“Not a single piece of scientific evidence supports the ban,” said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who joined 16 other Democrats and independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont in writing Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Margaret Hamburg.

The lawmakers stressed that the science has changed dramatically since the ban was established in 1983 at the advent of the HIV-AIDS crisis. Today donated blood must undergo two different, highly accurate tests that make the risk of tainted blood entering the blood supply virtually zero, they said.

The senators said that while hospitals and emergency rooms are in urgent need of blood products, “healthy blood donors are turned away every day due to an antiquated policy and our blood supply is not necessarily any safer for it.”

Brian Moulton, chief legislative counsel for the Human Rights Campaign,the nation’s largest gay rights group, said they are hopeful that the policy, last reviewed in 2006, will change under President Barack Obama, “who is interested in looking at all the policies that have a discriminatory effect.” The goal, he said, is “to have policies in place that are based on the science” rather than “any discriminatory idea about our community.”

The senators’ letter noted that in March 2006, the American Red Cross, America’s Blood Centers and the American Association of Blood Banks reported to an FDA-sponsored workshop that the ban “is medically and scientifically unwarranted.”

The FDA, in a statement, said that “while FDA appreciates concerns about perceived discrimination, our decision to maintain the deferral policy is based on current science and data and does not give weight to a donor’s sexual orientation.”

It said that while some groups favor relaxing restrictions, others, “such as those representing the hemophilia community, support continuation of the current policy.”

People with hemophilia, a bleeding disorder, require periodic transfusions and in the past, before screening techniques were improved to ensure blood was HIV-free, were among those most at risk of contracting the virus.

Kerry compared the effort to lift the blood donation ban to legislation he backed in 2008 to end the law banning people with HIV from traveling and immigrating to the United States. That ban was lifted last year.

Also signing the letter were Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Dick Durbin and Roland Burris of Illinois, Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Mark Udall and Michael Bennet of Colorado, Al Franken of Minnesota, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Carl Levin of Michigan, Tom Harkin of Iowa, and Mark Begich of Alaska.

If you work in the Vatican, being gay might put a damper on your career advancement. So, like any practical person, Angelo Balducci, a Gentleman of His Holiness, and Thomas Chinedu Ehiem, a 29-year-old Nigerian Vatican chorister, decided to satisfy their illicit sexual desires in private, with boys they bought and could pay to keep silent. In fact, these men, involved in a prostitution ring, were careful to keep their gay sex life reserved for people who were paid and then turned out after the act was complete.

What better strategy is there?

Although this seems like a good idea, turns out prostitution is illegal. Moreover, Balducci and Ehiem were caught, which makes the gay thing also a problem.

Now, what if being gay was not antithetical to working in this religious institution? What if these men did not have to hide their sexual desires but could, instead, have relationships with other men out in the open? Perhaps the whole prostitution ring embarrassment might have been avoided. At least, there would be less incentive to pay upwards of 2,000 Euros to sneak boys in and out of the Vatican.

This is the byproduct of sexual repression. Sexual “deviance” is pushed underground, involved in a world where the normal checks and balances don’t hold and sexual exploitation is easier and more common. Better to let it out. Even in the Vatican. Especially in the Vatican where these kinds of real scandals don’t bode well for the future of an organization centered on the enforcement of morality.

Martin Ssempa showed the videos to some 100 adults during a church service Wednesday in Uganda’s capital.

He says he plans to show the films regularly to educate churchgoers on gay sex and also plans to show the videos to parliamentarians. He says some churchgoers cried after watching the videos, which he said he downloaded from the Internet.

Ugandan gay rights activist Julian Peppe condemned Ssempa’s decision to show pornography in church, saying he should be arrested and needs mental rehabilitation.

The proposed bill has sparked protests in London, New York and Washington.

Anwar Ibrahim is accused of sodomizing a former male aide and could be barred from politics for five years if convicted. He claims the government trumped up the charges in order to remove him from the political scene and weaken his opposition political party. The government denies the allegations.

Anwar said Monday he was dissatisfied that the judge took no action against a newspaper owned by the ruling party that published a headline and photograph about the trial last week that he said were misleading and tantamount to contempt of court.

High Court Judge Mohamad Zabidin Diah’s decision raised “an element of real danger of bias,” Anwar said in a court document. “There has been a departure from the standard of evenhanded justice which the law requires.”

