Box Turtle Bulletin

Colin Powell Thinks DADT Should Be “Reevaluated”; Ken Blackwell Thinks He Knows Better

Former secretary of State and retired general Colin Powell has again voiced support for reevaluating “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military. Powell told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria for Sunday’s GPS program that “We should be reevaluating it.” A clip from that interview was played on Wolf Blitzer’s The Situation Room today:

Powell said:

We definitely should reevaluate it. It’s been 15 years since we put in DADT which was a policy that became a law. I didn’t want it to become a law but it became a law. Congress felt that strongly about it. But it’s been 15 years and attitudes have changed and so I think it is time for the Congress, since it is their law, to have a full review of it, and I’m quite sure that’s what President-elect Obama will want to do.

That clip was immediately followed by an interview between Wolf Blitzer and Ken Blackwell, the former Ohio Secretary of State who is running for chairman of the Republican Party. Blackwell is also a senior fellow the Family “Research” Council, a credential that Blitzer failed to mention.  Blitzer asked Blackwell whether he agreed with Powell that DADT ought to be reevaluated:

KB: No I don’t. I don’t have General Powell’s experience in the military, but I think that the present policy is working and should be held in place.

WB: Because a lot of gays don’t think it’s working. They think a lot of talented young men and women who happen to be gay, they’re getting kicked out even after the U.S. taxpayer spends hundreds of thousands of dollars training them for sophisticated missions.

KB: Well I think the legislative process works. I think this issue has been vetted, discussed, debated and decided upon, and it works.

Gen. Powell last addressed DADT in July during an inteview with the late Tim Russert. At that time, Powell demurred when asked about DADT, saying, “the country certainly has changed” since 1993, when DADT was enacted. “I don’t know that it has changed so much that this would be the right thing to do now,” he added.

Top Evangelical Leader Resigns After Voicing Support for Civil Unions

Richard Cizik, vice president of the National Association of Evangelicals, resigned today following widespread criticism from fellow evangelicals over his Dec 2. interview on National Public Radio’s “Fresh Air” program. Cizik drew outrage by saying that he is “shifting” on the issue of same-sex marriage, saying “I would willingly say that I believe in civil unions.”

Cizik also acknowledged that he voted for President-elect Barack Obama during the primaries, pointing out that younger evangelicals are more willing to support a pro-choice political candidate based on other issues such as health care. He also said he supported the government distributing contraceptives to bring down the number of unwanted pregnancies.

Following the interview, Lieth Anderson, president of the NEA responded to the predictable outcry by eliciting an apology from Cizik. Anderson wrote a letter to the NAE board of directors saying that Cizik had apologized for the remark and that “our NAE stand on marriage, abortion, and other biblical values is long, clear, and unchanged.” NAE executive director W.T. Bassett tried further to calm the waters with an e-mail to constitutents which quoted Cizik as backtracking:

“I categorically oppose ‘gay marriage’ and see now that my thoughts about ‘civil unions’ were misunderstood and misplaced,” Cizik said, according to the message. “I am now and always have been committed to work to pass laws that protect and foster family life, and to work against government attempts to interfere with the integrity of the family, including same-sex ‘marriage’ and civil unions.”

Meanwhile, Cizik drew further criticism from pro-LGBT advocates this past week for being a signatory to the misleading New York Times ad by the Becket Fund which falsely characterized the peaceful protests against Prop 8 as “mob violence.”

Is Gay the New Black?

Newsweek and The Advocate ask the question. Patricia Nell Warren says of course not. I agree. You?

Wanda Sykes Discusses “A Day Without Gays” And Prop 8

I showed up for work yesterday. I just didn’t see how calling in gay to my employer would be in any way a meaninful act. Wanda Sykes showed up as well, last night on Jay Leno’s show. 

Is Pope Benedict XVI Just Being Ironic?

The Catholic Church is not known for its ironic sense of humor. But how else do we read this statement from Pope Benedict XVI on the occasion of 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

Some 60 years ago, on Dec. 10, the U.N. General Assembly, meeting in Paris, adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which still today constitutes a very high point of reference in the intercultural dialogue on liberty and the rights of man. The dignity of every man, really guaranteed only when all his fundamental rights are recognized, protected and promoted. The Church has always confirmed that the fundamental rights, beyond the different formulations and the different weight they might carry in the realm of the different cultures, are a universal fact, because they are inscribed in the very nature of man.

…I support these good wishes with the prayer that God, Father of all men, will enable us to build a world where every human being feels accepted with full dignity, and where relations between individuals and peoples are governed by respect, dialogue and solidarity.”

The Vatican has taken a nonsensical, contradictory position by opposing a U.N. resolution calling for the elimination of anti-homosexuality laws around the world, even though a Vatican spokesman claims they oppose all criminal penalties against homosexuality. The Vatican has staunchly opposed the death penalty while opposing a measure calling on nations to lift the death penalty and other criminal penalties for LGBT people.

