The Hatewatch blog is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based civil rights organization.

SPLC Responds to Attack by FRC, Conservative Republicans

By Mark Potok on December 15, 2010 - 1:05 pm, Posted in Anti-LGBT

This morning, 22 members of Congress and a large number of other conservatives signed on to a public statement attacking the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for listing several anti-gay religious right organizations as hate groups.  Published in two Washington, D.C., newspapers as a full-page ad, the statement was organized by the powerful Family Research Council (FRC) and other “pro-family organizations that are working to protect and promote natural marriage and the family.”

The statement, whose signatories included House Speaker-Designate John Boehner and the governors of Louisiana, Minnesota and Virginia, ran under the headline, “Start Debating/Stop Hating.” It accused “elements of the radical Left” of trying to “shut down informed discussion of policy issues” and decried those who attempt to suppress debate “through personal assaults that aim only to malign an opponent’s character.” The SPLC, it said, was engaging in “character assassination.”

It was a remarkable performance, given that it was precisely the maligning of entire groups of people — gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people — that caused the SPLC to list groups like the FRC. Remarkable, too, was the accusation that the SPLC was avoiding debate — in fact, the very first public discussion of the issues raised by the SPLC came in a Nov. 29 debate between the FRC’s Tony Perkins and myself on MSNBC’s “Hardball With Chris Matthews.”

Consider a few of the comments about gays and lesbians that have come from some of the groups now denouncing character assassination. The FRC, in a booklet entitled Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex With Boys, has claimed that “one of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order.” The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer wrote this year that “[h]omosexuality gave us Adolph Hitler, and homosexuals in the military gave us the Brown Shirts, the Nazi war machine and 6 million dead Jews.” Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel, which was not listed by the SPLC but helped organize today’s newspaper ad, describes relationships between gay men as “one man violently cramming his penis into another man’s lower intestine and calling it ‘love.’” Officials of several, including the FRC, have called for criminalizing gay sex.

Almost all the religious-right groups named by the SPLC also have engaged in a particularly toxic and widespread defamation of gay men: The claim that they are essentially pedophiles who molest children at far higher rates than heterosexuals.

In fact, this became the crux of my “debate” with the FRC’s Perkins — the claim, as he put it in the very last moments of the show, that “the research is overwhelming that homosexuality poses a danger to children.” To prove this, Perkins cited an outfit called the American College of Pediatricians, which certainly sounded authoritative. But he was being less than honest, to say the least. In fact, the American College of Pediatricians is a tiny group that broke away from the real professional association — the similarly named American Academy of Pediatrics — specifically because that 60,000-member organization had endorsed gay and lesbian parenting. Perkins’ move was enough to cause Chris Matthews to run a special segment two days later that explained the difference between the academy and the so-called college.

The reality is that virtually all real researchers in the field have concluded, as did the American Psychological Association in an official statement, that “homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.”

Despite the claims made in today’s statement, the SPLC’s listings are not in any way intended to suppress these groups’ free speech. We’re not asking that these groups be silenced or punished in any way. What we are doing is calling them out for their lies. There is nothing wrong with labeling an organization a hate group based on what they say. A simple example illustrates the point: If a neo-Nazi group said all Jews are “vermin,” no one would argue with our characterizing it as a hate group.

Neither are we mounting an attack on individuals or “groups that uphold Judeo-Christian moral views,” as today’s statement suggests. In fact, as we say in our article dissecting the views of these groups, “Viewing homosexuality as unbiblical does not qualify organizations for listing as hate groups.” Instead, as we explained there, “the SPLC’s listings of these groups is based on their propagation of known falsehoods — claims about LGBT people that have been thoroughly discredited by scientific authorities — and repeated, groundless name-calling.”

Several thoughtful Christian commentators understood that clearly. Warren Throckmorton, a respected professor and past president of the American Mental Health Counselors Association, put it like this the day after my debate with Perkins: “For the most part, the reaction of defenders of the newly labeled hate groups is to avoid addressing the issues the SPLC raised, instead preferring to attack the credibility of the SPLC. Reviewing the charges leveled against the Christian groups, I think their responses are mostly unfortunate and unhelpful. The SPLC has identified some issues which are legitimate and have damaged the credibility of the groups on the list. Going forward, I hope Christians don’t rally around these groups but rather call them to accountability.” After reviewing the SPLC’s list of “10 Myths” about gays and lesbians, he wrote that “much of what is said by Christians about homosexuality is provably false and rooted in ignorance and fear.”

