The Gaytheist Agenda

We found out a few days ago that they finally assigned a number to the Marriage Ban Initiative here and it’s #8 on the ballot. In response, my better half pulled an all nighter and created some new designs. Here they are and as always they’re available on a wide variety of merchandise including clothing, hats, yard-signs, bumper stickers, buttons and more.

There’s also this one, which we wore to Pride this weekend. It got lots of attention and has been selling well the past few weeks.

So there they are. The latest designs to help beat down the hateful anti-marriage amendment. Enjoy!

 

As I mentioned I’ll be heading to SF this weekend for Pride. Hopefully we’ll see a few of you there. Nonetheless I’ll be sure to get plenty of pictures and fill you in on the happenings. In the meantime I invite you to vow to vote no on the California Marriage Ban. Click below to do it:

You can also join me and Sapphocrat in our boycott of Bolthouse Farms. Their Bolthouse Foundation just gave $100,000 to our enemies. The Newswire has the whole sordid story.

And remember, Equality for All is still looking for volunteers so you can sign up any time, or you can make a donation here if you don’t have the time to volunteer. The bigots are pulling out all the stops and we need all the help we can get.

 

Sapphocrat and I will be heading into SF this weekend to catch some of the Pride festivities, and also to volunteer for Equality for All. There is so much to be done to defeat the November Marriage Amendment Ballot Initiative. Equality for All is still looking for volunteers to help out, so if you’re available this weekend or anytime between now and November click the link and sign up.

From 3-6pm Sunday we’ll be with Equality for all. Earlier in the afternoon and later in the evening we’ll be elsewhere mingling and having fun. We’ll be wearing our CAN I VOTE ON YOUR MARRIAGE NOW? T-Shirts, and we’ll be handing out matching buttons until we run out. Hope to see you there!

 

It’s bad enough when the RRRW has to stick their noses in everything that goes on here, but it goes beyond the pale when they push their homophobia into the lives of our neighbors across the pond. Heinz corporation had this wonderful ad depicting family life where the parents just happened to be two men.

Apparently the folks at American Family Association have decided that even in foreign nations they get to define what a family is, and what goes into commercials. After receiving 200 complaints Heinz pulled the commercial from the air. Wayne Besen of Truth Wins Out appeared on CNN to defend the ad.

 
From the Truth Wins Out Blog:

The Headline News segment included Randy Sharp of the AFA, who claimed that the ad promoted a homosexual lifestyle: “What does mayonnaise have to do with homosexuals and their lifestyle?” Sharp claimed that 70,000 AFA supporters in the United States disagreed with the ad.

How is it that 70,000 American AFA supporters in the US even saw the ad to determine that they disagreed with it? I smell BS.

Business marketing analyst Dan Hill said Heinz was right to pull the ad. Hill said:

“In business you can never afford to forget that the bottom line is that ‘family values’ means ‘my family, not your family,’ and I think in the UK most households have traditional family structures.”

Well, perhaps Heinz could rely on “traditional families” to buy their products then since they’re obviously not opposed to throwing us aside to cater to them (which is par for the course really). There are plenty of other brands out there.

 

Sapphocrat and I got our marriage license yesterday afternoon. It was a breeze really. We purposely waited almost a week and went a county away in hopes of avoiding long lines and it worked. We were able to put in our application online, and after a five-minute wait in line we signed the form, gave our affirmations and got our license. Actually, we got two licenses. The first is the official one that goes back to the state after our wedding, which is going to be next month, and the second is a keepsake license that we keep after the ceremony. Sweet.

 

This one is pretty nasty. A group of swingers in Texas apparently doped children (some of whom were their own and others who attended a local day-care center) with painkillers and made them perform sex shows for them. (I wonder why it is, if the RRRW is so against sexual perversion and extramarital sex, they aren’t crusading against “swingers”. But that’s for another time…back to the story.)

A tiny Texas community is bracing itself for more revelations in a child abuse case, in which children as young as five were allegedly given powerful painkillers and prompted to perform sex shows for adults.
…..
In all, six adults have been charged in connection with the case, including a parent of three of the children.
Mineola, about 80 miles east of Dallas, was the location for the sex shows, which were performed in a building where prosecutors say four children were trained to perform in front of an audience of 50 to 100 once a week.
…..

Sick, sick, sick. Yet people claim same-sex couples shouldn’t be able to have children because the risk of abuse is too great.

 

Addendum. A comment has arrived. Blue Linchpin said:

 

Surprised? I’m not. It’s been going on forever. Only they’re called Child Beauty Pageants!

As much as I dislike child beauty pageants I really can’t equate them to what the sick SOBs in TX did to those children. It’s true that they’re both forms of exploitation, but the pageants aren’t sexual abuse. They’re close, but they’re not there…yet.

I wrote previously about a recent study that found differences between the brains of straight and gay individuals. There’s a Slate piece on the same study that goes beyond the Time article I quoted.

So, what’s the common factor? If the study’s design rules out learned influences, and if the results in women rule out genetics, that leaves what the authors call “hormonal influences” or noncognitive differences in the infant environment. According to the Guardian, the same research team has “begun another study to investigate brain symmetry in newborn babies, to see if it can be used to predict their future sexual orientation.” If it can, that will scratch postnatal factors off the list, and the search will narrow to hormones in the womb. Already, the authors point to evidence that homosexuality may be caused by “under-exposure to prenatal androgens” in males and “over-exposure” in females.

There’s the “more research” I was hoping for. It would be wonderful if we could determine whether the brain differences are present at birth or if they form later in life.

But here comes the part that broaches the concern many LGBT people have even in their quest for proof that being gay is innate; the fact that our opponents will do all they can to eradicate it medically, even if it means doing so in the womb. They continue to see us as a flaw, a defect, and still wish to wipe us out at any cost.

…..
Would hormonal intervention work in humans? Should we try it? Some thinkers are intrigued. Last year, the Rev. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote: “If a biological basis is found, and if a prenatal test is then developed, and if a successful treatment to reverse the sexual orientation to heterosexual is ever developed, we would support its use.” Mohler told the Associated Press that morally, this would be no different from curing fetal blindness or any other “medical problem.” The Rev. Joseph Fessio, editor of the press that publishes the pope’s work, agreed: “Same-sex activity is considered disordered. If there are ways of detecting diseases or disorders of children in the womb … that respected the dignity of the child and mother, it would be a wonderful advancement of science.”

If the idea of chemically suppressing homosexuality in the womb horrifies you, I have bad news: You won’t be in the room when it happens. Parents control medical decisions, and surveys indicate that the vast majority of them would be upset to learn that their child was gay. Already, millions are screening embryos and fetuses to eliminate those of the “wrong” sex. Do you think they won’t screen for the “wrong” sexual orientation, too?

Liberals are slow to see what’s coming. They’re still fighting the culture war. The Toronto Star, like other papers, finds a neuroscientist who thinks the new study “should erode the moral judgments often made against homosexual preferences and rebut any argument that it is a mere a lifestyle choice.” Well, yes. But then what? The reduction of homosexuality to neurobiology doesn’t mean your sexual orientation can’t be controlled. It just means the person controlling it won’t be you.

…..

I’ve seen it coming for some time now. What, with the “ex-gay” movement’s ferocity I knew in a heartbeat that if a biological cause were found for homosexuality the first thing the RRRW would do would be to work on a scientific “cure” for it. If they embraced science for one reason only it would be to rid the world of gay people. I daresay some of them, the most extreme ones, might even give up their anti-abortion stance if it was predicted a fetus was to be born gay. Radical thoughts, yes, but after what I’ve heard and read from some of the more virulent anti-gay contingent I don’t think I’m that far off base.

 


 
Addendum. A comment has arrived. Ebon said:

This stuff always pisses me off. if there’s one reason above all others that I hate the Religious Reich, it’s the perversion of science. If we do find a biological basis for homosexuality and if that biological basis can be manipulated (lot of “if”s there), it still doesn’t mean that we should do it.

All the things that could be done with that kind of technology and they’re fixated on eliminating something that doesn’t even cause any harm? WTF? All the applications research like that could have and the idiots are fixated on narrowing the wondrous variety of humanity down to a dull little box of vanilla. How limited, how insulting, how small a world.

Indeed. It just proves once again that they don’t, as they say, “love the sinner but hate the sin”. They truly hate gay people, for why else would they seek to completely eradicate us by any means possible? (If the language and propaganda they use to demonize us wasn’t enough to convince skeptics this certainly should.)

I can’t help but wonder why I’m always reminded of the eugenics movement when it comes to these people…

 

Kevin said:

Long ago when arguing with some fundie that people were born gay or straight he cameback and said that violent criminals are said to be born that way, does that mean society should let them rampage and hurt whoever they want?

That’s when I realized it just doesn’t matter if science finds an answer to this, politically and socially people have a right to be gay no matter where it came from.

And I agree that those so inflamed over gayness will stop at nothing to stop it if they can, including manipulating the fetus in the womb or even abortion of a gay fetus though they find abortion abhorrent.

Over the years I’ve found there is no logic with these people, just pure, raw emotion, and they can find a way to justify any kind of action. Lying for Jesus is a noble thing to them.

If I had a dollar for every time homosexuality had been compared to murder, rape, theft and the like I’d be rich. Filthy rich. I’m disgusted the way we get likened to literal criminals who commit harmful acts against others, but then look who’s doing the comparisons. It’s not as if they’re a font of compassion or integrity. Then after they spew lies about us they turn around and plot to harm us. Par for the course, really.

The Radical Realist said:

I f***ing love the hypocrisy of that baptist fool. Despite the horror of the possibility of eliminating gay people via the womb, I’m practically rolling on the floor laughing at the hypocrisy. According to his twisted logic, it’s not okay to f*** with god’s will when a poor meth head with 4 kids becomes pregnant with another one, or when a person has been a vegetable for 12 years; yet it is okay to f*** with his will to eradicate homosexuals when it satisfies your irrational fear and hatred of gays. Nice.

Pure comedy.

All life is sacred from the moment of conception, don’t you know, unless that life is L,G,B or T. Then it needs to be “fixed”. Paging Dr. Mengele.

 

Are people gay by choice or by birth? That’s the question that keeps being asked, and one that is at the heart of the fight for LGBT rights. LGBT advocates tend to believe either that being gay is inherent or that it doesn’t matter while detractors insist it is a choice. A new study provides more evidence that being gay may very well be biological.

…..
Scientists at the Karolinska Institute studied brain scans of 90 gay and straight men and women, and found that the size of the two symmetrical halves of the brains of gay men more closely resembled those of straight women than they did straight men. In heterosexual women, the two halves of the brain are more or less the same size. In heterosexual men, the right hemisphere is slightly larger. Scans of the brains of gay men in the study, however, showed that their hemispheres were relatively symmetrical, like those of straight women, while the brains of homosexual women were asymmetrical like those of straight men. The number of nerves connecting the two sides of the brains of gay men were also more like the number in heterosexual women than in straight men.

Just what these brain differences mean is still not clear. Ever since 1991, when Simon LeVay first documented differences in the hypothalamus of gay and straight men, researchers have been struggling to understand what causes these differences to occur. Until now, the brain regions that scientists have come to believe play a role in sexual orientation have been related to either reproduction or sexuality. The Swedish study, however, is the first to find differences in parts of the brain not normally involved in reproduction — the denser network of nerve connections, for example, was found in the amygdala, known as the emotional center of the brain. “The big question has always been, if the brains of gay men are different, or feminized, as earlier research suggests,” says Dr. Eric Vilain, professor of human genetics at University of California Los Angeles, “then is it just limited to sexual preference or are there other regions that are gender atypical in gay males? For the first time, in this study it looks like there are regions of the brain not directly involved in sexuality that seem to be feminized in gay males.”
…..

Very intriguing. Granted it was a small sample size, but it’s a perfect springboard for more research of this nature. I’d love to see a study like this expanded, and of course I look forward to others of its nature.

 

This is some of the best news I’ve had recently. This means that the November ballot initiative brought on by the RRRW here in CA may be stopped. Sapphocrat has the story. Head over and read it.

 

Today Americans United for the Separation of Church and State Filed a lawsuit against South Carolina over their I Believe license plates. Here is the press release from AU:

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today filed a lawsuit in federal district court on behalf of several religious leaders and a religious organization whose First Amendment rights are violated by South Carolina’s “I Believe” license plate.

The new plate features the words, “I Believe,” accompanied by a depiction of a large, bright-yellow Christian cross superimposed on a multicolored stained glass church window.

Plaintiffs in the case include four South Carolina clergy the Rev. Dr. Thomas A. Summers, Rabbi Sanford T. Marcus, the Rev. Dr. Robert M. Knight and the Rev. Dr. Neal Jones as well as the Hindu American Foundation.

The Summers v. Adams lawsuit charges that the Christian plate gives preferential government treatment to one faith. It asks the court to prevent South Carolina officials from producing the plates.

“The state has clearly given preferential treatment to Christianity with this license plate,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. “I can’t think of a more flagrant violation of the First Amendment’s promise of equal treatment for all faiths. I believe these plates will not see the light of day.”

The South Carolina legislature unanimously passed legislation to produce the license plate, and South Carolina Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer said he is willing to put up the required $4,000 to produce the plate, with the money to be reimbursed by the state later. The legislature has not proposed or made available a similar specialty plate for any other faith.

Gov. Mark Sanford allowed the bill to become law without his signature.

In South Carolina, an individual can apply for a vanity plate less than seven characters long, but symbols and emblems are not permitted. Other specialty plates are created either by DMV approval or through the legislature. Plates approved by the DMV are subject to signification regulations, including “no slogans, names or other text.”

The Americans United lawsuit says the Christian license plate violates the separation of church and state as well as freedom of speech. It notes that other religions will not be able to get similar license plates expressing differing viewpoints, nor can a comparable “I Don’t Believe” license plate be issued.

The lawsuit was filed in Columbia, S.C., in the U.S. District Court for South Carolina.

“The state has made believers of non-Christian faiths feel that they are second-class citizens,” Lynn said. “Under our Constitution, that’s impermissible.”

Attorneys working on the case include AU Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan, AU Litigation Counsel Heather Weaver and AU Madison Fellow Nancy Leong. Aaron J. Kozloski of Capitol Counsel, a Columbia, S.C. law firm, is serving as local counsel.

I wish them success. I notice how none of the states that have these religious plates ever offer such plates to any religion but Christianity, nor do they offer any plates to atheists. What’s more, according to Think Progress, SC is planning on offering the I Believe plates at cost rather than the usual $70 fee they charge for specialty plates. It’s obvious they are promoting Christianity, and that is completely inappropriate.

 

Addendum. A comment has arrived. Ebon said:

I’m curious: Would you object if they also offered plates (at the usual price) to atheists and those of minority faiths? I can just see an atheist plate with the Darwin fish or perhaps that lovely “Coexist” logo I’ve seen you use here.

If they made it fair by offering plates to people of other faiths, and of no faith, (at the same cost, of course) I’d be satisfied. But they insist on only offering plates to Christians, which is a blatant promotion of one religion over another.