Bryan Fischer, mouthpiece for the anti-gay American Family Association, is not thrilled about Jason Collins coming out. On his radio show Monday, Fischer urged NBA teams not to sign Collins because he will be “eyeballing” them in the shower. In a new post published today, Fischer tried to appropriate his coming out as evidence that gay people are not “born that way,” because Collins’ twin is not gay:

One other significant, significant piece of this story is that Jason Collins is absolute proof that homosexuals aren’t “born that way,” despite the bloviations of that noted geneticist Lady Gaga.

Jason Collins has an identical twin, Jaron, who was “astounded” to discover that his brother had entered into the homosexual lifestyle. He, despite sharing Jason’s identical DNA, is as straight as a laser beam. Identical twins share straits that are genetically determined: height, skin color, eye color, hair color and so forth. If homosexuality is a genetically-caused sexual preference, Jaron Collins should be as gay as his brother. He’s not.

It’s true that twin studies suggest that sexual orientation is not hard-wired into DNA, but of course this has always been obvious because sexual orientation is not inherited — a remarkable number of gay people have straight parents. But just because homosexuality is a bit more complex than a particular gene prescription doesn’t mean Fischer’s point has any validity.

The latest research suggests that variations in sexual orientation can be influenced — not by the genes themselves, but by how certain markers (“epi-marks”) on the genes interact with hormones inside the womb. These epigenetic markers act as switches that can be activated during fetal development, affecting how DNA expresses itself. The end result is the same: an individual’s orientation is determined before birth and cannot be changed. This actually jibes with some recent twin studies, which suggest that even identical twins who share a hormonal environment in the womb can still experience different levels of blood during development. Thus, even twins with identical DNA can have differences in how that DNA is expressed.

Fischer can continue to claim that gay people have “entered into the homosexual lifestyle,” but it’s his word against millions of people like Collins who know that their orientations are innate, not chosen.

Negative reactions continue to pour in about Sen. Rob Portman’s (R-OH) decision to endorse same-sex marriage, having changed his opinion because his son, Will, is gay. In addition to Bryan Fischer’s claim that being gay is comparable to robbing a bank and CPAC attendees’ claims that the golden rule doesn’t apply to homosexuality, several other groups and individuals have specifically targeted Will in their responses to his father’s new position. The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins applauded Portman’s love for his son, but condemned Will’s “choices,” which are “harmful” both to him and to “society as a whole”:

PERKINS: I commend Senator Portman for his unconditional love for his son.  Regardless of a child’s choices, the love of a parent can and should be a guiding beacon in the lives of their sons and daughters.  Unconditional love, however, does not mean unconditional support in choices that are both harmful to them and society as a whole.  This is especially true when we approach public policy.  Our unconditional love for our children should not override the historical and social science evidence which makes abundantly clear what is best for all children and for society – being raised by a married mother and father.

Conservative Baptist minister William Murray went even further in a statement released through his Government Is Not God PAC, calling on Portman to subject Will to ex-gay therapy before he dies from AIDS:

Portman has conveniently ignored the warnings against the sin of homosexuality in both the Old and New Testaments – and is accepting a behavior that may eventually kill his son from AIDS, other sexually transmitted diseases, or oral cancer. [...]

What sort of core values motivate a U.S. Senator to change his mind about a sexually destructive behavior simply because his son is involved in it? What will happen to Rob Portman’s belief system when he discovers that his son is infected with HIV or throat cancer?

A person with a same-sex attraction has a treatable condition. No one is “born gay” and there is hope for those who want to overcome these destructive behaviors.

In his original statement, Portman admirably noted that his son’s sexual orientation was not a choice.

Read more

Marriage equality became law today for the Little Traverse Bay Band of Odawa Indians in Michigan when Chairman Dennis McNamara signed a new marriage equality measure passed by the tribal council on March 3^rd. Not only did he sign the bill, but McNamara then presided over the wedding of two of his longtime friends who met three decades ago in the Navy.  The Chairman told the Associated Press:

MCNAMARA: There should not be a dividing line, and we should all be able to seek a good life.

Unfortunately, those who will now be able to marry through the Little Traverse system still face legal questions in the state of Michigan due to a constitutional ban on gay marriage in the state.  Though the Tribe has the sovereign authority to enact its own marriage laws, it is unlikely that the state will recognize them.

Bryan Fisher, Director of Issues Analysis for the right-wing American Family Association, not only derided the tribe’s decision, but went a step further to prescribe their cultural values to the tribe:

FISCHER: We think it would be a serious mistake for any sovereign nation to legalize same sex marriage…Homosexual behavior itself is immoral, it is unnatural and it is unhealthy, and it is a mistake for any culture to normalize that kind of behavior.

Two other Tribal nations have legalized same-sex marriage, the Coquille Tribe in Oregon, and the Suquamish Tribe in Washington.  And, the LGBT legal equality movement is growing with the launch of a new Tribal equality toolkit, now being shared with interested tribal leaders.

Our guest blogger is Erik Stegman, Manager for the Half in Ten campaign at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer is not thrilled by Sen. Rob Portman’s (R-OH) announcement that he now supports marriage equality because of what he has learned from his son being gay. Fischer explained that just because a child is something doesn’t mean a parent should support it. His comparison? Robbing a bank:

While a story like this naturally stirs our emotions with sympathy for the family, and even fear for the future of his son, we still must ask the question as to whether such a revelation should be a basis to change our collective mind about the cornerstone institution of Western Civilization. The answer to this question must surely be “No.”

Public policy should be based on reason, not emotion. If it turned out my son was a bank robber, I would not love my son any less. I might even have great sympathy for the circumstances that drove him to steal. I would come alongside him and help him in any way that was in my power. But I would not change my mind about the morality of bank robbing.

Fischer noticeably avoids addressing Portman’s son directly. Indeed, conservatives regularly ignore the reality of the lives LGBT people are already living in favor of ideals and and principles that they apply without regard for consequence. Bank robbers go to prison, and apparently that’s exactly where Fischer believes Portman’s son belongs.

Conservatives regularly use rhetoric about “religious freedom” in an attempt to substantiate discrimination against the LGBT community. Today, the American Family Association’s resident blowhard acknowledged as much in a rant comparing homosexuality to murder and theft, insisting that discrimination was valid:

FISCHER: We ought to discriminate on the basis of sexual behavior. I make no apology about that. We should discriminate! Yes! If you oppose civil unions, you are discriminating against homosexual behavior. We shouldn’t apologize for that. That’s what public policy and the law is all about — what the law is about is it’s about discrimination.

We discriminate in the law against people who commit murder. Why? Because that’s behavior that we don’t want to promote in a civil society. In our law, we discriminate against theft. Why? Because it’s counter to the kind of society that we want to build. It damages society. It hurts society. So we discriminate against people who steal from other people. We discriminate against people who kill other people. We discriminate against people who molest children. All of this is right; this is the right kind of discrimination.

The law is all about discrimination and I am saying absolutely, yes, we should discriminate against homosexual behavior. This is not behavior that ought to be promoted. It should not be legitimized. Relationships that are built on homosexual activity should not be glamorized, they shouldn’t be normalized, they shouldn’t be naturalized, they shouldn’t be given special protections in law. And I have no apologizes for saying yes we should discriminate against homosexual behavior.

Watch it (HT: Jeremy Hooper):

Fischer stops just short of calling for homosexuality to be made illegal, which he probably knows he can’t because such laws were found to be unconstitutional in Lawrence v. Texas. But with comparisons to murder, theft, and child molestation, Fischer makes it quite clear that his desire to discriminate is not simply “religious” in nature. Indeed, his motives to discriminate are quite invidious in nature. His candor may be unique among conservatives, but his feelings likely are not.

Conservatives did not take kindly to Monday’s news that the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) will consider lifting its national ban on gay scouts and scout leaders next week. Unsurprisingly, they immediately began drawing correlations between homosexuality and pedophilia.

The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins called the potential move “devastating” and suggested it would undercut the “well-being of the Scouts.” The Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber ranted on Twitter that “No caring father will leave his son in the Boy Scouts if they cave on perversion.” And outdoing his peers at the other anti-gay hate groups, the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer penned a lengthy screed claiming that Jerry Sandusky, the Penn State University football coach convicted of child molestation, is “the new poster boy for Scouting“:

If the Scouts do not reverse themselves, we will soon be reading the kind of horror stories about Scouting that we have read about in the Catholic Church. Homosexual pedophiles already seek to infiltrate scouting because it provides a target rich environment for their twisted desires. Abolishing the sexual orientation standard will turn every Boy Scout in America into vulnerable prey for the sexually deviant.

And while the Church had resources that enabled it to weather the storm, the Scouts do not. The Scouts as an organization will wither and die, winding up as a dessicated shell of its former self if it exists at all.

There are three serious flaws with this argument. First, and most importantly, there is absolutely nothing that links a same-sex orientation to the disorder of pedophilia. And because sexual orientation is such an unreliable predictor for pedophilia, the BSA has significantly struggled to protect scouts from sexual abuse even with a ban on openly gay scout leaders, so if that’s its purpose, it’s not working anyway. Lastly, this argument only addresses the policy’s impact on gay male scout leaders; lesbian women like Jen Tyrrell who support the organization and the many scouts who may be coming out don’t factor in at all.

News stories like this reveal the raw candor of what those who oppose LGBT equality actually believe. Perkins, Barber, Fischer, and others are all servants to decades-old defamatory myths that bear no reflection on reality.

A chorus of right-wing leaders Thursday decried the withdrawal of Pastor Louie Giglio from President Obama’s second inauguration ceremony, suggesting a left-wing conspiracy to force him off of the program. His withdrawal came a day after ThinkProgress exclusively reported that in the 1990s, Giglio had given a lengthy sermon in which he advocated for dangerous “ex-gay” therapy for gay and lesbian people, referenced a biblical passage often interpreted to require gay people be executed, and impelled Christians to “firmly respond to the aggressive agenda” and prevent the “homosexual lifestyle” from becoming accepted in society.

Their outraged comments included:

• “[T]he administration’s inclusivity only goes so far. It’s not inclusive of those who disagree with them.” [Richard Land, Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission]
• “This president appears determined to stir division and create two Americas: One America that holds to a biblical view of sexuality and another that offers tolerance so long as you embrace its redefined view of sexuality.” [Tony Perkins, Family Research Council]
• “It is the ultimate hypocrisy for the Obama administration to pretend it supports diversity and yet denounces anyone who dares to disagree with its radical homosexual agenda. Rev. Giglio’s comments about homosexuality from more than a decade ago were not hateful but represent the historical teachings of the world’s three major religions. Apparently the Obama administration’s definition of tolerance is only broad enough to include its own views.” [Robert Jeffress, First Baptist Church, Dallas, Texas]
• “The intolerant Left claims another scalp.” [Kirsten Powers, Fox News political analyst]
• “Louis Giglio, a popular orthodox evangelical pastor whose views are mainstream Christian cannot pray the Inaugural benediction.” [Erick Erickson, RedState]
• “The bully bigots at Big Gay win huge victory for fascistic intolerance.” [Bryan Fischer, American Family Association radio host]

Watch Fischer’s rant on his radio show:

These critics seem not to understand that respecting different opinions does not require giving a platform and a microphone to those whose promote discrimination and division. Though Pastor Giglio is completely free to believe as he chooses and to preach the harmful message of “pray away the gay” therapy, a public ceremony like the presidential inauguration is not the place for him to do so.

Social conservative heavyweight James Dobson dedicated his radio show this morning to discussing Friday’s shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, and like Mike Huckabee and Bryan Fischer, concluded the shooting was caused by Americans “turning our back on God.” Specifically, he believes there are consequences to women getting abortions and marriage equality:

DOBSON: Our country really does seem in complete disarray. I’m not talking politically, I’m not talking about the result of the November sixth election;  I am saying that something has gone wrong in America and that we have turned our back on God.

I mean millions of people have decided that God doesn’t exist, or he’s irrelevant to me and we have killed fifty-four million babies and the institution of marriage is right on the verge of a complete redefinition.  Believe me, that is going to have consequences too.

And a lot of these things are happening around us, and somebody is going to get mad at me for saying what I am about to say right now, but I am going to give you my honest opinion: I think we have turned our back on the Scripture and on God Almighty and I think he has allowed judgment to fall upon us.  I think that’s what’s going on.

