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.

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

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.