Zing!

The award for The Most Stinging Yet Right On The Nose Rebuke goes to John Marble, spokesman for the National Stonewall Democrats. When he heard President Bush spouting B.S. about what the "ideal parents" would be like -- specifically that, regardless of any other factors, they would be heterosexual -- he replied: "It's too bad we don't have an ideal president."

In Interview, Bush Belittles Gay Parents

President Bush angered advocates for LGBT equal rights by suggesting in a Thursday interview with the New York Times that "studies" show children develop better when raised by heterosexual married couples.

The remarks were part of the president's response to a question about the Florida law that bars gay men and lesbians from adopting children. The law -- one of the harshest anti-gay laws in the country -- was recently upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, and this month the Supreme Court refused to hear the challenge on appeal.

Regarding the Florida law, the president responded, "I don't know this particular case."

He continued by focusing on the "ideal in society" of children being raised by a man and a woman. "And I believe children can receive love from gay couples, but the ideal is -- and studies have shown that the ideal is where a child is raised in a married family with a man and a woman."

"It's too bad we don't have an ideal president," said John Marble, spokesman for the National Stonewall Democrats.

"Any law that bars gay Americans from adopting children is morally wrong," he told the PlanetOut Network. "It's disturbing that we have a president who refuses to denounce such a law."

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation's largest LGBT rights group, objected to the president's lack of knowledge about parenting research.

"Every credible study has shown that sexual orientation has no affect on parenting ability," said HRC Political Director Winnie Stachelberg. "Adoption should be about what's best for the child, not appealing to a political base. The nation's leading child welfare, psychological and children's health organizations agree that gay parents make just as good parents as straight ones."

"With so many children in foster care in need of permanently nurturing homes, it's critically important that we put science before ideology when making family policy decisions," she added.

In a recent study published in the journal Child Development, researchers found that teenagers raised by lesbian couples developed as well as teens raised by opposite-sex couples.

Last December an Arkansas state court overturned a law that banned gay people and anyone living with a gay adult from becoming foster parents. The judge noted in his ruling that being raised by gay or lesbian parents does not increase likelihood of psychological problems, nor does it endanger the health, welfare and safety of a foster child. -- Tom Musbach

Read the entire article here --> http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2005/01/28/1

Cubs, Webelos, Eagles, Felons

It's nice to see the Boy Scouts are indeed paying for the effects of their institutional homophobia. If they can't be bothered to do what's right out of an adherence to ethics, maybe the financial hit they're taking will encourage them to see the light. That is, unless they are allowed to cook the books. Is there a badge for defrauding taxpayers?

FBI Probes Boy Scouts Over 'Phantom' Members In Gay Ban Wake

New York -- The FBI is investigating the Boy Scouts of America amid allegations the organization is inflating its membership to gain funding.

Membership in the BSA has declined since a 2000 Supreme Court ruling that held that the Boys Scouts and its affiliates can prohibit gays. The high court said the constitution gave scouts the right to choose its members. The Scouts also prohibits atheists.

A number of cities banned the scouts from using public facilities, and charitable groups such as some United Way chapters cut off the scouts.

But, in cities where agencies like the United Way continues to fund the BSA it is alleged that troops are being encouraged to list fake names as members to boost enrolment making the group eligible for more money.

Federal agents are probing local councils in at least three states -- Alabama, Georgia, and Texas.

"The BSA national leadership continues not to follow their own oath of honesty," Scott Cozza. of Scouting For All told 365Gay.com.

"This isn't the way to deal with dwindling numbers -- being inclusive is."

In Birmingham, Alabama, boy Scout volunteer Tom Willis said he knew something was wrong when he saw that 20 youngsters on the list for a scouting program all had the same last name: Doe.

The Greater Alabama Council claimed 10,000 new Scouts that year, and tax forms show it had revenue of $6.5 million, including $100,709 in government grants. In a United Way funding application, the group said it served almost 120,000 youths and adults in 2003.

"I would say the numbers are probably inflated 30 to 40 percent in our council," Willis said.

Federal prosecutors have subpoenaed the Boy Scouts' grant applications, audits and tax forms from 1999 through last year from the United Way of Central Alabama.

Nationally, the Boy Scouts claim 1.2 million adult leaders and 3.2 million youth members in six programs, including the Cub Scouts and the Boy Scouts.

Suspicions have led to investigations elsewhere. In Texas, a Scout group removed thousands of names from its membership rolls and a federal grand jury two years ago looked into the matter. No charges were filed.

In Atlanta, independent auditors are investigating claims the metropolitan area's Boy Scouts inflated black membership numbers to 20,000 to gain more donations. A civil rights leader contends there are no more than 500 blacks actively involved. -- Doug Windsor

Read the entire article here --> http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/01/012505scouts.htm

What a Fag

With his penchant for organizing pride events, it seems pretty likely Oklahoma student Kyle Houts will be coming out of the closet as gay eventually. I give him a year.

College Republicans Plan 'Straight Pride Week'

EDMOND, Okla. -- A University of Central Oklahoma student group is planning what it calls "Straight Pride Week" on campus.

Members of the College Republicans said despite objections from some, they have every right to celebrate.
 
"The general gist is that if you are a straight student on campus be proud, be loud, this is your time to shine," said college Republican Kyle Houts.

The group has posted fliers on campus that read, "we're here, we're conservative, we're out."

Members of the Gay Alliance for Tolerance and Equality say they consider the College Republican's celebration an attack on gay and lesbian students.

University officials have given the College Republicans permission to put up their fliers, but say their approval does not constitute an endorsement.

Read the entire article here --> http://www.thekcrachannel.com/education/4139721/detail.html

Ethics & Religion (& Payola)

If the majority of Americans support GW's antiquated ideas about marriage, as so many of the fundies purport, why is it necessary to pay off reporters to write positively about it?

Web Site Reveals Third Columnist Paid By Bush Administration

January 27 -- According to a report on Salon.com, another columnist has been paid to promote Bush administration initiatives. Salon claims that the Department of Health and Human Services paid conservative columnist Mark McManus $10,000 to back the Bush marriage agenda.

One day after President Bush ordered his Cabinet secretaries to stop hiring commentators to help promote administration initiatives, and one day after the second high-profile conservative pundit was found to be on the federal payroll, a third embarrassing hire has emerged. Salon has confirmed that Michael McManus, a marriage advocate whose syndicated column, ³Ethics & Religion,² appears in 50 newspapers, was hired as a subcontractor by the Department of Health and Human Services to foster a Bush-approved marriage initiative. McManus championed the plan in his columns without disclosing to readers he was being paid to help it succeed.

Responding to the latest revelation, Dr. Wade Horn, assistant secretary for children and families at HHS, announced Thursday that HHS would institute a new policy that forbids the agency from hiring any outside expert or consultant who has any working affiliation with the media. ³I needed to draw this bright line,² Horn tells Salon. ³The policy is being implemented and we¹re moving forward.² -- Raw Story

Find this article here --> http://rawstory.com/news/2005/index.php?p=10

We're Not Laughing With You, We're Laughing at You

Tina Fey on Saturday Night Live's "Weekend Update" this weekend:

"Dr. James Dobson, the founder of the conservative Christian organization Focus on the Family, claimed in a speech Tuesday that the cartoon character Spongebob Squarepants is gay and is being used in a pro-homosexual video designed to brainwash kids. And yet he gives that carpet-muncher Dora the Explorer a free ride."

