Then there are the targets of more crass homosexual extremism such as Maggie Gallagher, Greg Quinlan, AFTAH, Mike Heath, and pretty much every pro-family leader who still resists the “queer” activist agenda — and even churches that stick to the Word of God on sexual morality or that dare advance the redemptive truth that men and women can overcome homosexuality through Christ.

A relatively new person on the victim list is Julea Ward,  a graduate student at Eastern Michigan University’s (EMU) School of Counseling who was expelled from the program because she said that as a counselor she could not affirm a client’s homosexual relationship due to her belief in Jesus Christ and biblical morality. Ward is being helped by Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), a Christian legal defense group. – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org. This is an ADF video:

Folks, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and every Republican who covers up for Schwarzenegger’s liberal follies are helping to destroy the GOP’s “pro-family” brand. Corrupting children’s minds and souls through manipulative school exercises like “Harvey Milk Day” is anti-family and anti-child to the core. You simply cannot be pro-sexual sin and pro-family at the same time.

Thanks to California’s moral weakling of a governor, millions of schoolchildren will be subjected to propaganda extolling San Francisco homosexual crusader Milk — who, as my friend Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia.com rightly says — is hardly an appropriate role model for children. Kudos to Randy and other pro-family Californians for working so hard trying to stop this public policy madness. – Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth

TAKE ACTION: Contact Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele (chairman@gop.com; 202-863-8700 or -8500) and also your local/state GOP representatives (in office and out) and tell them how offended you are at Republican California Gov. Schwarzenegger’s latest capitulations to the Homosexual Lobby. Tell Steele that moral issues are an important plank of the Republican Party and that “going gay” will sap the strength out of the conservative grassroots. If you are a Democrat, call or write Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine and urge the party to STOP pandering to homosexual activists and undermining traditional marriage. (Kaine is the current Governor of Virginia.)

_____________________________________

SaveCalifornia.com News Release, October 12, 2009

SaveCalifornia.com Appalled at Signing of ‘Harvey Milk Gay Day’

SB 572, opposed by overwhelming majority, signed by “People’s Governor”

CLICK HERE FOR MILK DOCUMENTATION AND BILL FACTS

Sacramento – SaveCalifornia.com, a leading West Coast pro-family, pro-child organization, is appalled that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed SB 572, “Harvey Milk Day,” into law.

“Harvey Milk* was a sexual predator of teens, an advocate of polygamous relationships, a public liar, and is in no way a good role model for impressionable schoolchildren,” said Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com. “Sadly, children in public schools will now have even more in-your-face, homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination. This provides the strongest impetus yet for loving parents to remove their children from anti-family public schools.”

“’Harvey Milk Day’ teaches children as young as five years old to admire the life and values of the notorious homosexual activist Harvey Milk” said Thomasson. “The ‘suitable commemorative exercises’ that are part of ‘Harvey Milk Day’ can easily result in cross-dressing exercises, ‘LGBT pride’ parades and mock gay weddings on school campuses — everything Harvey Milk supported.”

Schwarzenegger vetoed ‘Harvey Milk Day” last year; he signed it this year. The Governor also previously claimed to oppose same-sex “marriage,” but now supports destroying the definition of marriage as only between a man and a woman, in court, and by his signing of SB 54, to recognize out-of-state homosexual “marriages” in violation of Proposition 8.

For several months, SaveCalifornia.com has been leading parents and grandparents to call, email, fax, and petition Governor Schwarzenegger to veto “Harvey Milk Day.” The clear majority of correspondence to the Governor was opposed to SB 572. As a whole, Californians are 4 to 1 against the notion of statewide day of significance honoring the San Francisco gay activist.

For documentation of Harvey Milk’s values and further analysis of “Harvey Milk Day,” see SaveCalifornia.com’s SB 572 veto request letter.

* Randy Shilts, The Mayor of Castro Street: The Life and Times of Harvey Milk (1982)

– end –

Related link: Get more perspective on this issue on Randy Thomasson’s blog

SaveCalifornia.com is a leading West Coast nonprofit, nonpartisan organization representing children and families. We stand for marriage and family, parental rights, the sanctity of human life, religious freedom, financial freedom, and back-to-basics education.

“As a general matter, once a religious person or institution enters the stream of commerce by operating an enterprise such as a doctor’s office, hospital, bookstore, hotel, treatment center and so on, I believe the enterprise must adhere to a norm of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. … … While I was initially drawn to the idea of providing an exemption to those enterprises that advertise solely in very limited milieus (such as the bed & breakfast that advertises only on Christian Web sites), I became wary of such an approach as a practical matter….”
– Homosexual legal activist, Georgetown law professor, and Obama EEOC appointee Chai Feldblum, “Moral Conflict and Liberty: Gay Rights and Religion,” 2006, p. 52. Feldblum favors a limited exemption to “gay rights” laws for religious teaching institutions and the “leadership” of faith-based groups.

Will Her ‘Rights’ Replace Yours? In the world of Chai Feldblum (above), defending sodomy and homosexuality-based relationships is a “moral” endeavor. Legally speaking, she sees the battle between “gay rights” and religious/moral opposition to homosexuality as a “zero sum game” — i.e., one side wins and the other side loses. But if the “right” of homosexuals and transsexuals to have their lifestyles approved supersedes the freedom of Americans to act on their belief that homosexual behavior is wrong, then wouldn’t Christians and moral Americans become second-class citizens?

_____________________________

TAKE ACTION: The U.S. Senate will be taking up the Chai Feldblum nomination, probably in the next few weeks. Call and write your two U.S. senators (202-224-3121; www.congress.org) and urge them to oppose her confirmation to be a Commissioner on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Tell your Senators that you oppose awarding superior rights to people based on their homosexual, bisexual or transsexual lifestyle — which they would have if Feldblum’s radical egalitarian philosophy takes hold in the employment realm. Explain that Americans’ First Amendment liberty to follow our conscience should never be made subservient to special interest sexual agendas.

Dear Readers,

AFTAH is featured in the report below by American Family Association’s “One News Now.” about President Obama’s latest homosexual appointee: Georgetown law professor and lesbian legal activist Chai Feldblum as a commissioner at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). (Think “sexual orientation discrimination” EEOC lawsuits against businesses if Obama gets his way legislatively.)

Unlike some “gay” activists, Feldblum at least grants that we religious Americans have a legitimate “belief liberty” to oppose homosexuality. But she also asserts that according to her reading of the law and Constitution, homosexuals’ “moral” claims should usually eclipse ours under. (And please forgive me if I don’t gush over Feldblum’s recognition of our moral rights — considering that homosexual practice has been linked as a dominating causal factor for HIV and other sexually-transmitted diseases, and that it ranks up there with incest, bestiality and child sacrifice in the Old Testament not-to-do list.)

If her paper trail is any indication, Feldblum will help destroy religious liberty in this country (albeit, with some exemptions; see pp. 50-55 HERE) by elevating modern, newfangled “gay rights” and “transgender rights” above our precious, foundational American freedom to live by our religious and moral convictions. Beware: Obama just made it easier for this smiling legal activist with a very “queer” understanding of morality to steal your precious American liberty, and trample over your conscience in the name of “gay equality.”

  Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

P.S. What is a homosexual activist doing teaching law at a Catholic university, anyway? Oops, I forgot: Georgetown is CINO (Catholic In Name Only); its “Catholicism” does not guide its public actions — in fact, GU profs like Feldblum actively undermine historic Church teachings. Isn’t that sort of like the “gay” vision of impotent “Christianity” that Feldblum and fellow secular activists have for faith-motivated Americans in the public square? They are redefining “core American values” to include the celebration of “gay” tolerance — and neutering our nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage — through a radical egalitarian ideology that masquerades as “equality.” (Their rally cry? “Sexual liberty”!) Doesn’t it make more sense for our historic, genuine First Amendment liberties — established by a fledgling nation fleeing religious oppression in the Old World — to remain sacrosanct in the law?

Study this: Feldblum’s 2006 Beckett Fund symposium paper, ‘Moral Conflict and Liberty: Gay Rights and Religion”

AFA’s One News Now reports:

President taps lesbian activist to EEOC

By Allie Martin – OneNewsNow – 10/12/2009

Chai Feldblum (Obama EEOC appointee) President Barack Obama continues to deliver on his promises to the homosexual activist community.

The president has nominated Chai Feldblum, a lesbian activist, to be commissioner for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Her appointment is awaiting Senate confirmation.

Feldblum, a law professor at Georgetown University, has signed an online petition titled, “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage: A New Strategic Vision for All Our Families and Relationships.” That petition chides conservatives for opposing same-sex “marriage” and also calls for a “new vision” for achieving recognition from the government and private sector for diverse kinds of partnerships.

“Chai Feldblum is on record saying that the battle between our religious freedoms and homosexual so-called rights is a zero sum game,” says Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality.

“She says she can’t think of a case where the religious rights — in other words, our moral right to oppose homosexuality, our First Amendment freedom — trump their gay rights. So, effectively, Chai Feldblum is for superior rights for homosexuals, and I think that’s very dangerous for our country.”

Speaking at a forum in 2004, Feldblum stated that “gay sex is morally good.” (View her comments on YouTube)

_____________________________

Additional Resources:  “If You Hate America, You Have a Lawyer: Chai Feldblum”

Folks, Americans give far more credit to professional institutions like the American Psychological Society (APA) than they deserve. We forget the strong liberal, anti-faith bias of academia and especially the soft sciences — and the enormous cultural subversion that PC-driven professional organizations have engaged in over the years. (Groundbreaking “sexologist” Alfred Kinsey himself was a notorious pervert.) This includes, in the APA’s case, forays into the “study” of adult-child sex (pedophilia). Remarkably, as Lifesite’s Matthew Hoffman reports below, the APA continues its affiliation with known pedophilia advocate Theo Sandfort. Regardless of what it puts out on the (in)ability of people to change their “orientation” (translation: sexual practices, thoughts and habits), the APA has no moral authority on these matters given its documented conflict-of-interest stemming from an overwhelming pro-homosexualist bias. Conservatives should resist the temptation to cite the APA as authoritative when it happens to bend a degree or two in their direction. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

_______________________________

LifeSiteNews reports:

The Psychological Profession and Homosexuality: Lunatics Running the Asylum?

Special LifesiteNews Report Commentary by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman [click HERE to sign up for LifeSiteNews e-mail updates]

WASHINGTON, August 14, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) — A man goes to a psychologist with a problem.  “Doctor,” he says, “I’m suffering terribly. I feel like a woman trapped inside the body of a man.  I want to become a woman.”

The psychologist responds: “No problem. We can discuss this idea for a couple of years, and if you’re still sure you want to be a woman, we can have a surgeon remove your penis, give you hormones for breast enlargement and make other changes to your body.  Problem solved.”

Gratified, the first patient leaves, followed by a second. “Doctor,” he says, “I feel terrible. I’m a man but I feel attracted to other men.  I want to change my sexual preference.  I want to become heterosexual.”  The psychologist responds: “Oh no, absolutely not!  That would be unethical.  Sexual orientation is an immutable characteristic!”

The irony of this little tale is that, while reading like a joke, it is in reality an accurate description of the mental health professions today.  While dismissing and condemning reparative therapy for homosexual orientation, the majority of psychiatrists and psychologists in Anglophone North America have embraced the concept of “sex change,” a procedure that does nothing more than mutilate the patient to appease his confused mind.

The American Psychological Association Perpetuates the Madness

In its most recent statement on the topic, the American Psychological Association (APA) has softened its tone somewhat against psychologists who do reorientation therapy for homosexuals. However it maintains that, “Contrary to claims of sexual orientation change advocates and practitioners, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation.”

The refusal of the organization to accept the increasingly strong evidence against its position is another reminder of how entrenched the sophistry of sexual hedonism has become among the leaders of the organization.

In recent years, a number of studies have been published in peer-reviewed psychology journals, indicating that significant numbers of patients who voluntarily participate in therapy to change their sexual orientation are successful and happy with the results. Combined with numerous individual testimonies by former homosexuals, evidence in favor of the practice is overwhelming.

However, in its new report, “Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation,” the APA’s leadership declares that all of those studies can be dismissed because, in its words, “None of the recent research (1999-2007) meets methodological standards that permit conclusions regarding efficacy or safety.”

The report therefore conveniently disposes of the most recent studies on the topic — the ones that undermine the APA’s position.  The only studies that remain are ones done before the resurgence of the reparative therapy movement, in the 1970s, when the APA declared that homosexual orientation and sodomy really weren’t unhealthy after all.  New research is rejected in favor of research that is now over 30 years old, applied to therapeutic practices that may no longer be in use.

However, the authors of Essential Psychotherapy and its Treatment, a standard text in medical schools, disagree with the APA’s leadership, and say that the newer studies vindicate sexual reorientation therapy.

The newest edition (2009) notes on page 488 that, “While many mental health care providers and professional associations have expressed considerable skepticism that sexual orientation could be changed with psychotherapy and also assumed that therapeutic attempts at reorientation would produce harm, recent empirical evidence demonstrates that homosexual orientation can indeed be therapeutically changed in motivated clients, and that reorientation therapies do not produce emotional harm when attempted (e.g., Byrd & Nicolosi, 2002; Byrd et al., 2008; Shaeffer et al., 1999; Spitzer, 2003).”

The APA’s latest report, done by a task force composed of psychologists with long records of homosexualist activism, also claims as “scientific facts” that “same-sex sexual attractions, behavior, and orientations per se are normal and positive variants of human sexuality — in other words, they are not indicators of mental or developmental disorders” — and “no empirical studies or peer-reviewed research supports theories attributing same-sex sexual orientation to family dysfunction or trauma.”

These unbelievable statements fly in the face of more than a century of scientific, peer-reviewed studies and clinical observation that indicate that much homosexual behavior originates in deficient family relationships and is associated with a wide range of diseases and pathological behaviors.

Studies have shown that homosexuals disproportionately come from families in which sons or daughters lack a healthy relationship with one or both of their parents, or in situations in which the homosexual was the victim of child sex abuse by a same-sex adult.

Homosexual behavior is also statistically associated with a host of diseases, disorders, and pathological behaviors, including venereal and other diseases, promiscuity and unstable relationships, anxiety disorders, depression and suicide, alcoholism and drug abuse, domestic violence, pederasty, and early death.

Even the homosexual Gay and Lesbian Medical Association admits that homosexuals suffer disproportionate rates of disease and self-destructive behavior.

Although the homosexualist leadership at the APA tries to rationalize these relationships by claiming that they are caused by social stigma or other factors, their claims ring hollow.  Many stigmatized groups exist in society that display none of the pathological tendencies of homosexuals, and these tendencies appear even in countries that are very tolerant of homosexual behavior, such as the Netherlands.

Homosexualism on the Defensive

The very existence of the report, however, is evidence that the homosexualist establishment currently in power at the APA is on the defensive, and seeking to preserve its ideology of sexual permissiveness as a paradigm in the psychology profession.

After surrendering itself to a hedonistic ethos in the 1970s and 80s, the American psychological practice has been transformed into a vehicle for patients to rationalize and reconcile themselves with self-destructive, irrational, and narcissistic behavior, paying an “expert” to soothe their consciences by assuring them that “science” is on their side.

However, an increasing number of mental health professionals whose institutions were stolen from them by political activists in the 1970s are now rising up to take back their profession in the name of true science, and patient health.

Former APA President Dr. Robert Perloff has publicly endorsed the National Organization for the Research and Treatment of Homosexuality (NARTH), the largest American organization devoted the treatment of unwanted homosexual attractions, and has denounced the APA’s campaign against such treatment.

“The ideology of those who oppose efforts to try to facilitate transfers from SSA, that is, Same Sex Attraction, to heterosexual attraction, must not, must not stand in the way of those homosexual persons who desire to live their lives heterosexually, a choice which is unarguably theirs to make,” he said in a videotaped statement played at NARTH’s 2008 annual meeting.

Dr. Robert Spitzer, who has been been called the “architect” of the American Psychiatric Association’s normalization of homosexuality in the 1970s, provoked outrage from the homosexualist establishment when he admitted in 2001 that his own investigations had convinced him that sexual reorientation therapy can work.

His study, published in the peer-reviewed Archives of Mental Health in 2003, found that a majority of his sample of 247 people had developed heterosexual urges or had ceased to be predominantly homosexual after only one year of therapy.  None of the subjects said that they had been harmed in the process.

After presenting his paper before the American Psychiatric Association in 2001, Spitzer said: “I’m convinced from people I have interviewed…many of them…have made substantial changes toward becoming heterosexual. I came to this study skeptical. I now claim that these changes can be sustained.”

Other prominent figures in psychiatry and psychology have also raised their voices in protest, including Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, a psychiatrist and physicist who has testified before Congress in favor of reparative therapy, and has denounced the hijacking of the mental health professions by homosexualist ideologues in his book, the “Trojan Couch.”

“Some of my psychiatric and psychological colleagues have woven for themselves their own set of illusory robes of authority, and for the past 35 years have been proclaiming doctrines in the public square that depend upon the authority that derives from the public’s belief that these robes exist,” Satinover said in a recent interview .

