Box Turtle Bulletin

NOM speaks to another mostly-empty city plaza

Continuing to demonstrate itself to be the NOM Tour of Mostly-Empty City Plazas, the National Organization for Marriage’s tour stop in Columbus, Ohio, was surprisingly poorly attended.

As they moved out of the northeast and into more conservative Ohio, it was assumed that NOM’s rallies would begin to pick up attendance. They even brought out Maggie Gallagher, their big media star, to speak to the crowd at the State House south lawn. But the crowd didn’t show up.

The Tour Tracker reports that the NOMbies at the peak were about 30 and that protesters numbered about 120. Of course, NOM will report 60 supporters because it appears that their counting method is to simply multiply by two (the 19 or so in Annapolis became “about 50 supporters in attendance”).

In Columbus, police set up barricades behind which protesters were required to stand. The protesters chanted and blew whistles. While that is annoying to the speakers, I’m not sure exactly what it accomplished. There’s nothing really wrong with the “hey hey ho ho” chants, but I think it would be more effective to sing We Shall Overcome. Or really annoy NOM and get a few powerful tenors to belt out Ave Maria.

But for the most part they didn’t engage in Shocking! and Outlandish! behavior that would frighten the horses (and yes, there were horses; the police were mounted.) One young lady crossed the line and was reportedly confrontational towards the people attending the NOM rally before being arrested. That was unfortunate and if NOM got any pictures or video of her, she will undoubtedly be the star of their next “I’m a victim” video.

The protest was by far the most interesting part of NOM’s event – even to NOM. Their website has no pictures of their own crowd, deciding instead to post one of the marriage supporters.

One odd thing: Brian Brown was missing from the festivities, and rumor is that he flew to California. No one seems to know why. Maybe he was too bored and depressed from no one showing up to hear him speak.

UPDATE: Here are the two sides of the story about the young lady who was arrested:

NOM’s version:

One woman, before she was escorted out of the rally by police, went through the crowd offering her hand to NOM supporters before ripping it away and cursing in their faces.

Maggie Gallagher’s version:

The protestors seemed a pretty angry lot, but mostly respected the line. (The Ohio cops were going to make sure of that!) One woman tried to incite folks to storm the podium again, but the police made that seem like a pretty bad idea.

I love cops.

Holly Hahn’s version:

This is what happened. I accidentally wandered into the NOM side of the protest. Seeing some opportunity for amusement, I wandered around inside the barricades shaking hands and introducing my self as a homosexual. One older man got upset and grabbed me and tried to wrestle me away, the cops told me to go behind the barricade and i did. Then the cops told me to leave and I refused. They dragged me away, cuffed and charged me with disorderly conduct and obstructing. I cooperated once arrested. I need ANY AND ALL pics and videos, to prove I was shaking hands, not “grabbing arms” please repost!

To clarify” I parked in the parking garage and was unsure which side of the statehouse I need to be. There were NO barricades the way I entered. I didn’t actually realize I was in NOM territory until I noticed the logo on the podium.

p.s absolutely nothing happened to the old man who grappled with me, but i think they recorded me cussing at him to GTFO me, unfortunately. I am truly sorry if my um..unrestrained comments while being assaulted are used in a way that is detrimental to the cause. The fact is I am woman, 5’0 and there was a man grabbing and grappling with me and police yelling at me. I was scared and angry.

p.p.sYes, It wasn’t premeditated. I have done many many protests and actions over the years, but really this time I just wandered into the wrong side and decided to run with it. I can’t let anyone go through their life saying they haven’t met a queer. It’s kind of my policy. So I started shaking hands.
Putting myself in the public eye doesn’t scare me a bit. I am who I am.
I refuse to be afraid and unlike the anonymous donors to Prop 8 and other hate legislation, I am true enough to my beliefs to put my real name on them.
My name is Holly Hahn. I am a lesbian. I am not scared of police, social disapproval or bigots stalking me.
I believe that the time for Mr/s Nice Gay is over. I’m tired of endless attacks against our lives. I don’t want them to feel safe behind the barricade- why should they get the privilege of feeling safe when their words or hate make our brothers and sisters UNsafe?
I will cross barricades again, and I am hoping to organize a courthouse sit in on my court date

UPDATE TWO

I bring you two messages from the National Organization for Marriage. The first is from Maggie Gallagher:

My message to the protestors: Hate is not a family value. The 62 percent of Ohioans who came together across lines of race, creed and color to vote for marriage are not haters, and it’s wrong to portray them, or the American people that way.

