BREAKING: Exodus International is Shutting Down
Liveblog of Exodus Conference
First Impressions Ahead Of Exodus 2013 Conference
Arizona group to put marriage back on ballot
Exodus International Issues Apology, Hints At Further Developments Tonight
Ex-Gay Leader Sentenced For Criminal Sexual Assault of Male Clients
Andrew Comiskey Doesn't Believe In Apologies
Murkowski makes three
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.
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:
Tomorrow is closing arguments in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the case over whether Proposition 8 was in violation to the US Constitution. Here’s what National Organization for Marriage’s Maggie Gallagher has to say about it:
Dave H
June 15th, 2010 | LINK
Sorry, Timothy. The only numbers that count are the numbers for the people who voted.
It’s like in football. You can talk forever about rushing yards, passing yards, sacks, turnovers, penalties, yada yada yada, but the only statistic that matters is the one that’s on the scoreboard at the end of the game.
Don’t worry, I loathe Maggie and NOM as much as anyone, and I find it obscene that in this country that is supposed to be the beacon of freedom and guaranteed rights that we even entertain the idea of putting people’s rights up for a vote.
But your argument is useless.
John in the Bay Area
June 15th, 2010 | LINK
In point of fact, the Californians who voted for Prop 8 voted AGAINST marriage, not for marriage.
Eric in Oakland
June 15th, 2010 | LINK
It is obscene for her to talk about voting to take away the equal rights of a minority as an exercise of a “civil right”.
Sadly, it is quite common for the anti-gays to pervert the English language though.
Ex:
Pro-family = anti-family for gays
Pro-marriage = anti-marriage for gays
Religious freedom = against freedom of religion for tolerant churches
Love = hate
Christopher
June 16th, 2010 | LINK
Dave H, I understand the point you’re making–that it’s the end result of the vote that matters, not the actual numbers, but I think what Timothy was getting at is that Maggie is also citing numbers as though they’re important.
What she’s saying is that the opinion of 7,001,084 people is more important than the opinion of 6,401,482 people–but only because the slightly larger majority holds what she considers to be the right opinion.
So I think we’d agree that it’s fair to ask who made Maggie such an absolute authority that she gets to decide who matters more when it comes to granting or denying rights.
Paul in Canada
June 16th, 2010 | LINK
Oh come now – surely Maggie is right – a minority of California’s most ignorant and hateful citizens should dictate equality for all…. LOL
Even if the majority of citizens voted for Prop 8, it still doesn’t excuse the political ‘leadership’ to be, uh, leaders and ensure equality for all citizens.
I just don’t understand your US referendums… even in a ‘democracy’, they are not structured to be democratic in the true sense of the word. The majorities voice rules? Yikes!!!!!
Priya Lynn
June 16th, 2010 | LINK
DaveH said “I find it obscene that in this country that is supposed to be the beacon of freedom and guaranteed rights that we even entertain the idea of putting people’s rights up for a vote.”.
The United States hasn’t been the beacon of freedom and guarenteed rights for several decades, if ever.
Jason D
June 16th, 2010 | LINK
And Ted Olson today will be asking the courts to nullify our right to vote for marriage.
When did voting on other people’s civil rights suddenly become a right unto itself?
Mags, I vote we take away your right to vote or speak. I bet I can find 7 million people who’d agree, would that make it fair enough for ya?
AJD
June 16th, 2010 | LINK
I agree with Priya Linn. This country has always made big promises, but has consistently failed to fulfill them with respect to minorities.
Gays and lesbians are only the latest group to be flagrantly denied the freedom, justice and equitable treatment under the law that is supposed to be every American’s birthright, following a long line of other groups that has included blacks (slavery and segregation), Native Americans (ethnic cleansing and denial of citizenship), women (denial of suffrage and protection from rape and assault), Chinese (exclusion from immigration) and Japanese (internment).
I want equality as much as anyone, but let’s not pretend that oppression with the consent of the majority is anything new in this country.
Regan DuCasse
June 16th, 2010 | LINK
NOM and every other ‘family’ representative that keeps talking that line of BS, behaves as if this were a situation unprecedented in the courts for minorities.
And in the case of gay people, who have traditionally been on the receiving end of seriously harmful bigotry and discrimination at that.
The demand to vote, was precisely because of an unfair advantage. And also after advancing the stereotype of gay people as threatening.
As what had to be proven in court:
what benefit has there been to society in promoting this discrimination.
and what evidence is there that this particular minority is harmed.
The answer clearly has been none to the former, to justify the discrimination.
And plenty of the latter to end it.
Bragging over and over about the power of the majority ‘the people have spoken’, while also claiming that gay people have political power and the ability to sway the voters is more of that two headed snake Maggie Gallagher is capable of being.
What is actually going on, and why it’s so important, is the exponential damage this kind of law does to the Constitution and Bill of Rights and the mission statement of both.
Neither of these documents is for the purpose of discrimination. And most definitely not against any citizen’s group exclusively.
And since marriage, children or whatever family ideal NOM thinks is out there, ISN’T protected by this amendment, it’s worthless to that purpose altogether.
So therefore, shouldn’t and needn’t be in place.
Most importantly though, another contradiction is the indictments on judges that the anti gay put forth.
That any rulings in favor of gay people are by ‘activist’ judges or ‘legislation from the bench’…
when actually it is THEY who want the judges and legislation to de facto enforce laws that do not exist to begin with.
Such as a morals test to qualify to marry. A fitness or fertility and fecundity and biological relationship test to qualify to parent or marry.
A religious enforcement standard against a group in a country that has no religious enforcement whatsoever.
And non protection of a minority from the tyranny of a majority, even though that tyranny is well documented to what extent it damages a particular minority.
In every way, the anti gay want each and every law and protection guaranteed a citizen, to be denied gay people and without any cause, or reason that garners improvement for the efforts.
And they want historical context and societal improvements garnered by NON DISCRIMINATION against previously discriminated people, to be ignored and forgotten because they don’t think the category fits.
Strict scrutiny has been very necessary here and the anti gay’s logic doesn’t pass such scrutiny.
When it’s all said and done, how certain religious people in particular ARE scrutinized regarding this law, are proven to be extraordinarily, cruel, SELFISH, ignorant and liars.
The proof of which is extolling a predictable outcome as fair to whose lives are most affected by it.
Burr
June 16th, 2010 | LINK
I don’t get all this gloating over a victory by a mere 2.2%.. That’s not exactly a resounding statement. In fact it speaks to how utterly flimsy the public’s opinion is on it. The truth is that the trend is going in only one direction. I think the false bravado only serves to try to cover up what they know is the truth and what horrifies them. This ain’t holding up for long, whether in court or in the ballot box. I can’t wait to hear them bitch and moan once they start losing these votes, they’ll probably even hypocritically claim that even a majority has no right to “redefine culture” so to speak.
Leave A Comment