Via Towleroad…  Republican party chair Reince Priebus says gay civil rights are not a civil rights issue…

“I think there’s a big difference between people that have been murdered and everything that has come with Jim Crow than marriage between a man and a man and a woman and a woman,”

Yes Reince.  Of course.  Because, you know, gay people have never been murdered and have never been denied jobs.  Certainly no republicans have Ever campaigned for laws that would deny jobs to gay Americans.

No. Just no.

A rainbow halo? Really?

[h/t Shakesville]

Michael Brown, Jew for Jesus, and one of the most irrationally homophobic men in the United States, writing to Kathy Baldock, Evangelical Christian and advocate for LGBT people:

“Kathy, to use your words, people are ‘absolutely sick of the hatred, bigotry and discrimination’ being shown against Christians in our society today. People have had it with gay activists shoving their agenda down their throats, trying to indoctrinate their children, taking away their religious right and freedoms, and twising [sic] the Word of God. You are totally on the wrong side of this issue, and if not in this world, then before the throne of God, you will come to that bitter realization. I will certainly continue to pray for you.

As to whether you know God or love God, that’s for Him to decide, not me, and it is not for me to judge your motives. But as to you whether you are rightly reading and interpreting the Word with regard to homosexual practice, I have no doubt that you are quite wrong.”

And yet, Michael, please show me the kid who put a gun in his mouth and pulled the trigger because he had been so bullied, beaten up, preached against, humiliated, and/or driven into self-loathing, for being a Christian. Or a Jew for Jesus. Whatever the case may be. Show me. I’m waiting. Everyone is.

Oh, you have nothing? I guess we’ll just continue to shoulder the bodycount, then, at the hands of people like you, while you continue to inhumanely bitch about your plight. Just the way it’s always been.

[h/t to Thers for the line of questioning]

Hey mister, can you spare a dime?

To hear Greg Quinlan cooing about Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX) alleged legal “victory” over Truth Wins Out this week, one could be forgiven for thinking his noxious  hate group actually accomplished something monumental.

Instead, it turns out, TWO got the last laugh, as Quinlan is now begging, hat in hand, for funds to cover his legal fees. According to the fundie website One News Now:

“To my ascertation [sic], he had painted himself into a corner to the point where his small band of donors were demanding that he rise up against me and against PFOX because we called him out on the hateful rhetoric that he says against me and against others,” explains Quinlan.

Those “others” included people and organizations, such as PFOX, that promote the perspective that homosexual men and women can leave that lifestyle successfully.

The judge dismissed the case. Meanwhile, Quinlan says PFOX had to resort to insurance coverage to pay legal expenses for what he believes was a frivolous lawsuit.

“The insurance policy kicked in, but we do have a $5,000 deductible — so we’ll have to wait and see what happens there,” he states. “But in the meantime, we’re looking for help and support to get back the $5,000 in the short term.”

“The lawsuit hardly made a dent in our budget, so I think it is fair to say that we came out ahead in this case and hopefully taught PFOX a lesson,” said Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen. “It is clear that PFOX is paying a steep price for having a truth challenged loose cannon as its President. ”

As demonstrated by Truth Wins Out, Greg Quinlan lied on two fronts. First, he claimed that TWO’s Besen had instructed people to kill him. Then, he changed his story and asserted that Besen had made these threats in a private conversation.

“We have asked for Quinlan to provide phone records or a time and place where this alleged private conversation occurred,” said TWO’s Besen. “As one might imagine, I don’t have private conversations with people of such ilk. Quinlan has remained silent on this matter and refused to answer these basic questions because he is a liar who fabricated the entire incident.  Our challenge for Quinlan stands: take a lie detector test or put a sock in it.”

Quinlan’s second fib occurred when he claimed that Besen was fired from the Human Rights Campaign. TWO provided an official letter from HRC contradicting Quinlan’s false claim. Still, Quinlan repeats this lie, setting the stage for another court case.

“In the first court case, Quinlan was able to claim he did not know the facts surrounding my leaving HRC,” said Besen. “Now that Quinlan has seen the letter refuting his baseless and false assertion, it will be significantly easier to prove malice in court the next time he repeats this lie.”

Or at least he was, at some point? This is why this election is going to be fun. Let’s keep talking about this stuff, because it will make wingnut heads explode. Here’s a flyer from a long, long time ago:

And look at him now!

[h/t Lawyers, Guns & Money]

This video, of a woman testifying against, um, p-e-n-i-s-e-s and gays and declaring that gays molest schoolchildren because the kids don’t have AIDS yet, and also that Hillary Clinton became gay in college due to rohypnol, went viral today, but I wasn’t around to post it because I’m dealing with a sick puppy.

But seriously, Peter, is that you?

[h/t Wonkette]

This is beautiful. As David Badash points out, Chris Matthews seems to have “evolved” on the subject of Tony Perkins’ extremism. This interview springboards from a recent, stupid statement from Tony Perkins suggesting that his own children wouldn’t likely ever be gay, due to the fact that Tony Perkins knows better than everyone else how to raise his children. Barney Frank retorts that it’s really not fair for Tony Perkins to put himself up on a pedestal above Dick and Lynne Cheney in the parenting department.

Perkins’ statement is silly on its face. If it wasn’t, there wouldn’t be so many gay adults with horror stories about their fundamentalist upbringings, and there wouldn’t be so many gay teens struggling with depression and suicidal tendencies because of the lack of support from their “Christian” families. Tony, you very well may have a gay child, and due to your beliefs, the only thing we can predict is that if you do, your child will grow up with a grievous sense of self-hatred, and it will be your fault and, I assume, your wife’s fault. Sorry.

The great thing, though, about this video, is that Chris Matthews acts as a journalist the entire time, pushing back and correcting Tony’s hateful crap. David Badash also points out that, at the end, Tony Perkins’ lies get downright disgusting, as he claims that there isn’t a surplus of children who need loving homes in this country. Wow, Tony. For somebody whose organization spends so much time screaming about blastocysts, one would think you’d give a damn about actual, breathing kids without parents. But you don’t. You care about your bigotry and your influence.

Repugnant.

It’s beautiful watching Tony squirm as he looks dumber and dumber over the course of fifteen minutes.

By Herndon Graddick, GLAAD President

Judging by its coverage of President Obama’s announcement that he now supports marriage equality, it appears CNN still has a little “evolving” of its own to do.

The bulk of the media’s coverage of this issue has been focused on what this statement will mean politically for President Obama and the Democratic Party — and what it means for the future of marriage equality, now that a solid majority of Americans and the president support it. This includes CNN, which had several thoughtful pieces and interviews on these ideas. For example, Anderson Cooper’s panel of Alex Castellanos, Paul Begala and Evan Wolfson broke down the issue purposefully, in a way that would help the audience better understand the significance of this announcement.

So with a wealth of political thinkers, analysts and strategists to go to — why has CNN turned to Tony Perkins three times in the last few days to represent the “other side?” He was on with Piers Morgan Tuesday night to talk about the vote in North Carolina. He appeared with Wolf Blitzer Wednesday evening to talk about the President’s support for marriage equality, and then was interviewed by Soledad O’Brien Thursday morning on the same topic.

All of this is fine, as long as Perkins is put into the proper context. Which he sort-of was by Morgan and O’Brien, but Blitzer didn’t even come close.

Here’s the crux of the problem — and the exact reason why GLAAD’s Commentator Accountability Project was born. Tony Perkins and others of his ilk cannot be used to exemplify those who simply oppose marriage equality. CNN is more than welcome to interview him on the issue of marriage equality, of course. His is unquestionably one of the loudest voices in the nation speaking about the issue.

But when Perkins gets interviewed, a responsible journalist needs to tell the audience exactly who Perkins is speaking for. Based on his own statements — Tony Perkins represents people who believe supporting LGBT equality is akin to being a terrorist. Who believe marriage equality is the same as bestiality. Who say that gay people are “vile,” “hateful,” “spiteful” “pawns of the enemy.” Tony Perkins does not represent people who oppose marriage equality. Tony Perkins represents those who oppose LGBT people — period.

If CNN wants that side represented in this discussion, then Perkins is absolutely the right man for the job. But they need to make it clear to the audience that that’s what he’s there for. And by not doing so, they have not told the whole story. Wolf Blitzer’s interview with Perkins is a perfect example of this.

Blitzer asked Perkins how he felt when he heard the news, that Obama supports marriage. Fine. He then asked Perkins “What’s wrong with giving gay Americans the same rights as heterosexual Americans?” Then he asked Perkins whether he agrees with Romney about giving same-sex couples hospital visitation rights. He followed it up with “What about allowing gay couples to be on each other’s health insurance policies? Would you have a problem with that?”

