Meet the people who scare the religious right

When people like Rick Santorum, Ann Coulter, and Maggie Gallagher or groups like the National Organization for Marriage claim that being black and gay isn't the same or falsely claim that the gay community is trying to piggyback on the struggles of the black community, just remember the people in the following videos.

They are the people who Santorum, Coulter, and Gallagher don't want you to see.

These are the people who NOM doesn't want you to see. To the homophobic race-baiters seeking to divide and conquer both communities, they are most dangerous people in the world:







Editor's note - I am aware of the unfortunate fact that the African-American transgender community is not represented with a video montage. Unfortunately I could not find one. So what does that tell us? We may be closer to where we want to be but we still have miles to go in order to get there.

If there is a video out there, please send it to me and I will feature it on my blog.

BUSTED! NOM supported poll against marriage equality called out for distortions

This piece is pretty significant as far as I am concerned because it is the lead story of the Huffington Post's Gay Voices section:
 

Contrary to almost every other national poll regarding marriage equality, Deseret News, a newspaper owned by the Mormon Church, claims that two thirds of Americans oppose marriage equality.

When the mouthpiece of the Mormon Church publishes a new poll showing that two thirds of Americans now oppose marriage equality, it raises some questions. One needs to ask who conducted the poll, who was questioned, and whether respondents reflect the demographics of the national population. There is little such information in the article. All it or the attached graphics indicate is that 1,000 randomly chosen adults in 50 states were surveyed.

Did these people represent groups proportionally, or, as in a previous National Organization for Marriage poll, was it skewed toward older respondents? Deseret News doesn't say, nor do they reveal whether respondents reflect the population distribution of the states. For instance, a poll that over-surveys residents of the South will be skewed in one direction, while one that over-surveys residents of the Pacific states and New England would give very different results.

And that's only the beginning. Other juicy tidbits of the article includes revealing the author of the poll: - Gary Lawrence

Latter-Day Commentary describes him as an "LDS, Republican, conservative hawk" who was the "state LDS grassroots director for the Protect Marriage coalition. Brother Lawrence, who has served as a bishop has spent over 35 years studying opinions and behaviors of the American public."

 . . . Lawrence is a political propagandist who earned a pretty penny peddling anti-gay polls. He is also being paid by NOM and the right-wing Minnesota Family Council to produce poll results on their behalf. Minnesota Independent reported that "the groups touting the survey are remaining mum about the poll's details." Lawrence said that he can't release the data "purchased by an outside group." At least he didn't suggest they fork out $29.50 for his book on how Mormons can "improve their image, and spread the gospel."

The article should be read in its entirety.

James Peron of the Moorfield Storey Institute - the writer of the piece - did his job well. He should be commended, as should the Huffington Post for giving the article prominence.

It is worth mentioning that NOM trumpeted the results of this poll yesterday on its blog. Perhaps someone - in a polite manner because we NEVER need to stoop to their level - should let the organization know that its face is now cracked and on the ground.

This is what children will learn about gay history

I have not forgotten that this is LGBT History Month. How very appropriate that some folks in California who tried to stop the teaching of gay history failed miserably in their attempt.

Don't let them or anyone talking about children "being indoctrinated to accept a lifestyle" fool you with their phony talking points. The clip below - courtesy of The Legacy Walk - gives a true picture of what children will be learning when it comes to the contributions of the gay community.

We are more than merely an "orientation." We are a people.

And frankly, I don't see how it's such a bad thing for children to know:

Know Your LGBT History - In & Out

I'm going to catch so much hell for this but I loved In & Out.

It was a 1997 comedy which was inspired by Tom Hanks' Oscar speech (when he won Best Actor for Philadelphia.) In the speech, he thanked one of his teachers and classmates.

In&Out repeated the speech moment but made one big difference.

What if Hanks had accidentally outed the people he thanked.

That's what happens in In & Out when an actor (played by Matt Dillon) thanks one of his high school teachers from the podium and outs him as a gay man.

Only one thing, however. No one knows that the man is gay, including the teacher himself.

Okay, some folks didn't like this movie because they felt it exploited stereotypes about gay men. This is true. Kline's character is a stereotypical gay man who likes Barbara Streisand and has a "fey" manner about him even while constantly insisting that he isn't gay.

And there are some scenes - i.e. the dance scene and the "I am Spartacus" type ending - which I felt were corny as hell:



But the saving grace of this movie has to be the performances. Tom Selleck is okay as the openly gay talk show host willing to exploit the entire incident for ratings. I found Kline to be marginal as the main character. Of course the scene everyone remembers is when Selleck liplocks Kline:



However the person who really steals the show in this movie, and this becomes its saving grace, is Joan Cusack as Kline's fiance - a woman who is counting on marrying him so much that she lost weight and based her entire self-worth on the fact that he would lead her down the aisle.

Cusack received a much deserved Oscar nomination for her role as a jilted bride (you really didn't think they would get married, did you?)




Not to worry though. This is a comedy, which means it has a happy ending for all parties involved, including Cusack. Guess who her character ends up with at the end of the movie?

Past Know Your LGBT Posts: .

'Family Research Council pushes more hate' and other Friday midday news briefs

POLL: New Hampshire Voters Want To Preserve Marriage Equality Law, Vote For Candidate Who Opposes Repeal - The question is will it be the same after NOM inundates them with lies about gays wanting to harm the innocence of children.

