Saturday, November 27, 2010

Why the National Organization for Marriage was profiled for its anti-gay hatred

This is actually a repost of two pieces I wrote in July detailing a very short feud between me and the National Organization for Marriage.

It is very relevant to right now seeing that the National Organization for Marriage is not happy after being profiled by the Southern Poverty Law Center for it's anti-gay bile. Of course the organization claims that it is being unfairly labeled as "bigoted" simply because it is "standing up for traditional marriage." However, this post proves otherwise:

From July 2010:

What's up with the National Organization for Marriage (NOM)?

Not too many people are noticing this, but that organization, started to supposedly "protect marriage" from us so-called evil LGBTs, seems to be going off the deep end in terms of rhetoric.

When it began, NOM cleverly played up the "we are unfairly being called bigots because we simply want to protect marriage" meme. And that was because of the savvy of its founder, Maggie Gallagher.

But now with Gallagher handing the reins of the group to Brian Brown, the organization has abandoned all pretenses of martyrdom and is headed straight for crazy-talk territory.

This was evident when it joined forces in its "Summer for Marriage" tour with one Louis J. Marinelli III, a man who not only cites the discredited work of Paul Cameron, but is also very vocal in the belief that gays want to cause all sorts of mischief from molesting children to creating polygamous relationships.

And if that's not bad enough, from an administrator of NOM's Facebook page comes this little "gem:"

(Gays and lesbians) are not being repressed, discriminated against. There is no and never has ever been a homosexual man hunt for them. Jews, Christians, and Blacks were hunted down and murdered. Homosexuals have nothing in common with the three.

Now I could go into a history of the persecution of the LGBT community in places like Nazi Germany or talk about Sakia Gunn, Michael Sandy, or even Matthew Shepard (whose murder was not soley about a robbery no matter what the right says), or the countless number of LGBTs who have lost their lives due to hate but what's the point?

Sometimes people say things so wildly inaccurate that any comment you want to make is unnecessary. The statement by NOM is beyond the pale and it further proves what many LGBTs know about that group. NOM is not interested in defending marriage. It's only interested in bashing LGBTs, but not by physical attacks.

NOM seeks to psychologically bash us.

Friday, November 26, 2010

U.S. judge says lesbians can be 'converted' if allowed to serve in the military

I wasn't going to post anything else today after this morning, but this bit of repulsive information needs to be known:

Joe Rehyansky, a part-time magistrate and Vietnam veteran, wrote on conservative news site The Daily Caller that lesbians should be allowed to serve in the military because straight male soldiers could “convert” them.
The Daily Caller swiftly removed some of his remarks but not before they were picked up by other websites.
Mr Rehyansky, of Hamilton County, Tennessee, argued that men were naturally more promiscuous than women and “it fell to men to swing through the trees and scour the caves in search of as many women as possible to subdue and impregnate – a tough job but someone had to do it”.

Then, he claimed that the “promiscuity” of gay men, coupled with HIV, would have “the potential for disastrous health consequences” if gay men were allowed to serve openly in the military.

Rehyansky's entire piece is vomit-worthy, spewing the same anti-gay distortions which is now coming back to haunt organizations such as the Family Research Council. But it's the following part that's causing eyes, tempers, and blood pressures to be raised:

His final argument, which has now been removed by The Daily Caller, was as follows: “My solution would get the distaff part of our homosexual population off our collective ‘Broke Back,’ thus giving straight male GIs a fair shot at converting lesbians and bringing them into the mainstream.”

How very interesting that this piece came out the week before Congressional hearings and a vote on the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the military policy in regards to gays serving in the military.

Call it a hunch, but I'm betting those who want to retain the policy aren't going to be calling on Rehyansky as a witness.



Bookmark and Share

The Family Research Council should be apologizing to the gay community

The disagreement between the Southern Poverty Law Center and the new groups designated as anti-gay hate groups hit the Washington Post yesterday.

And while I am happy with the coverage, I am not happy with how these groups are trying to cover their tracks. They are trying to make it seem as if they are being attacked because they have made stands against gay marriage.

The key person pushing this argument is Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.

Perkins has even had the temerity to demand an apology from the SPLC:

Family Research Council will continue to champion marriage and family as the foundation of our society and will not acquiesce to those seeking to silence the Judeo-Christian views held by millions of Americans. We call on the Southern Poverty Law Center to apologize for this slanderous attack and attempted character assassination."

Let's be clear about something - the claim that these groups, particularly FRC,  are being attacked merely for their stance against gay marriage or their stance against homosexuality is a lie.

FRC in particular has a long history of demonizing the lgbt community. Via studies, briefs, and research papers heavily reliant on junk science and fear tactics, FRC attacked the lgbt community long before discussions of gay marriage even came on the scene.

Unfortunately some of these past studies, briefs and press releases are no longer on FRC's web page.  In December of 2008, I noticed this and emailed the organization asking for an explanation. I was told the following:

The papers that you inquired about have been removed from our website indefinitely due to the fact that they have outdated sources.

The email further pointed out that there were several other studies which remained on the web page.  The irony is that these studies used the same material the "outdated" papers used, which is another way of saying that FRC got rid of the papers but used the same bad sources.

Luckily for me though, John Aravosis of Americablog created a webpage which featured statements by the Family Research Council (and other religious right groups and figures) pertaining to the lgbt community. The following are just a few things said about the lgbt community:

"Homosexuals say they don't want the children, but boy they put a lot of energy into going after them." - Robert Knight of FRC writing in a Focus on the Family newsletter, quoted by People for the American Way, "Hostile Climate," 1997, p.15.

"Gaining access to children has been a long-term goal of the homosexual movement." - "Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex With Boys," Family Research Council publication, July 1999

"There is a strong undercurrent of pedophilia in the homosexual subculture. Homosexual activists want to promote the flouting of traditional sexual prohibitions at the earliest possible age....they want to encourage a promiscuous society - and the best place to start is with a young and credulous captive audience in the public schools." - Robert Knight, Family Research Council.

"In the United States, homosexual activists are more circumspect about their efforts to gain access to children...homosexual activists publicly disassociate themselves from pedophiles as part of a public relations strategy"- "Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex With Boys," FRC publication, July 1999

"You don’t have to eat the stale crumbs off the dirty floor, which is basically what lesbianism is." - AFTAH (Americans for Truth) Web site interview with FRC's Yvette Cantu.

I should mention that throughout all of the complaints and claims of persecution, neither Perkins nor any of the other persons or groups profiled by the SPLC have issued the short clarifying statements of "we have not done these things" or "our statements have been misconstrued."

Make no mistake about it. These groups have been spooked by being called out on their lies and are on the defensive. And now they are attempting to flip the argument.

But you can't make yourself look like a victim when a paper trial exposes you as a bully.

No matter how Perkins tries to spin the situation, he has a lot of answering to do at the very least in regards to FRC's past statements against the lgbt community.

Perhaps he should be the one to make the apologies.

Related posts:

Newly named anti-gay hate groups plead victimhood but do not address charges

Talking Points Memo picks up the SPLC anti-gay hate groups story

Ignoring your hate group status won't make it go away

Family Research Council, American Family Association named as anti-gay hate groups

18 Anti-Gay Groups and Their Propaganda


10 Anti-Gay Myths Debunked





Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Newly named anti-gay hate groups plead victimhood but do not address charges

Well that was quick. I just knew something would happen that I had to address.

Apparently some organizations who are on the Southern Poverty Law Center's list and profiles of anti-gay hate groups aren't happy about it and their spokespeople are addressing the issue.

But the venue that they chose to address SPLC's list and the way that they are saying (or rather what they are not saying) raises some questions as to the accuracy of their complaints.

Coral Ridge Ministries's Robert Knight, Concerned Women for America's Wendy Wright, and Christian Anti-Defamation Coalition head Gary L. Cass all responded in outraged tones over SPLC's either profiling or designating their organizations as anti-gay hate groups.

The venue where they choose to address the charges was on the pages of World Net Daily, an online publication which is infamous for its anti-gay rhetoric.

A writer on the site, Les Kinsolving, has in the past referred to the lgbt community as the "sodomy lobby."

In October of this year, he called a judge’s order to stop enforcement of the military’s ban on gay and lesbian troops in the military as a "disease ridden judicial decision."

In August of this year, the publication dropped conservative writer Ann Coulter as a keynote speaker from a conference it held because she earlier spoke at a conference held by a gay Republican group.

And in February of this year, another writer on World Net Daily, Molotov Mitchell, spoke out in favor of Uganda's "Kill The Gays" bill, even evoking Martin Luther King Jr's name in defense of it.

Joining Cass, Perkins, and Knight was Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in an official statement which may not have been put out to World Net Daily specifically but was still picked up by the publication.

The irony of appearing in an anti-gay online publication in order to complain about being unfairly targeted as anti-gay seemed to have escaped Perkins, Wright, Knight, and Cass. This is probably because they were too busy pleading victimhood.

Knight - "Smearing legitimate groups merely for disagreeing about homosexuality is a very hateful act."

Perkins - "The Left's smear campaigns of conservatives is being driven by the clear evidence that the American public is losing patience with their radical policy agenda as seen in the recent election and in the fact that every state, currently more than thirty, that has had the opportunity to defend the natural definition of marriage has done so . . ."

Cass - "We are going to form a coalition of organizations to lobby Congress to withhold funds from SPLC."

Wright - "If they were to judge according to actions, they would have to have a special section for homosexual groups that vandalize and threaten people who oppose the homosexual agenda. We've had death threats against us posted openly on websites because of our work to uphold traditional marriage."

Of course Wright did not say just which lgbt groups were threatening her organization. Nor did she, Knight, Perkins, or Cass directly address any of the charges lodged by the SPLC, which are listed in a detailed report.

For the record, Knight, whose name pops up several times in the report, is inaccurate when he said that groups are being smeared for voicing a mere objection to homosexuality. SPLC said the following in the report:

Generally, the SPLC’s listings of these groups is based on their propagation of known falsehoods — claims about LGBT people that have been thoroughly discredited by scientific authorities — and repeated, groundless name-calling. Viewing homosexuality as unbiblical does not qualify organizations for listing as hate groups.

SPLC also gave a detailed description as to what these falsehoods are, including the claims that:

Gays molest children at a higher rate than heterosexuals,

Same sex parents harm children,

Gays have a lifespan shorter than heterosexuals, and

Gays controlled the Nazi party in Germany and helped orchestrate the Holocaust.

SPLC contends that these groups are knowingly pushing these falsehoods.

Now it would seem to me that through all of the whining and clinging to the cross of victimization done by Knight, Perkins, Wright, and Cass would be some type of declaration that these charges aren't true.

Maybe some type of short statement such as "we never said these things" or "we were misconstrued."

But none of the four denied the fact that their organizations are pushing these falsehoods.

So while it seems that these groups aren't ignoring SPLC's charges, it's obvious that they are doing a insanely poor job of refuting them.


Bookmark and Share

Talking Points Memo picks up the SPLC anti-gay hate groups story

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone. I most likely won't be posting until Friday afternoon.

The popular political blog Talking Points Memo has picked up the story about SPLC naming the Family Research Council as an official anti-gay hate group:

The Family Research Council is perhaps the most prominent voice in conservative social politics and the hosts of an annual rite of passage for many Republicans who hope to run for president. And now, FRC is on the same Southern Poverty Law Center list of hate groups as the Ku Klux Klan.

The SPLC gave the Family Research Council the designation due to anti-gay speech from its leaders, which the SPLC says includes calls for gay men and lesbians to be imprisoned.

Labeling the Family Research Council a hate group puts one of Washington's most powerful social issues advocates into the company of groups like the Nation of Islam and the now mostly defunct Aryan Nations in the eyes of the SPLC, which tracks 932 active hate groups in the U.S.

The article is an excellent read, particularly the part that goes into details regarding the comments of FRC employee Peter Sprigg. But I found this part to be very interesting:

The SPLC designation of the Family Research Council as an anti-gay hate group potentially poses more of a challenge for Republicans. Though many conservatives view the SPLC as a progressive group and therefore no more worthy of respect than, say, ACORN, the SPLC hate group label will almost undoubtedly make it into press reports about future events like the Values Voter Summit. That means Republican presidential hopefuls who may want to reach out to gay and lesbian Republican groups like the Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud -- which can be good sources of fundraising as well as "I'm not anti-gay" cred on the campaign trail -- may have to explain why they publicly praised and rushed to address a group that SPLC is calling one of the worst perpetrators of ugly myths about gays.

As Beirich told me, there is no difference between the FRC and the KKK in the eyes of the SPLC now. Still, she said that the hate group designation doesn't mean the SPLC thinks everyone who supports the FRC "has a full understanding of what they're up to." Many who support the FRC may do so because of the group's very public ties to evangelical Christianity, and Beirich stressed that the SPLC designation has nothing to do with an "attack on the churchly world."

By the way, FRC did not return TPM's request for a comment on the hate group designation.

Related posts:

Family Research Council, American Family Association named as anti-gay hate groups

Ignoring your hate group status won't make it go away




Bookmark and Share

The priest, the victim, and the hitman and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Texas: Catholic Priest Allegedly Tried to Have Teen Sexual Abuse Victim Murdered - Soon to be an episode of Law and Order no doubt, probably one of the creepiest things I have read in a while.

New federal task force on LGBT youth suicide prevention to be announced - Say what you will, this is major.

Bryan Fischer, Tony Perkins, and the Hate Agenda - Keep the pressure up on these folks!

Caution over HIV 'breakthrough' - I agree. Read the article, keep praying, and keep playing it safe.

Tell the Apple iTunes Store to remove anti-gay, anti-choice iPhone application - I'm speechless about what Apple iTunes is doing.


Bookmark and Share

Ignoring your hate group status won't make it go away

For now, the groups (i.e. the American Family Association, the Family Research Council) just added by Southern Poverty Law Center to the list of anti-gay hate organizations seem to be silent on their new status.

But other folks aren't.

Lgbt activist and author Dan Savage is making sure that this designation isn't being ignored.

Savage (who came up with the idea of the "It Gets Better Project" to combat the problem of gay teen suicides) took CNN to task yesterday during an interview for how the network gives a platform to these groups:

The Southern Poverty Law Center labels these groups as hate groups and yet the leaders of these groups, people like Tony Perkins, are welcomed onto networks like CNN to espouse hate directed at gays and lesbians. And similarly hateful people who are targeting Jews or people of color or anyone else would not be welcome to spew their bile on networks like CNN and then that really -- we really have to start there. We have to start with that type of cultural reckoning.

Meanwhile, a person whose presence was noted several times on SPLC's profile of these groups, Robert Knight of Coral Ridge Ministries, has come out with a new book claiming to tackle the so-called "harmful effects of same-sex marriage."

One wonders if he cited the work of the discredited Paul Cameron in this book like he has done several times in the past, including as a Congressional witness in 1994 when he spoke against ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act).

One thing is certain. Even before SPLC's citation, he wasn't so eager to talk about Cameron. In June of this year,  Knight, through his representative, declined to have an interview with me about the subject.

This is a far cry from the conversation I had with him in 2004 when he came to the University of South Carolina to have a debate with former Human Rights Campaign head Elizabeth Birch.

During the conversation after the debate (a conversation I recounted in my 2007 book Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters), I was able to question Knight as to why he used Cameron's work even though it had been discredited several times.

His answer to me was:

“Yes we have used his research. So what?”

But Knight and others listed by SPLC do have their defenders.

William A. Jacobson, Associate Clinical Professor at Cornell Law School, didn't care for SPLC's list. He is especially angry that the National Organization for Marriage is on the list (Editor's note - SPLC does not consider NOM as an official anti-gay hate group, but did profile the organization):

The inclusion of NOM on this list really is outrageous, and typical of how SPLC seeks to demonize a mainstream conservative (and in this case, constitutional) view.  The explanation SPLC gives for including NOM is flimsy and filled with innuendo.  

Jacobson also said about SPLC's list in general:


Most of these groups are unknown to me,  although a couple are well-known Christian groups, such as American Family Association and Family Research Council (both of these entities will be on SPLC's upcoming Hate Group list).  I don't defend or not defend these groups because I don't know much about them, but based upon SPLC's past performance, the burden should be on SPLC to make the case for including a group on a hate list.

Unfortunately that leads one to think that Jacobson didn't read SPLC's breakdown of these groups at all. The organization gives very detailed reasonings as to why these groups are profiled as well as the inaccurate things they say about the lgbt community.

Jacobson - and many responders to his blog post - were conveniently silent about these inaccurate claims, instead choosing to play the victim and complain about "liberal conspiracies" against Christians.


Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

THIS is the DADT repeal ad that Fox News refused to run

Earlier today, I mentioned in my news briefs an article talking about how Fox News refused to run a DADT repeal ad.

Well just because those so-and-so's won't run it doesn't mean that I won't. I found the ad to be an excellent piece:






Bookmark and Share

'Ex-gay' group targeting middle school students and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Notorious ‘Ex-Gay Group Plans to Target Middle School Students in 2011 - And they like to claim that we target children.

Fox News rejects ad featuring gay troops discussing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” - And this shocks us because?

PFOX Board Member Cited As Key A Reason The Family Research Council Is a SPLC Certified Hate Group - Sometimes it is about who you know.

NJ Assembly approves tougher bullying law - Excellent!




Bookmark and Share

Bogus study claims that fatherless homes leads to lesbians

In a huge show of audacity, the recently named anti-gay hate group the Family Research Council just came out with a study of its own on the lesbian community. And of course, this "study" has been propped up by another anti-gay hate group the American Family Association via its phony news publication, One News Now:

A recently released study shows a link between childhood family structure and the rate of female homosexuality -- undermining the claim that sexual orientation is genetic or biological.

Family Research Council (FRC) looked into the family lives and worship rates of 7,643 women between the ages of 14 and 44. Pat Fagan, senior fellow and director of the Marriage and Religion Research Institute at FRC, co-evaluated the data and tells OneNewsNow about the findings.

"Once the girl grows up in a home in which her father is not present, it's about three times" more likely she has had or will have homosexual partners, he says -- but when she is raised by parents who are married and "always intact, it's about a four-percent rate." Moreover, he explains that rate is "slightly higher in the always-intact-but-cohabitating parents -- that's parents who never married."

Statistics are also higher with step-families, the cohabiting step-family, and the single divorced parent, adds the FRC spokesman.

In keeping with what I said yesterday, I am going to keep this short and sweet.

I wouldn't believe the Klan if they came out with a "study" about African-Americans, so why should I or anyone else believe a study about lgbts by a group who not only has a known bias against lgbts but has been known to play loose with the facts.

It's all about credibility and in this case, the Family Research Council doesn't have any.

However, if you feel so desired to read an excellent take down of this ridiculous piece of work, check out this post by my online buddy, Zach Ford.



Bookmark and Share

Monday, November 22, 2010

Family Research Council, American Family Association named as anti-gay hate groups

Today, the Southern Poverty Law Center added five more groups to its list of anti-gay hate groups, including some names that are long overdue.

The new groups are:

1. American Family Association
2. Americans for Truth About Homosexuality
3. Dove World Outreach Center
4. Family Research Council
5. Illinois Family Institute

This brings the total of anti-gay hate groups to 18 and all of them are profiled in exact detail by SPLC.

Other groups profiled by SPLC but not designated as official hate groups are:

1. Christian Anti-Defamation Commission
2. Concerned Women for America
3. Coral Ridge Ministries
4. Liberty Counsel
5. National Organization for Marriage

And as an added bonus SPLC also has a page in which they debunk 10 anti-gay myths. And I am sure you have heard of all them before (i.e. gays molest children at a higher rate than heterosexuals, gay have a short lifespan, you can "cure" homosexuality.)

And one thing that cannot be repeated enough is SPLC's reasons to list these organizations as anti-gay hate groups:

Even as some well-known anti-gay groups like Focus on the Family moderate their views, a hard core of smaller groups, most of them religiously motivated, have continued to pump out demonizing propaganda aimed at homosexuals and other sexual minorities. These groups’ influence reaches far beyond what their size would suggest, because the “facts” they disseminate about homosexuality are often amplified by certain politicians, other groups and even news organizations. Of the 18 groups profiled below, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) will be listing 13 next year as hate groups (eight were previously listed), reflecting further research into their views; those are each marked with an asterisk. Generally, the SPLC’s listings of these groups is based on their propagation of known falsehoods — claims about LGBT people that have been thoroughly discredited by scientific authorities — and repeated, groundless name-calling. Viewing homosexuality as unbiblical does not qualify organizations for listing as hate groups.

The last sentence was emphasized by me because it needs to be remembered. Unfortunately when the inaccuracies of various religious right groups are pointed out, the conversation tends to go on a religious direction and this is a mistake.

When we go to the religious direction, we give these groups a chance to cover themselves. "These are merely our personal religious beliefs," they say. 

Religion is immaterial. The bad acts that theses groups commit in the name of religion is the point we should focus on and hammer consistently.
Keep our message short and sweet - these groups knowingly lie about lgbts in attempts to demonize us.

My advice to everyone is to read SPLC's profiles, memorize them, and pass them around to your friends and neighbors.

These groups and their spokespeople are liars and we need to call them as such. We need to hammer that point over and over and over again until it is drilled into the head of America.

Hat tip to People for the American Way and Truth Wins Out

Related posts:

The American Family Association must address Bryan Fischer's hateful comments

10 reasons why Americans for Truth is a hate site

Christian Anti-Defamation Commission defends exorcists and hate groups from the 'scary gays'

Why doesn't Robert Knight want to talk about Paul Cameron? 

National Organization for Marriage needs to address hate in its own ranks 
  
The top 12 lies of Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council




Bookmark and Share

Joint Chiefs chairman want DADT repealed as soon as possible and other Monday midday news briefs

Employing discrimination as an act: Far-right back to pushing the 'ENDA will tie our hands' charade - Gary Cass strikes again. Making sure everyone has the fair right to work? Not such a good idea. Defending discredited researchers and churches who want to exorcise "homosexual demons" out of children? Super.

Pentagon to Release the Fabled DADT "Study" a Day Early - This promises to be interesting. The momentum continues to be on our side.

Navy Chief Praises DADT Survey, Isolating McCain Further - Another good sign.

Joint Chiefs chairman: Congress should end gay ban as soon as possible - The final bit of good news. Get cracking folks.

NJ senator introduces college anti-bullying law - More good news for us.

Benilde student wants to start gay advocacy group - I love it when the next generation is proactive.


Bookmark and Share

The American Family Association must address Bryan Fischer's hateful comments

 (Editor's note - An online buddy, mentor, and one of my all-around favorite people Pam Spaulding is having surgery this morning. Pam is a truly awesome individual to whom I owe a lot to in terms of getting this blog off of the ground and noticed.  My prayer is that she has a successful operation.)

There is this constant talking point, or rather whine, by many who are involved with conservative Christian groups (i.e. the religious right) that they are under attack by so-called "Godless forces of radicalism" or that they are unfairly called bigots because they simply want to defend "Christian values."

The American Family Association is one of these groups. According to its own webpage, the AFA:

works to promote decency and morals in American culture,
1. to restrain evil by exposing the works of darkness and to promote virtue by upholding that in culture which is right, true and good;
2. to convince men of sin and drive them to Christ's grace and forgiveness; and to
3. to guide and encourage Christians to live-out the new holy identity that is theirs as citizens of Christ's kingdom.

These are seemingly nice qualities for an organization to have, except when one actually listens to the words Bryan Fischer, an employee of AFA:

  • Homosexuals comprise less than three percent of the population, yet are responsible for one-third of all child sex abuse cases. There is an overwhelming correlation between homosexual preference and pedophilia. This is further evidence that homosexuality is in fact sexual deviancy. For this reason alone, no homosexual should be elevated to the United States Supreme Court. 
  • If we connect the dots here, the inescapable conclusion is that gay sex is a form of domestic terrorism. 
  • Bottom line: every Muslim who enters the United States carries within his bosom the seeds of sedition. It is dangerously foolish for the United States to invite folks inside our borders whose god orders them, through his holy prophet, to murder American infidels. 
  • “Hitler discovered that he could not get straight soldiers to be savage and brutal and vicious enough to carry out his orders, but that homosexual solders basically had no limits and the savagery and brutality they were willing to inflict on whomever Hitler sent them after. So he surrounded himself, virtually all of the Stormtroopers, the Brownshirts, were male homosexuals. 
  • . . .the illegitimacy rate among Hispanic women is over 50%. I’m not sure pro-family values are as strong in the Hispanic community . . .

Fischer is AFA's Director of Issues Analysis and his statements have caused much consternation amongst many people. But his latest statement, criticizing the awarding of the National Medal of Honor to Army Staff Sgt. Salvatore Giunta, took the proverbial cake.

Giunta recently received the National Medal of Honor for saving members of his squad during the War in Afghanistan on October 25, 2007.

However, Fischer said:

We have feminized the Medal of Honor.

. . .When we think of heroism in battle, we used the think of our boys storming the beaches of Normandy under withering fire, climbing the cliffs of Pointe do Hoc while enemy soldiers fired straight down on them, and tossing grenades into pill boxes to take out gun emplacements.

That kind of heroism has apparently become passe when it comes to awarding the Medal of Honor. We now award it only for preventing casualties, not for inflicting them.

So the question is this: when are we going to start awarding the Medal of Honor once again for soldiers who kill people and break things so our families can sleep safely at night?

Fischer's comments about Giunta has received a lot of deserved negative attention from many voices, except for one - that of the American Family Association.

As far as it is known, the AFA has said nothing about Fischer's comments regarding Giunta nor any of his other outrageous statements. Nor has any other religious right group, even though Fischer has been sought as a speaker to various religious right functions such as the Values Voters Summit this year, which was also attended by Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, Indiana Rep. Mike Pence, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

By the way, none of these individuals, some who are possible 2012 presidential candidates, have said a word about Fischer's comments.

But it would appear to me that the most important voice in this matter should be the AFA because it is the organization which gives Fischer a platform.

The folks at the AFA seem to be playing dumb in hopes that if they don't acknowledge the controversy, then it will go away.

This behavior has certainly worked for them in the past when the organization was caught selling a video featuring a man who falsely claimed to have been "delivered from homosexuality." (The AFA is still selling the video by the way.)

But for the American Family Association to remain silent about Fischer's comments contradicts everything the organization claims to stand for - truth, virtue, decency, and morality.

Hatred and bigotry lodged in God's name is still hatred and bigotry.

Many, myself included, have on several occasions accused religious right groups of working in the name of a bad facsimile of God which is perverted by their own egos, prejudices, and selfish desires of conquest.

If  the AFA continues to be silent about Fischer then they will prove our point better than we have ever hoped to imagine.




Bookmark and Share

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Phony Christian gets DESTROYED over Medal of Honor comments


Regardless of what the religious right says, if Christianity is suffering problems in this country, they shouldn't blame the lgbt community.

Perhaps some of these folks should look in the mirror.

We have phony Christians praising countries who would persecute lgbts, relying on fear tactics and outright lies, and finally as the piece de resistance, not only criticizing soldier for saving lives rather than "killing the enemy" but at the same time, totally disrespecting women.

One that last note, I speak of the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer and his recent comments about Medal of Honor recipient, Army Staff Sgt. Salvatore Giunta.

Guinta received the Medal of Honor for saving members of his squad during the War in Afghanistan on October 25, 2007.

However, Fischer criticized the awarding of the Medal of Honor to Giunta.

Fischer is known for saying hatefully outrageous things in the name of God, but I think even he will admit that he went too far with this:

We have feminized the Medal of Honor.

. . .When we think of heroism in battle, we used the think of our boys storming the beaches of Normandy under withering fire, climbing the cliffs of Pointe do Hoc while enemy soldiers fired straight down on them, and tossing grenades into pill boxes to take out gun emplacements.

That kind of heroism has apparently become passe when it comes to awarding the Medal of Honor. We now award it only for preventing casualties, not for inflicting them.

So the question is this: when are we going to start awarding the Medal of Honor once again for soldiers who kill people and break things so our families can sleep safely at night?

While I hate to point this out, Fischer's inference is inaccurate. During the course of saving his comrades, Giunta did in fact kill one of the enemy soldiers and wounded another.

Fischer, who to my knowledge has never served a day in the Armed Forces, has been called to the carpet all over the place - from the blogsphere, to the editorial pages, to the evening news.

And as such it should be. This is a free society where every man has a right to express his opinion. But you should expect some type of verbal blow back if your opinion makes no logical sense or infuriates many people.

Fischer's opinion in this case more than fits the bill in both descriptions. He is even catching hell on the American Family Association's webpage.

The comments below his piece are many and they are all, shall we say, questioning Fischer's Christian virtues:

As disgusting as I find this post, I am exiting the page with a smile on my face because of how uplifting I find the comments here. Christians, Mormons, atheists, soldiers, EVERYONE is on the exact same page.

This is unbelievably twisted logic, and a dramatically false interpretation of the Christian gospel. Go back to the Bible and read a little more, and while you're at it -- beg forgiveness from all the brave Medal of Honor recipients you have insulted, and all the feminists you have enraged.

Like the scorpion that would rather sting and die than not sting and live. There was only one reason for this disturbing article.... A deep seated jealousy and insecurity about his "manliness" Oh the fact that Pres Obama gave the award had something to do with it. Its that same twisted logic used on Senator Kerry. He went to Vietnam and risked his life, Bush pulled strings and got out of it. Bush never fought in a war, thats why he started one, so he could be macho ... By the way Jesus walked around in Bare feet slept on the ground ,helped the poor and was humble. Jesus was love incarnate. He was also celibate .. I guess he wasn't a real man, never had a woman

Why hasn't the AFA taken this down? There is more than enough evidence to prove that not only that his facts are plain wrong and his theology completely backwards, but his opinions are completely detrimental to any sort of credibility you hoped to have as well. This is a major failure on your part that this even got it past editing. How many more comments do you need to fill your quota? Here's +1. Also, Mr. Fischer: You need to put the Xbox down for a bit. The Medal of Honor isn't an achievement you can unlock if you kill 1,000 Afghanis.

Unbelievably revolting. If I had read his article on a comments section rather than a website, I would have thought it was a troll just trying to piss people off. Sadly that isn't the case. And to use the word 'feminization'? As if it masculine to kill people? Just an FYI: Jesus had a zero kill-count. I think one commenter nailed it on the head: "Amazing. You've managed to enrage Christians, atheists, Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals, the pro-war crowd, the anti-war crowd, men, women, veterans, conscientious objectors, and this is just the beginning of the list. Not since 9/11 have I seen so many people united in the face of one horrible deed."

When you have one (Congressional Medal of Honor) around your neck ,your opinion might matter. Until that day I invite you not to belittle the sacrifices and actions of those who have earned this Honor.

"So the question is this: when are we going to start awarding the Medal of Honor once again for soldiers who kill people and break things so our families can sleep safely at night?" I'm sorry, this is a Christian website and you're claiming we don't glorify killing people and breaking things enough?

My father was a U.S. Army Ranger at Pointe du Hoc (note correct spelling) and both he and I think you are a colossal idiot. Of course, he only won two Silver Stars, one Bronze Star, and two Purple Hearts, so maybe he doesn't know what he's talking about.

If you think that what Salvatore Giunta did wasn't "manly" enough, I'll pay for your plane ticket to Afghanistan so you can take his place. I'm willing to bet an entire year's salary that you wouldn't last five minutes before you were begging to be put back on a plane to America, much less save the lives of your comrades in the same way this man did.

Amazing. You've managed to enrage Christians, atheists, Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals, the pro-war crowd, the anti-war crowd, men, women, veterans, conscientious objectors, and this is just the beginning of the list. Not since 9/11 have I seen so many people united in the face of one horrible deed. Congratulations, Bryan. I hope your follow-up post will be a resignation letter.


Bookmark and Share

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Megyn Kelly vs. Rachel Maddow - you decide who is the journalist and who is the #&^@

Megyn Kelly GQ Men of the Year Issue

This is Megyn Kelly of Fox News.  She was just selected one of  GQ magazine's news personalities of the year.

The interview is interesting. She brags about being on the number one news network, infers that sometimes Glenn Beck does misinform people, and does not think that President Obama is a Muslim.

Based on the comments below the piece, no one really cares about what she thinks.  My guess is that the photo took all of the attention.

Personally I tend to think that the photo is the beginning and end of her talents - a blond with nice breasts and long legs. I don't think of her as a real journalist.

Case in point is the ridiculous New Black Panther case she keeps pumping in an attempt to paint the Obama Administration as racist. Now Kelly hardly did any investigations but rather had the same guests on continuously to repeat the same mantra - without any concrete proof - that the Obama Administration is racist towards white people.

Now when she did have someone on who disagreed with this opinion - Kirsten Powers - this happened:




Now to add a bit of levity to the situation, here is how a real journalist, Rachel Maddow, handles an interview with someone she does not agree with:




Sex and stupidity sells, doesn't it. But sooner or later those with talent and aptitude always come out ahead. So keep pushing up your breasts and stretching those legs, Megyn.

They are the extent of your journalistic assets and they are going to get you only so far.



Bookmark and Share

Friday, November 19, 2010

Know Your LGBT History - Spartacus

How many of you familiar with the classic movie Spartacus (1960) knew that it had a scene cut because it heavily inferred a homosexual seduction?

The scene was when Crassus (Laurence Olivier who was rumored to have been a bisexual and involved in an affair with actor Danny Kaye) attempts to seduce his slave, Antoninus (Tony Curtis).

It's a interesting conversation regarding the eating of snails and the eating of oysters. But I think folk knew what was going on.

That's why the scene was cut. It was later added to the 1991 dvd release:

When the film was restored (two years after Olivier's death), the original dialogue recording of this scene was missing; it had to be re-dubbed. Tony Curtis, by then 66, was able to re-record his part, but Crassus' voice was an impersonation of Olivier by the actor Anthony Hopkins. A talented mimic, he had been a protege of Olivier during his days as the National Theatre's Artistic Director and knew his voice well.