What on earth was Blitzer doing here? Why were we spending so much time finding out exactly which rights Perkins does and doesn’t support gay couples having? Finally he ended the interview.

Blitzer: “Do you accept the concept that gay people are born that way?” (Which Perkins answered by incorrectly claiming “there is no conclusive evidence to suggest being gay is genetic.”)

Seriously. That’s what he closed with. Blitzer had five minutes to discuss the significance of a sitting president endorsing marriage equality with one of the leaders of the country’s anti-gay movement, and the audience learned next to nothing about this issue.

Blitzer could have given his audience the answers to all of these questions in nine seconds. Watch:

Blitzer: “Joining me is Tony Perkins from the Family Research Council, which has been labeled a ‘hate group’ by the Southern Poverty Law Center for its anti-gay activism.”

Boom. Done. Now the audience knows exactly who Perkins is, has a pretty good idea of where he’s coming from, and Wolf has four minutes and fifty seconds to ask the real questions that should have been asked of Perkins yesterday.

“You have said that gay people have an ‘emptiness within them.’ But now that more LGBT people are coming out and becoming respected members of their communities — to the point where a majority of Americans, including the President, are supporting marriage equality, how are you going to continue to make that case?”

“Your organization has distributed a pamphlet that depicts gay men and lesbians as physically and mentally ill pedophiles who can be cured. Members of your organization have called for gay people to be deported, and for being gay to be illegal. Do you think we’ve reached a tipping point in this country where your organization’s goals are no longer attainable? What are you hoping to gain from continuing to spread these messages?”

“You’ve said that marriage equality will ‘open the door to all manner of moral and social evil,’ and yet it’s been legal in parts of this country for eight years, it’s been legal throughout Canada for seven years, and in parts of Europe for more than a decade. And now the President says he supports it. Is it possible you’ve overstated the case here? What kinds of social evil have been unleashed so far, that can be directly tied to same-sex couples getting married?”

Follow up — “What kinds of social evil do you think will be unleashed, and what is your evidence for thinking that?”

Morgan and O’Brien in particular did a better job of establishing Perkins’ “credentials” on this topic by asking more challenging questions. But again, the audience didn’t get the full story. O’Brien asked Perkins what was the “root” of his argument against marriage equality. Perkins said something about no-fault divorce from the 1960s and how it led to co-habitation.

Let’s ignore the fact that no-fault divorce allowed more people to get OUT of marriages, and marriage equality would allow more people to get INTO them, so this is a silly argument. Let’s instead focus on the fact that he’s lying.

The root of his argument against marriage equality is the fact that Perkins believes gay people are “pawns of the enemy.” It’s his belief that gay people are “operating outside of nature.” It’s his belief that being gay leads to “eternal damnation.” It’s his belief that gay people are trying to “recruit (kids) into that lifestyle.” It’s his belief that marriage equality is the same as “man-horse marriage.”

But he’s not going to tell Soledad O’Brien that. And he certainly doesn’t want her audience to know that.

To cable news viewers, he’s just the conservative guy who comes on sometimes to talk about gay stuff from a Republican point of view. But Perkins’ own statements will show you that those positions don’t come from politics. They are the result of pure animus towards gay people, and a belief that they’re doing the work of “the enemy.”

You can expose how extreme Perkins’ positions are by challenging them, like O’Brien and Morgan did. But you’re still not telling the whole story, unless you tell your audience what’s at the heart of those positions. We are once again asking journalists to hold anti-gay activists like Perkins accountable for their own statements against LGBT people, and to deliver that critical information to their audiences.

Speaking of the history of marriage, Jon Stewart had some fun with Republicans and Fox News hosts and their reactions to Obama’s announcement of support for marriage equality. Not that long ago, Jon points out, marriage equality was ultimately going to lead to man-turtle marriage and end civilization, but now, for Fox hosts, Obama’s just cynically doing something popular to get re-elected. Yes, that is how far we’ve come.

[h/t Queerty]

“But it’s been this way for 5,000 years!,” says Tony.

No, Tony, it hasn’t. Lawrence O’Donnell points out that Perkins could debunk his own talking points about marriage simply by reading his “beloved Bible.”

[h/t Joe]