Peter Sprigg

Tags ››› Peter Sprigg
  • Fox News Contributor To Headline Hate Group Conference On “The Politically Incorrect Truth About Sexuality”

    SPLC Senior Fellow: “Coven Of Haters” Will Advocate For Harmful And Discredited Ex-Gay Therapy

    ››› ››› RACHEL PERCELAY

    Fox News contributor Robert Jeffress is headlining the “Stand4Truth” conference scheduled for October 28 and 29 in Houston, TX, which is advertised as telling the “politically incorrect truth about sexuality and gender” and is sponsored by at least three anti-LGBT hate groups. Jeffress -- who is also a member of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s “Evangelical Executive Advisory Board” -- will be joined by fringe anti-LGBT extremists and hate group leaders, and proponents of discredited "ex-gay" reparative therapy. 

  • New Research Counters Myth That Banning Discrimination Against LGBT People Is “Economically Harmful”

    Researchers Found Innovators Flock To States That Prevent Discrimination Against LGBT Workers

    Blog ››› ››› ALEX MORASH

    Recently published research highlighted by the Harvard Business Review found that states with laws that ban employment discrimination against LGBT Americans saw a direct increase in business innovation -- counter to right-wing media myths that such laws result in negative interference in the market.

    According to a study published on June 15 by the journal Management Science, “state-level employment nondiscrimination acts (ENDAs) -- laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity -- spur innovation” among firms headquartered in those states. The study’s authors -- finance professor Huasheng Gao and economist Wei Zhang -- published an op-ed on August 17 in the Harvard Business Review highlighting their findings that states that protect employees with ENDAs see an increase in innovators moving to those states and a boost in business productivity. The research found that “firms headquartered in states that passed ENDAs experienced an 8% increase in the number of patents and an 11% increase in the number of patent citations, relative to firms headquartered in states that did not pass such a law.” The researchers concluded that this change was a result of individuals moving based on their approval or disapproval of the change in the law and theorized that “pro-LGBT individuals are likely to be more creative than the anti-LGBT ones” leading to companies in states that prohibit workplace discrimination having broader access to more creative talent:

    We looked at data for thousands of firms — almost all U.S. public firms that actively filed patents — from 1976 to 2008. We found that the adoption of ENDAs led to a significant increase in innovation output. On average, firms headquartered in states that passed ENDAs experienced an 8% increase in the number of patents and an 11% increase in the number of patent citations, relative to firms headquartered in states that did not pass such a law. These results start to show up two years after the adoption of ENDAs and largely are driven by firms that previously did not implement non-discrimination policies, by firms that operate in human-capital-intensive industries, and by firms in states with large lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) populations.

    These findings contradict years of right-wing media myths falsely claiming that protecting LGBT people from discrimination curbs free market innovation and hurts business. Daily Signal commentator and Heritage Foundation fellow Ryan Anderson claimed that the passage of nondiscrimination laws for LGBT Americans would “foster economically harmful government interference” and that this interference could result in “potentially discouraging job creation.” In an op-ed for CNN, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council -- an extremist organization designated as an anti-LGBT hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center -- pushed the myth that banning discrimination would be be tantamount to “federal government interference in the free market.”

    Right-wing claims that banning employment discrimination against LGBT people would hurt business are often followed with the myth that nondiscrimination laws are unnecessary. The Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby misleadingly argued that, save for “occasional incidents of bigotry … there is no urgent crisis in the treatment of gay and lesbian employees,” because “free markets” have already rooted out systematic discrimination.”

    Contrary to myths promoted by right-wing outlets that ENDAs are unwarranted, the Williams Institute found that “widespread discrimination” against LGBT employees remains a problem in American workplaces. American workers still face discrimination based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, and the results outlined in the Harvard Business Review show that laws prohibiting such discrimination are beneficial to both workers and businesses, regardless of right-wing media claims.

  • Fox News Falsely Suggests Planned Parenthood Is Swapping "Sex Changes" For "Baby Body Parts"

    Blog ››› ››› ERIN FITZGERALD

    Fox News is arguing that Planned Parenthood’s newest venture is helping “transgender patients with sex changes,” which the FoxNews.com article says will help fill budget gaps caused by the health care provider no longer accepting reimbursements for fetal tissue donations. But Planned Parenthood has offered trans-inclusive health care services, according to well-established guidelines, well before the organization discontinued fetal tissue reimbursement.  

    Planned Parenthood has "found a new niche that could prove nearly as controversial as providing abortions" -- helping transgender people through the "sex-change process," says a May 5 FoxNews.com article. The article also claims that since Planned Parenthood has stopped "selling baby body parts for money," the “gender reassignment process may enable the organization to make up the lost cash."  The false allegations of fetal tissue profiteering that Fox News is referring to have been repeatedly debunked.

    But Planned Parenthood offering medical care to transgender people is not “new.” Standards of care for providing transition-related services have been on the books for almost 50 years and are supported by major medical associations, such as the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association. Trans people use Planned Parenthood as a means to access a diverse range of culturally competent medical services, such as reproductive health care, STD screenings, pap smears, cancer screenings, and even sometimes hormone treatments. Planned Parenthood provides one aspect of many that go along with transition-related care.

    The author is correct about one thing -- both hormone therapy services and facilitation of fetal tissue donation account for a negligible amount of Planned Parenthood’s resources each year. Currently, less than 1 percent of the organization’s health centers even facilitate donations for fetal tissue research. Hormone therapy services also account for less than 1 percent of the 9.5 million services that are performed each year, according to the latest annual report.

    The article relies solely on the opinion of hate group spokesperson Peter Sprigg, a senior fellow at the Family Research Council, who is not a medical professional. Sprigg predicts severe backlash from patients experiencing transition regret, which -- much like so-called “post-abortion syndrome” -- is a conservative myth debunked by scientific evidence. More from the Fox article:

    But Peter Sprigg, a senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council, told FoxNews.com the most severe backlash may not come from Americans who find the practice “bizarre,” but rather down the road “from clients who recognize this was not in their best interest.”

    [...]

    “This illustrates how Planned Parenthood, rather than providing specific services, is kind of the central clearinghouse for the sexual revolution in all respects. And that’s come to include having sex without the consequence of pregnancy and also the freedom to change one’s sex if you choose.”

     
  • Chris Cuomo Debunks The 'Bathroom Predator' Myth Behind Anti-LGBT Laws

    Chris Cuomo: "You Are Creating The Problem. You Are Not Solving It."

    Blog ››› ››› MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

    New Day host Chris Cuomo debunked the baseless defense of a recent anti-LGBT law in North Carolina that broadly bans transgender people from using bathrooms that align with their gender identity by Peter Sprigg, a spokesperson for anti-LGBT hate group, the Family Research Council. Although CNN's New Day still did not identify FRC as a hate group, Cuomo slammed Sprigg's false claim based on the repeatedly debunked "bathroom predator" myth that allowing transgender people to use bathrooms that align with their gender identity will allow men to pretend to be transgender to sneak into bathrooms and commit sexual assault. Cuomo noted that these "risks" haven't "play[ed] out in any statistic." From the April 4 edition of CNN's New Day:

    CHRIS CUOMO (HOST): I think its more about culture and I think we should have that discussion. But just to be clear, Title IX, okay, which is obviously the discrimination on discrete categories, there hasn't been a specific case about transgender yet. But we do know that transgender has been in many cases applied as a Title IXrequirement category. So that would be the legal basis of this contravening federal law would then trigger funding mandates about places that receive federal funds. But, again, whether this is legal or not can be tested out. But this is about something else. This is about what folks in North Carolina and Mississippi right now, Georgia recently, want and don't want.

    PETER SPRIGG: Well, I agree that it's about culture and it has always been a part, not only of our culture but of every culture that has ever existed that we separate biological males and biological females for the purpose of certain intimate activities the like bathing, dressing, and going to the bathroom. And that's all that this bill provides is retaining the status quo with respect to that longstanding tradition.

    CUOMO: But times change. And that's what this is really about. Are you ready to change in North Carolina? Are you ready to respect transgender people for what they say they are? Because you can't point to any potential danger here. I know that's what you are doing and others are doing, saying there is a risk to women. But we don't see that play out in any statistic that you can cite. You know I know you have been using the baker analogy that we saw with gay marriage. You shouldn't have these bakers be having to bake cakes for people they don't want. You shouldn't have these girls having to go into bathrooms with people they don't want. We don't see that risk. However, we do see the reciprocal risk. We do see the risk to transgender people when they are called out and exposed to this kind of scrutiny.

    [...]

    SPRIGG: When you see someone who is obviously a man, regardless of whether they're wearing a dress or not, I think a woman in a restroom where she expects only to be with women or a girl who expects to be with girls, has the right to feel uncomfortable about that. And to feel like her privacy has been violated. It is a privacy issue. Even if their safety is never violated in practice.

    CUOMO: But the point is that the reason it looks like a man is because the person identifies as a man. So they want to go into the men's bathroom. You're saying yeah but on the birth certificate, it still says that that person is woman so they have to go into the women's bathroom. You're creating the problem. You're not solving it.

    SPRIGG: No, No. The transgender people are creating the problem by pretending to be the opposite of their actual biological sex even when people can see that they are their biological sex.

    CUOMO: See, but that's the pretending part, though, Peter, right? Because that's the concern. You're saying they're pretending. They're saying they're not pretending. And this is part of cultural evolution. You seem unwilling to embrace that.

    SPRIGG: I am unwilling to embrace that. And most of the American public is unwilling to embrace the idea that people's inner feelings somehow trump the objective reality of their, biological reality of their bodies. It's very much a world view issue, and it's one where the American public is not on the side of the transgender movement.

    Cuomo continued to debunk the myth in a series of tweets:

    [Twitter, 4/4/16]

    [Twitter, 4/4/16]

    [Twitter, 4/4/16]

    [Twitter, 4/4/16]

    [Twitter, 4/4/16]

  • CNN Invites Hate Group Spokesperson to Debate Mississippi's Extreme Anti-LGBT Law

    Blog ››› ››› ERIN FITZGERALD

    CNN hosted a spokesperson from a notorious anti-LGBT hate group during a discussion of an anti-LGBT bill under consideration in Mississippi, giving him a national platform to peddle misinformation about the purpose and impact of the bill.

    On the April 1 edition of CNN's New Day, guest host Don Lemon interviewed Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council (FRC) to discuss Mississippi's HB 1523 -- which is being referred to as the "most sweeping anti-LGBT legislation in the U.S." and which would establish a legal defense for discrimination against LGBT people in a number of settings.

    FRC has been designated as an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The group has a history of making wild and inflammatory attacks on LGBT people while masquerading as a serious policy organization in the media. Sprigg has called for recriminalizing gay sex in the U.S. and suggested that LGBT people should be "export[ed]" from the country. CNN failed to identify Sprigg as a hate group spokesperson, and Sprigg took advantage of the national platform to spread misinformation about the bill and its potential impacts.

    CNN has been criticized for hosting an FRC representative in the past. In 2013, just minutes after the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), CNN hosted Tony Perkins -- president of FRC -- to peddle lies about the decision's impact on religious liberties. In response, more than 32,000 people signed a petition asking CNN to stop hosting the hate group leader.

    Media outlets routinely invite anti-LGBT hate groups to comment on federal policies, state laws, and Supreme Court cases, needlessly exposing audiences to misinformation while failing to hold those groups accountable for their track records of dishonesty and inflammatory rhetoric. If a media outlet thinks it necessary to host a hate group with a history of misinformation in a report or segment, it should at the very least properly identify the group as anti-LGBT extremists.

  • After Hosting Anti-LGBT Hate Group, NPR Acknowledges "We Have To Do A Better Job"

    Blog ››› ››› MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

    After NPR's The Diane Rehm Show hosted a spokesman from a notorious anti-gay hate group during a discussion of same-sex adoption, NPR's ombudsman admitted that the show erred in failing to properly identify the group.

    On the December 10 edition of NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, guest host Melissa Ross interviewed Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council (FRC), to discuss legal battles over parenting and adoption rights for same-sex couples. While the Southern Poverty Law Center has listed FRC as an anti-gay hate group since 2010, NPR didn't identify Sprigg as a hate group spokesman, and Sprigg used the platform to peddle misinformation about LGBT equality. 

    In a post responding to criticisms of the segment, NPR's ombudsman Elizabeth Jensen joined Diane Rehm in acknowledging that the show erred by "not us[ing] a clear identifier" for Sprigg. Rehm admitted that she has "to do a better job of being more careful about identification":

    I heard from many people after Media Matters for America, which calls itself a "progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media," wrote a blog post objecting to a guest on the Dec. 10 Diane Rehm Show (which had a guest host, Melissa Ross, that day). Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council, was one of four guests invited to discuss the day's topic: legal battles over parenting and adoption rights for same-sex couples.

    Media Matters wrote that NPR (which distributes the show but does not produce it) gave Sprigg "a national platform to peddle misinformation about same-sex parenting." The organization Faithful America also sent an email blast that said: "Tell NPR: Don't let anti-gay hate group speak for Christians."

    In the last 45 seconds of the program, as Ross was focused on wrapping up, Sprigg said that "most orthodox Christians" believe that "engaging in homosexual conduct is contrary to the will of God," a claim that depends on the murky definition of "orthodox Christians." (See this May 2015 Pew Research Center poll looking at Americans' attitudes over whether their religious beliefs are in conflict with homosexuality.) But as I read the transcript, the show's other guests forcefully pushed back against Sprigg's other claims at pretty much every turn.

    I asked Rehm about the guest booking. Her view (with which I agree): "I certainly don't see that there's a problem having someone like that on the program." Where the show erred, she said, "was we did not use a clear identifier [for Sprigg] other than the title of his organization." She added, "We have to do a better job of being more careful about identification."

  • NPR Invites Anti-Gay Hate Group To Debate Same-Sex Parenting

    Blog ››› ››› RACHEL PERCELAY

    NPR hosted a spokesman from a notorious anti-gay hate group during a discussion of same-sex adoption, giving him a national platform to peddle misinformation about same-sex parenting.

    On the December 10 edition of NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, guest host Melissa Ross interviewed Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council (FRC) to discuss legal battles over parenting and adoption rights for same-sex couples.

    The Southern Poverty Law Center has listed FRC as an anti-gay hate group since 2010 due to the organization's propagation of known falsehoods about LGBT people. The group has a history of making wild and inflammatory attacks on LGBT equality while masquerading as a serious policy organization in the media. Sprigg, who served as an ordained Baptist minister before joining FRC, has called for recriminalizing gay sex in the U.S. and suggested LGBT people should be "export[ed]" from the country.

    But NPR didn't identify Sprigg as a hate group spokesman, and Sprigg used the platform to peddle misinformation about LGBT equality. Sprigg cited a widely discredited paper to suggest that children raised by same-sex couples perform poorly, and resurrected the long debunked horror story that Catholic adoption agencies have been shut down for refusing to serve same-sex couples. While guest host Melissa Ross did not push back on Sprigg's talking points, fellow guest Emily Hetch-McGowan, Director of Public Policy the Family Equality Council, called out FRC's use of discredited research:

    PETER SPRIGG: And I think that certainly there is abundant reason to believe that children do best when raised by a married mother and father. And within the context of foster care the judge has an obligation to do what's in the best interest of the child. And he exercised that discretion.

    MELISSA ROSS: And what research does the Family Research Council cite to buttress the claim that a child is better off with a heterosexual couple?

    SPRIGG: Well, there's an abundance of research showing that children do better overall when raised by their own married biological father who are committed to one another in a life-long marriage. There are just reams of research showing that. Now this is a slightly different situation because of the fact that you're dealing with a situation where they are being removed from their biological parents. But we think that there is evidence to suggest that children would do better with a mother and father even if it's not their biological parents.

    Previously:

    Asking Hate Groups About Marriage Equality Isn't Balance, It's Bad Journalism

    FRC's Sprigg Desperately Tries To Justify Discriminating Against Gay Blood Donors

    FRC's Sprigg Spreads Lies About Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)

  • Asking Hate Groups About Marriage Equality Isn't Balance, It's Bad Journalism

    Blog ››› ››› CARLOS MAZA

    Media outlets have repeatedly turned to an extreme anti-gay hate group to comment on the Supreme Court's recent marriage equality decision, needlessly exposing audiences to misinformation while failing to hold the group accountable for its track record of dishonesty.

    Following the Supreme Court's June 26 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges -- which found that bans on same-sex marriage violate the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution - several media outlets invited representatives from the Family Research Council (FRC) to offer their reactions to the decision.

    FRC has been labeled an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) because it propagates "known falsehoods" about the LGBT community, including linking homosexuality to pedophilia and accusing gay people of trying to "recruit" children. The group has a long track record of making wildly inaccurate policy predictions about the consequences of basic protections for LGBT people.

    But despite the group's extremism and without reference to their record, FRC was widely cited by major media outlets in the wake of Obergefell, including NPRThe New York Times, and USA Today.

    Spokespersons from FRC were also invited to react to the decision on national television. ABC's This Week invited FRC's Ken Blackwell - who previously blamed same-sex marriage for a mass murder - to discuss the court's decision. On Fox News' The Kelly File, Megyn Kelly offered a platform FRC president and frequent guest Tony Perkins, who has called pedophilia a "homosexual problem." As usual, none of these outlets identified FRC as a hate group or informed their audiences about the organization's history of misinformation.

    And during the June 29 edition of CNN's New Day, host Chris Cuomo invited FRC's Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies, to discuss the decision in Obergefell. Sprigg, whoseprofessional experience before FRC includes serving as a Baptist minister and 10 years as a "professional actor," has previously suggested he'd prefer to "export homosexuals from the United States." But despite his extremism and lack of expertise, Sprigg was given a platform to fearmonger about the consequences of country-wide marriage equality:

  • Daily Caller Gives Platform To Another Anti-Gay Hate Group

    Blog ››› ››› LUKE BRINKER

    The Daily Caller provided a hate group spokesman a platform to smear marriage equality and same-sex families, part of the conservative website's pattern of promoting the commentary of some of the most extreme anti-LGBT figures in the country.

    In a May 5 column, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council (FRC), an anti-gay hate group, touted Irreplaceable, a new Focus on the Family film celebrating straights-only marriage. Sprigg lauded the film for its support of "God's design for marriage." If society were to "devalue" marriage, he argued, it would "devalue being a parent," and thereby "devalue children":

    If you devalue marriage, you devalue being a parent - or more specifically, being a mother or a father, since the importance of gender roles ("not deterministic, but dynamic") is emphasized.

    If you devalue parents, then you devalue children. Jonathan Last, author of What to Expect When No One's Expecting, says that the sexual revolution dismembered the "iron triangle" of marriage, sex, and baby-making, and the resulting indifference in the West to creating the next generation constitutes a form of "civilizational sickness."

    His column is relatively tame in the context of his career of fear mongering about gay people, including baselessly peddling the claim that gay men are sexual predators who prey on children.

    Meanwhile, Sprigg's stances on other LGBT issues are no less offensive. He sits on the board PFOX, a group promoting discredited "ex-gay" therapy, and has asserted that the proper response to gay teen suicides is to encourage gay youth to change their sexual orientations. In remarks that he later walked back following fierce criticism, Sprigg said he "would much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than to import them into the United States." Sprigg is no friend of the transgender community either, having declared contrary to expert consensus that trans people suffer from "delusions."

    Sprigg isn't the first hate group spokesman to be granted column space in the Daily Caller. FRC President Tony Perkins has also written for the website. In July 2013, the site published a column from Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM) President Austin Ruse cheering Russia's draconian anti-LGBT crackdown, praising Russian President Vladimir Putin for taking a stand against the sexual "immorality" that Ruse claimed pervades the United States.

