The REAL face of the Anti-SB48 Campaign

Typical example of  anti-SB48 messaging.

Those trying to overturn California’s Fair Education Act have churned out propaganda pieces full of stock photos of bright-faced fake parents and children who are (allegedly) at risk for gay "indoctrination."

 But a more accurate picture in this discussion, one of the realfaces of who's opposing SB48, is that of Reverend Louis Sheldon.

His organization, The Traditional Values Coalition, is listed as a hate group by The Southern Poverty Law Center.

Sheldon held a press conference yesterday in Orange County. Unfortunately for him and the anti-SB48 forces, ZERO reporters or real-life supporters showed up. Perhaps this is indicative how how much support the extremists actually have?

It's a fascinating, creepy, must-watch video:

Note how Sheldon uses the standard anti-LGBT talking points (which in this case are flat-out lies.) "You're messing with the children," he says and references sexual material being taught to 5- and 6- year-olds. Then, as soon as he’s challenged by the Courage Campaign questioner, he gets agitated and walks his claim back – because it’s a lie, he knows it’s a lie, and it can’t stand up to even the slightest of scrutiny. 

Then, when asked about representation of a list of specific heroic Americans who were LGBT, he even more angrily dismisses the line of questioning, as it cuts through the frail logic of his position:

"You're on one track," he growls, having run out of ammunition, then rattles a bit further and ends the session with a final comment on "they gay agenda" and skulks off.

Yes, good Reverend, the questioner IS on one track, and it's the track of truth.

For more, visit Prop 8 Trial Tracker.

For more on Traditional Values Coalition's hate activities, including their anti-LGBT, anti-Muslim, and anti-tolerance activities, read the SPLC Fall 2011 report here.

That's Not Funny!

This morning, after a series of minor gaffes like spilling coffee on myself and forgetting my own cell number, I composed the following tweet:

Today, I embrace my inner Mongoloid.

As I played with the phrasing --"Today, I ..." or "God, grant me the serenity to accept  my own.." -- I realized this tweet might be offensive to both people of Mongolian decent as well as those facing Down's Syndrome and its challenges. So the tweet ended up on the scrap heap. But it started me thinking.

There may be a few among us who have never posted a Facebook update/comment or tweet and later regretted it (or thought one up and had the good sense NOT to share it.) The rest of us are not so lucky or self-disciplined. Some of our messages are genuinely funny or insightful, but inappropriate for one reason or other -- they are unnecessarily offensive to an individual or group, or have an unintended double-meaning, that sort of thing. Other times we are mad or drunk or tweeting post-Ambien or in a hurry or ... and we post something regrettable.

So I had this idea -- Ask my Twitter and FB friends to share their awkwardness! I'm looking for either things you've posted and regretted (after we came to our senses or someone(s) told you you were being asshole-ish and needed to check yourself ... or things you, at the last minute, had the good sense NOT to post. And here's how we'll do it: all comments on this blog are moderated. 



So I invite you to send me your gems as comments. Then, I'll strip your name and post the "best of" anonymously in a follow-up blog, however off-color or misanthropic they might be. The only no-nos are inciting violence, libel, or swipes at named people not in the public eye. This should be fun. Have it it, kids.


CLICK BELOW TO SEND ME YOUR BEST/WORST!

CA Gov Brown Vetoes Westboro Funeral Protest Bill

On Wednesday, California Governor Jerry Brown vetoed SB888, a bill that would make it a crime for protesters to disrupt a funeral and keep protesters 1,000 feet back from mourners. The bill was passed almost unanimously by the CA Legislature in response to protests by the Westboro Baptist Church. The Kansas-based congregation has a history of colorful, vocal demonstrations at events they feel condone or promote homosexuality, which in their view is in direct contrast with the will of God.

Brown's office told UPI that the Governor opposes offensive actions by protesters, but acknowledges a recent 8-1 U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing Westboro's protest of the funeral of a fallen U.S. soldier, and feels SB888 violates that decision.

Westboro targets servicemembers' funerals because, in the church's view, those soldiers were fighting to defend a nation and culture steeped in homosexuality, and therefore doomed.

Another reason for such protests is they almost guarantee Westboro a slot on the evening news and in the cable news channels' daily churn. For an otherwise inconsequential group like Westboro, this media attention is lifeblood. It keeps them in the headlines, and gives them fodder for lawsuits, several of which have proven lucrative for the organization. Clearly, Westboro has found its niche.

Brown's veto is not happy news for the CA Assembly, LGBT people and our rights organizations, the families of servicemembers, and those who beg for civil discourse. It's good news for Westboro and for civil libertarians who view First Amendment free-speech as sacred.

I have repeatedly found myself in the position of decrying Westboro's vitriol while defending their right to voice and promote the message. I've learned a lot in the process, and have had a fascinating dialogue with members of Westboro even as we have publicly sparred. There are many ironies here, and I intend to explore them in a web/magazine piece I've been gradually efforting for a few months with Westboro's cooperation.

One irony? For all the hatred, profanity and denigration Westboro heaps at the feet of gays, they're often out-zinged by the antipathy and hatred gays lob back. Westboro says "God Hates Fags" and warns of an eternity in hell. Meanwhile, a number of my gay brethren actually ideate or advocate physical harm against Westboro members. "I wish you were dead" is not an uncommon thing to see directed at Westboro in a Twitter feed or a Facebook page.

Is it our role to protect society from the potentially poisonous speech of the few? In some cases, no. So says the U.S. Supreme Court in regard to Westboro, and I agree with their decision. Our First Amendment exists to protect the speech of the few from being suppressed by society. It's easier for me to embrace this when it's rights of Gays or Muslim-Americans whose voice is being silenced. It's more difficult when it's people shouting at me that I'm worthless, calling my church pastor a whore (as Westboro did) or making other inflammatory statements.

Gay kids harm themselves because they repeatedly hear statements like those of Westboro coming from the mouths of their parents, authority figures and peers. I view this as a problem. But I don't see gagging Westboro as a solution.

More in the longer piece. But I wanted to get a few thoughts out now. You are welcome to comment. If you do, your words may be referenced in the longer article.

Thanks!