The religious right activist group, American Family Association, usually claims "victory" when they need to finish a boycott that they already lost. You'll recall that two years ago we beat the AFA when they pressured Ford to back away from its support for equal rights. It took about 2 weeks. Since that time, AFA continued its boycott, issuing press releases claiming credit for the downturn in the US auto industry, etc. And now they finally had to save face and end the boycott somehow, so they're trying to say that Ford has backed away from advertising in the gay media. Uh, no. Ford said that it's had to cut back on all of its advertising and charitable giving because of the company's financial situation. Note how AP, of course, gives no mention of the fact that the boycott was a total failure two years ago. (Background on the Ford battle. Joe.My.God. also has more.)
It's one thing to have the right to protest, it's another to make an ass of yourself while doing so. The American Family Association, a far-right organization better known for its virulent homophobia and being accused of a long history of anti-Semitism, is now attacking Burger King for being "anti-family" because the hamburger giant has a new commercial showing a dad in a bathtub pretending he's "SpongeBob No Pants" - the guy's his wife gives him a look like he's a moron.
You see, depicting a man who might have no pants while taking a bath - and check out the commercial, you don't even see the guy's chest because of the soap suds, let alone anything else - is now anti-family. And apparently even worse, depicting a dad who is acting goofy is a big ole sin.
The commercial is really cute, and goofy. And you'll see more skin by far in a Pampers commercial than you will in this one. But the far-right isn't about legitimate exercises in free speech. They're about lies. They know they can't get what they want by playing fair - they're fringe extremists and the public knows it. And as Joe Murray, their former spokesman has already shown, the only one with no clothes is the prissy American Family Association.
You can see the commercial here. I flagged it as inappropriate since the AFA says it's inappropriate. I mean, how dare they post sexually explicit commercials online where children might see them. Do the AFA a favor and report their commercial to YouTube. It should be behind a wall at the very least.
I met Joe Murray a few years ago when I was guest hosting Mike Signorile's radio show while Mike was on vacation. I first saw Joe on O'Reilly, representing one of the lead, and most hateful and homophobic, religious right organizations, the American Family Association. Joe was one of AFA's lawyers, and often served as one of their spokesman. I don't know why, but in spite of Joe's defense of AFA, I had the sense that he might not be all that bad. So, I had him on Mike's show, we hit it off, and kept in touch.
Over the years, Joe's views began to mellow and shift. He became increasingly opposed to the war in Iraq, and increasingly understanding of the concerns of the gay community. He's still a conservative Catholic, and staunchly pro-life, but true to what I thought I saw inside Joe when we first met, he's a Christian who actually believes what he says. I remember reading once that the true believer poses the greatest threat to a totalitarian regime - he's the one to become first, and most, dispirited with the lies. That would be Joe.
In addition to a couple of kick ass columns Joe has written in the past few weeks, he's also done a series of interviews with blogger Pam Spaulding over at Pam's House Blend. I highly recommend you check them out. Here is her first interview. And here is her second.
As an aside, this is an example of something I learned from Senator Kennedy's staff in the early 1990s. Don't necessarily write someone off just because you disagree - even if you disagree violently. There's a core of humanity in (most) everyone - it's only a matter of finding it, or helping them find it in themselves.
Here is Joe's latest column on hate crimes and the religious right. Joe is an incredible writers, and public speaker - it's good to finally have him on the good side. Here's Joe's column:
Whether Americans realize it or not, there is already a federal hate crimes law on the books. In 1968, while Mississippi was burning and the racial tensions in America had reached a boiling point, Congress passed a hate crimes law that covered biased attacks based on the victim's race, ethnicity, national origin and religion.
After the bill was enacted into law, the world as we knew it did not cease. The First Amendment survived, the southern tensions began to cool, and life went on. Some four decades later, Conyers thinks it is time that the federal hate crimes law is updated....
While it is true that this writer has reservations about the need for a hate crimes law period, he also sees the blatant hypocrisy that exists when people, who are protected by current hate crimes laws, vehemently seek to exclude groups, like the LGBT community, from the same benefits.
If hate crimes is to be law, than why exclude gays? It is one thing to be against hate crimes, it is another to intentionally deny protection to a class of individuals when one enjoys the protection he is denying. This is shameful.
