Connect with us

Watch: Evangelicals Franklin Graham And Ralph Reed Bash Gays For Easter (Video)

Published

on

For Easter, ABC News’ “This Week” hosted three top evangelical Christian leaders who spent a good portion of the segment obsessing over homosexuality, bashing gay people, and bearing false witness about same-sex couples raising children. The triumvirate at the table were Franklin Graham (image), the son of the 95-year old Rev. Billy Graham; Ralph Reed, the disgraced grifter, campaign finance law breaker, and Pat Robertson‘s former executive director of the Christian Coalition; and Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission who replaced the disgraced Richard Land in that role.

Host Martha Radditz invited Graham to “stand by” his recent infamous comments that gay people adopt children in order to sexually abuse them and to “recruit” them into homosexuality, and that Vladimir Putin signing his archaic anti-gay laws “was probably a pretty smart thing to do” in “protecting his nation’s children.” After watching video of himself making those comments, Graham was only too happy to stand by them. Graham trumpeted that President Putin thinks “taking advantage of children, exploiting children is wrong,” suggesting that gays are “taking advantage of children, exploiting children,” and that Barack Obama does not. He also added, “We used to have a president in this country who did what’s right for this country but we don’t seem to have that right now.”

Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart this morning called Graham “beneath contempt” and his comments “offensive” and “detestable.”

Moore pushed back only slightly, professing, “I agree that every child deserves both a mom and a dad.”

And then Ralph Reed pushed his way in, tossing to the table — and the millions of viewers watching across America — lies from the thoroughly-discredited Regnerus study. “And by the way, Martha, the social science on this is clear. This isn’t about Vladimir Putin, this is about what’s best for children here in the United States and the social science is irrefutable. And it is a child who grows up in a home without the mother and father present — and they both play very unique, procreative, nurturing, and socializing role — they’re nine times more likely to end up dropping out of high school, they’re five times more likely to end up in poverty, and they’re three times more likely to end up addicted to drugs and alcohol.”

//www.youtube.com/embed/H9a6qIyK7YI?start=308&end=520

Of course, most of America doesn’t know that just last month a federal judge who presided over a case on same-sex marriage in Michigan sat listening to the state’s lead witness, Mark Regnerus, and concluded that the “Court finds Regnerus’s testimony entirely unbelievable and not worthy of serious consideration, and that Regnerus “certainly cannot purport to have undertaken a scholarly research effort to compare the outcomes of children raised by same-sex couples with those of children raised by heterosexual couples.”

But Ralph Reed chose to tell falsehoods about gay people by couching them in the phrase, “a child who grows up in a home without the mother and father present,” while talking about same-sex couples raising children.

Cokie Roberts stepped in and took Reed to task.

But the social science is also irrefutable that a child raised in an orphanage is in much worse shape than a child raised in a home,” the ABC News anchor told Reed. “And the fact that people are willing to take these children and raise them, and raise them in a loving way is clearly better for these children.”

His response?

“I think the social science is just simply not in yet on same-sex couples and I think the law has every right to set an ideal. And the ideal is a mother and a father.”

Reed of course is lying out of both sides of his mouth.

From one side, he spouts Regnerus “facts,” which have nothing to do with gay parents, and from the other, “the social science is just simply not in yet on same-sex couples.” Which is it?

Meanwhile, the social science is in on same-sex couples.

Every major medical association has stated that children raised by same-sex parents turn out no different than their peers raised by different-sex parents.

“Decades of social science research also confirms that children of same-sex parents have similar levels of psychological adjustment and are no more likely than their peers raised by heterosexual parents to report behavioral issues. All of the leading national child welfare and social service organizations agree that children raised by lesbian, gay, and bisexual parents are just as happy, healthy, and well-adjusted as children raised by different-sex parents. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, Child Welfare League of America, and National Association of Social Workers all have published organizational statements confirming that lesbian, gay, and bisexual people make excellent parents who raise developmentally healthy children.”

— March 4, 2014, Amici Curiae Brief Of Family Equality Council, Colage, Voices For Utah Children, And The Children’s Center Of Salt Lake City, Kitchen v. Herbert.

Hat tip: Daily Kos and Mediaite

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.

BREAKING NEWS

Georgia GOP Rep. Who Denied Tours Were Given Now at Center of Investigation Into Who Led Pre-Insurrection Capitol Tours

Published

on

One U.S. Congressman led a tour of the United States Capitol on January 5, 2021, the day before the January 6 insurrection when thousands of Trump-supporting MAGA activists, including many with weapons, breached the building that is the center of American democracy.

Representative Barry Loudermilk, Republican of Georgia, was caught in video surveillance footage leading a tour Jan. 5, according to a letter sent to him by the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack.

“Based on our review of evidence in the Select Committee’s possession, we believe you have information regarding a tour you led through parts of the Capitol complex on January 5, 2021,” the letter from Chairman Bennie Thompson and Liz Cheney reads.

Loudermilk’s leading a tour is not in itself illegal, but it is complicated by several factors.

First, Loudermilk sits on a committee that point-blank told the House Select Committee no one led any tours on January 5.

“Republicans on the Committee on House Administration—of which you are a Member—claimed to have reviewed security footage from the days preceding January 6th and determined that ‘[t]here were no tours, no large groups, no one with MAGA hats on,’” the Jan. 6 Committee tells Loudermilk. “However, the Select Committee’s review of evidence directly contradicts that denial.”

In fact, as attorney Luppe B. Lupen notes, Loudermilk himself filed an ethics complaint against U.S. Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) – who is a former federal prosecutor and former U.S. Navy helicopter pilot – urging the Ethics Committee to investigate her and 33 Democrats for claiming “without evidence” there were reconnaissance tours conducted.

RELATED:
‘I Can Confirm That’: Democrat Says GOP Member of Congress Gave Capitol Tour to Insurrectionists Day Before Attack

Second, Loudermilk was one of the Republicans texting White House chief of staff Mark Meadows during the insurrection. CNN published this transcript:

Rep. Barry Loudermilk to Mark Meadows

It’s really bad up here on the hill.

Rep. Barry Loudermilk to Mark Meadows

They have breached the Capitol.

Mark Meadows to Rep. Barry Loudermilk

POTUS is engaging

Rep. Barry Loudermilk to Mark Meadows

Thanks. This doesn’t help our cause.

Third, Loudermilk has run interference for Donald Trump numerous times.

“He didn’t have anything to do with January 6. I think that’s a far-fetched idea,” Loudermilk said last year, causing Esquire magazine to literally ask if the Georgia Congressman was “insane.”

One year earlier Loudermilk “criticised the process of impeachment and drew a comparison between the current inquiry into President Donald Trump to the trial of Jesus,” the BBC reported.

Political scientist Norman Ornstein weighs in:

 

Continue Reading

News

Kellyanne Conway Accuses Husband George of ‘Cheating’ on Her – With Twitter

Published

on

Kellyanne Conway’s forthcoming memoir accuses her husband, George, of having an affair with a social media site, People Magazine reported on Thursday.

While some couples might feel their partner spends too much time on the internet, Conway went to the extreme.

“Heading into the school year in the fall of 2018, all four Conway children were thriving,” the senior Trump adviser wrote in the book. “They were with me full-time in D.C. My mom had moved in with us to help with my Core Four. George was spending chunks of time in New York at the firm, where he voluntarily went from partner to an of-counsel role, spending his nights alone at our house in Alpine, New Jersey, 240 miles away from D.C. The numbers don’t lie. During this time, the frequency and ferocity of his tweets accelerated. Clearly, he was cheating by tweeting. I was having a hard time competing with his new fling.”

Instead of blaming Conway for being 240 miles away from her and the family, she says that his public disagreements with the president is what appears to have damaged their marriage.

IN OTHER NEWS: Reporter booted out of Madison Cawthorn party describes ‘stunning and sudden desertion of his closest allies’

“Don’t assume that the things he says and does are part of a rational plan or strategy, because they seldom are,” Mr. Conway wrote of Trump in 2019. “Consider them as a product of his pathologies, and they make perfect sense.”

Mrs. Conway refused to address it when asked by the media, but the president was eager to do so on her behalf.

“George Conway, often referred to as Mr. Kellyanne Conway by those who know him, is VERY jealous of his wife’s success & angry that I, with her help, didn’t give him the job he so desperately wanted,” Trump responded, threatening Mr. Conway’s manliness by calling him Mr. Kellyanne Conway. “I barely know him.”

“I had already said publicly what I’d said privately to George,” wrote Mrs. Conway in the book. “That his daily deluge of insults-by-tweet against my boss—or, as he put it sometimes, ‘the people in the White House’—violated our marriage vows to ‘love, honor, and cherish’ each other. Those vows, of course, do not mean we must agree about politics or policies or even the president. In our democracy, as in our marriage, George was free to disagree, even if it meant a complete 180 from his active support for Trump-Pence–My Wife–2016 and a whiplash change in character from privately brilliant to publicly bombastic.”

WATCH: Hearing witness turns the tables on Republican for complaining about Florida textbook that mentioned racial bias

She implies that something significant happened in 2018 to change her husband’s attitude so much toward the president that it was enough he switch sides.

“Whoop-de-do, George!” Mrs. Conway told him. “You are one of millions of people who don’t like the president. Congrats.”

“If I had a nickel for everybody in Washington who disagreed with their spouse about something that happens in this town, I wouldn’t be on this podcast. I’d be probably on a beach somewhere,” Mr. Conway said about his regular disagreements with the president in an extended Skullduggery podcast in 2018. “I don’t think she likes it. But I’ve told her, I don’t like the administration. So it’s even.”

Critics of Mr. Conway harken back to his desperation for a job with the Trump administration. But he has said that top Justice Department gig wasn’t something he wanted after Trump fired FBI Director James Comey and special counsel Robert Mueller was appointed.

IN OTHER NEWS: Trump’s ‘dangerous’ election lies may be about to blow up in Pennsylvania Republicans’ faces

“If I get this door prize, I’m going to be in the middle of a department he’s at war with,” Conway recalled thinking at the time. “Why would anybody want to do this?”

He went on to brag about his wife and that she was the one who got Trump elected. Prior to her, “he was in the crapper.”

By the end of 2018, Conway said he was so disgusted with the Republican Party that he was quitting.

“I don’t feel comfortable being a Republican anymore,” he said. “I think the Republican Party has become something of a personality cult.”

All of it circulated around Trump’s treatment of the Justice Department and the justice system. Mr. Conway said he was “appalled” when Trump tried to go after federal prosecutors for indicting GOP members of Congress before an election.

“To criticize the attorney general for permitting justice to be done without regard to political party is very disturbing,” he said.

Thus began the internal marriage war of the Conways.

Read the full report in People Magazine.

Continue Reading

RIGHT WING EXTREMISM

Second Most-Powerful Senate Republican Says Bill to Fight Domestic Terrorism After Buffalo Is Too ‘Partisan’ to Pass

Published

on

Senate Republican Minority Whip John Thune of South Dakota immediately poured cold water on a just-passed House bill to help fight rising domestic terrorism, in the wake of his past weekend’s massacre of ten Black people in Buffalo by a self-avowed white nationalist and antisemite and a California church shooting deemed a “politically motivated hate incident” by local law enforcement.

The House bill passed with all Democrats and just one Republican voting for it. 203 Republicans voted against the legislation that would establish new offices across three federal agencies to help identify and combat domestic terrorism. Three of the Republicans who voted against the legislation are original co-sponsors of the bill, and many who voted for a very similar bill two years ago voted against this bill Wednesday. The final tally was 222-203.

CNN’s Manu Raju reports Senator Thune, the second-most-powerful Senate Republican, is “skeptical the domestic terrorism bill that passed the House will get 10 GOP senators,” which it would need to pass, assuming all 50 Democrats vote for it.

“He noted that it was a ‘pretty party-line vote.’ Said he had not studied the details of the bill yet but noted the outcome in the House makes him think it is ‘largely a partisan bill.'”

Republicans have a long history of blocking any attempt to curtail or get out in front of preventing domestic terrorism, despite – or because of – the vast majority of extremist-related murders are committed by right-wing extremists.

Republicans’ opposition to addressing right-wing extremism and domestic terrorism goes back at least as far as 2009, when, as Wired reported, “an analyst at the Department of Homeland Security focusing on far-right extremist groups” published this report about the danger of right-wing extremism. Outrage was so dramatic DHS was forced to retract it.

In 2016 Politico reported Congressional Republicans also in 2009 “succeeded in pushing to shut” down a DHS program, an intelligence unit “called the Extremism and Radicalization Branch.” Its mission? “Studying and monitoring sub-sections of the population for potential signs of ideological and political radicalization.”

RELATED:

GOP Senators Orchestrate ‘Blockade’ of Key Biden Agenda Bills: Voting Rights Bill Killed, Infrastructure in Doubt

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.