Connect with us

National

White House mum on inaugural pastor’s anti-gay sermon

Carney refers questions to inaugural committee

Published

on

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney answers questions at the White House daily briefing

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney had no comment on Pastor Louie Giglio’s anti-gay sermon. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney declined to answer questions Wednesday about a new report that the Georgia-based pastor selected to give the benediction for President Obama’s inaugural once held vehemently anti-gay views.

Asked by the Washington Blade whether the White House has a problem with the views reportedly expressed in a sermon by Louie Giglio — which include support for widely discredited “ex-gay” therapy and urging Christians to prevent the “homosexual lifestyle” from being accepted in society — Carney said he hasn’t seen the ThinkProgress report and deferred comment to the Presidential Inaugural Committee.

“I haven’t seen that report,” Carney said. “I would refer you to the inaugural committee. I haven’t seen the report.”

Asked to clarify whether the administration was unaware of the sermon before the selection was made, Carney reiterated, “I’m saying that I haven’t seen the report.”

The inaugural committee didn’t immediately respond to the Blade’s request for comment on Giglio’s remarks.

The Blade’s questioning about Giglio came later in the briefing after ABC News’ Jonathan Karl — referencing new objections from Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) — asked Carney about 1998 anti-gay remarks that defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel made that have stirred controversy in the LGBT community. Carney noted Hagel apologized for those remarks.

“I think Sen. Hagel was very clear about the fact that he thought those comments were not appropriate,” Carney said. “He regretted them, and they don’t represent the totality of his views. I would point to the statement he made.”

Carney added the Senate will have “the opportunity through the confirmation process as they do traditionally and repeatedly to ask him questions about his views on this” issue, and — touting Obama’s support for the LGBT community — said Hagel would execute Obama’s policy as directed. Outstanding LGBT issues that remain at the Pentagon include certain partner benefits, the lack of non-discrimination policies and prohibition of openly transgender service.

“The secretary of defense — Sen. Hagel, when he is confirmed as we hope he will be — carries out the president’s policies and, I think, the president’s policies on LGBT issues are both commendable, supported by the LGBT community and will continue to be the policies of this administration as long as President Obama is in office,” Carney said. “So, again, I think you’ve seen what Sen. Hagel said about this, and the president is very confident that Sen. Hagel will be confirmed and that he will be an excellent secretary of defense and will implement all of the president’s policies with regards to the Defense Department.

The Blade concluded its questioning by noting both Hagel’s 1998 anti-gay remarks and the anti-gay sermon from the 1990s from Pastor Giglio and asking whether the administration had a kind of statute of limitations for when someone can make such comments and still be deemed acceptable by the administration.

“I think I’ve addressed the question about Sen. Hagel,” Carney replied. “And I would simply point you to President Obama’s record on LGBT issues as representative of his beliefs, convictions and his policies, and where he believes this country is moving and where he hopes to lead it.

A partial transcript of the exchange between reporters and Carney on Hagel and Giglio follows:

ABC News: If I could just ask you about Chuck Hagel, who was criticized pretty strongly today by Ben Cardin, who’s not a exactly an arch-conservative here. Certainly, right in the mainstream of the Democratic Party, one of the things he raised was the comments that Hagel made against James Hormel, which had come under fire by gay groups. I’m wondering if you could help me understand, he made those comments 15 years ago, calling James Hormel aggressively and didn’t apologize for them until a month ago when it was clear that he was in the running to named secretary of defense. Why that kind of a delay and does he have to explain why 15 years of those comments —

Jay Carney: I think Sen. Hagel was very clear about the fact that he thought those comments were not appropriate. He regretted them, and they don’t represent the totality of his views. I would point the statement he made.

ABC News: But 15 years later —

Carney: Senators will have the opportunity through the confirmation process as they do traditionally and repeatedly to ask him questions about his views on this. The secretary of defense — Sen. Hagel, when he is confirmed as we hope he will be — carries out the President’s policies and, I think, the President’s policies on LGBT issues are both commendable, supported by the LGBT community and will continue to be the policies of this administration as long as President Obama is in office. So, again, I think you’ve seen what Sen. Hagel said about this, and the President is very confident that Sen. Hagel will be confirmed and that he will be an excellent secretary of defense and will implement all of the President’s policies with regards to the Defense Department.

Washington Blade: The website ThinkProgress is reporting that the Pastor Louie Giglio, whom President Obama selected to deliver his inaugural benediction, held vehemently anti-gay views in the 1990s. In a recording attributed to him from that time, Giglio advocates for widely discredited “ex-gay” therapy, references a biblical passage often attributed to require gay people to be executed and impels Christians to “firmly respond to the aggressive agenda” and prevent the homosexual lifestyle from becoming adopted in society. Does the White House have a problem with Obama’s inaugural pastor holding those views?

Jay Carney: I haven’t seen that report. I would refer you to the inaugural committee. I haven’t seen the report.

Blade: So it’s fair to say that the administration was not aware of this sermon before the selection was made?

Carney: I’m saying that I haven’t seen the report.

Blade: The news is breaking days after the President nominated Chuck Hagel, whom, as you acknowledged, made those 1998 anti-gay comments against Jim Hormel. Is there some kind of statute of limitations on when someone can make anti-gay remarks and still deemed acceptable by the administration, and if so, what is it?

Carney: I think I’ve addressed the question about Sen. Hagel, and I would simply point you to President Obama’s record on LGBT issues as representative of his beliefs, convictions and his policies, and where he believes this country is moving and where he hopes to lead it.

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