Americans for Truth about Homosexuality

Excerpted from Psychologist Can Again Seek City Contracts, by Chao Xiong, published Oct 10, 2006, in Minneapolis Star Tribune:

The psychologist suspended by the Minneapolis Police Department in August after concerns surfaced about his past affiliation with a group opposing civil rights for gays will be allowed to bid for future work with the city.

Interim Police Chief Tim Dolan rescinded the suspension of Campion, Barrow and Associates in a Sept. 6 memo to the City Council. The Champaign, Ill.-based company came under fire after concerns were raised about Michael A. Campion’s time with the Illinois Family Institute. His company began screening potential officers for the department more than a year ago and also works with other agencies in Minnesota.

The chief’s memo said there has been “no specific allegation of sexual bias” regarding Campion and that information on sexual orientation is not collected in the hiring process. Concerns about a disparate racial impact in his screening process also were unfounded, police said. That means Campion can throw his hat in the ring, along with other firms, when the department solicits firms to conduct future psychological testing.

…Peter LaBarbera said Campion was one of their board members up until about a year ago. LaBarbera asserts, and police confirm, that there was a verbal agreement made before the suspension that Campion’s company would conduct some evaluations for the department. But Campion was notified last week — after Dolan’s memo — that the work was going to a different company, according to LaBarbera and Minneapolis Deputy Chief Don Harris.

…Waggoner Kloek, who is also the anti-violence program manager for the gay rights group OutFront Minnesota, said her main concern with Campion is that he was unable to adequately explain how he separated his personal beliefs from his work during a meeting with some PCRC members in August…

Continue reading at Star Tribune…

Excerpted from Philly Schools Celebrate Gay History Month, by Steve Jordahl, published Oct 3, 2006, by Family News in Focus:

Alberta Wilson of Faith First Educational Assistance Corporation had a parent show her an elementary-level phonics-card that’s being used in the district.

“They’re teaching three syllable words – the word fam-i-ly. And on those phonics cards they have a mom and a dad, an elderly grandparent and grandfather raising children, and then they have two men and two women. They are teaching our young children that this is acceptable and that they should tolerate it. It is an outrage, it’s against God, and God is not pleased.”

…Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth is warning that the organizations that are pushing this agenda have a “give and inch, take a mile” mentality.

“The homosexual agenda always advances incrementally and so they start out by putting it on the calendar and then there’ll be pressure to say, ‘hey, we have to teach gay history just like we teach African-American history.’”…

Continue reading at Family News in Focus…

This story is also posted at Focus on the Family’s Citizen Link website.

Excerpted from Gay Marriage – An Oxymoron, by Bryan Kemper, posted on Stand True (emphasis ours):

…Stand True is most definitely against homosexual marriage. In fact, I would go as far as saying there is no such thing as homosexual marriage. Marriage is an institution created and ordained by God for a man and woman.

Genesis 2: 24 – For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. 25 The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.

Outside of the marriage covenant, IS shame in sexual activity. The sexual act inside of marriage is a bond that brings man and wife together as one flesh, and this bond cannot happen between two men or two women. They cannot become one flesh and therefore it cannot be called marriage.

The state may recognize their illicit union as a “state marriage,” but it cannot be recognized as a true marriage ordained by God. As Christians we know the truth and must abide by it whether or not the state does. Although society may want to allow something like this, we cannot support it or even validate it by calling it marriage.

…It is very clear in God’s Word that homosexuality is unnatural and an abomination to God.

Romans 1:24 – Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
25 – They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised. Amen.
26 – Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
27 – In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28 – Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.
29 – They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,
30 – slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;
31 – they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
32 – Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Our society and government want to legitimize sin, and they demonize anyone who stands for the truth as intolerant or hateful.

As Christians we have a duty and responsibility to stand for the truth no matter how unpopular it is in society. We must love our neighbor as ourselves, but we must not love or even accept our neighbor’s sin. In fact, I would say it is not love if we just close our eyes and tolerate our neighbor’s sin. How can we truly say we love them, if we allow them to continue on a path to eternal damnation without offering them the truth?

The gospel of Christ is offensive to those who do not believe.

I Corinthians 1:18 – For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

The Gospel can cut deep but also offers the only hope for forgiveness to sinners like us. The Gospel is full of grace and acceptance with God we don’t deserve. And if we reject this Grace where will we go? The Gospel is 100% truth with no room for margin or tolerance or variation. We must live by this truth and not society’s version of truth. We must Stand True to God’s law and Jesus Christ without exception…

Continue reading at Stand True…

Excerpted from the Oct 2, 2006, post on The Seventh Sola:

… this is what becomes of a party that compromises for political expediency, especially when it involves pro-family moral values. Liberal Republicans and so-called “moderates” are precisely why a real conservative agenda never gets enacted. And the idea of a “Log Cabin Republican” is simply abhorrent.

Read the rest of this post…

By Peter LaBarbera

With the efficiency of a Stalinist historian, the homosexual group Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) has purged this photograph of former Florida Rep. Mark Foley, disgraced homosexual and seducer of teenaged boys, from its website. Foley was among the politicians and pundits whom LCR proudly recorded as speaking at its 2003 national convention in Washington, D.C. But they’re not so proud anymore. We apologize for the poor reproduction quality below, but clearer evidence of Log Cabin’s whitewashing handiwork can be found by clicking on these links: BEFORE (scroll down three rows of photos and Foley is there) and AFTER (magic: Foley is gone).

Too bad Foley’s young victims and their parents won’t be able to erase the effects of his twisted behavior from their minds so easily.

Log Cabin Republicans also removed Foley’s name from the write-up on its 2003 convention. Foley’s photo in the new, pederast-free (at least as far as we know) web account has been replaced by a second photo of political pundit Mort Kondracke.

This is part B of our response to “Out in Scripture” (from the pro-homosexuality Human Rights Campaign) by for Sept 17, 2006, by Americans For Truth writer Sonja Dalton:

“Out in Scripture” makes the following assertion about Psalm 116:1-9:

The psalmist in Psalm 116:1-9 expresses a similar strength and gratitude. In spite of distress, persecution, affliction, even death, God delivers and is merciful to those whose whole lives are grounded in God (116:5-6). What a valuable word for the LGBT community! When one claims the truth of one’s core identity in God — whether that core is known through being a teacher or in claiming the fullness of one’s God-given gender identity or sexual orientation — divine support is available.

And so we must ask: Is “homosexuality,” “bisexuality,” or “transexuality” a grounded, God-ordained identity?

Let us open our Bibles and examine what the Creator has revealed about the God-ordained identity of humankind…

Read the rest of this article »

Excerpted from Who Protected the Pervert Congressman?, by Cliff Kincaid, published Oct 1, 2006, by Accuracy in Media:

It’s one of the worst congressional scandals ever. A top House Republican who denounced sex predators as “animals” stands accused of acting like one. Mark Foley had served as a Deputy Majority Whip in the House and co-chair of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. His forced resignation, after being exposed as a homosexual pervert who talked dirty to young boys, has done more damage to the GOP than George Soros could ever think of doing. But it remains to be seen whether the liberal media and the Democrats can successfully exploit this scandal.

Brian Ross of ABC News broke the story and publicized the “sexually explicit” messages Foley sent to former congressional pages. Curiously, Ross never once used the word “homosexual” in referring to Foley’s conduct. But if Foley acted out his Internet fantasies in real life, he will be exposed as not only a homosexual pedophile but a predator. The messages indicate Foley is extremely sick and demented.

The failure to use the word “homosexual” in describing Foley’s dirty talk is likely due to fear over being labeled “homophobic” or biased by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), which exists to make sure that only positive portrayals of homosexuality are permitted in the media. Plus, the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association previously warned the media, in connection with sexual abuse by Catholic Priests, to avoid linking homosexuality to pedophilia.

The questionable line we already see emerging in the media is that Foley is guilty of inappropriate behavior toward young people but that it has nothing to do with his “sexual orientation.”

In fact, the entire scandal might have been avoided if Foley’s homosexuality had been exposed and confronted, rather than protected, over the last several years. Top Republicans and the media were part of this cover-up.

Peter LaBarbera, who began his writing career at Accuracy in Media, raised questions about Foley’s secret life back in 2003, after alternative newspapers and columnists began running stories about Foley’s homosexuality, even reporting that he had a “boyfriend.” LaBarbera gave credit to Bob Norman of the Broward-Palm Beach New Times newspaper for exposing Foley. However, LaBarbera found that most non-homosexual newspapers did not pursue the matter and that homosexual Republican groups were protecting him. For example, LaBarbera quoted Patrick Guerriero, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, a homosexual activist group, as saying, “I could care less about [Foley's] sexual orientation.” Guerriero insisted that the congressman had no obligation to discuss it.

At the time, as Foley was said to be considering running for the Republican nomination to the U.S. Senate, LaBarbera noted that “Many homosexual activists assert matter-of-factly that Rep. Foley is ‘gay’ and resent that he is not running for Senate as an open homosexual. Many social conservatives, on the other hand, argue that Florida’s voters have a right to know what lies behind his pro-homosexual voting record in Congress.”

Continue reading at AIM…

By Peter LaBarbera

Washington insiders have known about Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL)’s homosexuality for a long time, but I would suspect that most of his constituents have been in the dark about it. Years ago in D.C., I once tried to discourage a Foley run for U.S. Senate by calling his office and asking: 1) if he is a homosexual; and 2) if his constituents have a right to know about it. A top aide came on the line and told me that the staff does not answer questions about the Congressman’s “sexual orientation.”

I wonder, picking up on my friend Cliff Kincaid’s theme below here: why did senior GOP leaders protect Foley’s homosexual secret? How many knew about his predatory behavior towards teenaged boys; when did they find out and why didn’t they do anything about it? Were they going to keep protecting the dirty secret as he announced a run for U.S. Senate?

Is “winning” as a Republican now more important than protecting children? Is it more important than letting a representative’s constituents know about his immoral behaviors, which of course influence his votes (Foley was pro-”gay”)? We need answers from House Speaker Denny Hastert and Rep. John Shimkus (R-Illinois), who chairs the House Page Board.

And isn’t it telling most of the tiny number of homosexual male U.S. Congressmen have been caught in sex scandals–remember Barney Frank, who let his male lover, a hustler, run a prostitution ring out of his D.C. apartment? And Massachusetts Rep. Gerry Studds, who had sex with a 17-year-old boy and then turned his back on fellow House Members during the censure vote against him? And Bob Bauman (R-Md.), who in 1980 was charged with soliciting a 16-year-old boy for sex?

Let’s see: three homosexual Congressmen involved in sexual seductions of minor boys–ages 16, 17, and 17 (Foley). And yet homosexual activists ridicule anyone who suggests there is a predatory or pedophilic component to male homosexuality….

Read the rest of this article »