Haggard floats back up

It's like a train wreck: you can't look away.

Since the guy fell from grace and his church took a huge hit, he just hasn't gone under; people with megalomania rarely do.

A few notes apropos politics and religion

There's been quite a reaction to Stuart Shepard's most recent stupid video for the FOF nuts.

Anyone who Rod Parsley is against, I'm likely for.

The Matthew 25 group has released a nice, positive video supporting Obama and highlighting his strength on family issues...you know, actual family issues, like education and health care, not just being rabidly anti-gay...

Obama leads amongst every class of religious voters besides white Evangelicals.

What a relief! Biblical "experts" (as if such a thing is possible or needed) on the apocalypse have finally decided that Obama isn't the Anti-Christ.

A win for sound science education! Californians don't have to dumb down their university academic standards to appease creationists.

Roy Moore may be one-upped by the idiot judge in Alabama who used his courtroom to invoke others to pray...

Focus on the Family poon video #2

The last time we saw this poon Stuart Shepard, he was against helping the poor (like Jesus, I guess). This time, he's asking God to smite the Democratic convention with rain. Olbermann had him as the "Worst Person in the World" last night:


You can see the YouTube video of his imprecation below the fold:

I mean, sure, people are starving to death and dying of disease all over the place, but why waste your time asking God to do something about that?

Copeland continues to stonewall Congress

The investigation of Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) into the tax-free practices of some religious organizations turned up a few rocks, and some especially slimy creatures are scurrying away from the harsh sunlight:

Already a well-known figure, Copeland has come under greater scrutiny in recent months. He is one target of a Senate Finance Committee investigation into allegations of questionable spending and lax financial accountability at six large televangelist organizations that preach health-and-wealth theology.

All have denied wrongdoing, but Copeland has fought back the hardest, refusing to answer most questions from the inquiry's architect, Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa.
...
Swicegood said the church's independent compensation committee approves all payments to board members.

Marilyn Phelan, a Texas Tech University law professor and author on nonprofit law, said the practice could pose problems. Both the IRS and Texas state law prohibit benefits beyond reasonable compensation for insiders, including board members, she said. If violations are found, nonprofits can lose their tax-exempt status and board members can face penalty taxes.

As the Senate Finance Committee considers its next step, Copeland is not backing down. His ministry is portraying the inquiry as an attack on religious liberty.

At the same time, it is moving forward with a big fund-raising project: soliciting donations for new television equipment so Copeland can be broadcast in high-definition.

I'd love to see this crook thrown in jail, but it's enough to hope for all the money he's misused to be taxed. From their supposed needs for private jets to their staying in $5,000 a night resorts during "evangelistic trips" and driving Bentleys that they write off as "work-related vehicles"...it all just makes me sick. Paula and Randy White have probably cooperated more than anyone else, but with their ongoing divorce and financial issues, it's understandable that they can't take any more heat.

Update on Grassley & ministers investigation

I was reading about additional craziness from John Hagee, and it reminded me of something that I'd written about a while back but forgotten about. First, the article on Hagee divulged much of what I already knew -- that he and his ilk want war with Iran, like, yesterday. Why is it that tying this guy and Parsley around McCain's neck isn't a toxic political millstone? The double standard applied to Rev. Wright and Obama is obvious here.

As I read about Hagee's lavish lifestyle and million-dollar salary, it reminded me of Sen. Grassley's investigation into financial impropriety in "prosperity" churches. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has been leading an investigation by the Senate Finance Committee into the finances of six ministries commonly affiliated with "prosperity preaching" with the aim of updating the tax code to appropriately deal with this malfeasance. I admitted a little skepticism at the utility and motives of this investigation when I first read about it. At the time, I said:

I read this the other day and I'm still scratching my head. I mean, I dislike Benny "Let the Bodies Hit the Floor" Hinn as much as anyone, and I think the whole lot of those six are probably as corrupt and unethical as it gets. However, I just don't understand the legal power that a Congressperson has to audit the finances of these people.

The IRS? Sure! But Congress...!?!? We'll wait and see if this goes anywhere.

It turns out that three of the six ministries are cooperating, and have until March 31st, according to this press release:

Baucus and Grassley lead the committee with exclusive Senate jurisdiction over tax policy; the ministry inquiry that Grassley launched last November is meant to gauge the effectiveness of certain tax-exempt policies.

