The "End of Civilization" Candidate

One of the Republican presidential hopefuls, Mike Huckabee, recently proclaimed that legalizing gay marriage would bring the "end of civilization." Does he realize that gay marriage is already allowed in the Netherlands, Belgium (love those chocolates), Canada, South Africa, and Spain, and that a variation called civil partnerships is allowed in New Zealand and the United Kingdom (which consists of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland)? Has civilization ended in any of those countries? Did allowing gay marriages stop heterosexuals from marrying? Did the birthrate plummet? Is heterosexual sex so much worse than gay sex that it needs the special legal protection of marriage to promote heterosexuality?

What of our Canadian neighbors? Has their civilization collapsed and nobody noticed? Do we need to send relief expeditions?

Why does the GOP attract such idiots?

New Concept: Loan to People Able To Repay

Last week, I read where the U. S. House of Representatives passed a bill to reform mortgage lending practices; one of its provisions would require that lenders determine the loan could be repaid by the borrower. Apparently, lenders didn't care that borrowers would be unable to repay -- the borrower would just refinance the loan, generating new loan origination fees in a giant ponzi scheme.

I hope that the companies that produced these deceptive, fraudulent, predatory loans fail.

Congratulations to Al Gore!

Congratulations to Al Gore for sharing the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

Along with Jimmy Carter, Gore symbolizes the best in public service. Although Gore was unsuccessful at winning the presidency, he continued to shape discussion about important issues, such as global warming. He also graciously conceded to Bush when many people, including me, think he actually won. (Oh, but for the thwarted Florida recount.)

Oh No! Not Another Wacky Attorney General!

President Bush's nominee for Attorney General, Michael Mukasey, had some surprising testimony yesterday. Appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mukasey stated his belief that the President and his administration had the constitutional authority to operate beyond the limits specified by law. Perhaps he could explain how our system of government, supposedly based upon the rule of law, differs from dictatorships? If laws can be superseded, what prevents governmental abuses of authority?

The Bush administration, its appointees, and its nominees continue to amaze me.

Gay and Lesbian History Month

It's that time of year! No, not Halloween, although it's getting closer; rather, October is Gay and Lesbian History Month. From people who have researched this topic, here are some famous people who were gay:

• Alexander the Great
• Plato
• Sappho
• Leonardo da Vinci
• Desiderius Erasmus
• Michelangelo
• Francis Bacon
• Christopher Marlowe
• Frederick the Great
• Lord Byron
• Herman Melville
• Walt Whitman
• Horatio Alger, Jr.
• Oscar Wilde
• Peter Ilyich Tchaikovsky
• Marcel Proust
• Willa Cather
• Gertrude Stein
• E. M. Forster
• Virginia Woolf
• John Maynard Keynes
• T. E. Lawrence
• Jean Cocteau
• Bessie Smith
• Charles Laughton
• Noel Coward
• Tennessee Williams
• Alan Turing
• James Baldwin
• Andy Warhol

I confess, I had to look up some of these names to find out what made them famous. :-)

The War on Visas

Because of 9/11, the Bush administration has tightened the visa requirements for admission to the United States, with the effect that many applicants are denied admission.

Particularly with student visas this policy is misguided. The United States had previously welcomed students to our colleges and universities. When I attended the University of Iowa, I met students from Germany, France, Japan, China, Chile, Nigeria, Iran, and Lebanon. It was wonderful to learn something about each of these countries, and to make friends that I otherwise would never have known.

This exposure benefited me and the many other Americans who met the foreign students, while the foreign students learned first-hand about the United States. After graduating, many found jobs here, benefiting our economy with their knowledge and hard work. Others left for their homes, with closer ties to our country. Either way, we benefited.

Now, student visas are difficult to get as the Bush administration cites potential terrorism risks. That policy is unfortunate because the benefits so greatly outweigh the small risk.

The Faith Club

One of the results of 9/11 was that three women of different faiths started meeting together to discuss their religions (Islam, Christianity, and Judaism) and to write an interfaith children's book. The Faith Club tells their story, as they discover how much the differing faiths share in common.

One of the women describes her belief that there are different, equally valid routes to God. That is one of my beliefs too. Here is a quote from Ranya Idliby:

"I believe that God does not distinguish between humans because of their race, color, or religious tradition. God sees beyond the different rituals and judges the valor of humans not on the merits of one tradition over the other but rather on our own actions and choices."

