Why the ultra-conservatives will lose the culture war, if I have to single-handedly defeat each of them myself

So I'm sitting here, going about my life, totally thinking about blogging on other things, when I stumbled across this.  For the sake of emphasis, let's repost the full headline:

'Christianity' in Mississippi: Constance McMillen & learning disabled students sent to fake prom

That's right, the "well-meaning" and "loving" and "concerned" parents of Fulton, Mississippi rented a country club to hold a prom for their duly selected outcasts, while their presumably totally upstanding young Christian virginal children who are totes free from sin had their own prom elsewhere.  

To them I say this:  I hope your merciful God gets Old Testament on your ass. 

Now I've quietly followed the Southern Prom Saga of 2010 for awhile, and I can relate to these kids.  I didn't go to my own high school's prom for fear of being pumped full of redneck lead.  (That's right, I said it, I was scared those whole 4 years.  Savor the belated victory.)  Fortunately, my then-boyfriend went to a much more welcoming school, and I went to the senior prom with him.  We danced with the principal.  Talk about being on another planet a mere 15 miles from your home.  But I digress.

On the one hand, this is a pretty small issue.  One kid (well, two) in one dinky little town was denied access to her prom, on a pretty silly basis.  She rejected that decision, and the school just canceled the whole prom.  Lucky for her, a Reagan-appointed activist judge ruled that her rights were denied, but didn't force the school go forward, on account of the parent-created prom that was to serve as a stand-in for the school sponsored event.  

On the other hand, this whole incident (and the related incident taking place near Macon, Georgia) is indicative of a far greater problem:  Many, many, many, many, many, many, many American schools (particulary middle schools and high schools) are unsafe for LGBTQ youth.  Here's another tidbit from my past you didn't know:  right after my rather forced outing in 10th grade, I was at one of many meetings with the guidance counselor for my grade (nice lady), who assessed the situation I was facing.  Lots of teachers -- including several I'd never known -- were reporting an obscenely large number of hateful language being directed my way, even without me in the room.  That counselor said to me, in blunt terms, "I don't think you're safe here, and I don't think my bosses [the principal and assistant principals] will protect you.  Here's a transfer form.  Pick your school if you want."

Fortunately for me, I come from a long line of exceedingly stubborn mountain people.  To her, I said "I refuse to let them win," and walked out.  The next 3 years sucked monkey balls.  Sure, I avoided physical harm (though I also avoided being alone anywhere), and I walked around just as cocky and arrogant as all the other teenage boys, but inside I was scared out of my brain.  So much so that when I got a viewbook in the mail for a little dinky college that had a picture of kids drawing a pink triangle on sidewalk chalk, I was on them like like a gay man on an antique store (oh... wait...).  I needed an escape.  

Why?  Because at 18, I felt worn down.  I felt old.  I was declared cynical before my time by coworkers twice my age.  And that, friends, is the experience of a gay kid in a small town high school with a penchant towards conservatism.  

I don't want to suggest that all small towns are as teeming with vile, nasty, brutish people as the folks of Fulton who perpetuated this immature affront.  Nor to I have any interest in breathing any life into the myth that only Southern rural locales are unsafe for LGBTQ folks --  the cities and suburbs can be hateful too. 

But as I've told queer kids when I've done trainings and presentations about advocating for their rights:  "Take all that negative energy and use it to make a better world."  You see, over 10 years later, I for one still refuse to be defeated.  And you know what? 

I've got this on my side:  

Blessed are you when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice for your reward is very great in heaven. For so they persecuted the prophets that were before you.

The Gospel of St. Matthew, Chapter 5, Verses 11-12

News of the sleaze: televangelists and ethnicity-based elections

You may remember our dear friend Pat "Hurricanes, Tornadoes and Meteor Showers" Robertson, from his recent idiocy related to a certain Haitian pact with Satan (it sort of rhymes!). Now, at the war crimes trial for Charles Taylor -- that's right, the war crimes trial -- it has come out that the good reverend offered to lobby U.S. officials on the venerable Mr. Taylor's behalf. Now which is worse? A national pact with Satan to overthrow systemic slavery (which somehow included paying reparations to the enslaving party), or a personal pact between a real, live, actively-slaughtering-innocent-people war criminal and one of Amer'ca's finest lobbyvangelists?

In other news, the NYT has a decent run-down of the complexities of holding an election in Cote d'Ivoire, wherein one must be a bona fide Ivorian to vote. Of course, determining who is what is clearly a tumultuous and easily corrupted process, quite possible leading to a powder keg.

Hat tip to Chris Blattman for the first piece.

My religious upbringing summed up in less than 3 minutes

This is about as accurate as one can get. Enjoy!

From the office of unqualified hacks

Ladies and gentlemen, Rev. Franklin Graham is going to save Darfur.

Now isn't that nice?

Here's the deal. Billy Graham's significantly dumber son is going to get Omar Bashir to stop slaughtering people by encouraging policy types to be nice to the dictator. Then, to top it all off, Rev. Graham is going to build or rehabilitate hundreds of churches in Sudan, through his aid group, which is of course funded by USAID.

Not bad for a man who thinks Islam is a religion of hate, intolerance and violent proselytizing. Then again, Graham the Younger's doctrine of Christianity seems to meet those criteria pretty well. Perhaps these two have more in common than they first thought back in 2003.

What's the rationale for this bold and daring plan? Why, it's the fact that Bashir signed the Comprehensive Peace Agreement with the SPLM/A in Southern Sudan back in 2005. That apparently means that he's a reasonable man who's willing to compromise (though not reasonable enough to meet with Bill Frist, Graham's travel companion). Never mind the fact that the civil war in Southern Sudan raged for some twenty years before it was ended, or that there is some evidence that Bashir is undermining the agreement.

Thanks for the hard work, Brother Franklin! The rest of us will change course right away, by sending Bashir some lovely Valentine's cards, complete with those little heart candies with the cute messages.

NoVa and RoVa: not so different after all

A few months back, the Post published a glaringly offensive piece comparing the alleged differences between Northern Virginia (NoVa) and the rest of Virginia (RoVa). Aside from being painfully classist, smug, and elitist, the piece is generally not deserving of comment because it's so grossly exaggerated. Nonetheless, the point was that NoVa was this bastion of liberal modernity while RoVa was full of dirt eating hicks who do math on their fingers and can't really spell. In a season of particularly intense political campaigning in the state, the point of the piece seemed to be that NoVa really is superior, even if its political desires (electing liberal Democrats) somehow were to be drowned out by RoVa's clamor for conservatism. One particular gem including this line:

In RoVa, they hope the South will rise again. In NoVa, they hope the souffle will.

After the election, there was even talk of NoVa seceding from RoVa because it was so liberal, unique, and incredibly different. The accusation was that the legislature in Richmond was just using NoVa for its hordes of tax revenue, while denying it an appropriately elitist, holier than thou voice in state affairs.

Why do I bring this up now? Because this past Sunday, NoVa sent word that it's not so different from RoVa after all. Seven parishes of the Episcopal Church, most of them located in NoVa, voted to leave the Episcopal Church of the United States of America and instead place themselves under the jurisdiction of a radical social conservative archbishop in Nigeria, who opposes the rights of gay people to even eat together in public, among other virtues. Two of those congregations are among the oldest and largest in the United States, and none other than George Washington was a member of one.

What does this mean about the NoVa/RoVa dichotomy? Simply put, social conservatives are all over the state of Virginia (and a lot of other "blue" states/counties/cities) and thus maybe NoVa should stop being so damn smug. Just because your cars, houses and incomes are bigger than those of your compatriots further south doesn't make you special. I should also remind you that Virginia's recent bizarro anti-gay marriage amendment passed with some 57% of ballots cast. Therefore even if you do deserve some credit for electing left-leaning types like Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, and Jim Webb, don't construe this as making you somehow better than other people. If anything, voting in this country should be the great equalizer, not the great specializer.

You would think that I would be more bothered by other, more obvious aspects of this little saga. For instance, I grew up gay in a part of Tennessee not all that different from RoVa. Yet I maintain that people have the right to believe and vote as they please, even if I disagree with it and/or think some of their decisions will bear disastrous fruits. Though I'm one of those much beguiled bleeding heart liberals, I believe that conservatives are basically good people (as all people are), they just think differently from me, and that's ok. I believe that one of these days, various social issues will be worked out in ways amenable to the rights of all Americans.

In short: NoVa should get off its high horse, especially in light of these recent events. In the meantime, if NoVa wants some sort of voting in the state legislature based upon dollars contributed, they should consult the World Bank, and remember how well that's worked out for poor people.