High school senior Allen Lee sat down with his creative writing class on Monday and penned an essay that so disturbed his teacher, school administrators and police that he was charged with disorderly conduct.
"I understand what happened recently at Virginia Tech," said the teen’s father, Albert Lee, referring to last week’s massacre of 32 students by gunman Seung-Hui Cho. "I understand the situation."
But he added: "I don’t see how somebody can get charged by writing in their homework. The teacher asked them to express themselves, and he followed instructions."
Allen Lee, an 18-year-old straight-A student at Cary-Grove High School, was arrested Tuesday near his home and charged with disorderly conduct for an essay police described as violently disturbing but not directed toward any specific person or location.
The youth’s father said his son was not suspended or expelled but was forced to attend classes elsewhere for now.
Today, Cary-Grove students rallied behind the arrested teen by organizing a petition drive to let him back in their school. They posted on walls quotes from the English teacher in which she had encouraged students to express their emotions through writing.
"I’m not going to lie. I signed the petition," said senior James Gitzinger. "But I can understand where the administration is coming from. I think I would react the same way if I was a teacher."
Cary Police Chief Ron Delelio said the charge was appropriate even though the essay was not published or posted for public viewing.
Disorderly conduct, which carries a penalty of 30 days in jail and a $1,500 fine, is filed for pranks such as pulling a fire alarm or dialing 911. But it can also apply when someone’s writings can disturb an individual, Delelio said.
"The teacher was alarmed and disturbed by the content," he said.
But a civil rights advocate said the teacher’s reaction to an essay shouldn’t make it a crime.
"One of the elements is that some sort of disorder or disruption is created," said Ed Yohnka, a spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. "When something is done in private—when a paper is handed in to a teacher—there isn’t a disruption."
(emphasis mine) I hear they’re going to pass a new law against Disturbing The Peace Of The People In Charge. They say the penalties will be severe.
Pissing On The Grave Of Edward R. Murrow…(continued)
In case you were wondering why the quality of journalism coming out of Washington is so Piss poor, David Broder explains here…
Let me disclose my own bias in this matter. I like Karl Rove. In the days when he was operating from Austin, we had many long and rewarding conversations. I have eaten quail at his table and admired the splendid Hill Country landscape from the porch of the historic cabin Karl and his wife Darby found miles away and had carted to its present site on their land.
It isn’t simply that they’re mindlessly parroting the talking points of whoever occupies the White House, as even a faint recollection of the unmitigated hostility Bill Clinton got from them recalls. No. They’re see themselves as part of that republican ruling elite now. There’s David Broder, the man they call the "dean" of Washington journalism, happily recalling his times eating quail…Quail, mind you…with Karl Rove in his historic cabin. And no…I strongly doubt they went out hunting quail beforehand. Not with Cheney anyway.
Sorta puts Broder’s crack about how the Clinton’s came in and "trashed the place" into perspective doesn’t it? Read that Sally Quinn column…it’s one big long inside the beltway bellyache about Clinton and Monica…and ask yourself where the puffed up moral outrage is over…oh say, Guantanamo Bay, the shredding of the Geneva Convention, torture, the destruction of New Orleans, the use of the Department of Justice as a weapon against political opponents and against dissent, being lied into a war that’s killed thousands of young Americans who had their whole lives ahead of them, and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of the people we allegedly went to war to liberate. Don’t see it? Well there’s a reason for that. The Washington news establishment all regarded the Clinton team as nothing more then poor southern white trash in Their Town and that’s why they hated them. That’s all that mattered to them then, and it’s all that matters to them now.
As NRO’s designated chickenhawk, let me be the one to ask: Where was the spirit of self-defense here? Setting aside the ludicrous campus ban on licensed conceals, why didn’t anyone rush the guy? It’s not like this was Rambo, hosing the place down with automatic weapons. He had two handguns for goodness’ sake—one of them reportedly a .22.
The other was a nine millimeter Glock. Yes, in fact you Can hose down a place with a semi automatic handgun. Ask me how I know. And according to news accounts, he had a lot of ammo with him.
At the very least, count the shots and jump him reloading or changing hands. Better yet, just jump him.
You’re a kid sitting peacefully in class and then someone bursts in and starts shooting. Never mind you have not clue one at that point what kind of gun it is, let alone how many rounds it can hold. Never mind the blast of even a small caliber handgun inside a closed space can be positively disorienting. Never mind that with practice you can drop the clip on that Glock and have another in it and a round chambered faster then someone could probably rush you unless you were practically standing right over them. Just fucking for once in your life try to put yourself in someone else’s place you drooling soulless right wing babbling moron. You’re a kid…you are in class peacefully going on about your school day and then suddenly you and your classmates are being shot at. By the time the first few shots are fired your thoughts are a frightened scrambled mess. Count? Count? Grow a fucking brain Derbyshire, you pathetic warrior male wannabe.
Handguns aren’t very accurate, even at close range. I shoot mine all the time at the range, and I still can’t hit squat.
Why is that not surprising. I shoot mine all the time too John, and I figure I’m not all that exceptional at hitting what I’m shooting at, because most of the other folks at the range there with me usually do too. But you probably think the gun adds several inches to your dick and that’s why you’re not really working it. You think just holding it in your hand makes you something. No. It doesn’t. It’s just a damn gun and you’re still the sorry brain dead soulless asshole you were before you picked it up.
Yes, yes, I know it’s easy to say these things: but didn’t the heroes of Flight 93 teach us anything?
Moron! Asswipe! The people on Flight 93 were grown Adults dealing with a situation that allowed them the means to find out what was happening to them (via their cell phones) and time to get themselves organized and together. And their attackers didn’t have guns, only crude knifes. The passengers of flight 93 had a chance the kids at VA Tech never did.
Point of fact, I read of at least one adult, a professor, who seems to have actually tried to save as many of his kids as he could, by staying behind and trying to block the doorway as his kids jumped out the classroom windows. Apparently the killer managed to get in anyway because that professor was one of the dead. But he stayed behind to try and save some of his kids. There’s a hero.
At least four years of emails sent by White House adviser Karl Rove have gone missing, a lawyer for the Republican National Committee informed congressional staff members Thursday, a front page article in today’s Washington Post reports.
"GOP officials took issue with Rep. Henry Waxman’s account of the briefing and said they still hope to find the e-mail as they conduct forensic work on their computer equipment," Michael Abramowitz reports for the Post. "But they acknowledged that they took action to prevent Rove — and Rove alone among the two dozen or so White House officials with RNC accounts — from deleting his e-mails from the RNC server. Waxman (D-Calif.) said he was told the RNC made that move in 2005."
I caught a reference to a 2005 article in the Boston Globe about the propaganda machines of the religious right. It was one I’d read before, but I don’t think I’d managed to blog about it then. It’s a good one…well worth reading still. These are religious right front organizations that take on the trappings of legitimate science and then inject themselves into the news stream as opposing viewpoints to well established institutions. They’re completely fake, but the mainstream news media, and in particular the TV networks, all give them a platform to spread their lies under a bogus effort at "balance", and because it suits the money at the top of the media corporations to keep republicans in power…
President Bush had a ready answer when asked in January for his view of adoption by same-sex couples: ”Studies have shown that the ideal is where a child is raised in a married family with a man and a woman," the president said.
Bush’s assertion raised eyebrows among specialists. The American Academy of Pediatrics, composed of leaders in the field, had found no meaningful difference between children raised by same-sex and heterosexual couples, based on a 2002 report written largely by a Boston pediatrician, Dr. Ellen C. Perrin.
But Bush’s statement was celebrated at a tiny think tank called the Family Research Institute, where the founder, Dr. Paul Cameron, believes Bush was referring to studies he has published in academic journals that are critical of gays and lesbians as parents. Cameron has published numerous studies with titles such as ”Gay Foster Parents More Apt to Molest" — a conclusion disputed by many other researchers.
The president’s statement was also welcomed at a small organization with an august-sounding name, the American College of Pediatricians. The college, which has a small membership, says on its website that it would be ”dangerously irresponsible" to allow same-sex couples to adopt children. The college was formed just three years ago, after the 75-year-old American Academy of Pediatrics issued its paper.
That pediatric study asserted a ”considerable body of professional evidence" that there is no difference between children of same-sex and heterosexual parents.
The Family Research Institute and the American College of Pediatrics are part of a rapidly growing trend in which small think tanks, researchers, and publicists who are open about their personal beliefs are providing what they portray as medical information on some of the most controversial issues of the day.
Created as counterpoints to large, well-established medical organizations whose work is subject to rigorous review and who assert no political agenda, the tiny think tanks with names often mimicking those of established medical authorities have sought to dispute the notion of a medical consensus on social issues such as gay rights, the right to die, abortion, and birth control.
For example, Cameron’s Family Research Institute, with an annual budget of less than $200,000, tries to counter the views of the 150,000-member American Psychological Association, which has an annual budget of $98 million. The tiny American College of Pediatricians has a single employee, yet it has been quoted as a counterpoint to the 60,000-member American Academy of Pediatrics.
(emphasis mine) The quickest way to deflate the propaganda of these religious right front groups is to shine a light on them. More often then not you find their bogus studies and stats getting injected into the political conversation without acknowledgment of where it came from. That’s because these outfits are well understood to be propaganda mills and not real scientific institutions, whatever their names make them sound like. So whenever politicians like president Nice Job Brownie start quoting their numbers, reporters need to ask where those numbers came from.
Senior Bush aides, asked for the basis of the comment about adoption, now say they are unaware of any studies comparing heterosexual and same-sex adoptions — by Cameron or by any pediatric association. The president, they say, was probably referring to studies that show children are better off living with both biological parents — though those studies have nothing to do with adoption by same-sex couples.
Duck and weave, duck and weave. You may remember the time Mr. Book Of Virtue Bill Bennett got caught on ABC’s This Weekquoting Paul Cameron’s bogus figure for the average lifespan of homosexuals. He first denied he got it from Cameron, then he said there were other researchers who got the same figures. And so there were. The other researcher Bennett pointed to, Jeffrey Satinover, had in fact, gotten his figures from Cameron too. When that was pointed out to him, Bennett retracted the claim, only to make it again some years later.
In June, the Rev. Bill Banuchi, executive director of the New York chapter of the Christian Coalition, said in a speech protesting Gay Pride Day that gays should be legally required to wear warning labels, not unlike Jewish stars under the Nazis.
"We put warning labels on cigarette packs because we know that smoking takes one or two years off the average life span, yet we celebrate a lifestyle that we know spreads every kind of sexually transmitted disease and takes at least 20 years off the average life span, according to the 2005 issue of the revered [sic] scientific journal Psychological Reports."
One month later, Dr. John Whiffen, chairman of the board of the National Physicians Center for Family Resources, a faith-basped advocacy group that was contracted by Bush Administration federal health officials to develop an abstinence education curriculum, said that, "There are obvious effects for male homosexuals from a health standpoint. Parents should discuss those with their child." Then he added: "It’s fairly well-accepted that smoking is not a good idea. It takes seven years off your life. It appears that male homosexuality takes more than that off your life. Naturally you should warn them about that."
You notice that none of these people said anything about where they got their information about homosexuality. That’s because they know full well that it comes from a completely untrustworthy source. And yet even knowing that, they continue to cite it, and all those other bogus groups with names that mimick actual institutions of science. All the while posturing as defenders of virtue and morality and godliness…that pesky ninth commandment exempted.
Two weeks ago, the University of Florida voted to deny Jeb Bush an honorary degree. By a 38-28 vote, the faculty Senate rejected the former governor’s nomination, citing concerns about some of Bush’s education initiatives, including his dismantling of affirmative action programs in the state:
In higher education circles, Bush’s greatest criticism came over his “One Florida” plan, which ended race-based admissions in state universities. Black enrollment dropped at UF and statewide after the change took effect, as critics predicted.
Bush’s policies of “rewarding and punishing schools according to students’ standardized test results and using vouchers to send certain students to private schools at public expense” also contributed to the rejection of his nomination.
Upset by this lack of Jeb Bush adoration, the conservative-controlled House Schools & Learning Council voted yesterday to force the university to rename its education school the “Jeb Bush College of Education.”
Over the faculty’s opposition, the school will now have “to erect ‘suitable markers‘ noting the college’s new name and include the revised name in all university documents, including catalogues and brochures.” The lawmakers acknowledge they “came up with the idea as an answer” to the faculty’s denial of Bush’s honorary degree.
I’m surprised they didn’t make them give Jeb a few more college degrees while they were at it…maybe a PhD in Advanced Physics or Computer Science or something. This may all seem like the same old, same old and yes it is, but look at it: a group of conservative lawmakers decided to force an institute of higher education to give someone recognition in the field of education that they had not earned from that institution. Yes, yes…often that only amounts to giving them piles of money…but at least the giving of money to a college or university makes it possible for that institution to continue to do its job. Jeb acted to deny minority students an education and drain the public schools of money they desperately need to educate kids, our nation’s future…voted to in other words, make the world poorer then it was before he took office, and he and his Conservative cronies expected that institution to give him accolades anyway. And when they didn’t, they forced them to. Next time you hear a conservative yap, yap, yapping about how people have to earn their place in this world, and that liberals are always giving people stuff they haven’t earned and don’t deserve…laugh in their face.
The Daily Dish: Enemy of the People: Meet Professor Walter F. Murphy, emeritus of Princeton University. He’s a former Marine, with five years of active service and 19 years in the reserve, and a legal critic of Roe vs Wade and supporter of the Alito confirmation. He’s also on the Terrorist No-Fly List:
I presented my credentials from the Marine Corps to a very polite clerk for American Airlines. One of the two people to whom I talked asked a question and offered a frightening comment: "Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that." I explained that I had not so marched but had, in September, 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the Web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the Constitution. "That’ll do it," the man said."
Just a heads up about what these people are up to.
I am posting the below with the permission of Professor Walter F. Murphy, emeritus of Princeton University. For those who do not know, Professor Murphy is easily the most distinguished scholar of public law in political science. His works on both constitutional theory and judicial behavior are classics in the field. Bluntly, legal scholarship that does not engage many themes in his book, briefly noted below, Constitutional Democracy, may be legal, but cannot be said to be scholarship. As interesting, for present purposes, readers of the book will discover that Murphy is hardly a conventional political or legal liberal. While he holds some opinions, most notably on welfare, similar to opinions held on the political left, he is a sharp critic of ROE V. WADE, and supported the Alito nomination. Apparently these credentials and others noted below are no longer sufficient to prevent one from becoming an enemy of the people.
"On 1 March 07, I was scheduled to fly on American Airlines to Newark, NJ, to attend an academic conference at Princeton University, designed to focus on my latest scholarly book, Constitutional Democracy, published by Johns Hopkins University Press this past Thanksgiving."
"When I tried to use the curb-side check in at the Sunport, I was denied a boarding pass because I was on the Terrorist Watch list. I was instructed to go inside and talk to a clerk. At this point, I should note that I am not only the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence (emeritus) but also a retired Marine colonel. I fought in the Korean War as a young lieutenant, was wounded, and decorated for heroism. I remained a professional soldier for more than five years and then accepted a commission as a reserve office, serving for an additional 19 years."
"I presented my credentials from the Marine Corps to a very polite clerk for American Airlines. One of the two people to whom I talked asked a question and offered a frightening comment: "Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that." I explained that I had not so marched but had, in September, 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the Web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the Constitution. "That’ll do it," the man said. "
"After carefully examining my credentials, the clerk asked if he could take them to TSA officials. I agreed. He returned about ten minutes later and said I could have a boarding pass, but added: "I must warn you, they=re going to ransack your luggage." On my return flight, I had no problem with obtaining a boarding pass, but my luggage was "lost." Airlines do lose a lot of luggage and this "loss" could have been a mere coincidence. In light of previous events, however, I’m a tad skeptical."
Nice. Welcome to George Bush’s America. If you’re thinking they "lost" his luggage so they could take it somewhere they could inspect it more thoroughly for evidence of a crime, you’re still not paying attention. This was harassment. State sanctioned harassment of someone who was critical of Bush. And they would have Wanted him to complain publicly about it. So harassment not only punishes its target, but also sends a message to anyone else thinking about speaking out against the Bush administration. One of DeLong’s commenter’s avers the following:
Possibly, just possibly, Walter Murphy might now question his support for the nomination of Samuel Alito.
Yah Think? Another commenter brings up the firing of all those federal prosecutors via this New York Times story:
April 9, 2007
Another Layer of Scandal
As Congress investigates the politicization of the United States attorney offices by the Bush administration, it should review the extraordinary events the other day in a federal courtroom in Wisconsin. The case involved Georgia Thompson, a state employee sent to prison on the flimsiest of corruption charges just as her boss, a Democrat, was fighting off a Republican challenger. It just might shed some light on a question that lurks behind the firing of eight top federal prosecutors: what did the surviving attorneys do to escape the axe?
Ms. Thompson, a purchasing official in the state’s Department of Administration, was accused by the United States attorney in Milwaukee, Steven Biskupic, of awarding a travel contract to a company whose chief executive contributed to the campaign of Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat. Ms. Thompson said the decision was made on the merits, but she was convicted and sent to prison before she could appeal.
The prosecution was a boon to Mr. Doyle’s opponent. Republicans ran a barrage of attack ads that purported to tie Ms. Thompson’s "corruption" to Mr. Doyle. Ms. Thompson was sentenced shortly before the election, which Governor Doyle won.
The Chicago-based United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit seemed shocked by the injustice of her conviction. It took the extraordinary step of releasing Ms. Thompson from prison immediately after hearing arguments, without waiting to issue a ruling. One of the judges hinted that Ms. Thompson may have been railroaded. "It strikes me that your evidence is beyond thin," Judge Diane Wood told the lawyer from Mr. Biskupic’s office.
For years now critics of those of us who have been warning of the creeping facisim of the Bush administration have been called hysterical, and suffering from something they call "Bush Derangement Syndrome". The only thing surprising about Ms. Thompson’s case is that she was allowed to challenge her imprisonment in the courts at all. Bush, Gonzalas and the republicans have made it quite clear that they think Habius Corpus is a luxury America can no longer afford…
I’m On The Lord’s Side…And That Must Mean You’re Not.
So after a couple weeks of dodging questions about why he’s busy helping a bunch of gutter crawling bigots pass an anti same-sex marriage amendment in his state, Colts Coach Dungy has finally decided to make it clear just exactly where he stands. Fine.
CARMEL, Ind. — Colts coach Tony Dungy said he knows some people would prefer him to steer clear of the gay marriage debate, but he used a speech Tuesday night to clearly stake out his position.
Dungy told more than 700 people at the Indiana Family Institute’s banquet that he agrees with that organization’s position supporting a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman.
"I appreciate the stance they’re taking, and I embrace that stance," Dungy said.
…
"IFI (The Indiana Family Institute) is saying what the Lord says," Dungy said. "You can take that and make your decision on which way you want to be. I’m on the Lord’s side."
Pisst…Hey…Tony… The Ku Klux Klan thinks they’re on the Lord’s side too. You think you’re not like them because you aren’t burning any crosses Tony? Think again…
The coach said his comments shouldn’t be taken as gay bashing, but rather his views on the matter as he sees them from a perspective of faith.
"We’re not anti- anything else. We’re not trying to downgrade anyone else. But we’re trying to promote the family — family values the Lord’s way," Dungy said.
Like hell you’re not trying to downgrade anyone. You just said there that anyone who supports equal marriage rights for same sex couples is a tool of Satan. Here’s what comes of that Mr. Righteous Man-o-god…
(New York City) Four men charged in the brutal homophobic assault on gay entertainer Kevin Aviance last summer pleaded guilty in a Manhattan court Wednesday.
Avaince was attacked as he left the Phoenix bar last June. The four beat him unmercifully, breaking his jaw, doing serious damage to one leg and leaving him with cuts and bruises over most of his body.
As they attacked him the four young men yelled homophobic slurs.
(Bartow, Florida) Two men charged with the brutal murder of a gay Winter Haven man have been ordered held without bail following a brief court appearance.
William David Brown Jr., 20, and Joseph Bearden, 21, are charged with first-degree murder and armed robbery in the killing of Ryan Keith Skipper, 25.
The prosecutor said he expects to argue for the maximum sentence on the grounds the killing was a hate crime.
Police had originally begun investigating the murder as a robbery gone wrong until associates of the accused said that Skipper had been killed after coming on to the men.
Skipper’s body was found last week on the side of a road. He had been stabbed more than 20 times.
…
Skipper is described by friends as outgoing and gentle. He was studying computer sciences.
On the Lord’s side. On the Lord’s side. Right. You and every segregationist who ever lived and claimed that mixed race marriages were against the Lord’s will.
I would really, really like it if someday some reporter got in this jackass’s face and asked him straight-up if he thinks that since he’s on the Lord’s side, are people who support same sex marriage on Satan’s side. And if they are, would his sport be better off if Satan’s followers stopped attending games. You want it to be a wholesome family experience, don’t you Tony?
GILLETTE, Wyo. A lesbian couple in Gillette have been told they can’t receive communion at the church they’ve attended since 1998, in part because they publicly opposed a bill that would have barred Wyoming from recognizing gay marriages. Leah Vader and Lynne Huskinson have attended Saint Matthew’s Catholic Church since 1998, and were married two years ago in Canada. Earlier this year, when the Legislature considered a bill that would have barred Wyoming from recognizing such marriages, the two said the bill amounted to discrimination.
Last week, they got a letter from the Reverend Cliff Jacobson of Saint Matthew’s, telling them they can no longer receive communion, in part because of their public position.
Jacobson says the church reaches out to homosexuals, but that it must do so within its own moral structure. He says the Cheyenne Diocese played a role in the decision to bar the women from receiving communion.
(emphasis mine…) Yeah the church reaches out to homosexuals. With a clenched fist. This is just the first crack of the whip. They’ve been hinting for years now that they’ll start using communion, and possibly even excommunication, as a way of punishing dissent. It’ll come down on the gay people in the pews first, because we’re the easy target. But heterosexuals who don’t vote the way Pope Ratzinger dictates, or who are politically active in politically incorrect ways, will be next. Never doubt that.
On the March 6 edition of Fox News Live, while discussing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-NY) March 4 speech and her participation in a commemorative civil rights march in Selma, Alabama, host E.D. Hill accused Clinton of affecting a "Southern drawl" during her speech and asked pollster Scott Rasmussen: "[W]ould it happen elsewhere, if she was attending, say, a GLAAD [Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation] convention, would she speak with a lisp?"
You just know they all think gays have limp wrists and walk with a swish too. Why the hell did Harry Reid agree to have a democratic presidential candidates debate hosted by Fox News? He going to ask Focus On The Family to host the one after that?
John Ashcroft. You remember him…right? The man who scared the steaming crap out of everyone when President Junior made him Attorney General, because of his bedrock fundamentalist contempt for all that civil liberties and religious pluralism stuff? The man whose father, a traveling Pentecostal minister, anointed him with oil in the kitchen the day he took office? The religious zealot who asked nominees for judgeships if they were faithful to their spouses, and whether they drank? Who vetoed a bill while governor of Missouri to allow liquor sales on Sunday? The sanctimonious jackass who said, "I don’t particularly care if I do what’s right in the sight of men. The important thing is for me to do right in God’s sight. The verdict of history is inconsequential; the verdict of eternity is what counts." The self righteous prig who ordered a cover for the statue of the "Spirit of Justice" in the lobby of the Justice Department because one of her breasts was exposed?
Former Attorney General John Ashcroft, who sent a letter this week to his successor Alberto Gonzales blasting the proposed merger of Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. and XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., approached XM in the days after the merger was announced offering the firm his consulting services, a spokesman for XM said Saturday.
The spokesman said XM declined Mr. Ashcroft’s offer to work as a lobbyist for the company.
Mr. Ashcroft was subsequently hired by the National Association of Broadcasters, which is fiercely opposed to the merger. On its behalf he conducted a review of the effects on competition if the two satellite radio companies were allowed to merge.
See…all this time you thought what made Ashcroft dangerous was his moral fanaticism. But people become fanatics precisely because they have no personal sense of the moral and decent. Their inner lives are a vast unexamined wasteland where no personal sense of right and wrong ever had a chance of taking root. So as they walk through their lives, they come to embrace a kind of idolatry that’s all performance and ritual and ostentatious humility, dress themselves up as the idol’s champion and commissar, wage righteous war on behalf of it, so they can appear to themselves, to each other, and to the world, as all they are not within. Moral. Honorable. Decent. They wear their religiosity on their sleeve like that because not having a conscience, it’s the only place they have to put it.
Which is why fanatics are so dangerous. It’s not their moralizing. Fanaticism is the opposite of moralizing. They are incapable of moralizing. They have no brakes. They’ll do whatever that stone idol sitting silently in the middle of that vast inner wasteland tells them to.
Speaking today at the Conservative Political Action Conference, right-wing pundit Ann Coulter said: “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards.” Audience members said “ohhh” and then cheered.
A 21-year-old man from Bayonne, New Jersey was followed off the PATH train in Hoboken and attacked by two men who had been harassing him on the train for, among other things, wearing pink pants.
Hobokenpath Police are calling the attack an anti-gay hate crime, according to the Jersey Journal:
"When the train pulled into the Hoboken station, the two men followed the Bayonne man off the train and up the stairs, then attacked him near a newsstand on the concourse in Hoboken Terminal, police said. The man required 12 stitches to close facial wounds, police said, adding that he also had a black eye and was temporarily blinded in one eye. Using video shot from security cameras, police were able to identify Hoboken High School student Andy Rivera, 19, of Marshall Drive. He was brought to the police station for questioning and arrested Tuesday at 2 p.m. on charges of bias intimidation and aggravated assault."
The other assailant is still at large, but a warrant has been issued for his arrest.
I’ll bet Couter’s audience would have cheered that beating too. Coulter, you’ll recall, is the well respected conservative pundit who said her only problem with Timothy McVeigh is he didn’t go to the New York Times building.
Former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA), prior to Coulter’s appearance: “I am happy to hear that after you hear from me, you will hear from Ann Coulter. That is a good thing. Oh yeah!”
Police in Detroit released a sketch Thursday of the man suspected of killing Andrew Anthos, a 72-year-old disabled gay man whose dream was to light the Michigan State Capitol dome red, white and blue for Independence Day.
Anthos died Feb. 23, 10 days after a fellow bus rider, spouting anti-gay slurs, paralyzed him with a blow from behind with a metal pipe. Police have since questioned several people aboard the bus, including the wheelchair-bound friend Anthos was helping through the snow when he was struck.
Coming up…another lecture from David Broder and the other Wise Old Men of Washington, about how liberals are so hateful, and just too damn angry…
…I believe this is a vital issue in the life of the church. The hope of wholeness and holiness of life is integral to the Gospel message. Jesus didn’t die on the cross to save us from throwing gum wrappers on the sidewalk or using the wrong fork to eat our tofu, he died to save our deepest selves from our darkest sins. And, because we are created with human bodies full of hormones and fallen psyches full of what my friend Bill Stafford calls "disordered affections," many of those deepest sins will involve our sexuality. We are not given new life and new power in Christ so we can do what we darn well please. We are not our own, we are bought with a price, says St. Paul. Therefore, he says, we are to glorify God with our bodies.
…
In August of 21003, ECUSA’s General Convention created an uproar when it decided to endorse and bless the consecration to the office of bishop a man publically and proudly living a homo-erotic relationship. This unprecedented decision–made in the face of international pleas that it not take place–created an uproar in the whole Christian and, indeed, the entire mono-theistic world. The Anglican Communion, under the direction of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, created a commission to explore how the communion could and should respond to this provocative, unilateral action by one small branch of the Anglican Communion…
…
The Episcopal Church needs to be called to just the sort of repentance and humility it says it believes. Only that sort of clear, forthright repentance can lead to reconciliation…
Church ousts him after ‘inappropriate relationship’
An Orange Park priest and leading voice in the theologically conservative Anglican movement in America has been stripped of his clerical credentials after having "an inappropriate relationship" with an adult female church member, the parish’s top lay leader said Monday.
The Rev. SAMUEL C. PASCOE was removed Feb. 10 from his position as senior rector at Grace Church (Anglican) and lost his ministerial license as a result of the relationship, said David Nelson, senior warden of the former Episcopal congregation.
Pascoe, who is married with three sons, said he couldn’t comment on the situation and referred all questions to Nelson.
Pascoe, 56, for several years has been an outspoken critic of the Episcopal Church USA for what he and others see as the denomination’s increasingly progressive interpretation of Scripture and its growing acceptance of homosexuality.
When the denomination elected an openly gay priest as bishop of New Hampshire in 2003, Pascoe helped lead a movement that resulted in his and several other parishes quitting the denomination and its Jacksonville-based Episcopal Diocese of Florida. He sharply criticized Florida Bishop John Howard for refusing to quit the national church.
"He’s known nationally, for sure, and he’s probably the biggest player in Florida," said David Virtue of Virtueonline.org, an Internet-based Anglican news and commentary site with about 4 million readers.
Pascoe led his parish into the Anglican Mission in the Americas, then orchestrated a $4 million fundraising campaign to build new facilities after the congregation left Grace Episcopal property in 2006, Virtue said.
Virtue said the tragedy isn’t for the Anglican movement but for Pascoe and his family.
"He is a godly evangelical who struggled for the faith, led his parish out … and started all over again, and then suddenly this," Virtue said. "It defies all reason."
The Rev. Kurt Dunkle, a spokesman for Howard and the newly installed rector at Grace Episcopal Church, said the diocese has no comment.
Nor did the Rev. Neil Lebhar, a spokesman for the Anglican Alliance of North Florida and another leader of the region’s Anglican movement.
Nelson said the parish was informed of the relationship and Pascoe’s status during Ash Wednesday services last week and again in services Sunday.
"It’s a painful thing that has taken place," Nelson said. "And it’s difficult for Sam given the comments he has made" on issues of sexual morality.
Ah…just blame the homos. That’s the routine in that glass house you call a church isn’t it? It isn’t Sam’s fault, whatever he did that was…inappropriate. It’s ours…right? Because Gene Robinson became a bishop poor Sam just lost all his moral bearings and he couldn’t help himself. Blame Gene Robinson. Sam’s a righteous man of God so it can’t be his fault he’s a jackass. It has to be the gays fault. Blame us. That’s what you think we were put on this earth for after all, isn’t it?
There are those who do not believe that the institution of marriage is under assault. There are those who do not believe that same-sex marriage is a knowing attempt to undermine the nature of marriage. There are those who do not believe that many homosexuals bear a particular animus for heterosexual marriage, and have designs beyond mere tolerance.
Then there are those of us who live in the real world.
You need to pay attention to what Shapiro is saying because it’s all there, plain as day. Gay people in his reckoning want the right to marry Specifically in order to destroy marriage. And because we hate it so much we’re willing to throw our very selves at it to destroy it. Dig it. According to Shapiro, our ultimate weapon of choice for destroying marriage is…us. Shapiro isn’t merely saying in his Human Events article that we want to destroy marriage, not merely that we hate the institution of marriage because we know that it represents a spiritual state that only heterosexuals can enter into, he’s saying that we know just how depraved and unfit our relationships are, so we want to have our relationships embraced by it, in order that our depravity will destroy it. If you still have trouble believing how thoroughly the gutter has demonized homosexual people in their own minds, read that article. It says it all. When Ben Shapiro looks at gay people, he simply does not see human beings. He can’t. He sees only monsters. This is how bigots think.
What provokes him is the initiative filed in Washington State recently, in the wake of the supreme court ruling last year that the state had a legitimate interest in restricting marriage to opposite sex couples for the welfare of children. Activists in the state have simply called the heterosexual majority on it, by filing a referendum of their own to make having children mandatory in order to be married. No children, no marriage. Of course no one expects it to pass, but that’s not to say there won’t be a lot of fun to be had watching the religious right argue that the ability to bear children is only a barrier to marriage for same sex couples.
Shapiro sees the weakness here. Basing the arguments against same-sex marriage on children makes no sense if you’re going to let opposite sex couples who will not or can not have children marry anyway. The exception disproves the rule, and makes it clear that the issue isn’t children at all, but homosexuality. The problem for Ben and his kind, is that in defending the exclusion of same sex couples from marriage simply because they are same sex couples, the argument then becomes chillingly honest in its core bigotry.
Shapiro’s article rises to almost Orson Scott Card levels of contempt for the inner lives of homosexual people in its matter-of-fact exaltation of heterosexual coupling as something sacred and divine. But as usual with the right, the rhetoric of the sacred is merely excusing not devotional. A squirt or two of Righteous Men Of God perfume sprayed over the stench of that open sewer they call their conscience, in the hope that it will be a tad less obvious to anyone with a nose…
Advocates of same-sex marriage argue that gender is literally meaningless. It is for that reason that they compare gender to race in legal contexts…
Well I don’t know anyone supporting same-sex marriage who thinks gender is literally meaningless, only that in this particular context, a legal, secular covenant of marriage, it’s irrelevant. There is just no factual basis for asserting otherwise.
It isn’t children…
If gender is meaningless, children do not need both mother and father; a father and a father, two mothers, six fathers and a mother — any or all may suffice. To homosexual marriage proponents, the fact that only the sexual union between men and women produces children is an unfortunate accident of nature.
But, this is exactly what Washington State referendum throws back in the faces of crackpots like Shapiro. In fact, children have no bearing whatsoever on the ability of a couple to marry or not. You are not required to have children, you are not required to be fit to raise children, you are not even required to be Capable of having your own biological children. All you have to be, is an opposite sex couple. And here Ben illustrates perfectly the reason why that’s purely an animus based form of discrimination…
Gender is not meaningless, of course. The radical individualism that denies all distinction between men and women is deeply pernicious. It denies the spiritual in mankind. It denies the obvious physical and spiritual bounty springing from traditional marriage…In one sense, Washington’s same-sex advocates do us a favor: They make clear that in order to deny homosexual marriage, we must uphold the beautiful and natural distinctions between men and women. They also make clear that we must uphold the value of heterosexuality over homosexuality. We must take up the gauntlet and, in doing so, vindicate the possibility of a higher spiritual elevation through the deepest possible human relationship.
(emphasis mine)
And there it is: Homosexuals don’t love…they just have sex…
Shapiro’s position is that marriage is a sacred institution that same sex couples are simply incapable of entering into, not merely because they don’t have the right combination of genitals, but because they do not, Can Not, love one another as deeply, as wholeheartedly, as devotedly as heterosexuals do. Heterosexual love is spiritual. What homosexuals do is merely carnal.
This isn’t exactly the first time I’ve heard this argument. I’ve had people tell me to my face as far back as my teen years that they flat-out didn’t believe that a same sex couple could possibly be capable of loving each other as deeply or as wholeheartedly as a heterosexual couple. And this is the unspoken (sometimes spoken outright) premise behind ever dolled up statistic you’ve ever read about how promiscuous homosexuals are. Homosexuals don’t love…they just have sex… Now…re-read that first part I quoted you…
There are those who do not believe that the institution of marriage is under assault. There are those who do not believe that same-sex marriage is a knowing attempt to undermine the nature of marriage. There are those who do not believe that many homosexuals bear a particular animus for heterosexual marriage, and have designs beyond mere tolerance.
Then there are those of us who live in the real world.
A particular animus for heterosexual marriage… So…follow the thinking here: Homosexuals are depraved. So depraved they cannot possibly enter into the kinds of loving and devoted intimate relationships that heterosexuals do. To even consider putting their dirty, brief, barren sexual assignations on the same plain as heterosexual love amounts to a despicable attack on the very human capacity to love and cherish, body and soul, ’till death do you part. Heterosexual love is spiritual. Homosexuality is just empty lustful rutting, utterly devoid of any deep spiritual meaning for the people involved.
But here’s the problem with all this: if homosexuals are incapable of feeling that kind of tender, cherishing human love, then why are they so damn insistent about having the right to marry? What is all this crap about securing their relationships, providing for one another, hospital visitation and all that? Why would homosexuals even care about all that? Why aren’t they all just laughing it off that they can’t get married? Oh…look at all those silly heterosexuals, going on about that love thing again…how boring and pointless… Why do they fight for their sterile relationships so fiercely? What could their cheap tricks, their empty, barren assignations, possibly mean to them?
It must be envy. It must be envy turned to hate. Homosexuals must be so utterly depraved that they want to drag everyone else down into their gutter too. Because they can’t bear to witness the sight of that higher spiritual elevation, that deepest possible human relationship that they can never enter into themselves.
Next time someone hears this little gutter crawling maggot use the phrase "Love the sinner, hate the sin", or something like it, please laugh in his face. If any side in this fight is incapable of experiencing the emotion of love, it’s the one that keeps insisting that love is something you feel for a gender, not a person. No Ben…lust is what you feel for a gender. It’s how we’re wired as sexual beings. And yes…most people mate to the opposite sex. But some of us mate to the same sex. Love is what transcends all that, and takes it to that higher plain that you know absolutely nothing whatsoever about, because you can’t see the person, for the gender.
Advocates of same-sex marriage argue that gender is literally meaningless.
That’s simply ignorant. What the right asserts is that gender is everything. What anyone with half a brain knows is that there is more to a person then their gender. But this kind of thinking past surface appearances has always been hard for right wingers to get their minds wrapped around. Consider the difficulty they’ve always had comprehending that there is more to a person then the color of their skin. Get one of these drooling morons started on The Bell Curve sometime. Go ahead. It’ll be fun.
It’s probably somewhat easier for a gay person to see the confusion here then a straight person. Because heterosexuals mate to the opposite sex, it’s all too easy for them to mistake the intimate and spiritual complementary nature of two lovers for their gender. But the complement isn’t the gender, it’s the person. Otherwise, any two random opposite sex pairs must be equally capable of experiencing that same spiritual intimacy and clearly that just simply isn’t true. Some people are not only incompatible, but explosively so. And most of us know all this from our day to day experience in that real world right wingers can’t bear to look at because their cheapshit conceits wouldn’t survive it. Some people just plain don’t get along. And some people…just can’t live without each other.
If homosexual sex wasn’t rewarding and satisfying to homosexuals then we wouldn’t do that. So much so goddamned obvious…right? Yes you babbling idiot, the parts fit. And I’m here to tell you they work very well in that configuration thank you. The first time I put my hands on a guy I desired, felt the muscle and bone under his skin, something deep down inside of me Just Lit Up. I had no idea what the word ‘passion’ meant before that. I sure as hell knew what it meant afterward. If homosexual sex wasn’t rewarding and satisfying to homosexuals then we wouldn’t do that.
But it takes more then sex to make a marriage. It takes more then a sexually compatible gender. Any couple, gay or straight, whose only common ground between them is sex, isn’t likely to last long. Sex can seal an intimate soul-to-soul bond between two people. It can join a couple together where there is love, and lift them both to that higher spiritual plain. But it cannot put love someplace where it isn’t. You cannot make sex the basis of a marriage, it simply won’t work. What makes it work, is the way two people complement each other deep down inside. It is the people, not their gender, that make a marriage.
It doesn’t take a radical individualist to see how this works, just someone with even a meager regard for the essential beauty and dignity of the human race. We are not ants in an anthill, or bees in a beehive, each of us predestined to live out the measure of our lives according to our biological caste. We are human beings, each of us endowed with our own unique personality and consciousness. That diversity among individuals is what has made us so successful as a species. But it also means that we have somewhat complicated love lives. It’s easy to jump in the sack for a one night stand with a willing date…that’s just an instinct that’s older then the fish, let alone the mammals, let alone the primates. It’s much, Much harder to find a soulmate and make a life together with them. If gender was all there was to it, that wouldn’t be true. The country music singers would have to find something else besides broken hearts and lonely nights to sing about.
But human cultures for generations and even today some cultures still, have tried to behave as if it Were true. Arranged marriages. Strict rules on marrying outside your faith, or your class, or your race. As if the human heart knows these things more then it knows the beloved person within. If anything destroyed marriage the way the Ben Shapiros of the world knew it, it was the Enlightenment, and Democracy. But then religious fanatics and secular totalitarians have long despise both of these human events.
The ironies here are monumental. You have a political movement that ostentatiously stands for individual freedom against big government and the so-called nanny state, that categorically rejects the fact that the most spiritual and intimate of all human relationships is between two individual people, and not a couple of faceless gender stereotypes. You have them arguing in all seriousness that this most intimate and spiritual of human relationships only exists to benefit society, rather then the two people whose lives are at the center of it. You have a political movement that stands squarely against Darwin, and puts on a really swell show of moral outrage at the very idea that human beings are part of the animal kingdom too, arguing that a biological fact we share with nearly every other vertebrate species on this good earth counts for more then the unique humanity of the individuals who make up a couple. And, most amazingly of all, here is a political movement that avails itself of every excuse it can grab to bellyache about the sexualization of America, telling us that it’s the sex a couple has that makes a marriage, not the love they feel for, and give to, each other. How much more of this do people have to see before they finally get it, that the religious right and their American conservative enablers are to marriage, as brothels are to chastity?
They don’t give a good goddamn about marriage. They care about power. They care a Lot about power. Here’s their spirituality: They want to tell us how to worship, what churches we can go to, and when and what God to believe in and how to pray to it. They want to tell us who we can marry, and why, and when we can have sex with them, and when we can’t and why. They want us to understand that how much we may love someone it doesn’t matter. What matters is whether or not we get their permission. Their permission to worship. Their permission of have sex. Their permission to love. And above all else they want us to understand that our fulfillment in life isn’t to be found in the arms of the one we love, but in how well we serve them.
Think I’m being overwrought here? Two Words: Radical. Individualism.
That’s not just how Ben is putting it these days, that’s a catch phrase now all throughout the kook pews. Radical Individualism. And a radical individualist is someone who holds…
…these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
It is not merely the human rights of gay people that are at stake here. It is not merely the intimate lives of gay people that are on the chopping block if these people get their final way.
Take one last look again, at how completely certain in his own mind Ben is, that same sex couples are incapable of loving as completely, as wholeheartedly, as opposite sex couples are. There is the unmovable prejudice. But you have to understand, it’s not just about homosexuals. We are not human beings in their regard. But most people who walk this earth aren’t either. Ben and his tribe are the True Humans. The rest of us are the mud people. Only True Humans feel. Only True Humans have needs. The rest of us have our place. That is what they believe. That is the world they inhabit. That is why appeals to basic human decency do not reach them.
This blog is powered by WordPress and is hosted at Winters Web Works, who also did some custom design work (Thanks!). Some embedded content was created with the help of The Gimp. I proof with Google Chrome on either Windows, Linux or MacOS depending on which machine I happen to be running at the time.
