The Daily Agenda for Tuesday, May 21
Connecticut Scouts simply announce that they are accepting gay scout leaders
Church of Scotland allows ministers in relationship
Last Minute Bid to Sink Marriage Bill Fails in British Commons
Will Illinois Be #13?
The Daily Agenda for Monday, May 20
Gay Man Shot To Death In NYC Hate Crime
The Daily Agenda for Sunday, May 19
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.
occono
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
Whoooo!
Timothy Kincaid
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
Both the Tenth Amendment and Due Process? Very cool.
John in the Bay Area
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
So, will Obama file an appeal?
Burr
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
Very cool.. and well very fricking obvious.
Can’t wait to hear how the retards in SCOTUS get it wrong, though.
Timothy (TRiG)
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
Are there any links to the original PDFs instead of the ad-ridden flash Scribd version?
PDF is an open standard, which can be viewed with Free Software. Flash isn’t.
Also, Woot! Excellent news!
TRiG.
Burr
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
TRiG, click the download button. :)
Mark
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
Conservatives ought to be receptive to the 10th Amendment argument…not saying they will be, but they ought to be.
Timothy (TRiG)
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
It seems Scribd isn’t using flash after all, though I’m sure they do on their embedded version. They’re using some very clever HTML and CSS instead, which are open standards.
You still can’t download it without signing in, though. The original PDFs must be available somewhere.
TRiG.
bearchewtoy75
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
So, what does this mean, really?
Will US Gov. recognize same sex marraige if the state does also? Does it have to go through the appeals process first?
Michael
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
I urge everyone to contact their senators and representatives to request that they take immediate action to repeal all aspects of DOMA. Doing so will save the government millions in what amounts to a ridiculous effort defend a law that is so clearly a violation of the constitution.
Mark
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
“So, what does this mean, really?
Will US Gov. recognize same sex marraige if the state does also? Does it have to go through the appeals process first?”
Well, if the decisions stand it will mean the Feds have to recognize legal state marriages. However, the decisions will almost certainly be appealled all the way up to the SCOTUS.
Timothy Kincaid
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
No word yet on appeal. The Justice Department is “reviewing the ruling”
Burr
July 8th, 2010 | LINK
Apparently a ruling in CA is expected soon?
Priya Lynn
July 9th, 2010 | LINK
Timothy said “No word yet on appeal. The Justice Department is “reviewing the ruling””.
If I remember correctly Obama said something to the effect that although this law is discriminatory his government has to defend laws that are constitutional. This is his opportunity to show some intregrity and refuse to defend this law based on his own assessment of the situation.
Neon Genesis
July 10th, 2010 | LINK
If DOMA is unconstitutional because it infringes on states’ rights to decide, does this mean states are required now to put gay marriage to a vote? Is it now unconstitutional for the federal government to make gay marriage in all 50 states? Is Loving v Virginia unconstitutional now?
John in the Bay Area
July 10th, 2010 | LINK
Neon Genesis,
A lower court does not have the authority to overturn Loving v. Virginia.
Patrick Garies
October 12th, 2010 | LINK
Neon Genesis wrote: “If DOMA is unconstitutional because it infringes on states’ rights to decide, does this mean states are required now to put gay marriage to a vote?”
The answer is “no”. These decisions just mean that, if a state chooses to make marriage inclusive of same-sex couples, the federal government must respect that state’s decision and recognize those state-sanctioned marriages as it would any other marriage from that state rather than selectively denying that state’s couples benefits as they do today.
Neon Genesis wrote: “Is it now unconstitutional for the federal government to make gay marriage in all 50 states?”
I would think so.
Congress could presumably circumvent that though by issuing a non-discrimination law covering sexual orientation.
Neon Genesis wrote: “Is Loving v Virginia unconstitutional now?”
No. Only the Supreme Court or a constitutional amendment can change that.
Timothy Kincaid
October 12th, 2010 | LINK
No, Congress cannot circumvent the constitution. But the Courts can find that anti-gay marriage laws are in violation to Due Process and Equal Protections.
Leave A Comment