Let's all join together to keep tabs on NOM's lies

Maggie Gallagher of NOM

The National Organization for Marriage consistently talks about how the organization is working to "protect marriage" and how to "traditional marriage" isn't bigotry.

One wonders if Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown of NOM took classes from political pollster and consultant Frank Luntz in terms of how they stay on that message even the face of the fact that the message is a complete dodge.

You have to give them props for that.

However, that's all you can give them props for. In terms of integrity and truth, one almost wishes that there was a grade lower than "F" to give the organization.

So I have decided to do something as a way to remind folks of the emptiness of NOM's message.

I am keeping tabs on just how often the group and its members contradicts its claim of simply "protecting marriage."

To me, NOM's actions are bigotry, but it goes farther than that.  If you took a look at NOM's past actions, you would find that the organization  has been engaging in extremely un-Christian tactics in order to gain success for its endeavors. Granted, nothing illegal has been going on (at least as far as I know) but NOM's actions belie the organization's claim that it's simply an innocent group protecting marriage:

• The latest questionable action comes courtesy of Jeremy Hooper. On it's blog, NOM is implying that a random reader of the Minnesota's Star Tribune wrote a letter to the editor the state's marriage amendment. However, as Hooper details, the man - William LeMire - isn't necessarily random.

• Then there are the recent developments in New York with NOM's anti-gay marriage commercial using refuted information.

• NOM's supporting of a poll in the very homophobic World Net Daily, a publication which also pushes birther claims regarding President Obama.

• Then there is Maggie Gallagher's awful appearance at a Congressional hearing on "protecting marriage" where she contradicted her past statements against the lgbt community and same-sex households.

• How NOM pushed the propaganda of a known Massachusetts hate group in Maryland.

• And last but least, the organization's attempts to ignore state disclosure laws, resulting in several investigations into its finances.

The list isn't complete yet. But like that old saying goes - "it ain't, but it's gonna be."

After all, NOM gives us so much to work with.

Got tips? Send them to charlekenghis@aol.com

Defending traditional marriage certainly isn't bigotry but demonizing the lgbt community to defend traditional marriage IS bigotry. And lying to defend traditional marriage is even worse.


Some information for this post is taken from NOM Exposed and Equality Matters 

You can become fans of their facebook pages here and here.

Religious right raising money for alleged lawbreaker and other Wednesday midday news briefs

$30K Raised For Man Charged With Assisting Lisa Miller - Really not a surprise. I have no doubt $30,000 is there and I have no doubt that more is forthcoming. But I do doubt the notion that a lot of this money, if not all of it, was sent it by folks concerned about this man's well-being. My guess is that the same folks involved with keeping Janet Jenkins away from her daughter are the same folks footing the bill here.

Former MI Asst. AG: I'm A Victim Of A 'Homosexual Activist Agenda' - Right. It has nothing to do with how you stalked the young man in question.

Presbyterian Church votes to allow gay ordination - This is good news indeed!

Navy revokes guidance on same-sex marriages - Ugh. For one brief shining moment, it was Camelot. This is why voting is important folks. The religious right still has enough sway in Congress to buffalo stuff like this.

West Bend School Board refuses to sanction Gay-Straight Alliance - Sue, sue, sue!

I feel sorry for NOM and the 'defenders of marriage'

Make no mistake about it. The National Organization for Marriage knows that its New York ad against gay marriage is peddling the distortion that:

Massachusetts schools teach second graders that boys can marry other boys.

This of course is an alteration of NOM's original claim that learning about gay marriage is a part of kindergarten curriculum in Massachusetts.

We know this is a lie because:

1. The site Politifact exposed it as untrue,

2. Maggie Gallagher of NOM unsuccessfully tried to refute the claim during an interview. She finally asked the interviewer to ask NOM's president Brian Brown about the claim.

A third reason doesn't necessarily come from NOM but someone they worked with in defeating the progression of gay marriage in Maine.

Marc Mutty, chairman of Yes on 1, said the following about the usage of hyperbole about school curriculum in an upcoming documentary on the vote:



Transcript:

We use a lot of hyperbole and I think that's always dangerous," says Mutty during a Yes on 1 strategy session, at the time on leave from his job as public affairs director for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Maine.

"You know, we say things like 'Teachers will be forced to (teach same-sex marriage in schools)!' " he continues. "Well, that's not a completely accurate statement and we all know it isn't, you know?"

"No," interjects a woman off-camera. "We don't say that."

"Let's look back at our ads and see what we say," Mutty persists. "And I think we use hyperbole to the point where, you know, it's like 'Geez!' "

Later, Mutty tried to recant his statement, but he danced around what he originally said about hyperbole.

No matter how angry I get when the lgbt community is slandered by people like Maggie Gallagher, Brian Brown, and NOM; no matter how many lies are told on us by organizations like the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family, no matter how many times elected officials who are supposed to look after our best interests kick us aside, I wouldn't trade places with these folks for anything in the world.

I sometimes feel sorry for them for so many reasons.

One reason is that they delude themselves into thinking that their efforts can somehow stop marriage equality permanently. The reality is that every victory they get is a mere postponement of the inevitabilty of marriage equality. The polls are on our side, the momentum is on our side, and most importantly, the youth of America (who will make up the next voting generation) are on our side. And you can only postpone the inevitable, but you can never stop it from happening.

The second reason is their ability to turn their backs on their own integrity. Mutty is a prime example of that. His admittance that he knew what they were lyng in Maine is sad. It probably wouldn't be if Mutty and his ilk could find a verse in the Bible which condones lying and bearing false witness in the name of God. Unfortunately for them, such a verse doesn't exist.

The third reason is that these folks have to look at themselves in the mirror after knowing what they have done.

And if when they look in the mirror, they fail to realize just how much their behavior and their lies trivializes their religious beliefs, morals, and values - well that would be reason number four that I pity them.

