The Family Research Council continues to use 'outdated' work

In December of last year, I emailed the Family Research Council inquiring about the quiet removal of several studies from its webpage. These studies were designed to prove the alleged "dangers of homosexuality."

They were:

"Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse"

"The Negative Health Effects of Homosexuality,"

"Homosexual Parenting: Placing Children at Risk"

Tuesday night, I received an answer via email:

Dear Alvin,

Thank you for contacting Family Research Council.

The papers that you inquired about have been removed from our website indefinitely due to the fact that they have outdated sources. However, we have other resources on our website that contain similar information, such as the following:

Getting It Straight
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=BK04A01

What's wrong with letting same-sex couples legally "marry?"
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IF03H01

Why Marriage Should Be Privileged in Public Policy
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS03D1

Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02

Ten Arguments From Social Science Against Same-Sex 'Marriage'
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IF04G01

You think that would be the end of the story.

Hardly.

The Family Research Council seems to have taken the studies it claims to contain "outdated sources," polished them up, and are now pushing them as credible, up-to-date work.

However, many of these "new" resources contain the same information as the "outdated" studies, sometimes verbatim, including the same endnote citations.

Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples (still on the webpage) and the Negative Effects of Homosexuality (removed from the webpage) is a perfect example of this. Among other things, both contain the following:

- A citation of the book Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women by Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg as a correct generalization of lgbt sexual habits despite the fact that it was written in 1978 and was not meant by the authors to be a correct assessment of the lgbt community in general.

A passage from Homosexualities clearly says:

“. . . given the variety of circumstances which discourage homosexuals from participating in research studies, it is unlikely that any investigator will ever be in a position to say that this or that is true of a given percentage of all homosexuals.”

- A citation of the book The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop by David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison despite the fact that the book was written 1984 and was not meant to be a correct assessment of the lgbt community in general.

A passage from The Male Couple says:

“We always have been very careful to explain that the very nature of our research sample, its size (156 couples), its narrow geographic location, and the natural selectiveness of the participants prevents the findings from being applicable and generalizable to the entire gay
male community.”


This is important because even if one were to ignore the obvious misusage of these books, their published dates (1978 and 1984 respectively) leads one to ask what exactly does the Family Research Council consider to be an "outdated source?"

And that isn't all I found.

As I said before, some of the studies now present on the Family Research Council's webpage (and thus considered to be accurate) contain some of the same information and citations present in the "outdated" studies.

Some of this information has gotten the Family Research Council in trouble a number of years ago.

Look at the study, Getting It Straight for example.

In chapter 4 - Is Homosexuality a Health Risk, there is this passage (pg. 88):

A study of 3,365 high school students published in Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine found: “Gay, lesbian, bisexual, or not sure male students were 6.50 times more likely to report a suicide attempt than heterosexual male students. Gay, lesbian, bisexual, or not sure female students were 2.02 times more likely to report a suicide attempt than their heterosexual female peers.”

Robert Garofalo, et al, “Sexual Orientation and Risk of Suicide Attempts among a Representative Sample of Youth,” Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 153 (May 1999): 490.


In 1998, Garofalo complained that FRC and several other religious right groups was distorting his research. According to him, the groups omitted a crucial part of his findings (i.e. gay teens engage in negative behavior - suicide attempts - when faced with abuse from a homophobic society). Interestingly enough, when Garofalo complained, then FRC staff member Robert Knight questioned his credibility. (Boston doctor says ads distorted his work on gays, The Boston Globe, August 4, 1998 )

Then there is this passage in the same chapter on pg. 89:

A study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology on the mortality rates of homosexuals concluded that they have a significantly reduced life expectancy:

• “In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age twenty for gay and bisexual men is eight to twenty years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged twenty years will not reach their sixty-fifth birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871.”

In 2001, the researchers of this study complained that their work was being distorted by organizations like FRC.

Now wouldn't complaints by a study's author render it unusuable or a possible "outdated source?"

Apparently not to the Family Research Council.

Also:

Chapter 5 of Getting it Straight, Do Homosexual Parents Pose a Risk to Children, is interesting in that except for a few alterations (i.e. rearranging of text) it is identical to Homosexual Parenting: Placing Children at Risk - one of the studies FRC removed from its webpage claiming that it contained "outdated sources."

By that same token, chapter 6 of Getting It Straight, Is There a Link Between Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse? is a total rehash of Homosexuality and Child Abuse, yet another study that FRC removed from its page for having "outdated sources."

What's interesting about Homosexuality and Child Abuse is that a researcher cited in it, Nicholas Groth, sent a letter to FRC in 2002 complaining about how his work was being distorted to prove that gays molest children at a higher number that heterosexuals - something that his work found not to be true.

However, despite his complaint over five years ago, Groth's work is cited in Getting It Straight (pg. 123):

Another study found that “some authors now believe that boys may be sexually abused as commonly as girls (Groth, 1978; O’Brien, 1980).”

These are just a few of the things that I found. There so many other inaccuracies in these supposed credible studies. All of it makes one wonder just exactly is FRC's definition of an "outdated source."

And if I can take the question further - just what exactly is FRC's definition of truth and Christian principles?

It is ironic that while FRC head Tony Perkins pleads innocent ennui and criticizes lgbts for our supposed intolerance, his group engages in tactics that justify our position of anger.

Regardless of one's personal beliefs about homosexuality, no one should approve of FRC's deceptive tactics.

Hat tip to Emproph for sending me a link to FRC's "outdated" studies.

Glenn T. Stanton is no expert

Focus on the Family staff member Glen Stanton was on Dr. Phil today on a program about transgender children. At one point, Stanton was billed as an "expert."

Now in Dr. Phil's defense, he pretty much allowed Stanton and the other guest, Joseph Nicolosi to cut their own throats. They had no idea what they were talking about and it showed. Also Dr. Phil gave the legitimate medical professional the final word in a one-on-one conversation; something that was very appropriate.

So all in all, I thought the show went well.

But I think in terms of religious right spokespeople, the word "expert" is used too much.

I looked into Stanton's background and found the following:

Glenn T. Stanton is the research fellow for global family formation at Focus on the Family in Colorado Springs. He is also directing a major research project on international family formation trends at the Institute of Marriage and Family in Ottawa. He debates and lectures extensively on the issues of gender, sexuality, marriage and parenting at universities and churches around the country. He recently served the Bush administration as a consultant on increasing fatherhood involvement in the Head Start program.

. . . A graduate of the University of West Florida, Glenn earned a master’s degree in interdisciplinary humanities with an emphasis in philosophy, history and religion. He has also taught in each of these disciplines.

All impressive but there is nothing that constitutes him to speak expertly on the issue of homosexuality.

That bothers me.

Other things bother me about Stanton.

According to Box Turtle Bulletin, last year, Stanton claimed that there’s a “clear consensus” among anthropologists that “A family is a unit that draws from the two types of humanity, male and female.”

The University of California at Irvine’s Anthropology Chair Bill Maurer and Associate Professor Tom Boellstorff as well as the American Anthropological Association all vehemently disagreed with this claim.

I have no idea how Stanton felt he was credentialed to speak for the anthropological community. Whatever the case, the rebuke put Stanton in the company of so many other religious right spokespeople who have been called to the carpet because of their distortion of legitimate studies, including his boss James Dobson.

And then I am bothered by a piece Stanton wrote called Why Homosexuality Falls Short of the Ideal. This passage especially gave me pause:

HIV is the most notable infection associated with homosexual sex and other promiscuous behaviors, but it is important to realize that this is only part of the problem. Professor Thomas Schmidt, in his excellent study of homosexuality, Straight & Narrow?, explains, "Doctors who work with homosexual men are now trained to look regularly for at least 15 common afflictions apart from HIV/AIDS and we could double or triple the number by taking into account less common problems."

The problem with this is that Thomas Schmidt, who is not a medical physician or researcher but a theologian, freely used the work of discredited researcher Paul Cameron in the book Stanton cited - Straight and Narrow? Compassion and clarity in the homosexual debate.

Proof of that is here:

6. About 80% of homosexual men engage in anal intercourse, and consequently suffer from a condition known to doctors as 'Gay Bowel syndrome'. This is a cocktail of physical trauma and a long list of infectious diseases. (Schmidt, p.108,109; F.R.I. report, "Medical Consequences...")

8. In the homosexual community as a whole, evidence of life-long faithful relationships is almost non-existent. One study showed 1%. (Schmidt, p.105-108; F.R.I. report "Same Sex Marriage")

22. While only a minority of homosexuals are paedophiles, male homosexual paedophilia is intensely active. Consequently approx. 80% of paedophilic victims are boys who are molested by adult males. (Schmidt, p.114; F.R.I. report. "Child Molestation and Homosexuality")

Editor's note - F.R.I. stands for Family Research Institute, the organization created and run by Paul Cameron.

What Stanton did is a clever trick propagated by religious right "experts" who are well aware of the flaws in Cameron's work - not citing Cameron directly but citing another person who originally cites Cameron.

Last year on this blog, I talked about how the Family Research Council has covertly removed the "studies" of its homosexuality expert Timothy Dailey from its webpage.

