Box Turtle Bulletin

Is the Tea Party movement good for gays?

The gay community tends not to fare well when angry conservative populist movements gain influence; the “common man” tends not to hold the interests of minorities to heart.

So many gay individuals and organizations have viewed the Tea Party movement with suspicion and concern. This reaction seemed to be confirmed by social conservatives pointing to the movement and offering praise. However, the Tea Party movement may prove to be a tremendous boon for the community.

There are several articles today about the movement from several different sources and they all seem to be saying the same thing: not only are the Tea Partiers not social conservatives, they want nothing to do with them.

Patrik Jonsson, writing for the Christian Science Monitor, starts his article this way

Emergence of the grass-roots “tea party” movement as a major force on the American political right is having a quiet but fundamental effect on the Republican tribe: Social conservatives have been voted off the island.

In recent years, fiscal conservatives seem to have taken a back seat to social conservatives in the Republican Party. President Bush, with his drunken sailor spending and moralizing piety was about as far from the fiscal conservative wing as you could get.

The Party had gambled that “the people” weren’t interested in esoteric things like the national debt or a balanced budget and pandered instead to biases against gay marriages and pregnant women. Not that Republicans actually did anything on social conservative issues, but by targeting a voter base that cared little about fiscal responsibility, they managed to answer to no one.

But the Tea Party movement appears to be a backlash, as much against the Republican Party that they feel has betrayed them as against President Obama and the Democrats. And in their efforts to change the focus of the Party, they are refusing to allow social issues to intrude. (New York Times)

Tea Party leaders argue that the country can ill afford the discussion about social issues when it is passing on enormous debts to future generations. But the focus is also strategic: leaders think they can attract independent voters if they stay away from divisive issues.

“We should be creating the biggest tent possible around the economic conservative issue,” said Ryan Hecker, the organizer behind the Contract From America. “I think social issues may matter to particular individuals, but at the end of the day, the movement should be agnostic about it. This is a movement that rose largely because of the Republican Party failing to deliver on being representative of the economic conservative ideology. To include social issues would be beside the point.”

And it appears that the jettisoning of the social conservatives is not merely cosmetic. “Family values” leaders are feeling the bite and are not happy with being booted from the drive’s seat (Politico).

“There’s a libertarian streak in the tea party movement that concerns me as a cultural conservative,” said Bryan Fischer, director of Issue Analysis for Government and Public Policy at the American Family Association. “The tea party movement needs to insist that candidates believe in the sanctity of life and the sanctity of marriage.”

“As far as I can tell [the tea party movement] has a politics that’s irreligious. I can’t see how some of my fellow conservatives identify with it,” said Richard Cizik, who broke with a major evangelical group over his support for government action on climate change, but who remains largely in line with the Christian right on social issues. “The younger Evangelicals who I interact with are largely turned off by the tea party movement — by the incivility, the name-calling, the pathos of politics.”

But what impact will this have on our community? That depends, of course, on whether the movement can maintain its anger and its mission.

If they are effective and are seen as a political force, they could change what it means to be a Republican. If they want to draw in young people worried about their ability to pay a massive and ever increasing public debt, they may strong-arm the Party to drop issues such as abortion and gay marriage from the Party Platform. They may even insist on advancing and supporting gay candidates if they are perceived to be the best on fiscal issues.

It is possible that this movement of “common folk” – which includes more than a few that are complete wackadoodles: birthers, racists, and conspiracy theorists – could ultimately place our nation in a position in which there is one party that supports our rights (at least in theory) and another that “has no opinion” on the matter.

Time will tell us whether this movement – one our community mostly mocks and somewhat fears – will bring about a change in public consciousness on social issues, or whether they will just be another footnote in the history of our nation’s advancement.

The Lies of Martin Ssempa, Part II

George Oundo

Ugandan pastor Martin Ssempa’s latest tirade includes a “testimony” by George Ooundo, a deeply disturbed man who was an important ex-gay “success story” for a short while. A very short while. Last we heard, he is now ex-ex-gay and seeking forgiveness in the LGBT community for being part of a massive anti-gay vigilante campaign. I don’t know what demons Oundo is wrestling with, and for the sake of compassion for this obviously troubled young man, the less said the better. But Ssempa’s account of Oundo’s “story of transformation” somehow avoids one critically important element: Oundo hasn’t changed at all.

It looks like we may have the beginnings of an ongoing series.

Coalition of Ugandan Catholic, Anglican, Muslim, Other Leaders Unite Against Anti-Gay Bill

Not only is this major news, but it was carried exclusively in Uganda’s state-owned New Vision, which is the largest daily newspaper in Uganda. The statement was released on Tuesday, but with the non-descriptive headline of “Position of ICRCU” [sic], I didn’t notice its importance. (GayUganda also missed the statement when it came out.)

The Inter-Religious Council of Uganda (IRCU) is a coalition composed of the supreme heads of Uganda’s largest officially-recognized religions: Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Muslims, Christian Orthodox and Seventh-Day Adventists. Among the Council’s goals are to “promote non-violence, peaceful coexistence and respect for human rights.” But with respect to the draconian Anti-Homosexuality Bill that is now before Parliament, the IRCU’s position had been in direct conflict with their stated goal. Shortly after the anti-gay bill was introduced into Parliament last fall, the IRCU met with a Parliament committee and strongly supported for the bill, although some of the individual council members expressed reservations over the death penalty. This became the official position of the Ugandan Anglican Church, while the head of Uganda’s Roman Catholics called for the bill to be rejected altogether.

Now, with this latest statement from the IRCU, it appears that the Council’s position has evolved toward a position which is closer to rejecting the bill. It’s unclear that they reject the bill entirely — they throw in the caveat that “we recognize the need to improve on the Penal Code as it has gaps which can be addressed by some provisions contained in the proposed Bill” — this statement may well be interpreted politically as a rejection. Despite the strong prejudices and vitriol expressed in the statement (they openly call for another vigilante campaign in point #7), it is nevertheless a notable criticism of the proposed legislation. Here’s the statement:

IRCU is an initiative that brings together different religious institutions to address issues of common concern.

Its membership comprises of the Roman Catholic Church in Uganda, the Uganda Muslim Supreme Council, the Church of Uganda, the Uganda Orthodox Church and the Seventh Day Adventist Church.

Vision: A divinely Peaceful, prosperous and HIV/AIDS free Uganda

We the Council of Presidents of the Inter-Religious Council of Uganda (IRCU) gathered this 10th day of February, 2010, at IRCU Secretariat;

Having read and considered carefully the provisions in the Anti-Homosexuality Bill yet to be debated by Parliament;

Aware of our mandate to nurture and protect the moral fibre of our society, guided by the Holy Scriptures of the religions we subscribe to;

Hereby state that:

1. The Bible, the Quran and other Holy Teachings treat homosexuality as a sin. Both the Bible and Qur’an are categorical in their objection to same sex relationships (Lev. 18:22; Surah Ash’shura 26:165-166). Homosexual acts are contrary to the natural divine law, and under no circumstance can be approved.

2. The IRCU Council of Presidents, therefore, condemns homosexuality as an undesirable evil that should not be allowed in our society.

3. Our religious teachings promote respect, compassion and sensitivity. We, therefore, condemn the sin but welcome the sinners to confess, repent and seek a new beginning. This is based on the belief that all people are called by God to fulfill His will in their lives; IRCU, therefore, decries the proposed death penalty and life imprisonment in the proposed Bill as unwarranted. We believe homosexuals need conversion, repentance, support, and understanding and love in order to abandon their practices and return to God fully.

4. Since the proposed death penalty and life imprisonment do not provide the sinner an opportunity to repent, hence falling short of compassion to those who need conversion, repentance, support and hope, they are unnecessary.

5. Even the proposal to prosecute those who fail to disclose information regarding homosexual acts is inconsistent with the trust, confidentiality and professional ethics of persons such as parents, priests, counselors, teachers, doctors and leaders, to whom the sick, troubled and repentant sinners turn in search of support and advice for rehabilitation. The proposed law does not provide for the rehabilitation of repentant homosexuals. Yet as Religious Leaders, we are mandated to reach out to all people of God in a show of love and compassion (Mt. 9:10-13). The proposed Bill also has the potential to destroy the family as it is likely to undermine the important role of parents in providing guidance to their children.

6. Additionally, in our view the proposed Bill may not be called for considering that acts of sodomy are already condemned under section 145 of the Penal Code. However, we recognize the need to improve on the Penal Code as it has gaps which can be addressed by some provisions contained in the proposed Bill.

7. We the Council of Presidents of the Inter – Religious Council of Uganda, therefore, advise government, and all well-meaning groups and individuals to take remedial measures against this evil that has crept into our society by:

a. Exposing the people and organizations funding homosexuality in the country;
b. Providing enough information on recruitment and funding to the public in the interest of transparency and accountability;
c. Establishing facts on homosexuality and gay activities in Uganda and publishing a brochure which IRCU can distribute through its structures;
d. Emphasizing our core cultural and religious values and undertaking moral education in schools; and
e. Counteracting the distortion and misrepresentation of the debate on homosexuality by the media.

His Eminence Metropolitan Jonah Lwanga: Archbishop of the Uganda Orthodox Church; Chairperson, IRCU Council of Presidents

His Grace the Most Rev. Henry Luke Orombi: Archbishop of the Church of the Province of Uganda/Member IRCU Council of Presidents

Pr. Dr. John Kakembo
President, Seventh-day Adventist Uganda; Union/ Member IRCU Council of Presidents

His Eminence Sheikh Shaban R. Mubaje: Mufti of Uganda/ Member IRCU Council of Presidents

His Grace Dr. Cyprian Kizito Lwanga
Archbishop of Kampala Archdiocese
Member IRCU Council of Presidents

As I said, it’s difficult to get to the bottom line in this message, but there are some encouraging elements to this. First, while this is still a deeply homophobic and ill-informed document, it represents the strongest criticism yet of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill by Uganda’s mainline religious leaders. Catholics, Anglicans and Muslims together make up almost 90% of Uganda’s religious adherents.

It is also significant that this statement was published in full in the state-owned New Vision newspaper. Not only is it Uganda’s largest newspaper, but it can be reasonably assumed that New Vision’s content is closely monitored by the government. While Uganda has the trappings of a democracy, it is effectively a one-party state which has been ruled continuously for twenty-four years by President Yoweri Museveni and his New Resistance Movement (NRM). One reflection of New Vision’s short leash with the government is the fact that despite the tremendous controversy the bill has drawn both inside and outside of Uganda, New Vision has been almost completely silent on the controversy. In fact, their reporting has been so scant that if one were to rely solely on New Vision for information about the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, one might be left with the impression that there is no such bill before Parliament. New Vision, despite being Uganda’s largest mass-circulation newspaper, has been almost completely missing in action on this story.

[Update: Another significant point to notices is that this statement repeats a line others have put forward as possible justification for dropping the bill. “In our view the proposed Bill may not be called for considering that acts of sodomy are already condemned under section 145 of the Penal Code,” they say in point #6. This has been put forward by other less prominent critics as a face-saving way out of the mess by pointing out that Ugandan law already criminalizes homosexuality, and it also criminalizes child sexual abuse and rape in gender-neutral terms. While this line of objection comes across as very weak to western ears (slanderously equating, as it does, homosexuality with pedophilia and other sex crimes), when raised in the context of how the debate surrounding the proposed legislation has been framed in Uganda until now, it would be a serious mistake to overlook its importance. The IRCU is now the most prominent body to raise this particular objection.]

These two three factors are encouraging signs, which may help to explain something else I’ve noticed but haven’t publicly asked until now: Where is the bill itself? When Parliament returned from recess in February, it was expected to be near the top of Parliament’s business in the Legal Affairs and Presidential Affairs committees. Some six weeks have passed, and we still have heard of no action on this supposedly urgent, high-priority bill from either committee.

One possible explanation for this inaction may well be the massive landslides that Uganda has been grappling with in the Bubuda district in eastern Uganda on March 3. While we’ve been hearing a lot about the Haitian and Chilean earthquakes in the west, Uganda’s media has been consumed with their own natural disaster at Mt. Elgon near the Kenyan border which has claimed at least 300 lives.

But that doesn’t explain the delay through February. There is now some speculation that there may well be a conscious slow-down on the measure, as “suggested” by President Museveni at January’s meeting of the ruling party’s Executive Council at State House Entebbe.

If the bill is not passed into law, the next more likely scenario would be for the bill to die a quiet, unannounced death. It is inconceivable that Parliament would vote to defeat the measure, and making an official announcement of its withdrawal would likely inspire political unrest ahead of the 2011 elections. Even though Uganda’s Electoral Commission is packed with Museveni’s supporters and the fairness of the upcoming elections is very much in doubt, such unrest would only serve to further stain Museveni’s rather shaky reputation as a reformer. Museveni is expected to run for another five year term as president. If the 66-year-old President completes that term, the “democratic reformer” will have ruled Uganda for an unprecedented thirty uninterrupted years.

It’s difficult and perhaps foolhardy to try to read the tea leaves in Uganda politics — especially by a foreigner some 9,5000 miles and ten time zones away — but I don’t believe that we will ever see this bill officially “killed.” It also appears that Museveni doesn’t have the stomach to incur worldwide condemnation by passing this law, not now when his government is already under heightened scrutiny in advance of its upcoming elections. Instead, after observing what is going on in Uganda’s state-owned media, coupled now with this statement by Uganda’s most influential religious leaders, it appears increasingly possible that this bill may remain in the two committees (most notably, in the Presidential Affairs committee)  to be “studied” and “revised” for a very, very long time.

[Hat tip: GayUganda]

Click here to see BTB’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

The alarmist and misleading new headlines about HIV transmission

The Centers for Disease Control has issued a “new look at disproportionate impact of HIV and syphilis among U.S. gay and bisexual men”. And this “new look” is quite alarming:

The data, presented at CDC’s 2010 National STD Prevention Conference, finds that the rate of new HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men (MSM) is more than 44 times that of other men and more than 40 times that of women.

That certainly sounds frightening. And it lends itself easily to anti-gay activist who argue that gay men and women do not deserve equal rights under the law because gay men are crawling with disease. (Iowa Independent)

Homosexual activity is “more dangerous for individuals who engage in it than is smoking,” and because of this, state lawmakers need to pass a constitutional amendment overturning last year’s Iowa Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage, according to Iowa Family Policy Center President Chuck Hurley.

Naturally, anti-gay activists like Hurley fail to distinguish between “individuals who engage in homosexual activity” and individuals who engage in unsafe sex. And, having only the vaguest of notions about those same-sex couples who marry, he leaps at a conclusion that is out of his reach.’

Unsafe sex significantly increases the odds of seroconverting. And considering that the CDC lumps all men who have sex with men (MSM) together regardless of their relationship status or sexual practices, single gay men who whoop it up sans condom with a stranger tonight have a FAR MORE than 44 times likelihood of becoming HIV positive than does a heterosexual dude that does the same. Which is one reason we should encourage relationships and responsible sex.

But setting aside the lunacy of opposing committed relationships so as to stop promiscuous behavior, let’s look at the numbers themselves. And let’s consider the responsibility of the CDC and those who use their statistics to report them in a way that is meaningful and useful rather than pointlessly frightening.

Yes, “44 times that of other men” is scary. But what does it mean?

For that we have to look at the following paragraphs.

The range was 522-989 cases of new HIV diagnoses per 100,000 MSM vs. 12 per 100,000 other men and 13 per 100,000 women.

The rate of primary and secondary syphilis among MSM is more than 46 times that of other men and more than 71 times that of women, the analysis says. The range was 91-173 cases per 100,000 MSM vs. 2 per 100,000 other men and 1 per 100,000 women.

Unpacking the medical language, this is what we find:

There were about 33,750 new cases of HIV infection in 2007. Assuming that gay/bi men make up about 4% of the population, this number is about three quarters of one percent (0.75%) of all gay/bi men.

For syphilis, the number is about 5,900 cases and an infection rate of about one tenth of one percent (0.13%).

Previous analysis suggests that about 12% of all gay/bi men are currently living with HIV. As syphilis is treatable, the total number of gay men living with syphilis is less easy to determine.

Further, if we wish to be credible, we have to recognize that the gay community is not homogeneous. HIV and syphilis infections impact certain demographics far more than others. Factors such as race, location, education, and self-worth can have almost as much a factor on one’s likelihood to contract HIV as sexual orientation.

Too often we can read alarming headlines and think, “why fight it, it’s inevitable.” This isn’t true. Most gay men don’t have HIV and never will. And while these frightening statistics can remind us to be careful, they should be taken in perspective.

When we hear “HIV diagnoses… 44 times that of other men” or “2000 times higher than repeat blood donors”, we have to remind ourselves to step back and take a better look at the numbers. We need to recall that the purpose of information of this sort is to fight the virus, not the people who are infected. And we need to understand that we each are individual and not a statistic.

Another passenger on board LaBarbera’s Wackadoodle Train

Nearly every week on the elimination competition television show So You Think You Can Dance, highly excitable judge Mary Murphy will see some performance that especially liked and shriek at the top of her lungs, “Wooo-woooo, you’re on the Hot Tamale Train.” Well I figure that if Murphy can have a train just for “hot tamales”, then Peter LaBarbera can have one for wackadoodles.

And today yet another wackadoodle has jumped on the train racing forward in its quest to discredit Dr. Warren Throckmorton. Today’s passenger: Laurie Higgins.

