Tony Perkins salutes gay persecution while his group cries about Christian persecution

Check out this nauseating tweet from the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins:

What Perkins is referring to is the Ugandan anti-gay bill which would give persecute people in that country simply for being gay. This awful bill may pass the Ugandan Parliament very soon. When it initially introduced, the bill contained a provision for the death penalty. According to Think Progress:

Many news outlets — notably the BBC, among others — reported last week that lawmakers had dropped the death penalty provision, but without confirmation of a language change, it’s impossible to conclude whether this is another bait-and-switch that basically isn’t true.

According to the BBC, “substantial amendments” were made, but MP Medard Segona could provide no further details. It is just such a proposed amendment that has repeatedly caused confusion about the fate of the death penalty in the bill, replacing the word “death” with a reference to a preexisting Penal Code Act that does allow for the death penalty. Homosexuality is already illegal in Uganda; the sole purpose of this bill is to enhance the extent of the punishment and number of ways offenses can be prosecuted. It is irresponsible to suggest that the death penalty has been removed without a thorough investigation of the bill’s new language.

Think Progress also points out that the site Box Turtle Bulletin "dissected the bill" and found some alarming facts, including:

• Clauses 1 and 2: Anybody Can Be Gay Under the Law. The definition of what constitutes “homosexual act” is so broad that just about anyone can be convicted.
• Clause 3: Anyone Can Be “Liable To Suffer Death”. And you don’t even have to be gay to be sent to the gallows.
• Clause 4: Anyone Can “Attempt to Commit Homosexuality”. All you have to do is “attempt” to “touch” “any part of of the body” “with anything else” “through anything” in an act that does “not necessarily culminate in intercourse.”
• Clauses 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10: How To Get Out Of Jail Free. The bill is written to openly encourage — and even pay — one partner to turn state’s evidence against another.
• Clauses 7, 11, and 14: Straight People In The Crosshairs. Did you think they only wanted to jail gay people? They’re also targeting family members, doctors, lawyers, and even landlords.
• Clause 12: Till Life Imprisonment Do You Part. And if you officiate a same-sex wedding, you’ll be imprisoned for up to three years. So much for religious freedom.
• Clause 13: The Silencing of the Lambs. All advocacy — including suggesting that the law might be repealed — will land you in jail. With this clause, there will be no one left to defend anyone.
• Clause 14: The Requirement Isn’t To Report Just Gay People To Police. It’s To Report Everyone. Look closely: the requirement is to report anyone who has violated any the bill’s clauses.

But apparently Perkins and FRC doesn't see this as persecution. That's bad enough.

However, we get into seriously ugly territory when we see the following on FRC's homepage:

If, while on FRC's homepage, you clicked on that graphic, you would be taken to a page entitled The Cry of the Martyrs: The Threat to Religious Liberty Around the World. 

The page includes a webcast and information and links regarding the worldwide persecution of Christians worldwide. One link, Voice of the Martyrs, includes  stories of Christians being persecuted in other countries. The page is also called A Global Perspective on the Persecution of God's Children.


That confuses me. I thought we were all God's children.

Let me be clear. No one should be attacked or persecuted because of their religious beliefs. And by that same token, no one should be attacked or persecuted because of their sexual orientation.

Hate is hate and violence fueled by that hate is just as wrong when it is aimed at a Christian, a gay or lesbian, or a gay or lesbian Christian.

There is no difference between the two. And any true Christian person or organization would recognize this.

So perhaps Perkins and FRC would be best advised to hush up before they drown out the voices of the true Christians.

Hypocrisy on its own is bad enough. Brazen hypocrisy, particularly on the part of people calling themselves Christians, leaves an especially pungent stench.

'Religious right members ecstatic over Uganda's anti-gay bill' and other Monday midday news briefs

 American Family Association Leader Praises Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Law - When it's all said and done, we will discover that Bryan Fischer was actually a plant of the gay community (shut up Alvin).

‘Kill The Gays’ Bill Instigator Scott Lively Praises God For “Cleansing” City With Violent Explosion, Takes Credit - First Lively claims he means gays no harm. Then when the lights go out, the boogeyman in him rips off his mask.

 NOM Now Warning Against Young People Having Gay Friends - Cause if straight young folks have gain friends, they might learn style, humor, and other stuff that they don't need. Sarcasm intended. 

NOM's Ruth Institute now offering tattoos; they're temporary like org. itself - Homophobic tattoos for Christmas? Sorry but my heart is still set on that G.I. Joe with the kung-fu grip.

Michigan bill could harm potential same-sex families

It looks like potential same-sex families may have a serious upcoming problem due to the Michigan legislature. According to Equality Michigan:

Extremists in the Michigan House of Representatives have scheduled a hearing on November 27th for a bill in the House Committee on Families, Children, and Seniors, which would allow adoption agencies the ability to deny an adoption placement based on that agency's moral or religious beliefs. However, the bill acknowledges that denying a couple based on religious or moral convictions does not imply "that the proposed adoption is not in the best interests of the adoptee."

Additionally, the bill protects public funding for agencies choosing to discriminate. Giving any government-funded agency a license to discriminate is immoral and unethical. With 14,000 children in Michigan seeking a safe home to prosper in, our focus should be on cultivating stable environments to raise these children, and not turning away capable and willing families eager to love and support a child in need. The strength of one's convictions alone is not justification in and of itself for any action - it is a despicable excuse for damaging another human being. The fact that the proposed bill specifically states that this biased filter does not imply the couple are unfit to adopt shows this is merely providing a license to discriminate based on an unlimited array of arbitrary criteria and not actually an attempt to protect children.

The primary sponsor, Representative Kenneth Kurtz (R-Coldwater), is wasting our money on a bill which does nothing to help the 14,000 children residing in foster care in Michigan. Rather than addressing that actual problem, they are fabricating a new one by offering this vile solution. 

As far as I know right now, this is purely a legislative move, rather than one finagled by religious right groups. However, one wonders as this situation gains attention, just how many so-called pro-family groups will come sniffing.

The bill itself is ridiculous but any inclusion of religious right groups would make it worse because it would be yet another attack on gay families thus revealing yet again the contradiction behind the mindsets of these groups who attack the gay community.

Allow me to explain - some  believe that based upon religious grounds, homosexuality is a sin and should be not looked at positively, but instead should be shied away or stamped out in all forms. This includes pro-gay laws, actions which would protect our lgbt children from bullying, and anything that would advance same-sex families.

The problem with this idea is that when they do this, these folks (whether they be by themselves or formed in groups) who have a religious belief against homosexuality are acting as the aggressors because they are demanding that their personal beliefs be codified in law, regardless of the fact that there are millions who do not believe as they do.

And many of these religious folks recognize this, so what do they do?  They create a false medicinal belief that homosexuality is a "dangerous lifestyle." Based on upon lies, junk science, and legitimate science that are in some cases deliberately cherry-picked, they have created a body of medicinal quackery that compares to the belief that lobotomies are healthy.

Lastly, when they can't turn to this, they create false media panics, such as this one  - i.e. adoption agencies should not be "forced" to violate their own personally held beliefs, even if this means they are allowed to discriminate against same-sex households even if said households pose no danger to children and that there are many children waiting to be placed in good homes.

This is the grand contradiction of the religious right when it comes to homosexuality - in order to hold what they feel God's commandment against homosexuality, they willingly break His commandment against lies, deception, and bearing false witness.

It makes as much sense as tossing a pocketful of dollar bills up into the air and expecting more than you tossed in the air to land magically in your hand.

We should all keep our eyes on Michigan. It may be a bellwether for future actions against gay families.

Anti-gay pastor scorches NOM in choice interview

Ken Hutcherson

Anti-gay Washington state pastor Ken Hutcherson has been described by many (this blogger included) as a homophobic, self-conceited loudmouth.

How strange it is that two of those attributes which has been seen as a bane to lgbt equality has now become positive qualities.

Whatever the case may be, the National Organization for Marriage has clearly done something to infuriate Hutcherson and he does not plan to go "gently into that good night."

 Instead, he is becoming vocal as to how that anti-gay group lost their fight against marriage equality in Washington state two weeks ago, including hurtling charges of racism against NOM. 

In probably his most public interview to date on the matter - with gay activist Michelangelo Signorile on Signorile's SiriusXM OutQ radio program - Hutcherson continues not to hold back anything back.

 Highlights:

 "I said to [the National Organization for Marriage], 'You think I’m controversial because I don’t look white. I don’t talk white. I don’t act white. And I am not that milquetoast-looking kind of guy that’s is going to be calm about everything. I’ve got a passion on what’s right. I’ve got a passion, and I will stand on what I think biblical principles are. If that’s controversial, then we’ve got a problem, and we’ll never win another election on anything.”

 “I think they (NOM) went weak, extremely, to the point where the national organizations wanted to be a little bit more loving, to look more to point of putting no bad taste in anyone’s mouth.”

