Minnesota Family Council defends documents linking gays to bestiality, pedophilia
Wednesday, May 25, 2011 at 4:34 pm
- 44 Comments
Tom Prichard, president of the Minnesota Family Council, defended his organization’s “legislative manual” in an interview with National Public Radio on Wednesday. The manual asserted that gays and lesbians are more likely to practice sex with animals and children and that they enjoy eating human excrement. After the documents were brought to light on Tuesday they disappeared from the Family Council website.
Prichard defends the postings as getting “into the nature of homosexuality and homosexual behavior,” but says that won’t be the focus of his group’s efforts to pass the constitutional ban.
“The focus of this campaign is the nature and purpose of marriage — not a referendum of homosexuality per se, or its lifestyle activities and behaviors,” he says. “I would see that as a separate issue.”
The Minnesota Family Council did not immediately return a request for comment by the Minnesota Independent. The Family Council is a lead proponent of a ballot initiative that asks voters to put a ban on gay marriage in the Minnesota Constitution.
As the blog As Good As You points out, the research used by the Family Council and the statements made in the legislative manual have been debunked as false.
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter44 Comments
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 4:51 pm
I think Tom Prichard spends a little too much time in his studies about Eating Human Excrement.. In reality Bestiality, Pedo’s and Human Waste probably turns this guy ON.. What a Perv !!
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 5:09 pm
Why did said material get removed only to be defended?? Maybe said organization is trying to hide what it has said….repeatedly.
BIGOTS
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 5:11 pm
“The focus of this campaign is the nature and purpose of marriage — not a referendum of homosexuality per se, or its lifestyle activities and behaviors,” he says. “I would see that as a separate issue.”
This only became a “separate issue” once the public was made aware of these horrible “documents” of hate. HA! Prichard is sorry…sorry he got caught, not for the lies and slander he spreads.
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 5:21 pm
He’s just trying to cover his ass from a lawsuit. Sorry buddy. NOT getting away with it in Minnesota. This isnt Uganda!
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 5:28 pm
Being gay is not a “condition”. It is a human trait no more changeable than race, hair color, eye color, etc. You may have been told, persuaded and now believe otherwise. However, those professionals who study such matters disagree vehemently with your beliefs.
You asked about science. Here are some resources.
These professional bodies unanimously state:
1. Homosexuality is an normal, naturally occurring trait… See More
2. “Reparative therapy” or “conversion therapy” does not work and is harmful to those subjected to it.
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
Sexual orientation and homosexuality
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx
Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture
Ryan D. Johnson April 30, 2003
http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html
APA Officially Rejects Reorientation Treatment for Homosexuals — Overwhelming research from the past hundred years rejected due to “serious design flaws.”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/aug/09080608.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION
POSITION STATEMENT Homosexuality and Civil Rights
Approved by the Board of Trustees, December 1973
Approved by the Assembly, 1973
POSITION STATEMENT Therapies Focused on Attempts to Change Sexual Orientation (Reparative or Conversion Therapies)
Approved by the Board of Trustees, March 2000
Approved by the Assembly, May 2000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
AMA Policy Regarding Sexual Orientation
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
Policy Statement: Homosexuality and Adolescence (RE9332)
http://web.archive.org/web/20031212181440/http://www.aap.org/policy/05072.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Issues
http://www.socialworkers.org/resources/abstracts/abstracts/lesbian.asp
Position Statement: “Reparative” and “Conversion” Therapies for Lesbians and Gay Men
http://www.socialworkers.org/diversity/lgb/reparative.asp?print=1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UNITED PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS REJECT “REPARATIVE THERAPY” also called “CONVERSION THERAPY”
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_expr.htm
The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American Psychological Association, American School Health Association, Interfaith Alliance Foundation, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Social Workers, and National Education Association formed the “Just the Facts Coalition.” They developed and endorsed “Just the Facts About Sexual Orientation & Youth: A Primer for Principals, Educators and School Personnel” in 1999.
The primer says, in part:
“The most important fact about ‘reparative therapy,’ also sometimes known as ‘conversion’ therapy, is that it is based on an understanding of homosexuality that has been rejected by all the major health and mental health professions. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, together representing more than 477,000 health and mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus there is no need for a ‘cure.’
“…health and mental health professional organizations do not support efforts to change young people’s sexual orientation through ‘reparative therapy’ and have raised serious concerns about its potential to do harm.”
Again, I hope you will examine and consider this evidence with an open mind.
Quick Facts About Homosexuality
by C. Ann Shepherd
Sexual orientation can not be caught or taught.
“Family fears of catching homosexuality, or of being recruited at school
or elsewhere are utterly without scientific foundation.”
~ Dr. Jack Weinberg, President American Psychiatric Association,
October 6, 1977.
Sexual orientation is not a choice.
Sexual orientation is deep-seated and not something one chooses to be
or not to be.
~ Dr. Alan P. Bell, senior author of “Sexual Preference”, Bell, Weinberg
& Hammersmith, Indiana University Press, 1981.
Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early
in the life cycle, possibly even before birth.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
It is believed that there are several factors which determine sexual orientation.
Sexual orientation is likely to be the result of several different factors,
including genetic, hormonal, and environmental. None of these factors
alone are responsible for determining sexual orientation. Psychological
and social influences alone cannot cause homosexuality.
~Tineke Bodde’, “Why is My Child Gay? ” Federation of Parents and Friends
of Lesbians and Gays, Inc., 1988.
“There is evidence that parents have very little influence on the outcome
of their children’s sexual orientation under normal upbringing conditions.”
~June Machover Reinisch, Ph.D. (Response from brochure) “Why is My
Child Gay?” Federation of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays,
Inc., 1988.
Gays & lesbians discover their sexual orientation. They are not recruited or brainwashed into the “gay lifestyle”.
Gay and lesbian children are often aware of being different at a very early
age. They generally become aware of their sexual orientation during
adolescence or early adulthood.
~ R.R. Troiden, “The Formation of Homosexual Identities”, The Journal
of Homosexuality, 17, 43-73.
Homosexuality is not a mental or emotional disorder.
The research on homosexuality is very clear. Homosexuality is neither
mental illness nor moral depravity. It is simply the way a minority of
our population expresses human love and sexuality. Study after study
documents the mental health of gay men and lesbians. Studies of
judgment, stability, reliability, and social and vocational adaptiveness
all show that gay men and lesbians function every bit as well as
heterosexuals.
~ The American Psychiatric Association and The American Psychological
Association, July 1994
Efforts to change sexual orientation are ineffective and can be harmful.
Research findings suggest that efforts to repair homosexuals are
nothing more than social prejudice garbed in psychological accouterments.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
No scientific evidence exists to support the effectiveness of any therapies
that attempt to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals.
~ John C. Gonsiorek and James D. Weinrich, eds., Homosexuality:
Research Implications for Public Policy, Newbury Park, Calf.: Sage, 1991.
All attempts fail when gay people try to become heterosexual.
~D. C. Haldeman, “The Practice and Ethics of Sexual Orientation Conversion
Therapy”, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, p.221-227, 1994.
“Groups who try to change the sexual orientation of people through so-called
conversion therapy are misguided and run the risk of causing a great
deal of psychological harm to those they say they are trying to help.”
~Dr. Raymond Fowler, American Psychological Association Executive Director
Clinical experience suggests that any person who seeks conversion therapy
may be doing so because of social bias that has resulted in internalized
homophobia, and that gay men and lesbians who have accepted their sexual
orientation positively are better adjusted than those who have not done so.
~American Psychiatric Association
The incidence of homosexuality is constant regardless of new laws or social attitudes.
It [homosexuality] is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure
which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different
moral values and standards of a particular culture.
Contrary to what some imply, the incidence of homosexuality in a population
does not appear to change with new moral codes or social mores.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
Gay and lesbian youth are at greater risk of committing suicide.
Gay and lesbian youth are two to three times more likely to attempt suicide
than their heterosexual peers.
Gay and lesbian teens account for thirty percent of all completed suicides
among adolescents.
~U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “Report of the Secretary’s
Task Force on Youth Suicide”, Washington D.C., 1989.
Gay and lesbian people are just as capable of being good parents as are heterosexual parents.
Children who are raised in gay or lesbian homes are no different in any
aspects of psychological, social, or sexual development from children in
heterosexual families.
~C.J. Patterson, “Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents”, Child Development,
63, 1025-1042.
Thirty-five different studies have shown that children of gay and lesbian
parents are no more likely to become homosexuals than children of
heterosexuals, and are just as well adjusted.
~Jane Gross, “New Challenge of Youth: Growing up in Gay Homes”,
New York Times, February 11, 1991.
Gay men and lesbian women are rarely involved in child sexual abuse.
In the U.S. ninety percent of all sexual child abuse is committed by
heterosexual men. The molesters are almost always family members,
close family friends or the mother’s boyfriend.
~P.J. Falk “Lesbian Mothers: Psychological Assumptions in Family Law”,
American Psychologist, 44, 941-949, 1989.
~Mary Koss, et al. “No Safe Haven: Male Violence Against Women At Home,
At Work, And in the Community”,
American Psychological Association, 1994.
Gay people are not obsessed with sex.
Gay men and lesbian women share the same amount of interest in sexual
activity as heterosexual persons, neither more nor less.
~Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, for the Institute for Sexual Research,
“Homosexuality: A Study in Human Diversity”, Simon and Schuster, 1978.
There is no single Gay Lifestyle.
The lives of gay men and lesbian women are just as varied as the lives of
heterosexuals.
~Linda D. Garnets and Douglas C. Kimmel, “Psychological Perspectives on
Lesbian and Gay Male Experiences”, Columbia University Press, 1995.
©1996-1998 C. Ann Shepherd
AND if thats not enough, reinforcement from MOTHER NATURE and the animal kingdom
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d68_vlLD60Y
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 5:33 pm
Prichard is attempting to defend the fiction of this PEER-REPUDIATED character
Paul Drummond Cameron was born November 9, 1939, in Pittsburgh (PA).
He received his BA from Los Angeles Pacific College in 1961; his MA from California State University, Los Angeles, in 1962; and his PhD from the University of Colorado in 1966. His dissertation was titled Age as a determinant of differences in non-intellective psychological functioning.1
He was affiliated with various colleges and universities until 1980. They include Wayne State University (1967-68), University of Louisville (1970-73), Fuller Graduate School of Psychology [part of the Fuller Theological Seminary] (1976-79), and the University of Nebraska (1979-80).
On his curriculum vitae, he describes himself as a “Researcher/Clinician.” According to the web site of the Nebraska Department of HHS Regulation and Licensure, his license as a Psychologist has been “inactive” since 1995.
He is chairman of the Family Research Institute, PO Box 62640, Colorado Springs, CO, 80962-2640. Telephone: (303) 681-3113. Fax: (303) 681-3427. E-mail: pdcameron@juno.com
APA letter to Paul Cameron 12/2/83
In the mid-1980s, the gay press labeled Paul Cameron “the most dangerous antigay voice in the United States today.”2,3,4 Here are some important facts about him.
* On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that “Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists” by the APA Board of Directors.5 Cameron has posted an elaborate argument about his expulsion from APA on his website, claiming that he resigned from APA before he was dropped from membership. Like most organizations, however, APA does not allow a member to resign when they are being investigated. And even if Cameron’s claims were accepted as true, it would be remarkable that the largest professional organization of psychologists in the United States (and other professional associations, as noted below) went to such lengths to disassociate itself from one individual.
* At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it “formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality.”6
* In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA) adopted a resolution which asserted that “Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism” and noted that “Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research.”7 The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of “critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron.”
At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee’s report and passed the following resolution:
The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, “The Paul Cameron Case,” is to be published in Footnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron’s frequent lecture and media appearances.”8
* In August, 1996, the Canadian Psychological Association adopted the following policy statement:
The Canadian Psychological Association takes the position that Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism and thus, it formally disassociates itself from the representation and interpretations of scientific literature in his writings and public statements on sexuality.
* Cameron’s credibility was also questioned outside of academia. In his written opinion in Baker v. Wade (1985), Judge Buchmeyer of the U.S. District Court of Dallas referred to “Cameron’s sworn statement that ‘homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals,’” and concluded that “Dr. Paul Cameron…has himself made misrepresentations to this Court” and that “There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron” (p.536).9
Footnotes
1Biographical information obtained from various sources, including Cameron’s curriculum vitae, Who’s Who in the West, 26th Edition, 25th Edition; Who’s Who in America, 52nd Edition, 51st Edition, 50th Edition. (return to text)
2Walter, D. (1985, October 29). Paul Cameron. The Advocate, pp. 28-33. (return to text)
3Fettner, A.G. (1985, September 23). The evil that men do. New York Native, pp. 23-24. (return to text)
4Pietrzyk, M.E. (1994, October 3). Queer science: Paul Cameron, professional sham. The New Republic, pp. 10-12. (return to text)
5Notice: Persons dropped from membership in the American Psychological Association. (1984). Internal communication from APA to all members. (return to text)
6The full NPA resolution read as follows:
The science and profession of psychology in Nebraska as represented by the Nebraska Psychological Association, formally dissociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality. Further, the Nebraska Psychological Association would like it known that Dr. Cameron is not a member of the Association. Dr. Cameron was recently dropped from membership in the American Psychological Association for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists.
[Nebraska Psychological Association. (1984, October 19). Resolution. Minutes of the Nebraska Psychological Association. Omaha, Nebraska: Author.] (return to text)
7A copy of the full ASA resolution in Acrobat PDF format can be downloaded. It read as follows:
WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron, a psychologist, was dropped from membership in The American Psychological Association for violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists;
WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron has been presented in the media as a sociologist;
WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism;
WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research;
WHEREAS the American Sociological Association is on record as opposing oppressive actions against lesbians and gay men and affirming its commitment to their civil rights;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: THAT the Association reaffirms its opposition to efforts to undermine the civil rights of lesbians and gay men through the distortion of sociological concepts and the falsifying of sociological research; and
THAT the Association articulates this opposition by charging the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology with the task of critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron.
[Sociology group criticizes work of Paul Cameron. (1985, September 10). Lincoln (NE) Star.] (return to text)
8 The ASA Task Force findings were described in ASA Footnotes (January, 1987, p. 4). The final resolution and the committee report were published in ASA Footnotes (February, 1987, page 14). Available from the American Sociological Association, Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, 1722 N Street, NW, Washington DC 20036. (202) 833-3410. (return to text)
9On page 536 of his opinion, Judge Buchmeyer noted the following examples of misrepresentations by Cameron to the Court:
“(i) his sworn statement that “homosexuals are approximately 43 times more apt to commit crimes than is the general population” is a total distortion of the Kinsey data upon which he relies – which, as is obvious to anyone who reads the report, concerns data from a non-representative sample of delinquent homosexuals (and Dr. Cameron compares this group to college and non-college heterosexuals);
(ii) his sworn statement that “homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals” is based upon the same distorted data – and, the Court notes, is directly contrary to other evidence presented at trial besides the testimony of Dr. Simon and Dr. Marmour. (553 F. Supp. 1121 at 1130 n.18.)”
[Baker v. Wade, 106 Federal Rules Decisions 526 (N.D. Texas, 1985).]
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 5:42 pm
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron_sheet.html
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 6:00 pm
@Wendy Leigh- Thank you so much for your posts. The extent to which smoke and mirrors are used by people who claim to worship the God who IS Truth is stunning. But I find hope in the prospect that facts will ultimately win out over the mythology of hate and ignorance.
Praise Jebus, God hates being peer reviewed, Amen.
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 6:08 pm
Intelligence Report, Winter 2010, Issue Number: 140
10 Anti-Gay Myths Debunked
By Evelyn Schlatter and Robert Steinback
10 Anti-Gay Myths
Ever since born-again singer and orange juice pitchwoman Anita Bryant helped kick off the contemporary anti-gay movement more than 30 years ago, hard-line elements of the religious right have been searching for ways to demonize homosexuals — or, at a minimum, to find arguments that will prevent their normalization in society. For the former Florida beauty queen and her Save Our Children group, it was the alleged plans of gays and lesbians to “recruit” in schools that provided the fodder for their crusade.
But in addition to hawking that myth, the legions of anti-gay activists who followed have added a panoply of others, ranging from the extremely doubtful claim that homosexuality is a choice, to unalloyed lies like the claims that gays molest children far more than heterosexuals or that hate crime laws will lead to the legalization of bestiality and necrophilia. These fairy tales are important to the anti-gay right because they form the basis of its claim that homosexuality is a social evil that must be suppressed — an opinion rejected by virtually all relevant medical and scientific authorities. They also almost certainly contribute to hate crime violence directed at homosexuals, who are more targeted for such attacks than any other minority in America. What follows are 10 key myths propagated by the anti-gay movement, along with the truth behind the propaganda.
MYTH # 1
Homosexuals molest children at far higher rates than heterosexuals.
THE ARGUMENT
Depicting gay men as a threat to children may be the single most potent weapon for stoking public fears about homosexuality — and for winning elections and referenda, as Anita Bryant found out during her successful 1977 campaign to overturn a Dade County, Fla., ordinance barring discrimination against gay people. Discredited psychologist Paul Cameron, the most ubiquitous purveyor of anti-gay junk science, has been a major promoter of this myth. Despite having been debunked repeatedly and very publicly, Cameron’s work is still widely relied upon by anti-gay organizations, although many no longer quote him by name. Others have cited a group called the American College of Pediatricians to claim, as Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council did in November 2010, that “the research is overwhelming that homosexuality poses a [molestation] danger to children.”
THE FACTS
According to the American Psychological Association, “homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.” Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation’s leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.
Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because “he often finds adults of either sex repulsive” and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may “regress” to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.
The Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.
Some anti-gay ideologues cite the American College of Pediatricians’ opposition to same-sex parenting as if the organization were a legitimate professional body. In fact, the so-called college is a tiny breakaway faction of the similarly named, 60,000-member American Academy of Pediatrics that requires, as a condition of membership, that joiners “hold true to the group’s core beliefs … [including] that the traditional family unit, headed by an opposite-sex couple, poses far fewer risk factors in the adoption and raising of children.” The group’s 2010 publication Facts About Youth was described by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association as non-factual. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, was one of several legitimate researchers who said Facts misrepresented their findings. “It is disturbing to me to see special interest groups distort my scientific observations to make a point against homosexuality,” he wrote. “The information they present is misleading and incorrect.”
MYTH # 2
Same-sex parents harm children.
THE ARGUMENT
Most hard-line anti-gay organizations are heavily invested, from both a religious and a political standpoint, in promoting the traditional nuclear family as the sole framework for the healthy upbringing of children. They maintain a reflexive belief that same-sex parenting must be harmful to children — although the exact nature of that supposed harm varies widely.
THE FACTS
No legitimate research has demonstrated that same-sex couples are any more or any less harmful to children than heterosexual couples.
The American Academy of Pediatrics in a 2002 policy statement declared: “A growing body of scientific literature demonstrates that children who grow up with one or two gay and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual.” That policy statement was reaffirmed in 2009.
The American Psychological Association found that “same-sex couples are remarkably similar to heterosexual couples, and that parenting effectiveness and the adjustment, development and psychological well-being of children is unrelated to parental sexual orientation.”
Similarly, the Child Welfare League of America’s official position with regard to same-sex parents is that “lesbian, gay, and bisexual parents are as well-suited to raise children as their heterosexual counterparts.”
MYTH # 3
People become homosexual because they were sexually abused as children or there was a deficiency in sex-role modeling by their parents.
THE ARGUMENT
Many anti-gay rights proponents claim that homosexuality is a mental disorder caused by some psychological trauma or aberration in childhood. This argument is used to counter the common observation that no one, gay or straight, consciously chooses his or her sexual orientation. Joseph Nicolosi, a founder of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, said in 2009 that “if you traumatize a child in a particular way, you will create a homosexual condition.” He also has repeatedly said, “Fathers, if you don’t hug your sons, some other man will.” A side effect of this argument is the demonization of parents of homosexuals, who are led to wonder if they failed to protect a child against sexual abuse or failed as role models in some important way. In October 2010, Kansas State University family studies professor Walter Schumm said he was about to release a related study arguing that homosexual couples are more likely than heterosexuals to raise gay or lesbian children.
THE FACTS
No scientifically sound study has linked sexual orientation or identity with parental role-modeling or childhood sexual abuse.
The American Psychiatric Association noted in a 2000 fact sheet on gay, lesbian and bisexual issues that “no specific psychosocial or family dynamic cause for homosexuality has been identified, including histories of childhood sexual abuse.” The fact sheet goes on to say that sexual abuse does not appear to be any more prevalent among children who grow up and identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual than in children who grow up and identify as heterosexual.
Similarly, the National Organization on Male Sexual Victimization notes on its website that “experts in the human sexuality field do not believe that premature sexual experiences play a significant role in late adolescent or adult sexual orientation” and added that it’s unlikely that someone can make another person a homosexual or heterosexual.
With regard to Schumm’s study, critics have already said that he appears to have merely aggregated anecdotal data, a biased sample that invalidates his findings.
MYTH # 4
Homosexuals don’t live nearly as long as heterosexuals.
THE ARGUMENT
Anti-gay organizations want to promote heterosexuality as the healthier “choice.” Furthermore, the purportedly shorter life spans and poorer physical and mental health of homosexuals are often offered as reasons why gays and lesbians shouldn’t be allowed to adopt or foster children.
THE FACTS
This falsehood can be traced directly to the discredited research of Paul Cameron and his Family Research Institute, specifically a 1994 paper he co-wrote entitled, “The Lifespan of Homosexuals.” Using obituaries collected from gay newspapers, he and his two co-authors concluded that gay men died, on average, at 43, compared to an average life expectancy at the time of around 73 for all U.S. men. On the basis of the same obituaries, Cameron also claimed that gay men are 18 times more likely to die in car accidents than heterosexuals, 22 times more likely to die of heart attacks than whites, and 11 times more likely than blacks to die of the same cause. He also concluded that lesbians are 487 times more likely to die of murder, suicide, or accidents than straight women.
Remarkably, these claims have become staples of the anti-gay right and have frequently made their way into far more mainstream venues. For example, William Bennett, education secretary under President Reagan, used Cameron’s statistics in a 1997 interview he gave to ABC News’ “This Week.”
However, like virtually all of his “research,” Cameron’s methodology is egregiously flawed — most obviously because the sample he selected (the data from the obits) was not remotely statistically representative of the homosexual population as a whole. Even Nicholas Eberstadt, a demographer at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, has called Cameron’s methods “just ridiculous.”
MYTH # 5
Homosexuals controlled the Nazi Party and helped to orchestrate the Holocaust.
THE ARGUMENT
This claim comes directly from a 1995 book titled The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams. Lively is the virulently anti-gay founder of Abiding Truth Ministries and Abrams is an organizer of a group called the International Committee for Holocaust Truth, which came together in 1994 and included Lively as a member.
The primary argument Lively and Abrams make is that gay people were not victimized by the Holocaust. Rather, Hitler deliberately sought gay men for his inner circle because their “unusual brutality” would help him run the party and mastermind the Holocaust. In fact, “the Nazi party was entirely controlled by militaristic male homosexuals throughout its short history,” the book claims. “While we cannot say that homosexuals caused the Holocaust, we must not ignore their central role in Nazism,” Lively and Abrams add. “To the myth of the ‘pink triangle’ — the notion that all homosexuals in Nazi Germany were persecuted — we must respond with the reality of the ‘pink swastika.’”
These claims have been picked up by a number of anti-gay groups and individuals, including Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association, as proof that homosexuals are violent and sick. The book has also attracted an audience among anti-gay church leaders in Eastern Europe and among Russian-speaking anti-gay activists in America.
THE FACTS
The Pink Swastika has been roundly discredited by legitimate historians and other scholars. Christine Mueller, professor of history at Reed College, did a line-by-line refutation of an earlier (1994) Abrams article on the topic and of the broader claim that the Nazi Party was “entirely controlled” by gay men. Historian Jon David Wynecken at Grove City College also refuted the book, pointing out that Lively and Abrams did no primary research of their own, instead using out-of-context citations of some legitimate sources while ignoring information from those same sources that ran counter to their thesis.
The myth that the Nazis condoned homosexuality sprang up in the 1930s, started by socialist opponents of the Nazis as a slander against Nazi leaders. Credible historians believe that only one of the half-dozen leaders in Hitler’s inner circle, Ernst Röhm, was gay. (Röhm was murdered on Hitler’s orders in 1934.) The Nazis considered homosexuality one aspect of the “degeneracy” they were trying to eradicate.
When the National Socialist Party came to power in 1933, it quickly strengthened Germany’s existing penalties against homosexuality. Heinrich Himmler, Hitler’s security chief, announced that homosexuality was to be “eliminated” in Germany, along with miscegenation among the races. Historians estimate that between 50,000 and 100,000 men were arrested for homosexuality (or suspicion of it) under the Nazi regime. These men were routinely sent to concentration camps and many thousands died there.
In 1942, the Nazis instituted the death penalty for homosexuals. Offenders in the German military were routinely shot. Himmler put it like this: “We must exterminate these people root and branch. … We can’t permit such danger to the country; the homosexual must be completely eliminated.”
MYTH # 6
Hate crime laws will lead to the jailing of pastors who criticize homosexuality and the legalization of practices like bestiality and necrophilia.
THE ARGUMENT
Anti-gay activists, who have long opposed adding LGBT people to those protected by hate crime legislation, have repeatedly claimed that such laws would lead to the jailing of religious figures who preach against homosexuality — part of a bid to gain the backing of the broader religious community for their position. Janet Porter of Faith2Action was one of many who asserted that the federal Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act — signed into law by President Obama in October 2009 — would “jail pastors” because it “criminalizes speech against the homosexual agenda.”
In a related assertion, anti-gay activists claimed the law would lead to the legalization of psychosexual disorders (paraphilias) like bestiality and pedophilia. Bob Unruh, a conservative Christian journalist who left The Associated Press in 2006 for the right-wing, conspiracist news site WorldNetDaily, said shortly before the federal law was passed that it would legalize “all 547 forms of sexual deviancy or ‘paraphilias’ listed by the American Psychiatric Association.” This claim was repeated by many anti-gay organizations, including the Illinois Family Institute.
THE FACTS
The claim that hate crime laws could result in the imprisonment of those who “oppose the homosexual lifestyle” is false. The Constitution provides robust protections of free speech, and case law makes it clear that even a preacher who suggested that homosexuals should be killed would be protected.
Neither do hate crime laws — which provide for enhanced penalties when persons are victimized because of their “sexual orientation” (among other factors) — “protect pedophiles,” as Janet Porter and many others have claimed. According to the American Psychological Association, sexual orientation refers to heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality — not paraphilias such as pedophilia. Paraphilias, as defined by the American Psychiatric Assocation, are disorders characterized by sexual urges or behaviors directed at nonhuman objects or non-consenting persons like children, or that involve the suffering or humiliation of one’s partner.
Even if pedophiles, for example, were protected under a hate crime law — and such a law has not been suggested or contemplated anywhere — that would not legalize or “protect” pedophilia. Pedophilia is illegal sexual activity, and a law that more severely punished people who attacked pedophiles would not change that.
MYTH # 7
Allowing homosexuals to serve openly would damage the armed forces.
THE ARGUMENT
Anti-gay groups are adamantly opposed to allowing gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the armed forces, not only because of their purported fear that combat readiness will be undermined, but because the military has long been considered the purest meritocracy in America (the armed forces were successfully racially integrated long before American civilian society, for example). If gays can serve honorably and effectively in this meritocracy, that would suggest that there is no rational basis for discriminating against them in any way.
THE FACTS
Homosexuals now serve in the U.S. armed forces, though under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy instituted in 1993, they cannot serve openly. At the same time, gays and lesbians serve openly in the armed forces of 25 countries, including Britain, Israel, South Africa, Canada and Australia, according to a report released by the Palm Center, a policy think tank at the University of California at Santa Barbara. The Palm Center report concluded that lifting bans against openly gay service personnel in these countries “ha[s] had no negative impact on morale, recruitment, retention, readiness or overall combat effectiveness.” Successful transitions to new policies were attributed to clear signals of leadership support and a focus on a uniform code of behavior without regard to sexual orientation.
A 2008 Military Times poll of active-duty military personnel, often cited by anti-gay activists, found that 10% of respondents said they would not re-enlist if the DADT policy were repealed. That would mean some 228,000 people might leave the military in that instance. But a 2009 review of that poll by the Palm Center suggested a wide disparity between what soldiers said they would do and their actual actions. It noted, for example, that far more than 10% of West Point officers in the 1970s said they would leave the service if women were admitted to the academy. “But when the integration became a reality,” the report said, “there was no mass exodus; the opinions turned out to be just opinions.” Similarly, a 1985 survey of 6,500 male Canadian service members and a 1996 survey of 13,500 British service members each revealed that nearly two-thirds expressed strong reservations about serving with gays. Yet when those countries lifted bans on gays serving openly, virtually no one left the service for that reason. “None of the dire predictions of doom came true,” the Palm Center report said.
MYTH # 8
Homosexuals are more prone to be mentally ill and to abuse drugs and alcohol.
THE ARGUMENT
Anti-gay groups want not only to depict sexual orientation as something that can be changed but also to show that heterosexuality is the most desirable “choice” — even if religious arguments are set aside. The most frequently used secular argument made by anti-gay groups in that regard is that homosexuality is inherently unhealthy, both mentally and physically. As a result, most anti-gay rights groups reject the 1973 decision by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses. Some of these groups, including the particularly hard-line Traditional Values Coalition, claim that “homosexual activists” managed to infiltrate the APA in order to sway its decision.
THE FACTS
All major professional mental health organizations are on record as stating that homosexuality is not a mental disorder.
It is true that LGBT people suffer higher rates of anxiety, depression, and depression-related illnesses and behaviors like alcohol and drug abuse than the general population. But studies done during the past 15 years have determined that it is the stress of being a member of a minority group in an often-hostile society — and not LGBT identity itself — that accounts for the higher levels of mental illness and drug use.
Richard J. Wolitski, an expert on minority status and public health issues at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, put it like this in 2008: “Economic disadvantage, stigma, and discrimination … increase stress and diminish the ability of individuals [in minority groups] to cope with stress, which in turn contribute to poor physical and mental health.”
MYTH # 9
No one is born a homosexual.
THE ARGUMENT
Anti-gay activists keenly oppose the granting of “special” civil rights protections to homosexuals similar to those afforded black Americans and other minorities. But if people are born gay — in the same way people have no choice as to whether they are black or white — discrimination against homosexuals would be vastly more difficult to justify. Thus, anti-gay forces insist that sexual orientation is a behavior that can be changed, not an immutable characteristic.
THE FACTS
Modern science cannot state conclusively what causes sexual orientation, but a great many studies suggest that it is the result of biological and environmental forces, not a personal “choice.” One of the more recent is a 2008 Swedish study of twins (the world’s largest twin study) that appeared in The Archives of Sexual Behavior and concluded that “[h]omosexual behaviour is largely shaped by genetics and random environmental factors.” Dr. Qazi Rahman, study co-author and a leading scientist on human sexual orientation, said: “This study puts cold water on any concerns that we are looking for a single ‘gay gene’ or a single environmental variable which could be used to ‘select out’ homosexuality — the factors which influence sexual orientation are complex. And we are not simply talking about homosexuality here — heterosexual behaviour is also influenced by a mixture of genetic and environmental factors.”
The American Psychological Association (APA) acknowledges that despite much research into the possible genetic, hormonal, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no evidence has emerged that would allow scientists to pinpoint the precise causes of sexual orientation. Still, the APA concludes that “most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.”
In October 2010, Kansas State University family studies professor Walter Schumm said he was about to release a study showing that gay parents produced far more gay children than heterosexual parents. He told a reporter that he was “trying to prove [homosexuality is] not 100% genetic.” But critics suggested that his data did not prove that, and, in any event, virtually no scientists have suggested that homosexuality is caused only by genes.
MYTH # 10
Gay people can choose to leave homosexuality.
THE ARGUMENT
If people are not born gay, as anti-gay activists claim, then it should be possible for individuals to abandon homosexuality. This view is buttressed among religiously motivated anti-gay activists by the idea that homosexual practice is a sin and humans have the free will needed to reject sinful urges.
A number of “ex-gay” religious ministries have sprung up in recent years with the aim of teaching homosexuals to become heterosexuals, and these have become prime purveyors of the claim that gays and lesbians, with the aid of mental therapy and Christian teachings, can “come out of homosexuality.” Exodus International, the largest of these ministries, plainly states, “You don’t have to be gay!” Another, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, describes itself as “a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality.”
THE FACTS
“Reparative” or sexual reorientation therapy — the pseudo-scientific foundation of the ex-gay movement — has been rejected by all the established and reputable American medical, psychological, psychiatric, and professional counseling organizations. In 2009, for instance, the American Psychological Association adopted a resolution, accompanied by a 138-page report, that repudiated ex-gay therapy. The report concluded that compelling evidence suggested that cases of individuals going from gay to straight were “rare” and that “many individuals continued to experience same-sex sexual attractions” after reparative therapy. The APA resolution added that “there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation” and asked “mental health professionals to avoid misrepresenting the efficacy of sexual orientation change efforts by promoting or promising change in sexual orientation.” The resolution also affirmed that same-sex sexual and romantic feelings are normal.
Some of the most striking, if anecdotal, evidence of the ineffectiveness of sexual reorientation therapy has been the numerous failures of some of its most ardent advocates. For example, the founder of Exodus International, Michael Bussee, left the organization in 1979 with a fellow male ex-gay counselor because the two had fallen in love. Alan Chambers, current president of Exodus, said in 2007 that with years of therapy, he’s mostly conquered his attraction to men, but then admitted, “By no means would we ever say that change can be sudden or complete.”
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 6:31 pm
We need to remember and be aware that the anti-LGBT forces have created their own groups mimicking the names and banking on the credibility of actual professional organizations – such as the American College of Pediatricians, a virulently anti-gay lobby of about 100 or so hyper-conservative doctors, which counts on its deliberately confusion-inducing name similarity to the establishment American Academy of Pediatrics. These groups produce no research and represent vanishingly small minorities of their professions, but cause a great deal of harm.
It seems to me that by a “respectful discussion,” what the MFC really means is “submit respectfully to our righteous authority, perverts.”
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 6:40 pm
An “Inconvenient Truth” that the Repulikan Corporate Church Party doesn’t want people to know is ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Most Homosexuals were raised in Heterosexual households..
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 6:49 pm
Minnesota needs to dump ALL of the extremism including the MFC who has now been proven to push scientifically peer-repudiated KNOWN FALSEHOODS to purposefully misinform and demonize Minnesotans to further their own political agendas. This ISN’T Uganda folks. My bet is that Minnesotans don’t take kindly to being manipulated into turning on their fellow Minnesotans.
http://minnesotansunitedforallfamilies.com/
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 9:22 pm
You have more blood on your hands MFC, as if 11 kids in the last 16 months weren’t enough, a young man was just bashed in St. Cloud for being gay by three men.
I see the world that you want Family Council. A world based on KNOWN FALSEHOODS and discredited mythology. I will fight you in Uganda and I will fight you in my state. History repeating.
Comment posted May 25, 2011 @ 10:02 pm
At his rate these guys are arrogantly and carelessly going on, they are hopefully will burn out like the comet Bradlee Dean. My coming of age was during Anita Bryant- Ronald Reagan era and it was horrible. Not one more generation of children should be raised with this backdrop of gay bashing and money being fed to groups to keep the bigotry alive for political purposes. Rally on Minnesota.
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 1:01 am
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Tom Prichard has more butt plugs in him than a used-sex-toy shop.
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 1:25 am
I’d like the Senate and House Republican caucus’s to give Andy Birkley their positions on being manipulated and misinformed with faulty and peer repudiated data. In light of the ACTUAL findings and citations brought forth, I would consider it reasonable to see some change their position on legislation that limits their Constitutional liberties and full citizenship rights based on grossly manipulated data.
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 1:28 am
should read * limits some Minnesotans their Constitutional liberties…
Pingback posted May 26, 2011 @ 3:52 am
[...] Minnesota Family Council Defends Documents Linking Gays to Bestiality, Pedophilia. Read more [...]