And despite all of that, the Pope calls for a world where people are “goverened by respect, dialogue and solidarity.” What solidarity? What respect? What dialogue? I am truly at a loss for words.

I think maybe he’s confused the meaning of Matthew 6:3. He must think it says, “Don’t let your left hand catch what your right hand is doing.

Gays To Blame For Big Three’s Failures

Guess who’s to blame for the Big Three’s woes. That’s right, it’s us. RightMichigan has it all figured out:

The Big Three automakers — DaimlerChrysler, General Motors and Ford Motor — announced in June that they would offer health benefits to the same-sex partners of their 466,000 hourly and salaried employees in the United States. I could not find much on the cost of providing these benefits however ….

That “however” is his way of saying that the absence of actual data isn’t going to deter him one bit. He goes on to guesstimate that the Big Three could save $125 Million. Or is it $25 million? I can’t tell. There are too many elementary math errors, typos, and undocumented assumptions to make heads or tails out of it. But what the heck, it doesn’t matter anyway. This is why the Big Three need $30 billion. You see? It’s all our fault.

[Hat tip: Ed Brayton]

BYU Rehangs Photo Exhibit

Michael Wiltbank’s photo project is back up:

BYU spokesman Michael Smart said a miscommunication between administrators in the College of Fine Arts and Communication led to the removal. “When the action became apparent after the weekend, college administrators reviewed the decision,” Smart said. “Because the project does not violate BYU’s honor code, the project was rehung Tuesday afternoon.

The photo project, which featured pairs of photos of one gay student and one straight supporter, had been removed last Friday. Michael writes in his blog:

While I was of course frustrated that the work was removed, I also hoped that it, and this situation, would prompt more discussion. This has now happened, and I’m very pleased about it.

New York Marriage Hopes Back On

[Jim has also written about this change in the marriage landscape]

We told you of an agreement between Senate Majority Leader hopeful Malcolm Smith and three renegade Democratic Senators which would buy their support by assuring them that gay marriage would not be allowed to be presented for a vote in the New York State Senate. Now it seems that Mr. Smith has had a little conversation with his integrity and that his integrity won.

Newsday is reporting that the deal is off:

“We’re prepared to wait if we have to to come into the majority,” Smith said. He was flanked by senators Neil Breslin of Albany and Liz Krueger of Manhattan when he made the announcement.

Smith said the three renegades were motivated by “personal interests.” He also said he wouldn’t subject civil rights issues to negotiation, referring to a proposal backed by many Democrats to legalize gay marriage.

“That issue should never be a part of a negotiation,” Smith said, and should be subject to the legislative process.

The article suggests that the role of “integrity” was played by other members of the Democratic Caucus who had to remind Smith about what he believed. Nonetheless, this is a significant and brave step for Smith and for the Democrats. And I commend them for finding their courage and taking the risk.

The three rebels may decide that if they can’t get their way, they’ll turn power back over to the Republicans. But I think a more likely scenario is that they know that such a vote would be political suicide and that in the end they will support Smith. And, if so, there will probably be a vote on marriage equality in the relatively near future.

So now it is up to Empire Pride to lobby the other Democratic Senators and to work with Log Cabin to try and pull enough Republican Senators to get a “yes” majority. Those readers living in New York should begin to consider what steps they can take to help.

(hat tip Good As You)

New York Dems To Gang Of Three: Drop Dead

Remember that apparent deal we told you about between New York State Sen. Malcom Smith and the so-called “Gang of Three”? That deal centered on the Democrats taking control of the Senate for the first time in forty years in exchange pledging to Sens. Rubén Díaz Sr., Pedro Espada, and Carl Kruger in writing not to put same-sex marriage legislation up for a vote.

It now looks like that deal has fallen apart:

Sen. Malcolm Smith said today that he will cease negotiations on the reorganization of the Senate with the so-called “Gang of Three”. “We are suspending negotiations, effective immediately, because to do so otherwise would reduce our moral standing and the long-term Senate Democratic commitment to reform and change,” Smith said. “It became very clear to me, over time, that those negotiations started being more about self interest.”

…”Frankly, we would rather wait two more years to take charge of the Senate than to simply serve the interests of a few,” Smith said. He also said limiting civil rights of New Yorkers should not be part of the negotiations, but should be part of the legislative process.

TWO Calls Out Becket Fund in Full Page Ad

We’ve already talked about the full-page ad placed by the Becket Fund in last Friday’s New York Times which falsely characterized the peaceful protests against California’s Proposition 8 as “mob violence.” And we also provided evidence of some of that ad’s cosigners’ undisguised hatred against gay people.

Tomorrow, Wayne Besen and Truth Wins Out will counter that ad with a full-page ad in the Salt Lake City Tribune. TWO’s ad calls attention the the Becket Fund’s ad demanding an end to “anti-religious bigotry” against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints:

“Beginning today,” they wrote, “We commit ourselves to opposing and publicly shaming anyone who resorts to the rhetoric of anti-religious bigotry, against any faith, on any side of the cause, for any reason.

TWO responds by including some rather shameful anti-religious sputterings by three of the Becket Fund ad’s cosigners:

“Hollywood is controlled by secular Jewswho hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular.” – Bill Donohue, Catholic League

“Mormonism either affirms historic Christianity, or it doesn’t. Since it doesn’t, it can’t call itself Christianity – a fact that all the good will and public relations in Utah can’t change. …”While Mormons share some beliefs with Christians, they are not Christians.” –Chuck Colson, Prison Fellowship Ministries

“Most evangelicals still regard Mormonism as a cult.” — Rich Cizik, National Association of Evangelicals

Here is the TWO ad. (Click on the image to see the full-size version.)

Seamus Hasson’s Amazing Mathematics

Seamus Hasson, new recipient of our LaBarbera Award for his comparison of Prop 8 protesters to El Qaeda, made some amazing claims on KPFK yesterday:

…there have been at least ten churches painted with swastikas, threats to close down or else. There’s been six churches with small-bore rifle fire through their windows. By my count, there have been at least six instances of burning Books of Mormon on the church steps. These aren’t isolated occurrences here and there; this is an uprising of some sort.

I checked up on Hasson’s claims by reviewing newspaper reports of vandalism following the passage of Proposition 8. While I may have missed some reports (if so, please advise), my numbers are substantially different from those of Hasson.

Instances of swastika vandalism:

• 11/9/08 – Trinity Presbyterian Church in San Jose, CA. Swastikas and Stars of David were found painted on a church building. Probably not related to Proposition 8.
• 11/13/08 – Holocaust Memorial in San Francisco, CA. Benches, plaques, and statuary defaced by swastikas written in black marker. Probably not related to Proposition 8.
• 12/9/08 Jehovah’s Witness Church in Northumberland, PA. Painted with swastikas, racist obscenities and “KKK”. Probably not related to Proposition 8.

Other use of swastika:

• Days following vote – Roman Catholic Church in Riverside, CA. Yes on 8 signs arranged in the form of a swastika on the lawn – no spray painting. (from SL Tribune’s compilation of Prop 8 response)
• 11/9/08 – Saddleback Church in Orange Co., CA. A protest sign was carried saying – “Will your rights be next?” – with a Nazi swastika drawn in place of the “x” – no spray painting.

I do know of at least one instance of spray painting on a church. In the days following the vote, a Mormon Church in Utah was tagged with “Nobody is born a bigot”. This was likely related to Proposition 8, but no swastikas were used.

So as for “churches painted with swastikas” by protesters over Proposition 8: Hasson’s count: ten; my count: zero.

Burning Books of Mormon:

• 11/11/08 – Mormon Church in Littleton, CO. A burning copy of the Book of Mormon was found on the door step. Likely related to Proposition 8.

So as for “instances of burning Books of Mormon on the church steps” by protesters over Proposition 8: Hasson’s count: six; my count: one.

I found no instances of churches being threatened to “close down or else”. None. And by “small-bore rifle fire”, Hasson means a bb gun (as in “You’ll shoot your eye out, kid“).

Which leaves me with the following conclusion: Either

• There are an abundance of painted swastikas on churches and burning Books of Mormon that did not make it into the news;
• Hasson can’t count to ten; or
• Hasson is deliberately lying about vandalism that he claims is coming from the supporters of Proposition 8.

I’ll let you decide.

LaBarbera Award: Rabbi Nachum Shifren

We’ve been predicting that somebody, somewhere would compare the peaceful, First Amendment-protected protests against the passage of California’s Proposition 8 to the Nazis and the Holocaust. Well, here it is:

We are dealing with the equivalent of a moral takeover of the country that has as its bedrock a belief in G-d and His promise for humanity. They don’t want civil rights! What they desire is quasi Gay/Lesbian hegemony, where a huge “bookburning,” reminiscent of the Nazis, will purge any remnants of the “Christian, White, mainstream America” that has given ALL AMERICANS the most profound scope of freedom, liberty, and justice that Mankind has yet to experience.

People have perhaps wondered: why the Mormons? Answer: they are a small, yet vocal Christian minority. They have been selected by the mobs as vulnerable, a group that might not have such massive support among America’s Christians.

We who are friends of the Mormons, their patriotism, their family values, will not falter in our continued support of these dear Americans. Let us recall the Christian minister Niemoller, whose admonition during those dark years of Nazi Germany moved us to our core:

“When they came for the gypsies, I said nothing, because I wasn’t a gypsy. When they came for the homosexuals, I said nothing, because I wasn’t a homosexual. When they came for the Jews, I said nothing, because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I said nothing, because I wasn’t a Catholic……then they came for me, and there was no one left to defend me.”

That was penned by Rabbi Nachum Shifren in a piece he titled “We are all Mormons.” Jeremy Hooper was especially puzzled by Rabbi Shifren’s recognition in the last quoted paragraph that gays have, in fact, been persecuted:

But the really interesting thing for us? That Niemöller poem that Rabbi Shifren quotes did not, in its original form, even mention gays, yet here he has made a point of including homosexuals as one of the persecuted groups. Does he not see anything odd about that? Here he is going ballistic about the “immoral” gays and their “licentiousness,” yet he fully admits they have been (/still are) a persecuted minority? It just seems odd.

Very odd indeed. And it’s that strangeness which makes Rabbi Shifren a perfect candidate for the LaBarbera Award.

[Hat tip: Good As You]

U.S. Catholic Groups To Hold Vigils At Cathedrals

Three Catholic groups which support LGBT equality have announced plans to hold vigils in five U.S. cities today to call attention to the Vatican’s opposition to a U.N. resolution calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality. DignityUSA, New Ways Ministry, and Call To Action will hold vigils in the following locations:

  Read the rest of this entry »

LaBarbera Award: Seamus Hasson

Yesterday we gave the LaBarbera Award to Pat Boone for comparing the peaceful protests against Prop 8 to Mumbai terrorists who killed 163 people in what is now being referred to as India’s 9/11. That was the day after the Becket Fund placed a full-page ad in the New York Times falsely characterizing these same peaceful protests — protected by the First Amendment’s peaceful assembly clause — as “mob violence.” Now we have a new LaBarbera Award winner in Seamus Hasson, the founder and chairman for the Becket Fund itself.

On yesterday’s “The Morning Show” on KPFA, host Aimee Allison spoke with Hasson about the New York Times ad, and asked him about the broad brush characterization of the movement as violent:

Aimee Allison: So, Rev. Russell was commenting, there may be a few individuals, but not a movement. Seamus Hasson, your response to that: if there are individuals, why are anti-Prop 8 movement folks being painted with that broad brush?

Seamus Hasson: Well, whether it’s an organized movement like Al Qaeda or whether it’s the Al Qaeda-like, um, inspired acts of terrorism elsewhere, people are right to be concerned about, um, radical Islamist violence —

First it was Mumbai terrorists, now we’re Al Qaeda-like. You know, the people who flew planes into buildings and killed more than three thousand people. That Holocaust analogy is just around the corner…

[Hat tip: GLAAD Blog]

Carol Boltz’s Blog

On Monday, we presented Ray Boltz’s new video, “Don’t Tell Me Who To Love.” That video and single came out just a few months after Boltz, a popular Contemporary Christian Music singer, came out of the closet publicly. He had come out privately some years earlier to his wife and other close associates.

Carol Boltz has been through a lot over the past few years. It’s one thing for the straight spouse to deal with a husband who has had to tell her that he’s gay. It’s quite another thing entirely when that husband is a well-known public figure.

Carol has a blog now, and she’s telling her side of the story. It’s a tremendous act of courage, as well as support:

Today I realized that I have recently signed two comments on my friend, Peterson’s, blog, with the closing, “my heart goes out to you.” I was responding to another wife, like me, of a gay man. She, like me, had all of the emotions to deal with when this deep secret was revealed. I can’t know how best to help this woman, but I knew that I could identify and share what has helped me. By closing in the way I did, I hope that she knows that someone else has been where she is today, and I lived through it.

Somehow I have made it out of my Christian fundamentalism, and the misconceptions of homosexuality that I had previously known, to a bigger understanding of gay people. My faith has been shaken, but it is still there. Without sounding presumptuous, and I surely don’t have all the answers to so many questions, I have grown more than I even thought or dreamed possible.

Many things have helped me in the past [almost] four years, and there are ways that hope has entered my life and my heart. I hope that I can offer that to other wives of gay men, and perhaps to my friends who read this, too.

Her blog is not only heartfelt and courageous, but it also has some great gems of simple common sense:

Speaking up for gay marriage, it is my belief that besides all the reasons mentioned in this article, it would make more sense for gay people to marry gay people, than for them to marry straight ones.

This is a blog by a woman who is still trying to sort things out from a very difficult position. I hope you will visit, read, and learn — and offer your words of support.

[Hat tip: Peterson Toscano. Even though Carol is my Facebook friend, I’m embarrassed to say I didn’t know about her blog.]