted in the New York Times, November 23, 1994
Miscellaneous Lunacy
“I’m so old-fashioned I believe in horse whipping.”
— Jesse Helms, Senate debate on AIDS, 1991
“Your tax dollars are being used to pay for grade school classes that teach our children that CANNIBALISM, WIFE-SWAPPING, and the MURDER of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior.”
— Jesse Helms, fundraising mailer, 1996
“If God had wanted us to use the metric system, Jesus would have had 10 apostles.”
— Jesse Helms
“I have tried at every point to seek God’s wisdom on the decisions I made, and I made it my business to speak up on behalf of the things God tells us are important to Him.”
Two Muslim women at Barack Obama’s rally in Detroit Monday were barred from sitting behind the podium by campaign volunteers seeking to prevent the women’s headscarves from appearing in photographs or on television with the candidate.
The campaign has apologized to the women, both Obama supporters who said they felt betrayed by their treatment at the rally.
“This is of course not the policy of the campaign. It is offensive and counter to Obama’s commitment to bring Americans together and simply not the kind of campaign we run,” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. “We sincerely apologize for the behavior of these volunteers.”
Building a human backdrop to a political candidate, a set of faces to appear on television and in photographs, is always a delicate exercise in demographics and political correctness. Advance staffers typically pick supporters out of a crowd to reflect the candidate’s message.
When Obama won North Carolina amid questions about his ability to connect with white voters, for instance, he stood in front of a group of middle-aged white women waving small American flags. On the Republican side, a Hispanic New Hampshire Democrat, Roberto Fuentes, told Politico that he was recently asked, and declined, to contribute to the “diversity” of the crowd behind Sen. John McCain at a Nashua event.
But for Obama, the old-fashioned image-making contrasts with his promise to transcend identity politics and to embrace all elements of America. The incidents in Michigan, which has one of the largest Arab and Muslim populations in the country, also raise an aspect of his campaign that sometimes rubs Muslims the wrong way: The candidate has vigorously denied a false, viral rumor that he himself is Muslim. But the denials seem to some at times to imply that there is something wrong with the faith, though Obama occasionally adds that he means no disrespect to Islam.
“I was coming to support him, and I felt like I was discriminated against by the very person who was supposed to be bringing this change, who I could really relate to,” said Hebba Aref, a 25-year-old lawyer who lives in the Detroit suburb of Bloomfield Hills. “The message that I thought was delivered to us was that they do not want him associated with Muslims or Muslim supporters.”
In Detroit on Monday, the two different Obama volunteers — in separate incidents — made it clear that headscarves wouldn’t be in the picture. The volunteers gave different explanations for excluding the hijabs, one bluntly political and the other less clear.
In Aref’s case, there was no ambiguity. …
Good for Camp O with the quick apology — but you’ve got to wonder what drives some of these volunteers; aren’t they required to, er, graduate from Camp Obama Basic Training or anything before being given this kind of (ir)responsibility? If not, why not? And if so, are they not getting the message — or is there something wrong with the message itself?
In any case, that’s some Unity Pony they got goin’ there.
When you get hate mail this impudent (which is just-this-short of a physical threat), you know you’re hitting a raw, shredded, glistening-bloody nerve — which means you know you’re doing something right:
Name: Warren Bigley email address: warrenbigley@yahoo.com Message: Yeah it looks like you ran out of false stories to make up about conservatives 2 years ago huh? How would you like to debate? I can come to you or you can come to Ohio and we can have an oldfashioned liberal vs Conservtive debate.
But like every other liberal i am sure you are to cowardly to take me up on it.
Warre W Bigley Leader of the conservative cause
REMOTE_ADDR: 75.109.158.119 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506) DATE: 20:21:32 2008-5-1
If I had any clue as to what you were talking about, “Warre,” I might address it, but since you make no reference to, well, anything, it stands to reason that you’ve been trolling the Internet looking for any good, strong, liberal Americans you haven’t yet smeared. And you found me. Awwwwwww!
Who are you anyway, little boy? Oh, wait, you’re the “Warren W. Bigley” who was put on disciplinary probation by West Virginia University “for issuing a press release as president of a student Republican group the school said was not properly registered,” aren’t you?