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 7:20 am
Why do NOM and the various “family”-themed anti-woman/anti-gay organizations (so called because they are fronts for the mafia-like organization “The Family,” not because any families benefit from their machinations) resort to distortions, discredited research and vague scaremongering because they know that in a fair trial of the facts in court – whether court of law or court of public opinion – they lose. They cannot come up with a single valid reason to stop marriage equality – not a single valid public policy to support their views – and they persist because it’s big money for them from their donors, and because it’s still a potent get out the vote for the 25% of the population that still votes Republican.
Terrify the Republican base that their way of life is being eroded by liberals and stroke their feelings of specialness just a little bit, and they’ll completely forget that liberals haven’t been in control of the country in 30 years and the decline and fall of the American Empire is all their own fault.
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 8:59 am
So, Prichard thinks it’s okay for practitioners of bestiality, pedophiles and excrement eaters to marry as long as they aren’t gay? Well that sure answers a lot of questions I’ve had about him.
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 10:20 am
No Other Minority EVER in the history of this country has had thier VERY RIGHTS as Citizens Voted on by the Majority….Ever! This is a Travesty…….in the end, all it will do is put a ((Hold)) on Justice and Fairness….Pit Neighbor against Neighbor…Create hard feelings that NEVER go away (see Prop 8 3yrs later) …..leaving MN looking Foolish and Ugly, and Unwelcoming and On the WRONG side of History……while Brian Brown and Fattass Maggie Gallagher leave MN Pockets LINED with FRESH HATE CASH and its populace in Tatters…as they LAUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK $$$$…(this is HOW they make thier living, they DON’T have REAL JOBS) Watchng MN in the rear-view mirrors, on thier way to Create Hate in another state…..for me, it will just add MN to the Long List of states NEVER to ever go too in the Hateful,Bigoted country…..as america stands as a Model of Hypocracy…Liberty & Justice for Some..NOT ALL.
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 10:26 am
Don’t worry, DG. Because this is where the hate stops. They can’t ram their Fred Flintstone crap through here.
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 10:30 am
It’s dangerous to think of the Minnesota Family Council as anything other than a political organization whose goal is to get a certain demographic to the polls to vote for Republicans. It has no other purpose. To try to make sense of what it does in any other way takes the focus on what it is up to. Getting mad about the ridiculous and infuriating things it says and does doesn’t help. It needs to be viewed as a political organization and fought as such.
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 11:40 am
“… a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest…”
The Boxer, Paul Simon
Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 12:34 pm
Well, it is difficult to codify a vague sense of unease into seemingly valid research.
“…mistakes were made…” Ron Ziegler, White House Press Secretary for Richard Nixon
Praise Jebus, God hates hind sight, Amen.
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 2:13 pm
@ Katie B………. you men Freud Flinstone in this case I’m sure ; )
Pingback posted May 26, 2011 @ 5:05 pm
[...] though the items were removed, the head of the Minnesota Family Council, Tom Pritchard, actually defended the material: Prichard defends the postings as getting "into the nature of homosexuality and [...]
Pingback posted May 26, 2011 @ 5:08 pm
[...] though the items were removed, the head of the Minnesota Family Council, Tom Pritchard, actually defended the material: Prichard defends the postings as getting "into the nature of homosexuality and [...]
Comment posted May 26, 2011 @ 8:27 pm
I have been gay my entire life, and never ate human excrement. I have no desire to do so and just the thought of it makes me wanna puke.
On the other hand, I have a straight friend who does anal with his wife, and then she licks him clean. EEEEwwwwwww
Comment posted May 27, 2011 @ 2:57 am
@ Jeff, Bless you, and your son Corporal Andrew Wilfahrt. A Minnesota hero.
Comment posted May 27, 2011 @ 3:32 am
Dear Wendy:
Many thanks for your extremely informative and extensive posts on this site.
Comment posted May 28, 2011 @ 3:35 pm
In reality, these referendums very rarely end up actually reflecting the will of the voters.
Instead, they tend to be co-opted by well-financed special interest groups like NOM that flood voters with misleading and outright false information in order to inflate public opinion against minority groups (in this case, the LGBT community). As law professor Paula Abrams wrote in 2008:
One can readily conclude that lawmaking by initiative, the manifestation of unchecked majority will, carries a high risk of producing bad laws. The “bad law” risk posed by the initiative is not simply that of generic poor policy. The absence of the deliberative process can leave the voters with profoundly inaccurate information. False information may be an unintended byproduct of the public campaign, or it may be deliberately disseminated for political advantage. Deliberate dissemination of false information can be a particularly potent and harmful strategy to agitate the majority against minority groups. Immune from legislative or executive review, initiative campaigns may rely on appeals to voter prejudice. [Oregon Law Review, Vol. 87, 1025, emphasis added, 2008]
It’s not surprising that anti-gay groups would rely on fearmongering and propaganda to scare people into opposing LGBT equality. Frankly, it’s just easier to get people to vote based on fear and intolerance than it is to get them to accept minority groups as being equal and deserving of fair treatment. As James Wenzel, et al., explained in 1998:
The problem for tolerance, and hence for democratic government, is that while the urge to repress potential threats has a strong, potentially genetically transmitted (see Willhoite 1977), affective component, a tolerant response requires the commitment of substantial cognitive resources. This ingrained propensity to respond in an intolerant fashion must be overcome by resort to reasoned argument. Citizens must be convinced that reason requires that they ignore their initial impulses toward what they perceive as self-preservation and extend rights to those whom they view as threatening and potentially destructive. Ballot choices involving unpopular minority groups create a context where citizens must make choices about these groups on the basis of their affect toward the groups, in combination with the information received during the petition drive and campaign. [Citizens As Legislators, Ohio State University Press, emphasis added, 1998]
http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201105190011
Comment posted May 28, 2011 @ 9:42 pm
Seems Ron Pritchard is more of an expert on bestiality, pedophilia and excrement eating than any gay male I have ever know. Wonder what he has been hiding from us. He must have a secret repulsive agenda of perverted activities he’d rather not have the public know about regarding him. He certainly has a filthier mind and mouth than most gay men I have known.
Comment posted May 29, 2011 @ 12:31 pm
I see that you folks have ‘em surrounded! :-)
Two more things to add:
1) The Minnesota Chapter of ITN: http://www.itn-mn.org/events/join-us-for-%E2%80%9Ctransformation-in-the-twin-cities%E2%80%9D-with-ed-silvoso-on-october-14/
…is part of the International Transformation Network headed by Ed Silvoso:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/International_Transformation_Network
More info on the ITN:
| Video Exposes Antigay Western Theocratic Effort “Transforming” Uganda: http://bit.ly/lZlpl2 via @addthis
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2010/1/15/134445/911
| Resource Directory for the New Apostolic Reformation: http://bit.ly/d7FD6g via @addthis
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2010/1/20/131544/037
2) Instead of pushing Paul Cameron’s discredited ‘the queers-are-out-to-get-our-kids’ BS, perhaps the good ‘Christians’ at the MFC and NOM etc should circle the Bibles around THIS problem:
WARNING: Innocent children being senselessly brutalized.
Return to Africa’s Witch Children | Watch Free Documentary Online: http://bit.ly/aODLW0 via @addthis
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/return-to-africas-witch-children/
“A story of an estimated 15,000 children in Africa’s Niger Delta being denounced by Christian pastors as witches and wizards and then killed, tortured or abandoned by their own families.
Two-and-a-half-year-old Ellin is one such child. Found at the side of the road, her body having been severely burnt with boiling water. Nwanakwo, eight years old, had acid poured over him after being labeled a wizard, and later died.
Return to Africa’s Witch Children is a documentary that follows the work of Gary Foxcroft, an Englishman whose charity, Stepping Stones, raises funds to help care for more than 150 children accused of witchcraft, and blamed for catastrophes, death and famine. Narrated by Sophie Okonedo.”
The charity that’s trying to help these “witch children”.
Stepping Stones (Africa’s “Witch Childen”) http://bit.ly/kgBLXU via @addthis
http://www.steppingstonesnigeria.org/history.html
Check out my blog for more info re what these anti-LGBT ‘Christian’ hypocrites are REALLY up to:
HOW GAYS ARE BEING USED TO CREATE A THEOCRACY
http://howgaysarebeingusedtocreateatheocracy.blogspot.com/2011/05/how-gays-are-being-used-to-create.html
Comment posted May 30, 2011 @ 12:47 pm
Stop trying to make rational arguments with the “faith based” ignoramuses of the world. Arguing with such stupid poop gives it credibility….just call it insane anti-scientific tripe!
Comment posted May 30, 2011 @ 3:04 pm
Informing Minnesotans of the FRAUD that is being conducted and the CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT FRAUD by these and groups folks is worthwhile and necessary.
Without the discredited quackery these ideologues have NO BASIS to reasonably argue why some Minnesotans should be Constitutionally handicapped or to write into law this unfounded bigotry in our state constitution.
There are larger and equally nefarious forces at work here too, those who seek to “make disciples of all nations.”
Comment posted May 31, 2011 @ 6:28 am
Wendy is correct. However, the effectiveness of this approach by posting such information on this website (repeatedly or not) depends on the number of unique hits on each webpage as well as number of unique visitors to this website.
I observed that in East Central Minnesota, the local papers in hardcopy such as the Kanabec County Times, the Pine City Pioneer and Isanti County News have widespread circulation. However if one is to go to their websites, not all content is posted online nor is such content kept up to date. Additionally, the number of hits on each page is very, very low (often less than 50 or 100) in comparison to the number published on newsprint (in the tens of thousands). Finally, one cannot post a comment unless s/he has a paid subscription. Given this reality, I stopped “monitoring” those websites – and posting information and rebuttals as appropriate whereever possible. This is why like the AFLAC duck, I keep quacking about writing letters to the editor of these community newspapers.
We have the messages, but what good is that if we don’t get those messages out there?
*quaaaaack*
Comment posted June 3, 2011 @ 2:06 am
Wendy Leigh
Comment posted May 30, 2011 @ 3:04 pm
“…There are larger and equally nefarious forces at work here too, those who seek to “make disciples of all nations.”
Yup:
| The Social Transformation Conference & the 7M Movement: http://bit.ly/gdArvO via @addthis
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2011/3/30/114012/087
Summary: The New Apostolic Reformation’s drive to convert America into a witch-hunting, theocratic horror show–and they (via their proxies & cohorts in the GOP) are gaining increasing control in a number of States. (BTW, the article includes a link to the folks at Truth Wins Out who also acknowledge this menace.)
–
| If Almost 1/4 of US States Can Now Fund Creationism…: http://bit.ly/ijqdhR via @addthis
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2011/5/25/124843/619
Summary: These kids will be voting in a decade or so = a likely U.S. theocracy.
–
The Religious Right uniting with Religious Renegades, Part 1: http://bit.ly/m8g6qn via @addthis
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/mwest/110518
Summary: The GOP is in bed with the NAR in spite of its heresies.
Comment posted June 4, 2011 @ 5:07 pm
*quaaaack*
I am still tasting the bile at Rod Bergengren’s anti-LGBT letter just published at
http://isanticountynews.com/2011/06/01/i-now-pronounce-you/
Again, most of the ICN readers are not going to the website to read the angry comments rebutting this letter. That’s why it is soooooo important to write letters that get published in local newspapers! Get on with this already!
*quaaaack*
Comment posted June 4, 2011 @ 9:06 pm
Hi Lane.
Thanks for the link to Rod Bergengren’s wordy, ‘the homosexual’-laden and Conservapedia-supported ‘treatise’.
“Your comment is awaiting moderation.”
Comment posted June 5, 2011 @ 12:14 am
My comment criticizing Isanti County News for publishing Mr. Bergengren’s letter apparently was approved.
A few years ago, the Kanabec County Times in Mora published a letter that was so outrageous that I just had to send a very stern email to the editor reminding him of his responsibility to the community, suggesting that no more such letters be published – especially from that woman. I intended that email for his eyes only so I was surprised, somewhat chagrined to see it published anyway. But that is okay because since then, no more such letters have been published in KCT – at least that I’m aware of.
*quaaaack*
Pingback posted October 4, 2011 @ 10:00 am
[...] Minnesota Family Council took feverishness progressing this year when it reprinted most of Magnuson’s work on a website. After fortifying a information that indicted gays and lesbians of enchanting in bestiality, incest [...]
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
