Analyzing and refuting the inaccuracies lodged against the lgbt community by religious conservative organizations. Lies in the name of God are still lies.
Remember what I said in my last post about NOM's audacity? Forget that. The following not only crosses the threshold for audacity but wins the award in perpetuity. Check out the following photo:
Jeremy Hooper from Goodasyou.org (who deals with NOM's lies at a level that even closer than me - I admire his strength and strong stomach) instantly suspected it to be a fake.
And he was right:
From Hooper:
Yes, that's right: They lifted a Reuters photo. From another state. From more than three years ago. Featuring a man who stands against NOM's agenda in most every way possible.
In the long run, it doesn't matter how many victories NOM receives - even though the organization is going to eventually lose this fight against lgbtq equality - the organization has shown itself to be totally devoid of integrity and morality.
Seems to me that anyone looking to this organization to protect marriage or anything they perceive to be "good" and "noble" is barking up the wrong tree.
Today, the National Organization for Marriage really decided to raise the bar for unashamed audacity. The organization is now demanding that Obama's Justice Department pay for Speaker of the House John Boehner's defense of DOMA ( the Defense of Marriage Act):
In response to Democratic Rep. Mike Honda of California's calls for hearings on the cost of the House's defense of DOMA, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) released this statement:
"John Boehner and the House are stepping in to do the job that President Obama refused to do: defend a law passed by bipartisan majorities. The cost of hiring lawyers to defend DOMA should be deducted from the budget of the Justice Department," said Brian Brown, President of NOM. "The $1.5 million cost of defending DOMA represent less than one-one hundredth of one percent of the Justice Department's huge $28 billion budget. President Obama's defection of duty is responsible for incurring this cost; he should trim some fat and find the money to pay for it."
The Obama Administration decided not to defend DOMA because it felt that the law could not be defended. Speaker of the House John Boehner decided to take up the slack . . . and stepped into a hornet's nest. He is now set to spend over $1 million on the defense of DOMA. The amount of the defense was earlier set at $500,000 but apparently the lawyer handling the case, Paul Clement, quickly went through this amount.
Perhaps it had something to do with the fact that the defense of DOMA was rooted in chicanery and junk science:
3. Clement is also citing - in a second hand fashion - junk science from discredited researchers. In his defense of DOMA, Clement cites the work of Case Western Reserve University law professor George W. Dent, Jr. But Dent's work - which Clement uses - cited both Paul Cameron and George Rekers, two discredited researchers. Cameron has been censured or rebuked by several organizations for his bad methodology in his studies. He has published work which claimed, among other nauseating false things, that gays stuff gerbils up their rectums. (Editor's note- the piece Cameron cited to make this claim - The Straight Dope - actually said that this claim was not true. Cameron dishonestly "flipped the script" to make it seem that The Straight Dope was affirming this claim.) Rekers lost a lot of credibility for last year's scandal when he was caught coming from a European vacation with a "rentboy."
It is for these reasons that Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA) demanded a hearing on how money is being spent on the defense of DOMA.
Even if no one ignored that Boehner's defense of DOMA is rooted in bad techniques and junk science - which I noticed NOM did ignore - the audacity of the organization here is astounding.
NOM just lost a court case in which it sought to sought to hide donors in CA who contributed to the successful effort to pass Proposition 8.
Perhaps NOM shouldn't worry who is paying for the defense of DOMA and focus on releasing its donors as it has been ordered to by law and the courts.
My favorite phony news service, One News Now, is giving a Florida religious right group, the Florida Family Association, room to gripe about what it calls a "gay promotion targeted at children:"
MTV's channel "Teen Nick" has begun airing a promotional announcement for The Trevor Helpline, "a free and confidential service that's open for gay and questioning youth. Be proud of who you are." The organization's website has a constant link called "Things to consider when coming out" and is currently promoting "Gay History Month."
Upon discovering that Target Corporation is the main advertiser during Degrassi, the Florida Family Association -- which describes that program as "shameful" -- prepared an e-mail for the public to send to the CEO and other officials of the retail chain.
They are openly recruiting teens and children to become 'gay' on a program that also promotes the transgender and homosexual lifestyle," laments David Caton, executive director of the pro-family group.
And he wonders how the helpline helps a child or teenager who may be a bit confused about his or her sexuality, since in openly promotes that "if you call this helpline, you are not persuaded to walk away from the lifestyle. You are persuaded to be proud and embrace it." Caton contends that is "irresponsible" on the part of a network that caters to young people, and on the part of Target.
What's irresponsible is letting Caton run his mouth. The hotline he is griping about is a part of the Trevor Project, which is an organization devoted to preventing suicide amongst lgbtq youth.
But apparently suicide amongst lgbtq youth doesn't seem to be a problem to Caton. He seems to think that telling a lgbtq youth to simply change "his or her orientation" will keep them from being bullied at school or isolated at home.
And there, ladies and gentlemen, is the real sad story of how Christianity has been corrupted in this country. By himself, Caton is an unfeeling, uncaring buffoon. But he is not by himself.
Caton is a part of a much-moneyed interwoven system of wannabe Christians who seem to ignore the sick and the hungry in lieu devoted solely on the nonexistent gay menace.
It seems to be a zero sum game to these supposed Christians in which they are willing to sacrifice anything, including the safety and well-being of lgbtq children.
When I first saw this on Joe Jervis's site, I told him that I simply had to steal it. Sometimes comic strips and editorial cartoons nail plain truth so succinctly:
The 1975 made-for-television movie Cage Without A Key is a juvenile prison picture with a twist.
Susan Dey portrays a young woman who is thrown into reform school after being tricked into committing a robbery. Of course the story is about her trials and tribulations in reform school, complete with the requisite evil prison lesbians. However one character did stand out.
Vastly underrated actress Jonelle Allen (this woman should have gotten more roles because she was awesome) portrays Tommy, another prisoner who is also a lesbian, but becomes Dey's friend and savior.
Media researcher Steven Capsuto cites the character of Tommy as probably the earliest well-developed gay teen character on television, as well as the first well-developed non-white gay character.
And of course you know that means, don't you? Allen's character is not long for this world. In fact, she dies saving Dey in the middle of a brawl at the end of the film as the following scene shows (starting at 10:10):
15 Inspiring LGBT Religious Leaders - These faith leaders need to be commended for proving that the lgbtq identity and religious faith are NOT necessarily in separate camps.
To hear some members of the religious right talk, any progress of lgbtq equality is the result of a nefarious plan to supposedly "indoctrinate" folks.
However as the following snippet of an Associated Press article proves, there are no evil plans, just the steady flow of progress:
The number of gays and lesbians adopting children has nearly tripled in the last decade despite discriminatory rules in many states, according to an analysis of recent population trends.
"It's a stratospheric increase. It's like going from zero to 60," said Miami attorney Elizabeth Schwartz, who has coordinated more than 100 adoptions for gay and lesbian families in the last year. "I think many really dreamed of doing this but it wasn't something they ever thought would become a reality."
About 21,740 same-sex couples had adopted children in 2009, up from 6,477 in 2000, according to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law. About 32,571 adopted children were living with same-sex couples in 2009, up from 8,310 in 2000. The figures are an analysis of newly released Census Bureau estimates.
The New York-based Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute released a report Thursday culminating a four-year project surveying 158 gay and lesbian parents and their experience with the adoption process. Their researchers found the highest number of homosexuals adopted children from Massachusetts, California, New York and Texas.
Several states specifically prohibit same-sex couples from adopting jointly, while others have a patchwork of discriminatory policies that make it difficult for gays and lesbians to adopt either as individuals or as couples. But some states have eased restrictions on gay families.
No doubt the religious right will step gingerly around this issue. "Same-sex households are untested social experiments," they will say. "The true effects of these households have not been seen."
It's all a bunch of poppycock.
The point is clear. These families illustrate the point that when it comes to same-sex household and the gay community in general, we are not talking about hypothetics or abstract concepts.
Same-sex households encompass real people with real families - just like every other normal American family. And whether folks like it or not - be it a teacher who attacks a gay display at her place of employment or marriage clerks who refuse to do their elected duties - there is going to have to be some acknowledgement AND respect of these families.
All of the talking points in the world aren't going to change that.
More details are emerging from today's court case in California in which the National Organization for Marriage and the other organizations forming the group ProtectMarriage.com lost the bid to keep its donor identities secret.
And there is one detail which stands out. In its attempt to keep its donor list secret, ProtectMarriage.com compared itself to the NAACP during the height of the Civil Rights Movement.
Joe La Rue, a lawyer for the group (Protect Marriage.com), said in oral arguments today that those donors would remain exposed to harassment "so long as these names are perpetually kept on the state's website."
. . . California law requires the disclosure of the identity of anyone who contributes $100 or more to a campaign. ProtectMarriage.com said the $100 limit was too low, and it claimed it qualified for an exception to disclosure laws once granted by the U.S. Supreme Court to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Socialist Workers Party.
