Saturday, May 16, 2015

Six Notes on Jephthah's Daughters that Spurred Me to Think

At this link below, you will see posted six notes written over a month and a half by David Alexander, a reader who sent me his thoughts on the book.

Wednesday, May 13, 2015

The sacred art of offending people

This is my latest on Public Discourse:

In a nutshell, we need offensive, obnoxious people to keep society from stagnating.

Thursday, May 7, 2015

The wrong direction for adoption -- Ohio

This news just came from Columbus, Ohio:

Couched in the language of sentimentality and empathy, the article is really declaring open season on children and heralding a cash market to buy and sell children.

See here (excerpt):

Led by their faith, the Freas have abandoned fertility treatments in favor of adoption.
Columbus Adoption Attorney Tommy Taneff says the Freas are far from alone.  "There are more people who want to adopt than children available for adoption,” Taneff said.
He says recent changes to Ohio law offer more protection and options for adoptive families.
The changes shorten the amount of time birth fathers have to sign up for the Putative Father Birth Registry from 30 to 15 days.  Adoptions can now be contested only six months after finalization, reduced from the previous one-year period.  The change also creates a pre-birth notice for birth fathers that an adoption is in the works.
"If he fails to do something after that notice, and he doesn't register in those 15 days after the birth, and he doesn't file that parentage action, then the adoption is going to proceed without him.”
The state adoption tax credit has also jumped from $1,500 to $10,000.
Maybe the biggest change to the law is now prospective parents who've been pre-approved will be able to advertise their search for a child.  Taneff predicts we'll soon see ads in papers, on television, and even on billboards.

All together now -- creepy! Creepy!

At least the article's author admits that there is a shortage of babies to adopt, not -- as so many people falsely claimed in recent debates -- hundreds of thousands of desperate babies about to be sent to orphanages.

(The issue of kids in foster care is very different and will be addressed separately.)

Friday, May 1, 2015

The Jephthah Files -- Jumbo Version!

This is a cross-post from the International Children's Rights Institute, pulling together the massive range of work done by ICRI members in relation to the Supreme Court cases.

The Institute has deliberately sought to avoid being identified as an organization against gay marriage, for several reasons.
First, our board and council members do not have uniform opinions on this policy issue.
Second, it is hard to know what it means to be for or against gay marriage. Is this a legal question about the impact of policy changes? Is this a statement on the moral status of love between men or love between women? Does being for gay marriage mean being against gay civil unions or does being against gay marriage mean being for civil unions? Or is it vice versa -- does support for gay marriage mean support for all legal recognition of same-sex love, or does opposition mean opposition to all legal recognition of same-sex love?
Third, the rhetorical climate is divisive on the issue of gay marriage and those on the Institute's councils who are active in the debate wish to make it clear that concern for children's rights is the group's only stake in the debate.
Having provided all these caveats, it is my pleasure to share some of the work that has been done by members of the ICRI Testimonial Council on gay marriage:
Heather Barwick has recently joined the Institute's Testimonial Council:
David Boyle, Esq.
Rivka Edelman:
Katy Faust:
Robert Oscar Lopez:

Denise Shick:
Dawn Stefanowicz:
David Upham:
Joint statements:

Tuesday, April 21, 2015

This piece on religious liberty....

There's a huge debate going on over at Crisis over how much religious liberty should be the focus of the marriage and family movement. My two cents:

Another COG goes off the reservation


Brandi Walton reads the Riot Act. So awesome!

Dear Jeremy Hooper: I had nothing to do with this one so don't even think about tweeting a bunch of "Robert Oscar Lopez Mastermind of Anti-Gay Evil" stuff.

Friday, April 3, 2015

History has been made!

One week ago (March 27, 2015), three briefs were filed at the Supreme Court in Washington DC. I was there!

Each of the three briefs was authored by a pair of COGs -- or children of gays. Six COGs authored passages in all, though we were also speaking on behalf of the hundreds of gay families whose members we've worked with.

This represents the first time that the Supreme Court will be reading independent, scholarly advisement on marriage policy from COGs writing on their own. Up until now, COGs have been largely controlled by COLAGE, which answers mostly to the demands of aspiring gay parents even though they claim to represent "children of lesbians and gays everywhere." COLAGE has typically not given much depth or extended time to individual COGs, especially COGs who are independent of their gay guardians, able to think critically about same-sex parenting, and stable enough in their education and career to speak openly and survive the backlash from gay parents.