The second I bring from NOM’s Facebook page. The site is heavily edited by NOM’s associates and only the messages that the administrators want there remain. What follows is the comments to this post. (I left nothing out so as not to appear to be cherry picking the worst)

Daniel Rowinski: ugh i find out my city of Cleveland will host the gay games of 2014.

Theresa Preece: The Gay Games?

John Ozanich: Gay Olympics

Theresa Preece: Yes, I know. SO many comments….

Danielle Burke: That is extremely disappointing :(

John Ozanich: all about money

Tara J Later: Oh, now that is beyond funny. The thing that comes to mind is the javelin throw on the movie ” Revenge of the Nerds”. Let’s get the aerodinamics right. I’m rotfl, big time.

Minister Dixon: “The Gay Games?” Yeah, now I’ve heard everything. How are Gay Games different from other games?

John Acker: Do the males (they are anything but men) compete in accessorizing and lisping?

John Ozanich: you ever see Jesse Owens do a 500 yard sprint wearing a feathered pink boa ?

Tara J Later: @ Min. Dixon….I think I have the answer to that question. The uniforms are tighter and shorter, to make sure they show every part of the body as much as possible. That’s the difference. And the uniforms will be flaming loud.

Minister Dixon: John do you want my turkey sandwich to come back up? LOL

Minister Dixon: @ Tara, if it’s anything like their parades, you may have a point there :)

Tara J Later: I do have to admit, that everyone of my homosexual friends have great taste in style… Only one is on the loud side, but none of them want marriage. It’s quite interesting that they aren’t on the band wagon.

Nick Jones: Do these games consist of slapping fights, sex in public and who can say ‘hey’ the gayest?

Nick Jones: Do these games consist of slapping fights, sex in public and seeing who can say ‘hay’ the gayest?

John Ozanich: no, that’s Congress, Nick…

Minister Dixon: LOL, hey John, you’re not well, hahaha

And now my message to the Maggie: Hate is not a family value. It is true that not all of the 62 percent of Ohioans who voted to deny equality to their gay neighbors are haters, but many of the people who support the National Organization for Marriage and who participate at your Facebook page are.

The Latino Catholic-Protestant Divide on Same-Sex Marriage

Why is the AFA’s Bryan Fischer so animated against Catholic Latino immigration? Well it turns out a new poll by Public Religion Research Institute was released today on “Religion, Proposition 8, and Same-Sex Marriage in California.” The poll examines the attitudes of various religious communities in California toward same-sex marriage. The must surprising finding was that Latinos overall were supportive of marriage equality (PDF: 397KB/26 pages):

There is a striking Catholic-Protestant divide within the California Latino community on public policy issues related to gay and lesbian rights.

• A majority of Latino Catholics (57%) say they would vote to make same-sex marriage legal, compared to just 22% of Latino Protestants.
• The Catholic-Protestant gap within the Latino community is evident across a range of gay and lesbian public policy issues.

This leaves the Latino community almost evenly divided on the issue, with 49% of Latinos regardless of religious affiliation supporting same-sex marriage, and 46% opposed. (Note: I have not been able to determine the margins of error for these smaller subsamples.) But Latinos overall appear more likely to shift toward a more pro-gay position, with 31% of Catholic Latinos and 25% of Protestant Latinos saying they have become more supportive, vs. 22% of White Californians saying the same thing. Only 9% of Catholic Latinos and 15% of Protestant Latinos report having become less supportive.

One interesting finding is in who Californians trust as sources of information about homosexuality:

• White evangelical Protestants, Latino Protestants, and black Protestants all ranked their own clergy leaders as the most trusted source of information about homosexuality.
• Both white and Latino Catholics say they trust the parents of gay or lesbian children more than their own clergy as a source of information about homosexuality.

Joseph M. Palacios, Adjunct Professor of Sociology at the Center for Latin American Studies at Georgetown University, cites three likely reasons for these findings:

Family First: Latino Catholics orient their social lives around the family and extended family even in the context of high Latino single-parent households (estimated 33% of all U.S. Latino households; 36% of all Latino Children in California live in single-parent households). Family solidarity is strong and even though children may not follow “traditional family values” as projected by the church and the U.S. society, parents want to keep their children within the family. It is not surprising that Catholics in general and Latino Catholics in particular, as the Public Religion Research study shows, see that parents learn about gay issues from their children. Their moral and ethical judgments are primarily made through this social reality rather than abstract pronouncements from their church leaders.

Catholic Communal versus Protestant Individual Faith: Catholicism is a communal faith that highlights the life cycle process through the sacraments of baptism, Eucharist, confirmation, and marriage. Families experience their moral lives through communal participation in the sacraments, as well as the Latino community’s cultural observances of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Posadas, Dia de los Muertos, etc. Protestant Latinos, on the other hand, have a faith that is individually driven through faith conversion (“accepting Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior”) that often separates a person from the Catholic sacramental life cycle process and the social fabric of the Catholic-based cultural celebrations. …

Latino Catholic Tolerance versus Protestant Fundamentalist Judgment:Catholics allow complexity and ambiguity in moral decision-making since Catholicism is neither fundamentalist nor literalist regarding the Bible. Rather, Catholics can weigh factors such as the Bible, church teaching, and social reality affecting decision-making. Latino Catholics in the United States live in this social context that allows the free exercise of conscience rather than enforced scriptural fundamentalism or bishops’ and pastors’ exhortations in making decisions regarding homosexuality and gay rights– as is often exercised in Protestant fundamentalist and evangelical denominations and now by increasingly doctrinaire Catholic bishops. Further, as noted in the study, Catholic priests rarely mention homosexuality or gay issues in sermons except when forced to by the bishops as happened during the Prop 8 campaign.

Palacios cites another possible factor: Latino Catholics’ centuries of historical experience with the Church dictating political policy. Many Latin-American revolutions were as much rebelions against heavy church influence as they were rebellions against Spanish rule. (And Spain, too, has finally shaken off the Franco-era’s close political collusion with the Church in state affairs.) Latino Catholics know, perhaps far better than others, the benefits of a strong church-state separation.

AFA’s Bryan Fischer: Protestant Immigrants Good, Catholic Immigrants Bad

The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer has some reservations about the fact that some Evangelical conservatives support President Barack Obama’s immigration reform proposals. Those evangelical see Latinos, who make up the bulk of the expected beneficiaries of immigration reform, as being sufficiently anti-gay and, therefore, desirable future voters for socially conservative causes. Fischer disagrees:

Not so fast. According to the Christian Post, 57% of Latino Catholics in California support homosexual marriage. Let’s not forget that Latinos make up 36.6 percent of California’s population.

The good news, if you happen to be an evangelical, is that just 22 percent of Latino Protestants support gay marriage.

If getting pro-family illegals legalized is the goal, perhaps Dr. Land can be persuaded to amend his recommendation and give preference to Protestant illegal aliens.

Leave it to Fischer to suggest a religious test for entry to the U.S. The American Family Association, according to former AFA attorney Joe Murray, isn’t just anti-gay, but anti-Catholic as well.  This, of course, shouldn’t be too surprising. Where there’s one form of bigotry, there’s almost never a good reason to refrain from indulging in other forms as well.

Update: Details behind Fischer’s numbers are discussed here.

Gay Marriage Killed The Penguins

The ex-gay nutcake of San Diego strikes again:

Penguins Boycott Argentina’s Forced Same-Sex Marriage Law! Homosexual Activists Claim Penguins Are Gay: Shocked Penguins Drop Dead in Response!

Hundreds of dead Magellanic penguins have washed ashore on beaches in Brazil this month, animal experts say.

At least 500 have been reported in the Peruibe area, The Christian Science Monitor reported. The city is south of Sao Paulo.

Brazil, Argentina, Antarctica… it’s all the same, isn’t it? Here’s the Christian Science Monitor report. Scientists say normal migrations are normal, but the currents have shifted due to local weather patterns. But ex-gay gadfly James Hartline, who is off his meds again, says it’s punishment for same-sex marriage in Argentina:

This is the latest in a series of global strikes by nature against areas of the world where homosexual activists are being empowered to spread homosexuality and paganism via their partners in activist governmental bodies and liberalized emergent church organizations.

Congrats to Detroit’s black gay pride

It is tougher as a minority. But it can be crazy difficult being a minority within a minority. And sometimes you just need a time and place where you look out and everyone you see knows exactly where you are coming from.

So congratulations to Detroit’s Black Pride for 15 years of giving a voice, presence, and closer sense of community to a part of our family.

Marriage support in the Americas

Americas Quarterly gives a good summary of the current status of LGBT rights in the Americas. They also provide a graph of the support for marriage equality in the various nations. Based on the American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP), it provides more than a yes or no answer to the question of support.

With public policies toward gay marriage varying widely, this is a critical moment to look at citizens’ opinions with respect to same-sex marriage. First, we examine levels of support for same-sex couples having the right to marry. Then, we assess both individual- and national-level determinants of variation in that level of support. Analysis is drawn from data from the American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP) survey, which includes 42,238 respondents from 25 nations in North, Central and South America and the Caribbean were asked this question:

We asked the following question: How strongly do you approve or disapprove of same-sex couples having the right to marry?

