November 30, 2011

KY Church Bans Gay Marriage but they also decided to go back to the 60’s and now bans Interracial Marriages

 Posted by: Bridgette P. LaVictoire

Gulnare Freewill Baptist church has decided to take a stand against an insidious form of marriage…interracial marriage that is. The Pike County, Kentucky church has voted not to accept interracial couples as members or to allow them to take part in worship activities.
This came up when the daughter of Dean Harville, a longtime member of the church who serves as its secretary and clerk, brought her fiance to the church this past June. Stella Harville’s fiance is Ticha Chikuni, who is from Zimbabwe. Stella Harville is getting her master’s degree in optical engineering at a school in Indiana and Chikuni works at Georgetown College. Neither of them are members of the church, though Harville was baptised there.
Randy Johnson, the president of the Pike County Ministerial Association said of the vote that “It’s not the spirit of the community in any way, shape or form.” he is not the only one who is pushing back against this vote.
After the two sang at the church, which has about forty people attending it, Dean Harville was informed by pastor Melvin Thompson that the couple would not be allowed to sing at the church again. Thompson stepped down as pastor in August over health issues, but did not back down from the issue. The new pastor, Stacy Stepp, said that the couple could sing at the church if they so wanted to; however, Thompson pushed the issue and proposed that the church go on record as saying that they would not condone interracial marriage.
Thompson’s proposal said that all people were welcome to attend public worship services, but that the church was against interracial marriage and that “parties of such marriages will not be received as members, nor will they be used in worship services.” Interracial couples were also banned from various events including funerals. The recommendation also stated that it is not intended to judge the salvation of anyone, but is intended to promote greater unity among the church body and the community we serve.”
Members at a meeting decided to put the matter before the whole church, and nine people voted for it and six against. There were a lot of abstentions.
Harville stated that he felt that it was motivated by racism, and that “It sure ain’t Christian. It ain’t nothing but the old devil working.” However, Thompson, who owns a hardware store, has told reporters that the proposal was taken out of context. Still, Stella Harville said that the whole thing has been hurtful and that “They’re the people who are supposed to comfort me in times like these.”
Johnson, with the local ministerial association, said the reactions have included heartbreak and disbelief.
“Most of us thought that we’d moved well beyond that,” he said.
Harville said he plans to ask the conference of churches to which Gulnare Freewill Baptist belongs to overturn the vote.
Even if that happens, however, “I don’t think I’ll be able to go back there,” his daughter said.
Ah, it is hard to forget that many of those opposed to interracial marriages once used Bible verses like “And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son” to oppose marriage equality for the people.

Star Says } Kris Humphies is Gay

Kris Humphries Is Gay?!?
Kim Kardashian’s divorce after 72 days of marriage to Kris Humphies  has everyone talking and imagining everything under the sun of how could this happen after 72 hours. We can all agree that its highly unlikely that nothing happen to make this marriage end after 72 hours, after all the hoopla and money involved.  But as the days pass it just keeps getting better and better.  For the sake of her business’ she need to play the good one and keep the medias eyes on her. Why? It;s the money honey! Now there there are reports swirling across the internet that he’s gay! .
According to Star magazine, the real reason behind Kim and Kris’ “marriage disaster” is because he’s batting for the wrong-I say right team. What, wasn’t it enough that she’s making him out to be this epic douche on their reality show?!?

 magazine claimed that there was a sex tape between Kim and Kris. So which is it?!? Did they film a tape together? Or is he gay and didn’t touch her after the honeymoon? Or did he make a gay sex tape with her?

I’ve know of marriages that were ended very quickly because one of the participants, usualy the batter, was striking out and missing the catcher. So might or might not be the case.
Star Magazine sometimes gets it right. So in the interest of keeping my readers informed Im posting and I willl follow up if there is anything to follow. 
pic credit: Star Mag.

Pedophile Father of 3 } Dresses up as Teen Girl to get his Prey

A paedophile who posed as a gay 14-year-old girl to entice children to perform sex acts in front of a web camera has been jailed for almost seven years.
Father-of-two Barry McCluskey, 40, pleaded guilty to 49 charges including lewd and libidinous behaviour. The offences were committed between March 2003 and August last year at locations in Glasgow.

The former nurse often used the pseudonym 'Clare' when he contacted children, whose ages ranged between nine and 15, via online instant messenger services.
Jailed: Father-of-three Barry McCluskey posed as a gay 14-year-old girl to entice children to perform sex acts in front of a web camera
Jailed: Father-of-three Barry McCluskey posed as a gay 14-year-old girl to entice children to perform sex acts in front of a web camera  

In one instance he asked a 14-year-old girl to rub her naked breasts and bend over in front of the webcam while wearing grey knee-high socks.
He told one girl: 'Three more videos, then I am out of your life forever.'
He often blackmailed the children, telling them he would distribute the videos of them, or even commit suicide, if they did not do as he said.
McCluskey was arrested after police found him on Glasgow's Erskine Bridge, apparently contemplating suicide.
McCluskey also admitted two charges of surreptitiously following schoolgirls and filming up their skirts, as well as filming women and children in public changing rooms.
Sentencing him today at the High Court in Glasgow, temporary Judge Rita Rae said McCluskey's actions were 'depraved' and that the case should act as a warning to parents who allow their children full access to the internet.
She noted that in one case McCluskey would not leave one of his victims alone even after she pleaded with him that her mother was dying of cancer. The girl told McCluskey that she would kill herself if her mother found out.
Judge Rae sentenced him to a total of six years and eight months, which will be backdated to November 1 last year when he was first taken into custody.
She also imposed a lifelong restriction order on him, meaning he will be monitored after his release and can be returned to custody if a judge orders it


Little Hitler is Been Taken Away from The Hitler Family by Jersey Authorities

Thumbnail image for worstbabynames.jpg 
The parents of Adolf Hitler, the 5-year-old New Jersey child with the most unfortunate name, have had their newest baby, a boy named Hons Campbell, taken away from them as well. Adolf and his sisters, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie, were all taken into custody by New Jersey Youth and Family Services in 2009. The Campbells, Heath and Deborah, say they don't know why Hons was taken, and the agency has reportedly been prohibited from talking about it. However, last year an appeals court ruled that the older children were at risk due to the parents' "unspecified physical and psychological disabilities," including violence in the home.
There was also apparently evidence of abuse or neglect, found by a family court, which the Campbells say is untrue -- they say their children were taken because of their Nazi-inspired names. The Department of Youth and Family Services has denied that:
DYFS spokesperson told in 2009 that she could not comment on a specific case, but said children are only taken into custody if there is a suspicion of abuse or neglect.
"We would never remove a child simply based on their name," the spokeswoman said.
Those three kids remain in foster care, while a hearing over the custody status of Hons is scheduled for today.
But..seriously, wouldn't a nice Twilight-derived monicker have sufficed?

Study } Legalizing Medical Marijuana Will Reduce Traffic Deaths

A drunk driving arrest in progress in Las Vegas, Nevada on April 24, 2009. Photo: Flickr user Alex E. Proimos.
By Stephen C. Webster
States that have passed initiatives to legalize medical marijuana have also seen a decline in traffic fatalities, according to a new study out this week by the Institute for the Study of Labor.
Opponents of medical marijuana often focus on the social detriment to making America’s most valuable cash crop available to those approved by doctors, arguing that medical marijuana legalization makes it easier for teens to buy pot and that they’ll soon move to more dangerous drugs. They also suggest that legalization would increase the number of vehicle accidents — and that very argument was one of the main reasons why California voters did not approve full legalization in 2010.
But far from marijuana acting as a “gateway” to more dangerous drugs, as authorities often claim, researchers found that it’s more commonly used as a substitute for alcohol, which is often more harmful and inebriating than marijuana.
Studying data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, researchers also found that legalizing medical marijuana did, in fact, drive up usage among adults. But contrary to medical marijuana critics’ claims, they were unable to find evidence of it growing the number of minors on the drug.
A further analysis of data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System, spanning from 1990 to 2009, revealed that states which legalized medical marijuana saw a decline in alcohol consumption. A decline in traffic fatalities was a direct side effect of that.
Traffic fatalities are the leading cause of death for Americans age 35 and under.
“Specifically, we find that traffic fatalities fall by nearly 9 percent after the legalization of medical marijuana,” researchers wrote.
They also found that legalization has an even more pronounced impact on the overall instances of alcohol playing a role in traffic deaths, suggesting that its reductive effect on the number of drunk drivers is even stronger than its overall effect on fatalities.
“Every objective study on marijuana has concluded that it is far safer than alcohol for the user and society,” explained Mason Tvert, director of SAFER, a group which advocates for legalization in Colorado. “It should come as little surprise that when we allow adults to make the safer choice to use marijuana it results in less drinking and fewer alcohol-related problems.”
So far, just 16 states have legalized medical marijuana, even though polling showseight in 10 voters, from both political parties, favor allowing marijuana use if recommended by a doctor. According to the polling firm Gallup, a full 50 percent of Americans even favor outright legalization and regulation, which would see marijuana treated similarly to alcohol.
Despite the White House’s recent admission that parts of the marijuana plant may have “some” medical value, President Barack Obama adamantly opposes legalization. Similarly, his administration’s Justice Department has continued the policy of cracking down on the sales of medical marijuana in states that allow it.

A new poll suggests that Christians (unlike Muslims) are likely to put their faith before their country } Security Thread


 (Credit: iStockphoto/sjlocke)
If you have the stomach to listen to enough right-wing talk radio, or troll enough right-wing websites, you inevitably come upon fear-mongering about the Unassimilated Muslim. Essentially, this caricature suggests that Muslims in America are more loyal to their religion than to the United States, that such allegedly traitorous loyalties prove that Muslims refuse to assimilate into our nation and that Muslims are therefore a national security threat.
Earlier this year, a Gallup poll illustrated just how apocryphal this story really is. It found that Muslim Americans are one of the most — if not the single most — loyal religious group to the United States. Now, comes the flip side from the Pew Research Center’s stunning findings about other religious groups in America (emphasis mine)
American Christians are more likely than their Western European counterparts to think of themselves first in terms of their religion rather than their nationality; 46 percent of Christians in the U.S. see themselves primarily as Christians and the same number consider themselves Americans first. In contrast, majorities of Christians in France (90 percent), Germany (70 percent), Britain (63 percent) and Spain (53 percent) identify primarily with their nationality rather than their religion. Among Christians in the U.S., white evangelicals are especially inclined to identify first with their faith; 70 percent in this group see themselves first as Christians rather than as Americans, while 22 percent say they are primarily American.
If, as Islamophobes argue, refusing to assimilate is defined as expressing loyalty to a religion before loyalty to country, then this data suggests it is evangelical Christians who are very resistant to assimilation. And yet, few would cite these findings to argue that Christians pose a serious threat to America’s national security. Why the double standard?
Because Christianity is seen as the dominant culture in America — indeed, Christianity and America are often portrayed as being nearly synonymous, meaning expressing loyalty to the former is seen as the equivalent to expressing loyalty to the latter. In this view, there is no such thing as separation between the Christian church and the American state — and every other culture and religion is expected to assimilate to Christianity. To do otherwise is to be accused of waging a “War on Christmas” — or worse, to be accused of being disloyal to America and therefore a national security threat.
Of course, a genuinely pluralistic America is one where — regardless of the religion in question — we see no conflict between loyalties to a religion and loyalties to country. In this ideal America, those who identify as Muslims first are no more or less “un-American” than Christians who do the same (personally, this is the way I see things).
But if our politics and culture are going to continue to make extrapolative judgments about citizens’ patriotic loyalties based on their religious affiliations, then such judgments should at least be universal — and not so obviously selective or brazenly xenophobic.
David Sirota
David Sirota is a best-selling author of the new book "Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado. E-mail him at, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at  More David Sirota

Glee Casts Ricky Martin

Ricky Martin GleeGlee is temporarily lifting its moratorium on stunt casting, and with good reason.
The Fox phenom is in negotiations with Ricky Martin to guest star early next year, sources confirm to TVLine exclusively.
The bon-bon shaker extraordinaire will play what aGlee insider is calling “the hottest Spanish teacher ever in the history of Ohio.”
And a musically inclined one at that.
I’m told Martin’s scalding instructor will headline two big musical numbers in the episode, which is slated to air in late January.

After wrapping Glee, Martin is off to New York to begin rehearsals for his role as Che in the Broadway revival of Evita (opening in April 2012).
The Glee stint marks Martin’s most high profile acting gig since his two-year run on General Hospital in the mid-90s.
Thoughts? Which McKinley pupil do you think will sport the biggest crush on the new hot prof? Care to predict which musical numbers Martin will perform? Hit the comments!
by Michael Ausiello

Toto this Ain’t Kansas } Illegal to be Gay in Kansas and other States

One of the more measurable fundamental victories that the gay rights movement has made is the 2003 Supreme Court ruling Lawrence v. Texas, which ruled that laws criminalizing gay and lesbian sex and relationships are unconstitutional under the equal protection clause. It made "sodomy laws," which existed in thirteen states, unenforceable -- no one could be charged criminally for, essentially, being gay. Confusingly, however, the ruling doesn't mean that "sodomy laws" are gone. Many are still on the books, and while they're not legally enforceable, that doesn't mean that they never disrupt the lives of gay citizens. As recently as 2009, over five years after the ruling that made it illegal, Texas's sodomy law was invoked when police officers told two men who were asked to leave a restaurant for a public display of affection that they could be cited for "homosexual activity." The police department later defended the officers by describing it as a "rookie mistake," and a "poor understanding of the law," not intentionally discriminatory.
Today, gay activists in Kansas are arguing that their own state's sodomy laws, which also remain on the books, are indeed intentionally discriminatory. The Kansas Equality Coalition is fighting to have Kansas's (already invalidated) law finally repealed. While Kansas's governor, Sam Brownback, is notoriously homophobic, the KEC's chairman, Thomas Witte, says he has a strong case against the outdated law. Speaking to the Lawrence Journal-World, Witte said:
“We believe that the current statute, while ultimately unenforceable, is an affront to thousands of law-abiding gay and lesbian Kansans... “This law technically criminalizes our relationships and leaves us open to harassment by unscrupulous authorities who may still make arrests under the provisions of this statute,"
And despite Brownback's history of opposition to causes that help the gay community, Witte and other activists may actually have a good platform from which to argue. One of Brownback's moves as governor -- which stands alongside such gems asclaiming in 2007 as a state Senator that countries in which gay marriage was legal had "plummeting" marriage rates and "80 percent of the first-born children are born out of wedlock" -- has been to create an "Office of the Repealer." (He was also in a highly publicized "Twitter tiff" with a high school student last week.) The department exists solely to identify laws that are "unreasonable, unduly burdensome, duplicative, onerous or in conflict to be repealed." "Unconstitutional" isn't actually included on the list, but it seems like a reasonable addition. So far the Office of the Repealer has shown no positive indication of planning to repeal the law. It's entirely possible that there are laws that are higher priorities for economic reasons; part of the Office's mission is to take action on laws that are "detrimental to the economic well-being of Kansas; hinder the growth of liberty and opportunities for Kansans and Kansas business." But given that a law currently on the books has actually been declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court, doesn't it seem like a pretty solid candidate for an initiative that identifies "unreasonable" legislature?
There are plenty of common-sense arguments to be made for equality. For instance, many activists are quick to bring up how much economic stimulus states that ban gay marriage are losing out on. Is there a similar argument to be made for all laws that make us second-class citizens? Everyone's taxes, ours included, go towards the creation and upkeep of laws like Kansas's outdated one criminalizing homosexuality. It's entirely possible that DOMA could be repealed within the next few years, but several states could still have laws on the books that make any kind of same-sex affection or relationship illegal, even if they can't be enforced. Isn't that rather "unreasonable?" One of Governor Brownback's criteria for the Office of the Repealer's review is whether a law "[defies] a common-sense approach to governance." At what point does that describe any law that dictates inequality?
posted by

pic credit : Wikipedia

How About .50cents Every Month

Is that too much? We need it, IF everyone reading the blog will give us a dollar or less every few months and become our members You, they will save us.

Featured Posts

Visible First Time}} Gay Athletes Take Over in Waves on The Olympics

  By  JOHN LEICESTER Associated Press   TOKYO -- When Olympic diver Tom Daley announced in 2013 that he was dating a man and “couldn...

Most Popular Posts