Pam Spaulding's Blog, page 62

The National Organization for Marriage owes me an apology for lying about Marinelli

crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters

By now, we have all heard the uplifting story of Louis J. Marinelli, the former National Organization for Marriage strategist who defected from the group and now supports marriage equality.

It's a story which demonstrates that actually getting to know lgbts can change one's mind about who we are as a people.

There is also another story involved which demonstrates the duplicity of the NOM, the organization which Marinelli was once affiliated with.

Jeremy Hooper from Goodasyou covered this story but since I am principally involved, I feel the need to comment on it.

When the story of Marinelli's defection broke, Brian Brown, president of NOM, issued this statement:

"Louis worked in a volunteer capacity as a bus driver during our summer marriage tour. Around this time, he started pushing Facebook supporters towards NOM and we paid him as a part-time consultant for helping us expand our internet reach.”

Now during that abysmal Summer Marriage Tour, I wrote a piece in the Huffington Post commenting on an unbelievable comment on NOM's Facebook page (which was run by Marinelli) - National Organization for Marriage: Gays Were Never Hunted Down and Murdered Like 'Jews, Christians, and Blacks'

NOM got furious at my article and sent the following missive (I highlighted the crucial parts):

"The Huffington Post on Wednesday falsely attributed statements to the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) about discrimination faced by gays and lesbians. The statements were apparently posted by an unnamed "administrator" of the "Protect Marriage: 1 Man 1 Woman" Facebook account. Huffington Post falsely claims that this is NOM's Facebook page. The Facebook account on which these statements were reportedly made is not NOM's Facebook page and neither NOM nor anyone representing NOM made these statements. The Facebook account in question is operated by a private party and NOM does not control what is allowed to be posted on the account, a fact that could have been easily known to Huffington Post had they reached out to NOM to verify the report

Now at the time, which the help of the webpages Goodasyou and Box Turtle Bulletin, I was able to point out the duplicity of  NOM's  statement:

As this link courtesy of Box Turtle Bulletin and Goodasyou proves, the page "Protect Marriage: 1 Man 1 Woman" is associated with NOM. From its Twitter page, NOM is pushing the page as its own. Furthermore,  Louis J. Marinelli - self identified "NOM strategist" is the general manager of the page.

 But now I guess my proof is unnecessary. That "unamed administrator" and "private party" was Marinelli, who the organization has just admitted to have paid as a "part-time consultant for helping them expand their internet reach."

NOM clearly owes me an apology for calling into question my journalistic integrity. The organization obviously wasn't telling the truth when it tried to disavow itself from Marinelli back then.

It's okay though. My guess is that right now, NOM is too busy eating and digesting all that crow to make a suitable apology to me.

Related post:

Of course NOM's misrepping Louis' role. It's the one constant of the Brown/Marinelli marriage - Jeremy Hooper goes into more detail regarding Marinelli's Facebook page and NOM.

 

Montana State Rep calls for gays that 'recruit' go to jail for 10 years

Has anyone felt a little "recruity" lately? According to Rep. Ken Peterson, (R-Billings), apparently Teh Homosexual Menace has been hard at work (but he doesn't have personal knowledge of this, ahem). (The Missoula Independent via Unicorn Booty):

According to Peterson, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, there are at least two prosecutable offenses-felonies punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $50,000 fine. One is the "recruitment" of non-gays. "Homosexuals can't go out into the heterosexual community and try to recruit people, or try to enlist them in homosexual acts," Peterson says. He provides an example: "'Here, young man, your hormones are raging. Let's go in this bedroom, and we'll engage in some homosexual acts. You'll find you like it.'" Peterson hasn't actually seen this happen, he says, because "I don't associate with that group of people at all... I've associated with mainstream people all my life."

The other offense, in Peterson's legal opinion, is the public display of homosexuality, since he believes the Supreme Court's decision only applies to private acts behind closed doors. Being gay in public, he says, is a wholly different matter:

"In my mind, if they were engaging in acts in public that could be construed as homosexual, it would violate that statute. It has to be more than affection. It has to be overt homosexual acts of some kind or another... If kissing goes to that extent, yes. If it's more than that, yes."

WTF? So will Peterson be the arbiter of what kind of same-sex kissing is a violation?  Unicorn Booty thought the same thing I did when I saw a photo of Peterson:

Is it just us, or are the only people who actually make asinine statements like this that suggest being gay is a daily choice actually closeted homosexuals? If I was a betting man, I would put twenty bucks down on Rep. Peterson getting caught up in a gay sex scandal before his time in office is up.

Brittany Novotny Elected President Of The Young Democrats Of Oklahoma

This is great news!

I received a note from Brittany Novotny late yesterday telling me she's been elected President of the Young Democrats Of Oklahoma. As of yesterday afternoon, she is the first trans person to be elected president of any state YD chapter.

You may remember Brittany Novotny from her challenging of Republican Sally Kerns in the Oklahoma District 84 Assembly race. At that time, Novotny didn't want her transgender identity be the focus of the election, but recognized that Kern's hate inspiring diatribes are a contributing factor in her decision to run. In a district that is heavily weighted for Republicans, Novotny pulled in roughly 35% of the district's votes.

Novotny is hard working. She received the many of votes she did in that election because her long hours walking the 84th District, asking voters for their votes. I'm sure she was elected president of the Young Democrats of Oklahoma in part because of her tireless work.

Brittany Novotny has my congratulations on her election as President. Frankly, I believe we'll be seeing much more from her in years to come -- and I for one would warmly welcome that.

A fascinating, technical analysis of The Donald's comb-over (and our general fear of baldness)

Bruce Handy at Vanity Fair has decided that Donald Trump's battle with baldness, the combover, needed a breakdown. It's hilarious, but also kind of sad, not that I feel sorry for the newfound birther and prospective 2012 GOP Clown Car occupant:

Thanks to the miracle of harsh lighting, the photo appears to reveal one of Trump's most tightly-held secrets. Look closely. See the cross-hatching in Trump's hair?

My baldly-stated thesis: this could be evidence of a rarely-sighted, possibly unprecedented "double comb-over." It looks as if a length of hair growing from the part on the left side of Trump's pate has been combed left-to-right over the crown of his head, while a second length of hair, growing from the back of his head, has been combed back-to-front over the first length of hair. Salon-strength hair products likely play a role in the final construction of this lattice-like structure-which could also explain the "ship's prow" look one sometimes sees in side views of Trump.

The effort required to manufacture this follicular construction is probably only achievable with the Donald's wealth, perhaps that's why he supports lower taxes on the rich...

Honestly, when you have national press doing an analysis of your combover, it's time to let it go. Eventually Giuliani gave in to the inevitable. Will Trump? I mean he could take a bit of time off and consult The Hair Club for men, or since he has the dough to throw around, get one of those expensive, natural-looking transplant if he's that afraid of everyone seeing his scalp.

***

Saying goodbye to your hair

Seriously, on the subject of baldness generally, I'm not quite certain why some men feel so insecure about this. My brother's hairline receded fast and furious in his 20s, so he just started shaving his head to avoid "the horseshoe." Besides with his very curly hair, that rendered a combover practically impossible. I suppose if you feel your head shape isn't conducive to the cue ball look, then you have to think of other options.

However - news flash - the comb-over is not the answer; it only draws attention to the fact that you can't let go of Mother Nature's plan for the top of your head.

For many women, baldness and thinning hair is fairly common over time. My hair was so thick as a child that it was hard to get any kind of comb through it. I was diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) in my teens, and at that point my hair started to thin a bit because of the hormones messing up the ovaries. My hair has also thinned quite a bit now; I wonder sometimes what it would look like if I shaved my locs off and started over with a short natural. I bet a lot more scalp would show.

Many women with PCOS start to have male pattern baldness after years with the syndrome. I ran a local support group for a year and heard many tales of insecurity, shame about hair loss affecting their confidence. I think that's why you're starting to see more visible marketing of products like Toppik and Joan Rivers Great Hair Day to women. I know women who swear by Toppik (JRGHD is a new product).

I don't see many women sporting a shaved head as a solution to hair loss, but I do see the equivalent in terms of failed attempts to fool people about the pliight. Sisters, if you don't have the dough for a good weave, give it up. I can spot a cheap nasty weave right away. If you've seen Chris Rock's documentary "Good Hair", you'll know what many black women will spend to 1) hide nappy hair, 2) instantly achieve long hair) and 3) make hair appear to be thicker. And it's not just black women either. Many celebs have been also sporting a weave for years not-so-under the radar - Lindsay Lohan, Jessica Simpson.

Perhaps the publicly unraveling of the fantasy came with the much-photographed Britney Spears during her meltdown period sporting horror weaves - unmaintained, trashy-looking dissheveled locs that clearly looked sewn/glued in.

