Family Research Council recycling tacky Prop 8 video

Via Joe Jervis, I just saw an online video from the Family Research Council talking about the "terrible, horrible, downright no-good thing"s that would happen to families and children should a California law, SB48, not be repealed.

SB48 is a law requiring schools to integrate factual information about social movements, current events and history of people with disabilities and LGBT people into existing social studies lessons. It also prevents the State Board of Education from adopting instructional materials that discriminate.

But according to FRC, schools would be "forced" to talk about same-sex households. Of course scholls are already talking about same-sex households because children who live in these households attend public schools and I'm sure that they talk about their families. But watch the video:



Did you notice something strange? You probably didn't . . . unless you watched the video the Family Research Council ran in efforts to pass Prop 8 in 2008:



Pretty much the same lies - i.e. "schools will forced to talk about same-sex parents." There are so many things to note about these two videos:

1. For a group which claims to be focused about "the family," the Family Research Council goes out of its way to dismiss the existence of same-sex families. Why is that? That's a question someone should ask FRC head Tony Perkins the next time he shows his face on a news program.

2. The star in both of these videos, David Parker, is an unmitigated liar. I've covered what happened in his situation so many times. Long story short (check out this link for the entire story) - the incident of him being arrested seemed to have been planned and propagated by him and Mass Resistance, a Massachusetts anti-gay group which the Southern Poverty Law Center has designated as a hate group. And while Parker and his wife are quick to cry and whine in the video as if they are victims, they conveniently omitted the false charge they made against the school district that Parker's son was assaulted because of his father's stance against same-sex families. Parker and the other family in the videos, the Wirthlins sued the school district and lost at every turn, including the Supreme Court, thereby validating the fact that there is nothing wrong with schools talking about same-sex families.

3. Last, but not least, isn't it just TACKY for FRC to recycle the pro-Prop 8 video footage in an attempt to stop SB48? In the Prop 8 video FRC was saying if same-sex couples are allowed to be married, schools will be "forced to talk about same-sex families." Now they are saying if schools teach about the contributions of gays and lesbians throughout history, they will also be "forced to talk about same-sex families."

Since children in same-sex families are already attending America's schools and therefore students are  already talking about the issue, why don't FRC push legislation banning the children of same-sex families from attending public schools?

Seems to me that if FRC don't want schools to acknowledge that same-sex families exist, why not take it all the way and keep their children from attending public schools?

Then again, I had better hush. I don't want to give Perkins and company any ideas.

Family Research Council lies about gay adoption to harm Target

The Family Research Council is not happy with the recent decision by Target to help a pro-gay adoption organization (the Family Equality Council) raise money to defeat an anti-gay bill in Minnesota by selling t-shirts.

And as the organization always does, FRC is displaying its displeasure through basic lies via the following handout:

So according to FRC, Target is aiding and abetting the shutting down of Christian adoption agencies if they sell t-shirts helping to stop the anti-marriage equality in Minnesota and this will "harm" children and the so-called cause of "religious liberty."

Not only is this a lie, but it is a lie which has already been shot down.

In January of this year, former presidential candidate Newt Gingrich conducted an interview on CNN where he made the exact same charges about gay adoption in general (i.e. that it would harm children by forcing Catholic adoption agencies to shut down):

SOLEDAD O’BRIEN (HOST): You were talking about gay adoption and you said that the church, the Catholic Church, was forced to close its adoption centers. Isn’t what really happened that, if the church decided it was going to continue to take federal funds and have access to those foster children, that they couldn’t continue to discriminate against gay couples who wanted to adopt?

NEWT GINGRICH: That’s right.

O’BRIEN: They weren’t really forced to close, they made the decision.

GINGRICH: No, no. They were forced to close because you’re saying to a religious group “give up your religion.” That’s absurd. The idea that the state would impose its secular values on a religious organization is an absurdity.

O’BRIEN: If you want funding. Isn’t that if you want funding?

GINGRICH: No, no, in Massachusetts–

O’BRIEN: You can do whatever you want but if you want funding.

GINGRICH: No, that’s not true. That’s not true. There are states now, including the District of Columbia, which essentially adopt laws that say you can’t offer an adoption service unless you meet the secular standards of the state. They are in effect saying the secular standards of the state are more important than religious freedom. I think it is inherently anti-Christian and anti-Jewish. It is in favor of a secular model, that I think is wrong. And I think that it’s wrong for the government to impose its values on religion. That’s the whole point of the First Amendment, is to not have the government imposing values on religion. [CNN, Starting Point, 1/10/12]

Equality Matters quickly refuted Gingrich:

Family Equality Council: Choice To Stop Public Adoption Services “Was Made By Catholic Charities Alone.” Jennifer Chrisler, Executive Director of the Family Equality Council, wrote in an email to Equality Matters:

Mr. Gingrich’s comments are patently false and inherently anti-family.  The decision to end public adoption services in Massachusetts and the District of Columbia was made by Catholic Charities alone. They wanted to continue to receive public funding without adhering to the law and when the state refused to make an exception for them they balked at providing critical social services to youth.

This has nothing to do with the government trying to impose values on religion. On the contrary, this had to do with the Catholic Charities trying to impose its values on children and families who needed social services.

His comments are a distraction at a time when we should be focused on the best interests of children and finding them loving and permanent homes. [Jennifer Chrisler Email, 1/10/12, emphasis added]

Massachusetts’ Catholic Charities "Voluntarily" Chose To Stop Providing Adoption Services Instead Of Serving Same-Sex Couples. According to the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) blog:

So here’s a little reality check. Catholic Charities of Boston was not forced out of the adoption business because of marriage equality in Massachusetts. The organization voluntarily ceased doing adoptions after the state’s four Catholic Bishops got wind that gay parents had been adopting kids through Catholic Charities from an October 2005 Boston Globe story. Not surprisingly, all of this happened as the Massachusetts Legislature was wrestling with whether to put an anti-gay marriage amendment on the statewide ballot, which the local Catholic hierarchy supported wholeheartedly. […]

Catholic Charities was accepting state funds to provide adoption services and was thus bound by the state’s gay-inclusive anti-discrimination law not to reject qualified adoptive parents based on sexual orientation. Oh, and by the way, the non-discrimination law has been on the books since 1989—long before marriage equality was but a doodle on Mary Bonauto’s legal pad. [GLAD.org, 3/10/11, emphasis original]

Catholic Charities Of Boston Was Never Denied An Adoption License. According to a GLAD fact sheet on Catholic Charities and adoption services in Massachusetts:

Did the state “deny” Catholic Charities of Boston “its adoption agency license”?

No. For 17 years Catholic Charities of Boston complied with non-discrimination laws and put the best interests of children first, in some cases placing a child with gay or lesbian parents. Catholic Charities chose to close down its adoption services. At no point was it denied an adoption license. [GLAD.org, 12/22/11]

Catholic Adoption Agencies Can Still Choose To Discriminate Against Same-Sex Couples In Private Adoption Services. Steve Major, director of communications for the Family Equality Council, wrote in an email to Equality Matters:

Catholic Charities facilitates relatively few public adoptions nationwide. In areas where they’ve declined to comply with existing non-discrimination rules and stopped doing public placements (Massachusetts, D.C., parts of California – and will be the likely result in IL where the issue is still working its way through the state courts) there has been little to no impact on the state’s ability to place children. Other adoption agencies have agreed to step in and continue the work of finding children their forever families.

Catholic Charities and other religiously affiliated organizations who receive public funding should be obligated to follow the same non-discrimination laws that other agencies adhere to.  If they place their own religious objections ahead of the law and the best interests of kids, they should withdraw from conducting public adoptions. They are free to continue facilitating private adoptions. [Steve Major Email, 9/9/11, emphasis added]

As for Illinois, the argument between the state and the Catholic Charities was pretty much the same thing - can the Catholic Charities freely accept tax dollars while discriminating against those whose monies contribute to those tax dollars - i.e. gay and lesbian couples.

After the courts said no, the Illinois Catholic Charities gave up its fight.

So all in all, by helping the Equality Family Council, Target is not harming children nor the so-called cause of "religious liberty."

But by lying about the situation, the Family Research Council is doing a lot of damage to the cause of Christianity.


Hat tip to Jeremy Hooper.

'Black and gay leader are finally teaming up together' and other Monday midday news briefs

Black Leaders and Gay Advocates March in Step - Some good news for Monday.

Minnesota State Board: Anti-LGBT Group May Exploit Loophole To Evade Disclosure - Ugh. A NOM affiliated group in Minnesota could have an out to keep from disclosing its financial sources.

Focus on the Family's plan to combat LGBT social stigma? Going younger and louder with the very same - Focus on the Family's solution to self-hatred and stigma? More things which create self-hatred and stigma.

EXCLUSIVE: Zach Wahls On The Boy Scouts’ Decision To Reconsider Anti-Gay Discrimination Policy - Met Zach Wahls last week. Wow he is tall!!

Hold the Judgment: Changing Attitudes on LGBT Issues Defy Religious Stereotypes - A post like this is needed in our community.

Who cares if the National Organization for Marriage may have broken the law?

Brian Brown of NOM

The National Organization for Marriage hasn't said a word about being investigated by the state of California since the news broke last week.

But other folks are and they aren't exactly helpful:

A Republican leader says an openly homosexual presidential candidate is just being "a sore loser" in attempting to attack California's man-woman marriage battle.

California's Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) is investigating whether the National Organization for Marriage failed to report donations made to Proposition 8. Republican Fred Karger, whose website bills him as "the first openly gay presidential candidate from a major political party in American history," asked the Commission to look into whether the "Yes on 8" campaign failed to reveal almost $400,000 it received in 2008, including $10,000 from presidential candidate Mitt Romney's Alabama super PAC.

"Let's say for the sake of argument that Mitt Romney's super PAC contributed to Prop. 8. What's wrong with it?" asks Celeste Greig, president of the California Republican Assembly (CRA). "It was a valid proposition that the people overwhelmingly supported."

What was wrong with it was the fact that NOM may have not reported Romney's $10,000 contribution which came by the way of an Alabama PAC. And the fact that this money came from an Alabama PAC is odd in itself.

In addition, to the Romney money there were 10 more contributions NOM did not report, including: $150,000 from Michael Casey of Jamestown, RI, $100,000 from Sean Fiedler of New York, NY and $25,000 from NOM Board member Craig Cardon of Mesa, AZ, a General Authority in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

All in all, that's $340,000 which NOM is alleged to have not reported.

So it is a pretty big deal.

Attacking Karger is merely killing the messenger. If Greig was concerned about preserving the laws in her state, she would lay off of Karger and start asking questions about NOM.

Conservative bloggers get embarrassed at Netroots Nation

Jim Hoft

Netroots Nation this year was off the chain. We progressives - including the creme de la creme of lgbtq activists and bloggers - gathered together in Rhode Island to coordinate our plans, bounce around new ideas, talk to Congressmen, and basically rejuvenate ourselves for the fights ahead.

This was my second Netroots Nation. During my first one, I was a young, eager-eyed blogger ready to meet some of my  idols and Congressmen.

This one was special because I accomplished a lot of things. I was able to give a talk on what I do with my blog (it was called "opposition research, but I corrected the term. It's actually truth-telling on the religious right) to good applause.

I participated in a panel discussion about lgbtq rights in "red states" and was able to give a deserved shout out to all of the South Carolina lgbtq organizations who work steadily to accomplish equality for our community but rarely get their due. By the way, the fact that we were able to pass transgender-inclusive non-discrimination ordinances in various SC cities without so much as a peep from the religious right was deemed as extremely impressive.

I was able to meet Congresswoman and hopefully soon-to-be Senator Tammy Baldwin as well as NAACP president Benjamin Jealous and have a quick discussion with them on how they are my inspiration.

Lastly, I was able to work some mischief in. Oh come on now. That's that reason why you reading this post and I won't disappoint you. Yesterday, Netroots Nation was infiltrated by a few right-wing bloggers, famous for their vitriol.

Jim Hoft, Dana Loesch, and various other writers of the Breitbart site.

For those who don't know, Hoft has written vulgarly inaccurate pieces on President Obama. One infamous piece had to do with that the President's speech in Tucson, Arizona after that awful shooting incident last year.

Hoft had claimed that the White House was demanding that people applaud Obama's speech via the Jumbotron. In reality, the Jumbotron was merely closed captioning for the hearing impaired.

And I would remiss not to mention that it was Hoft who kept publishing post after post after post falsely accusing former Obama appointee Kevin Jennings of teaching children how to have gay sex, sending children to adult gay bars, etc. etc.

When I walked up to him during Netroots Nation and confronted him about what he had done, he wasn't exactly loquacious.  We had two conversations. Now those who know me are aware of the fact that I adore the television character Columbo. Columbo was a police detective who caught criminals in lies by not yelling at them but treating them politely while just simply pointing out several facts. I tried to follow that direction in that I did not yell at Hoft nor call him names. We had a somewhat "pleasant conversation:

Me: Mr. Hoft, I loved your work on Kevin Jennings.

Hoft: Well thank you

Me: I would have loved it more if it was accurate. Come on man, you know that stuff wasn't true.

Hoft: (nervous laugh)

Me: I mean come on, seriously, where did you get that stuff.

Hoft: Well I'd have to look over it.

Me: But you wrote it and you were wrong.

Hoft: Well I don't remember . . .

Me: Well I could send you the information. Are you going to correct any of what you said.

Hoft:  Well I'd have to look over it

(Hoft begins to move away from me.)

Me: Wait a minute, where are you going? Let's continue to talk. I haven't even mentioned the Obama speech stuff. That was when you said Obama's people was ordering audience members to applaud but it was really the Jumbotron for the hearing impaired.

Hoft: Well . .  like I said, I would have to look at it.

Me: Well I got your twitter, I can send you where you got it wrong if you send me your address.

(Hoft was already gone)

Dana Loesch

Now my conversation with Dana Loesch was more polite, which is a surprise in light of a lot of the stuff she has said and written in regards to urinating on dead soldiers, Georgetown student Sandra Fluke, and the transgender community.

It was what happened afterwards that was interesting. In case you didn't hear, Loesch attempted to asked Sen. Sherrod Brown a question and he shot her down like she was an enemy warrior in a video game. She tweeted about it:

"Sen. Brown, do you have time for a question?" - me

 "Not from you I don't." - Sen. Sherrod Brown #nn12

After the incident, Loesch confided in me how shocked she was that Sen. Brown shot her down like that. And I was all "now that's just a crying shame." But I was being deceptive.  After all, it was me who alerted Sen. Brown's aide that Loesch was in the audience and was going to probably ask him a question for the direct objective of embarrassing him?

It wasn't my idea to do it at first. Daily Kos Markos Moulitsas told me that I should alert Brown's aide on what Loesch was planning. So I did.

And I enjoyed the outcome.

Granted, what I did was probably insignificant, petty,  and probably won't amount to a hill of beans in the long run.

But what the heck? It was fun. I didn't yell at anyone. I didn't call anyone names. I like to think that I merely regulated the situation.

No hard feelings, guys. But come on. Some of us progressives aren't exactly pushovers. We also know how to fight. But more importantly, we fight intelligently.

WOW! Black minister gives spirited defense of marriage equality

From Think Progress, something simply awesome:

Pastor Frederick Haynes of the Friendship-West Baptist Church in Dallas gave a powerful sermon in support of President Obama’s recent endorsement of marriage equality. Haynes notes that during his oath of office, Obama vowed to uphold the constitution, not the Bible. During his sermon, which criticized both fellow pastors and the congregation for their condemnation of marriage equality, “the congregation stood up and shouted their disapproval at him.” Haynes argued that the congregation should change its views:

HAYNES: He [President Obama] swore upon oath to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution, not the Bible, but the Constitution of the United States. He is not the pastor of the United States, but the president of the United States. And for the first time in the history of this nation, we have a president who has dared to use his position to make the democratic promise available, not just for a select few who are up and in, but for everybody, regardless of their race, their creed, their color, or their sexual orientation! And my brothers and sisters, I  salute the President.

Have you ever read the Gospel and heard Jesus say anything about homosexuality?…Black folk can’t even deal with homosexuality because we got issues with sexuality. And because we got issues with sexuality we can’t have a healthy discussion about homosexuality. Why, why do you get so upset?

Pastor Haynes should be commended for his intelligence, his integrity, and his bravery for stepping out on the right side of history on this issue.

'Baltimore denounces NOM's racist tactics' and other Friday midday news briefs

Editor's note - Just met two of the meanest right-wing columnist - Dana Loesch and Jim Hoft. No doubt, they are here to push the false line that "progresives are discouraged." Expect that to be the subject of their columns. Of course knowing Hoft's tendency to exaggerate, take what will be said with less than a grain of salt. Surprisingly I engaged them in a very polite conversation about how they lie, particularly Hoft. Yes, I specifically called Hoft out. They were very nice people to talk to. I guess I killed them with kindness. More on a later post, particularly how they tried to get me to pose in front of a Democratic Socialist table. I emphasize TRIED.

Baltimore mayor denounces NOM - More African-American public officials, particularly in states facing those awful marriage amendments, need to be as vocal.

After NAACP Marriage Stance, Discord And Discussion - Some African-Americans are not happy with the NAACP supportive stance on marriage equality. One member has quit. I personally think this is a good thing. Not that the member has quit, but that the NAACP has thrust itself into relevancy by pushing a much needed discussion in the black community.

Militant FRC puts gay soldiers at war with 'heroes'; callous disregard at war with rational conversation - The Family Research Council just can't get over the fact that DADT is DEAD.