Another Christian website, Canyonwalker Connections, wrote: “Lies are evil.  Lies breed fear. … If we repeat the myth enough, maybe it will gain muddy traction and stick. This is what FRC and other Hate Groups do so well. They demonize the gay community. … If the church cannot police our own, perhaps God is using secular organizations to slap His children upside the head? Would not be the first time. I will stand with, beside and in front of my GLBT fellow humans to ensure that they gain equality with me. Family Research Council, you should be more concerned about where you are on God’s list of naughty or nice, sheep or goats. And Southern Poverty Law Center, I applaud you, thank you, really … thank you.”

At the end of the day, it’s hard to know if the politicians and other leaders who signed today’s anti-SPLC statement really know some of things the groups they are throwing in with support. What’s a fact is that, despite their claims, the groups have so far, without exception, failed to confront the facts of SPLC’s report.

  • BarbaraH

    What a sad state of affairs. The conservatives this country are a symptom of the US’s decline. Many have become “people of the lie.” And that we are to be governed by people who believe it is their way or the highway is sad indeed. If the palins, Boehners, etc. think they make this country look good and strong, they are sadly mistaken.

  • William B. Lewis

    Where can I obtain a list of the 22 members of congress?

  • Michael R Payne

    I knew that $50 I donated to the SPLC was a good investment! I notice that mainstream religions, although they may philosophically oppose homosexual behavior, have left this debate alone. Its the law of the land now and they understand that basic premise.

    I live in the land of mega-churches, Colorado Springs, and they rail at every opportunity against LGBT rights, as an attractant to the people who already hate. They preach to the choir, and the children of the choir, they are not attracting new adult converts. If everyone had a job, and flag draped coffins coming home stopped, hate speech would fade into the background. SPLC press forward and keep the faith.

  • Frank Ryan

    Heckuva job, SPLC. I keep remembering with not-so-generous thoughtsthe Family Council as the goofies who tried to turn the Air Force Academy mandatory Christian. The Council might be wrong…and usually is…but they’re never in doubt. Go get ’em.

  • pat titus

    The comments of the FRC and their carefully selected
    ‘experts’ stem from ideas last seriously considered in
    the 30’s. I wonder what the ages are of these so called
    experts? This may be important because unless you
    are 70, like me, you may never have heard this stuff
    before, nor witnessed its having been checked out and
    disproved by more advanced experts over the years.
    Having seen it disproved should make people less
    likely to buy in. Makes me really wonder about those
    Senators and their C St. friends, many of whom are
    old enough to know better.

  • Herbert E. Larson

    This is the defense of their stupidity for the members of the choir, so get used to hearing us leftest facist marxist will not debate assigned none debate subjects.

  • Ginger P. Patton

    Thank you once again for going to battle against injustice. It does not surprise me that McConnell of Virginia is in on this; I have to live with the mentality of this degenerate racist every day as a Virginian. Thankfully we have the SPLC; God bless each and every one of you and the work you do.

  • Beth

    This blog’s willingness to publish Joseph’s comment illustrates roundly how pro-free-speech the SPLC really is.

    As for the anti-LGBT hate speech, as a regular reader of The Washington Post, I’ve noticed a recent trend in its willingness to publish radical opinions from the extreme right. I wonder sometimes if they do this just to prove to readers that they are not simply a shill for the left. Either way, I hope SPLC is willing to take out an ad of the same size rebutting their opinion (and the WP is willing to accept the ad and print it, of course). Even better would be the WP running a guest rebuttal column from the SPLC, but I shan’t hold my breath on that one.

  • John

    THANK YOU SPLC FOR YOUR WORK! When I saw that an organization was secure enough to risk donations to do what is right (speaking out), I knew I could support the SPLC. You do amazing work, in all you do. What is more Christian than seeking justice? Isaiah 58.

    The courage of the SPLC is inspiring. The response of the hate groups demonstrates why the SPLC’s mission, despite all the progress made over the last few decades, is just as relevant today as it was decades ago. Thank you for taking a stand.

  • Joseph

    What a load of anti-white dribble on this site. When the authors and commentators start adopting honest debate and fair-mindedness you may start accruing some credibility.

    Fortunately many more are seeing through you and your days are numbered.

