Newt Gingrich's Religious Right Victimhood Propaganda

Newt Gingrich’s Religious Right Victimhood Propaganda

Demanding the right to hate

PoliticsJanuary 2012 • Views: 27,537

Today Newt Gingrich neatly summed up one of the most dishonest arguments from the right: that their “religious freedom” is being taken away when the government won’t allow them to act on their anti-gay bigotry. It’s an argument that tries to cast the offenders as victims and vice versa, and it’s a total perversion of the term “religious freedom.”

Gingrich has been falsely claiming that religious adoption services have been “forced to close” by the evil secularist state. Soledad O’Brien points out in this clip that Gingrich’s claim is simply a lie; these organizations are choosing to close themselves down rather than allow same-sex couples to adopt children.

Completely lost in this sickening inversion of reality: the welfare of the children themselves.

Youtube Video

Jump to bottom

24 comments

FemNaziBitch Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:22:29am

Victim of time?

Out with the old …

HappyWarrior Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:27:02am

Newt lying and spreading bigotry, shocker. // And frankly it says a lot about the character of the people(or there lack of) that run those religious based adoption agencies that they’d rather close down than allow gay couples to adopt.

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:32:53am

It takes a special sort of moral monster to close an adoption clinic rather than let gay people adopt. There’s so many kids out there who need a home.

Tumulus11 Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:37:21am

GINGRICH: Because you’re saying to religious group, give up your religion. That’s absurd. The idea that the state would impose its secular values on a religious organization is an absurdity.
O’BRIEN: If you want funding. Isn’t that if you want funding.

GINGRICH: No. No. In Massachusetts.

O’BRIEN: You can do whatever you want but if you want funding.

GINGRICH: No, that’s not true. That’s not true. There are states now, including the District of Columbia, which essentially adopt laws that say you can’t offer an adoption service unless you meet the secular standards of the state.
……

. Newt Gingrich is wrong.

‘DC Catholic Charities — which received government funding — voluntarily shut down rather than provide adoption services to same-sex couples and Catholic Charities in Massachusetts ‘refused to place children with same-sex couples as required by Massachusetts law. After a legislative struggle — during which the Senate president said he could not support a bill ‘condoning discrimination’ — Catholic Charities pulled out of the adoption business in 2006.’
// Think Progress

Sionainn Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:40:46am

If churches want to discriminate against adults perfectly capable of raising children, then they shouldn’t be allowed to be in the adoption business. There is no fundamental right to involve themselves in adoption guaranteed to religious organizations.

Four More Tears Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:42:10am

I really have no problem with the notion that the secular standards of the state are more important than religious freedom…

Sionainn Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:43:10am

re: #6 JasonA

I really have no problem with the notion that the secular standards of the state are more important than religious freedom…

I think the welfare of orphaned children is more important than religious freedom to discriminate.

Four More Tears Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:43:56am

re: #7 Sionainn

I think the welfare of orphaned children is more important than religious freedom to discriminate.

Amen.

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:46:14am

And once again, the consumers of this information are just fine with being lied to.

Eventual Carrion Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:49:51am

They could have just stopped taking state money and stayed open and made their own rules, or did all their profit come from the state money?

Four More Tears Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:50:49am

re: #10 RayFerd

They could have just stopped taking state money and stayed open and made their own rules, or did all their profit come from the state money?

Wouldn’t this have been a non-profit?

Four More Tears Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:53:27am

Damn Democrats and their big-government nanny-state getting involved in our lives! Oh wait…

Three Leading GOP Presidential Nominees Pledge To Be Tough On Porn

Eventual Carrion Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:53:58am

re: #11 JasonA

Wouldn’t this have been a non-profit?

Don’t know, but non-profit doesn’t mean NO profit. You are allowed to have so much in reserve for operating expenses and administrative costs even if you are non-profit. People are still getting paid something for administrative and clerical work.

wrenchwench Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:54:35am

Anit-Jewish too, Newt says. Did a Jewish adoption agency close over this issue too, or did he pull that out of his nether regions? I think it’s more likely that Christian adoption agencies are protecting their “right” to discriminate against Jews as well as gays. From Virginia:

[…]

“It’s a shame that the board would explicitly authorize agencies acting on their behalf to discriminate” and overlay their political beliefs, religion and theology on what they think is best for a child who needs a home, Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, a lobbyist for Equality Virginia, said after the vote.

She said the new regulations would allow Catholic Charities, for example, to turn away prospective parents because they’re single, Jewish, gay or already have a certain number of children.

[…]

And

JFS [Jewish Family Services] Provides Adoption Services to All

JFS offers adoption services to all prospective parents, regardless of age, gender, disability, religion, political belief, and family status. We firmly believe great parents come from all walks of life, and all children deserve a permanent, loving home.

[…]

Eventual Carrion Tue, Jan 10, 2012 9:55:00am

re: #12 JasonA

Damn Democrats and their big-government nanny-state getting involved in our lives! Oh wait…

Three Leading GOP Presidential Nominees Pledge To Be Tough On Porn

So some GOP noms are hardon porn. Who coulda thunk!

wrenchwench Tue, Jan 10, 2012 10:05:24am

re: #10 RayFerd

They could have just stopped taking state money and stayed open and made their own rules, or did all their profit come from the state money?

It looks like it’s a licensing issue in Virginia, not (just?) funding. Still, if an agency wants a license from the state to perform a service for the public, they should not be allowed to discriminate against members of the public. They can do what they want in the case of a private adoption, but they want access to the babies of mothers who are looking for help in the yellow pages.

Lidane Tue, Jan 10, 2012 10:08:32am

re: #3 Obdicut

It takes a special sort of moral monster to close an adoption clinic rather than let gay people adopt. There’s so many kids out there who need a home.

Agreed.

elizajane Tue, Jan 10, 2012 10:26:01am

Do you realize how stunning it is that even a Republican candidate (except for Santorum) will say, of course gays should be allowed to adopt, it’s just that Catholics should also be allowed to discriminate. I mean, can you imagine that being the general default position twenty years ago?
About five years ago China closed its adoption program to single parents because they were afraid (correctly, I must say) that sometimes these “single parents’ might actually be lesbians. You already had to sign a pledge promising that, if you were a single woman, you would STAY single (or possibly marry a guy) — but this was not enough. They could see the way the wind was blowing in the USA and they just did not approve.
So, good for us! We’ve actually progressed a lot in this area.

dragonfire1981 Tue, Jan 10, 2012 10:28:27am

re: #12 JasonA

Damn Democrats and their big-government nanny-state getting involved in our lives! Oh wait…

Three Leading GOP Presidential Nominees Pledge To Be Tough On Porn

It’s the Republican War on Sex don’t you know? Anyone who has it,anywhere, anytime in any form who is NOT Christian AND Married is a perverse heathen of the highest order and must be smited…mightily.

Mongo only pawn... in game of life. Tue, Jan 10, 2012 11:03:21am

Newt Gingrich Disgraced Former Speaker of The House and the truth= Matter? Meet Anti Matter.

theheat Tue, Jan 10, 2012 12:18:47pm

This was one of those pants on fire type lies, which ties nicely into the whole gay agenda and Obama hates America thing the fundies and wingnuts came to agreement about propagating about long ago. It isn’t just a lie, it was a barefaced lie, and Newt felt comfortable enough with his wingnut base to say it with a straight face.

tshinkle Tue, Jan 10, 2012 12:23:21pm

Gingrich is absolutely right on this issue; of course the Catholic Charities were forced to close. The Catholic Charities have been providing adoption services for over 100 years and would prefer to continue. But they were faced with being forced to change a core value (a child is best served being raised by a loving mother and loving father) or forced to quit providing the service. Maybe they’re wrong not to accept same-sex couples as adoptive parents, but saying they weren’t forced out is a bit silly.

Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut Tue, Jan 10, 2012 12:29:52pm

re: #22 tshinkle

But they were faced with being forced to change a core value (a child is best served being raised by a loving mother and loving father) o

Nope. That’s a lie. Even if they believed that, absolutely, that’s different than saying a child with no parents is better off than a child with one or two gay parents.

Varek Raith Tue, Jan 10, 2012 1:12:37pm

re: #22 tshinkle

They voluntarily shut down.
Also, their ‘core value’ is based on a fabrication.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Newt Gingrich’s Religious Right Victimhood Propaganda

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud