Connect with us

Looking At LGBT Equality And The Family Research Council Shooting

Published

on

When Scott Roeder assassinated Wichita, Kansas based physician and abortion provider George Tiller on Sunday, May 31, 2009, I was understandably upset. Violence of this type is nothing new, and Tiller himself was the target of a previous assassination attempt in 1993. This kind of thing happens from time to time in the abortion debate, with outraged zealots choosing to solve through mind bending acts of violence what they feel they are unable to accomplish through considered and thoughtful debate.

When things like that happen, when the business of political discourse derails in such a mindless and tragic fashion, the aftermath always proves instructive. Within the first few hours, anti-abortion activists from the major pro-life organizations, fearing a backlash, moved in quickly with full throated denunciations of the attack. Here is one from World-Class-Asshole Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council.

We are stunned at today’s news. As Christians we pray and look toward the end of all violence and for the saving of souls, not the taking of human life. George Tiller was a man who we publicly sought to stop through legal and peaceful means. We strongly condemn the actions taken today by this vigilante killer and we pray for the Tiller family and for the nation that we might once again be a nation that values all human life, both born and unborn.

See that? He denounces the attack, while affirming the basic premise of their argument. From a PR perspective, it’s a pretty nicely constructed public statement.

It is also one that enraged me. “Screw you,” I thought to myself. “You played a part in this. You spend all of your time riling up the base hatred and self-righteous indignation of your supporters, and then run for the hills when things escalate beyond your control.” While it probably unfair to blame the FRC entirely for the part they played in Dr. George Tiller’s assassination, on some level, that is true. In politics, some amount of your strategy must be an attempt to clarify the sins of your opponent. These sins are then used to motivate your organization. The more awful your enemy behaves, the more useful that behavior is a recruiting tool for your movement. It’s depressing, but times are what they are.

The problem is that angry, hostile rhetoric can produce a wide range of results, and when you start painting targets on people some of the more misguided sociopaths among us will elect to shoot at them. Some of us don’t handle passion well, and for those people, a passionate debate like abortion becomes an ideal breeding ground for the bacteria of hate. The FRC had long been part of the effort to demonize abortion providers, and the attack was at least in some small way an outgrowth of that. I wanted them to take responsibility for their role in stoking that public fervor, however minor a factor it may have been in that specific assassination attempt.

I thought about Dr. Tiller upon learning of Floyd Lee Corkins, and his attack on the D.C. offices of the Family Research Council. According to news reports, which for our purposes today we will assume are accurate, Floyd walked into the FRC lobby with a loaded pistol, ludicrous amounts of ammunition, some Chick-Fil-A sundry, and began running his mouth about how awful the FRC is. They are, by they way, awful. Upon questioning by a member of the security staff, Corkins started firing, shooting the security guard in the arm. The tables, it seems, had been reversed. This time, it was one of our people doing something violently stupid.

I want to make clear, I am not taking responsibility for this yahoo’s poor judgment or unstable psyche. Something exists in the mind of a potential mass shooter that is unique to their classification. These are people capable of packing up lethal weaponry, leaving the house, driving across town, parking, getting out of the car, putting change in the meter, walking into a public place in the middle of the day, taking a pistol out, and shooting someone. A shooting isn’t ever just one bad decision. It’s a deliberate series of bad decisions, each one being a necessary step in a process. At every stage of that bad decision, the assailant in question must renew their resolve to murder. To make it through each step, and to complete the devastating final act, takes determination of a sort that chills the blood. Ultimate responsibility belongs to the shooter. They’ve worked hard to accomplish their horrific goals, and have earned the appropriate recognition for their efforts. Hopefully involving orange outfits and lots of concrete.

What makes this personally conflicting is that I completely understand where his anger comes from. The Family Research Council, along with other like minded organizations like the American Family Association, and the National Organization for Marriage, deal in bigotry. The sole reason for their existence, the very premise upon which they have rented office space and obtained corporate letterhead, is to work to make the lives of LGBT people in this country worse. A good day for the FRC will almost always be a bad day for gay people. They cloak themselves in Christ, and then work as hard as they can to make sure that gay people can’t marry, have no federal protection of any kind, and are as despised and alienated as possible by the general public. If the FRC had its way, the United States would return to the days before Lawrence v. Texas, when homosexuality was illegal. They want me to be able to be fired from my job, or kicked out of my home for being gay. They would have gay teachers disgraced and removed from contact with their students. They would have us return to the days before Stonewall when we were hunted by our peers, lobotomized by our loved ones, terrified to leave our closets. There is no law supporting any aspect of LGBT equality that people like the FRC wouldn’t find time to oppose. What’s worse, mainstream media outlets frequently have FRC head Tony Perkins on their programs so that he can tell the American people all of this in person. The reality is that if not for hate, organizations like the FRC would have very little to do all day. Perhaps you can engineer a way that their behavior doesn’t positively define bigotry, but if so, I have yet to see a compelling case made for such a prospect.

When the Southern Poverty Law Center calls the Family Research Council a hate group, it does so for a reason. Essentially, we have two groups. Gay people and enlightened supporters, and the Family Research Council and their hate filled cabal. Gay people are simply minding their own business, falling in love, starting families, having jobs, trying to find their place in society. We wish only to participate in society with the same protections and responsibilities everyone else enjoys. The ideal situation is one of agnostic disinterest on the part of the American people. We want equality, and to be left alone. The FRC, entirely uninvited to the equation, exists to interfere in that process. They work to deny us the basic pleasures of life. In a world with no FRC in it, we exist unmolested, content to engage in the standard issue Jeffersonian pursuit of happiness. Without us, the FRC has no meaning. They do nothing. They have no point. Their goals are ones of destruction. They instigate and perpetuate this battle, leaving us little choice but to set about fighting it.

I understand why Floyd Corkins felt like he was under attack. He was. We all are. He has a right to be angry. What he doesn’t have is a right to run around shooting people. I want to win this debate on the merits of our argument, not by inflicting damage on our opponent sufficient to run them out of the debate entirely. I want them to realize why they are wrong. I want our victory to be clean, and based on well considered fact. Floyd Corkins, by choosing a solution of violence, has undercut the righteousness of our struggle, injured a perfectly innocent security guard, and what’s worse, generated public sympathy for an organization that deserves nothing but national scorn. Violence, even against the empty suit that is Tony Perkins, is no way to solve our problems. Only through winning the hearts and minds of the American people can our struggles come to an end. Bigotry is a reaction to fear, and making bigots more fearful isn’t going to help solve our problems. It only makes things worse.

While the actions of Floyd Corkins are his own, both sides of the battle for equality must take time to acknowledge our casualties, and take responsibility for the damage the battle is causing. We would stop our defense in a moment if that were possible. However, as we remain gay despite the best efforts of the Family Research Council, we have little choice but to continue fighting. The only actor in this scenario capable of ending this confrontation are the bigots, the agitators, the ones who choose to assault our community. For us this struggle is mandatory. For them, it is decidedly optional. They elect to attack us, and we must therefore defend. Never through violence, as that sort of victory is never sustainable, but through the perseverance of thought and the never abating belief that equality shines through all other obstructions, and in the end will prevail.

 
Benjamin PhillipsBenjamin Phillips is an Essayist, Web Developer, Civics Nerd, and all around crank that spends entirely too much time shouting with deep exasperation at the television, especially whenever cable news is on, and proudly serves as Director of Development for The New Civil Rights Movement. He lives in St. Louis, MO and spends most of his time staring at various LCD screens, occasionally taking walks in the park whenever his boyfriend becomes sufficiently convinced that Benjamin is becoming a reclusive hermit person. He is available for children’s parties, provided that those children are entertained by hearing a complete windbag talk for two hours about the importance of science education, or worse yet, poorly researched anecdotes PROVING that James Buchanan was totally gay. If civilization were to collapse due to zombie hoards or nuclear holocaust, Benjamin would be among the first to die as he has no useful skills of any kind. The post-apocalyptic hellscape has no real need for homosexual computer programmers who can name all the presidents in order, as well as the actors who have played all eleven incarnations of Doctor Who.

Related Topics:
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

‘Fear Small Crowds?’: Trump and Team Mocked as ‘Snowflakes’ for Inauguration Move

Published

21 hours ago

on

January 17, 2025

By

When Donald Trump raises his right hand on Monday to swear an oath to the U.S. Constitution as America’s 47th President, he will do so not as most Presidents have done, outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., but inside. Amid forecasted temperatures in the mid-20s, Trump has decided to move the proceedings inside, a decision that was quickly met with mockery and prompted speculation about crowd size concerns.

Washington, D.C. suffers from — or boasts, depending on personal preference — a wide range of temperatures. In January, temperatures in recent years have ranged from a balmy 80 degrees (2024) to a frigid 5 degrees (2015). And while temperatures in the mid-40s are average for January, 24 degrees, the forecast for Inauguration Day, is not especially unusual.

“Due to the dangerously cold temperatures expected Monday, President-elect Trump’s inauguration is moving indoors. Expect Trump and Vance to be sworn in inside the Capitol Rotunda,” CNN’s Kaitlan Collins reported Friday. A short time later she added: “Trump confirms it’s moving inside, citing the danger posed to attendees by the cold. He says guests will be brought inside the Capitol.”

READ MORE: Biden Sparks Legal Battle by Declaring Equal Rights Amendment Is Now ‘Law of the Land’

Trump posted a dramatic explanation: “January 20th cannot come fast enough! Everybody, even those that initially opposed a Victory by President Donald J. Trump and the Trump Administration, just want it to happen,” he claimed.

“It is my obligation to protect the People of our Country but, before we even begin, we have to think of the Inauguration itself. The weather forecast for Washington, D.C., with the windchill factor, could take temperatures into severe record lows,” Trump also claimed.

“There is an Arctic blast sweeping the Country. I don’t want to see people hurt, or injured, in any way. It is dangerous conditions for the tens of thousands of Law Enforcement, First Responders, Police K9s and even horses, and hundreds of thousands of supporters that will be outside for many hours on the 20th (In any event, if you decide to come, dress warmly!),” he wrote.

“Therefore, I have ordered the Inauguration Address, in addition to prayers and other speeches, to be delivered in the United States Capitol Rotunda, as was used by Ronald Reagan in 1985, also because of very cold weather. The various Dignitaries and Guests will be brought into the Capitol. This will be a very beautiful experience for all, and especially for the large TV audience!”

The temperature during Reagan’s second inauguration was 7 degrees, with a windchill making it feel like -40, Fox News reports.

The decision surprised many.

“It was 28°F when Barack Obama was sworn in at noon on January 20, 2009 before a crowd of nearly two million people,” observed Aaron Fritschner, Deputy Chief of Staff to U.S. Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA). “NOT INCLUDING THE INSANE WIND CHILL!!”

Susan Rice, a former top advisor to both Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, mocked Trump and team: “SNOWFLAKES,” she snarked, using the common derisive term occasionally leveled at Democrats by the right.

READ MORE: Trump Threatens FBI Office, Alleges ‘Corruption,’ Demands They ‘Preserve All Records’

Some critics suggested the issue was not weather but attendance — just like when Trump was inaugurated before a small crowd in 2017, only to make his first White House Press Secretary’s job to denounce those claims and declare, “This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period,” he emphatically and infamously insisted — reportedly at Trump’s direction.

“Moving the inauguration inside due to freezing temps takes crowd size ‘off the table’ as Trump’s second term begins,” CNN’s Brian Stelter, citing his colleague Dana Bash, noted.

Sam Stein of The Bulwark suggested that President-elect Trump has been trying to get more people to show up: “Trump has been running twitter ads to get folks to come to the inauguration. If they’re now moving it indoors, you have to imagine folks who booked travel will be left distraught.”

David Axelrod, senior advisor and chief campaign strategist to President Barack Obama, also mocked Trump.

“In ’61, John F. Kennedy was Inaugurated on the Capitol steps, in windchills of 7 degrees. It was almost as cold for Obama in ’09. In fairness, Trump IS more than 3 decades older than JFK & Obama were. Or did he just fear small crowds?”

Former Obama Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton, offering a history lesson, suggested there aren’t a large number of people interested in attending Trump’s second inauguration. He wrote “Tell me you have a crowd size problem without telling me you have a crowd size problem. It was colder for Obama’s and JFK’s inaugurations and JFK didn’t even wear a coat.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘My Eyes and Ears’: Trump Names Ambassadors to Hollywood, Critics Question Motives

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

Biden Sparks Legal Battle by Declaring Equal Rights Amendment Is Now ‘Law of the Land’

Published

24 hours ago

on

January 17, 2025

By

President Joe Biden, just days before he will exit the White House, announced on Friday that the Equal Rights Amendment, which would enshrine in the U.S. Constitution equal rights for women, is now the 28th Amendment and “the law of the land.” Although he has some legal scholars backing this declaration, experts say there are still legal hurdles and a legal battle to overcome.

“Today I’m affirming what I have long believed and what three-fourths of the states have ratified: The 28th Amendment is the law of the land, guaranteeing all Americans equal rights and protections under the law regardless of their sex,” President Biden wrote. “I have supported the Equal Rights Amendment for more than 50 years and have long been clear that no one should be discriminated against based on their sex. We must affirm and protect women’s full equality once and for all.”

“On January 27, 2020,” President Biden explained in his statement on the White House website, “the Commonwealth of Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. The American Bar Association (ABA) has recognized that the Equal Rights Amendment has cleared all necessary hurdles to be formally added to the Constitution as the 28th Amendment. I agree with the ABA and with leading legal constitutional scholars that the Equal Rights Amendment has become part of our Constitution.”

READ MORE: Trump Threatens FBI Office, Alleges ‘Corruption,’ Demands They ‘Preserve All Records’

“It is long past time to recognize the will of the American people. In keeping with my oath and duty to Constitution and country, I affirm what I believe and what three-fourths of the states have ratified: the 28th Amendment is the law of the land, guaranteeing all Americans equal rights and protections under the law regardless of their sex.”

