Headlines
LGBT, Politics

Andy Gipson – Wishes Death On Gays

More on page 867
LGBT, Transsexual

Pillay on homo/trans-phobia: Punish violence and hatred, not love!

More on page 843
LGBT

Pirates team up with ItGetsBetter.org

More on page 839
Featured, Transsexual

Transsexual Spring

More on page 828

Andy Gipson – Wishes Death On Gays

Posted in: LGBT, Politics | Comments (0)

Rep. Andy Gipson (R) sends out a death wish to homosexuals, in America. A petition at change.org, was created, in hopes of bringing attention to this and hopefully get an apology. However, Gipson made a second Facebook Post, saying he would not apologize, and even posted one of the letters he received, and posted the content of it, as well as included the constituent’s mailing address. Why would he post that kind of information? Is he trying to get people attacked over their protest against him?

This man should be removed from office. He is too dangerous.

Rep. Gipson, since you believe in every word of the bible, do you think killing homosexuals should be carried out?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/andy-gipson-mississippi-gays_n_1528716.html

Mississippi state Rep. Andy Gipson (R) weighed in on President Barack Obama’sgay marriage decision last week, invoking a bible passage that calls for gay men to be “put to death.”

In a May 10 Facebook post, Gipson called homosexuality a “sin,” citing Leviticus 20:13 and Romans 1:26-28:

Leviticus 20:13 reads: “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”

Here is a text of the entire post, which includes comments.
Andy Gipson
Been a lot of press on Obama’s opinion on “homosexual marriage.” The only opinion that counts is God’s: see Romans 1:26-28 and Leviticus 20:13. Anyway you slice it, it is sin. Not to mention horrific social policy.
Share · May 10 at 8:55am via mobile ·

  • 83 people like this.
  • 2 shares

    • David DeLeeuw ‎”Horrific”?? How so, Andy? What would be horrific if two men who loved each other joined together in civil union and were afforded all the same rights and priveledges that you and your wife enjoy?

    • Gwen Love how can you say you were born a homosexual when god made humans the way they should be you choose what you want to be but the bible says judge not that you be not judged although i think homosexual marriage is wrong these people sre the ones that are going to be judged by god

    • Joanne Smith Thank you so much for being a godly man who isn’t afraid to speak out on what is right. God’s Holy Word says it all. It is time all people who believe this is wrong speak up. We have been silent too long!!!

    • Charlene Loyd Thank you Andy! We need to pray.

    • Sandra Inman You are so right, and of course GOD got it right!

    • Charles Coward No matter what we think, same sex marriages or relationships are sinful. God said so in scripture, that’s all I need to know on this subject. Again, thanks Andy for standing on our Christian values and morales.

    • Ken Behrens Amen Andy! Thanks for standing up for the Truth in all you do!

    • Tony Barker Amen, well spoken.

    • John Henry Berry Amen is what I have to say also and thanks for helping d’lo also and for what you do as my representative

    • Linda Oneil Bennett As long as this world continues to turn, there will be darkness, thanks to Jesus Christ there is light. The darkness will never hide the light,and only because he lives in us. My heart breaks for anyone who does not see the light,and I pray for them.All this right and wrong , should and should not , if you seek his word you will find it is wrong. If you chose not to believe that , that is what it is .I am thankful that I know who wins in the end. Phil.2:10-11 Thanks Andy for standing up for what you believe!

    • Gene W. Amason Wake up America. The apostle Paul said, “He who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.” Nuff said.

    • Pat Finley Obama really seems to be working to lose the election!

    • Pat Calder We continue to appreciate you, and the stand you take for Christian morals!!!

    • Michael Paul Meadows Thank you Andy for your stance on this issue. I believe Obama is doing this to divert attention off of his failed policies as well as adding (stealing) 5 trillion to our national debt. He has made known he inherited debt and a bad economy, bit what about the next guy.

    • Jeramy Little Just something to think about here… God also says that sex before marriage is a sin. Should that be illegal? God says that gluttony is a sin. Should overeating be illegal? Gossip is a sin. Should gossip be illegal? The point is, we are all sinners. So should all sin be illegal? Or are we just going to categorize some sins as worse than others? I also believe homosexuality is a sin, but when you deprive a gay couple of marriage, you aren’t making them any less gay… You just deny them tax benefits that married people have.

      How about we not have ANY government issues marriages and just leave marriage what it is… A church issue. When you think about it, there really is no such thing as same sex marriage because God has told is that marriage is only a union between male and female. That does not change if the government were to decide to issue a gay couple a marriage license. God determines what marriage is, not the government. Marriage should strictly be a church issue, not a government issue. If you insist on making it a government issue, leave it up to the states and not the federal government.

    • David DeLeeuw Still no answer from “Andy” why this would be a “horrific” social policy. Please keep your religious opinions out of government policy and lawmaking.

    • Jeramy Little As a Christian, you should let your faith influence every aspect of your life. I think the problem a lot of folks have developed is that they also expect the government to do it for them. Even if you believe homosexuality is immoral, as I do, you cannot legislate morality. You can’t make a person any more or less moral by legislating with pen and pad. If we done more in our relationships with each other instead of expecting the government to do it, I believe we could get more accomplished as far as morality is concerned.

    • Andy Gipson Sorry I’ve been busy and not had a chance to reply. David, in addition to the basic principal that it is morally wrong, here are three social reasons it’s horrific social policy: 1) Unnatural behavior which results in disease, not the least of which is its high association with the development and spread of HIV/AIDS; 2) Confusing behavior which is harmful to children who have a deep need to understand the proper role of men and women in society and the important differences between men and women, and fathers and mothers; and 3) Undermines the longstanding definition of marriage as between one man and one woman, a definition which has been key to all aspects of social order and prosperity. Anytime that definition is weakened our culture is also weakened. And yes, that is also true for other conduct which weakens marriage’s importance in society.

    • Jeramy Little I agree that your first two points are true Mr. Gipson, but making same sex marriage legal or illegal does nothing to stop those things. Gay sex causes aids and HIV, not gay marriage. Why should government be in the marriage business? Why should marriage be anything more than a church issue? All the government does is issue a license and give married couples tax benefits.

    • Andy Gipson Jeramy, our State government is in the business of making laws which reflect policy of the State. Carrying your logic to the next level, we would have no laws or policies. A point to remember is, Mississippi already has a policy in our State as defined in our State constitution which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. The people of Mississippi voted on that issue in the year 2004, if I am not mistaken. Many people voted because of their religious convictions and beliefs on the subject. So what we have here is a President who is offering his opinion that that our State policy is wrong, or incorrect. My point is, he is wrong.

    • David DeLeeuw Sorry, Andy, I don’t buy into your points. The behavior itself doesn’t cause disease. It is a promiscuous lifestyle (even among heterosexual partners) that leads to the spread of the HIV virus. There is no evidence to suggest that a monogamous homosexual couple spreads the virus. In fact, a monogamous heterosexual couple (where both partners do not have the virus) could NEVER spread the vrius to each other, much less to anyone else. So, in fact, legal civil unions between homosexual monogamous couples should DECREASE the spread of the virus.

    • David DeLeeuw I don’t believe that children are in jeopardy of being confused. My children have been exposed to homosexual couples and homosexual persons all of their lives and are not confused at all. My children were not born as homosexuals and are not confused by sexuality. My children, as your children and your grandchildren, cannot possibly be confused by seeing homosexual couples – married or otherwise.

    • David DeLeeuw How can a married homosexual couple possible undermine my heterosexual marriage to my wife? I don’t see that as a threat to me or my marriage at all.

    • Jeramy Little I have no problem with state laws making these kind of decisions, just as long as the federal government stays out of it. I think it’s better, however, to keep government out of the marriage business altogether, simply because marriage is a church issue. Laws and policy should be made to protect individuals rights and liberty, not to attempt to enhance morality because morality cannot be accomplished through legislation.

    • Jeramy Little So where do the laws end? If we make laws based off of what’s scriptural or not, should sex before marriage be illegal? Should overeating be illegal? Should divorce except or means of fortification be illegal? Should lustful thoughts be illegal? Should believers being unequally yoked with unbelievers be illegal?

      That’s the whole point I’m trying to argue. Laws, for the most part, should be made to protect people’s rights and liberty. There should never be any government recognized marriage, but if you are going to have it, it should only be at the state level. The federal government has no authority to define what marriage is.

    • Jeramy Little And I know some of those words are misspelled and used, my phone thinks it knows what I want to say.

    • Jeramy Little You lost me a little there… This country was founded by a lot of Christians, but it was not founded on Christianity. It wasn’t founded on any particular religion. The Christian phrases that you mentioned were not mentioned by any of our founding fathers, they were added many years later. I have no problem with those phrases, I have no problem with what people deem as a sin. The problem comes when we try to make laws based on whether something is a sin or not. All sin is sin. There is no one sin that is bigger than the other, and it’s not wise to try to make laws based on what is a sin or not because then it becomes a matter of which sins do we won’t to make legal or illegal. And the biggest point of all is that regardless if you do try to legislate morality, it’s pointless. It doesn’t work. A law written down with pen and paper does nothing to make people more moral. If the government decides to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple, is that a marriage in God’s eyes? No, it’s not. It’s nothing more than a license given by the government. They are not married in the sight of God, and that’s all that matters when it comes to marriage. If government were to all of a sudden decide we will no longer recognize marriage at all, what would that hurt? What would that change other than people receiving the benefits that married people receive? It wouldn’t change anything. Marriage is determined by God, not the government. And no right now the federal government has no influence over what the define marriage, but that’s not because there is a lack of people trying. Government at the federal level needs to be limited to protecting liberty, providing for defense, and providing a sound currency.

    • Dennis Raines preach it brother.

    • David DeLeeuw Preach it, yes… Just don’t enact laws against it.

    • Ryan Herndon David, why don’t you contact and bash your Tennessee lawmakers? That is the state you live in…right?

    • Al Harrist How is it that “The only opinion that counts is God’s?” First, whose God’s opinion are you talking about? Well, obviously yours, but my point is that Americans hold an immeasurable array of beliefs about gods, goddesses, and lack there of; so which god’s opinion should be the law of the land, and why should it be yours over mine or anyone else’s? Secondly, prove to me, as a lawyer with a greater understanding of the law than I possess, that there is a God at all and that you–more than I or anyone else–know what his or her intentions are. I know you have your faith, but I mean something that would stand up in court.
      Human rights, equality and dignity are not bestowed by the state or the federal government. They should never come to vote because that implies they are the state’s to give or to take away, and that is constitutional heresy. If you put interracial marriage on the ballot today in our too-often backwards state, it would struggle to pass. So should that right be taken away just because a majority of people think it’s wrong? Remember that many of those folks will tell you they have a biblical basis for that belief. Same-sex marriage is no different.
      I’m glad the session is over, but the laws you have championed continue to impact the people of the state and I would appreciate a response to this anyway.

    • Al Harrist I am also curious to know when you will be drafting and pushing laws to have adulterers and those who “curse” their parents stoned to death. We should hold all Americans to the high standards set in Levitican law, not just homosexuals. So y’all better only plant on kind of crop in your fields, only wear clothes made from one type of fabric and follow all the decrees set forth in Leviticus. Reverend, I mean Representative, Gipson believes that only God’s opinion matters in making our laws, and those are all opinions of the same God in the same book of the same Bible. We can’t pick and choose, now can we?

