Boo-yah! This is teh awesome.

I don't know the guy, but it was written by someone named Ben Janken. I know it's long, but read it because it's awesome:

In an online debate, a pastor wrote this: "I also submit that just because I may believe that homosexual acts are wrong, it doesn’t mean I don’t care about homosexual people. Not all love says “yes”; all that says “no” does not necessarily mean hatred.”

Pastor, We have VERY VERY different ideas of love. You idea of love is spreading YOUR conception of the gospel to the poor sinners out there– whether they are interested or not, without knowing whether they have already heard it and accepted it–or rejected it. In short, with knowing nothing about their spiritual state or how G sees them– or anything about them at all. In short, it’s all about you, and not about the people you allegedly love. And that’s not love, it’s narcissism.

A host of other good Christians are all happy to tell me how much they love me, and then follow it up with comments like ‘cancer on society’ and the whole vicious panoply of anti-gay, homophobic, lying rants. They will tell me how much they love me right before they tell me how much they hate my child-molesting, disease spreading, country-destroying, religion-despising, marriage-compromising, military demoralizing ways -- all of which is news to me and my husband. Sorry, if that’s love, I prefer hatred. At least it doesn’t assume I’m so stupid that I can’t tell the difference.

You say that YOU are entitled to say NO based upon YOUR religious beliefs (which you have admitted in this space could be mistaken), beliefs which I and a LOT of other people do not share, whether on the nature of homosexuality or G’s message to the world. But funny, you don’t usually makes campaigns against other religious beliefs– that would be so Middle Ages of you. Muslims, of course, are excepted. But you--by this I mean a generic you, Christians who think my sex life is their business--feel free to do that to gay people on a regular basis. I don’t know if my marriage, which I assure you means far more to me than it does to you, will exist on November 4, thanks to people who, like you, know nothing about homosexuality, my soul, or my life--or as far as I can tell, their book--but still presume to tell me that I am not entitled to the same treatment in society that they are. In fact, the treatment I am entitled to is quite a bit different, and not in a good way, than the treatment they accord themselves. It’s called the myth of heterosexual superiority in service to the reality of heterosexual privilege.

You say you are entitled to say NO when you clearly know little about the subject (including the precious little that your book allegedly says on the alleged subject), and NOTHING about me, my experiences, my life, my beliefs, and yes, MY homosexuality--we’re not really alike, despite your assumption that our ’sin’ defines us so.

And here, pastor, is the crux of the issue. When you tell me you love me, it means vastly different things to each of us. You may tell me you love me, but the rhetoric and the religious belief is exactly the same as the generic you I have already addressed above. And I would be willing to bet that you do not believe my marriage can and should be valid, and would vote to “disappear” it if you had the opportunity, all in the name of loving me but hating my sin. As (I believe) General Westmoreland so bravely put it: "We must destroy that village in order to save it." Lucky villagers! Saved!

As far as I can tell, in its practical effects, that “love’, that “rhetoric”, that “religious belief” is completely indistinguishable from hatred. So I prefer the hatred, because at least it is honest and not self-serving. Only self-service here at The Morality Cafe. When the practical effects of your love and your care– and the political, cultural, religious and social agendas that your commitment to ‘love’ requires you also to commit to– is indistinguishable from the effects of the ‘no’s”, the ‘disapproval’, and the hate, then I might just lack the subtlety to be able to tell the difference.

So get ready to rant and roll.

YOU WOULD RATHER…

You would rather bend and twist scripture, which you believe is the word of G, to fit your very narrow religious and political agenda, than to admit that the seven or so extremely ambiguous passages allegedly condemning gay people are no where near as clear as the 250 or so passages governing hetero behavior.

You would rather tear down the wall of separation between church and state that protects the religious freedom of everyone, than allow gay people to live their lives free of your religious bigotry –excuse me, your ‘love’ and ‘concern’.

You would rather that children who have been abused and neglected by their hetero parents be transferred from institution to group home to foster home to institution, rather than be kept in the foster or adoptive homes of people you disapprove of, but with whom you have no factual or actual beef, other than that they exist and have a normal desire for children in their lives. After all, it’s for the children.

You would rather that American soldiers die for lack of intelligence information that could be provided by Arabic and Farsi translators, rather than let gay people serve their country in the military, whether in the closet or openly and proudly.

You would rather that young men die of a fatal disease that is fairly easily prevented, rather than give them non-judgmental, factual information about how they can behave responsibly and/or protect themselves. After all, they are just fags receiving the ‘just penalty for their error.’ If they didn’t persist in their sin, they wouldn’t have the problem.

You would rather that children be taunted, beaten, and ostracized for real or perceived sexual orientation or gender non-conformity, than include sexual orientation in anti bullying bills. Gotta stop that gay agenda where it counts--with the kids. After all, bullying is normal and natural, just like heterosexuality, and those kids need to learn that they have no value, and no adult will rescue them if they continue to deliberately transgress your beliefs-- what your sadistic idea of the god of love has so clearly told them they must not do. If only they could read your book, and understand it with the finesse that you do. After all, spare the rod, spoil the child, n’est-ce pas? This is a fabulous example of that. Wouldn’t want those kids to turn out gay, or think that they are worthwhile human beings.

You would rather believe that the bullying directed at children is the validation and not the result of attitudes like yours. Nevertheless, you’re ‘there’ for the kids. Though where ‘there’ might be in entirely open to question. Perhaps they are on the edge of a cliff, and you are standing right behind them--ready to push.

You would rather pretend that the story of Sodom is a clear condemnation of all homosexuality, thereby allowing you to conflate the relationship of two people who love and support each other throughout their lives with the threatened gang rape of two strangers, than admit that there just might be a difference between them. After all, they’re both wrong, so they must be the same.

You would rather that young men die of a highly preventable fatal disease, rather than affirm that marriage and monogamy are positive values for gay people, and ought to be encouraged for them. But you get bonus points here. Because you do everything in your power to degrade and destroy and prevent gay people from having normal, healthy lives and normal, healthy relationships, you then get to disparage those gay people (usually gay men) who express their sexuality in unhealthy ways and for not having normal lives and healthy relationships, all the while completely denying the existence or the relevance of those who do. It’s a win-win situation--for you.

You would rather that children spend their lives in an orphanage or some third world hellhole, dying for a home, dying for parents (of whatever gender) that love them, or maybe just literally dying. After all, every child deserves a mother AND a father, and they are better off dead that adopted by gay people.

You would rather believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that gay people cannot be good parents in every sense of the word, preferring to believe that every child deserves a mother and a father. I think we can CERTAINLY argue that. Ask any kid who has been abused, beaten, molested, thrown out, or born addicted, or born to parents who didn’t want him, or weren’t prepared for him, or have their own emotional issues.

You would rather believe that a gay woman makes a lousy father, and a gay man a lousy mother, than give said gay people credit for being caring and conscious human beings. I can tell you, a lot of actual fathers and mothers make LOUSY fathers and mothers.

You would rather rant on and on about the threat of gay marriage to heterosexual marriage, tell any lie, cook any statistics, rather than do anything at all about the mess that straight people have made of marriage. It’s all because the queers are getting married.

You would rather grant 25,000 moral waivers to convicted felons and cripple our national security, than allow upstanding, talented, patriotic gay people to serve their country openly and honestly– unless of course, they are willing lie and hide and hope that no one outs them. After all, it might make SOME BIGOTED, INSECURE, IMMATURE, FEAR-RIDDEN STRAIGHT BOY UPSET. And we are the ones hurting unit cohesion?

You would rather blame gay people for child molestation when all the available un-narthed research shows that the majority of it occurs within your precious and pure heterosexual family. Of course. It's called ACCESS. After all, its easier and better to blame a faceless stranger for their non-existent crimes against children if it serves your political agenda. I mean, why look at the really ugly truth? It will just make straight people look bad and won’t save a single kid. Here in California, we just had a wrestling coach arrested for sexual contacts with boys ranging over 20 years. He has been ordered to stay away from all children unless another adult is present, INCLUDING THE SON OF HIS GIRLFRIEND. But you'll say he's a gay man and a threat to children, despite his apparent heterosexuality.

You would rather spend $30 million dollars to save your marriage from the non-existent threat of my marriage, than spend that $30 million dollars as you were enjoined by your lord and savior for saving the hundreds of thousands of lives of the people lost in Darfur. After all, they are just black, and poor, and far away. And at least they believe in Jesus. Oh wait. They don’t. They are just black, and poor, and far away.

You would rather that gay men pretend to be straight and marry women that they have no sexual or romantic interest in, consistently commit adultery with strangers in parks (thanks Bob Allen), and endangers their lives, wives, families, and careers (thanks, Larry Craig), than live their lives openly an honestly with another man in the bonds of marriage. That way, you get to ruin two lives for the price of one. Bonus points– you get to pretend that these allegedly straight men are typical of the average gay man. I have met an awful lot of those men– sadly.

You would rather pretend that gay people are a cancer on society (thanks, Sally Kern), rather than admit that the real cancer on society is organized, institutionalized hate, especially when it is called love. Especially when it leads to the disaster known as the 2nd term of George Bush. Especially when it means your fundraising strategies might be crippled. Especially when it means that you won’t have to examine the many sins of heterosexual society, or Bush’s refusal to pay any attention to al Quaeda. You can just blame the fags for the moral, political, and financial decline of the country. Did you hear the one about the goat in the desert?

You would rather insist I get into a lifetime of pain and suffering and denial– trying to change something that not only is almost always immutable, but doesn’t need to be changed — than allow me to live my life in peace and happiness with someone of the same sex. The BEST research that has been published so far, the Jones and Yarhouse study, indicates that the effort is doomed to failure– ‘complicated’ and ‘ambiguous’ failure, as they so naively and charmingly put it. AND THEY WERE ON YOUR SIDE. But hey, ex-gay ministries need money, too.

You would rather insist that the finest part of me is evil, sick, and wrong– and make sure that I think so, too– than allow me the simple dignity of living my life in peace. Well, actually you will allow that, as long as I don’t demand equality before the law -- or respect, or dignity, or to live my life in peace.

You would rather deny my children health insurance and the security that comes with living in a home where their parents are married, and have all of the societal benefits and support that marriage brings, than allow my marriage to exist. After all they’re just the children of fags and dykes. They may even be fags themselves. They are certainly not as valuable as the heterosexual children of presumably heterosexual parents. “Save the children” doesn’t apply.

You would rather blame gay people for the imminent fall of western civilization through means that cannot be tested, explained, or logicked into existence, than admit that unrestricted, unfettered, unregulated, unconscious, and un-responsible heterosexual breeding have brought the whole planet to the very brink of ecological and financial destruction. If only you weren’t so busy maligning us, I’m sure you’d find the time to do something about it. The Pope, a.k.a. G’s viceroy on earth, is absolutely certain that it is G's will both to beat up on gay people as you never would on anyone else, and then breed us to the point of self-destruction.

You would rather fight tooth and nail against the inclusion of gay people in hate crimes laws, rather than admit that a good deal of the hatred and violence we experience for no other reason than WHO WE ARE is the direct result of the hatred, lies, and violence you preach. After all, as the Pope himself has said, if gay people want to go around demanding rights that they could not possibly be entitled to, they shouldn’t be surprised if someone gets violent over it. Who do those people think they are? Children of G?

You would rather believe that my marriage is such a threat to your marriage that you MUST pass a constitutional amendment to keep me from enjoying what you have. If your marriage is so threatened by my marriage that this is the only course open to you, your marriage has problems that even a biblically correct lifestyle won’t help.

You would rather that my friends Andy and Paul spend thousands of dollars to secure the life that have together spent decades building, rather than allow them the simple dignity of the rights that you can purchase with a $50 marriage license with a woman you met 5 minutes ago. Ah, the sanctity of marriage. Ask David Vitter. Ask Bill Clinton, who was signing the Defense of Marriage act while he was getting monica'd in the Oval Office. The difference, of course, is that all of our security can be overturned in a moment with the combination of a distant relative, a homophobic judge, and a law that allows it. And with your approval, you just love us so much.

You would rather that our lives be made as difficult and unpleasant as possible, so that you can rest easy in your unshakeable superiority, whether real or imagined. Wait, it’s not real. Heterosexuality isn’t superior or special. It isn’t even normal. It’s just common. And exclusive heterosexuality is nowhere near as common as you would like to believe. Ask Ted Haggard.

You would rather have sodomy laws, invading the private lives of people you don’t even know exist, see gay people in prison for the mere sin of their existence, and demanding those people living lives of degradation and furtiveness, just to satisfy yourself that sin is being punished. Just not your sin. One sin at a time, and the sins of others are always a priority.

You would rather create that world of furtiveness, shame, and degradation than allow gay people to live freely. After all, it’s for our own goddamn good. And you get so much satisfaction for it. Win-win again.

You would rather have good Christian people leave their faith– and abandon the hope of salvation that you so, so fervently believe in, and was G’s great gift to us, the central part of your faith– than admit that your incredibly biased and hypocritical and self-serving “interpretations” of “relevant” Scripture could possibly be a lot more about bias and a lot less about Scripture.

You would rather kick openly gay, accepting, proud gay people out of the clergy rather than pay attention to your own theology, which says that people become ministers because they have been called to the ministry by G. No one becomes a minister by going down to the mall and asking for an application at the holy recruiters. Maybe G is trying to tell you something about what he actually thinks, instead of what YOU think he thinks, bound as you are by your bibliolatry and self idolatry. You actually think that you speak for G, and that his message is contained within you.

In short, you would rather add to the darkness in the world than add to the light, add to the lies than add to the truth, add to the hate and the fear rather than the love that you keep proclaiming you feel so strongly for the people you seem to hate so much.

KANSAS CITY, Kansas (CNN) -- Army Spc. Jeremy Hall was raised Baptist.

Army Spc. Jeremy Hall, who was raised Baptist but is now an atheist, says the military violated his religious freedom.

Like many Christians, he said grace before dinner and read the Bible before bed. Four years ago when he was deployed to Iraq, he packed his Bible so he would feel closer to God.

He served two tours of duty in Iraq and has a near perfect record. But somewhere between the tours, something changed. Hall, now 23, said he no longer believes in God, fate, luck or anything supernatural.

Hall said he met some atheists who suggested he read the Bible again. After doing so, he said he had so many unanswered questions that he decided to become an atheist.

His sudden lack of faith, he said, cost him his military career and put his life at risk. Hall said his life was threatened by other troops and the military assigned a full-time bodyguard to protect him out of fear for his safety. Watch why Hall says his lack of faith almost got him killed »

In March, Hall filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, among others. In the suit, Hall claims his rights to religious freedom under the First Amendment were violated and suggests that the United States military has become a Christian organization.

"I think it's utterly and totally wrong. Unconstitutional," Hall said.

Hall said there is a pattern of discrimination against non-Christians in the military.

Two years ago on Thanksgiving Day, after refusing to pray at his table, Hall said he was told to go sit somewhere else. In another incident, when he was nearly killed during an attack on his Humvee, he said another soldier asked him, "Do you believe in Jesus now?"

Hall isn't seeking compensation in his lawsuit -- just the guarantee of religious freedom in the military. Eventually, Hall was sent home early from Iraq and later returned to Fort Riley in Junction City, Kansas, to complete his tour of duty.

He also said he missed out on promotions because he is an atheist.

"I was told because I can't put my personal beliefs aside and pray with troops I wouldn't make a good leader," Hall said.

Michael Weinstein, a retired senior Air Force officer and founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, is suing along with Hall. Weinstein said he's been contacted by more than 8,000 members of the military, almost all of them complaining of pressure to embrace evangelical Christianity.

"Our Pentagon, our Pentacostalgon, is refusing to realize that when you put the uniform on, there's only one religious faith: patriotism," Weinstein said.

Religious discrimination is a violation of the First Amendment and is also against military policy. The Pentagon refused to discuss specifics of Hall's case -- citing the litigation. But Deputy Undersecretary Bill Carr said complaints of evangelizing are "relatively rare." He also said the Pentagon is not pushing one faith among troops.

"If an atheist chose to follow their convictions, absolutely that's acceptable," said Carr. "And that's a point of religious accommodation in department policy, one may hold whatever faith, or may hold no faith."

Weinstein said he doesn't buy it and points to a promotional video by a group called Christian Embassy. The video, which shows U.S. generals in uniform, was shot inside the Pentagon. The generals were subsequently reprimanded.

Another group, the Officers' Christian Fellowship, has representatives on nearly all military bases worldwide. Its vision, which is spelled out on the organization's Web site, reads, "A spiritually transformed military, with ambassadors for Christ in uniform empowered by the Holy Spirit."

Weinstein has a different interpretation.

"Their purpose is to have Christian officers exercise Biblical leadership to raise up a godly army," he says.

But Carr said the military's position is clear.

"Proselytizing or advancing a religious conviction is not what the nation would have us do and it's not what the military does," Carr said. The U.S. Justice Department is expected to respond to Hall's lawsuit this week. In the meantime, he continues to work in the military police unit at Fort Riley and plans to leave as soon as his tour of duty expires next year.

Why haven't these assholes been arrested yet?

Phase II

What. The. Fuck.

BBC Story on Senate Committee Findings

The Daily Show Story on Senate Committee Findings

Why are we not hearing about this? Why aren't we rioting in the streets? Why aren't we DEMANDING that our politicians be indicted? I don't care if Bush IS leaving office in a few months - it's not too late to impeach and prosecute his sorry ass.

I want to know, from our country's watchdogs (aka the Media), WHY did I have to hear about this from the BBC and COMEDY CENTRAL?! The 10-second MSNBC clip was a start, but you have to tell us the whole story! This is repulsive. When I first heard about this yesterday, I felt sick. Everyone should.

Our president and vice president colluded to deceive us into war. Many of us suspected this all along, but now our own government is telling us it's true! What's next? Are they going to start renaming the days of the week or writing books that we're required to read?

We need to start acting, folks. We are on dangerous ground when our president lies to us in order to start a war that benefits him and his cronies financially.

I don't want to sound like a reactionary, but this is scary stuff and most people seem disinterested. I wish more people cared about American politics than American Idol...

Kent Hovind

Holy crap! I knew this guy was a douchebag, but I had no idea he was such a nut job, too.

Kent Hovind

Abortion for fun and profit!

So the title of this post is a little glib, I admit, but when it comes down to it, fundamental Christians and Jews oppose abortion because it violates the sixth commandment (5th if you're Catholic). Y'know, that whole "Thou shall not murder" thing. Picky picky.

So recently, someone pointed me to Exodus 21-22:
"When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine."

According to the OT, abortion is an offense punished by fine. So here's an idea, let's up the cost of abortions by, say $50 (just an arbitrary number I pulled out of some pink unicorn's butt - not too high, but enough to add up and make a difference). We'll be putting a $50 "fine" on those who choose to have abortions, thus satisfying the Biblical requirement.

But what will we do with that $50, you ask? I'll tell you. Every time someone pays for an abortion, that extra $50 fine will go into a fund that provides funding for programs such as sex ed, STD awareness, AIDS treatments, teen pregnancy, etc. Let's use those fines from abortion to help create a society in which abortion may no longer be needed.


Meh...just rambling and putting some thoughts out there...

I hate to start with links but...

Facts aren't always true you know.

So...welcome. I will put up a bit of an intro in a day or two. Enjoy the stories for now.