It seems that the same bit of chicanery may be going on with Focus on the Family and Glenn T. Stanton.

I first found Stanton's homosexuality paper on the webpage of the Palmetto Family Council. It said clearly that he was the author of the study.

However, on the Palmetto Family Council's new webpage, the study remains but Stanton's byline is gone.

In addition, I could not find the piece on the Focus on the Family webpage.

It just goes to show that one unfortunate aspects of this so-called cultural war is how anyone with a religious testimony and/or a phony organization with an official sounding name can suddenly be considered to know more about homosexuality than us who are lgbt.

From Linda Harvey to Janet Folger Porter to Timothy Dailey to Matt Barber to Peter LaBarbera to Glenn T. Stanton - the list goes on and on. and they are all phonies.

Let me clarify one fact. I don't have a problem with these folks entering the conversation on lgbts, gender identity or the like. I have a problem with their audacity and their lack of honesty. Often times, these individuals have no desire to be objective. They already have a preconceived religious beliefs which they manipulate science, facts, and common sense to adhere to.

They are not experts and they don't need to be called such.

The problem is that talk shows like Dr. Phil won't vet these people. They just book them on the show as "experts," which gives them undeserved credibility. And all under the guise of "seeing both sides of the issue."

In the long run, it's up to the lgbt community to make the noise and expose these charlatans.

We need to put a serious kibosh their lies by challenging their credentials, or lack of credentials, and their shoddy workmanship at every turn.

Ken Blackwell cures this brotha's Monday blaahs

Lord, it's so hard to keep up with all of the mess emanating from the religious right.

For the benefit of those who don't know, in addition to updating my two blogs, I have an 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m. job. So sometimes I can't keep up with the news like so many other lgbt blogs. Subsequently when I post, I try to make it a doozy - i.e. either show something new and different or throw out a different dimension to exposing religious right lies.

Today, I was a little under the weather

I turn 38 this upcoming Sunday and I'm not looking forward to it. You can chalk it up to wondering if I have done something relevant with my life so far. I've had this notion many times before.

When I turned 30 and felt that I had not hit the nadir of relevance, I calmed my hysteria by noting that legendary actor Burt Lancaster didn't really start cooking until he reached 32 and that Nobel Prize-winning author Toni Morrison didn't start writing until she was 35.

These days as I approach 40, I tell myself that Jerry Seinfeld didn't really hit it big until he was in his 40s.

I guess if I haven't done anything of relevance by the time I reach 50, I will be pulling Grandma Moses out of my hat.

Right now, I am trying to get together a serious column regarding ENDA, gays, African-Americans and the "privilege of oppression."

Sounds good, don't it?

But leave it to possible GOP National Committee Chairman Ken Blackwell to wake me up.

'Change' Ken Blackwell can believe in

The GOP may select Ken Blackwell to be the first African-American chairman of their National Committee. Something that we can blame on Obama no doubt.

Now I suppose we are going to be inundated with cross conversations between the lgbt community and the heterosexual African-American community on just what is a "civil right." This interview looks to be the possible first salvo.

Personally speaking, the entire conversation drives this black gay man to distraction. Every time lgbts and African-Americans get into this discussion, I feel like a child caught in the middle of a nasty custody battle. (Eat your heart out, Gloria Vanderbilt)

Now while I feel that the lgbt community in general can do more to help black gays and lesbians be more visible, I can't shake the notion that the entire argument puts my heterosexual black brothers and sisters in some of the most unlikely of positions.

Not only does the subject of homosexuality make the black community seem hypocritical (i.e. citing religious belief against homosexuality as a defense when some forms of popular African-American music embrace sexualized images of women and fornication - which you hardly ever hear Harry Jackson or Ken Hutcherson talk about) but it also causes the black community to forget its own history.

Take the notion pushed by some of my heterosexual black brothers and sisters that "gays have it easy because they can hide who they are."

Those who say that tend to forget a sad bit of African-American history.

It's not talked about much now but a while ago, there were some African-Americans who took advantage of their lighter skin tone in order to "pass" for white. They did this to escape the potential dead end life that racism subjected black America to.

Needless to say, those who could not pass weren't exactly happy with the actions of their lighter-skinned brothers and sister.

It was a controversial thing. Books were written about "passing," and vigorous conversations were had about the practice in meeting places such as barbershops and churches.

Hollywood even did several movies on the subject. The most famous had to be Imitation of Life, in which a light-skinned black woman ran away from home in order to pass for white.

Her mother gets so distraught that she dies of a broken heart, And this leads to the climactic, tear jerking ending in which the daughter interrupts the funeral, flings open the hearse and collapses on her mother's coffin in surfeit of hysterical tears.

You can see the scene here.

This leads to me to ask if passing caused so much trouble for African-Americans back then, then why in the hell would it be a good idea for the lgbt community right now?

Trying to be something you aren't isn't good for anyone, be they black, gay or black and gay. It's a practice that must never been encouraged.


News briefs:

Family advocacy group announces Pepsi boycott - brought to you by those who define boycotts by the lgbt community as acts of terror.

Right Wing Leftovers - Mike Huckabee says he is not "pro-sodomy." THANK YOU JESUS!!! I mean we don't just accept anybody.

DADT WITHOUT THE DA - In 1993, those who opposed gays in the military had Colin Powell, Congressman Sam Nunn, the phony studies of Paul Cameron, a host of public officials, and the full force of religious conservatives on their side. Now in 2008, all they have is a phony expert who gets destroyed every time she opens her mouth. I love America.

Always With The Bathroom; Always With The Misrepresentations - There are situations that can only be described as earring-yanking, wig snatching-off moments. What's happening now in Florida is at least 10 of them.

Violence is fine, just as long as no one gets naked

This isn't necessarily a gay issue but it illustrates the mindset of those who think that lgbts are the ruination of America:

The Chicago Shakespeare Theater's production of Macbeth left one audience member outraged over some surprising content.

Laurie Higgins, the director of the division of school advocacy at the Illinois Family Institute (IFI), is a fan of Shakespeare and the Chicago Shakespeare Theater. But while attending a recent production of Macbeth, she was shocked when the actress portraying Lady Macbeth performed scenes topless.

. . . The play also included simulated sex scenes -- with one of the actors fondling Lady Macbeth's bare breasts -- and one scene was set in a strip bar with scantily clad actresses in leather thongs.

Higgins is the "activist" who helped give Deerfield High School in Illinois so much uncalled for attention last year. She helped create a moral panic because the lgbt play Angels in America was being read in a senior honors English class.

Higgins and those who agreed with her point of view (including our friend Peter LaBarbera) incorrectly said that children were being "indoctrinated into homosexuality" and were "forced" to read the play.

LaBarbera even posted some of the more questionable play dialogue on his webpage in an attempt to induce further outrage.

Of course Higgins, LaBarbera, and others who tried to say that Deerfield was "under siege" by the lgbt community convienently omitted that Angels in America was not required reading (students had a choice between the play and The Plague by Albert Camus). They also failed to mention that students were required to get their parents' permission in order to read Angels in America.

So much for that moral panic. What makes this one interesting is the play itself.

Those who are familiar with Shakespeare know that Macbeth tells the tale of a loyal soldier whose ambition leads him to become king of Scotland through violent means.

The play is filled with images of witchcraft, violence, blood, and murder. One scene even has a child being killed in front of his mother.

But Higgins makes no mention of Macbeth's violence in the article.

Maybe she thinks that Macbeth's violence is fine, just as long as we don't get to see Lady Macbeth's breasts.

Perhaps Higgins would be placated if Lady Macbeth was given a sharp left hook instead.

Enough of going to the streets - let's go to the library

I am currently reading an excellent book, Perfect Enemies: the religious right, the gay movement and the politics of the 1990s.

Perfect Enemies breaks down the culture war between the lgbt community and the religious right by zeroing in on key battles such as the argument about gays in the military that nearly screwed up Clinton's presidency and statewide anti-gay initiatives that took place in Oregon, Colorado, and Maine.

The authors, Chris Bell and John Gallagher, are very thorough and make several points that I agree with. Probably my favorite is:

At heart of the gay movement's lack of success in American politics is its failure to understand its opposition. By the start of the 1996 presidential campaign, the gay groups still lacked a research arm that would allow them to monitor the religious right's anti-gay activities.

To this day, I still don't see that comprehensive research arm. Certainly there are efforts in pockets (i.e. Truth Wins Out, Box Turtle Bulletin, myself , and probably a few others) but there doesn't seem to be a concerted effort by the lgbt community at large to educate themselves about the religious right.

Some of us instead paint people of faith with a broad intolerant brush and that's not only incorrect but it is damaging to our spirits. When we do this, we forget that lgbts are also people of faith.

We also forget that people of faith are not the enemies of lgbts. Our enemies are the spokespeople and organizations who exploit the beliefs, egos, and anxieties of some people of faith.

It's been my experience that there is some resistance to the idea that maybe lgbts should learn the language and methods of the religious right. Some view it as beneath the community and others view the idea as wasting time with compiling "gotcha" moments.

Seems to me that planning and anticipation would do us a lot more than waiting until the inevitable happens and then making speeches about protesting in the streets.

Everybody seems to want to be the firebrand or the fiery activist.

I say what is wrong with being the pragmatic manipulator whose quiet studies allow him or her to not only anticipate the actions of the religious right but also the ways to counter the skillful way they argue.

Can we devote as much attention to that as we do to "trying to get attention."

It's like what one of my favorite book, The Art of War, says:

It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.

News briefs

Gay Man to Be Tapped As Deputy Director of Obama's Public Liaison Office - It's not a cabinet position but I'm partly satisfied . . . for now

Lesbian couple invited on Inaugural Whistle Stop Tour - Girlfriends, when you get a chance, pull Obama aside and give him a nice earful.

Rick Warren sidekick demanded that all gays be arrested, published names of gays in Uganda - Perhaps when no one should be near Warren when he says the inaugural prayer. Lightning has a way of hitting more than one thing when it strikes.

Milwaukee OKs 'gay'-affirming school - In the spirit of researching the enemy, read this article. Feel free to comment on it - BUT BE NICE AND ACCURATE!!

Another professor cries foul over religious right misrepresentation of research

In what seems to be becoming a habit, another professor has cried foul over what he calls the distortion of his work by the religious right.

Theo Sandfort, Associate Professor of Clinical Sociomedical Sciences (HIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies - New York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia University) said his work is being incorrectly cited.

Recently, Regina Griggs of PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays) voiced her displeasure with a recent study conducted in California that said young gays and lesbians were more likely to suffer depression or commit suicide if their parents or guardians reacted negatively to their sexual orientation:

"So what we're doing is we're telling young people and we're telling their parents, 'You must accept those feelings. Who cares where they come from? It's a gay lifestyle -- endorse it!' ....and [then] they threaten parents and frighten them by saying, 'If you don't, then your child may commit suicide.'"

Griggs also added:

Studies in the Netherlands -- where there is an "extremely open society," notes Griggs -- found that although the homosexual lifestyle is affirmed through the culture, the suicide rates have remained steady or increased.

The "studies" Griggs alluded to is actually one study and it has been cited by the religious right numerous times to claim that homophobia has very little to do with the depression and suicide rate of lgbts

The study, Same-Sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders, appeared in the Archives of General Psychiatry in 2001 and it looked at psychiatric disorders in gay adults from the Netherlands.

The part Griggs alluded to said:

It is unclear to what extent findings from this Dutch study can be generalized to other cultures or nations. Compared with other Western countries, the Dutch social climate toward homosexuality has long been and remains considerably more tolerant. To the extent that the level of social acceptance of homosexuality induces differences in mental health status in relation to homosexuality, the observed differences might be greater in other Western countries than in the Netherlands.

Griggs incorrectly cites this study because it had absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand (i.e. negative behaviors in lgbt youth in the United States).

Also, while she has no problem citing the line about Dutch/Netherlands social climate being more "tolerant," she omits the more important line that comes before it - It is unclear to what extent findings from this Dutch study can be generalized to other cultures or nations.

Via email, Professor Sandfort said:

There is a difference between the U.S. and the Netherlands in terms of acceptance of homosexuality. That does not mean that there is no homophobia (and homophobic damage) in the Netherlands. It is not clear how difference in climate affects the prevalence of mental disorders. We don't know the final answers, but in the U.S. as well as the Netherlands, homophobia is related to mental health problems.

He also said that Griggs and others who use the study to claim that homophobia does not have an effect on negative lgbt behavior are clearly distorting his work:

"They use data to promote their moral convictions without truly understanding what the issues are. They are not interested in understanding how people's lives are affected by their social environment."

Sandfort's complaint is not the first time a professor has cried foul about how PFOX distorts his work.

Last year, Gary Remafedi, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Minnesota, complained that PFOX distorted his work on suicide attempts in gay youth.


News briefs and other issues

It seems that when I'm busy at work, all sorts of interesting things happens.

A blogmate of mine had some problems with hackers:

SoapBlox, host of Pam Spaulding's group blog Pam's House Blend, was subject to a hack on Tuesday that took several blogs offline.

. . . A group called Astalavista has been linked to the hijacking of the affected server, now taken offline by the ISP, and using it to perform attacks on other websites, according to a notation on SoapBlox's front page.

It is not known what can be salvaged. Other sites affected include RadicalRuss.net, BlueJersey, American Liberalism and BeThink.org.

"I wish I could see a bright side to this," Spaulding told PageOneQ. "It's incredible that years of hard work can be destroyed in a flash, but we're in the digital age and there are people motivated to silence voices through malicious acts. I'm hopeful that data will be recovered, but Paul Preston of Soapblox has said he will not restore any sites. That means Pam's House Blend will need to find a new hosting platform and a redesign. That will take a good amount of time."

Pam is back online for now but I just wanted to give her a shout out of support. I have never met her personally but have had the pleasure of posting few diaries on the House Blend.

I hope things work out because the House Blend is a very vital source for this community.

Hang in there, girlfriend!!!


And in other news . . .

ACLU Asks Judge To Suspend Adoption, Foster Law - History will view that ballot measure as huge mistake. The courts need to strike it down quickly.

Soldiers say they'd leave military if 'gay' ban lifted - The only place where Elaine Donnelly has any credibility is on One News Now and the commentators there are giving her grief. Sometimes the world is a good place.

11 gay bars get letters threatening ricin attacks - According to the Mike Huckabee rules of life, this doesn't qualify as a hate crime because no lgbts had their heads cracked open. Okay that was Ann Coulterish of me, but what the hell.

And speaking of girlfriend, let me leave you all with something to ponder. The following link is a glimpse of what I think is the "real" Ann Coulter.

No it does not insult her body, but it is something to think about.

Watch the entire thing!!

Killer of gay man may get undeserved early parole

Sean Kennedy's killer may go free earlier than expected.

For those who are not aware, the following are the facts:

Sean William Kennedy, 20, was attacked in the early morning of May 17, 2007 outside the former Brew's Bar in Greenville, South Carolina. His assailant, Stephen Andrew Moller, pulled up in a car, threw one punch after reportedly yelling anti-gay slurs, and fled. Kennedy died about 17 hours later from the brain injury he sustained, and friends and family believe he was targeted at least in part due to his sexual orientation.

Since South Carolina has no hate crime statute, no enhancement was available for Moller's June 2008 sentence of five years in prison on a reduced charge of involuntary manslaughter. The judge reduced the sentence to three years with credit for seven months' time served and ordered Moller to seek help to manage anger and substance abuse.

There is a now a strong possibility that Moller could get out on parole as early as next month.

Moller should have gotten more time for this senseless crime but as it was, he received a lucky break.

He does not deserve another one. As someone who has lost a loved one due to senseless violence (my father), I know what it's like to have that constant spot of emptiness in your heart when pondering the unfairness of a life snatched away through the selfish acts of another.

It's not vengeance but justice for Moller to serve his full time.

Since Sean's death, his mother Elke has been a huge advocate for the lgbt community as well as an outspoken proponent for hate crime laws. She is the founder of Sean's Last Wish, a group devoted to stopping the violence against lgbt youth.

She is urging that people write the parole board asking that they not give Moller an early release:

Letters can be sent to:

Department of Probation Pardon and Parole Services
2221 Devine Street, Suite 600
PO Box 50666
Columbia SC 29250

Just who is bashing who, Christian Anti-Defamation Commission?

From the Christian Newswire comes a press release from the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission on what they think are the top instances of "Christian Bashing" in 2008.

My first thought is it's amazing how religious right groups come up with some new organization with an official sounding name.

My second, after reading the list, is they have got to be kidding. Their definition of bashing has less to do with discrimination and more to do with people questioning their definition of Christianity:

INSTANCE #6: Religulous the Movie
Bill Maher released a very shallow, pseudo-intellectual documentary entitled Religulous. The movie did not cover any new intellectual ground. It simply raised the old attacks on the faith. Maher studiously avoided being fair and did not allow for legitimate Christian answers from any leading Christian intellectuals.

or some sports anchor letting loose with a stream of profanities (the example they list here is vulgar but could someone explain to me how this is "bashing"):

INSTANCE #8: ESPN Anchor Dana Jacobson's "F--- Jesus" Remark
Speaking at an ESPN corporate event in Atlantic City, N.J., to honor ESPN Radio personalities Mike Greenberg and Mike Golic, Dana Jacobson let go with a steam of vulgar remarks; "F--- Notre Dame," "F--- Touchdown Jesus" and finally "F--- Jesus." Jacobson was suspended for a few days for the incident.

or someone daring to tell them that in an pluralistic society, they have to respect the fact that the Christian faith does not take always precedent:

INSTANCE #5: Chaplains Fired for Praying in Jesus' Name
Chaplains for the State of Virginia are being denied their right to pray in Jesus' name. Six chaplains were fired for continuing to pray in Jesus' name. Earlier this year in Virginia, Rev. Hashmel Turner, a city councilman in Fredericksburg, was told by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that his prayers during city council meetings that ended in Jesus' name will continue to be banned.

or lies:

INSTANCE #4: Colorado Law Criminalizes the Bible
SB200, a Colorado state bill recently signed into law, criminalizes the Bible. Section 8 of the bill entitled "Publishing of discriminative matter forbidden" makes publishing the Bible illegal because it contains anti-homosexual passages. This is part of a larger effort to criminalize the expression of certain opinions and beliefs.

