Mat Staver, Liberty Counsel doubles down on implausible story against Macy's

As Mat Staver and the Liberty Counsel continue milk the case of the former Macy's employee who was fired for harassing a transgender customer, one has to wonder are they reading their own press.

Yesterday, I pointed out how Staver and the employee, Natalie Johnson, conducted several interviews in which they tried to whitewash the fact that Johnson's actions violated Macy's policy and that concerns about "religious liberty" and "men in women's changing rooms" were a pitiful dodges.

I even hinted that the Liberty Counsel was "conjuring up" a story of an "anonymous" Macy's employee troubled by the policy.

But in an interview with the phony news service One News Now today, Staver seems to be sticking to that story and making up new ones:

Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, now tells OneNewsNow that an employee of another store has told him she has persistent problems keeping men out of the women's fitting room.

However, that's not exactly what the Liberty Counsel said yesterday on its blog:

The employee said she constantly has to ask men to leave the women’s fitting rooms.

It may seem like an insignificant jump from "asking men to leave women's fitting rooms" to "having persistent problems keeping men out of women's fitting rooms," but this jump only elucidates the questions I asked yesterday.

Those questions were:

Were these transgender women, rather than men accompanying their loved ones? These are two totally different situations.

And if these were transgender women, what are the odds of this employee having the ability to violate company policy without losing her job? If this woman had been truly asking transgender women to leave the fitting rooms, we would be hearing about this before now.

If this anonymous employee has had  "persistent problems" with transgender customers, then that would mean there was in fact conflict between her and those customers. And if this is the case, I refuse to believe that several transgender women in different cases would allow themselves to be disrespected and not complain, especially when the store policy is in their favor.

How is this woman continuing to keep her job in light of this possibility? Or does this woman even exist?

Then Staver tries to make it seem that there is a groundswell of negative reactions to Macy's policy:

According to Liberty Counsel, the public is reacting.

"Consistently the people of America are saying that they will not shop at Macy's," explains Staver. "They're tearing up their Macy's credit cards, they're sending back their Macy's gift cards, they say that they will not shop at Macy's -- and this is a consistent response that we're seeing from the public around the country."

The Liberty Counsel founder says customers are "literally outraged and shocked" at Macy's policy.

Staver conveniently doesn't provide proof of this claim, just like neither he nor the Liberty Counsel has provided proof of the existence of the anonymous Macy's employee.


To reiterate, I smell a rat.

Email Macy's and send the company your support for standing up for our rights and dignity. And most of all, tell Macy's to not back down. 

'Santorum picking on gays (again)' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Santorum Blames Gays For Plummeting Marriage Rate - Santorum would blame the gay community if his cable went out.

Chaplains not forced; These fearful talking points, on the other hand… - And this, boys and girls, is how the religious right claims victory in a situation where there was no victory for them.

Gay Vietnam Vet Who Challenged Romney On Marriage Equality Speaks Out - Yes this has been seen and talked about ad naseum. But a Mitt Romney buttwhipping is something we can always enjoy over and over again.

It Happened to Me: I Told My Boyfriend I Was Born a Boy - An issue at the crux of all of the lies and fear tactics thrown at the transgender community. A necessary and powerful story.

Michigan Gay Men Allegedly Being Targeted In Police Stings For 'Soliciting And Accosting' - This story is not as clear cut as you think. The article alleges that officers are the ones making the first moves and are targeting gay men for behavior that would be acceptable for heterosexual couples.

'Ex-gay' president changing statement in face of lawsuit?

Very few people are aware of the possible lawsuit that the organization Truth Wins Out may lodge against the ex-gay group PFOX.

The incident stems from an October 7 interview on NewsPlus with Mark Segraves (WDCW-TV). At the 10:38 mark of the show, PFOX President Greg Quinlan claimed that Wayne Besen, head of Truth Wins Out, said the following:

“Truth Wins Out if you look further, including Wayne Besen. He’s asked for people, you know, somebody needs to run Greg over. He needs to be hit with a bus. Somebody should inject him with AIDS. Those are the things that Wayne Besen and Truth Wins Out says about me. That’s pretty hateful rhetoric.”

Reportedly, Truth Wins Out sent PFOX a letter last week asking for an apology, claiming that Quinlan's claim was a lie.

Quinlan, however refused to apologize. In a letter sent out, he also tried to turn the incident around on Besen, claiming that Besen is a persistent harasser of the so-called peaceful ex-gay movement.

That's neither here nor there. The important piece is the claim by Quinlan that Besen has been calling for someone to harm him.

Quinlan, in his letter, claimed that Besen told these things to him in a private conversation:

First of all, Besen blatantly mischaracterized what I actually said on the program, claiming that I suggested he solicited my assassination. This is a bald-faced lie and Besen knows it. The truth is that Besen once said to me in a private conversation that someone should run me over with a bus or inject me with AIDS. Did I think he was serious? No. I knew it was just Wayne being Wayne; one part bluster, two parts hyperbole and three parts hot air.”

Besen has denied this conversation ever took place.

Here is the thing though which may hurt Quinlan's case. The claim he made about Besen calling for others to harm him is on video. And at no point does Quinlan indicate that it was a private conversation between him and Besen. In fact, Quinlan expressly said that Besen was telling people to harm him:



So while at the present time, Quinlan is showing all sorts of bravado (the end of his letter is a challenge to Truth Wins Out and Besen to go ahead and sue him), we will see if that bravado holds up in the face of what appears to be an incriminating video.

Liberty Counsel eagerly smearing transgender community and Macy's with lies

With the recent case of the former Macy's employee, Natalie Johnson, who was fired because she harassed a transgender customer, the right wing group, the Liberty Counsel, is acting as if it won the lottery.

The organization has been on a massive press tour pushing their version of the story.

The young lady was fired because she violated the store policy which allows the transgender community to use whichever changing room they see fit. She took it upon herself to accost a transgender teen who was coming from one of the changing rooms. The teen and her friends complained and when informed of the policy, the young lady said she would not follow it.

That is why she was fired. She is presently suing - via the Liberty Counsel - claiming that her religious beliefs were violated.

Now while neither she nor the organization can't seem to decided whether or not to use the phony angle of religious persecution or the even more fallacious image of how Macy's policy would lead to women being violated (this sort of thing has never happened, neither in Macy's nor in places where there exists transgender inclusive policies), the one angle both seem to agree on is smearing the transgender community.

First was an overly friendly interview on Fox News where the anchor, Shannon Bream, let Johnson and Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver go unchallenged about the situation even to the point of saying awful things about the transgender community.

From Equality Matters:

During the segment, Fox’s Bream listened quietly as her guests repeated a number of anti-trans smears, including referring to the transgender teen as “a man... wearing lipstick” and promoting the right-wing myth that transgender protections put women and girls “in jeopardy”

 . . .  Instead of accurately portraying the problem of discrimination based on gender identity, Bream allowed her guests to openly chuckle as they trivialized the experience of the transgender teen and attacked Macy’s non-discrimination policy. 

Staver also made an appearance on the radio show of right-wing host Janet Parshall. Parshall, who once referred to same-sex families as  "pretend families," of course let Staver go on a lying tangent as to supposedly how dangerous Macy's policy is:

As you mentioned before the break, this really puts every woman at risk. A father doesn’t want to take his twelve, thirteen year-old daughter there to go to Macy’s and let her go into a woman’s fitting room, not knowing whether there may be some pedophile, pervert, or some other kind of person who’s waiting to do a sexual assault on this young woman, or your wife. Any woman does not want to go into a men’s restroom, a men’s fitting room, or a woman’s fitting room, thinking that they may be watched by a peeping tom or even worse, sexually assaulted or raped, and in fact this is a liability waiting to happen and Macy’s needs to fix this problem.

Lastly comes an item from the Liberty Counsel's blog which may signal that perhaps Staver and company reached too much in pushing this phony panic:

Another Macy’s employee has contacted Liberty Counsel and shared about repeated issues with men using the women’s fitting rooms. This individual asked to remain anonymous out of fear of losing her job. The employee said she constantly has to ask men to leave the women’s fitting rooms. In addition, she has been asked numerous times by mothers who have daughters in the fitting rooms to please ask the men to leave the women’s dressing rooms.

Here is where it gets tricky. Two questions need to be asked.

Were these transgender women, rather than men accompanying their loved ones? These are two totally different situations.

And if these were transgender women, what are the odds of this employee having the ability to violate company policy without losing her job? If this woman had been truly asking transgender women to leave the fitting rooms,  we would be hearing about this before now.

I smell a rat.

More specifically, I smell an ambulance chasing organization eager to ride a phony controversy all the way to the bank.

Email Macy's and send the company your support for standing up for our rights and dignity. And most of all, tell Macy's to not back down. 

Related posts:

LGBTQ youth caught in the crossfire of phony 'religious liberty'

Woman files lawsuit because she can't harass transgender customers

Macy's stands up for the lgbtq community

'NOM lying through photos again' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Why is NOM’s NH effort so local-averse? - Sad. The National Organization for Marriage continues to lie through photo-shopping.
  
Farah Disparages GOProud and Warns that Obama Made U.S. "Global Sex Cop" - GoProud needs to stop whining about "the Gay Left" cause we aren't the ones giving the group hell.

Ghana Hopes ‘Incidence Of Homosexuality Will Be A Thing Of The Past’ - Ugly mess.

James Inhofe Stands By Rick Perry, Talks Bestiality, Gays In The Military - One fool standing by another fool equals two fools who should sit the hell down.

DeMint Blocks Confirmation Of El Salvador’s Ambassador Because She Condemned Homophobia - DeMint doesn't think that gays should teach children. Why should we be surprised over this?

Janice Crouse - another phony expert of the religious right

The following video is a perfect demonstration of the slick ways so-called religious right experts pass along propaganda and lies about the lgbtq community





Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America has done this sort of thing before. Last year in fact.

And just like that time, she does not say where she got her statistics. It's probably because she either relying on junk science or distortions of legitimate science.

When it comes to legitimate science, religious right phony experts, like Ms. Crouse here, have been known to take convenience sample studies - i.e. studies taken at STD clinics or studies in which the authors have indicated cannot be taken to generalize about the entire gay community - and distort them to demonize lgbtqs in mass.

Or when they talk about negative behaviors (i.e. suicide) and diseases in the gay community - and Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council is a master at this - they are quick to cite the studies talking about these things but omit the portion of the studies which places the blame on how societal homophobia contributes to these diseases and negative behaviors.

Let's look at Crouse's claim that gays live 20 years less than heterosexuals (.11 seconds). My guess is that she received statistic from the 1997 Oxford study (which I have talked about more times than I can count).

Those who know of this 1997 study also know that in 2001, the authors of the work had to go on record complaining about how folks like Crouse was distorting their work.

As you can see, Crouse doesn't really care. As long as she has something to demonize gays, she will continue to use it.

Just like every other phony religious right "expert."

Related posts:


CWA's Janice Crouse crams a bunch of anti-gay lies in one statement 
 
How religious right groups distort legitimate research to demonize the gay community
 

Editor's note - The attached video is a short snippet. The longer version is here and as you can see, Crouse does NOT provide any statistics for her charges.


Hat tip to Right Wing Watch

Report - Media helping to promote anti-gay hate group

Last year, the Southern Poverty Law Center designated the Family Research Council as an official anti-gay hate because of the group's deliberate use of lies and junk science to spread false information about the lgbtq community.

However, according to a new report by Equality Matters, the mainstream media is not only ignoring this but seems going out of its way to give FRC and its spokespeople credibility:

In November of 2010, the Southern Poverty Law Center listed the Family Research Council as an anti-gay hate group due to its “propagation of known falsehoods” about the LGBT community. Since being listed, however, FRC spokespersons have been invited 52 times to discuss issues ranging from the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” to the 2012 presidential campaign. Despite FRC’s long history of producing anti-gay propaganda, every major news network has invited the group on national television while failing to acknowledge its hate group designation.

Analysis: News Networks Regularly Host Family Research Council Spokespersons  

FRC Listed As An Anti-Gay Hate Group In November 2010. In November 2010, the Family Research Council (FRC) was added to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) list of anti-gay hate groups due to its “propagation of known falsehoods” about gays and lesbians. [SPLC, November 2010]

FRC Spokespersons Made 52 Television Appearances Since Being Labeled A Hate Group. According to an Equality Matters analysis*, FRC spokespersons – including Tony Perkins, Peter Sprigg, and Ken Blackwell – have been invited to appear on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News a total of 54 times in the twelve months since Perkins first appeared on MSNBC to discuss being labeled as a hate group. 24 of those appearances were on Fox News, 19 were on MSNBC, and 11 were on CNN.

And Equality Matters' report notes the exact reasons why FRC should be considered as a hate group:

SPLC: FRC’s “Specialty Is Defaming Gays And Lesbians.” From an October 7 SPLC report:

The Family Research Council (FRC) bills itself as “the leading voice for the family in our nation’s halls of power,” but its real specialty is defaming gays and lesbians. The FRC often makes false claims about the LGBT community based on discredited research and junk science. The intention is to denigrate LGBT people in its battles against same-sex marriage, hate crimes laws and anti-bullying programs. To make the case that the LGBT community is a threat to American society, the FRC employs a number of “policy experts” whose “research” has allowed the FRC to be extremely active politically in shaping public debate. [...]

The FRC also strongly promotes the “ex-gay” movement as a way to combat LGBT civil rights measures, though professional organizations have repeatedly called so-called “reparative therapy” (which seeks to turn gays and lesbians into heterosexuals) into question and issued statements that don’t support it. [...]

Part of the FRC’s recent strategy is to pound home the false claim that gays and lesbians are more likely to sexually abuse children. This is false. The American Psychological Association, among others, has concluded that “homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.” That doesn’t matter to the FRC, though. [SPLC Report, “The Anti-Gay Lobby,” 10/7/11, via LGBTQNation, emphasis added]

'NOM's financial records raising questions' and other Monday midday news briefs

NOM’s 2010 financial records raise questions - Read the article in its entirety. It's a major one, especially this part:

Under IRS rules regarding nonprofit entities with 501©3 and ©4 status, all donations above $5,000 must be disclosed. Of the 22 contributions NOM’s (c )4 was obligated to list, all but five were greater than $5,000.

The top five contributions to the National Organization for Marriage, Inc.:

$3,416,000
$2,940,000
$750,000
$600,000
$400,000

TWO Announces Intent to Sue PFOX As Early as This Week - Uh oh. This ex-gay group may get sued. Go get 'em Truth Wins Out!

AFA's Buster Wilson Calls on MSNBC to "Clean the Stable" of Maddow & O'Donnell - Now we know why Bryan Fischer gets away with so much nonsense.

Iowans Confront Perry At Campaign Event: ‘Why Do You Hate Gay People,’ ‘Go Back To Texas’- Ouch.

