Connect with us

Opinion: NOM’s Robert George Is Responsible For Family Research Council’s Anti-Gay Hate Speech

Published

on

According to Robert P. George‘s Princeton University bio, Robert George sits on the Board of Directors  of the anti-gay hate group Family Research Council (FRC).

George also is a founder and current mastermind of the anti-gay-rights National Organization for Marriage (NOM).

Together with the convicted felon Chuck Colson, Robert George wrote and promoted the gay-bashing Manhattan Declaration.

Though hate group leader Robert George wrote the following phrase into his declaration — “We believe in law and in the rule of law” — the hypocrite’s group NOM broke campaign finance laws 18 times.

Robert George — a head of that anti-gay group of  law-breakers — also is, deplorably, embedded in the United States government as part of the U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom.

Bearing critical witness about Robert George’s and NOM’s gay-bashing hatred to the California Fair Political Practices Commission, Ellen Sturtz of Equality California said:

“I come here today, urging you to do your utmost to protect our democracy against those who have contempt for it, us and our laws.”

Robert George’s Family Research Council, aggressively assisted by Robert George’s National Organization For Marriage, long has propagandized — and by that I mean, told lies about — why the Southern Poverty Law Center placed the Family Research Council on its anti-gay hate groups list.

SPLC’s main criteria for putting an anti-gay group on the hate groups list include that a group spreads demonizing lies against gay people.

There is seemingly no end to the demonizing lies that Robert George, FRC and NOM spread against LGBTers.

Here is one example from all of the demonizing lies that Robert George’s FRC spreads against gays:

“One of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order.”

NOM’s Brian Brown recently appeared on television. A CNN interviewer asked him about that FRC statement:

“Isn’t that hateful in your opinion?”

Brian Brown answered: “No.”

The interviewer had already told the anti-gay bigot Brian Brown — directly– that from that statement, and others like it:

“We . . understand why they were labeled a hate group.”

It was not clear whether the interviewer understands that NOM’s Robert George also is an FRC board member. However that may be, she tried once more with NOM’s Brian Brown.

“It is spewing hate,” she said. She asked if he agrees that it is spewing hate; Brian Brown said “No.”

Something that Robert George, the FRC and NOM appear not yet to have comprehended is that mainstream America recognizes anti-gay hate speech when it hears it. With ever-accelerating rapidity, more and more Americans are understanding that all bullying non-acceptance of LGBTers is rooted in sheer hate and ignorance. Despite Robert George’s, FRC’s and NOM’s best efforts to poison people’s minds against LGBTers, the expansion of understanding, acceptance and support for equality is inexorable.

Still, being as Robert George has not yet apologized for the above example of FRC’s anti-gay hate speech, let us analyze what makes it hate speech.

The sentence identifies “the homosexual rights movement” as the “defendant” of the accusation, but it does not specify who that defendant is, meaning, Robert George/FRC are alleging that all persons involved with “the homosexual rights movement” are guilty of the accusation.

One part of the accusation is that a “primary goal” of “the homosexual rights movement” is “to abolish all age of consent laws.”

By many measures, President Obama, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg are heroes of “the homosexual rights movement.”

In other words, FRC’s Robert George is standing behind — and staking his personal reputation and honor on — the allegation that Obama, Cuomo and Bloomberg “want to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order.”

Yet, Obama, Cuomo and Bloomberg have never in the least advocated abolishing age of consent laws.

So, given Robert George’s group’s anti-gay hate speech lies, it would appear that the Family Research Council’s Robert George’s personal reputation and honor are swirling in the toilet of baseless and defamatory lies where he put them.

Moreover, even if all heterosexual LGBT rights allies are removed from the “defendants” class of Robert George/FRC’s hateful and ridiculous allegation, there is no evidence — admissible in a court or otherwise — that any recognized and established LGBT rights  organization seeks to abolish all age of consent laws.

As an attorney, Robert George perhaps understands the trouble he would have demonstrating to a court of law that his hate speech corresponds to documentable facts.

The evil and malicious aims of this Robert George/Family Research Council hate speech are clear; signal to voters that what gay rights advocates really want is to rape children, in order to hate-and-fear-monger voters into voting against gay rights.

By ghastly ironic coincidence, anti-gay hate group leader Robert George also is on the Board of Advisors of The Catholic League, which fights by the Catholic Church’s side, tooth-and-nail, against the lifting of statutes of limitations for prosecution of child rapes.