“The diagnostic change that in 1973 removed homosexuality as a formal disorder from the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), a change that many now accept as simply indisputable in spite of the fact that it was based wholly on fiction,” he added.

“The question isn’t just homosexuality, said Satinover, “but rather, freedom from all sexual constraint. This has been an issue for civilization for thousands of years…We now have so little of a moral compass that we’re really completely at sea. We’re awash in the tide of unconstrained instinctive behaviors which are all being labeled ‘okay’ because nobody really has a sense, any more, as to what’s right and what’s wrong.”

Whither Psychology?

The debate over reparative therapy for homosexuality runs deeper than the issue itself.  It is arguably a debate over the future of the psychological professions as a whole.

Although there are signs that an increasing number of mental health experts are taking an honest look at the facts regarding homosexual behavior and sexual orientation therapy, there are other signs that portend an even darker future for the profession.

In 1998, the APA released a study by three psychological researchers from Temple University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Michigan, claiming that the “negative potential” of adult sex with children was “overstated” and that “the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative sexual effects from their child sexual abuse experiences.”  It even claimed that large numbers of the victims reported that their experiences were “positive,” and suggested that the phrase “child sex abuse” be replaced with “adult-child sex.”

The APA not only passed the paper through its peer review process where it was approved by multiple psychologists associated with the organization, but actually published it in one of its journals, Psychological Bulletin.  Moreover, when objections were raised by radio talk show host Dr. Laura Schlessinger and various pro-family groups, the organization defended the article for an entire year.  It was also defended by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which chillingly stated that it “saw no clear evidence of improper application of methodology or other questionable practices on the part of the article’s authors.”

Although the sheer insanity and destructiveness of the content should have prevented the APA from publishing the article in the first place, the sexual libertines in charge of the organization only issued a muted retraction after the U.S. Congress joined the fray, passing an unprecedented resolution condemning the study.

The publication of the paper was only one example of such lunacy by mental health professionals in peer-reviewed journals.  One of the three authors of the study, Robert Bauserman, has a history of publishing pedophilia-advocacy “studies,” including one for the now-defunct journal Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, whose editors admitted to being pedophiles.

Since the 1998 article, Bauserman and fellow author Bruce Rind have gone on to write more articles defending child sex abuse [adult-child sex], which have appeared in such mainstream journals as the Archives of Sexual Behavior (2001) and Clinical Psychology (2003).  Apparently, the psychology profession is comfortable with Bauserman and Rind’s work, and intends to continue publishing it.

Another apologist for child sex abuse who has received acceptance, affirmation, and recognition from the mental health professions is Dr. Theo Sandfort, who is currently an Associate Professor of Clinical Sociomedical Sciences (in Psychiatry) at Colombia University.  Sandfort published a study in 1981 that claimed that boys as young as 10 years old had “positive” experiences in their “sexual relationships” with adults.

While he was co-director of the research program of the Department of Gay and Lesbian Studies at the University of Utrecht, Netherlands, Sandfort interviewed 25 boys from between the ages of 10 and 16 who were in such “sexual relationships” — that is, they were being sexually abused by adults.  In fact, the abusers themselves took Sandfort to their victims so he could interview them.  When the victims gave Sandfort their “positive” responses, he duly recorded them.

“For virtually all the boys … the sexual contact itself was experienced positively,” Sandfort wrote, without a hint of irony.

The fact that Sandfort was promoting the sexual abuse of minors with the help of their victimizers didn’t seem to faze him.  Nor did it faze his then-employers at the University of Utrecht.  Nor did it faze the prestigious University of Colombia, which later gave him a professorship, even after he went on to write articles such as “Pedophile relationships in the Netherlands: Alternative Lifestyles for Children?” and books such as “Childhood Sexuality: Normal Sexual Behavior and Development” (2000).

It hasn’t fazed the APA either, which has named Sandfort a “fellow” of the organization since 2002.

The defense and even the promotion of mental health experts who defend child sex abuse is a terrifying, but not unexpected movement down the slippery slope of sexual hedonism embraced by the powers that be at the APA.  It not only threatens homosexuals, who are deceived by the seductive argument that their orientation is nothing to worry about, but psychology and psychiatry themselves.

The outcome of the current battle over the science of homosexuality may well determine the future of the mental health professions as a whole. Will they turn back from the brink, or plunge into the abyss? And what will become of the societies that heed their counsel?

PRESS RELEASE by the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH)
August 6, 2009

Contact: David Pruden, Phone: (888) 364-4744

NARTH’s Press Release on APA Gay and Lesbian Task Force Report

As a scientific and professional organization the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) welcomes all responsible discussion and investigation into the important psychological factors surrounding homosexuality. The gay and lesbian task force report just released at the American Psychological Association (APA) convention in Toronto suggests no change in the clearly established APA policy that client self-determination is the crowning principle of all ethical mental health treatment. Respect for religious diversity demands that psychologists and mental health professionals give as much weight to belief as they do to sexual identity.

NARTH appreciates that the APA stressed the importance of faith and religious diversity. Unfortunately, however, the report reflects a very strong confirmation bias; that is, the task force reflected virtually no ideological diversity. No APA member who offers reorientation therapy was allowed to join the task force. In fact, one can make the case that every member of the task force can be classified as an activist. They selected and interpreted studies that fit within their innate and immutable view. For example, they omitted the Jones and Yarhouse study, the Karten study, and only gave cursory attention to the Spitzer study. Had the task force been more neutral in their approach, they could have arrived at only one conclusion: homosexuality is not invariable fixed in all people, and some people can and do change, not just in terms of behavior and identity but in core features of sexual orientation such as fantasy and attractions.

With regard to possible negative effects of therapy, as in all provisions of psychological care, the possibility exists that the client may not be happy with the outcome. We believe the report indirectly supports the findings published in the current Journal of Human Sexuality that reveal no significant ill-effects of therapy. Further, if some clients are dissatisfied with the therapeutic outcome, as in therapy for other issues, the possibility for dissatisfaction appears to be outweighed by the potential gains. The possibility of dissatisfaction also seems insignificant when compared to the substantial medical, emotional, and physical risks associated with homosexual behavior.

NARTH would suggest that these medical and emotional risks, along with the incongruity of homosexual behavior with the personal and religious values of many people will continue to be the motivation for some individuals to seek assistance for their unwanted homosexual attraction.

###

NARTH is a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality. As an organization, it disseminates educational information, conducts and collects scientific research, promotes effective therapeutic treatment, and provides referrals to those who seek assistance. NARTH upholds the rights of individuals with unwanted homosexual attraction to receive effective psychological care and the right of professionals to offer that care.

Where’s the media frenzy? Duke University official Frank Lombard is accused of raping his adopted 5-year-old son and attempting to induce someone to cross state lines to engage in sex with the boy. The same media and Duke professors who were all over the bogus 2006 Duke lacrosse “rape” case are not interested in this horrifying homosexual adoption-rape story.

_____________________
Folks, the jaundiced liberal media deserves much blame for the deterioration of American culture and the collective erosion of morality. Political correctness and identity politics destroy common sense by shielding favored classes and causes from criticism. Ask yourself: what logical reason is there that Matthew Shepard not Jesse Dirkhising is a household name in this country? (And don’t respond that Shepard was targeted “just because he was gay” because that is not true.)

This creep Frank Lombard and anyone — straight, “gay” or bisexual — convicted of the rape of a young child like this ought to be a candidate for automatic life imprisonment without parole or the death penalty, in my view. Homosexuals may not yet have achieved full “protected class” status in the law, but they sure have achieved it in the media. Kudos to WorldNetDaily and UNC professor-scribe Mike Adams for taking up the watchdog role to which journalists with integrity once aspired. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

_______________________

WorldNetDaily reports:

______________________________

News agencies gagging gay’ factor in boy rape

But coverage beyond bonkers or fake Duke lacrosse assault

By Joe Kovacs, WorldNetDaily, posted July1, 2009

Editor’s note: The content of this story is graphic in nature and may be objectionable to some readers.

News coverage of a Duke University official accused of raping his adopted 5-year-old son and offering the child to someone else is apparently lacking what some say is a key piece of information: the fact the alleged perpetrator is a homosexual who lives with another “gay” man.

Frank Lombard, associate director of the Health Inequalities Program at the university’s Center for Health Policy, was arrested last Wednesday in Raleigh, N.C., for attempting to induce someone to cross state lines to engage in sex with the child, who is black.

The arrest affidavit goes into graphic detail of Lombard’s alleged actions, including alleged performance of oral sex with the child in front of a webcam, and sodomizing the boy with his finger and tongue. It also prominently cites the fact that Lombard is a homosexual living with another “gay” man.

In his online profile, Lombard reportedly describes himself as “perv dad for fun.”

But days after the case broke, there have been few, if any, mentions in news stories that Lombard is part of a homosexual couple raising children.

In reports by the Associated Press, CNN and ABC News, for instance, the “gay” factor is never brought up.

A Lexis-Nexis news database search by WND using search terms “Frank Lombard” and “homosexual” or “gay” resulted in just four results, none of which were any major media.

Just today, Duke’s campus newspaper, the Chronicle, finally mentioned the affidavit where it was stated, “he lived in Durham, North Carolina with his live-in homosexual partner.”

An online comment in reaction to the ABC News story mentioned media hypocrisy with the high-profile case of Duke lacrosse players who were wrongly accused of a rape that never happened:

“The Duke lacrosse case was front page news everywhere, professors were signing statements of protest, another professor threatened to resign in protest when the students were readmitted to Duke when found innocent. Could it be the liberal media and professors are as afraid of the gay lobby as Obama is, since this could harm the gay adoption activists?”

Radio host Rush Limbaugh commented today on the apparent double standard, stating, “Did you hear there has been an actual rape at Duke University? An actual rape in Durham, North Carolina. It’s not a phony one. Not a false charge. An actual rape. A guy sold his adopted 5-year-old son to a sex practitioner. A 5-year-old kid, yeah. There’s a problem with this, too, because the guy is gay, a gay adoption.

“This is why you haven’t heard about it. This does not fit the template. A false charge of rape at Duke when you had the poor, black, down-on-her-luck dancer and the rich, white, lacrosse players, oh, that fit the template. They were guilty before any evidence. This you haven’t heard about because this doesn’t fit the template here of what we’re trying to accomplish.”

The silence is reminiscent of the 1999 homosexual rape and murder of 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising of Prairie Grove, Ark. Many news agencies across the nation ignored coverage.

Among those trying to shine the light on the homosexual aspect of the Lombard case is Mike Adams, a professor of criminology at the University of North Carolina-Wilmington.

“I tried to contact Frank Lombard over the weekend to probe his expertise regarding the health benefits of raping small children,” wrote Adams. “So far, he’s declined to comment.”

Lombard faces a maximum of 20 years in prison if convicted.

______________________

Joe Kovacs is author of “Shocked by the Bible: the Most Astonishing Facts You’ve Never Been Told.”

Folks, I sent the following e-mail to FOX’s late-night “Red Eye” host Greg Gutfeld, and cc’d to guests Marc Lamont Hill and Monica Crowley:

From:  Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
To:  Greg Gutfeld, host of FOX’s “Red Eye” [redeye@foxnews.com]; (guest) Prof. Marc Lamont Hill; Monica Crowley (FOX commentator and also a guest on that segment)
Date:  March 30, 2009

Greg [Gutfeld] and FOX “Red Eye” Crew…

…. I caught the tail end of the segment on tonight’s Red Eye where Prof. Marc Lamont Hill was lecturing us about “homophobia” – comparing gay sexual content with straight sexual content. So, does the ever-expanding definition of that tendentious term now cover all those who don’t want to see two men kissing on TV, or those who recoil at two guys engaged in “gay” foreplay on the big screen? Then guess what: we’re all “homophobes” now except for a small percentage of homosexuals and straight “progressives.” (Note that use of the latter term is curiously conditional on labeling as “progress” the embrace of aberrant sex linked disproportionately to STDs, including HIV; the CDC reports that a full 71 percent of male HIV cases in 2005 were linked to MSM, or “men having sex with men”: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/resources/factsheets/msm.htm.)