All that's changed now. It took years for us COGs who wanted to speak honestly and independently to hone our voices, find our platforms, and work together even if we don't always agree on topics like civil unions, adoption, and religion. We all agree that kids need someone to look out for them and that hasn't happened up until now.

Read the briefs -- they are, beyond historic, very informative and ranging.

Here is the joint brief filed by Dawn Stefanowicz and Denise Shick:

Here is the joint brief filed by Katy Faust and Heather Barwick:

Here is the joint brief filed by me and B.N. Klein:

It is crucial that the state attorneys know that these briefs are out there and represent the scholarly viewpoints of people who have actual standing in the question of gay marriage. Often during these debates, people who don't stand to lose anything for gay marriage are the ones who always talking--on both sides.

The six of us and the hundreds for whom we speak have a stake in gay marriage. We will bear the brunt of the fallout. We need our voices to be heard.

Thursday, April 2, 2015

Support the Gay Right to Own Slaves!

Garett Epps from Atlantic Monthly on NPR yesterday literally warned that religious liberty laws will be cited by "PEDIATRICIANS AND VETERINARIANS" to refuse service to gay families. SO GAY PEOPLE'S KIDS ARE LIKE THEIR PETS?
OH MY GOD!!!!! Why does our side not have the guts to draw parallels to slavery and Jim Crow when it's staring us right in the face? History and ethics are totally on OUR side but people who oppose same-sex marriage always want to be so understated and nice, then they capitulate within two days.

Jim Crow is Gay, Haven't You Heard?

The LGBT movement has no place accusing the Indiana law of being like Jim Crow. Same-sex parenting is Jim Crow because it FORCES children AGAINST THEIR WILL to live in segregated domestic spaces. The state unilaterally estranges a child from its mother or father or both, then transfers to two gay adults the financial, psychological, and physical power to keep the child in a home that excludes one sex for EIGHTEEN YEARS. If the child wants to leave, or if the excluded parent wants their kid back, THE GAY COUPLE USES STATE FORCE to keep the child against the child's will.
Why does nobody notice this?

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

One of the recent interviews I've done

I had the great opportunity of connecting with a few African American radio stations lately. It was nice to speak among men of color on these tough issues.  I hope to do more.

Oh and this piece came out in Washington Times.

Friday, March 20, 2015

Dear Conservatives: You know I love you, so please just don't get stuck on these things that annoy you

I love conservatism. I built my scholarly career on it -- to demonstrate, I refer you to Colorful Conservative, my scholarly monograph.

And I love conservatives.

I am conservative.

But I am, I guess, an annoying conservative. For the following reasons, which I hope fellow right-wingers can get over.

1. I really like Michel Foucault and queer theory

This is tough to tolerate, I know. It would be so much better if I quoted G.K. Chesterton, worshipped Edmund Burke, and lined my shelves with Ayn Rand and Hayek.

Instead, I have four head shots of Michel Foucault hung over the printer in my office and get a happy feeling inside when I think about Madness and Civilization and Discipline and Punish. Now, I am open to the idea that Foucault is actually a dark, malevolent intellectual force, especially when you consider that he inspired someone as scary as Judith Butler. He is often credited for destroying sexual ethics as we once knew it.

On the other hand, he understood so clearly how the to counteract the Orwellian tendencies of the Left. He predicted, indirectly, that the Left would slide into its own totalitarianism and reproduce all the power condensations that leftists sought to overturn. Foucault got language, the way power slips and slides out of our grasp. Let me throw out a wild guess and conjecture that he would not have believed that the social-science "consensus" on same-sex parenting was anything more than a discursive illusion. You can read him without turning into Dan Savage.

2. I love the French

I am not sure why conservatives view people with distrust when Francophilia rears its lovely head. There is something admittedly pretentious about being American and loving everything French.

But what can I say? The French may elect socialist governments but they are delightfully conservative in all the ways that count. They take nation and clan very seriously. For them femininity and masculinity both matter. And of all other countries in the world, it was really France that led the way in articulating the strong case against same-sex marriage and gay adoption.

3. I support civil unions for gay people

This is such a contentious issue and has burnt so many bridges between me and right-wingers I could have been allied to. I am happy not to talk about it too much. People have shown me the folly of supporting any halfway measure for gay couples, since the gay marriage movement was like a dagger posed at the heart of ambiguity, nuance, and the compromising spirit.

But the thing is, I've always only opposed gay marriage when it meant endangering children's rights to a mother and father. I think same-sex couples deserve recognition and dignity. I think if done right civil unions could have been a testing ground for gays to brainstorm new forms of relationship recognition that matched the gay community instead of aping straight people. So forgive me -- this is my stance and it won't change.

4. I am never going to consider myself ex-gay

There's something perverse about society's inability to understand the basics of bisexuality. A bisexual--such as myself--is capable of coupling with either men or women. It doesn't mean you sleep with both sexes simultaneously or have polyamorous domestic situations. I am faithful to my wife. But I have been with men and do not feel like running around claiming I was always straight, which wouldn't be true, or claiming I have been "cured," which I haven't.

I think people make choices in life and what you do with your body is one of those choices. People should decide to do things that make them happy. I am not ex-gay.

Okay, conservatives, as long as we can get over these four little humps, I can offer a lifetime of energized activism to you, since I agree with you on everything that matters.

Thursday, March 19, 2015

My interview in New York

This just got posted from this week:


How to spot a false gay marriage argument

Heather Barwick's open letter to the gay community in Federalist has become a bombshell. It's going all over the place (see earlier posts).

Yahoo Parenting! picked up the story, and look at how the Family Equality Council responded:

“There’s nothing wrong with her sharing her experience — it’s an important conversation, and one that we have, and should have, all the time,” Gabriel Blau, executive director of the Family Equality Council, tells Yahoo Parenting. “But denying a huge swath of American citizens our civil rights is not an answer.” [...] Blau, who is raising a 7-year-old son with his husband, adds, “I think it’s disingenuous to say you don’t support LGBT rights and that your concern is children. Supporting marriage equality does not create our families — it creates support for families that already exist.” He adds that Barwick’s pain over the absence of a father “who chose not to be in the picture” and her conclusion to not support gay marriage represent two distinct issues, and that her connection of the two is “such a non-sequitur.” 

Gabriel Blau is blowing smoke. Let me break this down:

1. He says this is an important conversation, that we should have, yet why has his organization never come to the defense of those of us who tried to have the conversation? Look at the YouTube video in the left-hand column of this blog. Look at the speech I gave in January 2014, in Utah, at a moment when Blau's allies in the gay movement were demolishing my character and inspiring threats and attacks against me? Blau has no credibility because he only even engaged respectfully in the conversation when he absolutely had to -- when Barwick's letter went so viral and scored so many supporters, he couldn't avoid it.

2. This discussion about "our civil rights" is complete hogwash. When Blau refers to his own "civil rights" he is talking about the right to take away the human rights of his 7-year-old son, who is going to be further deprived of ties to his mother as a result of same-sex marriage.

3. Who is Gabriel Blau to talk about "disingenuous" reasoning? His group has been using gay couples' children as robots and props to promote a system that takes them away from their birth parents and takes their birth parents away from them. Is it disingenuous to say that you want the "right" to prevent your child from knowing his mother?

4. Gabriel Blau lies. "Supporting marriage equality" does create what he calls "our families." It is being argued before the Supreme Court as something necessary so that two Michigan women can automatically adopt each other's children and subordinate their children to their joint custodial powers. The families that already exist don't need any changes in the law. Gay couples who raise children are raising them generally in a situation akin to foster care. The change that will occur in gay marriage is a change in what the kid gets--the kid gets threatened with total erasure of his ties to his mother.

5. Oh my God, is Gabriel Blau talking about "non-sequiturs"? Are you serious? You take a kid away from his mother, force him not to have a relationship with his mother, force him into a custodial relationship with someone who isn't his father, and then you say that because of this you need a marriage certificate? How is that for a non-sequitur? Amazing.

This is a great idea!!!! Buy Dolce and Gabbana for your mom on Mother's Day!

Excellent idea:

Also, think about what to buy from their collection for Father's Day too.

Tuesday, March 17, 2015

My piece on art, Elton John, and Dolce & Gabbana

Read this--

It's me pretending I'm artsy. :)

Heather Barwick's amazing letter to the LGBT community

This is such a heartbreaking and touching piece by Heather Barwick, which just got published in Federalist: 

You really have to read the whole thing. She is able to capture a spirit of love and understanding while also asserting the importance of having a mom and dad.

