Tony Alamo Update: Evangelist Sentenced to 175 Years in Jail

Finally this child molester who hid behind religion will get his just metes.  Read more about the sentencing.

Tony Alamo Guilty on All Ten Counts

  The jury has come back with its verdict in the Tony Alamo case and he is guilty on all ten charges.

Tony Alamo Found Guilty of Transporting Minors for Sex

Latest News:

Here is the latest from the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: “Jurors on Friday found evangelist Tony Alamo guilty on all 10 counts of transporting five young girls across state lines for sex.

The jury of nine men and three women found Alamo guilty of transporting girls as young as 9, in violation of a nearly century-old federal law. He was accused in a 10-count indictment. Each count carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

The jury returned a verdict shortly after entering its second day of deliberations. The seven-day trial included testimony from Alamo’s accusers for the prosecution, and his common-law wife and a mother of an accuser for the defense.”

Read the entire article here.

And What Will the Conservative Republicans Say Now about Sancti-MOAN-ious Sanford’s Revelations and the Sanctity of Marriage? Come’on Now, We’re All Waiting with Bated Breath

Mr. A-List (that’s A for Adultery), Republican Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina was forthcoming with even more revelations about his relationship with Maria Belen Chapur, the Argentinian woman with whom he has been having an affair. It seems, though, that his current mistress is not the only woman he has been involved with during his marriage to his wife, Jenny. “Oh, what a tangled web . . .” If you’re into the details the South Carolinian newspaper, The State has the most.

Actually, I’m not that interested in what Sanford or other straight people do in bed; it’s just that when so many of them give out this “holier than thou” attitude, laying it on thick about the sanctity of marriage and how gay marriage and homosexuality are just about the worst thing that anyone could be part of, you want to sit there and say, “Hey, Sluggo, maybe you might want to re-think your position on love and who can love whom, and maybe your love isn’t really any different than anybody else’s love.” (Wow, that was a long sentence; I got to take a breath myself.)

Anyway, ya gotta dig these cartoons:

And So It Goes–Another “Moral” Republican, Presidential-Hopeful “Goes Down” . . . So To Speak . . . All the Way to Argentina

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, another one of the "A-List" Republicans

“Lost” Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina has come back to the States from Argentina, and upon his return admitted to having an affair with an Argentinian woman whom he had met some eight years ago.  This is the same Republican governor who made such a big fuss over the stimulus package and didn’t want to take money for his state, which in the end the state legislature accepted.

We probably should start making some tick marks on the calendar to see how many weeks in a row, these Republican big-wigs are going to “come out” admitting to breaking some biblical rule.  It was just last week that U.S. Senator John Ensign admitted to having had an affair with an employee, who was also the wife of one of his top aides.

These types are the same ones who rail against gay marriage and espouse the “sanctity of marriage”.

Just once I’d like to hear from any of the bible-beaters and have them show where that book says there is anything wrong with love, either gay or straight.  What I don’t understand is where they get all so quiet and seem like the shyest little girl in the corner, when one of these conservative Republicans breaks one of the 10 commandants from their own holy book.  I mean, one of the 10 commandments; that should be like really a big deal, but they’d rather go on harping, campaigning, and spending money trying to tear down gay people based on a few debatable verses.

More Damaging Fallout for Republicans from the Ensign Affair; More of their “Moral” Values Lead to Even More Hypocrisy

John Ensign, Republican Senator

The situation surrounding the admitted affair of Nevada Republican Senator John Ensign is getting even more damaging for Republicans.

Doug Hampton, the husband of the woman who was involved with Ensign, says he wrote a letter to that favorite network of the right, Fox News, informing them of the affair and asking for their help. Both Hampton and his wife Darlene had worked for Hampton, and their 19-year-old son had also been given a job during the affair.

In the letter, Hampton also said that Hampton’s roommate, Republican Senator from Oklahoma, Tom Coburn, knew about the affair. (Please tell me–why do U.S. Senators need roommates?)

Fox News claims that they didn’t get a letter from Hampton, but strangely enough, it was not soon thereafter that Ensign publicly admitted to the affair.

Ensign’s Republican colleagues are saying nothing more than it’s a private situation and they feel so sorry for his family.

What short memories they have! How much time and taxpayers’ money did the Republicans in Congress spend trying to force President Clinton out of office after the Lewinsky revelations? For months on end, basically all other congressional work stopped so that they could force every little detail out. But now with Ensign, they want only to say, “It’s a personal situation.” What hypocrites!

One of those giving support to Ensign is beleaguered Governor of Nevada, Jim Gibbons, who is in the process of divorcing his wife. The Las Vegas Sun says this about Gibbons’ response to Ensign’s admission:

Ensign’s admission comes on top of a string of disclosures and allegations about Gibbons. Since his election in 2006, Gibbons has been accused of sexual assault, sending love notes on a state phone and improperly firing a state employee. In recent court documents related to divorce proceedings, his wife, Dawn, accused him of a history of infidelity.

This is the same Gibbons who recently vetoed a domestic partners bill in Nevada. Fortunately, the Nevada Senate was able to override Gibbons’ veto.

Aren’t these two Nevada Republican politicians the true posterboys for the sanctity of marriage? How many more closet doors will be cracked open before people realize the true hypocrisy in the actions and words of these leaders of the so-called “moral” Grand Old Party.

Why Don’t These “Moral” Republicans Ever Seem To Have To Face the Consequences of their Actions?

John Ensign, Republican Senator

Interesting, interesting, interesting. Don’t those Republicans just personify the “family values” they so glowingly espouse. (Thanks to The Rachel Maddow Show and the Las Vegas Sun for this one.)

A couple of days ago, Senator John Ensign, the Nevada Republican, admitted to having an affair with the wife of one of his top aides. Yes, interesting, because Ensign was one of the Republican senators who had called for President Clinton to resign after the Monica Lewinsky affair. This same “forgiving” senator also had demanded that his fellow Republican senator, Larry Craig from Idaho, resign after he was arrested for trying to do some hanky panky with an undercover cop in a restroom in the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. Up to now, though, Ensign himself has only found it fit to step down from a senate committee chairmanship.

Since Ensign’s admission of his breaking the 7th commandment (wonder why he didn’t say it that way?), it has come to light that the woman with whom he was having this affair was also on his payroll, but even worse (great for her I suppose), her pay was doubled in both of the two jobs that she had as his employee. (Now it sounds like it was really three.)

What’s even more gob-smacking is that during the same period, her 19-year-old son was being paid for doing “research policy consulting”. Yes, that sounds like something a 19-year-old is really qualified for.

So onward go these moral Republicans, who never seem to have to pay in any way for what they get caught doing. People like Craig continue in office until the term ends, feigning being wronged, liked the meadowlark feigns being wounded to distract you from her nest of eggs. Others like prostitute hiring, David Vitter, U.S. Senator from Louisiana, smile and act they have done nothing and that everyone should pat him on the back for just being a man. And now Ensign.

Well, as for Ensign, I’m waiting for these moral Republicans, especially these evangelical christian types to come out and use their holy book literally, like they always do when they try to condemn gay people and homosexuality.

I mean here it is:

( Leviticus 20 verse 10 and Deuteronomy 22 verse 22). Moses had said both the adulterer and the adulteress had to be stoned. Where was the adulterer? Where was the man that had been found in the very act of committing adultery with the woman? Why had they not brought the man to be stoned together with the woman according to the law of Moses? Both adulterer and adulteress caught committing adultery had to be stoned according to the law of Moses. To stone the woman alone would have been wrong. (Here’s my source, in case somebody wants to mess with me.)

No, these hypocrites only want to use their morality and their religious beliefs, and their literal use of the bible when it suits their purpose. So, of course, they are not going to say anything against people like Craig, Vitter, or Ensign.

Let’s see if these hypocrites’ acts can somehow be blamed on gay people, like, for example, “if those gay people in Massachusetts (because that was the only state where same-sex marriage was legal when Ensign started his affair) weren’t able to get married, I would never have have wanted to cheat on my wife and sleep with my employee who just happens to be the wife of one of my top aides.”

Sex in a Pan–Decadent and Easy!

In the 80s and 90s, I lived in a great little garden complex over in Montrose (Houston, Texas) on Burlington Street. There were 32 apartments, all of which overlooked the swimming pool and small courtyard in the middle. It was a great little complex, friendly and close-knit, and for a lot of those years, it was about 80% gay and about 20% straight and whatever. Everybody worked, but because the bars were close, a lot of us went out in groups and often hung out at the pool and had barbeques together.

Unfortunately, during that that time, AIDS started picking off people, almost like a sniper, and one by one, our group got smaller and smaller. Of course, a few people did move to other places. I lived there for fifteen years, and by the time I left. it was about 10% gay and 90% straight. The straight people were cool, the type that you still find in the area, but it just wasn’t the same atmosphere. I finally moved, not because I didn’t like my neighbors, but because there had been a small tornado which came through the neighborhood, and it had torn off part of the roof. The company the owners hired made cheap repairs and my ceiling started leaking. Even though my part of the building hadn’t been damaged by the tornado, the entire roof had been replaced with crappy materials and workmanship.

Anyway, when we used to have our parties and get-togethers, my friend Neil sometimes made this great dessert. He didn’t call it “Sex in a Pan”, but I’ve seen others call it that. I don’t remember him calling it by any special name, but I loved it, and I’ve made it on my own over the years. It’s super easy to make, and you end up with a decadent dessert that everyone will talk about. ^ou make it in steps, so you do need to have a little time, but even then you can watch your favorite TV shows or do laundry at the same time because it doesn’t require a lot of attention. If you are a complete “choco-holic”, you can use the chocolate version of almost all of the ingredients.

Sex in a Pan

Preheat the oven to 350 degrees F.

–The Base

1 Cup chopped pecans, 1 Cup flour, 1/3 Cup butter, 3 Tablespoons sugar

Combine these ingredients well, and press them evenly into 9″X 12″ (approximately) glass or metal baking dish. Bake for 20 minutes, take it out, and let it cool for at least 30 minutes.

–The Filling

8 ounces of cream cheese, 1 cup powdered sugar, 1/2 small container of whipped topping

Mix these together and spread over the cooled base.

–Topping Layer One

2 Cups milk, 1 small package instant chocolate pudding, 1 small package instant vanilla pudding

Mix these together (electric mixer is best), and spread over the filling.

–Topping Layer Two

Other 1/2 of the whipped topping, semi-sweet chocolate, chopped pieces of maraschino cherries, chopped pecans

Add the final layer of whipped topping; then sprinkle with shaved chocolate and other delights of your choosing!

Refrigerate for a couple of hours for the entire dessert to set. If you want, you can add the final sprinkles of chocolate, cherries, and nuts right before serving. To serve, cut into squares, and gently lift them out with a spatula. This serves 12 if you have guests. It also refrigerates well, so if you have any left over, you can pig out on it later!

I Just Hope It Doesn’t Do More To Damage the Ozone Layer

For those who want to be in on the latest products, the Time magazine website has an interesting little read on a new condom being developed by a guy over in Germany. His impetus for this new product? Size problems.

The title of the article itself is a gem: “Spray-On Condoms: Still a Hard Sell”.

And you thought Time magazine was only about news and politics!

Dog Poop, Religion, Homosexuality and the “Ick” Factor

Ever since I got Annie two years ago, I’ve had to pick up her poop. Depending on what she has eaten (a lot of dry food, more wet food, little tidbits from my plate), sometimes that poop comes out in nice firm turds, sometimes they’re more squishy, and sometimes–well–they can be runny. Even though we might go outside more often, Annie usually poops two times a day, once during our first short, sleepy walk of the morning, and then at our evening–five thirty-ish–walk after I get home from work.

Because she’s the first dog I’ve ever had on my own, she’s the first one I’ve had to clean up after. The dogs we used to have on the farm when I was growing up must have pooped somewhere, but never anywhere close to the house, and even if they had, I doubt whether it would have been a big concern, considering all the other poop that was around, mostly chicken poop and cow poop. Of course, from time to time, some of that poop did have to be cleaned up. Cleaning out a hot, stinky chicken house was a horrible task.

But when I got Annie, I knew that I would have to clean up her poop. I think if you have a dog in the city, you have to clean up after it. There are laws on the books, but I’m embarrassed by how many dog owners I see walking their dogs when I’m walking Annie who don’t or won’t clean up after them. But that’s another gripe of mine, not my particular one of the day.

When I brought Annie home, I was prepared. I had bought the little rolls of bio-degradable bags to use to collect her poop, and still save plastic grocery bags just in case I run out of the other. At first it was a little “icky” cleaning up her poop, but after a short while, it wasn’t “icky” or disgusting, just part of the routine. I’m sure the reason that some dog owners don’t, or won’t, clean up after their dogs is because they think it’s disgusting–because it’s poop, and they don’t want to even feel the poop. (Using the bags is super easy–put your hand inside the bag, grab the poop, turn the bag inside out around the poop, tie the end in a knot, and toss it away.) You don’t even have to touch the poop. But so what if you did? Would it be a big thing? Just wash your hands! Think how many parents have had to change dirty diapers. There’s poop in them too. But what would happen if they didn’t clean up their babies after pooping?

My point is that if you have a dog or a baby, you have to clean up the poop. And, soon enough, it’s part of the routine. Cleaning up the poop, and the poop itself, is no longer something disgusting. It’s part of the norm, like washing the coffee cup that has been sitting with a half cup of coffee with cream in it all day. You wash it; it’s clean. It’s not something “icky”.

So, you say, where does religion come into all of this?

Well, a lot of the things people go “ick” over are because of something their religion has taught them, and sometimes their culture. But a religious “ick” is very different from a mere cultural “ick”.

Meat is a good example. Some religions forbid eating pork. Some Jews have to have a kosher kitchen, and surprisingly, their counterparts, the Muslims, have something nearly the same. For the most part, they won’t eat ham and shrimp and other foods because of the culinary rules of the religions. I’ve seen them in places where a variety of meats are available–and if there’s ham or shrimp on the table, that “ick” factor comes into play, but it’s a religious “ick”.

In some countries, people eat foods, especially meats, which bring out the “ick” in people from other cultures. The French and the Kazakhs eat horse meat. Some Koreans and Chinese eat dogs. In some places, they eat monkeys. Those are all high on my “ick” factor for foods. I remember one time I went to the meat case in a store here in Houston and saw package after package of wrapped-up chicken feet, but people from a lot of cultural backgrounds cook up chicken feet in one way or another. We raised, killed, scalded, plucked, cleaned, cut up, and cooked our own chickens on the farm, but the chicken feet always got thrown out to the dogs, along with the entrails. Chicken entrails (guts) and chicken feet are very high up there on my “ick” factor as food. (How do you do with eating chicken guts?) Eating testicles of any animal is pretty high up there too. Unknowingly, I ate some goat testicles when I lived in Greece. The “ick” factor came into play later that night.

I’m not saying there is anything wrong with people having an “ick” factor, but we should understand why we feel that way. Culturally, things that some consider foods are not foods to others. Personally, chicken feet are not food. I just don’t see anything edible about them. Dogs are not food because they are pets. Others see it differently; it comes from our perspective of what is food and what is not food.

But this religious “ick” about food is another matter. People adhere to their beliefs because some old book, the Bible, the Talmud, the Koran, or some other religious book contains rules about what could be eaten–in other words, what was healthy to eat–thousands of years ago. We’ve got all kinds of books with rules about this today, what to eat if you have high blood pressure, what to eat if you have diabetes. We also have books that can tell us what wild mushrooms are edible, what cereals have the highest fiber content, what fruits contain a lot of sugar. Nobody–but nobody–today would equate any of these “rules” to some religious rule. And this is wherein lies the problems with religion and the “ick” factor.

Which brings about the mistake made by these religious people–of any hair-brained cult religion–and their viewpoint against homosexuality. They try to use a few lines of text (which have been translated and interpreted through a number of languages over a couple of thousand years) to try to prove that homosexuality is wrong. I would bet that 95% of these people who think this way couldn’t even find these texts in whatever book they purport to believe in, let alone really be able to explain what the text might even be saying. In reality, these people–and others–who disagree with homosexuality are just trying to use religion to justify their own “ick” factor.

As a society, we have made sex–any kind of sex–”icky”. We can’t really talk about it; it’s too “icky”. Therefore, when most straight people start to have to deal with something like homosexuality, the “ick”: factor really kicks in. A straight guy really gets disgusted when he thinks about what two gay guys might do with each other. (Strange, though, how most straight guys get really intrigued if it’s two women doing something with each other.) I think a lot of other people just have fallen into society’s view that anything sexual is basically something that can’t be talked about. And the religious hardcore just use their religious book to support their own “ick” factor: “It’s something disgusting to me, so I’m going to use my Bible to prove it.”

PENIS. VAGINA. PENIS. ANUS. VAGINA. PENIS. VAGINA. PENIS. VAGINA. PENIS. VAGINA. ANUS. PENIS. VAGINA. PENIS. PENIS. VAGINA. VAGINA. PENIS. PENIS. ANUS. PENIS. PENIS. VAGINA. VAGINA. ANUS.

Look at these for several minutes. You can even think of them in different combinations and orders. You can get over your “ick” factor. Or maybe, you can’t. As a gay man, reading the word “vagina” is OK; anything more personal would still be pretty “icky”.

One thing we need to understand about our “ick” factors: they are not moral issues, nor should they be something that governments make laws restricting. This is the problem that is gotten into when governments start legislating based on religious “morality” (my quotes because I do not consider a lot of so-called christians moral in any way whatsoever): Should Ahmad feel guilty because he ate a ham sandwich? Should you feel guilty because Ahmad ate a ham sandwich? Should you feel guilty because Ahmad ate a ham sandwich? Should you feel guilty because Ahmad ate a ham sandwich? Should Ahmad be punished because he ate a ham sandwich? In the end, none of those should matter under the law. The only thing that matters is this: Ahmad should be punished if he stole the ham sandwich.

Just because someone or some group of people think pork is disgusting does not mean any government should write laws not permitting other people to eat pork. Just because you think people having sex in a way that is “icky” to you does not mean that any government should write laws not permitting others from doing it, and in turn, preventing them from any other benefit (i.e. gay marriage) that the rest of society has without question. I know of no government that ever outlawed left-handedness even though a lot of grade school teachers who didn’t like it gave a lot of whacks to little left-handed kids. I can’t imagine anybody thinking that any kid ever chose to be left-handed, and, thus, to be whacked by their teachers. Nor did any gay person ever choose to be gay, and, thus, be called names, have beer bottles thrown at them, denied having rights that others have, or worse, being beaten or killed.

It’s like this: if you don’t want to pick up dog poop, don’t get a dog, but your unwillingness to pick up dog poop should in no way interfere with my getting a dog, and, thereafter, picking up her poop.

(Oh, and if you’ve ever seen chickens pecking up their own poop and whatever else they might find, you might get some of that “ick” factor next time you stop off at KFC on your way home from work. Pigs, in my estimation, are a helluva lot cleaner than chickens, but neither a nice ham sandwich nor chicken salad brings out any “ick” factor in me.)