alvinmcewen
Log in to comment or register to create your own blog
I was so angry at CNN's Don Lemon last weekend because of the ignorant way he chose to voice a few comments.
Lemon took it upon himself to underline ways that the black community can improve itself. His suggestions were that we should stop wearing baggy pants, using the n-word, dropping out of school and having children out of wedlock.
They were good points, but the way he phrased them came across as a patronizing lecture which talked down to African-Americans because the majority of us don't act in those manners.
I felt he could have used the power of his pulpit to have a nuanced discussion about the problems in the black community, rather than sounding as ignorant as Fox host Bill O'Reilly, who pretty much repeated the same stereotypes about African-Americans.
However in the midst of my raging anger, an inner thought kept running throughout my mind.
For all of the arguments and discussions asking is the struggle for lgbt equality comparable to that of the African-American civil rights movement, there are times when very few notice the similarities.
And this is one of those times
Lemon's condescending lecture does nothing for the African-American community. Sagging pants and bad English are not indigenous to the African-American community. And children out of wedlock and the drop-out rates are not problems that's not centered solely based in the African-American community.
If there are going to be serious discussions about problems facing the black community, then they don't need to start with a pundit wagging his finger while sequestered behind a desk. There needs to be discussions as to why things such as out of wedlock births are happening. The discussions should have more context by mentioning socioeconomic factors such as unemployment, not having access to good education and healthcare, and systematic racism so ingrained that it practically works by itself. And there needs to be viable solutions voiced.
All Lemon (O'Reilly for that matter) actually did was to exacerbate racism against African-Americans by allowing those with biases against black folks to flood the comment boards with vulgar displays of gloating.
And they both reminded me of how the religious right exacerbates homophobia against the lgbt community.
So many religious right groups and leaders, from Tony Perkins and Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council to Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel, are quick to point out Centers for Disease Control statistics which talk about health risk factors in the lgbt community as proof that homosexuality is a supposed dangerous lifestyle.
However, these so-called defenders of truth and morality always seem to deliberately omit that the CDC says that homophobia and its negative effects on the lgbt community are clearly to blame for the health risk factors, and not the so-called gay lifestyle. I've always believed that they omit this simple fact because it destroys their argument. They don't seek to have a nuanced discussion on being gay because they want to dehumanize the lgbt orientation.
Certainly this is not what Lemon was trying to do to the African-American community, but that is in fact what he did. Lemon dehumanized the African-American community into stereotypes, much like the religious right does to the lgbt community.
It's something which strikes at the heart of my soul because of my dual identity as a black gay man. It was something that Mr. Lemon maybe should have thought of seeing that he is also a black gay man. That tidbit hurt me the most because I once looked up to Lemon as a role model. With O'Reilly, such nonsense is to be expected. He is nothing more than a high maintenance Morton Downey, Jr. whose rage and bluster conceals the fact that he just that - rage and bluster without a semblance of nuance or integrity. And thus, his analyses of the arguments of the day are as soggy and weak as a bag of cotton candy caught in a rain storm.
Instead of agreeing with O'Reilly, Lemon should have aspired to give his audience something more intelligent.
Lemon's patronizing sermon is definitely something both the lgbt and African-American community should keep in mind instead of being tricked into playing another bout of the "oppression Olympics." Let's not allow ourselves to be fooled by segments of society who sees both of our communities as either children needing to be lectured or undesirables. And let's not allow ourselves to be pawns of pundits who see us as commodities to increase their ratings.
There is an unfortunate dichotomy in America which looks at both the black and gay communities as entities to be talked about rather than talked to and commodities to be used and abused like tissue paper. To defeat this dichotomy, both communities must do all they can to not only solve their problems but also wrest control of the conversation from those who would seek to define us in ugly and simplistic terms.
Because they simply don't have our best interests at heart.
This has to be probably the nastiest paragraph that I have ever had the misfortune to read. But it needs to be brought to your attention:
" (Tyler) Clementi had so much experience with online hookups that he must have started them prior to turning eighteen. When he was a minor, it's probable that he had liaisons with men who were older than eighteen and committing statutory rape. Seen through this lens, society failed not in fostering homophobia, but rather in allowing a culture of abuse to flourish online."
Tyler Clementi was the 18-year-old Rutgers student who committed suicide in 2010 after his roommate taped him - without his knowledge - having a romantic encounter with another man.
His suicide sparked a huge amount of attention and helped to shine a light on the problems that lgbt youth have coming out, as well as that of bullying.
It was a terrible situation for everyone involved. And you would think that those who oppose lgbt equality would have at least a degree of decency and respect to allow him to rest in peace.
Don't fool yourself.
That repulsive paragraph is simply a minor portion of an ugly piece of trash which links gays to pedophilia. It was written by National Organization for Marriage ally Robert Oscar Lopez. Lopez has been making a name for himself by claiming to be a man who was raised in a lesbian household.
According to Equality Matters:
In March, (Lopez) was scheduled to speak at NOM’s anti-equality rally outside of the Supreme Court.His writing frequently appears on NOM’s blog. NOM has called Lopez a “hero,” touted his “excellent” testimony against marriage equality in Minnesota, and asked supporters to pray for him during his efforts to fight marriage equality. NOM has also repeatedly relied on Lopez’s testimony about being raised by a lesbian couple to argue against same-sex parenting. NOM’s allies have peddled this kind of extreme anti-gay hate speech before. A July 3 blog post by NOM’s Ruth Institute similarly promoted the claim that pedophiles would use gay marriage as a “cover” to acquire children for sexual abuse.
Also, according to Equality Matters, this isn't the first time a NOM ally has exploited Clementi's suicide and besmirched his memory:
And in February, NOM’s Jennifer Morse suggested that Clementi may have killed himself because he was exploited by a much older man. The Clementi family called on Morse to apologize for her comments, and she was eventually forced to clarify her remarks.
Tyler Clementi was a victim of ignorance. He was young man whose life was snuffed out by societal homophobia and basic nastiness. To throw out nasty, unproven theories regarding his alleged sex life is vile and totally uncalled for. It not only dishonors his name, it disrespects him and his family, who are no doubt still grieving over his loss.
I hope that Lopez will take back his trashing of Clementi's memory.
Hat tip to Equality Matters
Almost from the very day we began the argument over marriage equality, opponents have been fretting about how they would be perceived. They have expressed in supposedly sad tones that they merely believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and it was unfair that their "simple and innocent" belief would have them labeled as bigots.
I think Justice Kennedy last week expressed the problematic deception behind this false worry with his words about DOMA. He said DOMA demeaned children in same-sex families by sending them a message that their families are somehow inferior.
In expressing that, Kennedy did not call anyone a bigot. However, to hear the opponents of marriage equality rant and rave, that's exactly what he did. They refuse to notice that by not calling them out specifically, Kennedy was actually agreeing with their notion that their beliefs regarding marriage equality don't make necessarily make them bigots. But he did attack the idea behind opposing marriage equality and you can attack an idea without attacking those who prescribe to that idea.
Now that is the standard view of Justice Kennedy's opinion versus the opponents of marriage equality fretting about being unfairly called bigots.
But it's not my view.
I don't worry about the so-called bigotry of marriage equality opponents because I am bothered by their deliberate evasiveness. Let's be honest. Their whine about being unfairly cast as bigots is a cynical dodge. It's a game many of them play to distract us from a real issue of marriage equality.
And that issue is the one Justice Kennedy so eloquently put. What about the children raised by gay couples? Why should these children feel that their families are somehow inferior simply due to someone else's personal beliefs? Why should they be denied rights and self-esteem simply because someone like Tony Perkins from the Family Research Council or Brian Brown from the National Organization for Marriage will not address their very existence while at the same time wax insincerely about being labeled as bigots. Or attempt to blur over the point with meaningless statements about "decades of social science research" supporting their point of view but not naming at least one study which would accurately back them up.
