Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters

Thursday, August 12, 2010

National Organization for Marriage don't like lgbt families

While we are awaiting Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling on that temporary stay on gay marriages in California (and let's keep our fingers crossed that we win that one also), this video by Rob Tisani of the blog Waking Up Now is a reminder as to what it is all about:

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Making fun of anti-gay liars is always good therapy

I want to do something thought provoking and intelligent tonight but I'm not in the mood.

Those who read my blog have been with me through it all, be it fire leading to temporary homelessness to annoying power outages.

So now comes theft. Some unemployed by choice idiots broke into my apartment and stole my laptop and television.

Of course the benefits of having a job and a little bit of mad money is that I was easily able to replace them, albeit I will be paying for them both over over a year thanks to lovely rent-to-own deals.

Oh well, I will take solace in the fact that the idiots who stole my laptop can't make it work. I had no battery and they left the plug.

I hates a thief but I can't stands a dumb one.

Anyway, the following clip is from Infomania making fun of anti-gay "therapist" Richard Cohen and others who push the phony theory of reparative therapy.

Enjoy. Tomorrow morning I should have my mojo back:

National Organization for Marriage gets smacked down in NC and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Pam Spaulding’s Encounter With NOM Volunteer - Man I wish the NOM folks would come down to South Carolina.

Guest column by CD Kirven: Open Letter to Dr. Alveda King from a Black LGBT Rights Activist - An excellent retort to the madness that is Alveda King.

Rep. Lamar Smith: No Impeachment of Judge Vaughan Walker - And sanity reigns. At least just a little bit.

Porno Pete’s Truth Academy Bombs - A lovely point which should be reiterated. By the way, I requested Petey's friendship on Facebook. Bet I have a better chance of kissing Brian Brown than him saying yes. Then again, perish the thought. Gay is not a synonym for desperate.

Why Prop 8 lost - the video evidence speaks for itself

By way of Box Turtle Bulletin, I saw this on LGBT POV:

Most of us were so swept up in anticipation of, then excitement over District Court Judge Vaughn Walker’s ruling last Wednesday, Aug. 4, affirming the constitutional right of same sex couple to marry that we didn’t notice that court also posted videos and documents presented as part of the Prop 8 trial. All of this material – including the actual courtroom testimony (transcripts of which are available on the American Foundation for Equal Rights website – is now part of the record going before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal.

And needless to say that this video evidence is stunning. It totally belies the claims - especially by folks like Brian Brown from the National Organization for Marriage - that people voted Proposition 8 to specifically "protect marriage."

A lot of lies and fear went into pushing for Proposition 8. Right now, the writer of the piece, Karen Ocamb, is focusing on the testimony, the Executive Director of the San Francisco-based Traditional Family Coalition and a Protect Marriage spokesperson in the Asian community.

Tam tried to leave the case because he claimed he was fearful for the safety of his family. He ended up being a hostile witness for the plantiffs and did more than enough to prove that the Prop 8 vote wasn't just about marriage:

The most striking portion of the deposition, which was shown at trial, is Tam acknowledging the aforementioned letter he had written urging a vote for Prop 8 in which he says that same sex marriage will lead to legal prostitution and legal sex with children:

“This is put forth by the SF city government, which is under the rule of homosexuals. They lose no time in pushing the gay agenda – after legalizing same sex marriage they want to legalize prostitution. What will be next? On their agenda list is: legalizing having sex with children.”

Aside from Tam's videotaped testimony, other video evidence, which comprised mostly of the commercials for the Prop 8 side are stunning in their inaccurate claims about how marriage equality would harm children or how churches could lose their tax-exempt statuses. They would be downright infuriating until one realizes that while it was stuff like this that ensured a victory at the ballot box, it also ensured an embarrassing defeat in court.

Turnabout is fair play indeed.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Republicans FINALLY get around to criticizing Prop 8 decision. Whoop te do

Politico is reporting that a bunch of Republicans in the House of Representatives finally got around to criticizing the Prop 8 decision:

Republicans in California are remaining largely silent on last week's ruling overturning Proposition 8. But a band of conservative House members didn't waste a minute in their day back in Washington, highlighting their opposition to gay marriage.

Reps. Lamar Smith of Texas, Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, Steve King of Iowa and John Fleming of Louisiana told reporters on Tuesday that the California federal judge who overturned Prop. 8 acted against the will of voters in striking down the state's ban on gay marriage.

