Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day He visits us.

– I Peter 2:11-12

Excerpted from Psychologist’s Association with Family Group Costs Job, published Oct 4, 2006, by WorldNet Daily:

…Technically, Michael Campion’s work for the department simply was ‘not renewed,’ but since even city officials confirm they have been unable to attract a single complaint about him, pro-family groups are citing liberal interests’ objections to his former association with their efforts as a reason.

“They want to demonize Christians, and they’re willing to play hardball,” Pete LaBarbera, spokesman for the Illinois Family Institute, told WND.

…LaBarbera said Campion’s difficulty was that he was run over by a strong homosexual lobby in the city. He said his own organization also took a hit from a Minneapolis news report that said the IFI opposes civil rights for gays.

“The position we take on a sexual orientation law is that by making a right based on sexual behavior it doesn’t fit the traditional civil rights model,” he said.

…”Obviously he’s being treated because of his Christian association in the past,” LaBarbera said. “People all over the nation have to be watching this case with a great amount of care. If you go to the Catholic church that believes homosexuality is a disorder, does that mean you can’t have a federal job?”

He said simple logic confirms that one cannot determine rights on “how people have sex.”

…”The liberal ‘diversity’ lobby is going after Mike because of his deeply-held religious and moral beliefs. In fact, no homosexual police officers have come forward with charges of bias,” LaBarbera said. “How ironic that the forces of ‘tolerance’ are now leading a new assault on civil rights, this time against people of faith.”

Continue reading at WorldNet Daily…

Excerpted from “Same Sex Marriage Harms Children’s Rights” Marriage Symposium Hears, published Sept 21, 2006, by LifeSite News:

Louis DeSerres, co-founder of Preserve Marriage – Protect Children’s Rights, addressed the issue of harm to children’s rights resulting from same-sex marriage at symposium on marriage held at Brigham Young University Law School last week. The ‘What’s The Harm? How Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Will Harm Society, Families, Adults, Children and Marriage’ symposium was jointly sponsored by The Marriage and Family Law Project at Brigham University Law School and The Marriage Law Project at the Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law. The symposium was held on September 15-16, 2006.

DeSerres asked if there is a more natural and self evident birth right for a child than to have a mother and a father. More specifically, while nature creates every child with two biological parents, same-sex marriage leads to the creation of fatherless and motherless children, taking away one of the child’s natural parents.

…Man-woman marriage provides the child with many benefits, said DeSerres enumerating fourteen such benefits which are all lost with same-sex marriage.

Some of the harms caused by same sex ‘marriage’ are irreversible, suggested DeSerres. “Unfortunately, the harm is permanent as no legal authority can bring back the missing biological parent of a child born from an anonymous sperm donor or a surrogate mother. Only prevention can protect children’s rights to a father and a mother.”

Continue reading at LifeSite News…

Excerpted from Speculation Flies on Fallout from Foley, by Douglas Turner, published Oct 4, 2006, by The Buffalo News:

… “This is a story that people can understand,” Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute told The Buffalo News. “Other issues, like the conviction of [lobbyist] Jack Abramoff and two congressmen, may have gone over people’s heads. This is about the welfare of young people. For that reason I think this will have a very, very significant effect on the election.”

…Peter LaBarbera, spokesman for Americans for Truth, an evangelical lay organization, denounced what he called “the GOP’s growing flirtation with pro-homosexual policies.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said, “When a party holds itself out as the guardian of values, this is not helpful.”

Continue reading in The Buffalo News…

Excerpted from The Road to Nowhere? Middle Church, by Dr. Albert Mohler, published Oct 3, 2006, by Crosswalk:

Bob Edgar wants to rescue America from the religious right. In his new book, Middle Church: Reclaiming the Moral Values of the Faithful Majority from the Religious Right, Edgar intends to reset the nation’s agenda when it comes to matters of Christian concern.

…Edgar could have offered a careful, exegetical, historical, and theological engagement with moral issues. Instead he offers irresponsible generalizations such as this: “The Bible mentions abortion not once, homosexuality only twice, and poverty or peace more than two thousand times. Yet somehow abortion and homosexuality have become the litmus test of faith in public life today.”

How can an intelligent reader, armed with even the slightest knowledge of the Bible and the Christian tradition, take such a statement seriously? The Bible does not mention abortion only in the sense that it does not make direct reference to the practice of surgical abortion as is common today. The Bible speaks clearly to the sanctity of human life and to the priority of protecting unborn life. Furthermore, to state that the Bible mentions homosexuality “only twice” indicates that Edgar has redefined homosexuality as something other than that which the Bible addresses in numerous passages.

There can be no doubt that the Bible’s consistent judgment is that homosexual acts are inherently immoral and sinful. The Christian church in all of its major branches has understood this for two thousand years. This has been a true ecumenical consensus until recent years when some more liberal churches in the West have abandoned the Christian tradition in order to endorse homosexual practice.

Thus, it is an act of intellectual dishonesty for Edgar to claim to speak for “classic historical Christianity.”

Just in case we might miss his point, Edgar offers this assessment of Scripture: “The far religious right is fond of condemning homosexuality because they say the Scripture is immutable and its words are literal.” Again, Edgar identifies the scriptural consensus that homosexuality is sinful as an example of the radical nature of the “far religious right” [italics his]. Once again, one need not be very conservative to end up in Edgar’s category of the far religious right…

In an amazing passage, Edgar asserts: “People of faith must be able to conduct a respectful and open conversation about all aspects of sexuality including homosexuality. God has a lot to say on all these topics, and if we skip the listening and rush straight to the judging–an enterprise in which we’re not supposed to be involved anyway–we can’t hope to make serious progress in our discussion.”

Statements like this must leave us wondering if this author actually means to be taken seriously. His book is filled with moral judgments–judgments about ecology, justice, racism, and a host of other issues. But when it comes to sexuality, Edgar offers the facile suggestion that moral judgment is “an enterprise in which we’re not supposed to be involved anyway.”

In other words, when Edgar makes moral judgments, he’s not being judgmental. But when others moral judgments, they are being judgmental. The Bible does not say that we are not to make moral judgments, or that we are not to judge moral behavior. Indeed, the Bible makes absolutely no sense if that is the case. The Bible–in both Old and New Testaments–is filled with moral judgment and with advisement on how we are to make such judgments. Of course, the judgments we are to make concern behavior, not the heart. We are expressly forbidden to judge another’s heart. That distinction is missing from Edgar’s analysis.

…What separates Bob Edgar and biblical Christianity is the fact that God has told us how He is going to judge humanity–and the crucial issue in that judgment is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

When it comes to matters of public policy, evangelicals surely do not have all the answers. Furthermore, evangelicals are well served by a reminder that our moral agenda needs to be broader than the issues of the daily headlines.

Nevertheless, conservative Christians did not decide to make abortion, homosexuality, and stem cell research front-line issues. It is nothing less than intellectual dishonesty to suggest that evangelicals prompted the national debate on those issues. On all of these fronts, evangelicals are simply calling on the Christian church to stand by its historic convictions and moral wisdom.

Continue reading at Crosswalk…

By Peter LaBarbera

(Published Oct 9, 2006, in Post Chronicle)

Note the excerpt below from homosexual writer Andrew Sullivan, from his October 2nd blog post entitled The Vatican and the RNC.

If the Foley incident is not about pedophilia, it is also not, it seems to me, about homosexuality. It’s fundamentally about the closet. The closet is so psychologically destructive it often produces pathological behavior. When you compartmentalize your life, you sometimes act out in one compartment in ways that you would never condone in another one. Think Clinton-Lewinsky, in a heterosexual context. But closeted gay men are particularly vulnerable to this kind of thing. Your psyche is so split by decades of lies and deceptions and euphemisms that integrity and mental health suffer. No one should excuse Foley’s creepy interactions; they are inexcusable, as is the alleged cover-up (although we shouldn’t jump to conclusions yet about who knew what when). But there’s a reason gay men in homophobic institutions behave in self-destructive ways.

Or think of it another way: what do the Vatican and the RNC have in common? Here’s one potential list: entrenched homophobia, psychologically damaged closet cases, inappropriate behavior toward teens and minors … and cover-ups designed entirely to retain power. The parallels are looking a little creepy. And the source is the same.

After decades of cultivating a victim mentality ad nauseam, homosexual advocates are reduced to this argument: Foley’s predatory behavior was, ultimately, OUR fault. Society (read: Bible-believing Christians and churches) is to blame. Once again the circular logic of what I call “gay fundamentalism” is exposed: whatever deviance, whatever threats to health, children and morality–all is laid at the door of “homophobic” society because of the “shame” we cause “gays” by not celebrating or at least not accepting their lifestyle choice. How convenient for them.

The truth is Mark Foley, like the rest of us, is a sinner in need of a Savior. As fallen human beings, our hearts are bent toward sin. God spoke through the prophet Jeremiah: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jer. 17:9, KJV) It’s tough to own up to that truth: each of our hearts is so bent toward “wickedness” (now there’s a word you don’t hear very often) that we can’t even know our own potential for self-deception!