Just as they feel that they have a right to boggart the definition of "marriage," marriage equality opponents feel that they have an equal right to boggart the argument over marriage equality itself until it's less about same-sex families and more about them. As long as they focus all of the attention on themselves, they don't have to address how their point of view actually harms same-sex couples and their children.
And sadly, I think that those leading the charge against marriage equality know this. Their careful avoidance of same-sex couples and especially their children is deliberate.
A little tip, guys. All of the talk about "morality" and "values" don't mean a thing if you employ dishonest methods designed to ignore the rights, needs, or the very existence of your fellow Americans.
Especially when those fellow Americans are children.
By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court declared the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to be unconstitutional. They also dismissed the Prop 8 case, which means gays in California can resume getting married.
All in all, an awesome day for the lgbt community It almost - but not quite - makes up for the ruling yesterday when the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act.
But for my money, I want to focus on DOMA because the case was doomed from the start. Speaker of the House John Boehner gave $2.3 million to lawyer Paul Clement and Clement pretty much wasted it on a piss poor defense. In 2011, both Americablog and Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters broke stories which pointed out the following serious problems with the DOMA defense:
1. Clement tried to sneak in the testimony of former NOM chair Maggie Gallagher in a way which would have kept her from being cross-examined.
2. A professor cited by Clement in a brief defending DOMA, Lisa Diamond, complained that her work was being distorted.
3. Clement is also citing - in a second hand fashion - junk science from discredited researchers. In his defense of DOMA, Clement cites the work of Case Western Reserve University law professor George W. Dent, Jr.
But Dent's work - which Clement uses - cited both Paul Cameron and George Rekers, two discredited researchers. Cameron has been censured or rebuked by several organizations for his bad methodology in his studies. He has published work which claimed, among other nauseating false things, that gays stuff gerbils up their rectums. (Editor's note- the piece Cameron cited to make this claim - The Straight Dope - actually said that this claim was not true. Cameron dishonestly "flipped the script" to make it seem that The Straight Dope was affirming this claim.)
Rekers lost a lot of credibility for last year's scandal when he was caught coming from a European vacation with a "rentboy."
Also, Dent cited the work of Walter Schumm's study Children of Homosexuals More Apt To Be Homosexuals? A Reply to Morrison and to Cameron Based on an Examination of Multiple Sources of Data.
Schumm's study was criticized for using the same false methodology as Cameron's work. i.e. citing sources "from general-audience books about LGBT parenting and families, most of which are available on Amazon.com"
Furthermore, Dent cited a book called Straight & Narrow by Thomas E. Schmidt to make criticisms about gay health. However, Schmidt is not a credible researcher in the field of gay health. He is a professor of New Testament Greek at Westmont College in Santa Barbara and according to Rev. Mel White of the group Soulforce, Schmidt cited Cameron's discredited studies many times in Straight & Narrow (5th letter to Jerry Falwell.)
And last, but not least, Dent cited the work of the American College of Pediatricians. The American College of Pediatricians is not a credible organization, but an organization created to give credibility to junk science about the gay community. Last year, over 14,000 school district superintendents in the country were sent a letter by ACP inviting them to peruse and use information from a new site, Facts About Youth. The site claimed to present "facts" supposedly not tainted by "political correctness." Of course these were not facts, but ugly distortions about the gay community, including:
Some gay men sexualize human waste, including the medically dangerous practice of coprophilia, which means sexual contact with highly infectious fecal wastes
It all goes to prove that just like cologne on bad body odor, money can't cover up the smell of bull.
Last week, I received the following money plea email from the Family Research Council:
The secret is out. The Obama administration has joined forces with perhaps the most anti-Christian organization in America today -- the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).
By making reckless accusations against those who stand for biblical morality, the SPLC has incited violence and hatred against those who oppose the Obama administration on issues such as same-sex "marriage" and religious liberty.
The anti-Christian crusade instigated by the SPLC has already resulted in an armed terrorist attack on Family Research Council headquarters in Washington, D.C.
You would think that the Obama Justice Department would distance itself from the SPLC for creating a climate of animus and hatred toward groups like FRC, but since the attack on our headquarters the Justice Department has shown no signs of breaking ties with the SPLC.
That's why FRC is urging Congress to investigate the SPLC's ties to the Obama administration. Will you help us stand strong? The President needs to be exposed for colluding with the SPLC to stifle debate on social policy issues by means of intimidation, fear-mongering, and spreading lies.
The email ends with a plea by FRC for folks to send a "much needed gift" so that the organization can continue to supposedly expose SPLC and the Obama Administration
No doubt this is just a ploy for FRC to raise money (and a way to get back at SPLC for rightfully designating it as a "hate group") but I would advise the organization to tread lightly. There is a myriad of information out there which would prove that the Family Research Council is guilty of everything it has been accused of by the Southern Poverty Law Center. And then some.
In the possible Congressional investigation or hearing, I am sure the following will come out how the Family Research Council:
- distorted Centers for Disease Control data to demonize the lgbt community,
- accused gays of being tools of Satan,
- publicly wished for gays to be deported,
- publicly wished for "homosexual behavior" to be declared illegal,
- falsely accused an organization (GLSEN) of deliberately giving adult material to minors,
- pushed a false connection between homosexuality and pedophilia,
- distorted scientific research and ignored the authors of said research when they complain about how you misuse their data,
- published papers and studies authored by fake experts filled with false data egregiously cherry-picked, and
- made inaccurate comparisons about such things as same-sex marriage as opposed to heterosexual marriage
The question for FRC is do you really want all of this to come out?
Do you really want there to be a Congressional hearing or investigation where no doubt you would be exposed as a fraudulent organization who has for over two decades hid its homophobia, lies, and propaganda behind "Christian principles."
I think the old adage of being careful of what you wish for because you just might receive it is very apropo here.
Related posts:
How They See Us: Unmasking the Religious Right War on Gay America
16 Reasons why the Family Research Council is a hate group
This is just pathetic. Apparently the Family Research Council is attempting to attach gay equality to the Department of Justice leak story:
When the Justice Department is done violating journalists' First Amendment rights, it looks like they'll move on to employees'. In a chilling memo to DOJ staff, the Obama administration is warning managers that they'd better start embracing homosexuality--or else. The email, which a Justice employee leaked to Liberty Counsel, is a scary reminder of how far this administration will go to crush free speech and expression in America.
In advance of June, the DOJ is priming its staff for a four-week in-your-face "gay pride" celebration that demands, not only the participation of--but affirmation by-- all staff. Based on this new directive, "LGBT Inclusion at Work: The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Managers," it's no longer acceptable to be quiet or even neutral on homosexuality. In a not-so-veiled threat, the administration tells staff that when it comes to homosexuality and cross-dressing, "Silence will be interpreted as disapproval." That's absolutely outrageous. Even criminals have the right to remain silent! President Obama's so-called Department of Justice is actually telling workers that there's no place in the government for people with unspoken objections to homosexuality. In fact, writes NRO's Ian Tuttle, "there is no longer a place even for private, unexpressed disapproval..."
Forget tolerance. The DOJ wants--and expects--vocal support for sexual deviance. Nowhere is that more evident than in this latest list of "DO"s and "DON'T"s, which includes some eye-opening advice for staff leaders. "DO assume that LGBT employees and their allies are listening to what you're saying" (sound ominous?) "and will read what you're writing (whether in a casual email or in a formal document)." "DO attend LGBT events sponsored by DOJ Pride" and decorate your office accordingly. "DO display a symbol in your office (DOJ Pride sticker)." "DO use a transgender person's chosen name and the pronoun that is consistent with the person's self-identified gender." "DO use inclusive words like 'partner,' 'significant other,' or 'spouse' rather than gender-specific terms."
It's hilarious how FRC claims that the brochure in question was "leaked." Makes the entire situation sounds ominous doesn't it? Don't be fooled by FRC's shuck-and-jive. There are certain facts about the brochure that FRC omitted. According to Ed Brayton of Free Thought Blogs:
First of all, this is a pamphlet of “practical tips to help managers create a truly inclusive workplace climate.” It’s not a set of commandments delivered from Mt. Sinai. It wasn’t even sent out by DOJ officials, it was sent out by DOJ Pride, the Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Employees of the U.S. Department of Justice and Their Allies.
In his post, Brayton was calling attention to the fact that another religious right spokesperson, Matt Barber of the Liberty Counsel, was distorting the brochure. Brayton especially called attention to the fact that Barber was cherry-picking portions of the pamphlet to make it seem more ominous.
Apparently FRC is doing the same thing. No matter how FRC attempts to make the brochure (this one) sound like a dangerously forced directive on behalf of the DOJ, it's really not. The brochure informs DOJ employees of the simple fact that some of their fellow employees are lgbt and gives tips as to how to behave towards them.
And really, what's wrong with that?
I think FRC's last statement on the matter gives a key to the entire matter:
As FRC has said for years, this debate has never been about tolerance. It's about forced acceptance. President Obama admitted as much when he praised the NBA's Jason Collins. Read what he said when Collins announced he was gay: "The LGBT community deserves full equality, not just partial equality. Not just tolerance."
On that score, I would say that FRC is partly right. Lgbt equality has never been about tolerance. You tolerate your pets having accidents on the carpet. You tolerate traffic jams. You even tolerate the slow cashier who makes you wait in a grocery store. But no one has the right to think that they are so superior that they should tolerate a fellow human being merely attempting to live his or her life.
Nor is lgbt equality about forced acceptance. To a degree, it's never been about acceptance but respect of a fellow human being. And with that respect comes the knowledge that your sexual orientation - gay, straight, or bisexual - does not put you on a pedestal where you have the patent to concepts like "family," "morality," or "love."
FRC seems to think that those who believe as it does do in fact have a patent to those concepts. That's all well and good if the organization wants to follow that delusion. However, FRC doesn't have the right and will never have the right to force the lgbt or our allies to live under that same delusion.
I’m happy to report that five months later, while not on the radar of the mainstream lgbt media, the book has become a huge success.
As of right now, How They See Us has drawn over 20,000 readers, making it the number one political book as well as the number five non-fiction book on Scribd.
A lot of the credit is owed to the book’s supporters who consistently either talked it up to their friends, tweeted it on a daily basis, or embedded it on their blogs. And recent events has shown that this book is needed.
Remember last month when Michigan Republican leader, Dave Agema, posted what he called “facts about homosexuality” on Facebook. Many of Agema’s claims had already been cited and refuted in How They See Us. And the fact that Agema pulled his claims from an over 20-year-old piece even proved the basic point of my booklet – that the same claims made now by such groups as the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, and other so-called pro-family groups are not facts but old lies rooted in junk science or cherry-picked legitimate science.
And with marriage equality quickly gaining support and popularity, there seems to be this false dichotomy going around that Christians are being victimized for speaking against marriage equality. Two weeks ago, an article on CNN’s webpage asked that question. The article was okay but it nevertheless still gave the inaccurate impression that religious right groups are unfairly victimized simply for expressing religious opposition to marriage equality. This mindset totally absolves them of the propaganda they have spread about the lgbt community before marriage equality was even an issue.
My next goal with How They See Us is getting more copies into the hands of people who can use them. I am currently creating a hard copy edition of How They See Us which I intend to distribute at pride festivals free of charge. I also intend to mail copies to certain members of Congress, HRC, GLAAD, and also put the word out to many pride centers across the nation that the book is available for their usage free of charge.
While articles have been written which ask the question of whether or not Christians are being attacked for professing their so-called personal beliefs, there has been very little media attention and virtually NO mainstream articles focusing on present-day religious right anti-gay propaganda or how so-called “pro-family” groups routinely cherry-pick science to demonize gays. And that’s a real shame. Hopefully, How They See Us can help to change that.
How They See Us is available for free and can be downloaded from here.A story about an anti-bullying workshop at New York's Red Hook school district has been playing huge in religious right and conservative circles lately. The story, which not only includes the tale of a forced lesbian kiss between middle school girls at the workshop but also boys being told to carry condoms in their pockets, has been the talk of several conservative sites from Free Republic to The American Thinker to World Net Daily. The National Organization for Marriage referred to this story in three separate emails last week as an example of what will happen should marriage equality become legal across the country.
Not surprisingly, the story isn't necessarily true.
According to the school district, during the workshop at Linden Avenue Middle School, no female student was forced to engage in any lesbian kissing, male students were not told to carry condoms, and sexual activity between students was not condoned in any way. The district also said:
During the week of April 9, eighth grade communication sessions were held at Linden Avenue Middle School. These sessions were designed by building leadership and the guidance department. The goals of these sessions were to encourage students to treat one another (and all marginalized groups) with more respect as well as to further develop an appreciation for personal dignity. In response to parental concerns about these sessions Dr. Zahedi, the middle school principal, held an evening informational forum on April 16. This session was well attended and the subsequent feedback has been positive. In addition, the Board of Education and Superintendent of Schools, Paul Finch, addressed the community at the April 24 board meeting on the topic of these sessions. Here again, feedback from the community and students was overwhelmingly positive.
Here is an interesting fact you do need to remember - this story gained steam when it was picked up by Fox News reporter Todd Starnes. While Starnes did cite the area newspaper, The Poughkeepsie Journal, in his post, he choose to add more lurid detail about the alleged lesbian kiss. Also, while The Journal talked about the entire workshop as a whole, Starnes chose to take the "they didn't even notify the parents" route, thereby playing up a semantical tone that the school was trying to "indoctrinate" students.
On Monday of last week, the district sent Starnes an email asking that he update his story with correct information. It is not known whether or not Starnes chose to update his story but now the school district has to deal with what it calls "hostile and hateful emails" from many who don't even live in the area. It puts the blame for this solely on Starnes and the organizations - such as NOM - who chose to repeat Starnes' "inaccurate" story.
My guess is that Starnes had already made up his mind what the "true story" about the workshop was once he heard of the alleged lesbian kiss and condoms.
According to Equality Matters as the "culture reporter" for Fox News, Starnes uses his role as a mouthpiece to not only funnel information from several anti-gay groups, but also to push anti-gay information into the mainstream. Equality Matters points out several other incidents in which Starnes has made it a point to report stories which "depict LGBT equality as a threat to religious and personal freedom."
In the case of the Red Hook School District, the only threat was most likely Starnes himself. A reporter on a crusade to push a point of view instead of the facts is always dangerous.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, earlier this week opened his big mouth and verified the Southern Poverty Law Center's charges of anti-gay hate against his organization.
On his show, Washington Watch, he played host to Dave Agema, the Michigan Republican leader catching flack for posting discredited information about the lgbt community on his Facebook page. To call it a vile conversation would be a supreme understatement. The vindictive, yet condescending tone towards the gay community from these two would take about three or four blog posts to fully explore.
Amongst other things, Agema compared being gay to alcoholism and wished that he could supply high schools with the information he put on his Facebook page. But for my money, a significant portion of the interview came when Perkins said:
I’m joined by Dave Agema; he is the Republican National Committeeman from the state of Michigan. We’re talking about a post that he put on his Facebook page citing facts, statistics regarding the homosexual lifestyle during the oral arguments before the Supreme Court on same-sex marriage. What is troubling to me is that your post has been called a form of hate but simply what you are doing is having a conversation presenting the truth. These are documented facts. I looked at what you put up there and some of it is the same information we have on our website, some of it comes from the CDC, comes from other medical sources, it’s all footnoted, there’s nothing hate in here it is just talking about the facts.
Let's take a look at some the statistics that Agema placed on his Facebook page - statistics both he and Perkins said are "facts" and statistics that Agema want children, including our lgbt children, to know:
50% of suicides can be attributed to homosexuals.
About 50% of the women on death row are lesbians.
There is a notable homosexual group, consisting of thousands of members, known as the North American Man and Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). This is a child molesting homosexual group whose cry is "SEX BEFORE 8 BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE." This group can be seen marching in most major homosexual parades across the United States.
Many homosexuals admit that they are pedophiles: "The love between men and boys is at the foundation of homosexuality."
Homosexuals live unhealthy lifestyles, and have historically accounted for the bulk of syphilis, gonorrhea, Hepatitis B, the "gay bowel syndrome" (which attacks the intestinal tract), tuberculosis and cytomegalovirus.
Homosexuals are 100 times more likely to be murdered (usually by another homosexual) than the average person, 25 times more likely to commit suicide, and 19 times more likely to die in a traffic accident.
Perkins said that these claim are accurate, as well as fact checked. But that's a lie. One source listed as a citation on the post Agema cited, Paul Cameron, is a charlatan who has been either censured or dismissed from several medical associations for his bad research methodologies and outrageously homophobic claims, including the claim that gays stuff gerbils up their rectums.
And another source of Agema's post, Edward R. Fields, has been recently revealed to be a white supremacist and a Holocaust denier.
Perkins also said that some of the information comes from the Centers for Disease Control. While he is accurate about that, he is still being highly deceptive. Dr. Judith Kovach, director of the Michigan Project for Informed Public Policy, recently told a Michigan newspaper that while the CDC does say that the gay community has more general health problems, it is not because of the orientation (which Perkins and Agema implies) but because of the stress which comes from having to deal with homophobia and discrimination:
"A member of any group that experiences discrimination, stigma and oppression is going to react to that stress with higher degrees of anxiety, depression and hopelessness. But there's absolutely no evidence that if you control for stress that there are any higher frequencies of mental health disorders."
The same article points out that the CDC clearly says homophobia and discrimination - and NOT the lgbt orientation - can contribute to mental and physical health problems.
So why is Perkins' statement, intended no doubt to give Agema some type of credibility, significant? Because he has unintentionally proven the Southern Poverty Law Center correct.
In late 2010, the Southern Poverty Law Center designated FRC and several other religious right organizations as hate groups because of the information they spread about the lgbt community:
Even as some well-known anti-gay groups like Focus on the Family moderate their views, a hard core of smaller groups, most of them religiously motivated, have continued to pump out demonizing propaganda aimed at homosexuals and other sexual minorities. These groups’ influence reaches far beyond what their size would suggest, because the “facts” they disseminate about homosexuality are often amplified by certain politicians, other groups and even news organizations.
Since this happened, FRC and Perkins have consistently claimed that SPLC targeted them simply because they are a Christian group which opposes homosexuality and marriage equality.
But now, because of Perkins' need to vouch for incredibly bad anti-gay statistics by claiming that some of those same statistics are on FRC's webpage, that talking point has perhaps been revealed as a careful dodge.
After all, what Christian group do you know vouches for statistics partly created by a discredited researcher who thinks that gays stuff gerbils up their rectums and a white Supremacist who denies that the Holocaust happened?
Two years ago, I wrote a post entitled 16 reasons why the Family Research Council is a hate group.
Thank you, Mr. Perkins for giving me reason number 17.
As if it's a surprise to anyone, the Family Research Council is rushing to support Dave Agema, the Michigan Republican leader who is facing a firestorm for putting outdated anti-gay propaganda on his Facebook page.
Last week, Agema posted on his Facebook page something called Everyone Should Know These Statistics on Homosexuality, a vicious anti-gay litany of lies, including:
Many homosexual sexual encounters occur while drunk, high on drugs, or in an orgy setting.
Homosexuals live unhealthy lifestyles, and have historically accounted for the bulk of syphilis, gonorrhea, Hepatitis B, the "gay bowel syndrome" (which attacks the intestinal tract), tuberculosis and cytomegalovirus .
25-33% of homosexuals and lesbians are alcoholics .
Homosexuals are 100 times more likely to be murdered (usually by another homosexual) than the average person, 25 times more likely to commit suicide, and 19 times more likely to die in a traffic accident.
Since that post, Agema has been catching a lot of flack, including from members of his own party demanding that he resign.
The Family Research Council has just backed Agema. In an email recently sent out, the organization said the following:
When leaders like Republican National Committeeman Dave Agema so much as raise questions about the harms of homosexuality, the RNC throws them under the bus faster than you can say "political correctness." Agema, a staunch Michigan conservative, is taking fire from his own party for a Facebook post that detailed the harms of homosexuality. And while people may not agree with everything in his column, they should agree on his freedom to call for a discussion. But under this new "inclusive" and "welcoming" RNC, simply raising awareness on certain social issues is off-limits. A group of GOP officials is calling on Agema to resign--including state party chairman Bobby Schostak, who claimed that statistics about the consequences of homosexual behavior (consequences which even the Left acknowledges!) are a "form of hate."
While Agema's research may be somewhat outdated, FRC's "Top 10 Myths about Homosexuality" highlights a summary of recent data, which all point to the high rates of physical and mental illness associated with homosexuality. Several of these hazards are echoed by the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, which makes a point of posting the risks so that people can discuss them with their doctors. To his credit, Agema isn't backing down. He insists that we shouldn't cut off debate about a lifestyle with direct public policy implications.
While FRC rightfully calls Agema's information outdated, it replaces the information with some distortions of its own. The post it highlighted, "Top 10 Myths about Homosexuality," has several problems with accuracy. For one thing it repeats the same lies as Agema, but backed with cherry-picked studies.
A perfect example of this is FRC's claim about the work taken from the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association. FRC cherry-picked the GLMA's work to give it a totally different meaning.
While FRC lists the health problems which may affect gays and lesbians, the organization is careful to omit the information from the GLMA which points to how homophobia and societal rejection plays a part in creating these health problems and hindering lgbts from receiving adequate care. By omitting this information, FRC incorrectly makes it seem that the sexual orientation itself is a factor when it comes to gay and lesbian health problems.
For the record, Agema was not debating. He was spreading lies and distortions derived from bad sources. One source listed as a citation on the post Agema cited, Paul Cameron, is a charlatan who has been either censured or dismissed from several medical associations for his bad research methodologies and outrageously homophobic claims, including the claim that gays stuff gerbils up their rectums. The problem here with Agema is that he is so wrapped up in his own self-righteousness that he fails to realize no one is persecuting him or trying to hinder his right to free speech.
With free speech comes responsibilities and the main responsibility is the hope that one doesn't use his or her free speech to spread lies and deceptions. Caught up in his own phony martyrdom, Agema doesn't want to realize that in bearing false witness against the lgbt community, he has betrayed those Christian values which he is seeking to defend.
The Family Research Council, on the other hand, is another case entirely. It wasn't that long ago when the group peddled the same lies in the same unabashed form as Agema. However, knowing fully well that the information was propaganda, FRC dialed back the rhetoric and is now attempting to portray a more "kinder, gentler" image of homophobia.
And a central part of this false image is portraying every ugly offense it lodges against the lgbt community as merely a way of "starting a debate." What FRC does to the lgbt community is no different than a reporter asking a politician, "so when did you stop beating your wife," and then whining about being silenced when the politician objects to the offensive nature of the question.
This is not debating. It's called demonizing. It's called lying. And it has no place in the public square. The question is how long will it be before the media stops being fooled by FRC's shuck-and-jive?
It wouldn't be allowed if Agema and FRC were talking about African-Americans. It wouldn't be allowed if Agema and FRC were talking about people of the Jewish faith. And it certainly wouldn't be allowed if Agema and FRC were talking about women.
What is about the lgbt community which makes it permissible to treat us any different?