Those 'Values' keep a comin': FRC bus seats another uber-extreme voice - FRC pushing more hate. Sad.

Teacher's anti-LGBT Facebook rant crosses the line -  - Sorry but if this teacher had said the same thing about religion or ethnic groups as it pertained to displays at her job (like the situation did here with the gay community), there would be no talk of this being a "free speech" issue. Furthermore I refuse to believe you can claim that EVERY negative comment made about the gay community is a simple expression of a religious belief.

Shaquille O’Neal, Amy Poehler Among Celebrities In New Anti-Bullying PSAs - You have to admit. This is pretty cool.


Gay Military Personnel To Join NOH8 Campaign For Marriage Equality - Ending Friday's news briefs on a positive note.

Liberty Counsel is LYING about Dakota Ary case

Remember the recent case of Dakota Ary - the student who was supposedly suspended for "merely" claiming that homosexuality was a sin last month.

To recap - after a media blitz in which Ary's family and the religious right group the Liberty Counsel boggarted the public with only one side of the story, it was later learned via the teacher, Kristopher Franks, involved in the situation that Ary was not as innocent as portrayed.

Apparently the nonchalant statement he made was a part of an alleged campaign of harassment he and a few other students were conducting against the teacher.

However because the laziness of the media and the willingness of the religious right push a phony victim, the talking point that Ary was persecuted drew enough negative attention to cause the teacher to be investigated.

Needless to say though that the teacher was exonerated.

But now weeks after the entire incident is over, the Liberty Counsel is trying to claim victory so to speak by claiming that the school district has said that Ary did nothing wrong:

“In fact, in his file is a letter now that says that Dakota has a right under the First Amendment to express his own personal opinion consistent with his First Amendment protections,” (the Liberty Counsel's Mat) Staver remarks. “So we are very pleased with this as the result has now taken a few weeks, but the result is exactly what we were looking for.”

However this is what the letter actually said:

The Fort Worth Independent School District has concluded its review of the removal of Dakota Ary from the German class led by Kristopher Franks.

This review was conducted in accordance with District policies and was essential for two reasons: 1) Dakota’s claim of a potential First Amendment violation and 2) the implication that bullying behavior might have been involved. After carefully reviewing the information gathered, the District has determined that neither potential issue has validity.

A perceived student conduct violation does allow for the temporary removal of a student. The District then considers two questions before assessing discipline. The first is whether there has been a violation of the Student Code of Conduct. If so, the District then determines the appropriate consequence for such a violation. But in this case, as in all cases, if the perceived violation is determined not to be true, the student is returned to class, as soon as possible, without consequence. Unfortunately, Dakota remained in in-house suspension for almost four hours before returning to his assigned classes without a consequence. While the delay was due to the District’s attempt to carefully consider the competing interests presented by the referral, we do apologize for the delay in returning Dakota to class.

As previously stated, Dakota was not punished for expressing an opinion and there is no permanent record of his being punished for expressing an opinion. We recognize Dakota has the right to express an opinion in a manner consistent with law and policy.

The letter says that neither issue - a: the possiblity that there was bullying involved and b. Ary's First Amendment rights being violated - had any validity.

Furthermore, the letter make something clear  - Ary's First Amendment Rights were not violated.

That last part is probably something which Staver is seizing upon to claim victory:

We recognize Dakota has the right to express an opinion in a manner consistent with law and policy.

Of course Ary does. Everyone has that right. The point was the question of whether or not Ary's manner was consistent with law and policy.

If you ask me, it sounds as if the district is trying to this controversy and unfortunately is playing into the Liberty Counsel's hands. I bet a steak dinner that  the organization pushed hard for this letter as a way of claiming victory and covering up for the fact that it intentionally jumped the gun to make Ary a victim before the case was even fully investigated. And I bet the organization pushed hard to have that last statement about Ary's "First Amendment rights"  be included.

But the clincher of the Liberty Counsel's audacity is the following statement by Staver:

Homosexual activist teacher Kristopher Franks was also suspended while his classroom conduct was under investigation. Staver says that on Frank's return to the classroom, he remained under close supervision.

“He was accompanied by an administrator from the school in the classroom to observe his behavior,” Staver explains. “The teacher is clearly on notice now that his action is inappropriate, that what he did is wrong, and he’ll no longer be able to use the classroom as a bully pulpit to promote his homosexual agenda.”

As far as it is known, Staver's statement is inaccurate. Staver does not reveal who gave him that information. His claim about the teacher "being put on notice" is not in the letter.

As as stated before, Franks was fully exonerated.

Black people can get along fine without being defended by Ann Coulter

Recently, author (I guess I have to call her that) Ann Coulter defended presidential nominee Rick Santorum for comments he made about the difference between being black and gay.

And amazingly enough, she actually took it upon herself to defend black people as only Ann Coulter can - i.e. putting down another group of Americans:

I'm sick of people comparing gays to blacks. No, it's very different. What Santorum said is true. It's sexualization of the military. It's not someone being Black. Tell me how being Black is like being gay. You can see someone is Black. You can't see someone is gay and the precise policy we're talking about is whether they can go around announcing they're gay."

I never thought it was possible but as a black man AND a gay man, I am offended by Coulter twice as much rather than singularly.

Rather than go into an expository about being black and gay, I think it would suffice that folks look at the source when it comes to such a comment. Furthermore, someone should tell Coulter that simply because she may have gone out a few dates with Jimmy "J.J." Walker" does not make her an authority on the black community:

Furthermore, I think the black community can get along just fine without being "defended" by someone like her. Lastly, someone should inform Coulter that she is not a "down sista," no matter what the following clip from The Boondocks may portray her as (parental guidance suggested) :

'Glee part of a huge gay conspiracy?' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Tony Perkins Blames Gays For The Economy - Well why not?He blames us for everything else.

Matt Barber Uncovers The "Glee" Conspiracy - Geez, this stuff just writes itself.

Fundraiser to aid GOP backers of N.Y. gay marriage - And it raked in over a million dollars. Betcha NOM won't talk about it.

Discussing Lawrence King's Murder, Truth In Action Ministries Blames The Victim - Just mind boggling and sad . . .

Thank you Maggie Gallagher for revealing your lies - In case you missed this morning's post, a recap - Maggie Gallagher just helped the movement for equality . . . again.

Thank you Maggie Gallagher for revealing your lies

Maggie Gallagher

Former chairwoman of the National Organization for Marriage, Maggie Gallagher, recently let the cat out of the bag so to speak when she chose to praise the Family Research Council during the "Values Voter" Summit:

GALLAGHER: I want to pause and say I know all of the organizations involved in this fight, and I treasure fighting with each and every one of the people on this panel, the organ – the Family Research Council, and others. 

Equality Matters breaks down why this admittance is significant:

Gallagher’s decision to single out the Family Research Council (FRC) – the organization that hosted the Values Voter Summit at which Gallagher was speaking – is worth noting. The group has been labeled an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for promoting smears about the LGBT community. Indeed, SPLC urged public figures attending the Values Voter summit to stop associating with anti-gay groups like FRC, which work to “create a climate of hate and violence against the LGBT community.” A recently released SPLC report documents FRC’s history of promoting anti-LGBT smears and propaganda, including depicting gay men as mentally ill child molesters

 . . .  If Gallagher truly “treasure[s]” her relationship with FRC, it’s safe to assume that she doesn’t see this kind of hate speech as particularly problematic. In fact, NOM has criticized the SPLC for labeling FRC as a hate group. Both Gallagher and NOM president Brian Brown signed a statement last year condemning the SPLC for its “hateful rhetoric” and “character assassination” efforts against FRC.

In other words,  Gallagher's admittance puts a huge hole in her schtick. Those who have heard Gallagher espouse her views against marriage equality are familiar with her con game. She can't complete one sentence without implying that how folks like her are "unfairly labeled a bigots because they simply believe that traditional marriage is the joining of the two halves of humanity."

Gallagher has managed to ride that tired old argument into a bit of success against the gay community and some national face time. And the talking point is also useful in the fact that its basic dishonest drives some gays to distraction while Gallagher nonchalantly wraps herself up in the cloak of false victimhood like an aggressor hitting someone with a large rock and then assuming an innocent pose when investigated.

But it's a nasty lie which Gallagher has now exposed thanks to her eagerness to kiss up to FRC. Gallagher has revealed that NOM is a fraud. It's not about values or morality. The organization is nothing more than the same old rotten homophobia encased in new wrapping paper and given a neat bow.

Bigots fail in California! Anti-gay referendum doesn't get enough signatures

All of the religious right's lies and all of the religious right's men won't be able to put gays in the closet again.

From the San Diego Gay & Lesbian News:

Today was the deadline for signatures to qualify a new referendum for inclusion on the November 2012 ballot.

As EQCA announced yesterday, the anti-equality advocates were unable to get the specified number of signatures to get their discriminatory policies back in the hands of the voters.

They were seeking a referendum to overturn the recent FAIR Education Act (SB48), which ensures classrooms are including LGBT, minority and handicapped individuals in the teaching of history.

At many public locations where the group attempted to gather signatures, it was reported they were misleading the public about what the law was about, even linking it in some cases to pedophilia.

After a last minute rally in an attempt to uncover or gather more signatures, today the group sent out an email to all their supporters, entitled, "We Fought the Law and the Law Won."

In the email, they shared their disappointment with losing their attempt at overturning the "very bad law" and thanked their supporters.

They also offered guidance on what to expect of their referndum's "opponents," avowed to not give up the fight for the sake of the children and identified the state politicians that stood with them in the attempt to overturn the FAIR Education Act.

The communication also gives insight into to their discriminatory tactics, from the school board level, up.

Unfortunately we did not collect enough signatures to qualify the referendum to overturn SB48. That law will be in place in our schools at the first of next year.

We thank all of you that worked so hard to provide the hundreds of thousands of signatures received. In the end, 90 days was too short a time to accomplish such a large task.

In the coming days you will see the celebration of our opponents. We know this because it has already started in social media and other places. And some of the rhetoric will be harsh. Remember, despite what they say about us, we opposed SB 48 simply because we do not believe that children should be exposed to an intentionally one-sided argument about lifestyles and values we do not hold.

And you will have to face some of those who said from the beginning that our referendum effort was a waste of time. They said we did not have enough money, the commitment of enough groups, or enough days. Ultimately they were right. And in private perhaps they will ask if the effort they withheld would have made the critical difference.

