Religion and sexuality – Page 76

The SPLC hate list and the Nazi card

Last week, the Southern Poverty Law Center published several articles devoted to identifying groups who perpetuate stereotypes and falsehoods about gays. In one of the articles, the SPLC articulated a list of ten myths about gays which they claimed the groups identified as hate groups willfully promote. Elsewhere, the SPLC updated the list of what they term anti-gay hate groups, adding several groups, some of which are well known social conservative organizations.

The reaction was slow but has started to emerge from the groups identified by the SPLC. One such reaction comes from Matt Barber, Liberty University adminstrator and board member at AFTAH, who wrote an op-ed for the Washington Times, titled “SPLC: The wolf who cried ‘hate.‘

The SPLC criteria for inclusion as a hate group were at one time somewhat vague. Now, with the ten-myth criteria, it becomes easier to identify the types of public statements which the SPLC views as promoting bias toward gays. One myth I have written about is the Scott Lively inspired claim that gays animated the Nazi party. In fact, the SPLC referred to a couple of posts on this blog by my friend and colleague, JonDavid Wyneken, history professor at GCC (part 1 & part 2). Referring to claims made in Lively’s book, The Pink Swastika, SPLC’s Evelyn Schlatter and Robert Steinback wrote:

The Pink Swastika has been roundly discredited by legitimate historians and other scholars. Christine Mueller, professor of history at Reed College, did a line-by-line refutation of an earlier (1994) Abrams article on the topic and of the broader claim that the Nazi Party was “entirely controlled” by gay men. Historian Jon David Wynecken at Grove City College also refuted the book, pointing out that Lively and Abrams did no primary research of their own, instead using out-of-context citations of some legitimate sources while ignoring information from those same sources that ran counter to their thesis.

More recently Bryan Fischer, speaking for another newly added hate group the American Family Association, said

Homosexuality gave us Adolph Hitler, and homosexuals in the military gave us the Brown Shirts, the Nazi war machine and six million dead Jews.

These are false claims which have been addressed multiple times by experts and primary sources. These are the kinds of claims which led the SPLC to place the AFA on their list.

And so it is stunning to see one of Matt Barber’s arguments in defense of the groups recently named to the hate group list. In fact, the argument is the big finish to the Washington Times column I referred to above. He says:

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.

Exactly. By Barber’s reasoning, then, the AFA and Scott Lively have lost the argument since the Nazi card has been played repeatedly by members of the SPLC’s hate list.

There is another strange twist in Barber’s op-ed. He says this:

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).

The groups which now populate the SPLC list specialize in ad hominem and hyperbolic attacks. Claims that gays die 20+ years early, that they are child abusers, that they are inherently diseased, and responsible for the Holocaust are the kinds of ad hominem and hyperbolic attacks which lead thoughful people, liberal and conservative, to question the credibility of those making the claims.

Christian groups should care about nuance and bearing honest witness. They should avoid misleading stereotypes and strive for accuracy in fact claims. When they don’t, they hurt the church and the good work that others are doing. Being designated a hate group is a serious matter and one which should cause reflection about the charges and not reckless defensiveness.

For more posts debunking the thesis advanced by the American Family Association and The Pink Swastika, click here…

Kampala court told gays have gone into hiding; will rule in 2 weeks

The first report from Kampala on the Rolling Stone trial comes from the Deutsche Presse Agentur via Monsters and Critics:

Kampala – Uganda’s gay community has gone into hiding after a local tabloid published 100 of their names and pictures, their lawyer told a High Court judge Friday.

Kampala-based weekly Rolling Stone in October published the names and images of people they said were homosexuals, accompanied by the headline: ‘Hang Them, they are after our kids: Pictures of top 100 Homos.’

Gay activists filed a petition in court to restrain the tabloid from further publication of pictures and anti-gay stories, and sought damages and costs incurred following the publication of the article.

‘By publishing the identities of these people and places they were frequenting for dinner, and their residences, it was tantamount to a violation of their rights,’ lawyer Henry Onaria told the Kampala court.

‘Homosexuals have always been harassed but this time they have been put in danger, they cannot move freely and they are in total hiding after this publication,’ he added.

Justice Kibuka Musoke, hearing the petition, said he would rule on the case in two weeks.

There is a small but growing community of gays and lesbians in the East African country, but its members have frequently complained of harassment by both the government and sections of the public.

Last year, a lawmaker presented a bill in parliament spelling out tough penalties for homosexuality, ranging from a few years in jail, to life imprisonment and hanging.

The move prompted a furious reaction from human rights bodies and Uganda’s western donors. The bill was subsequently put on ice.