Sigh. What we all do for vanity and the hairline. But the Donald, given his ego and wealth, clings to his solution with apparent nerves of steel.

New Jail Policy For Transgender Detainees In Cook County, Illinois Jails

Via NBC Chicago's Jail Has New Policy for Transgender Inmates; Gender-identification, rather than sex at birth, respected under new policy:

Transgender inmates at Cook County Jail can now be housed, dressed and searched according to the gender they identify with rather than their sex at birth under a new policy that advocates hope will keep some of the facility's most vulnerable detainees safe.

Since March 21, transgender inmates entering the jail have been screened by a Gender Identity Committee that decides where and how they should be housed. Previously, all inmates automatically were assigned to live among the gender they were born with, regardless of how they self-identified, a situation that attorneys said put them at high risk for physical and sexual abuse.

...Sheriff Tom Dart first revealed the new policy to the Windy City Times newspaper, saying it came about when he realized the jail didn't have a policy for housing transgender inmates.

...The new seven-page policy applies to housing, clothing, showering, grooming and searches, among other categories. The Gender Identity Committee has broad discretion over what clothes and toiletries inmates should have access to and what gender security officers can search them. The policy requires sensitivity training on gender identity disorder and the Gender Identity Committee for all officers and supervisory staff.

The Illinois Family Institute (IFI) isn't happy. From WorldNetDaily's Jail to house transgender men with women inmates; Critic wonders who's paying costs of special panel to evaluate needs:

In a move the Illinois Family Institute suggests is more worthy of a skit on the television show "Saturday Night Live," Cook County Jail in Chicago has instituted a new policy that assigns men and women to cells based on their perceived gender.

The concept that a man believes he is a woman or a woman believes she is a man was in the news just days ago when lawmakers in Maryland considered a bill that would ban statewide "discrimination" based on the gender people feel.

Responding to Cook County's new policy, the Illinois Family Institute said "sexual anarchists" are seeking "to manipulate language in an attempt to convince the public that cross-dressing and elective amputations of healthy body parts are not signs of disordered thinking."

"These rhetorical stratagems must be opposed at every turn, whether they occur in anti-discrimination and anti-bullying laws and policies, comprehensive sex ed, or fatuous, costly jail policies," IFI commented.

IFI asks the following in Laurie Higgins' piece Lola Comes to Cook County Jail:

So who, pray tell, is footing the bill for the "Gender Identity Panel" with whom the gender-confused detainees get to consult? And who is footing the bill for the mandatory sensitivity training administered to corrections staff, physicians, and therapists?

Here's another pragmatic thought: Does anyone actually believe that women who wish they were men will want to be detained in the men's facility at Cook County Jail? Doubtful. What we're really talking about then is housing men who wish they were women in the women's facility at Cook County Jail. Men who wear women's cosmetics and women's clothing are, in reality, men. Even men who take female hormones and have their penises amputated are, in reality, men. Why should female detainees have to room with seriously confused men?

Ah, the misogyny expressed by Laureie Higgins of the IFI.

Well, this news, despite what WorldNetDaily and the IFI believe, is definitely an improvement for trans people in Cook County, Illinois. It will no doubt help protect trans people from some forms of jailhouse abuse -- such as sexual assault due -- in Cook County jails.

What folk like IFI's Laurie Higgins forget is that this policy is designed with the safety of transgender detainees in mind. She would rather trans women be physically endangered because of what she believes regarding societal sex and gender norms -- belief that she expressed as crudely as she possibly could for her article.  

DADT Update: The Service Chiefs Report, The Republicans Fret

There's been a great deal of concern around here about the effort to prepare the US military for the full repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT), and I've had a few words of my own regarding how long the process might take.

There was a hearing before the House Armed Services Committee Thursday that had all four Services represented; with one exception these were the same Service Chiefs that were testifying last December when the bill to set the repeal process in motion was still a piece of prospective legislation.

At that time there was concern that the "combat arms" of the Marines and the Army were going to be impacted in a negative way by the transition to "open service"; the Commandant of the Marine Corps and the Army's Chief of Staff were the most outspoken in confirming that such concerns exist within the Pentagon as well.

We now have more information to report-including the increasing desperation of some of our Republican friends-and if you ask me, I think things might be better than we thought.

The Governments of the States Parties to this Constitution on behalf of their peoples declare:

That since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed;

That ignorance of each other's ways and lives has been a common cause, throughout the history of mankind, of that suspicion and mistrust between the peoples of the world through which their differences have all too often broken into war...

--From the Constitution of the United Nations Educational,

Scientific, And Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

So let me start with the good news; I'll do that by telling you what I though would happen, compared to what the Service Chiefs are now saying is going to happen:

My guess was that, due to all the process involved, we could be looking at a full year for implementation, and if the Services felt that they had to rotate all the overseas deployed forces back to the USA before they could complete training, you could easily be looking at 18 months.

That, as it turns out, was wildly inaccurate.

The Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, Peter W. Chiarelli, reported Thursday that his Service might be able to report they're ready to certify by May 15th of this year; to make that happen they are going to train the troops overseas and at home, both at the same time, and they wanted us to know that they've already completed much of the "train the trainer" work already. They also expect to certify after about 50% of the training is complete instead of waiting for 100%, and that's because the leadership believes they'll know of any implementation problems that are likely to crop up by then.

The most outspoken opponent of the change in December, Marine Commandant General James Amos, says that he's seeing far fewer problems than he expected, and he believes the move to open service won't have any serious impact on his force.

Here's how the Defense Department reported Amos' testimony:

A department [of Defense] survey last year showed that about 60 percent of Marines in combat units had concerns about the repeal, Amos noted, but those concerns seem to be waning. The general visited with Marines in Afghanistan over Christmas and spoke with their commander this morning on the issue, he said.

"I'm looking specifically for issues that might arise out of Tier 1 and Tier 2 and, frankly, we just haven't seen it," Amos said. "There hasn't been the recalcitrant push back, the anxiety about it" from forces in the field.

Amos said the Marines' commander told him, "'Quite honestly, they're focused on the enemy.'"

The Navy says they expect to complete their Tier 3 training (the final phase of training) as soon as the end of June; Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Gary Roughead told the Committee that he foresees no problem achieving a successful transition to open service.

(A quick note to the reader: I have been known to write satirical stories with crazy made-up character names, but the actual name of the actual Admiral who is tasked with leading the Navy into the era of open service is actually...Roughead. Some may consider this to be evidence of Intelligent Design; I continue to disbelieve.)

Air Force Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz, who also seemed to suggest, back in December, that trouble might be waiting on the road ahead, seemed far more confident this week; it looks like the Air Force might have Tier 3 training wrapped up by the July 4th holiday.

The Service Chiefs also announced that those who have been discharged under DADT will be eligible to petition to return to the military.

There is today a mechanism in place within the Defense Department to consider the petitions of those who voluntarily leave the military and wish to reapply; that system looks at what jobs are available, and, if it meets the needs of the Services, a job offer is extended to the applicant. (The individual might not return at the same grade or rank they held when leaving, however, and that would also depend on the military's interpretation of what best fits military "force structure" requirements.)

At the hearing the Committee members were told that those who were discharged under DADT could reapply under the same rules that exist today for those who leave voluntarily; the same system that's in place today will "work" those applications.

There was some not unexpected bad news: Republican Members of the House are just so over the top on objecting to this one that it's ridiculous and funny and maddening and just awful, all at once.

There was begging ("if there was just some way the Service Chiefs could convince the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs not to certify, then we could all be saved" was the gist of that one), and fake expertise ("when I served we were all afraid of 'em, and I can't believe today's troops still aren't" is the rough outline of how that argument went and California's Duncan Hunter was an example of one Congressman who fit into that "genre"); there was even an offer to do another survey so we can "do what the troops really want" (I can save y'all the time and trouble: what they really want...is to get the hell out of Afghanistan).

If the Grim Weeper had been in the room, I'm sure he would have had a big ol' blubbery cry over the tragedy that's befallen the Nation on this somber occasion-and it's a good thing he wasn't, because I have no doubt such a display would have once again caused Tonstant Weader to fwow up, just like that time back at Pooh Corner.

Among the Republicans there was a lot of preoccupation with the potential for men, in combat, in those close, confined, spaces...men who are depending on each other, night and day...to be subject to the advances of other strong, powerful, muscular, men in a variety of manly uniforms-I mean, as far as I can tell, there are Republicans who see this as some kind of eventual "Livin' La Vida Loca" kind of situation, only, you know, a bit more butch, and I would love to know what in the world they think life aboard a Ballistic Missile Submarine or on a Forward Operating Base in Southeastern Afghanistan is really like?

Oddly enough, the predominantly male Committee didn't seem as concerned about the possibility of female same-sex relationships impacting military readiness and unit cohesion in a negative way; if anyone has a guess as to why that might be the case I'm sure I'd love to hear it.

The military, to their credit, did a lot of pushing back against the Republicans. For example, at one point there were questions as to whether this would cause an unacceptable number of troops to leave the all-volunteer military. The response: right now the real problem is that as we withdraw from Iraq and troopers come home to a bad economy, too few want to leave.

They also spent a lot of time pointing out that "standards of conduct" already exist to manage sexual contacts and harassing behaviors between opposite-gendered persons, and that those very same rules will be used to manage issues of conduct in a same-sex context.

Risk mitigation is suddenly very important for some Republicans, and they do not want to repeal if there is any risk at all that the move could impact combat readiness or pose a hazard to the force.  

That line of logic led to one of the most stupid questions I have ever heard asked in a hearing, ever, in decades of actually paying attention, and it came from Republican Vicky Hartzler (MO-04).

What she was trying to do was to show that the Generals would not want to recommend policies that add to the risk facing the troops. What she had been told was that the future risks of open service were as yet unknown (hard to know today with 100% certainty what the future holds), but that, based on progress made so far, the risks seemed to be low and that mitigations seemed to be in place for currently identified potential problems.

But what she asked the commanding officers of four military services was...wait for it...whether they had ever recommended sending their troops into heightened risk environments?

They actually all kind of seemed a bit stunned by the question-but they kept their poker faces-and then they reminded her that sending troops into combat is actually a bit of a high-risk activity.

The deer then jumped out of the way of the headlights, and the hearing resumed.

Look, folks, I am not passing along any news when I tell you that DADT still scares the loose buttons off a bunch of suits in Washington and that they still want to have this out anyplace they can-but it is news to find out that they are ahead of where they could have been over at the Pentagon, and that all the Service Chiefs do really seem to be on board, at least publicly, and that they are all reporting fewer problems than they expected as this process moves forward.

In a tough week it's nice to report good news, and I think this qualifies-and if things continue at this pace, we could see certification and full open service before Labor Day.

Now I know we don't usually give Labor Day presents, and to make it worse, we're hard to shop for...but if there's one thing everyone loves to get, it's a More Perfect Union-and I bet once we try it on, there's no way it's going back.

Pop Quiz! Evolution!

Evolution is generally believed to be a very slow process. But some biologists have theorized it can also arrive in sudden, unexpected, accelerated leaps.

One of these two speakers below recently generated some fanfare when he announced he was "evolving" on the issue of marriage equality for LGBT Americans. See if you can match the speaker to the latest quote!

SPEAKER A Was a Constitutional law professor and was described in 2007 by the National Journal as the most liberal member of the US Senate. Seeking higher office he promised to "use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws."

SPEAKER B Founded “Protect Marriage: One Man, One Woman” the largest cause for traditional marriage on Facebook. Organized the 2010 Summer for Marriage bus tour with the National Organization for Marriage, Concerned Women for America and a variety of other pro-family political organizations.

QUOTE 1 "Once you understand the great difference between civil marriage and holy marriage, there is not one valid reason to forbid the former from same-sex couples, and all that is left to protect is the latter."

QUOTE 2 "I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix."

No clicking the links. That's cheating. 

Political odds and ends...and the usual fundnuts

So I guess we'll know soon enough if there's a government shut down/end to the political game of chicken. [UPDATE: Ah, it appears, as of 11PM ET that a deal has been made, according to CNN.] Other than that looming story, here are things that circulated in my Twitter and Facebook universe today.

* What was that about job creation? House GOP to hold hearing on 'defending marriage' on April 15.

* GOP To Use Bush-Rove Anti-Gay Hate Playbook To Battle Obama Re-Election. Of course they will. These are the favorite tools in the GOP toolkit, though race-baiting is probably a close second. The question is whether America will fall for the dog-eared, tattered playbook again.

* The Terrible Twos: The Tea Party Throws a Tantrum. Great essay at Huff Po by People for the American Way's Michael B. Keegan.

* This is f'ing out of control - Rush On Woman Concerned About Access To Birth Control: "We Are Supposed To Pay" If She "Did Not Close Her Legs". As Eva Kraus noted on FB, "We've been paying ever since Limbaugh's mother didn't close HER legs."

