Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Right-Wing Voices Sneer at Senate Committee Torture Report



TRIGGER WARNING

This week, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence released its Committee Study of the Central Intelligence Agency's Detention and Interrogation Program, a harrowing report on the CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" against detainees. According to the report, CIA interrogations of detainees were far more vicious than the CIA described to lawmakers, with physical violence, waterboarding, sleep deprivation, stress positions, rectal rehydration, and threats of violence against loved ones among the "enhanced interrogation techniques" used on detainees.

The report states the CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" was not an effective strategy for collecting intelligence. To boot, the CIA's arguments for the use of these techniques rested on incorrect claims regarding their effectiveness. Outside attempts to exert oversight over the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program were stonewalled, the report states, with the CIA impeding White House, Congress, and Office of Inspector General oversight. Not surprisingly, CIA personnel were rarely held accountable for inappropriate activities and violations of CIA policies, the document argues.

Global human rights organizations have expressed outrage at the CIA actions described in the report, urging further investigation of torture. According to the Atlantic, Senator John McCain asserted that the torture described therein "compromises that which most distinguishes us from our enemies, our belief that all people, even captured enemies, possess basic human rights."

Americans from across the political spectrum, including conservatives, have expressed disgust at CIA mistreatment of detainees. For example, Rod Dreher argued that the report "shows our government’s capacity for committing barbaric evil" and mused on what the report says about the U.S.
"This is a matter of deep conscience. What kind of country are we? Is this what America is? Is this what we defend? The worst kind of barbarism? In particular I want to say to my fellow Christian conservatives: think hard about this report, and the idolatrous attitude that so many of us have toward America. We are America’s good servants, but God’s first. When our country has done evil, we must not hesitate to condemn it, and work to reform it. What we must not do is fall victim to an instrumentalist mentality that calls evil acts good because they achieved, or are believed to have achieved, desired results."
Unfortunately, several right-wing voices refuse to take the report seriously or wrestle with the moral implications of torture. In the days before the report's release, Fox News featured several voices defending "enhanced interrogation techniques" as a means by which the CIA allegedly saved American lives. During the December 8th edition of The O'Reilly Factor, Karl Rove claimed that such harsh techniques kept America safe, blasting those behind the report as "desperate" and eager to "smear" the CIA. (Hat tip to Media Matters.)
 "We aren't going to convince the hard left, but we do need to remind the American people, the vast majority of whom are not part of the hard left, that these techniques worked in a dark moment for our country to keep our country safe ... People who want to diminish the CIA, regardless of the impact on our allies, regardless of the security of the United States. They've spent $40 million and six years coming to this moment, and they're desperate before they lose control of the Senate Intelligence Committee, to smear the CIA, and shame on them for doing so."
During the December 8th edition of The Five, Eric Bolling applauded the CIA's techniques, insisting that it produced quality intelligence. (Hat tip to Media Matters.)
"I celebrate what the CIA did in the aftermath of 9/11. Three-thousand people lost their lives downtown. We were angry. America was on our heels. We didn't know what to do, and the CIA came forward, and they aggressively interrogated, legally, aggressively interrogated some bad guys, and they got some intel that led to the capture of Osama Bin Laden. Why are we apologizing for it? I'm not really sure."
During the December 8th edition of The Sean Hannity Show, Hannity showed little concern over the use of waterboarding and other forms of torture, convinced that it saved Americans. Noticing a pattern? (Hat tip to Media Matters.)
"John Kerry asked [Sen. Diane Feinstein] to delay the release of the committee's report on "CIA torture and rendition" during the Bush administration, so we get this on the same day that Obama is releasing how many people from Gitmo? Five people? Six people? So Bush tortured terrorists and Obama releases them ... I don't give a flying rip because I am certain that American lives were saved ... I don't care that we waterboarded Kalid Sheik Mohammed."
We know now that, according to the report, "enhanced interrogation techniques" were not an effective strategy for gathering intelligence. Even before the report's release, their effectiveness in amassing intelligence was debatable, with former intelligence agents admitting doubt about the efficacy of waterboarding, sleep deprivation, stress positions, etc.

Even after the release of the report, some voices from the right remained unmoved. On the December 9th edition of Fox News' Outnumbered, some commentators were dismissive of the report. Jesse Watters told viewers, "I don't want to know about it; I think people do nasty things in the dark, especially after a terrorist attack." Andrea Tantaros saw no need for transparency at the CIA, defending the CIA's actions as a necessity after 9/11. Americans need not be upset over the torture report, she explained, because such practices have supposedly been stopped. The report's release, in her eyes, was a Democratic distraction. (Hat tip to Media Matters.)
"Sunlight at the CIA? I'm sorry. That's one place I don't need sunlight. I don't think they need to give me a lot of transparency at the CIA. Look, thousands of Americans were killed after 9/11. The Bush administration did what the American public wanted, and that was do whatever it takes to keep us safe. These terror tactics have been stopped because as a country, we decided we are better than this, so we stopped them, which is my point. Then then why are we putting out this memo? ... It's about politics. It's about Democrats being so fundamentally lost as a party, Harris, they have to return to an old playbook, the plays that they ran right when Obama got into office trying to prosecute CIA officials for these terror tactics, and that same playbook that they feel got them the House of Representatives back."
I was appalled by these flippant attitudes toward torture, toward waterboarding, physical abuse, and rectal rehydration, which a senior medical advisor to Physicians for Human Rights called "a form of sexual assault masquerading as medical treatment." In their moral apathy, they disregarded brutal treatment of detainees as somehow justified by September 11th, as if two wrongs could make a right.

We're capable of better moral reasoning than this.

Torture is not only ineffective, but immoral, whether the targets of torture are criminals or one of the 26 detainees who did not meet the standard for detention. A state that tortures is a state that has abandoned its founding principles and any moral high ground. When human dignity is diminished in this way, it allows for many other human rights to be violated, with hideous consequences.

It will take many years and intensive reform before the U.S. can remedy this sin. Until then, we must call for intelligence strategies that actually keep Americans safe, instead of barbarism that fails to keep anyone safe. We must demand transparency from our government. We must demand that those who were responsible for torture be held accountable.

As for the right-wing voices who blast same-sex marriage and contraception coverage as immoral, but sneer at a torture report, your moral compass is broken.


For additional commentary, visit the following links.

Ben Irwin: If this is what a Christian nation looks like, then I don’t want to be a Christian

Religion Dispatches: Torture Denial: U.S. Flunks the Religious Acid Test

Mother Jones: Here Are Some of the Worst Conservative Reactions to the CIA Torture Report 


Monday, December 8, 2014

News Tidbits

Associated Press: Religious nonprofits challenge health law

Colorado Public Radio: Denver nuns take opposition to contraception coverage to court

AZ Central: Protest held against Tempe pastor for AIDS comments

The Advocate: Arizona Anchor Challenges 'Hatemonger' Pastor on Antigay Views

Pink News: Salvation Army: Homophobia claims are a ‘myth’

Gay Star News: Northern Ireland: Catholic Church ends ties with adoption agency over same-sex parents ruling



Commentary Tidbits

Los Angeles Times: Pope Francis' woman problem

On Faith: Divorce Rates Are Dropping. But Are We Saving Marriage?

Religion Dispatches: It’s The Apocalypse, Stupid: Understanding Christian Opposition to Obamacare, Civil Rights, New Deal and More

Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Family Research Council conveniently silent about anti-gay pastor, church it once defended

Buzzfeed: Emails Show “Pro-Family” Activists Feeding Contacts To Russian Nationalists

Jezebel: New Zealand Pastor Admits To Praying Gay Christian Will Commit Suicide

Huffington Post: Meet the Pastor Who Told Me He Hoped I Got Brain Cancer and Died



Sunday, December 7, 2014

Washington D.C. Bans Conversion Therapy for Minors



Washington D.C. has joined New Jersey and California in banning a dubious and toxic form of "therapy" for young people. On December 2nd, the District of Columbia City Council voted unanimously to ban conversion therapy for minors, according to the Washington Blade. The Conversion Therapy for Minors Prohibition Amendment Act forbids licensed mental health care providers from seeking to change minors' sexual orientation or gender identity.

Conversion therapy, long touted by the so-called "ex-gay" movement, has come under increasing scrutiny by medical professionals. For example, a 2009 report by the American Psychological Association concluded that efforts to change people's sexual orientation are not only unlikely to be successful, but involve risks of harm as well. The Pan American Health Organization, the American Medical Association, and other health groups have criticized conversion therapy, while research has shown sexual orientation change efforts to be highly dubious. Defenders of conversion therapy such as NARTH have been accused of promoting dangerous junk science, misrepresenting other professionals' research, and fueling homophobia. The infamous George Rekers hailed from the NARTH's board, as many may recall.

LGBTQ rights organizations were pleased with the D.C. city council's decision. "No child should be subjected to this extremely harmful and discredited so-called therapy," said Human Rights Campaign legal director Sarah Warbelow in a December 2nd press release. "While the LGBT youth in our nation’s capital will soon be protected once this bill is signed into law, HRC is committed to making sure these kinds of protections are secured throughout the entire nation."

Similarly, the National Center for Lesbian Rights applauded the city council's decision. In a December 2nd press release, NCLR staff attorney Samantha Ames praised the District of Columbia for protecting minors.
"The Council has used its authority to protect our most vulnerable youth from dangerous and discredited pseudoscience that tells them who they are is wrong, and reaffirmed the consensus of every major medical and mental health organization that all children are born perfect, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity."
Predictably, the Religious Right was disappointed. Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council, accused the city council of attacking freedom of speech and religion in a recent press release.
"The DC City Council disregarded powerful testimony by therapists who debunked misconceptions about sexual reorientation therapy and by clients who had benefited from it.

This new law is an outrageous assault upon the freedom of speech of therapists, the freedom of religion of clients who seek help in living lives consistent with their faith, and the privacy of the therapist-client relationship."
Similarly, Liberty Counsel founder Mat Staver blasted the legislation as an alleged affront to religious liberty in a December 4th statement.
"The unfortunate irony here is that this bill was passed in the name of ‘human rights.’ By restricting religious freedom, a fundamental human right, this bill is injurious to human rights and equality ... Liberty Counsel will continue to stand with the churches, schools, therapists, and families of Washington, D.C., in opposition to this restriction of religious freedom."
In a December 5th statement, Voice of the Voiceless president Christopher Doyle condemned the bill, claiming that sexually abused children somehow benefit from conversion therapy. He resorted to using the ugly stereotype of LGBTQ people as sexual predators, mocking LGBTQ rights advocates by referring to the recent arrest of HRC co-founder Terry Bean.
"The real torture that is occurring is a life-time of hopelessness that a sexually abused child will have to undergo after they are raped by the likes of HRC’s Terry Bean. No wonder HRC was one of the key supporters of this bill. Their headquarters are in Washington, D.C. and they need to ensure access to as many young boys as possible to keep their leadership satiated. Now we have a better idea as to what Terry Bean may have been doing for those ten hours per week that he is listed as ‘serving’ on HRC’s Board of Directors, according to their latest non-profit filing."
Chris? Accusing others of sexual predation might not be a smart move on your part. Just sayin'.

Conversion therapy bans are important tools for protecting LGBTQ youth from bigotry masquerading as "therapy". At stake is the health and well-being of young people, not religious liberty, a fact that more jurisdictions are beginning to understand.


Steve Anderson Calls for Executing Gays to End AIDS



Steve Anderson, head of Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe, Arizona, has a long history of spouting misogynist, homophobic, and generally obnoxious vitriol from the pulpit, as Friendly Atheist has documented. (There was also this altercation between Anderson and DPS officers in 2009.) This holiday season, Anderson is in hot water over some vicious comments he made about LGBTQ and HIV positive people.

Anderson's November 30th sermon, "AIDS: The Judgment of God", is no longer available for viewing at his YouTube account, but an audio recording is still available at his church's website. In the sermon, he disparaged HIV awareness efforts and mocked HIV positive people as "homos", "reprobates", and "freaks". In one chilling segment, he even called for the execution of all gays in order to eradicate HIV.

Anderson begins the sermon by complaining about all the attention surrounding World AIDS Day, offended that even his bank had display material commemorating the day.
"I told the manager, I said, 'Look, I know you probably don't have any control over it ... locally here, I don't appreciate this. This offends me.' But the sad things is I'm probably the only person that complained about it because our society is so brainwashed, they don't even understand why I would have a problem with all this AIDS paraphernalia being put forth."
"AIDS is the judgment of God," Anderson insisted. After citing Bible verses condemning same-sex intimacy, he described HIV as a punishment that LGBTQ people have supposedly earned by offending God. Quoting Deuteronomy 28, in which God threatens to afflict disobedient humans with disgusting diseases, Anderson fumed that America was infested with sexually transmitted infections.
"Don't tell me that God won't send disease! Don't tell me that God won't send pestilence as a punishment! DON'T TELL ME THAT THE FACT THAT OUR COUNTRY TODAY IS FILLED WITH STDS ISN'T THE JUDGMENT OF GOD TODAY, BECAUSE IT IS! And you say, 'Well, that has nothing to do with it.' That's baloney! You know and I know that married, heterosexual, normal Christian people are not picking up these diseases. They're just not doing it. Unless they get a blood transfusion from one of these freaks, they're not going to get it. You get it from being promiscuous. You get it from living a life of sin."
Anderson's sermon dripped with hostility toward people with STIs and HIV, blaming them for their infections. The idea that a monogamous person could contract a disease from an unfaithful partner apparently never occurred to him. More importantly, the idea that people with infections are still human beings deserving of respect was alien to him. Disease, in Anderson's eyes, is an excuse to lash out at LGBTQ people, non-monogamous people, and anyone whose sexual lives look different from his.