Bill Johnson, Former Alabama Governor Candidate, Caught In Lesbian Sperm Donation Scandal - Simply hypocritical.

LGBTQ youth caught in the crossfire of phony 'religious liberty'

As more information is coming out about the former Macy's employee who was fired for harassing a transgender customer, the story continues to keep getting disturbing.

Natalie Johnson - with the help of the religious right group, the Liberty Counsel - is suing Macy's claiming that the store violated her religious beliefs because of its policy of allowing transgender customers to use the women's changing room. Johnson is claiming that her religious beliefs prevents her from allowing transgender customers to use the women's changing room.

Here are some new details to the story, courtesy of Johnson (which is kind of stupid because it wrecks her entire case):

She approached the customer after she was leaving the changing room and insulted her, calling her a man.

The next day when informed of Macy's policy of allowing individuals of going into whichever changing room they wanted, she said that she refused to comply with the policy. That was why she was fired.

However, to me, the following is the most disturbing detail of them all:

The transgender customer was a teenager.

All of the negative lgbtq messages out there for our children to see is bad enough. But this situation, to me, is the worse. To have someone come up to you in a public setting and accost you in regards to who they assume you are had to be intimidating.

Luckily the young lady stood up for herself and had friends with her.

But this is just another case of how the phony cry of  "religious liberty"  has the potential to harm our children.

There are two cases on appeal in the courts of two women demanding to be let back into their graduate program at their prospective colleges. Both women, Julea Ward and Jennifer Keeton, are claiming that they were unfairly dismissed because their "religious beliefs" about homosexuality. In reality, neither woman wanted to counsel gays.

And if that's not bad enough, both women expressed a desire to be school guidance counselors.

Naturally their cases have been taken by the Alliance Defense Fund, another religious right group.

Certainly there is no deliberate attempt to potentially undermine the well-being of lgbtq youth by these folks and the groups taking their cases.

But it doesn't erase the fact that if the courts fall for their phony talk of "religious liberty," the undermining of lgbtq youth is a strong possibility.

Email Macy's and send the company your support for standing up for our rights and dignity. And most of all, tell Macy's to not back down.

Full-page ad calls out anti-gay 'religious liberty' claim

The following full page ad (click on image to enlarge) ran today in the Ithaca Journal courtesy of the group Truth Wins Out. It calls out the religious right in regards to their false claim of "religious liberty."

Maggie Gallagher, NOM should simply stop being such liars

Today's Know Your LGBT History has been pre-empted because apparently Maggie Gallagher and the National Organization for Marriage think that gay people are stupid.

Yesterday I posted that Equality Matters caught the National Organization for Marriage putting a post on its blog which used the work of the discredited researcher Paul "gays stuff gerbils up their rectums" Cameron.

Equality Matters also pointed out that this sort of thing is the standard for NOM. On its blog and on the blog of its affiliated group - The Ruth Institute, NOM posts links to pieces either showcasing anti-gay propaganda or junk science designed to demonize the gay community, especially in terms of our interaction with children.

Apparently attention to this fact must have really bugged NOM because today, former chairwoman Maggie Gallagher posted a piece on the group's blog which basically said that just because NOM puts something on its blog doesn't mean that its endorsing the work:

Some in the gay blogosphere are trying to assert that NOM--or me--endorses the view of every blogger/article NOM links to, by the act of linking to it.

This would lead to the absurd conclusion that NOM endorses the editorial positions of the New York Times, because NOM links to them--or The Advocate for that matter, as we often link to stories in the gay press.

If you want to know what NOM's message is, there are abundant videos and press stories (including our own press releases) with me, or Brian Brown, or other NOM personnel actually speaking. Fair enough to criticize us for what we actually believe and say.

The standard "a link constitutes an endorsement" would cut off the free flow of ideas at the knees.

 I would like to say personally that nothing in any argument I've ever made on gay marriage, rests on the idea that same-sex couples harm their own children at any higher rates than any other family form. (If there is data that shows this, I've never seen it.)

Excuse me? Apparently Gallagher must think that we are stupid. Passing along information about the gay community which you know to be inaccurate and incredibly stigmatizing is not the "free-flow of ideas."

It's lying. You can't explain it away and you certainly can't sugarcoat it.

And when you put it front and center on your blog, you are in fact endorsing it because you want people to see it. And you want people to link to the piece in question.

Maybe I shouldn't be so abrupt with Gallagher. She was always a poor spokesperson. Remember this part of her piece:

If you want to know what NOM's message is, there are abundant videos and press stories (including our own press releases) with me, or Brian Brown, or other NOM personnel actually speaking. Fair enough to criticize us for what we actually believe and say.

Okay, how about when Brian Brown told the following lie at a New York rally early this year:

" . . . kids as young as kindergarten are taught in Massachusetts that their parents are bigots because they believe marriage is the union of a man and a woman."

Or how about the time earlier in 2010 when Gallagher cited a study about abused children to make the case against marriage equality even though no same-sex couple took part in the study.

