Tweet
crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters
On today's episode of Hardball, Family Research Council spokesperson and board member Peter Sprigg said that he believes that Lawrence vs. Texas (the Supreme Court decision that struck down the sodomy laws) was “wrongly decided” and that “gay behavior” should be criminalized.
His comments were in the middle of a debate with Servicemembers Legal Defense Network's Aubrey Sarvis.
Freudian slips about the lgbt community are nothing new to Sprigg. Two years ago, he said that he would prefer that the United States “export” gays and lesbians.
The entire video is below and Sprigg's comments about “criminalizing gay behavior” are at the end (the exchange begins at 7:40), but I would suggest that you watch the entire thing. Sarvis totally destroys him.
And it proves the point that in a head-to-head debate with facts on hand, religious right groups can't get away with their nonsense.
Transcript (courtesy of Firedoglake.com):
MATTHEWS: What should a young woman or man, 22 years old, out of college, officer material, they want to serve their country. But they’re gay. What should they do? They want to serve their country?
SPRIGG: Well, they should serve it in some civilian capacity, and not join the military.
MATTHEWS: Why not?
SPRIGG: Because the presence of homosexuals in the military is incompatible with good order, morale, discipline and unit cohesion. That’s exactly what Congress found in 1993 and that’s what the law states!
[snip]
SPRIGG: Don’t ask don’t tell is the Clinton compromise policy which is actually incompatible with the law that was passed by Congress. There’s almost universal misunderstanding about that. I’d like to see us do away with this don’t ask don’t tell, and simply enforce the law that was passed by Congress.
[snip]
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you Peter, do you think people choose to be gay?
SPRIGG: Uh, people do not choose to have same-sex attractions, but they do choose to have homosexual conduct [...]
MATTHEWS: Do you think we should outlaw gay behavior?
SPRIGG: Well, I think certainly-
MATTHEWS: I’m just asking you, should we outlaw gay behavior?
SPRIGG: I think that the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned the sodomy laws in this country, was wrongly decided. I think there would be a place for criminal sanctions against homosexual behavior.
MATTHEWS: So we should outlaw gay behavior.
SPRIGG: Yes.
And lest we forget, the rest of Sprigg's comments are extremely offensive. His implication that gays and lesbians shouldn't openly serve in the military because we may subject heterosexuals to sexual harassment is akin to saying that integration should not exist because black men will force themselves on white women.
It's insane and if FRC had any personal integrity, it would make a statement distancing itself from Sprigg's statements. In light of all the attention about the Ugandan anti-gay bill, his comments about “criminalizing gay behavior” are just ugly. Of course even if there were no Ugandan anti-gay bill, Sprigg's comments should still be viewed as uncalled for.
But I doubt that FRC will say or do anything distancing itself from Sprigg. His comments are totally on point with religious right dogma, not only about gays in the military but also other facets of our lives.
Religious right groups don't see us as people and they have been exploiting the fears and ignorance of people of faith in order to get others to share their view of the lgbt community.
The only reason why Sprigg got caught today is because he couldn't muster up enough shiftiness.
We need to spread this clip and remind everyone what Sprigg said. Whether he realizes it or not, he is the true face of religious right groups.
Behind their phony veneer of “traditional morality” and “loving the sinner but hating the scene” is a corrupt working of lies, distortions and yes, hate.
27 Comments
Interesting piece… This will get coverage I hope.Mr. Sarvis was using good quotes from the latest poll re Americans and DADT.79% of all support Gays in military, 61% of weekly churchgoers support.Mr. Prigg said that 10% of Military Times readers said they wouldn't reenlist…so WHAT?! They can go work for Blackwater.
Re-criminalisation was always the objectiveand will remain the case; there can be no civil rights for criminal behaviours.
Expect a repeal of Lawrence in a year or so and then a wave of arrests…..
FRC Miliatary ClownsI can’t believe that Matthews let “assaults” go by .. he usually picks up on outrageous hyperbole like that.
I choke over this argument that people who re-enlist if gays have a place at the table. Truman integrated the army and we have a finer force because of it, not despite it. Same with women.
Still, face it, the Obama admin is falling on itself, again, failing to find good messaging for a controversial issue.
Obama introduced the topic as “the right thing to do”. Yeah, Mr. President, that’s not your best foot forward into this crowded room, especially when you have a platform as big as the State of the Union address…
I can’t remember where I read it…… but today someone pointed out that there were a large percentage of servicemen who claimed they would quit if blacks were admitted, but the REALITY was that almost none did when push came to shove.
You know it will be exactly the same with this.
They are becoming more desperateThat’s how I read this exchange.
Keep talking, Sprigg!We need people like him out there torpedoing their cause.
At a time when, like it or not, we have troops fighting three wars, saying gays shouldn’t serve in the military, shouldn’t wear uniforms is so outrageous and flies so much in the face of widespread public opinion, it’s a perfect bucket of cold water to wake people up. This, my friends, is how crazy and bigoted the FRC is.
Mr Marvis was really good,, but Rachel’s interview with Lieutenant Colonel Victor FehrenbachWAS AMAZING, I hope someone can link her video when it’s upon her site.
Nothingupsets me more than to be talking gay marriage to someone who spends all their free time fighting gay marriage and gay rights and they say “I don’t hate gays, I love gays”. I almost want to deck them. Nobody spends that amount of time trying to make someone miserable because they “Love them’.
This guy is a bigger idiot than McCainCriminalize gay behavior, WTF???? This guy is a complete moron. We need to criminalize stupidity and send this guy to the pokey (pun intended lol). Now that would be justice.
Let the bigots leaveIf 10% leave due to their bigoted attitudes I say good riddance. Replace them with gay troops and you get win-win. The bigots get driven out so the rest of the hard working professional military people don’t have to listen to their hatred, and the gay troops get recognized and will finally be treated equally.
Total F****g pig low-life!Entitled to his opinion, but not exempt from being called on it. What else does this a**h**e want to see happen to LGBT people???!!!
As if anyone has any questions. ”Concentration camps for the lot of them,” in his pathetic opinion.
Asshole.
Can anyone tell me if sprigg ever served?Tweety talked about Sarvis’ service to his country but sprigg is just frc asshat. So I assume he has never served and like everything else, sprigg is simply talking out of his ass again.
agreed
I can’t stand that shit either. Makes my blood boil when someone can actually stand there and utter such an idiotic statement. They seem to have no idea or do not care how much they are making other people’s lives miserable for their own bigoted piece of mind. Their rationale is so twisted it’s not even funny.
This kind of talk usually comes with the idiotic assumption that they’re somehow “helping those poor gay people” just like you help alcoholics. So much stupidity.
Being a fanatical religious nutjob ought to be criminalised.It frightens me that a country with nuclear weapons has people like this in its population.
Maura, let’s pray that doesn’t happen….I would highly suggest arming yourself for the possibility, though New York makes it quite difficult in the first place. If Lawrence is overturned, then they’re coming after us all.
and maybe, the framers of the Constitution made a mistake as well,by allowing Religion to run rampant without any government control whatsoever. Instead of “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” It should have said, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, unless it threatens the democracy…”
Herb, many peoplehave been “loved to death” in this country through “doing the righteous” thing. These religious people actually believe that loving someone by stoning them to death for god is just.
What the religious nuts really wantis to put us all behind barbed wire in concentration camps. A national round-up followed by interment. Bounties to be offered for turning in your gay neighbor, bigger bounties for turning in your family members. America the Beautiful…
If Obama does not stop agressively defending DOMA in the courts….I fear Maura’s prediction might very well have merit.
I once saw a bumperstickerIt read “LOBOTOMIES FOR REPUBLICANS–IT’S THE LAW.”
This just confirms my suspicion that the procedure is a conservative initiation rite.
Well, to paraphrase our fierce advocateGod is in the militia….
The same churches who “love the sinner” hereare lobbying for imprisonment and death for us in countries where they have the power to do so with impunity.
We cannot survive such love….
At least Sprigg got to the bottom linehe wants to criminalize homo-SECK-ual behavior.
Count me with the other upthread…that “but I love gay people” crap is nerve wrecking. Chris Matthews did a good job here, though I wish he had time to go a little deeper.
I’m with everyone…about the “I love gay people” thing. I’ve had so many people tell me that while saying I’m immoral or deserve to be fired from my job, barred from marrying my partner, etc.
To put it simply, “love” is a word these people simply don’t understand. It would be more accurate to describe it as a mix of condescension and invalidation. As someone mentioned, they look upon us as they would alcoholics, but they simply refuse to listen to our side of the story because their religion teaches them that they already know what’s best for everyone else.
They do understandThere’s a big difference between your idea of love and theirs.
Yours is “Supporting me in a temporal life.”
Theirs is “making your temporal life so miserable that you will turn away from your wickedness, be saved and not burn for eternity.”
It’s a tough-love thing. But your eternal life is of more concern than your earthly life to these people, and they see themselves as kind and caring for making sure you don’t endure infinite torment for finite happiness.
You give them too much credit.They’re not worried about our eternal souls, they’re worried about their own. They think that they have to fight “sin” everywhere they see it so their own souls won’t burn because they “didn’t do enough to spread Jesus’ word”.
SpriggI went to college with Peter Sprigg (Drew University, NJ). Sprigg the Prig was a sanctimonious little shit then and he’s grown into an even bigger one since.