“The National Organization for Marriage tried to win the moderates. And if you’re going to win the moderates then you got to stay away from what they call hard-line biblical principles.So they tried to come with the psychological and sociological argument." 

Hutcherson claimed he was especially against NOM's infamous wedge strategy of pitting the black and gay communities against each other on the subject of marriage equality:

 "I was totally against that approach, because it’s wrong. That’s not what we do to win, is to show our prejudice." 

You can listen to the entire interview here (and might I suggest that you wear a bib because it is CHOICE!)

I'm personally interested as to how NOM going to taper this down. The lgbt community has dealt with Hutcherson as an antagonist, so he can't really hurt us.

However, as a seemingly ally of NOM who has turned his back on the group and is now labeling them as racist, Hutcherson is like a nuclear bomb.

Pretending like Hutcherson doesn't exist will not help NOM's image. And Hutcherson has never been one being quiet about his "existence."

Poor NOM. The anti-gay group is slipping BADLY

Maggie Gallagher of NOM

A friend showed me the following tweet from the National Organization for Marriage:

NOM ‏@NOMupdate

Problems with #SSM in the Netherlands: little demand, instability, losing rights to religious exemptions.. http://myop.us/XzhrZI  @MarriageNZ

Collapse 

•  Reply 
•  Retweet 
•  Favorited
•  

The tweet links to New Zealand version of an anti-marriage equality webpage (which I am certain NOM has a lot to do with. The title of the page is called Protect Marriage - One Man. One Woman. That's Marriage.)

The page in question outlines supposed problems with marriage equality in the Netherlands by spotlighting certain statistics. One in particular stood out. It was about the supposed instability of gay men:

Instability of relationships

Recent research from a major British medical journal AIDS on male same-sex relationships in the Netherlands — arguably one of the most gay friendly cultures on earth — indicates gay men have a very difficult time living by the values of marriage. This study found that steady homosexual relationships in the very gay-friendly city of Amsterdam, on average, last only 1.5 years. The study also found that gay men in steady relationships there have an average of eight partners a year outside of their current relationships.

The footnote says this citation is:

Maria Xiridou, et al., “The Contributions of Steady and Casual Partnerships to the Incidence of HIV Infection Among Homosexual Men in Amsterdam,” AIDS, 17 (2003): 1029.38.

Now some of you will point out the easy distortion with this study, i.e. the date. The study is nine years old.  So much "recent research."

However, don't leave it at that. There are so many other morsels of distortion behind the usage of this study.

Xiridou's study was not designed to look at married gay couples. It was designed to "access the relative contribution of steady and casual partnerships to the incidence of HIV infection among homosexual men in Amsterdam and to determine the effect of increasing sexually risky behaviours among both types of partnerships in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy."

No lesbian couples were interviewed. For this study, Dr. Xiridou received her information from the Amsterdam Cohort Study of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and AIDS Among Homosexual Men. To gain this information, researchers studied 1,800 gay men between the years of 1984- 2000. Same sex marriage was legalized in the Netherlands in 2001, thus making the information irrelevant to points about gay marriage. Information for the Amsterdam Cohort Study is found here.

In other words, Xiridou's study is being used to demonize married gay couples when in fact no married gay couple took part in the study.

Way to go, NOM.  In your eagerness to demonize same-sex couples, you take part in a distortion that easy to refute.

Happy Thanksgiving, you turkeys.

Let us all commemorate Transgender Day of Remembrance

Today is Transgender Day of Remembrance and with that in mind, let us ALL remember that "justice" does not mean "just us."

Please click on the graphic to learn some history. I enjoyed reading it myself.

And while we celebrate history, let's not forget those who were deprived of their right to make history due hatred. Let's all do what we can to protect all of our brothers and sisters:


 

'Christian magazine claims that demon rape can cause homosexuality' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Can You Be Raped by the Devil? - An interesting article from the "Christian" magazine called Charisma. A choice excerpt for your edification: 

The two most identifiable sexual demons are the incubus, which is a male sexual demon that traditionally assaults women, and the succubus, which is a female sexual demon that assaults men. Sometimes they also lure people into homosexual behavior. (Contessa)Adams notes that one evangelist, whose name she would not divulge, was so troubled by the sexual pleasure the succubus gave her that she even contemplated suicide.Adams says the succubus spirit that used to attack her confused her so much that she contemplated becoming a lesbian. 

Years from now when lgbt equality is a reality, our sons and daughters will ask us "How in the hell did you lose to these people for so long?" 

 New ridiculous talking point: More out gays = less credibility for science of sexual orientation - Aw Peter Sprigg, I miss your bad studies. On the risk of blowing my own horn, I like to think that since  I have debunked your lies numerous times  (and you have mentioned it in an offhand manner) that I've spooked you from playing researcher. Still, this latest explanation of yours makes no sense AT ALL.

 HIV Testing Will Now Be Covered Under Obamacare - As it should be! 

 Liberty Counsel: God's Judgment is on America for Electing Obama and 'Adopting Sin as Official Public Policy' - In other words - blah, blah blah, whine, whine, whine. 

Homosexuality can be explained through plumbing and extension cords

Everyone is talking about how the Republican Party needs to do some "soul searching" after its electoral humiliation. If you ask me, I think the same holds for some folks who call themselves Christians. In three states, voters clearly showed that they have no problems with gays getting married. However, to hear Franklin Graham (a whisper of a shadow of what his father Billy Graham ever was) breaks down why these voters are supposedly wrong. And it all has to do with plumbing:



And the reduction of gay relationships to matters of sex even filters down to the obscure pastors blessed with a camera and a youtube account as you will see with this guy who not only uses props (extension cords) but links Obama with the anti-Christ in a manner which reminds one of PBS programs Sesame Street and The Electric Company:

 

I am of two opinions about this entire thing. I am thrilled that members of the religious right are going bonkers over the re-election of Obama.

But then I get a little spooked about the conviction of their mania.

Second clip courtesy of Joe Jervis.

Thank you Bryan Fischer for all you are doing for gay equality

Forget 'Porno' Pete LaBarbera, Matt Barber, Linda Harvey. Forget Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher. This guy above is the one we need to spotlight more than the others. By his ignorant words and egotistical nature, Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association is doing more for the cause of lgbt equality than Cher with magic powers.

In this particular juncture, he is being interviewed by an online buddy David Pakman, who has this incredible talent of letting members of the anti-gay right make themselves look like fools by simply asking questions and allowing them to bloviate on and on.

According to Pakman:

“Today I interviewed Bryan Fischer, and it was quite extreme. He repeatedly cited the Regnerus study regarding gay parenting even though I continued to tell him the study is bogus. I also asked him which other anti-gay ideas he agrees with. He DISAGREES with “God hates fags” and that gays and lesbians should be put to death, but AGREES that gay exorcisms like those discussed by former Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt are a valid way of “helping” people. He also said that he isn’t worried about more and more states passing marriage equality, that most states still DON’T allow it.”

Ah yes the Regnerus study, which continues to be destroyed for its lack of credible information about gay families.

And that's just a tidbit of Pakman's interview. Let the title of the video clip, Anti-Gay Exorcisms Work, People Never Born Gay, Gay Parents Bad, clue you in.

Thank you Bryan Fischer for all of the work you have done to progress the cause of lgbt equality.

You dumbass.

'"Ex-gay" youth minister suspected in sex cult murder of wife' and other Monday midday news briefs

“Ex-Gay” Christian Youth Leader Suspected In “Religious Sex Cult” Murder Of Wife - Does the religious right want more discussion of these "ex-gay" ministries? Let's start here.  

Secrets of Tyler Deaton's prayer group emerge - And here is more information about the above scandal.

 Black support for gay marriage growing - Good for us. Now let's have more discussion of lgbt of color issues in the black community. And be sure to include us in those annual "State of Black America" reports.  

Florida Lesbian and Gay Adoptive Parents Tell Their Stories - These stories are important to tell and to hear so that SOME FOLKS don't get to boggart the conversation in regards to gay parenting. 

 Conservative ‘Justice’ Group Encourages Clerks To Discriminate Against Same-Sex Couples - Do it at your own electoral peril my friends. 

Anti-gay pastor's charges of racism ignites a verbal feud with religious right

What was once a war of words between anti-gay Washington state pastor Ken Hutcherson, the National Organization for Marriage, and Focus on the Family has now developed into a full-scale ugly feud complete with charges of racism.

 On election day two weeks ago, NOM lost four ballot initiatives. In Minnesota, voters turned back efforts to add an anti-gay marriage amendment to that state's constitution. In Maryland, Maine, and Washington state, voters approved ballot initiatives which would legalize gay marriage.

NOM faced criticism over what was called "moderate" tactics in opposing marriage equality. Ken Hutcherson, senior pastor of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond, WA and an extremely vocal opponent of gay equality in general,  said groups like NOM and Focus on the Family practically handed the victories their opponent:

"Their intention was to be moderate, non-controversial," Hutcherson told OneNewsNow in an exclusive interview, pointing out that the National Organization for Marriage, Focus on the Family and Family Policy Institute's unbiblical strategy was a severe departure from the state's churches' aggressive campaign to stop same-sex marriage using the weight of family values and Scripture. He notes that the groups essentially told him and other local Christian leaders' that their message on marriage and social issues was too offensive. "They did not want me involved basically in the top leadership, so I took a back seat and let them run with it," Hutcherson shared. "And that really hurt our unity out here." 

Hutcherson later turned the criticism up a notch in an interview with The Christian Post by accusing the organizations of racism. He said he was excluded from the fight because he is an African-American:

"When I knew my involvement was going to generate controversy, I offered to step back and suggested others who were on the frontlines do so as well for the sake of unity. They refused, leaving me as the odd man out. If you look at them, they were all the same color with the same moderate views. It just didn't make sense why they would not include a person of color who was willing to fight." "I believe there are conservatives of all colors, but the leadership from NOM, Focus and Mission Public Affairs, wanted to run being a moderate campaign where everyone felt warm and fuzzy. But we know that sin is never satisfied and always wants more. These guys just looked and acted too much like the GOP – old and white."

Brian Brown, president of NOM, told The Christian Post that Hutcherson's charges were reckless:

Brown . . . called Hutcherson's comment "absurd and reckless," and that he never heard any complaints from the Washington pastor. He also pointed to others such as Maryland's Bishop Harry Jackson, Jr. who is also black and was out front in his state's effort to overturn a new state law. "In the body of Christ I think if we have differences they need to be aired out between us and not in the public arena." 

Of course Brown omitted the fact that NOM has been paying Jackson for his efforts.  According to Mother Jones, Jackson has received $20,000 from the National Organization for Marriage's "education fund" for his efforts to exploit the opinions of those in the black community who do not agree with marriage equality. In addition, in 2010, Jackson attempted to get a measure on the ballot opposing marriage equality in D.C. In pursuit of that effort, he led the group Stand for Marriage DC. According to documents attained by Mother Jones, NOM gave $60,000 for that effort.

In the same Christian Post article, Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family also voiced a disagreement with Hutcherson's claim of racism. Both he and Brown expressed the wish that Hutcherson should have come to them with his complaints.

Though Hutcherson has a point when it comes to the small number or lack of African-American in leadership positions in these organizations, those familiar with the pastor's past antics - myself included - should probably chalk up his accusations of racism to sour grapes that he wasn't given a larger role in the fight against marriage equality.

Still, the fact that Minnery and Brown made a point to tell Hutcherson to keep disagreements "in house" definitely proves that he struck a nerve.

And I think that's what Hutcherson wanted. Don't be surprised if he attempts to strike more nerves.
 

Know Your LGBT History - The sad hysteria over the 'down low'

 In 2004, African-American author J.L. King published On the Down Low: A Journey Into the Lives of Straight Black Men Who Sleep with Men and ignited a controversy.

The book basically talked about how some married men were having gay relationships on the side. Now for those of us familiar with people like Jim McGreevey and Ted Haggard, this wasn't anything new. A lot of us call it "being in the closet."

However, in the African-American community, which rarely addresses gay issues as it should, the book was a virtual firebomb.

To say folks went crazy was an understatement. King's book was an instant success, was the subject of a multitude of discussions, seminars, and television programs.

And unfortunately, a lot of the information was wrong. For a long time, men on the supposed "down low" was blamed for the HIV rate in the African-American community, particularly amongst black women. However, in 2009, the Centers for Disease Control debunked this belief.

In the meanwhile, so many folks were cashing in with their own plays, screenplays, and even new books about the supposed "down low" phenomena. The most ludicrous without question had to be that of Nation of Islam member Shahrazad Ali.

Ali, in her book How To Tell if Your Man is Gay or Bisexual, gave a few "tips" on spotting "down low men," including:

How does he sleep at night, what position does he sleep in? Does
he sleep like a woman, or like a man? What does he talk about in his
sleep?

You can touch his rectum to see if he has those tell-tale humps
on his anus from having it stretched open with a penis. Then later on
ask him if he's ever had hemorrhoids really bad.

If he asks you to "toss his salad" and you agree, and his legs go
up too quickly, he's probably used to doing it.

Looking back at it, my guess is that the "down low" nonsense became hysteria in the black community because it challenged some notions that you can "spot" a gay man. Some folks were expecting the limp wristed, swishy stereotype and it never occurred to them that gay men come in all forms.

The saddest thing to me is that almost throughout the entire hysteria (which has abated at least a little), while sexual health education  of the black woman became a big part of the discussion, very few people talked about the needs of the black gay man, i.e. why some gay men felt the need to be in the closet in the first place.

Except for this excellent documentary shown above (which I have included clips of), the mindset behind the "down low" hysteria seemed to be "how dare those men infect and lie to our women."

It was a seriously missed opportunity to educate members of the African-American community on the visibility and issues of black gay men.

Past Know Your LGBT History posts:

'Religious right lashes out at black voters for pro-Obama, pro-marriage equality votes' and other Friday midday news briefs

Religious right lashes out at African-Americans over pro-Obama, pro-marriage equality votes:

 Linda Harvey - Ninety-three percent of African Americans voted for Obama in this election. Where are the Christians? Where are those who choose candidates based on the content of his or her character? Is it safe to conclude that ninety-three percent of African Americans are now in favor of homosexuality as marriage, late-term and sex-selection abortions, and they love the idea of limiting opportunity be penalizing success in this country? Do all this ninety-three percent agree that people of faith should be forced to pay for other people’s abortion-causing drugs? These are drugs that kill unborn babies. This is a human rights issue of the first magnitude and I am guessing there are plenty of black women and men who would have a problem with this if they chose to open their eyes about these policies aggressively supported by Obama and his administration, and now America has signed on for four more years of this.  

Michael Brown - I simply do not understand how my black evangelical friends who so staunchly oppose same-sex marriage and who stand against abortion could cast their vote for the most radically pro-abortion, pro-gay-activist president in our history. Was there no moral compromise involved in voting for him? Are there no issues that could disqualify him in your eyes? And must Barack Obama be elected and then reelected in order to make up for past injustices, as one black evangelical woman claimed?

Well gee, maybe it's because not all African-Americans are monolithic. Maybe we have our minds and don't jump every time some religious right organization pays off a greedy pastor to undermine our support of a candidate. And to answer Mr. Brown's question, we didn't vote for Obama for revenge. We voted for him because we felt he was the better candidate. And he was, too. It's nice to see these folks show their true faces. I wonder how many other religious right groups and figures feel this way but won't publicly say so.


 In other news:

 Fox News Downplays Major Election Night LGBT Victories - Color me not surprised. Personally I think the network was too busy trying to recover from Obama's victory. 

 Boykin: Gays, the left to blame for heterosexuals' inability to keep it in their pants - So in other words, gays are mind controlling heterosexuals to cheat with each other. Okay, that's another secret revealed by some big mouthed queen. I swear it's so hard to conduct an evil plan to destroy "normal society" when your fellow gays can't keep their mouths shut! 

 Oregon Democrats Nominate Country’s First Lesbian House Speaker - Sweet! 

NOM's election losses creating division in religious right

Ken Hutcherson is mad at NOM.

The National Organization for Marriage is dealing with heavy criticism from the right after losing four ballot initiatives against marriage equality.

Two days ago, Mass Resistance, an anti-gay hate group in Massachusetts, seemingly claimed that NOM was not anti-gay enough in opposing marriage equality. Brian Camenker, Mass Resistance's president said:

 . . . both NOM and the state pro-family groups went to great lengths not to criticize homosexual behavior. They were very fearful of being perceived as "anti-gay" or "homophobic" especially in the liberal press. So they insisted on moderating everyone's messages. In Minnesota, for instance, activists were specifically told, "Don't make this a gay issue." Those who deviated from this and took a more direct approach were shunned and even publicly criticized by the pro-family establishment.

And yesterday, that sentiment was echoed by Washington state pastor Ken Hutcherson. Hutcherson has been an extremely vocal opponent of gay equality in general, opposing not just marriage equality, but also gay/straight alliances in schools.

Hutcherson said groups like NOM and Focus on the Family practically handed the victories to marriage equality supporters in Maine, Maryland, Washington state, and Minnesota - the four states who had either laws regarding marriage equality on the ballot:

"Their intention was to be moderate, non-controversial," Hutcherson told OneNewsNow in an exclusive interview, pointing out that the National Organization for Marriage, Focus on the Family and Family Policy Institute's unbiblical strategy was a severe departure from the state's churches' aggressive campaign to stop same-sex marriage using the weight of family values and Scripture. He notes that the groups essentially told him and other local Christian leaders' that their message on marriage and social issues was too offensive.
"They did not want me involved basically in the top leadership, so I took a back seat and let them run with it," Hutcherson shared. "And that really hurt our unity out here."

While it sounds like "sour grapes" on the part of Hutcherson, who he gave the interview to is significant. One News Now is the online publication owned by the American Family Association.  And while One News Now gave Hutcherson an unchallenged platform to challenge NOM, it did not seek any comment from NOM.

'Scary' video demonstrates the consequences of gay marriage in America

The above video correctly illustrates the consequences of what will happen if America allows marriage equality. And no there are no mistakes. It lays down the consequences exactly as they will be. And I happen to agree with it totally. Keep telling yourself "it's only a possibility, it's only a possibility."

'Marriage equality a plot to destroy religious liberty?' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Controversial pastor Scott Lively considers running for governor of Massachusetts - This hateful individual is part responsible for the hell Ugandan lgbts are going through right now. He isn't going to win should he choose to run, but still . . . DAMN!

 Barber: Gay Marriage is a Weapon Designed to Destroy Religious Liberty - Aw hell! Who told him? I swear dishy gay men CANNOT stop revealing our secret plans! 

 Today in religious freedom: MN Catholic church denies confirmation to 17-year-old equality backer - I suppose some folks may find this appropriate but it is probably the main reason why Christianity is losing a lot of points in America.  

Worldwide Transgender Murders Increased By 20 Percent In 2012 - This ain't good. Stay strong, brothers and sisters.  

Sharing the Stories of LGBT Youth: Izabela, 17, From Lincoln, Neb. - Let's end these news briefs on a positive note. Anytime our lgbt children can speak out and share their stories is positive. 

Obama nominates gay black man for federal court

Obama makes history for both the African-American and gay communities:

The White House announced on Wednesday that President Obama has nominated Judge William Thomas, an out gay man, to serve on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Thomas would be the first out LGBT black man to serve as a lifetime-tenured federal judge. In a statement, Obama noted the diversity of Thomas and six other nominees, saying, "They ... represent my continued commitment to ensure that the judiciary resembles the nation it serves." He added, "These individuals have demonstrated the talent, expertise, and fair-mindedness Americans expect and deserve from their judicial system. I am grateful for their willingness to serve and confident that they will apply the law with the utmost impartiality and integrity. Too many of our courtrooms stand empty. I hope the Senate will promptly consider all of my nominees and ensure justice for everyday Americans."

Thomas is the first out LGBT black judge to be nominated by Obama, but, if approved by the Senate, he would be the second out LGBT black judge. The first, Judge Deborah Batts, also was the first out LGBT federal judge. She was nominated by President Clinton and sat on the Southern District of New York bench. She took "senior status," a near retirement, earlier this year. 

 Yes this is a big #^@ deal, particularly to THIS black gay man and others who are like me because rarely do we see lgbt of color role models. It's not as if they aren't out there. It's just that very few folks focuses on them.

Certainly Mr. Thomas will not be seen as the "black gay judge" and Obama did not pick him because of those designations. However, in a world where gay black men have little visibility either sometimes by accident (by the gay community) or sometimes deliberately (by the African-American community), it's nice to see a spotlight on one of us who is successful.

And speaking of those of us who are successful:


 

Hate group leader blasts NOM for not being sufficiently anti-gay

Brian Tashman at Right-Wing Watch beat me to this, but it's so hilarious that it needs more attention. Apparently Mass Resistance, a venomous SPLC-declared hate group in Massachusetts is angry at the National Organization for Marriage.

According to its founder, Brian Camenker, NOM lost the recent four ballot initiatives for several reasons, including not being anti-gay enough. Cameneker, in fact, called NOM' strategy "flawed."

 In sharp contrast to the homosexual lobby's slick, sophisticated propaganda machine, the pro-family overall approach was largely the same moderate, inoffensive, often logically incoherent approach that they've coasted on until now. A number of activists made it a point to complain to us about that. For example, most of the pro-family message was some variation of: Every child needs a father and a mother; the word "marriage" is special; marriage is about procreation; marriage is a timeless institution; gays already have all the rights marriage brings; etc.