CNN calls Biden’s announcement “a last-minute move that some believe could pave the way to bolstering reproductive rights.”

“It will, however, certainly draw swift legal challenges – and its next steps remain extremely unclear as Biden prepares to leave office.”

The news network also credits U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) with “making a major push for certification, saying in a memo to interested parties that it would give Biden a way to ‘codify women’s freedom and equality without needing anything from a bitterly divided and broken Congress’ in the aftermath of the 2022 Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.”

In 2020, after Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the ERA, the necessary requirement of three-fourths ratification may have been met.

As The Brennan Center for Justice noted just days later, “there are still hurdles in the ERA’s path. The ratification deadlines that Congress set after it approved the amendment have lapsed, and five states have acted to rescind their prior approval. These raise important questions, and now it is up to Congress, the courts, and the American people to resolve them.”

READ MORE: ‘My Eyes and Ears’: Trump Names Ambassadors to Hollywood, Critics Question Motives

Congress could try to waive the deadline and try to ignore the states that rescinded their ratification.

President Biden did not order the National Archivist to certify the ERA as the 28th Amendment. Some have suggested neither has the legal authority to do so at this point.

But some have also suggested the deadline was unconstitutional.

The Associated Press called President Biden’s declaration “a symbolic statement that’s unlikely to alter a decades-long push for gender equality,” and “unlikely to have any impact.”

“Presidents do not have any role in the amendment process. The leader of the National Archives had previously said that the amendment cannot be certified because it wasn’t ratified before a deadline set by Congress,” the AP added. It noted that the National Archives said, “the underlying legal and procedural issues have not changed.”

READ MORE: DeSantis’ Rubio Replacement Seen as Trump Loyalist and MAGA Culture Warrior

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

Trump Threatens FBI Office, Alleges ‘Corruption,’ Demands They ‘Preserve All Records’

Published

1 day ago

on

January 17, 2025

By

Just days before he will be sworn into office, President-elect Donald Trump is alleging the FBI has been engaging in “corruption,” after learning the Bureau has shut down its “DEI Office,” officially the Office of Diversity and Inclusion. The FBI has a lengthy, ongoing investigation into the January 6, 2021 insurrection and attack on the U.S. Capitol. It also conducted an intensive investigation into Trump’s removal and refusal to return classified documents, including top secret national security materials, and executed a lawful search warrant on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and residence to retrieve some of those documents.

“We demand that the FBI preserve and retain all records, documents, and information on the now closing DEI Office—Never should have been opened and, if it was, should have closed long ago. Why is it that they’re closing one day before the Inauguration of a new Administration? The reason is, CORRUPTION!” Trump alleged, offering no proof or evidence, in a social media post Thursday evening.

Trump pointed to a report from Mediaite: “FBI Shuttered DEI Office Ahead of Trump’s Inauguration.”

READ MORE: ‘My Eyes and Ears’: Trump Names Ambassadors to Hollywood, Critics Question Motives

“While on the campaign trail, Trump stated he would end ‘wokeness’ and ‘leftist indoctrination’ by dismantling diversity programs and imposing fines on colleges ‘up to the entire amount of their endowment,” the Mediaite report reads. “More recently, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) sent a letter to outgoing FBI Director Christopher Wray stating the agency’s DEI practices ‘endanger Americans.’ Blackburn made those comments shortly after the New Year’s Day terror attack in New Orleans.”

The Bureau’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion “was created in 2012 to provide guidance and implement programs that promote a diverse and inclusive workplace that allows all employees to succeed and advance,” according to an archived version of its website. That page, which stresses, “Different backgrounds. One mission,” appears to no longer be accessible from the FBI’s website, and instead forwards to the main page.

“The FBI’s efforts to diversify are crucial to creating an inclusive workforce and to being increasingly effective and efficient in our investigations and keeping the American public safe,” FBI Chief Diversity Officer Scott McMillion said in a quote on that page.

READ MORE: DeSantis’ Rubio Replacement Seen as Trump Loyalist and MAGA Culture Warrior

Apparently baseless accusations against DEI abound.

The New Republic notes that the “FBI came under fire recently as many on the right openly blamed the deadly truck attack on New Year’s Day in New Orleans on the agency’s DEI policies.”

“The priority of the last four years has been DEI, not IEDs,” New York Republican Representative Dan Meuser had told Fox News,” TNR reported.

“The ODI office isn’t closing because of corruption,” TNR added, “like Trump is claiming in all caps on Truth Social. It’s likely closing for the same reason Walmart, Meta, McDonald’s, and others are reneging on DEI policy: Trump is back.”

READ MORE: Trump Ran on Promise to Lower Grocery Prices — Few Americans Now Believe He Will

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.