How condescending and pompous of Dr. Hill to peer into each of our hearts and minds and diagnose us with irrational fear (”phobia”). I didn’t see the rest of the segment — could you please post it online? — but please, please, don’t tell me that FOX is now joining the legions of pseudo-moralists who judge anyone who doesn’t celebrate homosexuality or cheerlead for “same-sex marriage” as somehow fearful, bigoted and hateful.

Enough already. Gay sex is wrong, unhealthy (especially between men), and my hunch is it’s still pretty off-putting to most FOX viewers who are honest with themselves. And that’s OK. But I’ll go further: if there is a growing acceptance of homo-sexual behavior, especially among young people, that’s not a good thing but a sign of America’s descent into decadence, and our departure from a transcendent Judeo-Christian moral code that has served this nation well.

Please note that I’m cc’ing Dr. Hill on this message, but if you reach him before I do, please tell him to go ahead and report me to the anti-Christian “defamers” over at GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) for my heartlessly homophobic and horribly heterosexist defense of … normalcy and natural sex. Thanks–pl

(I run a Chicago-based group that opposes the homosexual, bisexual and transsexual activist movements.)

Peter LaBarbera

President
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
www.aftah.org

Wright Is Wrong. Wright State University has banned a Christian group in the name of “nondiscrimination.” Homosexual superior rights are incompatible with Americans’ cherished religious and First Amendment freedoms. TAKE ACTION: help the Foundation for Individual Rights (FIRE) defend liberty on campus by e-mailing Wright State University President David R. Hopkins at david.hopkins@wright.edu to let him know what you think about Wright State’s decision to ban the Campus Bible Fellowship.

Here is more evidence that historic American religious freedoms and homosexual “superior rights” (masquerading as civil rights) are incompatible. Activists on the left love to decry “book banning” but they are the ones doing the “Christian banning” — at least on college campuses. We’ll be happy to report those pro-homosexual activists who join us in decrying this assault on religious liberty in academia. FIRE and Campus Bible Fellowship are wonderful organizations worthy of your support. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.com

____________________________________

March 2, 2009

Wright State U. Bans Christian Group from Campus

Foundation for Individual Rights (FIRE) Press Release

DAYTON, Ohio, March 2, 2009—Wright State University has banned a Christian group from meeting on campus because of its requirement that voting members be Christian and its refusal to accept “nondiscrimination” language that would eliminate faith-based standards for its voting members. In response, the Campus Bible Fellowship has turned to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) for help.

“A Christian group has the right to be Christian, a Jewish group has the right to be Jewish, and a Muslim group has the right to be Muslim,” said FIRE President Greg Lukianoff. “Courts have affirmed this principle time and time again. It is shocking that in a free society, public universities like Wright State still don’t seem to understand or respect this crucial component of religious liberty.”

After more than 30 years of existence as a registered student organization at Wright State, the Campus Bible Fellowship (CBF) was prohibited from re-registering in 2009. On January 30, according to CBF representatives Joe Hollaway and Gary Holtz, CBF was informed by Wright State’s Office of Student Activities that its registration was being denied for two reasons. First, CBF refused to adopt university-mandated nondiscrimination language in its membership requirements that would have stripped the group of the right to require voting members to adhere to religious and behavioral standards. (Nonvoting members did not have to meet these standards.) Second, Wright State objected to the requirement in CBF’s constitution that voting members “accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior” and subscribe to the group’s articles of faith. Strangely, however, Wright State has so far refused to put this decision in writing.

CBF, which has been unable to meet on campus since the decision, contacted FIRE for help. FIRE wrote to Wright State President David R. Hopkins on February 12, informing him of federal legal precedent setting forth the principle that “if Wright State is to allow expressive organizations to exist on its campus at all, it must allow religious organizations to exist, to define their missions, [and] to select their own members.” FIRE also pointed to its victories in similar religious liberty cases at Ohio State University and at Tufts University.

“Wright State’s demands are not only unconstitutional, they are nonsensical,” said Robert L. Shibley, FIRE’s vice president. “It makes no sense for the university to force a group that exists to communicate its version of the Christian message to accept voting members or leaders who reject that very message.”

While President Hopkins has yet to respond to FIRE, Wright State General Counsel Gwen Mattison has continued the university’s increasingly suspicious practice of refusing to respond in writing to letters from both CBF and FIRE. On February 26, Mattison phoned FIRE’s Adam Kissel to inform him that Wright State would be recognizing CBF for the remainder of the academic year, but that the group would be required to make changes to its constitution when reapplying in May. However, when Kissel e-mailed Mattison to confirm the substance of the conversation, Mattison refused, replying only: “Incorrect–no other reply will be forthcoming.” CBF reports that it also has no knowledge that the ban has been lifted.

“If Wright State thinks that it can avoid the consequences of its actions by refusing to put its dealings with the Campus Bible Fellowship in writing, it is sorely mistaken,” said Shibley. “This shady practice strongly suggests that the university knows that its actions are illegitimate and unconstitutional.”

Wright State even appears to be violating its own policy that organizations created “for the purpose of deepening the religious faith of students within the context of a denominational or interdenominational grouping … may register through customary procedures,” even if they exclude members on the basis of religious views.

FIRE is calling on President Hopkins to immediately reverse the ban on the Campus Bible Fellowship and to ensure that its policies do not consign religious organizations to second-class status.

“While FIRE itself does not engage in litigation, Wright State would be wise to change course immediately to avoid ending up on the wrong side of an embarrassing and expensive civil rights lawsuit,” Shibley concluded.

FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process rights, freedom of expression, and rights of conscience on our nation’s campuses. FIRE’s efforts to preserve liberty at Wright State University and elsewhere can be seen by visiting www.thefire.org.

—-

TAKE ACTION:

Help FIRE defend liberty on campus! E-mail Wright State University President David R. Hopkins at david.hopkins@wright.edu to let him know what you think about Wright State’s decision to ban the Campus Bible Fellowship.

—-

CONTACT:

Robert L. Shibley, Vice President, FIRE: 215-717-3473; robert@thefire.org
David R. Hopkins, President, Wright State University: 937-775-2312; david.hopkins@wright.edu
Gwen M. Mattison, General Counsel and Assistant Attorney General, Wright State University: 937-775-2475; gwen.mattison@wright.edu

This book is a must for any social conservative’s library. (Order it HERE.) I’ve known Dale for over a decade, and few in the pro-family movement have demonstrated the diligence, courage, dedication and intelligence that she has in answering the various propaganda myths and lies emanating from the radical feminists and their homosexual and gender-confused (”transgender”) allies. Here is a typically sensible quote from One Man, One Woman (p. 217):

It’s true that human beings can be weak, selfish, and sinful, and not every married couple will be good parents. But a male/female married couple nonetheless has built into it all the things children need for healthy development: a mother and a father to fulfill parenting roles and to model gender identity; a vowed bond of permanent commitment between two persons with sexual complementarity; and freedom from the stigma and distractions that accompany “experimental” family forms.

As you can see from the book’s outline below, there are several chapters on the cause and development of “SSA” — Same-Sex Attraction (Disorder), as some call it. I doubt I will agree with everything presented in those chapters, but I’ve always known Dale to make her case thoughtfully, so it will be engaging. You can order Dale’s book HERE. It’s a few dollars cheaper on Amazon. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth

This outline is taken from the Sophia Institute Press website, where there is also an essay from Dale titled, “Why I Spent Ten Years Writing This Book, and Why You Need to Read It.”

Contents

Introduction: Clarion Call at Cairo

Part I: The Politics of Sex and Marriage

1. The Political Struggle Over the Definition of Marriage
2. The Ideology of the Sexual Left
3. The Debate Over Same-Sex Attraction

Part II: Understanding Same-Sex Attraction

4. How Sexual Attraction Develops
5. Same-Sex Attraction in Men
6. Same-Sex Attraction in Women
7. SSA Treatment and Change

Part III: Marriage and Intimate Relationships

8. The Definition and Purpose of Marriage
9. Why Redefining Marriage Will Harm Persons with SSA
10. Why Redefining Marriage Will Harm Society

Part IV: The Effects on Children

11. Same-Sex Parenting Places Children at Risk
12. Dangerous Lies: The Politicization of Research

Part V: Beyond Same-Sex Marriage

13. Same-Sex Marriage and the Slippery Slope
14. The Threat to Religious Freedom
15. The Threat to Public Schools

Conclusion: What Must Be Done?
Biographical Note: Dale O’Leary

The following appeal was sent out by PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays). Americans For Truth will be working with PFOX and other pro-family groups and ministries to attain — at the very minimum — balance in the selections that libraries carry on the homosexual issue. There is no logical or common sense reason why taxpayer-funded public libraries should make available every latest “gay”-affirming book — including those designed to open up young minds to the false and dangerous notion that homosexuality is normal — while NOT carrying faith-based and ex-”gay” books that oppose a pro-homosexual ideology. — Peter LaBarbera

_________________________

Ex-Gay Books in Your Library

Please ask your county, school, or city library to order ex-gay books. Many public libraries have book order forms on their website which allow you to request specific books for the libraries to buy. Most local libraries stock gay books, but not ex-gay books. According to the American Library Association, libraries cannot support censorship and a librarian’s professional code requires them to seek out books that represent a wide range of viewpoints. Below is a letter from a PFOX Dad on how to ensure that your local library is not censoring ex-gay books:

Dear Parents and Friends,

Good day to you all and thank you for taking the time to read this letter. It is of critical importance, not only to us as parents and friends, but to all the families that are affected by SAME SEX ATTRACTION (SSA) to get involved with helping others.

Recently, while looking at our public library website for something totally not related to SSA, my wife pointed out all the pro-gay information on the local library web site. After some diligent searching, it became apparent there was little to no information on unwanted SSA. Material on how homosexuality originates was absent. Any resources to help people overcome their SAME SEX ATTRACTION were also absent.

This led me to do website searches for all the counties in Arizona with almost identical results. Further website searches on the public libraries for Boston, San Francisco, and Los Angeles again yielded the same results. What became apparent is that ex-gay books and resources have either been eliminated or never included in the libraries.

Fellow parents and friends, this is our time to stand together in order to assist other families. You can help by searching your local and school libraries for ex-gay books and resource material. Most public libraries have online catalogs on their website where you can search for books. If your determine helpful information is missing, write the schools, libraries, school boards, and politicians to alert them to this systematic censorship. Gently point out that censorship should not be the job of the library, and then insist that they include ex-gay books such as those listed below. You must also point out that this material belongs under the classification of homosexuality. Also, many public libraries have book order forms on their website which allow you to request specific books for the libraries to buy.

Below is a sample of a letter I sent to our local library which resulted in some positive steps with books ordered within two weeks and a note that web sites will be added shortly. Feel free to use it, and then do not forget to follow up.

Best wishes to all, let’s all get to work. Write back to PFOX with your results at pfox@pfox.org.

Sincerely,

Jose Schwartz
PFOX Dad
_______________________

(Sample letter for you to send if your library does not have a book request form on their website)

Dear Librarian,

Good day. The reason for this e-mail is an obvious omission in material associated with the _______Library System which needs to be addressed immediately. The health, safety and well being of many people hinges on getting this situation rectified.

While searching your library’s online catalog, I could not find many books about leaving homosexuality or the origins of same sex attractions. Every day parents of gay children search for answers to their children’s condition only to be given the same information: “deal with it” or “they are born that way”. Neither of these are satisfactory options for the concerned parent. In addition to the numerous homosexual books which appears on your library system, your library needs to provide ex-gay books to everyone seeking it.

Please provide equal access to all information, including ex-gay books. According to the American Library Association, libraries cannot support censorship and a librarian’s professional code requires them to seek out books that represent a wide range of viewpoints. Therefore, please order some of the following books for the library:

• Restoring Sexual Identity by Anne Paulk (Harvest House, 2003) ISBN: 0736911790

• When Homosexuality Hits Home: What to Do When a Loved One Says They’re Gay by Joe Dallas (Harvest House, 2004) ISBN: 0736912010

• 101 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality by Mike Haley (Harvest House, 2004) ISBN: 0736914706 ISBN-13: 9780736914703

• My Genes Made Me Do It: A Scientific Look at Sexual Orientation by Dr. Neil and Briar Whitehead ISBN-10:1563841657 ISBN-13:978-1563841651

• The Battle for Normality by Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D. ISBN-10:0898706149; ISBN-13:978-0898706147

• The Heart of Female Same-Sex Attraction by Janelle Hallman

ISBN-10:083083429X; ISBN-13:978-0830834297

• Light in the Closet: Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change by Arthur Goldberg ISBN: 0-9631478-8-9

• A Parent’s Guide to Preventing Homosexuality by Joseph and Linda Nicolosi ISBN:0830823794

• Homosexual No More by William Consiglio ISBN-10: 0896939359; ISBN-13:978-0896939356

• Desires in Conflict by Joe Dallas ISBN-10: 0736912118; ISBN-13:
978-0736912112

• The Battle for Normality by Van Den Aardwig ISBN-10: 0898706149; ISBN-13:978-0898706147

• Alfie’s Home (Children’s picture book) by Richard Cohen ISBN: 0963705806

• Homosexuality: The Politics of Truth by Jeffrey Satinover ISBN-10:080105625X; ISBN-13: 978-0801056253

• Healing Homosexuality: Case Stories by Joseph Nicolosi
ISBN-10: 0876683405; ISBN-13: 978-0876683408

• The Puzzle – Exploring the Puzzle of Male Homosexuality by Louis A Berman ISBN-10: 0972301313; ISBN-13: 978-0972301312

Many of these books can be ordered at:

http://www.cepbooks.com/cgi-bin/wwregistry.pl?::cepbooks::::::Books

Also while searching your library’s website, there was a link to “Gay and Lesbian” issues. If you follow this link, there is absolutely nothing about Unwanted Same Sex Attraction (SSA) or how homosexuality originates. There is nothing about GID (Gender Identity Disorder) either. Links to informative and supportive web sites should be on your web site. These links need at a minimum to include:

www.pathinfo.org

www.homosexuality101.org

www.exodus-international.org

People leave homosexuality every day. The information is for those wanting it, seeking it, needing it. As the gay community says, it is all about choice and self-determination. The problem with choice is, in order to choose, there must be more than one thing to select from…correct? Please, give everyone with UNWANTED SAME SEX ATTRACTION the resources needed in order to make an educated decision.

Very truly yours,

[Your signature]

(A copy of this article is online at http://pfox.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=241#241)

To subscribe or unsubscribe to this PFOX list, forward this email to pfox@pfox.org

Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays
PFOX
Box 510, Reedville VA 22539
804-453-4737
pfox@pfox.org
www.pfox.org

Check out this fascinating nugget from a near-three-decades-old Time Magazine article on (pro-”gay”) sex researchers William Howell Masters and Virginia Johnson. Note the high success rate of homosexuals seeking change. This begs the question: why isn’t the potential for change for homosexuals studied in the academy today, or the environmental factors common in the development of homosexual identity? Instead, all we hear about are studies — many funded through taxpayer dollars — seeking to prove that homosexuality is genetic.

We already have ample proof that “gays” can change, despite the heated denials of fanatical (and very vocal) homosexual ideologues like Wayne Besen. Yet a stifling pro-homosexual political correctness hinders all inquiry into this part of the equation, which is sad, because many men and women with unwanted homosexual attractions could be helped through such research. Also, we know that homo-sexual behavior is very unhealthy (especially for men) — another subject worthy of government-subsidized research.

There are absolutely no logical or common-sense reasons why “changing-homosexuality” research and the environmental factors common in homosexual development should not be studied in the academy. It’s all about “gay” power and “gay” politics. AFTAH’s challenge to “queer” activists and their allies: what are you afraid will be discovered through such research? For the leading secular organization pursuing the reality of healthy change for homosexual men and women, see NARTH’s (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality) website at www.narth.com. — Peter LaBarbera

From Time’s article, “Masters and Johnson on Homosexuality,” April 23, 1979 (emphasis added):

One of the book’s most unexpected findings did not come out of the homosexual research project, but from sex therapy provided for gays–itself something of a pioneering venture. Between 1968 and 1977 the researchers treated, for various sexual problems, 151 homosexuals, including 54 men and 13 women who wanted to convert or revert to heterosexuality. M & J do not list a success rate for such conversions, only a known failure rate. That failure rate is now at 35%, and is not expected to exceed 45% when all the five-year follow-ups are completed. For professional therapists, many of whom believe that such conversions are rare or impossible, this is likely to be the book’s most surprising statistic. It would mean that a permanent, or at least longterm, switch to heterosexuality is possible more than half the time among gays who are highly motivated to change.