Tuesday, June 01, 2010

Why doesn't Robert Knight want to talk about Paul Cameron?

A few days ago, I sent an email to Coral Ridge Ministries writer (and former employee of the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America) Robert Knight.

I was inspired to ask for the interview due to Knight's recent piece in which he connected the recent House vote on the DADT repeal to a " homosexual conspiracy" to overturn so-called traditional values. This is what I asked:

My name is Alvin McEwen and I am editor and blogmaster of the site Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters.

I am emailing in pursuit of an interview with Mr. Robert Knight.

I read his recent piece regarding DADT and I would like to interview him regarding past comments he made about the gay community, particularly the research he used - most specifically that of Paul Cameron.

If this is a possibility, please get back with me.

Thank you for your time.

Today I received this answer:

We would like to decline your request at this time.

Andrew Scott

Coral Ridge Ministries
P.O. Box 1600
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl 33302-1600

On the surface, it may seem like an insignificant correspondence, but like so many things, there's a lot of work under the surface.

As I wrote in a recent piece, while George Rekers helped to create the junk science that demonized the lgbt community, it was Robert Knight who appeared on talk shows, in debates, and in front of Congress repeating this junk science.

And both men have another thing in common - they both utilized the work of the discredited Paul Cameron, a man who has been rebuked or censured from a plethora of legitimate medical organizations because of his bad research techniques. He is also a man who published "studies" that said, amongst other things, gay men are four to seven more times likely to rape their fellow servicemen in the Armed Forces - that it when they are not wallowing in feces, sticking gerbils up their rectums, and molesting children at a high rate.

Knight even referred to Cameron's work in an effort to defeat ENDA in 1994. So yes, Knight has some explaining to do.

Did he know the facts about Cameron's dubious history?

If he didn't, would he be willing to retract his past dependency on Cameron's work?

Why doesn't he want to talk about it?

It's one thing to oppose pro-lgbt legislation on a religious basis. However it is something entirely different to inaccurately cast members of the gay community as a disease-infested ravaging horde by way of bad research. 

For that matter, not just Knight, but every other religious right spokesperson and group who used Cameron in the past and still in the present to claim that "homosexuality is a dangerous lifestyle" needs to start talking.

But they won't if the gay community allows them to pretend as if none of it ever happened.

Related post: 

Why we should care about Paul Cameron

Bookmark and Share

Boondocks to take on 'No Homo' . . . and Tyler Perry? and other Tuesday midday news briefs

This upcoming episode of the Boondocks will supposedly air on June 14. According to an episode summary:

Granddad is cast as the leading man by mega-superstar of stage and screen, Winston Jerome. But when the theater group turns out to be a homoerotic evangelical cult, it's up to Huey and Riley to put a pause to it.
Two to one, Winston Jerome is a take-off on Tyler Perry. This may turn out to be interesting.

In other news . . .

Homophobic Backlash Sweeping Africa, More Jail Terms Seen - Oh look! The Black media has finally gotten on board.

Newsweek Reporter Gets Jail Time In Iran For Gay-Looking Ahmadinejad Picture - I'm speechless.

A Loss In Our Community - We lose a vital voice in the community.

Because AIDS makes some 'traditionalists' hard - Trash can't help but to be trash, no matter how it tries to spray itself with deodorant.

Why we're losing the 'gay' debate - Relax. This is a piece from One News Now. Apparently the columnist, Peter Heck is whining that his side is losing the unfortunate war on lgbt rights. Well let me tell you why you are losing, Peter and it won't even take that long.

You are losing because your foundation has been built on lies and deceit. You have pushed phony horror stories and junk science for years against the lgbt community and now it is coming back on you.  Or to be more specific, you are losing because you believe nonsense like this:

all sexual behavior – married heterosexual conduct, adulterous heterosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, homosexuality, pedophilia, coprophilia, polyamory...ALL of it – is chosen behavior. No one is compelled into any sexual conduct. Even those who choose to abide by God's design for sex within the confines of a married, monogamous, man/woman relationship, how, when and if they engage in sexual behavior, is a choice. It has nothing to do with unalterable, unchangeable, immutable characteristics.

That ignorant statement flies in the face of all credible research and science, but let me guess. Your Bible leads you to say it so that makes it correct.

So basically you are losing because you are a dumbass.

Bookmark and Share

FRC: Gays and lesbians shouldn't be employed in 'some' jobs

On a web page solely devoted to stopping the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), the Family Research Council finally lists reasons why it feels that lgbts shouldn't receive employment protection.

These reasons are more of the same nonsense regarding how a "Christian employer" should have the right to discriminate even if said discrimination is taking place in a secular business and how Christians on the whole will be "forced to accept homosexuality."

I was almost disappointed because I had anticipated the usual  "drag queens teaching school children" talking point which I have come to expect from religious right groups. But then I read the following:

* ENDA would mandate the employment of homosexuals in inappropriate occupations.

So according to FRC, lgbts should be barred from some occupations. The organization doesn't go into detail but based upon its past linkings of homosexuality and pedophilia, I don't think it's farfetched that FRC is saying that gays shouldn't be employed in occupations involving children.

Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, but knowing groups like FRC, maybe the jump isn't completely inaccurate.

Related posts:

Congressman: if gays were more 'quiet,' they wouldn't have to worry about getting fired

Family Research Council deliberately misinterpret words of Obama official to discredit ENDA

Lgbt employment protection? Absolutely not. Ugly anti-gay comments at work? Sure.

Family Research Council getting extremely 'scary' about ENDA

Religious  right groups can't make up their minds when lying about ENDA

Family  Research Council exploiting Amanda Simpson's appointment to stop ENDA
Family  Research Council head misrepresents credible information to hurt ENDA

Bathrooms,  Church Exemptions, and Lies: Five ways the religious right  misrepresents ENDA 

'Men hand-in-hand skipping down to adoption centers to 'pick out' a little boy for themselves'

Andrea Lafferty - I'm proud to be a member of a hate group

Andrea Lafferty - 'Won't someone PLEASE think of the children.'

Andrea  Lafferty: ENDA will lead to the molestation of disabled veterans
Traditional  Values Coalition stoops to lowest level of fraud in new attack on ENDA

Religious  business owners should not have the 'special right' to discriminate

Andrea  Lafferty spins lies against transgender teachers to hurt ENDA

The  30 Dirty? Why can't the religious right stop lying about ENDA?


Bookmark and Share