It's The Epi-mark, Stupid! Science Proposes The Origins Of Homosexuality ... And The Christian Right Goes Into Convulsions!!

And It Happened In - of all places - Tennessee!!

     "KNOXVILLE – Epigenetics – how gene expression is regulated by temporary switches, called epi-marks – appears to be a critical and overlooked factor contributing to the long-standing puzzle of why homosexuality occurs.

According to the study, published online today in The Quarterly Review of Biology, sex-specific epi-marks, which normally do not pass between generations and are thus "erased," can lead to homosexuality when they escape erasure and are transmitted from father to daughter or mother to son."

According to the study, published online today in The Quarterly Review of Biology, sex-specific epi-marks, which normally do not pass between generations and are thus "erased," can lead to homosexuality when they escape erasure and are transmitted from father to daughter or mother to son."

He may not know it, but Professor Sergey Gavrilets of the University of Tennessee is now officially demon spawn. His study suggests a theory that regulation of certain genes (e.g. testosterone) can determine homosexuality. Such a theory (in Tennessee, no less) will cause mass hysteria among members of the state's Christian Right upper eschelons and produce reactions the likes of which have not been seen since Galileo was imprisoned for his theory of the earth revolving around the sun.

While some hate groups (Council of Conservative Citizens) are quick to posit that the study says there is no such thing as a "gay gene" (it actually does not) and still imply that "environment" has much to do with sexual orientation (the study, however, actually talks about biological environment), other groups are simply taking the tack that the study is "just a theory" (like evolution) or that Gavrilets is just a scientifically political pawn dependent upon government grants.

Reactions so far:

• ....this article is propaganda.....do you see what this does? If homosexuality is genetic, then those who oppose same sex marriage are cavemen and the Bible is a fable.....
• By the way, homosexuality may be "common" in nature; so are ritual killing, cannibalism, torture and indiscriminate sexual behavior. Should we emulate those too?
• BOTTOM LINE - JUST BECAUSE THEY FOUND A CONDITION NAME FOR YOU DOES NOT JUSTIFY YOU DEMANDING THE WORLD EMBRACE YOU. ASK TO GET YOUR CONDITION FIXED...period!
• A worthless waste of money, a worthless study, more worthless "science" signifying nothing.
• Stunning coincidence that this "scientific breakthrough" is reported the same week that the SCOTUS decides to take p same-sex marriage, don't you think?
• Studies like this will be the death of all credibility for "science." This is pure politics and social engineering. Nothing scientific about it.

Possibly the worst result of acceptance of the study: "get yourself 'FIXED'!" It may embrace science only to the point of being a possible repairman. In any event, the CR may reason that NOT going through newfangled medical or "scientific" cures is a"choice" and therefore still against God's will. Acceptance and happiness at what you are will not enter into the picture.

"A Choice" Is Out The Window

The strategy of the Christian Right may come in the form of total denial of the new study: as comments have it, the study smacks of "pure politics", especially coming before the Supreme Court decisions. But denial can only last so long, especially if the scientific community weighs in favorably to Gavrilets' study.*

The study's greatest blow to the Christian Right is that it's meme of "homosexuality is a choice" has little bearing in the culture war debate: any biological link** precludes/trumps "choice". How the Christian Right will continue to blare out its meme despite the study remains to be seen and will certainly be entertaining.

Re-defining "Abnormal"

If the Christian Right loses the current "born this way vs choice" battle, rest assured that it will re-focus on "abnormal" and how prayer, reparative therapy or abstinence will stem the "abnormal" proclivities and, in a sense, need to redefine the term, for in the past, "abnormal" has equaled ... "perversion." 

Abnormal. Epi-mark. Epigenetics. Born This Way. Choice. Gay Marriage. Supreme Court. Christian Right.

2013's gonna be very interesting, don't you think?


*To be sure, the Right will call in their own "experts" and "scientists", but under close scrutiny of their credentials and beliefs their statements may not hold water. It is up to responsible professional journalists to point that out.

** Several years ago, a study found that testosterone levels may have been "re-routed" in up to 25% of gay men.

Be Careful Who You Lionize: Bio of "Historian" David Barton's Hero Devours His "Founders Bible" With Slavery, Incest and Homosexuality

This one ranks along with the Creation Museum's "Adam" being a gay actor with a porn site.

David Barton has been pushing the "American Is A Christian Nation" meme so hard and so long that he's now at his sloppiest in establishing it: he has now created "The Founders' Bible", a copy of the New American Standard Bible (naturally) combined with:

... more than 150 articles (averaging 4 pages each) by our Signature Historian David Barton covering everything from the founding of the first American colony in Jamestown, Virginia, on May 14 of 1607, forward to the present day. It deals with virtually every political hot button including Radical Islam’s current Jihad against America.

And if the articles are at all like Barton's public rants for his organization Wallbuilders (considered a hate group), The Founders Bible is sure to find its way into the homes of every homophobic, anti-feminist, Islamophobic, and Dominionist believer in the country. He will be signing copies of the Bible at Glen Beck's Restoring Love rally in Dallas on July 26th.

Before that event, however, Barton might have to do some serious backpeddling, since this piece just came out:

William Throckmorton:
Founders’ Bible Cites Pro-Slavery Leader as Proponent of America as a Christian Nation
William Throckmorton's piece is worth reading and his subsequent articles will definitely be interesting. What caught my eye (and the eyes of many others) was a comment citing the wikipedia entry for man in question, James Henry Hammond: he was THE most ardent advocate for slavery on RELIGIOUS grounds and constantly opined in Congress and as Governor of South Carolina that even as inferior as they were, black slaves had it better than the poor industrial workers of the North. He was the politician who coined the term "Cotton is King." And if this isn't enough to make people wince about David Barton's hero, like a Popeil product commercial, we can say "Wait! There's more!!":

His Secret and Sacred Diaries reveal that his appetites did not end there. He describes, without embarrassment, his 'familiarities and dalliances' with four teenage nieces - the daughters of Wade Hampton II. Blaming the seductiveness of the “extremely affectionate” young women, his political career was crushed for a decade to come, and the girls with their tarnished social reputations never married.

AND...

As a young man, Hammond had a homosexual relationship with a college friend, Thomas Jefferson Withers, which is attested by two sexually explicit letters sent from Withers to Hammond in 1826. The letters, which are housed among the Hammond Papers at the South Carolina Library, were first published by researcher Martin Duberman in 1981, and are remarkable for being rare documentary evidence of same-sex relationships in the antebellum United States.

In The Founders Bible, Barton gushes with admiration about how Hammond so eloquently supported one of John Adams' pro-Christian statements and practically puts Hammond on a saint's pedestal. But now people like Throckmorton are gushing with disgust about Hammond's pro-slavery pronouncements. And other people (like me) are gushing laughter at the ardent "Christian Nation" politician's incest and homosexual dalliance.

Don't Think - Believe
- inscription at the entrance of the Creation Museum

Vetting is a process examination and evaluation: a process which always seems to elude those like David Barton and his followers. And the inclusion of St. Hammond into The Founders Bible is yet another piece of hilarity in the world of the Right's non-vetting process: we saw it in the VP pick of Sarah Palin, but it was evident back in 2007 when the Creation Museum discovered (6 weeks after its opening) that the beautiful "Adam" for their creation video was a gay actor with a website selling soft-core porn.

Then again, the process of vetting involves some deep thinking, and when searching for just the right quote from a distant, relatively obscure (to the American public), blind belief takes hold and the thought process is cast aside.

David Barton's work has been based upon blind belief - a belief that the United States of America was actually founded as a totally Christian nation. His "proof" has been laughed at by true historians the world over. Would that this latest gaff might get even more people laughing.

Robertson Redux: Listen Kid, I Love You Even Though You're An Abomination!

It's a wonder that gay Americans are as patient as they are with some of these Religious Right wingers 

- Cenk Uygur, The Young Turks

Patient? Sorry Cenk, not me.  

I have a Google Blog Alert for Pat Robertson giving me the latest news and comments about our illustrious Religious Right Leader, so I was surprised to see that blog roundup smny.net was running comments on a piece that occurred 1 year ago. Then I read the comments. Take two:

Pat Robertson makes me feel ashamed of being a human being

and the more pertinent:

WOW The sad part is people believe this sh*t.

THE SAD PART

Asking for Pat Robertson's advice is like asking a parrot for directions to the nearest hospital: you might get an answer, just not the one you need right now.  Of course, Robertson is always full of it. Advice, that is. Ask me what else he's full of some other time. His book, Bring It On, is chock full of wisdom and knowledge no Christian household should be without. 

For example:

Just what is Islam and why do those people hate Americans so much?

Muhammad claimed to have had a series of dreams and visions in which a being he called "Allah," who was the moon god among the deities in Mecca, a city in Saudi Arabia where Muhammad's father was the keeper of three hundred sixty stones, including a black stone which was probably a piece of meteor... The moon god (the symbol of Islam is a crescent moon) supposedly appeared to Muhammad and revealed to him the tenets of Islam...The name [Koran] means "recitations," possibly because it was meant to be read aloud, but more likely because it was delivered orally by Muhammad to his friends, who wrote it down.

Huh?? WTF!?! Bring It On is proof that Robertson's senile imagination took hold at least  seven years ago (some say much earlier - about 1988 when he ran for President). For starters,  Islam is an Abrahamic religion and follows closely the precepts of Judaism in that it recognizes Adam, Abraham, Moses and (from Christianity) Jesus. The Jews were known as The People of the Book and the Bible was greatly revered and respected. The history of Muhammad's father is not known. Wherever Robertson got the keeper of the stones bit is anyone's guess. "Allah" is probably derived from Aramaic and means "one, incomparable God." The "moon god" did not appear and reveal secrets to Muhammad, but rather the angel Gabriel did. 

One more important note: reading about the Qu'ran will present a clearer picture of Islam's intents and purposes and will accentuate the similarities between Islam and Christianity, some things Robertson would never want you to know. Today's evangelizing Imam need  only a television camera and a suit to look like they're on a 700 Club of their own.  And after reading the Qu'ran, look to the Old Testament of the Bible, then ask yourself if the Abrahamic religion of Moses is still a "religion of peace."

Of course, even Robertson agrees that some of the questions he answers in his book are somewhat strange, but let's face it, anyone who asks Pat Robertson about anything these days is quite clueless. The man never ceases to amaze people which the broad spectrum of what he doesn't know. At the drop of a hat (or less), Robertson will tell you what's wrong with wearing a tattoo ("it's pagan and ugly") to declaring bankruptcy (it's Christian depending upon the amount).

Robertson never mitigates his tone either. Whether it's making pronouncements about  "Haiti's pact with the devil" or feminism turning women into lesbians and witches,  he never misses a beat. After all, he reasons, he's only the messenger of God and God's demands. And he doesn't care what people think about his advice. There is no quibbling about it. Robertson/God has spoken. 


So in The 700 Club segment in question,  Pat Robertson  took to the airwaves to mete out his sage advice to a mother whose question was:

How should we, as parents of a homosexual son, handle the ongoing challenges facing us such as staying true to our faith and following the commandment "love your neighbor as yourself?" This is very difficult for us. - Teresa.

Robertson then proceeded to question the age of the son - as if he knew what he was talking about and the age would determine his answer (Not!)


Then he pondered the idea of there being "real" or "fake" homosexuals by calling them "so called" homosexuals and trying to distinguish between "homosexuals because of biological problems" and the rest of us, who, in his view were "made homosexuals BECAUSE OF A COACH OR GUIDANCE COUNSELOR, or some other male figure who has abused them." Then came the hard line zinger:  tell him the "truth" because "I love you" and  "the Bible says that this is an abomination before God."  

"I mean if someone is on the way to hell, you have to rescue them." 

Recently, Pat Robertson gave advice to a woman whose husband was constantly flirting with other women. His advice? Make yourself prettier and get over it.

I've read just about every name people have called Pat Robertson and most of them banish him to some remote alternate reality reserved for the inane footnotes of history. The problem therein lies that while we should not listen to what he says, we need to listen to (and monitor) the people who DO listen to what he says.


And while there are some who think that Robertson's just another example of a snake oil salesman falling in love with his own snake oil,  there are too many people in America who touch their TV screens in hopes that Pat Robertson will heal their hemorrhoids. 

Only one? That's still too many. Remember:

WOW The sad part is people believe this sh*t.

Fascism in America Will Be Wrapped In A Flag, Carrying A Cross and Have a VERY Raspy Voice!

Is Lou Engle The Most Dangerous Man In America?

In 1996, editor (AU magazine) and writer Rob Boston wrote The Most Dangerous Man In America? Pat Robertson And The Rise Of The Christian Coalition. I've read the book and appreciated its straightforward take on Robertson's hypocritical form of Christofascism. I recently perused some of the reviews of the book on Amazon.com:

But the man [Robertson] is fringe. He's dumped his own personal fortune into his misguided ambitions. His movement is fading. At worst, all he did was channel folks who would have otherwise supported Pat Buchanan or third parties behind the established Republican candidate. His "Family Channel" - his main cash cow - is long gone, and the 700 Club will be off the air when the Disney Acquisition of the Fox Family Channel is complete.

Pat Robertson is history, not the bogeyman.

That review was written in 2002. "The 700 Club" is still broadcasting specious stories of "inspiration" and "decadence" and Pat Robertson is still broadcasting his talks "with God" and somewhere in America a little old lady in a rest home or a trailer park still touches the screen when Robertson appears hoping that he'll manage to cure her hemorrhoids. Yes, Pat Robertson is still with us, but his bloviations about Katrina, Haiti, Hugo Chavez, Ariel Sharon and all things gay have chipped away at the man's charisma. Many people think that senility has finally settled in Robertson's brain.

The problem is that Robertson still gets recognition. At 80, Robertson has a bigger political base than his father (Senator Absolom Willis Robertson) ever achieved. He has the ability to get attention wherever he is.  And he uses that recognition with wild abandon.

But is he still the "Most Dangerous" in America's all-male political elite?Or has raspy-voiced evangelical Lou Engle taken over that role? Fiery preachers have come and gone, but Engle's violent speech is in league all its own:

My son, Jesse, he's nineteen years old. God has given him dreams, to go to San Francisco to launch a house of prayer - one block frpom the Castro District - where homosexuals boast the dominion of darkness. He's going there with weeping in his heart. With a dream that prayer is stronger than the dominion of that spirit.

...he's starting to cast out homosexual spirits out of our new converts. Its scary as hell... but fathers are to send their sons into the darkest places. ...St. Francis - Francis means 'free man'. San Francisco is the City of the Free Man.!

This last pronouncement I looked up. "Franciscus" means Frenchman. And while Francis, in some etymologies, means "free," Francis does not necessarily mean "Free man!" BTW: interestingly, the nickname "Francis" was given to Giovanni ("John") di Bardone by his father who was, at the time, an Italian cloth merchant enamored of all things French.

O.K., so that's a little picky, but expand Engle's half-truth into an hour-long sermon. Throw in some quotations from one Bible translation, then from another. Keep on demonizing, demonizing, demonizing until people think that a place like San Francisco has everyone practicing Satanism on the streets. Make people think that walking near 18th and Castro is an act of foolhardiness or extreme courage for anyone who is righteous. Make them think that everyone they see will automatically go to hell if they do not listen to your message. Make them think they may be coerced into homosexual acts in order to obtain dominion over a person's soul.

Engle uses pre-teens and teens in an indiscriminate, manipulative, and destructive way: both he and his son use Fundamentalist Biblical buzz-words constantly and never, ever let up. From start to finish, they never give the teenage mind a chance to question, a chance to think. The teenager is bombarded, pummeled with  confusing sentiments:

TheCall belief and intent has never been about promoting hatred toward the homosexual community as a whole or towards individuals who identify as LGBT. We have always sought to offer a message of love and redemption to those with same-sex attractions, though at times our communication could have been expressed more effectively and graciously.

Considering the vehemous condemnation of an entire group of people as being possessed by demons, any statement of the sort is disingenuous at least, or an ugly lie at most. I've tried to figure out exactly how teens have gotten hooked on his sermons: he has no more charisma than any other street preacher who screams redundant word after redundant word. In a sermon given to "Holywood", Los Angeles in 2007 during a pre-TheCall rally, (and during the most virulently anti-gay portion), Engle refers to "God" 44 times, himself ("I") 31 times, "Dream" 15 times, "Mel" or "Gibson" 10 times, "Jesus" 6 times, and "Christ" 4 times. "Love" is never mentioned. 

Like Rod Parsley, Engle's rhetoric is somewhat military in tone, but "blood" is given a more commanding presence. Like other firebrand preachers, the frequent mention of "God" is the vengeful, jealous, self-righteous God of the Old Testament.

Engle, along with Scott Lively and a small band of other preachers/lawyers were very instrumental in encouraging Uganda on its "Kill the Gays" bill. It would be unnecessary to say more, but to the politically and morally obtuse: Lou Engle bad - tolerance good.

Ratzinger Smells Money AND He Wants To Be Queen!

He also wants to get a ride on Uganda's anti-homosexuality bandwagon -
(courtesy of Rick Warren)

So now Pope Benedict XVI wants to welcome disgruntled Anglicans into the Roman Catholic fold. Why? Is it a blatant act of bigotry? Or does he simply want to act the part of a Samaritan to arch conservatives?

Neither.

It's money.

And the British Monarchy

Let's conjecture here: could Benedict be taking his cues from the one and only Rick Warren? It's possible:

Minority groups in Western provinces have stated their opposition to what they consider unscriptural actions by the Churches of England, Canada, Australia, and the ECUSA, and in the United States, some (such as the Anglican Mission in the Americas and the Convocation of Anglicans in North America) have withdrawn their affiliation with the ECUSA and realigned themselves with African provinces such as the Churches of Uganda and Rwanda.

Since Rick Warren has Uganda snuggled nestled in his back pocket (let's just hope he doesn't sit down!), Benedict might have seen the efficacy of letting the Anglicans enter the Church of Rome through the back door while allowing Anglican priests to keep their wives. Although Uganda's clerics have a slightly more paranoid fear of homosexuals:

On July 9, 2008, The New Vision Newspaper reported that Archbishop Orombi had addressed the West Ankole diocese alleging a threatening atmosphere or conspiracy by homosexuals to cause him harm, saying, "Nowadays, I don’t wear my collar when I am in countries which have supporters of homosexuals. I am forced to dress like a civilian because those people are dangerous. They can harm anybody who is against them. Some of them are killers. They want to close the mouth of anybody who is against them."

Warren. Orombi. Benedict. Looks like Uganda's gays don't have a chance of survival against Christofascists. The closets of Uganda will be overflowing.