NOM Chairman Defends Uganda Anti-Gay Law, Suggests Gay 'Recruitment' The Real Human Rights Abuse | Right Wing Watch

Maggie Gallagher, Brian Brown and "now" John Eastman. NOM's hatred of all things LGBTQI is shining brightly as usual.  What started out as a religious organization seeking to influence voters and legislatures to limit the civil rights of others based upon the teachings of the Catholic Church, has now "grown" to an international juggernaut of sadistic evil spouting hate wherever they land.

Eastman quoted Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni’s insistence that the new law was “provoked by western groups who come to our schools and try to recruit children into homosexuality." Noting that US aid restrictions prevent assistance from going to governments that commit human rights violations, including the failure to take “appropriate and adequate measures” to “protect children from exploitation,” Eastman implied that the real “exploitation” was coming from gay rights advocates recruiting children.

He also suggested that US opposition to laws criminalizing homosexuality hinders efforts to fight HIV/AIDS in Sub-Saharan Africa. (In fact, experts say that the criminalization of homosexuality hurts the effort to fight the epidemic.)

What is farcical concerning Eastman's statement, consider the following comments from Joe.My.God:

But what struck me the most is how he waxes outrages about how US aid might be cut off to select African nations because of their tendency to commit genocide against gay people. He becomes emotional as he emphasizes how important these aid programs are. But this man cares not a whit about these aid programs. He never once in his entire public career ever uttered a word about them. And his party generally opposes foreign aid and constantly seeks to cut it.
__________
A bunch of conservative Christians from US are bemoaning cultural imperialism in Africa? There's a direct connection between US missionaries working within Uganda and the writing and passing of this draconian legislation. The laws that they support are artifacts of cultural imperialism.

Or do they imagine we've all forgotten that? Or do they believe Scott Lively's work time in Uganda doesn't qualify as imperialism? Out-fucking-rageous.

Both of which ring true specially in regards to the British colonial origins of anti-gay laws and Scott Lively.

NOM Chairman Defends Uganda Anti-Gay Law, Suggests Gay 'Recruitment' The Real Human Rights Abuse | Right Wing Watch

NOM Asks Presidential Candidates To 'Prevent The Promotion' Of Gay Rights In Schools | Right Wing Watch

In a “marriage pledge” released today, NOM asks presidential candidates to support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and commit to overturning court rulings in favor of marriage equality.

NOM’s pledge also includes a plank similar to Russia’s infamous “gay propaganda” law, which bars “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships among minors.” In the third plank of its pledge, NOM asks candidates to “prevent the promotion of a redefined version of marriage in public schools and other government entities,” along with reversing Obama administration policies “that have the effect of undermining marriage.”

NOM also asks the candidates to “direct the Department of Justice to investigate, document and publicize cases of Americans who have been harassed or threatened for exercising key civil rights to organize, to speak, to donate or to vote for marriage and to propose new protections, if needed,” a reference to the sentiment among anti-gay activists that they are being persecuted by prohibitions on anti-LGBT discrimination.

Zack Ford over at Think Progress adds this, 

In other words, wholly committing to undoing all of marriage equality — as NOM is unequivocally asking — is a nothing short of a death wish for a candidate actually hoping to win the general election. Still, it seems likely that at least a few candidates will sign the pledge. Ted Cruz surely will; he has already filed for the passage of a federal marriage amendment. Scott Walker, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal, Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, and Rick Perry have all expressed support for an amendment. Marco Rubio has claimed he’s never supported such an amendment, though he actually has.

NOM Asks Presidential Candidates To 'Prevent The Promotion' Of Gay Rights In Schools | Right Wing Watch

‘Only God’ Can Stop Gay Marriage - The Daily Beast

Two points I harp about, the rash of alleged "religious liberty" incidents and the exporting of hate,,,

"They have a tough road ahead, and more and more they're being honest about that. That's becoming their new cry, now they're the David against Goliath," said Jeremy Hooper, a political consultant who has monitored the activities of anti-LGBT groups for a decade. “They're owning the fact that they're at a loss now.”

