Confirmed: FRC's Peter Sprigg supports 'criminal sanctions' against the lgbt community

On today's episode of Hardball, Family Research Council spokesperson and board member Peter Sprigg said that he believes that Lawrence vs. Texas (the Supreme Court decision that struck down the sodomy laws) was "wrongly decided" and that "gay behavior" should be criminalized.

His comments were in the middle of a debate with Servicemembers Legal Defense Network's Aubrey Sarvis.

Freudian slips about the lgbt community are nothing new to Sprigg. Two years ago, he said that he would prefer that the United States "export" gays and lesbians.

The entire video is below and Sprigg's comments about "criminalizing gay behavior" are at the end (the exchange begins at 7:40), but I would suggest that you watch the entire thing. Sarvis totally destroys him.

And it proves the point that in a head-to-head debate with facts on hand, religious right groups can't get away with their nonsense.



Transcript (courtesy of Firedoglake.com):

MATTHEWS: What should a young woman or man, 22 years old, out of college, officer material, they want to serve their country. But they’re gay. What should they do? They want to serve their country?

SPRIGG: Well, they should serve it in some civilian capacity, and not join the military.

MATTHEWS: Why not?

SPRIGG: Because the presence of homosexuals in the military is incompatible with good order, morale, discipline and unit cohesion. That’s exactly what Congress found in 1993 and that’s what the law states!

[snip]

SPRIGG: Don’t ask don’t tell is the Clinton compromise policy which is actually incompatible with the law that was passed by Congress. There’s almost universal misunderstanding about that. I’d like to see us do away with this don’t ask don’t tell, and simply enforce the law that was passed by Congress.

[snip]

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you Peter, do you think people choose to be gay?

SPRIGG: Uh, people do not choose to have same-sex attractions, but they do choose to have homosexual conduct [...]

MATTHEWS: Do you think we should outlaw gay behavior?

SPRIGG: Well, I think certainly-

MATTHEWS: I’m just asking you, should we outlaw gay behavior?

SPRIGG: I think that the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned the sodomy laws in this country, was wrongly decided. I think there would be a place for criminal sanctions against homosexual behavior.

MATTHEWS: So we should outlaw gay behavior.


SPRIGG: Yes.

And lest we forget, the rest of Sprigg's comments are extremely offensive. His implication that gays and lesbians shouldn't openly serve in the military because we may subject heterosexuals to sexual harassment is akin to saying that integration should not exist because black men will force themselves on white women.

It's insane and if FRC had any personal integrity, it would make a statement distancing itself from Sprigg's statements. In light of all the attention about the Ugandan anti-gay bill, his comments about "criminalizing gay behavior" are just ugly. Of course even if there were no Ugandan anti-gay bill, Sprigg's comments should still be viewed as uncalled for.

But I doubt that FRC will say or do anything distancing itself from Sprigg. His comments are totally on point with religious right dogma, not only about gays in the military but also other facets of our lives.

Religious right groups don't see us as people and they have been exploiting the fears and ignorance of people of faith in order to get others to share their view of the lgbt community.

The only reason why Sprigg got caught today is because he couldn't muster up enough shiftiness.

We need to spread this clip and remind everyone what Sprigg said. Whether he realizes it or not, he is the true face of religious right groups.

Behind their phony veneer of "traditional morality" and "loving the sinner but hating the scene" is a corrupt working of lies, distortions and yes, hate.

Does FRC's Peter Sprigg support 'criminal sanctions' against the lgbt community?

 UPDATE - It's been confirmed.

Did Peter Sprigg, one of the spokespeople of the Family Research Council make a huge verbal boo-boo on a today's episode of Hardball with Chris Matthews.

Reports are coming in that he actually admitted that he supports "criminal sanctions" against the lgbt community.

If this story is true, it's not the first time Sprigg has made a "Freudian slip" in regards to his feelings about the lgbt community.

Two years ago, he said that he would prefer that the United States "export" gays and lesbians:



I am waiting on video confirmation which will hopefully come later tonight. Stay tuned.

Lee Daniels - first gay black man to receive Best Director Oscar nomination and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Lee Daniels ‘Stoked’ Over Oscar Love - Congratulations to Lee Daniels, the first gay black man to receive an Oscar for Best Director.  Take that,  DONNIE MCCLURKIN!! Editor's note - while the preceeding article does not talk about Daniels's orientation, this one does.

Live: 'Don't ask', you shall receive anyway (12PM EST) - For those who want to see the hearing.

A harassment-free school opens in L.A. - Regardless of what they say, schools like this are needed.

This Vanderbilt Muslim Chaplain Says He Supports Executing Gays. Why Is the University Keeping Him? - Talk about your hot messes.

Religious Right Sues Over Hate Crimes Law - Unbelievable. Or maybe not. Like the post says, what took the right so long. LOL

Maggie Gallagher commits 'sin of omission' to make case against marriage equality - You saw this piece yesterday but check out the Huffington Post version and also pay attention to the comments section. There is a young man who claims to be a gay man of color and (conveniently enough), he is trying to hijack the conversation and talk about "racism  in the lgbt community.)

Peter LaBarbera mad at Fox News over gays in the military

Will wonders ever cease?

Our favorite anti-lgbt spokesperson, Porno Petey (I mean Peter LaBarbera) is mad at Fox News over a recent episode of the O'Reilly Factor where guests said that it's time to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell and allow gays to serve openly in the military:

. . . on Thursday, January 28th, FOX business anchor Cheryl Casone (who stepped in for Carlson) and FOX News analyst Margaret Hoover both agreed America was ready to have homosexuals openly serve in defense of our nation [Transcript available HERE].  It was a shocker for me to hear this on FOX News–the “fair and balanced” network.  Even O’Reilly fed into the liberal line which suggested it was time for this social experiment to take place.  It has become all too evident the network seems to be leaning to the left, in order to appease and attract more liberal viewers.  FOX would not want to offend this new demographic which has helped the FOX News Channel’s ratings go through the roof.


Mr. O’Reilly, the purpose of the United States Armed Forces is to defend America.  It is not a place for social experiments or political correctness.  Indeed, the  Constitution does not apply in many cases to the U.S. military and FOX News should not be advocating Barack Obama’s far-left policies.

I don't know what's funnier - the claim that Fox News is trying to "attract liberal viewers," (I especially love how  the network "attracts liberals" with its continued ugly attacks on our president.) or the fact that LaBarbera calls allowing gays to serve in the military a "social experiment."

LaBarbera's pathetic screed is laughable, but that phrase "social experiment" stays with me because I've heard it used before -  it's when folks like LaBarbera are talking about same-sex couples raising children.

In both cases (gays serving in the military, same-sex couples raising children), the religious right willfully ignores the fact that both concepts have existed for a long time. But yet these so-called defenders of morality feel the need to not only speak against them (and create ridiculous and distorted reasonings as to their position) but also deny lgbts our basic humanity.

To them, when gays and lesbians want to openly defend our country, we are doing it for selfish reasons and to allow us to do it is a "social experiment."

When gays and lesbians want to adhere to the natural urge to have, raise, and nurture the next generation, to allow us to do so is a "social experiment."

And why do the religious right believe this? Because to them, lgbts aren't real people; only cogs in some ignorant fantasy they have about "values" and "traditional morality."