That's One Way of Doing It

Ian Welsh at Firedoglake, ladies and gentlemen:

At one point I even had a huge fight with my father over the issue of gay marriage and didn’t speak to him for almost 6 months as a result. (He wound up thinking I must be gay since I’m not married and if I weren’t how could I care so much about the issue? I let him think so, since it forced him to rethink his beliefs about gays. My mother, needless to say, did not approve of my methods, but my Dad is now pro gay marriage.)

You know, it’s almost too bad my parents don’t have a problem with equal rights for same-sex couples, because now I so want to emulate Ian!

What’s hiding in the humor of that story is the fact that it’s harder to hate when you know someone who’s gay, or black, or an atheist, or any other disparaged group. It’s tough to condemn someone you love. It’s hard to champion taking their rights away.

Good. It should be.

If you have any friends or family members who are planning to vote away a same-sex couple’s rights this Tuesday, now might be a great time to pull an Ian Welsh.

That's One Way of Doing It
{advertisement}

Crazy Christian Ladies Can Run, but They Can't Hide

Heh.

Never underestimate the power of the Woozle to expose to daylight what you’d rather hide. So much for trying to delete a shameful post. This will remain long after the cached page is gone.

Janine from Farmington, who used to be Raani from Ft. Worth, tried to password-protect her blog to hide it from the prying eyes of us sodomite-loving godless sorts, but funny thing about Google cache – it allows you to view the page in all its wretched glory. The latest offering is a rather spectacularly hateful guest post by Pastor Anderson, in which he manages to misinterpret Genesis to a remarkable degree:

2. How Do the Sodomites Recruit Others to their Lifestyle?

Every Sodomite in the Bible is a rapist or molester. The Bible tells three sickening stories about Sodomites and every one of the three stories involves someone being violated against their will.


Example #1

And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father’s nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. – Genesis 9:20-24


The first Sodomite mentioned in the Bible is Ham. Ham took advantage of his own father Noah while he was drunk. He didn’t just see his father’s nakedness; the Bible says that Noah knew what his younger son had done unto him. The first example of homosexuality in the Bible involves a person being violated against his will.

A normal person (i.e., not a frothing fundie with a sick as fuck mind) reads the following sequence of events: Ham sees Noah drunk and naked, ran out and blabbed to his brothers, said brothers squeamishly backed into the tent and covered Daddy up without looking, and Noah got pissed because he found out Ham had ratted him out for being a naked drunken slob.

Pastor Anderson, however, somehow pictures a rape scene. I’d hate to see his Rorschach test results.

After much more picking apart the Bible for filthy bits in order to prove his fucktarded theories, the Pastor solemnly calls for intolerance:

It is time that preachers and Baptist people take a stand against the Sodomite freaks and turn off the television that tries to shove their perversion down our throat. God help a generation of Christians that does not think that homosexuality is “that bad.” We need a revival of old-fashioned righteous indignation and hatred for sin and perverts.

The next time someone tries to ban pornography while extolling the Bible and its virtues, at least I have a list of salacious verses to point them to.

This is the face of fundamentalist Christian love. These are the sorts of people extorting companies that support No on Prop 8. These are the types who cheer on abortion clinic bombers. This is Sarah Palin’s fan club.

And they want to run this country.

Expose them. Ridicule them. Drive them back to the fringe where they belong.

Crazy Christian Ladies Can Run, but They Can't Hide

Lies, Bigotry – and Extortion

The religious right has gotten so drunk on their own supposed power that they feel comfortable resorting to blatant blackmail to get their way:

Apparently all’s fair when you’re trying to deny folks their rights.

The letter from Yes on 8 came by certified mail, demanding at least $10,000. Jim Abbot knows exactly why he’s being targeted – his business gave $10,000 to a group called Equality California, which supports No on Prop 9..

..The letter says if Jim doesn’t give an equal donation to Yes on 8, the name of his company will be published. It reads in part, “It is only fair for Proposition 8 supporters to know which companies and organizations oppose traditional marriage.

It’s fucking official.

The anti-gay frothers trying to force an anti-gay marriage amendment onto California’s constitution proudly own this thing. The .pdf of the extortion letter they sent is here. It’s on their letterhead, with their signatures. Some key paragraphs from the letter sent to Abbot & Associates:

We respectfully request that Abbot & Associates withdraw its support of Equity California. Make a donation of a like amount to ProtectMarriage.com which will help us correct this error and restore Traditional Marriage. A donation form is enclosed. We will be most grateful and will advertise on our website Abbot & Associates’ generous contribution.

Were you to elect not to donate comparably, it would be a clear indication that you are in opposition to traditional marriage. You would leave us no other reasonable assumption. The names of any companies and organizations that choose not to donate in like manner to ProtectMarriage.com but have given to Equality California will be published. It is only fair for Proposition 8 supporters to know which companies and organizations support traditional marriage.

We will contact you shortly to discuss your contribution sincerely hoping to receive your positive response.

That’s not only extortion. It’s language the Mafia would be proud of.

Who are the wanna-be Mafiosi?

Ron Prentice
Yes on Prop 8,
Campaign Chairman

Edward Dolejsi
Executive Director, California Catholic Conference

Mark A. Jansson
Executive Committee Member

Andrew Pugno
General Counsel

Only their leading lights. They’re not even using proxies.

Usually, when right-wing groups are caught in something so egregiously evil it could harm their cause, they try to back away. Not these fuckers. They’re proud of themselves:

But when asked about the letter to Equality California donors, Prentice confirmed they were authentic and said the ProtectMarriage.com campaign was asking businesses backing the other side “to reconsider taking a position on a moral issue in California.”

[snip]

“I think the IDing of, or outing of, any company is very secondary to the question of why especially a public corporation would choose to take a side knowing it would splinter it’s own clientele,” he said.

This says something utterly incredible about these ratfuckers. Not only do they think extortion is acceptable, they believe that so many people agree with their rabid fear of gay marriage that threatening to “out” a company that doesn’t agree with them will produce compliance with their agenda. As if companies haven’t gone round trumpeting their fair and equal treatment of gays. As if companies don’t take enormous pride in their diversity. These fucking morons are so locked in their rigid anti-gay worldview that they don’t realize they’re trying to rob these companies with a toy gun.

Let’s send them a message that blackmail won’t be tolerated. Let’s stand for equal rights for same-sex couples. If you’ve got a few spare bucks, try to get yourself on Prentice’s list of people to out. Donate here.

Lies, Bigotry – and Extortion

Sanity Returns to California

I was going to go on a tirade against Prop 08 in California this weekend. Polls were showing that a majority supported that piece of bigoted shit. I could not believe that Californians were going to allow the Mormon Church to snow them into voting to destroy equal marriage rights.

Looks like I can breathe a provisional sigh of relief:

The LA Times just posted a story that the Public Policy Institute of California released a poll showing that Prop. 8 polls have switched and the polling is now 52% against and 44% in favor. The poll had a 3% margin of error.

The LA Times writes:

While California voters remain closely divided on the question of gay marriage, a majority oppose a measure to ban it, according to a poll released Wednesday by the Public Policy Institute of California.

But the poll also found that support for Proposition 8, which would amend the state Constitution to disallow same-sex marriage, has gained somewhat since a similar survey was taken in late August.

We’re not out of the woods yet, but at least we’re seeing some rays of light.

Sanity Returns to California

Dana's Woodshed Part 2: Bigoted Buffoons

I usually don’t filch my news from Pharyngula, considering how many of you are disciples of our Cephalopod Overlord, but George W. pointed this perfect pearl of deluded dumbfuckery, and I have to agree: it’s worth reproducing here:

You really don’t want to read about another terrifying crazy Republican woman, do you? Too bad. Here it is: a good Christian homeschooling mom who doesn’t like gay people. And by “doesn’t like”, I mean “wants them stoned to death and everything they touch blown up.”

A friend recently sent me this article about a “gay-friendly” high school. If we were living in a biblical society, homosexuality would be punishable by death so such a school would be unnecessary. Although I’m against the special accommodations, perhaps this new trend of segregation will protect straight kids from these predators. With any luck, some radical will blow up the gay school. No, I’m not condoning vigilantism–I’m merely saying that it would be poetic justice.

Firstly: I weep for the quality of homeschooling when the schoolers have no fucking clue what “poetic justice” actually is. Since gays aren’t in the habit of blowing up “straight” schools, and therefore aren’t likely to blow up a gay-friendly school by mistake, there is zero chance of poetic justice.

Secondly: I would like to thank this bigot for providing such a stark demonstration of the moral foundations of Biblical teachings. For those more moderate (read: less murderous) Christians, this should be a rather shocking wake-up call as to what we could expect if our society were, in all its particulars, biblical.

Thirdly: For all of you who don’t believe gays don’t face homicidal hatred from decent Christian folk, this should have just rudely ripped the scales from your eyes.

As a writer, I shouldn’t experience failures of imagination, but I have never been able to wrap my mind around anti-gay animas. I find it easier to comprehend the inner life of a shark. I’ve often found sharks pleasanter company than these pious folks who believe that sexual orientation is such a threat to civilization that gays should be subjected to a Holocaust.

And finally, a word to the author of this filth: you are most certainly “condoning vigilantism,” you fucktard. You can’t weasel out of it by saying you’re not when your entire piece cheers it on.

People like her convinced me God doesn’t exist. I could think of no reason why, if He did, and He was as loving as these morons claimed He is, why He didn’t turn them over His knee for a little tough love. It was only much later that the thought occurred to me that He might be the biggest bigot of them all, but by then, I had other reasons not to believe.

Right, then, on to our next bigot: Ames at Submitted to a Candid World recently published a fantastic piece on patterns in presidential elections, which is worth reading in and of itself. But it’s the comments I now direct your attention to, and in particular, one RandyT, whose pearls of wisdom include the following:

eletists like you are the reason this country is in such trouble. George Bush has done everything to protect America and you America hating types can only point out the problems not solutions. you solution is more government more goverment more more more. Why? Is it because you don’t have the courage to help yourself? you make me sick.

RandyT, I refuse to be lectured by a nasty, small-minded jerk who can’t spell and has such a poor grasp on proper capitalization. You make me sick, you inane lackwit.

Ames is a wonderful human being. He and his readers spent the thread educating RandyT, trying to talk him down from his ledge of stupidity before he could do himself an injury. We need a lot more kind and caring people like them. I wish I could be one. Alas, I am more of the Riggs school of suicide prevention:

Confession time: In my darkest moments, when I’ve been inundated by the relentless idiocy of wingnuts, religious frothers, and other assorted batshit-insane 28-percenters, along with the other 20% or so of this country still slavishly loyal to the Cons, I do wish McCain would be elected. It is for the same reason that Riggs took that suicide on a several-story fall: I hope it would be the short, sharp shock that would jolt them out of their stupidity. I want them to come begging for Obama’s “socialist” policies. I want them to grovel for his foreign policy. I want them to see that the destruction Bush began is only the beginning, and that the worst disaster we’ve ever faced isn’t an African-American in office, but another fucking Con.

But it’s not worth destroying America completely just to prove to these people how deluded they are. Besides, unlike a man having a very bad day, they’re too lost in their fantasy world for anything so small as the total disintegration of America to snap them out of it.

So. If Ames & Co. can’t reach ’em, and a good session with the Smack-o-Matic doesn’t correct ’em, fuck ’em. There’s enough sane people in America now to push these bigoted fuckwits to the fringes where they belong.