Anderson refused to acknowledge innate sexual orientation, convinced that most "normal" men are not drawn to same-sex intimacy.
"The Bible is saying that these things are not convenient ... It means things that don't come naturally. They don't come naturally. These are unnatural. In fact, the Bible says they're against nature. Now look. We all have a sin nature. We all struggle in a battle with the flesh, don't we? But, are we tempted to be a sodomite? Absolutely not. Ninety-some percent of men today, this thought would never even enter their mind. Why? Because they have not been given over to vile affections, that's why. We have a sin nature. That's why we're tempted to steal, that's why we're tempted to lie, that's why if I were to drive down the road, and there was a billboard with some scantily-clad female, you know, the flesh is going to want to look at that image, and the spirit's going to have to say, hey I'll send no wicked thing before mine eyes, but the flesh is going to be tempted to sin, and there's going to have to be an effort made to subdue the flesh, to mortify the flesh, to walk in the spirit, to resist temptation, to not yield to that. But, if there was some dude in his underwear on a billboard, it's not a temptation, my friend! ... In fact, it's repulsive ... to the normal man."
He went on at length about how same-sex intimacy disgusted him and how LGBTQ people supposedly indulge in "gross" activities that go against natural human inclinations.

The most revolting segment of Anderson's sermon, and the segment that has attracted the most media attention, was Anderson's call for executing gays. Toward the end of his talk, he cited Leviticus 20:13, claiming that society could eradicate HIV by murdering gays.
"Turn to Leviticus 20:13, because I actually discovered the cure for AIDS. Now, this is the cure for AIDS, okay? And you know, everybody's talking about 'Let's have an AIDS-free world by 2020!' ... Look, we could have an AIDS-free world by Christmas ... We'd be like ninety-some percent AIDS-free by Christmas if we would follow this. Here's what the Bible says. Leviticus 20:13. 'If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, okay, even both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.' And that, my friend, is the cure for AIDS. It was right there in the Bible all along, and they're out spending billions of dollars and research and testing. It's curable, right there, because if you executed the homos like God recommends, you wouldn't have all this AIDS running rampant."
This naked hate speech sickened me. In Anderson's eyes, LGBTQ and HIV positive people are expendable vermin who deserve death for their supposed transgressions. When someone calls for the death of an entire class of people, even in jest, he must be condemned by people of conscience. Hate crimes against LGBTQ and HIV positive people are all too real, and they are fueled by attitudes such as this.

One wonders why Anderson harbors so much hatred toward the LGBTQ and HIV positive communities. What kind of hatred blinds Anderson to their fundamental humanity? What kind of broken moral compass leads him to disregard their dignity and lives? What kind of toxic faith leads him to fixate on hateful passages in scripture while ignoring other passages celebrating compassion? What kind of inner turmoil causes a man to obsess over the sexual practices of consenting adults?

Fortunately, one nonprofit is using Anderson's hate speech toward a good cause. A humanitarian aid organization called Planting Peace just launched a Christmas fundraising drive, in which they promise to give Anderson a lump of coal for every donation (minimum $10) to their organization. (Hat tip to Huffington Post.)
"Pastor Steven Anderson of Tempe's Faithful Word Baptist Church has called for the execution of gays by stating in a recent sermon that "we can have an AIDS-free world by Christmas" if gays are executed. In response to his ridiculous and unbelievably offensive statement, Planting Peace invites you to make a donation that will go toward helping people with HIV/AIDS. It's clear to us that Pastor Anderson falls on the "naughty list" this year, so in addition, for every donation we receive Planting Peace will send a lump of coal to Pastor Anderson in a festive package tied with a bow that will be delivered on Christmas Eve."
Something tells me that Steve Anderson will get a lot of coal from Santa this Christmas.


Saturday, December 6, 2014