No wonder your panties are in a twist, “Warre” — you’re a Mitt Romney supporter, and you’ll never be able to get over the fact that nobody wanted your whacked-out, Dark Ages, gay-hating dog torturer to come within 100 miles of the White House.
“Leader of the conservative cause”? How ridiculous you are! If you only knew…! You’re the leader of nothing, “Warre.” You’re a snot-nosed little punk who thinks he can bully everyone else into silence.
Well, guess what, little boy? That may have worked on the playground, but it doesn’t work now. I’ve come up against far more fearsome bullies than you, “Warre,” for longer than you’ve been alive.
And why would I ever want to “debate” a liar who accuses me of making up “false stories”? I would never “debate” you, kiddo, as your style of “debate” would probably entail putting a bullet through my head the moment you realized your tough-guy, banty-cock posturing was crumbling like the Walls of Jericho against my reason and logic. Why would I want to go up against such a whack-job as yourself? You, Romney, the Taliban — you all scare me for the same reason. You sound like a crazed idealogue who is completely and utterly out of control.
By the way, that you were accepted into West Virginia University — or any institution of learning above the third grade — is utterly amazing. Does WVU have an affirmative action program for the terminally illiterate?
Helpful tips:
• Punctuation is your friend.
• In accordance with every manual of style in existence (in English, at least; is English your native language?), we spell out all numbers from one to ten.
• “Old-fashioned” / “old fashioned” is not one word.
• “Conservtive” is spelled “conservative.”
• The word “to” in this case (”i am sure you are to cowardly”) should be spelled “too.”
• The word “i” in the same sentence should be capitalized (”I”).
• Your name is spelled “Warren,” Warren, not “Warre”.
P.S. Your offer to come to California is declined, “Warre.” You are not welcome here. We are a peaceful people, and we don’t want raging, puffed-up, self-important little bigots here. Now, as nicely as I can put it: Get lost, loser, before I report you to your mommy, and she grounds you from using your My First Big-Boy Computer™ for a month.
P.P.S. I hope you enjoyed the attention you got from me, punk. I did it so that if some crackpot hunts me down and kills me, there will be a public record of your nut-ball email for the investigation.
A sign is causing heated arguments outside of a church in Jonesville (South Carolina).
Pastor Roger Byrd of Jonesville Church of God put the sign up which reads “Obama Osama humm are they brothers?”
Pastor Byrd says the sign is not meant to be racial or political but rather to make people think. “His name is so close to Osama I have a feeling he might be Islamic therefore he doesn’t recognize Christ,” Pastor Byrd said. …
Pastor Byrd told News Channel 7 he would ask his congregation to vote on whether to keep the sign. They voted unanimously to keep the sign up Sunday night.
Jonesville Church of God does not have any African American members.
After all, aren’t there a lot of “good, decent, moral people in this country who do not yet embrace their” Muslim or black “brothers and sisters as full members of our shared community”?
As a woman, I know how the c-word rings in my ear. As a lesbian, I know how “dyke” sounds when it’s thrown at me as a slur.
But I never thought, in this day and age, I would feel the sting of anti-Italian hate. That should have died out with my grandparents’ generation — but it appears that the Wrong Mr. Wright has been keeping that brand of discrimination alive and well, thankyouverymuch.
The following is all over the right-wing blogosphere this morning. Well, of course it is; do you think any Obama worshippers would dare touch it? And now that I’m bringing it up (and I suspect I will be the only left-wing blogger to dare mention it), I’m bracing myself for yet another round of hate mail.
But I’ll be damned if I’m going to give Wright a pass on “garlic noses” — it isn’t the only time he’s let his animosity toward Italians come through, loud and clear:
Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor emeritus of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago where Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has been a member for two decades, slurred Italians in a piece published in the most recent issue of Trumpet Newsmagazine.
“(Jesus’) enemies had their opinion about Him,” Wright wrote in a eulogy of the late scholar Asa Hilliard in the November/December 2007 issue. “The Italians for the most part looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans.
“From the circumstances surrounding Jesus’ birth (in a barn in a township that was under the Apartheid Roman government that said his daddy had to be in), up to and including the circumstances surrounding Jesus’ death on a cross, a Roman cross, public lynching Italian style. …” Wright wrote. “He refused to be defined by others and Dr. Asa Hilliard also refused to be defined by others.
“The government runs everything from the White House to the schoolhouse, from the Capitol to the Klan, white supremacy is clearly in charge, but Asa, like Jesus, refused to be defined by an oppressive government because Asa got his identity from an Omnipotent God,” said Wright.
Every issue of the magazine published last year included Wright’s column, “The Message,” in which he covered a range of subjects, including his views on other African-American churches as expressed in his April 2007 commentary “Facing the Rising Sun.” …
Trumpet Newsmagazine started publication in the 1980s in Chicago and distribution expanded in March 2006 to several other cities, with broader circulation through subscriptions. On the magazine’s masthead, Wright is named as the magazine’s CEO and Wright’s daughter, Jeri Wright, is the publisher.
Requests for comments from Jeri Wright, the magazine’s marketing staff, and the Obama campaign were not answered by press time. …
“Garlic noses”?
“Public lynching Italian style”?
Why doesn’t he just come out and call us greaseballs, wops, dagos, gumbas, mafiosi?
So, before you hit the comment link below and tell me what a racist I am (because… what? because I have the audacity to criticize a man who happens to be black?), consider how you’re going to convince me — a third-generation Italian-American extremely sensitive to cracks about her rich heritage — that Wright isn’t the bigot here.
Convince me that I don’t have the right to rip into anyone who calls Italians “garlic noses.”
It was supposed to be fun and a life lesson learned but some parents and taxpayers in University City still are not laughing and remain frustrated over the school board allowing a young man to wear the homecoming queen crown.
. . .
“A king should be a king and a queen should be a queen,” says University City resident Richard Dockett.
. . .
The criticism was pointed directly at the board who thought this would be a lesson in diversity and the power of the vote, but some citizens saw it differently. “It appears to me that we put more emphasis on gay rights than on we do on educating our children,” said former board member Walter Daniels.
Zaggy’s run wasn’t about sexual orientation, he says it was all about fun which is mother re-iterated as she criticized the community for being what she sees as closed-minded. “As a parent this is the first time that I have been truly disappointed,” said Mariann Zaggy, “not in our school board not in our school district or our administration or our students, but I am truly ashamed in the self-righteous citizens and parents in our district who think the election of a boy as a homecoming queen is somewhat deviant.”
We’d be ashamed too, Ms. Zaggy. All we are right now is really glad we don’t live in Bigotsville, Missouri.
A court in Jaipur, India, has denied an HIV-positive woman custody of her 8-year-old daughter, a rights activist said Friday.
The woman, who was not identified to protect her privacy, married a soldier from northwestern Rajasthan state in the late 1990s without knowing that he was HIV-positive, said Kavita Srivastav, state convener of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, a private rights group.
Her husband died four years ago. After his death her in-laws began treating the woman badly and took her daughter on the grounds that the mother had become HIV-positive, Srivastav said.
. . .
The court rejected her plea this week, ruling that she would not able to take care of her daughter because of her HIV-positive status, Srivastav said.
The Walt Disney Co. is issuing a formal apology to a San Diego man for an incident Saturday at Disneyland that the company claims was a misunderstanding but which the man asserts was anti-gay bias.
Wil Kenney claims he was targeted and harassed by Disneyland security — as well as roughed up by Anaheim, Calif., police — because a Disney staff member overreacted to Kinney’s holding another man’s hand.
. . .
Security claimed Kenney had threatened someone with a gun; Kenney denied it. Anaheim police were called; according to Kenney, they forced him face-first into a wall and then frisked, searched and interrogated him in front of hundreds of Disney guests.
Kenney said officers left after finding no weapons on anyone in his party. He said he may have been targeted by police because a Disney employee grew nervous seeing Kenney holding hands with his partner, which he believes then led to the chain reaction of events.
Rob Doughty, vice president of communications for Disneyland … claimed Kenney made a hand gesture that a Disney crew member interpreted as threatening. Doughty said security came over and detained Kenney and his group, who grew angry. …
. . .
… Doughty, who heads Disney’s employee gay group, said Disney staffers were not even aware Kenney was gay until two hours after the incident. “Our policy is, everyone is welcome,” Doughty said. “If a same-sex couple wants to hold hands at our park, that’s fine.”
Tweet This Post! 
How ridiculous you are! If you only knew…! You’re the leader of nothing, “Warre.” You’re a snot-nosed little punk who thinks he can bully everyone else into silence.