These arguments are not emotional, fairly general, and not very compelling. In contrast, the homosexual lobby made the arguments in their ads emotional and personal. At its root, "gay marriage" is really about the forced acceptance of homosexuality as a normal part of society. But both NOM and the state pro-family groups went to great lengths not to criticize homosexual behavior. They were very fearful of being perceived as "anti-gay" or "homophobic" especially in the liberal press. So they insisted on moderating everyone's messages. In Minnesota, for instance, activists were specifically told, "Don't make this a gay issue." Those who deviated from this and took a more direct approach were shunned and even publicly criticized by the pro-family establishment.

This included some of the vocal black churches in Maryland who wanted to quote the Bible, and activists in Maine and Minnesota who felt compelled to discuss the negative aspects homosexual behavior. Except for some material posted on websites of the local pro-family groups, there were no attempts at all that we know of to persuade the public through advertising that homosexual behavior was perverse, dysfunctional, and unhealthy.

Our side basically conceded that argument completely, and even went to lengths to state that "we're not anti-gay." The homosexual lobby took full advantage of that by aggressively portraying homosexuality as just another facet of normal human behavior. This tactic is not sustainable, as it soon became clear. It certainly does not effectively counter the emotional strategies put forth by the homosexual lobby. At some point you have to engage in the real battle at hand.

It sounds to me as if that Camenker is angry that NOM didn't talk go for the jugular with the anti-gay stuff. In other words, Camenker sounds sore that NOM didn't take the route that Mass Resistance is famous for, i.e. making up horror stories about gays invading schools and harming children like so:

The "Little Black Book" - Hard-core pornographic homosexual "how-to" booklet given to kids at high school!

 

Elementary school teaching cross-dressing and transgenderism in 3rd grade

 

Politicians, corporations honor BAGLY director - cross-dresser who works with kids - as Grand Marshal of Gay Pride Parade.

Or running repulsively insulting videos like the following:



Needless to say that Mass Resistance does worse. The organization makes it a point to take pictures of and videotape youth participation at pride events to push the ridiculous "gays indoctrinate children" lie.

And this group is criticizing NOM for not partaking in this madness. Between you and me, I kinda wish NOM would have because it would have led us to win by a larger margin.

However, as it is, I doubt NOM will be taking Mass Resistance's advice any time soon. NOM believes in subtle homophobia, not the in your face kind.

'Teacher unfairly attacked for protecting gay student' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Florida Teacher Accused Of Turning Student Into Lesbian - What kind of world do we live in when teachers are falsely attacked for protecting gay students from abuse?

 Illinois Hate Group Encourages Bullying And Rejection Of Transgender Students - Apparently a world that anti-gay hate groups would love. 

 Tony Perkins gets another mainstream media pass - This is a hot mess. What the hell is The New York Times doing spotlighting FRC's Tony Perkins without giving a good view of the lies he and his organization, the Family Research Council, undertakes against the gay community? Indeed, evil triumphs when those who have the power to expose it do nothing.  

LaBarbera: Tammy Baldwin 'Hardly a Role Model,' Lacks 'Healthy, Wholesome Behaviors' - And Tammy Baldwin is also a United States Senator, Mr. LaBarbera. Meanwhile, you are a poor, pathetic man who masks his inner turmoil with homophobia. Let that stick in your craw.

Hate group has bad priorities when it comes to the Boy Scouts

The Family Research Council can't help itself when it comes to smearing gays. Maybe it's a clinical thing.

In this particular scenario, the organization is not exactly happy that UPS has decided not to donate to the Boy Scouts due to its policy of not allowing gays to be members.  According to FRC, UPS is punishing the Boy Scouts because the organization is supposedly trying to keep boys safe from pedophiles:
 

What UPS and other corporations refuse to acknowledge is that the Scouts' policy isn't a matter of intolerance--but security. After hundreds of cases of child sex abuse plagued the organization, the BSA tried to create a membership criteria in the best interest of kids' safety and parents' rights. Over the years, the Boy Scouts have paid millions--possibly hundreds of millions--to boys victimized by same-sex predators. And the financial toll was nothing compared to the emotional trauma of these children, whose lives are forever scarred by those encounters. For more than 100 years, the Scouts have focused on instilling character and leadership into America's boys. They aren't about to compromise that mission just to placate liberal companies and activists. 

Note what FRC says here - "same sex predators," i.e. making the inaccurate point that a man who molests a boy should be automatically considered as gay. 

And the sad thing about what FRC did? Other than blaming gays for the situation with the Boy Scouts, this organization has made no comment on the scandal created when it was learned that the Boy Scouts has been shielding potential pedophiles for decades, even after barring gays to be members or serve in leadership positions..

Why is FRC even defending the Boy Scouts at all?