(Photo Credit: Brian Clark, The Virginian-Pilot)

The repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has opened the door to various milestones as military traditions become inclusive of same-sex couples. Today, the Navy tradition of being the first couple to share a homecoming kiss went to a same-sex couple for the first time. Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta won the lottery aboard the Oak Hill to fulfill the tradition and was greeted by her girlfriend, Petty Officer 3rd Class Citalic Snell when she crossed the brow.

Watch an interview with the couple about their historic moment:

Gay Republican group GOProud said today that “Speaker Gingrich said absolutely nothing wrong” when he told a gay voter he’d be better off supporting President Obama’s reelection. Both GOProud and the Log Cabin Republicans insist that the liberal press is misrepresenting Gingrich’s comments, but in doing so they’ve conceded that supporting LGBT equality is not among their top priorities:

GOPROUD: The liberal press is at it again, attempting to mischaracterize the words of a Republican Presidential candidate. Speaker Gingrich said absolutely nothing wrong in his exchange with the gay Iowa voter… Speaker Gingrich handled himself with class and dignity in this discussion with the gay voter and the press reports that have reported otherwise have done a real disservice to the truth.

LOG CABIN REPUBLICANS: In this political climate, the door is wide open for a strong Republican candidate to win the support of conservatives, independents and disillusioned Democrats – and there are those who are working hard to paint any and all Republicans as bigoted in a fear-mongering effort to shore up the president’s base. That is unfair and highly unfortunate for our community.

Gingrich’s point was that it’s “perfectly legitimate” that voters who are primarily concerned with LGBT equality should support Obama, not Gingrich or one of the other Republican candidates. By rushing to defend his positions on “job creation, national security and a better future,” these groups are admitting that the dignity of LGBT people is not their primary concern. If it were, they might have made at least one reference to Gingrich’s numerous anti-gay positions, proposals, and statements that should more than justify concern from all voters, conservative or otherwise. Apparently, voters who care about their own ability to live, love, and work without fear of discrimination do “a real disservice to the truth” by refusing to “judge each character fairly.”

Watch the exchange between Gingrich and the voter:

Pat Robertson confirmed today that showing compassion for people who are gay means forcing them to endure harmful, ineffective ex-gay therapy. Answering a question from a father with a gay son, he said that to show the son love, the father should convince him to stop doing “whatever he’s doing” and “unacquire” his homosexuality:

ROBERTSON: You want to say, ‘look I don’t agree with what you’re doing but I love you, you’re my son, you came from my body, you’re part of me and I’m with you but I’d like you to get out of this.’ … We’ve had many people who have indeed left the homosexual lifestyle and gone into a heterosexual relationship and have been very, very happy. But all I can say is love the son, love the son, and show him what you consider a better way.

Watch it:

Robertson’s answer confirms the duplicity of a “love the sinner but hate the sin” approach. His facts about the nature of homosexuality and the success of ex-gay therapy are completely wrong and more importantly, family rejection is harmful to young people. Scientific consensus agrees that same-sex orientations are a natural and healthy variation among humans and other animals. To condemn and repress such orientations is the opposite of showing love — it is the reinforcement of harmful stigma.

As NOM Exposed points out, Newt Gingrich is now fully endorsing the self-victimizing rhetoric promoted by extreme anti-gay groups. In a new 20-page proposal, Gingrich commits to a creating a 12-member presidential commission that will investigate “threats or impediments to religious freedom,” promising an “On Day One” Executive Order to set it in motion.

Reflecting Gingrich’s crusade against judges, the proposal makes various claims about how LGBT equality somehow infringes on the religious freedoms of people with anti-gay beliefs. Here are a few examples of what the commission will investigate from the 12-point mission statement:

2. The extent to which schools from primary to university level are discriminating against religious viewpoints, restricting religious expression, or forcing students to violate their conscience by forcibly imposing beliefs about sexual orientation, gender, same sex “marriage” and abortion, to which students have constitutionally protected religious objections.

6. The extent to which individuals 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.

8. The impact on religious freedom of same-sex “marriage” and non-discrimination laws, including the rights of individuals, businesses and religious institutions that have a conscientious objection to providing or engaging in services that support values they oppose.

11. The extent to which states are restricting religious institutions from competing for state funding for educational and other social programs.

It’s worth noting Gingrich borrowed point #6 verbatim from the National Organization for Marriage’s presidential pledge he signed this week. The pledge, in fact, was likely the primary (or sole) catalyst for this proposal. NOM’s broad claims of harassment against those who oppose equality have failed to impress the courts.

Gingrich seems to join those who oppose even the mere mention of LGBT people in schools, including basic education about LGBT people, anti-bullying policies, or even professional ethics for counseling students. He also conflates the right to hold an anti-LGBT belief with the right to discriminate against LGBT people, taking the side of New York town clerks, Iowa bakers, and Vermont B&Bs who have refused to serve same-sex couples. Similarly, adoption agencies such as those run by Catholic Charities believe that they should be entitled to discriminate against same-sex couples without jeopardizing their state subsidies, an argument that did not hold up in Illinois recently.

Gingrich clearly buys in wholeheartedly to the talking points that somehow Christians are the primary victims in the “culture war” for LGBT equality, referencing both the defamatory Manhattan Declaration and a recent “study” on religious liberty from the Catholic Bishops of Maryland. These arguments ignore the real harm that is done to LGBT people of all ages by the proliferation of stigma and resistance to justice.

The FAMiLY Leader’s Bob Vander Plaats insisted that the Rick Santorum campaign did not know about his endorsement of the former Pennsylvania senator ahead of time, despite the presence of national political director Michael Biundo at yesterday’s announcement. Well, now the candidate himself has confirmed Vander Plaats’ claim, telling a reporter in Iowa that he first heard about the endorsement from a blind man:

SANTORUM: I was standing here and someone like you, person in front of me said, oh I just heard Rick Perry is the guy [the FAMiLY Leader] is going to endorse…another person said, I just heard. I said, what do you mean you just heard? You don’t’ have an ear piece. This guy said, ‘I’m blind’. I have very good hearing and and I herd somebody in the kitchen say that they didn’t endorse anybody. I said, okay, they didn’t endorse anybody….And then just as they were breaking up, somebody came in and said ‘no they endorsed you.‘

Watch it:

Last night, Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren pressed Rick Santorum on how he planned to secure the gay vote in Iowa, given his strong opposition to same-sex marriage and endorsement from Bob Vander Plaats, the ant-gay leader who compares homosexuality to a public health risk. Santorum — who himself has likened same-sex marriage to bestiality and almost every inanimate object — explained that gay people “have the rights of every other citizen,” before claiming they are immoral, unfit for parenthood, and shouldn’t be allowed to marry:

VAN SUSTEREN: How are you going to get the gay vote? How can you convince them that despite, you know, your views and his [Bob Vander Plaats] views, that you could — I mean, is there any way that you could convince them to vote for you?

SANTORUM: Well, look, I have nothing against gay people. They have rights of every other citizen. But what they did in Iowa and what some are trying to do, not all gays, but some are trying to do is change the laws of this country with respect to what the definition of marriage is….. But if there are differences, I’m certainly going to speak out on those differences when I think it’s in the best interests of our country to have laws that reflect having men and women raise children and form solid marriage bonds.

Watch it: