Connect with us

Is NOM’s Brian Brown Standing With Cardinal Dolan Against Church Child Rape Victims?

Published

on

Among the many motives that the Catholic Church of Rome has for scapegoating LGBTers worldwide is that of attempting to distract world attention from the Church’s seemingly endless child rape scandals.

In the United States, nobody fights harder than the Catholic Church against proposed laws to lift the statutes of limitations for prosecution of child rape. And the Republican Party is the Church’s political ally in its war against such proposed legislation.

New York State Senator Thomas Duane, a Democrat, proposed Senate Bill S3333. The proposed legislation seeks to extend “the statute of limitations in criminal and civil actions for certain sex offenses committed against a child less than eighteen years of age.”

A Duane staffer told this reporter: “If you think Cardinal Dolan fights hard against marriage for same-sex couples, you should know that that is nothing, compared to how fiercely Dolan fights against laws designed better to hold child rapists accountable for their crimes.” The staffer added that Republican state legislators — not Democrats — lead the charge against the proposed legislation.

A perfect example of why the statutes of limitations should be lifted comes from California. Though the Los Angeles diocese settled with many of the Church’s child rape victims there for a total of over $660 million — (without any admission of wrongdoing) — attorney Ray Boucher found that the Church subsequently engaged in cover-ups, even allowing known child rapist priests to hide out in rehab centers until the statute of limitations for prosecutions ran out.

The statutes of limitations need to be lifted, additionally because Church officials sometimes engage in attempted intimidation of victims while the victims are still minors.

For example, in August, 2011, Father Jaime Duenas of the Bronx was arrested on charges he had repeatedly molested a 16-year-old girl working in the rectory. After victims’ advocates criticized then Archbishop Dolan for his handling of the matter, Dolan teamed up with Catholic League president Bill Donohue, took to his blog and trashed the 16-year-old girl. Dolan and Donohue were not only attempting to intimidate that victim, but also sending a very public message: “Dare to come forward as a young victim, and you too will be trashed to the public by the most powerful Catholic Church leaders in the country.”

And the Church’s intimidation related to statutes of limitations is not limited to youngsters. As President of the Colorado State Senate, Joan Fitz-Gerald, a Democrat, proposed legislation to lift the statute of limitations on child rape. Fitz-Gerald spoke to the New York Times about the Catholic Church’s war against her proposed legislation: “It was the most brutal thing I’ve ever been through. The politics, the deception, the lack of concern for not only the children in the past, but for children today.”

At its upper echelons, the National Organization for Marriage is united with the Catholic Church in political strategy. There apparently is no political strategy which NOM has that is not also promoted by the Church. NOM founder and mastermind Robert P. George sits on the advisory board of the Catholic League. Catholic League president Bill Donohue often attempts to scapegoat homosexuals to distract attention from the Church’s child rape scandals. NOM’s Brian Brown appears to abet his NOM boss Robert George and Bill Donohue in those efforts.

For example, very shortly after the 2011 arrest of Father Jaime Duenas, NOM’s Brian Brown attempted to smear gay rights advocates by alleging that gay rights are connected to a (non-existent) push to “normalize pedophilia.” Brown hate-and-fear-mongered against gays by mischaracterizing a medical experts’ symposium session that was aimed at improving treatment for pedophiles. The symposium had less than nothing to do with gay rights. Brown’s reprehensible actions in that anti-gay smear match the apparent Catholic Church political strategy of scapegoating and falsely blaming gays to distract public attention from the Church’s child rape scandals.

In his outlandish and completely unsupported anti-gay smear, NOM’s Brian Brown referenced alleged “Biblical views of marriage.”

In a debate Brown had with Dan Savage, Savage raised the point that the Bible has been used to justify slavery, that such pernicious abuse of the Bible was discontinued, and that people today must discontinue all gay-bashing abuses of the Bible.

In his gay-bashing propaganda produced after the debate, Brown lies about the extent to which the Bible historically was used to justify slavery. Brown actually says that Popes have condemned slavery, as though nobody knew anything about the history of the Catholic Church.

Pope Nicholas V, Pope Callixtus III, Pope Sixtus IV, Pope Leo X and Pope Alexander VI all issued papal “bulls” authorizing the slave trade and sometimes citing Biblical justifications for it.

If it is true that 1) later Popes condemned slavery, then 2) Brian Brown and all of his fellow NOM anti-gay bigots should 3) take that papal movement away from Bible-justified slavery, towards human enlightenment as 4) a model for ending all present-day Bible-based gay bashing.

As explained above, the appearance is that through NOM’s Robert George’s position of authority in the Catholic League — and Robert George’s position of power and influence in the Republican Party — NOM’s despicable tactic of smearing gays as pedophiles is coordinated with the Church’s political strategies.

If the Catholic Church and NOM are not coordinating political strategies against lifting the statutes of limitations for prosecution of child rape, then when will NOM’s Robert George, Brian Brown, Maggie Gallagher and Thomas Peters make public demands that the statutes of limitations be lifted?

New York City-based novelist and freelance writer Scott Rose’s LGBT-interest by-line has appeared on Advocate.com, PoliticusUSA.com, The New York Blade, Queerty.com, Girlfriends and in numerous additional venues. Among his other interests are the arts, boating and yachting, wine and food, travel, poker and dogs. His “Mr. David Cooper’s Happy Suicide” is about a New York City advertising executive assigned to a condom account.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Pete Buttigieg Nails Trump for His Ugly Comments About Wounded Vets

Published

on

During his Sunday morning appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg called out Donald Trump over reports he told military leaders he didn’t want wounded vets to be seen by the public while he was president.

In a recent Atlantic profile of General Mark Milley, the retiring military office recounted the former president telling him “no one wants to see” wounded soldiers, with Milley adding he found Trump’s attitude to those serving their country “superficial, callous, and, at the deepest human level, repugnant.”

Buttigieg, who served in Afghanistan during his 8 years while in the Naval Reserve, was asked by CNN host Dana Bash about the former president’s apparent distaste for service members.

“I want to ask you about a new Atlantic profile that says that then President Trump complained to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley after an Army veteran who lost a leg in combat sang at an event at the Pentagon,” Bash prompted her guest. “Trump reportedly told Milley, ‘Why do you bring people like that here, no one wants to see that, the wounded.'”

“After that article came out, Trump attacked Milley on social media, kind of a rambling post, but suggested that milley deserved the death penalty. You’re a veteran– what’s your response?” she asked.

“It’s just the latest in a pattern of outrageous attacks on the people who keep the country safe,” the Biden administration official replied.

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?

After pointing to fellow vets who suffered horrific injuries, he added, “These are the kind of people that deserve respect and a hell of a lot more than that from every American, and definitely from every American president.”

“And the idea that an American president, the person to whom service members look at as a commander in chief, and the person who sets the tone for this entire country could think that way or act that way or talk that way about anyone in uniform, and certainly about those who put their bodies on the line and sacrificed in ways that most Americans will never understand, and I guess wounded veterans make president Trump feel uncomfortable.”

Watch below or at the link.

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Scared to Death’: Trump’s Prison Panic Admission Means He Knows He’s Doomed Says Legal Expert

Published

on

Reacting to a report that Donald Trump has been quizzing his attorneys about what type of prison he likely will be sent to, former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner stated that is not only an indication that he knows he’s going to be convicted but also an admission of guilt.

Speaking with MSNBC host Jonathan Capehart, the attorney was asked about a recent Rolling Stone report about Trump’s prison panic.

As Rolling Stone reported, Trump asked if he’s “be sent to a ‘club fed’ style prison — a place that’s relatively comfortable, as far these things go — or a ‘bad’ prison? Would he serve out a sentence in a plush home confinement? Would government officials try to strip him of his lifetime Secret Service protections? What would they make him wear, if his enemies actually did ever get him in a cell — an unprecedented set of consequences for a former leader of the free world.”

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?

According to the attorney, Trump is revealing himself by asking for so many details.

“What does this tell you about Trump’s mindset?” host Capehart asked.

“It tells me he is scared to death” Kirschner quickly answered. “It tells me he has overwhelming consciousness of guilt because he knows what he did wrong and he knows he is about to be held accountable for his crimes. So it is not surprising that he is obsessing.”

“If he was confident that he would be completely exonerated, would he have to obsess about what his future time in prison might look like?” he suggested. “I think the last refuge for Donald Trump can be seen in a recent post where he urged the Republicans to defund essentially the prosecutions against him. which, to this prosecutor, Jonathan, smells a lot like an attempt to obstruct justice.”

Watch below or at the link.

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

‘Vulgar and Lewd’: Trump Judge Cites Extremist Group to Allow Drag Show Ban

Published

on

A federal judge in Texas known for a ruling that attempted to ban a widely-used abortion drug is citing an extremist anti-LGBTQ group in his ruling allowing a ban on drag shows to stay in place.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a former attorney for an anti-LGBTQ conservative Christian legal organization, and a member of the Federalist Society, in his 26-page ruling dated Thursday cited the “About” page of Gays Against Groomers to claim, “it’s unclear how drag shows unmistakably communicate advocacy for LGBT rights.”

Judge Kacsmaryk, appointed by Donald Trump twice before finally assuming office in 2019, suggests the First Amendment does not provide for freedom of expression for drag shows, calls drag “sexualized conduct,” and says it is “more regulable” because “children are in the audience.”

READ MORE: ‘The Public Deserves to Know’: Abortion Pill Banning Judge Redacted Details About Millions of Dollars in His Stock Portfolio

Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern adds, “Kacsmaryk’s conclusion that drag is probably NOT protected by the First Amendment conflicts with decisions from Texas, Florida, Tennessee, and Montana which held that drag is constitutionally protected expression. It also bristles with undisguised hostility toward LGBTQ people.”

Calling the judge “a proud Christian nationalist who flatly refuses to apply binding Supreme Court precedent when it conflicts with his extremist far-right beliefs,” Stern at Slate writes that Kacsmaryk ruled drag “may be outlawed to protect ‘the sexual exploitation and abuse of children.’ In short, he concluded that drag fails to convey a message, while explaining all the reasons why he’s offended by the message it conveys.”

Stern does not let Kacsmaryk off the hook there.

“From almost any other judge, the ruling in Spectrum WT v. Wendler would be a shocking rejection of basic free speech principles; from Kacsmaryk, it’s par for the course. This is, after all, the judge who sought to ban medication abortion nationwide, restricted minors’ access to birth control, seize control over border policy to exclude asylum-seekers, and flouted recent precedent protecting LGBTQ+ equality,” Stern says.

READ MORE: Far-Right Judge Under Fire for Failing to Disclose Interviews on Civil Rights – but LGBTQ Community Had Warned Senators

“He is also poised to bankrupt Planned Parenthood by compelling them to pay a $1.8 billion penalty on truly ludicrous grounds. And he is not the only Trump-appointed judge substituting his reactionary beliefs for legal analysis. We have reached a point where these lawless decisions are not only predictable but inevitable, and they show no sign of stopping: Their authors are still just settling into a decadeslong service in the federal judiciary.”

West Texas A&M University President Walter V. Wendler penned the letter that sparked the lawsuit.

Titled, “A Harmless Drag Show? No Such Thing,” Wendler wrote: “I believe every human being is created in the image of God and, therefore, a person of dignity. Being created in God’s image is the basis of Natural Law. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, prisoners of the culture of their time as are we, declared the Creator’s origin as the foundational fiber in the fabric of our nation as they breathed life into it. Does a drag show preserve a single thread of human dignity? I think not.”

Journalist Chris Geidner concludes, “It’s an extremely biased ruling by a judge who has established that he does not care about being overturned — even by the most conservative appeals court in the nation.”

READ MORE: ‘Corruption of the Highest Order’: Experts ‘Sickened’ at ‘Definitely Bought’ Clarence Thomas and His ‘Pay to Play’ Lifestyle

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.