News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
|
|
Andrew Comiskey Doesn't Believe In Apologies
Massachusetts GOP Senate Candidate goes to Pride
The Daily Agenda for Wednesday, June 19
Another Exodus Conference Is Upon Us. Let's Review.
For Our Opponents: Talking to Your Kids About Same-Sex Marriage
The Daily Agenda for Tuesday, June 18
The Daily Agenda for Monday, June 17
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
Governor Pat Quinn has now signed Illinois’ civil unions bill into law:
Moments ago Gov. Pat Quinn signed into law the Illinois Religious Freedom and Protection and Civil Union Act at a signing ceremony in downtown Chicago. His signature represents a long-fought victory toward fairness for thousands of gay and lesbian couples in Illinois.
The law becomes effective on June 1st.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Martin
January 31st, 2011 | LINK
Good, but notenough. Not portable across state lines, not necessarily recognized in places that allow SSM, and NOT MARRIAGE.
Rob San Diego
January 31st, 2011 | LINK
OMG is it really called that? That’s gayer then us? So what, in order for Illinoisans to get some basic rights, we have to be reminded of religious freedoms, like they have us by the balls or something? No shit really, like religious freedoms isn’t in the U.S. Constitution. (At this point writing this far I decide to look up the actuall bill and read it.)
OMG, did anybody actually read this bill? (as I scream off the top of my lungs and my head spins around,)YOU KNOW IT ONLY TOOK 14 WORDS TO TAKE AWAY MARRIAGE RIGHTS OF CALIFORNIANS? This thing reads like a novel! Most of it didn’t even make sense to me!
First it says they have the right to religious freedom. Again what, is that not in the U.S. Constitution? I mean did Illinoisans not have religious freedom? Were they being forced to follow a certain religion?
Next it’s nothing but, “you can do this, but you can’t do that!” And don’t even get me started about all their amendments, they basically said “well if we give you some rights, it won’t affect this or that.”
For example…
If we give you SOME rights it won’t impact housing prices or construction.
If we give you SOME rights it won’t impact hiring judges, but may increase court cases.
If we give you SOME rights it won’t impact pensions or the retirement system.
If we give you some rights, it won’t impact the fiscal of public health.
And my favorite… If we give you SOME rights, it won’t impact the budget of fiscal year 2008.
Wow, can they really spit in your eyes anymore? I mean I’m not saying that my state of California is any better, but I also just read the bill that gave us Domestic Partnerships and even though it much longer, it sounds a hell of a lot better than what they just passed in Illinois. Ours didn’t remind us just how much religion has us by the balls and hates us.
As happy as I am for them receiving some rights, I almost feel just as bad and sorry for them. (Just my opinion.)
Timothy Kincaid
February 1st, 2011 | LINK
Rob,
Our supporters have been making a point of including language that reassures religious people that their church won’t be forced to do anything.
Is it legally necessary? No. The constitution already protects them.
But it diffuses some of the fears and takes away that talking points from all but the most dishonest (who will say absolutely anything anyway).
And our supporters have also been giving the bills titles that point out the religious protections. It’s all about diffusing fear and lies. With NOM and FRC trying to scare them into believing that the gays were going to storm their church and take away their right to determine their rites, sometimes you have to give a lot of assurance.
As for the stuff you read about the budget of 2008 and housing prices, I’m not sure where you are getting that. Senate Bill 1716′s full text can be read here. Perhaps you read an analysis of the bill?
L. Junius Brutus
February 1st, 2011 | LINK
Rob: “OMG, did anybody actually read this bill? (as I scream off the top of my lungs and my head spins around,)YOU KNOW IT ONLY TOOK 14 WORDS TO TAKE AWAY MARRIAGE RIGHTS OF CALIFORNIANS? This thing reads like a novel! Most of it didn’t even make sense to me! ”
That’s not really a problem with the law. The important thing is that it does what it supposed to do: give same-sex couple every single state right that other couples have.
Rob San Diego
February 1st, 2011 | LINK
This is where I got the amendments Timothy.
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=1826&GAID=9&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=30661&SessionID=51
As I mentioned, I’m very happy for them, I feel very strongly about the wording on this just as you did in your article titled “Why the word “marriage” matters” where you went on about the bill in Hawaii that makes an obvious point that we are inferior to heteros.
L. Junius Brutus said “That’s not really a problem with the law. The important thing is that it does what it supposed to do: give same-sex couple every single state right that other couples have.”
If that is the case then all it has to say is “2 people of the same sex shall have some of rights and responsibilities of married couples, only it will be called a civil union and not marriage.”
Timothy Kincaid
February 2nd, 2011 | LINK
Rob,
That is HB 1826, from the 2007-2009 session, which did not pass. And, incidentally, what you were reading were assessments of the bill, not the language of the bill. The bill itself can be read by selecting House Amendment Number 4 (navigating these legislative websites is more than a little tricky).
The bill that the Governor signed was SB 1716. Read it.
Actually, what it does say is:
It also defines its terms, notes who is qualified for a civil union, and lays out the procedures (who is responsible for preparing or filing the forms, etc.) but it avoids all discussion of “protecting marriage” and the rest.
Leave A Comment