We all know Laurie from her declarations that it is the Christian duty of children and teachers to “condemn volitional homosexual conduct” of gay students (i.e. bully them). And we remember when we awarded her the LaBarbera Award for equating homosexuality with Nazi atrocities.

So it’s not too surprising that this defender of “culture of disapproval and condemnation” had chosen to yet again climb on board with The Peter and his collection of wackadoodle extremist nutcases to attack the latest conservative evangelical Christian who is not adequately pure in his animosity towards gay people, Dr. Warren Throckmorton.

Now Laurie is not one to consider perspective, allow for differing understanding, or honor any opinion that veers in the slightest from her own. Black and white, all or nothing, these are notions that Laurie values. She’s don’t need no complexity; she’s a simple thinker.

“Nuance” — yet another manifestation of rhetoric serving the cause of sin.

You see, for Laurie, Christ means everything (a notion with which I’m sure she’d agree). And this Christ of Laurie’s is no namby-pamby, eat with sinners, forgive them for not knowing what they do, liberal activist kind of Jesus. No! He’s a hardcore conservative, follow The Law to the letter, kick over the tables of the religious folk I disagree with, stern Jesus who demands complete obsequience.

And Laurie loves this Jesus so much, so very very much, that she’d be privileged to pile the firewood and light the torches to defend his TRUTH.

And as for valuing professionalism or respecting the mental health of the patient, that’s not for Laurie. That sounds too much like nuance. It’s much much easier to demand that clients yield to the religious dictates of their counselor.

Throckmorton and Yarhouse’s statement could be made only by those whose allegiance to a secular worldview takes precedence over their allegiance to Christ. Unfortunately, Throckmorton and Yarhouse are not alone in their subordination of faith and truth to the demands of secular professional guidelines or requirements.

But what really gets Higgins’ goat is that Throckmorton considers that gay people may have some civil right to self determination and equality under the law:

In his interview with One News Now, Throckmorton also said that “he takes a more ‘nuanced’ view” on the topic of same-sex marriage. He said “that he opposes same-sex marriage but believes the Equal Protection Clause permits homosexual civil unions.” Tricksy rhetoric again. He cleverly avoids saying he supports homosexual unions, instead saying that the Equal Protection Clause permits homosexual unions.

Laurie is having none of that. It’s time, she thinks, for Christians to denounce civil law, to abandon professionalism, to throw freedom in the hopper where it belongs, and to become downright nasty to friends and family who don’t share her own passion for denouncing the sinners around them.

What seems clear is that many Christian mental health professionals are subordinating their faith to the professional standards established by a world largely hostile to faith. No serious Christian — no one who understands that Christ expects full submission of every aspect of the lives of those who accept the gift of eternal life that came at the cost of His life — would affirm to others either implicitly or explicitly profoundly sinful behavior, behavior that orthodox Christian doctrine teaches will lead to eternal damnation.

Increasingly, Christians from all walks of life are going to have to choose between their work and their faith, between friendships and faith, and perhaps even between family and faith.

But Laurie Higgins isn’t the only new passenger. Peter also hauled aboard “a reader” who had this to say:

Warren seems to compartmentalize “mental health/mental illness” as if it is entirely separate from the consequences of sinful attitudes, lustful thoughts, wicked behaviors — whereas a mature Christian (especially a counselor) ought to see a strong connection between the two.

Personally, if I were The Peter, I’d not want to look too closely at the strong connection between mental illness and religion. There’s a reason why asylums are full of sad folks who think they are Jesus or Joan of Arc.

Oh, yes. Peter has himself a whole train full of wackadoodle nutcases. But before he gets a full head of steam, he may want to peer down that track a ways. Rather than ‘roll across the trestle, spanning Jordan’s swelling tide‘ he may find that he’s heading for a derailing.

Tell GoDaddy To Remove Web Site Advocating Murder of LGBT Kenyans

We reported earlier that GoDaddy is hosting charged domestic terrorist Neil Horsley’s ProjectSEE web site, which is posting identifying information about LGBT Kenyans along with an exhortation to carry out the Levitical call to murder. That web site is also the source for several posters which are appearing in parts of Kenya with photos and other information about LGBT individuals there. Horsley has already been arrested for threatening Elton John in front of his condo in Atlanta.

After the New York office of the Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR) contacted Joe.My.God, who referred them to me for more information, amfAR CEO Kevin Robert Frost faxed the following letter to Bob Parson, CEO and founder of GoDaddy. We encourage you to contact GoDaddy yourself and demand that this web site be taken down.

Meanwhile, the Gay Activists Alliance International (GAAI) has reportedly contacted PayPal about Horsley’s fundraising account through their web site. I’m told but cannot confirm that PayPal has promised to investigate.

Click here to read the letter from amfAR to GoDaddy

State Department Issues Annual Human Rights Report, Highlights Uganda

The State Department has issued its annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2009, which shows that LGBT people continue to experience state-sanctioned or permitted violence and discrimination. For example, the report notes the following cases of human rights violations against LGBT people in Uganda:

For example, on April 5, police in Mbale District arrested SMUG activists Fred Wasukira and Brian Mpadde. On April 17, a court in Mbale charged Wasukira and Mpadde with homosexual conduct and remanded the suspects to Maluke prison. On May 20, the court released Wasukira on police bail; Mpadde was released on June 16. The case was ongoing at year’s end.

On June 19, police in Kitgum interrogated former police coach Charles Ayeikoh over allegations that he was involved in homosexual acts. An investigation was ongoing at year’s end.

In July the administration of Mbalala Senior Secondary School in Mukono District dismissed student John Paul Mulumba after he acknowledged that he was a SMUG member.

During the year the UHRC stopped investigating the July 2008 case in which SMUG activist Usaam Mukwaya alleged that police tortured and humiliated him during an illegal detention; Mukwaya reportedly decided not to pursue the case.