The judge is scheduled to hear the application and decide whether to step down from the case Tuesday.

However, Anwar’s application appeared unlikely to succeed because Mohamad Zabidin has previously refused to cite the newspaper for contempt, saying Anwar’s lawyers should file a police complaint if they believed the daily’s coverage was malicious.

Anwar is accused of sodomizing 24-year-old Saiful Bukhari Azlan at a private condominium on June 26, 2008.

Sodomy, even if consensual, is punishable by up to 20 years in prison in Muslim-majority Malaysia. A sentence of at least one year would bar Anwar, 62, from politics for five years from the date of his release.

The trial began last week with testimony from Saiful, who claimed that Anwar asked him for sex when they met at a condominium to discuss Anwar’s work schedule.

However, most of the details of the alleged incident were not made public because Anwar’s lawyers successfully called for that part of Saiful’s testimony to be recorded in court without public observers because of its explicit nature.

Anwar’s defense team had been scheduled to cross-examine Saiful on Monday before the interruption.

“What we are asking for is a fair trial,” Anwar said. “Clearly it’s a political trial, there’s no doubt about it.”

Opposition members believe the trial was orchestrated by Prime Minister Najib Razak and his allies to cripple Anwar’s People’s Alliance, which severely eroded the ruling National Front coalition’s parliamentary majority in March 2008 elections. Supporters of Anwar, who is married with six children, view him as a potential prime minister.

Anwar was previously tried for sodomy in 1998 when he was deputy prime minister under then-leader Mahathir Mohamad. He spent six years in prison for alleged corruption and sodomy before the sodomy conviction was overturned. Anwar maintains his innocence, insisting he was framed by Mahathir, who has denied it.

Under a proposed settlement filed Tuesday in Los Angeles Superior Court, eHarmony will link its straight and gay Web sites and allow people to use both without paying double fees.

Plaintiff’s attorney Todd Schneider says the company also agreed to pay about $500,000 to an estimated 150 Californians to settle the class-action suit, plus around $1.5 million in court and attorney’s fees.

The company didn’t admit any wrongdoing.

A judge must approve the settlement. A court date is scheduled for Feb. 3.

The Shady Lady Ranch successfully won state and county approval to clear the way for the “prostidude,” as Nevada’s newest sex worker is already being called. After a slow first week on the job, his first appointments are scheduled for this weekend.

The male prostitute – known as “Markus” – has quickly become the center of attention in Nevada’s brothel industry.

He has been criticized by female counterparts for not being willing to have sex with men. And he created a dustup after telling Details Magazine that his pioneering role in the sex business was “just the same” as civil rights icon Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat and move to the back of the bus. Not surprisingly, he has been forbidden from doing interviews after the remarks.

Competing brothel owners also fret that hiring gigolos in Nevada will bring unwanted scrutiny from state officials, potentially tempting them to make prostitution illegal. The competitors have also expressed concerns about sexually transmitted diseases, and worry that female customers can’t be inspected as carefully as men are before sex.

Markus, 25, described himself as a well-read college dropout and former U.S. Marine from Alabama. He said he drove to Los Angeles to become a porn actor and left after filming two scenes, the first about a month ago. He said he ended up in a homeless shelter near Santa Monica, Calif., after being unable to find another job.

Shady Lady madam Bobbi Davis picked him from about 10 potential hires culled from hundreds of applications, many featuring crude inquiries, according to her husband and co-owner Jim. Part of Markus’ appeal was that he was not afraid to deal with heavy publicity.

“Whichever woman may walk through that door, she’s appreciated,” Markus said in his Details interview. “A surrogate lover will love that woman for a whole hour, or however much we charge here, and she’ll leave feeling much more empowered and much more confident in herself.”

Jim Davis told The Associated Press that after reading the article, he and his wife decided that Markus doing interviews was bad for business. Bobbi Davis declined an interview with the AP. The Davises declined to give Markus’ real name, which is customary for sex workers in Nevada.

Davis said the Shady Lady had received dozens of e-mails expressing interest in the gigolo. He said it took years to establish steady business from truckers, salesmen and other travelers after the brothel opened 17 years ago, and getting paying women customers could take at least a month.

“This is a business – if (Bobbi Davis) didn’t think she could make more money she wouldn’t have done it,” Davis said. “Why else would she start something like this?

“And if she knew what she was getting into, she probably wouldn’t have,” he said.

