|
-- tips@phblend.com
PHB Mobile
| Best of the Blend |
|
Blog Posts
Special Events and Interviews
| Blend-o-licious endorsements... |
The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."
He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior."
(CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)
Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego)."Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:
A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)
"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)
Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush
who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"
|
Support the Blend
|
|
An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.
|
Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 15:30:00 PM EDT
|
 Daddy Dobson of Focus On the Anus has made it clear he wants nothing to do with John McCain, but he's now turned his ire on Barack Obama as well. Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family -- who has stayed unusually quiet in this election cycle likely due to his loathing of presumptive GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. -- will tomorrow attack Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, on Tuesday for a speech the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee delivered in 2006 to the liberal Christian group Call to Renewal. First, let's take a look at the part of the Obama speech Daddy D has his panties in a bunch over. It's below the fold. |
| Pam Spaulding :: Daddy D's whining anti-Obama diatribe |
From Obama's Senate web page:[G]iven the increasing diversity of America's population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.
And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's, or Al Sharpton's? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount - a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application? So before we get carried away, let's read our bibles. Folks haven't been reading their bibles.
...Even those who claim the Bible's inerrancy make distinctions between Scriptural edicts, sensing that some passages - the Ten Commandments, say, or a belief in Christ's divinity - are central to Christian faith, while others are more culturally specific and may be modified to accommodate modern life.
The American people intuitively understand this, which is why the majority of Catholics practice birth control and some of those opposed to gay marriage nevertheless are opposed to a Constitutional amendment to ban it. Religious leadership need not accept such wisdom in counseling their flocks, but they should recognize this wisdom in their politics. Dobson erupted:..."I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology" and charges that Obama "is dragging Biblical understanding through the gutter."
"Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the lives of tiny babies?" Dobson asks. "What he's trying to say here is unless everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe." Based on what he's saying his radio show, it's clear that the tantrum is because Daddy D has no candidate in his pocket this time around. You have to check out the reader comments at Jake Tapper's post on ABC. A sampling:Could any serious person take this Dobson person as legitimate? In late 2004, Dobson led a campaign to block the appointment of Arlen Specter to head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, because he thought Specter was fruitcake liberal. Arlen Specter is a Republican, highly-respected by his colleagues in the U.S. Senate such as Sens. Lugar and Warner. Is it a Christian virtue to attack Specter, who is battling cancer, and being the best person he can possibly be? Pastor Dan at Street Prophets smacks Daddy D down:You, sir, have proved beyond a doubt that you are a doddering old tool, completely and irredeemably unfit for the game of politics.
You have been had. Punked. Owned. Fooled into showing yourself for the hateful ignoramus you are. Josh Dubois will now walk you around on a leash for the rest of the campaign.
Had you chosen to greet the Obama campaign's overture with even a modicum of goodwill, with even the tiniest sliver of cautious, skeptical optimism or curiosity, you would have owned the frame. You could have said with a straight face that Obama needed your stamp of approval to connect with "values voters." You would have been able to say, plausibly, that Democrats were reaching out to conservative Evangelicals and that you welcomed their attempt to bridge the gap on issue X, Y, or Z, thereby at least attempting to paint Obama into a corner. You would have to been able to position yourself in your favorite role of kingmaker with a whole new party.
But because you an irascible asshole, you chose to spit in their eye instead, and for that I thank you.
Because were you not such a bigoted, ignorant, miserable twit, you would have understood that Jesus said exactly nothing about abortion or homosexuality while your friends and colleagues have had plenty to say about Leviticus. Furthermore, you would have understood that without the Levitical code, there would be no objection to homosexuality in the Bible. It's all built off the priestly code, and if one part of that code can be said to no longer apply, then all of it is provisional.
You also would have understood Obama's point, you flatulent creep: that scripture is challenging in many ways, not just in the ways that a bunch of patriarchal crypto-fascists in Colorado Springs deem acceptable. Oh my. Go read the rest. Also check out steerpike66's related diary "Apparently, Leviticus is now off the menu."
UPDATE: Wayne Besen of Truth Wins Out makes this observation about the hypocrisy of Daddy D's charges... TruthWinsOut.org (TWO) responded today to Focus on the Family leader James Dobson's attack on Barack Obama. On Dobson's daily radio show, the right wing leader accused the democratic nominee of 'distorting' the Bible. This charge was odd, considering Dobson has been blamed by at least seven top researchers for " distorting" their scientific findings.
"James Dobson is a serial distorter and has consistently twisted the work of respected scientists to support his political agenda," said TWO Executive Director Wayne Besen. "It his the height of hypocrisy for him to point fingers and accuse others of distortions. It is clear that Dobson has little credibility and has tremendous difficulty with the truth."
In the past two years, at least seven researchers have accused Dobson of manipulating or cherry picking their results to back his anti-gay teachings. Letters and videos documenting the concerns of these respected professors can be viewed at TruthWinsOut.org.
The first researcher to step forward was New York University educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, PhD. On Sept. 14, 2006 Gilligan wrote a letter to Dobson that stated: "I was mortified to learn that you had distorted my work this week in a guest column you wrote in Time Magazine...What you wrote was not truthful and I ask that you refrain from ever quoting me again and that you apologize for twisting my work."
The most recent scientist to claim Dobson distorted his work was University of Minnesota's Gary Remafedi, M.D., M.P.H. In a letter to Dobson dated April 28, 2008 he wrote, "I want to draw your attention to a gross misrepresentation of our research at the website of 'Focus on the Family.'"
Other leading researchers who have taken issue with Dobson's use of their work include: Dr. Kyle Pruett, Professor of child psychiatry, the Yale University School of Medicine; Dr. Robert Spitzer, Professor of Psychiatry, Columbia University; Angela Phillips, Professor, Goldsmiths College in London; Dr. Elizabeth Saewyc, Associate professor, school of nursing, University of British Columbia; and Dr. Judith Stacy, Professor of sociology, New York University
"We urge the media to report the facts and allow America to see the real James Dobson," said Besen. "He portrays himself as a beacon of morality, but he is really just a tower of half truths." |
|
|
