So what would you do if a well-respected organization that was instrumental in shutting down the Ku Klux Klan called you on the carpet?
Well, if you're Tony Perkins from the Family Research Council, you embrace the opportunity as Manna from Heaven! Sunday, I pointed out how ginning up hatred for gay people is a great cash cow for the rabid Fundamentalist crowd. And yesterday, the FRC proves me right by gleefully fundraising off the Southern Poverty Law Center's naming them a hate group, imploring their followers to give, give, give, give, and of course, give.
Tony's beside himself because people figured out his hate speech sounds a lot like hate speech and categorized him with Ku Klux Klan and Neo-Nazis. But it's a totally different thing, because Tony is only saying hateful things about gay people, and we all know that's OK. The letter asks:
How do you feel about you and FRC being lumped in with neo-Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, racist skinheads, and other radical organizations?
In fact, there is good reason to associate Tony Perkins with the Ku Klux Klan, and it's not just because he talks about gays in the same manner that Klansmen talk about blacks. It's because the KKK is in fact, apparently a serious part of their target market for outreach. From Southern Poverty Law Center:
Perkins paid $82,500 to use the mailing list of former Klan chieftain David Duke. The campaign was fined $3,000 (reduced from $82,500) after Perkins and Jenkins filed false disclosure forms in a bid to hide the link to Duke.
Wow, so he does outreach activities to Klansmen, and then lies about it to the Federal Election Council resulting in a $3,000 fine. Is lying on FEC filings "bearing false witness?" Just asking.
So, Tony's full of "outrage" from this "malicious" association with people that are, in fact, his business associates.
Tony's panties are also in a bunch because he's being lumped in with "other radical organizations." But as I recall, the dude has defended the Uganda "Kill The Gays" bill. Federal Election Council filings show Family Research Council spent $25,000 lobbying on the bills behalf. What exactly would be a bridge too far for Tony Perkins if rounding up and executing gays is kosher? That sounds like a radical agenda to me, maybe I'm out of touch with the kids are saying these days?
But what to do about this? He offers,
"We can let the Left intimidate us into silence. Or..."
Or...? You could take it as a sign from God? You could take a thoughtful moment of quiet prayerful reflection? You could search your soul, and consider if your words and actions are, in fact, hurtful to kind, innocent people and not in keeping with God's plan and Christ's teachings for man on Earth? You could have an Epiphany?
No, of course not. Tony had a different reaction. And he's got a plan, a better plan, the perfect remedy for this is, of course... I love this... wait for it....
Now I urge you to show you won't be intimidated into silence. Please follow this link to take your place alongside these leaders and others in defense of FRC by making a tax-deductible donation to support our work.
Give, Give, Give, Give, Give!
It's hard to miss the great big button saying "Consider Donating Today To Stand With FRC" But just in case you do, they offer not one, not two but FOUR additional hotlinks to their donation page.
Yes, give. Donate! Tax-deductible yet. Wait a minute? My tax dollars are subsidizing a hate group? I don't remember signing on to that!
What So What Is The Truth That Must Not Be Silenced?
Perkins is encouraging folks to "sign the Statement of Support to join the many who are protesting this attempt at censorship." So, what is this truth that the "ultra-liberal" SPLC is trying to "censor?" Here are some of the messages they need help to continue spreading (all from SPLC):
“homosexuals are overrepresented in child sex offenses”
“homosexuals are attracted in inordinate numbers to boys.”
Huh. Even the lesbians?
“One of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order.”
Now, I'd been told the primary goal
was destroying straight peoples' marriages. I'm very confused right now. Did I miss a memo?
Mark Potok of the FRC very recently appeared on MSNBC’s “Hardball with Chris Matthews” to claim:
"If you look at the American College of Pediatricians, they say the research is overwhelming that homosexuality poses a danger to children.”
Of course, the American College of Pediatricians
is not the respected, mainstream American Academy of Pediatrics,
(which says nothing of the kind
) but rather a discredited, Christian Fundamentalist breakaway fringe group with no creditability among doctors and scientists or anyone. But quoting junk science from junk scientists is what they do best, when not quoting the ancient Book of Leviticus.
“[t]here is a strong current of pedophilia in the homosexual subculture. … [T]hey want to promote a promiscuous society.”
And Family Research Council's Yvette Cantu has shared these serioius concerns about gays parenting:
“If they [gays and lesbians] had children, what would happen when they were too busy having their sex parties?”
Silly, everyone needs a night off from the kids, sex parties are just like Bridge Night to the gay community. No problem, you just call the Tranny Nanny Service™. We're all so rich,
after all. Help is easy to hire.
So what are FRC's thoughts on gays' fight for immigration equality? FRC's Peter Sprigg told Matthews:
“I would much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than to import them.”
To Uganda no doubt. How about here in the US? Should gays be jailed or executed? FRC's Peter Sprigg told Chris Matthews:
“I think there would be a place for criminal sanctions on homosexual behavior.” “So we should outlaw gay behavior?” Matthews asked. “Yes,” Sprigg replied.
I wish Matthews had thought to asked Sprigg to weigh in on whether they should be capital offenses.
Seems Family Research Council longs for the good old days. Like when we jailed great artists like Oscar Wilde or heroes like Alan Turing, who may well have saved the free world in WWII, and was thanked by the oppressive hand of government meddling in his love life, until he finally killed himself.
So Is The Family Research Council Bearing False Witness?
In truth, the American Psychological Association, among others, has concluded that “homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.”
Dr. Gregory M. Herek, Ph.D. from UC Davis University of California fleshes out what is the consensus of psychological and medical community in on the University of California website, he says:
The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to argue that homosexual and bisexual men never molest children. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so. And, as explained above, many child molesters cannot be characterized as having an adult sexual orientation at all; they are fixated on children.
So wait, they aren't child molesters by default?
But Why Would They Want To Repeat Such Awful Lies Over And Over?
Herek says it's all about demagoguery:
Members of disliked minority groups are often stereotyped as representing a danger to the majority's most vulnerable members. For example, Jews in the Middle Ages were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Black men in the United States were often lynched after being falsely accused of raping White women.
Ah, yes, that would be that whole "blood libel" thing.
So that's why they're always imploring us to "think of the children!" And why Maggie Gallagher, National Organization for Marriage and other anti-gay groups are always featuring children in their ads! They call that a dog-whistle, don't they?
Though, oddly, these paragons of propriety didn't seem to be very thoughtful of the children when they used the kids' images without permission in their hateful propaganda prompting outrage from the children's parents.
So Why Is Family Research Council Always On Respectable News Programs?
That's a really good question, why is a hate group welcomed onto MSNBC? Why are they allowed to go on the TV and spread this nonsense? They wouldn't invite a well-known Klansman on to discuss affirmative action or neo-Nazi to discuss immigration reform, would they? So why are Tony Perkins and his friends the go-to for gay issues "balance?" Why are the media complicit in helping him spread lies, hate and misinformation from their junk scientists? Why are they helping him bamboozle the ignorant and hateful out of their money?
How about we tell MSNBC to stop inviting them?
Tell CNN too.
Tell ABC here.
Tell CBS here.
You can tell Fox News too, I hear they're very responsive!
The dude can fundraise to his little choir all he wants off his hateful rhetoric, but he shouldn't be allowed to weigh in, as though he's a sane, rational person on matters that concern my civil rights. These snake-oil salesmen demagogues have no place in polite society or the table of serious discussion.Updated by Clarknt67 at Tue Feb 22, 2011, 12:54:11 PM
My friend David Badash cross-posted my similar article on Maggie Gallagher to his blog. The Maggster herself deigned to post a comment (he assures me it's authentic). Fun times! Join it here, if you're inclined.