Pam Spaulding's Blog, page 82

The Blend 2012 GOP Clown Car Update

Good lord, the GOP has clowns stepping all over one another to hop into the 2012 Clown Car.

At the top of the list is Mike Huckabee, who is apparently trying to sound as deranged as possible in order to grab The Base (of Stupidity). The former Arkansas governor apparently has little control over himself after his incredible statement that Barack Obama "grew up in Kenya" (he now says he that he "misspoke"). And he's got issues -- footage of him has surfaces saying he only answers to his wife and crazed fundie Janet "bringing a fetus to testify" Porter, yet he's still the man to beat in all of the polls. The latest:

The Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey released Wednesday night showed Huckabee winning 25 percent of likely Republican voters, followed closely by Mitt Romney at 21 percent. Newt Gingrich garners 13 percent of the vote and Sarah Palin 12 percent, according to the poll, but no other GOP hopeful tops single-digits.

Well the above news cannot be music to the ears of either Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich, potential Clown Car occupants who are apparently doing too much jockeying for a seat position, even by Faux News standards:

Fox News announced Wednesday that it is suspending the contracts of political contributors Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum because both have demonstrated that they are seriously considering running for president.

Dianne Brandi, the network's executive vice president of legal and business affairs, said in an interview that the channel made the move because Gingrich aides told Fox News executives that the former House speaker is stepping up his exploration of a presidential bid.

While Gingrich is not expected to announce that he is forming a federal exploratory committee this week, he is expected to say in Georgia on Thursday that he is meeting with advisors to explore seeking the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, a Gingrich aide said.

Santorum, a former senator from Pennsylvania, has indicated that he plans to participate in Republican primary debates, Brandi said, "so that leads us to believe he is seriously considering running."

Brandi said the network acted out of journalistic principle.

Did you have to re-read that last sentence out of disbelief? Hold the phone - both Huckabee and Sarah Palin are still on the Faux News payroll!! What a joke. Speaking of Palin, her protege, Michele Bachmann is already showing signs of oxygen-depleted brain function from blowing up too many Clown Car balloons for her arrival. Look at this delusion:

Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., thinks she might be in the wrong House.

She knows the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives is allowing her party to vote to cut spending and take the first steps toward reversing the Obama agenda.

But she also knows it's not enough, and is quick to tell party activists that they'll have to win the White House next year if they really want to change the government's course. And she thinks she might be just the one to do it.

...She once said the media should investigate the loyalty of members of Congress. She said that Obama might create "re-education camps" to indoctrinate young people. She repeated as fact an erroneous report that President Barack Obama's recent trip to India cost $200 million a day. She's said that FDR turned a "manageable" recession into the Great Depression.

The lunacy is of course shared by her cheerleaders. Take this SC woman who's taken a hit off of the Clown Car pipe:

"Polished . . . sophisticated," said Peggy Upchurch, a Republican from Lake Wylie, S.C. "She's not the crazy right-wing person I was led to believe."

***

Meanwhile, I don't know what to think about this WSJ commentary by Darrell Delamaide, "Can a fat man get elected president - GOP hopefuls defy conventional wisdom on looks." I guess it is a relevant question in this age of bulemia, anorexia and the myth that fat=stupid, lazy, ignorant, etc., but given the subjects in this article I'd have to counter that their weight is the least of their problems. The WSJ photo montage selection doesn't help matters...

The Republicans seem ready to defy, or at least challenge, that conventional wisdom with their lineup of presidential prospects for 2012. It is, of course, politically incorrect to speak of a candidate's physical attributes - even though sometimes it is, if you'll pardon the pun, the elephant in the room.

So we come to the current crop of potential presidential candidates in the Republican Party. Several of the party darlings are well outside the weight norm of what is considered telegenic - New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

An overall flattering portrait of Christie in last weekend's New York Times Magazine nonetheless felt compelled to state the following: "Chris Christie is fat. You can use nicer words if you want - rotund, portly, big-boned - but it is what it is, and the governor will be the first to tell you so."

Christie could slim down to, say, a Kevin James in "The King of Queens" and be a conventionally presentable candidate. (James is a TV and movie actor, after all.) As for Barbour, he's got much heavier baggage than his weight; ditto, Gingrich. And Huckabee may opt to stay, uh, heavy and happy on TV.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is probably the most presidential-looking of the potential male candidates in the Republican camp, in terms of height and weight. (Don't forget hair - it's a good bet we'd elect an overweight president before a bald one.) We don't yet know much about how winning female candidates will look.

Oh, I have a good idea about any female prez candidate -- you won't see a heavy-set woman elected president any time soon. Any woman with a chance will have a low body mass index, and be focus group tested for hair, clothing choice, makeup, everything 10x worse than what a man would have to put up with. And she simply cannot have an ample bust and/or booty, since that will clearly throw the media into a misogynist tizzy.

A Big Frackin' Deal: For The First Time, More Americans Support Marriage Equality Than Oppose It.

Last week, the General Social Survey (GSS) released data for 2010. According to Sociologist Darren Sherkat of Southern Illinois University, who's taken a close look at the dataset, for the first time, more Americans support than oppose same-sex marriage.

Here's the way the data for legalizing same-sex marriage looks from 1988 through 2010:

As he puts it

For the first time, a legitimate scientific survey is showing very clearly that the proportion of Americans who agree or strongly agree that same sex marriage should be legal exceeds the proportion who either oppose or strongly oppose marital rights.

Crossposted from Daily Kos
Who is being surveyed? According to Wikipedia, more than 50,000 non-institutionalized adults:

The General Social Survey (GSS) is a sociological survey used to collect data on demographic characteristics and attitudes of residents of the United States. The survey is conducted face-to-face with an in-person interview by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, of a randomly-selected sample of adults (18+) who are not institutionalized. The survey was conducted every year from 1972 to 1994 (except in 1979, 1981, and 1992). Since 1994, it has been conducted every other year. The survey takes about 90 minutes to administer. As of 2008 27 national samples with 53,043 respondents and 5,364 variables had been collected.

This differs from some other polling on the matter, such as recent polling done in various states by, for example, PPP (in RI, DE, CO, and CA), as these polls only query registered or likely voters, not all adults.

Still, two polling outfits that have polled regularly on this issue, CBS News and Pew Research Center, also ask adults, not voters, and their results point the same direction, if not yet clearly illustrating more support than opposition.

Pew most recent polling:

"Do you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally?"

Favor: 43%, Oppose 47%

CBS most recent polling:

"Which comes closest to your view? Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry. OR, Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry. OR, There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple's relationship."

Marriage: 40%, Civil Unions: 30%, No recognition: 25%

Whatever the 'true' numbers are, the trend is unmistakable.

According to the data from the GSS, support for marriage equality has risen since 1988 at a rate of 1.5% per year, while opposition has decreased at a rate of 1.4% per year. By the time November, 2012 rolls around, it is fair to say (if the GSS trend continues), at the date of the next Presidential election, almost exactly 50% of Americans will support marriage equality while only 37% will oppose it, a huge spread.

As a correspondent just put it to me in an email

Imagine where those numbers could go if a certain gifted orator who also answers to the title "Constitutional Law Professor," "Fierce Advocate," "LEADER of the Free World," among others, put his mind to moving them?

Yes, the President could be leading here, instead of evolving at approximately the rate the polls are mutating. Instead of waiting for the cosmic ray that will transform him into a marriage equality advocate, he could be influencing public opinion and guaranteeing that the polling will indicate a majority in support of the fundamental right to marriage.

You did a great thing by all but declaring DOMA unconstitutional in deference to the 14th amendment, Mr. President. Now is the time to take the second half of that great leap, and declare to the world that you believe that the fundamental right to marry the person of your choosing is also embedded there, just as your parents' right to marry was.

NJ court awards gay couple $3.15M after Burger King visit serves up 'a whopper of a hate crime'

The King has turned a royal blind eye to a hate crime at one of its franchises.

[A] New Jersey court awarded $3.15 million to 46-year-old Noel Robichaux and 43-year-old Peter Casbar. The gay couple entered a Union City Burger King in 2007, and a trio of employees, including Angel Caraballo, 28, and Christopher Soto, 19, verbally abused them and then chased them outside and pummeled them. Caraballo and Soto pleaded guilty to aggravated assault.

"They beat us, they spit on us, and they threw us around like rag dolls," Robichaux said. "It was insane. We were astounded by the words they used. I was floored by the amount of anger and hate."

...Indeed, Burger King Corporation was not named in the lawsuit. But the chain could pull the franchise license as other chains have done. Or it could at least distance itself from this sort of behavior. Better, it seems to blame Food Service Properties Corp. and Union City Restaurants Corp., which owned the Union City location and seven Burger King franchises at the time of the crime.

Steven Goldstein, chair and CEO of Garden State Equality, a New Jersey-based advocate group, told New Times: "This was a whopper of a hate crime. Truly one of the worst cases of a hate crime to happen in the LGBT community. We're looking to see if Burger King appeals this ruling. There can be no question that employees of Burger King beat a same-sex couple to a pulp. We will be aghast if Burger King appeals this. If they do appeal, I would imagine that everyone in the LGBT community would think twice before going into any Burger King again?."

A snapshot of the movement's organzations in a new report by the Movement Advancement Project

A new report was released by the Movement Advancement Project (MAP) takes a look at the national LGBT movement’s finances and operations.  

Among its findings: revenue is down a fifth, and programming expenses are being cut, but organizations are efficient in their fundraising and still show strong signs of overall financial health. Did you know that fewer than 4% of LGBT adults donate to the movement? More info.

Organizations working in the movement for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) equality are showing strong signs of financial health and operating efficiency in the face of a cumulative 20 percent revenue decline from 2008 ($202.7 million)  to 2009 ($161.3 million), according to a first-of-its-kind report by the Movement Advancement Project (MAP).

The “2010 National LGBT Movement Report,” available at www.lgbtmap.org, examines 39 leading organizations of the national LGBT movement comprising 69 percent of the budgets of all LGBT social justice advocacy groups. MAP found that organizations were highly adaptive in meeting the challenges of the difficult economy and have responded in part by scaling back their programs and taking other steps to reduce expenses to better match revenue.

“This report shows that the national LGBT movement is facing a tough fundraising climate due to the economic downturn,” said Ineke Mushovic, executive director of MAP. “But the groups we analyzed are adapting well by taking steps to respond to the downturn and showing impressive financial and organizational stability as a result.”

The report follows two years of both advances (in federal administrative policies, marriage and relationship recognition, hate crime legislation, open military service and public opinion) and setbacks (in efforts to ward off anti-LGBT laws in several states, growing concern about youth bullying and violence, and a stalled attempt to pass a federal employment non-discrimination law) in the movement for LGBT equality.

Among the report’s key findings:

* The 39 participating organizations’ combined 2009 expenses of $165.6 million are only half of the combined annual expenses of just the 10 largest organizations working to oppose LGBT equality ($333.1 million).

* Many organizations are scaling back their programs in order to align with available resources. Combined 2010 budgets ($135.4 million) are down 18 percent from 2009 expenses ($165.6 million).

* General financial health remains strong. Organizations have good and rising average working capital (a measure of cash reserves), declining but still-healthy liquidity ratios (funds to cover current obligations), and steady cash and net assets (which speaks to institutional durability).

* Movement groups are highly efficient in their fundraising and programming operations, with all 39 participants exceeding the efficiency standards of both the American Institute of Philanthropy and the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance. An average of 79 percent of expenses is spent on programs and services, 9 percent on management and general expenses, and only 12 percent on fundraising.

* Less than 4 percent of all LGBT adults in the U.S. donated $35 or more to these LGBT organizations. While organizations are generally effective at retaining smaller donors (those giving $35 or more) year over year, the number of larger donors (those giving $1,000 or more) is dropping and not easily replaced.

* The staffs of participating organizations are diverse, roughly mirroring the broader U.S. population: 32 percent identify as people of color (12 percent African American, 12 percent Latino/a, 7 percent Asian/Pacific Islander and 1 percent Native American or other). Also, 46 percent are women and 6 percent identify as transgender.

Donors to the movement said this is an important time to expand support for ongoing efforts to achieve equality. “With organizations seeing revenue drop by a fifth, protecting LGBT Americans will require increased engagement with existing and new donors,” said Michael Fleming, executive director of the David Bohnett Foundation. “In the face of efforts to eliminate our freedom to marry, and with other anti-equality initiatives under way, we have the opportunity and the need to invest in organizations working to ensure equality. It is critical that more supporters step up, and we now have the data to help people do just that.”

The Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD)—which is currently suing to overturn the anti-gay federal Defense of Marriage Act and helping press for marriage and transgender inclusive non-discrimination protections in several New England states—notes that the economic pinch comes at a critical moment for the movement’s pursuit of equality. “Like most of our colleague organizations, we’ve definitely experienced belt-tightening in the past couple of years,” said GLAD Executive Director Lee Swislow. “The challenge is that we’re in a time of such great need for both legal advocacy and public education that this work simply has to move forward. We absolutely must be in Rhode Island, Maine, Massachusetts, the federal courts and more, and with even greater capacity. Our ability to both bring in new donors and expand the support of those who already invest in this work will be crucial to sustaining and accelerating our progress toward equality.”

The list of organizations participating is below the fold.
The groups participating:

Participating Organizations:
ACLU LGBT & AIDS Project
CenterLink
COLAGE
Council for Global Equality
Empire State Pride Agenda
Equality California
Equality Federation
Equality Forum
Family Equality Council
Freedom to Marry
Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD)
Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD)
Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund and Leadership Institute
Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN)
Gay-Straight Alliance Network
GroundSpark
Human Rights Campaign (HRC)
Immigration Equality & Immigration Equality Action Fund
In the Life Media
Lambda Legal
Log Cabin Republicans & Liberty Education Forum
MassEquality
National Black Justice Coalition
National Center for Lesbian Rights
National Center for Transgender Equality
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
National Youth Advocacy Coalition
New York City Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project
Out & Equal Workplace Advocates
The Palm Center
Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG)
Point Foundation
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network
Services & Advocacy for GLBT Elders (SAGE)
Soulforce
Sylvia Rivera Law Project
Transgender Law Center
The Trevor Project
(One organization wished to remain anonymous)

Someone call homophobe Robert Knight a waaaaaambulance

crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters

Okay, I admit it. One of the side benefits of the Obama Administration's decision not to defend DOMA in the courts is how it has sent the religious right into orbit.

One person in particular who doesn't seem to be happy is one of the original crafters of DOMA, Robert Knight. When he helped to craft DOMA,  Knight allied himself with the so-called major religious right groups like the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America.

But now, as a senior fellow of the American Civil Rights Union (what exactly is that anyway), Knight isn't too happy with the Obama Administration's decision.

I mean we're talking practically apoplectic:

Allow me to take off the gloves. As one who helped draft the first version of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), I regard Obama's order on Feb. 23 to Attorney General Eric Holder to abandon DOMA's legal defense as lawless, reckless, arrogant and a violation of his oath of office. I think it is an impeachable offense.

I'm just warming up.

Obama, like Hillary Clinton and countless other prominent Democrats -- and some useful idiot Republicans -- have been pretending to support marriage while doing everything in their power to undermine it.

First of all, I am so sure that the Obama Administration is shaking in its boots that Knight "took off the gloves" to get nasty.

Knight's piece gets funnier:

If you doubt what they intend, check out Brian Camenker's shocking exposé, "What same-sex 'marriage' has done to Massachusetts." Mr. Camenker, who heads the group MassResistance, is warning the nation that there will be no quarter for those who think homosexuality is wrong and that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Putting Catholic Charities out of the adoption business was just the beginning, followed quickly by brainwashing children in government schools and denying people jobs

Way to Knight. Cite a known anti-gay hate group - Mass Resistance - and include some nonsense about brainwashing. The subtlety of  the brainwashing statement is hilarious, seeing that Knight has, on more than one occasion, accused the lgbt community of "going after children." And not necessarily to "brainwash" them if you catch my drift.
Knight then repeats the usual nonsense about evil gay people wanting to ruin society and have lots of illicit sex, i.e. the usual shrill nonsense which served him well while he ran with the "big dogs" at the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America

Then he says the following, which caught my attention:

Hoover Institute research fellow Stanley Kurtz has chronicled the acceleration of societal uncoupling from marriage in Sweden:

"Marriage is slowly dying in Scandinavia. A majority of children in Sweden and Norway are born out of wedlock....Not coincidentally, these countries have had something close to full gay marriage for a decade or more. Same-sex marriage has locked in and reinforced an existing Scandinavian trend toward the separation of marriage and parenthood."

That part really interested me because in 2004, I had the "pleasure" of meeting Knight during an event at a local college in my area (he is a really, really, really short guy) and asked him directly in front of a crowd of people why would he used Stanley Kurtz's work even after it was debunked during a Congressional hearing when Kurtz himself, under questioning by Congressman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., admitted that he couldn't prove his argument.

I learned two things that night. First, religious right spokespeople become very tongue-tied when they are called on their bullshit, especially in front of a group.  I don't think I have ever seen a white man turn that shade of red.

The second is that it's amazing how these folks will lie with impunity. I learned that lesson in a personal one-on-one with Knight after the event when I was able to ask him why he used discredited work to demonize the lgbt community. Specifically, I was talking about the work of infamous researcher Paul Cameron.

His answer to me - “Yes we have used his research. So what?”

 It's nice to put that sort of thing in perspective. DOMA is on its way out.  Hopefully sooner than later, it's going to be put on the deceased list.

Much like the career of a lying homophobe, who shall remain nameless.

So what, indeed.

Related posts:

Anti-gay activist - Lie told about Obama's Tucson speech is mere difference of opinion

Robert Knight: DADT was repealed because Republicans wouldn't get gross about homosexuality

Westboro hate-mongers win Supreme Court suit

Update from Lurleen: You can read the SCOTUS opinion here (PDF).

From this morning's Seattle Times:

The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the First Amendment protects fundamentalist church members who mount attention-getting, anti-gay protests outside military funerals.

The court voted 8-1 in favor of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan. The decision upheld an appeals court ruling that threw out a $5 million judgment to the father of a dead Marine who sued church members after they picketed his son's funeral.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for the court. Justice Samuel Alito dissented.

"What Westboro said, in the whole context of how and where it chose to say it, is entitled to 'special protection' under the First Amendment," Roberts wrote, "and that protection cannot be overcome by a jury finding that the picketing was outrageous."

And you know what? I'm actually ok with this ruling. For one thing, free speech cannot be free if only popular expression is permitted. Suppression of speech is a dangerous thing, and you can bet that people like FRC and NOM would not hesitate to use precedent to prevent any demonstrations against their fear-mongering and lies.

And for another, this means that when the Crypt Keeper at long last dies, there will be absolutely nothing that the hate cult can do to keep away the festivities. They pissed in the bed, and I will take great delight in helping to wring out the sheets on top of them. I already have my "Fred Phelps Burns In Hell" sign ready to go.

Pastor Joe Fuiten exploits a social tragedy to vilify gays

In 2003 Washington became the first state in the nation to criminalize human trafficking.  Washington continues to be a national leader (see p. 3) in systematically tackling human trafficking crimes, with the Legislature currently considering SB 5546.  This bill is "aimed at helping law-enforcement investigations of child prostitution and human-trafficking cases", said bill sponsor Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles.

No one knows exactly how many American children are lured into prostitution ...But an estimated 300,000 to 800,000 kids, most of them girls, are forced to sell their bodies a number of times a day, according to a new book by investigative reporter, Julian Sher ...whose book, Somebody's Daughter: The Hidden Story of America's Prostituted Children and the Battle to Save Them, provides a comprehensive look at child-sex trafficking in the U.S. [snip]

"Johns get off with a little rap on the knuckles. Pimps are businessmen. They only put a 14-year-old girl on the streets because there's some middle-class guy willing to pay for sex with a 14-year-old," Sher said.

(emphasis added)

Concern over human trafficking in Washington state is not a partisan issue.  This was clear when members of the Senate Judiciary committee kept questions and comments about SB 5546 constructive during the February 11th public hearing of the bill and then voted unanimously to approve it in a subsequent meeting.  (Click on the picture to the right for video of the public hearing, which starts at time mark 22:20.)  Senate Judiciary committee member Senator Pam Roach, a radical-right conservative with anger issues, is particularly notorious for haranguing witnesses during legislative hearings.  That even she sat mute during the public hearing on a bill sponsored by her progressive committee colleague Senator Kohl-Welles speaks volumes to the sincerity with which Washington's legislators regard the human trafficking problem.

What an incongruent shock, then, to receive Pastor Joe Fuiten's February 24th e-mail titled Needed: A Consistent Stance on Teen Prostitution.  An Assemblies of God pastor from the Seattle suburb of Bothell, Fuiten is so consumed by anti-gay animus that he is willing to exploit the tragedy of sex slavery in Washington in his ridiculous attempt to vilify gays.  Fuiten's e-mail features a guest column by Philip Irvin, a Seattle city employee with a



Joe Fuiten



[image error]

Philip Irvin, "a Caucasian with no African-American blood"

With a recent public forum on teenage prostitution and the ensuing media coverage there is a renewed impetus for many, including churches, to become involved in this issue. However, while we could and should devise various ways to help those enslaved in this dungeon, some perspective is called for to realize that this is not THE problem per se. Rather, teen prostitution is a consequence of the real problem which is Seattle's unrestrained sexual appetite. We need to address this malignant source if we are to effect any lasting solution to teen prostitution.

...Below are just a few of many examples of how to reduce support for Seattle's sexual appetite and thereby reduce the customer base for prostitution. As homosexuality is in the vanguard of proclaiming "sexual freedom" which results in acceptance of other sexual practices, most of the more flagrant abuses and thereby easiest targets-those on the cutting edge-relate to homosexuality.

-- Philip Irvin, quoted by Joe Fuiten

The rest of the e-mail is at the end of the post.

Reprehensible describes Fuiten's exploitation of the real suffering of others as a vehicle to vilify gays.  Utterly laughable is his feeble attempt to implicate gays in a crime perpetrated largely by heterosexual men.  Dangerous and irresponsible may best describe a pastor who avoids holding accountable the middle-class heterosexual men who buy the bodies of young women.  Men of the same class, it seems likely, as those who worship at Fuiten's church and live in Bothell's comfortable neighborhoods.

Although Fuiten pretends to be concerned about the great human tragedy of human trafficking -- specifically teenage prostitution -- his real goal is clearly to smear gays by exploiting the tragedy suffered by others.  Late in 2009 Fuiten exploited a different local tragedy in a similar cynical ploy.  He tried to link the advent of domestic partnerships to the murder of local police officers.

Sadly, what looks like a pattern of reprehensible behavior in one man may simply be a case study in the standard practice of Washington's radical right.  Recall that prior to the 2010 fall elections Fuiten joined state Senator Val Stevens and others on the Washington radical right in using the fetus as a political football in a smear campaign aimed at each others favored gubernatorial candidates.

Below is a copy of Fuiten's e-mail.  Note that although it appears to be part of his "Frankly Fuiten" series, as of this writing he has not posted it to the Frankly Fuiten web page.

Needed: A Consistent Stance

on Teen Prostitution

Needed: A Cultural-Moral Shift in Seattle

Guest Columnist

By PHILIP IRVIN

reply2philip@gmail.com

With a recent public forum on teenage prostitution and the ensuing media coverage there is a renewed impetus for many, including churches, to become involved in this issue. However, while we could and should devise various ways to help those enslaved in this dungeon, some perspective is called for to realize that this is not THE problem per se. Rather, teen prostitution is a consequence of the real problem which is Seattle's unrestrained sexual appetite. We need to address this malignant source if we are to effect any lasting solution to teen prostitution.

As examples of the problem:

? If a man dates an adult woman and gives her a bottle of wine, box of chocolates and a theater ticket to have sex, Seattle not only celebrates his sexual freedom, it has enshrined it as a sacred civil right protected by law and enforced by a savage Office for Civil rights- funded by your taxes.  However, if another man pays the cash value of these "gifts" to have sex with an underage woman is it any wonder that he asks, "What's the big deal?"  

? Seattle Municipal Code protects "a person's attitudes, preferences, beliefs and practices pertaining [to sex]" with the same amount of force and in the same venues as it protects differential treatment and disparaging remarks on the basis of race. Civil rights protection of sexual actions in some venues (e.g. adverse comments by an employer or landlord) causes corresponding social protective sanctions in others. Due to our hostile Seattle sexual culture many pastors have even become reluctant to speak out on sexual purity-Seattle is more attached to freedom of sex than freedom of religion.

? In our public schools if a teenage girl wants to have myriad sexual partners, her wishes trump parental authority and the schools will give her contraceptives without parental knowledge or consent, ensure that she receives the inevitable cures for sexually transmitted diseases and will discretely drive her to have abortions as needed. The message is clear: Seattle embraces amateur teenage prostitution; we are only chagrined by the professional kind.

? I photographed a person in a professionally crafted costume at a festival. The costume had an incredibly cute face and winning smile. People lined up to be photographed next to it and it captured the atmosphere of the event. The costume was that of an erect penus with testicles and was at the Seattle Center as part of the Gay Pridefest. What message did this costume and event convey about sexual appetite?

Rather than merely focusing on helping individual  

victims of teen prostitution, we need a cultural

transformation to address this malignant source

such as that accomplished by William Wilberforce.

Wilberforce was a member of British Parliament from 1780-1825. When he became concerned about slavery he could have used his vast resources to purchase the freedom of thousands of slaves but he did not. Instead he spent his life and resources spearheading what is considered by many to be the greatest act of compassion in human history; the abolition of the slave trade in the British Empire. When he took office Black slavery was almost universally accepted as the natural order of things but by the time he left office he and his compatriots had made slavery so odious that it could not long survive in the Empire. If we rescued ten teens from prostitution but did nothing to curb Seattle's cravings, how many girls would be recruited to replace them merely to meet market demand?

Would we not be better focusing on a cultural shift to

reduce the demand rather just rescuing individuals?

In discussing this with other Christians I've heard the objection that,

"Only God can change people's hearts!" If this is true, why does our pastor waste his time preaching a sermon to provide moral instruction if, as it is claimed, "Only God can change people's hearts?" In reply I have been told that God can use a sermon to touch people's hearts. If this then is true, is God so impotent that he cannot also use a law or policy change (such as the examples listed below) that not only provides moral instruction but also is reinforced by police power of enforcement and/or government approbation to touch people's hearts?  

The Christianese phrase, "Only God can change  

people's hearts" often means, "I refuse to  

consider the practical actions being proposed."

I have also heard the mantra that it doesn't do any good to change a person's outward actions; that an inward change of heart is needed. This is only partially true. There is an inextricable two-way link between beliefs and actions. Your beliefs affect your actions but also your actions affect your beliefs. If you were bribed to be under the teaching of an engaging preacher you would absorb at least some of what he says. If, for whatever reason, you were exposed to a steady stream of pornography it would likewise influence your sexual values. Exposing individuals to either sermons or pornography will influence beliefs. Since there is a sharp contrast between what most Christians say they believe and what they actually believe as demonstrated by their actions, most want to emphasize the importance of stated beliefs rather than actions.

James 2:17 warns that "Faith without  

works is dead" because beliefs and actions  

are so inextricably intertwined.

When laws are made they are usually controversial otherwise they would have been passed earlier. But once passed they are generally accepted and serve as a moral guide to most people and this guidepost changes people's hearts. While we would like to convince ourselves that all of our own personal values have been carefully considered before being ingested, in truth most values are indiscriminately absorbed. If we believe that Biblical values produce the greatest good for society is there any reason we should not aggressively advocate using Biblical values as the basis of our culture?

Can we really claim to be loving if we do otherwise?

Below are just a few of many examples of how to reduce support for Seattle's sexual appetite and thereby reduce the customer base for prostitution. As homosexuality is in the vanguard of proclaiming "sexual freedom" which results in acceptance of other sexual practices, most of the more flagrant abuses and thereby easiest targets-those on the cutting edge-relate to homosexuality:

? End City support of Pridefest.

Just because Pridefest is now held at the Seattle Center on City property does not mean it has to stay that way. The City could deal with this the same way it dealt with private firearms. While the Second Amendment would seem to afford some protection for gun ownership, about twenty years ago the Seattle City Council banned the use of Seattle facilities, such as the Seattle Center, for gun shows. It recently defied state law and banned guns in parks, again including the Seattle Center. Would it be unreasonable to ask them to ban the use of these same facilities for events that promoted "sexual freedom" as equally unwholesome? As a first step we could merely ask that Pridefest pay normal rent for the Seattle Center rather than be given it rent-free as a recognized, "community event."

? Oppose City financial support of "gay tourism."

In 2009 Seattle's Office of Economic Development awarded a $15,000 grant to promote "gay tourism." The jingle used was "Travel Gay Seattle - Where OUT is IN." Why not pursue a detailed accounting of how this money was spent? We could report our findings along with our recommendations to City leaders when or if similar grants were under consideration. This would at least explore whether part of their definition of "tourism" is not just a euphemism for something considerably more sleazy.

? Return sexual morality to the public schools.

If an employer distributed condoms to employees so they could have "safe sex" with each other he would be pummeled with litigation for creating a hostile work environment. Shouldn't we defend our kids from a similar hostile school environment? Is there any reason we should not seek to influence the sexual values presented and taught in school? Why not advocate having current or former teen prostitutes tell their story in schools to provide a warning of what actions and environments to avoid as well as the dire consequences of failing to heed their warning?

? End a sexual commission.

Seattle boasts a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Commission. I will not bore you with its source of funding. Isn't it time to ask whether there is any justification in continuing this commission or should we expect that, a hundred years from now, it will still be around finding more societal barriers to kick down? Alternatively should we not ask, with a straight face, for the creation of a commission to encourage sexual restraint?

There should be little disagreement that helping teen

prostitutes escape their chains is a Biblical admonition.

But, in dealing with this issue, we have two options before us:

(1) While working with these victims we can also work to bring a Christian influence and curb Seattle's sexual appetite, or ...

(2) ... alternatively, we can embrace and encourage our culture to remain away from Christ by being content to only work on cleaning up its messes.

Reigning in Seattle's unrestrained sexual

appetite is the only way to make a long-term

reduction in teen prostitution.

Dr. Joseph B. Fuiten is the senior pastor of Cedar Park Church in Bothell, Washington, and he is the former president of Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government and the Positive Christian Agenda. Currently, Pastor Fuiten is a founding member of the Family Policy Institute of Washington, an associate organization of Focus on the Family.

Related:

* "Family" group sacrifices child security on the altar of anti-gay animus

* Joe Fuiten links domestic partnerships and marriage equality to the murder of police officers

* Washington state's radical-right uses the fetus as a political football

White House to hold conference on bullying prevention on March 10

From the WH Press Office:

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

_______________________________________________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                

March 1, 2011

White House Conference on Bullying Prevention Set for March 10

WASHINGTON - On Thursday, March 10, President Obama, the Department of Education, and the Department of Health and Human Services will welcome students, parents, teachers and others to The White House for a Conference on Bullying Prevention.  The conference will bring together communities from across the nation who have been affected by bullying as well as those who are taking action to address it.  Participants will have the opportunity to talk with the President and representatives from the highest levels of his Administration about how all communities can work together to prevent bullying.

Chris Geidner at MetroWeekly noted:

White House Domestic Policy Advisor Melody Barnes said that the conference is an event that would include President Obama and the Education and Health and Human Services departments.

...The Student Non-Discrimination Act (SNDA) and Safe Schools Improvement Act (SSIA) never received the specific endorsement of the administration in the 111th Congress, although White House and Education Department officials repeatedly expressed support for the aims of the bills.

Neither Barnes nor [White House Deputy Communications Director Jen] Psaki referenced federal legislative efforts as a topic of discussion at the conference.

Mike Huckabee: I answer to Janet "fetus testifying" Porter

Right Wing Watch pulled this gem out of the vault -- from a Take Back America 2009 event. Listen to likely GOP Clown Car Occupant Mike Huckabee.

At the event, Huckabee was introduced by Porter herself and upon taking to the microphone, quipped that there are two Janets to whom he obediently answers - his wife and Janet Porter:

Updated: Is NOM Pulling Off A Palace Coup in Maryland?

Maryland's march toward marriage equality seemed all but assured when the bill passed the Senate last week. It was presumed the House would be no problem. Then reports began to leak out that the House vote might be closer than expected.

Yesterday, a critical vote in the committee failed to go as expected when two delegates failed to show for the vote. Among them, Delegate Jill Carter, from WBAL-TV's website:

Delegate Jill Carter, D-Baltimore, said she skipped the vote because she wants $15 million in funding restored to Baltimore schools and passage of her bill to more evenly divide child custody for divorced parents.

The Baltimore Sun reports Ms. Carter as saying she's got more important things to do than help deliver equality to Maryland residents:

But Carter said there are "more important, or at least equally important" issues that she would like to see fast-tracked in the way that, in her view, gay marriage has been. And she said that until she hears from House leadership, she does not plan to cast a committee vote in favor of the Civil Marriage Protection Act.

What's really going on in Maryland? Is it possible that an out-of-state special interest group is meddling in the local politics? Has National Organization for Marriage been twisting arms? Reports are coming in that Delegates in the House are collaborating in distributing materials from known hate groups.

The Maryland House of Delegates website lists Jill Carter's contact information as: (410) 841-3283, (301) 858-3283,  Email Jill Carter

Concerned parties might be inclined to ask Ms. Carter who exactly is setting her priorities for her? An well-funded, out-of-state  special interest hate group? Or her concern for Maryland citizens?

Baltimore Sun has some words to say about Ms. Carter, and they ain't pretty. They suspect her "hostage taking" make succeed, but reccomend against it, and conclude she has earned herself a spot in "political infamy" for her "gay marriage tantrum. Some highlights, from their editorial page:

 To condemn her action runs the perverse risk of encouraging her bad behavior.

 But what she did brings disrepute not just on herself but on the entire effort to enact this legislation.

 

Ms. Carter left the House Judiciary Committee's voting session today and demanded that legislative leaders fast-track two other causes, an effort to restore education funding and a divorce-custody bill she is sponsoring, before she would return to cast what would be the decisive vote in bringing the marriage bill to the House floor. That self-aggrandizing action shows a deluded sense of her importance that will do her no favors in her efforts to support other causes or in her future campaigns for office.

But more damagingly, it reduces legislation about fundamental human rights -- legislation she co-sponsored -- to petty horse trading.

There is no question that legislative leaders should not and will not accede to her demands. They cannot negotiate with a hostage-taker.