Showing posts with label Famous but Uninformed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Famous but Uninformed. Show all posts

May 24, 2014

Barbara Streisand Find Gay Sex Distasteful, Many Find her Distasteful




Barbra Streisand finds Gay Sex Distasteful - The Normal Heart's Larry Kramer Says Star Homophobic and Cheap?
Does gay icon Barbra Streisand believe gay sex is “distasteful?” In a recent interview with the NY Times. Playwright, Larry Kramer, alleges that the legendary singer may be homophobic or at the very least, hypocritical.
Larry first began working with Barbra when he tried to turn his 1986 Broadway play, The Normal Heart, into a film. The play focuses on the HIV-AIDS crisis of the 80s. Barbra eventually bought the rights to the play and worked with Larry to raise funding for the film version.
However, when Larry suggested an intimate love scene between two men, he says Barbra was turned off by the idea.
“I said, ‘I really think it’s important that after eons of watching men and women make love in the movies, it’s time to see two men do so,’” Kramer told the NY Times. “I bought her a book of very beautiful art pictures of two men making love, and she found it very distasteful.”
But no one calls out Baba, who also happens to have a gay son. “The Way We Were” singer was quick to respond to Larry’s comments.
“Larry was at the forefront of this battle and, God love him, he’s still fighting. But there’s no need to fight me by misrepresenting my feelings. As a filmmaker, I have always looked for new and exciting ways to do love scenes, whether they’re about heterosexuals or homosexuals. It’s a matter of taste, not gender,” she told the NY Times.
She also added that her intention was “to promote the idea of everyone’s right to love. Gay or straight.” “I was trying to reach a large audience, and I wanted them to root for these two men to get married.
Unfortunately, Larry and Barbra were unable to raise the money needed to make the film. He even admitted that he demanded a lot of money and Barbra was not willing to use her own money.
Glee creator Ryan Murphy now owns the rights to the play and The Normal Heart will premier on HBO on May 25. He even used his own money “which shows how much he wanted to do this, and how tacky it sort of is that Barbra never would think of something like that,” Larry said taking another dig at Babs.
Do you believe Barbra Streisand is homophobic or is Larry Kramer just bitter he couldn’t get his film made earlier? Join the conversation and leave a comment.
Photo Credit: FameFlynet 

Andrew Sullivan’s husband Douglas Laycock Criticized the Gay Community


                                                                         
To be fair before I introduce this posting by Law Professor Douglas Laycock, I have referred to his Laycock husband Andrew Sullivan Laycock as a non gay.  My reasons are public and I feel he is one of those Republicans that might be embarrassed  by their party on many occasions but they follow it because gold is thicker than blood and the GOP’s business strategies sometimes is hard to pass up for anyone who might be afraid of trying something new and loosing money. Now I’ll present you this story which is very interesting coming from Mr. LayCock. I invite Mr. Laycok to come to this blog and explain anything we might have gotten wrong about him in the future ( we have never had the opportunity to quote his writings in the past).

A UVA law professor married to the University’s president is coming under fire from an advocacy group that claims his recent legal arguments in favor of religious exemptions are aiding anti-gay and anti-woman agendas.
Douglas Laycock, School of Law faculty member and husband of UVA President Teresa Sullivan, is one of the country’s leading experts on religious liberty, and is well-known for a legal stance that often puts him on opposite sides of polarizing political issues: He supports individual religious rights, but also a total separation of church and state, and he’s argued several Supreme Court cases from that position, defending conservative Lutherans and SanterĂ­a sect members alike. 
Some of his recent writings have been heavily cited by members of the religious right, and now he’s facing the ire of activists on the other end of the political spectrum.
“His work, whether he understands it or realizes it or not, is being used by folks who want to institute discrimination into law,” said Heather Cronk, co-director of Berkeley, California-based LGBT activist group GetEQUAL.
UVA law professor Douglas Laycock is being criticized by a gay rights group for his legal arguments in favor of controversial laws and court arguments. Photo: UVA Media RelationsUVA law professor Douglas Laycock is being criticized by a gay rights group for his legal arguments in favor of controversial laws and court arguments. Photo: UVA Media Relations