One would think that a press organization would read other reports or actually cite sources, but not here. What does “put on ice” mean? The Anti-Homosexuality Bill has been stuck in committee, but as readers of CNN, Box Turtle Bulletin or this blog know, those supporting it are claiming that it will move during this session of Parliament.

Ugandan coalition supports Rolling Stone Hang Them campaign

This just in from Gay Uganda.

At the Rolling Stone’s day in court yesterday, Pastor Moses Male (you can watch him in action here) declared solidarity with the Rolling Stone’s outing campaign. I have three independent reports that gays were chased away from the court house and one was attacked.

The flyer that Male was distributing is on the right. Click the image to read it.

Male baits GLBT people to make a public stand, but he supports a tabloid which has incited violence against them. Male was one of the ministers, along with Martin Ssempa, who was investigated for making a false report of homosexuality about Rev. Robert Kayanja.

The court extended the ban on outing GLBT people until Friday when the Rolling Stone will present a case.

Ugandan court extends ban on Rolling Stone’s outing campaign

I knew there was a trial yesterday, but had not heard any news. According to this report, a Ugandan judge extended the ban on the Rolling Stone’s outing campaign.

A Ugandan high court judge on Tuesday extended a ban on the publication in the media of pictures identifying people as homosexuals, sparking the ire of a leading anti-gay pastor.

Judge Vincent Musoke-Kibuuka extended the ban at a Tuesday hearing in the case of homophobic tabloid Rolling Stone, which has no connection to the US magazine.

The judge had expected to hear arguments from Rolling Stone newspaper editors defending their right to out gay men and women in their new, sporadically published tabloid.

But Musoke-Kibuuke extended the ban, first issued on November 1, when Rolling Stone managing editor Giles Muhame insisted he was not ready to offer a defence, citing “a problem with my wife”.

Speaking on behalf of the National Coalition Against Homosexuality and Sexual Abuse in Uganda, Pastor Solomon Male accused the court of using the ban on outing to protect “selfish, heartless and aggressive criminal offenders.”

Shouting on the courthouse veranda, Male asked, “How can homosexuals who deliberately break the law claim right to privacy?”

Homosexuality is defined in Uganda’s penal code as “carnal knowledge against the order of nature”, and can bring a prison sentence of seven years to life.

Male was last year investigated for libel after accusing a prominent Evangelical pastor, who is minister to Uganda’s First Lady, of sexually abusing teenage boys.

Before ending Tuesday’s hearing, Musoke-Kibuuke scolded Muhame, a 22-year-old undergraduate student, for coming to court unprepared.

“You have given reasons which are not very satisfactory,” the judge said, prompting a mumbled apology from Muhame.

Muhame told AFP that when the case resumes on Friday, he will vehemently defend his right to publish photos he finds on gay dating websites, as he did in Rolling Stone’s November 1 issue.

“I can’t tell you what our defence will entail. But we will be ready. We are making very excellent notes,” he said.

Male was joined by Martin Ssempa in making those libelous accusations against Robert Kayanja, a famous pentecostal minister in Kampala.

UPDATE: According to Giles Muhame’s Facebook page, the problem which kept the Rolling Stone from mounting a case was with the lawyer for the Rolling Stone. Apparently his wife just gave birth.

Today Rolling Stone managers appeared in court to defend the right to publish homosexuals in the newspaper. But the case could hardly take off as the newspaper lawyer’s wife had just given birth. The judge accepted our excuse. We are preparing the finest of notes in defence…..Case adjourned to Friday.

Muhame had predicted demonstrations at the court house. I heard from witnesses that no demonstrations took place but that some of the GLB people were harassed and threatened.

Ladies Home Journal on anti-gay bullying

The 9th largest monthly magazine, Ladies Home Journal, has an article out on newstands today which addresses anti-gay bullying. The article by Kenneth Miller is titled, “Gay Teens Bullied to the Point of Suicide” but covers the entire topic of anti-gay bias and religious tolerance. The subtitle, “It’s a shocking trend. Isn’t it time for all of us to encourage compassion and respect, no matter how we feel about homosexuality?” captures the tone of the piece aimed at the moderate to conservative readership of LHJ. I think Miller and the LHJ staff did a nice job of bringing in a variety of voices to urge a united voice against anti-gay bias and bullying. Full disclosure: I am a bit biased since I have a couple of quotes in the piece. The article sets the stage by calling out the extreme rhetoric used by some social conservatives:

“Despite recent cultural shifts, kids still get the overwhelming message from society that homosexuality is not acceptable,” says Scott Quasha, PsyD, a professor of school psychology at Brooklyn College. It’s not uncommon to hear fierce condemnation from politicians and preachers as they debate gay civil rights. Homosexuality is compared to incest, bestiality, even violent crime. “This trickles down into the schools, where bullying occurs,” says Dr. Quasha. “A gay child is an easy target for classmates looking to make trouble.”

Antigay bullying is something all parents should be concerned about, says Merle Bennett Buzzelli, who oversees the public school antiviolence program in Akron, Ohio. “The victims are not just students who are actually gay,” she points out — the abuse is also directed at straight kids who don’t quite fit gender norms. Tomboyish girls and guys who show interest in, say, gymnastics or dance are often called the same names — and subjected to the same ostracism and attacks — as their gay and lesbian classmates. There’s no evidence that Billy Lucas was gay, but he was “different,” classmates said. Because of that, bullies called him “fag” and told him he didn’t deserve to live. Of course, for kids who do experience same-sex attraction, the use of the word gay as an all-purpose put-down is just one more painful indication that they don’t fit in, whether or not they look or act any different from their peers, says Dr. Quasha.

Dr. Quasha is making a simple but effective case for the disruptive nature of stereotype threat. Stereotype threat, in this context, refers to the fear of being considered gay by others, usually more socially powerful peers. Stereotypes about gays are consistently negative among young teens, often held as a global, diffuse negative attitude.

I am not sure about this, but I think stereotype threat operates in two broad ways. For students who are sure or pretty sure they are gay, the threat is that the social group will believe or assume every negative stereotype about gay people. For non-gay or unsure teens, I think the threat is that they will be considered gay and that such assessments are negative. Hopefully, a school environment tolerant of differences and intolerant of harassment will make improve life for both categories of students.

The article considers people who hold all shades of beliefs regarding homosexuality with a money quote from Dr. Caitlin Ryan:

After almost a decade of research on gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender teens, Dr. Ryan’s group has found a clear pattern: The more supportive the parents and family, the better kids do over the long run. “That doesn’t necessarily mean changing your deeply held beliefs,” Dr. Ryan explains. “It means finding a way to balance those beliefs with the love you have for your child.”

Parents are called on to seek that balance all the time. Children do all kinds of things parents do not like or approve of but the role of parent involves providing love and direction. These values have to be balanced and carefully woven into an attachment that is like no other.

Ryan continues:

Even parents who can’t be fully accepting can find ways to be supportive. “You can say, ‘I think this is wrong but I love you and I’m going to be here for you,'” Dr. Ryan suggests. “Be willing to listen. Give your child a hug.”

This advice won’t please everyone but seems a reasonable compromise. In some cases, the agree to disagree approach leads to mutual respect and the maintenance of a solid attachment. In other cases, as noted in this article, parents become more accepting, even supportive.

I appreciate that the author reached out for comment from people of various faiths, in order to highlight the value of mutual respect and tolerance.

We all need to speak more carefully, says Father Mike Tegeder, pastor of the Church of St. Edward in Bloomington, Minnesota. “The Catholic Church teaches that each person has dignity, whatever their race or gender or sexual orientation,” he says. “We don’t need to agree with one another, but we have to respect one another’s dignity as children of God.”

And many religious groups agree. Exodus International, a conservative Christian organization that had previously encouraged kids to speak out against homosexuality, changed direction after the recent string of suicides, deciding to advocate “biblical tolerance and grace” instead of confrontation. For Warren Throckmorton, PhD, an associate professor of psychology at Grove City College, a Christian school in Pennsylvania, the group’s reversal was an obvious choice. “It seems to me that Christians should be first in line in saying that everyone should be treated the way you yourself want to be treated,” says Dr. Throckmorton, a traditional evangelical who recently developed The Golden Rule Pledge, a program specifically designed to help conservative churches prevent antigay bullying.

The article provides resources for parents and community groups, including the Golden Rule Pledge and provides a clear message that respect for the dignity of all is a virtue about which we all should be able to agree. Let me ask social conservatives who want to criticize this article. What do you have to offer instead? How can the Golden Rule be wrong or inadequate? Do you like to be stereotyped or to be the target of demeaning rhetoric? I assume not, so don’t do it to other people.

UPDATE: Sigh, just after I posted the above, I saw this article in the Christian Post, describing the efforts of “an interfaith coalition” to block the NJ Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights. Instead of demonstrating respect during the Week of Respect mandated by the bill, the coalition wants to have their own week, called “Morality Awareness Campaign.” The coalition was also glad to have private religious schools exempted. Watch this and ask yourself if that was such a good idea. Really, watch this…