Monday, May 08, 2017

Mark Green controversy not anti-Christian bias, just 'foot-in-mouth' disease

As to be expected, anti-lgbtq evangelical groups are play the martyr and beating the somber tambourine over Trump's former nominee for Army Secretary, Mark Green. Green withdrew his name last week after a firestorm over comments he made in the past, include comments bashing the transgender community, the Islamic community, and evolution.

However, leave it to anti-lgbtq hate group the Family Research Council to claim that Green was a "victim" of anti-Christian bias:

What does evolution theory have to do with the Army? A lot, if you want to be the branch's secretary. That's just one of the fights the Left picked over Donald Trump's choice to lead the Army. Dr. Mark Green's beliefs on everything from creation to sexuality became the subject of a nasty campaign to discredit the respected flight surgeon -- a campaign, unfortunately, that ended Friday when Green withdrew his name from consideration.

"Due to false and misleading attacks against me, this nomination has become a distraction," Green said. "Tragically, my life of public service and my Christian beliefs have been mischaracterized and attacked by a few on the other side of the aisle for political gain."

LGBT activists, in particular, were upset that Green supported privacy laws like North Carolina's and the view of marriage that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and even Barack Obama held at one point. To them, that was an unacceptable change from former Army Secretary Eric Fanning -- who not only identified as gay, but openly used his power to advance that agenda in the military. (How convenient that Fanning wasn't put under the same scrutiny when he was nominated!) Green, on the other hand, was maligned, misquoted, and mistreated by liberals desperate to keep a pro-family, pro-gun, pro-freedom, pro-marriage leader from a position of military authority.

But if being a conservative disqualifies Green from public service, then Washington is going to be a pretty empty place. A group of 11 congressmen, led by Marine vet Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), tried to defend Green, writing in a letter to Senate leadership that "Any attempt to politicize personal statements or views that have been expressed by Mark at any point throughout his career must not be allowed to supersede his qualifications or be conflated to create needless uncertainty with his nomination." But it was too late. The Left's crusade against the West Point grad, Tennessee state legislator, and longtime conservative had already taken its toll.

"I think there is a movement to target people of faith who are being nominated," Tennessee Lt. Governor Randy McNally told the Washington Examiner. "They want their own, either agnostics or people who are non-Christians. 'They' being the Democratic Party." FRC's own Army vet, Lt. General Jerry Boykin (Ret.) knows what it's like to be in the cross-hairs because of your Christian views. Sadly, he said, liberals have become "so powerful, and so vicious, that it's getting hard to find good people like Mark Green to run for office or engage in public policy because of the lies and hateful attacks they will have to endure." And the military in particular needs strong leaders with the stomach to stand up for what's right.

Just stop it already. The controversy over Green was not a case of anti-Christian bias. It was, in fact, a case of "foot in mouth" disease. Let's be honest about this situation. Green basically said dumb things which rightfully caused people to question his ability to lead.  Green wasn't done harm by anyone except for his inability to keep his ego in check. He practically made it easy for people to call him out, as the videos below prove. When viewing them, ask yourself is this the type of person you want leading the Army?  A man who inaccurately characterizes a group of people as a "disease." and says he wouldn't follow a SCOTUS ruling simply because he didn't like it?



'LGBTQs shouldn't celebrate after Trump's empty religious liberty order' & other Mon. midday news briefs

No, LGBTQ Americans Aren’t In The Clear After Trump’s Religious Liberty Order - Michelangelo Signorile has been very accurate with predictions of how the lgbtq community would fare in the "Age of Trump." In this day and age, his pieces should be required reading for anyone worried about our future. And he is again with another good assessment of our situation.

Former University of Iowa athletics administrator wins $1.43 million in Title IX lawsuit - Under the radar but just as important.

Support LGBTQ Muslims - Yes, LGBTQ Muslims exist and they deserve our support. We are all family and must lift each up other. That's how we defeat hate.

History Shows Why LGBTQ People Shouldn’t Support the Far-Right - A necessary history lesson for all of you gay Milo Yiannopoulos supporters out there.

How They See Us: Unmasking the Religious Right War on Gay America - Now is a perfect time to revisit the 2013 booklet I published online. Before Trump taking the White House and the anti-lgbtq right was pushing the "radical homosexuals want to persecute Christians" talking point, they were heavily pushing lies, anecdotal drivel, and bad science to falsely claim that "homosexuality is a dangerous lifestyle." 

Like so:




Groups like the Family Research Council, the Liberty Counsel, the American Family Association, etc. are probably a bit reluctant to revisit those days, so let's reminisce. At the very least, it serves to remind folks that their claim about "protecting Christians" is much in line with the other stuff they used to push with the objective being to stigmatize the lgbtq community and undermine our attempts to gain equality for ourselves, our families, and our children.

Debra Messing, Billy Porter bring passion, fire to the GLAAD Awards

The second half of the 2017 GLAAD Media Awards, held Saturday, will definitely be memorable thanks to fiery speeches by award recipients Debra Messing and Billy Porter. Both speeches reminded the lgbtq community what we are fighting for and why we will eventually win.



The entire list of award recipients can be seen here, including (surprise, surprise) yours truly who was honored to receive the award for 'Outstanding Blog.' I already gave a nice written speech on Facebook but I reiterate my thanks and love for all of you who have supported me through the years.

Friday, May 05, 2017

''Christian' group Family Research Council cheer House vote to overturn Obamacare' & other Friday midday news briefs

FRC president Tony Perkins and his group cheer the House vote to repeal Obamacare.

Republicans Back Pact to Gut Obamacare - Presenting a first on this blog's news briefs - a link to a religious right article with no refutation or snarky comments. Why? Because the supposed moral Family Research Council's congratulatory bull over the GOP House repealing of the ACA (Obamacare) needs to be read unadulterated and in its untainted form. Millions could lose healthcare, certain things which shouldn't be pre-existing conditions are now such, and people are scared to death. But the supposed Christian group the Family Research Council is acting like Trump pushed a cure for cancer. A Christian group? No. A single-minded hate group hiding behind Christ? Yes.  

Meet the evangelicals who still love Trump - Who cares about millions losing healthcare, etc. It's all about power to these folks. Why be a moral conscience when you can rule over it all? 

 Dave Daubenmire Accuses Religious Right Leaders Of Engaging In ‘Idolatry And Hero-Worship’ Of President Trump - I DESPISE Dave Daubenmire. He is a disgusting, homophobic, conspiracy theory-spinning skin tag on the butt of humanity. But in this case . . .
 
Seven Facts about Gender - This still needs to be pointed out.  

Gay men, straight women hit by ‘stealthing’ - This NEEDS to be talked about. I can't think of any justification for this behavior. It is a serious betrayal of trust.  

NPR Continues To Uncritically Host Anti-LGBTQ Hate Group Alliance Defending Freedom - It's sad when you realize that possibly only a sex scandal will get news organizations to do the right thing when it comes to these groups.

Thursday, May 04, 2017

Some members of the anti-lgbtq right not happy with Trump's executive order

Ryan Anderson not happy with today's executive order

Don't be fooled by the supposed show of support from anti-lgbtq and evangelical right groups regarding Trump's executive order. Some aren't happy that they didn't get the "BIG PRIZE" they wanted. And these folks aren't shy about voicing their disappointment.

From Yahoo News:

An executive order by President Trump meant to reward religious conservatives for their support of him in last year’s election fell short of what many had hoped for and drew widespread criticism on Thursday. 
“The executive order on the whole looks to accomplish very little of substance, against the backdrop of a lot of show,” said John Inazu, a professor of law and religion at Washington University in St. Louis and author of “Confident Pluralism: Surviving and Thriving Through Deep Difference.” 
 Ryan T. Anderson, a Heritage Foundation scholar who is a leading advocate for religious conservatives, wrote that Trump’s order “does not address the major threats to religious liberty in the United States today.”

