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 27th, 2010
With Jay Leno on the Tonight Show:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI1jurKRM8w“Look, it’s just not fair.”
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:
Ryan
July 27th, 2010
Talk about obvious trolling. The man is bothered by a gay character in a McDonald’s ad! Suddenly he’s on our side? Baloney. He knows an executive order can’t supercede a law passed by Congress, and the next Republican president would just rescind it anyway. Pure theatrical nonsense.
hyhybt
July 27th, 2010
Well, of course he can say that, knowing that such an order would be illegal, giving his side more fuel while doing nothing good for those serving.
tina
July 27th, 2010
When I googled Bill O’Reilly & DADT, I got a statement from Jan ’10. He said DADT isn’t anti-gay, it’s about making ppl comfortable in the barracks.
Quite the epiphany lately.
Will we be hearing him redress remarks like that?
AdrianT
July 27th, 2010
I see no reason to doubt O’Reilly’s sincerity here, and it is most welcome. There is nothing illegal about an executive order. If anything, it should be illegal to vote on basic human rights in the first place.
Once thousands of GLBT service people are out, you cannot force them back in the closet – the idea that a future president would reverse such an order is hysteriical nonsense.
However, the US military does have a serious problem with evangelical extremists who have wormed their way into the command chain. This must be resisted in the strongest possible way.
Ryan
July 27th, 2010
There are many reasons to doubt his sincerity–you really don’t see them? He takes every opportunity to belittle gay people on his show all the time, he was even angry that another country aired a gay commercial. He even has voiced support for DADT in the past. And no, the President shouldn’t be able to defy the law with an executive order; even a law as odious as DADT. A President with that much unchecked power would be very dangerous. It’s quite clear that Bill is trolling and kissing up to the liberal Los Angeles audience.
Timothy Kincaid
July 27th, 2010
Ryan,
Bill O’Reilly is not an ally of our community. But he also does not “take every opportunity” to belittle gay people. I think that perhaps you are getting second hand information which is not being reported to you in a way that allows you to make informed opinions.
hyhybt
July 27th, 2010
Adrian: Executive orders that directly and explicitly contradict laws passed by Congress and signed by the President are not illegal?
Bearchewtoy75
July 27th, 2010
O’Reilly has contradicted himself more than a few times. And he’ll take any opportunity to give Obama a criticism!
I would love for Obama to put an executive order ending DADT, but it already looks like it’s going to be a tough reelection campaign and you know the Republicans would jump on that in a minute.
Pliny
July 27th, 2010
hyhybt:
You’re both right and wrong here. A President cannot simply make a law passed by Congress go away with an Executive order. However, when that law explicitly provides a trapdoor…
Here’s the relevant bit of 10 U.S.C. § 654 (The DADT law) You can read the whole thing here. It’s actually not that long.
(e) Rule of Construction.— Nothing in subsection (b) shall be construed to require that a member of the armed forces be processed for separation from the armed forces when a determination is made in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense that—
(1) the member engaged in conduct or made statements for the purpose of avoiding or terminating military service; and
(2) separation of the member would not be in the best interest of the armed forces.
It’s that bit of text at the end there that everyone hangs their Executive order hat on. An order from the President specifying that separation of LGBT soldiers is not in the interest of the armed forces would seem to satisfy this.
Mark
July 28th, 2010
A federal statute cannot be undone by an executive order. O’Reilly should know that . . . but Jay Leno should have known that too and called him out on it.
I was really pleased to see Jay Leno’s comments about how senseless DADT is and I hope that those thoughts resonate with citizens and policymakers.
hyhybt
July 28th, 2010
“It’s that bit of text at the end there that everyone hangs their Executive order hat on. An order from the President specifying that separation of LGBT soldiers is not in the interest of the armed forces would seem to satisfy this.”—Yes, but would that not make things worse? Executive orders change every time we get a new president, and it seems to me that one of the worst things to do would be to allow open service for a couple of years and then, after people have come out, remove it again. If there were any assurance Obama would remain in office through a second term, it wouldn’t matter so much because by then everyone would be too used to the idea to go back; but there’s a fair chance he’ll lose reelection.
Bruno
July 28th, 2010
I think he’s a bit schizo. He goes from pandering to the dark side to reasoned thought in one fell swoop. Megalomaniac.
Leave A Comment