Analyzing and refuting the inaccuracies lodged against the lgbt community by religious conservative organizations. Lies in the name of God are still lies.
Impact Magazine just ran an awesome story from Rob Waston, director of Partners and Alliances Communication for Hitachi Data Systems and who also blogs at evoL.
The story by Waston talks about his two sons who he and his partner fostered and then adopted. Excellent read through and through. I especially liked this part:
As I look at my sons,
I am filled with the awareness of a love for each that I could never
fathom in my wildest imagination previously. The love I have for each
is unique, each powerful in its own right, but its own “color” if you
will. Jason is the son of my heart, Jesse is the son of my soul.
Today they act as twins. Since he is physically bigger, they have
decided that Jesse is the “big brother”. Since he was born four months
earlier, Jason has been dubbed, by mutual consent, as the “older
brother”. We do not have a “little brother” in the family.
That is how two little best friends became brothers. It is how my
gay family came together. We have a unique story, but we are not
unique. All same-gendered parent families have a story. While my
friend at the airport was right, “all ways can be hard”, all ways can
also be miraculous, loving and intensely wonderful.
How our families come together is being judged today, and in the next few months. It will be judged by the US Supreme Court. Our families are likely to be judged long after that as well, no matter what the results.
And, no matter what the judgments on our value, I will always know
the truth. I know how thoroughly REAL we are. I live it and I have
seen it.
All of the nonsense in the world dragged about by Maggie Gallagher, Brian Brown, and that bunch at NOM can never compete with that. It reminds one that family doesn't necessarily always come from biological ties.
But those who create families through biological ties and those who don't should never think that their families are in competition with each other. Rather, they are kindred spirit because they both share the ability and desire to love and sacrifice.
Stunning video! I love it! Okay my lesbian, bisexual, and transgender brothers and sisters, the ball is in your court. I would love to see an equally powerful video created by one of you.
Olympic Wrestling Canceled Because Of Gay Conspiracy, Russian Coach Claims - Claiming that gays plotted to eliminate wrestling from the Olympic Games is the single most clueless thing I have heard in a while for so many reasons besides the belief that gay men enjoy watching men in tight outfights slam-bamming each other on a mat.
In the controversy involving Sullivan High School in Indiana and the situation involving the supposed "traditional, no gays allowed" alternative prom, Diana Medley the special education teacher who spoke on the side of those wanting that prom (Medley is not employed at Sullivan High School) has taken a huge amount of the criticism.
Petitions have been passed around asking that she be dismissed, comment after comment have been written about her. And the final indignity? The video above parodies her absolutely vicious comments about gays, particularly gay youth.
The reason for all of the animus directed at Medley is simple. Think Progressputs it like this:
Of course Medley has the right to her fraudulent, offensive beliefs, but
she also has an obligation to the safety and well-being of students
that she supervises. As a special ed teacher, she is likely working with
students who are already vulnerable to bullying because of their
physical, mental, or learning disabilities. By publicly stating that an
entire group of students don’t have a purpose in life, she compromises
her trust as an educator.
I would also like to add that to many older gays, Medley touched a nerve because perhaps she reminded them of the times they were bullied in school. Perhaps to them, Medley represents the teacher or principal who stood by and let it happen and then afterwards blamed them for their treatment by saying that they needed to supposedly "act normal."
Number one on the Top Ten Chart of Tackiness is the above graphic by the National Organization for Marriage.
It's pathetic on so many levels. At least allow me to count off three:
1. It attacks same-sex families
2. It blames same-sex families for the single-parent homes and takes President Obama's words out of context. At no time has President Obama ever blamed same-sex households for fatherless homes. Jeremy Hooper said the following:
When President Obama uttered those words,
he was referring to the very specific problems of dads who played a
role in creating a family only to abdicate responsibility. That is
an issue—one that we should solve. Same goes for when mothers step out
on families that they should support. In an ideal climate, we could
all agree on this.
In a less politicized world, we could hope that all
human beings would take responsibility for whatever family form they, by
virtue of their own choices, created.
But in the aggressive world that NOM is forcing on us all? Gays are the
scapegoat. Our families come at an expense. A penis and a vagina are
innately better than a doubled set (regardless of any other qualities
attached to the genitalia). Homes like mine are on par (or worse than)
ones where a father walks out on his children. And of course our
President cannot make a strong statement about
3. It underscores the simple fact that other than attacking same-sex households and attempting to inaccurately attach them to the problem of fatherless homes, the National Organization for Marriage has done NOTHING to address the problem or provide solutions. If anything, NOM is exploiting the problem of fatherless homes to attack same-sex families.
But one good thing does come out of NOM's graphic. It exposes just how low the organization will stoop to attack same-sex families and households. Hat tip to Jeremy Hooper.
I really believe that when it's said and done, the lgbt community will win the marriage equality fight. Marriage equality is about fairness, love, and equality.
And let's face it, though our opposition is well-connected and has much money, it will be their rhetoric in opposing our right to marry each other which will be part of their undoing.
Especially when one compares their hyperbolic rhetoric to the reality:
Glenn T. Stanton of Focus on the Family: "This is a really pernicious lie of Satan to say that the gender part of humanity doesn’t really matter because the gender part of humanity is really denying the distinct God imaging in each of us as males and females. We need to understand that as Christians. That’s the biggest thing. The other is that, ‘you know kids don’t really need a mom and a dad they just need any configuration of loving adults who care for them,’ . . . As a good friend of mine says, ‘you know a lot of these people advocating for same-sex marriage, I’ve been in the marriage work for decades, I’ve never seen these people come to the stump to advocate for marriage, the only time they are for marriage is when it has same-sex in front of it.’ Think about that. These are not advocates of marriage; they’re advocates for redefining marriage."
Reality:
Jonathan Mintz, John Feinblatt and their daughters celebrate their wedding ceremony.
Mat Staver, The Liberty Counsel:"Basically marriage will be completely destroyed, families will be destroyed, children will be hurt by this and freedom of speech and freedom of religion, including in the pulpit itself, will absolutely be bulldozed over. This would open a floodgate of unimaginable proportions. That’s why with those kinds of consequences to have five of the nine justices ultimately have this kind of power in their hands, that’s not how this court and this country was established, to have five individuals to be able to have that kind of catastrophic, social re-engineering power in their hands, that’s just not something that was envisioned by the founders."
Reality:
72-year-old Byron and 86-year-old Phillipe, a couple who have been together for 51 years, poses at their wedding.
Gordon Klingenschmitt, anti-gay activist and "exorcist" - "Every kid deserves a mom and dad. We must defend traditional marriage.
Sadly, Obama equates sin with holiness, confusing lust with love, thereby confusing the demonic with the Holy Spirit, when Satan can never be equal with God. There is one reason homosexual sodomy will never be "equal" to traditional marriage: Satan will never be equal to God."
Reality:
Luz Heurtelo and Natassia Heurtelo before their wedding in Brooklyn.
I could say more, but is there any need? One side spins tales of revolution, destruction, and Satanic possession. And the other side simply shows basic love. Sure, I am preaching to the choir with this post but people forget that sometimes a choir needs practice and in this case, our choir needs to remember that we have beautiful voices which sound like angels when we sing together in harmony.
Lastly, we need to remember what we are singing for.
Love, honey. The most powerful emotion in the universe.
As to be expected, the Family Research Council didn't care for President Obama's State of the Union address.
The organization particularly didn't care for the part where President Obama mentioned equal treatment for same-sex military couples.
FRC especially didn't like the announcement before the SOTU speech that the Pentagon would be giving some benefits to these same-sex couples.
And the brazen hypocrisy in which FRC engages in to criticize this will astound you:
. . . Hours before his State of the Union
address, the commander-in-chief gave his Pentagon the thumbs up to
hundreds of thousands of dollars in new spending for homosexual partner
perks. Starting August 31, the same-sex boyfriends and girlfriends of
service members will be eligible for privileges that even cohabiting
heterosexuals are not: military ID cards, access to military
commissaries, gymnasiums, and movie theaters, participation in family
support programs on bases and posts, and the chance to fly on Defense
Department aircraft on the taxpayers' dime.
For a liberal movement so intent on policing discrimination, this
policy is full of it! The U.S.government has decided that what you do in
the bedroom qualifies you for federally-subsidized benefits (unless you
happen to be heterosexual, like 96.6%
of the U.S. population). Once again, it's exclusion in the name of
"inclusion." Under this policy, Washington is officially in the business
of incentivizing homosexual behavior in our military--an observation
that appalls veterans like Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.).
"The President is eroding our military's apolitical stance and
forcing conformity onto the rest of society by pushing his liberal
social agenda through the Department of Defense. In a weak attempt to
not violate the Defense of Marriage Act, the administration is using a
play on words by saying 'same sex domestic partners' can have access to
benefits instead of 'spouses.'"
What's more, Sen. Inhofe points out, America is on a "slippery slope"
with this kind of preferential treatment. "Why would the DOD extend
benefits to same-sex partners and then deny cohabiting heterosexual
couples the same benefits? The Department of Defense is essentially
creating a new class of beneficiary that will increase costs and demand
for limited resources that are currently available for military
families, active and reserve forces, and retirees.
Why indeed would the DOD extend benefits to same-sex partners and then deny cohabiting heterosexual couples the same benefits?
Maybe because the cohabiting heterosexual couples generally have the option to get married, whereas the same-sex couples do not have that same option in most cases.
Also while some states offer same-sex couples the option of marriage, there is that annoying little pesky law called DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) which precludes the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages.
FRC is claiming that the Obama Administration is discriminating against cohabiting heterosexual couples by offering same-sex couples benefits that cohabiting heterosexual couples cannot receive.
However, the reason why these benefits had to be given is because by law, the federal government cannot recognize the marriages of same-sex couples no matter if these marriages are legal via state law.
And the reason why the federal government cannot recognize these marriages is because of DOMA, a law which was partly crafted by an FRC employee.
It's not the Obama Administration which is practicing discrimination. If anything, the Obama Administration is cleaning up the mess that the FRC helped to become law.
The sad irony is that while FRC dismissively refers to same-sex couples as "boyfriends" and "girlfriends," it is because of efforts like groups like FRC that these couples aren't considered to be more than that by the federal government.
It's the equivalent of criticizing someone for being in a hole while omitting the fact that you are the one who put them there in the first place.
Per usual, members of the religious right are attacking gay parenting (again). Jennifer Morse of NOM's Ruth Institute is talking to conservative host Michael Brown and proceeds to go on a ridiculous tangent about parenting in which she spouts very little facts.
Her rambling starts at 2:00 of this clip:
Here are just a few things I noticed. I'm sure you can add more:
At 2:20 - Morse says that there needs to be more recruitment of adoptive parents coming from the mother/father dynamic. That's a good point which she brings up because as far as I know, NOM has NEVER undertaken any attempt or pushed any legislation to do this.
2:25 - Morse says that since American couples "go all over the world" to find children to adopt, including children of different races and handicaps so she does not believe that there is a shortage of homes to adopt children. Funny how she doesn't cite any statistics.
Fact: According to Adam Pertman, head of the Evan Donaldson Adoption Institute:
More than 104,000 children in the United States are waiting in foster care
to be adopted by permanent, loving parents. These girls and boys, who
are on average 8 years old, typically remain in temporary situations for
over three years before being placed with "forever families."
Then Morse goes into a spiel which folks on her side the argument have done before and very few of us have called them out - pitting heterosexual two-parent families against gay parents. She makes it seem that society is favoring gay parenting supposedly traditional heterosexual parenting, when in fact there has never been any competition regarding gay or heterosexual parents, except for in the talking points of folks like Morse.
She then claims that one cannot compare same-sex parenting to heterosexual parenting without going into detail as to why. Of course Morse is contradicted by many credible health organizations including the American Psychological Association and the National Association of Social Workers.
Everything else Morse says is purely blather and nonsense which has nothing to do with the reality of gays raising children.
And the religious right can't seem to figure out why they lose the vast majority of court cases involving gay adoption.
'Gay-free' prom idea backfires on supporters in Indiana town - MSNBC is now saying that idea of a "traditional" prom with no gays allowed has backfired on the organizers with the school and the church where they met coming out against their idea. I can remember a day when they would have been widely applauded. I do love change.
No matter how many times the Family Research Council claim that they are merely "defending" Christian values, the organization cannot hide that its stock and trade is bigotry and hysterical lies about the gay community.
For example, check the following tidbit it sent out as a recent Washington Update (important part placed in bold):
Just three weeks after a federal court ruled that the White House had overstepped its authority in certain "recess" appointments, the President isn't showing any signs of backing off his second-term power grab. During tomorrow's State of the Union speech, the President is expected to announce another round of "executive actions" on issues he doesn't feel Congress is moving quickly enough to address. Like his two dozen gun initiatives, these directives would help President Obama implement the more controversial parts of his agenda without the House and Senate's approval
.
"It's a very dangerous road he's going down..." said Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa). "Just because Congress doesn't act doesn't mean the President has a right to." Although the White House wouldn't comment on the details, officials have confirmed that his actions would include special right for homosexuals and cross-dressers in the workplace. With lawmakers in both parties unwilling to push Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), the President is moving ahead on his own version, which would ban government contractors from "discriminating" on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama promised to put the "whole weight of [his] administration behind... a fully inclusive [ENDA]." His position, which would have ordered employers (like schools and day care centers) to hire transsexuals, drag queens, and drag kings, was considered "too radical" even for his own party. Now the President is considering the next best thing: demanding full conformity with his views for anyone working with or for the federal government.
You will notice that the piece never said a word about "Christian values." Rather, it shrieks portents of doom about young children held as captive audiences in schools with "transsexuals?," "drag queens," and drag kings."
Exploiting the fear of parents regarding the safety of their children is the lowest thing any one person or organization can do.
Ever since the Boy Scouts hinted about a decision to do away with its "no gays allowed" policy, the Family Research Council has been working the talk shows and sending out emails with portents of doom of what will happen if this takes place.
But as Carlos Maza from Equality Matters points out, there is something pathetically familiar about these talking points.
They were the same ones FRC used to against the DADT repeal. Unsuccessfully, I might add. What's more, now that DADT has been repealed since 2010, none of their predictions of doom have come true.
Maza points out three failed predictions. Allow me to spotlight one:
So what exactly is the incentive?... Is it safety? Because unless
something changed in the last seven months, the Scouts are still dealing
with the fallout of more than 2,000 cases of child molestation with the current policy in place!
Can they honestly tell parents that entrusting little boys to men with
same-sex attractions is somehow going to reduce the incidence of child
sexual abuse?
The military already has a serious problem with sexual assault by
homosexuals. If the current law against homosexuality in the military is
overturned, the problem of same-sex sexual assault in the military is sure to increase.
For the other two, check out Maza's post. He ends it by saying:
Now that the Boy Scouts’ final decision on its gay ban has been
postponed until May, it’s likely that media outlets will get another
opportunity to cover the controversy. When they do, they should ask how
groups like FRC have any credibility when it comes to predicting the
consequences of repealing the ban.
I am a senior at Sullivan High School. Just wanted to let all of you
know it is NOT the school that is banning same sex couples!! I hate how
the school is being made out as the bad guy, that is not the case at
all. The only prom that's banning them is the "traditional prom" that is
being held somewhere else (it is not supported by the school). The only
way they can go to the traditional prom is if they go with someone of
the opposite sex.
Sullivan High School is ACCEPTING the same sex couples
and the staff at SHS is for the same sex couples going and so are the
majority of student and people in the community!!!! I absolutely hate
how my town is getting called Anti-Gay Bigots because a few "Christians"
are planning a separate prom!
Not all of Sullivan is like that I can
damn well guarantee it. It appalls me that some people in my community
cant accept others for who they are, but like i said not all of us are
that narrow minded so please stop saying all of Sullivan County is like
that because we aren't. My date (who is a guy) and I are attending the
school prom that is ALLOWING same sex couples to go!
Oh. My. God. This is a hot mess. Students and parents from Sullivan High School in Sullivan, IN actually want to ban lgbt students from their prom.
A team of Valley high schoolers and parents petition to ban gays from their prom.
NBC 2's Paige Preusse reports how Sullivan High School says there's nothing legally they can do to allow it... several students and parents are taking matters into their own hands.
Several parents, students, and others who believe gays should be banned from the Sullivan High School prom met Sunday at the Sullivan First Christian Church.
"We don't agree with it and it's offensive to us," said Diana Medley.
Their idea is to create a separate...traditional prom.Students say there are several others from their high school who agree, but are afraid to take a stand.
"If we can get a good prom then we can convince more people to come and follow what they believe," said student Kynon Johnson.
And now they want everyone to know where they stand.
"We want to make the public see that we love the homosexuals, but we don't think it's right nor should it be publicly accepted," said a local student.
But not all in the community think what they're doing is right.
"We shouldn't be condemning people, and that's what judgement is. Christ came to save the people not to condemn them."
Local man Jim Davis says we've all sinned...so why should gays be treated with less respect?
"Love them as a person. You don't have to love what they do, because the gays may not love all the mistakes you make," said Davis.
The sad part is that Davis was the only person who spoke out against this awful idea. The television report (what you are reading is the transcript from the televised news report which does not allow embedded links) did not seek out anyone who was lgbt or an lgbt ally.
But if you think that is sad, check out this next passage:
Diana Medley is a special education teacher in town. She doesn't believe anyone is born gay.
"I believe that it was life circumstances and they chose to be that way; God created everyone equal," said Medley.
"I don't understand it. A gay person isn't going to come up and make some change unless it's to realize that it was a choice and they're choosing God," said Medley.
God help the lgbt student who goes to her school because Medley has shown that she will close them out if they come to her for help. I can't imagine what she would do if she sees an lgbt student being bullied.
When this controversy goes viral - and I have a feeling that it shall - I am betting that groups like the Family Research Council, the National Organization for Marriage, and networks like Fox News will rally to the side of these awful individuals.
I'm sorry for those who get offended by my words but these children and these parents are terrible. This is not merely expressing an opinion, it is mass bullying of lgbt students, some who are probably already struggling with their sexual orientation and are having feelings of sadness, isolation and depression.
Imagine a community of people attacking you, not because of anything you did, but because of their prejudices regarding who you are.
For those who whine that "gays are the bullies," you need to sit your ass down and check out what's going on here.
If there are some lgbts who can be called bullies, it's because incidents like this have taught us well.
Editor's note - Those who want to see the video news report can see it here.
UPDATE - The video seems to have disappeared from the page and the article has been altered. The lead now reads"A team of Valley high schoolers and parents rally for a traditional prom that bans gays." UPDATE 2 - The video is back up but it has been altered.It and the article seems to have been altered to include more information on Medley, including this passage:
Diana Medley is a special education teacher in town. She doesn't believe anyone is born gay."I believe that it was life circumstances and they chose to be that way; God created everyone equal," said Medley.
"Homosexual
students come to me with their problems, and I don't agree with them,
but I care about them. It's the same thing with my special needs kids, I
think God puts everyone in our lives for a reason," said Medley.
For those who are curious as to what the original news report said, here it is saved from youtube:
In celebration of the news that the late Jeanne Manford, founder of PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) has been selected to receive the 2012 Presidential Citizens Medal, I present the story of PFLAG in her own words with an assist from Rachel Maddow and President Obama. I have never seen this video until now.
Remember that episode of Sanford and Son where the lead character Fred Sanford met a white version of his nemesis, his sister-in-law Esther? In that spirit, I present to you the British version of Maggie Gallagher.
In this debate, she is commenting negatively on the decision by the British government to pursue the passage of marriage equality. For those who don't want to watch the entire thing, just take a glimpse at the first part and notice how the moderator makes her backtrack from her "marriage has existed the same way from the beginning of time" talking point.
However for those who are a student of such things, pay attention to what she says during the debate and notice how "oddly" her talking points mirror the ones used by Gallagher, NOM, and others attempting to hinder marriage equality in America, including the "homosexuals have no right to redefine the definition of marriage for all of us" lie.
If you don't think these folks are collaborating, then you are in a deep coma.
If you don't know who Zach Wahls is, you had better learn.
He is a young man raised in a lesbian household, intelligent, articulate,and not shy about defending his family or gay equality. Wahls, an Eagle Scout, has also been on the front lines for the lgbt community in the recent Boy Scout ado.
In short, he is the religious right's worst nightmare. And nothing says that more than two interviews this week in which he went head-to-head with Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention.
The first interview is when the Boy Scouts were deciding whether or not to change its "no gays allowed" policy. To say Zach did rather well would be an understatement:
This second interview was done after the Boy Scouts decided to postpone its decision. Zach mops up the floor with Land. But for those who think that the second video is too long, allow me to clue you to a juicy part. At 6:40, Zach decides to ask Land a question about the talking point he keeps repeating concerning the Boy Scouts' "core values." It got a bit vicious after that and Zach did not back down :
Though BSA refused to share any of the details of the two-year review that resulted in keeping the policy, plenty of conservatives voices have attempted to make the case on behalf of the organization, including Mike Huckabee, Bill O’Reilly, Rick Perry, the Family Research Council, the Liberty Counsel, the American Family Association, the National Organization for Marriage, and the Southern Baptist Convention,
to name a few. While some have made weak appeals to “traditional
values,” the overwhelming argument against changing the policy has been a
claim that Scouts will be more vulnerable to abuse if gays are allowed
to participate in the organization, an argument that doesn’t even
address the question of gay Scouts. Here is a sampling of the underlying
assumptions about gay people that inform this point of view:
The LGBT community is viewed entirely as adult gay men.
The only aspect of a person that defines a gay identity is participation in same-sex sexual behavior.
Nothing is apparently more important to gay men than having as much sex as possible and talking about it at all times.
For gay men, there is no difference between being attracted to other adult gay men and being attracted to underage boys.
Gay men are so obsessed with having sex that consent means nothing to them.
Even though the men most commonly found abusing boys identify as
heterosexual, the fact that their victims were boys means that they must
be secretly gay, as opposed to just being pedophiles.
It’s impossible for a child to learn that gay people even exist without becoming “sexualized” and somehow put at risk.
So long as homosexuality is prohibited, all Boy Scouts will remain
totally chaste and never think, learn about, or talk about the existence
of sex.
Some in the lgbt community have publicly asked why should we be concerned about the doings of the Family Research Council. Apparently some of us figure that if we close our eyes and put our fingers in our ears, FRC will do us no actual harm as a community.
Think again, especially after you read this from the organization's webpage:
Congress may not always act responsibly, but there are plenty of
members who do! Today, we honored the House and Senate leaders who stood
on principle and notched a perfect 100% on FRC Action's annual scorecard.
Almost 30 of the 93 congressional "True Blue" winners dropped by the
Capitol Hill Club for our special reception, and it was encouraging to
see the camaraderie in the room among the leaders who take the slings
and arrows for the rest of us as they stand for family values.
As part of this year's event, we also welcomed new members of
Congress, who will be valuable reinforcements for the pro-family cause.
This year, FRC Action scored votes on everything from repealing
ObamaCare and protecting DOMA to the President's court nominees and
safeguarding conscience rights. I appreciate the members who took time
out of their busy schedules to join us--as well as the FRC and FRC
Action staff, Tom McClusky, Connie Mackey, Sherry Crater, Mike Mears,
and Tim Potter, for your tireless efforts for our values.
Congratulations to the 112th Congress's class of True Blue winners! Thank you for all you accomplished in the name of faith, family, and freedom.
This ridiculous award underscores the simple fact that in spite of all of the highly specious things FRC has done to undermine gay equality, it has a degree of credibility to some members of Congress.
And it is Congress which passes laws (well duh). That's why it is so important for us to continue to publicly debate and denounce FRC, as well as show all of the reasons why the organization is a hate group.
And on that last point, FRC always makes it easy for us.
