Barack Obama may be setting new highs when it comes to presidential appointments of People Practicing Homosexuality (PPH) in his administration — already more than 150, according to AP – but he’s setting new lows everywhere else. Yesterday, leftie Comedy Central “anchor” Jon Stewart referred to the Commander-in-Chief as “dude” in the course of his half-hour interview with Obama. (Obama is the first president to appear on the show.) 

Read liberal Washington Post writer Dana Milbank’s slam on Obama and his appearance (“On Comedy Central, the joke was on President Obama Wednesday night”) HERE, and watch the “dude” reference in context starting at about 1:45 on Part 3 of the videos of the Daily Show interview HERE.

I agree with this comment responding to a YouTube critical of Obama’s Daily Show disaster: “Obama has diminished himself so many times enough already that even liberals don’t treat him with presidential respect.” We at AFTAH are not nearly as cool as Jon Stewart, and don’t have anything approaching his cultural sway (especially with young people), but here are some questions and comments we wish he would have delivered to the Dude-in-Chief:

• Dude, stop undermining our military by using illegal means to homosexualize it (under the existing law that only Congress can change, homosexuals are barred from serving in the Armed Forces; see www.cmrlink.org); 
• Dude, abortion is the murder of an innocent life; stop promoting it and don’t make taxpayers subsidize it;
• Dude, aren’t you trashing the Defense of Marriage Act and the Constitution by granting via Executive Order marriage-type benefits to homosexual “spouses“?;
• On the same point: dude, you really pulled the wool over America’s eyes (and Rick Warren’s…) with all that talk in the 2008 campaign about how you believe marriage should be preserved as between a man and a woman. If that were true, why didn’t you use your Bully Pulpit to criticize the homosexual activist judge who recently single-handedly overturned California’s Proposition 8 — even though this marriage-defense amendment had passed in a statewide referendum?
• Dude, homosexuality is a sin, according to the Big Guy Upstairs (the real Annointed One) who created the world, so could you stop celebrating homosexual “pride” and stop promoting “gay” identities to impressionable young people?
• Speaking of which: dude, do you get to change God’s transcendent moral code just because you’re the coolest cat who ever sat in the Oval Office (the pro-homosexuality-obsessed Jon Stewart also might ask that of himself…);
• Dude, fire Kevin Jennings. He hates Bible-believing Christians (at least those who object to his homosexual lifestyle) — and the organization he founded, GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network), promotes reckless sexual behavior and gender confusion to minors; what message are you sending by stubbornly keeping this bigoted extremist on the Obama Team?
• Dude, stop making a sham of your public profession to be a Christian by using your tremendous executive powers to distort historic Christian teachings – and promoting sexual immorality as a “right” and abortion-on-demand as a “choice”;
• Dude, before you made that YouTube video about bullied gay youth, shouldn’t you at least have looked into the massive health risks linked to gay sex? Is the proper response to bullying to promote dangerous lifestyles and identities based on unnatural and unhealthy behaviors?
• Dude, we get it: you respect Muslims, but enough with the “America is not a Christian nation” comments already;
• Dude, since you respect Muslims so much, why not learn from their strong moral disapproval of homosexuality and abortion?
• Dude, a federal bill granting “civil rights” based on homosexuality and gender confusion (ENDA, the Employmen Non-Discrimination Act) will be used to take away the rights of other citizens who disagree with homosexuality. What about their “civil rights”?; in fact, the woman you appointed to the E.E.O.C., Chai Feldblum, has essentially affirmed that the courts will grant superior rights to homosexuals at the expense of Americans’ religious liberties; “Gays win, Christians lose,” she says; is that fair in a nation founded on religious liberty?
• Dude, why don’t you expand your vision by “vetoing” Political Correctness and inviting some EX-”gays” to the White House? Wouldn’t that be consistent with your commitment to “diversity”?
• Dude, why did one of your “gay” appointees urge his fellow homosexual activists visiting the White House to lobby for coverage of transsexual “sex-change” operations under Obama-care? I feel sorry for these terribly confused people,  but should Americans be forced to pay for their grotesque, body-disfiguring operations with their hard-earned tax dollars?…. 

We could go on and on, but there is too much work to be done to spend time pondering the degree to which Obama has degraded the Office of the Presidency, and harmed the United States of America with his left-wing agenda (after running for office posturing as a moderate). There’s a big election Tuesday. Change is coming. Yes, we can, dude — er … Mr. President. Yes, we can. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Funding Homosexual "Pride": One of the criteria by which a corporation gets a perfect "100 percent" pro-"gay" HRC rating is by either funding homosexual events or organizations, or buying positive ads in homosexual publications. Thus, funding "gay pride" parades like the one shown above -- with all their attendant perversions -- is one way for a company to get a perfect HRC score. Scantily clad go-go boys like the above, riding atop a "gay pride" float, can be found at any big-city "pride" parade. We added the box to accentuate that to gain a perfect "gay" rating, corporations are required to finance the celebration of immoral conduct and lifestyles.

By Peter LaBarbera

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) begins its project of regularly informing readers about “100-percent” pro-homosexual corporations, according to the rating system set up by the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign (HRC). We will be updating this page with further details about the system, through which HRC is effectively pressuring companies to go along with — and subsidize — its radical pro-homosexual and pro-transsexual agenda.

To earn a perfect 100-percent ranking by HRC and its “Corporate Equality Index” for 2010, a corporation must meet five sets of “positive-behavior” criteria and avoid one set of “negative” behaviors. The bulk of HRC scorecard’s involves getting points for implementing “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” nondiscrimination policies and providing corporate benefits to homosexual/transgender employees and their same-sex partners. To see the HRC requirements, go to page 5 on this online PDF document.

1. Criterion 1 requires that the corporation establish a “sexual orientation” corporate nondiscrimination policy and engage in “diversity training” to implement it. (AFTAH readers will be well aware that such “training” usually propagates only a homosexualist ideology and makes no room for teaching respect for and understanding of moral or religious opponents of homosexual behavior.)
2. Criterion 2 requires the same nondiscrimination policy and diversity training based on “gender identity and expression.” To get 5 points and the full credit in this category (of the 15 points possible), HRC stipulates that: “2c)
   Offers transgender-inclusive insurance coverage for at least one type of benefit: At least one: Counseling by a mental health professional; pharmacy benefits covering hormone therapy and other associated lab procedures; medically necessary surgical procedures such as hysterectomy; or short-term leave for surgical procedures.”;
3. Criterion 3 requires provision of various domestic-partner health insurance and other benefits (providing “adoption assistance” helps fulfill one part of this section);
4. Criterion 4 requires the corporation to support a homosexual employees resource group or “diversity council.”

Criteria 5 and 6 essentially lock an aspiring “100-percent pro-homosexual” corporation to aggressively affirm homosexuality with company dollars AND not do anything that could be construed as “anti-gay”:

• Criterion 5: “Engages in appropriate and respectful advertising and marketing or sponsors LGBT community events or organizations”
• Criterion 6: Employer exhibits responsible behavior toward the LGBT community; does not engage in action that would undermine LGBT equality

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force is using this sticker and a national "Queer the Census" campaign to turn the U.S. Census into a homosexual visibility project.

TAKE ACTION: Ask your Congressman and Senators to stand against Barack Obama’s executive imposition of the homosexual activist agenda — in spite of U.S. laws. The Obama administration is flouting DOMA and the homosexual exclusion law for the U.S. military. Call 202-224-3121; www.congress.org

Dear Readers,

Our imperious Panderer-in-Chief, Barack Obama, continues to undermine DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act — which, like the military’s homosexual exclusion policy, is still the law of the land. Homosexual activists led by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force demanded the “Queering” of the U.S. Census — and Obama complied. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

American Family Association’s One News Now reports:
________________________________

Census used as ‘gay gimmick’

Jim Brown and Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow -

Traditional marriage proponents are warning that homosexual activists and the Obama administration are once again working in concert to “manipulate” federal law.

The Associated Press reports that the Census Bureau plans to count same-sex couples who say they are married, regardless of whether they have a marriage license (see AP article). Even though only five states and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex “marriages,” the Census Bureau says same-sex couples should feel free to check the “husband” or “wife” boxes on the census form, rather than “unmarried partner.”

Peter LaBarbera, executive director of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, argues that the Bureau is clearly violating the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which does not recognize same-sex “marriages.”

“What they’re obviously trying to do is magnify the numbers of homosexuals in the society,” he suspects.  “This dates way back in the gay movement.  There was a time when homosexual activists just lied and said that ten percent of the public was gay — that was a bald-faced lie.  It took decades to finally disprove that lie, but here again we see them calling themselves married because they want to be called married.  Well, that’s not what the law says.”

LaBarbera believes homosexual activists are using the census as their latest “gimmick” to seek affirmation of their lifestyle, and he challenges Congress to “step up” and prevent the Obama administration from promoting the “gay” agenda by dictate.

Marriage by opinion is not marriage by law

Similarly, Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs at Liberty Counsel, believes the source for the Bureau’s instructions can perhaps be traced as far as the White House. (Listen to audio report)

Matt Barber”It’s a shame that the Census Bureau, in tangent with radical homosexual activists, are choosing to use the census, which is supposed to provide objective, quantifiable information relative to varying demographics around the country, that they’re using this as a tool for political activism,” Barber laments.

He notes that just because a homosexual couple might call their relationship a marriage, that does not make it so. “It is directly contrary to probably the letter, at least the spirit, of the Defense of Marriage Act,” he adds.

The federal law recognizes marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and the cultural affairs director believes the purpose in the census campaign is to “create an impression in the minds of the American people” that the movement for legalizing homosexual marriage has more steam behind it than it actually does.

TAKE ACTION: Below are the main homosexual/trans activist bills that we urge you to stand against (call Congress at 202-224-3121; 202-225-3121; www.congress.org):

• Hate Crimes (“Thought Crimes”) — STATUS: passed House and Senate attached as amendment to DoD appropriations bill: HR 1913: www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1913&tab=summary; now in House-Senate conference;
• Federal “Special Workplace Rights” Based on Homosexuality and Gender Confusion — ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act (HR 3017; S 1584) — 40 co-sponsors in Senate (all but 2 are Democrats): www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-1584; 181 co-sponsors in the House (all but 5 are Democrats): www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3017. More info on this Top Priority bill for “gay” activists: http://americansfortruth.com/news/obamas-homosexual-opm-chief-calls-enda-top-priority-keystone-that-will-propel-rest-of-gay-legislation.html
• Allowing Admitted Homosexuals in the Military — HR 1283, audaciously entitled, “Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2009″; 176 co-sponsors: all but one are Democrats: www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3017.
• Homosexuality Indoctrination in Schools via “Bullying”/”Safe Schools” Funding — HR 2262, innocuously titled, “Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act”: www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2262; 88 cosponsors (all but 1 Democrats); more info: www.illinoisfamily.org/news/contentview.asp?c=34545
• Federal Domestic Partner Benefits for Homosexuals: (HR 2517); sponsored by lesbian Rep. Tammy Baldwin, D-WI); “Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act”; 110 co-sponsors, all but 1 are Democrats: www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2517
• Repeal of DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act); HR 3567: mischievously named the “Respect for Marriage Act”  it would repeal DOMA, which protects states from being forced to recognize out-of-state “gay marriages”; homosexual Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) opposes this bill due to timing. See: www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3567; “Gay” Blade account here: www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=27207
• Homosexual “Couples” Immigration Expansion — “Reuniting Families Act” (HR 2709): “would allow homosexuals to sponsor their “permanent partners” for residency in the United States”;  www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2709; more info: www.cnsnews.com/public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=49464

America is getting to know the real Barack Obama — and he’s a lot more radical than a 2008 presidential candidate by the same name. This aggressively pro-homosexual speech by Michelle Obama to the Democratic National Committee’s Gay & Lesbian Leadership Council (June 27, 2008) had only 56,805 views on YouTube as of August 7, 2009. Most Americans have never seen this side of Michelle Obama, just as most have not seen the side of her husband that celebrated America’s biggest abortion “provider,” Planned Parenthood, in a 2007 campaign speech. (That speech had only 84,875 views on YouTube as of Aug. 7.) Social liberals and “gay” activists will cheer this speech by Michelle; everyone else won’t recognize her vis-à-vis the “apolitical” First Lady described by the national media. (A transcript follows the video; emphasis and web links added.) — Peter LaBarbera

To put it in perspective: timeless truth from that “obscure” passage in the New Testament.–Ed.:

“Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 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.” (Romans 1:26-27)

_______________________________________

Incomplete transcript of Michelle Obama speech to DNC’s Gay & Lesbian Leadership Council, June 27, 2008 (emphasis and web links added):

Reprinted from TransGriot website: http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2008/06/michelle-obamas-remarks-to-dncs-gay-and.html

Thank you Howard Dean [then Democratic National Committee Chairman], for all your hard work building our party. We are proud to have you as our party Chairman. I want to recognize the members of UNITE HERE Local 6 who are working this event tonight. And thank you all for inviting me to spend some time with you.

I’m honored to be with you in a week that reminds us just how far we’ve come as a country. Five years ago today, the Supreme Court delivered justice with the decision in Lawrence v. Texas that same-sex couples would never again be persecuted through use of criminal law. And on Saturday, we recognize the anniversary of the day people stood up at Stonewall and said “enough.”

These anniversaries remind us that no matter who we are, or where we come from, or what we look like, we are only here because of the brave efforts of those who came before us. That we are all only here because of those who marched and bled and died, from Selma to Stonewall, in a pursuit of that more perfect union that is the promise of this country.

Over the course of this campaign, we’ve seen a fundamental change in the level of political engagement in this country. We’ve seen a renewed sense of possibility and a hunger for change. We’ve seen people of all ages and backgrounds investing time and energy like never before; writing $20, $30, $50 checks; investing for the first time ever in a political candidate. We’ve seen people talking to their neighbors about candidates and issues; working hard to clarify misperceptions; challenging one another to think differently about the world and our place in it.

It’s precisely this type of individual engagement and investment that has been the mission of my husband’s life. Barack has always believed that there is more in this country that unites us than divides us; that our common stories and struggles and values are what make this country great; that meaningful change never happens from the top down but from the bottom up.

I’ll never forget the first time I realized there was something special about Barack. It was nearly 20 years ago this summer. Barack and I were just getting to know one another, and he thought the best way for me to get to know him better was to get a better sense of the work he cared about most — his work as a community organizer.

He took me to a small church basement on the South Side of Chicago, where a group of neighborhood residents were gathered; folks he knew from his years as a community organizer before he went to law school. They were desperate for change. They were regular Americans struggling to build a decent life for themselves and their families. Single mothers living paycheck to paycheck; grandparents raising grandkids despite an income that wouldn’t allow it; men unable to support their families because jobs had disappeared when steel mills closed. Like most Americans, they didn’t want much; they weren’t asking for much: just dignity and respect.

I watched as Barack walked into the room, took off his jacket, rolled up his sleeves, and instantly connected with each and every person in that room. He spoke eloquently of “the world as it is” and “the world as it should be.” He said the key to change is understanding that our job as citizens of this nation is to work hard each and every day to narrow the gap between those two ideas. He explained that we often settle for the world as it is even if it doesn’t reflect our personal values. But he reminded us that it is only through determination and hard work that we slowly make the world as it is and the world as it should be one in the same. His words were powerful not only because they made us believe in him – they challenged each of us to believe in ourselves.

One of the many reasons I’m proud of the way Barack has handled himself in this campaign is that he is still the same man I fell in love with in that church basement. His unyielding belief in that simple idea – closing the gap between the world as it is and the world as it should be – is precisely why he’ll be a President you can be proud of.

Barack is not new to the cause of the LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender] community. It has been a conviction of his career since he was first elected to public office. In his first year in the Illinois State Senate, he cosponsored a bill amending the Illinois Human Rights Act to include protections for LGBT men and women. He worked on that bill for seven years, serving as chief cosponsor and lobbying his colleagues to reject the political expedience of homophobia and make LGBT equality a priority. In 2004, his efforts paid off as that bill finally became law, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity in the workplace, in housing, and in public places.

He’s led on gender-based violence with his work on the Illinois Gender Violence Act, successfully reaching across the aisle to put in place the nation’s strongest law giving the survivors of sexual assault or domestic violence legal remedy against their attackers. He joined his colleagues in fighting to include explicit protections for the LGBT community in that act. He lost that battle, but his efforts brought gender violence in the LGBT community into the political consciousness like never before.

In 2004, after hearing from gay friends and supporters about the hurtful impact of DOMA, Barack went on record during his U.S. Senate race calling for its complete repeal. And as a U.S. Senator, he voted to protect our Constitution from the stain of discrimination by voting against the Federal Marriage Amendment.

Barack’s record is clear. There is so much at stake in this election. The direction of our country hangs in the balance. We are faced with those two clear choices: The world as it is, and the world as it should be. We have to ask ourselves: Are we willing to settle for the world as it is or are we willing to work for the world as it should be?

Despite the extraordinary challenges we face today, we have a candidate who believes that the country is moving in the right direction, despite the inequalities created over the last 8 years.

And then we have Barack Obama, who believes that we must fight for the world as it should be.

A world where together we work to reverse discriminatory laws like DOMA and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

A world where LGBT Americans get a fair shake at working hard to get ahead without workplace discrimination.

A world where our federal government fully protects all of us — including LGBT Americans — from hate crimes.

And, a world where our federal laws don’t discriminate against same-sex relationships, including equal treatment for any relationship recognized under state law.

A world that recognizes that equality in relationship, family, and adoption rights is not some abstract principle; it’s about whether millions of LGBT Americans can finally live lives marked by dignity and freedom. Barack has made crystal clear his commitment to ensuring full equality for LGBT couples. That is why he supports robust civil unions. That is why he has said that the federal government should not stand in the way of states that want to decide for themselves how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples — whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union, or a civil marriage. And that is why he opposes all divisive and discriminatory constitutional amendments – whether it’s a proposed amendment to the California and Florida Constitutions or the U.S. Constitution. Because the world as it should be rejects discrimination.

But, it’s not just about the positions you take, it’s also about the leadership you provide.

Barack’s got the courage to talk to skeptical audiences; not just friendly ones. That’s why he told a crowd at a rally in Texas that gays and lesbians deserve equality. Now, the crowd got pretty quiet. But Barack said “now, I’m a Christian, and I praise Jesus every Sunday.” And the crowd started cheering. Then he said, “I hear people saying things that I don’t think are very Christian with respect to people who are gay and lesbian.” And you know what? The crowd kept cheering.

That’s why he told evangelicals at Rick Warren’s Saddleback church that we need a renewed call to action on HIV and AIDS.

That’s why he went to Ebenezer Baptist Church and said that we need to get over homophobia in the African-American community; that if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll embrace our gay brothers and sisters instead of scorning them. And that’s why he stood up at the 2004 Democratic National Convention and told all of America that we refuse to be divided anymore.

That’s the choice in this election. Between slipping backward and moving forward. Between being timid or being courageous. Between fighting for the world as it should be, or settling for the world as it is.

My husband is running for President to build an America that lives up to the ideals written into our Constitution. We have just come through a historic primary election where a woman and a black man were running to become President of the United States. It hasn’t been painless, but change never is. As I travel this country, I am certain that we have arrived at a moment in our collective history where we are ready to move forward and create the “world as it should be.”

I know which world Barack will fight for each and every day as your President. But he can’t do it alone. As he said in that church basement, change happens when ordinary people are ready to take the reins of their own destiny. He needs you by his side every step of the way. That kind of change won’t be easy. There will be powerful forces who believe that things should stay just the way they are.

That’s where you come in. Your voices of truth and hope and of possibility have to drown out the skeptics and the cynics.

If you stand with my husband; if you reach for what is possible and if you refuse to let this chance get away; we can begin building that better world in November.

Thank you.

By Peter LaBarbera

McDonald’s Corporation scored an 85 percent ranking on the Human Rights Campaign’s (HRC) “Corporate Equality Index.” HRC, the nation’s leading homosexual lobby group, publishes the corporate survey every year. The following are the 11 criteria used by HRC to evaluate whether a major company is sufficiently pro-homosexual and pro-transsexual; note that McDonald’s passed all but one test (a gender-identity ‘nondiscrimination’ policy– criterion 2a). (AFTAH has endorsed a nationwide boycott of McDonald’s.) See important explanatory notes at bottom:

2008 Human Rights Campaign Corporate Equality Index Ratings and Breakdown:

• Criterion 1a: [McDonald's: YES] Prohibits Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation (15 points)
• Criterion 1b: [McDonald's: YES] Provides Diversity Training Covering Sexual Orientation (5 points)
• Criterion 2a: [McDonald's: NO] Prohibits Discrimination Based on Gender Identity and/or Expression (15 points)
• Criterion 2b: [McDonald's: YES] Provides Diversity Training Covering Gender Identity OR Has Supportive Gender Transition Guidelines (5 points)
• Criterion 2c: [McDonald's: YES] Offers at Least One Transgender Wellness Benefit (5 points) +
• Criterion 3a: [McDonald's: YES] Offers Domestic Partner Health Insurance (15 points)
• Criterion 3b: [McDonald's: YES] Offers Domestic Partners Dental, Vision, COBRA and Dependent Coverage Benefits (5 points)
• Criterion 3c ++: [McDonald's: YES] Offers at Least Three Other ‘Soft’ Benefits for Domestic Partners ++ (5 points)
• Criterion 4: [McDonald's: YES] Has Employer-Supported Employee Resource Group OR Firm-Wide Diversity Council (15 points)
• Criterion 5: [McDonald's: YES] Engages in Appropriate and Respectful Advertising, Marketing or Philanthropy (15 points)
• Criterion 6: [McDonald's: YES] Exhibits Responsible Behavior Toward the GLBT Community; Does Not Engage in Action That Would Undermine GLBT Equality. Employers Found Engaging in Such Activities Will — Have 15 Points Removed From Their Scores. (—) +++

+ HRC explains Criterion 2c transgender benefits (emphasis added): “At least one: Counseling by a mental health professional; pharmacy benefits covering hormone therapy; medical visits to monitor the effects of hormone therapy and other associated lab procedures; medically necessary surgical procedures such as hysterectomy; or short-term disability leave for surgical procedures.”

++ HRC explains Criterion 3c “Domestic Partner” soft benefits (emphasis added): “Other domestic partner benefits include at least three of the following (provided to the employee on behalf of the employee’s same-sex domestic partner): FMLA [Family Medical Leave Act]-like leave ; bereavement leave; employer-provided supplemental life insurance for a partner; relocation/travel assistance; adoption assistance; qualified joint and survivor annuity for domestic partners; qualified pre-retirement survivor annuity for domestic partners; retiree healthcare benefits; or employee discounts.”

+++ HRC writes regarding Criterion 6: “Employers found engaging in activities that would undermine GLBT equality will have 15 points removed from their scores.” [Explanatory note from AFTAH: HRC reports using among its sources: "Internal Revenue Service 990 tax filings for business foundation gifts to anti-GLBT groups." Thus, corporate foundation gifts to pro-family or conservative groups opposed to, say, homosexual 'marriage,' would result in 15 points taken off their HRC score. Conversely, corporate gifts to homosexual groups -- such as McDonald's' $20,000 donation to the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce -- are welcome and result in 15 additional points (Criterion 5). This same dual standard is reiterated in Point 10 of the HRC-affiliated "Equality Project's" Equality Principles for homosexuality-affirming corporations: "The company will not bar charitable contributions to human rights groups and organizations on the basis of sexual orientation, gender expression or gender identity, nor will it support groups opposed to such rights."]

Source: 2008 Human Rights Campaign Corporate Equality Index, pp. 8-10, 27, 35; Equality Project: http://www.equalityproject.org/principles/en.html.

As local organizations start mobilizing their troops to the front lines of marriage in California, FRC is launching a national effort to educate the public to the damage this ruling may do to democracy, the family, and religious freedom. Together with a broad coalition of pro-family allies, FRC has planned a strategic series of panel discussions on the implications of the California supreme court decision for the nation. Tomorrow, we’ll kick off the event at the National Press Club with legal and policy experts such as Glen Lavy of the Alliance Defense Fund, Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel, FRC’s own Ken Blackwell, and more. More people must recognize that this epidemic of judicial activism has sweeping consequences for children, businesses, the legal system, and every other facet of society. If you live or work in the nation’s capital, we encourage you to join us at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow at 529 14th Street, NW for “California Same-Sex Marriage: Answering the Assault on Family and Society.” To RSVP, call 1-800-225-4008 or visit our website at www.frc.org. If you cannot attend, please log onto our site Thursday afternoon for video of the panel discussion.

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM AT ITS WORST: This will always be immoral. California’s highest court has created a “fundamental” marriage right out of behavior — homosexuality — that is fundamentally wrong and destructive. At left is a homosexual male kissing scene as it appeared on the CBS soap “As the World Turns.” Everywhere Americans turn — TV, media, schools, in corporations and the courts — this unhealthy and immoral behavior is being promoted.

California’s highest court has just invalidated California’s Proposition 22, creating a legal “fundamental” right to homosexual so-called “marriage” out of thin air, under the guise of equal protection. We’re reading the 172-page decision — available at http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF — now, but as we suspected, the court’s majority made use of the fact that in California, homosexual couples already have been given most of the same rights as normal couples — including the right to adopt children.

Footnote 72 on page 117 of the California decision is key:

Contrary to the contention of the Proposition 22 Legal Defense Fund and the
Campaign, the distinction in nomenclature between marriage and domestic partnership cannot be defended on the basis of an asserted difference in the effect on children of being raised by an opposite-sex couple instead of by a same-sex couple. Because the governing California statutes permit same-sex couples to adopt and raise children and additionally draw no distinction between married couples and domestic partners with regard to the legal rights and responsibilities relating to children raised within each of these family relationships, the asserted difference in the effect on children does not provide a justification for the differentiation in nomenclature set forth in the challenged statutes.”

In other words, by creating an expanding array of rights based on immoral and unnatural behavior, California’s politicians paved the way for this arrogant ruling. We must return to principled public policy opposing the creation of ALL newfangled rights based on changeable, immoral and deviant sexual behavior. Homosexual so-called “marriage” is wrong because homosexual behavior is wrong. To illustrate how far afield our culture has drifted — from God, decency and common sense — consider this question:

How will homosexual California couples — say, two men — consummate their “marriages”?

Click here to read a previous AFTAH article: “Homosexual Activist Wayne Besen Makes a Strong Case for a Federal Marriage Amendment,” pointing to the chaos that could ensue from this ruling and why America needs a strong Federal Marriage Amendment that protects more than just the word “marriage.”– Peter LaBarbera

Here are links to Concerned Women for America’s and National Organization for Marriage’s press releases on the California Marriage ruling:

NOM: California Supreme Court Overturns Prop 22

CWA: California Supreme Court Betrays “We the People” on Marriage

LANSING, Mich. (Catholic News Agency), May 8, 2008 — The Michigan General Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that the state’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages also blocks Michigan governments and state universities from offering “domestic partnership” benefits for homosexual couples. Click HERE to read the Michigan Supreme Court ruling.

The Marriage Protection Amendment was approved by nearly sixty percent of voters in 2004. Considered the broadest of the 11 state marriage amendments barring same-sex marriage, the language of the Michigan amendment says “…the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.”

The Michigan ACLU, representing the AFL-CIO homosexual activist group National Pride at Work, had challenged the application of the law as based in Attorney General Mike Cox’s interpretation of the amendment.

The Michigan court’s 5-2 decision did not rule on whether government employment benefits can be offered to homosexual partners on some broader basis also available to other employees. Some local governments and universities have attempted to maintain present benefits by amending the eligibility requirements.

“The people of Michigan have constitutionally protected marriage as exclusively the union of one man and one woman, period, and that includes prohibiting the recognition of homosexual relationships as equal or similar to marriage for any purpose, including offering spousal-type benefits to the homosexual partners of government employees,” said Gary Glenn, one of the co-authors of the Marriage Protection Amendment and head of the American Family Association of Michigan.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, praised the decision, saying, “The Michigan Supreme Court courageously upheld the will of the people.”

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12591

Related news release from Thomas More Law Center: “TMLC Praises Michigan Atty General Cox for Defending Marriage Amendment; Blasts Gov and Universities”