 Or how about when NOM blanket states with flyers designed to imply that gays want to use marriage equality to corrupt the innocence of children. Flyers like so:

Or how about now when NOM is teaming up, even as I speak, with the Minnesota Family Council, a group which spreads inaccurate information via its site that gays engage in pedophilia, bestiality, and the consuming of urine and feces.

Of course Maggie Gallagher doesn't attack same-sex couples.  She simply leaves those nasty actions to the groups NOM aligns itself with and then plays stupid when these groups are caught in the act.

If that's not bad enough, Jeremy Hooper  from Goodasyou.org points out several other things:

For starters, we could talk about the times you, Maggie, called homosexuality an "unfortunate thing" and "at a minimum, a sexual dysfunction much as impotence or infertility," suggested gays "can always control their behavior," called on a sitting President to give more research dollars to "ex-gay" research, or talked about the "several kinds of sins" that both gays and their supports commit every time they support marriage equality. Then we can go from there. 

You see this is why so many lgbtqs cannot stand Gallagher or NOM. It's bad enough that they are trying to take away our rights. It's bad enough that they demonize us, our children, and our families on a daily basis.

But absolute final straw is when NOM - and Gallagher - have the audacity to lie to us that they mean us no harm when we see their weapons for our destruction plainly behind their backs. And they aren't even trying to hide them.

The lgbtq community knows the difference between a kiss in the lips and a kick in the chops and Gallagher's piss poor explanations to the contrary are fooling no one.

'Did NOM's Brian Brown assault reporter at Gingrich event?' and other Friday midday news briefs

As we all know, the National Organization for Marriage is cozying up to various Republican presidential candidates, including Newt Gingrich.

And apparently because of that, we have the following footage of an incident which took place when a recent Gingrich fundraiser. Allegedly, NOM's president, Brian Brown, attacked a reporter, Andy Kroll, from Mother Jones - a progressive magazine - and shoved him out of the room when Occupy protesters appeared. From Joe.My.God comes a segment of the Keith Olbermann show with the reporter in question talk about the incident along with video footage. The part about Brian Brown begins at 3:12:



Pull your eyes from the lovely video of Brian Brown making an idiot of himself on camera (again) to ponder the irony that his organization thinks that gays and lesbian wanting to protect their relationships and families are the biggest threats to marriage, while a thrice divorced politician is it's savior

In other news:

Perry’s Staff Divided Over ‘War On Religion’ Ad - Rick Perry's gay staffer opposed a homophobic ad. What's wrong with that sentence? The fact that a gay person would work for such a man.

Malawi To Review “Bad” Laws - Hopefully a positive effect of the Obama Administration's new policy.

Faith-Based Group on Troy Mayor Controversy: 'Enough is Enough' - The mayor of town makes a nasty statement about gays, faces a backlash, and now some folks are sticking up for her. The poor thing. Her religious liberty to call gays "queers" (in a negative connotation of course) has been violated.

“I no longer identify as a Christian . . .” they write - A good friend of mine is fed up with phony cries of "Christian persecution coming from the religious right.

Woman files lawsuit because she can't harass transgender customers

Unbelievable. Earlier this week, I post a piece about a Macy's employee who was fired for harassing a transgender customer. Today, we learn more details about this case because she is now suing:

Natalie Johnson is a 27-year-old student and, until last week, worked at the River Center Macy's.

On Nov. 30, a teenager shopping caught her attention.

"I made sure to keep an eye on him because he was shopping for women's clothing," remembered Johnson.

She said she was convinced the shopper was a man. So when she saw him in the women's dressing room, she told him he couldn't change there.

"I had to just straight forward tell him, 'You're a man,' and of course that made him really got him steamed," said Johnson.

But the group of people he was with supported the shopper, arguing Macy's policy allows transgender people to change in the fitting room of the gender they associate with.

"I've made my choice the other day," Johnson told her manager. "I refuse to comply with this policy."

Johnson said she was let go.

Johnson filed a complaint with the Federal Employment Commission, claiming her religious beliefs prevent her from recognizing transgender people.

"There are no transgenders in the world. A guy can dress up as a woman all he wants, that's still not going to make you a woman," said Johnson.

There are so many things to be said about this. First of all, I refuse to believe that this woman filed this lawsuit on her own volition. Someone, or rather some organization talked her into it. This woman has no case because she admits that she refused to comply. The religious belief argument is a dodge. No one was attacking her religious beliefs. She was the aggressor. She was the violator. If she had a problem, she should have stepped aside. No one was forcing her to be in the dressing room (aren't dressing rooms usually confined to one person anyway) with the customer?

I mean what's next? Should harassing same-sex couples or same-sex couples and their children in stores be protected under the false umbrella of  "religious liberty?"

This woman felt that she was above following the policies of her employer and found out that no, she was not.


No doubt the organization - and I bet it's the Liberty Counsel -  that pushed Johnson into filing this lawsuit hopes to exploit people's fears about the transgender community and the lie about "men being able to invade women's bathrooms," etc.

But I think this going to backfire. This frivolous lawsuit demonstrates just how hollow the claim of "religious liberty" by the religious right are. It's obvious that "religious liberty" to some of them means the liberty to give us hell.