  • R Lavigueur

    Mitch Beales,

    You will rarely hear the FRC assert that children would be safer with lesbian parents, since women molest children (male or female) far less than do men. Logic, for these organizations, means agreeing with their conclusions. If they like the conclusion, they’ll seize any evidence that they can find that remotely suggests it and dismiss out of hand the rest.

    As a point of interest, most men and women who molest children don’t easily fit into the heterosexual/homosexual/bisexual binary, as many pedophiles feel no attraction to adults of either gender. The ones that do, however, almost overwhelmingly report being heterosexual, even the ones who molest boys. In many cases, these people just have easier access to male children than female children.

  • Mitch Beales

    CPT_Doom “Perkins asserted … that 86% of the men who molest boys are gay.” Really? I’ll bet the other 14% were bisexual. Duh! I would guess that the men who molest girls are overwhelmingly heterosexual or bisexual too.

    These right wing fools spew utter nonsense as if it had meaning and no one even challenges idiotic statements like this!

  • Mitch Beales

    Brutus perhaps you have noticed that Lee posted a “dissenting view” if you can call it that. Actually what he posted is simply a bald-faced lie since the equivalent of FRCs actions would be for SPLC to denounce all of Christianity as a hate cult. If you had read the comments you would have noticed that the SPLC has not even done this regarding the Mormons.

  • Brutus

    I stand corrected. I just thought more people actually bothered to read your material. I really did.

  • Lee

    “It was a remarkable performance, given that it was precisely the maligning of entire groups of people — gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people — that caused the SPLC to list groups like the FRC.”

    Yes, we get the fact that the SPLC engages in the very tactics of the “racists” it despises. That’s the point. The SPLC is, by its own standards, a bigoted organization.

  • R Lavigueur


    If you look back at some of the earlier posts on the topic, either the FRC’s new status or anti-gay groups in general, you’ll find some of the dissent that you’re looking for.

    Of course, around this issue most of the dissenters disappear from the debate shortly after you start asking them where the evidence for their position came from, or asked them if they really thought that the FRC didn’t make the statements that the FRC is accused of when the proof is everywhere.

    In general, I’ve found that the people who disagree with the SPLC enough to comment here tend to disagree with its coverage of racist or anti-immigrant groups, less so with its coverage of anti-gay groups. Given what can be found in some of the other comments on the site, I don’t think that the veiled accusation of censorship is all that likely to be at work.

  • Brutus

    32 comments and not one single dissenting view in the lot? I find that hard to believe. Especially in light of the fact that this is fairly “hot” news item and making headlines.

    Are we to believe, then, that not a single person who disagrees with your organization has bothered to come to this site, read this article and write a critical comment?


  • Liam

    Just an outside perception, but the FRC and these “conservative” US Government Representatives are in bed together; does that make them hate themselves?

  • Snorlax

    You know what’s really funny?

    These Reich Wingnuts have a bigger closet than their opponents on the left. They’re falling out of the closet all the time now. Like Ken Mehlman.

    Karl Rove allowed a male prostitute, Jeffy “Lube” Gannon, into the White House Press Corpse for two years on day passes. Secret Service logs indicate Jeffy stayed overnight on those day passes too.

    You Reich Wingnuts have just as many GLBTQ in your ranks as the left does in theirs. Probably more, based on what I’ve read.

    When you point one finger at someone else, three fingers are pointing back at YOU, right wingnuts!!

  • Snorlax

    So the Reich Wingnuts are calling SPLC character assassins and haters?

    Nice example of Rovian Projection, a propaganda tactic of accusing your opponent of your worst flaws. It defuses those flaws, like a manure spreader.

    Karl Rove first used this to get Dubya elected Gubna of Texis. Rove started rumors accusing incumbent Gov. Ann Richards of being gay…because rumors about Dubya’s gate swinging both ways were all over Texas at the time. It worked and Dubya got elected.

    Nice try, Reich Wingnuts.

  • David A Gabriel

    Slowly my fears are being realized, “When and if fascism comes to America it will not be labeled ‘made in Germany’; it will not be marked with a swastika; it will not even be called fascism; it will be called, of course, ‘Americanism, wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.” [I paraphrase, apologies.]

  • Jack Wolford

    This list of signers may show who’s giving and who’s receiving in my opinion. It might also be that some of these organizations are giving with money they can’t afford and by people whose jobs are in jeapordy as neither the lobby or the recipients have been very successful particularly in preventing Hate Crime legislation from becoming law.

  • legalhound

    Dakotahgeo you got that right! My husband calls them Talibangicals for a reason. These people would ban all music except what they like, they don’t dance so don’t expect to be able to do that if they get much more political power and the stupid blaming the third reich on gays is nothing more than projection. Most of those in the GOP isle behave like self-loathing gay men. Case in point Lindsey Graham and Jeff Sessions. The most misogynistic morons in the senate! Not only do they hate women, they go right after gays just as fast. Most of those in Congress who have behaved this way have eventually gotten caught fooling around with other men. So maybe the GOP lawmakers who have signed on with the FRC are just trying to deflect the attention away from themselves. It sure wouldn’t be the first time.

  • Dakotahgeo

    Most people with an ounce of wisdom and common sense know exactly what these 22 signators are getting at. They represent the new American christian Taliban of the religious right. Pay them no heed but watch them like hawks, if you know what I mean. They are the epitome of evil.

  • Karl Bateman

    It is a shame that you are not including the LDS church with this group of religious right. They have proved themselves to be on the same page as these others as they have actively given of time and money to remove rights of LGBT people. This has happened in Hawaii and California, as well as active campaigns for many years at legislative levels. This church has actively preached from the pulpit as well as active homophobic teachings within the BYU University for many years. I would ask again after sending numerous requests that SPLC review this organization based on their hatred of LGBT.

  • Allen

    Isn’t this attack just a big red flag that pretty much says, “Yeah, we admit it, we’re a hate group.”?

  • Steven

    There seems to be a lot of confusion in the Family Research Council, since Sprigg and Perkins espoused different viewpoints on laws on homosexuality. The FRC has to reevaluate their position, and make the right decision to abandon the hatred of homosexuality.

    I do not agree with their dubious support of heterosexual families and I strongly oppose denigration of homosexuality or same-sex marriages. Supporting heterosexuality in itself is an implicit insult to homosexuality because it promotes one above the other.

    More pressing issues that the FRC should focus on are single parent households, and the encouragement of family values in both same-sex and heterosexual families. The FRC should be giving monetary or social support to the numerous single parents who are struggling. In America, there are almost 14 million single parents.

  • Sandy

    I’m sure not surprised. It’s going to be a L-O-N-G congressional session this one. I hope “the people” who voted these hate mongers into office are paying close attention and that they are getting what they want…

  • Marisa

    I don’t know why anyone would NOT have realized that the Family Research Council was and is a hate organization – I figured that out LONG ago. Keep up the good work, SPLC!!!!

  • mikeksf

    Thanks for naming the FRC for the hate group that it is and holding them responsible for their lies. The very concise list of their fellow travelers who signed the ad is most telling. It’s a horror filled who’s who of the anti gay radical right that is fueling and reigniting the culture wars in this country. All of them spewing bile to raise money and promote their political agendas. I was a little sad though that Westboro Baptist and the Phelps clan weren’t signers too. Perhaps they were just too busy at Elizabeth Edwards’ funeral for Tony to catch up with them. After all, they’ve distilled the message of Perkins and his ilk to it’s essence, “God Hates Fags”.
    “But, oh no”, cry the people on this list, “you can say anything, but you can’t say THAT! Why, Westboro is so irresponsible, so uncultured, so very, very hateful.”

  • Rev. Dan Vojir

    Wonderful! You people inspire me to fight much more than I ever have to fight the Christian right! I have recently been ordained and intend to use my ministry to fight.

    I have studied Christian history extensively and the one thing that really gets to me is that Right-wingers of Perkins’ ilk have never really apologized for the wrongs done by the Church. Granted, Christians have done a great deal of charity throughout history, but they do not have a corner on goodness. In particular, I would point to the Southern Baptist Convention: many of the Right’s “Christian” leaders are Southern Baptist. Enough said.

  • Kevin Brown

    Keep up the good work, organizations like the Family Research Counsel (and others like them) are hate groups, unfortunately they portray themselves as mainstream Christian organizations which allows them to spread their hate even more effectively. The SPLC’s decision to call them out on their lies is a brave one and has my full support. Oh yes and I love the twisted logic that somehow calling a hate group out for their lies suddenly becomes censorship. I must have missed the part where the SPLC tried to have the FRC censored, oh wait I didn’t because it never happened!

  • Stephen

    Thanks for this reply to FRC etc. I’m sure you can inform me whether or not I’m right in thinking that these groups are the first that actually pay people to try to stop a minority group achieve civil rights. I can’t think of an anti-semitic or anti-black group that is led by people who make their living from this kind of activity.

  • Peter Paul Fuchs

    I thank you for this well-reasoned and, under the circumstances, very temperate response to a very flamboyant publicity stunt. I think the distinction you are making is critical. Merely believing that homosexuality is “unbiblical” is not — nor should it be for any true believer in the religious freedom of other citizens — enough to bring the label of a “hate group”. Rather it is precisely the hyperbole and simply falsehoods which are the real characteristic of the worst kind of violence-inducing propaganda. As you distinguish, that is what makes if hateful. Could anyone deny that thematically similar techniques in other countries bring about the most base for of retaliation in places where the rule-of-law is not as enshrined as it is here? Ironically, and pathetically, what the right-wing seems to argue is that that very sacred rule- of- law should be taken for granted, and practically abused as a way of justifying their claim that such pernicious speech can continue without consequences. Well, the fact that we are lucky not to have as many consequences sometimes does not mean such will always obtain. Thus the right-wingers are guilty of a kind of casualness with the very sacredness of the rule- of- law by presuming that it will constrain everyone who hears their prevarication. And it is a further tragic irony that they seek justification for this by the sacredness of constitutional protection for such matters. Even so, you are wise to emphasize that there is no taste for limiting other people’s right to speak per se. But that has nothing to do with the clear duty of responsible people to identify such speech as injurious to the commonweal. Certainly their tactic of trying to label this matter an issue of the “Left” will fail utterly. It is grounded precisely in the most potentially conservative reading of the very idea of the rule- of -law. This will have a very difficult time being protected in a society where there is dogged diffidence and outright mentally wayward fantasy about the accepted and uncontroversial findings of things like psychological experts. Thus, at bottom, what they seem to be arguing is that they have a right to keep a modicum of craziness and not have it labeled so even when it leads to potentially hateful consequences for fellow citizens. With this tangled web of grandiosity as their demand from others, I would say that merely labeling them as hateful is almost an act of charity.

  • constance kosuda

    Hi Mark – you are doing a great job –

    I saw this “debate” on Matthews’ show – if you had a chance to fully articulate your points, it would have been much better –

    maybe interrupt them, as often as they interrupt you!!!

    I remember reading that most child sexual molestations are done by heterosexual men, usually in the home of the child that is molested.

    another pesky fact you may want to harp on –

    it’s a winner, and they don’t want to hear it.

    good job, you!!!

  • Miguel

    So they’re complaining about character assassination, yet describe the SPLC as “a liberal fundraising machine” on their website.

    I’m glad I have a lifetime supply of irony meters.

  • jerilyn kay miller

    OMG! The SPLC is nothing but truthful and fair to all persons. This is what i see, feel when i read info from SPLC. How such stupidity is involved in our legislator is beyond my comprehension. Please , citizens of USA, learn the truth about candidates before voting fools into office. jeri

  • Melissa

    Don’t take the bait, SPLC. FRC wants to paint themselves as your opposite, thus your equal. They are not. Your Hatewatch lists come from doing valid research and they are protected by the First Amendment. Keep up the good work.

  • Linnea

    Thank you, thank you, Mark and all of you, for standing your ground against the FRC and their ilk. They’re used to their critics backing off when they push back, but they’ve bitten off more than they can chew this time! And they must know, in some corner of their hearts, that what they’re saying simply is not true. That’s why they’re so ticked off that you all have called them on the carpet.

  • David Hart

    BTW, the last time Perkins made this claim, Bob Schrumm (SP?) was on the Chris Matthews show. Bob totally eviscerated Perkins citing the FBI statistics.

    Just to be specific, the published and peer-reviewed Jenny study is selectively ignored by Perkins and his ilk. It clearly established that gays are less likely to be pedophiles that straight men. Since that study, we are finding that the percentage of gays in the population is higher than was thought at the time. This means that they are even less likely to be molesters than Jenny concluded.

  • David Hart

    As usual, Mark, this is superb work. I am an agnostic Jew but, perhaps, the British Quakers expressed this best in 1963:

    Quaker Life published an essay on “Quaker Views – Close Relationships,” which commented:

    “This tolerant attitude probably reflects the view of most British Quakers. No discrimination is found among Quakers in terms of employment policies. However, there are some Quakers who are very unhappy about the subject of homosexuality.”

    “What would Quakers say to people who point to teachings in the Bible against homosexuality? Most British Quakers, while finding much inspiration in the Bible, would not use it as the final or only authority. We believe in obedience to the same spirit of God that inspired the writers of the Bible and that we feel can speak directly to people today. We remember that the writers of the New Testament accepted the institution of slavery but Christians no longer keep slaves. Parts of the New Testament seem to support the argument against the ordination of women but several churches now ordain women. How the Christian Church decides which of the teachings in the Bible are eternal and which were ‘of their time’ is an important issue. Within Quakerism we feel it is very important for ideas to be treated by careful and prayerful consideration by the larger Quaker community – which may take a long time.”

  • Lynne @ No Junk. Just Jesus.

    The Religious Right has skipped over all those parts of the Bible they don’t like (e.g., warnings about becoming more evil than non-believers if only “God-fearing” on the surface, commands to treat others — even “enemies” — with love and respect, and examples of acting in the world without using evil world tactics like lying and pushing and attacking).

    And like schoolyard bullies, they aren’t satisfied unless they have someone smaller than themselves to kick. What they will figure out one day is that the sheep they’ve been kicking belong to the Biggest Guy in the universe, and He isn’t going to let them off without all the penalties He’s warned them with to-date (– another part of the Bible they’ve been ignoring and rewriting).

  • Loonesta

    Love the Christ, hate the Christers.

  • Jason

    Well if this doesn’t prove the inequality and oppression of the GLBT community and their supporters, I’m not sure what will. A group that is constantly disseminating inaccurate information and lies is called on their hate speech and suddenly there are political figures standing up and calling foul.

  • DJ M

    Thank you, thank you, thank you SPLC! Please keep up the fight against these hate mongers and bigots. It’s time someone took them on. The only way to fight these bigots is to call them out on their lies/misinformation/distortions of reality at every turn. Keep the fire under their heels. Don’t let up!

  • CPT_Doom

    Although I was so happy Chris Matthews corrected Perkins when he referenced the ACP during the 11/29 debate, I was bothered that no one bothered to contradict Perkins in his association of gay men with pedophiles. It does not matter if, as Perkins asserted (pretty baselessly, as it turns out), that 86% of the men who molest boys are gay, or if, as the reputable scientific associations have concluded, that gay men do not molest at higher rates than straight men. Either way, the actions of a child molester must never be used to limit my civil liberties. Just because I happen to be similar to a criminal does not make me one. After all, men, straight or gay, commit crimes like murder, rape, robbery and assault at rates much higher than their percentage in the overall population; however we do not limit the civil liberties of men or presume them to be criminals.

    That is really the worst part of the anti-gay hate movement – they consistently lump all LGBT people together and assume we think, act and plot alike. Nothing could be further from the truth and the ultimate aim of the “gay agenda” is to be treated as individuals – based on our own skills, abilities, actions and words, not some group we allegedly belong to.

  • Kathy Baldock

    When someone accuses me of something and I KNOW it is not true, I have to think it is about them. I laughed in amazement when I read about this new positioning yesterday.
    I am not a fan of FRC and they unfriended me on Facebook, but this did sit on their wall over the weekend while they were out schmoozing at congressional parties raising money. ( my assumption)

  • Steward B. Clinton

    I love you guys and gals. You give me both hope and determination. PLEASE Keep the righteous fight flowing – Especially now. “MOTIVATION BREEDS MOTIVATION”,

    I wonder what you all think of this and the existence of these groups in our leadership.

  • Ian

    I want these cowards to show me where, exactly, in the First Amendment is says “individuals and organizations may not criticize the speech of others.” Someone pointing out the lies and distortions in your arguments is not, I repeat, not the same thing as censoring them.

    Grow a spine.

    And these people wonder why Christianity is losing ground in developed countries.

  • Hardy Haberman

    This is an obvious “talking points” attack by the right-wing. These folks see demons everywhere but within their own ranks. It’s not that surprising but it’s sad that they will so blindly trust people like Paul Cameron, what may be even more sad is they may know Cameron is a fabricator and are cynically using him as a resource anyway. Either way, they are misguided, but well organized.