Box Turtle Bulletin
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobby“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobbyJuly 25th, 2010
The National Organization for Marriage has interesting criteria for whether a baby is cute.
Here’s Maggie Gallagher:
I spoke with one young couple who showed up with the most adorable baby in tow.
Okay.. This baby is adorable.
Here’s Louis Marinelli:
Moving on. There was one couple (one of those bolder couples who came into the rally itself) who were particularly disappointing. The two men decided not to just attend the rally but they brought a baby with them. Notice I said ‘a baby” because it isn’t “their baby”. It was clearly adopted. They were white the baby was not.
And this baby is not white.
So… let’s see if we can figure out their policy. Hmmm, first baby: adorable; second baby: not white. Hmmm.
Can you imagine the accusations if we said that?
Latest Posts
Featured Reports
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 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.
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.
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.
“Google” is a trademark of Google Inc.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Hector
July 25th, 2010
Oh well. I’ll say it. The “National Organization for Marriage” is a bunch of racist haters. See? It wasn’t that hard.
Darren
July 25th, 2010
Wow. That’s offensive to adoptive parents everywhere. WTF?!
Richard W. Fitch
July 25th, 2010
So how does Louie feel about the hundreds of white M-F couples who have adopted Haitian babies since the earthquake?
Jon Trouten
July 25th, 2010
You beat me to the punch, Darren. As an adoptive father, I find Louis’ statements pretty despicable.
Aaron
July 25th, 2010
Yes, I completely agree with Darren, saying a parents who adopt a baby aren’t the babies “real” parents (and implying that they are somehow inferior to biological parents) is pretty disgusting. :/
Leo
July 25th, 2010
I believe the shirt the guy’s wearing in the first picture reads “Alum ’08 Brigham Young University.” Imagine that.
It’s clear that this is a movement that’s capturing the imaginations of a broad swath of the public. A group that truly reflects the full gamut of American experience.
Emily K
July 25th, 2010
Someone said this before, that gay couples are more likely to adopt children straight couples don’t. Older, “darker” children, children that aren’t as “in demand” as cute little white babies.
It might be a stretch to assume Mags is racist from this comment alone, but her statements are clearly offensive to all adoptive parents.
Emily K
July 25th, 2010
I meant to say “stretch to assume Louis is racist…” but maybe it can be applied to all of NOM.
Tony P
July 25th, 2010
The folks at NOM have an interesting strategy. Brian and Marinelli are the attack dogs while Maggie tries to be the lapdop.
But they’re all dogs.
Kathy
July 25th, 2010
Marinelli says adopted babies are not their parents’ babies? I know these folks have a really narrow definition of “family” but I didn’t realize they excluded adopted kids from being part of their families.
Rev Ray neal
July 25th, 2010
The problem with such statements by NOM is that they don’t even know how others hear what they say. We hear the problem with what they say, but they focus on their ‘intention’ which was to put down the adoption of any child by gay parents…and that’s all they see. They are ‘mentally handicapped’ to see their own prejudices. It is so pathetic.
Richard W. Fitch
July 25th, 2010
Kathy – only adopted kids of F-F or M-M couples.
John
July 25th, 2010
I don’t believe this was intended as a racial slur, Timothy, but instead to point out that the child obviously isn’t this couple’s by natural birth. Of course they still ended up putting their foot in their mouths because this is quite easily seen as a slam against adoptive parenthood. No doubt they only have a problem with this when it comes to same-sex couples but in their eagerness to slam such couples they…let’s say expressed themselves poorly.
Ugh. I feel like I just defended NOM and now need a shower…
Bearchewtoy75
July 25th, 2010
John,
I do think there is a racist element there. He could have made the same cut about them not being “real” parents if the kid were white. He chose to point out the kid’s race, which was unnecessary. If a MM couple have a child, it obviously isn’t a biological one.
Richard W. Fitch
July 25th, 2010
John – You overlook the fact that many M-M couples now opt for one of the partners to be the sperm donor and have their child thru a surrogate mother. This is every much their child as a step-parent raising a child from a very young age. The racial element can not be dismissed since these bigots are almost exclusively white Tea-Baggers as will as being gNOMe bigots.
Brieuse
July 25th, 2010
So this person has contempt for families that adopt. Who is he to judge?
Riva
July 25th, 2010
She also referred to the second baby as an ‘it’ when clearly, the baby is a little girl. (I love the hat!)
That being said, I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that it’s only because the second couple were queer and/or adoptive parents. How often do y’all hear folks comment on the attractiveness of babies and children from other races? ie a white person commenting on a black or latin@ child and vice versa? And if you do hear the comments, are they offered to ‘prove’ the speaker is not racist?
Down here – here being Texas – when I do hear someone comment on a child or baby from another race, it’s nearly always a sop or a cover. Since they have gushed over a baby of their own race, they also have to comment on another baby to show they aren’t narrow-minded.
The quote reminds me of lots of people I know who have no problem gushing about children of their own race, but dismiss children of another as unimportant.
TampaZeke
July 25th, 2010
Bearchewtoy75, what?
I and my husband are a MM couple and we have a son that is biologically mine.
I know what you were intending to say but it was SORELY lacking and comes off sounding about as ignorant as Marinelli’s statement.
Might I add, the fact that the child is black does NOT preclude her from being the biological child of one of the men. The skin complexion of a child does not always accurately reflect the race of his/her parents. I used to work with a mixed race woman whose complexion was darker than most of her black co-workers.
Regan DuCasse
July 25th, 2010
It’s bad enough that they put down non parent adults as if we don’t do ‘our share’ in the support and survival of the human race and integrity of our communities.
Now this.
I’d lost both of my biological parent units by the time I was 15 years old. Adoption is another means of a child surviving if something happens to their parents.
NOM behaves as if nuclear families and op sex parents is the end all and be all of a child being loved and cared for.
BOTH of these examples of parents show that a child is loved. PERIOD.
For the gay couple at least, it’s a good bet that their social circle will include black friends, and a diversity of people to nurture them all.
The other couple, I highly doubt it and woe if their child is gay.
I have so many gay parent friends who don’t share their child’s ethnicity. Nor are all their kids the same ethnicity.
Besides, my white gay male friends that have black daughters?
Guess which big mouthed, black woman friend of the family is engaged to help them as their daughters develop and grow into themselves?
:0P
The point is, good parents in particular, will find someone to fill the void. The same way an only child might find a best friend as close as a sibling, gay couples do not live in isolated bubbles without the participation and influence of whoever shares their child’s situation.
What disturbs me most is that such families are portrayed as if they are the only adults or other children involved in their children’s lives.
It might be true that in Brian Brown’s life he’s only got friends and family exactly like HE is.
But that telegraphs how boring and inexperienced he is in telling other parents how to raise their children in ways he’s not qualified to and hasn’t the charity or guts to do himself.
Emily K
July 25th, 2010
This is an important role to fulfill.
I think that children of all backgrounds and races should have role models of all types in their lives. It takes a village, as Ruth and Naomi proved at the end of their book.
ebohlman
July 25th, 2010
Regan:
That’s projection: the religiously rigid generally regard the outside world as a scary place, and avoid “mixing with it” as much as possible. My religiously rigid (Catholic) grandmother used to proudly declare that “the Bohlmans don’t mix with people.” So they assume that any responsible parents would hold their kids as close to them as possible and not allow them to be contaminated through exposure to other people (a cynic would say that they’re afraid other people might notice marks they left on their kids from hitting them).
Candace
July 25th, 2010
Well, the NOM clowns have backed themselves into another corner:
If they say ALL adopted children are the targets of their dissaproval, then they earn the ire of every adoptive parent (and child) on the planet;
If they say ONLY children adopted by same-sex parents are the subject of their comments, then they prove that their crusade is not about preserving or protecting marriage or families, it’s based on animus towards gay people– and, by extension, their families.
If they leave that little gem up on their website, they prove they agree with it. If they remove it, they lose an opportunity to slam gay families.
A smart lawyer will have a field day with this.
NOM — proving once again that you really can’t fix stupid.
homer
July 25th, 2010
NOM seems to have jumped the shark. Their desperation is growing- they know Prop 8 will be overturned. The judge in MA overturned portions of DOMA. Their grand tour is flailing about because really, people have more interesting things to do during the summer than listen to Brown or Gallagher.
In response, they are getting nastier, associating with nastier folks. Their facebook page isn’t being edited- really vile comments are left there for everyone to see.
I cannot foresee the future, but it seems clear to me that something is going on. It is too early to see whether this is the end, or merely a temporary situation (it seems likely that the Prop 8 ruling could re-energize these folks).
Jon Trouten
July 25th, 2010
Candace: They were specifically calling out gay adoptive parents in that post. Here’s the full text from that blog entry related to the male couple (louisjmarinelli.blogspot.com/2010/07/columbus-gay-marriage-protest-for-civil.html#comments):
“There was one couple (one of those bolder couples who came into the rally itself) who were particularly disappointing. The two men decided not to just attend the rally but they brought a baby with them. Notice I said ‘a baby’ because it isn’t ‘their baby’. It was clearly adopted. They were white the baby was not.
“This baby has been adopted and is being raised in a house of homosexuality and can’t even speak yet. Who will speak for this and all the other children who are adopted and are being subjected to a house of homosexuality?
“Let’s say this couple was ‘married’ on paper by one of the states that have legalized same-sex ‘marriage’. That doesn’t change the fact that, according to recent research from San Francisco State University, a great number of same-sex couples, whether they are ‘married’ to each other or not are in open relationships!
“Is this the kind of household we want to be putting adopted children into? Who will speak for these children? Nonetheless, they came. So be it. However, and I’ll take my words from the Ohio State Troopers on this one, the couple came to the rally to stand as a ‘symbol’.
“What kind of parents use their children as symbols? Coming to the rally and standing there quietly as they did wasn’t enough. They had to make a statement – a statement that involved exploiting their own child for their own gain. This is why I will emphasize the fact that adoption exists to give children the parents they need – not to give parents the children they want. These two men are not the kind of parents this child needs.”
Louis is fine with adoption. He just doesn’t believe that these men are the kind of parents that their daughter needs.
Jon Trouten
July 25th, 2010
BTW, I like the new disclaimer of Louis’ blog:
“A statement of clarity: I would like to take this opportunity to state that the opinions and statements made in this blog reflect only the opinions of myself, personally, not the National Organization for Marriage.
“I am not an employee of the National Organization for Marriage. I am a third party who is directly involved as a partner with the Summer for Marriage.
“Therefore, positions I take and statements I make do not reflect the positions or opinions of any other person, entity or the National Organization for Marriage as a whole.
“This statement of clarity has been added due to the heavy attention our opponents give to this blog and the great lack of understanding of who or what I represent. Let this stand as a clarification to all.”
Maybe NOM was sweating over the content on and negative reaction to Louis’ blog. More likely, they’re trying a good cop/bad cop routine between the “One Man, One Woman” blog and the “NOM” blog.
Candace
July 25th, 2010
Jon, I know what they were doing. I’m just giving the two alternatives they were faced with after making such a nasty statement:
1. Acknowledging their animus is only directed towards gay familes, which pro-equality advocates can take and run with in sooooo many ways;
2. Or trying to squeak out of the clear anti-gay animus by claiming they disapprove of all adoptive families.
Their admission that their animus is only towards adoptive gay parents is going to be an early christmas present to somebody, somewhere.
Patrick
July 26th, 2010
If I remember correctly Steven Curtis Chapman, the popular evangelical singer, and his wife adopted three Chinese daughters. I wonder how they would feel knowing these girls weren’t *really* their daughters? After all, it’s obvious they aren’t *their* daughters since Steven and his wife are white and the girls aren’t.
Personally, I believe that if an individual or group or prejudiced against one group, such as gays, they’re very likely to be prejudiced against other groups. The comment on interracial adoptions does nothing to make me reconsider my opinion.
GreenEyedLilo
July 26th, 2010
Huh. I thought that use of the child as a “symbol” was called being a responsible parent who didn’t want to leave the baby at home by himself. And if the male couple was using their child as a symbol, so the hell was the mixed-sex one!
