RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

01/22/2013

Peter Sprigg gets on CNN again; plays the victim—again #glaadcap

by Jeremy Hooper

Peter Sprigg, a man who has said that there is "a place for criminal sanctions" against homosexuality and said that he'd "prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than import them into the United States" (both of those here) was on CNN again this morning. Because why not? They'd uncritically book a man who said the same about any other minority population, right?

Anyway, Peter apparently said this about President Obama's inclusive inaugural mentions:

Screen Shot 2013-01-22 At 8.50.02 Am

"Laying down the gauntlet"? Um, not for nothing P.S, but isn't your employer, the Family Research Council, the one fighting daily against every single last gain for LGBT people? And aren't you the one who, just yesterday, retweeted the beyond hostile Bryan Fischer with an added claim that gay people are not created? Some might say that those actions are the ones that are "laying down a gauntlet," not the push by a human population to live lives free of fear.

And as for "working together"? Well honestly, Peter—we have no plans to "work with" you on the matter of lGBT rights. This is not a two-sided debate with equally merited contenders. The Family Research Council has made it perfectly that its vision leaves LGBT unprotected, unmarried, aggressively unchurched, excluded from any and every institution, and, ultimately, "changed" into something called an "ex-gay." We are not entertaining any of that as it's a really a thing. We proudly reject the FRC's highly discriminatory agenda. America voted in a President who sides with us, not the Family Research Council. Better luck in '16, buddy.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails