Evangelical pastor calls Trump a strong leader. You can laugh now.

For one reason or another, enjoy the nonsense below of evangelical Christian pastor Robert Jeffress explain why folks like him will most likely still support Trump no matter what he does:

.@robertjeffress: "The reason Evangelicals overwhelmingly support @POTUS is not because he has a perfect past. None of us has that. It's because of his strong leadership and also because he's fulfilling the policy commitments that he has made." pic.twitter.com/pZXa1FyCTh

— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 8, 2018

Simply a hot mess. Just one more reason why I hope their support of Trump will blow up in the face of the anti-LGBTQ right-wing evangelical community. Their explanations of why they supported him will be EPIC.

'Franklin Graham gets dragged on twitter for attack on progressives' & other Fri midday news briefs

Franklin Graham

Franklin Graham goes on a twitter tear attacking progressives - And is getting dragged for it on twitter. 

10 tips for LGBTQ couples hoping to foster children - Yep! This is very needed!

Victory! Mississippi Supreme Court Rules That Lesbian Spouses Are Both Legal Parents to Their Marital Children - Complicated case with a good ruling. 

Parents face many challenges in discussing sex with LGBTQ children - THIS is a serious situation because it is part of the trepidation some parents have when their children come out. They need resources to help them. And there are a lot of entities just chomping at the bit to scare them with false information. 

AARP Survey: Many LGBT Elders Fear Long Term Care Facilities - Another very important issue we need to remember.

Anti-LGBTQ activist angry at 'Love, Simon' for showing a positive image of gays

Peter LaBarbera is angry at 'Love, Simon' for showing a positive image of the gay community.

I haven't written about anti-LGBTQ activist 'Porno' Peter LaBarbera in a long time. I don't find him relevant anymore. The only reason why I'm posting about him today is because of the audacity he has to whine about the hit movie, "Love, Simon."

From Right Wing Watch:

Peter LaBarbera

Anti-LGBTQ activist Peter LaBarbera was, unsurprisingly, not a fan of the new gay teenage romance film “Love, Simon,” complaining to Religious Right radio host Janet Mefferd on Tuesday that the film fails to promote a “religious message” and does not warn audiences that gay people face a life of physical and mental illness “and of course the judgment of God.” 

LaBarbera joined Mefferd on Tuesday to weigh in on the release of “Love, Simon,” which is a romantic comedy film that features a 17-year-old boy who reveals his sexual orientation to his friends and family and falls in love with a classmate. LaBarbera, who has long been livid about the entertainment industry advancing LGBTQ causes, shared with Mefferd what he saw to be “three myths” promoted in the film. 

“Number one is that being homosexual—quote-unquote ‘gay’—is basically who you are, intrinsically who you are. You know, if that line just happens to be gay. That’s number one. Number two, that there’s a total mutual equivalence between homosexual romances and the gay lifestyle and normal, heterosexual living, so it’s presented as totally equal. 

Number three, that parental love, the way they love their son after he comes out and declares his homosexuality or they find out, the parents, is they just basically express regret they didn’t know earlier,” he said. “There’s no sorrow. There’s no religious message at all in the movie, Janet, and there’s nothing that says any disapproval.” 

LaBarbera said he believed the movie was “like a Disney gay movie” that was made for teenagers before complaining that “there’s no aftermath after this boy finds his quote-unquote ‘gay’ romance.”

“We’re never going to hear later about the diseases associated with homosexuality that he likely would get, mental illness, and of course the judgment of God,” LaBarbera said.

LaBarbera deserves to be mocked, but I still find him amusingly insulting. He seems to think he has the right to tell the LGBTQ community who we are. He thinks he knows us better than ourselves to the point where he gets to determine the stories we tell. We know the horror stories about our lives LaBarbera wants to tell - evil yarns about oversexed, unhappy, multi-diseased gays who waste away in pools of their own excesses.

Too bad for him. It's not our job to coddle his religious beliefs or buttress his hate. The way we tell our authentic stories is for us to decide, not someone who is ruled by delusion springing from internal things I would talk further about if I had any experience in psychology. LaBarbera is so indicative of the rest of the religious right who get angry at us for daring to tell our stories truthfully and away from the lies and stereotypes they generate about us. How dare we take control and not fall for the web of self-hatred they craft for us out of their twisted version of religion, cherry-picked and junk science, and plain hatred.  They have a right to believe whatever they want about us, but they don't have the right to make us believe  their lies. Nor do they have the right to control how we tell our own stories.

LaBarbera will just have to get over his anger at "Love, Simon.". If not, he knows where he can go.

'No medically valid reason' - AMA strongly opposes ban on transgender troops' & other Thur midday news briefs

‘No medically valid reason’ to exclude transgender troops, AMA chides Mattis - Religious right groups and folks on the right are quick to bring up medical reasons to support the banning of transgender troops. BUT when a legitimate medical group - such as the American Medical Association -  weighs in opposing the ban, these folks are quick to omit and ignore. It's not accidental. It's Standard Operating Procedure with folks and groups who work to smear the entire LGBTQ community.

Doctors’ group slams trans military ban for rejecting ‘wide body of peer-reviewed research’ - More details about this latest development, including the fact that other legitimate medical associations are standing with transgender troops.

The Next Census Will Ask About Same-Sex Couples - I'm all for this.

A Republican dramatically came out to pass a conversion therapy ban in Maryland - This was brave of her to tell her story while voting for the ban. Her parents tried to change her from bisexual. And the story is even sadder. Her father, also a legislator, voted against the ban and denied her story.

Religious Right Activists Are Working ‘Behind The Scenes’ To Get The White House To Protect Ex-Gay Kidnapper Lisa Miller - This awful situation mostly fueled by the religious right hasn't been forgotten. The Liberty Counsel has yet to meet justice for its part in it. But we are patient. Getting Trump involved will insure that all hell will break loose. And we will be ready with the pitchforks.

A little advice before you exploit MLK's assassination, Family Research Council

Only the Family Research Council would have the audacity to depart briefly from its daily bout of Trump butt-kissing to mourn the 50th anniversary of MLK's assassination and exploit the occasion for its own purposes:

The world was a different place after that horrible day in Memphis, when Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. stepped out on his hotel balcony and took what would be his last breaths. Just 39 when an assassin's bullet killed him, Dr. King had already accomplished a lifetime of transformative work. How much more he could have done, we'll never now. What we do know is that he changed the arc of history -- forever. 

Taken at the height of his influence, Rev. King would never live to see his dream of racial harmony realized. Even now, 50 years later, Americans feel the familiar strain that threatens some of Dr. King's greatest accomplishments. In the five decades since his death, our country made progress, but the gulf between black and white still remains one of the most intense divide in America. And while the times may have changed, the solutions have not. There is one path to true racial reconciliation: the church. 

"The church," he wrote in Strength to Love, "must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state." What motivated Rev. King and powered his movement was Scripture -- an understanding that "darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that." Civil rights could not have been achieved if that light, powered by the religious freedom to shine it, had been extinguished. It's what enables the church to speak out today on behalf of marriage, the unborn, the downtrodden, and the persecuted. It's what powers the truth that everyone, regardless of race, gender, or social-economic status, has value. 

When Dr. King almost single-handedly turned the tide against racial segregation in this country, he did it from the pulpits of America's churches. Imagine where we would be now, as a nation, if pastors like the Reverend King didn't have the freedom to make their voices heard on the cultural issues of the day. He understood then, as we do know, that religious liberty was the key to every other freedom on earth. Without it, he could never have advocated for the cultural change that took root in the hearts of people across this great land. If we want to preserve his memory, we have to start by defending the church's right to speak into the racial gap -- and to stand, as unbiased representatives of Christ.

Little advice, Family Research Council? First, let's not be so quick to patronize. Turning the tide of racial segregation was a group effort and Dr. King himself would probably say that he didn't come anywhere close to almost single-handedly doing it alone. There were a multitude of folks involved from prominent African-American leaders to vibrant, brave marchers, to especially the black maids and other domestic workers who gave their nickels and dimes and other assorted monies to fund the movement. And let's not forget Bayard Rustin, the black gay man who coordinated the 1963 March on Washington. You should especially take him to heart before you begin your usual tangents about "radical homosexual agendas."

Secondly, instead of pretending to mourn King while exploiting his assassination to push for your bastardized version of "religious liberty," how about you unattach your lips from Donald Trump's rear. Stop providing a cover for his racially insensitive actions and comments. Stop using the "we all need to pray" card as an excuse to weasel out of being a true moral voice. Stop cheerleading  Trump's attempts to divide America by lies and resentment. And stop cheering his attempts to disenfranchise the poor and wreck health care.

On the risk of sounding presumptuous, I tend to think that if Dr. King were still alive, he wouldn't necessarily be a fan of yours.  So stop pretending that you are a fan of his.

'Fox network personality Tucker Carlson claims the transgender community doesn't exist' & other Wed midday news briefs

These days, Tucker Carlson has a constant "did I must mistake something messier for silent flatulence" look.

Tucker Carlson: There is no trans community - I don't know with that boy. He used to be somewhat of a decent journalist.

Anchorage, Alaska’s anti-transgender ballot initiative is defeated - Boom!

Laura Ingraham Once Sent A Student Reporter To Secretly Tape LGBTQ Group - If it were me she had done that to . . . 

NBA star makes big LGBTQ reveal - Way to go, Reggie Bullock!

Conversion ('ex-gay') therapy is a fraud and should be done away with

A bill in California could completely end the practice of conversion therapy, or attempting to convert one's sexual orientation from gay to heterosexual, in the state. Right now, the state outlaws this sort of therapy for minors. But this bill would label the practice of conversion therapy itself as a fraud.

Anti-LGBTQ groups such as the Family Research Council and the Alliance Defending Freedom are fighting the bill by arguing that the bill is against freedom of speech and religious liberty and could lead to increased suicides, etc.

Really? Exposing people to danger via fraudulent therapy has nothing to do with freedom of speech or religious liberty. And it is actually fake methods like "ex-gay" therapy which sow feelings of inadequacies and depression which in turn leads to suicides.

As these two videos demonstrate:

'Anti-LGBTQ groups determined to keep 'ex-gay therapy' from being declared a fraud' & other Tue midday news briefs

These are the national anti-LGBTQ groups fighting California's conversion therapy fraud bill - The fraudulent practice of "ex-gay therapy" is dying a slow death. But anti-LGBTQ groups are determined not to let it die. It's the usual folks who claim they are attempting to "protect Christians."

American Legion decides to allow transgender teen attend Boys State - As an alumni of Boys State, I wholeheartedly support this action. 

Grindr Will Stop Sharing Users’ HIV Status With Outside Companies After Security Flaw - Uh they shouldn't have been doing that in the first place. 

Imagine Dragons, Mike Shinoda to Headline Festival for LGBTQ Charities - This is a good thing.

Christian Colleges Are Tangled In Their Own LGBT Policies - An old article but still a fascinating one.


Photo take from Political Research Associates.

Anti-LGBTQ hate group having a problem staying relevant

Lou Sheldon

From the Southern Poverty Law Center comes a story which should give optimism to the LGBTQ community as we go through the Trump years. It would seem that we are outlasting another hate group whose purpose was to end our struggle for equality:

For those who can't remember back in the day, the Traditional Values Coalition, led by Lou Sheldon, was one of the meanest, most vindictive anti-LGBTQ hate groups in America. Forget subtleties because TVC made its objective clear. According to it, the LGBTQ community were a bunch of diseased, Morlockian monsters who needed to be stamped underfoot:

(Lou)Sheldon, a protégé of Christian Right evangelist Pat Robertson, launched TVC in Anaheim, California, before moving its headquarters to Washington, D.C. His anti-LGBT rhetoric — calling homosexuality a “deathstyle;” claiming child molestation is the real “homosexual agenda;” suggesting AIDS victims should be forced into leper-like colonies — pushed TVC to the forefront of the battle against equal rights in the 1990s. 

In 1993, TVC distributed a video, featuring Sheldon as well as then-Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, called “Gay Rights/Special Rights: Inside the Homosexual Agenda,” as a propaganda tool to galvanize opposition to LGBT rights. The film attempts to contrast the civil rights movement of the ‘60s with the fight for LGBT equality, with one speaker condemning the “high-handed attempt of the gay and lesbian movement to highjack the 1964 Civil Rights Act in trying to give national credence to their immoral lifestyle.” The video also attempts to conflate homosexuality with pedophilia, a common refrain from TVC (the TVC website, when it was online, claimed “[t]he effort to push adult/child sex… is part of the overall homosexual movement”). 

A December 1994 New York Times article titled “Minister Brings Anti-Gay Message to the Spotlight” heralded Sheldon’s influence with the incoming conservative congress elected the month before. The next year, Sheldon was part of a push to support a senate bill to cut federal money for public schools “encouraging or supporting homosexuality.”

Supposedly, in 1995, then Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich promised Sheldon that there would be Congressional hearings looking at the so-called promotion of homosexuality in public schools.

That's how powerful TVC was back then. Twenty years later, things have changed tremendously. SPLC's article points out that Sheldon's daughter, Andrea Lafferty, seems to be having problems keeping the group relevant and afloat.

The poor dear (sarcasm intended.) I guess there is no room for unbridled, free-range homophobia in the now passive-aggressive world of the religious right.

'Judge tosses ridiculously homophobic rainbow flag lawsuit' & other Mon midday news briefs

Judge Dismisses Homophobe’s Lawsuit Claiming Rainbow Flags Are Religious Symbols - We have more important fights so I'm glad this anti-LGBTQ mess was thrown out of court. 

FBI National Academy Accepts First Transgender Applicant - In the face of ignorance and stupidity, the transgender community keeps on shining and achieving.

In photos: The private lives of India’s LGBTQ community - I've said it once and I will say it again - our fight is universal. 

Alaskans set to vote on bill that would ban transgender people from using the bathroom - And of course the group pushing this is reading from the script of inaccurate anecdotal horror stories of transgender women using the restroom.

New Amazon ad features gay couple getting ready for their wedding - Sweet!

Do you find this offensive? Or funny?

Let's ease into Monday with another somewhat "frivolous" post. Seeing how successful my recent post on Prince at the 1985 Grammys was, I may post things from time to time to bring up a bit of nostalgia or make you think about internal issues regarding the LGBTQ community.

Do not worry, though. The main goal of this blog - to expose the religious anti-LGBTQ right and their tactics to undermine our equality and safety - remains and will be the subject of the majority of posts here.

That being said, let me ask a question, mostly to the younger folks. The above clip is from a legendary 1974 comedy Blazing Saddles. In a wild, madcap way, Blazing Saddles, and its director Mel Brooks,  makes fun of Western movie cliches, as well as racism, anti-Semitism, and bigotry and stereotypes of all kinds. And let's not forget homophobia. 

Do you find this scene in which the cast of Blazing Saddles end up in a brawl with the gay men shooting a musical (don't ask) offensive or funny? Personally, I find it hilarious and I doubt I'm alone among those who grew up watching this film. Still, I want to know what others think. Please, do not go on any tirade about "political correctness" or nonsense like that. Just simply, what do you think and why?

'Big questions remain about Trump's trans ban. Who gave the recommendations?' & other Fri midday news briefs

No one will say who gave the recommendations for Donald Trump's recent transgender military ban.

Pentagon says White House helped draft transgender military ban, contradicting White House’s claim - The questions linger and I hope they don't stop. We could be looking at something potentially big here.

Pentagon refuses to clarify unknowns in transgender ban - More on the situation. 

Real Visibility Is Transgender People Living Openly And Authentically - AMEN! 

Mike Pence says he's 'proud' that his hometown is hosting its first Pride - Yeah. Right.

LGBTQ Americans Won't Be Counted in 2020 U.S. Census After All - Positives and negatives about this. Either way, I am very wary of the situation.

Watch It - Prince steals the show at the 1985 Grammy awards.

I'm putting this post out for two reasons:

It's Prince, which in itself is reason enough. And we are nearing the second anniversary of his death. A lot of us still miss him because he was frankly talented as hell, as this video shows.

The 1985 Grammy Awards show came a year after Michael Jackson's legendary sweep and in contrast to that show, the competition was heavy. Especially for Album of the Year.

Cyndi Lauper, the winner of Best New Artist, was at the start her career, with She's So Unusual. Bruce Springsteen - who only received one award that night - had cemented his legendary status and hype with Born in the USA. Tina Turner - who turned out to be the big story of the awards - won three, thereby completing what was called the greatest comeback in music history with Private Dancer. And there was Prince, who has come into his own with the monumental album and movie Purple Rain. He also won three that night.

Unfortunately the winner of Album of the Year turned out to be Lionel Richie's Can't Slow Down, which had to be seen as an upset. It was one of two Grammys  he won that evening.

Still, the best performance of the night had to belong to Prince, performing "Baby I'm A Star" with his band at the time, the Revolution, Sheila E,  and members of the audience joining in (was that Grace Jones on stage?)

I'd kill to have that outfit he wore. I'd even wear it to church.

Trump Administration's cozy relationship with anti-LGBT hate groups is being ignored . . . and that's not good

If the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins had said these lies about any other group of Americans, neither he nor his group would have hardly any influence in the Trump Administration

Editor's note - Just one news brief today because it's an important one:

The trans military ban is yet another example of the White House's cozy relationships with anti-LGBTQ hate groups - Trump's attempt to ban transgender troops is only part of the story about his cozy relationship with the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Family Research Council, and other anti-LGBTQ hate groups who are attempting to undermine LGBTQ safety and equality:

 After consulting with ADF, Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions released religious exemptions guidance making it easier for individuals and businesses to discriminate against LGBTQ people. 

 The Justice Department issued an unusual brief on behalf of ADF’s client in the Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission Supreme Court court case.
 ADF is reportedly in “negotiations” with the Trump administration to undo protections for incarcerated transgender people. 

 Perkins has bragged about how many times he has visited the White House. 

 Trump is nominating attorneys with ties to ADF for federal judgeships. 

 Former ADF legal counsel Matt Bowman works in the Health and Human Services Department (HHS), which has been employing more right-wing religious activists and has started a Conscience and Religious Freedom Division that makes it easier for health care providers to deny services to LGBTQ people, among others.

Dear Family Research Council, repetition does not turn a lie into truth

Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council can't make their lies into truth no matter how many times they repeat them.

An annoying, but enduring tactic of anti-LGBTQ groups is to repeat a lie consistently no matter how many times it has been refuted.

A good example of this is yet another Washington Update by the Family Research Council praising Trump for his latest attempt to ban transgender men and women from serving in the military.

I will spare you the nauseating entirety of the kiss-up because I wanted to point to the follow excerpt:

For this White House, rolling back Obama-era extremism is nothing new. President Trump has been doing it for the better part of 14 months. But doing the right thing isn't always the easiest thing, and the media is doing its best to make the administration's reversal of the Pentagon's transgender policy sting. Lucky for us, Donald Trump isn't bothered. With the military on the brink, staring down a $3.7 billion price tag for service members' sex changes, President Trump decided it was time for a return to common sense. And plenty of Americans are lining up to thank him.

