David Badash

It was December 9, 2010. Joe Manchin, the former Democratic Governor of West Virginia, cast his first vote as a newly-sworn-in U.S. Senator. He voted against repealing the discriminatory, anti-LGBTQ “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

He was the only Democrat to do so.

His reason?

“As a Senator of just three weeks, I have not had the opportunity to visit and hear the full range of viewpoints from the citizens of West Virginia.”

That’s the same Joe Manchin who in 1982 had begun his political career as a member of the West Virginia House of Delegates.

After nearly three decades of serving as a lawmaker, Secretary of State, and a governor, Senator Manchin felt he wasn’t sufficiently well-enough informed to do the right thing and vote to protect America’s LGBTQ service men and women.

Fast forward to today, when Joe Manchin has now been in public service for almost 40 years.

On the campaign trail Joe Biden indicated his top priority was passing the LGBTQ Equality Act, legislation that has been introduced into Congress in various forms since the 1970’s, even longer than the 73-year old Senator from West Virginia has been in politics. Biden said he wanted to sign the Equality Act into law in his first 100 days.

There are three things getting in the way of legislation that seven out of 10 Americans not only support, but think is already federal law: the filibuster, Republicans, and Joe Manchin. Ironically, Manchin, like Republicans, opposes killing the filibuster and opposes passing the Equality Act.

“A little more than two months into Biden’s term,” The Daily Beast reports, “Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) has taken on the role of perpetual fly in the ointment of progressive legislation. The Equality Act is no exception.”

Make no mistake, Manchin is anti-LGBTQ. He opposes same-sex marriage (although agrees it is settled law) and echoing the massive conservative campaign against transgender people, opposes the Equality Act (in part) because, he claims, it does not provide “sufficient guidance to the local officials who will be responsible for implementing it, particularly with respect to students transitioning between genders in public schools.”

That is not the function of legislation, that is the function of the Dept. of Education, something Manchin certainly must know.

“In private, according to those familiar, Manchin has been equally skeptical this time around, citing a massive call-in campaign organized by conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation intended to sink the bill. Manchin told one co-sponsor of the Equality Act that the calls to his office were opposed to the legislation ‘a thousand to one.'”

The Beast calls getting 60 votes to pass the Equality Act without one of them being Manchin’s “functionally impossible, given the Senate’s current makeup.”

Just one day after 2020’s historic Election Day, the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear a landmark case seeking to revoke non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people, along with minority religious groups like Jews and Muslims. The case could hand Christians special rights to discriminate. It relies on overturning a 30-year precedent, something Justice Amy Coney Barrett has said she is not opposed to doing.

The case, Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, involves Catholic Social Services (CSS) of Philadelphia, which lost in a unanimous Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, but appealed to the Supreme Court.LISTEN: Mark Cuban Joins The New Raw Story Podcast!

The City of Philadelphia notified Catholic Social Services in 2018 that it would no longer send children to them to be fostered or adopted because of the religious group’s refusal to place children in homes headed by same-sex couples or LGBTQ people.

With the loss of placements comes a loss of taxpayer funds. CSS isn’t banned from continuing to adhere to its policies or religious beliefs, it just won’t be able to use children the City of Philadelphia was sending them as tools to continue its discriminatory practices.

“In court papers, the group has argued that Philadelphia’s moves unlawfully targeted its right to exercise its religion, which is protected under the First Amendment,” CNBC reports. “Philadelphia, on the other hand, has said it is entitled to enforce anti-discrimination policies in order to protect LGBT residents. The city says it is not hostile to religion, noting that its policies apply evenly to religious and secular government contractors.”

Brief falsely suggests LGBTQ people do not exist, but rather are choosing “actions, behaviors, or inclinations.”

53 members of the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives are urging the nation’s highest court to rule against LGBTQ people when it hears three landmark cases October 8. The lawmakers, all Republicans (list below), say the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not – and should not be interpreted to – protect gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people, including their own constituents.

In a grotesque and ignorant reading of a key portion of the 55-year old legislation the Republican lawmakers suggest LGBTQ people do not exist, but rather are choosing “actions, behaviors, or inclinations,” which is false.

“Title VII’s sex discrimination provision prohibits discrimination because of an individual’s sex; it does not prohibit discrimination because of an individual’s actions, behaviors, or inclinations,” the lawmakers say in the amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court.

“What the statute actually prohibits is discrimination ‘because of [an] individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin,’” the Republicans insist.

The Advocate notes the brief “demeans the plaintiffs bringing actions forward to the court,” including claiming one of the plaintiffs only claimed he was gay so he could sue for wrongful termination. It also repeatedly misgenders a funeral director who is a woman and transgender, referring to her as “he.”00:0000:44

The brief also wrongly claims a correct interpretation of the Civil Rights Act to include LGBTQ people would “adversely” affect “the protection of women’s rights.”

And in a nod to the Hobby Lobby case, the brief proclaims that the “funeral home is a closely held corporation whose principal is a Christian,” strongly suggesting it is his First Amendment right to fire someone because they are LGBT.

The friend of the court brief was co-authored by Ken Starr, the former head of Baylor University who resigned in disgrace. Starr is also known for having defended Jeffrey Epstein, for being an attorney representing supporters of California’s anti-gay Prop 8, and the infamous special prosecutor whose work led to President Bill Clinton’s impeachment.

It is unknown if taxpayer funds were used to pay for the brief.

Republican Senators who have signed the amicus brief include Marsha Blackburn, Roy Blunt, Mike Braun, John Cornyn, Kevin Cramer, James Inhofe, James Lankford, and Mike Lee.

Republican Representatives include:
Robert B. Aderholt (AL-04), Rick W. Allen (GA-12), Brian Babin (TX-36), Jim Banks (IN-03), Andy Biggs (AZ-05), Ted Budd (NC-13), Michael C. Burgess (TX-26), Doug Collins (GA-09), Warren Davidson (OH-08), Jeff Duncan (SC-03), Bill Flores (TX-17), Russ Fulcher (ID-01), Louie Gohmert (TX-01), Paul A. Gosar, (AZ-04), Glenn Grothman (WI-06), Michael Guest (MS-03), Andy Harris (MD-01), Vicky Hartzler (MO-04), Jody Hice (GA-10), George Holding (NC-02), Richard Hudson (NC-08), Jim Jordan (OH-04), Steve King (IA-04), Doug LaMalfa (CA-01), Doug Lamborn (CO-05), Debbie Lesko (AZ-08), Thomas Massie (KY-04), Mark Meadows (NC-11), Alex X. Mooney (WV-02), Ralph Norman (SC-05), Pete Olson (TX-22), Gary Palmer (AL-06), John Ratcliffe (TX-04), David Rouzer (NC-07), Van Taylor (TX-03), Tim Walberg (MI-07), Mark Walker (NC-06), Randy K. Weber (TX-14), Ron Wright (TX-06), and Ted S. Yoho (FL-03).

In the years before the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the same rights and responsibilities to marriage that different-sex couples do, the National Organization For Marriage, known to many simply as “NOM,” was a recognized leader in the fight against equality.

The religious right poured millions of dollars into the tiny organization, despite its ludicrous efforts to battle equality. Some said it was the Catholic Church. Others said it was the Mormon Church. At one point, investigations into NOM’s taxes revealed the vast majority of its funding came from a tiny handful of anonymous donors sinking a few million into the group’s coffers.

Though never officially declared an anti-gay hate group NOM crossed the line into wild, baseless fear-mongering, supporting those who spread falsehoods against marriage equality, same-sex couples and LGBTQ people, and the impact marriage would have on society.

Despite ever-increasing and ever-desperate fundraising emails, their funding was drying up even before the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision. Their leaders found jobs elsewhere, and today it’s unclear if NOM really even exists anymore – and if so, to what degree.

And now, Joe Jervis of Joe.My.God. has just reported that NOM’s website has expired.

Visitors to the once-infamous NOMblog.com are now greeted with a GoDaddy screen declaring: “NOTICE: This domain name expired on 7/25/2019 and is pending renewal or deletion.”

Domain owners are sometimes given a few weeks to renew in case of an accidental lapse, but at some point the owners lose any rights to the domain and someone else can snatch it up, via auction or just trying to register it once it goes dead.

And someone has.

“I’ve put in the required whopping $12 bid to snap up the domain,” Jervis announces, noting he’ll forward any traffic from visitors to NOMblog to his own site.

U.S. Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO) has no problem pretending to be pro-LGBT when he’s at a fundraiser hosted by a conservative LGBT organization, but he can’t hide his record from voters or from his challenger, a gay Democrat.

Dan Baer, a former U.S. Ambassador under President Barack Obama, announced in April he is running for the U.S. Senate, hoping to win the Democratic nomination and the Senate seat currently held by Gardner. As The Advocate reports, Baer “just received the endorsement of the LGBTQ Victory Fund,” which works to help elect out LGBTQ candidates.

Report Advertisement

Baer, if elected, would be the first openly gay man to serve in the U.S. Senate. Senator Tammy Baldwin, who is a lesbian, was the first out LGBT person elected to serve in the Senate.

As the Colorado Times Recorder reported in May, Sen. Gardner “was one of three swing-state Republican senators to receive money from a fundraiser hosted by American Unity Fund (AUF), a conservative LGBT rights group.”

Here he is posing with “AUF supporter Jay Timmons, president of the National Association of Manufacturers,” who “posted a picture of Gardner and U.S. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) posing with Timmons and his husband at the event.”00:0100:45

Senator Gardner’s anti-LGBT history is well-known. He has been rated extremely low (12% and 16%) by HRC.

Gardner has a troubling relationship with marriage equality. He has stated very publicly his opposition, but in his tough race against Democrat Tom Udall, the incumbent, Gardner massaged his position, saying it was a matter for the courts.

Report Advertisement

In June of 2014 HRC called Gardner’s views on equality “incredibly antiquated,” noting he “voted against allowing unmarried same-sex partners to adopt children and to prohibit sexual orientation discrimination.” Gardner, HRC said, “is determined to discriminate against and exclude LGBT people.”

Later that year, less than one month before he would be elected to the U.S. Senate, Gardner “issued a statement … that he isn’t budging from his position that marriage should only be between a man and a woman but also emphasizing his respect for the law and for all couples,” Colorado’s Fox 31 reported.

“My views on marriage have long been clear,” Gardner told the Denver-based station. “I believe we must treat each other with dignity and respect. This issue is in the hands of the courts and we must honor their legal decisions.”

His press secretary in that same article is quoted saying Gardener is “a strong supporter of marriage equality.”

Marriage equality seems to be a marriage of convenience for Sen. Gardner.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Monday announced the formation of a new commission that will take a “fresh look” at human rights through the lens of “natural law,” and civil and human rights advocates are outraged. In preliminary filings the State Dept. noted the Commission will explore “our nation’s founding principles of natural law and natural rights.”

“Natural law,” is religious right wing extremist code for anti-abortion and anti-LGBTQ rights, especially marriage for same-sex couples.

Make no mistake, Trump’s “Commission on Unalienable Rights” is an affront to universal human rights. It will no doubt be welcomed by social conservatives who for decades fought against LGBTQ rights, women’s rights, affirmative action and economic justice. https://politi.co/2NxtEPj 1667:26 PM – Jul 5, 2019Twitter Ads info and privacyTrump’s ‘natural law’ human rights panel readies for launchThe State Department initiative is seen as a potential counterweight to an expansive liberal view of human rights.politico.com119 people are talking about this

Secretary Pompeo, a known right wing Christian extremist in his own right, has named Mary Ann Glendon, a professor who is also his former mentor, to lead the “Commission on Unalienable Rights.”

Glendon is an anti-abortion, anti-gay Catholic activist who served as U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See (the Vatican) under President George W. Bush. She is also known for her opposition to the use of condoms to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS.

“I hope that the commission will revisit the most basic of questions: What does it mean to claim something is, in fact, a human right?” Pompeo told reporters Monday, adding, as Yahoo News notes, that “words like rights can be used for good or evil.”

Glendon should understand Pompeo’s remarks. She penned a 2004 op-ed supporting a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. In a unique twist of language she claimed the amendment “should be welcomed by all Americans who are concerned about equality and preserving democratic decision-making.”

And in a shocking move Glendon chastised the awarding of a Pulitzer Prize to the Boston Globe for its work exposing pedophile priests. She reportedly said; “If fairness & accuracy have anything to do with it, awarding the Pulitzer to the Boston Globe would be like giving the Nobel Peace Prize to Osama bin Laden.”

Anti-gay hate group leader Tony Perkins was briefed on the Commission before it was officially announced, CBS News reports.

A State Dept. official says the Commission is a “personal project” of Secretary Pompeo’s, and Politico reports the Commission “was conceived with almost no input from the State Department’s human rights bureau, people familiar with the matter say, effectively sidelining career government experts who have focused on human rights policy and history across numerous administrations.”

As extreme as Glendon is, the preliminary proposed Chair was Robert P. George, a Princeton professor who co-founded NOM, the extremely anti-gay National Organization For Marriage.

Meanwhile, Amnesty International issued a scathing rebuke t Pompeo and his new Commission. In “Trump Administration Commission on Unalienable Rights Politicizes Human Rights for Hate,” the human rights organization’s national director of advocacy and government affairs, Joanne Lin, said:

“This administration has actively worked to deny and take away long-standing human rights protections since Trump’s inauguration. If this administration truly wanted to support people’s rights, it would use the global framework that’s already in place. Instead, it wants to undermine rights for individuals, as well as the responsibilities of governments.”

“This approach only encourages other countries to adopt a disregard for basic human rights standards and risks weakening international, as well as regional frameworks, placing the rights of millions of people around the world in jeopardy.”

“International agreements, like the Universal Declaration for Human Rights, have been upheld by prior administrations over the last 71 years, regardless of their party. This politicization of human rights in order to, what appears to be an attempt to further hateful policies aimed at women and LGBTQ people, is shameful.”

longtime Tea Party Republican politician now running in a special election for the open U.S. House seat for North Carolina has a long history of anti-LGBT animus and spreading lies about gay people.

Fern Shubert during her failed campaign to become governor of North Carolina in 2004 claimed that gay people lead a destructive lifestyle. ThinkProgress’ Josh Israel unearthed an archived copy of Shubert’s old campaign website and investigated her long history of extremist attacks against LGBT people, same-sex marriage, women’s choice, gun control, and the Democratic party.

“Love the sinner but hate the sin seems appropriate,” Shubert’s 2004 campaign website stated. “Unfortunately, some believe sin is old fashioned and want everyone to condone a lifestyle that history shows is destructive.”

Shubert, who has served in both chambers of the North Carolina state legislature, also likened gay people to pedophiles.

“After what happened in the Catholic Church, it amazes me that anyone can keep a straight face when suggesting that the Boy Scouts should accept homosexual scoutmasters and parents should ignore homosexual recruitment,” she says in that campaign website. “NAMBLA has made their interest in child abuse quite evident. If the press were not so supportive of ‘gay rights,’ more people would recognize the hidden agenda.”

Gay people have no “hidden agenda” and are not more likely to be pedophiles than straight people.

“The government’s attack on traditional families is already reflected in rising crime rates,” she wrote in a section titled “Same-Sex Marriage.”

“Anyone who cares about the future should seek to structure a society that provides the best environment for raising children, and that is the traditional two parent family.”

Studies prove children raised in same-sex parent headed households are no different than children raised in different-sex headed households.

Shubert also likened the “Democrat” party to the Taliban, which is false on its face.