Family Research Council's 'we are not a hate group' campaign gets destroyed on two fronts

Step 1 of the DADT stand alone repeal is done. Now the Senate needs to do their job - however long it takes.

This morning, the Family Research Council announced a huge campaign complete with full page ads in Politico and the Washington Examiner attacking the Southern Poverty Law Center for "daring" to call them and other religious right groups out on their anti-gay propaganda and deceptions.

FRC trumpeted the fact that over 20 Congressional leaders and conservatives gave their support to the campaign.

By this afternoon, both FRC and those Congressional leaders may want to do a rewind for two reasons.

First, the Southern Poverty Law Center issued a what can only be described as devastating response to the campaign. This is my favorite part:

Despite the claims made in today’s statement, the SPLC’s listings are not in any way intended to suppress these groups’ free speech. We’re not asking that these groups be silenced or punished in any way. What we are doing is calling them out for their lies. There is nothing wrong with labeling an organization a hate group based on what they say. A simple example illustrates the point: If a neo-Nazi group said all Jews are “vermin,” no one would argue with our characterizing it as a hate group.

Neither are we mounting an attack on individuals or “groups that uphold Judeo-Christian moral views,” as today’s statement suggests. In fact, as we say in our article dissecting the views of these groups, “Viewing homosexuality as unbiblical does not qualify organizations for listing as hate groups.” Instead, as we explained there, “the SPLC’s listings of these groups is based on their propagation of known falsehoods — claims about LGBT people that have been thoroughly discredited by scientific authorities — and repeated, groundless name-calling.”

The second reason is a bit more practical.

Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association (one of the groups SPLC named as an anti-gay hate group) had a radio interview today on the David Pakman Show and in less than 30 minutes, he proceeded to totally wreck any claims by the FRC that religious right groups don't peddle anti-gay hatred through junk science and propaganda, giving new meaning to idea of giving someone enough rope to hang themselves:





Among the highlights according to David Pakman:

“The Southern Poverty Law Center belongs on its own list [of hate groups]...for peddling falsehoods about homosexuality”

“We're the ones telling the truth about the link between homosexuality and pedophilia.”

“Active participation in the homosexual lifestyle will deprive a male of anywhere between 8 and 20 years of his life expectancy” - a Paul Cameron lie.

“There is ‘no such thing as a monogamous homosexual relationship’”

“The rectal wall is one cell thick” - now Fischer is quoting Paul Cameron almost verbatim.

“We need to take our cue from gay porn actors”

“Those homosexual activists that are so intent on normalizing homosexual behavior...they must be harboring some deep seated longing to be straight”

“...homosexual activists must be latently heterosexual”

It's funny except for the fact that over 20 Congressional leaders signed a letter saying that this sort of thing isn't hatred but an example of "Judeo-Christian" moral views.

Whatever you do, don't tell Jesus. I think He may get rather upset over this.

Family Research Council's anti-SPLC campaign places bullseye on the backs of Republican leaders

Those organizations either named as anti-gay hate groups or profiled for their tendency to defame the lgbt community via lies are running scared.

From People for the American Way's Right Wing Watch:

Today, FRC announced that it was running this open letter [PDF] in both Politico and The Washington Examiner and that the effort had the support of dozens of Republican members of Congress and conservative leaders:

Family Research Council (FRC) announced the placement of a full-page open letter in today's print editions of Politico and the Washington Examiner responding to the Southern Poverty Law Center's (SPLC) recent attacks on FRC and other groups.

SPLC has targeted FRC and other organizations that uphold Judeo-Christian moral views, including marriage as the union of a man and a woman. The open letter, signed by more than 150 organizational leaders, Members of Congress and other elected officials, calls for a "vigorous but responsible exercise of the First Amendment rights of free speech and religious liberty that are the birthright of all Americans."

The open letter was signed by many current and former elected and government officials including Speaker-designate John Boehner, Majority Leader-elect Eric Cantor, U.S. Reps Mike Pence (R-IN), Michele Bachmann (R-MN), John Carter (R-TX), John Fleming (R-LA,) Trent Franks (R-AZ), Louie Gohmert (R-TX,) Gregg Harper (R-MS), Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Steve King (R-IA,) Don Manzullo (R-IL), Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Joe Pitts (R-PA), Peter Roskam (R-LA), Lamar Smith (R-TX,) Steve Scalise (R-LA,) Fred Upton (R-MI), U.S. Senators Jim DeMint (R-SC), Jim Inhofe (R-OK,) David Vitter (R-LA), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Sam Brownback (Gov.-elect, Kansas), Governor Bobby Jindal, former Governor Mike Huckabee, Governor Tim Pawlenty, former Senator Rick Santorum, Edwin Meese III, former Attorney General of the United States, and Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.

Those look like some pretty heavy hitters, don't they? Personally I am not impressed. The vast majority if not all of these individuals have been very vocal with their tendency to stigmatize the lgbt community whether it be Mike Huckabee with his insults to lgbt households, Tim Pawlenty via his unnecessary and coldhearted vetoing of a bill that would allow same sex partners to make end-of-life decisions for their partners, or Jim DeMint who doesn't believe in the hiring of any gay teachers.

But it would seem to me that FRC, through its need to deny the obvious (that its hate group status does not come from upholding "Judeo-Christian" moral beliefs but its desire to smear the lgbt community via lies and junk science) have now expanded the bullseye placed on its back by the Southern Poverty Law Center  to include Congressional leaders who have signed this madness.

If the lgbt community and our allies are smart, we would communicate with any and all of these Congressional leaders via email, phone, or whatever and ask:

Congressman or Congresswoman so-and-so,

Do you really stand with groups who proclaim that:

•Gays should be exported from the country;

•The federal government must be overthrown if it allows gay marriage;

•"Moral perverts" need to be kept out of the military;

•There is nothing "conservative" about "one man violently cramming his penis into another man’s lower intestine and calling it 'love'";

•Homosexual behavior ought to be outlawed;

•Gay sex ought to carry criminal penalties;

•Gays ought to be prohibited from serving in public office;

•Gay sex is domestic terrorism;

•"Hitler recruited around him homosexuals to make up his Stormtroopers ... [because] homosexual soldiers basically had no limits [to] the savagery and brutality they were willing to inflict."

Or how about organizations who will intentionally cite discredited research in order to smear lgbts the same way the Klan cites FBI statistics to smear African-Americans?

We need those questions continuously until we either receive an answer or, at the very least, send a message to these leaders that maybe they should know all of the facts behind a situation before interjecting themselves into it.

For another good list to ask Congressional leaders about, go to:

FRC's 'Start Debating, Stop Hating' effort: Let's look at some of those aligned debaters, shall we?

Tasteless youtube video = wingnut wetdream

Christmas is a holiday which should bring out the best in all of us, but with the annual "War on Christmas" moral panics (thank you Fox News and religious right), some folks have decided to show their asses.

And what better way to show your ass than to feature a video showcasing the worst of wingnut fantasies, including homophobia, Islamophobia, racism (what did you think that crack about diversity meant anyway), and lies about Nativity scenes all to the tune of "The 12 Days of Christmas."



Some folks may find this video hilarious due to its ignorance. There is even of segment of folks who may actually like it.

But I for one am confused. Just when did the season of "Peace on Earth, good will towards men" become one of unabashed nastiness?

Hat tip to Goodasyou.org

Newsweek poses the question about the African-American and lgbt civil rights movements

I hate talking about this comparison because it makes me feel like a piece of rope in a tug of war. But Newsweek is taking an interesting look at how the lgbt civil rights movement compares to the African-American civil rights movement:

Four months before Rosa Parks refused to vacate her bus seat to a white man in 1955, she attended a retreat at the Highlander center in Tennessee, where she took a workshop alongside blacks and whites on school desegregation. More than a half century later, the Highlander center is still training soldiers in the fight for equal rights. Only now the battleground has shifted. Last January, four dozen gay and lesbian activists gathered for a center retreat overlooking the Smoky Mountains to get inspiration on how they could show—not just tell—America that their rights are being violated.

But how? There are no “heterosexuals only” Woolworth counters where gays and lesbians can protest segregation; even Woolworth itself is long gone from the U.S. “We needed to create the urgency and critical mass to stop the injustice towards our community,” says Robin McGehee, a mother of two and cofounder of the civil-disobedience group that was formed during those five days in Tennessee, called GetEQUAL. “What are our lunch-counter images?”

More here

Before BOTH groups get defensive and start yanking and pulling me and the rest of mine (i.e. lgbts of color), allow me to throw out some thoughts You can either take or leave these thoughts, but they are MY observations.


To the African-American community - Yes the lgbt civil rights movement is the same as the African-American civil rights movement.  Just because the conditions of injustices are different do not make the injustices more palatable. Remember before you throw out Bible verses against the lgbt community that Bible verses were used to justify slavery and segregation. You should be flattered that lgbts are copying the work done in the 50s and 60s just like African-Americans back then copied the work of Gandhi. You see, no one group has the patent when it comes to fighting for their rights.

To the lgbt community - Gay is NOT the new black. And don't ever say some dumb shit like that ever again. It's counterproductive and it keeps you from educating yourself on the nuances of the African-American struggle. Yes the struggle for lgbt equality is similar to the African-American civil rights movement, but that does not mean it excuses you from taking into account the different nuances between the two. And above all, stop making it sound so simplistic. Marching was only part of the story. Behind each march was a plan  as to how said march would affect the movement as a whole, which proves that marching alone without a game plan will get you nowhere. And remember that you all don't have to get along. Goodness knows those working in the African-American civil rights movement didn't. But they learned to work together. Educate yourselves on how this was done.


To both communities - As an lgbt of color I have to say from the heart that BOTH of  y'all are getting on my damn nerves. The irony is that lgbts and African-Americans are similar in terms of history. If you would stop fighting, you would learn this.  Also don't ignore the ignore the needs of lgbts of color in your community. Don't assume to know who we are or what we want. Ask us. Lastly,  as an lgbt of color, let me say that I will NOT make a choice between my racial heritage and my sexual identity. I embrace both. But when I feel that the lgbt community is wrong, I will say so. And that  also goes for the black community.

I am not a commodity, I am person who is uncompromisingly black and unapologetically gay.  Deal with it.

Men kicked out of New Zealand town for allegedly 'being gay' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Portrait of dissension developing at Castro Camera - I DO NOT like division in the lgbt community because it takes away energy and attention away from our true enemies on the right. But Jeremy Hooper has a point with why there is underlaying tension against the Human Rights Campaign.

NH High School Student Traumatized By Book On Income Inequality - So a student is so "traumatized" by a description of Jesus in the book that he has to be home-schooled. I'm sorry but seeing that he is defended by a group - Focus on the Family - who makes it their mission to keep pro-lgbt literature from schools, I find it hard to sympathize with the high school student.

Colorado: First Openly Gay Latina Supreme Court Justice Sworn In - This is SO cool!

Men allegedly order "gay" pair out of town - A nasty hot mess in New Zealand.

DMV employee in transgender privacy case suspended - From what I understand, this was the second time he committed this offense. He should have been fired.

Rachel Maddow connects Ugandan homophobia to American group 'The Family'

Last week, I posted a clip of an interview that Rachel Maddow conducted with David Bahati. Bahati is the member of Ugandan Parliament who is heavily pushing the infamous "kill the gays" bill.

Today, I am posting the final part of the interview in which Maddow connects Bahati to a group in America called The Family. Its a stunning interview:



Related post:

Rachel Maddow gives anti-gay Ugandan enough rope to hang himself 

Religious right leader admits to using bad research to demonize gay community, sees nothing wrong with it

If you want the quintessential fact why the Southern Poverty Law Center is correct in calling out certain religious right organizations for their anti-gay bias, check out this portion of an interview between members of two of these groups -  Peter LaBarbera, head of Americans for Truth and Martha Kleder of the Concerned Women for America:




Transcript:

Kleder: One of the things I've also noticed is that the SPLC seems to be riled by the fact . . . uh . . . if they don't particularly like your source that you document then you must be a hate group.

LaBarbera: Paul Cameron.

Kleder:  Yeah.

LaBarbera: They say if you cite Paul Cameron, then you are a hater. I mean that's ridiculous. You know there is a researcher who just came out and found that Paul Cameron's work on the greater likelihood of homosexual adoptive parents to have . . . for the child to emerge as a homosexual. He confirmed Cameron's thesis. You don't have to agree with everything Paul Cameron ever did but how proposterous to say that citing a researcher . . Paul Cameron's work has been published in peer-reviewed journals. What they've done, Martha is set up these criteria and then you violate them,  they call you a hate group, and then they have their little echo chamber on the left which reports their charge. And of course the media, which really doesn't like us anyway. The media is very pro-gay, they cite us and so it begins to take a life of its own.

One of the main reasons why religious right groups (i.e. Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, The Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, etc.) have been profiled by the Southern Poverty Law Center as anti-gay hate groups is because of their repeated citings of the work of discredited researcher Paul Cameron. They use his work to spread propaganda about lgbts.

'Porno' Pete LaBarbera accuses SPLC of using 'shoddy ' research

As you all may have already guessed, I am home from work today recovering from a nasty bout with a cold. But leave it to folks on the religious right to warm up my temperature. After all, it is said that heat reduces a cold.

This war that members of the religious right are waging against the Southern Poverty Law Center is reaching the point of pitiful absurdity. Earlier today, I talked about the Family Research Council's ridiculous Start Debating, Stop Hating campaign designed to portray those designated as anti-gay groups  as victims.

But I think in the case of naked audacity, our friend "Porno" Pete LaBarbera takes the cake.  From the People for the American Way (who may start charging me for referring to them so many times) comes a interview between he and Martha Kleder from Concerned Women for America - an organization not named by SPLC as a hate group but was profiled nevertheless for its anti-gay bias..

During the interview, LaBarbera repeats the ridiculous and very much discredited idea that a man who molests a young boy is gay and therefore homosexuality and pedophilia are linked.

But that inaccuracy pales to his next comment:

We need to ask the new Congress to investigate the links of the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security to the SPLC. We know it's research is shoddy.

Family Research Council digging itself deeper in the hole in war against hate group label

If you want more proof of the Family Research Council's anti-gay bias, check out this exchange between organization members Tony Perkins and Peter Sprigg, courtesy of People for the American Way:

Perkins: So it's really an act of desperation. They've been on the defensive for slapping the label on the Family Research Council and there's some stuff coming out in the days ahead that is really going to push back and put them even more so on the defensive.

But let me zero in on some of the issues they bring up. As I stated earlier, it's all old stuff that's been out there for a long time, so it makes the timing of this very, very questionable. But one of the issues that seems to bother them the most, which I've had to debate now on a couple of TV programs, is the connection between - and this is what the social science, peer-reviewed data shows - a correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That seems to be a real problem for them.

Sprigg: Exactly. And yet it's important to spell out what we're saying and what we're not saying on that issue ...

Perkins: It's not what we're saying; it's what the social science professionals ... we take the date, we kind of break it down and communicate it to policy makers, but this is not research we've done.

Sprigg: Oh no, we've just surveyed the research that has been done. Although what's problematic is that a lot of time the researchers are unwilling to accept the logical conclusions of their own findings.

No doubt Sprigg is hinting on the complaints by researchers such as (Judith Stacey, John Horgan, Gary Remafedi, as well as many others) who have voiced objections on numerous occasions to the religious right groups - like FRC - distorting their work to push a phony notion that "homosexuality is a dangerous lifestyle."

The Family Research Council tries to declare war on the Southern Poverty Law Center

Rumor control has it that the Family Research Council is taking its war against the Southern Poverty Law Center to another level.

FRC is supposedly launching a Start Debating, Stop Hating campaign designed to make it seem that SPLC is unfairly targeting the organization and other religious right groups for their stances against gay marriage.

For the record, SPLC is not targeting FRC nor any other religious right groups for their stances against gay marriage, but for their continued pushing of anti-gay falsehoods and propaganda which has been refuted more times than many of us have fingers to count.

But leave it to the Family Research Council make an attempt to obscure the issue.

On its webpage, FRC has a statement announcing the campaign. The organization is also inviting folks to sign its petition.

FRC's statement was nice but I felt that it needed work, therefore I made a few minor additions that I think puts proper perspective not only on FRC but the other organizations which were either named as hate groups or profiled.

Parts of FRC's statement are in bold and my "tweaking" is below each statement:

The surest sign one is losing a debate is to resort to character assassination.

" . . . hatred for men, which is very typical of a lesbian experience" - Kristi Hamrick,  October 16, 1996, Family Research Council web site.

"Homosexuals say they don't want the children, but boy they put a lot of energy into going after them." - Robert Knight of the Family Research Council writing in a Focus on the Family newsletter, quoted by People for the American Way, "Hostile Climate," 1997, p.15

"The homosexual rights movement has tried to distance itself from pedophilia, but only for public relations purposes." - "Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex With Boys," FRC publication, July 1999

Peter LaBarbera's ramblings exposes the Family Research Council's deception

Leave it to Peter LaBarbera to unwittingly call the Family Research Council a liar.

LaBarbera is no doubt still smarting from his organization being called an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Now one of the main reasons why SPLC named LaBarbera's organization, Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, as a hate group (as well as several other religious right groups) is because they continue to push many falsehoods about the lgbt community. One in particular is the notion that homosexuality and pedophilia are related. The SPLC said this is not true:

According to the American Psychological Association, “homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.” Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation’s leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.

Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because “he often finds adults of either sex repulsive” and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may “regress” to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.

The Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.

However,  LaBarbera  in advertising his recent appearance on a Concerned Women for America radio program said the following:

I challenge the SPLC’s “hate” criterion chastising any group that says homosexuals are disproportionately involved in child molestation. (I ask why there are so many boy victims of pedophilia if homosexual men comprise such a tiny percentage of society; I assume few boys are molested by women.)

I won't even begin to ponder where LaBarbera looked to find the photo of the pedophilia magazine he used on his webpage to illustrate his point.

But I will point out that LaBarbera, who has absolutely no training in the field of pediatrics, child welfare, or the prevention of child sex abuse, seems to think that he is more skilled to make a correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia than those who do have adequate training in these fields.  I think that the statement by the Southern Poverty Law Center (using the statements of legitimate groups and researchers) is more than enough to refute his nonsense.

But here is the thing that's interesting about LaBarbera's need to bring up pedophilia and homosexuality -  doesn't it contradict the recent whinings of the Family Research Council concerning SPLC's labeling of them and other religious right groups - LaBarbera's included - as hate groups?


FRC claims that SPLC is trying to "shut down the discussion" by labeling them simply because they stand the for the so-called "Judeo-Christian" definition of marriage:

The surest sign one is losing a debate is to resort to character assassination. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a liberal fundraising machine whose tactics have been condemned by observers across the political spectrum, is doing just that.

The group, which was once known for combating racial bigotry, is now attacking several groups that uphold Judeo-Christian moral views, including marriage as the union of a man and a woman. 

I fail to see how the covert labeling of gay men as pedophiles aligns with "Judeo-Christian moral views." But if the inaccurate linking of homosexuality and pedophilia isn't a huge part of this controversy, then why did LaBarbera feel the need to bring it up?

The lgbt community owes LaBarbera a degree of thanks for his ignorant stridency. He has proved that FRC's claim is merely a talking point designed to obscure and deceive.

Make no mistake about it. SPLCs' designation has nothing to do with gay marriage and more to do with groups passing along propaganda and lies under the guise of Christianity. It's not about trying to shut down "Judeo-Christian" beliefs and more to do with exposing those who would exploit these beliefs to cage the lgbt community or make us pariahs to ourselves and the mainstream community at large.

This issue is about bearing false witness, an ugly sin but one which FRC and other religious right groups  - LaBarbera's included - are committing with unrestrained glee.

Do not censor religious right groups. Demand that they answer questions

I am in TOTAL disagreement with other lgbt activists (such as Dan Savage) who think that the news media shouldn't have religious right organizations on their shows on the grounds that their opinions are akin to those of the Ku Klux Klan.

It's not that I don't agree with the root part of this argument. Just like the Klan demonizes African-Americans based on ignorance, fear, and (in some extreme cases) religion, religious right groups do the same to the lgbt community.

But I think veteran newscaster Tom Brokaw put it best:

Asked how antigay views should be presented, he said, “You just say that they’ve got strong opinions. You treat like them like anyone else. You cross-examine and ask them the right questions.”

That's the thing which as been solely missing from this controversy regarding the religious right and the lgbt community. No one in the lgbt community has issued a clear plan of attack. It has been a morass of words thrown around, such as "bigots" and "haters, and tangents devoted to the issue of gay marriage or sidetracked to the larger issue of condemnation  of the Christian religion.

And in the middle of  this complicated muddle, religious right groups zero in on one issue, i.e. censorship, and begin to control the debate.

This issue is not about gay marriage per se, nor is it about condemnation of religion. It's about the intentional propagation of falsehoods and junk science in order to smear a group of people.

Therefore demanding that the news media keep people like Tony Perkins or groups like the Family Research Council off television is extremely counterproductive. It gives the inaccurate notion that somehow their ideas are so truthful that the lgbt community is fearful of letting them be heard.

Instead, we need to demand that certain questions be asked. For example:

"Mr Perkins, why did your organization freely and unapologetically cite the work Paul Cameron, a discredited researcher who thinks that gay men stuff gerbils up their rectums?"


"Why do religious right groups continue to cite a 1997 study to claim that gays have a short lifespan when in 2001, the researchers of the study complained that you all were distorting their work?  To be more specific, why do religious right group ignore legitimate researchers who complain about how they distort their work?"


"Mr. Perkins, why did your organization remove several anti-gay studies from your web page on the grounds that they used outdated studies? And this being the case, why did you cite those supposed "outdated" studies in works that do appear on your pages?"

Or even better, demand that the news media interview some of us on their shows when they have people like Perkins on. The lgbt community is a bit more intelligent and sophisticated than we were in the past in terms of calling attention to how religious right groups lie. We should be chomping at the bit to confront them on national television and making them spell out in exact terms why their distortions and junk science are accurate.

But instead of relishing the thought of a public feud, we seem to be backtracking from it or trying to sidestep it.

The lgbt community should take note of the recent hell President Obama has been getting from progressives about his need to compromise with the GOP. Just like it seems that President Obama has been reluctant to get into a war with the bullies of the GOP, the lgbt community seems to be reluctant to get into a needed fight with our bullies, i.e. the religious right.

But whereas as Obama tries to compromise with the GOP, the lgbt community seem to view the media as our parents and we run to them crying that they keep the big, bad bullies of the religious right from picking on us.

The media is not the parents of the lgbt community and it's not their job to stop the religious right from picking on us via their lies. It's our job to call them out and not just with words like "bigots," but with demands that they either explain their propagation of lies (such as linking homosexuality to pedophilia or claiming that gays caused the Holocaust) or apologize for them.

But we can't do this adequately without calling them out.

Doesn't anyone think that it's time we started?

Know Your LGBT History - Dirty Laundry

Dirty Laundry (2006) is a rare movie which should have gotten more attention. It's not all the time that one sees a funny, insightful movie with a gay black man as the center of the plot. Rockmond Dunbar portrays a successful writer in a big city who has go to back home to his Southern family when he discovers that somewhere along the way, he had a small dalliance with someone of the opposite sex And this encounter produced a son.

I never heard of this movie until recently. When I finally saw it, it thoroughly enjoyed the experience.

Past Know Your LGBT History Posts

Know Your LGBT History - The Willie Witch Project

Know Your LGBT History - Spartacus

Know Your LGBT History - Caged

Know Your LGBT History - The Birdcage

Know Your LGBT History - Maude

Know Your LGBT History - That Certain Summer

Know Your LGBT History - Boat Trip

Know Your LGBT History - Staircase

Know Your LGBT History - Beautiful Thing

Know Your LGBT History - Armed and Dangerous

Know Your LGBT History - The Proud Family

Know Your LGBT History - Suddenly Last Summer

Know Your LGBT History - Gay TV Now

Know Your LGBT History - Stewardess School

Know Your LGBT History - Up the Academy

Know Your LGBT History - Don't be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood

Know Your LGBT History - A Different Story

Know Your LGBT History - Victim

Know Your LGBT History - The Color Purple

Know Your LGBT History - Making Love

Know Your LGBT History - A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge

Know Your LGBT History - Noah's Arc

Know Your LGBT History - Ode to Billy Joe

Know Your LGBT History - Adorable Adrian Adonis

Know Your LGBT History - The Night Strangler

Know Your LGBT History - All in the Family

Know Your LGBT History - Tongues Untied

Know Your LGBT History - The Celluloid Closet

Know Your LGBT History - Querelle

Know Your LGBT History - Theatre of Blood

Know Your LGBT History - Strange Fruit

Know Your LGBT History - Designing Women

Know Your LGBT History - The Children's Hour

Know Your LGBT History - Sylvester

Know Your LGBT History - Once Bitten

Know Your LGBT History - The Boys in the Band

Know Your LGBT History - Christopher Morley, the crossdressing assassin

Know Your LGBT History - Midnight Cowboy

Know Your LGBT History - Dracula's Daughter

Know Your LGBT History - Blacula

Know Your LGBT History - 3 Strikes

Know Your LGBT History - Paris Is Burning

Know Your LGBT History - The Women

Know your LGBT History - Soul Plane

Know Your LGBT History - The Player's Club

Special Know Your LGBT History - Fame

Know Your LGBT History - Welcome Home, Bobby

Know Your LGBT History - Barney Miller

Know your lgbt history - The Jerry Springer Show

Know your lgbt history - Martin Lawrence and that 'gay guy' on his show

Know your lgbt history - The Ricki Lake Show

Know your lgbt history - Which Way Is Up

Know your lgbt history - Gays in Primetime Soaps

Know your lgbt history - Boys Beware

Know your lgbt history - The Boondocks

Know your lgbt history - Mannequin

Know your lgbt history - The Warriors

Know Your LGBT History - New York Undercover

Know Your LGBT History - Low Down Dirty Shame

Know Your LGBT History - Fortune and Men's Eyes

Know your lgbt history - California Suite

Know your lgbt history - Taxi (Elaine's Strange Triangle)

Know your lgbt history - Come Back Charleston Blue

Know your lgbt history - James Bond goes gay

Know your lgbt history - Windows

Know your lgbt history - To Wong Foo and Priscilla

Know your lgbt history - Blazing Saddles

Know your lgbt history - Sanford and Son

Know your lgbt history - In Living Color

Know your lgbt history - Cleopatra Jones and her lesbian drug lords

Know your lgbt history - Norman, Is That You?

Know your lgbt history - The 'Exotic' Adrian Street

Know your lgbt history - The Choirboys

Know your lgbt history - Eddie Murphy

Know your lgbt history - The Killing of Sister George

Know your lgbt history - Hanna-Barbera cartoons pushes the 'gay agenda

'Know your lgbt history - Cruising

Know your lgbt history - Foxy Brown and Cleopatra Jones

Know your lgbt history - I Got Da Hook Up

Know your lgbt history - Fright Night

Know your lgbt history - Flowers of Evil

The Jeffersons and the transgender community  

Fox News try to help the Family Research Council dodge the truth and other Friday midday news briefs

The conservative movement covers for FRC at its own peril - Fox News trying to help the Family Research Council dodge its anti-gay hate group status. Isn't that like a werewolf helping a vampire to prick a neck?

Milk's friends aghast at HRC store plans - I'm sorry but I agree with HRC here. And they will be giving a portion of the proceeds away to pro-lgbt causes. What's wrong with that? Lastly, if folks are all up arms about it, then let them buy the property. Don't get me started on folks always wanting to complain about things but can never offer positive solutions.

3,000 Catholic Anti-Gay Marriage DVDs Returned to Archbishop - I can think of no better way of protesting an anti-gay dvd but to send it back to the source. Loud and heavy applause for those involved in this effort.

Let’s Spin This, and Let’s Spin it Right: Against Republicans - Zach Ford nails what the lgbt community needs to do after the failure to break the anti-DADT repeal filibuster yesterday. It's an excellent plan and VERY simple, that is if the community can get off of its bitching towels to get it done. In a war, every victory and every loss is an opportunity for a future victory. And if you don't think that getting lgbt equality hasn't been a war, then you have been asleep.

Aberdeen teen, ACLU file suit claiming years of bullying at school - Go ACLU!

Religious right doesn't want lgbt children to have parental support

A new study has come out saying that lgbt youth who receive support from their parents are less likely to engage in destructive behaviors such as suicide or substance abuse.

According to U.S. News and World Reports, the study which appears in Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing:

. . .also found that those adolescents with highly accepting families have much higher levels of self-esteem and social support when they're young adults.

The study included 245 white and Hispanic LGBT young adults, aged 21 to 25, in California who were open about their sexual orientation to at least one parent or caregiver during adolescence.

Examples of positive parental and caregiver support include supporting their gender expression or advocating for their children when they are mistreated because of their LGBT identity.

However, leave it to the folks at the American Family Association's One News Now to object to the study. And what makes the phony news publication's objection more shameful is that it doesn't even try to refute what the study says. Instead, it quotes Dr. Andre Van Mol, a private physician in California. Mol calls the study "indoctrination":

"This is ideology and indoctrination in high gear, and it carries with it the implicit [threat] 'or else your kid will kill themselves,' which is ridiculous," contends Dr. Andre Van Mol, a family physician in private practice in Redding, California.

. . . "Love is not the same as enablement and co-dependency," counters Van Mol. "A parent can fully love and accept their [LGBT] teen, give them a safe home where they know that they as a person are accepted, and still have it be known that their parents feel that acting out on that sexual orientation will be an inherently negative thing," he suggests. "I don't think that's contradictory."

The family physician goes on to tell OneNewsNow the study pushes the fruits of a strategy to take over the medical field with the ideology and indoctrination of homosexuality.

I think it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Mol doesn't know what he is talking about.

Apparently One News Now isn't alone in raising an objection about the study:

In a November commentary, Christopher Doyle of the support group Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX)calls efforts to scare parents into embracing their children’s sexual behavior for fear of suicide “minority stress” theory propagated by gay activists.

Even in gay-tolerant cultures, the occurrence of suicidal behavior is much higher among homosexuals than heterosexuals,” he explained.

Doyle, an ex-gay and PFOX board member, cited a 2006 study of homosexuals in the Netherlands, which was the first country to legalize same-sex marriage. Gay men were five times and lesbian women were 10 times more likely to contemplate suicide than heterosexuals. Another study found that a lower level of social hostility toward homosexuals in the Netherlands and Denmark compared with the U.S. was not associated with a lower level of psychiatric problems among homosexuals in these European countries.

Of course Doyle is inaccurate. The "studies" (actually there weren't two different studies. The article in the Christian Post is inaccurate. There was only one study) Doyle referred to was the work of Dr. Theo Sandfort. In an email written last year, Sandfort objected to how his work has been distorted.

On the whole, this entire needless controversy is a perfect example of how religious right groups operate. Was it really necessary for them to object? Common sense tells one that children who receive love and support from their family tend to have less problems with self-esteem. And we all know that unfortunately in some homes, lgbt children are robbed of that crucial support system because of the real fear that they will be rejected by their parents or even worse, kicked out on the streets.

The study just affirms this. But leave it to the religious right to object solely on grounds that the lgbt identity is involved. And according to them, the study has nothing to do with making sure that lgbt children are safe and sound, but some evil plan by "gay activists" to force acceptance of homosexuality.

Such an idea is devoid of not only common sense, but basic Christian decency and kindness.

The sad irony is that without parental support, lgbt children are more likely to engage in behaviors such as suicide and substance abuse, and thereby become a statistic eagerly cited by religious right figures such as Tony Perkins and Peter Sprigg regarding the so-called "dangers of homosexuality."

One can't help thinking that the only reason why the religious right objects to parents giving support to lgbt children is due to the cold fact that depressed, drug addicted lgbt youth are of more use to them than happy lgbt youth.

Related posts:

One News Now, Matt Barber dehumanizes recent suicide victims

Why can't the religious right stop denigrating gay suicide victims?

Phony Christians shedding crocodile tears over the bullying of lgbt teens

DADT repeal goes down for now but the gay community isn't beaten yet

For a group whose mantra has been that President Obama and the Democrats aren't listening to the American people, it would seem that the Republican party was committing a bit of transference.

I'm sure that the American people don't like the idea of unemployment benefits being held hostage, nor do they like the idea of tax cuts for those who don't need them.

But we definitely know that the American people favored the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the policy dealing with gays serving in the military.

However, the Republican Party won't even allow it to come to a vote, exercising their right to be complete hypocritical assholes.

So what's the lgbt community to do now?

Well one thing to not do is play a self-defeating game of blame. No doubt some will say that President Obama and the Democrats should have pushed for this law when they had a larger number of votes in the Senate.

I disagree. If the 2008 Proposition 8 vote in California should have taught the lgbt community anything, it's that anytime anything which benefits us comes up for a vote, it will always be a knockdown, drag out battle.

By just simply existing without shame, lgbts constantly threaten the status quo. And the status quo doesn't like that.

So right now while some of us are tending to our war-torn hair, washing our dirty faces, and trying to bind our psychological wounds which come from being slapped down yet again by the powers-that-be, let's not succumb to the temptation of enveloping ourselves in the morass of self-pity and finger pointing.

No battle is over as of yet. And this one has just started.

For one, there is the new plan by Senators Lieberman and Collins to bring up DADT on a stand alone vote.

And while that may lead to something, I prefer the petition by HRC which reads as follows:

Mr. President: Halt the discharges by the end of 2010

The Senate has failed our military and failed the American people. It's clearer than ever that we need President Obama to take action to end this law that hurts our families, our soldiers, and our national security.

Send your letter asking President Obama to honor his commitment to ending this law by giving up his Administration's defense of this unconstitutional, discriminatory law and by enacting a stop-loss order to prevent any more discharges.

Send your message now.

The link is here. Now I know some of you probably want to vent (again) at the "inaction" of President Obama and the folks at "Gay,Inc" but don't do it.

Seems to me that the most important thing is for us to get this issue done now. One doesn't stop in the heat of battle to start berating. If that first option don't work and Obama doesn't listen to the second option as of yet, then we spend 2011 agitating until he does listen.

We not only have the people on our side, but apparently the Pentagon too

The struggle for equality involves more than just putting the word "equality" in your name and spouting profanity online.

The struggle for equality involves action, patience, and an old fashioned "never say die" spirit.  African-American activist Fredrick Douglass put it best:

“If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning.”

DADT repeal, Eddie Long trying to settle sexual coercion lawsuits, and other Thursday midday news briefs

All eyes are on the Senate today as hopefully they take up discussion of DADT. Heavy prayers, people. Heavy prayers.

Ex-senator reverses opposition to gays in military - Nice reversal from the guy who led the charge to keep from serving openly in the military during the Clinton years 17 years ago.

Chaplains Worry About Careers If 'Don't Ask' Is Lifted - Poppycock!

Senator Collins, why are tax cuts for the rich more important than pay raises for the troops? - An excellent question.

WATCH: Anti-Gay Pastor Eddie Long Attempting to Settle Sexual Coercion Lawsuits - Oh really?

Social Conservative Bryan Fischer: Blame The Gays For WikiLeaks - Bryan Fischer strikes again.

Rachel Maddow gives anti-gay Ugandan enough rope to hang himself

Now see this is what a credible journalist does.

Rachel Maddow had David Bahati on her show. Bahati is the member of Ugandan Parliament who is heavily pushing the infamous "kill the gays" bill.

She didn't yell at him. She didn't interrupt him. She didn't talk over him. Maddow simply used her skills as a journalist to let Bahati show himself as the homophobic fraud that he is.

It is a big long but enjoy it. It's just too, too awesome.


Part 1:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Part 2:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Related post:

Megyn Kelly vs. Rachel Maddow - you decide who is the journalist and who is the #&^@

Paul Cameron wants gays to go through 'public shaming' . . . amongst other things

Discredited anti-gay researcher and noted homophobe Paul Cameron has gone on record about the classification of his group, the Family Research Institute, as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

It was during a very poor interview with the Colorado Springs Gazette. I say the interview was poor because the writer didn't give any detail about Cameron's dubious history of censures and rebukes by folks from legitimate medical organizations to conservative talking heads.

Of course in the writer's defense, he or she really didn't need to. Cameron came across in the interview as batshit crazy in spite of the fact that, according to the writer, he "dressed smart and had impeccable manners" and also discussed his views in a "calm, professional manner."

But how Cameron looks or professes his views is irrelevant. You really have to read some of what Cameron said:

God’s 11th Commandment is “Thou shalt not corrupt boys,” Cameron told me. He celebrated the Ugandan anti-gay bill, in which the penalty for gay activity could be death. “Whatever they decide, I’m OK with,” he said.

Cameron believes homosexuality should be criminalized in America. He proposes heavily taxing single American adults and homosexuals because of their failure to procreate. He would also like to see gays undergo a “public shaming,” though he offered no specifics.

The article also revealed some very interesting things about Cameron's group. It's run out of his home (why am I not surprised), run by private donations, has only four staffers, and has a budget of $85,000.

Now that last one really threw me. Who in the hell would donate money to this loon?

It's gets better. Cameron said the classification of his organization as a hate group by SPLC was a "left-wing" deal.

I would have loved for the writer to have questioned him about the lie he told in 1982 about a child being castrated in a public restroom by a gay man. Or that comment he made to Rolling Stone magazine about homosexuality providing one with "most satisfying orgasm one could get."

Oh well. Where the writer failed to do his or her job, Cameron definitely took up the slack:

The gay lifestyle, which he says is chosen, will lead to the destruction of the West. “Liberal minds are attracted to societal destructive things like moth to a light,” he told me. “No society can long endure that does such a thing.”

“If God has changed his mind (about homosexuality being an abomination, as written in the Bible), he must want the West to die.”

It's almost hard to believe that Cameron used to be the go-to guy for all anti-gay material used by the religious right. And if it weren't for the attention he has been receiving of late, he probably would still be.

And that is probably the main reason why those named as anti-gay hate groups, and their defenders, want to deflect the controversy to one about same-sex marriage. They are afraid to be questioned about their past affiliation with Cameron.

To be honest, I really can't blame them. Cameron is just plain crazy.

Related posts:

Homophobic 'researcher' Paul Cameron in all of his repulsive glory

More homophobic lies from the Paul Cameron Poland tour

Illinois Family Institute uses Paul Cameron's work but claims its not a hate group

Conservapedia's unbelievable defense of the discredited Paul Cameron

Why we should care about Paul Cameron

Why does Miss California's church believe that homosexuality and pedophilia are linked
 

Anti-gay pastor proves the far reach of destructive homophobia

I bet it seemed like a good idea at the time to those who voted for a bill pushed by El Paso, TX pastor Tom Brown to rescind health benefits afforded to domestic partners (including of course lgbt couples.)

Then they got caught in their own homophobic trap. From Think Progress:

Last year, the El Paso, Texas City Council voted 7-1 to extend city employee health benefits to their domestic partners, including LGBT couples. But while many celebrated the progressive move, the right-wing El Paso Word of Life Church’s Pastor — and self-advertised exorcist — Tom Brown slammed the council for “condoning immorality” and giving “a huge black eye to democracy.” Incensed over the idea of equal treatment, Brown spearheaded a ballot initiative to rescind these benefits, which passed this November by a 55 percent majority.

But, in his eagerness to rob gay and unmarried partners of their health benefits, Brown’s group quickly drew up the bill “wording on its own” because he “could not find a lawyer” to advise. By doing so, Brown’s blow to equal rights also doles a “black eye” to 200 El Paso retirees and public servants who will now lose their health benefits on Jan. 1 too:

[City Attorney Charlie] McNabb said his office had identified 200 people who would lose benefits under the language of the referendum that voters approved by a 55-45 percent ratio.

Only 19 gay and unmarried partners of city employees receive benefits under the ordinance voters rejected last week. But McNabb’s staff found that some retirees and others would lose their benefits because of the wording of the ballot issue.[...]

Some are spouses of deceased city employees and some are retirees with other jobs. Still others work for city agencies such as the Public Service Board and the 911 district but are not legally city employees.

In addition, City Council members have city health benefits but technically are not city employees, McNabb said.

Not only same-sex and unmarried partners, but employees of the 911 call center, retired firefighters, retired policemen, and even foster children will lose health benefits because of Brown’s bigotry. While admitting that he only intended to strip the 19 same-sex couples of their benefits, Brown said he has “no regrets” for doing “what was right,” and that city officials “have to respect the will of the public.” 

That my friends is the root end of hatred, be it homophobia, racism, or sexism. It's like an ugly wildfire and sooner or later, if not stopped, engulfs everyone.

Get off your butts and call your Senators about DADT! and other Tuesday midday news briefs

DADT repeal vote could come today. The blogsphere has been going crazy over this. From Americablog Gay:

SLDN. The switchboard at the Senate is 202-224-3121. If you live in the state's of any of these Senators call them ASAP. Tell them to put equality over procedure. Senator Collins is key. If she won't support us -- having voted for DADT repeal in Committee -- it will be hard to get others. So, all you Mainers, get on the phone.

The target list:

KEY SENATORS WHO NEED TO HEAR FROM REPEAL SUPPORTERS NOW:

--Susan Collins (R-ME);

--Olympia Snowe (R-ME);

--Richard Lugar (R-IN);

--Judd Gregg (R-NH);

--Scott Brown (R-MA)

--George Voinovich (R-OH);

--Kit Bond (R-MO);

--Joe Manchin (D-WV)

--Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)

--Mark Kirk (R-IL)

If you want some guidance on calling, SLDN has a sample script here.

And in other news:

Religious Right Tries to Marginalize SPLC - This makes it official - The religious right are SCARED of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Reversing Pryor reluctance: Right-leaning Dem to do fully right thing - Senator Mark Pryor (homosexuality is a sin) makes a 360 degree turn for the lgbt community on DADT. Hmmm.

Homosexuality in Leviticus - The Washington Post does right by the lgbt community (finally) by inviting The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire to write an excellent piece on those Biblical verses about homosexuality and the need for context.

Another conservative gives a poor defense of SPLC anti-gay hate groups

Another conservative recently tried to defend religious right groups designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups.

And like the others, she failed miserably.

Rebecca Hagelin, a member of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank (Washington, D.C. seems to collect think tanks like a dog collects fleas) gave her opinion of the controversy in a Town Hall column, Culture Challenge of the Week: Playing the Hate Card.

You can read it if you, but allow me to break it down. The following opening is the gist of the entire column:

Children know instinctively that “hate” is a bad thing. And they understand that hating a classmate, teacher, or neighbor is nothing like “hating” the broccoli on the dinner plate. Real hate is a deliberate choice: it wishes evil and foments dark, angry feelings towards another person. And ultimately, it extinguishes any light and all love from the hater’s heart.

It’s a serious thing, hate is. And America’s own tangled history of racial prejudice, fueled by unfamiliarity and ignorance, serves as a cultural memory of the power of hate.

So it was a shocking turn of events last week when the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a long-standing civil rights group, added more than a dozen new organizations to their list of hate-mongering groups. Neo-Nazis? KKK-spin-offs? Muslim or Jew-haters? No. The new “haters,” in this era of sexual license, are those who maintain that marriage has an intrinsic meaning--the union of man and woman--that simply cannot be extended to homosexual couplings. Crying “hate speech,” the SPLC denounced “anti-gay” groups for spreading “falsehoods” that say children do best when raised by a mom and a dad, as opposed to two dads or two moms. “Falsehoods” that support traditional marriage are now “hate speech,” thrown into the same filthy bucket as KKK and Neo-Nazi ideology.

Hagelin is attempting to sell folks a weak Hollandaise sauce and stale toast claim that these groups are supposedly being unfairly silenced or "victimized."

Nowhere in her piece did Hagelin address the real reason why SPLC considered these organizations as hate groups:

Even as some well-known anti-gay groups like Focus on the Family moderate their views, a hard core of smaller groups, most of them religiously motivated, have continued to pump out demonizing propaganda aimed at homosexuals and other sexual minorities. These groups’ influence reaches far beyond what their size would suggest, because the “facts” they disseminate about homosexuality are often amplified by certain politicians, other groups and even news organizations. Of the 18 groups profiled below, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) will be listing 13 next year as hate groups (eight were previously listed), reflecting further research into their views; those are each marked with an asterisk. Generally, the SPLC’s listings of these groups is based on their propagation of known falsehoods — claims about LGBT people that have been thoroughly discredited by scientific authorities — and repeated, groundless name-calling. Viewing homosexuality as unbiblical does not qualify organizations for listing as hate groups.

 Hagelin's omission is intentional and it reveals the game plan on the part of those condemning SPLC for standing up to these groups.

They are sidestepping the credible reasons why SPLC has a beef with these groups (i.e. the usage of junk science, the pushing of known lies to smear the lgbt community) in an attempt to make the controversy about a backlash regarding gay marriage.

Of course this notion is false and Hagelin as well as others who would defend these anti-gay hate groups on these grounds know this.

But I guess when you are in the business of lying about the lgbt community, being deceptive in general comes easy to you.