After the Supreme Court issued a collective “whatever” to Bishop Harry Jackson and his whiny appeal to force a vote on marriage rights in the District of Columbia, which runs up against the District’s nondiscrimination policies, the National Organization for Marriage has decided that maybe the new House of Representatives [now with lots more bigots!] can help them hurt gay families in the nation’s capital:
Jackson and his supporters took their case to the Supreme Court after the D.C. Court of Appeals said that the board was within the law in making such a decision. Jackson, a minister at the Hope Christian Church in Belstville, said the court’s split decision (5 to 4) gave him reason to hope.
The National Organization for Marriage (NOM), the nation’s most vociferous opponent of gay marriage, says it will work with Congress to strike down the law.
“With a pro-marriage majority in the new Congress we will explore a number of avenues to force the District to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to voters,” NOM President Brian Brown said in a statement. “As the four Court of Appeal justices who dissented in this case made clear, the District of Columbia owes it to the voters to allow them to decide the critical issue of marriage which has existed since before there was a District of Columbia.”
When you’re filled with such bigotry and prejudice that you spend your entire life trying to hurt gay families everywhere in a malignant game of whack-a-mole, you have problems. Therapy recommended.
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to take up a case seeking to force the Washington, D.C., government to hold a referendum on the city’s gay marriage law.
The high court declined to hear an appeal filed on behalf of opponents of a March 2010 law that made the District of Columbia the sixth jurisdiction in the United States authorizing gay and lesbian couples to marry.
The justices did not comment on the action. Their refusal to take up the case leaves in place an appeals-court decision upholding an earlier rejection of the planned referendum. The court ruled that the city was justified in rejecting the referendum because it sought to authorize a form of discrimination barred by the city’s Human Rights Act.
“Today’s action by the Supreme Court makes abundantly clear that D.C.’s human rights protections are strong enough to withstand the hateful efforts of outside anti-LGBT groups to put people’s basic civil rights on the ballot,” said Joe Solmonese, president of Human Rights Campaign, in a written statement.
This is why wingnuts don’t like the judicial branch. It’s one thing to convince a bunch of yahoos to vote against gay people’s fundamental rights, but in courts of law, they have to actually be able to back up their arguments. In this case, the Supreme Court simply said “nah, we’re busy.” As I said, too bad, so sad!
If you’ll remember, Bishop Harry Jackson, who doesn’t seem to really live in the District of Columbia, has his panties in a wad because the DC City Council won’t allow a popular referendum on their equal marriage law, arguing that it violates the District’s Human Rights Act. The appeals court agreed. Now it’s up to the Supreme Court to decide whether the case is even worth hearing:
According to the court’s public docket, the nine justices scheduled a private conference among themselves for Friday to discuss the case known as Jackson v. the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics. Under longstanding court rules, the justices usually announce a decision on whether to accept or reject a case on the Monday following such a conference.
“Generally, if a case is considered at a conference, viewers can expect that the disposition of a case will be announced on an Orders List that will be released at 10 a.m. the following Monday,” the court’s website says.
[...]
Bishop Harry Jackson, pastor of a Beltsville, Md., Christian church, and other same-sex marriage opponents filed a petition with the Supreme Court Oct. 12 asking the court to consider hearing the case in a process known as a petition for a Writ of Certiorari. The case consists of their appeal of a lower court ruling that rejected their contention that the city must allow voters to decide the marriage question in a ballot initiative.
The D.C. Court of Appeals upheld the Board of Elections and Ethics’ decision to bar Jackson and his supporters from organizing a ballot initiative on grounds that, if approved, the initiative would violate the city’s Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act bans discrimination based on sexual orientation.
If the SCOTUS rejects the case, the lower court’s ruling will stand and Harry Jackson will probably start crying, but he will live through the ordeal.
There is a brochure on the website of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX) that says,”Get Smart, Get The Facts”. Unfortunately, PFOX is fact averse when it comes to accepting that the District of Columbia has rescinded a certificate supposedly honoring the “ex-gay” organization.
On April 28, 2010, a controversy erupted after it was discovered that Adrian Fenty, then the mayor of Washington, D.C., inadvertently signed a “Certificate of Appreciation” for radical PFOX activist Regina Griggs. An ecstatic PFOX plastered the certificate prominently on its website. According to a gushing PFOX press release:
The government of the District of Columbia has awarded a certificate of appreciation to Regina Griggs, executive director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX). The certificate, signed by D.C. mayor Adrian Fenty, recognizes Griggs for her “dedication, commitment, and outstanding contributions as Executive Director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays.”
“Regina’s award is well-deserved,” said Greg Quinlan, President of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays. PFOX presented the award to Griggs last week in honor of her ten years of volunteer service to parents and the ex-gay community.
Like most everything with PFOX, the dust-up was a combination of grandstanding and smoke and mirrors. As for the certificate, it was essentially meaningless — no more than a perfunctory piece of paper signed by auto pen that virtually anyone could attain with minimal effort.
Nevertheless, PFOX deceptively pretended that the paper was a significant achievement that conferred the endorsement of the DC government. (Yes, the group’s actions are truly as desperate and pathetic as they sound.)
Upon learning that PFOX had received the lame piece of paper and was misrepresenting it as a real accomplishment, the mayor’s office took back the “honor”. The mayor’s office released a statement saying:
“A staff level error was made when the request for the certificate in question was fulfilled. We apologize for the error as it runs contrary to the Mayor’s vision of a more open and inclusive city.”
This very public and humiliating spanking occurred in April 2010. Yet, PFOX still has the certificate proudly displayed on its website.
Clearly, PFOX is an untrustworthy and unscrupulous organization with few morals and little regard for truth. If the group had one scintilla of integrity, it would have taken the certificate down from its site in April. Yet, the group continues to misrepresent itself and mislead the public — including potential clients in which it is trying to hawk expensive “ex-gay” snake oil cures.
To view the rescinded certificate, please visit the PFOX website and scroll down to the right hand corner.
Ironically, PFOX was allowed into the World Bank program as a DC-based charity*, even as it blatantly continues to defy the will of the DC government and parades a certificate that it was plainly told was invalid.
It is impossible to shame PFOX, because the group is shameless.
** PFOX is also fudging its DC credentials in its attempt to access taxpayer money through the World Bank. In reality, PFOX is not even close to DC. Its headquarters is in Reedville, VA — 127 miles and a two hour and forty minute drive southeast of the nation’s capitol. To be listed as a charity an organziation has to have “a substantial local presence in the Greater Washington metropolitan area.” No one familiar with the workings of this group can claim that PFOX has but minimal ties to the District.
In case you missed this, it’s sort of funny, in that intense schadenfreude kind of way. Joe Sudbay:
The homophobic organization’s candidate for DC City Council in Ward 5, Delano Hunter, got thumped. Incumbent Harry Thomas Jr. defeated Hunter by a 3 to 1 margin. Here is the latest breakdown courtesy of DCist:
Ward 5 Council
Harry Thomas – 62.05%
Delano Hunter – 20.07%
Kenyan McDuffie – 13.77%
Joe points out that, in NOM’s mind, they were going to show the DC City Council that citizens didn’t want marriage equality by helping Delano Hunter win. The District of Columbia told them to get bent.
Contact: Wayne Besen, TWO Executive Director
Phone: 917-691-5118
E-Mail: wbesen@truthwinsout.org
Web: www.TruthWinsOut.org
We are Relieved That The Mayor Did Not Honor A Hate Group, Says TWO
NEW YORK — Truth Wins Out (TWO) thanked Washington, DC mayor Adrian Fenty today for quickly clarifying that a certificate of appreciation given to Regina Griggs, an activist with Parents & Friends of Ex-Gays, (PFOX) was a clerical error. PFOX had breathlessly touted the certificate in a press release and proudly displayed a copy of it on its website. Today, the mayor’ office issued the following statement
A staff level error was made when the request for the certificate in question was fulfilled. We apologize for the error as it runs contrary to the Mayor’ vision of a more open and inclusive city.
The Mayor is proud of his ardent support of the LGBT community as illustrated in his championing of the Marriage Equality legislation which he signed into law on December 18, 2009.
“We appreciate Mayor Fenty’ rapid response and for clarifying this troubling issue,” said Wayne Besen, Executive Director of Truth Wins Out. “The mayor took an affirmative step to stop PFOX from touting the certificate as a stamp of approval from the DC government. We are pleased that no such recognition was given and that the mayor did not endorse a hate group that deliberately spreads misinformation against LGBT people. Additionally, we thank GLAA’ Richard Rosendall for bringing the issue to our attention and for their efforts to resolve this matter.”
According to a gushing PFOX press release:
The government of the District of Columbia has awarded a certificate of appreciation to Regina Griggs, executive director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX). The certificate, signed by D.C. mayor Adrian Fenty, recognizes Griggs for her “dedication, commitment, and outstanding contributions as Executive Director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays.”
Truth Wins Out also took PFOX to task for its overwrought excitement over a certificate it was mistakenly given.
“This pathetic publicity stunt shows how desperate PFOX is for attention and how delusional they truly are,” said TWO’ Besen. “Now they look doubly ridiculous, because the they were never meant to have this certificate.”
UPDATE: Mayoral candidate and Council Chair Vince Gray today issued the following statement about Mayor Fenty’ Certificate of Appreciation honoring the work of Parents and Friends of ExGays and Gays:
“For the Mayor to issue a certificate of appreciation honoring an organization that has done so much to alienate so many is not only an insult to the LGBT community, it is yet another example of the insensitivity of his administration. It is an embarrassment to our city that he would make such an offensive mistake. It was the Mayor’ signature on the certificate, not a staff-member’, and I hope the Mayor will personally take responsibility.”
Antigay activist Ruth Jacobs is a veritable pornographer for Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and for Christian-Right outfits in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, D.C.
Her testimonies against comprehensive sex education and transgender access to public facilities routinely consist of graphic and one-sided descriptions of sex acts. Her kinky speeches are purposely entered into the public record in order to fill the minds of taxpayers, library visitors, churchgoers, and elected officials with dirty thoughts and sex-starved antigay fantasies instead of uplifting public dialogue about public health, human dignity, freedom, and lifelong love between two people. Jacobs also refers to the supposed rights of unnamed, absent, and frankly non-existent “ex-transgender” and “ex-gay” people to be free from the existence of the real gay and transgender people who testify.
See for yourself — but don’t watch this from your workplace:
The Genocide for Jesus blog has helpfully transcribed her entire appearance at a District of Columbia hearing on marriage for the District’s gay couples.
Of particular note, according to the blog:
During a questioning period, she admitted to Council chair Phil Mendelson that she had no evidence of her claims of a connection between same-sex marriage and HIV infection. Councilman David Catania asked her what gay male sex had to do with lesbians and marriage, especially since lesbians have the lowest rate of HIV infection. Jacobs became flustered and said she wasn’t there to talk about that fact.
The antigay parents group P-FOX is demanding that the Walt Disney Company offer special protection for non-existent ex-gay employees who are already protected, in any event, under existing antidiscrimination policy covering sexual orientation.
According to TowleRoad, P-FOX also falsely claims (again) that the Superior Court of the District of Columbia ruled that “former homosexuals are a protected class that must be recognized under sexual orientation non-discrimination laws.”
In fact, the city court merely held that mutability of characteristics may not be used under the city’s Human Rights Act as a pretense exclude persons from protection under the city law. The ruling has no effect outside Washington, D.C., due to the extreme breadth of that city’s antidiscrimination law.