“This ought to clear up any misunderstanding about our interest and the committee’s role,” Grassley said. “We have an obligation to oversee how the tax laws are working for both tax-exempt organizations and taxpayers. Just like with reviews of other tax-exempt organizations in recent years, I look forward to the cooperation of these ministries in the weeks and months ahead.”

Grassley wrote to six ministries on Nov. 5, 2007, asking a series of questions on the nonprofit organizations’ expenses, treatment of donations and business practices. The questions were based on presentations of material from watchdog groups and whistleblowers and on investigative reports in local media outlets. One of the six ministries – Joyce Meyer Ministries of Fenton, Mo. – has cooperated substantially with his request and provided the requested information. Benny Hinn Ministries of Grapevine, Texas, has indicated a willingness to cooperate and provided answers to
five of the 28 questions so far.

Representatives for Randy and Paula White of Without Walls International Church/Paula White Ministries, Tampa, Fla., verbally have indicated to Finance Committee staff that they will cooperate. Baucus and Grassley wrote to them on March 11 to thank them for the verbal commitment and to reiterate the committee’s role.

The remaining three ministries have not cooperated, citing privacy protections or questioning the committee’s standing to request the information. Baucus and Grassley wrote to them on March 11 to describe the committee’s jurisdiction and role in determining the effectiveness of tax policy developed by the committee, distinct from the Internal Revenue Service’s role, which is to enforce existing law. The three ministries are: Kenneth and Gloria Copeland of Kenneth Copeland Ministries, Newark, Texas; Creflo and Taffi Dollar of World Changers Church International / Creflo Dollar Ministries College Park, Ga.; and Eddie L. Long of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church/Eddie L. Long Ministries, Lithonia, Ga.

The committee’s jurisdiction includes the federal tax policy governing the billions of dollars donated to and controlled by the nation’s tax-exempt groups. The federal government forgoes the collection of billions of dollars to tax-exempt organizations every year.

It doesn't surprise me much about the Copelands or the Dollars. I don't know anything about Long, but I am quite familiar with Copeland and his reputation. I was pleasantly surprised about Hinn -- I figured him for one of those likeliest to resist, rather than cooperate. Randy and Paula White have faced enough personal problems recently with the divorce, so facing additional (scandalous) financial ones was probably a smart decision they made.

While you can read the pseudo-justifications for refusing to cooperate proffered by Creflo and Ken at their own sites, Eddie offers no such attempt at saving face. A little digging finds that some of these jokers are getting paid over $1M salaries. Fuc*ing absurd. Long's church has a gym inside ("Samson's Gym") that offers memberships and massages (all for a large fee, of course) -- the divisions between business and church blurred for these individuals long ago.

The clusterfuc* that is election day

If you really want to lose all faith in the American political system, read this.

Churches as businesses

Times are good for megachurches:

An analysis by The New York Times of the online public records of just over 1,300 of these giant churches shows that their business interests are as varied as basketball schools, aviation subsidiaries, investment partnerships and a limousine service.

At least 10 own and operate shopping centers, and some financially formidable congregations are adding residential developments to their holdings. In one such elaborate project, LifeBridge Christian Church, near Longmont, Colo., plans a 313-acre development of upscale homes, retail and office space, a sports arena, housing for the elderly and church buildings.

But the entrepreneurial activities of churches pose questions for their communities that do not arise with secular development.

These enterprises, whose sponsoring churches benefit from a variety of tax breaks and regulatory exemptions given to religious organizations in this country, sometimes provoke complaints from for-profit businesses with which they compete — as ChangePoint’s new sports center has in Anchorage.

Mixed-use projects, like shopping centers that also include church buildings, can make it difficult to determine what constitutes tax-exempt ministry work, which is granted exemptions from property and unemployment taxes, and what is taxable commerce.

The article in the NYT highlights another reason that churches should lose their tax exemption; not that this is any different than them acting as lobbyists or the RR bulldog groups making millions or as funnels of corruption for government $. The full-text of the NYT article is below:

November 23, 2007

In God's Name
Megachurches Add Local Economy to Their Mission

By DIANA B. HENRIQUES and ANDREW W. LEHREN

In Anchorage early in October, the doors opened onto a soaring white canvas dome with room for a soccer field and a 400-meter track. Its prime-time hours are already rented well into 2011.