"Legalizing an alternative form of marriage dilutes a long-standing and widely accepted standard of marriage as a union between a man and woman. We should adhere to such standards rather than undertake a massive social experiment with perhaps unknown consequences," said Smith, who is introducing a resolution condemning the ruling.

Bachmann said the ruling tramples on the will of the people who voted to enact the ban.

"This is yet one more example of a judge substituting his moral pronouncement under the guise of constitutional law, and I think that's what people are upset about," she said.

Who's upset? I'm not upset and neither are millions of Americans who like fairness and justice.

Please forgive me for yawning that these folks have come in a week late with the same stupid talking points which rightfully sank Proposition 8.

Who knows, maybe King learned his lesson after sending out a letter condemning Obama appointee Kevin Jennings for contributing to the delinquency of a minor even AFTER his office was informed that Jennings didn't do anything wrong.

And I would be remiss to mention that King is the same guy who said that lgbts wouldn't have to worry about job discrimination if we were more quiet, which is the same as saying we should act ashamed about who we are and don't do anything any "normal" person would do at the job like talk about our families.

Bachmann? I've written her off a long time ago.

Any time the lgbt community finds itself opposite Bachmann is proof that not only God exists but that He smiling upon us.

Well to that madness, allow me to post again the comments of lawyer David Boies on Face the Nation:

And let's not forget his words:

"In a court of law you've got to come in and you've got to support those opinions, you've got to stand up under oath and cross-examination. And what we saw at trial is that it's very easy for the people who want to deprive gay and lesbian citizens of the right to vote [sic] to make all sorts of statements and campaign literature, or in debates where they can't be cross-examined.

But when they come into court and they have to support those opinions and they have to defend those opinions under oath and cross-examination, those opinions just melt away. And that's what happened here. There simply wasn't any evidence, there weren't any of those studies. There weren't any empirical studies. That's just made up. That's junk science. It's easy to say that on television. But a witness stand is a lonely place to lie. And when you come into court you can't do that.

That's what we proved: We put fear and prejudice on trial, and fear and prejudice lost."

Smearing of Prop 8 judge reveals media double standard in 'outing' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Judge Vaughn Walker Gets Smeared By the Media - I have to agree with Michelangelo here. There is a double standard when it comes to outing.

Comparing Prop. 8 judge to Emperor Nero just the latest in Wash. Times' anti-gay assault - Does the Washington Times even like lgbt folks?

Thoughts outside of a vacuum: This Hoover makes noise but doesn't suck - I'm shocked. A conservative telling her colleagues to check themselves about opposing marriage equality.

Voters To Decide On City Domestic Partner Benefits - And I hope they decide the right way.

LaBarbera to Ann Coulter: Reconsider Appearance at Event for GOProud — Phony ‘Gay Conservatives’ - I rarely, RARELY like to include anything by Peter LaBarbera in a light that's not rightfully making fun of his madness. But THIS is too tempting. Apparently he doesn't think much of Ann Coulter appearing at a Republican gay function anymore than some of us do. Ann, dearest, while I still don't like what you stand for, LaBarbera could provide soooo much fodder for you. Take advantage, take advantage.

Eleventh researcher complains that the religious right distorted his work

Yet another researcher is accusing religious right groups of misusing his work.

John Horgan, a science journalist and Director of the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ, yesterday published an article in Scientific American calling various religious right groups to task for what he says is a distortion of his work:

. . . Christian homophobes have misused my writings on the biology of homosexuality, particularly "Gay Genes, Revisited," published in Scientific American in November 1995. In it I reported on weaknesses in the claims of scientists—and particularly the geneticist Dean Hamer, "discoverer" of the "gay gene"—that homosexuality has a genetic basis. (I've continued beating up on Hamer over the years for exaggerating the links between specific genes and behaviors; see for example this essay.)

Anti-gay Christians cite "Gay Genes, Revisited" to make the case that homosexuality is not hardwired; people with homosexual inclinations can change their behavior and even minds through therapeutic interventions. See, for example, the references to "Gay Genes, Revisited" on these Mormon and Catholic sites.

Horgan was saying that he wasn't making a case against the lgbt equality (which religious right groups have done with his piece) but was saying that sexuality is more fluid than the simplistic notions that people are either gay or heterosexual.

Personally I am in favor of Horgan's opinion that sexuality is fluid. I also believe the phrase "gay gene" is a straw man argument, or a buzzword perpetrated by the religious right such as the phrases "radical homosexual activist" or "protecting marriage."

But the most important thing to remember is that Horgan is yet another researcher accusing the religious right of distorting his/her work. By my count, he is number 11.

For the record, there is already:

National Institute of Health director Francis Collins, who rebuked the American College of Pediatricians for falsely claiming that he stated sexual orientation is not hardwired by DNA.

Six researchers of a 1997 Canadian study (Robert S. Hogg, Stefan A. Strathdee, Kevin J.P. Craib, Michael V. Shaughnessy, Julio Montaner, and Martin T. Schehter), who complained in 2001 that religious right groups were distorting their work to claim that gay men have a short life span.

The authors of the book Unequal Opportunity: Health Disparities Affecting Gay and Bisexual Men in the United States (Professors Richard J. Wolitski, Ron Stall, and Ronald O. Valdiserri), who complained that their work was being distorted by Focus on the Family.

University College London professor Michael King, who complained that the American Family Association was distorting his work on depression and suicide in LGBT individuals

University of Utah professor Lisa Diamond, who complained that NARTH (the National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality), a group that also shares board members with the ACPED, distorted her research on sexual orientation.

Dr. Carol Gilligan, Professor of Education and Law at New York University, who complained that former Focus on the Family head James Dobson misrepresented her research to attack LGBT families.

Dr. Kyle Pruett, Ph.D., a professor of child psychiatry at the Yale School of Medicine, who has also complained that Focus on the Family distorted his work.

Dr. Robert Spitzer, Professor of Psychiatry at Columbia University, who has consistently complained that religious right groups distorted his study to claim that the LGBT orientation is easily changeable.

Judith Stacey, Professor of Sociology at New York University, who has had to, on more than one occasion, cry foul over how religious right groups distorted her work on LGBT families.

Greg Remafedi, Professor at the University of Minnesota, who has complained several times about how religious right groups such as the American College of Pediatricians and PFOX have distorted his work, all to no avail. The American College of Pediatricians refused his request to remove his work from their site.

In light of the Prop 8 decision last week and lawyer David Boies's eloquently put take down of religious right head Tony Perkins on Face the Nation about how religious right groups deal in fear and phony data regarding the lgbt community, these complaints of scientific inaccuracies need to be brought out to a wider audience.

Remember that it is these groups which the news media legitimizes by pushing them as the "pro-family" opposition without making people aware of their history of duplicity when it comes to lgbt research.

We need to understand that religious right groups and spokespeople don't deal with concrete ideas, but abstract illusions.

They say that "every child should have a right to a mother and a father," while ignoring that the fact that while every child does have a mother and a father, not every child is born into a home with both a mother and a father and that these children do well when they are given love and support.

They claim that it is the lgbt community who are causing the most damage to American families while ignoring the real issues like poverty, socioeconomic inequalities, and lack of good health information

They divert everyone's attentions to some candy coated vision in the clouds so no one notices as they handicap the lgbt comunity at the knees.

Someone needs to start yanking away their sticks.

Big hat tip to Joe Sudbay at Americablog.

Editor's note - here is an added bonus. One of the people distorting Horgan's work, John R. Diggs, is an old hat when it comes to misusing research to demonize the lgbt community. This post goes into detail about his highly flawed piece, The Health Risks of Gay Sex.

Monday, August 09, 2010

Florida attorney general wants to ban gay adoption even after the Rekers scandal because of personal belief

One would think that after being embroiled in a scandal that rocked Florida, the religious right, and his gubernatorial aspirations, Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum would change his negative opinion of gay adoption, the very reason for the scandal.

Think again. From Think Progress:

Fresh off his George Rekers scandal, Florida Attorney General and gubernatorial candidate Bill McCollum is telling Florida Baptist News that he wants to expand Florida’s discriminatory adoption laws to prohibit gay people from serving as foster parents:

MCCOLLUM: I don’t believe in gay adoption. I don’t believe in involving the government in enforcing or encouraging the lifestyle of gays and homosexuals. I just don’t believe that. [...]

Q: Florida permits homosexuals to serve as foster parents. That has been used as an argument to undermine the ban on adoptions. Should homosexuals be permitted to serve as foster parents in Florida?
MCCOLLUM: Well, I personally don’t think so, but that is the law.
Q: Should the law be changed?
MCCOLLUM: I think that it would be advisable. I really do not think that we should have homosexuals guiding our children. I think that it’s a lifestyle that I don’t agree with. I realize a lot of people do. It’s my personal faith, religious faith, that I don’t believe that the people who do this should be raising our children. It’s not a natural thing. You need a mother and a father. You need a man and a woman. That’s what God intended.

And here I thought God always commanded us to stand for truth. I guess I didn't get the memo McCollum received.

But we now see the reason why McCollum pushed in fighting for Florida's ban against gay adoption in spite of the fact that his office at first couldn't find any "experts" to speak on their side,

and the reason why George Rekers was the "expert" chosen in spite of the fact that McCollum's staff warned him that Rekers had credibility problems,

and the reason why McCollum is still pushing against gay adoption even after his case was soundly defeated in court and his office frittered away over $100,000 dollars to Rekers.

That reason being - McCollum's personal beliefs tells him that gay adoption is wrong. Never mind being destroyed in court and never mind the all of the research which demonstrates his position to be wrong because those things don't matter.

Facts and truth don't matter to McCollum. Just his personal pseudo-Christian beliefs.

Maybe it's just me but I don't think that this is right. I don't think that a politician has a right to waste money and discriminate against people simply because of his personal beliefs (and I underline that part about "personal beliefs" because again, nothing concrete backs up McCollum's stance that gay adoption is dangerous or wrong.)

But something must be noted here and needs to be the topic of discussions that go beyond blogs.

In two cases (this one and the case of Proposition 8), we are seeing the dangers of people sacrificing truth for personal beliefs.

In the case of Proposition 8, when the reality that same sex marriage is harmless wasn't to the liking of some folks, they manufactured a plethora of phony data to say that it was.

In this case in Florida, McCollum isn't manufacturing false data. He is doing much worse by saying "to hell with the data" and "to hell with reason and accuracy. Gay adoption is wrong because I think so."

When people can push phony data or push aside accurate data with a public assurance that they are doing so in God's name, I think there are bigger problems in this world than the so-called "homosexual agenda."

After all, us "homosexuals" aren't the ones lying with impunity.

More proof that the Family Research distorts information and other Monday midday news briefs

Tony Perkins' fearmongering about same-sex parenting is refuted by medical consensus - More reasons as to why the Prop 8 folks lost in court.

Pathetic Porno Pete Puffs Up Crowd Numbers At Failed Hate Conference - Why are we even surprised? And by the way, I love the first sentence of this piece.

You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet: Ominous Rumblings From the Right - Bring it on.

Staten Island Marches Against Hate Crime - Good for them!

NOM's Latest Target? Maine's Clean Elections Law - For a supposed Christian organization, they certainly have a lot to hide.

Prop 8 lawyer destroys religious right lies on Face The Nation

Very satisfying appearance by Prop 8 lawyer David Boies on Face the Nation yesterday as he took on the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins and destroyed him. I especially like when he said the following:

"In a court of law you've got to come in and you've got to support those opinions, you've got to stand up under oath and cross-examination. And what we saw at trial is that it's very easy for the people who want to deprive gay and lesbian citizens of the right to vote [sic] to make all sorts of statements and campaign literature, or in debates where they can't be cross-examined.

"But when they come into court and they have to support those opinions and they have to defend those opinions under oath and cross-examination, those opinions just melt away. And that's what happened here. There simply wasn't any evidence, there weren't any of those studies. There weren't any empirical studies. That's just made up. That's junk science. It's easy to say that on television. But a witness stand is a lonely place to lie. And when you come into court you can't do that.

"That's what we proved: We put fear and prejudice on trial, and fear and prejudice lost."

And that is why the religious right will eventually lose this so-called culture war. Their foundation is built on lies and all lies are sooner or later exposed as such.

Hat tip to Americablog.

Sunday, August 08, 2010

MLK's anti-gay niece smears Coretta Scott King for 'not having his DNA'

The National Organization for Marriage has continued its sad, poorly attended "Summer for Marriage" Tour across the nation, this time stopping in Atlanta. And speaking for the organization at this juncture was Alveda King, the niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Her speech was ridiculous, especially the implication that gay marriage is "genocide." But what caught my eye were negative comments she made in an interview after the speech.

The crude comments come in at about 7:21 when she is asked about Coretta Scott King's support of gay marriage.

Alveda says that her (Alveda's views) supposedly come from the "Lord" and "Natural Law."

But then she adds a nasty little caveat:

She (Coretta) was married to him (Martin Luther King, Jr.). I've got his DNA. She doesn't. She didn't. She's passed away."

Views about gay marriage aside, Alveda's comments were nasty and totally inappropriate. And I would say that they reveal her mindset more than her ramblings.

Let's be clear. Coretta Scott King was very instrumental in the life and legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr. She was more than his wife. She was an integral part in the African-American civil rights movement. And after his assassination, she carved a niche for herself as a human rights activist. Alveda was merely a teenager during the civil rights movement and as far as we know, she never had any discussions with King about civil rights matters.

In all honesty, Alveda has made a career off of exploiting the King name. If she didn't have this name, no one would really care about what she thought in regards to gay rights, African-American rights, etc.

But since it is her name, it is also her right to reap the benefits from having it.

But what she doesn't have a right to do is disrespect the legacy of a woman whose shoes she's not worthy enough to even latch.

Coretta Scott King was a hero.

You, Alveda, are an exploiter.

Please don't ever mistake Mrs. King as anything less or yourself as anything more.

Hat tip to Goodasyou.org

Harry Jackson doesn't like same-sex families

It has been fun to watch members of the religious right spin themselves into oblivion as they try to deal with the Prop 8 decision handed down last week.

But once in a while, one of them says something which makes you angry. For me, it is this piece by Rev. Harry Jackson which appeared on CNN's webpage.

Jackson, probably the most prominent African-American in religious right circles (probably because he is one of a scant few African-Americans in those circles) is claiming that gay marriage will damage families and society.

Jackson repeats the same anti-gay nonsense channeled by the religious right - and dismissed in the Prop 8 decision. But then he says this:

. . .if same-sex marriage becomes legally recognized across the country, our kids will be told that gay marriage is a civil rights issue and that those who oppose it are akin to the racists of history who opposed interracial marriage and supported slavery.

We can teach our children at home that marriage is between a man and a woman, but our children's public schools will teach them that marriage includes same-sex couples. Both would be "equal marriages" under the law.

What might this look like? In Massachusetts, where a ruling legalized same-sex marriage in 2004, kids in public schools are reading books depicting same-sex families. At a California charter school in 2008, kindergartners' parents objected when a school newsletter alerted them to "National Coming Out Day;" a parent told a local ABC-TV affiliate that a teacher at the school screened a film to kindergartners the previous year showing gay families.

While I disagree with Jackson's assessment that those who oppose gay marriage will be thought of as bigots, he makes a good case of why this could happen.

Usually when religious right figures list anecdotes about incidents which happen when lgbts gain marriage rights, non-discrimination rights, etc, the incidents end (albeit not truthfully) with the implication being that if we gave lgbts rights, someone would be deprived of their rights, put in jail, having to unfairly pay a fine, etc.

But not so in this case.

Jackson is saying that allowing gay marriage would make school acknowledge the presence of lgbt families.

What's wrong with that? Schools should be doing this all along because lgbt families exist and children who are in these households attend our nation's schools. Why should they have to be ashamed of their families just to suit the ignorance of others?

According to a report by Gary Gates, Lee M.V. Badgett, Jennifer Ehrle Macomber, Kate Chambers of the Urban Institute:

* More than one in three lesbians have given birth and one in six gay men have fathered or adopted a child.

* An estimated 65,500 adopted children are living with a lesbian or gay parent.

* More than 16,000 adopted children are living with lesbian and gay parents in California, the highest number among the states.

* Gay and lesbian parents are raising four percent of all adopted children in the United States.
.
* An estimated 14,100 foster children are living with lesbian or gay parents.

* Gay and lesbian parents are raising three percent of foster children in the United States.

But in Harry Jackson's world, simple acknowledgment of these families is akin to the war, famine, or plague; scourges that have wiped out past societies.

Sounds like bigotry to me.

Saturday, August 07, 2010

The right's comparison of Michelle Obama and Marie Antoinette is more astute than they realize

So members of the right are using a trip to Spain to again smear First Lady Michelle Obama as uncaring and extravagant.

