The Gay Fray
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
Bells
Staff member
Indeed.
According to the police report, the turd molested his sisters while they were asleep as well. Repeatedly. And his parents protected him, even though their own daughters were his victims.
There are so many things wrong with that whole story, I wouldn't know where to begin.
Bells said:
Let us go ahead and start with everyone else's discomfort. The Duggars are an emblematic caricature of rape culture, even for those who would assert there is no such thing. It is part of that weird unsettling people experience that makes these people fascinating in the first place. Something about them isn't just unusual, but distressingly so and often in an abstract way.
Thus, the words that cut into the soul: We already knew.
Isn't that a terrible feeling?
To know that somebody is being hurt, and do nothing? Whatever legal and moral excuses we want to make, yeah, they probably work out fine. After all, who am I to go playing supercop, right?
It's kind of like the Michael Jackson thing, in a way, except more so. I don't need testimony about sweaty shirtless little boys and front desk deliveries of Vaseline; most of us don't need that kind of testimony. Much like the idea of looking at a group of people and counting off the numbers―at least one of them is gay ... at least one of them is a closet atheist ... at least one of them is a Scorpio, for Heaven's sake―we might look at specific cohorts and know that some circumstance will eventually become true.
We don't know when or where it's happening, but you know how it goes; some folks just make us uneasy, and we can't explain why. And for most people, it has to do with the baby factory aspect, but even then they can't really put their fingers on it, and that is in part because American society, generally speaking, either is not aware of, or else rejects the proposition of rape culture.
But when you are famous in part because of a decision to (A) be a vessel that receives a man's seed and carries his offspring, and (B) seek fame for it, yes, you are a caricature of rape culture. And as we looked upon this flotilla of running jokes Americans have but don't necessarily understand, yes, the spectacle made us uneasy.
And this is one of the reasons why.
Statistically speaking, we know this will happen.
Observationally, we have every reason to believe it will happen in a setting that empowers such behavior.
There is a reason we are uneasy, even if it is just our subconscious minds stitching together fragments of information we've picked up along the way: One in four girls, one in five boys. Doctrine and delusion; the immeasurable value of the human soul armored in superstitious self-interest.
One of the worst things I ever did for―or to―myself, and, let us be fair, to anyone else, was walk down the street one day and keep a private count in my head. One, two, three ... her. She will be raped. One, two, three, four ... him. That little boy will know the moment. One, two, three ... her. It's her turn ... tonight.
It is an interesting exercise, and very, very depressing. And I can tell you what will stop you in your tracks: "One, two three ... her ... er ... I mean ... oh."
Because, you know, sometimes there is just something about the way a person looks. And we also know life doesn't work that way; she doesn't get a pass tonight just because it was her turn last night.
And, to be honest, that puts an end to the exercise. There is a certain appearance. A look. An aura. And, you know, in adventure novels, you always say that about the guy who has "done work", who has killed for money. You can see it in his eyes, in how he carries himself.
For rape survivors, it's not just an appearance of shellshock or something like that. Once you've seen the expression, marked the motions, received into your conscience all the cues you can't properly catalog but would beg there be a God that you could pray to blot it all out, you start hoping it's some other trauma. You can't unsee it, and then you start thinking you see it everywhere. And somewhere in there you have to take a moment to remind yourself that maybe you're thinking about these things too much. But you see something about a person, and all you want to do is find a way to make something in the past unhappen.
Most people already have a version of this count. It's why societies hate sluts. It is easier to condemn the harlot than look into the heart of our identity. Still, though, we are at some valence aware that it is happening; we see the spectre, the shadow, the aura, and it is terrifying, so we look away, each in our own way.
But in our culture wars there is a strange distillation of what "family values" implies, and the Duggar name is long recognized as one of our society's foremost examples. When we look at what goes into this, there is a reason we are uncomfortable.
Statistically, it is going to happen, full stop.
Circumstantially, it will occur in an environment that empowers such dangerous behavior.
Consider that the difference isn't how one treats women, but, rather, how one treats which woman.
This is going to happen.
And this time it happened in a dangerous context that nurtures and empowers such outcomes.
And we all knew it would happen.
So let us start there, perhaps. What did we all know? And why did we know it? And how do those devices and notions work?
Because the abstract reason we were uneasy to begin with is rape culture itself.
That's it. Basic revulsion. We know danger when we see it.
The sickening feeling that accompanies the knowledge is the context; say what we will about the volunteer soldier at war, but this isn't any proper juxtaposition―we're talking about sexual abuse and exploitation, about raping, children.
This danger brings that strong a reaction.
So why do we do nothing about it?
That is to say, we have our instruments of law and order, but in bringing justice we fall well short of even our basic duties, speak nothing of our best ideals.
This shadow, this raping whisper in our consciences, is attached to so much of how we see the world.
Somewhere in America right now, a mother knows she helped set her daughter up to be hurt. Not intentionally. She just passed on the family values. And that's why the girl didn't say anything. And that's why nobody noticed. Nobody enjoys indicting their entire life.
But that mother? Certes, we don't envy her; but what about the men? Consider that this spectre reaches into our daily lives. In order to drive the absurdity of that point, I would simply note that last year I had occasion to write:
And, you know, damn it, if a continuing rape crisis besieging the women we know—our mothers and daughters and sisters and friends—is what it takes for you to be able to crack a crude, locker-room joke without feeling like you’re oppressing women, what the hell is wrong with you?
Because, yes, that's how deeply it reaches. Nobody enjoys indicting their entire life. Rape is so fundamentally woven into our culture that everybody has a neurotic reason to look away. At some point, we have to accept that yes, dealing with rape culture really does mean killing some of the fun. And, you know, sure, it's not much compared to the actual phenomenon, but I would also ask that we consider just how absurdly awful things are that such a sentence would have any substantial meaning, or even reason for existing. Because that absurdity is why such a stupid sentence about killing the fun has such gravity. We can roll our eyes and scowl and roar all we want, but this is what we're up against.
Look at how the words fall all over themselves. Look at the mess. What is this idea, and how does it work?
And I would propose that is a fine place to start. And it's not so much no time like present as much as the foot-tapping in the conscience because this discussion is way overdue.
This episode is emblematic, with the trappings of legend. And of course we could see this coming. Not that we could do anything to stop it, but the point isn't to indict everyone in America for failing to stop it. Rather, I would suggest there are reasons we could see it coming, and this will all keep happening in really, really stupid ways as long as we leave that vaguely sickening unease to vagary.
Since at some point this general discussion of rape culture needs to happen, given the driving influence of rape culture attitudes, and considering that this is one of the cases that rises to the public discourse, I would propose the whats, hows, and whys of rape culture make a fine starting point.
Bells
Staff member
These people are happier to let a child molester remain in their midst, then they would a member of the the LGBT community.
It needs to be said, they did nothing to treat their son after he admitted to sexually molesting his sisters and at least one other girl, sometimes while they slept. They hid it, they protected him, they removed him from the house for a couple of months and then returned him to the house and right to where his victims were.
Jim Bob and church elders subsequently took Josh to a state trooper for a "very stern talk," but didn't officially report the incidents. When police were later tipped off, the statute of limitations had expired. So Josh never faced legal trouble and he never got counseling.
These are people who hold themselves up, and who are held up on television, as models of sexual morality. For many observers it was clear before now that Duggar morality is founded on repression, but this adds secrecy and total lack of accountability to that score. Most importantly, it's clear that none of them—not Jim Bob, Michelle, or Josh—developed any compassion or hesitation about condemning others as a result of this.
Josh Duggar's career has been more or less as a spokesman for bigotry. It's obvious he didn't learn the lesson that he, as a child molester, was not in a position to judge others for their loving, consensual, adult relationships. So it may be worth asking if he learned the lesson that he shouldn't sexually assault people—true, his parents didn't even try to teach him not to judge others, but it doesn't seem like they tried all that hard to turn him away from his predatory behavior, either.
For what it's worth, Mike Huckabee, who the Duggars endorsed and campaigned for in the 2008 Republican presidential primary, is standing by Josh.
These are people who hold themselves up, and who are held up on television, as models of sexual morality. For many observers it was clear before now that Duggar morality is founded on repression, but this adds secrecy and total lack of accountability to that score. Most importantly, it's clear that none of them—not Jim Bob, Michelle, or Josh—developed any compassion or hesitation about condemning others as a result of this.
Josh Duggar's career has been more or less as a spokesman for bigotry. It's obvious he didn't learn the lesson that he, as a child molester, was not in a position to judge others for their loving, consensual, adult relationships. So it may be worth asking if he learned the lesson that he shouldn't sexually assault people—true, his parents didn't even try to teach him not to judge others, but it doesn't seem like they tried all that hard to turn him away from his predatory behavior, either.
For what it's worth, Mike Huckabee, who the Duggars endorsed and campaigned for in the 2008 Republican presidential primary, is standing by Josh.
We should not be too surprised by Huckabee. Well, we should, but we aren't.
I really am at a loss for words. How does one defend this? He told the victims he is sorry so it is all good?
Janet and I want to affirm our support for the Duggar family. Josh’s actions when he was an underage teen are as he described them himself, 'inexcusable,' but that doesn’t mean 'unforgivable.' He and his family dealt with it and were honest and open about it with the victims and the authorities. No purpose whatsoever is served by those who are now trying to discredit Josh or his family by sensationalizing the story. Good people make mistakes and do regrettable and even disgusting things. The reason that the law protects disclosure of many actions on the part of a minor is that the society has traditionally understood something that today’s blood-thirsty media does not understand—that being a minor means that one's judgement is not mature.
So yeah, it's the mean old media picking on the Duggars. Not the fact that the parents covered up that their son was molesting his sisters and at least one other non family member. And if that weren't bad enough it appears the cop that they talked to about the situation was also a child molester. Kinda odd that is the cop dear old Dad took him to talk to, huh?These are people who support sending children to re-education camps if they are gay, but sexually molesting one's sisters as they sleep? Teenage mistake, boys will be boys, sure, it's "inexcusable", until it is excusable and just say sorry to your sisters for fondling their vaginas and their breasts and it's all good....
When a teenage boy goes to his parents, crying and confesses that he has molested his own sisters, it's a cry for help. Instead, they shipped him off to live with a family friend for a few months, let him return and be around his sisters again, made him say sorry to them, then had a pedophile police officer give him a "stern talking to". And then these people go on to lecture and berate others for daring to fight to give consenting same sex adults equal rights.
I don't think cringe worthy is an apt description. This is pure evil.
And it doesn't end with Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar.
The Family Research Council, that anti-gay hate group who constantly prattle on about the dangers LGBT pose to children and how they are about protecting children, said nothing about one of their senior executives molesting children. Well, they said nothing about the children themselves.
The FRC statement, posted only on its website’s front page (as opposed to a dedicated press release page that would be archived), simply states, “Today Josh Duggar made the decision to resign his position as a result of previously unknown information becoming public concerning events that occurred during his teenage years. Josh believes that the situation will make it difficult for him to be effective in his current work. We believe this is the best decision for Josh and his family at this time. We will be praying for everyone involved.” The organization, committed to protecting children and families, never identifies the “concerning events” nor condemns Duggar’s behavior.
FRC has a well-documented history of demonizing LGBT people as being a threat to children. A 2002 document called “Homosexuality and Child Abuse,” still found on FRC’s website, claims, “The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls.” This claim incorrectly assumes that the men who molest boys are gay, when in fact pedophilia is not motivated by sexual orientation. Male pedophiles who molest boys might be completely heterosexual; because the children are prepubescent, sexuality does not explain the disordered behavior. In 2010, Perkins, along with Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg, complained that scientists refuse to accept that there’s “a correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia.” Perkins doubled down on this claim just last year.
Given the way FRC claims that protecting children is its motivation for most of its positions, its silence on actions that Duggar admitted to is telling. As Dan Savage tweetedThursday night, “If a gay dad did nothing after his son molested 5 girls… @FRCdc & @FRCAction would argue that no gays should be allowed to have kids.”
FRC has a well-documented history of demonizing LGBT people as being a threat to children. A 2002 document called “Homosexuality and Child Abuse,” still found on FRC’s website, claims, “The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls.” This claim incorrectly assumes that the men who molest boys are gay, when in fact pedophilia is not motivated by sexual orientation. Male pedophiles who molest boys might be completely heterosexual; because the children are prepubescent, sexuality does not explain the disordered behavior. In 2010, Perkins, along with Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg, complained that scientists refuse to accept that there’s “a correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia.” Perkins doubled down on this claim just last year.
Given the way FRC claims that protecting children is its motivation for most of its positions, its silence on actions that Duggar admitted to is telling. As Dan Savage tweetedThursday night, “If a gay dad did nothing after his son molested 5 girls… @FRCdc & @FRCAction would argue that no gays should be allowed to have kids.”
Last edited:
On Law and Conscience
We should remember that conservatives fretting about being prosecuted for religious conscience are not entirely wrong:
Welcome to Alabama.
¡Yellowhammer Pride!
___________________
Notes:
Edgemon, Erin. "Alabama minister convicted of disorderly conduct in same-sex marriage case". AL.com. 18 May 2015. AL.com. 23 May 2015. http://bit.ly/1AqUlbs
We should remember that conservatives fretting about being prosecuted for religious conscience are not entirely wrong:
A Prattville minister arrested after offering to perform a same-sex wedding inside the Autauga County Courthouse in February pleaded guilty Monday to misdemeanor disorderly conduct.
Anne Susan DiPrizio, 44, was sentenced to 30 days in the Autauga Metro Jail, which was suspended in lieu of six months unsupervised probation, the Montgomery Advertiser reported. She was ordered to pay a $250 fine and other court costs.
According to reports, DiPrizio, a Unitarian minister, offered to marry a lesbian couple on Feb. 10 in the Autauga County Probate Office and wouldn't leave the office when asked by probate office officials.
(Edgemon)
Anne Susan DiPrizio, 44, was sentenced to 30 days in the Autauga Metro Jail, which was suspended in lieu of six months unsupervised probation, the Montgomery Advertiser reported. She was ordered to pay a $250 fine and other court costs.
According to reports, DiPrizio, a Unitarian minister, offered to marry a lesbian couple on Feb. 10 in the Autauga County Probate Office and wouldn't leave the office when asked by probate office officials.
(Edgemon)
Welcome to Alabama.
¡Yellowhammer Pride!
___________________
Notes:
Edgemon, Erin. "Alabama minister convicted of disorderly conduct in same-sex marriage case". AL.com. 18 May 2015. AL.com. 23 May 2015. http://bit.ly/1AqUlbs
Éire!
Republic of Ireland says yes to marriage equality
We stand in awestruck admiration:
The vote in favor exceeded sixty-two percent, a resounding outcome. Prime Minister Enda Kenny proudly proclaimed Ireland a "small country with a big message for equality".
Only one constituency out of forty-three, Roscommon-South Leitrim, returned a majority vote against; the final count was 1,201,607 in favor, 734,300 against. Health Minister Leo Varadkar, who emerged earlier this year as the Republic's first out minister explained, "This is really Ireland speaking with one voice in favour of equality".
Even local Catholic leaders stepped up, telling parishioners they had better have a good reason for voting against marriage equality.
Raise a glass in honor and gratitude. Éire speaks, and we are so amazed.
____________________
Notes:
British Broadcasting Corporation. "Huge Republic of Ireland vote for gay marriage". BBC News. 23 May 2015. BBC.com. 23 May 2015. http://bbc.in/1Am5r1H
Republic of Ireland says yes to marriage equality
We stand in awestruck admiration:
The Republic of Ireland has voted overwhelmingly to legalise same-sex marriage in a historic referendum.
(BBC)
(BBC)
The vote in favor exceeded sixty-two percent, a resounding outcome. Prime Minister Enda Kenny proudly proclaimed Ireland a "small country with a big message for equality".
Only one constituency out of forty-three, Roscommon-South Leitrim, returned a majority vote against; the final count was 1,201,607 in favor, 734,300 against. Health Minister Leo Varadkar, who emerged earlier this year as the Republic's first out minister explained, "This is really Ireland speaking with one voice in favour of equality".
Even local Catholic leaders stepped up, telling parishioners they had better have a good reason for voting against marriage equality.
Raise a glass in honor and gratitude. Éire speaks, and we are so amazed.
____________________
Notes:
British Broadcasting Corporation. "Huge Republic of Ireland vote for gay marriage". BBC News. 23 May 2015. BBC.com. 23 May 2015. http://bbc.in/1Am5r1H
Post Script ― You know, it's funny. Sad, actually. I have this book, and any other day I could easily trip over it. I mean, I know exactly where it is supposed to be because it is always there. But there is one exception to the rule; any time I need the book, it isn't there. This happens a lot, and has something to do with my usual lack of organization, but at some point this just gets silly. I sometimes find stuff in places it should never be, like the next room under the sofa in the farthest corner where it's hardest to reach. But this just has the fourteenth century text of a poem made famous eighty years ago when it was rewritten. And it would have been great for this occasion. So, naturally, the book is nowhere to be found. I can no longer assert that it is actually inside the house. Which would sound really strange, but sure, why not? I will find it about this time next week, sitting right where it is supposed to be.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
"19 Kids and Counting" star Josh Duggar responded to allegations of child molestation Thursday by calling his actions "inexcusable."
Now, Mike Huckabee is standing up for him.
"Josh’s actions when he was an underage teen are as he described them himself, 'inexcusable,' but that doesn’t mean 'unforgivable.' He and his family dealt with it and were honest and open about it with the victims and the authorities," Huckabee wrote in a post on Facebook. "No purpose whatsoever is served by those who are now trying to discredit Josh or his family by sensationalizing the story. Good people make mistakes and do regrettable and even disgusting things."====http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment...ee-defends-19-kids-counting/story?id=31236959
Good people do not molest little girls. Not even on their worst days. What is Huckabee trying to do? Court the pedophile vote for his presidency?
Now, Mike Huckabee is standing up for him.
"Josh’s actions when he was an underage teen are as he described them himself, 'inexcusable,' but that doesn’t mean 'unforgivable.' He and his family dealt with it and were honest and open about it with the victims and the authorities," Huckabee wrote in a post on Facebook. "No purpose whatsoever is served by those who are now trying to discredit Josh or his family by sensationalizing the story. Good people make mistakes and do regrettable and even disgusting things."====http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment...ee-defends-19-kids-counting/story?id=31236959
Good people do not molest little girls. Not even on their worst days. What is Huckabee trying to do? Court the pedophile vote for his presidency?
Bells
Staff member
Nor do good people force victims of child sex abuse to remain in the same house as their abuser for him to keep abusing, which he apparently did keep abusing them after he had come clean about what he had done and his sisters had told their parents. It was only a year later, during which Josh kept molesting, that his parents decided to send him away for a few months to work with a friend of theirs and to teach him that he was committing a sin. At no time did they seek to get him treatment, or their daughters treatment.
Good people don't lie about the person molesting their child, to protect the child molester and to prevent him being arrested, nor do good people refuse to hand over a child molester for questioning, nor would good people continue to force their daughters to suffer as they did at the hands of their molester.
And finally, good people do not then go out of their way to try to wrongly paint people from the LGBT community as paedophiles and child molesters, repeatedly, while lying about and protecting their own child molester son.
Huckabee supports them because they support his own homophobic and misogynistic causes.
The tragedy of this story is that the parents did sweet fuck all for a year while their son knowingly molested his sisters and they knew about it. He needed treatment and help and even the "elders" in their church knew this and told them that. They refused.
Worse still, these people support the re-education of gays, to try to turn them straight through the dangerous and hateful pray away the gay and punishing gay teens for being gay and lesbian. But for someone who sexually assaults and molests little girls? Nothing at all. They sent him away to work with a friend of theirs when he didn't stop molesting and lied about his getting treatment. They don't think a child molester should get treatment, but a gay kid? They are happy to punish and "treat" them.
And that is the insidiousness of these people. Pure evil.
Good people don't lie about the person molesting their child, to protect the child molester and to prevent him being arrested, nor do good people refuse to hand over a child molester for questioning, nor would good people continue to force their daughters to suffer as they did at the hands of their molester.
And finally, good people do not then go out of their way to try to wrongly paint people from the LGBT community as paedophiles and child molesters, repeatedly, while lying about and protecting their own child molester son.
Huckabee supports them because they support his own homophobic and misogynistic causes.
The tragedy of this story is that the parents did sweet fuck all for a year while their son knowingly molested his sisters and they knew about it. He needed treatment and help and even the "elders" in their church knew this and told them that. They refused.
Worse still, these people support the re-education of gays, to try to turn them straight through the dangerous and hateful pray away the gay and punishing gay teens for being gay and lesbian. But for someone who sexually assaults and molests little girls? Nothing at all. They sent him away to work with a friend of theirs when he didn't stop molesting and lied about his getting treatment. They don't think a child molester should get treatment, but a gay kid? They are happy to punish and "treat" them.
And that is the insidiousness of these people. Pure evil.
Last edited:
Bleecker Days
Here is a way of looking at it: You know it's a good day when you can comfort a survivor.
No, really. There is even a bit of comfort against the idea of a transphobic murder attempt. As much as we might like to say insanity doesn't discriminate, it actually does in this particular iteration. But in the end, it is insanity. And in the end, our victim lives.
And the queer community in New York? Yeah. Fuck with them. I dare you.
Sister live, sister stand. That's what we get to call a good day.
____________________
Notes:
Wulfhorst, Ellen. "New York police seek subway attacker in possible hate crime". Reuters. 3 June 2015. Reuters.com. 5 June 2015. http://reut.rs/1H8xJOq
Here is a way of looking at it: You know it's a good day when you can comfort a survivor.
A New York City police hate-crime task force is hunting for a man suspected of pushing a transgender woman onto subway tracks in the city's Greenwich Village neighborhood, authorities said on Wednesday.
The 28-year-old victim was treated and released from a local hospital following the incident, which took place on Monday at about 9 a.m., according to the New York Police Department.
She had been approached by a man who was acting "erratically," police said.
The man said, "What are you looking at?" before throwing a empty plastic bottle at her and pushing her onto the tracks, police said.
(Wulfhorst↱)
The 28-year-old victim was treated and released from a local hospital following the incident, which took place on Monday at about 9 a.m., according to the New York Police Department.
She had been approached by a man who was acting "erratically," police said.
The man said, "What are you looking at?" before throwing a empty plastic bottle at her and pushing her onto the tracks, police said.
(Wulfhorst↱)
No, really. There is even a bit of comfort against the idea of a transphobic murder attempt. As much as we might like to say insanity doesn't discriminate, it actually does in this particular iteration. But in the end, it is insanity. And in the end, our victim lives.
And the queer community in New York? Yeah. Fuck with them. I dare you.
Sister live, sister stand. That's what we get to call a good day.
____________________
Notes:
Wulfhorst, Ellen. "New York police seek subway attacker in possible hate crime". Reuters. 3 June 2015. Reuters.com. 5 June 2015. http://reut.rs/1H8xJOq
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Franklin Graham hates Wells Fargo because they support gay people. But he changed to another bank that also supports gay people. Guess hating isn't an exact science just yet.
Franklin Graham Drops Bank Over LGBT Rights Stance, Joins Bank That's Sponsoring A Pride Event
SUBMITTED BY Brian Tashman on Tuesday, 6/9/2015 11:10 am
"Upset that Wells Fargo is running an ad which includes the story of a lesbian couple learning sign language before adopting a child who is deaf, Franklin Graham announced last week that the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association will no longer do business with the bank.
Graham spoke with Craig James of the Family Research Council, which is cheering on Graham’s announcement, on yesterday’s edition of “Washington Watch,” where he explained that he will be switching to BB&T, another North Carolina-based bank.
Graham may not have done much research, as BB&T has received an 80 percent score in the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index and this year is the sponsor of the Miami Beach Gay Pride Parade, along with the chief sponsor of Miami Beach Gay Pride’s “Legacy Couples” program, which celebrates same-sex couples in “committed relationships of 10 years or longer.”
A bank spokesman said the company hopes to “support the individuals and organizations that broaden our perspectives and strengthen the diverse fabric of our communities. That’s why BB&T is proud to be a part of this day of pride and celebration of the 2015 Legacy Couples.”
In fact, BB&T hosted a same-sex couple’s wedding reception earlier this year “in a makeshift chapel at event sponsor BB&T Bank South Beach branch.”
Graham added that anti-LGBT Christians should also boycott Starbucks, Tiffany’s and Nike since they “promote the gay lifestyle.”
- See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conte...s-sponsoring-pride-event#sthash.vfWv3Wcr.dpuf
Franklin Graham Drops Bank Over LGBT Rights Stance, Joins Bank That's Sponsoring A Pride Event
SUBMITTED BY Brian Tashman on Tuesday, 6/9/2015 11:10 am
"Upset that Wells Fargo is running an ad which includes the story of a lesbian couple learning sign language before adopting a child who is deaf, Franklin Graham announced last week that the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association will no longer do business with the bank.
Graham spoke with Craig James of the Family Research Council, which is cheering on Graham’s announcement, on yesterday’s edition of “Washington Watch,” where he explained that he will be switching to BB&T, another North Carolina-based bank.
Graham may not have done much research, as BB&T has received an 80 percent score in the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index and this year is the sponsor of the Miami Beach Gay Pride Parade, along with the chief sponsor of Miami Beach Gay Pride’s “Legacy Couples” program, which celebrates same-sex couples in “committed relationships of 10 years or longer.”
A bank spokesman said the company hopes to “support the individuals and organizations that broaden our perspectives and strengthen the diverse fabric of our communities. That’s why BB&T is proud to be a part of this day of pride and celebration of the 2015 Legacy Couples.”
In fact, BB&T hosted a same-sex couple’s wedding reception earlier this year “in a makeshift chapel at event sponsor BB&T Bank South Beach branch.”
Graham added that anti-LGBT Christians should also boycott Starbucks, Tiffany’s and Nike since they “promote the gay lifestyle.”
- See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conte...s-sponsoring-pride-event#sthash.vfWv3Wcr.dpuf
Bells
Staff member
At this rate, he and his ilk will be forced to store their money under their mattresses.
Thank You, Secretary Carter!
SecDef: "Discrimination of any kind has no place in America's armed forces."
It is my honor to thank Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, who today announced that transgendered members of the United States military are now protected against workplace discrimination.
In truth, I loathe the word "meritocracy", which seems to be one of those terms that became popular because people felt smarter when they said it. Kind of like how "transition" became popular for having three syllables, and thus sounding smarter than "transform", "transmute", "transport", "transcend", or "transfer", among others.
Never mind. I digress. Still, it's kind of like a Shel Silverstein poem; you know, five pennies is more than one measly dollar.
Oh, right. Never mind. I digress from digression.
It is also true that there is more work to be done; transgenderism is a dischargeable health condition in the U.S. military. However, a periodic review is underway, and while Pentagon Spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Nathan Christensen specifically noted that the review is general and not specifically to examine the transgender policy, there is some reason to be confident that Secretary Carter wants to be rid of such outcomes. With the services themselves leading the way―including the heavily Christianized Air Force―it is easy to hope the policy revision is coming.
With estimates ranging as high as fifteen thousand transgender personnel, these are pretty tall stakes.
The periodic review takes a while; we shouldn't expect more good news tomorrow, or even next month.
Meanwhile, there is today.
And today is a good day.
Thank you, Secretary Carter.
____________________
Notes:
Vanden Brook, Tom. "Gay and lesbian troops will be protected by new Pentagon policy". USA Today. 9 June 2015. USAToday.com. 9 June 2015. http://usat.ly/1dvmL9W
SecDef: "Discrimination of any kind has no place in America's armed forces."
It is my honor to thank Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, who today announced that transgendered members of the United States military are now protected against workplace discrimination.
Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced Tuesday that gay and lesbian troops for the first time will be protected from discrimination by the same equal opportunity policy that protects other servicemembers.
Carter announced the change at the Pentagon's Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Pride event.
The change ensures that gay and lesbian troops' complaints about discrimination based on sexual orientation will be investigated by the Military Equal Opportunity program, the same office that handles complaints based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
"Discrimination of any kind has no place in America's armed forces," Carter said. The military needs "to be a meritocracy."
(Vanden Brook↱)
Carter announced the change at the Pentagon's Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Pride event.
The change ensures that gay and lesbian troops' complaints about discrimination based on sexual orientation will be investigated by the Military Equal Opportunity program, the same office that handles complaints based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
"Discrimination of any kind has no place in America's armed forces," Carter said. The military needs "to be a meritocracy."
(Vanden Brook↱)
In truth, I loathe the word "meritocracy", which seems to be one of those terms that became popular because people felt smarter when they said it. Kind of like how "transition" became popular for having three syllables, and thus sounding smarter than "transform", "transmute", "transport", "transcend", or "transfer", among others.
Never mind. I digress. Still, it's kind of like a Shel Silverstein poem; you know, five pennies is more than one measly dollar.
Oh, right. Never mind. I digress from digression.
It is also true that there is more work to be done; transgenderism is a dischargeable health condition in the U.S. military. However, a periodic review is underway, and while Pentagon Spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Nathan Christensen specifically noted that the review is general and not specifically to examine the transgender policy, there is some reason to be confident that Secretary Carter wants to be rid of such outcomes. With the services themselves leading the way―including the heavily Christianized Air Force―it is easy to hope the policy revision is coming.
With estimates ranging as high as fifteen thousand transgender personnel, these are pretty tall stakes.
The periodic review takes a while; we shouldn't expect more good news tomorrow, or even next month.
Meanwhile, there is today.
And today is a good day.
Thank you, Secretary Carter.
____________________
Notes:
Vanden Brook, Tom. "Gay and lesbian troops will be protected by new Pentagon policy". USA Today. 9 June 2015. USAToday.com. 9 June 2015. http://usat.ly/1dvmL9W
Bells
Staff member
Harpy Alert
Conservative harpy, Ann Coulter, has been busy.
New book, book tour and thus, more opportunity to spout the utter rubbish she is known for.
This time, she was on conservative network owned and operated by Glenn Beck. Yes, I know, much eye-rolling to be had by that fact alone. If any two people were so alike each other, it is those two.
Anywho, the harpy is currently whining about illegal immigration and now has a new spin on her weird conspiracy theories.
Yes, that's right. You did not miss-read that.
According to the harpy, the left are too busy aborting babies and "going gay", so they have to bring in illegal immigrants to out-breed white Christian conservatives.
She then goes on;
Ignoring the fact that the harpy has no children (there is a god after all), she is telling "Christian America" to go out and have children to make sure that the left turning gay and aborting babies are not letting the migrants breed them out of existence.
Praising that the "Christian Americans" are having more children well above the "replacement rate", she believes that they, the "Christian Americans" have a "leg up" on the left who are turning gay and aborting babies and bringing in illegal immigrants to have babies to vote for the left..
Conservative harpy, Ann Coulter, has been busy.
New book, book tour and thus, more opportunity to spout the utter rubbish she is known for.
This time, she was on conservative network owned and operated by Glenn Beck. Yes, I know, much eye-rolling to be had by that fact alone. If any two people were so alike each other, it is those two.
Anywho, the harpy is currently whining about illegal immigration and now has a new spin on her weird conspiracy theories.
Ann Coulter spoke to The Blaze, Glenn Beck’s network, last week about the “demographic war” between conservatives and liberals, who she says need the support of immigrants to take power since they are “aborting and going gay.”
Yes, that's right. You did not miss-read that.
According to the harpy, the left are too busy aborting babies and "going gay", so they have to bring in illegal immigrants to out-breed white Christian conservatives.
She then goes on;
“All of these left-wing loons who used to be fighting with revolutionaries in the jungles of Peru, now they’re here at home trying to bring the jungles here,” Coulter said. “And they work for these left-wing, anti-American, pro-Third-World immigration groups, and then they become immigration judges.”
Coulter added that the government should deal with undocumented immigrants by “rounding them up”: “When I look at the costs of court translators alone, rounding them up is a bargain. And when you realize that there are not 11 million illegal aliens here, as we have been insistently and angrily told for at least a decade now, there are at least, at a bare minimum, 30 million illegal aliens here.”
She expressed hope that “Christian America” will have more children to stop liberals from taking over the country with the votes of immigrants.
Coulter added that the government should deal with undocumented immigrants by “rounding them up”: “When I look at the costs of court translators alone, rounding them up is a bargain. And when you realize that there are not 11 million illegal aliens here, as we have been insistently and angrily told for at least a decade now, there are at least, at a bare minimum, 30 million illegal aliens here.”
She expressed hope that “Christian America” will have more children to stop liberals from taking over the country with the votes of immigrants.
Ignoring the fact that the harpy has no children (there is a god after all), she is telling "Christian America" to go out and have children to make sure that the left turning gay and aborting babies are not letting the migrants breed them out of existence.
Praising that the "Christian Americans" are having more children well above the "replacement rate", she believes that they, the "Christian Americans" have a "leg up" on the left who are turning gay and aborting babies and bringing in illegal immigrants to have babies to vote for the left..
All Quiet on the Home Front
A fun moment―well, you know, if you're me―from the Gay Fray.
Call it a quiet moment; a family moment.
I'm not quite in the middle of nowhere; the Peninsula is a rural somewhere in the middle of a bustling region. But for the moment I'm in the sort of place where nobody thinks it strange if you go shooting in your backyard at ten in the morning, or even ten at night.
Or midnight.
Or whenever.
The Census Designated Place in which I currently find myself has a population of around fourteen hundred; it goes by a very simple name: Home.
Actually, Home is about a mile and a half up the road. Never mind.
But I had a moment to ask my father about the general store, and what time it closed. You know how it is, when you're a smoker, tomorrow morning is too late for your next pack. Regardless, yeah, the store was still open.
After he told me that, I looked down at myself, dressed in a Monster Magnet t-shirt and black peasant skirt, and said, "What do you think? Will I get beaten?"
The question didn't faze him at all. "Yeah, maybe," he replied. "You might want to put on some jeans."
And so I did.
Sigh.
We passed the moment lightly, of course. And I wore my fucking Eddie Bauer Boyfriend jeans. But it was nice to come face to face with the phobia in such a casual context.
To be among friends. To be among people who give a damn. To know you have your family at your back.
That's the thing about the Gay Fray. After all those years of hiding, it turns out I'm one of the lucky ones. Every gay dude needs a dad who knows the score. Or a mother who will buy him a skirt for Father's Day. Or a stepmother who gives him a skirt simply because she never managed to wear it in the year since she bought it and, you know, let's face it, "It will look fabulous on you!"
It's true that I don't necessarily believe them when they say they always would have been supportive, but that was also a different time. Everyone deserves a family that will stand for them.
That was then, and this is now. No, really, think about it. A boy and his dad, sharing a manly moment, because the boy is wearing a skirt, and the locals might not like that, and things could get dangerous, and everybody's shaking their heads about how fucking stupid that situation is.
This was unimaginable to me even five years ago.
And, yet, here I am, not quite in the middle of nowhere, and still we press forward.
(A couple miles past the general store is another CDP with an actual full-blown grocery store. My stepmother has extracted a promise from me that I will join her on a shopping excursion; she really does want to see how people react. And, in truth, like I said, we might be underestimating people on this one, but at the grocery store next to the fire department and the sandwich shop where the cops hang out? Come on, how paranoid do I really have to be? Still, though, we cannot overlook that she would expect some sort of reaction.)
I'm a lucky one. In my life, this sort of thing isn't supposed to be any big deal. And in this corner of the country, I really am empowered, compared to what supremacists can inflict on people like me in places like Kansas, Texas, and Louisiana.
I waited forty-one years to come out of the closet. And, you know, sure, there are reasons why. But that was then and this is now, and when I look to the fight that is about to happen, all I can think is that every one of my LGBTQ+ brothers and sisters deserve the same chance to figure themselves out that I have.
It really doesn't seem so much to ask.
"Remember the breakwaters, down by the waves. I first found my courage knowing Daddy would save. I could hold back the tide with my Dad by my side."
A fun moment―well, you know, if you're me―from the Gay Fray.
Call it a quiet moment; a family moment.
I'm not quite in the middle of nowhere; the Peninsula is a rural somewhere in the middle of a bustling region. But for the moment I'm in the sort of place where nobody thinks it strange if you go shooting in your backyard at ten in the morning, or even ten at night.
Or midnight.
Or whenever.
The Census Designated Place in which I currently find myself has a population of around fourteen hundred; it goes by a very simple name: Home.
Actually, Home is about a mile and a half up the road. Never mind.
But I had a moment to ask my father about the general store, and what time it closed. You know how it is, when you're a smoker, tomorrow morning is too late for your next pack. Regardless, yeah, the store was still open.
After he told me that, I looked down at myself, dressed in a Monster Magnet t-shirt and black peasant skirt, and said, "What do you think? Will I get beaten?"
The question didn't faze him at all. "Yeah, maybe," he replied. "You might want to put on some jeans."
And so I did.
Sigh.
We passed the moment lightly, of course. And I wore my fucking Eddie Bauer Boyfriend jeans. But it was nice to come face to face with the phobia in such a casual context.
To be among friends. To be among people who give a damn. To know you have your family at your back.
That's the thing about the Gay Fray. After all those years of hiding, it turns out I'm one of the lucky ones. Every gay dude needs a dad who knows the score. Or a mother who will buy him a skirt for Father's Day. Or a stepmother who gives him a skirt simply because she never managed to wear it in the year since she bought it and, you know, let's face it, "It will look fabulous on you!"
It's true that I don't necessarily believe them when they say they always would have been supportive, but that was also a different time. Everyone deserves a family that will stand for them.
That was then, and this is now. No, really, think about it. A boy and his dad, sharing a manly moment, because the boy is wearing a skirt, and the locals might not like that, and things could get dangerous, and everybody's shaking their heads about how fucking stupid that situation is.
This was unimaginable to me even five years ago.
And, yet, here I am, not quite in the middle of nowhere, and still we press forward.
(A couple miles past the general store is another CDP with an actual full-blown grocery store. My stepmother has extracted a promise from me that I will join her on a shopping excursion; she really does want to see how people react. And, in truth, like I said, we might be underestimating people on this one, but at the grocery store next to the fire department and the sandwich shop where the cops hang out? Come on, how paranoid do I really have to be? Still, though, we cannot overlook that she would expect some sort of reaction.)
I'm a lucky one. In my life, this sort of thing isn't supposed to be any big deal. And in this corner of the country, I really am empowered, compared to what supremacists can inflict on people like me in places like Kansas, Texas, and Louisiana.
I waited forty-one years to come out of the closet. And, you know, sure, there are reasons why. But that was then and this is now, and when I look to the fight that is about to happen, all I can think is that every one of my LGBTQ+ brothers and sisters deserve the same chance to figure themselves out that I have.
It really doesn't seem so much to ask.
Pretty Straight ... uh ... Forward ... Straightforward ... Yeah, That's It, Straightforward
Rear Admiral Alan M. Steinman, USPHS (Ret.)↱ explains in terms that are easy enough to understand:
This would seem to be something of an important point. It was all of what, Tuesday↑, when we heard from Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter announced workplace discrimination protection for transgender service personnel?
As I noted then:
Hope is easy, some days. Others bring unexpected hints of progress.
The United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps is one of the nation's seven uniformed services. Rear Admiral Steinman also served in the Coast Guard, and emerged in 2003 alongside Army Brigadier General Virgil Richard as the nation's highest ranking openly homosexual service members.
But this really is straightforward:
This would be an unexpected turn for the awesome, you know? The key question is whether the heat catches. Secretary Carter seems to want this to happen. President Obama would probably like to make it happen before he leaves office. Republicans have every reason to have this off the table come November, 2016. The AMA is unequivocal. The services are leading the way. Surgeon General Vice Admiral Vivek Murthy is in the fight against conversion therapy for minors with the White House at his back. This really could happen quite quickly.
In truth, wise politics would tell Republicans to concede this point if they intend to stand for conversion therapy; this is a possibility, especially as Texas↱, one of the most influential conservative states, prepares to pick a fight in defense of the dangerous fake therapy↗.
Setting aside the question of what manner and magnitude of tantrum Republicans might pitch over the question of transgender troops, we might still watch to see what happens next. If this runs the course of the Pentagon's periodic review, yes, Democrats have a social issues weapon to carry into election season. Still, this might move more quickly. The Rear Admiral's public call for the end of transgender exclusion can only be called expected in hindsight. There is a, "Well, duh!" moment in there, because the Pentagon and services are crafting polices well presumed against exclusion. This isn't tiptoeing; they're miles into inclusionary territory. So of course it's time for this public call to end the exclusionary policies.
Still, it's also true I just wasn't expecting this message, this weekend.
____________________
Notes:
Steinman, Alan M. "No medically valid reason for a ban on transgender military service". The Hill. 14 June 2015. TheHill.com. 14 June 2015. http://bit.ly/1MCjMYT
B.D. "Good News with an Asterisk". This Is. 17 May 2015. bdThisIs.WordPress.com. 14 June 2015. http://wp.me/pUgG0-1lA
Rear Admiral Alan M. Steinman, USPHS (Ret.)↱ explains in terms that are easy enough to understand:
Last week the American Medical Association (AMA) passed a resolution that has the potential to transform the debate over one of the last remaining policies of government discrimination. The 220,000-member AMA voted to affirm that "there is no medically valid reason to exclude transgender individuals from service in the U.S. military."
This would seem to be something of an important point. It was all of what, Tuesday↑, when we heard from Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter announced workplace discrimination protection for transgender service personnel?
As I noted then:
It is also true that there is more work to be done; transgenderism is a dischargeable health condition in the U.S. military. However, a periodic review is underway, and while Pentagon Spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Nathan Christensen specifically noted that the review is general and not specifically to examine the transgender policy, there is some reason to be confident that Secretary Carter wants to be rid of such outcomes. With the services themselves leading the way―including the heavily Christianized Air Force―it is easy to hope the policy revision is coming.
Hope is easy, some days. Others bring unexpected hints of progress.
The United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps is one of the nation's seven uniformed services. Rear Admiral Steinman also served in the Coast Guard, and emerged in 2003 alongside Army Brigadier General Virgil Richard as the nation's highest ranking openly homosexual service members.
But this really is straightforward:
The armed forces generally strive to ensure that Pentagon policies reflect the most up-to-date medical science, including routine reviews of all personnel policies. Unfortunately, the military's current rules on transgender service—which remain intact despite the 2011 lifting of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy banning openly gay service members—are based on assumptions and attitudes that are decades out of date.
The transgender service ban is contained in military medical regulations that govern physical and mental health standards for entering and remaining in the military. Among other exclusions, the rules prohibit what the military refers to as "transsexualism," a diagnosis that was eliminated by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) more than twenty years ago. Last year, the APA removed "gender identity disorder" and replaced it with a diagnosis that focuses on the distress that often accompanies feeling at odds with the gender one was assigned at birth.
When asked why the military continues to impose transgender restrictions that are unsupported by medical science, Pentagon spokespeople have claimed it would be difficult to provide adequate medical treatment to transgender troops in the "austere environments" of combat.
Yet that rationale has been repeatedly discredited by the increasing visibility of many of the estimated 15,500 currently-serving transgender troops, as well as by the experiences of the 18 allied nations that allow transgender service, including Britain, Canada and Australia. Research supports the case that the policy is outdated and unnecessary. Last year, a peer-reviewed study that I co-authored with former Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders and other experts found that "there is no compelling medical rationale for banning transgender military service, and that eliminating the ban would advance a number of military interests, including enabling commanders to better care for their service members."
Another study authored by Professor Diane Mazur, a legal scholar at the Palm Center, which studies sexual minorities in the military, found that "two different standards can apply to comparable medical care, or even the same medical care, depending on whether the service member is transgender or not." While the military seeks to retain and support non-transgender personnel with a variety of medical conditions, it automatically excludes transgender personnel with medical needs no more difficult to meet—irrespective of their fitness for duty.
The AMA resolution echoes these research conclusions, effectively eliminating the last remaining argument for banning transgender service. The AMA cites data showing that transgender individuals require no more specialized, risky or burdensome medical care than any other military members. It concludes that the military's regulations "are out of date with respect to the medical consensus about gender identity," noting that, by contrast, regulations governing non-transgender conditions "are updated regularly based on current scientific consensus and best practices." Finally, the AMA resolution calls for the provision of medical care to transgender personnel "as determined by patient and physician according to the same medical standards that apply to non-transgender personnel" ....
.... The significance of last week's AMA resolution, therefore, cannot be overstated. The fact that the oldest and largest association of physicians in the country has now endorsed the conclusion that the transgender exclusion policy has no factual basis to support it signals an indisputable medical consensus on the matter.
The transgender service ban is contained in military medical regulations that govern physical and mental health standards for entering and remaining in the military. Among other exclusions, the rules prohibit what the military refers to as "transsexualism," a diagnosis that was eliminated by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) more than twenty years ago. Last year, the APA removed "gender identity disorder" and replaced it with a diagnosis that focuses on the distress that often accompanies feeling at odds with the gender one was assigned at birth.
When asked why the military continues to impose transgender restrictions that are unsupported by medical science, Pentagon spokespeople have claimed it would be difficult to provide adequate medical treatment to transgender troops in the "austere environments" of combat.
Yet that rationale has been repeatedly discredited by the increasing visibility of many of the estimated 15,500 currently-serving transgender troops, as well as by the experiences of the 18 allied nations that allow transgender service, including Britain, Canada and Australia. Research supports the case that the policy is outdated and unnecessary. Last year, a peer-reviewed study that I co-authored with former Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders and other experts found that "there is no compelling medical rationale for banning transgender military service, and that eliminating the ban would advance a number of military interests, including enabling commanders to better care for their service members."
Another study authored by Professor Diane Mazur, a legal scholar at the Palm Center, which studies sexual minorities in the military, found that "two different standards can apply to comparable medical care, or even the same medical care, depending on whether the service member is transgender or not." While the military seeks to retain and support non-transgender personnel with a variety of medical conditions, it automatically excludes transgender personnel with medical needs no more difficult to meet—irrespective of their fitness for duty.
The AMA resolution echoes these research conclusions, effectively eliminating the last remaining argument for banning transgender service. The AMA cites data showing that transgender individuals require no more specialized, risky or burdensome medical care than any other military members. It concludes that the military's regulations "are out of date with respect to the medical consensus about gender identity," noting that, by contrast, regulations governing non-transgender conditions "are updated regularly based on current scientific consensus and best practices." Finally, the AMA resolution calls for the provision of medical care to transgender personnel "as determined by patient and physician according to the same medical standards that apply to non-transgender personnel" ....
.... The significance of last week's AMA resolution, therefore, cannot be overstated. The fact that the oldest and largest association of physicians in the country has now endorsed the conclusion that the transgender exclusion policy has no factual basis to support it signals an indisputable medical consensus on the matter.
This would be an unexpected turn for the awesome, you know? The key question is whether the heat catches. Secretary Carter seems to want this to happen. President Obama would probably like to make it happen before he leaves office. Republicans have every reason to have this off the table come November, 2016. The AMA is unequivocal. The services are leading the way. Surgeon General Vice Admiral Vivek Murthy is in the fight against conversion therapy for minors with the White House at his back. This really could happen quite quickly.
In truth, wise politics would tell Republicans to concede this point if they intend to stand for conversion therapy; this is a possibility, especially as Texas↱, one of the most influential conservative states, prepares to pick a fight in defense of the dangerous fake therapy↗.
Setting aside the question of what manner and magnitude of tantrum Republicans might pitch over the question of transgender troops, we might still watch to see what happens next. If this runs the course of the Pentagon's periodic review, yes, Democrats have a social issues weapon to carry into election season. Still, this might move more quickly. The Rear Admiral's public call for the end of transgender exclusion can only be called expected in hindsight. There is a, "Well, duh!" moment in there, because the Pentagon and services are crafting polices well presumed against exclusion. This isn't tiptoeing; they're miles into inclusionary territory. So of course it's time for this public call to end the exclusionary policies.
Still, it's also true I just wasn't expecting this message, this weekend.
____________________
Notes:
Steinman, Alan M. "No medically valid reason for a ban on transgender military service". The Hill. 14 June 2015. TheHill.com. 14 June 2015. http://bit.ly/1MCjMYT
See Also:
B.D. "Good News with an Asterisk". This Is. 17 May 2015. bdThisIs.WordPress.com. 14 June 2015. http://wp.me/pUgG0-1lA
Bells
Staff member
What..
The..
Fuck..?!?
Sometimes, you hear of something and those are instantly the three words that enter your brain.
Meet Jay Kallio. Jay is a transgender man and frankly, what he went through should send chills of horror down the spine of any breathing human being.
Think about this for a few seconds. A biopsy confirmed he had a very aggressive form of breast cancer. Normally, a doctor would immediately call the patient and surgery and treatment would begin immediately. Not so for Jay.
No, Jay went for weeks with absolutely no word. And even after another doctor contacted him to ask him how he was going after hearing his diagnosis, his treating physician was still not contacting him.
Not because of a hospital mix up, or lost note or even a lost or misplaced test. No. When the doctor finally agreed to contact Jay, he explained what his personal issue was.
He only contacted Jay, when Jay attempted to get his case transferred to a different doctor who would treat him, since his treating physician had yet to contact him about the diagnosis or treatment. And instead of working to get his patient the medical care he desperately needed, the doctor was more concerned about apparently 'treating' his transgender status with a psychiatrist. Think about the evilness behind this deliberate act. This doctor was willing to let his patient die by withholding information about his breast cancer and attempted to deny him treatment by not informing him of the diagnosis and not contacting him about the diagnosis or about his treatment options..
Jay was finally able to find a doctor to treat his cancer and he got what he had always wanted, to have both of his breasts removed, but the appalling thing is that a doctor was willing to let him die of cancer than treat him because of his prejudice and bigotry. Sadly, Jay is now also battling terminal lung cancer, but he thankfully has a great team of doctors who are not bigoted, biased or prejudiced about his transgender status.
Welcome to religious freedom, people. Where doctors are putting the lives of people at risk, because of their personal beliefs.
The..
Fuck..?!?
Sometimes, you hear of something and those are instantly the three words that enter your brain.
Meet Jay Kallio. Jay is a transgender man and frankly, what he went through should send chills of horror down the spine of any breathing human being.
It began when Kallio found a lump on his breast just three months after a mammogram. He had a second mammogram, then a biopsy and, when weeks went by without receiving any test results, he just assumed everything was fine. That changed when he suddenly got a phone call from the doctor who performed his biopsy -- and who was not his primary physician.
"She said to me, 'Hi, I was just curious how you were doing with your diagnosis.' And I said, 'What diagnosis?' She she sort of spurted, '[Your doctor] hasn't called you yet?'" Kallio remembered.
The biopsy confirmed that Kallio had "very aggressive" breast cancer, and Kallio knew he needed treatment immediately, especially as the pain in his breast intensified.
"It felt like getting shot slowly. It felt like it was heading right for my heart. So I was getting nervous. I still get nervous when I think about it," he said.
Even after that, Kallio's doctor still wouldn't contact him, which came as a huge surprise considering his doctor was head of surgery at a major hospital in "great big blue Manhattan," a liberal city where Kallio expected "embracing care" from "competent experts." The physician eventually got in touch when Kallio made moves to have his case transferred, but the conversation did not go as he hoped.
"She said to me, 'Hi, I was just curious how you were doing with your diagnosis.' And I said, 'What diagnosis?' She she sort of spurted, '[Your doctor] hasn't called you yet?'" Kallio remembered.
The biopsy confirmed that Kallio had "very aggressive" breast cancer, and Kallio knew he needed treatment immediately, especially as the pain in his breast intensified.
"It felt like getting shot slowly. It felt like it was heading right for my heart. So I was getting nervous. I still get nervous when I think about it," he said.
Even after that, Kallio's doctor still wouldn't contact him, which came as a huge surprise considering his doctor was head of surgery at a major hospital in "great big blue Manhattan," a liberal city where Kallio expected "embracing care" from "competent experts." The physician eventually got in touch when Kallio made moves to have his case transferred, but the conversation did not go as he hoped.
Think about this for a few seconds. A biopsy confirmed he had a very aggressive form of breast cancer. Normally, a doctor would immediately call the patient and surgery and treatment would begin immediately. Not so for Jay.
No, Jay went for weeks with absolutely no word. And even after another doctor contacted him to ask him how he was going after hearing his diagnosis, his treating physician was still not contacting him.
Not because of a hospital mix up, or lost note or even a lost or misplaced test. No. When the doctor finally agreed to contact Jay, he explained what his personal issue was.
"The first thing [the doctor] said was, 'I have a real problem with your transgender status.' And he said, 'When I found out you were transgender, the first thing I wanted to do, my first impulse was to send you to psychiatry,'" Kallio said. "So this is what a breast surgeon wanted to do with my breast cancer, is first send me to psychiatry."
He only contacted Jay, when Jay attempted to get his case transferred to a different doctor who would treat him, since his treating physician had yet to contact him about the diagnosis or treatment. And instead of working to get his patient the medical care he desperately needed, the doctor was more concerned about apparently 'treating' his transgender status with a psychiatrist. Think about the evilness behind this deliberate act. This doctor was willing to let his patient die by withholding information about his breast cancer and attempted to deny him treatment by not informing him of the diagnosis and not contacting him about the diagnosis or about his treatment options..
Jay was finally able to find a doctor to treat his cancer and he got what he had always wanted, to have both of his breasts removed, but the appalling thing is that a doctor was willing to let him die of cancer than treat him because of his prejudice and bigotry. Sadly, Jay is now also battling terminal lung cancer, but he thankfully has a great team of doctors who are not bigoted, biased or prejudiced about his transgender status.
Welcome to religious freedom, people. Where doctors are putting the lives of people at risk, because of their personal beliefs.
The Doctor at the Center of the Universe
This is interesting: I had a talk with my doctor today, a result of this being my first physical examination since affirmatively identifying as homosexual.
Big deal, right?
Think about a class of people who do exist in society: Predators whose hunt intends to spread a sexually transmitted disease.
And, you know, look, it's not like we don't know they exist.
But there really is a difference between knowing that fact intellectually and the strange feeling in that vast dimension 'twixt heart and gut: My doctor, coincidentally one of the best family practitioners in Seattle, considers this an important enough public health issue to address directly.
Remember, I'm the guy who thinks the tinfoilers who resent being asked about firearms in the household are completely missing the point.
A'ight, Doc. You have my attention.
Then again, this is Seattle. There are, of course, people who don't like any number of things about my lack of traditional machismo, but there really is a difference about living in gay-friendly communities. When I hear about the questions in other communities, the disputes occupying the public discourse, it seems a different world.
But the good doctor wished to stress the importance of not simply being responsible, but that responsibility requires extraordinary vigilance under the circumstances; which, in turn led him to discuss predation.
With me.
And then he reiterated the point.
Yes, Doc. You definitely have my attention.
Sure, it's corny, but you know what they say, knowledge is power. And more than the fact that these people exist in the world, the fact that my doctor considers the public health risk they pose significant enough to specifically invoke, and, furthermore, reiterate, is a pretty powerful bit of knowledge.
And similarly unsettling.
Then again, it also occurs to me that I have no idea what goes on in any other office with any other doctor and patient. But I never got this sort of advisory lecture before. This is significant.
And I trust my doctor.
And he is not under any extraneous moral obligations of the state.
It's not just a matter of listening to what he says; it is also significant that he said it in the first place. This is apparently a big enough problem that he feels so compelled. That would seem to make it all the more important to pay attention.
This is interesting: I had a talk with my doctor today, a result of this being my first physical examination since affirmatively identifying as homosexual.
Big deal, right?
Think about a class of people who do exist in society: Predators whose hunt intends to spread a sexually transmitted disease.
And, you know, look, it's not like we don't know they exist.
But there really is a difference between knowing that fact intellectually and the strange feeling in that vast dimension 'twixt heart and gut: My doctor, coincidentally one of the best family practitioners in Seattle, considers this an important enough public health issue to address directly.
Remember, I'm the guy who thinks the tinfoilers who resent being asked about firearms in the household are completely missing the point.
A'ight, Doc. You have my attention.
Then again, this is Seattle. There are, of course, people who don't like any number of things about my lack of traditional machismo, but there really is a difference about living in gay-friendly communities. When I hear about the questions in other communities, the disputes occupying the public discourse, it seems a different world.
But the good doctor wished to stress the importance of not simply being responsible, but that responsibility requires extraordinary vigilance under the circumstances; which, in turn led him to discuss predation.
With me.
And then he reiterated the point.
Yes, Doc. You definitely have my attention.
Sure, it's corny, but you know what they say, knowledge is power. And more than the fact that these people exist in the world, the fact that my doctor considers the public health risk they pose significant enough to specifically invoke, and, furthermore, reiterate, is a pretty powerful bit of knowledge.
And similarly unsettling.
Then again, it also occurs to me that I have no idea what goes on in any other office with any other doctor and patient. But I never got this sort of advisory lecture before. This is significant.
And I trust my doctor.
And he is not under any extraneous moral obligations of the state.
It's not just a matter of listening to what he says; it is also significant that he said it in the first place. This is apparently a big enough problem that he feels so compelled. That would seem to make it all the more important to pay attention.
Sodomite Suppression Act Suppressed
"But I said I don't like sour stuff!": Swallow this.
(Detail of FLCL episode 1, "Fooly Cooly".)
You know, to the one, it's not like we couldn't see this coming.
The order from Judge Cadei↱ is available for public review, and taking all of four short paragraphs to reach its order, is easily consumed.
Some things really are that straightforward.
To the other, five months? Yeah, we know the wheels of justice turn slowly, and sometimes this is the price of due process. In the end, though, it's the right outcome. It's just one of those occasions when the issues are so clear that it's hard to believe it took five months.
So it goes.
Then again, I think the bigots expected to have to swallow this foul load. Which is a mystery unto itself, you know, like, why. But still, it's hard to believe they really thought they could win this one. Maybe they're hoping for a chance to complain about the government oppressing decent, faithful Americans with peaceful points of view.
____________________
Notes:
Reilly, Mollie. "California Judge Throws Out Ballot Initiative Calling For Execution Of Gay People". The Huffington Post. 23 June 2015. HuffingtonPost.com. 23 June 2015. http://huff.to/1QOXd9P
Cadei, Raymond M. "Default Judgment by Court in Favor of Plaintiff". Superior Court of the State of California County of Sacramento. 22 June 2015. bdThisIs.WordPress.com. 23 June 2015. http://wp.me/aUgG0-1rT
"But I said I don't like sour stuff!": Swallow this.
(Detail of FLCL episode 1, "Fooly Cooly".)
You know, to the one, it's not like we couldn't see this coming.
A California judge has ruled against a proposed ballot initiative authorizing the execution of gay and lesbian people, calling the suggested measure "unconstitutional on its face."
The proposed Sodomite Suppression Act calls for "any person who willingly touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification be put to death by bullets to the head or by any other convenient method." The measure also would outlaw advocating gay rights to minors, punishable by 10 years in prison and permanent expulsion from California.
While the measure was publicly ridiculed and stood little chance of collecting more than 365,000 signatures necessary to appear on the 2016 ballot, California Attorney General Kamala Harris was required by state law to circulate the proposed initiative because its backer, attorney Matt McLaughlin, paid a $200 filing fee ahead of the February deadline. In March, Harris asked for legal permission to toss out the initiative.
"As Attorney General of California, it is my sworn duty to uphold the California and United States Constitutions and to protect the rights of all Californians," Harris said in a statement after filing the request for declaratory relief. "This proposal not only threatens public safety, it is patently unconstitutional, utterly reprehensible, and has no place in a civil society."
Superior Judge Raymond M. Cadei on Monday sided with Harris, ruling that the attorney general has no obligation to issue a title and summary for the measure.
"The proposed initiative ... is patently unconstitutional on its face," Cadei wrote. "Any preparation and official issuance of a circulating title and summary for the Act by the Attorney General would be inappropriate, waste public resources, generate unnecessary divisions among the public, and tend to mislead the electorate."
(Reilly↱)
The proposed Sodomite Suppression Act calls for "any person who willingly touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification be put to death by bullets to the head or by any other convenient method." The measure also would outlaw advocating gay rights to minors, punishable by 10 years in prison and permanent expulsion from California.
While the measure was publicly ridiculed and stood little chance of collecting more than 365,000 signatures necessary to appear on the 2016 ballot, California Attorney General Kamala Harris was required by state law to circulate the proposed initiative because its backer, attorney Matt McLaughlin, paid a $200 filing fee ahead of the February deadline. In March, Harris asked for legal permission to toss out the initiative.
"As Attorney General of California, it is my sworn duty to uphold the California and United States Constitutions and to protect the rights of all Californians," Harris said in a statement after filing the request for declaratory relief. "This proposal not only threatens public safety, it is patently unconstitutional, utterly reprehensible, and has no place in a civil society."
Superior Judge Raymond M. Cadei on Monday sided with Harris, ruling that the attorney general has no obligation to issue a title and summary for the measure.
"The proposed initiative ... is patently unconstitutional on its face," Cadei wrote. "Any preparation and official issuance of a circulating title and summary for the Act by the Attorney General would be inappropriate, waste public resources, generate unnecessary divisions among the public, and tend to mislead the electorate."
(Reilly↱)
The order from Judge Cadei↱ is available for public review, and taking all of four short paragraphs to reach its order, is easily consumed.
Some things really are that straightforward.
To the other, five months? Yeah, we know the wheels of justice turn slowly, and sometimes this is the price of due process. In the end, though, it's the right outcome. It's just one of those occasions when the issues are so clear that it's hard to believe it took five months.
So it goes.
Then again, I think the bigots expected to have to swallow this foul load. Which is a mystery unto itself, you know, like, why. But still, it's hard to believe they really thought they could win this one. Maybe they're hoping for a chance to complain about the government oppressing decent, faithful Americans with peaceful points of view.
____________________
Notes:
Reilly, Mollie. "California Judge Throws Out Ballot Initiative Calling For Execution Of Gay People". The Huffington Post. 23 June 2015. HuffingtonPost.com. 23 June 2015. http://huff.to/1QOXd9P
Cadei, Raymond M. "Default Judgment by Court in Favor of Plaintiff". Superior Court of the State of California County of Sacramento. 22 June 2015. bdThisIs.WordPress.com. 23 June 2015. http://wp.me/aUgG0-1rT
Bells
Staff member
Holy crap they did it!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/26/supreme-court-gay-marriage_n_7470036.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/26/supreme-court-gay-marriage_n_7470036.html