NOM Has A Hissyfit, Part Five Thousand

This is an exciting year for queers in Washington State, as it appears that the legislature is finally on the brink of approving same-sex nuptials for all residents of the Evergreen State. Numerous politicians have voiced their support for a measure legalizing marriage equality, while a number of large corporations based in Seattle and outlying areas have endorsed the proposed law, to include Starbucks:

Starbucks is proud to join other leading Northwest employers in support of Washington State legislation recognizing marriage equality for same-sex couples. Starbucks strives to create a company culture that puts our partners first, and our company has a lengthy history of leading and supporting policies that promote equality and inclusion.

This important legislation is aligned with Starbucks business practices and upholds our belief in the equal treatment of partners. It is core to who we are and what we value as a company. We are proud of our Pride Alliance Partner Network group, which is one of the largest Employer Resource Groups for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) employees in the U.S., helping to raise awareness about issues in the communities where we live and work.

While I'm not a HUGE fan of corporations, I DO get a tickle when they (whatever their other practices) get their heads out of their collective asses and fall on the right side of history regarding LGBT rights. One organization (which seems to have forgotten it was effing broke recently) has weighed in heavily against the measure, specifically targeting Starbucks for their support. Who is it? Our old friends over at National Organization for Marriage:

 

Today, Brian Brown, the president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), sharply criticized Starbucks' decision to wade into the gay marriage fight in Washington State. That decision comes on top of an earlier decision by Starbucks to ask the Supreme Court to strike down the federal definition of marriage as one man and one woman as well.

"Americans should be able to drink a peaceful cup of coffee without worrying that a portion of the company's profits is going to be used to push gay marriage without a vote from the people," said Brown. "This is a gratuitous leap into a hot button culture war issue; respect for diversity touted by Starbucks ought to include respecting the diverse views of all its customers and employees."

Meh. I'm not sure that Starbucks has actually contributed a dime to marriage equality, but can't you just HEAR Miss Bond's hissyfit in NOM's hatequarters?

Santorum: Homophobia And Anti-Islamic Sentiment In One Sentence? Yes Please!

Rick "Frothy Mix" Santorum has stepped in it yet again.  Evidently not happy with the fact that Dan Savage has forever linked his name to poopy lube, Rick is continuing his ride on the Waaaaahmbulance by accusing the gay community of issuing a jihad on him.  Because, of course, we do that.

"So the gay community said, 'He's comparing gay sex to incest and polygamy, how dare he do this,' and they have gone out on a, I would argue, jihad against Rick Santorum since then," the former senator said at a campaign stop in Spartanburg, S.C., on Friday.

Okay, fine, Rick.  No, we don't like you.  Yes, we changed the definition of your name-- not once, but twice-- to mean something real icky.  We laugh at your nonsensical "towel, napkin, tree, car" arguments against marriage equality and call you an idiot.  All those things are true. But, really?  A jihad?

Hey, though, congrats on being both anti-gay AND anti-Muslim all in one sentence.  You get extra asshole points for that one.

NOM: Mean Ol' Al Franken Bullied Tom Minnery!

Advocates and activists for LGBT equality crowed with delight when, during the DOMA congressional hearings, Sen. Al Franken called out Focus on the Family's Tom Minnery for submitting an inaccurate and misleading representation of scientific research.  Essentially, Minnery tried to say that a certain study proved children did better in heterosexual families, which was a big load of bullcrap.  Just because it's awesome, watch the video again:




Now, the National Organization for Marriage is promoting a piece written by Carrie Daklin of Minnesota Public Radio in which she whines that Al Franken should have avoided embarrassing Tom Minnery and that Franken's criticisms constituted an "ambush."

"I [would] hope that if I did have to testify before the Senate, whoever was questioning me would be kind, would recognize that this was his sandbox, not mine, and that, as a representative of our country, he would not embarrass me for his own purposes.

"Sadly, when Tom Minnery testified, that was not the kind of treatment he received from Al Franken.

"Sen. Franken [...] chastised Minnery's assumption of the definition of nuclear families, and stated, essentially, that if Minnery had so misinterpreted the information in the HHS report, then all of his testimony was subject to question.

"A fine performance, Sen. Franken, but here's the rub: In case you missed it in those DOMA hearings, the federal government doesn't recognize same-sex marriage. So I would think it might have been reasonable for Minnery to assume that a federal report had followed federal law.

"... Humiliation and respect are mutually exclusive. I am afraid that in his zest for the issue at hand, Sen. Franken, wittingly or not, fostered humiliation instead of respect."

In her analysis, Daklin is essentially claiming that it's not Minnery's fault that he assumed the federally funded scientific study was in contrast with the federal government's political position, a complaint that illustrates perfectly the fatal flaw within the anti-gay movement.  Science is not going to find in favor of the politically expedient, unfortunately, and Minnery's misrepresentation of the facts showed sloppy work and a disrespect for the study that he was attempting to quote.  

Really?  Minnery humiliated himself, and any attempt to foist this off on Franken is amateur politicking at best.  Minnery received the respect that his testimony deserved which, unfortunately for him, was a round of laughter and jeering.  

The Archbishop Of Maryland Says Something Pointless

Since the advent of marriage equality in New York State and Washington DC, the state of Maryland is gearing up for a similar debate that will hopefully bring gay marriage to the thousands of LGBTs living in that state.

LifeSiteNews (an anti-gay online rag that invalidates same-sex marriage by putting the word in quotes) reports that Archbishop Edwin O'Brian isn't so happy about it, and had strong words for the states Catholic governor.

"'Maryland is not New York,' wrote Archbishop Edwin O’Brien of Baltimore in a statement to LifeSiteNews Tuesday. 'During the 2011 session, Maryland lawmakers chose not to redefine marriage because they listened to their Maryland constituents and stood by their deeply-held moral convictions.'

"A Maryland same-sex 'marriage' bill passed the State senate in February, but it failed in the House of Delegates in March. At that time, Gov. O’Malley had promised to sign the bill if the House had approved it.

"But he has now pledged to step up his efforts following the example of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a fellow nominal Catholic. 'There are times in Annapolis when a governor’s support can move an issue over the goal line,' O’Malley said Friday."

I lived in Baltimore when O'Malley ran for governor, and I have to say I'm a fan.  Congrats to O'Malley for standing up for civil rights.  Also: Edwin O'Brian might be disappointed.  Baltimore has a thriving gay population, not to mention its proximity to Washington DC, one of the great gay meccas in our country.  

Sally Kern Hearts Ruben Diaz

Does anyone else hear wedding bells?

Ever since Sen. Ruben Diaz's impassioned "no" to marriage equality-- followed by some bizarre ramblings on the floor of the Senate and ensuing defeat-- he's been the focus of intense scrutiny from the liberal press, even notably complaining vociferously about the "hatred" he experiences at the hands of one of my favorite bloggers, Joe Jervis of JoeMyGod.

It seems that there's a whole support group for marriage haterz who vote against gay rights (and then get roundly denounced by the left), as he's now blathering on about how all the other anti-gay bigwigs are writing letters of support to him, including Archbishop Dolan.

He released a list of these arch-villains and their "statements of support."  None, however, neatly demonstrates the unholy alliances that take place in order to deny LGBTs the same rights as everyone else as the missive from renowned crazy person, Sally Kern.  Just a reminder-- she once asserted that gays are a worse threat to America than terrorists.

"Sen. Diaz, you are in my prayers. Three years ago I was the target of the homosexuals because of statements I made regarding the dangers of the homosexual agenda. So I know what you are going through. Continue to stand strong on God’s Word. What the homosexuals mean for evil toward you, God will use for His glory, your good, and the benefit of others. God bless you and your family."

Awww, isn't that precious?  I can't shake the image of Diaz, Dolan, Kern, Bryan Fischer, Rick Santorum and friends all gathered together in a church basement, chainsmoking and chugging coffee all while detailing the horrors they experienced at the hands of the "radical gay agenda."

LCR Head Named To RNC, Social Conservatives Have A Conniption

Gay Repubs celebrated this week as the central fundraising arm of the GOP, the Republican National Committee, named the executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans to the Finance Committee.  This is a huge step of inclusion for gays in the GOP, as until now the LCR has existed on the fringe of the conservative movement.  Some say the move is signaling a shift away from social issues on the Republican Party's agenda, and a small but very vocal element of the right is very very unhappy about it.

Image via JoeMyGod:

I have to say, I love it whenever Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association throws a hissy.  It means SOMETHING must be going right.

Do Liberals Hate God? Rep. Tod Akin Thinks So.

Last Sunday, NBC aired a telecast of Rory McIlroy becoming the youngest US Open champion in history at the age of 24.  The pre-taped introduction of the broadcast, however, included a version of the Pledge of Allegiance that omitted the phrase "under God," and that has some conservatives foaming at the mouth.  NBC has, of course, since issued an apology, claiming that they didn't want to offend anyone.  That's not enough for some.

Meet Rep. Todd Akin, a Republican from Missouri.  He thinks the omission is a symptom of something more sinister: nothing less than liberals' deep-seated hatred for God.

via ThinkProgress:

"AKIN: This was something that was done systematically, it was done intentionally, and is tremendously corrosive in terms of all of the values and everything that’s made America unique and such a special nation.

"PERKINS: Why would NBC do this?

"AKIN: Well, I think NBC has a long record of being very liberal and at the heart of liberalism really is a hatred for God and a belief that government should replace God. And so they’ve had a long history of not being at all favorable toward many of things that have been such a blessing to our country…This is a systematic effort to try to separate our faith and God, which is a source in our belief in individual liberties, from our country. And when you do that you tear the heart out of our country."

His spokesperson has since refused to apologize for the remarks, stating that while Akin wasn't attempting to editorialize on any individuals beliefs, he was demonstrating that conservatives believe that individual rights come from God, while liberals believe that rights come from the government.

And to that I say: BULLSHIT.

You don't use the phraseology "hatred of God" without meaning something very plain and specific.  IE: that liberals hate God.  You're not outlining a difference in the meaning of "human rights," you're quite simply accusing the progressive movement of having an intrinsic hatred of religious belief.  

I consider myself a spiritual (if not religious) liberal, and there are many others that see through the bullshit of his non-apology and take umbrage with the idea themselves.  Several liberal religious leaders issued statements to that effect:

"Faith Aloud, a counseling and advocacy group for reproductive health and rights, launched an online petition calling on Akin to apologize, and called the comment 'an outrageous insult to all who follow their faith toward policies of compassion and justice, and is not befitting a member of Congress.'

"Rev. Krista Taves of the Emerson Unitarian Universalist Chapel, said Akin must 'know very little about liberals,' and suggested conservative policies hurt vulnerable individuals.

"Vicky Trippe, a retired teacher and ProVote Activist from southwest Missouri, has heard this from political opponents before. In 2005, she launched a bumper and coined the phrase, 'Because of my faith, I vote for Democrats.'"

So I'd like to introduce you, Todd Akin, to the religious components of the liberal movement.  We feel, just as you do, that our various and (ahem, more) diverse faiths lead us to vote and believe the way we do, to include the separation of church and state.  So keep your platitudes about "rights from the government," blah blah blah bullshit.

T-Punk Threatens to Take Coca-Cola On

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council issued some vague threats and ultimatums today.  Yaaaaaawn.

What's he in a snit about?  Law firm King and Spalding pulling out of the DOMA defense case at the behest of Coca-Cola.  My question is, what the hell does Tony fucking Perkins of the FRC think he's going to do against one of the largest multinationals in the world? 


"While this form of corporate terrorism may have paid off temporarily, even the press is chiding HRC for its own intolerance toward the legal process. But that doesn't faze homosexual activists. They were all too eager to take credit for their campaign of intimidation. 'We did all of this, and we're proud to have done it,' Sainz bragged. According to the email traffic, King & Spalding 'was starting to hear from companies that... they might have to rethink their relationship with [the firm].'

"Rumors are flying that one of those companies was Coca Cola. People closest to the story are suggesting that the soda king did most of the arm-twisting. 'Sources... confirm that one of King & Spalding's top clients, Coca Cola, also based in Atlanta, directly intervened to press the firm to extricate itself from the case.' A spokesman for the company refused to comment. But if the allegations are true, I guarantee that FRC won't hesitate to!"

Hmmm.  I'm thirsty for a Coke all of a sudden. 


[JoeMyGod]