Those who have watched anti-gay groups closely suggest that there will be two major strategic shifts in their strategy.

First, as opposition to gay marriage collapses, American anti-LGBT activists will slow their battle against it. Instead, they’ll fight for the rights of those who hold anti-gay views—with resources shifting to so-called “religious freedom” groups.

"It's becoming increasingly evident that where the opponents of same-sex marriage can make a serious case is that it is a violation of religious liberty to sanction same-sex marriage," said Jonathan Rauch, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a long-time adovate for marriage equality. “[Their strategy is] to circle the wagons and say, look, if we're not going to win the debate on the public legitimacy of same-sex marriage, we can win the religious liberty one so that we don't have to be a part of this."

And second, with falling support domestically, many anti-LGBT groups will take their message abroad to places where the momentum is with them.

“It looks like the hardest core of anti-gay marriage advocates are turning their attention overseas, by lobbying for anti-gay marriage and anti-gay rights in places like Uganda and Russia,” Rauch said.

‘Only God’ Can Stop Gay Marriage - The Daily Beast

Ten Years From Now | NOM Blog

Not quite as nice as Brad Paisley's "Letter to Me" (5th Gear, 2007), I can only hope that a majority of what Brown "cites" come true.

But I am also a bit confused as to this "preservation of marriage" or "redefining marriage." I would have to say that if there is any redefinition going on, it would be at the hands of the church. Biblical references aside for the moment, me thinks that Brown needs to acquaint himself with the work of John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the 14th Century, which shows that the Roman Catholic Church did not condemn homosexuality until at least the 12th century. Or, The Marriage of Likeness: Same Sex Unions in Pre- Modern Europe which lists in detail some same sex union ceremonies found in ancient church liturgical documents.

Though Boswell's work is considered controversial by some, his findings need explaining especially in light of pre-Christian Greek attitudes towards homosexual relationships. Although I am loathe to cite the following due to interpretational controversy, one cannot ignore the presentation of Achilles and Patroclus in Homer's Illiad or Aeschylus' Myrmidons; even Plato had something to say in the Symposium, Phaedrus offers his commentary. Again in the Symposium, we have Pausanias of Athens and Agathon. And last, Alexander the Great and Hephaestion.

"For Roman citizens, marriage was a duty and was not meant for the purpose of fulfilling erotic needs. Therefore, it was considered normal for a male to look for sexual fulfillment outside marriage, though females did not have such liberty. Presumably, the main Greco-Roman moral view on human sexuality was that sexuality was good, as long as it did not interfere with a person's obligations to the state or family or involve the abuse of free children or married women. Other views stated that sexuality was dangerous and should be limited. People that held such beliefs would usually commit themselves to celibacy or limit their sexual activities either to marriage, or strictly for the purpose of procreation. Such views, though, did not preclude homosexual acts; they simply aimed to reduce promiscuous heterosexual activity."

As to he so-called "biblical" marriage,,,

Vaughn Roste, in 2004, put this piece together Biblical Marriage: A Bad Source For Debate:

1. Marriage consists of one man and one or more women. (Gen 4:19, 4:23, 26:34, 28:9, 29:26-30, 30:26, 31:17, 32:22, 36:2, 36:10, 37:2, Ex. 21:10, Judges 8:30, 1 Sam 1:2, 25:43, 27:3, 30:5, 30:18, 2 Sam 2:2, 3:2-5, 1 Chron 3:1-3, 4:5, 8:8, 14:3, 2 Chron 11:21, 13:21, 24:3).
2. Nothing prevents a man from taking on concubines in addition to the wife or wives he may already have. (Gen 25:6, Judges 8:31, 2 Sam 5:13, 1 Kings 11:3, 1 Chron 3:9, 2 Chron 11:21, Dan 5:2-3).
3. A man might chose any woman he wants for his wife (Gen 6:2, Deut 21:11), provided only that she is not already another man's wife (Lev 18:14-16, Deut. 22:30) or his [half-]sister (Lev 18:11, 20:17), nor the mother (Lev 20:14) or the sister (Lev 18:18) of a woman who is already his wife. The concept of a woman giving her consent to being married is foreign to the Biblical mindset.
4. If a woman cannot be proven to be a virgin at the time of marriage, she shall be stoned. (Deut 22:13-21).
5. A rapist must marry his victim (Ex. 22:16, Deut. 22:28-29) - unless she was already a fiancÈ, in which case he should be put to death if he raped her in the country, but both of them killed if he raped her in town. (Deut. 22:23-27).
6. If a man dies childless, his brother must marry the widow. (Gen 38:6-10, Deut 25:5-10, Mark 12:19, Luke 20:28).
7. Women marry the man of their father's choosing. (Gen. 24:4, Josh.15:16-17, Judges 1:12-13, 12:9, 21:1, 1 Sam 17:25, 18:19, 1 Kings 2:21, 1 Chron 2:35, Jer 29:6, Dan 11:17).
8. Women are the property of their father until married, and their husband after that. (Ex. 20:17, 22:17, Deut. 22:24, Mat 22:25).
9. The value of a woman might be approximately seven years' work. (Gen 29:14-30).
10. Inter-faith marriages are prohibited. (Gen 24:3, 28:1, 28:6, Num 25:1-9, Ezra 9:12, Neh 10:30, 2 Cor 6:14).
11. Divorce is forbidden. (Deut 22:19, Matt 5:32, 19:9, Mark 10:9-12, Luke 16:18, Rom 7:2, 1 Cor 7:10-11, 7:39).
12. Better to not get married at all - although marriage is not a sin. (Matt 19:10, I Cor 7:1, 7:27-28, 7:32-34, 7:38).

So, as you can see one can not make such a blanket statement that "gay theology" or the "gay agenda" is redefining marriage when it is quite obvious from history, biblical history as well, that marriage was never pigeon holed in the first place. It's just not that simple,,,

_

After Gilgamesh has a series of bad dreams, Enkidu comforts him, saying, “’Take my hand, friend, and we shall go [on] together, [let] your thoughts dwell on combat!’” (Tablet IV).

Ten Years From Now | NOM Blog

There is a method to my madness,,

How 2014's Elections Will Influence 2016's Voting Rights

This sad state of affairs after the recent election highlights well a point I was making here. Our votes do count and have future ramifications:

Parties are very susceptible to being taken over by ideologues because lower party offices have no appeal to the vast majority of our citizenry. Many precincts are represented by no one. If you decide all of a sudden because it's your Christian duty to become a precinct representative, you only need a few votes to get elected. Increasingly, they have the key say so on who will be a delegate at the national convention, and who will write the party platform and nominate the presidential candidate,,,

In the presidential election year of 2016, it looks unlikely that those problems will subside — especially if Congress fails to restore the Voting Rights Act. The two states that had the closest vote tallies in the last presidential election — Florida and Ohio — will go into the presidential election year with Republicans controlling the offices of governor and secretary of state and holding majorities in their state legislatures.

In Florida, Republican Gov. Rick Scott, who won reelection yesterday, will be able to appoint a secretary of state and will enjoy the support of a veto-proof Republican majority in the state House.

In Ohio, controversial Republican Secretary of State Jon Husted won reelection on Tuesday, along with Gov. John Kasich. They’ll be able to work with a strengthened GOP majority in the state legislature.

In North Carolina, where a Republican legislature and governor have cracked down on voting rights, the GOP held onto its majority. Republican secretary of state candidates in the swing states of Colorado, Iowa and Nevada also won elections yesterday.

Two influential elections for voting rights also took place in states unlikely to be presidential swing states. Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a national ringleader for advocates of restrictive voting laws, won reelection. In Arizona, which has been working with Kansas to defend their states' respective tough voting requirements, Republican candidate Michele Reagan also won her contest.

End Times Radio Host: Obama Will Kill More Than Mao, Stalin And Pol Pot

The interview drifted into a conversation about Israel’s role in the Last Days, with the commentators warning that President Obama’s foreign policy will lead to a war against Israel.

Wiles asked: “Steve, do you believe that Barack Obama is a potential mass murderer on the scale of Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot?”

“Yes,” Quayle said. “I think he will supersede them all.”

Bryan Fischer Suggests Native Americans Were Justifiably Removed From Their Land

Fischer recounted the Biblical tale of the Amorites, a group that had “lapsed into superstition and paganism and idolatry and sexual immorality and savagery” until they were vanquished by the Israelites. He then paraphrased God as saying, “I’m going to be patient with the Amorite people for 400 years, and if they continue to sin at the rate they’re sinning, every time they sin they’re putting a little more slop in the slop bucket, and if they keep doing that the slop bucket’s going to get full, and I’m going to have to empty out that slop bucket.”

Fischer then used the story to justify the violent expulsion of Native American people from their territory at the hands of white settlers. “This may even be a part of American history, when we think about the moral right for the nation and the peoples that God brought into this land to exercise sovereign control over the land,” he said. “Part of that equation may have to do with the immorality of those nations that were exercising sovereign control over this land at the time.”

Scott Lively Defeats Baal With Massachusetts 'Victory'

Anti-gay activist Scott Lively managed to capture more than 19,000 votes in his race to become governor of Massachusetts, which, he wrote on his website yesterday, represents a “HUGE VICTORY” in that those 19,000 voters “have not bowed their knee to Baal.”

Boasting in the third person that “he (by conservative accounts) handily won the two major debates in which he appeared” and “refused to engage in negative campaigning (except to criticize the other candidates for pandering, and for supporting abortion and sodomy),” Lively reported that he was changing his party registration back to Republican and would henceforth dedicate himself to helping “the Christian conservatives take the GOP back from the RINOs.”

“I will likely run for another office in 2016 as part of this effort,” he added.

Michael Peroutka: I'm Not A Neo-Confederate, 'If Anything, I Want To Be Just A True Confederate'

“It’s interesting how they create these terms and we don’t even know what they mean,” Bushman said. “Look, a Confederate, if you want to talk about ‘southern pride’ so to speak, or whatever, would be that you’re against the federal government and the violation of states’ rights, if you understand kind of the idea behind it. But a neo-Confederate? That would be kind of like you’re a fake Confederate or a wannabe Confederate.”

“If anything, I want to be just a true Confederate,” Peroutka replied.

He added that it is just a “code word” that’s “meant to stir up hatred against us.” Groups like Right Wing Watch, Peroutka added, think “Michael Peroutka’s a threat because he believes what Jefferson and Adams and Washington believed.”

National Organization for Marriage Defeats Every Republican It Targeted Who Embraced Same-Sex 'Marriage'; Group will Target Sen. Rob Portman for defeat in 2016

The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) claimed victory in their efforts to defeat three prominent Republican candidates for the US House and US Senate, and announced they will set their sights on defeating Sen. Rob Portman for reelection in 2016, or if he decides to run for president. Through their Super PAC, the NOM Victory Fund, the nation's largest organization supporting natural marriage opposed the election of Republican US House candidates Carl DeMaio (CA52) and Richard Tisei (MA6) as well as Republican US Senate candidate Monica Wehby of Oregon. Tisei and Wehby were defeated on Election Day while DeMaio conceded defeat yesterday.

