He has a right to run for governor but the people who signed his petition are nothing but homophobes and transphobes.
Anti-Gay Pastor Scott Lively Has Qualified For Mass. Governor RaceYou may remember that I wrote about him being sued about what he did in Uganda, he won the case but is appealing the case,
"The natural family of a man and woman...is the self-evident foundation of all civilization," says the pastor who lobbied for Uganda's "Kill the Gays" bill.
By Lamar Dawson
May 2, 2018
Lively has actively promoted anti-LGBT laws in Uganda and Russia and hopes to bring them to the United States as well.
In 2016, Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) filed a lawsuit against Lively accusing him of crimes against humanity, claiming he convinced lawmakers in Uganda to pass draconian anti-gay laws. In multiple trips over a course of a decade, SMUG maintains Lively fostered hatred and violence against LGBT Ugandans, who he labeled “brutal savages” and pedophiles.
Lively has positioned himself as the pro-Trump answer to the state’s current LGBT-friendly governor, Charlie Baker, who is critical of the president. On Lively’s campaign website, the pastor states he advocates for the traditional definition of marriage writing: “The natural family of a man and woman united in life-long marriage for mutual love and support and the bearing and nurturing of children, through birth or adoption, is the self-evident foundation of all civilization.”
On the campaign trail, Lively has also promised to go after Baker’s Transgender Anti-Discrimination Law which allows people to choose public facilities like restrooms and locker rooms based on their gender identity, and protects transgender people from discrimination in public spaces like libraries.
In Scathing Ruling, Court Affirms SMUG’s Charges Against U.S. Anti-Gay Extremist Scott Lively While Dismissing on Jurisdictional GroundSo now he is appealing his victory…
Historic Case Has Broken New Legal Ground, Documented Lively’s Campaign of Persecution in Uganda
Center for Constitutional Rights
June 6, 2017, New York – Yesterday, a federal court minced no words in affirming that U.S.-based anti-gay extremist Scott Lively aided and abetted the crime against humanity of persecution in a ruling dismissing the lawsuit brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) on a narrow jurisdictional ground.
“Anyone reading this memorandum should make no mistake,” wrote Judge Michael Ponsor of the U.S. District Court in Springfield Massachusetts. “The question before the court is not whether Defendant’s actions in aiding and abetting efforts to demonize, intimidate, and injure LGBTI people in Uganda constitute violations of international law. They do.”
The judge ruled that even though the evidence supports SMUG’s claims that Lively worked to deprive them of fundamental rights, the court did not have jurisdiction as a result of a 2013 Supreme Court ruling issued after SMUG’s case was filed. The ruling in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Shell limited the extraterritorial reach of the Alien Tort Statute, under which SMUG brought its claim. “The much narrower and more technical question posed by Defendant’s motion is whether the limited actions taken by Defendant on American soil in pursuit of his odious campaign are sufficient to give this court jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims,” Judge Ponsor continued. “Since they are not sufficient, summary judgment is appropriate for this, and only this, reason.”
Savaged by Judge, Anti-Gay Minister Appeals Court WinSo this is the guy running for the highest office in the state of Massachusetts.
Court House News
By Zack Huffman
June 16, 2017
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (CN) – Just days after a federal judge tossed the crimes-against-humanity suit against him, an anti-gay evangelist has brought an appeal to remove criticism of his hateful bigotry from the court record.
Lively now claims in the footnote of a June 8 notice of appeal that Ponsor went too far.
“Although this order granted summary judgment in [his] favor,” Lively said the First Circuit should intervene to clean up “certain extraneous but prejudicial language immaterial to the disposition of the case.”
Lively’s attorneys, Horatio Mihet with the Orlando firm Liberty Counsel, also contend that “the district court had no jurisdiction to entertain or enter” such language.