This was originally intended as a reply to a Moveon.org letter sent to me asking me what concerns I had of what was in the news right now and what news I was interested in. I thought I would reply my biggest concerns, some concerns I have had for awhile, and address my views on a few things.

I am really disgusted with this oil disaster right now. I think we need to put more of the tax focus on energy and more taxes on gasoline at the pump. We have got to get away from our oil dependency. I would even go with nuclear before buying more oil from terrorists and to cargo oil all over the ocean. Of course, the world would be a much better place if we would have made Exxon pay for their damage years ago because this created an environment where anyone can get away with an Oil Spill and not pay the consequences.

I am also concerned that our spending is out of control we do need to keep taxes reasonable so that companies and people do not move to other countries. The Tea baggers have lots of good points and it makes me want to join them if they weren’t racist hypocrites. Then they make statements about microchips in people but want less government. But some of the sain people such as Ron Paul make good points in the unfair taxes for some while others get by without paying taxes at all when some should (they are probably getting more use out of Federal facilities than the people paying for them for free).

I also think that gays should get every federal right such as marriage. GLBT are paying taxes and deserve to be treated like every other tax paying citizen. While I agree that the Arizona law went to far at discrimination I do feel we have got to do something when it comes to illegals mooching off our system. If someone is living off our healthcare and driving uninsured cars down the highway these people need to be addressed.

We need to focus on incentives for companies more to build stronger internet backbones, faster rails, and curing diseases and viruses such as HIV and cancer. Private companies need greater support doing these things and much larger tax or cash incentives. We want to be the first here in America and want to make sure our bio-techs are focused on science that can save lives and not things like Ambien and Restless Leg Syndrome just to make a quick profit.

We have to make sure the FDA does not stop any more natural supplements such as Almonds or something like Vitamin D. We have to protect natural ways to keep healthy and make sure there are no toxins in these products at the same time. That will be hard but we have to do it. We should also make it where natural pain killers or a natural inflammatory such as THC/Pot are available and we should be able to grow anything in our own yard. This is a freedom we must have to be a real America and get away with having to buy things like this from the drug lords in Mexico.

Finally, I feel that Churches that do not do a certain amount of community service SHOULD pay taxes. If the church is not doing say 50% community service besides preaching and activism why are they getting by without paying taxes just like any other business? They are a business they need to be taxed.

I feel that the news is not really worth watching lately. I get more quality stuff out of the Daily Show than anything and still fast forward through Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow. Most of my factual news comes from the Yahoo.com homepage and if I want opinions I turn over to MSNBC.

These are just some thoughts designed to make you think:

There will always be a controversy about the age of models appearing in gay porn. I am talking about the younger models here of course, as anyone who can prove that they are over 18 years of age may appear in pornography if they so chose, straight or gay, and heaven knows I’ve seen enough retired men and women making some pension-boosting money from appearing in porn movies.

But, if someone has proved that they are over the minimum age, why should there be a controversy? We’ve seen, in the past, some well known models (or those who went on to become well known) get themselves caught up in a ‘scandal’ for one reason or another. Lying about their age at the time is a common one, and unscrupulous producers knowingly using under-age models is another, though thankfully less common, reason.

In the USA there is a code called Title 18, section 2257, sometimes simply known as ‘2257’. This is a requirement of producers of adult material to be able to prove the legal minimum age of their models at the time of photography, or filming. You will see this at the bottom of many pages on most porn sites, certainly all those produced in the USA should carry a link to a page, or information, where anyone can find out the address of the producer/keeper of records, and make an enquiry into the age of a certain model. If an enquiry is made then the company must be able to produce documentation backing up and proving their claim that their models were over 18 when filmed. That’s the simple version of the code. And it means that, in the USA, producers must have copies of things like driving license, ID, etc. on file, by name of model, showing that they were legally allowed to appear in porn at that time.

That’s good, it’s something that all good and respectable porn producers would want to have, and insist on having before they get a guy naked. But it actually only applies to the United States. So, when you find a company from, for example, Europe, stating their 2257 information, it actually doesn’t mean anything, legally. It has been taken as good practice by good producers, no matter what their country of residence and business. (Other countries have other laws, some have no laws at all.)

But it’s always interested me to notice that many a ‘teen’ and even ‘twink’ site that carries content featuring ‘just 18’ etc. boys will have their 2257 address of records in a place like Cyprus, or Prague. Are they really based there? Is this just a way of avoiding the legalities? And if so, why? And what happens if you are based in the Czech Republic but your servers are in America and your content comes from Spain? Where do you stand legally then? It’s a bit of a minefield.

And there is another one. What about those sites (I won’t mention names here as I don’t want to get caught up in the fuss) that feature young looking models. What’s the difference between someone who is 18 or 19 but who looks 16 or 17 appearing in a movie, as opposed to someone who is actually 16 or 17 appearing in one? Obviously it’s not legal, in most countries, to show under-age nudity and it’s probably not moral either, although that point could me argued on a personal level. And yet there are many sites around where the models look younger than they are, and we’re told that they are ‘just 18’ etc. to start with.

It looks like there is a fine line between under-age porn actors and porn actors who look underage.

Just as a final, slightly unrelated thought, I’ll leave you with this. A couple of years ago there was a controversy because a famous actor, who was then 17, appeared naked on stage, in London, in a play. You could go and see him nude live on stage, but you couldn’t show photos of him nude on the web – though people did.

Two questions: What is GRINDR, and who is using it? Firstly, here’s is what GRINDR is:

Basically it’s a great, and popular, new application for your iPhone or iPod Touch or now you can even use it on your iPad. There is no messy registration process attached to it, you don’t need to enter an email address or anything, you don’t even validate your account; you simply ad the application on to your iPhone etc. And then you’re ready to use it. And you can hang out on GRINDR where and whenever you want. It’s a social networking tool for gay men, you can see who else is on, you can check photos and profiles and you can see where other guys are. These guys may be simply out and about looking for other guys to hook up with for a drink, or more, or they may be on the network searching out Mr Right, as well as Mr Right-now of course. And, once you are up and running on it, they will be able to contact you.

More specifically it also lets you see who is in your area. It maps out other users and you can, on the free versions, see around 100 other guys at a time. If you pay the full whack of $2.99 a month (yes, two-ninety-nine only) you can have up to 200 guys and no adverts on your screen. Not bad eh? You can check out more about the application at www.grindr.com, follow it on Facebook and Twitter and you’ll find it very easy to install and use.

So, you’re set up and maybe you’re on holiday in… let’s say, Australia. Want to know who else is around? Simply use your application and check the guys out. But then ponder this: many famous people are also using IPhones, and many gay guys are using GRINDR, put the two together and you’ve got the potential to hook up with your favorite gay stars, and porn stars, or how about singing stars? Back in March The Daily Telegraph reported that super-star George Michael had been using his GRINDR application to hook up with other hunky guys down under in Australia. The publication said: “At 10.16am on Monday, using the profile name Back for Wood, George Michael used Grindr to send the message “Hi there” and a picture of himself taken in a hotel room mirror to someone he liked the look of , who happened to be just 185m away, according to Grindr GPS.” (I am a little curious as to how they found out, it suggests that there may be some security issues with the application. But then I assume the guy he sent the photo to sent it on to the paper to get some quick cash.)

Anyway, the George Michael story sent me scurrying around the net to see if any other ‘names’ had been found out in a similar way. Sadly I didn’t find anyone else, but it did make me wonder. Think of your favorite porn star (Turk Melrose in my case, or Turk Mason as he’s now calling himself), and then see if you can find him via your GRINDR application. Imagine if he’s in your same hotel or just down the road. Thanks to the GPS in your phone matching up with the GPS in his, you never know who you are only a few metres or miles away from. Sadly Turk was nowhere near me when I tried it out, and I am on the other side of the world to Australia so I doubt George will be popping by tonight, but you can start to see the endless fun you can have with this ‘find him now and near’ application.

Stay tuned we will be having some contests involving iPads coming soon.

No this is no April Fool’s Joke or anything this really is a painting of Jesus Christ dated back to 12th Century art where his genitals wee exposed during the crucifix. This painting is displayed in a Catholic Church near Oklahoma City, OK. The church is not taking the painting down and surprisingly most of the visitors to a news website in the city agree that it is ok to leave up.

Keep in mind this is a 10-foot-tall crucifix hanging above the alter at a Catholic church. One Facebook comment makes the point “The image is quite obvious; but, I find it interesting that many people don’t… seem to notice (on a 10-foot-tall crucifix), and that 62% of people polled don’t find it offensive (whereas people sure were “outraged” when Erykah Badu exposed herself at Dealey Plaza in downtown Dallas, Texas on March 17). According to the Church, there are no plans to remove it.”

I agree that our bodes are art and so are the clothes we wear for that matter. We may be disgusted by seeing one person walk around nude but someone else we may get turned on by but when we came out of our mommies we certainly were not dressed and we bared all. We were in our birthday suits. I am surprised there is not more art that depicts nudity in our true form and the beauty of our different bodies.

Jesus in this painting definitely had something sticking out of his skirt or dress that looked mighty powerful and that was not your ordinary sized penis. I am not sure if I was in shock it was so big or because the balls were so big. In some of the same paintings dating back to this time it seemed to show more abs and images of the genitals. The crucifix hanging at this Catholic Church resembles other San Damiano crucifixes except for Jesus’ abdominal area, which is noticeably more pronounced than on similar crucifixes. Very hung if you ask me.

Could this be a sexual depiction of Jesus? Could this be a bondage type depiction? I do not think so I think it is just the way the artists captured this moment. I do find it strange that some captured abs in that area that look similar and this painting has a full out private part sticking out for the world to see.

The Catholic Church certainly has their problems with some Priests who are pedophiles (people who molest children) which has been confused with gays serving in the church. There is a big difference there because gays are not pedophiles they are attracted to the same sex of someone who is consenting adult. But this Vatican problem is something that has been crippling the church and as for the artwork it is certainly not going to be a problem because it has been around for thousands of years and no one has bothered to remove the genitalia from the paintings as they should not.