The American Family Association has announced today that the organization's founder and longtime leader, Donald Wildmon, has resigned after more than 30 years as chairman of what has long been one of the leading anti-gay organizations in the country.

According to a press release, Wildmon has resigned due to ongoing health concerns caused after he was bitten last summer by a mosquito carrying the St. Louis encephalitis virus. Wildmon said that he will continue to work with AFA, and that his son, Tim, who has been with the organization for 24 years, is expected to succeed him as chair.

According to the press release: The retired United Methodist minister [Donald Wildmon] began AFA in 1977 in his dining room with a typewriter and a used offset press. Today the ministry operates on a $20 million annual budget with 175 employees. The ministry owns and operates 180 radio stations, a monthly magazine with a circulation of 170,000 and an internet presence of 2.5 million supporters.

Here are just a few examples of how Wildmon has used his budget and his influence to try and stall LGBT rights:

• Wildmon is first national religious leader to call on GOP officeholders to purge their staffs of LGBT people after the Congressman Mark Foley scandal in 2006.
• Wildmon calls on his supporters to take action against McDonald's after the fast food chain joins the National GLBT Chamber of Commerce in 2008.
• Wildmon and his AFA troops worked to pass Proposition 8 in California in 2008.
• Wildmon called for a boycott of PepsiCo because the company supported gay rights.

Amnesty International has called on the authorities of Lithuania to remove all restrictions on the distribution of public information relating to the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people decreed in a new law.

The controversial Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effect of Public Information enters into force 1 March.

This law will violate the freedom of expression and will directly discriminate against people on account of their sexual orientation or gender identity, said John Dalhuisen, expert on discrimination at Amnesty International.

It will stigmatize gay and lesbian people and exposes advocates for their rights to the risk of censorship and financial penalties.

This law is an anachronism in the European Union.

The new law now classifies any information which denigrates family values or which encourages a concept of marriage and family other than stipulated in the Constitution  and the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania as detrimental to children and consequently bans it from places accessible to them.

As marriage is defined in Lithuanian law as the union of a man and a woman, any public promotion of same-sex partnerships, or advocacy for equality in marriage, would be prohibited under the new law.

An art exhibition portraying Jesus as the gay son of a prostitute has been closed after the organisers at Granada University in Spain admitted that furious protests from churchgoers meant that they could no longer guarantee the safety of its creator, Fernando Bayona.

The exhibition also shows Jesus having sex with Mary Magdalen before turning gay. There is a lot of anger and there have been some very serious threats to both the artist and our staff, said a worker at the university.

Censorship of homosexuality on New Zealand pay TV channels set to continue for some time yet despite a number of gay people objecting to a man-on-man kiss being blurred on the E! channel.

Viewers expressed their concern to GayNZ.com after Sky TV's E! channel blurred over a scene from the movie I Love You Philip Morris of actors Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor kissing. They felt it was unnecessary and conveyed the message that two men kissing is somehow shameful or unpalatable.

They don't censor scenes from movies and shows where there is violence and all sorts of gross stuff, why should they think two men tenderly kissing was an affront, argued Raymond of Auckland. Why would they put a large oval 'modesty patch' over two men kissing? asked Dominic of Wellington.

The American producers of the E! entertainment news programme say the scene was blurred because of the restraints placed upon us due to the international nature of our programmes and channels.

The E! spokesperson said New Zealand viewers see an international version of the programme that goes out worldwide just hours after it is assembled. We have to ensure our content is compliant in all of the territories that we transmit in, and unfortunately there are some territories that same sex kissing is required to be blurred.

Gay New Zealand television producer Glenn Sims of RedFlame Media says he understands where the E! producers are coming from, but believes that the conservative sociology of the American TV marketplace which got so indignant about a flash of nipple in prime-time a few years ago is just as much to blame as the institutionalised homophobia of some of our Asia/Pacific neighbours such as Singapore and Malaysia. Censoring such gay-themed content reinforces homophobia, he acknowledges.

E! says it tries to be sensitive to the different requirements of each territory and claims to be in the process of overcoming the technical hurdles that will allow us to create territory-specific versions of our shows.

Organisers of last year's first-ever Moscow Gay Pride have today formally taken their case of the ban by the authorities in the Russian capital of both a parade and a picket to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.

This follows the unsuccessful appeals against the bans through the Russian court system, which are now exhausted, as far as requirements of European Court's jurisprudence are concerned.

The organizers are considering appealing pride bans to the Russian Supreme Court parallel to their European Court application though it will not effect the consideration of the case in Strasbourg.

At the same time, Moscow Pride organisers announced that this year's Moscow Pride will definitely be going ahead, and that an application for a parade will be made in accordance with Russian law, two weeks before the event, scheduled for Sunday May 27, the day in 1993 when homosexuality was decriminalised in Russia.

The application to the European Court of Human Rights combines two cases: one concerning the ban by Moscow authorities of the gay pride march and the second concerning the banning of the alternative pride picket, both scheduled for May 27, 2006.

In the application, the litigants claim that in denying permission to stage both the march and the picket the Russian Federation breached Article 11 (right to freedom of peaceful assembly), Article 13 (right to effective court protection) and Article 14 (discrimination ban) in conjunction with Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, to which Russia is a signatory.

The Vatican condemned Britain's proposed equality law, complaining that legislation to give homosexual equal rights violates natural law.

The Vatican launched an unprecedented attack on the human rights policies of Gordon Brown, claiming that they threatened religious freedom and urging Catholic bishops to fight back with missionary zeal.

The Archbishop of Westminster, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols, added his voice to the assault, describing the new equality legislation as unjust.

In what was interpreted as an attack on Harriet Harman's Equality Bill, which is going through Parliament, the Pope urged the 35 Catholic bishops from England and Wales in Rome on a five-yearly ad limina visit to make a united stand against it. He claimed that the proposed equal rights laws threatened longstanding British traditions of freedom of speech.

The Pope's words indicated the level of Catholic anger, shared at the highest levels of the Church of England, at the Labour Government's repeated moves to marginalise religion in public life.

The Pope said: Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet, as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed.

Protest the Pope

Based on article from timesonline.co.uk

Surprise at the Pope's remarks is giving way to more determined opposition to his views, with the National Secular Society vowing to set up a Protest the Pope campaign to hold demonstrations during Benedict's visit this year.

Aware of the growing controversy, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols, in Rome leading the 34 other bishops of England and Wales on an ad limina, or five-yearly visit to see the Pope, said that Benedict XVI was only saying publicly what many devout people believed.

I think [the Pope's] words will find an echo in many in our country who are uneasy that perhaps one of the unintended consequences of recent legislation is to drive religious belief and practice into the sphere of the private only, the Archbishop said. Related Links

Archbishop Nichols told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4 that the Pope had a right to express his views, which he denied were party political: The way in which our public life is organised is something to which everybody has a right to contribute.

The National Secular Society has threatened to bring together gay groups, victims of clerical abuse, feminists, family planning organisations and pro-abortion groups in a new group, the Protest the Pope Coalition, to be launched later this week.

The taxpayer in this country is going to be faced with a bill of some £20 million for the visit of the Pope, a visit in which, he has already indicated, he will attack equal rights and promote discrimination, said Terry Sanderson, the society's president: We have a petition online where people can make clear their opposition to the state funding of this visit.

Peter Tatchell, the human rights campaigner, was also among those planning online petitions against the visit: [The Pope] seems to be defending discrimination by religious institutions and demanding that they should be above the law.

Comment: A Bloke in a Dress

7th February 2010. Based on article from readingchronicle.co.uk

Reading MP Martin Salter came under fire when he enraged Catholics by attacking the Pope in an internet blog.

The Labour MP sparked lively debate on a national newspaper website with his near 700 word defence of the Government's Equality Bill in which he described the Pontiff as a bloke in a dress.

Salter accused Pope Benedict XVI of being deliberately misleading in his argument against the proposed legislation, adding: I find the hypocrisy of the Pope reprehensible, especially in a leader of a Church that internationally covered up its own institutionalised abuse.

See Salter's blog post from blogs.telegraph.co.uk