    • Jeramy Little Gods law is the only law that matters, and it is the most important law. What I think a lot of Christians seem to overlook is that God’s law is perfect, and we are incapable of keeping it because we are sinful. So why would you want to make Civil law the same? We can’t keep it. We need to do everything we can to keep God’s law in our everyday walk with him. Civil law should be to protect liberty, property, civil rights, etc. We need to quit looking for the government to instill morals for us and do it in our relationships with each other. Marriage is not a government issue, IMO. It’s a church issue. All government can do is issue a license on a piece of paper.

    • Al Harrist I appreciate both your kindness and your sentiment, Jeramy. God’s law should be the most important law in your life if you are a devote Christian, but not all of the Mississippians which Andy represents (reads: works for) are Christians. And not all the Christians he represents subscribe to that kind of bigoted point of view. But I see we agree on this, if for different reasons: Our laws should be secular not biblical because biblical law is not relevant to all people in Mississippi. And no law should truncate the basic, innate human rights of any citizen of our state or nation.

    • Andy Gipson Al, I serve the one true God, Creator, Sustainer, Redeemer. The one God revealed in Scripture through His Son Jesus Christ. He is the only sinless one who has ever lived. And it is by His grace, through faith, that I am saved. I cannot prove God to you but I pray that you will keep an open mind to Him. Search the scriptures and He will reveal Himself to you.

    • Jeramy Little Correct. When you think about it, it would be the perfect system for all people of every faith if we would let it

    • Katrina Renee Byrd ‎Andy Gipson, a few weeks ago I held the door as a lady exited the Dairy Queen. I didn’t hold that door for her because she was older then me. i didn’t hold it open because she was white and I’m black. i didn’t hold it because she was a few inches shorter than me and as I held the door open for her it didn’t occur to me to inquire as to whether she was gay, transsexual, heterosexual, a fornicator, an adulterer, a smoker, a liar, killer or cheat. I held that door for her because she was a human being. When are we going to stop using God’s Word as a means to fuel our addiction to separation, lack of tolerance for the beliefs of others and as a tool to oppress folks we don’t like. Our country is built on Christian beliefs. How often did Christ use the Word to promote hate? His main focus was love, peace, healing joy, prayer and knowledge.

    • Al Harrist This is a great discussion for church, Andy, and one day we can have it there, if you like. But you don’t work in the church, you work in the state house. You are not a preacher, you are a representative of all the people in your district–the Christian majority, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, atheists, straight or gay. Your duty at home and the church may be to God and I hope you seek him and his love in every decision you make there, and I pray that it enters your mind as you conduct your business, but in the State house, your duty is to the People. All of them, including the homosexual, queer and transgender ones. So pray for me, and I will pray for you. But please do uphold the establishment clause of the constitution which separates church and state when you are working for the people of this state.

    • Andy Gipson That’s where you are wrong, Al. First, I don’t check my convictions and beliefs at the door when I enter the House of Representatives. Particularly not on something such as the sanctity of marriage which the people of Mississippi have defined as between a man and woman in our State Constitution. And by the way, I also am a preacher and am interim pastor at a local church. I happen to take the Bible very seriously, believe it to be inspired and true. And you are asking me to ignore my beliefs, or segregate my beliefs from my public service? Come on!

    • Andy Gipson Katrina, Jesus loves everyone and so do I. Jesus loved people enough to tell them the truth, and then He proved His love when He died for our sins. He loved us enough to give us his Word, the Bible. His utmost desire for every person is to repent of sin (every kind of sin) and turn to Him in faith. I won’t ignore the truth for the sake of political correctness. We need to love people enough that we speak the truth, in love. We fail to love as Christ loved when we don’t speak the truth. Jesus himself was crucified for speaking the truth. It’s no different today. This whole debate began not with me, but the President’s opinion on same-sex marriage. I am entitled to a different opinion, based in God’s Word. I’m not ashamed and won’t back down.

    • Al Harrist Guess what, neither do I. Neither does anyone. We all take our convictions with us. We are all guided by the things we believe in. I am not faulting you for that. I am saying that when you support laws, especially constitutional laws, that make a group of people less than any other in the eyes of the law, THAT weakens our society. When women couldn’t vote, our society was weaker. When the races couldn’t marry, our society was weaker. When any one group is discriminated against it weakens our society. And I am saying that you don’t have to leave your convictions at the door. I hope they guide you in making better decisions than to reference a bible verse that suggests we should kill gay men! Uh, come on! Your comments about disease and the effect gay marriage would have on society is just scientifically wrong and reflect a horrible ignorance, Andy. You should know this.

Recent entry
Andy Gipson
Today I’ve received many emails and telephone calls from around other parts of the country regarding my stated opposition on facebook to same-sex marriage, where I simply referenced two passages of God’s Word, the Bible, as the primary basis for my opposition. Here’s the sample text of an email I’m getting demanding that I apologize:

“Greetings,

I just signed the following petition addressed to: Representative Andy Gipson, Legislative District 77 in Mississippi.

—————-
Publicly apologize and meet with members of Unity MS and MSSC

Representative Gipson,

Your recent posts on Facebook in opposition to Gay Marriage are derogatory, harmful, judgmental and outright threatening to the LGBT population. Quoting scripture in the bible that condones murdering homosexuals is a blatant act of harm and prejudice.