Those who are steaming over this - and you should be -  should forget making this woman the onus of your anger. She is nothing more than a tool. Email Macy's and send the company your support for standing up for our rights and dignity. And most of all, tell Macy's to not back down.

Related posts:

Macy's stands up for the lgbtq community

Why I get a nagging feeling every time I hear the phrase 'religious liberty' 

NOM is now pushing the discredited work of Paul Cameron

NOM is now pushing P. Cameron's discredited work

You all knew that this would happen sooner or later.

From Equality Matters:

Earlier today, Equality Matters reported that the National Organization for Marriage’s (NOM) Ruth Institute was endorsing a book that claimed, among other things, that gay parents are more likely to molest their own children than heterosexual parents.

Now, NOM appears to be doubling down on that claim – and this time on its main blog.

In a December 8 blog post, NOM promoted an essay posted on the “Bad Catholic” blog titled “Two Lesbians Raised a Baby and This Is What They Got...” The essay – written by blogger Marc Barnes – is a response to a video of an Iowa man speaking eloquently in defense of his two moms, which recently went viral. 

Referring to the video as “false advertising,” Barnes attempts to lay out the case for why gays and lesbians aren’t fit to raise children:

• Gay couples are less likely to stay together
• Gay couples don’t want to get married
• Gay relationships are more likely to be violent/abusive

Near the end of his essay, Barnes makes an argument which is apparently becoming NOM-dogma – gay parents molest their children at higher rates than heterosexual parents:

Similarly, the children of homosexual parents are much more likely to be sexually abused. The journal Adolescence reports that a “disproportionate percentage—29 percent—of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent…. Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50″ (P. Cameron and K. Cameron, “Homosexual Parents,” Adolescence 31 (1996): 772.).

That's right.  Barnes - and NOM, since it is featuring Barnes' piece -  is now pushing the work of the discredited Paul "gay stuff gerbils up their rectums" Cameron.

Do the religious right even care about the victims of anti-gay persecution?

Based upon religious right reaction to the new Obama Administration policy regarding worldwide anti-gay persecution, one has to ask do these so-called followers of Christ have any problem with rape, "honor-killings," and murder if these actions are done to gays.

It sounds harsh to say that but what other opinion can one gauge after reading the words of religious right talking heads such as

Peter LaBarbera:

Homosexuality -- once widely regarded as a Crime Against Nature -- is no more a "fundamental human right" than any other sexual sin.

Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council:

It is startling that President Obama is prepared to throw the full weight and reputation of the United States behind the promotion overseas of the radical ideology of the sexual revolution.

Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel and radio show host Janet Mefferd:

Mefferd: Here’s a question I had too. In all the stories I was reading yesterday about this directive, in none of them did I see any break down of statistics on the number of homosexuals and transgenders worldwide who are being tortured, persecuted and killed for being gay, have you seen any statistics like that?

Barber: Of course not, it’s nonsense. It’s Orwellian New Speak.

These folks aren't stupid. They're willfully ignorant. And sad.

Now in some cases, in between the verbose adjectives about "sexual anarchy" and claims about how the Obama Administration is trying to" impose sexual madness" on other countries, came a spattering of pronouncements about how it was "awful that these things are happening" and how "no one should condone violence." (LaBarbera's press release didn't even have the good taste to do this.)

It seems to me that the all of the huge declarations, the adjectives of disgust should be aimed at the plight of the victims.

But these folks are so concerned with demonizing homosexuality that the victims of anti-gay persecution are merely an afterthought to them.

Victims like:

Nathaniel Cunningham, who was chased out of his home in Jamaica by an anti-gay mob.

Noxolo Nkosana and Noxolo Nogwaza who were both stabbed and raped by groups of men in South Africa. Nkosana lived. Nogwaza was murdered and her face and body was disfigured.

 Mahmoud Asgari and Ayaz Marhoni who, in 2005, were publicly executed in Iran for being gay after a trumped up charge of sexual assault.

And these are just a few of many. People like them, innocent gays and lesbians caught up in hateful cultures, are the people the Obama Administration is seeking to help.

But God forbid that the religious right even acknowledge the plight of these people. God forbid that these holier-than-thou folks be accused of  pushing the so-called gay agenda.

The absolute nastiness of these folks is best demonstrated by LaBarbera's last comment in his press release:

All Americans who love God and respect His wonderful design for mankind should be ashamed of Obama's and Hillary's campaign to force a deeply flawed sexual ideology on innocent nations that do NOT want to emulate American decadence.

Someone should tell LaBarbera that you can't talk about God's "wonderful design" while intentionally covering up the act of devils.

'Rick Perry anti-gay ad is a disaster on youtube' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Marriage Criminalization Bill Introduced In Nigerian House - In response to the Obama Administration's new policy, the Nigerian legislature is playing the "bricks without straw" game. We all know how that ended when the Pharaoh played it against Moses.

Occupy Rick Perry: He is the 2% - Rick Perry's gay bashing ad is a disaster for his campaign. How nice.