Some people would disagree with my belief that God's grace extends beyond just Christians. I have a difficult time believing that my Jewish and Muslim friends, with their love and compassion for others, are not given God's grace too.

I highly recommend the book.

Gays and Religion

I believe in God, and in his grace, love, and compassion. But religious nuts have made it difficult to be gay and to be religious. Rather than endure the constant condemnations for being gay -- which most gays including me would say is inborn -- gays quit the church. How ironic, given that the New Testament is filled with stories of love, compassion, and inclusiveness.

A few years ago I was active in protesting an anti-gay resolution passed by the county where we lived. At our protests, one of the counter-protesters displayed a sign saying "Thank God for AIDS." Not only was that sign offensive, but it is bad theology.

The most vocal "mainstream" group has to be the Southern Baptists, the church of my mother and most of her side of the family. The last Southern Baptist Sunday service that I attended was given by Charles Stanley here in Atlanta. Stanley managed to lump gays with murderers, rapists, and child molesters. I was polite enough not to walk out of the sermon, but only because I was attending with an aunt and several cousins. Since then, I have not been back in any Southern Baptist church except for funerals.

The only mainstream denominations that welcome gays are the Episcopal Church and the United Church of Christ (UCC), both of which are fairly recent developments. Indeed, the Episcopal Church is now being turn apart because of its commitment to gays.

During the 1970s, gays started a denomination, the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC), to provide a home for worship. As the name implies, most of the metro areas in the United States have at least one of their churches. The Cathedral of Hope (don't you love the name?) located in Dallas was the flagship church until they recently split from the MCC and joined the UCC. (The Cathedral of Hope was designed by a famous architect, and yet I think it is one of the ugliest buildings I have ever seen.)

I do wish the mainstream churches would stop crucifying gays in their sermons.

A Letter to Pat Robertson

This letter has been published on various internet sites, sometimes to Pat Robertson, to Dr. Laura, and to Jerry Falwell (before his death). I find it amusing as well as a foil to those religious nuts who would condemn people for being gay. Here it is:

Dear Pat Robertson,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your religious channel, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Does it merit stoning him?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I'm nearsighted. Does my vision have to be 20/20? Is that with or without the corrective lenses? What if I need bifocals?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My cousin has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.

A Fitting Tribute to Matthew Shepard

Last week, the United States Senate passed the Matthew Shepard Act. The act expands federal laws against hate crimes to include sexual orientation. The act is a fitting tribute to Matthew Shepard.

For anyone unfamiliar with Matthew Shepard, here's a summary: Matthew Shepard was a 21 year-old student at the University of Wyoming. After meeting two men at a gay bar in Laramie, the three men left together. The two men drove Matthew Shepard to a rural area, tied him to a fence post, beat him savagely, pistol-whipped him, and left him for dead. He died of his injuries after lingering for five days. The two men were not gay, and had gone to the gay bar to look for a victim. Matthew Shepard endured what nobody should, because he was gay.

The murder occurred in 1998. Since then, efforts to include sexual orientation as a hate crime have not been successful, until now.

The Matthew Shepard Act is expected to be vetoed by President Bush.

Creation Museum's Unique Exhibits

Creationists, the people who believe in the Bible's account of the creation of the earth, now have a museum to showcase their belief. The Creation Museum recently opened in Petersburg Kentucky, a suburb of Cincinnati Ohio.

The group's website declares Be prepared to experience history in a completely unprecedented way. Indeed. To this group, history means the book of Genesis.

There are exhibits on Noah's Arc and the Garden of Eden. Just outside the Garden of Eden, dinosaurs are exhibited including the tyrannosaurus rex in an unique blend of natural science and biblical belief. Visitors may watch any of several informational movies, including Six Days of Creation and Dinosaurs and Dragons. Reaching outside the book of Genesis, the museum also depicts the Crucifixion.

Visitors of this museum have noted differences between its displays of natural history and those displayed at the Kentucky state parks. These differences have prompted state naturalists to organize a trip to the museum to see its depictions.

Naming this place a museum is misleading. Its blend of Bible with science doesn't accurately portray scientific theory. Intentionally or not, its organizers are preying (I love puns) upon the lack of understanding of natural history by its visitors.

Letter to Homophobes from a Vermont Mother

This letter-to-the-editor was submitted by Sharon Underwood to the Valley News in April of 2000. It has been republished many times on the internet. I reprint it here because it is so moving and eloquent:

As the mother of a gay son, I've seen firsthand how cruel and misguided people can be.

Many letters have been sent to the Valley News concerning the homosexual menace in Vermont. I am the mother of a gay son and I've taken enough from you good people.

I'm tired of your foolish rhetoric about the "homosexual agenda" and your allegations that accepting homosexuality is the same thing as advocating sex with children. You are cruel and ignorant. You have been robbing me of the joys of motherhood ever since my children were tiny. My firstborn son started suffering at the hands of the moral little thugs from your moral, upright families from the time he was in the first grade. He was physically and verbally abused from first grade straight through high school because he was perceived to be gay. He never professed to be gay or had any association with anything gay, but he had the misfortune not to walk or have gestures like the other boys. He was called "fag" incessantly, starting when he was 6.

In high school, while your children were doing what kids that age should be doing, mine labored over a suicide note, drafting and redrafting it to be sure his family knew how much he loved them. My sobbing 17-year-old tore the heart out of me as he choked out that he just couldn't bear to continue living any longer, that he didn't want to be gay and that he couldn't face a life without dignity.

You have the audacity to talk about protecting families and children from the homosexual menace, while you yourselves tear apart families and drive children to despair. I don't know why my son is gay, but I do know that God didn't put him, and millions like him, on this Earth to give you someone to abuse. God gave you brains so that you could think, and it's about time you started doing that.

At the core of all your misguided beliefs is the belief that this could never happen to you, that there is some kind of subculture out there that people have chosen to join. The fact is that if it can happen to my family, it can happen to yours, and you won't get to choose. Whether it is genetic or whether something occurs during a critical time of fetal development, I don't know. I can only tell you with an absolute certainty that it is inborn.

If you want to tout your own morality, you'd best come up with something more substantive than your heterosexuality. You did nothing to earn it; it was given to you. If you disagree, I would be interested in hearing your story, because my own heterosexuality was a blessing I received with no effort whatsoever on my part. It is so woven into the very soul of me that nothing could ever change it. For those of you who reduce sexual orientation to a simple choice, a character issue, a bad habit or something that can be changed by a 10-step program, I'm puzzled. Are you saying that your own sexual orientation is nothing more than something you have chosen, that you could change it at will? If that's not the case, then why would you suggest that someone else can?

A popular theme in your letters is that Vermont has been infiltrated by outsiders. Both sides of my family have lived in Vermont for generations. I am heart and soul a Vermonter, so I'll thank you to stop saying that you are speaking for "true Vermonters."

You invoke the memory of the brave people who have fought on the battlefield for this great country, saying that they didn't give their lives so that the "homosexual agenda" could tear down the principles they died defending. My 83-year-old father fought in some of the most horrific battles of World War II, was wounded and awarded the Purple Heart.

He shakes his head in sadness at the life his grandson has had to live. He says he fought alongside homosexuals in those battles, that they did their part and bothered no one. One of his best friends in the service was gay, and he never knew it until the end, and when he did find out, it mattered not at all. That wasn't the measure of the man.

You religious folk just can't bear the thought that as my son emerges from the hell that was his childhood he might like to find a lifelong companion and have a measure of happiness. It offends your sensibilities that he should request the right to visit that companion in the hospital, to make medical decisions for him or to benefit from tax laws governing inheritance. How dare he? you say. These outrageous requests would threaten the very existence of your family, would undermine the sanctity of marriage.

You use religion to abdicate your responsibility to be thinking human beings. There are vast numbers of religious people who find your attitudes repugnant. God is not for the privileged majority, and God knows my son has committed no sin. The deep-thinking author of a letter to the April 12 Valley News who lectures about homosexual sin and tells us about "those of us who have been blessed with the benefits of a religious upbringing" asks: "What ever happened to the idea of striving . . . to be better human beings than we are?"

Indeed, sir, what ever happened to that?

- Sharon Underwood, White River Junction, VT

Pocketknives and Safety

Most guys carry a pocketknife, and I'm no exception. The one I prefer is a swiss army knife, with a small knife blade, scissors, a blade with a screwdriver, and inserts containing a pair of tweezers and a toothpick. The knife blade is just slightly larger than the width of a quarter. It's small and compact, yet able to open a package or dislodge a stuck piece of food.

The government is threatened by this knife. To board the ferry to Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty, you must go through security similar to the security at airports. The Park Service police removed the pocketknife from my key chain, and seized it.

I can only assume that the knife was threatening to the security of the ferry (it could have drilled holes in the hull), to the crew (it could have threatened the life of the crew), or to the monument (it could have cut through the arm holding the torch).

Now that I know how dangerous it is, I'm thankful that I never injured myself with it. Since I've carried it for years, I'm probably lucky to be alive! Certainly, it could not be the government overreacting.

Safety at what cost? (Part 2)

The first part dealt with the cost to our values and freedoms. This part deals strictly with numbers.

The number of American service personnel killed (to date, 3,797 deaths) is the only number reported consistently by the American media. This number is dismaying enough, but it hides several other important numbers:

1. American casualties (those who are wounded, often with a loss of limb), which is much greater than the number of service personnel killed
2. coalition troops killed and wounded
3. American and coalition contractor deaths and casualties
   
4. Iraqis killed and wounded

The number of Iraqis killed is unknown; no official number exists despite being the highest number of deaths. CNN reports one study estimating 655,000 Iraqi deaths. That number is a tragedy. Since there are usually many more wounded than killed, the Iraqi casualties must be in the millions. We have failed to protect Iraqi civilians. Unwittingly, we have unleashed sectarian violence, which the Iraqi government either has not stopped or cannot stop. We must do better. Not only does the future of the country and perhaps the region depend on it, but human lives are being lost. We must add these lives as one of the costs of the invasion, performed, according to President Bush, to provide safety to Americans.

Safety at what cost? (Part 1)

Since the September 11th World Trade Center attacks, the safety of Americans has been the priority of this administration. This goal seems to outweigh all other considerations. Thus, we have:

• the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in an attempt to extract information to safeguard Americans
• people detained indefinitely at Guantanamo without any recourse or any rights except for those guaranteed by the Geneva Convention
• wiretapping of people's cellphones, landlines, and emails
• a TSA that arbitrarily changes its rules on prohibited items
• a list of suspected terrorists without procedures for removing people listed wrongly (of course, the government doesn't make mistakes)
• a war in Iraq because Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction and sheltering terrorists; we still have not found any weapons of mass destruction and the terrorists that we're fighting are a result of the country's invasion
• student visas to the US are routinely delayed or denied
  

At what cost is this policy of protecting Americans from terrorists? Are we endangering the values and the freedoms that made our country great?

It's A Republic

The United States is a republic, which means that minorities have rights that cannot be removed by the electoral whims of the majority. These rights are guaranteed by the constitution (freedom of speech, of religion, of due process, and so forth) and by a judiciary that is supposed to be independent.

Whenever they disagree with a judge's ruling, the right wing nuts consistently attack the judicial independence of judges. The extremists label any ruling with which they disagree as judicial activism and the extremists make the charge that the judge is creating law.

Recently, they are complaining about a state ruling in Iowa that allowed gays to (gasp!) marry. One extremist is calling for the judge to be impeached. I applaud the judge for ensuring the rights of gays.

The real complaint of the right wing nuts is that the ruling treats gays as equal to heterosexuals. I wish the extremists would get a life and leave me to my own.

When Religion Conflicts With Facts

A new book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry, sounds interesting. The book says that most of the claims of the religious extremists are wrong, based on "junk" science. Indeed, the book calls many of their claims "lies." Imagine that, so-called religious leaders telling lies. Isn't there a commandment against that? LOL.

I think these Christian extremists have a bigger problem than their hypocrisy. They are incapable of any rational analysis of facts that conflict with their religious understanding. Rather than modifying their view, they attempt to impose it on everyone. They would deny sex education to teens, abortions to women, evolution and the big-bang to science, and equal rights to gays.

Historically, this uncritical mindset is not new. Zealots with the same mindset held that the Earth was flat, tortured people during the Inquisition, and killed heretics during the crusades.

Let's hope that rational thought wins over religious zealotry.

Bush Makes Clinton Seem Better

One thing I've got to say about President Bush: he's making his predecessor look better.

I didn't like Bill Clinton. I thought he lacked principles and would do whatever was politically expedient. I don't like Hillary Clinton for the same reason.

Yet Bush has managed to make me wish for a President that makes better decisions, with more forethought, more planning, and better execution. Who knew that Katrina was just a forerunner to perpetually bumbling Iraq?

Clinton also seemed to have better appointments. After all, with Bush we have endured Alberto Gonzales, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, John Bolton, and Mike Brown.

Bush's Leadership

Bush's Style
President George W. Bush likes to appoint people to positions and then let them run their department. When Bush appoints good people, this style works. When Bush appoints unqualified or incapable people, then bad things happen.

With Bush's appointments, bad things commonly happen. Look at Mike Brown as head of FEMA and the New Orleans Katrina debacle, or look at Donald Rumsfeld and the Iraq war.

Iraq As an Example
Iraq was badly planned, with no contingency plan, and it over committed the United States military. Dissenting voices were ignored, even when the dissenting voices were knowledgeable military people. The Army Chief of Staff was forced into retirement, because he vehemently disagreed with Rumsfeld's assessment. (In hindsight, it was Rumsfeld that should have been forced into retirement).

As an American, I am appalled at the lack of options that we have. How do we turn this mess into a success without flooding the country with troops that we do not have? There is no viable option to achieve the vision that Bush proclaimed in going into Iraq: to nurture a middle east democracy.

(Of course Bush probably wasn't aware that the middle east does have democracies: both Israel and Lebanon. Lebanon's government has been badly undermined by rioting and terrorism, a direct result of the turmoil that Bush has fermented with his ill-conceived foray into Iraq. Egypt, too, is a democracy in name, but the results are usually predetermined. Kind of like elections in the old Soviet Union).

Results So Far of Iraq
What must the Iraqis feel, living in a country that is unsafe six years after a foreign invasion? Neither the American nor Iraqi government is providing basic security, which is a prerequisite to rebuilding their country.

Bush has lowered Americans to the level of terrorists by denying that the Geneva convention applies to them, by denying them Criminal trails in our courts, by classifying evidence as secret and denying the defendants the right to see the evidence. If you are accused of a crime, how do you defend yourself without knowing the evidence? Can't the government convict anyone of any crime by asserting "we have the proof, but you can't see it"?

And we have tortured people, in a misguided effort to elicit information and confessions. I had always been proud to be an American, but I am not proud of our record here; I am ashamed.

Finally, we have fermented terrorism throughout the middle east.

And Bush wants to stay the course. Amazing!

Muslim Terrorists and Their Heavenly Reward

Isn't it amazing that a religion which has so much trouble with sex -- at least certain Muslim sects still stone or hang adulterers and gays -- promises their terrorist "martyrs" a heaven with virgins as their reward?

It's not just one virgin being promised, but a lot. Indeed, Bin Laden is rumored to have promised each of his terrorists seventy-two virgins. Of course, these are males being promised female virgins; I wonder if female terrorists are promised male virgins? I guess the virgins must be Muslim; the non-Muslim world would have trouble locating enough virgins. LOL.

On a more serious note, one of my college friends was a Muslim from Lebanon. Whenever there was any news report of a Muslim killing people because of religious beliefs, he would shake his head in disapproval and explain sadly that they had misinterpreted the Koran. Although I'm not familiar with the Koran's teachings, I believe my friend: I think God disapproves of terrorism, and that the Muslim terrorists have a surprise awaiting them.

The Republican Party Continues to Amaze

Republican party leaders acted swiftly and decisively to persuade Republican U. S. Senator Larry Craig to resign. As someone arrested for soliciting gay sex in a men's room, Craig was considered a liability -- especially as the Republicans have positioned themselves as the party of the religious right.

Interestingly, Republican party leaders did nothing on the scandal facing Republican U. S. Senator Ted Stevens, who is being investigated by the FBI for accepting bribes, and of the scandal facing Republican U. S. Senator David Vitter, who was the client of an expensive prostitution service. (I guess if you solicit for sex, it should be as a paying customer, and it should be heterosexual sex.)

You would never know that the Republican party has a great history; it is, after-all, the party of Abraham Lincoln and of Teddy Roosevelt. Of course, Lincoln and Roosevelt were reformers, and few recent Republican Presidents have had their intellect, their courage, and their vision.

My Mixed Heritage and Iowa's Gay Marriages

One of the reasons I'm interested in the Civil War is that my father's family is from Iowa while my mother's family is from Georgia. My mother's grandfather fought in the Confederate Army, while Iowa contributed the most Union soldiers of any state in proportion to their population. Rumor has it that family members enlisted, but I haven't been able to verify that.

Indeed, when the Union Army invaded Georgia, many units from Iowa fought; there is even a monument to the Iowa dead at the Chickamauga battlefield in north Georgia.

So it was with interest that I noted the gay marriages taking place in my home state of Iowa. According to Reuters News, gay couples were lined up to apply for marriage licenses when the doors to the Polk County (the county that Des Moines is in) Courthouse opened this morning.