Responses were given based on a 1-10 scale, where ‘1’ meant “strongly disapprove” and ’10’ meant “strongly approve.” These responses were then recalibrated on a 0-100 basis.

First hand report from the Log Cabin v. DADT trial in Riverside

I hope Karen Ocamb and LGBT POV will forgive me for lifting so much from Tom Carpenter’s excellent summary of the trial, but it is so concise and clear that I just couldn’t edit it. Tom is a lawyer and a board member of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.

The White and Case lawyers [representing LCR] have really outgunned the government and they have put on an excellent case.

I saw the end of fellow Naval Academy grad Jenny Kopfstein’s testimony and she brought tears to my eyes.

She was followed by Larry Korb who qualified well, and as a Reagan DOD Assistant Secretary of Defense was very impressive. His testimony was clear that DADT was wrong when it became law in 1993 and has reduced military readiness and retention, as well as unit morale and cohesion. The government didn’t lay a glove on him and he was able to take on the lawyer who was cross examining him. As a trial lawyer, he made me feel sorry for the young lawyer who was clearly out of his league.

Alex Nicholson, the executive director of Servicemembers United and named plaintiff, was next. He was his usual articulate self and very skillfully turned the questions on the government lawyer who was attempting to cross-examine him. The only hit he took was when the government had him admit he was only on active duty for 9 months and never received an Military Occupational Specialty as a linguist or human intelligence gatherer. Not much.

Alex was followed by Dr. Allan Okros, a retired Canadian 0-6 who has worked for the military in uniform or as a civilian for 33 years. He is an expert on personnel issues and was a contemporary of Charlie Moskos, the father of DADT. He testified about the cultural and ethical similarities between the Canadian Forces and the US. He described the lifting of the ban in Canada as a “nonevent.” Based upon that experience, he testified that, with proper leadership, the result would be the same in the US. He is one of the best experts I have seen on gays in the military.

The last witness I saw was Tony Leverde a former USAF SSgt. He testified about what it was like to not hide your sexual orientation at the same time as not violating DADT. He was respected by his peers and subordinates, most of whom knew or suspected he was gay, even though he never admitted it. He was able to testify over objection that his honesty and being himself actually improved his relationship with fellow service members and enhanced unit morale. Didn’t see his cross but from watching the Judges reaction she seemed impressed.

Today was closing arguments, and a judgment could come in a few months, well before Congress and the review committee and the President and the Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs decide at some unspecified time in the future that the Military may possibly be ready to allow gay men and women to serve openly.

A Summer FOR Marriage tour

I’m not sure how this slipped my attention, but Freedom to Marry is doing a Summer for Marriage tour that mirrors the locations selected by NOM. Except, of course, Freedom to Marry’s tour actual is for marriage, not for marriage restriction.

And it seems that Freedom to Marry events actually have people show up. Unlike NOM’s event in the empty plaza in Annapolis (you have to see the video: there was literally no one standing in the plaza in the sun when the event started), there were about a hundred people at 7 different events across the city. More ministers showed up for Equality Maryland’s Pride in Faith program than did total people attending NOM’s plaza event.

For more info, check out their site.

New Zealand researcher reports correlation between sexual behavior and childhood abuse

The New Zealand Mental Health Survey was a project between 2002 and 2003 in which 13,000 New Zealand residents were given face to face interviews on a number of subjects involving mental health. Dr. Elisabeth Wells of the University of Otago reviewed the data collected and announced that there was a correlation between childhood trauma and homsexuality (Otago Daily Times)

Information extracted from 13,000 face-to-face interviews clearly showed those with same-sexual or bisexual orientation were more likely to have experienced negative events in childhood, Associate Prof Elisabeth Wells said yesterday.

People who had experienced sexual abuse as children were three times more likely to identity themselves as homosexual or bisexual than those who had not experienced abuse, she said. Also, the more adverse events someone experienced in childhood, the more likely they were to belong to one of the “non-exclusively heterosexual” groups.

We can expect anti-gay activists to immediately jump to Dr. Well’s conclusions and declare them evidence that sexual orientation is a product of environment (and therefore – by some strange logic – gay people are not worthy of civil equality).

I have not yet obtained Dr. Well’s study. But sight unseen there are glaring problems with this research.

First, we should consider the sample quality: (NZHerald)

The study questioned 13,000 people aged 16 and over on mental health issues. Ninety-eight per cent of the respondents identified themselves as heterosexual, compared to 0.8 per cent identifying themselves as homosexual, 0.6 per cent as bisexual and 0.3 per cent as “something else”.

