Showing posts with label anti-gay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-gay. Show all posts

Friday, May 4, 2012

Billy Graham is a bigot

I wrote this to him:

You know whats extra sad here? Marriage equality is coming to America. Numerous cases are making their way to the Supreme Court. North Carolina already bans same-sex marriage. All you did, was slap the face of every gay person in America with your hate. All the gays who once admired you, all the gays who lose their faith because of your hate. That is on your hands. You will have to answer to your hate when you pass. So sad for you and so sad for all the families you hurt, with your selfish war against love.

Thursday, May 3, 2012

Russia is the new Nazi Germany

So St. Petersburg passed a law banning gay people from assembling, as well as any type of gay media.  Gays no longer have free speech, and anyone "promoting" anything gay, or saying anything positive about gay people, are now breaking the law.  Now Russia is trying to pass such legislation to make all things gay illegal.  Its so heartbreaking.


Saturday, April 28, 2012

Christians walk out of phenomenal speech in utter shame

Dan Savage delivered an excellent speech called "Journalism on the Edge" at a National High School Journalism Convention event.  Christian students walk out of speech in obvious shame when Savage begins discussing the utter hypocrisy in using the Bible to bully gay people while ignoring everything else unfavorable in the "holy" book about how to live.  Crowds cheered in applause during key speaking points.  Savage also addresses the students walking out pointing out how different it must feel when the bullies have their excuses ripped to pieces:



Bullying is never worthy of a defense whether you are a slaveowner or a gaybasher. Thats the message and it was not much of a stretch. Any Christian today would call the bible's approval of slave-ownership bullshit - Savage made a logical parallel and this was just too much to bear for a handful of kids. Why would they be so offended by his disapproval of using the bible as a weapon to bully others? Savage defended himself and all the gay kids in high school today in a way they may not be able to do for themselves. Generally, there isnt a giant gay population in any highschool and in many, there is one or two who are out. I applaud him.

But this is the thing: times are changing and tables are turning. Is this were any other human rights issue, it would probably get really ugly and potentially bloody. However, I seriously doubt gay people have the heart for that. Bitterness? Definitely, but revenge, not likely. We dont want to harm anyone but we will defend ourselves and if that requires calling a kettle black, then in my mind, its all good. The point of journalism as I see is to question ideas through communication. These kids who walked out didnt want to hear the idea at all and were extremely disrespectful to the presenter. Had he not referred to their behavior as "pansy assed" then the only thing people would upset about is his referring to the bible's immoral set of mores as such. What they did was cowardly, and though not my words, he clearly stated that.

The message was not hurt and cannot be hurt. The message is a step in our social process of becoming a civilized species - it will happen, because it must happen. Love conquers all, and it will. Those who cannot accept it, will be outcast an in my view that is whats starting to happen. The speech is an example of that. Evolving is not always fun for everyone. It certainly hasnt been all fun for gay folks over the last 50 years, and it probably wont be fun for anti-gay folks today and into the future. Bless their hearts!

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Robert Spitzer pens letter of apology

Addressing the editor of Archives of Sexual Behavior Dr. Ken Zucker, Robert Spitzer writes a letter of apology concerning the study published in 2001 which claims highly motivated homosexuals can change their orientation to heterosexual.  Spitzer is now retracting the study and owning up to some major research flaws.  He is remorseful that anti-gay activists have misused the study to claim that people can change their sexual orientation, although the study was unable to prove so irrefutably. A portion of his letter was obtained by Truth Wins Out:


    Several months ago I told you that because of my revised view of my 2001 study of reparative therapy changing sexual orientation, I was considering writing something that would acknowledge that I now judged the major critiques of the study as largely correct. After discussing my revised view of the study with Gabriel Arana, a reporter for American Prospect, and with Malcolm Ritter, an Associated Press science writer, I decided that I had to make public my current thinking about the study. Here it is.

    Basic Research Question. From the beginning it was: “can some version of reparative therapy enable individuals to change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual?” Realizing that the study design made it impossible to answer this question, I suggested that the study could be viewed as answering the question, “how do individuals undergoing reparative therapy describe changes in sexual orientation?” – a not very interesting question.

    The Fatal Flaw in the Study – There was no way to judge the credibility of subject reports of change in sexual orientation. I offered several (unconvincing) reasons why it was reasonable to assume that the subject’s reports of change were credible and not self-deception or outright lying. But the simple fact is that there was no way to determine if the subject’s accounts of change were valid.

    I believe I owe the gay community an apology for my study making unproven claims of the efficacy of reparative therapy. I also apologize to any gay person who wasted time and energy undergoing some form of reparative therapy because they believed that I had proven that reparative therapy works with some “highly motivated” individuals.

    Robert Spitzer. M.D.
    Emeritus Professor of Psychiatry,
    Columbia University




Wednesday, April 25, 2012

Maddow reports on Robert Spitzer's retraction

According to Spitzer, the study is not scientific, but is simply a collection of anecdotes and testimonials. He is ashamed of the research being published in a scientific journal as to give the impression that it is empirical work when it is no more than self-reporting results under heavy influence from religious figures.