Two ways One News Now picks homophobia over accuracy

The American Family Association led phony news service One News Now seems to be on a tear about the lgbt community right now.

There are two articles in today's edition about us and both of them are slightly twisted.

The first one is about Jennifer Keeton, the Augusta State University graduate student who unsuccessfully sued the university claiming that she was forced to compromise her beliefs about homosexuality in order to receive her degree.

What it boiled down to was the fact that Keeton didn't want to read material on counseling gays nor did she want to counsel gays at all.

Of course One News Now makes her sound like a martyr:

Dr. Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America sees judicial activism in action.

"The really horrendous part is that one single judge is able to make a decision that influences so many different aspects of our culture. And we're seeing it over and over again where that judge is imposing his own personal views -- which is such a contradiction and is so ironic when this young woman's rights are being taken away from her."

The judge has placed a gag order on the case. But in an interview last month, Keeton's attorney -- David French with the Alliance Defense Fund -- said one of the elements in the remediation plan called for Keaton to attend a "gay-pride parade" and write about her feelings. He called it "ridiculous."

"She should be free from thought reform," the attorney argued. "She should be free from sensitivity training merely because she holds Christian beliefs. Just respect her First Amendment rights."

Of course the article omits the fact that during deliberations, Keeton neither testified on her own behalf nor offered up any witnesses to prove her case.

The second article involves Bradley Manning, the solider in the middle of the Wikileaks scandal.Wikileaks is a site which has displayed classified documents of the U.S. war in Afghanistan. Manning, a 22-year-old soldier suspected of leaking documents to Wikileaks. He is currently awaiting court martial.

In the midst of this scandal, there is a claim, propagated by anti-gay activist Cliff Kincaid, and pushed by One News Now, that Manning is an angry gay activist who leaked information because he was angry at the military's policy on gays in the military. This was from the One News Now article from a couple of days ago:

The British newspaper Daily Telegraph first reported that Private 1st Class Bradley Manning, a U.S. Army intelligence analyst, was not only openly homosexual but also considering a sex change. Manning could face more than 50 years in prison for passing secret documents to WikiLeaks, whose founder Julian Assange has an anti-American and anti-military bent.

But the Daily Telegraph never reported that Manning was seeking a sex change operation.

The claim about the sex change, as well as the entire narrative of Manning being "an angry gay soldier who leaked documents because he is mad at military's policy on gays and lesbians" is a concoction of Kincaid.

Today has been a slight change to One News Now's pushing of the article:

Cliff Kincaid, president of America's Survival and editor of Accuracy in Media is concerned about reports that Manning had been blatantly open about his homosexuality for more than a year and apparently held a grudge against the U.S. military because of its ban on homosexual military service. He thinks the military should have recognized that Manning was a security risk.

There is no mention of a "sex change" operation and no claim that the "Bradley Manning is an angry gay activist" narrative is being pushed by the Daily Telegraph. Nice change, but the inaccurate narrative of Manning being an angry gay soldier, i.e. a security risk, is still present.

It's a shame that One News Now feels that truth and accuracy are allowable casualties when it comes to defending the so-called opinions of God.

What the heck does Glenn Stanton know about gays and lesbians anyway?

I must be on a tear when it comes to responding to anti-gay ignorance today.

This morning it was Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America and her sad attempt to demonize lgbt households by using data having nothing to do with them.

This afternoon, it's Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family.

The point of annoyance for me is an article in today's USA Today talking about how Hollywood is  showing more lgbt characters and families.

Stanton, along with the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer, is quoted as the voices who disagree with this increased visibility.

Now Fischer has a history of making asinine anti-gay comments (which unfortunately the article did not talk about) so there is a paper trail which destroys his credibility as a rational voice on the matter.

But Stanton is a bit more problematic. He tries to make himself sound reasonable but comes across as insulting:

"When actual gay and lesbian weddings are shown on TV (as in news coverage), we win. When they're shown through the lens and creativity and artifice of Hollywood, we don't. Hollywood is succeeding, but they're doing so by not representing reality."

First of all, Stanton's statement is gibberish. Secondly, as far as I know, Stanton is not gay so the question has to be just who is he to decide what is reality when it comes to the lgbt community.

Furthermore, I really don't understand the USA Today can push him as an expert when he has clearly gone on record saying the following:

I don't know of anyone who has referred to me as an "expert" on homosexuality. I have never referred to myself on this, simply because I am not. But I would describe myself as an expert on the issue of same-sex marriage. I have published a book and had many of my articles on the subject republished in numerous mainstream volumes.

I don't mind being critiqued, but at least get it right.

Apparently part of Stanton's "expertise" on same sex marriage is to push inaccurate data on the lgbt community like he did in his piece Why Homosexuality Falls Short of the Ideal.

This piece,  Stanton not only cites the work of the discredited Paul Cameron (via secondhand through Thomas Schmidt) but he also says the following:

In addition, because of the extremely high rate of incidence among homosexuals, a group of rare intestinal diseases have been grouped together under the title "gay bowel syndrome."

There is no such thing as "gay bowel sydrome." In the late 70s, there was a belief that there a series of intestinal disorders which was supposedly related to male sexual activity. However as time went on, it was discovered that the problems that made up "gay bowel syndrome" were not specific to homosexuals, not confined to just the bowels, nor did the term itself meet the medical definition of a syndrome.

There are a myriad of cases where this term has been expunged from usage in various places from the New York Times to the National Institutes of Health.

However, people like Stanton, i.e. phony religious right experts, continue to push the term to the ignorant and unassuming.

But that is the crux of the religious right's war on lgbt America. It's not enough for them to have a negative view of the lgbt community. They seek to force that view on society, even if it means beating back the voices of the lgbt community.

It's pretty much the equivalent of allowing a Klansman to dictate the public images of the African-American community.

Hat tip to People for the American Way.

Ex-gay organization facing financial troubles and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Exodus International Lays off Staff, Cuts Benefits - I hate the fact that people are losing their jobs, but what they are selling is a hideous lie.

Calif Senate approves ending effort to 'cure' gays - What took them so long?

What Rush Limbaugh and Peter LaBarbera Have In Common - Don't you dare. Just read the piece.

True To Misogynistic Roots, NOM Blames Ted Olson’s Liberal Wife for His Support for Gays - And we should be surprised because?

Black males aren't graduating like they should? Blame the gays

A column I read this morning in the American Spectator by Concerned Women for America "senior analyst" Janice Crouse had me reeling due to its audacity to deceive.

The goal of Crouse's piece was probably to demonstrate just how the recent Proposition 8 decision and gay marriage in general is hurting the black community.

However, what she accomplished was showing yet again how some on the right, especially the religious right, dishonestly manipulate facts and figures.

In her piece, Why Young Black Males Are Not Graduating High School, Crouse seems to be trying make a correlation between a recent report by the Schott Foundation (in which the overall 2007-08 graduation rate for Black males in the U.S. was only 47 percent) and the recent Prop 8 ruling:

Nancy Pearcey, in an article on American Thinker, identified certain "facts that Judge Walker claims are now established by the 'evidence' presented in his courtroom." Those "facts" presumably will be deemed as "truth" far beyond the courtroom. Among those "facts," the following three are especially relevant for young black boys' futures:

• "Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage."

• "The gender of a child's parent is not a factor in a child's adjustment."

• "Having both a male and a female parent does not increase the likelihood that a child will be well-adjusted."

Those three general false principles that Judge Walker supposedly established in his arguments in favor of so-called "same-sex marriage" are equally faulty when applied to the more than 40 percent of today's children who are born to single mothers. They are doubly relevant when the majority of those children are black.

What Crouse is doing is a tactic done by many on the right after the Prop 8 ruling went down - cherry picking parts of Judge Walker's statements to imply that he said "fathers don't matter" and then using data having absolutely nothing to do with his decision or same sex marriage in general to make an unfair correlation.

It's a diversionary tactic designed to take attention away from the fact that the Prop 8 folks lost because their case was poor.

To a bigger extent, Crouse sad piece is a part of a grander tactic by the religious right to unfairly brand same-sex parents as selfish or to imply that lgbts who seek to parent children are causing these children to be "denied" something vital and important despite the fact that studies have shown just the opposite.

Crouse lists a number of problems facing black youth including poverty, bad schools, and family breakdown. Same-sex marriage and equality didn't make the list, but it doesn't stop Crouse from trying to push it in as best as she can.

The irony is that Crouse actually does provide an excellent solution:

Common sense tells us that there is no surer recipe for the child to lag behind in learning than having to contend with the strain and disruption of a broken, dysfunctional family, where the parent or parents are so focused on themselves and their needs that they have little emotional energy to spare for the child's needs. Before we can address the problems of public education, we have to address the problems of marriage and family. Only then can we begin the massive overhaul of cultural values that will be necessary to close the educational gaps in America.

Too that good point got obscured by a bunch of anti-gay garbage.

Is Jennifer Keeton being left out in the cold by her anti-gay allies?

It may be too early for such speculation, but I find it interesting that it's been a couple of days since Jennifer Keeton lost her lawsuit against Augusta State University and not one religious right talking head has commented on it.

Keeton, a graduate student, sued the university because, as she put it, it would have forced her to compromise her "Christian beliefs" on homosexuality.

It really came down to the fact that Keeton didn't want to read material on counseling gays nor did she want to counsel gays period.

The courts ruled against her on Friday.

Seeing that it's Monday, I would have thought to hear at least the usual slate of anti-gay lies from our friend Peter LaBarbera, but he seems to be on an Elizabeth Hasselbeck/Ann Coulter kick.

One News Now has been silent about the Keeton case. And there isn't even a statement from her lawyers at the right-wing Alliance Defense Fund.

Before the case went to court, we were bombarded with lies about how Keeton was unfairly targeted, how she was forced to choose between her Christian beliefs and her degree.

Now that the courts ruled against her, all we are hearing are the crickets.

Maybe the folks are in shock over the loss. Or could it be that they have deserted Keeton because they recognize just how ridiculous her case was (and they wouldn't be alone in this regard because Keeton neither offered witnesses nor testified.)

Only time will tell. 

Ugandan official proud of his persecution of gays and other Monday midday news briefs

Ugandan MP: Homosexuality is an abomination punishable by death - Sad, sad, sad.

Gay Muslims exist, and they need solidarity too - Amen.

Hong Kong Residents: Beware Of Fraudulent Information By Discredited Ex-Gay Therapy Group - Junk science is global my friends.

Coulter on fundie Take Back America confab: 'They're a bunch of fake Christians' - Well duuuuh.

Tensions Rise in Guadalajara - With the Catholic church unfortunately leading the way.

Breaking the taboo over the mental health crisis among Britain's gay men - And when the religious right manipulates this information, they always conveniently omit how homophobia causes these things.

One News Now and Cliff Kincaid demonstrate homophobia, ability to lie

The sad thing about homophobic lies (or any lie in general) is the ease which people repeat them even after they have been refuted.

Take the case of Bradley Manning, the soldier in the middle of the Wikileaks scandal. Wikileaks is a site which has displayed classified documents of the U.S. war in Afghanistan. Manning, a 22-year-old soldier suspected of leaking documents to Wikileaks. He is currently awaiting court martial. The fact that Manning is allegedly gay has brought the wolves out, so to speak. This is from this morning's edition of One News Now:

An conservative activist and author says members of the Senate need to made aware that the U.S. soldier accused of leaking classified information to the WikiLeaks website is an open homosexual who apparently held a grudge against the U.S. military for its law excluding homosexual military service.

The British newspaper Daily Telegraph first reported that Private 1st Class Bradley Manning, a U.S. Army intelligence analyst, was not only openly homosexual but also considering a sex change. Manning could face more than 50 years in prison for passing secret documents to WikiLeaks, whose founder Julian Assange has an anti-American and anti-military bent.

Cliff Kincaid, president of America's Survival and editor of Accuracy in Media, says that information is finally getting some notice.

But the Daily Telegraph never reported that Manning was seeking a sex change operation.

The claim about the sex change, as well as the entire narrative of Manning being "an angry gay soldier who leaked documents because he is mad at military's policy on gays and lesbians" is a concoction of Kincaid.

And basically, anything Kincaid says about the lgbt community should be taken with a grain of salt.

He leads the right-wing group Accuracy in Media, the same group which had to retract a blog post falsely accusing a gay Obama appointee, Kevin Jennings, of being a pedophile. Kincaid has also made the vile claim that disease-tainted gay blood threatens our troops.

In addition, Kincaid has unashamedly defended Uganda's infamous "Kill The Gays" bill.

As we have seen last week with the situation involving Peter LaBarbera, Glenn Beck and Chai Feldblum, little things like accuracy usually get pushed out of the way when there is an anti-gay meme to be repeated.

And it's up to the lgbt community to beat down these memes before they can become the "official story."