Posts Tagged As: Illinois Family Institute
October 8th, 2013
Once a voice for those who opposed marriage equality in a somewhat civil tone, the National Organization for Marriage is racing down the fast lane towards anti-gay extremism. In the past few months, as it has became unavoidable clear that equality is the near future, NOM has abandoned all pretense of principled opposition on the issue of marriage and has been edging towards becoming just another of the shrill voices screaming about the homosexual agenda and ranting about what the evil radical homosexual lobby is trying to do to destroy America and harm Christians (as they define them).
Today is another example: (NOMblog)
Same-sex ‘marriage’ radicals are at it again… the latest example comes from Chicago.
In what the Chicago Tribune rightly called “a stunning public admission” openly homosexual Democratic State Representative Greg Harris of Chicago, outright admitted in a public debate that the proposed law in Illinois redefining marriage did NOT provide religious liberty or conscience protections for individual Christian business owners.
The article continued, saying that “it was clear that both he and homosexual Chicago Alderman Deb Mell (a former state representative and co-sponsor of SB 10) oppose any such protections.” (emphasis added).
That seemed odd to me, as the Trib hasn’t referred to someone as “homosexual Chicago Alderman” since the 90’s. This is the rhetoric not of reporters or even editorial boards, but of anti-gay activists. So I did a little searching and, sure enough, this didn’t come from the Chicago Tribune’s reporters or editorial staff at all.
It came from Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute, one of only 34 groups listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an active anti-gay group (a “hate group”). And that “stunning public admission”, yeah that was only Laurie being “stunned”.
Now most of us can pretty easily distinguish between raging bias-based ranting and news coverage. But it is becoming increasingly evident that Brian Brown and others at the National Organization for Marriage live in a world where anti-gay epithets and paranoid raging against gay Americans seems normal and ordinary.
April 15th, 2011
Laurie Higgins is an activist who writes strident florid diatribes decrying “the normalization of homosexuality” for the the anti-gay hate group, Illinois Family Association (IFI is one of only seventeen groups so designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center). But Laurie doesn’t see herself as a hater – or not of people. Laurie only hates sin.
Higgins’ specialty is schools and one can usually find her railing about the evils of gay-straight alliances, often at about the same time that the news is covering the story of a gay teen who committed suicide. And as part of the small but shrill collection of truly outlandish wackadoodle activists, Laurie is dedicated.
Annually, she calls on Christian parents take their kids out of school on the Day of Silence to show that they oppose its goal of drawing attention to anti-gay bullying and harassment. She considers No Name-Calling Week to be “devilish” because the curriculum, which call on students to not use ‘gay’ as a slur, “manipulate[s] emotions while never exposing or critiquing the assumptions embedded within the activities.”
And it isn’t that Laurie thinks that these are admirable efforts which go too far in their efforts to stop bullying. Nor does she simply think that such efforts unfairly portray conservatives as hateful or uncaring.
Rather, Laurie believes that there should be “a culture of disapproval and condemnation” towards homosexuality. She believes that Christians students have a moral obligation to denounce the homosexual agenda in public schools and cultivate a such a culture.
But Laurie owns no shame for this. She feels no responsibility whatsoever for any consequences that come from her campaign. That children suffer is not due to her words of truth but due to the confusion from others lying to them and deceiving their soul.
And Laurie is firmly convinced that it is she who genuinely loves those who experience a disordered sexual attraction to their same sex. Unlike the depraved, carrion-devouring culture, Laurie loves them enough to tell them that a celibate life lived in submission to God is not a lonely, unfulfilled life. She alone is brave enough to tell children that a life in which they will never kiss, hold hands, date, infatuate about, fall in love with, marry, build a life with, and grow old together with anyone ever is a life defined by real love and real peace.
And as much as she loves those depraved and disordered people, she hates their sin. And it is her hatred of the sin of homosexuality that drives her to feats of rhetoric that have contributed to IFI’s recognition as a hate-group.
In fact, Laurie can stand as Example One of the embodiment of St. Augustine’s call to Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin. But the little problem with loving the sinner and hating the sin is that Laurie, like most who live that principle, just can’t tell where the person lets off and their sin begins.
Let’s look at a paragraph from her most recent article. Although it is titled as though calling the church to care, it is just one of her usual encouragements to hate. The sin, of course.
When I think about the evil done to children by teachers who tell them that homosexuality is deserving of respect and affirmation, I become angry, and I desperately want others to experience the righteous anger that should well up in decent people who see young children taught that evil is good. We do not embody the love of Christ when we remain silent while body and soul-destroying lies are being affirmed to and in children, teens, and adults.
Laurie would have us note that it is homosexuality that she opposes. But is it? Are teachers telling children, “homosexuality is deserving of respect and affirmation”?
No, they are not.
Rather, teachers are telling students that homosexual persons are deserving of respect and admiration or, at least, that their homosexuality is not cause for precluding such persons from respect and admiration.
And Laurie doesn’t believe that at all. She thinks that society should be withholding respect and admiration for these people. It should reject and condemn. It should make them feel shame.
When we consider the honesty of the situation, what Laurie really means is:
When I think about the evil done to children by teachers who tell them that homosexuals are deserving of respect and affirmation, I become angry, and I desperately want others to experience the righteous anger that should well up in decent people who see young children taught that evil doers are good. We do not embody the love of Christ when we remain silent while body and soul-destroying lies are being affirmed to and in children, teens, and adults.
But that looks too much like hate so say in public.
And besides Laurie would tell us that she does think that they are, like all of us, “deserving of respect and admiration as a Child of God.” She would go on about their eternal soul and what “real love” means and sacrifice and freedom in Christ and a whole lot of other phrases that allow Laurie to see herself as separate from the misery, pain, and death of innocent children for which she will have to answer to her Maker.
But the truth is that when it comes to real gay people in real situations, Laurie’s sees the sinner as inseparable from their sin. And her only response is hate.
August 25th, 2009
The Nazis, of course, were notorious for having murdered an estimated six million Jews, along with another six million undesirable Poles, Ukrainians, Russians, Hungarians — and let’s not forget homosexuals — for good measure. We all know that; that’s why you can say “Nazi” or “Hitler” without having to describe the abject evil they represent. And Laurie Higgins, of the Illinois Family Institute, thinks that Hitler’s atrocities are on par with homosexuality.
In an article she penned last July, Higgins says the “church should fight homosexuality like it did Nazism,” a confusing title given that she goes on to lament the church’s failure to fight Nazism as a parallel to today’s affirming churches:
What is alarming about the account of the German Evangelical Church’s reprehensible failure is its similarity to the ongoing disheartening story of the contemporary American church’s failure to respond appropriately to the spread of radical, heretical, destructive views of homosexuality. Don’t we today see church leaders self-censoring out of fear of losing their positions or their church members? Don’t we see churches criticizing those who boldly confront the efforts of homosexual activists to propagandize children and undermine the church’s teaching on homosexuality? Aren’t the calls of the capitulating German Christians for “a more reasonable tone” and a commitment to “honor different views” exactly like the calls of today’s church to be tolerant and honor “diversity”? Don’t pastors justify their silence by claiming they fear losing their tax-exempt status (i.e. government assistance)? Don’t they rationalize inaction by claiming that speaking out will prevent them from saving souls?
…I’ve asked this question before and I will ask it again: How depraved does the behavior have to be and how young the victims before the church, starting with those who have freely chosen to assume the mantle of pastor or priest, will both feel and express outrage at the indecent, cruel, and evil practice of using public money to affirm body and soul-destroying ideas to children?
Higgins asks, “where is the outrage?” Well I have some outrage for her. Virtually every question she asks is a strawman. First, is it even possible for Higgins to portray LGBT people less humanely than this? Nowhere is there even a hint that gay people are people, let alone fellow citizens, neighbors, parents, children, families, co-workers, care-givers, soup kitchen volunteers, or anything else remotely human. Instead, she equates her fellow citizens with the vile racism behind slavery and the horrific anti-Semitism of the Holocaust. Is that not, too, an outrage?
And further, how can she overlook massive numbers of evangelical, Catholic and Mormon churches which have actively fought to demonize LGBT people at every turn, including blaming gays for all sorts of natural disasters, economic crises and other evils in the world. They’ve accused LGBT people of conspiring to molest your children, abolish Christianity, and generally destroy civilization. They’ve collectively spent millions — probably even billions when it is all counted — to permanently render LGBT people as second-class citizens. I’m not one to draw parallels, but since she brought it up, I can’t help but notice that second-class citizenry was a tactic employed by the Nazis against a reviled minority back then.
Some Christians who think that being gay is a sin will say, in moments of pious reflection, that homosexuality is no worse a sin than any of the other sins and, heck, we’re all sinners. But Higgins is not that kind of Christian. She thinks being gay is a much worse kind of sin, a special Hitler-and-Nazi-Germany kind of sin. Higgins needs to bone up on her history and closely observe the consequences of labeling a hated minority with that kind of evil. And accept responsibility for her part in it.
July 16th, 2009
The Illinois Family Institute is decidedly anti-gay. They believe that your “lifestyle” is inherently evil and they know no limits in their fight against “militant homosexual activists.” IFI is one of only 12 Anti-Gay Hate Groups listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
But even those persons at IFI who have dedicated their lives to anti-gay activism are approachable. And recent events demonstrated this to me.
At this time yesterday, the IFI had a flyer on their website which they were encouraging their followers to pass out at church (it was conveniently sized to fit in a church bulletin). “Urgent!” it warned and then listed just why Illinoisans should fear Senate Bill 909, the Matthew Sheppard Hate Crimes Bill.
As its second bulletin point it declared:
It Infringes on Freedom of Speech and Religion.
Miss California , Carrie Prejean, could have been charged with a “hate crime” for her views on same-sex marriage if S. 909 was already law. What could constitute a “hate crime” under this bill is a homosexual man or woman claiming they were discriminated against and hurt by what was said.
Now, those who read here know that this is complete nonsense.
The bill says nothing about “claims” or “hurt by what was said.” Instead it provides states with federal assistance for a crime that
(A) constitutes a crime of violence;
(B) constitutes a felony under the State, local, or tribal laws; and
(C) is motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, or is a violation of the State, local, or tribal hate crime laws.
And I think we all know that Carrie’s babbling about “opposite marriage” was not a violent felony. Indeed, if hate crimes legislation could lead to Carrie’s arrest, it would have; Nevada has hate crimes protections in place.
So I contacted the Illinois Family Institute and had a lengthy email exchange with David E. Smith, its Executive Director. Smith was not quick to agree that his claims were baseless. He decidedly did not want to admit that his claim was hyperbolic, dishonest, and
a flat-out attempt to lie to those who use IFI as a resource a claim based more in desire to influence belief about the bill than in any real possible scenario. *
But I appealed to Smith’s integrity and the commands of his (and my) faith not to lie, and ultimately Smith had to admit – mostly to himself – that his flyer was not truthful.
And he changed it. And I commend him for making that change.
It’s not now a glowing endorsement of the bill, but at least it reads a bit more honestly:
It Infringes on Freedom of Speech and Religion.
To see where “hate crime” laws lead, we can look to other countries where such laws have been passed, and also to our nation\’s public universities. More than 230 public universities have so-called “speech codes” that are being used to restrict Christian speech. The majority of these speech codes censor any speech that challenges homosexual behavior.
Now I don’t think that S. 909 will lead to “speech codes”. But, unlike the false claims about Carrie Prejean, this slippery sloap is at least a legitimate concern and a credible issue over which reasonable people can disagree.
I am sure that our readers will continue to see false, offensive, or inflamatory statements in the many anti-gay writings of IFI. But that is not why I tell this story.
I want to let this serve as a reminder that the most effective strategy is not always to go in with guns blazing and call an opponent a homophobic lying bigot. Even if you think they are.
Now some folks have no interest whatsoever in the truth. They lie because that’s what lying liars do. But some – even those most extreme – don’t want to think of themselves as liars. They want desperately to “win”, but perhaps not at the cost of their immortal soul.
And I think that we could have a more reasoned debate, tear down a few walls, find some common ground, if we insist that all of us – those who agree and those who disagree – speak the truth, hold ourselves with honor, and demand honesty.
Sometime you’ll get it.
* The Illinois Family Institute objected to my characterization of their efforts as “a flat-out lie”. As I cannot state for certain what went on in their heads, I will concede that perhaps they were so confused by their own rhetoric as to actually believe that Carrie Prejean could have been arrested for saying that she supported “opposite marriage”.
May 12th, 2009
On May 5, the Illinios Family Institute joined the chorus of those who misstated the APA’s definition of orientation so as to claim that the Matthew Sheppard Hate Crimes Act would protect pedophilia, exhibitionism and various other paraphilias:
The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has defined the broad term of “sexual orientation” to include bestiality, pedophilia, incest, and “gender identity” disorder among 547 forms of sexual deviancy or ‘paraphilias.’
Clearly our Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion and the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, are at risk, not to mention legitimizing and safeguarding over 2 dozen mental/sexual disorders.
H.R. 1913 is an insidious piece of legislation that is aimed at protecting immoral deviant behaviors while inhibiting moral verbal opposition with the threat of prosecution…
We contacted the IFI and referred them to what the APA actually says. They have now issued a correction:
In the article entitled “Hate Crimes Bill Moves to Senate” (5/5/09), we mistakenly stated that the American Psychiatric Association’s actual definition of “sexual orientation” includes paraphilias. The APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) classifies “sexual orientation” as heterosexual, homosexual, and bi-sexual. The 547 mental disorders called “paraphilias” specifically involve non-human objects, physical pain, or unwilling partners as in pedophilia. IFI apologizes for the error.
Ok. That’s more of a slur by association than an apology. Which is, naturally, why IFI has been designated a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
And, of course, the IFI went on to oppose the bill in terms of “threats to equal protections”, an argument that did not seem to require attention when other classes of people were offered hate crimes protections.
Nevertheless, I do commend them for taking action to admit their misstatement.
April 28th, 2009
On April 15, Laurie Higgins, the Director of the Division of School Advocacy for hate-group Illinois Family Institute, wrote an article about why she opposed Dr. Throckmorton’s efforts to get Christian kids to follow the Golden Rule in response to GLSEN’s Day of Silence.
She argued that Christian kids should not “do to others what you would have them do to you”, but rather they “must condemn volitional homosexual conduct”.
I found this to be an endorsement of the bullying that GLSEN sought to counter as well as a perverse distortion of Christianity. I responded with a commentary in which I stated that “Higgins opposes the Day of Silence because she believes it is a Christian kid\’s duty to bully his gay classmates”.
This did not sit well with Laurie Higgins.
She countered with another article in which she accused me of spreading “pernicious lies” and tried to draw a distinction between “condemnation, which means strong disapproval” and bullying. She even went so far as to argue that “censoring” the public condemnation of gay students by other students “constitutes an act of incalculable harm”.
Higgins expressed no mention of the harm of allowing this “strong disapproval”, such as the suicide deaths of two eleven year-old boys in the previous week.
To Laurie, Christians students should show contempt and disgust and derision. It is a good thing to abuse their fellow students that they think might be gay. It\’s the Christian thing to do. It\’s just condemnation of sin, not bullying, you see. It keeps society on the straight and narrow way.
Now Laurie has responded again. In her opinion piece The Bullying Tactics of “Anti-Bullying” Activists, she seeks to defend her honor.
Rather than review her bullet points one by one, I’ll let my previous writing stand on its own. I think that the observations I have made about her character, values, goals, intentions and agenda are far more evident in her writing than are her new protestations.
And, perhaps most important, Laurie and I have found a common point. Referencing something I wrote in the comments to my own commentary, she indicates that I have, indeed, identified her intention and purpose (in the comments an individual who called herself “Teri” said I “hit the nail on the head”).
Though Laurie truncates my comment, I’ll repeat it in full.
Laurie\’s defenders play the same game that she does. They talk about “homosexual behavior”.
What they don\’t tell you is that they define “homosexual behavior” to include the simple act of identifying as gay.
You see, to the IFIs and Exoduses and others who “fight the homosexual agenda”, they really don\’t care so very much what you do in the privacy of your home – so long as you are suitably ashamed and believe that you are a sinner.
What they oppose is gay people openly and proudly identifing themselves and living with dignity.
Laurie and Teri and their pals would FAR rather have a teenage kid sneaking off to a seedly alley to have shame-filled anonymous unsafe sex than they would some virginal boy announcing that he is gay and plans to stay pure until he falls in love and marries the man of his dreams.
You see, as long as he hates himself they have a chance to save his soul. And that is far more important to them than his body or his spirit or his health or his character.
This is why they fight so hard against the Day of Silence and Gay-Straight Alliances. Not because of sex, but because these groups help counter the culture of disapproval and condemnation.
Because what Laurie wants more than anything is that the culture and society be dominated by disapproval and rejection of gays. Not gay sex, but gay identity. [The section in bold is quoted by Higgins]
And on this Laurie Higgins and I agree. We both acknowledge that she sees her goal as defending the culture of disapproval and condemnation.
Where we disagree is that I find the suffering and dead children she leaves in her wake to be abominable and horrific.
