jaysays.com |

because simon isn’t cool anymore.

Obama Puts Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in the Closet

March 29, 2009 By: jaysays Category: DADT, LGBT News

In a sad and twisted moment, the Obama Administration has decided to delay the repeal of the military’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy until 2010.  The policy, implemented during the Clinton Administration, prevents gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.  Should it become known that they are homosexual, they loose their jobs.

This turn reeks the foulness that was the Clinton Administration – court the gays, liberals and progressives, get their votes, then continue to deny them the very thing that was promised, blatantly.

You may recall Robert Gates’ YouTube video wherein he was asked if the administration would repeal the current Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy.  His response was simple, yet to the point, “Yes.”  But now, excuses for not overturning the policy seem to be all the action being taken by the administration:

This is a considerable slap in the face after the U.S. finally decided to sign the U.N. Declaration calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality.  Although a positive move forward, the administration stated that the signing of the declaration would have no impact on existing U.S. law – presumably should it have had an effect, the U.S. would have continued the policy of bigotry and left the declaration on human rights unsigned.

Upon completion of this post, I will go out to my car, which has proudly displayed an Obama pin in the rear view mirror since the election, and remove it.  I may even run over it a few times (100 or so) just to make sure my point is made.  To Obama, to America, to the free “god” loving citizens of the world, I am nothing if I am not denied.  Yet they demand my respect, my complacency and flinch at any signs of anger or resentment for what this country, it’s people and the present and past administrations are doing.

Some may say that we should be patient.  Some may say that overturning Don’t Ask Don’t Tell or providing any rights denied LGBT people should wait due to the pressing matters of the economy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the overall chaos the world has fallen into; however, there comes a time when we have to demand human rights and decency be put first in the list of our priorities, otherwise, something else will always be more important.

VIDEO: Evangelical Teachings of “TRUTH”

March 03, 2009 By: jaysays Category: Commentary, Religion

I’ve been contemplating this project for a while – Should I, do a video slide show?  Do a video monologue?  Use puppets?  All of that seemed complex and I wanted the message to be clear.  The fact remains that Evangelical Christians continue to abuse biblical text and the “authority” bestowed upon them by “God” to keep people other than themselves down.  But how do you express that in an honest and forthright way?  I attempt to with this video:

Inauguration Declares Equality for All – Except Gays

January 21, 2009 By: jaysays Category: Discrimination, LGBT News

My hope for enjoying the inauguration as an American and citizen of the world was lost when, openly gay Bishop Gene Robinson’s invocation was not aired due to a “misunderstanding” between HBO and the Obama administration.  The Obama inauguration committee apparently “mistakenly” advised HBO (the network with exclusive broadcast rights) that this very politically charged invocation by Robinson which was seen by many as Obama’s effort to include the gay community, was part of the pre-show and should not air.  I was sick.  I kept imagining how such a mistake could be made in the spirit of inclusion.  Tuesday came and, having took the day off work for the inauguration, I sat myself in front of the TV to watch the event and hope for some sort of “apology” and recognition of all of us as part of this country.  Instead, what I received was a message of equality and diversity, in Black and White.

By now you’ve all heard the controversy regarding Rick Warren’s invitation to deliver the invocation at the Presidential Inauguration.  Many LGBT activists and their allies called the Obama administration out on his invitation to Warren.  Warren, who compared gay marriage to pedophilia, incest and polygamy, did deliver the invocation.  In true religious hypocracy, he said:

Help us, oh God, to remember that we are Americans. United not by race or religion or by blood, but to our commitment to freedom and justice for all. When we focus on ourselves, when we fight each other, when we forget you, forgive us.

When we presume that our greatness and our prosperity is ours alone, forgive us. When we fail to treat our fellow human beings and all the earth with the respect that they deserve, forgive us. And as we face these difficult days ahead, may we have a new birth of clarity in our aims, responsibility in our actions, humility in our approaches and civility in our attitudes—even when we differ.

I died a little inside and the inauguration – what was supposed to be the greatest moment in my life as it relates to the greatness of the United States was now nothing but meaningless sidebar.  Warren, asking God to forgive when “we fail to treat our fellow human beings… with the respect that they deserve…” while he continually fails to treat a large segment of human beings with ANY respect, reminded me of the man who beats the hell out of his wife every night only to apologize the next morning – over and over again.  Stop asking God to forgive you for your wrongs Mr. Warren and start doing something to earn forgiveness from those you are holding under the water.

I then spent the remainder of the inauguration thinking too much about how the statement “equality for all” was met with such great applause – how comments about the end of discrimination and segregation were met with such great fanfare – yet people are still suffering under the foot of those that rule.  We build a wall against the Latinos, we profile the migrant worker, we bash gays and lesbians and disenfranchise our transgendered brothers and sisters – all the while we celebrate our great victory in the civil rights movement, a movement which is now being defined as “black and white” rather than “we the people.”

The following is what you didn’t see:

Lawsuit Filed to Remove “God” from Inauguration

January 09, 2009 By: jaysays Category: Commentary, Religion

As Rick Warren prepares to take the stage at the Obama Inaugeration, a lawsuit was filed naming Plaintiffs as:

Michael Newdow; Mel Lipman; Dan Barker And Annie-Laurie Gaylor; Marie Castle; Herb Silverman; Kirk Hornbeck; Catharine Lamm; Richard Wingrove; Christopher Arntzen; John Stoltenberg; Katherine Laclair; Louis Altman; “Unnamed Children;” The American Humanist Association (“AHA”); The Freedom From Religion Foundation (“FFRF”); Minnesota Atheists; Atheists For Human Right[s] (“AHFR”); Atheist Alliance International (“AAI”); New Orleans Secular Humanist Association (“NOSHA”)

and Defendants as:

Hon. John Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice Of The U.S. Supreme Court; Presidential Inaugural Committee (“PIC”); Emmett Beliveau, Executive Director, Pic; Joint Congressional Committee On Inaugural Ceremonies (“JCCIC”); Senator Dianne Feinstein, Chairperson, JCCIC; Armed Forces Inaugural Committee (“AFIC”); Major General Richard J. Rowe Jr., Chairperson, AFIC; Rev. Rick Warren; Rev. Joe Lowery.

The lawsuit has spawned much controversy due to the outrage held by many members of the LGBT community to the non-gay friendly Rick Warren’s appointment to lead the invocation.  In one posting regarding the lawsuit, the author states:

Those who were responsible for the lawsuit, these individual atheists and their organizations,The American Humanist Association; The Freedom From Religion Foundation ; Minnesota Atheists; Atheists For Human Rights; Atheists Alliance International; New Orleans Secular Humanist Association, coupled with the gay terroristic activities surrounding the passing of Proposition 8 in California, and Rick Jacobs, who chairs the California’s Courage Campaign and the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender), are the abject clearinghouse for America’s immortality and anti-America sentiment. These groups are nothing less than moral nazis and terrorists.  See: Postworthy

Try as I might I can’t decide which group will suffer the most from the association.  Will the reputation of the LGBT community suffer from the association with the atheist organizations the most or will the atheist associations suffer the association with the LGBT community the most?  As a gay atheist, I find myself battling for equality on two fronts – my lack of religion and my lack of heterosexual desires.  The primary difference between the two is, although I did not choose to be a gay man, I did choose to “come out” – whereas I not only chose to “come out” as an atheist, but I also chose to “be” an atheist.

Further to that, I’m sick of the inappropriate use of the word terrorists when referring to the actions and reactions of the LGBT community to the passage of proposition 8.  I remember a time in America where terrorists where generally those doing the attacking, not those defending themselves from attackers.  I refer you to another post regarding resin poisoning threats against gay bars in Seattle.

Near the beginning of the Rick Warren scandal, I made this post about how we [LGBT people] are upset that the prayer leader is against civil equality for homosexuals, but could care less about the fact that the Government is again sanctioning religion.  Looks like someone was listening.

Supporters of the oath of office, which has “traditionally” included the words “Under God,” claim that it was inserted into the oath by George Washington – this claim is debatable as many believe it is a myth.  As a side note, “Under God” was not added to the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954 due to pressure from the Knights of Columbus.

Gay Hater Rick Warren Chosen to Give Invocation at Inauguration

December 18, 2008 By: jaysays Category: Discrimination, LGBT News

Many people in the LGBT Community have expressed their outrage over the choice of Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration of President-Elect Barack Obama.  Mr. Warren, being a conservative pastor at Saddleback Church, has expressed opinions against abortion rights, same-sex marriage and stem cell research.  Because of his conservative viewpoint and exclusionary attitude toward non-heterosexuals, LGBT activists have shown deep outrage over his selection.

But the real questions shouldn’t be why Mr. Obama chose to have Mr. Warren deliver the invocation, instead we should be asking, why, in a country with separation of church and state, an invocation is being said at all to kick-start a Presidential Inauguration?  It’s simple.  In spite of the ideology of separation of church and state, the United States of America has become increasingly theocratic.  Legislation and regulations are no longer based upon what is just and right in the eyes of man, but what is just and right in the eyes of the church.

Obama has defended his selection of Mr. Warren stating that it is part of his political promise to include all Americans during his presidency; however, he has not made any statements regarding allowing religion to be part of an otherwise political ceremony.

See: Obama Defends Invocation by Conservative Pastor | 44 | washingtonpost.com.

Christmas Banned by Purtian Christians

December 15, 2008 By: jaysays Category: Commentary, Religion

Few realize that due to Puritan influence in the 1600’s, Massachusetts banned Christmas.  The rationale behind this was three fold:

  1. The ritual reminded the Puritans of the Church of England, which they were escaping;
  2. They didn’t consider Christmas as a religious holiday as it did not coincide with the birth of Christ as purported; and
  3. The Puritans frowned on drinking, feasting and playing games – which was a big part of the Christmas holiday.

The law was only active for 22 years and read:

For preventing disorders, arising in several places within this jurisdiction by reason of some still observing such festivals as were superstitiously kept in other communities, to the great dishonor of God and offense of others: it is therefore ordered by this court and the authority thereof that whosoever shall be found observing any such day as Christmas or the like, either by forbearing of labor, feasting, or any other way, upon any such account as aforesaid, every such person so offending shall pay for every such offence five shilling as a fine to the county.

So to all those proposing religious influence within our government by banning same-sex marriage, I say:

Merry Christmas.

Gay Mob Runs Christians out of Castro

November 20, 2008 By: jaysays Category: Stupid Things People Say About Gays

Recently, a group of “Christians” were run out of San Francisco’s Castro District by a “Gay Mob”.  I love the elevation this story has received in calling it a “gay mob.”  Video footage of the incident shows a group of people being escorted by police while a group of homosexuals (and/or those supporting homosexual rights) are chanting things such as “stay out of our neighborhoods if you don’t like us.”  Christian right-wing organizations are appalled and outraged that they were not allowed by this mob to express their religious freedom.  Well, there’s a taste of your own medicine for you.  This incident has inspired this issue of “Stupid Things People Say About Gays”.

Cute how they tell us to “stay out of our neighbor hood if you don’t like us” My response, stay out of my country if you don’t like us! OUR country was Christian before it was filled with fags.
They are allowed to be disgusting in public, we are allowed to pray in public.

We have the last laugh in all of this, they’re the ones with no future. — genesis311311

First, I feel the need to say (although it may be considered a “bounces off me and sticks to you” sort of argument) that the welcoming of the “Christian” group into the Castro District was very similar to the welcoming bestowed upon homosexuals by “Christian” churches.  Everyone is welcome in the “Christian” church as long as you become an “ex-gay.”  The torment the “Christian” church berated on the homosexual is far more horrifying than “stay out” if you don’t like us.

Secondly, your comment stating “stay out of my country if you don’t like us” and using the argument that the United States was founded as a “Christian” nation obviously demonstrates that you have never been to a history class outside of “Christian” school (or just didn’t pay attention), never read a book not acceptable by the “Christian” teaching and have never had an independent thought which did not conform entirely to the way you are taught.  Examples of the founding of the United States not being on behalf of “Christianity” include:

  • The Declaration of Independence begins, “”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”  I note that is says “they are endowed by their Creator” rather than they are endowed by my God.  Although it is unarguable that most of the founding fathers were “Christian”, it seems that they intended to leave God out of the letter of the law.
  • The United States Constitution fails entirely to mention God.  It is an obvious omission and certainly was not an error.  Most historians and even theologians believe that the omission was intended to prevent a theocracy wherein the church would have more power than the President – as was the case with the Catholic church’s involvement in politics in Europe.
  • “In God We Trust” was placed on currency in the U.S. during the Civil War, not upon the founding of our Nation.
  • “Under God” was not in the Pledge of Allegiance until the McCarthy era [1954] when it was added.
  • The Treaty of Tripoli, signed in 1797 (note: that was not long after the 1776 “founding” of our nation) by Pickering and then President John Adams  states, “As the Government of the United States…is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion–as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility of Musselmen–and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” [emphasis added]
  • In 1786, an Act for Establishing Religious Freedom (Jefferson again) was passed in the Assembly of Virginia.  It stated, in parts:

…that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions

…that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world…

…that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles, on the supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency, will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own… [emphasis added]

…that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right.

See: “The Writings of Thomas Jefferson Memorial Edition” (ME), Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert Ellery Bergh, Editors, 20 Volumes., Washington, D.C., 1903-04. Volume II, Appendix, pp 300-303

I highly recommend those that feel the United States was founded as a religious nation to see Our Godless Constitution, by Brooke Allen and the countless books, articles and information available (and cited above).  I also refer them to the U.S. Constitution for more precedence regarding this issue.