Connect with us

News

Breaking-Exclusive: Activist Admits Her Testimony To Senators On Texas Anti-Gay Bill Was False

Published

on

A leader of the anti-gay organization Concerned Women for America has admitted her testimony to the Texas Senate over a bill that would shield clergy and churches from same-sex weddings was not true.

Last week lawmakers on a Texas Senate committee heard testimony on SB 2065, a bill designed to shield clergy members and churches from performing same-sex weddings. While the First Amendment already provides this protection, this bill would allow clergy members who are employed by the state as justices of the peace or county clerks to refuse to marry same-sex couples. Texas lawmakers are engrossed in a battle against their LGBT constituents, and this month over two dozen anti-gay bills before them, including one that would literally defund same-sex marriage in the Lone Star State.

LOOK: Texas Lawmakers Begin Week Focusing On Anti-Gay Bills By Voting To Shield Clergy And Churches

On Monday, May 4, Beverly Roberts, an Area Director for Concerned Women for America, delivered testimony before Texas Senators. Concerned Women for America (CWA) is a right wing religious anti-gay, anti-abortion activist group that opposes same-sex marriage, a woman’s right to choose, the teaching of evolution in schools, feminism, pornography, stem cell research, and advocates for school prayer.

The mission of CWA is to protect and promote Biblical values among all citizens – first through prayer, then education, and finally by influencing our society – thereby reversing the decline in moral values in our nation,” its website states.

“I have a question for you,” Roberts, in red in the photo above and video below, told the Texas Senators as she began her testimony. “Is it necessary for a couple to be married by a minister to be legally married?” she asked.

“If not, why are homosexual couples in states where same-sex marriage is legal, demanding that ministers perform their marriage ceremonies?”

“Should we not consider these to be hate crimes?,” Roberts continued. “Are these not instances of targeted bigotry? Are these couples not engaging in the same bullying tactics they profess to deplore? Why are they attacking a minister when they don’t even need him to perform their marriage? So again I ask you, who are the bullies, the bigots and the haters?”

The New Civil Rights Movement reached out to Roberts via email on Monday, asking her to point us to “the story or stories you testified about,” as, to our knowledge, there are no actual instances in reputable news reports of same-sex couples demanding that ministers perform their marriage ceremonies.

In an email response received Monday night, Roberts effectively admitted that her testimony was false.

“My testimony did not relate to a specific instance,” Roberts told NCRM in her email, adding it was “to put a law into place ahead of a possible Supreme Court Ruling requiring all states to perform same-sex ‘marriages.'”

“We know that, given the tactics of the LGBT community, it would not be long before they started suing churches and ministers who decline to do their ceremonies,” Roberts wrote. “They just move incrementally as they force their agenda on the rest of us and we have begun to fight back.”

And yet, Roberts clearly asked Texas Senators, “why are homosexual couples in states where same-sex marriage is legal, demanding that ministers perform their marriage ceremonies?” while being unaware of any same-sex couples who, to her knowledge, have demanded that ministers perform their marriage ceremonies. All she could offer NCRM was, “We know that, given the tactics of the LGBT community, it would not be long before they started suing churches and ministers who decline to do their ceremonies.” That is not an instance of it having happened.

In her email Roberts included a link to an article in the Washington Times about last year’s story from Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, where right wing blogs and websites falsely claimed one same-sex couple had demanded ministers who own a wedding chapel marry them, but those reports were proven false long ago, as NCRM reported in, “Almost Everything You’ve Been Told About The Idaho Wedding Chapel Story Is A Lie,” and “Entire Hitching Post Controversy Is False: ACLU Finds Chapel Falls Under Religious Exemption.”

It’s important to note that Roberts pointed to the Washington Times story not as an example – although it would have been false – of same-sex couples demanding that ministers perform their marriage ceremonies, but rather, as she wrote in her email, in relation to “the ordinance that I was using as an example for what is to come.”

After Roberts’ testimony, and the testimony of others, including pastors who compared same-sex marriage to bestiality and pedophilia, as John Wright at Towleroad reported, the committee passed the bill 5-1. Yesterday, the Texas Senate passed the bill, 21-10. It is awaiting a vote by the Texas House.

The New Civil Rights Movement reached out again to Roberts today asking if she had anything additional to add. We have not received a reply.

Related:

Lawmaker Totally Certain His Unconstitutional Bill Will Override Supreme Court Marriage Ruling

Texas Anti-Gay Lawmaker And Gay Son Suffer Fallout Over Anti-Discrimination Bill

Texas Attorney General Sues Feds To Stop Same-Sex Spouses From Taking Care Of Each Other

 

Image: Screenshot via Lone Star Q/YouTube
Video from an article at Towleroad by John Wright

 

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

‘Unambiguous Felony’: Trump at Risk in IRS ‘Personal Vendetta’ Audit Investigation – Report

Published

on

According to a report from former Assistant U.S. Attorney Mitchell Epner at the Daily Beast, Donald Trump’s legal problems may be growing exponentially because there appears to be evidence he attempted to use the IRS to persecute political enemies before he lost re-election.

At issue, Epner wrote, are accusations from former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly that the former president demanded the IRS look into tax returns filed by, among others, former FBI Director James Comey and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

According to the legal expert, there is already an investigation by the IRS inspector general into the suspicious audits of the two FBI officials, with Epner writing, “As reported earlier this summer, both Comey and McCabe were subjected to highly unusual IRS audits. The odds of an individual randomly being subjected to this type of audit are similar to being struck by lightning. For both to be the subject of special audit by happenstance is about as likely as a whale falling from the sky and landing in the middle of a mountain range.”

As he notes, there is evidence Kelly is willing to provide evidence about Trump’s illegal demand, with Epner writing that “a president who unlawfully seeks to have an individual audited is subject to up to five years in prison. The crime does not require that the IRS actually carry out the audit. The crime is completed with the mere request.”

RELATED: The coming indictment of Donald Trump will break his power: former Obama lawyer

“If Trump made this demand while he was president, that is an unambiguous felony. Section 7217 of Title 26 of the United States Code makes it a crime for the ‘President’ to ‘request, directly or indirectly, any officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service to conduct or terminate an audit or other investigation of any particular taxpayer with respect to the tax liability of such taxpayer,'” he wrote before adding, “Based on my training and experience as an Assistant U.S. Attorney who prosecuted tax offenses, I expect that each IRS employee along the chain of command kept detailed notes and records of who ordered them to conduct the audit, and on the facts that were cited to support that audit demand. I would not be surprised if each of those IRS employees cooperated with the DOJ, with all fingers pointing in Trump’s direction.”

He concluded that “the nice thing about prosecuting tax crimes is that the crimes are very clearly delineated. Few jurors have any sympathy for people who cheat on their taxes or wrongfully sic the IRS on an individual to carry out a personal vendetta.”

You can read more here.

 

Image by Evan El Amin/Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Trump Complains the ‘Fake News Went Crazy’ With Coverage of His 2-Hour Meeting With Notorious Racist He Won’t Condemn

Published

on

On Saturday evening, Donald Trump issued a fourth statement on his meeting with white nationalist Nick Fuentes and once again refused to denounce his racism and anti-Semitism.

Trump posted to his Truth Social account, “so I help a seriously troubled man, who just happens to be black, Ye (Kanye West), who has been decimated in his business and virtually everything else, and who has always been good to me, by allowing his request for a meeting at Mar-a-Lago, alone, so that I can give him very much needed ‘advice.’”

“He shows up with 3 people, two of which I didn’t know, the other a political person who I haven’t seen in years. I told him don’t run for office, a total waste of time, can’t win. Fake News went crazy,” Trump wrote.

Trump’s dinner has already become an issue in the 2024 presidential campaign and could play a role in determining the next Speaker of the House of Representatives. Trump’s ambassador to Israel condemned him dining with “human scum.”

Trump has received harsh headlines.

“Trump criticized for dining with far-right activist Nick Fuentes and rapper Ye,” headlined The Washington Post.

“Trump’s Latest Dinner Guest: Nick Fuentes, White Supremacist,” was The New York Times headline.

“Trump world reels after white nationalist dinner,” headlined Politico playbook.

“Trump’s former US ambassador to Israel blasts meeting with Ye, Nick Fuentes: ‘You are better than this,'” Fox News headlined.

NBC News headlined, “‘F—ing nightmare’: Trump team does damage control after he dines with Ye and white supremacist Nick Fuentes”

READ MORE: Trump’s Dinner With Kanye Also Included a Former Aide Accused in Pay-for-Pardon Play, and White Supremacist Fuentes

Continue Reading

News

‘Poisonous’: Former Advisor Says Republicans Have ‘Just Switched Trump Off in Their Brain’

Published

on

In an interview with The Guardian, one of Donald Trump’s former senior advisers stated that the word he is getting from people he has spoken to is that they want the former president to be put out to pasture after the poor midterm election results for Republicans weeks ago.

According to John Bolton, who served as Trump’s national security adviser, it’s time for the GOP to move on from the former president if the party wants to reclaim the Oval Office in 2024.

Bolton, whose tenure serving under Trump ended acrimoniously, told the Guardian’s David Smith that there are a multitude of reasons to put Trump in the rearview mirror, but the impact that the former president had on GOP fortunes in the midterms seems to be the final straw with many conservatives.

“There are a lot of reasons to be against Trump being the nominee but the one I’m hearing now as I call around the country, talking to my supporters and others about what happened on 8 November, is the number of people who have just switched Trump off in their brain,” Bolton explained.

ALSO IN THE NEWS: Trump’s new Mar-a-Lago scandal proves why aides want him to stick to a teleprompter

Elaborating, he continued, “Even if they loved his style, loved his approach, loved his policies, loved everything about him, they don’t want to lose and the fear is, given the results on 8 November, that if he got the nomination, not only would he lose the general election, but he would take an awful lot of Republican candidates down with him.”

“There’s no doubt Trump’s endorsement in the primary can be very valuable to a candidate in the Republican party. But relying on that endorsement or trumpeting yourself as the Trump-endorsed candidate is poisonous in the general election. So if you actually want to win elections, Trump is not the answer,” Bolton continued. “William F Buckley [the conservative author] once had a rule that in Republican primaries he supported the most conservative candidate capable of winning the general election and, under that theory, Trump loses.”

The Guardian’s Smith notes that Bolton “… joins Trump’s vice-president Mike Pence, secretary of state Mike Pompeo, attorney general William Barr, UN ambassador Nikki Haley, chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and onetime ally Chris Christie in a growing rebellion among alumni making the case – overtly or subtly – that Trump has become an electoral liability.”

You can read more here.

Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.