(Weekly Column)

The Roman Catholic Church’s toxic obsession with homosexuality manifests itself in countless ways. The most recent anti-gay outburst came from the Chicago Archbishop, Cardinal Francis George, who foolishly compared the LGBT community to the Ku Klux Klan.

George’s offensive remarks came during a dispute over the scheduled starting time of the annual LGBT pride parade. The June 2012 event was originally set to begin at 10am, but a priest bitterly complained that this would interfere with morning services.

In an interview with Fox News in Chicago, Cardinal George said: “Well, I go with the pastor. I mean, he’s telling us that they won’t be able to have Church services on Sunday, if that’s the case. You know, you don’t want the Gay Liberation Movement to morph into something like the Ku Klux Klan, demonstrating in the streets against Catholicism.”

Cardinal George’s outrageous comparison of the LGBT community to the Ku Klux Klan was so degrading and hurtful that apologizing will not be sufficient. He has crossed so far over the line of basic decency that he couldn’t see it with a pair of binoculars. His only road to redemption is handing in his resignation. If George has a shred of dignity and a sliver of class he will immediately step down. To help influence his decision my organization, Truth Wins Out, launched a petition that has already been signed by more than 4,000 people.

First, bringing the KKK into a logistical discussion over a parade’s starting time is as brazen as it is bizarre. Especially, when the problem had already been resolved in good faith by changing the jump off time to noon. With no logical reason to bring this hate group into the mix, it is fair to assume that the nasty analogy was a cheap shot and a low blow designed to slime the LGBT community. If George’s intention was to play demagogue by unfairly pairing the LGBT community with vile imagery, he should have simply gone all the way and thrown in the Nazis, Charles Manson, Jim Jones, and Osama bin Laden. These odious examples would have made as much sense as the Klan comparison.

Second, how does one compare a peaceful movement of non-violent tax paying families to a group with a unique history of terror in the United States? Can the good Cardinal provide examples of masked homosexuals showing up at Catholic Churches and burning crosses or other objects on their lawns? Can George show us evidence that LGBT people are lynching people of faith? Are their choirboys and nuns hanging from trees that we don’t know about? Apparently, he can’t back up his irrational position and this is why he refused to appear on Chicago’s WGN radio to discuss his remarks, as I did on Tuesday morning.

Third, George falsely claimed that the LGBT parade was about “demonstrating in the streets against Catholicism.” This far out assessment is simply paranoid and delusional. While the rabidly homophobic positions of Rome have rightfully angered many LGBT activists, the vast majority of parade marchers and spectators don’t go to make a political statement, but to have a good time. Such parades also include a large number of LGBT Catholics and organizations that represent the gay faithful.

It is a mark of George’s solipsism that he thinks we are as obsessed about the Roman Catholic Church as it is about our lives. Despite the Vatican’s best efforts to harm our families, most LGBT Catholics choose to follow the lead of their straight counterparts and ignore the more medieval and extreme proclamations from Rome.

For instance, the Public Religion Research Institute showed “nearly three-quarters of Catholics favor either allowing gay and lesbian people to marry (43%) or allowing them to form civil unions (31%). Only 22% of Catholics say there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship.”

Such polling may explain why George tried to backtrack on Christmas day: “Obviously, it’s absurd to say the gay and lesbian community are the Ku Klux Klan, but if you organize a parade that looks like parades that we’ve had in our past because it stops us from worshipping God, well then that’s the comparison, but it’s not with people – it’s the parade.”

Obviously, this is another ridiculous response. Parades are not simply unattended rolling floats and hovering balloons – but events that are defined by the people marching. George’s dissembling continues when he says such parades “stops us from worshipping God.”

I’d like examples of where George was prohibited by the LGBT community from worshiping. Of course, he won’t provide any – because this is more about George’s dishonesty and hyperbole than it is about reality. At this point, the best George can do is to proclaim that he meant to say “gay, gay, gay” and it mistakenly came out KKK.

(Weekly Column)

Anti-gay crusader David Caton is back in the news and this time he is targeting Islam. The New York Times’ Samuel Freedman reports that Caton is going after advertisers of the show All American Muslim. He apparently thinks that the show is a plot to mainstream Muslims who are surreptitiously trying to trick Americans into thinking they are normal, when they are actually organizing to destroy wholesome Christian families.

In my budding activism years in Florida in the early 1990’s, the LGBT community’s chief foe was Caton of the American Family Association and later the Florida Family Association. Caton, an admitted porn addict, wrote a self-help book and fancies himself an expert who dispenses such sage advice as: When talking to women, avoid looking at the mouth and instead focus on the nose.

I’m not sure if this works or just causes a nose fetish.

Equality Florida’s Executive Director Nadine Smith has sparred for years with Caton and describes him as a “less original cross between the Westboro Baptist Church (the “God Hates Fags people) and the ‘minister’ who likes to burn Korans.”

According to Smith: “In the ’90s he would spout all kinds of wild claims about the consequences of passing anti-discrimination policies that included gay people.

He said business owners would be helpless as gays began having sex on the job.

Teachers would alternate dressing one day as women, the next as men…He even proposed that people entering gay bars be photographed and their pictures be posted at the post office or other public square.”

According to a 1993 Orlando Sentinel article, Caton said: You don’t see abortionists out recruiting people into a lifestyle. It is an orgy, party-crazed lifestyle. I can’t think of any lifestyle that would bring anyone as close to death as the homosexual lifestyle.

What is his evidence? He says a man once sat next to him in a shopping mall and put a hand between his legs. “My body was grabbed in a public place,” he said.

First, while such behavior is inappropriate, it mirrors tawdry behavior by some heterosexuals. In fact, it sounds very similar to accusations leveled against Herman Cain. Second, the odds of a gay man randomly fondling Caton at a Florida mall without probable cause are infinitesimally small. It can be embarrassing or even physically dangerous to make random public passes at heterosexual men. This is why it almost never occurs in the real world.

Caton’s activism seems driven by his lack of self-control. Hillsborough Commissioner Pat Frank once blasted Caton for working to pass an anti-nudity ordinance.

“That’s going to cost us money that we can ill afford to spend to try to keep Mr. Caton’s temptations away from him,” Frank said. “And that’s what this amounts to … He’s on a one-person crusade to satisfy himself.”

Like Caton, many of the vilest homophobes are now throwing their hat in the anti-Islam ring. While they are portraying these innocent, tax-paying Americans as terrorists, the only terrorizing that is taking place comes from these right wing activists who are panicking the rubes that give them money.

For instance, evangelist Lou Engle just brought his stadium revival, The Call, to Detroit’s Ford Field in an effort to target the areas large Muslim population. Leading up to the massive rally, Apostle Ellis Smith, Engle’s local “point person” for The Call, referred to Islam in a sermon as a “false,” “lame” and “perverse” religion.

The Christian Action Network (CAN) used to attack Gay Days at Disney and created a videotape allegedly showing that the event was an “orgy of depravity.” (Having been to the event, the long lines to get on the rides was the only thing depraved)

Now, CAN is promoting a new documentary “Islam Rising” highlighting the supposed dangers of Islam in America. The group’s website asks, “Do you live near Islamberg?” and ominously warns about the, “Pro-Islam bias in public schools.”

I happen to agree that Sharia law is dangerous and any government run by fundamentalist clerics is a real threat to individual liberty. But it is beyond ridiculous to argue that Islamic law is a realistic danger to Alabama and Oklahoma and all of the other fundamentalist Christian enclaves.

Entrepreneurs like David Caton and organizations like The Call and CAN represent the opportunistic underbelly of America. When one minority, such as LGBT people, begins to gain societal acceptance, these professional haters simply redirect their depravity, pivot their prejudice, and morph their meanness into the latest vulnerable minority.

