Showing posts with label Editorial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Editorial. Show all posts

March 8, 2020

How Much Should Religious Orgs Get Paid By The Government to Convert You?

Many Americans know by now that when Christian nationalists talk about “religious freedom” they are really asking for the privilege to impose their religion on other people. What Americans may not yet understand is that they are also demanding money from taxpayers to do so.

Long before Donald Trump hitched his political fortunes to the Christian right, previous Republican administrations had primed the pumps that would send public money flowing toward religious organizations.

In 2002, the George W. Bush administration increased the flow of federal money to faith-based organizations providing services on behalf of the government. Mr. Bush himself insisted that these organizations would not be permitted to discriminate. But in fact the new method of faith-based funding invited the risk of discrimination and the erosion of church-state separation.

The Obama administration, responding to these concerns, put in place provisions to ensure that members of the public were not subject to discrimination on the basis of religious belief or unwanted proselytizing. The provisions also required that users of church-sponsored social programs be made aware of nonsectarian options. 

The Trump administration is now proposing to eliminate these Obama-era safeguards. And true to form, they did so earlier this year, on the increasingly Orwellian-sounding annual Religious Freedom Day in January.

One purpose of the new proposed regulations is to make sure that organizations receiving taxpayer money are exempt from the kinds of anti-discrimination law by which nonreligious organizations must abide. If that sounds like a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, that’s because it is — or at least it should be.

Under the proposed regulations, faith-based aid organizations that receive public money are free to hire and fire their workers and subcontractors on account of their religion, sexual orientation, or any other behavior or characteristic that the organization finds religiously appealing or objectionable. Aid-providing organizations will no longer have any obligation to let members of the public receiving their services know if there are available nonsectarian options. Organizations that receive their money through vouchers and other forms of indirect aid can now proselytize, require that recipients participate in religious activities or ask that recipients pledge their loyalty to Jesus. And the government itself is no longer required to offer a nonsectarian option for those whose beliefs or conscience make it impossible for them to accept aid on these terms.

“The proposed rules would strip away religious freedom protections from people, often the most vulnerable and marginalized, and even allow faith-based organizations to discriminate in government-funded programs,” Rachel Laser, president and chief executive of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, told me. She added that this puts the interests of these organizations “ahead of the needs of the people seeking critical services.”

Why is the Trump administration so determined to tear down the wall of separation between church and state? The long game is clear: because that’s the way you “take back America” and make it a Christian nation. 

But the short game is more relevant now. There is a pile of public money on the other side of the wall that separates church and state, and Christian nationalists are determined to grab it (and to hold on to what they have already grabbed).

These kinds of pro-discrimination rules are bound to cause harm. There may be a woman who loses her job at a faith-based service provider because she is “living in sin” with her partner. There may be people seeking counseling services who will forgo the help they need because it is offered only in conservative Christian health care settings and is staffed with Christian-only providers, all of whom claim to be living in conformity with a “Bible lifestyle.”

There will be some minority-religion providers — a Jewish soup kitchen here, a Muslim job-training initiative there — that will defend the new rules and claim to benefit from them. But they will serve, in effect, as strategic cover, lending the appearance of diversity to a movement that ties the idea of America to specific conservative religious and cultural identities.

Legitimizing these forms of discrimination is itself a grotesque violation of whatever it is that we actually mean by religious freedom. But that’s the point, as far as Mr. Trump and his Christian nationalist allies are concerned. The religious rights of the larger American public are collateral damage in a war of conquest aimed squarely at the public coffers.

To grasp the motivation for the Trump administration in promulgating “religious freedom,” it helps to review a little Supreme Court history. In 2017, the Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Mo., brought a case in which the church claimed that it had an equal claim to government grants for purchasing materials to upgrade its playground.

At the time, many commentators raised a concern that the case was really just a device for eliminating Establishment Clause concerns from decisions affecting the public funding of religious institutions and activities. Lawyers from conservative Christian legal organizations, including the Alliance Defending Freedom, argued that refusing to allocate public money to religious institutions amounted to discrimination against religion. This theory, if it takes hold in law, significantly weakens the Establishment Clause. If withholding taxpayer money from religious institutions amounts to discrimination, then the taxpayer has no choice but to fund religion.

Some important things to know about today’s Christian nationalist movement: It doesn’t believe in the First Amendment as we usually understand it and as our founders intended it. It doesn’t believe that the government should make no law respecting an establishment of religion. It also takes a dim view of government assistance — unless the money passes through churches first. Politically connected religious leaders like Ralph Drollinger of Capitol Ministries, whose White House Bible study has been attended by at least 10 current and former members of Mr. Trump’s cabinet, maintains that social welfare programs have no basis in scripture. “The responsibility to meet the needs of the poor lies first with the husband in a marriage, secondly with the family (if the husband is absent), and thirdly with the church,” Mr. Drollinger has written. “Again, nowhere does God command the institutions of government or commerce to fully support those with genuine needs.” 

These ideas are shared by David Barton, a historical revisionist who sits on the boards of an array of Christian nationalist legislative and data initiatives, pastoral networks and other influential groups. Mr. Barton has argued that the Bible and God himself oppose progressive income taxes, capital gains taxes and minimum wage laws. “Since sinful man tends to live in bondage, different forms of slavery have replaced the more obvious system of past centuries,” according to an essay posted to Mr. Barton’s WallBuilders website titled “The Bible, Slavery and America’s Founders.” “The state has assumed the role of master for many, providing aid and assistance, and with it more and more control, to those unable to provide for themselves. The only solution to slavery is the liberty of the Gospel.”

While these activists rail against direct government aid to the poor, they are eager to increase the flow of government handouts to churches and religious groups who may then provide the aid themselves, but without adherence to nondiscrimination law. As a further bonus, when the money gets funneled to religious organizations, some of it then can then be pumped back into the right-wing political machine through religious organizations and the policy groups they support, which act as de facto partisan political cells.

In order to understand the game that Christian nationalists are playing, it’s important to remember that the First Amendment has two clauses concerning religion: one that guarantees the freedom to exercise religion and one that prohibits the government from establishing any religion. What the framers understood is that these two come as a pair; they are necessarily connected. We are free to exercise religion precisely because the government refrains from establishing religion.

At present, the Christian nationalist movement has substantial sources of support in the form of access to wealthy donors and robust donor-advised charities. It also has a large base of supporters who make large numbers of small contributions. But leaders of the movement know that their bread will have a lot more butter if it comes from the government. They already receive significant funding indirectly from taxpayers in the form of deductions and exemptions. They are determined to secure these extra funds, and they are immensely fearful of losing them, especially if a pluralistic society decides to do something about the fact that its tax dollars are being used to fund groups that actively promote discrimination against many citizens and support radical political agendas.

In the future, if the Trump administration has its way, the current flow of taxpayer money to religious organizations may well look like the trickle before the flood. Religious nationalists dream of a time when most or all social welfare services pass through the hands of religious entities. They imagine a future in which a young woman seeking advice on reproductive health care will have nowhere to turn but a state-funded, church-operated network of “counseling” centers that will tell her she will go to hell if she doesn’t have the baby.

The discrimination against individuals and the misuse of public money that the Trump administration’s proposed regulations would allow is bad enough. But these are far from the worst consequences of this kind of assault on the separation of church and state. The most profound danger here is to the deep structure of American society and politics.

In 1786, when Thomas Jefferson and James Madison pushed through the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom that Religious Freedom Day commemorates, the issue that motivated them and that brought evangelical Christians at the time over to their side was a detested tax imposed on all Virginians to pay for the church services demanded by the established church. “To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical,” Jefferson wrote. “No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever.” 

It is ironic, then, that the Trump administration’s religious freedom initiative seeks to fund religious organizations with taxpayer money. But what makes this particularly dangerous is that the same money in many cases goes to churches and religious organizations that are increasingly and aggressively asserting themselves in partisan politics, and that happen to support Mr. Trump. As Jefferson and Madison understood, the destruction of the wall that separates church and state corrupts politics just as surely as it corrupts religion.


Katherine Stewart (@kathsstewart) is the author of “The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism.”

June 27, 2019

Is Trump A Rapist?

Editorial with facts

Add caption
E. Jean Carroll, trump inicially said he never met her that is until pictures and accounts of the two talking came forward. She was very well known as an opinion columnist so there was no reason for him not to. Then he said she is not his type to rape. Well he is comparing to all the ones he has admitted to grabbing their puzz. She looks like those married or divorced outgoing women he talked about in the bus. The picture of hers on those years shows a very good looking woman, educated and smart. Just the type he resents and like to bring down to his knees. She kept quiet and helped Trump be elected on 2016.   (Adam Gonzalez)

E. Jean Carroll says Donald Trump sexually assaulted her in a dressing room at a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s. He denies the accusation.

E. Jean Carroll says Donald Trump sexually assaulted her in a dressing room at a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s. He denies the accusation.CreditCreditCraig Ruttle/Associated Press
I am simply disgusted by what’s happening in America.
Related image
 Take mine, no take mine is shaven, no mine is bushy. A Man with no sence of decency or inside control will sucumb many times and so did Trump. The problem is that these type of men preferred what is not his and the ones that don't want it. This according to his own descriptions,

My political differences with this president and his accomplices in Congress — and now on the Supreme Court — are only part of the reason. Indeed, those differences may not be the lesser reason, and that, for me, says a lot.

For me, the reason is that the country, or large segments of it, seems to be acquiescing to a particular form of evil, one that is pernicious and even playful, one in which the means of chipping away at our values and morals grow even stronger, graduating from tack hammer to standard hammer to sledgehammer.

America, it seems to me, is drifting toward catastrophe. Donald Trump is leading us there. And all the while, our politicians plot about political outcomes and leverage. Republican politicians are afraid to upset him; Democratic politicians are afraid to impeach him.

One thing that should never be underestimated is a politician’s clawing instinct toward self-preservation. These disciples of flexibility have learned well that the trees that remain standing are those that bend best in the storm.
Sign Up for Jamelle Bouie's Newsletter
Join Jamelle Bouie as he shines a light on overlooked writing, culture and ideas from around the internet. 

Trump is to them a storm. But, to many of us, he is desolation, or the possibility thereof.

But, because nothing changes, because he is never truly held accountable, too many Americans are settling into a functional numbness, a just-let-me-survive-it form of sedation. But, that is where the edge of death is marked. That is where the rot begins. That is where a society loses itself.

Take for instance the latest sexual accusation against Trump: Advice columnist E. Jean Carroll alleges that Trump sexually assaulted her in 1995 or 1996 in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room. Carroll doesn’t call it rape, but rape is what she describes.

Carroll writes that Trump “pushed her against the wall, pushed his mouth against her lips, then pulled down her tights, unzipped his pants and forced his ‘fingers around my private area, thrusts his penis halfway — or completely, I’m not certain — inside me,’” as The New York Times reported it.

Don’t just keep reading. Don’t just think that you’ve heard this before. Don’t just think that this kind of “behavior” is baked into how people feel about Trump. Go back and read that last paragraph. Read it slowly. Place yourself — or your mother, or your wife, sister, daughter, cousin, girlfriend or friend — in that dressing room. Imagine the struggle. Imagine the violation. Imagine the anger.

And now remember that the alleged perpetrator is now the president. And, remember that Carroll is by no means alone; a chorus of other women have also accused Trump of sexual misconduct.
But, Carroll’s account stands out for its brutality and severity.

And yet, her account landed like one more body on the pile in a mass grave: reduced by the multitude of other accusations rather than amplified by them.

There was media coverage of Carroll’s accusation and social media discussion of it, but it never truly sufficiently sunk in and gathered the gravity it deserved.

Then Dean Baquet, executive editor of The Times, even said this newspaper “underplayed” the article it published on the accusation.

And Trump, in his swelling depravity, responded to the allegations by telling The Hill: “I’ll say it with great respect: Number one, she’s not my type. Number two, it never happened. It never happened, O.K.?”

Well, sir, which type for you is rape-worthy?

To you, America, I ask: What is the breaking point? Is there a breaking point? Does nothing now matter that used to matter? Do we simply allow this accusation to pass like all the others, using the limping excuse that whether or not the man who sits in the Oval Office is a sexual predator or not, he was sufficiently litigated in the 2016 election?

A sickness has settled on this country. We are stuck in a stupor. People have settled in themselves that the only remedy is at the ballot box in 2020, mostly because that is what they are incessantly being told.

And just a few days on from the rape allegation, the news of the moment has shifted. We eagerly anticipate a sorting to emerge from the Democratic debates, anticipate Robert Mueller’s testimony before Congress and anticipate Trump’s performance in Asia. 