In mentioning the deaths of Carl Walker-Hoover, Jaheem Herrera, and Eric Mohat (the first time she’s been inclined to do so) she finds no evidence that “compassionate, intelligent expositions of conservative views of homosexuality” (the condemnation and strong disapproval in which she says Christian kids must engage) are in any way to blame.
Even though the parent of all three boys lay the blame for the death of their children at the feet of anti-gay bullying, Laurie thinks that she’s identified another culprit. Believe it or not, it’s me.
April 21st, 2009
The homosexual blog Box Turtle Bulletin carried an article last week in which Timothy Kincaid spread pernicious lies about me. I don’t know Mr. Kincaid, so I don’t know if he has a limited capacity for following the logic of an argument or if he has a limited commitment to truth and an unwillingness to provide evidence for his defamatory claims.
The crux of Higgins\’ argument is the indignant insistence that she does not personally bully children but that “There is an important distinction between interacting with individuals and participating in public debates”
In my interactions with individuals who identify as homosexual, I would never articulate my views about homosexuality unless the topic were introduced by them. If the topic were introduced by them, I would speak the truth graciously.
Higgins goes on at quite some length in her “graciously truthful” way, crafting a world in which schools are hell bent on promoting a radical, subversive, ahistorical view about the nature and morality of homosexuality and are conspiring to censor conservative views. This makes it “ethically legitimate for all citizens to participate in the public discussion regarding what best serves justice and the common good.”
But let\’s stop for just a moment and remind ourselves exactly what it is that we are talking about, exactly what it is that Higgins finds so objectionable: anti-bullying programs.
The constant use of “faggot” and “homo” and the constant deriding of students who may not fit the stereotype of sexual norms is pervasive in our public schools. And it is resulting in the staggering truth that children as young as 11 years old are killing themselves rather than face another day of this abuse.
And let\’s also keep in mind that there is nothing whatsoever that these kids can do about it. They did nothing to start it, do nothing to contribute to it, and have no way of stopping it. Many of them do not identify as gay and most of those who do have never engaged in any sexual behaviors of any kind. These are just kids who – for reasons that adults can never fathom – have been declared to be “a fag” and therefore deserving of torment.
Think about this when you read the next paragraph.
The truth is that public schools can find ways to curb bullying without addressing homosexuality. For example, students who engage in promiscuous behavior, particularly girls, are often called “sluts,” “skanks,” and “whores.” Public educators deplore such bullying, and yet even in the service of ending bullying they would never permit books, plays, films, days of silence, newspaper articles, essays, speakers, panel discussions, and “diversity” weeks to be employed in the service of transforming students’ views on the morality of promiscuous behavior. They would find ways to curb bullying of promiscuous teens without ever specifically addressing promiscuous conduct.
I want to be charitable. I want to believe that no one, not even Laurie Higgins, would oppose programs that seek to stop kids calling other kids “skank” or “whore”. I can\’t.
I want to believe that Laurie thinks it wrong to push gay kids into lockers, beat them up, threaten them, and subject them to a constant barrage of insults. I can\’t.
I want to believe that she feels more empathy and a closer association with those being tormented than to those who doing the tormenting of their fellow students. I can\’t.
There simply is no way to avoid it. There is simply no other possible conclusion. Laurie Higgins supports the bullying of gay students, she just refuses to think of it that way. Higgins sees the abuse as the legitimate response of moral kids to the immoral conduct they see in others.
Just like Laurie finds it reasonable to call a promiscuous girl (or one so accused) a slut or a whore, so too is it reasonable to torment gay kids (or those so assumed) with taunts of “faggot” and to physically abuse and threaten them. Because in her world Christians are required to “condemn” objectionable behavior – which means public derision and abuse – even if most of their victims have never engaged in any behavior at all.
To Laurie, Christians students should show contempt and disgust and derision. It is a good thing to abuse their fellow students that they think might be gay. It\’s the Christian thing to do. It\’s just condemnation of sin, not bullying, you see. It keeps society on the straight and narrow way.
And if there is collateral damage, that is of little concern to Laurie Higgins. She has never shown the slightest care for the victims, not even in passing. The important thing to Laurie is that students who share her contempt for homosexuality be unhindered in their efforts to condemn and berate.
And if this results in dead children, that is of no consequence; to Laurie it\’s a small price to pay.
April 20th, 2009
April 17th, 2009
Illinois Family Institute is only one of 12 anti-gay groups assigned Hate Group status by the Southern Poverty Law Center. It is a well deserved designation.
