NOM's attempt to exploit 'gay indoctrination' lie backfires

The National Organization for Marriage has - in its own way - admitted that it erred in a video claiming that a gender identity lesson in an Oakland, CA school was targeted at kindergartners.

Originally in a letter to supporters, NOM's president, Brian Brown said:

Just when you think it can't get any weirder or more disturbing, an Oakland grade school decided to teach kindergartners about multiple genders, under the banner of preventing bullying.

Watch that video. Look at the children's faces. And then look at the activist from a group called "Gender Spectrum" who wants to embed in these children's minds the idea that we all have a right to make up our own gender(s).

But the video (seen below) clearly showed that the students NOM called kindergartners were in fact fourth graders. An announcer on the video also said so.

When NOM's error was exposed, Brown's letter was surreptitiously changed to say:

Just when you think it can't get any weirder or more disturbing, an Oakland public school decided to teach grade-school children about multiple genders, under the banner of preventing bullying.

Watch that video. Look at the children's faces. And then look at the activist from a group called "Gender Spectrum" who wants to embed in these children's minds the idea that we all have a right to make up our own gender(s).

And now a note on the NOM blog entry reads (Correction: The Oakland class in multiple genders was addressed to fourth-graders, not kindergarteners, and this post has been update to correct the error.)

However, the title of the video still said Public School Teaches Kindergartners There Are Multiple Genders Without Parental Consent.

That is until now. You will notice that the title of the video has been changed:



However, NOM still seems to be holding out on the idea that parents were not notified, even though the video said - at 1.45 -  that the parents did not have a problem with the lesson AND an article on the Fox News website quoted Oakland Unified School District spokesman Troy Flint saying that parents were given prior notice and in fact, three families opted their children out of the lesson.

I might also point out that the article also quoted a spokesperson for a group opposing the lesson, who also said that three families opted their children out, thus giving more proof that parents knew beforehand of the lesson.

The question here isn't were kindergartners incorporated in these lesson plans but why did NOM feel the need to push this incident to the brinks of hysteria.
 
Why did NOM feel the need to go the extra mile and bring up false visions of scared  and possibly tear-stained kindergartners held captive in classes being taught lessons that could potentially scar them for life?

Why did NOM feel the need to embellish the lessons plans in such a way that not only channeled the "gay recruitment" lies of Anita Bryant, but also the daycare sex abuse hysteria of the 1980s?

As if I have to ask that question.

In spite of Brown's talk of civil and respectable discussion regarding marriage equality, this is the modus operandi of NOM.

The organization does not want a civil discussion on marriage equality and they certainly don't want to talk about the same-sex couples or the same-sex couples with children who are the true center of discussions on marriage equality.

Instead, the organization wants to scare people into opposing marriage equality by pushing phony horror stories of children getting their minds corrupted via a plot by a group of hedonistic monsters out to wreck American values and Christianity.

I think it's safe to say that in this case, it was NOM which got wrecked. And while this embarrassing incident is probably a momentary, very small setback for the group, I sincerely hope folks remember it and file it away for future reference.

Know Your LGBT History - Torch Song Trilogy

Thank you everyone for what you did to make this a very productive week. The anti-NOM talking points went viral and was seen by over 3,000 people. And we still have a long way to go. I want to end today with a positive movie.

I could kick myself for waiting to long to include Torch Song Trilogy in my Know Your LGBT History posts.

Torch Song Trilogy, which was originally a hit Tony-award winning Broadway play (Best Play, Best Actor) which told the story of Jewish drag queen (played by Harvey Firestein) living in New York during the late 1970s/early 1980s. The audience sees his trials and tribulations from losing a lover (Matthew Broderick) to an awful gay bashing, to adopting a child, to his constant struggles with his mother to get her to understand him.

When it was made into a movie in 1988, there were small changes, but the tone of the play stayed the same.

And it is a simple enjoyable movie about self-love and most importantly self-respect.

There are so many good scenes in Torch Song Trilogy. Here are just few of my favorites.

The first one is the musical number done by Firestein and the other drag queens (one being played by the legendary Charles Pierce):




The second one is when Firestein is sparring with his mother (played by Anne Bancroft) at the grave of his father. She can't understand how can Firestein compare the relationship he had with his murdered lover to her marriage. It's a powerful retort he gives her:



And the last one is a collection of scenes between Firestein and Bancroft which should give us all something to think about concerning coming out and trusting people with our lives, especially our parents:




Past Know Your LGBT History Posts:

NOM's lies gets a complete debunking AGAIN and other Friday midday news briefs

Good Things Made To Sound Bad – NOM’s Latest Plea For Discrimination - Apparently NOM's president Brian Brown told so many lies in his letter that I missed some. Zach Ford of Think Progress gives a complete debunking of Brown's mess.

Right Wing Mobilizes Against Adoption And Foster Care By Gay Couples - Bring it on. Even if we lose this round, the venomous hate and lies coming from the religious right will be further exposed.

Planned gay pride picnic in heart of Harlem puts local church leaders in a tizzy - Further proof that lgbt equality isn't an issue of African-Americans vs. whites. The nasty comments coming from the black pastors against their own brothers and sisters is just sad.

Kerry Eleveld: “LGBT Journalists Are More Necessary Than Ever” - You ain't just whistling Dixie, girlfriend.

Big Bird Causes Gay Prom Queens in Virginia, Say Wingnuts - Yep. That's how it happens.

NOM tries to cover its tracks after being caught in a blatant lie

UPDATE - As you can see, NOM has changed the title of the video. For an update on this story, go here.