Listen to it, via RightWingWatch:

It’s not surprising that these conservatives are championing their own self-fulfilling prophesies. They are clinging to values that are becoming increasingly obsolete, so in order to convince themselves that those points of view still have relevance, they attach meaning to every disaster that occurs, be it a shooting or a hurricane. As Hemant Mehta has pointed out, religious venues are no safer from such tragedies, so the exception Huckabee, Fischer, Dobson, and others anoint for themselves is a mere fabrication of superiority.

Anti-gay conservatives continue to be outraged that two same-sex weddings took place at West Point this weekend, including one in the academy’s Cadet Chapel. Many though, are now making a false claim that the marriages somehow are a violation of federal law. Along with an image of a crying soldier, Tony Perkins argued in the Family Research Council’s Washington Update Monday that the weddings were inconsistent with the Defense of Marriage Act:

In September of last year, the Pentagon did issue a memo giving military bases the power to decide whether or not to host same-sex “weddings.” Of course, that guidance came from Jeh Johnson, general counsel for the Department of Defense–not Congress. According to Johnson, decisions about military facilities should be made on a “sexual-orientation neutral basis.” And while the “wedding” may have been consistent with Johnson’s memo, the DOD’s general counsel is no substitute for the 427 elected members of Congress who voted to define marriage as the union of a man and woman for the government’s purposes. That means it affects federal employees (which Fulton is) and federal property (where West Point resides). The President may vehemently disagree with the law–but until the Supreme Court overturns it or Congress rejects it, DOMA is still the law of the land.

Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness, whose life seems to be dedicated to opposing open service in the military, similarly argued that the marriages violated DOMA:

DONNELLY: Even though Congress made it very clear and it’s in the legislation that they intended the Defense of Marriage Act to be respected and honored on military bases, several times now the administration has allowed various branches of the service to disregard that. This is the most blatant example.

The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer was more direct with this tweet:

Military breaks the law, allows homosexual “wedding” at West Point. So much for honoring their oath.

All of these interpretations distort was DOMA actually says. The law has two components. The first (Section 2) says that no state shall have to recognize a same-sex marriage performed elsewhere. The second (Section 3) simply states that for any federal regulation or Act of Congress, “the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.” It is an incredible stretch to interpret this language such that a same-sex wedding is somehow illegal merely because the resulting union is not recognized by the federal government. Plenty of activities are legal that are not accounted for in written law, many of which can also take place on government property. There’s no question that DOMA applies to these couples’ marriages, but it’s a very different question to try to apply it to their weddings.

What Perkins, Donnelly, Fischer, Robertson, and others really want is for the military academies to blatantly discriminate against gays and lesbians. If any graduate of the Academy is welcome to hold a wedding in the Cadet Chapel, then Brenda Sue Fulton should not be have been exempted merely because of who she was marrying.

David Pakman sat down with the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer to discuss the recent marriage equality wins and other LGBT issues. Fischer claimed he is “for homosexuals, but against homosexuality,” wanting to help them “leave that lifestyle.” He compared homosexuality to drug use — an addiction that people can escape — and he agreed that exorcism could assist in that process:

FISCHER: I think there’s no question that there are spiritual factors at work in this —

PAKMAN: Are they demons?

FISCHER: — that using spiritual weapons of our warfare according to the New Testament can be effective. We know that people can get delivered from homosexual behavior. The former president of the American Psychological Association, Nathan Cummings — he’s seen that happen in his own private clinical practice. He’s seen people get free of homosexual behavior and change their sexual orientation, so it certainly is possible. There may be spiritual factors at work. If there are, then the power of the Gospel, the name of Jesus Christ, the power of the Holy Spirit can be of enormous help.

PAKMAN: And an exorcism might be a way to do that?

FISCHER: Well we believe in the reality of spiritual forces just like Jesus did. [If] you got a problem with demons, David, your problem’s not with me, it’s with Jesus Christ, because he believed in them.

Watch it:

Exorcisms or other forms of spiritual warfare against LGBT people are one of the most extreme forms of ex-gay ministry. Unfortunately, their provocative nature often distract from the psychological abuse of more common forms of ex-gay “therapy” that target vulnerable young people (and their parents).

Fischer went on to cite the fraudulent Regnerus study to claim that same-sex couples can never be good parents. When asked when he decided to be straight or if he could change his attractions, Fischer refused to answer, choosing instead to simply erase the experiences of millions of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals by reducing their lives to “sexual behavior.”