Gay Servicemembers Tell Rick Perry To Get His Facts Straight Before Running Ads That Slam Them - Yep! A TOTAL disaster.

Va. man surrenders in Vt. lesbian custody case - Slowly but surely, the noose is tightening around the religious right regarding Janet Jenkins/Lisa Miller case. I am guessing that certain members of a certain religious right group are wetting their pants in fearful anticipation.

Iowa’s Influential Social Conservative: Gingrich Convinced Us He ‘Asked God’s Forgiveness’ Over Affairs - How convenient . . . and phony as hell.

Religious right exploits Christian ignorance

Let me be clear on something.

I generally have no problems those who feel that based on their religious beliefs, homosexuality is a sin.

Despite the public buzzword to the fact, neither I nor a vast majority of the lgbtq community is looking for "tolerance." We are not looking for approval. We just want what should be afforded to us as tax-paying Americans - the right to live our lives not defined by someone else's standards of how we are or fevered imaginations about how we may engage in sexual intercourse.

You don't have to approve of me. Just don't stand in the way of me getting what belongs to me.

I have very deep problems with organizations like the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage. I have severe issues with people like Tony Perkins, Peter Sprigg, or Maggie Gallagher.

I feel that these folks are not only deliberately spreading distortions and propaganda against the gay community, but also deliberately exploiting the ignorance of some Christians.

A perfect example of what I am talking about is what happened last night. My piece, Attacks on Obama Administration policy shames Christianity, published here, Pam's House Blend, and The Huffington Post generated some blowback. One young lady felt compelled to write me. Another young lady also felt compelled to respond on a comment board.

What was compelling about the two response was how alike they were. Both were struck by the stories of the lesbians in South Africa being raped in order to try and change their orientation.

Both women condemned the practice.

Both women then threw the standard religious right phrasing at me about how it was "wrong to elevate homosexuality into a human rights issue."

And both women were shocked speechless when I informed that they were doing just that - "elevating homosexuality to a human rights issue" by condemning the practice of women being raped for being lesbians.

It left me thinking. If these women had abandoned the religious right buzzwords and dogma about the "gay lifestyle," they would have found common ground with me. They probably would have still thought of homosexuality as a sin, but they would have still understood not only the President's actions, but also the plight of gays worldwide.

It saddens me to think that not only these two women, but many other folks are led possibly led astray by people like Gallagher and Perkins and that many other people are also swayed against their gay neighbors by junk science studies and inaccurate anecdotes of spooky gay people all propagated to feed on their fears and religious beliefs.

It's a shame to realize that maybe we can actually all get along if it weren't for some people.

Gays should never fear or avoid confronting the religious right

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's monumental speech on gay rights yesterday has gotten a lot of reaction. However, none is as strange, at least to me, than that of Jim Downs, Assistant Professor of History and American Studies, Connecticut College.

He seems to think that Clinton's speech did a disservice to the American gay community. His piece in The Huffington Post, Hillary Clinton Is Not Helping the Gay Civil Rights Movement, leaves little to the imagination.

Basically, Downs is saying that Clinton's speech is emboldening the religious right and conservatives in America, such as Rick Perry in a recent anti-gay ad, to target gays as the means to motivate the Republican base. The gist of his piece can be seen here:

Clinton's clumsy language enables Perry to get even clumsier. It also allows him to open the door and let the religious right and the Tea Party loose on gay people. Clinton is worried about violence against gays abroad, but how does Perry's language provoke the religious right to launch a crusade against "gay" Americans at home? Perry exclaims, "Investing tax dollars to promote a lifestyle many Americas of faith find so deeply objectionable is wrong." In the stroke of a sentence, Perry calls on Tea Party advocates with his references to "tax dollars" and he summons the religious right with his reference to "faith." All of which ends up with both groups tying gay people to the whipping posts in a symbolic gesture to broaden the Republican base. Put another, gay people once again reenter the election season as a political football in order to rally the right against the left.

There is a certain degree of abject cowardice in Downs' piece which I find incredibly distasteful.

Regardless of Clinton's speech, the gay community will be a target to motivate Republican voters. As long as we have the temerity to live openly and honestly without fear - you know, like taxpaying citizens - there will always be some demagogue out there exploiting fears about us to the ill-formed, ignorant, and willfully stupid.

That's how it's always been as long as I can remember it.

But we shouldn't allow these things to keep us from speaking out against injustice. Gays should never cower from bullies. And we should never put ourselves in some type of psychological stasis in hopes that we are ignored.

You have to put these things in perspective. In the case of Rick Perry's recent attacks on our community, we shouldn't be all that surprised. Perry was once the leading candidate in the Republican primary. Now he is the leading drip, exposed as a bad politician and an even worse campaigner. His sad attack on us is nothing more than a drowning man clinging to a slowly sinking life raft.

Gays should never fear the desperation of those who choose to be our enemies. But we should fight them head on. And Downs' column reveals a sad fact, not only about the gay community, but many of those we anoint as our leaders. Unlike our brothers and sisters in foreign countries, we have the means to fight back, but we rarely do.

