Robert Morrison

FRC Invokes Matthew Shepard in Anti-Gay Marriage Column

Submitted by Brian Tashman on Thursday, 3/28/2013 4:05 pm

Family Research Council senior fellow Robert Morrison is out with a column reflecting on his experience at NOM’s March for Marriage and how “marriage benefits everyone,” except for the same-sex couples who he believes should not have the right to marry.

Morrison writes that “marriage is a blessing to families” but is now “under attack” by gays and lesbians. Then, he uses the violent death of Matthew Shepard, the victim of an anti-gay hate crime, as a reason to oppose same-sex marriage: “Three-quarters of the teen rapists in our prisons are fatherless young men, so are two-thirds of the teen murderers. Even gay martyr Matthew Shepherd [sic] was killed by two fatherless young men. Marriage bashes no one.”

I’ve been going to pro-life marches since 1981, so I’m getting used to the drill. Still, this week’s March for Marriage in Washington, D.C. promised to be different in many ways. It was slated to coincide with the U.S.Supreme Court’s oral arguments on the Defense of Marriage Act and on California’s Proposition 8. The media says Prop 8 was designed to “ban” homosexuals from marrying. It was designed for no such thing. As was the federal Defense of Marriage Act, Prop 8 was designed to protect an institution that is under attack.

…

I saw many old friends from the March for Life. But I saw so many new friends. It was amazing to see how many black, Hispanic, and Asian folks had come out for this one.

State Sen. Ruben Diaz harangued the crowd estimated at 5-8,000. Sen. Diaz is from New York. He spoke in Spanish. He crowed: “I’m black. I’m Hispanic. I’m against abortion. I’m against this homosexual stuff. And I’m a Democrat.” He added that he wins by 89 percent in his state senatorial district.

…

When we see dozens of Democrats abandoning their previously held positions and a few Republicans also willing to betray the voters who put them in office, it would be easy to become cynical about everyone in politics. But we have to stand firm and push back. Marriage is a blessing to families. Three-quarters of the teen rapists in our prisons are fatherless young men, so are two-thirds of the teen murderers. Even gay martyr Matthew Shepherd [sic] was killed by two fatherless young men. Marriage bashes no one. Marriage benefits everyone.

…

We are seeing a great sorting out. We saw that early in the country’s life, too. Thomas Paine wrote about the sunshine soldiers and the summer patriots who cut and run when there was fighting to do.

These are the times that try men’s souls. Women’s, too. But it’s for our children and our grandchildren that we stand fast. On earth, there’s no better cause.

FRC Furious with Cheney for Supporting Marriage Equality

Submitted by Brian Tashman on Friday, 2/24/2012 10:50 am

Family Research Council senior fellow Robert Morrison yesterday chided former Vice President Dick Cheney for his support of marriage equality, particularly his role in garnering Republican support for the bill in Maryland. Morrison bragged that he didn’t respond to media inquiries at the 2000 GOP convention in Philadelphia to goad him into criticize Cheney, even though FRC president Tony Perkins attacked the Cheney family after Mary had a child with her partner. He also said that just because Cheney has an openly gay daughter, that is no reason he should support equal rights for gays and lesbians. He even called on Cheney to follow in the footsteps of Ben Franklin, who supported the American Revolution even though his son was a prominent loyalist who fled to Great Britain after the war. “In this great cultural clash,” Morrison lamented, “Dick Cheney has enlisted with the forces of dissolution”:

Consider this thought experiment. Twin brothers announced on a TV talk show that they were gay. Under the laws proposed, can they marry? If not, why not? They’ve certainly had a “committed relationship” since before they were born. What constitutional principle could you invoke to say these twins cannot marry each other? And if these twin brothers may marry, why not a twin brother and sister?

Dick Cheney probably never met Mae West. For younger readers unfamiliar with one of Hollywood’s original blond bombshells, I’ll simply say: sailors in World War II called their large life jackets Mae Wests. (This is a family blog, after all.)

