Friday, July 22, 2011
Via JMG: Only Losers Call People 'Nazis' And If You Don't Agree, You're A Fucking Nazi
The American Family Association's Bryan Fischer is furious that somebody on the internet called him a "Nazi gas bag." Because only losers call people Nazis. This a clear indication that the Left has lost the argument and the debate in public policy. Because name-calling is the first refuge of a man who does not have an argument. As soon as someone starts calling you names, then realize they're out of ammunition, they're out of arguments. They can't reason with you any longer, they don't have facts on their side, they don't have reason on their side, they don't have logic on their side, they don't have history on their side, they don't have research on their side, they don't have science on their side so they start calling you things like a "Nazi gas bag."Bryan Fischer, two months ago:
Ladies and gentlemen, they are Nazis. Homosexual activists, when it comes to freedom of speech, are Nazis. When it comes to freedom of religion, they are Nazis. There is no room in their world dissent, there is no room in their world for disagreement, there is no room in their world for criticism. You criticize homosexual behavior, they tag you as a bigot and a homophobe and then they got to work to silence you just like the Roman Catholic Church did in the days of Galileo - it's no different; it's the Spanish Inquisition all over again. Ladies and gentlemen, they are Nazis. Do not be under any illusions about what homosexual activists will do with your freedoms and your religion if they have the opportunity. They'll do the same thing to you that the Nazis did to their opponents in Nazi Germany.Right Wing Watch notes: "Bryan Fischer is a lot of things, self-aware is not one of them."
Via jMG: LOS ANGELES: Prosecutors Seek To Ban Gay Panic Defense In King Case
Prosecutors in the trial of Brandon McInerney plan to ask the judge to have the jury disregard the sexual orientation of his murder victim, openly gay teen Lawrence King. Attorneys for Brandon McInerney argue that their client, who was 14 when he gunned down Larry King in an Oxnard junior high school computer lab, was so humiliated by King's flirtation that it provoked him to kill his classmate. Gay rights advocates say the argument is a classic "gay panic" defense. The panic defense became a flashpoint following the 2002 slaying of Gwen Araujo, a Bay Area transgender teen who was beaten and strangled by three men. Defense attorneys for the suspects argued that their clients panicked after learning Araujo was a biological male and won a mistrial. When the suspects escaped first-degree murder convictions, legislators responded by passing a law designed to blunt the use of panic defenses.McInerney's defense attorney maintains that the murder was "provoked" by King's "relentless sexual advances."
Via Gay Politics Report: N.Y. state flag to fly in Castro this weekend
- NYC wedding crush prompts lottery for Day 1 nuptials
New York City has resorted to a lottery to determine who will be able to get married this Sunday, the first day same-sex couples will be allowed to legally wed in the Empire State. Hundreds of couples have applied, but city clerks will only be able to accommodate 764 of those, which will still set a single-day record. "We want to make as many New Yorkers have the most important part of their life be that first Sunday," said New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, an out lesbian who plans to marry her partner. Reuters (7/19)
- N.Y. state flag to fly in Castro this weekend: A merchants' association in San Francisco's Castro neighborhood has decided to fly the New York state flag along with the rainbow flag this weekend to mark the beginning of legal marriage for same-sex couples in the Empire State. "We want to show solidarity with our brothers and sisters in New York," said Steve Adams, president of Merchants of Upper Market and Castro. Bay Area Reporter (San Francisco) (7/18)
Congressman Lungren is a disgrace... I am ashamed to have to register in his district
Dear Dr. Orey,
It is my belief that marriage is a foundational societal institution. As the United States Supreme Court itself recognized in 1878, "upon it society may be said to be built, and out of its fruits spring social relations and social obligations and duties..." In short, marriage is a fundamental element of civil society itself.
In this regard, it is entirely appropriate for the supreme law of the land to uphold the institution of marriage. The Constitution should recognize the civilizational precept that marriage consists solely of the union between a man and a woman.
Another aspect of this issue which is central to the question of governance, concerns the role of the judiciary in our society. It is not the function of judges to act as policymakers or quasi-legislators. When the judiciary assumes the role of the legislative branch it has overstepped its proper function. The effort by some state courts to redefine the institution of marriage, coupled with a generally expansive interpretation of its own power by the federal judiciary, poses a serious challenge to the very notion of self-government. Our founding fathers did not envision that we would be governed by philosopher kings and it was for that reason they conceived a limited judicial power which would render the judiciary "the least dangerous branch."
Recently, the Executive branch has also posed a serious challenge to the notion of self-government. As you know, the Constitution requires in Article II Section 3 that the President "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." The Administration's unilateral determination – apart from the wishes of Congress, which passed DOMA by a bipartisan vote of 342-67 in the House and 85-14 in the Senate – that DOMA does not pass constitutional muster is an affront to our system of government, to the checks and balances established by the Constitution, and to the rule of law.
In remarks on the House floor, I elaborated on this affront:
Mr. Speaker, while Congress was out of session last week, the United States Department of Justice made an unfortunate decision. They announced they would no longer defend an Act of Congress that was signed into law by President Clinton. That law is the Defense of Marriage Act.
The statement that came out of the Justice Department said they could find no constitutional basis for defending that law. I recall we had the same thing happen in my home state where then Attorney General Jerry Brown said he could not defend Proposition 8 which dealt with the definition of marriage.
Having served in that office in California, I can tell you, I defended laws I disagreed with. I defended laws I had voted against. I thought it was my solemn obligation to uphold the Constitution and the laws duly enacted in my state just as I believe the Attorney General of the United States has that obligation.
I believe it is a dereliction of duty. To somehow now find that there is no constitutional basis for defending that law is incredible. I think it is regrettable and I think we ought to look into it.
While we may disagree on this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me in the future on matters important to you.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your views with me.
If you would like to stay informed about federal legislation introduced in the 112th Congress, as well as local issues that may interest you, please take a moment to subscribe to my weekly e-newsletter at www.lungren.house.gov.
I look forward to discussing this or any other issue affecting our 3rd Congressional District with you in the future. For upcoming Town Hall meetings, or for information on issues or legislation pending before Congress, please visit my website at www.lungren.house.gov. If you need assistance with a federal agency, please call my Gold River office at (916) 859-9906. My staff and I are always available to address your concerns, answer your questions, and listen to your ideas.
Sincerely,
Daniel E. Lungren
Member of Congress
Note: Please do not respond directly to this e-mail. To better serve the constituents of the Third District I have established a Feedback Form on my website. If you wish to contact me with any concerns, I would ask that you please utilize the following link and I will respond shortly (https://forms.house.gov/
Via AmericaBlogGay: Anti-gay bigots offer counseling services to gay man who testified at DOMA hearings
As the man told the Advocate, the last people he'd go to for help is some anti-gay hate group. I wonder if they weren't offering to "cure" him. From Andrew Harmon:
Puzzling remarks by anti-marriage equality witnesses were legion at the hearing, but perhaps no more so than those of Focus on the Family senior vice president Tom Minnery, who spoke directly after Wallen's heartfelt testimony about his group’s firm stance against repealing DOMA. Minnery expressed his condolences for Wallen’s loss, then seemed to offer him counseling and outreach services from his organization, which until two years ago had sponsored an ex-gay summit known as Love Won Out.
“I had read his prepared testimony the night before, so I knew what he was going to say,” Wallen told The Advocate. “But I was shocked when he offered condolences, and was in disbelief when he was offering his services. If I were looking for help, his [organization] would be the last place I would go to.” Asked what services they might provide, Focus on the Family vice president of communications Gary Schneeberger said in a statement to The Advocate, “We offer a variety of print and online resources, as well as free counseling referrals, to help people deal with the myriad challenges of life.
Our law makers need to feel what we feel!!
I have totally cleaned this e-mail from all other names, sending it to you in hopes you will keep it going and keep it clean. This is something I will fight for and I hope you all read it all the way through. You will be glad you did.
The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.
Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.
I'm asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.
3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
7. All contracts with past and present Congress are void effective 1/1/12. The American people did not make this contract with Congress. Congress made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.
If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.
THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!
If you agree with the above, pass it on. If not, just delete.
You are one of my 20+. Please keep it going.
The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.
Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.
I'm asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.
3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
7. All contracts with past and present Congress are void effective 1/1/12. The American people did not make this contract with Congress. Congress made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.
If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.
THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!
If you agree with the above, pass it on. If not, just delete.
You are one of my 20+. Please keep it going.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Via JMG: The Changing Face Of AIDS
Via JMG: MINNESOTA: Gay Barbarians Glitter-Bomb Ladybird Bachmann's "Ex-Gay" Clinic
reposted from Joe
Via AmericablogGay: Anti-gay leader in Iowa is a birther
Big shock that an anti-gay religious right leader is also a fan of racist theories about African-Americans (they were all born in Kenya, you know). I am intrigued, however, that this family values leader looks all about 12. I know lots of gay men who come off far younger than their age, but not a lot of straight men. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Today in WTFland: American Family Association: The First Amendment Only Applies To Christians
"The First Amendment was written neither to guarantee freedom of religion to Muslims or Buddhists or Hindus nor to prohibit their free exercise of religion. It wasn’t written about them one way or another. It was written for one specific purpose: to protect the free exercise of the Christian religion. We must be clear: the First Amendment does not prohibit the free exercise of alternative religions, but neither does it guarantee it. It simply does not address the issue at all." - American Family Association spokesman and national radio host Bryan Fischer.Labels: AFA, Bryan Fischer, Christianists, dominionists, First Amendment, hate groups, liars, theocracy
Via JMG: New York Episcopal Bishop Orders Gay Clergy To Marry Their Partners
That's a headline you probably didn't expect. Long Island Episcopal Bishop Lawrence Provenzano has put his foot down against gay clergy who residing in homosexual relationships, and has given a nine month deadline for them to either get married or stop living together, according to the News Observer. “I need to be mindful that the church has always asked people to live in committed monogamous, faithful relationships. I won’t allow heterosexual clergy to live in a rectory or church housing without the benefit of marriage. When one puts it in that context, then you see how it all begins to make sense,” said Provenzano. Reverend Christopher Hofer, pastor of the Episcopal Church of St. Jude agrees with Provenzano, “I think his statement was not only fair, but beyond generous. It gives people time, acknowledging that there’s a financial component involved and recognizing that some may not choose to live together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)