"I hope that our success in defeating these three Republican candidates sends a message to the Republican leadership in Washington that the GOP faithful demands candidates who are committed to defending marriage, which is a critical element of the Republican platform," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "Together with our success with independent expenditure and grassroots campaigns to help elect pro-marriage Republicans like Thom Tillis, Tom Cotton, Joni Ernst and Ben Sasse, we've proven that speaking out in support of traditional marriage is a winning issue for Republican candidates."

Gary Cass: 'Homosexuality Mocks God, Confuses Our Children, Corrupts Our Culture' And Damns The Soul

Gary Cass sent out a fundraising email to supporters of his Christian Anti-Defamation Commission today seeking donations so that his organization can continues its fight against the "tyrannical state" which seeks to "force us to comply with unjust laws that promote an anti-Christian agenda."

In particular, Cass warned that "homosexuals are demanding rights that don't exist at the expense of our legitimate, God-given rights" and so he desperately needs donations to fight back against the idea that people are born gay because it "mocks God, confuses our children, corrupts our culture and damns the souls of those who refuse to forsake their sin and follow Christ":

Why Would People Hate A Chaplain?' Gordon Klingenschmitt Cannot Understand The Controversy Surrounding His Election

Appearing on the "Bible News Radio" program on Monday, newly elected Republican legislator Gordon Klingenschmitt voiced his confusion as to why his election to a seat in the Colorado House of Representatives has generated so much controversy and criticism, wondering "why would people hate a chaplain?"

Klingenschmitt, who has a long and well-documented history of saying an endless stream of truly insane things, seemed utterly mystified as to why his becoming an elected representative would be of concern to anyone.

"I'm just a guy who believes the Bible," he said. "I love Jesus. I love people. I'm a man of faith and compassion."

Phil Burress: Nondiscrimination Laws Let 'A Mentally Disturbed Person' 'Be Around Women And Girls'

Phil Burress, head Citizens for Community Values, the Ohio affiliate of the Family Research Council, told Religious Right activist Molly Smith this week that a proposal to expand Cleveland’s nondiscrimination ordinance to include protections for transgender people would allow “mentally disturbed” people to “be around women and girls in a women’s restroom.”

“A transgender person is a mental disorder,” Burress insisted, adding “it would take someone who has a mental disorder that would want to walk into a women’s bathroom in the first place.”

Conservatives aren’t just fighting same-sex marriage. They’re also trying to stop divorce. - The Washington Post

What is highlighted here is only the first tentative volley in the Reich's ubiquitous war on American life. Keyes with his report is bringing this attack to the front lines outlining the roles of Family Leader, Family Research Council and NOM.

For years, social conservatives have been fighting to prevent certain people from getting married. But they’re waging a parallel battle, too: Trying to keep married couples together.

In cooperation with the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage, socially conservative politicians have been quietly trying to make it harder for couples to get divorced. In recent years, lawmakers in more than a dozen states have introduced bills imposing longer waiting periods before a divorce is granted, mandating counseling courses or limiting the reasons a couple can formally split. States such as Arizona, Louisiana and Utah have already passed such laws, while others such as Oklahoma and Alabama are moving to do so.

If divorces are tougher to obtain, social conservatives argue, fewer marriages will end. And having more married couples is not just desirable in its own right but is a social good, they say. During his presidential campaign, former senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) emphasized finishing high school and getting married as cures for poverty. “If you do those two things, you will be successful economically,” he declared at a 2011 event in Iowa.

A legislative movement against divorce may seem like a non-starter in a country where half of married couples avail themselves of this right, but as with legal challenges to Obamacare and the rise of the tea party movement, today’s fringe idea can quickly become tomorrow’s mainstream conservatism.

[,,,]
Yet the conservative push for “divorce reform” is finding sympathetic ears in statehouses, where Republican lawmakers have regularly introduced bills to restrict the practice. Their rationales range from the biblical (God bemoans divorce in Malachi 2:14-16) to the social (divorce reduces worker productivity) to the financial (two households are more expensive to maintain than one). Leading conservatives such as Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) have also argued that marriage is a solution to poverty.

The cause earned national support in 2011 when three Republican presidential candidates — Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and Santorum — signed a pledge from the Family Leader, a conservative organization in Iowa, that urged “ ‘cooling-off’ periods” for people seeking what it called a “quickie divorce.”

[,,,]
At least a dozen other states since 2011 have tried to make divorce more difficult. Along with Iowa, New Hampshire and Oklahoma have tried to eliminate no-fault divorce for parents. In Oklahoma, lawmakers are also considering a bill that would virtually prohibit no-fault divorce but preserve divorce as an option in cases of “impotency.” Other states are pushing legislation to lengthen the waiting period before a judge can grant a divorce, including up to two years in North Carolina. Currently, most states have a two- or three-month waiting period before a divorce is finalized, though it is longer in a handful of mostly Southern states, including Louisiana, North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia.

Conservatives aren’t just fighting same-sex marriage. They’re also trying to stop divorce. - The Washington Post

How Marriage Equality Opponents' Three National Strategies All Contradict Each Other | ThinkProgress

2013 represented a significant turning point in the marriage equality fight with the Supreme Court’s overturning of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), but the next — and possibly last — phase of that effort is already taking form. What’s left is for the Supreme Court to address whether state constitutional bans on same-sex marriage violate the rights of gay and lesbian couples, and with cases in Nevada, Utah, Ohio, and Oklahoma already headed to the appellate level, that could happen within the next few years. In the meantime, opponents of marriage equality are doing their best to slow the momentum and limit the recognition of same-sex marriages as much as possible.

At the federal level, opponents currently have three proposed strategies for rolling back some of the recognition that same-sex couples now have. Particularly in the wake of the Utah and Oklahoma decisions, groups like the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and Family Research Council (FRC) have been emphasizing two talking points: that states should have the right to establish their own definition of marriage and that the religious views of people who oppose marriage equality should be protected. Each of the three proposed strategies would limit same-sex marriage to a certain extent according to these talking points, but the principles that inform each strategy are in conflict with each other.

While none of the three plans seems to be politically viable, here’s a look at how conservatives are tripping over themselves to stem the tide of marriage equality.

How Marriage Equality Opponents' Three National Strategies All Contradict Each Other | ThinkProgress

Maggie Gallagher: Moral Gays Deserve The Right To ‘Ex-Gay’ Therapy | The New Civil Rights Movement

The “ex-gay” industry kept the cash flowing into the coffers of hate groups like the American Family Association and the Family Research Council, as well as Gallagher’s National Organization For Marriage (NOM).

So, imagine my surprise when Maggie Gallagher, co-founder and former Chair of NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, chose to write a glowing response to Cumming’s op-ed.

In her regular National Review column, Gallagher calls Cummings “rather a giant in the field of psychology,” which is kind of like calling ExxonMobile “rather a giant in the field of climate change denialism.”

But the best line from Gallagher’s post?

“Cummings’s point is that competent therapy can be helpful to highly motivated patients who choose to deal with same-sex attraction in other ways than, well, being gay.”

Maggie Gallagher: Moral Gays Deserve The Right To ‘Ex-Gay’ Therapy | The New Civil Rights Movement

Federal, state ethics complaints against NOM, Iowa Family Leader, Santorum being evaluated | God Discussion

Last month, gay rights activist Fred Karger filed a complaint in Iowa against the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), a Washington, D.C.-based organization that opposes same sex marriage, saying it violated state law by not disclosing who contributed money during its Iowa efforts to oust Iowa Supreme Court justices during the elections in 2010 and 2012.

According to the Des Moines Register, the complaint will be considered at the Iowa Ethics & Campaign Disclosure Board’s Aug. 8 meeting, where it will be decided whether the complaint is "legally sufficient" for investigation.

Federal, state ethics complaints against NOM, Iowa Family Leader, Santorum being evaluated | God Discussion