Duck Dynasty: No, Tolerance Doesn't Have To Go Both Ways

Sorry. Duck Dynasty again. It's always the stupid shit that forces a dialogue, it seems.

There's a lot of whining going on about there being no tolerance for people of faith in America anymore.

Here's the thing about tolerance. Tolerance (which I've posted about before here) does not require that one be tolerant of social injustice. When we denounce beliefs which cause harm to others (and yes, denigrating LGBT folks and equating homosexuality with bestiality is indeed harmful), we are in no way in conflict with the concept of tolerance. Tolerance, in a global declaration by the UN, is defined as "the responsibility that upholds human rights, pluralism (including cultural pluralism), democracy and the rule of law. It involves the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism and affirms the standards set out in international human rights instruments...The practice of tolerance does not mean toleration of social injustice or the abandonment or weakening of one's convictions."

When people state that they stand with Robertson because he has the right to speak freely about his faith, they're right -- he does have that right. But it begs the question -- are Christians required by their faith to malign human beings for their natural traits? (If so, that's a horribly flawed morality.) And are those who disagree required to tolerate it?

The reason why it has become "politically incorrect" to denigrate gays and lesbians is not because society no longer tolerates religious belief or family values. It's because this view of sexuality and gender is as unethical and as harmful as the Taliban belief that women should stay at home rather than go to school. It is quite simply archaic and discriminatory thinking that has no value in modern society -- thinking that is morally dubious at best. While those who embrace reason, science, and human progress are moving on and leaving behind naive and outdated views from ancient texts, others remain kicking and screaming, believing that others are being intolerant of their Bronze Age ideas about sexuality and gender (or about the origins of the cosmos and life).

If we must tolerate religious views of LGBT-condemning fundamentalist Christians, then we must also tolerate the religious views of women-stoning fundamentalist Muslims. We can't say that one is any more or less correct. They are both morally unsound and archaic views that cause harm to others.

Why aren't people tolerant of those who wish to cure epilepsy or mental illness by drilling holes in the skull? (This was a common early medical practice.) Well, mostly because we learned more about biology, realized that we were mistaken, and we changed our approach.

There is nothing about tolerance that requires someone to tolerate the mistreatment or maligning of other human beings because of their natural traits. So crying foul on this one and saying it's an attack on faith and family values is to miss the point. Because anti-LGBT sentiment is not a value. Any faith that dictates that it is, is morally flawed. Acquiescing to such ideology is not a virtue.

The Duck Dynasty Thing Has Absolutely Nothing To Do With Free Speech

The creator of this image doesn't get it.

So this whole Duck Dynasty/A&E thing. I've been seeing a lot of comments in the blogosphere/Twittersphere, and petitions being passed around on Facebook, and one thing seems clear: Too many Americans have no idea what the First Amendment does and doesn't do.

Robertson has all the rights in the world to believe and say what he wants about LGBT folks. Nobody can take that right away from him. However, his employer, A&E, has no obligation whatsoever to pay him for making comments which they feel are not aligned with their values. They are in no way compelled to continue to provide a forum for a guy who has offended a significant number of their viewers.

I imagine if an employee of Fox News (or any other network) made comments on or off the air that equated Christians with swine, that individual would be suspended. And I imagine that the same people who are backing Robertson and boycotting A&E, would applaud the suspension of this employee.  And if he were to remain, I assume they would boycott the Network.

You have the right to say whatever crazy, hurtful, or morally dubious thing you want (short of hate speech, which is not protected).  You don't, however, have the right to keep your TV job after you say it.

8 Things I Don't Get About Evangelicals Leaving Nasty Notes (And No Tip) For Homosexual Waitpersons

Here's what I don't get about Christians leaving nasty notes and no tip for homosexual waitpersons (see here and here for a few recent examples):

If homosexuality is a choice (as so many misinformed Evangelicals believe), and if acting upon homosexual urges is 'an abomination,' then I have a whole lot of questions:

1. How do these Evangelical diners know that their waitperson is having sex, or with whom they have having sex? Maybe their waitperson is a virgin?

2. Why are they so sure that their waitperson is gay? Did they talk about all the gay sex they're having and then list the specials for the day?

3. Do Evangelicals think about the sex that every waitperson is having? Maybe that's a problem?

4. Do they leave similar judgmental notes for seemingly straight waitpersons who might be having sex for reasons other than procreation? Or who might be divorced? Or having an affair? Or who might have a tattoo? Or who might be judgmental assholes?