During the year police dismissed for lack of evidence a September 2008 case against SMUG members George Oundo and Brenda Kiiza, who were charged with indecent practices.

LGBT persons were also subject to societal harassment and discrimination.

For example, on March 17, the Uganda Joint Christian Council and the Family Life Network launched a campaign to curb homosexual conduct in higher institutions. SMUG accused the organizers of using religion to attack the LGBT community in the country.

The report also mentions arrests, executions, and other violence and abuses in Malawi, Senegal, Nigeria, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jamaica, and elsewhere around the world.

98% of Disney Shareholders Say No To “Recognizing Ex-Gays”

Um, would that be because they already have that covered by recognizing straight people? PFOX, of course, lives in a bizarre alternate universe of their own.

Georgia Man Arrested for Threatening Elton John, Runs Web Site Calling for Death to Gay Kenyans

A Georgia man who was arrested for making terroristic threats against Elton John this week is also behind a web site inciting violence and murder of gay Kenyans.

The Associated Press is reporting that Neal Horsley, 65, was arrested early Wednesday in Carrollton, Georgia for making a terroristic threat. Atlanta Police Sgt. Curtis Davenport would not say who Horsley is accused of threatening, but it is believed that the charges are in connection with a February 28 YouTube video in which Horsley held up a sign reading “Elton John Must Die” in front of a building where he said John has a condo. In the video, Horsley is heard saying, “We’re here today to remind Elton John that he has to die.”

Horsley is not only calling for Elton John’s death, but we have learned that he is also the operator of a Kenyan site known as ProjectSEE. That web site is responsible for placing posters written in Swahili in parts of Kenya containing photos and identifying information for LGBT people, and encouraging Kenyans to follow the Levitical law calling for their death.

The anonymous blogger GayUganda received an email from an American in Kenya saying that ProjectSEE is placing posters in the Rift Valley area of Kenya:

First, it explicitly encourages the broad public posting of images of individuals, with a Swahili translation that basically advocates their harm through a Swahili Leviticus ‘quote’ that says death is in order. Encouraging these postings in a place like Kenya presents a very real and potentially harmful threat to their targets.

Secondly, they have put individual faces and in some cases contact information on the posters, placing some people at potentially immediate risk.

Third, this campaign and website appears to be organized and financed by U.S. citizens based on U.S. soil.

According to the ProjectSEE web site:

The Project SEE coalition exists to expose the “who, what, where, when, why, how, & to what extent” of the satanic efforts to legalize abortion, legalize homosexuality and otherwise contaminate Kenya with tolerance for the rebellious abominations that have corrupted the USA and Europe, and caused unbelievers to blaspheme the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The section inside the quotation marks includes a hyperlink to another page seeking and providing personally identifiable information on the web site’s targets. BTB is not providing direct hyperlinks to ProjectSEE in order to discourage increasing the site’s Google PageRank.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has an extensive profile on Horsley’s anti-abortion terrorism activities:

It was Horsley who Clayton Waagner, a self-described anti-abortion “terrorist” on the Ten Most Wanted List, chose to drop in on shortly before being arrested last November. It was Horsley who propelled his notorious website — featuring home addresses and other detailed information about hundreds of abortion providers — into the national limelight after a physician was murdered by a sniper in 1998.

It was Horsley who managed to make himself a central focus of a Home Box Office documentary on the extremist fringe of the anti-abortion movement. Horsley has become so well known that the Southern Party — a neo-Confederate group with strong secessionist elements — had him give a keynote speech last August.

According to a “whois” lookup for ProjectSee, the web site is registered through GoDaddy, and the domain servers hosting the web site are also operated by GoDaddy. (Disclosure: BTB uses GoDaddy for domain name registration.) GoDaddy’s Terms of Service prohibits the following activities:

• activities designed to defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties;
• activities prohibited by the laws of the United States and/or foreign territories in which You conduct business;
• activities designed to encourage unlawful behavior by others, such as hate crimes, terrorism and child pornography;
• activities that are tortuous, vulgar, obscene, invasive of the privacy of a third party, racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable…

I have not yet been able to determine specific contact information for lodging a complaint against ProjectSEE. GoDaddy’s Technical and Billing Support phone numbers are provided here.

Desmond Tutu: LGBT People Are a Part of the African Family

In a column appearing in this morning’s Washington Post, Nobel laureate and retired South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu lays out the moral wrongs of what is happening to LGBT people across Africa, as only he can:

In my country of South Africa, we struggled for years against the evil system of apartheid that divided human beings, children of the same God, by racial classification and then denied many of them fundamental human rights. We knew this was wrong. Thankfully, the world supported us in our struggle for freedom and dignity.

It is time to stand up against another wrong. Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people are part of so many families. They are part of the human family. They are part of God’s family. And of course they are part of the African family.

…No one chooses to be gay. Sexual orientation, like skin color, is another feature of our diversity as a human family. Isn’t it amazing that we are all made in God’s image, and yet there is so much diversity among his people? Does God love his dark- or his light-skinned children less? The brave more than the timid? And does any of us know the mind of God so well that we can decide for him who is included, and who is excluded, from the circle of his love?

The LaBarbera-Birther-Dominionist link

To paraphrase a common phrase, “wackadoodle extremist nutcakes of a feather flock together”. So it should be no surprise to find anti-gay activists dancing the tango with “birthers” and other fringe political gadflies.

Currently anti-gay activist Peter LaBarbera is waging war on Dr. Warren Throckmorton. Throckmorton engages in the grievous sin of believing that therapists – even Christian therapists – should allow same-sex attracted clients who are seeking congruence with their religion to determine their path without overlaying the therapists’ views, even if it means that “some religious individuals will determine that their religious beliefs may become modified to allow integration of same-sex eroticism within their valued identity.”

But Throckmorton infuriates LaBarbera even more by questioning the efficacy of reparative therapy and noting that “it appears from the research that change is infrequent in attractions”. LaBarbera sees this as heresy or, in his words, Throckmorton has “lost his faith in God’s ability to change people.”

LaBarbera has begun a letter and media campaign seeking to threaten Throckmorton’s employment at Grove City College. And he’s rounded up a number of “concerned citizens” to assist in his quest. Not surprisingly, they are as, ummm, colorful as is Peter himself.

First up was Linda Harvey. We know Linda well here at BTB and are familiar with her efforts to endanger the wellbeing of school children who may be discovering their same sex attractions.

But, for those who may not know the extent of Linda’s animus and how it goes to the very core of her self definition, these words from her “testimony” might shed some light.

It was 1992. I had spent months reading the Bible seriously for the first time in my life, and I was trembling on the brink of a stunning decision: to become a Christian, but not just another pew-warmer. I was increasingly tempted ­ beyond all conventional wisdom — to accept the Bible as true, which would make me one of “those” Christians.
…
So I continued on, hopeful in the joy of discovery. Plodding through the morality code passages in Leviticus ­ lambs being sacrificed, how to deal with boils and leprosy– I concluded some of the messages were symbolic, some were particular to that specific ancient time, while other messages were timeless. It was one of those timeless verses that stopped me cold.

“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.”

Whoa. If ever there was a definitive statement, this was it. I read it again, then continued on a little farther, looking for the escape clause. Not finding any, I read the passage again. Then I did some cross-referencing to find relevant verses about homosexuality in both the Old and New Testaments. This led me to Leviticus 20, Romans 1, and 1 Corinthians 6, passages conveying a consistent platform, strong and uncompromising. I mulled it over for a while, recognizing that it was probably a sub-category of the commandment against adultery. And for a woman thoroughly grounded in heterosexual desires, I had a very interesting reaction. I closed the Bible and stopped reading it for several weeks.
…
A troubling internal debate threatened my new faith. Even back then in 1992 ­ ancient history in the “gay rights” movement ­ I had absorbed the notion that only obtuse bigots opposed homosexuality. Every enlightened person knew that the freedom to practice homosexuality –responsibly, of course — would surely not threaten the mainstream, but would simply meet the needs of a small, harmless and kind of pitiful minority.
…
For several weeks I stewed about this, strongly tempted to return to the comfort of my familiar plastic beliefs. Opposing forces wrestled for authority in my mind and heart as I considered first one, then an alternative view of “truth.” What was the reality behind this issue? It was the first time, but not the last, where I would encounter a Joshua 24 moment. I needed to “choose this day whom I would serve.” I didn’t recognize the moving of the Holy Spirit yet, how He presents evidence before each of us in unique ways to drive us toward understanding. In deciding what to believe, or even how to sort it all out, I would be starting a journey toward either one or the other kingdom of two completely different masters.

Linda’s very essence – as “Christian not a pew-warmer” – is grounded in the rejection of the idea that gay people are non-threatening and the adoption as literal, relevant, and objectively true a Scriptural passage that calls for the execution of gay men. To Linda, this was the separation between “plastic beliefs” and choosing to serve God; her entire “journey” is based on the belief in death for homosexuals.

Next up was Steve Baldwin, “the former Executive Director of the Council for National Policy, a former State Assemblyman in California, and a longtime conservative Republican activist.” Baldwin wrote Grove City College’s president, seeking to discredit Throckmorton and threated to “no longer be recommending Grove City College” to “hundreds of conservative high school students” who ask him for a recommendation.

As might be expected, Baldwin is no friend of the gay community. His article written for the Regent University Law Review, Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement, is a recitation of fabrications and oft-repeated but debunked demonizations.

It is difficult to convey the dark side of the homosexual culture without appearing harsh. However, it is time to acknowledge that homosexual behavior threatens the foundation of Western civilization the nuclear family. An unmistakable manifestation of the attack on the family unit is the homosexual community’s efforts to target children both for their own sexual pleasure and to enlarge the homosexual movement. The homosexual community and its allies in the media scoff at this argument. They insist it is merely a tactic to demonize the homosexual movement. After all, they argue, heterosexual molestation is a far more serious problem.

Unfortunately, the truth is stranger than fiction. Research confirms that homosexuals molest children at a rate vastly higher than heterosexuals, and the mainstream homosexual culture commonly promotes sex with children. Homosexual leaders repeatedly argue for the freedom to engage in consensual sex with children, and blind surveys reveal a shockingly high number of homosexuals admit to sexual contact with minors. Indeed, the homosexual community is driving the worldwide campaign to lower the legal age of consent.

The thesis is breathtaking in its dishonesty.

As we have shown, the premises behind such claims are based on the false assumption that every adult who molests a child of the same sex is, by default, homosexual even if he identifies as heterosexual, is married, and has a long string of opposite sex victims.

Of course, activists like Baldwin don’t limit their extremist to gays. He also advocates for library censorship. But his greatest influence was as the executive director of the Council for National Policy, a dominionist secretive right-wing umbrella group.

After Baldwin was Priscilla Smith, “a freelance writer based in Indiana”. Smith disapproved of an email that was purportedly sent by “David Bier, Grove City College Senior” to LaBarbera in which he states, “Your recent article on Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton is yet another of your pathetic attempts to mislead otherwise moral individuals into the belief that God disapproves of homosexuality.”

This convenient email – whether genuine or contrived – was Smith’s jumping off point. She ranted:

They are about to graduate a young man from their so-called Christian institution without teaching him that God not only disapproves of homosexuality, but He describes it as an abomination, unnatural, dishonorable, perversion, depravity.

I don’t know much about Ms. Smith. If she is a freelance writer, she’s rather selective about making her writings available.

After the elusive Ms. Smith, the Peter ran a commentary by Michael Glazte. As readers may recall, Glatze had been a gay activist (though few knew who he was, he thought of himself as a “rising star”) who became ex-gay and converted to Mormonism before settling on conservative Christianity while working at a Buddhist retreat. Currently he seems to hold a grudge against Throckmorton, and lent his voice to the attack.