Last night, I posted an emergency item regarding a letter that National Organization for Marriage Brian Brown posted on NOM's blog. The letter was the typical "we have to do something before the homosexual agenda overcomes us" tripe that folks have come to expect from Brown.

The first item in the letter talked about a recent incident in Oakland, CA where students were taught lessons on gender identity:

Just when you think it can't get any weirder or more disturbing, an Oakland public school decided to teach grade-school children about multiple genders, under the banner of preventing bullying.

Watch that video. Look at the children's faces. And then look at the activist from a group called "Gender Spectrum" who wants to embed in these children's minds the idea that we all have a right to make up our own gender(s).

But when this letter was first posted, Brown originally said:

Just when you think it can't get any weirder or more disturbing, an Oakland grade school decided to teach kindergartners about multiple genders, under the banner of preventing bullying.

Watch that video. Look at the children's faces. And then look at the activist from a group called "Gender Spectrum" who wants to embed in these children's minds the idea that we all have a right to make up our own gender(s).

Not only have the words in Brown's letter have changed, but the video, which was on NOM's blog, is now gone.

And why is that? Because it proves that Brown wasn't originally telling the truth:



At .42 seconds of the video, the announcer says "these fourth graders were told that in nature, things aren't always what they seem."

Now some folks may say "what difference does this make?" It should make a big difference because neither Brown nor NOM acknowledged that the original claim - that these children were kindergartners - was made in error.

Also, the title of the video - Public School Teaches Kindergarteners There Are Multiple Genders Without Parental Consent - has not been changed.

Lastly, that part in the title about the parents not giving consent seems to also be inaccurate.

At 1:45, the announcer said, "the school maintains most parents, teachers, and students had no problem with what was taught."

This statement calls into question the accusation  that parents did not consent for their children to be taught these lessons.

A written Fox News story further calls into question that accusation.  The article quoted Oakland Unified School District spokesman Troy Flint saying that parents were given prior notice and in fact, three families opted their children out of the lesson.

Either through sloppy work or intentional distortion, NOM exploited a very useful and legal lesson regarding respect and tolerance in an Oakland school to demonize the lgbt community. And now, when caught red-handed, the group is trying to slowly maneuver itself out of the potential hole it's in.

Now I ask you.  Can anyone really trust this group to lead a civil and dignified debate on marriage equality in Minnesota or anywhere else for that matter?

NOM's Brian Brown sets record for most lies told in a letter

UPDATE -  For an update on this story, go here.


It's one thing to lie. But it's quite another to lie so poorly that you are immediately exposed and not care.

The National Organization for Marriage's president, Brian Brown post a letter on NOM's blog. In the letter, he talked about a recent incident in California in which a class was taught gender diversity:

Just when you think it can't get any weirder or more disturbing, an Oakland grade school decided to teach kindergartners about multiple genders, under the banner of preventing bullying.

Watch that video. Look at the children's faces. And then look at the activist from a group called "Gender Spectrum" who wants to embed in these children's minds the idea that we all have a right to make up our own gender(s).

Let's ignore Brown's hysterical tone and do exactly what he says.  Look at the video:




At .42 seconds of the video, the announcer says "these fourth graders were told that in nature, things aren't always what they seem."

Did you catch that? In spite of Brown's and the video claims that these are kindergartners, the announcer clearly says that they are fourth graders.

Now some folks may say "what difference does this make?" It should make a big difference. Why did Brown and NOM feel the need to lie about the grade of the children involved in the lesson plan? To add further hysteria to the false meme of "gays recruiting children," no doubt.

And that's not the only lie told by NOM.

At 1:45, the announcer said, "the school maintains most parents, teachers, and students had no problem with what was taught."

This statement calls into question the accusation lodged by Brown and the title of the video that parents did not consent for their children to be taught these lessons.

A written Fox News story further calls into question the accusation by Brown and NOM that this situation took place without parental consent. The article quoted Oakland Unified School District spokesman Troy Flint saying that parents were given prior notice and in fact, three families opted their children out of the lesson.

The rest of Brown's letter is filled with pathos and descriptions of morality and truth - in between the phony anecdotes of gays persecuting Christians. He even mentions the Catholic Charities in Illinois controversy while omitting the crucial part about taxpayer money and an incident involving a therapist who was busted using "ex-gay" therapy in Great Britain - making sure to make her sound like the victim of course. For the truth of that story, go here.

He even mentions  NOM's efforts to ban marriage equality Minnesota, making sure to omit the ugliness regarding his organization's partner in that effort, the Minnesota Family Council, and its manual linking homosexuality to pedophilia, bestiality, urine and feces consuming:

In 2012, we hope, pray and expect that the people of Minnesota, after a dignified and civil debate, will join 31 other states in voting to protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

I think he can kiss that hope goodbye. Finally Brown ends his letter in part with:

Thank you for all you make possible. At NOM we want no less than to be your voice for your values—and for the truth about the human person: We are born male and female, called to come together in love so that the future can happen.

I know what you are thinking because I was thinking it too.

Why can't that old wives tale about lightning striking audacious liars be true?

NOM is running a sugary con game on America

From Equality Matters comes something which I noticed but didn't talk about that much. The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) is only pretending to be an organization solely concerned about "traditional marriage."

While NOM chairwoman Maggie Gallagher talks all sweetness and light about how NOM is about the philosophies of love and proving that "children need a mother and a father," the organization is running an anti-gay chop shop which is geared at denigrating the lgbt community on levels that go beyond opposing marriage equality:

In reality, NOM is a run of the mill anti-gay hate group, intent on spreading fear and misinformation to prevent LGBT equality.