We request that you:
1. Publicly apologize, for the harm you have done to the LGBT people through your words and actions, and
2. Meet with Unity Mississippi and the Mississippi Safe Schools Coalition, to see for yourself the day-to-day struggles of LGBT people and especially LGBT youth when they are faced with hearing hurtful and derogatory messages from their elected representatives.
—————-

Sincerely,

(Name)
(eradicated by myinterwebz)
Omaha, Nebraska 68134

Note: this email was sent as part of a petition started on Change.org, viewable at http://www.change.org/petitions/state-rep-andy-gipson-publicly-apologize-and-meet-with-members-of-unity-ms-and-mssc. To respond, click here”

To be clear, I want the world to know that I do not, cannot, and will not apologize for the inspired truth of God’s Word. It is one thing that will never “change.” Anyone who knows me knows I also believe that all people are created in God’s image, and that all people are loved by God, so much so that He gave us the truth of His Word which convicts us of the reality and guilt of our sin, and He gave us His Son Jesus who paid the full penalty for all our sins, by His grace through our faith in Him as we repent of our sin. John 3:16. It is this message that I preach every Sunday. I sincerely pray God will reach someone through this message.

Share · 10 hours ago via mobile ·

  • 80 people like this.

    • Audarshia Lee Flagg Amen……Stand….Stand...don’t you dare…apologize for standing for what’s right…your reward is greater with God:))))))) Thank you for taking a stand!!!

    • Kathy Mangum Monk Amen and amen, Andy! We must stand on God’s word!

    • Ken Behrens Stand strong Andy! To be so “tolerant” , its amazing how those in favor of gay marriage are intolerant of other viewpoints. The word of God can not be compromised. Thank you for all you do!

    • Dale Whittington Gordon Thank you for taking a stand!!! Don’t ever comprise! Keep being honest…

    • John W Pace Stand firm My Brother in Christ.

    • Jim Stanford Amen Brother…..Stand Strong!

    • Dorothy Perrett Brown Thank you for being a man of God and standing on His Word!

    • Gene W. Amason Andy, thank youfor not apologizing for the truth of God’s Word. We not only stand behind you , we stand with you.

    • Charlene Loyd Thank you Andy for you stand….you should never be asked to apologize for what God’s Word says. We are behind you!!!

    • Anthony Underwood Don’t back down brother. God has got your back!!

    • Kim Prince Moore Thanks for taking the stand.

    • Diane Roberts God bless you Andy, for your stand. We stand with you and most of all we stand for God’s Word.

    • Brandi Cockrell We need more elected officials who can stand firm on their beliefs… Not ones who have “evolving” beliefs that only “evolve” to suit their political aspirations. We are grateful to you! Keep standing strong and firm!

    • David Clanton Great job Andy. Stand tall and do not apologize.

    • Steve Womack God bless you Andy ,for your stand. We stand with you and God stands with us all . I appreciate what you do.

    • Jeramy Little Nothing wrong with your stance on same sex marriage. Personally I agree with you 100% in what the Bible says about marriage. I am a Christian, I believe the Bible is the Word of God. I believe that Jesus Christ is God’s one and only son, and that faith in him is the only way to salvation. I believe that we should never give in to our beliefs in our daily lives.

      I do not, however, believe you can legislate morality. Government does not determine what marriage is, God does. If the government were to issue a same sex couple a marriage license, it would be just that… A license. It would not be marriage in the eyes of God. I have said many times, marriage is a matter for the church, not the government. God’s law is perfect… Man is sinful. If you create civil laws based in what God’s law is, you are guaranteeing us to all be lawbreakers, because we cannot keep God’s law. That’s why Christ took our place on the cross. God’s law is not here or us to abide by at all times. It’s here to reveal to us that we cannot keep it, and therefore we must turn to Christ to save us. Why would you want to make a civil law try to be the same? If government stopped issuing marriage licenses, what would that hurt? Leave it to the church… It’s a church issue.

    • Joy Everett Taylor Schaub Thank you for your unwavering faith in the Wprd of God. You are in the political position you are in for such as ted as this

    • Anthony Phillips Im so sick of Change. Gays,Bisexual,lesbians,Transgender and Obama….

    • Johnny Mcnaughton I read your initial post, it states your stance. America has the problems it has because people do not take a stand, they straddle the fence! We, your supporters, appreciate your stance!

    • Anthony Phillips Andrew Melichar go stuff something in your mouth and leave Andy alone.

    • Cemper Carpenter Scott So So So Proud of you Andy for Standing Strong for your Faith and God’s Word. We Love you and appreciate all that you do!!!!

    • Blair Anderson I think you’re awesome Andy! I have a question regarding Jeremy’s post: “God’s law is not here “for”us to abide by at all times.” Why would God give us a law and tell us it’s “okay” to break it. I expect my children to follow the rules ALL the time, why would God expect any less? Our biggest problem today is that we stand down on issues that God’s word clearly says Hates.

    • Chris Rast Way to go sir!!!! We were all created in Gods image. We were made perfect & given the right to make our own decisions & we as humans messed that up. We as christians are supposed to stand up for our religious beliefs.

    • Anthony Phillips ok, this Andrew Melichar has created this petition and it has 36 of 5000 signatures, just wondering what happens when it reaches 5000, is Andy going to be ordered to apologize or what? HA he might get an order from fagbama.

    • Joe Worrell Thanks for making a stand. You are a Godly man and I appreciate you.

    • Rhoda Phillips Benton So proud of you for taking a stand and sticking to your beliefs. More men of GOD who are not afraid to take a stand is what we need in government positions. Thank you! Your reward will certainly be great!

    • Michael Paul Meadows Thank you for holding principle higher than people. I think it is healthy for people to get offended when presented with truth. It usually promotes a personal assessment.

    • Ted W. Cole I stand with you my friend…. GOD is in control…no place for Gays.

    • Charles Savell We don’t apologize for GOD WORD , keep up the good work.

    • Cynthia Bynum Thank You Andy for the TRUTH that you represent. WE should all pray that we could take such a stand in our daily lives. To God Be The Glory.

    • Angela McWilliams Moore Thank you! God’s word is final!

    • Gary C Cherry I stand with you Andy

    • Susan Jones You cannot apologize for the truth in the Bible, only the ones that do not believe the Bible are the ones that wants us to apologize for what it says. Good Job Andy.

    • Jerry Hutcheson Jeramy Little laws against murder, stealing are legislating morality.

    • Lance Hamilton Thanks for being the man of God you are. Great to see we elected the right man to represent us…

    • Reign Down Great job Andy

    • Valerie Brock Certainly no apology needed Andy. God’s Word says it all :-)

    • Jeramy Little To Blair Anderson: We are to do our very best every single day to keep God’s law, but we have to understand that even though we try, we can’t always do it. God’s law is perfect, and we are not. The purpose of the law is to reveal to us that we cant keep it, we are sinful, and that we need a savior. It points us to Jesus Christ.

      To Jerry Hutcheson: Murder and stealing are laws because they deny others of their rights and property. That’s what laws should be for. You cannot legislate morality, the fact that you put a law on paper does nothing to change the sun problem in a persons heart.

    • Jeramy Little Sin problem, not sun problem

    • Janice Sherman Brien One more time…. TJefferson’s “wall of separation of church n state” was bc British Colonial America had Episcopal pastors paid from the King/Br. Govt…and the other Christian denominations did not get paid pastors from the Crown. So, the Episco pastors preached the British side of govt rule from England. Geo Wash said w/out the Biblical foundation, the people cannot n willnot be equipped to rule thenselves. Thx, Andy. You r not alonr in this. Be of good courage.

    • Sharon Simmons Ammann So proud to know you, Andy!! May God bless you and your family!

    • Mary Bates Speak it Andy! God has given it to you! I thank you for allowing Him to use you for His people!

    • Angela Criswell Whether or not you believe homosexuality is biological, or a choice, a sin or a civil rights issue, we all deserve respect, and I find comments like “fagbama” deeply, deeply offensive. I’m conflicted about a lot of things, but that’s not one of them.

Tags: , , ,

dana @ May 19, 2012

Pillay on homo/trans-phobia: Punish violence and hatred, not love!

Posted in: LGBT, Transsexual | Comments (0)

Tags: , , , ,

dana @ May 16, 2012

Pirates team up with ItGetsBetter.org

Posted in: LGBT | Comments (0)

Tags: ,

dana @ May 16, 2012

Transsexual Spring

Posted in: Featured, Transsexual | Comments (1)

The transgender community leaders have been trying to delegitimize, or at least reconfigure, treatment for transsexualism, ever since the term was first used as a political umbrella. An umbrella that includes transsexuals (whether they like it or not), crossdressers, transvestites, gender queer, gender fuckers and any other category they can get their hands on, but use the face of mostly women born transsexual as the cover photo.  Now, transgender is no longer a political identity. Now people identity as transgender men or women. And this includes men who go out on the town, on a Friday night, dressed in their favorite skirt. A lot of these men identity as “Transgender Women”.

What the hell does it mean when someone says transgender people need to have access to treatment such as HRT, SRS, etc? This is where we see what is really going on. Transsexual men and women are who they are talking about. Not crossdressers who go out dressed as a woman. It seems as if the non-transsexual transgender community is hiding behind the skirts of women born transsexual. Why can’t people use the word transsexual, when it comes to those who need treatment for a medical condition?  And has anyone noticed who sex reassignment surgery is being talked about in the transgender community? This is going to have it’s own article in the near future and will be putting a spotlight on why a lot of us don’t want anything to do with anything transgender.

Please go to the link below and read about how things are changing for our community, in a very good way. Keep up the good work, Ashley!

The Transsexual Spring: The Tide’s Shifting This Season As The Transsexual Uprising Gains Major Ground In Affirming, Accurate Education & Medical Rights
By Ashley Love 

Currently The Transsexual Uprising for liberation from the anti-gender binary and anti-medical narrative reservation known as the “transgender umbrella”, which is really a concocted socio-political invention that literally impedes and erodes the rights and public understanding of those born with transsexualism, is making numerous and major advancements this Spring.

And what a beautiful and promising Spring it is! Spring into Action! The Transsexual Spring! Flowers are blooming in such abundance that they can’t be held down, and there’s nothing the honey stealing wasps and bee *colony* workers can do about it, though they are trying

The important ruling last month by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) says it’s “sex discrimination” via the 14th Amendment to discriminate against those who transition sex, and clearly states that our condition is *medical*. It’s not about “dress up, fetishes, costume balls, drag stage acts” or other transgenderist activities, hobbies or lifestyles.

Read the full article…..

 

Tags: , ,

dana @ May 14, 2012

ThosePeskyDames – Feminism Should Be Inclusive!

Posted in: Feminism, LGBT, ThosePeskyDames | Comments (0)

Tags: , , ,

dana @ May 12, 2012

Obama Supports Same-Sex Marriage!

Posted in: Featured, LGBT, Politics | Comments (0)

video platform video management video solutions video player

 

Tags: , ,

dana @ May 9, 2012

Republicans, Get In My Vagina! Funny Or Die

Posted in: Feminism, Humor, Politics | Comments (0)

Kate Beckinsale, Judy Greer and Andrea Savage “spread” the message that the one thing women really want in their vagina is the government.

Republicans, Get In My Vagina! from Kate Beckinsale

Tags: , , , ,

dana @ May 6, 2012

My Past

Posted in: Uncategorized | Comments (7)

I am posting this because I am not going to let my past be used to silence me. I just had an email exchange with Cathy Brennan that didn’t turn out like I thought it would. I found out she doesn’t give a shit about me..and never did. While I still support the U.N. document Cathy and Elizabeth submitted, I can’t support what has transpired since. Pretendbians? Really?

http://crossdresserclub.com/home/member.php?u=11535

The link above is to an old profile I had on a site called Crossdresser Club which is owned by a transsexual woman. I am only posting this because this might be used against me. Someone brought this up to me so I need to vent it now.

Second wave feminism is dead.

 

dana @ May 5, 2012

Cristan Williams and Autumn Sandeen on Ashley Love

Posted in: Derp, LGBT | Comments (0)

Seriously, go read this back and forth with Cristan Williams and Autumn Sandeen and tell me if it doesn’t make your head hurt.

http://www.cristanwilliams.com/b/2012/04/21/my-response-to-loves-transsexual-rally/

Cristan and Autumn are so fucking dense. Both of them, together, can’t understand why Ashley Love can have a problem with GLAAD while supporting some of the things they do. Get ready for your brain to implode. Deena, how do you do it?

 

  1. My Response to Love’s “Transsexual” Rally: http://t.co/8p8YmBPp

  2. It is amazing to see how far some transwomen will go in order to distance themselves from other transgender persons. http://t.co/4ZmERpyj

  3. Cristan Williams: My Response to Love’s “Transsexual” Rally http://t.co/GC1Vnlm5#LGBT #trans #transgender

  4. RT @TransNewsGirl: Cristan Williams: My Response to Love’s “Transsexual” Rallyhttp://t.co/GC1Vnlm5 #LGBT #trans #transgender

  5. I was at this year’s GLAAD Media Awards in Los Angeles this weekend as a journalist for LGBT Weekly covering the red carpet. I photographed much of the event and have a few video interviews I need to process for YouTube for use on Pam’s House Blend this week.

    The pre-party for the GLAAD Media Awards began at 3:30 PM, the stars began walking the red carpet began at 4:30 PM, and the dinner/ceremony/fundraiser proper began at 6:00 PM.

    I also was inside for the dinner and awards ceremony. I was there when Chaz Bono — a trans man — was presented the prestigious Stephen F Kolzak award by his Mom Cher and his Step-Mom Mary Bono. (Video of him winning the award is on Perez Hilton’s website here). The Stephen F. Kolzak Award is presented to an openly LGBT media professional who has made a significant difference in promoting equality — that a trans-identified person won the award this year is a very big deal.

    I was assigned to table 115. At 05:58 PM on the 20th,I received a text from a friend of mine who also was attending the GLAAD Awards. She said Ashley was at her table — table 104. Later my friend told me Ashley was there because someone who didn’t know about her alleged history of “crashing” and disrupting LGBT events had given her their spare ticket — the spare ticket originally being for the wife of a lesbian attendee that couldn’t attend the event due to illness.

    I was approached by two senior members of GLAAD’s staff at different points in the evening and told that Ashley was at the ceremony. Both times I was approached by staff, I was informed that security had been notified. Given my past public history with Ashley, I believe they were afraid that there may be trouble between Ashley and I — I certainly was not looking to be a part of any drama at the GLAAD event, and would go out of my way not to be involved in any disruption of the event. Hey, I love GLAAD and the work that they do — it’s an organization I even financially support.

    On seeing Ashley at table 104, I briefly exchanged peasantries with Ashley at the GLAAD event, as well as at Alexis Rivera’s memorial service a couple of weeks ago that we both attended. There were no sparks…no drama…at least between the two of us.

    Given Ashley’s alleged history of disrupting LGBT events — she’s allegedly rushed stages and taken microphones to deliver her transsexual-related messaging at other LGBT fundraisers — I was told by four people in the know at the event that she was being watched extremely closely. (I’m personally aware of two east coast LGBT fundraisers from which she was escorted out of in 2010.) However, other than just her presence apparently causing heightened tension for much staff & security at the GLAAD Media Awards, Ashley didn’t disrupt GLAAD’s event.

    This all said, Ashley being inside and seated at a table at the GLAAD Media Awards Ceremony at 6:00 PM — an hour-and-a-half before the protest was scheduled to end — indicates to me that the protest had light participation. And, as a journalist I can’t make much sense of Ashley Love going to the dinner and awards ceremony — with a ticket donated to her on the evening of the event — after scheduling a protest to begin when the red carpet walk was scheduled to begin. Well, unless she was planning to disrupt the awards ceremony.

    But since Ashley didn’t disrupt the ceremony, I’m at a loss to explain her presence at the GLAAD Media Awards ceremony in light of her planned protest — a scheduled protest I just learned about this morning upon reading your blog entry.

    No wonder the GLAAD staffers at the event were concerned about her presence — if I were a GLAAD staffer I would have been concerned too knowing she’d scheduled a protest earlier that evening, knowing that both Ashley and I were there and have had a sometimes contentious history, and knowing of her alleged past history of disrupting events. It no doubt appeared to GLAAD staff that Ashley’s presence was a metaphorical powder keg waiting to be lit — thankfully for all of us at the event there was no metophorical explosion.

    • Okay… let me get this right… Not only is Love a victim of GLAAD and thus a freedom fighter, she’s also a supporter of GLAAD who participates in their events?!? I’m at a loss… I’ve no idea what to make of her inconsistent behavior.

      Let me guess: at some point in the near future, we’ll see a pic with only Love holding a sign with a caption noting that she’s a freedom fighter and then later on we’ll see pictures of her and celebs which won’t mention the fact that they were taken at the an event she publicly disavowed.

      Again, this is why the TS Separatist movement – as it has been over the past 5 years – is dead. Love’s debunked narrative and bizarre behavior is all that’s left of what seemed to be (at one time) a fairly ferocious movement.

      *sigh*

      • I really can’t explain her behavior at all — it literally makes no sense to me.

        I’m not in any way trying to denigrate Ashley here, by the way. I’ve no desire to enter into any drama with her, and if all we had here to discuss was her behavior on the inside of the event, then I wouldn’t have publicly commented on it. By itself, her inside the event behavior wasn’t noteworthy. Only in the context of the protest she organized and participated in earlier that evening does her inside behavior at the GLAAD event, and GLAAD’s seemingly high concern about her being there, make that seemly behavior on the inside of the event noteworthy.

        Personally, I’m just trying to match what I saw of her behavior inside of the event with what I now know were her actions on the outside. And, it just doesn’t add up, Cristan. As much as I try to make sense of the totality of Ashley’s behavior that evening, I just can’t align her inside the event behavior and the outside the event behavior.

        I can only wonder what the people she protested on the outside of the event with would think of her attending the very same event she was protesting, eating a dinner for which a strong supporter of GLAAD had paid several hundred dollars. As someone who was on the invited to be participation inside of GLAAD’s event, and someone who has experience being a direct action protester myself, I’m mystified as to why Ashley would even want to come inside to be a well-behaved spectator of the awards ceremony for the organization she’d just finished protesting just minutes earlier.

        “Shocked” is just not a strong enough word to describe what I’m thinking and feeling — again, I can’t make any sense whatsoever of her behavior on Saturday night.

        • Oh, now she’s claiming that she went in with fliers and handed them out at the event. She claims to have talked with several GLAAD people who thought that her assertions were quite logical and agreed that change needed to happen. In short, Love is the freedom fighter who has been inside the belly of the beast emerged victorious in the face of insurmountable odds.

          Did you – or anyone else, for that matter – actually see any of the fliers she supposedly distributed inside the event? Did anyone see her distributing fliers?

        • I didn’t see the MAGNET direct action, but that’s not suprising — my friend & I had parked with the hotel’s valet due to lack of available parking in the area, and my personal focus was getting to the red carpet quickly. Oh, and we arrived at the event before 3:30 PM.

          However, I talked to a source at GLAAD about the MAGNET action, and that person said the action really didn’t rise to the level of a protest. Basically, I was informed MAGNET was pamphleting — if the action had risen to the level of a rally or protest, security would have been closely monitoring the action. That source at GLAAD I spoke to never actually saw one of the pamphlets, but that source did hear from security that pamphlets were distributed.

          And just as that someone at GLAAD I contacted never saw a copy of the distributed pamphlets, neither my friend or I saw a copy of the distributed pamphlets.

          Frankly, I would’ve liked to see a copy of the pamphlet. Opposition material distributed at an event I’m attending and/or covering is just the kind of stuff that I — most especially when I’m in journalist mode — want to see.

  6. Well tell me…..could you understand if I protested outside a Democrat fund raiser against some of their stances and positions that I disagreed with and then had no problem entering the building to listen to speakers and applaud them on other things they actually accomplished? How simple is that?

    Would you then engage in petty character assassination because you think I have to support all or nothing about the democrats? If you did I would laugh at your simplicity.

    • For me, it was from ticket Ashley solicited from a guest right before the event and then received from that guest, and what was the agenda of the person who paid for the multi-hundred dollar ticket. The woman who bought the ticket is someone who didn’t know about Ashley’s anti-GLAAD pamphleteering of the event earlier that afternoon.

      In other words, after Ashley organized and participated in anti-GLAAD pamphleteering of the GLAAD Media Awards, she didn’t just walk into the event and listen to the speakers — she couldn’t have. That she went to the GLAAD event’s after party and participated in more than just listening to speakers there too, is also noteworthy.

      Again, for me this is not to derail Ashley for her point of view in organizing anti-GLAAD pamphleting of the event, nor is for Ashley soliciting a ticket from an event attendee when the ticket was bought and paid for by a strong supporter of GLAAD, or Ashley’s attending and participating in the GLAAD after party. This is instead about being confused by the totality of Ashley’s behavior — confused by the mixed messaging that Ashley’s behavior of that afternoon and evening sends to people in trans community; confused by the mixed messaging that Ashley’s behavior of that afternoon and evening sends to the population of transsexual, transgender, and gender nonconforming people. If Ashley’s behavior is the standard we use to determine what she, as an activist, actually stands for, I can’t for the life of me figure out what Ashley actually does stand for.

      • You can’t figure it out? Well let me make it simple for you. Ashley doesn’t believe in the fruit basket or umbrella approach to sex/gender issues. Ashley does believe GLAAD has done some good things in standing up to those in society who oppress others.

        I really do not know much more than those 2 things about Ashley nor do I care to. Ashley is perfectly capable of speaking for Ashley. But I would consider it a favor if you ceased with the character assassinations.

        • My appologies.

          I have self-imposed rules I adopted earlier this year against 1.) taking the opinions of people who don’t reveal full names seriously (unless they engage in cyberharassment or cyberstalking), and 2.) engaging with people who don’t reveal full names.

          I broke both of those rules when I responded to you earlier because I wanted to point out I didn’t have a dog in the fight on Ashley’s pamphleting, but her behavior later that evening seems relevant. By my own rules, I shouldn’t have because I don’t know who you really are; you appear to me not to be brave enough to state your opinions under the name you use in the brick-and-mortar world.

          In the brick-and-mortar world, I’ve chained myself to the White House Fence twice, and went to jail twice, to stand up for the values I believe in — all done under my legal name. Beyond engaging in direct action under my own legal name, under my own legal name I’ve participated in organizing a campaign against DJs in Sacramento who slurred trans youth, under my byline I reported on the Angie Zapata Hate Crime Trial from the courtroom; under my legal name I was one of the first two trans reporters to be credentialed by the Democratic National Convention for covering the 2008 Democratic Party Convention — and wrote under my own byline; and under my own byline I write a column forLGBT Weekly. In other words, my activism and my visibility aren’t limited to just expressing opinions and engaging in keyboard activism.