I have experienced Professor Throckmorton’s forked tongue, as he has pretended to seek “my side” of the story various times, then turned around and told a biased side of the same story, in a public sphere, with the intention of discrediting my testimony and shaming my stance for Gospel truth. As we have all seen, throughout Christian history, it is quite easy for people to create false worlds, to skew human perception, to persecute Christian truth. Sadly, this professor at a seemingly-reputable Christian school, has engaged in these tactics, with the outcome of persecuting the very truth he supposedly is teaching, atop his perch.

Aside from Glatze’s bitterness, he betrays a worldview that heightens the concerns that have been expressed about his mental stability. He seems to think that “objective” and “subjective” are filtered through dogma rather than observations so that “objective truth” becomes that which he’s been taught and now believes.

It is funny. In this world, truth seems to almost be subjective. Then, you meet Jesus. In Jesus, truth is objective. It is from this vantage point that I write this.

Such a way of thinking lends itself easily to cults and manipulation. It certainly has led to some peculiar political views. After advocating for bullying in schools (“Bullying in schools is a part of life, a part of growth“) and making some racists comments about President Obama, even NARTH removed him from their site.

But the very latest participant in LaBarbera’s campaign of personal destruction is also perhaps the most peculiar. Margaret Hemenway, described by the Peter as “a Virginia parent”. She pretended to be the mother of a 16 year-old girl who, after attending Catholic school, was considering attending the evangelical Grove City College.

We want our children to grow up to be healthy and happy–enjoying a wholesome college experience–not one which will undermine their years in a safe and nurturing Catholic educational environment. It is remarkable that the College would permit this professor, given your school’s Biblical charter, to crusade on behalf of homosexuality–would you also allow your staff to advocate openly for adultery, pornography or prostitution–other sexual sins? Where do you draw the line and how is the professor’s conduct and activity consistent with your Christian mission? We would look forward to your reply.

Hemenway first blipped my radar in 2008 when she claimed in an article hosted by Human Events that her daughter’s first grade teacher told her class that she was marrying another woman and “read aloud, “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” about two male “gay” guinea pigs, promoted by the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender Lobby for children.” She claims to have lodged a complaint.

But Margaret Calhoun Hemenway is no Virginia parent new to politics. Her bio states

Mrs. Hemenway spent 15 years on Capitol Hill in various staff positions in the Senate and the House, followed by five years in the Pentagon. She is married to a native of Washington, D.C. and is a proud parent of three school-age children.

And Hemenway is not shy in expressing her views. Currently she contributes to FamilySecurityMatters.org. And it is from her writings there that we find Hemenway’s more peculiar political activism.

It seems that Hemenway’s father-in-law, John D. Hemenway, is a lawyer heavily involved with the “Birther” movement, a collection of conspiracy theorists who believe that President Obama is not eligible to be President because he was not born in the United States.

From a letter he wrote to Rupert Murdock:

That problem is this: the man now occupying the White House is likely Constitutionally unqualified to hold the office.
…
As an attorney, I facilitated a lawsuit (Hollister vs. Soetoro et al.) in the United States District Court (D.C. Circuit) demanding that Obama produce his birth certificate or satisfactory substitute evidence.

But I am not trying to peg Margaret with guilt by association. She has written or her own faith in the birther movement.

Mr. Obama’s lawyers are now threatening my 84-year-old father-in-law, through Judge Robertson, with penalties of legal fees for pursuing the truth about Mr. Obama’s birth. This threat of financial sanctions is meant to silence all of us who remain unsatisfied with equivocations by the Obama camp about his legal qualifications to become President, and to punish us for pursuing our Constitutionally-guaranteed right to redress.

The Obama campaign, with questions about his birth in Kenya to his Kenyan father (a British citizen), and his years in Indonesia where he was known as Barry Soetoro (taking the surname of his stepfather), was not nearly as forthcoming as the McCain campaign. What was posted in support of Mr. Obama’s eligibility was not a birth certificate, but something that resembles a “Certification of Live Birth” or COLB, which, even if authentic, does not prove “natural born” U.S. citizenship. In Hawaii, a Certification of Live Birth is issued within a year of a child’s birth to those who register a birth overseas or one that takes place outside of a hospital.

So in his desire to punish and discredit Dr. Throckmorton, anti-gay activist Peter LaBarbera has surrounded himself with a most fascinating collection of characters: a woman who’s very identity is defined by her adoption of death-penalty based Levitical prohibition on homosexuality, a dominionist whose writings on homosexuality mirror those of Paul Cameron, an unknown freelance writer named Smith, an ex-gay with a grudge and a history of sporadic religious associations and a questionable worldview, and a Birther.

As history progresses and even conservatives begin to see gay people as human – as their friends, family, neighbors and co-workers – those who are left behind are increasingly appearing as fringe and, frankly, more than a little weird. And these are just the ones that Peter is taking public.

US State Department Officials Meet with Ugandan LGBT Advocates

Canada’s Xtra is reporting that two diplomats from Washington met with LGBT advocates in Uganda to discuss the pending Anti-Homosexuality Bill that is now before that nation’s Parliament. Geeta Pasi, US Bureau of African Affairs’ East Africa director and Bruce Wharton, the bureau’s director of public affairs, met with a Kampala-based US embassy staff member and local advocates to discuss some of the options, including imposing economic sanctions and convincing US Evangelicals who are popular in Uganda to speak out against the bill.

According to Brown Kiyimba, a Kampala-based Unitarian minister, the diplomats spoke very little at the meeting, and were mostly listening. The diplomats however did express concerns that passage of the draconian bill would limit American investment in the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Diplomats also said they would consider granting visas for LGBT leaders to travel to the US to raise awareness about the legislation. Local leaders expressed concerns about the safety of LGBT people, with many planning to flee if the law is passed. While that reportedly led to a short discussion on the possibility of asylum, no commitments were made as far as I can tell. According to Xtra, the US Embassy had no comment on the meeting.