In the end, everybody that dedicated time and effort to qualifying this referendum should hold their heads high. The children in California schools and their parents owe a debt of gratitude to each of you for attempting such a huge task.

We hope that you will be there for the next battle.

While we did not overturn this very bad law, we built a small army of dedicated volunteers that collected an incredible amount of signatures. There will be a next battle. Despite the overuse of the term "tolerance," there is little tolerance for those who do not endorse the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender lifestyles. And there will be more laws passed that advocate for these and attempt to silence any opposition.

What tripe. They pass themselves off as so noble. Of course they omit the depths they stooped to in trying to get signatures for the petition such as telling basic lies about what the petition was about and then trying to push the following mess in area churches:

I didn't post this yesterday in spite of the fact that several pro-gay blogs did simply because I wanted concrete confirmation. Having dealt with religious right tactics, I was very wary of a Trojan Horse tactic. But there is no need to be wary any more.

These folks and all of their lies about "indoctrinating children" lost and lost hard. And that includes the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage.

Let this be a lesson to us all. There are times when all of the money, influence, and connections in the world can't make lies true. And if those of us who are fighting these lies hold fast to our principles and never stop fighting, we win.

For true information about the Fair Education Act, go here.

'Chaplains have no problem with Pentagon's same-sex marriage rules' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Jeffress Denounces Gays As Promiscuous, Manipulative And Abnormal - Rick Perry - that's YOUR pastor. And by the way, HUGE PROPS to Right Wing Watch for refuting this man's lies.

Wanda Sykes Says Motherhood Encouraged Her To Come Out - I love me some Wanda Sykes.

Tracy Morgan Offers Non-Apology on Letterman for Homophobic Remarks - Just sad. I blue humor but Morgan's routine was simply not funny.

Chaplains: Pentagon’s Same-Sex Marriage Rules Don’t Bother Us - Something you won't hear from the religious right when they attack DADT.

Southern Poverty Law Center and Truth Wins Out Launch Campaign Targeting Destructive Conversion Therapy - Good for them!

Tell The Media To Stop Using Tony Perkins And Hate Group Spokespeople As Guest Commentators - Not censorship. Simply basic decency. Would you agree with David Duke being called upon to give commentary on racial issues?

Why the hell is Tony Perkins being given media legitimacy?

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council seems to be given some degree of legitimacy in regards to the 2012 elections:

On October 10, CNN host Carol Costello invited Tony Perkins – president of the Southern Poverty Law Center-designated anti-gay hate group the Family Research Council (FRC) – to discuss the impact of his group’s recent Values Voter Summit.

And apparently CNN is one of many news media outlets giving Perkins some sort of legitimacy:

In the past few months – and aside from publishing an op-ed in The Washington Times – Perkins has been invited to appear on Fox News, Fox Business Network, MSNBC, and CNN to discuss the GOP primary and the 2012 election.

These appearances have typically followed the same pattern:

• The host fails to acknowledge Perkins as the leader of an anti-gay hate group
• Perkins is allowed to speak generally about what social conservatives want from a candidate
• Perkins attempts to link same-sex marriage to the bad economy
• The host asks Perkins which candidate his group will endorse
• Perkins pitches his Values Voter Summit (three times in less than ten minutes during a recent Hannity segment)

Giving Perkins any type of media legitimacy is wrong, period.

And the reason why is simple.

The issue is not about censorship.

It's about consistency.

It's about basic decency.

And mostly it's about integrity.

Would David Duke be allowed to espouse about 2012 election  as an "expert" by the media even though they know his history of passing along venomously inaccurate information about African-Americans and Jewish people?

Or how about someone equally Anti-Semitic or racist?

Of course not.

When the Rev. Robert Jeffress recently called Mitt Romney's religion a "cult," no one looked the other way. And no one invited him on their news program as an "election authority."

But somehow simply because Tony Perkins wraps his homophobia, his organization's history of intentionally passing along inaccurate information about gays behind the veneer of Christian values, those of us who are the victims of his slander are supposed to look the other way while the media gives him the red carpet treatment?

Allow me to be a little more succinct.

David Duke believes that African-Americans are inferior to whites. He believes that Jewish people are taking over (or are have taken over) the government.

Tony Perkins runs an organization featuring spokespeople who say they want gays deported out of the United States.

Tony Perkins runs an organization who routinely passes along junk science which accuses gay men of molesting children at a high rate.

Tony Perkins runs an organization which passes along  information by a discredited researcher who claims, amongst other things, that gay men stuff gerbils up their rectums.

Tony Perkins runs an organization which spreads the inaccurate belief that gays have short lifespans over 10 years after this belief was proven to be false.

What's the difference between Perkins and Duke? I'm sure that if you give him time, Duke could pull out a Bible and point to verses which justify his beliefs just as quickly as Perkins.

What really grinds me is how the issue seems to always be cast as a competition between those with "personally held religious beliefs against homosexuality" and the gay community itself.

This issue is not about "personally religious beliefs about homosexuality" because when people like Perkins pass along this bad information, they prove that they can't even abide by the religion they are supposed to profess faith in.

Or did that commandment about bearing false witness get thrown out?

I am intensely disturbed by this con game that the gay community has to deal with on a daily basis; that somehow people can say and claim some of the most nastiest, totally inaccurate (easily provably inaccurate at that) things about us  and get away with it if they can manipulate a talking point that these things are said in love and because of "deeply held religious beliefs."

