FRC’s latest clarification about Uganda resolution

Timothy Kincaid

June 4th, 2010

The Family Research Council has released the following statement:

Inaccurate internet reports have been circulating indicating that the Family Research Council lobbied “against” a congressional resolution condemning a bill proposed in Uganda. The Uganda bill would have provided for the death penalty for something called “aggravated homosexuality.” Unfortunately, those spreading these false rumors deliberately failed to obtain the facts first.

FRC did not lobby against or oppose passage of the congressional resolution. FRC’s efforts, at the request of Congressional offices, were limited to seeking changes in the language of proposed drafts of the resolution, in order to make it more factually accurate regarding the content of the Uganda bill, and to remove sweeping and inaccurate assertions that homosexual conduct is internationally recognized as a fundamental human right.

FRC does not support the Uganda bill, and does not support the death penalty for homosexuality — nor any other penalty which would have the effect of inhibiting compassionate pastoral, psychological and medical care and treatment for those who experience same-sex attractions or who engage in homosexual conduct.

I guess they found a position on the death penalty. But it appears that they do not object to incarceration or other forms of punishment, so long as they still have access to the “criminal” so they can provide “pastoral, psychological and medical care and treatment.”

There is no ambivalence about their agreement with incarceration of gay people, just so long as you don’t inhibit the churches’ access to them. And I shudder to think of what kind of “medical treatment” the Family Research Council would advocate for those who “engage in homosexual conduct.”

B John

June 4th, 2010

Let’s hit ’em where it hurts…right in their tax exempt status.

I did some research and found this explanation of 501(c)’s at the Treasury website (http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/ls717.htm)

“Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) are commonly referred to as “charities.” … charities are subject to the most stringent rules with respect to their advocacy activities. Section 501(c)(3) expressly provides that charities are prohibited from intervening in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office; and charities may not engage in more than “insubstantial” lobbying in an attempt to influence legislation.”

“For communications that fall within the section 501(c)(3) general definition of “lobbying,” exceptions are provided when an organization makes available certain nonpartisan analysis, study, or research, or provides technical advice to a governmental body in response to a written request.”

So, they had to have received a written request for the information from someone in Congress, or they appear to have been in violation (which I think they are all the time…what do they do besides lobby?). So when is the IRS going to pull their tax-exempt status?

Please go to http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f3949a.pdf and complete that one page IRS form and mail it into the IRS complaining that FRC does more than an insubstantial amount of lobbying to influence legislation. Remember, this wouldn’t be about just this specific situation, but their overall practices. Frankly, it’s all they do. You can submit annonymously, and I filled out the form in about 3 minutes.

Can’t hurt to at least try to get the IRS to pull their tax exempt status.

Lindoro Almaviva

June 4th, 2010

I ma quote my granny here and say they can take their pastoral care and shove it “where the sun don’t shine”

AJD

June 4th, 2010

You never know with people like this. I mean, they publicly state they’re against the death penalty for homosexuality, but is that what they say amongst themselves in private?

Priya Lynn

June 4th, 2010

AJD, David Bahati has said that many of the people who publicly oppose his bill have assured him privately that they support it. It wouldn’t be surprising if people from FRC were amongst them.

Lindoro Almaviva

June 4th, 2010

John, I think it is a fabulous Idea. Can we get some help is what do we need to fill. I am more than willing to fill one out.

DN

June 4th, 2010

So wait, the FRC thinks this clarification makes them sound like decent people? Give me a break!

AJD

June 4th, 2010

Priya: That was my thinking also… There’s no “logical” reason why the FRC would oppose a resolution against this hideous bill, especially considering that the Senate passed it unanimously. The reason they’re giving just seems like a convenient excuse to me.

L. Junius Brutus

June 4th, 2010

This isn’t really news. But I’m glad that it’s been getting more attention. You might be interested in seeing (and hearing) Perkins defend the Ugandan bill:

http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=CM10B11

Does civility require the acceptance of all behavior? Hello, I am Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council. At the recent National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama took the podium calling for greater civility in Washington, which in my opinion is a laudable goal. However, his comments quickly turned to his preoccupation with defending homosexuality. The President criticized Ugandan leaders for considering enhance penalties for crimes related to homosexuality. The press has widely mischaracterized the law which calls for the death penalty, not for homosexual behavior which is already a crime, but for acts such as intentionally spreading HIV/AIDS, or preying upon vulnerable individuals such as children, which has been a problem in Uganda for years because the large number of orphans. The President said that “We may disagree about gay marriage, “but surely we can agree that it is unconscionable to target gays and lesbians for who they are.” Mr. President as long as you characterize efforts to uphold moral conduct that protects others and in particular the most vulnerable, as attacking people, civility will continue to evade us.

Perkins is lying, and he knows it. If this is only about HIV and children, then why would Obama’s comments constitute “defending homosexuality”? It makes little sense. He’d talk about defending child molestation, which would be a lot more shocking to most people (but perhaps not to these people).

I also note that FRC again claims that the Ugandan bill is being ‘mischaracterized’, yet it says that it does not support it. Why would you lobby to stop the alleged mischaracterization of a law that you don’t support? Don’t they have anything better to do?

I’ve saved the MP3 (which you can download) on my HDD, and saved it for posterity. They can’t remove this and claim that it never happened.

Furthermore, see the following op-ed by Perkins, attacking efforts to promote human rights for us: http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.frc.org/op-eds/nag-in-chief-takes-leftist-worldview-abroad

Derrick

June 5th, 2010

@B John:

The FRC statement asserts that they were responding to a request from “Congressional offices”. I would like to know which “offices” requested help from an organization that has no particular knowledge about Ugandan law and no expertise in international law. The request had to be in writing, so this will come out.

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.

 

Latest Posts

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

FBI Reports Massive Surge In Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes in 2015

Baptist General Convention of Texas Warns Churches in Dallas and Austin Over LGBT Inclusion

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

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.

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 500 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.

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.

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.