She speaks as a member of the LGBT community, not as an outsider attacking it.

Monday, March 16, 2015

The backlash against Dolce and Gabbana proves them right in more ways than one.

The completely petulant and histrionic response from gay parents like Ryan Murphy to Dolce & Gabbana's comments can give average Americans a small taste of what children in such homes will have to deal with. You can't be a good parent and want to have absolute control over what your kids think and feel, in addition to what the whole world thinks and feels about you and your kids. It's a recipe for emotional abuse of whoever is under your power. Look at the punitive urge, the lust for vengeance, the despotism. That is what I see in Ricky Martin, Jeremy Hooper, Ryan Murphy, and Elton John. These are men who will terrorize human beings if they can, if they are within their striking distance. They acquired children the way they get everything they want in all aspects of their lives: through economic leverage, intimidation, and sheer arrogance. Imagine being a helpless and confused child longing for a mom, and being under the power of a dad who throws out clothing and calls for all-out destruction of anyone who hints that you have lost something by being denied a mom. Imagine not one such man lording over you, but two. This is horrible. These people are disgusting. I hope and pray that Dolce and Gabbana do not capitulate to them. These repulsive tyrants must learn at some point that they are not gods, and they cannot bring the world to their knees.

The English version of the Letter to Dolce & Gabbana We Published in Italy

This letter got published on Tempi today, in Italy.

For the benefit of non-Italian-speakers, here is the English version. Enjoy! :)

Dear Dolce and Gabbana,

Greetings from the United States. The six signers of this letter were all raised by gay and lesbian parents. Five of us are women and one is a queer man, though we all raised our children with their opposite-sex parents. We want to thank you for giving voice to something that we learned by experience: Every human being has a mother and a father, and to cut either from a child's life is to rob the child of dignity, humanity, and equality.

We know that gay parents can be loving, since we loved our parents and they loved us. Nonetheless, we have all had firsthand experience with the harsh backlash that follows when the dominant view of "gay parenting" as universally positive is questioned. We know that you will come under tremendous pressure, especially now when both Italy and the United States are being pushed to override our concerns for our rights to a mom and dad, in order to please a powerful gay lobby.

Nobody receives more vicious attacks from the lobby than those who come from the gay community and question its policies: children of gay couples just as much as the gay men who defend them (like the two of you).

In all likelihood many in the international community will try to get your shows cancelled, your advertisements censored, and your reputation destroyed online. You have shown yourselves to be extremely brave. You have given us great inspiration as all six of us prepare to submit letters to the US Supreme Court against gay marriage.

We want to praise your courage and thank you for your inspiration. We also implore you not to surrender when the backlash grows in intensity. If you back down from what you said and apologize, it will leave the children of gay homes even more vulnerable and discredited. It is important for our sake, for the sake of Italian children as well, that you not apologize or capitulate. Please support the idea that all children need to be bonded with their mothers and fathers. It is a human right.

If we can help you in any way, please, let us know. We are not all Christian but we want to send you our blessings, and we promise that we will be lifelong buyers of Dolce and Gabbana from now on.

Heather Barwick, contributor to Federalist

Katy Faust, writer at asktheBigot

Denise Shick, author of My Daddy’s Secret

Sunday, March 15, 2015

Completely awesome post by Katy Faust on IVF

Okay, if you haven't heard yet, before I get to Katy Faust's amazing latest post on children conceived through genetic "donors," I should alert readers that Jephthah's Daughters: Innocent Casualties in the War for Family 'Equality' is now available on Amazon Kindle for the cute affordable price of $5. Check it out. You can also get the preferable format of a beautiful book for just $16 also on Amazon.

Anyways, you must read Faust's latest roast:

She took the time to compile a range of voices from COGs (children of gays) who were conceived through sperm or egg donation. Read it! It's time for all of us to be heard.

And this is also to remind Dolce & Gabbana -- WE LOVE YOU -- and you can't let COGs down by going back on your statements now. Stand strong!

Dolce & Gabbana, please don't surrender

If somehow you can read this, Dolce & Gabbana, please hear us.

We, the dissenting children of same-sex couples, need you not to backtrack on what you said about the problems with depriving children of a mother and father.

There are many of us who came out of gay homes who know firsthand the deep sense of grieving and loss that hangs over us, all the way into middle age and beyond, because we were denied the most basic of human dignities: the love of the man and woman who gave us life.

As this Guardian article reflects, you have come under withering attacks and it will only get worse:

You must understand why your words infuriate people so much. Those gay couples who have forced children into their care know, deep down, that they have done something cruel.

They know, because they have to face the questioning and sometimes hostile stares of children who have to obey them and pretend they are their parents. The children become rebellious teenagers, then independent adults -- and they become, eventually, mature enough to say out loud what simmers unspoken in their minds for most of their lives:

These two gay people used me. It wasn't fair. I am hurt. I am angry. Nobody will listen to me.

You will hear the usual platitudes that all it takes is love (which isn't true), or that social science has proved that gay parents do just as well as others (which isn't true).

But you know, deep down, the truth that compelled you to risk your fashion business and say what you said: To uproot a child from his biological roots, turn him into a product, and sell him to a gay couple so that the LGBT movement can get emotional satisfaction and political prestige, is WRONG. It creates a class of children severed from the life cycles that shape all of us, a group of children forced to exist outside of history, indeed out of reality.

Please don't surrender. If you go back on what you said, you will be leaving all of us who grew up in gay homes and have come to see the light, on our own to face the cruelty of the world again.

God bless you.

Robert Oscar Lopez 

Saturday, March 7, 2015

Have gay marriage supporters checked their privilege lately?

Over 300 corporations have said we have to support gay marriage. The Koch brothers are won over to the cause. State attorneys general are willing to use the full power of the intelligence apparatus, police, and ties to yellow journalism to put you out of business if you oppose gay marriage. And now there is a special global LGBT envoy so if you are banished from the US for opposing gay marriage, there is nowhere to go.

Oh, and the gay movement just hijacked Selma too. Because gay men wanting to buy babies on the black market from sex slaves kidnapped by Boko Haram is just like black people in the 1960s wanting to be able to vote. Right.

Check your privilege.

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Now that the Koch Brothers and other right-wing bogeymen are all pro-gay-marriage, can the ligbitists please stop pretending they're fighting for the oppressed?

Read this:

How often have we heard about those rascally Koch brothers from our friends on the anti-globalization left?

Well, now gay marriage is being championed by one of the Koches AND they have a rich and powerful "global LGBT envoy."

Who's the Man now?

Nothing screams corporate sellout like supporting gay marriage and turning kids into corporate-owned commodities.

Face it, gay marriage enthusiasts -- you're working for the 1%.

Monday, February 23, 2015

Saturday, February 21, 2015

Buy Jephthah's Daughters: Innocent Casualties of the War for Family "Equality"

Innocent Casualties of the War for Family “Equality”

Book available now!

Edited and compiled by two adults who were raised by lesbians – a radical Jewish feminist and a queer Latino scholar -- this text is the most comprehensive examination of all the social interests sacrificed in the cause of family “equality,” by which we mean the larger set of demands posed in conjunction with the same-sex marriage movement.

It’s not just about love. It was never just about that. It’s about all the groups – children, women, minorities, the developing world, gays, and intellectuals—who will have to be treated as collateral damage in order for the demands of a small elite for family “equality” to be met. This is not speculation or a matter of “beliefs”—this book provides extensive documentation of all the impacts around the whole world, which have already been felt by the so-called marriage equality movement.

At just $19.99, this book is a serious bargain. Weighing in at 484 pages, with 57 essays by sixteen different writers and over 550 endnotes, this text covers an enormous amount of ground, addressing children’s rights, feminism, queer theory, critical race theory, social-justice movements, international relations, immigration, academic integrity, the rights of artists and performers, and much much more.

The bulk of this book consists of testimonials that have never been heard before and arguments that have been noticeably ignored in the debate on same-sex marriage.

Whether you are for or against gay marriage, this text is essential reading. If you oppose gay marriage, you need to master these arguments and galvanize allies so that the full spectrum of documented consequences can be presented to the public before same-sex marriage becomes a global fait accompli.

If you support gay marriage, then it is imperative that you confront and consider all the groups who will have to suffer irreparable harm for your policy goals to be met. You may decide it's worth it, and that's what citizens in a free society are allowed to do: weigh different costs and benefits and arrive at their own judgment. You just need to do it with your eyes open to everything that goes into your judgment. History will lay responsibility at your feet.