Mae West famously said: “Marriage is a great institution, but I’m not ready for an institution.” How strange that Mae West had a better understanding of civil marriage than a former Vice President of the United States, a man who was twice elected to national office by pro-family voters.

…

In 2000, Dick Cheney might have considered Philadelphia’s most famous son, Benjamin Franklin. Franklin’s own son was the royal Governor of New Jersey. It was a patronage job Ben had secured for him. When his son remained loyal to the Crown, Benjamin Franklin did not refuse to sign the Declaration of Independence citing a “personal situation.” That’s one of the many reasons why we remember Ben Franklin with admiration and respect.

Dick Cheney is said to be worth hundreds of millions. His family may not suffer the devastation that comes from the breakdown of marriage. But in his recent book, Coming Apart, Charles Murray shows how the loss of marriage for the white working class in America has already had catastrophic consequences. If we seek the reason behind the great disparities in wealth that the Occupy crowd is howling about, we need look no further than the collapse of marriage. In this great cultural clash, Dick Cheney has enlisted with the forces of dissolution.

Right Wing Leftovers

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Wednesday, 2/2/2011 6:33 pm
  • Joseph Farah says he "wouldn't vote for Mitt Romney if he were running against Satan himself."

  • Gordon Klingenschmitt says the repeal of DADT will result in a "purge" of Christians from the military.

  • Focus on the Family is not impressed with Barbara Bush's support for marriage equality.

  • FRC 's Robert Morrison says Lila Rose "deserves a Pulitzer Prize."

  • Anti-mosque activist Andy Sullivan opposes the "Ground Zero Mosque" because "according to the IRS, they are a religious 501c3 charity, meaning they cannot have access to federal monies. No religious institution has the right to have access to federal monies."

  • Next, Bill O'Reilly will be asking "magnets, how do they work?"

  • Finally, Bryan Fischer says we need to "start dismantling egregiously wrong precedents such as Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas."

FRC Defends Use of the "Southern Strategy" by Completely Redefining It

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Tuesday, 8/31/2010 1:22 pm

Robert Morrison is a Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council, so you'd think that he'd be familiar with what the term "the Southern Strategy" actually means and what it entailed. 

But you'd be wrong, because Morrison is claiming that the "Southern Strategy" is nothing more than run-of-the-mill political efforts to win votes in the South:

A former Republican National Chairman is getting kudos from the liberal media for an odd thing. Veteran political reporter Dan Balz of the Washington Post applauds Ken Mehlman’s decency, reserving generous commendations for Mehlman’s efforts at “outreach” to black voters. He notes that Mehlman made a special effort to apologize to black voters for Richard Nixon’s “infamous” Southern strategy of 1968 and 1972.

For a savvy reporter like Balz, this is nonsense on stilts. Can anyone imagine Democratic National Chairman Tim Kaine apologizing for Thomas Jefferson’s Southern strategy? Or Andrew Jackson’s? Woodrow Wilson’s? Franklin D. Roosevelt’s?

FDR won four elections as president, something now barred by the Twenty-second Amendment. Every one of those elections started out with Roosevelt’s campaign managers banking on the electoral votes of the Solid South.

First of all, that is obviously not what people mean when they use the term "Southern Strategy," as Mehlman's actual apology illustrates:

"By the '70s and into the '80s and '90s, the Democratic Party solidified its gains in the African American community, and we Republicans did not effectively reach out," Mehlman says in his prepared text. "Some Republicans gave up on winning the African American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization. I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong."

The "Southern Strategy" was a targeted effort by Republicans to win over traditional Southern Democrats through the use of racially polarization. As Richard Nixon's strategist Kevin Phillips explained:

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.

Or, as Lee Atwater bluntly put it:

“You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Nigger, nigger, nigger,’ ” said Atwater. “By 1968, you can’t say ‘nigger’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things, and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.”

Morrison asserts that "there’s nothing infamous at all about seeking support in the South" and, as such, Republicans have nothing for which they need to apologize ... which I guess is true provided that you redefine the term "Southern Strategy" to mean the exact opposite of what it actually was.

Do Not Underestimate The Right's Opposition to Gov. Daniels' Truce

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Tuesday, 6/29/2010 11:24 am

Several weeks ago, Gov. Mitch Daniels set off a firestorm when he suggested calling a truce in the culture wars in order to focus the nation on addressing economic and security issues. 

Needless to say, that suggestion did not sit well with the Religious Right, since fighting culture war issues is their main priority.  But eventually the story ran its course and the attacks on Daniels subsided as everyone involved moved on to other issues. 

Or so we thought ... but apparently the Family Research Council is still upset about it since FRC Senior Fellow Robert Morrison just wrote an op-ed attacking Daniels once again that ran in the Indianapolis Star. 

Daniels' supporters had been defending him on the grounds that he has a solid pro-life conservative record and thus he could get away with calling for a truce because nobody could question his credentials.  But it looks like that is not the case, as Morrison slams Daniels for allowing Planned Parenthood to host a fundraiser in the Governor's mansion and slams his "blinkered view [of] prosperity [with] no moral foundation": 

What Mitch Daniels missed in his call for a "truce" in the culture clash -- a call he has adamantly repeated in recent days -- is that we can no more be quiet about the slaughter of innocents than we can about the plundering of the next generation's hopes for prosperity.

Planned Parenthood hosted a fundraiser in the Indiana governor's residence. No pro-life governor would allow that. If we accept that, how can we complain when Gov. Kathleen Sebelius invites the grisliest of partial-birth abortionists to her governor's mansion? Is it somehow OK because Daniels is a Republican?

...

The Republicans have ever been a party of enterprise. This is not wrong. Abraham Lincoln believed passionately in "the right to rise." He unleashed great engines of wealth production in the form of new inventions and a trans-continental railroad. Even with the tragedy and destruction of the Civil War, American industry and agriculture prospered.

But what saved Lincoln's new Republican Party from being dismissed as advocates only for "Golden Calf" politics -- a soulless worship of great wealth -- was its basic commitment to human dignity, to the right of every man to eat the bread his own hands had earned.

Daniels misses all this. He does not understand that human life is the basis for all wealth. President Reagan's Mexico City Doctrine was not just a cutoff of federal funds from the death-dealing minions of Planned Parenthood. It was importantly that, but much, much more.

Reagan's Mexico City Doctrine boldly declared that human creativity and human procreativity were the indispensable sources of all wealth. Every farmer knows you cannot prosper if you eat the seed corn ... We know that where there is no vision the people perish. With Mitch Daniels' blinkered view, the perishing will continue apace, and prosperity will have no moral foundation.

FRC: Failure to Mandate Pledge of Allegiance Creates More "American Talibans"

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Friday, 2/26/2010 1:08 pm

Earlier this week it was reported that, back in January, a teacher at Roberto Clemente Middle School in Germantown, Maryland had publicly reprimanded a student who refused to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and even called the school's security officer to escort the student to the counselor's office when she continued to refuse.  This, despite that fact that the "Supreme Court ruled in 1943 that students cannot be forced to salute the flag [and] Maryland law explicitly allows any student or teacher to be excused from participating in the pledge."

The ACLU got involved and now the teacher has agreed to apologize, but Robert Morrison of the Family Research Council is outraged about the whole thing, holding it up as evidence that the ACLU is creating "future American Talibans":

Is the Montgomery County school case too trivial to merit national attention? No. It illustrates how classroom discipline and American patriotism are under constant assault by the ACLU. Our tax dollars are funding this radical outfit. Thomas Jefferson said “to require a man to provide contributions of money for the propagation of opinions he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical.” Surely, the fact that the ACLU uses our tax money against us is a gross violation of our rights.

Does it matter? John Walker Lindh is currently sitting in federal prison. He is the so-called American Taliban who was convicted of fighting against Americans in Afghanistan. Young Lindh was educated in Montgomery County Public Schools. Was he taught anything about why he should be loyal to his country? Why jihadism is a threat to all our rights? I seriously doubt it. By punishing a teacher who simply tried to give students the opportunity to express their patriotism and support for our country during a time of war, the Montgomery County public schools are doing nothing to avoid future American Talibans.

FRC's Morrison Explains How Condoms Ruined Our Nation

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Tuesday, 8/4/2009 5:08 pm

In recent week, Religious Right groups were nearly unanimous in their opposition to the legislation introduced by Reps. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, and Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn seeking "common ground" in the debate over reproductive choice.

Though "aimed at preventing unintended pregnancies and supporting pregnant women," the Religious Right immediately dismissed the effort as a "red herring,"a "travesty," and an effort to increase abortions.

Among the various reasons they gave for opposing the bill was that, in the words of Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, "contains no funding for abstinence programs nor anything to encourage teens and young adults to refrain from risky sexual behavior."

Today, Robert Morrison, a Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at FRC, took to the organization's blog to provide an explanation of what is wrong with the bill's lack of funding for abstinence programs, offering some rather bizarre "proof" of why "condom programs don't work."

The "proof" he provides?  Bill Clinton's dalliance with Monica Lewinsky:

Our children are, in fact, still paying for most deplorable episode in our history. One of my brilliant foreign students, a young Austrian, told me during a White House tour last summer that the first time he ever heard of the Oval Office was when Bill Clinton disgraced it. How terrible for America.

The latest effort at condom-pushing in Congress—the so-called Ryan-DeLauro bill—is being touted by TIME and other media outlets as the historic compromise that will solve the problem of abortion in America. It will bring “peace in our time” in the culture wars, TIME and the bill’s pushers believe.

Well, it won’t. With the passage of a dozen years, however, we might use the tawdry Clinton-Lewinsky story to teach an important lesson: condom programs don’t work.

The idea behind condom-pushing is that if enough young people are educated enough, informed enough, and have enough “access” to condoms, they will faithfully and effectively use them to prevent unwanted pregnancy, AIDS, and all other STDs.

Advocates of condom-pushing are forever treating us like the Church Lady on Saturday Night Live. “Get real,” they yell at us. They tell us over and over again that it is only America’s “puritanical” sexual mores that prevent our young people from getting the “information” and equipment they need. We are the ones who are woefully impractical and need to “get with it,” they try to convince the American people.

So let’s do a reality test of our own. Suppose we have a President who is not only an Ivy League graduate but also a Rhodes Scholar from Oxford. Is that smart enough? And suppose he has “access” to all the condoms in the world. In fact, he has appointed Tim Wirth to be his Under Secretary of State. Tim keeps a supply of condoms in a silver bowl on his desk. Our leader has only to snap his fingers or press a button to have Tim come running with his silver bowl. Talk about access. As for information about condom use and effectiveness? Suppose our Chief Executive actually sends messages to Congress every year for a nearly decade touting condoms and appropriating billions of tax dollars for their distribution and use? Is that enough information?

Yet suppose further that a 21-year old intern comes into the office of our Commander-in-Chief, bearing pizza and snapping the thong of her underwear. What then becomes of all that education, access and information? Poof! Bill Clinton never even thought about using them.

Poof and proof. Condom programs don’t work. Q.E.D.

Apparently, if Clinton and Lewinsky had only been properly indoctrinated with abstinence education teachings, this nation would have been spared "the most deplorable episode in our history."

Astronauts + Right-Wing Abortion Group = Anti-Abortion Ad, Obviously.

Submitted by Anonymous on Thursday, 7/16/2009 2:40 pm

Throughout the catalog of right-wing organizations, one can easily find examples of attempts to connect two things which, under rational thought, would have no reason being mentioned in the same article, ad, or argument. Usually, the connection (or lack thereof) will leave you scratching your head.

Just take, for instance, Robert Morrison's recent article on the Family Research Council's blog that takes you through a confusing journey from the French national holiday, Bastille Day, to why we shouldn't confirm Sonia Sotomayor. Then there was Operation Rescue's recent press release that tries to connect Sotomayor and her virtually non-existent abortion record to the criminal prosecution of an abortion clinic worker in Florida. Kyle has previously written about the Right's tendency to try and link seemingly distant subjects.

The most recent attempt to connect the unconnected comes in the form of a new television ad from the anti-abortion group, Fidelis. The ad, which launched today, attempts to intertwine the anniversary of the Apollo 11 launch and the importance of a "pro-life" agenda:

Dr. Joseph Kerwin, the first American doctor in outer space, joined other former NASA greats yesterday at a press conference sponsored by the Catholic pro-life group Fidelis, the creator of the new advertisement and its popular web site CatholicVote.org.

The event commemorated both the fortieth anniversary of Apollo 11’s historic landing on the moon and the new ad buy from Fidelis.

...

Brian Burch, the president of the group, told LifeNews.com that putting a man on the moon was once thought impossible.

“Neil Armstrong will go down in history as one of the greatest explorers. His long journey to the moon started, as each of us started, with a small kick in our mother’s womb,” said Burch. “Today, we salute the astronauts of Apollo 11 and all other brave pioneers who give meaning to the potential of every human life.”

With today marking the anniversary of the liftoff of Apollo 11 and July 20 marking the anniversary of the first moonwalk, the new Fidelis pro-life commercial comes at an appropriate time.

In a note to supporters of the organization, Kerwin talked more about the new "Imagine" television commercial. He said it would "be running regularly on local Houston television stations for the next several weeks."

"Their new ad is already creating buzz in Houston, and I can't wait for the rest of the country to celebrate the 40th Anniversary of Apollo 11 with this new ad," he said.

"Next Monday, media outlets around the world will commemorate the historic achievement of Apollo 11. The courage and dedication of the astronauts aboard Apollo 11, and hundreds of others involved in our nation's space program make me proud of our great country," Kerwin added. "But most importantly, the achievements of the space program remind me of the potential of every human life."

"May we never cease to marvel at the gift, and potential of every human life," he concluded.

While I understand the Right's need to come up with new and innovative ways to market their message, I simply don't think comparing Bastille Day and Sonia Sotomayor or abortion and outer space will cut it.

What Do Bastille Day, The Library of Congress, Jimmy Carter, and Sonia Sotomayor Have in Common....Nothing?

Submitted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 7/14/2009 3:27 pm

Today is Bastille Day in France, marking a pivital time in both the French Revolution and overall French history. Apparently, it's also a day for the Family Research Council to attempt to intertwine the French Revolution, Jimmy Carter, and Sonia Sotomayor. All with a negative twist, of course.

In a post to the FRC's blog, Robert Morrison wrote a short, albeit quite confusing, article that begins by generalizing the entire French Revolution as counter-productive (I'm sure the feudal peasants would disagree). It goes on to blame the French Revolution for later revolts around the world:

Why should Christians care? Why should citizens of the United States care? Because the turmoil unleashed by the French Revolution spawned a host of other revolutions—those in Russia (1917), China (1949), Cuba (1959), and Cambodia (1970). And those revolutions unloosed oceans of innocent blood.

Maybe it slipped the mind of Morrison that the American Revolution and Declaration of Independence served as an inspirational catalyst for the French revolution and its most important document, The Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen. So, what is he saying about the American Revolution?

Morrison continues his strange train of thought by citing Librarian of Congress, James Billington's view that the French Revolution spawned the Nazi movement:

Our Librarian of Congress—James Billington— maintains that the French Revolution also spawned the Nazi movement in Germany. His work, Fire in the Minds of Men, carefully traces the malignant ideas of communism and Nazism back to their roots in revolutionary France.

He finally wraps it up by claiming that the views of "liberals" like Sonia Sotomayor belong in the zoo:

As we watch hearings in Washington on the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, keep in mind that liberalism would give us a “living Constitution,” not one that restrains power even as it protects American liberty. Maybe the best place for the liberals’ Constitution is not in the Archives, but in the Zoo.

If you want to be thoroughly confused, click here; however, I wouldn't recommend it.

The Confusing FRC

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Thursday, 4/2/2009 11:57 am

Yesterday, the Family Research Council released a petition aimed at "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to urge him to stop lying to himself and the American taxpayer" about his pro-life views, saying "he cannot claim to be pro-life and continue advocate for taxpayer funding of abortion."

FRC's action alert urging people to sign it begins thusly:

Senator Reid used to claim he was pro-life. Since he became Majority Leader in the Senate, however, he is sounding more and more like his pro-abortion colleagues Chuck Schumer and Ted Kennedy. Just recently he told reporters he would be perfectly fine with a health care bill that requires taxpayers to fund abortions.

Is he taking his talking points from the President of Planned Parenthood? Two weeks ago she said that she would pursue making abortion part of President Obama's health care plan.

I have to admit that I had to re-read this several times before I realized that the "she" to which FRC referred  was not a typo referencing Reid but was rather referring to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards.

While I am more that willing to chalk my confusion about this up to my own stupidity, I don't know that I can say the same for this recent op-ed FRC Senior Policy Analyst Robert Morrison in the Washington Examiner in which he complains about ... well, I'm not sure entirely:

With the talk of whether President Barack Obama is a Socialist, it’s no wonder the country is confused. Some ofthe confusion began when NBC’s late Tim Russert made the switch on national TV in advance of the 2000 election. Prior to that, Republican states had been shown on network election maps in blue, with Democratic states in red.

In 1980, CBS showed President Ronald Reagan’s states as deep a blue as a California swimming pool. Jimmy Carter’s small haul of states was an embarrassed red. When Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York went blue, Dan Rather went green. In 1984, the map went almost all blue again, as Reagan romped to a second landslide victory.

Beginning in 2000, the vision of red state Republicans and blue state Democrats was burned into our minds with the 34-day wait for resolution by the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore.

It’s time to switch colors back. Around the world, conservative parties’ color is blue. And liberals—oh alright—call yourselves progressives if you insist— are red. It’s the color of Labour in Britain, Liberals in Canada, and the SPD in Germany. The Left is red for a very good reason. It represents revolution. Go see Les Mis if you doubt it.

President Obama should be saluted for reaching out to voters in red states and blue states. Not for him the vicious view of a Michael Moore, who wondered why terrorists would want to kill so many blue state voters on 9/11.

Let’s hope both parties will make their best cases to Americans as Americans. E Pluribus Unum should recognize no division. As the victory of Prop. 8 showed in California this time, and the marriage amendment in Ohio proved last time, voters are entirely capable of making differing judgments on men and measures. It’s time they were treated with more respect.

Apparently, Morrison doesn't like the use of red for Republicans and blue for Democrats and seems to believe that this has something to do with why people think President Obama is a socialist and it's all Tim Russert's fault ... plus, some reference to Michael Moore and gay marriage.

Seriously, this is the entire op-ed ... and I literally have no idea what it means.

Syndicate content

Robert Morrison Posts Archive

FRC Invokes Matthew Shepard in Anti-Gay Marriage Column
SUBMITTED BY: Brian Tashman, Thursday 03/28/2013, 4:05pm
Family Research Council senior fellow Robert Morrison is out with a column reflecting on his experience at NOM’s March for Marriage and how “marriage benefits everyone,” except for the same-sex couples who he believes should not have the right to marry. Morrison writes that “marriage is a blessing to families” but is now “under attack” by gays and lesbians. Then, he uses the violent death of Matthew Shepard, the victim of an anti-gay hate crime, as a reason to oppose same-sex marriage: “Three-quarters of the teen rapists in our prisons are... MORE >
FRC Furious with Cheney for Supporting Marriage Equality
SUBMITTED BY: Brian Tashman, Friday 02/24/2012, 10:50am
Family Research Council senior fellow Robert Morrison yesterday chided former Vice President Dick Cheney for his support of marriage equality, particularly his role in garnering Republican support for the bill in Maryland. Morrison bragged that he didn’t respond to media inquiries at the 2000 GOP convention in Philadelphia to goad him into criticize Cheney, even though FRC president Tony Perkins attacked the Cheney family after Mary had a child with her partner. He also said that just because Cheney has an openly gay daughter, that is no reason he should support equal rights for gays... MORE >
Right Wing Leftovers
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Mantyla, Wednesday 02/02/2011, 6:33pm
Joseph Farah says he "wouldn't vote for Mitt Romney if he were running against Satan himself." Gordon Klingenschmitt says the repeal of DADT will result in a "purge" of Christians from the military. Focus on the Family is not impressed with Barbara Bush's support for marriage equality. FRC 's Robert Morrison says Lila Rose "deserves a Pulitzer Prize." Anti-mosque activist Andy Sullivan opposes the "Ground Zero Mosque" because "according to the IRS, they are a religious 501c3 charity, meaning they cannot have... MORE >
FRC Defends Use of the "Southern Strategy" by Completely Redefining It
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 08/31/2010, 1:22pm
Robert Morrison is a Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council, so you'd think that he'd be familiar with what the term "the Southern Strategy" actually means and what it entailed.  But you'd be wrong, because Morrison is claiming that the "Southern Strategy" is nothing more than run-of-the-mill political efforts to win votes in the South: A former Republican National Chairman is getting kudos from the liberal media for an odd thing. Veteran political reporter Dan Balz of the Washington Post applauds Ken Mehlman’s decency, reserving... MORE >
Do Not Underestimate The Right's Opposition to Gov. Daniels' Truce
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 06/29/2010, 11:24am
Several weeks ago, Gov. Mitch Daniels set off a firestorm when he suggested calling a truce in the culture wars in order to focus the nation on addressing economic and security issues.  Needless to say, that suggestion did not sit well with the Religious Right, since fighting culture war issues is their main priority.  But eventually the story ran its course and the attacks on Daniels subsided as everyone involved moved on to other issues.  Or so we thought ... but apparently the Family Research Council is still upset about it since FRC Senior Fellow Robert Morrison just... MORE >
FRC: Failure to Mandate Pledge of Allegiance Creates More "American Talibans"
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Mantyla, Friday 02/26/2010, 1:08pm
Earlier this week it was reported that, back in January, a teacher at Roberto Clemente Middle School in Germantown, Maryland had publicly reprimanded a student who refused to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and even called the school's security officer to escort the student to the counselor's office when she continued to refuse.  This, despite that fact that the "Supreme Court ruled in 1943 that students cannot be forced to salute the flag [and] Maryland law explicitly allows any student or teacher to be excused from participating in the pledge." The ACLU got involved... MORE >
FRC's Morrison Explains How Condoms Ruined Our Nation
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 08/04/2009, 5:08pm
In recent week, Religious Right groups were nearly unanimous in their opposition to the legislation introduced by Reps. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, and Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn seeking "common ground" in the debate over reproductive choice.Though "aimed at preventing unintended pregnancies and supporting pregnant women," the Religious Right immediately dismissed the effort as a "red herring,"a "travesty," and an effort to increase abortions.Among the various reasons they gave for opposing the bill was that, in the words of Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council... MORE >
Astronauts + Right-Wing Abortion Group = Anti-Abortion Ad, Obviously.
, Thursday 07/16/2009, 2:40pm
Throughout the catalog of right-wing organizations, one can easily find examples of attempts to connect two things which, under rational thought, would have no reason being mentioned in the same article, ad, or argument. Usually, the connection (or lack thereof) will leave you scratching your head. Just take, for instance, Robert Morrison's recent article on the Family Research Council's blog that takes you through a confusing journey from the French national holiday, Bastille Day, to why we shouldn't confirm Sonia Sotomayor. Then there was Operation Rescue's recent press release that tries... MORE >