Dequick Debunk

As if the self congratulatory screed that is the DL Fister Show needs yet one more example of how far removed from reality the author is, he has an entry relating his triumphant return from Washington, D.C. where he campaigned for the Federal Marriage Amendment. He's fairly brimming with excitement when he writes, "Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know, liberals are convinced that they have once again beat back the advancing hordes of 'conservative homophobes'. Whatever."







"Even though I'm ex-gay I still like a finger up my ass during sex."





Whatever indeed. The "pastor" is much more interested in the souvenirs that he brought back. Like a renewed sense of outrage over gay rights which he's afraid besmirches the reputation of other civil rights movements, "like a drag version of civil rights." Something he has in common with LaShawn the Barbarian who recently wrote in a comment on her blog, "As black person, it offends me when homosexuals try to use our fight to be treated as first class citizens to argue that perversion is also a civil right. It’s nauseating, actually."

Bad Reporter by Don Asmussen


The shiny bauble that DL holds so dear is a piece written for the Weakly Standard that he calls a "blistering deconstruct" of gay rights as civil rights. There's only one teensy small problem with it. A large part of the argument hinges on the canard that "the claim that the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman constitutes discrimination is based on a false analogy with statutory prohibitions on interracial marriages in many states through much of the 20th century." As I showed a few months back, not only do gay marriage advocates draw this connection, but it is also recognized by those arguing for traditonal marriage. Here's a brief recap from the marriage case argued in New Jersey:

Justice Virginia Long: "Why is that an interest? The interest in maintaining marriage 'as it has been'?"

Patrick DeAlmeida: "Because it is such a fundamental institution in society that it is a reasonable thing that the legislature not change it radically. There are some things that make up our society that are so fundamental that a change in them is something that belongs to the elected representatives of the people."

Justice Barry T. Albin: "Didn't Virginia argue that in the Loving case? When they tried to support banning interracial marriage -- in fact criminalizing them?"

DeAlmeida: "They did."

DL may not have brought home an STD as a memento of his trip, but that certainly would have been preferable to what he did bring back. A "brilliant" paper by Dr. John Diggs called "The Health Risks of Gay Sex," in which the "doctor" draws inappropriate and inacurate conclusions. But don't take my word for it. The authors of the Vancouver study cited in Diggs's paper had a public rebuke for those who would misuse the information.

Over the past few months we have learnt of a number of reports regarding a paper we published in the International Journal of Epidemiology on the gay and bisexual life expectancy in Vancouver in the late 1980s and early 1990s. From these reports it appears that our research is being used by select groups in US and Finland to suggest that gay and bisexual men live an unhealthy lifestyle that is destructive to themselves and to others. These homophobic groups appear more interested in restricting the human rights of gay and bisexuals rather than promoting their health and well being.

[...]

It is essential to note that the life expectancy of any population is a descriptive and not a prescriptive measure. Death is a product of the way a person lives and what physical and environmental hazards he or she faces everyday. It cannot be attributed solely to their sexual orientation or any other ethnic or social factor.

[...]

In summary, the aim of our work was to assist health planners with the means of estimating the impact of HIV infection on groups, like gay and bisexual men, not necessarily captured by vital statistics data and not to hinder the rights of these groups worldwide. Overall, we do not condone the use of our research in a manner that restricts the political or human rights of gay and bisexual men or any other group.

For all their blathering about "truth" it really is the thing DL and his ilk are least interested in.

Update: LaShawn the Barbarian repeats the phony "interracial marriage is nothing like gay marriage" argument.