Today, the American Family Associaton’s OneNewsNow interviews Brian Camenker of the Massachusetts anti-gay group MassResistance, who warns that when a high school student comes out as gay it is all part of a strategy carefully orchestrated by gay rights activists “seeking to draw susceptible students into their ranks”:
A Massachusetts family values advocate says it's no accident that so many students announce that they are homosexuals.
Brian Camenker of Mass Resistance says these incidents of students “coming out” are the result of a carefully calculated strategy by homosexual activists. He says, historically, school administrators eagerly work with activists who are seeking to draw susceptible students into their ranks.
“We saw one situation at Brookline High School in Brookline, Massachusetts, where the principal actually participated in an assembly where they encouraged kids to announce that they were coming out,” he tells OneNewsNow.
He says the activists prey on pupils who are the most vulnerable.
Camenker says it's not just in Massachusetts - this is happening all across the nation. He says parents need to know about these recruitment programs and demand that they be kept out of their children’s schools.
In a blog post yesterday, American Family Association research director Ed Vitigliano reacted to the news that Christian singer Vicky Beeching came out as a lesbian by trying to provide an empathetic explanation of homosexuality, and failing utterly.
“I think most men would think that Vicky was a very pretty lady,” he wrote, which “makes the subject of sexual orientation rather difficult to understand at times.” After explaining how he has always liked women, Vitigliano wrote that to gay people, being gay “must have appeared just that natural.”
But, he cautioned, gay people are “broken” like the blind and paralyzed and “in order to be Christians they will have to accept that their ‘orientation’ is a manifestation of brokenness, not wholeness.”
I was disappointed to read about yet another Christian artist who has “come out” as a homosexual and claimed that God had a hand in the process. In other words, she stated that God (1) made her a lesbian and (2) led her to declare it unashamedly to all who would listen.
I think most men would think that Vicky was a very pretty lady, and those sorts of appraisals are usually made without thinking. This makes the subject of sexual orientation rather difficult to understand at times.
Since I was five years old I’ve noticed girls. I had my first crush on a neighborhood girl and actually had a dream that I married her! I can remember my second crush in the first grade when I was six: Jill Drowns. Brown eyes, blond hair in braided pigtails. As for my wife of 33 years, well, she was the most beautiful woman I had ever seen – and still is.
I don’t know what it’s like to feel that way toward a man. I don’t know what it must have been like to feel that way toward another boy in first grade.
So I feel compassion toward homosexuals. I don’t believe most of them woke up one day and decided they’d be attracted to same sex people. Neither do I believe they’re born that way. I think the answer lies somewhere in between.
What causes homosexuality? I think there’s probably a web of causes – some apply to this group, some to that, etc. I believe that some homosexuals have endured sexual abuse or other trauma; others suffer from a deficit of some sort that turned them toward the same sex side of the aisle in an attempt to heal.
At this point I realize I have offended most of the homosexuals reading this. So let me even the score and offend some Christians: I believe some percentage of homosexuals (I have no idea how large or small) simply grew up just like me – only different. Instead of having a crush on an opposite sex person, they experienced a crush on a same sex person. To them it appeared just that natural.
But if there’s a God who designed us – and I believe there is – then we obviously aren’t designed to be attracted to the same sex. With my apologies to the Vicky Beechings of the world, the human race is clearly designed as male and female, with sexually complementary equipment. We are obviously intended to grow through childhood and enter puberty attracted to the opposite sex – because that’s the only thing that makes sense of the biological design inherent in humankind.
So for Vicky and Ray and Jennifer and Clay – how do we explain the fact that their attraction developed in complete disregard for design? Here’s the short answer: They’re broken. Why is that so hard to say? Sexual and romantic attraction was supposed to develop one way and it developed another. Maybe it was because of something that was done to them or around them; maybe it wasn’t. But it is different.
Are we not all broken in small and large ways? As a fallen race, isn't there a web of characteristics about us all that doesn’t reflect the way God designed us? If a child is born blind, does that mean God approves? Isn't it a sign that something is not as intended? Eyes were created to see. To not see is not the same as being able to see. The blind are still human, but their brokenness is still brokenness. But isn't that what we’re doing with homosexuality? Aren't we denying the obvious – that there’s a disconnect between design and operation in the homosexual? Aren’t we applauding as courageous those who declare their brokenness to be wholeness?
Only God can make a broken person whole. Sometimes it is done as a miracle, as when Jesus healed a blind or lame or paralyzed person. Sometimes we must wait for our entrance into the kingdom of heaven, when all brokenness is finally healed. I believe God can make homosexuals whole in this life. Despite the ridicule that follows such a statement, I believe that does happen. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 says so. However, for many – or even most – homosexuals, in order to be Christians they will have to accept that their “orientation” is a manifestation of brokenness, not wholeness. Like the rest of us who are broken in some way, they will have to reject that lameness and give it to God. They will hobble through life learning to love Him more and more – and yes, learning to obey Him.
In a speech to the Stanford Anscombe Society last month, anti-gay activist Robert Oscar Lopez explained that he would support marriage equality…if it didn’t come with protections for children raised by same-sex parents.
“I supported marriage for a long time,” Lopez said, “but the problem is that the people who have supported gay marriage have chosen to yoke gay marriage and gay parenting together.”
“That put me in the horrible situation where I have to oppose gay marriage, because it ultimately means that in order to protect the sexual relationship between two adults, you have to shatter the relationship between a child and either his father or his mother,” he continued.
“A lot of the people who I might have disagreed with ten years ago, who kept on warning that gay marriage was a portal to new things, unfortunately those people were right and gay marriage became this tidal wave that then swept up children,” he said.
Protesters throughout the nation have come out to march and peacefully protest the unjust criminal system that led to Michael Brown being gunned down in Missouri on August 9, including members of the People For the American Way Foundation family.
In Missouri, two members of PFAW Foundation’s Young Elected Officials Network have taken key roles speaking out for justice. State Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal and Alderman Antonio French were both part of the protests in Ferguson; Chappelle-Nadal was tear-gassed, and French was arrested. Other members of the YEO Network have also been organizing national petitions, marching, buying food and water for protestors, trying to dissuade looting, among other things.
Chappelle-Nadal, elected in 2010, represents part of St. Louis County in the Missouri Senate. She has been vocal in her criticism of Missouri Governor Jay Nixon and his response to the crisis in her community.
“I never expected to represent a war zone,” she tweeted Thursday.
French, on the other hand, has been documenting the protests through “advocacy journalism.” Born and raised in O’Fallon, French has dedicated his time in public service to improving the quality of life in north St. Louis, often working in conjunction with police to create safer spaces.
During the protests last Wednesday, French was arrested and then released early Thursday, but the reason behind the arrest remained unclear. His arrest, along with his work documenting the protests, have made him a “national voice against the militarization of police.”
In Miami, another PFAW Foundation voice joined the protests. Young People For alum Phillip Agnew, founder of the Dream Defenders, organized a similar demonstration to protest how “police departments around the country will continue to use black and brown bodies for target practice.”
Many Americans are appalled at the actions taken by law enforcement officials in Ferguson, Missouri this month. PFAW Foundation is proud of the work being done by members of our leadership networks to build a more equal America.
This weekend, Linda Harvey welcomed to her radio show Molly Smith, the Cleveland anti-choice activist who’s heading up a new national splinter group that thinks that the major anti-choice groups aren’t extreme enough. One of the issues that separates Smith from the major anti-choice groups is her insistence on linking anti-gay and anti-choice activism, a divide that came to a head when she was rebuked by National Right to Life Committee for attacking anti-choice advocate Sen. Rob Portman when he came out in favor of marriage equality.
Smith and Harvey discussed the Gay Games, which took place over the weekend in Cleveland and which Smith contended were “not gay” but in fact “very melancholy” because they featured participants in a “sad and destructive lifestyle.”
Later in the interview, Smith lashed out at the Cuyahoga County GOP for officially welcoming the Gay Games, saying that opposition to LGBT rights must always be paired with anti-choice activism because homosexuality is an “anti-family lifestyle.”
An unarmed teenager gunned down in the street. Peaceful protesters attacked in a military-style assault. Journalists tear-gassed and arrested to prevent them from covering the actions of government officials. This is not the America to which we aspire.
Many Americans are both angry and appalled at the actions taken by law enforcement officials in Ferguson, Missouri, this week. These actions do not reflect a commitment to the Constitution or to the principles of equal justice under the law and freedom of the press. We applaud the Department of Justice for undertaking an investigation into the violence, and we are grateful that state officials have stepped in to institute a more sensible law enforcement presence. We encourage state and federal officials to continue monitoring the situation and to intervene as necessary to prevent further civil rights violations.
At the center of this controversy is a dead teenager and a grieving family. We recognize that the pain and outrage felt by so many people is grounded in the fact that this kind of killing of young men of color happens far too often. Part of the tragedy is that a killing like this is not surprising. If our commitment to equality and human dignity is to have real meaning, we cannot continue to tolerate conditions that require so many parents to teach their children how to live through a chance encounter with law enforcement.
In the long run, our elected officials must grapple with many complex policy questions, including racial disparities in the administration of justice. Today we support community leaders who are demanding accountability.
The following is a guest post by Roeland Park Councilwoman Megan England, member of People For the American Way Foundation’s Young Elected Officials Network.
Before a city council vote last week in Roeland Park, Kansas, it was legal in our town to refuse or terminate housing, services, or employment for someone on the basis of who they are or who they love. I didn’t believe that our community would tolerate this kind of treatment for our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender neighbors and friends. As a councilmember, I felt the obligation to ensure that everyone — regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or military status — has the opportunity to live, work, and contribute here.
This spring, Councilwoman Jennifer Gunby and I introduced a non-discrimination ordinance providing protections for the LGBT community and others. This seemed like the right thing to do for many reasons. First, it’s fair and just. It shows that our town, like so many others, values diversity and inclusion. It highlights the shared values of our community. It’s good for our economy, since it attracts businesses and visitors who want to feel that everyone is welcome in our town. It supports a strong and productive workforce and happier, healthier communities. What’s more, many of our neighboring towns were already a few steps ahead of us. Cities like Lawrence, Kansas and Kansas City, Missouri have had similar non-discrimination protections for over 20 years. In every corner of the country, cities and towns are increasingly understanding the importance of passing laws that prevent discrimination. And we were thrilled last week when Roeland Park finally did, too.
However, we still face an uphill battle in the larger fight for equality. In my work on this ordinance, I’ve learned that many people — even members of the press — are still unaware of the lack of federal protections in place for the LGBT community. There’s no end in sight to congressional gridlock in Washington, and it may be a while before our state of Kansas has the leadership necessary to wipe discrimination from the books. My hope is that other local elected officials will realize, like I did, that they have the power to make a simple but profound change in the lives of those they are sworn to represent. While change may be slow nationally, at the local level we have a tremendous opportunity to protect and serve our constituents, and to drive progress and innovation.
When Councilwoman Gunby and I began this process, we thought change might come quickly; we didn’t expect five months of revisions, public hearings, and tense discussions. While much longer and more difficult than we imagined, I now realize the importance of that process. It reaffirmed my respect for the political process. I saw the benefits of engaging the community in a critical dialogue, and in bringing light to the issue week after week. In some of the more difficult moments, when I wasn’t sure that the ordinance would ultimately pass, I wondered if it had all been worth it. One local transgender man answered that for me by sharing the story of how speaking publicly for the first time and simply telling his personal story encouraged young trans people to reach out to him for support and guidance. It was this act of kinship, of humanity and community, that reinforced for me the importance of the process no matter the outcome.
When focused on the big picture, we sometimes fail to see the smaller impacts of our work, the daily reverberations. But now, with both the ordinance in place and many conversations started, our community is all the better for it.
On a recent episode of Liberty Counsel’s “Faith and Freedom” radio program, Mat Staver argued that marriage equality can’t be a fundamental right because it’s not “deeply rooted in our history that you have to protect it,” and in fact “homosexuality has always been considered a crime against nature” and “something that’s been criminalized in our culture.”
A fundamental right in constitutional law has to either be specifically articulated in an enumeration of the Constitution — so a fundamental right would be freedom of speech, freedom of religion, so it’s part of the First Amendment, it’s actually absolutely articulated — and if it’s not articulated, the court has said it has to be deeply rooted in our history such that if you were to not protect it, it would literally unravel the concept of ordered liberty that is so essential to who we are and it is so deeply rooted in our history that you have to protect it. Parental rights can be something that falls within a category such as that.
Now, here, obviously, the issue is, did same-sex marriage become a fundamental right? And the answer clearly is no. If they really were honest, it’s no. And to the contrary, same-sex marriage or homosexuality has always been considered a crime against nature. Instead of protection deeply rooted, it’s been something that’s been criminalized in our culture, not just in America but around the world.
Later in the program Staver discussed the recent appeals court decision striking down Virginia’s marriage equality ban with Liberty University Law School’s Rena Lindevaldsen. Lindevaldsen argued that because the court acknowledged that people in same-sex relationships sometimes raise children from opposite-sex relationships that it undermined the argument that being gay is a fundamental characteristic. “Now they’re saying, by the way, we can have relationships with whoever we want to and we still get this right to marriage,” she lamented.
Earlier this week, John Hagee declared that Christians (or “counterfeit Christians,” as he called them) who are pro-choice or supportive of LGBT rights are the “greatest problem” leading to America’s destruction.
David Barton picked up the theme on his “Wallbuilders Live” radio program today, rattling off statistics showing that many young Christians don’t think homosexuality and abortion are sins, and that some have even had abortions or are “active homosexuals” themselves.
“Whoa,” Barton said. “There is nothing in the Bible — nothing — that aligns with this. How can you be a Christian and a follower of Jesus Christ when you don’t follow his teachings on these things?”
He concluded that it was a problem of “real biblical illiteracy” in the U.S.
Last month, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper announced that he would no longer defend the state’s marriage equality ban because "there are really no arguments left to be made."
This did not sit well with Mark Creech, executive director of the North Carolina Action League. In a Christian Post column yesterday, Creech attacked Cooper for “wimpishly” capitulating to “tyranny” and yielding to the “despotism” of “judicial totalitarians.”
By refusing to resist with every legal means possible, Cooper capitulates to a form of tyranny in our day. He abandons his post on the field of battle, throws up the white flag, stands in the very place of the state (a state that voted by 61% for the marriage amendment) and wimpishly replies to the 4th Circuit that North Carolina accepts their judgment and surrenders. Furthermore, he calls on the judges who will preside over the cases currently challenging the state's marriage amendment to stand down and yield to the despotism of two judicial totalitarians.
Televangelist John Hagee dedicated his Sunday sermon this week to asking if America can “survive until 2017,” walking through a number of issues that he feared would impede the country’s survival. The chief among these, he said, are “counterfeit Christians” who are pro-choice or support LGBT rights.
“You people who are running around calling yourselves Christians supporting abortion, you are not!” he thundered.
“Our greatest problem in this nation is counterfeit Christianity,” he explained later in the sermon, telling gay-affirming pastors, “Those of you who got on national television and endorsed homosexual lifestyle because the president did so, you are a counterfeit Christian, you are a moral coward, you are a hireling shepherd. Shame on you.”
Hagee also warned that the separation of church and state “will prove suicidal for America.”
American Family Association of Michigan president Gary Glenn won a Republican primary for a seat in the Michigan state House yesterday, making him potentially the second most virulently anti-gay GOP candidate in the country, behind Colorado demon-hunter Gordon Klingenschmitt.
Glenn was a prominent supporter of Michigan’s 2004 constitutional amendment banning marriage equality and was a big backer of his “very special friend” Mike Huckabee’s 2008 presidential bid. As the head of the American Family Association’s Michigan affiliate, Glenn has pushed any number of extreme anti-gay positions:
This, of course, is all run of the mill for someone associated with the American Family Association.
Last year, after the Supreme Court struck down the federal component of the Defense of Marriage Act, David Barton claimed that the ruling would force military chaplains to perform same-sex marriages against their will.
That fear, of course, was completely unfounded and the Pentagon clarified that DOMA repeal would in no way mean that a military chaplain would have to perform a marriage against his will.
But Barton is still claiming that military chaplains are being forced to officiate same-sex weddings that violate their religious beliefs, saying on his “Wallbuilders Live” program today that military commanders are ordering chaplains to “perform homosexual weddings.”
Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver lamented this week that the United States’ support for LGBT equality means that America is no longer “the shining city on the hill, the example for other nations to follow” and has instead become “the example of what not to follow.”
Staver and Matt Barber discussed their work pushing anti-gay policies throughout the world on arecent episode of Faith & Freedom Radio, including defending Scott Lively in a lawsuit involving his anti-gay work in Uganda, and efforts to stop sex education and marriage equality in Croatia, which Barber said he hoped “will set a trend in nations around the world.”
“[O]ther nations around the world are affirming marriage as the union of one man and one woman, while America is rejecting it,” Staver lamented. “It’s as ridiculous as rejecting the laws of gravity.”
Barber: We were deeply involved and had a hand in helping to reverse Croatia’s harmful sex education policies and supported Croatia’s constitutional amendment affirming marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and Lord willing, this will set a trend in nations around the world.
Staver: Yeah, it will. And it looks like some of the world, a lot of the world, is going the opposite way that America is. America used to be the shining city on the hill, the example for other nations to follow. Now it’s the example of what not to follow. And other nations around the world are affirming marriage as the union of one man and one woman, while America is rejecting it. It’s as ridiculous as rejecting the laws of gravity. But some judges think they have the audacity and the arrogance to do just that.
Conservative activist and potential GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson joined James Dobson on Family Talk Radio yesterday, where the two got to talking about LGBT-affirming pastors.
Dobson, joining a long line of anti-LGBT activists who don’t quite understand what bisexuality is, asked what pastors who endorse marriage equality are going to do about bisexual people, who he said “have sex with males and females at the same time.”
“That’s called orgies, that’s what it used to be called” he said.
Carson, for his part, despaired that pastors who approve of same-sex marriage have given a “finger-in-your-eye to God.”
Carson: I find it difficult sometimes to understand why ministers are willing to abandon the scripture to go along and get along. I just find that very puzzling.
Dobson: I do too, especially on the issue of gay marriage. There are many, many formerly conservative big-time ministers — I mean those who have big churches and great influence — who have abandoned that.
Carson: They’ve been beaten into submission.
Dobson: If they’re right to do this today, were they wrong yesterday?
Carson: The bigger issue is, of course, if you can say the Bible is wrong on that, then, you know, why isn’t it wrong on everything, or anything that you don’t want it to say?
Dobson: I have been on a crusade to say to many ministers, and I’ll say it again now, that if men can marry and if the things that are said about same-sex relationships and marriage and the Bible are misunderstandings, what do you do with the rest of LGBT? What do you do with bisexuality? If one of those is right and proper and holy, what about those who have sex with males and females at the same time? That’s called orgies, that’s what it used to be called, or just sleeping around with everybody and it doesn’t matter. How can a Christian minister who reads the Bible condone that?
Carson: Well, you know, my emphasis is that marriage is an institution established by God himself. And when you look in the New Testament, the marriage relationship is used to help us understand His relationship with His people. So when you start distorting that, you’re really going pretty deep into the finger-in-your-eye to God. That’s why I have a hard time understanding why ministers are willing to do that.
The anti-marriage-equality movement seems to have anointed Ryan T. Anderson as its next intellectual leader. Anderson, who is now a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, follows in the footsteps of his mentor Robert P. George and National Organization for Marriage founder Maggie Gallagher in being able to talk about the marriage issue without spewing fire and brimstone or talking about how gay people make them want to vomit .
This kinder, gentler approach has endeared Anderson and his predecessors to a movement that’s trying to snatch its image away from the likes of Bryan Fischer and Pat Robertson.
But it also can obscure the fact that Anderson’s supposedly intellectual arguments against marriage equality can still be far out of the mainstream.
On Friday, Heritage promoted on its website a video clip of Anderson speaking at a Stanford University event, where he was asked by an attendee why he, as a gay man, should not be able to file a joint tax return if he gets legally married in California.
Anderson responded that legally married same-sex couples should not have access to all the trappings of legal marriage, because while in some states they can “be issued a marriage license,” they “can’t actually get married” because marriage is inherently a union of a man and a woman.
This is basically a nullificationist argument against benefits for legally married same-sex couples. Like those who argue that gun laws or health care reform aren’t actually law because they violate their impression of what the Constitution says, Anderson is saying that even legal, state-sanctioned marriages don’t count because they violate his view of what marriage is, and therefore should not earn legal, state-sanctioned benefits.
Far from trying to brush over this nullificationist argument against marriage equality, Heritage is actively promoting the video to its followers.
The full clip is four minutes long, but the fun really starts at about the 2:10 mark.
Anderson: The reason that you should not have the option of filing a joint tax return is that you can’t get married, given what marriage is.
Questioner: But I could in California, I can get married.
Anderson: You can be issued a marriage license in the state of California, but you can’t actually get married. And I’m sorry to say it that way, but given what marriage is, a union of sexually complementary…
Questioner: How is that not discrimination?
Anderson: And it’s not discrimination, because everyone is equally eligible for entering into the marital relationship, where you understand marriage as a union of sexually complementary spouses, a permanent, exclusive union of man and a woman, husband and wife, mother and father. If you’re not interested in entering into that sort of a union, you’re not being discriminated against.
What you’re asking us to do is to redefine marriage to include the adult relationship of your choice. And the adult relationship of your choice happens to be a same-sex couple. There are other adults who want to have marriage redefined to include the relationship of their choice, which may be the same-sex throuple or the opposite-sex quartet. So what I’m asking you in response is, what principle are you appealing to when you say this is discrimination to vindicate your rights but not their rights? Because it seems to me that your position ultimately leaves to simply the dissolvement of the marital union.
It’s not that you don’t have a right to get married, it’s that you aren’t seeking out marriage. Marriage is by nature a union of sexually complementary spouses, a union of man and woman, husband and wife, mother and father. And based on just what you’ve said about yourself, it doesn’t sound like you’re interested in forming that sort of a union. It sounds like you’re interested in forming a union with another man, and that’s not a marriage. So that’s why I don’t think the law should treat the relationship that you want to form as a marriage.
BuzzFeed’s Lester Feder is out with an investigative report today on the rise of Europe’s own homegrown Religious Right. Feder cites People For the American Way’s research into funding going from American groups to the European Right — including from Alliance Defending Freedom, the American Center for Law and Justice, and, surprisingly, the fringe anti-choice group Personhood USA — but also notes that a lot of the movement’s energy is travelling in the opposite direction across the Atlantic.
Feder reports, for instance, that last month’s sparsely attended March for Marriage in Washington, D.C., was followed by a very well-attended gathering of representatives from about 70 countries who “met to discuss creation of an International Organization for Marriage.”
A review of tax disclosures conducted by the progressive advocacy group People for the American Way found that several U.S. groups — many of which boomed in the 1990s — had recently invested in conservative drives across Europe: The American Center for Law and Justice, founded by Pat Robertson, sent $1.1 million to its European branch, the European Center for Law and Justice, in 2012, which is the most recent year for which tax disclosures are available. Another group founded by well-known American social conservatives called the Alliance Defending Freedom spent more than $750,000 on European programs that year. The Federalist Society, which promotes conservative legal philosophy, reported spending nearly $800,000 in “conferences and seminars” in Europe that year. Personhood USA, a small Colorado-based group that has tried to pass ballot measures that would give fetuses the legal status of “persons” — a strategy for rolling back abortion rights that is controversial even among pro-life activists — poured $400,000 into Europe in 2012, just after one of its ballot measures went down in flames in Mississippi. (Personhood USA President Keith Mason declined to answer questions from BuzzFeed about which organizations received the funds or what they were used for.)
But while there are links to the U.S., the movement is very much homegrown. Arsuaga said neither HazteOír nor CitizenGo get funding from U.S. groups — and they don’t need it. Arsuaga said 99% of HazteOír’s 1.9 million euro ($2.5 million) annual budget comes from donations from Spanish citizens. CitizenGo has been raising 30,000 to 40,000 euros (roughly $40,000 to $55,000) each month from the 1.2 million members it’s signed up worldwide since its October launch.
Today, American ties seem much more about a shared vision to build a global conservative movement rather than leaning on stronger and wealthier U.S. partners for support. Arsuaga, Volontè, and La Manif Pour Tous President Ludovine de La Rochère were all in Washington on June 19 to support the National Organization for Marriage’s March for Marriage. Their more important business, however, might have been in a closed-door summit the next day, where representatives of around 70 countries met to discuss creation of an International Organization for Marriage, according to Volontè and another participant. A follow-up meeting is planned for next year.
Many LGBT rights supporters mocked the March for Marriage’s paltry turnout. So these Europeans appeared as if they were there to encourage a beleaguered movement, not the other way around — they now possess the vigor that has evaporated from the U.S. movement as opposition to marriage equality has collapsed.
We have reported on how American anti-gay groups, frustrated in their mission at home, are quietly working to form alliances with activists, politicians and funders in Europe, Russia and South America.
The strange case of Personhood USA’s $400,000 expenditure in Europe in 2012 —which represented more than one-third of its total spending that year — offers a clue that a similar dynamic may be happening in the extreme anti-choice movement. While Feder notes that most of the funding for recent viral anti-choice campaigns in Europe has been homegrown, and Personhood USA refused to say what its European shopping spree went toward, the personhood movement could be hoping that it can reclaim some of its energy by looking overseas.
It’s also important to note that the anti-gay and anti-choice movements on both sides of the Atlantic have significant overlap. One example: Last year, National Organization for Marriage President Brian Brown — who has worked extensively with European and Russian anti-gay groups — joined the board of CitizenGo, a conservative platform modeled on MoveOn.org that Feder reports recently helped to defeat a comprehensive sex-ed proposal in the European Parliament.
In a fundraising email today, American Family Association president Tim Wildmon starts out by criticizing Keith Olbermann for naming as his “worst person in sports” a former NFL coach who said he would not have drafted openly gay player Michael Sam because “things will happen” and he “wouldn’t want to deal with all of it.”
But Wildmon uses the anecdote to launch into a larger indictment of the progressive movement and its “PC Gestapo,” which he asserts is “out to destroy our country as it has existed” by being “against patriotism,” “against religion,” “against our Constitutional Bill of Rights,” and “most certainly is for promoting the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender movement and punishing people who dare speak against it.”
Which leads Wildmon back to Michael Sam. Having been a sports reporter and been in locker rooms himself, Wildmon can definitively say that “[p]utting a man like Sam, who says he is sexually attracted to men, in with all that beefcake seems unfair to the straight players and a distraction to Sam.”
The politically correct or "progressive" crowd found a new target this week. When asked about "out and proud" football player Michael Sam, former NFL coach Tony Dungy said he would not have drafted Sam had he still been coaching. Said Dungy: "I wouldn't have [drafted] him. Not because I don't believe Michael Sam should have a chance to play, but I wouldn’t want to deal with all of it. It's not going to be totally smooth...things will happen."
For this comment, ESPN commentator Keith Olbermann named Dungy the "Worst Person in the World" on Monday night. Condemnations of Dungy came from all over.
This is where the "progressive" movement is. If you hold a view that is not in agreement with theirs, you are to be demonized by them, the progressives, who, ironically, don't believe in demons. Why do they do this? Because they, the progressives, consider themselves morally superior to those of us who hold traditional values even though, again, ironically, progressives don’t believe in moral values unless they define them. They moralize against those who promote morality.
The progressive movement is out to destroy our country as it has existed. It is against patriotism. It is against religion in general and is in particular hostile to evangelical Christianity and traditional Catholicism. It is against borders. It is against capitalism. It is for high taxation and government control and regulation of almost everything. It wants people depending on government so they can be controlled. It believes government debt is good. It is against our Constitutional Bill of Rights, in particular the First and Second Amendments. It is for abortion on demand even through nine months of pregnancy. It wants to downgrade the American military. It rejects the idea that Western Civilization is superior to other civilizations. And it most certainly is for promoting the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender movement and punishing people who dare speak against it.
Basically, what I have just described is the platform of the modern day Democrat Party and the philosophy/agenda of much of the New York/Washington, D.C., liberal media, Hollywood and most university campuses. When Barrack [sic] Obama said he wanted to "fundamentally transform" America, what he was saying to his fellow hardcore progressives was: "I've got the wrecking-ball ready."
Sexually, God made man for woman and woman for man. It's obvious. It's natural. Progressives can't stand this. So they are always trying to equate homosexuality with heterosexuality or elevate homosexuality over heterosexuality. When someone like Dungy makes a comment that can in any way been seen as challenging this narrative then that person must be immediately discredited or publicly shamed no matter the truth of what he is saying.
By the way, having been a sports reporter for a few years I've been in many football locker rooms where the players walk around naked or half-naked, changing clothes and going in and out of the showers. Putting a man like Sam, who says he is sexually attracted to men, in with all that beefcake seems unfair to the straight players and a distraction to Sam.
Would you put a heterosexual man in the locker room/showers with all the female cheerleaders? Would you tell the girl cheerleaders who objected to this man being in the locker room that they needed to end their bigoted and sexist attitude and treat the man with respect?
Tony Dungy will probably survive being the "worst person in the world." But the fact that he is in the crosshairs of the PC Gestapo over this comment is chilling to free speech and free thinking.
It's ironic that the people who now scream the loudest about tolerance have become the least tolerant among us.
Tim Wildmon, President