The article goes on to say that the judge presiding over the case, U.S. District Judge Morris England, Jr. was very skeptical about this:
The Socialist Workers Party involved relatively few people, he said, and belonging to the NAACP in the early 1950s "could cause you to be killed." In contrast, he said, Proposition 8 proponents not only enjoyed the support of millions of people, but prevailed in the election.
England's skepticism probably had to do with the evidence which was given to him as "proof" of harassment:
The judge read from a batch of declarations in which people claimed yard signs were stolen, that they received harassing phone calls, or, in one case, that people protested outside someone's business. "That's the extent of what happened," he said.
The article goes on to say even in the face of England's skepticism, ProtectMarriage.com's lawyer continued to push the comparison, even bringing up segregation and "Jim Crow" laws.
So in the world of NOM, someone protesting your business or stealing your yard sign is the equivalent of getting shot to death in your front yard (Medgar Evers) or being beaten half bloody (Fannie Lou Hamer).
The irony of NOM's defense is stark when one takes into account how in New York, Maryland, and North Carolina, the organization used black pastors to claim the gay community is trying to "piggyback" on the struggles of African-Americans during the Civil Rights Movement.
It definitely proves that in this fight over marriage equality, there is exploitation of the Civil Rights Movement and the African-American community in general.
Supporters of the 2008 ballot measure that outlawed same-sex marriage in California have lost a lawsuit that sought to block their past and future campaign finance records from public view.
A federal judge in Sacramento on Thursday ruled against ProtectMarriage.com and the National Organization for Marriage, saying the two groups failed to prove they should be exempted from the state's campaign disclosure laws.
Mollie Lee, a lawyer in the San Francisco City Attorney's office, says U.S. District Judge Morrison England Jr. ruled from the bench after a brief hearing and plans to issue a written opinion later.
The two groups, which sponsored and helped finance the gay marriage ban known as Proposition 8, filed the lawsuit in January 2009, claiming their donors were harassed after their names appeared on the Secretary of State's web site.
This loss come days after NOM lost a court case in Washington State. In that particular case, NOM sought not to disclose the names of 137,500 people who two years ago signed Referendum 71 petitions to bring the state’s domestic-partnership law to a vote.
NOM may try to push the idea that people who support their efforts are being harassed but according to the courts, that theory is bupkis.
Why is NOM fighting so hard not to disclose its backers?
I wish someone would put the question to Brian Brown or the rest of that bunch.
Thank you Blabbeando for the tip.
The religious right have been very measured about Spirit Day. Other than the following stupid comment from Brian Raum of the Alliance Defense Fund, they have been silent:
"We should not turn a blind eye to the physical and mental harms that people engaged in homosexual conduct bring upon themselves by chalking those harms up to 'stigma, discrimination, and victimization'—demanding more health studies and changes to the medical system—rather than dare ask people to reconsider the path they are traveling down. Instead, we tell them 'it gets better' when, in fact, it does not."
If you visit Facebook today, or Twitter, or Tumblr, there's a good chance you'll be seeing purple.
October 20th is Spirit Day -- a celebration begun one year ago by a teenager named Brittany McMillan to honor the memory of young people who have taken their lives after being bullied.
It has become a day when people all over the world wear purple to show support for LGBT people and speak out against the bullying of LGBT teens.
In 2010, millions participated.
This year, the White House is going purple on Facebook, as well. You can also join the celebration by making your social networking icon purple, or just adding a statement of support.
And October 20th is also a day to remember that it does get better.
And of course, the page contains a message from President Obama, Vice President Biden, and the White House staff. It's an old message but VERY appropriate:
Fox News, Keith Ablow Misinform About Transgender Child - It's like I've been saying. Sooner or later Fox News will turn its guns of misinformation fully on the gay community. Can you picture a future where the network conducts a one-sided interview with Peter Sprig on his junk science studies or pushing the phony idea that Paul Cameron is a "victim" of the gay community? This is merely cocktail canape right now.
PFOX caught in yet another spinjob; also, grass still green - When I first saw this, I was about to go into ORBIT! Thank you Jeremy Hooper for showing PFOX's claim to be a lie. Giving FRC's Peter Sprigg "special thanks" for serving on a school board is like giving a wolf an award for quickly killing a lamb before eating it.
I've come to the conclusion that the "former ad executive who found Jesus" Linda Harvey is the homophobic version of the Designing Women character Suzanne Sugarbaker, but light on the charm and extra heavy on the crazy.
How do you feel about open homosexuals tending to your child in a health care setting? Do you think these folks provide good role modeling at a time when your child is very vulnerable? I was thinking about this recently when I heard that Children’s Hospital in Columbus has a homosexual employees group called NCHARGE, which stands for Nationwide Children’s Hospital’s Advocates Representing Gay Employees. The meeting minutes of this groups reveal that they participated in last June’s gay pride parade, that they participated in a health expo on adolescent health this summer and that they’re concerned about same-sex partner benefits. They’re also planning to be identified with rainbow lapel pins.
But let’s say your eleven year-old has broken her leg rather badly and needs to be in the hospital a few days, which would you prefer: a nurse who’s proud of her lesbianism, who has rainbow identifiers on her work clothing, or a nurse who does not?
I would like to suggest that parents think long and hard about this. If you want your children to admire people who proclaim a homosexual lifestyle, they’re involvement with your child during a hospital stay is sure to be an influence. And let me be clear that folks involved in these behaviors can be certainly competent workers but they are tacking on to their workplace identity one that is highly offensive to many people and can be erroneously influential to children who won’t, or shouldn’t, see the whole picture of how this behavior really manifests itself.
Here’s what parents can do: select your pediatrician very carefully, first of all. There are a few homosexual doctors treating kids, there are far more nurses, LPNs, technicians and other health care workers in these lifestyles so you may want to consider writing a letter that you file with your pediatrician that should your child ever be hospitalized, you do not want your child to be treated or cared for by one of these members of the Children’s Hospital gay employees group except in the case of an emergency situation. But for routine in-hospital care where contact with your child would be required, your values should be respected.
Harvey confuses the hell out of me. A while back, she claimed that gay people don't exist. So if there are no gay people, then there can be no gay doctors. And if there are no gay doctors, then parents are "worrying" needlessly, aren't they?
I know you all want to say rude things about Harvey, but don't. As for me, I've long stopped getting upset at Harvey's comments.
I now look at her as our friend. Nay, she is one of our best ally in fighting the religious right.
You see, there are people like Tony Perkins, Brian Brown, Maggie Gallagher, and Peter Sprigg who formulate the deceptive idea gays are aggressive bullies and that we aren't the targets of some folks attempting to push us back in the closet.
They come with junk science, half-baked anecdotes, and carefully phrased talking points designed to obscure the truth.
But Harvey lets her homophobic "freak flag fly." Forget the talking points, Harvey just flat don't like us and is not afraid to say it.
She is the true face of the religious right and thus the face we need to remind people of when they come with their phony stories of "bullying gays" or "religious persecution."
Harvey voices what a lot of them actually think. As more Americans see and hear of people like Harvey, they will get a correct indication of what the gay community has to deal with day after day after day.
So at least try to suppress your desires to call Harvey every name in the book. Try not to get too angry at her nonsensical claims.
Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA), the ranking member on the House Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee, is requesting a hearing on House Speaker’s John Boehner’s (R-OH) “irresponsible, backdoor use of taxpayer money to pay the private law firm Bancroft PLLC to represent the House in support of the constitutionally-questionable Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA),” he announced in a press release. The legal team that Boehner and the Republicans hired has come under harsh criticism for arguing that homosexuality is a choice, misrepresenting research, and relying on such experts as ex-gay advocate George Rekers and the National Organization for Marriage’s Maggie Gallagher. House Democrats are also calling on Boehner to hold a a briefing on his efforts, which are have cost taxpayers more than a million dollars.
The continued defense of DOMA is slow-moving train wreck which continues to pick up speed.
From a favorite site of mine, Box Turtle Bulletin, comes news that an old adversary of the gay community is taking a trip to Moldavia:
Scott Long, former director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights Program at Human Rights Watch, has learned that American anti-gay extremist Paul Cameron is headed to Moldova to oppose proposed anti-discrimination legislation which would include sexual orientation. Long writes:
Moldova is a splinter of a country between Romania and Ukraine, a point of contention between Russians, Turks, and others for centuries, and one of the poorest states in Europe. An anti-discrimination bill that prohibits unequal treatment on grounds including sexual orientation is before its Parliament, due for debate at month’s end.
In the days before the debate starts, Paul Cameron is coming to town. An e-mail from the Alianţa pentru Salvarea Familiilor din Moldova (Alliance to Save the Family in Moldova) announces that the “U.S. sociologist, founder and president of Family Research Institute” will stay from October 24-29, and “will share the U.S. experience in implementing anti-discrimination legislation.” There will be a roundtable with “representatives of various parliamentary committees, ministries and other institutions of the state,” plenty of lobby meetings with lawmakers — and, of course, media will be saturated with Cameron’s fake statistics.
For the younger folks in the gay community and for the rest of the folks who may not be aware of Paul Cameron, allow me to introduce you to a little bit of sordid anti-gay history. Every lie, every piece of distorted of junk science about the gay community, even some ways in which religious right groups distort actual science to demonize the gay community were either formulated or "improved upon" by Paul Cameron.
He is the man is responsible for pushing the following myths about the gay community:
Lesbians are more likely to die in car wrecks,
Gay men molest children at a high rate and are more likely to be serial killers,
Gay men stuff gerbils up their rectums,
Gays and lesbians in the military are more likely to rape their heterosexual counterparts.
Basically, it was Cameron who in the 80s came up with the idea of aggressively using science to prove that homosexuality is a "dangerous lifestyle." The problem is to do this, Cameron attained a reputation for either distorting legitimate science or distorting his own work to gain the conclusions he wanted from his "studies." He has also been discredited and censured by many group and individuals on the left, the right, and in the middle due to his bad research techniques. Several of his studies have been criticized for such errors as having small sample sizes, showing an anti-gay bias in interviews, and not having enough responses to establish a suitable analysis.
For Children of Same-Sex Couples, a Student Aid Maze- If receiving student aid is this much of a problem, just think of the other problems children in same-sex households have to deal with. You see this is what NOM and the rest of the religious right and their phony victims want to take attention away from - real victims of discrimination and prejudice.
Fox Host Attacks College For Voluntary LGBT Application Question- The way Fox News misrepresented this situation should serve as a warning to the gay community. Imagine a highly-watched news network aggressively pushing anti-gay half-stories and homophobic guests. Fox isn't doing it with the fierceness it is using to undermine President Obama. But imagine one day if it does.
Rick Santorum feels like he has been bullied by a recent episode of Saturday Night Live which made fun of his run for president:
Santorum -- depicted by actor Andy Samberg in the sketch, titled "Yet Another GOP Debate" -- suggested that the segment was "bullying" during an interview with New Hampshire radio station WGIR on Sunday. The former Pennsylvania senator said he had been "hammered" by "the left" for his support of conservative principles.
"The left, unfortunately, participates in bullying more than the right does," Santorum said. "They say that they’re tolerant, and they’re anything but tolerant of people who disagree with them and support traditional values."
I don't feel the least bit sorry for Santorum. He is a public figure which makes him a target for comedians. Over the years SNL has made fun of many public figures from President Obama to Star Jones.
And when Santorum acts like he is Joan of Arc at the stake, it makes it harder for me to sympathize with what a mockery his name has become.
Yesterday, another child committed suicide because he couldn't deal with the bullying which comes with being openly gay.
And unfortunately he is the latest in a long line of children who feel that there will not be a better tomorrow for them because of the ignorance of others.
I hate that. Any decent person would hate that. Any decent Christian would hate that.
So you will have to forgive me if I don't feel sorry for you, Mr. Santorum. You are a self-righteous phony who deserves every bit of mockery rained down upon you.
In the early days of Christianity, their oppressors crucified them, fed them to lions, and burned them like torches. Somehow, I don't think that being made fun of by a late-night comedy show compares to these atrocities.
Mr. Santorum, you are not being bullied. Your ignorance is indicative of the reasons why others think its okay to bully.
So please get over yourself and stop acting like a straight-up BIYAAAATCH.
Archbishop John Nienstedt sent a letter to every priest in the state at the start of October urging them to put every Catholic church in Minnesota to work passing a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
“It is imperative that we marshal our resources to educate the faithful about the Church’s teachings on these matters, and to vigorously organize and support a grass roots effort to get out the vote to support the passage of the amendment,” the letter read. It went out on Oct. 4 to every priest in the state.
The archbishop said it wants priests in every parish to identify a “church captain” in order to create an “ad hoc committee” in every church in the state. The “church captain” is a component of the Schubert Flint strategy used in 2008′s divisive Proposition 8 battle in California.
The strategy mirrors a similar one used by conservative Christians in California to pass Proposition 8 and end marriage rights for same-sex couples.
. . . According to Nienstedt’s letter, the church captains will be organized by the Minnesota Catholic Conference, the public policy arm of the Catholic church, which will in turn report to the Minnesota for Marriage coalition for statewide efforts. Minnesota for Marriage is made up of the Minnesota Family Council, MCC and the National Organization for Marriage.
“A major issues will be placed before the State of Minnesota in the November 2012 election. a constitutional amendment to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” Nienstedt wrote. “The sanctity of marriage and vital role of the family is at stake. It is a firmly-held teaching of our church that a marriage is a union of a husband and a wife, and that they together are the ones suited to be a father and a mother.”
First of all, I wonder if this is legal for a tax-exempt organization to take such a role in the political process?