CNN Contributor Defends Radio Host Who Said Obama Turns Kids Gay - When talking to Loesch less than 10 minutes ago, she claims that she was merely pointing out the fact that our community was giving this silly child undue attention. Maybe. But it's convenient that she never said a word to me about us "bullying" him. Personally I feel this way. Certainly we don't want to bully the child but he said something wild which needs attention drawn to it. And how interesting is it that she goes out of her way to defend this child, which leads me to say has she been as vocal defending gay youth. Just asking.

Macon Telegraph reverses decision to not publish lesbian wedding announcement - Not bad.

SC gay group uses Sen. DeMint to make point about anti-gay discrimination

From my friends at the Alliance for Full Acceptance, an ad which gets to the heart of discrimination with a little help from Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC):



To see more ads and to learn about how you can help to put these ads on the air, go to AFFA 2012 Media Campaign

'Signorile calls out Maggie Gallagher's duplicity' and other Thursday midday news briefs

What Are Gay Marriage Opponents Thinking? A Discussion With Maggie Gallagher - Maggie Gallagher is getting bold if she allowing herself to be interviewed by Michelangelo Signorile. After this interview, expect Gallagher not to be so bold.

First trans witness ever to testify before Senate on ENDA - I love it when good history is made

Pelosi: If Dems Win The House, DOMA Defense Goes Away - Talk about your incentives to vote Democrat!

BREAKING: Another Federal Judge Strikes Down DOMA - Which would be good because defending it is a waste of money. For the second time this week, it has been struck down.

LaBarbera and Wooden are Positive that Nobody Wants their Kids to be Gay - I'm almost a proponent of spontaneous combustion over this one.

Game On in Washington State: Marriage on the November Ballot - We knew this would happen. So let's do this thing!

Sarah Jessica Parker and the religious right's hypocrisy on polygamy

Sometimes I get confused in regards to the ability of religious right to change its colors on a position.

Recent attacks on actress Sarah Jessica Parker is a perfect example.

Parker recently posted a video commercial for President Obama's re-election.

To say that the National Organization for Marriage didn't appreciate this video is an understatement. From its blog:

..So now the president is now not content to advocate redefining marriage as being possible between two people of the same sex. He is now in favor of redefining marriage so that it can be any union at all — which is to say, he is in favor of abolishing any publicly normative definition of marriage. If “you should be able to marry anyone you want,” then you should be able to marry someone who is already married, you should be able to marry your father, your mother, your sister, your brother, whoever. Taken as stated, the president’s position, proclaimed by his actress-spokesperson, is to personally advocate polygamous and even incestuous marriages.

No doubt the president does not really intend to say this. But why not, at least on the logic of the left-wing marriage nihilists whose rhetoric he is parroting? Conservatives say that same-sex marriage is a step towards the destruction of marriage. Their liberal opponents respond that this is childish, that letting gay people marry does not threaten any existing marriage. But that response completely misses the point, which is this: the argument by which the left defends same sex marriage is inseparable from an argument that marriage should be anything anybody wants it to be, which is the same thing as saying there should be no publicly normative definition of marriage, which is the same thing as destroying marriage as a public institution.

The incest thing is ridiculous. And of course the thing about polygamy is equally ridiculous. But the question is how can NOM accuse Obama's support of marriage equality leading to polygamy when its founder, Maggie Gallagher, said in 2003 polygamy is better for children:

"At least polygamy, for all its ugly defects, is an attempt to secure stable mother-father families for children."

Now granted, Gallagher will duck and dodge in that way in which the lgbt community has become used to. She will no doubt give a long explanation of what "she actually meant" or claim that since then her opinion has changed and she has written pieces which have spoken out against polygamy.

The religious right doesn't care about the bullying of Christian students either

In an attempt to make a point about how supposedly too much unnecessary attention is paid to the bullying of gay students, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council accidentally demonstrated his organization's lack of care in regards to bullying in general.

According to that "lovely" phony news service, One News Now:

 Since Education Secretary Arne Duncan has once again met with a group of LGBT students to hear suggestions for improving school experience, one conservative wonders if a meeting with Christian students is even a possibility.

This latest meeting can be added to the list of about two dozen others Duncan has held with LGBT students since taking office. Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council (FRC) recognizes that Dncan can meet with whomever he wants -- but offers one query.

"I'm curious whether he would be willing to meet with Christian students in a similar way so that they could relate their experiences of bullying and persecution because they've expressed their faith or their personal moral convictions at school," Sprigg notes.

The gist of Sprigg's comment and the article is that focusing on the bullying of gay students is supposedly unnecessary:

Sprigg points out that studies show the main reason students are bullied is not because of sexual orientation, but because of body image, academic performance and perceived intelligence. So while Duncan is placing the Department of Education's focus on the lesbian, "gay", bisexual and transgender students, Sprigg contends no one is looking out for the students who need the attention.

That link in the article doesn't point to any of the "studies," but another One News Now article featuring a statement from Peter Jon Mitchell of the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada  Apparently IMFC is a  Canadian religious right group.

Mitchell said the following:

A report on state legislation up to April 2011 for the U.S. Department of Education found that 48 pieces of legislation on bullying were passed between 2000 and 2006, with an additional 78 pieces of state legislation passed in the following four years. Many of the laws aim to protect homosexuals, but the study reveals there is little bullying on that basis.

"The primary reason or primary trigger for bullying is body image, followed by academic performance and sort of perceived intelligence," Mitchell reports.

Someone should tell Sprigg that an article talking about a generic report while providing no link to the report is not equal to a legitimate study.

But more than that, I am struck by Sprigg's first statement - "I'm curious whether he (Arne Duncan) would be willing to meet with Christian students in a similar way so that they could relate their experiences of bullying and persecution because they've expressed their faith or their personal moral convictions at school."

That's a good question. An even better question would be why don't Sprigg  or FRC get a group of these students together for such a meeting.

My guess is that it won't happen.

The reason is not because the supposed bullying of Christian students isn't happening. That's not the point.

The point is that Sprigg  wouldn't be interested in getting such a group together because he only mentioned these students as a way to play Christian students and gay students against one another in the eyes of the public.