Even in this ailing economy, bigotry is one business that seems to be booming.

Just when you thought Minnesota’s Catholic bishops couldn’t sink any lower into the cesspool of anti-gay bigotry, Saint Paul and Minneapolis Archbishop John Nienstedt posts a letter to the local diocesan website that injects a prayer for marriage discrimination into the Catholic Mass itself.

Nienstedt writes that he is “pleased” to offer the following prayer, “meant for use within the Holy Mass as part of the Prayer of the Faithful,” for the explicit purpose of “assist[ing] in the strengthening of our state-wide efforts to defend marriage in our civil constitution:”

Heavenly Father,

Through the powerful intercession of the Holy Family, grant to this local Church the many graces we need to foster, strengthen, and support faith-filled, holy marriages and holy families.

May the vocation of married life, a true calling to share in your own divine and creative life, be recognized by all believers as a source of blessing and joy, and a revelation of your own divine goodness.

Grant to us all the gift of courage to proclaim and defend your plan for marriage, which is the union of one man and one woman in a lifelong, exclusive relationship of loving trust, compassion, and generosity, open to the conception of children.

We make our prayer through Jesus Christ, who is Lord forever and ever. Amen.

The archbishop’s letter also “encourage[s] the posting of the prayer within Eucharistic Adoration chapels, along with an encouragement to adorers to pray for the success of the amendment and all efforts to strengthen marriage.”

There is absolutely no defense on any level for this kind of malicious, disgusting hatred. Nienstedt’s text is anything but a “prayer,” but instead is an overt attempt to cloak a set of anti-gay political talking points with the mantle of faith. The Archbishop even stoops so low as to use the Eucharist, which is sacred to LGBT and non-LGBT Catholics alike, as a weapon in the fight to exclude loving same-sex couples from marriage in Minnesota. This latest affront is religion-based bigotry in its most putrid, vile form.

This isn’t the first time that Minnesota’s Catholic bishops have specifically encouraged their priests and congregants to use parish time, facilities, and resources to push for the passage of the state’s proposed ban on same-sex marriage. In September 2010, the bishops produced and mailed a DVD attacking marriage equality to all registered Catholic households. And in another letter this fall, Nienstedt directed parish priests to form committees in their churches devoted “…to educat[ing] the faithful about the church’s teachings on [marriage], and to vigorously organiz[ing] and support[ing] a grass-roots effort to get out the vote to support the passage of this amendment.” The Archbishop called it “imperative that we marshal our resources” in this fight.

And as a side note: Archbishop Nienstedt’s contemptible “prayer” is just the latest example of Catholic churches and dioceses engaging in nakedly political activity in violation of the Internal Revenue Code. The tax-exempt status of these serial lawbreakers needs to be revoked. Exactly why aren’t they being investigated already?

(Weekly Column)

In June, I penned a column, “The Fall of the Ex-Gay Myth,” which predicted that so-called “ex-gay” programs would crumble from internal rot. “It’s time for the discredited ‘ex-gay’ myth to simply go away and be rightfully viewed as an experiment that was tried and failed,” I wrote at the time.

In the months since this column was written the decline of these “pray away the gay” organizations has only accelerated. Here are the Top 10 ex-gay-related stories of 2011:

1) Bachmann Scandal: Nothing brought the idiocy of reparative therapy into the spotlight more than Truth Wins Out’s undercover operation that proved the clinic of Marcus Bachmann, husband of Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), practiced this form of discredited therapy. Prior to the investigation, Marcus had lied to the American people by denying his practice engaged in such quackery. The story made a mockery out of such practices and was featured in media across the globe.

2) John Smid: Love in Action “ex-gay” ministry leader John Smid went public with a startling confession: “I’ve never met a man who experienced a change from homosexual to heterosexual.” The honest words of this “ex-gay” poster boy sent shockwaves through the entire “ex-gay” industry. Observers of these groups asked: “If Smid’s hardcore regimen of prayer and therapy did not work for him, whom would it work for?”