Dana's Woodshed Part 2: Bigoted Buffoons

Bashing Ann Barnett

Well, same-sex marriage has been legal in California for over a week now, and aside from a few histrionic fits from the frothing right, civilization hasn’t ended and marriage seems to be flourishing. Two of my friends are still planning to get hitched this October, in fact – what a surprise that California’s decision didn’t impact theirs, eh?

The worst effect I can discern at this point has been that the “aawww, happy couples, how sweet!” factor has gone up exponentially, reaching near-diabetic levels. I keep coming across pictures of ecstatic partners kissing over wedding cakes. It’s such a normal human thing that it really shouldn’t be that heart-warming – and I’m one of those people who tends to roll the old eyes at weddings anyway – but the fact they had to fight so long and so hard for such a basic ceremony has me wanting to pop open champagne by the case.

If Ann Barnett had her way, the corks wouldn’t be popping at all. And that’s where I have to put down the bubbly and limber up the Smack-o-Matic.

I’m sure the majority of you have heard about the Kern County, California clerk’s decision to stop performing marriage ceremonies right before same-sex couples could start tying knots. If not, educate yourselves and return.

Right, then. A couple of points:

First, the whole “we’re not gonna do it cuz we can’t afford it” defense sort of collapses in light of little details like this:

On Monday, The Bakersfield Californian published e-mail messages between her office and a conservative legal group, the Alliance Defense Fund in Arizona, which had unsuccessfully argued against same-sex marriage in front of the State Supreme Court.

In one message, a member of Ms. Barnett’s staff requests legal assistance, saying Ms. Barnett “fully expects to be sued” for stopping the weddings.


You don’t have the resources to perform weddings, but you’ve got the resources to pay settlements? Go on, pull the other one – it’s got wedding bells on.

It’s even better that they’ve reached out for defense to the group of lackwits who failed miserably in front of the Supreme Court on same-sex marriage issues. Something tells me the more liberal California courts will be making mincemeat out of these meatheads.

Secondly, does anyone else find it ironic that it’s the government, which is supposed to be non-religious and non-discriminatory, that’s discriminating based on religious dogma (despite their transparent financial figleaf), while we’ve got some deeply religious folks doing things like this:

Still, ministers like Rev. Byrd Tetzlaff of the Unitarian Universal Church will be out here at the Kern Co Administration Plaza marrying gay and straight couples for free.

Rev. Byrd Tetzlaff, Unitarian Universal Church: “I think it’s important because we need to celebrate justice wherever it is and folks have been denied the right to get married for a long time.”


You know, I don’t think atheists would have much to bitch about if the vast majority of churches were like this. Oh, there’d be good-natured quibbles about rational vs. irrational thinking and all that rot, but nothing like the acrimony that’s sparked when dogmatic religious fucktards decide that their medieval views need imposing on society. I don’t know if Rev. Tetzlaff drinks, but my shot glass is tipped her way regardless.

I’d like to see a lot more of this sort of thing. A lot more same-sex couples getting to suffer enjoy the same right to marry that heteros do, and a lot more moderate and liberal religious sorts getting out into the public eye and proving that you can believe in a magic sky daddy without being a total asshole about it.

One final point: FindLaw’s Vikram David Amar has a nifty little column up showing that the neocon’s palpitations over teh gays getting married OMG!!111!1! is remarkably similar to the hysterics thrown over letting black kids go to school with white kids:

After the school desegregation ruling, some jurisdictions simply tried to close down their schools, rather than desegregate them. Prince Edward County, Virginia, shut down its public education system in 1959 rather than comply with a desegregation decree. The case ultimately made it to the Supreme Court, in Griffin v. County School Board, which ordered the schools to reopen, stating whatever “nonracial grounds might support a State’s allowing a county to abandon public schools, the object must be a constitutional one, and grounds of race and opposition to desegregation do not qualify as constitutional.”


You know, I don’t know what it is about that ruling, but I get this strange feeling it might come into play when Ann Barrett gets her bigoted arse hauled into court.

I can hardly wait. This is going to be almost as good as Expelled: the Unending Dumbassery.

Bashing Ann Barnett

Lying for the Cause

I can’t even express my outrage at this kind of dishonest bullshit.

Back in 2004, Michigan passed an amendment to their constitution that reads:

To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose. [emphasis added]


I want you to think about that for a minute. Think of all of the people you know whose health care benefits would be wiped out by such an amendment. Think of all the people you know who would be denied rights as basic as the right to see your lover one last time before he or she died.

You’d be upset about such an amendment, right? You’d raise issues such as this in opposition:

“It’s probably those six extra words — ‘or similar union for any purpose,’” says Jay Kaplan, of the Detroit office of the ACLU. “I presume it will include things like civil unions, and it could prohibit state and local governmental entities from providing domestic partner benefits or recognizing civil unions, and it could prevent private employers from recognizing them too.”

[snip]

Dana Houle, spokesman for Coalition for a Fair Michigan, a group that opposes the proposal, says, “That really is the key point. If the backers of Proposal 2 only wanted to ban same-sex marriage, which is already illegal, they could have left off the last six words. I think that shows that they have other intentions besides just banning same-sex marriage.”


And you may not be reassured by the Citizens for the Protection of Marriage’s claims to the contrary:

Proposal 2 is Only about marriage. Marriage is a union between husband and wife. Proposal 2 will keep it that way. This is not about rights or benefits or how people choose to live their lives. (Emphasis in original) [from a pamphlet distributed by CPM, quoted in Michigan Messenger]

[Karen] Hemphill argued that all the amendment aims to do is to protect the traditional meaning of marriage. “This has never been about taking benefits away from people. The last six words of the amendment were added on the advice of our legal counsel in order to precisely define marriage. Even the court of appeals agreed that this was the best way to protect the definition of marriage.” [The Michigan Daily]

You may be skeptical of arguments put forth by CPM fellow travellers:

This position is echoed by Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, who says, “Under that policy, every single person currently receiving any kind of benefit would continue to do so. But it would not be on the basis of a government employer singling out homosexual relationships for the special treatment of being recognized as equal or similar to marriage.” [Metro Times Detroit]

Furthermore, the two groups that lead the campaign for passage of the amendment, Citizens for the Protection of Marriage and the American Family Association of Michigan, both insisted that the language concerned “marriage only.” Campaign director Marlene Elwell, according to published reports, said: “This has nothing to do with taking benefits away. This is about marriage between a man and a woman.” [ACLU press release]


You might experience a niggling feeling of doom when hearing about incidents like this:

Patrick Gillen, an attorney with the [Thomas More Law Center] who helped write the amendment, has represented the center in a suit against Ann Arbor public schools for offering domestic partner benefits.
Gillen, who did not return calls from Metro Times, recently represented the Citizens for the Protection of Marriage before the Michigan Board of Canvassers.

“When asked by our attorney if he could say that it was not their intent to use the vague language to challenge domestic partnerships and civil unions, he refused to answer,” says Houle.


You may ask why he couldn’t answer that question. And you probably won’t be surprised to learn that the whole constellation of organizations pushing to ban gay marriage were lying sacks of shit.

But the ink was barely dry on the ballots before those who advocated the proposal began filing lawsuits to prohibit the same partnership benefits in public employee contracts that they adamantly denied would be affected before the vote took place. The Thomas More Law Center, led by Patrick Gillen, who had also acted as counsel for the CFPM and had actually written the ballot language, immediately filed suit against Ann Arbor Public Schools and against Michigan State University to void partnership benefits in their union contracts; both suits were dismissed for lack of standing by the plaintiffs.

Unfortunately, the issue did not end there. Just one month prior to the election, state employees had finished negotiating a contract with the state of Michigan that included domestic partnership benefits. A month after the election, Governor Granholm and the public employees unions agreed to remove that language from the contracts pending a court ruling on whether the new law prohibited them. Attorney General Mike Cox subsequently issued a legal opinion indicating that such benefits do indeed violate the language of the ballot initiative and the city of Kalamazoo then voided similar language in their own union contracts.

The ACLU then filed suit against Governor Granholm and Attorney General Mike Cox on behalf of 21 same-sex couples and the National Pride at Work organization, asking the court to grant declaratory relief and rule that the language that Proposal 2 inserted into the Michigan state constitution does not prohibit the extension of partnership benefits to same-sex couples by public employers. The trial court judge found in favor of the ACLU. The Court of Appeal
s then overturned that decision and ruled that the language does rule out such benefits. The case is now pending before the Michigan Supreme Court, where oral arguments are expected to be heard the first week of November.


Let us recap, briefly: bigoted motherfuckers propose anti-gay marriage amendment, opponents argue said amendment could be used to deny benefits to same-sex couples, bigoted motherfuckers say “Oh, pshaw and pish! That’s not what it’s about at all,” enough citizens are snowed by bigoted motherfuckers to pass anti-gay amendment, and the instant it’s passed, bigoted motherfuckers say “Ha, ha, fooled you!” and start filing lawsuits to deny benefits to same-sex couples.

The Citizens for the Protection of Marriage, who were never “about taking benefits away from people,” gleefully filed an amicus brief with the Michigan Supreme Court explaining why their amendment was all about taking benefits away from people [pdf]:

The decision below correctly held that policies recognizing same-sex domestic partnerships violate Michigan’s Marriage Amendment. For there is no question that by means of such policies recognition is given to the agreement of same-sex partners to unite in an intimate union labeled a “domestic partnership” an illicit parallel to the marriage agreement recognized by the state law of civil marriage. As demonstrated above, and found by the court below, there is no question that the “domestic partnership” is a union of same-sex partners that is similar to marriage. And there is no question that such policies recognize the union of the same-sex partners in a “domestic partnership” for the purpose of providing medical and other benefits to same-sex partners of employees. For these reasons, such policies are contrary to the plain meaning of Article I, [statute] 25, which provides that “the union of one man and one women [sic] in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.” By the same token, such policies enter into an arena that has been preempted by the People of the State of Michigan. And for this reason, policies which seek to recognize same-sex domestic partnerships for the purpose of providing benefits are unlawful.


The Michigan Supreme Court agreed. Same-sex partners in Michigan get to kiss their benefits goodbye. The bigoted motherfuckers lied their way to a major legal victory.

These dishonest sleazebags share the same tactics as the IDiots, the Republicon Party, and all the other little it’s-moral-to-lie-if-you’re-lying-for-Jesus pieces of shit. I think that would be a good thing to keep in mind the next time they try to assure you that their noxious little proposals have “nothing to do” with raping decent people up the ass. Their twisted views of rights, decency and morality mean they will joyfully deceive you into helping them tie the noose they plan to use on your very own neck.

They all lie. Don’t you ever forget it.

Tip o’ the shot glass to Ed Brayton for breaking the bad news.

Lying for the Cause

Bashing the Gay-Bashers

It’s time to turn from IDiots, pollyticks, religion and lack thereof for a bit and mount a different horse entirely. This one likes to give the homophobic elements in our society a good, sharp kick, and he’s been getting a bit restive. There’s so many gay-bashers to bash.

I utterly cannot stand the anti-gay bigotry in our country.

I can’t state that strongly enough. Of all the elements of fundamentalist religion I despise, the whole “gays are evil” thing sticks a blasting cap in my magazine of rage and blows it sky-high. It’s ignorant and ridiculous to argue against evolution on religious grounds. It’s repulsive to condemn someone’s harmless sexual orientation – I was about to say for religious reasons, but no. It’s repulsive to do it for any reason.

Many of my most cherished friends have been gay or lesbian. I don’t want to paint a whole group of people with the same brush, but they’ve been almost without exception the warmest, sweetest, and most fun people I’ve ever had the honor of knowing.

Some of my most respected supervisors were homosexual. It did not matter one fucking iota that they were attracted to people of the same sex.

It enrages me to think that these people that I’ve loved and admired have faced prejudice and condemnation simply for not being heterosexual. What the fuck does it matter?

I’ve run into the attitudes sometimes. I had a customer go into an anti-gay diatribe, and finish by saying, “I do business with your company because there’s no lesbians.” I nearly swallowed my tongue laughing. The poor retarded bigot had no fucking clue that we had everything he hated: gay-friendly policies and benefits, plenty of gays and lesbians on staff, and a hell of a lot of homosexuals in management. He was dealing with one of the most gay-friendly businesses I’d ever worked for. I think he realized from that choking sound I was making that he’d maybe misjudged just a bit. He hung up before I could tell him, “Actually, my supervisor’s a lesbian, and we all love her dearly.” Too bad.

Luckily, no fuckwit has ever aired his or her bigotry to my face. I tend to get a little incandescent when I’m off the clock.

Being a homebody, I don’t go in much for the parades and other such displays of solidarity. I probably should. But I’m not shy about making it abundantly clear that gay-bashing won’t be tolerated, and I’ve administered some firm correctives to acquaintences who have started to go there, which is probably why it’s never turned to open war. Amazing how rapidly prejudiced dickheads shut up when they’ve thrown out their little test lines and gotten a cold response, innit?

But that’s not enough. There’s been some spectacular anti-gay fuckwittery lately, and as the National Day of Silence is over, I think it’s time for me to unleash here. It’s not just creationists and politicians who deserve my wrath.

We start here:

Here’s one of the more outrageous stories you’ll hear today. A high school principal in Memphis heard that two students were a gay couple and she posted their names where everyone could see it:

In September of 2007, the principal at Hollis F. Price Middle College High told teachers she wanted the names of all student couples, “hetero and homo,” because she wanted to monitor them personally to prevent students from engaging in public displays of affection.

The two students now represented by the ACLU, Andrew and Nicholas (who have asked that their last names not be revealed), were two A students who had been seeing each other for a short time and were attempting to keep their relationship quiet and private.

The principal heard about them through another student, then wrote their names on a list she posted next to her desk, in full view of anyone who entered her office.


That’s fucked-up in so many different ways I don’t even know where to start. What the fuck is a principal doing making lists of couples in the first place? Where the fuck does she get off posting it in open view? As if that weren’t sick enough, she then called the mother of one of the gay students and harangued her, asking if she knew her son was gay. She said she wouldn’t tolerate homosexuality at her school. These students were singled out for abuse and harrassment due to her actions. One of them was denied a trip to help rebuild homes in New Orleans because he was told he might embarrass the school.

This kind of attitude is absolutely beyond the pale in this country. It’s as bad as racism. And people still get killed because some mouth-breathers react with violence:

At 8:15 a.m. on Feb. 12, 15-year-old Lawrence King was shot twice in the head as he sat at a computer in his school’s computer lab in southern California. The gunman was classmate Brandon McInerney, and the two knew each other well. According to friends of both young men, King, who was openly gay, was frequently tormented by classmates, including McInerney. To get back at him, King — who often wore makeup to school — flirted with McInerney, turning the tables on the homophobic remarks he endured daily.

But as the bullying and flirting escalated, and McInerney became bullied himself, he snapped and shot King. Students and community members say the shooting was motivated by anti-gay bias.


This needs to stop. And the only way it’s going to come close to stopping is if each and every one of us combats the “God hates gays” mentality that makes it seem justified to put two bullets in a human being’s head because he flirted with you.

There’s far too much enabling bullshit in this country. Parents throw fits over children’s books that portray gays as decent, ordinary people – bullshit. Homophobic pastors organize protests against the National Day of Silence – bullshit. Anti-gay legislation being pushed in the name of “protecting marriage” – bullshit.

I’ve had it with bullshit. Expect more bashing of gay-bashers. Much, much more.

Bashing the Gay-Bashers