Nearby is a cold-storage facility leased to Sysco, a giant food-distribution corporation, and beside it is a warehouse serving a local contractor and another food service company.

The entrepreneur behind these businesses is the ChangePoint ministry, a 4,000-member nondenominational Christian congregation that helped develop and finance the sports dome. It has a partnership with Sysco’s landlord and owns the warehouse.

The church’s leaders say they hope to draw people to faith by publicly demonstrating their commitment to meeting their community’s economic needs.

“We want to turn people on to Jesus Christ through this process,” said Karl Clauson, who has led the church for more than eight years.

Among the nation’s so-called megachurches — those usually Protestant congregations with average weekly attendance of 2,000 or more — ChangePoint’s appetite for expansion into many kinds of businesses is hardly unique. An analysis by The New York Times of the online public records of just over 1,300 of these giant churches shows that their business interests are as varied as basketball schools, aviation subsidiaries, investment partnerships and a limousine service.

At least 10 own and operate shopping centers, and some financially formidable congregations are adding residential developments to their holdings. In one such elaborate project, LifeBridge Christian Church, near Longmont, Colo., plans a 313-acre development of upscale homes, retail and office space, a sports arena, housing for the elderly and church buildings.

Indeed, some huge churches, already politically influential, are becoming catalysts for local economic development, challenging a conventional view that churches drain a town financially by generating lower-paid jobs, taking land off the property-tax rolls and increasing traffic.

But the entrepreneurial activities of churches pose questions for their communities that do not arise with secular development.

These enterprises, whose sponsoring churches benefit from a variety of tax breaks and regulatory exemptions given to religious organizations in this country, sometimes provoke complaints from for-profit businesses with which they compete — as ChangePoint’s new sports center has in Anchorage.

Mixed-use projects, like shopping centers that also include church buildings, can make it difficult to determine what constitutes tax-exempt ministry work, which is granted exemptions from property and unemployment taxes, and what is taxable commerce.

And when these ventures succeed — when local amenities like shops, sports centers, theaters and clinics are all provided in church-run settings and employ mostly church members — people of other faiths may feel shut out of a significant part of a town’s life, some religion scholars said.

Precedents in History

Churches have long played an economic role. Medieval monasteries in Europe and Japan were typically hubs of commerce. In the United States, many wealthy denominations have long had passive investments in real estate. And churches, like labor unions and other nonprofit groups, have been involved in serving immigrants, the elderly and the poor.

But the expanding economic life of today’s giant churches is distinctive. First, they are active in less expected places: in largely flourishing suburbs and barely developed acreage far beyond cities’ beltways and in communities far from the Southern Bible Belt with which they are traditionally associated. And in most cases — as at ChangePoint in Anchorage — these churches say their economic activities are not just an expression of community service but, more important, an opportunity to evangelize. The sports dome, for example, is a way to draw the attention of young families to the church’s religious programs.

“We don’t look at this as economics; we look at it as our mission,” Pastor Clauson said.

Scott L. Thumma, a pioneer in the study of megachurches at the Hartford Institute for Religion Research at the Hartford Seminary in Connecticut, whose roster of churches was the basis for the Times analysis, said he has noticed churches that sponsor credit unions, issue credit cards and lend to small businesses.

Although community outreach is almost always cited as the primary motive, these economic initiatives may also indicate that giant churches are seeking sources of revenue beyond the collection plate to support their increasingly elaborate programs, suggested Mark A. Chaves, a religious sociologist at Duke University.

Investing Capital Assets

Also feeding this wave of economic activity is the growing supply of capital available to religious congregations.

The Evangelical Christian Credit Union in Brea, Calif., a pioneer in lending to churches and a proxy for this market shift, has seen its loan portfolio grow to $2.7 billion, from just $60 million in the early 1990s, said Mark A. Johnson, its executive vice president. Where bankers were once reluctant to lend to churches, the credit union now shares a market with some of the nation’s largest banks.

ChangePoint paid $1 million upfront and borrowed $23.5 million from a state economic development agency to buy a defunct seafood-packaging plant and warehouse out of foreclosure in July 2005. To do so, it formed a partnership with the for-profit owner of the cold-storage unit surrounded by the seafood plant’s land. An affiliated nonprofit is developing the sports dome with a gift of $4 million worth of church land. The church controls these entities directly or through board appointments, said Scott Merriner, executive pastor and a former McKinsey consultant.

Pastor Clauson acknowledged that a few local businessmen who own sports facilities have complained about the subsidized competition they face from The Dome, a nonprofit organization. It is an issue the church takes seriously, he said.

“We don’t want to be taking bread off of people’s tables,” the pastor said.

But the sports dome “is scratching such an enormous proverbial itch, there is no way we’re harming anyone,” he said, adding, “There is more than enough need to go around.”

Martin McGee, the Anchorage municipal assessor, acknowledged that the property poses an assessment challenge. Land and floor space used only by the church are exempt, he said, but the rest of the seafood plant site is taxable, and the tax treatment of the sports dome site is still under review.

The tax issues will be even more complex for a megachurch project in Charlotte, N.C. There, the University Park Baptist Church paid $11.5 million late last year to buy the Merchandise Mart, a half-million-square-foot office and exhibition space.

Some 57 percent of the space will ultimately be remodeled for church use, but the rest will bring new business activity to the neighborhood, said Claude R. Alexander Jr., the church’s lead pastor who also serves on the board of the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce.

His church has left its economic mark on the neighborhood it will leave behind when it moves to the mart. With its traffic added to that of another megachurch a few miles away, a once-quiet intersection between the two churches has recently seen the construction of fast-food outlets and other businesses.

The traffic is unlikely to ease when University Park moves. The other nearby megachurch, the Friendship Missionary Baptist Church, already has zoning approval for Friendship Village, a complex of shops, apartments, homes, offices and housing for the elderly on 108 acres off Charlotte’s beltway.

According to Tom Flynn, the economic development officer for Charlotte, University Park’s purchase of the Merchandise Mart already has prompted interest in older properties nearby.

A Complex Tax Challenge

The church, which formed a for-profit property management unit that also includes a small limousine service, envisions a mixture of commercial and religious uses at its new site — with its own share of the space beginning around 38 percent and rising over time.

What’s a poor tax assessor to do?

The entire site is currently taxable, said Alonzo Woods, the church’s director of operations. But when the church moves in, it will seek exemptions for areas used “strictly for church purposes.”

Churches are moving into residential development, as well. Windsor Village United Methodist Church, one of two churches that own shopping centers in Houston, is teaming up with a national home builder to develop more than 460 homes in the southwestern section of the city.

And in Dallas, The Potter’s House, a 30,000-member church established by Bishop T.D. Jakes, is the linchpin in an economic empire that includes Capella Park, a community of 266 homes.

Just how far-reaching the megachurch economy can become is clear at the First Assembly of God Church in Concord, a small community northeast of Charlotte. Under the umbrella of First Assembly Ministries are the church, with 2,500 in weekly attendance; a 180-bed assisted-living center; a private school for more than 800 students; a day-care center for 115 children; a 22-acre retreat center; and a food service — all nonprofit. In addition, there is WC Properties, a for-profit unit that manages the church’s shopping center, called Community at the Village, where a Subway outlet, an eye-care shop and other businesses share space with church programs that draw traffic to the mall.

Doug Rieder, the church business administrator, said WC Properties files a federal tax return and pays property taxes on the commercial space at the mall.

But Mr. Rieder acknowledged the difficulty of allocating space, staff time and expenses to the appropriate tax category. “We’re very intertwined — it gets tough day to day,” he said adding, “I have to constantly ask myself whether I am accurately allocating our costs.”

Concord was delighted to have First Assembly as the new landlord at the mall once anchored by Wal-Mart.

“That’s a very crucial crossroads for the city,” said W. Brian Hiatt, the city manager. “And the church has been a great partner.”

Another contribution the church makes to the city is a free daylong celebration it holds on Independence Day, complete with fireworks.

Mr. Hiatt said no one seemed to find it awkward for a church to conduct the community’s celebration marking the birth of a country committed to separation of church and state.

