Jeremy Hooper uncovered a sermon delivered last July by the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins. In it, he makes the most odious comparison, juxtaposing gay soldiers marching in a pride parade to the Aurora shooting and pedophiles kidnapping children:

PERKINS: I believe we see a generation rising that proclaims neither a dedication to our nation or Almighty God. I mean, just look at some of the headlines that took place this week:

The most tragic mass shooting in the history of our nation at the opening event of the latest Batman movie.

Yesterday for the first time in the history of our nation’s military, men and women in uniform marched in a gay pride parade in San Diego, California.

Children are being snatched off our streets almost daily, taken from their parents and their families by perverted individuals pursuing their own interests and desires.

I ask you this morning, “Are we a nation under God or are on the verge being a nation gone under?”

Listen to it:

Here is a picture of those servicemembers marching in the San Diego LGBT Pride Parade in uniform:

Here is an image of the 12 individuals murdered in the Aurora, Colorado shooting:

Not only does Tony Perkins believe these two incidents are equally as tragic, he preaches to others that they should feel the same way. It’s this kind of demonization of gays and lesbians that prompts the Southern Poverty Law Center to designate the Family Research Council as a hate group. Just one month after Perkins delivered this sermon, FRC was unfortunately targeted by a gunman who wounded a security guard but luckily did not kill anyone.  At that time FRC blamed the SPLC for granting a “license” for violence with its “hate group” label. Of course, when the FBI’s latest hate crime statistics showed that the number of incidents targeting a person’s sexual orientation went up even though the incidents targeting other groups went down, FRC had no comment.

Screenshot of the deleted post.

The National Organization for Marriage has always attempted to maintain distance between its efforts and the more candid anti-gay rhetoric of groups more publicly identified by their Christianity. Plenty of exceptions have always been found, but NOM no longer seems to be trying to uphold such distinctions. In its efforts to fight marriage equality in Rhode Island, NOM has allied with MassResistance, an extremist group designated a “hate group” for its anti-gay rhetoric.

On its Rhode Island for Marriage page, NOM published two videos as a “preview” of what the “radical homosexualist movement” is all about, each full of hate groups’ rhetoric condemning homosexuality as a disorder and sin worthy of death and calling the LGBT movement a push toward the “collapsing morality” of “atheistic Communism.” That was until Jeremy Hooper called them out today, and without explanation, NOM removed the post from its page. Screenshots preserve the record, and more importantly, the videos can still be viewed on YouTube:

Perhaps NOM did not watch the videos before posting them, or perhaps the organization didn’t count on being associated with the offensive content they contain. Either way, NOM’s new alliances are troubling, and it will be interesting to see how they maintain their new relationships while trying to hide from the resulting bad PR.

For reasons that remain unclear, cable news networks continue to provide airtime to the Family Research Council, neglecting to recognize that it has been designated as a hate group for its anti-gay views, let alone the fact that it hardly represents mainstream Christianity. Today was no exception, as FRC’s Peter Sprigg was invited on CNN to join the chorus of conservative objections that Pastor Louie Giglio will no longer be participating in President Obama’s Inauguration because of his anti-gay views. Sprigg attempted to claim that Christians are the victims, but fortunately, Truth Wins Out’s Wayne Besen was there to set the record straight:

SPRIGG: The world we live in, unfortunately, is increasingly marked by the enforcement of intolerance in the name of tolerance, exclusion in the name of inclusion, and forced uniformity in the name of diversity. It’s contradictory, it’s downright Orwellian, and yet people actually make these statements, unbelievably, with a straight face. [...]

BESEN: Peter, I find it ironic that you’re embracing diversity. I mean you called for the imprisonment of gay people and said we should export homosexuals out of the United States and suddenly you’re for tolerance? I’m a little confused here.

SPRIGG: [silent laughter] Well this is about Pastor Giglio and President Obama, it’s not about me.

Watch it:

Jeremy Hooper is right to celebrate this as a victory for GLAAD’s Commentator Accountability Project, which seeks to expose the anti-LGBT records of conservative spokespeople whose positions are typically not given proper context by the news outlets that interview them. Sprigg’s presence on CNN is the quintessential example of this whitewashing, because as Besen pointed out, his positions are seemingly even more anti-LGBT than Pastor Giglio’s. Sprigg has proven time and time again that he does not even have the most basic understanding of sexuality but does have a significant antipathy toward the very existence of gays and lesbians. He has no authority to speak about LGBT issues, and CNN should learn from this interview not to provide a pedestal for his bigoted point of view again.

The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins has launched a new daily radio show on American Family Association radio, and Jeremy Hooper is tracking it closely. On the second episode Tuesday, Perkins addressed a listener’s question about nondiscrimination protections, asserting that the existing protections for people of faith are fine, but creating protections for LGBT people would be problematic:

PERKINS: Actually, religion is a protected class, So right now under existing law, you can’t use that as a component to discriminate against individuals. [...]

This administration — the Obama administration — wants to push the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. What is that? It sounds nice. But it is actually providing special protections to people — employment protections and benefits — based upon their sexual behavior. So let’s say an employer at a day care, an elementary school, or a church does not want to hire someone who is openly engaged in homosexual behavior. They would be forced to either defend themselves in their decision or could suffer legal consequences as a result.

Listen to it:

As Hooper points out, Perkins is peddling a significant double standard. He voices no objection to the protections his Christian faith already enjoys, yet claims that protections for LGBT people would be “special” and violate Christians so-called “religious freedom.” As conservatives do, he only referred to “homosexual behavior,” erasing gays and lesbians and framing their identities as a choice. But not only are same-sex orientations (or non-conforming gender identities, which ENDA also would protect) not chosen, but religious beliefs are. So if Perkins argument is that people should not be protected based on their lifestyle choices, by his own logic religion should not be a protected class.

Of course, Perkins motivations are not rooted in logic, but in animus against LGBT people and an expectation that one group of people enjoy a superior status in society over another.

Gov. Jerry Brown

In December, the Ninth Circuit granted conservative groups an injunction against a new California law banning harmful ex-gay therapy from being offered to minors, preventing it from taking effect January 1. The temporary delay allows the Court time to hear the case and address the conflicting rulings offered by lower courts in two different suits challenging the law. In the meantime, Gov. Jerry Brown (D) has appealed the injunction, calling on the Court to focus on the decision upholding the ban issued by U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller.

The Liberty Counsel, which is leading one of the lawsuits along with the ex-gay organization NARTH, boasted the injunction when it was granted last month, doubling down on some of the most absurd and offensive claims used to justify ex-gay therapy. In particular, Liberty Counsel Chairman Mat Staver reiterated claims that sexual abuse is somehow responsible for young people’s same-sex orientations:

STAVER: The minors we represent have not and do not want to act on same-sex attractions, nor do they want to engage in such behavior. They are greatly benefiting from counseling. These minors have struggled with same-sex attraction and have been able to reduce or eliminate the stress and conflict in their lives by receiving counseling that best aligns with their religious and moral values.

Without this emergency injunction, the State of California would essentially barge into the private therapy rooms of victimized young people and tell them that their confusion caused by the likes of a Jerry Sandusky abuser is normal and they should pursue their unwanted same-sex sexual attractions and behavior.

Staver neglects to explain that the “stress and conflict” these young people experience is only the result of the family rejection that the Liberty Counsel and ex-gay advocates foment. Studies that have attempted to show correlations between sexual abuse and homosexuality have been largely inconclusive, and certainly plenty of gay people have never experienced abuse. Such claims only seek to stigmatize by implying that people with same-sex orientations are disordered and may themselves have a propensity for abuse themselves, which is completely unfounded.

In the state’s appeal of the injunction, California Attorney General Kamala Harris (D) cited mainstream medical opinion, condemning ex-gay therapy as “unsound and harmful.”

The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins never misses an opportunity to defame the LGBT community while painting conservative Christians as victims, and his latest exploit may signify a petty new low for the hate group. In his Washington Watch Daily Radio Commentary on Monday, Perkins defended the Salvation Army for being anti-gay and claimed that the LGBT community is selfish and only targets the organization because it’s Christian:

The Salvation Army does a lot for America, but don’t expect a ringing endorsement from homosexuals. Hello, I’m Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. Gay activists will be putting a little something in the red kettle this year-but it won’t be money. They’re asking people to drop in complaints instead because the Salvation Army has a biblical view of sexuality.

Despite decades of community service, activists say those kettles are pushing an anti-gay agenda. Nothing could be future from the truth says Major George Hood. You don’t have to be straight to get help from the Salvation Army, he explained. Not a single “policy, practice, or program” even asks about sexual orientation. “The very mission of the Salvation Army calls for meeting the needs of humans without discrimination.”

The truth is, homosexuals are only targeting the Salvation Army because it’s Christian. And they’d rather help their agenda than the needy. Do your part to help the Salvation Army-because far too many families are saved by their bells.

LGBT bloggers Bil Browning and John Aravosis have thoroughly cataloged the Salvation Army’s anti-gay record. Major Hood, Perkins’ ringing endorsement for LGBT-inclusion, defended the notion of discriminating against gay employees in 2001 because “it really begins to chew away at the theological fabric of who we are.” The Church has hidden its position statement on homosexuality, claiming it’s “Under Review,” but it previously believed the following:

Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex. The Salvation Army believes, therefore, that Christians whose sexual orientation is primary or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life. There is no scriptural support for same sex unions as equal to, or as an alternative to, heterosexual marriage.

Seeking special protection to not hire gay employees and condemning gays to a life without love is hardly a good record “without discrimination.” That’s not to say the Salvation Army doesn’t accomplish good works, just like many other organizations that engage in charity but have anti-gay policies, like the Boy Scouts of America. But these are clearly groups that reinforce stigma against gay people and actively engage in discrimination, so it’s perfectly reasonable for LGBT activists to suggest supporting organizations that don’t instead. To suggest that this has anything to do with an attack on religion or an aversion to charity is a ghastly ad hominem attack against the LGBT community. It’s as absurd as suggesting that opposition to Chick-fil-A is based on hatred for fried chicken. What’s at stake is a basic level of respect for people’s lives, and it’s outlandish for Perkins to claim that groups (like his) who have none are somehow victims.

A former employee is suing the anti-gay Family Research Council for sexual harassment, citing the sexually suggestive comments of her supervisor, particularly in regards to birth control.

Moira Gaul worked as director of women’s and reproductive health for the FRC, an anti-gay hate group that claims to represent “traditional family values.” Her expertise is in abstinence-only education. But even for a woman ideologically aligned with such a socially conservative organization, the anti-woman rhetoric of her supervisor proved too much:

According to court documents first obtained and reported by journalist Evan Gahr, former FRC employee Moira Gaul, 42, filed a complaint in 2009 with the District of Columbia Human Rights Commission in which she accused her supervisor of gender discrimination. She claimed that her boss, the director of the Center for Human Life and Bioethics at the time, referred to the use of birth control pills as “whoring around,” addressed emails to her with the words “hi cutie,” pressured her to attend parties, and referred to her as a “young, attractive woman.”

“His attitude toward me and other women was rude, belittling, and at times, angry,” she wrote in the complaint.

Gaul’s supervisor’s comments are reminiscent of the assertion by Rush Limbaugh that young women’s rights activist Sandra Fluke was on birth control because she was having “so much sex.” FRC has been one of those groups most opposed to the contraception mandate requiring employers to cover contraception under the Affordable Care Act. The organization promotes abstinence-only sex education and is rabidly anti-gay.

The Huffington Post reports that the suit was originally settled back in 2009, but that it has re-emerged because Gaul and her attorney believe the FRC illegally retaliated against her for filing the original suit.

East Aurora School Board

Illinois’s East Aurora School Board does not have the courage of its convictions, having once again given up on protecting transgender students. In October, the district innocuously passed a policy that would protect transgender students’ ability to identity with their authentic gender. The Illinois Family Institute, an anti-LGBT hate group, objected to the accommodations for “gender-confused teens,” and four days after passing it, the school board rescinded the policy.

Despite caving, there was hope that East Aurora would still do right by its trans students. The board formed an ad hoc committee to explore the issues with a goal of forming an alternative policy. However, when the committee met, over a hundred community members came to protest, claiming that protecting trans students was somehow “destructive” and that it would threaten the safety of other students if they were allowed to use the appropriate bathrooms. These arguments were of course spurred again by the Illinois Family Institute, which went so far as to encourage the bullying of trans students. The outcry overwhelmed the committee, which decided to put the transgender policy on hold. Now, they’ve abandoned it entirely.

The committee was not designed to be effective in the first place. Rather than focus on researching the policy, the committee allowed itself to be overwhelmed by public comment. The crowd was so against the effort that security had to be called to protect committee members. Anthony Martinez, executive director of Illinois LGBT advocacy group The Civil Rights Agenda, sat on the committee and described it as a “failure of leadership”:

MARTINEZ: I think it was a failure of leadership by the school board. I think the folks handling this from the beginning were out of their depth. You only have to look and see that the Ad Hoc committee never once discussed the matter of policy. All we did was sit and listen to people voice their displeasure.

Indeed, the school board’s failure was ever questioning itself in the first place or creating space for a hate group’s influence to play out. The end result was stirred up antipathy towards trans people with no real progress for the safety of the students at risk.

The Family Research Council has announced that it has suspended its contract with UPS, accusing the shipping company of “openly discriminating against the Boy Scouts of America (BSA).” UPS announced last month that it would no longer give charitable donations to organizations like BSA that discriminate against the LGBT community, in accordance with its own nondiscrimination policy. In a press release Tuesday, FRC argued that the Scouts’ policy is a “matter of security” to prevent child sex abuse:

The Scouts’ policy is also a matter of security. After hundreds of cases of child sex abuse plagued the organization, the Boy Scouts tried to create a membership criterion that reduces the risk to Scouts, and that protects the rights of their parents to be the first to discuss topics like sexual orientation with their children.

Tony Perkins then echoed this sentiment in his “Washington Update“:

Unfortunately, the company only reiterated its position that until the BSA puts a greater priority on the political agenda of LGBT activists than the protection of Scouts, they are not entitled to the same equality UPS claims to endorse. Apparently, the company isn’t interested in true diversity but in strong-arming anyone who disagrees with their extreme agenda — including a century-old youth development program, whose only crime is instilling character into millions of American boys. As for their longstanding policy on homosexuality, the Boy Scouts are doing what every parent would want them to: putting children’s safety first.

After UPS first announced its policy change, FRC similarly argued that BSA was just protecting Scouts from pedophilia. There is nothing to substantiate FRC’s claim that gay people are somehow more likely to engage in child abuse, and it is because it insists on such a defamatory connection anyway that the Southern Poverty Law Center designates it as a “hate group.”

BSA has yet to explain why it stands by its discriminatory policy. Records released to the Oregon Supreme Court in October show that the organization grouped innocent gay volunteers along with those accused or convicted of child abuse or other “suspected moral problems.” UPS should be commended for not caving to FRC’s boycott threat and these offensive portrayals of the gay community.