Perhaps the enthusiasm will change some minds.

Toilets, Closeted Hypocrites, and the Signals

What is it about toilets and closeted hypocrites? Larry Craig is just the most recent closeted politicians to be arrested for soliciting sex in one.

In a way, it's interesting. Here I am an openly gay man and yet I'm never had sex in a restroom, and don't know the signals for soliciting sex. Yet a closeted politician who denies he is gay not only knows these signals but is arrested for using them to solicit anonymous gay sex.

It's an amazing world!

Are Religious Fundamentalists Bearing False Witness?

When the religious fundamentalists decry sexual orientation as a choice, are they violating the commandment to not bear false witness? ("Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." Exodus 20:12, Deuteronomy 5:16).

• Most gays (including me) believe that we did not choose our sexual orientation. Indeed, we often struggled against it for years.
  
• More and more scientific studies support that sexual orientation is biologically determined. (For a synopsis of the studies supporting sexual orientation as being biologically determined, click here.)
• The American Psychological Association believes that sexual orientation is not a choice. (Click here for further information.)
• Gays who try to become heterosexual through programs like Exodus International only have a success rate of one-half of one percent. (See my previous post on this statistic.) If sexual orientation were a choice, wouldn't they be more successful in changing their sexual orientation?

If sexual orientation is not a choice, are people bearing false witness when they claim it is?

The Exodus "Success" Story

Since religious fundamentalists believe sexual orientation to be a "choice," naturally they have provided a way for gays to change: Exodus International, which takes gays and "changes" them into heterosexuals. But wait, Exodus only claims a success rate of 25% to 50%. (Kind of a big range, isn't it? Wouldn't you think they would know their success rate more precisely?)

Let's be clear: here is a group that only takes people who are highly committed to changing their sexual orientation, places them in an environment designed to maximize success and minimize temptations, and the group can only claim a success rate of 25% to 50%?

One independent analysis concluded that the 25% to 50% rate was vastly overstated. Their conclusion was that less than 1% (one percent) changed. (Their actual number was 0.5%, or one half of one percent.)

And the religious fundamentalists never tell you that the two founders of Exodus, both male, fell in love and held a gay commitment ceremony.

Face the truth: sexual orientation is not a choice.

Religious Fundamentalists: Frustrating, Wrong, and Afraid

Religious fundamentalists are certainly exasperating to me. Their belief that sexual orientation is chosen is wrong. If being gay is a choice, is being heterosexual a choice? Did they choose their orientation?

I remember giving up talking to a religious fundamentalist; as I was turning away, he told me very loudly to "stay away from the children." I was amazed, as he apparently thought that gays were pedophiles or that gays recruited (if any fundamentals are reading this, he was wrong. Statistically, a pedophile is more likely to be heterosexual in orientation than to be gay. And recruiting is a myth to explain why people "choose" to be gay). It certainly wasn't a good experience for me.

Perhaps the real reason some of the religious fundamentalists are so vocal concerning gays is that they are afraid of their own sexuality. Christianity, at least, has certainly discouraged sexuality except for procreational purposes (and then when married). Of course, their virulence could also be hiding their attraction to the same sex.

I'm ready for the fundamentalists to get a new cause: feeding the hungry, providing health-care for the sick, or providing shelter to the homeless.

Republican Senator Arrested for Lewd Conduct in the Men's Room

Idaho U. S. Senator Larry Craig, a Republican, pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct at the Minneapolis airport after a plainclothes officer investigated complaints of lewd conduct in one of the restrooms.

Craig denies he's gay, and voted in favor of the Defense of Marraige Act (DOMA).

Wouldn't it be more honest to himself and to his constituents to admit the truth?

Here are the links:

News Report of Guilty Plea
DOMA Senate Roll Call

Do These People Think?

Twice in the last two weeks I've read someone expressing the view that Washington is screwed up because of the liberal politicians. Hello! The most "conservative" president in years has been in power for six years, and had a conservative, Republican Congress through most of his term.

Let's look at some issues:
1) Are they blaming Iraq on liberals? Would that be Colin Powell, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, or George W. Bush?

2) Who would they be blaming the deficit on? (Remember, it was a huge surplus when Clinton left office).

3) Are the "liberals" (such a nebulous term) responsible for global warming, for high prescription drug prices, for the healthcare uninsured, for high gas prices, or for the illegal immigrants?

What are they thinking?