Wednesday, December 06, 2006

Somebody Tell Us -- What Are We Supposed to Think Here?

Earlier this year, a Sacramento satirist wrote a column proposing the ironic hypothesis that being conservative causes you to have gay kids. How else can you explain it? He starts with the Cheneys and goes on:
In addition to Mary Cheney, there’s ... oh wait. I’ve got a list. The public conservatives with gay children, grandchildren or siblings include: Phyllis Schlafly (queen of the anti-feminists), Randall Terry (of Operation Rescue fame), Newt Gingrich (Mr. Contract With America), Jesse Helms (who needs no description, except that he’s slightly to the right of Genghis Khan), the late Barry Goldwater (a libertarian who really didn’t care who loved who), and the late Sonny Bono (yes to gay daughter, no to gay rights).

Alan Keyes--former presidential candidate, family-values advocate and, most recently, a carpetbagger who sought to keep liberal Democrat Barack Obama from the Illinois Senate gig--put his college-student daughter, Maya, on the campaign trail while he bashed Dick Cheney for tolerating his lesbian daughter. Then Maya came out, and in a flurry of family values Keyes tossed her from the family home and cut off her tuition money. Don’t you just absolutely love those conservative family values?

But that’s not all. There’s the recently deceased Charles Socarides. He fathered both the discredited “reparative therapy” movement (which claimed that sexual orientation could be changed through psychiatry) and Richard Socarides, an openly gay official in the Clinton administration.

Regina Griggs, executive director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX), a group that advocates “tough love” and lots of scripture to turn your homo kid around to heterosexuality, has a gay son. Sadie Fields, a state chair of the Christian Coalition in Georgia, has a lesbian daughter, as does Bill Byrne, the Cobb County, Ga., commissioner who pushed through a resolution declaring “the homosexual lifestyle” unwelcome in suburban Atlanta. Apparently his daughter’s not invited to Thanksgiving. Not that she’d want to go.

And in our own state, we had the late state Senator Pete Knight, a traditional-values firebrand who led the so-called Knight Initiative, 2000’s Proposition 22, which amended the state constitution to refuse legal recognition of same-sex marriages. Knight’s plan to keep gay couples from marrying didn’t stop his gay son, David, from tying the knot with his long-term partner during San Francisco’s giddy wedding party in early 2004, before the courts overturned the marriages. It's a family tradition

The weird thing is, a lot of these aren't just "conservative" people, many of them are rabidly anti-gay "family values" hypocrites. You wonder how it is when they talk with their kids, do they just avoid the subject, or how does that work?

How do you spend your working day trying to undermine your own child? And why? Sometimes we are asked what motivates "those people." The only good answer is, "I don't know." (But ... we have our theories.)

This old article comes to mind today because of something in this morning's Post. I am just dying to know how this is going to play in the Family Blah-Blah side of the world.
Mary Cheney, the vice president's openly gay daughter, is pregnant. She and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, are "ecstatic" about the baby, due in late spring, said a source close to the couple.

It's a baby boom for grandparents Dick and Lynne Cheney: Their older daughter, Elizabeth, went on leave as deputy assistant secretary of state before having her fifth child in July. "The vice president and Mrs. Cheney are looking forward with eager anticipation to the arrival of their sixth grandchild," spokesman Lea Anne McBride said last night.
Cheney, 37, was a key aide to her father during the 2004 reelection campaign and now is vice president for consumer advocacy at AOL. Poe, 45, a former park ranger, is renovating their Great Falls home.

News of the pregnancy will undoubtedly reignite the debate about gay marriage. During the campaign, Mary Cheney was criticized by gay activists for not being more publicly supportive of same-sex marriage. Her father said people "ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to" but deferred to the president's policy supporting a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages. Cheney herself called the proposed amendment "a gross affront to gays and lesbians everywhere" in her book, "Now It's My Turn: A Daughter's Chronicle of Political Life," which was published in May.

Cheney has described her relationship with Poe -- whom she took to last year's White House dinner honoring Prince Charles and Camilla -- as a marriage. The two met in 1988 while playing ice hockey and began dating four years later. They moved from Colorado to Virginia a year ago to be closer to Cheney's family. In an interview with the Post six months ago, when asked if she and Poe wanted children, Cheney said that was a "conversation I think I should have with Heather first."

In November, Virginia voters passed a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and civil unions; state law is unclear on whether Poe could have full legal rights as a parent of Cheney's child. The circumstances of the pregnancy will remain private, said the source close to the couple. This is the first child for both. Mary Cheney and Partner Are About to Be Moms

To his credit, Satan -- uh, I mean, Dick Cheney -- has been quiet about his daughter's sexual orientation. Never mind that he sits over there in the White House ... keeping quiet ... while The Party campaigns as hard as they can to make sure gay people are prevented from adopting family values. His fake-outrage over John Kerry's mention of something everybody knew was an overly-facile exploitation of her situation, it seemed to me, but I suppose a professional politician like Cheney knows if he's gone too far.

That's, I say, that's a joke, son, a joke.

One thing I'm not seeing in this Post article is anything about how Ms. Cheney got pregnant "... the circumstances will remain private..." I don't know much about this stuff, having taken, y'know, the old sex-ed curriculum, but it seems to me two women would need something else -- has David Crosby been in the area lately?

And the idea that they consider this a marriage, while living in Virginia. John at AmericaBlog explains what that means:
... Virginia had already set up new Jim Crow laws targeting gays two years ago. Those laws may vitiate any legal agreement between the two, period, about anything. The law ensures that Mary's partner has no legal rights whatsoever in their child, or in what happens to Mary (or vice versa), such as if one partner has to go the hospital, the other can't visit. The law may even nullify any wills that Mary and Heather write regarding each other, and it may make it impossible for gay people to go to court to resolve any difference about anything - the courts can't recognize gay unions, so they can't make any decisions that would imply recognition (custody, hospital visitation, wills, etc.) It's beyond ironic that Virginia's new law, one of the most hateful, bigoted laws on the books, is now targeting the vice president's own daughter and soon-to-be new grandchild.

Read more here, it's chilling the extent to which Virginia has slipped back into its racist, hateful path. BREAKING: Cheney's lesbian daughter Mary is pregnant!

We have seen it over and over again, the ability of the anti-gay nuts to compartmentalize. If they know a gay person, that person is either the perfect limp-wristed interior-designing stereotype, or they are a completely unique mystery -- they can't just be a person whose partner happens to have the same plumbing as them.

So here they're going to have to figure out what to do. Not only are these two women acting like they're married, but one got pregnant! What if we learn that she had ... oh, it's too much to think! ... what if she had sex outside of marriage?!?! No, put that out of your mind: it's possible that it was an implanted embryo, but even then -- that would mean that somebody masturbated, wouldn't it?

It will just be too fun, watching the hypocrites dance around this one.

36 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"That's, I say, that's a joke, son, a joke."

Sure it is, Jim.

We believe you.

December 06, 2006 1:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It will just be too fun, watching the hypocrites dance around this one."

Dance around what?

Children are prone to disagree with parents.

Good parents love their kids unconditionally.

Lunatic fringe gay advocacy groups exploit family disagreements.

What's the big deal?

December 06, 2006 1:37 PM  
Blogger andrear said...

I see - so I love my kid unconditionally while publicly saying whatever they are is a sin, a disease, a crime- and by the way, mine is one of the 3 that was ever born that way. That makes sense- oh, wait, it came from anon -no wonder it is nonsense.

December 06, 2006 2:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you going to disown your kids if the go to work for Focus on the Family?

December 06, 2006 2:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

December 06, 2006 4:42 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

Anon. Obviously I'll put up with obnoxious. I'll put up with ignorant. Rude in support of an argument, maybe.

Rudeness for its own sake, no. Go somewhere else if you want to poison the air with your verbal flatulence.

JimK

December 06, 2006 4:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry, Jim, but my point is that this post is thoughtless.

December 06, 2006 5:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well many people find it newsworthy that for the first time in recorded history the lesbian daughter of the Vice President of the United States of America is pregnant and living with her same sex partner of 15 years in Virginia where they have no rights as a couple.

Figures you'd want to sweep this bit of news under the rug though.

December 06, 2006 6:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, I find it newsworthy. I just find Jim's post unkind to a family doing an admirable job of holding together despite their differences.