Apparently, Anderson seems to be miffed because the executive order totally dodged allowing people to discriminate on the grounds of  "personal religious beliefs"

 . . . what Trump issued today is rather weak. All it includes is general language about the importance of religious liberty, saying the executive branch “will honor and enforce” existing laws and instructing the Department of Justice to “issue guidance” on existing law; directives to the Department of the Treasury to be lenient in the enforcement of the Johnson Amendment; and directives to the secretaries of the Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services (HHS) to “consider issuing amended regulations” to “address conscience-based objections” to the HHS contraception mandate. But the federal government should be honoring and enforcing our religious liberty laws anyway, legislation is required to actually address the Johnson Amendment—which isn’t the prime priority on religious liberty—and the Supreme Court has already unanimously instructed the federal government to resolve the case of Little Sisters of the Poor and other HHS mandate cases. By contrast, the February draft—a version of which was originally planned for today according to media reports—made good on many of the president’s promises to protect religious liberty from government penalties. That draft protected the religious liberty rights of all Americans in very tailored ways that addressed the problems of today.

Anderson failed to acknowledge that the February draft of Trump's executive order was so rigid in allowing discrimination on religious grounds that it caused a huge backlash.

According to Think Progress, other members of the right weren't happy with the executive order:

The Federalist’s David Harsanyi was also unimpressed, pining like Anderson for the “comprehensive relief” that would have been provided by the drafted order that previously leaked. “Trump’s executive order does little, and what little it does can be easily overturned,” he said. And over at the National Review, David French called the executive order “worse than useless.”

Think Progress also pointed out that LGBTQ groups aren't taking anything lightly and will be prepared should this issue come up again. As well we all should be because it will come up again.

Today was merely one round in a long fight.

'Trump's signed EO may have backed away from anti-lgbtq provisions' & other Thur midday news briefs

Trump

Trump Backs Off from Anti-LGBT Provisions in ‘Religious Freedom’ Executive Order: REPORTS - Rumors are flying about that Trump did back away from the anti-lgbtq provisions of his still dreadful "religious liberty" executive order. I've seen different takes on the situation and none are consistent. The EO seems to be focused on pulling back restrictions on churches to engage in political activity. This is NOT a good idea and may just backfire. Details still pending. 

LIVE VIDEO: Trump Signs Religious Liberty Executive Order Reportedly Without Feared Anti-LGBT Provisions - More info.  

What's in Trump's religious liberty order? - What's exactly in the executive order. 

 Here’s the anti-LGBTQ record this Trump appointee is trying to scrub from the internet - Oh no you don't!  

How Repealing Obamacare Will Hit the LGBT Community Extra-Hard - Meanwhile, the GOP is voting to repeal Obamacare. This post from January outlines why it could be detrimental to the lgbtq community. 

Schumer latest to oppose Mark Green over nominee’s anti-LGBT views - Meanwhile, homophobia of a certain person chosen by Trump to be Army Secretary may come back to bite him in the butt. Good.

Wednesday, May 03, 2017

If 'religious liberty' can justify anti-lgbtq discrimination, then why not racial discrimination?

Trump possibly signing the executive order giving a license to discriminate, which actually targets the lgbtq community is ugly enough, but we may not be considering the entire scope.

History tells us of unintended consequences.

Wikipedia describes unintended consequences as outcomes that are not the ones foreseen and intended by a purposeful action. In other words, Trump's possible 'religious liberty' executive order may initially target the lgbtq community, but I defy anyone to refute the video below (thanks to Wayne Besen and Truth Wins Out). Also tell how any other ethnic, racial, or religious group - even Christians - would be safe from discrimination should Trump sign that executive order.


Related post: Trump, anti-lgbtq right will repeat history with 'license to discriminate' executive order