LGBT groups stand in solidarity with the Family Research Council

GETTY IMAGES Local and federal investigators work to gather evidence after a security guard was shot in the arm at … Continued

GETTY IMAGES

Local and federal investigators work to gather evidence after a security guard was shot in the arm at the headquarters of the Family Research Council Aug. 15, 2012 in Washington, D.C.

Shortly after news spread about the Wednesday morning shooting of a security guard at the Family Research Council’s (FRC) headquarters by a gunman , Truth Wins Out, a non-profit organization that fights anti-gay religious extremism, posted the following press release:

Authorities identified the shooter as Floyd Lee Corkins II, of Herndon. The security guard, Leonardo R. Johnson, was called a hero by D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier for his role in helping to prevent further injury at the conservative group’s D.C. office Wednesday..

Besen added his name a statement issued by Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) and signed by 25 LGBT groups.


View Photo Gallery: A security guard a was shot and wounded after a scuffle with a man who expressed disagreement with the group’s conservative views.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights organization that added the FRC to its list of hate groups that it monitors, issued the following statement:

Some attempted to connect the shooter to the Chick-Fil-A boycotts based on material found in his backpack, as well as link him to LGBT organizations. At this time, no major LGBT groups claim to have a direct connection to him.

Despite Truth Wins Out’s long history of debating with pro-family “Christian” groups, Besen posted online a response from Jim Daly, president of Focus on the Family, adding that he totally agrees with Daly.

As Besen stated, Daly issued a truly Christian response.

Moving forward, will this sentiment continue? What prevents those who proclaim to be Christians in the public square from putting forth the principle of liberty of conscience articulated by Roger Williams, the founder of the state of Rhode Island? After all, this pioneer of religious freedom also founded the first Baptist church in America, a denomination frequented by many who self-identify with the religious right. To quote Williams, “Men’s consciences ought in no sort to be violated, urged, or constrained.” Rather than create Puritan enclaves designed to separate the saved from the damned, Williams chose to embrace all, knowing we are not isolated individuals but part of a shared global humanity.

Becky Garrison
Written by

  • marshalphillips

    another news day, another shooting, when are we ever gonna learn?
    guns are not the answer!
    who is pushing this pro-gun agenda amongst us?

  • jjlc125

    “Truth Wins Out, a non-profit organization that fights anti-gay religious extremism,…”

    The “anti-gay religious extremism” description is a statement of opinion, not fact. The author should instead have said that Truth Wins Out opposes what it believes to be “anti-gay religious extremism.”

    Wayne Besen’s condemnation of the shooting is welcome. However, Mr. Besen should re-evaluate his style of discourse since he regularly vilifies Roman Catholics, evangelical Christians and others who disagree with his views on sexuality and the definition of marriage.

  • Catken1

    So it’s not “religious extremism” to argue for denying people not only marriage and family, but also jobs, homes, service in public buildings, even custody of their children, even the right to SEE their children, because they disobey your preferred religion’s dogma concerning appropriate dangly bits for one’s sexual/marital partners?

    It’s not “religious extremism” to push for civil laws that require the civil government to privilege those who follow your religious dogma and punish those who do not?

    If a Muslim advocated doing to Christians what the FRC advocates doing to gays, or if anyone advocated doing the same to black people, white people, Jews, Asians, left-handed folks, or any other group, you would have no problem labeling them as “anti-X religious extremists.”

    And it’s a bit disingenuous to innocently complain about being condemned for your “views on sexuality and the definition of marriage” – but when those views include using the civil law to force others to comply with your views, and to attack other people’s marriages and families SOLELY because they do not abide by your views, well, there’s a reason they’re criticized. Tolerance and freedom of speech do not mean that you’re immune from criticism while you attack everything that is dear to and cherished by other human beings