This post is dedicated to the intelligent but misguided colleagues of mine who complain when anti-gay spokespeople are given a platform to spread their homophobic lies.

You cannot stop lies by covering the mouth of those who tell them. You only give them power through pity. As the following post, courtesy of Right Wing Watch proves, by all means, give anti-gay spokespeople a platform to spread their lies. But not a platform which offers no challenge. Let people like Tony Perkins, or in this case, Mat Staver, speak. But make sure they are challenged by someone who knows their stuff such as Rep. Jerry Nadler:

 Testifying before a House committee today about supposed threats to religious freedom in the U.S., Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver struggled to defend his support for allowing businesses to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler grilled Staver about his view that it would be wrong for a wedding photographer to discriminate against a Jewish couple because of a religious objection, but that the photographer is free to discriminate against a same-sex couple.

First, Staver tried to avoid the question by saying a photographer wouldn’t refuse to work for a Jewish wedding, but ultimately agreed that such anti-Jewish discrimination is in fact a violation of the law.

“I don’t see any difference at all” between refusing a Jewish couple and a gay couple, Nadler said.

He continued: “I’m holding out myself in commerce and my religious belief is that I don’t want black people or Jewish people or gay people in my restaurant and the federal government says that is discrimination, is that a violation of the freedom of religion?”

“No,” Staver conceded.

Public condemnations are messy, but in the case of anti-gay groups and spokespeople, it is something which is very necessary. You see, even when their anti-gay propaganda is refuted on paper,  they tend to repeat it as if nothing happened. They tend to get away with this a lot.

Public condemnation and exposure is one of the only few actions which they have a difficult time ignoring. It not only exposes flimsiness of their arguments but also their lack of integrity. Don’t think so? Ask Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family about the 2011 incident in which Sen. Al Franken called him out during his testimony for distorting a study.

I doubt he will want to talk about it.