Combating the bullying of any students is not what Sprigg and FRC are going for. It's not in any of their goals. To my knowledge, FRC has never pushed for any concrete legislation or made any legitimate suggestions when it comes to combating the bullying of any students.

Keeping down the gay community is all they aim for.

In other words, Sprigg is using Christian students as patsies.

He's not interested in stopping the bullying of Christian students any more than he is interested in stopping the bullying of gay students.

And it's sad because some folks will read Sprigg's comments and think that he makes a good point without realizing that he is exploiting Christian students for yet another game of "stop the queers."

'Opposition Research' or 'Truth Telling?'

My talk today at Netroots Nation went over pretty well.

I was supposed to be talking about how I track religious right distortions, as it was phrased "opposition research."

However, I made a point to say several times that it's not necessarily "opposition research" but "truth telling."

It's really nothing more than what journalists and pundits should be doing when writing about or interviewing folks like Tony Perkins and Maggie Gallagher, i.e. digging deep and questioning their responses rather than allowing them to go on a monologue of talking points.

Even though I would have really loved to have gone into detail about the six deceptions of the religious right, it was still a step forward to be able to finally throw out the idea that gay activists should educate themselves more on the religious right.

The entire day in general went quick and very well. I was especially pleased to give some positive shout outs to my lgbtq brothers and sisters in South Carolina during the second panel discussion I took part in, i.e. turning purple and red states into blue states on the subject of lgbtq equality.

Between you and me though, the red state/blue state dichotomy is dumb as hell and for the life of me, I don't know who ever thought it up.

The general gist of panelists there is that the national gay rights organizations are too quick to write off states like Florida, Indiana and my state of South Carolina because they figure we are lost causes.

But meanwhile, the gay communities in these states are thriving and getting things done. I was especially glad to brag on the various gay organizations in South Carolina.

So all in all, I have thus far accomplished the goals I set out this year. Can't wait until tomorrow.

BREAKING: California will investigate National Organization for Marriage

This just hit my inbox:

Contact:  Brian Wilson
Brian.RightsEqualRights@yahoo.com

In a surprise move, the state of California’s ethics office just announced that it will investigate Fred Karger’s complaint against the Washington, DC based NOM.  In his sworn complaint of May 17^th, Karger alleged that NOM did not report over $340,000 that it raised to pass Proposition 8 four years ago.  California joins the state of Maine which is in its third year of its investigation of NOM, the leading anti-gay marriage organization in the country.

Here’s the letter Karger received yesterday from Gary Winuk, the Chief Enforcement Officer of the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC):

To view Karger’s May 17^th complaint:  CLICK HERE.

It shows that NOM had received 11 large contributions in 2008 that were never reported as required under California election law.  That was the year NOM helped lead the effort to pass California’s Proposition 8.

Mitt Romney’s $10,000 Contribution Never Reported

One of the 11 missing contributions was $10,000 from presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s Alabama PAC.  In addition to the Romney money there were 10 more contributions NOM did not report, including: $150,000 from Michael Casey of Jamestown, RI, $100,000 from Sean Fiedler of New York, NY and $25,000 from NOM Board member Craig Cardon of Mesa, AZ, a General Authority in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church).

NOM Must Obey the Law

“The National Organization for Marriage has spent tens of millions of dollars to take marriage rights away from millions of Americans over the last four years,” said Karger, who is also responsible for the NOM investigation in Maine and the 2010 FPPC successful prosecution of the Mormon Church on 13 counts of election fraud.  “NOM is allowed to participate in these elections, but it must obey all state and federal laws and report where all of its money is coming from.  Once again it looks like they got caught.”
 

We’ll be Watching

“Now as NOM funds the four anti-gay marriage elections this fall in Minnesota, Washington, Maryland and Maine, I will be watching them closely.  Under the leadership of Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown, NOM is relentless in its desire to harm people and apparently thinks that it is above the law.  I will continue to monitor their activities in every state where it wages its war against the LGBT community,” added Karger.

And this has been confirmed by The Sacremento Bee

14-year-old accuses President Obama of making children gay

From The Huffington Post comes an absolutely ridiculous story:

A West Virginia-based teen radio host is making waves after proclaiming that President Obama "is making kids gay" in a recent episode.

Fourteen-year-old Caiden Cowger, who hosts the twice-weekly "Caiden Cowger Show," made his anti-gay proclamations in a recent broadcast, video of which was uploaded to his YouTube channel on May 26. "Homosexuality is a belief," Cowger, who has previously interviewed former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain, declares. "The person is not born that way, no matter what Lady Gaga says...it is a decision."

After confessing that he was once friends with some kids who have since come out as gay, he notes, "They were not homosexuals [then]...they just decided all of a sudden, 'I think I'm going to be gay,'" before he eventually concludes, "I'm going to tell you this, guys:  President Obama...Vice President Biden...is making kids gay!"

Cowger, who is identified by The New Civil Rights Movement as a Pentecostal Christian, slams homosexuality as "a perverted belief, it's immoral and not natural" before noting, "I'm not for bullying homosexuals, I believe that it's wrong. But when you're trying to teach them the word of God and they consider that bullying...I find that a big problem, not being allowed to convert other people to my religion."

Please guys, no rude comments. This is just a 14-year-old child who doesn't know his ass from his elbow. No doubt the right will embrace him as a truth-teller, but in reality he is a mere child talking about things he knows nothing about.

And though some folks may disagree with me giving him attention, I say when the  right shows its ignorance, shine a spotlight on it.

I mean really . . . from coaching three-year-olds to sing anti-gay songs in church to encouraging 14-year-olds to accuse Obama of making children gay.

Come on, guys on the right. Even if you have no sense of decency, where is your sense of self-respect?

'Students rally around fired gay coach' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Wade Davis, Former Football Player, On Being Gay In The NFL - Interview with African-American gay former football player



In other news:

Miss Pennsylvania USA Resigns In Protest Of Transgender Candidates - Poor baby. She will get over it.

Team rallies around gay coach fired over drag queen photos - This is very encouraging!

New Mexico Appeals Court Rejects Claim That Religious Right Can Ignore Anti-Discrimination Laws - The gay community's reaction is mixed over this. What do you think?

Ninth Circuit Denies Request to Rehear Prop 8 Case, So What Happens Now? - I KNOW you all have heard this good news. But what does it mean?

Netroots Nation - First Day : I get to talk about debunking the religious right!

As many of my readers know, I am presently in Providence, RI attending Netroots Nation. Presently, I am at a portion of the conference where lgbtq activists and bloggers are coming together to brainstorm and talk about our experience and goals.

Imagine my surprise when I was asked to give a 10 minute presentation on "opposition research" and another panel discussion on blogging in conservative red states.

I am extremely psyched by both, but specifically the first. I have long wanted to talk about the importance and the need to study the tactics of the religious right.

 When I was first asked, I envisioned an image of myself wearing a uniform that George C. Scott wore in Patton while standing in front of a giant rainbow flag. My first line would be:

"Folks, opposition research is hell. God help me, I love it so."

Seriously though, my goal is to press upon folks the importance of knowing those who want to stop our equality. It's not enough to simply call them "bigots." It is imperative that we break down their tactics and expose their lies at every turn.

I really want to impress upon folks two things:

1. It is very important to "know the enemy" and put them on the defensive before something happens. We tend to wait until Maggie Gallagher or Tony Perkins says something before reacting. We need to get them to react now and then.

2. The positive effects of putting positive information out there for our youth to read. On that score, I am going to have to share a painful story from my college days in terms of why information needs to be out there regarding the religious right to not only educate,  but also to inspire our young folks and also to let them know that they are not alone . . . . and to get them motivated.

Wish me luck. I intend to make the most of my time here ;p

Gay family in center of JC Penney Ad smacks down religious right nonsense

From Think Progress:

JC Penney recently incited backlash from the American Family Association’s One Million Moms for featuring a gay couple in one of their Fathers’ Day advertisements when OMM suggested that the department store was “promoting sin” with their inclusive advertising.

Gay couple Cooper Smith and Todd Koch responded today to the negative and positive attention their ad has received, saying that the positive support has been overwhelming and the criticism doesn’t bother them because “we’re not ashamed of our family.” Smith pointed out that the ad shouldn’t be controversial because it just reflects the day-to-day life of his family

Phony Christian blogger needs to pray for herself

Well I am in Rhode Island for Netroots Nation and it promises to be fun. I already feel rejuvenated being around so many high level lgbtq bloggers and hope to have my spirits renewed and restored.

Now I wasn't going to post anymore today but a blogging buddy of mine sent me something which I just had to talk about as yet another example of religious right hypocrisy.

A certain "Christian" blogger by the name of Stacy Harp has issued the following for me:

Praying for the Homosexual & Lesbian Community
Please share with your friends who have a heart to see the lost come to Christ.



Please pray for Alvin McEwen today.  Alvin isn't known by many people, but he is an active homosexual blogger who advocates daily for homosexuality.  He has written about how he is a Christian on his blog, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, and recently made headlines when he claimed to have "exposed" a right wing group of Christian leaders who he said were out to commit a cyber attack on the gay community. (He was quickly found to be found out wrong.)

Pray for Alvin's emotional healing and for him to come to a biblical understanding of who Christ is, so that he will know the true freedom found in a personal relationship with Christ and leave the sin of homosexuality behind.

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11

What prompted Harp to call me out? I don't know. I guess I have been posting some very good anti-religious right stuff lately.

Anyway, Harp alluded to the Truth4Time story I broke earlier this year and that I stand by.

However, since Harp wants to bring up the past, let's bring up hers as a way of giving anyone not familiar with her an idea of what type of "Christian" she is.

Not surprisingly enough, she is the type who masks her ignorant raw homophobia behind a phony religious veneer. Years ago, she attempted to bait a friend of mine, Joe Brummer, into a ridiculous conversation about gay sex. Below, via Pam's House Blend, are various comments made by Harp (I apologize in advance for the language):

Stacy: You’re in total denial. And for you to enjoy sex with a man, you know, whether it’s anal or oral, whatever the heck it is you do, that’s just wrong. It’s perverted – It’s disgusting – It’s unnatural – and you know it.

And:

Stacy: Homosexuality is all about sex, and that’s disgusting. You don’t teach sex to three year olds. I’m sorry, but that just is not appropriate. You do not do that.

Stacy: It’s not a lie, it’s totally the truth. That’s what makes you gay, is that you like to put your penis in somebody’s asshole. That’s what makes you gay.

And:

Stacy: No, you know it’s…so let me ask you something…

Joe: Regardless, I now have less than fifteen minutes to get myself out the door.

Stacy: So if you putting your penis…

Joe: I’m hanging up now.

Stacy: …in somebody’s asshole, and this isn’t about sex…

Joe: I am not going to have a sexual conversation with you.
  
Stacy: …then I don’t know what is.

And:

Stacy: Putting your penis in somebody’s asshole…

Joe: …to have a sexual conversation with you.

Stacy: …is all about anal sex, and that’s what you do…

Joe: Stacy, you have a nice day.

Stacy: …right? That’s exactly what you do.

Joe: Have a nice day, thank you for calling.

Stacy: That’s what you do.

Stacy Harp: Ladies and gentlemen, that was Joe Brummer, denying, that homosexuality, is all about putting his penis, in somebody’s asshole. You know, and uh, it’s really interesting, that you know, he doesn’t have the guts to admit that, but now he wants to make it all about, not that. So, you know, there ya go, I mean this is just evidence that somebody who supports the fact that homosexuality is about um-is about um, you know having kids, having sex with kids, ‘n stuff, unbelievable.

So folks, who do you think needs prayer more? Me or Stacy?

Homophobic church continues to face backlash

Editor's note - there will be no midday post today because I will be traveling to Rhode Island to attend Netroots Nation

The church where that three-year-child sang "Ain't No Homos Gonna Make It To Heaven" continues to feel much deserved backlash via CNN:




Hat tip to Towleroad.

A month of anti-gay hell

From Think Progress has come up with something which NEEDS to be shared far and wide:

As perhaps a backlash of North Carolina’s passage of Amendment One and President Obama’s support for marriage equality, May proved to be rife with anti-gay rhetoric in churches across the country. Here is the month’s worth of anti-gay rhetoric compiled into one video:

Marvel Comics proves religious right has unhealthy obsession with gay community

I like to think of myself as a connoisseur of comic books. Now one comic book in particular that I have found to be very interesting is The Punisher by Marvel Comics.

The Punisher is about a former soldier whose family was massacred by the Mafia. Since that time, he has carried a very effective one-man war against crime.

In the last few years, The Punisher comic book has been the showcase of, shall we say, repulsive actions, all viewed in living color including but not limited to:

Eviscerations (i.e. disembowlements), cannibalism, rapes, immolations (i.e. setting people on fire), close-ups of violent shootings, death by snakes, piranhas, sharks, polar bears (the scene in which the polar bear swipes the man's head clean off was simply incredible), beheadings, the destruction of an entire island by a nuclear bomb, a tossing of a gangster from the top of the Empire State building (in the full view of a young teenager who got super excited over it), testicular castrations . . .

I think you get the picture.

But not once, I repeat, not once have any religious right group  raised anything resembling anger, outrage, disgust, or downright shock over any of these things.

But these groups are crying bloody murder now and you know what they are angry about?

The wedding of a gay superhero, Northstar,  to his boyfriend in another Marvel comic:

From that lovely bastion of phony news, One News Now:

Pro-family groups are outraged by the recent announcement about plans for some comic book super heroes to embrace alternate lifestyles.

. . . Focus on the Family's Glenn Stanton, director of family formation studies, says it is "shameful" to press this issue upon children.

"What's really disturbing about this is the real arrogance of these cartoon creators who think their job is not just to entertain, but to indoctrinate, to preach at us," he observes. "We go to church to be preached at; we don't go to comics to do that. And again, it's just arrogance on the part of these creators."

He also dubs it a political move. "It's kind of activist comic books, which we don't need. Comic books are for entertainment; they're not for activism, social activism," Stanton contends.

. . .Monica Cole of OneMillionMoms.com, an advocacy branch of the American Family Association, agrees.

"DC Comics and Marvel, they have an agenda, and it's to indoctrinate children at a younger age," she laments. "And they're doing it. They're being successful at it."

Now I usually end a piece like this with a quirky comment, but I don't think I need to.

Sometimes the idiocy of the religious right speaks very well for itself.

'By all means, discriminate against gays' and other Monday midday news briefs

Something to listen to when you go to the bathroom:



In other news:

Owner of Oak Park gay club believes weekend fire suspicious - Great. Now arson.

Over 300 Mormons Join Utah Gay Pride Parade; Mormons Building Bridges Send Message Of Love - Extremely admirable by members of the Mormon community.

A Win for Gay Mothers in New Mexico - More good news for our community.

Protest Held At "Ain't No Homos" Church - Regardless of what members say in public, I bet that church is hating that child's song now.

Lawsuit - Doctor refused to treat HIV-positive patient and insulted him

There has been a lawsuit filed in New Jersey which should send a chill up the spine of members of the lgbtq community.

According to Courthouse News Service:

A gay HIV-positive man says in court that a hospital denied him treatment and visitors, as the doctor remarked, "This is what he gets for going against God's will."

Joao Simoes sued Trinitas Regional Medical Center in Union County Superior Court. He says that the hospital admitted him in August 2011, but that "requests for his lifesaving medication were not honored," and his sister was denied visitation rights.

Susan V. Borga, M.D., from the Department of Behavioral Health and Psychiatry, allegedly approached Simoes while he was confined to the hospital's mental health wing. Borga is not named as a defendant.

Simoes says Borga was unfazed when another patient told her that he had just gotten out of prison, where he served time for murder. But her reaction was allegedly different when Simoes said that he did not work because he planned to go back to school and because of his HIV status.

Borga then allegedly asked Simoes how he got HIV, to which he responded, "I got it from unprotected sex."

The complaint then says that "Dr. Borga closed the plaintiff's file, put it down and looked at plaintiff with disgust on her face and asked, coldly, "Is that from sex with men?"

Simoes says he responded affirmatively and that, "immediately after hearing this, Dr. Borga proceeded to exit the room."

After this consultation, no nurse or doctor came to see Simoes, even though he told them that he needed to take his HIV medication, according to the complaint.

When the hospital finally permitted Simoes to call his personal physician on the third day of his stay, he learned that the doctor had already spoken with Borga about Simoes' medication, according to the complaint.

Borga allegedly responded: "You must be gay, too, if you're his doctor."

"Additionally, apparently realizing that plaintiff's doctor had an accent, Dr. Borga exclaimed, 'What, do you need a translator?' to which plaintiff's doctor had again responded that Dr. Borga needed to give plaintiff his HIV medication," the complaint states.

"Dr. Borga responded to plaintiff's doctor by stating, 'This is what he gets for going against God's will,' and hung up the phone on plaintiff's doctor."

More to the story here

If true, this awful story in itself highlights the blatant disrespect that some gays fear that they will face from physicians if they are out. Studies have shown that fear of stigma play a huge stumbling block in the successful treatment of gay men in combating disease, especially AIDS:

One study found that participants who reported high levels of stigma were more than four times more likely to report poor access to care.16 These factors all contribute to the expansion of the epidemic (as a reluctance to determine HIV status or to discuss or practice safe sex means that people are more likely to infect others) and a higher number of AIDS-related deaths. An unwillingness to take an HIV test means that more people are diagnosed late, when the virus has already progressed to AIDS, making treatment less effective and causing early death.

An even more noxious notion is the simple fact that not only does stimga play a role in the spread of AIDS, but when phony experts like Peter Sprigg from the Family Research Council cite the numbers of gay men with AIDS, they will blame the sexual orientation of these gay men as causing the diagnosis, while deliberately omitting how prejudice and stigma plays a part.

Book blows the lid off of gay link to black gospel music

Clara Ward

THIS promises to be interesting.

 According to a recent article in The New York Times, Anthony Heilbut - "producer, reviewer and historian of black gospel music for nearly a half-century,"- is coming out with a new book which promises to blow the lid off of how the black church embraces gays and lesbians in gospel music while at the same time denying their existence and espousing about how homosexuality is a sin:

Rosetta Tharpe

 . . . amid the volatile national debate about same-sex marriage, Mr. Heilbut has thrown the doors open to what he calls the “secret closet” of gays in gospel. In a lengthy chapter of his forthcoming book, “The Fan Who Knew Too Much,” he not only pays homage to the artistic role of gays and bisexuals, but also accuses black Christians, clergy and laity alike, of hypocrisy in opposing same-sex marriage while relying on gay people for much of the sacred music of the black church.

James Cleveland

The timing of Mr. Heilbut’s book, and the intensity of his argument, has thrust it from the dusty corners of arts criticism into the heat and light of the political arena in a presidential election year. Same-sex marriage, more than any other issue, has forced the black church as an institution to try to reconcile its dueling strains of ideological liberalism and theological conservatism. At the congregational level, it has meant the awkward coexistence of gay musicians and antigay preaching and casual ridicule.

“The family secret has become public knowledge,” Mr. Heilbut writes in his book, “and the black church, once the very model of civil rights, has acquired a new image, as the citadel of intolerance.” Left unchecked, he continues, the trend “would introduce an ugly but not uninformed term, ‘black redneck.’ ”

As the article points out, it would seem that there is more of an emphasis on what this situation has to do with the argument of marriage equality than lgbtqs of color in the Black church in general.

While this is unfortunate, the good thing is that this book will no doubt continue a discussion of the hypocrisy of some vestiges of the Black church as it pertains to the lgbtq community:

Mr. Heilbut, 71, discovered gospel while exploring Harlem as a teenage member of the N.A.A.C.P. As he went on to write “The Gospel Sound” and to produce award-winning gospel records, he was also immersed in the everyday homophobia of the black church. “I heard it forever,” he said in a recent interview. “ ‘He’s a great singer, but he’s a sissy.’ Or, ‘He did a terrible thing, but at least he’s not a sissy.’ ”

His reasons for breaking his silence are partly practical. Many of the musicians he identifies as gay or bisexual — James Cleveland, Alex Bradford, Clara Ward, Sister Rosetta Tharpe — are now dead, and in Mr. Cleveland’s case, dead from AIDS.

In the book, Mr. Heilbut recounts a conversation with another gay musician, Charles Campbell, shortly before his death. When Mr. Heilbut asked if he could “tell his story and quote him,” Mr. Campbell replied: “Sure, baby, I think it needs to be told. It all needs to be told.”

Read more of this article here

Related post:  

NPR exposes the complex relationship between the Black Church and gays

Know Your LGBT History - A brief history of gay relationships

No one famous today. Just a reminder that we and our relationships have existed long before Stonewall:



Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

'NOM pouring money into Maryland anti-marriage equality fight' and other Friday midday news briefs

Blogging for LGBT Families Day 2012: Contributed Posts - It’s Blogging for LGBT Families Day!

Illinois School Board Bans Family Diversity Book - Because gay folks don't have families (sarcasm alert).

 How NOM's seemingly limitless cash well is shaping Maryland - NOM literally pouring money into Maryland's anti-marriage equality fight.

  Writer James Robinson Shines a Light on DC Entertainment's Latest Gay Superhero, Earth-Two's Green Lantern - Yeah, yeah, yeah. Green Lantern of Earth Two is gay. Now about NOM and Maryland . . .

  Report: anti-LGBT murders jumped 11 percent in 2011 - And this too. 

Anti-gay groups ignoring researcher's call to stop using his work

From Truth Wins Out:

In 1973, Dr. Robert Spitzer led the charge to successfully have homosexuality removed from the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), which is its list of mental disorders. This was a major victory and remains one the gay movement’s signature achievements.

Given his stature and key role in declassifying gay people as sick, it was quite a surprise when Dr. Spitzer published a non-peer reviewed 2001 study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior that claimed some “highly motivated” gay people could reach their “heterosexual potential” through prayer and therapy. When he announced his work at the 2001 APA meeting in New Orleans, it created a media sensation. An Associated Press story called his findings “explosive.”

In 2012, Dr. Spitzer recanted in the American Prospect magazine and in a letter to the Archives of Sexual Behavior, obtained by Truth Wins Out, Dr. Spitzer asked that his study be withdrawn. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show and the New York Times covered his apology.

During an interview with  Lisa Darden and Truth Wins Out's Wayne Besen (see above video), Spitzer said the following:

Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX) is still misusing your study and a video featuring you remains prominently placed on the group’s website. Would you like to address PFOX?

“I ask that PFOX stop showing this video. This is quite misleading. I had no way, really, of knowing when I examined any particular subject whether they really had changed or whether they were deceiving themselves or even outright lying when they claimed that they had changed. So, please don’t show this [video] to anyone.”

The retraction of your study must be very upsetting to anti-gay organizations.

“I’m curious as to whether they have said anything or how they live with the fact that the one study that they have always been citing has now been taken away from them. I would think that’s a pretty rough place to be in.”

Is the “Ex-Gay” Industry capable of unbiased research on homosexuality?

“The people who are pushing the ‘ex-gay’ idea are so full of hatred for homosexuality, really, that I don’t think they can respond in an ethical way.”

They are responding by ignoring Spitzer. The Family Research Council continues to link to his work (the following comes up on FRC's webpage when I google Spitzer's full name) and PFOX hasn't removed any citation of his work from its webpage.

While we shouldn't be surprised, the big question is what are we going to do about it?