You'll forgive me for not being impressed but I've seen it before. Remember the rumor spread about her supposedly eating lobster, caviar, and champagne at the Waldorf-Astoria while Obama was preparing for the third Presidential debate in 2008? It didn't happen. Not that it matters, however. After all, why let truth stand in the way of a good rumor.

But there is a new thing in this recent smear. Members of the right, such as Rush Limbaugh, have compared Mrs. Obama to Marie Antoinette, the Queen of France during the French Revolution who was executed for crimes against the state. It's a talking point which several have repeated so don't think the comparison is spontaneous or by accident.

Antoinette's name is byword for uncaring extravagance mostly due to the legend of her comments regarding why the people of France were raising hell. Allegedly when she was told that they have no bread, she remarked "let them eat cake." The story symbolized her supposed nasty attitude regarding her subjects.

And so we have members of the right now using Mrs. Obama's vacation in Spain with her daughter to spread the meme that she is just like Antoinette in the fact that she is doesn't care about people suffering from this awful climate of recession in the United States.

However, I would advise those on the right to tread lightly with this comparison. While it is not known for a fact that Antoinette said the "let them eat cake" comment, it is known that the rumors were used to make her public enemy number one in France. She was not popular for a multitude of reasons, one of which because she was foreign (Austrian). Therefore any negative rumor told about her gained immediate popularity

So subsequently when she, her husband Louis XVI, and the rest of their retinue were arrested, she was subjected to many indiginities by the French mobs hungry for blood including:

nearly made to stare at the head of her mutiliated friend (Maria Teresa Luisa of Savoy, Princess of Lamballe) as crowds paraded it on a stick outside of her window,
being separated from her family and falsely accused of molesting her young son, a charge which she denied so vehemently that it is said she nearly turned the women who were against her to her side,
and even suffering a final indignity of being denied privacy before her execution to take care of the hemmorraging caused by her uterine cancer.

Certainly things are not as extreme for Mrs. Obama as they were for Antoinette the irony here is stark. Members of the right are using a historical symbol of uncaring extravagance to smear the First Lady while forgetting that this same figure became that symbol due to substantiated rumors designed to flame mobs against her.

Perhaps Limbaugh and the rest shouldn't worry about how much Mrs. Obama compares to Marie Antoinette and worry about how they compare to those bloodthirsty French mobs who demanded Antoinette's blood.

Friday, August 06, 2010

Know Your LGBT History - Don't be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood

The Wayans family is the first African-American film family of Hollywood and they got this monicker through their brand of blue humor comedy movies.

Some are funny, others areastupid and in a few of them, the lgbt community have been made fun of. But to be honest, so have a lot of other groups and nationalities.

Now their first movie to hit it big, Don't Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood, (1996) was a takeoff of the annoying plethora of movies which featured black men in danger of being murdered through gang activity and neighborhood violence.

I hate to say it but this movie grows on you and there are some serious laugh out loud scenes.

But I had a discussion with a friend of mine involving two scenes which didn't necessarily talk about the lgbt community per se but is still of some interest to us . . . maybe.

The first scene is a take off of the cookout scene from the movie Boys N Da Hood. In it, the head villain is bragging about how he is not afraid to go back to jail. And his sentiments are echoed by members of the cast, until the last part:

'Porno Pete' LaBarbera's 'Truth Academy' flopping big time and other Friday midday news briefs

Bulletin: Porno Pete’s ‘Truth Academy’ a Poorly Attended Dud - And we should be surprised by this lovely turn of events?

This is not a parody - But mercy, I wish it was. The GOP gay group GOProud is inviting (wait for it) Ann Coulter to speak. Coulter hasn't exactly been verbally nice to the lgbt community. I still am in the Twilight Zone about the flyer in this link calling Ann Coulter the "right wing Judy Garland." That had BETTER be a parody.

Martin Ssempa didn’t like the article on gays in Uganda - Dr. Poo Poo doesn't like it when others tell facts about the lgbt community.

Hospital Responds to Discrimination Trans Flap - So it admits the wrong done to members of our community. Good. Now fix it.

Religious right blame game continues over Prop 8 decision

In two separate interviews, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America continued to place game on the Prop 8 decision - which they lost big time - on other reasons. Never mind their side just couldn't defend its mess.

It was the classic religious right strategy of using talking points to evade the question. I don't think the hosts (Rick Sanchez or Chris Matthews) were having any of it though: