A rally will commence on the courthouse steps Saturday morning at 10:30 in Eureka in support of equal rights and gay marriage.
Check out the radio archives on KMUD if you missed this morning’s 9am talk show, Thank Jah it’s Friday. Therein you will find intelligent discourse coupled with the idiocy of one caller who said allowing marriage between gay men will lead to sexual abuse of boys. He even suggested such abuse is “consensual,” as if a young teenager has the capacity to “consent” to such behavior.
But maybe the crooked caller was onto something. If marriage leads to child sexual abuse, perhaps we should outlaw heterosexual marriage. Lard knows there are an alarming number of girls in this country who would be better off living a childhood free of the sexual predation by their straight male relatives.
Of course, this has nothing to do with the civil rights of two consenting adults to join their lives, property and tax returns with the same freedom as other such adults.
Or perhaps there is another solution. As one woman on the show suggested: we can ban gay marriage as long as we ban straight divorce.
Now there’s a threat that might sober the crazies.
November 14, 2008 at 11:21 am
The rally on Saturday at the Eureka Courthouse will be held simultaneously with hundreds of other rallies in cities in all 50 states and several foreign countries. At least 56 other California cities will be participating in the rally.
A march through Old Town will follow the rally, which will begin promptly at 10:30 am.
Everyone, gay or straight, is welcome to attend this civil rights rally and march. I have full and updated rally information (and contact information) on my blog.
Joe
November 14, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Teaching degrees and leading congregations also contributes to sexual abuse. We should shutter our schools and churches. Please, think of the children.
November 14, 2008 at 12:48 pm
It’s Catholic and Protestant sexual oppression that leads to a lot of abuse cases.
The priests are stuck in the “repressional” instead of coming out of the closet.
November 14, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Slobbering Homophobes, HUH? You mean like O’Reilly? O’Reilly: Gay marriage will lead to ‘legalizing narcotics, unrestricted abortion, revocation of the Patriot Act.’
November 14, 2008 at 1:19 pm
While it would be convenient to blame religion for rampant child sexual abuse, the problem is much more far reaching.
But there are some churches who should have their tax-exempt status revoked over their politicizing from the pulpit when it comes to Prop 8.
November 14, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Joe Cornish –
What’s your blog’s name?
November 14, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Also if gay people started getting married doesn’t that mean they would have less sex and then the conservatives would be happy?
November 14, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Click on Joe’s name. It’s a link to his blog.
November 14, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Hey, O’Reilly, Gays seldom have abortions!
November 14, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Don’t get me wrong- I voted no on 8, but what exactly is the point to this rally?
November 14, 2008 at 3:06 pm
I want you to compare the messages you are getting about two very different groups: homosexuals and nuclear families.
Homosexuals:
According to many psychiatrists, ( http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/socarides.html )homosexuality is a state of arrested development caused by having an unloving father, and a controlling overbearing mother. As one gay acquaintance said, referring to his father, “I always wanted the love of a man.”
Gay behavior is often characterized by extreme promiscuity (100’s of partners); anonymous sex (typified by the “glory hole”); wallowing in feces and urine; and sadomasochism. This behavior is the cause of AIDS. The powerful gay lobby’s refusal to allow preventive measures has resulted in a deadly epidemic. And because some gays insisted on donating blood, many hemophiliacs and others became infected. (See “A Radical Holocaust” in The Politics of Bad Faith (1998) by David Horowitz)
What is the message government and media give us about this self-destructive behavior? We’re told that we are bigots and hate mongers to question it. We’re told that AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease that affects everyone equally. We must all practice “safe sex” and teach it to children in schools. This is a lie. Seventy five per cent of AIDS fatalities are gay. The rest get it from infected needles or blood transfusions. (See The Myth of Heterosexual Aids (1990) by Michael Fumento) We are told that homosexuality as like left-handedness. It is “a sexual orientation” as normal as heterosexuality. It is a matter of socialization. If a baby boy is given dolls or dressed in pink, he’ll act like a girl. There is no such thing as biological sexual instinct. (For how untrue this is, see “As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl” (2000) by John Colapinto)
Nuclear Families:
Unlike homosexuals who are normal, nuclear families are almost always dysfunctional. Have you ever seen a positive portrayal? The worst offender is the “patriarchal” father, who labors to provide for his wife and children. After consulting with his family, he may insist on providing leadership. In times of war or danger, he may sacrifice his life. But don’t be fooled. He is usually a violent alcoholic who beats and sexually abuses his wife and children.
Almost as evil as the patriarchal father is the poor dupe called the “wife,” “homemaker” or “mother.” This is a woman who actually feels a profound connection to her husband and child. She calls it “love.” Because of it, she will nurture her child herself, which is very bad for her career. Inevitably, government sponsored programs or the media will teach her that she is a prisoner of “oppressive stereotypes” and she will divorce.
Conclusion:
People who fornicate like rabbits, wallow in shit and cause deadly epidemics are normal. People who sacrifice their lives for love, who nurture and create the next generation, are “oppressors” “doormats”, or “old fashioned.” This campaign to make heterosexuals act like homosexuals is not an accident.
Heterosexuality is not defined by the sex of your partner. Heterosexuality is a life cycle consisting of courtship, marriage (as an evolving union), and parenthood. Each stage is necessary for our emotional and spiritual development. Ultimately, heterosexuality is about our relationship to God, expressed through our mate and our children.
In contrast, homosexuality is arrested development, and as such it is a perversion. Specifically, most gays are stuck in the adolescent courtship stage, or what is called “sexual liberation.” Increasingly gays are holding up their mirror to us, and convincing us to be just like them. Heterosexual society is imitating gay behavior in its obsession with sex and appearance, promiscuity, and child aversion. All human relationships are being made sexual, including adult-child. The symptoms of our arrested development are seen in plummeting birth rates, epidemics of adultery, divorce, out of wedlock childbirth, pornography child abuse, STD’s, and violent crimes involving sadomasochism.
Heterosexuals are a Persecuted Majority:
Powerful forces in government, corporations, media and education are brainwashing us. Daily, they assault our identities as males and females, husband and wives, fathers and mothers. They assail the dynamics by which heterosexuals connect and love. Heterosexuality is based on an exchange of woman’s power for man’s love. Women want love; men want power. I counsel men. Ninety per cent of marriage breakups are due to women being brainwashed to seek “equality” which in practice means controlling and emasculating their husbands.
Gay and feminist activists pretend society is oppressing them when in fact heterosexual society is the victim. This is passive aggressive. They are clubbing us over the head and then calling us homophobes for reacting. But gays and feminists are just pawns, empowered and manipulated by greater forces. The ultimate purpose is some kind of “New World Order” where emotionally starved people who have no culture or identity can be manipulated by sexual signals.
To understand how sinister this is, read Dr. Judith Reisman’s article about the Hepatitis B vaccinations of normal American children. Hepatitis B is venereal disease, which is rarely found in children unless they are infected by their birth mother. It is not a threat to the vast majority of American children. But it is a threat to pedophiles because it identifies a child who has been sexually abused. According to Reisman, in order to protect pedophiles, more than 80% of newborn American children are being injected with this vaccine which may have dangerous side effects. Reisman writes: “Government justifications for imperiling the health of all healthy American newborns as a means of protecting a largely antisocial adult sex and drug subculture is without historical or scientific precedent.”
Then buy, John W. DeCamp’s “The Franklin Cover Up” (1996). This is a chilling description of how the investigation of a nationwide child sex ring was suppressed because it lead directly to Capitol Hill.
In conclusion, we are lulled into believing that we are in a Golden Age, the “end of history.” But events like Sept. 11 are a rude reminder that the passions and perversions that shaped the past will shape the future. Judeo Christian civilization is being overthrown and replaced with a new fascist totalitarianism. The plan requires the destruction of our sources of individual strength and meaning, the nuclear family. We must organize and act. We must bombard politicians, media and corporations with the message that we are on to them, and they will pay.
November 14, 2008 at 3:07 pm
the point of the rally is to call attention to this fucked-up proposition that strips rights from a segment of the population. not being personally affiliated, i would suspect there will be some kind of organized movement to overturn the prop, like signature collecting. with the weather like it is now, let’s hope it stays that way tomorrow. and let’s hope the local media cover this, as last week’s rally in Arcata received minimal attention, if any, except on the blogs and Arcata Eye.
November 14, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Last week California legalized gay marriage. Why do you suppose the bankers wanted to placate the less than one per cent of the population who are marriage-minded gays so badly that they are willing to redefine the central life ritual of 96% of the population who are heterosexual? Marriage is a heterosexual institution, mostly about reproduction. It’s like saying Muslims have an “equal right” to celebrate Passover.
The bankers want heterosexuals to suffer from the same gender confusion as homosexuals do, which makes it impossible to bond permanently with the opposite sex. As result, the vast majority of people will substitute promiscuity for love, marriage and family. Eventually the State will take over reproduction and indoctrination of the young. Here is an article I wrote in Nov. 2001 which tears the veil from the “homosexual lifestyle” they pretend is so attractive. (Much more in my book at http://www.cruelhoax.ca)
———————-
Imagine that an organism is sick. Imagine that the sick cells convince the organism that they were healthy, and in fact, the healthy cells are sick. The gullible organism would just get sicker and sicker.
This is the relationship between society and homosexuals today. Gays argue that same-sex behavior is no different than being left-handed. On the other hand, they say heterosexual behavior is not natural, but socially conditioned and “oppressive.” Heterosexual society and family are taking heavy casualties. Our stupid, opportunistic and craven leaders have betrayed us. We don’t even know we are at war.
Let’s decide whom, in fact, is sick.
Let’s look at gay behavior as defined by two gays, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen Ph.D., authors of “After the Ball: How America will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s”(1989).
In Chapter Six, they outline “ten categories of misbehavior,” drawn from their own experiences, wide reading and thousands of hours of conversation with hundreds of other gays. Their contention is that the male gay lifestyle, (not gay sexuality mind you), “is the pits.” They want gays to improve their image by addressing “what is wrong with a lot of gays.” (276)
What follows are some highlights. As you read this, ask yourself if there is another human community, including the Mafia that could make these generalizations about itself. Ask yourself if we haven’t caught this disease, or at least the sniffles.
* The authors say “a surprisingly high percentage” of pathological liars and con men are gay. This results from a natural habit of self-concealment, and leads to a stubborn self-deception about one’s own gayness and its implication.
* They say gays tend to reject all forms of morality and value judgments. Gay morality boils down to “I can do whatever I want and you can go to perdition. (If it feels good, I’ll do it!)” If a gay feels like seducing a trusted friend’s lover, he’ll do it, justifying it as an act of “sexual freedom” and the friend be damned.
* They say gays suffer from a “narcissistic” personality disorder and give this clinical description: “pathological self absorption, a need for constant attention and admiration, lack of empathy or concern for others, quickly bored, shallow, interested in fads, seductive, overemphasis on appearance, superficially charming, promiscuous, exploitative, preoccupied with remaining youthful, relationships alternate between over idealization and devaluation.”
* As an example of this narcissism, the authors say “a very sizable proportion of gay men” who have been diagnosed HIV positive continue to have unprotected sex.
* They say the majority of gays are extremely promiscuous and self-indulgent. They must continuously up the ante to achieve arousal. This begins with alcohol and drugs and includes such “forbidden” aspects of sex as wallowing in filth (fetishism and coprophilia) and sadomasochism, which involves violence.
* They say many gays indulge in sex in public bathrooms and think it is antigay harassment when it is stopped. Many think they have a right to importune straight males, including children.
* Many gays are “single minded sexual predators” fixated on youth and physical beauty alone. When it comes to the old or ugly, gays are “the real queer bashers.” Disillusioned themselves, they are cynical about love.
* “Relationships between gay men don’t usually last very long.” They quickly tire of their partners and fall victim to temptation. The “cheating ratio of ‘married’ gay males, given enough time, approaches 100%.”
* Even friendships are based on the sexual test and hard to sustain. Unattractive gay men find it nearly impossible to find a friend, let alone a lover.
* The authors say gays tend to deny reality in various ways: wishful thinking, paranoia, illogic, emotionalism and embracing crackpot ideas.
Is there any doubt that this behavior is sick? Obviously this is not true of all homosexuals. I feel no malice toward gays. I feel the same way about people who have the flu. I want them to get better and I don’t want it to spread.
Unfortunately, even the authors of this book are deceiving themselves. They claim that it is the gay lifestyle and NOT gay sexuality that is “the pits.” Who are they kidding? The two are inseparable.
The authors of this book are public relations experts who believe that “our problem is fundamentally one of bad image with straights.”
The book details “a comprehensive public-relations campaign that should go a long way towards sanitizing our very unsanitary image:”
“Desensitization”: flooding straight America with advertising presenting gays in the “least offensive manner possible.”
“Jamming”: Advertising that equates fear of gays with hatred of Jews, Blacks and women.
“Conversion”: Presenting images of gays that look like regular folks. “The image must be the icon of normality.”
They say “it makes no difference that the ads are lies” because “we are using them to…counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies.”
This book was written in 1989 and obviously a campaign similar to this has taken effect. Read what the authors say about it:
“By Conversion, we mean something far more profoundly threatening to the American Way of Life [than subversion] …We mean conversion of the average American’s emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media. We mean…to turn their hatred into warm regard whether they like it or not.” (153)
Thus gays want Americans to learn that something they naturally and justifiably regard as sick, is in fact healthy. Thus Americans will be defenseless to resist their overtures whether in parks, barracks, bathrooms or classrooms.
It is a measure of the authors’ cynicism and self-deception that THEY quote psychologist M. Scott Peck, who in “People of the Lie” characterizes people who suffer from extreme or “malignant” narcissism simply as “evil.”
Evil people, Peck says, have “an unshakable will to be right and will not consider the possibility that they are wrong…Their main weapon, interestingly enough is the lie with which they distort reality to look good to themselves, and to confuse others.” (297)
The publicity surrounding gay marriage doesn’t reflect the reality. Gays don’t want to marry. In Canada, gay marriage has been legal for more than a year yet only one in one thousand marriages are homosexual. Gays and lesbians make up about 40 out of 1000 population.
Gay marriage is really designed to make heterosexuals see homosexual behavior as the new normal. They could have designated a separate but equal status for the homosexuals who want marriage.
Gays can continue to fool themselves. But let us stop. Their behavior is sick. And it’s contagious.
November 14, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Maybe someone on here can answer a couple things for me (and, no, I am not a homophobe or any other slur you might be tempted to use, just curious):
1) If this is a democracy and the majority rules, then why is this still an issue, since the majority has spoken?
2) It seems that a major objection is the use of the word “marriage.” In that case why isn’t a “civil union” acceptable to gay culture? Doesn’t it convey the same rights?
November 14, 2008 at 3:59 pm
1) If this is a democracy and the majority rules, then why is this still an issue, since the majority has spoken?
Sure, Civics 101. We live in a democratic Republic where majority does not rule. In fact, our Constitution explicitly protects the minority from the tyranny of majority rule.
2) It seems that a major objection is the use of the word “marriage.” In that case why isn’t a “civil union” acceptable to gay culture? Doesn’t it convey the same rights?
No. Civil Unions as they are described do not allow the same rights granted to heterosexual marriages in the state. Hence, the inequality.
You can claim religion, tradition or the flying spaghetti monster as your rationale for denying citizens of their rights, but a quick scan of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, commonly referred to as The Bill of Rights should disabuse you of this silly notion.
Once you’re done reading the 1st Amendment, skip on down to the 14th Amendment, that too will help answer your question.
November 14, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Wow ernie! You are one fucked up little Nazi, aren’t you. Why don’t you just leave people alone.
November 14, 2008 at 4:05 pm
1) This is still an issue because we have a constitutional democracy, which contains inherent protections against “the tyranny of the majority.” That means that the majority cannot enact laws that deprive the minority (or a minority group) of basic human rights. (Or, if they do so, such laws can be overturned.)
Not so long ago, “the majority” said (through legislation) that people of two different races could not legally marry. The courts, eventually, wisely said in essence, “No, you cannot deprive people of the right to marry based on their skin color.”
2) No, it doesn’t convey the same rights. It’s a weasel way to pretend to convey the same rights without doing so. There are numerous areas where it’s not equal to marriage. It’s somewhat parallel to the pretense for decades that separate education for black children was “equal” to what was provided to whites. The US Supreme Court wisely ended that nasty pretense in a case called “Brown vs. Board of Education” in 1954.
November 14, 2008 at 4:34 pm
“O’Reilly: Gay marriage will lead to ‘legalizing narcotics, unrestricted abortion, revocation of the Patriot Act.’”
Well, why didn’t someone mention that earlier. I would have phone banked!!!
not really kidding…
November 14, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Im not a nazi, infact i despise them and i am whole heartedly against any for of fascism.
Infact this year I voted for ralph nader and helped campaign for him.
I am only trying to present to you all an alternative viewpoint.
Instead of this blog just being a bunch of people agreeing with each other why not introduce some real debate?
Does what I say threaten your logic?
Its always good to keep an open mind, if you dont even read what i have to say or think about it and just jump to hatefull comments, then how better are you than those you despise for being so closed minded?
Lets hear some real response to what I posted and I challenge someone to try and reply with your viewpoints of my post in a respectful and intillectual manor.
November 14, 2008 at 4:49 pm
HAHA! In the most strictest interpretation of Catholicism, divorce is a sin. Perhaps these religious fanatics should apply their own beliefs equally and not pick and choose…not that I agree with most of them.
November 14, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Ernie sez: “Lets hear some real response to what I posted and I challenge someone to try and reply with your viewpoints of my post in a respectful and intillectual manor.”
Ernie, your humorous spelling aside, why don’t you cite some books or articles that come from reputable scholars who are willing to submit their ideas to peer review or other scholarly forums, rather than self-referential rantings about hidden totalitarian conspiracies? For one thing, there are plenty of above-ground totalitarian conspiracies (like the Patriot Act) to worry about!
Maybe you’d also enjoy the various commentaries surrounding Ezra Pound’s overweening condemnations of Usury. Sounds like you might resonate with his wild ideas – but he was still a great Poet!
November 14, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Real response to what you wrote:
Most credentialed psychiatric professionals have long ago rejected the classification of homosexual behavior as a disorder. They have also rejected consensual BDSM behavior as a disorder. That last only occurred in last four years. (Somehow you were in your right mind to enter a cage fight with bare knuckles but not if you let your girlfriend spank you.)
Many of your assertions (it is hard to filter your personal thoughts from those your are paraphrasing the gay doctor authors whose credentials I will have to take your word for) are just flatly bullsh*t. Am I guessing,? No.
Most of the psychological characteristics you have mentioned are very prevalent in all areas of society, so why do you feel the need to work on the gays and not the rest of the world?
“Gay marriage is really designed to make heterosexuals see homosexual behavior as the new normal.” Well, yeah, among other things. The same way that having to eat at the same lunch counter with non-whites forced whites to see non-whites as normal. Deal with it.
An observation: You just spent a lot of time and energy thinking and typing about gay sex. Why do think that is, ernie? What is really motivating you, ernie? Work on that for the night.
And lastly, last week California BANNED GAY MARRIAGE you dumb ass!!!!
November 14, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Ernie had better not start reading psychological profiles of heterosexuals.
November 14, 2008 at 6:16 pm
emerald hexagon, heres a reply to the first thing ya had to say.
In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a mental disorder from the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II).
This decision was a significant victory for homosexual activists, and they have continued to claim that the APA based their decision on new scientific discoveries that proved that homosexual behavior is normal and should be affirmed in our culture.
This is false and part of numerous homosexual urban legends that have infiltrated every aspect of our culture. The removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has given homosexual activists credibility in the culture, and they have demanded that their sexual behavior be affirmed in society.
What Really Happened?
Numerous psychiatrists over the past decades have described what forces were really at work both inside and outside of the American Psychiatric Association-and what led to the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder.
In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a mental disorder from the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II).
This decision was a significant victory for homosexual activists, and they have continued to claim that the APA based their decision on new scientific discoveries that proved that homosexual behavior is normal and should be affirmed in our culture.
This is false and part of numerous homosexual urban legends that have infiltrated every aspect of our culture. The removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has given homosexual activists credibility in the culture, and they have demanded that their sexual behavior be affirmed in society.
What Really Happened?
Numerous psychiatrists over the past decades have described what forces were really at work both inside and outside of the American Psychiatric Association-and what led to the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder.
In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a mental disorder from the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II).
This decision was a significant victory for homosexual activists, and they have continued to claim that the APA based their decision on new scientific discoveries that proved that homosexual behavior is normal and should be affirmed in our culture.
This is false and part of numerous homosexual urban legends that have infiltrated every aspect of our culture. The removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has given homosexual activists credibility in the culture, and they have demanded that their sexual behavior be affirmed in society.
What Really Happened?
Numerous psychiatrists over the past decades have described what forces were really at work both inside and outside of the American Psychiatric Association-and what led to the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder.
November 14, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Quote: Ernie, your humorous spelling aside, why don’t you cite some books or articles that come from reputable scholars who are willing to submit their ideas to peer review or other scholarly forums, rather than self-referential rantings about hidden totalitarian conspiracies? For one thing, there are plenty of above-ground totalitarian conspiracies (like the Patriot Act) to worry about!
I have cited books and articles by reputable scholars, sorry they arent reputable to yourself. Also all these ideas are open to peer review, thats whats going on right now your all my peers and your reviewing what i have to write. And this isnt apart of a hidden conspiracy agenda, is right in line with the patriot act and all the other things you deem totalitarian. Also correcting my spelling mistakes at best shows you have nothing of sustance to say in response. Lets hear something real this time!
November 14, 2008 at 6:23 pm
This is a continuation of my above post
Dr. Ronald Bayer, a pro-homosexual psychiatrist has described what actually occurred in his book, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis. (1981)
In Chapter 4, “Diagnostic Politics: Homosexuality and the American Psychiatric Association,” Dr. Bayer says that the first attack by homosexual activists against the APA began in 1970 when this organization held its convention in San Francisco. Homosexual activists decided to disrupt the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, homosexual activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA’s convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, “Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you.”
Homosexuals forged APA credentials and gained access to exhibit areas in the conference. They threatened anyone who claimed that homosexuals needed to be cured.
Kameny had found an ally inside of the APA named Kent Robinson who helped the homosexual activist present his demand that homosexuality be removed from the DSM. At the 1972 convention, homosexual activists were permitted to set up a display booth, entitled “Gay, Proud and Healthy.”
Kameny was then permitted to be part of a panel of psychiatrists who were to discuss homosexuality. The effort to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM was the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, not scientific discoveries.
Prior to the APA’s 1973 convention, several psychiatrists attempted to organize opposition to the efforts of homosexuals to remove homosexual behavior from the DSM. Organizing this effort were Drs. Irving Bieber and Charles Socarides who formed the Ad Hoc Committee Against the Deletion of Homosexuality from DSM-II.
The DSM-II listed homosexuality as an abnormal behavior under section “302. Sexual Deviations.” It was the first deviation listed.
After much political pressure, a committee of the APA met behind closed doors in 1973 and voted to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM-II. Opponents of this effort were given 15 minutes to protest this change, according to Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, in Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth. Satinover writes that after this vote was taken, the decision was to be voted on by the entire APA membership. The National Gay Task Force purchased the APA’s mailing list and sent out a letter to the APA members urging them to vote to remove homosexuality as a disorder. No APA member was informed that the mailing had been funded by this homosexual activist group.
According to Satinover, “How much the 1973 APA decision was motivated by politics is only becoming clear even now. While attending a conference in England in 1994, I met a man who told me an account that he had told no one else. He had been in the gay life for years but had left the lifestyle. He recounted how after the 1973 APA decision, he and his lover, along with a certain very highly placed officer of the APA Board of Trustees and his lover, all sat around the officer’s apartment celebrating their victory. For among the gay activists placed high in the APA who maneuvered to ensure a victory was this man-suborning from the top what was presented to both the membership and the public as a disinterested search for truth.”
November 14, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Dr. Charles Socarides has set the record straight on how homosexuals inside and outside of the APA forced this organization to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder. This was done without any valid scientific evidence to prove that homosexuality is not a disordered behavior.
Dr. Socarides, writing in Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality writes: “To declare a condition a ‘non-condition,’ a group of practitioners had removed it from our list of serious psychosexual disorders. The action was all the more remarkable when one considers that it involved an out-of-hand and peremptory disregard and dismissal not only of hundreds of psychiatric and psychoanalytic research papers and reports, but also a number of other serious studies by groups of psychiatrists, psychologists, and educators over the past seventy years…”
Socarides continued: “For the next 18 years, the APA decision served as a Trojan horse, opening the gates to widespread psychological and social change in sexual customs and mores. The decision was to be used on numerous occasions for numerous purposes with the goal of normalizing homosexuality and elevating it to an esteemed status.
“To some American psychiatrists, this action remains a chilling reminder that if scientific principles are not fought for, they can be lost-a disillusioning warning that unless we make no exceptions to science, we are subject to the snares of political factionalism and the propagation of untruths to an unsuspecting and uninformed public, to the rest of the medical profession, and to the behavioral sciences.” Dr. Socarides’ report is available from the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality: http://www.narth.com.
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DSM
The DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) is the most widely used diagnostic reference book utilized by mental health professionals in the United States.
It’s a manual by which all diagnostic codes are derived for diagnosis and treatment – every single physician (an estimated 850,000*) in the United States refers to this book in order to code for a diagnosis. In plain English, what does this mean? It means that for over 30 years physicians have been prevented from properly diagnosing homosexuality as an aberrant behavior and thus, cannot, recommend a course of treatment for these individuals.
Prior to that time, homosexuality had been treated as a mental disorder under section “302. Sexual Deviations” in the DSM-II. Section 302 said, in part: “This category is for individuals whose sexual interests are directed primarily toward objects other than people of the opposite sex, toward sexual acts … performed under bizarre circumstances. … Even though many find their practices distasteful, they remain unable to substitute normal sexual behavior for them.” Homosexuality was listed as the first sexual deviation under 302. Once that diagnostic code for homosexuality was removed, physicians, including psychiatrists, have been prevented from diagnosing homosexuality as a mental disorder for more than three decades.
November 14, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Also i would like to make one last comment about the title Heraldo chose to use.
Thank Jah there are smart people to counter this slobbering homophobes.
Well i don’t think you should thank “Jah” as you put it considering any real rasta, not the “poser liberal white kids” knows that gay relationships are unnatural and that is why countless reggae artist sing about burning the gay man and etc. Gay sex his highly looked down upon within jamaica / ethiopia communities. As well as rastas abroad.
so this i sing a praise!
Thank Jah for natural living!
We will not be courupted by Babylon!
November 14, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Right, like Babylon’s discrimination.
The “thank Jah” bit was taken from the show so named on KMUD. But Jah can sink along with the rest of the patriarchal myths that support the down presser man. Or mon. Whatever.
November 14, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Ernie,
You should not be perpetrating the fraudulent idea that the United States is a Judeo-Christian nation. The United States was founded on principles from the French (European) Enlightenment and classical Greek philosophy, not “Christian” or “Judaic” philosophy.
have a peaceful day,
Bill
November 14, 2008 at 7:25 pm
I’d be glad to respond to each and every one of your demented points, Ernie, but the Bible says we must honor our father and mother, and my dad and mom taught me never to waste time arguing with hate-mongers or the insane.
November 14, 2008 at 7:29 pm
If heterosexual marriage is endangered (and it’s tru divorce rates are high), the reason has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not gay people can marry.
Even though I read about half of what Ernie had to say (Ernie, persuasive rhetoric needs to be more succinct), I still will never know how gay marriage can possibly be a threat to anyone, or anyone’s marriage, or anyone’s family.
Ernie, marriage is NOT about reproduction as you say. If that is so, then you are going to want to make it illegal for senior citizens to marry, and to nullify my and my husband’s marriage, since we both already had children and don’t want more.
And women’s desire for equality neither emasculates men nor does it contribute to divorce. Masculinity does not depend on the ability to have more rights than another. Husbands who quash their wives’ rights and individuality contribute to divorce. Don’t mistake the cause for the result. That’s faulty logic.
I find it morally repugnant that many states allow adult men to marry and impregnate girls as young as 12. Somehow that is still a “right.”
November 14, 2008 at 7:34 pm
“…persuasive rhetoric needs to be more succinct…”
Ernie: listen man, he’s trying to help you.
November 14, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Ernie, stop writing so much. Nobody will read a manifesto like that.
November 14, 2008 at 9:13 pm
The Ernie posting here is the “Real Ernie” and should not be confused with me, “The Phony Ernie”. When I comment, I sign my own name, first and last. I have my own blog, and take full credit for my screw-ups and misconceptions, of which I have many.
I dealt with the reality of the Gay issue a long time ago, I asked a gay friend of mine. I said: “Why are you gay” he said: “I just like being gay. I said it’s okay with me. I always kinda’ liked being hetro myself. He said “fine by me”. We spent the rest of the day discussing nuclear physics. It didn’t seem like that big of a deal to me.
It did really surprise me to find out there was another “Ernie” though, I hope that I haven’t damaged his good name.
November 14, 2008 at 9:28 pm
The caller’s name is Ron Davidson, and he calls up my show regularly. His three pet issues are homosexuality as perversion, Darwinism as the source of social evil, and Waco as the revealing of the black helicopter secret world government. He’s usually kind of comic relief for the KMUD talk shows, and he calls every one of us.
Remember when the tsunamis hit Indonesia? He called up one show to point out that tsunamis never hit Christian countries. Of course, within the US it’s the Christian states which usually get hit by hurricanes and tornadoes.
November 14, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Ernie, you’re a long winded son of a gun, aren’t you. We’ll be dead by the time you finish your diatribe. But go ahead and air it. Just realize the 19th century closed up shop about 108 years ago. You might want to have a real conversation with the opposition, might lighten your load. It could happen.
November 14, 2008 at 11:28 pm
I voted against Prop. 8, and I fully support the lawsuit being brought forward by the ACLU to strike down Prop. 8 as unconstitutional restrictions on free association rights under the 1st Amendment and equal protection rights under the 14th Amendment.
I also voted against Measure T, albeit on slightly different grounds under those same amendments, namely free speech.
I expect to get the usual amount of hatred and intolerance that I’ve come to expect on this blog from so-called liberals for taking the later position — I just hope I’ve made it clear that those wicked ACLU people are the ones going to court for people who have spent the rest of this year hating on us just because we didn’t like David Cobb’s awful authorship skills.
Just one of life’s little ironies, eh?
November 15, 2008 at 3:04 am
No one seems to understand me. i dont have a problem with gay people. Im not christian. I dont like the church. I belive in treating others the way you want to be treat even if inside you dislike something about them. I in no way have ever been hatefull or mean to a gay person, i simply wanted to prove some points. i hope i have atleast caused some people out there to do some thinking. And also ernie, i in no way meant to pose as your name, this just happened to be my name too. Im not a conservative, im a down to earth natural person, and i call it like i see it. You dont have to belive in the church to know the diffrence between whats right and wrong. I just know my history and i know america is on the attack from multiple fronts, so many that i think itd be hard for many of you to fully understand. I know however there is plenty of great folks in the county that understand what i write. Although i realize this blog is probably not as full of likeminded folks. Just remember folks keep an open mind, never miss an opertunity to learn something from what someone else has to say, certainly what you all have said has affected me, and i feel some of your points have been valid and alowed me to view it from your angle much better. I dont want to get rid of anyone or any of that nasty stuff, my concern for gays is one outta compasion for what i call the manipulated culture we live in today some reffer to this as babylon. Just remember folks evil people are whos in power right now and they want as much as they can to divide and conquor each and everyone of us mentaly and spiritualy. That means taking our identifty from us and making us scared, confused, and ultimatly manipulated from conception to death, turn off your TV, stop watching MTV the trends these days are leading everone down the wrong path into dumbed down sheep. Go study eugenics or “social darwinism” and you will know why we are being fed this shit and why our food is poisoned and why our pharmacutical industry would rather dope you up than cure you. Why the war on drug is fought so that they can have a reason to get rid of undesirable folks in society, Whys there flouride in my water! Why is the war on terror a compleat sham, how come osama bin laden is still working for the cia as a puppet of world government, how come afghanistan is producing more heroin today than ever before. How come no one can explain what brough down building number 7 at the world train center, 9/11 was an inside job folks. And they manipulated you the whole dame way. Go research fractional reserve lending, find out that the federal reserve is a private bank that control the money supply and benefits from america going to war for its own sake, go research who the rothchilds are how the bank of england started, what freemasonry is, what is the CFR. Who are the bilderburg group. what really happens at the bohemian grove? Is global warming real, id say its more manipulation so they can get a carbon tax on all of you to fund world government. The truth is the sun is heating up and solar flare activity is to blame its all a natural cycle. hell in august there was no solar flares and it snowed in kenya. George bush’s family has nazi ties (prescott bush), his father sold steel to the nazis and was even convicted of treason. Arnold schwazenegger is a nazi too so it the current pope (nazi youth). Also after ww2 the nazis joined teams with the united states, at the time they had the most patents on missles and the best scientist they all joined teams with us and the vatican opened up an embassy in america to smuggle many of these refugee nazi to america. Whats that the first head of nasa used to bea nazi! go figure. Infact all the nazi wealth was reinvested into america and its facist ideology after that. The elites dont care about race. They dont care about white people. they dont care about jews or blacks, they are but pawns on the world table. In the end they want to strip us down make us loose hope or faith in anything, destroy the family structure and alow the state to raise our children while doping the population on pharmacutical drugs and crap schools that dumb your kids down. television that rotts wholes in your mind and makes your a fool. The news channels are total brainwash. the news ticketer at the bottom moving with all the graphics changing all the time has been proven to put your mind in a lower vibrational field. where you are more sudgestable. Black people are great, they have had a hard time in the country and i truely feel bad for ther past mistreatment, alot of em have it real hard because i belive the system is stacked against them. And also to sum it all off. Barak obama is nothing but a pretty front man who will be a hella of alot slicker than bush on going back on his words and continuing the NWO agenda.
Thanks yall. i just got all my storys out there for ya so i can save ya all some more time.
November 15, 2008 at 7:42 am
I am so tired of Christians telling me how to run my life. It goes on and on. “We the righteous, will keep the ignorant rabble from harming themselves”. Yeah right. Some of you need to be sent to your maker immediately for refurbishing.
There will be more elections, and Prop 8 will go away. How about a grass roots movement to remove all tax exempt status for churches, so that these people can finally start contributing to the common good, like the rest of the country does?
November 15, 2008 at 8:00 am
Thank Jah that the long-winded ernie is NOT our blog friend, Eel River Ernie!
I was the caller on Thank Jah that suggested either the churches stop the political drives from the pulpit or parish hall, or if churches wish to reamain political, then they should lose their tax-excempt status.
Please note that churches are not democratic institutions. Many are patriarchal and are run by bishops. My current church: The Church of the Open Air (my garden).
We are a nation that allows for FREEDOM of Religion.
November 15, 2008 at 8:06 am
Any time I make a political contribution, my contribution is out of money that has been taxed by the California Franchise Board and the United States Treasury. If I give money to a church, then that money is tax-exempt. The church does not pay income tax either.
November 15, 2008 at 8:09 am
It scares me but this Ernie dude is starting to make sense to me. I believe that the whole world is out to get too. But I learned a good lesson from the fish. Stay in the school and don’t stand out so when “They” come to get you, they will not be able to find you hidden in with the other fish. So I keep my nonsense hidden.
The only thing that I don’t agree with “Ernie” on is this gay thing, but I figured out that he must know a whole different set of gay people than I know, because the people that I know seem alright… But then I realized that it was all part of the plot. They sent these CFR, Nazi, Sex loving, NSA people out cleverly disguised as gay folks, just to get Ernie. No wonder the gay people seem different to him. They are out to get him!
Get back in the school Ernie, Quick!!!
November 15, 2008 at 8:15 am
I meant Ernie Branscomb a.k.a. South Fork Ernie. Eel River Ernie’s real name is NOT Ernie. That I learned at the Blogger’s Picnic. E.R.E, I sure hope you are not the writer of those diatribes posted above!
November 15, 2008 at 9:21 am
The Eel River Ernie (E.R.E.) is in a state of self imposed quarantine for the past week. He is rumored to have landed several fall steelhead out of the Trinity River and was seen as late as yesterday floating down the Eel River between Stafford and Rio Dell in some kind of pointy ended contraption called a “Drift Boat.”
Eel River Ernie does not think as deeply as some Ernie’s do and does not engage in discussions about politics or deep social issues. I will keep him posted (on pun intended) on further developments in regard to the continuing saga of Ernie’s.
November 15, 2008 at 9:27 am
Very impressive quote in Kristobel’s blog, that I think sums the moral and social issue up pretty well:
FROM GOODRIDGE V DEPT OF HEALTH (Mass. 2003):
“Marriage is a vital social institution. The exclusive commitment of two individuals to each other nurtures love and mutual support; it brings stability to our society. For those who choose to marry, and for their children, marriage provides an abundance of legal, financial, and social benefits. In return it imposes weighty legal, financial, and social obligations. Without question, civil marriage enhances the welfare of the community. It is a social institution of the highest importance. It is central to the way the Commonwealth identifies individuals, provides for the orderly distribution of property, ensures that children and adults are cared for and supported whenever possible from private rather than public funds, and tracks important epidemiological and demographic data. Marriage also bestows enormous private and social advantages on those who choose to marry. Civil marriage is at once a deeply personal commitment to another human being and a highly public celebration of the ideals of mutuality, companionship, intimacy, fidelity, and family. Because it fulfills yearnings for security, safe haven, and connection that express our common humanity, civil marriage is an esteemed institution, and the decision whether and whom to marry is among life’s momentous acts of self-definition. It is undoubtedly for these concrete reasons, as well as for its intimately personal significance, that civil marriage has long been termed a civil right.”
http://chocolatecoveredxanax.blogspot.com/
A civil right and a social good.
So we should deny it to a huge segment of the population because why?
Measure 8’s passing just shows me how much further we have to go as a culture. We’ve come a long ways, in most ways, but homosexuality for some reason hits some primal snag in the psyche of too many still. How can we help them “get over it” (besides, I hope, winning the legal challenge to Measure 8)? The best way to understand anything scary and abstract is to examine it up close and personal.
I’ve heard this argument that gay folk (at least “out” ones) have a tendency to be more promiscuous and combative and have a more intense set of seemingly self-created problems. But I suspect those are the ones that used to get the press more, for the shock value, and might be an artifact of being labeled “other” and unaccepted and viewed as the embodiment of evil for so long in so many ways.
To the contrary, the gay folks I know tend to be in some of the more stable “marital” relationships I see. Long term, loving, and hard-working couples. Contributing to their communities, caring for their kids, grandkids, co-workers and neighbors.
So we should discourage this stability, contentment, and security? And punish them with lesser rights because why?
November 15, 2008 at 11:01 am
1st a short little blurb that sums up the issues. It wasn’t the Church who donated the money, it was the members who did so. The Church has a right of free speech to speak up on moral issues. Thus no IRS can prohibit it from doing do. People want the tax free status of the churches revoked, without thinking what it would do.
Consider this, for my Marriage, I didn’t have to pay for a space, for the wedding, or reception, nor cleanup, etc. Friends and family helped setup and tear down at the reception.
Also consider the amount of charity work we do worldwide. Many times there at disaster areas with food and other necessities before FEMA.
November 15, 2008 at 11:31 am
“The Church has a right of free speech to speak up on moral issues…”
The Mormon church which used to marry off girls to lascivious “prophets,” (and still does in its breakaway, “reformed” churches) indeed has a right to to call rank hypocrisy morality or any other thing they might wish to call it.
November 15, 2008 at 11:52 am
Very good, CPR.
Would anyone care to add a few notes about the Mormon Church’s abominable and long-standing attitudes against African-Americans?
November 15, 2008 at 12:01 pm
I see the Southern Humboldt folk, Ernie Branscomb in particular now joined by Eric Kirk crawled back out from under their rocks again. What is it with these rock crawlers anyway? They all closet bigots and mealymouthed hypocrits?
Hey Ernie, maybe you should try practicing what you preach, then maybe you’d stay where you belong, back under your rock. “Get back in the school Ernie, Quick!!!” Why? So, he can learn to think, believe and talk like you?
November 15, 2008 at 12:52 pm
ernie,
You’ve just got to rush out and read The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. All your comments about gays apply to Jews, too. It’s literally incredible!
November 15, 2008 at 12:52 pm
?
November 15, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Sorry. The question mark was for Joe Blow’s confused comment.
November 15, 2008 at 12:54 pm
What are you talking about, Mr. Blow? Ernie B. and Eric are not bigots. There is plenty of bigotry on this thread, but it’s not coming from them.
November 15, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Well Joe, I told Eric that after the election that we would probably find ourselves on the same side again. I didn’t know it would be this soon.
I agree that I must be a closet bigot, because it certainly isn’t overt. I like to try to get along with all people, even ones that I disagree with, but you leave me confused as to what it is about me that disagrees with your sensibilities?
Go ahead and list my failings, but if you do, please list how you would do it better, because all I heard was name calling, and It leaves me confused. I want to change so I can please you, but I just don’t know what you would do better. Please advise me.
I was only trying to make it clear, that the “Ernie” that was posting was not me. I also wanted to make it clear that I did not agree with him on many points. I also wanted him to know that I was aware of the massive government plot to take out “Ernies” and tip him off to be more subtle.
You remind me of that Ling cod that is always snapping at me.
November 15, 2008 at 1:10 pm
last week’s rally in Arcata received minimal attention, if any, except on the blogs and Arcata Eye.
Last week’s rally also received attention from local radio stations KHUM and KSLG. My show on the latter had call-ins from both rally organizers and other local affected individuals.
This week has been no different.
Local media is not limited to print.
November 15, 2008 at 2:03 pm
For those of you who are skipping around in this thread and are confused, ernie is one person Ernie (capital “E”) is someone else altogether.
November 15, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Thank’s Bob, I didn’t know it was that simple…
November 15, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Regarding those commenting on my observations, I posted this on the Eureka Standard, Carson Park Ranger, for his benefit and BLESSED LORD, he proved my point. Don’t you just love it? So, I’m posting it here too, for Branscomb’s benefit. I added some minor modifications to help with the confused minds.
It also serves to expose and identify the hypocrites, the mealy-mouthed bigots, the balled-faced liars, the self-righteous intolerants and the blatant corrupt, to name a few.
November 15, 2008 at 3:02 pm
That is a beautiful self-diagnosis Joe Blow. Almost brought a tear to my eye.
-boy
November 15, 2008 at 3:36 pm
“No one seems to understand me.”
Ernie, if you’d like some help, I’ll edit your copy so it makes sense. Yes, I’m retired, but for you I’ll make an exception.
Today’s rally was so great that I’ll do a good deed even for you.
Joe
November 15, 2008 at 3:45 pm
“…balled-faced liars…”?
November 15, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Mr. Blow
In order to “throw pearls before swine” you would have to have some, and I just plain haven’t heard any. I don’t get your point. Are you just trying to prove that the rest of the world is bigoted and stupid, and you end up being a genious by default? You haven’t said one word about your position on anything, but for the fact that I’m stupid. That was a given when I started talking to you.
At some point, you might simply think that we disagree and let it go at that. I don’t call you names, though I confess I have thought of some.
November 15, 2008 at 3:55 pm
ernie, I will not engage in any type of debate with you. Pure hatred and animosity towards any group of people is a form of facism.
Criticising people for their lifestyles and choices is one thing. Taking their civil rights and equality away from them is another issue, the issue at hand.
But you take it to the next level by accusing them of being inferior, dirty, and suffering from some kind of misinterpretation of a Freudian complex.
Keep typing ernie. Everyone loves a Nazi wingnut to laugh at.
November 15, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Point made. Thanks folks.
November 15, 2008 at 6:03 pm
From a Black Mormon, which goes in to great detail
What does the Book of Mormon teach about race?
The Book of Mormon says that “he inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.” (2 Nephi 26:33).
The Book of Doctrine and Covenants (containing the Revelations of Joseph Smith) contains a prophecy by Joseph Smith made in 1832 about the a war between the North and South, and that the slaves would be set free and marshalled for war by this conflict (D&C section 87).
Joseph Smith ordained free black men to the Priesthood, and wanted blacks freed, educated, and given equal rights (Compilation on the Negro in Mormonism, p.40). He invited people “of every color” to join the Church and worship in the Nauvoo Temple (Times & Seasons, 12 Oct. 1840).
…..
Joseph Smith was a great advocate for the rights of black people in the 1840s. He was one of the first white men to call for the end to black slavery, and he called for the education and granting of equal rights of black people in America, back in 1843. Some historians believe his pro-black teachings influenced Abraham Lincoln, who lived not far from Joseph Smith in the 1840s.
Joseph Smith appointed Elijah Abel, his adopted brother and a black Mormon, to be a Seventy Apostle; a position Abel retained throghout his life.
November 15, 2008 at 6:08 pm
From an former Mormon via Salon:
“One of my converts was a black woman…She wanted to know why the Mormon church had discriminated against black members until the 1970s. White men could hold the priesthood (the power to perform rituals like baptisms), but black men were only granted that right in 1978, well after the civil rights movement. Why?
“I told her I didn’t know why, but I would find out. So I searched the scriptures. I looked in the Book of Mormon. What I dug up was not pretty. The Book of Mormon talks about righteous people having white skin and sinners having dark skin. When the dark-skinned evil people repented, their skin turned white. How was that supposed to help me explain things to her? Digging, researching and investigating is not a good idea if you’re a Mormon. You tend to find out things that don’t make sense. All I could come up with was that either God was racist or that Joseph Smith (who supposedly translated the Book of Mormon from the mysterious golden plates, which the angel Moroni had given him and then conveniently taken away) was a racist. Why did it take until June of 1978 for God to tell his prophet that all worthy men (of course, only men) could have the priesthood? We’re talking 10 years after the civil rights movement! Not finding anything helpful, I used the basic argument on her — that there were things we didn’t know but that they would be revealed to us eventually, if we were worthy. We had to have faith. It worked for her, and she was baptized.”
November 15, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Capdiamont, you have been officially tagged!
I was Tagged.
Greg and I have were tagged by Ekovox over at http://299opine.blogspot.com/ to post seven things you probably don’t know (or don’t want to know) about me…
1. I was on the Golf Team in High School. I have not played golf since high school, but one of these days you may see Greg and myself at the Eureka Muni Driving Range.
2. I also played tennis growing up. Alison from Congressman Mike Thompson’s office and I plan on playing tennis one day soon. Alison, I think I will go to Sport and Cycle tomorrow and buy a couple of rackets and some tennis balls. Can any of the bloggers list the public tennis courts in Eureka?
3. I have only traveled within the continent of North America. And yes, I can name the countries within the continent: Mexico, United States, and Canada. You betcha!!!
4. I have a two alcoholic drink maximum. Water is great!
5. My second toe is my longest toe.
6. I played the flute and the piccolo. Yeah! Stars and Stripes forever!
7. I like quiche and it is one of my cooking specialties.
Now I am going to tag:
1. Andrea
2. Andrew Bird
3. Capdiamont
4. Richard Salzman
5. James Faulk
6. Tony and Heidi
7. Richard Marks
November 16, 2008 at 12:17 pm
What in the hell does Joseph Smith’s well intentioned but never practiced attitude towards the rights of blacks have to do with the Neo-Mormon’s contributions to promoting hatred and oppression against Gays? Just what are you trying to babble, capdiamont?
The issue is that there is a minority of collective religious entities that are ran as corporations, such as the Mormons, the Vatican, etc.; and these corporations use their overwhelming power, capital and guilt to sway the politics that rule the majority of the masses. Just like big business. Jesus is big business. Just ask Jim and Tammy Faye.
There is an apparent and unacceptable intrusion of Church into State. But I’m sure most of you who are thinking people already realize this.
November 16, 2008 at 12:50 pm
The Mormon church teaches that the indigenous people of the Americas were a lost tribe of Israel (which has been definitively proven to be false). The people who turned to evil were made darker (American Indians) by god and they wiped out the good “white” people. Not until Joseph Smith was given the golden tablets which he “translated” into the Book of Mormon by an angel and baptised by the spirit of John the Baptist were any baptisms valid.
While the Mormon church’s foundation has been scientifically proven to be false, so has the mainstream Christian churches’ foundation been proven to be false, i.e. everything in the universe being created in 7 days and no mention of evolution.
If there is a god, there is no way mere mortals can know its desires. Those who claim to speak for god are automatically suspect to rational people. A wise woman said, “You know god is man-made when it hates the same people you do.”
November 16, 2008 at 6:43 pm
I sense some mob Mormon bashing here in retribution for prop 8.
Mormon racism wasn’t exceptional in the 19th century. It had been the common Christian theology for centuries, based on an interpretation that the mark put on Cain was black skin.
That contrasts with Jewish theology that held that Cain repented and was forgiven. The mark was the Hebrew letter “vav”. The mark was placed to protect him from revenge on earth, as the biblical passage’s literal words say
From wikipedia:
“Historically, some Christians have interpreted the Biblical passages so that the “mark” is thought to be part of the “curse”. In 18th century America and Europe, it was commonly assumed that Cain’s “mark” was black skin, and that Cain’s descendants were black and still under Cain’s curse. Accepting the theory that God had cursed black people, some have used the curse as a Biblical justification for racism.
Early and Modern Christians
According to some scholars, some early interpretations of the Bible in Syriac Christianity combined the “curse” with the “mark”, and interpreted the curse of Cain as black skin.[6] Relying on rabbinic texts, it is argued, the Syriacs interpreted a passage in the Book of Genesis (”And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell”) as implying that Cain underwent a permanent change in skin color.[7]
Ephrem the Syrian (306-378): “Abel was bright as the light, / but the murderer (Cain) was dark as the darkness”.[8]
In an Eastern Christian (Armenian) Adam-book (5th or 6th century) it is written: “And the Lord was wroth with Cain. . . He beat Cain’s face with hail, which blackened like coal, and thus he remained with a black face”.[9]
The Irish Saltair na Rann (The Versified Psalter, AD 988), records Gabriel announcing to Adam: “Dark rough senseless Cain is going to kill Abel”.[10]
According to Anne Catherine Emmerich,
“Cain’s posterity gradually became colored. Hams children also were browner than those of Shem. The nobler races were always of a lighter color. They who were distinguished by a particular mark engendered children of the same stamp; and as corruption increased, the mark also increased until at last it covered the whole body, and people became darker and darker. But yet in the beginning there were no people perfectly black; they became so only by degrees” [1]. “
November 17, 2008 at 10:54 am
Not to pick out the Mormons over any other group, but I have sat through a talk by a Mormon couple in which it was stated in no uncertain terms (this was mid to late 1990s) that while black people were not beyond all salvation, they had more work to do, because they were inherently more evil than the fairer races. I am not talking about the FLS but the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints, the “Real” Mormon Church.
It is, was, and will remain a racist institution.
And homophobic.
And sexist.
And frankly, a little just plain old weird with their sacred underwear and all that. But hey, if they back off of my civil rights, they can keep their long johns.
I agree with NAN that it was a pretty common Christian view of the time in the 1800s, but it is now the 21st century, and I would love it if we could move on. And to be fair, it is not the most blatantly racist religion nowadays. You can find some real pieces of work among Baptists, Methodists, etc. The Mormons are just big, rich, and active. And they can still not admit to racial equality with a straight face.
On another note, though, I think holding the Mormon Church responsible for the FLS ring of holy pedophiles is unfair. The two groups have been split for a long time, and the Mormon Church has spent millions cooperating with the Feds to prosecute the FLS. They are definitely two distinct groups.
November 17, 2008 at 1:04 pm
OK, my point is that Mormon’s aren’t exceptional, even now. Racial prejudice in some form is common. The fact that laws and continual enforcement are needed to supress it, is proof that it exists. Our new president has publically commented on that truth, with little rebuttal or outcry.
Most of America lives, works, and socializes in segregated communities. As a local comment, its been observed that a factor considered by retirees who choose relocation to rural places like Humboldt county is its racial and ethnic composition. Fortucky and Tulsa by the sea are charming indirect local codes that allude to that factor.
BTW, Here’s a link to scientific implicit association based tests to evaluate your personal hidden biases in a large variety of catagories, including race and sexuality. Most people who take the tests are surprised by the results.
November 17, 2008 at 4:19 pm
What’s up with that holy Mormon underwear? And they call other people perverted?
November 17, 2008 at 5:54 pm
A solid majority of us think that holy undershorts are an extremely queer custom. Why not push forward a citizen initiative to prohibit Mormon’s from wearing offensive underwear?
We don’t hate the wearers, it’s the shorts that we hate.
November 17, 2008 at 9:23 pm
I wonder if the special undies have a butt flap.
November 18, 2008 at 12:38 pm
So, if I may summarize:
Little ernie is a major tool who spends much of his time putting together lengthy manifestos about what gay people do in their private lives and in their homes. He is sure they must be choosing to make their lives more difficult, and choosing to have the neanderthals of society take aim at them. He’s certain they are disgusting—they wallow in shit!. But he’s not obsessed, religious, or full of hateful shit. He’s just trying to help and add to the discussion is all.
And the Mormons have no history of racism or sexism, that was just our collective imaginations! God just forgot to tell them until 1978 to clarify that they are not racist, as he did when he changed his mind about polygamy. Joseph Smith had many black friends.
Big Ernie continues to show incredible patience with his talent-less stalker Joe Blow, who just “learnded” how to blog but hasn’t got the idea that you should have something to blog about besides another blogger. Just go away, Joe.
Question:
So, can I use my constitutional religious freedoms to develop a faith that makes people like lil ernie and the devout mormons into second class citizens? These folks have problems with the idea of equal treatment for all and they believe in magic, so my religion would require them to keep their crazy myths to themselves. I can’t see that this should cause any problem because my religion would be the only one that is totally right. Hope that’s not a problem for anyone else who doesn’t believe my new religion. Well, actually I don’t care.
November 19, 2008 at 11:25 am
Freedom and equality or oppression and subjegation? You cannot have both.
Any person who truly has a link with the creator or the earth, depending on your preference, knows only love.
There is no room for hatered when your heart is full of light.
November 26, 2008 at 1:04 pm
To me are equally not nice, both homosexuals, and Mormons..