WaPo Blogger Dave Weigel on Debunked Claim FRC Supported Uganda Bill


Some gay activists continue to claim -- including in our comment boxes and Facebook wall -- that FRC supported legislation in Uganda that could have threatened gays with deaths. This claim is false as Dave Weigel reports in the Washington Post:

Family Research Council spokesman J.P. Duffy has issued a statement on the "inaccurate internet reports" -- mine was here -- on the conservative group's stance on a resolution condemning an anti-gay bill in Uganda. FRC, said Duffy, does not support Uganda's bill -- although I don't know who said it did. Instead:

FRC's efforts, at the request of Congressional offices, were limited to seeking changes in the language of proposed drafts of the resolution, in order to make it more factually accurate regarding the content of the Uganda bill, and to remove sweeping and inaccurate assertions that homosexual conduct is internationally recognized as a fundamental human right.

As I noted, the Democrat-authored resolution made several blanket statements about the universal rights of sexual preference. The FRC lobbied to take those out, something completely in line with what its membership would expect.


  1. Joseph Benning
    Posted August 17, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    The reason "gays" keep lying about this is so they can continue to intimidate, bully and harass anyone that disagrees with them. Lies get people in trouble. They need to learn that.

  2. Preserve Marriage
    Posted August 17, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    The truth doesn't matter. Homosexual special rights advocates will continue to repeat their lies, knowing if they repeat them enough, people will believe them.

  3. Joseph Benning
    Posted August 17, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    The lies will continue so certain people can continue to harass and bully others into acceptance of something they are against. Shameful.

  4. Chairm
    Posted August 17, 2012 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

    Is there any SSMer here who acknowledges that this claim against FRC is objectively disputable?

    You might emotionally feel the need to err on the side of disputing in favor of the claim, I dunno, but you can't reasonably claim it is a slamdunk.

    And so the labeling needs to be rejected.

    Indeed, if you cling to it, then, you are promoting the worse sort of political activism -- if a lie is big enough just keep repeating it to give it more power than the truth.

  5. A. H. Abraham
    Posted August 17, 2012 at 10:33 pm | Permalink

    America is made weaker by its sins day by day. What if Islam takes over America? Do you think it is impossible? Look at Europe!! If and when it does, Uganda will be here. Wake up now or you will be hunted down. Think Sharial law!! In other words think Judgment. America is a nation blessed by God. Now it has become an eyesore, an “Obamination” before God.
    God created human being in a family of one man and one woman. You! Who sit on the high seat in Washington are destroying what God has made by your crafty and selfish words. God will surely visit your iniquities, you! Who have made this nation an Obamination, God will not spare.
    Freedom without boundaries is like an ocean without shores, it will drown everything. Freedom without responsibility is real slavery. Slaves of sin, slaves of unnatural lust. God is not deaf and blind, make no mistake, the blessing God gave to America is about to be given to some other nation. Look around who is getting ahead of America. Judgment Day is close at hand! So, repent while there is still time-repent!!! 8/17/2012

  6. Chairm
    Posted August 18, 2012 at 11:12 am | Permalink

    A day has past since I made my query of SSMers regarding this false claim against the FRC.

    This claim is designed to inflame angry and violent feelings against the FRC and, by direct association, all pro-marriage organizations that have supported the FRC's pro-marriage position? Remember the attempt to smear the chicken restaurant by linking its small financial donation to the false claim made against the FRC. If SSMers want to manufacture dots to connnect, then, they are to be held morally accountable for setting the record right on this false claim.

    Where are you, SSMers, on this point of contention?

  7. Posted August 18, 2012 at 3:48 pm | Permalink
  8. Posted August 18, 2012 at 3:49 pm | Permalink

    Sorry, the above comment was:

    "crickets chirping".........

  9. Chairm
    Posted August 23, 2012 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    And a fifth day has passed.

    Where are you, SSMers, on this point of contention?

Comments are temporarily disabled. Please try back later.