And what's more, these folks are not called out, but rather patted on the back by those whose very livelihood are supposed to be invested in seeking the truth.
 
There is absolutely no reason, no justifiable explanation for any legitimate news network to make a charlatan who trades in character assassinations of innocent groups of people via the spreading of junk science (even if it is done in the name of God) as a legitimate source of information.

Edward R. Murrow has to be spinning in his grave. What's more, I cringe to think what would happen if Joseph McCarthy were alive today.

He would probably be given his own show.


Related post:

16 reasons why the Family Research Council is a hate group

Family Research Council tries to cast Rick Santorum's idiocy as an attribute

This is one of those I just can't resist posts. The following came from a Family Research Council email:

 . . . the media seems intent on making Sen. Rick Santorum the punching bag for being the most outspoken about keeping the military focused on its mission to fight and win wars. But if Chris Wallace and others honestly think they can get the Senator to blink on his beliefs, then they don't know Rick Santorum. His position, which mirrors that of our military service chiefs, is that "The Army is not a sociological laboratory. Experimenting with Army policy, especially in a time of war, would pose a danger to efficiency, discipline, and morale, and would result in ultimate defeat." In a heated exchange with Wallace, who tried to catch Rick with some "gotcha" questioning, Santorum didn't back down. "...I know the whole gay community is trying to make this the new civil rights act. It's not... You are black by the color of your skin. You are not homosexual by... the color of your skin... It is behavioral." Wallace tried to turn the tables by suggesting that Sen. Santorum wa s questioning the homosexual soldiers' service. "They're all volunteers," Wallace said, "defending our... country." "That's exactly the point, Chris," Santorum fired back. "They are all volunteers, and they don't have to join in a place where they don't feel comfortable serving with people because of that issue." 

Now I've heard of attempting to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but what FRC attempts to do here is pitiful.  For the record, the organization is talking about the recent disastrous appearance Santorum made on Fox News Sunday where host Chris Wallace not only grilled him (yeah I can't believe journalistic integrity was in Wallace either), but actually demonstrated the ignorance that some folks have concerning gays serving openly in the military is comparable to the ignorance that some had concerning Truman's desegregation of the Armed Forces.

Conveniently, FRC talks about Santorum's answer to Wallace's grilling in order to make it seem that he was standing firm. However the entire exchange demonstrates that Wallace left Santorum with egg on his face:

Wallace then read a quote that seemingly was in line with everything Santorum had been arguing previously.

“The army is not a sociological laboratory. Experimenting with policy, especially in a time of war, would pose a danger to efficiency, discipline and morale and would result in ultimate defeat.”

Wallace attributed the quote to a World War II general arguing against racial integration of the military. Santorum suggested there is a big difference between race and sexuality, because one involves “activities” of a different nature as opposed to just being different. Wallace went down the line of Santorum’s talking points and said the general’s comments over a half-century ago were exactly in line with them. Santorum insisted on a clear distinction between the social climate then and now, and claimed that unlike race, sexuality is a choice.

And of course FRC omitted this interesting eyebrow-raising exchange from the interview:

"The problem is that sexual activity with people who you are in close quarters with who happen to be of the same sex is different than being open about your sexuality," Santorum said on "Fox News Sunday."

Fox host Chris Wallace pushed back, asking Santorum if he was suggesting gay soldiers would "go after" their colleagues.

"They're in close quarters, they live with people, they obviously shower with people," Santorum said, saying the presence of gay soldiers could have an adverse "effect on retention and recruitment."

All in all, the interview exposed Santorum to be a nut who justifies homophobia with nonsense and obviously worries about showering with gays too much. That comment he made about heterosexual soldiers not being comfortable around gay soldiers is inaccurate. According to Think Progress:

The extensive Pentagon study found that servicemembers don’t care about serving next to gay soldiers, so unit cohesion would not be impacted.

Santorum is hardly an upstanding hero for morality in my book. But of course I'm not wearing Family Research Council-colored glasses.

Letting the religious right speak for itself does wonders for the gay community

It always amazes me how some members of the religious right will pretend to push nobility and rationality, but then will drop their masks when they think no one is looking.

From Think Progress:

Recently, two contributors to the Friendly Atheist blog attended a Marriage Symposium organized by the Illinois Family Institute (an American Family Association affiliate) and reported back what they heard. The panel included Austin Nimocks from the Alliance Defense Fund and Linda Jernigan, a self-identified ex-gay. Here are some insights into the thinking and strategies of those opposed to LGBT equality:

• Anti-bullying programs are meant to silence anti-gay beliefs.

• Do not use the term “sexual orientation” because it implies “biological determinism.”

• Do not use the term “gay” because it normalizes and empowers people who are gay.

• Same-sex couples are “sterile” by design and cannot provide for children what an opposite-sex couple can.

• Marriage is a “pre-political” institution, and therefore not a civil right.

• Anti-gay advocates should “reach out and resist,” framing resistance to equality efforts as compassion for those who are gay.

• People in Sudan and Malaysia who have sex with farm animals demonstrate how marriage can deteriorate.

• “The end goal of gay activism is an assault on gender” — in other words, at the heart of sexual orientation discrimination is gender discrimination and a desire to maintain gender norms.

• Same-sex couples are “greedy” for trying to deprive a child of a mother or a father, and they will negatively impact how children are gendered.

Think Progress suggests that you check out the full report and I also suggest the same. There are two things worth knowing though.

Austin Nimocks was the person who helped anti-gay legislators in NC craft that awful amendment which the state will be voting on next year.

The Illinois Family Council was called out last year by the Southern Poverty Law Center for its homophobia:

Over the years, the group also has occasionally embraced the groundless propaganda of Paul Cameron (see Family Research Institute, above). Until 2009, it carried an article on Cameron — “New Study Shows that Homosexuals Live 20 Fewer Years” — preceded by a full-throated endorsement LaBarbera. “Paul Cameron’s work has been targeted for ridicule by homosexual activists, and he’s been demonized by the left,” LaBarbera wrote in his introduction, “but that should not discount his findings.” IFI also posted a video attacking school anti-bullying programs that claimed, based on Cameron, that gay men’s median age of death is 42. Both were removed in response to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s 2009 listing of IFI as a hate group, which was largely based on its use of Cameron.

 . . .In 2009, Higgins compared homosexuality to Nazism, likening the German Evangelical Church’s weak response to fascism to the “American church’s failure to respond appropriately to the spread of radical, heretical, destructive views of homosexuality.” Elsewhere, Higgins has pined for the days when gays were in the closet. “There was something profoundly good for society about the prior stigmatization of homosexual practice… . [W]hen homosexuals were ‘in the closet,’ (along with fornicators, polyamorists, cross-dressers, and ‘transexuals’), they weren’t acquiring and raising children.” She’s also said that McDonald’s, because it ran a gay-friendly TV ad, is “hell bent on using its resources to promote subversive moral, social, and political views about homosexuality to our children.”

Former 'ex-gay' renounces lies and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Former Ex-Gay Head Now Says Change In Orientation Is Impossible And Change In Relationships Are Unnecessary - Well I could have him that.

Romney: ‘I’m Very Reluctant To Borrow Lots More Money’ To Fund Global AIDS Prevention Programs - Because apparently true leaders don't do what they can to stop a global epidemic. Don't worry. He will change his position in probably the next few days.

Liberty Counsel attorney calls gay adoption 'unconscionable'; Countless able scions 'un' his con - Matt Barber is picking on same-sex households again. 

NYC Drag Ball Project in Development at Showtime - I am DEFINITELY all for this. It's about time that this community get some spotlight rather than that A-List mess on LOGO.

Barton, Kern Stoke Fears That Gays And Lesbians Threaten Lives Of Critics - That's right. Sally Kern felt so threatened that she has trolled from religious right site to religious right site to whine about it and about her silly book.

Eddie Long wants his money back

Forget The Young and the Restless because this Eddie Long scandal is becoming more twisted than any soap opera.

The latest news? Long wants to recoup the settlement money he gave three of the five men accusing him of sexual coercion. According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Attorneys representing Eddie Long's church have informed three of the five young men who accused the pastor of sexual coercion that they intend to recover nearly $1 million from their financial settlement, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has learned.

The letter, sent this week by the Atlanta law firm Drew Eckl & Farnham, alleges that Jamal Parris, Spencer LeGrande and Centino Kemp violated terms of a confidentiality agreement outlined in the settlement with Long and New Birth Missionary Baptist Church. The firm is seeking at least $900,000 already paid the three accusers, according to people involved in the settlement but not authorized to speak publicly. That figure is a portion of the total settlement with the three men.

Financial terms of that settlement have not been disclosed but, based on the letter and the fact each of the young men were paid equitably, the total comes to at least $1.5 million.

The letter outlines the plaintiffs' "demand for arbitration" though no legal documents have yet been filed.

The letter could simply be a threat, said Atlanta litigator Hayden Pace.

"No one's going to turn over the money just simply because you've asked for it," Pace said. "You're going to have to earn it back by establishing your right to it in the courts."

Parris and LeGrande, who broke their silence in an interview with the AJC last month, said at the time they were aware of the risk.

“I’m going to tell the world – money does not buy happiness,” LeGrande said in August. “When you sleep at night, the problems are still there. The money stuff, who cares about the number.”

“I feel like burning [the money],” he said.

Oh brother. Something tells me that we have only just begun with this in spite of all that's happened over the past year.

Related posts: 

Eddie Long's accusers speak out even after settlement

Anti-gay pastor Eddie Long's fifth accuser in lawsuit

Eddie Long scandal underscores failure of the black church

Eddie Long scandal - Chronology of what has happened and where we are now  
 

NOM's 'defense alliance' backfiring

The National Organization for Marriage recently began what it calls the Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance (Marriage ADA), which is a campaign to supposedly spotlight incidents of "Christians" being "intimidated" or  "persecuted" for standing up for the so-called traditional view of marriage (i.e. one man + one woman).

Marriage ADA features video testimonies of supposed "victims" of said intimidation.

But Equality Matters has raised a very interesting question which echoes something which has been trolling about in my mind the day the second "victim" - Jerry Buell - came out.

Is this thing backfiring on NOM?

Equality Matters took a clear look at the five examples NOM has featured demonstrating so-called "gay intimidation" and found them to be proving the opposite - i.e. these folks are not being victimized and NOM is demanding special privileges for those stand against marriage equality, even to the point of not being accurate about their stories:

Since its inception, Marriage ADA has posted five such videos. And so far, not a single one has actually demonstrated someone having their rights or dignity denied. 

The first video posted tells the story of Frank Turek, a corporate consultant who claims to have been fired from Cisco Systems “for being somebody who has a traditional marriage viewpoint.”  

In reality, Turek is far more than your average “traditional marriage” supporter. As Right Wing Watch has documented, Turek has a history of making outrageous anti-gay comments, including asserting that gay rights advocates and Islamic extremists are “in concert together” because they both hate Western civilization. He’s also compared homosexuality to alcoholism and pedophilia, calling it a “road to destruction.” It’s Turek’s views on gay people, not gay marriage, that got him in trouble. His contract with Cisco – and later with Bank of America – was terminated after employees complained about anti-gay remarks Turek was on the record as having made.

In other words, the Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance’s first horror story was neither about marriage nor defamation. 

The second story promoted by Marriage ADA was that of Jerry Buell, a Florida high school public school teacher who was temporarily suspended from his position after posting anti-gay comments to his Facebook account:

On July 25, Buell posted on his Facebook page, "I'm watching the news, eating dinner, when the story about New York okaying same sex unions came on and I almost threw up."

"If they want to call it a union, go ahead. But don't insult a man and woman's marriage by throwing it in the same cesspool as same-sex whatever! God will not be mocked. When did this sin become acceptable???," Buell added.

Buell was suspended while school officials investigated to determine if Buell had violated the school’s ethics code or social media guidelines. Ironically, even organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union, which strongly opposed Buell’s comments, still came to his defense. Buell admits as much in NOM’s video:

What I like about it is the people who were opposed to what I said and said “I totally disagree with your stand, but doggone it I’ll stand next to you because you had the right to say it.”

Within days, Buell was allowed to return to the classroom. No further disciplinary action was taken.

NOM’s final three videos tell the stories of Rose Marie Belforti, Ruth Sheldon, and Laura Fotusky – three New York clerks who have either resigned or may be asked to resign from their positions due to their unwillingness to issue same-sex marriage licenses. Although Laura claims to have received “negative comments” after filing her resignation, none of the three women reported facing “threats to their person, property, or livelihood,” as NOM claims at the end of each video. They voluntarily resigned from their jobs after recognizing that upholding the laws of the state of New York would require them to violate their personal beliefs about marriage. 

So let’s recap NOM’s alleged victims of “defamation”:

• a man whose contract was terminated after employees complained about his anti-gay history
• a man whose temporary suspension ended after he was supported by a pro-gay group
• several woman who decided to resign once they realized their jobs as government employees would require them to violate their religious beliefs

None of NOM’s videos demonstrate how opponents of marriage equality are having their “rights and dignity” denied. None of NOM’s videos are even examples of “defamation.”  If you look past NOM’s ominous background music, these videos really just tell the story of how the LGBT community and opponents of same-sex marriage are learning to find an acceptable middle ground, even as gays and lesbians begin to experience greater acceptance and equality in the law.

I am making a wild guess here but I think I know who NOM's sixth "victim" will be.

If it's who I think it is, then NOM will be digging itself deeper in a hole.

And I just happen to have a heavy shovel and a sturdy back.

'Final score: Bryan Fischer - 1, Mitt Romney - 0' and other Monday midday news briefs

Mitt Romney Mildly Scolds Bryan Fischer - Bryan Fischer attacks Mitt Romney's religion and Romney answers back with this? What a wimp!

Fischer Says Romney "Insulted" Values Voters Crowd - Meanwhile, Fischer gives Romney a swift kick in the "you know what."

To those making the Romney fracas all about Mormonism - And here to provide the post-game wrap up - Jeremy Hooper.

Values Voter Bigotry Fest Erupts In War of Words Over Romney's Faith - Poor Romney. He is like a rabbit trying to appeal to a bunch of hungry crocodiles.

Ugandan Party: Coincidence or Conspiracy? - Officials from a gay-bashing country (Kill the Gays bill)attending an American conference put on by gay-bashing American groups. Coincidence my tuckus.

One Values Voter poll, two #FAILs - The gay community makes a quiet, yet effective strike at the Values Voters summit.

SPLC's report on anti-gay hate groups needs wider audience. Provide it.

Tony Perkins

The Southern Poverty Law Center has come out with a stunning report on the anti-gay stances of the Family Research Council and the American Family Assocation. Part of it reads as follows:

 The Family Research Council -

The Family Research Council (FRC) bills itself as “the leading voice for the family in our nation’s halls of power,” but its real specialty is defaming gays and lesbians. The FRC often makes false claims about the LGBT community based on discredited research and junk science. The intention is to denigrate LGBT people in its battles against same-sex marriage, hate crimes laws, anti-bullying programs and the repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

To make the case that the LGBT community is a threat to American society, FRC employs a number of “policy experts” whose “research” has allowed FRC to be extremely active politically in shaping public debate. Its research fellows and leaders often testify before Congress and appear in the mainstream media. It also works at the grassroots level, conducting outreach to pastors in an effort to “transform the culture.”

In Its Own Words
“Gaining access to children has been a long-term goal of the homosexual movement.”
— Robert Knight, FRC director of cultural studies, and Frank York, 1999

“[Homosexuality] … embodies a deep-seated hatred against true religion.”
— Steven Schwalm, FRC senior writer and analyst, in “Desecrating Corpus Christi,” 1999

“One of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets of a new sexual order.’”
--1999 FRC pamphlet, Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex with Boys.

“[T]he evidence indicates that disproportionate numbers of gay men seek adolescent males or boys as sexual partners.”
— Timothy Dailey, senior research fellow, “Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse,” 2002

“While activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two. … It is a homosexual problem.”
— FRC President Tony Perkins, FRC website, 2010

Bryan Fischer

The American Family Association -

Initially founded as the National Federation for Decency, the American Family Association (AFA) originally focused on what it considered indecent television programming and pornography. The AFA says it promotes "traditional moral values" in media. A large part of that work involves "combating the homosexual agenda" through various means, including publicizing companies that have pro-gay policies and organizing boycotts against them. The AFA has a variety of outlets to disseminate its message, including American Family Radio Network, its online One News Now and the monthly AFA Journal. In early 2011, the AFA claimed more than 2 million online supporters and 180,000 subscribers to its Journal.

In Its Own Words
"[T]he homosexual lifestyle is characterized by anonymous sexual encounters and celebration of sexual obsession and perversion unparalleled in any other social group."
– Richard Howe, "Homosexuality in America," AFA publication, 1994

"As with smoking, homosexual behavior's ‘second hand' effects threaten public health… .Thus, individuals who choose to engage in homosexual behavior threaten not only their own lives, but the lives of the general population."
– Gary Glenn, president of Michigan chapter of AFA, 2001

"Homosexuality is not only harmful to homosexuals themselves, but also to children and to society."
– Stephen Bennett, AFA writer, 2004

"If President Obama, Congressional Democrats, and homosexual activists get their wish, your son or daughter may be forced to share military showers and barracks with active and open homosexuals who may very well view them with sexual interest."
– AFA press release, February 2010

"The homosexual movement is a progressive outgrowth of the sexual revolution of the past 40 years and will lead to the normalization of even more deviant behavior."
– Don Wildmon, AFA website, 1999 (still posted as of 2011).

"Homosexuality gave us Adolph Hitler, and homosexuals in the military gave us the Brown Shirts, the Nazi war machine and six million dead Jews."
– Bryan Fischer, AFA director of issue analysis for government and public policy, 2010

It would be in the gay community's best interest if more folks read this report and referred it to their friends and neighbors.

In a weekend in which we saw Republican presidential candidates flock to these two groups like they pushing manna and a leader of one of these groups (Tony Perkins of FRC) presented as a legitimate election analyst,  this report needs to be pushed hard.

And we need to be the ones who push it. It's simply not enough to say that SPLC has named these organizations as hate groups. We need to provide a copy of this report to everyone we can.

A copy of the full SPLC report is here (PDF).

Hat tip to LGBTQ Nation.

Phony Christian event turns into free range gay bashing and hypocrisy

Thanks to this weekend's "Values Voters" Summit, I am learning that I am not an ordinary gay American.

Apparently I am Darth Vader.

So far the speakers of the supposed Christian rally have said that gays are evil. We are out to destroy America. We are threats to public health.

And we are very, very very unhappy.

Don't worry. By next week they will attempt to temper their rhetoric by lying about someone who was supposedly discriminated against for furthering the belief that gays are evil, out to destroy America, and are public health threats.

Only these charlatans will claim that said fake martyr is being "persecuted" for expressing his/her Christian faith.

This conference is  nothing unusual for the gay community. We have come to expect the rhetoric from these folks so at this point, I find the homophobia slightly annoying.

But it's not just the gay bashing that I find annoying, but the constant strain of doomsayer rhetoric:

"America is at it's decline." "We are heading towards the abyss." "God is going to turn away from us."

Isn't that what these losers said last year and the year before that and the year before that?

At what point do we get the simple fact that these folks are not interested in the salvation or preservation of America, but rather the salvation of their status and the preservation of their bank accounts?

They don't offers solutions and they don't give hope.

These so-called Christians push lies. They peddle in fear and deceptive talking points all done under the shadow of a supposedly approving deity. Never mind that junk about benevolence and integrity. The God these "Values Voters" serve is a cross between J. R. Ewing from Dallas and Alexis Carrington Colby from Dynasty. Power and the spreading of lies to increase that power rules the day.

They seem to think that Christianity is a capitalist design and that the chapters in the Bible where Jesus told the rich man to sell all of his possessions and follow Him and where Jesus drove the moneylenders out of the Temple were later added via a liberal conspiracy.

In the world of these "Values Voters," Jesus actually said "pick up your cross and follow me and I will give you a nice car, a nice house 2.5 kids and a Republican in the White House every four years." And somehow the empty jargonistic theory of  "American exceptionalism" - a bland version of the Master Race theory but still nonetheless nauseating in its audacity - can be reconciled with Jesus's decree to show love and humility. Or even worse, rationalized so much that guillible folks will think that the empty jargonistic theory of "American exceptionalism" is exactly what Jesus was talking about when he said show love and humility.

Seems to me that if God hasn't let loose with a huge thunderbolt on America for allowing these characters to soil His good name, then maybe this country has nothing to worry about when it comes to His judgement.

But that's not necessarily a good thing. I have a feeling that we will be hearing the same messages of doom from these cast of characters next year which would prove that maybe God has a strange sense of humor.