          Until you express your opinions under the full name you use in your brick-and-mortar world life, I’m not going to further bother engaging you.

          So, I won’t respond to your questions directly. To quote a saying we had on my last ship in the Navy:

          Who the hell are you that I should give a sh** what the f*** you say?

          So again, my apologies. I won’t forget that those rules of mine again should I again happen to read one of your comments in others’ blogs.

  7. Too funny. Fortunately I don’t feel the slightest need to live by your rules. Slap yourself for breaking them.

    Just as I won’t engage in character assassination of Ashley I won’t engage in it against you either even though the temptation is great.

    If you want to know I exist ask Toni (Dys). I do not post using my full name because I really have neither NPD nor the desire to have employers do simple web searches and turn up discussions that are none of their concern.

    Here’s my rule set. Rule 1 if I can connect in real life to someone through 6 or less degrees of separation then I don’t need to know their full name or other personal information. Rule 2 IQ does not impress me nor do advanced degrees because anyone can claim them. Rule 3, when someone tries to impress me it often translates to me as them having low self esteem. Rule 4 never live by another person’s rules unless they coincide with your own values and that includes these rules.

  8. Oh Deena, equivocation is above you.

    Are you asserting that Love just has a little disagreement with a few things GLAAD does or are you honestly acknowledging that Love has a FUNDAMENTAL disagreement with GLAAD, to the point of accusing them of actively trying to sabotage the lives of transsexuals? Because those two types of disagreements are very different.

    Pretending that Love simply has a disagreement does a disservice to Love’s message. Either GLAAD is ruining the lives of transsexuals, is therefore anti-transsexual (as Love asserts) and should be protested in the most strident tone (as Love does) or the offense, while noteworthy, is minor; GLAAD is a friend and we should party with them. There’s a truth to be known about Love’s truth claims.

    If you honestly believed that the Democratic party was out to literally ruin the lives of transsexuals, would YOU party with them? I think not. I think you’re moral outrage wouldn’t allow you to do something like that because it would cause some cognitive dissonance for you, would it not?

    Therein lies the confusion between Love’s assertions of fact and Love’s actions. Trying to pretend that Love’s assertion of sabotage, ruin and slander is a mere disagreement is dishonest equivocation, Deena.

    Tisk, tisk tisk…

  9. Why Cristan how disingenuous of you to fake not grasping the simultaneous existence of 2 mutually exclusive opposites. Look up conundrum. You might also call such a thing a catch 22. Simply defined “it can’t be but yet it is”.

    Ashley is a big girl and capable of speaking her own mind on these matters. But I doubt she will engage with you. I on the other hand am a ditz and enjoy the occasional joust. We are quite different in many ways but at least you are cordial.

    Autumn Sandeen on the other hand has proven through past actions to be a rather nasty piece of work. You just knew I had to mention Autumn. She wants my full name, address and other personal facts and I have full confidence that if she had them she would launch an attack.

    So let me repeat this for you. Women can hold more than one position on people and organizations even when those positions seem to conflict with each other. Men seem to have difficulty comprehending that. That’s old news. It has exasperated most men throughout the ages. Go figure.

    • To be clear, you’re saying that you’re happy to support the events of organizations you truly believe want to destroy you and people like you because the word conundrum.

  10. Get a good night’s sleep and try again.

    • Yah… I got a couple of nights sleep and the idea of partying with a group you believe wants to maliciously destroy your existence still seems a bit strange to me.

Tags: , ,

dana @ May 5, 2012

ZERO Day Exploit for Oracle – CVE-2012-1675

Posted in: Tech | Comments (0)

Oracle released a rare “take action now” advisory for a 13 year bug in Oracle TNS Listener which has a publicly available exploit.

Oracle Security Alert for CVE-2012-1675

Description

This security alert addresses the security issue CVE-2012-1675, a vulnerability in the TNS listener which has been recently disclosed as “TNS Listener Poison Attack” affecting the Oracle Database Server. This vulnerability may be remotely exploitable without authentication, i.e. it may be exploited over a network without the need for a username and password. A remote user can exploit this vulnerability to impact the confidentiality, integrity and availability of systems that do not have recommended solution applied.

With a publicly available exploit at http://www.joxeankoret.com/download/tnspoison.zip (written in Python).

http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2012/Apr/204

This way, an attacker is able to register any instance in the remote TNS
listener and connections to the registered instance will be routed to
the attackers machine but, is this interesting? Well, not very
“exciting”. But, what occurs if an attacker tries to register one
already registered instance's name or service name? The TNS listener
will consider this newer registered instance name a cluster instance
(Oracle RAC, Real Application Clusters) or a fail over instance (Oracle
Fail over).

When 2 or more database instances are registered with the same name the
TNS listener will make load balance between all the registered remote
database servers. The latest registered remote database server will
receive the first client connection and the second will be routed to the
previously registered remote database server.

With this exploit, you are able to see data stored in the database and even able to send your own queries to view or change data. This is all without authentication.

As many of the client connections are connected to the legitimate
database through our proxy, we are also able to inject commands and/or
hijack connections. To inject commands, simply, wait for the customer to
send an SQL query/statement, replace the contents of the statement with
our desired command and that's all.

For session's hijack, simply, close the socket opened between the client
and our box and use the established connection channel between the real
database server and our machine. You may start sending SQL statements
right now.
You can find more details about the exploit below:
http://www.joxeankoret.com/download/tnspoison.pdf
A video is included here
http://eromang.zataz.com/2012/04/30/oracle-database-tns-poison-0day-video-demonstration/

Patch now!!! At the very least, block traffic heading to port 1521 except for those IP addresses that need to access it.

 

Tags: , , , ,

dana @ May 3, 2012