That is to say, while fraudulently alleging that all gay rights advocates are pedophiles, Robert P. George is on the Board of Advisors of a group very aggressively seeking to deny child rape victims their days in court.

THINK ABOUT THIS

There is something especially egregious and pernicious about a hate group putting the word “research” in its name, as though all the gay-bashing defamation it pumps out could be dignified with what the word “research” most often implies, i.e. academic discipline, respect for facts, and respect for others.

When NOM sponsored an anti-gay hate rally where one of its speakers yelled through a megaphone that homosexuals are “worthy to death,” virtually the entire “homosexual rights movement” called for NOM to apologize.

NOM ignored those calls then, and has never officially apologized.

For instructions on how to report Robert George’s National Organization for Marriage as a hate group, go here.

Robert George is a Republican party United States government official with authority over FRC and NOM, which deliberately spread demonizing lies against gay people, not stopping short of saying that gay people are “worthy to death.”

And, as a U.S. government official drawing a salary funded by tax payers, FRC’s and NOM’s Robert George has authority over a group known to break campaign finance laws.

Call and write your U.S. Senators and Congresspeople.

Tell them that you object to your taxes paying the salary of Robert George, whose groups, the Family Research Council and the National Organization For Marriage, deliberately scapegoat a social minority by spreading demonizing lies against gays.

Tell your Senators and Congresspeople that you do not think it is appropriate for Robert George to be a U.S. government official, being as he has authority over a group that breaks campaign finance laws.

Tell your Senators and Congresspeople that it is absurd and repugnant for Robert George to be a commissioner with the U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom, given that Robert George tells demonizing lies against gay people in hopes of eventually prohibiting all clergy who wish to marry gay couples from doing so.

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.

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.

OPINION

‘I Hope You Find Happiness’: Moskowitz Trolls Comer Over Impeachment Fail

Published

3 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) is mocking House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer over a CNN report revealing the embattled Kentucky Republican who has been alleging without proof President Joe Biden is the head of a vast multi-million dollar criminal bribery and influence-peddling conspiracy, has given up trying to impeach the leader of the free world.

CNN on Wednesday had reported, “after 15 months of coming up short in proving some of his biggest claims against the president, Comer recently approached one of his Republican colleagues and made a blunt admission: He was ready to be ‘done with’ the impeachment inquiry into Biden.” The news network described Chairman Comer as “frustrated” and his investigation as “at a dead end.”

One GOP lawmaker told CNN, “Comer is hoping Jesus comes so he can get out.”

“He is fed up,” the Republican added.

Despite the Chairman’s alleged remarks, “a House Oversight Committee spokesperson maintains that ‘the impeachment inquiry is ongoing and impeachment is 100% still on the table.'”

RELATED: ‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

Last week, Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) got into a shouting match with Chairman Comer, with the Maryland Democrat saying, “You have not identified a single crime – what is the crime that you want to impeach Joe Biden for and keep this nonsense going?” and Comer replying, “You’re about to find out.”

Before those heated remarks, Congressman Raskin chided Comer, humorously threatening to invite Rep. Moskowitz to return to the hearing.

Congressman Moskowitz appears to be the only member of the House Oversight Committee who has ever made a motion to call for a vote on impeaching President Biden, which he did last month, although he did it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

It appears the Moskowitz-Comer “bromance” may be over.

Wednesday afternoon Congressman Moskowitz, whose sarcasm is becoming well-known, used it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

“I was hoping our breakup would never become public,” he declared. “We had such a great thing while it lasted James. I will miss the time we spent together. I will miss our conversations. I will miss the pet names you gave me. I only wish you the best and hope you find happiness.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Published

5 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case centered on the question, can the federal government require states with strict abortion bans to allow physicians to perform abortions in emergency situations, specifically when the woman’s health, but not her life, is in danger?

The 1986 federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), signed into law by Republican President Ronald Reagan, says it can. The State of Idaho on Wednesday argued it cannot.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, The Washington Post’s Kim Bellware reported, “made a clear delineation between Idaho law and what EMTALA provides.”

“In Idaho, doctors have to shut their eyes to everything except death,” Prelogar said, according to Bellware. “Whereas under EMTALA, you’re supposed to be thinking about things like, ‘Is she about to lose her fertility? Is her uterus going to become incredibly scarred because of the bleeding? Is she about to undergo the possibility of kidney failure?’ ”

READ MORE: Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Attorney Imani Gandy, an award-winning journalist and Editor-at-Large for Rewire News Group, highlighted an issue central to the case.

