Archive for the NAACP Category


Posted in 2012 US ELECTION, DIANE VALENCEN OPINIONS, MITT ROMNEY, NAACP with tags , , , on 11/07/2012 by Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F.

Well he almost made it without embarassment and for a period of about 11 minutes Mitt Romney looked confortable speaking at the NAACP Convention being held in Houston, Texas.

Then he said he would “sign a bill that repealed ObamaCare.” A full throated chorus of boos rose from the gathered membership that last for nearly 30 seconds and seemed to unnerve Romney for an additional half minute causing him to stammer into the explanation the US Chamber of Commerce had a poll that said ObamaCare would cost jobs.

Romney was booed a second time when he made the proposal that “If you want a President that will make things better in the African-American community you’re looking at him.” The presumpted GOP Presidential nominee did recieve tepid applause several times for his take on creating more opportunity for African-Americans. However, as much as he tried to say “ObamaCare” as quietly as possible in the list of programs that need to be cut the gathered members gave no quarter.

Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!

Diane Valencen, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.], ArF J., M.F.
Editorial Page Editor
The Dis Brimstone Daily Pitchfork
65 Shatter 2 AS


Posted in COUNTER-THEOCRACY, NAACP on 20/05/2012 by Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H. [Journ.]

I know this post is a day late, but by no means is it a dollar short. Yesterday the NAACP issued a statement that supports gay marriage and to have that heroic organization do so is an historic stride forward not just for the LGBTQ community in the United Staes but for civil rights in general. But this leads to a little bit of a counter-intuitive situation for the religious right in America. To understand the issue of gay marriage in the US you have to know its opponents you have to know who they really are.

Whether homosexual couples have the right to marry isn’t the issue to conservatives; the US Constitution clearly makes room for gay marriage. To conservatives this is simply about the power to control the masses. This issue is solid gold to churches who need to fill their pews. In the recent history of American politics there has never been an issue that had the opportunity to bridge the gap between the most segregated day of the week. Black regular churchgoers and white regular churchgoers alike have the reputation of being more conservative than those who rarely attend services. And your humble ranter would the be remiss if I didn’t point out that America is a nation of people who by a vast majority express their faith in Christianity or believe in G-d.

What I couldn’t understand for years was why the black church was so set against gay marriage. Now I could go down the litany of bibilical prohibitions on same sex relations that conservatives of all stripes point to in an effort to make the case against gay marriage, but I won’t bore you with that. It is preferable to point out once again that the right is about control in the hands of a powerful few; the left about Freedom for everyone.

As of the last past hours I wasn’t reading in the mainstream press about any rights of black or white churches being restricted in the same manner that gay rights are being denied. I haven’t read anything about leftist bombing churches or threatening pastors–not one iota of that has crossed any of the four screens in front of me right now. But I do see a disturbing trend on the right that has for years been saitsfied using the ballot box to deny marriage rights to people who pose no threat to opposite sex marriage.

Andy Gipson, a Mississippi state legislator, has made the following comments [emphasis mine.]:

“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.”

Now for anyone who hasn’t been following this issue, Gipson’s passages of scripture from the King James Version [KJV] read this way:

From Romans

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

From Leviticus

13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

No sooner than Reverend Gipson [oh sorry, I didn’t point out that this state legislator is a Baptist minister did I? Quelle surprise for Mississippi!] began to get a little push back from his above Facebook® post, he doubled down [once again emphasis mine]:

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.

These three points that Gipson makes are flawed terribly. Number 1 straight couples get sexually transmitted diseases as well. That doesn’t make promiscuity strictly a GLBTQ issue and besides the lesbian rate of HIV/AIDS is very low.

Number 2, ah the canard about protecting the children. Now in Reverend Gipson’s world, and what a really fucking frightening world that is, you catch homosexuality like you catch a cold. To Gipson homosexuality is a form of depravity that is outside his perfect ideal of creation. To be gay is a horrible mistake to those who think and act like this man. To admit that being attracted to the same sex is genetic would mean that the g-d of his religion made “those people that way.” There is no confusion that I’ve seen among the children raised by gay and lesbian parents. There is however a growing intolerance among pre-teens and teens who are raised in so called Christian homes who bully young people who are terrified to come out, or who are assumed to be gay.

Finally, Number 3, makes the case that this is about one thing that is the incestuous offspring of two fathers and mother and they are money, power and control. read the words, ” . . . the key to all aspects of social order and control.” Curious even to a Jewish former cab driver from Brooklyn who has seen his share of social disorder and chaos in a place he was sent to by his government called Vietnam. To keep the poor and middle class at bay then, from elites with degrees in Business Law like Gipson you need a powerful and strict set of rules. These rules have to apply force by way of the most massive appeal to authority possible. That authority must have not only the power of life and death over the second by second condition you know as life, but equally and more powerfully this authority this authority must be allied with the amassing of wealth and power by those who speak for it in resonant tones wearing suits and ties.

In Hindsight

All these calls for blood and anger and destruction from people who say they follow the Prince of Peace it doesn’t make sense to me. I have a suggestion for Gipson since he hates the modern world so much. I suggest he take the advice of his Master and divest himself of all his wealth. I would call on him to go back and live as his idols did in the first century CE. That would mean no iPad, no smart phone no electricity, no running water and no privilege just for being perceived as a racial and class elite. When you do that Mr Gipson I will have a little respect for you.

Pax Terra!

Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.]
Managing Editor—Research
The Dis Brimstone-Daily Pitchfork
14 Shatter 2 AS

%d bloggers like this: