Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Iowans couldn't care less about gay marriage

A Personal Note

Military Times poll shows sharp decline in support for DADT

Today's Question

Our condolences to the Burke family

"Family" Leader Reportedly Confirms Opposition to Uganda's Anti-Gay BIll

Ollie North: Repeal DADT and What's Next? NAMBLA and Same-Sex Marriage

Michigan Christians sue because the Matthew Shepherd Act restricts their rights. They must want to violently attack gay people

Featured Reports

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than two hundred posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

David Benkof: Behind the Mask

At first glance, David Benkof appears to be a young gay man who believes that same-sex marriage will damage the institution of marriage, that there are better options for gay couples than marriage, that the community should join him in prioritizing other more pressing issues, and that the marriage discussion is harming the efforts of gay couples in red states to get recognition for their unions. He also claims that he’s a gay columnist, that he speaks for an influential collection of gay thinkers, and that he is part of the gay and lesbian community and that he shares our goals and dreams. But none of that is true.

“Repeat After Me”: The Reparative Therapy Echo Chamber

The April 2008 edition of the pay-to-publish vanity journal Psychological Reports featured a new report from NARTH. Written by NARTH president A. Dean Byrd, past president Joseph Nicolosi, and Richard W. Potts, the report carries the unwieldy but self-descriptive title, “Clients perceptions of how reorientation therapy and self-help can promote changes in sexual orientation.” While the title describes what the authors meant to show — how clients describe the benefits of reparative therapy — the report itself actually illustrates something very different: the ex-gay movement’s remarkable ability to instill an almost robot-like parroting of ex-gay rhetoric among their clients.

Testing the Premise: Is MRSA The New Gay Plague?

The Toronto Star said that a new study “discover[ed] a new strain” of a super-bug “hitting gay men.” Headlines in Britain screamed, “Flesh-eating bug strikes San Francisco’s gay community,” and anti-gay extremists across America spread the alarm that gays were introducing another plague into “the general population.” But there was a small problem with all of this: None of it is true!

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

 

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don't miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Review: The Gay Report

When Karla Jay and Allan Young published The Gay Report in 1979, it quickly a favorite source of statistics for many anti-gay extremists. But before you accepts these statistic at face value, you should examine the inner workings of this survey very carefully. What you learn might surprise you.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.

Log Cabin Republicans Attack Ad Against Mitt Romney

Jim Burroway

October 4th, 2007

What do you think about this?

YouTube Preview Image

I really had to scratch my head over this one. Yes, I get it, Mitt Romney is a shameless flip-flopping opportunist who shouldn’t be trusted. He for abortion rights before he was against them. He was for gun control before he was against it. And he was for gay rights before he was against them. Heck, he even promised to out-Kennedy Sen. Kennedy when he was running for governor of Massachusetts.

Oh, wait. That last part isn’t in the commercial.

It seemed really strange to me that a national gay political group would put out a TV ad like this without mentioning the massive pink elephant in the room. During his 1994 campaign against Sen. Edward Kennedy, Romney sent a letter to the Massachusetts Log Cabin Republicans promising to be a stronger supporter for gay rights than Kennedy. And the Massachusetts LCR returned the favor by supporting Romney.

Romney went back to the Massachusetts LCR in 2002 to ask for their support for his gubernatorial campaign, promising that if he won he would respect that state’s high court pending decision on same sex marriage and not launch a fight either way. Again LCR endorsed Romney. And the rest, as they say, is history, with Romney leading the fight to try to amend the Massachusetts constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

Romney’s positions on an awful lot of things have changed over the years, and LCR naturally is feeling betrayed. And so they’re fighting back by bringing up lot of things that Romney has flip-flopped on.

But the issue of gay rights remains unmentionable. That had me puzzled at first, but after several rounds of emails, I think I understand what’s happening. Think about it. Imagine the howls of protest if LCR had used Romney’s previously-admirable stand on gay rights to tell anti-gay voters not to trust his his current stand on gay rights.

So okay, I get it. The Log Cabin Republicans are letting it be known that no candidate can court the gay Republican vote and accept gay Republican money one year and turn around later and bash gay Americans later in the political careers when it suits them. Revenge can certainly be sweet, and good for LCR for exacting theirs.

But what’s that about “Massachusetts Values” at the end? Ever since same-sex marriage was legalized in Massachusetts three years ago, we’ve heard nary a word about “Taxachusetts.” So I doubt that’s what springs to mind among conservative voters when they hear “Massaachusetts Values.” So what did they mean by that? Are “Massachusetts Values” supposed to be anything like “San Francisco Values”? After all, we all know what that means.

Maybe LCR managed to talk about the big pink elephant after all.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0 | TRACKBACK URL

Robguy
October 4th, 2007 | LINK

That was an attack ad? I thought they were endorsing him. Those wacky Like Cock Republicans – I can’t make sense out of ANYTHING they do.

Benton
October 5th, 2007 | LINK

Truthfully, I wasn’t sure if it was an attack ad or what. But I do agree about the Mass. Values comment.

KipEsquire
October 5th, 2007 | LINK

The best thing that could happen to a GOP candidate’s chances of winning the nomination is to be attacked by LCR.

And none of this changes the fact that gay Republicans are, by defintion, self-loathing.

(Full Disclosure: I am not a Democrat.)

A Stitch in Haste
October 5th, 2007 | LINK

With Enemies Like This……

In response to this video:

…

Ben In Oakland
October 5th, 2007 | LINK

I can’t even begin to fathom this ad. Big ol pink elephant sitting on the sofa, indeed! The Repubs– including LCR– are bringing this country down to its knees, and not in a good way.

Timothy Kincaid
October 5th, 2007 | LINK

Kipesquire,

And none of this changes the fact that gay Republicans are, by defintion, self-loathing.

This sort of antagonism and ad hominem attack are unacceptable at this site. Your statement is neither true nor civil. Do not repeat it.

Dan
October 5th, 2007 | LINK

I’m a gay Republican. Personally, I think this ad is genius.

First, you have to keep in mind that gay Republicans support gay marriage because we believe it to be an authentically conservative position. One need only look at the late Barry Goldwater to see the fundamental congruence of conservatism (of the libertarian or, as I prefer to be called, “classical liberal” variety) with supporting the liberties of gay citizens. Gay marriage is important because it enhances societal stability and is truly the “pro-family” position.

Second, keep in mind that more than half of Republicans generally are themselves disconcerted by the disproportionate influence of the socially conservative Dobson wing on the Republican party. You wouldn’t know it, but half support the end of DADT. Two-fifths support gay marriage or civil unions. More than three quarters oppose allowing employers to discriminate based on sexual orientation. The Dobson wing really is just a minority of Republican voters, even though they’ve been treated like they run the place.

Third, remember that Romney is leading in Iowa and New Hampshire, and that he is not leading solely because of the evangelical bloc. While he no doubt has almost all of that bloc in his camp, the majority of New Hampshire Republicans are, almost by definition, relatively close to being my kind of Republicans.

Now, personally, I see–and I’m sure that the LCR leadership sees it the same way–a Romney nomination as a full-fledged disaster for the Republican party. Aside from the fact that Romney is essentially unelectable, he would owe his political existence to the continued dominance of the socially conservative wing of the party. If elected, it would more or less mean the death for quite some time of any other vision of the Republican Party.

How do you hurt him the worst? Criticizing him for flip-flopping on gay issues would only intentionally decrease his support among the voters least likely to be in his camp to start with, and would unintentionally decrease his support only by appealing to the homophobic tendencies of his core bloc.

On the other hand, the four things they chose to hit him on make complete sense.

-They hit his conservative credentials in general.

-They hit him on abortion. Some two-thirds of Republicans consider themselves “pro-life.” (A majority of those, however, believe that abortion should be legal in some circumstances.) This hits his support in his core bloc hard, but it also hurts him outside of that bloc as well.

-A pro-second amendment attitude is relatively pervasive in the Republican Party, especially among the more libertarian bloc with which I identify. Hitting him here hurts his support across a broad spectrum.

-Hitting him for distancing himself from Ronald Reagan. Reagan, is of course, a Republican hero, so this hurts him across the party. Not only that, however, but Reagan never really was much of Dobson type of guy. Reagan almost single-handed defeated a measure in California to ban gay teachers from schools, which coincided with the establishment of the LCR group and which the group to claim Reagan, to some extent, as one of their own.

The general effect is, of course, to expose Romney for the massive fraud that he is.

I wouldn’t read too much into the “Massachusetts values” line. Most people aren’t even going to realize that it’s a gay group airing the ad. Even still, I would say–and thing most LCRs would agree–that gay marriage is pretty the only thing going right with Massachusetts politics. While I spent some time in Massachusetts recently, and just knowing that I had the right to get married there had a pretty significant impact on me, it’s also true that I would be relatively averse to saying that I have “Massachusetts values.” On gay issues? Certainly. On everything else? Certainly not.

This ad is pure political genius. It hits Romney hard on blocs within the Republican party with whom gay Republicans might find political allies, while simultaneously undercutting his support in the bloc which gay Republicans find anathema–and it does without a cynical and destructive appeal to their homophobia. This ad has the potential to send saner Republican voters currently tempted by Romney to the other big three who are far less in bed with people like James Dobson while simultaneously sending members of the Dobson crowd to nobodies like Huckabee and Brownback. All in all, that ain’t bad for a thirty-second spot put on by a small group of gay Republicans.

allan
October 5th, 2007 | LINK

uh,, yea..
it’s an anti romney ad.

Laser Haas
November 12th, 2007 | LINK

This comment has been removed due to a violation of our comments policy. All accusations of wrongdoing require substantiation and sources.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.