News Tidbits

Washington Post: Abortion foes debate best PR approach

Vancouver Sun: Pope tweets shout-out for DC anti-abortion rally, urges politicians to protect unborn

Stanford News: White Republicans and Southern evangelicals most likely to claim reverse discrimination, Stanford research finds

The Advocate: Gary Bauer Says Minorities Are Leaving His 'Coalition for Normal Marriage'

American Medical News: Legal showdown over gay conversion therapy waged in 2 states

Edge Boston: Pastor Won’t Testify in Same-Sex Custody Dispute

The Telegraph: UK: Catholic adoption agency faces punishment for gay discrimination

Washington Blade: Anti-gay groups file Prop 8, DOMA briefs

Log Cabin Democrat: Religious visitors barred from school lunch visits

Pennlive: East Shore church to pay $10,000 fine for fake terrorism raid

The Religious Right is STILL Blaming Newtown on Unrelated Things

As mentioned in prior posts, the Religious Right wasted no time in issuing insensitive responses to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. Voices from the far right continue to blame the tragedy on atheism, evolution, abortion, insufficient national piety, or Satan himself. Instead of taking part in our national soul-searching or contributing to the national conversation on guns, violence, and mental health services, the Religious Right clings to simple answers that promote its agenda.

First, in a December 17th statement at the American Values website, Gary Bauer used the tragedy as a cheap excuse to lash out at atheism, evolution, and national impiety. (Hat tip to Right Wing Watch. See www[dot]amvalues[dot]org/eod/?p=1641)

"What is happening in our society that spawns these young, twisted men who can kill the innocent so easily? First and foremost, as a nation, we are running from God ... Today’s children are taught by our culture that we are a cosmic accident. Something slithered out of the primal slime and over billions of years evolved into a human being. We are cousins, ten times removed, to the ape at the zoo eating his own excrement.

God is pushed out of every public place. The number of Americans professing they are atheists, agnostics or faithless grows yearly and is reported breathlessly by happy social scientists and reporters as evidence that we are putting away the old superstitions."

Next, on the December 17th edition of Generations Radio, host Kevin Swanson and David Buehner used the Newtown shooting as an opportunity to condemn abortion, birth control, and national impiety. Swanson predicted that the Newtown shooting would lead to an increase in homeschooling in Connecticut, and that President Obama would fail in his attempt to address mass violence because he allegedly neglected the church and the Holy Spirit. Hyperbolically, Buehner insisted that increasing "tyranny" would not halt anarchy, as the two forces feed off of each other.

Predictably, Swanson claimed that schools, abortion laws, the media, and the president encouraged "rebellion" against God, complaining that the fear of God (the source of all morality in his eyes) is not taught in schools. Swanson attributed America's high rates of violence to impiety as well as "environmental factors" such as abortion and contraception. At the 4:07 mark, he raged against abortion, dismayed that the media gives attention to the Newtown massacre but ignores abortion. (Hat tip to Right Wing Watch. See www[dot]oneplace[dot]com/ministries/generations-radio/player/the-connecticut-school-massacre-a-very-sick-nation-317156.html)

"I think part of that [violence] is due to the sort of environmental factors that feed into it. It's also due to the fact that we have a huge abortion holocaust that was inspired by Colorado in 1967, when we first legitimized abortion in the sate, and of course the 1973 Roe v. Wade also legitimized abortion. And America has been really, the leader. Think about the leaders in birth control. Think about the leaders in surgical abortions. Really, America has been at the forefront of leading abortion around the world, and Dave, this has not been mentioned. We've talked about the 20 children slaughtered in Newtown, Connecticut last week, but we hardly ever mention--I haven't heard on a single news story the other 5,000 killed yesterday, and it probably was more than 5,000 if you include the abortifacient birth control pill that is being used by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Christians around America, and that probably was not mentioned yesterday as people were lamenting the loss of the 20."

At the 5:13 mark of the program, Swanson and Buehner lambasted American society for its alleged defiance of God, speaking of the Newtoqn massacre in the same breath as abortion, same-sex marriage, and explicit rap music.

SWANSON:  America has been stunned by what happened. I think there is still somewhat of a conscience. There may not be a conscience about killing the unborn children, there may not be as much of a conscience of killing twenty-seven year olds, but apparently when these bodies of little six and seven year olds riddled by bullets are being examined by the experts, hundreds of thousands and millions of people in America are still somewhat stunned, apparently they have some level of moral outrage left for the slaughter of the innocents in Newtown, Connecticut.

BUEHNER: Kevin, I think you’re exactly right. The liberals are proposing that we as a nation follow a kinder, gentler flavor of rebellion against God. They’d like a rebellion that stops a little short of murdering kindergartners. They want the rebellion that involves gay marriage. They want the rebellion that embraces rape rap and abortion and a media that is in utter defiance against the law of God. That’s the kind of society they want. They want a society that’s in rebellion, but not that much rebellion.

Finally, Dan Delzell, pastor of Wellspring Lutheran Church in Papillion, Nebraska, penned a December 21st commentary on the shooting for the Christian Post. Delzell's well-meaning but misguided commentary lamented the loss of innocent life while attributing Adam Lanza's rampage to infernal influences. He wrote that "[w]hen Adam entered the school, it was like Satan himself was entering. The evil angel had a very willing vessel through whom to work." (Hat tip to Dispatches from the Culture Wars)

"We will never know what voices Adam Lanza heard in his head....or what they were telling him. But whatever was going on at the time, Adam made the decision....and acted on his wicked intentions....and decided to do it, do it, do it. That degree of cold-blooded viciousness must in some way be connected to the influence of Satan."

Delzell attempted to make sense of the carnage through theodicy, asking why an all-powerful God did not prevent the massacre. He concluded that God allowed this horror to happen so as to allow free will in the world, which would allow humans to love God more sincerely (!?).

"Could God have stopped the horror at Sandy Hook? Of course. Could God have stopped Osama bin Laden before 9/11? Of course. Could God have stopped Hitler before his crusade against the Jews? Of course. Could God have stopped Adam and Eve from sinning? Of course. God could have made robots instead of people....which would have left free will out of the equation....and no choice on any matter. But that is not what God did. He loved man and He wanted man to love Him back....and to do so from the heart."

While Delzell clearly meant well and took the loss of life at Newtown seriously, his simplistic explanation for the tragedy offered little insight. Instead of exploring the real-life roots of mass violence and the means by which we can prevent it, he blamed Satan.

These and other Religious Right reactions to Newtown disappoint me. At a time when our country needs insight from all quarters into mass violence, too many voices from the right can offer only judgment, superstition, and politically charged agendas. As tempting as it might be to accept neat, simple explanations for the Newtown tragedy, we must find mature answers to our questions.

News Tidbits

American Independent: National Organization for Marriage wants Starbucks to pay ‘price’ in Middle East

New York Times: In Virginia’s Hills, a Football Crusade

al-Arabiya News: Muslims should celebrate a traditional Christmas: UK minister

Chicago Tribune: Vatican vows to fight gay marriage after gains in U.S., Europe

The Advocate: Gary Bauer Insists GOP Can Win If More Antigay

News Tidbits

NPR: Publisher Pulls Controversial Thomas Jefferson Book, Citing Loss Of Confidence

NPR: The Most Influential Evangelist You've Never Heard Of

Politico: Romney held private Denver meeting with Dobson, Bauer

CNN: Romney ad hits Obama for 'war on religion'

MLive: Threats of rape at Gay Day protest bring call for Grand Rapids police protection

Pink News: Australian minister says Christians against marriage equality are not being discriminatory

Gaystar News: Christian gay 'cure' tour sparks calls for ban

The Right Wing Lashes Out at VAWA (UPDATED)

So far, the right-wing war on women has lashed out at abortion access and contraception coverage, much to the alarm of reproductive rights supporters. Now, the latest target is anti-violence legislation.

The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), first passed in 1994, has strengthen victim services and provided funding for investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women. VAWA provides grants for law enforcement, victim services, and violence prevention initiatives, among many other programs related to domestic violence and sexual assault.

VAWA is currently up for reauthorization. Ms. Magazine reports that when the Senate Judiciary Committee voted on the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2011 in February, all Democrats voted to move the bill onto the Senate floor for a vote, and all Republicans voted no. Norma Gattsek, Feminist Majority director of government relations, called the Republican opposition a sign that "the war on women has no boundaries."

According to the New York Times, a newer version of VAWA would expand efforts to rural communities and Native American tribes, increase free legal assistance to domestic abuse victims, and expand the definition of violence against women to include stalking. Also, it would include same-sex couples under domestic violence programs and would allow more abused undocumented immigrants to apply for temporary visas. These last two elements have upset some Republicans, including Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa). According to the Huffington Post, Grassley claimed that the provision creates too many new programs for underserved populations and would lessen focus on helping victims. He also condemned the provision as an "avenue to expand immigration law" and offer benefits to those in the U.S. illegally.

Similarly, in a March 19th column at Human Events, American Values president Gary Bauer called VAWA a "trap" because of its provisions for same-sex couples and undocumented immigrants. He also claimed that the right-wing war on women is "fictitious" and made jabs at Sandra Fluke.

I was shocked. Are victims of violence less deserving of protection because of their immigration status? Does helping LGBT or rural victims somehow detract from helping other victims? No! Domestic violence and sexual assault are abominable, no matter who the victim is. Victims deserve help, full stop.

Supporters of the legislation are rightfully outraged. The New York Times quotes Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) as saying she was "furious" at Republican opposition to VAWA. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) reportedly warned her Republican colleagues last Tuesday that the GOP risked being branded as anti-woman. Given the uproar over many Republican's stances on reproductive rights, I'd say this branding has already taken place.

However, right-wing hostility toward VAWA was smoldering long before this round of reauthorization. Members of the Religious Right such as antifeminist Phyllis Schlafly and the Eagle Forum have disparaged VAWA as "feminist pork," ignoring VAWA's positive impact on domestic violence and sexual assault services. That hostility is rearing its head once again.

First, in a March 19th press release, Stop Abusive and Violent Environments announced the release of its new report which alleges that VAWA has resulted in civil rights abuses. Also, in a March 5th commentary at the Concerned Women for America website, intern Wendy Chen called VAWA an "oft-misused bandage" against domestic violence. She complained about VAWA's price tag while complaining that it allegedly hadn't reduced violence against women.

In a March 5th column at American Thinker, Concerned Women for America senior fellow Janice Shaw Crouse wrote that VAWA was a "bad piece of legislation" that ran the risk of "poisoning relations between women and men." Crouse called VAWA a "thinly veiled means of promoting feminist ideology" and claimed that its supposedly "broad" definitions of violence have resulted in men being jailed on "flimsy" accusations. She accused VAWA of creating a "climate of suspicion of men" and fueling a system that aggravates the supposed breakdown of families. VAWA, she insisted, was all about "fostering false allegations," restraining orders, arrests, and "re-educating judges in feminist ideology and biases." Crouse venomously concluded that the legislation offered women a "powerful weapon" for getting out of marriages, getting revenge on men, or dealing with regrets the morning after.

According to a transcript of February 13th interview with The Diane Rehm Show, Crouse criticized VAWA for allegedly having "overly broad definitions" and creating "single-mom families and welfare-dependent families." Crouse told Rehm that she objected to cultural changes "where men are seen as suspect and where women's word is taken without any responsibility for backing it up with specific instances."

The February 2012 edition of the Eagle Forum newsletter bashed VAWA as well. The newsletter accused VAWA of doling out massive funds to "radical feminist organizations" and failing to help "real" victims of domestic violence. Furthermore, it claimed that VAWA is supposedly rooted in "feminist-created gender stereotypes" that men are "naturally" abusers and women are "naturally" victims. Like Crouse, the newsletter insisted that VAWA defines domestic violence as annoyance or unpleasant speech, and that it allegedly promotes divorce and hatred of men.

The contempt for women claiming abuse is palpable here. The constant refrain of "false allegations" and "real victims" smacks of reluctance to believe victims. The authors seem to have forgotten that domestic violence and sexual assault are serious problems, and that women are far more likely to be victims of domestic violence or sexual assault than men (see here, here, here, and here). Not surprisingly, these antifeminist attacks are reminiscent of the anti-VAWA rhetoric of so called "fathers rights" groups, as discussed in "Patriarchy Reasserted: Fathers' Rights and Anti-VAWA Activism."

I sincerely question how much research Eagle Forum and Crouse did on VAWA. First, VAWA does not frame all victims as female and all perpetrators as male. The legislation clearly states that male victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking can receive services and benefits under VAWA.

Second, despite claims from detractors that VAWA hasn't impacted violence rates, research suggests that VAWA grants have been associated with reductions in rape and assault. To boot, while they may bemoan the alleged costs of VAWA, research suggests that VAWA actually saves billions of dollars in net averted social costs (i.e., property losses, medical care, police response, lost productivity). As this VAWA evaluation explains, VAWA has has not only vastly expanded victim services, but honed the criminal justice system's response and fostered greater collaboration between stakeholders. Now, domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking are treated as community problems requiring coordinated responses.

More than ever, enlightened men and women need to pay attention to the political landscape. VAWA, a vitally important tool for addressing violence against women, is facing resistance from several GOP lawmakers and right-wing voices. If we take domestic violence and sexual assault seriously, we need to speak out for VAWA.


For additional commentary, visit the following links.

U.S. Department of Justice: Building on a Good Foundation: Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act

Human Rights Watch: US Senate: Renew the Violence Against Women Act

The Hill: Congress must reauthorize VAWA now

Gothamist: Republicans Cool With Violence Against Women, As Long As They're Gay Or Immigrants

Feministing: Women Dems push for Violence Against Women Act

Commentary: Wisconsin Protest Edition

For several days, thousands of demonstrators have protested at the Wisconsin state capitol building in Madison, WI. Demonstrators are protesting against Gov. Scott Walker's legislation to cut public employee benefits and reduce their collective bargaining power.

Several progressive voices have penned commentary on the relationship between the Religious Right and opposition to the Wisconsin protests. For your reading pleasure, here are a few commentaries from the past week.


Religion Dispatches: Is Wisconsin Union-Busting Religiously Sanctioned?

Right Wing Watch: Gary Bauer Outrages by Incivility of Wisconsin Protests

Talk to Action: Two Decades of Christian Nationalist Education Paved Way for Today's War on Labor

Talk to Action: The War on Unions, Regulatory System, and Social Safety Net - Examples from Fundamentalist Textbooks