The yellow-painted Shady Lady compound is more than 30 miles north of Beatty – an unincorporated township of less than 1,200 people between Las Vegas and Reno.

The small, fenced-in brothel includes a French-themed foyer that displays a pricing menu – $200 for 40 minutes, $300 per hour. It sits on 40 acres of mostly empty land the Davises originally bought for $11,000, Davis said.

Three connected bedrooms are distinctly decorated. One has a heart-shaped hot tub in its bathroom, another has an Asian theme. The brothel’s newest space is a disconnected cottage that looks like a roomy studio, with a kitchenette, a wooden bathtub in the bedroom and armrests on the toilet. The cottage cost $50,000 to build, Davis said.

Markus plans to use the cottage.

“It won’t be successful,” said Arie Mack Moore, owner of the Angel’s Ladies Brothel, about two miles north of Beatty. “You can’t have both (male and female prostitutes) in the same building or adjacent to each other, in my opinion.”

Moore claims his business has picked up since Markus was hired, with customers saying they wanted to avoid the Shady Lady because of Markus.

A 22-year-old prostitute at Angel’s Ladies named “Cuddles” said Markus’ unwillingness to see gay males makes the Shady Lady seem sexist and discriminatory. Her brothel services women.

“How can you just turn down services because of what someone’s preferences is? It comes with the territory. It comes with the business,” she said.

Davis said that he and his wife aren’t interested in establishing a gay male clientele, but it will be up to Markus to decide whether to accept men as customers. Davis said Markus told him that he wouldn’t perform for male customers.

“All this gay homophobia in this country is horrible,” Davis said. “Everybody’s so damn scared two men might have sex – it’s happening every day in Las Vegas. Not going to happen here, but that’s all the big fear, is gay people.”

George Flint, a longtime lobbyist for the Nevada Brothel Owners Association, said allowing a male prostitute creates legitimate health concerns. Male customers are thoroughly cleaned and inspected for signs of disease before sex at Nevada’s brothels, and he doesn’t believe the same “fanaticism” is possible when checking female customers.

He also worries about the ramifications for the six other brothels in Nye County and the 24 total in Nevada.

“We got an industry in this state right now that’s got an investment of somewhere between $50 million and $75 million,” Flint said. “And yet Bobbi’s in the catbird seat right now where her antics and her procedures and her demands and her goals could potentially bruise an entire multimillion-dollar-a-year industry.”

Flint said he believed the Shady Lady Ranch, which is not a part of his association, could see a temporary wave of curious female customers, but the experiment will ultimately fail.

“I think she truly believes that it’s a viable effort, and I’m wondering after four or five days and there haven’t been any takers, if she’s beginning to wonder if maybe she was wrong,” Flint said. “You and I and the rest of the world can sit and debate this damn thing until hell freezes over, but if nobody shows up at her front door, what’s it proved?”

Consider the following two exchanges:

Jack: I can’t support gay marriage because it violates my religion.

Jill: Some people’s religions teach that interracial marriage is wrong.

Jack: So, you’re saying that opposing same-sex marriage is just like racism?!

Jill: I should be allowed to marry whomever I love.

Jack: What if you love your brother? Should you be allowed to marry him?

Jill: So, you’re saying that homosexuality is just like incest?!

Exchanges like these have become familiar—so familiar, in fact, that it would be handy to have a name for the fallacy they contain.

Take the first exchange: Jill never said that opposition to marriage equality is “just like” racism. Rather, she used the analogy to interracial marriage as a counterexample to the implied premise that “Whatever a religion teaches is right.” In other words, she seems to be saying that citing religion doesn’t exempt a view from moral scrutiny.

Similarly, in the second exchange, Jack never said that homosexuality is “just like” incest. Rather, he used the analogy  as a counterexample to Jill’s premise that people should be allowed to marry anyone they love.

Analogies can be tricky. They compare two things that are similar in some relevant respect. That does not mean that the two things are similar in EVERY respect, or “just like” each other. In both examples above, the second party is misreading the first’s analogy to have far broader implications than intended. This is a fallacy, whether the misreading is deliberate or just careless.

Although people sometimes use the term “fallacy” to denote any false belief, philosophers reserve the term for faulty (but plausible-looking) patterns of reasoning. We give fallacies names to make it easier to spot and avoid these faulty patterns.

As far as I can tell, the specific fallacy described here doesn’t have a name. But it’s common enough to merit one. Some colleagues have suggested “Fallacy of Misreading,” which seems too broad, or “Fallacy of Being a Dumbass” which probably won’t catch on well.

I’d like to propose “Fallacy of Perverted Analogy.” The name captures the central problem: twisting an analogy to mean something broader than intended. In addition, “perverted” suggests something potentially non-consensual—which is appropriate here, since the fallacy is committed not by the originator of the analogy but by a second party. (Beyond that, I relish the thought of accusing certain marriage-equality opponents of perversion.)

It’s worth distinguishing this fallacy from others in the vicinity. This is not the fallacy of “false analogy,” which involves the analogy’s originator comparing two things that are NOT similar in the intended relevant respect.

It’s related to “Straw Man,” insofar as the person committing the fallacy now attacks the bad misreading (i.e. straw version) of the opponent’s argument rather than the actual argument. But it seems that “Perverted Analogy” occurs before “Straw Man.” Moreover, even if “Perverted Analogy” is a subspecies of “Straw Man” it’s specific enough to deserve its own name.

Same with “Red Herring,” which refers to an irrelevant point that throws one off the track of the main argument. That’s surely happening here, but in a precise way worth naming separately.

So, by definition, one commits the Fallacy of Perverted Analogy when one misreads an opponent’s analogy to make a far more sweeping comparison than the opponent needs or intends.

A nice example appeared at Mirror of Justice, a Catholic legal theory blog, last month. In a Christmas Eve post, Michael Perry observed that moral theology must take experiential evidence seriously, even though doing so is often difficult because of visceral reactions to the unfamiliar:

“I fully understand that for many of us this is hard to do – for some of us, impossibly hard:  those whose socialization and psychology have bequeathed to them a profound aversion – I am inclined to say, an aesthetic aversion (though, of course, they do not experience it that way) – to unfamiliar modes of human sexuality. (Black bonding sexually with white?  Yuk!  Female bonding sexually with female?  Or male with male?  Yuk squared! ….)”

Perry was using aversion to interracial coupling as a familiar historical example of how visceral reactions make it difficult to appreciate the unfamiliar. But Robert George wasted no time in accusing Perry of tarring gay-rights opponents as “the equivalent of racists.” Only by perverting Perry’s analogy could one infer such an equivalence assertion.

There are, no doubt, many other examples of the fallacy—on both sides of the debate. Because I’m eager to name and fight the fallacy, it would be useful to collect these. Readers can post links to their favorite examples in the comments section.

***********

John Corvino, Ph.D. is an author, speaker, and philosophy professor at Wayne State University in Detroit. His column “The Gay Moralist” appears Fridays on 365gay.com.

For more about John Corvino, or to see clips from his “What’s Morally Wrong with Homosexuality?” DVD, visit www.johncorvino.com.

Both the defense and prosecutors said there was no intention to kill. But prosecutors said defendant Bruce Lavallee-Davidson, a farmer from Skowhegan, was responsible for ensuring his gun wasn’t loaded when it was being handled. He was convicted Wednesday and faces at least four years in prison.

The trial shed light on a dungeon in the victim’s South Portland home that was filled with sex toys that three men used as a drug-fueled escape from reality.

Assistant Attorney General Lisa Marchese said the focus should be on the handling of the gun – not the sexual acts that were going on in the victim’s basement. The victim, Fred Wilson, 50, of South Portland, died of a single gunshot wound to the head on April 18, 2009.

“You just don’t hold a gun to someone’s head and pull the trigger without making sure it’s not loaded. And at the moment he pulled the trigger, he didn’t know,” she said.

Defense lawyer Tom Hallett told jurors the men had been using guns as part of their sexual play and that the victim was a thrill seeker who may have slipped a bullet into the .44-caliber Rossi revolver unbeknownst to Lavallee-Davidson, who’d previously checked to make sure the gun was unloaded.

Jurors deliberated less than an hour before returning their guilty verdict in Cumberland County Superior Court. Manslaughter carries a maximum sentence of 30 years in state prison in Maine. Because a gun was involved, the minimum sentence is four years, Marchese said.

The bespectacled Lavallee-Davidson, with short gray hair and a goatee and dressed in a sport coat, gave the appearance of a college professor in the courtroom. He showed no visible reaction to the verdict, and left without speaking to reporters. Hallett said the outcome was “devastating” for him.

The Dartmouth College graduate was in a committed relationship when he testified in favor of keeping Maine’s now-overturned gay marriage law at a public hearing, four days after the discovery of Wilson’s body and several weeks before he was indicted by a grand jury in Cumberland County.

The fatal shooting happened after Wilson, Lavallee-Davidson and a third man had been smoking pot, consuming the party drug GBL, huffing aerosol inhalants and having sex over a 12-hour period in the basement of Wilson’s Colonial home in a middle-class neighborhood two blocks from the ocean.

The third participant, James Pombriant, 65, of Auburn, testified he first thought the others were playing a sick joke on him when he saw the flash of a handgun after hours of partying.

Pombriant, who was engaged in a sex act with the victim when the shot rang out, says there was a moment of silence before Lavallee-Davidson said, “I think I killed him.”

Lavallee-Davidson, 50, contended the killing was a tragic accident.

His lawyers said their client checked not just once – but three times – over the course of the night to make sure the revolver wasn’t loaded. They contend the victim loaded a bullet into the revolver’s chamber while Lavallee-Davidson slipped out of the room to use the bathroom.

When Lavallee-Davidson returned, Wilson asked him to put the gun to his head and pull the trigger to intensify his pleasure, the defense contended. On the first try, there was a click when Lavallee-Davidson pulled the trigger. Wilson asked him to do it again, and there was a flash, the defense said.

After the shooting, Pombriant and Lavallee-Davidson left Wilson’s body behind for hours before Pombriant called police. Police recovered the handgun used in the killing and a .12-gauge Mossberg shotgun that Lavallee-Davidson had taken to Wilson’s home for the sex games.

Hallett said he was disappointed by the jury’s fast verdict. “It was a close call. It was a tough case, and minds can disagree,” he said.

Both the defense and prosecutors say there was no intention to kill. But prosecutors say defendant Bruce Lavallee-Davidson, a farmer from Skowhegan, was responsible for ensuring his gun wasn’t loaded when it was being handled.

The trial in Portland, the state’s largest city, has shed light on a dungeon in a home in neighboring South Portland filled with sexual toys that three men used as a drug-fueled escape from reality. But Assistant Attorney General Lisa Marchese says the focus should be on the handling of the gun – not the sexual acts in the victim’s basement.

“You never point a loaded gun at someone’s head,” Marchese said after resting her case Tuesday, emphasizing it’s the responsibility of the person holding the revolver to ensure the chamber is empty. “You don’t point a gun and pull the trigger unless you’re 100 percent sure.”

The bespectacled Lavallee-Davidson, with closely cropped gray hair and a goatee and dressed in a sport coat and khakis, gave the appearance of a college professor as he sat quietly in court, where closing arguments were anticipated Wednesday. Before becoming an organic farmer, he was a technology administrator for Maine Central Institute, a prep school.

The Dartmouth College graduate was in a committed relationship when he testified in favor of keeping Maine’s now-overturned gay marriage law at a public hearing, four days after the discovery of the body of 50-year-old Fred Wilson and a couple of weeks before he was indicted.

The fatal shooting happened after the three men had been smoking pot, drinking beer, huffing aerosol inhalants and having sex over a 12-hour period in the basement of Wilson’s Colonial home in a middle-class neighborhood two blocks from the ocean.

One of the participants, James Pombriant, 65, says he first thought the others were playing a sick joke on him when he saw the flash of a handgun early on April 18, 2009.

Pombriant, who was engaged in a sex act with the victim when the shot rang out, says there was a moment of silence before Lavallee-Davidson said, “I think I killed him.”

Lavallee-Davidson, 50, contends the killing was an accident.

One of his lawyers, Mike Whipple, says his client checked three times over the course of the night to make sure the .44-caliber Rossi revolver wasn’t loaded. Whipple contends it’s likely Wilson loaded the gun while Lavallee-Davidson briefly stepped away to use the bathroom.

When Lavallee-Davidson returned, Wilson asked him to put the gun to his head and pull the trigger to intensify his pleasure, the defense contends. On the first try, there was a click when Lavallee-Davidson pulled the trigger. Wilson asked him to do it again, and there was a flash, the defense says.

After the shooting, Pombriant, of Auburn, and Lavallee-Davidson left Wilson’s body behind in the home over the course of the day before Pombriant called police that night. Police recovered the handgun used in the killing and a .12-gauge Mossberg shotgun that Lavallee-Davidson had taken to Wilson’s home for the sex games.

