“Can I blame gay culture for my drug addiction, please?”

That’s the question my friend Mark King asks in a provocative piece that I wanted to share with you all. It comes from his blog, My Fabulous Disease, which is linked on my blogroll. Excerpt:

After a lifetime of sporadic, recreational drug use, I became a full-blown crystal meth addict ten years ago, and then eventually got clean and sober in January of 2009. But why would I, or anyone as engaged in life as I was, morph into a drug addict?

It seemed an unlikely turn of events for a gay advocate and outspoken community leader living with HIV. Was my drug addiction some sort of post-traumatic stress from the AIDS horror show of the 1980’s?

Maybe it pre-dated AIDS, and resulted from the stress and shame of growing up gay. It’s easy to understand why anyone who came of age believing they were perverted (and going straight to hell) might need a stiff drink. Research indicates that gay men and lesbians are more likely to smoke, drink and use drugs. Was I born this way, GaGa?

So I was immediately drawn to the new book, Gay Men and Substance Abuse: A Basic Guide for Addicts and Those Who Care for Them. I thought the book might bolster my hypothesis that I was a victim of gay culture and doomed from the start.

Does he answer the question? Read the rest here. I liked it a lot- it made me think.
How about you? Comments please….

Answering Hate With Love- And Sense

Dr Michael Brown, an ex-heroin-shooting Jewish rock drummer turned Christian theologian, has a thing about The Gays.  He’s written a book called “A Queer Thing Happened To America- and what a long, strange trip it’s been”.

I don’t read anti-gay Christian books. It’s completely humiliating for me. But my friend Kathy does- and she crafts excellent responses to them. She takes apart Brown’s book. Excerpt:

Dr. Brown writes: “Is it so hateful to believe that homosexual practice is harmful and that change is possible? (If a doctor takes issue with you or me being overweight, do we brand him or her an anti-fat, hate-filled bigot, or do we recognize that the doctor is expressing concern for our well being? Isn’t the doctor trying to be helpful rather hateful?)

That  analogy falls apart quickly. When you suggest that an overweight person cut back and deny themselves excess calories, they get healthier. When you tell a gay person to deny their sexual orientation, that is when you get all the symptoms from shame to depression to addictions to suicide at the extreme.

Amen. Read her entire response here.

“My Friends Are Gay, Not Broken.”

 

You may have heard of Exodus International, the “pray the gay away” ministry. They have a controversial iPhone app- and they also get under the skin of my friend Kathy Baldock. From their website:

Exodus International is the world’s largest ministry to individuals and families impacted by homosexuality.

With over 35 years of ministry experience, Exodus is committed to encouraging, educating and equipping the Body of Christ to address the issue of homosexuality with grace and truth.

Besides the awkward phrase “impacted by homosexuality”- Exodus has a lot of explaining to do. And Kathy asks for clarification:

I spent quite a bit of time going through most of the pages on the Exodus International website and they are not straight forward (pun not intended) in the message.  I am trying to understand what it is that Exodus does, says and promises. It is not clearly stated, so I wanted to come and observe for myself at yourJune Freedom Conference, but you uninvited me.

I see that Exodus believes that the opposite of homosexuality is holiness.  That has bothered me since you wrote that in  ”Leaving Homosexuality” on page 23; yes, I read the whole book.  I agree that God wants us to be holy as He is holy (I Peter 1:16), but that in no way indicates that holiness is the opposite of homosexuality.

Read her whole post here. I love how she stands up!

Queering Ecology: One Goose At A Time

If you’re an amateur naturalist, like me, you’ve probably spent some time in the library or online looking for sexual ambiguity in nature- after all, one of the biggest arguments against the biodiversity of sexual orientation is this: Natural Law.

The argument basically says nature dictates what is (and what isn’t) natural. The basic premise for years had been that animals and plants have clearly established sexual roles and are completely hetero-oriented. And that was a basic premise of my high school science and biology classes.

Because my own experience doesn’t bear this out, I’ve always known that science would soon catch up- destroying the faulty premise of hetero-only natural law. My friend Alex Johnson- a bona fide environmental scientist, also had the itch to find the versatility of nature.

In his fascinating piece for Orion Magazine, Alex writes:

Where is the line between what is Nature and what is Human? Do I spend equal times in the parking lot and the forest? Can I really say the parking lot is separate from the forest? What if I end up staying in the parking lot the whole time? What if it has been a long drive and I really have to pee?

The problem is, the Nature/Human split is not a split. It is a dualism. It is false.

I propose messing it up. I propose queering Nature.

As it would happen, I’m queer. What I mean is this: A) I am a man attracted to men. B) Popular culture has told me that men who are attracted to men are unnatural, and so C) if my culture is right, then I am unnatural. But D) I don’t feel unnatural at all. In fact, the love I share with another man is one of the most comfortable, honest, real feelings I have ever felt. And so E) I can’t help but believe that Nature, and the corresponding definition of “natural,” betray reality. From my end of the rainbow, this thing we call Nature is in need of a good queering.

Like I said- fascinating.  Read the full piece here.
Then forward it to your high school science teacher.

Montana Family Foundation: Using Scripture To Slander Others

First, listen to this podcast.

Second, listen to this:
This fundamentalist, smug and patronizing interpretation of Paul’s letter to the Romans by Mr Laszloffy is used to villify and degrade other human beings- and in particular, a human being I consider to be a friend.
Jamee Greer is not part of the radical homosexual agenda or a latter-day Gomorran. He is a man who simply wants identical freedom for all Montanans.  This irresponsible podcast advocates harsh judgment, not God’s love and forgiveness.
I’m terrified that some fundamentalist is going to start picking off liberal lobbyists.

Third: If something happens to Jamee Greer because of this, Mr Laszloffy, the cries to heaven will be deafening. So will my words. And they will be these: You are personally responsible for spreading hate and destruction. And I will speak them until you repent.

I asked My friend Kathy to do a bit more work with this. As a straight woman, a Christian, a non-Montanan and a friend, she’s got more objectivity than I do right now.

RESPONSE TO MONTANA FAMILY FOUNDATION’S  JEFF LASZLOFFY
by Kathy Baldock, Canyonwalkerconnections.com

The Word of God is a Holy Text. Abuse of the Word of God, unfortunately is rampant in the church. Theology is a compilation of the interpretation that we read (re-written from the original Greek and Hebrew), with our personal translation of what those words mean as understood in our context, our language and our own personal filters.  Added to all this, is the personal revelation and relationship we individually have with Jesus.

So, is there room for one person to view Scripture differently than another person?  Of course.

One of the most flagrant mis-uses and abuses of verses of the Bible is the section quoted by Jeff Lazloffy on the Legislative Update on the  Montana Family Foundation Radio podcast.

Mr. Lazloffy bases his assessment of a group of people at the legislative session in Montana on some verses from the Book of Romans. Verses originally spoken to a group of people left behind in Rome in about 60 AD after all the  converted Jewish Christians, the Jews and Gentile “acting like Christians” were forced to leave Rome. Theses groups were infighting over who was right, who got to use the temple space (kind of like today), so the Caesar kicked all the trouble makers out of Rome in the Edict of 54 AD. They were excommunicated for five years. So, after five years, the baby Christians left behind, the ones that were once polytheists and idol worshippers (from generations and culture of both) had fallen back into their old ways of worship in the temples. Duh! They were doing what they knew to do and, they had no mentors around to help stop the falling back.

Priscilla carried a letter from Paul to these Romans (hence the Book) and the letter told the once-gentiles-then-believers-now gentiles-again to please recall commitment once made. Having once known Jesus as Lord, they had turned from Him. THAT was the grave sin. Turning back to idol worship. Not same sex behaviors!  Not homosexuality. Idol worship.  Putting others things before the commitment to God.

But, misreading and abusing this text from Romans give more fuel to the anti gay crowd, so, we keep on repeating the scenario. “If you are gay and will not stop being gay, God will cut you loose and you will be a reprobate.” Noooooo.  If you once had the knowledge of God and turn from Him, He will let you go your own way. Back to your old stuff.

For a full treatment of these verses go to “Romans 1:18-32. . .To Whom Was This Directed?”

It is dreadful when Christians misuse Holy Words to subjugate, threaten and demonize any other group of people . I read the Gospel as Good News. How did a Book of love get to become a weapon of fear and destruction? This is how: you put it in the hands of a people who indeed have an agenda of fear and exclusion, two messages completely contrary to the message of the Gospel.

I speak the same language as you Mr. Lazloffy, so this is for you.  I do not believe for one minute that God showed you a vision of Mr. Greer in the way you depicted it. If those were God’s eyes, you would have seen someone you are called to love and serve, not judge and oppress. You were looking at one of God’s children, equal to you in His eyes. If you need a verse, stop camping on the misuse of Romans 1: 28 and drop on back to Isaiah 58:6-12.  Cut the cords of oppression, fight for justice. Stop laying more oppression onto the backs of others.

I am assuming many of the objects of your version or “God love” have left churches.  Yet, you want them to follow the club rules and, not only have they never bought into the rules, you won’t even let them in the club. (My assumption here, but I do assume you are not welcoming of gay/trans people in your home church, unless they change that is.)

The church has gotten to looking very much unlike Jesus. Rather than look at this group of others as “steeped in sin”, do what God really did ask of you:  look at your own sin and, back to this again, love and serve.

Christians like you are keeping the youth away from churches, denying 5% of the population access to a God that somehow was able to handle my sorry self and yours. If He wants to make someone not gay, or not liberal, or not whatever the thing they are that makes you uncomfortable, then let Him do it. This stinky stuff called self-righteousness that we wear out in public is a stench to a Holy God. And it is stinky to others too.

Go love and serve, fight for justice and against oppression and then, you might actually smell sweet enough, like Jesus, to draw people to Him instead of repulsing them away.

I am a straight Evangelical Christian who is finally understanding the message of Jesus that is not embodied in Romans 1:28.  The overarching message of the Bible is not power packed into six anti gay verses, it is this : love your neighbor (told once) and love your enemy/the stranger (told twenty six times). I do not need a vision to confirm that you are failing at that calling. I only needed to listen to your three minute legislative summary.

Go apologize and serve the others, then, you will begin to look like the Lord I love and serve

Focus On The Family: Stop Lying!

Kathy at CanyonWalker Connections does a great job of exposing Focus On The Family‘s lies. Excerpt:

My team is looking stupid.  I’d like to think I live my life with genuine concern and grace towards others.  Then, some person or group wears the same team jersey comes along and treats people badly, messing up all the traction. Christians can be amongst the kindest, most loving, giving and forgiving people and then, well, you know. We can also be the meanest, most hateful people when we think that  you have it wrong and we have it right.

Fabulous!
This is a great piece- especially if you’re unsure how to respond to the Christianist Agenda.  Read it all here.

Where Should We Stand?

I wanted to cross-post this yesterday, but got completely caught up in open houses and then people over for the Oscars…sigh. I wonder how James Franco feels today.
I bet, sadly, not good.

Anyway, this is another post from my friend Ted Hayes on the pro-life/choice false dichotomy. Excerpt:

Most of the other efforts to date of these holier-than-thous have been to wage war against women, particularly in the area of abortion. They can depend on their very ill-informed base’s jumping up and down with glee if they fuel the culture war and attack women and the LGBT community. Since their last foray into the fight against any form of equality for gays ended with repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” they have now turned their “guns” toward a woman’s right to choose.

It’s an excellent read- and don’t forget to post comments in favor of Ted’s becoming a regular contributor to Bilerico!
Full text here.

Educate Me

I love my life. It sometimes seems that I’m a magnet for fascinating people- I know so many whose stories and attitudes have shaped my life for the better- some of you are reading this right now, and believe me, I’m deeply grateful. I would love to tell all of your stories, or at least give you the opportunity to tell your own to my other friends. With the limitations of time and space however, I’ll have to pick and choose- a little.

I’m going to do a little bit of that today.

I’d like you to meet my friend Ted Hayes. Ted is a retired chemist, Baptist minister and Doctor of Counseling- and an untiring inspiration to me. He always has thoughtful responses to issues that are close to his heart. His partner, recently deceased, was a Montanan, and that, along with our shared “professional Christian” careers, gave us a great place to relate to, from and with each other. He recently shared something with me that I simply had to share here- and with it, you will also learn to know and love my friend Ted.

~

As many of you know, I am an 80 year-old gay male living alone after the death of my beloved nearly two years ago.  In my twilight years, and especially in the 21st century, I really don’t find it necessary to defend who I am and what I have become.  I am just one happy guy still involved in the experiences of life and basking in the memories of the preceding 80 years.

Yet, even at this age and in this century, I still receive inquiries like the following and I want to put an answer out here so that any who wish may see my response.  Some of you may know also that I was a Southern Baptist minister for a number of years during the last century.  It is from my life in that capacity that I receive the most inquiries and to a degree I believe they are legitimate, especially when one comes along under the subject heading: “Educate me.”  I believe that is the primary way that those of the heterosexual “lifestyle” will gain greater understanding of who I am and why.  I want to give their sincere searches the attention they merit.

My response may at times sound flippant or condescending, but it is not intended to be that at all.  (If you, as a reader, are offended, please accept my apology up front.)  It may demonstrate my weariness at being asked the same question year after year when there is such an abundance of written material available to those who sincerely want answers.  But I will address the question from my perspective – the only one to which I can truly speak.

Late last night (2/20/2011) I received the following via Facebook.  It is from someone in my “ministerial” past.  I present it to you verbatim:

Hi, Ted. I’ve been wondering about something and finally am getting down to just asking you about it. I only want to get a better understanding; I’m not being judgmental. How do you reconcile your practice of homosexuality with what the scriptures say about it? My interpretation of the scriptures is that it is a sin. I know we are all sinners, but the sins that I realize I commit, I ask for forgiveness and don’t make a conscious effort to continue.  Just wondering.

Six sentences about which books, theses and dissertations have been written, have been directed at me on Facebook where the normal response is limited to some 400-500 characters, not words.  That is why I have chosen the format of a “note” that I can post on my wall.  I hope it will provide the inquirer, and others who may read this, with a “better understanding.”

I always have to smile when I read, “your practice of homosexuality.”  It is almost like there is the belief – though I am confident that is not the case — that at some point in my life I chose to get a degree in homosexuality so that I could take the state exam, get my license and then open up my office to practice.  It seems similar to someone who might at some point choose to pursue a career in medicine or law and who chooses classes that will provide a solid background for the rigors of either a medical school or a law school curriculum.

Such is not the case with my homosexuality.  I did not wake up one morning and decide that I would be homosexual and set about learning what I needed to know so that I could “practice” my sexuality.  When my family asked me what I was planning on doing with my life, I did not say, “Oh, I think I will be a homosexual even though it will take years of study.”  Being homosexual is what I am, not something I became or something I practice.  Too, I don’t need to “practice” my homosexuality any longer since I am really quite proficient and professional in my ability to be gay.

I cannot remember when I was not homosexual.  I may not have known the vocabulary that is available now but I did know that I was different before I entered grammar school.  I discovered what that difference was a year or two later.  There were no role models in Tennessee back in the 1930s so I lived a life of abject loneliness and sexual abstinence until I screwed up (Freudian choice of words?) the courage to come out when I was a few weeks shy of my 47th birthday and after I had left the ministry.

At that point I became a more serious student of scripture than I had ever been before.  I did not read the Bible and simply say, “That’s what that means.”  I began the kind of study that necessitated a lot of hard work since it required looking at it in the context of the time and customs when it was written, not just my reading it and interpreting it as I saw fit.  I read books by scholars who were on both sides of right/wrong controversy where my sexuality was concerned.  After years, I became convinced that what those scholars said — who were much more intelligent and versed in scripture than I – was true.  “If you want to find a book that condemns homosexuality as an orientation, you must look somewhere else other than in the Bible.”

If we look at scripture in that manner we will find that many of the instances where a verse or two look as if they were condemning homosexual orientation, they were really polemics against idolatry, sexual abuse, inhospitality and other such subjects.  We need to look at all of scripture in its historical context to better understand what the writing was saying then and determine what it means in the context of 21st century life.

When an inquirer states, “I am not being judgmental,” I begin looking for the judgment that undoubtedly will come, if not immediately, then certainly, soon.  That happened in this inquiry as well.  Notice the reference to “sin.”  The statements, “How do you reconcile your practice of homosexuality with what the scriptures say about it? My interpretation of the scriptures is that it is a sin. I know we are all sinners, but the sins that I realize I commit, I ask for forgiveness and don’t make a conscious effort to continue,” say, in essence, “I make changes and you haven’t” or “my repentance has been more effective than yours.”  Reminds me of the little ditty we used to chant after Sunday school as children back in the dark ages: “We don’t smoke and we don’t chew and we don’t go with girls who do.  Our class won the Bible.”

If we are speaking in theological terms, then, yes, I am a sinner.  But my sin is not my homosexuality.  The inquirer seems to define homosexuality as a behavior that is interpreted as sin.  I did not engage in “homosexual behavior” until I was 47 years old.  Does that mean that, even though I was homosexual all those years before, I did not become the sinner until I engaged in the behavior defined as sin?  Does it mean that since I am now alone again and “not practicing my homosexuality” I am no longer a sinner?  I think you can begin to see how ludicrous this becomes.

It also necessitates calling up that old standby that many anti-gay individuals and groups use: “Love the sinner; hate the sin.”  This is an effort to relieve the guilt felt for hatred.  If I (the sinner) am defined as the behavior that is defined as “sin,” then those who use the little statement above have not gained absolution of their guilt, they have rather compounded it.  If I am the sin and the sinner, then the statement really reads: “Hate the sinner; hate the sin” and there needs to be some other escape from the unchristian act of hatred.

I would encourage those who read scripture, and use it to pass judgment, to begin reading the scripture as a means of confronting their biases and not as a tool for confirming them.

Many of those who condemn on the basis of scripture apparently have not confronted their own sins during their “studies.”  Some of the most outspoken critics, of those of us who are gay, base it on scripture while they themselves, for example, have been through numerous marriages and are, therefore, guilty of adultery according to scripture.  And we know what the Bible says the penalty for adultery is, don’t we?

Stones anyone?

McCarthyism In It’s Latest Manifestation: A Christian Minority Persecution Of Gay People

Guest Post
I am so angry. I am angry because I am tired of the relentless attacks by alleged Christians, who profess to belief and follow the precepts of their collective idealogical/theological standards as spelled out in the tenets of their “holy” book. They do not.
What I see, is yet another form of McCarthyism cloaked in pseudo religious form, being used to demonize, victimise, and ostracise the gay men, women, transgendered,bisexual, persons, who, according to their narrow interpretative beliefs and practise of Christianity are inherently evil.
Today, again, were two absolutely stunning examples displaying nothing but naked hatred for LGBTQ human beings. First from the Southern Poverty Law Centre’s listed hate group Family Research Council’s Peter Spriggs, an editorial in this morning’s Baltimore Sun newspaper railing against marriage equality in Maryland. This was followed by this afternoon’s vote by the Iowa House of Representatives on a proposed Iowan constitutional amendment to not only just ban same-sex marriage, but also nullify marriages that have already taken place in that state since equality rights were granted.
Here is an except from the editorial by FRC’s Spriggs:

“Opposite-sex relationships are the only type capable of producing children through natural intercourse and the only ones assured of providing children with both a mother and a father. Affirming only opposite-sex relationships as ‘marriage’ thus makes perfect sense. But affirming same-sex relationships as ‘marriages’ makes no sense. These relationships are incapable of producing children through their sexual union.

And while some homosexual couples do raise children (most of whom were conceived in previous heterosexual relationships), such arrangements by definition deprive a child of his or her birthright to be raised by both a biological mother and father. Maryland may choose to tolerate and even protect such unconventional childrearing by allowing adoption by homosexual partners or couples. But it has no obligation to actively affirm and celebrate (through ‘marriage’) the deliberate creation of permanently motherless or fatherless families.”

This bigot’s equating a civil marriage license to bearing children is fallacious. The divorce rate in the US is 54%. Every divorce in a marriage with children deprives a child of a full-time mother and father. The out-of-wedlock birthrate in the US is 40%. If Mr. Spriggs is so concerned about the children, why is he not working to make divorce more difficult, and removing children from single-parent households? The truth is, the divorce of 54% of American marriages does much more harm than the <3% of the population who are gay (and probably less than half of those want to get married and half of those that marry would want kids–so that’s less than 1% of the population.)
Marriage is about the uniting of two lives together. The state has no requirement and no expectations that a married couple will have children. A childless marriage is as valid in the eyes of the state as a marriage with 12 children. Couples who can’t have, or don’t want children don’t view their marriages as ‘fake’. People get married because they meet someone they want to spend the rest of their lives with. A person who divorces his/her spouse because the spouse is infertile would be seen as an arse.
Many people who grew up in abusive homes would attest that the simple fact of having a ‘natural’ mother and father present does not guarantee that a child will be loved and nurtured.

These are the same arguments that have been trotted out by the proponents of Proposition 8. It fails to account for centuries of family law that accord rights and responsibilities to siblings, grandparents, adopted parents, and many many many other people who have nothing to do with the actual procreation of the child, and, yes, even to same-sex parents of children. And if marriage were purely for procreation, why would childless couples allowed to married, or at least why a marriage certificate isn’t merely a “learner’s permit”, and no rights or responsibilities conferred until a child is produced?And also failing is to show how any mechanism barring same sex couples from marrying achieves this goal.

Is he really proposing that if homosexual couples were allowed to marry, that it heterosexuals would somehow fail to produce children? It’s akin to say that by allowing interracial couples to marry, that that would somehow hurt white couples? There is no mechanism which would cause either, and both are just grounded in irrational discrimination.

“The Constitution is meant to protect the freedoms and liberties of all Iowans,” she said after the bill passed. “It is inappropriate to use the political process to single out and deny a group of Iowans of their constitutional protections.” ~ Carolyn Jenison, Executive Director of the LGBT-rights group One Iowa.

Let’s leave the Maryland situation and Sprigg’s bull-feces for a moment and look at Iowa where a constitutional ban on gay marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships passed the Iowa House this afternoon in a 62-37 vote. Three democrats joined 59 Republicans in support of the measure. Thirty-seven Democrats voted “no,” and one Republican was absent.
The Iowa Independent reports:

After discussing his belief that marriage is about “responsible procreation,” state Rep. Rich Anderson (R-Clarinda) asked what could come next if the 2009 Iowa Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage is allowed to stand. He concluded that it would lead to legalized polygamy and incest.

I could also cite the example of Dean Cannon, the speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, who wants to return the ban on adoption by Gay & Lesbian couples.
Cannon discussed his views in an interview with the Florida Baptist Witness news outlet, where he said that the Republican-controlled legislature would be prepared to attempt to resurrect the adoption ban depending on how the issue plays out in more court districts or the administration of Governor Rick Scott.

“Until we know how the governor and DCF secretary are going to apply it, it’s not a foregone conclusion that the Legislature should step in,” said Cannon. “If we think we should, we’re certainly prepared and willing to do so.”

Plus, add in the battles in New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, California and apparently also the District of Columbia as now a GOP lawmaker on the House committee that oversees matters pertaining to Washington wants to revisit the city’s same-sex marriage law.
Then there is the bullying in schools all over the United States specifically aimed at kids who are either Gay or “perceived” to be Gay.
What we have now is McCarthyism in its latest manifestation and without a doubt, even more ugly. This is state sanctioned persecutions of human beings based on beliefs that ought to be held separate from governmental operations and practise but aren’t due to the overwhelming need by a very small minority that are in a state of absolute lust  to be set in power over the majority.

McCarthyism n. The practice of publicizing accusations of political disloyalty or subversion with insufficient regard to evidence.

In this case, the political being augmented by alleged theological disloyalty because after-all, homosexuality is a sin right?
What part of the U. S. IS NOT a Christian nation do these morons not get? I was speaking to a friend and whose principle work is as an LGBTQ activist in Utah. Brave fellow that eh? Utah is ground zero and he said and I believe him, until we find a practical way to counter the Mormons and their money, looking at the National Organization for Marriage as an example, and find a unified voice, then this form of McCarthyism will continue to roll over all of the equality rights of the LGBTQ people, not just the marriage ones either.

Harvey Milk once said that Gay people need to come out. Why? Simply because this is how the perceptions of evil and sick and any other twisted definition the Reich-wing comes up with targeting gays, lesbians, bis, trans, persons can be stripped away and exposed for the outright bigotry and lies they are. When people can relate to one another as human beings and not some form of vague ideological vitriol, then the humanity shines not the bigotry.

We need to target Mom, Pop, Apple pie, and Chevrolet driving folk because they are the ones we need to accept us, as ourselves…fellow human beings.
But, until the LGBTQ community gets its act together, gets its message across to those who really need to hear it and not the Christianazis like Spriggs, or those GOP extremists, or NOM, then we all will continue to lose and this nasty McCarthyism will continue to reign unchecked.

When Is It Okay To Say “Nazi?”

A couple of posts from the blogosphere seem ready to ask just that.

Kathy Baldock from Canyonwalker Connections continues to chronicle Scott Lively’s hate filled ravings- antics that have led to the murder of gentle-spirited David Kato in Uganda. Excerpt:

There has been much focus on Scott Lively again in the past day as well. For his involvement in the “Kill the Gays” Bill, read the following post. I wrote to Mr. Lively about a year ago and we have maintained a mostly respectful exchange over the months. I will not directly quote him; that is my part of the bargain for keeping this communication open.

Full article here

Michael Hamar posted a provocative article on Bilerico this morning entitled “65 Years After Auschwitz And The Christianists Have Learned Nothing.” Excerpt:

The hatred and malicious denigration of others can lead to shocking horrors, yet conservative Christians in the USA and their minions and hangers overseas (such as in Uganda) have apparently learned nothing from the nightmare of the Nazi regime and its deadly propaganda campaign against Jews. We hear much about supposedly “protecting marriage” from the Christian right, but their true agenda is denigrating LGBT citizens and keeping us a hated class of individuals.

Read it here. And I mean read it. Then add your voice to the conversation.