Connect with us

National

Anti-gay activists speak out against marriage equality

Speakers attack Obama over marriage endorsement

Published

on

Bishop Harry Jackson of the Hope Christian Church (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Anti-gay activists took to Capitol Hill on Thursday to speak out against LGBT rights as they condemned President Obama’s recent endorsement of marriage equality.

Bishop Harry Jackson, senior pastor of the Hope Christian Church and among the leaders in the fight against the legalization of same-sex marriage in D.C. and Maryland, led a news conference, which was sponsored by the anti-gay Family Research Council.

Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage was a particular point of consternation for Jackson, who wondered  aloud whether Obama intended to employ the “bully pulpit” of the presidency to “absolutely erase the image of biblical marriage from the face of the earth.”

“Voters need to know whether they have a friend or … an enemy to an institution that God has ordained,” Jackson said. “Some of us have taken his statements as a declaration of political war against the venerable institution of marriage.”

Jackson drew attention to a letter that he said social conservative leaders sent to President Obama expressing their disapproval of his support for same-sex marriage as well as his other work in LGBT advocacy.

“The undersigned pastors and Christian leaders write to raise serious concerns over your recent declaration of support for same-sex ‘marriage,'” the letter states. “This declaration follows a long trail of actions by your administration that subvert the law of the land as well as the good of society. From permitting open homosexuality behavior in Armed Forces, to opposing state marriage amendments, to refusing to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act, to giving taxpayer-funded marriage benefits to same-sex couples, you have undermined the spirit if not the letter of the DOMA law.”

A White House spokesperson didn’t respond to a request for comment on the letter.

Jackson assserted the president’s support for same-sex marriage was particularly troublesome for racial minority communities, whom he contended held the view that marriage is between one man and one woman.

“What was most concerning about the president’s comments was it seemed to be a slap in the face of black clergy,” Jackson said. “They seem to say I know that you hold these views, and that in the marriage amendment battle in the great State of California, 70 percent voted for marriage, while nearly 95 percent voted for President Obama. … Given those kinds of statistics, it seemed and felt to some of us who happened to be African-American; it felt like an insult, or a gauntlet was laid down.”

But numbers that Jackson cited from California in 2008 have been debunked by studies of the exit polls on which they are based, and a new poll suggests that a growing number of black Americans support same-sex marriage in the wake of President Obama’s announcement. A Washington Post/ABC News poll published on Wednesday found that 59 percent of African Americans now support same-sex marriage, with 65 percent approving of President Obama’s position.

Jackson threatened “political consequences” for Obama as a result of his announcement in support of same-sex marriage and said he’d continue to oppose same-sex marriage, eliciting applause from participants at the news conference.

As part of efforts to protest Obama’s support for same-sex marriage, Jackson called on churches to participate in a 40-day fast; asked church leaders to read a statement on Father’s Day affirming marriage as one man, one woman; and called on voters across racial groups and religious denominations to cast their votes based on moral conscience whether they identify as Democrat or Republican.

Tony Perkins, the Family Research Council’s president, also spoke at the news conference and argued that LGBT advocates have to win same-sex marriage through legislative or court action because they can’t achieve it through a vote of the populace.

“The president has said that he’s OK with states defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman,” Perkins said. “I guess that’s pretty good, since the 32 states that have voted, have voted in favor of traditional marriage. If you can do the math, that’s more than half the states.”

That may change in November when voters in as many as four states — Maine, Minnesota, Maryland and Washington — will decide at the polls the issue of same-sex marriage. In Maine, the support for same-sex marriage is promising. A poll from April found that support for same-sex marriage has reached 58 percent among the electorate.

Those who took part in the event appeared to largely consist of conservative religious leaders. Participants seemed to have been taking part in a lobby day and wore badges saying “Defense of Marriage.” The Family Research Council didn’t respond to a request for comment on more information on the event, but Perkins said the news conference took place after an annual pastors conference where nearly 600 people gathered from 46 states.

Other social conservatives who spoke at the news conference also had harsh words for Obama in the wake of his support for same-sex marriage.

Bishop Joseph Mattera, overseeing bishop of the New York-based Christ Covenant Coalition, accused Obama of subverting the family. Mattera said he’s been a senior pastor for 29 years and that his grandmother was the first ordained female Hispanic minister in New York City.

“It would be like saying it’s OK for us to counterfeit American dollars and have no consequences,” Mattera said. “When you counterfeit something, you cheapen the value of it, and by counterfeiting marriage with alternate definition of it, you actually weaken it. As a Hispanic leader, I want to say that my community needs strong marriages.”

Mattera said he thinks Obama endorsed same-sex marriage to drew attention away from the economy as the general election approaches. suggesting the economic conditions of the country don’t warrant Obama’s re-election.