I also wonder if that adorable white baby in the first picture was adopted, too. It is, of course, possible.
The undertones here are absolutely disgusting.
@ Bearchewtoy: Some same-sex couples do have biological children from previous relationships. I know two bisexual parents, both with same-sex partners now, raising children conceived in previous mixed-sex relationships.
TampaZeke
July 26th, 2010
@GreenEyedLilo – Not just from “previous relationships”. Some of us have biological children that were born to us while married to our same sex spouses.
John
July 26th, 2010
Perhaps, but I doubt it. There’s enough to criticize NOM for without bringing in a flimsy charge of racism. The fact that the parents are of an obviously different color and race is a sign that the child is adopted. If the child were obviously of the same race and color as at least one of the same-sex parents there would still be a chance one could be the biological parent. This to me was an stupid slam on adoptive parents even though I’m sure NOM only meant it for same-sex parents.
Matt
July 26th, 2010
The overt racism–direct or implied–is pretty appalling–as is the dig at all adoptive parents. Remember that these people only care about fetuses anyway. They wouldn’t care if there were huge encampments of minority babies lying around all over the U.S.–just so long as not one mother was allowed to have an abortion or one gay man/woman/couple was allowed to adopt. As Randi Rhodes says, “they love the fetus and hate the child.”
I do find it interesting that they picked out the Mormon couple–who were probably ordered by their local Elder to attend.
(I cannot resist this JOKE–apologies in advance if anyone if offended: I am amazed that they only have one kid–I didn’t think BYU gave diplomas to anyone with less than three.)
John
July 26th, 2010
Good point. Still, odds are when a child is of a different race and color than the parents it’s adopted. That’s not a certainty as you note.
So IOW you wish to engage in the very same racism and stereo-typing that you criticize others for? Interesting…
Aya
July 26th, 2010
The “symbol” bit annoyed me too (as you can see from my comment on his blog). :P
To me, they’re not showing off the child as a symbol but the family as a whole as a symbol. And what a beautiful symbol that is, in my opinion.
Tom, Rick and Amoret
July 27th, 2010
Well, the pic is of our family. We were at the rally organized by Equality Ohio to stand up for our families. We walked up to the front amongst the NOM folks (there were only about 20 people). We definitely stood out and the speaker was a bit taken aback. After they finished their hate-filled rants we introduced ourselves to the organizer. We told him that when they are spouting this stuff to please think about families like ours – that we love our daughter just as much as he loves his kids. And that our daughter does not deserve to be told that she is not part of a real family. We told him that Ohio is already last in the nation for LGBT equality and that we did not understand why they were here, I mean really, could you just leave us alone for crying out loud! Any how, we are glad we took our daughter and we will continue to stand up for our family with her. Our family is not a prop we are simply standing up for ourselves and our community and we will not be intimidated or hide from hate!
Timothy Kincaid
July 27th, 2010
Tom and Rick,
Thank you for putting a face to those “ookie scary militant homosexual activists who are adoping not-real kids just for their agenda”. It’s a lot harder spouting hatred when the victim of your demonization are right there in front of you. And thank you for standing up for Amoret. She is a lucky little girl.
Kyle Toms brother
August 1st, 2010
My first reaction when I read that crap that the Louis guy said about my brother and my brother and law and niece not only made me sick but angry. But remembering that the greatest weapon is LOVE. The Love within our hearts will diffuse any stupidity, bigotry, and hatred eventually. I hope all people who judge others and promote hate will wake up and realize that we are all one, and to let others be them selves and to be happy. Tom and Rick are amazing people and amazing parents. They have a very normal family life. These bigots judge my brother are wrong about gay parents. Tom and Rick have created a beautiful home life for them and amoret. They promote love. If I was a kid and I could choose my parents I would choose Tom and Ricks household over someone like Louis who promotes hate. But I will just send love and I am very happy that Tom is my brother and that he is happy. It’s time for people to be true christians and let your brothers and sisters be, don’t judge focus on your own life. Be good to all people. Even the haters, may they feel the love.
Peace Love and smiles.
Miss ya Tom, Rick and Amoret
Love ya
Kyle
Leave A Comment