5. WWJD?

6. Maybe sexual orientation is not a choice?

7. Maybe who cares if it is a choice?

8. Maybe gratuities are for services rendered and not for the display of specific human traits?

Pat Robertson: Democrats Are The 'Party Of Gays, Godlessness And Whatever Else'

It's gotten to the point that it would be newsworthy if Pat Robertson didn't say something completely insane in his broadcast. He's a broken record of bigotry, senility, and illogic.

That being said, Robertson is downright outraged that the Democratic platform openly embraces marriage equality and the right to abortion.

Robertson, speaking on The 700 Club:

Back in the 1850s or 60s there was a charge that one party was the party of rum, Romanism and rebellion. I don’t know what you label the Democrats now but it’s the party of gays, godlessness and whatever else. I mean, same-sex marriage is in the platform, they want to go along with that as a right, I’m just astounded.
…
They can’t defend it and you ask yourself, you’re going to go before the American people and that’s going to be the face they’re going to present to America. You have insulted the Catholic Church with your rules, you have insulted right-to-work states, you have insulted certain union groups with your stand on the pipeline and now you’re going after God, it makes no sense but that’s what they want to do.

Watch:

Bryan Fischer: Gays Have 'No Business' Being Republican

In an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Bryan Fishcer of the American Family Association said that gays have "no business" in the Republican Party.

"They have no business being there. Our message is to them is that your home is in the Democratic Party," said Bryan Fischer, director of issue analysis for the Tupelo, Miss.-based American Family Association, a conservative radio host and a leading anti-gay figure in the GOP.

"These groups are actively working to undermine and subvert the Republican party platform and the principles of the Republican Party," Mr. Fischer said in a telephone interview. "They are undermining the moral foundations of the Republican Party."

It's no matter to him that Log Cabin Republicans support nearly every other party platform from tax policy to gun rights.

"There is no place for the homosexual agenda," he said. "The Republican platform is very clean on the issues of marriage and family and parenting, and these are people that are actively working against the principles of the party."

"The reason they are for gay marriage is that it is an issue of liberty for people to have the freedom to do what they want ... but we oppose gay marriage because it threatens liberty," he said.

He offered two examples of businesses whose freedoms were trumped by what he calls the gay agenda. First, he said several mayors are trying to keep Chick-fil-A restaurants out of their cities because the company's devout Christian owners oppose gay marriage. In another example, he said, the New Mexico Civil Rights Commission fined Christian photographer Elaine Huguenin for refusing to photograph a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony.

"The gay agenda is a threat to religious liberty. It is a danger to the liberty that the party stands for ... and it's tyranny that's being launched against businesses," Mr. Fischer said.

He said younger members of his party don't see that "because they are young and they are immature and they are unaware of the severe dangers to liberty that is posed by the homosexual agenda."

There you have it, my LGBT friends. The Republican Party does not want you. The Democrats, on the other hand, could sure use your help voting bigots out of office.

More Chick-fil-A Bigotry From CEO Dan Cathy: 'Redefinition' Of Marriage Is 'Twisted'

via Good As You:

DAN CATHY, president and COO of Chick-fil-A:"It's very clear in Romans chapter 1, if we look at society today, we see all the twisted up kind of stuff that's going on. Washington trying to redefine the definition of marriage and all the other kinds of things that we go—if you go upstream from that, in Romans chapter 1, you will see that because we have not acknowledged God and because we have not thanked God, that we have been left victim to the foolishness of our own thoughts, and as result, we are suffering the consequences of a society and culture who has not acknowledged God or not thanked God—he's left us to a deprived mind. It's tragic and we live in a culture of that today."

Watch:

Chick-fil-A Backpedals Bigotry After Backlash

Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy

Just a few days after their CEO made anti-gay remarks you'd expect to hear from Pat Robertson, Chick-fil-A posted a note to their Facebook page affirming their commitment to "treat every person with honor, dignity and respect – regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender." Chick-fil-A claims this is part of their "tradition." Right.

Here is the message in its entirety:

The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect – regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will continue this tradition in the over 1,600 Restaurants run by independent Owner/Operators. Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.

Chick-fil-A is a family-owned and family-led company serving the communities in which it operates. From the day Truett Cathy started the company, he began applying biblically-based principles to managing his business. For example, we believe that closing on Sundays, operating debt-free and devoting a percentage of our profits back to our communities are what make us a stronger company and Chick-fil-A family.

Our mission is simple: to serve great food, provide genuine hospitality and have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.

Two things:

1. You can bet your sweet fried ass that Chick-fil-A would never have posted that note had the public response to CEO Dan Cathy's comments been overwhelmingly positive. The words ring hollow, like the plaintive voice of a young child who has angered her parents, and who will say whatever she has to say to regain their favor.

2. If Chick-fil-A truly intends to "leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena," they will not funnel one more dime into SPLC-designated hate groups such as the Family Research Council. They will not support the ex-gay ministry Exodus International. And they will open up their camps and retreates to the LGBT population (not that many would want to go). Anything less amounts to a hill of beans.

Chick-fil-A, to be sure, is free to run their business as they please. This is America. And the great thing about America is that we have the freedom to vote with our pocketbooks and to call out bigotry in the public space. But until they have proven that they are not actively participating in the discrimination of human beings based on their natural traits, they can expect the boycotts to continue, and they can expect to live with the repercussions of their public comments.

Chick-fil-A CEO: We're Not A 'Christian Business,' But We Operate On 'Biblical Principles'

It's a well-known fact (and the source of many barbs) that Chick-fil-A is always closed on Sundays. And it's a fairly well-known fact that the chain is a supporter of anti-gay organizations.

What's the deal with the whole Chick-fil-A Christian thing? And is it okay, as a supporter of equality and church-state separation, to eat their delicious chicken sandwiches?

The short answer? Quite a lot, and no.

Chick-fil-A president and CEO Dan Cathy spoke to the Baptist Press.

"We don't claim to be a Christian business," Cathy said in a recent visit to North Carolina. He attended a business leadership conference many years ago where he heard Christian businessman Fred Roach say, "There is no such thing as a Christian business."

"That got my attention," Cathy said. Roach went on to say, "Christ never died for a corporation. He died for you and me."

"In that spirit ... [Christianity] is about a personal relationship. Companies are not lost or saved, but certainly individuals are," Cathy added.

"But as an organization we can operate on biblical principles. So that is what we claim to be. [We are] based on biblical principles, asking God and pleading with God to give us wisdom on decisions we make about people and the programs and partnerships we have. And He has blessed us."

Most people don't have a problem with the political or religious ideologies embraced by their eateries, so long as it does not affect their dining experience. (And to be sure, many Christians are more than thrilled that companies like Chick-fil-A are vocal about their religious beliefs.)

There are very good reasons why so many businesses go out of their way to stay out of religious and political debates -- they risk alienating a large part of their clientele. Customers at a Chick-fil-A are not likely to see bible verses on the walls, or to be asked by the fry-cook if they know Jesus, but one doesn't need to look too hard to know that Chick-fil-A is an organization deeply committed to promoting Biblical principles. This includes supporting anti-gay marriage initiatives and allegedly discriminating against its own employees who don't share their beliefs.

Cathy is very clear about Chick-fil-A's mission:

Cathy believes strongly that Christians are missionaries in the workplace. "Jesus had a lot of things to say about people who work and live in the business community," he said. His goal in the workplace is "to take biblical truth and put skin on it. ... We're talking about how our performance in the workplace should be the focus of how we build respect, rapport and relationships with others that opens the gateway to interest people in knowing God.

"All throughout the New Testament there is an evangelism strategy related to our performance in the workplace. ... Our work should be an act of worship. Our work should be our mission field. As long as we are stateside, let's don't think we have to go on mission trips by getting a passport. ... If you're obedient to God you are going to be evangelistic in the quality of the work you do, using that as a portal to share [Christ]," he said.

When asked if Chick-fil-A's success is attributed to biblical values, Cathy quickly said, "I think they're inseparable. God wants to give us wisdom to make good decisions and choices." Quoting James 1:5, he spoke of how often he asks God for wisdom.

So, okay, Cathy doesn't necessarily want his employees testifying from behind the register, so what's the big deal? There are a tons of companies with Christian CEOs and Christian values, right? Sure. And this is America, where people are free to believe what they want.

The problem arises when highly successful companies like Chick-fil-A start using their muscle to support initiatives which are discriminatory.

There was a time when the Atlanta college football bowl game, which is now named after Chick-fil-A, was called the Peach Bowl. The annual bowl features teams from the ACC and the SEC. It struggled for a long time. Then 15 years ago the Chick-fil-A organization got involved. It was rebranded as the Chick-fil-A Bowl and has been incredibly successful with 15 consecutive sellouts.

"We are the only bowl that has an invocation. It's in our agreement that if Chick-fil-A is associated in this, there's going to be an invocation. Also, we don't have our bowl on Sunday, either," Cathy said.

So if you attend a Chick-fil-A bowl, you better be ready to pray to Jesus. If you're Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, or a non-believer, then, well, suck it.

Chick-fil-A also invests in Christian growth and ministry through its WinShape Foundation, which offers scholarships, camps, retreats, and foster homes.

In order to be eligible for a WinShape scholarship, one must sign a contract which includes Christianity-based rules, and commitment to a fundamentalist Christian lifestyle.

Gay couples are not allowed at WinShape retreats.

WinShape gave $2 million dollars to anti-gay groups in 2010, including the gay 'conversion therapy' organization Exodus International, and the Family Research Council, which has been designated a hate group by the SPLC. The company also gave $2 million to anti-gay groups in 2009.

Cathy is absolutely unrepentant regarding his company's support of anti-gay organizations:

"Well, guilty as charged," said Cathy when asked about the company's position.

"We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.

"We operate as a family business ... our restaurants are typically led by families; some are single. We want to do anything we possibly can to strengthen families. We are very much committed to that," Cathy emphasized.

"We intend to stay the course," he said. "We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles.

So, there you have it straight from the horse's mouth.

Many Christians might agree with Cathy in his assertion that Chick-fil-A is not a Christian business. A Christian business might actually refrain from actively contributing to the denial of others' rights.

Robertson: The Bible Was 'Terribly Wrong' About Slavery, But Not About Homosexuality

Evangelicals love to cherry-pick their scripture. They love to cite 'The Word of God' when it rails against homosexuality. "The Bible is quote clear," they'll tell you.

The Bible is quite clear about a lot of things that Christians have long dismissed: slavery, wearing blended fabrics, eating shellfish, executing people for petty offenses, etc.

Pat Robertson has a long history of hating gay people. "The Bible is so clear about homosexuality," he's said.

However, Pat, like many evangelical Christians, loves to cherry-pick.

"Despite what the Bible says, “We have moved in our conception of the value of human beings until we realized slavery was terribly wrong.”

Have we, Pat? It seems like just a few months ago, evangelicals were up in arms when Dan Savage suggested the same thing.

SAVAGE: We can learn to ignore the bullshit about gay people in the Bible the same way have learned to ignore the bullshit in the Bible about shellfish about slavery, about dinner about farming, about menstruation, about virginity, about masturbation. We ignore bullshit in the bible about all sorts of things. The Bible is a radically pro-slavery document. Slave owners waived Bibles over their heads during the civil war and justified it…We ignore what the Bible says about slavery because the Bible got slavery wrong.…If the Bible got the easiest moral question that humanity has ever faced wrong, slavery. What are the odds that the Bible got something as complicated as human sexuality wrong? 100 percent.

So, we have Pat Robertson admitting that the Bible was "terribly wrong" about slavery. To extend Pat's thoughts on the "value of human beings" idea into the treatment of the LGBT population doesn't seem to be much of a stretch, does it? It's not that radical a notion.

It will happen. Eventually. Unfortunately, we'll have to wait until bigoted dinosaurs like Pat Robertson die out.

Fischer: Gays Cannot Be Reasoned With Because God Has Given Them Over To Depraved Minds

Via Right Wing Watch:

"...you cannot reason with these people because they are impervious to facts, they are impervious to logic, they are impervious to reason, they are impervious to history, they are impervious to the truth."

Bryan, that's actually a pretty apt description of yourself and your fellow Christian Right lunatics.

Go on.

"And the reason that gays and liberals and the like cannot be reasoned with is because God has given them over to a "depraved mind," so "their thinking is messed up [and] they don't process information the way normal people process information."

Wait, what?. I don't even.

NC Pastor: Pen In All Gays & Lesbians & Wait For Them Die Out

There's a point where religious morality gets so completely twisted that it becomes the epitome of pure evil.

Take North Carolina Pastor Charles Worley of Providence Road Baptist Church in Maiden, NC.

Here's what the minister suggested to his congregation as a way to address the LGBT population:

I figured a way out — a way to get rid of all the lesbians and queers. But I couldn’t get it passed through Congress. Build a great big large fence, 150 or 100 miles long. Put all the lesbians in there. Fly over and drop some food. Do the same thing with the queers and the homosexuals. Have that fence electrified so they can’t get out. Feed ‘em, and– And you know what? In a few years they’ll die out. You know why? They can’t reproduce.

Watch:



Coming on the heels of Amendment One, and hateful remarks by hate-mongering NC pastors Sean Harris and Patrick Wooden, Worley's comments underscore the fact that, despite how far we've come, religious bigotry is alive and well in North Carolina.

NC Kid-Run Newspaper Pens Editorial Against Amendment One

The children of Greensboro, NC's Lindley Park community have been writing, printing, and distributing their own xerographic newspaper, The Lindley Park Gazette for a few years now. The neighborhood paper is funded by $5 ads bought by neighborhood businesses, and is distributed to over 300 homes and businesses.

The paper isn't just kid's stuff. There's serious stuff in this rag. Lucy Newsom and her staff cover real issues affecting the area, including Amendment One.

A few months ago, I posted a pro-equality editorial by Max Gearhart which ran in the Gazette. Now, with the May 8 vote fast approaching, the paper has published an editorial urging their readers (or perhaps their parents) to vote against the amendment.

This editorial is a collective stance taken by the entire staff of kids who publish the paper. The editorial was published in the May 2 edition of the paper.


Lindley Park Gazette Editorial Against Amendment One
We've spent months making signs, marching, researching and reporting. We have made videos. We write about this in our paper.

The one thing we can not do is vote.

Please vote (for us) against Amendment One.

The North Carolina Same-Sex Marriage Amendment will appear on the May 8, 2012 ballot in the state of North Carolina.

It says: Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.

Our parents have the opportunity to vote on this. We hope they will vote AGAINST it. And here is why:

Sometimes, as kids, we feel like we are in the minority. Just because we are young. We literally cannot vote. Sometimes we get bullied because we are small. It is not fair for the big guys to beat up on the little guys. It is scary on the playground but it is terrifying when the people who are supposed to protect you are part of the bullying.

Amendment One would write bullying into the NC state constitution.

What if the dominant religion in North Carolina said that all women have to wear burquas or that children can be sold into slavery or told who they have to marry? What if you thought - and of course you would – Hey, that is not cool! Women have rights! Kids need to be protected! But this religion was so popular that it had power to take away rights from those less powerful. To make their beliefs into the LAW. It would feel terrible if you were bullied by your state. That is what this amendment feels like to us. Bullying.

The sad fact is that bullying happens. It happens on the playground and in governments all over the world. We can’t let it happen here in North Carolina.

We understand that most of the religious leaders in North Carolina are speaking out against this as unfair. We know that religion is not the enemy. Most religious leaders see that it is bullying. But there are some leaders in religion and politics and even in the media who have misused their power to BE bullies. To try to write bullying into the CONSTITUTION. To make discrimination part of a document that is supposed to protect ALL of us.

We believe that gay marriage is fine. It is cool with us. But more than that, no matter how you feel about gay people, bullying is never OK. Never. We pledge to stand up for the people who are getting bullied, no matter who they are. We will not let the bullies win on the playground or in our government.

Please VOTE (for us) AGAINST AMENDMENT ONE. 

Wife Of NC Senator: Amendment One Is Necessary ‘To Protect The Caucasian Race’

Sen. Brunstetter, Caucasian

The Amendment One debate has certainly had its share of crazy, but a story reported by Pam's House Blend really takes the cake.

Chad Nance, a freelance journalist covering the NC election, recorded the wife of NC Sen. Peter Brunstetter saying some ridiculously offensive stuff about Amendment One.

Nance said he recorded a conversation with the woman, whose name is Jodie Brunstetter, on video, and that she confirmed that she used the term “Caucasian” in a discussion about the marriage amendment, but insisted that otherwise her comments had been taken out of context by other poll workers.

…Nance paraphrased the remarks, as told to him by those who were present: “During the conversation, Ms. Brunstetter said her husband was the architect of Amendment 1, and one of the reasons he wrote it was to protect the Caucasian race. She said Caucasians or whites created this country. We wrote the Constitution. This is about protecting the Constitution. There already is a law on the books against same-sex marriage, but this protects the Constitution from activist judges.”

Nance said he recruited a friend, who works for the Coalition to Protect All North Carolina Families, to witness his interview with Jodie Brunstetter. He said Brunstetter reluctantly acknowledged that she had used the term “Caucasian” and then repeated the statement previously attributed to her, but substituted the pronoun “we” for “Caucasian. Nance said Brunstetter insisted there was nothing racial about her remarks, but could not explain why she used the term “Caucasian.”

Holy shitballs, people. This is what we're up against in NC.

When you visit the polls on May 8, I hope you realize that voting for Amendment One is to align yourself with this garbage.

Amendment One Supporters: I Have Nothing Against Homosexuals, Except That I Do

Christian Conservatives have a most disingenuous mantra when it comes to the topic of marriage equality.

Take the following passage from a News & Observer article about NC's Amendment One:

Gaffney said she was not against homosexuals and has gay and lesbian friends. But she does not want them to have the right to marry.

“If America doesn’t get back to God, we are going to definitely be lost,” she said.

While those who use the 'I'm not against homosexuals -- I have lots of gay friends" line tend to believe they are doing the Christian thing by fighting marriage equality, what everyone else hears is this:

"I am not against homosexuals, it's just that they're wicked, sinful, and hell-bound, and I believe their rights should be restricted."

Sorry, folks, but you're either with homosexuals or you're against them. You either accept the overwhelming scientific evidence which shows us that sexual orientation is determined by genetic factors, brain structure, and early uterine environment, or you simply ignore it and continue to cling to the Bronze Age view of homosexuality as abomination. (Those same folks believed epilepsy was caused by demons.)

And no matter how much you try to convince yourself and others that you have gay and lesbian friends despite your discriminatory views, you might want to reconsider just how they view your friendship. People usually don't think too highly of 'friends' who consider them to be abominations unworthy of equal rights under the law.

"I really like you, but you are part of why America is lost. You are leading us away from God, and I am working to ensure that your rights are limited."

With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Stop trying to candy-coat your bigotry, folks. Free yourself. Admit it. You really, really don't like gay people and you want to see them suffer.

Tell us the truth. It's the Christian thing to do, right?

The Family Leader: Do You Want Gay Marriage In Your Coffee?

The folks at The Family Leader have released a little video warning fellow Christian conservatives about the harms of drinking Starbucks.

As you probably are aware, the National Organization for Marriage initiated a boycott of Starbucks due to the company's vocal support of same-sex marriage. The boycott has been a complete failure, and now NOM is moving their initiative to countries where homosexuality is criminalized or stigmatized.

Regardless, the backwards blowhards at The Family Leader are having another go at it.

For those of you unfamiliar with The Family Leader, they are an "umbrella group comprising the Iowa Family Policy Center, Marriage Matters, Iowa Family PAC, and Iowa for Freedom." Their mission statement states that the organization "provides a consistent, courageous voice in the churches, in the legislature, in the media, in the courtroom, in the public square…always standing for God’s truth."

If you recall, they were the folks behind "The Marriage Vow: A Declaration of Dependence upon MARRIAGE and FAMILY," which was signed by Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, and Rick Perry. Mitt Romney said the pledge was"undignified and inappropriate." Particularly, Romney took issue with language in the pledge which stated that children born into slavery in 1860 were better off than children born today in America.

The description accompanying the video reads as follows:

The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) http://www.nationformarriage.org/ are urging customers across the globe to "Dump Starbucks" because the company has taken a corporate-wide position that the definition of marriage between one man and one woman should be eliminated and that so-called same-s*x marriage should become equally normal.

On January 24th, 2012, Starbucks issued a memorandum declaring that a bill in the state of Washington to legalize so called same-s*x marriage is "core to who we are and what we value as a company".

A portion of every cup of coffee purchased at a Starbucks goes to fund this corporate attack on marriage. If you would like more information about why NOM wants you to "dump Starbucks" or would like to sign the petition, click the www.DumpStarbucks.com link above. Take action today!

Watch:

My Amendment One Twitter-Fight With Two Leading Anti-LGBT Bigots

On Friday night, I responded to a tweet by Peter LaBarbera referencing NC's Amendment 1 measure, which would add language to the NC constitution which would define marriage as between one man and one woman.

DL Foster, Patrick Wooden, Peter LaBarbera

For those of you unfamiliar with Peter LaBarbera, he is the president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, an anti-LGBT organization that is classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. He's a horrible, horrible man.

As I was preparing to reply to LaBarbera's tweet, Pastor DL Foster, founder of the ex-gay ministry organization Witness Freedom Ministries chimed in by praising NC conservatives and people of faith for their 'passion' for fighting 'evil' homosexuality.

For those of you unfamiliar with DL (yes, that's what he goes by) Foster, he was "delivered from homosexual sin over 22 years ago," and now reveres himself as "an expert, well versed on issues in the cross section of sexuality and theology." His Website states that he's been "quoted, cited and interviewed extensively in such media venues as CNN, Newsweek, Charisma, WorldNetDaily, 700 Club Newswatch, AOL Black Voices, Faith Under Fire, ABC News, Jewish World Review, TV One Network and numerous other print and broadcast mediums."

It was an ugly and disjointed discussion, if you can even call it a discussion. As these things go, it was sloppy, rapid-fire torrent of off-the-cuff remarks, retorts, overlapping threads and nothing even resembling a conclusion.

If anything useful came out of it, hopefully the below Storify-zation of the melee will show you what we're up against on May 8, and just how important it is that people get out and vote.

We won't change the minds of folks like Pete and DL. We're better off using that time and energy making sure that people know the harms of the amendment, and that they actually go to the polls to vote.

Anyway, here goes...

It's probably worth noting that DL Foster blocked me immediately after this 'conversation.' I've only been blocked (that I'm aware of) by two other accounts: Governor Rick Perry and the Pro-Amendment organization NC 4 Marriage.

He's in good company.

Pastor Dennis Terry Introduces Rick Santorum, Tells Non-Christians And Liberals To Get Out Of America

Via HuffPo:

Praying for a white, straight, Christian America.

In a revival type speech, Greenwell Springs Baptist Church pastor Rev. Dennis Terry offered some pointed words about abortion, gay marriage, and prayer in schools as he introduced Family Research Council president Tony Perkins and 2012 Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum.

So, here we have Dennis Terry, who is a raging homophobic, science-denying, hate-monger, introducing Tony Perkins, another raging homophobic, who is president of the Family Research Center, an SLPC-designated hate group, and Rick Santorum.

As if there was any more correlations necessary to illustrate Rick Santorum's theocratic, discriminatory, and intolerant views.

"There is only one God and his name is Jesus ... We don't worship Buddha, we don't worship Mohammad, we don't worship Allah, we worship God, we worship God's son Jesus Christ...God, have favor on Rick Santorum." said Terry.

Watch:

Vote For Marriage NC: Protecting Marriage From 'The Whims Of Radical Activists'

Vote For Marriage NC is the deceitful, Bible-thumping, bigoted organization rallying 'marriage supporters' to pass the harmful amendment to ban same-sex marriage in the NC state constitution.

I get their emails. As a straight, married father living and working in North Carolina, Vote For Marriage NC comes across as, well, pathetic. They have nothing. It doesn't matter how you look at it, Amendment One is completely unnecessary, discriminatory, bigoted, shortsighted, bad for business, and just really lousy legislation.

We hate gay people, and this family is a stock photo

Their latest email is a flaccid attempt to rally 'marriage supporters' to stand up and be counted, as they can't seem to rally quite like the anti-amendment folks.

Dear Marriage Supporter,

Recent reports claim that “several thousand” of our opponents will be marching on our State Capitol today in protest of our efforts to preserve marriage through the Marriage Protection Amendment that is on the ballot on May 8th.

These activists have an agenda, and we must act now in order to put a stop to it. Will you stand by while activists seek to redefine marriage in our state, or will you join our efforts to protect marriage? Please donate $20, $60, or $100 now if you want to preserve marriage in North Carolina!

By passing the Marriage Protection Amendment on May 8th, we can protect marriage from the whims of radical activists who are working to redefine marriage against the will of the people. But we can only make our voices heard with your support.

In December 2011, a court case was filed in Guilford County challenging our state’s marriage laws. The threat to marriage is real in North Carolina, and our opposition’s organized and highly funded campaign is using deceptive messaging to confuse voters about what the Marriage Protection Amendment accomplishes. Thankfully, we know the truth: The Amendment simply elevates our current marriage laws to a constitutional amendment where it can only be changed by another vote of the people of North Carolina. Protecting marriage in our Constitution will prevent the court in Guilford County or any other state court, for that matter, from re-defining marriage for the rest of us.

How do we make our voices heard above the roar of activists and our oppositions’ deceptive messaging? Volunteer or donate today! May 8th is rapidly approaching, and we need your support to bring us to victory.

With your support, we can make sure marriage stays between only a man and a woman on May 8th.

Sincerely,

Rachel Lee
Communications Director, Vote FOR Marriage NC

There's something incredibly telling in the email. Vote For Marriage NC can't seem to come up with actual reasons why same-sex marriage is such a threat.

Let's see. Well, for starters, they want to 'protect marriage from the whims of radical activists who are working to redefine marriage against the will of the people.' Hm. Do they mean radical activists like myself? A married, lifetime North Carolinian, father of three, who lives in the suburbs? God forbid a pasty, overweight, lawn-mowing, soccer dad destroy marriage with one of his crazy whims. Am I not part of the will of the people? Are the thousands of gay and lesbian citizens not part of the will of the people? And really, do we want to put the rights of human beings up for a vote? Do you know how that might have went in certain southern states during the civil rights era?

If you believe marriage to be a union between a man and a woman, you are working with a definition of marriage completely different to what actually occurred in, say, 500 BCE or 54 CE. Marriage has been redefined over and over and over again, and it will continue to be until the earth is swallowed by the sun (or until humans are extinct, whichever comes first).

The email mentions that 'these activists have an agenda.' Well, of course we have an agenda. We have an agenda to allow citizens of our great state to be treated equally -- just as civil rights activists had an agenda to allow human beings with different skin color to be treated equally.

Hey Vote For Marriage NC, have you ever thought that maybe you are the radical activists? As I mentioned, I'm not gay. I'm happily married. I contribute to the state economy. I vote. I mow the lawn. I attend parent-teacher conferences. I volunteer at the food bank. I grill out. And I think you are radical. You are actively working to deny rights to other human beings based on their natural traits. That's radical. Jesus would ask you to kindly chill the fuck out.

Which group more resembles the radical Taliban? The people who want equal treatment for all, regardless of natural traits? Or the ones who are hell-bent on oppressing an entire group of citizens because they do not meet your definition of holy?

The only fact in your email, Vote For Marriage NC, is your opening salutation.  You're absolutely right. I am a 'marriage supporter.' For everyone.

12-Year Old Autistic North Carolinian Pens Pro-Equality Editorial For Kid-Run Paper

Max Gearhart

Max Gearhart doesn't understand how anyone would want to deny marriage rights to same-sex couples. While Amendment 1 is being hotly debated across North Carolina, Max sees it as a no-brainer.

"How can we be so unfair to our own people?" asks Max.

Max Gearhart, a resident of Greensboro, is 12 years old.

He also happens to be autistic.

Max decided to write a short, succinct essay in support of same-sex marriage in his local paper. No, not the Greensboro News & Record. Max published his essay in the Lindley Park Gazette, a neighborhood paper, written by kids, published by kids, and distributed by kids. (The Greensboro News & Record ran a story about the the Gazette in November.)

Here's Max's editorial, as it appears in the February issue of the Lindley Park Gazette:

Disagreeing with Amendment OneBy Max Gearhart
I heard that there might be a new amendment to our state constitution called Amendment One. My parents will be asked to vote on it in May. It says that homosexuals cannot get married to their same gender and I say that we should say no to this because everyone is equal and we should not categorize people like that. I think nobody should be categorized because God created us all and no government law can ever deny that. If we pass this law, it will be really unfair. Gays are one of us! How can we be so unfair to our own people? Next thing you know they'll try to make a rule about autistic people not being able to marry.

Amendment One is a really unfair law that should never be passed. I think we should convince our parents to vote no on this law.

Here is exactly what Ballotopedia says about Amendment One

The North Carolina Same-Sex Marriage Amendment will appear on the May 8, 2012 ballot in the state of North Carolina as a “legislatively-referred constitutional amendment.” The measure would define marriage in the state as between “one man and one woman.” If approved, the proposed measure would amend Article 14 of the North Carolina Constitution by adding a new section.

The text of the measure reads:
Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.

From Ballotopedia.org

News & Record story on the Lindley Park Gazette

The fact that a young, autistic boy can speak so openly and clearly about the discriminatory and harmful nature of Amendment 1 speaks volumes.

Not only does Max's sentiment reflect survey statistics (support for same-sex marriage is much higher in younger age groups), it also underscores the fact that prejudice is learned through living in (and observing) a society where prejudices exist.

Most importantly, however, Max teaches us that, while a great many of us are born lesbian or gay, nobody is born a bigot. Even a kid knows that.

Max's mother, Jamy Gearhart, perhaps said it best when she wrote about the Lindley Park Gazette on her blog (months prior to her son's editorial appearing within its pages):

We should pay attention because these kids are the people who will be the custodians of this planet some day. Our future is in their hands and it's so heartening to think that they may grow up to make real and positive changes in our world. If what they are doing now is any indication of their future doings, I foresee great things for them.

NOM's Maggie Gallagher Believes Her Bigotry Represents The Mainstream

Thom Hartmann interviewed Maggie Gallagher last week on his show 'The Big Picture.' It's unfortunate that the interview has not been seen by more people.

Maggie Gallagher is the founding president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). While NOM has, on one hand, been designated as an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, the group is a powerful anti-equality force. NOM has been instrumental in several anti-equality initiatives across the US, including Prop 8, New York same-sex marriage opposition, and the 2012 presidential marriage pledge signed by Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, and Tim Pawlenty.

In the below interview, Hartmann eloquently dismantles Gallagher's case against same-sex marriage. What we learn in the process is that: A) there is no valid secular case against same-sex marriage, and B) there is no valid Biblical case against same sex marriage, unless we're also to follow all the other kooky legal advice from Biblical times. (It goes without saying that legislation must have a secular basis, but we can't ignore the religious arguments in this debate.)

We also see in the interview exactly what we're up against in the equality debate here in America. It is this nebulous, but powerful mix of fear, self-righteousness, religious bigotry, and ignorance (and boat-loads of money) that is driving the anti-equality debate. As Hartmann suggests, this vehement anti-equality sentiment is more fringe than it is mainstream.

What is dangerous is when the mainstream is inundated with damaging and inflammatory myths repeated ad nauseam by the likes of Maggie Gallagher.

Perhaps, as Hartmann suggests, we really should look to the Bible for guidance. Hartmann then introduces a segment by Betty Bowers, "America's Best Christian."

If only we could have had a camera on Gallagher's face at this point in the program.

Watch: