Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
I sent a link to my post about Janet Folger's anti-gay lies to the contact email from her group, Faith2Action. I got a response from their communications director, Ross Conley. I think you'll find it as interesting as I do. I'll reprint the full email below the fold, along with my response:
Mr. Ed Brayton,The reference to Dr. E. Fields was found on an internet search for statistics on public sex. Such a reference can be found on a number of websites, including this FreeRepublic article. We honestly had no idea that this E. Fields was the same man who holds such racist views. A Google or Yahoo search on "Dr. E. Fields" shows nothing.
However, if we are going to use such a standard to reject any research by a person who holds racist views, we had better all stop quoting men such as Charles Darwin and Karl Marx. Both held extremely racist views, as any internet search with their names and the word "racist" will show. A number of sites also suggest that Dr. Alfred Kinsey was a racist, despising both African-Americans and Jews.
Most Christians do not want to see homosexuals locked up or arrested. We don't want to be exposed (or even worse have children exposed) to things that should never occur in public - by heterosexuals or homosexuals. Public restrooms are not the place for sex of any kind. I think that it's awful that families have to avoid restrooms and other places because of such activity. It is also extremely sad that our society has degenerated to a place that such subjects even need to be discussed.
Ross Conley
Communication Director
Faith2Action
I think the fact that they used a source they had never heard of, and knew nothing about, is quite telling; clearly there's a reason why this group is not called Reason2Action. I think it's even more interesting that even after getting caught citing one bizarre fringe source for statistics, the link they provide is to an article from yet another bizarre fringe group, Catholic Apologetics International.
CAI is a weird little offshoot of the Catholic Church run by Robert Sungenis. Sungenis is an uber-Catholic who acts like some of the more idiotic Protestants - in particular, with his support for geocentrism. Yes, that's right kids, he thinks Galileo and Copernicus were wrong. Let's roll back the clock to the middle ages, when the Catholic Church ruled the world with an iron fist; welcome to Robert Sungenis' wet dream.
Had Conley just stopped there and said "hey, we didn't know who it was, we won't use that citation again", one could perhaps have cut them some slack. But he then goes on to justify it by saying that Darwin and Marx were racists too, apparently oblivious to the obvious differences between Victorian times and modern day. To compare a mildly racist person who was actually quite liberal on the issue at the time with someone in modern times who is a member of the KKK and neo-Nazi groups is patently absurd.
Darwin, of course, was actually quite enlightened on racial issues compared to the civilization and times he lived in. He was an outspoken opponent of slavery, for example, at a time when most people still thought slavery was the natural order of things. Indeed, he was far more enlightened on this question than his creationist counterparts in the United States.
The whole world was racist back then, or at least the large majority of it. Even those who opposed slavery in the staunchest terms could hardly bring themselves to believe that the races were actually equal. What changed that? Science, of course, particularly biology. The data makes clear that there are no extent subspecies of Homo sapiens, that we are all one species, all equally "evolved."
Science has shattered the myth of racial division over the last 150 years. Racism lives on primarily in fringe religious groups like the KKK. One need only look at the essay by "Dr" E Fields that I linked to, where he makes an explicitly Biblical argument against "race mixing." Had they done just a tiny bit of research they would have known that they were citing a man who has retained his ancient religious biases despite 150 years of science showing them wrong; that might even serve as a lesson for them. These are the things you learn when you actually do some research rather than blindly citing people you've never heard of.
I also find it fascinating that they don't bother to address the blatant lies in Folger's column. No mention at all of her lie that the library was going to make gay porn available to kids, or of the even bigger lie that the city council was taking regular books out of the library to make room for the gay porn for the kids to read. No mention of her lie about the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force trying to make it legal for them to have sex in public parks in front of your kids. No attempt to defend those lies or explain them away. Speaks volumes, doesn't it?
Comments
Unfortunately, many people -- not just these ideologues -- think that research means "looking for information to back me up."
I'm a corporate librarian, and I have people ask me to find data that will support a business proposal or bolster a decision that has already been made. In the results I make a point of calling out data or opinion that conflicts with their assumption. (In the case of a done-deal, I may decline to invest company time on a cya mission.) But as a shareholder it bothers me that people might be making costly business decisions based on gut feeling and "some data that backs me up."
Posted by: Gerry L | July 29, 2007 10:09 AM
So in other words, they weren't looking for accurate data, they were looking for "facts" to fit their own agenda and went to google to quote mine.
Ross, that's not research, you moron.
Posted by: MAJeff | July 29, 2007 10:12 AM
And Kepler, Newton, Einstein, and perhaps others as well, mostly(? entirely?) because of various (alleged) not-his-brand-of-woo-woo-ism actions, statements (mined? quotes), and (I rather suspect) nonsense he has simply invented:
http://www.catholicintl.com/noncatholicissues/personal_lives.htm
The mind doesn't only boggle, but it melts down into the floor, the ground below, down through the disc to the elephants, and is now working its way through the turtle. Is this guy for real? Geesh!
Posted by: blf | July 29, 2007 10:47 AM
Were you honestly expecting anything different from them?
Posted by: Divalent | July 29, 2007 10:56 AM
These Faith2Action folks wouldn't earn anywhere near a passing grade in a freshman course in writing research papers. Haven't they ever heard of the concept of 'evaluating sources'?
Posted by: Elf Eye | July 29, 2007 11:06 AM
Such a reference can be found on a number of websites, including this FreeRepublic article.
WND using FreeRepublic as a source. I'm speechless.
Most Christians do not want to see homosexuals locked up or arrested.
Just "Most"?
Posted by: Coin | July 29, 2007 2:33 PM
Most Christians do not want to see homosexuals locked up or arrested.
I wouldn't be surprised to find out that most Christians wanted to see homosexuals deported or executed, instead. I'm not saying that's the case, I'm only saying I wouldn't be surprised if it were.
Posted by: Shawn Smith | July 29, 2007 3:26 PM
It's funny (but not "ha, ha" funny) that Ross Conley evades the Faith2Action citation of "Dr. E. Fields" as an authority on homosexual behavior by saying "we honestly had no idea that this E. Fields was the same man who holds such racist views." Conley claims a Google and Yahoo search turned up nothing for "E. Fields." Actually, five minutes of my Googling turned up dozens of references to "Dr. E. R. Fields," including a lengthy report from the Anti-Defamation League that documents Fields' 40 years of involvement with neo-Nazi, holocuast-denying, white-supremacist, homophobic groups from the KKK to the Christian Anti-Jewish Party, whose declared aim was "to make being Jewish a crime, punishable by death." It may be that Conley was simply too lazy to check out Fields, but citing as authoritative anything by such a notorious Nazi bigot says something about the credulousness of Faith2Action.
Posted by: peter irons | July 29, 2007 4:29 PM
Bullshit Mister Conley!Your girl holds a college degree in communications.I am a high school drop-out.Yet,I know better than to quote a source that I have exactly no background on.Perhaps her next article will contain selected quotes from institutionalized mental patients.As far as research by Mr.Fields it is the same as all bigot research.Quote another bigot.
Posted by: spartanrider | July 29, 2007 5:05 PM
Sungenis is also a repeat plagiarist and raging anti-Semite. He's alienated former friends and co-workers over these things.
Posted by: Adrienne | July 29, 2007 7:20 PM
So they Googled "E. Fields," but not "Is Homosexual Activity Normal?"
Because if you Google the title of Fields' publication (and it is, in fact, an 8-page pamphlet, not a "book"), it turns up several articles in the first few pages of results that identify the publisher as being associated with the KKK.
Plus, if you scan down that FreeRepublic page Conley cites, you'll see that a poster (post #33) there also identified Fields' material as coming from a "white-supremacist organization."
Posted by: Loren | July 29, 2007 9:51 PM
Being that she does have a call-in show, it would be wonderful if she got some pointed questions phoned in from the readers here. You can listen to her live on the Internet, 1-2PM CST. As I've been one of the few people who has ever called her and challenged her on some of the things she's said, I'd love some company.
Posted by: General Zia | July 29, 2007 10:37 PM
Quite frankly, whether Darwin, Marx or Kinsey were racist isn't terribly relevant. The importance of their work stands on the work hundreds of other people have built upon their work.
Conley's arguments are hilarious. "It's not my fault, no one told me". The admission that his idea of sources is "stuff found online" is pretty much and admission that he has no credibility. And the "but everyone is doing it" is worthy of a first grader (and deserves a reply of "if everyone jumped off a cliff, would you do it"). It's also factually inaccurate, but then, what do you expect from someone who admits that "anything you can find on the internet" is his idea of a reliable source.
Posted by: IanR | July 30, 2007 12:10 AM
Is this true-- that nobody can use public restrooms any longer? I mean, like, is it true everywhere? Like at Ken Ham's Creation Museum? Because I know, like, they have that porn star playing Adam. So, like, people can't even use the restrooms there? Like, what are you supposed to do? Like, if you totally start to gag???
Posted by: hoary puccoon | July 30, 2007 1:26 AM
It's actually worse even than that. On that page he gives his name as "Dr. E. R. Fields", and searching on that produces several relevant results. Did Faith2Action deliberately leave out an initial in order to find nothing?
Posted by: Stephen | July 30, 2007 1:36 AM
However, if we are going to use such a standard to reject any research by a person who holds racist views, we had better all stop quoting men such as Charles Darwin and Karl Marx. Both held extremely racist views, as any internet search with their names and the word "racist" will show. A number of sites also suggest that Dr. Alfred Kinsey was a racist, despising both African-Americans and Jews.
Nya nya nya to you too Mr. Conley. Yeah I'm sure you guys were evaluating and quoting the research on its merits alone. Well done sir. Nya.
Posted by: 386sx | July 30, 2007 2:19 AM
[Darwin] was an outspoken opponent of slavery, for example, at a time when most people still thought slavery was the natural order of things.
Not crucial to your argument, Ed, but I think that's a pretty large exaggeration. It's hard to imagine Britain abolishing slavery in 1808 if there were really such a consensus about its propriety. Even back in 1774, when Samuel Johnson was writing a rebuttal of the American tax protests, he asked mockingly "Why do we hear the loudest yelps about liberty, from the drivers of Negroes?" And Johnson was a Tory writing (mostly) to his fellow Tories.
Posted by: Jeffrey Kramer | July 30, 2007 7:19 AM
Mr. Brayton:
Shame on you for starting this blogified withchunt against Mr. Conley, Dr. Fielding and Ms. Folger (damn, she makes some good coffee, good to the last drop!!). You are very well aware that Senator Robert Byrd is a racist, Ted Kennedy is a murderer and the Clenis is a cigarialist adulterer. But, do they get shouted down by the right for their cockeyed, crazy views? Hmmm?
It's CAI's right, privelege and duty to debunk the views of nutjobs like Copernicus (btw, his movie, "Apocalypse, Now" had nothing to do with the "Rapture") and Gaylielo.
FoxNewsiness is right, you leftwing blogger people are mean bullies and crazier than hell. I saw a sign last night, out in front of "The Burning Cross of Righteousness Church and Firing Range", that said "Jesus Christ is the answer to all of life's problems"--that's my new mantra. It's the "little womans" too. Why just this morning I was
instructing her on the proper way to fix the grits and redeye gravy, giving her a few pointers on her driving an mentioning, just in passing, that she might could lose a couple of L.B.'s. Well, folks, she just picked up that 24" diameter, 13 pound, cast'arn "Missionary Skillet", reared back and, last thing I recall, before I woke up, said, "Jesus Christ, would you just shut the fuck up!?". She says it worked for her--But I think it's gonna leave a mark.
One question; how did somebody namea "Ham" get a gig at GOD's Creation Museum, wtfwj say?
Posted by: Democommie | July 30, 2007 7:26 AM
I skimmed the comments, and did not see anyone post a link to this article:
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2007/07/mrs-folgers-christian-science.html
Jesus' General is taking the side of Mrs. Folger against you, Ed. Watch out.
Brian
Posted by: Brian63 | July 30, 2007 7:13 PM
It's actually worse even than that. On that page he gives his name as "Dr. E. R. Fields", and searching on that produces several relevant results. Did Faith2Action deliberately leave out an initial in order to find nothing?
My gut says 'no.' The FreeRepublic page lists him as "E. Fields," and a lot of other online pages that cite him don't include the R. I think it's a fair concession to assume that the page they pulled the quote from didn't have the R either, so they didn't know his middle initial.
And in my experience, a lot of people are simply bad at researching with Google. They wouldn't think to Google "E. Fields," look for a related result, change their search parameters, and search again. This is why I think it's a bigger failure on their part to not simply Googled the name of the publication that they already knew, since that would've thrown up warning signs immediately.
Posted by: Loren | July 30, 2007 7:34 PM
This Google search yields over 60,000 results. This one gives a still-impressive 840. I guess this "proves"...well, you figure it out.
Posted by: kemibe | July 31, 2007 8:18 PM
Kudos on the Terry Pratchett reference! A'Tuin would be proud!
Posted by: Navy Vet | August 1, 2007 11:58 AM