Family News in Focus: Where truth goes to die

I have listened to Focus on the Family's (FOTF) Family News In Focus (FNIF) for most of my life. As a child my mother would have the radio on a "Christian" station at all times and FNIF was continually broadcast.

As an adult, I have payed close attention to both FNIF AND FOTF due to the bizarre influence James Dobson has on many in my family (and millions of others families).

But over the past few months FNIF and FOTF have become more unhinged than usual. Sure, they have always been peddlers of half-truths but over the past few months they have taken to outright, unabashed lying. Almost everything they air (which consist of at least a 40% daily helping of "focus" on the "gay agenda") is so blatently false and so verifiably refutable I am genuinely concerned with what's going on.

Therefore I have decided to start a somewhat regular series on Screaming devoted to exposing FOTF in general and FNIF in particular. Look for it soon.

What should I call the series? I'm thinking "Focus on the Faggot" or "Family News that Fucsus"
What say you, bloggers? And ideas?

Ps, all comments are moderated so if you don't see it right away, don't fret. It will be there soon enough (though I reserve the right to discard all comments I deem worthless).

I wish Jeremiah Wright would shut the hell up

Barack Obama's former pastor is at it again. Today on a radio broadcast of one of his sermons he said "...God will destroy America and God should destroy America"

I totally understand what so many on the right have been saying for months now. That Barack Obama sat in the pew of this man is indefensible.

I am so glad I heard this today. It puts it all in perspective for me. In fact, I may change my vote due to the disgusting things this man represents and that Obama listened to for so many years.

What?

Huh?

Oh my God! You mean to tell me that was not Jeremiah Wright I was listening to? It was who?

A man by the name of Laurence White, you say?

Who is Laurence White?

He was the featured speaker today on the radio broadcast of Focus on the Family in a sermon entitled "For Such a Time as This". And he said that God SHOULD destroy America if abortion continues. In context, that is pretty appalling but taken out of context and people could question Dobson's patriotism, his associations and his affiliation with the Republican party.

I wish our side would fight as nasty as their side and take out an ad highlighting this and saying that Sarah Palin, by associating with James Dobson, believes God should destroy America.

Furthermore, at this years so-called "Values-Voters Summit", hosted by The Family Research Council and perennially primped choir boy Tony Perkins, a choir sang the song "WHY should God Bless America" sung to the tune of "God Bless America". The words were:

Why should God bless America?
She’s forgotten he exists
And has turned her back
On everything that made her what she is

Why should God stand beside her
Through the night with the light from his hand?
God have mercy on America
Forgive her sin and heal our land

The courts ruled prayer out of our schools
In June of ‘62
Told the children “you are your own God now
So you can make the rules”
O say can you see what that choice
Has cost us to this day
America, one nation under God, has gone astray

Why should God bless America?
Shes’s forgotten he exists
And has turned her back on everything
That made her what she is

Why should God stand beside her
Through the night with the light from his hand?
God have mercy on America
Forgive her sins and heal our land

In ‘73 the Courts said we
Could take the unborn lives
The choice is yours don’t worry now
It’s not a wrong, it’s your right

But just because they made it law
Does not change God’s command
The most that we can hope for is
God’s mercy on our land

Why should God bless America?
She’s forgotten he exists
And has turned her back on everything
That made her what she is

Why should God stand beside her
Through the night with the light from his hand?
God have mercy on America
Forgive her sins and heal our land

And these people have the audacity (that's a Jeremiah Wright word) to say that liberals are the ones who are unpatriotic.

What point in time would they prefer we as a country return to?

This is the key difference between liberals and conservatives:

Conservatives envision America as she was. Liberals envision America as she could be.

I'll take the latter. Every. Single. Time!

PALIN-eroles: Profiteroles for election night

This is cross posted at Jon-Marc's baking website, BakeItTilYouMakeIt.com

Below you will find my twist on profiteroles, the PALIN-eroles, perfect for your election night party.
Why are they called "PALIN-eroles? Well, as I say in the video below,

1. They're easy, just like a Palin
2. They're cheap (unless you are using other people's money. Then you can buy top notch)
3. They are nice looking, but inside they are empty (and must be filled)
4. They require a lot of hot air in order to be effective

So, without further ado, here I am making the PALIN-eroles, where I also discuss Palin, James Dobson, prop 8 and more. The recipe is after the vid

PALIN-eroles:

• 1 cup bread flour or all-purpose flour
• 1 teaspoon sugar
• ¼ teaspoon salt
• 3/4 stick unsalted butter, cut into pieces
• 1/2 cup water
• ½ cup milk
• 4 large eggs

Equipment:
a small (about 1 1/2-inch) ice cream scoop; a large pastry bag fitted with a 3/4-inch plain tip

Make profiteroles:
Chill a small metal baking pan in freezer. Form 18 ice cream balls with scoop and freeze in chilled pan at least 1 hour (this will make serving faster).
Preheat oven to 425°F with rack in middle. Line a large baking sheet with Silpat or parchment.
Bring butter, water, and milk to a boil in a small heavy saucepan. At the boil, remove from heat then add flour mixture and combine
Return to heat and, with a wooden spoon, stir in figure eights until mixture looks like mashed potatoes, about 4 minutes. Transfer mixture to a bowl and cool slightly, stirring until mixture is 180 degrees.
Add eggs 1 at a time, stirring to combine after each addition.
Transfer warm mixture to pastry bag and pipe 18 mounds (about 1 1/4 inches wide and 1 inch high) 1 inch apart on baking sheet.
Bake until pastry begins to rise, 10minutes. Reduce heat to 350, prop oven door slightly ajar with a wooden spoon and bake for an additional 15 minutes. Cool on sheet on a rack.

For chocolate sauce (recipe from Gourmet Magazine March, 2008):
• 1/2 cup sugar
• 1 cup heavy cream
• 7 oz fine-quality bittersweet chocolate (no more than 60% cacao if marked), finely chopped
• 1/2 teaspoon pure vanilla extract
• 1 tablespoon Cognac or brandy (optional)

Make chocolate sauce (recipe from Gourmet Magazine March, 2008):

• Heat sugar in a 2-quart heavy saucepan over medium heat, stirring with a fork to heat sugar evenly, until it starts to melt, then stop stirring and cook, swirling pan occasionally so sugar melts evenly, until it is dark amber.
• Remove from heat, then add cream and a pinch of salt (mixture will bubble and steam). Return to heat and cook, stirring, until caramel has dissolved.
• Remove from heat and add chocolate, whisking until melted, then whisk in vanilla and Cognac (if using). Keep warm, covered.
Serve profiteroles:
• Halve profiteroles horizontally, then fill each with a ball of ice cream. Put 3 profiteroles on each plate and drizzle generously with warm chocolate sauce.

What the hell is Anne Rice doing on James Dobson's show?

I'll update after I listen to both broadcast (aired today and tomorrow). But Anne Rice is on James Dobson's Focus on the Family radio show and I am none too happy about it. I applaud her finding faith but to go on the show of a man who has been such an evil force against the cause of Christ is both sad and a kick in the teeth to her readers.

What does Christopher Rice, her son, think about this?

Dennis Prager speaks at Focus on the Family Chapel service PART I

The audio of his talk can be found here

Dennis Prager recently gave a talk (sermon, really) to the monthly Focus on the Faggot…er…I mean Focus on the Family chapel service. I wanted to write a response to his sermon because many things stood out about his little “marriage” lecture.

James Dobson decided that Prager’s sermon was so good that he wanted to broadcast it on two days worth of Focus programming. Dobson introduces Prager by lavishing praise on him and then says something that is very telling.

About three minutes into the first broadcast, Dobson tells listeners that Prager is Jewish, “which means we don’t see eye to eye on our Christian faith, obviously”.

This introduction raises some serious questions about Dobson. Does Dobson consider Prager’s Jewish faith to be part of the “Christian faith” or was that just a slip of the tongue? And does Dobson believe, based on Dobson’s faith, that Prager is going to heaven? If he does, how does he reconcile that belief with the strictures of his fundamentalist beliefs? And if he does not believe Prager is going to heaven, why would he have someone that is hell bound take the stage at a chapel service?

I know the answers to all of the above questions because, after at least 20 years of listening to Dobson starting when I was a child, I know what he believes. No, he does not believe Jews go to heaven and the reason he invited Prager to chapel was because Prager sees “eye to eye” with Dobson in regards to gay marriage and homosexuality in general.

However, following the logic that it is ok for a hell bound Jew to take the stage as long as that Jew is in lockstep with Dobson on one issue (or many issues, for that matter), it begs the question if Dobson would welcome an open homosexual on the stage if that homosexual agreed with Dobson on the evils of, let’s say, gambling.

See, if the unpardonable sin is rejecting Christ (which Prager is guilty of, according to the faith of Dobson) then what Dobson is suggesting by inviting Prager to chapel is that Dobson believes that Prager’s belief that gays should not be married trumps Prager’s lack of belief in Christ. Ultimately what Dobson is doing here is quantifying sin, something that every fundamentalist is forced to do due to their literal interpretation of the Bible. If Dobson does not believe he is quantifying sin then I look forward to him extending an invitation to an openly gay gambling opponent. In fact, I know a thing or two about the devastating effects that alcoholism has on families – a far more devastating effect than whether or not I can marry my husband, which has no effect on straight marriage – and I would be happy to address the chapel.

One other glaring note about Dobson’s introduction is his reference to the Torah. You have to listen to it but he basically says that the Torah is the Old Testament. The quote is “I asked him to speak about homosexuality in the Torah. Or in the Old Testament”
Reading that, one might think that Dobson was saying that he asked Prager to speak about homosexuality in the Torah or in the Old Testament. But that is not what he meant and when you listen, what he is saying is “In the Torah, in other words, the Old Testament” There is no room for interpretation when listening to how Dobson said it. But given the demographics of his audience, I am sure not many listeners picked up the fact that the Torah and the Old Testament (OT) are not synonymous. In fact, the Torah is the first five books of the OT, not the entire OT.

Moving on to Prager’s sermon.

Prager opens his remarks by calling Dobson “one of the greatest Americans of our time”.
He then goes on to say that he has a niece that is gay. He says that he loves his niece and he loves her partner but does not condone their life. What he does here is nothing more than gilding the lily that is “Love the sinner, hate the sin”. He immediately jumps from his “compassion” for his niece to the idea that if one accepts homosexuality one will accept “anything” – the slippery slope that fundamentalists often employ as a scare tactic.

But of course Prager, like Dobson, depends on the audience not to think the slippery slope fallacy to its logical conclusion. Because if they did, many would be forced to ask if Dobson accepts that a Jew can speak at chapel because he shares Dobson’s fundamental values, would he then accept a Muslim who had those values. In other words (in Prager’s words) “is everything ok?”.

Prager then begins the warfare talk that is so popular among fundamentalists. He speaks of the “battle” being lost in most of the Western world but that the “battleground” is in the United States. He asks his audience if we (we, as in the people of the United States) will be governed by Judeo-Christian values (an interesting term, to be sure, considering that Judeo-Christian is meant to illicit thoughts reaching back to the beginning of time. But the Judeo-Christian concept is relatively new only dating back to the turn of the 20th the century) or “secular’ values. This “battle”, Prager goes on to say, is the reason for the “anger” directed at evangelicals.

He then immediately follows up the anger statement by asking the audience why there was so much anger at Sarah Palin when she was nominated. He says, of course, that the answer is because Palin spoke too much about God. Prager, like Dobson and the rest, take much comfort in believing that people are angry with them because of their God. It is far easier (and far more noble) to believe that than to examine the real reasons people are angry at them over, among other things, Sarah Palin.

This anger that many on the right talk about is a way for them to further insulate their “flock” from reality. If one can convince someone that their beliefs are despised because their God is despised, then they need not worry themselves with facts and science and the legitimacy of their claims. Many, my mother included, when cornered revert to “God said it, I believe it, that’s that”

It is, of course, the most intellectually lazy and dishonest way to live. But intellectual laziness is of no concern to fundamentalists. One need only go to right wing blogs and read how many throw around words like “intellectual elite” and disparage degrees from places like Yale or Harvard in order to see how deep the contempt is for the intellectually curious. In fundamentalists' circles the mind is to be feared, not explored. And if the mind arrives at a conclusion that is not in sync with fundamentalism then the mind is automatically suspect, often attributed to the work of Satan.

Prager continues along this vein of “God values” by telling the audience that he asks those on the “secular and religious left” if they have a “book from which” they get their “values”. He says that those on the left invariably answer that they do not get their values from a book but instead from their heart. Prager is doing two things here.

The first is implying to his audience that if one does not have a “book” from which to glean values, such as the Bible, then one simply has no values. The other thing Prager is doing is using the word “heart” as a euphemism for the word “mind”. This is just another way of dismissing the mind as an agent of evil rather than a tool meant for good.

Prager proves this by saying “We who are religious know that the heart is a rather weak source for strong values”. In other words, the mind cannot be trusted and must be perceived as weak lest it be relied upon. Prager continues “And that’s the battle, and it’s very hard to battle people’s hearts”.

Once Prager makes the case that the mind (heart) is ultimately of no use in determining ones’ values he then begins to get to the reason of his sermon by rhetorically asking what God did on the second day. He answers that God “separated”.

Anyone with half a (suspect) mind, including his audience, can see where Prager is going. Everyone knows that by God “separating”, it automatically means that homosexuality is wrong. But more on that later.

Prager then tries to credential himself by saying he has taught the Torah in Hebrew for twenty years and proceeds to give his audience a lesson by saying that the Hebrew word for “holy” (qadosh) is also the word for “separate”. This is true. Qadosh means “to set apart for a special purpose”. But I would also note that the word “Qedesh” is Hebrew for “male prostitute”, derived from Qadosh.

He continues that “there is a war against the Biblical notion of separation”. Prager knows his audience well and knows that war imagery plays well to this crowd. My mother told me a few months ago that she was “pro war” and that she believed “God is pro war”. This shocked me and immediately I wondered how she arrived at such a belief. The father of Jesus certainly is not pro war and no matter how much one might want to twist theology to make God pro war (or to make God more in line with a president who goes to war based on lies) does not make it so.

But Prager says that five examples prove there is such a war between “holy and profane”;

1 Cursing. Prager says that the ubiquity of cursing in society is proof of the profane. He says that public cursing is “evil”. Supposedly, teenagers cursing in a grocery store is enough for Prager to think that the world is an evil place (I should note that at this point I was ready to quit listening but I soldiered on)
2 Apparently Prager thinks that if you use the term “good and evil” you are right wing religious. Or in other words, only fundamentalists believe in good and evil, as opposed to the left that does not believe in such a thing??? He goes on to tell the audience that since they believe in good and evil they are detested. Again, he is trying to build a separation (is that holiness?) between his audience (the good moral people) and the heathens.

One man’s heathen is another man’s infidel. One man’s qadosh is another man’s qedesh. You say fundamentalist Christian, I say fundamentalist Muslim. Let’s call the whole thing off!

He says that the secular left is making war on the Judeo-Christian value system and provides a few examples of how the left does not believe in evil.

One example is that “major French and German guests on my radio show from France and Germany”(you know, as opposed to the French and German people he might have on his show that are really from Mars). Anyway he says that “every single one” references George W. Bush’s use of the term “good and evil” as what those French and Germans from France and Germany think is wrong with America. He says that Europe does not use the term and that, according to those on the left, the “only evil is to talk about evil or even worse, confront evil”

Prager then goes on to say that the media never uses the word “terrorist”. At this point I am about to pop a blood vessel. Is he serious? Is his audience that stupid? A quick google search can prove him wrong on this. What media does he listen to? Certainly not the media I listen to. They all use the word terrorist. But again, Prager does not let facts get in the way of his diatribe based on emotion. “Separate” emotion, but emotion nonetheless.

He goes from that fantastical story to another about how the media never call murderers “murderers”. And at this moment it is as if you can hear him slip into a parallel universe where all these things he says are true.

3 That, unless you are a right winger, there is no way you can believe that there is a separation between man and God. And since there are atheist on the left, there can be no one who believes in God on the left.

I believe in God and I have friends who are atheist and we don’t try to convince the other. But in Prager’s world we on the left are all monolithic beings who march to the beat of one secular drummer.

4 Apparently if you believe that there is a separation between man and animal, you are Biblical. But if you believe man and animal are equals you are lefty and therefore a member of PETA. That’s the line of logic with number four, according to Prager.

Therefore, since those of us on the left are all members of PETA, he makes fun of PETA and uses them as proof that no one on the left can separate the value of a human from an animal.

It’s called a straw-man or a red-herring. Take your pick. But I didn’t have to tell you that, did I, silly liberal?

Also, on point four, apparently Prager is in love with his stereo system. You’ll just have to listen if you want to know the context. But he does say “I am not guided by love, I’m guided by values”.

In Prager’s world, values and love are mutually exclusive. And if “love” guides you, well, it is the same as being guided by your “heart”. And, remember, that is evil.

5 And finally he gets to his main point. God created male and female. Man and woman. After trying to impress the audience with speaking in Hebrew, he says that that separation of the sexes is what makes us “distinct”.

He says that there is a Biblical law that says that a man cannot wear women’s clothing and vice-versa. To prove that society has “strayed” from this he says that almost all urban high-schools across America have “cross-dressing day. It’s actually part of the curriculum”. He says that this proves that there is an onslaught against the notion that “there is anything different between the sexes”

Now putting aside Shakespeare for a moment, I immediately called my friends who were in high-school recently, including my brother. My brother did not answer the phone (no surprise there) but I asked my friends who went to “urban” high schools if they had a cross-dressing day and, if so, was it part of the curriculum. After they all laughed, they said no.

Again, I do not live in Prager’s world. I live in the real world. And apparently the real world is vastly different than Prager’s world.

Prager follows up his cross-dressing fantasy by saying that “Folks if you are truly interchangeable, it doesn’t matter who you have sex with, right?”

Ok, this is where I am going to end it. Part two will be up in a few days. Prager gets into a lot of stuff that will take up another five pages and I just don’t have the time to cover it all right now.

Dennis Prager on Focus on the Family

UPDATE: I did not realize it was a two part program so my response will be up Wednesday night

I am writing a response that will be up tomorrow night about today's Focus on the Family broadcast with Dennis Prager. Go listen to it.

I am amazed (not really) that Dobson prefaces Prager's remarks with saying that Prager is some sort of genius.

But anyway, check back tomorrow for the response to this half-wit

Queen Esther called and she wants her lipstick back!

There has been quite a lot of buzz on the ‘internets’ the past couple of days speculating as to whether Sarah Palin will withdraw. The growing opinion by some on the right is that Palin is not up for the job. Kathleen Parker, a columnist and darling of the right, was the first to speak the truth that dare not speak its name in Republican circles. She was followed by others on the right who echoed her sentiments.

Parker, originally a Palin cheerleader, is known for her Coulteresque venom towards democrats. For instance, there’s this gem:

"These bastards like Clark and Kerry and that incipient ass, Dean, and Gephardt and Kucinich and that absolute mental midget Sharpton, race baiter, should all be lined up and shot.

So when Parker says Palin should take her lipstick and high-tail it back to her igloo, that’s saying something. That’s saying a lot actually. But unfortunately for Parker it is not saying enough. With people like Palin, it will never be enough.

For a moment let’s say John McCain picked Mitt Romney as his running mate instead of Palin. Romney, with an ego the size of his bank-account, will do anything and say anything to be elected as demonstrated by his failed bid for the presidency.

But if Romney became the iceberg to McCain’s ship that Palin has become, Romney might consider dropping out. He would strategically consider the implications his staying in the race had on him. He would drop out in an act of pure selfishness in order to preserve some hope of future political aspirations.

Romney may be slick but he has no delusions as to who he is. Though his ego is big, he would never presume to be chosen by God. Not even Mittens is that presumptuous.

Sarah Palin, on the other hand, is that presumptuous. She is cut from the same cloth as George W. Bush and she believes that God has brought her to this moment. Some of her staunchest supporters have even likened her to Queen Esther of the Bible.

There is no way Palin will drop out. No way in hell…literally (speaking of literally, why does Joe Biden use the word literally in every other sentence? It gets on my literal nerves!). It's the same reason Bush couldn't withdraw from Iraq. Hell, even Todd Palin cannot fathom withdrawal as evidenced by his five children.

It's the fundamentalist God-complex

James Dobson and his traveling band of hate believe that Sarah Palin has been sent by God “for such a time as this”. These are the same people that believe Bush “won” the presidency for such a time as that.

The people that James Dobson leads believe it is them against the world. They cannot accept that they might be wrong. Therefore, once Palin was anointed by the evangelical pope and his posse, the time for speculation was long gone.

If Palin appears unqualified, it’s the media’s fault. If Palin can’t answer a simple question, it’s the question’s fault. If Palin seems like the worst pick that one could imagine, it’s the liberal’s fault. But it is never, under any circumstances, Palin’s fault.

How could it be? After all, since they believe that Palin has been plucked from her igloo by God, then if they were to fault Palin they would be faulting God. And since they seem to want to speak for God ALL THE DAMN TIME, they can’t backtrack. “Oops, we were wrong. We thought we knew what God was trying to say but it turns out it was just acid-reflux. We promise to be more careful next time. Pinky swear!”

And when all else fails, they hide behind the Bible. They cite verses that speak of persecution of Christians as an explanation for perceived attacks against them or their candidates. What they do not realize is that very few are attacking them for their faith.

Instead, people are angry at them for using their faith as a substitute for their minds.

And sadly, those that still cling to the notion that Sarah Palin is the right choice are a disgrace to their faith, their minds and to a God that gave them both.

Why Ray Boltz Matters...And James Dobson Does Not

Reading the various responses from so called “Christians” over the admission by Ray Boltz that he is gay is enough to make one sick. I expected the outcry to be swift and brutal and the Christianists do not disappoint. Actually, when it comes to their vile condemnation of gays, the Christianists never disappoint.

You know, it’s the usual dribble from people who are unable to think for themselves. Instead they regurgitate old arguments that can be, and have been, refuted time after time.

But when one chooses to “bury my head in the sand” as my mother proudly proclaims, then when revelations such as Boltz’ come out, instead of responding analytically, with reason and deliberate contemplation, Christianists simply become the dog of Pavlov, conditioned to spit out automated responses.

Actually, they are more like the dogs of Dobson, the seemingly perennial leader of the far right. Dobson, from his perch high atop the Colorado mountains, separates the venial sins from the mortal sins for his followers lest they be burdened with such a difficult task.

Yes, Dobson regularly says that everyone’s a sinner and all have fallen short…blah, blah, blah. But this is just another case where his actions are in conflict with his words. Actually his words are in conflict with his words. And no one, including Dobson’s most devout worshippers (Tom Minnery, say what?), can square Daddy D’s obsession with gay people with the totality of the Bible, no matter how hard they try.

Anyway, when something such as the Ray Boltz story breaks, it is religiously wired in the evangelical’s brain to start their symbolic salivating. Before you even read the comments, you know what they will say. And what they say speaks to their horizontal faith, not their God inspired convictions.

Often times they attempt to avoid the religious underpinnings of their bigotry by instead using the words of homosexuals against homosexuals. The most frequently used, and outrageously hilarious, is the book “After the Ball”. This book, by two homosexual marketers, is often cited by the Devout Dobson Do-Nothings as “evidence” that there is, in fact, a homosexual agenda. If you go to a “Love Won Out” conference (a conference aimed at gays who want to “pray away the gay” and those that love them) you will hear references to the book continuously.

In fact, if you were to only listen to Dobson’s Army of Mental Midgets (yep, I’ve settled on that one. The DAMMs from here on out), you would think “After the Ball” was a gay-manifesto that every homosexual had hidden under their mattress for quick reference in case they forget what the “agenda” is.

The book, written in 1989, is proof positive that the gays are using things such as AIDS to garner sympathy for the cause (because, you know, AIDS is an endearing sort of disease). At least that’s what the DAMMs and others such as Robert Knight would have you believe.

But the truth is I, and most of my fellow homos, would have never even heard of the book if it were not for the repetitious citations by the far-right. In fact, I have never even seen the book except once at Strand Bookstore, a used book bookstore, on sale for .75 cents.

That doesn’t stop Papa D from getting his vestments in a wad, though. He believes that the book is a “play-book” to elicit sympathy from the unsuspecting, pure as the driven snow, American public.

This, of course, is intellectually lazy and Dobson knows it. He just knows the DAMMs do not. Taking his continual citation of “After the Ball” to its logical conclusion would inevitably lead to his opponents citing any of the thousands of outlandish books written through the ages by so-called Christians calling for everything from ethnic cleansing to war.

But Dobson depends on the ignorance of his followers. He not only depends on it, he banks on it, literally. The lemmings that worship at the alter of the Dobson empire have made him not only an extremely powerful and dangerous man, but an extremely wealthy man as well.

Ray Boltz’ music has touched millions of people. He is still the same man he was ten years ago. The difference is now we all know. Nothing has changed about Ray Boltz the man. Nothing, except that he has shared with us a burden he has carried within for too long.

Instead of throwing out his music, or waxing poetic about loving the sinner and hating the sin, perhaps the Christianists could try something else. Perhaps they could try simply loving. Period. No conditions, no attachments, just pure, vertical, God-like love. Perhaps they could quit quantifying so called sins and start getting down to what the Bible really does, and does not, say about homosexuality. Perhaps they could tell Daddy Dobson to shut the hell up, tell him that he no longer gets to claim the banner of Christ because he has sullied that banner in the slop for too long. Perhaps there will be a leader, a shepherd boy if you will, that will rise up out of the dust bin of the religious right and call God’s people to a fuller understanding of all of his children. Perhaps those who got teary eyed every time they heard “Thank You” will whisper a prayer of thanks for Ray Boltz instead of praying for Ray Boltz. Perhaps, on the other side of tomorrow we will look back at this dark time in our nation's history and shake our heads in disbelief that someone as spiritually deficient as James Dobson could have even existed, much less influenced so many to hate.

Perhaps…but not likely.

On Slaps and Seething Rage

This morning while I was writing a piece entitled “Facts are Not Privy to Opinion” my mother called. This is not unusual, as my mother and I talk at least five or six times a week. What was unusual was how the conversation ended. Actually it did not end. It digressed into a screaming match that culminated in me slamming the phone down (as much as you can slam down a cell phone with a Bluetooth ® ear piece).

Before I go on I should fully disclose something. The entire maternal side of my family are fundamentalists Christians. Most belong to the Southern Baptist Convention, a denomination of Christianity founded on the principle that slavery was not only tolerated, but also ordained, by God. This legacy of slavery has left an indelible stain on the convention that permeates its theology even today. And, sadly, many in my family still cling to the notion that African-Americans are inferior. The word “n*gger” is a word that still is used by many in my family (including my father who, incidentally, is gay but that is another post[s] for another time).

Many say that marijuana is a “gateway drug”. Well religious based racism is a gateway bigotry. Because while I do not doubt that my mom loves me, she does believe that the seven verses in the Bible that – and this is highly debatable – deal with homosexuality (out of the over 35,000 verses in the Bible which is .02%. Read that again. Point. Zero.Two percent) are clear in their condemnation of gays. As such, homosexuality is therefore not in accord with the will of God.

Growing up in such a toxic environment is dangerous for any child. But growing up while realizing I was gay along the way made it close to deadly. At the age of 21, after years of not being able to reconcile my upbringing with my sexuality, I attempted to take my own life.

I was living in a tony apartment in the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington DC. I seemingly had my entire life, and the world, ahead of me. But one morning, facing such despair of which I could not overcome, I went to the medicine cabinet and began taking entire bottles of my roommate’s prescription medications. I chased the pills with 150 year old scotch.

When I came to, at the George Washington University Medical Center, I was surrounded by at least forty of my friends, my father and his partner and…no one else. I asked my dad if my mother knew. He said she did. For two days I sat in that hospital. As friends came and went, there was not one phone call from my mother’s side of the family. No flowers. No cards. Only deafening, undeniable silence.

This was not only odd, it was downright antithetical of my maternal family’s behavior towards the sick. They visit hospitals when someone has a hangnail removed. Granted, I was in Washington DC and they were in Texas. I did not expect them to visit. But I did expect to hear their voice.

Instead, I learned later, my mother (in Texas) sent over two men from a Washington “ex-gay” group. When my father discovered this he made sure they were not allowed in my hospital room. But the damage was done. It was clear that my mother’s answer to my shame of being gay was to send over two men who believed that one could “pray away the gay”. It is something that, to this day, is still the source of tremendous pain and heartache.

The suicide attempt was just three months after my mother found out I was gay. I write “found out” because I did not tell her. Instead, shortly after I moved to DC, my mother broke into my voicemail (keep in mind she lives in Texas) and listened to my messages. One of them was from a guy I was dating at the time. The language he used on the voicemail left no room for anyone that heard it to deny who this guy was in relation to me. Within a week my mother told me she knew. I told her I knew she knew.

My mother repeatedly claims that she does not lie. Never. She says it, you can believe it. That’s that. It has almost become a mantra of hers. In fact, she says it with such frequency and such ferocity that it is borderline clinical in its redundancy.

But on the phone with her the night I confirmed I was gay, I pleaded with her not to tell anyone. She promised me she would not.

She did.

I found out a year later that she had almost immediately told not only my aunt but my grandparents as well. My aunt was (and still is) the director of a pregnancy center that tries to talk women out of abortions and my grandparents (my grandfather, really) were, at one time, big time leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention.

She lied.

This was on the heels of her swearing that she would never file for divorce from my father (although, admittedly, she had every reason to). “Jon-Marc, I will never be the one that files. I promise you that”. Not two months later, she filed.

These were the two most agonizing things in my life – my shame of my sexuality and my parents’ divorce. And in the midst of those two things, my mother lied. She lied big. If I were to quantify the lies I have been told in my life those two would be at the top, hands down.

I write the backstory to put into context the conversation I had with my mother this morning.

She called and we basically talked about nothing. The weather. My grandmother. What my mother had for breakfast. My plans for the day. My weekend.

Then we started talking about Hurricane Ike. This is what went down as I remember it (although I do realize that there are two sides and, as Dr. Phil says, no matter how flat you make a pancake, it still has two sides):
Mother: You know, if it were not for Christians, the victims of the hurricane would not be getting any help, except from the government. The Red Cross, the Salvation Army, the Southern Baptist Men…

Me: Wait, do you really believe that there is no other charitable organization other than “Christian” organizations that are going to help the victims?

Mother: Um, well, yes. Pretty much. I believe that. Why does that make you mad?

I should note something. “Christian” has a very strict definition for fundamentalists such as my mother. Although they will all claim that anyone that believes in Jesus Christ, that he was killed and rose again three days later, is a Christian, their actions speak louder. That is why you will see Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America etc. put quotes around the word Christian when referring to a ministry like Soulforce, a gay Christian ministry.

I should also note that my mom is the assistant director at the pregnancy center where my aunt is the director. The center, incidentally, is a direct beneficiary of Focus on the Family. They receive sonogram machines, money and who knows what else from Daddy Dobson. Dobson has also contributed much to the misery of gay people.

Now back to the conversation. This is where it gets a bit fuzzy.
Basically it got to the point where she said something along the lines of “You slap me in the face with things you say you believe”.

Me: I don’t tell you anything I believe!

Mother: You do on your blog. And you know I read it! You slap me in the face with what you write on your blog! You are trying to hurt me with what you write! I'm hanging up now
(Not sure if she hung up or not)

Me: Slap you in the face? Are you kidding me? You want to talk about being slapped in the face? Try the time you sent two ‘ex-gays’ to my hospital room, try the time you blabbed about me being gay to gran and granddaddy and B (my aunt). Don’t give me this sanctimonious bull-shit about being slapped in the face!

At which point I “slammed down the phone” by pressing the button on my Bluetooth ® headset.

People ask me why the Sarah Palin thing bothers me so much. It bothers me because I know Sarah. She is my mother, she is my two aunts, she every girl and boy I grew up with who ever wore their faith on their sleeve. She is my youth-minister in junior high who told me to stop singing the words to “Jesus Christ, Superstar” because it was blasphemous. She is my best friend in college who told me, in all seriousness, that he thought Bill Clinton was the anti-Christ.

Truth to these people is something they scream from every pulpit and discuss ad nauseum. Hell, they even capitalize the word. We know the Truth…Some people do not know the Truth…Jesus is the one source of Truth.

But when it comes down to the actual truth for fundamentalists, the “Truth” is as malleable as silly-putty, meant to be discarded when it is inconvenient, used as a weapon when it is advantageous, and hidden when it is dangerous to their cause.

It has been proven that Sarah Palin is an outrageous liar. In fact, it has been proven that she is a complete fraud. But in the mind of my mother, and those of my mother’s mindset, they dismiss these “truths” by blaming the “librul (spelled wrong on purpose) media” or “left-wing bloggers”. They throw the baby out because they believe the bathwater has been dirtied by people who do not “know Jesus” the way they “know Jesus” – the gays, the abortionists, the mockers of God. Radical Muslims have a name for them; Infidels. Radical Christians do too. They call them unsaved.

In the minds of the fundamentalists, the scrutiny of Palin feeds into the absurd notion that “Christians” are somehow “persecuted”. The more “truth” that is disclosed, the more resolute they become in their support. It’s the world against the Christianists. They are most comfortable when they believe that the world is out to get them.

Meanwhile the real victims of persecution get further marginalized. Gay kids hide voicelessly in the closet lest they get disowned by their parents and friends, African-Americans get followed in department stores because they are likely to steal, immigrants are blamed for lack of jobs in this country.

And the poor, poor Christianists? You know, the ones who claim the very president of this country as their own and who controlled congress six of the last eight years. Yeah, them! They have the audacity to claim that it is their faith that is in danger of being outlawed. Is this the fucking twilight zone?

So the perceived persecution of poor pitiful Palin is just more reason for them to love her. When it is all said and done, they have no use for the “truth”. The decriers of relativism use truth as their most relative concept.

And Sarah Palin is not a slap in the face I am willing to take. She angers me for the very same reasons my mother angers me – a lack of integrity and intellectual honesty with regards to the truth.

It is times like these when the rage is so hot and the resentment is so acute that I feel like tearing down the dam I have built with all my family secrets. I feel so furious and want to hurt them as badly as they all, while hiding behind their religion, have hurt me. Let the waters flow, let the secrets out and when the flood recedes, let them take inventory of the skeletons amidst the debris. I want to unleash the secrets that only I know. I want the world to know them too. I want the world to see them for the frauds and liars they are.

Let loose the “truth” that they would be forced to face. Let them confront the closet cases, the adulterers, the black blood in the white heritage, the ones that have had abortions and the ones that have mistresses, all within our big “happy” family. Take no prisoners and let them grapple with the consequences and twist in the wind.

Sometimes, times like this, I want nothing more than that.

But in the end I realize that my need to exact revenge serves no purpose beyond temporary satisfaction. Instead I have this blog to vent and to calm down.

Slap, slap!