Posts Tagged As: Tennessee
July 7th, 2016
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is leading a coalition of thirteen states in a lawsuit filed against the Obama administration. The lawsuit seeks a permanent injunction against directives from the Justice Department and the Education Department which warn that Title IX funding may be withheld from school districts and colleges that discriminate against transgender students. The particular point of contention among conservatives is whether schools can be compelled to make restrooms and changing rooms available to transgender students according to their gender identity:
The coalition, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, has already filed suit against the Obama administration to seek a permanent block of the directive. Wednesday’s request, if approved, would affect not just these states but public schools across the country.
The states filed the case in U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Texas. Harrold Independent School District, just northwest of Wichita Falls, is the official plaintiff on behalf of Texas, but most of the attention in the Lone Star State has fallen on the Fort Worth Independent School District.
There, the superintendent incurred the wrath of Paxton, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and other Republican leaders for setting local rules that would allow transgender students to use the bathroom of their choice.
Last week, Paxton issued a nonbinding opinion that the new guidelines for transgender students violate state law by relegating “parents to a subordinate status” in being informed about their children. He also said Fort Worth ISD Superintendent Kent Scribner illegally enforced the rules without the school board’s input.
Scribner countered that the school district’s guidelines for transgender students had been approved by the district five years ago, long before the current controversy.
The thirteen states joining the lawsuit are: Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wisconsin, and West Virginia.
January 6th, 2016
Last year Mr. and Mrs. Bumgardner decided that they just weren’t all into the marriage thing anymore and decided to call it quits. Unfortunately for them, their divorce was assigned to Judge Jeffrey Atherton of Chattanooga.
Judge Atherton was really quite upset that the US Supreme Court had ruled that gay people have all the same rights as other people and threw a little fit. If gay people could get married then, well, he’s show them. He’d write a petulant and whiny little ruling taking it out on the Bumgardners.
Although this Court has some vague familiarity with the governmental theories of democracy, republicanism, socialism, fascism, theocracy, and even despotism, implantation of this apparently new “super-federal-judicial” form of benign and benevolent government, termed “kryptocracy” by some and “judi-idiocracy” by others, with its iron fist and limp wrist, represents quite a challenge for a state level trial court. In any event, it should be noted that the victory of personal rights and liberty over the intrusion of state government provided by the majority opinion in Obergefell is held by this Court to have divested subject matter jurisdiction from this Court when a divorce is contested. Individuals, at least according to the majority opinion, are apparently authorized (along with the federal judiciary) to define when a marriage begins and, accordingly, ends, (without the pesky intervention/intrusion of a state court) leaving irreconcilable divorces under Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-4-101 (11), Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-4-103, and perhaps even Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-4-129 to some degree (but only when the grounds and/or irreconcilable differences are stipulated), intact and within the jurisdiction of this Court to address.
Nah nah nah nah nah! Go ask the limp-wristed Supreme Court to divorce you!
Judge Atherton (you homophobic bigot), you can consider yourself publicly reprimanded.
September 20th, 2015
Either Tennessee politicians Rep. Mark Pody, R-Lebanon, and Sen. Mae Beavers, R-Mt. Juliet, are phenomenally dense and lack even the most rudimentary understanding of law or else they are about the most pandering creatures on the planet. Even grade schoolers know that the US Constitution, as measured by the Supreme Court of the United States, is of a higher order than state law. But that makes no matter to these nincompoops. (Tennessean)
On Thursday two state Republican lawmakers unveiled their answer: a bill that they believe voids the Supreme Court decision and continues to define marriage under Tennessee law as a union between a man and a woman.
“Natural marriage between one (1) man and one (1) woman as recognized by the people of Tennessee remains the law in Tennessee, regardless of any court decision to the contrary,” the bill states.
“Any court decision purporting to strike down natural marriage, including (a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision), is unauthoritative, void, and of no effect.”
Their bill consists primarily of seven pages of WHEREAS statements quoting freely from the dissents penned by the Justices on the losing side of Obergefell v. Hodges. For some reason, they seem to think that the determination of Supreme Court Justices are legally compelling, but only when they agree with them.
This bill will go nowhere. Even should the legislators in Tennessee unanimously pass the bill with trumpet flare and dancing nymphs, it has no legal basis and will impact nothing. This sort of cynicism is a sad reflection on our political system and on the gullibility of these lawmakers’ constituents.
January 30th, 2015
GracePointe church in Franklin, TN, (a Nashville suburb) is an evangelical church with most of the beliefs of a typical evangelical in the South. It has a healthy sized congregation of 800 to 1,000 on Sundays and is best known as the church Carrie Underwood and her family attend.
They have long been somewhat supportive of gay congregants, but after three years of reflection the pastor has decided that “somewhat supportive” is not enough. (Time)
“Our position that these siblings of ours, other than heterosexual, our position that these our siblings cannot have the full privileges of membership, but only partial membership, has changed,” he said, as many in the congregation stood to their feet in applause, and other sat in silence. “Full privileges are extended now to you with the same expectations of faithfulness, sobriety, holiness, wholeness, fidelity, godliness, skill, and willingness. That is expected of all. Full membership means being able to serve in leadership and give all of your gifts and to receive all the sacraments; not only communion and baptism, but child dedication and marriage.”
This may be one of the first evangelical megachurch – at least in the South – that has taken this stand.
It can’t have been an easy decision and Pastor Stan Mitchell has to be aware that this is a divisional issue and attendance will drop. But hopefully others will be attracted by a message of inclusiveness.
January 16th, 2015
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the four marriage cases in which the Sixth Circuit turned back an effort to bring marriage equality or marriage recognition in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. According to today’s order: (PDF: 43KB/2 pages) the Court intends to keep the arguments focused on two narrow questions:
The cases are consolidated and the petitions for writs of certiorari are granted limited to the following questions: 1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? 2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state? A total of ninety minutes is allotted for oral argument on Question 1. A total of one hour is allotted for oral argument on Question 2. The parties are limited to filing briefs on the merits and presenting oral argument on the questions presented in their respective petitions. The briefs of petitioners are to be filed on or before 2 p.m., Friday, February 27, 2015. The briefs of respondents are to be filed on or before 2 p.m., Friday, March 27, 2015. The reply briefs are to be filed on or before 2 p.m., Friday, April 17, 2015.
Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog believes that oral arguments may take place in late April with a final ruling “probably in late June.” He adds:
Although the Court said explicitly that it was limiting review to the two basic issues, along the way the Justices may have to consider what constitutional tests they are going to apply to state bans, and what weight to give to policies that states will claim to justify one or the other of the bans.
November 6th, 2014
Chase Strangio, staff attorney for the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project, has announced that they will bypass an en banc review and appeal today’s Sixth Circuit decision directly to the U.S. Supreme Court:
“This decision is an outlier that’s incompatible with the 50 other rulings that uphold fairness for all families, as well as with the Supreme Court’s decision to let marriage equality rulings stand in Indiana, Wisconsin, Utah, Oklahoma, and Virginia. It is shameful and wrong that John Arthur’s death certificate may have to be revised to list him as single and erase his husband’s name as his surviving spouse. We believe it’s wholly unconstitutional to deny same sex couples and their families access to the rights and respect that all other families receive. We will be filing for Supreme Court review right away and hope that through this deeply disappointing ruling we will be able to bring a uniform rule of equality to the entire country.”
Meanwhile, this dissent of today’s decision, written by Sixth Circuit Judge Martha Daughtrey, caught my eye. She denounced the majority’s opinion which refused to recognize the judiciary’s responsibility for guaranteeing the rights of all Americans (PDF: 309KB/64 pages):
Today, my colleagues seem to have fallen prey to the misguided notion that the intent of the framers of the United States Constitution can be effectuated only by cleaving to the legislative will and ignoring and demonizing an independent judiciary. Of course, the framers presciently recognized that two of the three co-equal branches of government were representative in nature and necessarily would be guided by self-interest and the pull of popular opinion. To restrain those natural, human impulses, the framers crafted Article III to ensure that rights, liberties, and duties need not be held hostage by popular whims.
More than 20 years ago, when I took my oath of office to serve as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, I solemnly swore to “administer justice without respect to persons,” to “do equal right to the poor and to the rich,” and to “faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me . . . under the Constitution and laws of the United States.” See 28 U.S.C. § 453. If we in the judiciary do not have the authority, and indeed the responsibility, to right fundamental wrongs left excused by a majority of the electorate, our whole intricate, constitutional system of checks and balances, as well as the oaths to which we swore, prove to be nothing but shams
She also wonders aloud:
These four cases from our sister circuits provide a rich mine of responses to every rationale raised by the defendants in the Sixth Circuit cases as a basis for excluding same-sex couples from contracting valid marriages. Indeed, it would seem unnecessary for this court to do more than cite those cases in affirming the district courts’ decisions in the six cases now before us. Because the correct result is so obvious, one is tempted to speculate that the majority has purposefully taken the contrary position to create the circuit split regarding the legality of same-sex marriage that could prompt a grant of certiorari by the Supreme Court and an end to the uncertainty of status and the interstate chaos that the current discrepancy in state laws threatens. Perhaps that is the case, but it does not relieve the dissenting member of the panel from the obligation of a rejoinder.
November 6th, 2014
In a 2-1 decision, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the state constitutional bans on marriage of the states of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. Writing for the majority, Judge Jeffrey Sutton said:
When the courts do not let the people resolve new social issues like this one, they perpetuate the idea that the heroes in these change events are judges and lawyers. Better in this instance, we think, to allow change through the customary political processes, in which the people, gay and straight alike, become the heroes of their own stories by meeting each other not as adversaries in a court system but as fellow citizens seeking to resolve a new social issue in a fair-minded way.
This determination ignores the fact that when animus in present, a minority cannot become the “hero of it’s own stories” as they lack the ability to win in the “customary political processes”. When confronting Goliath on the field of political battle, the only stone in David’s sling is that of judicial protection. Judge Sutton would have David face the giant with no stones at all.
This is, of course, not the end of the story.
It is likely that the plaintiffs will ask for an en banc review and, if they do not prevail in that venue, will appeal to the Supreme Court.
February 27th, 2014
It would appear that the outcry over Arizona’s license-to-discriminate bill that was finally vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer last night may have reached something of a high water mark. Major companies, business group, professional organizations, and major league sports all came out with strong statements denouncing the bill in the moments leading up to Brewer’s veto. Typical was this one from Yelp’s CEO Jeremy Stoppelman:
SB 1062 would serve to create an environment where consumers would not know how they would be treated – or whether they would even be served – when they patronize a business. This bill goes against the rule that every great business subscribes to, which is that the customer is always right. It will not only be bad for customers, but also bad for local business in the state. I also believe that it would be in consumers’ interests to be made aware of businesses within the state that did engage in discriminatory behavior. Since early 2010, Yelp has hired over 650 employees in Arizona. Over the next few years, we hope to hire hundreds more. It would be unconscionable for the state to encourage discrimination against any of them.
Arizona joins three other states in putting an end to their license-to-discriminate bills in just the past twenty-four hours:
Over the past several weeks, license-to-discriminate bills have been defeated or withdrawn in Colorado, Kansas, Maine, Tennessee, and Utah. But we’re not out of the woods yet. Similar bills are still working their way through Idaho, Missouri, South Dakota, and Georgia, where Atlanta-based Delta Airlines has announced its opposition. The Idaho bill was returned to a House committee last week, with the sponsor saying he wants to “find the right language.” In addition, there’s a push to put a similar measure on the ballot in Oregon in November.
August 7th, 2012
You-know-who is crowing over his big win in Tennessee.
The Democratic Party establishment from Tennessee to Washington is in political collapse today because of Public Advocate supporter and volunteer Mark Clayton. You see, Mark has won the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate in TN to face establishment Senator Bob Corker in November.
This is a major blow for the Homosexual Lobby and their allies entrenched in the Democratic Party’s leadership. In the run up to the primary, Mark openly stood up for true marriage and the Family. It was not a secret or a trick. When given the opportunity to listen without the heavy-handed tactics of the party leadership, even most Democrats believe in true marriage and the Family.
Public Advocate is barred from endorsing candidates and campaigns. And if it wasn’t for recent events, I wouldn’t mention this race to you. But the Democratic leadership has now disavowed Mark and attacked him over his affiliation with your Public Advocate. As expected, they refer to your Public Advocate as a “hate group”. And they are branding anyone who stands with us as “bigots” and “hate-mongers.”
Eugene Delgaudio’s Public Advocate is, in fact, an SPLC-designated anti-gay hate group. Clayton is the organization’s vice president. He is also the Democratic nominee for Tennessee’s U.S. Senate race. The Tennessee state Democratic Party has issued a statement:
Mark Clayton is associated with a known hate group in Washington, D.C., and the Tennessee Democratic Party disavows his candidacy, will not do anything to promote or support him in any way, and urges Democrats to write-in a candidate of their choice in November.
Meanwhile, Delgaudio, naturally, closes his email with:
P.S. Please prayerfully consider chipping in with a donation of $10 or more to help Public Advocate fight for traditional values.
August 6th, 2012
Republican Senator Bob Corker is opposed to marriage equality. He supports a constitutional amendment to make sure that gay people cannot have equality in any state. He opposed lifting the ban on open service in the military. He is not by any means a friend to the gay community.
About the only remotely pro-gay position that Corker has ever taken was saying that he would be “open to looking at” civil unions provided that they were limited to certain rights (e.g. hospital visitation) and resembled marriage in no way at all.
In other words, just about the only way that Corker could possibly be the best choice for gay voters would be if the Democrats selected a challenger who was an anti-gay activist affiliated with an actual anti-gay hate group.
Which they just did.
Mark Clayton, the Democratic Party nominee for Corker’s senate seat, is the Vice President of Public Advocate of the United States. Public Advocate (better known as Eugene Delgaudio’s alter-ego) has been determined by the Southern Poverty Law Center to be an anti-gay hate group. (Who knew Delgaudio had a Vice President?)
It seems that Clayton used that title to lobby for Tennessee’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill last year. (Who knew that Public Advocate actually advocated for anything?)
Of course Tennessee Democrats didn’t intend to select an anti-gay activist to represent their party. They really didn’t set out to elect anyone in particular to that nominal task. Clayton was just listed first on the ballot.
And now they are trying to figure out how to get rid of him. So far, there doesn’t seem to be any way to do so and it’s pretty much a foregone conclusion that Corker will win reelection regardless of who the Democrats nominated.
But until such time as there is some other option at the ballot box (I don’t know if Tennessee allows write in votes) gay voters are best served by voting for Bob Corker. The fewer votes for Eugene Delgaudio’s side-kick, the better.
May 1st, 2012
Rep. Joey Hensley (R-Hohenwald) has pulled the proposed “Don’t Say Gay” education bill from consideration before the Tennessee General Assembly. But while the bill dies with the end of the legislative session, it’s effects will continue on. Hensley has told reporters that he received assurances that the Department of Education and the State Board of Education will send a letter to all Tennessee school districts “telling them they cannot teach this subject in grades kindergarten through eight.”
March 13th, 2012
If it’s possible to die of embarrassment, then the nationwide uproar over Tennessee’s proposed “Don’t Say Gay” bill may well kill the bill. The (Nashville) Tennessean reports that the bill’s sponsors have agreed to put off debating the bill until the end of the legislative session, using a procedural move often used when sponsors decide not to push a bill:
Sponsors had been under pressure to amend the original bill, which would have banned any teaching about homosexuality apart from “natural human reproduction” before eighth grade. The measure was meant to keep schools and teachers from initiating discussions about gays and lesbians, but even its backers conceded Tuesday that it might have brought unintended consequences. “We found out there really is not sex education curriculum in K-8 right now,” said state Rep. Bill Dunn, R-Knoxville, the bill’s original sponsor.
After slapping his forehead an exclaiming a Homer-esque “Doh!”, backers say they will instead shift their focus towards abstinence-only education.Another Sponsor, Rep. Hoey Hensley (R-Hohenwald), said that he would push for the bill again if the abstinence-ed bill fails. Gob. Bill Haslam criticized the “Don’t Say Gay” bill earlier this week, saying it was an unnecessary distraction that could cause more problems than it allegedly solves.
March 7th, 2012
Romney hangs in there again like a punch-drunk fighter staggering toward the finish of the sixth round (ooh look at me, I’m using a sports metaphor), picking up wins in six of the states up for grabs yesterday including a very hotly contested Ohio, where Santorum very nearly pulled off an upset. Romney did best in his home state of Massachusetts, and he did well in neighboring Vermont. He also did very well in the Idaho caucuses, where 23% of spudsters are fellow Mormons. There were no exit polls in Idaho, but in Arizona where Mormons made up 14% of the vote, they broke 96-4 for Romney on Feb 28.
Romney also did very well where he had very little actual competitors (Virginia, where Santorum and Gingrich weren’t on the ballot). Which is to say that he has done very well where he had the home field advantage (as did Gingrich) or where his most potent opponent was missing. Or Alaska.
Which goes to day that Romney is still having trouble closing the deal with Santorum racking up rack up wins in the more conservative middle bits of the continent. In Oklahoma, Santorum’s first place finish came in spite of Sen. Tom Coburn’s endorsement of Romney, while Romney actually came in third in North Dakota and just barely avoided that same fate in Oklahoma. And in Ohio, where Romney poured massive amounts of dollars into the race, he only managed to pull out a 1% win over Santorum in the bellwether state. But even there, he he lost among Evangelical, blue collar and rural voters, but won among those who were 50 and older.
But here’s the stat I find most telling: When Ohio voters were asked whether they’d support Romney in the general election regardless of who they voted for in the primary, 36% said they would not be satisfied with a Romney candidacy, versus 33% who said they’d reject a Santorum candidacy. In other words, Ohio Republicans are less willing to settle for Romney than Santorum.
But this is a race for delegates, not popular votes. And whatever weaknesses that exist in Romney’s popular support within the GOP, he’s still by far the frontrunner in the delegate race according to CNN’s count, with more delegates than his opponents combined. But at only about half way through the primaries, Romney’s still a long way from the 1,144 needed to secure the nomination. Kansas, US Virgin Islands and Guam hold caucuses next week, followed by primaries in Alabama, Mississippi and Hawaii the week after that. Which means that for Romney, the long slog continues. But for the other candidates in the field, the slog is even longer.
The idea behind Super Tuesday was to bring the nomination process into clearer focus. The only thing made clear yesterday is that GOP voters would still prefer another candidates. But that’s not the choice available to them. Which means that Romney will almost certainly be the nominee when all is said and done, but what is said and done before then will continue to be the story. As Ezra Klein at the Washington Post put it, “For three guys who profess to not like the media very much, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich are really making all our dreams of a long, unpredictable primary come true.”
February 16th, 2012
A Tennessee House Education Committee approved the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill on a voice vote yesterday, sending it to the House Education Committee, which could take up the measure next week. Observers say it is on track for passage in the full house by the time the legislature adjourns in the spring.
The bill (PDF: 36KB/1 page), which would prohibit elementary or middle school teachers from discussing any sexual orientation other than heterosexuality, which opponents fear would prohibit discussions of bullying against gay students. It reads:
SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 49-6-1005, is amended by adding the following as new subsection (c) and by relettering the existing subsection (c) accordingly:
(1) The general assembly recognizes the sensitivity of particular subjects that are best explained and discussed in the home. Human sexuality is a complex subject with societal, scientific, psychological, and historical implications; those implications are best understood by children with sufficient maturity to grasp their complexity.
(2) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, no public elementary or middle school shall provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual orientation other than heterosexuality.
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring it.
The state Senate has already passed a version last year with an amendment which they claim narrows the scope of the bill. That amendment changed section 2 to read (PDF: 44KB/ 1 page):
Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, any instruction or materials made available or provided at or to a public elementary or middle school shall be limited exclusively to natural human reproduction science. The provisions of this subdivision shall also apply to a group or organization that provides instruction in natural human reproduction science in public elementary or middle schools.
So far, the bill in the house appears not to have been updated to reflect the Senate’s change.
January 30th, 2012
In Tennessee, there are no protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation. There also are no protections against discrimination based on stupidity, ignorance, and unvarnished bigotry – as State Senator Stacey Campfield (R – Dist. 7) discovered.
Campfield, a 43 year old confirmed bachelor, has a very special interest in homosexuality. For several years he unsuccessfully attempted to pass anti-gay legislation in the House of Representatives. And, as the good people of Knoxville seemed to be in the mood to reward buffoonery and ineptitude, in 2010 he was promoted to the state Senate, where his Fight Teh Ghey campaign found more fertile ground.
In May of last year, Campfield’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill passed the Senate 19-10, ensuring Tennessee’s reputation as a being, ahem, less attune with the realities and sensibilities of the twenty-first century. The bill is currently in the Education subcommittee of the House (as HB 229) along with an accompanying bill requiring all residents to drop out of school after the sixth grade, smoke corn-cob pipes, play the banjo and the marry their cousin. (Okay, maybe that last bill is not actually up for debate.)
In addition to his legislative contributions on the subject, Campfield is quick to offer his intellectual analysis on this and related subjects. On a recent interview with Michelangelo Signorile, Campfield asserted that “average lifespan of a homosexual” is “very short” and that that HIV came about when a homosexual airline pilot had sex with a monkey. Perhaps Campfield was attempting to garner support for the bill by illustrating the extent to which his own education had been blighted due to obsession over Teh Ghey.
But despite the efforts of their legislators to live up to stereotype, Tennessee has a good many decent, educated, and cultured people. And some residents are greatly offended when elected officials proudly display their ignorance and animus and make the state look like a haven for redneck bigots.
Martha Boggs, the owner of the Bistro, decided that as a business owner she had the right to refuse service and so on Sunday when Stacey Campfield showed up for brunch she told him that he was not welcome.
Campfield, no doubt, was delighted. From what I’ve seen over the years, the man dotes on publicity of any kind. But if he decides to try and play the martyr and decry the evil Left, I don’t think it will play well. Boggs seems like just some lady who’d had enough and I don’t think Stacey will do well in comparison.
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.