Tuesday, August 05, 2014

NOM exploits families to harm the lgbt community

One of the most vile things about the National Organization for Marriage is how it takes seemingly innocent concepts and exploits them for an ugly purpose. This tweet is a good example:

It's a nice thing to say., except when one realizes who is saying it. This is NOM, the group that has attempted to stop gays from marrying and same-sex households from protecting their family, especially their children.

This is the same organization which attempted to push a junk science study which attacked same-sex families. And it is the same organization helping to push a bill which would allow religiously-based foster care providers and adoption agencies to discriminate against gays while using tax dollars.

Taking all of that into account, we realize that NOM doesn't care about families of any stripe. All of the twitter posts and fake expressions of support of the "family unit" can neither erase nor conceal that fact.

NOM certainly doesn't care about gay families and heterosexual two-parent families are merely a tool for the group to set up a fictional competition in which the outcome is at the very least, the omission of gay families and at the very most, the disappearance of gay families.

'How to correct anti-transgender talking points' & other Tues. midday news briefs

Read: Catholic Bishops back tax-subsidized adoption discrimination (*and alienating even more young people, apparently) - You know, maybe if the Catholic Bishops wouldn't spend so much money fighting marriage equality, they wouldn't have to rely on tax dollars for their adoption agencies. Just a suggestion. 

Fighting Back Against Anti-Transgender Talking Points - This is what I like - simple, easy to remember corrections of anti-transgender arguments.  

They're Gay, They're Christian And They're Celibate! - I'm celibate too . . . but NOT by choice.

LGBT Youth Turn To The Internet For Social Support But Also Find Cyberbullying - This is just terrible! 

Linda Harvey: LGBT-Friendly School Books 'Normalizing Sinful Behavior' - There she goes again . . .

Anti-gay publication can't spin away discrimination

Read the following article from the American Family Association's One News Now about the effort to subsidize anti-gay discrimination with tax dollars in when it comes to adoption and foster care:

Under a bill introduced in the U.S. Senate, states will pay a price if they violate the religious beliefs of faith-based adoption and foster care agencies. The Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act is a bill to protect the agencies from being forced to violate their religious beliefs to contract with the government to help children. Leanna Baumer with the Family Research Council says policies in states such as California and Illinois have worked to "squeeze out faith-based providers by refusing to respect their religious and moral convictions." One example is being told to place children with homosexuals, in violation of their faith, or lose government funding. "And so it tells states that if you want to continue receiving federal funding, they need to not discriminate," Baumer says of the Senate bill. "If they ignore that prohibition," she says, "they'll risk losing a percentage of their federal funding, and faith-based providers who are aggrieved will be able to sue that state in federal court." The hope is that Congress will provide bipartisan support for the bill so that political correctness does not trump the welfare of children who need the services. 

The point is how these things are all about "spin" or phrasing. Notice the article omits that some faith-based agencies, such as the Catholic Charities in Illinois voluntarily ended their adoption programs rather than comply with the state's civil union laws.

No one is implicitly told to put children in gay homes. The point is that there is no basis for adoption and foster care agencies to discriminate while using tax dollars. The recent Hobby Lobby decision has opened up a hornet's nest when it comes to "religious liberty," but I think in this case, there will be little ado.

Until these folks can justify discrimination with tax dollars, I don't think their appeal is going to convince people.