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 lobbySeptember 17th, 2007
The “values voters” seem (so far) to be obsessed about homosexuality. And the candidates that showed up to pander are playing right along. They all weighed in on how to oppose “the homosexual agenda” with only Ron Paul hedging his anti-gay attitudes in terms of libertarianism.
Every single candidate present would veto ENDA, would support a federal marriage amendment, and would support healthcare policies that would reward a “moral” lifestyle.
So it’s not too surprising that Stephen Bennett was trotted out to ask the following question:
Would you support legislation ensuring that schools would lose federal funding if they exposed children to homosexual indoctrination?
They all said yes.
UPDATE: Peter LaBarbera appeared to ask a “question” to Mitt Romney… who wasn’t there to answer. What miniscule credibility this circus of the extreme had was completely abolished by allowing questions to non-present candidates. Those candidates that showed up should be ashamed.
Mat Staver “asked a question” of Fred Thompson comparing gay marriage to slavery.
UPDATE: A straw poll took place following the debate in which this slick bar-graph declared Mike Huckabee the winner. Janet Folger (left) gesticulated wildly.
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:
a. mcewen
September 17th, 2007
geez was david parker there too?
upnorth
September 17th, 2007
i would just like to correct an inaccuracy above about ron paul’s position on the federal marriage amendment. “all” the candidates didn’t support the amendment. Ron Paul didn’t vote for it in Congress and has repeatedly said that he supports leaving gay marriage up to the individual states (as the defense of marriage act does), or in an ideal world, not up to government at all but up to individual churches.
Lynn David
September 17th, 2007
What!?
Alan Keyes didn’t out-moral Mike Huckabee? I’m appalled, I tell you!! Appalled!!!
Finally… yikes! Any presidential candidate who was in a debate with Stephen Bennett and Pete LaBarbera as questioners isn’t worthy of hte title President of the United States.
David
September 17th, 2007
What do you think of the Value Voters’ agenda as stated on their “about” page at
http://www.valuesvoterdebate.com/preamble.cfm?host_id=f2a
What parts, if any, do you find reasonable among their stated goals?
grantdale
September 18th, 2007
Sorry David — took a awhile to read it. For some reason it’s coming up in Arabic, from a pirate server somewhere in Afghanistan.
I was able to (hopefully) accurately translate the page. (thank “The Creator” for bablefish.com!)
“we are all created equal … life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness blah blah”
“secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves”
(and we do mean, ourselves)
Everything in between indicates they’re paying lip service to the former, and aiming for the latter.
Which probably explains why it’s in Arabic, and on a pirate server somewhere in Afghanistan.
(Others can answer in all seriousness, if they care to. As someone thankfully outside the reach of that particular cultural milieu — as of now — we find the whole thing rather beyond absurd. Is this sort of thing due to home-schooling and gated-communities or something???)
Mike
September 18th, 2007
(Quoting)
>>”Would you support legislation ensuring that schools would lose federal funding if they exposed children to homosexual indoctrination?”
>They all said yes.
I would like to point out that Paul would like to get rid of Federal control of education entirely and leave it to the states, a position that is hard to express using only red and green lights. You may certainly disagree with him on whether cutting out the Department of Education is a good idea, but his answer is consistent with that position.
In other words, I doubt his answer was because he hates gays, but because he hates government — or at least, federal intrusion into local issues.
Jason
September 18th, 2007
David,
I read that agenda. I could write for pages about how they go from what is not true to what does not follow, but I’ll just answer your question:
Part I of Number 9:
“True Enforcement and Border Security”
I agree that we should not be allowing people to illegally sneak into our country. So yes, I agree our security is lax and in need of true enforcement.
Timothy Kincaid
September 18th, 2007
To the Ron Paul supporters:
It is sometimes difficult to determine exactly what he means when he speaks. He may well oppose a federal marriage amendment, I really couldn’t tell.
However, from his language it was clear to me that he did not view gay people as equal citizens. He used some “them and us” language about gays imposing on “our families”.
I don’t disagree with Paul’s libertarian ideals and to the extent that he is consistent (ie. opposing hate crimes for race, religion, etc.) then that’s fine.
But let’s not become confused and think that he’s a champion for equality and opponent to bigotry. He had an opportunity to show himself as such last night and failed miserably, in my opinion.
David
September 18th, 2007
Jason,
I thank you for giving an honest answer to my question and for your willingness to actually read through their agenda in order to give that answer.
I must say I am disappointed that you are the only Box Turtle Bulletin reader who was willing to do so.
Mark
September 20th, 2007
Tim:
Ron Paul does oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment–that’s in the record.
Frankly, I didn’t like the way Dr. Paul phrased some of his answers, and it’s pretty clear that he’s a bit uncomfortable with the topic. And I’m not a knee jerk supporter who agrees with him 100%. But I failed to hear any examples of rank bigotry from Mr. Paul. Perhaps some ignorance, but I don’t think he is a bigot.
And as a previous commenter noted, you also have to view Dr. Paul’s answers in terms of his overall libertaian philosophy.
The bottom line is that while gay issues are very important, the issues of a murderous interventionist U.S. foreign policy, the prospect of a war with Iran, the criminality of the Bush administration, growing domestic abuses of human rights, and an out of control Federal government and a disintegrating dollar and economy eclipse ALL ELSE in my opinion.
It’s fine to be critical of Dr. Paul , but keep in mind the larger picture here.
Timothy Kincaid
September 20th, 2007
Mark,
I’m glad to hear he opposes the FMA. But I didn’t hear that at the debate and I doubt the audience did as well. He talked around the question leaving me with a false impression.
I don’t object to you making your decisions based on whatever criteria you believe is best. However, here at BTB we tend to discuss politicians from the perspective of how they would (or do) legislate on equality. That’s our interest and we believe that there are more than enough sites that evaluate positions on Iran.
So it is unlikely that we will be tempering our criticism of someone’s lack of respect for gay citizens by their views on Darfur, Iran, budget deficits, or really anything else.
Nonetheless, I do understand that Paul’s objection to ENDA is based differently than Keyes’.
Leave A Comment