Controversy has completely engulfed openly gay Portland Mayor Sam Adams. More than a year after denying the charges leveled at him from an undeclared mayoral opponent, Adams has admitted to having a sexual relationship with then-18-year-old Beau Breedlove, who is now 21.
The whole world is focused on Adams’ sexual relationship with Breedlove, but the real issue here is Adams’ lies to the public, the media and the people who voted him into office.
Some are calling for his resignation. Others are defending him. A warning: Let’s not play into double-standards.
Adams admitted to the relationship with the then-18-year-old Beau Breedlove, who is now 21. Adams said he lied about the 2007 allegations because he did not want the public to give into “untrue rumors” that he had broken the law by having sex with a minor. Adams met Breedlove when the boy was 17.
Breedlove has not commented much to the press. Citizens have expressed outrage over Adams’ lies about the affair. Journalists and bloggers have said Adams has lost his trustworthiness and credibility.
Back in October I ranted and raved over the coverage of the anti-gay mailer and commercial sent out against now-U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan. The mailer, in part, attacked Hagan for supposedly not supporting the Boy Scouts, because of their ban on gay troop leaders.
In the coverage, media conveniently forgot to mention that Boy Scout policy, likely the most important part of it, actually bans both leaders and youth members who are gay.
It seems the mainstream press aren’t the only ones ignoring gay youth: Gay media is doing it too.
In a recent article, 365Gay.com Newscenter staff explored a federal court’s request for an opinion from the California Supreme Court over a case involving San Diego Boy Scouts and their leases of public space.
Even gay journalists conveniently not mentioned that gay youth are also targets under the Boy Scouts’ anti-gay policies:
The Boy Scouts has been the target of preferential treatment lawsuits since the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2000 ruled that the organization has a constitutional right to exclude openly gay men from serving as troop leaders and because it compels members to swear an oath of duty to God.
Gay youth who are members of the Boy Scouts will never be protected if the public isn’t aware that they’re also targets under the anti-gay leadership of the largest youth organization in this nation. It’s a shame our own gay media isn’t even willing to report the situation accurately.
Speaking with former Boy Scouts and others for years since my dismissal, I’ve found far more youth dismissed from the Scouting program than adult leaders.
How shameful is it that a youth service organization discriminates against its own youth members? It’s even more shameful that media — and gay media, in particular — can’t (or won’t) report the truth.
Foot-in-mouth syndrome or how conservatives really feel about Falwell’s minions? Either way, it’s funny as hell.
Other conservative groups that loudly backed Prop. 8 are being targeted as too extreme and off-putting by ProtectMarriage.com, which put the constitutional amendment on the Nov. 4 ballot and hopes to help persuade the state Supreme Court to uphold the measure.
“We represent the people who got things done, who got Prop. 8 passed,” said Andrew Pugno, general counsel for the Yes on Prop. 8 campaign. “An important part of defending Prop. 8 is eliminating arguments not helpful to our concerns.”
Pugno, for example, persuaded the Supreme Court last week to bar the Campaign for California Families from intervening in the court case over the validity of Prop. 8 and the same-sex marriage ban.
“That organization represents the extreme fringe and is not representative of the coalition that got it passed,” Pugno said. “They didn’t even support Prop. 8 until sometime in the summer.”
People associated with the group didn’t expect the Prop. 8 campaign’s efforts to push them to the sidelines.
“I’m surprised, because we’ve litigated beside each other for 4 1/2 years” in the unsuccessful effort to keep the Supreme Court from overturning Prop. 22 same-sex marriage ban in 2000, said Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, which represents the Campaign for California Families. “We have the same goal, which is to defend Prop. 8.”
The group, now known as the Campaign for Children and Families, is run by Randy Thomasson, who for years has been one of California’s most visible opponents of gay rights and what he bills as “the homosexual agenda.”
I could go on about other demographic breakouts, but the conclusion is the same: No, of course AA voters aren’t the sole reason Prop 8 passed; some of the blame belongs elsewhere. But they’re a damned big part of the reason, and we shouldn’t try to paper over that fact.
Given that no other racial/ethnic group’s rejection of Prop 8 even came close to these figures and that black liberalism has been contested since the Reconstruction era (think DuBois vs Washington struggle), I find that it is not plausible to blame blacks for the passage of Prop 8 by statistics alone.
Some of the statements being made by West Coast queers about the blame the African-American community holds for “passing” Prop. 8 is wrong. The numbers just don’t support that “conclusion” that blacks were the reason Prop. 8 passed. And, I find it disturbing that the only folks I’ve heard repeat those lines are privileged, white gay men.
“Blogger wars” are usual around the blogosphere, you know. Two bloggers get into some sort of disagreement. Most of the time the “war” is childish and immature; some drama flamed by the human disconnect our wonderful internet age has fueled. But there are occassions when these “blogger wars” flame up for legitimate reasons: Like when a blogger doesn’t provide any sort of verification or evidence of the claims she’s making online.
Photo right: YouTube screencap of one young lady involved in the Castro scuffle.
I spent some time yesterday going back and forth with religious blogger Marcus French, the editor of Voice of Revolution (the blog of Dr. Michael Brown — one of the Charlotte’s most outspoken anti-gay advocates).
Citizenlink.org, the website of the anti-gay Focus on the Family’s political action group, posted a press release Friday from California’s Yes on 8 campaign.
Through the entire thing, the Yes on 8 folks and Focus on the Family ignore every reality in our nation, politically, legally, socially. They conveniently paint a common experience among adopted children as one that only occurs in kids with gay parents. The political spinning is great, really it is. It’s also shameful.
Oh, and utilizing the family situation of a world-wide famous Hollywood couple. Yeah, Yes on 8 needs some attention.
The Right screams and rants when the political left uses children to a political advantage, yet the Right has no problem whatsoever doing it themselves.
From The LA Times:
The food fight is over.
Nearly a month ago, opponents of Proposition 8 — which would amend the state Constitution to ban gay marriage — started a “soft boycott” of Bolthouse Farms, among the largest producers of fresh-cut carrots in the world and the maker of juices and smoothies sold in foodie haunts and upscale markets.
Company patriarch William Bolthouse Jr. had donated $100,000 to help get the measure on the Nov. 4 ballot, and Californians Against Hate wanted gay and lesbian shoppers and their friends to know it. The group figured it was truth in labeling.
Demonstrations at the “rock ‘n’ roll” Ralphs on Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood and Whole Foods markets in New York City and Washington, D.C., ensued. The gay blogosphere lit up, indignant.
But on Wednesday, the company and the advocacy group made peace, and the prickly pear cactus lemonade can flow again.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) issued the following statement regarding the memorials planned for openly gay, 15-year-old hate crime murder victim Lawrence King:
“I was deeply saddened by the recent death of 15-year-old Lawrence King who was killed at his school in Oxnard , CA . No one should face intimidation or violence, particularly at school, because of their sexual orientation or the way they express their gender identity.
“We must finally enact a federal hate crimes law to ensure that gay, lesbian and transgender Americans are protected against violent, bias-motivated crimes. We must send a unified message that hate-based crime will not be tolerated.”
I did a search to see if Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) had yet made any statement on the situation, but I couldn’t find anything. That, of course, isn’t to say that Obama hasn’t said anything — I just couldn’t find it.
The issue is too emotional for me to say anything worthwhile… I guess this is what is meant when it is said, “their blood shall be upon them.”
OXNARD, VENTURA COUNTY
Boy, 14, charged with murder, hate crime
Police say he shot classmate -he’ll be tried as an adult
Friday, February 15, 2008
(02-15) 04:00 PST Oxnard, Ventura County — Prosecutors filed a charge of murder with a hate-crime enhancement Thursday against a 14-year-old boy in the school shooting of a classmate who has been declared brain dead.
Prosecutors said they would try Brandon David McInerney as an adult. They changed the charge from attempted murder after learning that the victim, 15-year-old Lawrence King, will not survive.
[…] The felony complaint filed by prosecutors did not contain the reasons they are seeking a hate crime enhancement, and prosecutors said they could not reveal them.
Several classmates have said King would wear feminine attire, making him an unpopular figure with other boys at his campus.
King sometimes came to school wearing makeup and high heels, said eighth-grader Nicholas Cortez, 14.
Another eighth-grader, Michael Sweeney, said King’s appearance was “freaking the guys out,” the Los Angeles Times reported Thursday.
“He would come to school in high-heeled boots, makeup, jewelry and painted nails – the whole thing,” Sweeney told the Times.