Shooting sparks controversy over ‘hate’ designation for conservative group
By Michael Pearson, CNN
(CNN) – It’s an online gallery of hate.
Here on the Southern Poverty Law Center website is Blood & Honour, a racist skinhead group with members who killed two homeless people they deemed inferior, according to police. A quick scroll away is the World Church of the Creator, which calls nonwhites “mud races” and preaches “racial holy war” that has, according to authorities, inspired some members to commit violent crimes.
Then there’s the Family Research Council.
The SPLC says the conservative Washington policy group is listed as a hate group because “it has knowingly spread false and denigrating propaganda” about lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people.
The designation, in place since 2010, has ignited a fierce debate after an apparently politically motivated shooting Wednesday at the FRC’s Washington offices.
A Virginia man who authorities say harbors “strong opinions with respect to those he believes do not treat homosexuals in a fair manner” is accused of shooting the manager of the council headquarters, wounding him in the arm.
The suspect was carrying 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches, leading investigators to link the attack to recent comments by the restaurant chain’s CEO defending traditional marriage and the Family Research Council’s staunch defense of traditional marriage.
While the SPLC defended its label Thursday, saying it was about the “demonization” of gays and a long history of anti-gay activism, the FRC and its conservative allies struck back.
“I believe the Southern Poverty Law Center should be held accountable for their reckless use of terminology,” FRC president Tony Perkins said.
In response, SPLC senior fellow Mark Potok said the FRC was looking to make gains from the tragedy.
“Perkins and his allies, seeing an opportunity to score points, are using the attack on their offices to pose a false equivalency between the SPLC’s criticisms of the FRC and the FRC’s criticisms of LGBT people.”
The FRC, through spokesman P.J. Duffy, declined to comment for this article.
Outside opinions were, predictably, mixed.
Tufts University political science professor Jeffrey Berry said the council is a mainstream, if very conservative, public policy shop — one of a multitude in Washington.
“I’m not comfortable calling them a hate group,” he said.
“There’s probably some things that have been said by one or two individuals that qualify as hate speech. But overall, it’s not seen as a hate group,” said Berry, who has written extensively about the influence of ideological and public policy groups in Washington.
Peter Montgomery, a blogger for the liberal think tank People for the American Way, said he backs the SPLC’s designation.
“If you ask me, ‘Does the FRC promote hatred towards gays and lesbians?’ I would say yes it does,” he said. “The FRC is not the KKK. But that doesn’t also mean they deserve a free ride from being called out on their hateful rhetoric.”
The FRC opened its doors in 1983, three years after founder James Dobson, now of Focus on the Family, held a prayer session with eight Christian leaders at a Washington, D.C., hotel, according to the FRC’s official history.
“FRC’s immediate goal was to counter the credentialed voices arrayed against life and family with equally capable men and women of faith,” the group writes in its history.
According to its mission statement, the FRC “champions marriage and family as the foundation of civilization, the seedbed of virtue, and the wellspring of society.”
“Properly understood,” the mission statement continues, ” ‘families’ are formed only by ties of blood, marriage, or adoption, and ‘marriage’ is a union of one man and one woman.”
According to IRS data, the group received nearly $12 million in revenue in 2009, the latest year for which data is available.
It works on a variety of topics, including anti-abortion policy, traditional marriage, educational choice, religious liberty and family tax policy.
What has raised the SPLC’s ire is the Family Research Council’s stance on homosexuality. The council calls it “by definition unnatural.”
“We oppose the vigorous efforts of homosexual activists to demand that homosexuality be accepted as equivalent to heterosexuality in law, in the media, and in schools,” according to the council’s website.
“Attempts to join two men or two women in ‘marriage’ constitute a radical redefinition and falsification of the institution and FRC supports state and federal constitutional amendments to prevent such redefinition by courts or legislatures.”
The group says it also supports programs to help people overcome “unwanted” same-sex attractions.
But the SPLC says the group goes further than simply promoting a conservative Christian perspective. It spreads lies in pursuit of its own political agenda restricting the rights of homosexuals, the group argues.
Among other things, the SPLC says the council uses dubious science to convince Americans that gays pose a threat to their way of life, particularly that gays are a threat to children.
In 1999, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, an FRC analyst co-wrote a booklet called “Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex With Boys.”
In the document, which is not available on the FRC website, the authors reportedly argued that “the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the “prophets” of a new sexual order,” according to the SPLC.
The group also was heavily involved in the effort to prevent the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy prohibiting military service by openly gay men and women. Among other things, Perkins said, the change would force the military to pay for sex-change operations.
In 2010, the FRC was widely denounced after blogger Joe My God published documents that appeared to show the FRC provided $25,000 for lobbying efforts to defeat a congressional resolution expressing opposition to a proposed law in Uganda, which called for the imprisonment of gays and lesbians and the death penalty for those accused of spreading disease and other acts of “aggravated homosexuality.”
The story was picked up by several news organizations and still appears in Internet denunciations of the group. In a 2010 statement, the FRC said that it did not support the Uganda bill or the death penalty for gays and lesbians.
In a statement published at the time, the group said it only wanted lawmakers to “remove sweeping and inaccurate assertions that homosexual conduct is internationally recognized as a fundamental human right.”
Not long after that controversy, the SPLC added the FRC to its list of hate groups.
The FRC has been a “font of anti-gay propaganda throughout its history,” the SPLC wrote.
However, unlike many of the groups listed in its “intelligence files,” it does not accuse the group of any violent or illegal acts.
At the time of its designation as a hate group by the SPLC, the FRC called the label “slanderous” and “character assassination” in an open letter published in Washington newspapers.
“This is intolerance pure and simple,” the ad read. “Elements of the radical Left are trying to shut down informed discussion of policy issues that are being considered by Congress, legislatures and the courts.”
After Perkins’ comments Thursday, the debate began to take off.
In The Washington Post, columnist Dana Milbank noted the controversy.
“I disagree with the Family Research Council’s views on gays and lesbians,” he wrote Thursday. “But it’s absurd to put the group, as the law center does, in the same category as Aryan Nations, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Stormfront and the Westboro Baptist Church.”
On the conservative website Newsbusters, a commenter posting as “Blonde Gator” said calling an organization a hate group doesn’t make it true.
“Just because the FRC has a mission statement which doesn’t align with your own agenda, does NOT make them a hate group,” Blonde Gator wrote.
Elsewhere, a blogger going by the name of “Senator Blutarsky” said the designation lowered the bar for what constitutes hate.
“The Great Chicken War showed that in 2012, all one need do is subscribe to a conventional understanding of Christian teaching, and boom! You’re a bigot,” the commenter wrote, referring to the Chick-fil-A controversy.
On the website for “Truth Wins Out,” which describes itself as a nonprofit “fighting anti-gay lies and the ex-gay myth,” blogger Wayne Bessen wrote that the SPLC was “100% correct” in labeling the council as a hate group.
“As someone who reads Perkins’ anti-gay fundraising letters — make no mistake about it — this group loathes LGBT people with a special passion,” he wrote.
One commenter on the site said the shooting “was Lady Karma finally come a-calling on the FRC.”
“GLBT people have put up with their hatred, beatings, burning, rapes, murder … for centuries now,” said the poster, writing as “Merlyn.” “But the second something like this happen we are blamed and groups like the FRC ramp up the volume of their calls to incarcerate us. I’m not saying I approve of what the shooter did, but all things considered, the FRC got off very lightly.”