Deputy Attorney General Bill Stokes doesn’t dispute that the killing was unintended. Nonetheless, he said, the circumstances fit the legal definition of manslaughter, which means to cause death through recklessness or criminal negligence. Manslaughter carries a penalty of up 30 years in prison.

Some friends have urged me against writing it, not because readers find frank discussions of anal sex “icky,” but because the offending comments’ source—Peter LaBarbera—is unworthy of serious attention.

In one sense these friends are quite right. But for reasons I hope to make clear, LaBarbera’s most recent ugliness needs answering.

LaBarbera is the president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH), one of the nastier anti-gay groups. In a recent letter at his website, he discusses how Matt Barber at Liberty Counsel (a right-wing legal group) is threatening to boycott the Conservative Political Action Conference unless CPAC drops the gay conservative group GOProud as a co-sponsor.

LaBarbera writes,

“It boils down to this: there is nothing ‘conservative’ about — as Barber inimitably puts it — ‘one man violently cramming his penis into another man’s lower intestine and calling it love’.”

Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

LaBarbera’s post led Liberty Counsel to deny that Barber had ever said such a nasty thing, prompting a sharp rebuttal from LaBarbera, followed by Barber’s admission that he had indeed made the comment privately years ago (and had given LaBarbera permission to quote it). This back-and-forth was interspersed with some barbs between LaBarbera and Randy Thomas, president of the ex-gay group Exodus International, at Thomas’s Exodus blog.  (Thanks to Pam’s House Blend for exposing the imbroglio.)

I’ll focus here on LaBarbera, since he was the one who saw fit recently to post Barber’s words and to defend them repeatedly, calling them “a brutally honest and necessarily accurate description of homosexual sodomy.” He also challenged Thomas to “cite chapter and verse in the Bible” explaining why their use of these words is wrong.

Chapter and verse? Let me try.

Exodus 20:16: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” (Hint: it’s one of the Ten Commandments, and it boils down simply to “Don’t lie.”)

Look, Peter—and I know you’re reading this—NOBODY calls it love when a man “violently cram[s] his penis into another man’s lower intestine.” Nobody.

We sane people call that rape.

Indeed, the “violent cramming” of a penis into any bodily orifice, male or female, is rape. Not love. The description is not merely uncharitable (about which we could both cite many verses), it’s a blatant falsehood.

Frankly, I’m not surprised you missed this simple, obvious point, because when it comes to homosexuality, you wouldn’t know truth if it violently crammed itself into your—oh, never mind.

Now one might argue that we shouldn’t bother with LaBarbera. Indeed, a Christian friend of mine told me just that, stating that LaBarbera’s comments are “no more worth writing about than the graffiti on men’s room walls.”

And I wish I could ignore them. I really, really do. If only the sentiments underlying them weren’t so pervasive and harmful.

I’ve been defending gays and lesbians against heterosexist distortions for two decades. And one of the things that has saddened and angered me most is our opponents’ continued tendency to reduce our lives, our commitments, and our intimacy to bare mechanical descriptions—and false ones at that.

Why do they do this? Perhaps it’s because of a fundamental lack of empathy (a trait that forms the core of The Golden Rule, another biblical principle).

Or perhaps it’s because they know that dehumanizing us in this way is an extremely effective tactic. As LaBarbera himself writes at the Exodus blog, his and Barber’s “colorful and dismissive” language are precisely geared to “re-stigmatize shameful homosexual behavior.”

Stigmatize, it surely does.

By spreading their lies about “violent cramming” and such, LaBarbera, Barber and their ilk have visited needless suffering upon countless LGBT people, particularly LGBT youth.

Among the unspoken casualties of such stigmatization is that it makes it harder for us to have frank conversations about the relative risks of various sexual practices, for fear of feeding such nastiness. The upshot is more silence, and shame, and—paradoxically—risk.

All of which LaBarbera and Barber can answer to their Maker for, when and if Judgment Day should come. “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me” (Matthew 25:40).

***********

John Corvino, Ph.D. is an author, speaker, and philosophy professor at Wayne State University in Detroit. His column “The Gay Moralist” appears Fridays on 365gay.com.

For more about John Corvino, or to see clips from his “What’s Morally Wrong with Homosexuality?” DVD, visit www.johncorvino.com.