Experiencing a same-sex encounter was more common than identifying as either homosexual or bisexual. Nearly 2 per cent reported they had been in a same-sex relationship, while another 3 per cent reported having experienced a same-sex encounter.

Either New Zealanders are unlike others samples of humanity or there is something wrong with the way in which the original study was conducted. By comparison, the US’ CDC report in 2005 found that 90.2% of US men identified as heterosexual, 2.3% as gay, 1.8% as bisexual, 3.9% as something else, and 1.8% didn’t answer the question.

Zero point eight percent is way outside the normal range of responses for sexual identity. This is such an outlier that it is difficult to give credibility to any conclusions drawn from this sample. Basically, of the 13,000 participants, only about 100 were homosexual and 75-80 we bisexual.

And even more oddly, it appears that more people have “been in a same-sex relationship” than the total combined homosexual and bisexual population. This seems peculiar and suggests that perhaps there is confusion either in the questions or in the way in which the survey was conducted.

Secondly, at least according to news reports Dr. Wells lumped anyone with any same-sex experience into one category regardless of identity or extent of sexual history.

The New Zealand Mental Health Survey by the University of Otago in Christchurch has found that people identifying themselves as gay, lesbian, bisexual or having had same-sex encounters are more likely to have experienced events such as sexual assault and violence in the home as children.

This seems to be a particularly poor way of identifying specific populations. Unless, of course, one is viewing any same-sex experience to be a troublesome act and you’re seeking to look for traits of sexual nonconformity.

Third, the study is based on face to face questioning. Researchers have long known that controversial or sensitive information is seldom accurately collected by this methodology. (Dominion Post)

Other researchers and gay rights advocates took issue with the study’s findings. Green MP Kevin Hague, who is gay and a former director of the Aids Foundation, said the research should be taken “with an enormous grain of salt”. “I think it’s pretty unlikely that there is any underlying real association.”

The more likely explanation was the way the study was done. “Respondents who are prepared to talk to interviewers about what may be the sensitive subject of their same-sex experience or attraction may also be the most likely to be prepared to talk to the interviewers about other sensitive subjects – in this case traumatic childhood experiences.”

Fourth, Dr. Well’s appears to have an understanding of sexual orientation that is non-conventional – one might even say that it closely mirrors that of another age, one which is seldom currently found outside of anti-gay activism.

“I suspect there might be some gay and lesbian people who will be indignant, but it is not my intention to anger them. You could say that if someone was sexually abused as a child, chooses to live as a homosexual and lives life well, then that is not a bad thing. But if they are living a homosexual life and regretting it, that is another matter.”

Dr. Wells may be speaking out of ignorance; she simply may not have read the literature on the subject before releasing her opinions. Or perhaps she is seeing her work as thwarting collected wisdom and research and instead justifying or advocating for reorientation therapy.

It’s hard to tell.

Finally, Dr. Wells appears to be taking leaps.

When a responsible researcher finds a correlation, they report a correlation. They may speculate as to the reasons, but they do not announce causation or linkage, association and they never conclude more than their study finds. Sadly not all researchers are responsible.

Again, we are going from news reports which may not be accurate:

She said there was no way of knowing from her study why there was a link between negative events in childhood and same-sex sexual orientation.

No. They was a correlation. Linkage assumes that the correlation is tied to causation, something that was not studied by Dr. Wells and about which she cannot speak.

People who either identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual, or have had a same-sex encounter or relationship, tend to come from more disturbed backgrounds,” Associate Professor Wells said.

That is simply not consistent with her findings. (stuff.nz)

Of those who reported sexual abuse or rape in childhood, about 15 per cent were non-heterosexual. Of those who had not had these experiences only five per cent were non-heterosexual.

Even if 15% of her sample came from a more disturbed background, the majority did not. It would not be truthful to say that gay/bi/encounter people “tend” to come from such a background when the majority did not.

Conclusion:

I do not know if there is any validity to this study. I’ve requested the study and either Jim or myself will look it over. We will gladly give Dr. Wells any benefit of the doubt and should any of my presumptions based on news reports turn out to be hasty, we’ll gladly correct the situation. However, there are so many red flags all over the place that it seems unlikely.

But Dr. Wells did say something with which I agree.

Dr Wells said: “I don’t quite see how our findings feed into gay-bashing, although maybe I underestimate the ability of people to twist certain things.”

Yes, Dr. Wells, you have vastly underestimated the ability of anti-gay people to twist research to support what they wish to believe. And that was unfortunate.

Words of wisdom from NOM’s Facebook followers

Perhaps I’m being too harsh on the National Organization for Marriage. Perhaps they do have something of value to teach me.

So I’ve turned to NOM’s Facebook page to see what TRUTHs NOM’s followers can share with me (remember to always capitalize TRUTH, it makes it truthier). And I have to admit that I’ve found some pretty amazing things:

The NOM Diet:

Susan Long: Those of us who are trying to follow the Bible as Gods word are being forced to throw up everytime something like homosexuailty comes up.

NOM’s solution for jail overcrowding

Susan Long: This is so true. This is act of disobedience is no difference than murder,abortion and we could go on forever. Speaking of aborttion I think all those who are in prison for murder should be let out. Abortion is no different than blowing someones brains out or beat6ing them to death. God will get enough of us as I believe he has and we better look for the ramifications to soon come.

NOM’s approach to creative writing

Kayla Hatcher: Stuipd Gays…

NOM’s civics lesson

Thomas Shank: That’s right Laura! We should gently judge their lives. I mean kindly tell them it’s wrong. Jam 2:3
This is a Christian nation

NOM’s approach to logic

Richard Lutz: It is hard talking with many people because it’s easier for them to justify their sin than it is to change, and they’ll fight anyone who exposes their darkness to the light. As born-again believers… we need to remember that our ultimate goal should not be to win arguments… but to win souls.

Donna Billman: The Bible and God’s word are the only logic necessary, He created us and set the rules in place and His rules for how we should live are to protect us and to honor Him.

NOM on what gay people are like

Nick Jones: Why is it that some homosexuals (like the post that was just deleted) continually want to look like the opposite sex. Homosexual men want to look like women in appearance and mannerisms and the women want to throw on this fake masculinity. Is this an imitation of cheap heterosexuality?

Jeanette Gartman: The reason is because they are lost. They are confused about the gender roles. And society does not do the Truth any favors. neither does the media, nor the school, nor even parents!

Tanya Beckel Redfield: Because as a generalization, many homosexuals tend to work in up scale jobs… less blue collar. So as a business, it would make sense to support a group that has more money to spend..

Jaime Thissen: There’s a lot of gay people who are just plain angry. I guess it’s because they can never as fulfilling of a relationship as a committed straight couple. It would certainly explain all the hate from them on the discussion board….between that and the successful indoctrination of the Class of 2011 (laughs).

Tony Johnson: I personally think that the gay/lesbian community has became what they supposedly hate-a community of intolerant bigots who are totally self-centered !!

Carol Toth: That’s why it’s easier for them to claim the BIBLE IS OUTDATED THAN TO FACE THE HELL THEIR CONDEMING THEMSELVES TOO BY THEIR UNNATURAL ACTS.

NOM on the gay agenda

Bryan Hanny: It has never been about equal rights, which they already have provided as all people under the constitution do. Its about special rights and about legitimizing thier dangerous lifestyle.

Kimberly Schueler: This is Satan @ work, guys!!!

Noah Windscheffel: My brothers and sisters in Christ: I want you all to remember that it is not a battle between gays and those who aren’t. It is a battle between the followers of Christ, and Satan and his demons. The battle isn’t about homosexuality. It is about sin. But we must continue to speak the truth in love. Remember this: They will hate us, because they first hated Christ. But we must continue to love in a Christ-like way and pray for the ones who haven’t come to Jesus yet. It is a spiritual battle, not a physical one. May you always follow Jesus.

Moira Murphy O Mahoney: will there come a day when being “straight” is outlawed….and all reproduction done in labs etc.etc…make a good movie. no…too sad. (too farfetched I hope)

Cindy Dalton: That’s right, Tara. The Gay Man-Boy Love Association, a group of pedophiles, is already lobbying here in Virginia to legalize sex between a consenting man and a male child. What does “consenting” mean exactly? These professional criminals know how to groom children into allowing them to molest them.

NOM on what should be done to gay people

Stephanie Zembery-Darrah: Unless you are evil and have no morals and values you have no rights in this country anymore, it is time we take our country back. This country was founded on Christian beliefs, if they don’t like it THEY can leave, we don’t want the pollution here anymore! ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN that is the way it is meant to be. Be fruitful and multiply…how can you do that any other way???????? It just isn’t even natural any other way.

Charles Smith: all the carpet rubbers and stool pushers need to be on an island. so in a hundred years they will be extinct. lmao.

Nelson Eaton: Well, Everyone has rights except hard working strait american people so,When they stormed the podium and started threatening children.The best way to handle a pervert is to stomp the crap out of them.

NOM on differing viewpoints:

Well… there just don’t seem to be many people who disagree with NOM’s agenda. It can be quite odd reading the threads because NOMbies often reference comments and people who have magically disappeared. Odd.

And finally, NOM on how anti-gays see themselves:

From dozens of NOMbies: Love the sinner, hate the sin.

Public Religion Research Institute survey shows current status of support in California

The Public Religion Research Institute released a survey today about the attitudes of Californians on gay issues. PRRI is a progressive organization and the survey was funded by strong supporters of our community, so we must be cautious to look for bias. As I believe that the language of the Survey Report lends itself to a slightly rosy translation rather than strict interpretation of the numbers, I’ll mostly focus on the results.

The methodology was a randomly selected telephone survey of 2,801 adults with additional oversamples of African Americans and Latino Protestants (this was relevant due to a desire to find statistically valid conclusions about of those populations). This is a sufficiently large sample to provide meaningful information. The results were subsequently weighted to correct for oversampling, and to allow for comparisons between categories of participants.

I’ve reviewed the questions of the poll and do not think that this is a poll which is designed to generate specific answers. However, the language leading up to some questions does, in my opinion, set up the participant to view gay rights in terms of “chances in life” and some follow up questions seem to be a bit on the persuasive rather than inquisitive side.

All that being said, here are the findings of the PRRI survey:

Q.7 Which of the following statements comes closest to your views

42% Gay couples should be allowed to marry
31% Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions, but not marry OR
24% There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship

This seems to be very similar to the findings of the Field Poll, well within the probability range. I think we can assume that these probably represent the attitudes and perspectives of Californians.

Q.10 Do you believe that gay and lesbian couples who want to get married are trying to change the institution of marriage or join it?

39% Change it
57% Join it
4% Don’t know

This is an interesting finding. It seems that some participants believe that gay people have no ill intention towards marriage or any desire to revise it, yet they still prefer civil unions to marriage. This is a demographic that may be open to arguments about fairness and equality.

It also suggests that about 4 in 10 Californians have been receptive to the campaign of lies and villainization that enemies of equality have waged. To reach these people we must assure them that we are not trying to make marriage mean anything other than what it has always meant.

Q.12 In 2008, Californians voted on Proposition 8, the state constitutional amendment to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. Did you vote “Yes” to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry, or did you vote “No” on Proposition 8.

39% Yes
49% No
8% Did not vote on Proposition 8
4% Don’t know

Obviously this is not how Californians voted on Proposition 8 (it passed with 52.2% of the vote) and there are a few possibilities why. It could be that this is a bad sample. Or it could be that the language of the question made the participants embarrassed to answer the question honestly.

But I think that this is an answer that is consistent with the way in which voters respond after the fact. Surveys which ask “who did you vote for” consistently find that those polled disproportionately “recall” having voted for the winner, especially if he’s popular.

This isn’t because they are dishonest. Rather, it’s because they probably were not a firm vote and went back and forth in their mind before casting their vote. So their current thinking influences their recollection and they recall having favorable attitudes for the winner and disfavorable towards the guy they actually voted for.

In this case, however, the majority of participants who voted “recall” being on the losing side. This would only make sense if they now consider Proposition 8 to have been a bad idea. Which brings us to:

Q.15 Do you think the passage of Proposition 8 was a good thing for California, a bad thing or do you think it hasn’t really made any difference?

22% A good thing
29% A bad thing
45% Hasn’t made any difference
4% Don’t know

Slightly more say “a bad thing”, but not enough to really account for the variance between Q.12 and the actual vote. So a chunk of the “no difference” crowd would have to be generally negative towards Prop 8 in order for this survey to have any consistency at all.

And it appears that they are.

Q.16 If you had to vote on a similar ballot proposition tomorrow, would you vote to keep same-sex marriage illegal or would you vote to allow gay and lesbian couples the opportunity to get married?

45% Vote to keep same-sex marriage illegal
51% Vote to allow gay and lesbian couples to get married
4% Don’t know.

A review of the polling compared to the results on gay marriage issues shows that pre-election polls often have the gay supporting percentage correct but that all of the “unknowns” vote against equality. So this is a squeaker.

What follows are a few questions that I think advise us as to our future efforts. Going forward, it seems that we need to educate and inform and be diligent in challenging the lies that are regularly told by those who seek to keep us denied civil equality.

Q.26.d Sexual orientation is determined at birth

26% Completely agree
25% Mostly agree
20% Mostly disagree
21% Completely disagree
8% Don’t know

Not only do we need to educate about the evidence surrounding the etiology of sexual orientation, we need to educate about the phrasing of this question. The issue is not whether orientation is “determined at birth” but whether it is a naturally occurring phenomenon over which each of us has little or no input and that for many gay people biology plays a key role.

In other words, the issue isn’t whether there is a “gay gene” but rather whether orientation can be “caused” or whether, like handedness, it just develops.

Q.26.e Homosexual orientation can be changed

15% Completely agree
19% Mostly agree
21% Mostly disagree
37% Completely disagree
8% Don’t know

It looks like our stories and our honesty is being heard. But with 34% still buying into the “change” myth, we have a ways to go.

The survey also found that 67% mostly or completely agree that gay and lesbian relationships should be accepted by society and that 60% mostly or completely disagree with the statement that “sexual relations between two adults of the same gender is always wrong.” Additionally, 25% believe that they are more supportive of gay rights than they were five years ago while 8% think they have become less supportive.

The Survey Report has some additional analysis. For me, the fascinating parts are the comparisons of various religious participants and how church denomination, attendance, and pastoral message influences attitudes, both negatively and positively.

Lt. Choi Confirms DADT Discharge

This comes from an email that was sent out this morning:

My Statement on DADT Discharge

This morning I received notification of my honorable discharge from the army under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” After 11 years since beginning my journey at West Point and after 17 months of serving openly as an infantry officer this is both an infuriating and painful announcement.

But my service continues. To all those veterans who have endured similar trials and injustices or prematurely ended their military service because of the unjust policy: our fight has only begun.

The true honor and dignity of service does not come from a piece of paper, a pension or paycheck, a rank or status; only an unflinching commitment to improve the lives of others can determine the nature of one’s service. From the first moment we put on our nation’s uniform and swore our solemn oath, we committed ourselves to fight for freedom and justice; to defend our constitution and put the needs of others before our own. This is not an oath that I intend to abandon. Doing so at such a time, or remaining silent when our family and community members are fired or punished for who they truly are would be an unequivocal moral dereliction that tarnishes the honor of the uniform and insults the meaning of America.

Lt Choi also spoke to Newsweek, describing the circuitous route in which he got the news. It turns out the certified letter was sent to his father, who is not on speaking terms with Dan. Lt Choi says that his first inclination right now is to go home to his family.

ACLU sues for domestic partnerships in Montana

In 2004, Montana residents voted by 67% to revise their state constitution to include:

Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.

However, this amendment does allow for other forms of couple recognition, and the ACLU has now sued the state to provide recognition to same-sex couples.

Seven committed same-sex couples today filed a lawsuit against the state of Montana for failing to provide legal protections to same-sex couples and their families in violation of the Montana Constitution’s rights of privacy, dignity and the pursuit of life’s basic necessities and its guarantees of equal protection and due process. The goal of this lawsuit is ensure that same-sex couples are able to protect their families with the same kind of legal protections that opposite-sex couples are offered through marriage.

Because there is a constitutional amendment in Montana barring marriage for same-sex couples, the couples in the lawsuit are seeking the protection of state-recognized domestic partnerships, similar to those in place in several other states.

Donaldson and Guggenheim v. Montana

Yet again the National Organization for Marriage demonstrates that they have no integrity

There are pictures and video from the National Organization for Marriage’s tour stop in Trenton, New Jersey. I took the broadest photograph, compared it to the others and to the video, and counted 63 people. Including the half-dozen Knights of Columbus that stood behind the speakers, it would be safe to say that at no point at NOM’s rally were there over 80 people present.

Here’s what Brian Brown claimed:

Thanks to all of you who came out for the Summer for Marriage rally at the State House in Trenton. We had about 120 people take time off work and give up their lunch break to come stand for marriage in New Jersey.

At some point, doesn’t he get embarressed?

Oh, but it gets worse. In his Trenton recap video he claims,

Literally, thousands of Americans have stood up in the past few days to say we know what marriage is, marriage is the union of a man and a woman.

Thousands? Literally?

Not even by Brian’s wildly exaggerated, totally false, counts. So far he has claimed inflated numbers of: Augusta 200; Manchester 150-200; Albany 100; Providence 200-250; and Trenton 120; for a complete tour audience of 770 to 890 for their first five stops. Not exactly “thousands”, literally or otherwise.

Not only can the tourists on NOM’s Tour of Mostly-Empty City Plazas not count, they can’t add either. Or they simply have no integrity at all.

Marriage is official in Argentina

The President of Argentina has now signed the marriage equality law. The first same-sex marriages will occur in August.