Jim Garlow, chair of Renewing American Leadership (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Jim Garlow, chair of Renewing American Leadership, said Obama’s support for marriage equality undermines the definition of the union — even within the president’s own family.

“I would pose the question to the president: which one is unimportant — father or mother?” Garlow said. “By his redefinition, one will have to go. Is your wife so unimportant, sir, that she can be replaced by simply any other male? Or is there value in the fact that one man and one woman, a father and a mother, the person who contributes the egg and the sperm as they come together are best in the position to protect and nourish and care for that child?”

Garlow also took issue with Obama asserting that he and first lady Michelle Obama are “practicing Christians” and invoking his belief in Jesus.

“We didn’t ask for this argument,” Garlow said. “He moved to our arena and declared it in those words. That being the case, maybe a basic ‘101’ of Christianity. It would be wise for him to know that throughout historic, orthodox, authentic, biblical Christianity — and there’s no other kind of Christianity other than Biblical Christianity — marriage has always been defined as one man, one woman.”

Fernando Carbrera, a Democratic member of the New York City Council, also took issue with Obama’s support for same-sex marriage and said it troubled his constituents in his district that has heavy presence of racial minorities.

“I represent a district of about 160,000 people mainly made up of Latinos and African Americans, constituents that have said to me over and over again that they support traditional marriage,” Carbrera said. “I’m here to say to my president, to my Democratic president, ‘Do not take the Latino and African-American vote for granted.'”

Carbrera said marriage should remain one man, one woman because only that union enables the creation of children. Responding to arguments that some opposite-sex couples are unable to have children, Carbrera asserted, “But they have the potentiality for it.”

Anne Gimenez, a pastor for the Rock City Churches in Virginia Beach, Va., noted the various backgrounds of individuals who oppose same-sex marriage at the conference.

“We’re here from so many various backgrounds and differences,” Gimenez said. “But those differences don’t matter to us today because we stand here — we’re the church. And we’re united, and we’re united over this issue. And I call upon every believer, every Christian across the nation to take the biblical stand for marriage.”

Gimenez said her granddaughter was present at the news conference and wanted her to know that her grandmother took a stand “because it’s important for our families, and our children, and our great grandchildren.”

Speakers at the news conference also decried comments from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) during a news conference earlier this month when the Democratic leader said he’d be open to repealing the Defense of Marriage Act legislatively.

“If it gets on the floor, we’ll be happy to take a look at it,” Reid was quoted as saying in Politico. “It’s an important piece of legislation.”

LGBT advocates countered the statements from anti-gay activists at the news conference by saying their views amounted to an attack on the LGBT community and misrepresent the views of religious and minority groups.

Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, called their words “extremist, insulting, and just plain nasty comments” that stand in stark contrast to Obama’s description of his evolution in coming to support marriage rights for gay couples.

“Happily, the values embraced by the president — the Golden Rule of treating others as you would want to be treated, fidelity to the bedrock American commitment to liberty and justice for all, respect for the love and commitment of real families — resonate much more deeply with most people than the divisive attacks, political red-meat, and reckless disregard for evidence, truth, and logic that we saw on display at the right-wing’s latest show,” Wolfson said.

Paul Guequierre, a spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, said views expressed by the activists placed them “on the wrong side of history and are in the minority on the issue of marriage equality” and cited the recent polls showing growing support for marriage equality — even among religious groups and racial minorities.

“People of faith in this country support marriage equality and support among African Americans is on the rise,” Guequierre said. “The myth that religious people don’t support LGBT equality has been debunked.”

Asked by the Washington Blade at the news conference how the legalization of same-sex marriage affects opposite-sex marriage, Jackson replied, “It’s the change in the definition of an institution in this time of shifting morals and values, the changing of that definition is significant. Young people don’t have role models; they have no idea how to be an appropriate father or a mother, and really at the very heart of the church, and the very heart of a nation, a free democracy, strong families need to be there, so it’s about the definition.”

In a follow-up inquiry, the Blade asked whether it’s true that opposite-sex couples can still marry in places where same-sex marriage is legal. Jackson wouldn’t take the question during the conference, but responded to the Blade afterward.

“I don’t think anyone was implying that traditional marriage would be destroyed in terms of the opportunity for people to enter into it,” Jackson said. “What I’m talking about — the structure if you want to call it that — of traditional, biblical marriage is that the terms, the roles the way people conduct in day-to-day life right now is hanging by a thread.”

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), a Tea Party favorite, was scheduled to speak alongside other anti-gay activists at the news conference, but didn’t make an appearance. His office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on why he was absent.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

The White House

Trump tells Fox News he won the ‘gay vote’ — but polls tell a different story

Trump falsely claims LGBTQ support on Fox despite polling showing overwhelming opposition.