Here is the scene:



Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

Know Your LGBT History - Caged

Know Your LGBT History - The Birdcage

Know Your LGBT History - Maude

Know Your LGBT History - That Certain Summer

Know Your LGBT History - Boat Trip

Know Your LGBT History - Staircase

Know Your LGBT History - Beautiful Thing

Know Your LGBT History - Armed and Dangerous

Know Your LGBT History - The Proud Family

Know Your LGBT History - Suddenly Last Summer

Know Your LGBT History - Gay TV Now

Know Your LGBT History - Stewardess School

Know Your LGBT History - Up the Academy

Know Your LGBT History - Don't be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood

Know Your LGBT History - A Different Story

Know Your LGBT History - Victim

Know Your LGBT History - The Color Purple

Know Your LGBT History - Making Love

Know Your LGBT History - A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge

Know Your LGBT History - Noah's Arc

Know Your LGBT History - Ode to Billy Joe

Know Your LGBT History - Adorable Adrian Adonis

Know Your LGBT History - The Night Strangler

Know Your LGBT History - All in the Family

Know Your LGBT History - Tongues Untied

Know Your LGBT History - The Celluloid Closet

Know Your LGBT History - Querelle

Know Your LGBT History - Theatre of Blood

Know Your LGBT History - Strange Fruit

Know Your LGBT History - Designing Women

Know Your LGBT History - The Children's Hour

Know Your LGBT History - Sylvester

Know Your LGBT History - Once Bitten

Know Your LGBT History - The Boys in the Band

Know Your LGBT History - Christopher Morley, the crossdressing assassin

Know Your LGBT History - Midnight Cowboy

Know Your LGBT History - Dracula's Daughter

Know Your LGBT History - Blacula

Know Your LGBT History - 3 Strikes

Know Your LGBT History - Paris Is Burning

Know Your LGBT History - The Women

Know your LGBT History - Soul Plane

Know Your LGBT History - The Player's Club

Special Know Your LGBT History - Fame

Know Your LGBT History - Welcome Home, Bobby

Know Your LGBT History - Barney Miller

Know your lgbt history - The Jerry Springer Show

Know your lgbt history - Martin Lawrence and that 'gay guy' on his show

Know your lgbt history - The Ricki Lake Show

Know your lgbt history - Which Way Is Up

Know your lgbt history - Gays in Primetime Soaps

Know your lgbt history - Boys Beware

Know your lgbt history - The Boondocks

Know your lgbt history - Mannequin

Know your lgbt history - The Warriors

Know Your LGBT History - New York Undercover

Know Your LGBT History - Low Down Dirty Shame

Know Your LGBT History - Fortune and Men's Eyes

Know your lgbt history - California Suite

Know your lgbt history - Taxi (Elaine's Strange Triangle)

Know your lgbt history - Come Back Charleston Blue

Know your lgbt history - James Bond goes gay

Know your lgbt history - Windows

Know your lgbt history - To Wong Foo and Priscilla

Know your lgbt history - Blazing Saddles

Know your lgbt history - Sanford and Son

Know your lgbt history - In Living Color

Know your lgbt history - Cleopatra Jones and her lesbian drug lords

Know your lgbt history - Norman, Is That You?

Know your lgbt history - The 'Exotic' Adrian Street

Know your lgbt history - The Choirboys

Know your lgbt history - Eddie Murphy

Know your lgbt history - The Killing of Sister George

Know your lgbt history - Hanna-Barbera cartoons pushes the 'gay agenda

'Know your lgbt history - Cruising

Know your lgbt history - Foxy Brown and Cleopatra Jones

Know your lgbt history - I Got Da Hook Up

Know your lgbt history - Fright Night

Know your lgbt history - Flowers of Evil

The Jeffersons and the transgender community     



Bookmark and Share

Anti-gay doctor loses legal claim and other Friday midday news briefs

Prospective RNC Chair Saul Anuzis Defended Right-Wing Extremist: ‘Exactly The Type Of Young Kid We Want’ - Remember this you lgbt voters who pulled the Republican lever in the last election.

Forget adult lives. Peter LaBarbera now wants your innocent memories, too - You get the feeling that Porno Pete just plain don't like us?

‘Shameful’ UN vote ‘may lead to more gay executions’ - This is awful.

Anti-gay Christian doctor has legal claim against adoption panel rejected - As well she should. I respect her personal beliefs but children have a right to a good home and being in a same-sex household is not detrimental to a child.


Bookmark and Share

Anti-gay whine: patients should have NO say in visitation and medical decisions

If you want an example of how meanspirited and anti-gay some members of religious right groups are, check out this bit.

From the Huffington Post:

In a move hailed as a step toward fairness for same-sex couples, President Barack Obama is ordering that nearly all hospitals allow patients to say who has visitation rights and who can help make medical decisions, including gay and lesbian partners.

The White House on Thursday released a statement by Obama instructing his Health and Human Services secretary to draft rules requiring hospitals that receive Medicare and Medicaid payments to grant all patients the right to designate people who can visit and consult with them at crucial moments.

The designated visitors should have the same rights that immediate family members now enjoy, Obama's instructions said. It said Medicare-Medicaid hospitals, which include most of the nation's facilities, may not deny visitation and consultation privileges on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.

The move was called a major step toward fairness for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans.

Now what's wrong with that allowing patients to be allowed to have a say in regards to visitation and medical decisions?

In reality, nothing is wrong with that? But in religious right land, the lgbt part seems to bring out the nastiness.

And one of the main purveyors of anti-gay nastiness, Liberty Counsel's Matt Barber just had to put in his two cents:

Barber considers the new rules political theater in trying to create the disingenuous idea that people based on their so-called "sexual orientation" are roundly discriminated against. Faith-based hospitals are not exempt from the rule.

"Certainly there are Catholic hospitals and Baptist hospitals that recognize homosexual behavior as sinful behavior," he points, "and they do not want to take part in affirming homosexual sin under the strong arm of the government."

Some religious hospitals may have to make a decision as to whether to conform to the rules or not accept Medicare patients. Barber says what the Obama administration is doing is casting liberty of conscience aside and forcing acceptance of homosexuality.

Seems to me that regardless of religious beliefs, a hospital's first priority would be the patient's well being.

 I would sincerely hope any hospital wouldn't be so coldhearted to feel that there has to be a choice between beliefs about homosexuality and allowing an lgbt's partners to make crucial decisions in regards to care - especially if that decision is the difference between the life or death of the patient.




Bookmark and Share

Thursday, November 18, 2010

The arguments against repealing DADT rooted in outlandish fear and homophobia

In the fight to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the argument of the lgbt community has been consistent.

Sexual orientation should not be used a criteria to keep people from serving their country. Lgbts can and have served in the military admirably and should not have to lie to continue to do so.

Now on the other side of the fence, the arguments of those who want to keep DADT (or keep lgbts out of the military altogether) have ranged from distortions to downright outrageous lies.

Let's look at the top five:


5. Gays will go "rape crazy" on military men - This year, discredited researcher Paul Cameron actually had the audacity to come out with a "study" claiming that gays are four to seven more times likely to rape their fellow servicemen. He even says that some perpetrators of heterosexual sex assaults can be termed as gay because apparently some gay men "like women too."

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, while saying nothing about Cameron's phony study, actually echoed its main points:

Our military exists to fight and win wars, not engage in radical social engineering. Forcing soldiers to cohabit with people who view them as sexual objects would inevitably lead to increased sexual tension, sexual harassment, and even sexual assault.


4. Heterosexuals will abandon the military if DADT is repealed - Last year, The Military Times came out with a survey claiming that a majority of respondents (58%) said they opposed openly gay service and 10% said they would not re-enlist if the ban was lifted. However, the Palm Center and Gary Langer who headed polling for ABC News skewered the survey for numerous errors.

Robert Knight of the right-wing Coral Ridge Ministries earlier this year said the following:

" . . .25 percent of people in the military have said they'll either resign or they wouldn't re-enlist. It would hurt recruitment because the military draws from traditional populations that have very traditional values. It would hurt unit cohesion."

However, it was discovered that the poll he was citing was nonexistent.  Knight's claim originated from a quote by World Net Daily writer Mychal Massie.  World Net Daily is a publication not necessarily know for its credibility. Amongst other things, it pushes the belief that President Obama is not a United States citizen.

3. Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal will lead to the draft, forced abortions, pansexual cross-dressing, forced abortions - Robert Knight again:

Forcing open homosexuality on the armed forces would destroy the volunteer military and bring back the compulsory draft. Since women are now deployed close to combat, and the only legal reason they are not eligible is their combat exemption, a new draft could include our daughters. And some would face pressure to have on-base abortions in order to complete their tours of duty.

Chaplains would be the first victims of Mr. Obama's homosexualization of the military, followed by anyone who violated "zero tolerance" policies for homosexual acceptance. Bible-believing Christians would quickly find themselves unwelcome in Barney Frank's new pansexual, cross-dressing military.

Other fallout includes family housing, reduction in retention, recruitment and unit cohesion, an increase in homosexual sexual assaults and a boost to overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

Can you believe that? He forgot the wanton cannibalism.

2. Gays in the military will lead to increased diseases - Earlier this year, a right-wing group, America's Survival, put out a video claiming that gays serving openly in the military will lead to an increase in diseases like AIDS. The video was so offensive that it was removed from youtube.

America's Survival is led by Cliff Kincaid, head of the right-wing group Accuracy In Media. Kincaid and AIM has a long history of smearing the gay community.

Earlier this year, AIM was forced to retract a story on its web page which inaccurately accused Obama appointee Kevin Jennings of being a pedophile.

And Kincaid is probably one of the only few people in this country who openly defends Uganda's anti-gay bill including the part about the death penalty for "aggravated homosexuality."

Now what can top all of these ridiculous reasons? This one by the Traditional Values Coalition:

1. The repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell will lead to "sodomy on the battlefield" and sex parties:

Imagine the impact that the rampant spread of STDs, including HIV would have on the military? How will the military handle the spread of these diseases in the barracks? How will the military handle sodomy in battlefield situations?  . . . what about the unrestrained drug and sex antics committed by young male homosexuals?


The reasons for repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell are good enough to stand on their own.  But the claims of the opposition add credibility to these reasons simply because they are totally unprovable, illogical, and add nothing to the argument. They mainly come from a desire to exploit fear and ignorance. And a place of desperation.

Fear, ignorance, and desperation are qualities which have never had a place in our Armed Forces. And they don't deserve to be accommodated now.

But those who have served admirably and will continue to do so, regardless of sexual orientation, should be allowed in through the front door.


Bookmark and Share

Another university Christian group loses the 'right' to discriminate and other Thursday midday news briefs

Transgender Day of Remembrance 2010 - Until we are all equal, none of us are really equal.




Court Ends Group's Challenge to Calif. Law School - Sorry guys. Campus recognition means no discrimination allowed in your ranks.

PFOX Refuses To Take Down Rescinded DC Certificate of Appreciation - Audacity, thy name is PFOX.

Perkins: If DADT Is Repealed, The Draft Will Be Reinstated - Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council never runs out of stupid things to say.

Senate press conference and hearing creating momentum for DADT repeal - Let's end today's news briefs with some sensible good news.



Bookmark and Share