Scott Rose

Last active
2 years, 1 month ago
  • Jimenez’s publisher – Steerforth Press — so far has refused to respond to my inquiry about the fact-checking processes for Jimenez’s book. Jimenez himself is obnoxious; his promotions of himself and his methods would not pass muster in either a court of law or in a university setting. He is thumping his chest about how he traveled all over “in the dark underworld” of drug trafficking — as if travelling all over “in the dark underworld” of drug trafficking actually had anything to do with the Matthew Shepard case. Jimenez to top all is playing on stigma and prejudice against people with substance dependency issues. The equation of hard drug abuse automatically equaling violent behavior is false. Most people with substance dependency issues never act out violently. Most people convicted of violent crimes were not intoxicated with drugs at the time of the violent crimes.

  • Scott Rose commented on the blog post NOM Has Launched International Organization for Marriage

    2013-04-15 09:05:45View | Delete

    The new pope is just as bad, look up his record of gay-bashing in Argentina.

  • Scott Rose commented on the blog post NOM Has Launched International Organization for Marriage

    2013-04-15 09:00:23View | Delete

    In French, the bigots hypocritically are talking about “lying about the numbers,” but in fact, the numbers don’t lie; poll after poll after poll in France shows majority support for equality. Then, it is absolutely a joke for this bigot group to have an office in Dublin; the Irish just passed a measure towards equality with almost 80% support, and polls show that that reflects the Irish population’s level of support for equality.

  • Scott Rose commented on the blog post Anti-gay parenting study author casting his lot with NOM

    2013-03-18 09:06:16View | Delete

    It’s important to keep in mind that the worst of the culprits in the Witherspoon/Regnerus scandal is Social Science Research editor James Wright and the publisher, Elsevier, both of whom are guilty of violating science publishing ethics in the Regnerus matter. Without publication in a peer reviewed journal, the study is nothing. We know for sure that the study did not receive valid professional peer review. This happened with James Wright’s knowledge, and Elsevier too is certainly now aware of the facts of the case. What’s more is that Darren Sherkat’s “audit” of the publication of the Regnerus and Marks paper also contains lies — and things that Wright himself knows are untrue. The audit was fake, and carried out with the pre-determined result of shielding Wright from accountability for his violations of science publishing ethics. Consider this; in his “audit,” Sherkat alleges that Wright told him the six people who peer reviewed the Marks and Regnerus papers, but not who peer reviewed which paper. How could Sherkat possibly have checked for conflicts of interest, without knowing who peer reviewed which paper?

  • The response to these ridiculous proposals to allow heterosupremacist theocRATs to discriminate against the fags and lezzies they hate so much is to make counter-proposals that would allow gay and gay-rights-supportive people not to refuse professional services to anti-gay bigots.

  • Scott Rose commented on the blog post Students, parents want lgbt students banned from the prom

    2013-02-11 13:41:36View | Delete

    No matter what the school’s official position might be, there are certain things that a public school teacher may not do and/or say in non-confidential public venues without violating her contract and/or terms of licensure. Precedent law stipulates strict separation of church and state in public schools. For any teacher to speak ill of anybody — in public — on religious grounds violates most public school teachers’ contracts. Other standards, too, have to be upheld under the contract, i.e. a teacher convicted of possession of child pornography could not expect not to have her license revoked.

  • Where did Dostoyevsky ever write such horseshit?

  • The head NOMzi Joan Eastman would deserve to have a toilet plunger suctioned over his mouth and then pushed up and down until all of the gay-bashing bigot shit had been flushed out of him. How hilarious that he says that the National Cathedral’s decision shows that there’s no need for a “one size fits all legal decision” on marriage equality and that it can be left up to individual states, after HIS NOMzi group proposed a “one size fits all” constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage throughout the country! His hypocrisy on that same issue is evident where he talks about people who are not strict originalists with the federal Constitution. The original Constitution did not ban same-sex marriage.

  • I note that the anti-gay-bigots’ signs do not address any of the legal issues involved in the case.

  • Excellent work, Alvin. It’s worth noting that of late, we have seen mainstream broadcasters (finally) ready to tell anti-gay bigots that they are anti-gay bigots. CNN’s Carol Costello, for example, told Bryan Fischer that his outlandish claims against gays constitute hate speech. The flip side of that, unfortunately, is that the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank clouded issues by saying that the so-called Family Research Council should not be listed as a hate group (as though the SPLC were not crystal clear with its criteria). So much work remains to be done, and this book is a great contribution to the effort.

  • I am filled with disgust and outrage that the Catholic Church of Rome continues to portray gay human beings as “less than” and defective, on the basis of their idiotic and hateful interpretation of “scripture” and in the face of everything science acknowledges about human sexuality. I understand that the point in the post is that anti-gay religious bigots are “protected,” but really this is no better than a country club that refuses to accept applications from black or Jewish members. Somebody should pick the Pope up by the scruff of his Hitler Jugend neck and toss him into the Tiber River. How many of the Catholic Church’s child rape victims remain uncompensated? Why has the Church never allowed outside investigators to inventory its holdings for assets stolen from Holocaust victims and paid to Vatican officials by known Nazi war criminals whom they helped to evade justice through the ratlines to South America? Why do we have to put up with the criminals of this Church demonizing gay people internationally? We must demand with unwavering determination that the Catholic Church cease and desist from all of its anti-gay hate speech and acts of hate against gay people.

  • Scott Rose commented on the diary post UT-Austin Administration Distances Itself from “Frackademia” Study by Steve Horn.

    2012-12-07 17:50:24View | Delete

    The University of Texas at Austin’s now demonstrated — and admitted — general lack of proper ethics oversight that extended to the behavior of its now former professor Charles Groat also very severely tainted the school’s inquiry into scientific and academic misconduct allegations against Associate Professor Mark Regnerus in the matter of The New Family [...]

  • Congratulations to Ravi and Paris!

  • Lewis should take his civil unions crap to the toilet with him the next time he goes, and flush it hard to make sure it goes down.

  • The IRS Commissioner in Washington could decide to investigate a church. This petition asking IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman to Investigate the Catholic Church and Cardinal Dolan for violations of 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status violations already has over 5,500 signatures. Please sign the petition, and then re-post it:


  • The phrase “Shit-for-brains” has meaning, particularly when Soggy Noggin Rethugliturds endorse a candidate who has vowed to nominate anti-gay-rights federal and Supreme Court judges and attorneys general.

  • Scott Rose commented on the blog post Barack Obama: Right man. Wrong color.

    2012-10-15 07:39:00View | Delete

    Romney might as well have personally said the N word, when he referred to the NAACP as “them” “they” et cetera and said “if they want free stuff.” That is the well-worn Republican strategy of making people of color the face of welfare, even though a majority of welfare recipients are white. What’s more, is that universal health care is the standard in countries more civilized and advanced than the United States. When somebody like Romney profits off the labor of a worker with no health care coverage, and then doesn’t give a damn that the person has no coverage, and is sick, and can’t get the proper care, Romney has gotten the “free stuff” of that person’s labor. To put this in perspective, remember that the US spends in 2 days on its military what it spends on health care in an entire year. It would be one thing to talk evenhandedly about healthcare reform, but for Romney to have baited the NAACP as he did, and then to talk about “them” and “they” as wanting “free stuff” was as blatantly racist as saying the N word.

  • Regnerus gave a June 14, 2012 video interview to The Daily Texan. (It’s here: In that interview, Regnerus says “I know the funders are conservative. I don’t know what they make of this.” That is a lie. Regnerus knew exactly what the funders make of his study. He is attending a November 2 -3 event at Princeton, with Witherspoon’s Ana Samuel and Robert Oscar Lopez, who is evidently part of NOM’s strategy to get people raised by gay parents to denounce gay parents to the public. Also appearing at that even, NOM/Witherspoon mastermind Robert George. We have a recent letter that UT sent to the Texas Attorney General, asking for exceptions to our Public Information Act document requests for Regnerus study-related communications from and to David Ochsner, UT’s Director of Public Affairs; we did not get specific communications yet, but UT’s letter describes elaborate public relations strategizing sessions taking place with UT administration and Regnerus BEFORE the publication of the Regnerus study. Note also in the video, at about the 7:50 point, Regnerus says that he had a feeling “WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROJECT” that it would not get past peer review at the National Institutes of Health. First off, we know for sure now, that Witherspoon organized “this project” and was always going to be the chief funder, i.e. Regnerus is deliberately misleading the public by creating an appearance that the study originated with him, rather than with Witherspoon. Furthermore though, Regnerus says that before he had even collected any data — the time-frame he gives in his quote is “when we started this project” he thought it would not get past peer review at the National Institutes of Health. That appears to be an admission that the study design itself was intentionally booby-trapped. Why would a researcher fear that his study would not get past peer review at the National Institutes of Health, before he had even collected any data for it? Elsewhere, Regnerus has said that he did not know ahead of time what his results would be. Given that, why in this rehearsed video interview did Regnerus say he thought his project would not get past peer review at NIH “for political reasons”? This is what happens when lying liars lie. Honest researchers have no reason ever to lie about their work.

  • The dogs tortured with uncomfortable shoes at the beginning reminds me of Shitt Wrongmoney putting poor Seamus on the top of the car.

  • Load More