    The Daily Caller has also published numerous pieces from National Organization for Marriage (NOM) President Brian Brown, who condemns homosexuality as "deceitful, harmful, and degrading to the human soul," and American Values President Gary Bauer, who in addition to campaigning against marriage equality in the U.S. has used his Daily Caller column space to inveigh against critics of Russia's anti-gay laws.

    While Sprigg, Perkins, Ruse, Brown, and Bauer have only written for the Daily Caller's opinion section, anti-gay talking points have also found their way into the website's purportedly straight news reporting. 

  • Fox's Bream Makes Third (Failed) Attempt To Smear A San Antonio Non-Discrimination Ordinance

    Blog ››› ››› LUKE BRINKER

    Fox News host Shannon Bream invited the hate group Family Research Council's (FRC) Peter Sprigg to confirm her baseless belief that a proposed non-discrimination ordinance would ban Christians from holding public office in San Antonio, marking her third failed attempt to smear the measure.

    On the August 27 edition of America Live, Bream and Sprigg peddled unfounded right-wing attacks on the proposal - which adds sexual orientation and gender identity to the city's existing non-discrimination ordinance - as an assault on the rights of Christians. Bream opened the segment by echoing critics who claim the ordinance could be "the first step to banning Christian conservatives from holding public office":

    BREAM: New developments today with a controversial proposal in San Antonio that critics say could be the first step to banning Christian conservatives from holding public office. The city council proposing an ordinance that disqualifies anyone who has ever, quote, demonstrated a bias against a person based on race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity. That appears to include people who have spoken out against things like gay marriage and in support of traditional marriage.

  • Fox Hosts Family Research Council To Continue Its Fact-Free Attack On Transgender Student Bill

    Blog ››› ››› CARLOS MAZA

    Fox News hosted a spokesman from an anti-gay hate group to continue the network's ongoing assault on a California bill that will allow transgender students to have access to school facilities and teams that correspond with their gender identity.

    Following Gov. Jerry Brown's signing of a law that prohibits California public schools from discriminating against transgender students, Fox News invited Peter Sprigg, spokesman for the Family Research Council (FRC), to appear on the August 13 edition of America's Newsroom.

    Sprigg - whose history of extreme anti-LGBT commentary includes suggesting that gay people should be exported from the U.S. -  asserted that the law would ignore "biological reality" while pandering to students' "transient feelings and emotions":

  • Why The Media Should Stop Taking ENDA's Opponents Seriously

    Blog ››› ››› CARLOS MAZA

    As Congress prepares to once again consider the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), media outlets should avoid giving platforms to hate mongers who have made careers manufacturing blatant falsehoods about the bill.

    On July 10, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee will vote on ENDA - a bill that would prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. ENDA has been introduced in every Congress since 1994 except for the 109th. The measure already has 52 Senate co-sponsors, though its prospects in the House remain to be seen.

    An overwhelming majority of Americans support ENDA, including a strong majority of Republicans, Catholics, and senior citizens. Even among people who identify themselves as having unfavorable feelings towards homosexuality, half favor workplace protections for LGBT people. In fact, nine out of ten voters incorrectly believe a federal law like ENDA already exists.

    ENDA also has the backing of the business community, with small businesses and Fortune 500 companies alike supporting policies protecting LGBT employees.

  • CNN Hosts FRC's Peter Sprigg To Discuss Anti-Gay Pastor's Withdrawal From Obama Inauguration

    Blog ››› ››› CARLOS MAZA

    CNN invited Family Research Council (FRC) Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg - who has previously advocated the criminalization of homosexuality and deportation of gay people from the United States - to condemn the recent withdrawal of an anti-gay pastor from President Obama's second inauguration. 

    During the January 11 edition of CNN Newsroom, host Carol Costello invited Sprigg and Truth Wins Out director Wayne Besen to discuss Georgia pastor Louie Giglio's decision to withdraw from performing the benediction at Obama's inauguration.

    Giglio announced his withdrawal after ThinkProgress revealed that he had given a "vehemently anti-gay" sermon in the mid-1990s during which he condemned the "homosexual lifestyle," claimed gay people would go to hell, and claimed that gay people could become straight through the power of Christ.

    Sprigg, whose organization has been labeled an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center for spreading known falsehoods about LGBT people, attempted to downplay Giglio's comments, accusing gay activists of pursuing "intolerance in the name of tolerance":

    SPRIGG: The world we live in, unfortunately, is increasingly marked by the enforcement of intolerance in the name of tolerance, exclusion in the name of inclusion, and forced uniformity in the name of diversity. It's contradictory, it's downright Orwellian, and yet people actually make these statements, unbelievably, with a straight face.

    Besen responded by pointing out that Sprigg has previously called for the criminalization for homosexuality and advocated for exporting gay people from the United States, a point that Costello confirmed:

    BESEN: Peter, I find it ironic that you're embracing diversity. I mean you called for the imprisonment of gay people and said we should export homosexuals out of the United States and suddenly you're for tolerance? I'm a little confused here.

    SPRIGG: [laughing] Well this is about Pastor Giglio and President Obama, it's not about me.

    BESEN: No, I just find it ironic that you're a spokesperson for tolerance.

    COSTELLO: But Wayne is right, Peter. Wayne is right about that, Peter.

    Sprigg's history of inflammatory anti-gay rhetoric goes even further, endorsing "ex-gay" therapy and claiming that gay people are mentally ill. According to a recent SPLC report:

    Sprigg authored a 2010 brochure touting "The Top Ten Myths about Homosexuality." In the brochure, Sprigg claimed that ex-gay therapy works, that sexual orientation can change, that gay people are mentally ill simply because homosexuality makes them that way, and that, "Sexual abuse of boys by adult men is many times more common than consensual sex between adult men, and most of those engaging in such molestation identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual." He also claimed that "homosexuals are less likely to enter into a committed relationship" and "less likely to be sexually faithful to a partner." Sprigg's sources are a mixture of junk science issued by groups that support ex-gay therapy and legitimate science quoted out of context or cherry-picked, a tactic long used by anti-gay groups to bolster their claims about gay people. [emphasis added]

    It's not surprising, then, that Sprigg falsely claimed that the majority of Americans find homosexuality to be immoral. Pastor Giglio's anti-gay remarks may seem tame to someone like Sprigg, but they're far out of line with the American public's growing acceptance of LGBT equality.

  • Why Does The Media Overlook Peter Sprigg's Homophobia?

    Blog ››› ››› JAMISON FOSER

    Family Research Council senior fellow Peter Sprigg was on CNN last night -- and quoted in yesterday's Washington Post -- opposing equal rights for gays. Neither news organization adequately explained who Sprigg is, perhaps because doing so would raise serious questions about why it granted him a platform.

    Peter Sprigg wants "gay behavior" outlawed and has said he would "much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than to import them into the United States because we believe that homosexuality is destructive to society." Sprigg's comments played a role in the Southern Poverty Law Center's decision to identify FRC as a "hate group." (Sprigg subsequently apologized for the comment about exporting gays, saying he was guilty of "speaking in a way that did not reflect the standards which the Family Research Council and I embrace" -- but he did not retract the substance of the comment.) The fact that Sprigg is so intolerant of gays is crucial to interpreting his comments on gay rights -- but neither CNN nor the Post offered a hint of the extremity of Sprigg's views.

    That's nothing new at the Post, which has previously gone so far as to give Sprigg an unmoderated online Q&A session with its readers. And CNN has frequently hosted Sprigg and quoted him in news reports, presenting him to its audience as an expert on everything from parenting to (completely fictitious) attempts to prevent the celebration of Christmas to military readiness. (Dan Savage has previously criticized CNN for providing a forum for gay-bashers.)

    It's hard to imagine CNN or the Washington Post treating, say, David Duke this way. And yet they frequently feature Peter Sprigg as though he's a legitimate, mainstream figure -- and they do so while withholding from their audience information that would make clear that he is not.

    The obvious implication of all this is that CNN and the Washington Post are far more comfortable with homophobia than they are with racism or anti-Semitism. I just wish they'd come out and say it.