Laurie Higgins, the Director of the Division of School Advocacy for the Illinois Family Institute, gives voice to the attitudes and beliefs that have led to IFI being identified as a hate group. Laurie is also one of the organizers of the Day of Silence Walk Out.
She is not pleased that Dr. Warren Throckmorton is suggesting that Christian kids should treat gay kids as they wish to be treated. She is angry that he wants them to stay in school on the Day of Silence. And she is particularly irate that Throckmorton opposes the abuse of gay kids.
In her article, Dr. Throckmorton’s “Golden Rule” Misguided at Best, Higgins makes minimal lip service to “the worthy goal of ending bullying, but it’s quite clear that she does not at all wish that the bullying of gay kids should end at all.
“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets,” means that Christians should affirm to others God’s Word–the entirety of God’s Word–in a godly way.
Higgins declares that the Golden Rule means the exact opposite of what it says. Rather than do unto others as you’d have them do to you, she endorses the “affirming God’s Word” (ie public condemnation and ridicule) of others “in a godly way”. It is difficult to fathom a more perverse interpretation of Christ’s commandment.
[If] we allow schools to define discrimination so expansively as to prohibit all statements of moral conviction, character development is compromised and speech rights are trampled. And if administrators continue to define discrimination in such a way as to preclude only some statements of moral conviction, they violate pedagogical commitments to intellectual diversity and render the classroom a place of indoctrination.
Higgins supports discrimination, as long as it is based on “moral conviction”.
Dr. Throckmorton believes that “Christian students should be leading the way to make schools safe and build bridges to those who often equate ‘Christian’ with condemnation.” In this statement, Dr. Throckmorton glaringly omits the truth that Christians must condemn volitional homosexual conduct. And to those who view homosexuality as moral, this necessary Christian condemnation of homosexual behavior renders homosexual students unsafe.
Yes, Higgins actually supports making schools unsafe for gay kids.
She believes that “Christians must condemn volitional homosexual conduct.” In other words, Christian kids have a moral obligation to harangue and harass gay kids and publicly condemn them.
[As] moral beings living for a time in a fallen world suffused with brokenness of all kinds, we are all charged with the same moral task: We all must determine which of our myriad messy feelings are morally legitimate to act upon. Adults are supposed to help children navigate those murky waters.
Higgins believes that adults – teachers and administrators – should also condemn gay kids.
Let’s be clear. Higgins does not oppose the Day of Silence because it is the wrong way to go about ending the bullying of gay kids. Rather, Higgins opposes the Day of Silence because she believes it is a Christian kid’s duty to bully his gay classmates.
April 15th, 2009
The Illinois Family Institute, one of only twelve anti-gay groups in America listed by the SPLC as a hate group, tried to out-fear NOM’s fearmongering commercial released last week with a fearmongering video of their own. The IFI’s video, which endorsed the current status quo in schools where kids are being bullied and hounded into killing themselves, was posted as a response to the Day of Silence slated for Friday, April 17.
I had hoped to post about the IFI’s video this evening, but guess what? It’s no longer on YouTube. There’s nothing but a note saying “This video has been removed by the user.” And the original link on the IFI web page bragging about this video is also gone.
So what gives?
JoeMyGod seems to have some of the details leading up to its withdrawal. The IFI originally listed a Baptist Church in Glendale, Arizona as a producer of the video. In fact, the video referenced that church’s DareToStand.org web site. But that church denied having anything to do with the clip. They have posted a note, which reads:
Please note: The Illinois Family Institute posted an article on its site April 15, entitled Dare to Stand regarding a video produced by a church in Illinois. Because the radio ministry of Northwest Valley Baptist Church coincidently [sic] bears the name Dare to Stand, we were mistakenly connected with it.
Neither Dare to Stand radio nor Northwest Valley Baptist Church is in any way involved with the development of this video or with the web site connected with it (www.dare2stand.com). Our website is www.daretostand.org. Please contact the Illinois Family Institute at www.illinoisfamily.org for more information.
The IFI’s web page was then changed to identify the video’s creator as Grace Gospel Center in Bensonville, Illinois. And then sometime after that, the video and the web page both vanished into thin air.
So I can’t give you a blow-by-blow analysis of the video’s false claims. Just as well though. When they are putting out false claims about who is actually involved in making their own video, you know it has problems.
Update: It’s baaaack:
This video reminds me of a short movie that was put out in the 1950’s which imagined the United States invaded by the Communists. It featured Jack Webb and was called Red Nightmare:
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"
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.