News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
|
|
The Daily Agenda for Saturday, February 11
The Daily Agenda for Friday, February 10
Again anti-gays blindly and gleefully shoot themselves in the foot
Rep. Walsh leads with her heart
Advocate, WaPo, AP Get it Wrong On Anti-Homosexuality Bill
Uganda Executive, Parliament Tussle Over Anti-Homosexuality BIll
The Daily Agenda for Thursday, February 9
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
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 450 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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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"
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
President Barack Obama will be in Los Angeles on Wednesday, which will be the day immediately following Decision Day. Do you think he can make it through the entire visit without mentioning Prop 8?
The answer is yes, he did.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
RMB
May 28th, 2009 | LINK
Hate to say I told you so BUT.
Scott P.
May 28th, 2009 | LINK
I won’t vote for him a second time.
Not even mention what happened? He sure as hell is running away from us as fast as he can, or should it be described as a side-ways shuffle?
Eddie89
May 28th, 2009 | LINK
Things could be worse.
We could have had President McCain throwing gays under the bus by pushing for a Federal Marriage Amendment after marriage equality was achieved in Iowa, Maine and Vermont.
Yes, things could be and should be better. But, again, things could have turned out much, much worse.
Nate
May 28th, 2009 | LINK
I didn’t honestly think that he would be able to do much, as far as gay rights are concerned. I’m more concerned with getting representatives in office who care about LGBT rights. I mean, yes, the President has power, but lasting change is accomplished through Congress. I mean, how many times have we seen a new President come in and cancel out changes made by the previous President?
Jason D
May 28th, 2009 | LINK
Am I disappointed in Obama on these issues? Yes, absolutely.
Will I be holding his feet to the fire on this one? Absolutely!
Am I glad that gay bloggers aren’t giving him a pass on this, you bet!
Am I willing to give him time? Yes, he’s just barely 6% into his term. That’s the first 30-minutes of a normal person’s workday. Do you get most or all of your important work done in the first 30-minutes of your day?
But if I still hear feet dragging come Nov 2010…well, then I’ll have to give up on him.
Timothy Kincaid
May 28th, 2009 | LINK
Eddie
McCain spoke eloquently against a Federal Marriage Amendment. And that was after Massachusetts. He particularly would favor the rights of Maine and Vermont to legislatively enact marriage definitions as they see fit.
Interestingly, McCain might have favored an FMA had the CA Supreme Court overturned Prop 8, but otherwise there is no reason to accuse McCain of wishing to champion a position that he is on record as opposing.
JJQR
May 28th, 2009 | LINK
Timothy Kincaid : True. Whether one supported McCain or not, let’s at least be honest about him. (And we WOULD have had a gay Chief of Staff).
Eddie89
May 29th, 2009 | LINK
I’m not too sure if McCain would have maintained his stance against a Federal Marriage Amendment in the face of additional states granting marriage equality to gays and lesbians.
I am of the opinion that he would have buckled under the pressure from the religious conservatives to back such a measure.
Some examples:
Sorry, but my own research has further solidified my opinion that things would be worse for the LGBT community under a McCain administration.
Ephilei
May 29th, 2009 | LINK
You do remember Obama never claimed to be for marriage equality. If he wasn’t pro-marriage during the campaign and he’s not pro-marriage now, that doesn’t make him a hypocrite. If we’re going to criticize him, let’s criticizing for not flipfloping.
Priya Lynn
May 29th, 2009 | LINK
Timothy said “McCain spoke eloquently against a Federal Marriage Amendment. And that was after Massachusetts. He particularly would favor the rights of Maine and Vermont to legislatively enact marriage definitions as they see fit”.
I believe Mccain also said he’d support a Federal Marriage Amendment if the “Defense” of Marriage Act was overturned. Mccain was decidedly worse on this issue than Obama.
Timothy Kincaid
May 29th, 2009 | LINK
Priya, Eddie,
Priya, you are correct in that McCain is less favorable on ALL gay issues.
However, Eddie you are just wrong when you said that McCain would push “for a Federal Marriage Amendment after marriage equality was achieved in Iowa, Maine and Vermont.”
I’m not defending McCain’s position on gay issues. But to claim that he would do something other than what he clearly stated on many occasions is not something that is logical or acceptable.
And it is not logical to assume that McCain would suddenly become an anti-gay activist when his decades long history suggests that he has little interest in inacting anti-gay legislation or policy. If asked (in a way he can’t avoid), McCain will often voice support for the anti-gay position. But he shows little interest in taking any leadership on gay issues that isn’t favorable (think back to the campaign – McCain tried his hardest to avoid discussing gay issues). In other words, he may vote anti-gay sometimes – and even ran an anti-marriage ad in AZ – but on those areas in which he is supportive, he’ll often take the lead.
There is no question that Obama was the more pro-gay candidate. Obama had sharply stronger positions on gay issues – he expressed support for pretty much ALL gay issues other than marriage.
Unfortunately, the difference in the positions of McCain and Obama don’t seem to be resulting in differences in administration. Or, at least, not yet.
Obama still has time to become an advocate for equality. But to date, I can’t point at much that he’s actually done (and little that he’s said) on gay issues that is materially different from what McCain would have done.
From McCain we would have expected little to nothing. Ironically, that is also what we have received from Obama.
Leave A Comment