This May, Equality Matters decided to examine just how far away from its only-marriage message NOM has strayed.

The results might (not at all) surprise you.

Roughly 20% of the entries on NOM’s blog in the month of May were unrelated to the organization’s stated goal of “protecting marriage.” Instead, these posts dealt with a number of more traditional anti-gay topics.

According to Equality Matters, these topics include:

Opposing Civil Unions

NOM’s opposition to marriage equality is just part of the organization’s broader opposition to any legal recognition of same-sex couples. Using the argument that civil unions create a “backdoor” into same-sex marriage, the group has aggressively opposed efforts to provide same-sex couples with even fraction of the rights and protections currently afforded to heterosexual couples.

May 4: Press Release: NOM-RI Critiques New Civil Union Legislation in Rhode Island

May 5: Gay Rights Groups Seek to Exclude Religious Adoption Agencies

May 12: ADF, NOM, and GLAD All Agree - Civil Union Legislation is a Bad Deal for Rhode Island

May 12: Breaking News from AP: Civil Unions Bill Flops in Rhode Island

May 12: Rhode Island Hispanics Deliver 2,000+ Signatures Against CU Bill

May 13: IL Religious Adoption Agencies Push for Right to Help Kids

May 16: Ted Olson Comes Out Against Civil Unions for New York

May 17: Gay Activists Stage "Kiss In" During Mass after Brazil High Court OKs Civil Unions

May 19: Rhode Island House Committee Approves Civil Unions Bill Nobody Likes

May 27: Breaking News: Catholic Charities of Rockford Ceases Adoptions, Foster Care

Opposing Pro-LGBT Curriculum

In recent weeks, NOM has become increasingly involved in the fight against anti-bullying efforts that attempt to teach kids to respect and appreciate their LGBT peers. These lessons have nothing to do with marriage, but NOM opposes them anyways. In May, NOM pushed polls opposing Harvey Milk Day, fear-mongered about a “gender diversity” lesson in California, and freaked out about a Queerty post that supported teaching students about “queer sexuality.”

May 3: New Poll: 65%-22% Americans Reject Teaching Gay Subjects in Grade School

May 16: Queerty: Can We Admit That We Do Want To Indoctrinate Kids?

May 16: Queerty's Wrong About One Thing

May 16: Should Public Schools Teach About Gay Marriage? (Includes Video)

May 17: Prominent Gay Blogger: Not educating kids about SSM "makes them ignorant, hateful little morons."

May 19: Poll: Should California Public Schools Celebrate Harvey Milk's Birthday?

May 19: What's Next After SSM? BC Parents Face School Policies Condemning "Heterosexist" Ideas

May 24: School Teaching Kindergartners That There Are More Than Two Genders

May 27: CA Elementary School Students Get Lessons in Gender

May 27: Education Author: Some Fish Change Sex, Humans Don't

May 31: UNESCO Approves Sexually Explicit Instruction Under Anti-Homophobia Label, Brazil's President Rejects After Public Outcry

Opposing Same-Sex Parenting

NOM relies heavily on the myth that same-sex parents aren’t fit to raise children in order to promote their agenda against marriage equality. NOM’s chairwoman Maggie Gallagher advanced this assertion under oath during a House hearing on the Defense Of Marriage Act, so it’s not surprise that NOM’s blog is following in lock-step.

May 12: New Book: Psychologist Writes of Daughters' Father Hunger

May 17: Sociologist Brad Wilcox: The “Elite Wisdom” on Moms & Dads is Dead Wrong

May 19: Dr. Jenet Erickson on Why Having a Mother Really Matters

May 26: Canadian Sociologist on Why Mothers Matter

May 27: Gender Confusion over at Slate

Opposing Non-Discrimination Laws

NOM is also in the business of opposing non-discrimination laws that protect LGBT Americans. The group routinely downplays the existence of oppression of the LGBT community and supports clearly discriminatory laws and policies on the grounds of religious liberty. This past month, NOM focused on protecting religious adoption agencies that choose to discriminate against (non-married) same-sex parents. The organization also criticized an ABC show for exposing the impact that NOM’s talking points can have on LGBT families. 

May 5: Australian Gay Groups Seek to Narrow Religious Liberty Protections for Schools, Ministries

May 17: UK High Court Rules Against Last Catholic Adoption Agency

May 24: After Pushing Out Christians, England Faces Foster Shortage

May 24: ABC News Propaganda: People who Think Children Need Moms and Dads are Intolerant Bigots Who Accost Families in Restaurants

There are a multitude of other topics, but I think these will suffice to prove the basic point that NOM is not concerned with "traditional marriage." It, like so many other anti-gay groups, busies itself with demonizing the lgbt community and reducing our dignity and worth.

At least with the Family Research Council and the American Family Association, the lgbt community knows where it stands - even if it is in quicksand.

NOM should take off the mask of sweetness and light  and bare its fangs because no one is fooled any longer.

Another NOM ally linking homosexuality with bestiality and other Thursday midday news briefs

Watch: Anti-Gay NY Senator Ruben Diaz Defends Comparing Homosexuality to Bestiality - Didn't he just hold a "dignity" march in New York with the National Organization for Marriage last month? I swear between him in New York and the Minnesota Family Council in that state, I'm guessing that NOM really doesn't want a "civil" discussion on marriage equality, no matter what the organization says.

It gets better, batter: SF Giants release pro-equality clip - This is not only cool but very necessary.

Obama Administration Seeks To Address Homeless Crisis Among Gay Teens - It's about time too.

In South Africa's black townships, being gay can be fatal - Pray for our brothers and sisters in other countries.

In issue of adoption, Catholic charities must adhere to basic fairness

The Family Research Council is upset over a recent development in Illinois regarding a Catholic charity:

The Roman Catholic diocese in Rockford has announced that it will close its doors on the church's adoption program before subjecting children to placement in homosexual homes. Like it did in Massachusetts and Washington, D.C., the Catholic Church refused to violate its convictions. Unfortunately, it's only a matter of time before other dioceses follow suit. For the church, this is an act of self-defense. Without a religious exemption, the law makes programs like this one vulnerable to lawsuits or state budget cuts. Much to the frustration of the bill's own sponsor, the state refused to carve out special protections for the religious organizations like this one.

Horror stories like this are common in religious right propaganda - i.e. the gay agenda is causing discrimination against Christians. One of the talking points from the National Organization for Marriage claims that marriage equality will cause Catholic Charities to close, thus depriving children a chance to be placed in a good home.

Of course the real story is a bit more complicated.

When FRC and NOM paints this as an issue of discrimination against Christians, they omit one crucial detail - the Catholic Church is receiving taxpayer funds for its adoption programs. When it canceled the adoption program, the Roman Catholic diocese in Rockford said goodbye to $7.5 million dollars in state contracts. In fact, Catholic Charities in Illinois receive $30 million in taxpayer money for its adoption program.

So this isn't a question of the supposed gay agenda, but rather an entity (the Catholic Church) using taxpayer money but not wanting to follow the laws which come attached to that money.

And in this case, asking for a religious exemption just won't cut it. While I understand wanting to adhere to one's faith, this is an issue in which the welfare of the child must come first. Studies have shown that children do not suffer from a same-sex household. Other than religious teaching, there is no justifiable reason for the church to deny gay couples to adopt children.

So in essence,  Catholic Charities are telling Illinois gay residents, "we think that your households aren't good enough to raise children and yes we will take an obscenely large amount of your money to adhere to this belief." 

That's neither right nor fair. It's not right nor fair to the child - who is denied a chance at a good home simply because of religious doctrine. And it's certainly not right or fair to the gay couples - who are hardworking taxpayers and should be treated with the dignity and respect which comes with that title.

NOM showing large scale hypocrisy in Minnesota

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

NOM pushing 'gay marriage will confuse children' distortion

On its blog, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has an item about a California class which teaches children about gender diversity:

Video: Coming to a Public School Near YOU?

Fox News covered a class full of kindergartners in California being taught that you can feel like a girl, feel like a boy, feel like both, or feel like neither.

Watch it and tell us what you think:

The blog post then shows a video of the lesson and ends with:

The group brought in to teach children these lessons (allegedly to prevent bullying) is called Gender Spectrum.

"People can be girls, feel like girls, they can feel like boys, they can feel like both, and they can even feel, like I said, kinda like neither."

Now let's be clear here. We all know why NOM chose to push this item. The organization is implying  that marriage equality will confuse children, i.e. making them think that "gender doesn't matter."

It's yet another way the organization is seeking to scare people into voting against marriage equality.

And like all of its other tactics, this one by NOM is blatantly dishonest.

While seeking to attack people's visual senses by showing the video, NOM omits (maybe intentionally, maybe not intentionally) two pertinent facts which destroys the organization's horror story:

1. The children who took part in this lesson were not required to.  According to the article, all parents were informed of the lesson plan beforehand and were able to opt their children out of it if they chose to do so. So this was case of parents still having control over what is being taught to their children.

2. These lessons had nothing to do with marriage equality but the issues of gender identity and bullying. Whether the religious right wants to adhere to the fact or not, the issues of gender identity are becoming more widely known and some parents are finding that they have to deal with this issue.

Both of these facts are relatively easy to find because they are contained in the Fox News story which NOM referred to but chose not link to.

And as I asked before, what's so wrong with talking about this issue to children in a reasonable manner? Children aren't porcelain or glass. And they won't remain children forever. Teaching a child respect and understanding at an early age is hardly a bad idea.

But the fact of the matter here is not what the lessons teach. It's the fact that in spite of all of its talk about having an intelligent conversation on the pros (and mostly cons) of marriage equality, NOM has no problem calling on the gay boogeyman lie yet again.

NOM teams up with gay = pedophilia and bestiality group in Minnesota and other Wednesday midday news briefs

NOM, Family Council register to begin fundraising for marriage battle - A few things u need to know about this: 1. NOM, the Minnesota Family Council (the group which claims that homosexuality is linked to pedophilia, bestiality, and the consuming of urine and feces), and the Minnesota Catholic Conference are involved in this effort. NOM and MFC have already formed a group called Minnesota for Marriage (a rather innocuous title seeing that they only wanted heterosexual marriages). 2. The Minnesota Family Council's CEO - John Helmberger - is listed as the chair and treasurer of the group. 3. Both NOM and MFC are presently being investigated for failing to disclose lobbying efforts.

Recipients of civil union license: 'We wanted to make a statement' - Congratulations Illinois couples! BTW the first couple to register was an African-American couple.

Confessions of a Blog Addict. Or Why I Love to Hate GetReligion.org and FamilyScholars.org - Hilarious article and it mentions this blog too.

Melissa Harris-Perry: LGBT Advocates Need Public Progressive Faith - Last but not least, an excellent article which everyone should read. It covers so many good points. But for me, the main point is that I have been given the perfect answer to relate to those African-Americans who say "I can't hide my skin color, but gays can hide who they are." Answer - "Since when is the closet a privilege? Since when having to lie about your life is a privilege?"

Being openly gay has nothing to do with talking about sexual intercourse

One News Now columnist Peter Heck typifies the willful ignorance some folks have about the lgbt community.

Recently he put this ignorance on display in a piece in which he attacked CNN anchor Don Lemon for coming out. Heck then proceeded to write a long rambling piece further criticizing Lemon, American culture, former NBA star Charles Barkeley, and even Lady Gaga, calling her "vile and perverted."

The meat of Heck's rambling is best seen in the following passage:

. . . why do the very people who constantly tell us that what a person does in their bedroom is no one else's business, simultaneously find it necessary to inform everyone of what they do in their bedroom? If this is a private matter, Don, then let's keep it private. Perhaps I'm the only one who feels this way, but frankly, I don't care to know what kind of sex the evening news anchor is into. Beyond it being remarkably irrelevant to the dissemination of news, it's just kind of creepy that these proponents of sexual anarchy feel it is their civic duty to incessantly shove their unconventional behavior in front of our children's faces.

How many of us have heard that ridiculous notion - i.e. homosexuality is all about sexual intercourse. Why do you tell anyone who you are sleeping with?

Even when someone folks try to show the lgbt community support, they succumb to the ignorance when they say things like "I don't care who so-and-so is sleeping with."

Being an lgbt goes way beyond sexual intercourse and behavior. It's a point we need to press consistently. Announcing that you are gay is not automatically giving someone a window into your bedroom. And being honest about your sexual orientation does not mean that you are going to regal people with your sexual prowess.

Part of the difficulty lgbts face in this world is people like Heck willfully trying to connect being an lgbt with thoughtless hedonistic behavior, hence the constant tired strain that "homosexuality is a lifestyle."

Well I'm gay and my life has less to do with sexual hijinks and more to do with getting up every day, working, etc. - you know, normal stuff. And to the millions of lgbts - especially lgbt couples and individuals taking care of children - it's pretty much the same thing.

Being an lgbt is no different than being a heterosexual. Being open and honest about your lgbt orientation is about honesty and living your life without fear.

You do not choose to be gay and being open about your orientation does not mean that you are choosing to talk about your sex life.

Ignorance, however, is a choice.  It's a point that Heck has made abundantly clear.

The Family Research Council - the hate group hangs itself with its own words

I've written so many times about why the Southern Poverty Law Center was correct to name the Family Research Council as an official anti-gay hate group. But this time, let the Family Research Council and its spokespeople themselves give you proof of the group's much deserved designation:

What does Tony Perkins know about 'Godly' leadership? and other Tuesday midday news briefs

If you have not seen this morning's post - dissecting the distortions behind NOM's talking points and making the case for marriage equality - I suggest that you do. Link to them, post them on your blog, send them to your friends and family.


On the anti-equality crowd's blogger cherry-picking: We matter when it's opportuni$tic - Bet on seeing this deceptive talking point about "gay recruitment" in New York and especially Minnesota. In the absence of logic, some folk use fear to get what they want.

Lisa Miller Is Still On The Run - She ought to be ashamed of herself for keeping her daughter away from her other mother.

Transgender McFatter senior crowned prom queen - Good for her. Goodness and true beauty always wins out in the end.

Perkins: America Needs Godly Leaders - Perhaps it does. But what does that have to do with Tony Perkins, the Family Research Council or the rest of the religious right?

Marriage Equality - Simple answers to NOM's complicated lies

There is no justifiable reason to deny the gay community (and I am speaking about lgbts in a colloquial sense) the right to marry. However, what the gay community seems to be lacking is a way to break this issue down into simple, true points which demonstrates the necessity of marriage equality in spite of organizations who mobilize people (through ignorance and fear) against marriage equality. By refuting the points of one of these groups - the National Organization for Marriage - with accurate, simple information, we can not only prove the need for marriage equality but also show the basic emptiness of arguments against marriage equality.

As evidenced by its talking points, the National Organization for Marriage is taking a highly deceptive tone in its supposed "defense of marriage."

The idea that "marriage has to be defended" is nothing more than a cynical talking point designed to take attention away from the true issue - the lives of same-sex couples and especially the livelihood of children in same-sex households.

And it is a talking point which fuels NOM's tactic of creating division on many levels - same-sex households vs. heterosexual two-parent household, the lgbt community vs. the heterosexual community, the black community vs. the lgbt community and so on. This "divide and conquer" strategy, created via a passive/aggressive subterfuge, is designed to appeal to people's fears, jealousies, and ideas of religious superiority rather than their belief in basic fairness.

The truth of the matter is marriage is not "under attack." It has never been "under attack."

But what is under attack is truth, integrity, and basic fairness for the hundreds of thousands of same-sex couples and especially their children who seem to be nothing more than chess pieces in NOM's game of exploitation and manipulation, as evidenced by the following talking point:

NOM - "Gays and Lesbians have a right to live as they choose, they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us."

 Truth - Allowing gays and lesbians to marry does not "redefine marriage" for the entire country because they are not forcing heterosexuals to engage in gay marriage. It's 100% false. And the gay community don't have a right to live as they choose, per the currently unequal laws of this nation in terms of employment, housing, etc.

Unfortunately, generalizations and straw man arguments encompass more of NOM's talking points. The following are the list of said talking points, as well as logical answers which refutes them:


Answers to NOM's "Frequently Asked Questions"

NOM - 1. Are you a bigot? “Why do you want to take away people’s rights?”
“Isn’t it wrong to write discrimination into the constitution?”

