Paul Cameron wants gays to go through 'public shaming' . . . amongst other things

Discredited anti-gay researcher and noted homophobe Paul Cameron has gone on record about the classification of his group, the Family Research Institute, as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

It was during a very poor interview with the Colorado Springs Gazette. I say the interview was poor because the writer didn't give any detail about Cameron's dubious history of censures and rebukes by folks from legitimate medical organizations to conservative talking heads.

Of course in the writer's defense, he or she really didn't need to. Cameron came across in the interview as batshit crazy in spite of the fact that, according to the writer, he "dressed smart and had impeccable manners" and also discussed his views in a "calm, professional manner."

But how Cameron looks or professes his views is irrelevant. You really have to read some of what Cameron said:

God’s 11th Commandment is “Thou shalt not corrupt boys,” Cameron told me. He celebrated the Ugandan anti-gay bill, in which the penalty for gay activity could be death. “Whatever they decide, I’m OK with,” he said.

Cameron believes homosexuality should be criminalized in America. He proposes heavily taxing single American adults and homosexuals because of their failure to procreate. He would also like to see gays undergo a “public shaming,” though he offered no specifics.

The article also revealed some very interesting things about Cameron's group. It's run out of his home (why am I not surprised), run by private donations, has only four staffers, and has a budget of $85,000.

Now that last one really threw me. Who in the hell would donate money to this loon?

It's gets better. Cameron said the classification of his organization as a hate group by SPLC was a "left-wing" deal.

I would have loved for the writer to have questioned him about the lie he told in 1982 about a child being castrated in a public restroom by a gay man. Or that comment he made to Rolling Stone magazine about homosexuality providing one with "most satisfying orgasm one could get."

Oh well. Where the writer failed to do his or her job, Cameron definitely took up the slack:

The gay lifestyle, which he says is chosen, will lead to the destruction of the West. “Liberal minds are attracted to societal destructive things like moth to a light,” he told me. “No society can long endure that does such a thing.”

“If God has changed his mind (about homosexuality being an abomination, as written in the Bible), he must want the West to die.”

It's almost hard to believe that Cameron used to be the go-to guy for all anti-gay material used by the religious right. And if it weren't for the attention he has been receiving of late, he probably would still be.

And that is probably the main reason why those named as anti-gay hate groups, and their defenders, want to deflect the controversy to one about same-sex marriage. They are afraid to be questioned about their past affiliation with Cameron.

To be honest, I really can't blame them. Cameron is just plain crazy.

Related posts:

Homophobic 'researcher' Paul Cameron in all of his repulsive glory

More homophobic lies from the Paul Cameron Poland tour

Illinois Family Institute uses Paul Cameron's work but claims its not a hate group

Conservapedia's unbelievable defense of the discredited Paul Cameron

Why we should care about Paul Cameron

Why does Miss California's church believe that homosexuality and pedophilia are linked
 

Anti-gay pastor proves the far reach of destructive homophobia

I bet it seemed like a good idea at the time to those who voted for a bill pushed by El Paso, TX pastor Tom Brown to rescind health benefits afforded to domestic partners (including of course lgbt couples.)

Then they got caught in their own homophobic trap. From Think Progress:

Last year, the El Paso, Texas City Council voted 7-1 to extend city employee health benefits to their domestic partners, including LGBT couples. But while many celebrated the progressive move, the right-wing El Paso Word of Life Church’s Pastor — and self-advertised exorcist — Tom Brown slammed the council for “condoning immorality” and giving “a huge black eye to democracy.” Incensed over the idea of equal treatment, Brown spearheaded a ballot initiative to rescind these benefits, which passed this November by a 55 percent majority.

But, in his eagerness to rob gay and unmarried partners of their health benefits, Brown’s group quickly drew up the bill “wording on its own” because he “could not find a lawyer” to advise. By doing so, Brown’s blow to equal rights also doles a “black eye” to 200 El Paso retirees and public servants who will now lose their health benefits on Jan. 1 too:

[City Attorney Charlie] McNabb said his office had identified 200 people who would lose benefits under the language of the referendum that voters approved by a 55-45 percent ratio.

Only 19 gay and unmarried partners of city employees receive benefits under the ordinance voters rejected last week. But McNabb’s staff found that some retirees and others would lose their benefits because of the wording of the ballot issue.[...]

Some are spouses of deceased city employees and some are retirees with other jobs. Still others work for city agencies such as the Public Service Board and the 911 district but are not legally city employees.

In addition, City Council members have city health benefits but technically are not city employees, McNabb said.

Not only same-sex and unmarried partners, but employees of the 911 call center, retired firefighters, retired policemen, and even foster children will lose health benefits because of Brown’s bigotry. While admitting that he only intended to strip the 19 same-sex couples of their benefits, Brown said he has “no regrets” for doing “what was right,” and that city officials “have to respect the will of the public.” 

That my friends is the root end of hatred, be it homophobia, racism, or sexism. It's like an ugly wildfire and sooner or later, if not stopped, engulfs everyone.

Get off your butts and call your Senators about DADT! and other Tuesday midday news briefs

DADT repeal vote could come today. The blogsphere has been going crazy over this. From Americablog Gay:

SLDN. The switchboard at the Senate is 202-224-3121. If you live in the state's of any of these Senators call them ASAP. Tell them to put equality over procedure. Senator Collins is key. If she won't support us -- having voted for DADT repeal in Committee -- it will be hard to get others. So, all you Mainers, get on the phone.

The target list:

KEY SENATORS WHO NEED TO HEAR FROM REPEAL SUPPORTERS NOW:

--Susan Collins (R-ME);

--Olympia Snowe (R-ME);

--Richard Lugar (R-IN);

--Judd Gregg (R-NH);

--Scott Brown (R-MA)

--George Voinovich (R-OH);

--Kit Bond (R-MO);

--Joe Manchin (D-WV)

--Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)

--Mark Kirk (R-IL)

If you want some guidance on calling, SLDN has a sample script here.

And in other news:

Religious Right Tries to Marginalize SPLC - This makes it official - The religious right are SCARED of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Reversing Pryor reluctance: Right-leaning Dem to do fully right thing - Senator Mark Pryor (homosexuality is a sin) makes a 360 degree turn for the lgbt community on DADT. Hmmm.

Homosexuality in Leviticus - The Washington Post does right by the lgbt community (finally) by inviting The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire to write an excellent piece on those Biblical verses about homosexuality and the need for context.

Another conservative gives a poor defense of SPLC anti-gay hate groups

Another conservative recently tried to defend religious right groups designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups.

And like the others, she failed miserably.

Rebecca Hagelin, a member of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank (Washington, D.C. seems to collect think tanks like a dog collects fleas) gave her opinion of the controversy in a Town Hall column, Culture Challenge of the Week: Playing the Hate Card.

You can read it if you, but allow me to break it down. The following opening is the gist of the entire column:

Children know instinctively that “hate” is a bad thing. And they understand that hating a classmate, teacher, or neighbor is nothing like “hating” the broccoli on the dinner plate. Real hate is a deliberate choice: it wishes evil and foments dark, angry feelings towards another person. And ultimately, it extinguishes any light and all love from the hater’s heart.

It’s a serious thing, hate is. And America’s own tangled history of racial prejudice, fueled by unfamiliarity and ignorance, serves as a cultural memory of the power of hate.

So it was a shocking turn of events last week when the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a long-standing civil rights group, added more than a dozen new organizations to their list of hate-mongering groups. Neo-Nazis? KKK-spin-offs? Muslim or Jew-haters? No. The new “haters,” in this era of sexual license, are those who maintain that marriage has an intrinsic meaning--the union of man and woman--that simply cannot be extended to homosexual couplings. Crying “hate speech,” the SPLC denounced “anti-gay” groups for spreading “falsehoods” that say children do best when raised by a mom and a dad, as opposed to two dads or two moms. “Falsehoods” that support traditional marriage are now “hate speech,” thrown into the same filthy bucket as KKK and Neo-Nazi ideology.

Hagelin is attempting to sell folks a weak Hollandaise sauce and stale toast claim that these groups are supposedly being unfairly silenced or "victimized."

Nowhere in her piece did Hagelin address the real reason why SPLC considered these organizations as 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.

 Hagelin's omission is intentional and it reveals the game plan on the part of those condemning SPLC for standing up to these groups.

They are sidestepping the credible reasons why SPLC has a beef with these groups (i.e. the usage of junk science, the pushing of known lies to smear the lgbt community) in an attempt to make the controversy about a backlash regarding gay marriage.

Of course this notion is false and Hagelin as well as others who would defend these anti-gay hate groups on these grounds know this.

But I guess when you are in the business of lying about the lgbt community, being deceptive in general comes easy to you.

Matt Barber prepares Liberty Counsel for their phony SPLC martyrdom

According to People for the American Way, Matt Barber has started building the cross for the Liberty Counsel by predicting that while the organization was not declared an official hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center right now, it will be in the future:

I'll make a prediction right now. I've written several articles, I've underscored and pointed out and exposed the Southern Poverty Law Center on a number of occasions. They personally attack me in this report that they put out, but they do not classify us as a hate group yet. I think they're a little leery of doing that because I have been one person at the forefront of exposing their activities here.

But I am going to make a prediction here: they are eventually going to do that in retaliation for us pointing out what they're doing, they're fraudulent activities. They will do that and at that point the mainstream media is going to be held accountable. They will try to marginalize Liberty Counsel eventually as a hate group and we're going to hold their feet to the fire when they do that.

I have yet to see any of these silly articles Barber is referring to, but if in the future, the Liberty Counsel is declared an anti-gay group rather than profiled for its homophobia (like it was recently), it may be because of comments of Barber like the following describing lgbt relationships:

“one man violently cramming his penis into another man’s lower intestine and calling it ‘love."

Of course that being the case, maybe Barber is making that cross for something other than Christian martyrdom.

I'm just saying . . . but then again I am not a psychiatrist.

Matt Barber ruminates about 'sexual deviancy' . . . again and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Liberty Counsel: DADT Keeps "Moral Perverts" Out Of The Armed Services - Matt Barber is at it again. Which of course leads me to ask again the proverbial question - If Matt Barber hates gay sex so much, then why does he keep talking about it?

Salt Lake City schools to vote on anti-gay bias - This ought to be interesting.

Seattle-Area County Swears in Gay Politician - This is good news.

STAND-OFF: Ugandan ‘Kill-The-Gays’ Author Says He Is Attending DC Conference -  While Event Organizers Say The Genocidal Madman Is Barred - I almost missed this juicy controversy in the making.

More religious right attacks on SPLC fail to yield results

The attack on the Southern Poverty Law Center by religious right groups continue and like the others, the new attacks are not only pitiful, but give ammunition to the idea that the SPLC was correct in branding these organizations as anti-gay hate groups..

This time, the attacks are coming from Peter LaBarbera, head of the group Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (surnamed Porno Pete by members of the lgbt community for his "penchant" of going to subcultural leather events, taking pictures, and describing in intimate details all of the "interesting" encounters he saw there between gay men while ignoring the heterosexuals attending said events) and Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute.

Conveniently, both groups have been profiled as anti-gay hate organizations by SPLC for their attempts to smear the lgbt community through junk science or outright lies.

LaBarbera said the following:

The leftist SPLC is now slandering conservative, Christian and Tea Party groups by mislabeling them as “hate groups” on a par with genuine, fringe hate groups like the KKK. American taxpayers should insist that the federal government have no role in legitimizing the SPLC, which has politicized “hate” and turned it into a fund-raising business to demonize conservatives – including mainstream pro-family groups that oppose homosexual activism.

LaBarbera's whining about being unfairly smeared for supposedly simply standing against homosexuality is rather ironic. Days before, he published the following picture on his site:

The man in this doctored photo, for those who don't know, is openly gay Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA). LaBarbera put this awful thing on his page to illustrate a ridiculous phony panic he made earlier about gay TSA agents getting their "thrills" by feeling up men.

Seems to me that there is no difference between this picture and a photo of a black man with a toothy grin biting into a huge slab of watermelon.

For all of LaBarbera's posturing about being "persecuted due to his supposed Christian beliefs, it's things like this picture which more than makes the case for SPLC.

Higgins (Illinois Family Institute) took it upon herself to attempt to debunk SPLC's list of anti-gay myths in a piece below LaBarbera's whining. However, she doesn't seem to be familiar the rules of debunking claims, especially the first rule that if you debunking a claim, you simply must address the claim.

You read that right. She doesn't even try to debunk SPLC's anti-gay myths more than she offers a weak explanation as to why there is nothing wrong believing these myths.

For example:

SPLC - MYTH # 1
Homosexuals molest children at far higher rates than heterosexuals.

According to the American Psychological Association, “homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.” Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation’s leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.


Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because “he often finds adults of either sex repulsive” and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may “regress” to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.

Higgins -  The SPLC thinks that the belief that same sex parents harm children constitutes hatred. The first problem is that Schlatter and Steinback fail to define harm. If one believes that homosexuality is morally flawed, then a household centered on a morally flawed relationship cannot be beneficial.


It is entirely possible that a brother and sister in an incestuous relationship or that polyamorist parents could raise children, providing for their physical needs, comforting them, and teaching them their ABCs. But most of society believes that such relationships would harm children because they would teach children that incest or polyamory are morally permissible. Would Schlatter and Steinback include organizations on their “hate groups” list that propagate the belief that incestuous parents or poly-parents harm children?

As I pointed out in an earlier post, in its profiles and list of anti-gay myths, SPLC cited many sources including the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Association, The Child Molestation and Research Institute, the Child Welfare League of America, the National Organization of Male Sexual Victimization, Nicholas Eberstadt, of the conservative American Enterprise Institute, The Palm Center, and Richard J. Wolitski, an expert on minority status and public health issues at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For her supposed debunking, Higgins cited only one source (and it was the distortion of the 1997 Oxford study which supposedly said that gay men have a short life span. In an absolute bizarre move on her part, Higgins refutes her own point that gay men have a short life span by also citing the 2001 complaint of these researchers that religious right groups were distorting their work).

Higgins's entire argument seems to be "yes we say all of those awful things about lgbts .  . . but . . . but . . . "

At the end of the piece, LaBarbera and Higgins tries to shift the argument by providing links to article that supposedly demonize SPLC.

But I didn't bother to read those links. After seeing the depths of duplicity LaBarbera and Higgins sunk to in order to defend their own organizations, I have a problem with believing anything they say.

You see that's the problem of being caught in a lie. People have a problem with believing anything that you say.

And it's a much deserved denouement for LaBarbera, Higgins and the rest involved in anti-gay groups.