One of the National Organization for Marriage’s (NOM) closest allies is taking aim at gay-straight alliances, arguing that students should treat the groups in the same way that they would treat the Ku Klux Klan or Nazi skinhead groups.

Robert Gagnon – a theologian with a long history of extreme anti-gay rhetoric -- has been a NOM ally since he began presenting at the organization’s annual student summer “It Takes A Family” (ITAF) conference in 2009, warning students that homosexuality is a sin akin to polygamy and incest.

Since last year, Gagnon has criticized Alan Chambers – head of the “ex-gay” group Exodus International – for suggesting that homosexuality wasn’t incompatible with Christianity.

In a February 19 post on his Facebook page, Gagnon criticized Chambers for encouraging Christian students to attend gay-straight alliance meetings in their schools “not to speak but to serve and listen and to offer to help, finding common ground.” Gagnon compared the groups to the Ku Klux Klan and Nazi skinheads, writing:

GAGNON: More ridiculousness by Alan Chambers of Exodus (will it ever end?): Christian young people should respond to a "gay-straight alliance" in public school by going to such meetings "not to speak but to serve and listen and to offer to help, finding common ground." There is no "speaking the truth in love" here (Eph 4:15). So if there is a "polyamory appreciation" group or "prostitutes for Christ" group or Ku Klux Klan / Nazi Skinhead group of "women abusers advocacy society" at a public school, Christian students should go to such meetings, not speak, but serve and find common ground? How can sane evangelical Christians support any longer any organization led by Alan Chambers? The man has become as "useful" to homosexualist advocacy as naive Western leftists of the 1920s to 1950s who extolled the virtues of Leninist and Stalinist Russia were useful to these dictatorial regimes. 

Despite his comments, Gagnon is already slated to speak at NOM’s 2013 ITAF conference.

Previously:

NOM Invites “Gays Are Worthy Of Death” Speaker To Student Summer Conference… Again

ITAF Speaker Robert Gagnon: Homosexuality Has "Disproportionately High Rates Of Measurable Harm," An "Unnatural Component To It"

Meet Robert Gagnon, The Anti-Gay Professor Speaking At NOM’s ITAF Conference

This week, Equality Matters breaks down the mainstream media’s focus on pedophilia when covering the Boy Scouts and NOM’s bizarre horror story about employment non-discrimination measures:

iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/equality-matters/id429665764

RSS: http://equalitymatters.org/rss/m3.rss

To listen to last week’s podcast, click here.

National Organization for Marriage (NOM) spokesperson Jennifer Morse recently railed against laws protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination in the workplace, falsely claiming that such measures would allow gay employees to manipulate their employers into listening to the “gay lobby.”

During the January 29 edition of Lutheran Public Radio’s Issues, Etc., Morse was asked why many of the Boy Scouts’ corporate donors were considering pulling funding for the organization over its ban on gay members.

Morse’s theory? They’ve been taken over by gay employees because of non-discrimination laws:

MORSE: Once a person is in the workplace, then they use their position of authority to steer the whole organization towards the larger objectives of the gay lobby which is not limited to making their company and their employer as successful as possible in the marketplace. You know? They’ve got other objectives that they’re working towards and they’re using their positions of authority inside companies to do that. And I think that’s the pattern, and I think that’s, in a sense, the story, for people to see that. And of course for an employer to say “well, gosh, I don’t want you to work for me anymore because the objectives of the gay lobby are not my objectives and you’re taking up a lot of corporate time pressuring us internally to steer us towards the gay lobby, and that doesn’t really do anything for me, and so I want to fire you because of that or I don’t want to promote you because of that because I don’t think you’re really working hand in glove with the overall objectives of this company,” I think they’d have a hard time firing somebody on that basis because of the anti-discrimination law. Or certainly it would be tricky to fire somebody. So I think people need to kind of understand that there’s more at stake than anti-discrimination policy. That those kinds of statutes, those kinds of laws, that kind of case law and so on, it seems like it’s innocent enough, actually carries with it, in its wake, more than people may realize. [emphasis added]

Morse has a history of conjuring comically inaccurate “policy analysis,” so it’s no surprise that her understanding of non-discrimination laws has no basis in reality.

Employment non-discrimination laws protect employees from being treated unfairly due to their real or perceived sexual orientation. They don’t give employees carte blanche to push political agendas – gay or otherwise – on their employers, especially if doing so wastes “a lot of corporate time.”

This isn’t the first time a NOM spokesperson has strayed away from their “protect marriage” talking points to attack non-discrimination efforts that would protect gays and lesbians. The organization has praised Exxon-Mobil for its decision to reject a non-discrimination policy, claiming that the company had somehow supported “pro-marriage values” by doing so.

NOM’s Cultural Director Thomas Peters has urged supporters to vote against an ordinance in Alaska that would have protected LGBT people from discrimination in employment, financial practices, housing, and other businesses.

And NOM co-founder Maggie Gallagher has written in opposition to employment non-discrimination measures, arguing:

I oppose extending anti-discrimination laws to gays for many reasons: a distaste for big government, fear of the job-shrinking side effects of more lawsuits, a sense of injustice that a small affluent group should be pressing for new economic protections. But of course, that’s not the whole story.

Let me be frank here. What I dislike about extending the civil rights model to gays is what such rhetoric implicitly does to people like me, who accept orthodox Christian, Muslim or Jewish teachings on the subject of sex.

If being gay is just like being black, then people like me, who consider homosexual acts a sin, are just plain bigots. [emphasis added]

Previously:

NOM's Morse: Kids Are Better Off With A Single Parent Than With Two Gay Parents

NOM Invites “Gays Are Worthy Of Death” Speaker To Student Summer Conference… Again

NOM’s Anti-Defamation Spokesman Promotes Column Claiming “Communist-Homosexualists” Have Infiltrated The Catholic Church

When the Boy Scouts announced in late January that it would be reviewing its ban on openly gay members, it should have sparked a national conversation about discrimination against LGBT youth. Instead, mainstream media outlets allowed their coverage to be hijacked by anti-gay conservatives fear mongering that gay scout leaders might sexually abuse young boys.

In the week following the Boy Scouts’ announcement that it would be reviewing its ban on gay members, cable news coverage of the story repeatedly forwarded the claim that allowing gay scout leaders would increase the likelihood of child sexual abuse. According to an Equality Matters report, over half of Fox News’ and CNN’s segments about the story included references to pedophilia:

The belief that gay men are more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexual men is one of the oldest and most damaging anti-gay smears in American politics. Despite being debunked by the American Psychological Association (APA) and a wide variety of child welfare experts, right-wing groups like the Family Research Council (FRC) continue to peddle the myth to mainstream media outlets, often citing a mountain of junk science in the process.

Unfortunately, some cable news networks took the bait. Fox News repeatedly raised the specter of sexual misconduct while covering the story:

CNN, on the other hand, opted instead to air segment after segment of hosts butting heads with anti-gay guests like FRC president Tony Perkins or Southern Baptist Convention spokesman Richard Land – both who, unsurprisingly, forcefully defended the “gays are pedophiles” myth:

These segments were typically devoid of credible commentary – only one CNN segment actually featured experts on child welfare – and occasionally devolved into “he said, she said” arguments between CNN’s hosts and their discredited anti-gay guests.

In both cases, the networks allowed the debate about the Boy Scouts’ ban to be co-opted by anti-gay zealots who were able to plant seeds of fear and anxiety in the minds of viewers. Instead of discussing the real, damaging effects of discriminating against young gay scouts, networks wasted their time rehashing an argument that hasn’t been taken seriously by child welfare experts in years.

With the Boy Scouts’ decision to postpone reviewing its gay ban until May, cable news outlets have a chance to decide how they’ll cover the story once it makes national headlines again. They should resist the urge to follow groups like FRC down the anti-gay rabbit hole and instead focus their coverage on the real victims of the current policy.

To see the full Equality Matters report, click here.

This week, Equality Matters looks into CNN’s willingness to give airtime to the “gays are pedophiles” myth and the Family Research Council’s (FRC) recycled arguments against lifting the Boy Scouts’ ban on gay members:

iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/equality-matters/id429665764

RSS: http://equalitymatters.org/rss/m3.rss

To listen to last week’s podcast, click here.

The Family Research Council (FRC) has been one of the leading voices in the media condemning the effort to repeal the Boy Scouts’ ban on openly gay members. FRC’s talking points, however, are the same ones the organization used to lobby against the repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy – all of which turned out to be completely baseless.

Since news broke that the Boy Scouts would be reconsidering their ban on openly gay members, FRC has been making the rounds on mainstream media outlets warning that lifting the ban would heighten incidences of sexual abuse and undermine the organization’s retention.

If FRC’s talking points sound familiar, it’s because they’re carbon copies of the (thoroughly disproven) arguments the group used while lobbying against the repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay service members.

“Gays Will Increase The Rate Of Sexual Assault”

FRC on the Boy Scouts’ ban:

So what exactly is the incentive?... Is it safety? Because unless something changed in the last seven months, the Scouts are still dealing with the fallout of more than 2,000 cases of child molestation with the current policy in place! Can they honestly tell parents that entrusting little boys to men with same-sex attractions is somehow going to reduce the incidence of child sexual abuse?

FRC on DADT repeal:

The military already has a serious problem with sexual assault by homosexuals. If the current law against homosexuality in the military is overturned, the problem of same-sex sexual assault in the military is sure to increase.

“Gays Will Undermine Troop/Unit Cohesion”

FRC on the Boy Scouts’ ban:

This is not just about scout leaders. It would be about scouts that are attracted to people of the same-sex. Is that right, for Boy Scouts who are out wanting to learn the basic tenets of scouting to have to worry about whether or not the boy in the tent with them is attracted to them? Is that right?

FRC on DADT repeal:

Sexual attraction among members of the same sex — living, exercising, fighting and training alongside one another in the closest of quarters — could devastate morale, foster heightened interpersonal tension and lead to division among those who, more than virtually any other group in society, need to act as one.

“Gays Will Undermine Recruitment/Retention”

FRC on the Boy Scouts’ ban:

While some people may disagree with the view that values, ethics, or morals require abstinence from homosexual conduct, it is hardly unusual that parents and leaders of Boy Scouts believe this. In fact, it remains a majority viewpoint even in the general public… Parents, Scouts, and leaders are likely to abandon the Boy Scouts of America in droves if the organization abandons them.

FRC on DADT repeal:

Repeal the homosexual ban, and there will be some candidates, with the encouragement of significant others like parents, who will remove themselves from the military’s pool of eligible candidates.  Conversely, there is no evidence qualified homosexuals – who make up barely two percent of the American public – will flood into the military to make up any shortfall. 

In the case of DADT, not a single one of FRC’s doomsday predictions turned out to be anything more than baseless fear mongering – motivated by the group’s extreme anti-gay animus. FRC demonstrated that, when it comes to serious policy analysis, it doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously.

So what’s changed?

Now that the Boy Scouts’ final decision on its gay ban has been postponed until May, it’s likely that media outlets will get another opportunity to cover the controversy. When they do, they should ask how groups like FRC have any credibility when it comes to predicting the consequences of repealing the ban.

Previously:

CNN Devotes Three Segments In Three Days To Debating The “Gays Are Pedophiles” Myth

Fox Invites Tony Perkins To Peddle “Gays Are Pedophiles” Myth Over Boy Scouts Ban

News Outlets Rely On Tony Perkins For Anti-Gay Boy Scouts Commentary

CNN invited Family Research Council (FRC) president Tony Perkins on their network to discuss the Boy Scouts’ ban on openly gay members, making it the third time in three days that the network has hosted a guest who claims gay men are more likely to sexually abuse children than straight men.

During the February 6 edition of CNN’s Starting Point, CNN host Soledad O’Brien grilled Perkins over his view that allowing gay members into the Boy Scouts might expose young boys to sexual abuse and assault:

O’BRIEN: Are you saying that someone who is gay is a pedophile, sir?

PERKINS: No, I never said that. You said that. I didn’t.

O’BRIEN: No, I’m asking a question because you’re saying that you would be worried about –

PERKINS: They are trying to create an environment that is protective of the children. This doesn’t make it more protective. There is a disproportionate number of male on boy — when we get into pedophilia, it’s male on boy, there’s a higher incident rate of that. But we’ve never said all homosexuals are pedophiles or all pedophiles are homosexuals.

Perkins’ appearance was the second time an FRC spokesperson had made an appearance on CNN this week. On February 4, FRC Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg appeared on CNN Newsroom where he sparred with host Carol Costello over the same “gays are pedophiles” talking point:

COSTELLO: [D]o you really think that a gay scout leader is going to like, become a gay scout leader to push a gay agenda? Seriously?

SPRIGG: Well, the mere fact that someone openly identifies themselves as homosexual means that they are modeling for boys the acceptability of homosexual conduct. And parents who do not agree with that view have a right to protect their children from that. They have a right to protect their children just from being exposed to the topic prematurely. And they have a right to protect their children from the potential risk of child sexual abuse at the hands of men who might be attracted to other males.  

COSTELLO: Well, I’ll just say that the American Psychological Association has studied the issue that you just mentioned. Homosexuals are not any more likely to molest kids than straight men.

SPRIGG: Well, I think –

COSTELLO: And plus you’re condemning every single homosexual in the country as being a possible pedophile and that’s not fair.

And during the February 5 edition of CNN’s Starting Point, Richard Land – president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission – similarly warned that permitting gay scout leaders would result in “boys and men who are going to end up in relationships that are going to be tragic.”

In all three segments, CNN’s hosts debunked the claims of their anti-gay guests, pointing out that experts have rejected the claim that gay men are more likely to engage in pedophilia than straight men.

Still, it’s worth asking why CNN felt the need to continuously provide a national platform for this kind of extreme anti-gay commentary. It’s important to challenge right-wing talking points when they bubble up into the mainstream media, but at some point, inviting people like Perkins and Sprigg to continue peddling their anti-gay horror stories in front of a national audience starts doing more harm than good.

As the Columbia Journalism Review’s Jennifer Vanasco wrote :

I don’t think it’s bad for reporters to bring up pedophilia when writing about gay men and the Boy Scouts if parents bring it up on their own as a worry. But it is important to recognize that being concerned about gay men leading children in the scouts because of prospective pedophilia is an unfounded fear.

By repeatedly hosting notoriously anti-gay guests, CNN may have allowed their discussion of the Boy Scouts’ anti-gay policy to be hijacked by those hoping to frame the debate around the baseless “gays are pedophiles” myth.

Previously:

On CNN, NRO's Ed Whelan Defends Boy Scouts' Anti-Gay Ban

CNN's Carol Costello Grills Peter Sprigg Over Boy Scouts' Gay Ban

Fox Invites Tony Perkins To Peddle “Gays Are Pedophiles” Myth Over Boy Scouts Ban

Family Research Council (FRC) president Tony Perkins appeared on Fox News to warn that lifting the Boy Scouts’ ban on gay members would expose scouts to higher rates of sexual abuse and molestation, after a week of making the rounds on mainstream media outlets to provide anti-gay commentary in the debate.

During the January 3 edition of Fox News’ America’s News HQ, Perkins repeated the widely debunked myth that allowing gay men to participate in the Boy Scouts would raise the risk of child sexual abuse in an interview with host Shannon Bream:

BREAM: How do you respond to those who say that the suggestion that somehow a gay scout master would be a threat to a child suggests that they would act inappropriately simply because of their sexual orientation, and they find that insulting?

PERKINS: Yeah, that’s a good question, Shannon. Although there is a higher incidence of men who self-identify as homosexual who abuse children, not every homosexual is attracted to children. We've never said that, no one has ever said that. But let’s be real. It doesn't pass the parent test. As a parent of three daughters, I wouldn't want my neighbor, who is a heterosexual, a man, camping out with my girls. So why would I want a man who is attracted to men camping out with my boys? […]

BREAM: The Boston Globe had an editorial that said basically gay soldiers now serve openly in our armed forces, gay marriage is legal in a number of states. They say Eagle Scouts have been returning their badges in protest, that the country has changed and it’s time for the Boy Scouts to change with that.

PERKINS: Well, first off, we're not talking about grown men, we're talking about children who are impressionable and cannot make informed decisions. That's why we treat them as children. And they’re going to be in an environment where they are going to be secluded from their parents in many cases. And it's not just about scout leaders, it's about other scouts. Look, last fall the Boy Scouts were forced to release about 15,000 pages from what they call their “Perversion Files.” They had identified between the 1960s and the 1990s, about 1900 individuals who preyed upon children. Now that was with the policy they had in place. They still had a problem and paid out millions of dollars. [emphasis added]

Perkins shied away from explicitly linking homosexuality to pedophilia in his statements to mainstream media outlets in the week before this Fox News appearance, but he may have felt more comfortable promoting the smear on Fox, where the “gays as pedophiles” narrative is far from unfamiliar. Fox’s Bream failed to push back and point out that every major medical organization has rejected the damaging myth that gay men are more likely to engage in pedophilia than straight men.

In a recent column for the Columbia Journalism Review, Jennifer Vanasco chastised outlets like Fox for failing to provide context while giving airtime to the pedophilia horror stories surrounding the Boy Scouts, writing:

[T]his is not a safety issue. It’s about prejudice. When people say that they are worried about putting gay men in leadership positions because children might be harmed by pedophilia, what they are really saying is that gay men make them uncomfortable, and they believe gay men to be perverted and deviant. Happily, most Americans no longer think this way, but the media still needs to pierce the illusions of those who do. When something is wrong, we need to explicitly say so.

I don’t think it’s bad for reporters to bring up pedophilia when writing about gay men and the Boy Scouts if parents bring it up on their own as a worry. But it is important to recognize that being concerned about gay men leading children in the scouts because of prospective pedophilia is an unfounded fear. Instead of further scaring our readers, we should inform them — with facts. [emphasis added]

Previously:

News Outlets Rely On Tony Perkins For Anti-Gay Boy Scouts Commentary

Fox News Adopts Pedophilia Narrative While Covering Boy Scouts' Gay Ban

Fox's MacCallum On Boy Scouts: "I Don't Think That Being Gay Has Anything To Do With Being A Pedophile"

The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has started to announce the lineup of speakers for its annual “It Takes A Family” (ITAF) summer conference, and the roster already includes a theologian who’s written that gay people are “worthy of death.”

NOM’s Ruth Institute announced this week that Robert Gagnon, an associate professor of the New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, would be speaking at the 2013 ITAF conference:

Gagnon has been a speaker at every ITAF since the conference’s inception in 2009. The weekend-long event is allegedly aimed at preparing college students to defend “natural marriage” on their campuses by exposing them to a variety of prominent anti-gay speakers and activists.

Last year, an undercover Equality Matters investigation revealed that attendees at NOM’s ITAF conference were being exposed to anti-gay misinformation and propaganda. Gagnon was one of the chief purveyors of homophobic commentary, leading several talks on why Jesus would have condemned homosexuality.

NOM’s ITAF conference also sold Gagnon’s book, “The Bible And Homosexual Practice,” in which Gagnon states that gay people are “worthy of death”:

Participation in same-sex intercourse is partly its own payback for turning away from the one true God, since Paul regards such behavior as itself unclean, a dishonoring of one's own body, and a self-shaming act of obscene indecency. At the same time, it is evidence of God's future judgment, since the participants have no excuse for not knowing that those who do such things are worthy of death. [Page 337, emphasis added]

Gagnon’s career of anti-LGBT extremism doesn’t end with condemning gay people to death – he’s also:

• Called homosexuality “repulsively contrary to nature”
• Advocated for treating homosexuality like a mental disorder
• Linked homosexuality to pedophilia
• Advocated strongly for the practice of “ex-gay” therapy

His history of extreme anti-gay comments has not disqualified him from being a part of the Ruth Institute’s “Circle of Experts.” And, unfortunately, students attending NOM’s ITAF conference this summer will witness his expertise first hand.

Previously:

NOM Scrambles To Distance Itself From “Worthy Of Death” Rhetoric

EXCLUSIVE: Undercover At NOM's Anti-Gay Student Conference

Meet Robert Gagnon, The Anti-Gay Professor Speaking At NOM’s ITAF Conference

This week, Equality Matters tells the truth about Chick-fil-A's anti-gay donations and shines a spotlight on Fox's tainted coverage of the Boy Scouts' ban on gay members:

iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/equality-matters/id429665764

RSS: http://equalitymatters.org/rss/m3.rss

To listen to last week’s podcast, click here.

Major news outlets turned to Family Research Council (FRC) president Tony Perkins for commentary on the Boy Scouts’ decision to revise its ban on openly gay members, ignoring the hate group leader’s history of trying to link homosexuality to pedophilia.

In the week since The Boy Scouts of America announced a review of the organization’s ban on openly gay members, major news outlets have turned to Perkins to provide a voice in opposition to the move. The New York Times, LA Times, CNN, and Fox News all included portions of Perkins’ statement on the controversy in their reports:

“The Boy Scouts of America board would be making a serious mistake to bow to the strong-arm tactics of LGBT activists and open the organization to homosexuality. What has changed in terms of the Boy Scouts' concern for the well-being of the boys under their care? Or is this not about the well-being of the Scouts, but the funding for the organization?

"The Boy Scouts has for decades been a force for moral integrity and leadership in the United States. Sadly, their principled stances have marked them as a target for harassment by homosexual activists and corporations such as UPS which are working to pressure the Boy Scouts into abandoning their historic values.

"The mission of the Boy Scouts is 'to instill values in young people' and 'prepare them to make ethical choices,' and the Scout's oath includes a pledge 'to do my duty to God' and keep himself 'morally straight.' It is entirely reasonable and not at all unusual for those passages to be interpreted as requiring abstinence from homosexual conduct.

"If the board capitulates to the bullying of homosexual activists, the Boy Scouts' legacy of producing great leaders will become yet another casualty of moral compromise. The Boy Scouts should stand firm in their timeless values and respect the right of parents to discuss these sexual topics with their children," concluded Perkins. [emphasis added]

As usual, Perkins’ statement to mainstream media outlets is notably more restrained than the kind of hateful rhetoric he uses in the comfort of his own anti-gay circles.

In the January 29 edition of FRC’s Washington Update, Perkins explained the real reason behind his support for the Boy Scouts’ gay ban – he thinks gay Scout Leaders are going to molest their children:

So what exactly is the incentive?... Is it safety? Because unless something changed in the last seven months, the Scouts are still dealing with the fallout of more than 2,000 cases of child molestation with the current policy in place! Can they honestly tell parents that entrusting little boys to men with same-sex attractions is somehow going to reduce the incidence of child sexual abuse?

Perkins’ extreme position hasn't exactly been a secret. FRC earned its “hate group” label from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) largely because it continues to promote the myth that gay men are more likely to be child molesters than straight men. Despite being rejected by every major medical expert who has studied the issue, the “gays are pedophiles” talking point has been at the heart of FRC’s support for the Boy Scouts’ anti-gay ban.

Perkins clearly prefers to tone down his rhetoric when talking directly to mainstream media outlets, but it doesn’t change the fact that his position is based on one of the most damaging smears in anti-gay politics. So why are news outlets like CNN and The New York Times giving his comments a national spotlight?

Previously:

Fox's Don Imus: Boy Scouts' Gay Ban Is "The Worst Kind Of Bigotry"

Fox News Adopts Pedophilia Narrative While Covering Boy Scouts' Gay Ban

Fox's MacCallum On Boy Scouts: "I Don't Think That Being Gay Has Anything To Do With Being A Pedophile"

Despite the objection of one of its prime time hosts, Fox News’ coverage of the Boy Scouts’ review of its policy banning gay scouts and scout leaders has been tainted by the right-wing myth that gay men are predators looking to sexually abuse young boys.

During the January 29 edition of Fox Business Network’s Imus in the Morning, Don Imus asked Martha MacCallum – co-host of Fox’s America’s Newsroom – for her thoughts on the Boy Scouts’ decision to review their ban on openly gay scouts and scout leaders:

MACCALLUM: I think it’s a great organization and I think there’s room for everybody in that organization. I mean, I think you have to obviously be very careful with anybody who deals with children, whether you’re a male or a female in school or in any organization you have to be careful. But I don’t think that being gay has anything to do with being a pedophile.

MacCallum may not see a link between homosexuality and pedophilia, but her network certainly does. In two segments on the Boy Scouts’ policy later that day, Fox News employees uncritically brought up the fear that gay scout leaders might sexually abuse their own scouts.

From the January 29 edition of America’s Newsroom:

FOX REPORTER DOUG MCKELWAY: Others say, and I’m sure we’ll hear a lot of this in the coming days, a lot of people who don’t want their kids to go camping out deep in to the woods for days on end with guys who are avowed, open gays.

From the January 20 edition of Happening Now:

MCKELWAY: For families who’ve long seen the Boy Scouts as a refuge for traditional values, the proposed policy change is deeply disturbing.

[…]

CO-HOST JON SCOTT: But the Scouts already have prohibitions on Scout Master contact with scouts, right?

MCKELWAY: They do. And following literally hundreds of incidents of predation by pedophiles, the Scouts adopted a policy whereby one-on-one contact between adults and scouts is prohibited, separate accommodations for adults and scouts are required, and when camping, no youth is permitted to sleep in the tent of an adult other than his own parent or guardian.

The claim that allowing gay men to serve in the Boy Scouts would expose scouts to the threat of sexual abuse is a popular talking point for those on the fringe of anti-gay politics. It’s a horror story based on the myth that gay men are more likely to molest children than heterosexual men – a smear that’s been flatly rejected and condemned by medical experts.

Fox’s adoption of the pedophilia frame while discussing the Boy Scouts’ policy revision gives undue credibility to one of the most damaging anti-gay myths in American politics. It’s also not the first time the network has showed a willingness to entertain the homosexuality-pedophilia link.  Fox’s Bill O’Reilly has openly defended the junk science behind the smear and the network has repeatedly promoted the myth that accepting homosexuality inevitably leads to accepting pedophilia.  Last June, Fox’s “medical expert” Keith Ablow cited a widely debunked study to suggest that the children of same-sex couples are more likely to be molested.

Previously:

Fox's MacCallum On Boy Scouts: "I Don't Think That Being Gay Has Anything To Do With Being A Pedophile"

Has Fox News Evolved On Marriage Equality, Too?

LGBT Group Petitions Fox News To Drop Its Transphobic Coverage

Mainstream media outlets are echoing a report that the fast food giant Chick-fil-A has allegedly ceased its donations to anti-gay organizations and causes. In reality, the majority of the company's anti-gay donations remain unchanged.

In a January 28 Huffington Post article, Campus Pride executive director Shane Windmeyer reported that - according to the 2011 IRS 990 tax form he had seen - Chick-fil-A had ceased its practice of donating millions of dollars to anti-gay groups through its charitable arm, the WinShape Foundation. According to Windmeyer:

This past week Chick-fil-A shared with me the 2011 IRS Form 990, filed in November for the WinShape Foundation, along with 2012 financials. The IRS has not released the 990 to the public yet, but the financials affirm Chick-fil-A's values a year prior to the controversy this past July... The funding reflects Chick-fil-A's promised commitment not to engage in "political or social debates," and the most divisive, anti-LGBT groups are no longer listed.

Mainstream news outlets quickly picked up on the story, including CNN, ABC, and the LA Times. On January 29, CNN reported that "Chick-fil-A has stopped donating money to anti-gay organizations":

But even if Windmeyer's claim that Chick-fil-A has stopped funding the most extreme anti-gay groups is true, the company would only have reduced its anti-gay donations by less than one percent.

As Equality Matters reported last year, Chick-fil-A donated $1.9 million to anti-gay groups in 2010 alone through WinShape Foundation. The majority of that money went to groups like the Marriage & Family Foundation, the Fellowship Of Christian Athletes, and the National Christian Foundation.

• Marriage & Family Foundation: $1,188,380
• Fellowship Of Christian Athletes: $480,000
• National Christian Foundation: $247,500
• New Mexico Christian Foundation: $54,000 
• Exodus International: $1,000
• Family Research Council: $1,000
• Georgia Family Council: $2,500

Windmeyer essentially admitted that Chick-fil-A would continue giving money to those groups in an interview with The Advocate:

Windmeyer clarified in an interview with The Advocate that when he saw IRS tax forms last week, provided to him by Chick-fil-A officials, that several of the groups identified by Equality Matters are still indeed receiving donations.

Those groups include the Marriage and Family Foundation, National Christian Foundation and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.

What Chick-fil-A was attempting to highlight by showing Windmeyer the tax documents from 2011 is that it had stopped giving to what it considers more activist groups such as Exodus International, which had practiced so-called "conversion therapy," and the Family Research Council, which is labeled by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a "hate group."

Chick-fil-A gave a total of $2,000 to Exodus International and Family Research Council in 2010, which accounts for less than one percent of its total anti-gay donations: 

As Think Progress' Zack Ford notes, the extremely minor reduction in Chick-fil-A's anti-gay donations does nothing to change the company's abysmal track record on LGBT issues:

Chick-fil-A is not ending the bulk of its anti-gay giving. Chick-fil-A is not implementing any LGBT-inclusive policies like nondiscrimination protections, of which it has none. And Dan Cathy is not apologizing for his vitriolic comments — in fact, he's making no public comments of his own whatsoever. In other words, the company is doing nothing to improve its atrocious record on LGBT issues. Cathy's opening mind for friendships with gay people is commendable, but does not justify Windmeyer's blessing of Chick-fil-A franchises on college campuses in the face of protests from LGBT student groups.

Previously:

Campus Pride's Windmeyer: Chick-fil-A Hasn't Stopped Its Anti-Gay Donations

Fox's Kilmeade: Chick-fil-A Supports "Traditional Marriage, You Know, Man And A Woman"

UPDATED: Chick-Fil-A Claims It Will Stop Donating To Anti-Gay Organizations

Fox News struggled to consistently cover President Obama’s endorsement of marriage equality during his second inaugural address, at times agreeing with his position while still looking for ways to criticize his comments.

On January 21, President Obama became the first president in U.S. history to mention gay rights during an inaugural address, stating:

We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths – that all of us are created equal – is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall…

It is now our generation’s task to carry on what those pioneers began.  For our journey is not complete until our wives, our mothers, and daughters can earn a living equal to their efforts.  Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law – for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well. [emphasis added]

Fox wasted no time in criticizing Obama’s speech, railing against the president’s “liberal agenda” and falsely accusing him of ignoring economic issues.

Yet, when it came to Obama’s support for marriage equality, the network shied away from the anti-gay talking points one might expect to hear on Fox.

During the January 21 edition of Fox’s The Five, for example, co-hosts Dana Perino and Eric Bolling admitted that they agreed with the president on same-sex marriage, opting instead to half-heartedly criticize Obama for changing his position on the issue:

PERINO: I like that. I agree with it. What I think is strange is that he didn’t talk about that in 2008. Now maybe because he had the evolution of his thinking and he had the announcement in June and now he’s able to say it – I mean I think that’s good and fine. That’s why I keep going back to the 2008 speech versus this 2012 speech is just so different.

BOLLING: Yeah. You’re 100 percent right, Dana. Remember, about a year ago he evolved to seeing things this way on gay rights. Look, we’re all in agreement. We agree. I don’t think there’s anyone here that disagrees with anything President Obama said on that issue. However, does it really need to be in the inaugural address? [emphasis added]

The Five returned to the topic of marriage equality the next night when Bob Beckel accused his co-hosts of being “out of the mainstream” on the issue of same-sex marriage. Greg Gutfeld corrected him, saying, “I was for gay marriage before Obama!” and Perino denied that the Republican party was opposed to marriage equality, asking “who talks about gay marriage anymore?”:

Even Fox & Friends co-anchor Brian Kilmeade shied away from anti-gay talking points when discussing the president’s position on gay marriage, instead arguing that Obama wouldn’t have made his comments had Vice President Joe Biden not “ram rod[ed] him into it on a Sunday comment that popped up.” 

Fox’s muted criticism of Obama’s support for marriage equality is a far cry from how the network has typically dealt with the issue of same-sex marriage. Less than a year ago, Fox Nation described Obama’s support for marriage equality as a declaration of “WAR ON MARRIAGE.” And Fox’s Bill O’Reilly has a long history of warning that same-sex marriage would lead to marriage with ducks, turtles, and dolphins.

The network’s garbled response to Obama’s second inaugural address seems to be more evidence of Fox’s uncomfortable balancing act in covering LGBT issues.

The network has largely moved past its days of attacking same-sex marriage, preferring instead to sweep major LGBT victories under the journalistic rug. At the same time, the network continues to appease its anti-gay viewers by offering contrived criticisms of Obama’s stance on gay rights and fear mongering about homosexual indoctrination in schools.

Previously:

WND Columnist: Obama Praised “Infamous Perverts” By Citing Stonewall In His Inaugural Speech

Pat Buchanan On Fox: Stonewall Riot Was Just A "Barroom Brawl"

Weekly Standard's Kristol Criticizes Obama For Stonewall Mention In Inaugural Address

This week, Equality Matters looks at the right’s reaction to President Obama’s second inaugural address, including his reference to the historic Stonewall riot:

iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/equality-matters/id429665764

RSS: http://equalitymatters.org/rss/m3.rss

To listen to last week’s podcast, click here.

The spokesman for the National Organization for Marriage’s (NOM) anti-defamation program is touting a column that accuses “Communist-homosexualist infiltrators” and “lesbian pagan witch nuns” of trying to change the traditions of the Catholic Church.

Damian Goddard – spokesman for NOM’s failed Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance – took to Twitter on January 22 to promote a series of articles written by Ann Barnhardt, a birther and right-wing conspiracy theorist who gained notoriety through her over-the-top YouTube videos:

Barnhardt’s three-part diatribe, “Why Priests Must Be Men,” is a scathing critique of the Catholic Church’s alleged deviation from its traditional rites, such as the practice of having a priest resting his elbows on the altar during consecration. Throughout her writing, Barnhardt repeatedly blames “Communist-homosexualist infiltrators” for altering the church’s practices:

I was planning for this to be the last essay I ever wrote, and since we're into "any day now" territory, and since I've had just about enough of these lesbian pagan witch nuns and their "female ordination" horse diarrhea, I'm dropping the bomb. And yes, it's a bomb. I've delayed on writing this particular essay because it is really, really hardcore. Very, very advanced stuff. […]

The rubric of the elbows-down posture was intentionally stripped from the Mass by the Communist-homosexualist infiltrators in the 1960's because they hated Our Lord, His Church, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, His Real Presence in the Eucharist, and specifically because of the connection to the marital act. The infiltrators had as a goal the total destruction of sexual morality, because that is the fastest and surest way to demoralize and then destroy a culture. The Communist-homosexualist infiltrators of the Church wanted to convince everyone that sex was no big deal, and if sex is no big deal, then it really can't be connected to the concept of "sin" , and thus DO WHAT YOU WANT! Contracept! Sleep around! Be a sodomite! Abuse yourself! Hey, it's not like what you do in private behind closed doors actually matters, right? Wrong. Our entire civilization is going to crash and burn first and foremost because of what people have done "in private behind closed doors" , namely making a complete mockery of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

[…]

If you try to explain this to Father Jazzhands, good luck. You will get a very odd look, and then be dismissed. He doesn't want to hear anything about this, because it messes with his narcissistic Communist-homosexualist neo-pagan worldview. Same with the Superfun Rockband Church™ denizens and their for-profit macchiato-sipping insipidity. And the lesbian pagan witch nuns? Those sick broads are so far gone, they aren't even in the same galactic cluster. The vast majority of them self-excommunicated themselves decades and decades ago. I just wish that Rome would make it official.

For a NOM anti-defamation spokesperson, Goddard seems to have no problem promoting Barnhardt’s gratuitous name-calling of LGBT people, including LGBT people of faith. Then again, Goddard himself hasn’t shied away from defaming those he disagrees with, including President Obama, whom he has previously called a “terrorist.”

Previously:

NOM’s Anti-Defamation Spokesman Doubles Down On Calling Obama A “Terrorist”

Looking Back At NOM's Failed Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance

He Doesn’t Even Go Here: Meet NOM’s New Anti-Defamation Alliance Spokesman

WorldNetDaily columnist John Lofton criticized President Obama for mentioning the 1969 Stonewall Inn riot – the event which many credit with birthing the modern gay rights movement – during his second inaugural address, inaccurately describing the rioters as “infamous perverts” and ignoring the widespread harassment of the LGBT community.

During his address, Obama referenced the historic Stonewall riot while recounting the country’s ongoing march towards equal treatment for marginalized groups, including women and African-Americans:

We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths – that all of us are created equal – is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall; just as it guided all those men and women, sung and unsung, who left footprints along this great Mall, to hear a preacher say that we cannot walk alone; to hear a King proclaim that our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on Earth. [emphasis added]

In a January 21 column for WorldNetDaily, Lofton criticized the president for citing the Stonewall riot, referring to it as “a group of sex perverts who rioted against police”:

Whatever else Mr. Obama’s address was it definitely was truly unique historically in that it is the first time – in an inaugural address – that a president has praised a group of sex perverts who rioted against police. The particular event I allude to here is a 1969 riot against cops at the “Stonewall Inn” in New York City. That is the “Stonewall” alluded to in the quote above.

So, what happened? Well, let’s start with the “Inn” itself and then move on what these “pioneers” did. A story in the liberal Denver Post (June 27, 1999) says this “Inn” was a place that operated “thanks to payoffs to the police and the Mafia.” A story in the liberal Los Angeles Times (June 26, 1996) refers to “Stonewall” as a place that was “a seedy, Mafia-controlled hangout for drag queens.”And a piece in the liberal Newsday newspaper (June 27, 1994) says it was the scene of “a revolt by people on the fringes of even the gay community … a sleazy Mafia bar [whose] patrons were the queerest, raggediest, grungiest of the gays.”

In his well-documented book “Stonewall” (Dutton, 1993), the pro-homosexual Martin Duberman tells how an epidemic of hepatitis among sodomite men was blamed on Stonewall because there was no running water behind the bar, and used glasses were simply run through stagnant vats of water, then re-used.[…]

When the police raided Stonewall about 1:20 a.m. on June 28, 1969, the bar was full of male whores and drugged and drunken “drag queens” (men wearing women’s clothes). A cop shoved one of the patrons, telling her (?) to keep moving. She (?) started swinging at the cop. […]

So, there you have it. This is what the “pioneers” of “Stonewall” did. This is the kind of thing Mr. Obama thinks “is now our generation’s task to carry on.”

But even Duberman – who Lofton cites to support the description of Stonewall rioters as “seedy” and deviant – disagrees with this account of the riot, and noted that Stonewall was his “bar of choice.” According to a January 22 NPR article:

"I liked the mix of people," [Duberman] said. "It was not filled, as some accounts have it, with drag queens and street hustlers — it was a nice mix of young and middle-aged, prosperous and not prosperous."

In reality, the Stonewall riot came in response to the long-time harassment of LGBT people by police officers in New York City. According to Duberman:

It was a time that every gay man Duberman knew in New York City would carry in his wallet the telephone number of the only two lawyers in the city "who could get you out of jail in case you were arrested by plainclothes police officers." […]

"Stonewall was probably the most popular gay male bar in New York in the late '60s," Duberman said. "It was one of the few, or maybe the only place where you could dance." […]

Bouncers at the door screened patrons, but they couldn't keep out police, who with some frequency would "raid" the bar, roust the patrons, and perhaps charge them with infractions ranging from loitering to specific regulations that at the time targeted gay men.

"They were using any excuse," Duberman said. "For example, you had to be wearing at least four pieces of 'gender-appropriate' garb."

Usually, he said, patrons would cower when the police would storm through, at times throwing customers against the wall, sometimes making arrests. […]

The night of [the riot on] June 28, 1969, was different.

When police raided the bar, and pushed customers outside, Duberman said, the men began to throw things back at the police — coins, bricks; eventually, a parking meter.

"It was really a howling mob, filled with the pent-up fury of years of oppression," he said. "It just all came out then for some reason. These things have a spontaneity to them that is never predictable."

The riot quickly became a symbol of gay pride, sparking the birth of gay rights organizations and prompting the first major Gay Pride marches in U.S. cities the following year.

In his column, Lofton ignores widespread anti-gay police harassment in order to depict the Stonewall rioters as deviant and unjustified. But Stonewall represents a major turning point in the fight for LGBT equality and rightly deserves to be seen alongside Selma and Seneca Falls as a birthplace of a modern civil rights struggle.

Previously:

Scam: WorldNetDaily Charging $29.99 To Send Anti-Gay Letters To Congress

WND's Kinsolving: Marylanders Will Vote Against Gay Marriage Because Of Syphilis, Pedophilia

Farah Blames Tolerance Of Homosexuality For Penn State Scandal

Following criticism over its recent coverage of transgender issues, Fox News is being petitioned to put an end to its long history of promoting misleading and defamatory representations of the transgender community.

Fox News came under fire after its Fox Nation website paired a January 13 article about transgender health insurance coverage with an image from the movie “Mrs. Doubtfire”:

The Fox Nation post sparked a petition from LGBT equality group Basic Rights Oregon, which called on Fox News to “end its transphobic content”:

Fox News: stop misrepresenting gay and transgender people with sensational and dehumanizing coverage. Trivializing transgender people's need for medically necessary health care ignores the position of the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, and countless other authorities on health care. We demand an apology and that Fox News end its transphobic content.

The transgender community has been a constant target of Fox News’ anti-LGBT commentary and misinformation over the past several years.

Mocking Transgender People

Fox Nation has a reputation for using inappropriate images and headlines to defame the transgender community. Long before it used Mrs. Doubtfire to depict transgender health problems, it used an image of a man in a wig to depict transgender people and implied that gender reassignment surgery caused a German politician to become a leftist:

Fox News reporter Todd Starnes has also mocked transgender women. In June, Starnes reacted to the news that a pro-transgender contestant had won the 2012 Miss USA pageant by mocking her on Twitter, writing:

In 2011, the crew of Fox & Friends poked fun at Chaz Bono, who had suffered a knee injury while performing on ABC’s Dancing with the Stars, joking that it was “the one part of Chaz that hasn’t been operated on.”

During a segment about a 7-year-old transgender girl in Colorado who had been barred from joining a local Girl Scouts troop, Fox’s Bill O’Reilly bluntly stated “so it’s a transvestite boy.”

And on January 11, both O’Reilly and Fox host Megyn Kelly mocked the appearance of a transgender prison inmate, joking that she was not attractive enough to be sexually assaulted in prison.

Attacking Transgender Protections

When Fox isn’t outright making fun of transgender people, it is busy criticizing efforts to combat transphobic intolerance and discrimination.

When the Girl Scouts of Colorado chose to accept a transgender girl into its ranks in 2011, FoxNews.com turned to some of the most transphobic pundits in America to comment on the story.

The network also invited hate group leader Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, to criticize the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency for providing hormone therapy to transgender detainees. Perkins referred to the program as “cross-dressing as healthcare.”

Fox also invited the founder of the notoriously anti-LGBT Liberty Counsel to condemn Macy’s after the company fired an employee for refusing to allow a transgender customer to use the fitting room of her choice.

The Fox & Friends crew has repeatedly mocked efforts to accommodate transgender people, including gender-neutral housing policies on college campuses and gender-neutral passports.

The crew also celebrated the International Transgender Day of Remembrance by scoffing at a transgender inmate in Massachusetts who requested that the state provide her with electrolysis treatment to complete her gender transition.

When a California school attempted to institute gender diversity lessons to promote tolerance and understanding, Fox ran three separate segments attacking the program in two days, with Perkins warning that the lessons might indoctrinate children into homosexuality.

Fox’s O’Reilly made a similar criticism of the television show, Glee, which featured a story line about a transgender teenager struggling with her gender identity. O’Reilly warned that the show would encourage “dopey kids” to experiment with homosexuality and potentially identify as transgender.

Fox’s harshest criticism, however, has been reserved for the supportive parents of transgender youth. Fox’s O’Reilly suggested that the parents of a transgender boy in Maryland might be guilty of “child abuse” for supporting their son.

Peddling Transphobic Pseudoscience

A large chunk of Fox’s anti-trans talking points originate with Dr. Keith Ablow, the network’s resident anti-LGBT pseudoscientist and a member for Fox News’ “Medical A-Team.” 

Ablow is most famous for igniting a controversy surrounding Chaz Bono’s appearance on Dancing with the Stars in 2011. Ablow warned that children watching the show might be [[come]] convinced to identify as transgender, a claim that was quickly discredited by medical experts. During several appearances on Fox, Ablow defended his column, comparing transgender people to people suffering from anorexia and heroin addiction. 

Despite being chastised by major medical organizations, Ablow used his FoxNews.com column to continue to assert that Americans are “Bono-ing… ourselves into oblivion.”

Ablow has also used his position as a medical “expert” to criticize a J. Crew catalogue featuring a picture of designer Jenna Lyons painting her son’s toenails pink. Ablow warned that such imagery might throw children into “psychological turmoil” and cause people to “grotesquely amputate body parts.”

When news broke of a lesbian couple in California deciding to support their transgender daughter, Ablow peddled the myth that having same-sex parents may have caused the child to become transgender. He also misinformed viewers about the consequences of allowing potentially transgender youth to use hormone blockers, claiming that the hormone treatments would be “tough to reverse.”

Previously:

Fox Nation Uses Image From “Mrs. Doubtfire” To Mock Transgender People

Fox Hosts Mock, Laugh At Transgender Inmate’s Appearance

Fox’s Starnes Blames “Heterophobic Bigots” For Anti-Gay Pastor’s Withdrawal From Obama Inauguration

This week, Equality Matters looks at a double whammy of Fox News’ transphobia, including a Bill O’Reilly prison rape joke and a derogatory Mrs. Doubtfire reference:

iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/equality-matters/id429665764

RSS: http://equalitymatters.org/rss/m3.rss

To listen to last week’s podcast, click here.

Fox Nation used a degrading image from the movie “Mrs. Doubtfire” to accompany a story about transgender healthcare, adding to the website’s long history of using offensive images to mock and demonize transgender people.

On January 13, Fox Nation posted a Newsmax.com article describing new regulations in California and Oregon that require insurance companies to cover medically necessary treatments for transgender patients if they also cover those treatments for patients who aren’t transgender.

The Fox Nation post featured a picture from the film “Mrs. Doubtfire,” ostensibly meant to poke fun at the serious problem of denying transgender people health insurance coverage for medical treatment:

In response, the LGBT equality group Basic Rights Oregon launched a petition to end Fox’s dehumanizing treatment of transgender people. By the morning of January 15, the image had been taken down and replaced with an image of a stethoscope:

Fox Nation has a history of using inflammatory and insulting images to degrade transgender people.

Previously:

Fox Hosts Mock, Laugh At Transgender Inmate’s Appearance

How Fox News Celebrated The Transgender Day Of Remembrance

Fox’s Ablow Supports Plastic Surgery, But Not For Transgender People