There are other crises, other emergencies, other traumas. Trump is waging war on immigrants, waging war on the environment, and has hinted at waging war on Iran.

How to weigh one woman’s tale of victimization — or that of multiple women — by Trump against a world being driven into chaos by Trump? Mustn’t our concern shrink relative to our concern for the rest of humanity? In a life in which the human capacity for outrage is limited and wanes, mustn’t we aim it at the most egregious offense?

I say that this allegation, if true, is the most egregious offense. Not the most deadly or having the most consequences for future generations, but absolutely the most revelatory about character, privilege and abuse of power.

This would be an act of the most intimate violence performed by the man who is now president himself, flesh to flesh, not with the numbing distance of a signature on an executive order or an offense screamed out at one of his rage rallies.

This president acts as if he is above the law, or is the law. He lies and he cheats and he bullies. He is hateful and rude and racist. He talks about women to whom he is attracted as if they’re objects to be possessed and about women who dare to challenge him as enemies who must be destroyed.

Carroll’s allegation fits the behaviors that have been established or alleged. America owes it to itself to deeply ponder it, and possibly hear sworn testimony about whether it’s true.

Or, conversely, America can simply sleepwalk its way to the polls in 2020 hoping the world is still intact when it opens its eyes.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email:

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and Instagram.

Charles Blow joined The Times in 1994 and became an Opinion columnist in 2008. He is also a television commentator and writes often about politics, social justice and vulnerable communities. @CharlesMBlow • Facebook

June 21, 2019

A Homophobe in NJ Remind us Again Why We Need Pride

Even in a city as diverse as Hackensack, you’ll find bigots. They blend in among midlevel bureaucrats, positions of substantial power but relative obscurity.
Like Frances Cogelja, a school board trustee, who is horrified at the direction this country is headed in. Not because of the porn star president, or babies being ripped from their mothers’ arms at the border; no. 
What Cogelja finds “repugnant” is the sea change transforming us from a nation in which gay people must stay in the closet or risk losing their jobs and friends, to one in which schools openly celebrate their achievements.
She is "disgusted and appalled” by a new law signed by Gov. Phil Murphy – one that requires all public schools in this state to teach about LGBTQ history! 
She wrote as much to the superintendent, it was just revealed through a public records request, and now her constituents are calling on her to resign. Happy Pride month, 2019. Thank you, Frances Cogelja, for reiterating why we need it.
New Jersey is only the second state in the nation, after California, to pass a law requiring the inclusion of LGBTQ education for middle and high schoolers.
One reason why we did it: Nationwide, as many as 70 percent of LGBTQ students report being harassed at school over their sexual orientation. 
Advocates at Garden State Equality say they’ve since been inundated with requests by administrators psyched about the chance to pilot the new program, which will be implemented statewide in the 2020-21 school year.
It will include key historical figures like astronomer Frank Kameny, who could become for this topic what Harriet Tubman is for lessons on slavery in America.
Kameny sued after he was fired from his government job for being gay, and in 1961, became an early leader of the gay rights movement. But have you ever heard of him? Has your kid?
As we come up upon the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, the prejudices of the past are still present-day news, which is why it’s so important to teach that kind of history.
Just this month, New York’s top cop finally gave an official apology on behalf of the department, for the way police behaved during the Stonewall uprising: “The actions taken by the N.Y.P.D. were wrong — plain and simple,” Commissioner James O’Neill said.
That’s what a real apology sounds like. Cogelja’s was more of an excuse. She said her disparaging comments about the law were simply intended to avoid lessons that “may be uncomfortable for my child.” 
She insisted she “will never resign,” citing the “opportunity to exercise my First Amendment rights.”
She is welcome to homeschool her kids or enroll them in private school. But it is not her right, as a sitting member of the board of education, to refuse to comply with the law because of her personal prejudices.
You are not allowed to “opt out,” as Cogelja claimed. Can a racist parent get his kid excused from learning about Harriet Tubman? Not in a public school.
Cogelja must resign, because how can she be trusted now to fairly represent LGBTQ students and teachers? “Everywhere I turn, this alternative lifestyle narrative is being shoved done [sic] our children’s throats,” she wrote.
We’ve made great strides over the last half-century, but all it takes is one half-witted official to prove how far we still have to go. It brings to mind the words of presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg, on the fight for marriage equality:
While some countries measure themselves by “territorial expansion,” he said, in America we measure ourselves by “moral expansion.”
“Narrative's a very powerful thing,” he’s argued. “And we need to make sure that everybody in America understands where they fit in this country's story.

June 1, 2019

How Can Philippine President Duterte Have Made Himself Straight?


Image result for rodrigo duterte ugly face
(pic by Veterand today)

Rodrigo Duterte is the offspring of the people that elected him no less than Donald Trump is also the offspring of the voters that believed them and voted any foolish reason. I have spoken to a couple religious voters, one is from my family (:( that believe in a second coming and said they hope Trump destroy the nation so Christ would not delay his coming and so everything will be destroyed and people would be judged. Talk about tough love! All the bad people gone...This is from a religious good person!

Others have said after electing a black president things needed to be balanced, the pendulum swinging to the opposite side. That is true, nobody could be more opposite than Donald and President Obama. Now between Rodrigo and the Donald...
I see a strong resemblance between these two men. Physically, they are both as ugly as the hillbillies in the movie 'Deliverance.' 

As offspring from their families both come from well to do families. Rodrigo came from parents that under the current Philippines standards were ok. His father had a car instead of a bike and they seemed to have supplied what Duterte and siblings needed. Rodrigo being who 'he does' he did not like school, just like Donald and instead of studying to become a doctor or lawyer, went into the army. That's where these two separated themselves at the hip. Donald was not going to go to Vietnam and return with parts missing or not come at all. Why? Vietnam was a place to be avoided to signed up to go. Multi-millionaire dad got him out of it like most millionaire parents even though there were some exceptional people that opted to go. The government for Donald was not something you give to but is there to take from and to help get places. He knew no history and had no social graces. Duterte in the army was what he is now. A slave to his big mouth and talking when he should be quiet. Even when he tells the truth it sounds like a lie. With the Don, he can stop talking but he can't stop lying. His lying is like a laser weapon that doesn't even aim and adjusts,  just shoots and destroys anything in his way, friend or foe as long is not him.

Rodrigo is the same way but many times he uses an actual gun. Neither man knows anything about science so Trump is not going to believe about Climate change unless a  cloud falls in his head and bring him Putin with the Rubles needed to get that big hotel in the sky...I mean Moscow. Rodrigo things one can become gay or straight rich or poor drug dealer or user by just wishing it. Very sicentific. 

Rodrigo goes around with a gun killing his enemies which he calls drug dealers. Among those, his police have killed thousands of young kids that messed up with drugs. Imagine if every time Rodrigo messed up someone put a bullet in one of his toes, they will be running out of space inside his ears by now.
Image result for rodrigo duterte ugly face

Now coming to the reason I really wrote this and is how Rodrigo can say that he was gay but cured himself of it?? 
First, because he is dumb and knows nothing about human sexuality. He things sexuality is a man with a penis looking for a hole, any hole which he then inserts where he can is sexual. Now he is careful always afraid he might get swallow by it careful he does not get swallow by it. He had a real bad time when he watched "American Gods" and the god swallowed through the man through the vagina....this is just talking...maybe he saw it maybe not. I am told some little man can have that fear thus become very oral.

Secondly, I thought if it was true about becoming straight by wishing it upon a star I would have become straight already because every time I look at Rodrigo I feel nauseous and temporarily lose my interest in man until I see a very looking one. He, on the other hand, looking at himself all these years would not want to be gay and be with a man. One thing he knows and that is the straights are the one species that have sex with anyone straight that would have sex with them. Straight is better.

May 30, 2019

“I love You Hon” Are You Gay?


I think I might be gay. I remember once wanting to kiss my best friend when I was maybe twelve. I also remember seeing an actress look too good in a movie and going home and pacing around thinking, "It's ok for other people to be gay, but not me!" Then I forgot about it for a while. I went to an all girls high school and wished I had a boyfriend. I had a huge crush on a guy in my twenties. For me, it's less about looks—some men have this aura about them that turns me on. I always thought women were more interesting to look at but I just thought that that was some sort of truth about people and not my own sexuality. I had a close female friend in college ask me if I wanted to touch her boobs and take a shower together once, and I didn't want to. We're both with men now. I recently had very short hair, and tried to become a barber, and it had a lot of people questioning my sexual orientation. Could they see something that I was blind to? That whole time was filled with sexual tension, both from the questioning of my identity, and from being surrounded by men who were horny for me. This would build up a hungry desire for my husband, who would happily oblige. Yes, I'm married. And I've been thinking a lot about having kids, and I'm worried that I might be gay. He knows this. He finds my worrying over whether or not I'm a secret lesbian to be comforting somehow. He says he's most worried about the things he doesn't know to worry about while I worry about things he wouldn't have thought to worry about. I'm ok with being gay, but I don't want to leave my husband and the life we have together. I love showing my husband my body, I love how he reacts to it and touches me, I love our intimacy. I love gazing at his body and being naked together. He makes me come. But sometimes I have dreams I'm with a woman and wake up with the thought, "I'm gay!" Is this just OCD or my truth trying to burst through? I know I need to know myself, but I'm just so unsure. Help!
Some Confusion Unconsciously Rousing Real Emotional Distress
P.S. Your advice gives me so much understanding.

I think you might be bi.
It sure doesn't sound like you're faking an attraction to your husband—and you're not just into him because he's into you; being wanted by him certainly seems to inflame your desire for him, SCURRED, but you're attracted to him as, well, as an object. A male object. You love gazing at his body, you love getting naked (and off) with him, etc. If you were gay... well, there are plenty of lesbian-identified women out there who were once married to men with whom they had enjoyable sex lives. But most of those women describe a disconnect, something missing, some sense of incompleteness they weren't quite able to articulate. (Or weren't fully conscious of at the time.) They knew somethingwas missing but didn't know what it was or couldn't bring themselves to admit it.
But you don't want something else, SCURRED, you want something and. Dick and pussy, pecs and tits, your husband's body and some hot woman's body. You seem clearly into men—male energy, the male gaze, your husband's body—and you're also attracted to women. It's really not that complicated. But despite reading my column for however long (sigh), you somehow have it in your head that you can only have one (male partners) or the other (female partners) and that you can only be one (gay) or the other (straight).
You can have both. You can have it all. You don't have to have it all, of course, and no one is entitled to anything (much less all), but you can have male and female partners, SCURRED, if your husband is okay with opening up your marriage. If he's not interested in an open relationship (or you're not), well, then you can't have male and female partners—but you can still identify as bisexual, even if you've never had sex with a woman and aren't, for the time being, able to have sex with a woman.
Soooooo... stop wasting time and energy on this debate/dilemma/d'whatever. You're bi.
P.S. I'm guessing your feeling angsty about this now because you're thinking about getting pregnant and having kids—like having a kid will prevent you from ever exploring your interest in women, so you have to figure this out right now. Not true: you can have a kid and keep exploring your sexuality.

May 20, 2019

A Maine Millennial Speaks About Franklyn Graham Anti Gay Gospel

                           Image result for franklin Graham the devil

Maine is consistently ranked as one of the least religious states in America, and I’ve always been grateful for that. Which is weird, because I come from a fairly religious family. We’re Episcopalian, and growing up, I went to church every Sunday, until I went off to college and could sleep in on the weekends (sorry, Mom). And I went to Catholic school for 13 years.

So why am I grateful that Maine isn’t very religious? Because I’m bisexual. I’ve liked women since I was 11 years old (as for men, I’ve been interested in them only since I was 23, but that’s another story). Maine’s lack of fervent religiosity and those weird Jesus billboards have helped keep the amount of homophobia I’ve personally experienced low. I’ve dealt with some, of course. It’s impossible to grow up LGBTQ in America without accruing some psychological scars. I’m just lucky to only have a few of them. And I’m incredibly lucky that none of them came from my family or our church.

I’ve been thinking about this because Franklin Graham is coming to Maine. Specifically, the Cumberland County Fairgrounds, on May 19 (the day this column is published), in the evening. He’s the evangelical pastor with a net worth in the tens of millions of dollars (not sure how he squares that one with Jesus saying, “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven”), who says that “homosexuality” is “something to be repentant of.”
Does that mean I only have to be half as repentant of bisexuality?
There are definitely things I’ve done that I need to be repentant of. Being attracted to women isn’t one of them.

I don’t know where I stand on the issues of life after death, big cosmic beings, etc., etc. (the fun existential questions of religion), but I do know a few things about Jesus, having spent a childhood reading about him flipping tables, turning water into wine and healing the sick. I am 100 percent sure that if he had a cellphone, he would use a lot of emojis while texting. (I cannot prove this – I just have a strong feeling that it is true, which I believe is the very definition of “faith.”) And I think he would care a lot more about what I’m doing to help the homeless and the hungry and the suffering than about who I swipe right on Tinder for. 

There are people all over the country – and, unfortunately, even in Maine – who think that there is something wrong with being queer. I don’t care about that when it comes to myself.  Their opinions don’t matter to me. It’s the kids I worry about. It just kills me to think that in the crowds who will surely flock to see Graham perform will be parents of queer kids; that they will think something is wrong with their children if they are anything other than solidly and traditionally heterosexual. It pisses me off to know that there are kids out there who are receiving something other than unconditional love and acceptance from their parents. It’s what I’ve always gotten from mine and it’s what every child deserves.

For the record: If God made you gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender or generally amorphously queer, and your parents have a problem with that, then I will be your parent now. Do your homework, clean your room, bedtime is 9:30.

The phenomenon of spiritual leaders using Scripture as a bludgeon and trading moral authority for access to power isn’t new. Hypocrisy, self-enrichment, bargains with politicians: I know a Pharisee when I see one.

Franklin Graham’s tour brochures say he is praying for “the lost.” Presumably, I would be considered one of the lost, on account of all the gay stuff  – not to mention the birth control, and living with a man out of wedlock, and taking the Lord’s name in vain (usually when I stub my toe). But I’m not lost.
I know exactly where I am, and where I am in Maine. As a fan of freedom of speech, and freedom of religion, and freedom of the press (really, of the Constitution in general – I keep a copy in my purse), I know that Franklin Graham has every right to come to my state and preach his poison. But I also have every right to show up with a posterboard sign to make a counterpoint.
No hate. No fear. There’s nothing wrong with being queer.

By Victoria Hugo-Vidal is a Maine millennial. 
She can be contacted at:

July 6, 2018

Kennedy's Departure Will Be Followed by Trump's Impeachment


 This picture might be an exaggeration but you don't have to be a lawyer to count how many laws Trump is broken (that we know of). Maybe he can give the Russians top secrets because the president has the power to declassified documents but how about selling out to our enemy? That is included on the articles of impeachment set out by the Constitution. The other stuff about the financial dealings from the past and now? Well, I would rather have you enumerate them. I am sure that there are people that think he is great because he is not a democrat. He is white and likes to destroy things people think has been oppressing them, like the dept. of Justice, the white house, FBI, banking system. The thing is he is not a republican either he is a Trump for Trump. There are people, that despise brown people so much and think for some reason this is a white nation or wanted to be one even though is never been one. Trump could put those kids in ovens not cages like he is done and some people will back him on it. But the majority of Americans are not like that have never been like that. The picture is been painted by Trump and shown to everyone. 🦊Adam

The midterm elections are still several months away, but if things go to plan, the next Supreme Court justice will be confirmed by the Senate in September, just weeks away from Election Day. So why is the president downright giddy about appointing a Supreme Court Justice so quickly? Because President Trump always makes everything about President Trump. 
Once again, we see the need for his immediate gratification. Just like the travel ban and the policy to separate children from parents at the border, the timing of the Supreme Court appointment, and its consequences are not thought out.
Case in point? The border debacle: After weeks of horrible news coverage and pressure from religious and Republican leaders, Trump was forced to sign an executive order reversing his policy. The administration was never prepared to implement the policy or the executive order.
Seeing the political problem he created — and has yet to properly fix — Trump worked to change the conversation. As a huge consumer of cable news, he was hearing over and over again that the policy of separating children from their parents “will cause him big problems with suburban women.” He wanted something to appeal to his base, so he pivoted to immigration and ICE, then something better, in his opinion, happened. Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement
Kennedy’s decision to step down from the Supreme Court was his own choice. But based on credible reporting by the New York Times and other outlets, the White House was on the charm offensive, encouraging Kennedy that his legacy would be protected, and that it was the right time to retire.
There is no doubt that at the age of 81, and after 30 years on the Supreme Court, Justice Kennedy has every right to retire, and we all owe him a tremendous debt of gratitude for his service. But by retiring now, the biggest issue for the midterms will be abortion, specifically how a “Trump Court” will reverse Roe v. Wade.
A few months ago, Trump started talking repeatedly about voter turnout at his campaign-style rallies. The writing on the wall? Democrats are more motivated than Republicans. The president mistakenly thought that by playing to his base, turnout for him would increase. There are two key problems with that. First, Trump isn’t on the ballot this November, and it has been proved that Trump’s support does not transfer well outside of Republican primaries. The other flaw? While it’s true that Republicans will turn out over certain issues, Democrats in response to those same issues will turn out in even highernumbers.
With the issue of Roe v. Wade all but on the ballot this November, it is extremely likely to increase suburban turnout by double digits among women, independents and Democrats who stayed home in 2016. This will lead to the defeat of incumbent Republicans from swing House districts. It’s true that in red states Republicans will turn out over abortion rights, but that’s not where the swing districts are.
The Democrats need to win 23 congressional seats to take back the House. According to the esteemed Cook Political Report, an independent, nonpartisan newsletter, there are 24 “toss-up” seats and 34 “lean” Democratic or Republican seats in play. In a typical midterm election, that would mean the party not in power had a very good chance of winning the majority. By injecting the issue of women’s reproductive rights into an already highly motivated liberal base, this will all but secure a Democratic House and a majority looking to impeach the president.
That doesn’t mean he will be removed. For the Senate this year, Republicans are defending nine seats, compared with the Democrats defending 25 (Sens. Bernie Sanders and Angus King are independents but caucus with the Democrats). Of those 25 Democratic seats, 10 of them are in states that Donald Trump carried in 2016. So it’s a pretty safe bet that the Democrats will not pick up the two-thirds majority to convict the president.
On June 27, 2018, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy resigned and all but ensured that on Jan. 1, 2019, the U.S. House of Representatives will initiate impeachment proceedings against President Donald J. Trump — another self-inflicted injury, Mr. President.


May 17, 2018

So Many Nations Trying to Bribe The President Now! Because They Can

 Who catches the eye of the business man making tons of millions on everything Trump? and President?


In light of the news that entities controlled by the Chinese government will contribute $500 million to an Indonesian development project that includes several Trump-branded properties, it’s worth taking a step back and marveling at how many powerful foreign groups and individuals appear to be attempting to influence the U.S.’s distinguished president by giving money or favors to his chintzy real-estate company and/or sketchy pals. And while there’s no conclusive evidence (yet) of such incentives having led directly to changes in the administration’s policies, there’s certainly no evidence that sending cash in the president’s general direction will hurt your chances of getting the hookup, so to speak, from the American government. Take a look:

• China, as mentioned, just committed $500 million to build a theme park in an Indonesian luxury mega-development that will also feature Trump Organization-branded hotels and a golf course. Days after the commitment was finalized, Trump announced that he wants to lift sanctions that have been imposed on a Chinese telecom company called ZTE, which did business with Iran.

On another front, White House adviser Jared Kushner’s family business has solicited individual Chinese investments in one of its U.S. developments with a presentation that explicitly noted that Kushner is Trump’s influential son-in-law. In February, the Washington Post reported that U.S. intelligence agencies have collected evidence that the government of China believes that Kushner can be manipulated through his business interests.

• A well-connected investor from Qatar, Ahmed Al-Rumaihi, is accused in a U.S. court filing by an aggrieved former business partner of having attempted to bribe said former partner for an introduction to Steve Bannon—and of having claimed in the process that former national security adviser Michael Flynn had taken Qatari money. The latter claim was made more noteworthy by video footage that shows Al-Rumaihi entering Trump Tower in New York City at the same time as infamous Trump lawyer Michael Cohen on Dec. 12, 2016, a day that Michael Flynn was also in the building. (Al-Rumaihi, in a bombshell interview published Wednesday by the Intercept, acknowledged having met with Trump officials and says Cohen asked him for a personal $1 million “fee” to help facilitate Qatari investments in the U.S.—but said he did not pay the fee and did not meet on Dec. 12 with Flynn. Cohen denies asking for the $1 million.) 

Qatar’s government has also reportedly met multiple times with representatives of Newsmax, the conservative media outlet run by Trump’s frequent Mar-a-Lago companion Christopher Ruddy, about a potential investment in the company. The reported negotiations have coincided with a shift in the Trump administration’s rhetoric about Qatar: After initially condemning the country for supporting terrorism, a condemnation that coincided with a Qatari decision not to invest in Jared Kushner’s company, the White House has now decided that Qatar is a trustworthy ally whose leader is, in Trump’s words, a “great friend.”

• Michael Flynn was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by companies connected to Turkey and Russia in 2015 and 2016 before reportedly pursuing Turkey- and Russia-friendly policies during his short tenure as national security adviser. It was also recently revealed that, in 2017, a U.S. investment company controlled by a Russian billionaire named Viktor Vekselberg paid Michael Cohen $500,000. Vekselberg is among the Russian individuals targeted by economic sanctions that Trump has reportedly been reluctant to impose despite the advice of his advisers and the wishes of Republicans in Congress. (The investment firm in question, Columbus Nova, denies that Vekselberg ordered the payment to Cohen and says Cohen was employed to provide legitimate business consulting services. There are, however, several reasons to doubt Columbus Nova’s version of the story.)

• A lobbyist named George Nader reportedly arranged lucrative contracts with the government of the United Arab Emirates for a security firm owned by Republican fundraiser/Trump buddy Elliott Broidy. Broidy then reportedly advocated UAE-friendly positions to Trump on several occasions, including a meeting in the Oval Office. (You may recognize Broidy’s name because he resigned from his role with the Republican National Committee when reports emerged that he’d employed Michael Cohen to arrange a $1.6 million NDA payment to a Playboy model. It’s a situation that has not quite been fully explained.) Nader, for his part, is now reportedly cooperating with Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation.

• Saudi Arabia, in addition to sharing the interests pursued by its ally the UAE, is reportedly involved in negotiations to invest in businesses owned by Trump crony and National Enquirer publisher David Pecker. Saudi Arabia was also reportedly involved, as a potential client, in a private-sector plan to build nuclear plants that Michael Flynn helped promote during his time in office. The Trump administration has consistently pursued policies that benefit Saudi Arabia and the UAE, most notably by withdrawing from the nuclear deal that provided economic and geopolitical benefits to the countries’ Middle Eastern rival Iran. 

• The Trump Organization has a number of active projects in India’s notoriously corrupt real-estate market—where several of its suspect local partners, as the New Republic has documented in an exposé, are “closely intertwined with the ruling party” of prime minister Narendra Modi. Donald Trump Jr. traveled to the country this February to promote Trump-branded apartment properties, a sales trip during which new buyers were offered the chance to have “conversation and dinner” with him. Don Jr., in addition to being the president’s son, has taken a role in the already-active Trump 2020 re-election campaign—and, during his trip to India, was scheduled to give a speech about U.S. foreign policy at a conference at which Modi also appeared. (After backlash, Trump Jr.’s speech was canceled and he instead participated in a softball interview about his life and “business culture.”)

On the potential “quo” end of things, the Trump administration has been consistently hostile toward India’s rival, Pakistan.

• Rodrigo Duterte, the president of the Philippines, named the developer of a Trump-branded building in Manila as the country’s trade envoy to the U.S.

• Diplomatic and lobbying delegations from some of the countries above and several others have spent significant sums at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. The Trump Organization has said it is donating all the profits the hotel derives from foreign government patronage to the U.S. Treasury—but hasn’t released any documents or details to support that claim.

One piece of subtext to all of this: European heads of state, who are generally governed by laws prohibiting bribery, have treated Trump like a typical U.S. president, making the case to him via formal diplomacy that doing things like withdrawing from the Paris climate accords and Iranian nuclear deal would damage U.S. interests. He’s generally ignored them in favor of developing buddy-buddy relationships with a number of authoritarians whose countries are friendly toward the Trump Organization and the people in its orbit.

All in all, it’s really starting to seem like Trump’s promise to create a “blind trust” that would completely insulate him from his business interests have not been entirely effective in its implementation. Sad! 

November 11, 2017

More Accusations of Indecent Behavior by Men From Hollywood and a Self Experience

I wanted to concentrate this weekend on the wave of people coming out with past experiences of sexual assault (intimidation or non-consensual sex between two adults or one adult and an underage victim.)
The problem with that is there are so many of those incidents coming out this week I can't just pick one and ignore the others. I could concentrate on the LGBT ones but how can I ignore the straight men doing this which is at the core simply because there are more of them. 

I have never seen any straight episodes but on a couple of occasions, I experienced gay ones.
One older guy going for a younger guy, which was not appropriate.  It was at "Boots and Saddles" NYC, back 30 years ago. This guy just intimidated a younger guy who did not want to leave the place where he was, he did not want to be driven away. He kept changing his space to stay away from this straight looking gay man who thought that either he was going to drive this guy out of the bar or at the very least get him to talk to him and put his arms around him(he already did that and the guy ran off from that space).
 I was about 5 yrs older than the guy in trouble here. I admired that he decided the assaulting guy was not going to drive him out but it was obvious he didn't know anyone there. I got offended by this situation and felt bad for the guy. I interceded and had to do it very strongly which was the reason I waited to see if the guy would leave the bar. The guy and I started a conversation which was easy for me to do and that disarmed the older guy because now the younger guy and I were talking and becoming friends. It's just so happened that he left with me that night and accepted an invitation for more. I thought he had been placed on my path and he was. I felt so good being with him, we had a lot in common except he had this thing about Puerto Ricans that they all cheat. I'm sure that was his experience. I understood it until it turned on me and he would take everything I told him with a big rock of salt, not a grain. The short relationship lasted until the first date of our meeting. He cursed me out just because I moved from the place he told me to wait for him and not move. I moved because he ordered me to stay in a spot and I wanted to see how this young guy was going to take it when he saw I had my own mind and was being too aggressive.
 I was just testing him because I had to make decisions about him and me, whether this was to be stopped there or be continued. He did not want to be just friends. He warned me of what he was going to do if when he came back he did not find me there.  I was curious...He was behaving with me opposite than at that bar. He had become aggressive. Finally, he got back (never told where he was going. Maybe he was getting an engagement ring??)  He said I was cruising for someone else. Cursed me out as a Puerto Rican etc. etc. I knew he was damaged and I could not help him there. I already had issues with the guy I was semi-dating which we kept breaking up every other month. This guy I thought would be the one that will make me drop some people in my life I no longer wanted to be with but also I did not want to be alone. I was never sorry I met him even after he cursed me out; I knew he had to be hurting about something recent.

The other experience involved someone from Hollywood who at that time spent a lot of time in NY. I didn't even know he was gay until he grabbed my crotch at the "Monster bar' in the West Village. That was 15 yrs ago and his name is Philben. I won't say whether that is his first or last name because he has come out since then. Things came out ok because of that I'm tall and 15 yrs ago I looked like an I worked out (I didn't, except jog).But he grabbed by my crotch and try to push me back to a corner (right behind me) in the bar where they had a private bathroom. When I stood my ground by staying standing and just looking at him trying to figure out what was going on. I would have met him if he introduced himself to me, etc. but that is not what he had in mind on his way to the bathroom. He wanted to take a bathroom buddy with him. So he went alone to the bathroom and by the time he came out there was a guy from his entourage who took him back to the part of the bar where they were all sitting. 

Today's newest headlines are Richard Dreifus, this time the father, Dreifus Sr. doing the penis showtime with a woman friend. He denies it. 

Also, there is one of the people I have the greatest respect for and that is George Takei. 
He is accused of giving alcohol maybe laced with a drug and trying to rape a younger guy. He denies it. 
I do believe both Dreifus and Takei are honorable men now and if they committed these assaults, their memories will come back like it did with Stacey and CK. I think eventually we'll know

This is not going to stop because this has been an everyday occurrence, still happening with men that because they have achieved something, they think it gives them the power to grab a stranger's crotch on the way to the bathroom( I stood still and not reacted forcibly because I knew who he was).
Someone else might have experienced a self-defense push back or punched him in the eye.

For the others, they are or think they are in a position to be protected and assault someone's most guarded personal possession which is their sexuality. Something we are glad to share but taken away it has a hurt that stays with the person because it is something stolen that cannot be put back.

October 11, 2017

Russian Gay Porn Guy M.Lucas Calls Liberals Apologists for Islam-A Liberal Calls Him Trumpie


Michael Lucas is a Pornographer and works either paid or not paid as an agent for tourism in Israel. Definitely nothing wrong with that. The part I have problems with is his lies about how much Israel is Pro LGBT. In a country that tries to use our community as a tool to show how wonderful they are for the LGBT community.  

The current government of the State of Israel is anti-gay marriage and has been against couples adopting and you can go one by one of the rights an LGBT would have in the US or most countries in the West and you will see Israel has none of those Gay Civil rights.  So what does Israel really have and how do they try to sell it?

1. They sell tourism. How beautiful the beaches are and in commercials you see two guys be next to each other at the beach But No *PDA's unless is Pride. That brings me to the second point.

2. Pride. It is so cute how the gay community (government helps)  converts Tel Aviv into to a rainbow of colors. If you are into rainbows and nothing meaningful inside, then rainbows are a good thing.

3. Security.  They point out how homophobic the Palestinians are. Muslim kills gays but Israel defends LGBT from the Muslims. Palestinians don't have many rainbows.

{*PDA= Public Displays of Affection }

I am not by any means against the state of Israel but I am against a government that is against LGBT. Yes, gays can freely walk the streets in Israel but we do more than walking the streets and going to the beaches. That is how it was here (US)in the 1960's. WE ask to be treated as other citizens. As far as I am concern Michael Lucas should be fighting for the things the LGBT needs but is not getting from the government in Israel and confronting them will not be suitable for a Porn mogul who's main interest Porn and it's money.  As a gay Russian why he hasn't said a word publicly calling out the Russian government and its treatment of gays? Is he helping give gay Chechens repatriation in Israel? No. I have to say that Liberals as many conservatives have been doing just that. Where has he been? Don't answer that....

I would take a vacation in Israel rather than in Iraq, Turkey, Palestine, Egypt and other unfriendly, unsafe places for LGBT BUT I won't go to Jamaica because they kill gays even though they are friendly to the gay tourists. And that is my point. Being a nice tourist place does not make it a Gay-friendly place beyond the tourist's dollars.A place where gays can be treated as straights with the same rights.
This guy Lucas tries selling it as a great Gay Mecca and is not a gay anything when you look at  England, Denmark, France and now Germany of how much respect they give to the LGBT lives by the civil and human rights they have given the LGBT population.

Lucas goes after liberals which I suspect he does not know the meaning of the word. He talks about generalities. If he even understood the LGBT community beyond cocks and assholes he would know we are just like the colors of the rainbow. Not just in skin color but we don't all do things the same way. Where most of us agree is in the way we vote for President. Most of us vote Democrats not because Democrats are great but when you find yourself with someone that sees you as someone disabled, not complete human being because of your sexuality and the opponent believes you should have all the rights any other person have, the choice is clear.
About the tax issue of democrats raising taxes is just as phony as Trump. A republican will raise the taxes as much as a democrat if they see a need for it. The government now is all Republican......can anybody say their taxes have come down? In the Presidents budget only the top 10% gets a tax cut. Who is going to pay for it? If you are not making over 300-500k your taxes never come down. That is the biggest fallacy the GOP sells which only other GOP'ers buy.

He mentions the Alt-Right The Alt right is what gave us Trump, thanks a lot!  The alt right is an extremist group and  they are no better than any extremist groups. They will kill us if they could get away with it. Extremism is a bad vice and it kills. I hated on the Right and the Left. One should be able to vote and see issues A la cart because life is no buffet.

The Alt-right fights to take civil rights back from gay adoptions to take rights from the married couples in inheritance, insurance and large purchases, etc.  Rights of married couples are being taken back but Lucas quotes Trump when he said he will defend the "LGBTQ" community. When Trump said it He even pronounced the Q. Yes he said it and he lied!! If you don't see it you don't read the news. But from the First day in office, he surrounded himself with rabidly anti-gay men from the Vice President PENCE on down. Trump brought in after entering the white house every Homophobe in town. Trump is a liar and a failure as a human being and Leader.
People who voted for him owe the rest of us something. They should be saying sorry for falling for the Russians ads in Facebook or Tweeter or YouTube or Google. They should be saying sorry because I voted for what I thought was the least evil candidate or because of what Trump said.....Trump was proven a lier grabbing pussies before the elections. So Forgive me if I blew my top when I saw this Pornographer bad mouthing me without knowing me and the rest of the LGBT community that hates the crazy man at the White House.

Michael Lucas should get his head up once in a while and see the colors and differences of our community both Liberals and yes conservatives that vote for us first rather than an illusion of getting a better tax deal. Even if that was true, which is not!!....Isn't our civil rights worth $10 more every month or 10% of your next  raise?? What is out of whack is an extremist and even violent at times Alt-right tied up with the extremist Evangelicals.


This is the Facebook Message I {{Adam Gonzalez}, it turns out he was a friend on Facebook. Haven't shared a word in years}} sent to Michael Lucas, Porn guy and Trump supporter it seems and anti-Muslim.

I read in Haaretz the following article in which Lucas steps on the liberals which have fought and allow his homosexual ass to make money and even have civil rights in most of the western world.
He says we liberals are anti-Jewish and pro-Muslims (he makes no distinction of gay Muslims, I guess in his mind there are none).

 I wonder what my liberal Jewish friends are?? The ones I know are pro-gay Muslims and for human rights for all. Let me have you be the judge of this human malady of gays gone Trumpie.

My intentions are for people to know the smelly side of this guy when he opens his mouth and tries to understand what liberals are since it seems he does not know nor whom Trump is to the LGBT community or his prostitute the *Breitbart. Just read an article right here on this blog today and you will get specific complaints of what Trump is doing to us to keep his 30+% of Evangelicals happy. Everything they asked of him he is trying to accomplish. He makes sure he keeps them happy because he is got no one else, no even the Republican Congress.
“Michael Lucas, I saw your article on Haaretz and have to tell you I'm impressed with how gay protrumpies are still protruding. You guys I guess see the world as money for us and taking money from us "liberals." I wish that was true but only people with certain brain anomalies can still think that. I am a liberal and I am amazed at homosexuals like you would have done without us "liberals" to fight for the rights that allow you to sell your bud and others'. Would you have a career without us? I'm sure but not money making. I can only dump you in Facebook, I'm sure you will get dumped in the pile of stuff you come from, again by others.”



Pro-Israel activist and gay porn mogul Michael Lucas spoke to the so-called alt-right website Breitbart about homophobia in the Muslim world, slamming American liberals as "apologists for Islam." 

Russian-born Lucas is a longtime pro-Israel activist and supporter of efforts to beef up gay tourism to Israel. In the past, he has written political opinion pieces detailing Israel’s impressive record on gay rights, organized gay tours of Israel and recently – and very publicly – pressured the New York LGBT Community Center to cancel meetings and events held by anti-Israel groups.
He produced “Men of Israel,” touted as the first pornographic film to be shot on location in the Holy Land with an all-Israeli/Jewish cast, as well as the non-porno, pro-Israel documentary “Undressing Israel: Gay Men in the Promised Land.”

Lucas told Breitbart's Aaron Klein that liberals "usually tie it to some specific person; specific bad leader" when discussing the treatment of the LGBT community in the Arab world, adding its an inconvenience for them. Steve Bannon's Breitbart has long dabbled in the theme of Muslim hostility toward the LGBT community, having hired Milo Yiannopoulos. U.S. President Donald Trump himself promised to protect the LGBT community in the U.S. from Islamic extremism when accepting the Republican Party nomination for president. 

In February 2016, Haaretz's Allison Kaplan Sommer reported on Lucas calling protesters who disrupted a reception for Jewish participants at a gay activism conference in Chicago “anti-Semites” and “Jew-haters,” accusing the conference organizers of enabling their behavior.

Now that we are talking about Muslim homophobia, it is becoming very inconvenient for liberals because liberals are apologists for Islam. So it is becoming very inconvenient, and that is why they usually tie it to some specific person; specific bad leader. For example, it would be [Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah] Sisi, or it would be in Chechnya the leader [Chechen President Ramzan Akhmadovich] Kadyrov, or it would be one individual that is responsible – or maybe at the most one political party, but not political Islam. So that is exactly what is happening here in this situation. 
This was happening before Sisi. This is happening all over the Muslim world – all of those Muslim countries to one degree or another. For example, in Saudi Arabia, it is a daily routine, while in Egypt there are waves.


*Breitbart News Network is a far-right American news, opinion and commentary website founded in 2007 by conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart. Wikipedia
EditorAlex Marlow (editor-in-chief); Wynton Hall (managing editor); Joel Pollak (senior-editor-at-large)
Created byAndrew Breitbart
OwnerBreitbart News Network, LLC
Key peopleSteve Bannon (executive chair)
CEOLarry Solov

Featured Posts

Second Day at Home {Adamfoxie}

I will rather post important stories not being published the way they should or post information in a new format that will h...