Published

on

President Donald Trump at the State of the Union in February 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Donald Trump claimed he won the “gay vote” in 2024, despite evidence showing otherwise.

While appearing by phone on Fox News’s panel show “The Five” on Thursday, Trump falsely claimed he performed particularly well among gay voters while discussing the ongoing war in Iran — a conflict he initiated without formal congressional approval.

“Now I think I did very well with the gay vote, OK? I even played the gay national anthem as my walk-off, OK?” Trump said on air.

“And I think it probably helped me. But I did great. No Republican’s ever gotten the gay vote like I did and I’m very proud of it, I think it’s great. Perhaps it’s because I’m from New York City, I don’t know…”

His claim contradicts 2024 polling from NBC News, which found that the GOP presidential ticket captured fewer than 1 in 5 LGBTQ male voters — a figure that may also include bisexual and transgender men. Trump’s support among LGBTQ female voters was even lower, at just 8%.

White LGBTQ voters favored Vice President Kamala Harris over Trump by a margin of 82% to 16%, while LGBTQ voters of color backed Harris by an even wider 91% to 5%.

Trump also used the appearance to criticize “Gays for Palestine,” saying: “Look at ‘Gays for Palestine’… they kill gays, they kill them instantly, they throw them off buildings, and I’m saying, ‘Who are the gays for Palestine?’”

He further pointed to his campaign’s use of the song “Y.M.C.A.” by the Village People — which he has repeatedly described as a “gay national anthem” — noting that it was frequently used as a walk-off song at rallies, as an indication that he and his campaign were supported by the gay community. The track, long associated with camp and hyper-masculine gay imagery, became a staple of Trump campaign events.

The Village People were later booked to perform at Turning Point USA’s inaugural ball celebrating Trump’s second inauguration. Lead singer Victor Willis previously criticized Trump’s use of the song dating back to 2020 and considered legal action to block it, but ultimately said there was “not much he can do about it.” He later acknowledged the renewed exposure was “beneficial” and “good for business,” boosting the song’s popularity and chart performance.

Despite Trump’s claims of strong support from gay voters, polling has consistently shown otherwise — even as several prominent gay men have held roles in or around his orbit, sometimes dubbed the “A-gays.” These include Richard Grenell, former executive director of the Kennedy Center and Special Presidential Envoy for Special Missions; Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent; Under Secretary of State Jacob Helberg; Department of Energy official Charles T. Moran; and longtime supporter Peter Thiel, co-founder and CEO of Palantir.

His efforts to portray himself as aligned with the gay community stand in conflict with policies advanced under his leadership. These include removing LGBTQ-related data from State Department reports, attempting to narrowly redefine gender identity in federal policy, restricting access to gender-affirming health care, and rolling back anti-discrimination protections. His administration also rescinded initiatives focused on LGBTQ health equity, data collection, and nondiscrimination in health care and education — moves advocates say contribute to stigma and worsen mental health outcomes.

Additionally, some HIV programs and community health centers have lost funding from the federal government after supporting initiatives inclusive of transgender people as a direct result of Trump-Vance policies.

Continue Reading

National

Anti-trans visa ruling echoes Nazi regime destroying trans documents

Trump administration escalates attacks on queer community

Published

on

The Trump administration has moved from identifying trans people as as threat to the family to claiming that trans people are a threat to the spiritual health of the nation. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention and Human Security earlier this month released its third Red Flag Alert for the United States about the Trump administration’s anti-trans legislation. As the Lemkin Institute shared in the press release, “the Administration has moved from identifying transgender people as as threat to the family and to the nation’s military prowess to claiming that transgender people constitute a cosmic threat to the spiritual health of the nation and the great direct threat to the US national security in the world.”

The news came the same day that the State Department issued a new rule, “Enhancing Vetting and Combatting Fraud in the Immigrant Visa Program.” Under this new guidance, all visa applicants are required to disclose their “biological sex at birth” during all stages of the process, “even if that differs from the sex listed on the applicant’s foreign passport or identifying documentation.” 

This rule also orders that applicants to the green card lottery program share their passport information, so in knowingly collecting passport information that the agency knows will not match a person’s biological sex at birth, it’s creating grounds to deny trans peoples’ biases on the basis of “fraud,” Aleksandra Vaca of Transitics explains.

As is written in the new ruling, “the Department is replacing ‘gender’ with ‘sex’ in accordance with E.O. 14168, Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, which provides that the term ‘sex’ shall refer to an individual’s sex at birth. Only male and female sex options are available for entrants completing the Diversity Visa entry form.” 

Along with outright denying the existence of nonbinary, genderqueer and gender expansive people, this policy creates a precedence for trans people to be stripped of their visas and deported because under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), any foreigner found to have obtained or possess a visa “by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact” will have their visa revoked and face deportation. 

By requesting information on “biological sex at birth,” the State Department is forcing a mismatch between documents and enabling officials to accuse trans, nonbinary, and gender expansive immigrants of fraud. Thus, trans and nonbinary immigrants can have their visas revoked and can be deported, and information gathered from immigrants during the visa request process can be added to federal databases and used by immigration authorities, including ICE agents. 

With the Supreme Court’s decision this past year allowing ICE officers to use racial profiling, Vaca argues that “now, The Trump administration has given ICE the reason it needs. Under this rule, ICE agents now have the enforcement rationale to assert that trans people–especially those belonging to racial minority groups–are more likely than cis people to have ‘misrepresented’ themselves during the visa process, and therefore, are more likely to enter the country ‘unlawfully.’”

This would enable ICE agents to target trans individuals specifically for being trans. If the goal of this were unclear, a day later the Trump administration released its statement for Women’s History Month 2026, writing that “we are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written and ensuring colleges preserve–and, where possible, expand–scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes. We are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”

And this is not the first time that ICE has targeted and harmed trans and nonbinary immigrants. Last June, Vera reported that ICE is not including trans people in detection in their public reports, and back in 2020, AFSC reported that trans people held in ICE detention faced “dreadful, ugly” conditions. 

While it seems like a new development in Trump’s anti-trans escalation, it echoes a deeply upsetting history of denying and destroying transgender people’s documents following members of the Nazi party seizing power in 1933. 

In the early 20th century, Weimar, Germany was an epicenter for gender affirming care with Maganus Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Science. One of the first book burnings of the rising Nazi regime destroyed the Institute’s extensive clinical records and library on trans health and history by Nazi students and stormtroopers. In doing so, the Nazis effectively destroyed the world’s first trans health clinic and one of the richest and most comprehensive collective of information about trans healthcare. 

Similarly, the Nazi government invalidated or refused to recognize what was called “transvestite passes,” or passing certificates that allowed trans people to avoid arrest under Paragraph 175 which prohibited cross-dressing. During the Weimar Republic — the regime that preceded the Third Reich — recognized and affirmed the identities of trans people (in limited ways) with specific documentation that helped prevent them from arrest. Invalidating and disregarding these passes allowed police and Nazi officials to target trans people and harass, extort and arrest them, and the record of passes themselves helped officials target trans people. 

The changes to visa guidelines — alongside Kansas’s move to revoke trans drivers’ licenses last month — is reflective of this escalation of violence against trans people during the Nazi’s rise to power, which scholars like Dr. Laurie Marhoefer is just beginning to uncover. And along with the revocation of identification documents this past week, a recent Fourth Circuit Court ruled that states can deny Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery.

The Fourth Circuit Court decision affirmed the Supreme Court’s decision in Skrmetti, which ruled that bans on gender affirming healthcare for young people are constitutional. This ruling extends this ban to include adult healthcare bans, allowing West Virginia’s exclusion of Medicaid coverage for adult gender affirming healthcare to take full effect. Even more upsetting was what the ruling itself said, calling gender affirming healthcare “dangerous.” 

As was written in the Fourth Circuit Opinion, “it’s not irrational for a legislature to encourage citizens ‘to appreciate their sex’ and not ‘become disdainful of their sex’ by refusing to fund experimental procedures that may have the opposite effect.” 

In reality, what this ruling and the opinion reflect, is the next step in government regulation and oversight over marginalized peoples’ bodies. From the overturn of Roe v. Wade, which removed federal protection of access to abortion, this next step represents the denial of people’s access to vital, lifesaving care–and to be clear, gender affirming care is not just for trans, nonbinary, and intersex people. It’s a dangerous escalation and one that echoes previous violence against trans people under fascist regimes; the Lemkin Institute is right to raise concern.

Continue Reading

Pennsylvania

Pa. House passes bill to codify marriage equality in state law

Governor supports gay state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta’s measure

Published

on

Pennsylvania Capitol Building (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would codify marriage equality in state law.

House Bill 1800 passed by a 127-72 vote margin. Twenty-six Republicans voted for the measure.

The Republican-controlled Pennsylvania Senate will now consider the bill that state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta (D-Philadelphia), who is the first openly gay person of color elected to the state’s General Assembly, introduced. Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro supports the measure.

“Here in Pennsylvania, we believe in your freedom to marry who you love,” said Shapiro on Wednesday. “Today, the House has stepped up to protect that right.”

Continue Reading

Popular