The law mentioned here has nothing to do with the Bible except in the mind of someone with a wild imagination who likes to play games with hypothetics.

INSTANCE #2: Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin Is Attacked
Alaska Governor, Sarah Palin, came under sharp attack by some in the mainstream media because she self-identifies as a Christian.

Palin was not attacked for being a Christian. Her lack of readiness for the vice-presidential position was her downfall, pure and simple. Also her eagerness to use inaccuracies to attack Obama - "palling around with terrorists" and how it led her to being such a polarizing figure had a lot to do with her lack of a positive image.

And this next one is a doozy:

INSTANCE #3: Barack Obama Defames Christianity
According to research into President Elect Obama's own statements about faith, and an examination of Obama's position on moral issues, CADC has determined that by any biblical and historic Christian standard, Barack Obama is not a Christian, although he claims he is a "devout Christian."

So this organization is "bashing" a Christian while complaining about "Christian bashing."

My head is spinning.

It is apparent that the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission is a phony organization not designed to protect the rights of Christians but created to be another cog in the religious right machine of entitlements.

Short post seeking your help - no I am not asking for money

Hey guys,

As you know, my other blog - Anti-Gay Lies and Liars, goes into more detail about the religious right by talking about their tactics and showing a time line of their distortions against the lgbt community.

I am in the process of redoing that site so I need feedback.

What do you think of it? Are there things that should be added or eliminated?

Are there controversies that I omitted from the time line? Are there future controversies that should be added for 2009?

Please send any and all comments via Charlekenghis@aol.com

Religious right groups call for mass exodus from public schools . . . again

Geez, it doesn't even shock me anymore:

Critics of America's public school system have launched a new effort highlighting the need for Christians to exit the system.

The initiative -- dubbed The Call to Dunkirk -- was launched by Dr. Bruce Shortt, author of The Harsh Truth About Public Schools; Rev. Voddie Baucham, author of Family Driven Faith: Doing What It Takes to Raise Sons and Daughters Who Walk with God; and the founder and director of the Exodus Mandate Project, retired U.S. Army Chaplain Lt. Col. E. Ray Moore.

Moore explains the proposal. "The Call to Dunkirk is a special emergency effort to try to get other ministries, churches, pastors, and the major Christian right and pro-family movement to join with us and the other K-12 home-school ministries in rescuing the children from the public schools during the year 2009," he says.

New effort my pinkie toe. It's an old effort and a tired one at that.

In 2005, Baucham and Shortt pushed for the same type of resolution via the Southern Baptist Convention:

A popular black evangelist is hoping that the proposed resolution on homosexuality in public schools that he has helped to put before the Resolutions Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention will spark a mass exodus of Baptist children from public schools.

The resolution, submitted by attorney and author Bruce Shortt and Dr. Voddie Baucham, Jr., calls on Southern Baptist churches to investigate whether their local school district has a "gay-straight alliance" or other homosexual clubs. The resolution also calls upon churches to encourage parents' removal of their children from schools that have curricula or programs that treat homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle.

Personally, I say if parents don't agree with public schools, they should have every option to homeschool their children. I have friends who do this already.

However, I don't agree with any homeschool initiatives taking money from the public schools and I certainly don't agree with making lgbts the boogiemen (i.e. the reason why children should be taken out of public schools.)

And making us the objects of fear is definitely the reasoning behind this so-called new initiative:

Although Christians have fought other aspects of the culture war such as homosexual "marriage," (Ray) Moore contends they are losing the fight when it comes to the education of their children.

"The real target of the liberals and the left has always been the children. And we can see in California where the conservatives won Proposition 8 -- the vote [was] 52 to 48 [percent] -- but...when Proposition 22 was voted on [in March 2000], they had a 61-percent margin of victory. So the culture is turning against Christianity and against the pro-family movement primarily because we've allowed our children to be educated in their schools," he adds. "They're converting our children; we're not converting them."

Ridiculous. No one is converting America's children.

LGBTs and liberals in general are not sitting in dark rooms taking instructions from a mysterious leader stroking a Persian cat while he periodically presses a button and drops one of us down to a pirahna tank.

If the religious right is truly losing the next generation, then they need to blame themselves and assess their bullshit.

You cannot call yourself pro-family if you are actively working against families simply because they don't fit your idea of the word. And you cannot call yourself Christian if you rely on lies and generalizations to get your point across.

What is happening here is like the ending of the classic fairty tale, the Emperor's New Clothes: Adults are distorting, lying, and obfusticating, but a child's simplicity getting to the heart of the matter.

In this particular case, the heart of the matter is that there is nothing wrong with being a gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender person.

Viva la progress!

Happy New Year !!! . . . and other stuff

2008 is almost over. I plan to spend the time counting down in the solitude of my home in hopeful peace and quiet.

I haven't been in the party mood for years; although I do remember a wild New Year's Eve party ten years ago when I attended Winthrop University.

Shut your dirty mind because it wasn't that type of party. The most you can do when you are the only gay in a heterosexual fraternity is get drunk, dance badly and pass out on the floor.

Which is what I did. Glad to say that I wasn't alone. We all passed out on the floor eventually.

Ten years later, I face 2009 with more of a clear head and optimism.

Incredibly this year, this country elected our first African-American president. Yeah I know - the Rick Warren thing.

But that aside for a second, it's still a remarkable acheivement that I thought I would never see.

And despite the Warren thing, I remain hopeful that an Obama Administration will be good for lgbts. Bear in mind I did not say good to lgbts.

I said good for lgbts in that we get a lot done.

So Rick Warren aside, let's work on getting our goals met rather than how far we can throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Enough preaching cause I know some of you probably don't like what I just said.

The following links are a reminder of just who our real enemy is:

Study: Family behavior key to health of gay youth - This study repeats the same thing many studies say about lgbts and behavior. It is how our families and society treats us that can lead to positive or negative behavior. How long will it be before the religious right distorts this study like the others?

Advocates fear attack on gay adoption by Louisiana lawmaker - The very idea that Lousiana Governor Bobby Jindal puts Family Research Council head Tony Perkins on a committee that could look at gay adoption and families just proves that he has no place NEAR the White House. You will remember that the FRC is the organization that once housed those Paul Cameronesque studies about gays and pedophilia.

Lesbian couple wins suit against Methodist camp - One News Now starts early work for a 2009 Misinformer Award. The article omits the part of the story about the tax breaks. Unbelievably, those posting comments didn't let One News Now forget.

Well that's it. Maybe Mr. "I want you, I need you, I gotta have you now" will show up at my door tonight.

Either way, Happy New Year and above all, be safe ;p.

2008 in religious right lies Part 2

Ye shall know them by their fruits - Matthew 7:16

The lies continue and they are doozies!

Janelle Hallman, a researcher from NARTH (National Association for the Research and Treatment of Homosexuality), an organization pushing discredited ex-gay therapy, cites Paul Cameron in her book, The Heart of Female Same-Sex Attraction: A Comprehensive Counseling Resource.

Lifesite News, a Roman Catholic "news" site, refers to a discredited Paul Cameron study that he falsely claimed to have presented to the Eastern Psychological Association in 2007 .

Discredited researcher Paul Cameron tours Russia where his history of distortions is virtually unknown. He speaks at Moscow State University and repeats much of his discredited work, including lie about gays and child molestation.

Insure.com, a publicly traded insurance company, continues to cite work from discredited researcher Paul Cameron even after it is alerted on his many censures and breaches of professional ethics.

In a brochure, The Slippery Slope of Same Sex Marriage, the Family Research Council cites the 2001 Dutch study by Maria Xiridou despite the fact that the study had nothing to do with same sex marriage.

In an article published in the American Family Association's One News Now, ex-gay organization PFOX claims that a "recent study" says that "the increased risk of suicide that is linked with young people who identify themselves as homosexuals before achieving full maturity -- a process encouraged by many homosexual high school clubs." The study in question, Risk Factors for Attempted Suicide in Gay and Bisexual Youth by Remafedi, Farrow, and Deisher, is not recent because it was published in 1991.

Gary Remafedi, M.D., M.P.H., a professor of pediatrics at the University of Minnesota and one of the authors of the study mentioned by PFOX (see above entry), claims the "ex-gay" organization distorted his research findings.

The Palm Center announces that a Duke University law review will be publishing a critique of a 2007 article by Elaine Donnelly. Donnelly is the president of the Center for Military Readiness, a traditional values interest group with no military or academic affiliation. According to Palm Center Director Aaron Belkin, Donelly's article is riddled with mistakes and misreadings of both Palm Center work and the "don't ask, don't tell" law and policy that governs gay service.

Elaine Donnelly testifies in front of a Congressional committee looking at the Don't Ask, Don't Tell law that deals with gays in the military. Her testimony, rife with fear stories of transgenders in the military, lesbians taking pictures of women in the shower, and gay men with AIDS, does nothing to help her argument in the eyes of the Congressional committee.

Robert Knight, of the right-wing Media Research Center, attempts to spin Donnelly's failed testimony as that of a "valiant woman facing an ultra liberal committee."

"Ex-gay" Greg Quinlan inaccurately claims that the director of the Human Genome Project, Dr. Francis Collins, said that homosexuality is not hardwired. Dr. Francis had gone on record in 2007 declaring that he never made this statement. When confronted with his inaccuracy by the webpage ExGayWatch, Quinlan accuses ExGayWatch of making up Dr. Collins's rebuke.

Dr. Collins confirms that he did complain about the inaccuracy of the "hardwired" quote.

The Maryland anti-gay industry group pushing the referendum against the anti-discrimination law protecting transgendered citizens is dealt a death blow when a court decision stops their efforts. The law goes into effect immediately afterwards. One News Now, however, inaccurately claims that the anti-gay industry group gained 900,00 valid signatures. They are off by a huge amount. The group only received 26, 813 valid signatures.

Professor Michael King of University College in the United Kingdom accuses the Catholic website LifeSite News and One News Now of distorting his work on the rate of depression and suicide in the gay community.

While misrepresenting Dr. King's work, One News Now adds to the distortion by citing the work of the discredited Paul Cameron.

Lisa Diamond, University of Utah professor, accuses anti-gay group NARTH of grossly and deliberately distorting her work on sexual orientation.

In a successful attempt to pass Proposition 8, a law that would outlaw gay marriage in California, the religious right group 'Yes on 8' spreads the following stories - not passing Proposition 8 will lead to pastors being arrested for not performing gay marriage and children will be forced to learn about homosexuality. On that last point, the group gets an assist from David Parker who films an interview with Family Research Council head Tony Perkins. Parker exaggerates his tale of being arresting including claiming that his son brought home a book about homosexuality. The book in question was about differing families and only one family featured in the book was of a same sex nature.

Members of the religious right make the claim that the gay community is conducting an organized campaign of violence and intimidation against the voters of Proposition 8. To prove this, they cite an incident of a 69-year-old woman who has a styrofoam cross ripped out of her hand during a silent vigil protesting Proposition 8. They omit the fact that the woman, Phyllis Burgess, pushed her way through the crowd of protestors to be on camera even at the point of allegedly knocking down a disabled man.

An uncoordinated wildcat gay rights group in Michigan, Bash Back, invade a local church where they allegedly pull a fire alarm, make out at the pulpit, and shout blasphemies in front of children. However, area police say the church exaggerated some details of the story. Also some religious right groups incorrectly link the group Bash Back with the Proposition 8 protests, which have been peaceful.

Mike Heath, head of the Main Family Policy Council, accuses the gay community of "hate crimes against Christians" because of the Proposition 8 vote, including a bomb sent to a missionary in Vancouver, British Columbia. This is a blatant lie because the incident and the organization the missionary was involved in had nothing to do with gays, Proposition 8, California, the Mormon church, etc.

Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Cindy Lederman declares that Florida's ban on gay adoption is unconstitutional. She especially criticizes the testimony of George A. Rekers, an expert that the state called on to testify about its ban. Lederman says Dr. Rekers’ beliefs are motivated by his strong ideological and theological convictions that are not consistent with the science. Based on his testimony and demeanor at trial, the court can not consider his testimony to be credible nor worthy of forming the basis of public policy. This is the same conclusion that a judge in Arkansas reached regarding Rekers' testimony regarding that state's adoption ban in 2005. During his Florida testimony, Rekers repeated Paul Cameronesque lies about the gay community and even said he would consider banning Native Americans from adopting children for the same reasons he would consider banning gays.

President-Elect Barack Obama faces a firestorm of criticism from the lgbt community due to his selection of prominent pastor Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration. Warren faces criticism due to his support of Proposition 8 in California and his comparing lgbt relationships to incest and pedophilia. In an address on his church’s website, Warren accuses his critics of “Christophobia” and claims that he never compared lgbt relationships to incest and pedophilia. However, an interview on Beliefnet.com clearly shows that Warren did compare lgbt relationships to incest and pedophilia.

The American Family Association complains that Campbell Soup is lending support to the alleged “homosexual agenda” because the company ran an ad in two issues of the lgbt-oriented Advocate magazine. The AFA is especially critical of the ad content because it features two lesbians and their son. This complaint comes at the same time the AFA’s newsite, One News Now, are calling lgbts “intolerant” for their anger over Rick Warren.

I am highly optimistic about 2009. The lgbt community are becoming more aware and highly skilled in exposing religious right distortions.

Consistency is the key to our victory. As long as they tell lies, we need to be there to tell the truth.

Liberty Counsel throws out another bad spin

Like clockwork, the religious right is telling lies about the yesterday's decision in New Jersey regarding the church owned pavilion and the lesbian couple who sued for access to it for their wedding.

Even before yesterday's decision, the religious right distorted the case to make it seem that lgbts are forcing Christians to "accept" gay marriage.

However the church lost the case because it was accepting tax breaks for the pavilion and a proviso for these tax breaks said that the pavilion to all with no exceptions

But of course Matt Staver and the Liberty Counsel spins the case to make it seem that lgbts are attempting to harm Christians:

“The clash between same-sex unions and religious freedom has arrived, and that clash will increase. We’ve seen a pastor arrested in Sweden for preaching that homosexuality is contrary to biblical principles. When the alarm was sounded, some thought it was all hype. But when a church has to sacrifice its religious convictions in order to invite the public to use its facilities, the threat to liberty is not hype. Whenever a right is granted to same-sex unions, then a right is taken from religious liberty and freedom of speech. Same-sex unions pose a serious threat to freedom of conscience and free exercise of religion.”

Jeremy from Goodasyou exposes Staver's statment for the lie that it is:

FACT: The New Jersey pavilion was open to public usage, without any hesitation until gays and lesbians wanted to start using the building for same-sex civil unions. It's not a religious matter -- it's about allowing the heterosexual public to use your facility, but not the homosexual public.

FACT: Nobody is trying to force churches to marry ANYONE (straight or gay). But this building was not and is not a church, and folks like Mat Staver KNOW IT! They are exploiting the fact that the building had church ties, all the while overlooking that those church ties had never previously been used to bar straight couples.

FACT: The Swedish pastor that the right loves to use, Ake Green, was arrested (but later acquitted) because Sweden, unlike America, has strict hate speech laws. Plus, it was only after his words were published publicly that he caught scrutiny.

FACT: Nobody is proposing similar laws here in the states, regardless of what folks like Staver want folks to believe. In fact, gays and progressives are more commonly on the side of protecting unpopular speech. For an example, see how Barney Frank was one of only 3 members of Congress to vote against a law designed to restrict Westboro Baptist's funeral-picketing pastime.

FACT: As a movement, gays and progressive allies are seeking CIVIL MARRIAGE EQUALITY. The way "religious freedom" REALLY applies to this matter is in regards to how everyone's civil liberties should be protected from being stifled by others' faith-based beliefs!

Victory for lesbian couple in New Jersey - how long will it be before the religious right starts lying about the issue?

I haven't posted this much in one day for a while.

In New Jersey, a case that has been a flashpoint for and against gay marriage in New Jersey has been decided and it is a victory for our side:

A New Jersey township that is owned by a church probably violated the civil rights of a lesbian couple when it refused to rent an open-air beachfront pavilion to the couple for use in a civil union ceremony, a state commissioner has concluded.

The finding, issued by J. Frank Vespa-Papaleo, director of New Jersey's Division on Civil Rights, said an investigation had determined there was reason to pursue anti-discrimination charges against the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association for denying Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Paster permission to rent its Boardwalk Pavilion for their civil union ceremony.

The pavilion had long been available for rental and use for secular events.

Today's ruling states in part, "When it invites the public at large to use it, the Association is subject to the Law Against Discrimination, and enforcement of that law in this context does not affect the Association’s constitutionally protected right to free exercise of religion."

The ruling -- called a "Finding of Probable Cause" -- does not resolve the civil rights complaint. It means only that the state has concluded its preliminary investigation and determined there is "sufficient evidence" to support a "reasonable suspicion" the anti-discrimination law has been violated.

Bernstein and Paster, who live in Ocean Grove, had applied for permission to rent the pavilion for their civil union ceremony in March 2007, but the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, which owns the pavilion, denied their request because it said the civil union ceremony conflicted with the religious beliefs of the United Methodist Church (UMC).

While this is a victory for our side, the case has been a rallying point for those against gay marriage. This ruling will, no doubt, add fuel to the fire of their claims that gay marriage does constrict religious freedom in this country.

Except for one thing.

When One News Now and the rest of the religious right start whining about this story, you most likely will not hear these details:

Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, which is affiliated with UMC, owns the pavilion and all the land in Ocean Grove -- a nearly one-square-mile section of Neptune Township originally founded as a seaside religious retreat. Homeowners there lease land from the church group.

The Association said it was not required to permit civil union ceremonies in its Boardwalk Pavilion based on First Amendment rights.

But in its investigation, the civil rights division found that the Camp Meeting Association had been permitting the public to use the pavilion for weddings and secular events prior to the request from Bernstein and Paster.

The investigation found that the association was even granted a tax exemption for the pavilion from the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) nearly twenty years ago.

The church group was eligible for the exemption under the state's Green Acres law, DEP found, because it said that the pavilion would be open to the public "on an equal basis."

So basically, while the pavilion is the church group's property, the church group has been applying for tax breaks under a state law that requires said property to be open and nondiscriminatory for all.

Seems to me that if you are applying for and receiving tax breaks under a law that requires your property to be open to the public on an equal basis, then you should follow that law.

Whether you are a religious body or not.

UPDATE - Box Turtle Bulletin breaks the situation down with its usual excellent analysis.

2008 in religious right lies Part 1

Ye shall know them by their fruits - Matthew 7:16

The lgbt community must never forget who our real enemies are. Our real enemies are not people of faith who believe that homosexuality is a sin. The real enemies of lgbt folks are ignorance and fear as well as the organizations and talking heads who exploit fear, ignorance for the sake of prominence and who will rely on discredited research and distorted anecdotes to make people of faith think that lgbts are out to get them.

And in 2008, these organizations and talking heads showed their asses often and unashamedly. This list of activities is so large that I have to break it up into two parts. Also, check out my last post on the 2008 Misinformers of the Year for a good laugh at the religious right:

Paul Cameron’s discredited study on “gay criminal habits” is cited as fact by supermarket tabloid magazine National Examiner.

Members of the anti-gay industry (i.e. Concerned Women for America, etc.) claim that a possible outbreak of staph infections amongst gay men in San Francisco is the result of a “politically correct” doctrine of not telling people about the so-called dangers of homosexuality. Some even infer that it is the new AIDS crisis. However, the Centers for Disease Control quickly issue a statement that will hopefully reign in future hyperbole. Amongst other things, the statement says: The strains of MRSA described in the recent Annals of Internal Medicine have mostly been identified in certain groups of men who have sex with men (MSM), but have also been found in some persons who are not MSM. It is important to note that the groups of MSM in which these isolates have been described are not representative of all MSM, so conclusions can not be drawn about the prevalence of these strains among all MSM.

In a show of unmitigated gall, anti-gay industry groups led by Concerned Women for America and Americans for Truth do not address their distortions of the MRSA infection. Instead, they try reverse psychology in claiming that they want to help gay rights group stop the infection.

Concerned Women for America leads the charge of anti-gay industry groups claiming that gay rights groups “strong armed” the medical community to play down the MRSA story. They do not offer any proof of their claims. In addition, Matt Barber (Concerned Women for America) and Peter LaBarbera (Americans for Truth) deny that they linked the MRSA infection to the AIDS crisis in their original spins. However, comments they originally said about the MRSA infection show otherwise.

An anti-gay industry group in Maryland hoping to get petition signatures against a law protecting the transgender community from discrimination are the recipients of an “interesting” media opportunity. They had complained that new law could lead to men “dressed as women” entering women’s locker rooms and bathrooms. Conveniently, there is a report of an incident of this situation taking place at a local gym. However it is highly suspicious. The woman reporting the incident just happens to be a member of the group attempting to get petition signatures. For this reason and others, the incident is dismissed by many as a publicity stunt. However the stunt and claims are successful. The group forces a referendum on the bill.

National Gay and Lesbian Task Force head Matt Foreman says in a speech that the gay community must take more of a responsibility in fighting AIDS. He says that AIDS is a gay disease. Despite the fact that NAACP member Julian Bond has said pretty much the same thing about AIDS and the black community, members of the anti-gay industry trumpet Foreman's speech as proof that homosexuality leads to AIDS.

Concerned Women for America member Matt Barber claims to reveal the "gay agenda." His "revelation" is an old one; it is the claim that the gay community is trying to take over America through points of attack from After the Ball, a book that many lgbts have never heard of.

An article in a Focus on the Family magazine cites the 1984 book The Male Couple to make the case that gay relationships involve promiscuity. However the article does not give the name of the book. This means of course it omits the caveat by the authors of The Male Couple that their research was not meant to be the best representation of all gay couples.

Focus on the Family member Glenn Stanton says that there is a "clear consensus" among anthropologists that "A family is a unit that draws from the two types of humanity, male and female." Stanton, who is not an anthropologist, is quickly challenged by legitimate people in the field such as American Anthropological Association. They call his claim a "gross misrepresentation of the position of the anthropological community on gay marriage"

Deerfield High School is accused by the anti-gay industry of "indoctrinating students into the homosexual agenda." This accusation involves a book, Angels in America, that was recommended as an assigned book in a senior AP English class. The book details the early days of the AIDS crisis and contains sexually graphic language. However, many lodging the accusation against Deerfield omitted that the book was not required for reading. Also, parents had to opt-in their children in the class, which means they knew fully well what the reading choices would be.

Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern gives a talk to a local Republican group where she says homosexuality is worse than terrorism. She also cites Paul Cameronesque statistics on the alleged gay life span and claims that gays are trying to "indoctrinate" two-year olds.

In defending Sally Kern, Concerned Women for America brings up the 1987 book After The Ball. The organization accuses the gay community of relying on tactics in the book to "bully" Kern. The organization also does not give any proof as to an orchestrated plan by the gay community to do such.

Mary Frances Forrester, wife of a North Carolina state representative, writes a column for a right-wing publication in which she pushes forth the hackneyed claim that gays are plotting to undermine "Christian values." In her column, she cites the work of discredited researcher Paul Cameron. She also cites the Michael Swift piece from 1987, omitting the part of the piece that clearly called it satire. She even gets Michael Swift's name wrong, calling him "Mark Swift."

Concerned Women for America accuses Human Rights Campaign head Joe Solmonese of potentially "risking lives in pursuit of a political agenda." The organization claims that Solmonese "recklessly" demanded that the Food And Drug Administration's ban on blood donations by men having sex with men be lifted. However the group omits that Solmonese was merely commenting on testimony by American Red Cross, the American Association of Blood Banks and America’s Blood Centers that the ban should be lifted. Concerned Women for America also does not comment on these organizations' testimony. The press release sent out by the organization focuses solely on attacking Solmonese.

Janet Folger, in a column defending Oklahoma Rep. Sally Kern's statements about homosexuality, refers to a 1997 Canadian study as proof that gays have a short life span. However, in 2001 the authors of the study complained on record that the anti-gay industry have been distorted this study.

Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council, in an interview about immigration laws denying the foreign partners of gay Americans the ability to immigrate to the U.S. unlike their heterosexually-married counterparts, says that he would prefer the United States deport gays and lesbians. He later apologizes for the comment.

Oklahoma Rep. Sally Kern writes a letter to the editor to a local newspaper defending her comments about homosexuality. Amongst other things, she cites a study by Paul Cameron. She also distorts the 1997 Canadian study as proof that gays have a short life span. She does this despite the fact that in 2001 the authors of the study went on record complaining how it has been distorted by the anti-gay industry.

Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America falsely claims that "multiple studies have established that homosexual conduct, especially among males, is considerably more hazardous to one’s health than a lifetime of chain smoking." Barber also refers to the 1997 Canadian study to claim that gays have a short lifespan. He addresses the 2001 complaint by the researchers of the study regarding the misusage of their work. Barber tries to dismiss the complaint as "worthless fluff." He also says that the researchers were under "tremendous pressure" to complain. However, he neglects to go into detail as to what pressure was "exerted" on the researchers. He is taken to task for this distortion on many left-wing and right-wing webpages and blogs.

Conservative columnist Kevin McCullough falsely claims that ENDA (Employee Non-Discrimination Act) would make it difficult for churches to fire youth ministers found to be having inappropriate relationships with young boys in church programs.

Coming tomorrow - things really get ugly.

The 2008 Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters Misinformers of the Year Awards

As 2008 draws to a close and we anticipate the possible joys and pains of 2009, let us not forget those who have tried to make life hell for lgbts.

This year, they were in rare form. Sometimes, they drove us a little north of where we were supposed to be.

But at other times, it was pleasureable to watch them leap through all sorts of ethical hoops in their ongoing struggle against the evil of the so-called Godless homosexuality, which everyone knows is the best kind of homosexuality.

So with that in mind, I present . . .

(drumroll please)

The Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters Misinformers of the Year Awards

“Who are you gonna believe? Me or your own eyes” Award Part 1

Peter LaBarbera - You just know that our friend Peter was going to snag at least one award. Of all of Porno Petey's exploits in 2008, one stands out.

Earlier this year, there was a small break out of staph infections amongst a group of gay men in San Francisco. Rather than waiting for the entire story to come out, members of the religious right (especially LaBarbera) claimed that this infection (MRSA) proved that homosexuality is a so-called “dangerous lifestyle.” LaBarbera in general tried to link MRSA to the early days of the AIDS crisis.

The Centers for Disease Control quickly said that based on the information, the MRSA infection had nothing to do with the lgbt orientation. In an attempt to backtrack from earlier statements, LaBarbera claimed that “gay activists” were falsely accusing him of calling MRSA a “new gay plague.”

But no one accused him of this. LaBarbera was playing a game of semantics to cover up his jumping the gun. However, judge for yourself after reading LaBarbera’s original claim:

Is this not an eerie reminder of the initial stories 25 years ago about AIDS -- then called GRID (Gay-Related Immunodeficiency Disease)? It is unfathomable that after that plague, disease specialists and the media are now surprised at the correlation of new infections with homosexual behavior;Wake up, medical and political establishment: homosexual behavior is unhealthy -- no matter how many secular sermons you preach against "homophobia." Due to liberal political correctness, which treats aberrant -- even deadly -- behaviors as a "civil right," we as a society don't seem to have learned much from the AIDS pandemic.

Who are you going to believe? Me or your own eyes " Award Part 2

Rick Warren - Warren is a classic example of giving some people enough rope to hang themselves. In the furor caused by President-Elect Obama’s selection of him to give the inaugural invocation, Warren tried to blame lgbts for the controversy. In a video message on his church’s webpage, Warren said he never equated same sex relationships to incest or pedophilia. Unfortunately for him, an online interview with Beliefnet.com proved otherwise.

So the question remains were we the ones who gave Warren the rope or was it Obama?

“Now that I’ve got it on my shoe, how do I get it off” Award

The Mormon church - Come on guys, while it is true that you were well within your First Amendment rights, there are consequences for every action done and every word said. In your victory regarding the Proposition 8 vote in California, you did the following:

Jumped into a situation that had absolutely nothing to do with the survival of the Mormon church.

Put up a wad of cash to fund lies about gays forcing children to be “indoctrinated” about homosexuality.

Aligned yourselves with people and groups who think that you are a cult and basically despise you.

Beat up on a group of people who, to my knowledge, have never done you any harm.

And all in the name of God.

The "Height of Hypocrisy" Award

The American Family Association, various religious right groups - After weeks of railing against lgbts for our Proposition 8 protests, after espousing the beliefs about a free nation and people's right to make choices unafraid, after wrapping themselves up in the flag of democracy, the AFA and various religious right groups made a 360 degree turn and called for a boycott against Campbell Soup for ads placed in the Advocate magazine. And the main bone of contention - the ads dared to show a same-sex couple and their child enjoying a bowl of soup.

Now see, I thought we were going to do the soup indoctrination thing after the inauguration.

"If Edward R. Murrow was alive, he would beat the hell out of you" Award

American Family Association's One News Now - This phony news services makes any of the yellow journalism committed by William Randolph Hearst look like Pulitzer Prize-winning material.

From writing articles telling only one side of the story, to its citing of Paul Cameron and legitimate studies taken out of context, to the hilarious comments section (where the so-called Christian readers of the site repeatedly reveal their abject ignorance and bigotry), if One News Now tells the true "Christian" side of today's cultural issues, then I think Jesus needs to sit some of his followers down for a looooong talk on truth.

“Nostradamus” Award:

Janet Folger Porter - Anti-gay spokesperson Porter finally reached her nadir of nuttiness this year through a column that took an interestingly mind-boggling look into the future of a Hilary Clinton presidency. Apparently in this future, gays have taken over and are working to re-educate her and other “Christians.” Those who will not re-educate will be imprisoned in filthy dungeons.

And here I thought the most we were going to do was strap them down and force them to watch Funny Lady for 24 consecutive hours.

“Exposed for Lying but He Keeps on Trying” Lifetime Achievement Award

Paul Cameron - Despite the fact that he is constantly and consistently exposed for bad research tactics, Cameron continues to spout his discredited anti-gay studies. And what’s more, he is referred to continuously by members of the religious right. This year, Cameron even traveled to Russia and gave a talk at Moscow State University. You gotta admire his chutzpah if not his lack of integrity.

“Is She Our Ally or Enemy” Award

Elaine Donnelly - Donnelly, head of the Center for Military Readiness, gave testimony in front of Congress this year against allowing gays to serve openly in the military She actually did more to make our case than we ever could. She got her behind handed to her for spouting inaccurate anecdotes and horror stories designed to appeal to fears about lgbts. And she gives me an idea; perhaps Paul Cameron should be the next to testify in front of Congress.

"Is He Our Ally or Enemy" Award

George Rekers - Former University of South Carolina professor and Family Research Council board member George Rekers struck a blow for gay adoption this year by testifying against it.

Rekers had testified in defense of Florida's gay adoption ban in November. Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Cindy Lederman not only ruled against Florida but said that Rekers' testimony cannot be considered as credible or worthy of forming the basis of public policy.

Ironically, this is the same conclusion that Pulaski County Circuit Court Judge Timothy White reached in 2005 when Rekers testified in defense of Arkansas's gay adoption ban.

This information enables Rekers to become a two-time award recipient as I now bestow upon him the coveted "Second Verse, Same as the First but the Song Still Sucks" Award.

SPECIAL AWARD

“Say it loud if you are black and proud but keep that gay *&@ to yourself” Award

To Harry Jackson, Ken Hutcherson, Alveda King, and the rest of the black ministers and spokespeople (this means you too, Crystal Dixon) who spout silly homilies like “don’t equate my skin with your sin” and help propagate the lie that the lgbt orientation and the African-American identity are mutually exclusive.

To all of the black ministers nationwide who knowingly have lgbt of color congregants but will not pursue private one-on-one nonjudgmental conversations with them

To Ebony, Essence, Jet, Emerge and other African-American oriented magazines who write very few articles regarding lgbts of color.

To all of the African-American social organizations who will not even mention lgbts of color.

To all of the African-American oriented television shows (such as House of Payne) who feature no lgbt of color characters.

To all of the African-American motion pictures who feature lgbt of color characters strictly as vehicles for the worst form of comedy.

To BET network for continuing to show Soul Plane almost every month (thereby showcasing the worst stereotypes about lgbts of color).

To all of the civic minded African-American spokespeople and leaders who will not even address the fact that lgbts of color exist.

To all of those in the African-American community who reduce lgbt of color relationships to sexual innuendoes by their patronizing comments like "not caring about who someone sleeps with."

To all of you, thank you for sowing the seeds of inferiority in the minds of lgbts of color and thereby causing them to act in ways that make the HIV rate go up in the African-American community.

And finally . . . .

The Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters Misinformer of the Year Award

Matt Barber - This guy’s entire career as a religious right spokesperson has been a fluke from the beginning. Originally, he was fired from AllState Insurance for anti-gay columns he wrote. Although Barber claimed to have written them on his own time, it was alleged that he used company equipment to do so. Also he did involve the company in his nonsense by listing the fact that he was an employee in his columns.

Barber parlayed that furor into becoming a spokesman for Concerned Women for America, where he scrapped with folks like Wayne Besen and Keith Boykin on coast to coast television, despite often times being in way over his head.

Whether using antiquated arguments against lgbts (citing that old inaccurate line about lgbts engaging in a organized campaign to take over America put forth by the book After the Ball) or constantly reminding everyone about alleged gay sexual intercourse (aiding and abetting LaBarbera on the MRSA debacle), Barber's attacks on the lgbt community have bordered on fanatic and loony.

But one act cements this award for Barber.

In June, he repeated the “gays have short lifespan” lie. In doing so, he cited the 1997 Canadian study with the full knowledge that in 2001 the study’s authors complained about the distortion of their work.

And he attacked the credibility of the authors for daring to complain. He called their words “worthless fluff” and said they were under “tremendous pressure” to refute their original work. Naturally Barber did not elaborate about this “tremendous pressure.”

You get that: a failed insurance salesman-cum-rightwing spokesman attacks the credibility of prominent researchers simply because they complain as to how their work has been distorted.

So in the grand scheme of things, we are talking about going from the Immaculate Conception, calming stormy seas, turning water into wine, healing the sick, and raising the dead to attempting make inaccurate information credible with a stroke of a keyboard.

Christianity hasn't fallen this far since Jan Crouch of Trinity Broadcasting discovered hairpieces.

Barber left Concerned Women for America in late 2008 to be a staff member at the religious right college, Liberty University. But he refuses to let go of the spotlight.

Like a quarterback falling on the football and thereby sealing a Superbowl victory, Barber cemented this award with a recent column comparing lgbts and progressives in general to idol worshippers and child sacrificers of Biblical times.

No need to run the clock out, Matt. At this juncture I doubt anyone can match your silliness.

So that's it. Those are my award winners. And by the way, the award is a huge bronx cheer.

Hey, if I really hated these guys, I would force them to listen to the Osmonds' One Bad Apple.

But Mr. Warren, you aren't telling the truth

In the transcript of Rick Warren's comments about the controversy (talked about in my last post), he said he never equated gay marriage with pedophilia or incest:

I have been accused of equating gay partnerships with incest and pedophilia. Now of course as members of Saddleback Church you know I believe no such thing, I never have. You've never once heard me in 30 years heard me talk that way about that.

Well then just what is this statement taken from an interview with Beliefnet.com:

Rick Warren: But the issue to me is, I’m not opposed to that as much as I’m opposed to the redefinition of a 5,000-year definition of marriage. I’m opposed to having a brother and sister be together and call that marriage. I’m opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that a marriage. I’m opposed to one guy having multiple wives and calling that marriage.

Steven Waldman: Do you think, though, that they are equivalent to having gays getting married?

Rick Warren: Oh I do . …

You can see the video of the interview here and judge for yourself.

In his defense, Warren does try to clarify what he meant in this interview:

. . . in that interview I named several other relationships, in fact I've done it several times, I've named other relationships such as living together, uh or a man with multiple wives or brother sister relationship or adults with children or common law partnerships or all kinds of other relationships. I don't think any of them should be called marriage. Now I was not saying that those relationships were the same thing because I happen to not believe that and I've never taught it. I was just pointing out that I believe the definition of marriage should only be included one definition, a man and a woman for life.

You can take it for what you want, but to me, Warren needs to man up and own his comments. The "explanations" he gives for equating same sex marriage to pedophilia and incest are weak at best.

And it is more proof that Warren's attack on lgbts for calling him out on his dishonesty is unfounded.

In the transcript, Warren also blames the media and bloggers for "creating this controversy."

I guess his lying has nothing to do with it, huh?

Someone needs to tell Warren that the more he talks, the worse he looks.

UPDATE - Apparently Steve Waldman, the Beliefnet writer who interviewed Warren, doesn't agree with the explanations either, but he does add a caveat in another attempt to clarify Warren's comments. I happen to not agree but still it is worth mentioning:

In his December 22 video Warren had an opportunity to do something quite straightforward and healing: clarify, take resonsibility and, ideally, apologize. He did clarify but did not, in my view, take responsibility. He could have simply said, "it came out in a way I didn't mean and I apologize for those who I hurt because of that." It wouldn't have required him to back off his position on gay marriage one iota. Instead, he blamed the media and misremembered or mischaracterized what he'd said.

On the other hand, what's most important is that he did make it clear that he doesn't believe gay relationships are the moral equivalent of incest etc. That idea should now be put to rest.

Hat tip to Teach The Facts for the transcript and to Box Turtle Bulletin for the part about Waldman.

Now hold up, Rick Warren! YOU started this @&%#!

Had to post this one.

Apparently Rick Warren has posted a video about the recent controversy.

According to Americablog:

Warren accuses gays of "hate speech," of launching "hateful attacks" against him, and he then says that gay and lesbian Americans have "Christ-ophobia," a clear effort to mock the term "homophobia." He goes on to explain that gays are "afraid of any Christian," suggesting that gay and lesbian Americans - gay and lesbian Obama voters - are not Christians. He then goes on to call gays criticizing him "evil." All this from a man who compared gay marriage to incest and pedophilia, and who explicitly bans "unrepentant gays" from his church membership.(He also adds that bloggers are "rude" and "need to get a life." I don't really care about that part, it's just more evidence that we're getting under Warren's skin, and that he's not quite ready for prime time.)

Lgbts are obviously getting to Warren and that's good.

And I am glad to see that NO ONE is allowing Warren to get away with playing the victim here.

As John Aravosis so eloquently stated, Warren was the one started this mess by comparing gay marriage to incest and pedophilia, and who explicitly bans "unrepentant gays" from his church membership.

And as Jeremy from Goodasyou.org has said:

We're not hiding. We're not life-deprived. We are daring to stand up against your attempts to deny us of our lives. We in the gay community, in particular, are putting our lives on hold to fight this needless battle that you are FORCING US TO FIGHT! Why? Because we DO love our lives and we refuse to hide them for anyone! HOW DARE YOU trivialize the pain you have caused?!?!?

This is truly a wig-snatching off, earring-removing moment for the lgbt community.

It's like that old ghetto saying: "don't start nothing and there won't be nothing."

I have tried to be moderate about this (mainly because I remember how unneccesarily angry I was about the Donnie McClurkin incident) and I still believe that despite this misstep, an Obama Administration is good for the lgbt community.

But this constant whining by Warren is getting me this close to "losing all of my religion."

Just who in the hell does Warren think he is?

I know I am preaching to the choir, but I really want to know this.

He tells lies about gays wanting to jail Christians, he disrespects us and our relationships, and then when he is called on it, we (the community that have been maligned) are the ones in the wrong because we are complaining about it?

We are the haters? My head is spinning from that lack of logic.

No one has threatened Warren. But there have been vigorous disagreements with his statements. I guess Warren is channeling the mindset of the rest of the religious right - to attack their lies amounts to hatred because they are right even when they are wrong.

I know about Warren's work to fight AIDS but to me, it is the equivalent of putting out a fire that you have started.

Doesn't he realize that the things he says goes a long way in fostering an inferiority mentality amongst lgbts that would lead them into dangerous behavior which in turn leads to catching AIDS?

When you infer that someone is a freak and help to make sure that they cannot prove you wrong, don't be surprised to have a freak on your hands.

If Warren really cared about the lgbt community and AIDS, he would do more to foster monogamous lgbt relationships rather than tell lies in order to kill them.

And then comes the alleged elimination of anti-gay language on his church's webpage.

Instead of trying to beat up on lgbts, Warren needs to come clean on this. Obviously there was a feeling that the language was inappropriate. If not, then why was it removed?

That in itself proves that Warren's whining is inaccurate. Mike Rogers said it best in his smackdown on Hardball - the lgbt community at large has not changed on our position regarding Warren. It is Warren who made the changes.

Warren should just get off of the cross and stop trying to be Joan of Arc because HE started this mess with us.

And we are finishing it.

Quick briefs from the world

Warren’s church removes anti-gay statements from website. (If you haven't done anything wrong then why do you feel the need to remove stuff from your webpage, Mr.
Warren)

Mike Rogers owns Warren defender on Hardball (Of course it's never about "gotcha politics" but I am so sick of weak ass spokespeople on news shows allowing people like Tony Perkins or Mike Huckabee to walk all over them with an Atticus Finch stick. Rogers was clear, to the point, never raised his voice, but controlled the conversation)

Lesbian's brutal gang rape investigated in Calif. (God, I hope this is just an urban legend)

Rule Shields Health Workers Who Withhold Care Based on Beliefs (If Concerned Women for America supports this then it can't be good for the lgbt community)

Yes on 8 Campaign: Liars (You mean they lied about not wanting to overturn the gay marriages that already took place in California? No shit.)

The AFA hates lgbt families

Despite all, I am convinced that despite the Rick Warren controversy, lgbts are in a much better state than we would be in if McCain had been elected president.

And I am equally convinced that an Obama Administration will be good for us.

But I guess a lot of folks don't really get why the lgbt community are up in arms about Warren. Much has been said, broken down, and manipulated, but what I read in One News Now today gives a perfect reason for our anger:

The American Family Association (AFA) says Christian consumers need to know that the Campbell Soup Company embraces the homosexual agenda.

Campbell Soup bought two 2-page ads in the December and January issues of The Advocate, the nation's largest homosexual magazine. The ads promote their Swanson line of broth, and one of the ads highlights the lives of two lesbians, who are portrayed as being married, along with "their" son. Other ads feature chefs from New York City.

Randy Sharp, AFA's director of special projects, says concerned consumers should contact company officials and ask them to stop endorsing homosexuality.

"When you specifically target a homosexual magazine, then your company is basically endorsing these activities; you're endorsing the lifestyle," claims Sharp. "And in one ad, which...clearly shows two lesbians who say they are married, who say they have a son together, ...the Campbell Soup Company is saying 'we approve of homosexual marriage.' There is no question whatsoever of what the intentions of the company are."

Yeah it's clear what the company is trying to do - sell soup, you moron.

Now Mike Huckabee, Warren, and the rest can do fluff televised interviews in order to their point of views sound palpable, but the AFA's objections regarding Campbell Soup is the real face of the religious right in America.

Why shouldn't Campbell Soup sell their products to lgbts? We have families and we eat soup.

Or better yet - just what gives AFA the right to dictate lgbt images? The organization is basically saying, "despite the fact that lgbts families exist and despite the fact that they are consumers, we don't like the idea of lgbt families so we are going to do everything we can to hinder that image."

I'm sure the AFA will give us the standard line of "not hating gays" and "just because you don't agree with the lifestyle means that you hate the person," but it just doesn't wash here.

It's one thing to be angry at a company for whom it gives money to, but this goes beyond the pale.

The AFA is angry because Campbell Soup dared to acknowledge the fact that not only lgbt families exist but they are pretty normal.

This attempt to dehumanize us and stigmatize our families under the guise of religion is what lgbts have to deal with everyday in one form or another.

And frankly, we are getting tired of it.

Unfortunately no one ever seems to want to ask Warren or Huckabee about things like this. And I won't hold my breath waiting for those questions.