Family Research Council

Mike Pence: Obama Treats Country “Like a Dog”

With growing speculation over his presidential ambitions, Indiana Republican Mike Pence is taking the anti-Obama rhetoric into high-gear. Pence is the winner of the Family Research Council’s 2010 Values Voter Summit straw poll, and is seen as a favorite of the Religious Right. By stepping down from his position as House GOP Conference Chair because he couldn’t commit to serving a full term, Pence signaled that he could potentially run for governor of Indiana or President. In an interview with US News & World Report, Pence rejects the social issues “truce” proposed by Indiana’s governor, defends the prominent role of social conservatives in the Republican Party, and maintains that Obama wants Americans “simply to obey” like a dog:

You’re about to start hearing a lot about a conservative Republican Indiana congressman, Rep. Mike Pence. That’s because the Hoosier, considered a shoo-in to win the GOP gubernatorial nomination in 2012, is weighing a challenge to outgoing Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and about 10 others in the Republican presidential primaries. “We’ve gotten encouragement to run for governor in 2012,” says Pence, a former broadcaster. “We’ve also gotten more than a little bit of encouragement to consider running for president.”

While Pence will decide in the spring, the presidency currently has his attention. Not just because he thinks President Obama is stretching the traditional boundaries of the office and isn’t worthy. “The current administration is the most egregious example of excess,” he says, accusing Obama of treating the nation like “a dog whose duty is not to ask why ...but simply to obey.” As he considers a run, Pence also has become a student of the presidency and recently delivered thoughtful speeches on the office.

But he sees Ronald Reagan as “the last president in my lifetime to really model a traditional American presidency.”

While some may say Daniels is the better-positioned Hoosier for 2012, the social and fiscal conservative Pence senses an advantage. He won’t go along with Daniels’s push for a truce on social issues to let candidates focus on economic topics. “To those who say we should simply focus on fiscal issues,” Pence says, “I say you would not be able to print enough money in 1,000 years to pay for the government you would need if the traditional family collapses.”

Right Hails Health Care Ruling As Victory For the Constitution

When a federal judge declared the military's ban on openly gay soldiers to be unconstiutional, the Family Research Council blasted it as unconscionable judicial activism

This is the very definition of judicial activism -- when you are unable to achieve your desired policy goals through the democratic process, simply go to court and get a judge to decree that it must be so.

Today, a right-wing Bush-appointed judge declared that a key portion of the health care reform legislation was unconstitutional, and FRC hails him as a hero: 

"We applaud Judge Hudson for striking down the individual mandate recognizing that no part of the Constitution empowers the federal government to command American citizens to spend their own personal money to purchase health insurance.


"We call on the incoming Congress to quickly move to repeal this unconstitutional law in its entirely not merely to tinker with various provisions. Such tinkering would likely doom the legal challenges that are the best hope for dooming this fundamentally flawed law that is a high taxing, poorly thought out, and taxpayer funding of abortion monstrosity."

Amazing, isn't it, how when a judge rules in a way the Religious Right dislikes, it is unadulterated judicial activism but when a judge rules in their favor, it is a heroic stand for the Constitution?

Liberty Counsel:

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, said: “I applaud the ruling by Judge Hudson. There is absolutely no authority in the Constitution that would allow the federal government to force every person to purchase a particular kind of health insurance. Today marks the beginning of the end of this federal power grab. I am confident when the Supreme Court hears the cases of Liberty University and the Virginia Attorney General that the final nail will be driven into this monster’s heart.”

Concerned Women for America:

"It is good to see that we still have judges who take seriously the oath they took to operate within the powers granted to them by the Constitution. The court recognized that the federal government has no power to force Americans to buy a private good and penalize them if they do not. It is nonsensical for the federal government to argue that not engaging in an economic activity is, in fact, an 'economic activity' in the law.

"The individual mandate is just one part of the many troubling issues with ObamaCare. This ruling represents the first step in protecting families from an overreaching federal government that is out of control.

American Center for Law and Justice:

"We're very pleased the federal court reached a sound decision and concluded that the individual insurance mandate is an unconstitutional violation of the Commerce Clause," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "This decision guts ObamaCare and represents a decisive and significant victory for America against the largest power-grab by the federal government in U.S. history. The court correctly concluded that forcing someone to buy health insurance is not economic activity and that Congress does not have that authority under the Commerce Clause. We're already working on an amicus brief on behalf of members of Congress in support of the Commonwealth of Virginia as this case proceeds through the appeals process."

Traditional Values Coalition:

TVC warned last year that ObamaCare was unconstitutional and was a violation of our right to determine our own health care needs. We also warned that it was going to destroy private health insurance in this country and was designed to force all Americans into a government-run system. This socialist system would include death panels, taxpayer funded abortions, and the creation of dozens upon dozens of bureaucracies that would control our future health needs.

We have pushed for the repeal of ObamaCare since it was enacted – and have repeatedly detailed the numerous flaws in it. In fact, President Obama has admitted that what he really wants a "single payer" system – code for a government-run system. ObamaCare is carefully designed to destroy private health insurance in America.


Hudson has correctly determined that Congress has no constitutional authority to force Americans to purchase health insurance or face a financial penalty.

I hope this is the beginning of the end for ObamaCare. It was a bill that no one had read in its entirety and it was rammed through on Christmas Eve last year. It should be gutted and repealed.

Richard Viguerie:

"Congratulations to Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli for his hugely important first-round victory over Obamacare today in federal district court.

"Mr. Cuccinelli has been a true leader in the cause of freedom and constitutionally limited government. His win is also a victory for the entire Tea Party movement and constitutional conservatives everywhere.

"Now more than ever, Tea Partiers and constitutional conservatives must rally behind and support Ken Cuccinelli as he takes his case--and the Gadsden flag ('Don't tread on me') that decorates his office--through the appeals process.

FRC: Scientists Refuse to Accept Clear "Correlation Between Homosexuality and Pedophilia"

It is no secret that the Family Research Council is absolutely outraged by the fact that it was been designated an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and has been pushing back in every way it can think of and is even planning on launching an ad campaign to generate support for itself.  

So it came as no surprise that the topic would dominate FRC's most recent "Washington Watch Weekly" radio program to continuing that effort as FRC President Tony Perkins and Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg spent a good portion of the program attacking the SPLC over the designation.

Of course, Sprigg himself is on record saying he wants to see gays exported from the country and that gay behavior ought to be illegal, so it came as no surprise that in defending themselves from the charges that FRC is a hate group, Sprigg and Perkins reiterated many of the same bogus claims that earned them the distinction in the first place, claiming that science supports the right-wing views about homosexuality but that scientists are unwilling to accept those finding:

Perkins: [Repealing DADT] is kind of a crown jewel for the homosexuals really. If they can take over the military and force open homosexuality, very little stands in their way.

Sprigg: That's right. They've already succeeded in taking over, ideologically taking over, the liberal institutions of society - the academia, the news media, and the entertainment media. They want to take over the conservative institutions of society like the military so that there will be no opposition to them at all.

Perkins: So it's really an act of desperation. They've been on the defensive for slapping the label on the Family Research Council and there's some stuff coming out in the days ahead that is really going to push back and put them even more so on the defensive.

But let me zero in on some of the issues they bring up. As I stated earlier, it's all old stuff that's been out there for a long time, so it makes the timing of this very, very questionable. But one of the issues that seems to bother them the most, which I've had to debate now on a couple of TV programs, is the connection between - and this is what the social science, peer-reviewed data shows - a correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That seems to be a real problem for them.

Sprigg. Exactly. And yet it's important to spell out what we're saying and what we're not saying on that issue ...

Perkins: It's not what we're saying; it's what the social science professionals ... we take the date, we kind of break it down and communicate it to policy makers, but this is not research we've done.

Sprigg: Oh no, we've just surveyed the research that has been done. Although what's problematic is that a lot of time the researchers are unwilling to accept the logical conclusions of their own findings.

Take a Stand With FRC and Those Who Want Homosexuality Criminalized

The Religious Right has been uniformly outraged ever since the Southern Poverty Law Center updated its list of anti-gay hate groups to include the likes of the Family Research Council and the American Family Association.

And today Jeremy Hooper discovered that they intend to do something more than just incessantly complain about it, as FRC is poised to launch a "Start Debating, Stop Hating" campaign designed to rally support for those groups who found themselves "slandered" by the SPLC: 

The surest sign one is losing a debate is to resort to character assassination. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a liberal fundraising machine whose tactics have been condemned by observers across the political spectrum, is doing just that.

The group, which was once known for combating racial bigotry, is now attacking several groups that uphold Judeo-Christian moral views, including marriage as the union of a man and a woman. How does the SPLC attack? By labeling its opponents “hate groups.” No discussion. No consideration of the issues. No engagement. No debate

These type of slanderous tactics have been used against voters who signed petitions and voted for marriage amendments in all thirty states that have considered them, as well as against the millions of Americans who identify with the Tea Party movement. Some on the Left have even impugned the Manhattan Declaration-which upholds the sanctity of life, the value of traditional marriage and the fundamental right of religious freedom-as an anti-gay document and have forced its removal from general communications networks.

This is intolerance pure and simple. Elements of the radical Left are trying to shut down informed discussion of policy issues that are being considered by Congress, legislatures, and the courts. Tell the radical Left it is time to stop spreading hateful rhetoric attacking individuals and organizations merely for expressing ideas with which they disagree. Our debates can and must remain civil - but they must never be suppressed through personal assaults that aim only to malign an opponents character.

You can take action by adding your name to the following statement:

We, the undersigned, stand in solidarity with Family Research Council, American Family Association, Concerned Women of America, National Organization for Marriage, Liberty Counsel and other pro-family organizations that are working to protect and promote natural marriage and family. We support the vigorous but responsible exercise of the First Amendment rights of free speech and religious liberty that are the birthright of all Americans.

Just let me point out to those thinking of adding their names to this statement that you are declaring your solidarity with people who proclaim that:

Anti-Choice Crowd Celebrates as GOP Picks Joe Pitts, Presses for New Restrictions on Abortion

When Michigan Republican Fred Upton was tarred as a “moderate” during his campaign to lead the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, leading anti-choice groups including the National Right to Life Committee and the Susan B. Anthony List suggested back in November that they could support Upton if he picks Joe Pitts to chair the Health Subcommittee. Pitts, the co-author of the restrictive Stupak-Pitts amendment during the health care reform debate, is one of the most fervently anti-choice members of Congress. Now, Upton won his campaign to lead the committee and selected Pitts to chair the Health Subcommittee which not only deals with health care legislation but also sets policy with regards to abortion rights and reproductive health.

Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser called Pitts’s appointment “a major pro-life victory,” and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council told LifeNews that Pitts is committed to passing anti-choice legislation to stop the purported taxpayer funding of abortion.

While the nonpartisan PolitiFact already determined that rightwing claims of taxpayer funding for abortion are false and simply untrue, the facts didn’t stop groups like SBA List, CitizenLink (formerly Focus on the Family Action), and the Family Research Council from spreading the badly misleading claim.

The “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” better known as “Stupak on steroids” would impel private insurers to drop abortion coverage by taking away the insurance plans’ tax deductions, make the Hyde Amendment permanent, and prevent “any government department from funding any program that touches on abortion in any way, however notional.” There is already a drive by Mike Pence and Michele Bachmann to pass the "Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act," which would de-fund reproductive healthcare organizations which provide abortions, like Planned Parenthood, even though such financing does not go to abortion coverage.

During an interview with CNSNews, Bachmann was asked “What should Republicans do to advance protections for the lives of those unborn babies who are being slaughtered in this country?” Bachmann repeats the two baseless and fallacious claims that women in Pennsylvania received taxpayer funding for abortions and that “for the first time in American history under Obamacare, socialized medicine, under President Obama, we have federal funding of abortion.” She also calls for the reinstatement of the global gag rule, which cuts off US funding to international family planning services.


Religious Right Tries to Marginalize SPLC

The Religious Right continues to react to the Southern Poverty Law Center's updated list of anti-gay hate groups and it is becoming clear that we've gotten to the point where people are speaking out against it without even having read it, which is why we have Ed Meese calling the list "despicable" and insisting that he knows the groups well, so they could not possibly be considered hate groups:

Former Attorney General Edwin Meese says it is “despicable” for the Southern Poverty Law Center to classify the Family Research Council and a dozen other top conservative organizations as “hate groups” similar to the Ku Klux Klan.

“I think it’s ridiculous,” Meese told about the list published by the SPLC. “I know about seven or eight of those groups. I know the people very well. I know the groups very well, I’ve worked with them over the years, and I think it actually undermines the credibility of the Southern Poverty Law Center to make such a statement.”

Last week, the Southern Policy Law Center announced that it was going to classify the Family Research Council and 12 other organizations as “hate groups” because of their positions on homosexuality.

Among the groups being designated by the SPLC are the American Family Association, Concerned Women for America, the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, Coral Ridge Ministries, Family Research Institute, Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, Illinois Family Institute, Liberty Counsel, MassResistance, National Organization for Marriage and the Traditional Values Coalition.

The SPLC said these organizations will be named to its "hate group" watch list.

But Meese said the Southern Poverty Law Center had cited no evidence whatsoever to show that the FRC or the other major pro-family conservative organizations were hate groups.

First of all, the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, Concerned Women for America, Coral Ridge Ministries, Liberty Counsel, and the National Organization for Marriage were not designated hate groups - they were simply listed among active anti-gay groups.

Secondly, the SPLC laid out the statements and agenda of all the groups included on the list in its report, so the only way Meese could claim they "cited no evidence whatsoever" is if he hadn't bothered to read it.

And then, in one final bit of irony, Maggie Gallagher complained that the goal of the SPLC was to marginalize conservative groups so that no elected or government officials would associate with them ... while Messe demanded that the government have nothing to do with the SPLC:

The liberal law firm informs the media and law enforcement of its “surveillance,” and has close ties to both the media and the Justice Department.

“The question is, can they get away with it? Is it going to become the case that a politician can’t have anything to do with the Family Research Council or they’ll be associating with a ‘hate’ group. Will the media now say ‘We can’t talk to the Family Research Council because they are an extremist hate group?’” Gallagher asked.


Meese, meanwhile, called on the Southern Poverty Law Center to apologize and remove the FRC and the other groups from the list. He also said no one in law enforcement should take these latest deisgnations seriously.

“What should happen is, they should rescind their statement and apologize,” Meese said. “If in fact, in any way, they are in collusion with the Justice Department or any other department of the federal government on this, I think it is a serious problem for the government."

Barber: Liberty Counsel Will Eventually Be Designated a Hate Group

When the Southern Poverty Law Center unveiled its update list of anti-gay hate groups, it made clear that "viewing homosexuality as unbiblical does not qualify organizations for listing as hate groups." Rather, the designation was "based on [the] propagation of known falsehoods — claims about LGBT people that have been thoroughly discredited by scientific authorities — and repeated, groundless name-calling."

As I noted at the time, how Liberty Counsel managed to stay of the list of anti-gay hate groups was a mystery - a point that I just want to reiterate in light of the video we just posted of Matt Barber and Mat Staver claiming gays need to be kept out of the military on the grounds that they are "moral perverts."

And, as it turns out, tomorrow's edition of LC's "Faith and Freedom Radio" is dedicated entirely to attacking the SPLC's update list, with Matt Barber predicting that LC will eventually be designated as a hate group but that the SPLC is currently too intimidated by him to do so now:

Staver: And I really think that it points out that this organization has marginalized itself because it has lost all credibility. I mean, Family Research Council is not a hate group. They may disagree with Family Research Council on the issue of same-sex marriage or homosexuality, but it's not a hate group. And the American Family Association is the same way.

Now they also list Liberty Counsel in there as well - they don't classify Liberty Counsel as a hate group, they've actually included 18 different organizations of which they've put a star by 13 that are considered hate groups. And Liberty Counsel is in there, not as a hate organization but is added in there and, who knows, before long it's going to get an asterisk.

Barber: I'll make a prediction right now, Matt: I've written several articles, I've underscored and pointed out and exposed the Southern Poverty Law Center on a number of occasions. They personally attack me in this report that they put out, but they do not classify us as a hate group yet. I think they're a little leery of doing that because I have been one person at the forefront of exposing their activities here.

But I am going to make a prediction here: they are eventually going to do that in retaliation for us pointing out what they're doing, their fraudulent activities. They will do that and at that point the mainstream media is going to be held accountable. They will try to marginalize Liberty Counsel eventually as a hate group and we're going to hold their feet to the fire when they do that.

I am actually inclined to back Barber's prediction that the SPLC will eventually designate Liberty Counsel as a hate group, but not out of "retaliation" for Barber's attacks on them, but rather because Barber is an unapologetic anti-gay bigot.

Right Wing Round-Up

DADT Defenders Desperate Last Stand: Keep Ban Since Intel Leaker Was Gay

If you thought that the arguments opposing the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell weren’t desperate enough, many on the Right are now suggesting that the ban on gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military should be kept in place because the alleged Wikileaks-leaker is gay. A New York Times profile on intelligence analyst Bradley Manning’s “desperation for acceptance — or delusions of grandeur” found that much of his “social life was defined by the need to conceal his sexuality under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and he wasted brainpower fetching coffee for officers.” The Times went on to report that “even as he professed a perhaps inflated sense of purpose, he called himself ‘emotionally fractured’ and a ‘wreck’ and said he was ‘self-medicating like crazy.’”

For the right wing media, the story wasn’t that Manning had a history of being victimized and excluded because of his sexual orientation, but that as a result of his sexual orientation he became a traitor. Ann Coulter suggests that Manning was a “narcissistic hothouse flower” and the “poster boy for Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”:

With any luck, Bradley's court-martial will be gayer than a Liza Minelli wedding. It could be the first court-martial in U.S. history to feature ice sculptures and a "Wizard of Oz"-themed gazebo. "Are you going to Bradley's court-martial? I hear Patti LaBelle is going to sing!"

Maybe there's a reason gays have traditionally been kept out of the intelligence services, apart from the fact that closeted gay men are easy to blackmail. Gays have always been suspicious of that rationale and perhaps they're right.

Bradley's friends told the Times they suspected "his desperation for acceptance -- or delusions of grandeur" may have prompted his document dump.

Let's check our "Gay Profile at a Glance" and ... let's see ... desperate for acceptance ... delusions of grandeur ... yep, they're both on the gay subset list!

Look at the disaster one gay created under our punishing "don't ask, don't tell" policy. What else awaits America with the overturning of a policy that was probably put there for a reason (apart from being the only thing Bill Clinton ever did that I agreed with)?

Liberals don't care. Their approach is to rip out society's foundations without asking if they serve any purpose.

The Family Research Council has also jumped in, commenting:

Now that the enemy has access to American intelligence, our mission in the Middle East may be irreparably harmed--all because President Obama is less concerned with winning the war than he is with winning the far-Left's approval. Unfortunately for all of us, Manning's betrayal painfully confirms what groups like FRC have argued all along: the instability of the homosexual lifestyle is a detriment to military readiness. By foisting this agenda on our soldiers, the White House is not only jeopardizing the future of national security but compromising its present.

WorldNetDaily’s Joseph Farah said that “the system of moral blindness and the disconnect from common sense,” which allowed Manning to serve as a closeted gay man in the first place, “made [the leak] inevitable.” Cliff Kincaid of the conservative Accuracy In Media blasted news outlets for not covering Manning’s sexual orientation enough for his liking, and claims that Manning’s sexuality and support for gay rights show that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell doesn’t go far enough and should become more stringent. Kincaid writes:

Now, because of the obvious mishandling of this homosexual ticking time bomb, it appears that the United States, its soldiers, and relations with countries in the region will pay the price. Lives-and a war on terrorism in Afghanistan-could be lost.

The revelations of Manning's openly pro-homosexual conduct suggest that a more liberal Department of Defense policy, in deference to the wishes of the Commander-in-Chief, had already been in effect and has now backfired in a big way.

The dramatic revelations about Manning's circle of friends and associates suggest that, rather than repeal the homosexual exclusion policy, as Obama is demanding, the prohibition on homosexuals should have been more strictly enforced and that it should be strengthened today.

As the Right tries to score political points by saying that due to Manning’s individual problems and turmoil, all gay and lesbian servicemembers should be viewed as disgruntled, treacherous, unstable, and disloyal people. And, the say, rather than dismantle Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, which produces extreme and troubling pressures on closeted soldiers, the policy should become more severe and oppressive.

Right Wing Round-Up

Beware The Green Dragon!

A who's who of Religious Right leaders have come together for a 12-part series called "Resisting the Green Dragon" which seeks to expose how the environmental movement is out to control the world and destroy Christianity:

Resisting the Green Dragon is therefore particularly timely because it not only refutes the scientific case for dangerous manmade warming and other "crises," but also exposes how environmental organizations use sophisticated media campaigns and even seek increased global governance to promote their agenda among policy makers, religious leaders, and youth.

"One of the greatest threats to society and the church today is the multifaceted environmentalist movement," says Cornwall Alliance founder and national spokesman Dr. E. Calvin Beisner. "There isn't an aspect of life that it doesn't seek to force into its own mold."

Many well-known Christian leaders agree. Focus on the Family's Tom Minnery joined Family Research Council's Tony Perkins, the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission's Richard Land, Concerned Women for America's Wendy Wright, Home School Legal Defense Association's Michael Farris, National Religious Broadcasters' Frank Wright, WallBuilders' David Barton, and radio talk-show host Janet Parshall in filming introductions and commentary for the 12-part DVD series, which started shipping last week.

A twelve minute preview is available here (password: RESIST) but I have edited it down because it is a marvel of delusional right-wing projection with Richard Land saying environmentalists have a long history of believing exaggerations and myths, David Barton saying environmentalists' claims are rooted in their own biases, Bryan Fischer claiming the movement relies on outright lies, and Janet Parshall warning that Christians must fight back against this false religion because God has called upon them to take dominion over the earth:

Religious Right United In Outrage Over SPLC Hate Group Designations

Last week the Southern Poverty Law Center updated its list of anti-gay groups and added several new organizations to its list of anti-gay hate groups. 

Many influential Religious Right groups found themselves placed upon the SPLC's updated list, including the Family Research Council, American Family Association, Concerned Women for American, National Organization for Marriage, and Liberty Counsel.  And to say that they are not happy about it would be a massive understatement.

NOM called it an "absurd distraction," saying it stood by its work and that the report was really an attack "on the majority of Americans who believe that to make a marriage you need a husband and wife" while Robert Knight of Coral Ridge Ministries and Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America both responded by accusing the SPLC of being the ones "who are actually filled with hate and bigotry."

For it's part, the Family Research Council called the designation part of a "smear campaign" designed to silence Christians and demanded an apology:

"The Left's smear campaigns of conservatives is also being driven by the clear evidence that the American public is losing patience with their radical policy agenda as seen in the recent election and in the fact that every state, currently more than thirty, that has had the opportunity to defend the natural definition of marriage has done so. Earlier this month, voters in Iowa sent a powerful message when they removed three Supreme Court justices who imposed same-sex marriage on the state. Would the SPLC also smear the good people of Iowa?

"Family Research Council will continue to champion marriage and family as the foundation of our society and will not acquiesce to those seeking to silence the Judeo-Christian views held by millions of Americans. We call on the Southern Poverty Law Center to apologize for this slanderous attack and attempted character assassination."

Matt Barber, who is one of the most vehemently anti-gay Religious Right activists operating today, yet somehow he and Liberty Counsel managed to avoid being labeled a hate group ... but that didn't stop him from ripping the SPLC in an op-ed in the Washington Times accusing the SPLC of comparing conservatives to Nazis:

So, center-right America: If you happen to believe in the sanctity of natural marriage and that, as a culture, we're best served by honoring the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic of our forefathers, you're now an official "hater."

Of course, the tired goal of this silly meme is to associate in the public mind's eye mainstream conservative social values with racism, white supremacy and neo-Nazism. The ironic result, however, is that, as typically occurs with such ad hominem and hyperbolic attacks, the attacker ends up marginalizing himself and galvanizing his intended target (I'm rubber, you're glue and all that).

Hence, beyond a self-aggrandizing liberal echo chamber, the SPLC - and by extension the greater "progressive" movement - has become largely, as it stews in its own radicalism, just another punch line.

It's often said that the first to call the other a Nazi has lost the argument.

Congratulations, conservative America: They're calling you a Nazi. Carry on.

Of course, that argument might carry more weight if, as Warren Throckmorton points out, groups like the American Family Association weren't regularly saying that all the Nazis were literally gay.

But in terms of sheer absurdity, it is hard to beat the reaction from the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission:

"The Southern Poverty Law Center has utterly discredited themselves by this provocative attack on organizations that promote traditional family values," said Rev. Gary L. Cass, of DefendChristians.Org, a ministry of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission.

"Labeling mainstream conservative organizations as 'Hate groups' is defamatory and is simply an intimidation tactic. We call on Congress to cut off their funding."

"Defend Christians.Org will work to form a coalition of organizations to lobby Congress to withhold funds from SPLC. We will also demand Congress restrict Federal law enforcement from relying on the biased SPLC reports, like the discredited 'Report on Right-Wing Extremism' SPLC wrote for the Department of Homeland Security," said Cass.

This tatic could possibly be effective if the SPLC actually received federal funds ... but it doesn't.  And for some reason Cass continues to insist that the SPLC wrote the DHS report despite having absolutely no evidence that that is the case. 

Another Conservative Fears DADT Repeal Will Lead to Draft

Last week Kyle reported that Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council feared that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military will damage recruitment to such an extent that the President would have to “bring back the draft.” Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy is now too sounding the alarm that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell would lead to the collapse of the volunteer military. In his Washington Times column, Gaffney uses the recent panic about TSA procedures to make his point that the draft will be reinstated if gays serve openly:

Suddenly, just as the Obama-led campaign to foist the radical homosexual agenda on the U.S. armed forces is reaching its denouement, the American people are getting a taste of forced intimacy - and they don't like it. In airports around the country, they are being subjected to intrusions on their personal space by people and machines of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

Team Obama's line is that "most" in uniform think there will be no problem, or at least "mixed" good and bad repercussions. But if even an estimated 10 percent choose to leave the service - let alone 40 percent of Marines, who, according to the leakers, think repeal will cause problems - the effect will be traumatic, possibly devastating, for the U.S. armed forces. If tens of thousands choose not to submit and "vote with their feet," as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, has called on them to do, it may become impossible to rely only on volunteers to staff our military.

In that case, a vote for repeal of the 1993 law barring homosexuals from the military amounts to a vote for reinstating the draft.

Gaffney’s column adds to the increasing scare-tactics by right-wing leaders to stop the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell at all costs. Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy has previously allied with vehemently anti-gay groups to prevent the repeal of DADT, and believes that the greatest threat to the military isn’t gays but President Obama, who he called “America’s first Muslim President.” Even though the Pentagon report is expected to show that the vast majority of troops have no problem with gay and lesbians serving openly and even a Sergeant who spoke to Perkins believes that soldiers will “serve anyway” following repeal, the draft drumbeat continues to grow.

FRC, AFA Among New Organizations Designated "Anti-Gay Hate Groups" By SPLC

Via Truth Wins Out, we see that the Southern Poverty Law Center has released a piece profiling Of 18 anti-gay organizations and has announced that they will be adding 5 new organizations to their list of active anti-gay hate groups.

The new additions are:

1. American Family Association
2. Americans for Truth About Homosexuality
3. Dove World Outreach Center
4. Family Research Council
5. Illinois Family Institute

The other anti-gay groups profiled by the SPLC but not offically designated as hate groups are:

1. Christian Anti-Defamation Commission
2. Concerned Women for America
3. Coral Ridge Ministries
4. Liberty Counsel
5. National Organization for Marriage

Given that SPLC make these designations "based on their propagation of known falsehoods...and repeated, groundless name-calling," how some other these other groups - like Matt Barber/Liberty Counsel and Robert Knight/Coral Ridge Ministries - managed to stay off the list of designated hate groups is a bit of a mystery.

Perkins: If DADT Is Repealed, The Draft Will Be Reinstated

You have to hand it to Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, as he just keeps trying out new reasons as to why Don't Ask, Don't Tell should not be repealed, with his latest being that if it is, so many current soldiers will leave that the military will be forced to re-institute the draft:

Barack Obama is opposed to the draft as a matter of principle, to be sure. So are most politicians in both parties. But the president’s drive to repeal the ban on open homosexuality in the military could have this unintended consequence: It could bring back the draft.


The military is not a red state/blue state institution. It unifies our country. It draws its dedicated members from all regions. Still, it is no secret that the military is a socially conservative institution. It recruits heavily from rural areas in the South, the Midwest, and the Inter-Mountain states.

In our larger cities, black and Hispanic recruits are encouraged to consider the military — which has historically been a great ladder of achievement for racial and ethnic minorities.

These are the very areas and groups who have been most resistant to the demands of the homosexual lobby. These are the very regions and groups who have rallied to our side whenever we put a defense of marriage initiative on the ballot

If these regions and groups do not enlist in our all-volunteer force, President Obama will be driven to the place he does not want to go: the military draft.

Of course, during FRC's own anti-DADT repeal webcast earlier this year Sergeant First Class Benjamin Ratcliff told Perkins point blank that soldiers who loved their country would continue to serve even if DADT was repealed:

I would tell them to serve anyway. If all men of courage and men that had a moral compass were to leave the military, then we wouldn’t have a military. There’d be nobody left to serve and protect. So I don’t really – I would serve regardless of what comes out of Washington. Even though I disagree with it strongly, I love my country more. So I would understand if parents had concerns. I was recruited for several years and I sat and listened to parents’ concerns, talked with them. They asked me a lot of questions about the wars and a lot about the liberal agenda. But I would tell them, serve anyway, absolutely.

But I guess that tends to undermine Perkins' anti-gay agenda, so he decided to just ignore it when penning this op-ed.

Religious Right Putting Pressure on CPAC to Drop GOProud

The other day we noted that the American Principles Project had informed the American Conservative Union that they would not be participating in next year's CPAC because of the decision to allow GOProud to serve as a sponsor.

Today, APP's Malia Blom went on CBN News to explain that they would not participate so long as CPAC was going to include groups like GOProud to who "actively work against a fundamental principle of conservatism: faith, family, traditional marriage": 

And the APP is not alone in pressuring CPAC to drop GOProud, as both the American Family Association and the Family Research Council weighing in as well

The American Family Association is also deciding whether to stay away from CPAC again this year over GOProud.

"We didn't send our radio talk show hosts up there last year because of GOProud," said AFA president Tim Wildmon. "We will have to look at their level of participation this year. In the next couple of weeks we'll decide."

The Family Research Council is working with ACU directly about the GOProud issue.

"We have communicated privately with the board with the desire to see this resolved in a way that benefits America's families," Family Research Council vice president for communications JP Duffy told WND.

More Good News For Huckabee: James Robison Is Back In Business

For the last several months we've been noting the gradual re-emergence of James Robison, who was an influential leader back at the founding of the Religious Right but who eventually sort of fell off the radar. 

But in the last year or so, he has suddenly become more and more involved in Religious Right activism and I guess nothing better demonstrates that fact like this article, via AU, reporting that a few months back Robison convened a large gathering of leaders to plot how to defeat President Obama in 2012:

Conservative Christian leaders from across the nation met two months ago near the Dallas airport to strategize about replacing President Barack Obama with someone who matches their agenda – a move that paralleled an effort by Christian leaders in 1979 to defeat then President Jimmy Carter.

About 40 conservative Christian leaders gathered in Dallas on Sept. 8-9 to begin laying the groundwork for a religious-political movement similar to the one that helped Ronald Reagan oust the Baptist Sunday school teacher from the Oval Office. Convened by evangelist James Robison – a key figure in the religious effort 30 years ago to promote Reagan's candidacy – the list of attendees included many of the most prominent Christian evangelists and ministers, including several Southern Baptist leaders.

Southern Baptist leaders attending the meeting included: Richard Land (president of the SBC's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission); Richard Lee (pastor and the editor of The American Patriot's Bible); John Meador (pastor of First Baptist Church of Euless, Texas); and Paige Patterson (president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary).

Others at the meeting included: Tony Evans (a megachurch pastor in Texas); Father Joseph Fessio (founder and editor of Ignatius Press); Craig Groeschel (pastor of; Miles McPherson (a megachurch pastor in California who spoke at the 2008 Republican National Convention); Johnnie Moore (a vice president at Liberty University who defended the school's decisions to have Glenn Beck and Newt Gingrich as recent speakers); Tom Mullins (a megachurch pastor in Florida); Doug Napier (legal counsel at the Alliance Defense Fund); Dino Rizzo (a megachurch pastor in Louisiana); Dave Roever (an evangelist who prayed at Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally); Mark Rutland (president of Oral Roberts University); David Stone (a megachurch pastor in Kentucky); and Stu Weber (a megachurch pastor in Oregon).

Several conservative Christian leaders highly active in politics attended the meeting, including: Stephen Broden (a pastor and Republican politician in Texas); Keith Butler (a pastor and Republican politician in Michigan); Maggie Gallagher (a conservative columnist who received tens of thousands of dollars for her work from the George W. Bush administration); Jim Garlow (chairman of Newt Gingrich's organization, Renewing American Leadership); Harry Jackson (pastor of Hope Christian Church in Washington, D.C.); Gene Mills (executive director of the Louisiana Family Forum); and Tony Perkins (president of the Family Research Council).

Some attendees have been guests on Glenn Beck's program on Fox News (including Broden, Garlow, Lee, McPherson, Mullins, Robison, Roever and Stone), and several were involved with his "Restoring Honor" rally (including Jackson, Land, Lee, Gallagher, Garlow and Roever).

Three of the attendees at the meeting have been under investigation since 2007 by Republican U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Baptist from Iowa, for perhaps violating IRS tax-exempt rules. Those at the meeting included televangelists Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar and Joyce Meyer.

Other individuals helped plan the September meeting but were unable to attend. They included: Jerry Falwell Jr. (president of Liberty University); Jack Graham (a former president of the Southern Baptist Convention); O.S. Hawkins (head of the SBC's Guidestone Financial Resources); Jack Hayford (president of Foursquare International); and author Ravi Zacharias.

I should point out, also, that Robison's return can only be good news for Mike Huckabee, as Robison was his mentor back in the 1970s, leading Huckabee to drop out of seminary so he could go to work for Robison as his director of communications.

If Robison and crew are looking to replace Obama "with someone who matches their agenda," Huckabee seems like a perfect fit.

Meet Congressman-Elect Tom Marino: Plagued by Corruption Charges

Following the election, RWW will bring you our list of the "The Ten Scariest Republicans Heading to Congress." Our ninth candidate profile is on Tom Marino of Pennsylvania:

In 2007, Tom Marino resigned from his position as US Attorney in Pennsylvania after a corruption scandal clouded his career and raised questions about his honesty. Marino had used his official title as US Attorney to provide a reference in 2005 to his “close friend,” convicted felon Louis DeNaples, who was trying to win the state gaming commission’s approval to open slot machines at a resort he owned. When his office began an investigation into DeNaples for lying about his ties to organized crime, Marino's assistants uncovered his reference and notified the Justice Department, which transferred the investigation out of Marino’s office. But questions about Marino’s ties to DeNaples remained.

Defending his actions, Marino said on a local radio show that the Department of Justice gave him permission to be a reference for DeNaples. But the Justice Department says there is “no record of Marino having received the permission” to serve as a reference for DeNaples and that Marino never informed the General Counsel office. Although Marino stands by his claim that he received written permission, he failed to produce any letter from the Department.

When the Justice Department launched an investigation into Marino’s actions, he resigned and promptly took a $250,000-a-year job as “DeNaples’ in-house lawyer.” Marino later under-reported his income on his financial disclosure forms, reporting that he only received $25,000 from DeNaples. Even Zack Oldham of the conservative blog RedState said of Marino’s actions: “The reality is just as bad as–if not worse than–the optics of this scandal.”

The DeNaples affair wasn’t even the first time Marino had run into corruption accusations. When Marino was District Attorney in Lycoming County, he tried to get a friend out of a drug charge by going behind the back of the county judge who had refused to toss out his friend’s conviction. According to the Luzeme County Citizens Voice, Marino “approached another judge and won the expungement, but the plan backfired when the second judge learned of the first judge's involvement in the case.”

Marino continued to struggle with the truth in his campaign for Congress. He criticized his opponent, Rep. Chris Carney, for leaving Washington as an anti-abortion rights bill was being circulated during the health care reform debate. Carney was not in Washington at the time because his wife was undergoing surgery for breast cancer.

He later alleged that Carney “has no problem spending taxpayers’ money for abortions” and that Pennsylvania women were receiving taxpayer-subsidized abortions under the new health care law, even though nonpartisan fact-checkers have confirmed, repeatedly, that the law prohibits taxpayer funding for abortion.

Marino also berated his opponent for refusing to take questions from the press on political matters after Carney, a Navy Reservist, was called for active duty and was barred by law from making “statements to or answer questions from the news media regarding political issues or regarding government policies.”

But his ethical challenges have not kept the far-right from embracing him. In fact, his rightwing politics have earned him the endorsement of Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, Rick Santorum’s America’s Foundation, Mike Huckabee’s HuckPAC, the Family Research Council, and the Government Is Not God PAC.

On the issue of immigration, Marino opposes a pathway for citizenship for illegal immigrants, and touts his endorsement from Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, which has been called a “nativist extremist organization” by the Southern Poverty Law Center. In his Americans for Legal Immigration PAC survey, Marino says he strongly favors Arizona’s severe SB 1070 law, would refuse to support comprehensive immigration reform, and that he would consider impeaching the President over immigration policy.

Marino said he would vote against extending unemployment benefits, maintaining that some of the people on unemployment simply don’t “want to go get work because they are being paid to stay home.” He said that non-senior citizens should face cuts in Social Security benefits if not the elimination of the program altogether, saying: “my generation and probably the generation that follows me, we are going to have to step up to the plate and say, ‘We are not going to get Social Security.’” The 60 Plus Association, a front group for the health care and pharmaceutical industries which supports privatizing Social Security, aired TV ads on Marino’s behalf.

In a radio interview in August, Marino reportedly suggested eliminating the IRS and the Departments of Education and Energy and replacing them with new agencies, saying, “There’s got to be a total revolution there.”

Despite the ethical cloud surrounding Marino, his hard-line conservative views and support from the Radical Right helped him win election to Congress. Watch this segment from an NBC affiliate revealing Marino’s ethical troubles:




Religious Right Blasts GOProud For Trying To Co-Opt Movement and Destroy Society

As we noted yesterday, the gay conservative group GOProud was urging the Republican Party to ignore the Religious Right's social issues agenda and the effort, not surprisingly, was not going over well with the Religious Right.

Concerned Women for America responded by saying that rather than ignoring social issues, such issues must be placed "at the very top of the list," which is a view shared by Gary Bauer, who dismisses GOProud as a "liberal group": 

There has been a lot of talk in recent weeks about the GOP establishment trying to co-opt the Tea Party into abandoning its commitment to fiscal conservatism. Unfortunately, at least one liberal group has already convinced some Tea Party leaders to abandon values issues.

I was very disappointed to read this morning that a pro-homosexual rights group has gotten more than a dozen Tea Party activists to sign on to a letter to new members of Congress. According to Politico, the letter urges them to focus exclusively on fiscal issues, and to oppose the consideration of social issues as part of the agenda for the new Congress. That is terrible advice, and it presents a false choice ... Tonight, I will be attending a reception for new House members. I promise you I will encourage them to fight for the entire conservative agenda — including values issues!

The Family Research Council also weighed in to blast GOProud as a phony conservatives who are out to co-opt the movement in an effort sow anarchy and destroy the fabric of society:

A group that had nothing to do with bringing the Republicans to power suddenly wants to dictate what the party does with it. GOProud, an aggressive pro-homosexual organization that desperately wants to be taken seriously by conservatives, is trying to force its way into the movement by persuading a small handful of tea partiers to sign on to a social truce for the 112th Congress.


If anyone's doing the co-opting, it's GOProud--whose "social truce" isn't a truce at all. If Republicans stand down on social issues, it's in this group's interest! GOProud is the one actively fighting for same-sex "marriage," homosexuals in the military, and gay "rights." Essentially they're saying, "We'll keep marching our priorities forward and you" (meaning conservatives) "stand down."

I say, no way! For starters, that won't fly with the broader Tea Party movement which is solidly in the social conservative camp (see DeMint, Jim). Secondly, it's a losing strategy for America. We need to shrink the size of government, but America needs strong families. Those families--not GOProud's phony substitutes--are the backbone of society. Think about the welfare costs associated with the breakdown of social order. Think about the cost in terms of crime and the criminal justice system. What about the loss of human potential? Do these folks really think we can just eliminate those government expenditures overnight? What this crowd is advocating will lead to anarchy, which, ironically, would provide GOProud and friends a perfect environment for their lifestyle.

Meet Congresswoman-Elect Vicky Hartzler: Missouri’s Anti-Gay Zealot

Following last Tuesday's election, RWW will bring you our list of the "The Ten Scariest Republicans Heading to Congress." Our seventh candidate profile is on Missouri's Vicky Hartzler:

Although Ike Skelton, the long-time representative in Missouri’s fourth congressional district, was far from a supporter of LGBT equality, Vicky Hartzler, who defeated him in this year’s election, has based her political career on supporting discrimination against gays and lesbians.

A former state legislator, she was the spokeswoman and public face of the Coalition to Protect Marriage in Missouri, which successfully amended the state constitution to include a ban same-sex marriage (which was already banned by statute) in 2004. The New York Times writes that her group used “church functions, yard signs and a ‘marriage chain’ of rallies across the state,” and Hartzler “said she hoped that the outcome would send a loud message to the rest of the country: ‘Here in the heartland we have a heart for families, and this is how deeply we feel about marriage.’”

Her work helped her receive praise from Religious Right leaders like Mike Huckabee, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, and Penny Nance of Concerned Women PAC.

Mother Jones asked if Hartzler was the “most anti-gay candidate in America” since she believes that repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell will “put us at risk,” maintains that sexual orientation is a choice and therefore gay people aren’t entitled to civil rights, and dubbed hate crimes legislation one of the “the extreme agenda items of the gay movement.”

Paul Guequierre of the Human Rights Campaign told Mother Jones that while “Ike Skelton has not been a friend of the LGBT community,” unlike Hartzler, “he does not wake up in the morning thinking about what he can do to harm the LGBT community.”

A staunch anti-choice activist, Hartzler supported legislation which “would have allowed for prosecutors to charge women who obtained late-term abortions with murder” and “also have permitted second-degree murder charges to be filed against doctors who performed such procedures.” She was also the chief sponsor of a bill that would pressure women seeking an abortion to view their sonograms. Throughout her career in the State House, she consistently received perfect ratings from the right-wing Missouri Family Network.

Hartzler wrote a book for Christian activists running for office called “Running God’s Way: Step by Step to a Successful Political Campaign,” which “discusses how to run a political campaign by using events and stories in the bible as a guide.” Phyllis Schlafly gave her a laudatory introduction at an Eagle Forum event, calling her book “a manual for action.”

In a profile by the American Family Association, Hartzler said that she found inspiration from God to run for public office at the age of nine, and her book maintains that “Christians must become more active in politics if they are to have the impact God calls them to have.” Hartzler said that her book provides Christian candidates with “the tools and inspiration they need to bring God’s light in a darkening world.”

According to one sympathetic review in a local newspaper, Hartzler’s book “praises Absalom — a rebellious son of King David, God’s anointed leader for Israel and according to Christian theology an early example of divinely ordained rule prefiguring that of Jesus Christ — as being the “first politician” and an example for modern political leaders. In Hartzler’s words, ‘Absalom won over the hearts of the people of Israel using time-tested campaign strategies. We, too, can campaign successfully following these same guidelines.’”

A climate change denier, Hartzler asserted that she does not believe in climate change since she read “some articles that [said] it’s actually decreasing, that we have climates getting colder…and certainly, I don’t believe that if there is a climate change that man has a very significant role in that.”

Hartzler ran an ugly anti-immigrant ad against Ike Skelton, where she claimed that by voting to reauthorize the Children’s Health Insurance Program he supports “welfare benefits” for “illegal immigrants”, and criticized him for opposing a measure that would prohibit illegal immigrants from attending public schools as “giving illegal immigrants free education.”

She appealed to Tea Partiers by slamming government spending, as she blasted Congress’s spending plans and said that “we just want the government to leave us alone here in Missouri’s 4th.” However, according to the Kansas City Star, Hartzler’s “farm has received $774,325 in federal subsidies from 1995 to 2009.” She defended the government farm subsidies as a “national defense issue,” and claimed that she would not support cuts to Social Security, Medicare, or defense.

In an editorial board interview she couldn’t name any programs she would cut funding to other than “the Lady Bird Highway Beautification projects. She indicated that garden clubs could do some of this work along the highways, saving public funds.”

However, Hartzler does appear to support spending money to expand the role of the Navy in Missouri, as she argued that under Skelton’s watch the landlocked state has “the smallest Navy here that we have had since the early 1960s.”

Hartzler blended her Tea Party lip service and Religious Right advocacy to topple one of the most powerful members of the House, and will now bring her years of anti-equality and anti-choice activism to become a prominent voice of the Far-Right in the GOP-led House.






Syndicate content

Family Research Council Top Posts

801 G Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 President: Tony Perkins Date of founding: 1983 Membership: 455,000 members. Finances: $10 million (2000 revenue)   MORE >

Family Research Council Posts Archive

Miranda Blue, Friday 11/15/2013, 5:24pm
Sen. Ted Cruz has a busy weekend planned. Not only is he confirmed to headline a Texas conference for state legislators hosted by fake historian David Barton, he is also confirmed to speak at a conference of anti-Muslim activists and right-wing muckrakers in Florida hosted by leading Islamophobe David Horowitz . Warren Throckmorton reports that Cruz is scheduled to speak at David Barton’s “ProFamily Legislators Conference” along with effusive conspiracy thoerist Glenn Beck, master voter suppressor and now Family Research Council bigwig Ken Blackwell, FRC... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Thursday 11/14/2013, 6:30pm
Several House Republicans have drafted articles of impeachment against Attorney General Eric Holder. Rick Santorum will be the keynote speaker at a Christian Women in Media Association event next week. Lucky them! We will never understand why groups like CWA claim that they have been designated a "hate group" by the SLPC when it is so demonstrably false. Ralph Reed says the GOP should try to model itself on Pope Francis. Finally, FRC prays against ENDA: "May God give House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Congress the moral strength to reject ENDA! (Ex 23:2;... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Thursday 11/07/2013, 6:34pm
Rand Paul lost his column at the Washington Times over plagiarism charges so , of course, he's been picked up by Breitbart. The Religious Right is flummoxed as to why Republicans in the Senate are not standing up to try and stop ENDA. FRC prays "may Gods people exercise their rights as Citizens to turn the tide in the military. May God send another Great Awakening that transforms our military troops and those in all the cultural spheres that shape our nation!" Speaking of FRC, the organization blasts the GOP for insufficiently supporting Ken Cuccinelli, saying... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 11/05/2013, 6:36pm
Layne @ PFAW Blog: Illinois to Become 15th Marriage Equality State. Andrew Kaczynski @ BuzzFeed: Sections Of Rand Paul’s Op-Ed On Drug Sentencing Plagiarized From Article Week Earlier. Towleroad: Ralph Reed Calls ENDA 'a Dagger' in 'the Heart of Religious Freedom'. Adele Stan @ RH Reality Check: How the Koch Brothers Are Funding the Anti-Choice Agenda Jeremy Hooper: Peter Sprigg flat-out lies; claims FRC never supported Ugandan law that it *TOTALLY* did support. Hemant Mehta @ Friendly Atheist: Friend or Foe 2013. Sarah Posner @ Moment: And why we... MORE >
Miranda, Monday 11/04/2013, 2:02pm
Last December, former Republican senator and presidential candidate Bob Dole took to the Senate floor in a wheelchair to urge his former colleagues to ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (CRPD), a United Nations treaty that would encourage countries around the world to emulate the United States’ protections for the rights of the disabled. The treaty fell six votes short of the 2/3 majority it needed for passage, thanks to an intense lobbying effort by Religious Right groups that warned – against all evidence – that the treaty would threaten U.S... MORE >
Peter Montgomery, Monday 11/04/2013, 10:56am
As RWW has been documenting, anti-gay groups have been getting wildly over the top in their denunciations of the federal Employment Non Discrimination Act, which would add to federal anti-discrimination law protections against workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.  With a procedural vote in the Senate scheduled as early as Monday evening, anti-LGBT groups are getting increasingly shrill. On Friday night, the Family Research Council blasted out a breathtakingly dishonest alert charging that under ENDA “employers would be forced to reward workers... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Friday 11/01/2013, 5:33pm
        Just as he promised, Rep. Steve Stockman is handing out copies of a book calling for President Obama's impeachment to his House colleagues. It is truly amazing that FRC argues that ENDA should not be passed because gays will be given "special status" when all the legislation does is provide the same protections that are already granted to Christians and those of other religious faiths. Samuel Rodriguez is launching a 40-day fast for immigration reform. It is probably a safe bet to be wary of anyone Glenn Beck calls "his friend... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Thursday 10/31/2013, 12:55pm
The Family Research Council is asking its members to pray against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which they claim will require employers to “give special treatment to LGBT employees” and instill an “anti-Christian bias in business.” The group urges members to pray that ENDA will “be decisively defeated” and ask God to “intervene to prevent furtherance of this law, which would plant homosexuality even more deeply into the fabric of our society.” The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) will be brought to the Senate Floor as... MORE >