Report - Media helping to promote anti-gay hate group

Last year, the Southern Poverty Law Center designated the Family Research Council as an official anti-gay hate because of the group's deliberate use of lies and junk science to spread false information about the lgbtq community.

However, according to a new report by Equality Matters, the mainstream media is not only ignoring this but seems going out of its way to give FRC and its spokespeople credibility:

In November of 2010, the Southern Poverty Law Center listed the Family Research Council as an anti-gay hate group due to its “propagation of known falsehoods” about the LGBT community. Since being listed, however, FRC spokespersons have been invited 52 times to discuss issues ranging from the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” to the 2012 presidential campaign. Despite FRC’s long history of producing anti-gay propaganda, every major news network has invited the group on national television while failing to acknowledge its hate group designation.

Analysis: News Networks Regularly Host Family Research Council Spokespersons  

FRC Listed As An Anti-Gay Hate Group In November 2010. In November 2010, the Family Research Council (FRC) was added to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) list of anti-gay hate groups due to its “propagation of known falsehoods” about gays and lesbians. [SPLC, November 2010]

FRC Spokespersons Made 52 Television Appearances Since Being Labeled A Hate Group. According to an Equality Matters analysis*, FRC spokespersons – including Tony Perkins, Peter Sprigg, and Ken Blackwell – have been invited to appear on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News a total of 54 times in the twelve months since Perkins first appeared on MSNBC to discuss being labeled as a hate group. 24 of those appearances were on Fox News, 19 were on MSNBC, and 11 were on CNN.

And Equality Matters' report notes the exact reasons why FRC should be considered as a hate group:

SPLC: FRC’s “Specialty Is Defaming Gays And Lesbians.” From an October 7 SPLC report:

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 and anti-bullying programs. To make the case that the LGBT community is a threat to American society, the FRC employs a number of “policy experts” whose “research” has allowed the FRC to be extremely active politically in shaping public debate. [...]

The FRC also strongly promotes the “ex-gay” movement as a way to combat LGBT civil rights measures, though professional organizations have repeatedly called so-called “reparative therapy” (which seeks to turn gays and lesbians into heterosexuals) into question and issued statements that don’t support it. [...]

Part of the FRC’s recent strategy is to pound home the false claim that gays and lesbians are more likely to sexually abuse children. This is false. The American Psychological Association, among others, has concluded that “homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.” That doesn’t matter to the FRC, though. [SPLC Report, “The Anti-Gay Lobby,” 10/7/11, via LGBTQNation, emphasis added]

'NOM's financial records raising questions' and other Monday midday news briefs

NOM’s 2010 financial records raise questions - Read the article in its entirety. It's a major one, especially this part:

Under IRS rules regarding nonprofit entities with 501©3 and ©4 status, all donations above $5,000 must be disclosed. Of the 22 contributions NOM’s (c )4 was obligated to list, all but five were greater than $5,000.

The top five contributions to the National Organization for Marriage, Inc.:

$3,416,000
$2,940,000
$750,000
$600,000
$400,000

TWO Announces Intent to Sue PFOX As Early as This Week - Uh oh. This ex-gay group may get sued. Go get 'em Truth Wins Out!

AFA's Buster Wilson Calls on MSNBC to "Clean the Stable" of Maddow & O'Donnell - Now we know why Bryan Fischer gets away with so much nonsense.

Iowans Confront Perry At Campaign Event: ‘Why Do You Hate Gay People,’ ‘Go Back To Texas’- Ouch.

Bill Johnson, Former Alabama Governor Candidate, Caught In Lesbian Sperm Donation Scandal - Simply hypocritical.

LGBTQ youth caught in the crossfire of phony 'religious liberty'

As more information is coming out about the former Macy's employee who was fired for harassing a transgender customer, the story continues to keep getting disturbing.

Natalie Johnson - with the help of the religious right group, the Liberty Counsel - is suing Macy's claiming that the store violated her religious beliefs because of its policy of allowing transgender customers to use the women's changing room. Johnson is claiming that her religious beliefs prevents her from allowing transgender customers to use the women's changing room.

Here are some new details to the story, courtesy of Johnson (which is kind of stupid because it wrecks her entire case):

She approached the customer after she was leaving the changing room and insulted her, calling her a man.

The next day when informed of Macy's policy of allowing individuals of going into whichever changing room they wanted, she said that she refused to comply with the policy. That was why she was fired.

However, to me, the following is the most disturbing detail of them all:

The transgender customer was a teenager.

All of the negative lgbtq messages out there for our children to see is bad enough. But this situation, to me, is the worse. To have someone come up to you in a public setting and accost you in regards to who they assume you are had to be intimidating.

Luckily the young lady stood up for herself and had friends with her.

But this is just another case of how the phony cry of  "religious liberty"  has the potential to harm our children.

There are two cases on appeal in the courts of two women demanding to be let back into their graduate program at their prospective colleges. Both women, Julea Ward and Jennifer Keeton, are claiming that they were unfairly dismissed because their "religious beliefs" about homosexuality. In reality, neither woman wanted to counsel gays.

And if that's not bad enough, both women expressed a desire to be school guidance counselors.

Naturally their cases have been taken by the Alliance Defense Fund, another religious right group.

Certainly there is no deliberate attempt to potentially undermine the well-being of lgbtq youth by these folks and the groups taking their cases.

But it doesn't erase the fact that if the courts fall for their phony talk of "religious liberty," the undermining of lgbtq youth is a strong possibility.

Email Macy's and send the company your support for standing up for our rights and dignity. And most of all, tell Macy's to not back down.

Full-page ad calls out anti-gay 'religious liberty' claim

The following full page ad (click on image to enlarge) ran today in the Ithaca Journal courtesy of the group Truth Wins Out. It calls out the religious right in regards to their false claim of "religious liberty."

Maggie Gallagher, NOM should simply stop being such liars

Today's Know Your LGBT History has been pre-empted because apparently Maggie Gallagher and the National Organization for Marriage think that gay people are stupid.

Yesterday I posted that Equality Matters caught the National Organization for Marriage putting a post on its blog which used the work of the discredited researcher Paul "gays stuff gerbils up their rectums" Cameron.

Equality Matters also pointed out that this sort of thing is the standard for NOM. On its blog and on the blog of its affiliated group - The Ruth Institute, NOM posts links to pieces either showcasing anti-gay propaganda or junk science designed to demonize the gay community, especially in terms of our interaction with children.

Apparently attention to this fact must have really bugged NOM because today, former chairwoman Maggie Gallagher posted a piece on the group's blog which basically said that just because NOM puts something on its blog doesn't mean that its endorsing the work:

Some in the gay blogosphere are trying to assert that NOM--or me--endorses the view of every blogger/article NOM links to, by the act of linking to it.

This would lead to the absurd conclusion that NOM endorses the editorial positions of the New York Times, because NOM links to them--or The Advocate for that matter, as we often link to stories in the gay press.

If you want to know what NOM's message is, there are abundant videos and press stories (including our own press releases) with me, or Brian Brown, or other NOM personnel actually speaking. Fair enough to criticize us for what we actually believe and say.

The standard "a link constitutes an endorsement" would cut off the free flow of ideas at the knees.

 I would like to say personally that nothing in any argument I've ever made on gay marriage, rests on the idea that same-sex couples harm their own children at any higher rates than any other family form. (If there is data that shows this, I've never seen it.)

Excuse me? Apparently Gallagher must think that we are stupid. Passing along information about the gay community which you know to be inaccurate and incredibly stigmatizing is not the "free-flow of ideas."

It's lying. You can't explain it away and you certainly can't sugarcoat it.

And when you put it front and center on your blog, you are in fact endorsing it because you want people to see it. And you want people to link to the piece in question.

Maybe I shouldn't be so abrupt with Gallagher. She was always a poor spokesperson. Remember this part of her piece:

If you want to know what NOM's message is, there are abundant videos and press stories (including our own press releases) with me, or Brian Brown, or other NOM personnel actually speaking. Fair enough to criticize us for what we actually believe and say.

Okay, how about when Brian Brown told the following lie at a New York rally early this year:

" . . . kids as young as kindergarten are taught in Massachusetts that their parents are bigots because they believe marriage is the union of a man and a woman."

Or how about the time earlier in 2010 when Gallagher cited a study about abused children to make the case against marriage equality even though no same-sex couple took part in the study.

 Or how about when NOM blanket states with flyers designed to imply that gays want to use marriage equality to corrupt the innocence of children. Flyers like so:

Or how about now when NOM is teaming up, even as I speak, with the Minnesota Family Council, a group which spreads inaccurate information via its site that gays engage in pedophilia, bestiality, and the consuming of urine and feces.

Of course Maggie Gallagher doesn't attack same-sex couples.  She simply leaves those nasty actions to the groups NOM aligns itself with and then plays stupid when these groups are caught in the act.

If that's not bad enough, Jeremy Hooper  from Goodasyou.org points out several other things:

For starters, we could talk about the times you, Maggie, called homosexuality an "unfortunate thing" and "at a minimum, a sexual dysfunction much as impotence or infertility," suggested gays "can always control their behavior," called on a sitting President to give more research dollars to "ex-gay" research, or talked about the "several kinds of sins" that both gays and their supports commit every time they support marriage equality. Then we can go from there. 

You see this is why so many lgbtqs cannot stand Gallagher or NOM. It's bad enough that they are trying to take away our rights. It's bad enough that they demonize us, our children, and our families on a daily basis.

But absolute final straw is when NOM - and Gallagher - have the audacity to lie to us that they mean us no harm when we see their weapons for our destruction plainly behind their backs. And they aren't even trying to hide them.

The lgbtq community knows the difference between a kiss in the lips and a kick in the chops and Gallagher's piss poor explanations to the contrary are fooling no one.

'Did NOM's Brian Brown assault reporter at Gingrich event?' and other Friday midday news briefs

As we all know, the National Organization for Marriage is cozying up to various Republican presidential candidates, including Newt Gingrich.

And apparently because of that, we have the following footage of an incident which took place when a recent Gingrich fundraiser. Allegedly, NOM's president, Brian Brown, attacked a reporter, Andy Kroll, from Mother Jones - a progressive magazine - and shoved him out of the room when Occupy protesters appeared. From Joe.My.God comes a segment of the Keith Olbermann show with the reporter in question talk about the incident along with video footage. The part about Brian Brown begins at 3:12:



Pull your eyes from the lovely video of Brian Brown making an idiot of himself on camera (again) to ponder the irony that his organization thinks that gays and lesbian wanting to protect their relationships and families are the biggest threats to marriage, while a thrice divorced politician is it's savior

In other news:

Perry’s Staff Divided Over ‘War On Religion’ Ad - Rick Perry's gay staffer opposed a homophobic ad. What's wrong with that sentence? The fact that a gay person would work for such a man.

Malawi To Review “Bad” Laws - Hopefully a positive effect of the Obama Administration's new policy.

Faith-Based Group on Troy Mayor Controversy: 'Enough is Enough' - The mayor of town makes a nasty statement about gays, faces a backlash, and now some folks are sticking up for her. The poor thing. Her religious liberty to call gays "queers" (in a negative connotation of course) has been violated.

“I no longer identify as a Christian . . .” they write - A good friend of mine is fed up with phony cries of "Christian persecution coming from the religious right.

Woman files lawsuit because she can't harass transgender customers

Unbelievable. Earlier this week, I post a piece about a Macy's employee who was fired for harassing a transgender customer. Today, we learn more details about this case because she is now suing:

Natalie Johnson is a 27-year-old student and, until last week, worked at the River Center Macy's.

On Nov. 30, a teenager shopping caught her attention.

"I made sure to keep an eye on him because he was shopping for women's clothing," remembered Johnson.

She said she was convinced the shopper was a man. So when she saw him in the women's dressing room, she told him he couldn't change there.

"I had to just straight forward tell him, 'You're a man,' and of course that made him really got him steamed," said Johnson.

But the group of people he was with supported the shopper, arguing Macy's policy allows transgender people to change in the fitting room of the gender they associate with.

"I've made my choice the other day," Johnson told her manager. "I refuse to comply with this policy."

Johnson said she was let go.

Johnson filed a complaint with the Federal Employment Commission, claiming her religious beliefs prevent her from recognizing transgender people.

"There are no transgenders in the world. A guy can dress up as a woman all he wants, that's still not going to make you a woman," said Johnson.

There are so many things to be said about this. First of all, I refuse to believe that this woman filed this lawsuit on her own volition. Someone, or rather some organization talked her into it. This woman has no case because she admits that she refused to comply. The religious belief argument is a dodge. No one was attacking her religious beliefs. She was the aggressor. She was the violator. If she had a problem, she should have stepped aside. No one was forcing her to be in the dressing room (aren't dressing rooms usually confined to one person anyway) with the customer?

I mean what's next? Should harassing same-sex couples or same-sex couples and their children in stores be protected under the false umbrella of  "religious liberty?"

This woman felt that she was above following the policies of her employer and found out that no, she was not.


No doubt the organization - and I bet it's the Liberty Counsel -  that pushed Johnson into filing this lawsuit hopes to exploit people's fears about the transgender community and the lie about "men being able to invade women's bathrooms," etc.

But I think this going to backfire. This frivolous lawsuit demonstrates just how hollow the claim of "religious liberty" by the religious right are. It's obvious that "religious liberty" to some of them means the liberty to give us hell.

Those who are steaming over this - and you should be -  should forget making this woman the onus of your anger. She is nothing more than a tool. Email Macy's and send the company your support for standing up for our rights and dignity. And most of all, tell Macy's to not back down.

Related posts:

Macy's stands up for the lgbtq community

Why I get a nagging feeling every time I hear the phrase 'religious liberty'