* Idaho Rejects Rape Exception In Abortion Bill Because 'The Hand Of The Almighty' Was At Work. Idaho's bill doesn't include exceptions for rape, incest, severe fetal abnormality or the mental or psychological health of the mother. As Think Progress reported, State Rep. Shannon McMillan (R) argued that women who were impregnated under "violent circumstances" should have no choice because it's not the fetus's fault.

* Tennessee Moves Against Nashville's Gay Protections Law. Ah yes, the clock is rolling back all over as the Rethugs dehumanize LGBTs at every turn.

* Homosexual influence = 'tyranny of the minority'. A ridiculous article up at OneNewsNow featuring this preposterous quote from Matt Bam Bam Barber: "So we have a situation here where we really do see a tyranny of the minority. The vast majority of people recognize that homosexual conduct is aberrant and that it's ridiculous for people to define themselves based upon these aberrant behaviors, yet this lobby has become so powerful and gained so much political power and cultural power in our larger culture."

* But does he top this asshat? Fischer: All Immigrants Must "Convert To Christianity". "Immigration is a privilege, not a right, and our policy should be to admit to our shores only those with a commitment to a full assimilation to American culture, adopting our faith, our heroes, and our history. Someone with a Muslim background who wants to become an American had best be prepared to drop his Islam and his Qur'an at Ellis Island."  

EqMD's HB 235 Senate Whip Count - The Votes Are There

I received a copy in my email today of the Equality Maryland (EqMD) whip count for HB 235 (the gender identity bill for employment and housing antidiscrimination protections), and a thumbnail link to the whip count is above. According to Dana Beyer, as reported in Maryland Senate Prez Tells Advocates He Will Expedite Gender Identity Bill If It Passes Committee:

"Senator Thomas Miller (D-Calvert and Prince George's Counties) told us that if Equality Maryland could show him the votes on the Senate floor, if we get out of this committee, he will expedite our Senate vote," Beyer said.

The whip count EqMD had stated the bill has twenty-seven votes. And, that whip count came with a note that said this would have been for a bill that included public accommodation. Without a public accommodation in the bill, the number is probably higher.

Twenty-four votes are needed for passage, and twenty-nine votes for cloture -- although Sen. Miller can apparently wrangle a cloture whenever he decides, such as how he did for the marriage equality bill which had fewer than twenty-nine votes for cloture.

In other words, the EqMD whip count indicates the votes are there to pass the HB 235. If he does what he says he would, the bill should be coming up for a vote on the Senate floor.

Now it's apparently completely up to Sen. Miller whether this that happens.  

Bob Vander Plaats to ThinkProgress - Homosexuality Is A 'Public Health Risk' Like Smoking

What a f'ing ignorant tool. Failed Iowa gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats is really working the issues important to Iowans - like trying to roll back marriage equality. I have to believe that when he belches out statements like this, that fair-minded people can see through the fundie bullsh*te. (Think Progress):

Vander Plaats and the Iowa Family Leader are at the forefront of a misinformation campaign to support the anti-equality effort. Vander Plaats, currently on a 99-county tour intended to solicit support for the Family Leader and rally social conservatives, regularly compares gay marriage to polygamy and incest, telling audiences, "Why not open it up! Bisexual, polygamy, multiple women? Why not?" Earlier this year, Vander Plaats was caught on video railing against "absolute tolerance" during a campaign stop.

Most outlandish, however, was the Family Leader's comparison on its website of homosexuality to secondhand cigarette smoke. (The Family Leader later removed the link to www.SecondHandEffects.com, a website which asserts that homosexuality reduces life expectancy by up to 35 years and promotes the idea that homosexuality is a curable disease.)

You have to see this nonsense to believe it. Vander Plaats on "the homosexual lifestyle":

VANDER PLAATS: When you take a look at it, this isn't the Family Leader, but say the New York Health Department. They've put out an ad basically highlighting all the dangers of the homosexual lifestyle, that you're this many times more to get this particular disease or this many times more to get this other type of disease. Now, they conclude with "practice safe sex." But they're almost taking our talking points. Because anybody, the Journal of Medicine will back us up on this, that this is a risky lifestyle, health risk lifestyle. If we're teaching the kids, "don't smoke, because that's a risky health style," the same can be true of the homosexual lifestyle. That's why I think we need to speak the truth once in a while.