“It was a very positive event,” he said.

Mr. Rieder, the church business manager, paused when asked whether people of other faiths would have felt comfortable at the event.

“We try not to discriminate in doing community service,” he said. “There are Muslims and other non-Christians here, of course. And we do want to convert them, no doubt about it — that’s our mission. We don’t discriminate, but we do evangelize.”

The same quandary confronts Pastor Clauson in Anchorage. “There is nothing inherently alienating about what we’re doing economically,” he said. “An Orthodox Jewish youngster or a conservative Muslim child encountering our programs would find zero intimidation.”

Nor does he want his community to become divided along religious lines, he said. But at the same time, “we definitely want to use these efforts as an open door to the entity that we feel is the author and creator of abundant life — Jesus.”

He added, “It’s a tough balancing act.”

Most stopped trying to "balance" $ and Jesus a long time ago...

Alberto Gonzales at UF

Despite my (continued and unresolved) anger that they invited him in the first place, I'm proud of the UF student body for protesting the criminal's speech.

Also check out the Alligator's article and their video of the protests.


Go Gators!

This week in God

Steve Benen's weekly segment is up, and you should read the whole thing. I just wanted to point out two things:

1) I read this the other day and I'm still scratching my head. I mean, I dislike Benny "Let the Bodies Hit the Floor" Hinn as much as anyone, and I think the whole lot of those six are probably as corrupt and unethical as it gets. However, I just don't understand the legal power that a Congressperson has to audit the finances of these people.

The IRS? Sure! But Congress...!?!? We'll wait and see if this goes anywhere.

Oh yeah, and worth mention is that this Sen. Grassley of Iowa is a Republican. I found that surprising, given the close ties the GOP has with the RR, especially in a state like Iowa. Bravo to him for rising above the fray of partisan pandering.

2) "Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial" -- a documentary about Dover comes on PBS Tuesday, November 13, 8:00 pm, details here and here.

You have got to be shitting me

Alberto fu%*ing Gonzales is getting paid $40K to come speak at my beloved UF?!?!?!?

Alberto Gonzales to speak at UF
By KIM WILMATH, Alligator Staff Writer
Thursday, November 8, 2007 1:38 AM EST

Alberto Gonzales, the former U.S. attorney general who resigned in August, will speak at UF on Nov. 19.

Student Government records state Gonzales was paid $40,000 for his speech at UF, which is the first college appearance since he resigned, said Steven Blank, Accent chairman. Accent, SG's speakers bureau, is sponsoring the appearance.

The speech will take place 7:15 p.m. at the Phillips Center for the Performing Arts, stated a press release from Accent.

The event has been in the works for a few weeks, Blank said.

Free tickets will be available for students with Gator 1 cards on Nov. 14 and for the general public Nov. 15 at the Phillips Center and the University Box Office, the release stated.

Blank said he expects a full house.

In 2005, Accent brought another former state attorney to UF - Janet Reno.

The show was so successful that the bureau jumped at the chance to host Gonzales, Blank said.

Gonzales was appointed the first Hispanic attorney general in February 2005 and later played a role in President Bush's fight in the war on terror after Sept. 11.

Gonzales resigned in August after a controversial tenure.

Gonzales faced scrutiny over his leadership of the Department of Justice in 2006, after he dismissed nine U.S. attorneys.

The White House administration said the dismissals were solely based on performance.

Gonzales called the issue "an overblown personnel matter."

However, some officials have said that the Bush administration was trying to politicize the justice system.

Questions were raised about whether Gonzales testified truthfully about the National Security Agency's abuse of surveillance programs.

Bush denied the accusations against Gonzales.

Meanwhile, Democrats cheered his resignation.

Bush appointed Peter Keisler as acting attorney general Sept. 17.

Gonzales wasn't the only high-level official to resign during Bush's second term.

Gale Norton, Bush's former secretary of the interior, resigned in March 2006. Andrew H. Card Jr., former chief of staff, resigned the same month.

Norman Mineta, former secretary of transportation, left in June 2006.

Christians and campaign finance

I don't remember why this never interested me before, but hearing people like James Dobson argue against campaign finance reform has finally made me stop and think. Let's concede the obvious: making politics fair is not in the best interests of money/power-hungry politicians and their lobbyists.

I mentioned Dobson's recently-founded 501(c)(4) group a while ago, and it looks like a clear reason for him to oppose campaign finance reform is his own organization.

The main thrust of campaign finance reform since the '90s has been targeting soft money. Soft money is contributed not directly to a campaign or candidate, but to a PAC like Dobson's, which then have very little regulation or disclosure requirements with the public. It's basically a way to try to buy elections, and the Supreme Court agreed in 2003 to uphold limitations on soft money. While I agree that our constitutional civil liberties must be protected, the issue is being obfuscated in much the same way that church-state issues are (by the same players): the Constitution protects individual liberties, not those of PACs. While I personally have the right to say and do as I wish with respect to advertising and campaigning for a candidate, the state has a vested interest in regulating the activity of collective efforts backed by corporate dollars.

Any time that transparency mixes with politics, those who practice in the dark fight furiously against the intrusion of light. We should be quite suspicious of those who are so vocal and adamantly opposed to this legislation via sheer demagoguery (using lies about limits on individual religious expression).

I don't actually think that Dobson wants to hide something of his own personal fortune. I mean, hell, Dobson only makes around $300 K himself in his $200M FoF empire (plus $30M for the FoF "Action" political branch), just chump change, really. I think the real fear that these people have is the way that the money flows from their non-profit religious groups to their political action groups. That, combined with who is funding those action groups. I think Dobson doesn't want the public to know that he is bankrolled by the same machinations that Ralph Reed, with the Christian Coalition, was: Jack Abramoff and crooks just like him. I think Dobson and Perkins and others like them are in bed with the same corrupt lobbyists that all the politicians are, and they don't want anyone to know about it. The money they receive from their religious fronts are siphoned over to PACs. They are able to take politicians out to dinner and on trips to influence their votes for their own special interests. Dobson and his ilk are no better than any other politicians or lobbyists in DC, they just don't want anyone to know about it.

How did he find time for this?

How in the world did Sen. David Vitter find time to earmark $100K of taxpayers' money to a nonsense creationist group called "Louisiana Family Forum" to promote bullshit pseudeoscience, given the amount of time he spent showing his "little something" to Wendy Cortez?

Fighting poverty is liberal and thus anti-Christian

Only in the bizzaro world of the Religious Right can one find such tortured convolutions of logic as evidenced in the video below, in which Focus on the Family Action attempts to argue that helping the poor is a liberal cause that should be opposed and the only way to help poor people is to get rid of those goddamned queers and fornicators...while maintaining their staunch Christian credentials throughout, of course:

Quoting Jesus (Matt 25:31-46 NIV):

The Sheep and the Goats

31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'

40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'

41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

Oh boy! A cornucopia of RR fun

Look out Tampa: The gay-bashing fundie caravan heads to Florida!!

from Talking with juvenile offenders about gay males and lesbians: implications for combating homophobia (p. 14):

Herek (1987) also found that 64% of the undergraduate students manifested a single function for attitudes toward homosexuality. In contrast, only 33% of all the juvenile offenders did so. A similar percentage of juvenile offenders manifested mixed negative functions. Young offenders' negative attitudes often do not correspond with just a single attitude function. Therefore, attempting to match group teaching strategies with a singular function would not be possible in many instances, and certainly not helpful in trying to overcome anti-homosexual postures. It would be more feasible and useful to target the range of functions, focusing on those which are particularly salient. Defensiveness is such a function for juvenile offenders. Unlike the broad distribution of functions which Herek (1987) revealed, among young offenders there was a preponderance of the Defensive function. Of Herek's undergraduate respondents, only 11% had exclusively Defensive attitudes, violating "a popular bit of folk-wisdom that all hostility toward gay persons results from personal conflicts about gender or repressed homosexual desires" (Herek, 1987, p. 295). In contrast, 24% of the delinquent participants' attitudes were exclusively Defensive. More strikingly, the present study found that defensiveness functioned as the sole or part basis of 84% of the juvenile offenders' negative attitudes toward homosexuals. This suggests that personal conflicts are central to the attitudes of most young offenders in this domain. In Herek's (1987) data, only 35% of the undergraduate students were wholly or in part Defensive. Such contrast between the two groups is not surprising. Adolescence is a period in our culture when there is a pronounced need for establishing personal identity, affirmed in part by excluding and stereotyping minorities (Erikson, 1968). College-age students, such as those who participated in Herek's (1987) study, would have largely resolved such adolescent role confusion.

So what can we say about Tony Perkins et. al? They haven't grown up yet, or haven't dealt with repressed desires? Ted Haggard, anyone?

My favorite aspect of the anti-gay advocates is their tendency to support these "ex-gay" people, 99% of whom are later found in a backseat somewhere joyfully swallowing man gravy. Along with lots of pastors and foaming-at-the-mouth social conservative GOP politicians, of course.

And now I can see why they chose "clean" (non-porn-carrying hotels) places to stay -- they all know they'll whack the weasel all weekend to the biggest, manliest bear porn they can find if it's anywhere within reach. ...the porn, I mean...

[we have] "a growing sense of confidence in our new attorney general."

Guess who said that? And guess why?

Before I tell you, I want to tell you that at the time this was said, the Iraq war was about 2.5 years old, and the first signs of Bush's plummeting popularity were beginning to show. Given that, an apropos offhand remark that also comes from the WaPo article in which the title quote is spoken sheds light on the priorities of this administration, and to whom they've pandered away all competence and credibility:

"I guess this means we've won the war on terror," said one exasperated FBI agent, speaking on the condition of anonymity because poking fun at headquarters is not regarded as career-enhancing. "We must not need any more resources for espionage."

Among friends and trusted colleagues, an experienced national security analyst said, "it's a running joke for us."

Why did the FBI agent say this? Because the AG was diverting resources away from fighting terrorism in order...wait for it...

...to fight...

...porn.

Not child porn. Consenting adults, legal porn.

And the FRC -- the Religious Right's most powerful Washington lobbying arm -- was ecstatic, and they were the ones with the "growing sense of confidence" in Alberto Gonzalez. My how the times change.

This was enough of a priority of the Bush administration to pull good agents off of cases involving threats of death and destruction to our country in order to search out people who make erotica involving urination and bondage. This is your president, America. God bless that motherfucker.
________________
Technorati tags: God, Religion, Politics

"Calling all frauds, calling all frauds..."

The "Creation Museum" is looking for a geologist Ph.D. with a decided lack of integrity and scientific understanding.
________________
Technorati tags: God, Religion, Intelligent Design, Evolution, Creationism

Carnival of AiG's Creation Museum

**UPDATE: Check out this amazing compilation of resources debunking the lies and silliness of AiG's grand experiment in "How We Can Waste $27M on Human Ignorance": DefCon presents
http://www.defconamerica.org/creationmuseum/**

Tomorrow morning at 10 AM the glorious Creation Museum of AiG is opening to the public. America's collective IQ will dip ~20 points, and progress in public understanding of science will be rolled back about 300 years.

PZ set up a "creation carnival" of posts related to AiG and its pseudo-science in general. It has 65 entries! Check it out.


Read these for some background:

• Yabba-dabba science, LA Times
• Adam and Eve in the land of dinosaurs, NYT
• NCSE resource
  
• The Rally for Reason
• Chris Hedges' report at Truthdig
• Petitions by DefCon

________________
Technorati tags: God, Religion, Intelligent Design, Evolution, Creationism

Egnor Lies on Eugenics and Darwin, AGAIN

I mentioned before a run-in I had with a very egnorant MD. He issues a faux challenge, then threatened litigation when the challenge was met. My experience was similar to that of others who also directly addressed this silly little man's arguments from ignorance, and got nothing in return.

Anyway, now I can't say that the guy above in question (an egnorant person) is one and the same as this other guy here who I'm linking to (since it might cost me something) -- draw your own conclusions; but this latter guy (Egnor) isn't just ignorant of evolutionary biology (while flaunting pretentions to authority) -- he's completely f*@#ing dishonest:

Dr. West notes that the linkage between Darwinism and eugenics isn’t just philosophical and moral. It’s logical. Darwin proposed that Caucasian Europeans (like himself) were the pinnacle of human evolution, and that they emerged by a struggle for survival. Altruism degraded the process by which the human race could advance. Darwin famously wrote in the 5th chapter of Descent of Man that the smallpox vaccine had regrettably allowed weak human beings to survive, and "excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed."

Ironically, Darwinists saw eugenics (a term coined by Darwin’s cousin Francis Galton) as the humane solution to the altruism-driven degeneration of the human race. Rather than exterminate the weak, they reasoned that it would be better to take control of evolution and prevent the weak.

I addressed this issue at some length a few months back. Lying creationists always cite *part* of what Darwin said, and always conveniently leave off the rest of his words. This dishonest hack has just followed suit. In Chapter 5, Darwin does indeed write about the problem with vaccinations and how they allow people without natural resistances to survive to reproduce and pass on this lack of resistance:

With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.

It sounds pretty evil, doesn't it? But at the same time, it sounds like he's not yet passing a conclusive ought in here, only saying that it seems that our actions to preserve the lineages of people with serious heredity flaws is "highly injurious to the race of man." So far, he hasn't prescribed any actions, only attempted to describe our humanistic efforts to preserve life. So...what does Darwin think of these actions? Well, the sentences directly after clarify it for us:

The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil [emphasis added].

Hardly supportive of eugenics, and instead a statement of contest to it -- an appeal for us to maintain "the noblest part of our nature" and calling eugenics "an overwhelming present evil."

This is not to mention the fact that whether or not Darwin was a racist, or a sexist, or a murderer, has nothing to do with the facts of evolutionary history. But it's a useful way to keep those who are emotionally predisposed to reject evolution from even trying to answer the question of whether or not it's true. Make them afraid -- "Evolution = eugenics = evil!" -- and thus keep them ignorant.

I hate lying frauds and hacks.
________________
Technorati tags: Religion, Philosophy, Intelligent Design, Evolution, Creationism

Best. Interview on Falwell. Ever. -- Hitchens Last Night on H&C

Watch it HERE:

I laughed so hard at the end -- "If you gave Falwell an enema he could be buried in a matchbox!" Bwahahahah

PS: If anyone thinks Hitchens is too much an asshole, or that his accusation that Falwell's apology was fake, read this:

Here's something I missed from before Falwell died or I would have written about it. Everyone remembers Falwell's infamous remarks to Pat Robertson on the 700 Club, blaming all of his usual political enemies for 9/11. I'll paste the exchange below the fold:

JERRY FALWELL: The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this.

PAT ROBERTSON: Well, yes.

JERRY FALWELL: And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen'.

PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government. And so we're responsible as a free society for what the top people do. And, the top people, of course, is the court system.

After that, both Falwell and Robertson flat out lied about it. Robertson told Fox News a couple days later, "I thought it was totally inappropriate at the time." Nonsense. At the time he said, "I totally concur" and even expanded on those comments. Falwell's first response was to claim that he was being misrepresented, then when that excuse didn't fly (because the video was being played all over TV, for crying out loud) he offered a fake apology (TRANSCRIPT).

Falwell told CNN: "I would never blame any human being except the terrorists, and if I left that impression with gays or lesbians or anyone else, I apologize."

But as it turns out, just last week before he died, Christiane Amanpour interviewed him on CNN and he said he was standing by what he said then. Watch the video HERE.

So he made an appalling statement, then he lied, then he offered a fake apology, and then he went back on the apology. And remember, folks, this is the voice of the "moral" majority.

About as moral as a cockroach, peddling ignorance and making $200 million a year for it.
________________
Technorati tags: God, Religion, Church-state, Politics

PBS Special on Regent & Robertson + Humor

Okay, you should probably get the humor first -- Maher playing Pat Robertson doing a "God's wrath forecast," interpreting the weather as acts of divine vengence for sin. Remember me mentioning the other day (or on Facebook) that Falwell and Robertson have a double standard when it comes to declaring some force of nature to be a tool of God? They are reticent to announce the KS tornadoes as retribution, but glory in declaring New Orleans to be.

Then, you can watch this PBS Bill Moyers Journal special (download directly here as mms://...wmv) on Regent's influence on DC and the recent AG scandal involving Monica Goodling. The humor first may help offset the rapid rise in b.p. you will experience.

________________
Technorati tags: God, Religion, Church-state, Politics