“The issue of medical judgment vs. good faith judgment is a huge one because different states have different standards of judgment,” she writes. “If a doctor exercises their judgment, another doctor expert witness at trial could question that. That’s a BIG problem here. That’s why doctors are afraid to provide abortions. They may have an overzealous prosecutor come behind them and disagree.”

Right-wing Justice Samuel Alito appeared to draw the most fire from legal experts, as his questioning suggested “fetal personhood” should be the law, which it is not.

“Justice Alito is trying to import fetal personhood into federal statutory law by suggesting federal law might well prohibit hospitals from providing abortions as emergency stabilizing care,” observed Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis.

Paraphrasing Justice Alito, Kreis writes: “Alito: How can the federal government restrict what Idaho criminalizes simply because hospitals in Idaho have accepted federal funds?”

Appearing to answer that question, Georgia State University College of Law professor of law and Constitutional scholar Eric Segall wrote: “Our Constitution unequivocally allows the federal gov’t to offer the states money with conditions attached no matter how invasive b/c states can always say no. The conservative justices’ hostility to the spending power is based only on politics and values not text or history.”

Professor Segall also served up some of the strongest criticism of the right-wing justice.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

He wrote that Justice Alito “is basically making it clear he doesn’t care if pregnant women live or die as long as the fetus lives.”

Earlier Wednesday morning Segall had issued a warning: “Trigger alert: In about 20 minutes several of the conservative justices are going to show very clearly that that they care much more about fetuses than women suffering major pregnancy complications which is their way of owning the libs which is grotesque.”

Later, predicting “Alito is going to dissent,” Segall wrote: “Alito is dripping arrogance and condescension…in a case involving life, death, and medical emergencies. He has no bottom.”

Taking a broader view of the case, NYU professor of law Melissa Murray issued a strong warning: “The EMTALA case, Moyle v. US, hasn’t received as much attention as the mifepristone case, but it is huge. Not only implicates access to emergency medical procedures (like abortion in cases of miscarriage), but the broader question of federal law supremacy.”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Published

8 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

Hours before his attorneys would mount a defense on Tuesday claiming he had not violated his gag order Donald Trump might have done just that in a 12-minute taped interview that morning, which did not air until later that day. It will be up to Judge Juan Merchan to make that decision, if prosecutors add it to their contempt request.

Prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office told Judge Juan Merchan that the ex-president violated the gag order ten times, via posts on his Truth Social platform, and are asking he be held in contempt. While the judge has yet to rule, he did not appear moved by their arguments. At one point, Judge Merchan told Trump’s lead lawyer Todd Blanche he was “losing all credibility” with the court.

And while Judge Merchan directed defense attorneys to provide a detailed timeline surrounding Trump’s Truth Social posts to prove he had not violated the gag order, Trump in an interview with a local television station appeared to have done so.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

The gag order bars Trump from “commenting or causing others to comment on potential witnesses in the case, prospective jurors, court staff, lawyers in the district attorney’s office and the relatives of any counsel or court staffer, as CBS News reported.

“The threat is very real,” Judge Merchan wrote when he expanded the gag order. “Admonitions are not enough, nor is reliance on self-restraint. The average observer, must now, after hearing Defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well. Such concerns will undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself.”

Tuesday morning, Trump told ABC Philadelphia’s Action News reporter Walter Perez, “Michael Cohen is a convicted liar. He’s got no credibility whatsoever.”

He repeated that Cohen is a “convicted liar,” and insisted he “was a lawyer for many people, not just me.”

READ MORE: ‘Old and Tired and Mad’: Trump’s Demeanor in Court Detailed by Rachel Maddow

Since Cohen is a witness in Trump’s New York criminal case, Judge Merchan might decide Trump’s remarks during that interview violated the gag order, if prosecutors bring the video to his attention.

Enter attorney George Conway, who has been attending Trump’s New York trial.

Conway reposted a clip of the video, tagged Manhattan District Attorney Bragg, writing: “cc: @ManhattanDA, for your proposed order to show cause why the defendant in 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘷. 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 should not spend some quiet time in lockup.”

Trump has been criminally indicted in four separate cases and is facing a total of 88 felony charges, including 34 in this New York criminal trial for alleged falsification of business records to hide payments of “hush money” to an adult film actress and one other woman, in an alleged effort to suppress their stories and protect his 2016 presidential campaign, which experts say is election interference.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.