A: “Do you really believe people like me who believe mothers and fathers both matter to kids are like bigots and racists? I think that’s pretty offensive, don’t you? Particularly to the 60 percent of African-Americans who oppose same-sex marriage. Marriage as the union of husband and wife isn’t new; it’s not taking away anyone’s rights. It’s common sense.”

Truth - This an unfair generalization of the argument for marriage equality. However, if one was to go there, one could point to the many instances of those claiming to protect marriage making homophobic comments which belie the claim that they simply believe that "mothers and fathers matter to kids."

For example:

Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage has called homosexuality “an unfortunate thing” which represents “at a minimum, a sexual dysfunction.”

Jason McGuire of New Yorker’s Family Research Foundation (NYFRF) has compared marriage equality to child abuse.

Alveda King, a conservative African-American activist, called marriage equality "genocide."

National Organization For Marriage of Rhode Island executive director Christopher Plante called same-sex families "tragic situations" akin to families with divorced or even dead parents.

The Minnesota Family Council (who is partnering with NOM to stop marriage equality in Minnesota) recently pushed information on its web page linking the gay community to bestiality, pedophilia, and the consuming of urine and human excrement.

NOM - 2. Isn’t the ban on gay marriage like bans on interracial marriage?

A: “Bans on interracial marriage were about keeping two races apart so that one race could oppress the other. Marriage is about bringing two sexes together, so that children get the love of their own mom and a dad, and women don’t get stuck with the enormous disadvantages of parenting alone.” “Having a parent of two different races is just not the same as being deprived of your mother—or your father.”

Truth - Racists believed that interracial marriage would create genetically inferior children. Some opposing marriage equality claim that it would create conditions placing children in danger.

But neither view is backed by science. Children born from interracial relationships are not inferior. In that same vein, the majority of studies which look at children in same-sex households have found that they suffer no adverse effects.

NOM - 3. Why do we need a constitutional amendment? “Isn’t DOMA enough?”

A: “Lawsuits like the one that imposed gay marriage in Massachusetts now threaten marriage in at least 12 other states so far. We need a marriage amendment to settle the issue once and for all, so we don’t have this debate in our face every day. The people get to decide what marriage means. No-end run around the rules by activist judges or grandstanding San-Francisco-style politicians.”

Truth -  Organizations like NOM favor voter referendums where they pour millions of dollars into commercials and flyers which rely on inaccurate studies or the repetition of false horror stories designed to scare people into voting against marriage equality. NOM brags about how people in states like California and Maine voted against marriage equality, but the organization always omits the part about how these voters were manipulated by fears of the "gay agenda coming for their children." NOM and other organizations opposing marriage equality are probably fearful of defending their arguments in court because as lawyer David Boies said, "the witness stand is lonely place to lie."  We saw this in the 2010 Proposition 8 trial when no one from NOM testified for the California law banning gay marriage.

NOM - 4. What’s the harm from SSM? “How can Adam and Steve hurt your marriage?”

A: “Who gets harmed? The people of this state who lose our right to define marriage as the union of husband and wife, that’s who. That is just not right.”

Truth -  What about the rights of same-sex couples? Also, according to the 2000 U.S. Census, 33 percent of female same-sex couple households and 22 percent of male same-sex couple households reported at least one child under eighteen living in their home and no doubt, that number has increased. And according to Gary Gates, a demographer at the University of California, Los Angeles, Black or Latino gay couples are twice as likely as whites to be raising children. What about the rights of these families?

NOM - “If courts rule that same-sex marriage is a civil right, then, people like you and me who believe children need moms and dads will be treated like bigots and racists.”

Truth - This is a distortion. Same-sex households are not in competition with heterosexual households. Children need family environments which give them love and support.

NOM - “Religious groups like Catholic Charities or the Salvation Army may lose their tax exemptions, or be denied the use of parks and other public facilities, unless they endorse gay marriage."

Truth -  No religious group (or any individual for that matter) will be forced to endorse anything.  Those are just words used to scare people. And tax exemption controversies have nothing to do with marriage equality, but rather how far should religious exemptions go if religious charities demanding these exemptions are using tax dollars. For example, is it fair for Catholic Charities in Illinois to have the right not to allow gays to adopt children they care for even if these charities are receiving over $30 million in tax dollars (after all, the gay community does pay taxes).

NOM - “Public schools will teach young children that two men being intimate are just the same as a husband and wife, even when it comes to raising kids.”

Truth - This is a lie. The nonpartisan webpage Politifact found that this claim was inaccurate. In Massachusetts, where same-sex marriage is legal, same-sex intimacy is not in the curriculum. Even those who oppose marriage equality, such as Marc Mutty - who helped lead the charge against it in Maine - said that this claim is hyperbole geared to motivate people through fear.

In reality, conversations about same-sex households probably happen already in schools amongst the students themselves. Again, according the 2000 U.S. Census, 33 percent of female same-sex couple households and 22 percent of male same-sex couple households reported at least one child under eighteen living in their home. It's safe to say that a vast number of these children attend public schools. Is it fair for them not to be able to talk about their families?

NOM - “When the idea that children need moms and dads get legally stigmatized as bigotry, the job of parents and faith communities trying to transmit a marriage culture to their kids is going to get a lot harder.”

Truth -  . Allowing same-sex couples to marry does not "legally stigmatize" two-parent heterosexual families as "bigotry." Same-sex couples with children are not in competition with mother/father couples. And to infer this is saying that families should be subjected to a caste system where one family is inferior to another simply because of make-up. That is un-American.

NOM - “One thing is for sure: The people of this state will lose our right to keep marriage as the union of a husband and wife. That’s not right.”

Truth - What about the rights of same-sex couples or same-sex couples and their children? Don't they have a say in this matter?