In February, Laycock penned a letter to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer in support of SB1062, a highly controversial and ultimately scuttled state law that would have given individuals and businesses broad rights to exempt themselves from state laws they’re opposed to on religious grounds. Critics slammed the bill as a thinly veiled attempt to give anybody in the state the right to refuse to serve gays and lesbians.
Laycock’s letter, written under a University of Virginia School of Law letterhead and signed by 10 other law professors from institutions around the country, argued that the Arizona law was a fair extension of the existing federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act because it didn’t pick winners: The government “could still show that compliance with the law was necessary to serve a compelling government interest,” he wrote.
Similar arguments underpin an amicus brief he filed in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., the high-profile contraception coverage case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. Laycock sides with the corporation, which claims that under the RFRA, its president’s religious beliefs should allow it to opt out of covering certain kinds of birth control.
“When we started connecting the dots between Laycock’s work on religious discrimination bills and contraceptive coverage and access for women—that’s when it began to be a big concern,” said Cronk. She said when conservative commentators like Maggie Gallagher, former head of the National Organization for Marriage, started pointing to Laycock’s arguments as support for their own strongly anti-gay agendas, GetEQUAL decided to push back with a campaign of their own.
Through the activist group Virginia Student Power Network, GetEQUAL found two UVA students willing to take up the cause of calling out Laycock: rising fourth-year Greg Lewis and now-alum Stephanie Montenegro. Last week, the pair sent an open letter to Laycock asking him to consider the “real-world consequences that [his] work is having.” They also submitted a Freedom of Information Act request seeking e-mails between Laycock and various right-wing and religious liberty groups.
Lewis said they’re not trying to smear Laycock, and they’re not trying to undermine academic freedom. They just want a dialogue, he said.
“I think it would be really constructive for him to hear how his work is being used to hurt the LGBTQ community,” said Lewis. “I don’t think he has any ill intent. I think he’s very thoughtful and moderate, and willing to hear both sides. But I think that everyone really has a lot to learn.”
Laycock said he’s anything but anti-gay.
“My position has always been that liberty in America is for everyone,” he said. “It’s for both sides in the culture wars. I believe that we should protect gays and lesbians in their right to live their own lives, including their right to get married, and we should protect religious conscientious objectors.”
He pointed out that he’s fought “tooth and nail” against some of the same religious rights groups he’s represented when he disagrees with them.
“I can’t help what other people do with my arguments,” he said. “I have told some of the folks on the religious right that their own claims to religious liberty would be taken more seriously if they would quit messing with the liberties of other people.”
Thomas C. Berg of the University of St. Thomas School of Law in Minneapolis has known and worked with Laycock for years, and said he has always held that the government should stay out of religious matters.
“In some cases, that leads to results that the left likes, and in some cases it leads to results that the right likes,” said Berg. He and Laycock made few friends among religious conservatives when they jointly filed an amicus brief in 2012’s landmark United States. v. Windsor case that urged the court to extend same-sex marriage benefits to every state in the union. Also not endearing him to the right: Laycock is preparing to argue another case before the nation’s highest court, this time on behalf of a Muslim prisoner’s right to wear a beard.
Laycock and others like him are used to criticism, Berg said; it goes hand-in-hand with defending civil liberties regardless of your personal feelings about the moral argument at hand.
“The positions all of us take as advocates are certainly open to vigorous criticism, and that’s just fine,” said Berg. “But that criticism should be accurate, it should be informed, and it should recognize that there is complexity in these issues.”
Just what kind of dialogue will grow out of the flap at UVA is still up in the air; Lewis said he’s been in touch with Laycock, but hasn’t set up a meeting. Meanwhile, GetEQUAL has launched a national e-mail campaign calling out Laycock for his role in shoring up the legal arguments of those who support “religious bigotry.”
“I take him at his word that he’s a moderate, that he supports marriage equality,” said Cronk. “The problem is his work is being used, potentially misused, potentially abused, by folks who do not show 
For his part, Laycock said he’s happy to talk to the students, though, he said, “they picked a very odd way to go about the conversation.” those values.”


