crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters
PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays), that bastion of ex-gay phoniness has just nominated Family Research Council's Peter Sprigg for an award for "distinguished service in public education."
PFOX head Regina Griggs said the following:
For the past four years, Mr. Sprigg has served on the school board's Citizens Advisory Committee on Family Life and Human Development. The 15-member Committee consults with professional educators within the public school system in developing and evaluating the student sex education curriculum.
Mr. Sprigg has spoken out in favor of including former homosexuals in the county's "Respect for Differences in Human Sexuality" school lessons. These lessons promote tolerance of homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals, transgenders, cross-dressers, and the intersexed, yet failed to include ex-gays, which is the only disfavored group within the public school system. Without Sprigg, the ex-gay community and parents would not have a voice in the public schools.
Mr. Sprigg also enabled public school staff to promote a positive learning environment that holds mutual respect for others by participating in PFOX's flyer distribution program. PFOX distributed flyers to every high school student in the Montgomery County public schools urging the elimination of bias and prejudice against former homosexuals and their supporters. Students also received factual information on sexual orientation and resources on alternatives to homosexuality.
How sweet.
Griggs doesn't give the name of the award but based on his past history, nominating Sprigg for any award having to do with the tolerance and the advancement of education is like nominating one of those really bad American Idol rejects for a Grammy.
Isn't Peter Sprigg the SAME GUY who said the following:
" . . . I would much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than to import them into the United States because we believe that homosexuality is destructive to society."
And you don't have to take my word for it, isn't that right, Peter:
Also based on some of the papers he has written for the Family Research Council, Sprigg wouldn't know factual information if it came to life and kicked him in the keister.
He helped to write the paper Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples and the book Getting It Straight, both of which have a plethora of inaccurate information (including numerous studies taken out context) regarding the lgbt community.
I talk about both the paper and the book and their numerous errors here and here.
At the time in which I wrote the two posts, I inaccurately gave another employee of FRC, Timothy Dailey, sole credit for writing these pieces. As you can see here, Sprigg had a hand in writing these pieces.
The only reason why Sprigg exists on this committee is to undermine anything that would benefit lgbts in a positive manner. He doesn't speak for tolerance and understanding but lies and obstruction.
From what I understand, his appointment was the result of a long and drawn out lawsuit over the school board's sex education program.
Also, there are enough reasonable members of that committee to cancel out any madness he may bring up.
But isn't it alarming that this man who would like to export gays and lesbians from the United States, who has no problem with creating junk science on gays and lesbians is on a committee that is supposed to look after the well-being of children, including those who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender?
I don't know what award PFOX nominated Sprigg for but I've got one for him.
But to say what it's called would cause me to "lose my religion."
Peter Sprigg's "research:"
The Family Research Council continues to use 'outdated' work
Another flawed piece of work courtesy of the Family Research Council
The lies of PFOX:
UPDATE - PFOX answers my question. And someone is still distorting the issue <t;
Another update from yesterday's post: PFOX caught distorting study
On Huff Post, Thomas B. Edsall spends a good bit of time breaking down just how demographically stuck in the mud the Republican Party is. Having turned off Latinos its beyond-hostile stance on immigration, it has missed a growth opportunity because of its bigoted base of blue collar, religious conservative voters (primarily in the South), a demographic that is their only growth area. With Republican party leaders so constrained by ideological blinders that none of their positions is likely to produce gains among non-white minorities, especially Hispanics, the GOP is finding it has no real alternative but to revert to a "white voter" strategy.Polling data shows that members of this group who took a chance on Obama (most never really supporters of Barack Obama in the first place), are "coming home" to the party of last resort. The GOP and its unappointed leadership -- Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter -- don't believe in broadening the party, and the alienated sheeple have clung onto the race-baiting and sheer lunacy (the Birthers) that leaves the party looking even more extreme and desperate.To some extent, it's working. The party's opposition to President Obama's agenda -- particularly his cap-and-trade energy proposal and health care reform plan -- is resonating strongly with disaffected white Democratic voters. Republican grievances about Obama, combined with race-baiting commentary from the far-right ideologues who have become some of the most dominant voices of the modern GOP, have led to a precipitous drop in the president's approval ratings among whites.
Take a look at the photos in this post -- taken by BlueNC's Jerimee Richer last week of the teabagger crowd protesting the President's town hall on health care in Raleigh . This is the Base the GOP has to expand. The appeal of the anti-Obama agenda has proven to be particularly strong among whites of low and moderate incomes. The Pew Center, tracking evaluations of Obama's job performance, found in a July 30 report that there "has been essentially no shift in opinion among affluent whites [but] among whites with annual family incomes of less than $75,000, Obama's approval ratings have declined substantially (from 57% in June to 47% today). Assessments of Obama's performance remain high among African Americans (85%)."...Republican pollster Bill Mcll McInturff notes that his party must make substantial gains among Hispanic voters or be relegated to minority status. But that just isn't likely.
With a solid majority of Republican senators opposed to the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina nominee to the Supreme Court, and a solid phalanx of adamant Republican opposition to any immigration reform which provides a path to permanent residency of illegal immigrants, the GOP has no real chance of increasing its share of the Hispanic vote.
Let's hope they don't have to back up an EMS wagon at the church to load up the bridesmaids as they fall out fainting. In all seriousness, may the happy couple have a wonderful life together...
Anyway, the baristas will hold down the fort as we head down to swelter (and I thought the NC humidity was bad); I'll actually wear a dress and less-than-practical shoes for the third time this year. Yipes! Nothing like our simple wedding in Canada -- we did the bare foot thing for the occasion.
I wore all natural fibers, of course, given my aversion to man-made material after growing up in the 70s when my beloved mom (and the rest of America) was sold on the "miracle of polyester." Traumatized, I tell you! Actually, I will wear rayon from time to time, and occasionally something tactile-unfriendly, but the minute I get home that shite comes off and into the hamper.
Enough of my babbling; wish us luck as we fly on USAir going to Birmingham and Delta back to NC. Let's see what happens...
So here's the Q of the day: for those of you who have had the pleasure of being a bridesmaid, was the outfit's style/color suitable for any use after the event? (I'm assuming the guys out there haven't had to deal with a fashion disaster unless we wind the clock back to the 70s).
Kate has been in at least 3 weddings, one of which she said the dress had a big "*ss bow" on it. I don't know if she actually burned it or just said that she wanted to.
I've been lucky; I have only had to serve as the "best person" at my brother's shindig, and I just wore a nice suit dress that I could actually wear again.
When: August 22nd from 12 p.m.-7 p.m. Where: Cascades Gateway Park in Salem
BRO Staff in Attendence: Juan
www.GayTalkRadio.org
No comments:
Post a Comment