3) Exodus SOS: Ex-Gay Watch’s David Roberts reported that a Nov. 16 secret summit took place in New York City, where Exodus President Alan Chambers desperately plotted how to “keep Exodus International from social and financial oblivion.” The report discussed how an ill-advised real estate deal and increasingly convoluted messages have brought Exodus to the precipice of total failure.

4) Rekers Study Unmasked: Prior to getting caught with an escort from RentBoy.com, Dr. George Rekers was the “ex-gay” industry’s most prominent therapist. Much of Rekers reputation was based on a study where he cited the alleged sexual conversion of a boy named “Kraig.” Box Turtle Bulletin’s Jim Burroway undermined this claim by discovering that “Kraig” had grown up to be a gay man and his family alleged the therapy with Rekers led to his suicide. This story, covered in an excellent CNN AC360 series, demolished a key pillar of “ex-gay” research.

5) Exodus iPhone app: Exodus International created an “ex-gay” iPhone app to promote people using their mobile phones to “pray away the gay.” It was so obnoxious that the website Fierce Mobile Content listed it in the Top 5 most offensive apps of 2011.  Fortunately, Truth Wins Out launched a 160,000-signature Change.org petition drive to persuade Apple Inc. to remove the “ex-gay” iPhone app.

6) Lisa Miller Saga: Lisa Miller and Janet Jenkins had a Vermont civil union in 2000 and Miller then gave birth to a daughter, Isabella, conceived through artificial insemination. Miller became a born again Christian and fled to Virginia with her daughter. When a judge handed custody of Isabella to Jenkins, Miller fled the country with her daughter. Kenneth L. Miller, 46, of Stuarts Draft, Va., was recently arrested for assisting Lisa Miller as she absconded to Nicaragua. This story is not yet finished and may ensnare anti-gay figures that may have aided and abetted international kidnapping. Keep your eye on this story!

7) Sergio Viula: This man was the leading provider of “ex-gay” quackery in Brazil. In an interview he gave to the Secular Humanist League of Brazil, Viula  called such programs “brainwashing” and said, “In fact, ex-gays don’t exist – it’s pure self-suggestion.”

8) Ex-Gay Goes International: As the “ex-gay” industry fails at home, they are opportunistically searching for fresh markets to exploit overseas. A perfect example occurred in Hong Kong, which hired a therapist, Hong Kwai-wah, to cure gay people by urging them to take cold showers when aroused. The controversial hire caused protests from Hong Kong to New York City.

9) Dr. Warren Throckmorton: This Christian therapist from Grove City College has surprisingly emerged as a leading critic of “reparative therapy.” A former member of The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), his knowledge of this topic has made him a ruthlessly effective foe of NARTH’s quack-like theories. Even more damaging, he has created a competing therapy model that gives LGBT Christians the option to come out of the closet or hold onto their fundamentalist beliefs – but it does not lie to them by promising that they can pray away the gay.

10) PFOX Lawsuit: Greg Quinlan, President of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX), appeared on television and fabricated an incident that never occurred: “Truth Wins Out if you look further, including Wayne Besen. He’s asked for people, you know, somebody needs to run Greg over. He needs to be hit with a bus. Somebody should inject him with AIDS.” As a result of Quinlan’s fake story, I am preparing a defamation lawsuit against PFOX that will play out in 2012.

There are many more possibilities I could have chosen — but these 10 stories really impacted the “ex-gay” issue in 2011 — which was a really bad year for such programs.

(Weekly Column)

Hillary Clinton’s soaring speech on international LGBT issues was game changing.  An historic address of this magnitude was desperately needed to counter the rising tide of backwards and barbaric nations that had recently been persecuting LGBT people to distract from their glaring problems.

“I want to talk about the work we have left to do to protect one group of people whose human rights are still denied in too many parts of the world today,” said Clinton to a packed auditorium of human rights activists who gathered in Geneva for International Human Rights Day. “I am talking about gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people, human beings born free and given bestowed equality and dignity, who have a right to claim that, which is now one of the remaining human rights challenges of our time.”

The list of countries that recently declared war on sexual minorities include: Russia, Nigeria, Cameroon, Uganda, Iran, and Zimbabwe.  For the contemptible despots who run these underachieving nations, fomenting homophobia makes political sense. By turning homosexuals into bogeymen these rulers can conceal their corruption and appear moral through the blessings of craven clergy.

If the worldwide attacks on LGBT people seem deliberate and coordinated, it is because they very well may be. In author Jeff Sharlet’s book, The Family, he reveals that ambitious American evangelicals are working to surround The United States, Canada, and Western Europe with fundamentalist regimes – using homosexuality as a key wedge issue to gain power. Researchers Rachel Tabachnick and Bruce Wilson have also documented that a radical and sprawling evangelical group, The New Apostolic Reformation, has infiltrated many countries and exported anti-LGBT hate.

It has been greatly disturbing to witness the war on LGBT people unfolding in recent weeks. I had privately fretted that these AHEM’s (American Hate Exporting Movements) were further along in their dubious and dangerous designs than people realized. I was also concerned that the American government would back off challenging international homophobia in an election year. After all, the Obama administration surely did not want to be browbeaten as anti-faith by phony martyrs and their false claims of religious discrimination.

However, something drastic needed to happen to turn back the tide of violence and discrimination that plagued these “loser nations.” The U.S. had to make it crystal clear that those exporting hate were not representing our government. Instead, these zealots were operating a shadow foreign policy that undermined America’s interests.

President Barack Obama boldly stepped into this bloody vacuum and provided desperately needed leadership and moral clarity. He issued an incredible memorandum directing all agencies to “promote and protect the human rights of LGBT persons.” This was followed by Clinton’s moving speech that was as notable for its directness, as it was for its depth.

Usually in such addresses we get diplomatic drivel that satisfies no one and accomplishes little. But today’s actions by the administration and Clinton’s speech were different. The words were spoken with true vision and encrusted in values. There was clarity and passion, and no one was left wondering where our country stood on the rights of LGBT people.

This was one of those times where our nation demonstrated true international leadership and made me incredibly proud to be an American. It was stirring to witness our country act decisively as force for moral good. There was no patronizing that relegated the LGBT community to the role of liberalism’s unwanted stepchild. There were no carefully crafted and focus grouped code words that sugarcoated the abuses – just the honest truth spoken from the heart.

“It is a violation of human rights when people are beaten or killed because of their sexual orientation, or because they do not conform to cultural norms about how men and women should look or behave,” said Clinton in her speech. “It is a violation of human rights when governments declare it illegal to be gay, or allow those who harm gay people to go unpunished.”

The beauty of Clinton’s talk was that it was highly educational. It forcefully challenged the ignorant stereotypes and vicious lies disseminated by despots and their American evangelical patrons.

“Being gay is not a Western invention; it is a human reality,” Clinton said. “And protecting the human rights of all people, gay or straight, is not something that only Western governments do.”

Needless to say, the leaders of AHEM’s and anti-LGBT politicians went nuts. “This is just the most recent example of an administration at war with people of faith in this country,” said failing presidential candidate Rick Perry, who shocked people by putting a complete sentence together. Perry conveniently failed to mention that Clinton and Obama are both people of deep faith.

The stunning events in Geneva mark the moment Barack Obama secured a national LGBT vote for his 2012 re-election campaign. Today we felt hope – but more importantly, we witnessed monumental change.

Our society has made remarkable progress in the fight for LGBT equality in my lifetime. The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was completed this year, and most Americans support ending discrimination against LGBT people in the workplace. In 2010, for the first time, two separate polls indicated that a majority of Americans support the freedom of same-sex couples to marry. The well-documented generation gap in support for LGBT rights ensures that anti-equality forces in the United States are ultimately fighting a losing battle.

But as the GOP presidential primary is so vividly reminding us, much work remains to be done in the struggle for LGBT equality. Of course, the usual suspects in the anti-gay pantheon remain the most vocal exponents of homophobia, but even well-meaning, LGBT-affirming individuals can and often do reinforce homophobia and heterosexism without even knowing that they’re doing it.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve found myself in the following situation: a supportive, well-meaning friend or family member is introducing me and my spouse to someone we don’t know. This person makes the introduction as follows: “Hi, so-and-so! This is John, and this is his [insert occasional awkward pause here] partner [or 'boyfriend,' or 'lover,' or 'friend'] Michael.”

Michael and I have been married for nearly six years. Still, we regularly find ourselves in the situation outlined above. I suspect that people have a wide variety of reasons for using non-marital terms to describe our relationship in social situations. Perhaps they aren’t (or are?) aware of the religious or political views of others and wish to sidestep any potential awkwardness that might ensue. Perhaps they themselves, while outwardly professing to support equality, still struggle silently with acceptance of our marriage. Perhaps they wish to save us from embarrassment or retribution. Even LGBT-identified friends of ours slip up on occasion, introducing Michael as my “partner” or asking me whether my “boyfriend” and I will be able to attend their holiday party. I suspect that in these cases especially, force of habit is the culprit: same-sex couples have been excluded from the rights and privileges of marriage for so long that many LGBTs don’t even think of committed same-sex relationships in marital terms.

However varied the reasons may be for using less contentious terms to describe our marriage, the result is always the same: it denigrates our love, telling us that our marriage is somehow unworthy of the term, inherently unequal and intrinsically less valuable than the marriages of our straight counterparts. It reinforces the still-powerful cultural taboos surrounding LGBT people and our relationships. It implies that honesty about the nature and definition of our relationship is less important than accommodating the prejudice of others. It tells us that it’s best to be silent.

I am not entirely without guilt here, either. Early in our marriage (perhaps due to my Catholic upbringing or the sometimes sadistic nature of Midwestern politeness), I often adapted my own terminology to suit my audience. For friends, family members, and people under 40 I used the term “husband,” but for elderly and conservative people, and in work-related situations, I retreated into the relative neutrality of “partner.” I’m no longer shy about making universal use of the term “husband,” but I’ve still occasionally been reticent to call others out for neglecting to do so themselves.

No more.

I can no longer concern myself with whether or not my marriage makes others uncomfortable. I have to be true to myself, my husband, and the love that we share. I refuse to make any concessions whatsoever to bigotry; from now on, I will correct anyone who disrespects the way Michael and I define our relationship. I will not allow my marriage to be denigrated in my hearing.

Of course, there are some in the LGBT community who make the conscientious decision not to describe their committed relationships in marital terms. I respect those decisions and would never suggest that those relationships are any less equal, committed, valuable, or meaningful than mine. However, decisions about how to define a couple’s relationship are for that couple, and that couple alone, to make. Michael and I define ourselves as husbands (as does the State of Vermont), so referring to us by any other term is a sign of deep disrespect that I, and hopefully others, will no longer tolerate.

This holiday season, when you’re introducing your married LGBT friends at a party, remember to respect the way they choose to define their relationship. Michael is my husband. Get used to saying that, because from now on, I’ll be correcting you if you don’t.

Note: This piece, which can also be found on the Huffington Post, is a retooled version of a post that originally appeared in the Bilerico Project in December 2010.

(Weekly Column)

I knew Russia was likely to embrace homophobia the moment I read that approximately 1.25 million Russians have emigrated from the nation in the past decade. Population experts say that the mass exodus is comparable in size to the migration following the Bolshevik Revolution.

This one-time superpower is disintegrating into a superstitious country more concerned about angels than economics. Each day, for example, tens of thousands of Russians stand in line for up to 12 hours in frigid weather to kiss a glass covered case that they believe holds the Virgin Mary’s belt.

To top it off, Vladimir Putin’s voracious appetite for power is morphing Russia into an unsettling hybrid that vacillates between pseudo-democracy and sort-of dictatorship. The faltering of this country, which has the world’s 11^th largest economy, would be significantly worse if it were not for the good fortune of having oil and gas exports.

In this politically stagnating and spiritually stifling environment, it is predictable that the city of Saint Petersburg would consider a totalitarian bill imposing fines for the so-called promotion of gay “propaganda.” If it were to pass, anyone who committed “public acts” promoting homosexuality, bisexuality or transgender identity to minors could pay up to 3,000 rubles while an organization could pay 10,000 to 50,000 rubles.

Such an outright assault on expression and speech are not the product of a free country and rightfully raised red flags within the U.S. State Department.

“Gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights,” the State Department said. “We have called on Russian officials to safeguard these freedoms, and to foster an environment which promotes respect for the rights of all citizens.”

Without exception, loser nations are always the most homophobic. Leaders of such lands desperately look for scapegoats to distract the public from noticing their dismal failures. They also find the promotion of religious extremism useful, because it is more difficult to vilify leaders who present themselves as deified.

The LGBT community rarely thrives in backward places that promote ignorance over education and medieval views over modernity. As these intellectual swamps sink, sexual minorities make ideal targets because their members are often isolated and deeply closeted, vulnerable to persecution, and don’t have the numbers to fight back.

Russia is not the only loser nation where leaders manipulate the public through virulent gay bashing. Brutal Zimbabwe dictator, Robert Mugabe, called homosexuality un-Christian and un-African last week, and then threatened to severely discipline anyone in a gay relationship.

“Do not get tempted into that (homosexuality). If you do fall for it we will punish you severely,” said Mugabe.

This warning comes from a loathsome tyrant who is single-handedly responsible for this nation’s despair and disrepair. By attacking LGBT people, the potentate hopes to mask his misdeeds. Anti-gay hate groups, such as the Evangelical Fellowship of Zimbabwe, aid this criminal by allowing him to pose as pious.

Even in some advanced nations there is the threat of retrograde preachers who have no qualms about dragging their countries into the gutter for personal riches and political gain. In Brazil, televangelist Silas Malafaia has become the country’s Pat Robertson, politicizing culture war issues like LGBT equality.

The New York Times reports that the self-righteous televangelist is transported in a private jet and that his fingers are “adorned with diamond-encrusted gold rings.”

Sure, the Bible says, “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” But one gets the distinct impression that Malafaia would solve this problem by hiring an architect to build a hollow needle of gold the size of the Lincoln Tunnel and drive through it in his Mercedes-Benz.

Homophobia is a mark of failing nations. Even in America, it is the emblem of poor, second-tier states. It is the signpost of inferior cities that perpetually fail to reach their potential and can’t figure out why.

It is not that anti-gay sentiment on its own causes the collapse of such places. It is that homophobia virtually never stands alone. It can only flower in corrupt environments that lack basic freedom, devalue education, limit liberty, have huge income disparities, degrade women, discourage religious pluralism, mock intellectuals, and promote superstition at the expense of science.

As a general rule, places that are leaders in passing anti-gay laws are losers in virtually every other category that defines successful, civilized societies.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

From Doug Ireland, Gay City News:

St. Petersburg: How you can help fighting anti-gay laws in Russia?

Join the international Campaign: 10’000 letters to the European Court of Human Rights and the United Nations

Many of you have been asking us how you can help to fight the bill in the most effective way. This Press Release aims to answer your questions as well as bring more insight about the context.

In the last few days, GayRussia has been consulting with its activists, other Russian based LGBT activist groups and legal specialists to think of how to best address the current circumstances.

First, you need to know that the bill is politically motivated: Russia’s Parliamentary election will take place on December 4^th and targeting LGBT is a way to earn support from religious and nationalist organizations. The bill received support from Valentina Matvienko the former Governor of the city who is now the speaker of the Upper Chamber of Parliament. Politicians in Moscow said that they are ready to implement a similar law in the Russian capital but also at the Federal level.

Second, we want to stress that the ban of the promotion of LGBT rights on the public place is de facto enforced in Russia since 2005. Implementing this law is only materializing what has been a sad reality for years. For several years, GayRussia has been denouncing the absence of freedom of assembly, freedom of expression and freedom of association for Russian LGBT. As a reminder, over 300 public events applied by GayRussia have been banned, LGBT groups partnering with us have been denied registration by the government in several regions, our activists have been often fined, arrested, judged and humiliated. They introduced 20 cases with the European Court of Human Rights and the United Nations. Russian prosecution refused to open criminal investigation against Mufti Talgat Tadjudin, the Governor of Tambov, Oleg Betin, and the former Mayor of Moscow, Yuri Luzhkov, for calling hatred or to kill LGBT people. The Russian Courts even legalized the insult “gomik” (faggot) which was used by Yuri Luzhkov while referring to gays.

Third, we see this law as a “unique” chance for the Russian LGBT community to re-mobilize itself as it did in 2002 upon the attempt to re-criminalize homosexuality and in 2006, on the eve of the first Moscow Gay Pride.

Russia’s LGBT community has historically been divided and GayRussia would like to hope that today’s attacks by politicians in St. Petersburg will serve as a lesson for LGBT groups in St. Petersburg who have been appearing in the media since 2005 arguing that both “gay prides” and “gay marriage” are provocations.

This anti-LGBT law is a chance for Russian LGBT people to work against homophobe politicians and government rather than to work against each other. Our enemies are homophobes: LGBT rights campaigners should not attack each other. If we stand united, we have more chance than if we stand in two opposite sides where we only fuel the anti-gay rhetoric.

Fourth, the St Petersburg law is nothing new in Russia. Similar laws have already come into force in Ryazan (in 2006) and in Arkhangelsk (in 2011).  More frightening, it is being discussed in Moscow, and also in Ukraine. It was also discussed in Lithuania in the past years.

GayRussia is the only Russian LGBT group which campaigned against the anti-gay law in Ryazan in 2009 when Nikolay Baev and Irina Fedotova (Fet) were arrested, detained and judged for holding a banner in front of a local school stating that “Homosexuality is normal”. The Constitutional Court gave a decision arguing that the law did not contradict with the Constitution. The activists lodged a case with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and with the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva.

These two cases are today a chance to make anti-gay laws history not only in Russia but in the whole of Europe.

The faster the European Court of Human Rights will open the case of Nikolay Bayev against Russia, the faster we will get a decision. And this decision will be binding for Russia. More important, it will make a European precedent which will serve Ryazan, Arkhangelsk, Ukraine, Lithuania and maybe more.

JOIN THE INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN!

At this stage, your support and your mobilization should be thought to help achieving a global solution to this problem, not only in St. Petersburg but also, in Ryazan, in Arkhangelsk, in Moscow, in Ukraine and elsewhere.

By asking the European Court of Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Committee to prioritize the case of Bayev and Fedotova, you can make a difference, globally. GayRussia propose template letters that you can print and send. An envelope, a stamp, and a piece of paper is all you need !

If 10’000 of you write a letter to these two institutions, IT CAN MAKE A CHANGE. Each of your letters will be filed in each case. The more letters are filed, the more chances we have to show the importance of these cases.

Templates of letters to send are available here:

http://www.gayrussia.eu/en/campaigns/model_letters.php

It will then be on our side to do the job and ensure that we win the case. We assure you that our efforts to fight in Court and win the case will be tireless and unstoppable as our previous campaigns have always been. Our aim is to defeat our Constitutional Court and our homophobic government. This year, GayRussia won the first ever LGBT case in Russia in the ban of the Moscow Pride at the European Court of Human Rights.