March 29, 2014

The Bieber is Hit The Justice System and Since Everyone Comes Out Scarred by It, We’’ll Ck.for New Tattoos

Say what?
image
You don’t want to seem out of it, so here’s what you need to know: Canada’s most regrettable export, Justin Bieber, recently underwent a deposition in Miami in a civil lawsuit filed by a paparazzi photographer who claims that the Bieb ordered his bodyguard to beat the photographer to a senseless pulp and, even more tragically, to take the memory card from his camera. And now you can barely click on a kitty video on YouTube without having to squirm past a clip of this train wreck.
I thought about doing this as a parody, but as the saying goes, sometimes the jokes just write themselves. As a public service, however, Buzzology is providing the highlights of Mr. Bieber’s lesson on how to act like a spoiled, disrespectful brat:
1. Immediately lay out the terms under which you will answer questions. Waggle your finger and rotate your neck at the deposing attorney to emphasize your feelings. If that doesn’t work, either feign a coma or walk out.



  2. Grace those around you with your opinions on the current state of journalism. As a means of furthering your point, confuse a male attorney with journalistic superstar Katie Couric.


  
3. Give ol’ Dale Carnegie a good spin in his grave and viciously attack the one person in the room who has no dog in the fight — the court reporter.



 4. Claim to have forgotten ever having set foot in Australia, one of the most memorable continents in the world. In all fairness to Mr. Bieber, he might not remember traveling to Australia simply because he might not know where Australia is.




5. Clearly show the world your lack of SAT prep by confusing the words “detrimental” and “instrumental” — as in, “I was discovered on YouTube. It was detrimental to my career.” Well, sure. If you learn to read by hanging around on YouTube — Land of Intellectual Discourse — then of course it will be detrimental to your career.


 While you’re at it, Mr. Bieber, why not hit it out of the ballpark by forgetting the international superstar who helped make you famous? Oh wait, you did that, too.
Hope you don’t have to stand in front of the Swingin’ Judge.
Tech Columnist 

Wether you are guilty or not, poor or rich once you go thru the massive slow wheels of the american justice system, you would have some scars to show. Some, particularly because of their low education and low resources will never come out or spent the majority of their rest of their lives dealing with it. 

It’s not necessarily that you are behind bars, that is just one part of it.  It’s dealing with it’s tentacles that spread wide and are suffocating, can destroy an individual’s liberty by its bureaucratic system of probation, fines, classes that are there not to teach anything but to punish the individual both financially and time wise. 

Yes, there are many that abuse the system as we often hear. For those either they are smart enough with the right money to throw away or just they have become cured of the pain it inflicts and like the individual that has no capacity to feel pain anymore and can stick his  hand on the fire to consume the fresh yet he does not feels it as it burns.

We will see what happens with the Bieber. My guess is that this being the first encounter he will probably go back to his old ways but with a more careful way of doing things. He can continue to do everything he was doing before except he can’t drive himself and he can’t punch other people  himself. People in his position have handlers to do all that for them.

Adam Gonzalez

March 2, 2014

The Evolution of Gay Rights and Homophobes Helping it Along The Way



I’m grateful for Anita Bryant.
I should clarify.
See, if it weren’t for Anita Bryant and her fear-mongering in the ‘70s, things would probably have turned out quite differently for me.
In 1977, when Miami (and, by extension, the entire nation) was debating whether children needed to be “saved” from homosexuals, I was one of those children.
I may have been 12, but I was quickly coming to understand that I was gay, or at least bisexual. Thanks to the popular culture of the time and shows like All In The Family and Barney Miller, I knew that “that thing” had a name. And I was probably that.
But I didn’t know what to make of it. Aside from the fact it wouldn’t make me terribly popular among my peer group, that is.
Enter Anita. Of course I knew the pretty lady from the orange juice commercials. But suddenly she was on TV telling everyone that they needed to “save our children” from homosexuality. I had no idea that there existed a (then-named) gay liberation movement, that local activists had recently effected passage of an ordinance banning discrimination on the basis of sexual preference (then the term of the day) or that the world was suddenly focused on my hometown.
And I certainly didn’t let on to my parents that I had a personal interest in all of this. Still, it didn’t take long to realize how they felt about it.
I still have a vivid memory of my mother hosting a “Stop the ERA” (Equal Rights Amendment) party for her ladies’ group, complete with a big, red stop sign-shaped cake and horrified whispers about unisex bathrooms.
So I just sat back and watched the drama on TV. The anti-Anita ads, explaining how if you start exempting one group from legal protection it’s not long before you start making it OK to discriminate against anyone, seemed logical. But the fear-based ads suggesting that “exposing” kids to gay teachers would make them gay made no sense to me at all. I was one of those kids. What I was feeling was as innate as my hair color. I wasn’t the victim of some adult molestation that “turned” me.
Nope, thanks to those ads and debates, and the ads and debates in cities from Eugene, Oregon, to St. Paul, Minnesota, in the ensuing months, I got really clear with this part of who I was. And I got to see eloquent, real-life gay and lesbian people on television answering questions, no matter how insulting.
By 1979, my parents and I were walking through a parking lot on the way to see a play and we spied a group of people gathered around someone collecting signatures. I quickly realized that it was a gay activist canvassing for a new equal rights ordinance. The last thing I wanted was my parents to stumble into that.
But, being the curious sort, my mother was determined to investigate. Finally, I had to tell her what that was about in order to steer her away.
Hearing this, she went on a tear, screaming at the man that he was “sick” and “needed to go to the hospital.”
I was crushed. Not that they knew that, though. Actually, they took the fact that I was keeping her away from that as a positive sign, I learned later.
But this all gave me my armor. So, by the time I came out in high school, I had the emotional protection that so many LGBT kids lack, even to this day. I knew there was a community “out there.” I just needed to get to it.
After finding my voice in college in the ‘80s, I found myself working with some of the very same people who helped fight Anita in the ‘70s. I heard their war stories from Stonewall in 1969 to the AIDS pandemic, which was then devastating everyone around me.
In 1987, exactly 10 years after the loss to Anita, I was organizing what was a haphazard Pride march around the War Memorial Auditorium in Ft. Lauderdale. (It was haphazard because, even then, the Pride committee was fearful that people wouldn’t want to be identified as gay on local TV if there was a march outdoors.)
I brought orange armbands for the marchers. People put them on. Asked of their significance by reporters, I said the first thing I could think of.
“We’re commemorating the 10 years since Anita. We want to show that she may be gone, but we’re still here; we’re still fighting. And we’re going to win.”
Nearly another 27 years hence, I couldn’t have imagined how right I would turn out to be.
There are myriad battles left to fight, but marriage equality is spreading across the U.S. faster than my Twitter feed can reload, we have openly LGBT figures everywhere from Congress to professional sports and acceptance of LGBT people at unprecedented highs.
And yes, Miami finally did pass anti-discrimination legislation again. In 2002, voters upheld it.
And they did it with the help of my mother who called to tell me, proudly and unprompted, that she called everyone in her address book to tell them to vote for it.
Oh, and she and my dad helped celebrate my wedding to their “second son” last year.
Anita didn’t get an invite, though

SPECIAL TO THE MIAMI HERALD

pic Miami Herald

I can still hear the chants down Fifth Ave in NYC : “Arriba, abajo Anita pa’ el carajo” ( in spanish more or less sends Anita to hell)

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/03/01/3966898/personal-evolution-amid-gay-rights.html#storylink=cpy

August 19, 2012

Last Will to Gay Man } You Most Marry a Woman or You Wont Get As Promised


Adam on The Property he Worked Lost
The Dad Left a final request to his son: Get a woman. Get married. I know about requests like that. When I left my house to move in with my ex, I had asked him if his house was his.  He had Diabetes and other health issues. I though about a day in which he died and then I found myself on the streets. This was Florida.  We were en-circled by his family.  He promised such a thing was not going to happen.  The property was given to him  by his grand parents and the house he bought. I thought I was covering all points, particularly with stories coming out of Miami about a news helicopter pilot who crashed died and his long term partner, even though they had a will, he was not even able to be at the funeral. All the furnishings of the house and the house were assumed  belong to the guy making the most money. The parents of the dead lover finally were going to have a chance to make their  displeasure statement about their son’s relationship with a man. They had to swallow him, but no more.

I am hearing this and Im disconcerted. I share all this with my partner he said not to worry. I told him I left everything for you. He said he loved and we will go to a lawyer. What discovered and what he knew, what that the same request had been mad of him by his grandparents. The property had a lien. It was clear to him if he married a woman.
In my case even though I got his grandparents to change their minds, not for me but because they loved him. But now our relationship suffered a wound that would not healed.  I did end up in the streets for the first time in my life. After making my accomplishments that made me proud of my life, now I had to live in a motel.

In the news ( NYPost ) now is Manhattan businessman Frank Mandelbaum, who specified that none of his money should go to any offspring his son Robert might have if he “not be married to the child’s mother within six months of the child’s birth.”
In this case in the news now we find 
frank
 Father Died
Frank Mandelbaum, 73, died in 2007, and his will prompted Robert Mandelbaum, a Manhattan Criminal Court Judge, to argue in a court battle over the estate that his longtime partner Jonathan O’Donnell is the only “mother” their 16-month-old son, Cooper, knows.

The couple married shortly after Cooper’s birth via a surrogate, entitling the child to a share in a $180,000 trust set aside for Frank Mandelbaum’s three grandkids, Robert declared.
The Manhattan Surrogate’s Court has yet to approve a settlement to ignore Frank Mandelbaum’s demand as discriminatory and against New York law.
The settlement is the only way to solve the dispute over Cooper, Robert Mandelbaum claims in court papers, because the will “imposes a general restraint on marriage by compelling Robert Mandelbaum . . . to enter into a sham marriage” — which he says violates state law supporting marriage equality.

robert
 Son Gets F*by father
A law guardian appointed to look out for Cooper’s interests agreed that there are “significant public policy reasons” for ignoring the dead dad’s dictate.
“Requiring a gay man to marry a woman . . . to ensure his child’s bequest is tantamount to expecting him either to live in celibacy, or to engage in extramarital activity with another man, and is therefore contrary to public policy,” Anne Bederka wrote in court papers. “There is no doubt that what [Frank Mandelbaum] has sought to do is induce Robert to marry a woman.”
The child’s birth complicated an already sour dispute over the handling of Frank Mandelbaum’s estate, prompting Mandelbaum’s wife, Ann Freeman, to say in court papers that Robert “alleged that he had a son from a homosexual relationship which he believed should be a beneficiary . . . My husband’s will specifically prohibited such a child from becoming a beneficiary.” Frank Mandelbaum, the founder of ID verification company Intellicheck, was well aware that his son was gay, Robert claimed in court papers, noting that his partner was included in family dinners and vacations.
 .
 



Love And Pride Sale! Up to 70% OFF on Selected Products Buy Now! Special offers and sales for all products! Up to 70% off, Free Shipping! Buy Now!||||

November 10, 2011

Ashton Kutcher Makes an Azz of Himself on Twitter } Gets Twitted Out


   

By Jen Chung in  



Last night, not only were there riots at Penn State over the firing of legendary coach Joe Paterno, Twitter users took the time to shame celebrity Twitter fiend Ashton Kutcher. Last night, the "Two and a Half Men" star and college football fan Tweeted, "How do you fire Jo Pa? #insult #noclass as a hawkeye fan I find it in poor taste"—which sent the Twitterverse into a frenzy.
For instance, musician Brad Walsh retweeted with, "You're a #fucking #shithead. RT @aplusk: How do you fire Jo Pa? #insult #noclass as a hawkeye fan I find it in poor taste."
Kutcher later Tweeted, "This is an insane story, I just heard paterno was fired, getting the rest of the story now... Wow." The rest of the story being that various Penn State administrators and employees—like Paterno— knew that a former defensive coordinator had allegedly raped and sexually abused young boys in Penn State facilities.
Now, after deleting various Tweets from the night (but many are captured on his Facebook page), Kutcher is handing over his Twitter account to his management team. Guess we won't be seeing shots like this anymore!
After the initial Tweet and some of 8 million-plus followers told him what happened, Kutcher Tweeted, "Heard Joe was fired, fully recant previous tweet! Didn't have full story. #admitwhenYoumakemistakes" and "Had no idea, thought it was a football thing" When one person replied to him "@aplusk where have you been the last three days!?", he answered, "working." Another person wrote, "@aplusk you're an idiot," Kutcher agreed.
Kutcher and wife Demi Moore run a charity that addresses child slavery and sex trafficking, and he Tweeted after the initial furor, "As an advocate in the fight against child sexual exploitation, I could not be more remorseful for all involved in the Penn St. case," and then, "As of immediately I will stop tweeting until I find a way to properly manage this feed. I feel awful about this error. Won't happen again." Now, he's released a statement:
Up until today I have posted virtually everyone of my tweets on my own, but clearly the platform has become to big to be managed by a single individual. When I started using twitter it was a communication platform that people could say what they are thinking in real time and and if their facts where wrong the community would quickly and helpfully reframe an opinion. It was a conversation, a community driven education tool, and opionion center that encouraged healthy debate. It seems that today that twitter has grown into a mass publishing platform, where ones tweets quickly become news that is broadcated around the world and misinformation becomes volitile fotter for critics.
Last night after returning home from work I walked by the television and simply saw a headline that Joe Paterno had been fired. Having no more information than that, I assumed that he had been fired due to poor performance as an aging coach. As a football fan and someone who had watched Joe's career move from that of legend/innovator to a head coach that fullfilled his duty in the booth, I assumed that the university had let him go due to football related issues. With that assumption (how dare I assume) I posted a tweet defending his career. I then when about my evening, had some dinner, did a little work, and about an hour later turned on ESPN where I got the full story. I quickly when back on my twitter account and found a hailstorm of responses calling me an "idiot" and several other explitives that I've become accustom to hearing for almost anything I post. I quickly retracted and deleted my previous post, however that didn't seem enough to satisfy peoples outrage at my misinformed post. I truely am sorry if I offended anyone and more over am going to take action to ensure that it doesn't happen again.
A collection of over 8 million followers is not to be taken for granted. I feel responsible for delivering an informed opinion and not spreading gossip or rumors through my twitter feed. While I feel that running this feed myself gives me a closer relationship to my friends and fans I've come to realize that it has grown into more that a fun tool to communicate with people. While I will continue to express myself through @Aplusk I'm going to turn the management of the feed over to my team at Katalyst Media to ensure the quality of it's content. My sincere apologies to anyone who I offended. It was a mistake that I don't think will not happen again.

 

September 6, 2011

Justin Bieber Being GAY a Decision/Abortion always wrong even if caused by rape.


http://www.bestgaynewsmagazine.com/

Ah yes, youth. They know it all, right??

ROLLING STONE asks the deep questions this week and  teenage pop sensation Justin Bieber has suggested thathomosexuality is a choice and that abortion is wrong even when pregnancy is caused by rape.

In the interview with the magazine, he appeared to label homosexuality as a choice rather than something that is uncontrollable.

He also spoke out against abortion even when pregnancy is caused by rape, saying “everything happens for a reason.”

The interview for next month’s Rolling Stone magazine has been distributed via blogs.

When asked what his views on homosexuality are, Bieber responded: “It’s everyone’s own decision to do that. It doesn’t affect me and shouldn’t affect anyone else.”

It is not clear whether he intended to label homosexuality as a lifestyle choice.

Bieber’s position stands in contrast with that of Lady Gaga who last year said: “there are some people in this world that believe being gay is a choice. It’s not a choice, we’re born this way.” Her single ‘Born This Way’ has been described as the new gay anthem by Sir Elton John.

Featured Posts

Immigrant Married to American CitizenTrump Backer is being Deported

 Trump promised if elected President he would get rid of the rapping, stealing, drug importing Mexicans and illegal immigrant...