.For those of you who've never heard of
After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, I will make the big assumption you're not alone. Heck, up until recently, I had no idea this book that was written in the 80's is apparently the "official" copy of the Homosexual Agenda® -- well, that's what the conservative "Christian" wing of religious right organizations are saying is our primary Homosexual Agenda® document.
If you hadn't heard, After The Ball is the book that's heavily referenced in the American Family Association's video 'Silencing Christians' as being our guidebook for the Homosexual Agenda®, and Focus on the Family research analyst Caleb Price just referenced the book on Monday. Heck, here's the search page for all Focus on the Family's references to this book, as well as the search pages for WingNutDaily and the Concerned Women For America.
First of all, the '90's are over, and I don't think America conquered its fear and hatred of gays. {Well, let's modernize a bit, and call us lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people instead of just gays -- which means I don't think America conquered its fear and hatred of the whole community of LGBT people in the 90's either.}
And, if you -- the LGBT activist -- wanted to buy a copy of this 80's take on the Homosexual Agenda®, it's apparently going to cost you a minimum of $54.45 for a used paperback.
What do ya' want? The book appears to have been out of print for quite awhile. 
So anywho, the Q of the Day is this: Can everyone who has read "after the ball" please raise one of your virtual hands?
By the way, one hand is down on my keyboard, and my other is holding a cup of coffee -- I've never read the book.
mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_11762001
FULLERTON, Calif.-A minister who recently reported an attack by a group of youngsters at his Orange County church has been ordered to report to jail next month for violating probation in a lewd-conduct case.Assistant District Attorney Jaime Coulter said Willie Holmes, president and founder of International Nondenomenational Assemblies, must report to jail March 6 to start serving a 60-day sentence, the Orange County Register reported Saturday.
BUT HERE IS THE REST OF THE STORY:
Holmes, 41, attracted media attention last week when Fullerton police arrested three teenagers suspected of attacking him and his family as they were driving to his church. Holmes says a group of youths stepped in front of his car on Feb. 13 and tossed rocks, bricks and bottles.Court records show Holmes pleaded guilty to engaging in lewd conduct and was sentenced to three years' probation for the November 2006 misdemeanor.
Holmes later pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts of contempt of court for violating the terms of his probation on Feb. 4, 2008. He was sentenced to 60 days in jail and three years' probation, and ordered to stay away from Hillcrest Park in Fullerton.Holmes was arrested a few days after his guilty plea on suspicion of misdemeanor indecent exposure, lewd conduct in a public place and loitering around a public toilet.
The indecent exposure count was dismissed, and he pleaded guilty to the other two counts. He was sentenced to 60 days in jail and three years' probation
And then his paid excuser:
Holmes' lawyer Jacqueline Goodman Rubio noted in a statement Sunday that the charges against Holmes stemmed from a police sting operation involving a decoy and not an actual victim.
"Like everyone else, he is not perfect," said Rubio, who has represented Holmes in all three cases. "But unlike others, my client has owned up to his mistakes and is cooperating with the authorities to pay his debt to society."
.....and then goes right out and does it again.
Rubio said Holmes chose to report the attack last week because he wanted to stand up for what he believed in: "peace in his communityommunity." despite facing "danger and humiliation" for going public.
Holmes' wife, Vanessa, 49, told the newspaper she was unaware of her husband's criminal record.
EH WHAT??? Arrested, charged and she doesn't know..
That's not all that woman doesn't know!!
Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial, we have always been, and we, I believe, continue to be, in two many ways, a nation of cowards. Though race related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion, and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we, average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about things racial.I breathed a sigh of relief when I heard these remarks because, as regular readers know, I frequently blog about why it's sometimes hard to speak freely and frankly about race in American society. I can't stand the seeing the term "post-racial" tossed around out there as truth, particularly when referring to the past election cycle or now that Barack Obama is president. I think we have plenty of evidence that we have a long way to go on the matter. I thought Holder was refreshingly frank; we all have fears of broaching the subject -- and the problem is not just on the right side of the aisle....And we, in this room, bear a special responsibility. Through its work and through its example, the Department of Justice - this Department of Justice - as long as I'm here, must and will leave the nation to the new birth of freedom so long ago promised by our greatest president. This is our duty, this is our solemn responsibility.
Take Maureen Dowd's reaction to Holder's comments; apparently the use of the word "coward" sent her into a paranoid tirade:
Yet Obama is oozing empathy compared with his attorney general, who last week called us "a nation of cowards" about race.Wow, where was the lecture, where was the sermon? I take it that the "Jackson/Sharpton" reference is shorthand for "those blacks from the old school who lay a guilt trip on whitey." Talk about dog whistles. Moreover, Holder was addressing ALL of us, not just white folks. I took his statement as inclusive. We are all responsible for the silence. You see, in Dowd's mind, Holder became the Angry Black Man when he said that; it blew away the post-racial fantasy she loved clinging to. One has to wonder -- in the wake of the unbelievable New York Post cartoon -- why she didn't get a reality check last week. As I said to Mike, the truth is, she reacted viscerally, and became defensive and transmitted it through her keyboard....We need leaders to help us through our crises, not provide us with crude evaluations of our character. And we don't need sermons from liberal virtuecrats, anymore than from conservative virtuecrats.
...In the middle of all the Heimlich maneuvers required now - for the economy, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, health care, the environment and education - we don't need a Jackson/Sharpton-style lecture on race. Barack Obama's election was supposed to get us past that.
So did right-winger Jonah Goldberg, who called Holder's statement "both hackneyed and reprehensible." His reaction to Holder's comments is even more absurd -- and revealing. Read it below the fold.
Goldberg:
I think this is nonsense as we talk about race a great, great, great deal in this country. Endless courses in colleges and universities, chapters in high school textbooks, movies, documentaries, after-school-specials and so on are devoted to discussing race. We even have something called "Black History Month" - the occasion for Holder's remarks to begin with - when America is supposed to spend a month talking about the black experience.Someone please change his Pampers; that's a pantload. Leaving aside the fact that Goldberg feels oppressed because people get to learn more about black history in February, he's in such a frenzy that he misses Holder's point -- we're not talking about discussing race on an Ivory Tower panel, with eggheads debating the merits of, say, affirmative action. It's not about any studies, polls, after-school specials or class readings. The AG said:Second, to the extent we don't talk about race in this country the primary reason is that liberals and racial activists have an annoying habit of attacking anyone who doesn't read from a liberal script "racists" or, if they're lucky, "insensitive."
we, average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about things racial.He's pointing a finger at you and me -- you and your neighbor, you and your colleagues at work. We are the ones who fail to engage on the topic of race because we feel so exposed, as I told Mike, afraid of being called stupid, racist or a bigot for simply asking questions out of ignorance and desire to learn, particularly if you don't have much personal experience with people outside of your race. That's tough stuff.
How many close black friends -- and I don't mean casual acquaintances -- do you think Goldberg has? Somehow, based on that diatribe, he can't have many. OK, well maybe not if he's friends with Jesse Lee Peterson.
Human nature makes it hard to reach out; Dowd and Goldberg, who clearly came unglued at Holder's use of the word "coward" simply dismissed the sentiment and message within it, and even worse, saw affronts that didn't exist directed solely at whites. But that's why we have to talk about race. This all cuts both ways, and there's no shame in admitting there's a problem and being part of the solution begins in your personal interactions, not pontificating in a paranoid fashion in a column.
I didn't use the word "coward," but I did call the American public "lazy" about going outside racial comfort zones in a recent post -- and it's the truth.
It takes effort and desire to expand your life experience by being socially inclusive; quite frankly associating with people who are more like you than less like you is the default of the majority of us. Is it lazy? Yes, but obviously the path of least resistance is human nature. What disturbs me is the lack of curiosity I've seen in too many people; they don't see learning about and learning from people from a different culture or race on a personal level has value for them. Staying in a comfort zone of homogeneity clearly has more value.***How do we own up to and fight our natural impulses in order to better ourselves -- and our country?
I couldn't resist sharing this one reaction to Holder's address -- Faux News talking head Megyn Kelly. Her interpretation is completely over the edge, no doubt reflecting some of the thinking on the right as they went breathless over this part of Holder's statement.
And yet, if we are to make progress in this area we must feel comfortable enough with one another, and tolerant enough of each other, to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us. But we must do more- and we in this room bear a special responsibility. Through its work and through its example this Department of Justice, as long as I am here, must - and will - lead the nation to the "new birth of freedom" so long ago promised by our greatest President. This is our duty and our solemn obligation.Protect your keyboards as you watch her discussion with Juan Williams...
I sh*t you not. The Bush record, particularly about protecting voting rights, is abominable; Holder stood up there that day and meant that the time of inaction and contempt for the rule of law is over. The LA Times reported that from 2001 to 2006, no voting discrimination cases were brought on behalf of African American or Native American voters. Hello -- remember Ohio, with Ken Blackwell's shenanigans (broken machines and not enough of them in predominantly black precincts)? And all those other states where votes "disappeared"? Please.
KELLY: He said they [the department] has a special responsibility in addressing racial ills. That - that strikes fear down the spines of many conservatives in this country, because they don't want the Justice Department taking us back to the day when they get heavily involved in things like affirmative action, and things like voter registration rights. [...]WILLIAMS: What you will see I think is more aggressive enforcement in terms of existing civil rights laws. And that was the fear that the existing civil rights laws were not being enforced by the Bush justice department.
KELLY: Well a lot of people thought that the Bush Justice Department sort of got us back to the point where we were - we were being reasonable.
No comments:
Post a Comment