And by fighting back, I don't mean solely street protests or acts of useless spontaneity fueled by rage. I mean a steady and consistent stream of calling out religious right lies.

We either sidestep confronting the religious right  as if we want avoid them. Or worse yet, we fight the battle on their grounds. We yield too much to them. We allow the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage to claim ownership of words like "morality" and "family" without raising the proper level of holy hell regarding the lies, distortions, and underhanded tactics they employ to acquire this license.

We let organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center do the hard work in calling out these groups and then will not support them loud enough with our voices, anger, and our media. Then we either scratch our heads or cry foul when these groups gain approval in the mainstream media.

Our problem is not that we are exploited to fuel a base of ignorance. Our problem is that we allow it to happen without a proper response, even though we know it's going to happen time and time again.

So Downs is way off base in his piece and whether he realizes it or not, he is causing more harm than Clinton's speech.

She told us that we are human beings. He is telling us that we should be cowards.

'Fake Christians continue to show their true colors regarding gay persecution' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

The two items below are the examples of silly desperation. Neither Rick Perry nor Rick Santorum will ever get to the White House. In fact, their behavior on the campaign trail makes one wonder just how did they attain their original elected offices in the first place. They are both like a bad dancer who has tripped his way through a recital and now thinks of himself as a Baryshnikov.

The polite word to describe both Santorum and Perry is demagogue.

Perry Launches New Anti-Gay Ad In Iowa:



Santorum: Gays ‘Destabilize The Family’ When They Have Children ‘Through Technology’:



For the lgbtq community and our allies - NEVER get angry at the desperation of fools. Use their ignorance to further your cause. In other words, don't get angry. Get educated.

Hat tip to ThinkProgress.

In other news:

Obama, Clinton to world: Stop gay discrimination - Awesome article on the new Administration policy.

US Pushes Hard on LGBT Rights Around the World - A very good break down on what it all means. As Box Turtle Bulletin says, fasten your seat belts.

Religious Right Explodes over LGBT Rights Initiative - One would think that truly Christian people would stand AGAINST persecution and not for it. Of course in all fairness, these are not Christian people. And true Christians need to open their mouths and put these phonies in check.

Press Coverage of Obama’s LGBT Human Rights Policy Was Muted - It's muted now but the historical perspective of this moment will overcome that.

Family Research Council 's hypocritical attack on the Obama Administration

Naturally the Family Research Council had to include its voice in the chorus of conservatives angry at the Obama Administration for its new policy of advocating the fair treatment of gays in its foreign policy:

Family Research Council criticized President Obama's memorandum today instructing federal agencies to promote the acceptance of homosexuality and gender identity disorder through its foreign policy.

FRC Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg made the following comments:

"It is startling that President Obama is prepared to throw the full weight and reputation of the United States behind the promotion overseas of the radical ideology of the sexual revolution. If he did the same on other issues, his own liberal allies would undoubtedly accuse him of cultural imperialism. Threats to withhold foreign aid from poor countries unless they conform their laws to the views of Western radicals are unconscionable.

"The United Nations, like the United States, remains sharply divided on the issue of whether special rights should be granted on the basis of sexual conduct, sexual orientation or gender identity. No treaty or widely accepted international agreement has established homosexual conduct as a human right, yet the Obama administration's actions seem guided by this fiction.

"President Obama should increase efforts to defend human rights that are widely recognized, such as religious liberty, rather than appeasing his domestic allies by imposing an alien ideology on other countries."

The huge irony is that FRC included a statement from Peter Sprigg, a man who has gone on record advocating that gays be exported out of the United States.

But more to the point, FRC seems to be saying that the Obama Administration shouldn't interfere with how a foreign country conducts its business.

How very ironic is it that earlier this year, FRC spoke out against a foreign country for doing just that:

According to the respected anti-persecution ministry Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), an Iranian Christian pastor has been sentenced to death in Iran for, to put it simply, being a Christian.

CSW says that “the death sentence handed down in 2010 for the crime of apostasy, to evangelical house pastor Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani, has reportedly been upheld by the third chamber of the Supreme Court in the Shia holy city of Qom. Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani of the Church of Iran denomination was arrested in his home city of Rasht on 13 October 2009 while attempting to register his church. His arrest is believed to have been due to his questioning of the Muslim monopoly on the religious instruction of children in Iran.”

According to the Voice of Martyrs, “With (Pastor Nadarkhani’s) sentence now upheld and confirmed, it is possible that the authorities will ask him to recant his faith and execute him without advance notice if he refuses — a typical pattern of action taken by authorities in such cases.”

This death sentence has been issued despite Iran being a signatory of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, whose Article 18 states:

“Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.”

Sadly, persecution of Christians in Iran is extensive

Certainly, I'm not saying that the persecution of gays is much more pressing than the persecution of Christians.

But FRC seems to be saying that the persecution of Christians is wrong while the persecution of gays should be allowed.

Violence against any group, be it gays or Christians, is wrong. There is no difference. Both need to be condemned equally.

And truly Christians groups know this.