Related posts: 

NOM exploiting children to stop gay marriage in New York

NOM brags about NY finances, but omits questionable history of bad ethics

NOM's passive/aggressive exploitation of its supporters

NOM exploiting children to stop gay marriage in New York

According to Jeremy Hooper from the blog Goodasyou.org, the National Organization for Marriage is fighting against the possibility of same-sex marriage in the state of New York by running a commercial ad it used in 2009.

The commercial claims of "dire consequences" if same-sex marriage is approved in New York.

However, one of those "dire consequences" was proven to be a lie. Starting at .07 is the following claim:

 Massachusetts schools teach second graders that boys can marry other boys.

That claim is an alteration of an original claim NOM made that kindergartners were "being taught about gay marriage in Massachusetts."

In February of this year, the Pulitzer Prize winning site PolitiFact called out the National Organization for Marriage for pushing that misleading statement.

At the time, NOM was fighting the passage of same-sex marriage in Rhode Island. The organization sent out brochures claiming:

"Massachusetts’ public schools teach kids as young as kindergartners about gay marriage. Parents have no legal right to object!"

During the investigation of this claim, PolitiFact talked to:

• Christopher C. Plante, executive director of the Rhode Island Chapter of NOM,
• Kris Mineau, executive director of the Massachusetts Family Institute,
• Jonathan Considine of the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education,
• the Massachusetts Comprehensive Health Curriculum,
• the Massachusetts Teachers Association, and
• Thomas Gosnell, president of the American Federation of Teachers Massachusetts.

PolitiFact concluded that NOM's claim was inaccurate:

Bottom line: The National Organization for Marriage mailing says that Massachusetts public schools teach kindergartners about gay marriage. The wording, including the present tense verb, gives the impression this is happening now, in many schools.

But the group’s only evidence is two incidents five years ago. It’s possible that somewhere, in one of the 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts, other kindergartners have been taught about same-sex marriage. But NOM couldn’t cite any other examples. We find its statement False.

So other than changing the grades of the children, NOM is still pushing a misleading implication that "being taught about gay marriage" is part of the Massachusetts school curriculum.

In the commercial aimed at New York, NOM also cites the story of children in California attending the gay wedding of their teacher as yet "another danger" of gay marriage. However, NOM conveniently omitted the fact that parents gave their children permission to attend this wedding.

The irony of NOM's commercial is that earlier today, the organization announced a $500,000 ad campaign geared to stopping the passage of gay marriage in New York.

NOM's tactics are more sophisticated, but they still add up to the lie told by Anita Bryant  regarding children and "gay recruitment" when she led opposition against a Florida pro-gay ordinance in the 70s

No doubt the organization figures if pushing the implication of  "gays recruiting children" worked for Bryant, then why can't it work for them.

Especially in light of the fact that NOM has more money to finance this lie.

NOM brags about NY finances, but omits questionable history of bad ethics

This just came in from NOM's blog:

The National Organization of Marriage today announced that it is spending $500,000 on a new ad and lobbying campaign to oppose same-sex marriage in New York and will spend $1 million to support Democratic State Legislators who cast their votes to defend the traditional definition of marriage and oppose any Republican Legislators who vote to redefine marriage.

“It’s become quite clear in recent days in New York that Governor Cuomo and same-sex marriage advocates are targeting a select number of Democrat state Senators, as well as some Republicans in their desperate attempt to coerce legislators to support their agenda,” said Brian Brown, President of NOM. “We want to be sure those courageous Democrats and Republicans who cast their vote of conscience in favor of traditional marriage will have a strong supporter if the radical gay activists come after them in their next election.”

I found the following part of the press release to be very interesting in light of how NOM called HRC "bullies" for its role in keeping the law firm King & Spalding from defending DOMA.

NOM pledged to vigorously oppose in their primaries any Republicans who support gay marriage. NOM previously played a leading role in defeating former Representative Dede Scozzafava in her Congressional primary bid. NOM has a long history of defeating Republicans who support same-sex marriage. They led the campaign to defeat Bill Binnie in New Hampshire and Tom Campbell in California US Senate primaries last year, and defeated legislators in Minnesota and New Hampshire who supported same-sex marriage there.

I guess things are different from when you are "bullying for Jesus."

NOM should be advised of the Biblical verse about how "pride goeth before a fall." To wit, this bragging by Brown of NOM's dedication in New York will no doubt raise questions regarding NOM's not-so clean, very questionable history regarding its ethics and its history of trying to sidestep state disclosure laws, which has gone hand-in-hand with NOM's "victories" against marriage equality. It's already happened six times.

A Christian organization fighting for the sanctity of a "noble entity" like marriage shouldn't have such a spotty history. I would like to know just what is NOM hiding.

According to the Minnesota Independent:

When the National Organization for Marriage and the Minnesota Family Council spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on ads promoting a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage and civil unions last fall, the groups should have reported those expenditures, according to a complaint filed with the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board earlier this month. The complaint, which focuses on ads launched throughout the 2010 campaign cycle in support of gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer, asks for financial penalties as well as an audit of NOM’s spending in Minnesota.

The filing by Common Cause Minnesota alleges that the Minnesota Family Council — and in particular its lobbyist, Tom Prichard — failed to report lobbying expenses related to several ads. Since the ad urged the public and legislators to act on legislation, in this case a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, it constitutes lobbying, the group argues in the complaint. The ads in question include references to an actual bill, SF120, and were created and distributed in partnership with NOM.

NOM's passive/aggressive exploitation of its supporters

Brian Brown of NOM

Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage claims that the organization has no animus against the lgbt community. They claim that the organization is only interested in "protecting marriage."

Gallagher herself has asserted on more than one occasion (usually in mainstream interviews or in public hearings but hardly ever when being interviewed by members of the religious right) that she has no problems with same-sex couples.

It's passive/aggressive nonsense. And that is NOM's game plan. Unlike other organizations such as the Family Research Council or the Traditional Values Coalition, NOM tries to make itself seem like a "kindler, gentler" opponent of marriage equality, i.e. lgbt equality in general.

But it's like what I have said when talking about Mike Huckabee - sometimes the most dangerous form of homophobia is wrapped in a soft glove.

A perfect example is the following on NOM's blog:

AG Eric Holder Refuses to Enforce Federal Immigration Rules on Marriage, Invites NJ to Redefine "Spouse"

In what's being called an "extraordinary" intervention, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder vacated a Board of Immigration Appeals decision last week and asked the Board to reconsider a case concerning a foreign-born man facing deportation who acquired a New Jersey civil union with another man, who is an American citizen:

[AG Holder] inquires if, DOMA Section 3 not withstanding, there is any New Jersey state law that would grant the men the right to be considered spouses. He goes on to ask whether, absent of DOMA, the couple fulfills all other criteria that would grant the foreign-born partner the term spouse under the Immigration and Nationality Act... --Care2

The case NOM is talking about is a recent one involving a married gay couple in which one is not a United States citizen and therefore is facing deportation:

The couple, Josh Vandiver of Colorado and Henry Velandia of Venezuela, were married in Connecticut and live in New. Jersey. On April 20, Soloway received a notice from the chief counsel of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that "termination of [Velandia's] removal proceedings would not be appropriate at this time because "the Attorney General released a statement in which he indicated that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) 'will continue to be enforced by the Executive Branch'" -- despite Holder's decision in that same statement that Section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional.

Soloway and others have argued, however, that the discretion given to the executive branch in its enforcement of immigration law allows it to exercise the discretion to put those cases on hold while challenges to the constitutionality of DOMA can be resolved.

Had the couple been heterosexual, the marriage would have been enough to keep deportation from taking place.

Notice what the NOM did. It just put out a tad bit of information. No making judgements. No comments about how this hurts marriage. No mean words.

Like a stereotypical mafia chief, NOM leaves all of that dirty work to those who support it by way of the comments section below the post. A few comments are as follows:

Wow. Is there really that much money flowing in from homosexuals to waste taxpayer money on this? Keep it up, Holder; November 2012 is coming soon.

This administration has less respect for democracy and law than any administration in history. If you don't like a law personally, simply ignore it.

Heh. I thought SSM activists keep saying that gays will uphold and strengthen the tradition of marriage by Only Getting Married For The Sake Of Love And Faithfulness and not, say, marrying for wealth, fame, or U.S. Citizenship.

. . . Now another reason why SSM hurts is becasue they can marry in a state like CT, and use that marriage to violate the laws of another state, and to violate the US immigration laws.

Holder should resign.

And there you go. NOM's hands are clean. Why should it be blamed for the words of those who support the organization's efforts?

Uganda 'kill the gays' bill may soon be law and other Tuesday midday news briefs

UGANDA PARLIAMENT MAY VOTE ON ANTI-HOMOSEXUALITY BILL TOMORROW! - Yes, we are THERE in Uganda - homophobia at it's deadliest form.

House Defense Committee will vote on anti-gay amendments on Wed - Dumb, dumb, dumb. Let it go guys. DADT was repealed.

Audio: The excessively condemnatory voice of North Carolina's 'protect marriage' movement - It's not just about "protecting marriage" as this post proves. It's about demonizing lgbts.

Adoption issue strikes home for new state rep - I don't care what religion you are. You take state monies, you follow state rules.

Putting an African-American face on gay marriage

I got this from Jonathan Capehart of  The Washington Post:

A new documentary looks at the black-gay civil rights divide by centering on Massachusetts Rep. Byron Rushing (D) during the commonwealth’s push to legalize same-sex marriage. The African American legislator eloquently weaves the two movements together in the 15-minute film. Following a screening of the movie last month, I moderated a panel discussion at Aaron Davis Hall in New York City that looked at the marriage equality push in New York state from a black perspective. The panel was filled with luminaries, including media and fashion mogul Russell Simmons. But the star of the event was a soft-spoken man named David Wilson.

In the film, Wilson tells the heartbreaking story about the death of his then-partner. The trauma of finding him lying in the driveway. The terror of being arrested by the police on suspicion of breaking and entering or assault and battery before neighbors convinced police otherwise. The indignity of being denied information by the hospital because he was a legal stranger to his partner. Only after his partner’s 75-year-old mother told the hospital who Wilson was did they inform him that his partner of 13 years was dead on arrival.

Wilson swore he’d never go through that again. And he would find love again. In 2003, he and Rob Compton became one of the seven same-sex couples to sue for and win the right to marry in the 2003 landmark Goodridge vs. the Department of Health case.

In the panel discussion, Wilson gives a powerful reason “to put a black face on the Marriage Equality movement," including this heartbreaking passage of what happened at his church when he came out at age 37:

I was married to a woman, had three beautiful children and finally came to terms with being gay at the age of 37. My ex-wife and three teen age children supported my coming out process as did my Mother and Father. My mother met with her pastor to ask for his support and to also ask that he stop preaching hatred from his pulpit. My mother and father had been a member of their Black church for over 40 years but the pastor said he could not support her or me. My mother was forced to leave her church because she could not bear the hurtful messages delivered every Sunday. When my mother had a heart attack 15 years later with five subsequent congestive heart failures, she came to my house for her final 11 weeks under hospice care. She asked me to call her home church Pastor to ask him to come and [have] prayer with her. He refused and sent his associate pastor. When my mother passed away, she wanted to be buried from her home church but her pastor agreed to the funeral but refused to allow me to deliver my mother’s eulogy. After an all-out effort by my mother’s flower club, deaconess board and ladies club, he reluctantly agreed that I could deliver the eulogy from the lowest of the three pulpits, which I was willing to do for my mother.

After my mother’s funeral, my dad never went back to his or any church with the exception of the day that he attended my legal wedding to my husband, Rob Compton. Dad was 89 and could not have been more proud of our role as plaintiffs in the Massachusetts marriage law suit which resulted in the right for us to marry.

My possible FINAL word on the gay vs. black conflict

As you all know being an lgbt of color, this constant conflict between black community and the lgbt community over civil rights and such exhausts me every time it comes up. I hate it. At times, I get angry at the black community for it's willful ignorance on the matter and other times, I get angry at the lgbt community for the ignorant assumptions it makes on the matter.

And in the long run, I can't seem to communicate to either community just what exactly is going on, i.e. that they are both being exploited by a third party (the religious right). So now I will issue my "possible final word" on the matter. I say "possible" because you never know. I may have something new to say in the future.

My "possible final word" doesn't come from me, but the legendary teller of fables, Aesop:

An Eagle had made her nest at the top of a lofty oak. A Fox, having found a convenient hole, lived with her young in the middle of the trunk; and a Wild Sow with her young had taken shelter in a hollow at its foot. The Fox resolved to destroy by her arts this chance-made colony. She climbed to the nest of the Eagle, and said: "Destruction is preparing for you, and for me too. The Wild Sow, whom you may see daily digging up the earth, wishes to uproot the oak, that she may, on its fall, seize our families as food." Then she crept down to the cave of the Sow and said: "Your children are in great danger; for as soon as you shall go out with your litter to find food, the Eagle is prepared to pounce upon one of your little pigs." When night came, she went forth with silent foot and obtained food for herself and her young; but, feigning to be afraid, she kept a look-out all through the day. Meanwhile, the Eagle, full of fear of the Sow, sat still on the branches, and the Sow, terrified by the Eagle, did not dare to go out from her cave; and thus they each, with their families, perished from hunger.

Moral - Gay folks and black folks can argue all day as to who gets to be the  "sow" and who gets to be the "eagle." But both groups better damn well recognize who the hell the fox is.

Cancer study reinforces dangers of homophobia and other Monday midday news briefs

Will Money Help Gingrich Win Over The Religious Right? - You actually to ask that question? Is a pea green? Could James Brown get down?

Navy gives thumbs-up to same-sex couples to marry on base in states where its legal - Good for the Navy!

Gay Republican Activists Still Really Not Looking For Dignity - No comment necessary.

Trans Woman Attacked at McDonald's Meets Woman who Saved Her - This is an awesome story.


Study finds gay men are more likely to have had cancer - A study we need to get in front of before the religious right exploits it. If and when folks like Peter Sprigg do exploit this story, they will most assuredly omit this passage:

Liz Margolies, executive director of The National LGBT Cancer Network, told Reuters that more information is needed to plan care and prevention strategies.

She pointed to research which suggests gay men, lesbians and bisexuals are more likely to smoke and abuse alcohol than straight people and said that LGB people are less likely to visit doctors for health check-ups, partly because of stigma.

One more thing - this morning I said that I would be publishing a quick guide on how to refute NOM's phony talking points on marriage equality. It's coming. And here is another preview. A little bit of the prologue:

As evidenced by their talking points, the National Organization for Marriage is taking a highly deceptive tone in its supposed "defense of marriage." The idea that "marriage has to be defended" is nothing more than a cynical talking point designed to take attention away from the true issue - the lives of same-sex couples and especially the livelihood of their children.

And it is a talking point which fuels NOM's tactic of creating division on many levels - same-sex households vs. heterosexual two-parent household, the lgbt community vs. the heteroexual community, and so on. This "divide and conquer" strategy, created in a passive/aggressive manner, is designed to appeal to people's fears, jealousies, and ideas of religious superiority rather than their belief in basic fairness.

The truth of the matter is marriage is not "under attack." It has never been under attack. But what is under attack is truth, integrity, and basic fairness for the hundreds of thousands of same-sex couples and especially their children who seem to be nothing more than chess pieces in NOM's game of exploitation and manipulation.

Defeating the National Organization for Marriage is easier than most think

The Chinese general Sun Tzu once said:

All warfare is based on deception.

That fits this video to a tee. I'm posting it because minus the ominous music, it's the National Organization for Marriage's whole argument for opposing marriage equality. It's the argument the organization has used across the country and now in New York.

Why am I posting it? Because Sun Tzu also said:

So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself.

Winning wars comes down to one point - studying those who set themselves up as your enemy so that you know their arguments and tactics.

And whether we realize it or not, the right to achieve marriage equality is a war.

Coming soon - How to refute NOM's talking points on "marriage."

Preview:

NOM - "Gays and Lesbians have a right to live as they choose, they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us."

Answer - That statement is a diversion. Allowing gays and lesbians to marry does not "redefine marriage" because they are not forcing heterosexuals to engage in gay marriage.

Comedy time - Five Red Flags Signs to 'Down Low Men'

It's the weekend, so I'm going to have a little fun.

The following video is a comical example of the dangers of not discussing lgbts issues in the African-American community.

A while back, a black gay man, J.L. King, wrote a book talking about "down low" black men, or black men who are secretly gay while maintaining a heterosexual facade.

The book was featured on Oprah and all hell broke loose, as it does in all situations of ridiculous moral panics.

African-Americans (particularly black women) practically flipped out over the real notion that there is such thing as closeted gay men. Fueling the madness was the now debunked belief that these men were causing the HIV rate to go up in the black community, chiefly amongst black women.

Seminars, books, and talk shows spread across the country supposedly giving tips about how to "detect down low men." Strangely enough, the idea of having a real conversation about homophobia in the black community never crossed the mind of these "concerned individuals."

The following video is an example of this insanity. According to this lady on the video, the red flags of "down low men" are men who:

don't check their nails palm down,

chew gum loudly,

chooses to blow something out of a man's eye,

pronounce their "esses better than a rattlesnake,"

and fart silently. Apparently a heterosexual man's fart is supposed to make noise.

No disrespect to the lady in this video, but I think she is serious:

Know Your LGBT History - Gimme A Break

Gimme a Break was a long-running 80s situation comedy featuring Tony and Emmy-award winner Nell Carter as a woman who is taking care of a California chief of police (Dolph Sweet) and his three daughters as a promise to a dying friend.

It got some criticism early in its run because of the implication that Carter was playing the stereotypical sassy black maid in the spirit of Beulah. However, Carter's timing and comic talents gave this television show its life.

The episodes varied from outrageous comedy to serious issues, such as the one featured in this week's post, The Chief's Gay Evening.

During a stakeout, featuring unfortunately a man in drag (couldn't they have gotten a woman police officer), the chief discovers that one of his officers is gay (not the guy in drag, by the way). What follows is a conversation about stereotypes and the damage they do.

I found the episode to be dated in terms of comedy, but still useful in showing young lgbts what the community had to deal with in the 80s. However, there was one thing I really liked about this episode. The gay man (Eugene Roche) stood up for himself without "begging for tolerance." There was no shame nor weakness in his portrayal.

Ironically, Carter appears only at the beginning and ending of this episode, which is a shame. When the actress died in 2003 of diabetes, it was discovered that she was in a long-term relationship with another woman, Ann Kaser. They were raising her two adopted sons together:







Past Know Your LGBT History Posts:

NOM threatening New York lawmakers and other Friday midday news briefs

Faith Groups Campaign to Block Gay Marriage - I believe the phrase "it's on now" is very apt here. A portion of the article which stands out is the following:

As in past years, the local religious opposition to same-sex marriage will have the support of a Washington-based national political lobby, the National Organization for Marriage, which formed in 2007 to fight same-sex legislation around the country. That organization was behind the April 12 blitz of automated phone calls singling out voters in about a dozen Senate and Assembly districts where legislators have said they are undecided. Brian Brown, the group’s president, said the calls urged voters to tell lawmakers they opposed same-sex marriage.

“We spent over half a million dollars in New York” in 2009, he said, “and we’re ready to spend that and more this time. We are willing to spend a million against any Republican senator who votes for gay marriage.”

Bear in mind that Brown and NOM are the same folks who have called the lgbt community "bullies" for causing the law firm King & Spalding to change its mind and elect not to defend DOMA in the courts. But it's okay cause NOM is "bullying for Jesus."

New York's organized opposition: Defending sanctity of preconceived monologues - Meanwhile, the New York Family Research Foundation is erasing dissenting comments from its facebook page to make it seem that all of those responding are on board with its anti-marriage equality stance.

Uganda’s “Kill The Gays” Bill May Be Fast Tracked For A Vote - Meanwhile, things just nastier in Uganda.

Clovis school district approves application for gay-straight alliance club - Victory!

Governor signs bill to end discrimination - Another bit of good news from Hawaii

A Houston tragedy the religious right won't tell you about

Mom: 'I Lost My Son Because I'm a Lesbian': MyFoxHOUSTON.com

This is a sad story coming out of Houston, TX.

According to Sharon Laverne Fuller, she lost custody of her son, William Fuller, a decade ago to his father, Rev. Tracy Burleson, because she is a lesbian.

This loss led to a chain of events which now sees her son and his father on trial in a murder-for-hire plot in which the ex-husband allegedly hired the son to murder his present wife, Patricia Burleson.

Burleson was found shot dead in her driveway a year ago.

And the kicker?

Also on trial is Tyonne Palmer, a woman who allegedly both men (the father and the son) had a sexual relationship with.

The point here is not to bash two-parent heterosexual households, even though if this had happened in same-sex household, the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, and various religious right groups would trot it out as a way to criticize same-sex families.

Ms. Fuller say it best herself in this interview. You see, at the time of the custody hearing, even her family supported her son's father:

They said that God told them to do that. And my question now is: did God change his mind?”

The point here is a basic question - in the history of the world, what has caused more death, destruction, and basic havoc? Lgbts or people thinking that they know what God wants?

By the way, Fuller has moved back to Houston to aid in her son's defense.

You know how "selfish" lgbt parents are.

Editor's note - The original post inaccurately stated that Ms. Fuller was once married to Burleson. 

Anti-gay groups to get an huge infusion of money, taking homophobia to state levels

If you want any indication of how successful the lgbt community has been in this so-called culture war, the following item in Minnesota Independent gives you a huge clue:

Anti-gay rights groups around the country will see a cash infusion over the next two years through a plan called “Ignite an Enduring Cultural Transformation.” And the groups are remaining mum about who is responsible.

The campaign, which largely targets states where Republicans won control of legislatures or governorships, has garnered the support of Republican political superstars such as former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Va.), Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Jon Kyl (Ariz.), and Rep. Trent Franks (Ariz.). The groups intend to pass anti-gay marriage amendments, curtail abortion rights and, in at least one case, ban “transgender bathrooms.”

Family policy councils — a creation of Focus on the Family in the 1980s — have launched the Ignite plan in 15 states. Each family policy council has a three-prong plan to achieve their legislative goals over the next two years: lobbying for legislation, mobilizing pastors and social conservatives and supporting candidates that have backed their initiatives. Each group has used a stock brochure containing nearly identical wording to explain their plan and to solicit funds. In many cases, an Ignite plan was launched with an anonymous matching-grant donor.

Requests for information from many of the policy councils were denied, and Focus on the Family told the Minnesota Independent that they have no involvement, declining to offer information on any organization that might back the plan.

The article goes on to list groups and dollar amounts. It ain't pretty:

In several states — such as Indiana, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and West Virginia — Ignite plans seems to be targeted at getting anti-gay marriage amendments passed.

 . . . The Family Policy Council of West Virginia (FPCWV) plans to spend $168,000 through 2012 (it’s average yearly budget is $132,000) during its two-year Ignite campaign to pass a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage and civil unions, and also to defeat laws that would prevent discrimination against gays and lesbians.

 . . . The Pennsylvania Family Institute plans to spend $1.5 million through 2012 on anti-abortion rights measures as well as a constitutional amendment barring gay marriage in the state. The average yearly revenue for the group over the last three years was $1.4 million.

The group also received a matching donation of $7,500 at the end of 2010.

 . . . In Minnesota, the Ignite plan calls for adding an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution banning gay marriage; the Minnesota Family Council is planning to spend $4.71 million in the next two years. The group averaged $832,000 in revenue over the last three years between the Council and it’s affiliate, the Minnesota Family Institute. If the Ignite campaign goes according to plan, the group will spend more than twice its historical average in working to abolish gay marriage in the state.

Seems to me that these groups are following the game plan of the National Organization for Marriage, i.e. get a mysterious, highly moneyed backer to fund their plans - funds which will pay for obscene amounts of flyers to spread, commercials to be filmed, and publicists to develop talking points as well as book spots on local television shows.

Get on the ball folks, cause it's coming. Whining about "Gay, Inc." ain't gonna cut it. It's safe to say that we are kicking serious ass on the national level with DADT overturned and DOMA and Proposition 8 slowly but surely on the way out.

There is definitely a lot more stuff to do on that level, but let's not forget the local levels. It's obvious that the other side hasn't.

Hat tip to my Facebook buddy Philip Lowe Jr. for this tip.

Ex-gay group disses 'It Gets Better' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Exodus International Attacks Google And Toy Story Over Anti-Suicide Ad - What a load of tripe from Exodus International, especially that part about "thousands of ex-gays." If this is truly the case, then I challenge them to have a march. Show your numbers instead of attacks on those of us comfortable with our orientation.

Photo: Meet the purchased families that'll drive down the L.I.E - Great! Another phony "we have to save marriage" tour.

Guest column by Irene Monroe: Marriage equality film comes to Harlem - Excellent news because despite what has been implied by "some people," marriage equality is not solely a "white" issue.

Fit to Rule on Same-Sex Marriage - Even the New York Times tells Proposition 8 proponents not to blame the judge simply because their case was piss poor.

VIDEO: First gay justice on Supreme Judicial Court confirmed in close vote - Barbara Lenk is confirmed in Massachusetts.

ACLU threatens to sue Clovis schools - Good. There is NOTHING wrong with gay/straight alliance clubs in high schools.

Proposition 8 defenders shouldn't blame the judge because their case was poor

By now, you all have heard the latest from the Proposition 8 proponents. They have filed a suit asking the courts to vacate the decision against Proposition 8 because the judge, Vaughn Walker, is gay.

These folks assert that since Walker was gay, he had a interest in the case and should have recused himself.

Let me just say that if that is the case, then I think the case in which the Supreme Court ruled that gays shouldn't be allowed in the Boy Scouts should be overturned because all of the justices ruling were heterosexual. But that is ridiculous.

And that is the point.

While legal experts agree that this gambit is desperate and will not prevail, it has succeeded in obscuring the fact that Proposition 8 proponents lost because their case was poor.

I mean really, really poor.

In the 13 day trial, lawyers fighting Proposition 8 brought out the experts, academics, and same-sex couples who were affected by the law.

In contrast, proponents only brought two witnesses.

Where was Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage or all of those pastors who rallied their congregations against marriage equality, such as Miles McPherson of the Rock Church of San Diego?

All of these "brave defenders of marriage" conveniently didn't not to testify.

It is not known why Gallagher didn't testify but others, like McPherson, claimed that they were fearful of violent reaction by those who supported marriage equality.

Some, like myself, felt that McPherson was worried less about violence and more worried about being questioned on bogus positions he took, such as using discredited research to make a link between pedophilia and homosexuality.

In the words of legal analyst Andrew Cohen, the trial was an "uneven matchup" which led to the foregone conclusion that Walker would rule against Proposition 8:

Judge Walker will so rule, in large part, because he has been left with virtually no other choice as result of the odd tactics and weak case presented to him by opponents of same-sex marriage.

Take, for example, the bizarre courtroom display Wednesday by Charles Cooper, the lead attorney for defenders of Prop 8. His side presented only two witnesses during the long course of the trial, neither of whom was particularly compelling. In fact, one of the defense witnesses, David Blankenhorn, was so hapless during his testimony a while back that Judge Walker on Wednesday questioned his credentials as an expert on marriage. When you have bad facts, you argue the law. When you've presented little evidence, or the evidence you've presented is not so hot, you say that evidence doesn't matter. That's partly why Cooper told Judge Walker during closing arguments, "Your honor, you don't have to have evidence for this."

But you do need evidence. And commercials telling lies about how children will suddenly become gay if  marriage equality becomes law or leaflets featuring phony horror stories about states which did pass gay marriage laws or pastors thundering about morality from the pulpit just ain't going to cut it.

It's easy to persuade voters that way, but in a court, you need logic, you need evidence, and you need witnesses.

Those who defended Proposition 8 had neither of the first two and very little of the last.

And that's why they lost.

Their pathetic maneuver of "gaming the referee" after the fact is just a matter of sour grapes by people who unfortunately have enough money to turn those sour grapes into wine.

But I don't think any court is going to swallow it.

Latest 'It Gets Better' video the best so far

You've probably seen this video, but what the hell. It's so awesome it needs repeated viewing:

NOM accuses gay organization of declaring a 'jihad?' and other Wednesday midday news briefs

A 'jihad,' Maggie? Really?! - Jihad is such a strong word, Maggie Gallagher. For shame. First mingling with birthers and now this. Actually this came before the birther association.


Down to the Wire for Josh & Henry: ICE Refuses to Terminate Deportation Proceedings, Citing DOMA - This ain't good, President Obama. Don't allow this to happen.

Gay Mormon Comes Out on The Voice - You have to admire his moxie.


The Utter Horrors of Gay Parenting - Strap Peter Sprigg down and make him look at this.

Manhattan commissioners to vote on repeal of discrimination ordinance - Oh come on folks! Voting to repeal a non-discrimination ordinance?

National Organization for Marriage refers to birther site in attack on lgbt education

 The National Organization for Marriage is in a good mood because as the organization tells it, a new poll says that a majority of Americans reject "teaching gay subjects in elementary schools:"

Bob Unruh reports:

An overwhelming majority of Americans say elementary school is no place to promote the homosexual lifestyle, and even among liberals there is the strong belief that such lessons should be left outside the door of the classroom, according to a new poll.

The results are from a WND/WENZEL Poll conducted for WND by the public-opinion research and media consulting company Wenzel Strategies.

"Whether they object on moral grounds or simply out of concern that many U.S. schools are failing in their core missions of teaching basics doesn't really matter – the vast majority of American adults want this type of curriculum kept out of the classroom," Wenzel chief Fritz Wenzel said.

There is just one BIG problem with that poll. It comes from the site World Net Daily, or more commonly known by some as WingNut Daily.

It is an extremely homophobic site. Among other things:

• A writer on the site, Les Kinsolving, has in the past referred to the lgbt community as the "sodomy lobby." In October of  last year, he called a judge’s order to stop enforcement of the military’s ban on gay and lesbian troops in the military as a "disease ridden judicial decision."

• At its online superstore (yes World Net Daily has a "superstore"), interested individuals can buy a discounted copy of The Pink Swastika, a discredited book which claims that gay men started the Nazi Party.

• In August of last year, the publication dropped conservative writer Ann Coulter as a keynote speaker from a conference it held because she earlier spoke at a conference held by a gay Republican group.

• And in February of  last year, another writer on World Net Daily, Molotov Mitchell, spoke out in favor of Uganda's "Kill The Gays" bill, even evoking Martin Luther King Jr's name in defense of it.

Even the World Net Daily article, which NOM refers, to repeats lies about Obama appointee Kevin Jennings, such as he supports "teaching children about fisting."

So I think its safe to doubt the credibility of this site's poll.

But vicious homophobia doesn't even scratch the surface in regards to World Net Daily's madness.

World Net Daily has also been the leader of birther nonsense, shamelessly implying that President Obama is ineligible to be president. The site has ran over 100 articles regarding this issue, including the following:

Kagan, Sotomayor blew chance to stop eligibility challenge?
Lawyers say Supremes broke rule, failed to respond to recusal motion

Hawaii official now swears: No Obama birth certificate
Signs affidavit declaring long-form, hospital-generated document absent

Questions raised over Obama birth date
Was claim he was 3 months old during 'Bay of Pigs' a slip?

Promises of Obama birth hospital trip vanish
Authors admit no one given tour of president's 'birthplace' in Hawaii

Oprah's half-sister 'has Obama's birth certificate'
Rush Limbaugh clowns about Winfrey's family secret

The site sells birther bumper stickers, postcards, and videos. World Net Daily also created a national billboard campaign asking "Where is the birth certificate."

Ironically, even now when Obama has made his long-form birth certificate public, World Net Daily is still spinning conspiracy theories. On Sunday, the site ran the following:

Online 'birth certificate' document 'was changed'
Analysis raises possibility content of text was altered

Way to go, NOM. I wonder how the African-Americans allies you made in Maryland and you are now making in New York would feel about your citing World Net Daily, a site working actively to delegitimize Obama's presidency.

Perhaps Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher, NOM's leaders, should remember before they spout off yet again about "unfairly being labeled as bigots" that you are always known by the company that you keep.

Or in this case, the sources you cite.

Related post:

Eleven examples of NOM's bigotry
 

Ex-gay documentary packs a serious punch

From the release:

In the summer of 2005, Zach, a 16-year-old boy from Memphis, Tennessee wrote on his MySpace blog that he had told his parents he was gay. Within days of his coming out, his mother and father would send him to Love In Action (LIA), a fundamentalist Christian program that refers to homosexuality as an addictive behavior. The depressed and fearful teenager shared his feelings on his blog.

"This Is What Love In Action Looks Like" documents the widely controversial and inspirational story of what The New York Times referred to as "A modern day message in a bottle."

In the documentary, former Love In Action director John Smid as well as former adult and teenage clients share their hearts on these experiences. In addition, local bloggers, community activists and classmates of Zach tell their stories of becoming involved with what would become an international news story.

Concerned people around the world awaited news of how Zach was doing during his eight weeks in Refuge. By the time he emerged in late July 2005, there was a barrage of headlines in the international press, including Good Morning America, CNN, The New York Times, Time Magazine and The Advocate among others.

In the years since it began, with all the media coverage and investigations, Zach had declined to tell his story. Until now. The teenager whose MySpace blogs began it all gives an exclusive interview for the documentary.

"This Is What Love In Action Looks Like," is directed by award winning filmmaker Morgan Jon Fox ("Blue Citrus Hearts," "OMG/HaHaHa").

Arizona newspaper features same-sex couple with 12 children and other Tuesday midday news briefs

This video breaks marriage equality down to the matter of common sense. All of that stuff NOM spouts about marriage being about "two halves uniting to create children" is just junk. What would it really hurt allow couples such as this one to get married?

And in other news:


'Little popular support in RI,' says Maggie; 'Stop stealing my gig,' says Pinocchio - Maggie Gallagher tells a blatant lie about popular support for marriage equality in Rhode Island.

2 gay dads, 12 happy kids - Yes! We need more articles in the media like this one.

Peter LaBarbera Thought Matt Barber’s “Joke” Was Funny - Dumb asses of a feather flock together.

Family Research Council clearly ducking debate over hate group charge

"The people who avoid a debate are the ones afraid of losing."

This statement by Family Research Council head Tony Perkins was meant to smear the lgbt community in regards to the recent debacle of the law firm King & Spalding's decision not to defend the DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) in court.

Of course this decision was a bit more complicated than the narrative of a bullying lgbt community, as this Huffington Post article clearly shows.

But I find that Perkins's statement about cowardice relating less to the lgbt community and more to his organization, the Family Research Council.

In November of last year, the Southern Poverty Law Center officially named FRC  - and several other religious right groups - as anti-gay hate groups because they

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.

In response, FRC  launched a huge "Start Debating, Stop Hating" campaign which claimed that SPLC's accusation was a plot to attack FRC's "Christian" stance on gay marriage and homosexuality:

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.

How does the SPLC attack? By labeling its opponents "hate groups." No discussion. No consideration of the issues. No engagement. No debate!

Perkins said an interview with Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller:

“We’re not afraid to debate the issues,” Perkins said in a phone interview. “We are not running from the debate. We are confident on the issues we advocate for based on empirical, peer-reviewed research.”

The comment is highly ironic seeing that the last time Perkins did have a debate on the issue - on the news program Hardball with the SPLC's Mark Potok - he distorted data to make the inaccurate claim that pedophilia and homosexuality is connected. He also cited an organization, the American College of Pediatricians. It was later discovered that the ACP is not a legitimate medical organization but a sham group created to push religious right distortions about the lgbt community.

Hardball's host, Chris Matthews, was forced to give a clarifying statement regarding the ACP on a later broadcast.

Since that time, Perkins has pretty much avoided debates, appearing on "friendly" news programs such as  Fox and Friends.  Nor has he been directly addressing SPLC's charges.

Now in December of last year, FRC spokesperson Peter Sprigg said the following:

"We will be preparing a more detailed response to (the) charge that FRC spreads “falsehoods” in our well-documented research, which does show that certain harms are associated with homosexual conduct."

Sprigg referred readers to two pieces he wrote - Getting It Straight: What the Research Shows About Homosexuality and The Top Ten Myths About Homosexuality. However, both of those pieces contained serious problems with distorted data and studies taken out of context and included studies that FRC admitted removing from its web page because of outdated sources.

Matt Barber uses Bin Laden's death to be disgustingly homophobic

Comments are coming in from all over regarding Osama Bin Laden's death. Probably the most repugnant comes from a familiar source:

We can always count on the Liberty Counsel's Matt Barber to make one feel morally superior. Remember this tweet on the night of President Obama's State of the Union address:

It would be easy to say something about Barber's obsession with gay sex, but something else needs to be said. It's really sad when someone who claims to represent Christianity and the "love of Jesus" exploits this occasion to make a crass joke about the lgbt community.

Granted this is the same guy who whines about how the lgbt community are anti-Christian bullies.

Barber's conduct leaves me to ask him a question:

The lgbt community are not anti-Christian bullies, but if we were, what would it have to do with you because if one were to judge you on your behavior, you are as Christian as the man whose recent death led to your crass comment.

Hat tip to Truth Wins Out.

National Organization for Marriage exploiting black people in New York and other Monday midday news briefs

Higher HIV risk in black gay men linked to partner choice, risk perception - Last week, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council blamed the problems lgbt teens face on the fact that they are "forced" to identify as lgbt. Uh Sprigg, here is what can happen when gay men try NOT to identify themselves as such.

NOM involvement in Bronx rally is racially motivated - Meanwhile, the National Organization is exploiting black people in New York in order to play them against lgbts just like they did in Maryland.

Kwa-Thema Brutal Corrective Rape Murder of 24 Year Old Lesbian - Let's not forget that the worldwide struggle - or war - for lgbt equality still exists. Caution beforehand - this story is graphic. I momentarily had second thoughts of including it.

Tea Party Nation: Obama Only Killed Bin Laden To Help His Reelection - Did you really think that those SOBs would give President Obama credit for anything?


Republican and Truther Commenters Are Outraged That Obama Announced Osama bin Laden's Death - They just can't help themselves.

Now do you believe that Obama is legitimately the President?

Today everything is preempted with the news that Osama Bin Laden, the mastermind behind 9-11, had been killed in a U.S. raid on his mansion.

Just think. Days before, the media was consumed with the nonsense of Obama's birth certificate with Donald Trump leading them by the nose and Fox News (and various other right-wing entities) striking them on the rear with a cattle prod just in case they veered away from the course.

And even before then, suspicion about President Obama and his motives had been stoked by folks like Glenn Beck, Congressmen like Allen West, faux news organizations like Fox, and assorted fools like Andrew Breitbart and Sarah Palin.

"He's a Muslim." "He's a Kenyan." "He hates America." "He is always apologizing to our enemies." "He is trying to destroy the United States." "Obama's  Justice Department is lenient on black people." "Obama is an empty suit."

Have I left anything out? Am I missing any barb or sling thrown at Obama since he was elected?  If I have, you must forgive me because there have been so many.

Nevertheless, through it all, Obama never forgot that he was elected President and he had a job to do. That's why we have something to celebrate right now.

Granted, this piece is not to praise Obama. Some folks on the left and the right don't like many of his policies - and justifiably so. And also, we have a long way to go in terms of grappling with the economic problems this country faces But Osama Bin Laden's death sends a message to all of the naysayers and folks who make it their business to stoke up negative noise about Obama.

He is the President, elected legitimately and has America's best interest at heart.

Perhaps sometimes you should just shut your mouths and let him do his job.