Connect with us

Top Anti-Gay Group’s Wild 2008 Pre-Election Fear Mongering Never Came True

Published

on

Focus On The Family during the 2008 election issued a 34-point “Letter from 2012” that predicted how terrible America would become if Barack Obama were elected. Two  examinations of each of their 34 points, many of them anti-gay, reveals that out of 34, the only ones that came true were — actually, well, none.

In total, the “Letter” mentions the word “homosexual” or some variation of it, 34 times. By contrast, it mentions “Christian” 31 times, “God” only 11, and the “Bible” only five.

The “Letter” interestingly predicts:

Many of our freedoms have been taken away by a liberal Supreme Court and a Democratic majority in both the House and the Senate, and hardly any brave citizen dares to resist the new government policies any more.

That seems ironic, because the group that is trying to take away freedoms aren’t Democrats, but Republicans — in a huge way. And frankly, many of the prophecies the “Letter” suggests, sound pretty darn good. So, in reality, “our freedoms” actually means, “how we oppress minorities.”

Focus On The Family is not technically an anti-gay hate group, although it was founded by the same man, James Dobson, who did create an anti-gay hate group, the Family Research Council. And Focus on the Family does dip its toes pretty deep into the anti-gay hate water — just not enough for the Southern Poverty Law Center to add them to their list of active anti-gay hate groups.

In 2008, “A Christian from 2012” supposedly penned the “Letter from 2012 in Obama’s America.” Some of the predictions that anonymous “Christian” made include imposition of same-sex marriage across all 50 states, the dissolution of the Boy Scouts, the expelling of Christians from the U.S. armed forces once Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was repealed, along with the payment of special recruiting bonuses — only to homosexuals, though.

Focus on the Family’s “Letter” claimed that President Obama by 2012 had created a liberal-stacked Supreme Court with a 6-3 majority of “justices who were eager to create laws from the bench.”

But that isn’t all.

The most far-reaching transformation of American society came from the Supreme Court’s stunning affirmation, in early 2010, that homosexual “marriage” was a “constitutional” right that had to be respected by all 50 states because laws barring same-sex “marriage” violated the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. Suddenly, homosexual “marriage” was the law of the land in all 50 states, and no state legislature, no state Supreme Court, no state Constitutional amendment, not even Congress, had any power to change it. The Supreme Court had ruled, and the discussion was over. This was a blatant example of creating law by the court, for homosexual “marriage” was mentioned nowhere in the Constitution, nor would any of the authors have imagined that same-sex “marriage” could be derived from their words. But it just followed the precedents that had been set by state supreme courts in Massachusetts (2003), California (2008) and Connecticut (2008).

President Obama repeated his declaration that he personally was against same-sex “marriage”, but he told the nation there was nothing he could do. The Supreme Court had ruled, and it was now the law of the land. The president asked the nation to support the decision.

After that decision, many other policies changed, and several previous Supreme Court cases were reversed rather quickly — raising the question, “Is America still the land of the free?”

Can’t you just taste the fear in the hearts of the Christian conservatives, the “Moral Majority,” the supposed Evangelical Christian, the radical right wing religious theocrats?

In Focus on the Family’s 2012, “many private Christian schools decided to shut down after the Supreme Court ruled that anti-discrimination laws that include sexual orientation extended to private institutions such as schools,6 and that private schools also had to obey the law and teach that homosexuality and heterosexuality are both morally good choices.”

And , yes, there’s more.

The Bible can no longer be freely preached over radio or television stations when the subject matter includes such “offensive” doctrines as criticizing homosexual behavior. The Supreme Court agreed that these could be kept off the air as prohibited “hate speech” that is likely to incite violence and discrimination. These policies followed broadcasting and print restrictions that were in place prior to 2008 in Canada and Sweden.

Fred Clark, who writes the excellent “Slacktivist” blog at Patheos, says the “‘Letter from 2012′ makes Focus on the Family look ridiculous,” but suggests, “let’s be generous — we’ll give them half credit for prediction No. 10. That one correctly foresaw the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — but then also incorrectly predicted a host of disastrous consequences of that repeal.

Obama did repeal DADT, but Christians have not been expelled from the military and the Pentagon isn’t paying “special bonuses” to LGBT recruits. But still, that one comes closer than the other 33 predictions, which are all utterly wrong, so let’s cut Focus some slack and say they’re 0.5-for-34.

The Boy Scouts and private Christian schools were not forced to disband by the Supreme Court; adoption agencies remain in business; religious broadcasters still broadcast; churches are not being compelled to host gay weddings or to hire lesbian clergy; Christian tribal gatherings are still permitted “at the pole” in public high schools; the Pledge of Allegiance and private gun ownership have not been outlawed.

Libby Anne’s post is long because it is impressively thorough and methodical. Here is what Focus on the Family said would happen. Here is what actually did happen instead. Over and over and over. Focus on the Family was wrong. Focus on the Family was wrong. Focus on the Family was wrong. … Thirty-four times over. Treat yourself to reading the whole thing.

Re-reading the Focus letter four years later, what strikes me most — besides how utterly wrong they are about everything — is how parochial their imagination is when attempting to envision a political dystopia. The horrors they predict are almost all narrowly targeted at and tailored toward them. I’ve read a ton of dystopian stories, good and bad, and this is the most cluelessly self-absorbed vision of its kind that I’ve ever seen.

Maybe my favorite part of the letter (here’s a .pdf version) is prediction No. 18: “Pornographic magazines are openly displayed in gas stations, grocery stores and on newsstands.” I can’t figure out which is more laughably wrong — that this is what they imagine is the real secret agenda of President Obama and his party, or that anyone in 2008 was looking ahead to 2012 and predicting boom times for print media.

For a more extensive look, read  Libby Anne’s analysis.

Hat-tip: Andrew Sullivan

Related:

Bobby Jindal: Gay Marriage Slippery Slope To Overturning Second Amendment

Focus On The Family: Chick-Fil-A ‘No Way Deviated’ — Still Funding Anti-Gay Groups

Tweet Of The Day: Focus On The Family On How To Have Sex

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

Trump Dodges, Denies and Deflects Questions as Ukraine Weapons Scandal Grows

Published

58 minutes ago

on

July 9, 2025

By

The halted Ukraine weapons scandal is growing as President Donald Trump on Wednesday said he had not even thought about who gave the order to pause the shipment of vital munitions—which caused tremendous turmoil inside the White House, Congress, and Kyiv—but if it had been given, he claimed, he would have both known about it and likely been the one to give it.

Last week, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, for the third time, approved the decision to pause the shipments of weapons to Ukraine—just before President Donald Trump spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Hours after that conversation, Russia launched one of the largest bombing attacks since the start of its illegal war against Ukraine.

“Sir,” a reporter asked President Trump at the White House on Wednesday afternoon, “yesterday you said that you were not sure who ordered the munitions halted to Ukraine. Have you since been able to figure that out?”

RELATED: ‘Secretary Chaos’: Hegseth Running ‘Absolute Clown Show’ Critics Say, Amid Calls to Resign

“Well,” Trump replied, as he acknowledged the munitions had been halted, “I haven’t thought about it because we’re looking at Ukraine right now and munitions, but, uh, I have no, I have not gone into it.”

“What does it say that such a big decision could be made inside your government without you knowing?” the reporter pressed.

“Uh, I would know,” Trump insisted. “If a decision was made, I would know. I’d be the first to know, in fact, most likely, I’d give the order, but I haven’t done that yet.”

The President then moved on to take a question from a different reporter.

President Trump on Tuesday had claimed he had no knowledge of who ordered the halt in weapons shipments. That pause came just after his July 3 call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Hours later, Russia launched a massive bombing campaign against Ukraine.

“So who ordered the pause last week?” a CNN reporter had asked Trump on Tuesday.

“I don’t know,” Trump replied. “Why don’t you tell me?”

The halt of weapons to Ukraine was so catastrophic and damaging that it set off “a scramble inside the administration to understand why the halt was implemented and explain it to Congress and the Ukrainian government,” CNN reported.

Critics blasted the President.

READ MORE: ‘No Amnesty’ and No Plan: Trump Ag Sec Grilled on Farm Labor as Deportations Continue

“This is quite literally becoming a daily thing, where Trump disavows making decision after decision, some of which would be wildly illegal without his involvement,” observed civil liberties and national security journalist Marcy Wheeler.

“There are some people who I think are really principled callers-out of cognitive decline, just like deeply invested in the matter as something that self-evidently needs to be called out publicly and not swept under the rug, who I can’t wait to hear from,” noted Pat Dennis, president of American Bridge, a Democratic Super PAC.

Watch the video below or at this link.

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Not Even Done Your Homework, Sir’: Dem Demands ‘Unqualified’ Trump Nominee ‘Shape Up’

Published

2 hours ago

on

July 9, 2025

By

President Donald Trump’s nominee to serve as Ambassador to Singapore, orthopedic and sports medicine surgeon Dr. Anjani (Anji) Sinha, was blasted and berated during his Senate confirmation hearing on Wednesday, after he appeared unable to answer critical questions about the role Singapore plays in U.S. national security and security in the Indo-Pacific region.

U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), a decorated Iraq War veteran and retired lieutenant colonel, pressed Dr. Sinha with pointed questions—particularly about Singapore’s role in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a bloc of ten member countries that includes Singapore.

“What does holding the ASEAN chairmanship entail for Singapore?” Senator Duckworth asked. “Can you name one thing? A role that they would have to play as ASEAN chair?”

“Well, you know that there—this is ASEAN chair is not only one country that are ten countries in—” Dr. Sinha replied.

READ MORE: ‘Secretary Chaos’: Hegseth Running ‘Absolute Clown Show’ Critics Say, Amid Calls to Resign

“No, the ASEAN chair is one country,” Duckworth explained.

“But there are 10 countries involved as the ASEAN group,” Sinha responded.

“You’re not answering my question. You’re not answering my question, sir,” said Duckworth, who sits on the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee and on the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. “Can you name one thing there will be of critical importance to Singapore as ASEAN Chair? A role? There are many things. Can you name one thing?”

“Defense, economics…” Sinha offered.

“Those are very broad. Name an issue,” Duckworth demanded.

“Trade,” Sinha said.

“I don’t think…no,” Duckworth replied.

The questions continued, with Duckworth appearing extremely dissatisfied with Sinha’s answers.

“Please,” she finally said, “I’m trying to help you here, but you’ve not even done your homework, sir. You want to be ambassador to Singapore, one of the most important alliances, friends we have in the Indo-Pacific. A key place that we’re going to be fighting against our greatest adversary in the region, the PRC,” she explained, referring to the People’s Republic of China.

READ MORE: ‘No Amnesty’ and No Plan: Trump Ag Sec Grilled on Farm Labor as Deportations Continue

“Singapore may feature incredible culture, but that should not be treated as a glamour posting,” Duckworth continued. “This nation is too important to the United States, to ASEAN, to the entire region. And frankly, I think the mission is important to U.S. interests and national security, and it should actually be a foreign service officer.”

“But I have even larger concerns with the political pick, when that political pick is somebody as unqualified as you,” she charged. “I’ve opposed political picks for Singapore from Democrats. So this is not a partisan issue. I just feel that you are not taking this seriously, and you think this is a glamour posting that you’re going to live a nice life in Singapore. What we need is someone who’s going to actually do the work.”

“You are not currently prepared for this posting, period,” Duckworth concluded, “and you need to shape up and do some homework.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Claims ‘Tremendous Power’ to Run ‘Places’ Like DC and NYC

Continue Reading

News

‘No Amnesty’ and No Plan: Trump Ag Sec Grilled on Farm Labor as Deportations Continue

Published

5 hours ago

on

July 9, 2025

By

One day after appearing in front of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to tell reporters there will be “no amnesty” for undocumented farm workers while insisting adults on Medicaid could replace them, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins faced sharp criticism for having no “concrete” plan to meet what she declared is the Trump administration’s goal of an entirely “legal” U.S. farm worker workforce.

“It sounds like you don’t yet have a concrete proposal to deal with farmers who rely on undocumented workers, am I right?” a Fox News Business host asked (video below).

“Well, no, we are working on it. We’re working on a concrete proposal,” Secretary Rollins insisted.

READ MORE: ‘Secretary Chaos’: Hegseth Running ‘Absolute Clown Show’ Critics Say, Amid Calls to Resign

“You’re working on it but that’s not a concrete proposal,” the host sharply charged.

“Well, no, the president has been very, very clear. We need to make sure that the food supply is safe,” Rollins said, before insisting that “ultimately, we have to move toward a 100% legal workforce, and that’s what this president stands for, and that’s what we’re doing.”

“The mass deportations will continue, but the president has been very clear that we have to make sure we’re not compromising our food supply at the same time,” Rollins said before declaring that “Congress has to fix it,” and U.S. Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer “is on it.”

“The border has to be secure and there will be no amnesty,” Rollins added, before the host again pointed out the administration has no plan yet.

READ MORE: Trump Claims ‘Tremendous Power’ to Run ‘Places’ Like DC and NYC

“It’s not easy, but I don’t think it’s fair to say there is a concrete proposal when you’re still working out details to try to deal with the needs of farmers who need a lot of these undocumented workers and at the same time not providing an amnesty.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Stupid Liberals With Stupid Policies’: Trump Transportation Secretary Slams NYC

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.