NOM - 5. Why do you want to interfere with love?

A: “Love is a great thing. But marriage isn’t just any kind of love; it’s the special love of husband and wife for each other and their children.”

Truth - Giving same-sex couples the right to marry does not interfere with anyone's marriage or the love of their children.  And love in a same-sex household between partners and between parents and children is no different than in a heterosexual household. Here, NOM is trying to define love, something they often accuse gay activists/ the state of doing.

NOM - 6. What about benefits? Don’t gay couples and their kids need the benefits and protections of marriage?”

A: “If medical proxies aren’t working, let’s fix that problem. If people need health care, let’s get them health care. Don’t mess with marriage.”

Truth - It goes beyond medical proxies. Why should gay and lesbian tax-paying citizens have to jump through hoops to get the same benefits as heterosexual marriage couples? And often these extra burdens are extremely costly. Plus they are not easily recognized like the currency of marriage is. Imagine having your partner of 20 years in the hospital with a serious injury, and having to explain why, exactly, you qualify to be by his or her bedside.

NOM -  “The issue isn’t benefits, it is marriage. Local folks can decide benefits. This is about the meaning of marriage, our most basic social institution for protecting children."

Truth - There have been  instances in which organizations who claim to be simply "protecting marriage" have interfered with local communities deciding these issues of  benefits on the claim that granting these benefits is a "backdoor way" to gain same-sex marriage. In Wisconsin, a "morality group" is trying to overturn the state law which allows gay couples to have hospital visitations.  Also, marriage in itself does not protect children from abuse, neglect, etc. However, the denial of marriage rights harms children. Not only children of gay parents, but also children who have gay family members, who constantly hear how controversial their loved ones supposedly are.

NOM - 7. Isn’t divorce the real threat to marriage?

A: “High rates of divorce are one more reason we should be strengthening marriage, not conducting radical social experiments on it.”

Truth - Denying same-sex couples the right to marry does not hinder the high rate of divorce. Nor does it strengthen heterosexual marriage. Also, it's highly offensive to say loving, tax-paying couples make up a "radical social experiment."

NOM - 8. Are you saying gays cannot be good parents?


A: “Two men might each be a good father, but neither can be a mom. The ideal for children is the love of their own mom and dad. No same-sex couple can provide that.”

Truth - The ideal environment for raising a child is one that provides love and support. No one is bashing the heterosexual mom/dad dynamic by pointing out the simple fact that this dynamic is not the reality for a lot of families. Also, multiple studies demonstrate that children in same-sex households are not harmed by this environment. NOM's definition is not only offensive -- it's intellectually vacant. Under NOM's definition, single mothers and fathers are just as "bad." Lastly NOM's point is very contradictory. There are many households where children are not with "their own" mom and dad, i.e. adoptive households.

NOM - 9. What about older or infertile couples? If they marry why not same-sex couples?


A: “Every man and woman who marries is capable of giving any child they create (or adopt) a mother and a father. No same-sex couple can do this. It’s apples and oranges.”

Truth - Again, not all families have a mother and a father in the household. If we base the worthiness of families based on this dynamic, how soon will it be before we start bashing single-parent households or heterosexual married couples who choose not to have children?

All in all, NOM's talking points are nothing more than smoke and mirrors. They are a perfect example of the saying -  "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Furthermore, they are also strategically worded to take all onus off of what NOM, as an organization, actually does on a daily basis. NOM's talking points are also deeply offensive to many (LGBT people and supporters alike). And perhaps most of all: They do not come close to matching the reality of the world.

Talking points developed by Jeremy Hooper and Alvin McEwen. Feel free to link to or copy and paste these points.

NOM throws Janet Corwin to the wolves after election upset

Republican Janet Corwin's recent upset loss in a New York Congressional race to Democrat Kathy Hochul -  that everyone initially gave her no chance of losing - has totally vexed the Republican party to no end.

But one can always count on NOM to advance the theory that Corwin's loss had less to do with her embracing of Rep. Paul Ryan's controversial plan to end present-day Medicare and more of the fact that she was not hot-button enough on social issues:

Pundits are parsing the loss to the Democrats of NY 26--Jack Kemp's old district--in the special election Tuesday. Fears that Paul Ryan's Medicare plan would hurt seniors was clearly issue number one. But Human Events noted how the candidate Jane Corwin, ran away from social issues that could have helped her:

So it was in New York-26 last night. Were it not for the presence of so-called “Tea Party” candidate Jack Davis (who drew about 9% of the vote) or a Corwin campaign that is increasingly being faulted by national conservative and GOP operatives, the results might have been different.

“The only thing the political consultants advising the Corwin campaign seemed to be able to do smartly was cash their big checks,” said former Rep. Fred Eckert (R.-N.Y.), leader of the state Ronald Reagan forces in 1976 and a onetime town supervisor of Greece, N.Y., (within the 26th District). “It’s too bad there is no such thing as malpractice for political consultants, or Jane Corwin could press charges and the whole dumb gang of them would have to pay fines and serve time.”

Eckert was referring to the failure of the Corwin campaign to bring up what he called “hot-button” topics, such as Hochul’s strong pro-abortion stance, including support for the controversial late-term abortion. In addition, he noted the Democrat’s support for same-sex marriage. Corwin described herself as pro-choice but against any federal funding and late-term abortion. She was also foursquare in favor of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Eckert noted that “this district has a strong Roman Catholic population and Hochul is a Roman Catholic. Had the Republicans defined where she stands on those two issues, it might have made a difference.”

The idea that Corwin didn't hit the "right social issues" enough will probably be the standard talking point of the religious right. But it's bizarre that NOM would suddenly turn on her seeing that the organization gave her campaign almost $6,000.

Also NOM conveniently omitted this fact:

Corwin appeared at an event  . . . for a conservative Christian group called the New Yorker’s Family Research Foundation. The foundation’s president, the Reverend Jason McGuire, has likened same-sex marriage to child abuse and asserted that gay New York State legislators, such as Sen. Tom Duane and Assemblyman Daniel O’Donnell, are going “against God’s word” by supporting marriage equality and face “an eternity in hell,”

I hope other candidates who working with NOM (surreptitiously or openly) to derail marriage equality is paying attention to this about-face.

And yes, that means you, Ruben Diaz.

Civil conversations about gays should not involve pedophilia, bestiality, or feces

The American Family Association (AFA)'s phony news service, One News Now has covered the recent vote by Minnesota legislators to put the issue of gay marriage up for a vote in 2012.

Par for the course with One News Now, only person - a religious right figure - is quoted in the story. Now usually when I point this out, it's to show how hypocritical this supposed Christian news service (and the AFA) are. But this time, one has to simply be amused by not only who One News Now chose to quote but also what this source says. The source is Chuck Darrell of the Minnesota Family Council (MFC) and he said the following:

"We have some work to do, but what's great about it is that we've got an 18-month period that's going to allow the people of Minnesota to have a conversation -- a civil, respectful conversation -- about why the amendment should be adopted and the importance of marriage."

Bear in mind that this is the same Minnesota Family Council who was recently busted for spreading inaccurate information via its site that gays engage in pedophilia, bestiality, and the consuming of urine and feces. It also cited the work of discredited physician Paul Cameron. Since this discovery became public, the Minnesota Family Council scrubbed these references from its site. However, you can still view the information here.  To top it off, even though the items were removed, the head of the Minnesota Family Council, Tom Pritchard, actually defended the material:

Prichard defends the postings as getting "into the nature of homosexuality and homosexual behavior," but says that won't be the focus of his group's efforts to pass the constitutional ban. "The focus of this campaign is the nature and purpose of marriage -- not a referendum of homosexuality per se, or its lifestyle activities and behaviors," he says. "I would see that as a separate issue."

I cringe to think about MFC's definition of a "civil, respectful conversation."

A video montage of the Eddie Long scandal

Remember days like this:



I know who I am, "Bishop" Eddie Long. I'm the gay guy who knows that my sexual orientation is a blessing from God. I am also the guy who didn't have to pay a secret settlement (rumored to be $15 million) to four young men who claimed that I sexually abused them.

But rather than expound on it further, I will let the following videos speak for me. I apologize to those who offend easily:

The Best of Know Your LGBT History

Happy Memorial Day Weekend! I thought I would create a special edition of Know Your LGBT History which will look at the best (and the worst) clips from the 100+ episodes of this segment which analyzes portrayals of the lgbt community on movies and television

Let's look at the worst:

From Cruising  (1980), an awful movie starring Al Pacino as a New York City police officer who infiltrates the so-called sadomaschistic world of homosexuality in order to find a serial killer of gay men. And this serial killer doesn't just kill gay men, he butchers them slowly and painfully (a point driven unnecessarily by the first murder scene.) There are no redeeming qualities to this movie. The gay characters are from the pit of a joint fantasy by Peter LaBarbera, Lou Sheldon, Matt Barber, and Donald Wildmon. They are pathetic individuals who, when not being murdered, are either immersing themselves in vile festishes or being intimidated into having sex with police officers. And yes the lgbt community protested like hell when this movie came out:



To the episode of the 1970s television series Police Woman. This episode, Flowers of Evil, dealt with three lesbians (named The Butch, The Bitch, and the Femme by the media) running a retirement home, stealing money from their residents, drugging them, and then gruesomely murdering them. This episode was awful. It was so bad that when the lgbt community protested, it was never shown on television again. However it is available on the Police Woman dvd and as you can see, as an abridged version online:



To I Got The Hook Up (1998),  just a plain hot mess which should have NEVER been made. For the purpose of this site, the offensive part starts at 2:39:



But there have been some really good portrayals.

Like this episode of The Jeffersons which looked at how main character George Jefferson dealt with learning that his navy buddy has transitioned to a woman. It was an episode ahead of its time:





And then there's Maude, another show ahead of its time when it comes to lgbt issues:







And then there is my personal favorite, the ending of the British movie Beautiful Thing (1996), a story about first love. If anyone ever asks what being an lgbt is all about, show them this scene. It's about love, honey.And I especially love the way the mother dances too in order to show support and protection to her son and his boyfriend:




Past Know Your LGBT History Posts:

Minnesota group quickly becoming liability to NOM and other Friday midday news briefs

Audio: Minnesota Family Council becomes even more of a liability to 2012 'protect marriage' fight - Keep posting on these folks, Jeremy. Let folks see what they think of us. "Respectful conversation" my foot!

Video: TN joins the south, again, land of the backwards bigots - A perfect way to describe the state's war on lgbts.

Catholic Charities of Rockford ends foster care, adoption services - Bye! Those tax dollars you received for your services belong to lgbts also. Don't take state monies if you can't follow the rules which come with that money.

After Forcing A Vote On Anti-Gay Amendment, NOM Wonders Why MN Has No Budget - NOM attacks Minnesota's governor on the fact that the legislature couldn't come together for a budget. Of course the organization omits that those "we need to protect marriage from those evil gays" shenanigans took up the majority of time which could have been devoted to the state developing a budget.