That $3.7 billion price tag comes from FRC itself. Supposedly, the organization claims that it reached this amount by using "pro-LGBT" resources.

With all due respect to FRC, it doesn't exactly have a history which lends to affirming its credibility when it comes to using data. In the past, the group has cherry-picked information from pro-LGBTQ sources and legitimate science or relied on junk science  to reach false (and negative) conclusions about the LGBTQ community.  Remember that FRC's lies are so numerous that the Southern Poverty Law Center designated it as a hate group.

I'm old school about this sort of thing. If a person or group has demonstrated a propensity to lie about a certain issue, I'm generally not going to believe any future claims they have about said issue.

In reality, the Pentagon commissioned a study about this subject in 2016. According to Fortune magazine:

The study, conducted by the Rand Corporation, estimated that there are between 1,320 and 6,630 transgender individuals on active duty in a force of 1.3 million people. The cost of providing those individuals with specialized health care, including possible surgeries, would be between $2.4 million and $8.4 million a year. Total military health-care expenditures were $6.27 billion in 2014.

In all fairness, Fortune magazine also points out that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis criticized the RAND study, claiming that it “heavily caveated data to support its conclusions, glossed over the impacts of health care costs, readiness, and unit cohesion, and erroneously relied on the selective experiences of foreign militaries with different operational requirements than our own.”   

But in July of last year, Reason magazine pointed out another study which, while not coming to the exact numerical figures as the RAND study, backed up the belief that the cost of allowing transgender troops to serve is nowhere remotely near $3.7 billion:

A New England Journal of Medicine study from 2015 found slightly less than 13,000 transgender service members and transition-related care amounted to between $4.2 million and $5.6 million per year. The military's annual health-care budget is around $48 billion a year. Those numbers are small enough on their own, but they shrink even more when put into context of other medical expenditures. For instance, the Pentagon spends about $42 million a year on the erectile-dysfunction drug Viagra and another $23 million on Cialis. According to one estimate, the Navy spends $115 million a year simply to transfer pregnant women from active duty back to land.

So who should you believe? Two groups with pretty much no credibility issues about this subject or a faux Christian organization which is infamous for lying about and denigrating the LGBTQ community to the point of being designated as a hate group?

In a reasonable society, this wouldn't have been a question anyone would have to ask.

'Should 'ex-gay' therapy be considered a religious liberty of churches?' & other Wed midday news briefs

Bethel comes out against LGBT bills pending in state Legislature - A church in California is sounding the alarm against pro-LGBTQ legislation, especially a bill which cracks down on fraudulent ex-gay therapy. Mark my words. Claiming that churches have a religious right to push ex-gay therapy (no matter how fraudulent it is) has potential to be the next "religious liberty" argument. To me, saying that a church should be allowed to push "ex-gay" therapy on the basis of religion is like saying churches can prevent people from being treated for ailments on the basis of religion. Both are wrong.

Trump’s transgender military ban prompts mental health experts to clarify the science - More nails in the coffin of Trump's ban on transgender troops? I'm all for it. 

LGBTQ Org GetEQUAL to Close Amid Financial Troubles and Storm Over High-Profile Firing - I was never that much of a fan but in terms of the advancement of LGBTQ equality, credit must be given where it's due. 

Trump Administration Creates an Office of Discrimination - This opinion piece asks a wonderful question - "Why is it that 'religious freedom' only comes into play when a woman or gay person is involved?... Is it really just a coincidence?"

Trump's ban on transgender troops has bad day in court

While Trump's newest policy on banning  transgender men and women from serving in the military came out Friday, his Administration went to court today in Seattle to defend the ban in general.

It didn't go well for them. To put it nicely, the judge might as well have said "how in the world are y'all gonna come up in my court with this bullshit?"

Washington publication The Stranger broke down the proceedings:

Justice Department attorney Ryan Parker did not have an easy case today attempting to argue in favor of President Trump's transgender military ban in US District Judge Marsha Pechman's courtroom. 

The plaintiffs in the case, which now include both transgender service members and the state of Washington, filed the lawsuit nearly eight months ago after Trump tweeted that transgender individuals would no longer be allowed to serve in the military.

. . . Justice Department attorney Ryan Parker attempted to argue that because of the new policy (which ultimately resembles the old one), the plaintiffs' case against the government over the old transgender military ban memo was moot. But Judge Pechman, who had earlier issued a preliminary injunction finding that the old ban caused immediate harm to transgender individuals, did not appear to buy that argument. 

"I've read your brief," Judge Pechman at one point told Parker. "I can't find any factual underpinnings in what you've supplied to me in the brief." 

Pechman also criticized Parker and the Justice Department for failing to respond to the state of Washington's arguments made in a separate brief altogether, failing to put their briefs in the right font, failing to make their arguments outside of their briefs' footnotes. She even once considered holding the Feds in contempt of court. Perchman also grilled Parker for not including arguments about the legitimacy of the Twitter-announced ban in the existing briefs, and merely focusing on the last-minute policy issued on Friday.

The ruling could come within a month. Meanwhile, according to The Hill, more than 20 retired generals and admirals issued a statement opposing this latest rendition of the ban.

'Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler helping hate group push lie about trans troop ban' & other Tue midday news briefs

The Family Research Council is doubling down on the lie that Trump's recent transgender troops ban came from the Department of Defense rather than an ad-hoc committee of anti-LGBTQ activists (including FRC head Tony Perkins.) Yesterday, the group retweeted the following from one of its allies in Congress:

(2/2) @DeptofDefense focus should be on fighting and winning our nation's wars, not advancing a political cause at the expense of lives and common sense.

— Rep. Vicky Hartzler (@RepHartzler) March 26, 2018

Hartzler was the point person in getting Trump's original transgender troops off the ground, including constantly needling him about it and supplying misleading data (which also included astronomical monetary figures about how much it would cost to allow trans troops to serve openly - figures which her office refused to explain about when asked) to justify it:

Hate group Family Research Council awards Congresswoman who waged war against transgender troops

Hate group to host Congresswoman who funneled its false data

In other news: 

Trans military ban ignored by reporters, White House at briefing - Why I'm pushing hard for the above issue. Very few in the media has covered this and our community has a way of being desensitized after a while. It's really not our fault. When you have to deal with homophobic bigotry, desensitization is a coping mechanism. 

College soccer player came out as gay at Christian college and it was no big deal - Yet another reason why we have to stop people like Robert Jeffress and Franklin Graham from bogarting the debate about the LGBTQ community and religion. 

Town That Initially Banned Pride Parade Celebrates LGBTQ People In A Very Big Way - Sweet victory for our community. 

Gay couple to open Wisconsin's first group home for LGBTQ youth - This is wonderful and I wish them much luck.

Family Research Council sets a standard for lying in explaining trans troop ban

The Family Research Council bent over backwards to obscure how its president, Tony Perkins, helped to develop a new ban on trans troops.

As to be expected, the Family Research Council posted a Washington Update celebrating Trump's newest attempt to ban transgender troops from serving in the military. And of course, the update is a piece of deluded trip which deliberately obscured that the fact that FRC president Tony Perkins was one of the folks who played a part in drafting this monstrosity of a policy.

Also, FRC seems to be deluding itself in terms of what is known about this newest ban. You can read the entire thing, but here is the meat of FRC's distortion:

Under the memo released Friday, both Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielson signed their names to a 40-page document that will help free our military from the radical grip of the Obama years. Building on the GOP platform he swore to uphold, the president took a strong and decisive step away from the uncertainty that Ash Carter injected into the military when he tore down the barriers to transgender service. "Military standards are high for a reason," Secretary Mattis wrote in the report, "the trauma of war, which all service members must be prepared to face, demands physical, mental, and moral standards that will give all service members the greatest chance to survive their ordeal with their bodies, minds, and moral character intact. The Department would be negligent to sacrifice those standards for any cause."

In the new policy, people who identify as transgender, but who haven't been formally diagnosed with "gender dysphoria" and have not undergone a "gender transition" are free to serve or join the military -- with one catch: they must serve as their biological sex. On the other hand, anyone with a history or diagnosis of gender dysphoria (which the Pentagon defines as someone who requires "substantial medical treatment, including through medical drugs or surgery") are barred from the military, except under limited circumstances. While there are certain caveats, including when a person entered the military and in what state of transition, the administration's decision sends a powerful message that the days of reckless social engineering in the military are over.

After digging into the science and the instability Obama's policy created, Mattis and his team were more convinced than ever that letting this type of gender chaos into the military presents a "considerable risk" to its "effectiveness and lethality." And they had more than enough evidence to back it up. The memo does a great job dismantling the flawed RAND study that former Secretary Ash Carter used to prop up Obama's move. DOD insists that RAND "mischaracterizes or overstates the reports on which it rests its conclusions" (p. 39). "In fact," officials write, "the RAND study itself repeatedly emphasized the lack of quality data on these issues and qualified its conclusions accordingly" -- a fact the last administration never bothered to mention.

The Defense Department also takes Carter's regime to task, explaining that they found several instances where "standards were adjusted or relaxed to accommodate service by transgender persons" (p. 19) -- which is somewhat ironic, given the Left's insistence on "equality." To bend the rules and justify their decision, Carter's team had to ignore stacks of research from their own ranks. For example, people who suffer from "gender dysphoria" in the military are eight times more likely to commit suicide (p. 21) and nine times more likely to have negative "mental health encounters." And while the taxpayer-funded treatments go on, their service peers are the ones left picking up the slack. "To access recruits with higher rates of anticipated unavailability for deployment thrusts a heavier burden on those who would deploy more often" (p. 27). While Democrats like Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) fire off angry tweets, arguing that the president's position "cuts directly across the drive for equality," DOD points out just how mistaken they are. If any policy was unfair, it was Obama's! As Defense officials point out, if a service member had to have genital reconstruction surgery because of a traumatic combat injury, they would have been disqualified from military service without a waiver. But if someone decided to change sexes because they were struggling with their identity, their waiver would be granted (p. 28). That's how twisted Obama's agenda was -- rewarding service members with mental struggles on one hand and punishing hurting heroes on the other.

As we all know, the memo in question was NOT developed by Mattis or the Department of Defense.  Mattis was actually for transgender men and women serving in the military. He advocated this position in February. What changed?

News brief special - Family Research Council trying to omit its role in developing transgender troop ban

Anti-LGBTQ Activists Reportedly Helped Guide New Pentagon Policy On Trans Service Members - Just in case you didn't know this, you do now and it will be shouted until it is drilled into the heads of the LGBTQ community. Don't let the homophobes write the policies which govern our lives. Tell each other and contact your congressional leaders. 

 Trump’s panel of “experts” on trans military ban included anti-LGBTQ hate groups and extremists - With more detail on who these folks are and why this practice is dangerous.

Joni Ernst says she supports transgender people serving in the military - Never thought I would ever agree with Joni Ernst but her statement says it all. 

 Meanwhile, the Family Research Council commented by sending this laughably ridiculous tweet by Congressman Andy Harris, who just happens to be an enemy of LGBTQ equality:

My statement regarding @POTUS’ policy regarding transgender individuals serving in the military: pic.twitter.com/sgYu80yINd

— Rep. Andy Harris, MD (@RepAndyHarrisMD) March 24, 2018

And another tweet conveniently omitting how its president Tony Perkins helped to develop the ban via refuted junk science:

The new policy will allow the military to apply "well-established mental and physical health standards" equally to all seeking to join the U.S. armed forces." @PressSecSanders @CBNNews #fairness #military https://t.co/Fm1PLnX15S

— FRC (@FRCdc) March 26, 2018

You are going to have to do better than that, FRC