New Hampsure results silence NOM's Maggie Gallagher
Mormon/Boy Scout sexual abuse problem
"Not Equal" Flag Debuted in New York DADT Protest
"Not Guilty, Not Ashamed, and Not Finished"
Anti-gay general's comments infuriate the Dutch
ENDA Sit-ins Result in Arrests in DC and San Francisco
Anti-Gay Group Sells Snakeoil
Schumer Argues for LGBT Incusion in Immigration Reform
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
The 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.
News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Pomo
May 16th, 2009 | LINK
but… but… Obama is the savior of all gay people!
Matt
May 16th, 2009 | LINK
The end of this, Gibbs says that Obama believes the policy doesn’t serve our national interest. SO WHY FOLLOW IT???
KZ
May 16th, 2009 | LINK
“The president believes the policy doesn’t serve the national interest.”
“The president believes the policy doesn’t serve the national interest.”
“The president believes the policy doesn’t serve the national interest.”
THEN FREAKIN CHANGE IT!!!!!!! This policy is ruining (and ruined) lives of qualified GI’s who just happen to be gay. And then there’s that tiny cost of upholding DADT. So far it’s passed the 300 million dollar mark.
David C.
May 16th, 2009 | LINK
Obviously, the Obama administration considers DADT a Third Rail. I’m still convinced that the reason Obama doesn’t tackle this issue right now is the military itself. There is just too much deeply entrenched homophobia in the command chain at the moment, though I believe that is changing.
Yes, sure, one can clearly see that the general population of the US favors repealing DADT, and I still think it’s all about trying to not “overreach” that has induced a kind of paralysis on the part of Democrats with respect to gay civil rights.
I also believe that Democrats can smell a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Were that to obtain, there would be a narrow window of near impunity within which to enact the most controversial elements of the gay civil rights agenda: Repeal of DADT and DOMA, and enactment of ENDA. Should that also correspond with the opening of a seat on the SCOTUS bench, we could see a cementing of a much more progressive court for years to come.
This does not mean that we should expect all of this to be a slam-dunk. The Democrats are keenly aware that their majority can evaporate very quickly, even in less than 18 months, should conservative elements manage to regroup. To succeed in the longer term, Democrats need to govern from just left of center to have a chance of locking things up in the mid-terms, at which point they may be able to drift a little more to the left.
John
May 16th, 2009 | LINK
My partner and I financially contributed to the Obama campaign and voted for him. I have been more than a little skeptical about him since he chose known bigot Rev. Warren to speak at his inauguration. I have also been disturbed by the substitution of the word “change” for “repeal” of DADT, and the general back-pedalling on gay rights.
I simply cannot support this administration if they choose to maintain this new direction.
However, I did look at the whitehouse.gov Civil Rights page today and the previous wording about repealing DADT was back. I refreshed the page several times, so I think I have the latest version. Perhaps this administration is waking up to a potentially serious problem they are creating for themselves by alientaing the gay vote.
Bruno
May 16th, 2009 | LINK
Gibbs is just the mouthpiece.
Liz
May 17th, 2009 | LINK
I think he’s quibbling because the question compares apples and oranges, if only because one issue (releasing photos) is something Obama has complete control over, and the other issue (changing legislation) is something he doesn’t. I thought we liked Obama because he isn’t the “Imperial President” kind of leader. I believe it’ll be better for the country to have congress have the debate (if the democrats grow some balls) and overturn DADT than if Obama just stops it unilaterally. With any luck, citizens can hear from gay veterans and those that fight with them and learn that they’re valuable soldiers who love and defend their country, despite their country’s reluctance to love and defend them back.
Things change slowly in the military. Last month they said they believe Stop/Loss is immoral and they plan to stop the practice… probably sometime in the summer of 2010.
CPT_Doom
May 18th, 2009 | LINK
Once again Obama proves he is the reincarnation of FDR – the ultimate political pragmatist. Of course he sees DADT and all GLBT rights as a third rail, and it is, for him right now. He is trying to use his ample political capital to push through a lot of radical stuff, and he is unwilling to risk it on GLBT stuff right now.
I am disappointed in him, of course, but I always said I supported him (and all Dems) in spite of, not because of, their positions on LGBT rights. What is needed, and what I do not see in the LGBT community right now, is a strategy to force the issue. We cannot rely solely on refusing to support Obama in some distant re-election campaign. We have to start actively fighting the administration on their bullshit right now.
Maybe a mass mailing of Obama bumper stickers, pins and t-shirts, a la the teabaggers, to demonstrate our disillusionment would be a good first step.
David C.
May 18th, 2009 | LINK
Sending a maelstrom of trinketry swirling around the White House will yield nothing. To accelerate change, pressure your elected representatives with a constant drizzle of letters, e-mails, and phone calls. They are the ones with the power to actually change things.
The President has to “deal” with Congress all the time. The more representatives and senators that equate their long term success to advancing gay civil rights, the more likely we are to get the attention of the Executive Branch. Eventually, the Obama LGBT legislative agenda will have some clear cover in congress. Then, and only then, will we see the kind of progress we all want.
And don’t stop with your representatives. Work with your neighbors and others in the communities where you live to educate voters. One does not have to wait for the next presidential election cycle: mid-terms are just about 19 months away.
Leave A Comment