VA Gov Issues Non-Reversing “Reversal” on Anti-Discrimination Ban

One week after Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R) ordered state universities to drop sexual orientation from their nondiscrimination policies, and nearly a month after Gov. Robert F. McDonnell signed an executive order dropping sexual orientation from the state’s anti-discrimination policies, Gov. McDonnell has now reversed his position, but not his executive order.

Gov. McDonnell’s new directive states:

We will not tolerate discrimination based on sexual orientation or any other basis that’s outlawed under state or federal law or the Constitution, and if it is reported, then I will take action, from reprimand to termination, to make sure that does not occur. I believe this properly takes care of it and assures the good people of Virginia that we will absolutely not have discrimination in this state.”

Gov. McDonnell’s executive order last month dropping sexual orientation from the state’s nondiscrimination policies has the effect of law among state employees, including state universities. But Gov. McDonnell’s new directive does not. It merely states the formal position of the governor himself. This gives the Attorney General all the legal maneuvering room he needs to issue this statement “applauding” the governor’s directive:

“I will remain in contact with the Governor and continue to work with him on issues important to Virginians,” Cuccinelli’s statement continued. “I expect Virginia’s state employees to follow all state and federal anti-discrimination laws and will enforce Virginia’s laws to the fullest extent.”

In other words, Cuccinelli recognizes that the governor’s latest statement does not have the force of law, but merely “sets the tone.” As Delegate Robert G. Marshall (R-Prince William) said, McDonnell’s directive carries no force and is no more than a “press release with fluff around it.”

There is some speculation that this fig leaf was put in place to try to impress the defense giant Northrop Grumman, which is considering moving its headquarters from Los Angeles to the Washington, D.C. area. Maryland, Virginia and the District are actively competing to win the company’s favor. Northrop Grumman enjoys a 100% rating in the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index. Among the many considerations that Northrop is facing is that Maryland’s policies are more in line with the company’s own policies. Says Maryland State Sen. Richard S. Madaleno Jr. (D-Montgomery):

Here in Maryland, we value our gay and lesbian citizens as part of a diverse population that makes the state strong. Virginia is doing the opposite and letting its LGBT citizens — and those considering whether to move and work there — know that they and their families are unwelcome second-class citizens. And they are counting on corporations like yours not to care.

Indeed, while there are efforts in Virginia’s legislature to pass a nonbinding resolution expressing the opinion that Virginia “maintains an ecumenical atmosphere in its sexual orientation hiring policies in the private and public workforce,” that resolution would not have an effect on Virginia’s nondiscrimination law. And even that nonbinding statement, which passed in Virginia’s Senate as part of a package of incentives intended to lure Northrop and other employers, is being stymied in Virginia’s lower House.

ABC’s Nightline on Uganda

Watch it:

Exodus President Wants To Apologize for Ugandan Conference. So What’s Holding Him Back?

As I write this about now, ABC’s Nightline, which is slated to cover the current anti-gay situation in Uganda, is just about to wrap up its broadcast on the east coast. I still have to wait another hour before I can see it, so I don’t know what the report will look like. But if the shorter segment shown on ABC World News with Diane Sawyer earlier this evening is any indication, it should be a good one.

Among the clips shown in the shorter evening broadcast were interviews with Ugandan pastor Martin Ssempa (who comes off looking like a buffoon — no surprise!), and video clips of the March 2009 conference put on by the three American anti-gay activists: Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively (who reiterated that he was very proud of his “nuclear bomb”), Exodus International board member Don Schmierer (who refused to be available for an interview or make a statement) and International Healing Foundation’s Caleb Brundidge (who was also nowhere to be found).

Exodus International president Alan Chambers has already responded, in a comment left on Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton’s web site:

I am disappointed that Exodus won’t be heard in this piece. Sadly, Don Schmierer declined the interview and our request to go on record with ABC was denied. I would have loved nothing better than to share our disdain for this bill and apologize for going anywhere near such a horrible conference.

If Chambers is sincere that he really does want to apologize on behalf of Exodus, then it is lamentable that ABC decided not to include his statement on their broadcast. An apology would be a very welcome — and I think newsworthy — development. But what’s stopping Exodus from issuing that apology that they know in their hearts is the right thing to do?

As we’ve discussed before, BTB’s Timothy Kincaid tried in vain to warn Chambers personally about the conference before it took place, but those warnings went unheeded. We also know that Ex-Gay Watch’s David Roberts had also contacted Chambers personally, as did Warren Throckmorton. But those please to contact Schmierer at the posh Triangle Hotel in downtown Kampala — they have faxes, Internet, and telephones like any other world-class hotel — went unheeded.

Instead, we got self-congratulatory sanctimony in the weeks following that fateful conference, when they were still proud of Schmierer’s performance. (By the way, people have been arrested in Uganda since then; we’re still waiting for Exodus VP Randy Thomas to book his flight to “plead for their freedom.”)

Back when the media hadn’t quite awaken to the unfolding tragedy in Uganda and BTB was one of the few outlets refusing to allow the story to go unnoticed, Exodus wrote us off as “American militant gay activists” making a bunch of “North American noise.” Now that mainstream television is highlighting the conference in prime time, Alan feels moved to make an apology. Odd, isn’t it?

But darn, now that he wants to apologize, there isn’t an ABC camera around to broadcast it. Oh well, I guess that means he can’t apologize now.

Seriously, if Exodus were to issue such a policy, BTB would be happy to do its part to get the world out. I’m no Diane Sawyer (Shut up, guys!), but I think we now have the world’s attention finally. I know that Exodus doubts my sincerity, but all I ever wanted was for them to respond responsibly to the mess they helped to create by their action and inaction. There is no better time than right now to make amends. Don’t tell me you you’re holding out for Diane Sawyer to do the right thing.