If Foley was molested as a youth as his lawyer states, then he joins the legion of sexually victimized men and women who have gone on to perpetuate their abuse, as adults, on others. But Foley, like all people caught up in the modern cult of homosexuality, IS responsible for his behavior before God. (Besides, why would it follow that his natural “orientation” is “gay” if a major contributing cause to his current state of sexual confusion is that he was abused as a teenager?)

Repressed homosexuality (the “closet”) did not put those male congressional pages at risk; active, practicing (albeit furtive) homosexuality did. Pederasty – sexual “relationships” between adult men and adolescent boys – is as old as the ancient Greeks, and to this day homosexual men pursue sex with teenage boys. In the early days of “gay liberation,” they callously called these boys “chicken.” Yet somehow the media and professional talkers are behaving as if this current scandal has nothing to do with homosexuality.

While many are in shock, Peter LaBarbera, President of Americans for Truth, says that Congressman Foley’s sexual orientation was no secret in Washington, D.C. LaBarbera uncovered this news for CWA in 2003.

Listen to Americans for Truth President Peter LaBarbara, interviewed by Martha Kleder of Concerned Women for America!

Click HERE to listen online.

AN AMERICANS FOR TRUTH PRESS RELEASE

CHICAGO, Illinois–The scandal of disgraced homosexual pederast and former Rep. Mark Foley illustrates the dangers of the GOP’s growing flirtation with pro-homosexual policies, said Americans For Truth President Peter LaBarbera.

“For years, we have seen some Republican Party leaders drift in a pro-homosexual direction,” LaBarbera said. “Their rationale is winning the votes of ‘moderate’ swing voters, but they forget that there is a price to pay among values voters when you abandon principle on a core moral issue.”

“Top Republican leaders knew about Foley’s homosexuality and his reckless behavior with underage boys, yet they did not act,” he said. “How long were they prepared to keep this dirty secret from the public? Is winning elections now more important to Republicans than protecting children? Is it more important than letting constituents know about a Representative’s immoral conduct, which of course influences his votes (Foley had a pro-“gay” record)?

Meanwhile, noting that the homosexual Log Cabin Republicans quickly erased a photo of Mark Foley from their website,” LaBarbera said. “Too bad Foley’s teenaged victims and their parents won’t be able to erase the effects of his twisted behavior from their minds so easily.”

He said it is telling that most of the tiny number of “outed” or openly homosexual male Congressmen have been caught in sex scandals:

• Rep. Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts), who let his male lover run a prostitution ring out of his D.C. apartment;
• Retired Massachusetts Rep. Gerry Studds (D), who had sex with a 17-year-old boy and then turned his back on fellow House Members during the censure vote against him. The defiant Studds even put the boy forward at a press conference to announce that their “relationship” was “consensual”;
• Bob Bauman (R-Maryland), who in 1980 was charged with soliciting a 16-year-old boy for sex.

“Three homosexual Congressmen have been involved in sexual seductions of minor boys, yet ‘gay’ activists ridicule anyone who suggests there is a predatory component to male homosexuality,” LaBarbera said.

Noting the re-elections of Democrats Studds and Frank after their sex scandals, he added, “Maybe Foley could make a comeback if he moves to Massachusetts and runs as a Democrat.”

From the news brief entitled OutFront Minnesota Leads Effort to Investigate Police Psychologist, posted Aug 31, 2006, by OutFront Minnesota:

OutFront Minnesota would like our community to know about recent developments with a police psychologist who’s been suspended and is being investigated by the Minneapolis Police Department.

This suspension comes as the result of work that OutFront Minnesota is doing with the Minneapolis Police Community Relations Council (PCRC). OutFront Minnesota serves on the PCRC, along with other council members representing other traditionally marginalized communities. Law enforcement is also represented on the council. OutFront Minnesota, in addition to several other PCRC members and law enforcement personnel, raised significant concerns about Dr. Michael Campion, after meeting with him for the first time on Tuesday, August 22nd, 2006…

Continue reading at OutFront Minnesota…

Followup – From the news brief entitled OutFront Minnesota Frustrated at Minneapolis Police Decision, posted Oct 3, 2006, by OutFront Minnesota:

…OutFront Minnesota is highly concerned about the use of a police psychological evaluator who has long standing ties to an anti-GLBT organization, as well his writings from the 1970’s advocating “conversation therapy” for GLBT people. During the Police Community Relations Council questioning of Dr. Campion, he gave no indication that he had renounced any of these beliefs and was, in our view, evasive in answering the questions…

Continue reading at OutFront Minnesota…