In just her first year in office, Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) has proven to be one of the most socially conservative members of Congress, and today she demonstrated just how intolerant she is of people who do not share her beliefs. In an interview, she and the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins were condemning the Air Force Academy for creating an outdoor worship space that accommodates “Earth-based” religions. Hartzler said she believes that her rabidly conservative brand of Christianity is “the main religion in our country” and condemned any attempt to accommodate “fringe religions”:

PERKINS: Do you see this as a part of a growing trend that we see that there is really kind of a marginalization of Christianity and almost a promotion of other forms of, I would have to say, fringe religions?

HARTZLER: I agree, I think so. Christianity is the main religion in our country and as a policy for the Department of Defense we need to defend the practice of religion but we do not have to obligate taxpayer funds to facilitate or accommodate it or pay for it.

PERKINS: Is it the government’s role to try to put all religions on the same plane?

HARTZLER: No, it’s not their role at all. Their role is to facilitate basic policy for our country and to not to try to lift up one religion over the other. They should be defending the basic rights that we have, that freedom of religion here, and certainly not facilitating or accommodating fringe religions. It’s crazy.

Listen, via Right Wing Watch:

Hartzler seems to believe it’s OK if the government accommodates her fringe brand of Christianity, as she has pursued legislative options to discriminate against same-sex couples in the military and applauded Speaker John Boehner for defending the Defense of Marriage Act using taxpayer funds. Perhaps she should spend some time with the First Amendment so she better understands how it’s unconstitutional both to establish her religious belief as law and to prevent others from the free exercise of their own beliefs.

As he struggles to keep his floundering presidential campaign afloat, Rick Santorum is hoping to impress social conservative voters in Iowa by touting the endorsements of fringe anti-gay activists. Yesterday and then again today, the Santorum campaign sent two email messages to supporters highlighting endorsements from Karen Testerman of New Hampshire’s vehemently anti-gay Cornerstone Policy Research and Cary Gordon of Iowa’s Cornerstone World Outreach.

New Hampshire’s Cornerstone is leading the charge to repeal marriage equality in the state and is closely linked to anti-gay groups like the Alliance Defense Fund, the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, and the National Organization for Marriage. The organization has also “endorsed discredited ‘ex-gay’ therapy outfits like Exodus International, Love Won Out, PFOX, and the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH).”

Iowa’s Cary Gordon — who led the charge the recall three Iowa justices who brought marriage equality to the state — is full of his own colorful opinions about gay and lesbian people (via Right Wing Watch):

– GAYS WILL EXTINGUISH AMERICA: “Protect the virtue of true Americanism from our own mental barbarians who attack our minds with the God-hating secularism of Europe,” like the Roman Empire “we too will be extinguished from the earth.” [3/2011]

– ADOPTION BY GAYS OFFENDS WOMEN: “When two men say to the world we can raise a child just as good as any heterosexual couple, I think that’s offensive to women, because you’re saying that a woman, a female, does not bring a unique contribution.” [3/2011]

– MARRIAGE EQUALITY WILL LEAD TO INCEST: Gordon said he believed the secular path he saw America’s society as being on would lead beyond legalizing same-sex marriages to polygamy, “whole villages getting married,” or grandparents marrying their own grandchildren. “There’s always been this fight of can you have a free country without God?” [3/2011]

Santorum has tried to break through with Republican primary voters by positioning himself as a lifelong conservative on foreign and domestic issues, but has yet to catch on as the favorite of the month in the GOP primary. His latest appeal even quotes Sarah Palin, who half heartedly endorsed the former Pennsylvania senator during an appearance last night on Fox News. “If voters start shifting gears and deciding they want ideological consistency, then they’re going to start paying attention to say, Rick Santorum,” she said.

North Carolina state Sen. Jim Davis (R) has joined the chorus of Republicans walking back their support of a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban all recognition of same-sex relationships. At a town hall this week, he reiterated his opposition to same-sex couples marrying, but admitted the amendment restricts freedoms “beyond his comfort zone”:

DAVIS: I have a lot of libertarian in me. I believe firmly, passionately that a marriage should be defined as being between one man and one woman. But I also believe with all my heart that in a free America people who choose to live a different lifestyle should have a legal right to do so. Just don’t call it marriage. [This amendment will] restrict their freedoms a little more beyond my comfort zone.

North Carolina’s inequality amendment would be more far-reaching than any other state’s, banning same-sex marriage, civil unions, and domestic partnerships. The rushed language of the amendment may lead to consequences for businesses and opposite-sex domestic partnerships as well.

North Carolina House Speaker Thom Tillis (R) expressed “personal difficulty” with the amendment last month, and when voters go to the polls on May 8 to decide, U.S. Rep. Renee Ellmers (R) has said that she will vote against the amendment. Though the legislators who advanced this measure are stepping back from it, religious proponents have now formed the “Vote for Marriage NC” coalition to advocate for it. The coalition includes the NC Baptist State Convention, Christian Action League, NC Values Coalition, and National Organization for Marriage.

The lead pastor at the Kentucky church that banned interracial couples from becoming members or participating in certain worship activities now expects that ban to be overturned. Gulnare Free Will Baptist Church, a small congregation in Pike County, Kentucky, voted to ban such couples Sunday, months after a former pastor originally drafted a resolution decreeing the policy.

But after outrage from local residents, local religious leaders, and the National Association of Free Will Baptists, current pastor Stacy Stepp told the Appalachian News-Express that he expected state and national Free Will Baptist officials to overturn the ban. He has also called for a new vote on the matter, perhaps as early as this Sunday, according to the Lexington Herald-Leader. The ban was instituted in a 9-6 vote of church members Sunday, though much of the 40-member crowd abstained. “We’re going to get it resolved,” Stepp said.

The National Association of Free Will Baptists released a statement Thursday backing that action and clarifying that it did not hold a formal position on interracial marriages because “it has not been an issue in the denomination.” It encouraged local and state church officials, as well as Gulnare’s membership, to “reverse the decision“:

Many interracial couples are members of Free Will Baptist churches. They are loved, accepted, and respected by their congregations. It is unfair and inaccurate to characterize the denomination as racist.

It is our understanding that steps are being taken by the church in question to reverse its decision. We encourage the church to follow through with this action. Leaders from the local conference and state association in Kentucky are working with the church to resolve this matter.

The ban on interracial couples was originally introduced through a resolution by former pastor Melvin Thompson after Stella Harville, a long-time attendee, performed at the church in August alongside her fiance, a native of Zimbabwe.

St. Petersburg’s anti-gay propaganda law may still be pending before the city council, but Russian lawmakers are renewing their call to extend the ban against so-called “homosexual propaganda” to the entire nation. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Kozak, an ally of President Vladimir Putin, said in a press conference yesterday that the St. Petersburg measure — which would fine groups or individuals who promote homosexuality, pedophilia, or transgenderism to minors — would ban “disgusting activity,” adding, “We should think about this topic on the federal level.” Regional governor Georgy Poltavchenko agreed, predicting that the ban would “serve for the good of public morals.” “There is nothing more abominable than propaganda regarding such things,” he said.

LGBT groups expressed dismay with the statements, conceding that the bill likely has the votes for passage. Prominent gay activist Nikolai Alexeyev tweeted, “Now Kozak and Poltavchenko have backed the bill on propaganda of homosexuality, even at a federal level. It really looks as if they’re going to pass it.” Igor Kochetkov, head of the Russian LGBT Network, issued a statement on the group’s Facebook page, linking the government’s actions to those of the German Nazis:

Apparently “United Russia ” is doing so badly on the eve of the election that they have no choice but to try and please the Nazis. In all countries where Nazis came to power, they began precisely with the persecution of gays. Mixing homosexuality and pedophilia is blatant ignorance or blatant provocation, insulting millions of people – gays and lesbians.

From a legal point of view this absurd law promoted by Kozak and Poltavchenko can not be assessed otherwise than propaganda of stupidity. From a political point of view it is a dangerous populism, which will only exacerbate social tensions in the country.”

Two regions of Russia — Arkhangelsk and Ryazan — have already adopted similar anti-propaganda laws that have been upheld by the Russian courts. But LGBT activists are pressuring St. Petersburg authorities to abandon the measure by asking the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights to condemn the bill. To the irritation of the Russians, the State Department has also spoken out against the proposal.

The ban passed the first of three readings on Nov. 16 and is expected to come up for a second reading some time “after parliamentary polls on December 4.”