It's all in a day's work at the lunatic fringe factory.

December 06, 2006 6:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What family? You mean Mary Cheney, Heather Poe and child?

In Virginia, that's not a family...it's a crime.

December 06, 2006 8:50 PM  
Anonymous David S. Fishback said...

One would think that at some point the Cheneys would understand that they should have the simple decency to stand up vigorously for the rights of people like their daughter Mary, her partner, and their upcoming grandchild. They may think that they have enough money to insulate their family members from the legally-hostile climate in Virginia. They are very rich, so maybe they do.

But the difference between truly public-spirited citizens and those who are selfish is that the former understand that all of our citizens should have the right o equal treatment under law, while the latter just worry about those close to them and don't give a hoot about anyone else. Lynne and Dick Cheney, thus far, have shown themselves to be in the latter category.

The best that can be said about the Cheneys is that they are better parents than Alan Keyes. But they also may be more morally culpable, because they plainly know better. Alan Keyes seems to be so blinded by his own ideology that he may, in his own mind, feel justified in his cruel treatment of his daughter.

December 07, 2006 6:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"What family?"

The Cheneys, obviously. Heather's a friend of the family.

December 07, 2006 8:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"But the difference between truly public-spirited citizens and those who are selfish is that the former understand that all of our citizens should have the right o equal treatment under law,"

The idea that everyone deserves the same treatment, regardless of their behavior, is, actually, lunacy.

"while the latter just worry about those close to them and don't give a hoot about anyone else. Lynne and Dick Cheney, thus far, have shown themselves to be in the latter category."

There is nothing to indicate that the Cheneys desire others in their situation to handle it any differently than they have. Your statement here, David, is lunacy.

December 07, 2006 8:30 AM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous, no one said everyone deserves equal treatment regardless of behavior. Everyone deserves equal treatment as long as their behavior doesn't infringe upon the rights of others - which being gay does not. It's the evil within you that wants to punish others who in no way affect your life.

December 07, 2006 12:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anonymous, no one said everyone deserves equal treatment regardless of behavior. Everyone deserves equal treatment as long as their behavior doesn't infringe upon the rights of others - which being gay does not."

When you say "being gay", do you mean acting upon feelings or just having them? The victims are different depending on what you mean by the term.

Do you think, if I don't wear my seatbelt, that I "infrnge on the right of others"?

"It's the evil within you that wants to punish others who in no way affect your life."

Evil I may be, but I don't really want to punish people for anything. I don't know where you get that.

December 07, 2006 12:36 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous, what part of "Everyone deserves equal treatment as long as their behavior doesn't infringe upon the rights of others" didn't you get? It couldn't be more straightforward. Loving monogamous gay relationships hurt no one, they benefit the couple and happier more productive individuals benefit society. I'm a male to female transexual, my relationship with my boyfriend deserves treatment equal to any other couple's relationship.

December 07, 2006 2:04 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous said "Evil I may be, but I don't really want to punish people for anything".

Oh come on! You come here day after day to lie, disparage, and demean LBGTs, its obvious you want to punish us. Guess that's just one more lie for you. Obviously it gets easy when you make it a habit.

December 07, 2006 2:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I'm a male to female transexual, my relationship with my boyfriend deserves treatment equal to any other couple's relationship."

I guess if you've changed sides, there is a case that you're not gay. I don't really know. The whole thing is strange.

December 07, 2006 2:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"its obvious you want to punish us"

You want to find one instance where I've suggested "punishing" anyone?

December 07, 2006 2:35 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous constantly painting LBGTs in the most negative light is punishing LGBTs. Constantly demanding that gays forego loving same sex relationships to satisfy your precocious whims is punishing gays. Lying about who LGBTs are and what we experience is punishing LBGTs.

December 07, 2006 3:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, I see. Anyone who I don't think is smashing good fun, I'm punishing.

And are La BiGoTs (LBGT), also "punishing" those they don't endorse?

That would be a pretty mild punishment, you must admit.

December 07, 2006 4:00 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

LBGTs aren't indiscriminately painting heterosexuals or any other group in a negative light like you are. That's a very serious punishment given that attitudes like you're spreading are the source of gay people getting fired, evicted, assaulted, or even murdered. LGBTs aren't trying to break up loving heterosexual relationships. What you're doing is evil

December 07, 2006 5:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"LBGTs aren't indiscriminately painting heterosexuals or any other group in a negative light like you are."

No, they're trying to seduce them.

"That's a very serious punishment given that attitudes like you're spreading are the source of gay people getting fired, evicted, assaulted, or even murdered."

Oh please. Gays are above average in wealth. No one is persecuting them. To top it off, they receive special protection in many major cities.

"LGBTs aren't trying to break up loving heterosexual relationships."

La BiGoTs would prefer everyone be promiscuous as they are. They commonly mock traditional families.

December 08, 2006 8:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lies lies and more lies, Anon. Do you really think you are doing God's work spreading these lies everywhere? Since being disowned by her dad, Maya Keyes most certainly is not above average in wealth. How about Ted Haggard, is he rich and did he get that way because he is gay or because he was a radical religious right leader?

December 08, 2006 8:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Have any statistics on income among gays? I think you'll find they have more than the average American.

December 08, 2006 8:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Have any statistics on income among gays?"

You're the onen who brought it up. What are you, stupid? Do your own research to back up your statements.

December 08, 2006 8:44 AM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous let me assure you no gay would want to seduce you under any circumstances, that's just wishful thinking on your part.

Gays are no more likely to be promiscuous than heterosexuals. Unlike your pathetic self I'm not just making baseless claims, I have something to back it up.

a) 40-60% of gay men, and 45-80% of lesbians are in a steady relationship
J Harry-1983 in Contemporary Families and Alternative Lifestyles, ed by Macklin, Sage Publ.
L Peplau-1981, in Journal of Homosexuality 6(3):1-19
J Spada-1979, The Spada Report, New American Library Publ

b) Studies of older homosexual people show that gay relationships lasting over 20 years are not uncommon

D McWhirter-1984, The Male Couple, Prentice-Hall
S Raphael-1980, Alternative Lifestyles 3:207-230, "The Older Lesbian"
C Silverstein-1981, Man to Man: Gay Couples in America, William Morrow Publ.

c) In a large sample of couples followed for 18 months the following "break up" statistics were observed: lesbians=22%, gay=16%, cohabiting heterosexuals=17%,

Blumstein and Schwartz (1983) American Couples: Money, Work, Sex; Morrow Publ.

In a study of sexual behavior in homosexuals and heterosexuals, the researchers found that of gay and bisexual men, 24% had one male partner in their lifetime, 45% had 2-4 male partners, 13% had 5-9 male partners, and 18% had 10 or more sexual partners, which produces a mean of less than 6 partners. (The statistics I did by myself using the data presented, which is presented as a percentage of total males interviewed, both gay and straight (p. 345)--they can be verified yourself by looking at the numbers given in the paper)(Fay; n=97 gay males of 1450 males total). In a parallel study, a random sample of primarily straight men (n=3111 males who had had vaginal intercourse; of the total sample of n=3224 males, only 2.3% had indicated having had sex with both men and women), the mean number of sexual partners was 7.3, with 28.2% having 1-3 partners, and 23.3% having greater than 19 partners (Billy). This data indicates that gay men may have fewer number of sexual partners than heterosexuals.

J Billy-1993: Family Planning Perspectives 25:52-60
R Fay-1989, Science 243:338-348

In another set of studies, the first (n=2664) showed that gay men had an average of 6.5 sexual partners in the past 5 years. In fact, the authors of this paper report that "homosexual and bisexual men are much more likely than heterosexual men to be celibate" given the data in the table below, which compares their data to a second, parallel study of only heterosexual men (n=1235, age=18-49 yrs). The table indicates the percentage of men having the given number of sexual partners in the previous year [top row: Binson; bottom row: Dolcini]:

orientation no partners 1 partner 2+ partners
gay 24 % 41 % 35 %
straight 8 % 80 % 12 %


D Binson-1995: Journal of Sex Research 32: 245-54.
M Dolcini-1993: Family Planning Perspectives 25: 208-14.


Your insane suggestion that no one is persecuting gays would be laughable if it weren't so heinous.

http://www.nasponline.org/resources/crisis_safety/neat_vulnerability.aspx

Studies of GLB youth in school settings reveal that they experience a significantly higher frequency of verbal harassment and physical assault than their heterosexual peers. Nearly half of the GLB youth in these studies have experienced property damage by other youth. Approximately one third of GLB youth were involved in physical fights with classmates or threatened or injured with a weapon on school grounds. Fourteen percent of the GLB youth involved in fights required medical treatment. Other reports of physical violence included GLB youth being spit on, urinated on, having their clothes pulled up or down or off, and gangrapes. Interviews with students who are abusers reveal their motivations to include statements of "defending" themselves from queers, thrill-seeking, peer dynamics of meeting friends' expectations and proving that they themselves are not gay.

Physical acts of violence against GLB youth in school are almost always part of an ongoing pattern of abuse. The more violent acts generally include multiple perpetrators. These offenders will often target the same youth for years. GLB youth report that among their verbal abusers, the vast majority are other students; however, teachers are also reported to make derogatory comments or hateful statements. Approximately one fourth of the GLB youth in one study shared that they were very afraid of being physically abused on their way to and from school, in hallways and in locker rooms. In response to the threats and attacks they experienced, some GLB youth reported carrying a weapon to school for defense.

GLB youth often skip school due to their fears of safety. Some drop out of school all together, unable to face the continuing verbal and physical attacks and social rejection of their peers.With few or no marketable skills, these GLB youth become socially and economically marginalized and increasingly at risk to become victims of violence in their communities. GLB youth who have disclosed their sexual orientation to their parents or have otherwise been "found out" are often thrown out of their homes onto the streets or are physically or sexually attacked by family members. GLB youth on the streets often turn to prostitution in return for food, shelter or drugs, and therefore expose themselves to a higher level of victimization

Besner, H. & Spungin, C. (1995). Gay and lebian students: Understanding their needs. Washington, D.C.: Taylor & Francis.

Fricke, A. (1981). Reflections on a rock lobster: A story about growing up gay. Boston: Alyson.

Harbeck, K. (Ed). (1992). Coming out of the classroom closet: Gay and lesbian students, teachers and curricula. New York:Harrington Press.

Herek, G. & Berrill, K. (Eds). (1992). Hate crimes: Confronting violence against lesbians and gay men. Newbury Park: Sage.

Ryan, C. & Futterman, D. (1998). Lesbian and gay youth: Care and counseling. New York: Columbia University Press.

Unks, G. (Ed.). (1995). The gay teen: Educational practice and theory for lesbian, gay, and bisexual adolescents. New York: Routledge.

December 08, 2006 11:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Gays are no more likely to be promiscuous than heterosexuals."

You know, I've been around many a year and have met these "couples" before. While they do spent a lot of time together, I've never met any that were monogamous.

You want to share your experience, randi?

December 08, 2006 4:15 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous I have a monogamous relationship with my boyfriend, not that I owe it to you to prove anything. Now its your turn, how about you identify yourself and tell us about your sex life.

December 08, 2006 6:08 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous, you simply aren't credible when it comes to your take on knowing whether or not gay couples are monogamous. Lies are typical to people with your blind opposition to gays.

December 09, 2006 2:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Randi

I just know that the people I've met don't even faintly resemble what you're saying.

December 09, 2006 5:30 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous, I and I'll bet most readers don't trust what you're saying to be the truth.

December 09, 2006 6:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, you and most readers know darn well that I'm right.

December 10, 2006 12:53 AM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

You may be physically mature, but your mental age is about seven and it shows.

I doubt you can convince yourself your right, let alone anyone else. Your long history of distortions and lies precedes you. The statistics speak for themselves.

December 10, 2006 1:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Randi's right. I've been reading Anon's BS on this fine blog for nearly 2 years now.

He's so full of it no one should ever pull his finger unless there's an empty manure truck ready to catch the load.

PTA

December 10, 2006 1:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, PTA. Here's the statement I think is wrong:

"Gays are no more likely to be promiscuous than heterosexuals."

How about you? You know a lot of monogamous gay couples?

They apparently have 'em on every block up in Canard-a.

December 11, 2006 2:24 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home