The antigay parents group PFOX claimed today that it has won recognition of “former homosexuals” as a protected sexual orientation in a D.C. Superior Court ruling. PFOX said:
“We are gratified that the ex-gay community in Washington D.C. now has the same civil rights that gays enjoy,” said Regina Griggs, executive director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX), which had filed the lawsuit against the District of Columbia government for failing to protect former homosexuals in the Nation’s Capital.
In a discrimination complaint filed by PFOX against the National Education Association (NEA) for refusing to provide public accommodations to ex-gays, the D.C. Office of Human Rights (OHR) had agreed with the NEA that sexual orientation protection did not extend to former homosexuals. “By failing to protect former homosexuals, the sexual orientation laws gave more rights to homosexuals than heterosexuals who were once gay,” said Griggs. “So PFOX asked the Court to reverse OHR’s decision, which it did. The Court held that ex-gays are a protected class under ‘sexual orientation.’”
“All sexual orientation laws and programs nationwide should now provide true diversity and equality by including former homosexuals,” said Greg Quinlan, a director of PFOX. “I have experienced more personal assaults as a former homosexual than I ever did as a gay man.”
Not so fast, Greg. The court did not reverse OHR’s decision; it ruled in June 2009 that the NEA was justified in excluding PFOX for its stridently discriminatory, antigay literature, and it chose not to reverse the decision. According to Washington City Paper:
While [Judge Maurice] Ross decided in the NEA’ favor, he also held that ex-gays do, in fact, constitute a protected group under the D.C. Human Rights Act. Judging from PFOX’ eerily celebratory press release, this is kind of a big deal for them.
According to Ross’ decision, the Human Rights Act doesn’t only protect groups defined by “immutable characteristics,” as the Office of Human Rights’ decision claimed. The Act also protects groups defined by “preference or practice” ‚Äîlike people who previously “practiced” gayness, and now “prefer” to practice heterosexuality:
OHR’ determination that a characteristic must be immutable to be protected under the HRA is clearly erroneous as a matter of law. . . . Indeed, the HRA lists numerous protected categories such as religion, personal appearance, familial status, and source of income, which are subject to change. . . . Pertaining to sexual orientation, moreover, the HRA in ¬ß2-1401.02(28) defines sexual orientation as “male or female homosexuality, heterosexuality and bisexuality, by preference or practice.” Thus, the HRA’ intent and plain language eschews narrow interpretation.
But while the NEA can’t discriminate against “ex-gays,” it may legally discriminate against exhibits that are explicitly anti-gay:
The Court affirms OHR’ ultimate determination that PFOX’ application was denied legally. In NEA’ judgment, PFOX is a conversion group hostile toward gays and lesbians. Thus, even though PFOX vehemently disagrees with NEA’ characterization, it is within NEA’ right to exclude PFOX’ presence at NEA’ conventions. . . . Indeed, the HRA would not require NEA to accept an application from the Ku Klux Klan or a group viewed by the NEA as anti-labor union or racist. . . . Similarly, military organizations and the Boy Scotts of America are excluded from renting exhibit space at the NEA Annual Meetings because of the positions those organizations take with regard to gay and lesbian rights.
. . . Thus, PFOX’ arguments miss the point. The NEA did not reject its application because PFOX’ members include exgays, homosexuals, heterosexuals, or members of any other sexual orientation. Rather, NEA rejected PFOX’ application because PFOX’ message and policies were, in NEA’ opinion, contrary to NEA’ policies regarding sexual orientation.
In other words, the D.C. Human Rights Act may protect groups who identify as “ex-gay” based on their mutable, previous and current sexual “practices” but does not — contrary to PFOX’s wishes — protect ex-gay activist groups such as PFOX that seek to use other organizations as soapboxes to spread political opinions and policies that are contrary to those of the host organization.
Unfortunately, the D.C. court has also legitimized a ludicrous claim that sexual orientation can be defined by what one isn’t, rather than what one demonstrably is.
Addendum: Given a great deal of misreporting by various blogs, I wish to reiterate:
Blame for the court’s logic regarding sexual orientation lies with the D.C. Human Rights Act (HRA), which broadly defines orientation as a matter of either “preference” or “practice.” The court observed:
While [Office of Human Rights'] analysis and the Title VII cases cited by OHR speak in terms of immutable characteristics, the HRA clearly does not limit itself only to immutable characteristics. The premise of the HRA is simple: to end all discrimination based on anything other than individual merit. Numerous protected classes listed in the HRA include mutable traits. Furthermore, the definition of sexual orientation defines an individual’ sexuality as a “preference” or “practice.” D.C. Code ¬ß2-1401.01. OHR’ analysis posits that the immutability of a person’ preferred sexual orientation categorizes them as a member of a protected class. In focusing on federal discrimination cases, however, the OHR misses the broad scope of the HRA and the explicit inclusion of the term “practice” in the HRA’ definition of sexual orientation.
If PFOX truly affirms D.C.’s Human Rights Act, then it will not only respect the NEA’s right not to host hostile and discriminatory organizations such as PFOX, but also move to hire “practicing” gay people in accord with PFOX’s claim to represent both “ex-gays” and those who “practice” homosexuality.
It remains the responsibility of the D.C. Council and mayor to reconsider language in the Human Rights Act which misdefines sexual orientation as a matter of “practice” or lack thereof.
While couples in Washington, D.C., seek to share in the joy of marriage, Focus on the Family is battling projecting onto those couples its own desire to put marriage — in Focus’ words — “on the chopping block.”
Instead of allowing healthy, loving, mature, and committed couples to marry, Focus on the Family wants voters to decide — through an illegal referendum — who should or shouldn’t marry, based on voters’ prejudices against sexual and religious minorities.
The effort to put civil social institutions and the private lives of Americans up for a vote reflects Focus on the Family’s disturbing contempt for individual freedom, religious liberty, family values, and national unity.
Even if one agrees that individual and religious liberty, and family values, should be damaged or destroyed in order to preserve a conservative cookie-cutter model of marriage for all, Focus’ model for marriage is unsettling.
Frank Worthen is a sexually confused man living in a largely sexless marriage with Anita, a woman whose son (from a past boyfriend) is openly gay and living with AIDS.
For more than 20 years, both Worthens have made a living from selling the home remedy of religious conversion to so-called heterosexuality, despite Frank’s ongoing sexual confusion and the failure of Anita’s ex-gay ideology to convert her son.
Anita’s attitude is that her son is broken and requires fixing: She says, “I cannot fix your kid, but I know God can.” Anita ridicules parents who affirm their gay children; she asserts that the parental closet is healthier, saying: “The thing about Love Won Out that is so profound and wonderful is that there’ so many parents in pain. You can hide among the crowd. You don’t have to go and wear a big banner that says, ‘My son’ gay.’”
Meanwhile, Frank scapegoats a pastor in his teenage years for his homosexual attractions — even though friends and family were at least vaguely aware of his sexual orientation since kindergarten. Frank tells Focus on the Family that his own inept and sometimes irresponsible choices prior to age 44 are synonymous with “the gay life,” and he falsely claims to have “left homosexuality” regardless of his attractions.
While many gay Christians and their families choose a path of sexual honesty and religious integrity, the Worthens have chosen denial and obfuscation.
The Worthens, sadly, are Focus on the Family’s role models for Love Won Out conference attendees. And it is this kind of shallow ex-gay marriage-of-convenience that Exodus and Focus say is threatened by the prospect of gay people being allowed to marry.
Without wishing for any harm to come to the platonic friendship of the Worthens, I think their “marriage” serves as a warning of the price that heterosexual Christians may pay when they deny marriage to others — and then get stuck in arranged marriages to gay partners, marriages formed out of duty to one’s religious community and not marital love.
Clearly, PFOX is an untrustworthy and unscrupulous organization with few morals and little regard for truth. If the group had one scintilla of integrity, it would have taken the certificate down from its site in April. Yet, the group continues to misrepresent itself and mislead the public — including potential clients in which it is trying to hawk expensive “ex-gay” snake oil cures.
