Endorsers undermine the message of NOM's march

With the National Organization for Marriage's March for Marriage just around the corner, the group is quickly gathering up the endorsements.

However, NOM would do better than to not let certain people endorse its march because they contradict its false message of  simply "defending marriage" without malice towards the gay community.

 Let's look at the recent endorsement NOM received from Focus on the Family's Tom Minnery:



Pay no attention to Minnery's wilted delivery and inaccurate claim regarding how God endowed marriage to be one way since the beginning of civilization. For my money, I am drawn to the nonsense he says about children needing the best chance to have a mom and a dad.

One would think he wouldn't have the audacity to make such a statement regarding children and parents when one remembers how he got busted during a Congressional hearing by Sen. Al Franken in 2011 for attempting to distort a study in order to make a negative assumption about same-sex families:



And then there is former senator and now head of the Heritage Foundation Jim DeMint:



One has to give it to DeMint how he seems to have memorized NOM's talking points. I especially liked it when he said that all Americans have the right to live as they choose, but do not have the right to "redefine marriage." But not for the reasons that you think.

You see, DeMint doesn't actually believe that.  What he does believe - and he said this in 2004 and 2010 - is that gays and sexually active unmarried women should not be allowed to teach in schools

So why is this important? Because of how NOM attempts to claim that it and those who support the organization, who supposedly believe in so-called traditional marriage, are being bullied and unfairly labeled as bigots

But yesterday, we got a good look at the vile anti-gay animus which many NOM supporters embrace. And today, we see the same animus, albeit tapered down, by two prominent individuals who support NOM and its march.

It all leads to the simple conclusion that NOM's whinings of unfairly being labeled as bigots is just a dodge to gain sympathy.

In spite of all of its false claims, NOM doesn't shy from having an bigoted anti-gay animus. NOM embraces it. If it didn't NOM wouldn't have any follower or allies.

'NOM's march suffers ANOTHER embarrassment' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Pro-gay artist gets NOM 'March For Marriage' ad yanked on copyright grounds - If you ask me, Brian Brown's decision to belittle lgbt bloggers and not take us seriously is beginning to play Jaws on his tush. I am presently working on a post which will hopefully cast further shadows on NOM's credibility . . . that is if no one else beats me to it.  

ACLU Claims Sultana High School Administrators Bully LGBT Students - Receiving the right to marry is awesome, but don't let our pursuit of it make us forget our children who have to make it through the firewall of nonsense that is adolescence in order to get to the point where they can marry.  
 Claims That There Is No Research About The Effectiveness Of Ex-Gay Therapy Are True - Tolerance, schmolerance. If you don't have any proof that the science you espouse actually works then don't expect to be given any type of credibility for it.  

Anti-Gay Activists Attack Rob Portman's Son's 'Disorder' and 'Abhorrent Lifestyle' - Now this is just pathetic.

Newt Gingrich underscores NOM's hypocrisy, desperation

Newt Gingrich

As the National Organization gets ready for its march, the group can't stop tripping over itself with embarrassment.

 Today's example - Newt Gingrich.

NOM posted a video clip of Newt Gingrich speaking about Sen. Rob Portman. Portman, a conservative Republican senator, recently revealed that he now supports marriage equality because of his relationship with his gay son.

In a blog post, NOM celebrates the fact that Gingrich said marriage should be between a man and a woman.

However in Gingrich's case, that should be a man and three women. Remember, Gingrich divorced his first wife of 18 years after an affair with another woman. He subsequently married this woman but divorced her after 12 years and an affair with another woman whom he is now currently married to. NOM is using this guy to defend marriage? This guy? Seriously?

A commentator to NOM's blog put it better than I ever could:

It's difficult to underestimate the sheer bare-faced chutzpah of this man and the fawning reverence paid to him by NOM and others, the outright cognitive dissonance it takes to believe that marriage is between one and one woman FOR LIFE and then to say he is an exemplar and supporter of marriage. He isn't. He is a destroyer of families, the very core of NOM's arguments. I would have more respect if there was at least one word addressing this hypocrisy.

Religious right activist makes poor case against marriage equality

Former Christian Coalition head and conservative activist Ralph Reed attempted to make the case against marriage equality to the Wall Street Journal. It was such a bad performance in his case. Feel free to pick him apart: 




Hat tip to Right Wing Watch.

'Hilary Clinton comes out in favor of marriage equality' and other Monday midday news briefs

Hillary Clinton comes out for marriage equality - Way to go Mrs. Clinton! 

 Republican National Committee Plan: Oppose LGBT Rights More Quietly - Now you KNOW we aren't going to let you get away with that.  

At CPAC, The Marriage Fight Is Over - At a recent meeting of Republican activists and bigwigs - actual and wannabe - NOM and its allies got extremely embarrassed while gay Republicans were received with open arms.  

Like so many brave visionaries before him, Bryan Fischer pushes GOP to stand for discrimination - Meanwhile, some folks are spooked that Republicans could embrace marriage equality.

NOM can't hide its supporters' ugly homophobia

I am so sick of NOM's talking point that those who oppose marriage equality are unfairly branded as bigots.

Let me rephrase that and say it the way NOM and its supporters do:

"It is unfair that those who support the traditional definition of marriage being between a man and a woman are called 'bigots.'"

That phraseology is no different than when the Klan sought to retool its image by saying  "we aren't anti-black. We are just pro-white."

Make no mistake about it, there is a certain animus directed at the lgbt community by many of those who claim to be fighting for "traditional marriage" and this animus is easily proven by those folks themselves.

Thanks to NOManiacs, a site which goes the extra mile by monitoring the stuff which NOM supporters say, the following gives a perfect view of the people who support NOM and the organization are hoping to come to its upcoming march.

NOManiacs assembled a bunch of comments from NOM's facebook page and created a flyer spotlighting these comments.  This flyer is highly NSFW and will no doubt get folks angry. Do not contact anyone, except your friends and allies in order to show them the truth about NOM supporters:

To see this flyer in a more readable form, click here.

The irony, according to NOManiacs is that many voices speaking for marriage equality have been barred from posting on NOM's facebook site, but these voices still remain.

Lgbts, African-Americans should pay attention to CPAC 2013

Know Your LGBT History has been postponed today so that I can feature on a point I wish to make:

Before any African-Americans or lgbts get roped again by outside groups (such as the National Organization for Marriage) in what I call the "Oppression Olympics, take a gander at these two videos from today's Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). Witness what happens when an African-American Republican tries to talk about minority outreach and how attendees react to the news that Republican Sen. Rob Portman (OH) now supports marriage equality due to his son coming out:



 

It puts it all in perspective. What's the use of  talking about who suffered the most or how much one movement for equality is not like the other if you fail to notice that the heel on both of your necks belong to the same people.

Hat tip to Think Progress.

'NOM digs its own hole with response to 'second best option' controversy' and other Friday midday news briefs

NOM chief responds to ‘second-best option’ remarks - Kudos to the Washington Blade for coming up in CPAC to ask that question. Excellent journalism preventing NOM from ignoring Eastman's comment.  

NOM Doubles Down On Anti-Adoption Argument Against Marriage Equality - Think Progress gives more detail and background on the entire "second best option" controversy.  

Bryan Fischer Compares Being Gay To Robbing A Bank - Bryan Fischer's tacky response to the news that Sen. Ron Portman now supports marriage equality due to his son coming out.  

FRC to Pastors: Now THIS is an Anti-Gay Sermon! - Simply VILE overkill! The inability to police its own rhetoric will be one of the reasons for the religious right downfall in America. 

 Musician featured in NOM's 'March for Marriage' ad supports marriage equality - NOM doesn't miss a trick, I swear!

 Dad Writes Heartwarming Letter To Son Struggling To Come Out - Probably the greatest coming out story you will EVER hear about. I swear, I get happy chills just reading the father's letter.

Video: Sen. Rob Portman explains his reversal on marriage equality

Conservative Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) announced yesterday that he now believes that same-sex couples should have the right to marry. This is a reverse of his original position on the issue. With this announcement, Portman becomes the first sitting Republican senator to support marriage equality.

Why did he change his opinion? It's simple:

 

While it is nice to see Sen. Portman make a welcomed change on the issue, the fact that he did not cut off contact with his son after the child came out to him is an even better thing to see.

This is what Christian values is all about.

Eastman, NOM places status above love in families

By now, many of you reading this post have heard of the comments uttered by National Organization for Marriage chairman John Eastman regarding Justice John Roberts' adopted children and adoption in general. And no doubt there will be some claiming that we are making too much of Eastman's statement or that it was a simple gaffe which takes needed attention away from the important subject of marriage equality

But attention over Eastman's words are not a phony moral panic and to label his comment as a simple "gaffe" is trivializing its harm.

What Eastman did was to push a concept into the idea of family which has no business being there. Families should never be judged on a tier. They aren't baked goods at the state fair to be given ribbons marking 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place.

Nor should it be implied that families exist in a caste system where the designated "gold standard" grabs all of the attention while other families who are not that "standard" are either hardly mentioned or downgraded.

When it comes to families, there is no such thing as a "second-best option," except unfortunately in the head of Eastman and his organization which - I may point out - has never offered any new ideas of placing orphaned or foster children into any family households at all, including the two-parent heterosexual household it holds so dear.

Nor has NOM ever offered any solutions to the real problems facing families of all stripe such as poverty, unemployment, lack of decent health and education options, or lack of good housing.

Eastman and NOM are like charlatans from days of old who would roll into town after town masquerading as physicians while hawking a useless cure-all with flowery rhetoric and flashy bottles.

In this case, the cure-all seems to be keeping members from the gay community from getting married and keeping same-sex families in the background. And like those charlatans, Eastman and NOM talk a good game, but when you get past the rhetoric and the flash you realize that the cure-all cures nothing.

Keeping gays and lesbians from getting married and keeping same-sex families in the background has never improved the quality of life of any household. It has never saved a family's mortgage nor gotten a family's children into a decent college.

Keeping gays and lesbians from getting married and keeping same-sex families in the background has never paid overdue utility notices, rent, or medical bills.

What this rhetoric does is pits us against one another by fooling us into thinking that the love and support each family is capable of giving should be judged not by how much good it does but who is the giver.

The rhetoric places status above love, support, and the willingness to sacrifice - three qualities which all good families have in abundance.

Eastman and NOM's rhetoric is a game, i.e. a vulgar exercise in passive-aggressive homophobia which cushions some from accepting the simple fact that maybe their disagreement  with marriage equality has less to do with saving the family and more to do with their inability to deal with innate inaccuracies about the gay community and same-sex families.

And unfortunately, as Eastman's comments demonstrate, other families are becoming collateral damage in this passive-aggressive game.

'NOM misrepresents child's testimony' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Let's look at the sad tackiness of the National Organization for Marriage:

Oh the poor baby, except for one thing:

And what makes it worse? In the words of a comment from where I gleaned NOM's tacky misrespresentation:

An additional thing that is incredibly deceptive about this is that when someone testifies before a legislative committee, typically it isn't a "give and take," it's a monologue by the person testifying. The committee is there to listen and let people have their say. The graphic makes it look like, oh, goodness, the lawmakers were left speechless by the perspicacity of this young child, whereas the reality of it was, they weren't there to ask OR answer questions. (Moreover, even if they were, one could hardly imagine that there would be lots of political capital in arguing with a pre-teen. It's pretty easy to see why this, almost certainly rhetorical, question would have been left alone.)

Misrepresenting a child's testimony. NOM is brazen and tacky, not to mention stupid. Did the organization think that no one would call it out on the lie?

In other news: 

‘Don’t Say Gay’ Bill Could Prevent Counselors From Providing Mental Health Support - This ain't good, folks.

Tennessee Counseling Bill Would Let Student Psychologists Reject Gay Clients Without Punishment - And this just as bad.

24 Awesomely Creative Ways To Come Out Of The Closet - Okay this is funny and cute.

O'Reilly capitulates after harassing openly gay legislator

Apparently, there seems to be an ever so small degree of journalism integrity in Bill O'Reilly's ever so small conscience which led him to make the following statement after harassing openly gay Colorado legislator Rep. Mark Ferrandino.

O'Reilly had spent several segments of his show implying that Ferrandino was protecting pedophiles, causing many folks to cry "foul."

 

Transcript: 

 O’REILLY: I have to report the truth here. First truism, homosexuality has nothing to do with the crime of pedophilia. Second, everyone we report on is defined and that guy is proud of his circumstance and promotes it, so we reported it. 

Even as he admits that homosexuality has nothing to do with pedophilia, O'Reilly still tries to give himself a lifeline. Equality Matters isn't having it. The site slightly reminds folks of the time in which he did conflate pedophilia with homosexuality:

O’Reilly’s explanation for his attacks still doesn’t pass the smell test, but it’s at least an improvement from when he openly defended linking homosexuality to pedophilia last summer.

 

The love of bigots . . .

I know. The Catholic Church has a new Pope and he is as bad as the last one. Oh well, I wasn't all that surprised. What surprised me today is yet another reference to the "homosexuality/outlet plug reference." To those who are not familiar with this inane thing, it is yet another way as to how the religious right attempts to reduce lgbt relationships to that of sexual matters, like so:



Yet another demonstration of the saying, "the love of bigots is more dangerous than their hatred."

'NOM-bought black pastor group working hard for the money' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

Same old, same old anti-gay bigotry from NOM-bought black pastor shell group - William Owens and his wife have to earn their $40,000 from NOM somehow.

Video: Rep. Jeanne Ives (R-Wheaton) says gays have 'disordered relationships' - Oh brother. Here we go again. Why, if lgbts are bullies, are our relationships constantly attacked. What is this? The zillionth time? Okay forgive me for being snarky, but girlfriend's wig/weave is a bit more disordered than any gay relationship I've ever seen.

Fox’s O’Reilly Backtracks After Accusing Gay Colorado Lawmaker Of Protecting Child Molesters - O'Reilly's explanation for his slander and harassment are just as bad as his journalistic skills.

 Obama Evolves Even Further, Denies That State Marriage Bans Are Constitutional - Okay, all of the Larry Kramer wannabes hush up (for at least three minutes) and let the man slowly stick his head out of the turtle shell.

Gay College Student Made to Drink Holy Water to Be Cured of Homosexuality - Let me guess . . . it didn't work.

Anti-gay parenting study author casting his lot with NOM

Regnerus

If folks are hoping that Mark Regnerus will plead any mea culpa regarding new allegations about his anti-gay parenting study and how the anti-gay funders may have influenced it, I think the following announcement from Jennifer Roback of NOM's Ruth Institute should give an indication that as to why that probably won't happen:

Protect Marriage Conference in San Diego May 30

I wrote to you earlier about the Ruth Institute annual three day pro-marriage conference here in San Diego for university students and young adults, called, “It Takes a Family to Raise a Village,”  or ITAF.  I want you to know that the deadline for application is coming up on March 15th, later this week.  So please, please, tell your students, interns, seminarians or other young adults who would benefit from the  ITAF program that they need to get on with it and apply now!!

This seminar-style conference brings together young adults, 18-30, for an intense inter-disciplinary, inter-faith program that will help them make an informed and compassionate case for natural marriage, one man, one woman for life.  Our graduates have gone on to form clubs, start their own blogs, be guests on radio programs and write for established internet outlets. This year our conference is in a beautiful San Diego resort, the Town and Country. We’ll be hosting about 35 students and a dynamic panel of speakers.

This three day event is FREE for students and includes all the lectures, food, transportation in San Diego, lodging, plus a travel stipend to assist them in travelling to San Diego.

And guess who just happens to be one of the speakers at this "Protect Marriage" conference:

 Mark Regnerus, Ph.D. He is associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, and a research associate of the university’s Population Research Center. His areas of research are sexual behavior and family formation. He is the author of the important new work on adult children of parents who had same sex relationships. He is also the author of two books on the sexual behavior of teenagers and young adults.

To me, it's more fascinating that his study - the item which he is more famous, or infamous, for is conveniently not mentioned in his biography except for a vague reference.

 I should mention that Roback and other speakers of the conference, i.e. Robert Gagnon have been extremely vocal as to their objections not only of lgbt equality but gay parenting and same-sex households in general.

I think it's safe to assume that Regnerus no longer cares about faking objectivity when it comes to where he stands on the subject of gay parenting.

Related post - Time to twitter bomb the right, Boehner about the Regnerus study

Former MN legislator regrets her DOMA vote in powerful testimony

Forget that crazy man I was talking about earlier today who gave insane testimony to stop marriage equality in Minnesota. THIS testimony is the most powerful. It's from Lynne Osterman, a former legislator who voted for DOMA and now regrets her vote:

'MN marriage equality hearing witness talks anal sex' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Courtesy of Joe.My.God., a "concerned citizen" speaking against marriage equality during a hearing this morning in Minnesota. Lord hammercy! 



In other news:

 Minnesota Legislator Interrupts Proceedings To Introduce Ex-Gay Friend - Speaking of those hearings - yesterday, legislator tried to pull a fast one.  

NARTH Loses Tax Exempt Status - NARTH is an anti-gay junk science group. I say a lot more of them need to lose their tax-exempt status.

 Video: FRC hopes SCOTUS confuses us for a theocracy, society of junk science - Another junk science-ridden anti-gay video, Family Research Council? Really? Y'all know what to do.

One last thing:

I got this interesting message from someone who wished to be anonymous:

Please do not assume that the faculty and students at UT support Regnerus's false work. Many have avidly spoke out against him, written about his article, and signed petitions against him. While the institution has been remiss to do anything against him, that is not the same thing as the faculty and students who have opposed his craptacular explosion of feculence. Many have apologized in public to their LGBT alum for what he has done to the name of Sociology at UT. Go after the institution but not the faculty and students who have dedicated themselves to undoing the damage Regnerus has caused to the department and school. 

It's nice to know that folks at Regnerus' university are as disgusted with his "study" as we are. Remember to tweet the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council, the University of Texas (Austin) and House Speaker John Boehner. Demand that they comment on the new allegations regarding the Regnerus study.  No rude comments and no threats.

@NOMupdate

 @FRCdc

@spriggfrc

@SpeakerBoehner

@UTAustin

And speaking of how to contact Mark Regnerus, I have been told that the following is his religious blog with an open comment section. Or you can reach him from his webpage by emailing him at  regnerus@prc.utexas.edu. (I am unsure whether or not you should include that last period). The same applies for him as the others.  Demand that he comment on new allegations regarding his study. But no rude comments or threats. Always respond to injustice with dignity.

Time to twitter bomb the right, Boehner about the Regnerus study

Regnerus

Seems to me that if I were a professor and my work and credibility had been questioned, I would respond.

 If I were a member of highly connected organization in Washington, DC or a member of Congress and a study cited in a brief to the Supreme Court which I supported had been called into question, I would respond.

But I am not University of Texas (Austin) professor Mark Regnerus nor am I connected with the Family Research Council or the National Organization for Marriage. And I am definitely not a member of Congress.

So instead of responding in this scenarios, I sit back and scratch my head at the silence.

Last year, when Regnerus' study was published, the religious right and their cohorts went press crazy, announcing to every news organization who cared that Regnerus' study made the case against marriage equality, gay adoption, and same-sex families in general.

They even ignored the pesky fact that the study was extremely flawed, choosing instead to overwhelm truth with repetition fueled by a very good media campaign. 

These groups, and the Republicans in the House of Representatives, even cited the study in briefs to the Supreme Court to defend anti-gay laws (DOMA, Prop 8).

But now, two days after the Huffington Post and the American Independent published an article bringing to light shocking allegations against Regnerus and his study, these folks haven't commented.

Not a word has been said from the right or Regnerus. Not even a cough.

It's not by accident of course.  The silence is deliberate because they are hoping that the story passes through the news cycle without so much as a peep. And when that happens, they will poke their heads out and continue to spout nonsense about traditional morality and family, as if nothing has happened.

Don't let them get away with it. Here is what you can do.

The following are the twitter addresses of the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council, the University of Texas (Austin) and House Speaker John Boehner. Demand that they comment on the new allegations regarding the Regnerus study.  No rude comments and no threats.

@NOMupdate

 @FRCdc

@spriggfrc

@SpeakerBoehner

@UTAustin 

I looked for Regnerus' twitter address but couldn't seem to find it. If anyone has any way of contacting him, please inform readers in the comments section below.
 

When a black gay man is brutally murdered . . .

Marco McMillian

I hate stories like this:

Marco McMillian was poised to make history as the first openly gay man to run for public office in Mississippi. Instead, supporters are coping with his shocking death. 

 McMillian was brutally murdered and it has been confirmed that it was because of his sexual orientation. Naturally his murderer is claiming the "gay panic defense," but is also taking it much further. He is claiming that McMillian tried to rape him. Where have we heard this before (I will give you a hint - David Kato, Billy Joe Gaither, Matthew Shepard) in which someone who viciously murders a gay man claims that he panicked because the gay man was "hitting on him." My God, this is going to get ugly.

 I just can't talk about it further.

Two good friends of mine, Viktor Kerney and Rod McCullom, have covered this story for Ebony magazine and their blogs. Check out their work and enter the world of what black gay men have to deal with in American society:

 MURDER IN THE MISSISSIPPI DELTA - An excellent overview of the entire ugly thing and how it reverberates throughout the entire community.

 No Mention of Marco McMillian's life as a Gay Man at Funeral - Truly sad.  

Does the Black Community Care When Its Gay Members are Killed? - No comment.

 REPORT: Suspect Claims Marco McMillian Tried to "Rape" Him - That's what the murderer's family is saying. It sounds fishy. Sorry but it does.

'Controversy over Regnerus study heats up BIG TIME' and other Monday midday news briefs

Controversy over new allegations about the Regnerus anti-gay parenting study and how much its funders had to do with its results continue to grow. Check out the following just revealed this morning:

 Mark Regenerus and Witherspoon collaboration - For those interested, here is a document dump of information regarding the Regenrus study and how it contradicts with the original story Regnerus told about the involvement of his funders. Page 11 shows something very interesting. On Aug. 22 of 2011 (Editor's note - this post originally had the inaccurate date of Aug. 22 2012), Mark Regnerus and a few other researchers met to discuss a public relations/media plan for the study. One of the researchers was Glenn T. Stanton from Focus on the Family. Stanton is not necessarily a pro-gay advocate. To the contrary, he is on record saying many untrue things about the gay community, including calling marriage equality a "lie of Satan."

‘More managerial than intellectual’: How right-wing Christian money brought us the Regnerus study - Philip Cohen of Family Inequality gives a good summary of entire mess.

Meanwhile, Tom Reller, the company spokesman for Elsevier, the company which published Regnerus' study, has a very spirited exchange with writer Scott Wooledge. Reller calls the Huffington Post article "nonsense":

In other news:

Harvey: Church Must Fight Against Homosexuality Like Slavery - Linda Harvey is ALWAYS good for a laugh.  

New York Times Puff Piece About Focus On The Family Ignores Its Regular Anti-LGBT Rhetoric - More news which should raise eyebrows as to why Regnerus was collaborating with FOF's Stanton to promote his study.