The Bunch of Boobs at "The Nation"

Have you seen the cartoon by Robert Grossman in "The Nation" that's raising the ire of gay activists and allies everywhere? Titled "Babe Lincoln," it depicts the former president in a shapely woman's body, high heels and bustier. Below, trying-hard-to-be-clever copy reads: "Newly discovered daguerreotype lends support to theory in recent book that the sixteenth president was gay. Log Cabin Republicans take note."

I heard about the controversy and really wanted to say it was much ado about nothing -- such as when fundies got up in arms about Spongebob Squarepants because they think that's a positive portrayal of gay people. I wanted to repeat my mantra from this past week: "It's a CARTOON." But when I actually saw this cartoon, I saw the nuance for myself.

If I reason it out long and hard enough (unfortunately), I can at least fathom how the religious extremists can make such an "intellectual" jump regarding Spongebob. Although their creator says his characters are asexual, their names are "Bob" and "Patrick" -- typically masculine names. And they do hold hands as much as, say, Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston used to. So, for people who haven't had much education beyond high school, it might look as though they are sexing it up.

However, this Lincoln cartoon defies rationalization. I just don't get it. The copy does not seem to refer to the illustration at all. How does Lincoln morphing form from one sex to the other make him or qualify him as gay? Even our most cruel and/or historic stereotypes about gay people don't posit that men grow breasts when they "come out." This cartoon is simply asinine -- and sub-standard.

Still, try as hard as I might, I really can't get too overworked about this. It really is just a cartoon, after all. I trust that smart people are able to reject it as inherently poor just as I have. However, I am profoundly disappointed to find such poor work in a typically excellent, usually smart publication such as "The Nation." The editorial staff over there, I would suppose, have enjoyed being a moral conscience, most recently challenging the Bush-backers and religious fundamentalists. I suspect they've lost a good amount of that prerogative now.

The Nation's 'Babe Lincoln Controversy Continues...

If the outrage continues to mount against The Nation 's decision to publish a gay-offensive cartoon by Robert Grossman, it's the magazine's own fault. Among the heartfelt letters of protest to the magazine was one from John Berendt, the former editor of New York Magazine and author of the best-selling Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, who wrote:

"I'm sure I'm not the only person who finds your Abe Lincoln cartoon deeply and painfully insulting. What you mistake for humor is nothing more than virulent and blatant homophobic garbage, utterly unworthy of the 140-year-old magazine entrusted to your care. It's this kind of ignorant stereotyping that fuels and perpetuates hatred, disgust and violence against homosexuals. I'm embarrassed for you."


See the cartoon -- and read more pithy critiques -- on Direland, Doug Ireland's web site. Find it here --> http://direland.typepad.com/direland/2005/01/the_nations_bab.html

Not Your Typical Self-Loathing Sponge

Just a thought...

If it turns out Spongebob really is gay, at least he has more courage than
Mary Cheney or the RNC's Ken Mehlman -- neither of whom, although gay
(Mehlman reportedly; Cheney undoubtedly) would be caught dead holding hands
in public with someone of the same sex.

Crackpots

File under: Couldn't have said it better myself.

[For the record, the "Live Vote" on msn.com, which asks, "Do you think Christian groups are going too far with their charges about 'SpongeBob'?" now stands at 92% Yes, 8% No (7784 responses). Now that's a mandate.]

Fear Not, These CRACKPOTS Can Be Saved

By Turning SpongeBob into Controversy, Groups Losing Credibility

January 21 -- Since I am a compassionate and tolerant person, I hate to generalize about any particular group. Because people are so wonderfully diverse, proudly independent and gloriously unique, any racial, ethnic or religious pigeonholing would be deeply insulting, not to mention inaccurate.

So when I hear the word ³Christian² these days, I don¹t assume good or bad. All sorts of people fall within that category. In my humble opinion, Jesus Christ was an important and influential figure in world history, and I respect that. Because he was a symbol of love and understanding, the term ³What Would Jesus Do?² resonates powerfully. If we all acted as Jesus would, I believe the world would be at peace, and love would wash over all of God¹s children.

But of course, not all Christians are alike. Many, if not most, Christians understand the true message of Jesus. But there is a frightening number of so-called Christians who can be best described as creepy, rigid, arrogant, cruel, know-it-all, pompous, obnoxious and treacherous ‹ better known by the acronym C.R.A.C.K.P.O.T.

These CRACKPOT Christians are nothing new. Throughout history there have been dangerous fools of all persuasions who have perverted religious text for their own selfish purposes. What they like to do, in essence, is force-feed their twisted beliefs on others while hiding behind a respectable label, thereby conning folks into thinking that their mean-spirited behavior is really born out of kindness and generosity.

But the CRACKPOT Christians may have gone too far. Now they¹re messing with SpongeBob.

SpongeBob SquarePants is a hugely popular cartoon character. He lives inside a pineapple underneath the sea. The CRACKPOT Christians, however, would like you to believe that he really lives in a loft in Greenwich Village above an antiques store with his longtime companion.

The CRACKPOT Christians want to warn Americans that a music video being sent to 61,000 U.S. schools in March featuring SpongeBob and promoting a message of tolerance is really a surreptitious attempt to turn straights into gays. Specifically, they¹re upset by a ³tolerance pledge² on the website of the nonprofit We Are Family Foundation, the producer of the video, that asks people to respect the sexual identity of others along with their abilities, beliefs, culture and race.

I¹ve only caught bits and pieces of SpongeBob, but I never noticed any Bette Midler playing in the background. Nor have I seen SpongeBob shopping for china at Williams Sonoma, or French-kissing another male sponge. He does, however, hold hands with his sidekick Patrick and enjoys watching the imaginary TV show, ³The Adventures of Mermaid Man and Barnacle Boy,² so I can see why the CRACKPOT Christians might get their knickers in a knot believing that the moral foundation of our nation¹s schoolchildren is in grave peril because a couple of cartoon characters touched each other.

But why stop at SpongeBob? I¹m sure the CRACKPOT Christians are, at this very moment, gathered somewhere in a secret location, scrutinizing old clips of Tom and Jerry to detect any signs of mutual arousal. I know the CRACKPOT Christians are all over the rumor that whenever Scooby-Doo humps a leg, it¹s always a man¹s leg. And have you noticed that Ed, Edd N Eddy hug each other quite a bit? I guarantee you the CRACKPOT Christians have noticed.

The now-infamous SpongeBob video ‹ or as it is more commonly known now among CRACKPOT Christians, ³The Insidious Perpetuation of the Undersea Gay Agenda By Animated Phylum Porifera² ‹ also features such notable characters as Barney, Winnie the Pooh, Bob the Builder, the Rugrats and others. By their participation, I have to assume they are targets as well. The CRACKPOT Christians will ask, ³Why is it we never see Barney with a girlfriend?² Or ³Is Winnie¹s preoccupation with honey just a smokescreen?² And ³Exactly what type of Œtools¹ is Bob the Builder busy with these days?²

Yet rather than dump on the CRACKPOT Christians for placing their heads in an anatomically impossible position, I feel a little sorry for them. By turning SpongeBob into a controversy, they¹re destroying the miniscule amount of credibility they might have had in the eyes of real Christians and others. These CRACKPOT Christians have succeeded in doing something I thought would be impossible:

They¹re giving Jesus Christ a bad name.

For a lot of people, this might be unforgivable. But I¹m more compassionate than most. I would like to help the CRACKPOT Christians redeem themselves. After all, they¹re human, or at least they started out that way. Guiding these CRACKPOT Christians along the path of righteousness will be a Herculean task, but as the Bible tells us, miracles do happen. How can I preach tolerance and then turn my back on those who need it most?

The first step for the CRACKPOT Christians is to accept that they have a problem. I know programs exist that can reprogram the insufferably preachy and transform them back into normal people like the rest of us. They have to get the message that taking the Good Book, living by the parts they agree with and disregarding the parts they don¹t, is a learned behavior and can be cured. They need to be taught that looking for secret messages where none exist is an urge that should be resisted.

Maybe they could use an instructional video. -- Michael Ventre

aaa --> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6853667/

Tragic Consequences

One had to ponder the wisdom of passing amendments banning gay marriage in states in which gay people weren't aware they had the right to marry anyway. Instead of simply pondering, now we can all see the tragic consequences. Thanks, Religious Right!

New Amendment Used In Defense Against Domestic Violence Charges

Some attorneys are attempting to use Ohio's new gay marriage amendment to defend unmarried clients against domestic violence charges.

The constitutional amendment took effect on December first. It denies legal status to unmarried couples.

In at least two cases last week, the Cuyahoga County public defender's office has asked a judge to dismiss domestic-violence charges against unmarried defendants. The attorneys in the two cases argue that the charges violate the amendment by affording marriage-like legal status to unmarried victims who live with the people accused of attacking them.

Advocates for victims of domestic violence have worried about the effect of the amendment since it passed in November. They fear defense attorneys around the state will copy the tactic used in Cuyahoga County.


Link --> http://www.wcpo.com/news/2005/local/01/15/domestic.html

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Defend the Country

Perhaps you're one of the people who remains passive about why it's important to combat homophobia. If you're not gay, it's easy to think, "Who really is hurt by such prejudice?" Quick answer, as this L.A. Times article illustrates: The entire nation.


Military's Self-Inflicted Wound

As the Pentagon begins its open-ended review of U.S. strategy in Iraq, military leaders face withering attacks for having insufficient boots on the ground, for making National Guard troops into regular soldiers and for involuntary recalls of thousands of former service members who returned to civilian life long ago, most believing they would never again wear a uniform.

But at the same time that the U.S. armed forces are hurting for qualified soldiers, they're also firing qualified soldiers just because they're gay. According to Pentagon statistics, three to four gays and lesbians, on average, have been sacked every day for the last decade.

Worse, many of those discharged include badly needed infantrymen, nuclear power engineers, missile guidance and control operators and nuclear, biological and chemical warfare specialists. Another category in short supply, translators, was highlighted last week with the publication of data I obtained from the Pentagon that reveal that since 1998, 26 Arabic and Farsi language speakers have been fired from the military for homosexuality.

...Imagine that it is possible to go back to Sept. 10, 2001, when intercepted cables warning of the impending terrorist attacks sat unread, in part because of our shortage of capable translators. Now pose a question to those who endorse "don't ask, don't tell" or a flat-out ban on gays in the military: Are your objections to homosexuality so strong that you support the discharge of all those linguists who lost their jobs for being gay, or are you willing to back-burner your concerns to do what is best for the military and the country?

With our armed forces stretched thin, our leaders should consider whether we can afford to place outdated ideas about homosexuality above military effectiveness. Isn't it time to face facts? -- Aaron Belkin


Read the entire column here --> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-belkin19jan19,1,5365048.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

You're Next, Peppermint Patty

I guess I scooped myself yesterday. Regardless, my comments about the gay character on "The Simpsons" applies just as much to this.

Furthermore, why do programs and videos such as this constantly escape my attention? Ah, yes -- because, unlike religious fundamentalists, my attention-span and intelligence have developed past a third-grade level -- and I don't spend my days watching cartoons.


US Right Attacks SpongeBob Video

US conservative groups are up in arms over a music video featuring children's TV heroes such as the cheerful cartoon character SpongeBob SquarePants.

Focus on the Family and other groups say the video -- a remake of the Sister Sledge hit, "We Are Family" -- is a vehicle for pro-gay propaganda.

The video's makers plan to mail it to U.S. schools in the spring to promote tolerance and diversity.

They say the attack is based on a misunderstanding.

The video also features children's favorites like Bob the Builder, along with characters from Sesame Street and The Muppet Show.

But James Dobson, founder of right-wing Christian group Focus on the Family, singled out SpongeBob at a black-tie dinner in Washington in the run-up to President Bush's inauguration, the New York Times said.

SpongeBob -- who appears on the children's cable channel Nickelodeon -- is seen as an icon for adult gay men in the US, apparently because he regularly holds hands with his sidekick Patrick.

His creators deny that he is gay, but he is not the first such character to cause controversy.

In 1999 conservatives claimed handbag-carrying Teletubby Tinky Winky, an import from the UK, was a bad role-model.

'Easy Lesson'

Nile Rodgers, who wrote the song and is founder of the We Are Family Foundation (WAFF) which released the new video, says it is intended to help teach children the values of co-operation and unity.

"We believe that this is the essential first step to loving thy neighbor," he said. "And the fun and exciting format makes it a lesson that's easy for children to learn."

But conservatives say it sees the video as a cunning attempt to promote homosexuality.

They point to the fact that the WAFF is linked to a pledge being promoted by some liberal groups which includes a recognition of tolerance of sexual identity.

"We see the video as an insidious means by which the organization is manipulating and potentially brainwashing kids," Paul Batura, a spokesman for Focus on the Family, told the New York Times.

Mr. Rodgers said the groups may have confused his foundation with an unrelated organization with a similar name that supports gay youth.

WAFF spokesman Mark Barondeso told the newspaper that anyone who thought the video promoted homosexuality "needs to visit their doctor and get their medication increased."


Read the entire article here --> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4190699.stm

Reality Check

I can totally understand if religious zealots would express concerns about this, except for one thing: HE'S AN F-ING CARTOON!


Internet Bettors Believe Devout Christian Ned Flanders Will Be 'Outed' On The Simpsons

January 18 -- Internet wagering on "The Simpsons" is continuing to take center stage at BetUS.com since the company posted odds on the mystery gay character who will be "outed" in an upcoming episode. Rumors have been circulating since last summer on who it might be, but in recent weeks the debate and speculation have turned into big money wagers.

"It appears that many of our customers have an opinion on who the gay character is," says Mike Foreman, spokesperson for BetUS.com. "We've taken more than 900 bets, mostly on Patty and Smithers."

According to Foreman, Marge's sister Patty was the favorite at 4/5 with Smithers trailing at 4/1 to be "outed." Ned Flanders is posted as 15/1, making the devout-Christian character a long shot; however, several large wagers have been placed on his character, which has come as a surprise to the bookmaker.

"We were positive that Patty would be the bettors' favorite, seeing that she has been identified in many online sources as the gay character thanks to a leak at Fox," says Foreman. "Nevertheless, it seems that our customers believe that Patty is just a rumor planted by the network to throw viewers off."

The Simpsons series is known to push the envelope, highlighting hypocrisy and culturally-based ignorance. Critically acclaimed for its fresh and cynical storylines, it is the longest running cartoon featured on prime-time television.

Foreman suggested that BetUS.com's customers are not necessarily betting on who's gay; it's a matter of how far the show is willing to go. The series has sparked controversy more than once, and if the mystery character is Ned Flanders, The Simpsons-gay debate may explode.

"Don't be surprised if the gay character is Flanders," says Foreman. "Can you imagine the controversy Matt Groening and writers will create if Ned comes out of the closet!"

Read the entire article here --> http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050118/mxtu001_1.html

Out, Damn Politician! Out!

For the record, I'm not either.

[Aside: There's something suspect when a man would gladly be known as a womanizer rather than gay. Methinks he doth protest too much.]

'I'm Not Gay' Florida Attorney General Declares

January 18 -- The man fighting to preserve Florida's anti-gay adoption law is battling a widely circulating rumor that he is gay himself.

Attorney General Charlie Crist took the unusual step this week of calling a popular Tampa radio show to deny the rumor as he prepares to announce his candidacy for Governor.

It was clear from the onset that the call to WQYK-FM had been prearranged.  

"Are you a homo?'' asked host Dave McKay.

"No, man. No. I love women. I mean, they're wonderful,'' Crist replied.

Crist and McKay have been friends for some time and the two proceeded on air to discuss the Attorney General's female friends and dating.

"Yeah, well, fortunately I have, uh, I'm very blessed,'' Crist said.

``I've seen you with some great-looking women,'' McKay then said, ``I've heard some women even complain that you're a womanizer.''

The afternoon drive show on the country music station is among the highest rated in the area.

McKay said he called Crist to offer him the chance to "set the record straight," after television coverage of political forum last week in which an audience member asked the Attorney General if he is gay.

Crist replied that he is not.

Crist is 48, was married for seven months in 1979 and is considered handsome and impeccably dressed. The rumors that he was gay had circulated privately in Florida since the beginning of his political career. -- Fidel Ortega


Read the entire article here --> http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/01/011805flaAG.htm

Call the Wedding Planner...

Writer Brett Porter brings up some good points against the proposed amendment regarding gay marriage. My favorite is the one he closes on: "If Americans feel the need amend the Constitution to refuse marriage rights to gays, doesn't that mean we¹re currently able to marry?"

How Blue Are You?

January 14 -- ...Do I support allowing gays to marry? Yes. Have I always felt this way? No. Do I sound like Donald Rumsfeld, now that I'm answering my own questions? Most certainly. The strongest argument that right-wingers and anti-gay bigots have is that if they allow two men or two women to enter into a most perfect union that solidifies their relationship, their own marriages would somehow change. Really? How?

I believe the most prevalent marriage statistic right now is that around half of all marriages end in divorce. What about all those folks who said they would stick around until they died? Should they not be allowed to marry? Old religious law says they shouldn't. Old law also says divorce should not be allowed.

What about the Britney Spears of the world? Don¹t their 80-hour marriages somehow demean the sanctity of marriage? Anti-gay folks believe that if the state sanctions gay marriage, it also condones their behavior. Does that mean anytime someone whose views or actions we don't agree with gets married, we condone their behavior as well?

Granting marriage rights to two caring, committed people does not condone their behavior. For those who enjoy such a small government, they certainly like it to control the morality and private bedroom acts of its citizens. ³We want a smaller government... except if it's to expand the military. And restrict minorities. And give corporate handouts. And...² Seriously, I could go on forever. For such absolutists that say who is going to hell and who is going to heaven, they certainly have a whole lot of wiggle room for their own positions.

Look at Canada. They can do it; why can't we? Their gay marriage law even allows churches the right to refuse to perform same-sex marriages. It even grants any wedding minister who doesn't want to marry two men or two women the right to abstain. Simple as that! It allows the inclusion of all Americans in this great rite of passage, but notes the possibility that not all Americans subscribe to the same mindset.
You see, liberals and progressives understand that. They have open minds. Conservatives don't.

A few last things about this whole amending crap: The Constitution should never restrict freedoms, only grant them. If not, blacks would still be in literal shackles and I would be getting my alcohol from the speakeasy down the street. And if Americans feel the need amend the Constitution to refuse marriage rights to gays, doesn't that mean we¹re currently able to marry?

Think about that one.

Read the entire article here --> http://www.outinchicago.com/arts/liberallyspeaking.asp

It's All about Love

Within this article is the message the fundies and Christian conservatives -- tragically -- just don't get.

Same-Sex Foster Care a Success

       
January 17 -- Like many of the neighboring homes along Massachusetts Avenue in Massapequa, the tan house with the front porch hints at the happy disarray within.

Two pink bicycle helmets lie, upturned, on the steps. Inside, a stack of folding chairs leans against the wall, the vestige of a neighborhood holiday party that drew 60 revelers. A kitchen counter is piled with groceries.

Before his kids arrived, Michael Medaglia prided himself on his spotless home. Now, he throws up his hands and recites recent advice from a neighbor. "If I have to neglect my household to go outside to throw a ball to my son, I'm going to," he said.

>From the cluttered kitchen to his insistence on saying grace before dinner, Medaglia takes pride in his family's average suburban lifestyle. But that "average," Medaglia acknowledges, comes with an asterisk.

Medaglia and his partner, Cliff Candida, are gay. Three of the four children who live in their home are in foster care. They have been raising the fourth -- a 6-year-old daughter whose birth family isn't able to care for her -- since infancy.

"We're an average household," said Medaglia, 41, who owns a local hair salon. "The only difference is that there's just not a woman here."

Candida, 40, who works as a custodian for a local school district, eagerly agrees. "What was instilled into us as children, we are giving to these children," he said.

The existence of same-sex foster parents has come under increased scrutiny following a court ruling in Arkansas last month that struck down that state's ban on gay foster parents. The state plans to appeal.

If that ruling stands, Utah will be the only state that bans same-sex couples from serving as foster parents, according to Paul Cates, of the Lesbian and Gay Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union. New York has no such restriction.

Officials with social service departments in Nassau and Suffolk say they don't keep track of how many same-sex couples participate in their foster programs, though they estimate that they make up only a small percentage of the more than 750 foster families on Long Island.

"That is not something that is asked during the interview process," said Karen Garber, a spokeswoman for Nassau County's Department of Social Services, which referred Medaglia and Candida to a reporter.

But even though the percentage of same-sex foster parents is small, anecdotal evidence suggests they are successful, said Dennis Nowak, spokesman for Suffolk's Department of Social Services. "Many of them understand the difficulties that our children face because of the difficulties they themselves have had," he said.

Medaglia and Candida became foster parents just over a year ago, when they took in two brothers and their sister, who range in age from 7 to 11, while their parents were going through marital troubles. Out of respect for the family's privacy, Medaglia and Clifford asked that the children's names and hometown not be published.

While Medaglia and Candida say they make no secret about their relationship and were upfront from the start with social services, they nevertheless have decided not to show too much affection in front of the kids. "We show affection to the kids," Medaglia said. "We don't show affection to each other."

Both said they were prepared to talk to the kids about their relationship, but the topic had yet to come up.

When the children first arrived, Candida said, he slept on the couch. But after several nights the children approached him, asking, "Why don't you go sleep with Mike? You'll be more comfortable."

The 10-year-old girl said she found the first few weeks a little uncomfortable. "I was kind of like, I don't know what to do here because there's all boys surrounding me," she recalled. "I was like, are they going to walk in on me when I'm in the bathtub or something?"

But once she was assured that the men respected her privacy, she said, she relaxed. Although their stay is only temporary, she and her two brothers call the pair "Daddy Mike" and "Daddy Cliff," and the men say that as long as the siblings are in their care they will treat them as their own.

The children have been equally welcomed by their neighbors and the couple's extended family. "Half the time we've got the block's kids in our house," said Medaglia. "So nobody is like, oh my god, there's a gay couple on the block. Don't send your kids there."

Candida and Medaglia speak with pride when they talk about the progress the kids have made. The 11-year-old, who was in special education when he arrived, is now in mainstream classes and has a B-plus average. The 7-year-old brother, who was shy and reserved, has come out of his shell, they said.

While none of the children say they mind that their foster parents are both men, what it actually means to be gay still seems ambiguous to them.

"People in my class say that you guys are gay," the 10-year-old told them last week, during a conversation with the couple, her siblings and a reporter. "And I told them that they're not. They're just two men together, but they're just best friends."

"Well, what if we were?" Candida asked her.

"Would it change anything the way you feel?" Medaglia asked.

"No, because you guys are both my foster parents," she answered, almost in a whisper. Medaglia said later that he planned to have a talk with her to explain.

The two men say they are beginning to prepare the children -- and themselves -- for their eventual return to their birth parents, now only a few months away. Medaglia says he has a good relationship with the children's father, who knows that the men are gay.

Candida has kept his distance from the birth parents. "I'm trying to deal with the fact that they're going to go back," he said. "When they're part of your life and you're basically living, eating and breathing with them every day and then all of a sudden they're not going to be in your house, it's a very difficult emotion."

Candida and Medaglia say they plan to visit the children regularly, taking them on picnics and doing some baby-sitting when the family needs it. They say there's no doubt they'll be foster parents again, and also hope to adopt children through the foster program.

"Just knowing what you can do for a child, it warms your heart," Medaglia said.

What seems to matter most to the children, the men say, is that they feel loved and supported. They shared a note the 10-year-old brought home from school around Thanksgiving.

In a child's careful cursive, the message reads: "I am very thankful for my mommy and my daddy and daddy Mike and daddy Cliff because they love me and never let anything bad happen to me." -- Katie Thomas, Newsday Staff Writer

Link --> http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-lifost0117,0,5741119,print.story?coll=ny-li-big-pix

Happy Martin Luther King, Jr. Day

I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant.

-- Martin Luther King, Jr.
Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech

Breakfast at the White House

I can't say I followed the Howler Monkey's (Scott Sherman) article this time around. He talks about the 23 percent of gays and lesbians who reportedly voted for George W. Bush in November. I'm not certain what he makes of such a statistic, and I think it's because he doesn't quite know what to conclude, either. But he takes the opportunity to issue a low-blow to the Log Cabin Republicans for refusing to support the president after Bush came out in favor of an amendment to thwart gay marriage.

Apparently, Sherman thinks a fair-weather friend is still a friend, indeed. Personally, I think the Log Cabins' action prior to the election was the soundest thing they've done to date.

Sherman says: "(The LCR) talked big, and now the stats are not proving out their threats. One thing I¹ve learned from 'The West Wing' is that once you piss in the president¹s fruit loops you¹re generally not invited back to breakfast again."

Seriously, how many gay people honestly feel George Bush is setting a place for us at the table in the first place?

Regardless, I think Sherman provides good advice in this passage:

23%

I can base my opinions only on my thoughts and the gay Republicans I¹ve managed to flush out of the closet through this column and here in Vegas. While I see gay rights and marriage as important, it was not the important issue during this election. That¹s where I feel the DNC made its miscalculation. Gay activists scream from the rooftops that we¹re just like everyone else except we love a same-sex partner. Perhaps these activists are correct, but not in the way that they would like you to think. Every gay and lesbian individual works, pays taxes, worries about retirement, and a host of other issues that every other American worries about. Do these issues overshadow gay issues? To start thinking about that now rather than in 2008 would behoove the (Democratic National Committee).

Read the entire piece here --> http://www.outinchicago.com/arts/conservativelyspeaking.asp

Call the Wedding Planner...

Writer Brett Porter brings up some good points against the proposed amendment regarding gay marriage. My favorite is the one he closes on: "If Americans feel the need amend the Constitution to refuse marriage rights to gays, doesn't that mean we¹re currently able to marry?"

How Blue Are You?

January 14 -- ...Do I support allowing gays to marry? Yes. Have I always felt this way? No. Do I sound like Donald Rumsfeld, now that I'm answering my own questions? Most certainly. The strongest argument that right-wingers and anti-gay bigots have is that if they allow two men or two women to enter into a most perfect union that solidifies their relationship, their own marriages would somehow change. Really? How?

I believe the most prevalent marriage statistic right now is that around half of all marriages end in divorce. What about all those folks who said they would stick around until they died? Should they not be allowed to marry? Old religious law says they shouldn't. Old law also says divorce should not be allowed.

What about the Britney Spears of the world? Don¹t their 80-hour marriages somehow demean the sanctity of marriage? Anti-gay folks believe that if the state sanctions gay marriage, it also condones their behavior. Does that mean anytime someone whose views or actions we don't agree with gets married, we condone their behavior as well?

Granting marriage rights to two caring, committed people does not condone their behavior. For those who enjoy such a small government, they certainly like it to control the morality and private bedroom acts of its citizens. ³We want a smaller government... except if it's to expand the military. And restrict minorities. And give corporate handouts. And...² Seriously, I could go on forever. For such absolutists that say who is going to hell and who is going to heaven, they certainly have a whole lot of wiggle room for their own positions.

Look at Canada. They can do it; why can't we? Their gay marriage law even allows churches the right to refuse to perform same-sex marriages. It even grants any wedding minister who doesn't want to marry two men or two women the right to abstain. Simple as that! It allows the inclusion of all Americans in this great rite of passage, but notes the possibility that not all Americans subscribe to the same mindset.
You see, liberals and progressives understand that. They have open minds. Conservatives don't.

A few last things about this whole amending crap: The Constitution should never restrict freedoms, only grant them. If not, blacks would still be in literal shackles and I would be getting my alcohol from the speakeasy down the street. And if Americans feel the need amend the Constitution to refuse marriage rights to gays, doesn't that mean we¹re currently able to marry?

Think about that one.

Read the entire article here --> http://www.outinchicago.com/arts/liberallyspeaking.asp

Breakfast at the White House

I can't say I followed the Howler Monkey's (Scott Sherman) article this time around. He talks about the 23 percent of gays and lesbians who reportedly voted for George W. Bush in November. I'm not certain what he makes of such a statistic, and I think it's because he doesn't quite know what to conclude, either. But he takes the opportunity to issue a low-blow to the Log Cabin Republicans for refusing to support the president after Bush came out in favor of an amendment to thwart gay marriage.

Apparently, Sherman thinks a fair-weather friend is still a friend, indeed. Personally, I think the Log Cabins' action prior to the election was the soundest thing they've done to date.

Sherman says: "(The LCR) talked big, and now the stats are not proving out their threats. One thing I¹ve learned from 'The West Wing' is that once you piss in the president¹s fruit loops you¹re generally not invited back to breakfast again."

Seriously, how many gay people honestly feel George Bush is setting a place for us at the table in the first place?

Regardless, I think Sherman provides good advice in this passage:

23%

I can base my opinions only on my thoughts and the gay Republicans I¹ve managed to flush out of the closet through this column and here in Vegas. While I see gay rights and marriage as important, it was not the important issue during this election. That¹s where I feel the DNC made its miscalculation. Gay activists scream from the rooftops that we¹re just like everyone else except we love a same-sex partner. Perhaps these activists are correct, but not in the way that they would like you to think. Every gay and lesbian individual works, pays taxes, worries about retirement, and a host of other issues that every other American worries about. Do these issues overshadow gay issues? To start thinking about that now rather than in 2008 would behoove the (Democratic National Committee).

Read the entire piece here --> http://www.outinchicago.com/arts/conservativelyspeaking.asp

Call the Wedding Planner...

Writer Brett Porter brings up some good points against the proposed amendment regarding gay marriage. My favorite is the one he closes on: "If Americans feel the need amend the Constitution to refuse marriage rights to gays, doesn't that mean we¹re currently able to marry?"

How Blue Are You?

January 14 -- ...Do I support allowing gays to marry? Yes. Have I always felt this way? No. Do I sound like Donald Rumsfeld, now that I'm answering my own questions? Most certainly. The strongest argument that right-wingers and anti-gay bigots have is that if they allow two men or two women to enter into a most perfect union that solidifies their relationship, their own marriages would somehow change. Really? How?

I believe the most prevalent marriage statistic right now is that around half of all marriages end in divorce. What about all those folks who said they would stick around until they died? Should they not be allowed to marry? Old religious law says they shouldn't. Old law also says divorce should not be allowed.

What about the Britney Spears of the world? Don¹t their 80-hour marriages somehow demean the sanctity of marriage? Anti-gay folks believe that if the state sanctions gay marriage, it also condones their behavior. Does that mean anytime someone whose views or actions we don't agree with gets married, we condone their behavior as well?

Granting marriage rights to two caring, committed people does not condone their behavior. For those who enjoy such a small government, they certainly like it to control the morality and private bedroom acts of its citizens. ³We want a smaller government... except if it's to expand the military. And restrict minorities. And give corporate handouts. And...² Seriously, I could go on forever. For such absolutists that say who is going to hell and who is going to heaven, they certainly have a whole lot of wiggle room for their own positions.

Look at Canada. They can do it; why can't we? Their gay marriage law even allows churches the right to refuse to perform same-sex marriages. It even grants any wedding minister who doesn't want to marry two men or two women the right to abstain. Simple as that! It allows the inclusion of all Americans in this great rite of passage, but notes the possibility that not all Americans subscribe to the same mindset.
You see, liberals and progressives understand that. They have open minds. Conservatives don't.

A few last things about this whole amending crap: The Constitution should never restrict freedoms, only grant them. If not, blacks would still be in literal shackles and I would be getting my alcohol from the speakeasy down the street. And if Americans feel the need amend the Constitution to refuse marriage rights to gays, doesn't that mean we¹re currently able to marry?

Think about that one.

Read the entire article here --> http://www.outinchicago.com/arts/liberallyspeaking.asp

It's All about Love

Within this article is the message the fundies and Christian conservatives -- tragically -- just don't get.

Same-Sex Foster Care a Success

       
January 17 -- Like many of the neighboring homes along Massachusetts Avenue in Massapequa, the tan house with the front porch hints at the happy disarray within.

Two pink bicycle helmets lie, upturned, on the steps. Inside, a stack of folding chairs leans against the wall, the vestige of a neighborhood holiday party that drew 60 revelers. A kitchen counter is piled with groceries.

Before his kids arrived, Michael Medaglia prided himself on his spotless home. Now, he throws up his hands and recites recent advice from a neighbor. "If I have to neglect my household to go outside to throw a ball to my son, I'm going to," he said.

>From the cluttered kitchen to his insistence on saying grace before dinner, Medaglia takes pride in his family's average suburban lifestyle. But that "average," Medaglia acknowledges, comes with an asterisk.

Medaglia and his partner, Cliff Candida, are gay. Three of the four children who live in their home are in foster care. They have been raising the fourth -- a 6-year-old daughter whose birth family isn't able to care for her -- since infancy.

"We're an average household," said Medaglia, 41, who owns a local hair salon. "The only difference is that there's just not a woman here."

Candida, 40, who works as a custodian for a local school district, eagerly agrees. "What was instilled into us as children, we are giving to these children," he said.

The existence of same-sex foster parents has come under increased scrutiny following a court ruling in Arkansas last month that struck down that state's ban on gay foster parents. The state plans to appeal.

If that ruling stands, Utah will be the only state that bans same-sex couples from serving as foster parents, according to Paul Cates, of the Lesbian and Gay Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union. New York has no such restriction.

Officials with social service departments in Nassau and Suffolk say they don't keep track of how many same-sex couples participate in their foster programs, though they estimate that they make up only a small percentage of the more than 750 foster families on Long Island.

"That is not something that is asked during the interview process," said Karen Garber, a spokeswoman for Nassau County's Department of Social Services, which referred Medaglia and Candida to a reporter.

But even though the percentage of same-sex foster parents is small, anecdotal evidence suggests they are successful, said Dennis Nowak, spokesman for Suffolk's Department of Social Services. "Many of them understand the difficulties that our children face because of the difficulties they themselves have had," he said.

Medaglia and Candida became foster parents just over a year ago, when they took in two brothers and their sister, who range in age from 7 to 11, while their parents were going through marital troubles. Out of respect for the family's privacy, Medaglia and Clifford asked that the children's names and hometown not be published.

While Medaglia and Candida say they make no secret about their relationship and were upfront from the start with social services, they nevertheless have decided not to show too much affection in front of the kids. "We show affection to the kids," Medaglia said. "We don't show affection to each other."

Both said they were prepared to talk to the kids about their relationship, but the topic had yet to come up.

When the children first arrived, Candida said, he slept on the couch. But after several nights the children approached him, asking, "Why don't you go sleep with Mike? You'll be more comfortable."

The 10-year-old girl said she found the first few weeks a little uncomfortable. "I was kind of like, I don't know what to do here because there's all boys surrounding me," she recalled. "I was like, are they going to walk in on me when I'm in the bathtub or something?"

But once she was assured that the men respected her privacy, she said, she relaxed. Although their stay is only temporary, she and her two brothers call the pair "Daddy Mike" and "Daddy Cliff," and the men say that as long as the siblings are in their care they will treat them as their own.

The children have been equally welcomed by their neighbors and the couple's extended family. "Half the time we've got the block's kids in our house," said Medaglia. "So nobody is like, oh my god, there's a gay couple on the block. Don't send your kids there."

Candida and Medaglia speak with pride when they talk about the progress the kids have made. The 11-year-old, who was in special education when he arrived, is now in mainstream classes and has a B-plus average. The 7-year-old brother, who was shy and reserved, has come out of his shell, they said.

While none of the children say they mind that their foster parents are both men, what it actually means to be gay still seems ambiguous to them.

"People in my class say that you guys are gay," the 10-year-old told them last week, during a conversation with the couple, her siblings and a reporter. "And I told them that they're not. They're just two men together, but they're just best friends."

"Well, what if we were?" Candida asked her.

"Would it change anything the way you feel?" Medaglia asked.

"No, because you guys are both my foster parents," she answered, almost in a whisper. Medaglia said later that he planned to have a talk with her to explain.

The two men say they are beginning to prepare the children -- and themselves -- for their eventual return to their birth parents, now only a few months away. Medaglia says he has a good relationship with the children's father, who knows that the men are gay.

Candida has kept his distance from the birth parents. "I'm trying to deal with the fact that they're going to go back," he said. "When they're part of your life and you're basically living, eating and breathing with them every day and then all of a sudden they're not going to be in your house, it's a very difficult emotion."

Candida and Medaglia say they plan to visit the children regularly, taking them on picnics and doing some baby-sitting when the family needs it. They say there's no doubt they'll be foster parents again, and also hope to adopt children through the foster program.

"Just knowing what you can do for a child, it warms your heart," Medaglia said.

What seems to matter most to the children, the men say, is that they feel loved and supported. They shared a note the 10-year-old brought home from school around Thanksgiving.

In a child's careful cursive, the message reads: "I am very thankful for my mommy and my daddy and daddy Mike and daddy Cliff because they love me and never let anything bad happen to me." -- Katie Thomas, Newsday Staff Writer

Link --> http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-lifost0117,0,5741119,print.story?coll=ny-li-big-pix

How Do You Say, "Ignorant Homophobes"?

No spin on this one. These words are the Associated Press writer's, not mine: "The military is putting its anti-gay stance ahead of national security."
 Â     

Military Has Discharged 26 Gay Linguists

January 14 -- The number of Arabic linguists discharged from the military for violating its "don't ask, don't tell" policy is higher than previously reported, according to records obtained by a research group.

The group contends the records show the military ‹ at a time when it and U.S. intelligence agencies don't have enough Arabic speakers ‹ is putting its anti-gay stance ahead of national security.

Between 1998 and 2004, the military discharged 20 Arabic and six Farsi speakers, according to Department of Defense data obtained by the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military under a Freedom of Information Act request.

The military previously confirmed that seven translators who specialized in Arabic had been discharged between 1998 and 2003 because they were gay. The military did not break down the discharges by year, but said some, but not all, of the additional 13 discharges of Arabic speakers occurred in 2004.

Aaron Belkin, the center's director, said he wants the public to see the real costs of "don't ask, don't tell."

"We had a language problem after 9/11 and we still have a language problem," Belkin said Wednesday.

The military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy allows gays and lesbians to serve in the military as long as they keep their sexual orientation private and do not engage in homosexual acts.

"The military is placing homophobia well ahead of national security," said Steve Ralls, spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, a nonprofit group that advocates for the rights of gay military members. "It's rather appalling that in the weeks leading up to 9/11 messages were coming in, waiting to be translated ... and at the same time they were firing people who could've done that job."

But others, like Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness, a conservative advocacy group that opposes gays serving in the military, said the discharged linguists never should have been accepted at the elite Defense Language Institute in Monterey in the first place.

"Resources unfortunately were used to train young people who were not eligible to be in the military," she said.

In the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, 543 Arabic linguists and 166 Farsi linguists graduated from their 63-week courses, according to a DLI spokesman. That was up from 377 and 139, respectively, in the previous year.

Experts have identified the shortage of Arabic linguists as contributing to the government's failure to thwart the Sept. 11 attacks. The independent Sept. 11 commission made similar conclusions.

Ian Finkenbinder, an Army Arabic linguist who graduated from the Defense Language Institute in 2002, was discharged from the military last month after announcing to his superiors he's gay. Finkenbinder, who said his close friends in the Army already knew he was gay, served eight months in Iraq and was about to return for a second tour when he made the revelation official.

"I looked at myself and said, `Are you willing to go to war with an institution that won't recognize that you have the right to live as you want to,'" said Finkenbinder, 22, who now lives in Baltimore. "It just got to be tiresome to deal with that ‹ to constantly have such a significant part of your life under scrutiny."

The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network last month sued the government on behalf of 12 other gay former military members seeking reinstatement. They argue that "don't ask, don't tell" violates their constitutional rights. -- Kim Curtis, Associated Press Writer

Read the entire article here --> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=519&e=6&u=/ap/20050114/ap_on_re_us/gays_military_linguists

Georgia's Gay Militia

Wow. According to a state representative in Georgia, asking to be treated the same as other folks is "militant." I wonder if the golf club in question will be able to invoke the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, then.

Considering the number of out lesbian professional golfers, this club's position isn't only hateful. It's bad business.

Gay Rights Row Over U.S. Golf Club

A Georgia golf club that is resisting an order to grant spousal benefits to members in same-sex partnerships has sparked a battle over gay rights.

The Atlanta club's defiant stand has angered gay activists and prompted threats of criminal prosecution and fines from city officials.

Now a bill has been submitted to the local legislature which would repeal the city's anti-discrimination law.

Atlanta is home to the largest gay community in the American South.

Republican Representative Earl Ehrhart, who sponsored the proposed bill, says it would forbid the state or any local government from penalising private groups for engaging in what he describes as lawful expression.

"What these militant homosexuals are seeking is special rights, not equal rights," Mr Ehrhart wrote in a recent editorial in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the city's largest newspaper.

Fine Threat

The 1,100-member Druid Hills Golf Club has ignored a ruling that it violates city law by not giving spousal benefits to the partners of gay members.

Atlanta mayor Shirley Franklin has threatened to impose a $500-a-day fine on the golf club.

The ruling came after two gay members of the golf club, Lee Kyser and Randy New, filed a complaint in July 2003.

Ms. Kyser and Mr. New asked the club to give their partners the same benefits that spouses are given - the right to attend alone and to bring guests, and the right to assume the membership should they die.

The club does not extend these benefits to unmarried heterosexual couples.

Druid Hills responded to the ruling filing a lawsuit challenging the city's anti-discrimination law.

The club's lawyer, Emmet Bondurant, says the couples knew the club's rules when they joined.

"The club's really fundamental position is that it simply doesn't discriminate based on sexual preference," he said.

"It knowingly admits people who are gay, and treats unmarried heterosexual and homosexual couples in precisely the same manner."

The row comes after Georgia and 10 other states passed constitutional amendments banning gay marriage or same-sex unions.

Read the entire article here --> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4171909.stm

A "Blow" to the Troops, All Right

Yes -- this is shocking, morally reprehensible, yadda, yadda, yadda. All I want to know is: What's the name of this agent, and how can I get some?

Pentagon Reveals Rejected Chemical Weapons

The Pentagon considered developing a host of non-lethal chemical weapons that would disrupt discipline and morale among enemy troops, newly declassified documents reveal.

Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops would cause a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow to morale, the proposal says.

Other ideas included chemical weapons that attract swarms of enraged wasps or angry rats to troop positions, making them uninhabitable. Another was to develop a chemical that caused "severe and lasting halitosis", making it easy to identify guerrillas trying to blend in with civilians. There was also the idea of making troops' skin unbearably sensitive to sunlight.

The proposals, from the US Air Force Wright Laboratory in Dayton, Ohio, date from 1994. The lab sought Pentagon funding for research into what it called "harassing, annoying and 'bad guy'-identifying chemicals". The plans have been posted online by the Sunshine Project, an organisation that exposes research into chemical and biological weapons.

Spokesman Edward Hammond says it was not known if the proposed $7.5 million, six-year research plan was ever pursued.

Link: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18524823.800&print=true

Not In My Backyard

For one Illinois senator, the fear of gay marriage is enough to thwart equal protection for gay people in all areas. I'm glad he went on record, though. Maybe now people will clearly see: The individuals who come out swinging against gay folks' prerogative to get married are the same people who don't want them to have any rights whatsoever. Sorry, buddy -- in America (and now, officially, in Illinois), it doesn't work that way.

Gay Rights Bill Advances

January 11 -- For the first time ever, the Illinois Senate approved a controversial measure Monday that would ban discrimination against gays and lesbians in matters of housing and employment, clearing a long-standing hurdle to passage and inspiring one key sponsor to proclaim a victory for "fundamental freedom."

Senators passed the bill 30-27, with one member voting present.

The measure now heads to the House, where sponsors vowed to pass it. The lower chamber pushed the same measure through committee Monday and now has it queued up for a floor vote on Tuesday.

If signed into law, the measure will add "sexual orientation" to the list of reasons for which people cannot discriminate in housing, lending and employment. The measure specifically states that the law would not require any employer, lender, real estate agent or landlord to give preferential treatment or special rights to people based on their sexual orientation.

"It sends a message that we in the Illinois Senate and Illinois believe that everybody has the right to equal protection," an enthusiastic Sen. Carol Ronen (D-Chicago), the sponsor of the measure, said after the vote. "We're a state that cares about that. We're a state that values certain fundamental truths, and a certain fundamental freedom."

Critics of the proposal claim the activists' ultimate goal is not just to end discrimination but to shift social norms about acceptable behavior. Some conservative religious leaders say if the gay rights bill passes, a push for gay marriage will be next.

Sen. Peter Roskam (R-Wheaton) warned his colleagues that they were opening that door.

"To vote yes, and to say, `Oh listen, I just voted for this very narrow thing.' Oh, no. Oh, no," he said. "We're voting on a much, much, much bigger agenda than that."

Gay activists expect the House to approve the measure. Rep. Larry McKeon (D-Chicago), the only openly gay member of the legislature, said he thinks he has more than the minimum 60 votes needed to pass the measure.

Four years ago, when the proposal was last before the House, no fewer than 63 lawmakers committed to vote for it, he said.

Whether they have a strong opinion about homosexual behavior or not, McKeon said, many House lawmakers think the measure is simply a matter of fairness.

"I know firsthand the extent of discrimination in employment and housing," McKeon said. "It's usually those with the least amount of resources that are impacted. The whole issue is quite real. ... I will sleep very comfortably when I know that this last bastion of sanctioned discrimination has been wiped out."

In trying to persuade other senators to vote in favor of the measure, Sen. John Cullerton (D-Chicago) took issue with social conservatives who say it would be supportive of the homosexual lifestyle.

Cullerton, a Roman Catholic, quoted a priest who made what he found to be a convincing point: The real immorality, he said, is in discrimination.

"[What if] somebody says, `You know what? We just don't rent to people like you.'" Cullerton said. "It's wrong." -- By Ray Long and Christi Parsons, Tribune staff reporters. Tribune staff reporter Erika Slife contributed


Read the entire article here --> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0501110468jan11,1,217013.story?coll=chi-news-hed

Contrived Charity

I thought compassion, sympathy and charity were Christian values. How come they come immediately natural to gay folks -- but have to be forced from "Christian" groups?

Human Rights Campaign Gives $100,000 to Tsunami Relief

A humanitarian service agency that seeks charitable contributions from the gay community announced on Wednesday it had received a gift of $100,000 from the Human Rights Campaign Foundation to support tsunami relief efforts in Southeast Asia. "Our work puts our community's highest beliefs and values into action," said Jeffrey Cotter, president of the Rainbow World Fund. "HRC's contribution reaffirms the GLBT community's commitment to service and charity and will inspire thousands of others to give what they can to support relief efforts."

"The GLBT community joins with the rest of the world in demonstrating compassion for the tsunami victims in Southeast Asia," said Bruce Bastian, a member of HRC's board of directors and lead sponsor of HRC's gift. "Americans are coming together like never before to help our friends across the globe." Steven Fisher, communications director for HRC, told Advocate.com that no general or program funds were used for the donation. "This money was donated specifically for the tsunami relief in the past week," he said.

The sponsored contribution, along with individual gifts, will go directly to tsunami relief efforts across Southeast Asia to provide food, water, shelter, medical supplies, and other critical provisions through CARE, Cotter said. "The tsunami aid drive is an important way for GLBT Americans and our friends and allies to help," added Cotter.

Link --> http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp?ID=14740&sd=01/07/05

Religious Right Joins the Tsunami Relief Effort, 16 Days Late
I guess the homos donating $100k to tsunami relief finally forced the religious right to actually acknowledge the massive death and destruction that occured in Asia well over 2 weeks ago.

>From Focus on the Family's press release today:

On today's national "Focus on the Family" broadcast, Focus founder and chairman Dr. James Dobson announced the organization's plans to join the tsunami effort. Capitalizing on its unique ability to understand and meet the needs of families worldwide, Focus hopes to raise one million dollars for relief efforts and will provide extensive grief, counseling and family resources for survivors.

Message: We care (about bad publicity).

Link --> http://americablog.blogspot.com/archives/2005_01_01_americablog_archive.html#110546942535074463

"This Harms Christianity"

Free speech is one thing, but when you spout incredible and incendiary hate speech you might want to make sure those you claim as inspiration are behind you.

Pastor Disowns U.S. Hate Site

...Åke Green, a pastor in Borgholm on Öland, Sweden, is currently appealing a ruling by a court in Kalmar, which sentenced him to one month in prison under Swedish hate crimes legislation. Green had been prosecuted for using a number of anti-gay Bible passages in a sermon.

The court¹s ruling has made some evangelical Christians view Green as a martyr -- and Sweden as a pariah land. The web site godhatessweden.com, owned by the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas (Editor's note: surprise, surprise), intersperses praise for Åke Green with comments on the tsunami such as ³we pray for all 20,000 Swedes in the tsunami¹s wake to be declared dead.²

The Westboro Baptist Church set up its anti-Sweden site following Green¹s conviction last June. The site calls Sweden ³perverted, irreversibly cursed of God and damned.²

Green has told of his distress that the web site is using his name in this way:

³I think it is appalling that people say things like that,² he said. ³It is extremely unpleasant.²

Green said that he has contacted newspapers in the United States to distance himself from the comments on the web site. He added that he is surprised that authorities in the United States have not intervened. ³This harms Christianity,² he said. -- James Savage

Read the entire article here --> http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=818&date=20050107

Why Can't I Own Canadians?

You've probably all gotten this in your e-mail in one form or another. I figured it should be on this site for reference, too -- and I personally love the take of addressing it to Saint George.

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. As you said, "In the eyes of God, marriage is between a man a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination -- end of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's laws and how to follow them:

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that a man is allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness -- Leviticus 15:19-24. The problem is, most women take offense when they're asked if they're unclean.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord -- Leviticus 1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states that he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Leviticus 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there degrees of abomination?

7. Leviticus 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Leviticus 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Leviticus 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Leviticus 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton-polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them (Leviticus 24:10-16). Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, as we do with people who sleep with their in-laws (Leviticus 20:14)?

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your humble follower

Verboten

File this under "Ironic."

The Secret Service announced today that the public display of crosses is prohibited at the Presidential Inauguration Parade on January 20.

However, shirts that say, "We elected this man President and all we got was this lousy parade" are still kosher.

What does the Bible say about betrayal again?....

Link: http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_6292.shtml

No, She Diiiiiiidn't

I'm really becoming a big fan of Mike Rogers at BlogActive.com. You can read more about him in this month's Genre Magazine. He scooped me on this story -- and I completely covet the headline he came up with!

Oops...She Did It Again!

Psycho-Preacher Fred Phelps, also know as the Wacko from Westboro, is at it again.

Apparently, Fred felt it was not enough to praise the tsunami for killing 2,000 Swedes, so the obviously deranged nutcase decided to show love, tsunami style, by thanking God for "3,000 dead Americans."

At least one thing is true: Fred is consistent.

Find the blogActive article here --> http://www.blogactive.com/2005/01/oopsshe-did-it-again.html
See the latest Westboro Baptist Church (if you must) here --> http://rawstory.rawprint.com/1204/westboro_tsunami_statement_104.php